Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Naomi Klein: I Support the Shock Doctrine!
In her best-selling book The Shock Doctrine, left-wing writer Naomi Klein denounced those "free-market economists who are convinced that only a large-scale disaster—a great unmaking—can prepare the ground for their 'reforms.'" This, she says, is the "shock doctrine" or "disaster capitalism," and its greatest proponent was, of course, the economist Milton Friedman.
Let's ignore the defamation of Friedman (but make sure to read Johan Norberg's brilliant evisceration of Klein here and here) and focus on the hideousness of the "shock doctrine"—i.e., using economic crises to impose upon a country policies they otherwise would reject. Caleb Brown flags this quote from Klein, in this month's issue of The Progressive, advocating disaster socialism:
Do we want to save the pre-crisis system, get it back to where it was last September? Or do we want to use this crisis, and the electoral mandate for change delivered by the last election, to radically transform that system? We need to get clear on our answer now because we haven’t had the potent combination of a serious crisis and a clear progressive democratic mandate for change since the 1930s. We use this opportunity or we lose it.
I spoke to Norberg about Klein's book and her misreading of Friedman last year for Reason.tv:
dennis|8.21.09 @ 6:48PM|#
With a lot of those on the Left it boils down to a terribly mistaken understanding of how reality works. With Klein, I think she is actually a morally reprehensible degenerate. She is the Daniel Pipes or Michael Ledeen of the Left.
Hobo Chang Ba|8.21.09 @ 6:50PM|#
Right, because Bush was, unlike Obama, obviously a "disaster
capitalist" who confronted the economic crash with deregulation.
Not...
I had figured she had crawled into a hole and died there out of
embarassment at the utter refutation of all her theories.
ed|8.21.09 @ 6:54PM|#
A smart guy, about 25 years ago, wrote this about the creation
of the United States: "The Founders snatched a nation from the jaws
of history." He was speaking of the almost impossible feat that the
Founders (and the ordinary citizens) pulled off. It could not have
happened at any other time in history. That "experiment" has been
under attack ever since.
When Klein speaks of using this (or any other) crisis as a mandate
for "radically [transforming] that system" she's not intent upon
creating something better. That is not her goal. She wants to
destroy that which has never existed at any other time in the
history of mankind.
Hugh Akston|8.21.09 @ 6:56PM|#
I was more surprised to find that not one of the commenters at
the P pointed out that Klein was advocating exactly what
she had denounced only a few years ago.
At least none that I could see. The layout at that site kind of
gave me a headache.
|8.21.09 @ 7:07PM|#
This is up there on the hypocrisy meter with all the ACORN/SEIU/MoveOn and other professional organizer types claiming that the tea party protests are fake and manufactured.
|8.21.09 @ 7:13PM|#
Ah, hell - we should have known it was the 'capitalism' part of the phrase she objected to... (though her formulation was pretty ass-backwards - since when do people run away from government in a crisis?)
|8.21.09 @ 7:16PM|#
Damn you Moynihan, for directing me to anything featuring K.
Uberman!
What's the difference between the finale of a David Copperfied shoe
and an interview with Naomi Klein?
With one you are sure to see a cunning stunt....
|8.21.09 @ 7:22PM|#
OK, even SHE doesn't believe a single fucking thing she wrote.
What a coniving and mendacious bitch.
I try to refrain from using the 'c' word, but yeah, what Warren
said.
|8.21.09 @ 7:24PM|#
With Klein, I think she is actually a morally reprehensible degenerate. She is the Daniel Pipes or Michael Ledeen of the Left.
Weird pairing to put together. Pipes and Leeden have pretty
dramatically different policy recommendations on Iran. Perhaps
either is mistaken about reality, but I am confused as to why you
call both morally reprehensible.
Obama\'s Best Critics Are On T|8.21.09 @ 7:32PM|#
You mean he has been in office for eight months already, and I still have to work for a living?
Outlaw Jose Rothbard|8.21.09 @ 7:34PM|#
Chasin' the economy from one bubble to the next bubble with stimulus ain't much of a livin', boy.
