Reading the comments I'm amazed not only how scared people are of learning a little about Marxist thought, but how childish their understanding of it seems to be. They're literally just repeating the same cliches their daddies taught them. Relax. Learn a little. Whatever you may think, it's a huge part of human history.
@@jamessalazar6702 I'm not sure what you're responding to, but you seem to be proving my point precisely. Relax. Learn a little. Differentiate between communism and Marxism. You don't have to accept it -- I haven't -- but stop parroting the same talking points as your mommy and daddy. You won't starve to death just by being quiet and learning.
Marx thinks the basis of capitalism is exploitation. When its heirarchy and compliance which is at the basis. Have you heard of the kulaks? That was class based guilt.
@@jackschwanke603 Yeah but if you listened to this video, obviously not every Marxist would agree with how the Kulaks were treated and dehumanized. The Bolsheviks kept running out of “State Enemy” and moved on to be very tyrannical. Most Marxists nowadays aren't going to class landowning peasants as the bourgeoisie.
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
The way he summarized this seems very to the point and unemotional. Often when this topic comes up it seems we get someone who has an axe to grind or is too personally invested. perhaps he does have an axe to grind but it didn't really come through in his description of history and the ideas that drove this part of history. It also rings true based on everything else I have seen and read. Thanks
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
A marxist who blames the brutal dictatorship of the marxist tradition on the societies that were forced to adopt it at gunpoint is an asshole. Marx's career was dedicated to calling for dictatorship, not critique of capitalism.
@@JC-21470 if you think socialism was the cause of their fall then you should do a bit more research: USSR - parastroika, Chernoble, botched Afghanistan campaign, etc. Cuba - fall of the USSR resulting in the loss their biggest trading partner, embargo by thr USA Venezuela - oil embargo by the US resulting in their biggest stream of income perishing
@Categories - prior to Marxist ideas taking hold Cuba was a thriving tourist destination and Venezuela the 4th largest exporter of oil in the world, now people are literally eating out of trash cans. Results matter, facts matter. History is full of examples of Marxist ideas being tried with disastrous results.
The comment section is embarrassing with how littered it is with people who have demonstrably lived a closed minded life, and still persist to. You don’t have to like Karl Marx to appreciate his academic contributions. The Communist Manifesto is the first work of sociology - arguably its greatest contribution to academia - yet most of the people on here probably hadn’t the first fucking clue of that. More over, I guarantee none of them have read Das Kapital, and most haven’t even heard of it. That, in and of itself, is why I don’t take most Americans seriously when they try to give their take on economics theories like socialism and Marxism. Hard to take you seriously when you repeatedly demonstrate you’re too fucking lazy to actually learn the topic you’re trying to critique.
You are some ignoramus. Socialism and sociology existed before Marx and manifesto. Manifesto is a work of seditious propaganda and not sociology. Marx is a heterodox philosopher (sophist) and not a contributor to mainstream sociology, economics or political science and was not at any time during his life. Even among outcasts of economics, we know Marx was not an innovator of new material of any kind. tWe have te receipts of other economists/writers credited with composing all theory of Marx except his historical or dialectic materialism. Marxist dialectic materialism reflects how stupid Marx was if Grundrisse and his math notes did not add this perspective. Marx wants us to accept that dialectic which the rational philosopher Hegel presented as a means of intellectual resolution is some natural means of resolution, and materialist of society. Of course this is a falsehood. A capitalist mode is the first based on economic autonomy, so the first to convey any materialism of the general public. Since you are such a genius with your Marx, present the formal name for the marxian theory which you claim has garnered any respect from any non-marxist academic inquiry in the history of that inquiry. I mean in industrial psychology, human resources, macro or micro economics, political economy, political science, anthropology, law, legal ethics, anthropology, sociology, or social sciences. Whereas Marx presented ideation for all these studies, none in their history ever regarded any contribution of Marx's as a contribution to the field. To the contrary, most regard the marxist vantage on these topics as incompetent, dogmatic, ignorant and certainly heterodox/fringe/radical.
Richard also says often, socialism has never been tried anywhere in the world. We went from slavery and feudalism to capitalism. What you call socialist/communist countries are still just "state capitalism". His examples are France with its "Air France" and other state businesses. Marxism is about economics but its foes twist it to mean some kind of ideal and form of government. It's not, and capitalism is mostly great compared to slavery.
In it's essence it's Marx's take on Hegelian Dialectic. On a related note, those that throw around ideological terms as pejoratives are almost certainly ignorant of what those terms actually mean.
Note that Marx believed that Hegelian dialectic would eventually reach a conclusion…..total Communism . Which never happened , and was the biggest of mistakes and assessments from KM himself .
@@stalin1909 That's true for any metanarrative. It's not necessarily the metanarrative or ideological theory that's flawed. It's that humans, as flawed as we are, will undoubtedly screw up anything we get our hands on.
it’s not marx’s take on the hegelian dialectic. we was a hegelian in his early to late 20s and kept the dialectical method throughout his later work. dialectical materialism is it’s own system
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
@@TheChewman2001 Marx presents a natural process, contradicting Hegel's proposal that dialectic is contrived thought - an approach of intellectuals to answer pivotal questions. Marx - post hegelian - presents DM as a justification for his own idealism as if there was some inevitability or universality to it. Was it normative sophistry or legit philosophy?
This guy is basically saying “Ah Marx wrote this great book and it rapidly expanded and it’s the fault of the countries that all these people starved” Not real Marxism as usual. 8 minutes of no answer.
This is not your ( normal guy ). Read a bit about him ! Know who his classmates were . You’re entitled to believe what u want to believe .But a regime of systematic inequality is not the answer. If it’s not for slavery , and annihilation of native Americans ( AKA exploitation) …Adam smith would’ve never been a known figure !
7:10 - 'Marx never laid any of this out' - total and utter nonsense. Marx wrote about the need for violent revolution often, and his biggest mistake was thinking that violent revolutionaries would fall to the wayside as utopia emerged. He was wrong. Violent revolutionaries tend to care a lot less about the revolution and a lot more about the violence. That failure in Marx's critique has lead to the deaths of tens of millions of people, and if he had lived to see the result of his ideas in action, he would have went back to the drawing board.
He was literally inspired by the violence of the first French Revolution overthrowing the monarchy. It’s amazing how little people actually understand about this ideology and just fill in their own blanks along the way. Communism has always been for the short sighted “thinkers”.
