COMMENTS: 142
Naomi Klein Strikes Back at Critics of Her 'Shock Doctrine' Book
September 11, 2008 |
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Media and Culture headlines via email.
Advertisement
- One year ago, I set off on a book tour to promote The Shock Doctrine. The plan was for it to last three months, quite long by publishing standards. Twelve months later, it is still going. But this has been no ordinary book tour. Everywhere I have traveled- from Calgary, Alberta to Cochabamba, Bolivia -- I have heard more stories about how shock strategies have been used to impose unwanted pro-corporate policies. I have also been part of stimulating debates and discussions about how the current round of crises -- oil, food, financial markets, heavy weather -- can be transformed into opportunities for progressive change.
And there have been other kinds of responses too. The Shock Doctrine is a direct attack on the intellectuals and institutions that have disseminated corporatist ideology around the world. When I wrote the book, I fully expected to get hit back. Yet for eight months following publication, there was an eerie silence from the "free-market" ideologues. Sure, a few dismissive reviews appeared in the business press. But not a word from the Washington think tanks that I name in the book. Nothing from the University of Chicago economics department. Even The Economist magazine, which used to attack me gleefully and with great regularity, never mentioned the book in print. An American television producer, who was trying to find an opponent to debate me on-air, confided that she had never been turned down so consistently. "They seem to think if they ignore you, you'll go away."
Well, the silence from the right has certainly been broken. In recent months, several articles and reports have come out claiming to debunk my thesis. The most prominent are a "background paper" published by The Cato Institute, extended into a full length book in Swedish (!), and a lengthy essay in The New Republic by senior editor Jonathan Chait.
Several readers have written to asking me to respond to these attacks, if only to help them defend the book more effectively. I resisted at first (clinging to my summer vacation) but I appreciate the feedback and several points do need correcting. Since the reports by Cato and The New Republic -- though purporting to come from radically different points on the political spectrum -- share some marked similarities, I've decided to tackle them together. Here goes.
Sorry Boys, Milton Friedman Supported The War
Both Jonathan Chait and The Cato Institute claim that the late economist Milton Friedman was a staunch opponent of the invasion of Iraq. The Cato paper states of me that, "She claims that Friedman was a 'neoconservative' and thus in favor of an aggressive American foreign policy, and she argues that Iraq was invaded so that Chicago-style policies could be implemented there. but nowhere does she mention Friedman's actual views about the war. Friedman himself said: 'I was opposed to going into Iraq from the beginning. I think it was a mistake, for the simple reason that I do not believe the United States of America ought to be involved in aggression.' And this was not just one war that he happened to oppose. In 1995, he described his foreign policy position as 'anti-interventionist.'"
Similarly, Chait accuses me of not knowing the difference between libertarians and neo-cons and chides me for never mentioning -- "not once, not anywhere" -- that Friedman "argued against the Iraq war from the beginning." Apparently Friedman's anti-war stance should be "morbidly embarrassing" to me.
I am not the one who should be embarrassed. Despite his later protestations, Milton Friedman openly supported the war when it was being waged. In April 2003, Friedman told the German magazine Focus that "President Bush only wanted war because anything else would have threatened the freedom and the prosperity of the USA." Asked about increased tensions between the U.S. and Europe, Friedman replied: "the end justifies the means. As soon as we're rid of Saddam, the political differences will also disappear." [Read the whole interview in German and our translation.] Clearly this was not the voice of anti-intervention. Even in July 2006, when Friedman claimed to have opposed the war from the beginning, he remained hawkish. Now that the U.S. was in Iraq, Friedman told The Wall Street Journal, "it seems to me very important that we make a success of it."
All of this has nothing to do with my book, however. In The Shock Doctrine, I describe the invasion and occupation of Iraq as the culmination of Friedman's ideological crusade because he was America's leading intellectual favoring the privatization of the state -- not because he personally supported the war, which is irrelevant. For more than five years Iraq has been the vanguard of this radical privatization project. Private contractors now outnumber U.S. soldiers and corporations have taken on such core state functions as prisoner interrogation.
Furthermore, I never said Friedman was a "neo-conservative" and I discuss, at length, how difficult it is to find terms to describe the corporatist project that are acceptable to all readers. On page 17 (all page numbers refer to the Picador paperback) I write:
"In the attempt to relate the history of the ideological crusade that has culminated in the radical privatization of war and disaster, one problem recurs: the ideology is a shape-shifter, forever changing its name and switching identities. Friedman called himself a 'liberal,' but his U.S. followers, who associated liberals with high taxes and hippies, tended to identify as 'conservatives,' 'classical economists,' 'free marketers' and, later, as believers in 'Reaganomics' or 'laissez-faire.' In most of the world, their orthodoxy is known as 'neo-liberalism,' but it is often called 'free trade' or simply 'globalization.' Only since the mid-nineties has the intellectual movement, led by the right-wing think tanks with which Friedman had long associations -- Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute and the American Enterprise Institute -- called itself 'neo-conservative,' a world view that has harnessed the full force of the U.S. military machine in the service of a corporate agenda."
The significance of the "neo-con" label gaining currency in the mid-nineties is that it was then that the Republicans, under the leadership of Newt Gingrich and backed by the think tanks I mentioned, swept Congress promising a "Contract With America." At this point, the label "neo-conservatives" was not a reference primarily to hawkish foreign policy positions but to harsh economic ones. Back in the mid-nineties, many of the people most associated with the neo-con label today - David Frum and William Kristol and much of the Weekly Standard crowd - were squarely focused on demanding Friedmanite cut-backs and privatizations inside the United States. Frum, for example, first made his name in the U.S. with Dead Right, his 1994 book exhorting the conservative movement to return to its free market economic roots. After Bill Clinton embraced much of this economic agenda, several of the key neo-con warriors narrowed their focus to American dominance on the world stage, a fact that has allowed their keen interests in Friedmanite economic ideas to be largely overlooked.
Ignore the Reporting, Attack the Author
Both Chait's essay and the Cato paper are marked by a stubborn refusal to wrestle with the evidence quoted in my book. For instance, Chait dismisses out of hand my suggestion that there were economic interests behind the 1999 NATO intervention in Kosovo (though he grudgingly admits I never claim that economics was the sole motivator). I do write that there were other factors motivating the war besides Slobodan Milosevic's egregious human rights violations. I base this claim on the post-war analysis provided by Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of State under U.S. President Bill Clinton and the lead U.S. negotiator during the Kosovo war. In a 2005 essay (quoted on page 415), Talbott wrote:
"As nations throughout the region sought to reform their economies, mitigate ethnic tensions, and broaden civil society, Belgrade seemed to delight in continually moving in the opposite direction. It is small wonder NATO and Yugoslavia ended up on a collision course. It was Yugoslavia's resistance to the broader trends of political and economic reform--not the plight of the Kosovar Albanians--that best explains NATO's war."
Instead of explaining how the words of a top-level U.S. official could so clearly coincide with my argument, Chait chooses to completely ignore the Talbott quote. Again and again, readers of The New Republic are left with the distinct impression that The Shock Doctrine is a work of opinion journalism, rather than a thesis based on research and reporting.
When Chait and The Cato Institute do acknowledge my reliance on facts, they accuse me of manipulating them to fit my thesis. Interestingly, the first time Chait quotes my work, he does just that. To explain to his readers what kind of an extremist he is dealing with, he quotes my first book, No Logo. In it, I allegedly described the world as a "fascist state where we all salute the logo and have little opportunity for criticism because our newspapers, television stations, Internet servers, streets and retail spaces are all controlled by multinational corporate interests." If he had let the quote continue for one more sentence, his readers would have known that I went on to dismiss this worldview as overly caricatured. The next sentences read: "there is good reason for alarm. But a word of caution: we may be able to see a not-so-brave new world on the horizon, but that doesn't mean we are already living in Huxley's nightmare… Instead of an airtight formula, [corporate censorship] is a steady trend but riddled with exceptions."
This is just the first of countless instances in which Chait twists my words to fit his thesis. When manipulation fails, he simply takes my points and passes them off as his own, without attribution. (I am well aware, for instance, that both Marxists and Keynesians have exploited crisis and disaster, which is why I explore left-wing disaster opportunism on pages 21-25, 65-70, 283, 316-317.)
Grasping at Straws
The Cato paper does, at times, acknowledge that there are facts in my book, but faults me for failing to provide sources for my statistics. This is a bold charge to make against a book with 74 pages of endnotes. The one example mentioned is the statistic "that between 25 and 60 percent of the population is discarded or becomes a permanent underclass in countries that liberalize their economies." I did not provide a source for this stat because it is an amalgamation of stats I had already cited and for which I had already provided multiple sources. This is standard practice: once a statistic has been sourced, it can repeated (for the sake of brevity) without repeating the source. So here are those stats on which the 25-60 per cent amalgamation is based, with their sources, straight out of The Shock Doctrine endnotes:
Elsewhere, the Cato paper claims that, "Klein never provides the reader with any data [about Chile] over a longer period. She never once admits that Chile is the social and economic success story of Latin America and has virtually abolished extreme poverty." In fact my economic analysis of Chile covers a 34-year span and I provide facts and data that directly challenge the claim that the country is a free market success story. Here is a relevant passage (pages 104-105):
"The only thing that protected Chile from complete economic collapse in the early eighties was that Pinochet had never privatized Codelco, the state copper mine company nationalized by Allende. That one company generated 85 percent of Chile's export revenues, which meant that when the financial bubble burst, the state still had a steady source of funds. By 1988, when the economy had stabilized and was growing rapidly, 45 percent of the population had fallen below the poverty line. The richest 10 percent of Chileans, however, had seen their incomes increase by 83 percent. Even in 2007, Chile remained one of the most unequal societies in the world--out of 123 countries in which the United Nations tracks inequality, Chile ranked 116th, making it the eighth most unequal country on the list."
A Massacre of Straw Men
Most of the attacks on The Shock Doctrine involve manufacturing claims, falsely attributing them to me, then handily tearing them down. For example, Jonathan Chait telescopes my point about Donald Rumsfeld's holdings in the Disaster Capitalism Complex like this: "Donald Rumsfeld maintained his stock in Gilead Sciences, which holds the patent for Tamiflu, even while serving as defense secretary. Get it? Rumsfeld would stand to profit from a flu pandemic. But surely you don't have to be an admirer of Rumsfeld to doubt that he would engineer an outbreak of a deadly virus in order to fatten his stock portfolio."
Actually, that is the plot of the movie V for Vendetta; it has absolutely nothing do with my book. What I do write about is how the Pentagon, under Rumsfeld's leadership, stockpiled Tamiflu and Rumsfeld stood to profit as the value of the stock increased by 807 per cent. On pages 394-395 I write:
"For the six years that he held office, Rumsfeld had to leave the room whenever talk turned to the possibility of avian flu treatment and the purchase of drugs for it. According to the letter outlining the arrangement that allowed him to hold on to his stocks, he had to stay out of decisions that 'may directly and predictably affect Gilead.' His colleagues, however, took good care of his interests. In July 2005, the Pentagon purchased $58 million worth of Tamiflu, and the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it would order up to $1 billion worth of the drug a few months later."
There are many more straw men propped up in The Cato Institute paper. Most involve vastly inflating the role I attribute to Milton Friedman. And no little wonder. Other than the University of Chicago economics department, Cato is the institution most intimately aligned and associated with Milton Friedman's radical theories. Among other tributes, every two years, Cato hands out the Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty, worth half a million dollars. (This year it went to a 23-year-old Venezuelan student activist to further his opposition to the government of Hugo Chavez). Since Friedman continues to serve as Cato's patron saint, it has much to lose from a diminishing of Friedman's reputation, as well as a direct interest in exonerating him of all crimes, real or imagined.
Here are a few more examples. The Cato paper claims that I put the entire blame for Pinochet's economic policies on the shoulders of Milton Friedman -- then "proves" that his direct involvement was minimal. Once again, I make no such claim. I do devote considerable space -- roughly 60 pages -- to describing the impact of a U.S. State Department program that brought more than one hundred Chilean students to the University of Chicago as part of a deliberate effort to export free-market economic ideas to Chile. This is the program that gave birth to the infamous "Chicago Boys" of Chile, several of whom were actively involved in planning the Chilean dictatorship's economic program before the 1973 coup even took place. Amazingly, the Cato paper makes absolutely no mention of this academic program in its effort to exonerate Friedman personally. The writer either missed 60 pages of my book, or deliberately chose to ignore them.
The greatest challenge in responding to the Cato paper is the scope of its dishonesty. Consider this one passage:
"Klein also blames Friedman and Chicago economics for the actions of the International Monetary Fund during the Asian financial crisis and the Sri Lankan government's confiscation of the land of fishing families to build luxury hotels after the tsunami. Yet the fact is that Friedman thought that the IMF shouldn't be involved in Asia, and he held that governments should be forbidden from expropriating property to give it to private developers. Of course, Klein could argue that Friedman was in some sense a source of inspiration for those policies, even though he was opposed to them. But she doesn't do that. She pretends that he agreed with them, and that that is what he and other Chicago economists wanted all along."
Absolutely everything in this passage is wrong. I never say Friedman favored the IMF bailout in Asia, quite the opposite. On pages 335-336, I report that, "Milton Friedman himself, now in his mid-eighties, made a rare appearance on CNN to tell the news anchor Lou Dobbs that he opposed any kind of bailout and that the market should be left to correct itself." In what way could this constitute "pretending" that Friedman supported the bailout?
I also freely acknowledge the fact that Friedman opposed the IMF on principle. However, as with Pinochet's government in the seventies, I also document that the IMF, at the time of the bailout, was packed with ideological Chicago Boys - a very different point than claiming the IMF was taking orders from Friedman. On page 202, I directly address this apparent contradiction:
"Philosophically, Milton Friedman did not believe in the IMF or the World Bank: they were classic examples of big government interfering with the delicate signals of the free market. So it was ironic that there was a virtual conveyor belt delivering Chicago Boys to the two institutions' hulking headquarters on Nineteenth Street in Washington, D.C., where they took up many of the top positions."
The Shock Doctrine has room for this kind of complexity because it is not -- despite what Cato claims -- a book about the actions of one man. It is about a multifaceted ideological trend that has successfully served the most powerful corporate interests in society for half a century.
Furthermore, I never wrote, as Cato claims in that same passage, that Friedman had anything to do with "the Sri Lankan government's confiscation of the land of fishing families to build luxury hotels after the tsunami." His name does not appear once in my 25-page chapter on the tsunami. Once again, to write that I "pretend" that Friedman is advocating these policies is pure fabrication. Furthermore, all of these inventions and misrepresentations appear in a single paragraph. The Cato background paper is 20 pages long and is comprised of dozens and dozens of equally dishonest paragraphs. Subjecting them all to this kind of rebuttal is simply too time consuming; my full rebuttal is the book itself.
Go to the Source
Thanks to a fantastic team of researchers, especially my incredible research assistant Debra Levy, The Shock Doctrine has withstood a year's worth of intense media scrutiny in dozens of countries. It is not unscathed, but it has emerged in better shape than I dared hope. When errors are discovered, we immediately correct them in future editions and post a correction and an explanation on the book's website. So far there has been only one significant error discovered, related to the profits earned from Dick Cheney's Halliburton stocks. It was immediately corrected. Readers of The Shock Doctrine know that this is but one of many examples that make the same point about conflicts of interest in the Bush Administration; indeed I devote an entire chapter to the topic. And this is the benefit of a methodology that is grounded not in anecdotes but in thousands of sourced facts and figures: the thesis does not rise or fall on any single example.
As to my critics' charge that I am selective in my use of quotations, that's a danger for any writer. It is also why Debra and I launched the "resources" section of the book's website. On this page, readers can access dozens of original reports, letters and studies that make up some of the key source material for the book. If you are concerned that I am exaggerating Friedman's support for the brutal regime of Augusto Pinochet, read a letter Friedman wrote to Pinochet. If you are suspicious that I am making disaster capitalism seem more conspiratorial than it is, read the minutes from a meeting that took place at the Heritage Foundation just two weeks after the levees broke in New Orleans. It lays out 32 "free market solutions" for Hurricane Katrina and high gas prices, many of which have been championed by the Bush Administration.
The thesis of The Shock Doctrine was not born of whimsy but of four years of research. Debra and I put these documents online because we want educators, students and general readers to move beyond an admittedly subjective version of history -- as all histories are -- and go straight to the source. We invite you to explore these documents, send us ones we missed, and come to your own conclusions.
