"THE SHOCK DOCTRINE: the Rise of Disaster Capitalism"

[shereads]

from a review of the book by Naomi Klein

In THE SHOCK DOCTRINE, Naomi Klein brilliantly proposes a compelling counter-story to the prevailing fable of free market infallibility. Buttressed by painstaking and wide-ranging research, and an ability to see connections where others only see coincidence, Ms. Klein amply shows that profit-making is not the essence of democracy as Milton Friedman and his minions would have it. She shows instead that the machinery of the state and the requirements of "disaster capitalism" are now so tightly synchronized in their exploitation of disasters both man-made and natural as to be virtually one in the same.

Citing pertinent examples to prove her thesis that "disaster capitalism" is now rampant around the world - in Russia, in China, in Iraq to name just a few - she describes how in times of crisis, elites everywhere have learned that they can profit by implementing policies, e.g., "shock therapy" or "shock and awe," that would have been vigorously opposed in normal times. When these changes to Friedmanite free-market dicta are opposed, as they were in Chile, a third shock is implemented. This, according to Klein is a shock that is entirely man-made - the torture and murder of those who would stand in the way of the takeover of the public sector, or, as neo-liberal economists would have it, the bringing forth of a new birth of freedom.

During the "Reagan Revolution," Klein argues, the notion of the `Entrepreneur As Hero' was buffed to a high gloss though the influence of right-wing think tanks whose pronouncements were reported by a cowed and obedient media. A decade later in the dot.com era, entrepreneurs were burnished to blinding sheen when the media fed the world images of swashbuckling venture capitalists who were touted as bringing forth a new millennium through the Internet. <my boldface ~ sr > Klein maintains that George W. Bush's "public offering" -- the War on Terror - covered slavishly and avidly by the media, has been wildly successful, lining the pockets of investors in the new Homeland Security sector as promises of taxpayer money everlastingly flowing into the coffers of the military-industrial-energy complex have been fulfilled. This is the new "new economy:" the looting of the public sector through the now tried-and-true methods of disaster capitalism.

THE SHOCK DOCTRINE reveals the many wounds that disaster capitalism has inflicted upon the body politic both here in the U.S. and throughout the world over the past 25 years. It is a breathtaking achievement. Highly recommended.

Klein credibly supports my own suspicion that the Iraq war and Bush's so-called "war on terror" have succeeded by the only standard that matters to neocons like Dick Cheney: they have created an efficient pipeline for the transfer of tax dollars into corporate hands.

It's once again worth noting that Halluburton Industries has spent four years ignoring the U.S. Army's demands that it account for billions in overspending on its Iraq contracts; and that Halliburton it now moving its headquarters - and our money - from the United States to Dubai. With the tax code restructured so that high-income families carry a reduced share of the burden, and with inherited wealth protected from taxation, Bush-Cheney have achieved vast gains for their economic class and effectively fulfilled the mission outlined by Cheney's "Project for the New American Century." The idea was on record long before Cheney volunteered to head the selection committee for a Bush 2000 running mate. If that isn't enough to turn sound minds into raving conspiracy theorists, what is?

Congratulations, Dick.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

from a review of the book by Naomi Klein



Klein credibly supports my own suspicion that the Iraq war and Bush's so-called "war on terror" have succeeded by the only standard that matters to neocons like Dick Cheney: they have created an efficient pipeline for the transfer of tax dollars into corporate hands.

It's once again worth noting that Halluburton Industries has spent four years ignoring the U.S. Army's demands that it account for billions in overspending on its Iraq contracts; and that Halliburton it now moving its headquarters - and our money - from the United States to Dubai. With the tax code restructured so that high-income families carry a reduced share of the burden, and with inherited wealth protected from taxation, Bush-Cheney have achieved vast gains for their economic class and effectively fulfilled the mission outlined by Cheney's "Project for the New American Century." The idea was on record long before Cheney volunteered to head the selection committee for a Bush 2000 running mate. If that isn't enough to turn sound minds into raving conspiracy theorists, what is?

Congratulations, Dick.

Wow, this really solidifies things I've been seeing in piecemeal for years.

This is why Eisenhower made those exiting comments about the military industrial state.