@@retwerts you are equally disgusting in your one-sided views. Why are you so scared of information? It’s almost as if you don’t have any real trust in the organizational system you say is the best? I think both sides are equally ridiculous.
"Marx wrote about the need for violent revolution often" -- care to provide some citations? Where did he write about the need for violent revolution? I'd like to read them. I'm genuinely curious as a social psychologist whose research frequently involves interpersonal aggression.
Hope you also read it. Because despite it's name it's not a "book about communism" in a sense that it would describe how to organise a communist society. Which kind of proves Wolffs point.
@@jaakkopitkanen7734 What would make a "book about communism" then? The basic tenet is there's a class divide between the workers and the ruling class and the proletariat should overthrow the ruling class and he details the justifications for why it should be done. The whole thing is about what the aim of communism is.
@@nmills5367 Something that would constitute a description about a communist society. Like the so called utopian socialists like Saint-Simon wrote. Marx was very clear to distinguish himself from utopian socialists. Those would be "books about communism". Marx main work das Kapital is better described as a book about capitalism (as the title says).
Also don’t forget that the manifesto is a pamphlet, not a book. It was turned into a book later. If you actually go read the “book” now you will see that the meat of it is just a collection of introductions that have been written for the pamphlet, but the actual manifesto is extremely short.
So in other words, every time Marxism/Communism was attempted it failed miserably (100’s of millions dead so far) but let’s futz with the outcome again (even though we have no plan) and see what happens this time. Yeah…
Failed miserably because the CIA and US government made a conscious effort to overthrow any country that decided to nationalize any of their resources. Should really have a full understanding of the historical events you are referencing.
Kid please read don't follow the wind just because they tell you 100 million people died its not true how about the 9 million the die each year in capitalism just from famine without even the wars that are because of the capitalist greed just look into it especially in the 3rd world capitalism and greed intertwined with corruption is killing us man
Wolf has repeatedly said he does not "see the world through the lens of body counts" (anyone wanting the video for this it's in Kirk Wilcox's channel). The genocides and killings are the point
Every Marxist, communist, socialist I’ve met others the exception of few, inherently has a negative view on their life. I wonder if there’s any correlation?
Well, political views always depend on your circumstances/position. So if you have profited from a certain system you will be in favor, and if you're being subjugated you take an oppositional stance. Thus it follows that the disenfranchised aim to change the status quo, get it now? That's your correlation. Theres no substitute for experience, and if you haven't been there you couldn't really get it. A bit like convincing a zealot Christian that there's no God, or turn an atheist into a believer for that matter. That's basically every discussion between simple capitalists and communists/Marxists. Me personally, I take a Marxist perspective, broadly speaking, I think the analysis is spot on. Capitalism has its benefits, but it also has many limits and downsides. Overall, in terms of real world policy, I'd like to believe that we're a few decades past those sort of simplistic models, but that's just me, one opinionated dude from the real best country on this planet. Switzerland.
Correct me if I"m wrong but isn't this "all Marxism was originally and all Marx ever wrote was a critique of capitalism, he never advocated for communism" patently false? In fact, isn't the opposite true?
No? It is very true. Marx wrote thousands of pages of text and in it you can find maybe a sentense or two of vague descriptions of communism. Try reading Marx sometime, you might be enlightened.
@@jaakkopitkanen7734 I had intended to comment and express some disagreements I have with your perspective. However, that would accomplish nothing as you are convinced by your thoughts and principles like we all are. If you are a real person, have a great day and I wish you well.
@@jl4018 Thank you, very polite. I wish you all the best too. I expect our disagreement is minor. I'm actually not a marxist at all, just have an opinion on how we should view his works at this point in history.
The only thing on socialism/communism that he wrote was The Communist Manifesto, which he only co-authored. In his own works, like Das Kapital, he critiques the origins of Capitalism and how it evolved out of Feudal society, and what he saw as more effective means of managing the economy as it continues to evolve. Evolve being a key word as he was a fan of Darwin's writings and sent him mail on multiple occasions, so he was likely influenced slightly by that.
@@mikehorne4053 This is a stupid comment. Of course Marx invented communism how we saw it roll out in all marxist tradition states. Wtf? Marx is not a contributor to economics nor to the understanding of economic history. He is a renowned idiot in the field. Wolff for example is a well-known charlatan and is outcast as a heterodox "arts" economist. Marx writes about his political economic concept in his Critique of the Gotha Program, not Manifesto. This is where Marx and not Lenin invents state capitalism. Also in Address to the Communist League by the Central Committee, Marx, not Lenin invented politburo dictatorship. This means that Wolff lies in this video since Marx never made any valuable critique (100% demagogy) and marx provides his brutal dictatorship ideation in detail.
i do not agree with him, but I listen him a lot, as a way of bursting my own information bubble. He is not for big government, but for a democracy at work. He sees what was wrong with 20 century implementations of marxism.
He's not advocating for USSR-style socialism. Why do you comment before having a solid understanding of Wolff's philosophy on how work should he organized?
No system (except anarchism) works without government enforcement. I do not understand your point. In capitalism a way of doing business legally is on terms set by the government in form of different laws. We talking only about exploring possibility of changing those laws to put common worker in better position. Wolf argue that now we have a system where decisions in company are made by handful of people. Those decisions are very often in their own short term interest, not in interest of workers, and in fact company. It is similar to autocracy at work. You can clearly see that something is wrong with the system every time when something big and bad happens - like crash or pandemic. Then the same people who made stock buybacks and paid themself huge bonuses for months and months begs for government bailouts. Is Wolf idea the right one? I do not think so, he is also very vague in interviews that i've listen to. But do not be intellectually lazy,
@@grzegorzowczarek3016 and I'm not talking about the legal umbrella under which capitalism operates. I'm talking about government taking control of the private sector to build a “better and more fair system” for the people.
Little need for that, there’s already a wash of capitalist figureheads Lex has had on before like Malice or even Elon Musk, which is likely a more fair opposition to a Marxist viewpoint, unless you’re trying to correlate Marxism to Fascism, which is a dishonest comparison at best.
I was pleasantly surprised Wolffe was invited to be a guest. Over all this was a good talk. I also don't agree with some of his points. But it's good to listen to someone who knows his stuff very well. Honestly, it made me rethink some of my sociopolitical positions because these are new information I needed to mull over in the coming days. I was kinda laughing at the comments here from people who I sense are digging their heels. Some even called Wolffe "psychopath" hahahahaha!!!!! I was like "what?" For me he sounds like a story-telling grandpa with much optimism.
