RIP David Graeber - one of the greatest minds of our time - his words and ideas have inspired me to follow in his footsteps and go on to study a Master's in Anthropology at his late University, the London School of Economics.
Remember what Orwell said: "As far as my personal preferences went I would have liked to join the Anarchists." George Orwell - Homage to Catalonia page 116. Ⓐ
whether anarchism is possible or impossible ,or whether it is good or bad for society but I believe that anarchist,s are really among the great and polite people of the world.
Dar Suraya I don’t believe in any government even a anarchistic one.. all should just make up there own within and on there property. If everyone is happy and likes democracy then let them do that. People shouldn’t have to be forced to vote or have anything to do with democracy. Anarchism is still a slave society without a leader forcing people to submit through words without violence. It’s better to not even have to be a part of any society. (In terms of u and what u own). Each person and property should be neutral and sovereign.
@@silverwave0018 If we organized an anarchist society, I would be on the frontlines arguing for individuals like yourself to own a segment of our land and do with it like you please. After all, anarchism is about uplifting people's humanity by eliminating unjust coercion - who am I to say what you see as oppression? I would only argue that in order to construct such a society in the first place we would need your help.
@@morgengabe1 I don't think that's really a thing that happens. I don't know of a single person who was encouraged to "think critically" in youth who grew up to resent the parent/teacher who told them to do that, for that reason. Usually they'd resent you for some backwards view that you have, like homophobia or transphobia. Or if they were hurt in some way and you rejected their experiences. The things that kids usually grow to resent parental or other adult figures for are bigoted views or the imposition of the authoritarian adult/child hierarchy, because a lot of parents either view (and thus treat) their children as their property, or otherwise act upon that hierarchy as an absolute that can't be questioned ("Because I said so" etc.), rather than treating children as autonomous, but inexperienced, humans who need to be guided through life for a while.
"Anarchists thus envision a world based on equality and solidarity, in which human beings would be free to associate with one another to pursue an endless variety of visions, projects, and cooperation of what they find valuable in life." David Graeber - The Democracy Project.
Well thats a utopia isnt it. Anarchism completely takes the bad character of people out of account and doesn’t realize that human beings have these wishes to gain power and can go batshit crazy when given ultimate freedom. We would all love to reside in an ideal anarchist world. But the issue is each and every human being has to be on board.
@ right, lots of high profile dissenters die "of pancreatitis" and "of cancer" and of "heart attacks". unless you have more evidence than the official story, we don't know he wasn't murdered.
No idea who the interviewer is but I just appreciate that he lets him talk without butting in as most interviewers would. We actually get well thought out explained answers
It’s Charlie rose. Great PBS interviewer. Well liked and well respected.Till his abusive behavior to women he worked with was exposed. Ironically Rose was abusing authority like his anarchist guest criticized at the time of interview.
It's amazing that Graeber who wrote the outstanding book "Debt" which is really revolutionary and brilliant, how could Yale be so shortsighted. This guy is a revolutionary thinker at a time when we need to hear intelligent out of the box thinking - whether one agrees or disagrees. Thank goodness for David Graeber and Jared Diamond with bringing their insights and brilliant hard work to a popular audience! Thanks Dave, great book!
do it. research it. research anarchism. research capitalism. research socialism. research it all. we all should. meanwhile, im going to look up how to write with capital letters.
Reddit has some great pages on the subject: www.reddit.com/r/Anarchy101/search?q=anarchism&sort=relevance&restrict_sr=on&t=all www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/search?q=anarchism&sort=relevance&restrict_sr=on&t=all Ⓐ "Anarchists thus envision a world based on equality and solidarity, in which human beings would be free to associate with one another to pursue an endless variety of visions, projects, and conceptions of what they find valuable in life." The Democracy Project by David Graeber
it's important to note that anarcho-capitalism is completely in opposition to the historical applications of anarchism, and anarchist socialist groups and movements (i.e. the ones that have worked, with most being threatened by external holders of power, or having been aggressively stamped out). the idea that unregulated capitalism will lead to equality in freedom is ridiculous. consolidation of power is within the interests of the rich, and funding a state to act out their desires is very much within their interests, as can be seen with the neo-colonialism of America and other western nations. libertarian socialist ideologies comprise the forms of anarchism that seek equality in freedom, and the people having horizontal structures in which people would have discussion-based, direct democracy for affairs that would affect them. freedom is not justified when exercising that freedom is at the expense of others' freedoms.
+Jpseudo There is a philosophical explanation why it is wrong. All the land and all the natural resources were noone's property at the beginning. What one had to do to make nature his property was to THREAT and/or to use any necessary amount of FORCE to make the "intruders" go away . This is clearly a violation of a non-aggression principal. Supposed "intruders" did NOT initiate force by simply trespassing or even taking something they found there. The only real reason to attack someone in this case would be if the intruder tried to take or destroy something that is necessary for the "owners" survival. Funny how many people who recognize the illusion of government fail to recognize the illusion of ownership.
***** You can put it that way, although I didn't go down that path. I just claim that theft, set as universal principal destroys the group that has it as principle. All immoral behaviour is exclusive, and can not work universally. Evil needs good to leech off. If absolutely everyone and always engage in something immoral, there is no survival for the whole group. Whereas if everyone act morally all the time, everything is perfectly fine, group lives long and prospers. Pretty easy way to determine whats good and what's bad without anyone serving you the "masochist argument" (those who like to be hurt would have the right to hurt others, following the Biblical moral imperative) Now what would happen if everyone on earth had a motive to posses more and more, all the time?
***** Sorry, I digressed a bit lol... Imagine a time where nothing firmly belonged to anyone. People lived on their pieces of land with their families in some primitive society and their small family units couldn't possibly cultivate 1000 akers of land like that. What is crucial for that to happen is to have other people, who have no land to be forced to cultivate YOUR land. And why would they do that? Because someone (in this case most likely YOU) violently deprived them of their land and they became dependant on you because you don't let them use resources you claim to own. EDIT: There is a difference between natural resources and human made products. You can own products but you can not own nature.
says the left anarchists. Anarchism has always existed albeit under different names. In recent centuries there have been two kinds 1.Collectivist and 2.Individualist. Sure some fall outside these classifications but most fall under one of these two branches. Socialist anarchism has always been more high profile because theyve been involved in many violent revolutions (i.e. spain mexico france russia) and have had some high profile court cases and became associated with punk rock in the 7s and 80s. This doesnt however mean left anarchists own the term. Ancap is an expression of individualist anarchism beyond philosophizing and speculation. Its individualism in a practical and active form. You can disagree with the tenets of individualist and market varieties but I'm tired of people making the assumption that only collectivists can be anarchists. I began on the far left with people like bakunin and slowly worked my way to the so called right of anarchism. Im not an ancap persay but I am much more sympathetic to ancap and voluntaryism than i am to anarcho-communism and the like.
eLiYaHu tHeBeWiLdErEr I don't even know what you're talking about, quite frankly. I didn't read any of that. I use my own mind to think. I AM an individualist who simply realizes that you can't own natural resources any other way then violently denying others access to them. PRODUCTS are all yours, take what you need from the nature and make the product, but let others do the same. And if you ever seriously thought of it you would have figured that in the beginning people and their families could only own as much as they could cultivate/guard by themselves. Why? Because others had no reason working for YOU as long as they had access to natural resources themselves. Someone simply had to deprive people of their land to make them serfs, slaves, whatever. And that is how people started owning more and more. Owning resources is always based on crime, and just because it wasn't YOU who committed it, but someone in the past, it doesn't make it right.After all, the idea of owning the nature is the same category of illusion as the idea of someone having the right to rule. Science says that we live in something called the eco system. We don't own the system, or it's parts, we are just a part of it. Nothing more, nothing less...
