The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, by Naomi Klein We'd seen Naomi Klein before on video giving talks. She works to put together pieces to make sense of them and to describe them to regular people. She's written a new book and done a new video "The Shock Doctrine" about Milton Friedman's brand of libertarian capitalism and its requirement for, and use of, violence, torture, and brutal shocks to get people into a state of weakened submission so that the laissez faire capitalists may put into place, without any resistance, and then dictate, a completely evil economic system for the fractured nation and finally the world. Naomi is correct in her analysis, of course. We've written about Milton along the same lines before.

Many others have also recognized that the so-called economic miracle in Chile was done only via an illegal and immoral coup, anti-democratic, and benefiting mostly rich and foreign exploiters. Naomi though does a particularly good job of emphasizing the direct connection between the same violent, sadistic shock treatments done on nations with those done on individuals as torture. It is the microcosm/macrocosm principle at work.

Of course, the shock and receptivity theory works, but it does not always result in evil selfishness. It depends upon the system in place before the shock. In fact, the coming wrath and Great Tribulation will be exactly such a shock after which people will finally be ready to accept an end to Milton Friedman's evil system. This is why we've often said and have written that it must get much worse before it gets much better. This outcome though is not what the current powers that be have in mind for the long-term or eternity. They falsely imagine that they are in ultimate control. They aren't, of course.

What is going to happen is that their standard will come full-swing back at them. They are going to suffer from what they've been dishing out to others while imagining they, the rich, are immune. They aren't.

We remember Milton Friedman's PBS series "Free to Choose." It was Milton in 1980 giving his all to make the case for economic libertarianism. "The free-enterprise system" is what it was called at the time and now "free-market economics." At the time and still, we found it incredibly dim-witted on its face. One of the most important aspects was realizing that Milton had no clue about the effect of preaching self-regulating selfishness would have on the effort to take care of and clean up the environment. There he was preaching that self-centeredness would magically cause people to work together to survive when in reality, the only preaching that will cause people to work together sufficiently to save the planet is the preaching of exactly the opposite of Milton's entire first principle of selfishness. The only people who listened to him were the greedy one's, many at the top. They want theirs while the getting is still good, before the resources run out and the planet becomes too polluted and before they die, leaving the disaster to posterity. What an evil, short-sighted, selfish, mentality that remains. It must and will be totally overturned.

The Christian Commons will inherit the Earth never to revert again to the evil, devouring spirit that is laissez faire capitalism. Egalitarianism and leaders who are the best servants will reign forever.

The use of the term "free" by the libertarians is highly selective. It is a connotation to mask the tyranny of insensitivity, pitilessness, indifference, neglect, abuse, and worse. Friedman thought that the only place for government was in forcing economic selfishness upon the people for the sake of the selfish. Now, the libertarians want all military and policing done by private enterprise, really corporations. The corporation is their state. Money, where it is placed, is the only vote necessary. Consequently, the one who corners the most money will have the greatest say regardless of how ruthless he has been or is in obtaining that corner. It won't stand. The prophecy is directly set against it.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.