Video Tutorials TV: One on One - Naomi Klein - Sept 26 - Part 1 Videos

nickvanzetti Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - she has good points but is heavily funded by the Ford Foundation and others. she water downs alot and frankly is full of shit.

KliphsPolitics Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Genius.

jammoexii Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - She is actually one of my favourite people period.

ikran2007 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - hope we have so many ppl like her in the west.

Onetimerule Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Karl Marx is the one who criticised capitalism best.

Esialpha Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Does anybody know what degree Klein finished?

4cats1room Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - When I saw her speak last year she said she is a trained economist. So I'm assuming Economics

4cats1room Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - can you link something with proof that she is funded by the ford foundation?

Esialpha Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - 4cats: She seems to know what she's talking about. I figured her education was either economics or journalism. Thanks for the info.

RichieHardcore13 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Proof? Credible citation?

phonedial9 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - I'd like to see her back in the day when she was a freak, dying her hair all different colors.

3chrds Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - gorgeous, to boot

stevemcqueen77 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Naomi Klein is a populist dullard; she's a university drop-out who places emotion above reason and logic.Allow me to quote Martin Wolf, editor of the Financial Times:"The assault on brands is a new, intellectually feeble twist on this old theme. It is no innocent twist. If freedom is slavery, then slavery can be freedom. Or as Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his intellectual progeny, a long line of communist tyrants, have argued, people must be forced to be free."

gramsci123 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - I'd say if you bother to read any of her books you'll find that she bases her opinions on empirical research and documented facts. I personally find her far from dull, but then I probably coudn't quote the editor of the Financial Times which presumably isn't in the least dull.

stevemcqueen77 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Well, perhaps you should acquaint yourself with publications such as the Financial Times and The Economist so as that you may garner a more complete understanding of the issues.I've read No Logo: it's absolute rubbish. Brands are a sign of corporate weakness, not strength. In 2000, the largest companies included the likes Exxon, GM, Ford, Toyota, GE, Shell and BP. Nike (a target of Klein) was 233rd on the list (market cap). Far from the upper-echelons of international corporate elitism...

stevemcqueen77 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Ask yourself, is it really that powerful? Do brands really have that much of an affect on your life?Moving on - working in a factory producing runners is a shitty existence. I'll concede that fact. However, when given the choice between working there and starving, I'm certain that you'd chose to work there. The fact that they have employees to begin with is a testament to the fact that there must be some advantage to working there in the first place.

KamikazeKoscki Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - Rothchild Dynasty are enpowered by the alien Goddesses they say.Many know that something is very wrong and believe that there is a conspiracy to enslave the population, but few suspect or dare to discuss that the conspiracy is an Anunnaki one.Aliens are behind the wars on the planet

moviedude111 Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - She is a communist which is why she opposes Milton Friedman.

themonkeywrench Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - "she's a university drop-out" - not only is that an ad hominem attack, it is also incorrect.She did drop out of university for a while to work elsewhere then went back and got a degree (I assume in journalism). So she has a university education.However, the implication that someone who has not been through university doesn't know anything shows your elitist mentality...

themonkeywrench Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - You can't have read it very closely then since she was not actually criticising the fact that companies use logos to differentiate themselves from each other.

themonkeywrench Says:

Nov 18, 2008 - No Logo criticised the fact that corporations like Nike project an image onto the public (caring about people, good for society, etc) via PR and advertising, while the realities of what harm they actually do (exploiting workers in the third world, harming the environment) are hidden, firstly because most production no longer takes place in the first world and secondly because corporations hide behind their logo - their image that has been repeated over and over in massive ad campaigns.