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.

How Hamas shoots itself in the foot

Inept, racist and bigoted fool:

A Hamas spiritual leader on Monday called teaching Palestinian children about the Nazi murder of 6 million Jews a “war crime,” rejecting a suggestion that the U.N. might include the Holocaust in Gaza’s school curriculum…

Hamas spiritual leader Younis al-Astal lashed out after hearing that the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, the main U.N. body aiding Palestinian refugees, planned to introduce lessons about the Holocaust to Gaza students.

Adding the Holocaust to the curriculum would amount to “marketing a lie and spreading it,” al-Astal wrote in a statement.

“I do not exaggerate when I say this issue is a war crime, because of how it serves the Zionist colonizers and deals with their hypocrisy and lies,” he wrote.

A U.N. official said no decision has been made about introducing Holocaust education in Gaza.

  • Marilyn

    Why is it bigotry though?   The kids of Gaza have nothing to do with the holocaust yet they have suffered for it for 62 years now so why would they want to have it rammed down their throats.

    Jews all over the world don't want to know this but they were not the only victims of that horror, there were gypsies, Serbs, Polish catholics by the million, the disabled, criminals were the major victims, and over 70 million people died in that war alone.

    The entire rest of the world has moved on and built new lives except jews who want to keep ramming and ramming it down throats to justify the horrors they are perpetrating on the Palestinians.

    Israel has made mourning the Nakba a crime, they refuse to teach about Palestine or Palestinians.

    Sometimes it ain't all about jews, sometimes it is just about other people too.

  • We can not dwell in the past.

    Our generation got nothing to do with Hitler’s holocaust. We were not there when it happened and we saw nothing. However, we are witnessing the Israeli holocaust in the occupied Palestine and it is our moral duty to speak out against it.

    No one can ignore the Israeli holocaust in the occupied Palestine. Therefore it will be hypocritical to cry about the old one while ignore the new one.

  • The total dismissal of the Holocaust and believing that it is a fabricated lie, is a foolish act on several levels. On the other hand singling out the sufferings of Jewish people as the only example of genocide atrocities is hypocritical.
    The fact is, throughout the history acts of mass persecution have claimed the lives of pillions of people of different races and beliefs. The UN would better set a course that teaches kids of all nations about that phenomenon. Within such context it would be accepted that Palestinian kids learn about the Holocaust provided that Israeli kids would learn about the Ethnic-Cleansing and war crimes practiced by their own country.

  • mallee

    Certainly a shot to the foot.

    However, it will be interesting if the Palestinians do study the mass murders of the second world war, they will understand the Israeli Psyhce so much more. They may even learn from the Israelis and not put up with being treated as the jews were in ww 11. They might even learn that Arabs had little, if anything, to do with what happened to the Jews in Europe and may well increasingly wonder; why the hell are the Jews in their lands, taking their houses and applying apatheid style laws to their peoples. The consequences might be interesing.

  • Duncan

    Almost every Israeli PM in history has either publically denied the very existance of the Palestinian people, or suggested that their expulsion is entirely justified, yet everyone is aghast when the Palestinians deny the holocaust.

    Stupid, racist, bigoted? Yep, holocaust denial is all these things.

    But why is the Palestinian education system being held to a higher standard than Israels own?

  • In my opinion, the UN has no business imposing an alien view of history on a people who are quite capable of educating their own children given half the chance (notably an end to the cruel economic blockade of Gaza).
    Antony, I think you need to decide whether your primary mission in life is to:
    (a) defend above all else core aspects of the Jewish narrative of history and social reality, or
    (b) serve as a genuine anti-Zionist and friend/ally of those oppressed by Zionism.
    Articles such as this suggest you primary mission is the former – that is, that you are primarily a gatekeeper, shepherding political progressives into unquestioning acceptance of a Judeophilic worldview. Yet other times you write as an impeccable anti-Zionist universalist. Perhaps you are conflicted?
    In the context of the debate underway some time ago within the Jewish community in Britain, I'd like to know whether you would you take the side of Gilad Atzmon or Tony Greenstein?
    It is NOT bigotry to adopt a questioning, skeptical approach to the 'official' history of World War Two – or to any other subject, for that matter. The ability to ask questions and debate important topics in open forum is fundamental to enlightened civilization.
    As you know, there is no such open debate over certain ''sensitive' aspects of World War Two history in the western mainstream media. The 'revisionist' case is given no airtime, nor may it contribute to the editorial content of mass circulation newspapers. This represents quite staggering censorship.
    The anti-Zionist cause is not well served, IMO, by supporting this attempt to stifle debate over what are, after all, historical events that were instrumental in giving birth to 'Jewish State'.
    Lord Victor Rothschild specifically used the six million estimate of Jewish war deaths in a speech to the House of Lords in 1946 – a speech that also signaled that Victor Rothschild, supposedly an 'anti-Zionist' member of his family, did in fact support the formation of a Jewish State in Palestine. He cited the six million as a reason why he changed his mind. His speech did not, of course, refer to 'The Holocaust', as that term was only associated with alleged Nazi atrocities from the late 1960s (the first references I heard, as a child, to the term 'holocaust', were in the context of a much-feared 'nuclear holocaust')
    Are we not allowed to question the six million figure because Rothschild said so, or because of the compelling historical evidence that it is the correct figure?
    If the latter, why is it that so many historians who disagree are routinely purged from academia, imprisoned or even physically attacked?
    Victor Rothschild, incidentally, according to the (Zionist) author Roland Perry, ended up in later years playing a crucial role advising the Israeli Government at the time of the 6-Day War. Israel's ability to read the communications of its opponents in 1967 – thanks to 'Enigma-style' technology – is probably why Enigma was classified Top Secret in Britain until after that crucial conflict in 1967, when Israel finally seized extra land craved by its leaders. Rothschild probably helped with that back in the UK – he had superlative connections within the British Secret 'Services'.
    So please forgive gentile anti-Zionists, such as myself, if occasionally we ask probing questions of our anti-Zionist Jewish allies.
    Once bitten, twice shy, as the saying goes.

