The Shock Doctrine - Channel 4

[LadyDeliah]

Just watched this on channel 4's website and I have to share.

It's about the dirty and violent history of Neo-Liberal poilcy dating back to Pinochet's coup in Chile and is based on the book by Niaomi Klein also called Shock Doctrine.

It's fascinating, hard hitting and blows the myth of how free market economics equates to democracy, so I hope you guys enjoy it as much as I did.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-shock-doctrine/4od

[LadyDeliah]

Anyone get to watch this?

[woodrot]

Naomi Kelin makes my teeth grate I'm afraid

[LadyDeliah]

Lol, the film has clips of her but is narrated by a Brit. I thought she was pretty good tho in the clips I saw to be honest.

[Marmora Man]

NK is the political obessive's political obssesive. EVERYTHING is a right wing wing corporatist conspiracy to her. Even attempting to question her stance and philosophy is seen, by her, as evidence of a conspiracy to silence her.

[Undisputedtruth]

I've only watch half of the programme. It was fascinating so far.

I didn't know that General Pinochet was the first to banned milk in schools. His friendship with Margaret Thatcher wasn't just a coincidence now then, Marmora Man?

You can also trace the Tory and Chilean's policies back to the economist Milton Friedman. Policies resulting in the selling of government assets (privatisation), high unemployment, increase wealth distribution to the rich and increasing levels of poverty.

[LadyDeliah]

Yes MM, watch the film before offering a critique please?

[Marmora Man]

I wasn't cricising the film, which I acknowledge I haven't bothered to watch, I was criticising NK.

However I see the usual suspects are already promulgating another conspiracy theory. Linking the banning of school milk in Chile & UK with the libertarian / monetarist economic theories of Milton Friedman is just bizarre.

[LadyDeliah]

So if you have any criticism of what is either in the film, or in Niaomi Klien's book, The Shock Doctrine, on which the film is based, I await your reasoned arguments.

Calling her a conspiracy obsessive or slagging off as bizarre, the film's claim of links between banning school milk and the neo-liberal doctrine pushed by Friedman, does not count as reasoned argument.

[Undisputedtruth]

@MM, I see that you've already misrepresented my words to make a cheap political point. I wonder if your libertarian belief is really just a smoke screen for greed.

LD is absolutey right that you should watch the film before offering remarks. Otherwise it shows how narrow minded you are.

[david_carnell]

Oh god it's like my VI form common room in here already.

I quite like Klein but I don't think I even want to watch this now.

[LadyDeliah]

It's pretty good, DC, give it a go.

[woodrot]

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> NK is the political obessive's political

> obssesive. EVERYTHING is a right wing wing

> corporatist conspiracy to her. Even attempting to

> question her stance and philosophy is seen, by

> her, as evidence of a conspiracy to silence her.

NK is part of the system & part of the problem. She may sell her books as original thought, but they are just a compendium of other thinkers ideas, nicely packaged up and marketed to the liberal white middle classes.The pin up girl for the guardianista urban shock brigade since Naomi Wolff jumped ship.

That isnt to say the programme isnt any good - im sure it is - But Adam Curtis is the King of this field I think.

Will give it a go at some point

[LadyDeliah]

I'm Sure the film-maker will be overjoyed at the prospect of an intellectual giant such as yourself, dear Wotsit deigning to cast your eye over his humble offering.

And as for original thought, I'm not sure she's claimed any. Her work is a look at available facts as far as I am aware and the way she links the facts available is plausible and compelling.

[LadyDeliah]

Also, dismissing a female activist/author because she is attractive smacks of latent misogyny.

[woodrot]

so very very wrong.

[LadyDeliah]

Ok, glad to hear it Woody.

[Huguenot]

Klein herself says at the start that her work is 'an attempt to create an alternative history', which implies that her view is a selective interpretation of events to suit her own agenda. It's up to you whether you imagine this agenda is to save the world, or sell her books.

As LadyDeliah points out, her history could reasonably be said to be based on 'available facts'. However, this should serve only to highlight how it's possible to alter 'facts' by changing your perspective, and changing their perceived hierarchy of cause and effect.

It's clear that 'the way she links the facts available is plausible and compelling'. Of course it is - this is the nature of consipracy theorists everywhere. From Tower 7 to Area 51 - it's all about making it 'compelling' by being selective.

There is no doubt that the US was involved in anti-communist activity both at home and abroad - it was the height of the cold war after all. There is no doubt that the CIA was active in Chile in protecting US commercial interests. This was the height of US imperialism, with wars in Korea and Vietnam underway. Allende was a Marxist embarked on nationalisation of industry. The US was obsessed with the Monroe Doctrine.

However, it is a considerable leap from that to suggest that this is a Bilderberg conspiracy by a financial elite to take over the world using war and a new economic religion to advance personal messianic domination.

The Joker and the Penguin were cartoon figures, not diabolic real life evil geniuses.

The rise and popularity of free market economics in the UK was driven entirely by the unions themselves, who used collective bargaining to plunder the nation's economic capacity and then held the people to ransom through fuel and refuse collection.

