Full of Shit? You're Not Alone.

I just finished watching the acclaimed Canadian documentary The Corporation. I have some problems with it.

A long-ish while ago, I was sent a link to the 9/11 Truther movie called "A Big Steaming Pile of Bullshit", or something similar. The movie made me so mad, inside of 15 minutes, that I made a HUGE rebuttal, minute by minute, and posted it online. I will probably never do that again, as it was time consuming, and- though I didn't know it at the time- much of that work had already been done (and done better).

Instead, I'll give a general overview of The Corporation, and my problems with it.


First off- for those who have not, or won't watch the movie- an overview. The Corporation lays out a picture that is, in a hyphenated word: anti-corporate. There are many notable names: Noam Chomsky, Milton Friedman, Naomi Klein, Ray Anderson, etc. There are many more notable corporations: IBM, Wal-Mart, Bechtel, Nike, Interface, GE, etc. The general consensus is: corporations are bad for people.

My take: maybe, but.

First off, let's start with a relatively limited sourcing of claims. There are many claims made in the movie, like all synthetic chemicals are bad for the environment, while only some are cited. The contracts between IBM and the Nazi government are shown, for instance; as are parts of the documents Jane Akre used to sue Fox News in her failed whistle-blower suit. In general, the film only shows a very few instances of corporate greed/malevolence/wrong-doing, and only in those few cases are there citations- if any are given, at all.

That's a minor point, as the few cases they show are all- generally- well documented. I bring it up because lack of documentation/citation is a warning sign. It means, usually, that: (a) the person has no proof whatever they're telling you wasn't a lie when it was told to them; or (b) they didn't figure you'd want proof so, despite their passionate position, they didn't bother actually researching it- and therefore have no idea that it's all conjecture and opinion, with little or no factual basis. There could be other reasons, but I'm too lazy to provide them- but have fun looking them up for yourself, consider it a lesson in how to do your own research when some asshole on teh intardwubz tells you something.

1) Not all synthetic chemicals are bad. Some of them are synthetic versions of chemicals that appear in nature. But, even if 99.999999999% of all synthetic chemicals are bad for people and the environment, there are those that are not. Seems like semantics, huh? It might be; but if you're gonna tell the truth, why exaggerate the claim? Especially when the truth is that some chemicals are only dangerous in large dosages.

2) At one point, while listing the sins of the Corporation, there is the caption: "Harm to animals: experimentation". To be highly pedantic: Fuck off. When is a chicken's life not equal to a humans? When killing that chicken can save the lives of thousands. When killing that chicken means prolonging the life of a family. Vegetarianism be damned. Sure, it may be morally ambiguous to test on animals in some cases, but not in others. Sure, we arbitrarily say: that animal is too cute to be tested on. But the claim is that animal experimentation isn't needed. That's an extraordinary claim, as animal testing has helped us develop much of modern medicine- including vaccines, insulin for diabetics, and better understanding of how our bodies work. So, prove it. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". Who said that, and why are they wrong? (Hint: They're not).

3) In general, the film makes pretty damning cases against certain corporations, or certain bits and pieces of corporations, or their histories. Then they take those cases and say "That's how all corporations work!" Which is not a logically valid argument. In fact, all it means is "Hey, I don't like what they did here, or how those people did that there, so all Corporations are bad." Want a quick way to check that reasoning? Change the word "Corporations" to the plural form of your favorite minority. Seems stupid, huh? Making broad generalizations- even if it's about a group that is generally despised- is never a logically valid tactic. In fact, it's an emotional argument, which has nothing to do with logic.

4) Furthermore, there are lots of loaded words used throughout- words that connotate heavily emotional ideas. Like saying "Patriots" instead of the more ambiguous "soldiers". Or "freedom fighters". In addition, there are loaded pictures/symbols. Buckets of skulls, barrels of radioactive waste, scenes of what looks like billowing clouds of polluted smoke pouring from smoke stacks. No way of knowing if that's just water vapor- not that I'm saying it is; but if it was, how would anyone know? These are shock tactics. For those of you who hate Micheal Moore, he's interviewed and footage from his movies/shows is cut-in at various points. It's easy to admit that Moore is very big on shock.

5) When alternate, or opposition, arguments are shown, they are shown mockingly. Mostly, though, they're just not shown. In fact, I'd say the only time a contrary opinion is shown, is when it's easily mockable.

6) Let's get this fucking straight, once and for all: 99% of all species that HAVE EVER LIVED.... EVER are already extinct. Extinction is the evolutionary norm, survival is the abnormality.

7)A point of interest: in 1991, when the conflict in Iraq took oil from $13/barrel to over $40. This is stated by a broker of some sort- I can't remember his name or title form the movie. It's just an interesting fact, it means nothing- he could have his figures wrong, he didn't cite his source(s).

8) On the mocking of alternate views, titles are changed based on what's being said. Watch closely, you'll see. One person is introduced with a mocking title, and it's not until much later int he movie that anything resembling a real title is given.

9) There is a discussion of FDR. There is no discussion of Keynesian Economics vs Austrian Economics, though blatantly Keynesian ideas are trumpeted at several points (especially during the brief bit about FDR).

10) They mention the nagging study. This is when they deride corporations for, you know, trying to sell people the stuff they make. What isn't mentioned, is that in all the psychological techniques, the absolute best way to resist them, is to know about them. Once you understand that you can be manipulated, and what they're trying to do, you're the most able to ignore their manipulations. This si true in interrogation, and it's true in advertising. This is why new ways of advertising have to be invented. By being aware, people are harder to manipulate.

11) After that whole movie, I still don't know what a corporation is, as opposed to an LTD, an LLC, INC, CO, etc... I have some general ideas- and some foreknowledge; but the movie never really explained what the fuck a corporation actually is.

12) Godwin's Law be damned, I guess. Though, by the very historicity of the case, it may actually be exempt- but still, as an avid internet type, my skin crawls at the violation out of reflex.

13)In general, their whole thing about IBM and the Nazis is the same argument in "Gun Manufacturers should be held accountable for their products being used in gun homicides." This seems apt when a gun company knowingly makes their guns easily moddable to fully auto, because it will sell better on the black market (increasing demand and profits). And yet, the argument isn't a great one. Guns made to shoot targets can be used, equally well, to kill people. The difference is in the user, not in the gun. [As a side note: I support laws that limit the types of firearms available to people. Mostly because I distrust all of you bastards; but also because I have a big mouth, and I'm a huge fucking target.]

In the end, I recommend the movie, in a way. It shouldn't be viewed by the terminally gullible. However, for those of you who aren't going to drink the tang, just because the video is sleek and has high production values, I say give it a look. You may learn something, or be inspired to learn more about something. Personally, I'm about to spend, what I estimate will be, many hours on theWikiGoodness looking up some things.

Also, there is a couple very unfortunate looking people later in the movie. So, if you're like me, and love to feel pretty at the expensive or the genetically unlucky, take a peek. Your self-esteem will thank you.