Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy

Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy

2002, Economics  -    -  Playlist 134 Comments
6.56
12345678910
Ratings: 6.56/10 from 50 users.

Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World EconomyA global economy, energized by technological change and unprecedented flows of people and money, collapses in the wake of a terrorist attack. The year is 1914. Worldwide war results, exhausting the resources of the great powers and convincing many that the economic system itself is to blame. From the ashes of the catastrophe, an intellectual and political struggle ignites between the powers of government and the forces of the marketplace, each determined to reinvent the world's economic order.

As the 1980s begin and the Cold War grinds on, the existing world order appears firmly in place. Yet beneath the surface powerful currents are carving away at the economic foundations.

Western democracies still struggle with deficits and inflation, while communism hides the failure of its command economy behind a facade of military might. In Latin America populist dictators strive to thwart foreign economic exploitation, piling up debt and igniting hyperinflation in the process.

With communism discredited, more and more nations harness their fortunes to the global free-market. China, Southeast Asia, India, Eastern Europe, and Latin America all compete to attract the developed world's investment capital, and tariff barriers fall. In the United States Republican and Democratic administrations both embrace unfettered globalization over the objections of organized labor.

Episodes included: 1. The Battle of Ideas, 2. The Agony of Reform, and 3. The New Rules of the Game.

More great documentaries

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

134 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
j smith
j smith
6 years ago

YET ANOTHER BLOCKED FILM IN THE NETHERLANDS

bluetortilla
bluetortilla
8 years ago

I found this extremely biased and closed to any compromise of opinion; black and white, and 'socialism' is black. If we do wish to describe economies in terms of opposing forces, they are clearly not government vs. the market but rather government vs. the corporation. If you want to see the mess that Reagan and Thatcher's ideas eventually got us into, take a look around now. The truth is that the people will never prosper unless they are willing to do what it takes in demanding self-rule. And on that point, this documentary had absolutely nothing to say.

Guest
Guest
10 years ago

well i go to say that this has given me a new list of books i want to read ..wouldn't regulated capitalism, nationalization and abolishing price controls be what a free market is? wouldn't this cause the economy to be self regulated by the consumer? of course this would work if the united states if only the major companies didn't outsource to find cheap labor in foreign countries ..but instead worked with the labor unions to install a favorable wage that people could live on.

shouldn't privatization be seen a corrupting force? a force that is destroying true "free markets"
shouldn't we be looking for a economic system that is favorable towards sustainable growth for society ?

Coal and Oil are kinda outdated non replenishing sources of energy ..shouldn't science step up and offer another solution into renewable energy sources like geothermal, methane, wave, tidal, solar, or wind energy and possibly many more.

End of Rant-

awful_truth
awful_truth
10 years ago

This is a follow-up to my previous blog. Now that I have completed watching all 3 parts, the 1st, and 3rd are by far the best, with an abundance of information that makes for a good documentary. In my opinion, comments by Richard Cheney, Larry Summers, and George Bush severely hurt the credibility of the documentary as a whole.
The most important contradiction is the idea that capitalism, and the creation of wealth for all people, is somehow their priority. In reality, these people are only interested in making as much money as they can, at the expense of anyone who gets in their way. (exploitation) It is too bad that this documentary ends at 9 11, and does not look into the fiasco of the 2008 financial meltdown, or these individuals would be seen for who they really are.
It should be noted that on some level, globalization is unavoidable, but will never bring about a level playing field without regulatory limits placed upon those who are calling the shots. Ultimately, the idea of 'fair' to all people is impossible, because the 'haves' want more, and can only obtain it from the backs of the 'have nots'.
George Bush's quote after 9 11, that "there is an opportunity here" proves this point by going into Iraq, and killing a million, while displacing 4 million more, when they had nothing to do with it. War has always been the most profitable business plan for those in a postion of power, yet the global economy, and the 2008 economic meltdown is proof that war is obsolete in the new world order, and threatens to destroy the very prosperity they hope to achieve!

