Reddit Reddit reviews The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism

We found 60 Reddit comments about The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Economic Conditions
Business & Money
The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism
neo-liberal economics in actionthe Chicago School of economicsdisaster capitalilsm
Check price on Amazon

60 Reddit comments about The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism:

u/iBelgium · 92 pointsr/worldnews

The world bank and the IMF aren't organizations who operate in the best interest of the world. It does what the biggest funder tells them to do (= USA).

  1. You start a crisis in a country and force them to take a loan
  2. You give them a loan but only if you can privatize all their public resources
  3. You end up with all their wealth and you also receive money from the loan

    You can read about it in [The Shock Doctrine] (
u/[deleted] · 50 pointsr/news

Shock Doctrine, people.
Don't have time to watch or read (read the reviews)? Naomi Klein on MSNBC explaining the basics in less than 5 minutes.

u/Soss · 38 pointsr/politics

Funny, reading about this exact same situation that happened in Chile and Argentina, The Shock Doctrine

u/Luv-Bugg · 28 pointsr/news

Scratch a liberal, a fascist bleeds. Neoliberal foreign policy is one of torture, of both the people and the economy. Would you like to know more?

u/Orangutan · 27 pointsr/conspiracy

A small history of biological warfare and experiments:

u/SnackRelatedMishap · 12 pointsr/worldnews

> Sounds like more conspiracy bullshit with no actual proof

Dude, so many books and articles have been written about this. The fact that this is new to you does not make it a conspiracy theory. It's not even controversial.

Western economists at the IMF in the 90's prescribed a set of policies, now colloquially known as 'shock therapy', to emerging market nations. In Russia these were prescribed ostensibly to help clamp down on an incipient hyperinflation. The radical policies consisted of a simultaneous elimination of all price/currency controls, wholesale privatization of all state-owned industry, and trade liberalization. The results were devastating, and allowed for a looting of the Russian economy by Western capital and, later, by Russian oligarchs in collusion with Boris Yeltsin.

Jeffrey Sachs, who was one of Yeltsin's advisors, has written much about his role in the crisis, and still feels the need to defend his record. Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel laureate, has a chapter in his book Globalization and its Discontents called "Who lost Russia?" in which he lays the blame square at the feet of free-market economists prescribing economic shock-therapy. Some believe that Larry Summers lost his bid to become President of the World Bank because of his role in the Russian economic reform project(also see: How Harvard Lost Russia for more about Summers).

Other books:

Sale of the Century, by Chrystia Freeland(formerly the global editor-at-large at Reuters)

The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Klein

u/MrSamsonite · 11 pointsr/AskSocialScience

For a broader look at the military and economic coercion of Latin America from the 1950s to the 1980s, see The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. For her coverage of Argentina, she draws heavily on True Crimes: Rodolfo Walsh and the Role of the Intellectual in Latin American Politics, which provides a great feel for the economic and social changes resulting from the country's various coups and uprisings.

This is admittedly a very leftist point of view of the situation, and one based more in issues of populism vs. neoliberalism in general than in Argentina specifically. For more on your specific question, this seems like a great starting point, if you haven't looked into it already:

EDIT: Here's a solid primary source on US support of the Argentine military junta in 1976:

u/wasabicupcakes · 11 pointsr/PoliticalHumor

The Shock Doctrine. Pretty eye opening.

u/picklemeparsnips · 9 pointsr/UkrainianConflict

You are better off reading The Shock Doctrine as it has more background and much better sources from several credible people.

Or of you are just literally challenged you could always watch the film of the book, but that is the lite version.

The IMF are gangsters and every where they go they leave a trail of debt and exploitation. Ukraine will be no exception.

u/whyamisosoftinthemid · 9 pointsr/whatstheword
u/thrallsballs64 · 9 pointsr/LateStageCapitalism

I'm currently reading a book called The Shock Doctrine that explores how the southern cone was forced into extreme free market capitalism. The book actually explores the forced free market capitalism on a global scale but the first third of the book is mostly about South America.

