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.

We need more bombs

While the world frets over the potential of a nuclear Iran, one Israeli is less worried. Jerusalem Post journalist and columnist Larry Derfner argues that military strikes against the Islamic nation would prove unsuccessful but he has another solution:

“…While I’m not happy about the prospect [of Iran going nuclear], I’m not going to have a nightmare over it because Israel, you see, has an answer to a nuclear Iran – more and better nuclear weapons of its own.

“It also has more and better chemical and biological weapons than Iran has. And Israel is going to keep on improving its WMD arsenal indefinitely. This is called deterrence, and it works well.”

So there you have it. Rather than trying to engage in dialogue, Israel should simply expand its arsenal and threaten anyone who dares challenges its God-given supremacy. Such Zionist arrogance goes to the heart of the problems facing Israel. When the US decides to seriously challenge Israel’s position in the Middle East, Israel will have to rely on more than military strength.

39 comments ↪
  • Wombat

    Yes Al,

    “You sound like an Arab.”

    Don’t you just love how when given just enough rope, these racist nutjobs all tend share this insatiable need to hang themselves?

  • violet

    So, is Israel supposed to roll over and die?You cannot seriously be claiming that the Arab nations want dialogue?How many times does Israel have to offer land to the Palestinians to make you happy? Three times isn't enough?You sound like an Arab.

  • violet

    Oh look. The Muslims in Denmark are so open to dialogue, they are calling for a boycott of Denmark because a cartoonist DARED to draw a picture of Mohammed. Antony, can I suggest you get your mediating arse over to Denmark to resolve this?

  • leftvegdrunk

    Violet, can you please clarify the connection between Denmark and Iran? Also explain what this has to with nuclear proliferation. Did youjust do a meta-search for Muslims?

  • leftvegdrunk

    Ant, this is a funny one. No doubt the right will support proliferation by Israel – with notable exceptions, of course – yet in the past there has been some suggestion that MAD won't work against Iran because they are irrational and crazy, unlike the Ruskis. It will be interesting to see where the war-mongers side on this one. And especially interesting to see what the likes of Pipes have to say.

  • Wombat

    When are you goign to get a grip n reality Violet? Even Israel has aknowledged that Iran is not even close to obtaining a nuclear weapon.But what do we have here?Israel's Sharon aims to scrap peace plan"http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L02599635.htm"As for being overly sensitive, why is Israel so sensitive about a show sating the obvious?Israel considers protesting BBC show on `secret weapons'http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=273071&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listSrc=YAs and for your quesrion:"How many times does Israel have to offer land to the Palestinians to make you happy?"Perhaps when Israel decides to actually hand the land over and mean it.

  • violet

    dirtbikeoptionI was demonstrating the Islamic awareness of dialogue as an option for resolving conflicts.You know, the: do as we say or we'll kill you one.You did know that Muslims live in both Denmark and Iran?

  • Wombat

    "I was demonstrating the Islamic awareness of dialogue as an option for resolving conflicts."As opposed to the Aemrican way of using dilalogue as say an obligatory precursor to conflict?

  • Antony Loewenstein

    I'm just loving this put-down:"You sound like an Arab."

  • leftvegdrunk

    I see. So you are saying that if Muslim A behaves in a certain way in a certain context, then Muslim B (or millions of Muslim Bs) will act in the exact same way regardless of the situation. Very clever.And the nukes fit in where?

  • leftvegdrunk

    Ant, lucky you weren't called a "faux patriot", because that would be racist.Seriously, where do you get these nutters from?

  • leftvegdrunk

    Oh, and Violet, your argument also assumes only one kind of Muslim, which is of course true. Well done. Point well made.

  • violet

    Nice boys. You pull out the racist card whenever you get in a tight spot. Well done. Oh, and the namecalling is very impressive. Oh, and Violet, your argument also assumes only one kind of MuslimYep, your right. I assume that all Muslims must take responsibility for the actions of a few. I believe any reformation or redefinement of Islam must come from within with pressure from without.Do you wimps have another suggestion? Or are you are content to sit on your arses and play with your blog? Masculinity on masse! Wow!

  • leftvegdrunk

    Your fallacious, infantile argument put me in a tight spot?Enough said. I'll leave you to solve the world's problems. Enjoy.

  • violet

    Antony,Here are some people showing how civilised they are — after those wicked Zionists gave them some land to make a new home.But, hang on, it isn't their fault. The Zionists made them do it, right?

