Preparing for the shock doctrine
There’s an interesting post at Well Sharp that applies Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine analysis to the current global financial pressures. Klein argues in her latest book that neo-conservatives have exploited moments of crisis to compel their policies onto a ’shocked and disoriented’ public:
The mechanism is that people and societies are pliable and suggestible in the moment of shock after trauma, when their world is shattered and they haven’t yet regathered their sense of self, and don’t have a narrative available with which to make sense of events.
Well Sharp lists four things that countries can do to minimise the likeliness of the Shock Doctrine being foisted upon them:
Military: Countries should minimise or avoid links with U.S. Military and security services. These have a proven track record in training torturers and as a breeding ground of anti-democratic movements & military coups. Likewise, when leases for U.S. military bases come up for renewal, ask them to leave.
Market: Look at ways to avoid the flight of capital or to minimise its impact (e.g. worker-owned businesses). End or minimise dependence on & links with IMF, World Bank. Minimise shocks from commodity price movements, gain some distance from WTO (e.g. barter arrangements, fair-trade agreements).
Cultural/Intellectual: Promote wider social awareness of shock tactics. Promote wider social awareness of political and economic history.
Social/Political: Avoid ‘movement beheading’ by promoting decentralisation of movements and grassroots leadership. Mobilise communities to meet crises themselves and ‘take power into their own hands’.
Here in NZ we need to invest in rebuilding our local communities so that they are economically independent and self sustainable. The Transition Towns movement is a good starting point, as is Sue Bradford’s Buy Kiwi Made campaign and the Greens’ transport, sustainable business and food policies. But we can certainly expand this out further. Well Sharp also has suggestions for how to apply these principles here in New Zealand.
September 22nd, 2008 at 2:04 pm
“neo-conservatives have exploited moments of crisis to compel their policies onto a ’shocked and disoriented’ public:”
Yes, they have. But so have marxists, fascists, trade unionists, and the creators of the social welfare state. Because what you’re looking at is a *tactic* for reform.
This “Shock Doctrine” thing is silly. Like most of Klein’s work: her examples are graphic and well-researched, it’s her arguments that never add up.
Everyone who wants to transform economies uses economic shocks as an excuse to undertake reforms. Roger Douglas used these tactics. But Michael Savage and the 1st Labour govt. So did King Dick Seddon. So did FDR in the USA. The problem is not with the tactics used for reform: it’s with what reforms people aim to accomplish.
September 22nd, 2008 at 2:25 pm
As for WellSharp’s comments:
“Market: develop policies to deal with our curent account deficit and overseas debt.”
Um, yup. Everyone thinks that’s a big problem. Keys, Cullen, Clark, Peters, Dunne, Anderton, you name it. Everyone thinks NZ spending more than we earn is bad.
But no-one really has a clue how to fix it.
September 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
>>neo-conservatives have exploited moments of crisis to compel their policies onto a ’shocked and disoriented’ public:
Just the the AGW movement, then. Let’s not forget Peak Oil.
Both used to justify pointless taxes and policy that will do nothing to protect us from either.
Do you guys ever look in the mirror?
September 22nd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Yeah I find it strange that the left claim that “shock doctrine” is a far right concept. I mean come on Michael Savage used it in NZ to create an unsustainable set of government policies. FDR in the US used it to create social security, we are still paying for social security in the US today as is many other western governments who went down the same path, all of this unsustainable policies all created using “Shock Doctrine” after the great depression.
Note the governments reactions to the great depression is the reason people today are so dependent on the government for everything. I mean why create schemes those only outcome is to create dependency amongst the people, the governments of the 30’s pushed a pill and its name was “dependency”.
September 22nd, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Toad -
Getting the Cullen Fund to divest it’s investment in Rakon would be a good start.
They were just in the business pages (Sunday Star Times, if my recall is correct, insert link if you wish…), over the weekend, bragging about their state-of-the-art facility in Mt Wellington, and continuing to say that their tech had applications for use in phone (GSM) systems which had not been fully developed.
Yeah, like my phone needs software for satellite guidance of ground to air missiles ….
September 22nd, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Katie…not sure the Rakon thing is just about satellite guidance. I think it has more to do with getting “controllable” and/or “trackable” circuts into as wide a range of devices as possible.
The theory goes that any Rakon-driven circuit could be immediately rendered non-functional in the event of a military action, or to prevent enemy use of Rakon-driven hardware.
As far as “shock doctrine” goes, it would be hard to go past 911 as an example of an event that goes on to drive an erosion of individual rights, and/or increases military empowerment.