Thursday, October 22, 2009


I think that Engler is trying to say is that this shock doctrine that Klein speaks of is only relevant in the United States. What I mean by this is that the "shock" of 9/11 was used to mask the governments intention's to it's citizens, but not to the citizens of Iraq. The foil that he speaks of is that this doctrine she speaks of had no type of effect on Iraqi resistance. These people knew right away why the most "powerful" nation in the world was "helping" their country. It wasn't to setup a democracy for the interests of Iraqi citizens but for the interests of our big government and our big corporations. But it isn't the first time this part of the world has been invaded for profit and is the reason that Iraqis are "unshocked' by the type of actions our government has been taking. This motivates Iraqi resistance because they are the ones who can clearly see our government isn't doing ANYthing productive for their country. This further implies that the United States is still the biggest bully in the world with no shame in our game. The government just tries to cover it up with our citizens in order to prevent social uprisings, they don't care what the world thinks because they're not the ones keeping them in power, it's the deceived population of our nation that allows for such immoral capitalism to continue in the world....


  1. so then how do you picture the world should work ? if this country were to discontinue wars or invasions. Are you a socialist?

    i agree though that the war on irag was unecessary , so im curious of what you think of the war in afghanistan?

  2. I guess my ideas are more socialist then anything but have you ever heard this idea of human rights? But if you could be so kind...Why are we in afghanistan again?

  3. As per capitalism versus socialism, there are a range of positions people can support. One way to think about it is which areas of society should exist as profit-making centers: education? health care? warfare? all? none?