 

[shereads]

Wow, this really solidifies things I've been seeing in piecemeal for years.

Sometimes, being right all the time really sucks.

This is why Eisenhower made those exiting comments about the military industrial state.

He did? What did he say?

 

[Edward Teach]

If that isn't enough to turn sound minds into raving conspiracy theorists, what is?

For Sean Hannity to say it?


An associate of mine who was taking a poly-sci course at a local university told me about the following:

The prof was challenged by one of the students for his remark during his lecture that there was no evidence Iraq was involved in 9/11. He asked the young student what evidence it would take for her to believe his statement. She replied that she would only believe it if she heard Sean Hannity say it. And she wasn't kidding.

 

[shereads]

She replied that she would only believe it if she heard Sean Hannity say it. And she wasn't kidding.

I'm surprised she'd be so easily swayed. For my sister and her husband to be convinced, there would have to be a concensus among Bill O'Reilly, Jesus Christ and George W. Bush himself. My brother-in-law maintains that GWB is "the most honest president who has ever held the office," and "a president for thinking men and women."

 

[S-Des]

The prof was challenged by one of the students for his remark during his lecture that there was no evidence Iraq was involved in 9/11. He asked the young student what evidence it would take for her to believe his statement. She replied that she would only believe it if she heard Sean Hannity say it. And she wasn't kidding.

Which is just as sad as the people clapping when Rosie O'Donnell said Bush's people are the ones who blew up the twin towers. Pointing out the idiocy on either side of the aisle accomplishes nothing, there's more than enough to go around. There are entire websites devoted to stories of students getting screwed on grades by whack-job professors who disagree with them politically (people who have a 4.0 average until a class where the professor spends all his time spouting conspiracy theories, where they magically are reduced to a 2.0 or lower student for that class alone, then return to their previous GPA (minus what they can't make up, of course).

As for Haliburton, they made billions under Clinton, now they've made billions under Bush. Big surprise, a rich corporation taking advantage of a situation to make more money. *shrug* Almost all politicians manipulate their office to make themselves, their family, and their friends money (just ask Harry Reid and his three, lobbyist sons ). If someone can prove that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld did it purposefully, I'll be thrilled to see them go to jail. Most likely it will continue to exist in books like this and blogs, where people can safely proclaim the validity of their theories without having to face the people they are accusing. They'll always be "right" and no one will ever have to pay. It's a win-win.

 

[shereads]

deleted pointless reply to predictable argument

 

[Edward Teach]

Which is just as sad as the people clapping when Rosie O'Donnell said Bush's people are the ones who blew up the twin towers.

So, you are equating Rosie O'Donnell to Sean Hannity? Good point. They carry about the same amount of weight in my book, too.

 

[past_perfect]

He did? What did he say?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

There is a fascinating theory about the causes of our American Civil War.

The Republicans wanted the transcontinental railroad located between Chicago and San Francisco. Democrats (South) wanted it placed between New Orleans and California.

Both groups fomented strife to alarm people and distract them. The Republicans actually went so far as to fund the Missouri riff-raff that attacked free-soilers in Kansas.

 

[rgraham666]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

(Stands and applauds!)

Damn, why can't we have Presidents of this quality today?

Oh wait. Never mind. We wouldn't vote for him. He couldn't compact his thoughts into five thirty second sound bites. Plus Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter etc would make it clear what a terrorist loving Commie he was. And lots of people would believe them.

 

[cantdog]

For the sake of argument, you know, it really does make a difference where you hear it from. What sets this apart is the research and the citations.

Nevertheless, I kinda liked "commie." We don't have a word like that today. Maybe "terrie?" Communism had a color, so we had "pinkos." If the color is green for them terrorists, maybe we could make do with a tinge of green.

Terries and their sallow apologists.

One could wave a list of known terries in the state department before the cameras. Terries and sallows could be brought before a new HUAC! Ooh. We got something here.

