The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism

The elegance of the presentation is matched only by the vicousness of the presented. Rarely does one book change the reality of the reader, or shatter the predispositions of ones opinions. There is much to be said to the importance and timing of such work, but one must wait till the shock wares off to articulate a clear postion. Bravo Naomi Klein. Bravo.

I just finished this book--no small feat, there's a LOT of information to assimilate--and thought it was astonishing, ground breaking, and essential reading. I admit that I'm extremely liberal in my political views, but I'm NOT a fanatic, however. That is, I believe I have an open mind to the extent that I am mostly willing to listen to an opposing view. My experience is that what I fervently believe today will not necessarily be my truth tomorrow. I have killed many a "sacred cow" because I saw, in time, that I clung to them out of fear, or out of allegiance based on faulty or insufficient information.

I recommend this book to anyone who wants detailed explanations for why the world is in such a disastrous economic morass. Anyone who refutes the cataclysmic agenda/policies of the U.S. government for past 8 years alone needs some shock therapy of his own.

It seems reasonable to assume that the people who might understandably find this book abhorrent are those who have profited from the misfortune or exploitation of others. If you're not an exploiter--e.g., anyone who knowingly diminishes another man's quality of life for personal enrichment--what motivation would you have to refute what's in this book with such a vehement, vitriolic hatred? Every argument, especially an economic one, appears to boil down to two perspectives: on one side are those who are primarily interested in preserving "me and mine"; and on the other, people who believe that everyone has a responsibility for everyone else, particularly for those who can't take care of themselves or adequately stand up for their own best interests. I'm not alone in thinking that a lot of the world's current misery owes to too many who think that survival of the fittest (which includes the most ruthless methods of rooting out) is the holy grail.

Everyone who writes a book has an agenda: money, fame, or a burning need to tell a story. Most probably it's a combination of all three. Even if there are discrepancies in this book (and no one commenting here has claimed to have researched every single fact in the book with documented proof), anyone who reads history and keeps up with current events knows what's going on in the world. As has been pointed out before, much of the information here is already known, but the way Naomi Klein has connected the dots is truly original and ultimately disturbing.

Despite the erosion of U.S. Constitutional rights by the current administration (not an opinion, this is a FACT), free speech is still my right. Just a suggestion: make your own case instead of tearing down someone else's. Debate is always more educational than mud-slinging.

This book raises important questions concerning the increasing use of expensive contract personal by the government for both reasons of political-economic theory and personal gain. It also discusses the lack of guidance, responsiblity, and accountablity often involving these people as well as possible corruption and violence.

However, the book takes too many early and, often well worn left wing, detours into other events that could loose some readers. It might have been interesting and meaningful to discuss the decline of the US Civil Service over the last 20 years instead of dwelling on CIA MK Ultra for example.

I think it is funny how the New Left thinks how much better life would be if it wasn't for puppet masters Milton Freedman or Henry Kissinger. What happened to all the individuals who could have chanlleged or presented alternatives to these gentlemen? Also, I don't recall Freedman being in favor of violence and corruption, but I do remember his "negative income tax" which was implemented years ago. For many poor people, the only Federal taxes they pay are for fuel and FICA.

Also, using war or "the moral equivelent of war" to justifiy significant social changes is not unique to conservatives or even their invention. I suggest readers pick up a copy of Jonas Goldenberg's book Liberal Fascism.

It might also be good to read Freedman's Free to Choose and John Maynard Keynes' books if you can find them. Keynes would not only discuss the use of economic fiscal policy, but the importance of powerful groups being challenged by other powerful groups. Since 1979, the US has used methods endorsed by both men.

This product was as advertized but took some effort to get the lowest price for the use this product provided.

Well written and very informative, but can be quite depressing when you learn what the wealthy do to stay wealthy and why the world is losing its middle class. I had to take a break half way through the book because I was just too annoyed at corporate American, politicians and economists.