Is it "fair game" to turn a recently deceased scholar into a symbol, to quote him out of context and use this deliberate misreading as the foundation for an entire book, and to make up fanciful connections between normative economics and political repression--connections contra the positions of the economists themselves--when convenient?

I say, "no", and thus would see The Shock Doctrine as the most major "popular" bit of academic misconduct since Michael Bellesisles's Arming America, were Klein an academic. Klein is not an academic, but that doesn't mean I will hold her to lesser intellectual or ethical standards.

See Tyler Cowen's review and Johan Norberg's whitepaper concerning this book before you buy it. Crisis precipitates change, and the ideas lying around influence that change. Big deal. That's no evidence for the existence of a conspiracy, nor justification for slandering Milton Friedman.


Recommended: No