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.

Whatever you say, Martin

“Renowned” Middle East “expert” Dr Martin Kramer argues – thanks to AIJAC – that the West supports Israel because of a moral obligation and shared democratic values. This predictable, delusional and naive interpretation is as convincing as the US occupation of Iraq.

Let him live in his delusions. Is this really the best Zionists can do?

  • Isaac Fain Dustup

    You forgot to put quotes around the word 'expert'…

  • Addamo

    shared democratic values

    What are those? Like the common ability to kill at a greater rate and more efficiently than any other country?

    Could it be that both share the value of threatenig to use nukes pre-emptively against non nuclear countries?

  • viva peace


    I wonder if you have actually read any of Kramer's books and articles? I have, and I acn assure you that nobody in Australia is even in the same class as an analyst.

    Perhaps you could point us to an anti-"Zionist" who outclasses Kramer?

  • captain

    Why its Ant himself!!!

  • john ryan

    The reason he is a first class anaylyst to Viva and Captain is because he agrees with them,one must NEVER critize Israel as its anti semitic,dont matter that Israel has stolen Palestinian land it is instituting Apartheid, it will not withdraw and dismantle the illegal settlements in the west Bank and it feels it can kill or jail anyone who dont agree,as the US is learning in Iraq and you would have thought the Israeli Govt would have learned by now you cannot oppress people for years and then complain when they fight back in any was possible,look at WW2.

  • captain

    john, can you please show us the property titles and demonstrate who "owned" the land? Was the land owned by the British, the Ottomans, the Romans, Muslims or Jews?

    Oh yes john, it is of course justifiable to murder people playing backgammon or having fun at a disco just because you believe you have been wronged.

  • David

    The "shared democratic values" theme is interesting. Clearly there is nothing democratic about a nation that assigns some rights to Jews but not non-Jews. On the other hand, I have to agree that much of our behavior here in the United States is indeed coming to resemble Israel's. Haditha springs to mind, as does Abu Graib, and Bagram.

    Most recently, our officials pronounced that inmates at Guantanamo were killing themselves in order to hurt us. Is that really so different from the Zionist's obsession with "anti-semitism"? We're all paranoids now.

  • Addamo


    I acn assure you that nobody in Australia is even in the same class as an analyst.

    Given that you speak of Hitchens in euqlaly glowing terms, that hardly speaks well of Kramer.

    john, can you please show us the property titles and demonstrate who “owned” the land?

    yes John, don;t you see that without evidence, there is no argument. The Australian aborigines and North American Indians were just so dumb not to have some land clams drawnup becasue he white man invaded. Serves them right.

    Oh yes john, it is of course justifiable to murder people playing backgammon or having fun at a disco just because you believe you have been wronged.

    Or to fire shells at Palestinains ona beach in Gaza, becase, well just bcause. Anyone knows that to interrupt agem of backgammon is a war crime.

  • captain

    Who Is to Blame for Grief on a Beach?

    By Charles Krauthammer
    Friday, June 16, 2006; Page A25

    It was another one of those pictures that goes instantly around the world. A young Palestinian, wailing in wretched sorrow, grieving over her dead father, stepmother and five siblings who had been killed by an explosion on a Gaza beach. Then came the blame. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (he's the moderate) immediately called the killings an act of Israeli "genocide" and, to dramatize the crime, legally adopted the bereaved girl.

    The sensational coverage and sensational charges raise the obvious question: Why would Israel deliberately shell a peaceful family on a beach?

    The Israeli government, clumsy as ever, seemed to semi-apologize by expressing regret about the deaths, implying that perhaps they had been caused by an errant Israeli shell targeting a Palestinian rocket base. But then, a few days later, an army investigation concluded that it was not Israel's doing at all.

    First, because the shrapnel taken from the victims (treated at Israeli hospitals — some "genocide") were not the ordnance used in Israeli artillery. Second, because aerial photography revealed no crater that could have been caused by Israeli artillery. And, third, because Israel could account for five of the six shells it launched at the rocket base nearby, and the missing one had been launched at least five minutes before the one that killed the family.

    An expert at a local chapter of a human rights group disputes the Israeli claims. Okay. Let's concede for the sake of argument that the question of whether it was an errant Israeli shell remains unresolved. But the obvious question not being asked is this: Who is to blame if Palestinians are setting up rocket launchers to attack Israel — and placing them 400 yards from a beach crowded with Palestinian families on the Muslim Sabbath?

    Answer: This is another example of the Palestinians' classic and cowardly human-shield tactic — attacking innocent Israeli civilians while hiding behind innocent Palestinian civilians. For Palestinian terrorists — and the Palestinian governments (both Fatah and Hamas) that allow them to operate unmolested — it's a win-win: If their rockets aimed into Israeli towns kill innocent Jews, no one abroad notices and it's another success in the terrorist war against Israel. And if Israel's preventive and deterrent attacks on those rocket bases inadvertently kill Palestinian civilians, the iconic "Israeli massacre" picture makes the front page of the New York Times, and the Palestinians win the propaganda war.

