Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

In "Shock Doctrine," I nod my head in agreement of many of Klein's ideas- namely that deliberately creating or relishing in disaster to pursue corporate interests or to exploit a country's resources is horrifically unethical. So what's the problem then? Klein makes a strawman's argument against a phantom opponent, whose ideas don't resemble anything Friedman actually believed or wrote. This would be obvious to anybody who actually read his works, in which he makes a case for individual liberty free of government intrusion, elimination of government handouts for corporations, and and organized democratic process that reflects the will of the people, while maintaining individual rights. Friedman never said that the fall of Communism should call for any foreign intervention to implement capitalism. He said that the failure of Communism RESULTED from the fact that people preferred to take control of the individual liberties that Communism once denied them. It was descriptive of the past, never prescriptive for the future. Klein gets the whole order reversed. Milton decried imperialist takeoevers, corporate theft, or governments usurping power. To Friedman understood that excessive central power tends to disproportionately trample on the rights of the poor. Friedman was suspicious of tyranny in all its forms, and believed that a government that gave special benefits to businesses (such as in eminent domain), over the property rights of the people, was despotic. And saying that Friedman was happy with Katrina because afterwards individuals got to choose their schools is like saying that someone would be happy that his dad dies, because afterward he makes sure to keep his health in check. Katrina was just one horrific example of how the government failed people. And criticizing the effectiveness of government, or the people demanding change after such a tragedy hardly constitute as celebrating the tragedy. (It so happens, that according to polls, the parents and children in the new charter LA schools LOVE them, because they are now empowered to choose and control their education, rather than be forced to suffer the same garbage education the government usually imposes on poor kids). Friedman believed that all actions should be voluntary and consensual, and that taking resources that belongs to the people of a particular region is nothing less than brutal theft. All I ask for readers of this book is to read "Free to Choose" by Friedman. Then decide if you think he was fairly represented in this sloppily researched book. If you still believe Klein's interpretation Friedman's ideas are correct, so be it, but I highly doubt you will.