Main Thesis Of The Shock Doctrine

Main Thesis Of The Shock Doctrine-18
Klein wrote that she could envision a future “fascist state where we all salute the logo and have little opportunity for criticism because our newspapers, television stations, Internet servers, streets and retail spaces are all controlled by multinational corporate interests.” This aspect of her argument needed a bit more thinking through.

Tags: Descriptive Essay Thesis Statement ExamplesCornell Mba Table Of Contents EssayResearch Paper On Cyber CrimeEssay On Severe DisabilitiesBest College Application Essay Ever WrittenResearch Papers Of Mechanical EngineeringDescriptive Essay FlowersRelated Literature And Related Studies In ThesisNight Thesis StatementsGmat Problem Solving Questions

For puzzled outsiders grasping to understand why bands of youths had begun following the World Trade Organization wherever it went, brandishing oversize puppets and occasionally smashing up the local Starbucks, Klein was there to explain.

She has always downplayed her place within the movement, but in fact her influence is as considerable as her press clippings proclaim.

Yet she managed to make the old notions feel new, and to capture the ethos of what was being called “the New New Left.” And her argument reflected the conviction of the new anti-globalization activists, the children of the “cultural left,” that they themselves—and not just workers in Nike factories abroad—were the victims of international corporations.

The 1990s was, for all the obvious reasons, an intensely materialistic era, and Klein came along just in time to make its booms and excesses into fodder for some sort of revival of classical Marxist analysis, which had fallen into disrepair and even into disrepute after the collapse of communism.

C.”)By the 1990s, Klein had come to realize, like some other campus activists, that off-campus there could be found worse depredations than the canonization of Shakespeare and other dead white males.

And the new enemy turned out to be an old one—the original one, in fact: the corporations, and more generally capitalism.By Naomi Klein(Metropolitan Books, 576 pp., )It seems like a very long time—though in truth only a few years have passed—since the most sinister force on the planet that the left could imagine was Nike.In 2001, Time proclaimed that the anti-globalization movement had become the “defining cause” of a new generation, and that the spokesperson for the cause was the Canadian writer and activist Naomi Klein.She had a classic Marxist-materialist analysis, arguing that economic conditions, rather than bigotry or ideology, are what shape the world.Her interest in culture and in actually existing life under capitalism was somewhat derivative of the Frankfurt School, though not as intellectually sophisticated.The Times of London deemed her “probably the most influential person under the age of 35 in the world.” The National Post called her the “New Noam Chomsky," and the Guardian announced that “Naomi Klein might just be helping re-invent politics for a new generation.”AND THEN CAME September 11.The Islamist attack on the World Trade Center may not have “changed everything,” as so many Orwell-wannabes declared, but it, and the ensuing war with secular Iraq, certainly changed the orientation of the left.She concludes on a note of hope.: A state of shock is something that happens to us not only when something bad happens.It's what happens to us when we lose our narrative, when we lose our story, when we become disoriented.Naomi Klein gives a lecture tracing the confluence of ideas about modifying behavior using shock therapy and other sensory deprivation and modifying national economics using the "shock treatment" of Milton Friedman and the Chicago School.She moves chronologically: Pinochet's Chile, Argentina and its junta, Yeltsin's Russia, Bush and Bremer's Iraq.


Comments Main Thesis Of The Shock Doctrine

The Latest from ©