I'm trying to read through all of Naomi Klein's oeuvre, because I think she is one of the great diatribists of our time. "Shock Doctrine" is one of the most eye-opening pieces of non-fiction I've ever had the privilege of reading, and "This Changes Everything," about climate change, has changed my behavior and attitude toward my surroundings probably more than any other book. "No Logo" is not as impressive an entry into her pantheon, but it prefigures the talent that she would display in her later works.

Perhaps it's because it was a bit dated--references to the influence of MTV and Nike abound; brand hegemons like Apple--whose share price has since increased by a factor of about 300x--do not even merit mention. Sweatshops were the cause celebre of the 1990s, and it's hard to say whether we hear less about them because corporations recognize that it's no longer profitable to employ exploitative sweatshop labor (as Klein points out: revenue and not morality is always the gravamen of this calculus), or because we grew fatigued by the effort and tolerate them now, or at least their slightly less exploitative post-1990s iterations.

One highlight of the book came toward its end, when Klein talks about the agency of youth consumers and of disenfranchised yet culturally relevant black and brown youth who live in the nation's cities. It's pretty incredible that brands as powerful as Nike and Disney caved to the pressure of these individuals, who understood themselves to have been chumps for paying 30x the cost of a shoe, and having engaged in the exploitation of other marginalized people throughout the world in so doing, all to pad the larders of megarich companies who had co-opted their sense of style and fashion to begin with. It's kind of great that people won't tolerate hostile corporate forces invading their space.

To wit, I've been venturing beyond my West Brooklyn/Lower Manhattan ambit of late, and have found myself in the Bronx, in Central Queens, and in white ethnic enclaves like Greenpoint. Milo Yiannopoulos, the smugly execrable male Ann Coulter/low-rent Oscar Wilde with a bronzer problem who is currently afflicting our society with his "provocative" yet wholly warmed-over ideas in the Trump era, is putting out his own book, entitled "Dangerous." I'm all for free speech, and come from the Millsian/Skokie line of ACLU types who think that one of the only things America is truly great at, and has benefited from, is its staunch defense of freedom of speech in the public arena. Even if they were repellent, which they surely are, I would defend Mr. Yiannopoulos' right to advocate his views. But freedom of speech is important for allowing new ideas to surface, not for perseverating the same "Muslims are bad!" "White men are responsible for all cultural innovations!" and "Women make up rape allegations for attention!" tommyrot that has been around since the Crusades, if not earlier, and has been widely discredited for centuries; we need this type of public voice like we need lectures about why the Earth is flat. Mr. Yiannopoulos is a gadfly, and he has never propounded an original idea other than that he is somehow noteworthy, as far as I can tell.

Anyway, I noticed that ads for his book, "Dangerous," were cynically posted all over the subway stations in less gentrified areas, ostensibly because people in the other areas would not tolerate their living spaces being desecrated by such an inane, bigoted idiot and his quest to enrich himself by sowing dissension. And happily, I noticed that of all the ads on the subway, even in the areas not teeming with effete latte liberals like myself, these ads were almost always the only ones torn down, desecrated, denounced, destroyed. As Klein notes, there may be no legal theory to support these actions, but one of the most powerful ways in which people can revolt against the invasion of their spaces and communities by hostile, capitalist attempts to make money off of them and their neighbors is through hostile, pointed destruction of the property that these forces use to accomplish their aims. I'm sure that Mr. Yiannopoulos would have some tired quip about the breeding of these people or their motivations, and how it shows that the left (read: the not extreme right) is intolerant of free speech, but this really just reflects an overbroad view of the protections to which private property and money are entitled, and a cramped view of the ways in which speech, protest, and dissent can, should, and will increasingly be expressed.

"The third world has always existed for the comfort of the First." Unfortunately this will likely always be true, and many of these sweatshops and evil corporate practices still exist, Naomi Klein would probably be happy to know that much awareness has surfaced, leading to harder pressure on the corps and the governments that allow these practices to exist. We still have to stay away from the Walmarts and so-called-designer goods as regardless of where on the spectrum, they are definitely profiting obscene amounts from their employees slave or slave-like labour, whether in the factories or the cashes. Yet supporting new 'ethical' brands isn't so easy - now there are just way too many products to choose from - it's so hard to tell if the values and way of life they are selling are congruent with their practices.

