I’m up insanely early due to whining dogs and screeching cats, so to keep the anger suppressed I’m searching for a little literary news this morning.

• The Guardian has a lengthy piece that has writers and other literary types picking a few of their favourite books of the year. I sifted through to find some poetry titles I might be interested in getting my hands on.
• Siblin and Brown are up for the 2010 National Award for Canadian Non-fiction.
• Naomi Klein has a new book in the works called No Logo. This piece does a brief overview of it. I put this here merely because my wife is reading The Shock Doctrine now and I’m paging through it every now and then.
• A lovely overview of a Welsh/British form of verse called the englyn. Kind of like the haiku, only cooler. Makes me want to try some of these.
• The National Post has a list of some historically inspired books you might find interesting. I’ve got the first of these on the shelf ready to go, if I can ever get to it.

Paul Bremer: The Thief of Baghdad

This week there was yet another terrible attack in Iraq.  I have to say previously I’ve struggled to understand what’s going on in the country, mainly because I am, and I dare say so are most Brits and Americans, pretty ignorant of Iraqi history and culture.  This was one of the reasons I didn’t think the Iraq war was a very good idea at all.  However, reading the chapters on Iraq in Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine have been enlightening.  You don’t have to be an expert in history, or Arab culture, or economics, or anything for that matter to see what is happening there.

It’s often been said the war in Iraq was all about oil.  That’s not even the half of it.  What the American government did to Iraq was nothing short of mugging on a national scale.  When the Americans took control through the CPA, all of Iraq’s 200 state run industries and factories were sold off – almost exclusivly to American companies.

Were Iraqis consulted about this?  Were they fuck.  As we all know Bush made plenty of noble statements about bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq and defeating Al Qaeda – all in the nice, tedious English we’d expect from such a simpleton.  What actually happened was far from democratic and actually contributed to a rise in religious extremism.

As Klein points out, in May 2003 Paul Bremer was installed as essentially a temporary dictator of Iraq and given power of decree.  What he said became law.  There were no elections before this, no referenda.  Amongst his decrees (which I’m sure he took in the Iraqis best interests) was to sell off all the public factories to American businesses.  Furthermore, these businesses were given the right to take 100% of their profits out of Iraq and then they were made exempt from Iraqi law.  Bremer also fired the entire civil service and removed price controls from essential items.

Klein points out that all of these measures are part of a economic shock doctrine established at the University of Chicago that has since been applied in many countries including Chile and Russia and, to a lesser extent, the UK.  The reasoning behind it is that only capitalist markets completely free from government control can succeed.  Of course, the shock doctrine’s measure of success is how rich the richest people get (in this case all American) and to hell with the poorer locals and it should by no means be applied voluntarily – you have to use violence to force it on people.  To put it simply, what the American government did to Iraq was violent theft.

So let’s look at it from an Iraqi’s point of view: assuming you survived the initial onslaught of the war, you go to work and find your factory has been taken over by an American company.  They promptly fire you in order to maximize profits in the country that just bombed you.  You go home and realise that you cannot afford to eat because price controls have been abolished.  You have no running water or electricity because there are no laws to make the American companies that run them do their job.  Have you voted for any of this?  No.  It’s not hard to see why so many violent extremists have cropped up.

Of course since Bremer there have been elections but this is of little practical importance since the Americans ensured Bremer’s decrees were irreversible.  Klein also alleges in her book that American companies hired to run local elections rigged results (349).  How do you think the Iraqi’s felt about all of this?

With this sort of anger on the streets Bremer made his most foolish decision: he fired the whole army.  The soldiers left their jobs and took their guns with them.

It cannot be a coincidence that the Justice Ministry was targeted this week.  Iraq’s legal system has been set up to benefit the American companies who stole everything of value from Iraq.  It wouldn’t surprise me if the bombers used weapons belonging to the old Iraqi army.

It’s said Al Qaeda linked organizations (there’s a whole article I could write on why that description is bullshit) took responsibility for the mass murder at the Justice Ministry.  If these organization existed before the invasion in Iraq they must have had very little support and certainly not enough to be capable of such outrages.  Certain Iraqis have simply done what people always do when they feel betrayed by the people running their country – turn to extremism.  If the American government’s aim was to bring democracy to Iraq they had a funny way of doing it and if it was to reduce the influence of mass murdering muslims then maybe they shouldn’t have plundered the country so blatantly.  Surely we can all understand this?

Dating-Down:
“By this I don’t mean dating a guy who’s less successful—a woman could earn quadruple her guy’s income and as long as he treats her well, I’m all for it. But if you’ve ever said what Rachel said to me recently—’I just have to learn not to expect so much, emotionally’ —you are in danger. If you make excuses for him, like ‘I wouldn’t want a guy who’s too romantic’, then you’re dating down too.”

————————————————————————————————————————-

Met with a friend today and realized how infectious passionate people are. He just came back from Ghana, now interns at City Hall and works part-time for the World Wild Life Fund. On top of that he’s dealing with a 15 million dollar budget working for the student union and keeping up with world events. The boy is definitely on his way to law school –this, I know. His interest in human-rights is contagious.

We talked Noam Chomsky, books, capitalism, Marxism, Barack Obama, media, IMF, travels… Into the BMV where he picked up The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy and I picked up The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein… Developing the Philippines, identity crisis, his new long-distance University of Victoria second-year law-student girlfriend… dot dot dot…NO BIG DEAL!