Outlaw Jose Rothbard |8.21.09 @ 7:39PM|#
Whoops, wrong thread, guess I'll make my way over to the Barnanke Corral fer a little shoot out.
|8.21.09 @ 7:40PM|#
Projection drives the majority of their
accusations.
Bingo. Their prognostications are limited to their own
impulses.
Warty|8.21.09 @ 7:55PM|#
I'm pretty sure that this bitch couldn't survive the hatefucking that she deserves.
|8.21.09 @ 7:56PM|#
...we haven't had the potent combination of a serious crisis and a clear progressive democratic mandate for change since the 1930s. We use this opportunity or we lose it
I believe that would be "we use this opportunity AND we lose
it".
There was a mandate for change -- that is, throwing out the
budget-busting, foreign-entanglementy, unprincipled,
crypto-socialist Republicans. And, there was a "clear progressive
democratic" candidate running in opposition. But that does not mean
there was a clear mandate for progressive change.
Thank goodness they actually believe their own bullshit, because if
they practiced half of what Machiavelli teaches, they'd have
leveraged their stupid good fortune into a Permanent Democratic
Majority. Now they're just seen as front men for the tax
consumers.
So I should take a moment to enjoy the progressives wailing
"Pony??! Where's my pony?! He promised us a Poneeeeeeee!!
WAAAAAAA!!!".
|8.21.09 @ 8:04PM|#
Why must it always be rape with you, Warty?
Mac: Um, I think we have to be very careful about how we do the
rape scene.
Dennis: Yeah.
Charlie: Well, what in God's name are you talking-there's no rape
scene.
Mac: Well, sure. Uh, I pay the troll toll, and then I rape
Dennis.
Charlie: No, you don't rape him. You become him. You do not rape
him!
The Libertarian Guy|8.21.09 @ 8:21PM|#
Well, the current crop of criminals in office do like the
concept of "not letting a good crisis go to waste"...
Maybe they'll manufacture something. Axelrod's a sneaky bastard,
maybe he and Rahm can cook up a fake bombing and pin it on the
right-wing kooks - union thugs will work off the books for a gig
like that.
BakedPenguin|8.21.09 @ 8:50PM|#
I try to refrain from using the 'c' word...
Intellectually, I know her utter worthlessness has nothing to do
with her being a woman, but I'm still hoping that her vibrator
gets a
short.
|8.21.09 @ 8:54PM|#
A smart guy, about 25 years ago, wrote this about the
creation of the United States: "The Founders snatched a nation from
the jaws of history." He was speaking of the almost impossible feat
that the Founders (and the ordinary citizens) pulled off. It could
not have happened at any other time in history. That "experiment"
has been under attack ever since.
When Klein speaks of using this (or any other) crisis as a mandate
for "radically [transforming] that system" she's not intent upon
creating something better. That is not her goal. She wants to
destroy that which has never existed at any other time in the
history of mankind.
Like most Canadians, especially those living in Vancouver, she's
been brainwashed to hate America and capitalism since birth. This
explains her fanatical willingness to lie and dissemble about just
about everything to acheive the overarching goal of destroying
both.
|8.21.09 @ 8:56PM|#
He was speaking of the almost impossible feat that the
Founders (and the ordinary citizens) pulled off. It could not have
happened at any other time in history. That "experiment" has been
under attack ever since.
...and this is why I cringe whenever I hear some fool complain
about the US being "the only first world nation that doesn't do X",
where X is some horrid statist thing. This, I think, is the main
benefit of patriotism vs. cosmopolitanism: the patriot is not
afraid to be different from the rest of the word, and indeed is
proud of his nation's unique traits, whereas cosmos in all cultures
want their country to resemble every other country in every
essential way.
|8.21.09 @ 9:00PM|#
Like most Canadians, especially those living in Vancouver,
she's been brainwashed to hate America and capitalism since
birth.
[citation needed]
There are huge swaths of Canada that view the US in a more
favorable light than their own federal govt (the prairie provinces
come to mind). And I doubt that even in the ultra-liberal sections
of Canada, it is so that most people hate America.
Gene Berkman|8.21.09 @ 9:17PM|#
"Like most Canadians, especially those living in Vancouver,
she's been brainwashed to hate America and capitalism since
birth."
