185 ms·

Naomi Klein investigates ‘conspiracy theory culture’ that has shaken her life

35 points by cratermoon 3y ago

dingusdew 3y ago
[dead]
bone_frequency 3y ago
As much as I can respect her hustle, it might be time for her to ride a new grift. Or maybe retire with the literal millions she made with her gigs.
- jbu 3y ago
  I guess you mean Naomi Wolf, as the sub-title makes clear? Quite different people. Klein is an excellent writer and thinker. Wolf is deep in the conspiracy hole.
  - toyg 3y ago
    Someone could argue Klein is a Chomsky-like intellectual: interesting, academically challenging, but largely ineffective at actually affecting the status quo she condemns. In the end, she sells books printed by the evil corporations she supposedly despises, and she's definitely made quite a bit of money from them.
    - 35997279 3y ago
      “We should improve society somewhat” vibes here. Speaking of academic challenges that are largely ineffectual: ideological purity games likes this are equally meaningless. Either the ideas are sound, or they’re not. Which ideas do you think are unsound, and why? No hiding behind “someone could argue,” or “but she claims x but does y.” Which ideas of Klein’s do you see as intending to affect which status quos, and why is it notable that they in themselves have not impacted them? Charles Babbage never lived to see his machine built. Does that make the endeavor less meaningful? Note: I have read “No Logo” and “The Shock Doctrine.” I have not assessed their impact on any particular status quo. I am not claiming that they have. I am challenging the misdirection of your comment in an attempt to understand what you meant by what you wrote.
      - toyg 3y ago
        > Either the ideas are sound, or they’re not. That's a pre-punk attitude, there. Ideas on their own do nothing, it's actions that produce change. Klein talks a good game but then publishes with the biggest conglomerates, does the promotion tours, etc etc; effectively, she sells out like everyone else. Does this make her work less meaningful? Yes, it weakens it significantly; claiming things like "capitalism is incompatible with controlling climate change" and "brands are bad for society" and then happily partaking in that same capitalism and branding, is incoherent to say the least. And sure enough, it does little except justifying her profile in the system.
        35997279 3y ago
        Incoherent? You mean you don’t understand the ideas themselves because of the medium by which it was transmitted? Be serious. You yourself are reading these words on a machine that is the result of capitalist and military influence. Does that mean that those aims, those causes, haven’t had a negative impact on, i.e, the environment or society? Certainly not. By the standards you set, no idea which goes against the status quo can legitimate unless that status quo is so weak it can be totally circumvented: The biological corollary would be saying vaccines don’t work because they didn’t prevent every instance of the disease they were intended to prevent. How many babies must we throw out with the bath water before we’re permitted to discuss the merits of the ideas themselves? The misquote Sorkin, this the reason the Left in the United States looses so goddamn always.
        toyg 3y ago
        The medium is the message. Embedding anti-capitalist discourse into capitalism is how progressives get coopted and neutered, always. You don't have to be a maximalist to express ideas, but if you express maximalist ideas (and Klein does), then it's only reasonable to expect you to be coherent. Otherwise you're just playing a part, for the benefit of a system that requires token opposition. To be fair, she occasionally tried to be coherent - supporting Chavez in Venezuela, for example. That didn't work that well either.
- _moof 3y ago
  Here's a helpful mnemonic device for identifying Naomis: If it's Klein, you're fine. If it's Wolf, woof.
  - hammyhavoc 3y ago
    [flagged]
pjc50 3y ago
It's very modern that she's experiencing trouble because of someone who simply shares her first name, not even an unusual one or her whole name, who has become famous for being unhinged on Twitter.
- toyg 3y ago
  Naomi is fairly unusual, both surnames have the same number of syllables, and both rose to fame around the same period, in the early '90s. It's not true that Wolf "became famous for being unhinged on Twitter"; she used to be considered a leftwing feminist and worked with Bill Clinton, while Klein was a radical anti-corporation leftist active in anti-G8 circles, so they were broadly "on the same side" from a mainstream perspective (although I'm sure Klein, as the most radical of the two, would strongly challenge that). It's very very easy to mistake them; I know I've been knowing their work for 30 years and still occasionally mix them up. Wolf seems to have drifted right only fairly recently - although I'm sure she would say that it's the Overton window around her that moved instead.
  - amadeuspagel 3y ago
