Ron Howard and Klaus Schwab Attack Boeing: A new Netflix documentary exploits people to attempt to kill American capitalism

With all the talk against Boeing, the great American airline manufacturer that the liberal Ron Howard directed hit piece tried to utilize from the high moral ground, the effort has one central message. The world needs to convert its values from shareholder capitalism to stakeholder capitalism the way the Desecrators of Davos view it. The new Netflix documentary that is now streaming that tells a story of Boeing’s 737 MAX safety concerns is all about painting Boeing as a company that fell from grace due to its greed in trying to stay competitive with the Airbus A320 and that its focus on short term profits was what killed hundreds of people in two crashes that occurred in the new plane, one in Indonesia, and another in Ethiopia. The Hollywood hit piece comes at the problem from a political point of view. It attempts to exploit the deaths of innocent people in a way that sells the Klaus Schwab view of the world from the Desecrators of Davos and not the get it done mentality of American manufacturing. It’s really a disgusting movie made by people attempting to apply Covid safety rules to the stock value of Boeing and shove them into the woke world of progressive logic as only radical leftists understand them. A lot is going on in what went on with the Boeing 737 MAX and the world of safety surrounding it. But remember what I say all the time, the rules of the world are made by the losers, meaning, those who can’t compete with the good in the world make rules for themselves to penalize the best and make them more equal to the lazy, the timid, and the socially awkward. 

Boeing and Airbus have a problem when it comes to making plans for a newly created for a smaler world where air travel to even far-flung places in the world is suddenly possible, in a relatively short period. This has pushed all these plane manufacturers to massively automate these fancy new planes in ways that wouldn’t even be conceivable a few years ago. Traditionally, a company like Boeing almost exclusively had pilots flying their planes from military backgrounds. Their pilots had been flying planes for decades in the military dime, so when there were continuous improvement opportunities, pilot feedback with the engineering staff allowed for adjustments as a plane matured in a program. But these days, with all these new planes entering the market, the pilots from places like Indonesia and Ethiopia are coming from backgrounds where flying planes weren’t a reality. So the training of new pilots has to be significantly simplified, and every possible contingency needs to be worked out that takes away the possibility of pilot error. That is how the anti-stall system was put on these new MAX jets from Boeing so that new pilots without the benefit of years of training could fly these planes much easier. In the case of Boeing, their anti-stall system malfunctioned, which contributed to the crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia. When sensors on the plane detected a stall condition during flight, the system took over the pitch from the pilots and pushed the nose down. The pilots, unsure how to deal with that condition, fought the flight controls, but the planes nose-dived from the air into a crash because of all the robust automation they didn’t know how to override. It’s kind of ridiculous that their expert for this film to establish moral character as if he spoke for all pilots is a guy who crashed his plane in New York.

The real problem was automating the flight systems due to pilot training limits. In the great race between Airbus and Boeing between these new fuel-efficient planes, Airbus has had better luck at adopting their aircraft to the needs of automation. Boeing, used to a significant relationship between pilots and engineers built on American military experience, had engineered some single-point failures that have proven to be costly. It certainly wasn’t on purpose. But the point of the Ron Howard documentary wasn’t to see the situation as an accident in a rapidly changing marketplace, but an intentional killing of innocent people because Boeing was too interested in profits. And that if only we had a society that didn’t worry about shareholder value as much as they do, those people would still be alive. The movie written in the way that all communists think assumes that if there were more employees in the labor union at Boeing, that if there were more quality inspectors, and if Boeing had been willing to ground the MAX jet instead of competing with Airbus for market share, that all those lives would still be with us. The assumption was that Boeing killed those people in their airplanes because they were greedy and only cared about their company’s stock value. The other assumption which wasn’t said but was heavily implied was that in a world of stakeholder capitalism, which is essentially state-controlled communism where a strong central authority runs everything, lives would be saved, and everyone would live happily ever after. 

Even more than that, this movie, Downfall: The Case Against Boeing, is an attack on great American industry and a swipe at the traditionally get it done mentality of enterprise. As liberals who do everything in life behind the safety blanket of armchair quarterbacking, they never plan to take responsibility for anything, as all liberals are prone to do. They are the first to preach about the morality of something, but when their side is guilty of sex trafficking, or drug abuse, they point to institutional failure and not themselves. In the case of Boeing, they want to bring down the concept of the CEO with large salaries and to replace them with state central control, to federalize big companies like Boeing so that safety can be imposed, and the temptations to play with people’s lives will be averted. They don’t tell you that their solution to the problem is not to build the planes. They plan to let the market rot and to use safety to hide the incompetence of all involved. To use rules and regulations to protect the inefficient from any expectation that might come from competition. To bend the world to the limits of the slow, the not very smart, and the timid. Boeing was a company built on risk, on American innovation, and when you didn’t get it right the first time, horse sense allowed you to survive to the next day, and everyone worked together to make things better. But when dealing with a global enterprise, which is what aviation is these days, we deal with people from all kinds of backgrounds. And the challenge is to simplify everything for them by making everything more complicated at the end of the system. And when you don’t figure everything out the first time, bad things can happen. Yet instead of understanding that, Ron Howard and the gang are more interested in introducing the Klaus Schwab view of the world, removing shareholder capitalism from consideration and replacing it with stakeholder capitalism. Because when the state controls Boeing, as liberals plan to impose on them, there won’t be any expectation of profits from a Boeing stock. Instead, the value will be that people are working, subsidized by the state, of course, and that safety will be first, even if that means not building and delivering the planes to the market. To the socialists and communists of the world, the market can wait. After all, safety is the most important thing, even if that means that the rest of the world has to slow down to those limits and that they will learn to like it. Whenever a lefty suggests that Americans do things too fast and too recklessly, that is what they are really after. In the case of American business, it should make us all sick to our core because it’s not just an assault on a great American company, but an assault on us all and the greatest country on earth and their core beliefs. 

Rich Hoffman

Click to buy The Gunfighter’s Guide to Business