Naomi Klein has won the inaugural Warwick Prize for Writing. Klein won for her much-praised lefty tome The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (Picador). Chair judge China Mieville called it "a brilliant, provocative, outstandingly written investigation into some of the great outrages of our time. It has started many debates, and will start many more..."
I can't vouch for the 'Warwick Prize' but that isn't really the point. If a book, any book, regardless of its political persuasion, "...has started many debates, and will start many more...", then it has served a useful purpose that millions and millions of books, alas, never get anywhere near.
Any critics of Klein's thesis agree with this? And think that accolades are deserved, ideological differences notwithstanding? Or has the 'Warwick Prize' perhaps got off to a bad start?
Originally posted by FMFThe corrupt bankers, CEOs, and other 'corporate elitists all had their hand in the 'cookie jar' of this financial disaster.
[b]Naomi Klein has won the inaugural Warwick Prize for Writing. Klein won for her much-praised lefty tome The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism (Picador). Chair judge China Mieville called it "a brilliant, provocative, outstandingly written investigation into some of the great outrages of our time. It has started many debates, and will start many m ...[text shortened]... fferences notwithstanding? Or has the 'Warwick Prize' perhaps got off to a bad start?