    > Wolf seems to have drifted right only fairly recently - although I'm sure she would say that it's the Overton window around her that moved instead. That's totally true. Conspiracy theories used to be a left-wing thing and are now a right-wing thing. Klein went from writing conspiracy theories to writing about them, while Wolf stayed course.
    - krapp 3y ago
      Conspiracy theories have always been a right-wing thing as well. What happened is that right-wing conspiracy theories were normalized, while left-wing conspiracy theories remained stigmatized. Also some (like anti-vaxx, traditionally a leftist thing) shifted polarity.
      - toyg 3y ago
        > while left-wing conspiracy theories remained stigmatized I don't think that's true. CIA involvement in South America or Italy, for example, used to be a leftist conspiracy theory; and now it is documented history. In fact, I'd argue that the Left effectively ran out of conspiracy theories, as most of them were proven true. Once the Berlin Wall came down, a lot of "pro-capitalists" activity became overt and acceptable, often even initiated by leftist governments, and historical actors came out of the wood to describe what really happened - the Cold War was over and winners didn't have to be ashamed of the extreme measures they took to get there. The only conspiracy left to the left (eh) was basically Echelon and internet surveillance; Snowden confirmed that too, so now there is nothing.
mvdl 3y ago
I am looking forward to the book and am particularly curious if it will address the origin of "conspiracy cultures" as I personally feel a lot has to do with governments and media plain lying and manipulating. It keeps me puzzled why conspiracies are not simply addressed but somehow need to be silenced instead. Maybe the book will provide insight or answers.
- pjc50 3y ago
  You can't address conspiracy theories because they can be generated much easier and quicker than they can be rebutted. And attempts to do so just mark you as "part of the conspiracy". "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" (1964), prev on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24964931 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24964931 (Although I might be inclined to agree with you that there are real, very obvious, unaddressed "conspiracies" that kind of happen while simultaneously everyone is aware of them but can't "see" them. Mostly to do with the operation of political donations, but things like the Sackler opiate scandal had evidence ignored for years. Or the Clarence Thomas bribery allegations.)
  - thr-nrg 3y ago
    The great replacement is a supposed conspiracy yet everyone in here complains how raising children is too expensive, how immigrants are imported to fill in for the missing people and how they accept wages lower than what natives would accept. But somehow putting three simple facts together makes you a white nationalist. Which is odd since I wasn't white when I immigrated here. I find the same is true for most other conspiracy theories. Epstein showed that there are a lot of very rich paedophiles. Covid responses around the world showed that vaccine passports were very much on the cards. And on and on. It's pretty disheartening to see the ideology which was supposed to keep power in check worship it instead.
    - pjc50 3y ago
      > But somehow putting three simple facts together It's putting the observations together in ways that assign intent and blame in ways that don't make sense that's the problem. You can't add 1+1+1 and make 5. (Especially in a country like the US that's literally built out of immigrants; is the argument that the US should revert to its 1600 population levels and their descendents?) > Covid responses around the world showed that vaccine passports were very much on the cards Well .. yes? They've been a thing for certain diseases for years. The US used to screen for TB at Ellis Island. I had to get a Yellow Fever vaccination with a little card in my passport to be allowed into Peru. And so on. What's the conspiracy? > Epstein showed that there are a lot of very rich paedophiles Now you're on to something; the way in which a lot of people will cover for sexual exploitation because it's happening among people they're friends with. #MeToo etc. Ronan Polanski. This one is hard to unravel. But you have to stick to evidence or you end up in a pizza parlor without a basement with a gun.
amadeuspagel 3y ago
> Award-winning author and Guardian columnist Naomi Klein is to publish a book about conspiracy theories, which she has described as a departure and “more personal, more experimental” than her previous books. Is it an autobiography?
- rasz 3y ago
  were you thinking of https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/feb/08/naomi-wolf-accused-of-confusing-child-abuse-with-gay-persecution-in-outrages https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/feb/08/naomi-wolf-acc... https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-50153743 https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-50153743 ?
danlugo92 3y ago
Today's conspiracy "crackpot theory" is tomrrow's declassified document whistleblower leak.