awful_truth
awful_truth
10 years ago

I must say, that the 1st installment of this documentary is relatively good. With that said, there were certain factors that weren't calculated while trying to determine which ideology had the most merits. (severely increased world population equals severe unemployment)
The 2nd installment shows heavy revisionist history, that is revealed within the documentary itself. Salvador Allende was a democratically elected leader who was ousted by a CIA backed Junta, (Augusto Pinochie) which was part of the 'Chilean experiment' created by Milton Friedman, and the Chicago boys.
Mohammad Mosadeq was the democratically elected leader of Iran, who was ousted by the CIA, and replaced with the Shaw of Iran, which led to the blowback of religious fundamentalists who are running the country today.
Furthemore, most Bolivians today spend almost 50% of their income on water, because all their natural resources are now foreign owned, the price of getting loans from the world bank. Oh, by the way, it is illegal in Bolivia to catch the rainwater, because it is owned by the Bechtel corporation of San Francisco. (Major shareholder Donald Rumsfeld)
Smeddly Darlington Butler, a general for the American military, exposed a fascist attempt to overthrow the American government in 1936, (Dupont, Goodyear, etc) because he no longer wanted to be a 'gangster for capitalism'. He had already defeated governments for the exploitation of Oil, fruit, and other commodities for corporate interests.
The awful truth is free markets do not lead to freedom or democracy, but to plutocracy, where a small number of wealthy elite are carving up the planet (pyramid scheme) for their own welfare. (manifest destiny)
I leave everyone with a paraphrase from Albert Einstein. "Communism, socialism, nationlism, militarism, etc while constituting diverse political ideologies, ulimately lead to the subjugation of the people by the state, putting an end to liberty and freedom for all".
P.S: Since the passing of Margaret Thatcher, I haven't seen a outpouring of grief, but the exact opposite. Whether it is deserved either way, is for the viewer themselves to decide.

Leon Mecanico
Leon Mecanico
11 years ago

Very good documentary, but, it just show half of the entire history, it does not tell the role that played the unilateral choice of the US government (Nixon) of dumping the gold standard back in 1971,making the US dollar almost worthless, (lots of US dollars were coming back home, nobody wanted them, producing inflation here in the US). The only way the FED found to stop inflation here in US, was to take out those cheap dollars and giving them to the first i*iot down the road : Latino America, producing hyperinflation in those countries, why?? because their rates of exchange was tied to the US dollar (consequence of Bretton Woods), so, if their economies took huge amounts of cheap dollars, they had to print mega-huge amounts of their currencies. Latinoamerica is the backyard of US, as Spain, Portugal, Greece, Italy are the Backyard of Germany.

Dan Howard
Dan Howard
11 years ago

LOL @23 where bankers whine about runs on the banks. They should all be strung up on polls.

Bruce Wilson
Bruce Wilson
11 years ago

An interesting piece of work but incomplete. While swinging back and forth in focusing on the 2 main economic philosophical arguments, they leave the bulk of exterior factors aside. Racism, geographics and weather, religion, war born removed from the economic ideologue influences, etc. Instead, they falsely profess a world in which all other factors must submit to the omnipotent manipulation of economics.

They also fail to examine the very specific individuals manipulating events to cause disruption of the systems that did not benefit them the most. Ideology moves people to action at it's best and worst but real people (generally, people with money/ power) actuate, agitate, and manipulate reality to their desired ends.

Where are the Kochs, Dulles', J.P. Morgans, etc. that move their chess pieces to speak in favor of whatever abstract philosophy suits them best? Where are the economic hitmen and others that get to actually make the decisions on what makes a GDP? Those that manipulate the numbers to fit their master's desire?

Economic philosophies are equal to racial, religious, political philosophies in their use as tools of those in power to maintain power or those that wish to rest greater control from those in power.

Again, Economics and those that profess it's ultimate power exist outside of the complete, balanced reality that is existence. No examination of any given subject can hope to be complete without accounting for all influences. Thus, ultimately entertaining, this series is an epic failure. Epic only because of the time spent in making it and watching it.

