BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


The Rise of Disaster Capitalism

 
 
wembley can change in 28 days
09:56 / 18.04.05
Posted at www.commmondreams.org, originally in the May 2005 issue of The Nation, here is Naomi Klein's piece The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.

A snippet:
Last summer, in the lull of the August media doze, the Bush Administration's doctrine of preventive war took a major leap forward. On August 5, 2004, the White House created the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization, headed by former US Ambassador to Ukraine Carlos Pascual. Its mandate is to draw up elaborate "post-conflict" plans for up to twenty-five countries that are not, as of yet, in conflict. According to Pascual, it will also be able to coordinate three full-scale reconstruction operations in different countries "at the same time," each lasting "five to seven years."

Fittingly, a government devoted to perpetual pre-emptive deconstruction now has a standing office of perpetual pre-emptive reconstruction.


In her article, Klein also touches on corruption in aid and reconstruction organizations/companies, as well as the fact that "reconstruction" is now a hugely lucrative business, and how desperate nations get played by the World Bank.
 
 
unheimlich manoeuvre
15:49 / 29.04.05
wembley - Thanks for the link, good article.
Yet, it's not anything new.
The Marshall Plan was introduced for the political and economic containment of Soviet influence in Europe after WWII. Although not pre-emptive and generally considered fairly benevolent.
 
 
pacha perplexa
19:48 / 29.04.05
"Pre-emptive" is the most scary bit. If I understood it correctly, they're trying to shape war-policies for areas before actual shit happens on them. By doing this, they ignore variables, historical contexts, and all that, which is very convenient.
 
 
eye landed
00:04 / 01.05.05
this idea reminds me of the pharmacological strategy of making drugs for healthy people: convince them theyre not perfect and that they need drugs for their imperfection. (this is an openly stated plan, just as postcolonial groups like the new american century publish their plans.)

both stem from out-of-control capitalism, and both are problematic, not just morally. both channel resources into solving problems that dont exist, while ignoring problems that do exist, such as ecological scarcity--which is the big problem kapitalizm (or any other economic theory) is mean to solve. as long as the bulk of the worlds r&d and industry is devoted to enriching a minority, we are not distributing resources equitably or efficiently. even if everyone currently alive were treated equally, our 'vanity consumption' would lead to disaster for future populations---maybe not far enough in the future that the present population is in fact a minority.

the postcolonial problem is best solved, i think, by localizing economies. show us the implications of our consumption in our own community instead of fourthhand reports of concentration camps in indonesia.

is the colonial impulse the result of the pretentions of the middle class? the truly rich can afford luxuries in their home country, but the middle class must demean the lower classes in order to feel like theyre at the top of the food chain. in western democracies with minimum wage and other socialist protections, the middle class must look to developing economies where people are more easily demeaned. capitalism teaches us that anyone can be king if theyre clever and hardworking. but kings need subjects. if there arent any white subjects available, we are lucky the 20th century taught us that brown people deserve an equal opportunity to be subjugated.

and of course, these pretentious middle class folks are being hoodwinked by the upper class, since their virtual kingdoms make money for corporations and governments in reality. demeaning the poor in order to pretend to be rich, the middle class subjugates itself in turn.
 
  
Add Your Reply