I usually stick to the fantasy genre but this book is really well written and has been eye opening for me.

u/grebfar · 8 pointsr/geopolitics

In short: Regulatory capture in the US led to the US Government handing out large sums of money to US Companies for services that were never delivered.

See also: The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Kline

u/Kelsig · 7 pointsr/neoliberal

>Would you support an invasion of Syria? Iran? North Korea? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? China? Or just one where Americans can happily watch death and destruction from their living rooms while cheering for "Muh cuntry nd muh freedom"?

Syria, yes, Iran, not if iran deal holds up and liberalization continues, north korea idk, egypt no, saudi arabia no, china no

>Neoliberals in support of the murder of civilians by the state, classy.

u/drownme · 5 pointsr/worldnews

And read the Shock Doctrine. Some of Klein's arguments are iffy, but on the whole it is possibly the saddest book I have ever read.

u/Mentalpopcorn · 5 pointsr/EnoughLibertarianSpam

I wrote a paper analyzing Chilean politics last year. The thesis was that libertarianism, Friendmanite neoliberalism, etc., in pure form, can only exist under authoritarian or totalitarian (in the case of Ayn Rand's objectivist capitalism) regimes and are logically incompatible with democracy.

The conclusion was that if people are ever given a vote, they will by and large vote against purist constructs of these political theories, and I used Chilean politics to demonstrate the point. I presented the argument in class and the logic of it was accepted, even by the two libertarian leaning classmates, but sadly it didn't move them at all. They concluded essentially that political freedom is unnecessary for real freedom™.

EDIT: If anyone is interested in learning more about the very fascinating "libertarian" dictatorship in Chile, and how it was implemented with the help of Milton Friedman, I suggest checking out Naomi Kline's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. She's definitely a leftist, and so it should be read with her bias in mind, but she's a fantastic writer and journalist and there's enough factual information to form your own perspectives on the matter without relying completely on her analysis.

u/omphalososos · 5 pointsr/socialism

My go to recs include a mix of articles, videos, and books. Check out Albert Einstein's Why Socialism? After that maybe watch Richard Wolff's Intro to Marxism. Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine is not a socialist book per se, but it illustrates the evils of capitalism and the real world consequences of historical atrocities committed in the name capitalist interests. Also, you should read primary texts. Read Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky. This Study Guide for Revolutionaries has essentially all of the canonized Marxist works categorized like a syllabus. If you haven't read the Manifesto yet, be sure to knock that one out too! Hope these suggestions help!

u/fapman · 4 pointsr/business

The Chicago School - the people who brought you the bloody revolution in Chile. Nice.

u/adodson · 4 pointsr/obama
u/jb4647 · 3 pointsr/houston

Read that series on private equity the NYTimes has been doing that I linked earlier.

Shit's more of "nefarious plot" than I realized. Another good read is "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein.

u/cheap_dates · 3 pointsr/atheism

He was really upset when he "came of age" and realized that our "wars" have little to do with being the leader of the free world and more about conquering new consumer markets.

My daughter said that one of the most popular languages in college today is Arabic. We are going to need people who speak Arabic to run those Mc Donalds and Starbucks one day, in the Middle East.

A good book if you have time:

u/big_red737 · 3 pointsr/suggestmeabook

You might be interested in the books of Naomi Klein, The Shock Doctrine and her latest This Changes Everything

u/the_big_wedding · 3 pointsr/politics

You have not been paying attention:

Read Naomi Klein's book, "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism".

You will read how Friedman's economic/political theories are implicated with current foriegn policy events starting with the assassination of Allende and the coup that brought Pinochet to power in Chile.

Friedman's theories and practices, taken together with Leo Strauss's political views of the world (neoconservativism), American foreign policy of interventionism, low-intensity conflict (dirty war) and Christian Zionism, Israel's Zionist Likud party's adoption of the Trans-Jordan Clean-break strategy has created a murderous toxic brew that has led to the current state of affairs both here and abroad.

