Gunning for Michael Moore

Michael Moore is one of the most odious men on the planet. I've personally never understood what anyone sees in him - his writing is awful and his films dire - but for some reason people like him. I suspect a lot of it is to do with his chosen subject matter. He panders to the liberal left and tells them exactly what they want to hear. Because of that - and because the liberal left dominate the media - he is feted by many of his peers and beloved by The Guardianistas who talk up his rubbishy propaganda to promote their agenda.

So, I'm delighted to see an interview on Frontpage magazine with Larry Elder. Elder is a conservative talk show host in America who has spent some time trying to arrange an interview with Moore - who famously declared that he would debate with "any Republican any place at any time". He has refused to debate with Elder - a Republican - at any place at any time.

The interview with Elder starts off by discussing gun control and crime in the US. Elder makes some relevant points about England.

FP (Frontpage): Can you talk a bit about rising crime in England and the high percentage of "hot burglaries" in that country?

Elder: In America, because the bad guy never knows whether someone in the home possesses a gun, the percentage of so called "hot burglaries" is relatively small, approximately 13%. In England, however, where possession of a firearm, even in the home, is severely restricted, bad guys need to worry about whether the homeowner possesses a handgun. As a result, the "hot burglary" rate in England is approximately 50%. I might also add that despite England's gentile (sic) reputation, London is a more dangerous city than New York. In virtually every category - armed robbery, car jacking, assault - England is now more violent that America. The only category where America still "leads" is homicides and the gap is rapidly narrowing. In England as here, laws dissuade only the law abiding, not bad guys. Guns are increasingly available on the black market.

FP: Can you expand a bit on how London is more dangerous than New York? Some would find this hard to believe.

Elder: In virtually every crime category, except for murder, London is more dangerous than New York.

That is a sobering thought. Ken Livingstone take note. Elder moves on to Moore.

A year or so ago, a crew from Canada came down to interview me for an unrelated subject. We started talking about Michael Moore's movie. They all laughed at the depiction of Canada as a place where there is so little crime that people leave their doors unlocked, particularly in big cities like Toronto.

Moore would have us believe that Canada is some kind of socialist success story. Those of us who read Mark Steyn recognise Canada as the nearest thing North America has to one of Europe's basket case states - dependent on immigration to maintain the bloated welfare state, politically correct to the point of parody, bereft of self-confidence and wrapped up in internationalism - though Harper is doing something to address these problems, which is more than can be said about anywhere in Europe!

The interviewer asks Elder about Moore's use of lies and distortions in his "documentaries".

I find Moore guilty of both wrong-headed naïveté and of deliberately lying and distorting. I think Moore genuinely believes that guns are a bad thing, but unfortunately advances his argument by using lies and distortions, as well as what he would undoubtedly say is to achieve a "good end."

Let me elaborate. I said that I "try not to assume" people like Michael Moore intentionally engage in "lies.” In Moore's case, what other conclusion can you reach other than he intentionally lied, distorted, and indeed engaged in propaganda? He manipulated scenes in "Bowling for Columbine" and in "Fahrenheit 9/11." Then, incredibly, he calls his work documentaries. When he is challenged about distortions and manipulative edits, he then calls his stuff works of fiction. He tries to have it both ways. I believe that Michael Moore is one of those "means to an end" kind of person. If it requires lies and distortions for a greater good, so be it.

We see the same technique used again and again by the left - to the point where the "lies and distortions" become accepted as truth and evidence. We've seen it in the past and we're seeing it today with the Canutists advancing their political agenda by spreading lies and distortions about global warming and climate change caused by man - despite there being no evidence.

Moore is not the only one doing this, nor is he the best - not by a long way - or even the most credible. But he is the most high profile. it's important that more and more people are made aware of this left wing technique and their insidious propaganda. It was sixty odd years ago that Hayek warned us of the dangers posed by socialist intellectuals - the "second-hand dealers in ideas". It's about time we started listening.