If Michael Moore Is A True Liberal, Why Is He Supporting A Fascist Neo Con For President – Gary Null

October 21, 2016


Dear Michael,


I have known you for many years as a fellow film director and have admired your productions and efforts to shine a spotlight on many of the ills in our government and society.  I have considered you a loyal liberal. Nevertheless your recent wholehearted support of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic party has convinced me you are another good liberal corporatist standing in opposition to a progressive agenda for the future.  It is one thing to use a moral standard to bash the federal system and the GOP, but it is quite another to protect the neoliberal community and not apply the same standards to its failures and crimes.

But lets say you are correct in your belief that realistic progressive change will come to fruition with another Clinton presidency.  If that is the case, then how do you account and address the horde of proven progressive thinkers, activists and visionaries, who have stood up for the protections of civil society and humanitarian principles and would denounce your neoliberal ideology.  Chris Hedges, Cornel West, Ralph Nader, Jill Stein, Michael Hudson, Glen Ford, Alan Grayson, Michelle Alexander, Henry Giroux, Noam Chomsky, and others stand in opposition to your decision to come to the rescue of the Clinton corporate machinery.  These are individuals who have dedicated their lives and efforts to build a conscientious citizenry that would live by moral values and restore our democracy. They advance an equitable multi-party electoral process and realize the Democrat-Republican monopoly is now an unquestionable failure. They don’t bow to the amoral rhetoric of supporting lesser evils. They stand firm with the truth of the dire state of the nation and don’t compromise their commitment to justice and the rights of the people over the influence and wealth of the elite who the Clintons represent.

It may require another two or three presidential rounds before we have a candidate on an independent ticket viably challenging the duopoly’s status quo.  If you had supported Nader vocally, we may not be facing the dismal choice between Clinton and Trump today. You may have helped boost a third party into the playing field that is so necessary at this moment in America’s history.  We might not be confronting our increasing exploitation of labor, minorities, women, and those in poverty.

What is most disconcerting is that you would ask those of us who truly embrace progressive, non partisan humanitarian values to support the Democrats’ anointed candidate.  How can any of us who have been at the front lines of social change, who sympathize with the youth of the Occupy Movement and have sympathy for the collapsing conditions in our poorest neighborhoods within our inner cities and rural America possibly support a woman who wants to expand nuclear armament at the tune of a trillion plus dollars.  A woman on record to expand NATO’s presence in order to surround and contain Russia. Who has confirmed her commitment to a no-fly zone in Syria, which the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff has stated may be equivalent to a declaration of war against Russia.

After witnessing Hillary’s debacle in Libya, transforming Africa’s most progressive Islamic nation with the highest standard of living to an economic basket case, how can we not be outraged at her support for aggressive actions in Syria to remove Assad.  Libya under Gaddafi was the jewel of Africa, recognized as such by international government bodies. Libyan women were the best educated and had the most freedoms in the Muslim world. Libya didn’t have a noticeable debt, no crime, and there was complete religious freedom aside from radical jihadism which Gaddafi abhorred and repressed.  Libyans had universal healthcare, free education, and all married couples were provided with home ownership because these were recognized as universal human rights.  Compared to the US, we are a banana republic.  And yet, your allegiance to Clinton, along with Bill Maher, is a commitment to the violence the Obama administration, with Clinton as Secretary of State, has waged on Libya and now Syria with countless civilian deaths.

No progressive or liberal worthy of title can support war hawks such as Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, Robert Kagan, Donald Rumsfeld, and George Bush. Yet each has publicly announced his or her support for Hillary.  Doesn’t this signal something worrisome to you?  Does this not hint of the future ahead with her taking the mantle of the most powerful nation in the world?

Hillary has used the neocon playbook for the coups in Honduras and Ukraine. Now both countries are in financial collapse and riddled with corruption and violence. After her success in bringing a totalitarian regime to Honduras, the country has descended into the most violent and unsafe nation in Latin America. Why?  To come to the rescue of Chiquita and Dole Foods who faced decreased market share by a democratic elected president trying to improve its population’s standard of living?

Have you not reflected upon the cost of life, the demolition of infrastructures necessary for sustaining life, in countries where we have backed and funded regime change?

Now you are asking us – no, you are begging us as you did Nader in 2000 – to support Clinton. You are asking us to vote for a neo-colonial planet ruled over by western financial interests and its western allies protected by American military and intelligence hegemony.

You have been a champion of labor and unions. You have become one of their celebrities. Yet dozens of Wikileak cables show Hillary fully supports TPP and other horrendous trade agreements.  You want us to vote for her whitewashed and “improved” version. And since when has she ever been fully truthful? Repeatedly the Clintons word is not etched in gold. For what other reason does 66 percent of the American public distrust her?

Hillary supports everything we should not be doing to realistically tackle the threats of climate change. She is a staunch supporter of nuclear power and the myths of clean coal and clean hydrofracking.  Funds and subsidies for these wasteful, polluting industries would better serve the development and promotion of innovative clean technologies that would catapult the US to meet the advancements made by other countries to lessen humanity’s reliance upon fossil fuels.

Michael, you want us to accept this? You want us to believe Clinton offers solutions for the 21st century at a time when her and the New Democrat worldview is stuck in the 20th.  In fact, she is rebirthing the Cold War mentality that should have been laid to rest in 1991.

Hillary is on record supporting mass surveillance and spying upon all Americans.  She supports the Patriot Act, the National Defense Authorization Act and the silencing and prosecution of all whistleblowers. She sanctioned the spying of diplomats and world leaders, including our allies such as Merkel and Cameron.  She has sanctioned the infiltration of peaceful protest movements and demonstrations.  She has sanctioned the exploitation of women and cheap labor by her corporate friends at Walmart.  She is a staunch supporter of genetically modified food and industrial agriculture. This is evident by the legions of former Monsanto officials and lobbyists who have been behind her campaigns and in Bill’s administration since 1992.

Hillary has not come forward to forgive student debt that is now impoverishing young adults, turning them into debt slaves.  Underneath the seeming compromises with Bernie Sanders she is not fully committed to a single payer healthcare system.  Therefore how can you justify your film Sicko as positive advocacy for universal healthcare? How can you justify your celebrity status and fortune built upon the opposite of what the Clinton’s represent?

Hillary is also a heroine of the privatization of education and the promotion of charter schools. She supports the World Bank and IMF, which rapes other nations by forcing them into structural adjustment and austerity to pay off loans while privatizing their resources and assets.  The only winners are the corporate hounds who benefit from her political leveraging.

Today we know through Wikileaks that Hillary did not become the Democratic candidate by legitimate means.  The DNC worked in collusion with her campaign and her staff to undermine Bernie Sanders who posed the greatest threat to her neoliberal corporate interests.

By endorsing Hillary you are also unintentionally endorsing everything she has done, every regressive policy she stands for, by pulling the Clinton lever in November?

This is a woman with an army of technocrats, beltway insiders and corporate moguls, coexisting in a symbiotic relationship, to assure the expansion of a corporate state and oligarchy. And the media and justice system is behind her. How else could she have escaped unscathed by an FBI investigation that should have indicted her.  So imagine how greater her power, her control and influence in office when she rallies 16 intelligence agencies, the military and law enforcement, and the justice department behind her.

America has been in an endless state of war since September 11, 2001. Do you truly desire this war to rage endlessly? Is this what you envision for the country?  For the world and its millions of victims?

Your plea for a vote for Hillary demands nothing less.

I hope you reconsider your position and join us in supporting Jill Stein to build a viable, dynamic and progressive movement for the future.

Your friend,

Gary Null