Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein trav­els across Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea, the United States, Britain, Greece, and Australia to witness the reality of disaster capitalism. He discovers how companies such as G4S, Serco, and Halliburton cash in on or­ganized misery in a hidden world of privatized detention centers, militarized private security, aid profiteering, and destructive mining.

Disaster has become big business. Talking to immigrants stuck in limbo in Britain or visiting immigration centers in America, Loewenstein maps the secret networks formed to help cor­porations bleed what profits they can from economic crisis. He debates with Western contractors in Afghanistan, meets the locals in post-earthquake Haiti, and in Greece finds a country at the mercy of vulture profiteers. In Papua New Guinea, he sees a local commu­nity forced to rebel against predatory resource companies and NGOs.

What emerges through Loewenstein’s re­porting is a dark history of multinational corpo­rations that, with the aid of media and political elites, have grown more powerful than national governments. In the twenty-first century, the vulnerable have become the world’s most valu­able commodity. Disaster Capitalism is published by Verso in 2015 and in paperback in January 2017.

Profits_of_doom_cover_350Vulture capitalism has seen the corporation become more powerful than the state, and yet its work is often done by stealth, supported by political and media elites. The result is privatised wars and outsourced detention centres, mining companies pillaging precious land in developing countries and struggling nations invaded by NGOs and the corporate dollar. Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein travels to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea and across Australia to witness the reality of this largely hidden world of privatised detention centres, outsourced aid, destructive resource wars and militarized private security. Who is involved and why? Can it be stopped? What are the alternatives in a globalised world? Profits of Doom, published in 2013 and released in an updated edition in 2014, challenges the fundamentals of our unsustainable way of life and the money-making imperatives driving it. It is released in an updated edition in 2014.
forgodssakecover Four Australian thinkers come together to ask and answer the big questions, such as: What is the nature of the universe? Doesn't religion cause most of the conflict in the world? And Where do we find hope?   We are introduced to different belief systems – Judaism, Christianity, Islam – and to the argument that atheism, like organised religion, has its own compelling logic. And we gain insight into the life events that led each author to their current position.   Jane Caro flirted briefly with spiritual belief, inspired by 19th century literary heroines such as Elizabeth Gaskell and the Bronte sisters. Antony Loewenstein is proudly culturally, yet unconventionally, Jewish. Simon Smart is firmly and resolutely a Christian, but one who has had some of his most profound spiritual moments while surfing. Rachel Woodlock grew up in the alternative embrace of Baha'i belief but became entranced by its older parent religion, Islam.   Provocative, informative and passionately argued, For God's Sakepublished in 2013, encourages us to accept religious differences, but to also challenge more vigorously the beliefs that create discord.  
After Zionism, published in 2012 and 2013 with co-editor Ahmed Moor, brings together some of the world s leading thinkers on the Middle East question to dissect the century-long conflict between Zionism and the Palestinians, and to explore possible forms of a one-state solution. Time has run out for the two-state solution because of the unending and permanent Jewish colonization of Palestinian land. Although deep mistrust exists on both sides of the conflict, growing numbers of Palestinians and Israelis, Jews and Arabs are working together to forge a different, unified future. Progressive and realist ideas are at last gaining a foothold in the discourse, while those influenced by the colonial era have been discredited or abandoned. Whatever the political solution may be, Palestinian and Israeli lives are intertwined, enmeshed, irrevocably. This daring and timely collection includes essays by Omar Barghouti, Jonathan Cook, Joseph Dana, Jeremiah Haber, Jeff Halper, Ghada Karmi, Antony Loewenstein, Saree Makdisi, John Mearsheimer, Ahmed Moor, Ilan Pappe, Sara Roy and Phil Weiss.
The 2008 financial crisis opened the door for a bold, progressive social movement. But despite widespread revulsion at economic inequity and political opportunism, after the crash very little has changed. Has the Left failed? What agenda should progressives pursue? And what alternatives do they dare to imagine? Left Turn, published by Melbourne University Press in 2012 and co-edited with Jeff Sparrow, is aimed at the many Australians disillusioned with the political process. It includes passionate and challenging contributions by a diverse range of writers, thinkers and politicians, from Larissa Berendht and Christos Tsiolkas to Guy Rundle and Lee Rhiannon. These essays offer perspectives largely excluded from the mainstream. They offer possibilities for resistance and for a renewed struggle for change.
The Blogging Revolution, released by Melbourne University Press in 2008, is a colourful and revelatory account of bloggers around the globe why live and write under repressive regimes - many of them risking their lives in doing so. Antony Loewenstein's travels take him to private parties in Iran and Egypt, internet cafes in Saudi Arabia and Damascus, to the homes of Cuban dissidents and into newspaper offices in Beijing, where he discovers the ways in which the internet is threatening the ruld of governments. Through first-hand investigations, he reveals the complicity of Western multinationals in assisting the restriction of information in these countries and how bloggers are leading the charge for change. The blogging revolution is a superb examination about the nature of repression in the twenty-first century and the power of brave individuals to overcome it. It was released in an updated edition in 2011, post the Arab revolutions, and an updated Indian print version in 2011.
The best-selling book on the Israel/Palestine conflict, My Israel Question - on Jewish identity, the Zionist lobby, reporting from Palestine and future Middle East directions - was released by Melbourne University Press in 2006. A new, updated edition was released in 2007 (and reprinted again in 2008). The book was short-listed for the 2007 NSW Premier's Literary Award. Another fully updated, third edition was published in 2009. It was released in all e-book formats in 2011. An updated and translated edition was published in Arabic in 2012.

