วีดีโอ

Excellent ✅

Fantastic interview Tutt’s show is increasingly becoming the best left wing content out there.

40:00 Conrad on platypus

Well spoken! “Mind forged manacles” Blake’s words ring true now in ways he could never imagine. Breaking those manacles feels intrinsic to your work. Thanks.

Her: Its boring & unreadable. Him: Yes the text is hard. Me: ::eye rolling so hard I pass out::

I will check back in a week to see if there is aprogram transcript

01:00 - Stone Graduate Center of CUNY 01:20 - Q : 01:45 - A : book , Visions of Inequality: From the French Revolution to the End of the Cold War by Branko Milanovic HC - 10 OCT 2023 _________ book , The World Under Capitalism: Observations on Economics, Politics, History, and Culture 1st Ed. by Branko Milanovic , available JUN 2025

01:46 - book , The Haves and the Have-Nots: A Brief and Idiosyncratic History of Global Inequality by Branko Milanovic , HC - 28 DEC 2010 _________ a book almost as good as the book , HAVES Without HAVE-NOTS by M J Adler , HC - 1991

4:25 - To go through life thinking one is right and everyone else is wrong is indeed a condition of life that we must learn to cope with.

Interesting discussion

JESSICA COCO IS ON POINT

I heard Jerry Brown in 1996: "Rush Limbaugh is funny if you are a male over '60".

I loved the conversation. DB has thorns and listening to his interviews are always sure to be an interesting back and forth.

Actually by the end of this video Bessner comes across as kind of obnoxious. He continually interrupts Tutt trying to ask the questions, he stares at his phone, he seems distracted, his answers are abrupt and dismissive and shallow, and finally does not match Tutt’s good faith academic curiosity and conversation. Not a great look.

Painstaking work.

Danny’s realist analysis resonates with me because I think we need to be serious and recognize the obstacles that left movements face and figure out how to navigate through them and support one another for the years that come. Thank you for the conversation, as real as is was, people should give it a listen 😊

could you add subtitles please?

Daniel, could you please turn on the captions option on this video?

Excellent loved it

Daniel’s a super smart and educated guy and provides much food for thought, but he’s got a snarky smirky arrogant edge that can be annoying and offputting. I wouldn’t say he’s not reading the times and the situation essentially right, but forgetting that such times and circumstances are produced by the dialectic as inner contradictions emerge and collide with the presumed reality and produce this inertia before the transformation occurs.

This was hilarious!

Daniel Bessner and C Derick Varn, the two real optimists of the left!😂

You folks do realize that _'Mr Hitter and the Nazties'_ are fictional characters? You do know that, right?

Striving, settling and sinking...isn't the right project under T just about some people desiring to sink others? Same for the countering neoliberal project? Use others? Manager others? Thus about sinking.

Love this convo and Daniel Tutt looks like Orson Wells. Bravo!

Do you have a recommendation of must read books?

26:45 ? I know. I know. Nuclear weapons.

Thanks Daniel. I would only say that if it's only extranous circumstances that will catapult some type of change, we don't really have to wait long; we are on the brink of WW3 and not to far from ecological catástrophe.

Citation please for 46:35 : "Losurdo chastized a lot of Marxists during the civil rights movement in the United States for criticizing like wealthy kids from the North going down to the South to support this civil rights struggle." Can't find it, thank you.

Daniel, you may want to look at getting a different camera or changing the settings on your camera. Your camera is doing a lot of focus breathing, which is distracting to the viewer. Great discussion, btw!

When he was naming the universities Milanovic worked at, I was so sad he didn't name my uni 😭

interesting interview. it is too late for this comment to go noticed by anyone i am sure, but I have a few thoughts - (1) one cannot conclude that left critiques of the soviet union are anticommunist because they oppose really existing socialism is question begging. it presupposes that the critics were wrong to dismiss the "really existing socialist" states as socialist without engaging with why they didnt think those governments were truly socialist (2) Rockhill acknowledges that the USSR was a lower stage of socialism, but the progression to the higher stage occurs through both practical and theoretical efforts. the kinds of efforts of "western marxists"! so it's incoherent to defend it from criticism by saying "well its just the lower stage of communism, of course its imperfect, it will get better!" (3) the critiques of western marxists were the outcome in part of actions by the Eastern Bloc that damaged their legitimacy among the workers as well as PB, even in the West, such as GDR in '53, Hungary in '56, and Czechoslovakia in '68. The Soviet political system inhibited internal change and critique, and this is part of what ruined the legitimacy of the system and caused institutional rot that delegitimized the whole political order and led to the collapse in the late 80s. If Rockhill was right, the workers would have come out to stop the collapse in the GDR, etc, but they didn't - why didn't they? Surely it wasnt because Adorno took CIA dollars or whatever (4) the fact groups like the FFS took money from western institutions is worth critique, but does not in itself prove that their critiques of the Soviet model were wrong. the fact that they could be weaponized by the CIA is not proof enough of their inaccuracy - on the contrary, the fact that they were useful weapons for the CIA suggests that there may have been use for them (5) Rockhill centers much of his argument on the fact that the Eastern Bloc states were authentic in their advocacy for national liberation, which the FFS thinkers and western marxists dismiss or overlook. yet the Soviet bloc states were always inconsistent on national liberation at best. See the fate of the Tatars, Kalmyks, and Chechens in the USSR or various national minorities in the PRC or Hmong in Vietnam. I would say that the USSR was better than the US on this point, but that's a low bar! (6) it is strange to appeal to a criticism of the Cultural Revolution in China when the excesses of the CR were so disruptive to living standards and stability in China that Mao nixed the project and Deng did a 180. (7) the dominance of a certain form of leninism in the 3rd world is in part a product of sheer power politics, not ideological or theoretical superiority. Groups like Trots and others were violently liquidated to sustain the monopoly of a certain theoretical approach on the left. It just seems like Rockhill ends up overcorrecting for the mistakes of Western Marxists by reverting to Stalinism, but surely we need to go beyond the petty 20th century divisions between Stalinists, Social Democrats, Trotskyists, Left Communists, Capitalist Roaders, and whoever else.

