Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine II : The Challenges it Poses

2 posts / 0 new
Last post
George Victor
Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine II : The Challenges it Poses

*

George Victor

The last thread was terminated with this question unanswered:

 

500_Apples wrote:George, I don't think there is such a thing as opting out of capitalism. By participating in this economy, whether we buy gas, food, magazines, et cetera we contribute to global imperialism. When the government forces you to pay taxes, you help finance the war in Afghanistan. Yes, our savings, our spendings, and our investments are used to further the political agenda we oppose.

 

 

my question: "do you think that if we managed our wealth, properly, the neo-con would not be able to rack up majorities at election time by appealing to everyone's fear of economic mismanagement?

 To repeat my central question from three years back...aren't our savings being used to further the very political agenda we hate?"

 

I tried to be very specific with that question, 500 Apples. Don't know where your idea that I'm proposiing "opting out" came from. It's old Karl's "surplus value" that we have to capture and use - very judiciously - to rescue ourselves from the pickle we're in. Don't leave the insurance companies to collect the premiums and invest them with only the maximizing of returns, in mind.

 

But another question...what do you think of Krugman's extension of Klein's ideas to explain conservatism's continuing destructin of social agencies, the further privatization of the world? Does it not fit?

 

(ah yes, that's from this link in the last thread) :

Shock Doctrine, U.S.A.
By PAUL KRUGMAN

"Madison, Wis., is looking a lot like Baghdad in 2003, with government officials exploiting fiscal crises for fun and profit."

(Perhaps you could let the suspense build a bit before offering the "CIA explanation,"  Fidel?  : )