One thing I would like to have more explored in detail in conjunction with the “Disaster Capitlaism” is the idea that the resistance in Iraq against US and UK soldiers/occuption has grown and exhilarated also because of the neoliberal way of “building” the country up again. And even more interesting would be to research if and to what extent that resistance of suicide bombings had an effect on the privatisation and exploitation drive of communal, formerly state owned, resources.
Given that the Left is said to be in a crisis by not being able to stop the neoliberal free market policies in the first world countries; it would be interesting to see if that very crazy way of Iraqi resistance has any impact on the free market policies there locally. And if the US wouldn’t have pushed through these free market neoliberal policies in Iraq, would they have achieved their political aims of reinstating a properly working democracy with grateful people?
I think they even would, as the resistance started actually very late in the whole war.
Which brings us to the question that the US would have been able to actually win both of these crazy imperialist wars, in Iraq as well as in Afghanistan, if they wouldn’t have coppled these wars with the brutal introduction of neoliberal cut-throat economic policies?
I think I am onto something mind-blasting here, like saying:
“It was the neoliberal ecomic policy, which lost the US the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq!”
Wow, and then I could work from this thesis actually backwards and substantiate the claim (if I would dare travel to both of this countries to interview people). And of course it would be necessary to actually examine the influences of the war on terror, Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and the whole torture stuff and human rights abuses on how this influenced the rise of the resistance as well.
So this thesis hangs around quite loosely at the moment.