this was an interesting interview. I think Marx's view on equality is interesting and nuanced. the naive view is that Marx rejected inequality. the more sophisticated view is that Marx did not oppose inequality. but I think the more sophisticated view is also mistaken. We see a dialectical notion of equality in the critique of the gotha program and his critique of wage egalitarianism where this is in practice inegalitarian and doesnt understand the material conditions that produce inequality. he also critiques fairness as a vague and ideological loaded concept and floating signifier. yet inasmuch as he opposed the oppression of women, racial minorities, colonized nations like the poles, etc, was against arbitrary forms of inequality. I think for Marx, the movement towards equality is a dialectical spiral that cannot move directly towards it, but can only move indirectly towards it.

An 18 month year old Baby, being baby sit by Grandpa, while mom is away. Will play a “self” game of “frustration”, yelling gone there throwing a toy under the bed. Instead of talking to grandpa, instead being their own master in the mirror instead of talking to a second person across the screen. A baby and adults sometimes we choose Lost Objects instead of Loss w/ Castration, preferring the self pleasure of frustration. For Loss involves you interacting with other objects, and those other objects have their own will and volition. Hell I do this too (the rest will be rambling). Recently I asked a poll who is more pessimistic, Baudrillard or Mark Fisher. People voice different responses, but in the end it is about the Chloreic like temperament (something not real, but work with me) where one rather struggle in a manic way against the dying of the light, that is what Fisher does … or has one has found other ways to cope. I do not have a universal answer here. I feel we are in a very addictus / preta type head space right now. Forgive me for like invoking half a dozen traditions.

I really want to be charitable & comradely in this space - so I'll delete a previous comment. The interview was incredibly informative, Daniel. I will say this though - amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics.

Two of the most popular guests I have had on my show talking... fun.

So, first this was a great discussion and everyone brought interesting and engaging points to the conversation. That's one. Two, given the apparent composition of this chat, it's not an ambiguous position communists in the United States and Canada should have in regards to the Ukraine-Russia War. That is to say, absolute defeat of the Ukraine AND MORE IMPORTANTLY the immediate cessation of aid, intelligence, and support for Ukraine from the United States, Canada, and Western Europe. I highly recommend comrades read the KKE's statement on the matter. Still, great job everyone and thank you.

Where does Danny’s analysis of the current moment leave us strategy and tactics wise? To me his analysis seems to lead to political nihilism but I could be wrong…

15:33- When did Nietzsche call for "the extermination of millions of failures?" Which book? What's the citation or footnote? I have read most of Nietzsche, it does not seem to be the kind of sentence he would ever write. It seems to me to be a scandalous misrepresentation.

Wow two of my favorites together!

I certainly disagree with Branko Milanović I really loved the interview and your careful approach to it. Also, it's funny to hear someone say "Whether is labor L or Capital K..." It just reminds me that English IS NOT nor should be the understanding for Marxism. Great job.

Great interview, Daniel T.

I thought it was 1% owned 80% and real wages haven’t increased since 78. I guess the wef numbers are better than richard wolffs.

What is the name of the book?

Brilliant! Thank you!

Another great guest and conversation. One question and potential "correction". Of course Nietzsche was no fan of socialism. But did he glory in the destruction of the Paris Commune? I'm wondering if anyone can provide evidence of this. In Sue Prideaux's biography of Friedrich Nietzsche, I Am Dynamite!, she discusses the contrasting reactions of Nietzsche and Richard Wagner to the Paris Commune of 1871. According to Prideaux, Wagner did glorify the defeat of the Commune, seeing it as a kind of triumph of order over chaos and as a vindication of his own reactionary political views. Wagner believed that the fall of the Commune symbolized the necessary suppression of the masses and the affirmation of a strong, hierarchical order. Nietzsche, on the other hand, was appalled by Wagner’s reaction. He found Wagner’s enthusiasm for the destruction of the Commune distasteful and morally troubling. Nietzsche, though critical of the Commune’s ideals, was repelled by Wagner’s uncritical support for the violent suppression of the movement. This difference in response is indicative of the growing rift between Nietzsche and Wagner. Nietzsche, in this instance, felt that Wagner's response was overly simplistic and reflective of a disturbing embrace of authoritarianism, which ultimately contributed to their estrangement. In Prideaux's biography, the depiction of this episode is part of the broader narrative of Nietzsche’s evolving philosophical and personal split with Wagner, a relationship that was once deeply influential but became increasingly strained due to Wagner's political views.

Fantastic presentation.

Another outstanding dialog. Solidarity Comrades

No, I heard they ask this question to Dr. Horn on several occasions. But I would like to ask his life of the rationalization of working class issues or to try to like boil working class issues down to where this class did not race, what do you think about people who passor and I think you said a little about it, but I would like to know more about people who pass, but they end up adopting fascism for safety reasons

just when i was getting excited to make a serious effort to read deleuze...