Market based economies and social based economies both fail to account for anything that isn't human and fail to think of consequence in any form outside their limited scope and aim (growth vs. shrink or stagnation). An apple from the opposite side of the globe should not cost 40 cents. Unlimited and unregulated (by 'market demand' or state dictate) Industrial growth of either sort sans ecological considerations equate to starvation of resources and the potential death of our species.

Hoping to find these broader nuanced perspectives is maybe hopeful thinking but throw a thinking human some sort of a bone....seriously!

iconoclast63
iconoclast63
11 years ago

A true "free market" economist would not only oppose government planning in industry, but also government interference in the price of money through the central banking mechanism (Federal Reserve), undue influence through government coercion in the form of corporations, and most of all, excess government power as a result of militarism. A "free market" would never condone allowing certain private interests to control the states desire and ability to wage war. Free marketers can't have it both ways. A "free" state only wages war in self-defense. A "free" state leaves the currency markets to the participants, it doesn't dictate legal tender and hand over control of the economy to a single industry with a government enforced monopoly. These are the contradictions that kill the free market. Where in the "free market" theory does it make it tolerable for certain individuals and groups to petition the government for a special kind of citizenship, ie; a corporation, that makes them above the laws of man and nature? Corporations don't have physical bodies, they can't get sick or die or go to prison. How is that "free"?

If we are going to talk about freedom we need stop wringing our hands about Keynes and start looking honestly at the way WE have allowed the power of government to be abused by wealth and power for the benefit of wealth and power.

eugene12
eugene12
11 years ago

The difficulty I have with economists is they operate in a world totally oblivious to human nature and, in some cases, reality. It's like they live on a planet where all is just, wonderful and utopean. They like simplistic answers based on naive, simplistic assumptions based on some reality I've never lived in. But don't we all.

I enjoyed the series as it helped me understand the fantasy I, presently, find myself living it. As I watch a vastly over populated planet bitterly fighting over a vanishing resource base, the ideas seem frightenly childish.

Samuel Gallop
Samuel Gallop
11 years ago

You all really need to stop watching intellectually nauseous documentaries and start getting some real education.

Good starting point: read Frank Chodorov's gem of a book.... The Rise and Fall of Societies.

The amount of idiocy coming out of your mouths ( or pens/keystrokes ) should experiment a considerable reduction thereafter.

PeSO821
PeSO821
12 years ago

Everybody seems to be turning Kensyan right now. Well, it is understandable because of irresponsible behavior of financial sector - but I really feel sad about it.
I hate government control and bureaucracy. I grew up in communist Yugoslavia - people who did not go through it, know little about how oppressive a systems, which want to achieve equality, can get.

Rocky Racoon
Rocky Racoon
12 years ago

To date nothing matches the Communist Manifesto theoretically or programatically.......Sure beats Nostradamus and the Book of Revelations that's for sure.
RR

steven johnson
steven johnson
12 years ago

The fact is capitalism works in a small way, but with a world economic system and globalization the only system that will ever work is a resource based economy...

rsecrest
rsecrest
12 years ago

@djjames99

The United States of America is a Representative Democracy sir. Also America has never been a totally "free market" economic system. Free market economics is based on a model of unforced coercion of which American History has NEVER had "unforced" coercion to purchase goods and services. We have always forced the consumer to buy goods by eliminating or taxing and tarrifing the competition to improve our own economic investments. Nowhere on this planet is there this pure form of "free market" capitalism that you speak of. It never existed. It was a falsehood constructed straight outta 1984 by Milton Friedman to explain why the rich should get richer and the poor should starve.

