Q & A | 04/28/2009 12:00 am

Naomi Klein: 'The Wall Street Bailout Is the Greatest Heist in Monetary History'

Naomi Klein © Ed Kashi

NAOMI: Brooksley Born [chairwoman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission], who, during the Clinton administration, blew the whistle on the unregulated derivative industry and wanted to regulate it like any other banking sector. For her prescience she was bullied by Rubin and Greenspan and Summers, who’s actually the enforcer of the three. He was the one who called her. They argued that just by talking about the need to regulate derivatives, she was going to create market panic. So not only wouldn’t they consider it, they wouldn’t even let her talk about it. She saw this whole crisis coming. You often hear this: “Well, no one saw this coming.” And that is such a reflection on who these men believe is someone. But there are so many people who saw this coming, and they’re considered nobodies. The only way you get to be a somebody is if you agree with them. Brooksley Born saw it coming. Elizabeth Warren has been an incredible watchdog. Sheila Bair, chair of the FDIC, also had a much more principled and ethical vision of what the bailout should be, in arguing that they should be offering direct aid to homeowners, as opposed to this top-down bailout. I feel like this gender split is not coincidental. There’s a need for more of a feminist analysis in understanding how we got here.

JOAN: As a child you rejected feminism, which your mother supported. What was it about feminism that you initially found so distasteful?

NAOMI: I think it was a combination of just basic boring teenage rebellion and, really, these basic, aesthetic objections.

JOAN: Hairy legs?

NAOMI: Yes. And it’s not that my mom was hardcore in that way, but I didn’t like being policed in any way. I rejected feminism as something that I felt was getting in my way of, you know, wanting to wear what I wanted to wear and do what I wanted to do. I really didn’t like the idea that it would be assumed that I would agree with my parents. It was a combination of just wanting to wear tight jeans and also just not wanting to be bossed around. I was a bit of a brat about it.

But when I was in first-year university at University of Toronto, there was a terrible crime against women that is really not known about outside of Canada. It was a massacre at the University of Montreal, the city where I was born and in which I grew up. A gunman went into an engineering school. At that time there were big debates about why there aren’t more women in engineering and in the hard sciences. And there were people arguing that it’s because women lack the certain intrinsic ability. As an aside, that’s what Larry Summers suggested when he was president of Harvard, which got him in so much trouble. There were other people who were arguing that it was the culture of the schools themselves, and that there needed to be more of an effort to bring women into the sciences. And affirmative action was being practiced at the engineering schools. The vitriol around this was so strong that this gunman, Mark Lepine, got it into his head that he had not gotten into this school because of feminists. He went to an engineering classroom at the University of Montreal and separated the men from the women. He turned to the women and said, “You’re all a bunch of fucking feminists,” and gunned them down. Fourteen women were killed. So it was a crime against women, a crime against feminism.

155 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

I found your article somewhat confusing. People were outraged at the bailouts period.

The Right is very vocale in there attacks. They have tea bag parties. They redicule constanly the bank bail outs. The only thing that is hated worst is the proposed health care plan.

Charges that the government has nationalized the bank and taken over the auto industry is held up by the Right as the government takeover and socialism.

So other than defending and being supportive of President Obama - I don’t see a radical grass roots leader.

By starry Nite on 04/28/2009 12:54 am

e-mail alert

starry, I have to say that it is not only the right that is enraged by the bank bailouts, I voted for Pres. Obama and I am also outraged. The banks own many in Washington, that is a problem and if we do not speak out it will go on and on. The "tea bag parties" could and should have been successful but instead it was turned into a protest mostly about the President, the important message was drowned out by the fringe. Pres. Obama said there will be regulation and I for one am waiting for this to happen, I don’t know why the foot dragging on this issue other than the banks are pushing back hard but we must push harder.

By Mel Berg on 04/28/2009 7:11 am

e-mail alert

I also voted for Obama and I too am outraged with the alarming government intrusion in private sectors.