Unedifying spectacle

Guess who?

An over 40 smoker who loves correcting spelling mistakes. A propagandist who can’t bring himself to criticise conservative leaders lest they stop sending him Christmas cards. A Court Reporter whose contribution to the journalistic canon can be summarised in one word: negligible. Any ideas yet?

Let me continue.

A man whose mates like comparing critics to Jewish concentration camp guards. (What are his kind saying about inciting hatred in the wake of the London attacks?) A meek individual whose output consists of little more than columns, criticism and bile. A writer afraid to actually report from the real world nor travel to places without an official guide.

Give up?

Yep, got it in one. Welcome to Australia’s favourite son. He rather reminds me of Robert Manne’s description of Herald Sun “journalist” Andrew Bolt. Reading him is like “being trapped in a small room with an angry, indignant, simple-minded man who believes the best way of convincing you that he is right, yet again, is to ridicule and shout.”

For those who believe in a black and white world – so reassuring, isn’t it followers? – bigotry, racism and ridiculing mental illness becomes part of the intoxicating mix.

Contribution to the world?

20 comments ↪
  • Phil

    Ha, got it in the first line.. Funnily enough I have just read Manne's Monthly piece at the cafe, too right. It was pretty good but nothing that you don't see weekly in the blogsphere, by folks like moi and Anon Lefty's Boltwatch. It appears that you still need the gentrified writers of the Monthly to make something real.

  • Antony Loewenstein

    Bugger! Thought maybe it would remain more of a mystery…Manne piece is alright – though i blogged about this a few days ago – but simply going after the Murdoch press is too bloody easy. Fairfax is often rarely better…

  • weezil

    Tim who?

  • Anonymous

    Oh fer the love of pete…he smokes? That's somehow a bad thing? Jeez, could you be any more ridiculous.

  • Antony Loewenstein

    jeez, for the love of pete, you don't get irony, do you Anon! THAT'S THE POINT!

  • Tim

    Pete who?

  • leftvegdrunk

    Spot on description of the man and his pitiful body of sniping and pointless work. Well said.Blair embodies what it is to be a defender of the conservative powers – no real understanding of anything, just a repetitive and mind-numbing series of attacks upon anyone who opposes or questions the prevalent system, characterised by abuse, innuendo, pettiness, and generalisations. And wherever you see this kind of behaviour in his writing you can expect that the "commenters" who habitually join the chorus will take things to the extreme. As they are meant to. A loud mouthed idiot with a small, vocal, ignorant cheersquad. Oh, and a love of banning dissenting contributors. Democracy, right wing style.

  • Mike Jericho

    Spot on description of the man and his pitiful body of sniping and pointless work. Well said.Coming from someone who has almost certainly never met Blair, I'd say your concurrence is worth precisely zilch.Blair embodies what it is to be a defender of the conservative powers – no real understanding of anything, just a repetitive and mind-numbing series of attacks upon anyone who opposes or questions the prevalent system, characterised by abuse, innuendo, pettiness, and generalisations.Aside from the uninformed, petty abuse, innuendo and generalizations you've just hurled around like a dead parrot, do you have anything of substance that you can use to evidence your arguments against Blair? And wherever you see this kind of behaviour in his writing you can expect that the "commenters" who habitually join the chorus will take things to the extreme. As they are meant to.Coming from an ardent member of the Loewenstein chorus, that was particularly lame and hypocritical. A loud mouthed idiot…Tim speaks so quietly in person that the first time I met him I had to keep asking him to repeat what he'd said.…with a small, vocal, ignorant cheersquad.Several million people a year read Tim's blog. How many read Antony's? He has accused Tim of making no impact and contributing nothing. Please show us how he stacks up in a way that is measurable, and doesn't end up inadvertantly proving that if Tim is a zero, Antony is a negative person.Oh, and a love of banning dissenting contributors.That's Andrea's call, not Tim's.Democracy, right wing style.I have never seen Tim as ingracious or insulting to a person of whom he has no personal knowledge. All you have done is prove our estimations of Antony's readership to be spot-on.

  • Shay

    Wow… I just added a comment mildly critical of the Iraq war to Tim's post about bombing Leeds… You should've seen how I got jumped on! The Tim Blair readership seem like a balance of kneejerk abuse merchants, and Tim's kind of people, which means moderately intelligent people who manage to sound informed and considered in their opinions, but always manage to come to the conclusion that everything Bush or Howard does or says is right, and everything the left does or says is wrong.Not sure if I should keep my comments restricted to Antony's blog for safety's sake, or if I should enjoy the stoush and keep on stirring them up over at Spleenville. But one thing's for sure, I'll never tick the "Notify me by email when someone replies to this post" box on my comments again.