Ultimately, 911 can be seen as an offensive counterintelligence operation (THE BIG WEDDING), an act of the deep state government that has run the United States since the JFK assassination, the purpose of which was to use the fear generated to create the security state, within which these criminal cabals have acted to carry out its agenda alluded to in my original post above.

u/Thurkagord · 3 pointsr/Libertarian

I did actually, back when I didn't pay attention to how the real world worked, and just thought that the general, vague concept of "more freedom" sounded good. Maybe I didn't go full tilt into internet Libertarian where the closest thing to a structural critique comes down to "taxation is theft!!" and "Dale gets it!" and all real analysis is predicated on thought experiments, hypothetical fantasy worlds, and have no real foundation in the reality in which we live. Like honestly, if you do any actual examination of how society is structured, and you STILL think that government and taxation, as a concept, are the most oppressive forces in the world keeping you from success rather than the moneyed interests that manipulate and fuel legislative policy, then your vicious meme takedowns are going to contribute nothing to discussion or understanding beyond giving yourself a temporary right-wing dopamine rush of 0wn1ng the l1bz.

If you'd like a chance to broaden your understanding of some of the structural concepts I am referring to, rather than just a general title of "liberal" or whatever, here are just a couple pretty basic reading options to get you started.


A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn (1980)

The Revolution of Everyday Life by Raoul Vaneigem (1968)

The Shock Doctrine: Rise of Disaster Capitalism, by Naomi Klein (2006)



u/Slightly_Lions · 3 pointsr/australia

Reminds me of the 'The Shock Doctrine'.

The idea is that you push through unpopular reforms in a time of crisis, with minimal scrutiny. Apparently it doesn't even have to be a real crisis to work in Australia.

u/ewokjedi · 3 pointsr/politics

Way to plagiarize and spin Naomi Wolf's recent book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, into a right-wing screed.

What is both sad and laughable about this is that the basic premise may be sometimes true--that governments use crises (imaginary, real, or real but inflated) to motivate their citizens to support their policies--but attempts to suggest, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that it is only those on the political left that use this "road map."

EDIT: Adding a link to Wolf's book on

u/pomod · 3 pointsr/CasualConversation

Neo-liberalism's been an ecological and social disaster. IMO; Read Naiomi Klein's Shock Doctrine for a critical POV

u/Ehchar · 2 pointsr/war

To allow companies access to cheap labor and resources. Low taxes & tariffs, minimal regulation typical neoliberal stuff. Access to financial markets bank loans, investments etc. Also to establish a network of military infrastructure to enable future conquest and prevent competing countries to do the same.

Some recommended reading:

You can find PDFs of both, I just linked the amazon page because they're both good books and quite cheap.

u/Chillypill · 2 pointsr/Denmark

Ved ikke om det er godnatlæsning som sådan. Det er ikke for en god historie, men til at blive klogere.

u/bperki8 · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

No problem. And, as /u/big_red737 said below, if you enjoy the People's History I suggest some Naomi Klein as well, especially The Shock Doctrine.

u/SteveBule · 2 pointsr/ChapoTrapHouse

Yeah no problem. While Blum's work shows the effect of anti-communist efforts and policies by US, it's not really a guide on ideology; it's an account of what happened and why. If you are interested in leftist ideology i would recommend the ABCs of socialism which provides laymen's terms answers to questions of socialist government structure (e.g. how authoritarianism can find it's way into the fray) and economics.

Also, anything by Noam Chomsky, Mike Davis, or Naomi Klein are usually very insightful for modern day analyses of power, politics, and economics. I've got a long list if you want anymore suggestions, mostly from the perspective of critiquing power (from the right or the left) and it's effects on societies

edit: also check out the Chapo Trap House podcast for cathartic sessions of shitting on asshole politicians across the spectrum and highlights of funny/bizarre political takes

u/cyclopath · 2 pointsr/books

Lots. In fact, nearly every book I have ever read has changed my worldview in one way or the other, some more than others. But, the most recent books to change my outlook on the world are:

The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for The 21st Century by George Friedman

Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism by Naomi Klein.