@@baconingbad "State capitalism" is not some kind of ideology juxtaposed to "capitalism" or "communism", state capitalism just a policy to be implemented to achieve a goal. Markets are an excellent tool to supplement the development of productive forces and industry, you saw it in the soviet union and in china today. Many people equate capitalism with market economics for that matter which is ridiculous, markets are incredibly ancient and in no way define capitalism, communism, or anything else
@@Cd5ssmffan I am not a big fan of USSR, especially during Stalinistic period (though admittedly, post-Stalin USSR was slowly going to shit), but it wasn't so simple. There were some aspects that didn't make it a pure State Capitalism per se or what people seem to mean by that. Not that I can't see where you're coming from or consider you to be 100% wrong here though.
@@baconingbad As Lenin put it, "fragments of both capitalism and socialism" were present in the Soviet economy in early stages, but some idiots like to extend that concept to the entire Soviet union's existence by claiming the bureaucracy was a "class" of its own, such claims fall apart when analysed with basic knowledge of history. The true problem in the case of the soviet union was that they did not adapt to the information age with OGAS, the bureucracy bloated and was no longer efficient for a nation of its size. Stalin saw this and attempted various democratic reforms throughout the 1930s but was interrupted by WW2, which saw political authority be consolidated by local beaurucrats again for wartime efficiency. Stalin then died before he was able to resume his work. China was saved from this exact fate because it put peripheral sectors of the economy into the hands of the market (which is why they are outpacing the US as we speak)
@@Cd5ssmffan One guy on Quora gave some good points on why Soviet bureaucracy wasn't that much of a class on its own. For example: no formal ownership rights above those of workers and farmers, if ownership did exist, it was collective, they had no personal privilege, no capital and no heriditary rights, and anyone could become a bureacrat. I do agree that in turn it did lead to some problems and it was far from perfect, nor do I like bureaucracy in any way, but if this is considered, it wasn't the same as capitalism in the worst usage of the term.
At the moment I live in a small town in a rural area. So many people here are hurting yet there is a passivity on there part towards direct action that depresses me. I put a lot of the blame on many of the local churches (there are exceptions, especially in the Black community). These churches seem to fear true social justice other than perhaps feeding the hungry (and many do not even do that). How to change this fatalistic attitude is the key to meaningfull change in "middle America".
while its true that church is no power towards change (duh!) i think your cause of depress is something very simple called conformism on behalf of you fellow citizens. The,oh dont bother, i aint gonna change the world...Thats why only when the shit hits the fun there is change, cause you got nothing to loose. But do we really need to reach new low's again?....
pdrboston.org/ People for Democratic Revolution, Boston Hello! To change the fatalistic attitude, we here at PDR have created a statement titled This I Believe. It states that the world should be based on the golden rule, that capitalism is immoral, that the economy should be based on sharing instead of buying and selling, that laws should only be made at the local level by egalitarians- people who value equality, mutual aid, and democracy, and that we need a revolution to make it happen. (read it here: media.wix.com/ugd/20615e_6c40d86078da6ea32d6379867405339e.pdf ) We collect signatures every week in working class areas all over Boston and greater Boston, and try to keep up with those who sign it and exchange contact info with us so we can grow the effort. Guess how many people sign it? Over 75% of the people who stop to read it sign it! We have three 2ft x 3ft poster boards of the signatures (797 so far) that we show to the public so that people know they are not alone in having such anti-capitalist, and thus revolutionary values, desires, and beliefs. (Pictures online here: www.pdrboston.org/#!boston-photos/c3pf ) Helping people to see that they are not alone is how we change the attitude. This is how we create a sea-change that sets the stage for people to organize and come together. We plan on collecting signatures from a majority of American adults, 130 million people. As the numbers climb, people's understanding of the possibilities will broaden. Bold talk will become coordinated, inspiring, and intelligent collective actions. Rallying people around the Vision that This I Believe outlines is how people can become united. Feel free to get signatures yourself. Contact us for tips and to join efforts. Check out our other projects, though I do need to update them with their latest evolutions, including adding a few! "Let's remove the rich from power. Have real, not fake, democracy, with no rich and no poor." "Capitalism isn't broken...It's evil. It won't be broken until WE BREAK IT!" pdrboston.org/ PDRBoston.org Thank you.
World religions in one of his talks he points out really didn’t become a thing till capitalism started. Like it was kinda needed to justify it. It is the opiate of the masses. Litterally, and it does serve a Scola community role, but other than that and some sense of order for people, as they are probably afraid of uncertainty. So they just dont
"Many of the normal motives of civilized life-snobbishness, money-grubbing, fear of the boss, etc.-had simply ceased to exist." George Orwell - Homage to Catalonia.
I am fascinated with how catalonia worked prior to the spanish Civil war. Incredible how every other force (fascist to the extreme right and marxists to the left) came together to crush that almost utopian society.
Finally read David Graeber's book "Debt: The First 5,000 Years". There is much in the book to take in (I ended up reading it twice) but it is worth it. I just wish the general public could be woken up (I am myself far from mainstream).
Yeah, the problem is that we so often feel we have to wait for the next best choice every four years and then to vote for him/her and make them president. Always a self-defeating practice to believe that that is all it will take, but seeing how they're all capitalists and bought for... (though Bernie appears to be neither of these things). Socialist anarchist organization, education and mass proliferation is the best thing we can do.
just found this guy today! couldn't be happier! it's always a pleasure to found a big thinker like this man. Is unbelievable that in the XXI century there are still people afraid of talking or even thinking about ideas like these... well religions still around that's one of the main reason we as humans are still fucked up
lol, Sure. If I get my way, then hopefully we will have people like you helping to lead my children when I die off. I worry about the future of my little girls every day, but when I come across youngsters with critical thinking skills like you, it adds another spark of hope in heart. I'm not that old, though (just 30), but I still think this way.
