No Is Not Enough: Resisting Trump's Shock Politics and Winning the World We Need
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Naomi Klein No Is Not Enough: Resisting Trump's Shock Politics and Winning World We Need. Toronto, Canada: Penguin Random House, 20171.Over past two decades, Naomi Klein has produced four books plus a collection of newspaper articles and other short pieces (Klein, 2002). I have reviewed two of books in The Innovation Journal. The first one, No Logo, was part of a review essay on books that demonized corporation in Vol. 6, No. 3 (2001). The second, The Shock Doctrine (2007) somehow slipped through my personal editorial cracks (read but not reviewed here or elsewhere), but a generally favourable review of third, This Changes Everything, appeared in these pages in Vol. 19, No 3 (2014). With No Is Not Enough, I am finally going for trifecta. Even covering three out of four, however, requires an explanation.Naomi Klein isn't an original or an especially profound thinker. Few such people make it to print, and fewer produce books that attract many readers or make a big impact on events of their days. Conveying extraordinary brilliance in conventional, accessible language is a talent that escapes most deep thinkers and writers of genius. Naomi Klein, however, does next best thing, and she does it rather well. She has sold a ton of books, is widely interviewed in all major media, contributes opinion pieces to widely diverse print and online journals, appears to have attracted a measurable constituency and, from at least one perspective, makes a fair amount of common sense. So, when I said she was neither an original nor a profound thinker, I intended no disrespect and, of course, Ms. Klein makes no such claims. She is and seems content to be a dedicated activist and a well-tuned popularizer. In fact, if people such as Marine Le Pen and Donald Trump hadn't so thoroughly discredited concept, I might even have referred to her as a populist. And I'd have meant it as a compliment.Why should readers of The Innovation Journal pay attention to her? The simple reason is that she raises some of most salient issues of our day and puts them in language that ordinary citizens can understand. Her main topics should be atop every government's agenda. If innovation is to contribute to public good, it must address issues such as vitality of democracy, fairness of public procedures, application of universal human rights, equity of economic arrangements and sustainability of planetary biosphere. Anything less is political distraction and an abrogation of our deepest moral and responsibilities. Others, of course, may do a better job of discussing any one of these pillars of modern civilization; but, few are her equal in provoking intelligent public consideration of them all. Moreover, Klein's personal journey through complexity and complementarity of issues she discusses is so open, so honest, occasionally so vulnerable but also and always so passionate, that it is hard not to follow along. Those who do so will almost certainly be amply rewarded.2.It took Naomi Klein almost a decade to bring together ideas she'd accumulated as a journalist and political activist and to condense them into her first three manageable volumes. It was certainly worth investment of time and effort. Permit me to rehearse her line of thought.No Logo was an attack on the brand bullies, multinational enterprises that exploited workers on periphery to sell commodities and merchandise to exploited middling and lower classes in centres of empire, or of what Kari Levitt (2002) called hinterland and metropolis in Silent Surrender, a splendid little book that once inspired social democratic and nationalist dissenters and still holds up well. In her initial enterprise, Klein gave a shout-out to ethical shareholders, culture jammers, street reclaimers, McUnion organizers, human rights hacktivists, school-logo fighters and Internet corporate watchdogs. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".