 

[Handprints]

from a review of the book by Naomi Klein

Citing pertinent examples to prove her thesis that "disaster capitalism" is now rampant around the world - in Russia, in China, in Iraq to name just a few - she describes how in times of crisis, elites everywhere have learned that they can profit by implementing policies, e.g., "shock therapy" or "shock and awe," that would have been vigorously opposed in normal times. When these changes to Friedmanite free-market dicta are opposed, as they were in Chile, a third shock is implemented. This, according to Klein is a shock that is entirely man-made - the torture and murder of those who would stand in the way of the takeover of the public sector, or, as neo-liberal economists would have it, the bringing forth of a new birth of freedom.

No disrespect to Ms Klein - I thoroughly enjoyed No Logo - but I can make the mirror argument by shifting the dates to 1957-1977 in order to describe the opportunism, tactics and "third shock" of disaster socialism. Most of the same countries feature in both arguments...

In fact, if you go back and read Regis Debray, you'll find that the hunt for shocks and means to exploit them had become the main preoccupation of "progressive elements" by the mid-50s and probably peaked during International Socialism's African adventures of the 70s.

Which side's efforts last longer and really do provide better lives for the inhabitants of the systems they alter may be a better test of their morality than trying to decide whose hands got bloodier doing the midwifing.

Regards,
H

 

[rgraham666]

What you resist, you become.

 

[Pure]

No disrespect to Ms Klein - I thoroughly enjoyed No Logo - but I can make the mirror argument by shifting the dates to 1957-1977 in order to describe the opportunism, tactics and "third shock" of disaster socialism. Most of the same countries feature in both arguments...

In fact, if you go back and read Regis Debray, you'll find that the hunt for shocks and means to exploit them had become the main preoccupation of "progressive elements" by the mid-50s and probably peaked during International Socialism's African adventures of the 70s.

Which side's efforts last longer and really do provide better lives for the inhabitants of the systems they alter may be a better test of their morality than trying to decide whose hands got bloodier doing the midwifing.

in terms of people killed you cannot equate regis and che with the likes of Cheney, Rummy, Wolfie etc...

what's you best estimate of iraqi deaths at US hands, since GWB started this liberation?

i'm not sure i agree with the 'disaster capitalism' thesis, but i do agree that 9-11 is being exploited to the T.

 

[trysail]

NATO Staggers in Afghanistan as Some Can't Fight On
By James G. Neuger

Oct. 8 (Bloomberg) -- NATO's campaign in Afghanistan is under threat from member countries on the front lines clamoring to get out and others on the sidelines refusing to go in.

With military casualties on the increase this year, the Netherlands and Canada are weighing full or partial pullouts within the next 18 months. Meanwhile, leaders in Germany, France, Spain and Italy, mindful of polls showing a majority of Europeans oppose the conflict, are resisting calls to send troops to relieve them.

The European reluctance to fight is making it harder for the 41,000-strong force to consolidate gains against the Taliban, which is battling on in the rugged terrain of southern Afghanistan six years after the U.S. drove it from power in response to the Sept. 11 attacks. It is also endangering the unity of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, raising the stakes for a meeting of defense ministers later this month.

``If NATO can't succeed with the task that it's been given, it's had it, it's lost all credibility,'' says Frank Cook, 71, a U.K. Labour member of Parliament who toured the war zone with allied lawmakers last month. ``Certain NATO members haven't fulfilled their NATO commitment.''

As the U.S. military hunkers down in Iraq, President George W. Bush is trying to shift more of the Afghan burden to Europe. The U.S. remains the dominant force in Afghanistan, with 15,000 soldiers under NATO command and another 11,000 in a separate counterinsurgency mission. Britain, which is shifting forces from Iraq to Afghanistan, now fields 6,700, the second-largest contingent.

Trainers and Helicopters
U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates will use the Oct. 24-25 NATO meeting in Noordwijk, Netherlands, to prod the allies to provide another 3,200 trainers -- to build up Afghan military and police forces that are understaffed, underequipped and underpaid -- and 20 helicopters to relieve an American unit in Kandahar.

``We have been very direct with a number of the NATO allies about the need to meet the commitments that they made,'' Gates told a Sept. 27 press conference.

``It's important that the full coalition show as much solidarity as possible,'' NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer told a news conference in Copenhagen today. ``Winning and keeping the hearts and minds of the NATO nations is as important as winning and keeping the hearts and minds of the Afghan people.''

