Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Published on Wednesday, May 20, 2009 by Russian Times
US Banks Bailout is Robbery in Progress – Naomi Klein
Obama’s Wall Street bailout the greatest heist in monetary history, believes Naomi Klein – an award-winning journalist, syndicated columnist, and international bestselling author.
The bestselling book “No Logo” which looked at the effects of branding, put the Canadian author on the map.
Her third and latest – “The Shock Doctrine” – turns its attention on how world leaders cashed in on disasters.
Klein says it is the bosses, not the workers, who should be losing jobs amid the contracting economy.
© 2009 Russian Times
Comments are closed
79 Comments so far
Show AllOk, so I agree with firing the bad bosses but we have to replace with qualified bosses or employees must go too. Suggesting that all bosses be fired and not separating the good from the bad is very unpatriotic, very bad for the economy, and only leads to more anarchy since all businesses need good leaders to enforce some discipline to sustain company growth. Instead of blaming capitalism alone, NK should shut her mouth and admit that it's socialism for Wall Street that's to blame. Her understanding of capitalism, while correct that the worst of it has failed us all, is fundamentally limited. Besides, she keeps trying to dress too cute instead of actually directing her energy and writings towards caring for the little guy. More than too many new regulations, there needs to be enforcement of existing ones in the current capitalist system.
Excuse me there, maxpayne, but could you please point out where she said that ALL bosses should be fired, any more than she said that all employees are currently being fired? I agree with you that existing regulations need more enforcement, but how exactly does her manner of dress play into her competence?
"Klein says it is the bosses, not the workers, who should be losing jobs amid the contracting economy."
In that sentence I don't see her drawing the line on this sentence so I'm to assume she means all bosses.
Well Max, using your logic, can we assume ALL the workers have been losing their jobs?
Who are you to keep telling people to keep their mouths shut? You, on the one hand, talk about how America is such a great country, you paint yourself as being patriotic (whatever the hell that means to you) and then tell people who have opinions YOU don't like that they should shut their mouths. "We're the most free people in the world, and keep your mouth shut if you disagree with me!" Nice. You also talk about how she never talks about the "little guy". Obviously her book "No Logo" (over 400 pages) on the empty industrial towns of Canada, the slave wages in the poorer countries (some of which are kinda part of the US, so it says "Made in USA") and the insane mindset that feeds it (capitalism and consumerism, "free trade" is simply an attempt to save the capitalist system from declining profits, which were a principle problem for the West in the 1970's before they started to pillage places like Latin America, who is now for their own good ignoring our nonsense economic ideas) didn't convince you. Her documentary (amazing) "The Take" on formerly middle class and now poor factory workers who were thrown out of work by a corporate crook and took over their former work places and ran them democratically, THAT wasn't anything about "the little guy", now was it? Do yourself a favor, read an author before you call their ideas simplistic.
You say things like "her understanding of capitalism...is fundamentally limited" and never explain at all what you are saying, as if you saying it an intelligent enough way make the words themself become an argument. Explain what you mean in detail. I'm amazed that you are not calling for more regulation. People like you never seem to really, no surprise, explain in detail what you are saying. It is true that finance is heavily regulated, but HOW is it regulated? Whenever there is a movement towards a "free market" there are more rules created to protect private property, and that term is widened. There ISN'T regulation on international capital flows, there is removed financial regulation internationally (tax shelters, the Eurodollar and Eurobond Zones which have NO reserve ratios or regulation). More regulations make sense in some areas and less in others. Private property should be defined in more narrow terms and should not have such dominance other over rights, including democratic rights, sovereign state rights, taking away private tyranny's rights to socialize the massive and growing environmental costs they create and other social rights. Do less rules protecting private property, so less regulation there, and more towards those other goals, so public opinion doesn't veer off so much from governmental policy. THAT would be far more logical, unless you can articulate in detail what you're saying, ditch the platitudes and the whole patriotic act. Not only does it not do what you want, shut off conversation, but it makes you look a bit silly.