Demon-Haunted World: Science As A Candle In The Dark by Carl Sagan

u/Marern9098 · 2 pointsr/BreadTube

(For context I'm a Democratic Confederalist basically a form of Anarchism)


This shit is honestly tamed and creates connections of intuitions with forms of subversions without context ensuring his point is met across. Such as the situation of the bargaining of a worker saying bargaining power is taken away and given to the supposed lazy person who wants '$ 3.00' per hour compared to the "Hard worker" who can function for 2.00 or 2.50 without establishing the more complex implementations of why they need that extra dollar why ones perceived labor is seen different than another. Also, he misses that many of his arguments work against the power structures he agrees with such his arguments against mass consumerization and the profitable/ beneficial structural nature of the capitalist media. And his arguments of destabilization are correct to an extent but he is also underplaying the situations the 'other' groups had to deal with. Such as slavery, legal and social discrimination for black people, Wage, and cheap labor exploitation of Asians/Asian Ancestry, Dehumanization and chastising of Gay/GSRM individuals and many more situation of 'context' he misses. Such social animosity doesn't simply by the fact that the certain exploitative system has been done away with no the effects are already seen, they have come to past and the only way to subdue it or attempt to pacify is to seek amends or give compensation but such Abuses will be there as scar they will never leave. His criticization of bureaucracy misses why such systems were created and for what purpose. That purpose was the management of information and logistics to ensure the current order, without such a system it would have caused major destabilization among the order of the state or exploitation of individuals. And his critique of the media also serves as another failure of the capitalist system unable to bring unbias information in exchange for its profit and popularity. A better understanding of the study of subversion is Naomi Klien's well researched and detailed work of the Shock Doctrine. And his focus is more of the Soviet Union's actions of subversion which would be seen as anti-socialist for a reason but that doesn't matter to me considering Stalin wasn't committed to the ideals of communism or of the movement he was a thug made to help it in destroying the reactionaries but in turn took it over and did it his way. Also, he appears to miss the notion that the US has done such action for its own benefit long before and long after the creation of the Soviet Union. I find it laughable how much he is willing to give up his freedoms and the possible freedoms of minorities for a future under Fascism. I'm honestly disappointed how these people are slowly just being sucked into Fascist propaganda.

Read or watch the Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein its magnitudes better than any more garbage this pseudo-intellectual has to offer

Shock Doctrine Book

Shock Doctrine Documentary

u/satanic_hamster · 2 pointsr/CapitalismVSocialism

> Capitalism has been consistently proven to raise the standards of living wherever it has been tried.

Google the word neoliberalism sometime, and spend a day researching it.

> Meanwhile, every single attempt at socialism - the USSR, the PRC, the DPRK, Venezuela, Cuba - has resulted in disaster, and has lowered the standards of living wherever it has been tried.

In what sense are these socialist, apart from what they call themselves in name? An anarcho-capitalist can have some actual, justified criticisms against socialism in practice (I've seen many), but when people like you plow forward with such an elementary misunderstanding, believe me when I say you look bad, even to your own camp.

The Zapatistas? The Paris Commune? The Ukrainian Free Territories? Revolutionary Catalonia? The Israeli Kibbutzim? That is your actual target.

> There is a reason why every single country that was once considered communist has transitioned towards capitalism...

Because they were bombed to hell in the interest of the capitalist class?

> ... and it should be no surprise to anyone that the standard of living has raised in these areas.

Like the four asian tigers did through State intervention? (And like the US did, also). Nothing even close to a free market prescription, albeit a quasi-capitalist one nevertheless.

u/SpaceRook · 2 pointsr/politics

Read Naomi Klein's book The Shock Doctrine. It explains these tactics perfectly. If you want to change a society's behavior, you create a false crisis and scare the shit out of people so they will accept something - anything - stable as soon as possible.

u/PranicEther · 2 pointsr/politics

You can start by finding out who your representatives are here.

Learn about what each office does and what they are responsible for.