Under Strength
Afghanistan's army now numbers 50,000 soldiers, according to NATO. It won't reach the desired strength of 70,000 combat- ready troops until 2009 at the earliest, the NATO commander in the country, U.S. General Dan K. McNeill, said last month.

As a result, NATO is conducting a two-tiered war, with the U.S., Britain, Canada and the Netherlands doing most of the fighting and dying while troops from countries such as Germany are confined to safer areas. In the first nine months of this year, 110 NATO soldiers were killed in action, almost double the 58 for all of 2006. The U.S. tops the casualty list, having lost more than 440 men and women since 2001.

The government of the Netherlands, with 10 of its soldiers killed and its reserves depleted, is weighing a cut in its force to around 1,200 soldiers from 1,700 next August and is negotiating with Norway, Slovakia and Ukraine to fill the gaps.

`They Can Do It'
For Hans van Baalen, a Dutch opposition lawmaker, there's one European country that can make a difference: France.

France's military is ``well-equipped, well trained to go down south -- they can do it,'' says van Baalen, 47, who chairs the Dutch Parliament's defense committee. ``The French should reconsider, the same with the Germans.''

So far, France has confined its 1,000 soldiers to the relatively safe Kabul region, and new President Nicolas Sarkozy's offer of six Mirage fighters to patrol the southern skies won't alter the balance of power on the ground.

Canada's 3,000-strong contingent has suffered more than 70 dead, on a par with Britain. With resentment brewing over the performance of other allies, the war may now claim a political casualty: Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

The three opposition parties that hold a majority in the House of Commons are pressing Harper to pull the troops out by February 2009. Confidence votes in late October may bring down the government and force new elections.

Hostage-Takings
War fatigue has gripped Europe, with the public troubled by the guerrilla fighting with no fixed front lines or exit strategy and by constant hostage-takings and casualties.

In the latest kidnapping involving westerners, four Red Cross workers were abducted southwest of Kabul on Sept. 27. At least 900 Afghan civilians were killed in 2006, Human Rights Watch estimates; for the first eight months of 2007 alone, the United Nations puts the figure at over 1,000.

``This was sold as an easier mission than it turned out to be, and once things got difficult, the governments have done a miserable job of explaining why we've got to be there,'' says Tomas Valasek, a former Slovak Defense Ministry official now at the London-based Centre for European Reform.

Opposition on the European continent to a shooting war -- 60 percent are against in France, 70 percent in Italy, according to a poll last month co-sponsored by the German Marshall Fund of the United States -- raises questions whether Europe has the muscle to back up its foreign-policy ambitions.

German Attitudes
In Germany, the culture of pacifism that took root after the two world wars is clashing with 21st-century realities. Opposition to the Afghan war is highest there, with 75 percent of people against active combat, the poll found.

Germany's parliament has to approve the dispatch of troops overseas, and some Social Democrats in the ruling coalition plan to vote against reauthorizing the 3,000-strong mission on Oct. 12, firing a warning shot at Chancellor Angela Merkel. More resistance is likely next month when the Bundestag considers whether to yank 100 elite German troops from the U.S.-led counterinsurgency force.

``It may in the end just be a purely symbolic gesture, but it won't help Germany down the road if the image that's given by the government is that Germany's commitment to Afghanistan will be costless, non-violent and purely humanitarian,'' says John K. Glenn, director of foreign policy at the German Marshall Fund in Washington.

Economy Neglected
One Social Democrat who plans to vote no, Klaus Barthel, blames the U.S. for overemphasizing military solutions and neglecting the buildup of Afghanistan's economy, which is still riddled with corruption and heavily dependent on poppy production.

``I don't detect readiness among the allies, rather a reliance on the military card in an increasingly fragile environment,'' says Barthel, 51. ``The policy doesn't seem to have any answers to the growing influence of the Taliban.''

One index of the Taliban's resurgence is the opium harvest, which rose 38 percent to a record 8,200 tons this year. Afghanistan produces 93 percent of the world's opium, the UN says, warning that the Taliban-infested southwest is taking on the traits of a narco-state.