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Media and Culture headlines via email
Stay up to date with the latest Media and Culture headlines via email
COMMENTS ( 142 )
READ COMMENTS
LOGIN OR
REGISTER TO POST A COMMENT
Comments are closed-
Thank you Naomi Klein!
Posted by: MamaPantz on Sep 11, 2008 1:45 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: MamaPantz on Sep 11, 2008 1:45 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are a light in the darkness of our times. My appreciation for your work has only gained since reading No Logo.
Keep up the good work. You are a gifted truth seeker, and with that comes resistance, as you will no doubt endure the forces that attempt to stifle your voice.
They can only keep us in the dark for so long. Keep shedding light on what you can.
Keep up the good work. You are a gifted truth seeker, and with that comes resistance, as you will no doubt endure the forces that attempt to stifle your voice.
They can only keep us in the dark for so long. Keep shedding light on what you can.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Thank you Naomi Klein!
Posted by: leTerrassier
» Rebuttals like this - direct engagement with erroneous accusations - are important.
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
Comments are closed-
4changenow
Posted by: 4changenow on Sep 11, 2008 6:09 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: 4changenow on Sep 11, 2008 6:09 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ok, you have presented your rebuttal --now just ignore them --do not give them any more energy -- I would rather see you research and write, rather than trying to convince or educate fools.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: samd11 on Sep 11, 2008 6:12 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: samd11 on Sep 11, 2008 6:12 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am reading "Shock Doctrine" right now and feel very strongly that it should be required reading in all North American High Schools. Change can only come from an informed citizenry. Thank-you Naomi Klein for your intelligence and bravery in telling us the truth.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: nochicagoboys
Comments are closed-
Wait!!!
Posted by: progdem on Sep 12, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: progdem on Sep 12, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So you are telling me people still read the New Republic? And that people still give a shit what a psuedo-intellectual like Chait thinks? TNR was eclipsed a while ago by the Nation, and the Nation has become something of a joke itself (what with the bib boom ba ra ra ra aspect to its coverage of the Democratic party).
As for the Cato institute, anytime they can have the screws put to them in print, it is a good thing.
As for the Cato institute, anytime they can have the screws put to them in print, it is a good thing.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: Bobsays on Sep 12, 2008 2:00 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Bobsays on Sep 12, 2008 2:00 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1) How is your carbon footprint - all that flying around the world, and back and forth across Canada to your island hideaway?
2) How are you any different than the neo-liberals you mock, with your caravan train flitting from one disaster to another?
3) Do you really believe that Friedman invented the 'shock doctrine', because I would like to introduce you to some other excellent 'shock doctrine' practitioners: Ghengis Khan, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot (you must really like this dude, he took it back to 'Year Zero'), and some people who wrote better books: Von Clauswitz (On War), Machiaveli (The Prince), Tsun Tsu (The Art of War). What is old is new again, eh?
2) How are you any different than the neo-liberals you mock, with your caravan train flitting from one disaster to another?
3) Do you really believe that Friedman invented the 'shock doctrine', because I would like to introduce you to some other excellent 'shock doctrine' practitioners: Ghengis Khan, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot (you must really like this dude, he took it back to 'Year Zero'), and some people who wrote better books: Von Clauswitz (On War), Machiaveli (The Prince), Tsun Tsu (The Art of War). What is old is new again, eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: progdem
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: HelperMonkey
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: huricane
» Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: HelperMonkey
» Exactly. Blantant fallacy.
Posted by: Coleman
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: pauldd
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» Thanks for the support!
Posted by: Bobsays
» I'm dubious of your "help...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: Bobsays, sophistocated troll. We see you.
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Bobsays a more sophistocated troll. I see you.
Posted by: rideyourbike11
» RE: Bobsays a more sophistocated [To define a 'Troll'
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: channing
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: channing
» RE: Ha!
Posted by: zipoka
» if you are so concerned about carbon footprints
Posted by: aalif ba ta tha
» bobsays just don't want to see facism to go away
Posted by: jreal
Comments are closed-
Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: Godfather89 on Sep 12, 2008 4:01 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Godfather89 on Sep 12, 2008 4:01 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not care what you say. Naomi Klein is biased in views, she see's Free Markets as a bad thing, which is something we need today.
Free Market Economics believes that we should not setup a National Bank. However, throughout her book discussing the military actions of South America to practice The Shock Doctrine, that's what Milton Friedman wanted. Setting up National Banks to control the economy "furthering the Shock."
Also Milton Friedman wanted fiat money. I know no real capitalists or Pro-Free Market economists that would wanted credit money (fiat money) instead of sound money backed by a commodity like Gold and Silver.
Also, Google: Ludwig Von Mises because, his economic philosophy overall was opposed to Keynesian and Friedmanite economic policies. Ludwig Von Mises system worked and predict a lot of what we are seeing today by following these PSEUDO-Free Market Economists like Friedman. Read: "What has Government Done With Our Money & The Case for 100% Gold Dollar"
Corporations doing the works of Government responsibilities is a dangerous thing and is related more so to a Command Economy (Socialism or Fascism) than it does have to do with a Free Market! Thus I conclude she is lying and biased in her approach!
Free Market Economics believes that we should not setup a National Bank. However, throughout her book discussing the military actions of South America to practice The Shock Doctrine, that's what Milton Friedman wanted. Setting up National Banks to control the economy "furthering the Shock."
Also Milton Friedman wanted fiat money. I know no real capitalists or Pro-Free Market economists that would wanted credit money (fiat money) instead of sound money backed by a commodity like Gold and Silver.
Also, Google: Ludwig Von Mises because, his economic philosophy overall was opposed to Keynesian and Friedmanite economic policies. Ludwig Von Mises system worked and predict a lot of what we are seeing today by following these PSEUDO-Free Market Economists like Friedman. Read: "What has Government Done With Our Money & The Case for 100% Gold Dollar"
Corporations doing the works of Government responsibilities is a dangerous thing and is related more so to a Command Economy (Socialism or Fascism) than it does have to do with a Free Market! Thus I conclude she is lying and biased in her approach!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: rnagisetty
» Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: Jesse
» Biased is as Biased Does
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: heading towards slavery
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: heading towards slavery
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Biased is as Biased Does
Posted by: Godfather89
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: JMA
Comments are closed-
"Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Sep 12, 2008 4:42 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Sep 12, 2008 4:42 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That remains my beef with this limited hangout work that supposedly upsets NeoCon Think Tank apparatchiks and other assorted disinfo nutcases.
By definition "capitalism" coined by Karl Marx requires free, open markets and genuine competition. We have NONE in the west for anything that matters. Ergo we have no "capitalism" let alone democracy.
Full stop.
The corporate crime ruling class that rules the west does so via propaganda masked Fascism and has for generations.
Other books including Engdahl's "A Century Of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order" and J. Perkins "The Secret History of the American Empire" both have issues but at least they are backed by years of hands-on field experience. Not for the most part, supposition, theory and footnotes (however extensive).
By definition "capitalism" coined by Karl Marx requires free, open markets and genuine competition. We have NONE in the west for anything that matters. Ergo we have no "capitalism" let alone democracy.
Full stop.
The corporate crime ruling class that rules the west does so via propaganda masked Fascism and has for generations.
Other books including Engdahl's "A Century Of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order" and J. Perkins "The Secret History of the American Empire" both have issues but at least they are backed by years of hands-on field experience. Not for the most part, supposition, theory and footnotes (however extensive).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: daw13
» "By definition 'capitalism' coined by Karl Marx..."
Posted by: pdxjoe
» Reality vs Theory (not a contest)
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» Free For Whom?
Posted by: pdxjoe
» "Free" for Fascist Oligarchs Unless Checked by Real Democracy
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Squarehead
» "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
Comments are closed-
Excellent Rebuttal
Posted by: TerryS on Sep 12, 2008 5:53 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: TerryS on Sep 12, 2008 5:53 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keep up the great work Naomi!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Neocons and academics don't mix
Posted by: scheherezade on Sep 12, 2008 5:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: scheherezade on Sep 12, 2008 5:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I discuss, at length, how difficult it is to find terms to describe the corporatist project that are acceptable to all readers.
Scholars of European Fascism have the same problem for the same reason -- neither phenomenon is grounded in any rational ideological basis.
Neoconservatives like to present their 'theories' as products of rigorous academic method. In fact, as Ms. Klein so aptly demonstrates, they're seldom backed by comprehensive, substantiatable data -- or exhaustively-researched secondary background analysis.
Indeed, neocon reaction to The Shock Doctrine reveals how very poorly-grounded in academic method it and associated ideologies are.
Neoconservativism pretends to be a legitimate 'alternative' analysis of what is presented as impartial research -- just as "intelligent design" pretends to be a scientifically-derived "alternative" to evolutionary theory.
In fact, as is happening in the civil sphere --neoconservativism seeks to replace rational, exhaustively researched, inductive academic method, itself, with theory by selectively-researched diktat.
Thanks to Naomi Klein for taking time to tease out, expose and document the flawed methodology that is the basis of what appears will be an endless fascist/neconservative war against the reason-based cultural principles that anchor our rapidly-fading Western legacy.
Scholars of European Fascism have the same problem for the same reason -- neither phenomenon is grounded in any rational ideological basis.
Neoconservatives like to present their 'theories' as products of rigorous academic method. In fact, as Ms. Klein so aptly demonstrates, they're seldom backed by comprehensive, substantiatable data -- or exhaustively-researched secondary background analysis.
Indeed, neocon reaction to The Shock Doctrine reveals how very poorly-grounded in academic method it and associated ideologies are.
Neoconservativism pretends to be a legitimate 'alternative' analysis of what is presented as impartial research -- just as "intelligent design" pretends to be a scientifically-derived "alternative" to evolutionary theory.
In fact, as is happening in the civil sphere --neoconservativism seeks to replace rational, exhaustively researched, inductive academic method, itself, with theory by selectively-researched diktat.
Thanks to Naomi Klein for taking time to tease out, expose and document the flawed methodology that is the basis of what appears will be an endless fascist/neconservative war against the reason-based cultural principles that anchor our rapidly-fading Western legacy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Neocons and academics don't mix = Cornerstone of Fascist Power
Posted by: channing
» RE: Klein can now claim co-heritage with the likes of Ghandi.
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Thanks Lauren, but I mispelled Gandhi
Posted by: channing
» Not just fascism
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Not just fascism, not just totalitarianism either
Posted by: channing
» Klein wrote an Okay book - Sorry but comparing her to Ghandi is Absurd
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: The point is the process she's experienced as a result of her work challenging power
Posted by: channing
» RE: The point is the process she's experienced as a result of her work challenging power
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Thank you for your thoughtful comments...
Posted by: channing
» RE: Thank you for your thoughtful comments...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Klein wrote an Okay book - [What is it with this fixation on 'fascism'?
Posted by: Squarehead
» Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs [ I am happy to confirm that I also don't really care that you should think
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [ No Need For Hysterics, Squarehead
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [ No Need For Hysterics, Squarehead
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Breaking News; I see the 'Foundation for Teaching Economics'
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Desperate News...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Your Sources: Parts 1
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Your Sources Part 2
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [I forgot to mention, in
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» What about the Neo-Liberals?
Posted by: pdxjoe
Comments are closed-
They don't care about the facts
Posted by: sliver on Sep 12, 2008 6:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: sliver on Sep 12, 2008 6:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The book has been smeared, and that's all the conservatives care about. Now the pundits, without a single fact, can say the book has been debunked. Likewise, Barack Obama and all the other Democratic candidates have been smeared with lies, but the subject of the lie doesn't matter, it's the smear they want.
Isn't there some sort of standard of reasonable truth that these people adhere to? They seem to think lies are acceptable tactics, as long as their side "wins".
Isn't there some sort of standard of reasonable truth that these people adhere to? They seem to think lies are acceptable tactics, as long as their side "wins".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
it's a cookbook
Posted by: schnoggi on Sep 12, 2008 7:09 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: schnoggi on Sep 12, 2008 7:09 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i highly recommend the article "Corporate Metabolism", available at http://www.tripzine.com/listing.php?smlid=327
Corporations are now the dominant lifeform on the planet; humans are just the substrate.
Corporations are now the dominant lifeform on the planet; humans are just the substrate.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: pauldd on Sep 12, 2008 7:23 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: pauldd on Sep 12, 2008 7:23 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great book. Cogent rebuttal to the ideologues. Critical posts on this thread are similar to those of critics of other individuals who are critical of "systems":
Ralph Nader - "How can Ralph profit from Cisco stock when he's critical of corporate influence in politics?"
Al Gore - "How can Al Gore fly on a plane or own a large home when he's critical of the effects of human activities on climate?"
and now - Naomi Klein - "How can you research a book and earn money from sales when you are critical of neo-liberal economic policies?"
Straw-men, all of them.
Air travel is actually the most efficient form of travel using less energy per passenger mile than ANY other form of chemically powered transportation? Don't believe me, look it up yourself.
Ralph Nader - "How can Ralph profit from Cisco stock when he's critical of corporate influence in politics?"
Al Gore - "How can Al Gore fly on a plane or own a large home when he's critical of the effects of human activities on climate?"
and now - Naomi Klein - "How can you research a book and earn money from sales when you are critical of neo-liberal economic policies?"
Straw-men, all of them.
Air travel is actually the most efficient form of travel using less energy per passenger mile than ANY other form of chemically powered transportation? Don't believe me, look it up yourself.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» The point is...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: gzuckier
Comments are closed-
Naomi rocks...
Posted by: BornaSkeptic on Sep 12, 2008 7:31 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: BornaSkeptic on Sep 12, 2008 7:31 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Truly, one of the finest articles I've read on ANY topic. Thank God for Alternet and Naomi Klein. They give me hope for the survival of our "democracy"....or what remains of it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Jeauxie
Posted by: center_peace on Sep 12, 2008 8:00 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: center_peace on Sep 12, 2008 8:00 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Boy howdy, I listened to this on audio book in my car and many times found myself pounding the steering wheel in disgust at all those wretched %$@#s who specifically seek to profit off human disaster.
Your writing is indeed brilliant and I raise my hat to each and every one of your researchers. And thank you so much for being such pillar of the world community.
Brava.
- J
Your writing is indeed brilliant and I raise my hat to each and every one of your researchers. And thank you so much for being such pillar of the world community.
Brava.
- J
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
This book changed my world view
Posted by: rkrenke on Sep 12, 2008 8:45 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: rkrenke on Sep 12, 2008 8:45 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Naomi, thank you for your fearlessness. This book opened my eyes to how we, the United States, are the real terrorists.
Many of my friends and family are either reading or have completed "The Shock Doctrine". I believe that they're truly shocked at our how our government's pro-corporate policies have literally destroyed countries and people, including our own.
I agree with others, this book should be required reading for all high school students.
Thanks for opening my eyes - I will continue to promote your book to anyone who'll listen.
Many of my friends and family are either reading or have completed "The Shock Doctrine". I believe that they're truly shocked at our how our government's pro-corporate policies have literally destroyed countries and people, including our own.
I agree with others, this book should be required reading for all high school students.
Thanks for opening my eyes - I will continue to promote your book to anyone who'll listen.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This book changed my world view
Posted by: EdinIowa
» RE: This book changed my world view
Posted by: nochicagoboys
Comments are closed-
Voice of freshness.....
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 12, 2008 9:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 12, 2008 9:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For all of those on the right that continue to take that "free-market" position, I want you to continue to shine the light of truth! If those neo-fascists really want free markets, then how about less agricultural subsidies for agri-business so that their products are truly competitive? Or how about less welfare for oil and coal industries - because when your profit margin is 1800% over and above. do you really need my tax dollars? Oh, I know, how about those no-bid contracts, can we faze them out?
Those preaching this nonsense are the very ones that are profiting at the trough of government. Exposure it not only needed but extremely necessary in this corporatocracy! How dare they cry foul because some of the shenanigans are being exposed. Continue on Ms. Klein, some of us thinkers are grateful!
Those preaching this nonsense are the very ones that are profiting at the trough of government. Exposure it not only needed but extremely necessary in this corporatocracy! How dare they cry foul because some of the shenanigans are being exposed. Continue on Ms. Klein, some of us thinkers are grateful!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Voice of freshness.....