What issues are you most concerned with? Taxes? Healthcare? Unemployment? etc. How has your represented responded to these issues (i.e. voting record)?

If you're a student in university, it may be helpful to take an intro political science class. If not, hopefully, some redditors can suggest some good reading for you.

Some websites or news programs that I find helpful in getting some info are NPR, BBC Worldnews, Al-Jazeera and Euronews. I'm not a fan of local news programming. I read a lot online for the local stuff.

You may enjoy The Daily Show with Jon Stewart or The Colbert Report. They're comedy shows but they tend to show the absurdities of it all. You can a learn a lot too. Sometimes, I enjoy the roundtable discussions on Real Time with Bill Maher. I've gone as far as to purchase some books based on the discussions they've had.

I can't recommend books for "getting to know politics" per se, but a few in my collection include that I found informative:

The Post-American World by Fareed Zakaria

The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein

Ghost Wars by Steve Coll

The Boys on the Bus by Timothy Crouse

Politics of the Veil by Joan Wallach Scott

Voices of Freedom vol. 1 & 2 by Eric Foner

Lies And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them by Al Franken

The Parliament of Man by Paul Kennedy

I found them enlightening and some gave me a clearer look at the workings of government and politics in America. Some stuff you have to take with a grain of salt. Checking the references from anything you read is helpful imo. Hope this helps a little.

u/RidleyScottTowels · 2 pointsr/fullmoviesonyoutube


An investigation of "disaster capitalism", based on Naomi Klein's proposition that neo-liberal capitalism feeds on natural disasters, war and terror to establish its dominance.

From yOU.tUbE description:

A documentary adaptation Naomi Klein's 2007 book, The Shock Doctrine.

Based on breakthrough historical research and four years of on-the-ground reporting in disaster zones, The Shock Doctrine vividly shows how disaster capitalism -- the rapid-fire corporate re-engineering of societies still reeling from shock -- did not begin with September 11, 2001.

u/erath_droid · 1 pointr/conspiracy

Check out "The Shock Doctrine"

The U.S. funded a lot of horrendous regimes and committed all kinds of war crimes in the name of "fighting communism."

... and then they wonder why so many people are pissed off at our government.

u/phottitor · 1 pointr/worldnews

>Hope we learned something from that, so we don't do that again to some other country.

that is never the point (it assumes some kind of "goodwill" but it never even comes into the equation except in name only)

obviously she is a leftist and you should have that in mind. Likely there are books that would describe the same disastrous events differently. for sure that applies to Chile because there is a wide-spread myth about how Pinochet economic policies were a "big success story", but even in Russia there is a bunch of assholes (e.g. Chubais) who maintain that Gaidar and his boys were a godsend to the country.

u/markth_wi · 1 pointr/TrueReddit

Are you arguing that President Bush didn't have his policies influenced by others around him, notably Vice President Cheney, his cast of characters and Donald Rumsfeld?

With respect to think-tanks, no - I do not think there is less influence on the part of such think-tanks, I do suggest that there appears to be less overt influence and implementation of foreign policy that is not at least plausibly in the interests of the United States. I think what is striking is the manner and apparent degree to which unaccountable advisers with dubious associations were at the policy helm.

Actually, the OSP was preceded immediately by the Office of Strategic Influence, but as with the other cast of characters involved with the neoconservative political movement, they just happened to be the guys in the room when policy was being written and foreign policy drafted related to actions in the Levant.

Here again, it's worth noting that Afghanistan (the actual source of the terrorist planning related to 9/11) was, until these guys were removed from their offices, considered seriously second fiddle.

As far as Ayn Rand and the pop-libertarian views of the Neoconservative planners, this is not just a buzzword fest - 200,000 people have died, and another million or so are economically displaced as a result it serves the purpose of leaving Iraq without a functional government.