Thank you for your clear and informative rebuttal of the opinionated bigot maxpayne. Maxpayne is a traitor to America and the human race.
copy right and intellectual property rights are also an example of adverse regulations, and as you mentioned property rights are the biggest examples of how free market capitalists dont take their own rhetoric serious
Maxpayne,
With all due respect, I disagree with you. I understand the dilemma of the good boss/bad boss dichotomy. But the real problem is the system. It has become so corrupt, that even the existing regulations are grossly inadequate. The system needs a complete overhaul. Naomi Klein is correct labeling it "disaster capitalism." And the group of architects behind the economic calamity (Geithner, Summers, Rubin, and others) are in charge of fixing it, when they should be in prison.
I agree that those goons deserve to be in jail. What I take issue with is NK labelling ALL capitalism as disaster capitalism instead of coming clean and stating that it's unfettered capitalism, not all capitalism, that's the problem. At least that's how I always heard her frame it like. I might read her book someday when I'm in the mood and feel like it. Right now, her book isn't a high priority anyway and I've heard contradictions from her what with her bashing capitalism and making it look like excess socialism is the answer.
Not only have you not read her writing, you obviously didn't even listen to the interview before you tell her to shut her mouth. You have a right to your opinion irrespective of its stupidity. She is saying this is NOT free market capitalism but Crony-ism, and is NOT socialism.....
Enough time and thought wasted commenting on your un-thought-through, quarter baked comments on this very respected and intelligent writer’s words.
So I skipped through the Rudy parts of this silly interview and fast forwarded some of the same old boring talk but there was NOTHING shocking about any of this. It was there all along. It's just that people were too ignorant and addicted to greed. Nothing shocking about that. And all this irrelevent bullshit talk on "torture" has nothing to do with this so I still stand correct that it was a silly interview. And she still thinks there's "hope" in Obama ? What a joke !
Maxpayne,
A good article that has a slightly different slant from Klein's is on Counterpunch. Click on the article titled "The Toll Booth Economy" by Michael Hudson. It is very insightful and worth reading.
Hmmm, sounds interesting. I'll give it a read.
Yeah, right. Sure you will. While you're there look up phd author Roberto Rodriguez's article on manipulating language and public opinion. You need some pointers.
Oregoncharles
Fascism might be the more accurate term. This is an ongoing transfer of wealth from the taxpayers into private hands. "The banks own the place." That's fascism, folks. And it's only going to get worse.
I used to think that too but there's a line to draw between capitalism and fascism. Any system can be abused by a fascist, be it socialism or capitalism. It's only a matter of taking sole control of it.
C'mon Rush, you don't fool anyone here - just out yourself and be done with the charade.
In the mean time, we have been hearing about the "enforcement of existing regulations/laws" for a long time now. It is a canard sent up by libertarian neocons and it means absolutely nothing other than to preserve the status quo.
Our system doesn't work...at least for the people. The current capitalist system was designed to do exactly what it is doing, and no amount of enforcement will help (well, it will in the short term). In order for a sustainable economic system to come to fruition, there must be limits on the ownership of the amount of capital, because when there is too much ownership in too few hands, we get what we have. What we are going through is the upper limits of this system. Oh, it can grow a little more, but not much more. As it continues to reach it's destructive pinnacle, the fabric of our society will tear into larger holes until it rips open completely.
It's funny (in a sick kind of way), that Economics 101 teaches us of the limits in supply without teaching us of the limits of demand. There are NO limits to demand, so we keep taking more from the planet's resources. There are also no limits to greed, so we keep taking more from others.
We are facing something that modern economics has no answer for. The "current capitalist system" is toxic, it is poison, and it is finite (thank God). You have no solution because it lies outside the box you are in. Hell, I have no solution either, but I at least am willing to see it for what it is - a Ponzi scheme.
I agree that the current capitalism which is really unfettered is showing its destructive nature. I just take offense to where she associates all capitalism as bad. While I appreciate the basic safety net that is socialism, in capitalism, we're all free to reach for the skies, feel the power, and be a hard hitting winner as each of us wishes to be. It's good to feel that one can fly like an eagle at least with good capitalism, not unfettered.
