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.

The set-up

“Israeli unilateralism means only one thing: it has nothing to offer the Palestinians, nothing worth negotiating over. The Road Map asserts that only a true end of the Occupation and the establishment of a viable Palestinian state will finally see the end of this conflict with its global implications. A genuine two-state solution may already be dead, the victim of Israeli expansionism. A two-state “solution” based on apartheid cannot be an alternative accepted by any of us.

“Yet apartheid is upon us once again. Sharon must act fast to complete his life’s work before his term of office expires within the next year. This is the crunch. We cannot afford to have our attention deflected by any other issue, important as it may be. It is either a just and viable solution now or apartheid now. We may well be facing the prospect of another full-fledged anti-apartheid struggle just a decade and a half after the fall of apartheid in South Africa. In my view, the next three to six months will tell.”

Jeff Halper, Coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD)

  • Ibrahamav

    Halper is a well known antisemite without anything to offer.

    Unless the Palestinians act quickly and come to the negotiating table in peace, Israel will dictate the borders of the second Palestinian state.

  • Wombat

    Dear ibrahamav,

    I am very surious as to what you would like to see happen and why?


  • Antony Loewenstein

    A well-known anti-Semite?
    Typical smear, based on lies.
    You’ll have to do much better than that…

  • Ibrahamav

    In the meantime, some proof of the nature of Halper:

  • leftvegdrunk

    Ibrahamav is a well known idiot without anything to offer.(Gee, that was easy.)

  • Ibrahamav

    Halper is well known. He is well known as an antisemite. For Lowensteins sake, I'll post all the proof on my blog and let the reader form his own conclution.Regardless, The Israeli government will finish the fence. Without Palestinian progress on negotiations, that fence will become the boundary and Israel will separate from what is left of the west bank of the jordan river.Hopefully the Palestinian nation of Jordan will come to their rescue as Israel cuts off all services.

  • Simon David

    Dear AntonyDont let anyone silence you – hang in there – it is people like you who are actually giving Israel some hope for a future.I was in Israel and the Occupied Territories last month and the situation there is truly horrendous. Im an Australian but have been living OS for the last 4 years, and I had forgotten how linited political debate is back home. The arguments that get you a bucketload of hatemail in Australia are mainstream political debate in Israel. The typical editorial page of HAARETZ would get you slapped down as an antisemite.The real threat to Israel is that the Palestinians are getting fed up with this whole charade – they are starting to lose all interest in a 2 state solution as it becomes clear that the "state" will be a chopped up bantustan. And they are not exactly unaware of the demographic trend running in their favour….

  • Ibrahamav

    The Palestinians were never interested in a 2 state solution other than as a temporary rest stage for the invasion of Israel.Truth helps.

  • Wombat

    How could they seeing as they have ever had a say in the matter. Facts help even more

  • Ibrahamav

    You should fault the Arab nations for that little factoid.But with the Palestinians actually having representation in the UN, I believe they have had their say.Yes, the facts help. But the facts usually condemn Palestinian and other arab leadership.

  • Wombat

    That's if you conveniently choose to ignore all the UN resolutions Israel cintinues to ignore.I'm sure that Israel would have more support at the UN if it showed some respect to it and international law. What is up to now Ibrahamav, something like 64 UN resolutions between 1955-1992? That has to be some kind of record.And that doesn't include the countless others that the US has had veto'd on Israel's behalf. Your factually challenged posts are begining to look increasingly shallow my friend.

  • Ibrahamav

    When Israel is accorded the full priviledges of membership, then it may take the resolutions with less salt.

    As for requiring US approval, you’re out on the wrong limb. General resolutions, which are the vast vast majority passed, do not require US approval.

    The vast majority of those Security council resolutions (which merely require the US to abstain to pass) also require action by Arab nations. Without that action, Israel has no need nor reason to act.

    Your whine about the term “antisemitism” has been tossed about for as long as the UN has been in existance. It has lost none of its sting. It has lost none of its meaning nor significance. And it has never stiffled debate.

    See how many times you can be wrong with one little post? Perhaps you should go to school and quit parroting Islamo-fascist and white supremist blogs?

  • Ibrahamav

    You bring up the typical antisemitic resolutions routinely passed by the UN and then call me shallow? LOL.What is shallow is your understanding of why so many resolutions are passed for so tiny a problem. How many resolutions pass condemning palestinian terrorism?

