Fatso

Amanda Marcotte has an interesting post on the general disdain for Michael Moore that seems to cut across the political spectrum. Here's the punchline:

But I do think liberals who dislike Moore so strongly are genuine in their distaste and not just trotting it out to appear fair’n'balanced. And I think that Ezra’s review points to why—the overarching theme of Moore’s career has been an attack on American exceptionalism, a disease that infects both the left and the right in this country. Granted, the right suffers from the disease far more, but the belief that America is somehow better or at least different and can’t be held up to the same standards as other countries is endemic. It’s why so many usually intelligent liberal types fell into the trap of supporting the invasion of Iraq, when it should have been clear from the beginning what a bad idea it was—they just believed, in their heart of hearts, that America could succeed at this task that would be impossible for anyone else. Maybe the Marshall Plan’s effectiveness has deluded us into believing we have powers we don’t, or maybe it’s just that exceptionalism is drilled into our heads from the first day we crack open a history book in school. But Moore’s repetitive refrain that Americans would overcome a lot of our problems by learning a little humility grates on a fundamental and widely shared belief, which goes a long way towards explaining why critics particularly don’t like the way Moore sandbags people and takes them down a few notches. It’s a representation of what he’s doing to our cherished belief in our superiority.

The problem is Moore’s right. American exceptionalism is our nation’s tragic flaw and until we set out to fix it, we’re going to continue to make one avoidable blunder (like the Iraq war) after another.

I've encountered this anti-Moore attitude among liberals, conservatives, devoted middlers and even radicals, who will readily admit that this or that Moore film was good. It's bizarre. I have no idea whether it's Moore's insistence on American humility that rubs people the wrong way, or his appearance, or the fact that he's on-camera so often in his films. None of those qualities in other stars seem to inspire such contempt from so many.

In the comments below Marcotte's original post, someone named "aimai" has this to say:

What Moore was doing was revolutionary because *no one else was doing it.* You could see pro corporate propaganda on any channel of any tv and embedded in any movie but you couldn’t see the america moore was showing you unless you peered around the edges of bad tv news and saw what was lurking behind the endless parade of local disasters.

In fact that is what I think is moore’s genius. Not only that he demands, through his everyman, an answer to questions that are too crude and rude for liberal pundits to be asking but that he looks behind the news coverage to see what is left on the cutting room floor–e.g. his famous shot of bush looking frightened on 9/11.

That’s his genius, and that’s rare and uncomfortable for elites (whether right or left). I remember thinking while I was watching columbine that moore is probably a pretty aspergers type guy. He refuses to worry about how other people perceive him or his questions, he refuses to be embarrassed by things other people would literally rather die than do (ask to see someone knowing they are going to be refused). I think the success and respect accorded to, say,the crew of 60 minutes or bill moyers depends heavily on their complicity not in the politics of republicans or liberals but in their acceptance of the cultural norms of the notion of an elite and of elite storytelling.

I admire Moyers, but "aimai" makes a good point: he's nothing if not polite, even toward those he skewers. Michael Moore doesn't operate in that mode. He's not disrespectful so much as irreverant.

Heaven forbid.