It didn't require the CIA to intervene. Organised workforces prove themselves as destructive and smug as any top-hatted Bullingdon Clubber. Just watch Bob Crow.

It was the people, the nation that wanted change, no conspiracy was necessary.

I also take rather obvious issue that Naomi Klein talks about a nation indulging in 'pure unregulated capitalism'.

It is tedious and dull when both LadyDeliah and UDT take examples from the US to try and justify a position in the UK. The UK has been, and remains, essentially a regulated socialist nation that treats libertarian theory with the deep suspicion it deserves.

Finally the longevity of irritating self observed Marxist idiots like Chavez should be clear enough evidence that motivations and approaches are different today. The war in Iraq wasn't a war on Marxism, but for resources.

What does that mean? Well it's an interesting 'alternative history' (as Klein puts it), but painfully selective and highly distorting.

[LadyDeliah]

So how selective is the history of the victors Hugo? I think it is important to have alternate view points to enable me to make a more informed decision on how I want to view the world, both in historical terms and in how that history may be shaping our lives today.

I take my information from as wide a base as possible, but also view what I see from the perspective I've gained through my own experiences, especially those that do not mirror the 'truth' as expressed by the mainstream media.

I have been an activist and seen first-hand the discrepancy between what I witnessed and what was reported in the mainstream media, but I do not necessarily dismiss what is reported in that media, I try to add to the information I get from them, by reading additional or sometimes contradictory information from a range of other sources.

Not all other sources are deranged internet conspiracy theorists as some of you like to label them. I am a lawyer and understand the importance of authoratative sources. I just don't believe that the mainstream media are the only authoratative sources available.

We are lucky in this day and age to have access to other sources of mass media that is not wholly controlled by the elite. This allows alternative view points to that endorsed by our 'leaders' to have mass appeal in a way that is unknown in history. I believe that it is this access to mass media and information sharing that will eventually result in the withdrawing of consent for the current elite in the US and Europe to govern us.

As the consent is withdrawn by the people, however, there are a number of directions society can go. One is dictatorship and with the NDAA passed on New Years Eve, I think the US has made a step towards full military dictatorship.

I just hope that in the UK, the people are more aware than the US citizens and don't similarly sleepwalk into giving up all of their rights.

[Huguenot]

If you're talking about 'detention without charge', then in your highly informed position you will know the NDAA does nothing to increase the powers that the President has had for a decade (in the United States - why are you so obsessed with them anyway?).

So no change there apart from conspiracy theorist proclamations.

Regarding the UK, you'll know that in the UK it's currently only 28 days.

You'll also know that the attempt by Labour to extend it to 90 days in 2005 and to 42 days in 2007 were resoundly beaten.

You'll also know that no-one has actaully been held beyond 14 days since 2008.

So talk of 'sleepwalking into giving up all of their rights' is so far from reality it doesn't even deserve drunkenly mumbling about, let alone shitting our pants?

[LadyDeliah]

Ok, Hugo. You are always right.

We can go back to our fluffy lovely existence and not worry about the frightening developments in the US. Developments which I imagined could possibly pave the way to World War 3 (US invade Iran - no big protests because military can detain indefinitely (without access to lawyers, charges,, judges etc) US (and other) citizens they deem to be terrorists - Russia & China get involved) and there we have it - reason to be concerned - But no, how stupid of me, the all knowing Huguenot, the only man to have all the answers, has told me that everything will be ok.

Phew I was about to get worried for no reason there, how silly of me.

Thank you Huguenot for saving me from myself.

[Voyageur]

Is petulance in vogue for 2012? How depressing :(

[LadyDeliah]

In the face of constant firing down of alternatives to the mainstream, elite view, despite masses of evidence that contradicts this view, petulance seems a good enough response to me!

I'd just like to bring this back up next year and see how far off my predictions for 2012 actually are!

Until then I am leaving you to it as I have armageddon to prepare for :)

[Wilhelm]

Boy did I pick the wrong day to give up painkillers

[Undisputedtruth]

NK had made clear that the UK was able to swallow free market policies after Margaret Thatcher had won the Falklands War and defeated the unions. Maggie Thatcher was a fan of free market policies long before she took on the Argentinians and unions.

Klein herself says at the start that her work is 'an attempt to create an alternative history', which implies that her view is a selective interpretation of events to suit her own agenda. It's up to you whether you imagine this agenda is to save the world, or sell her books.

Looking into Klein's background she had spent two years in Argentina where she learned how the free market policies impacted on local people. Her brief is simply about exposing free market policies and how ordinary people, like most people on this forum, loses out in the end.

What does that mean? Well it's an interesting 'alternative history' (as Klein puts it), but painfully selective and highly distorting.

The 'alternative history' is an attempt to look at free market policies history from an objective point of view. Nothing distortional I'm afraid.

It was the people, the nation that wanted change, no conspiracy was necessary.

Not quite true, Hugo. Maggie Thatcher was an admirer of free market policies. The Falklands war and a right wing press influenced people's thinking and made them more receptive to free market policies.