Si vous lisez Greenspan-le-pathétique, lisez aussi (et surtout) Klein-la-prophétique

Le système a du bon. Il lui faut vendre, encore vendre et toujours vendre. Ainsi sa logique organise-t-elle des confrontations fructueuses (pour le commerce), — mais aussi vertueuses. En même temps que sort le livre d’Alan Greenspan, The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World, mémoires un peu inquiets du grand homme de la Federal Reserve, sort cet autre livre, de Noami Klein: The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, commentaire dévastateur de la critique la plus qualifiée, notalmment par son radicalisme, du phénomène du capitalisme de notre Fin des Temps. Les circonstances et les structures du système placent d’une façon très heureuse ces deux livres en concurrence directe. L’un ne va pas sans l'autre. Si vous devez lire Greenspan, tenez Klein à portée de vos yeux, comme référence critique. Le résultat est impressionnant.

Arianna Huffington écrit le 25 septembre sur son site Huffington Post:

«On one side is Alan Greenspan, whose The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World offers his usual free market uber alles philosophy, while attempting to rehabilitate his tattered image (which is worth about as much as the U.S. dollar these days).

»On the other side is Naomi Klein, whose The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism offers an alternative economic history of the last 30 years and, using the war in Iraq as a mind-blowing example, pulls the curtain back on free market myths and exposes the forces that are really driving our economy.

«Klein's book is powerful and prophetic. Greenspan's is pitiful and pathetic.»

On a compris qu’Arianna en tient pour Noami Klein, dont elle définit le livre en ces termes: «It's a brilliant dissection of what Naomi Klein calls “disaster capitalism,” an economic philosophy born half a century ago at the University of Chicago under Milton Friedman. It holds that the best time to institute radical free-market policies is in the aftermath of a massive social crisis, such as a terrorist attack, a war, or a natural disaster like Katrina.

»Klein shows how the crony capitalists running the Bush administration saw post-invasion Iraq as the perfect proving ground for all their pet free-market policies. The fantasy was that a privitazied and corporatized Iraq would become a free-market utopia that would spread the gospel of the market throughout the Middle East. Democracy would reign, and Halliburton and Bechtel would stand supreme.»

Sur le même site, l’acteur et metteur en scène John Kusak, devenu également chroniqueur politique engagé, interviewe Noami Klein (dix-sept minutes d’entretien mis en ligne le 26 septembre). Klein est essentiellement remarquable par sa compréhension aigue du caractère éminemment, ontologiquement déstructurant du capitalisme dans sa phase radicale actuelle, qui semble bien être sa phase de complet achèvement.

Allez également lire (et écouter si vous le voulez) l’entretien de Democracy Now !, du 24 septembre, qui met face à face Greenspan-le-pathétique et Klein-la-prophétique. Extrait (la fin de l’entretien), — où vous découvrez combien l’human nature porte de responsabilités dans les échecs du capitalisme, la corruption, les malversations, etc. Placé devant les effets de son application, la défense du capitalisme est toujours la même: human nature. Il est manifeste que, sans les êtres humains, le capitalisme marcherait à la perfection.

«NAOMI KLEIN: There is something that I was quite interested in in your book, which was your definition of corruption and crony capitalism. You said, “When a government's leaders or businesses routinely seek out private sector individuals or businesses and, in exchange for political support, bestow favors on them, the society is said to be in the grip of crony capitalism.” You say, “The favors generally take the form of monopoly access to certain markets, preferred access to sales of government assets, and special access to those in power.” I kept thinking about Halliburton, Blackwater, Lockheed and Boeing. You were referring to Indonesia at the time, but I’m wondering, according to your definition — and we’re seeing these extraordinary — we’re seeing contracting emerging, as in the words of the New York Times, a fourth arm of government. Front page of the New York Times talks about $6 billion being investigated for criminal activity in contract allocation in Iraq. I’m wondering whether you think the United States is a crony capitalist economy, according to your definition?

»ALAN GREENSPAN: Every economy exists, no matter what the level of democracy, has elements of crony capitalism. It’s — given human nature and given the democratic structures, which we all, I assume, adhere to, that is an inevitable consequence. The major issue is, is it the dominant force within an economy? It was the dominant force under Suharto. It is not the dominant force in this country.

»NAOMI KLEIN: Well, how about this: in 2003, when you were head of the Federal Reserve, the US government handed out 3,500 contracts to companies to perform security functions. In 2006, the year that you left the Federal Reserve, they handed out 115,000 such contracts. It seems to me that it is becoming a dominant force.

»ALAN GREENSPAN: Are you talking about the contracts that the Federal Reserve put out?

»NAOMI KLEIN: I’m talking about the crony capitalist system of a Republican government handing out an extraordinary level of contracts to private companies, who then support these politicians with the political favors that you’re describing in your book, in your definition of crony capitalism.

»ALAN GREENSPAN: [inaudible] Federal Reserve is doing this or the government?

»NAOMI KLEIN: You’ve overseen an explosion of the contract economy.

»AMY GOODMAN: Final word, Alan Greenspan.

»ALAN GREENSPAN: I’m sorry. I misunderstand what you’re saying. Are you saying the Federal Reserve is doing that or the government is doing it?

»NAOMI KLEIN: I’m saying that the US government is doing it.

»ALAN GREENSPAN: Well, the US government has to purchase equipment from the private sector. It doesn't produce it itself. And you may characterize it in many different ways. And, obviously, I’m not going to deny that there’s all sorts of corruption, which goes on in every country. The problem, essentially, for a democratic society is to maintain the civil liberties of the society and suppress that. Corruption, embezzlement, fraud, these are all characteristics which exist everywhere. It is regrettably the way human nature functions, whether we like it or not. What successful economies do is keep it to a minimum. No one has ever eliminated any of that stuff.

»AMY GOODMAN: Well, on that note, we’ll have to wrap up this discussion, because I know you, Alan Greenspan, have to go…»

Mis en ligne le 27 septembre 2007 à 12H08