Read some of George Orwell's early works. He obseves the poverty in London and the insame work load of Paris in the late twenties and early thirties. He joins Anarchists and joins up to fight Franco in Spain but is amazed at the Communists supported by the Soviets turning on them. Later he studies the Soviets and concludes that Communism is not the answer and can often make things worse. On the surface Anarchism seems like "Tea Party" but the difference is that power comes from the bottom up.
Anarchists, Libertarian Socialists and all others who question the system should unite instead of fight each other. the more divided we are the more power the oppressors have.
there are fundumental diference's between the schools you mentioned that cant be gaped. You cant have a collectivist and a statist walking hand by hand. If you want all various groups to unite you need to come up with a new ideology that satisfies all people to its full extent. There is non so far...
Aemon z that issue could be solved with one vote at a workers council. The debates between anarchists schools of thought are useful and important. One party is a red bureaucracy.
If we can agree to leave each other alone in our communities to try these ideas while dismantling coercive forces, then we can partner. Is that possible in "libertarian socialism"?
You seem to be a self-appointed expert on anarchists. I'm an anarchist, and chaos and violence is exactly what I don't want. As long as you have governments, you'll have war, violence, oppression, abuse, exploitation, etc etc.
Yep... Leo Tolstoy lays the groundwork for the Anarchy he feels is laid out by Christ in his writing "The Kingdom of God is Within" It's brilliant. Tolstoy is a genius!
Christian anarchism is the only form of religious involvement in politics that I accept. Cheers to my Christian anarchist comrades! From a secular Anti-theist.
When talk shows were worth listening to. I've been recently reading his books for the first time, may he RIP. My respect for him has also increased when he said he was kicked out of Yale University - and he did not present himself to be a victim.
An anarchic situation can only be achieved through the practice of the design system known as permaculture. Without the off the grid lifestyle that permaculture offers, anarchy can only be an intellectual game. "Hence the futility of revolutionaries who have no gardens, who depend on the very system they attack, and who produce words and bullets, not food and shelter.” We need more anarchists to understand this and then embrace the genuinely anarchic.
Ehmm.. Why would I spend time on all that when we could have farmers who do this fulltime? Supply and demand? Voluntary interaction? How would anyone get any job done if they had to spend a certain amount of hours a day working their field/garden/crops/whatever? If I had to spend hours a day on permaculture, I wouldn't have time to actually do a job and provide the world with a service/product, right? Am I missing something?
***** Yes, you are missing a lot. There are plenty of books about permaculture or go to the permaculture institute's website from where you can find answers if you want them. The real question is, why wouldn't you live like this? In the future, humanity will have little choice so you might as well skill yourself up now. Aside from the tremendous satisfaction you will get out of it you will be able to either pass on skills or be ready, if the whole damn system descends into chaos sooner rather than later. Becoming an active permie is like the boy scout motto 'be prepared', always in a state of readiness. Which used to be the state of mind of much of humanity before the uptake of centralised dependency. A permie still thinks about doing work that provides a service/product but back on the local level not on the global level. You know, think globally, (what benefits nature) and act locally.
***** The other thing about a permaculture gardening system is, once it is established and mature it does not require several hours work a day. When getting your head around PC you need to think perennials not so much annuals. Food forests stacked with the different layers of the forest, mimicking the structure of a forest. Once established it does not require a lot of work. You can tweak it here and there but even if it is left alone it will thrive. At that point you become a forager and you will need the eyes to see what is going on. To recognise the food in the layers. All of this takes study and practical experience. I can tell you from my own experience that every effort in this direction is worth it. There is so much to PC as it is not just about gardening alone. It is the holistic approach to living.
What about the cities producing luxuries for the farmers and the farmers producing food for the cities? No need to live off the grid to live anarchistically
DAVID GRAEBER was a founding member of the Institute for Experimental Arts He did a lecture with the title: How social and economic structure influences the Art World in the Financial Consequences - International MultiMedia Poetry Festival organized by the Institute for Experimental Arts supported by LSE Department of Anthropology. Influential anthropologist David Graeber, known for his 2011 volume Debt: The First 5000 Years speaks about the correlation between the cultural sphere and society. The intellectuals and the artists create an imaginary way to criticize the economic system in any era. Art can overcome hegemonic frameworks and acknowledge other possible worlds, offer us the opportunity to understand better the marginalized social entities. Social exclusion is the process in which individuals or people are systematically blocked from (or denied full access to) various rights, opportunities and resources that are normally available to members of a different group, and which are fundamental to social integration and observance of human rights within that particular group (e.g., housing, employment, healthcare, civic engagement, democratic participation, and due process). As the economic crises go deeper in time more people face the effects of exclusion. Art and social sciences can give voice to the voiceless. Especially young social aware poets can give us a clear view of the real social effect of the financial consequences. - David Graeber You can watch the Lecture here: th-cam.com/video/WCF-8OQj0RE/w-d-xo.html
Chomsky defines anarchism "tendency in human development that seeks to identify the structure of hierarchy... i think mr. Graeber is on the same line...
Thanks! That made my day man. Been stressing over exams coming up, and I basically need 100 on them to stay in honors with distinction. So that`s why I had some of the anger come out in one or two of my posts; I apologize. You are also quite intelligent, and this has been a very intriguing discussion.
Anarchism , whatever you say about it , is complete and perfect freedom. It may not be a functioning system , but you would be free of any chains if you were in that system !
That is not what anarchism is. Anarchism is an umbrella term for societies that tries to drastically reduce central governance and transfer it to small communities that are small enough to work well trough the means of direct democracy. You are never free from every chain. If you want to own that much freedom then you have to control other people. Freedom is never created nor destroyed, you just distribute it- and exploits it if you have the freedom to do so in the first place. That is what politics is all about.
as a long time anarchist. In my experience, there have been 2 groups of anarchists: 1. Annoying hipster teenagers that see anarchism as stylish. and 2. Intellectual anarchists who fight for worker's rights and eventual liberation. I have met far more #2's than 1's in this equation, and none of them advocate banana-republic insurrection.
Go on Discord anarchist servers and you’ll find almost nothing but 1. Of course most of them aren’t even teenagers so no excuse for them. But it isn’t due to stylishness but rather because they want to justify being anti-social dicks whilst benefiting from social interactions. Getting real sick of them.
@@Liliquan Would you say it was less of a problem if, in spite of preferring to be antisocial dicks and largely keeping to themselves because of the fact, someone also wants others to be able to benefit from social interactions with themselves?
I'm awake now... I see the errors of my ways. Thank you for your TH-cam comment... it has changed my life entirely. If you don't believe that's fine. I do.