Plus the Constitution of the United States is a living document able to me amended as seen fit by our elected representatives in conjunction with the people. "Eroding" institutions like EPA, FEMA, NEA is quite hilarious in your omissions of such needless entities as NSC, DIA, CIA, NSA and USAID all of which are not part of the Constitution according to it's founding principles. It's funny how these entities are never mentioned when discussing unconstitutional government organizations by right-wingers, only Soc. Sec. and Medicare and Dept of Ed. I ask have you ever seen a federal budget? Nearly 70cents of every taxed dollar goes to defense. Do you even know what goes to other departments? The "Entitlements" as right-wingers call them only get about 10cents to 20cents depending on our current war spending. Any discretionary surplus is then funneled into smaller agencies and whatever is left over is then gobbled up by the defense budget. Don't come on here spouting foolishness unless you got some facts. Tired of the rhetoric. Give me honest government that doesn't treat it's citizens like children.

djjames99
djjames99
12 years ago

TWO simple items everyone needs to study and learn the true meanings of:

1) The United States of America IS and has ALWAYS been a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC based on Capitalism and the Free Enterprise system ever since we won our Freedom from the British.

2) The United States of America has NEVER been a Democracy NOR has it ever been based on Socialism.

If you don't know the difference, you may be asking for something that is the LAST THING IN THE WORLD YOU WOULD EVER WANT! If you think you want Communism, Marxism, Socialism, or Radical Extremism, you need to move to another country! Those are anathema to our CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC.

If you really DO want our elected representatives to adhere to OUR U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, then all currently Unconstitutional entities need to be shut down (from the EPA, to the FED, to FEMA, to the NEA to name just a few), and every elected official from the President on down who refuses to act to set this country back on the proper road needs to be arrested for Treason, put on Trial, and then suffer the appropriate consequences, if found Guilty.

Those who are out "protesting" for CHANGE and REVOLUTION need to learn EXACTLY WHAT IT IS they are ASKING for and make VERY SURE that's what they REALLY WANT.

Most people are not aware of the way our elected officials have slowly led us down this EVIL garden path away from the Constitution over the past 100 years, BUT it's time they learned. Then, if they want to protest, they will know EXACTLY WHAT TO WRITE ON THEIR SIGNS!

deanharrington
deanharrington
12 years ago

This documentary is garbage and nothing but propaganda!

Sion88
Sion88
12 years ago

A documentary sponsored by corporate interest. Gimme a break.

Forol
Forol
12 years ago

False flag documentary

vofearth
vofearth
12 years ago

lmao globalization did not create poverty...blatant lie...rest is just propaganda mixed with truth

umbrarchist
umbrarchist
12 years ago

It's not bad as long as you recognize that it is somewhat propagandistic. I have watched it a few times. I like that Galbraith is in it. His Age of Uncertainty is considerably better. I saw that back in 1977 and just found it on YouTube last year. It is curious how some of the best information gets disappeared in this society.

JohnBrady
JohnBrady
12 years ago

I have watched these a few times. I think it is very good providing you don't base all your economic knowledge on it. It helps you understand the 'formal' (for a lack of a better word) understanding of what has been happening with the economy over the last few decades. Goes into a lot of detail. I think its a must... again ensuring you don't watch it in a vacuum.

Rainmaker
Rainmaker
12 years ago

Are you freaking kidding me?! This "documentary" even starts with an introduction from Dick Cheney, and commercials of BP, some trust, and a number of other companies. I can't watch more than 4 min of this nonsense. If you want to learn the PURE theory of how everything SHOULD work in this world, get some good books on international economics. But we all know that in the real world the picture is totally different.

Internet and media these days are full of all kind of information and opinions you can think of. Get a decent education to develop a good CRITICAL THINKING/JUDGEMENT, and FILTER all you see and hear. Learn how to analyze BY YOURSELF.

In theory, socially-responsible capitalism is probably the best model out there. But in reality, what we see is that large companies tend to abuse their power and influence to promote their interests at the expense of everything else. What is now going on in the world is pure madness! The larger the company, the more lobbyists it has, and the more it controls politicians. And large companies grow bigger through mergers at incredibly fast rate.

