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.

Taking a stand

May this politician’s initial bravery inspire others across the world:

“A senior Norwegian government minister has apologised after she lent her backing to a boycott of Israeli goods.

“Finance Minister Kristin Halvorsen withdrew her support for the action following intense criticism from fellow politicians, Israel and the US. But she insisted the decision to make the public apology was entirely her choice.

“She told Norwegian television: ‘I regret that I supported the initiative to boycott Israel. It was my mistake as a member of government to make a political statement in a way that opposes the policy of the majority of the government.'”

Such behaviour worked to end apartheid in South Africa, and may well have the same effect in Israel.

UPDATE: The US government is not happy with Norway:

“US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice threatened Norway with ‘serious political consequences’ after Finance Minister and Socialist Left Party leader Kristin Halvorsen admitted to supporting a boycott of Israeli goods.

“The reaction was reportedly given to the Norwegian embassy in Washington DC, and it was made clear that the statements came from the top level of the US State Department, newspaper VG reports.”

  • orang

    Well you know, Norwegians don't know about dirty politics yet. They are too honest and too straight and they just want to sort of get a long , that's their nature (unless you criticize them for hunting whales of course) A quote from the article,"The Simon Wiesenthal Centre has condemned the Sor-Trondelag boycott as “a continuation of Norway's collaborationist history” during the nazi era."What????? If I was the Norwegians I'd kick the motherfuckers arse for that one.and,"It added that the boycott placed the Oslo government in the camp of “the forces of terrorism”."F*ck off you pox ridden cocksuking whore.! (that's what I'd say if I was a Norgy.)

  • Ibrahamav

    If you were Norwegian, you'd reflect on the previous harm you committed against the Jews during your Quisling days, realize that South African Aparthied has nothing to do with the middle east, unless you realize that it is Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and other ME dictatorships which are so much more related to South Africa, and apologize until you were spent.Then send a sizable donation to the UJA to cleanse your lutherin soul.But you're just a simian. And answered accordingly.

  • Pete's Blog

    A boycott of Israeli goods would certainly be supported if not promoted by neo-Nazi's. Given the US will always buy Israeli goods (unsold on European shelves) is it valid for pro-Palestinians to consciously, or unconsciously (and futily) support a neo-Nazi cause?

  • Ibrahamav

    Israeli goods sell quite well on European shelves. As the pan_arab movement, which the Palestinian cause is a part of, is quite fascist and racist in nature, they should have no moral qualms in supporting anything else.However, please ask pro-palestinians who wish to cripple Israel economically thus causing collective punishment on 5 million Jews as well as 1.2 million muslims, to refrain from using anything technical or medical from Israel.You'll quickly find that these antisemites (and most vocal supporters of the Palestinians are just antisemities in the closet) give in on anything affecting their own lives.

  • Edward Mariyani-Squi

    Ibrahamav said… "However, please ask pro-palestinians who wish to cripple Israel economically thus causing collective punishment on 5 million Jews as well as 1.2 million muslims, to refrain from using anything technical or medical from Israel."Hi Ibby! Can we take it from this statement that you are opposed to collective punishment in general, or is this aversion to this tactic nation-specific?

  • orang

    The telling part of the article was not boycott or not, but the reaction to the politician's proposal. No diplomacy needed here. The politian is either a nazi or a terrorist sympathizer for suggesting such a thing.

  • Wombat

    That's a good point Orang. It's as thought the US wanted to make an example of Norway.I came across this today. amazing, given that their constituents probably never got a visit.

  • Ros

    She told Norwegian television: “I regret that I supported the initiative to boycott Israel. It was my mistake as a member of government to make a political statement in a way that opposes the policy of the majority of the government.” Seems she still approves a boycott just shouldn't put the boycott as a member of the government. Anybody able to say what the boycott mission was. Was it just boycott Israel because it is populated by nasty people. Or was there some end point at which the boycott could be lifted. Like hand over the West Bank or change your government or return the Palestinians (and send the Jews back to Iraq Iran etc).With this limited information it would seem that she justs objects to Israel so its abolition would seem to be her call. Hard not to see this as anti-semitic.

  • Wombat

    "With this limited information it would seem that she justs objects to Israel so its abolition would seem to be her call. Hard not to see this as anti-semitic."That's what I call institutionalised myopia. Not being aware of the details of the boycott, it's so much more convenent to assume it must be based on some irrational hatred of Jews.Even your suggestion that Israel was "just boycott Israel because it is populated by nasty people" proves you are fishing for a reason to dismiss this policy as being fuelled by anti-Semitism.When you are defending human rights abuses, I suppose this is the only reliable defense one can muster.

  • Ibrahamav

    As usual, eddie can take nothing from my statements. He lacks the ability to think coherently.I'm glad that this particular rogue politician realized she was in the deep ocean and forgot her swimming lesson. She was lucky that she could pull herself out before drowning.She was guity of institutionalised myopia. But then, she wasn't an institution and had to drop it.

  • Wombat

    Ibraham,Would you care to address Eddie's question? "Can we take it from this statement that you are opposed to collective punishment in general, or is this aversion to this tactic nation-specific?"Just for the sake of clarification.

  • Ros

    Thanks addamo, so the answer to the question what is the boycott mission is just a general, Israel is guilty of human rights abuses. If this poly calls for boycotts against nations on the grounds that they can be designated human rights abusers then Norway won’t be doing business with much of the world. Maybe she has, do you know? You might choose to wonder however, if she hasn’t, why Israel?Maybe this poly has a reasoned approach to her mindset on Israel. Are you aware of her thinking on this? If you are unaware of any more information as to her purpose and reasons and the origins and purpose of the boycott I would respectfully suggest that you are suffering from institutionalised myopia, then you are not an institution either. That is calls against Israel need no supporting reasons or purpose, just must be a good idea. I prefer my kind of myopia to yours.

  • Wombat

    Ros,You made an assumption that the government of Norway arrivd at a descision to boycott Israel that had no conditions attached to it. Whta's more, you based your assumtion on the same information I had.If indeed your assumption is correct (based on some blanket hatred of Israel), then I would agree with you entirely. Than again, such a policy would also be a diplomatic disaster.My reference to instituional myopia stems from repetaed altercations (civilised ones) with Israeli firsters who reject that criticism of Israeli foreign policy cannot have but one motive, anti-Semitism. Your haste to reach for this switch seemed typical of that. If I am istaken, I take it back and appologise.

  • Ibrahamav

    Addamo_01 said… Ibraham,Would you care to address Eddie's question? ******************************I don't know anyone who wishes to address the baiting questions of an antisemite.

  • Ibrahamav

    I don't recall reading anything from any Jew or Israel with any statement that even comes close to "reject that criticism of Israeli foreign policy cannot have but one motive, anti-Semitism."In fact, it is often antisemites who scream this invented notion from the roof tops whenever it is proven that some rogue politician is calling for abuse of Israel without having consulted the actual facts.The Norwegian government has not now, or ever, called for a boycott of israeli goods. For good reason. It would be laughed out of the league of moral nations.

  • Wombat

    So I take it Ibraham, you are against colective punishment of any kind?

  • neoleftychick

    addamoThe collective punishment that Islamofascists have dealt the Israeli people over the decades is an abomination that all moral people must denounce. I am just stunned st how patient the Israelis have been. I would have vaporised the asshole Islamists years ago.