I think it's healthy if the interviewer has some critical perspective. I get the impression that Charlie Rose is pretty right leaning from other interviews, and as he put's it "obviously you see that I have not future in philosophy", but he generally isn't unfair to the other part.
Also keep in mind anarchism's positive influence on U.S. society, too. "Around the turn of the century, the Wobblies and other anarchists played the central role in winning workers the 5-day week and 8-hour day." David Graeber - Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology.
"the velocity of change is exponential" you can tell he's trying to string together complex sounding words because he knows David is so much smarter than him x)
I was thinking "Yale??? What was the CIA using Graeber for? That puts a new complexion upon his critiques." But then found out that they didn't know what to do with him, and it made more sense.
Democratization of the workplace is the solution that David is looking for here. There's no other way to organize society that is fair and equitable and bottom-up. If David doesn't like getting told what to do at work, he should start a rigorous pro-worker-cooperative campaign.
What you're suggesting is the same as stop smoking but continue to hang out with people that smoke. One worker coop or even multiple are not going to change the system.
David brought fear to the established guard. He refused to kiss the ring(s). Typical. Been there. He can accomplish more form behind the established walls. Go David!
The more you read about true anarchists the more you realize it is certainly not about chaos and violence. I personally have been enjoying some of Leo Tolstoy's books concerning his own ideas of Christian Anarchism. As a Christian myself it makes a whole lot more sense with what Jesus was preaching. I have been in so many Churches and have heard them speaking of the war as though it is a necessary thing which baffles me.
This interviewer is so god damn intimidated by Graeber. He stumbles over his words and has unusually nervous body language immediately after the first time he hears him talk. Love it.
Because he was clearly underprepared for this interview. I would bet that the term "anarchist" probably lead to some false assumptions, however I can't say for sure.
This was really a hit piece against this man. You can see Charlie Rose is glowing with enthusiasm as he explains that this man no longer has a job at Yale University. Even the point when Charlie Rose claims he can make a phone call and find out for him exactly why he was fired, that was a direct intimidation move to show the power that he has and to try to make the man feel small. You can see that for the first few minutes of the interview he can barely keep his eyes raise for more than a moment because he knows that Charlie Rose is a devil in disguise and he needs to build up his courage just to face this clown.
That last answer Dave gave he totally misinterpreted too (chalking this one up to stupidity, even if malice was also there). Anarchists don't have friends in the media.
@@zciliyafilms5508 Charlie Rose is a Jesuit. Eric Phelps says so. The Jesuits are the enemy. I know much about them. They run America after they hijacked it after the Civil War.
@@MrDuffy81 Whoa, OK. You've got my attention. I have a bit of intersection with the Jesuits myself, but not enough to get a complete feel. If you could please give me a pointer to a book or video I'd immensely appreciate it.
@@zciliyafilms5508 for some reason my last comment did not make it past TH-cam security. But check out the playlist called Jesuit world order on my channel. Also, the one called Eric phelps. They are featured playlists on the channel.
@@zciliyafilms5508 met a man who was the treasurer of a major biker gang. Did yardwork for him because he lived around the corner from me. Found out he was a knight of Malta. Told him I knew all about the Jesuits and his jaw dropped. Never talked with him again after that day.
![ไม่ต้องมีที่ที่ให้ฉันอยู่ แต่ขอแค่มีฉันอยู่ก็พอ (Spaceless) - getsunova [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4N8idbxZ-7M/mqdefault.jpg)
RIP David Graeber - one of the greatest minds of our time - his words and ideas have inspired me to follow in his footsteps and go on to study a Master's in Anthropology at his late University, the London School of Economics.
@Nadia Azari You are Iranian and women. You know.
Are you serious he past away....... Somebody killed him. 🤦♂🤦♂
"Anarchism is about acting as you already is free" well said.
“You cannot make the Revolution. You can only be the Revolution. It is in your spirit, or it is nowhere.”
― Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed
Jakob Alehed brilliant guy
Remember what Orwell said:
"As far as my personal preferences went I would have liked to join the Anarchists." George Orwell - Homage to Catalonia page 116. Ⓐ
underrated book, funny how that’s the one conservatives never quote
Orwell was also a snitch who reported to the British secret police on the activities and political leanings of people he knew.
That's a reference to the Spanish civil war where the only choices were Fascism, Socialism, and anarchism.
@@BoliceOccifer Now the only options are fascism vs anarchism.
Saying one should support anarchism just because a famous writer said so is a bit contradictory, no?
David was such a warm hearted human who carried a big vision for a new society based in the very best of humanity .. 🌹
whether anarchism is possible or impossible ,or whether it is good or bad for society but I believe that anarchist,s are really among the great and polite people of the world.
The only way we'll know is if we try.
Dar Suraya I don’t believe in any government even a anarchistic one.. all should just make up there own within and on there property. If everyone is happy and likes democracy then let them do that. People shouldn’t have to be forced to vote or have anything to do with democracy. Anarchism is still a slave society without a leader forcing people to submit through words without violence. It’s better to not even have to be a part of any society. (In terms of u and what u own). Each person and property should be neutral and sovereign.
@@silverwave0018 There is no government in Anarchism lol. If you want to be a Luddite,go be a Luddite
Assholes come in all shapes and forms. Anarchists included.
@@silverwave0018 If we organized an anarchist society, I would be on the frontlines arguing for individuals like yourself to own a segment of our land and do with it like you please. After all, anarchism is about uplifting people's humanity by eliminating unjust coercion - who am I to say what you see as oppression? I would only argue that in order to construct such a society in the first place we would need your help.
Anarchism is built from good education, and the latter is lacking. Educate yourselves and educate (don't indoctrinate) your children.
Yes! Give children critical thinking and life skills avoiding toxic brainwashing.
What do you do for/about/with a kid who resents you for encouraging them to think critically?
@@morgengabe1 I don't think that's really a thing that happens. I don't know of a single person who was encouraged to "think critically" in youth who grew up to resent the parent/teacher who told them to do that, for that reason. Usually they'd resent you for some backwards view that you have, like homophobia or transphobia. Or if they were hurt in some way and you rejected their experiences.
The things that kids usually grow to resent parental or other adult figures for are bigoted views or the imposition of the authoritarian adult/child hierarchy, because a lot of parents either view (and thus treat) their children as their property, or otherwise act upon that hierarchy as an absolute that can't be questioned ("Because I said so" etc.), rather than treating children as autonomous, but inexperienced, humans who need to be guided through life for a while.
"Anarchists thus envision a world based on equality and solidarity, in which human beings would be free to associate with one another to pursue an endless variety of visions, projects, and cooperation of what they find valuable in life." David Graeber - The Democracy Project.
Well thats a utopia isnt it. Anarchism completely takes the bad character of people out of account and doesn’t realize that human beings have these wishes to gain power and can go batshit crazy when given ultimate freedom.
