http://www.thenation.com/article/171048/super-storm-sandy-peoples-shock#

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/271-38/14495-focus-shameless-disaster-capitalism

Author and activist Naomi Klein. (photo: CharlieRose.com)

Shameless Disaster Capitalism
By Naomi Klein, The Nation
12 November 12


Yes that's right: this catastrophe very likely created by climate change-a
crisis born of the colossal regulatory failure to prevent corporations
from treating the atmosphere as their open sewer-is just one more
opportunity for more deregulation.

he following article first appeared in the Nation. For more great content
from the Nation, sign up for their email newsletters here.

Less than three days after Sandy made landfall on the East Coast of the
United States, Iain Murray of the Competitive Enterprise Institute blamed
New Yorkers' resistance to big-box stores for the misery they were about
to endure. Writing on Forbes.com, he explained that the city's refusal to
embrace Walmart will likely make the recovery much harder: "Mom-and-pop
stores simply can't do what big stores can in these circumstances," he
wrote.

And the preemptive scapegoating didn't stop there. He also warned that if
the pace of reconstruction turned out to be sluggish (as it so often is)
then "pro-union rules such as the Davis-Bacon Act" would be to blame, a
reference to the statute that requires workers on public-works projects to
be paid not the minimum wage, but the prevailing wage in the region.

The same day, Frank Rapoport, a lawyer representing several billion-dollar
construction and real estate contractors, jumped in to suggest that many
of those public works projects shouldn't be public at all. Instead,
cash-strapped governments should turn to "public private partnerships,"
known as "P3s." That means roads, bridges and tunnels being rebuilt by
private companies, which, for instance, could install tolls and keep the
profits.

Up until now, the only thing stopping them has been the law-specifically
the absence of laws in New York State and New Jersey that enable these
sorts of deals. But Rapoport is convinced that the combination of broke
governments and needy people will provide just the catalyst needed to
break the deadlock. "There were some bridges that were washed out in New
Jersey that need structural replacement, and it's going to be very
expensive," he told The Nation. "And so the government may well not have
the money to build it the right way. And that's when you turn to a P3."

Ray Lehmann, co-founder of the R Street Institute, a mouthpiece for the
insurance lobby (formerly a division of the climate-denying Heartland
Institute), had another public prize in his sights. In a Wall Street
Journal article about Sandy, he was quoted arguing for the eventual "full
privatization" of the National Flood Insurance Program, the federal
initiative that provides affordable protection from some natural
disasters-and which private insurers see as unfair competition.

But the prize for shameless disaster capitalism surely goes to right-wing
economist Russell S. Sobel, writing in a New York Times online forum.
Sobel suggested that, in hard-hit areas, FEMA should create "free trade
zones-in which all normal regulations, licensing and taxes [are]
suspended." This corporate free-for-all would, apparently, "better provide
the goods and services victims need."

Yes that's right: this catastrophe very likely created by climate change-a
crisis born of the colossal regulatory failure to prevent corporations
from treating the atmosphere as their open sewer-is just one more
opportunity for more deregulation. And the fact that this storm has
demonstrated that poor and working-class people are far more vulnerable to
the climate crisis shows that this is clearly the right moment to strip
those people of what few labor protections they have left, as well as to
privatize the meager public services available to them. Most of all, when
faced with an extraordinarily costly crisis born of corporate greed, hand
out tax holidays to corporations.

Is there anyone who can still feign surprise at this stuff? The flurry of
attempts to use Sandy's destructive power as a cash grab is just the
latest chapter in the very long story I have called The Shock Doctrine.
And it is but the tiniest glimpse into the ways large corporations are
seeking to reap enormous profits from climate chaos.

One example: between 2008 and 2010, at least 261 patents were filed or
issued related to "climate-ready" crops-seeds supposedly able to withstand
extreme conditions like droughts and floods; of these patents close to 80
percent were controlled by just six agribusiness giants, including
Monsanto and Syngenta. With history as our teacher, we know that small
farmers will go into debt trying to buy these new miracle seeds, and that
many will lose their land.

When these displaced farmers move to cities seeking work, they will find
other peasants, indigenous people and artisanal fishing people who lost
their lands for similar reasons. Some will have been displaced by foreign
agribusiness companies looking to grow export crops for wealthy nations
worried about their own food security in a climate stressed future. Some
will have moved because a new breed of carbon entrepreneur was determined
to plant a tree farm on what used to be a community-managed forest, in
order to collect lucrative credits.

In November 2010, The Economist ran a climate change cover story that
serves as a useful (if harrowing) blueprint for how climate change could
serve as the pretext for the last great land grab, a final colonial
clearing of the forests, farms and coastlines by a handful of
multinationals. The editors explain that droughts and heat stress are such
a threat to farmers that only big players can survive the turmoil, and
that "abandoning the farm may be the way many farmers choose to adapt."
They had the same message for fisher folk inconveniently occupying
valuable ocean-front lands: wouldn't it be so much safer, given rising
seas and all, if they joined their fellow farmers in the urban slums?
"Protecting a single port city from floods is easier than protecting a
similar population spread out along a coastline of fishing villages."

