What is Socialism? Government Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ก.ค. 2024
- A brief overview of the word, "Socialist". Take the Political Compass Test here www.politicalcompass.org/test And subscribe to HipHughes to keep the universe aligned for free here th-cam.com/users/hughesdv...
Libertarianism Explained • What is a Libertarian?
Liberalism Explained • What is a Liberal? Ide...
What is a Conservative? • What is a Conservative?
I really hate labels. You end up wasting time discussing definitions rather than discussing the actual ideas.
Right on.
We do that sometimes. I don't know many in real life, but I do talk a lot about the issues with people in real life.
I really feel Socialism is a very slippery slope, I know how Politicians love and crave power (on both sides) so we would b opening up ourselves to have that monster grow and we would end up like Venezuela or China. It’s scares the crap out of me !! And young people have NO clue what it’s about!! They just hear the word FREE! NOTHING is FREE people, someone ALWAYS pays.
pamela gruppi see this is why labels suck. People hear that the left are socialists and think we want to end up like Venezuela, as you said, but most of what we argue for already exists in the Nordic countries, which are essentially capitalist just with a high social welfare state.
robert franks these starting points deter conversation between those with different starting points, so no we really shouldn’t have a starting point.
Nice job, Keith! These transitions and notebook paper bits are really impressive. What editing program are you using nowadays?
I finally got my hands on Final Cut X. What are you editing with?
Hip Hughes to this day he still doesn’t know what software he uses
@@zachmac3373 Hip Hughes: Alright then, keep your secrets.
Legend has it Hip Hughes is still waiting for a response from Tom Richey...
some scary stuff I know.
@@hiphughes are you for the public ownership of business?
Politicians should watch this video.
+DustingBread America should watch this video.
+Keith Hughes (HipHughes) Speaking of political compass, I haven't visited in years. I'M TOTALLY RETAKING IT! I wonder where current American politicians rank on it, and in comparison with other known figures from history.
+andy spain how?
WHY? Wait a minute, wait a minute...listening to this guy, I wonder, is he defining socialism or selling it? I'm thinking the latter, what say you? Sounds it to me. And if any of you think the Fed has control now???? Understand that true socialism requires central control over ALL economic activities!!!! Socialism: "From everyone according to his abilities to everyone according to his needs"? Ha, nice! Especially in a country consisting of 317 Million people, hahahahaha....it's even more difficult than trying to implement socialist medicine. I'd pay to see how Socialism could be made to work especially here in America, after having a Declaration of Independence, and a Constitutional Republic! Holy cow. That would certainly be history in the making -- for an afternoon!!! LOL. Its not funny, seriously, Ya know how many thoughts, how many decisions, and judgments per second that is?????? And they're all gonna be convinced they should work their asses off to give to the guy under the oak tree eating a banana?? Hahaha....its not funny -- YOU NEED TO STOP IT, YOU SAID NEVER AGAIN, AND YET HERE WE ARE. it would be over for you Lefties in an afternoon. LOL. Understand that any place that has chosen Socialism as its form of government in the past did not convince all its people it was better method of government. In fact, few agreed it was but went along with it anyway to get along and be left alone. All done because they, like us, refused to talk politics or religion, which everyone must to keep the wolf from the door of your freedoms. Socialism is like the building of a dam, it has to be properly maintained or it collapses and the town is swept away by the rushing waters, and the bigger the populace the bigger the dam must be, but there can be no dam to ward of 317 Million!!!! Socialism then, guys, at its best, is TEMPORARY, at it's worst, TOLERATED. True socialism does not survive for very long because there is just no formidable way to create the incentive necessary to convey ones earnings to others without it becoming a piss poor replica of the free markets it sets itself against! It must create some sort of incentive, even if just a pinch of incentive, it must create incentive, but even that little pinch of incentive compels a spark in man to reach for more, its just human nature, not even to mention the influence coming from interactions with economic forces operating outside his Socialist government he's under; especially when that desire for more is denied to him, it will only lead him to jealousy, resentment, and eventual revolt. We've seen it all before. I am of the impression that this guy seems to be selling Socialism more than he's teaching it, I could be wrong, nothing makes me right, but its what I got for yas today. This all done with a smile and cutsie ootsie cartoon-like background to confound and confuse you, certainly not educate you, his facts are okay, but his conclusions concern me. He seems to me as if to be the smiling, hungry wolf at your door, beware of him. Listen carefully to him, subscribe to his channel, for if you listen carefully to what, and how, he is saying stuff, you can discern he's trying to sell it ta yas, but its all good, cause we need to know the enemy within the gates. In my humble opinion Socialism which I see as a form of tyranny calling itself socialism, operates on top of free-market capitalism! Its just another pernicious idea disguised as a good. Its what I got. SORRY BUDDY, BUT YOU UNDERESTIMATE THE INTELLIGENCE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, A VERY SERIOUS MISTAKE, AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE IS THE BEST OF THE REST, MY FRIEND. YOU MAY SHOW SUPPORTERS HERE, AND CLEARLY THEY ARE FROM YOUR TRIBE MOST OF THEM IT LOOKS LIKE, BUT 317 MILLION POEPLE, NOT GONNA HAPPEN. DON'T EVEN WASTE YOUR TIME TRYING TO CONVINCE THEM THAT THIS EVIL IS A GOOD, GOD CREATED MEN WITH CERTAIN INALIENABLE RIGHTS, THAT SOCIALISM TAKES AWAY, NOT GONNA HAPPEN HERE IN AMERICA,NOT EVEN THE SLIGHTEST CHANCE, NOT BY THE BIGGEST SMILE NOT BY THE CUTSIE OOTSIE WORDS OR ARTISTIC BACKGROUNDS, OH NO, AMERICA'S INTELLIGENCE IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD AND NO MATTER HOW YOU HAVE EM NOW, YOU NEVER ENSLAVE ANY OF US INTO YOUR DELUSIONAL THINKING.