Naomi Klein was born in Canada, but her parents immigrated to
Canada from the United States during the Vietnam War. So she was
born a new leftist more than she was born a Canadian.
|8.21.09 @ 9:37PM|#
Like most Canadians, especially those living in Vancouver,
she's been brainwashed to hate America and capitalism since
birth.
[citation needed]
I agree. Hazel, I rarely disagree with what you write, but I have
to call bullshit too. Most of the Canucks I've met have been
decent. A little loopy maybe, but no anti-capitalists.
I will also say that I am now officially obsessed with Canadian
women. I blame the SciFi Channel SyFy for that.
|8.21.09 @ 10:11PM|#
I confess to having been born in Canada, and raised in the
Canadian school system, so I admit my perspective is biased. It
must have been all the bullshit I was fed in the social studies
classes about how horrible things were in the US compared to the
blessed North, which naturally lacked the horrors of unrestrained
gun violence, imperialism, racism, capitalism and free market
health care.
Obviously some Canadians are capable of overcoming their
conditioning.
PantsFan|8.21.09 @ 10:16PM|#
Obviously some Canadians are capable of overcoming their
conditioning.
And not only the ones who leave. However, there's not nearly enough
that stick around to make it any better.
Cal Lipigian|8.21.09 @ 10:27PM|#
I have had a lot of Canuck co-workers, I assume since they up
and moved here they are more USAphilic than the average, and they
certainly think everything about their country is better than the
USA--except the health care and the lack of good paying jobs.
As a side note, they claim to have invented all four of our major
sports.
PantsFan|8.21.09 @ 10:32PM|#
Hockey - well, duh
Basketball - created by James Naismith, a Canadian living in
Boston
American Football - First documented football game was played at
the University of Toronto on the present site of University College
(400 yards west of Queen's Park) on November 9, 1961.
Baseball - not sure of any Canadian legends on its origin
|8.21.09 @ 10:33PM|#
As a side note, they claim to have invented all four of our
major sports.
There's no way that they invented beer pong!
|8.21.09 @ 11:15PM|#
It is easier to understood a lot about what Canadians do and
thing vis a vis us once you realize that they are the only other
country besides Pakistan, that I am aware of, whose entire national
identity is based on the assertion that they are emphatically not
another country.
In both cases the result has been a nagging inferiority complex
masked by self-important pretension.
|8.21.09 @ 11:16PM|#
to understand
Crap, it's late and I'm perpetually in a hurry - just call me John
Jr. and I'll be on my way.
Rhywun|8.21.09 @ 11:17PM|#
I don't take offense often, but the higher-than-average word
count of "cunt" and "bitch" and "rape" in this thread is unseemly.
And anyone who disagrees can go fuck themselves.
I cringe whenever I hear some fool complain about the US being "the only first world nation that doesn't do X", where X is some horrid statist thing.
Heh, Maher just used exactly that construction in describing
America's lack of 4 weeks of paid vacation for every worker. I
guess he figures since he gets, what, 32 consecutive weeks that
everyone else should too...? Then there was the Dem chick sitting
next to Jay Leno complaining about millionaire bank executives.
Next to Jay Leno.
Warty|8.21.09 @ 11:27PM|#
"rape" in this thread is unseemly
Shhh! Steve Smith will make an example of you if he hears you.
|8.22.09 @ 12:00AM|#
You know, for a site called "reason" there are a whole lot of
logical-fallacy-belching trolls in this thread.
Sure, Naomi Klein might be a hypocrite. Even if she is, it doesn't
make her other arguments patently false. Really - if she turns
around and supports abuse of "shock" for her own ends you know she
thinks it really works.
It's fairly naive to think that there aren't people of influence
who will do whatever they can to enrich themselves at the expense
of others, be they hardcore Stalinists or unabashed
"free-marketeers". There are poor countries open to free markets
who are abused by multinational corporations - pollution is one
example - which are enabled by a corrupt political class.
|8.22.09 @ 12:07AM|#
Holy shit.... holy shit.