Posted by: daniel1982
» $42 billion dollars...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: $42 billion dollars...
Posted by: daniel1982
» NEOCON speaks (but can't think)...
Posted by: PointMan
Comments are closed-
shock doctrine
Posted by: johanB on Sep 12, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: johanB on Sep 12, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Naomi Klein is absolute right in her thesis.
It is either pure jealousy or ignorance to call this book just an opinion piece. The Cato institute and Mr Chait have clearly their own little agenda and they will do anything tho distort the facts and the truth by taking things out of context or by partial convenient quotes. Why are they so desperate to defend Mr.Friedman, who has had such an incredible negative impact on the world as it is now, what is in it for them. Friedmans teachings, under the mask of fake liberalism are nothing more then creating a breeding ground for extremist economists. I guess that says a lot about Chait and the Cato institute. Maybe next time the Cato book could be written in an even more obscure language.
It is either pure jealousy or ignorance to call this book just an opinion piece. The Cato institute and Mr Chait have clearly their own little agenda and they will do anything tho distort the facts and the truth by taking things out of context or by partial convenient quotes. Why are they so desperate to defend Mr.Friedman, who has had such an incredible negative impact on the world as it is now, what is in it for them. Friedmans teachings, under the mask of fake liberalism are nothing more then creating a breeding ground for extremist economists. I guess that says a lot about Chait and the Cato institute. Maybe next time the Cato book could be written in an even more obscure language.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Fake Liberalism? Please expand.
Posted by: pdxjoe
Comments are closed-
Carbon footprint?
Posted by: davmills on Sep 12, 2008 10:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: davmills on Sep 12, 2008 10:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does the originator of this string know precisely what her carbon footprint is? As was pointed out earlier, her book isn't devoted to environmentalism, and it's an unfortunate fact that ecologists have to travel by pollutant plane to spread their message. They hopefully do as much as possible to reduce excess on the ground. As for her profiting perhaps from disasters, there's a film called "The Take," made cerca 2004, that shows her and her partner, Avi Lewis, actively encouraging a group of Argentinian workers to take charge of their own employment by operating a factory themselves. This and other such stories don't make it to the mainstream press.I don't agree with everything she says, but she herself has stated on CNN that she doesn't disagree with free markets as such, just free markets that enrich a minority.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
everybody opposed the war
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:00 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:00 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not at the time, of course, but now in retrospect they opposed it.
just like after WWII, all the germans had in fact been opposed to the nazis, it turned out.
just like after WWII, all the germans had in fact been opposed to the nazis, it turned out.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: everybody opposed the war
Posted by: Cathyc
Comments are closed-
well played ms. klein!
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:15 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:15 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
of course, it helps that the reality of the situation (both in the world and re your book) matches your description of it, rather than that of those who have left the reality based community behind in their attempt to reshape the world, or at least their imaginary version of it.
i don't know whether to look down at the righwingers for doing such a feeble job holding up their end of the argument, or give them credit for at least making an effort, unlike the "repeat it until it's true" meme which seems to have infected the "conservatives" since Reagan introduced it to them.
i don't know whether to look down at the righwingers for doing such a feeble job holding up their end of the argument, or give them credit for at least making an effort, unlike the "repeat it until it's true" meme which seems to have infected the "conservatives" since Reagan introduced it to them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Keep it up!!
Posted by: pioneer on Sep 12, 2008 12:18 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: pioneer on Sep 12, 2008 12:18 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are a national treasure. Your book is the BEST thing and should be required reading in every school in the world!!
Keep up your good work. I love it when you go on TV and "kill" the neos with facts.
Keep up your good work. I love it when you go on TV and "kill" the neos with facts.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» A national treasure, but which nation?
Posted by: redmaple
Comments are closed-
The attack on Naomi Klein begins now... er, now!
Posted by: Ghoulman on Sep 12, 2008 2:05 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Ghoulman on Sep 12, 2008 2:05 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Timing... seems the think tank and New Republic old boys were just waiting for the right time... notably after Naomi Klein has promoted her book. After all, there's little chance she'll be able to rebut the attacks on her in the MSM.
Do ya think election time will see her interviewed in the US? Not a chance!
The attacks by the neocons are always the same, attack the person. Culture wars, that's the strategy. Alan Greenspan set the tone... Naomi Klein is anti-capitalist! Um, but that's obviously not true. So why attack her like this?
You're either with us or against us. To quote the President of the US. And the neocons don't mean this to just apply to the war on terror but to their every policy. They believe that their economic philosophy is the only one that can make America great again and have pushed this since they came to prominence in the 90s. And now, we've seen the results. Hope you out there reading this still have a mortgage.
Naomi, thanks! Thanks for giving us all a well researched work of fact that points out the opportunism of neocon inspired 'free market' economic policy. A policy where the 'invisible hand' that the neocons purport will steady the markets actually is a free-for-all where corporations use that hand to slap the poor in the arse.
Thanks for this rebuttal. You're a class act as always. :)
Do ya think election time will see her interviewed in the US? Not a chance!
The attacks by the neocons are always the same, attack the person. Culture wars, that's the strategy. Alan Greenspan set the tone... Naomi Klein is anti-capitalist! Um, but that's obviously not true. So why attack her like this?
You're either with us or against us. To quote the President of the US. And the neocons don't mean this to just apply to the war on terror but to their every policy. They believe that their economic philosophy is the only one that can make America great again and have pushed this since they came to prominence in the 90s. And now, we've seen the results. Hope you out there reading this still have a mortgage.
Naomi, thanks! Thanks for giving us all a well researched work of fact that points out the opportunism of neocon inspired 'free market' economic policy. A policy where the 'invisible hand' that the neocons purport will steady the markets actually is a free-for-all where corporations use that hand to slap the poor in the arse.
Thanks for this rebuttal. You're a class act as always. :)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Best book!
Posted by: Kati on Sep 12, 2008 4:03 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Kati on Sep 12, 2008 4:03 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Naomi Klein, your book is a true masterpiece of research, synthesis and orginal insight. Thank you for writing it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
'Shock Doctrine' is True for those Living Under it!
Posted by: Purple Girl on Sep 12, 2008 4:07 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Purple Girl on Sep 12, 2008 4:07 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have yet to read the Book- it's on the list, but frankly I think i know the Gist of it- We've been actually living it now for the last 3 decades.Lets slip back to the days of Hostage Crisis, Odd/Even Days, numerous highjackings (I can still see that poor mans body on the Tarrmack). this is not new, they just have to 'Refresh' the Terror every few years to keep US walking on egg shells and disoriented enough to pull off a few more hiest- money, property, Rights...The last 7 yrs have been the Crescendo to their long symphony of Deception and Crimes.
But for anyone who realizes they are nothing more than automatic money movers between the corps has been watching this Tragedy for decades.Hindsight being 20/20 We Now know who the Real 'Trickey Dickey' has always been.
But for anyone who realizes they are nothing more than automatic money movers between the corps has been watching this Tragedy for decades.Hindsight being 20/20 We Now know who the Real 'Trickey Dickey' has always been.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
I was disappointed.
Posted by: BigRon on Sep 12, 2008 4:11 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: BigRon on Sep 12, 2008 4:11 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... by Ms. Klein's analysis of Margaret Thatcher. I'm a Brit, a Trades Union member, and no fan of Thatcher, but Thatcher reducing the power of the Trades Unions in the UK was both largely a popular move, and overdue.
If politics is like a pendulum, then in the UK, it had been swinging in a very lopsided manner, with some unions effectively above the law. Thatcher was swept into power shortly after the UK was brought to its knees by a string of strikes - it seemed that everyone in th UK was striking about something - usually without a ballot of their members.
The miners saw themselves as the elite of the working class, and quite happy to bring the country to a standstill by strike action for POLITICAL reasons. Thatcher ambushed them: stockpiled coal, and provoked a strike. They were brought down largely by their own arrogance.
How Ms. Klein manages to convince herself that Thatcher needed the "shock" of the Falklands war to enable her to take on the miners is a mystery. It does seem to fit in with Ms Klein's thesis; but my conclusion is simply that Ms Klein should stick to subjects which she understands. British politics apparently isn't one of those subjects. Thatcher may be an Icon of the USA's right... but on many issues (like healthcare) she stood way to the left of Hillary Clinton. If you didn't know that, then it's inadvisable to write books suggesting that you do know it.
If politics is like a pendulum, then in the UK, it had been swinging in a very lopsided manner, with some unions effectively above the law. Thatcher was swept into power shortly after the UK was brought to its knees by a string of strikes - it seemed that everyone in th UK was striking about something - usually without a ballot of their members.
The miners saw themselves as the elite of the working class, and quite happy to bring the country to a standstill by strike action for POLITICAL reasons. Thatcher ambushed them: stockpiled coal, and provoked a strike. They were brought down largely by their own arrogance.
How Ms. Klein manages to convince herself that Thatcher needed the "shock" of the Falklands war to enable her to take on the miners is a mystery. It does seem to fit in with Ms Klein's thesis; but my conclusion is simply that Ms Klein should stick to subjects which she understands. British politics apparently isn't one of those subjects. Thatcher may be an Icon of the USA's right... but on many issues (like healthcare) she stood way to the left of Hillary Clinton. If you didn't know that, then it's inadvisable to write books suggesting that you do know it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I was disappointed.
Posted by: rnagisetty
» RE: I was disappointed [Really? I was VERY impressed]
Posted by: Squarehead
» You are VERY easily impressed & it seems you who are "missing the point"
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [YES I am, by good quality thought
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [YES by moonwash & faux "leftwing" opinion]
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [That would be fatal.
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [ More Moonshine - what a surpirise...
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [is this the alternate 'fall back position'?
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [Mr MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» usterroristnation
Posted by: usterroristnation
Comments are closed-
The Democrats should tell the truth instead of losing
Posted by: rmirman on Sep 12, 2008 4:40 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: rmirman on Sep 12, 2008 4:40 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please transmit to Obama campaign!
Democrats historically have been very skilled at losing elections. We may again be on the way to throwing away a sure victory. The Republican convention was full of lies and insults. Were these answered? Of course not. Anyone ever hear of John Kerry? It is necessary to hit harder and make the issues --- and people --- clearer. Improvement is essential but there is little sign of it. Explain to the electorate what the Republicans are like and what a McCain (Bush extension) victory would mean for the country. This is never done so we keep losing. Doesn't anyone care? Have you seen Krugman's column on how well the Republicans create and use resentment? We are totally incapable of doing so. And we lose. We are likely to again throw away certain victory, hurting the country.
Here are some suggestions for themes that should be stressed expressed in terms of a commercial.
Consider some people talking.
Did you see the new unemployment numbers? They are really high.
I know, my job was wiped out and I am having a very tough time, not only in finding a new one.
The Republicans made a lot of speeches at their convention. What are they offering, how will they help me find work?
Most of what they said is lies and insults. Republicans are good at that. They have no ideas about how to help us, with anything. And they don't care. Their only ideas are how to help the wealthy, especially how to increase the enormous profits of the oil companies. And gas prices are so high now. Everything else is just lies and insults.
That's not surprising. The Republicans care a lot about the wealthy and look for ways to help them. They don't care about us, except as a way to trick us into voting for them, so they can help the wealthy even more.
That shows again that Republicans have contempt for people like you and me. They think that they can fool us by lying, and trying to prevent people like Barack Obama, who really wants to help us, from doing so by continually insulting and lying about him. Republicans think that we are stupid so that they can get away with lying. That way we won't notice their contempt for us, and their refusal to help.
Obama has ideas about how to help us. But, as he has shown so forcefully in the last few months, he is very smart and competent, and caring. It is amazing what he has been able to accomplish, what ability that shows. Obama is just what we need, someone who has proven that he is very talented, and very concerned. All Bush-McCain have to offer is lies and insults. They do not have ideas, just contempt for us. Their lies and insults show that they believe we are stupid so that they can get away their contempt. We aren't rich so why should they care?
And they don't care about the country. For them it is country last, winning first, no matter how much damage they do. Look who the Bush-McCain party picked for Vice President! Someone who is so inexperienced she would endanger the country if she became President. She will be one heartbeat away from the presidency, and that heart belongs to a 72 year old man, with four bouts of cancer and who has shown signs of forgetting, not only the number of houses he has. It is highly irresponsible and quite frightening, a 72 year old man with memory problems, which might likely worsen with advancing age, and an incompetent extremist with practically no relevant experience. It shows not only great irresponsibility but contempt for the country and for women. They think that by putting a woman, an incompetent woman, a woman who opposes everything women need, on the ticket they will get women's votes, even
Democrats historically have been very skilled at losing elections. We may again be on the way to throwing away a sure victory. The Republican convention was full of lies and insults. Were these answered? Of course not. Anyone ever hear of John Kerry? It is necessary to hit harder and make the issues --- and people --- clearer. Improvement is essential but there is little sign of it. Explain to the electorate what the Republicans are like and what a McCain (Bush extension) victory would mean for the country. This is never done so we keep losing. Doesn't anyone care? Have you seen Krugman's column on how well the Republicans create and use resentment? We are totally incapable of doing so. And we lose. We are likely to again throw away certain victory, hurting the country.
Here are some suggestions for themes that should be stressed expressed in terms of a commercial.
Consider some people talking.
Did you see the new unemployment numbers? They are really high.
I know, my job was wiped out and I am having a very tough time, not only in finding a new one.
The Republicans made a lot of speeches at their convention. What are they offering, how will they help me find work?
Most of what they said is lies and insults. Republicans are good at that. They have no ideas about how to help us, with anything. And they don't care. Their only ideas are how to help the wealthy, especially how to increase the enormous profits of the oil companies. And gas prices are so high now. Everything else is just lies and insults.
That's not surprising. The Republicans care a lot about the wealthy and look for ways to help them. They don't care about us, except as a way to trick us into voting for them, so they can help the wealthy even more.
That shows again that Republicans have contempt for people like you and me. They think that they can fool us by lying, and trying to prevent people like Barack Obama, who really wants to help us, from doing so by continually insulting and lying about him. Republicans think that we are stupid so that they can get away with lying. That way we won't notice their contempt for us, and their refusal to help.
Obama has ideas about how to help us. But, as he has shown so forcefully in the last few months, he is very smart and competent, and caring. It is amazing what he has been able to accomplish, what ability that shows. Obama is just what we need, someone who has proven that he is very talented, and very concerned. All Bush-McCain have to offer is lies and insults. They do not have ideas, just contempt for us. Their lies and insults show that they believe we are stupid so that they can get away their contempt. We aren't rich so why should they care?
And they don't care about the country. For them it is country last, winning first, no matter how much damage they do. Look who the Bush-McCain party picked for Vice President! Someone who is so inexperienced she would endanger the country if she became President. She will be one heartbeat away from the presidency, and that heart belongs to a 72 year old man, with four bouts of cancer and who has shown signs of forgetting, not only the number of houses he has. It is highly irresponsible and quite frightening, a 72 year old man with memory problems, which might likely worsen with advancing age, and an incompetent extremist with practically no relevant experience. It shows not only great irresponsibility but contempt for the country and for women. They think that by putting a woman, an incompetent woman, a woman who opposes everything women need, on the ticket they will get women's votes, even
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
follow up klein book?
Posted by: wleming on Sep 12, 2008 4:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: wleming on Sep 12, 2008 4:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
my hope is that ms. klein can do a follow up book on how capitalism opposes community, humanity and a greed free society. shes done all the research.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
sir
Posted by: mikmojo06 on Sep 12, 2008 6:56 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: mikmojo06 on Sep 12, 2008 6:56 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excellent rebuttal Ms Klein. Perhaps you could have shown more mercy as your critics were surely without weapons.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: sir [I like your allusion.
Posted by: Squarehead
Comments are closed-
COMPARING KLEIN TO McCAIN/PALIN
Posted by: wellaware lec on Sep 12, 2008 8:32 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: wellaware lec on Sep 12, 2008 8:32 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
makes me nearly breathless over the contrast. And that's with McCain/Palin COMBINED...
IMAGINE what it would be like if someone like Naomi Klein was President or Vice President in this country. Stunning, eh?
IMAGINE what it would be like if someone like Naomi Klein was President or Vice President in this country. Stunning, eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» scary.