Libertarianism , exists in so far and as much as a large and peaceful federated or otherwise friendly and stable state exists such that you can endeavor to eliminate all the unnecessary aspects of 'the state' that might obviously turn out to be very necessary, for post-war reconstruction governance. But it wasn't just the notion that the large social support state that existed in Iraq needed to be dismantled or the enormous make-work project otherwise known as the Iraqi Army was disbanded at a stroke, it was the lack of evident self-determination, with our efforts to install Ahmed Chalabi - a dubious character at best as the new Iraqi President.

And as far as Eisenhower, I've read the whole text, and it is precisely accurate to the situation in hand, what measures have we in place, to ensure against what has happened in two major instances in the United States, first in Viet Nam and now over 30 years with Iraq, is the unguarded influence of unaccounted-for and certainly unelected bodies of special interest policy groups who come in and basically "run" the decision-making apparatus.

As far as stabilization forces, why couldn't the UN or NATO or some central-Asian variant of NATO police and provide these resources, why does it have to be the United States on the receiving end of the bill and the bullets.

u/iceboob · 1 pointr/AskThe_Donald

it's funny you bring up wagner because milo is a jew. do you think his rise in popularity was coincidental?

he might say some correct things, but his purpose to maintain the status quo; that's why they sent him in. that's why i don't advise reading his work or supporting him. if you want something genuinely red-pilling, here's a good one.

u/geekwonk · 1 pointr/worldnews

Naomi Klein



u/PandyPandorica · 1 pointr/conspiracy
u/iguot3388 · 1 pointr/AskReddit

I noticed most of these posts are about fiction. I feel like all the books I read change my life, but the biggest ones that changed the way I look at the world have been:

Pop Science books by Steven Johnson (Emergence, Everything Bad is Good For You, Where Good Ideas Come From) and Malcolm Gladwell (Blink, Tipping Point, Outliers). These books changed all of my preconceived notions, and gave me a drive to search for intelligent outside perspectives. Emergence was especially influential. I approach Emergence in an almost religious way, you can see "God" or whatever you would call it, in Emergent intelligent behavior, a more science-friendly conception of God, I feel the same way when I watch Koyaanisqaatsi.

A Brief History of Everything by Ken Wilber. Most people either like Ken Wilber or hate him. To me, he gives a good model of looking at religion, spirituality, science, society, myth, and the way different people think similar to Joseph Campbell. If you ever wonder why religious people think a certain way, and scientific people and postmodern philosophers think a different way, this is the book.

The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. I didn't even finish this book because I got to depressed. It may be pretty biased, but it is really one of the best geopolitical books out there. I learned everything I needed to know about foreign policy and the economic conflict going on around the world.

EDIT: Another great one is The Book by Alan Watts

u/HutSutRawlson · 1 pointr/AskReddit
u/grimatongueworm · 1 pointr/politics

More manufactured crisis to justify closed door meetings to ram through unpopular legislation.

Naomi Klein wrote a great book about it.

u/Jorvic · 1 pointr/unitedkingdom

You'll be surprised to hear that Rail ticket prices are much higher today (its quickly becoming a rich man's toy), and tax payers subsidise private companies running the trains far more than they ever did under BR. It wasn't perfect admittedly, but by the end of the 70's BR had managed to turn itself around, despite having the lowest investment in western Europe. Nevertheless they managed to run the intercity routes at cost, compare that to today where those routes are heavily subsidised (except East Coast which went from being a massive loss making private route, to just about being in profit, with the highest customer ratings, all after it was nationalised a few years ago), BR managed to run so efficiently that they actually consulted the continental railways, which you will notice are still nationalised and in fact ultimately own many of the companies running our routes. If we had had a similar amount of investment to the continent, and BR hadn't been run into the ground in preparation for privatisation we might have a service to rival the rest of Europe (take Ireland who have over a 99% record on being on time, thats with a 5 minutes window of the eta, after privatisation here in the UK we now have a 30minute window and don't get anywhere close to that on time rate.