Oh gawd, you're killing me. You must have gotten this right from someone's talking points.
No, I made it clear myself that I support a balance between socialism and capitalism. I discussed this with Thomas More on earlier post on this site. No system is fool proof you know.
"Besides, she keeps trying to dress too cute instead of actually directing her energy and writings towards caring for the little guy."
Going after someone's appearance is a very bad way to criticize them dude. Rush Limbaugh does crap like that.
I was too skeptical of Klein and she keeps discussing too much about 9/11 and hope for Obama more than the mess. I guess I went a bit too over the edge on that part.
Well, if you would check out the Khalilizad to become Afghanistan's CEO post on the left, it should be easy to draw the connection between 9-11 and disaster capitalism.
9-11 and all that exploration of it can get to be a bit too much. All I can say about 9-11 is the liberals and progressives seriously need to consider fighting to abolish the CIA. No excuses for keeping that rotten agency that allowed 9-11 to happen on top of arming, training, and funding Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, Al Quaida, and the rest. I'm a bit too bitter that for decades people allowed disaster capitalism to build on and it's still going on as far as I can tell. Don't even get me started on the 9-11 conspiracy theories. Newark Airport, despite its failures and sloppiness still gets rewarded for allowing 9-11 to happen as well. And the same thing with immigration. 9-11 wouldn't have happened if our existing laws would have been enforced. Now, we're stuck with more big government and the DHS is a big joke.
Which existing laws? From what I remember, box cutters were legal to carry on airplanes back then. Yes, 9-11 was mostly an intelligence failure...but if you abolish the CIA, you got to have something in place that can take over its responsibilities and carry them out better. It is intelligence which is necessary to defend the country, far more than the most powerful (and wastefully expensive) military in the world.
As far as I can see, the CIA has already abandoned all its responsibilities and looks like just another rotten agency sucking our tax dollars away. The CIA has never been progressive or liberal friendly ever since it was founded as far as I can tell. All that military spending buildup over the decades has done nothing to keep the country any safer. It certainly didn't stop 9-11. The agencies I would love to see dismantled and rebuilt from ground zero are the FBI, CIA, DEA, FDA, NSA, FCC, IMF, World Bank, Pentagon, and Fed Reserve. They're the worst and it's a complete shame that the liberals and progressives are not even motivated to push for any significant reform to those agencies.
"They're the worst and it's a complete shame that the liberals and progressives are not even motivated to push for any significant reform to those agencies."
Liberals and progressives have pushed for it through researched posts on discussion boards, protests, phone calls to Congresspeople, publications, and many more. Problem is their voices were drowned out by the Democrat and Republican party (one party, two factions) that still supports these agencies as they are.
Ah yes, that is indeed true. Shoot, we really do need independents after all then and all of us had better vet them thoroughly. I have seen a few Republicans and Democrats call for abolishing some or all those agencies I mentioned but we'll obviously need more than that.
Got any proposals on rebuilding them?
Come to think of it, this country was way better off before most of them were built so I see nothing to lose by getting rid of most of those agencies I named. On the other hand, more taxpayer savings so that we could get back to making our government actually lean and efficient rather allow it to bloat and be even more sloppy. I've studied a lot about those agencies and the info is overwhelming.
It would get rid of a lot of corruption too.
For someone like myself leaving a former communist country 30 years ago, is not funny that now I learned that we have to salvage the capitalism.
"dress too cute"
Its not often we get such overtly sexist remarks here at CD. Perhaps you have a problem with intelligent women.
"Besides, she keeps trying to dress too cute instead of actually directing her energy and writings towards caring for the little guy." Really now. What do you have against cute girls?
If you were to read "The Shock Doctrine" you would be surprised to discover that her energy and writings are directed toward caring for the little guy and exposing the Chicago School of Economics cult that feeds on little guys around the world. Her research and interpretation are without equal in probably close to 100 progressively themed books that I have read.
I think she is smart and I think she is cute.
Great combo in my book even if we aren't supposed to notice these days.
