Capitalism - Feudalism without the Kings

Tax the Rich

Movie Monday

Sorry I missed Knitting Friday. I always have the guilt when I miss a posting but I was feeling pretty low due to dental work. When will this end? 

The 2012 US presidential election. Now, that's an abrupt switch but unfortunately,  mention of the 2012 elections does have a place on this Movie Monday. 

I have said before that I think one true legacy for Obama over the past four years is that he saved capitalism. So, by design or missteps, he is looking at a 2012 electorate he helped create which consists of the Romney-touting 1%ers, (who are doing very nicely, thank you), and the disillusioned and, many times misinformed, struggling rest of the country. And this could be very bad news for Obama.

Read this posting in TBogg:  http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/  

(The Obscure Charm Of The Plutocracy, TBogg Sunday July 8, 2012 7:08 pm)
to get a flavor of the thinking of the 1% elitests in the US.

Unfortunately, for Obama, those not cocooned in such wealth and status (the 99%) do not necessarily make up his constituency. Through chicanery, lies and missed opportunities by this administration, many in the 99% have bought into the meme that only by throwing this Kenyan, Marxist, tax-raising, death-paneler from office will their economic condition improve. And I really can't blame them because people who are struggling economically have no time for talk about how elitist and bad for the country the Republicans are. They're living in a real, scary world of doctors' bills, utility bills, kids shoe bills, and mortgage/rent payments. So many are dying by slow drips. Like it our not, Romney is the new broom and they just may believe he's going to sweep their problems away.

Which brings me to Anonymous (2011). It's a hatchet job on Shakespeare; a re-telling of that age-old controversy which says the Earl of Oxford and not Shakespeare wrote "the plays."  OK, I get it. Some scholars/historians think Shakespeare of the very, sparse biography and the cryptic will where he leaves his wife their second-best bed never had the ability to write works which have been labeled genius. You know, like the 1%ers of our era who believe that they alone are capable/worthy of great things. 

What's that quote from the Range Rover rider in TBogg: I just think if you’re lower income — one, you’re not as educated, two, they don’t understand how it works, they don’t understand how the systems work, they don’t understand the impact.

So how could Shakespeare, commoner that he was, ever "get it" and be able to think universal philosophical thoughts? OK, I'll accept Anonymous' right to present this theory (Oxford was too politically connected to be associated with some of the controversy in the plays so Shakespeare became his "front.") But to present Shakespeare as a drunken, avaricious  buffoon is sooooo 1%: How could our servants have genius?

Anonymous with this approach, lost me fast. And then it sealed my disapproval with an LSD fantasy where it presents Oxford and Elizabeth I as lovers, parents of the Earl of  Southampton and, hold on to your socks for this one, also as mother and son. Talk about the iconic line from Faye Dunaway in Chinatown: My sister, my daughter, my sister, my daughter....... That was tame compared to Anonymous.

On one level, Anonymous might be just an enjoyable, bad movie but it plays just too fast and loose with facts so that it descends into a laughable, unwatchable 19th century "You must pay the rent. I can't pay the rent." melodrama rapidly. 

But my major complaint with this type of movie is philosophical for it presents that hackneyed mantra: Only the rich have worth and talent. And then, in case you missed that message, it swift-boats Shakespeare. Sound familiar?