9/23/14 Kaia Hayes

The concept of shock treatment highlighted by Naomi Klein in Shock Doctrine was one that I haven't previously had a lot of exposure to. I am familiar with several of the examples given in the book, however I had only ever studied them as isolated cases; it was interesting and definitely a little disturbing to view them as small parts of a much broader movement to advance neoconservatism and globalism for the benefit of capitalism. Klein's use of the torture as a metaphor for the way economists such as Friedman believe a disaster or earth-shaking event can and should be profited from is very apt, and conveys the feeling of vulnerability and helplessness that is surely felt by the people affected. While I can appreciate the redeeming qualities of capitalism, there is a very clear line that, when crossed, begins to hurt more than it helps. It's disconcerting to think that not only are there people who devise plans to benefit from the psychological discord of others, they believe it is a perfectly viable and opportunistic method.

Shock Doctrine

            Naomi Klein’s thesis in The Shock Doctrine was a new idea to me, but it was a logical one. Although many disputed her work and criticized her lack of sources and twisting of the facts, I think she made a great argument and proved it with multiple examples from reliable sources. Her thoughts on “disaster capitalism” reminded me of how, in times of war and strife, citizens are willing to give up their freedoms for safety. In the history of the United States, the central government has increased its power primarily by taking more power and citing war as the reason they need this power. This happened with Abraham Lincoln in the Civil War in justification for the Emancipation Proclamation. While this brought about a positive end, the disaster capitalism practices that take advantage of the country during a crisis do not. It is wrong to try to use the shock that people are in as a way to radically change the system. Often times, people want things to be restored, not tear down what little is left. The shock treatment, as Klein states, is authoritarian, and should not be implemented in places where there is a crisis that makes the conditions favorable for drastic change (like Louisiana). People in a crisis should be heard and given what they need, not what the government thinks they need.

Response to "Shock Doctrine" - Alex Kendig 9/23/14

Naomi Klein’s shock doctrine is a chilling newsflash that unveils many of the covert secrets kept from us by those who feel they know better. From the questioning of Milton Friedman’s ideals, to the discussion of disasters as market opportunities, to the revealing of Ewen Cameron’s insanity disguised as academic curiosity, I found her writing to be meaningful and provocative. I couldn’t help but think of Burroughs’ predictions of humans enacting the four horsemen of the apocalypse while reading about Cameron’s torturous experiments onto completely innocent college students. I was absolutely appalled to find out the CIA was funding these cruel and senseless tests that had very serious—and long lasting—effects on the test subjects. I have heard of the CIA taking part in some pretty questionable things, but this was by far the most unsettling to read about.

The latter section of the reading provides an excellent foundation upon which to ask the question: “where is the line crossed?” To some, torture is an integral way of obtaining information from those who don’t want to give it, but to these people I would simply ask again, “where is the line crossed?” How can one rationalize electrocution as a “humane” way of getting information? To me, there is no humanity involved in shocking someone with electricity until they spew out whatever information can come to their mind quickly enough to stop the pain and suffering. I think torture is a medieval way of getting things done that sets us back to the days of Hammurabi’s Code that focus more on revenge and the idea of “getting even” than it does the promotion of justice and security. This reading really made me think about a lot of things, but if anything, it made me realize how much I disagree with the torturing of other human beings.