We would all love to reside in an ideal anarchist world. But the issue is each and every human being has to be on board.
0:00 - 9:00 Anarchism explained as a form of direct democracy where citizens directly change their own lives without state intervention.
A lot of anarchist are against democracy.
Rest in power, chief! Graeber will be missed.
i wonder whether he was murdered. i hope he faked his death to escape danger instead.
@@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 he died from a necrotic pancreatitis
@ right, lots of high profile dissenters die "of pancreatitis" and "of cancer" and of "heart attacks". unless you have more evidence than the official story, we don't know he wasn't murdered.
@@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 for you everything is a conspiracy.. okay got it 👍
I love when anarkiddies die :)
No idea who the interviewer is but I just appreciate that he lets him talk without butting in as most interviewers would. We actually get well thought out explained answers
It’s Charlie rose. Great PBS interviewer. Well liked and well respected.Till his abusive behavior to women he worked with was exposed. Ironically Rose was abusing authority like his anarchist guest criticized at the time of interview.
I feel like Charlie Rose kept interrupting David in this segment 😢
Charlie Rose's abuse, and hypocrisy, has been exposed. It's best not to worship anyone.
God damn I miss both of these genius gentlemen and this type of open easy conversation
Intelligent people has a healthy relation with humility! I like to read the books of David!
+Bruno56 ? Would be so kind and clarify your thoughts, please?
+Bruno56 I was confused. Now, I am even more. What is the point you are trying to reach, exactly, please?
+Bruno56 After trying to understand what you are expressing my humble conclusion it is that you might need some rest... ☺
+Bruno56 The consistency of your chain of arguments worth of a study. I am sorry I am not a professional of that area. ☺
+Bruno56 And?
It's amazing that Graeber who wrote the outstanding book "Debt" which is really revolutionary and brilliant, how could Yale be so shortsighted. This guy is a revolutionary thinker at a time when we need to hear intelligent out of the box thinking - whether one agrees or disagrees.
Thank goodness for David Graeber and Jared Diamond with bringing their insights and brilliant hard work to a popular audience! Thanks Dave, great book!
My comment is maybe a decade too late, but in The Dawn Of Everything, Graeber and Wengrow rip Diamond apart. Worth a read!
really interesting guy. makes me curious to research anarchism.
do it. research it. research anarchism. research capitalism. research socialism. research it all. we all should. meanwhile, im going to look up how to write with capital letters.
god your hilarious
Reddit has some great pages on the subject:
www.reddit.com/r/Anarchy101/search?q=anarchism&sort=relevance&restrict_sr=on&t=all
www.reddit.com/r/Anarchism/search?q=anarchism&sort=relevance&restrict_sr=on&t=all
Ⓐ
"Anarchists thus envision a world based on equality and solidarity, in which human beings would be free to associate with one another to pursue an endless variety of visions, projects, and conceptions of what they find valuable in life." The Democracy Project by David Graeber
kropotkin is a good start, also cryptocurrency
I would start with mutualism.
I never tire of listening to this brilliant man. What a loss. RIP
Rest in peace. You were an inspiration.
it's important to note that anarcho-capitalism is completely in opposition to the historical applications of anarchism, and anarchist socialist groups and movements (i.e. the ones that have worked, with most being threatened by external holders of power, or having been aggressively stamped out). the idea that unregulated capitalism will lead to equality in freedom is ridiculous. consolidation of power is within the interests of the rich, and funding a state to act out their desires is very much within their interests, as can be seen with the neo-colonialism of America and other western nations. libertarian socialist ideologies comprise the forms of anarchism that seek equality in freedom, and the people having horizontal structures in which people would have discussion-based, direct democracy for affairs that would affect them. freedom is not justified when exercising that freedom is at the expense of others' freedoms.
+Jpseudo There is a philosophical explanation why it is wrong. All the land and all the natural resources were noone's property at the beginning. What one had to do to make nature his property was to THREAT and/or to use any necessary amount of FORCE to make the "intruders" go away . This is clearly a violation of a non-aggression principal. Supposed "intruders" did NOT initiate force by simply trespassing or even taking something they found there. The only real reason to attack someone in this case would be if the intruder tried to take or destroy something that is necessary for the "owners" survival.
Funny how many people who recognize the illusion of government fail to recognize the illusion of ownership.
***** You can put it that way, although I didn't go down that path. I just claim that theft, set as universal principal destroys the group that has it as principle. All immoral behaviour is exclusive, and can not work universally. Evil needs good to leech off. If absolutely everyone and always engage in something immoral, there is no survival for the whole group. Whereas if everyone act morally all the time, everything is perfectly fine, group lives long and prospers. Pretty easy way to determine whats good and what's bad without anyone serving you the "masochist argument" (those who like to be hurt would have the right to hurt others, following the Biblical moral imperative)
Now what would happen if everyone on earth had a motive to posses more and more, all the time?
***** Sorry, I digressed a bit lol...
Imagine a time where nothing firmly belonged to anyone. People lived on their pieces of land with their families in some primitive society and their small family units couldn't possibly cultivate 1000 akers of land like that. What is crucial for that to happen is to have other people, who have no land to be forced to cultivate YOUR land. And why would they do that? Because someone (in this case most likely YOU) violently deprived them of their land and they became dependant on you because you don't let them use resources you claim to own.
EDIT: There is a difference between natural resources and human made products. You can own products but you can not own nature.
says the left anarchists. Anarchism has always existed albeit under different names. In recent centuries there have been two kinds 1.Collectivist and 2.Individualist. Sure some fall outside these classifications but most fall under one of these two branches. Socialist anarchism has always been more high profile because theyve been involved in many violent revolutions (i.e. spain mexico france russia) and have had some high profile court cases and became associated with punk rock in the 7s and 80s. This doesnt however mean left anarchists own the term. Ancap is an expression of individualist anarchism beyond philosophizing and speculation. Its individualism in a practical and active form. You can disagree with the tenets of individualist and market varieties but I'm tired of people making the assumption that only collectivists can be anarchists. I began on the far left with people like bakunin and slowly worked my way to the so called right of anarchism. Im not an ancap persay but I am much more sympathetic to ancap and voluntaryism than i am to anarcho-communism and the like.
eLiYaHu tHeBeWiLdErEr I don't even know what you're talking about, quite frankly. I didn't read any of that. I use my own mind to think. I AM an individualist who simply realizes that you can't own natural resources any other way then violently denying others access to them.
PRODUCTS are all yours, take what you need from the nature and make the product, but let others do the same. And if you ever seriously thought of it you would have figured that in the beginning people and their families could only own as much as they could cultivate/guard by themselves. Why? Because others had no reason working for YOU as long as they had access to natural resources themselves.
