Thinkcorps

I think the one thing I would take away from this movie—regardless of political caste—is that the emergence of a global economy, globalism if you will, requires a radical readjustment in your perspective. It is difficult to operate effectively on a global scale while simultaneously addressing local/national interests. The two are so vastly different that I don’t see either ever really understanding the other.

The most poignant moment in the movie for me was when the old lady in the (I’m assuming) bingo parlor, said that “those poor people will never be free.” I can only assume that she meant that when you’re sitting on billions of barrels of oil, people will always be knocking on your door and whispering in your ears. And they will.

To deny that Iraq has great strategic value both for its oil reserves and the impact it could have to balance power in the worldwide oil market is to be stupid. Our country runs on oil and has vast global investments that also require oil. Oil is important, and on some level, I think you can create spreadsheets that justify killing for it (I personally disagree morally, etc. with this, but capitalism is not inherently moral, is it?). Taking action to protect those oil reserves is by no means irrational. The Bushes know this, being both oil men and politicians, as Moore points out by illuminating the Bushes’ relationship with Saudi leadership.

The Other Reasons
I don’t buy the “freeing Iraqis” argument. (I heard this last night while watching Scarborough Country for a few moments until I got ill—that guy should be smart enough to know the shit he’s shoveling.) We went into Iraq ostensibly to disable the threat of Saddam’s weapons. Iraqi freedom was a side bonus, or it was supposed to be. If it is really our job to police the world, imposing freedom on all who stand in our way, then where are all the troops in Africa? No one wants to go to Africa because it’s of little strategic value compared to other targets, and it’s a bloody mess to boot.

Moore’s biggest failure, in my opinion, is that he takes things back to a personal/local level, showing the impact that this war has had on regular American families who’ve lost their children, and how the poor are going to have to shoulder the burden of protecting the rich. These are fine and true arguments, and I think that the government should weigh heavily the cost of sending our troops into battle.

Go Global
But the interesting points in the film are made around Carlyle Group. This is globalism defined. They evalute opportunities around the world and have created the necessary relationships to transcend old-style national borders and governments. This is how you do business on a global scale. These are the people you rub shoulders with.

When you build a home (or subdivision), for example, there are many local officials who’s approval is critical to your success. You aren’t operating in a vacuum. Same with politicians, only more so. Our government has many relationships around the world that it maintains to address US interests. Now, if you’re a US business seeking to expand internationally, wouldn’t you go talk to the guys who are tapped into that network?

The biggest problem I have with Bush & Co. is how clear it is that these global business interests (look at Cheney’s resume) are pulling the strings, and our government is currently ill-prepared to police the gray areas the current administration has illuminated. Cheney’s mystery energy meeting is a case in point. I could care less about whether Ken Lay was there—Enron’s a smokescreen anyway. I do however want to know what influence the other oilmen there had on our energy policy, and thus, our foreign policy.

I respect the idea that facilitating business will improve the lives of Americans (mostly the rich, unfortunately), but I also think we have a moral imperative to protect our environment and help those less fortunate. Simply pushing one agenda is not going to work—as I said before, capitalism is not inherently moral. Free markets don’t care much about babies, sickness, clean air, or birds.

How we balance out these competing visions is the real trick. I see how business operates on a global scale, but I’m not sure how other agendas can effectively rise to that level. We need a balance in order to succeed. After all, no matter you’re reasoning (wmds, freedom, or oil), creating balance in the Middle East is what the Iraq war is/was really about.