Dev Bruce
Dev Bruce
12 years ago

obviously what summers said at the end is the best approach using the markets to your interest but not allowing them to run wild.. you need some regulation and you need elements socialism because the market force are the people and when you dont keep a watchful eye you will have 1929 and 2008 all over again

Bobby
Bobby
12 years ago

Please explain why inflation was going through the roof in Chile while most of the industries were under state control. Thanks!

Mark Stouffer
Mark Stouffer
12 years ago

Shocking to see how many commentators would like to see the government controlling more of their lives. How strong is the urge to have a fearless leader take over your lives?

wpsmithjr
wpsmithjr
12 years ago

I haven't watched this, and I don't have too.

If there is a problem in the world... death and/or starvation... you can bet a government somewhere caused it.

There is no "free market" anywhere. They are all distorted by government intervention.

Governments are responsible for 160 million deaths in the last century alone.

F*ck government.

If we can't have limited government... I vote for anarchy.

Paul V
Paul V
12 years ago

I think that this is a lot of information, and yes it is a positivist capitalist perspective. But it also explains a lot of economic history and the economic perspective of the decision makers.

Jaak Wassmuth
Jaak Wassmuth
12 years ago

Please Remove this Propaganda Film

The producers of this film must have a very low opinion of the intelligence of their viewers. Not until they get to Bolivia do they even mention the IMF or the World Bank, then only in passing. Free Market Economy? The only free market in the world is the black market. So when the Bolivian's got squeezed out of their natural resources by the players in the so called, "free market," then their rich were thrown a rope. The poor vanished into the abyss of market statistics and like the domino theory that was given as the reason for the USA's debacle in Vietnam, the IMF and World Bank constrict trade with their victim countries, they impose restrictive tariffs and withhold foreign investment. When the victim is starving and on it's last leg, the "free market" comes to the rescue. Mr. Perkins in his book "The Economic Hit Man" effectively painted a moustach on the lie of that metaphorical Mona Lisa. That is when you see the wealth gap in a country widen.. It's happening in the USA right now friends.
If you don't have a garden, but you have a TV. Sell one and buy the other or warnings like these will ring in your empty stomach when you recall reading them.

Jaak Wassmuth
Jaak Wassmuth
12 years ago

This group of documentaries is a brilliant exercise in mis-information. It has been documented that the rise of Nazi Germany as well as Communist Russia were funded and supported by wall street bankers and industrialist; a fact that these documentaries managed to overlook. The federal reserve bank played a key roll in these investments as well as their downfall and dissolution. I think this film should be flagged as the propaganda that it is.
Also, if constriction will stop inflation, perhaps not printing money would have the same effect. garismendi was spot on with his suggestion that we all watch the "Secret of the Wizard of Oz."

planckbrandt
planckbrandt
12 years ago

The "experts" interviewed in this PBS documentary ignore the dependence on oil for transportation in every sector of the US economy by 1970s including "lumber and every aspect of home building" and everything aspect of everything else, including food which explains that inflation. This is the big fact they want to ignore, while focusing exclusively on Fiscal Policy to debunk Keynes. You have to look into the $$$ behind generating this propaganda and who stood to benefit by hiding the oil inputs factor in all that inflation.

Especially after the Streetcar scandal engineered by GM to get rid of electric powered public transportation. This documentary lacks critical thinking, and is a cover up for what was really going on here.

communism_works
communism_works
12 years ago

Good Documentary. I'm actually glad it's a pro-global bias. It's hard to find any information these days that isn't pure criticism.

henrymart81
henrymart81
12 years ago

I just started it.. Enough commercials, jeez.

AnjirGirl
AnjirGirl
12 years ago

Never thought that the price of eggs could make me tear up in sentiment...

Matteasmom107, I agree, the documentary, although very long, is very incomplete. And yes, it is very biased.

Matteasmom107
Matteasmom107
12 years ago

This could have been a great documentary, but it was mired by it's pro-capitalist bias and some glaring omissions. Perhaps some of that has to do with the fact that it was made in 2002, before the global meltdown. Here are a few things they left out:

They failed to mention the fact that the United States, under Reagan, was responsible for the Chilean Coup. They glossed over the systematic imprisonment, torture and execution of Chilean citizens under the Pinochet dictatorship that made enforcement of the "shock therapy" possible.