Someone simply had to deprive people of their land to make them serfs, slaves, whatever. And that is how people started owning more and more. Owning resources is always based on crime, and just because it wasn't YOU who committed it, but someone in the past, it doesn't make it right.After all, the idea of owning the nature is the same category of illusion as the idea of someone having the right to rule.
Science says that we live in something called the eco system. We don't own the system, or it's parts, we are just a part of it. Nothing more, nothing less...
Stalin's "Marxist" regime was not Socialism or Communism , it was State Capitalism, this is a much overlooked and important point.
@@Cd5ssmffan No, seriously, how was USSR a State Capitalism?
@@baconingbad "State capitalism" is not some kind of ideology juxtaposed to "capitalism" or "communism", state capitalism just a policy to be implemented to achieve a goal. Markets are an excellent tool to supplement the development of productive forces and industry, you saw it in the soviet union and in china today. Many people equate capitalism with market economics for that matter which is ridiculous, markets are incredibly ancient and in no way define capitalism, communism, or anything else
@@Cd5ssmffan I am not a big fan of USSR, especially during Stalinistic period (though admittedly, post-Stalin USSR was slowly going to shit), but it wasn't so simple. There were some aspects that didn't make it a pure State Capitalism per se or what people seem to mean by that. Not that I can't see where you're coming from or consider you to be 100% wrong here though.
@@baconingbad As Lenin put it, "fragments of both capitalism and socialism" were present in the Soviet economy in early stages, but some idiots like to extend that concept to the entire Soviet union's existence by claiming the bureaucracy was a "class" of its own, such claims fall apart when analysed with basic knowledge of history. The true problem in the case of the soviet union was that they did not adapt to the information age with OGAS, the bureucracy bloated and was no longer efficient for a nation of its size.
Stalin saw this and attempted various democratic reforms throughout the 1930s but was interrupted by WW2, which saw political authority be consolidated by local beaurucrats again for wartime efficiency. Stalin then died before he was able to resume his work. China was saved from this exact fate because it put peripheral sectors of the economy into the hands of the market (which is why they are outpacing the US as we speak)
@@Cd5ssmffan One guy on Quora gave some good points on why Soviet bureaucracy wasn't that much of a class on its own. For example: no formal ownership rights above those of workers and farmers, if ownership did exist, it was collective, they had no personal privilege, no capital and no heriditary rights, and anyone could become a bureacrat. I do agree that in turn it did lead to some problems and it was far from perfect, nor do I like bureaucracy in any way, but if this is considered, it wasn't the same as capitalism in the worst usage of the term.
@6:15 "In a way, anarchism is about acting as if you're already free".
Truer words...
Ahh David has the mind of a philosopher AND an anthropologist. Such a good man.
Tim Ingold calls anthropology "philosophy with the people in".
RIP. Another great thinker that establishment media have hidden from public view.
spaceandmotion
At the moment I live in a small town in a rural area. So many people here are hurting yet there is a passivity on there part towards direct action that depresses me. I put a lot of the blame on many of the local churches (there are exceptions, especially in the Black community). These churches seem to fear true social justice other than perhaps feeding the hungry (and many do not even do that).
How to change this fatalistic attitude is the key to meaningfull change in "middle America".
while its true that church is no power towards change (duh!) i think your cause of depress is something very simple called conformism on behalf of you fellow citizens. The,oh dont bother, i aint gonna change the world...Thats why only when the shit hits the fun there is change, cause you got nothing to loose. But do we really need to reach new low's again?....
pdrboston.org/ People for Democratic Revolution, Boston
Hello! To change the fatalistic attitude, we here at PDR have created a statement titled This I Believe. It states that the world should be based on the golden rule, that capitalism is immoral, that the economy should be based on sharing instead of buying and selling, that laws should only be made at the local level by egalitarians- people who value equality, mutual aid, and democracy, and that we need a revolution to make it happen. (read it here: media.wix.com/ugd/20615e_6c40d86078da6ea32d6379867405339e.pdf )
We collect signatures every week in working class areas all over Boston and greater Boston, and try to keep up with those who sign it and exchange contact info with us so we can grow the effort. Guess how many people sign it? Over 75% of the people who stop to read it sign it! We have three 2ft x 3ft poster boards of the signatures (797 so far) that we show to the public so that people know they are not alone in having such anti-capitalist, and thus revolutionary values, desires, and beliefs. (Pictures online here: www.pdrboston.org/#!boston-photos/c3pf )
Helping people to see that they are not alone is how we change the attitude. This is how we create a sea-change that sets the stage for people to organize and come together. We plan on collecting signatures from a majority of American adults, 130 million people. As the numbers climb, people's understanding of the possibilities will broaden. Bold talk will become coordinated, inspiring, and intelligent collective actions. Rallying people around the Vision that This I Believe outlines is how people can become united.
Feel free to get signatures yourself. Contact us for tips and to join efforts. Check out our other projects, though I do need to update them with their latest evolutions, including adding a few!
"Let's remove the rich from power. Have real, not fake, democracy, with no rich and no poor."
"Capitalism isn't broken...It's evil. It won't be broken until WE BREAK IT!"
pdrboston.org/ PDRBoston.org Thank you.
World religions in one of his talks he points out really didn’t become a thing till capitalism started. Like it was kinda needed to justify it. It is the opiate of the masses. Litterally, and it does serve a Scola community role, but other than that and some sense of order for people, as they are probably afraid of uncertainty. So they just dont
"Many of the normal motives of civilized life-snobbishness, money-grubbing, fear of the boss, etc.-had simply ceased to exist." George Orwell - Homage to Catalonia.
I am fascinated with how catalonia worked prior to the spanish Civil war. Incredible how every other force (fascist to the extreme right and marxists to the left) came together to crush that almost utopian society.
Thanks for this discussion. I hadn't heard of Graeber and regret that I missed him while he was alive. I appreciate this introduction.
Anarchism is acting as if you are already free.
tell that to the syrian curds
whey to go
anarchists are free - they have free minds.
charlie: Indeed, the Syrian Kurds have formed Anarchist enclaves in the middle of the Fascist madness of ISIS and Assad in Syria.
you are already free
Finally read David Graeber's book "Debt: The First 5,000 Years". There is much in the book to take in (I ended up reading it twice) but it is worth it. I just wish the general public could be woken up (I am myself far from mainstream).
"I am myself far from mainstream" cool bro. Hope you and Alex Jones have fun
How lovely is it to watch an interview done with genuine curiosity, with goodwill from both.
Thanks for the upload.
RIP David, you will be missed.
Brilliant man! His world view is inspiring!
David! Our hearts break for the loss of this human.
RIP man. I wish I had a chance to chat with you. Thanks for your contribution to this human thing.
rest in power.
