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.

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.

Making Freedom of Information more accessible in Australia

As a journalist, I’ve spent time investing in Freedom of Information requests that sometimes go nowhere and sometimes go far (see my report, with Paul Farrell and Marni Cordell of New Matilda, of the first time the entire contract between the Australian government and British multinational Serco was published in 2011).

Today sees the launch of a new campaign, Right to Know, which hopes to put tools in the hands of the public. Bravo. If corporate media was smarter, which it’s not, it would empower citizens to assist in its investigations. Instead, there’s a ghetto mentality. Collaboration is a key into future reporting:

  • examinator

    What Antony? You want people generally to know what they have opinions on ? Strewth, that *would* be novel!

    Jokes aside, Most people don't understand how councils work much less governments! Personally I'd be happy if they understood basic civics.

    Small point in your articles in Matilda (good by the way) but a small functional correction . You said Julia Gillard's government signed the contract. Technically that's sort of true but realistically it was the Department that did the negotiation, the contract drafting and presented the minister for his/her notional signature.

    In this instance there are two fundamental errors that have combined to make this an unmitigated disaster.
    – The first is woeful contract negotiation and design
    – secondly even more woeful control/ supervision probably due to the first.
    There is a wide gap between that and credible evidence that the minister or the government are culpable (regardless of which side of parliament has the treasury benches it occurred under).
    It is political partisan nonsense to blame JG for the poor Departmental negotiation or drafting the blame is with the Departmental internal supervision and expertise.
    It is nonsense to blame JG for the poor Departmental negotiation or drafting the blame is with the Departmental internal supervision and expertise.
    It is logically unsound to conclude that because of the above flaw/ short comings that private operation of jails generally has failed rather the * implementation* that has failed.
    I'd be looking at the PS involved AND if the minister's intervention was to blame before baying for blood.

    One must also consider it our Party System (either side) that rewards service to the party rather than competence with a ministry of the crown.
    Seriously, would you invest in a company whose CEO has no experience, knowledge or education to do the job? So why put Billions under the control of a minister with such obvious short comings.
    Being a good ambitious party member is no recommendation for a crown ministership. Likewise the notion that heads of departments aren't answerable for such cock ups is in my view breeding complacency.

    Notwithstanding I have difficulty reconciling the notion that private enterprise is even appropriate to run Public services given their fundamental philosophy is to make a profit (give the least they can and charge the most they can get away with) not provide the best public service for the money.
    Consider for example how much *more/better * service could be provided without the money that was the corporation's profit?
    The notion that Public services aren't or couldn't do better simply doesn't hold up to objective facts.
    Yes Public Service could be run better. How is a practical discussion not a philosophic one for another time.