I am happy for this friend of mine. His tales of Ghana and of the miracles which occurred there led to a conversation about discovering ourselves… And today I’ve discovered such: NO, I could never have such heavy, socio-economic-based conversations on a daily basis. But
YES, I am sometimes passionate about these things…

YES, people date-down for one reason or another, and YES they’re all around me… But NO (like my friend Michael who has stayed so committed to his standards and so unabashedly true to being himself) I don’t think I could ever do it. As I’m sure he would agree, being ‘unabashedly true to myself’ in the end, is so worth it.

————————————————————————————————————————-

“Here’s what I’ve got to say: Relationships aren’t supposed to suck. You deserve to be loved, to be paid attention to, to gaze across the room, see your boyfriend and think, ‘God, am I lucky to be with that guy’, and know he’s thinking the same about you.

As I write this, I realize that I myself have been the loser boyfriend. When I was dating a woman I’ll call Alison a few years ago, I still had some growing up to do. One night she was trying to talk about how our relationship might be more satisfying for both of us if we communicated better. And I actually asked her, ‘Can we talk about this during the commercials? 24’s on now.’ I wanted the sex and the companionship that came with having a girlfriend—but not the work. I wish now that Alison had told me to go home and watch my own TV, but instead she sighed and said, ‘OK.’ While my behavior was never her fault, she might have been surprised at what a good kick in the ass would have done for me. Luckily the next few women I dated gave me just that, and I shaped up considerably. That’s why I say this to my future girlfriend, whoever she may be: If you want me to be an excellent boyfriend, accept nothing less.”

I’m beginning to see striking similarities between the opponents of free-market capitalism and the opponents of evolution: They both make nonsensical claims and build straw men to try to make the object of their dislike appear silly or even dangerous.  For the anti-evolutionists, the quintessential (and flawed) argument goes something like this: “I can accept small adaptive changes, but those small changes can’t add up to a new species.”

And then there are the opponents of free-market capitalism like Naomi Klein, who enunciates in her book The Shock Doctrine the fundamental tenet of her collectivist philosophy: “I can accept that free markets work, but not for poor people.”

Ms. Klein’s main thesis – that an exploitative form of corporatism that she calls capitalism has been forcefully, and often bloodily, shoehorned into the lives of poor, unsuspecting ethnic people over the last several decades – has some merit.  But Ms. Klein seems to suffer from a congenital and quite common need to conflate free-market capitalism with corporatism.

I would direct Ms. Klein (and her intellectual peers) to Ayn Rand’s definition of capitalism: Separation of Economy and State.  The corporations that these collectivists have so many problems with have no power on their own.  None.  If they exist in a rational nation with objective laws, then they’re only as powerful as the product or the service they provide.  It is only through government intervention and/or criminal behavior that a corporation is able to exploit anyone.  In a true free-market capitalist society, only the criminals would get away with this – and then only when they could evade the legitimate law.  Needless to say, criminals have always been part of every society, and they always will be.  Free-market capitalism doesn’t breed a greater number of them.

In her book, Ms. Klein came up with the usual moaning about wealth disparity and crony capitalism.  She described what capitalism has done to the Chinese people while omitting the fact that in the last decade, since the post-crisis “free-market takeover” she so reviles, roughly 150 million Chinese have been lifted out poverty.  Her caterwauling is definitely nothing new.

Several times in the book, however, Ms. Klein made amazing statements such as, “At least under communism, everyone had a job” when speaking about the history of countries like Poland and Russia.  Yes, the unemployment rates in communist countries are always zero.  It worked wonderfully in Russia and Poland, didn’t it?

Anyone can create a job out of nothing.  If Washington wanted to, they could reduce the unemployment rate in America to zero overnight by handing everyone a government job.  The question is, Who’s paying for it?  Is it sustainable?  What happens when the money runs out?

But that’s the problem.  That’s what Ms. Klein and those like her can’t seem to understand.  In her book, she stated what she believes is the “core free-market promise – that increased wealth will be shared.”

Since when was that the core free-market promise?  I’m pretty sure Milton Freidman never claimed that the implementation of his ideas would lead to wealth being shared.  The point, Ms. Klein, is that no one should be forced to share.  The point is that you have to earn increased wealth.  The core free-market promise is that you’ll get the opportunity to earn as much wealth as you want.  The opportunity; no more, no less.

Sábado 26 de septiembre. Acabó el Festival de Cine de San Sebastián. El cansancio y el desconcierto doméstico impidieron ese último día que fuera a ver aquellas películas que por recomendación o por sensación estomacal pasaron a engrosar mi lista must-see.

La primera de ellas, ‘Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire’ de Lee Daniels, película que puse a parir en su día por motivos que ya contaré en otro post, pero que, tras oír comentarios varios, despertó en mí bastante interés. Ganó el premio del público en Donosti, con una puntuación brutal, pero mi ansia por verla surgió sobre todo cuando me enteré que ganó en Toronto (allí, el premio principal lo da el propio público), y es que este festival nos descubre año tras año grandes películas que logran gustar tanto a público, evidentemente, como a crítica, que no es poco. ‘Slumdog Millionaire’, ‘Eastern Promises’, ‘American Beauty’ o ‘Wo hu cang long’ (‘Tigre y Dragón’) han sido algunas de las ganadoras en Toronto estos últimos años. Convencido estoy de que ‘Precious’ será un bombazo, que como ‘Slumdog…’ arrasará en festivales y en los certámenes que son antesala de los Oscar (Golden Globe, BAFTA, Independent Spirit Awards) y, por supuesto, será la película independiente que todos los años se cuela como candidata a mejor película en los Oscar, como pasó con la propia ‘Slumdog…’, ‘Juno’ y ‘Little Miss Sunshine’.