@@almaza4331 Chomsky said that you don't actually believe in free speech at all if you don't believe in free speech for people you disagree with. Christopher Hitchens, at the time when he was a strong Trotskyist (he said before his death that he's still a Marxist), interviewed Tom Metzger, a white supremacist.
@@youtuber6185 However, I highly doubt Lex would have a white supremacist or ISIS spokesman on his podcast to let them defend their respective ideologies.
@@ColorMatching im sorry if that what your philosophy professor told you. He's wrong. Marxism is firstly an economic theory. He talked about companies, prices, workers, wages and so on. That's economics. The other stuff he talked about it's just related to criticize capitalism, which is a supposed economic theory.
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
The vast majority of critical thinkers avoid marxian ideologies, unless you utterly redefine the term "critical thinking" and weaponize it to only support critical theories, without using actual critical thinking skills.
"what are the defining characteristics of Marxism as an economic and political theory and ideology" and the answer is "a critique of capitalism" ...so, a vague, resentful something that offers no solutions 👍
Marx's critique wasn't vague though, you may not like his critique but it was very in depth and had specific examples of what he saw as flaws in the capitalist system in his book Kapital such as the boom and bust cycle and the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. As for no solutions I will admit his solution was quite vague, but he focused most of his intellectual energy to critiquing the entire economic system of his time which is a pretty big undertaking. Plus you as a reader are not entitled to a nice easy solution for every theorist you encounter
@@Joe-sg9ll the manifesto is one of his first works and not even one of his main ones. Marx considered the manifesto a blueprint and later scrapped a lot of the ideas in it. In addition, its supposed to be easy to read considering that is how manifestos work, they are supposed to be easily accesibile to people. Have you read critique of the Gotha program, 18 brumaire, kapital?
Can Marxist please explain to me the main pillars of how a society should be organized under communism? This guy didn't answer the question. I'm not being sarcastic either, I want the modern Marxists view. I don't expect an in depth explanation, just the main ideas. For example Capitalism can be explained as "Private ownership of capital, free exchange of goods and services, and free markets." What is modern communism in 10 sentences or so.
Can Marxist please explain to me the main pillars of how a society should be organized under communism? To preface the whole point of this video, it's complicated because there is no bible laying out how a Marxist should behave, what they should believe, and how society should exactly be organized. From the people I've talked to in most western countries they typically want to organize the workplace from being owned by the wealthy/shareholder class and have workers own more of the workplace hence leading to better conditions, pay, etc for the workers. If you think that sounds milquetoast and quite moderate (at least compared to the stereotypical commie), that's because most intellectual or educated Marxists are anti-authoritarians and would usually prefer the status quo to autocracy (Richard Wolff falls under this category). "Communist" typically implies that they are authoritarian, but it could also mean they view authoritarianism as tolerable for their end goals. But if you see the leftists infighting between Communist and Non-Communist Marxist parties in Europe they couldn't be more opposed. To sum up from what I've seen: (Modern flavor) Marxists are typically pro-union, want to see workplace democracy, and tangentially identify with progressivism (opposition to bigotry and inequality). Edit: I recommend Second Thought for a more western modern socialist view. His videos are a lot easier to digest than most.
@@GAGONMYCOREY Thanks for the reply; I suppose the "devil is in the details" as they say. Interesting how humanity, in general, are split philosophically on systems of government between a) Equality of outcome at the expense of the individual and b) Merit based outcomes which can lead to bad outcomes for those poorly equipped or the unfortunate.
This is the problem is that Communism is an umbrella term which is not one ideology but multiple. In the 20th century alone you had multiple communist movements such as Marxist-Leninists, Left-Comms, Council Communists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, Mensheviks, Maoists, Trotskyists, Agrarianists etc. Most of the communist countries that existed were Marxist-Leninists (because the Soviet Union was and they modelled the Soviet Union) but their is multiple other versions of Communsim. This is why this is such a hard discussion to have because people don't realize Communsim is not 1 ideology, how could you even begin to explain this to someone who's entire knowledge on this subject is outdated cold war propaganda (the average Americans knowledge on Communsim)
This was all addressed but you’d actually have to watch the whole podcast. In fact, had you watched and really listened, you wouldn’t be asking some of the shit you did lol
@@jl8410 I watch the video, he gave no specific systems in any level of detail just broad abstract systems. So do you have answers or just false pithy comments?
He never answers the question. If you think he answers the question, go back to Lex`s question . This is a shallow and intellectually vacant sheep of a person. I really wanted to hear his definition -- the attributes and characteristics .
@@ColorMatching he’s a full fledged Marxist. How many examples of communism do we have in history before people realize how much of a catastrophe this system is? Ironically he’s also has a history degree, yet he conveniently overlooks the hundreds of millions of corpses in Russia, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and etc.
@@chrispark7010 he hasn't overlooked anything. Stop blaming Marx for the atrocities committed by other people. Blaming him for the atrocities committed by communist regimes decades after his death is like blaming Adam Smith or Dave Ricardo for western imperialism, war, genocide, slavery and exploitation. stop implicitly sourcing a book that has been long debunked: The Real Death Toll of Communism.
He speaks with such arrogance, it becomes a turn off. He becomes highly nuanced when talking about the "right form" of Marxism and how it has not been truly tried, but then goes macro when talking about all of capitalism in one basket.
How many times should human societies try and fail before giving up? How many dead are necessary for the experiment to end or to succeed? How many people should "be made" to participate in the experiment? How about we stick with free markets and transparency principles instead?
Capitalism in America is being held together with printing money, true capitalism would of let American banks fail. Plus without the government assistance youd either have to make giving jobs law or the people who are at the bottom either die or theyll be a revolution attempted constantly.
@@TheJoker-um9tp totally agree with the first part. True capitalism would have let the banks fail in 2008. Obama and Osborn saved them with tax money. This is unacceptable. The second part is nonsense. Anything the government does is by definition an act of legislation. Each additional legislation makes it harder and harder for businesses to do their job. The result is that the more legislation you introduce, the bigger the companies need to become to comply. Resulting in less competition, fewer jobs, higher prices.
@@lexreinstein4244 you said the last bit was nonsense but why is their a safety net in terms of benefits. Why not just have a totally capitalist economy.