35 points by cratermoon 3y ago

[dead]

As much as I can respect her hustle, it might be time for her to ride a new grift. Or maybe retire with the literal millions she made with her gigs.

jbu 3y ago
I guess you mean Naomi Wolf, as the sub-title makes clear? Quite different people. Klein is an excellent writer and thinker. Wolf is deep in the conspiracy hole.
- toyg 3y ago
  Someone could argue Klein is a Chomsky-like intellectual: interesting, academically challenging, but largely ineffective at actually affecting the status quo she condemns. In the end, she sells books printed by the evil corporations she supposedly despises, and she's definitely made quite a bit of money from them.
  - 35997279 3y ago
    “We should improve society somewhat” vibes here. Speaking of academic challenges that are largely ineffectual: ideological purity games likes this are equally meaningless. Either the ideas are sound, or they’re not. Which ideas do you think are unsound, and why? No hiding behind “someone could argue,” or “but she claims x but does y.” Which ideas of Klein’s do you see as intending to affect which status quos, and why is it notable that they in themselves have not impacted them? Charles Babbage never lived to see his machine built. Does that make the endeavor less meaningful? Note: I have read “No Logo” and “The Shock Doctrine.” I have not assessed their impact on any particular status quo. I am not claiming that they have. I am challenging the misdirection of your comment in an attempt to understand what you meant by what you wrote.
    - toyg 3y ago
      > Either the ideas are sound, or they’re not. That's a pre-punk attitude, there. Ideas on their own do nothing, it's actions that produce change. Klein talks a good game but then publishes with the biggest conglomerates, does the promotion tours, etc etc; effectively, she sells out like everyone else. Does this make her work less meaningful? Yes, it weakens it significantly; claiming things like "capitalism is incompatible with controlling climate change" and "brands are bad for society" and then happily partaking in that same capitalism and branding, is incoherent to say the least. And sure enough, it does little except justifying her profile in the system.
      - 35997279 3y ago
        Incoherent? You mean you don’t understand the ideas themselves because of the medium by which it was transmitted? Be serious. You yourself are reading these words on a machine that is the result of capitalist and military influence. Does that mean that those aims, those causes, haven’t had a negative impact on, i.e, the environment or society? Certainly not. By the standards you set, no idea which goes against the status quo can legitimate unless that status quo is so weak it can be totally circumvented: The biological corollary would be saying vaccines don’t work because they didn’t prevent every instance of the disease they were intended to prevent. How many babies must we throw out with the bath water before we’re permitted to discuss the merits of the ideas themselves? The misquote Sorkin, this the reason the Left in the United States looses so goddamn always.
        toyg 3y ago
        The medium is the message. Embedding anti-capitalist discourse into capitalism is how progressives get coopted and neutered, always. You don't have to be a maximalist to express ideas, but if you express maximalist ideas (and Klein does), then it's only reasonable to expect you to be coherent. Otherwise you're just playing a part, for the benefit of a system that requires token opposition. To be fair, she occasionally tried to be coherent - supporting Chavez in Venezuela, for example. That didn't work that well either.
_moof 3y ago
Here's a helpful mnemonic device for identifying Naomis: If it's Klein, you're fine. If it's Wolf, woof.
- hammyhavoc 3y ago
  [flagged]

pjc50 3y ago

It's very modern that she's experiencing trouble because of someone who simply shares her first name, not even an unusual one or her whole name, who has become famous for being unhinged on Twitter.