    But there is an even larger question not asked. Whether the rocket bases are near civilian beaches or in remote areas, why are the Gazans launching any rockets at Israel in the first place — about 1,000 in the past year?

    To get Israel to remove its settlers, end the occupation and let the Palestinians achieve dignity and independence? But Israel did exactly that in Gaza last year. It completely evacuated Gaza, dismantled all its military installations, removed its soldiers, destroyed all Israeli settlements and expelled all 7,000 Israeli settlers. Israel then declared the line that separates Israel from Gaza to be an international frontier. Gaza became the first independent Palestinian territory ever.

    And what have the Palestinians done with this independence, this judenrein territory under the Palestinians' control? They have used their freedom to launch rockets at civilians in nearby Israeli towns.

    Why? Because the Palestinians prefer victimhood to statehood. They have demonstrated that for 60 years, beginning with their rejection of the United Nations decision to establish a Palestinian state in 1947 because it would have also created a small Jewish state next door. They declared war instead.

    Half a century later, at the Camp David summit with President Bill Clinton, Israel renewed the offer of a Palestinian state — with its capital in Jerusalem, with not a single Jewish settler remaining in Palestine, and on a contiguous territory encompassing 95 percent of the West Bank (Israel making up the other 5 percent with pieces of Israel proper).

    The Palestinian answer? War again — Yasser Arafat's terror war, aka the second intifada, which killed a thousand Jews.

    This embrace of victimhood, of martyrdom, of blood and suffering, is the Palestinian disease. They are offered an independent state. They are given all of Gaza. And they respond with rocket attacks into peaceful Israeli towns — in pre-1967 Israel proper, mind you.

    What can Israel do but try to take out those rocket bases and their crews? What would the United States do if rockets were raining into San Diego from across the border with Mexico?

    Now look again at that terrible photograph and ask yourself: Who is responsible for the heart-rending grief of that poor Palestinian girl?

  • David

    Poor Krauthammer. Looks like he wrote his Washington Post apologia before the the full extent of the Israeli coverup was exposed. I wonder if he'll offer a retraction? 🙂
    "The fragment of shrapnel, marked with numbers and two letters, was removed by Palestinian doctors from the abdomen of a teenage boy caught up in the blast.

    With Israel denying responsibility for the blast, an American munitions expert identified the shard as coming from the fuse of an artillery shell."

    "Meanwhile Israel's version of the timeline of Friday's events came under pressure last night after the discovery of a computer read-out on a blood test carried out on one of the victims in the Kamal Adwan hospital in Gaza.

    The read-out is marked at 5.12pm suggesting the incident happened around 4.45pm as it takes roughly half an hour for the ambulance to be dispatched from the hospital, reach the beach, return and deliver a patient to the blood testing centre.

    This timeline does not fit with Israel's account."

  • captain

    And of course Pal doctors are among the most honest in the world. Remember that cute story of the child literally dying from "shock"? (and I don't mean the physiological kind) Or what about the exaggerated Jenin casualties? Or the ambulances that carry terrorists?

  • ed squire

    captain Jun 17th, 2006 at 9:58 am

    Who Is to Blame for Grief on a Beach?

    By Charles Krauthammer

    I didn't get around to reading the article, but based solely on the name, I'll bet the answer to the question is: "Why, the Palestinians, of course." Am I right?

  • captain

    Oh, if a non self-hating Jew writes it, it must be false. Am I right?

  • Addamo


    Quoting from Charles Krauthammer? Oh my god, has it gotten that dour for you? Why not cut to the chase and just quote from Horoqitz next time?

    Too funny. Just too funny. I hope you are getting paid a lot to expose yourself in public like that.

  • viva peace

    John Ryan/Addamo

    As it is quite clear, that like AL, neither of you has read Kramer's work, why the hell are you still banging on with your bullshit? Do you people EVER read anything that requires a 3 digit IQ to comprehend?

    I am now convinced that you people are just dumb, ignorant, bigoted, and bitter. Having contributed to this blog for a few months now, I now see the full ugliness of the anti-semites and other Israel-haters. No wonder the poor wretched Palestinians have no friends with a PR machine made up of you clowns!

  • Addamo

    That's right Viva,

    You being the poster boy of tolerance, love, knowledge, truth, forgiveness, empathy and compassion. We are not worthy.

    If this audio file is any indication of Kramer’s fragile intellect, it speaks equally about yours. Being eductaed does not guarantee intelligence. You'll learn that one day.

  • Addamo

    By the way Captain,

    Looks like Karuthammerr's story is already being conradited by the IDF of all sources – imagine my surprise!!