@@edwardbateman3094 I understand what you are saying here. However, I have a theory on this subject. The theory is that western societies have been led to believe that our political conflicts are between liberals and conservatives. But this is just a cover up. The reality is that both liberal and conservatives, both republicans and monarchists, are all socialists at heart. The west has not yet really known a pure capitalist, free market government.
Ok, I deleted my last comment, because it's no point to argue with people whom never experienced real socialism in their lives. It's like talking about sex with virgin. Their theoretical views about socialism is ridiculous and glorifying capitalism is pathetic. They have no idea what are they talking about lol
At when and where is Marx ideas work whole heartedly? When we were cave men, or tribes sounds about right to me. I've met Cambodians, Russians and others and it doesn't sound good at all
This guy is a clown. 1. Russia wasn't losing WW1, Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed after Lenin took power. 2. Trotsky wasn't a Bolshevik, but a major figure of the opposing Menshevik party, and only joined after Lenin took power. Is this supposed to be the most important Marxist professor in US? American Academia is truly an embarrassment.
Bullshit. Marx designed politburo and state capitalism, not Lenin or Stalin. Lenin and Stalin just read Marx and you people, including big fat Wolff have clearly not read this part of marxian dogma.
At no point in your rambling did you get remotely close to something that resembles an answer. Congratulation we are all now dumber and may god have mercy on your soul. 😂 this life long teacher probably can’t make or fix anything. 🛠
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
I'm not being sarcastic, but why should they be split evenly? When I was bussing tables why should I have the same pay as the manager whose job was to not only do my job and anyone elses when necessary ,but also schedule shifts, light accounting work, inventory and ordering, and much more? Or when I was selling cell phones for Sprint why would I deserve the same pay as the CEO of the company? I think many CEO's of large companies get vulgar amounts of money, but I don't think an average employees salary should be anywhere in the ballpark of a manager/CEO whose job entails more work with much higher consequences for failure.
@@reasonerenlightened2456 Human society had done better than feudalism, like before monarchic authoritarianism on Europe. There is no better than freedom (capitalism). No better or different ways are acceptable.
Just a thought, Unfortunately Like Elizabeth Warren, I find Professor wolfs narrative unhelpful. Unlike Andrew Yang whose ideas are at least interesting ,Professor Wolf does not offer helpful solutions🤔IMO
Yes. The country that printed more trillions than anyone else and literally gave away trillions of dollars to businesses to DO NOTHING and individuals to DO NOTHING over the past two years, plus enables oligopolies funded by tax payers and enabled by regulations which crush competition, is the most capitalist country in the world. Wake up, buddy.
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
I was going to comment mocking and explaining how foolish the idea of Marxism was but you guys have done a great job pointing out this dude's lying nonsense.
Marx in the most misunderstood person ever. He has been demonized but he really was a brilliant man. I am not a socialist but socialism really is just another economic system and it is not communism. The best system is a mix of socialism and capitalism.
Reading the comments I'm amazed not only how scared people are of learning a little about Marxist thought, but how childish their understanding of it seems to be. They're literally just repeating the same cliches their daddies taught them. Relax. Learn a little. Whatever you may think, it's a huge part of human history.
@@jamessalazar6702 I'm not sure what you're responding to, but you seem to be proving my point precisely. Relax. Learn a little. Differentiate between communism and Marxism. You don't have to accept it -- I haven't -- but stop parroting the same talking points as your mommy and daddy. You won't starve to death just by being quiet and learning.
@@jamessalazar6702 I don't like to dismiss people, but you need to seriously edit this response if you want me to take you seriously.
Marx thinks the basis of capitalism is exploitation. When its heirarchy and compliance which is at the basis. Have you heard of the kulaks? That was class based guilt.
@@jackschwanke603 Yeah but if you listened to this video, obviously not every Marxist would agree with how the Kulaks were treated and dehumanized. The Bolsheviks kept running out of “State Enemy” and moved on to be very tyrannical. Most Marxists nowadays aren't going to class landowning peasants as the bourgeoisie.
@@GAGONMYCOREY they weren't peasants compared to the ppl invaded them
No one ever mentions Karl Marx famous sister who invented the Starting Pistol, her name was Onya
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
No one cares that’s whu
Onya Marx... gesetz... 💣
I will add this to my arsenal of dad jokes thank you.
The way he summarized this seems very to the point and unemotional. Often when this topic comes up it seems we get someone who has an axe to grind or is too personally invested. perhaps he does have an axe to grind but it didn't really come through in his description of history and the ideas that drove this part of history. It also rings true based on everything else I have seen and read. Thanks
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
A marxist who blames the brutal dictatorship of the marxist tradition on the societies that were forced to adopt it at gunpoint is an asshole. Marx's career was dedicated to calling for dictatorship, not critique of capitalism.
I was anti Marx until I read his books.
I read his book..and I disliked it even more
Maybe you should look at the results of his ideas over history, everywhere it has been tried has been a complete disaster, USSR, Cuba, Venzuela.
@@JC-21470 if you think socialism was the cause of their fall then you should do a bit more research:
USSR - parastroika, Chernoble, botched Afghanistan campaign, etc.
Cuba - fall of the USSR resulting in the loss their biggest trading partner, embargo by thr USA
Venezuela - oil embargo by the US resulting in their biggest stream of income perishing
@Categories - prior to Marxist ideas taking hold Cuba was a thriving tourist destination and Venezuela the 4th largest exporter of oil in the world, now people are literally eating out of trash cans. Results matter, facts matter. History is full of examples of Marxist ideas being tried with disastrous results.
@@JC-21470 according to who?
The comment section is embarrassing with how littered it is with people who have demonstrably lived a closed minded life, and still persist to. You don’t have to like Karl Marx to appreciate his academic contributions. The Communist Manifesto is the first work of sociology - arguably its greatest contribution to academia - yet most of the people on here probably hadn’t the first fucking clue of that. More over, I guarantee none of them have read Das Kapital, and most haven’t even heard of it. That, in and of itself, is why I don’t take most Americans seriously when they try to give their take on economics theories like socialism and Marxism. Hard to take you seriously when you repeatedly demonstrate you’re too fucking lazy to actually learn the topic you’re trying to critique.
You are some ignoramus. Socialism and sociology existed before Marx and manifesto. Manifesto is a work of seditious propaganda and not sociology.