Mr Graeber seems like a nice chap
The govt. needs u to think that u need it
Yeah, the problem is that we so often feel we have to wait for the next best choice every four years and then to vote for him/her and make them president. Always a self-defeating practice to believe that that is all it will take, but seeing how they're all capitalists and bought for... (though Bernie appears to be neither of these things). Socialist anarchist organization, education and mass proliferation is the best thing we can do.
Great, knowledgeable interviewer!
just found this guy today! couldn't be happier! it's always a pleasure to found a big thinker like this man. Is unbelievable that in the XXI century there are still people afraid of talking or even thinking about ideas like these... well religions still around that's one of the main reason we as humans are still fucked up
Nice. We need more people like us on this planet.
lol, Sure. If I get my way, then hopefully we will have people like you helping to lead my children when I die off.
I worry about the future of my little girls every day, but when I come across youngsters with critical thinking skills like you, it adds another spark of hope in heart.
I'm not that old, though (just 30), but I still think this way.
what an interesting interview.
Read some of George Orwell's early works. He obseves the poverty in London and the insame work load of Paris in the late twenties and early thirties. He joins Anarchists and joins up to fight Franco in Spain but is amazed at the Communists supported by the Soviets turning on them. Later he studies the Soviets and concludes that Communism is not the answer and can often make things worse. On the surface Anarchism seems like "Tea Party" but the difference is that power comes from the bottom up.
6:20 Such a good summation of Direct Action and Anarchism
Anarchists, Libertarian Socialists and all others who question the system should unite instead of fight each other. the more divided we are the more power the oppressors have.
there are fundumental diference's between the schools you mentioned that cant be gaped. You cant have a collectivist and a statist walking hand by hand. If you want all various groups to unite you need to come up with a new ideology that satisfies all people to its full extent. There is non so far...
Aemon z that issue could be solved with one vote at a workers council. The debates between anarchists schools of thought are useful and important. One party is a red bureaucracy.
I am a progressive utopian socialist. I do not let my mind be clouded by petty social theories.
HFS40000
I think you should reverse that order.
If we can agree to leave each other alone in our communities to try these ideas while dismantling coercive forces, then we can partner. Is that possible in "libertarian socialism"?
Fantastic expression of ideas.
You seem to be a self-appointed expert on anarchists. I'm an anarchist, and chaos and violence is exactly what I don't want. As long as you have governments, you'll have war, violence, oppression, abuse, exploitation, etc etc.
Yep... Leo Tolstoy lays the groundwork for the Anarchy he feels is laid out by Christ in his writing "The Kingdom of God is Within" It's brilliant. Tolstoy is a genius!
Yeah, I know, great way of doing taxes...😊
Christian anarchism is the only form of religious involvement in politics that I accept.
Cheers to my Christian anarchist comrades! From a secular Anti-theist.
I haven't, but I'll make a note to check it out. Thanks for the referral.
When talk shows were worth listening to. I've been recently reading his books for the first time, may he RIP. My respect for him has also increased when he said he was kicked out of Yale University - and he did not present himself to be a victim.
An anarchic situation can only be achieved through the practice of the design system known as permaculture. Without the off the grid lifestyle that permaculture offers, anarchy can only be an intellectual game. "Hence the futility of revolutionaries who have no gardens, who depend on the very system they attack, and who produce words and bullets, not food and shelter.” We need more anarchists to understand this and then embrace the genuinely anarchic.
Ehmm.. Why would I spend time on all that when we could have farmers who do this fulltime? Supply and demand? Voluntary interaction? How would anyone get any job done if they had to spend a certain amount of hours a day working their field/garden/crops/whatever? If I had to spend hours a day on permaculture, I wouldn't have time to actually do a job and provide the world with a service/product, right? Am I missing something?
*****
Yes, you are missing a lot. There are plenty of books about permaculture or go to the permaculture institute's website from where you can find answers if you want them. The real question is, why wouldn't you live like this? In the future, humanity will have little choice so you might as well skill yourself up now. Aside from the tremendous satisfaction you will get out of it you will be able to either pass on skills or be ready, if the whole damn system descends into chaos sooner rather than later. Becoming an active permie is like the boy scout motto 'be prepared', always in a state of readiness. Which used to be the state of mind of much of humanity before the uptake of centralised dependency. A permie still thinks about doing work that provides a service/product but back on the local level not on the global level. You know, think globally, (what benefits nature) and act locally.
*****
The other thing about a permaculture gardening system is, once it is established and mature it does not require several hours work a day. When getting your head around PC you need to think perennials not so much annuals. Food forests stacked with the different layers of the forest, mimicking the structure of a forest. Once established it does not require a lot of work. You can tweak it here and there but even if it is left alone it will thrive. At that point you become a forager and you will need the eyes to see what is going on. To recognise the food in the layers. All of this takes study and practical experience. I can tell you from my own experience that every effort in this direction is worth it. There is so much to PC as it is not just about gardening alone. It is the holistic approach to living.
What about the cities producing luxuries for the farmers and the farmers producing food for the cities? No need to live off the grid to live anarchistically
R.I.P legend.
Brilliant distinction between activism and direct action.
Interesting interview
DAVID GRAEBER was a founding member of the Institute for Experimental Arts
He did a lecture with the title: How social and economic structure influences the Art World in the Financial Consequences - International MultiMedia Poetry Festival organized by the Institute for Experimental Arts supported by LSE Department of Anthropology.
Influential anthropologist David Graeber, known for his 2011 volume Debt: The First 5000 Years speaks about the correlation between the cultural sphere and society. The intellectuals and the artists create an imaginary way to criticize the economic system in any era. Art can overcome hegemonic frameworks and acknowledge other possible worlds, offer us the opportunity to understand better the marginalized social entities. Social exclusion is the process in which individuals or people are systematically blocked from (or denied full access to) various rights, opportunities and resources that are normally available to members of a different group, and which are fundamental to social integration and observance of human rights within that particular group (e.g., housing, employment, healthcare, civic engagement, democratic participation, and due process). As the economic crises go deeper in time more people face the effects of exclusion. Art and social sciences can give voice to the voiceless. Especially young social aware poets can give us a clear view of the real social effect of the financial consequences. - David Graeber
You can watch the Lecture here:
th-cam.com/video/WCF-8OQj0RE/w-d-xo.html
Chomsky defines anarchism "tendency in human development that seeks to identify the structure of hierarchy... i think mr. Graeber is on the same line...
Bakunin said it's a natural rebellious spirit in humans.
Thanks! That made my day man. Been stressing over exams coming up, and I basically need 100 on them to stay in honors with distinction. So that`s why I had some of the anger come out in one or two of my posts; I apologize. You are also quite intelligent, and this has been a very intriguing discussion.
Did you pass the exams well enough?
fascinatory
Anarchism , whatever you say about it , is complete and perfect freedom. It may not be a functioning system , but you would be free of any chains if you were in that system !