And you're telling me she feels no cognitive dissonance
whatsoever?
|8.22.09 @ 12:10AM|#
Sure, Naomi Klein might be a hypocrite. Even if she is, it doesn't make her other arguments patently false. Really - if she turns around and supports abuse of "shock" for her own ends you know she thinks it really works.
She wrote an entire goddamn book criticizing the use of disasters
as a means of instating free market policies.
There's hypocrisy, and then there's hypocrisy.
Sean W. Malone|8.22.09 @ 1:07AM|#
DRINK... DRINNNNKKKK!!!!
And also... Fuck Naomi Klein (and not in the fun way). Even the
weakest and most casual survey of history would show
anyone that the idea that liberty - economic or personal -
is increased after a "disaster" has never happened.
alan|8.22.09 @ 2:31AM|#
You know, for a site called "reason" there are a whole lot
of logical-fallacy-belching trolls in this thread.
Sure, Naomi Klein might be a hypocrite. Even if she is, it doesn't
make her other arguments patently false. Really - if she turns
around and supports abuse of "shock" for her own ends you know she
thinks it really works.
It's fairly naive to think that there aren't people of influence
who will do whatever they can to enrich themselves at the expense
of others, be they hardcore Stalinists or unabashed
"free-marketeers". There are poor countries open to free markets
who are abused by multinational corporations - pollution is one
example - which are enabled by a corrupt political
class.
Fuck me. I can't believe I read the whole thing. Why would I do
that to myself? It is not like there was any chance after the first
paragraph the content would go beyond the usual insular retarded
shit that passes for political and economic thought on the left.
But I read the whole Goddamned thing anyway.
I tend to avoid masochism at all cost, don't have any impulse
towards BDSM, don't even need asphyxiation yo get off, but I will
give a random shit for brains a minute of my time. What the fuck is
my problem.
|8.22.09 @ 4:32AM|#
FUCK Naomi Klein and all the fucking fuckers who
fucketyfuckfuck...
...I'm sorry, what was the question...
|8.22.09 @ 7:21AM|#
I don't take offense often, but the higher-than-average word
count of "cunt" and "bitch" and "rape" in this thread is unseemly.
And anyone who disagrees can go fuck themselves.
"See, all I know is ball and good...and rape!
|8.22.09 @ 8:33AM|#
It's fairly naive to think that there aren't people of
influence who will do whatever they can to enrich themselves at the
expense of others, be they hardcore Stalinists or unabashed
"free-marketeers". There are poor countries open to free markets
who are abused by multinational corporations - pollution is one
example - which are enabled by a corrupt political
class.
Oh, I get it! You're the god of clueless irony.
Now, go back to boycotting Whole Foods.
|8.22.09 @ 8:50AM|#
You know, for a site called "reason"
What a stunningly original line. Sure did put us in our place.
Neu Mejican|8.22.09 @ 12:06PM|#
For discussion:
Is there a meaningful distinction between creating a
crisis in order to "impose upon a country policies they
otherwise would reject," (what, I believe, NK was criticizing in
her book), and reacting to a crisis by changing policies
in the direction indicated by an "electoral mandate for change
delivered by the last election"?
Two points to consider in this...1) the "they otherwise would
reject" and the "electoral mandate for change" can't both be
true...and 2)if NK was criticizing the "creation" of crisis, her
statement is not, strictly, hypocritical.
Carl Brutananadilewski|8.22.09 @ 12:14PM|#
See, all I know is ball and good...and rape!
Yeah, I was like everyone else, I thought rape was funny. Until it
happened to me!
Neu Mejican|8.22.09 @ 12:39PM|#
Looking a little closer...I withdraw 2 above. She is clearly
talking about "reacting to" crisis in her book.
I was wrong on that one.
|8.22.09 @ 2:47PM|#
It seems to me that the last major incident of shock doctrine the world experienced was in Germany in the 1930s. Why would Klein want a repeat of that?
