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.

Mitt Romney hates Palestinians (or maybe he loves them for the election campaign)

  • examinator

    In the leaked tape he clearly says there are 2 perspectives…. he outlined one the one he's held for some time i.e. that the Palestinians don't want peace ….for political reasons. He went on to say that is because they want to eliminate Israel, that (eliminating Israel ) is inconceivable.

    If I was focusing on only the down and dirty politics of the specific regimes that might be an interpretation. Certainly that of the intransigent current Israeli regime and some more radical power players in the various Arab (not not necessarily Palestinian alone). I really can't see the b/w conflict in Romney's WORDS saying that he will stand by Israel and is pro a two state solution. The only conflict come when one asks 'what does he mean by 2 states, side by side?' back to Palistan or 67 borders. One suspects he means the first ….but the words themselves AREN'T mutually contradictory.
    Is it poli- speak ? you betchum your booties .
    In my mind the interviewer was off beam she wanted a conflict… it make good TV but is it informative …..come on … this stage in the election what do you expect? Did you ever see the movie 'The Candidate' with Robert Redford?
    He started of clear hard then by the time of the election he was asking what do we stand for.
    This was the boiler plate for all elections ….put another way this is what you get when you cross one view fits all people and the marketing (spin) industry …. a product "that cleans like a white tornado " WT…. does that mean?

  • Kevin Herbert


    In your 267 words above, you've actually said:

    1. Romney has incompatible policy positions regarding Israel & the Palestinians.

    2. Politicians engage in double speak.

    3. The interviewer wasn't up to your standards of enquiry.

    4. Political messages are often contradictory.

    There…I said it in 46 words.

    • examinator


      [1. Romney has incompatible policy positions regarding Israel & the Palestinians. ]

      Sorry mate that's an over simplification and in fact misrepresents what I said.
      1. I said that the his word weren't inconsistent with each other although his policies * may* be as you define them.
      [3.The interviewer wasn't up to your standards of enquiry.]
      3. I said the interviewer had a predetermined perspective and wasn't interested in finding out what his polices were just to make a controversy .
      [4. Political messages are often contradictory. ]
      4 I said political messages are deliberately ambiguous… they mean what ever the listener's emotions want them to be.
      there is a difference between brevity and accuracy
      I'm sorry to complicate your world with the reality that Black or White (right or wrong) only exists in the mind of the observer both scientifically and figuratively.
      The relevance to the vid was that it proved nothing by way of a contradiction in policy from Romney.
      PS I wouldn't vote for Romney but on multiple grounds

      • Kevin Herbert

        So you used another 173 words and have not told us anything more.
        ..or even understood what I was actually getting at.

  • examinator

    Kevin I assume you are trying to tell me that I'm too verbose and that you don't like what I write. That's why the site has a thumbs down feature.
    The point I was making to you was * your 43 words* MISINTERPRETED/Misrepresented what I was saying. As I said there is a difference between brevity and accuracy.
    If I missed 'your point' then perhaps it is your brevity that is at fault.
    In the absence of anything new I'm calling this to an end too.