But, you might wonder, isn't there a joblessness crisis in most of these
cities? Nothing a little "reform of labor markets" and free trade can't
fix. Besides, cities, they explain, have "social strategies, formal or
informal." I'm pretty sure that means that people whose "social
strategies" used to involve growing and catching their own food can now
cling to life by selling broken pens at intersections, or perhaps by
dealing drugs. What the informal social strategy should be when super
storm winds howl through those precarious slums remains unspoken.

For a long time, climate change was treated by environmentalists as a
great equalizer, the one issue that affected everyone, rich or poor. They
failed to account for the myriad ways by which the superrich would protect
themselves from the less savory effects of the economic model that made
them so wealthy. In the past six years, we have seen the emergence of
private firefighters in the United States, hired by insurance companies to
offer a "concierge" service to their wealthier clients, as well as the
short-lived "HelpJet"-a charter airline in Florida that offered five-star
evacuation services from hurricane zones. "No standing in lines, no hassle
with crowds, just a first class experience that turns a problem into a
vacation." And, post-Sandy, upscale real estate agents are predicting that
back-up power generators will be the new status symbol with the penthouse
and mansion set.

It seems that for some, climate change is imagined less as a clear and
present danger than as a kind of spa vacation; nothing that the right
combination of bespoke services and well-curated accessories can't
overcome. That, at least, was the impression left by the Barneys New York
pre-Sandy sale-which offered deals on Sencha green tea, backgammon sets
and $500 throw blankets so its high-end customers could "settle in with
style". Let the rest of the world eat "social strategies, formal or
informal."

So we know how the shock doctors are readying to exploit the climate
crisis, and we know from the past how that would turn out. But here is the
real question: Could this crisis present a different kind of opportunity,
one that disperses power into the hands of the many rather than
consolidating it the hands of the few; one that radically expands the
commons, rather than auctions it off in pieces? In short, could Sandy be
the beginning of a People's Shock?

I think it can. As I outlined last year in these pages, there are changes
we can make that actually have a chance of getting our emissions down to
the level science demands. These include relocalizing our economies (so we
are going to need those farmers where they are); vastly expanding and
reimagining the public sphere to not just hold back the next storm but to
prevent even worse disruptions in the future; regulating the hell out of
corporations and reducing their poisonous political power; and reinventing
economics so it no longer defines success as the endless expansion of
consumption.

These are approaches to the crisis would help rebuild the real economy at
a time when most of us have had it with speculative bubbles. They would
create lasting jobs at a time when they are urgently needed. And they
would strengthen our ties to one another and to our communities- goals
that, while abstract, can nonetheless save lives in a crisis.

Just as the Great Depression and the Second World War launched populist
movements that claimed as their proud legacies social safety nets across
the industrialized world, so climate change can be a historic moment to
usher in the next great wave of progressive change. Moreover, none of the
anti-democratic trickery I described in The Shock Doctrine is necessary to
advance this agenda. Far from seizing on the climate crisis to push
through unpopular policies, our task is to seize upon it to demand a truly
populist agenda.

The reconstruction from Sandy is a great place to start road testing these
ideas. Unlike the disaster capitalists who use crisis to end-run
democracy, a People's Recovery (as many from the Occupy movement are
already demanding) would call for new democratic processes, including
neighborhood assemblies, to decide how hard-hit communities should be
rebuilt. The overriding principle must be addressing the twin crises of
inequality and climate change at the same time. For starters, that means
reconstruction that doesn't just create jobs but jobs that pay a living
wage. It means not just more public transit, but energy efficient
affordable housing along those transit lines. It also means not just more
renewable power but democratic community control over those projects.

But at the same time as we ramp up alternatives, we need to step up the
fight against the forces actively making the climate crisis worse.
Regardless of who wins the election, that means standing firm against the
continued expansion of the fossil fuel sector into new and high-risk
territories, whether through tar sands, fracking, coal exports to China or
Arctic drilling. It also means recognizing the limits of political
pressure and going after the fossil fuel companies directly, as we are
doing at 350.org with our "Do The Math" tour. These companies have shown
that they are willing to burn five times as much carbon as the most
conservative estimates say is compatible with a livable planet. We've done
the math, and we simply can't let them.

We find ourselves in a race against time: either this crisis will become
an opportunity for an evolutionary leap, a holistic readjustment of our
relationship with the natural world. Or it will become an opportunity for
the biggest disaster capitalism free-for-all in human history, leaving the
world even more brutally cleaved between winners and losers.

When I wrote The Shock Doctrine, I was documenting crimes of the past. The
good news is that this is a crime in progress; it is still within our
power to stop it. Let's make sure that this time, the good guys win.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:laamn-unsubscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:laamn-subscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:laamn-dig...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:laamn-ow...@egroups.com?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:la...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/laamn@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    laamn-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
    laamn-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    laamn-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to