Marx is a heterodox philosopher (sophist) and not a contributor to mainstream sociology, economics or political science and was not at any time during his life. Even among outcasts of economics, we know Marx was not an innovator of new material of any kind. tWe have te receipts of other economists/writers credited with composing all theory of Marx except his historical or dialectic materialism.
Marxist dialectic materialism reflects how stupid Marx was if Grundrisse and his math notes did not add this perspective. Marx wants us to accept that dialectic which the rational philosopher Hegel presented as a means of intellectual resolution is some natural means of resolution, and materialist of society. Of course this is a falsehood. A capitalist mode is the first based on economic autonomy, so the first to convey any materialism of the general public.
Since you are such a genius with your Marx, present the formal name for the marxian theory which you claim has garnered any respect from any non-marxist academic inquiry in the history of that inquiry. I mean in industrial psychology, human resources, macro or micro economics, political economy, political science, anthropology, law, legal ethics, anthropology, sociology, or social sciences. Whereas Marx presented ideation for all these studies, none in their history ever regarded any contribution of Marx's as a contribution to the field. To the contrary, most regard the marxist vantage on these topics as incompetent, dogmatic, ignorant and certainly heterodox/fringe/radical.
Richard also says often, socialism has never been tried anywhere in the world. We went from slavery and feudalism to capitalism. What you call socialist/communist countries are still just "state capitalism". His examples are France with its "Air France" and other state businesses. Marxism is about economics but its foes twist it to mean some kind of ideal and form of government. It's not, and capitalism is mostly great compared to slavery.
In it's essence it's Marx's take on Hegelian Dialectic. On a related note, those that throw around ideological terms as pejoratives are almost certainly ignorant of what those terms actually mean.
Note that Marx believed that Hegelian dialectic would eventually reach a conclusion…..total Communism . Which never happened , and was the biggest of mistakes and assessments from KM himself .
@@stalin1909 That's true for any metanarrative. It's not necessarily the metanarrative or ideological theory that's flawed. It's that humans, as flawed as we are, will undoubtedly screw up anything we get our hands on.
it’s not marx’s take on the hegelian dialectic. we was a hegelian in his early to late 20s and kept the dialectical method throughout his later work. dialectical materialism is it’s own system
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
@@TheChewman2001 Marx presents a natural process, contradicting Hegel's proposal that dialectic is contrived thought - an approach of intellectuals to answer pivotal questions.
Marx - post hegelian - presents DM as a justification for his own idealism as if there was some inevitability or universality to it. Was it normative sophistry or legit philosophy?
This guy is basically saying
“Ah Marx wrote this great book and it rapidly expanded and it’s the fault of the countries that all these people starved”
Not real Marxism as usual.
8 minutes of no answer.
That's not a real argument. That's a strawman. Quote what he actually said...
He didn’t say much
This is not your ( normal guy ). Read a bit about him ! Know who his classmates were . You’re entitled to believe what u want to believe .But a regime of systematic inequality is not the answer.
If it’s not for slavery , and annihilation of native Americans ( AKA exploitation) …Adam smith would’ve never been a known figure !
Not real Marxism? Then what is real Marxism, according to you?
Big words, too long, little brain can’t put together. Give small words. Little brain likes.
7:10 - 'Marx never laid any of this out' - total and utter nonsense. Marx wrote about the need for violent revolution often, and his biggest mistake was thinking that violent revolutionaries would fall to the wayside as utopia emerged. He was wrong. Violent revolutionaries tend to care a lot less about the revolution and a lot more about the violence. That failure in Marx's critique has lead to the deaths of tens of millions of people, and if he had lived to see the result of his ideas in action, he would have went back to the drawing board.
He was literally inspired by the violence of the first French Revolution overthrowing the monarchy. It’s amazing how little people actually understand about this ideology and just fill in their own blanks along the way. Communism has always been for the short sighted “thinkers”.
@@retwerts you are equally disgusting in your one-sided views. Why are you so scared of information? It’s almost as if you don’t have any real trust in the organizational system you say is the best?
I think both sides are equally ridiculous.
"Marx wrote about the need for violent revolution often" -- care to provide some citations? Where did he write about the need for violent revolution? I'd like to read them. I'm genuinely curious as a social psychologist whose research frequently involves interpersonal aggression.
@@tonglu3699 just look it up your self it’s not hard
Garbage. Marx couldn't stand the idea of utopia. You have never read Marx, like all rightwing hacks.
"That's all he did, Marx never wrote abook about Communism"
*googles Communist Manifesto
Hope you also read it. Because despite it's name it's not a "book about communism" in a sense that it would describe how to organise a communist society. Which kind of proves Wolffs point.
@@jaakkopitkanen7734 What would make a "book about communism" then? The basic tenet is there's a class divide between the workers and the ruling class and the proletariat should overthrow the ruling class and he details the justifications for why it should be done. The whole thing is about what the aim of communism is.
@@nmills5367 Something that would constitute a description about a communist society. Like the so called utopian socialists like Saint-Simon wrote. Marx was very clear to distinguish himself from utopian socialists. Those would be "books about communism". Marx main work das Kapital is better described as a book about capitalism (as the title says).
Also don’t forget that the manifesto is a pamphlet, not a book. It was turned into a book later. If you actually go read the “book” now you will see that the meat of it is just a collection of introductions that have been written for the pamphlet, but the actual manifesto is extremely short.
@@nmills5367 Not a description of a communist society, as I already stated. .Read the comments more carefully.
So in other words, every time Marxism/Communism was attempted it failed miserably (100’s of millions dead so far) but let’s futz with the outcome again (even though we have no plan) and see what happens this time. Yeah…
Failed miserably because the CIA and US government made a conscious effort to overthrow any country that decided to nationalize any of their resources. Should really have a full understanding of the historical events you are referencing.
There is an implied racism in Wolff. In that the millions of devoted Marxist Slavs simply didnt understand Marx's simple recipe as well as he does.
I have an idea: read Marx, Lenin, Russian history, then comment. In the meantime, go play with rocks.
Kid please read don't follow the wind just because they tell you 100 million people died its not true how about the 9 million the die each year in capitalism just from famine without even the wars that are because of the capitalist greed just look into it especially in the 3rd world capitalism and greed intertwined with corruption is killing us man
Wolf has repeatedly said he does not "see the world through the lens of body counts" (anyone wanting the video for this it's in Kirk Wilcox's channel). The genocides and killings are the point
Every Marxist, communist, socialist I’ve met others the exception of few, inherently has a negative view on their life.