Segunda película que se me quedó en el tintero: ‘Blessed’ de Ana Kokkinos. Película australiana que compitió en la sección oficial. Antes de que le dieran el premio al mejor guión en el Zinemaldi, este post en Blog de Cine ya había despertado mi curiosidad. Una pena no haberla visto porque al contrario que ‘Precious’, que no tengo dudas de que llegará a nuestras pantallas, la australiana probablemente no tenga la misma suerte. Espero equivocarme.

Las otras dos películas pertenecen a dos habituales del Zinemaldi. La primera de ellas, ‘The Shock Doctrine’ de Michael Winterbottom y Mat Whitecross. Winterbottom repitió de nuevo este año, tras haber competido el año pasado con ‘Genova’ (y haber ganado con ella la Concha de Plata al mejor director). Este año trajo un documental sobre el capitalismo neoliberal que provoca desastres naturales, guerra y terror para establecer su dominio. Tiene pinta de ser muy interesante, didáctico y revelador.

Y la otra habitual del festival, quien sino una de las hermanas Makhmalbaf, Hana en este caso, con su nueva película ‘Green Days’, que refleja las ansias de libertad que se respiraban en Irán previas a las elecciones presidenciales de este año y la desilusión y las protestas posteriores tras la derrota sufrida por el partido reformista debida a posibles irregularidades en el proceso de votación. Una muy buena oportunidad para observar de cerca parte de la realidad actual iraní. Espero verla dentro de poco.

Por cierto, curiosa la relación de estas hermanas con el festival. Hace dos años Hana ganó el Premio Especial del Jurado con ‘Buda as sharm foru rikht’ (‘Buda explotó por vergüenza’), cuando tan solo contaba con 19 años, película absolutamente recomendable, con una mocosa protagonista que nos tiene en vilo durante toda la historia en su odisea por conseguir el material necesario para acudir a una escuela en Afganistán. Y el año pasado, Samira, la hermana mayor, ganó el mismo premio con su ‘Asbe du-pa’ (‘El caballo de dos piernas’). Por cierto, Samira ha formado parte del jurado oficial de este año.

Cerradas las puertas del Kursaal por este año, al menos nos queda el consuelo de la Semana de Cine Fantástico y de Terror y, por qué no, los festivales de Valladolid y de Gijón. Quizás allí tengamos oportunidad de ver algunas de estas cuatro películas.

“En af de mest indflydelsesrige personer i verden under 35 år.”  The Times

Jeg husker da den canadiske aktivist og forfatter, Naomi Kleins bestseller bog No Logo udkom i 2000, og få år senere da hun besøgte København til en paneldebat med bla Frederik Preisler, direktør i Propaganda Reklame. Vi var en lille arkitektdelegation der havde forladt tegnebordene på Arkitekskolen for en eftermiddag – Anders Sælan (HLA), Jesper Reiter (EMA), Thomas Christoffersen (BIG) og undertegnede.

Kleins hovedbudskab var, at økonomien i Vesten i dag er baseret på at skabe brands frem for produkter, og at dette har negative konsekvenser for den 3. verdens levevilkår samt for den vestlige verdens værdier. Det var fantastisk dengang, at høre en personlighed der skar dybt ind i den vestlige forbrugerkultur  - man næsten skammede sig over at man selv kun tegnede streger. Det var bæredygtighed før det fik et navn!

Siden dengang har hendes budskaber taget fart og har haft så stor opmærksomhed, at den engelske avis The Times har kaldt Naomi Klein for “en af de mest indflydelsesrige personer i verden under 35 år.”

The Take (87 min), 2004
Naomi´s næste projekt blev filmen The Take, som har sit omdrejningspunkt i Argentinas økonomiske kollaps i 2001. I løbet af en nat lukkede landet ned og pengene forsvandt – firmaer lukkede og den lille arbejder var ladt i stikken.
Men en ny slags bevægelse tog langsomt form. Arbejderne fandt sammen under sloganet: “Occupy, Resist, Produce”. Indtog de aflåste fabrikker, bekæmpede lovmagten og genstartede selv produktionen…og et nyt liv! Se hele filmen her, Online!

“The Shock Doctrine – The only book of the last few years in American publishing that I would describe as a mandatory must-read. Literally the only one.” Rachel Maddow

The Shock Doctrine, 2008 - hent som PDF
Sidste år gjorde hun det så igen. Endnu en bog der rammer spot-on. The Shock Doctrine undersøger myten om at det globale frie marked er en demokratisk sejr. Hun går tæt på grundtanke, pengestrømme og bagmændene bag de skiftende kriser og krige som verden har oplevet i de sidste fire årtier. Og det er virkelig en gribende historie om, hvordan USA’s “frie” markedspolitik er kommet til at dominere verden gennem udnyttelse af katastrofe-chokerede mennesker og lande.

Why I Was So Wrong on September 11th:

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/09/why-i-was-so-wrong-september-11th

— By Tom Engelhardt

Hoping for Our Better Selves

Eight disastrous years later, I suddenly understand that day so much better, thanks to Rebecca Solnit, whom 9/11 indirectly sent my way offering hope in dark times. Now, she’s returned with her latest book, A Paradise Built in Hell, which capsizes our most basic sense of what disaster is all about, humanly speaking.

As befits an author who has written a guidebook to getting lost, she is bold beyond belief and her originality matches that boldness. And here’s the thing: if you take a journey into disaster with her (9/11 being but one of the many disasters she explores in the book), you won’t get lost. You’ll find yourself. You’ll find ourselves, our better selves, even in catastrophe.