Posted by: daniel1982
Comments are closed-
Wondered where Cato reaction was
Posted by: john2007 on Sep 12, 2008 10:01 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: john2007 on Sep 12, 2008 10:01 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your thesis of disaster capitalism is so profound and so well documented that I predict it will cause a major paradigm shift in the teaching of economics and in governmental policies far into the future.
I was waiting to hear what the crooks and liars at Cato and AEI would say about it. You can bet they have been scurrying all over each other trying to come up face-saving rebuttals; after all, your thesis correctly implies criminality on the part of all of them.
I was waiting to hear what the crooks and liars at Cato and AEI would say about it. You can bet they have been scurrying all over each other trying to come up face-saving rebuttals; after all, your thesis correctly implies criminality on the part of all of them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
THE DEATH RATTLE
Posted by: AlwaysAskWhy on Sep 13, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: AlwaysAskWhy on Sep 13, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks and the deepest gratitude to Naomi Klein for turning the lights on! We all owe her - BIG TIME.
What we are seeing now, from the attacks from Cato, et al, is the DEATH RATTLE of evil: blatant and obvious lies and denials, twisting the facts. And from those in the White House and the Republicans who stole the last two elections (and who are working their butts off to steal this one): unashamed lies, mass murder, looting, treason, fraudulent elections, stupid denials, paranoid illegal surveillance of this nation. They are JUNKIES, ADDICTED to the pornography of power and violence. They are so desperate they will do ANYTHING to keep the FIX COMING. Like junkies, they don't even care that we know the truth - they are so desperate - they can't help themselves. AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THE END, the DEATH RATTLE OF THESE GREEDY, INDIFFERENT, SADISTIC, DEPRAVED, MURDEROUS SOCIOPATHS.
IF WE ARE SMART, WE WILL IMPEACH THEM IMMEDIATELY AND REMOVE THEM TO A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN DO NO MORE HARM, TRY THEM IN OUR COURTS AND AT THE HAGUE FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE, THEN SEND THEM TO PRISON FOR THE REST OF THEIR NATURAL LIVES, AND THERE PICK THEIR BRAINS TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS HAPPENS TO HUMAN BEINGS.
What we are seeing now, from the attacks from Cato, et al, is the DEATH RATTLE of evil: blatant and obvious lies and denials, twisting the facts. And from those in the White House and the Republicans who stole the last two elections (and who are working their butts off to steal this one): unashamed lies, mass murder, looting, treason, fraudulent elections, stupid denials, paranoid illegal surveillance of this nation. They are JUNKIES, ADDICTED to the pornography of power and violence. They are so desperate they will do ANYTHING to keep the FIX COMING. Like junkies, they don't even care that we know the truth - they are so desperate - they can't help themselves. AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THE END, the DEATH RATTLE OF THESE GREEDY, INDIFFERENT, SADISTIC, DEPRAVED, MURDEROUS SOCIOPATHS.
IF WE ARE SMART, WE WILL IMPEACH THEM IMMEDIATELY AND REMOVE THEM TO A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN DO NO MORE HARM, TRY THEM IN OUR COURTS AND AT THE HAGUE FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE, THEN SEND THEM TO PRISON FOR THE REST OF THEIR NATURAL LIVES, AND THERE PICK THEIR BRAINS TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS HAPPENS TO HUMAN BEINGS.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
More Fun Stuff, from the people (those lovely Rightist foundations)
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More Fun Stuff, from the people (those lovely Rightist foundations) who gave you several of the posts on this story:
The connection is with the posters who contend that there has been no capitalism in US, only a distorted Fascism." All sources referencing fairly or very Right-wing viewpoints. Some of which include 'Economics Study' groups funded by the Scaife Foundation [& shared directorships; one of which (I swear, picked at random) is below
Bennett, William J.
20 institutional roles for $1,022,763
William J. Bennett on NBC's Meet The Press William J. Bennett is one of the prime movers of the conservative movement. Bennett was Secretary of Education in the Reagan Administration, and later he served as national drug czar, and has written numerous pessimistic books about American culture, appearing frequently on television (he's a favorite of Tim Russert and NBC's Meet The Press), and speaking regularly at any number of right wing organizations, as well as serving on many of their boards of directors. He is a "Distinguished Fellow" at the Heritage Foundation,
William J. Bennett on FOX News Sunday He also has very close ties to the Republican Party. Besides serving in the Reagan Administration, Bennett is quoted in a number of national magazines (1999) as editing or writing George W. Bush speeches, and he nearly became the chairman of the Republican National Committee a few years ago.
Bennett was one of the creators of Empower America, an organization whose main function seems to be to give its co-directors, which include Vin Weber, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Jack Kemp, access to the nation's news media, talk shows and highest levels of government.
From The Feeding Trough:
I want to know who the men in the shadows are, I want to hear somebody asking them Why?
-- Jackson Browne, from the song, "Blood on the Wire"
On November 14, 1996, an article appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (MJS) with the headline "Angry America: Target of Study." The article, based on an Associated Press dispatch, reported that former U.S. Secretary of Education William J. Bennett and retiring U.S. Senator Sam Nunn had made an announcement. They were going to launch a study to find out why people in this country are "so cynical, so distressed, so angry, so ticked off about so many things."
The study, to be conducted by the newly formed National Commission on Civic Renewal, would begin in 1997 and would be funded by a $950,000 grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts of Philadelphia. One of the Commission's 25 members is Michael Joyce, president of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.
The Bradley Foundation is the Milwaukee-based group that funded the notoriously racist book "The Bell Curve," so Joyce's participation on the Commission caught our attention. The articule turned out to be an interesting introduction to the world of conservative foundations....
Commission founder William J. Bennett himself is one good reason why some people in this country are so "ticked off." As chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and then U.S. Secretary of Eduation under President Ronald Reagan, Bennett was known for his crude defense of European-based college curricula nand his attacks on bilingual eduation, not to mention his call to dismantle the whole Department of Education itself. He has been an outspoken leader in national attacks on affirmative action. He has public attacked fellow Republican conservative Newt Gingrich for the House Speaker's overtures to the Rev. Jesse Jackson as well as to other Black Democrats. "Jesse Jackson has a history of being one of the worst racial polarizers in this country," Bennet said in an interview on CNN. (MJS 2/21/1997).
The connection is with the posters who contend that there has been no capitalism in US, only a distorted Fascism." All sources referencing fairly or very Right-wing viewpoints. Some of which include 'Economics Study' groups funded by the Scaife Foundation [& shared directorships; one of which (I swear, picked at random) is below
Bennett, William J.
20 institutional roles for $1,022,763
William J. Bennett on NBC's Meet The Press William J. Bennett is one of the prime movers of the conservative movement. Bennett was Secretary of Education in the Reagan Administration, and later he served as national drug czar, and has written numerous pessimistic books about American culture, appearing frequently on television (he's a favorite of Tim Russert and NBC's Meet The Press), and speaking regularly at any number of right wing organizations, as well as serving on many of their boards of directors. He is a "Distinguished Fellow" at the Heritage Foundation,
William J. Bennett on FOX News Sunday He also has very close ties to the Republican Party. Besides serving in the Reagan Administration, Bennett is quoted in a number of national magazines (1999) as editing or writing George W. Bush speeches, and he nearly became the chairman of the Republican National Committee a few years ago.
Bennett was one of the creators of Empower America, an organization whose main function seems to be to give its co-directors, which include Vin Weber, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Jack Kemp, access to the nation's news media, talk shows and highest levels of government.
From The Feeding Trough:
I want to know who the men in the shadows are, I want to hear somebody asking them Why?
-- Jackson Browne, from the song, "Blood on the Wire"
On November 14, 1996, an article appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (MJS) with the headline "Angry America: Target of Study." The article, based on an Associated Press dispatch, reported that former U.S. Secretary of Education William J. Bennett and retiring U.S. Senator Sam Nunn had made an announcement. They were going to launch a study to find out why people in this country are "so cynical, so distressed, so angry, so ticked off about so many things."
The study, to be conducted by the newly formed National Commission on Civic Renewal, would begin in 1997 and would be funded by a $950,000 grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts of Philadelphia. One of the Commission's 25 members is Michael Joyce, president of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.
The Bradley Foundation is the Milwaukee-based group that funded the notoriously racist book "The Bell Curve," so Joyce's participation on the Commission caught our attention. The articule turned out to be an interesting introduction to the world of conservative foundations....
Commission founder William J. Bennett himself is one good reason why some people in this country are so "ticked off." As chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and then U.S. Secretary of Eduation under President Ronald Reagan, Bennett was known for his crude defense of European-based college curricula nand his attacks on bilingual eduation, not to mention his call to dismantle the whole Department of Education itself. He has been an outspoken leader in national attacks on affirmative action. He has public attacked fellow Republican conservative Newt Gingrich for the House Speaker's overtures to the Rev. Jesse Jackson as well as to other Black Democrats. "Jesse Jackson has a history of being one of the worst racial polarizers in this country," Bennet said in an interview on CNN. (MJS 2/21/1997).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Part 2 {& Acknowledgment]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Part 2 {& Acknowledgment]
http://www.mediatransparency.org(& REMOVE THE GAP} /personprofile.php?personID=1
Bennett is now (1998) the John M. Olin Distinguished Fellow in Cultural Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation. The John M. Olin Foundation is another conservative funding group that until 1985 was headed by Michael Joyce, now president of the Bradley Foundation.
Bennett is pretty far to the right of the political spectrum, but he's not part of some fringe grouping. Not at all. On the contrary, he's a very visible national spokesperson for the same interests that ran the government during the Reagan and Bush administrations.
Today Bennett is a founder and director of an organization called Empower America, which describes itself as "...a unique combination of public policy institute and political advocacy organization." Empower America claims a membership of thousands of grassroots activists, but one of its main functions is to give its co-directors access to the news media, talk shows and the highest levels of government.
For example, for the past 20 years, orientation sessions for incoming members of Congress were run by the Kennedy School of Government in Boston. In 1994, the incoming members instead attended an orientation run by Empower America and the Heritage Foundation. One of the highlights of the orientation session was a talk by right-wing radio/TV talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whom Bennett called "a symbol of encouragement." Limbaugh was voted an honorary member of Congress."
Golden Stuff. Are we looking at brass necks? Or at idiocy?
http://www.mediatransparency.org(& REMOVE THE GAP} /personprofile.php?personID=1
Bennett is now (1998) the John M. Olin Distinguished Fellow in Cultural Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation. The John M. Olin Foundation is another conservative funding group that until 1985 was headed by Michael Joyce, now president of the Bradley Foundation.
Bennett is pretty far to the right of the political spectrum, but he's not part of some fringe grouping. Not at all. On the contrary, he's a very visible national spokesperson for the same interests that ran the government during the Reagan and Bush administrations.
Today Bennett is a founder and director of an organization called Empower America, which describes itself as "...a unique combination of public policy institute and political advocacy organization." Empower America claims a membership of thousands of grassroots activists, but one of its main functions is to give its co-directors access to the news media, talk shows and the highest levels of government.
For example, for the past 20 years, orientation sessions for incoming members of Congress were run by the Kennedy School of Government in Boston. In 1994, the incoming members instead attended an orientation run by Empower America and the Heritage Foundation. One of the highlights of the orientation session was a talk by right-wing radio/TV talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whom Bennett called "a symbol of encouragement." Limbaugh was voted an honorary member of Congress."
Golden Stuff. Are we looking at brass necks? Or at idiocy?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
More fun stuff, on the active Mr Bennett of the Scaife Foundation
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bill Bennett, God-Man : "When 4 Americans Are Hung.... You Level The City"
By Bruce Wilson Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 11:04:01 AM EST
"No person can be more rightly credited with making morality and personal responsibility an integral part of the political debate than William J. Bennett."
Until revelations concerning a gambling addiction torpedoed his burgeoning career, Bill Bennett was busily building brand name recognition as a conservative moralist and an advocate for personal responsibility. But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness. The concept that whole populations can be held accountable for the actions of a few violates typical American popular notions of fair play ( as well as the Geneva Convention ) and seems to contradict the conservative ethic which holds that we are masters of our fates.
I'm at the 2006 "Voter Values" conference sponsored by the Family Research Council, and this morning's first prominent speaker was Sean Hannity, followed by William Bennett. Recounting the incident that led to a massive US military assault on the Iraqi city of Fallujah - and implying that the US response to the deaths of four American private mercenaries working for Blackwater USA was somehow mild , Bennet stated : "When four Americans are hung and the city cheers, you take out Fallujah. You level the city...." Bennett then cited the example of the destruction of Hiroshima. Bennett's exhortation to mass collective punishment - the slaughter of hundreds or thousands of innocent civilians perhaps, or at least the destruction of their homes and cities - received enthusiastic applause. [ note: in response to one criticism of the following passage I originally wrote : "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new "Biblical" values systen based not in New Testament theme of mercy and forgiveness but, rather, in Old Testament narratives of mass slaughter. " I've amended the passage to now read: "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness." ]
By Bruce Wilson Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 11:04:01 AM EST
"No person can be more rightly credited with making morality and personal responsibility an integral part of the political debate than William J. Bennett."
Until revelations concerning a gambling addiction torpedoed his burgeoning career, Bill Bennett was busily building brand name recognition as a conservative moralist and an advocate for personal responsibility. But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness. The concept that whole populations can be held accountable for the actions of a few violates typical American popular notions of fair play ( as well as the Geneva Convention ) and seems to contradict the conservative ethic which holds that we are masters of our fates.
I'm at the 2006 "Voter Values" conference sponsored by the Family Research Council, and this morning's first prominent speaker was Sean Hannity, followed by William Bennett. Recounting the incident that led to a massive US military assault on the Iraqi city of Fallujah - and implying that the US response to the deaths of four American private mercenaries working for Blackwater USA was somehow mild , Bennet stated : "When four Americans are hung and the city cheers, you take out Fallujah. You level the city...." Bennett then cited the example of the destruction of Hiroshima. Bennett's exhortation to mass collective punishment - the slaughter of hundreds or thousands of innocent civilians perhaps, or at least the destruction of their homes and cities - received enthusiastic applause. [ note: in response to one criticism of the following passage I originally wrote : "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new "Biblical" values systen based not in New Testament theme of mercy and forgiveness but, rather, in Old Testament narratives of mass slaughter. " I've amended the passage to now read: "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness." ]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
And PART II www.talk2action.org/story/2006/9/23
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:56 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:56 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/9/23/[& REMOVE THE GAP] 1141/19091/Front_Page/Bill_Bennett_God_Man_
Bill Bennett, God-Man : "When 4 Americans Are Hung.... You Level The City" |
Bennett is doing just fine. Along with Michael
"junk bond" Milken they are getting states all over the country to pay for their K-12 curriculum for e-schools. Not a bad deal - they get the public school funding for each child they enroll, the kids learn at home on loaner computers, and the rest is profit for K-12. How much? I dunno, it's a private company.
Mary
by Brainbelle on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 01:43:33 PM EST
Thank you for bringing up that connection. I'd heard somewhere along the line that Bennett was in that arena but I'd long forgotten.
by Bruce Wilson on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 06:38:46 PM EST
Knowledge Universe.
...was founded by Milken, his brother and Larry Ellison in 1996, but doesn't even have a website?
Mary, my wife and I are educators and have been following private sector, charter school results and hadn't heard of KU until your post.
All I was able to find was a Forbes article, a lot of links to to the same article and an employment agency site, selling jobs at Knowledge Universe.
According to the article in Forbes, Knowledge Universe is a lot of interlocked corporations with 14,000 employees.
I wonder how they are scamming these school districts?
Which ones have bought into this deal?
And how is it working?
Where does Bennett fit in?
I read a while back Neil Bush is into some kind of education project funded by Saudis.
Is this some kind of stealth takeover of the public school system?
by justintime on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 10:31:26 PM EST
KU and K12
One of the more informative articles about KU was put together by Arizona State University: http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl [& REMOVE THE GAP] /EPRU/documents/EPSL-0404-118-EPRU.do c
I came to follow charter schools when the voters of Washington found them on the ballot for the 3rd time a few years back. They were defeated by later permitted by changing the distance a student must live from their school to anywhere in the state. That opened the door for K12's Virtual Academies. K12 set up the Washington Virtual Academy through the Steilacoom SD: http://www.steilacoom.k12.wa.us/do/SVA.asp
If you sign up for the K12 mailing list you will receive information about attending a K-12 demo in your area. I recommend it; they are quite the education. K12 does not promote their virtual academies in public as homeschooling, but the demo makes it clear they are marketing their program to homeschoolers as homeschooling. It's not. It's public school. The children are enrolled in the SD for the full federal/state/local funding. I do not know how much K-12 gets for each student and how much the SD keeps but this article indicates another district gets 6% of the $6000 in funding for their program run by Insight School Inc. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education [& REMOVE THE GAP] /2003253266_online 11m.html
(do you know what the average homeschooler could do with $6000 per child per year? That's a ridiculous amount of money for a few textbooks, worksheets and a computer.)