Vancity|8.22.09 @ 2:57PM|#
OK. I'm a Vancouverite, and I think I understand Naomi Klein's
thinking. Here goes:
(1) "Progressive democratic reforms" increase human well-being,
quality of life, health, education, and security. For example,
socialized healthcare leads to higher life expectancy and a lower
child mortality rate. See this table:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_compared#Canadian_health_care_in_comparison
(2) "Progressive democratic reforms" are popular. For example, 58%
of Americans favour Medicare for all:
http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html
(3) Conservative ideas are unpopular, so conservatives use
misinformation and bribery to get their way. For example,
conservatives peddle myths about Obama's health care reform ("death
panels"), and health care industry groups provide donations to
Republicans and conservative Democrats
(http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/1572/).
(4) Thus, the political system is stuck in a contest between
popular progressives and corporate-funded, deceitful
conservatives.
(5) If a crisis is exploited to promote conservatism (e.g.
Hurricane Katrina), then unpopular conservative ideas will take
root (e.g. private schools) that will decrease human well-being
(i.e. reduced quality of education).
(6) However, if a crisis is exploited to promote "progressive
democratic reforms", then this is good, because said reforms will
increase human well-being.
Note: it is important to recognize that Klein and her followers do
not consider the Blue Dog Democrats to be 'on her side.'
|8.22.09 @ 3:58PM|#
@ Daniel - Maybe she feels the dissonance, and maybe she doesn't
give a flying fuck. Maybe she revels in it. Or maybe she's
logically detached like everyone in Washington.
@Sean - I agree, true liberty does not have a tendency to increase
after disasters. Even if the examples are few, though, a "free
market" imposed upon a poor and otherwise unwilling populace is not
an increase in liberty. In these cases the reforms are biased
toward international investors and against the already poor working
class. Unfettered business across all borders is a noble goal, but
it can't always be instituted wholesale in good conscience.
@Alan, JW - Yep, I must be a big bad leftist, right? Not like any
reasonable person would ask questions in an attempt to spark real
discussion. Better just circle the wagons and hide your inability
to discuss anything intelligently.
@SugarFree - Yeah, but if this was trolls.com at least I'd have had
no grounds to say it.
|8.22.09 @ 4:41PM|#
(1) "Progressive democratic reforms" increase human
well-being, quality of life, health, education, and security. For
example, socialized healthcare leads to higher life expectancy and
a lower child mortality rate. See this table:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_compared#Canadian_health_care_in_comparison
"Progressive democratic reforms" do NOT increase life expectancy,
or lower child mortality in the long run. They will stifle
innovation and economic development, leading to a lower standard of
living for everyone. They are also too expensive for the government
to sustain without raising taxed to levels that are economically
stifling. Nearly every western country which has tried them,
including Canada, has realized this, and has been forced to start
cutting back on social services to constrain their burgeoniong
budget deficit. America hasn't done this yet because we've resisted
said policies for so long. Most of the rest of the world is slowly
realizing that we were right all along and these policies will
bankrupt their countries.
The budget cuts needed to avoid exploding budget deficits
eventually force rationing and a degradation in the overall quality
of healthcare. Which subsequently forces them to open their markets
to "supplemental" (i.e. private) health insurance.
|8.22.09 @ 4:45PM|#
|8.22.09 @ 4:46PM|#
(5) If a crisis is exploited to promote conservatism (e.g.
Hurricane Katrina), then unpopular conservative ideas will take
root (e.g. private schools) that will decrease human well-being
(i.e. reduced quality of education).
There must be some kind of magical shield around Vancouver that
prevents facts from entering, because only in an airless void of
make-believe could anyone think that private schools offer
lower-quality education or that Katrina was exploited to advance
conservative ideas.
|8.22.09 @ 5:57PM|#
Like most Canadians, especially those living in Vancouver...
Hazel, I believe that Naomi Klein lives in Toronto. She went to my
alma mater, the University of Toronto. She apparently learned
socialism there, I only learned engineering.
She has also married into the royalty of Canadian socialism, having
taken a Lewis as a husband. Father-in-law Stephen and his father
David being veteran leaders of the NDP*.
She could have only gotten closer to the pure genetic material of
Canadian socialist aristocracy if she had married Kieffer
Sutherland.
*which, as you might be aware, was once the party of working class
voters, but is now supported only by Canada's pseudo-intelligentsia
and a handful of United Church clergypersons and their
spouses.
