That's what happens in the land of the free.

Those fighting for freedom are considered unAmerican.

In fact, the next time you hear some cynic exclaim that nothing can change, suggest that they see Stone's film as a primer in political education

That's because US policies have played their part in developing Stone's politics ever since the Vietnam veteran turned up on the other sides of the barricades.

His CV includes movies like Salvador, Wall Street, Fourth of July, JFK, Nixon and a documentary where he went Looking for Fidel.

So, who better than Hugo Chavez in Venezuela to continue his political education about the reversal of fortunes of the infamous Truman doctrine.

Truman defined US policy as supporting "free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures."

That meant anyone resisting US imperialism, especially those who received solidarity from the socialist world.

In short it contradicts the view of the US neocons and all those who support their aims, as parroted by their puppets in the media.

Thus, Stone's opening salvo attacks CNN news for displaying all the arrogance of a people who've forgotten their founding fathers, let alone their manners.

Such was their behaviour, the national press critics chortled before choking as they realised they too worked for the same media.

Unlike myself, few, if any have ever seen the consequences of US support for former fascist puppets, never mind interviewed Stone.

Ironically, when I interviewed Stone in 1991 he was completely unaware we were in the same "hovel" in Dean St where Marx resided in 1851-56.

His look of astonishment was the same then as that he displays as he listens to Hugo Chavez explain the tenets of the Bolivarian Revolution,

Pointing up at a portrait of liberator Simon Bolivar, Chavez outlines the history of struggle he inspired against the Spanish empire and its relevance to today.

Chavez then proceeds to elaborate on his role in the Venezuelan revolution from the time when he was a soldier and arrested for organising a coup.

Standing in front of a firing squad, his companeros refused to shoot, making it possible for him to escape and go on to organise a resistance movement.

It finally succeeded in him being elected president, only to spend the rest of his term combatting counter-revolutionaries in the pay of the US.

Stone reminds us of the latter, especially the US concocting false film footage to support their contention that Chavez's supporters shot down the unarmed opposition.

Then it's off on the tour around the country before seeing Evo Morales in Bolivia, where he learns to chew coca leaves, while explaining its beneficial effects at such high altitudes.

All this is illustrated with archive footage and lessons in the US role in putting down any sign of resistance, including the assassinations of revolutionaries.

The list is too long to mention, but it does refer to Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954, Che Guevara in 1967 and Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973.

The witnesses for the prosecution include Cristina and Nestor Kirchner in Argentina, a country which has a long history of US interference.

Then it's up and on to see Lula da Silva of Brazil and Fernando Lugo of Paraquay before concluding in Cuba with a fascinating interview with Raul Castro.

It's an amazing journey, with everyone illustrating the degree of politicisation that has challenged US hegemony and the monetarist policies of the IMF.

They all say, it can be done. You don't have to be held to ransom by the banks. It is possible to change social priorities, if only we're prepared to show some solidarity.

They also know it's dangerous, especially when your neighbour is well-practised in subversion, genocide and already gearing up for war to control their oil.

We're reminded of the Bush doctrine: "War is the only way to stimulate the economy."

They were clearly pleased at the victory of Barack Obama, only to realise he's upped the war strategy and still refuses to recognise Cuba.

As for finance capitalism and being beholden to the banks and having to pay our debts? It's all shown to be the politics of fear.

Stone stands accused of producing propaganda and being a traitor, with some so-called liberals dismissing him as naive.

Obviously, it's not "balanced" it's trying to convey a history while attempting to propagate alternative solutions to capitalism.

Oddly, given that it's called a documentary, it includes contributions from Tariq Ali who is credited with writing the script, when it appears to have been produced on the hoof. What's that about?

Well, just in case we don't get the point, Tariq wants to emphasise that the Bolivarian revolution demonstrates there's been a political tectonic shift.

More, as with every acolyte of the theory of permanent revolution, he suggests that the South might go on to liberate the North.

Apart from his thesis being ignorant of the uneven development of capitalism, it's an insult to the ever-changing US working class.

They too have a history of suffering at the hands of the FBI and the mafia, alongside a constant stream of imported cheap labour.

That not withstanding, there's a lot to cheer the beleaguered left wherever they are, especially since the current crisis spotlights the need for social solutions.

The US, is no longer able to throw its weight around with impunity, whether it be in its own backyard or in its outposts around the world.

That's the point of Stone's film. We've got to build the resistance to imperialist hegemony. If nothing else, the film will provide for discussion.