Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism is a 2007 book by Canadian author Naomi Klein, and is the basis of a 2009 documentary by the same name.
The book argues that the free market policies of Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman have risen to prominence in some countries because they were pushed through while the citizens were reacting to disasters or upheavals. It is implied that some man-made crises, such as the Falklands war, may have been created with the intention of being able to push through these unpopular reforms in their wake.
But these techniques don't only work on individuals. They can work on whole societies. A collective trauma, a war, a coup, a natural disaster, a terrorist attack puts as all into a state of shock. And in the aftermath, like the prisoner in the interrogation chamber, we too become child-like, and more inclined to follow leaders who claim to protect us.
when will you learn this forum is focused on the concerns of corpulent deathly pale shit beards obsessed with stroking their micro-cocks over the latest disposable pop culture shite marketed at 12 year olds
it's a good book but pretty one-sided in a lot of areas. i distrust klein's tendency to villainize friedman's economic strategy, because it ignores a lot of other real issues that contribute to the failure of nations' economies
when will you learn this forum is focused on the concerns of corpulent deathly pale shit beards obsessed with stroking their micro-cocks over the latest disposable pop culture shite marketed at 12 year olds
plus pretty much everything written in shock doctrine was covered by earlier, much better philosophers/economists
not to diss naomi klein. she's good for what she is
i'll diss her for writing a bad book, because that's what shock doctrine is
after no logo had a bunch of success i feel like she's going 'OH I GUESS I'M A REVOLUTIONARY NOW' and wrote another book about how capitalism is like, harmful, and is now sitting patiently in toronto waiting for someone to knock on her door with cookies
That's like some economist version of diversionary war type shit. Empirical evidence? Aw hell nah. Believability? Maaaaybe.
what?
i mean the most concrete/recent/relatable to americans incident of this happening is the straight up privatisation of New Orleans's school system after Hurricane Katrina
when will you learn this forum is focused on the concerns of corpulent deathly pale shit beards obsessed with stroking their micro-cocks over the latest disposable pop culture shite marketed at 12 year olds
damn.
I want to do with you
What spring does with the cherry trees.
when will you learn this forum is focused on the concerns of corpulent deathly pale shit beards obsessed with stroking their micro-cocks over the latest disposable pop culture shite marketed at 12 year olds
i'm gonna see if i can get the forum's description changed to this just before the new forums hit
I agree the book feels like a rush job or gap-filled at times, but it's overall message is fairly enlightening.
it's not a rush job, it's just poorly written and disingenuous. Other economics and historians have written about this pattern, she says in the book that she's read them (in passing in a footnote), but doesn't mention that they're essentially the same book except better written.
Saying 'sure, the book sucks but i like the overall message' is like saying 'I didn't read twilight but I liked it based on the back cover blurb'. If you're not going to take into account the actual approach to the topic as written in the actual book, why bother?
when will you learn this forum is focused on the concerns of corpulent deathly pale shit beards obsessed with stroking their micro-cocks over the latest disposable pop culture shite marketed at 12 year olds
Pros: Skinny, can't grow facial hair, not 12 years old
Cons: Pale, can't grow facial hair (shut up, this counts as a bad and good thing), micro-cock, love pop culture shite (Gaga <3)
Posts
not to diss naomi klein. she's good for what she is
Tegan and Sara Appreciation Station | LOOKS GOOD! | Fancy Cat Moustache! :{3
Open to a No True Scotsman fallacy
Speaking of which, hello Berk how are you
damn.
Tegan and Sara Appreciation Station | LOOKS GOOD! | Fancy Cat Moustache! :{3
i'll diss her for writing a bad book, because that's what shock doctrine is
after no logo had a bunch of success i feel like she's going 'OH I GUESS I'M A REVOLUTIONARY NOW' and wrote another book about how capitalism is like, harmful, and is now sitting patiently in toronto waiting for someone to knock on her door with cookies
what?
i mean the most concrete/recent/relatable to americans incident of this happening is the straight up privatisation of New Orleans's school system after Hurricane Katrina
Tegan and Sara Appreciation Station | LOOKS GOOD! | Fancy Cat Moustache! :{3
Tegan and Sara Appreciation Station | LOOKS GOOD! | Fancy Cat Moustache! :{3
What spring does with the cherry trees.
http://www.thenation.com/article/katrinas-hidden-race-war
Tegan and Sara Appreciation Station | LOOKS GOOD! | Fancy Cat Moustache! :{3
i'm gonna see if i can get the forum's description changed to this just before the new forums hit
What spring does with the cherry trees.
phew
Secret Satan Click This!
them zany mlp fans eh
They couldn't afford Michael Bay.
They had to settle for M. Night Shymalan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCQj-z86qUo
They use explosion-esque sounds in the trailer.
it's not a rush job, it's just poorly written and disingenuous. Other economics and historians have written about this pattern, she says in the book that she's read them (in passing in a footnote), but doesn't mention that they're essentially the same book except better written.
Saying 'sure, the book sucks but i like the overall message' is like saying 'I didn't read twilight but I liked it based on the back cover blurb'. If you're not going to take into account the actual approach to the topic as written in the actual book, why bother?
but yeah that's pretty accurate
Man I told you to use some duct tape on that hole in your roof
What spring does with the cherry trees.
Secret Satan Click This!
Pros: Skinny, can't grow facial hair, not 12 years old
Cons: Pale, can't grow facial hair (shut up, this counts as a bad and good thing), micro-cock, love pop culture shite (Gaga <3)
Dang, I think Berk insulted me
But Lady Gaga probably counts too.
What spring does with the cherry trees.
but I don't get the Kpop fad either