  • Wombat

    Ibrahamav,The Isealir government not only flouts the UN resoolutions, it repeatedly fluts the rulings of the Israei supreme court.How can you describe the UN resolutions as antisemitic when they coudl not ahve bee passed without the consent of Isaerl's greatest ally and benefactor, teh US?Would you describe those rulings as antisemitic?The antisitic label is being thrown around so often and abused that it is fast losing any meaning or significance orhte than a weapon by which to stiffle debate.

  • Edward Mariyani-Squire

    David said…
    “Much as I hate to suggest it, it might be time to consider a policy of banning such blatant trolls. I mean, just how interesting is the typical ibrahim av contribution? Typically, they all boil down to the charge of “antisemite!”.”

    A better reason for banning Mullah Ibrahim than the fact he’s as mad as a cut snake, is the fact that he gives such an ignorant, ugly, de-humanising face to Israel that, among the unititiated, he (implicitly and inadvertantly), more than any neo-Nazi, works to encourage anti-semitic thoughts. I wouldn’t want my son reading the Mullah’s garbage for fear that he would get a demonically distorted impression of Israel, Zionism and Judaism. The Mullah is definitely R rated.

    That said, I’m opposed to banning anyone – no matter how hateful. After all, there are Australians who attempt to censor Loewenstein on exactly these ‘grounds’.

  • David

    So which is it, ibrahim av? You seem to be claiming (incredibly) that Israel DOESN'T flout U.N. resolutions. But then you also imply that yes, it DOES, but it's alright because it hasn't been given enough membership priveleges, and because those nasty Arab states haven't behaved either. And besides, everyone knows the U.N. is really "antisemitic". Which is it?BTW, Does this "ibrahim av" guy never go away? He seems to be a perpetual presence at every site that has every expressed a criticism of Israel or ever even considered expressing a criticism of Israel.Much as I hate to suggest it, it might be time to consider a policy of banning such blatant trolls. I mean, just how interesting is the typical ibrahim av contribution? Typically, they all boil down to the charge of "antisemite!".He is a hater, pure and simple. And if his last post was meant to be a summary of Israel's compliance with world resolutions, then he is also a liar. I say good riddens to him.

  • Wombat

    Yes, Ibrahamav seems liek he has severe anger management issues.I sincerely doubt that he is able to post a message without using the charge of antiseitism.He will never aknowledge that it would be easier to combat antisemitism if the Israelis were not stealing Palestinian land in the West Bank or gradually taking over all of Jerusalem.And isn't it interesting how he managed to completely avoid the fact that Israel's conduct has even been condemned by it's own courts?Has anyone on this forum been able to make a valid critisim of Israel without Ibrahamav accusing them of being antisemitic?

  • Antony Loewenstein


  • Ibrahamav

    Amazing that defending unfair and likely antisemitic criticism of Israel provokes such a display!At least Loewenstein has the decency to reflect on the criticism while the rest of you yahoos knee-jerk yourselves into meaningless psycho-babble.Perhaps if you left out the antisemitism and you a fair stick to criticise, then it wouldn't be charged.Israel has no need to follow any resolution requiring Arab action when the Arabs refuse to act. If the Arabs flout them with impunity, Israel has every right to demand the same exemption.But your blatant hatred refuses to allow you to see anything like that.

  • Wombat

    I agree with Edward,Banning anyone is the worst thing we can do. Extremists soon identify themselves by the venom that emanates from their posts, their obsession with identifying enemys where there are none, and their refusal to actually engane in constructive debate.Ibrahamav does a great disservice to himself and his beliefs. He appers to have a compulsion to pull ot the charge of antisemitism at the very mention of Israel.

  • David

    "Banning anyone is the worst thing we can do."Yes you're probably right.(I do hope no one has been distracted from reading the Halper article. It's a convincing analysis, imo, and very frightening.)

  • Edward Mariyani-Squi

    Ibrahamav said… "Perhaps if you left out the antisemitism and you a fair stick to criticise, then it wouldn't be charged."My comments were about you personally. I have no idea whether you're Jewish or not. (Perhaps not: you didn't know about Katurei Karta, for example.) So one could hardly call me anti-semitic here.Is this post anti-semitic too. (Bear in mind I still have no idea whether you're Jewish.)