Comments on: The Shock Doctrine http://andrewblackman.net/2008/01/the-shock-doctrine/ Andrew Blackman, literary fiction writer, author of the award-winning novel On the Holloway Road. Fri, 18 May 2012 05:52:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: baselessness http://andrewblackman.net/2008/01/the-shock-doctrine/#comment-7 baselessness Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:12:04 +0000 http://andrewblackman.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/the-shock-doctrine/#comment-7 Baselessness says : I absolutely agree with this ! Baselessness says : I absolutely agree with this !

]]> By: Axel Ztangi http://andrewblackman.net/2008/01/the-shock-doctrine/#comment-6 Axel Ztangi Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:58:37 +0000 http://andrewblackman.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/the-shock-doctrine/#comment-6 Finally someone (Hardt) with a bit of knowledge of these matters put Klein's book in proper perspective. The "shock doctrine" - does her branding of what is an inherent aspect of capitalism lead us to the conclusion that there was a "soft" capitalism preceding this? What about 19th C. colonialism? Or are we to believe that this "new" version of capitalism was developed from a failing earlier form and its renewal? I skimmed her book but will need to return to it to answer these questions. However I did read the last chapter and her proposals for a human economy refer to: small, though inspiring, worker managed takeovers in Argentina; larger, though more dispersed and agricultural, land takeovers in Brazil, that may have been successfully marginalized; and similar endeavors of "peoples economic power" across the world. While all these efforts at creating a new economy are worth supporting of course, they are nonetherless inconsequential to world capital movements. It comes down to this (and it was revealed in a Canadian interview whose link I lost): Klein's perspective is that of a liberal Canadian with Keynesian proclivities. Reforming the state, or resurrecting FDR as left-Democrats in the USA hope for, can't be a program for saving this planet from utter destruction. The old imagery of placing a bandage on a wound is insufficient here. At least a bandage might do some good in keeping the wound free of bacteria. The call for neo-liberalism-lite, or capitalism with a human face, is more like praying for the wound to heal itself. Finally someone (Hardt) with a bit of knowledge of these matters put Klein’s book in proper perspective. The “shock doctrine” – does her branding of what is an inherent aspect of capitalism lead us to the conclusion that there was a “soft” capitalism preceding this? What about 19th C. colonialism? Or are we to believe that this “new” version of capitalism was developed from a failing earlier form and its renewal?
I skimmed her book but will need to return to it to answer these questions.

However I did read the last chapter and her proposals for a human economy refer to: small, though inspiring, worker managed takeovers in Argentina; larger, though more dispersed and agricultural, land takeovers in Brazil, that may have been successfully marginalized; and similar endeavors of “peoples economic power” across the world. While all these efforts at creating a new economy are worth supporting of course, they are nonetherless inconsequential to world capital movements.

It comes down to this (and it was revealed in a Canadian interview whose link I lost): Klein’s perspective is that of a liberal Canadian with Keynesian proclivities. Reforming the state, or resurrecting FDR as left-Democrats in the USA hope for, can’t be a program for saving this planet from utter destruction. The old imagery of placing a bandage on a wound is insufficient here. At least a bandage might do some good in keeping the wound free of bacteria. The call for neo-liberalism-lite, or capitalism with a human face, is more like praying for the wound to heal itself.

]]>