That is not what anarchism is. Anarchism is an umbrella term for societies that tries to drastically reduce central governance and transfer it to small communities that are small enough to work well trough the means of direct democracy.
You are never free from every chain. If you want to own that much freedom then you have to control other people. Freedom is never created nor destroyed, you just distribute it- and exploits it if you have the freedom to do so in the first place. That is what politics is all about.
@@MegaBanne you need to research the word it literally means an(without)archy(rulers)
@@crislater870
Archy means government, state, a higher authority.
That is true... Add the first part 'an,' of without, and you get without rulers, authority, etc..
@@MegaBanne meaning rulers. Yes
Dang. Sharp as a knife. What a Human. What a Loss. RIP. David Graeber.
brilliant
David Graeber is extraordinary!!!
Graeber looks soo young. :p
as a long time anarchist. In my experience, there have been 2 groups of anarchists: 1. Annoying hipster teenagers that see anarchism as stylish. and
2. Intellectual anarchists who fight for worker's rights and eventual liberation.
I have met far more #2's than 1's in this equation, and none of them advocate banana-republic insurrection.
Go on Discord anarchist servers and you’ll find almost nothing but 1.
Of course most of them aren’t even teenagers so no excuse for them.
But it isn’t due to stylishness but rather because they want to justify being anti-social dicks whilst benefiting from social interactions.
Getting real sick of them.
@@Liliquan Would you say it was less of a problem if, in spite of preferring to be antisocial dicks and largely keeping to themselves because of the fact, someone also wants others to be able to benefit from social interactions with themselves?
Interesting interview with an interesting thinker.
One of the greatest... rest in peace
I'm awake now... I see the errors of my ways. Thank you for your TH-cam comment... it has changed my life entirely. If you don't believe that's fine. I do.
Charlie Rose seems mildly hostile in this interview.
I think it's healthy if the interviewer has some critical perspective. I get the impression that Charlie Rose is pretty right leaning from other interviews, and as he put's it "obviously you see that I have not future in philosophy", but he generally isn't unfair to the other part.
he seems hostile in every interview.
He's a lib so...
Love you, David.
Can you provide a link to that video where molyneux said that please, Im looking for it
Anarchy is the solution to achieve a civilized society.
"Does anarchy have a future?" Does statism?
the velocity of change is exponential
great
Also keep in mind anarchism's positive influence on U.S. society, too.
"Around the turn of the century, the Wobblies and other anarchists played the central role in winning workers the 5-day week and 8-hour day." David Graeber - Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology.
David Graeber is brave man !
This is proper journalism.
kiitos
If you want to talk to an interesting professor or ex professor who is an anarchist, the first guy you should ask is Noam Chomsky.
Ha, wrong. Chomsky is bought and paid for
Alric Wilhelm yes anarchism famously corporate and buying favor of professors. Wait...
MrTacticalinuit The anarchist that supports Hillary Clinton and Central banking?
+Brandon Sandersen the fuck?
@@MrGinger333 that certainly isnt Noam Chomsky. Sooo....
"the velocity of change is exponential" you can tell he's trying to string together complex sounding words because he knows David is so much smarter than him x)
I scrolled down for this comment
Rest in great power comrade
I like this guy! well said
He reminds me a lot of the skateboarder Rodney Mullen.
I was thinking "Yale??? What was the CIA using Graeber for? That puts a new complexion upon his critiques." But then found out that they didn't know what to do with him, and it made more sense.
!NIce
Woah, I sure missed plenty.
Democratization of the workplace is the solution that David is looking for here. There's no other way to organize society that is fair and equitable and bottom-up. If David doesn't like getting told what to do at work, he should start a rigorous pro-worker-cooperative campaign.
You missed the point.
What you're suggesting is the same as stop smoking but continue to hang out with people that smoke.
One worker coop or even multiple are not going to change the system.
You mean you're not yet an Anarchist? I was there too bro.
You mean you're not yet a moron? He was there too bro.
I couldn't agree more
yes, thank you friend :)
Don't be so disingenuous, Rose. "What do you mean by cower?" as if he's never encountered authority or quivering quislings in the realm of broadcast.
Rose is a sexual predator disingenuous dipshit
David brought fear to the established guard. He refused to kiss the ring(s). Typical. Been there. He can accomplish more form behind the established walls. Go David!
The more you read about true anarchists the more you realize it is certainly not about chaos and violence. I personally have been enjoying some of Leo Tolstoy's books concerning his own ideas of Christian Anarchism. As a Christian myself it makes a whole lot more sense with what Jesus was preaching. I have been in so many Churches and have heard them speaking of the war as though it is a necessary thing which baffles me.
Yes, you are, because no matter what environment one`s in history has shown us that people look first to help themselves.
This interviewer is so god damn intimidated by Graeber. He stumbles over his words and has unusually nervous body language immediately after the first time he hears him talk. Love it.
+Jackson A "intimidated"??? gimme a break...
Because he was clearly underprepared for this interview. I would bet that the term "anarchist" probably lead to some false assumptions, however I can't say for sure.
+Jackson A u r clearly mental
This was really a hit piece against this man. You can see Charlie Rose is glowing with enthusiasm as he explains that this man no longer has a job at Yale University. Even the point when Charlie Rose claims he can make a phone call and find out for him exactly why he was fired, that was a direct intimidation move to show the power that he has and to try to make the man feel small. You can see that for the first few minutes of the interview he can barely keep his eyes raise for more than a moment because he knows that Charlie Rose is a devil in disguise and he needs to build up his courage just to face this clown.
That last answer Dave gave he totally misinterpreted too (chalking this one up to stupidity, even if malice was also there). Anarchists don't have friends in the media.
@@zciliyafilms5508 Charlie Rose is a Jesuit. Eric Phelps says so. The Jesuits are the enemy. I know much about them. They run America after they hijacked it after the Civil War.
@@MrDuffy81 Whoa, OK. You've got my attention. I have a bit of intersection with the Jesuits myself, but not enough to get a complete feel. If you could please give me a pointer to a book or video I'd immensely appreciate it.
@@zciliyafilms5508 for some reason my last comment did not make it past TH-cam security. But check out the playlist called Jesuit world order on my channel. Also, the one called Eric phelps. They are featured playlists on the channel.
@@zciliyafilms5508 met a man who was the treasurer of a major biker gang. Did yardwork for him because he lived around the corner from me. Found out he was a knight of Malta. Told him I knew all about the Jesuits and his jaw dropped. Never talked with him again after that day.
I miss David.
so true...
No, it just helps me understand everything we've been talking about now. Don't worry about it, though. Take care.
Yes, well, that and the concept itself of having nations in general.
3:12 "I'm interested in anthropology because I'm interested in human possibilities"
- David Graebar
YES!
Legal and Economic Protection for the Individual is the Highest form of Development.