Under pressure from Europe, the U.S. this year backed a ``comprehensive approach'' -- code for putting more resources behind civilian reconstruction.

``Insurgency, weak governance and the narco-economy'' may stall progress or throw Afghanistan back to where it was five years ago, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon wrote in a Sept. 21 report. One warning sign: Economic growth slipped to 8 percent in 2006-7 from 14 percent in 2005-6, according to the UN.

What remains, for visitors like Cook, the U.K. lawmaker, is a country reminiscent of 12th-century Europe: a ``positively feudal, pre-Magna Carta system.''

 

[shereads]

(Stands and applauds!)

Damn, why can't we have Presidents of this quality today?

Oh wait. Never mind. We wouldn't vote for him.

Eisenhower? Certainly not. He had an adulterous affair. Also, his hair was not the least bit presidential.

 

[shereads]

"'Tell us about your missile program or we'll..

... humiliate you at ping-pong,' snarled the American. Sweat broke out on the Nazi's brow..."

In other Bush-league news, CNN last week interviewed one of the U.S. interrogators who questioned high-value Nazi prisoners during WWII. Asked if they used methods like water-boarding, he said, "Of course not. I was appalled when I read about that."

He explained that the most valuable information gathered by his group (a missile under development by the Germans) was obtained by 3 days and nights of intensive eavesdropping on the prisoners.

He added, "You learn a lot more by playing chess and ping-pong with a man than by threats and intimidation."



Cheney must be seething.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Eisenhower? Certainly not. He had an adulterous affair. Also, his hair was not the least big presidential.

You people have prolly figured out by now that my politics are somewhere left of center - far left, actually. But I have a great deal of respect for Eisenhower as president. Doing an Eisenhower/Bush comparison -

Ike - Republican President ............... Bush - Republican President
Ike - Long Time Military Vet ............. Bush - Yeah. Right.
Ike - Vast Leadership Experience....... Bush - Dick Chaney
Ike - Communicator ........................ Bush - Liar
Ike - Ended a great war .................. Bush - Started his own
Ike - Was respected by world ........... Bush - Yeah. Right.
Ike - US and World Prosparity ........... Bush - Ask Flint, Michigan

That was a different time with the cold war and all that. But the US was prosperous and there were no shooting wars. Now?

Eisenhower worried about what he called "The Industrial-Military Complex". Bush made that nightmare come true with Halaburton and Iraq.

The question that I don't understand is, what happened to the Repbulican Party?

 

[shereads]

There is a fascinating theory about the causes of our American Civil War.

The Republicans wanted the transcontinental railroad located between Chicago and San Francisco. Democrats (South) wanted it placed between New Orleans and California.

Both groups fomented strife to alarm people and distract them. The Republicans actually went so far as to fund the Missouri riff-raff that attacked free-soilers in Kansas.

Makes perfect sense. Nothing unites people behind their leaders like an enemy.

 

[trysail]

If you are a U.S. taxpayer, here's what you owe:

Iraq: $900,000,000,000
Estimated Unfunded Social Security liability: 11,000,000,000,000
Estimated Unfunded Medicare liability: 66,000,000,000,000
Treasury Debt: 9,000,000,000
No. of U.S. taxpayers in 2003: 131,000,000


PER TAXPAYER:
Iraq alone: $6,870

Social Security alone: $83,969

Medicare alone: $503,817

Treasury debt: $68,702

Total of Iraq, Treasury Debt, Social Security, & Medicare: $663,359

 

[shereads]

"Only a crisis, real or perceived, produces real change."

~ Milton Friedman, quoted in Klein's The Shock Doctrine

"Everything changed on 9/11."

~ GWB, justifying illegal domestic spying



The Shock Doctrine promotional video

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

JENNY

If you examine both political parties theyre modelled after the crime syndicate created by Lucky Luciano. Each controls specific organizations, industries, and services. Each provides its 'clients' with its vice of choice.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

JENNY

If I were a Democrat I'd give some serious thought to who I nominate for President in 2008. It may not be too late to push Hillary overboard. But if Guliani runs against her. she'll lose.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Leaders like crises because they provide opportunities to take power away from the people. Ultimately, though, leaders take too much power and freedom and start a revolt.