  • Marilyn

    Giles MacDonogh discovered that fully two thirds of the Austrian and German jews who were supposed to have been killed actually had escaped to the US and UK before 1938, then came back and claimed survivor status.

    It was the brilliant Tom Segev who pointed out after Obama's visit to Buchenwald that of the 250,000 inmates about 56,000 died and only about 11% of them were jews.

    Not one other journalist bothered to point that out – easier to allow the false impression that the only people who died were all jews.

    It has to be questioned and investigated properly, not used as a whip for the world to be hauled into submission every time we criticise Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.

    Why is it taboo to have a proper investigation?    With their obsession for the dead why aren't jews crawling all over every square inch of Europe looking for the dead so they can build monuments to them?

    Could it be that the zionists preferred Palestine to the people?

  • If Antony is upset about this then I really don't blame him. Why are you berating him for being a man who's still attached to his heritage while also managing to  criticize Israel?

  • Hi JennyIf in my comments I appeared

  • Hi Jenny
    If in my comments I appeared to berate Antony, I apologize; it wasn't my intent to do so – and I really do appreciate him posting my controversial comment in full.
    However, his intro called a Hamas representative an "Inept, racist and bigoted fool". At a time when the legitimate elected Government of Gaza is under such enormous pressure, I think friends of Palestine should be careful about adding to the pressure.
    The other issue here, in my opinion, is the credibility of the UN. It is vital that the UN is regarded as truly impartial. Recent bad decisions by the Security Council have put this in jeopardy. In that part of the world, any perception that the UN is serving as an enforcer of Zionist ideology would be poisonous to its ability to fulfil its core functions.

  • How is wanting the holocaust taught to Gazan children enforcing Zionist ideology? I'm rather uncomfortable with the assertions on your site that praise David Irving and seem to give Atzmon a pass. You seem to want Antony to be an either/or when no matter what, he'll always  be considered Jewish heritage though he may not be religous. I think Atzmon totally misses the point as do other secular anti zionists(and I'm one of em).

  • Jenny:
    How is wanting the holocaust taught to Gazan children enforcing Zionist ideology?
    I tried to explain why in my previous post. Perhaps you'd like to re-read it?
    First, the origins of the Israeli State were closely connected with the historical events that are in question.
    Second, 'the Holocaust' is really a brand name, first applied to (some of) the events of World War Two c. 1970. It is very much part of the Zionist ideological 'package'. Indeed, it is central to it.
    Zionists are entitled to their ideological 'packages'. Other people are entitled to theirs. If historical events are said to be indubitable, why has it been necessary to attack the careers, livelihoods, freedom and physical well-being of so many scholars – left and right – who have expressed doubts over aspects of the official narrative of World War Two Jewish suffering (known as 'The Holocaust' for the last 40 years).
    Does that real and easy to prove, systematic and sustained persecution not suggest there are doubts which are being suppressed in a manner more in keeping with totalitarianism than democracy?
    Is that state of affairs healthy? Is it normal? Is it sustainable?
    You seem to want Antony to be an either/or when no matter what, he’ll always  be considered Jewish heritage though he may not be religous.
    I don't know Antony personally.  I have read a fair amount of his material over the last few years. I write as a friendly critic, who is impressed by some of his writing, puzzled by other material. I don't have any claims over his beliefs and values – or anyone else's. I was engaging in dialogue. I thought that was the point of  having comments enabled. In the end, we must all live with our own choices.
    The second part of your comment was clearly written in haste and doesn't really make sense to me. But surely Antony can speak for himself on his ideology, values and future directions?
    I think Atzmon totally misses the point as do other secular anti zionists(and I’m one of em).
    Your criticism of Gilad Atzmon is left unexplained.
    You appear to be saying you are missing the point too. That is confusing 🙂