As for state owned, invested, or guaranteed industry, well yes it would be mad to subsidise clearly uneconomic projects, no ones talking about that. The point is more Mines were closed under the Wilson government than Thatcher, the difference was that uneconomic mines were identified in partnership with the Unions, closed, and new jobs found. A good example of this is with Michael Foot, who had to close the steel works in his own constituency Ebwr Vale, he genuinely thought he was going to be lynched when it was announced. When it closed they re-tooled, and up-skilled the workforce and opened a steel plating plant, which was a huge success. What happened under Thatcher was a politically motivated attack (this is all coming out with the 30 year rule cabinet papers) to close both uneconomic mines yes, but a huge number of profitable mines also (there was one mine which was targeted as 'uneconomical' which was taken over as a worker coop that only closed a couple of years ago, there is still a small amount of mining in the UK). They cynically left entire communities with no other option when they were closed, no investment to create new jobs, nothing. And it turned out to be a false economy, it costs a lot more to put thousands on the dole, destroying local economies and satellite businesses etc, than it is to wind down one industry as you build up another.

Ok as for the deficit, you have to go back to the planned mixed economy period to find constant budget surplices, its under the neoliberal, hands-off, economy where we find budget deficits. Both Thatcher and Major ran bigger deficits than Labour, Labours deficit compared very favourably to other countries in fact, to the point that George Osbourne promised to match Labour spending pound for pound. Then the crash hit, and because we had shifted our economy so far away from industry towards the service and finance sector we were far more exposed than any other country (say like Germany which maintains a strong SME industry). As people lost their jobs, and we bailed out the financial sector the deficit ballooned, we weren't living beyond our means, we were simply too exposed, thanks in part also to light touch regulation (Osbourne was calling for more deregulation beforehand if you remember).

We're not a poor country, private wealth in this country has never been higher, £7 trillion, wealth inequality has never been higher either and this is the reason were having such issues with growth and deficit reduction. The fact that the top earners contribute 30% of tax revenue is a huge problem, not something to boast about as the Tories keep doing. A huge amount of money is being withheld from the real economy. Start ups, and even long established companies simply cannot get the investment they need to expand to create more jobs, this is where the state needs to step in.

The 'good times' under Constervative and New Labour were built on a fib, it required unsustainable amounts of private debt, the subsidising of companies through tax credits, and the madness of subsidising private landlords rather than building social housing. It also required a large amount of people circulating through unemployment, in a job - on the dole for 6 months - in a job - repeat (there are only 2000 families with two generations out of work, and those out of work for more than 2 years has only skyrocketed after the crash) this kept wages low, as full employment allows for much stronger bargaining power.

So if our country is so rich, whats there to do about it? Well actually crack down on tax evasion and avoidance, currently HRMC have 3000 people investigating benefit fraud, but only 300 people investigating tax evasion which represents 170 times the loss than benefit fraud. a 5% one off wealth tax on the very richest in this country would eliminate the deficit for a year, allowing that money to spent on investing in new jobs. Full employment with well payed productive workers paying tax will pay off the deficit quicker than the massive shift to low pay and no pay weve seen.

Anyway I've gone on too much, sorry about that, I probably havn't explained the position too well as there is a hell of a lot of factors to it. If you're interested in seeing another side than the Austerity narritive I recommend two books which will explain it a lot better than me.
Richistan by Robert Frank shows how trickle down economics is a fantasy, and also shows an insight into how the other half live, really well written, a bit like an American Louis Theroux -

And Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein, which was published not long after the crash, and explains scarily presciently the ideological underpinning to Austerity, as well as the roots of neoliberalism.

Edit Sorry, missed off a point about taking over industry etc costing money. Things like the railway you can simply allow the franchises to pass, or allow the Nationalised East Coast company to bid on the other franchises. Things like Water, or industry you want to support, you simply swap their shares for government bonds, it doesnt cost anything, and the shareholders get a secure longterm invetment, everyone wins.

u/LibertarianSoup · 1 pointr/Libertarian

>Sorry you keep saying that free markets are not capitalism. I do not know of other people who share that definition of capitalism.

  • Harvard Academics

  • Progressives

  • Anarchists

  • Leftists

  • Authors at Capitalism Magazine

  • Left-Libertarians

  • Conservatives

  • Libertarians

  • Marxists

    Every single one of these links describes just how integral the government and government intervention is to functioning capitalism.

