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:

NEXT: Medicare and Life Expectancy

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Somebody really out to turn that cunt inside out.

  2. Who wouldn’t expect this?

    Projection drives the majority of their accusations.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. The ends justify the means, you bozos; even Naomi Klein knows this.

  8. 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.

  9. 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?)

  10. 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….

  11. show, I said show!

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

  14. You mean he has been in office for eight months already, and I still have to work for a living?

  15. Chasin’ the economy from one bubble to the next bubble with stimulus ain’t much of a livin’, boy.

  16. Whoops, wrong thread, guess I’ll make my way over to the Barnanke Corral fer a little shoot out.

  17. Projection drives the majority of their accusations.

    Bingo. Their prognostications are limited to their own impulses.

  18. I’m pretty sure that this bitch couldn’t survive the hatefucking that she deserves.

  19. …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!!!”.

  20. 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!

  21. 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.

  22. Shock doctrine? That’s that “nine in the stink, one in the pink” thing, right?

  23. 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.

  24. 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.

  25. 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.

  26. 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.

  27. I don’t rape, Epi. I hatefully seduce.

  28. “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.

  29. 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.

  30. 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.

  31. 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.

  32. 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.

  33. 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

  34. First game of football should be 1861. where’s that preview?

  35. As a side note, they claim to have invented all four of our major sports.

    There’s no way that they invented beer pong!

  36. 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.

  37. 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.

  38. 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.

  39. “rape” in this thread is unseemly

    Shhh! Steve Smith will make an example of you if he hears you.

  40. 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.

  41. Holy shit…. holy shit.

    And you’re telling me she feels no cognitive dissonance whatsoever?

  42. 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.

  43. 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.

  44. 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.

  45. FUCK Naomi Klein and all the fucking fuckers who fucketyfuckfuck…

    …I’m sorry, what was the question…

  46. 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!

  47. 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.

  48. You know, for a site called “reason”

    What a stunningly original line. Sure did put us in our place.

  49. 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.

  50. 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!

  51. 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.

  52. Klein = stupid cunt.

  53. 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?

  54. 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.’

  55. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, umph, brbl, pzzt, ffffffffff…..

  56. @ 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.

  57. (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.

  58. (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.

  59. 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.

  60. 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.”

  61. 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.

  62. “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.

  63. Erm… that should be the Canadian left is virtually identical to the American Left.

  64. 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.

  65. @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.

  66. 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.

  67. 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.’

  68. 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.

  69. 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.

  70. @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?

  71. 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.

  72. 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?


  73. a Canadian living in Boston

    He had to move first though.

  74. 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.

  75. …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.

  76. 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.

  77. Tony has now gone to the level of accusing me of favoring mass murder. His bot-programming must have some serious flaws.

  78. His bot-programming must have some serious flaws.

    Not really; they just steamlined the decision tree.

  79. 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.

  80. 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…

  81. 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.

  82. Klein and Coulter need to make a grudge fuck lesbian video.

    Only use I see for either.

  83. hmm,

    Only if they are wearing razer barbed strap-ons.

  84. @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)

  85. 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.

  86. Hazel, I realize you’re not the brightest crayon

    High praise, coming from you.

  87. clumsy attempts at antagonism.

    Not like those clever attempts such as “shut the fuck up” a zillion times.

  88. I don’t think STFU is meant as antagonism. I think people might be actually advocating shutting the fuck up.

  89. 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.

  90. //OK. I’m a Vancouverite, and I think I understand Naomi Klein’s thinking. Here goes://

    This has to be one of the stupidest statements I’ve read on here. How does being 1 person out of over a million make you understand Naomi Klein’s thinking?

    Vancouver by the way has elected Conservatives and the BC Liberals, both parties supporting the free market and free market reforms to some extent. [BC Liberal health minister supports implementing a parallel private healthcare system.]

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.