Think of Paradise as the perfect companion volume to Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine. Klein explained how governments try to take advantage of disasters to optimize their power and wealth (and that of their cronies); Solnit explains what ordinary people in disasters regularly do for themselves. They don’t, as we have been taught, run screaming from danger. They head for the smoke, pedaling hard, and then, without the help of governments, they begin to organize. They become, briefly, their better selves. So here’s a thought: Maybe it was the lack of the actual experience of 9/11 that left the rest of America so vulnerable when the Bush administration led them toward their lesser selves.

Subcomandante Marcos and Naomi Klein

My partner and I settled down to watch The Shock Doctrine on E4 last night. Based on Naomi Klein’s book – which I haven’t read – the film focused on military enforced capitalism, as practiced in many parts of Latin America, Eastern Europe and in Iraq. I’m relatively well versed in neo-liberal global politics since World War II, but some of the arguments were fresh, and the conclusions shocking.

Like Klein’s earlier book, No Logo, the film ended with a kind of middle class ‘call to arms’ which steered the viewer away from despair.

I’ve read some of Subcomandante Marcos‘ stuff, which I bought to pass the time – and scare myself to silly- whilst my partner was in Mexico. Marcos is the most well known member of the Zapatista movement – and is surprisingly humorous but never the less an inspiring writer/speech maker. I was interested to find that Marcos and Klein met in Chiapas. www.naomiklein.org

“We learned a long time ago that we should never subject ourselves to the schedules of the powerful. We had to follow our own calendar and impose it on those above.” Subcomandante Marcos

Je vous rassure : au milieu, ce n’est pas moi.

Chers lecteurs,

Vous l’avez constaté, les billets s’espacent sur ce blog : c’est que ma vie a été fort mouvementée ces derniers temps. Après un printemps cinématographique à Berlin, je passe un été théâtral à Paris. Trois mois sur les planches, ça se prépare avec beaucoup de travail, et c’est plutôt coton, les amis.

Alors, peut-être à bientôt, et en attendant, bonnes vacances, et une saine lecture que je vous recommande sur la plage – ou ailleurs :

The Shock Doctrine de Naomi Klein

La critique bientôt sur le blog…

Et puis, en septembre, quelques interviews d’auteurs pour la rentrée littéraire!

No, I’m not talking about the endless loop of Journey coming from the frat across the street again.  While music is usually a positive thing, unfortunately our military and intelligence agencies have decided to use it against “enemy combatants” in the war on terror.  The Society for Ethnomusicology, the professional association of ethnomusicologists, condemned this practice in 2007.  It took the American Musicological Society (the equivalent for musicologists) until 2008 to get around to taking a stand but hey, better late than never.

It’s been known for a while that American pop music has been projected into battlefields and used in torture chambers to get suspects to crack–both by offending their morals and/or aesthetic taste.  It’s usually part of a more sinister and well-honed torture method (laid out in chilling detail in Naomi Klein’s 2007 book The Shock Doctrine, which I’m only now getting around to reading), in which our spooks (or, you know, other countries’ spooks that we subcontract) first deprive prisoners of any sensory input and then flood them with stimulus in the form of strobe lights, electroshocks and loud music.  This causes prisoners to regress to a childlike state, lose aspects of their memories and become extremely vulnerable to the power of suggestion–which is how torturers get confessions out of these guys.

That’s where this list from Mental Floss via the WSJ comes in.  The CIA’s top choices?

1) Bruce Springsteen, “Born in the USA.” I really don’t like Springsteen either–I think it’s the terrible drum machine.  I hope that doesn’t make me a suspected terrorist.

2) Christina Aguilera, “Dirrty.” Apparently the interrogators chose this one because its sexual content would offend the moral views of some of the stricter Muslim suspects.  I hadn’t seen this video in a while–I forgot about those horrendous assless chaps she used to wear.  Remember when she came on the scene in the late 90s and she was the classy one out of all the teen pop stars (which she kind of is again given the Britney trainwreck)?  Like, my grandma bought me the album with “Genie in a Bottle” on it.

3) Nancy Sinatra, “These Boots Were Made for Walking.” I mean, it’s not the greatest song ever, but I don’t think I’d crack after listening to it for a long time (except for maybe that part where the bass line sounds like the bassist is just slowly detuning the instrument…).

4) AC/DC, “Shoot to Thrill” and “Hells Bells.” I dislike AC/DC so much that I am refusing to embed the clips.  Take that, Gitmo.

5) Barry Manilow’s oeuvre (so to speak). I will let this quote from the article speak for itself:

The New Zealand town of Christchurch recently blasted the crooner’s tunes throughout their central mall district to drive away the local punks who had been littering the area with graffiti, drinking in public and doing drugs.

I wonder how it feels to be the entire world’s punchline.

6) Barney the Dinosaur, “I Love You.” Given that 90s nostalgia is apparently au courant right now, just watch this clip and party like it’s 1993 (and you’re at preschool).  Note the dramatic half-step modulation around 0:31.

Che cos’hanno in comune l’Iraq dopo l’invasione americana, lo Sri-Lanka post-tsunami, New Orleans dopo l’uragano Katrina, le dottrine ultraliberiste della Scuola di Chicago e alcuni esperimenti a base di elettroshock finanziati negli anni Cinquanta dal governo americano? Secondo Naomi Klein, l’idea che sia utile cancellare un intero tessuto sociale per costruire da zero un’utopia, quella dell’ultraliberismo. L’autrice denuncia un capitalismo di conquista che sfrutta cinicamente i disastri.

Da una intervista all’autrice

N. K- Narratore : C’è una cosa che ho imparato durante i miei studi relativi alle condizioni  di shock. La natura di uno shock, è per definizione uno stato temporaneo. Il migliore dei modi, per resistere allo shock, è stare a vedere cosa ti sta succedendo e perchè.