The working class has been deserting the NDP in droves since it be
came the party in favor of all them queers and bringing all of them
darkies into the country.
|8.22.09 @ 6:16PM|#
Naomi Klein was born in Canada, but her parents immigrated to Canada from the United States during the Vietnam War. So she was born a new leftist more than she was born a Canadian.
Excellent point, Mr Berkman.
My observation is that the most socialistic professors at the
Canadian universities I went to were the ones who had been imported
from the US, along with those from the UK. This had happened during
the huge expansion of Canadian universities during the early to
mid-60s when there were not enough home-grown academics to handle
the load.
The native born profs might very well have been socialists but they
never brought up politics in a lecture. The Yank and Limey ones did
it all the time.
The closest thing to politics from one of my Canadian profs was in
a history class where the prof, who had been raised in one of the
Maritime provinces said that as he was growing up (in the 1920s,
sixty years after Confederation) the biggest complaint he heard was
about the fact that they had had to join Canada instead of becoming
"part of the States."
|8.22.09 @ 6:54PM|#
Okay, you've got a point there. My social studies teacher was a
mixed race African American who had immigrated to Canada from the
US. And he was *definitely* the most fire-breathing anti-American
socialist of the crop.
Still, the teacher's unions in Canada have the same underlying
lefty bias that they do in the US. With the addition that they are
all happy to lap up all the criticisms of US capitalism coming from
Americans, and integrate it into a provincial Canadian patriotism.
In other words, what originates as criticism of the US government
gets coopted into jingoistic praise of the Canadian government.
Anonymous|8.22.09 @ 7:33PM|#
"In other words, what originates as criticism of the US
government gets coopted into jingoistic praise of the Canadian
government."
Basically the Canadian left is virtually identical to the Canadian
left. Most "Anti-Americianism" is essentially anti-capitalist,
anti-individualist and anti-Republican. They love Democrats so this
is why the complaints about the Evil and Dangerous American Rogue
State and Iraq have plummeted now that a Democrat is in the White
House.
anonymous|8.22.09 @ 7:34PM|#
Erm... that should be the Canadian left is virtually identical to the American Left.
|8.22.09 @ 8:09PM|#
I'd argue that the Canadian left is worse. The US left at least partially justifies it's oppositional stance with the argument that criticism and dissent are good for America. But the Canadian left is not oppositional. It converts anti-capitalism into pro-Canadian patriotism. Thus, Canadians are NOT challanged to discuss the problems in their own system. Instead, they are encouraged to feel self-satisfied about the supposed superiority of their country vis-a-vis the United States.
alan|8.22.09 @ 10:13PM|#
@Alan, JW - Yep, I must be a big bad leftist, right? Not
like any reasonable person would ask questions in an attempt to
spark real discussion. Better just circle the wagons and hide your
inability to discuss anything intelligently.
I didn't give you permission to address me. When you demonstrate
something more than a coloring book for red tykes understanding of
how the world works, you may raise my interest in engaging you in
conversation, but til then, piss off.
alan|8.22.09 @ 10:19PM|#
Hazel,
As I've said before, from faux patriots, lefty trolls and some guy
who clearly has the Asperger's commenting on the symmetry of your
head, you are a saint for what you are willing to put with from
some people.
alan|8.22.09 @ 10:39PM|#
Previous comment wasn't aimed at the discussion you were having with Isaac. I was wondering the other day when a troll was rampant whether you still had the heart to engage them since I didn't see you doing so on that occasion, and then I saw a post near the top that got me thinking, 'yeap, she still does.'
|8.22.09 @ 10:49PM|#
What's with all the intense dislike of Klein. If she's wrong,
she's wrong. Make your case, educate people and move on. Putting
your ignorant poison out there is counter-productive and makes you
look like an idiot.
Klein does cherry pick select events in history in making her case
in Shock Doctrine. Some of what she infers is likely correct and a
lot is not. Lets face it, a moral and just free market is without
doubt the most efficient market there is. The problem is, as the
saying goes "power corrupts" and as immoral people succeed in the
free market system they quickly identify ways to not make it so
"free" but rather to skew it in ways that increases their success
at the expense of opportunities for others. To me the key is
transparency and education. If we can maximise those than society
has a fighting chance at staying within some band of reasonable
behavior and results. Without them we are doomed to be picked clean
by corrupt and powerful individuals as history (the real history
not the sanitized one you get in school and from the media) very
clearly shows.
alan|8.23.09 @ 1:18AM|#
What's with all the intense dislike of Klein. If she's
wrong, she's wrong. Make your case, educate people and move on.