By Kay Sara on 04/29/2009 8:07 am

e-mail alert

Interesting, haven’t read the whole article, just to page 9, but Ms Klein has some very interesting insights. I am glad she mentioned Brooksley Born, Elizabeth Warren and Sheila Blair. Oddly enough I see an ineresting blend of pragmatism and social justice. I do not believe the cause of social justice is finished, it just seems somewhat limited that way the left looks at it.

I don’t know when you did this interview, but Joan you asked Naoimi "Why are there no protests in the streets of America?" when there were the Tea Bag protestors on Tax day. They took to the streets and were mostly organized on Facebook. They got ridiculed instead of supported for their protests against the bank bailouts that would lead to an eventual rise in taxes. Is it because the protests were not done by the left? If all groups of people had joined then maybe it would have made a difference. As in all protests there were definitely people who were very far to the right or were there for the wrong reasons and used the protest negatively, but it was basically working class America protesting the elites. Those who opposed the protest did so to support President Obama and the financial plans of Summers and Geithner, so it seems to me that things are a little upside down and will stay that way until citizens put principles before personalities.

By Frannie Em on 04/28/2009 12:58 am

e-mail alert

PS It is late, will have to finish it tomorrow. Thank you Joan for your great work on this article. Interesting to see the viewpoint of Naomi Klein.

By Frannie Em on 04/28/2009 1:00 am

e-mail alert

The tea bag protest originated with a comment by a FOX commentator, was promoted by FOX, a station that carried the water for Bush who spent 8 years handing our money to private companies and sinking it into his war… so there was no credibility. These were for the most part anti-Obama rallies filled with anti-Obama signs calling him everything from a socialist to a fascist, being held by people who supported Bush, his war that put us in the hole in the first place, Reagan and Reaganomics,… and not the same thing as the grass roots taking to the streets that is going on in Europe. It was a FOX orchestrated political ploy, attended for the most part by FOX devotees.

By DeBúrca obj on 04/28/2009 6:46 am

e-mail alert

DeBurca

I can always count on you. I knew - almost verbatim - that is what you would say. I don’t know all of the particulars of how the movement got started, but I do know that there were a couple of small protests back in November and then January - even before the inauguration, protesting the first Tarp Funds and those protestors said they were going to throw their own Tea Party. Hardly anyone in the news picked up on it because they were small local events, then some of the more conservative sites started talking about it, then Fox News and then it took off from there. But there were a few women in Florida and some sights on facebook that were kind of a flashpoint for them.

By Frannie Em on 04/28/2009 9:42 am

e-mail alert

And nobody ridiculed THOSE protests! Because, unlike the teabag ‘protests’, those weren’t generated by FOX and it wasn’t a bunch of hypocrites who supported under Bush the very things they were protesting under Obama.

By DeBúrca obj on 04/28/2009 11:49 am

e-mail alert

DeBurca

I have nothing to say in response to this post. Both sides of the media have twisted it to mean whatever they wanted it to. But for the most part thousands of Americans decided to protest the bailouts, the eventual cost in taxes to everyone, and no bailouts for the little guy or small business where many of them hold their jobs. If the left had done it (or joined in) you wouldn’t be saying this. When you read some of the facebook groups in different states that participated, they come from all parties, many of them were independents, yes and many more republicans, but there were lots of democrats.

By Frannie Em on 04/28/2009 1:10 pm

e-mail alert

Of course she wouldn’t be saying anything if it had been leftists organizing it. Her entire point is that the FOX News people and their supporters are hypocrites for supporting this mess under Bush but opposing it under Obama. Bush is the one who ran up the deficit. Bush is the one who instilled the latest round of breaks and backslaps and bennies for corporations and their corrupt leadership. OK, he didn’t start the ball rolling, but he definitely knocked it along. Anyone who voted for him either time is part of the problem. Pardon me if I find their protests a bit less than convincing.

Leftists don’t go around making this mess. The centrists and right-wingers do. What happens with leftists is we get laughed at, shut out of politics by BOTH major parties, and thrown in jail when we won’t shut up. I *wish* we would be taken more seriously, then maybe we could all start talking about getting out of this mess in a way that makes sense.