Ri-fare  le persone, sconvolgerle per ridurle  all’obbedienza. Questa è la storia  di una travolgente idea. Nel 1950 ha catturato l’attenzione della CIA. L’agenzia ha finanziato una serie di esperimenti. Su di loro è stato prodotto un manuale  segreto su come “abbattere” la volontà dei prigionieri. La chiave è stata quella di utilizzare lo shock per ridurre gli adulti alla stregua di un bambino.

In riferimento ai manuali di interrogatorio della CIA del 1963 e il 1983 .

L’  ipotesi fondamentale di questo manuale è che queste tecniche  sono in sostanza i metodi per indurre la regressione della personalità. L’esperienza degli interrogatori  permette di riconoscere questo effetto quando appare e si sa che è  in questo momento che il soggetto è molto più disponibile ad essere suggestionato e a preferire e rispettare ciò che gli si dice rispetto a quanto avrebbe fatto poco prima di subire lo shock.

Ma queste tecniche non sono praticate solo sui singoli individui. Esse possono trovare applicazione su tutta la società. Un trauma collettivo, una guerra, un colpo di stato, una catastrofe naturale, un attentato terroristico, mette tutti in uno stato di shock. E in seguito, come il prigioniero,  nella camera dell’ interrogatorio, anche noi diventiamo come bambini, e più inclini a seguire i leader che sostengono di proteggerci.
Una persona che ha creduto fin dalle prime fasi  in questo fenomeno è stato il più famoso economista della nostra epoca, Milton Friedman. Friedman ha creduto in una sua applicazione radicale alla società in cui il profitto e il mercato regola ogni aspetto della vita, dalla scuola alla sanità, e anche all’esercito. Ha chiesto di abolire tutte le protezioni sugli scambi, liberalizzando i prezzi, i servizi e i servizi di controllo governativo. Queste idee sono sempre state estremamente impopolari, ed è comprensibile. Esse  provocano ondate di disoccupazione, producono impennate dei prezzi, rendono la vita più precaria per milioni di persone. Impossibile discutere e far avanzare con loro un ordine del giorno, democraticamente, Friedman e i suoi discepoli sono figure del potere dello shock.

Il soggetto deve essere immediatamente strappato da dove si trova,  bendato  e ammanettato. In questo momento,quando viene arrrestata la maggior parte dei soggetti fa esperienza di sentimenti di shock, di estrema insicurezza, e stress psicologico. L’idea è quella di evitare al soggetto il  rilassamento e il recupero dallo shock.

Friedman ha capito che, così come i prigionieri sono ammorbiditi  a causa dello shock della loro cattura, per l’interrogatorio, lo shock dei disastri potrebbe servire per ammorbidire la gente fino ad accettare la sua massiccia  radicale crociata per il libero mercato . Ha informato i politici che immediatamente dopo una crisi , loro dovrebbero spingere  attraverso una serie di azioni dolorose, intese  come polizze contro la capacità di riacquistare lucidità fiducia in se stessi da parte della gente.

Ha chiamato questo metodo “trattamento shock economici”. Io la chiamo “LA DOTTRINA DELLO SHOCK”.

Traduzione di fernirosso

Naomi Klein: Shock economy

E’ recentemente arrivato sugli scaffali delle librerie italiane l’ultimo lavoro di Naomi Klein, autrice di No Logo. Si intitola Shock economy. L’ascesa del capitalismo dei disastri ed è edito da Rizzoli.

Il testo “smonta il mito del trionfo pacifico e democratico dell’economia di mercato”: dalla guerra all’Iraq all’uragano Katrina che ha devastato New Orleans, la Klein ci parla della dottrina che sfrutta il disorientamento pubblico che segue grandi shock collettivi (guerre, attacchi terroristici, catastrofi naturali) per imporre misure economiche impopolari e antidemocratiche, come racconta anche The Shock Doctrine, cortometraggio di Alfonso Cuaron e della stessa Klein presentato al Festival di Venezia.

L’introduzione del libro è disponibile sul sito di Rizzoli mentre, per chi ha confidenza con l’inglese, il Guardian ne ha pubblicato quattro estratti nelle ultime settimane: The Shock Doctrine, The age of disaster capitalism, The erasing of Iraqe Why failure is the new face of success.

Sito di riferimento :

http://www.booksblog.it/post/1917/naomi-klein-shock-economy

*

Se quanto è accaduto in Argentina è stata la riprova tecnica per mettere in scena e in atto tutto lo spettacolo seguente, bisogna anche ricordare che, in quel paese, le cose hanno avuto una svolta diversa, di cui non parlano i media nazionali e non viene diffusa da tempo alcuna  notizia.

All’alba del clamoroso quanto ampiamente previsto crollo economico dell’Argentina nel 2001, la classe media del Paese si ritrova in un paesaggio fantasma fatto di fabbriche abbandonate e disoccupazione di massa. Alla periferia di Buenos Aires, un gruppo composto da trenta ex operai di una fabbrica di parti meccaniche per automobili, la Forja San Martin. Martin, entrano nella fabbrica e la occupano. La Forja San Martin è fallita a causa del suo stesso proprietario, amico di Carlos Menem e poco attento ai bisogni sociali e salariali dei suoi operai, e tutto ciò che gli operai vogliono è far ripartire la produzione, ispirati dal successo delle analoghe iniziative nella fabbrica tessile Brukman e della fabbrica di ceramiche Zanon in Patagonia. Gli operai iniziano un braccio di ferro con banchieri, avvocati, giudici, creando una rete di mobilitazione tra il movimento degli occupanti.
L’atto di riappropriarsi autonomamente del diritto al lavoro ha il valore di uno sconvolgimento alla struttura stessa della globalizzazione.Il regista e produttore Avi Lewis con sua moglie Naomi Klein, autrice del libro manifesto No Logo, portano gli spettatori all’interno di questa lotta, il cui fine ultimo è quello del recupero della dignità. Il documentario, dal contenuto energico e pregnante, è stato presentato alla sessantunesima Mostra d’Arte Cinematografica di Venezia.
Naomi Klein:
In Argentina 200 fabbriche sono state riprese dai loro operai. È incredibile. E questo fenomeno è stato quasi completamente ignorato dai media. Nessuno parla del fatto che i partiti di sinistra hanno preso il potere in America Latina, che il neoliberismo è stato
rifiutato ovunque. Guardate ciò che accade in Bolivia, in Venezuela, in Uruguay, Paesi dove si può parlare di presa del potere da parte del popolo.