I wonder if there’s any correlation?
Well, political views always depend on your circumstances/position. So if you have profited from a certain system you will be in favor, and if you're being subjugated you take an oppositional stance. Thus it follows that the disenfranchised aim to change the status quo, get it now? That's your correlation.
Theres no substitute for experience, and if you haven't been there you couldn't really get it. A bit like convincing a zealot Christian that there's no God, or turn an atheist into a believer for that matter. That's basically every discussion between simple capitalists and communists/Marxists.
Me personally, I take a Marxist perspective, broadly speaking, I think the analysis is spot on. Capitalism has its benefits, but it also has many limits and downsides.
Overall, in terms of real world policy, I'd like to believe that we're a few decades past those sort of simplistic models, but that's just me, one opinionated dude from the real best country on this planet. Switzerland.
ShortFatOtakus vid on why leftists are soo nihilistic perfectly lays out why your experience with leftists seems so bizarre and predictable
@@mysterioanonymous3206 say no to globalist peer pressure
I guarantee you have never met one.
Yes if they were to give themselves a lobotomy they would probably become happy and subservient
Correct me if I"m wrong but isn't this "all Marxism was originally and all Marx ever wrote was a critique of capitalism, he never advocated for communism" patently false? In fact, isn't the opposite true?
No? It is very true. Marx wrote thousands of pages of text and in it you can find maybe a sentense or two of vague descriptions of communism. Try reading Marx sometime, you might be enlightened.
@@jaakkopitkanen7734 I had intended to comment and express some disagreements I have with your perspective. However, that would accomplish nothing as you are convinced by your thoughts and principles like we all are. If you are a real person, have a great day and I wish you well.
@@jl4018 Thank you, very polite. I wish you all the best too. I expect our disagreement is minor. I'm actually not a marxist at all, just have an opinion on how we should view his works at this point in history.
The only thing on socialism/communism that he wrote was The Communist Manifesto, which he only co-authored. In his own works, like Das Kapital, he critiques the origins of Capitalism and how it evolved out of Feudal society, and what he saw as more effective means of managing the economy as it continues to evolve.
Evolve being a key word as he was a fan of Darwin's writings and sent him mail on multiple occasions, so he was likely influenced slightly by that.
@@mikehorne4053 This is a stupid comment. Of course Marx invented communism how we saw it roll out in all marxist tradition states. Wtf?
Marx is not a contributor to economics nor to the understanding of economic history. He is a renowned idiot in the field. Wolff for example is a well-known charlatan and is outcast as a heterodox "arts" economist.
Marx writes about his political economic concept in his Critique of the Gotha Program, not Manifesto. This is where Marx and not Lenin invents state capitalism. Also in Address to the Communist League by the Central Committee, Marx, not Lenin invented politburo dictatorship.
This means that Wolff lies in this video since Marx never made any valuable critique (100% demagogy) and marx provides his brutal dictatorship ideation in detail.
This guy thinks capitalism is slavery and once the government is our daddy we will be free. So wise
i do not agree with him, but I listen him a lot, as a way of bursting my own information bubble. He is not for big government, but for a democracy at work. He sees what was wrong with 20 century implementations of marxism.
He's not advocating for USSR-style socialism. Why do you comment before having a solid understanding of Wolff's philosophy on how work should he organized?
@@ColorMatching I've watched his material. If I'm incorrect, tell me how wolffs theories would work without government control?
No system (except anarchism) works without government enforcement. I do not understand your point. In capitalism a way of doing business legally is on terms set by the government in form of different laws. We talking only about exploring possibility of changing those laws to put common worker in better position. Wolf argue that now we have a system where decisions in company are made by handful of people. Those decisions are very often in their own short term interest, not in interest of workers, and in fact company. It is similar to autocracy at work. You can clearly see that something is wrong with the system every time when something big and bad happens - like crash or pandemic. Then the same people who made stock buybacks and paid themself huge bonuses for months and months begs for government bailouts.
Is Wolf idea the right one? I do not think so, he is also very vague in interviews that i've listen to. But do not be intellectually lazy,
@@grzegorzowczarek3016 and I'm not talking about the legal umbrella under which capitalism operates. I'm talking about government taking control of the private sector to build a “better and more fair system” for the people.
Marx literally wrote his own words.
It's crazy how people would trust a fraud like Wolff.
To balance this out, find someone that defends fascism... to balance it out
The kings man?
Everything on msm does. They call it capitalism.
Little need for that, there’s already a wash of capitalist figureheads Lex has had on before like Malice or even Elon Musk, which is likely a more fair opposition to a Marxist viewpoint, unless you’re trying to correlate Marxism to Fascism, which is a dishonest comparison at best.
@@Orgcent21 Christ, this stuff isn't rocket surgery. We have the data.
Find someone who can defend the artrocities under capitalism as well? But that would take far longer than 8 Minutes.
Well done! So brilliant you got a real expert on Marxism on the programme. You are living up to your principles of listening to all perspectives 👏👏👏
I was pleasantly surprised Wolffe was invited to be a guest. Over all this was a good talk.
I also don't agree with some of his points. But it's good to listen to someone who knows his stuff very well. Honestly, it made me rethink some of my sociopolitical positions because these are new information I needed to mull over in the coming days.
I was kinda laughing at the comments here from people who I sense are digging their heels. Some even called Wolffe "psychopath" hahahahaha!!!!! I was like "what?"
For me he sounds like a story-telling grandpa with much optimism.
by this logic, he now has to invite the Grand Wizard of the KKK or a Nazi apologist.
@@almaza4331
Chomsky said that you don't actually believe in free speech at all if you don't believe in free speech for people you disagree with.
Christopher Hitchens, at the time when he was a strong Trotskyist (he said before his death that he's still a Marxist), interviewed Tom Metzger, a white supremacist.
It’s important that even bad ideas get attention.
@@youtuber6185 However, I highly doubt Lex would have a white supremacist or ISIS spokesman on his podcast to let them defend their respective ideologies.
That's not Marxism, that's the history of Marxism.
Marxism is an economic model first and foremost.
It's not an economic model. Marxism is a philosophy of the many facets of capitalism. You haven't read Marx, have you?