This video is trying to sell SOCIALISM, and leave out the biggest problem. Socialism = government control over the INDIVIDUAL (no individual freedom). People think ( Are lied to) when a CAPITALIST SYSTEM (all of Europe) adopts some SOCIAL PROGRAMS, they are told the system is now socialist. The system is still Capitalist, only slightly corrupted.
Here is the basic definition of socialism:
Any ideology advocating workplace democracy, as well as the common ownership over the means of production by those who work them.
***** Thanks for spreading common sense. It's very embarrassing that most Americans have no idea what socialism is. Thanks.
***** what do you mean by workplace democracy ??
martinko40 Everyone who works for a company has a stake in the company/partial ownership/shareholder...and has a say in the company's future. Decisions for the company's future are voted on by all employees. It is not a dictatorship ran solely by 1 individual or an oligarchy ran by a small group (ie. board of trustees).
Kurt Davidson what about workers who already ATE their STAKE in company, and made very bad decisions, do they have a vote in decisions for the company future ?? are you going to let them EAT the STAKE Of others workers in the company until is nothing to eat for all ??***** I call it unlimited Government spending and stupidity of taxpayers who allows it .
+Black Flag Proletarian ***WRONG DEFINITION ***
What a great informative video.
I think it’s important to point out, no matter what your political beliefs, never subscribe to an ideology that won’t allow a measure of personal, demanding unquestionable loyalty. When you have to follow the charter to the letter, you become a slave to that ideology, losing all sense of individualism. The only thing our founding fathers did agree on, is the right to disagree. Each had their own individual and unique perspectives of faith and government. I have no doubt that if they were here today, they’d all proclaim they’re ‘right to change their minds.’
Thanks Keith for posting such an educational piece.
Kimmy Alan (aka proudsocialist)
"There are different type of socialists."
As a socialist I agree. I recommend richard d wolff's channel here on youtube for people to learn more. Particularly his may video.
Socialism to me, is about workplace democracy. As those during the enlightenment who saw feudal monarchies as illegitimate, I view the contemporary work environment the same way. So on the political compass, socialism and capitalism aren't left-right to me.
Communism is really just leninism, where the state facilitates the economy as opposed to bankers, shareholders and board members.
Many people view communism as less authoritarian because politicians are more likely to co-opt socialism (bernie sanders) but it is an ahistorical view.
Again Richard wolff's may video does the best job at explaining all of this.
Thankx I have a learning challenge, and just started to hear these words a lot from people at work. I'm trying to educate myself on such topics without a bias view.
What's the INCENTIVE to produce?
Who is going to start a business under your views? No one.
Name ONE country that has flourished under your economic views?
What you are describing is 1950"s Soviet Union. Breadlines are good???
@@youtubesucks1499 1. To better the society or Collective
2. What?
3. Vietnam and Cuba are doing fairly well if not a bit better than capitalist systems
Don’t forget about Anarchist Communists who reject Leninism and Bolshevik positions. They are a bit out there, but I think as socialists we shouldn’t forget that there is more to communism than just Lenin and Mao.
@@E.C.GoMusicandMore Anarchist who are political terrorists should be rejected. Like the Anarchist who shot Lenin and the one who shot Henry Frick.
Very clear way of getting the information through in a very engaging way, your enthusiasm is awesome! good job
Enjoyed the video and thought the material presented was very good! One small note, please make sure the sound effects of the transitions are at the same volume as you when you're talking. I might be wrong, but two of them seemed a little bit louder than you. Great overall though! Again, really enjoyed it!
Wow this was exactly the kind of video I was looking for.
+DustingBread Cause I made it for you.
