Dark Money is an understated political thriller documentary that seems to extol the homespun values of rural America, but is actually a chronicle of the last stand, tip of the spear (depending on who wins) battleground to see how individual people will guard against the disproportionate influence of moneyed interests, either from American oligarchs like the Koch brothers or artificially created people like corporations or nonprofits. Will government represent all people equally or favor the people with the most money, whether they are individuals or artificial creations, domestic or foreign?
Dark Money is a sober, must see for all Americans after the disastrous Citizens United SCOTUS decision. It is the documentary that Citizen Koch aimed and missed at being. Just when some of the talking heads seem as if they are nuts as they outline elaborate, outlandish conspiracy theories on a dry erase board, the film backs it up with proof and interviewing the opposition as corroborators to the conspiracy. When it culminates in an actual courtroom trial complete with surprise witnesses and email smoking guns, zeal for justice can no longer be dismissed as partisan or a loner’s obsessive, imaginative rants.
Dark Money really impressed me because every time that I asked myself a question, the filmmakers anticipated it, answered it and tied all the threads together into a cohesive, understandable story that anyone could understand. Why am I hearing about the death of snow geese? Why is this documentary focusing on Montana? If Citizens United equated money into something akin to freedom of speech, then what exactly is the legal problem? While it initially seemed hokey, I do think that it is useful to depict what a real representative should look like as the founding fathers’ originally intended because most of us are accustomed to professional full time politicians.
Dark Money was mostly told in chronological order although occasionally the film looks backward to history to remind viewers of what happened when moneyed interest last dominated government and how far reaching and devastating the effects of government for the few can be for everyone. Unlike films such as Little Pink House, it wasn’t afraid of keeping a somber tone even in victory because the filmmaker wanted to remind viewers that justice is slow, but the bad doers already won and were able to do lasting damage in the meantime.
While Dark Money occasionally shifts focus to examine what is happening on the federal level to compare and contrast the ineffectual Federal Election Commission with the effective and humble Montana Commission of Political Practices (COPP), it rigorously maintains its focus on the state level to show that even when the federal government fumbles in its fiduciary duties to the people, states can still effectively stem back the tide of insidious influence. Other states can use Montana as a guide on how to return to equal representation.
One of Montana’s secret weapons is the value of having an independent local and state level media focus on government so citizens can remain informed of any political shenanigans. While Dark Money may feel as if it is going off on a tangent by segueing into a human interest story when it focuses on John S. Adams, an investigative journalist, it does highlight how crucial it is to have watchdog independent media to expose wrongdoing by government officials and counter the “electoral bombing campaign,” which maligns candidates not bought and paid for by a 501(c)(4) through a postcard mailing campaign that the average candidate does not have the funds to counter.
Also because Adams is from Wisconsin, it gives Dark Money an ostensible reason to return home and compare Montana with Wisconsin, which the filmmakers use as a worst case scenario in which moneyed interests succeeded in buying every branch of government; thus legally it can prevent investigations into any corruption even when it exists. Wisconsin still serves as a chilling reminder of how powerless people can be if they don’t remain vigilant.
Dark Money was refreshing in comparison to Citizen Koch because it never fell into partisan politics by pandering to more conservative viewers by basically going, “Ew, Democrats.” The film barely distinguishes between Democrats and Republicans unless a viewer is really looking for the abbreviation next to the signs. Instead when there is a focus on politics, it is the civil war within the Republican Party or rather the infiltration of Libertarians into the Republican Party. The rhetoric superficially sounds the same as both sides discuss states’ rights, but the devil is in the details because the different ways that people use those terms can mean small to no government, but no government does not necessarily mean more freedom from government, just government by private interests. For the Libertarians depicted in this documentary, the people is a synonym for corporations or individuals with great wealth who want to hijack public forums and make them into one way streets in which they deliver the message, but receive no feedback. They want to eliminate the free market of exchanging ideas and collaborating.
I would have preferred for Dark Money to explore why individuals consciously side, even for a short time, with these oligarchs and corporations. Specifically Sarah Arnold, who ends up testifying for COPP, used to work for American Tradition Partnership. She clearly agrees with their agenda, but did not like their methodology. She basically explained that she didn’t want to become evil when fighting evil, but I’m really puzzled at what evil that she believes they were fighting because I have yet to see what these 501(c)(4)’s stand for that equals light and goodness. If her definition of good equals what a 501(c)(4) heralds, then I don’t understand what made her wake up one day and realize that the methodology, not the positions, are wrong. I know that this documentary is not partisan so I’m not saying the filmmaker should have broadened the scope, I’m just curious.
The Republicans featured in Dark Money were quite reasonable regarding the role of government in people’s lives, but I was curious if that was because of Montana’s demographics and lack of diversity. The majority of Americans are suspicious of other people’s motives for getting government assistance, but will become indignant of government tries to take it away from them. The only brown people that I recall seeing in the documentary was a photograph of Native Americans, and I have no idea if they are watching this film cackling sardonically at how ideal this film makes Montana seem. I think that shining a light on their perspective would have reflected the representative values professed by everyone in the film, and it is an unfortunate oversight that is not surprising, but disappointing.
One critic’s only explanation of why he gave Dark Money such a low rating is that PBS acquired it, and it fits in well with that channel’s lineup. This documentary isn’t pedantic with narrative voiceovers by a notable actor. It feels like an organic, fly on the wall perspective of what democracy looks like, and I was riveted at every moment. I never felt sleepy once. Even if it was the typical PBS documentary, which it isn’t, I like their documentaries, and I don’t see it as a problem. Dry and droning is C-Span. This film was riveting. Just when I couldn’t imagine how the story could go beyond the amount of time that had already passed, there was another twist. It delivered.