@@ColorMatching im sorry if that what your philosophy professor told you. He's wrong. Marxism is firstly an economic theory. He talked about companies, prices, workers, wages and so on. That's economics. The other stuff he talked about it's just related to criticize capitalism, which is a supposed economic theory.
@@SuperTommoxI had misunderstood what you meant by economic model. Yes, you're right, but so am I.
Yeah, a bad one.
@@russelltreadway how so?
Chris Headges next
If people Ever want to live in a better world than we have to be open too ideas for improvement.
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
Not from marxists, ever. There is no reason to take thalidomide. Let it go.
The vast majority of critical thinkers avoid marxian ideologies, unless you utterly redefine the term "critical thinking" and weaponize it to only support critical theories, without using actual critical thinking skills.
say critical one more time.
Sound like someone is captured by an ideology.
Ironically, this post lacks critical thinking
@@Archeidos-Arcana critically
@@jamessalazar6702 and yet I'm almost certain you're an apologist for capitalism.
I love how Marx didn't join that commune and continued to live off his rich friend lmao
What's that have to do with his understanding of capitalism?
@@ColorMatching don't remember saying it did
@@grantgosselin7813 so what's your point? How's it feel to join a book club but not be able to read?
@@ColorMatching oooo someone's upset
@@grantgosselin7813 thought stopping cliche. Good job.
"what are the defining characteristics of Marxism as an economic and political theory and ideology" and the answer is "a critique of capitalism" ...so, a vague, resentful something that offers no solutions 👍
No solutions? Power in the hands of the working class is not a solution? Keep supporting the rich!
@@SploinkyDH. I have never seen a Communist Nation where the Collective Workers Had more sway in society than politicians and Corporate leaders.
Marx's critique wasn't vague though, you may not like his critique but it was very in depth and had specific examples of what he saw as flaws in the capitalist system in his book Kapital such as the boom and bust cycle and the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. As for no solutions I will admit his solution was quite vague, but he focused most of his intellectual energy to critiquing the entire economic system of his time which is a pretty big undertaking. Plus you as a reader are not entitled to a nice easy solution for every theorist you encounter
The idea that you can’t criticize something without offering a solution to that something is absurd.
@@Joe-sg9ll the manifesto is one of his first works and not even one of his main ones. Marx considered the manifesto a blueprint and later scrapped a lot of the ideas in it. In addition, its supposed to be easy to read considering that is how manifestos work, they are supposed to be easily accesibile to people. Have you read critique of the Gotha program, 18 brumaire, kapital?
Funny that warren g harding released Eugene Debbs from prison. Debbs was put in jail by the Wilson admin using the unconstitutional espionage act.
Can Marxist please explain to me the main pillars of how a society should be organized under communism? This guy didn't answer the question. I'm not being sarcastic either, I want the modern Marxists view.
I don't expect an in depth explanation, just the main ideas. For example Capitalism can be explained as "Private ownership of capital, free exchange of goods and services, and free markets."
What is modern communism in 10 sentences or so.
Can Marxist please explain to me the main pillars of how a society should be organized under communism?
To preface the whole point of this video, it's complicated because there is no bible laying out how a Marxist should behave, what they should believe, and how society should exactly be organized. From the people I've talked to in most western countries they typically want to organize the workplace from being owned by the wealthy/shareholder class and have workers own more of the workplace hence leading to better conditions, pay, etc for the workers. If you think that sounds milquetoast and quite moderate (at least compared to the stereotypical commie), that's because most intellectual or educated Marxists are anti-authoritarians and would usually prefer the status quo to autocracy (Richard Wolff falls under this category). "Communist" typically implies that they are authoritarian, but it could also mean they view authoritarianism as tolerable for their end goals. But if you see the leftists infighting between Communist and Non-Communist Marxist parties in Europe they couldn't be more opposed.
To sum up from what I've seen: (Modern flavor) Marxists are typically pro-union, want to see workplace democracy, and tangentially identify with progressivism (opposition to bigotry and inequality).
Edit: I recommend Second Thought for a more western modern socialist view. His videos are a lot easier to digest than most.
@@GAGONMYCOREY Thanks for the reply; I suppose the "devil is in the details" as they say.
Interesting how humanity, in general, are split philosophically on systems of government between a) Equality of outcome at the expense of the individual and b) Merit based outcomes which can lead to bad outcomes for those poorly equipped or the unfortunate.
This is the problem is that Communism is an umbrella term which is not one ideology but multiple. In the 20th century alone you had multiple communist movements such as Marxist-Leninists, Left-Comms, Council Communists, Anarcho-Syndicalists, Mensheviks, Maoists, Trotskyists, Agrarianists etc. Most of the communist countries that existed were Marxist-Leninists (because the Soviet Union was and they modelled the Soviet Union) but their is multiple other versions of Communsim. This is why this is such a hard discussion to have because people don't realize Communsim is not 1 ideology, how could you even begin to explain this to someone who's entire knowledge on this subject is outdated cold war propaganda (the average Americans knowledge on Communsim)
This was all addressed but you’d actually have to watch the whole podcast. In fact, had you watched and really listened, you wouldn’t be asking some of the shit you did lol
@@jl8410 I watch the video, he gave no specific systems in any level of detail just broad abstract systems. So do you have answers or just false pithy comments?
You make it and we take it in the name of the people of course.
He never answers the question. If you think he answers the question, go back to Lex`s question . This is a shallow and intellectually vacant sheep of a person. I really wanted to hear his definition -- the attributes and characteristics .
We can do better than capitalism
I can not believe an institution gave him an economic degree
Why not?
Kick rocks kid
@@ColorMatching he’s a full fledged Marxist. How many examples of communism do we have in history before people realize how much of a catastrophe this system is? Ironically he’s also has a history degree, yet he conveniently overlooks the hundreds of millions of corpses in Russia, China, Cambodia, Vietnam, and etc.
@@whatis5444 read some more kid
@@chrispark7010 he hasn't overlooked anything. Stop blaming Marx for the atrocities committed by other people. Blaming him for the atrocities committed by communist regimes decades after his death is like blaming Adam Smith or Dave Ricardo for western imperialism, war, genocide, slavery and exploitation.
stop implicitly sourcing a book that has been long debunked: The Real Death Toll of Communism.
Where are you gonna find these angels to run sociatie ??
He speaks with such arrogance, it becomes a turn off. He becomes highly nuanced when talking about the "right form" of Marxism and how it has not been truly tried, but then goes macro when talking about all of capitalism in one basket.