http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2008/09/response-attacks

http://www.paidos.com/ficha.aspx?cod=45151

http://lavaca.org/seccion/actualidad/1/1619.shtml

East Timor is an interesting choice of topic, isn’t it?

Because East Timor is very dear to the heart of liberals.

In fact, there a ton of topics in the film that are normally associated with liberal Lefties:

• Mayan calendar
• Astrology
• Aspartame
• Nutrition
• Fluoride
• Paganism (because the narrator admits paganism can be used for good as well as evil)
• Kill your TV
• The environment having a harmony of its own (including acoustics)
• A reference to Naomi Klein’s book The Shock Doctrine (unnamed, but same subject matter)

That’s the first round of liberal references. They pause to show a long sequence of horrifying atrocities, from the Waco fire, which they say was an attack, not self-inflicted, to the Oklahoma City bombing to the Gulf War and sanctions. Again, you’re only allowed to think so much before you have to feel more?

But there’s another whole sequence of liberal references, including:

• Quantum physics
• Telepathy, clairvoyance, and other psychic phenomena
• Divine Intelligence (as opposed to God)
• “Consciousness shapes our reality” – also known as the book/movie The Secret
• Left-brain dominance, right-brain suppression
• Suppression of the feminine (which somehow “has nothing to do with man or woman” so they’re definitely not talking about feminists)
• Ruthless destruction of goddess societies (except the goddess is part of the evil New World Order plan? another little inconsistency in logic)
• Evolution (reference to the 100^th monkey)
• Chakras

But all of these topics are presented in such a short time with so little discussion (just a sentence or two per topic) that they don’t help at all with the emotions that were stirred up by the sequence of atrocities. All of this “information” isn’t very informative, so it just makes you confused. Which makes you more angry, and more desperate for a fast solution.

But the most important reason why all these liberal topics were included has to do with the Target Audience for this film.

Estimados, hoy les traigo 2 documentales de miedo. Son estos pocos instantes los que tenemos para darnos cuenta de lo que estamos pisando no es tierra, de lo que creemos no es lo que pensamos, sino lo que nos grabaron en el disco duro. Voy a tratar de ser lo mas objetivo posible en el comentario, anteniendome a las descripciones de cada autor respecto de su creación, claro que mi intención es que vean, aunque sea la sinopsis, para que se genere algo de conversación… o están todos de acuerdo con todo lo que se nos presenta? espero que no!

The Union: The Bussines Behind Getting High (sitio oficial TheUnionWeb ) es un documental canadiense que desentraña los misterios detrás  de la marihuana de British Columbia (supuestamente la mejor del mundo), explora sus distintas facetas y trata de responder las interrogantes que mas de alguna vez nos han apesumbrado (por que es ilegal?, riesgos reales para la salud?, usos alternativos?, efectividad de la regulación, creación de impuestos, etc..). Ha logrado ganarse varios premios como mejor documental o la elección del público en diversos festivales, pero espero esa no es la razón de su éxito, si no la mirada objetiva a un problema que lleva muchos tiempo siendo tabú y que debería tratarse abiertamente. Su director Brett Harvey, logra darle al toque humorístico que usa para contar el relato la seriedad que merece un tema con un trasfondo poco divertido, pero de efectos hilarantes. Muy explicativo en su forma de narración y bastante fundamentado en sus argumentos, este documental debió despertar conciencia el 2007, espero no sea tarde.

Para hablar de legalización, pros y contras del consumo, o simplemente aprender algo, les dejo el prewiew del documental para que se tienten. Si es así, descarguenlo desde aquí (con torrent) o vean el documental subtitulado al final del Post.

The Shock Doctrine (sitio oficial ShockDoctrine) es el libro que la periodista Naomi Klein escribe respecto de como el sistema capitalista de libre mercado ha influenciado en nuestras vidas y como nos comanda hoy de una manera antidemocrática. El como las altas esferas de poder manipulan lo que sucede en el planeta con tal de mantener este sistema y el control.

La canadiense Naomi Klein, una de las mas prestigiosas intelectuales del movimiento antiglobalización,  junto a Alfonso y Nicolás Cuarón nos muestran en un video de 7 minutos el resunen del libro de Klein, que creo mas de alguno ya devoró. Impactactante y controversial, Kleim es una figura que debate hoy hasta con el mismo Greenspan dado el alto revuelo que la palabra “crisis” tiene hoy en día. No del todo cierto, si loable en la forma de ampliar las libertades y mejorar la calidad y el sistema que manejamos, no lo desechen como una herejía y  mas concedan el tiempo de reflexión que merece.

