The basis for E.H. Carr's international relations classic, The Twenty Years' Crisis:  1919-1939 An Introduction to International Relations, is based on the quest for equilibrium that must be maintained in order to achieve the most in the international arena.  There is constant conflict between Utopian fantasy and cynical realism.  It's a matter of the bureaucrat versus the intellectual.  Both need to compromise.

 What does this have to do with Michael Moore?  Michael Moore makes good documentaries.  His latest, Sicko, is the fourth-most successful documentary in history.  However, because of the way he presents his materials it cannot be a useful tool to enact policy.  

I discussed earlier the need for a balance between Utopianism  and realism, but in convincing people of policy there's a need for good information, passion, but also restraint and good journalism.  Michael Moore's goal should have been to convince people that were not already set on the idea of universal health care coverage.  Instead he further polarized the situation.  First, let's look at one of his choice of subjects:  a single mother who volunteered to clean up after 9/11 who now needs an expensive inhaler each month that she can barely afford.  By choosing her Moore set himself up to be charged with almost insulting manipulation.  He took one of the greatest tragedies in American history and made it a central feature of his film.  To further compound his error, he takes her on a boat to Cuba where they receive immediate medical attention and she receives the expensive inhaler for five cents.  Once again, if he wanted to prove his point he could have taken her to any European country with socialized health care.  Once again, he choose to have her treated in a country that is bitterly antagonistic to America.  He can do better.  The rest of his examples are far more indicative of the health care crisis in American than the 9/11 volunteers and less insulting to the viewer's intelligence.      

If history is any indication, compromises need to be reached unless tyranny is to reign.   If Moore had chosen to present Sicko in a less polarizing way, more would be done.  As those who want a more just society, we need to behave respectfully to those who disagree with us and convince through solid argument and representative examples, not blatant manipulation.    

Since ancient times people worried about demagoguery.  Plato produced an indictment of rhetoric, Gorgias, and Socrates was sentenced to death for his inability to be swayed by the leaders of the time (on a trumped up charge of "corrupting the youth").  Today, we find demagoguery replacing facts, mainly in the form of religion.  The war in Iraq is peddled to church groups as a fight against the Muslim faith (see Ann Coulter's intolerant attack on Muslims sprinkled throughout Godless:  The Church of Liberalism) and spending on religion has seen a massive increase since Bush took office. Former Prime Minister of Britain, Tony Blair, said, "I don't want to end up with an American-style of politics with us all going out there and beating our chests about our faith."  It may be significant to note that Blair is considered one of the most religious leaders Britain elected in recent years.  

After all the conflicts over government and religion since the Bush administration took over, what does the Bible say about the separation between church and state? 

The following story can be found in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke:

"The Pharisees went off and made a plan to trap Jesus with questions.  Then they sent to him some of their disciples and some members of Herod's party.  'Teacher,' they said, 'we know that you tell the truth.  You teach the truth about God's will for people, without worrying about what others think, because you pay no attention to anyone's status.  Tell us, then, what do you think?  Is it against our Law to pay taxes to the Roman Emperor or not?'  Jesus, however, was aware of their evil plan, and so he said, 'You hypocrites!  Why are you trying to trap me?  Show me the coin for paying the tax!'  They brought him the coin, and he asked them, 'Whose face and name are these?'  'The Emperor's,' they answered.  So Jesus said to them, 'Well, then, pay to the Emperor what belongs to the Emperor, and pay to God what belongs to God.'

Matthew 22:15-22

If the Bible is to be taken as the literal truth, God wants a distinction between church and state.  The role of religion should be in changing its followers.  Churches could take over where the government has thus far been deficient.  Instead of spending money on mega churches, lobbyists, and political campaigns direct finances to serving the community.  Day-care for single mothers, alcohol and drug rehabilitation, shelter for the homeless and food for the hungry.  If so-called religious demagogues took time to read the Bible and think about the views they are espousing they could realize the most pronounced feature of Jesus' character is his sacrifice for the people.  Jesus was in the business of helping people, not legislating for them.  He didn't want to impose a faith on the unbelievers, he wanted to help them.  One thinks now of how Mary Magdalene would be received by the "followers of Christ".  She would probably be told to get lost and to not expect federal funding for STD testing nor a subsidy on birth control pills.  True believers, step up.  For the rest of you, see the passages on the Pharisees. 

For further reading: 

American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips

Jesus is Not a Republican:  The Religious Right's War on America by Clint Willis

Tempting Faith:  An Inside Story of Political Seduction by David Kuo