Putting your ignorant poison out there is counter-productive and
makes you look like an idiot.
I don't know, Steve, maybe it has something to do with how Klein
made her reputation by smearing one of the most honarable academics
to have ever lived. Maybe it has something to do with the
realization that if she actually did the bare minimum of background
research on Milton Friedmam, that she has to be aware of the lies
and distortions she perpetuates.
Maybe that her version is now the standard narrative in leftist
circles has something to do with why libertarians in general feel
that the left is hopeless. Maybe that steady stream of lies and
distortions on a myriad of subject matter that is well documented
on this very site is why there exist among us a fundamental
distrust of the left even if there is the occasion that the left
gets something right, as Nicholas Kristof did with his reporting on
the necessity of third world mercantile development. That rare
exception to the rule makes the rest of the left seem even that
much more bizarre in its underlying rationalization.
Of course, no one but the Reason staff has the right to decide the
purpose of this blog/message board, and if they went Marxist over
night (would make a great April Fools joke, btw) than those of us
who are regular visitors would be SOL.
However, I'll tell you what I'm not willing to do, and that is be
on the defensive. Many visitors with a leftist disposition feel
like we owe them an explanation beyond merely debating the issues
of the day, but an explanation for why we think the way we do as if
we owe an apology for not being on their straight and narrow.
To answer to leftist is not why the majority of libertarians who
frequent this board are here. We can get the leftist take in nearly
any AP story we run across with plenty of quotes like from the guy
above that states There are poor countries open to free markets
who are abused by multinational corporations - pollution is one
example - which are enabled by a corrupt political class any
day of the week.
We come here for a less standard narrative that would actually
discuss the trade offs involved. How is scarcity handled in the
conditions of that society you are describing. Whether or not that
nation is developing away from a traditional feudal order that
would only benefit the political classes tells us a lot about the
worth of the enterprise. What does the average wage as small as it
seems to us actually buy for the workers, and what of the life
style changes and what of material improvement? Most importantly,
what does the prospect of compounded wealth mean for the
generations that follow given most sustainable societies are made
up of people who sacrifice for the generations that follow, not the
other way around as we do in the socialist oriented West.
I don't wont the pat fables you would tell an elementary student,
it is an insult to the intelligence actually, but frankly the bulk
of the leftist narrative never gets beyond that level.
|8.23.09 @ 1:32AM|#
@Steve
You must be fairly new to Klein. I, and others, have been aware of
her "work" for nearly two decades now. Once, I used to make
intelligent arguments against here ideas. I got tired. She is
simply a monstrous ideologue. She is not in any way a decent human
being. Do you seriously discuss the ideas of people that have
proven to be liars, fools, or just plain evil?
|8.23.09 @ 2:13AM|#
What's with all the intense dislike of Klein. If she's
wrong, she's wrong.
She is not just wrong, she is a liar and a propagandist. She's well
educated enough that certain things she said, which are
demonstrably false, can't be attributed to ignorance. Rather than
engage Milton Friedman's ideas directly, for instance, she tries to
link him with people like Pinochet to discredit him indirectly.
It's the sneaky, cowardly, dishonest tactic of an idealogue willing
to lie in the service of a cause.
Tony|8.23.09 @ 7:00AM|#
smearing one of the most honarable academics to have ever lived
How dare she!
Has anyone here bothered to read Klein's book? Hazel, I realize
you're not the brightest crayon etc., but could you cite specific
instances in which Klein has lied?
|8.23.09 @ 10:52AM|#
Hazel, I should have added the disclaimer that my observations
were of conditions in the 1960s and 70s.
Except for brief visits I have not been to Canada for thirty years.
I'm aware that things are different now But not in an "on the
ground" sort of way.
I do know that there is discontent outside of the major cities. But
I have no idea of the actual depth and breadth.
|8.23.09 @ 11:31AM|#
...could you cite specific instances in which Klein has lied?
