US NOW

This movie is all about how the networked world can change our lives, and our political methods, for the better or for the worse.

One more thing... This is a public domain download.

Thanks, Looks Good!

Seems interesting.
Note that many options for web connections far better/FASTER than what we have now have been killed because they toke the control of the connections out of the hands of big corp.
So, i fear that a web based movement that became too strong could ultimately be cut off at the "root".
Still, IT DOES SOUND INTERESTING.

yes but this movie still portrays ideas within the context of worldview which accepts capitalism. enemy propaganda.

at 51:21 sec in to the documentary, Ed Miliband (cabinet minister) said that participatory government is possible but with limits, attempting to assure the need of representative government, pointing out that with out it, where would the people get the money for the projects they need and vote on, but that of course is humorous, since people pay the taxes that pay for representative government and the stock pile of money they use and waist mostly on project people don't want or need.
Bottom line, i don't think there is room for both.
Or, i don't think that those with power believe their is room for both, and so the status quo will be enforced if threatened. Viva la revolutione!

In the movie, they also point to the example of 60's communes failing as an argument that people can't Govern them selfs beyond some point, but what is NOT pointed out are the actions taken by governments to make communes fail exactly because they did succeed, people can govern them selfs, and that became a threat.
Commune-sm...
Or, do you think people would have voted to bail out the big banks or bail out the people losing their HOMES?
interesting movie.

I will check this out. But to the question above about would "the people" bail out the banks. Yes they would and did. And will again. News last night gave an interview with William Black who prosecuted the savings and loan fraud. He quoted Geithner as saying that US now has the policy of "capital protection." This means investor protection from loss _as policy_.

No one fights this because the grandmas who took their savings and put it in things recommended by the Beardstown Ladies, Motley Fool and other mass marketed shills have made the failure of markets a threat which no one will allow.

In this sense the investors such as the grandmas and 401k holders are too small to fail-- too small to question actions by government that will threaten their own survival. The people are now complicit in the looting.

Lon,

It's funny you mention that. That's how insidious the right has been over the last 25 years or so, in fact, when developing tax policy, such as IRAs and 401ks etc., the main objective was to make ordinary people feel invested in the interests of capital.

This has widespread effects, not the least of which is, as you say, making them complicit in the bail out of the ownership class. It also makes them unconsciously antagonistic to labor, to themselves.

In fact this is a big part of why there is always talk about social security being wrapped up in the capital markets. Good eye.

This is not original with me. Before he wrote "What's the Matter with Kansas?" Thomas Frank has a book called "One Market Under God" which very effectively gives the case for this creation of "the ownership society" that Bush 43 talked about. All of Frank's work is highly recommended including his journalism and The Baffler.

Frank unties the knot of why all this is so hard to understand from the standpoint of the question: "Where is the outrage?"

I enjoyed this documentary very much! Thank you, OP!

Here's the review I wrote for it: "Strategies for Revolutionaries: 'Government 2.0'" (http://sophrosyne.radical.r30.net/wordpress/?p=2484).