Very good informative video! Socialism is probably one of the most misunderstood ideologies in the U.S. So I think videos like this are very important in order to educate the general public!
Misunderstood? No, it is, and has been understood all too well by generations of all classes of Americans. So far, their high tide was the 1912 election here. It is understood now, it is proposed by several sets. The current President is a flamboyant capitalist, whom a lot of Americans find abrasive. It is said that (another) generation of coddled Americans see salvation in Socialism. People whom would legislate in the States never realize that "Final Solutions" tend to the Law of Unintended Consequences, and maybe those consequences are intended by a coterie of some sort. I have a dim view of the profligate, but libertarianism is preferable to it's controlled, kontrolled opposite.
Name one country where socialism has worked.
What's one INCENTIVE to risk your life savings under a work place democracy? If its that great... why don't you start a co-op.
Starting a business is hard.
@@youtubesucks1499 no country has ever been fully socialist (or communist), countries like norway are democratic socialists but not fully socialist.
@@zilla6300 Venezuela had a good run until they started eating their pets and homeless people.
@@youtubesucks1499 Venezuela was never socialist. they had very minimal socialist policies. your same statement could be used for many capitalist countries, the difference being my examples would actually be capitalist.
Under capitalism if you don't like your job you can quit and try to find a better job. Under socialism your most important job is political...making sure that the "freebies" keep flowing from the government.
+J Scott Upton In America today , it's the rich and the big corporations who get all the handouts and free stuff, while millions of Americans in the poor and middle classes are struggling to stay afloat . Wages have stagnated, but the cost of living has risen steadily, and this has been disastrous for America .
"Berger"...I never stated that America currently has a free market/capitalist system. What we now have (unfortunately) is what economists call a "mixed economy".
America has a kleptocracy now . The government is basically run by greedy rich people who "redistribute wealth " - but as reverse Robin Hoods, stealing from the poor and middle class to make the rich even richer . This is why this country is an unholy mess . Donald Trump is only going to make this worse as President .
The ones who don't work in America aren't lazy bums who want to sponge off the government. This is a right-wing myth . They just can't find jobs or jobs which pay enough with good benefits, so they're forced to live on welfare .It's not their fault . If the US government just dropped all its programs to help those in need, we'd have millions and millions of jobless, homeless people staring in the street . And another serious problem is the fact that wages have stagnated while the cost of living has risen steadily . Our economy is an unholy mess b because of the criminals in the Republican party . WE've made considerable progress under Obama , but with the disastrous election of Trump, this country is screwed !!! The damage is just starting . . . . . .
You said that right try and find another job.when their are no jobs..
Tom Arnold's son.
I love this guy. He really explains things in a positive way. Subscribed
The more government expands, the more freedom contracts.
+Rick Brunermer but do we really need that much freedom?
+Odd Mahtte Sara Surely you're joking... Maybe you want the government to tell you if you can have that life-saving operation. Maybe you're ok with the government having the control of your life and making decisions for you, based on what they think is good for the masses, not what is good for you. Maybe you, but not me. I don't believe the government does anything well or efficiently. I believe in the individual, not the government.
Perhaps when the government is full of representatives that make their own decisions. However, when the government is by, for, and literally composed of the people, that is the highest level of freedom a society may attain while retaining any semblance of a society with general well-being. The problem is when governance is essentially ruled by representatives who do what they want(which affects everyone) and cabals of groups looking out for their own interests(corporations, etc.). Government is essential and having a small government breeds even less effectiveness than what you already believe the government provides. This leads to inequality, strife and disjointedness which are the banes of societal well-being. Therefore, it is most effective to have a government that is large enough to implement significant change that affects the whole of the country. What keeps this in check is that the government should not be groups of politicians who believe they know what's best for the country(or rather, usually for themselves), rather the government should only be a vehicle for the will of the citizens. Only a shell that is a means through which the people can she what they want for the country accomplished. Personally, I don't even believe that we should have a position such as the President or any position with similar powers.
+Silver Fang -- How do you have a government composed of the people? A direct democracy, where all issues are decided by plebiscite? What happens when the bottom 51% of the people (income-wise) decides to vote that the wealth of the top 49% be confiscated and given to the bottom 51%?
+Greg B Interesting that you say that... That is, in effect, what is happening.
Thank you Keith, for another well explained summary of a complex subject. I especially like your even handedness and lack of bias.
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class.
That class had insisted that Bernie Sanders socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Bernie Sanders plan”.
All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one
will receive an A…. (substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.
The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
It could not be any simpler than that.