Even more troubling are the applications for K12. All are sent to a mysterious post office box in Baltimore. All require extensive personal information: For example, PA requires the child's dental records. OH requires information for the school... (for HOME schooled students?). All require family financial information.
Its getting to be a porous world. Ain't it Great!
Bill Bennett, God-Man : "When 4 Americans Are Hung.... You Level The City" |
Bennett is doing just fine. Along with Michael
"junk bond" Milken they are getting states all over the country to pay for their K-12 curriculum for e-schools. Not a bad deal - they get the public school funding for each child they enroll, the kids learn at home on loaner computers, and the rest is profit for K-12. How much? I dunno, it's a private company.
Mary
by Brainbelle on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 01:43:33 PM EST
Thank you for bringing up that connection. I'd heard somewhere along the line that Bennett was in that arena but I'd long forgotten.
by Bruce Wilson on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 06:38:46 PM EST
Knowledge Universe.
...was founded by Milken, his brother and Larry Ellison in 1996, but doesn't even have a website?
Mary, my wife and I are educators and have been following private sector, charter school results and hadn't heard of KU until your post.
All I was able to find was a Forbes article, a lot of links to to the same article and an employment agency site, selling jobs at Knowledge Universe.
According to the article in Forbes, Knowledge Universe is a lot of interlocked corporations with 14,000 employees.
I wonder how they are scamming these school districts?
Which ones have bought into this deal?
And how is it working?
Where does Bennett fit in?
I read a while back Neil Bush is into some kind of education project funded by Saudis.
Is this some kind of stealth takeover of the public school system?
by justintime on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 10:31:26 PM EST
KU and K12
One of the more informative articles about KU was put together by Arizona State University: http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl [& REMOVE THE GAP] /EPRU/documents/EPSL-0404-118-EPRU.do c
I came to follow charter schools when the voters of Washington found them on the ballot for the 3rd time a few years back. They were defeated by later permitted by changing the distance a student must live from their school to anywhere in the state. That opened the door for K12's Virtual Academies. K12 set up the Washington Virtual Academy through the Steilacoom SD: http://www.steilacoom.k12.wa.us/do/SVA.asp
If you sign up for the K12 mailing list you will receive information about attending a K-12 demo in your area. I recommend it; they are quite the education. K12 does not promote their virtual academies in public as homeschooling, but the demo makes it clear they are marketing their program to homeschoolers as homeschooling. It's not. It's public school. The children are enrolled in the SD for the full federal/state/local funding. I do not know how much K-12 gets for each student and how much the SD keeps but this article indicates another district gets 6% of the $6000 in funding for their program run by Insight School Inc. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education [& REMOVE THE GAP] /2003253266_online 11m.html
(do you know what the average homeschooler could do with $6000 per child per year? That's a ridiculous amount of money for a few textbooks, worksheets and a computer.)
Even more troubling are the applications for K12. All are sent to a mysterious post office box in Baltimore. All require extensive personal information: For example, PA requires the child's dental records. OH requires information for the school... (for HOME schooled students?). All require family financial information.
Its getting to be a porous world. Ain't it Great!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
THANK YOU NAOMI KLEIN. REMEMBER. THE MORE THEY HATE YOU THE MORE EFFECTIVE YOU HAVE BEEN.
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Sep 22, 2008 10:08 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Sep 22, 2008 10:08 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If only I could get them to hate me as much as you have. Then I too would know that I would have done something useful. Sadly they don't hate me enough. I can only keep trying.
Your insights are extraordinary. I am reading you slowly. By that I mean that I am reading for understanding.
I am 69 years old. I have 3 degrees and 30 graduate hours above the masters. I wake up each morning and ask the world whether I saw a new idea in the last 24 hours. I find that I nearly understood everything you have said before I read your book. You have cleared my mind in a gorgeous fashion. Thank You once again.
OUR WORLD HAS HOPE IN IT AS LONG AS WE HAVE YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE NAOMI KLEIN.
Your insights are extraordinary. I am reading you slowly. By that I mean that I am reading for understanding.
I am 69 years old. I have 3 degrees and 30 graduate hours above the masters. I wake up each morning and ask the world whether I saw a new idea in the last 24 hours. I find that I nearly understood everything you have said before I read your book. You have cleared my mind in a gorgeous fashion. Thank You once again.
OUR WORLD HAS HOPE IN IT AS LONG AS WE HAVE YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE NAOMI KLEIN.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
usterroristnation
Posted by: usterroristnation on Oct 1, 2008 9:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: usterroristnation on Oct 1, 2008 9:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
" ....If you are concerned that I am exaggerating Friedman's support for the brutal regime of Augusto Pinochet, read a letter Friedman wrote to Pinochet. If you are suspicious that I am making disaster capitalism seem more conspiratorial than it is, read the minutes from a meeting that took place at the Heritage Foundation just two weeks after the levees broke in New Orleans." And if you think it would be too much of a coincidence for a man to buy a few well located Towers in Manhattan and build in a get out clause in the contract in case they might just get destroyed in a "terrorist" attack and then take out a massive catch all insurance policy to cover this then check out were these Towers actually destroyed or "pulled" on the 11th of September 2001.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Alternet Comments:
» RE: Thank you Naomi Klein!
Posted by: leTerrassier
» Rebuttals like this - direct engagement with erroneous accusations - are important.
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: progdem
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: HelperMonkey
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: huricane
» Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: HelperMonkey
» Exactly. Blantant fallacy.
Posted by: Coleman
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: pauldd
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» Thanks for the support!
Posted by: Bobsays
» I'm dubious of your "help...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: Bobsays, sophistocated troll. We see you.
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Bobsays a more sophistocated troll. I see you.
Posted by: rideyourbike11
» RE: Bobsays a more sophistocated [To define a 'Troll'
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: channing
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: channing
» RE: Ha!
Posted by: zipoka
» if you are so concerned about carbon footprints
Posted by: aalif ba ta tha
» bobsays just don't want to see facism to go away
Posted by: jreal
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: rnagisetty
» Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: Jesse
» Biased is as Biased Does
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: heading towards slavery
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: heading towards slavery
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Biased is as Biased Does
Posted by: Godfather89
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: JMA
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: daw13
» "By definition 'capitalism' coined by Karl Marx..."
Posted by: pdxjoe
» Reality vs Theory (not a contest)
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» Free For Whom?
Posted by: pdxjoe
» "Free" for Fascist Oligarchs Unless Checked by Real Democracy
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Squarehead
» "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Neocons and academics don't mix = Cornerstone of Fascist Power
Posted by: channing
» RE: Klein can now claim co-heritage with the likes of Ghandi.
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Thanks Lauren, but I mispelled Gandhi
Posted by: channing
» Not just fascism
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Not just fascism, not just totalitarianism either
Posted by: channing
» Klein wrote an Okay book - Sorry but comparing her to Ghandi is Absurd
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: The point is the process she's experienced as a result of her work challenging power
Posted by: channing
» RE: The point is the process she's experienced as a result of her work challenging power
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Thank you for your thoughtful comments...
Posted by: channing
» RE: Thank you for your thoughtful comments...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Klein wrote an Okay book - [What is it with this fixation on 'fascism'?
Posted by: Squarehead
» Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs [ I am happy to confirm that I also don't really care that you should think
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [ No Need For Hysterics, Squarehead
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [ No Need For Hysterics, Squarehead
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Breaking News; I see the 'Foundation for Teaching Economics'
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Desperate News...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Your Sources: Parts 1
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Your Sources Part 2
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [I forgot to mention, in
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» What about the Neo-Liberals?
Posted by: pdxjoe
» RE: Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» The point is...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: gzuckier
» RE: This book changed my world view
Posted by: EdinIowa
» RE: This book changed my world view
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Voice of freshness.....
Posted by: daniel1982
» $42 billion dollars...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: $42 billion dollars...
Posted by: daniel1982
» NEOCON speaks (but can't think)...
Posted by: PointMan
» Fake Liberalism? Please expand.
Posted by: pdxjoe
» RE: everybody opposed the war
Posted by: Cathyc
» A national treasure, but which nation?
Posted by: redmaple
» RE: I was disappointed.
Posted by: rnagisetty
» RE: I was disappointed [Really? I was VERY impressed]
Posted by: Squarehead
» You are VERY easily impressed & it seems you who are "missing the point"
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [YES I am, by good quality thought
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [YES by moonwash & faux "leftwing" opinion]
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [That would be fatal.
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [ More Moonshine - what a surpirise...
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [is this the alternate 'fall back position'?
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [Mr MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» usterroristnation
Posted by: usterroristnation
» RE: sir [I like your allusion.
Posted by: Squarehead
» scary.
Posted by: daniel1982
Comments are closed-
Thank you Naomi Klein!
Posted by: MamaPantz on Sep 11, 2008 1:45 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: MamaPantz on Sep 11, 2008 1:45 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are a light in the darkness of our times. My appreciation for your work has only gained since reading No Logo.
Keep up the good work. You are a gifted truth seeker, and with that comes resistance, as you will no doubt endure the forces that attempt to stifle your voice.
They can only keep us in the dark for so long. Keep shedding light on what you can.
Keep up the good work. You are a gifted truth seeker, and with that comes resistance, as you will no doubt endure the forces that attempt to stifle your voice.
They can only keep us in the dark for so long. Keep shedding light on what you can.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Thank you Naomi Klein!
Posted by: leTerrassier
» Rebuttals like this - direct engagement with erroneous accusations - are important.
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
Comments are closed-
4changenow
Posted by: 4changenow on Sep 11, 2008 6:09 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: 4changenow on Sep 11, 2008 6:09 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ok, you have presented your rebuttal --now just ignore them --do not give them any more energy -- I would rather see you research and write, rather than trying to convince or educate fools.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: samd11 on Sep 11, 2008 6:12 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: samd11 on Sep 11, 2008 6:12 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am reading "Shock Doctrine" right now and feel very strongly that it should be required reading in all North American High Schools. Change can only come from an informed citizenry. Thank-you Naomi Klein for your intelligence and bravery in telling us the truth.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: daniel1982
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Keep us informed, Naomi
Posted by: nochicagoboys
Comments are closed-
Wait!!!
Posted by: progdem on Sep 12, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: progdem on Sep 12, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So you are telling me people still read the New Republic? And that people still give a shit what a psuedo-intellectual like Chait thinks? TNR was eclipsed a while ago by the Nation, and the Nation has become something of a joke itself (what with the bib boom ba ra ra ra aspect to its coverage of the Democratic party).
As for the Cato institute, anytime they can have the screws put to them in print, it is a good thing.
As for the Cato institute, anytime they can have the screws put to them in print, it is a good thing.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: Bobsays on Sep 12, 2008 2:00 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Bobsays on Sep 12, 2008 2:00 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1) How is your carbon footprint - all that flying around the world, and back and forth across Canada to your island hideaway?
2) How are you any different than the neo-liberals you mock, with your caravan train flitting from one disaster to another?
3) Do you really believe that Friedman invented the 'shock doctrine', because I would like to introduce you to some other excellent 'shock doctrine' practitioners: Ghengis Khan, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot (you must really like this dude, he took it back to 'Year Zero'), and some people who wrote better books: Von Clauswitz (On War), Machiaveli (The Prince), Tsun Tsu (The Art of War). What is old is new again, eh?
2) How are you any different than the neo-liberals you mock, with your caravan train flitting from one disaster to another?
3) Do you really believe that Friedman invented the 'shock doctrine', because I would like to introduce you to some other excellent 'shock doctrine' practitioners: Ghengis Khan, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot (you must really like this dude, he took it back to 'Year Zero'), and some people who wrote better books: Von Clauswitz (On War), Machiaveli (The Prince), Tsun Tsu (The Art of War). What is old is new again, eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: progdem
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: HelperMonkey
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: huricane
» Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: HelperMonkey
» Exactly. Blantant fallacy.
Posted by: Coleman
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: pauldd
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Claim to be a radical, then live like one
Posted by: nochicagoboys
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: drmflorida
» RE: Some questions for Naomi
Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» Thanks for the support!
Posted by: Bobsays
» I'm dubious of your "help...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: Bobsays, sophistocated troll. We see you.
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Bobsays a more sophistocated troll. I see you.
Posted by: rideyourbike11
» RE: Bobsays a more sophistocated [To define a 'Troll'
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: channing
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Bush (IS) a 'retard', 'fascist', 'war criminal', 'monkey' Bobsays
Posted by: channing
» RE: Ha!
Posted by: zipoka
» if you are so concerned about carbon footprints
Posted by: aalif ba ta tha
» bobsays just don't want to see facism to go away
Posted by: jreal
Comments are closed-
Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: Godfather89 on Sep 12, 2008 4:01 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Godfather89 on Sep 12, 2008 4:01 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do not care what you say. Naomi Klein is biased in views, she see's Free Markets as a bad thing, which is something we need today.
Free Market Economics believes that we should not setup a National Bank. However, throughout her book discussing the military actions of South America to practice The Shock Doctrine, that's what Milton Friedman wanted. Setting up National Banks to control the economy "furthering the Shock."
Also Milton Friedman wanted fiat money. I know no real capitalists or Pro-Free Market economists that would wanted credit money (fiat money) instead of sound money backed by a commodity like Gold and Silver.
Also, Google: Ludwig Von Mises because, his economic philosophy overall was opposed to Keynesian and Friedmanite economic policies. Ludwig Von Mises system worked and predict a lot of what we are seeing today by following these PSEUDO-Free Market Economists like Friedman. Read: "What has Government Done With Our Money & The Case for 100% Gold Dollar"
Corporations doing the works of Government responsibilities is a dangerous thing and is related more so to a Command Economy (Socialism or Fascism) than it does have to do with a Free Market! Thus I conclude she is lying and biased in her approach!
Free Market Economics believes that we should not setup a National Bank. However, throughout her book discussing the military actions of South America to practice The Shock Doctrine, that's what Milton Friedman wanted. Setting up National Banks to control the economy "furthering the Shock."
Also Milton Friedman wanted fiat money. I know no real capitalists or Pro-Free Market economists that would wanted credit money (fiat money) instead of sound money backed by a commodity like Gold and Silver.
Also, Google: Ludwig Von Mises because, his economic philosophy overall was opposed to Keynesian and Friedmanite economic policies. Ludwig Von Mises system worked and predict a lot of what we are seeing today by following these PSEUDO-Free Market Economists like Friedman. Read: "What has Government Done With Our Money & The Case for 100% Gold Dollar"
Corporations doing the works of Government responsibilities is a dangerous thing and is related more so to a Command Economy (Socialism or Fascism) than it does have to do with a Free Market! Thus I conclude she is lying and biased in her approach!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: rnagisetty
» Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Pick Your Battles
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: hms2004
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: Jesse
» Biased is as Biased Does
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: heading towards slavery
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: heading towards slavery
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: Biased is as Biased Does
Posted by: Godfather89
» RE: Pro-Socialism and Very Biased
Posted by: JMA
Comments are closed-
"Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Sep 12, 2008 4:42 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Sep 12, 2008 4:42 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That remains my beef with this limited hangout work that supposedly upsets NeoCon Think Tank apparatchiks and other assorted disinfo nutcases.
By definition "capitalism" coined by Karl Marx requires free, open markets and genuine competition. We have NONE in the west for anything that matters. Ergo we have no "capitalism" let alone democracy.
Full stop.
The corporate crime ruling class that rules the west does so via propaganda masked Fascism and has for generations.
Other books including Engdahl's "A Century Of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order" and J. Perkins "The Secret History of the American Empire" both have issues but at least they are backed by years of hands-on field experience. Not for the most part, supposition, theory and footnotes (however extensive).
By definition "capitalism" coined by Karl Marx requires free, open markets and genuine competition. We have NONE in the west for anything that matters. Ergo we have no "capitalism" let alone democracy.
