The new administration in America boasts about about its embrace of the shock doctrine.
Since they're trying to implement good policies, it's good. When other people use crises to implement bad policies it's bad. In a way this is obvious and uninteresting. But since the "bad" people think they are good how is it relevant to fault them for following the shock doctrine specifically rather than their support of evil policies. They do do this too, but "they" also just published a very popular book called The Shock Doctrine in which the shock doctrine was bad.
I honestly have a hard time getting my head round this attitude. It's maddening!
Anyway, my actual point in this post is that I personally am becoming less of a shock doctrine person. I've been keen on pushing libertarian stuff though by whatever (more or less democratic) means possible (in my fantasy land where Libertarian Happens). But now, for fear of hypocrisy, I'm willing to make an explicit deal, my team won't do it if your team won't.
If you think my timing is suspicious what with a Democrat just taking over. My team wasn't in power and the same applies to stuff like Bushes response to 9/11.