This book kinda just kept going and lost me around 3/4 through. It didn't really offer any clothing thoughts and recommendations, but I think that the solution is simple: be aware of the past and present of a brand, don't support brands that have been shown to have significant human rights complaints, buy less & local/small business, and stand up to those mother effing brand bullies.

um, read this book.

it has an unfortunate problem: written in the late nineties, detailing the then-prevailing juggernaut of unbridled globalization, its analysis was almost immediately dated once sept 11 changed the topic of the conversation. in my 2002 edition klein adds a slim afterword/nonupdate that, from the vantage point of 2007, fails to properly reargue her original and very persuasive terms.

that said, this is a staggeringly broad and well-researched book. it doesn't just rehash what we (already back then, of course) knew about the unholy troika of brand-based multinationals, cheap third-world labor, and regulatory failure. it combines sophisticated cultural analysis of what branding is (the colonization every piece of life with ideologically imagined products) with a description of the labor and capital conditions of the late 20th century.

in particular, klein argues that the companies have ceased to see themselves as holding responsibility for any of their workers, whether skilled or unskilled. workers' lack of security, combined with resentment at shrinking public spaces and the encroachment of marketing, have produced and will continue to fuel anticorporate movements.

we all remember the late 90s antiglobalization movement. ten years later it's a different globalization and the media is thankfully paying attention. anyway, read this book to understand a period of recent history that (for me) is hard to remember, because i was a teenager and because of the shocks that have followed.

Naomi Klein is an incredibly sloppy scholar. As a writer she reminds me of Malcolm Gladwell. Both write books that seem as if their author has reflectively thrown everything they've found that seems vaguely interrelated and interesting.

In this book, Klein takes on marketing, branding, and sweatshops. Her main theme is the gradual corporatization of the world, but I find it hard to compare the absolute horrors of sweatshops (which her investigative journalism exposed beautifully) to the public eyesores of billboard advertising or the general annoyance of mass marketing and branding. Which is not to say it's not related, but the problems of the sweatshops, imo, are much more relevant and interesting to our lives and worlds, then the minor annoyances of a logo on a stadium.

Again, don't get me wrong. It's all important, and it's all interrelated, but conflating the subjects - conflating something that is horrifically exploitative and is damaging individuals and countries to the concerns of well-heeled Americans who don't like advertising seem to me absurd.

That said, it's a good book, well written and full of great reporting on sweat shops and the way corporations silently run them (and fuck over nearly everyone, including, eventually, US, the consumers).

I thought this book would be outdated, but it holds up. I picked it up when another book (it came from something awful) that connected modern troll culture to the overplaying of the culture of branding. The most fascinating portions of the book are the places where the branding wins create a backlash--for example, Nike using Black youth to sell sneakers and then that same group brings the fight to Nike. I don't really think it worked though--I think Nike just got better at branding (see the Kaepernick ads).

Swego czasu był to dla mnie kluczowy tzw. eyeopener.

There are books that should be rated on how much they made you think, rather than how much you liked them. One of the criticisms often lobbied at No Logo is that Naomi Klein put too much faith in the anti-globalization movement, which sort of fizzled out in post-9/11 America. To be fair, that attack could have hardly been foreseen by 90s activists, who then tried, and failed, to make their message prevail against a tsunami of patriotism that set back many social movements (including LGBT rights).

Another criticism you could make of No Logo is that it spreads out too thin, covering the many open fronts against branding, so that the book becomes shallow. It also doesn't tell the reader what to do or how to go about fighting logos themselves.

However, in the 2002 epilogue (the one about the Zapatista insurgency), Naomi Klein fairly accurately predicts the Occupy movement, and even one of the reasons that caused its demise, and that was the lack of an undisputable leader with a 10 point manifesto. She actually describes a movement made up of many social justice groups that do not appear to seek an agreement amongst themselves, yet are busy with activity and chock-full of information.

What No Logo does well is describing the various ways in which corporations control what is said about them, absorb criticism and regurgitate it as promotional campaigns, as well as transcend trade laws, labor laws and human rights. In telling the reader how they accomplish this, Naomi Klein provides the tools for any mildly intelligent reader to predict a corporation's next movement. Thus, while she might not tell the reader what not to buy or what their next step should be, she encourages the reader to reflect on their own situation and how corporations exploit them.

Because of that, and because it did make me think about my own circumstances, I rate it 4 stars.

ذات يوم كنت أتحدث مع صديق لي عبر برنامج محادثة وفي معرض حديثه أخبرني بأنه اكتشف أن مشروب الفانيلا لذيذ للغاية. لم أعرف كيف أشكره على تلك المعلومة المثيرة للضجر، لكنني كرهته فيما بعد بسببها. فبمجرد أن أغلقت المحادثة وجدت إعلانات مشروب الفانيلا أمامي في صفحات موقع التواصل، أطفال سعداء وعارضات بأسنان ناصعة كالثلج، الجميع يبتسمون وكأن المشروب يُضحكهم.

