The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism,   ISBN:9780312427993

Customer Rating: 

Naomi Klein gives a wealth of information from a far-left point of view which is all too seldom heard in the discussion of solutions to economic problems. Whether or not one agrees with her analysis, it should be clear to everyone that enriching the debate with more ideas is a good thing. Sadly, this seems to be the opposite of the case, and the responses to her book from right-wingers and even some who don't think of themselves as right-wingers shows that at least one idea in the book is absolutely right -- the free market disciples now are treating any ideas that differ from theirs as a pollution rather than healthy dissent. Obviously, this tendency is dangerous, and should be opposed even by people who feel closer to Friedman than Chomsky ideologically.

I agree with other reviewers who found the metaphor strained. I suspect that it was just the easiest way to sell the book (in a time when marketing departments make all the major decisions about the eventual form of a book, even a book like this can be twisted into strange postures). It is really a sustained and cogent criticism of the Washington Consensus, the history of the Chicago Boys in dismantling economies around the world and clearing the way for riches to flow into the coffers of a few wealthy individuals.

When one looks dispassionately at the facts (without the legerdemain of right-wingers, which always claims that if a left-wing government has economic growth, it was all due to the previous right-wing government, while if a right-wing government has growth, it is of course due to the right-wing government's policies -- and so on) -- if one looks at statistics, then, it seems clear that these policies immediately impoverished millions and made the poverty of the already poor markedly more intolerable.

The only argument in favor of these policies that remains is that in the long run, they have made the world richer. The trouble with this claim is that there is no way of testing its validity. Industrialization goes forward under both left and right wing governments. The likelihood is that the world would be much richer after the passage of all these years, with their attendant technological innovation and just the sheer work of billions creating capital goods -- factories, infrastructure, even education that is passed down from parent to child regardless of whether schools close. I think few people would argue that a pure Communist system would have done better economically. By stamping out mixed economies wherever they arise (except in the developed world, which obviously had a head start) the possibility of comparison has been lost. But the fact that countries like America and Germany experienced their years of greatest wealth under their most mixed, Keynesian, economies, should demonstrate that there is nothing essential wrong with the Keynesian model. Whatever else it may be, it is very far from a disaster; unless we think the 60s in America were a time of economic catastrophe.

Also, it troubles me that, while the most die-hard Western Commie will ritually apologize for Stalin's crimes and insist that the form of Communism she espouses is very very different from Stalin's -- right-wingers have absolutely no tears to shed for the people slaughtered under right-wing dictatorships. It's very easy for them, it seems, to accept mass death of their opponents. This is the best evidence that the dogmatic period -- the bloody period -- of their philosophy is still ongoing.

Customer Rating: 

The Shock Doctrine is a dangerous book for it may taint the minds of those who lack a basic knowledge of history and elementary economics. It may fool those who are naïve, those who take every written word for fact. I fear for a generation of young adults who will grow up on completely misconstrued propaganda in the belief that what authors like Ms Klein write has anything to do with fact, reality and the way the world works. It is a shame, as the views, morals and values of the masses impact us all. That's why the shocking lies in this book need to be exposed for what they are.

One of the accolades for the book on its back cover reads "If you only read one non-fiction book this year, make it this one". This scares me, and should be of concern to all; but it probably also summarizes who the author had in mind when writing this book. I am not surprised, as anyone not fitting this group should find Ms Klein's work a glaring and complete delusion to truth, history and economics.

This is a shockingly wrong book; it is wrong on so many levels, not just the complete mischaracterisation of history and facts. But those errors are straightforward to refute, and many commentators have pointed those out. Of a deeper concern for the welfare of humanity are Ms Klein's ideological obfuscations. What Ms Klein's work mounts to, is a disguised praise for Communism, for what else can her passages imply? She seems to be in favour of a "right to work, to decent housing"; she seems to support land re-distribution and debt forgiveness. What about property rights Ms Klein? What about the fact that resources are finite and men have to compete for those resources? That is the reality we face; while it appears, Ms Klein is striving for ideological utopia, which by the way has been tried, tested and failed (I know as I come from a country that tried; involuntarily I might add). If Ms Klein is a disguised supporter of Communism as it appears, it is totally baffling that she uses quotes from George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four" to illustrate the ills of free markets. How illogical. Those quotes warn about the dangers of Communism and tyranny, not free markets. It makes me wonder if Ms Klein wrote this book with an understanding of socio-economics and with a careful intention to manipulate facts, or if she does not herself understand what she is writing. I doubt the second possibility, but am truly surprised by the insertion of such ill suited quotes.

Ms Klein: military dictatorships are not libertarian free market economies. They are fascist states. Of course they use coercion, torture and abuse. That's how fascist states are run. Don't confuse them for what Mr Friedman stood for. Torture is not a "silent partner" of free markets. It is a tool of fascist dictators.

The most far fetched, outrageous, illogical and simply incomprehensible arguments of Ms Klein involve her extension of the word "shock" as applied to torture, to economic "shock therapy". Just because the same word is present in the two phrases, does not mean that they mean the same thing. Have those praising The Shock Doctrine realised that fact? The two "shocks" which she uses interchangeably, are anything but the same thing. The behaviour of agonising pain applied to defenceless individuals is abhorable. That does not mean that the adaptation of individuals to a free market economy has anything remotely to do with it. I can assure you, that most real proponents of free markets do not take pleasure in ripping out other men's fingernails, or applying electric shocks to someone's body. Don't use universally tarnished and denounced examples of behaviour to blame a philosophy that has been developing for two centuries and has marked the greatest progress of human civilization.

Why does Ms Klein not move to North Korea or Venezuela? I am sure she would feel right at home there, in her little socialist paradise.

Customer Rating: 

In of her best books, Naomi Klein elaborates a theory about neo-liberalism and how governments implement this economic policies by taking advantage of disasters or situations. The Shock Doctrine explains a lot of things that happen around us everyday. For all political scientists, theorists, college students or just for a great historical-political-economical read, this is your book.

Customer Rating: 

Although Ms. Klein's book is very thorough and very good as far as it goes, it's theoretical background seems to be limited to economics and thus fails to put the policies from the 1970's to the present in the context of long term imperialism and militarism. The invasions of Mexico, Phillipines, and various countries in Latin America all happened before the Chicago School existed.

Customer Rating: 

I was not aware that Ms. Klein was a non-English speaker. How else could one explain her complete misinterpretation of Milton Friedman? Either she does not understand Milton Friedman's own words or she purposely chooses to distort the meaning.

Save yourself a few dollars and hours of wasted time. Skip this book and instead read Milton Friedman's far superior classic, "Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition."

Yes, I agree, there were many bad players during the 2008 economic meltdown leading to "the Great Recession." Don't forget that the U.S. federal government played a significant role in the fiasco ranging from the lack of SEC enforcment of existing securities laws to the lack of Congressional oversight of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the many failings of the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank and Treasury to the long-term effects of deficit spending and heavy borrowing from foreign countries. However, NONE of these failings originated from Friedman's market-based philosophies or policies.

There is a very simple test of Mr. Freidman's ideas. Which policies were more prosperous for its population, China under the Communist ideals of Mao (the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, 30 million dead) or China under the market-based reforms of Deng (the most-recent Asian economic miracle)? Which policies were more proposerous for its population, East Germany under socialist rule, or East Germany after reunification with the market-based West?

The many flaws of Ms. Klein's book are well discussed in the following article. Google the following text.

"Defaming Milton Friedman: Naomi Klein's disastrous yet popular polemic against the great free market economist"