Les dejo el video. Si quieren profundizar, Kleim junto a Avis Lewis crearon la película “La Toma” (aquí la pelicula con subtítulos LaToma) que narra la historia del cierre de una fabrica de autos en Argentina y como esta repercute en en otras ciudades del mundo, dejando que los propios protagonistas de la historia relaten el suceso y presentando soluciones al conflicto.

Antes de dejarles The Union subtitulado, les cuento que ciertos academicos creen que el rompecabezas que trata de resolver The Union tiene solución en el sistema atacado por Klein, o será otra forma de control?.

]]> http://thephoenixfalls.wordpress.com/2009/05/22/naomie-klain-on-rachel-maddow/ Fri, 22 May 2009 16:09:55 +0000 veecheck http://thephoenixfalls.wordpress.com/2009/05/22/naomie-klain-on-rachel-maddow/

I love Naomi Klein. I saw her speak about her book, “The Shock Doctrine,” in New Orleans. Now here she is speaking about the bailouts:

No me gusta ser paranóico ni mucho menos o mucho más, pero me llegaron dos correos que, fuera de ser verdad o mentira, dan que pensar. Supongo que a muchos de ustedes ya les han llegado éste tipo de correos y los hayan leido o no, pues quisiera comentar algo al respecto, además, de que me parece muy interesante los videos y links que les ofresco.

Quiero hacer énfasis en que sólo estoy emitiendo mi opinión sobre dichos corrreos. Creas o no en lo siguiente no es parte del problema, ni siquiera pretendo convencer a la gente, es más, ni siquiera estoy a favor o en contra.

Como todos hemos escuchado en correos, blogs y demás comentarios en Internet, se habla de que tooodo ésto de la Influenza es una cortina de humo -o chivo expiatorio, como se conoce comúnmente-, para ocultar ciertas actividades de nuestro gobierno. No citaré los correos que me enviaron, ya que considero que está fuera de lugar además de que puedo espantar a más de uno y exponerme a sonar sensacionalista.

Uno de los mensajes de correo, plantea un plan malévolo para endeudar al país . ¿Qué curioso que antes de la influenza el peso se recuperaba rápidamente frente al dólar y después de la influenza volvió a subir, verdad? Muchos me dirán, ¡Pero cómo no va a subir el dólar si toda la economía se paralizó como por una semana o mas! ¿Y quien me asegura que no es ese precísamente es el plan?

Cabe mencionar que durante los “días más fuertes de la epidemia” me llegaban mensajes de IUSACELL con consejos para prevenir la influenza. No usé tapabocas en todo este tiempo -más que en ocasiones en donde casi me obligaron a hacerlo, lo cual considero una grave falta a mis principios y derechos humanos-, y no me enfermé ni nadie de mi familia. Tampoco conozco a nadie que se haya enfermado de influenza. Ojo, no digo que el virus no exista, de hecho, creo que existe, pero o está bien controlado o incluso, fue liberado con intensión.

Ahora solventemos algunas cosas con noticias de sitios “serios” (lo pongo entre comillas porque al menos, lo considero sumámente más serio que ver las noticias de la TV, pero cada quien podrá emitir su opinión), como el periódico La Jornada:

• Formalizan préstamo a México del BM por mil 503.75 millones de dólares (2009-04-26)
• Créditos por 205 mdd para enfrentar epidemia (2009-04-27)
• La epidemia costará 1% del PIB y erosionará la ya frágil economía (2009-04-29)
• La influenza exacerba la volatilidad del tipo de cambio; podría llegar a $14.50 por dólar (2009-04-30)

Navegando por Internet me encuentro con éste documental, el cual ganó premios muy importantes (y que conste que es un documental hecho el año pasado, ¿eh?). Está largo, pero vale muchísimo la pena verlo. Zeitgeist: Addendum, es un documental hecho en el 2008 donde muestra estrategias de endeudamiento mediante gobiernos como el de Estados Unidos para inflar su moneda. Veanlo, está muy interesante. Me lo encontré navegando por ahí y desde el sitio del movimiento Zeistgeist.

En otro correo, me enviaron un link a un video que también es muy bueno, se trata de The Shock Doctrine, el cual habla sobre cómo ciertos sucesos bien estructurados hacen “cambios” importantes para una nación, pero esos cambios ¿A quién benefician? Vean el video, éste no es tan largo. En ese correo menciona las recientes aprobaciones del gobierno en materia de el consumo mínimo de drogas e intervenciones a la privacidad por medio de la Policía Federal en caso de que lo requiera.

• Aprueba el Senado dosis personal de droga y ley de combate al narcomenudeo. Milenio.com (2009-04-23)
• Con nueva ley, Policía Federal podrá intervenir en llamadas. SDPNoticias.com (2009-04-23)

De éstas dos noticias, la que más me alarma es la de la Policía Federal, o sea, ahora se pueden vestir de civiles, armados, entrar a tu casa, robarte, secuestrarte y mil cosas más y pueden escudarse en que “Es que estabamos investigando a una supuesta banda de narcotraficantes, ¿verdad pareja?”. Así o más inpunidad.

Ambos videos, tanto el de Zeitgeist: Addendum como The Shock Doctrine son muy interesantes y muy ad hoc. Como le comentaba a un compañero: “Una cosa es atacar abiertamente a Iraq y otra muy distinta atacar a México…”.

Llamenme alarmista, paranóico o como sea, pero sin importar como me llamen créen su propio criterio, no les digo que me crean a mi, para nada, es más ¡NO ME CREAN! Pero tampoco crean ciegamente en lo que la Televisión les dice. Es el medio de comunicación más corrupoto que exite y más en nuestro país. Investiguen, pregunten, lean, tomen conclusiones, pero no se dejen llevar por las masas.