أغلقت الموقع وتسللت إلى اليوتيوب لأستمع لموسيقاي المفضلة فوجدت الأغنية تبدأ بإعلان عن مشروب الفانيليا العضوي وفوائده التي لا تحصى. أغلقت المقطع بشكل كامل لكنني سمعت جرس الباب يرن فذهبت لأجيب. كان ذلك جاري يخبرني أنني نسيت مصباح سيارتي مضاءً. هل ظننت مثلاً أن بائع مشروب الفانيلا يدق بابي مثلاً؟ لم يحدث ذلك لكنك لم تبالغ، فقد يحدث شيء شبيه بذلك إذا استمرت الأمور على هذا المنوال. تابع المقطع التالي:

https://youtu.be/Nb0_Bh6MV6k

تخبرنا نعومي كلاين بأن الشركات العملاقة لم تعد تطمع في بيع المنتجات وبث الإعلانات بل تطمح للتغلغل في كل شيء حتى تصبح "أسلوب حياة". تحذر الكاتبة من أننا إن لم نجابه توسعهم ومخططاتهم فإنهم سيحتلون جميع المساحات ويقتحمون الخصوصيات ويؤثرون في شتى نواحي الحياة العامة.

يصف الكتاب تطفل العلامات التجارية على مناطق يفترض ألا تتواجد فيها مثل المدارس، الجامعات، وتؤثر في مجالات إنسانية مثل الموسيقى والسينما والرياضية. بدأ الأمر بمجرد ملصقات ملونة ثم بدأت برامج الرعاية ثم أصبحت الشركات هي التي تصمم وتمول كل شيء. لا تستغرب إذن الفريق الفلاني لا يرتدي سوى شعار الشركة الفلانية، وأن ممثلي ذلك الفلم لا يتناولون سوى البيبسيى أو أن مغني الراب يتباهى بحذاءه الأديداس.

بالإضافة إلى ذلك فإن الشركات متعددة الجنسيات تعمل جاهدة لتجريف الثقافات الأصلية ونشر ثقافة موحدة، مثل اختراع ما يسمى بـ"المراهق العالمي" الذي يوجد في كل مكان، يرتدي نفس الزي ويمارس نفس الهوايات. كما تعمل تلك الكيانات على ضرب الشركات المحلية بقدراتها الخرافية، ما يجعل الشركات المحلية تتكتل في كيان واحد ثم تمارس نفس السياسات المبتذلة لنظيراتها الأجنبية.

تدّعي المؤسسات العابرة للقارات أنها تخلق فرص عمل. ولكن الحقيقة أنها عملت على تسريح عدد كبير جدا من العمّال في أمريكا والدول الأوروبية. من ثم انتقلت إلى دول آسيا حيث تعاقدت مع مصانع تؤجر عمالة بطريقة هي أشبه بالعبودية الحديثة. وفوق هذا وذاك هي تعتمد على استحداث وظائف هامشية في منافذ البيع، وظائف ولا تؤدي إلى تطور ملموس ولا تمنح حقوقاً مميزة ويمكن الاستغناء عن أفرادها أو استبدالهم بسهولة.

مثل الكيانات السياسة بالضبط، استطاع مبتكرو الماركات العالمية استخدام مكرهم للتأُقلم مع كل الظروف. ركبوا موجة المطالبة بتمثيل الأقليات، تغنوا بحقوق المرأة، وقاموا بتشجيع أي حراك من شأنه الترويج لمنتجاتهم. يحكي الكتاب أن أحد المطربين أطلق أغنية تنتقد الشركات العملاقة وأحدثت صدى ملحوظاً، فتقدمت له إحدى تلك الشركات بعرض إصدار ألبوم كامل برعايتهم. كما ترى، لا مفر منهم إلا إليهم.

هذه بعض الأفكار المهمة في الكتاب. إن كنت قرأت عقيدة الصدمة فستجد نفس النبرة الحانقة غير المهادنة وسرد التفاصيل بالأدلة والإحصائيات. يختلف هذا الكتاب عن خلَفه بأن فيه لمحات عن الحياة الخاصة للمؤلفة. غير أني أعتب على الكتاب أنه لم يقدم فصلا يشرح الجانب النفسي لما تقوم به تلك الشركات من دعايات وترويج، أعتقد أن ذلك كان سيحقق فهماً أعمق لتلك الجهود الخيالية. في النهاية الكتاب متميز ومهم في تعرية تلك الكائنات الأخطبوطية الطفيلية التي تمتص كل شيء لتغذي رؤوسها التي لا تشبع أبداً.

i love naomi klein soooooo much i wish she was real

Santa pace!