Full stop.
The corporate crime ruling class that rules the west does so via propaganda masked Fascism and has for generations.
Other books including Engdahl's "A Century Of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order" and J. Perkins "The Secret History of the American Empire" both have issues but at least they are backed by years of hands-on field experience. Not for the most part, supposition, theory and footnotes (however extensive).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: daw13
» "By definition 'capitalism' coined by Karl Marx..."
Posted by: pdxjoe
» Reality vs Theory (not a contest)
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» Free For Whom?
Posted by: pdxjoe
» "Free" for Fascist Oligarchs Unless Checked by Real Democracy
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES [that Marx, in 'Kapital',
Posted by: Squarehead
» "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: "Capitalism" of Shock Doctrine DOES NOT EXIST
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps
Comments are closed-
Excellent Rebuttal
Posted by: TerryS on Sep 12, 2008 5:53 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: TerryS on Sep 12, 2008 5:53 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keep up the great work Naomi!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Neocons and academics don't mix
Posted by: scheherezade on Sep 12, 2008 5:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: scheherezade on Sep 12, 2008 5:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I discuss, at length, how difficult it is to find terms to describe the corporatist project that are acceptable to all readers.
Scholars of European Fascism have the same problem for the same reason -- neither phenomenon is grounded in any rational ideological basis.
Neoconservatives like to present their 'theories' as products of rigorous academic method. In fact, as Ms. Klein so aptly demonstrates, they're seldom backed by comprehensive, substantiatable data -- or exhaustively-researched secondary background analysis.
Indeed, neocon reaction to The Shock Doctrine reveals how very poorly-grounded in academic method it and associated ideologies are.
Neoconservativism pretends to be a legitimate 'alternative' analysis of what is presented as impartial research -- just as "intelligent design" pretends to be a scientifically-derived "alternative" to evolutionary theory.
In fact, as is happening in the civil sphere --neoconservativism seeks to replace rational, exhaustively researched, inductive academic method, itself, with theory by selectively-researched diktat.
Thanks to Naomi Klein for taking time to tease out, expose and document the flawed methodology that is the basis of what appears will be an endless fascist/neconservative war against the reason-based cultural principles that anchor our rapidly-fading Western legacy.
Scholars of European Fascism have the same problem for the same reason -- neither phenomenon is grounded in any rational ideological basis.
Neoconservatives like to present their 'theories' as products of rigorous academic method. In fact, as Ms. Klein so aptly demonstrates, they're seldom backed by comprehensive, substantiatable data -- or exhaustively-researched secondary background analysis.
Indeed, neocon reaction to The Shock Doctrine reveals how very poorly-grounded in academic method it and associated ideologies are.
Neoconservativism pretends to be a legitimate 'alternative' analysis of what is presented as impartial research -- just as "intelligent design" pretends to be a scientifically-derived "alternative" to evolutionary theory.
In fact, as is happening in the civil sphere --neoconservativism seeks to replace rational, exhaustively researched, inductive academic method, itself, with theory by selectively-researched diktat.
Thanks to Naomi Klein for taking time to tease out, expose and document the flawed methodology that is the basis of what appears will be an endless fascist/neconservative war against the reason-based cultural principles that anchor our rapidly-fading Western legacy.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Neocons and academics don't mix = Cornerstone of Fascist Power
Posted by: channing
» RE: Klein can now claim co-heritage with the likes of Ghandi.
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Thanks Lauren, but I mispelled Gandhi
Posted by: channing
» Not just fascism
Posted by: andabottleof_rum
» RE: Not just fascism, not just totalitarianism either
Posted by: channing
» Klein wrote an Okay book - Sorry but comparing her to Ghandi is Absurd
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: The point is the process she's experienced as a result of her work challenging power
Posted by: channing
» RE: The point is the process she's experienced as a result of her work challenging power
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Thank you for your thoughtful comments...
Posted by: channing
» RE: Thank you for your thoughtful comments...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Klein wrote an Okay book - [What is it with this fixation on 'fascism'?
Posted by: Squarehead
» Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S.
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs [ I am happy to confirm that I also don't really care that you should think
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [ No Need For Hysterics, Squarehead
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [ No Need For Hysterics, Squarehead
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Breaking News; I see the 'Foundation for Teaching Economics'
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Desperate News...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Your Sources: Parts 1
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Your Sources Part 2
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [I forgot to mention, in
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: Fascism is what runs the U.S. [Squarehead Chases Tail...
Posted by: OrwellMan
» What about the Neo-Liberals?
Posted by: pdxjoe
Comments are closed-
They don't care about the facts
Posted by: sliver on Sep 12, 2008 6:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: sliver on Sep 12, 2008 6:22 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The book has been smeared, and that's all the conservatives care about. Now the pundits, without a single fact, can say the book has been debunked. Likewise, Barack Obama and all the other Democratic candidates have been smeared with lies, but the subject of the lie doesn't matter, it's the smear they want.
Isn't there some sort of standard of reasonable truth that these people adhere to? They seem to think lies are acceptable tactics, as long as their side "wins".
Isn't there some sort of standard of reasonable truth that these people adhere to? They seem to think lies are acceptable tactics, as long as their side "wins".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
it's a cookbook
Posted by: schnoggi on Sep 12, 2008 7:09 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: schnoggi on Sep 12, 2008 7:09 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i highly recommend the article "Corporate Metabolism", available at http://www.tripzine.com/listing.php?smlid=327
Corporations are now the dominant lifeform on the planet; humans are just the substrate.
Corporations are now the dominant lifeform on the planet; humans are just the substrate.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: pauldd on Sep 12, 2008 7:23 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: pauldd on Sep 12, 2008 7:23 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Great book. Cogent rebuttal to the ideologues. Critical posts on this thread are similar to those of critics of other individuals who are critical of "systems":
Ralph Nader - "How can Ralph profit from Cisco stock when he's critical of corporate influence in politics?"
Al Gore - "How can Al Gore fly on a plane or own a large home when he's critical of the effects of human activities on climate?"
and now - Naomi Klein - "How can you research a book and earn money from sales when you are critical of neo-liberal economic policies?"
Straw-men, all of them.
Air travel is actually the most efficient form of travel using less energy per passenger mile than ANY other form of chemically powered transportation? Don't believe me, look it up yourself.
Ralph Nader - "How can Ralph profit from Cisco stock when he's critical of corporate influence in politics?"
Al Gore - "How can Al Gore fly on a plane or own a large home when he's critical of the effects of human activities on climate?"
and now - Naomi Klein - "How can you research a book and earn money from sales when you are critical of neo-liberal economic policies?"
Straw-men, all of them.
Air travel is actually the most efficient form of travel using less energy per passenger mile than ANY other form of chemically powered transportation? Don't believe me, look it up yourself.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: tommy_slothrop
» The point is...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: Thank you Ms. Klein
Posted by: gzuckier
Comments are closed-
Naomi rocks...
Posted by: BornaSkeptic on Sep 12, 2008 7:31 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: BornaSkeptic on Sep 12, 2008 7:31 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Truly, one of the finest articles I've read on ANY topic. Thank God for Alternet and Naomi Klein. They give me hope for the survival of our "democracy"....or what remains of it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Jeauxie
Posted by: center_peace on Sep 12, 2008 8:00 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: center_peace on Sep 12, 2008 8:00 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Boy howdy, I listened to this on audio book in my car and many times found myself pounding the steering wheel in disgust at all those wretched %$@#s who specifically seek to profit off human disaster.
Your writing is indeed brilliant and I raise my hat to each and every one of your researchers. And thank you so much for being such pillar of the world community.
Brava.
- J
Your writing is indeed brilliant and I raise my hat to each and every one of your researchers. And thank you so much for being such pillar of the world community.
Brava.
- J
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
This book changed my world view
Posted by: rkrenke on Sep 12, 2008 8:45 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: rkrenke on Sep 12, 2008 8:45 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Naomi, thank you for your fearlessness. This book opened my eyes to how we, the United States, are the real terrorists.
Many of my friends and family are either reading or have completed "The Shock Doctrine". I believe that they're truly shocked at our how our government's pro-corporate policies have literally destroyed countries and people, including our own.
I agree with others, this book should be required reading for all high school students.
Thanks for opening my eyes - I will continue to promote your book to anyone who'll listen.
Many of my friends and family are either reading or have completed "The Shock Doctrine". I believe that they're truly shocked at our how our government's pro-corporate policies have literally destroyed countries and people, including our own.
I agree with others, this book should be required reading for all high school students.
Thanks for opening my eyes - I will continue to promote your book to anyone who'll listen.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This book changed my world view
Posted by: EdinIowa
» RE: This book changed my world view
Posted by: nochicagoboys
Comments are closed-
Voice of freshness.....
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 12, 2008 9:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Sep 12, 2008 9:07 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For all of those on the right that continue to take that "free-market" position, I want you to continue to shine the light of truth! If those neo-fascists really want free markets, then how about less agricultural subsidies for agri-business so that their products are truly competitive? Or how about less welfare for oil and coal industries - because when your profit margin is 1800% over and above. do you really need my tax dollars? Oh, I know, how about those no-bid contracts, can we faze them out?
Those preaching this nonsense are the very ones that are profiting at the trough of government. Exposure it not only needed but extremely necessary in this corporatocracy! How dare they cry foul because some of the shenanigans are being exposed. Continue on Ms. Klein, some of us thinkers are grateful!
Those preaching this nonsense are the very ones that are profiting at the trough of government. Exposure it not only needed but extremely necessary in this corporatocracy! How dare they cry foul because some of the shenanigans are being exposed. Continue on Ms. Klein, some of us thinkers are grateful!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Voice of freshness.....
Posted by: daniel1982
» $42 billion dollars...
Posted by: buffeliscious
» RE: $42 billion dollars...
Posted by: daniel1982
» NEOCON speaks (but can't think)...
Posted by: PointMan
Comments are closed-
shock doctrine
Posted by: johanB on Sep 12, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: johanB on Sep 12, 2008 10:21 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Naomi Klein is absolute right in her thesis.
It is either pure jealousy or ignorance to call this book just an opinion piece. The Cato institute and Mr Chait have clearly their own little agenda and they will do anything tho distort the facts and the truth by taking things out of context or by partial convenient quotes. Why are they so desperate to defend Mr.Friedman, who has had such an incredible negative impact on the world as it is now, what is in it for them. Friedmans teachings, under the mask of fake liberalism are nothing more then creating a breeding ground for extremist economists. I guess that says a lot about Chait and the Cato institute. Maybe next time the Cato book could be written in an even more obscure language.
It is either pure jealousy or ignorance to call this book just an opinion piece. The Cato institute and Mr Chait have clearly their own little agenda and they will do anything tho distort the facts and the truth by taking things out of context or by partial convenient quotes. Why are they so desperate to defend Mr.Friedman, who has had such an incredible negative impact on the world as it is now, what is in it for them. Friedmans teachings, under the mask of fake liberalism are nothing more then creating a breeding ground for extremist economists. I guess that says a lot about Chait and the Cato institute. Maybe next time the Cato book could be written in an even more obscure language.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Fake Liberalism? Please expand.
Posted by: pdxjoe
Comments are closed-
Carbon footprint?
Posted by: davmills on Sep 12, 2008 10:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: davmills on Sep 12, 2008 10:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does the originator of this string know precisely what her carbon footprint is? As was pointed out earlier, her book isn't devoted to environmentalism, and it's an unfortunate fact that ecologists have to travel by pollutant plane to spread their message. They hopefully do as much as possible to reduce excess on the ground. As for her profiting perhaps from disasters, there's a film called "The Take," made cerca 2004, that shows her and her partner, Avi Lewis, actively encouraging a group of Argentinian workers to take charge of their own employment by operating a factory themselves. This and other such stories don't make it to the mainstream press.I don't agree with everything she says, but she herself has stated on CNN that she doesn't disagree with free markets as such, just free markets that enrich a minority.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
everybody opposed the war
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:00 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:00 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not at the time, of course, but now in retrospect they opposed it.
just like after WWII, all the germans had in fact been opposed to the nazis, it turned out.
just like after WWII, all the germans had in fact been opposed to the nazis, it turned out.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: everybody opposed the war
Posted by: Cathyc
Comments are closed-
well played ms. klein!
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:15 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: gzuckier on Sep 12, 2008 11:15 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
of course, it helps that the reality of the situation (both in the world and re your book) matches your description of it, rather than that of those who have left the reality based community behind in their attempt to reshape the world, or at least their imaginary version of it.
i don't know whether to look down at the righwingers for doing such a feeble job holding up their end of the argument, or give them credit for at least making an effort, unlike the "repeat it until it's true" meme which seems to have infected the "conservatives" since Reagan introduced it to them.
i don't know whether to look down at the righwingers for doing such a feeble job holding up their end of the argument, or give them credit for at least making an effort, unlike the "repeat it until it's true" meme which seems to have infected the "conservatives" since Reagan introduced it to them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Keep it up!!
Posted by: pioneer on Sep 12, 2008 12:18 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: pioneer on Sep 12, 2008 12:18 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are a national treasure. Your book is the BEST thing and should be required reading in every school in the world!!
Keep up your good work. I love it when you go on TV and "kill" the neos with facts.
Keep up your good work. I love it when you go on TV and "kill" the neos with facts.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» A national treasure, but which nation?
Posted by: redmaple
Comments are closed-
The attack on Naomi Klein begins now... er, now!
Posted by: Ghoulman on Sep 12, 2008 2:05 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Ghoulman on Sep 12, 2008 2:05 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Timing... seems the think tank and New Republic old boys were just waiting for the right time... notably after Naomi Klein has promoted her book. After all, there's little chance she'll be able to rebut the attacks on her in the MSM.
Do ya think election time will see her interviewed in the US? Not a chance!
The attacks by the neocons are always the same, attack the person. Culture wars, that's the strategy. Alan Greenspan set the tone... Naomi Klein is anti-capitalist! Um, but that's obviously not true. So why attack her like this?
You're either with us or against us. To quote the President of the US. And the neocons don't mean this to just apply to the war on terror but to their every policy. They believe that their economic philosophy is the only one that can make America great again and have pushed this since they came to prominence in the 90s. And now, we've seen the results. Hope you out there reading this still have a mortgage.
Naomi, thanks! Thanks for giving us all a well researched work of fact that points out the opportunism of neocon inspired 'free market' economic policy. A policy where the 'invisible hand' that the neocons purport will steady the markets actually is a free-for-all where corporations use that hand to slap the poor in the arse.
Thanks for this rebuttal. You're a class act as always. :)
Do ya think election time will see her interviewed in the US? Not a chance!
The attacks by the neocons are always the same, attack the person. Culture wars, that's the strategy. Alan Greenspan set the tone... Naomi Klein is anti-capitalist! Um, but that's obviously not true. So why attack her like this?
You're either with us or against us. To quote the President of the US. And the neocons don't mean this to just apply to the war on terror but to their every policy. They believe that their economic philosophy is the only one that can make America great again and have pushed this since they came to prominence in the 90s. And now, we've seen the results. Hope you out there reading this still have a mortgage.
Naomi, thanks! Thanks for giving us all a well researched work of fact that points out the opportunism of neocon inspired 'free market' economic policy. A policy where the 'invisible hand' that the neocons purport will steady the markets actually is a free-for-all where corporations use that hand to slap the poor in the arse.
Thanks for this rebuttal. You're a class act as always. :)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Best book!
Posted by: Kati on Sep 12, 2008 4:03 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Kati on Sep 12, 2008 4:03 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Naomi Klein, your book is a true masterpiece of research, synthesis and orginal insight. Thank you for writing it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
'Shock Doctrine' is True for those Living Under it!
Posted by: Purple Girl on Sep 12, 2008 4:07 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Purple Girl on Sep 12, 2008 4:07 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have yet to read the Book- it's on the list, but frankly I think i know the Gist of it- We've been actually living it now for the last 3 decades.Lets slip back to the days of Hostage Crisis, Odd/Even Days, numerous highjackings (I can still see that poor mans body on the Tarrmack). this is not new, they just have to 'Refresh' the Terror every few years to keep US walking on egg shells and disoriented enough to pull off a few more hiest- money, property, Rights...The last 7 yrs have been the Crescendo to their long symphony of Deception and Crimes.
