Naomi Klein - The Shock Doctrine - Part 1 of 6
BackNaomi Klein talks about her new book, The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.
** Help spread this video: rate it, comment on it, favourite it, share it **
Speaking at a benefit event for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, a social justice research institute.
The Shock Doctrine is the gripping story of how America's "free market" policies have come to dominate the world-- through the exploitation of disaster-shocked people and countries.
Channel: News & Politics
Uploaded: September 4, 2007 at 6:21 pm
Author: policyalternatives
Length: 00:05:54
Rating: 4.63
Views: 74668
Tags: naomi klein shock doctrine economy politics neworleans katrina iraq climate history neoliberal naomiklein
Video Comments:
runkaballe (September 5, 2008 at 1:48 am)
Wasnt talking about private enterprises, I was talking about governmental outsourcing it failed miserably in Chile and every other case.
To take a sledge hammer to a economy in the name of Noe liberalism cause death and starving kids.
Reforms takes time and should take time so the people and economical systems have time to adjust to the new rules. That did´t happened instead people starved most of the money was shipped abroad and it all went to hell.
To take a sledge hammer to a economy in the name of Noe liberalism cause death and starving kids.
Reforms takes time and should take time so the people and economical systems have time to adjust to the new rules. That did´t happened instead people starved most of the money was shipped abroad and it all went to hell.
marcoantoniocosta (September 4, 2008 at 12:31 am)
she's funny, and somewhat charming, I guess... but how does she explain that Chile's 'shocked' economy is now the strongest in Latin America, even ahead of Brazil, where state control of the economy is hegemonic? she doesn't.
it's sad to see people take the liberty they were born into for granted and try to take us back to the central power and tyranny 'for the common good'.
it's sad to see people take the liberty they were born into for granted and try to take us back to the central power and tyranny 'for the common good'.
Nullifidian (September 4, 2008 at 10:56 pm)
Well, perhaps it would be worth looking at the real figures for what Pinochet did for Chile. Between 1970 and 1989, wages fell by 8%. By 1989, the social safety net was in tatters, with family allowances down 28% and 20% average declines in housing, education, and health. The massive military spending and declines in social spending were linked with massive unemployment, which hit 26% during the 1982-1985 economic slump and peaked at 30% during Pinochet's regime.
marcoantoniocosta (September 4, 2008 at 11:19 pm)
There was indeed a tough period of transition from a protectionist, state run economy to a free market integrated with the rest of the world.
While you've shown those past numbers to make your point, the privileged state of the Chilean economy today among other Latin American countries speaks more eloquently for the virtues of freedom than I ever could. Chile's GDP per capita is around 13,000. Almost 4,000 higher than Brazil, where I happen to live, incidentally. They're just better off.
While you've shown those past numbers to make your point, the privileged state of the Chilean economy today among other Latin American countries speaks more eloquently for the virtues of freedom than I ever could. Chile's GDP per capita is around 13,000. Almost 4,000 higher than Brazil, where I happen to live, incidentally. They're just better off.
Nullifidian (September 4, 2008 at 11:04 pm)
Income distribution became regressive. In 1972, the wealthiest 5% held 25% of total income, compared to 50% of the income three years later. Wage and salary earners got 64%, and that declined to 38% five years later. Quality of life indicators declined: malnutrition affected one child out of two, three people out of five, and infant mortality rates skyrocketed.
Plus, due to the junta's monopolies, many business went bust or were curtailed, adding to the economic malaise of the working class.
Plus, due to the junta's monopolies, many business went bust or were curtailed, adding to the economic malaise of the working class.
marcoantoniocosta (September 5, 2008 at 12:17 am)
You're still talking about the period of economic reform. What's Chile's infant mortality today? Wages? Quality of life?
The monopolies did not exist before the reforms? In a free market monopolies can be maintained only with special privilege. Otherwise, the playing field is level, and competition arises.
Here in Rio, public buses are a state 'granted' monopoly for decades with prices fixed by the Mayor's office. Terrible. Is Chile still plagued by those monopolies from the Pinochet years?
The monopolies did not exist before the reforms? In a free market monopolies can be maintained only with special privilege. Otherwise, the playing field is level, and competition arises.
Here in Rio, public buses are a state 'granted' monopoly for decades with prices fixed by the Mayor's office. Terrible. Is Chile still plagued by those monopolies from the Pinochet years?
Nullifidian (September 4, 2008 at 11:15 pm)
The reason that Chile reversed these economic trends was that the mixed economy was brought *back* during the post-Pinochet period of democratization, causing economic indicators to rise in all segments of society.
It is highly ironic that you complain about "central power and tyranny", since these were both inescapable features of the Pinochet regime.
I guess the issue isn't central power and tyranny, but merely negotiating who gets to wield the truncheon.
It is highly ironic that you complain about "central power and tyranny", since these were both inescapable features of the Pinochet regime.
I guess the issue isn't central power and tyranny, but merely negotiating who gets to wield the truncheon.
marcoantoniocosta (September 4, 2008 at 11:51 pm)
You're factually wrong. During the redemocratization the free market reforms were deepened, not reduced.
In a free market, relationships are guided by voluntary exchange and self-interest, if anyone 'wields a truncheon' it is the consumer. Government is always force and always wields the truncheon over your wallet and head, be it Pinochet's dictatorship, social-democracies in Europe or present day USA.
In a free market, relationships are guided by voluntary exchange and self-interest, if anyone 'wields a truncheon' it is the consumer. Government is always force and always wields the truncheon over your wallet and head, be it Pinochet's dictatorship, social-democracies in Europe or present day USA.
canadaguy666 (August 26, 2008 at 12:59 am)
i love naomi. her passionate discourse on what are obviously unjust procedures and policies constructed by capitalist administrations and their lobbies and think tanks is striking and eloquent. she is incisive, compassionate, and intelligent- hallmarks for a ideal investigative journalist. i would totally wanna hit that if i wansn't a fag =D
-
Links:
-
Tags:
hip-hop interviews videos r kelly usher eminem jay-z beyonce chris brown artist
No, I suppose the United States of America is a freak example of private enterprise leading to prosperity. Silly me. :-)