Dave
I am glad that she is saying this, however to us that are paying attention, this is pretty basic stuff. Richard Wolf, Dean Baker, Michael Hudson, and David Harvey, for example have some very good analyses of the economic problems and more in depth analysis of the structural problems and historical contexts. Wolf has a documentary out called "Capitalism Hits the Fan" which is one of my favorites.
Not only are they cashing in on disasters, they are CREATING DISASTERS to cover their own lying, cheating, criminal butts.................
http:/www.israelshamir.net/Contributors/Collateral_Damage_911.pdf
Yeh, excuse us Mr. Max Pain. We have just come through a huge period of economic anarchy thanks to unfettered capitalism and we will be suffering for a long time. Suffering in the sense of having to put up with comments from the likes of you. You with your blinders on and archaic thinking. You must be someone that is fairly old and your brain froze 30 years ago.
You have to understand Max's pain...
He is the unfortunate victim of gender/race/class/religious/national priveledge...
His technocratic skills are undervalued by his boss...
He has a soul-killing desk job with a military contractor...
His industry is the largest recipient of corporate welfare...
He is going through a midlife crisis in his forties right now...
He is becoming aware of his role in the war machine...
He is struggling with his own demons, and projecting them at others...
He is struggling with his identity that has embraced the jingoist American exceptionalism...
He is just another selfish and insecure man hiding behind tough words...
He wraps himself in labels like they are the Stars & Stripes...
A Moderate Progressive Democrat... Whatever that is supposed to mean...
He throws around terms like Socialist and Communist without a clear understanding of their meanings...
He is the classic Hypocrite... a wellfare queen of corporate socialism who justifies his role in the slaughter & torture & displacement of millions of innocent folks because he is waiting for progressives to provide an equal paying job for him first...
Exactly. But traitors belong in prison, not therapy.
Hey Golden, you forgot to mention misogynistic dinosaur. Just because Naomi is good-looking and smart, Max Dumb feels threatened. Has mother issues too, evidently. Personally, if I could find a woman like Naomi, I'd marry her so fast it would make her head spin. That beauty? Those brains?
The problem is not capitalism. The problem is UNFETTERED capitalism. There's a difference between the two and NK ain't getting it right. If she really thinks socialism is the answer, then what about all that current "socialism" going to Wall Street in the form of taxpayer funded bailouts? Now there's corporate socialism right before our eyes so I won't say socialism is the problem but corporate socialism is. You have to differentiate and be more specific which NK ain't.
What we have now, in the words of Ralph Schoenmann, is "gangster capitalism," and we're in the end stage of its collapse. The rats are deserting the sinking ship, grabbing whatever they can carry.
Democratic socialism (add health care, housing, education and a guaranteed income to the socialized roads, water systems and army we already have) is a viable alternative.
no the problem is capitalism, but i agree that unfettered capitalism is often more unjust and exploitative than regulated capitalism. arguing over unfettered capitalism and regulated capitalism makes about as much sense as arguing over an unfettered mafia or a regulated one; unfettered slavery or a regulated one.
and not only should all bosses be fired, but the concept of alienated labor should be abolished along with markets, remunerating for input and bargaining power and private ownership of productive assets. instead we should have democratic allocative processes by workers and consumer councils, remuneration for effort and sacrifice as judged by our work peers and social ownership of productive assets.
anything else is just organized crime, regulated or not
Oh no, not again ! Do away with labor ? And what ? Push the unemployment to 90 % ?!? I gotta go get a beer !
I will take that as you admitting you have no clue what alienated labor is. Google it, reread what I wrote, let it process and get back to me. Thanks!
Finally we have arrived at your true vocation, i.e. "having a beer". You are a boon to beer producers everywhere. Be proud!
Hey, have a beer too. Your mind will be reformed as a result.
max, even i enjoy an occassional beer every now and then
maybe if we all had a spliff, then quenched our thirst with an ice cold one, even better.
Alice is illegal, man. Hey, maybe that's a good enough reason to take it up again... Nah, never did me much good.
I'm off to have a cold Singha.