  • Wombat

    Violet,As I seem to recall, you were lightning fast to draw the racist card. Perhaps next time we should ask your permissino before using it.Don't let us discourage you. What do we know? Perhaps bile alone will solve the worlds problems.

  • Shabadoo

    Is Violet NeoLeftyChick in disguise?Leaving her inaccurate hyperbole aside (not all Muslims are Arabs, not all Arabs are Muslims, etc), it seems disingenuous to argue that the Cold War MAD doctrine holds between Israel and Iran considering that:a. Iran's taking out Israel would not cause the entire planet to go up in a nuclear conflagration, as a USSR attempt on the USA would have caused, but rather irradiate a small portion of the Middle East;b. Considering that Ahmadinejad has implied that he is the 12th imam, among other things, there is simply no way to suggest that the Iranian leadership is made up of rational actors as was the Soviet politburo;c. Unlike Soviet Communism, which was godless and promised no afterlife, Islam takes a very dulce et decorum est stance when it comes to collateral damage, and Israel (and Jews in general) are a huge thorn in the side of modern-day and historical Islam…who's to say that Iran's leader wouldn't like to follow in the tradition of Eichmann, who when he was arrested in 1960, was lauded in the Saudi press as the man "who had the honour of killing six million Jews"?

  • leftvegdrunk

    Shab, on the money for the most part. I agree about Violet, although it's a pretty thin disguise.Part B, though, ignores some of the notoriously unstable characters within the Soviet. Ahmadinejad's comments are politically motivated and not necessarily indicative of some kind of perverse and irrational death wish. Consider the context. And remember that he is not the first – nor will he be the last – to make disgusting racist comments for the sake of domestic – even international- political gain.

  • Wombat

    Ah Shab, Believe it or not, but you are a breath of fresh air.a. It looks more like Israel/US is planning on taking out Iran, not the other way around. All Iran has stated is that it will retaliate. Logisticalyl, Iran has no hope in hell of succesfulyl starting anything.b. Ahmadinejad is a mad court jester. I doubt he has any more credibility in Iran than he does ion the international stage.c. I'd say that Iran is more of a thorn in Israel's ambitions of acquiring additional elbow room than the other way around.

  • Shabadoo

    Sure, Dirt, there were Strangeloves on both sides in the Cold War who wanted to "see the cinders dance" (RIP, Curtis LeMay), but obviously in both the USSR and the USA there were enough controls to keep any loose cannons from getting control of a warhead and popping off a missile, despite the Hollywood propaganda of the time…back to the topic, though, I have less faith in the sort of controls over the big-boy toys that a theocracy fraught with jockeying at the top and serious civil dissatisfaction down below could muster.But let's wargame this out a bit. Israel – and Addamo, I'll leave for the moment the phraseology of Israeli "elbow room", which sounds a bit close to "lebensraum" for my taste – it is pretty clear, maintains a nuclear arsenal for deterrent purposes, and to maintain a kind of stasis in a dangerous neighbourhood that's already ganged up on them three times. They aren't just going to let fly without reason, but the arsenal says to Egypt and Syria and everyone else, "Six Day War? Come and get us. We'll settle this in six minutes". As for elbow room, whatever "elbow room" Israel is looking for is pretty much around the margins of Gaza, the West Bank, and Southern Lebanon. Nukes don't even come into the equation.On the other hand, if Iran does get a nuke, and a delivery system, it radically changes the balance of power. And unlike Anty, I don't want to see a world with a level playing field: when you're playing for keeps, you want yourself and your mates to have all the advantages. Here the game gets complicated, and all sorts of nuclear blackmail scenarios, etc, come into view – to say nothing of a mullah-in-uniform who independently decides to let fly on Tel Aviv or somesuch. Just as the Israeli strike on Osirak in 1983 (?) was a great move – the whole Iraqi WMD question would be in a whole different place right now; imagine if a nuclear-armed Hussein had decided to invade Kuwait in 1991 and then hold the rest of the Middle East and the world hostage on the threat of, say, nuking the Saudi oil fields?We don't let crazy and unstable people buy guns; let's not let crazy regimes get nukes.