Communards is a damn funny term.
How many times should human societies try and fail before giving up? How many dead are necessary for the experiment to end or to succeed? How many people should "be made" to participate in the experiment? How about we stick with free markets and transparency principles instead?
Capitalism in America is being held together with printing money, true capitalism would of let American banks fail. Plus without the government assistance youd either have to make giving jobs law or the people who are at the bottom either die or theyll be a revolution attempted constantly.
@@TheJoker-um9tp totally agree with the first part. True capitalism would have let the banks fail in 2008. Obama and Osborn saved them with tax money. This is unacceptable. The second part is nonsense. Anything the government does is by definition an act of legislation. Each additional legislation makes it harder and harder for businesses to do their job. The result is that the more legislation you introduce, the bigger the companies need to become to comply. Resulting in less competition, fewer jobs, higher prices.
@@lexreinstein4244 you said the last bit was nonsense but why is their a safety net in terms of benefits. Why not just have a totally capitalist economy.
You could be a monarchist saying this up until the 19th century, and yet here we are now.
@@edwardbateman3094 I understand what you are saying here. However, I have a theory on this subject. The theory is that western societies have been led to believe that our political conflicts are between liberals and conservatives. But this is just a cover up. The reality is that both liberal and conservatives, both republicans and monarchists, are all socialists at heart. The west has not yet really known a pure capitalist, free market government.
Thank You for educating us🙏🌈
“Educating”, this guy is just a 17 year old edge lord who didn’t grow out of their communist phase.
Ok, I deleted my last comment, because it's no point to argue with people whom never experienced real socialism in their lives.
It's like talking about sex with virgin.
Their theoretical views about socialism is ridiculous and glorifying capitalism is pathetic.
They have no idea what are they talking about lol
Have you talked about "about sex with virgin" who have clocked hundreds of hours watching piorn?
At when and where is Marx ideas work whole heartedly? When we were cave men, or tribes sounds about right to me. I've met Cambodians, Russians and others and it doesn't sound good at all
Dont ever criticize any part of capitalism, lest you be labeled "Marxist"..........
This guy is a clown.
1. Russia wasn't losing WW1, Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed after Lenin took power.
2. Trotsky wasn't a Bolshevik, but a major figure of the opposing Menshevik party, and only joined after Lenin took power.
Is this supposed to be the most important Marxist professor in US? American Academia is truly an embarrassment.
Your fixation on irrelevant details does not help to advance the solution. You sound like a Marxist.
1. Yea those starving under supplied soldiers marched all the way home because they were "winning".
2. 😂😂😂
Correlation between Soviet Union and Marx is as big as between Crusaders and Christ.
Exactly
Thinking about the system instead of benefiting from it is foolish.
Bullshit. Marx designed politburo and state capitalism, not Lenin or Stalin. Lenin and Stalin just read Marx and you people, including big fat Wolff have clearly not read this part of marxian dogma.
Painful
Ohh lord.....
At no point in your rambling did you get remotely close to something that resembles an answer. Congratulation we are all now dumber and may god have mercy on your soul. 😂 this life long teacher probably can’t make or fix anything. 🛠
Not a good look getting this guy on the podcast.
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
I’m not a Marxist but I do think our economy isn’t split evenly between ceo and workers
I'm not being sarcastic, but why should they be split evenly? When I was bussing tables why should I have the same pay as the manager whose job was to not only do my job and anyone elses when necessary ,but also schedule shifts, light accounting work, inventory and ordering, and much more?
Or when I was selling cell phones for Sprint why would I deserve the same pay as the CEO of the company?
I think many CEO's of large companies get vulgar amounts of money, but I don't think an average employees salary should be anywhere in the ballpark of a manager/CEO whose job entails more work with much higher consequences for failure.
He said noting about nothing much
👎
"Poverty, hunger and spiritual misery'' seems like a good definition to me 🤔
Sounds like capitalism to me.
Yet human society hasn't done better than Capitalism, and it has tried.
Yes, thank you oil and the people who died for everything.
Your comment in the times of feudalism: "Yet human society hasn't done better than Feudalism, and it has tried."
@@reasonerenlightened2456 Human society had done better than feudalism, like before monarchic authoritarianism on Europe. There is no better than freedom (capitalism). No better or different ways are acceptable.
Just a thought, Unfortunately Like Elizabeth Warren, I find Professor wolfs narrative unhelpful.
Unlike Andrew Yang whose ideas are at least interesting ,Professor Wolf does not offer helpful solutions🤔IMO
Andrew Who? You have no idea what the real UBI is . I know because you mentioned Yang.
ayy lmao
What is funny?
@@SploinkyDH.don’t worry about it
@@thomasdolan4541 I completely forgot about this comment. I don't remember what it’s about. Mission accomplished.
When Wolfe goes and lives in a 1930s Soviet union style commune, them I will take him seriously.
I will go if you can send me back in time
What courage does Bernie not have?
his reaction to the DEMS back stabbing....possibly?
The funnier thing is a Marxist living in the most capitalist nation in the world lmao 🤣
Somalia? No he lives in America, America is 55% socialist.
America is not the most pro market system
Yes. The country that printed more trillions than anyone else and literally gave away trillions of dollars to businesses to DO NOTHING and individuals to DO NOTHING over the past two years, plus enables oligopolies funded by tax payers and enabled by regulations which crush competition, is the most capitalist country in the world. Wake up, buddy.
@@overduetax exactly socialism for the rich, capitalism for everyone else.
@@sheedy9 you mean Facsism like socialized losses? Yes it is bad for everyone look at the Inflation rate
Evil personified
You can have your Marxism as long as I and those loyal to me control ALL the Power and Wealth. I will give you Marxism if you accept me as your Master and King ordained by God.
I was going to comment mocking and explaining how foolish the idea of Marxism was but you guys have done a great job pointing out this dude's lying nonsense.
Marx in the most misunderstood person ever. He has been demonized but he really was a brilliant man. I am not a socialist but socialism really is just another economic system and it is not communism. The best system is a mix of socialism and capitalism.
Wrong
If he was such a brilliant man, why was he didn't poor his whole life and died penniless?
"The best system is a mix of socialism and capitalism."
...what do you think we have now?☯yay progress
Mix of Socialism and capitalism?jeez...ever been to India?Not that great.I am Indian btw.
How much of each in the mix?