tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9234955.post4886009583053568366..comments2023-11-02T15:45:38.275+01:00Comments on Cine y Política: Inside Job, de Charles FergusonLibertarianohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06167951779427917106noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9234955.post-40056221491138486982011-04-03T12:36:59.047+02:002011-04-03T12:36:59.047+02:00Yo creo, sinceramente, que en el documental se toc...Yo creo, sinceramente, que en el documental se toca todo menos el "quid" de la cuestión. Vamos, que no se habla del fondo del asunto ni de lejos. COmo ha escrito J. Tucker:<br />"The biggest problem was that the narrative never asked where all these paper profits were coming from. The monetary angle eluded them completely. The filmmakers missed this structural point because they decided at the outset to trace our problems all the way back to the “eighties.” Now, in the vocabulary of the left, the “eighties” is a curse word. It means Reagan, which means evil. It means capitalism, greed, the rich getting richer, and all the other political cliches we know so well. So rather than looking carefully at the monetary system that generated all this paper, they filmmakers looked to presidents and their great black beast of “deregulation.”"<br />Y añade:<br />"This film demonstrates all you need to know about the worldview of the American left, and it is completely barren of sound theory. They weave tales of demons all around, even as they lack the intellectual apparatus to understand events rationally. It really is pathetic. This film is a gigantic missed opportunity. They started to tell a good story and instead ended up chasing around ideological conventions and coming up empty handed. That said, if you can provide your own voice overs, Inside Job is worth an evening."JJ.Mercadohttp://centaurosdeldesierto.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.com