    Israel admits shell report flaws

  • ed squire


    Jun 18th, 2006 at 1:53 am

    Oh, if a non self-hating Jew writes it, it must be false.

    Hardly. Non-self-hating Jews like Jacqueline Rose seem to be on the ball. Not sufficently pious for ya? How about Martin Buber – another excellent, nay, brilliant, non-self-hating Jew.

  • Addamo

    I just listened to Martin’s speech and I must say, it sounded pretty much like Desrhowitz without the signature high pitch shrills.

    He argues that the pre 1967 US/Israel alliance, Israel was making friends with the likes of France, Russia and the UK. During the Cold War, Israel was a bulwark against Soviet Clients. So in essence, what he is admitting is that Israel is a loose cannon that must be kept from budding up to US adversaries.

    He talks about a Pax Americana, which JFK warned us about, as though it were the ultimate gift to the world. He insist that the relationship between Egypt and Israel is some resounding success, but fails to acknowledge that it is nothing more than an agreement held together by money and rubber bands.

    He is utterly delude in maintain that the US has rewarded Arab people who recognize Israel by seeing to it that Israel gives up more of the occupied territories.

    He refers to the revolution in Iran as a set-back for the US, while purposely ignoring any mention of the overthrow of Mossadegh.

    He paints Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait as anti-American, while purposely ignoring that the US tricked Saddam into doing do when US ambassador to Iraq, April Glasby, told Saddam the US would stay out of any issue between the two countries. He blatantly ignores that had the US warned Saddam from the beginning, he would likely have refrained.

    He maintains that the absence of an Arab ally like Israel in the region has FORCED the US to deploy in the Gulf States over and over again. Again, his recollection of history is selective enough to omit the inconvenient facts that have led to US involvement in the region.

    He blames the Arab states in the Gulf for US presence, as opposed to the obvious fact that the US presence was inevitable, because it does not tolerate states who put the interests of their own people before those of the US.

    At least he is lucid enough to admit that this is all driven by the US dependency on oil, and it’s need to guarantee an oil supply.

    His insistence that Israel is upholding US interests is completely ludicrous. In order to rebut the Harvard paper, he vainly attempts to portray Israel’s actions and policies as being pro US, which is absurd. I wonder how he rationalizes that against Israel arms sales to China and attempted arms sales to Venezuela.

    He disingenuously states that he does not know any serious terrorism expert who believes that the US support for Israel is grievance that helps recruitment for terrorist s groups. Has the guy not heard of Michael Sheuer? Talk about spin!!! He uses the bizzaro logic to argue that because no terrorist groups attack the US for this reason alone, that it must not be a factor.

    Then he turns around and admits that even though Al Qaeda mentions the Arab Israeli conflict, it is only part of a list, and not a reason in itself.

    He insists that Israel was against the war with Iraq, and did nothing to push for the attack on Iraq, wanting the us to attack Iran first. What absolute bunk!! Has the guy not heard of the OSP, which was run by Likudists Feith and Wolfowitz? Has not heard of the influence of other Likudists like the authors for the war, Woflowitz and Perle?

    His reasons given for why Saddam invaded Kuwait are the epitome of willful ignorance and outright BS. Not mention is made of the disputes between Iraq and Kuwait before the invasion, the fact that Kuwait was stealing oil from Iraq while simultaneously demanding that it’s loans to Iraq be repaid immediately.

    He constantly refers to Israel insecurity as something the world must learn to tolerate, along with Israel’s irrational behavior and policies. In essence, he admits that Israel is a loose cannon, and that the US must continue to quell Israel’s anxieties in order to avoid conflict in the region.

    He employs circular logic to insist that the US unconditional support for Israel has to be in accord with US interests, and that there would be no support for Israel if it threatened US access to oil. What he fails to recognize is that there is clearly a division between oil interest s and US policy towards Israel. For example, the neocons wanted to privatize Iraq’s oil, while the oil companies opposed this entirely.

  • If I had not already decided long, long ago that Bill Bonner is just right when he says that people come to believe the things they need to believe when they need to believe them, I would have no logical explanation for how anybody can believe in "the peace process." Israel is not going to give up Jerusalem, nor allow itself to be un-Jewished at a blow by granting the "Right of Return." The Palestinians are not going to settle for Jerusalem being held by Israel, nor will the surrounding Arab countries ever grant the sixty-year-plus "refugees" citizenship or take them out of their reverse Potemkin-villages.

  • I have started to think about bankruptcy as my onle option at this time. I am just a little unclear about The difference between chapter 7 and Thirteen bankruptcy. I reside in Florida plus own a home but We’ve no earnings for making any type of payments at the moment. I would want some expert advice if perhaps anyone could share a handful of insight depending on my situation.