Political Theory

Re: The Shock Doctrine

gethky — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 21:58:10 GMT

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Naomi_Klein_Financial_crisis_part_of_0921.html

Re: The Shock Doctrine

gethky — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 21:56:01 GMT

Naomi Klein and Andrew Sullivan have it out on Bill Maher's 19SEP08 broadcast, See the 8-minute video clip <a href="http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Naomi_Klein_Financial_crisis_part_of_0921.html">here</a>.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

HiggsBoson — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 21:15:54 GMT

Unfortunately millions of people read The Shock Doctrine and nodded their heads as it re-confirmed their belief that "free-markets" are evil and the only thing that can save us is more government control and regulation.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

DW89 — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 17:29:57 GMT

This summer I had the opportunity to hear Klein speak in person, and I can tell you that she is indeed ignorant of basic economics. The majority of her remarks were an attempt to analyze current events. When she commented on the prospect of opening up ANWAR and allowing more offshore drilling, her illiteracy was on full display. I don't remember her exact remarks, but let me paraphrase for you.

"What is never pointed out in the mainstream media is that it would actually be years before oil from ANWAR hits the market. This is the secret that the oil corporations don't want you to know. And of course, the shills who work for these corporations want you to think that somehow the prospect of more oil on the market in the future will MAGICALLY lower current prices. This is nothing but a lie! If we allow drilling in Alaska, the oil corporations will make billions but there won't be any benefit whatsoever for you and me when we go to the gas pump."

I'm certain that the line about magic is in fact what she said. Now, I do believe that the market is a wondrous and awe-inspiring phenomenon. However, there's nothing supernatural about it as Klein believes.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

BlackSheep — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:14:10 GMT

Solid_Choke:
Friedman WAS smeared. The author claims that Friedman was pro-Iraq War when, in fact, he was not. Lieing about somebody and then attacking them for taking a position they did not take is "smearing" them.

That's nothing. I've read that Klein associates Milton Friedman with Chile's Pinochet regime, actually stating that Friedman was a Chile's economic advisor. That's since stated as fact by (or maybe that's where she taken it from) "alternative" documentaries such as The War On Democracy.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

JonBostwick — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 01:10:59 GMT

Inquisitor:
On Mises calling Friedman a socialist, I thought that was more of a rumour than an actual fact?

Its true, but probably not how you imagine it.

Friedman: No question. The story I remember best happened at the initial Mont Pelerin meeting when he got up and said, "You're all a bunch of socialists." We were discussing the distribution of income, and whether you should have progressive income taxes. Some of the people there were expressing the view that there could be a justification for it.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Jon Irenicus — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:55:56 GMT

Which suggestions in particular? I am no Friedmanite, but I do not think Klein offered him an honest hearing.

-Jon

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Solid_Choke — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:51:34 GMT

Niccolò:

Jon Irenicus:

If only she read some Marx and Engels. Maybe she'd think twice about smearing Friedman...

-Jon

I don't see how Friedman is "smeared." His policy suggestions lead to a lot of real atrocities and exploitation of labourers and entrepreneurs on the side of government favored businesses.

He's just as bad as Marx and Engels, if not worse for legitimizng pure-positivism - i.e. data snooping.

Friedman WAS smeared. The author claims that Friedman was pro-Iraq War when, in fact, he was not. Lieing about somebody and then attacking them for taking a position they did not take is "smearing" them.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Niccolò — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:13:30 GMT

Jon Irenicus:

If only she read some Marx and Engels. Maybe she'd think twice about smearing Friedman...

-Jon

I don't see how Friedman is "smeared." His policy suggestions lead to a lot of real atrocities and exploitation of labourers and entrepreneurs on the side of government favored businesses.

He's just as bad as Marx and Engels, if not worse for legitimizng pure-positivism - i.e. data snooping.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Niccolò — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:11:41 GMT

JAlanKatz:

newson:
no, that's not sweatshopping, that's slavery, and i don't dispute there's plenty of that around. are sweatshops necessarily a life-enforcing environment, run by your "randian hero"? of course not, but if people work these terrible conditions of their own volition, then it's because it's the best of a bad lot.

If being the operative word. Find me a sweatshop that is actually a product of the free market, with workers not held in by force. The point of the Randian hero jab is to emphasize that we cannot pick and choose little things that would be changed if there were no government, or even under minarchy. The entire market structure would be different. Corporations are essentially products of the state - plus sweatshops, even if voluntary, are a step in the economic development, and that development would be more complete, further along, and proceeding faster without government.

People usually opt for slave labour in sweat shops because their governments allow no freedom in the market.

Sweatshops are NOT products of the free market, period.

JAlanKatz, I think this is probably the best post I've seen on this site today. *applauds*

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Jon Irenicus — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:11:40 GMT

If only she read some Marx and Engels. Maybe she'd think twice about smearing Friedman...

-Jon

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Niccolò — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:09:47 GMT

HRoth:

Whats the difference between corporatism and capitalism? and where can I find more indepth writings on that?

Nothing.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Niccolò — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:02:22 GMT

foster:

She seems to lack understanding of free markets vs. corporatism, however the book doesn't look that bad. At any rate, I think Mises called Friedman a socialist once.

That's because capitalism is not free market.

Mises can go ahead and equate the two all he wants - he's simply wrong on that point.

I think Klein's book, overall, is impressive and raises a fantastic point about American capitalism. It is the blood that fuels the American empire. See Kevin Carson.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Solid_Choke — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 00:39:26 GMT

Magnus:

Johan Norberg does a great job debunking the shock doctrine. http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp102.pdf

Here is Tyler Cowen's critique and you can find another debunking here.

Re: The Shock Doctrine

Magnus — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 13:25:50 GMT

Johan Norberg does a great job debunking the shock doctrine. http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp102.pdf