  • guinsPen

    That's AndreaTEH EVIL !!!

  • Mike Jericho

    "…but always manage to come to the conclusion that everything Bush or Howard does or says is right, and everything the left does or says is wrong."I'd say that your exposure to us is too limited. I've disagreed with Howard on certain issues from the start. One of his first really appalling decisions as PM was to fire the only two Australian astronomers surveying the southern sky for potential ELE-size asteroids, as a part of an international effort. At the time, I despised him for it. I thought it was myopic and indicative of a man who had no ability to think in the longer term.I still hate that decision. But I must admit that his actions in response to 9/11 (as well as later terrorist attacks) were as good as anyone could have hoped from a politician. He was more of a leader than France or Germany have enjoyed over the same period. He has served our long-term interests handily.I have also openly sided with the left over the issue of gay marriage. It drew some heat, but people have strong opinions. It's to be expected.From my point of view, the worst ad hominem attacks have always resulted from voicing a contrary opinion on major leftist sites. One draws pure vitriol, and nothing in the way of factual opposition. It isn't too bad here, yet, mainly because Antony hasn't garnered to himself enough fanatical, uncritical minions.

  • Andrea

    Actually, although Tim gives me free rein to ban, I leave the final banning decision up to Tim. If he asks me to unban people I do so.

  • Mike Jericho

    My mistake. Apologies.

  • Michael

    "Wow… I just added a comment mildly critical of the Iraq war to Tim's post about bombing Leeds… You should've seen how I got jumped on! "Actually Shay, you made several comments in that post, the first you defended for a little while, before accepting that the comment was particularly stupid saying: "I’m fully willing to accept that my point was daft.", then you spouted a few standard anti-war talking points about Iraq in another comment. A few readers just made deragoratory remarks, but at least three others took the time to write out fairly long replies quite effectively fisking your comments. Strangely enough at that point you seemed to find another pressing appointment to go to.

  • leftvegdrunk

    So this is what happens when you get a link from Blair's blog…

  • Andjam

    A propagandist who can't bring himself to criticise conservative leaders lest they stop sending him Christmas cards.Do you seriously believe that, or do you just like making stuff up?First line of first paragraph:An over 40 smoker who loves correcting spelling mistakes. First line of second paragraph:A man whose mates like comparing critics to Jewish concentration camp guards. You go on to say that it's ok for him to smoke. Can you clarify whether or not it was fair enough for one of his mates to compare you to a Jewish concentration camp guard? Or perhaps he/she should have compared you to a non-Jewish concentration camp guard instead?

  • David Heidelberg

    Wow, Andrea commented on your blog. Quick ban her!!

  • Dave S.

    "A few readers just made deragoratory remarks, but at least three others took the time to write out fairly long replies quite effectively fisking your comments. Strangely enough at that point you seemed to find another pressing appointment to go to."Yep, I'm still waiting.

  • Dave S.

    "A writer afraid to actually report from the real world nor travel to places without an official guide."Hmm. He had an official guide during his American trip?"For those who believe in a black and white world – so reassuring, isn't it followers?"Trotting out the old "mindless sheep" meme yet again, eh? Very lazy of you. There are quite a few arguments amongst us "followers." Check out the threads on Chapelle Corby and Terry Schiavo, for example. On the latter, Great Leader Blair was opposed to removing the feeding tube, and many of us disagreed. Shockingly, we weren't cast out from the village as heretics. Speaking of which, you apparently have never seen the sniping between the libertarians and the Christers, either.Oh, and BTW, we don't think it's a black and white world. Just in some respects, like religious fanatic murderers are evil and democracy is good. Silly, eh? As to "reassuring", well, it seems to me that a moral relativist outlook that assumes no evil and that everybody can be buddies if we just talk it out is far more "reassuring." Knowing that there are evil bastards out there and you need to do unpleasant things to stop them is not "reassuring" – it's adult. "bigotry, racism and ridiculing mental illness becomes part of the intoxicating mix."I assume by "ridiculing mental illness" you're referring to Tim's takedowns of ridiculous people like Richard Neville and Margo Kingston. I believe the mockery would end if they got the psychiatric help they needed. As long as they're being paid for their delusions, they're fair game. As for "bigotry" and "racism" – prove it. Cite just one example of Tim being bigoted or racist. Just one. Stop throwing these words around so casually. That's lazy, too. That's why the Left has become so marginalized – you trot out the same baseless, tired ad hominems, and people are learning to tune you out.

  • Comical_Ali

    "He rather reminds me of Robert Manne's description of Herald Sun "journalist" Andrew Bolt. Reading him is like "being trapped in a small room with an angry, indignant, simple-minded man who believes the best way of convincing you that he is right, yet again, is to ridicule and shout."My Dear Antony there is an old chasidic/Jewish saying – if you see a negative attribute or characteristic in someone its usually only just a reflection of ure own.who knows if you get back to ure Jewish roots you might get just a little wiser.