วีดีโอ

Hey do you have anything I could contact you on?

Are you going to keep making vids? I think it's quite informative

is a national liberation struggle worth supporting now? even though that would qualify as supporting the seid countries bourgeoise.

This is a very minor semantics thing, but the term "personal property" has always been somewhat nebulous for me, since products produced not for exchange on markets, have been called products (or what I say, possessions), since "personal property" is not something I believe ever uttered by Marx; and has odd implications since "property" generally presupposes bourgeois private property today. Other than this nitpick, this is a great series!

Demsoc isn’t Marxism as demsoc is it’s own thing that is placed near social democracy but is not capitalist

Nationalism is just as bad as Marxism, unfortunately even if we don't want to believe it. Do better my friend. Become an individual and reject shallow ideologies. Peace

I believe, there is a confusion social democracy with democratic socialism. Social democracy is what you describe. However, democratic socialism is a subtype of marxism but with emphasis on avoiding becoming a dictatorship by building and maintaining direct democracy through worker's counsels (aka soviets) and self-management of the workers. Like Rosa Luxemburg's Rätekommunismus which was clearly not a social democracy and had Social Democratic Party of Germany as it's main enemy

Nationalism led to the most horrific acts in the human history? Sister, get the meds, quick! Why is even yt recommending me this lunacy lmao

YAY WE GOT BETTER AUDIO

Thank you so much for this response to my question under your first video on revolution!

I know this is to understanding Marxism and not supporting it butttt a society with no class cannot work due to tribalism

this stuff is really good for us because nearly everyone started as mls to communism (some of them as ancoms like me) because only they show up when you search about communism. and even if someone learned about orthodox marxism and left communism, then liked the idea, they only had piles of texts in their hands (this isn't really a bad thing but some people just don't like reading) because there was too few content like this on platforms like youtube.

3:32 Perhaps you can expand upon this point in a future video? If Marxists (orthodox Marxists at least) are using revolution as a means of overthrowing the status quo, and they take inspiration from the bourgeois revolutions of the Enlightenment era, why would the communist movement or the proletariat have no need for nationalism? Every country on earth is at least on some level founded on nationalist precepts, and there is a genuine desire at least among a fraction of every proletariat for nationalistic aspirations. While I understand Marxists would prefer not to build their preferred society upon the model of the nation-state, that doesn't mean the concepts of the 'nation' or 'nationalism' are necessarily antithetical to realizing a proletarian revolution, and if anything parring class struggle with national struggle could be useful in realizing successful proletarian struggle. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong on this though.

Perhaps in a future video, would you cover the thoughts of pre-Marxian economists (especially Adam Smith) on class conflict - and how their views impacted Marx and his work? Observation, documentation, and analysis of class conflict were common among classical and later enlightenment thinkers, including later capitalist (i.e. bourgeois) economists. Smith was perhaps the most notable example, and while his criticism of price controls and advocacy for loosening trade restrictions remained, he also wrote about the origin of trade unionism in protecting the workers from manufacturers/merchants, condemned the avarice of the aristocrats of his day, and noted how the dual forces of profit and rent squeeze the wages of the workers. This quote in particular stands out to me, from Wealth of Nations Book I, Chapter 11, Part 2: "The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from [the manufacturer/merchant class], ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it."

Nice

Very Bordigist

I have a video idea for you. Imagine there is an isolated island with two cities on it and resources unevenly distributed. Like, one has access to coconuts but the other has access to pineapples. One city is Ancom one is Ancap. How would they interact? (The challenge being to refrain from fallacy, to properly represent the other side. Most arguments between Ancaps and Ancoms seem to desolve into straw man and ad hominem.) Neither city will parish if the other refuses to interact however, they will both thrive if they do. Would the Ancom city "take according to his needs" from the Ancap city or would it "free trade" with them? How would travel be affected? How would culture be different?

Can you turn up the volume of your miq 👍👍

Gironistic spine-shaking brain synapse firing ironpost

TALK louder you have a great voice

Ultraleft gang here 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