They made it seem as though the financial reforms were a spontaneous response to high inflation. This was not the case. The reforms were only undertaken because the IMF bailed out these countries, and they made huge cuts to social spending and privatisation the conditions of these loans. The fact that the "Chicago Boys" were entirely funded by the IMF was not discussed either.

Here is an update on some of the so-called success stories they featured:

The so-called "genius" Goni of Bolivia was forced to resign in '06 after his mass privatizations resulted in soaring prices for everything from natural gas to drinking water, causing widespread civil unrest and mass protests. He is currently exiled in the United States (probobly in Chicago, lol) and wanted by the Bolivian supreme court on charges that he ordered the massacre of around 70 civilians. So much for that "stability" he was gloating about!

Russia remains one of the most corrupt countries in the world, and Putin, being an oligarch himself, certainly didn't do much to reign them in. The number of billionares in Russia tripled after their "shock therapy". At the same time, the number of people living in poverty (under $4 a day) actually INCREASED by 72 million. 3.5 million Russian children are homeless. The alcoholism rate has doubled, drug addiction has increased by 900%, and they have one of the worst HIV epidemics on the planet, second only to Africa.

Poland has fared better, but inflation has been rising over the past 2.5 years, and unemployment is currently at 15%.

I could go on, but I think the point has been made...neo-liberal economic theory is not quite the success story that is being portrayed here. For some perspective, I suggest the following books: "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein, and "The White Man's Burden" by William Easterly.

-Rebecca

mikimonk
mikimonk
12 years ago

Best time and freedom I have in socialism !!! No system is perfect !!!!!!!
In cald war everybody trying to be the best for people and now democracy turning in to goverment dictature . No controle for incurance,tax ,banck and rich people make system for therselvs to protect and secure future .....

Kave_man
Kave_man
12 years ago

The markets are not free objection is the same as objection of the communists to criticism of their system - it's not the system, it's just that it was not implemented perfectly. It was never the state socialist system that was to blame for huge failures, it was always oh Marxism was not implemented perfectly, here are the gaps, if we had done it this way or that, changed this, rethought that everything would have been rosy. The EXACT same objection is raised by the free marketers - oh the markets are not TOTALLY free, if they were, then of course everything would have been perfect and so on. There is no perfect implementation of Marxism and no perfect implementation of free markets. Of course the question of the socialist state has been answered quite clearly - it was systemic, not a detail of implementation - the state socialist system of 20th century communism has failed completely and comprehensively. What the free marketers need to face is also this possibility that it IS systemic and not some detail of implementation. Of course, as long as it remains an implementation detail, the system need never change, and of course there will always be implementation gaps. It IS the system, pure and simple.

Southern N
Southern N
13 years ago

Can someone tell me when free markets have "failed"? Before you tell me that a free market has failed, ask yourself it was truly a free market.

Dlow
Dlow
13 years ago

@Who me? yeah you!- i am very well aware of the injustices the US has committed in Latin America.I have lived in Latin America for the last 10 years.being a gringo in central America you can hardly take a taxi ride without hearing about something negative the US government did in the past.Because of this i have done a lot of research on the topic. I have yet to see anything that says the cia was responsible for any economic collapses. economic collapses are due to poor economic policy. that is what this movie was about. "economics, not the injustices the US government has committed" the economic lessons this movie teaches are valuable. printing money to get out of debt is bad. like the US is doing right now. it doesn't matter what economic system you use. you do that it will hurt you. when an economic collapse happens and a gov can no longer employ and feed there citizens. the citizens need to feed them self's . to do this you have to allow people to create goods and sell or trad them. this movie is a true history of how why and when economic systems were created. that is all it is. you want this movie to be propaganda because if you do accept this as history it would change your economic philosophy. that is difficult, even a little painful. I know because when I left the US i was anti capitalism. after living for 10 years in a country that is moving from a socialist government toward a free market. i am confident that free markets are better. one by one as things get privatized the services improve and the prices drop. as for Putin i don't know much about Russia. so i will have to leave that alone for now.

