sotzo
Puritan Board Sophomore
The goal of this documentary is the establishment of corporations as being amoral power brokers, interested only in profits. As with much of Michael Moore's films (this one is not his although he is interviewed in parts of it) arguments are made on the basis of a single idea. This single idea controls the primary message of the film, which in turn results in arguments that do not take account of the full spectrum of human motivations, actions, etc. For instance, while I agree with the filmmakers that corporations are primarily interested in profit, does profit control every single decision and activity of a company? As it is with life outside a company, life inside is more complex than this. The individuals who make up a company are driven by personal satisfaction with their job, good working relationships with colleagues and other things. An interesting analogy would be to say that the only thing a doctor cares about is healing patients. Certainly this is not the case. Doctors also care about making money, having autonomy in patient treatment and their reputation in the community. In the same way it would be wrong to say "the only thing that drives a doctor to act is healing patients" it is similarly a poor argument to say "the only thing that drives corporations is profit".
The above aside, secular humanism cannot answer the problems the film sets forth. Folks like Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore are interviewed, but neither these men nor the filmmakers seem to understand that their worldviews cannot account for what "evil" is in the first place.
However, the Bible, in its sufficiency, is wonderful in what it has to say to the problems the film raises. For example, profits taken at the expense of poorly paid workers is condemned by Scripture (James 5:1-6). Hearts changed by the Gospel of Christ is THE answer. However, when hearts remain hard, the Christian is to aid the poor by influencing the civil authorities to that end (James 1:27 would certainly justify this means).
So, accumulation and power for the purpose of gaining more things and power is the result of sin. Christians, as ones called to participate in reversing the curse, should aim at taking government seats, executive positions, and other positions of "power" for the purpose of bringing God's kingdom on earth. Part of bringing his kingdom to earth is to see that the effects of sin are blunted until that day when they will finally be eradicated. Members of Christ's Church, no longer needing worldy goods or reputation as they are co-heirs with Jesus himself, are uniquely suited to carry out these tasks.
One of the most interesting things about the film is when it explains that, by law, a corporation has personhood. That is to say, in the same manner an individual has legal status, so does a corporation. The history behind this is quite interesting - it stems from corporations using legal precedent from cases involving civil rights violations against African-Americans. The way the courts acknowledged personhood for African-Americans was similar to how they granted personhood to corporations. Problem is, of course, that African-Americans are indeed persons whereas a corporation is not.
Finally, liberal Christians would be in danger of falling into or applying a liberation theology when seeing this film. We know that liberation theology is only slightly better at laying a foundation for true action in this world than secular humanism. A Jesus of liberation theology would have never told the lame man lowered through the roof that his sins were forgiven - he would have simply set up shop curing people with no concern for the gap that exists between God and man due to sin.
I highly recommend this film. It will provide an outstanding resource for community discussion with unbelievers and also cause some soul searching for those Christians who live and die by private property and the political rhetoric which protects it.
The above aside, secular humanism cannot answer the problems the film sets forth. Folks like Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore are interviewed, but neither these men nor the filmmakers seem to understand that their worldviews cannot account for what "evil" is in the first place.
However, the Bible, in its sufficiency, is wonderful in what it has to say to the problems the film raises. For example, profits taken at the expense of poorly paid workers is condemned by Scripture (James 5:1-6). Hearts changed by the Gospel of Christ is THE answer. However, when hearts remain hard, the Christian is to aid the poor by influencing the civil authorities to that end (James 1:27 would certainly justify this means).
So, accumulation and power for the purpose of gaining more things and power is the result of sin. Christians, as ones called to participate in reversing the curse, should aim at taking government seats, executive positions, and other positions of "power" for the purpose of bringing God's kingdom on earth. Part of bringing his kingdom to earth is to see that the effects of sin are blunted until that day when they will finally be eradicated. Members of Christ's Church, no longer needing worldy goods or reputation as they are co-heirs with Jesus himself, are uniquely suited to carry out these tasks.
One of the most interesting things about the film is when it explains that, by law, a corporation has personhood. That is to say, in the same manner an individual has legal status, so does a corporation. The history behind this is quite interesting - it stems from corporations using legal precedent from cases involving civil rights violations against African-Americans. The way the courts acknowledged personhood for African-Americans was similar to how they granted personhood to corporations. Problem is, of course, that African-Americans are indeed persons whereas a corporation is not.
Finally, liberal Christians would be in danger of falling into or applying a liberation theology when seeing this film. We know that liberation theology is only slightly better at laying a foundation for true action in this world than secular humanism. A Jesus of liberation theology would have never told the lame man lowered through the roof that his sins were forgiven - he would have simply set up shop curing people with no concern for the gap that exists between God and man due to sin.
I highly recommend this film. It will provide an outstanding resource for community discussion with unbelievers and also cause some soul searching for those Christians who live and die by private property and the political rhetoric which protects it.