  • Wombat

    I doubt AL is any more keen to see nukes on all sides than you are Shab. What is frightening though is hearing rumors of pre-emptive nuclear strikes by the US on Iran. It is the epitome of madness, irrespective of which side you are on.Ahmadinejad may be crazy, but he is not unstoppable and by no means the ultimate authority in his country. Many buy into the existence of some collective Islamic of the Massada Complex in Iran, but that seem extremely unlikely. Iran is uniquely positioned now to exert more control over the Middle East than it has in a more than a Century. It makes no sense, madmen or otherwise, that they should chance that by driving Israel into the sea, when they know it's an impossibility.As for Israel's elbow room, Iran is the single biggest foe for Israel right now. With Iran subdued or made Israel friendly, Israel could enjoy a period free from the restraints it has endured until now. While everyone would welcome an era of true security for Israel, it is not beyond possibility that an Israeli strongman may not want to take advantage of this opportunity to turn greater Israel into a reality.

  • leftvegdrunk

    Fair point, Shab. The only question that remains is "what about those other crazies who want or already have nukes?"

  • Shabadoo

    The chances of a pre-emptive American nuclear strike on Iran are precisely 0% – though I'm sure that the Pentagon and other agencies and quasi-governmental thinktanks and strategists have worked through what would literally be "the nuclear option", just as they have every other option for this scenario. Let's not turn a rumour of a plan into a "this is what's happening next" – just like everyone turned a Pentagon study of worst-worst-worst case global warming into "Pentagon thinks ice caps to melt faster than a poolside margarita on a 38 degree day!"As you say Ahmedinejad is NOT the supreme authority in the country, and that is the serious danger of their having nukes: no clear chains of command, no stability at the top, etc. All the more reason to prevent their acheiving their nuclear aims.I've actually had the privilege of knowing some Iranians over the years, especially many Iranian Christians and others with heavy-duty business interests who had to leave after the Revolution, and all of my reading out of Iran suggests that much of the populus, especially the young, hate-hate-hate the Islamic government and the country has the potential to be pro-Western and enterprise-rich. Let's hope things shake out that way.Dirt, yours is of course the trillion-dollar question, but one thing at a time, mate, one thing at a time!

  • Melanie

    I actually know Larry Derfner. So he gives his take on the situation. When a journalist's opinion suits Antony, he paints him as a 'brave' person. When he doesn't like what he says he makes it sound like Israeli government policy.

  • Wombat

    Shab,You might want to take a look at this article from Der Dpiegel:http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,392783,00.htmlI hope you are right abtout 0% bit.

  • Ibrahamav

    Yes, lets have a dialogue with the next Hitler of the middle east, the new Irani president. Are you willing to give him Iraq if he'll leave Australia alone? How about New Zealand? Surely that's okay?

  • Wombat

    Hitler of the Middle East!! Wow, how orignial is that? You are so addicted to hyperbole Ibraham.How many deaths has this new Hitler been responsible for so far Ibby?

  • Ibrahamav

    What an ignorant ass. How many had Hitler killed before England gave him Czechoslovakia?

  • Wombat

    Soi the naswer is Zero I take it Ibby. How many people's lives has Sharon got in his trophy cabinet. Ahmadinejad better get busy tryign to catch up.Nice way to avoid an argument – chage the subject.

  • orang

    addamo_01, come on don't be lame. You cannot compare a lightweight crazie like Ahmadinejad with ….(drum roll please)….Ladies and Gentlemen we bring you……The Butcher of Beirut….The Bulldozer……The maaaaaaaan of peeeeeeeace..(snicker)

  • Ibrahamav

    I see you snicker when you fart. Good trick. Did you get your bone?

  • Wombat

    Ibby just loves humour.

  • Ibrahamav

    Not really. Nothing funny about about you.

  • Wombat

    I think your hillarious quite frankly.

  • Ibrahamav

    Symptom of your mental illness?

  • Wombat

    Says he who has been advised to seek phsycological help on numerous occasions by numerous posters on this list.

  • Ibrahamav

    To be told such by a nutcase like you is a compliment. Many thanks.

  • neoleftychick

    Ask the former 110 Iraqi citizens slaughtered today about "dialogue" with the adherents to the "religion of peace."For my tastes, the Israelis REALLY have to grow up and move on from all this post-modern cultural relativism crap and accept the honest truth that they are surrounded by tens, and possibly hundreds, of millions of religious nutjobs and filthy disgraces to humanity.Nuke them till they glow and don't spare the uranium!

  • Ibrahamav

    The Israelis have accepted that fact and are determined to live normal lives in spite of it.