ps how can you make this statement.
"Commanding heights is an interesting watch and has information but is not a history"
are you saying that these events never happened. because that is the only way it is not history.
here is the definition of history
a continuous, systematic narrative of past events as relating to a particular people, country, period, person, etc., usually written as a chronological account; chronicle:

explain to me how Commanding heights doesn't fit this definition.
it seems to me that it fits well.

Who me? yeah you!
Who me? yeah you!
13 years ago

You gotta love the guy selling sandwiches dreaming of one day being the Thai Mac D's. After what he went through I would not have been surprised if he had hit the bottle, turned to drugs or committed suicide. You'll certainly never see the Lehman brothers execs starting again from the bottom.

@Dlow - mentioning the failures of Latin american economies without mentioning the hand the CIA had in these failures = disinformation. To dress this information up as fact in a history doc that seeks to influence viewers that the free market is the only workable solution = propaganda. If you want to learn about history analyse both sides of the argument eliminate the inconsistencies and inaccuracies, pick up on trends of deception or exaggeration and then form an opinion. There are plenty of books about the coalescing of CIA policy and transnational expansion "requirements". Commanding heights is an interesting watch and has information but is not a history. Did you not see the bit about how Putin was good for free markets? He is still the same person with the same goals but is not so readily championed. Why is that? Its not the Caucasus or the ex-KGB power clique nor is it the Khodorkovsky side show.

Dlow
Dlow
13 years ago

I see all these comments about this being propaganda. but to me all I see is a history lesson. everything i have seen actually happened. the only argument that i have seen for this being propaganda is that there were corporate sponsors. having corporate sponsors doesn't make it propaganda.
this is the definition of propaganda.
information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
how does this doc fit that definition. Commanding Heights is a history lesson learn from it.

forthetimebeing
forthetimebeing
13 years ago

@Dez Troy-Carter

so good to hear from you ;-)

@all

Marx must be separated from all totalitarianisms, just as Einstein must be distinguished from the atom bomb. He informs today as well as e=mc squared.

The gorilla in the room, as far as Marxists go, is that every revolution (civil war) begun in his name has begun as a noble experiment. That they have failed, often unforgiveably, and why, is not a lesson to be forgotten, but studied hard and well.

Marx has not failed, any more than Einstein made the atom bomb. But there is no Marx-like guidance for the post-revolution to insure against this tendency.

omega man
omega man
13 years ago

This is a very nice DOC chronically portray the human experience. Our struggle to deal with the world and be able to survive in all the chaos of masses of human beings all jocking for their cut.

However, they mostly left out 'The Wizards of OZ'. The central bankers behind the curtains, pulling all the strings, that start wars and then funds them from both sides, walking away with unbelievable wealth, while the troops and civs mostly die. Very scary, but true.

none the less, best doc yet. Just keep in mind there are forces that are at work here that are not mentioned. Those of the ruling elite bankers that pull all the strings.

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@bear
um
people don't work for money in and of itself.. money is just a medium of exchange..
and people don't work for "the betterment of society" which is a fallacy and a term that's been used to trick people into giving up liberties. no one can truly know what is for the betterment of society..

people should be able to exchange valuables.. and spontaneous currencies (mediums of exchange) should be allowed to rise without state interference and control. thats all.. very simple.. whatever arises out of this simplicity should be let to flourish unless the people decide its not good for them and they stop exchanging valuables for it. the best kinda democracy! vote with your $$

gto
gto
13 years ago

socialism - choice of the naive person

capitalism - choice of practical/realist person

globalization - the inevitable path or fall/rise (depends on your view)

forthetimebeing
forthetimebeing
13 years ago

@bear

hurrah for you, good head of steam there! family is socialism, communitarian is socialism, sustainability is socialism, sharing is socialism, incentives are socialism. Socialism is inevitable, or ". . . this is the way the world will end, the world will end, the world will end, this is the way, the world will end, not with a bang but a whimper." ;-)