    >Free market capitalism is a form of capitalism, not the system we have in the total sense of the word, but it is a form of capitalism.

    Where has this existed?

    >Inequality has been shown to be reduced through government intervention within capitalist economic systems. This is not to speak of other systems that do away with capitalism.

    No, it hasn't.

    >You keep saying that government invention has increased income inequality, but I would like evidence of that.

    I have linked you several articles and an entire book that describes this.

    >What I have never understood about AnCaps...

    I am not an AnCap, nor is the author of this article.

    My typical spiel regarding "capitalism"
u/RustyCoal950212 · 0 pointsr/Destiny

> by reality i mean everyone who's not on reddit with an economics major that's about to get switched to communications, trying to trigger people who read books


u/thebrightsideoflife · 0 pointsr/politics

>But there's a huge difference in deficit spending to....

errrrr... NO.

There are different "crisis" excuses that will come from either side:

  • OMFG!!! Terrorists are coming!! (so the Republicans and Democrats get together and pass The Patriot Act and fund two endless wars)

  • OMFG!!! Our economy.. NO, the ENTIRE FUCKING WORLD economy is going to collapse!!! We must give money to the banks!!! (so the Republicans and Democrats get together and pass TARP)

  • OMFG!!! People are going to lose their houses and their jobs!!! States are going to go bankrupt!!! Poor people are going to suffer!!! We MUST borrow a bunch of money and hand it out (to government agencies.. and wealthy contractors.. and to people who will then hand it to the banks..)! (so the Republicans and Democrats get together and pass the Stimulus)

    ... and on and on.

    If you think that bullshit has ended with Obama and he's suddenly going to be more fiscally responsible than the other clowns who have been in the White House recently then you're sadly mistaken. A government that can print it's own money out of thin air will continue to grow with every new crisis.
u/antonius_block · 0 pointsr/AskHistorians

I highly recommend Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine for more details on the historical role of the US in South America (and beyond) during Op Condor.

u/itsWEDNESDAYmydoodes · 0 pointsr/CryptoCurrency
u/OB1-knob · 0 pointsr/politics

I appreciate that you're coming at this with an open mind and asking reasonable questions. That's a great start.

The problem is that you've "listening" to the people on the right instead of reading a variety of material. There's way too much background manipulation going on in right-wing media, and what it does is create urgency and rage to open up your limbic brain (the part that controls feelings) to attach emotion to what the speakers are saying to your neocortex (the part that processes reason and language).

This is how marketing works. It's how branding messages bypass our rational thought and make us identify with the brand. It becomes a part of us. It's how commercials are designed to make you want that brand of fast food right now.

By reading, you use your rational brain to decide what you agree or disagree with. I personally feel that if the right had any actual good ideas they wouldn't have to resort to this kind of propaganda technique (Rush Limbaugh's drive-time-rage-show), gerrymandering, vote suppression and election voodoo, and other kinds of dirty tricks.

If they can't compete on a level playing field in the battle of ideas, then their ideas are simply too weak. They had 9 years to replace ObamaCare, so where is it? It doesn't exist because they lied to you. They never wanted a better plan at all.

If you want to understand the reality of what's going on today, stop listening to these talking heads and read Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine, Al Gore's The Assault On Reason and Sam Harris's The End Of Faith.

These three books are excellent primers to understand the issues facing us today, how we got here and where we need to go.

u/fifteencat · -2 pointsr/Economics

Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine looks at how Friedman's economic theories have actually played out when put to the test. What he says sounds plausible. But the real world doesn't conform to his plausible sounding theories.

u/El_Arabe_ARG · -3 pointsr/argentina

Tu fuente es una zurda, maestro, menos objetivo no tenias?

Perdón, es una zurda anticapitalista que tiene sus libros en venta en Amazon, adquieralo a menos de 15 USD, o en sus versiones en kindle, audiolibro, CD, paperback o hardcover.

The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism



Pick one again.