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.

Nobel Peace Prize to ElBaradei?

The following letter – sent to the UK Sunday Times – is written by Akiva Orr, a member of the Israeli committee to free the entire Middle East of all mass-destruction weapons:

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2005 was awarded to IAEA and Mohamed ElBaradei for their “efforts to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military purposes and to ensure that nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is used in the safest possible way”.

Why did the Nobel Prize Committee prefer ElBaradei to Vanunu who was 18 years in Israeli prison for informing the world press about Israel’s nukes? Awarding the Peace Prize to Vanunu would have been a bold step against nuclear armament.

It seems the Nobel Peace Committee is afraid of antagonizing the Israeli government or of being branded as anti-Semitic.

Yet what are the facts?

1. Israel was the first to introduce nuclear weapons into the M-E and thus started the nuclear arms race in the Middle-East.

2. For 40 years Israel refuses to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)

3. Israel refuses to allow an IAEA inspection of its Dimona nuclear pile.

Anyone who REALLY wants to stop the nuclear arms race in the M-E must take active steps, like economic boycott, political pressure, severing diplomatic relations, etc. against Israel to make it sign the NPT and allow an IAEA inspection of Dimona. This will signal to all other governments in the region that the campaign is not one sided.

If Israel persists in its refusal to sign the NPT, refuses to allow inspection of Dimona, and refuses to return to Norway the 30 tons of heavy water lent to it only for research on condition that it is not used for the production of nuclear weapons, them the same steps that the USA and IAEA applied to Iraq must be applied to Israel.

What did ElBaradei do about Israeli nukes? Nothing.

What did he say about Israel’s refusal to sigh the NPT? Nothing

What did he say about Vanunu being jailed for 18 years for informing the world press about Israel’s nukes ? Nothing

He visited Jerusalem and refused to meet Vanunu lest this antagonize the Israeli government. No wonder Israel congratulated ElBaradei and the IAEA on receiving the Nobel Peace Prize.

The IAEA applied to Israel a very different policy from the one it applied to Iraq.

It tries to solicit co-operation on nuclear disarmament from a government that refuses for 40 years to do so. This policy has failed for 40 years.

Why continue with it?

Why reject any pressure on such a government to make it change its nuclear policy?

The USA, IAEA, and the Nobel Committee know very well that Israel has nuclear weapons and keeps building them in Dimona, and refuses to sign the NPT and refuses an IAEA inspection of Dimona.

Yet the USA, IAEA, and the Nobel Peace Prize Comittee adamantly refuse take any step against Israeli nuclear policy.

This makes them accomplices to Israeli nuclear policy.

Israel persists in its refusal to sign the NPT, ElBaradei and the IAEA do not even criticize this – and get the Nobel Peace Prize.

Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell, and Niels Bohr, would have denounced such a duplicity.

Very impartial.

Or, as Niels Bohr used to say: “VERY interesting”

Akiva Orr

  • Ibrahamav

    It is not half-witted. And it is not an inability to see.

    But it is sinister.

  • Shabadoo

    My God, it's so simple! If only the Jews would give up their nukes, and while we're at it, all their weapons, then the rest of the Middle East would disarm, Iran would ditch its nuclear program, and the whole region would be at peace!This half-witted inability to see or make proper distinctions between states betrays ignorance at best and more sinister motives at worst.

  • Wombat

    Distinctins between states, meaning that some states are more deserving of respect than others Shabadoo? What tests do you propose should be applied to gauge such qualification? Perhaps agression towards neighbouring states? No question Iraq would fail, but would Iran?Well, if nothing else, this should at least help see Iran's efforts in more perspective.It is unfortunate however that the NPT is not compulsory.

  • Ibrahamav

    Agression or threatening agression? In which case Iran and many other Arab and islamic countries fail.

  • Wombat

    Am I right to assume by your omission ibrahamav, that you regard all the conflicts that Israel has engaged in as being purely defensive on their part?

  • Ibrahamav

    Purely defensive? You would have to define that.Was 1956 purely defensive or merely an opportunistic time to slap the Egyptians over the continuous terroristic raids coming from Gaza? Especially when encouraged by the French and English.

  • Wombat

    Purely defensive as in repellign an attack and not motivated by the acquisition of territory. And speaking of 1956, how is this connected to Operation Susannah in 1954?

  • Ibrahamav

    I am not familiar enough with Operation Susannah to comment.Strictly using your definition of 'purely defensive' I can't come up with anything but a skirmish or two. But I would never use that definition for the term. My definition would include wording such as "to prevent an imminent attack".