Sembra un'altra epoca quella in cui ho letto questo libro!
Altra pubblicità, altra vita. Ante G8 di Genova, ante black block, ante tutto e anti tutto.
Illuminante per certi versi, noioso per certi altri.
Da consultazione più che da lettura.
Ricordo ancora di essere rimasta affascinata dal capitolo sulla culture jamming e di aver cercato di saperne molto di più di quanto descritto nel libro.

Wstrząsnęła mną ta książka. Przenikliwością analiz, wzruszającą i piękną naiwnością recept i wieloma przykładami pokazującymi, że tak bardzo nie wiemy, co naprawdę dzieje się pod cienką warstwą wielkich politycznych i ekonomicznych snów o potędze.

Po przeczytaniu tej książki jeszcze bardziej zazdroszczę zachodowi kultury protestu. Tego, że potrafią zgromadzić się wokół jakiejś idei i zacząć o nią walczyć. Demokratycznie, kulturalnie, czasem burzliwie ale konsekwentnie i często skutecznie. Chciałbym, żeby to było kiedyś możliwe w moim kraju, w którym można ludziom zabrać wolność, demokrację, intymność i wszystko co ma wartość w imię fobii jednego człowieka... i gdy to się dzieje - jak dobrze pójdzie to wyjdzie na ulicę parę tysięcy ludzi raz na pół roku. Wiele o tym właśnie - kulturze protestu - można przeczytać w tej książce.

A poza tym jest świetna z wielu innych względów. Oczywiście przede wszystkim dlatego, że dość bezwzględnie demaskuje jak wielkie marki i korporacje robią nam bezustannie wodę z mózgu.

Mi profesor en la universidad de la asignatura de Comunicación Corporativa me recomendó en más de dos y tres ocasiones que leyera 'NO LOGO' de Naomi Klein, que seguro que me iba a gustar, decía. No le hice caso hasta ahora. El libro es un fiel reflejo de las causas y consecuencias de la liberalización de los mercados y del enorme poder de las multinacionales: paro, precariedad laboral, violencia, explotación infantil, hipocresía y conquista de los espacios públicos por las marcas.

Fiel al estilo investigador de Naomi Klein, con cientos de citas y datos, el libro es una buena base de información sobre cómo las multinacionales ocupan todos los espacios públicos con sus logos y se apropian de todos los movimientos; un ejemplo de cómo sus modelos empresariales de marca-si-productos-no ha ocasionado que las grandes marcas sean sólo eso, marcas, destinadas a las ideas y el marketing relegando la producción a subcontratistas del Tercer Mundo. De esta manera, las multinacionales se han enriquecido cerrando empresas en origen y generando paro, substituyéndolos por empleos precarios en el sector servicios donde reina la temporalidad y los trabajos a tiempo parcial. En el otro lado, reina inmune la explotación infantil, la violencia permanente y la pobreza extrema en los países productores ahogados por la deuda, por no hablar de las consecuencias en la destrucción del medio ambiente y de los recursos naturales por las multinacionales extractivas. Son temas tan ricos en información y hechos que el libro resulta en ocasiones muy pesado e incluso repetitivo debido al estilo fiel y preciso de N.Klein en la narración de los ejemplos (539 páginas).

'NO LOGO' fue escrito alrededor del año 2000, y han pasado 17 años desde entonces. A pesar de las esperanzas de los últimos capítulos de la escritora en movimientos antisistema y combativos contra las multinacionales de la década de los años 90, mi percepción es que estamos mucho peor. Las multinacionales tienen más poder cada año convirtiendo nuestras sociedades en claras plutocracias oligárquicas. Las situaciones se han agravado y lo que es peor, la gente lo ha aceptado. Solo hace falta fijarse en todos los que adoran a Amancio Ortega y su modelo de negocio, que no difiere en mucho del de Phil Knight y Nike.

La sociedad se ha vuelto inmune a los desagravios contra los derechos de las personas, se ha vuelto insensible al dolor ajeno y la situación que vivimos es la tendencia comúnmente aceptada a despreciar los derechos humanos en favor del desarrollo de la economía mundial.