But for anyone who realizes they are nothing more than automatic money movers between the corps has been watching this Tragedy for decades.Hindsight being 20/20 We Now know who the Real 'Trickey Dickey' has always been.
But for anyone who realizes they are nothing more than automatic money movers between the corps has been watching this Tragedy for decades.Hindsight being 20/20 We Now know who the Real 'Trickey Dickey' has always been.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
I was disappointed.
Posted by: BigRon on Sep 12, 2008 4:11 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: BigRon on Sep 12, 2008 4:11 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... by Ms. Klein's analysis of Margaret Thatcher. I'm a Brit, a Trades Union member, and no fan of Thatcher, but Thatcher reducing the power of the Trades Unions in the UK was both largely a popular move, and overdue.
If politics is like a pendulum, then in the UK, it had been swinging in a very lopsided manner, with some unions effectively above the law. Thatcher was swept into power shortly after the UK was brought to its knees by a string of strikes - it seemed that everyone in th UK was striking about something - usually without a ballot of their members.
The miners saw themselves as the elite of the working class, and quite happy to bring the country to a standstill by strike action for POLITICAL reasons. Thatcher ambushed them: stockpiled coal, and provoked a strike. They were brought down largely by their own arrogance.
How Ms. Klein manages to convince herself that Thatcher needed the "shock" of the Falklands war to enable her to take on the miners is a mystery. It does seem to fit in with Ms Klein's thesis; but my conclusion is simply that Ms Klein should stick to subjects which she understands. British politics apparently isn't one of those subjects. Thatcher may be an Icon of the USA's right... but on many issues (like healthcare) she stood way to the left of Hillary Clinton. If you didn't know that, then it's inadvisable to write books suggesting that you do know it.
If politics is like a pendulum, then in the UK, it had been swinging in a very lopsided manner, with some unions effectively above the law. Thatcher was swept into power shortly after the UK was brought to its knees by a string of strikes - it seemed that everyone in th UK was striking about something - usually without a ballot of their members.
The miners saw themselves as the elite of the working class, and quite happy to bring the country to a standstill by strike action for POLITICAL reasons. Thatcher ambushed them: stockpiled coal, and provoked a strike. They were brought down largely by their own arrogance.
How Ms. Klein manages to convince herself that Thatcher needed the "shock" of the Falklands war to enable her to take on the miners is a mystery. It does seem to fit in with Ms Klein's thesis; but my conclusion is simply that Ms Klein should stick to subjects which she understands. British politics apparently isn't one of those subjects. Thatcher may be an Icon of the USA's right... but on many issues (like healthcare) she stood way to the left of Hillary Clinton. If you didn't know that, then it's inadvisable to write books suggesting that you do know it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I was disappointed.
Posted by: rnagisetty
» RE: I was disappointed [Really? I was VERY impressed]
Posted by: Squarehead
» You are VERY easily impressed & it seems you who are "missing the point"
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [YES I am, by good quality thought
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [YES by moonwash & faux "leftwing" opinion]
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [That would be fatal.
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [ More Moonshine - what a surpirise...
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [is this the alternate 'fall back position'?
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [Mr MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: Squarehead
» RE: You are VERY easily impressed [& There's MORE MoonShine Deluxe speaks
Posted by: PointMan
» usterroristnation
Posted by: usterroristnation
Comments are closed-
The Democrats should tell the truth instead of losing
Posted by: rmirman on Sep 12, 2008 4:40 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: rmirman on Sep 12, 2008 4:40 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please transmit to Obama campaign!
Democrats historically have been very skilled at losing elections. We may again be on the way to throwing away a sure victory. The Republican convention was full of lies and insults. Were these answered? Of course not. Anyone ever hear of John Kerry? It is necessary to hit harder and make the issues --- and people --- clearer. Improvement is essential but there is little sign of it. Explain to the electorate what the Republicans are like and what a McCain (Bush extension) victory would mean for the country. This is never done so we keep losing. Doesn't anyone care? Have you seen Krugman's column on how well the Republicans create and use resentment? We are totally incapable of doing so. And we lose. We are likely to again throw away certain victory, hurting the country.
Here are some suggestions for themes that should be stressed expressed in terms of a commercial.
Consider some people talking.
Did you see the new unemployment numbers? They are really high.
I know, my job was wiped out and I am having a very tough time, not only in finding a new one.
The Republicans made a lot of speeches at their convention. What are they offering, how will they help me find work?
Most of what they said is lies and insults. Republicans are good at that. They have no ideas about how to help us, with anything. And they don't care. Their only ideas are how to help the wealthy, especially how to increase the enormous profits of the oil companies. And gas prices are so high now. Everything else is just lies and insults.
That's not surprising. The Republicans care a lot about the wealthy and look for ways to help them. They don't care about us, except as a way to trick us into voting for them, so they can help the wealthy even more.
That shows again that Republicans have contempt for people like you and me. They think that they can fool us by lying, and trying to prevent people like Barack Obama, who really wants to help us, from doing so by continually insulting and lying about him. Republicans think that we are stupid so that they can get away with lying. That way we won't notice their contempt for us, and their refusal to help.
Obama has ideas about how to help us. But, as he has shown so forcefully in the last few months, he is very smart and competent, and caring. It is amazing what he has been able to accomplish, what ability that shows. Obama is just what we need, someone who has proven that he is very talented, and very concerned. All Bush-McCain have to offer is lies and insults. They do not have ideas, just contempt for us. Their lies and insults show that they believe we are stupid so that they can get away their contempt. We aren't rich so why should they care?
And they don't care about the country. For them it is country last, winning first, no matter how much damage they do. Look who the Bush-McCain party picked for Vice President! Someone who is so inexperienced she would endanger the country if she became President. She will be one heartbeat away from the presidency, and that heart belongs to a 72 year old man, with four bouts of cancer and who has shown signs of forgetting, not only the number of houses he has. It is highly irresponsible and quite frightening, a 72 year old man with memory problems, which might likely worsen with advancing age, and an incompetent extremist with practically no relevant experience. It shows not only great irresponsibility but contempt for the country and for women. They think that by putting a woman, an incompetent woman, a woman who opposes everything women need, on the ticket they will get women's votes, even
Democrats historically have been very skilled at losing elections. We may again be on the way to throwing away a sure victory. The Republican convention was full of lies and insults. Were these answered? Of course not. Anyone ever hear of John Kerry? It is necessary to hit harder and make the issues --- and people --- clearer. Improvement is essential but there is little sign of it. Explain to the electorate what the Republicans are like and what a McCain (Bush extension) victory would mean for the country. This is never done so we keep losing. Doesn't anyone care? Have you seen Krugman's column on how well the Republicans create and use resentment? We are totally incapable of doing so. And we lose. We are likely to again throw away certain victory, hurting the country.
Here are some suggestions for themes that should be stressed expressed in terms of a commercial.
Consider some people talking.
Did you see the new unemployment numbers? They are really high.
I know, my job was wiped out and I am having a very tough time, not only in finding a new one.
The Republicans made a lot of speeches at their convention. What are they offering, how will they help me find work?
Most of what they said is lies and insults. Republicans are good at that. They have no ideas about how to help us, with anything. And they don't care. Their only ideas are how to help the wealthy, especially how to increase the enormous profits of the oil companies. And gas prices are so high now. Everything else is just lies and insults.
That's not surprising. The Republicans care a lot about the wealthy and look for ways to help them. They don't care about us, except as a way to trick us into voting for them, so they can help the wealthy even more.
That shows again that Republicans have contempt for people like you and me. They think that they can fool us by lying, and trying to prevent people like Barack Obama, who really wants to help us, from doing so by continually insulting and lying about him. Republicans think that we are stupid so that they can get away with lying. That way we won't notice their contempt for us, and their refusal to help.
Obama has ideas about how to help us. But, as he has shown so forcefully in the last few months, he is very smart and competent, and caring. It is amazing what he has been able to accomplish, what ability that shows. Obama is just what we need, someone who has proven that he is very talented, and very concerned. All Bush-McCain have to offer is lies and insults. They do not have ideas, just contempt for us. Their lies and insults show that they believe we are stupid so that they can get away their contempt. We aren't rich so why should they care?
And they don't care about the country. For them it is country last, winning first, no matter how much damage they do. Look who the Bush-McCain party picked for Vice President! Someone who is so inexperienced she would endanger the country if she became President. She will be one heartbeat away from the presidency, and that heart belongs to a 72 year old man, with four bouts of cancer and who has shown signs of forgetting, not only the number of houses he has. It is highly irresponsible and quite frightening, a 72 year old man with memory problems, which might likely worsen with advancing age, and an incompetent extremist with practically no relevant experience. It shows not only great irresponsibility but contempt for the country and for women. They think that by putting a woman, an incompetent woman, a woman who opposes everything women need, on the ticket they will get women's votes, even
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
follow up klein book?
Posted by: wleming on Sep 12, 2008 4:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: wleming on Sep 12, 2008 4:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
my hope is that ms. klein can do a follow up book on how capitalism opposes community, humanity and a greed free society. shes done all the research.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
sir
Posted by: mikmojo06 on Sep 12, 2008 6:56 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: mikmojo06 on Sep 12, 2008 6:56 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Excellent rebuttal Ms Klein. Perhaps you could have shown more mercy as your critics were surely without weapons.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: sir [I like your allusion.
Posted by: Squarehead
Comments are closed-
COMPARING KLEIN TO McCAIN/PALIN
Posted by: wellaware lec on Sep 12, 2008 8:32 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: wellaware lec on Sep 12, 2008 8:32 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
makes me nearly breathless over the contrast. And that's with McCain/Palin COMBINED...
IMAGINE what it would be like if someone like Naomi Klein was President or Vice President in this country. Stunning, eh?
IMAGINE what it would be like if someone like Naomi Klein was President or Vice President in this country. Stunning, eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» scary.
Posted by: daniel1982
Comments are closed-
Wondered where Cato reaction was
Posted by: john2007 on Sep 12, 2008 10:01 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: john2007 on Sep 12, 2008 10:01 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your thesis of disaster capitalism is so profound and so well documented that I predict it will cause a major paradigm shift in the teaching of economics and in governmental policies far into the future.
I was waiting to hear what the crooks and liars at Cato and AEI would say about it. You can bet they have been scurrying all over each other trying to come up face-saving rebuttals; after all, your thesis correctly implies criminality on the part of all of them.
I was waiting to hear what the crooks and liars at Cato and AEI would say about it. You can bet they have been scurrying all over each other trying to come up face-saving rebuttals; after all, your thesis correctly implies criminality on the part of all of them.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
THE DEATH RATTLE
Posted by: AlwaysAskWhy on Sep 13, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: AlwaysAskWhy on Sep 13, 2008 12:38 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks and the deepest gratitude to Naomi Klein for turning the lights on! We all owe her - BIG TIME.
What we are seeing now, from the attacks from Cato, et al, is the DEATH RATTLE of evil: blatant and obvious lies and denials, twisting the facts. And from those in the White House and the Republicans who stole the last two elections (and who are working their butts off to steal this one): unashamed lies, mass murder, looting, treason, fraudulent elections, stupid denials, paranoid illegal surveillance of this nation. They are JUNKIES, ADDICTED to the pornography of power and violence. They are so desperate they will do ANYTHING to keep the FIX COMING. Like junkies, they don't even care that we know the truth - they are so desperate - they can't help themselves. AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THE END, the DEATH RATTLE OF THESE GREEDY, INDIFFERENT, SADISTIC, DEPRAVED, MURDEROUS SOCIOPATHS.
IF WE ARE SMART, WE WILL IMPEACH THEM IMMEDIATELY AND REMOVE THEM TO A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN DO NO MORE HARM, TRY THEM IN OUR COURTS AND AT THE HAGUE FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE, THEN SEND THEM TO PRISON FOR THE REST OF THEIR NATURAL LIVES, AND THERE PICK THEIR BRAINS TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS HAPPENS TO HUMAN BEINGS.
What we are seeing now, from the attacks from Cato, et al, is the DEATH RATTLE of evil: blatant and obvious lies and denials, twisting the facts. And from those in the White House and the Republicans who stole the last two elections (and who are working their butts off to steal this one): unashamed lies, mass murder, looting, treason, fraudulent elections, stupid denials, paranoid illegal surveillance of this nation. They are JUNKIES, ADDICTED to the pornography of power and violence. They are so desperate they will do ANYTHING to keep the FIX COMING. Like junkies, they don't even care that we know the truth - they are so desperate - they can't help themselves. AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS THE END, the DEATH RATTLE OF THESE GREEDY, INDIFFERENT, SADISTIC, DEPRAVED, MURDEROUS SOCIOPATHS.
IF WE ARE SMART, WE WILL IMPEACH THEM IMMEDIATELY AND REMOVE THEM TO A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN DO NO MORE HARM, TRY THEM IN OUR COURTS AND AT THE HAGUE FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE, THEN SEND THEM TO PRISON FOR THE REST OF THEIR NATURAL LIVES, AND THERE PICK THEIR BRAINS TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS HAPPENS TO HUMAN BEINGS.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
More Fun Stuff, from the people (those lovely Rightist foundations)
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:12 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More Fun Stuff, from the people (those lovely Rightist foundations) who gave you several of the posts on this story:
The connection is with the posters who contend that there has been no capitalism in US, only a distorted Fascism." All sources referencing fairly or very Right-wing viewpoints. Some of which include 'Economics Study' groups funded by the Scaife Foundation [& shared directorships; one of which (I swear, picked at random) is below
Bennett, William J.
20 institutional roles for $1,022,763
William J. Bennett on NBC's Meet The Press William J. Bennett is one of the prime movers of the conservative movement. Bennett was Secretary of Education in the Reagan Administration, and later he served as national drug czar, and has written numerous pessimistic books about American culture, appearing frequently on television (he's a favorite of Tim Russert and NBC's Meet The Press), and speaking regularly at any number of right wing organizations, as well as serving on many of their boards of directors. He is a "Distinguished Fellow" at the Heritage Foundation,
William J. Bennett on FOX News Sunday He also has very close ties to the Republican Party. Besides serving in the Reagan Administration, Bennett is quoted in a number of national magazines (1999) as editing or writing George W. Bush speeches, and he nearly became the chairman of the Republican National Committee a few years ago.
Bennett was one of the creators of Empower America, an organization whose main function seems to be to give its co-directors, which include Vin Weber, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Jack Kemp, access to the nation's news media, talk shows and highest levels of government.
From The Feeding Trough:
I want to know who the men in the shadows are, I want to hear somebody asking them Why?
-- Jackson Browne, from the song, "Blood on the Wire"
On November 14, 1996, an article appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (MJS) with the headline "Angry America: Target of Study." The article, based on an Associated Press dispatch, reported that former U.S. Secretary of Education William J. Bennett and retiring U.S. Senator Sam Nunn had made an announcement. They were going to launch a study to find out why people in this country are "so cynical, so distressed, so angry, so ticked off about so many things."
The study, to be conducted by the newly formed National Commission on Civic Renewal, would begin in 1997 and would be funded by a $950,000 grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts of Philadelphia. One of the Commission's 25 members is Michael Joyce, president of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.
The Bradley Foundation is the Milwaukee-based group that funded the notoriously racist book "The Bell Curve," so Joyce's participation on the Commission caught our attention. The articule turned out to be an interesting introduction to the world of conservative foundations....
Commission founder William J. Bennett himself is one good reason why some people in this country are so "ticked off." As chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and then U.S. Secretary of Eduation under President Ronald Reagan, Bennett was known for his crude defense of European-based college curricula nand his attacks on bilingual eduation, not to mention his call to dismantle the whole Department of Education itself. He has been an outspoken leader in national attacks on affirmative action. He has public attacked fellow Republican conservative Newt Gingrich for the House Speaker's overtures to the Rev. Jesse Jackson as well as to other Black Democrats. "Jesse Jackson has a history of being one of the worst racial polarizers in this country," Bennet said in an interview on CNN. (MJS 2/21/1997).
The connection is with the posters who contend that there has been no capitalism in US, only a distorted Fascism." All sources referencing fairly or very Right-wing viewpoints. Some of which include 'Economics Study' groups funded by the Scaife Foundation [& shared directorships; one of which (I swear, picked at random) is below
Bennett, William J.
