When people speak about democracy their opinions differ greatly from opinions of their opponents. If politicians hold one truth about the essence of democracy, owner of huge enterprises have a different one, and average citizens have an absolutely different idea about the concept and real implementation of democracy. As a result, the logical question arises: “Does democracy have so many shades of meaning?” By the way, the question is a rhetoric one: there are no answers to it.
From the first impression the film of Michael Moore, The Big One, depicts an absolutely different aspect of social problems, unemployment and downsizing by huge companies. Still, let us think a bit: downsizing is another result, a negative aftereffect of misinterpreting or neglecting of main principles of democratic: all people are equal. So, what d we see? Rich people are more equal than pure ones. What can we think about the contemporary situation in the field of economics, politics, culture etc, if we watch TVs from morning till next morning? If somebody tells us from the screen of a TV set that everything is OK, and there is no aspects to worry about, would we reflect upon the destiny of those people who are under the threat of downsizing just because this or that company which earns several billions of dollars wants to save several thousands of dollars? It is obvious that the percentage of income and saved salary of those people who would be dismissed is incomparable.
Michael Moore has a book tour: he visited about fifty towns where people who worked for this or that big company for ten, fifteen, or twenty years suffer from the reality, they are downsized, and there are no obvious reasons for this act. The reason of promoting a company with the help of the lives of people who are left to the mercy of fate is an ugly joke of companies’ owners. Just imagine: you earn five billiard dollars per year. Would $100,000 change your life greatly? There is great doubt about it. Michael Moore asks owners the question of what the income of a company should be to change the lives of average citizens better. People have no money to pay for rent. There is even no opportunity to save some money for a car or a flat. There is just money to survive. While the movers and shakers want to save another thousand dollars.
The case with the owner of Nikes, Phil Knight, is another proof that owners of big companies have a mistaken interpretation of reality, if not to say that the interpretation is absolutely perverted. There is an impression that they live in an absolutely different reality: Phil Knight is sure that American people do not want to work at shoe factories, while American people come to the central office of Nike and ask for jobs. Of course, why should Phil pay six dollars per hour to an American citizen, if he can pay only several cents per hour to Indonesian girls? It is more comfortable to make an impression of a stupid man in front of the camera, than admit that the Indonesian labor is cheaper than the American one. Of course, the film of Michael Moore is created in a humorous tone. Still, there is a hard impression of despair and forlornness of the reason that almost nothing can be changed by average citizens and the ineffectiveness of governmental acts.