By Dana Seilhan on 05/04/2009 1:01 am

e-mail alert

Dana,

As far as I know, because I channel surf during the news, I used to hear it while my husband surfed. If I sit down, I switch between Fox, CNN, and MSNBC - mostly back and forth between O’Reilly and Maddow. I like them both - anyway, Fox News did not support all the spending of congress, they were upset about much of what the Republicans did for the last couple of years, and what we all tend to forget is that the democrats were there spending just as much on earmarks etc, and caucusing programs such as what happened with Fannie and Freddie. I don’t give any of them a pass. They all screwed it up.

My comment to DeB was because she is very left and a good fighter for her cause and she is appreciated as well as questioned for it, just as we all are. If you have commented because you feel you need to protect DeBurca, trust me she can hold her own better than most of them, and we love her for it, doesn’t mean that we agree with her. I like when she questions me, I have no problem with it, but I will answer as I see fit.

On the other hand, if you are approaching my argument (simple as it was) with the same type of argument back, we won’t have great conversations because when these tit for tat arguments get going, they go nowhere and result in an even deeper lack of understanding.

As to the protestors, if you have politically incorrectly stereotyped all of them to fit your concept of "the right" due to the type of media coverage it got, it seems to me you are limiting your worldview.

By Frannie Em on 05/04/2009 5:33 pm

e-mail alert

Our tea party was organized by fed-up dems!!! They can not believe what has moved into the White House- talking about the agenda.

By Mimi Jones on 05/04/2009 3:14 pm

e-mail alert

Mimi

I know, everyone has their own reason for protesting or not. I just know that sooner or later they are going to have to raise taxes to pay for all of this. The democrats complained about the tax rebates and said the gov should be raising taxes, now it is a different story. Obama went to NATO and the G-20 to get more help in Afghanistan so that he could reduce military spending because that is one way he wants to lower the deficit. He didn’t get any help. Today they came out with a proposal to hunt and gather in foreign banks for overseas corporate monies. Corporations have been hiding money overseas so as not to pay corporate taxes. So on the one hand we have one of the highest corporate tax base, but on the other hand they don’t pay them because they move their money and set up the corporations overseas. The Bush Admin was already after foreign bank for hiding money, so that process already has a foothold. I say if they can get the corporate money that should have been paid, go for it, but if there are legalities, then it will take years to get it and probably not help that much to lower the deficit in the long run. I say as long as it does not increase presidential power, then go for it.

By Frannie Em on 05/04/2009 5:47 pm

e-mail alert

One bit of wisdom gained from a homeless person (god rest his soul) is that we are all a bunch of hypocrites. It’s a difficult truth but valuable when it sinks in.

By S M on 04/30/2009 12:55 am

e-mail alert

Wrong! The tea party idea started because "Rick Santelli" from CNBC, called for a tea party revolution. Check it out for yourself so at least you look like a credible source when you post. As a matter of fact, GE the parent company of CNBC, got so upset at him for not being on the Obama team that they made him go through training to make sure he only promotes Obama’s agenda. The reason people keep getting it mixed up with Fox is because CBS, CNBC and others were made to try and reflect in onto FOX. You may want to look up how GE owns these media oputlets that you love and how the CEO has run the company into the ground. Then Obama has made a deal with the CEO of GE to represent him in his media outlets in exchange for the tax benefits for cap and trade/ alt energy, that is going to put our country at major financial and employment loss. So GE is now going to run our alternative enery cap and trade policys. And you guys hate Monopolies? Get your facts straight. Your being brainwashed by the Obama media!

Rick Santelli on CNBC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEZB4taSEoA

NBC, GE and media bias

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/amy-ridenour/2009/04/23/ge-owned-networks-media-bias-conflicts-interest-remain-focus-day-after

So please stop bashing fox for having a back bone in this Grave time in Nations history where we are all losing freedom of the press! God Bless FOX News.

By Jennifer Demetrulias on 04/28/2009 2:07 pm