20 institutional roles for $1,022,763
William J. Bennett on NBC's Meet The Press William J. Bennett is one of the prime movers of the conservative movement. Bennett was Secretary of Education in the Reagan Administration, and later he served as national drug czar, and has written numerous pessimistic books about American culture, appearing frequently on television (he's a favorite of Tim Russert and NBC's Meet The Press), and speaking regularly at any number of right wing organizations, as well as serving on many of their boards of directors. He is a "Distinguished Fellow" at the Heritage Foundation,
William J. Bennett on FOX News Sunday He also has very close ties to the Republican Party. Besides serving in the Reagan Administration, Bennett is quoted in a number of national magazines (1999) as editing or writing George W. Bush speeches, and he nearly became the chairman of the Republican National Committee a few years ago.
Bennett was one of the creators of Empower America, an organization whose main function seems to be to give its co-directors, which include Vin Weber, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Jack Kemp, access to the nation's news media, talk shows and highest levels of government.
From The Feeding Trough:
I want to know who the men in the shadows are, I want to hear somebody asking them Why?
-- Jackson Browne, from the song, "Blood on the Wire"
On November 14, 1996, an article appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (MJS) with the headline "Angry America: Target of Study." The article, based on an Associated Press dispatch, reported that former U.S. Secretary of Education William J. Bennett and retiring U.S. Senator Sam Nunn had made an announcement. They were going to launch a study to find out why people in this country are "so cynical, so distressed, so angry, so ticked off about so many things."
The study, to be conducted by the newly formed National Commission on Civic Renewal, would begin in 1997 and would be funded by a $950,000 grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts of Philadelphia. One of the Commission's 25 members is Michael Joyce, president of the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.
The Bradley Foundation is the Milwaukee-based group that funded the notoriously racist book "The Bell Curve," so Joyce's participation on the Commission caught our attention. The articule turned out to be an interesting introduction to the world of conservative foundations....
Commission founder William J. Bennett himself is one good reason why some people in this country are so "ticked off." As chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and then U.S. Secretary of Eduation under President Ronald Reagan, Bennett was known for his crude defense of European-based college curricula nand his attacks on bilingual eduation, not to mention his call to dismantle the whole Department of Education itself. He has been an outspoken leader in national attacks on affirmative action. He has public attacked fellow Republican conservative Newt Gingrich for the House Speaker's overtures to the Rev. Jesse Jackson as well as to other Black Democrats. "Jesse Jackson has a history of being one of the worst racial polarizers in this country," Bennet said in an interview on CNN. (MJS 2/21/1997).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Part 2 {& Acknowledgment]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:17 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Part 2 {& Acknowledgment]
http://www.mediatransparency.org(& REMOVE THE GAP} /personprofile.php?personID=1
Bennett is now (1998) the John M. Olin Distinguished Fellow in Cultural Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation. The John M. Olin Foundation is another conservative funding group that until 1985 was headed by Michael Joyce, now president of the Bradley Foundation.
Bennett is pretty far to the right of the political spectrum, but he's not part of some fringe grouping. Not at all. On the contrary, he's a very visible national spokesperson for the same interests that ran the government during the Reagan and Bush administrations.
Today Bennett is a founder and director of an organization called Empower America, which describes itself as "...a unique combination of public policy institute and political advocacy organization." Empower America claims a membership of thousands of grassroots activists, but one of its main functions is to give its co-directors access to the news media, talk shows and the highest levels of government.
For example, for the past 20 years, orientation sessions for incoming members of Congress were run by the Kennedy School of Government in Boston. In 1994, the incoming members instead attended an orientation run by Empower America and the Heritage Foundation. One of the highlights of the orientation session was a talk by right-wing radio/TV talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whom Bennett called "a symbol of encouragement." Limbaugh was voted an honorary member of Congress."
Golden Stuff. Are we looking at brass necks? Or at idiocy?
http://www.mediatransparency.org(& REMOVE THE GAP} /personprofile.php?personID=1
Bennett is now (1998) the John M. Olin Distinguished Fellow in Cultural Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation. The John M. Olin Foundation is another conservative funding group that until 1985 was headed by Michael Joyce, now president of the Bradley Foundation.
Bennett is pretty far to the right of the political spectrum, but he's not part of some fringe grouping. Not at all. On the contrary, he's a very visible national spokesperson for the same interests that ran the government during the Reagan and Bush administrations.
Today Bennett is a founder and director of an organization called Empower America, which describes itself as "...a unique combination of public policy institute and political advocacy organization." Empower America claims a membership of thousands of grassroots activists, but one of its main functions is to give its co-directors access to the news media, talk shows and the highest levels of government.
For example, for the past 20 years, orientation sessions for incoming members of Congress were run by the Kennedy School of Government in Boston. In 1994, the incoming members instead attended an orientation run by Empower America and the Heritage Foundation. One of the highlights of the orientation session was a talk by right-wing radio/TV talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whom Bennett called "a symbol of encouragement." Limbaugh was voted an honorary member of Congress."
Golden Stuff. Are we looking at brass necks? Or at idiocy?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
More fun stuff, on the active Mr Bennett of the Scaife Foundation
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:39 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bill Bennett, God-Man : "When 4 Americans Are Hung.... You Level The City"
By Bruce Wilson Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 11:04:01 AM EST
"No person can be more rightly credited with making morality and personal responsibility an integral part of the political debate than William J. Bennett."
Until revelations concerning a gambling addiction torpedoed his burgeoning career, Bill Bennett was busily building brand name recognition as a conservative moralist and an advocate for personal responsibility. But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness. The concept that whole populations can be held accountable for the actions of a few violates typical American popular notions of fair play ( as well as the Geneva Convention ) and seems to contradict the conservative ethic which holds that we are masters of our fates.
I'm at the 2006 "Voter Values" conference sponsored by the Family Research Council, and this morning's first prominent speaker was Sean Hannity, followed by William Bennett. Recounting the incident that led to a massive US military assault on the Iraqi city of Fallujah - and implying that the US response to the deaths of four American private mercenaries working for Blackwater USA was somehow mild , Bennet stated : "When four Americans are hung and the city cheers, you take out Fallujah. You level the city...." Bennett then cited the example of the destruction of Hiroshima. Bennett's exhortation to mass collective punishment - the slaughter of hundreds or thousands of innocent civilians perhaps, or at least the destruction of their homes and cities - received enthusiastic applause. [ note: in response to one criticism of the following passage I originally wrote : "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new "Biblical" values systen based not in New Testament theme of mercy and forgiveness but, rather, in Old Testament narratives of mass slaughter. " I've amended the passage to now read: "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness." ]
By Bruce Wilson Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 11:04:01 AM EST
"No person can be more rightly credited with making morality and personal responsibility an integral part of the political debate than William J. Bennett."
Until revelations concerning a gambling addiction torpedoed his burgeoning career, Bill Bennett was busily building brand name recognition as a conservative moralist and an advocate for personal responsibility. But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness. The concept that whole populations can be held accountable for the actions of a few violates typical American popular notions of fair play ( as well as the Geneva Convention ) and seems to contradict the conservative ethic which holds that we are masters of our fates.
I'm at the 2006 "Voter Values" conference sponsored by the Family Research Council, and this morning's first prominent speaker was Sean Hannity, followed by William Bennett. Recounting the incident that led to a massive US military assault on the Iraqi city of Fallujah - and implying that the US response to the deaths of four American private mercenaries working for Blackwater USA was somehow mild , Bennet stated : "When four Americans are hung and the city cheers, you take out Fallujah. You level the city...." Bennett then cited the example of the destruction of Hiroshima. Bennett's exhortation to mass collective punishment - the slaughter of hundreds or thousands of innocent civilians perhaps, or at least the destruction of their homes and cities - received enthusiastic applause. [ note: in response to one criticism of the following passage I originally wrote : "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new "Biblical" values systen based not in New Testament theme of mercy and forgiveness but, rather, in Old Testament narratives of mass slaughter. " I've amended the passage to now read: "But, Bennett seems to have drifted far since those days and now appears to champion a new allegedly "Biblical" values system based not in themes of mercy and forgiveness from the New Testament that Christianity has traditionally emphasized but, rather, rooted in a focus on Old Testament narratives on mass killing, and the punitive face of God, that ignores large swaths of the Old Testament of a distinctly different character, passages which emphasize mercy and forgiveness." ]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
And PART II www.talk2action.org/story/2006/9/23
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:56 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Squarehead on Sep 14, 2008 9:56 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/9/23/[& REMOVE THE GAP] 1141/19091/Front_Page/Bill_Bennett_God_Man_
Bill Bennett, God-Man : "When 4 Americans Are Hung.... You Level The City" |
Bennett is doing just fine. Along with Michael
"junk bond" Milken they are getting states all over the country to pay for their K-12 curriculum for e-schools. Not a bad deal - they get the public school funding for each child they enroll, the kids learn at home on loaner computers, and the rest is profit for K-12. How much? I dunno, it's a private company.
Mary
by Brainbelle on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 01:43:33 PM EST
Thank you for bringing up that connection. I'd heard somewhere along the line that Bennett was in that arena but I'd long forgotten.
by Bruce Wilson on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 06:38:46 PM EST
Knowledge Universe.
...was founded by Milken, his brother and Larry Ellison in 1996, but doesn't even have a website?
Mary, my wife and I are educators and have been following private sector, charter school results and hadn't heard of KU until your post.
All I was able to find was a Forbes article, a lot of links to to the same article and an employment agency site, selling jobs at Knowledge Universe.
According to the article in Forbes, Knowledge Universe is a lot of interlocked corporations with 14,000 employees.
I wonder how they are scamming these school districts?
Which ones have bought into this deal?
And how is it working?
Where does Bennett fit in?
I read a while back Neil Bush is into some kind of education project funded by Saudis.
Is this some kind of stealth takeover of the public school system?
by justintime on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 10:31:26 PM EST
KU and K12
One of the more informative articles about KU was put together by Arizona State University: http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl [& REMOVE THE GAP] /EPRU/documents/EPSL-0404-118-EPRU.do c
I came to follow charter schools when the voters of Washington found them on the ballot for the 3rd time a few years back. They were defeated by later permitted by changing the distance a student must live from their school to anywhere in the state. That opened the door for K12's Virtual Academies. K12 set up the Washington Virtual Academy through the Steilacoom SD: http://www.steilacoom.k12.wa.us/do/SVA.asp
If you sign up for the K12 mailing list you will receive information about attending a K-12 demo in your area. I recommend it; they are quite the education. K12 does not promote their virtual academies in public as homeschooling, but the demo makes it clear they are marketing their program to homeschoolers as homeschooling. It's not. It's public school. The children are enrolled in the SD for the full federal/state/local funding. I do not know how much K-12 gets for each student and how much the SD keeps but this article indicates another district gets 6% of the $6000 in funding for their program run by Insight School Inc. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education [& REMOVE THE GAP] /2003253266_online 11m.html
(do you know what the average homeschooler could do with $6000 per child per year? That's a ridiculous amount of money for a few textbooks, worksheets and a computer.)
Even more troubling are the applications for K12. All are sent to a mysterious post office box in Baltimore. All require extensive personal information: For example, PA requires the child's dental records. OH requires information for the school... (for HOME schooled students?). All require family financial information.
Its getting to be a porous world. Ain't it Great!
Bill Bennett, God-Man : "When 4 Americans Are Hung.... You Level The City" |
Bennett is doing just fine. Along with Michael
"junk bond" Milken they are getting states all over the country to pay for their K-12 curriculum for e-schools. Not a bad deal - they get the public school funding for each child they enroll, the kids learn at home on loaner computers, and the rest is profit for K-12. How much? I dunno, it's a private company.
Mary
by Brainbelle on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 01:43:33 PM EST
Thank you for bringing up that connection. I'd heard somewhere along the line that Bennett was in that arena but I'd long forgotten.
by Bruce Wilson on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 06:38:46 PM EST
Knowledge Universe.
...was founded by Milken, his brother and Larry Ellison in 1996, but doesn't even have a website?
Mary, my wife and I are educators and have been following private sector, charter school results and hadn't heard of KU until your post.
All I was able to find was a Forbes article, a lot of links to to the same article and an employment agency site, selling jobs at Knowledge Universe.
According to the article in Forbes, Knowledge Universe is a lot of interlocked corporations with 14,000 employees.
I wonder how they are scamming these school districts?
Which ones have bought into this deal?
And how is it working?
Where does Bennett fit in?
I read a while back Neil Bush is into some kind of education project funded by Saudis.
Is this some kind of stealth takeover of the public school system?
by justintime on Sat Sep 23, 2006 at 10:31:26 PM EST
KU and K12
One of the more informative articles about KU was put together by Arizona State University: http://www.asu.edu/educ/epsl [& REMOVE THE GAP] /EPRU/documents/EPSL-0404-118-EPRU.do c
I came to follow charter schools when the voters of Washington found them on the ballot for the 3rd time a few years back. They were defeated by later permitted by changing the distance a student must live from their school to anywhere in the state. That opened the door for K12's Virtual Academies. K12 set up the Washington Virtual Academy through the Steilacoom SD: http://www.steilacoom.k12.wa.us/do/SVA.asp
If you sign up for the K12 mailing list you will receive information about attending a K-12 demo in your area. I recommend it; they are quite the education. K12 does not promote their virtual academies in public as homeschooling, but the demo makes it clear they are marketing their program to homeschoolers as homeschooling. It's not. It's public school. The children are enrolled in the SD for the full federal/state/local funding. I do not know how much K-12 gets for each student and how much the SD keeps but this article indicates another district gets 6% of the $6000 in funding for their program run by Insight School Inc. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education [& REMOVE THE GAP] /2003253266_online 11m.html
(do you know what the average homeschooler could do with $6000 per child per year? That's a ridiculous amount of money for a few textbooks, worksheets and a computer.)
Even more troubling are the applications for K12. All are sent to a mysterious post office box in Baltimore. All require extensive personal information: For example, PA requires the child's dental records. OH requires information for the school... (for HOME schooled students?). All require family financial information.
Its getting to be a porous world. Ain't it Great!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
THANK YOU NAOMI KLEIN. REMEMBER. THE MORE THEY HATE YOU THE MORE EFFECTIVE YOU HAVE BEEN.
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Sep 22, 2008 10:08 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Sep 22, 2008 10:08 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If only I could get them to hate me as much as you have. Then I too would know that I would have done something useful. Sadly they don't hate me enough. I can only keep trying.
Your insights are extraordinary. I am reading you slowly. By that I mean that I am reading for understanding.
I am 69 years old. I have 3 degrees and 30 graduate hours above the masters. I wake up each morning and ask the world whether I saw a new idea in the last 24 hours. I find that I nearly understood everything you have said before I read your book. You have cleared my mind in a gorgeous fashion. Thank You once again.
OUR WORLD HAS HOPE IN IT AS LONG AS WE HAVE YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE NAOMI KLEIN.
Your insights are extraordinary. I am reading you slowly. By that I mean that I am reading for understanding.
I am 69 years old. I have 3 degrees and 30 graduate hours above the masters. I wake up each morning and ask the world whether I saw a new idea in the last 24 hours. I find that I nearly understood everything you have said before I read your book. You have cleared my mind in a gorgeous fashion. Thank You once again.
OUR WORLD HAS HOPE IN IT AS LONG AS WE HAVE YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE NAOMI KLEIN.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
usterroristnation
Posted by: usterroristnation on Oct 1, 2008 9:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Posted by: usterroristnation on Oct 1, 2008 9:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
" ....If you are concerned that I am exaggerating Friedman's support for the brutal regime of Augusto Pinochet, read a letter Friedman wrote to Pinochet. If you are suspicious that I am making disaster capitalism seem more conspiratorial than it is, read the minutes from a meeting that took place at the Heritage Foundation just two weeks after the levees broke in New Orleans." And if you think it would be too much of a coincidence for a man to buy a few well located Towers in Manhattan and build in a get out clause in the contract in case they might just get destroyed in a "terrorist" attack and then take out a massive catch all insurance policy to cover this then check out were these Towers actually destroyed or "pulled" on the 11th of September 2001.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
PROGRESSIVE WIRE
Stop the Execution of an Innocent Man!
DNA testing could free Hank Skinner before Feb. 24 execution date.
Half-Naked Hot Chicks and Beer: The Sexist Guyland of the Super Bowl Beer Commercial
Can Obama and Dems Overcome the Right's Talk Radio Monopoly?
Why We're Addicted to Disaster Porn