Bear
Bear
13 years ago

Why is the only incentive for people to work money?
This is just not true at all.
When I was a child I worked because I was told to. I think they called them "chores" and if I did not do them right(they inspected my work, IE quality control) I was penalized, usually by not getting things I wanted like candy or video games or other presents. If it was a severe thing I was grounded. Then I would have to do what ever it was right anyway.... No matter how you look at I worked for my basic social unit for "free"(a roof over my head and food/fun) and I did my best because if I did not my standard of living was dramatically decreased
Now let's put this into a clearer view for all of those out there that don't get it:
If The People are encouraged by the Government of The People, to work for the betterment of The People and they do an exceptional job they should get some kind of reward in standard of living. Conversely if they do a poor job then they should have a lowered standard of living. This way you combine the productive motivations of the private economy with the altruistic nature of the socialist system. If you work, everything you need is provided to have a pleasant life until you retire and then you are taken care(you would still do some kind of work to keep you active and productive, but only if your physical health allows.
If you do a good job you get a little more like the ability to go to night clubs for a drink and some music or more TV channels/internet time, you get the picture.
If you do a bad job the rations come with no spices and you get no coffee or sugar or salt. If you get caught hording or selling black market items you go to jail then you work there, with no freedom or entertainment with flavorless rations.
If you do a really good job you get a lot more. That way you standard of living is linked to your real output.
No banksters or military industrial profiteers will be able to steal your productivity because they would not exist because we will all be working for one goal. A good standard of living for all people on the face of this wondrous planet we live on. We would not have to worry about running out of resources because of an exponential growth curve driven economy which is unsustainable and the nail in the coffin for the Capitalist system. The Russian "socialist" system was more of a military dictatorship, not a true community oriented socialist state. If we do not do this we will use resources until there is scarcity and then we will kill each other for the control of those until we are no more. This is the reality of the planet we live on it does not go on forever, it is only finite. We all must share and work together or die of starvation and war. Period.
What we need is a Sustainabilityist system. Not a Socialist or Capitalist system.
One that supports all humanity and the planet on which we depend for our existence. We must have a paradigm shift or we are going to eat ourselves out of house and home and then where are we going to go?
The point of this film a a total fallacy. Wake up and smell the end of the world as we know it. We are wrong, our existence is backwards from the way it needs to be. Ask what you can do for the planet and humanity, not what humanity and the planet can do for you.
Please...

forthetimebeing
forthetimebeing
13 years ago

@princeton
By "in reality" you mean the centralized "ruler" hash (state capitalism) that's been made of it. Socialism paints the house with maximized resources and reduced energy expenditure. you're brainwashed by failed experiments. please do not repeat ;-)

princeton
princeton
13 years ago

@forthetimebeing

nice try, but no cigar.. socialism is we all work and throw our resources in a pool that has to be managed by some ruler, who will decide what everyone gets in return in a "fair' manner.
that is socialism... and in reality, it has never maximized resources while reducing energy expenditure.. to the contrary.. when no one owns anything, no one is motivated to work and produce, but instead, will slack off because no matter how much or what you produce, you will still get the same as everyone else.. that is socialism

basic economics people.. not so complicated.

@elvis p.

i like the way that was put.. sounds good.. but of course its absolute nonsense.

again.. basic economics people! money is merely a medium of exchange for goods and services.. it is so sad governments have counterfeited our currencies & brainwashed the public to the point people get mad at money itself, as opposed to the fact that violent criminals (politicians) steal it!

forthetimebeing
forthetimebeing
13 years ago

@ princeton

Greed may be a constant in human nature, but greed is not our ability and desire to maximize resources while reducing our energy expenditure. do less, eat (earn) more.

That is socialism.