¿Recuerdan El chupacabras y la crisis del 94? La matanza del 68 es la viva muestra histórica de lo que los medios pueden hacer.

She wrote The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.  I got a taste a few years ago when in was excerpted in Harper’s and then went and shelled out the hard-earned coin for my own copy.  It’s an awesome albeit thoroughly depressing read but you can’t have good news all the time (unless your name is Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush-truth be damned).  Anyhoo, pick up No Logo while you’re at it.  It’s just something grown-ups do…read books on disconcerting topics so they can become informed voters who demand better from their elected representation, for starters. 

Kein was on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show Wednesday night and she characterized the federal bank bailout as highway robbery…which it is.

La Influenza esta enfermedad que al parecer los medios de comunicación como la TV y el Estado están repitiendo el caso Influenza Asiática, por otra se esmeran por hacer denotar que la Influenza es algo distinto a la gripe cuando en realidad es lo mismo sólo que gripe es un termino en Francés mientras que Influenza en Italiano[1], existen otro par de cosas que son incongruentes:

La primera es que nos dijeron que este tipo de Influenza provenía del ganado porcino y la denominaron Influenza Porcina y con esto nos dijeron que el origen provenía de un poblado de Veracruz México por sus cantidad granjas Porcicultoras.

Hoy en día se sabe que este tipo de Influenza NO PROVIENE DEL GANADO PORCINO y por lo tanto la renombrado como “H1N1-A influenza Humana”.

Esto conlleva a la segunda ya que la pregunta seria realmente esta “pandemia” ¿proviene de esta población? o ellos solo son victimas de una acusación para sostener tal mentira, ya que el hecho que esta Influenza no provenga del ganado porcino refuta la mayor prueba de dicha acusación.

Existen un par de hipótesis las cuales nos explican este tipo de fenómenos catastróficos de las cuales rescato la de “The Sock Doctrine[2]” la cual nos dice que fenómenos como los sunamis[3] o incluso el 911 son provocados por las gobiernos e instituciones.

Ahora seria interesante preguntar la objetividad de estamos medios de comunicación, ¿serian capaz de ocasionarnos miedo para que entremos en sock?.

Muestro un vídeo: ¿que sentirías? si te repiten la palabra MIEDO, múltiples veces mientras te dicen que te tranquilices.

¿Que tan lejos puede llegar esto? pareciera como que estamos en una película de ciencia ficción sin embargo el estado de Shock es temporal y poco a poco eliminaremos este temor colectivo, por otra parte al parecer(si no se cambia) las universidades regresan a clase el día 7 y las escuelas de nivel básico el día 11 esto es importante ya que las escuelas son punta de lanza para la restablecer la vida económica pues al parecer la población esta sufriendo mas los estragos de la Influenza que la enfermedad misma[4] esto es otra contradicción ya que para detener una Influenza real[5] esto lleva meses e incluso puede tardar años.

¿Que podemos hacer? mantenernos informados esto es no esperar la información de los medios comunes, tener siempre un sentido critico de las cosas(cuestionar todo incluso este mismo post), hacer tu propio criterio.

Dejo un par de videos interesantes al respecto:

[1].-
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza

[2] .- La Canadiense
Naomi Klein  y su libro “The shock Doctrine” :

explora
el mito según el cual el mercado libre y global
triunfó democráticamente, y que el capitalismo sin
restricciones va de la mano de la democracia. Por el contrario, Klein
sostiene que ese capitalismo utiliza constantemente la violencia, el
choque, y pone al descubierto los hilos que mueven las marionetas
tras los acontecimientos más críticos de las últimas
cuatro décadas.

Demuestra
que el capitalismo emplea constantemente la violencia, el terrorismo
contra el individuo y la sociedad. Lejos de ser el camino hacia
la libertad, se aprovecha de las crisis para introducir impopulares
medidas de choque económico, a menudo acompañadas de
otras forma de shock no tan metafóricas: las torturas con
electroshocks o la picana en las celdas de las cárceles.

más
info: http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine/materiales-espanol

[3] .- Los terremotos
nucleares(bombas H)  provocados en Iran -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4288709.stm

mas informacion -
http://www.animalweb.cl/n_o_imperial/tsunami/bomba_h_y_tsunami.htm

[4] .- Día a día
en México mueren mas personas por enfermedades como la diarrea
o incluso el hambre la cual aumentara al detener el comercio con esta
influenza.

[5].- El caso mas
relevante de esto es la gripe española la cual la trajeron los
soldados al regresar de la primera guerra(también fue creada
por el hombre) la cual antes poder contener había matado a mas
personas que la guerra misma.

From London, Jonás Cuarón spoke to Excélsior on media coverage of the ongoing epidemic of influenza A (H1N1), a.k.a. swine flu, and the social crisis left in its wake.  The 28 y.o. filmmaker applied the concept of disaster capitalism, conceived by Canadian journalist and anti-globalisation activist Naomi Klein in her 2007 book The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. “I do not know whether the situation of influenza in Mexico is being utilised, but something similar did alert Naomi Klein about how such historical moments are used.   One example is the tsunami, where in the midst of human suffering in those countries were privatized beaches to hotel zones.” Cuarón also lamented on the closure of public arenas during the epidemic.  His debut feature film Año uña was set to release in his native country mid-May but its premiere has since been delayed to June.  Read more.

The son of director Alfonso Cuarón, Jonás first rose to internet fame as co-director of the six-minute companion film or book trailer The Shock Doctrine (2007).  Klein originally approached Alfonso who was busy working on post-production for Children of Men.  It was then Jonás began work on the project.  The film can be viewed online at BBC’s Film Network (which showcases up-and-coming UK filmmakers) and on YouTube.