Go read or watch the links in the post, Tony. Norberg cites a
number of cases.
Or is Klein just mistaken in her assertion that Milton Friedman was
an advisor to Augusto Pinochet? That's just one of her statements
which simply do not square with the facts.
You decide, intelligent liar or just a moron with poor reading
skills?
Either way, she's not someone worth listening to.
Chinny Chin Chin|8.23.09 @ 11:38AM|#
Over the past couple weeks, I've been worried that the Tony-bot
has run its course. The once-arrogant and infuriating posts had
become simply annoying. Clever overstatement of progressive talking
points was replaced by clumsy attempts at antagonism.
The 7am post, though, indicates that new programming may have been
uploaded. The irony of the vacuous platitude generator requesting
argument-supporting evidence is delicious.
Well done, programmer. It's nice to have you back on your game.
The Libertarian Guy|8.23.09 @ 12:20PM|#
Tony has now gone to the level of accusing me of favoring mass murder. His bot-programming must have some serious flaws.
|8.23.09 @ 12:37PM|#
His bot-programming must have some serious flaws.
Not really; they just steamlined the decision tree.
The Libertarian Guy|8.23.09 @ 1:07PM|#
A local-level Tony-bot stepped up his attack by accusing me of being a deadbeat dad... the idiot typed in the wrong name when he went rummaging around in court records. Shows what government education does for some people.
|8.23.09 @ 4:27PM|#
I practiced the "shock doctine" just this morning.
After hours of steadfastly arguing that food is the logical cure
for hunger, I cleverly exploited a sudden growl in my stomach to
implement my "buy-a-cheesburger" plan for dietary
liberalization.
It was an incredibly devious plot. I actually tried to do what I
believed right, at exactly the moment when it seemed most necessary
- and what's more, I used evidence confirming my hypothesis in
order to defend that hypothesis.
Then I laughed like the monster I am...
|8.23.09 @ 5:53PM|#
Klein's father was a draft evader, and her mother made a hateful
feministia film Not a Love Story. Thank Harper we are not accepting
any more of these loons in as "refugees".
Vancouver and Toronto are centers of loony leftism. The biggest
problem is CBC (public broadcaster) regularly gives her interviews,
but not criticism of her liberal fascism.
hmm|8.23.09 @ 6:11PM|#
Klein and Coulter need to make a grudge fuck lesbian
video.
Only use I see for either.
Vancity|8.23.09 @ 10:05PM|#
@Hazel Meade:
In fact, Canada has been running surpluses for the past 10 years
now, while the USA has mostly been running deficits. Canada's
healthcare system costs significantly less per capita than the
American healthcare system.
Of course, a much larger proportion of Canada's healthcare system
is funded by taxes, rather than private spending, and a case could
be made that this is inefficient. However, Klein et al would argue
that such inefficiencies are far preferable to
(a) the inefficiencies associated with private healthcare (i.e.
significant amount of money spent on billing)
(b) the moral problems associated with having millions of people
not having access to healthcare (other than basic emergency room
services)
|8.24.09 @ 12:14AM|#
Canada has been running surpluses for the past 10 years now,
while the USA has mostly been running deficits.
Because they cut funding to medicare and the Canada pension plan.
They dealt with their entitlement problem because it came to a
crisis sooner than ours, and have been shrinking the size of their
government.
You mgiht read this analysis here:
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10208
Apparantly, you want us to remake the mistakes Canada has already
learned from.
Tony|8.24.09 @ 12:28AM|#
clumsy attempts at antagonism.
Not like those clever attempts such as "shut the fuck up" a zillion
times.
hmm|8.24.09 @ 12:57AM|#
I don't think STFU is meant as antagonism. I think people might be actually advocating shutting the fuck up.
The Libertarian Guy|8.24.09 @ 9:30AM|#
Well, Tony, your party has been acting pretty antagonistic since
it regained power - anyone who deigns to speak against them, is
reminded that "we won" and how unpatriotic it is to defy anything
that comes out of the Obama camp.
Kinda like Bush and his side did, when THEY had all the power.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245