toyg 3y ago
Naomi is fairly unusual, both surnames have the same number of syllables, and both rose to fame around the same period, in the early '90s. It's not true that Wolf "became famous for being unhinged on Twitter"; she used to be considered a leftwing feminist and worked with Bill Clinton, while Klein was a radical anti-corporation leftist active in anti-G8 circles, so they were broadly "on the same side" from a mainstream perspective (although I'm sure Klein, as the most radical of the two, would strongly challenge that). It's very very easy to mistake them; I know I've been knowing their work for 30 years and still occasionally mix them up. Wolf seems to have drifted right only fairly recently - although I'm sure she would say that it's the Overton window around her that moved instead.
- amadeuspagel 3y ago
  > Wolf seems to have drifted right only fairly recently - although I'm sure she would say that it's the Overton window around her that moved instead. That's totally true. Conspiracy theories used to be a left-wing thing and are now a right-wing thing. Klein went from writing conspiracy theories to writing about them, while Wolf stayed course.
  - krapp 3y ago
    Conspiracy theories have always been a right-wing thing as well. What happened is that right-wing conspiracy theories were normalized, while left-wing conspiracy theories remained stigmatized. Also some (like anti-vaxx, traditionally a leftist thing) shifted polarity.
    - toyg 3y ago
      > while left-wing conspiracy theories remained stigmatized I don't think that's true. CIA involvement in South America or Italy, for example, used to be a leftist conspiracy theory; and now it is documented history. In fact, I'd argue that the Left effectively ran out of conspiracy theories, as most of them were proven true. Once the Berlin Wall came down, a lot of "pro-capitalists" activity became overt and acceptable, often even initiated by leftist governments, and historical actors came out of the wood to describe what really happened - the Cold War was over and winners didn't have to be ashamed of the extreme measures they took to get there. The only conspiracy left to the left (eh) was basically Echelon and internet surveillance; Snowden confirmed that too, so now there is nothing.

mvdl 3y ago

I am looking forward to the book and am particularly curious if it will address the origin of "conspiracy cultures" as I personally feel a lot has to do with governments and media plain lying and manipulating. It keeps me puzzled why conspiracies are not simply addressed but somehow need to be silenced instead. Maybe the book will provide insight or answers.

pjc50 3y ago
You can't address conspiracy theories because they can be generated much easier and quicker than they can be rebutted. And attempts to do so just mark you as "part of the conspiracy". "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" (1964), prev on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24964931 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24964931 (Although I might be inclined to agree with you that there are real, very obvious, unaddressed "conspiracies" that kind of happen while simultaneously everyone is aware of them but can't "see" them. Mostly to do with the operation of political donations, but things like the Sackler opiate scandal had evidence ignored for years. Or the Clarence Thomas bribery allegations.)
- thr-nrg 3y ago
  The great replacement is a supposed conspiracy yet everyone in here complains how raising children is too expensive, how immigrants are imported to fill in for the missing people and how they accept wages lower than what natives would accept. But somehow putting three simple facts together makes you a white nationalist. Which is odd since I wasn't white when I immigrated here. I find the same is true for most other conspiracy theories. Epstein showed that there are a lot of very rich paedophiles. Covid responses around the world showed that vaccine passports were very much on the cards. And on and on. It's pretty disheartening to see the ideology which was supposed to keep power in check worship it instead.
  - pjc50 3y ago
    > But somehow putting three simple facts together It's putting the observations together in ways that assign intent and blame in ways that don't make sense that's the problem. You can't add 1+1+1 and make 5. (Especially in a country like the US that's literally built out of immigrants; is the argument that the US should revert to its 1600 population levels and their descendents?) > Covid responses around the world showed that vaccine passports were very much on the cards Well .. yes? They've been a thing for certain diseases for years. The US used to screen for TB at Ellis Island. I had to get a Yellow Fever vaccination with a little card in my passport to be allowed into Peru. And so on. What's the conspiracy? > Epstein showed that there are a lot of very rich paedophiles Now you're on to something; the way in which a lot of people will cover for sexual exploitation because it's happening among people they're friends with. #MeToo etc. Ronan Polanski. This one is hard to unravel. But you have to stick to evidence or you end up in a pizza parlor without a basement with a gun.

amadeuspagel 3y ago

> Award-winning author and Guardian columnist Naomi Klein is to publish a book about conspiracy theories, which she has described as a departure and “more personal, more experimental” than her previous books. Is it an autobiography?

rasz 3y ago
were you thinking of https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/feb/08/naomi-wolf-accused-of-confusing-child-abuse-with-gay-persecution-in-outrages https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/feb/08/naomi-wolf-acc... https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-50153743 https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-50153743 ?

danlugo92 3y ago

Today's conspiracy "crackpot theory" is tomrrow's declassified document whistleblower leak.