There are five morals to this story:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
This is a true exercise in human nature. Human nature is the truest downfall of the progressive liberal ideas. The progressive agenda is wonderful on paper, who doesn't want everyone to have a home, and food, and medical care. I know I would love that, the problem is people. It is in our nature to do very little without reward, in fact I would say it is our most basic instinct. Without the "carrot" we will never strive for greatness, the experiment has been done. When you completely discount the moral of this story, you discount all that makes us human. Some day we will move past this as a species, and the utopia can begin, but until then we need to craft our laws to give that "carrot" for working towards improving, not just for being.
Sam Fowler This is absolutely wonderful
wtf is this bs?
1. Sanders is a socialdemocrat, not a socialist. He wants to keep private property of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Socialism is collective ownership and control over these means.
2. Taxing is a tool that is used by socialdemocrats and socialists *within* a capitalist economy. Within a socialist economy taxation would be rather useless.
3. What is this example of yours showing? "Average is worse than some good and some bad students"? Socialism/Communism NEVER advocated for complete equality, look this video th-cam.com/video/pzQZ_NDEzVo/w-d-xo.html (9 min) or read Marx directly (Critique of the Gothaer Program)
4. Now going into this example. Why does it fail as an example of socialism? Well, if the students would all work together on one project which is then graded in the end...that'd be socialist, since they share the thing that produces results (the project...which stands for the means of production...do you get it so far?). But since the students now still work on their own little projects/tests, no wonder that some people get frustrated when they get some bad grades. However this does not translate well into the real world either - people in many countries pay a progressive amount into public services and receive them either subsidized or free - then don't get demotivated because they know, whenever they get ill, they don't end up on homeless on the street because they have to sell their house to pay for an infected scratch or a surgery or whatever.
Now to these points directly:
(1) You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. - Indeed. You have to collectivize the means by which the wealthy got wealthy in the first place.
(2) What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. - Indeed. Capitalists do this all the time. They do nothing, except *owning* stuff. Then they let other people work for them and extract a portion of wealth these people have created. *This* kind of unjustified theft will be avoided in Socialism/Communism, since everybody owns and controls the stuff then. The kind of "Theft" you mean...well, who cares? Nobody starves because they have to pay into a public service. Nobody starves because they have to pay taxes. But they all recieve the service, whether they were rich or poor before...well, in Socialism/Communism there wouldn't be any rich or poor, since everyone has equal control, as stated before.
(3) The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. - True.
(4) When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation. - And...when did this ever happen? If you can name one example and back it up, I will run naked through the streets and scream "Hail Hayek! Hail the Free Market!"...well, I might get arrested, but since there is not one single example in history where the incentive to work dropped due to taxation, I am on the safe side here.
" It is in our nature to do very little without reward" Actually, blood donations are higher in countries where there is no monetary compensation. Actually Volunteer work has higher participations if there is no monetary incentive. This has been proven again and again and again. Stop this stupid "but muh human nature" bullshit. Humans are social creatures who care for each other...except they have to fight each other because jobs are limited, because houses are too expensive, in short because of capitalism.
"Without the "carrot" we will never strive for greatness, the experiment has been done." When? Seriously, WHEN??? The Soviet Union? Well, they certainly did achieve nothing...just transforming an agrarian and iliterate society into a space traveling industrial superpower in less than 40 years despite massive destructions and losses of lifes during two world wars and a civil war...yeah, they had no incentive at all...except making the life for everyone better.
People's duty should be to work for themselves, their family, and their country. The country should regulate the level of compensation each worker would receive. It would take the destruction on large firms and companies and transferring their ownership to the public-interest-government. It would take a mass reform of the military--the military would have to serve public-interest over government debacles. You would need a better source of education. You would need national harmony.
With everything I just listed, if a country does this right, it will take control of all other countries.
You're so blind.
Sam Fowler 🙌🏼
Where do u get all this shit from I'm tryna research socialism and capitalism to get a better understanding but I don't know where to start
Workers control over the means of production needs to be included as a core aspect of socialism. Whether it means total control through workplace democracy or a bit more control through unionization. An emphasis on various forms of workers control is absolutely crucial to socialism
Bruno56 I don't know what this means
Bruno56 I guess it depends what you mean by luxury. I'm comfortably middle class, sure. But I don't see how that makes me a hypocrite. What's the solution? Because Marxists criticize capitalism they can't participate in it or live any sort of comfortable life under it?
Bruno56 Are socialists just supposed to just deliberately make themselves miserable or just starve themselves do that people don't call them a hypocrite? We live under capitalism, people are going to have to participate in it fairly extensively to live even a comfortable life. Unless you're talking about rich socialists who own the means of production and exploit their workers, wealthy enough socialists are not hypocrites.
Bruno56 also at what level of income is acceptable to be a socialist? Middle and upper class people are called hypocrites and poor people are decried as greedy, selfish and lazy. Not saying you think these things necessarily, but what's a satisfactory level of income for a socialist for you?
Bruno56 hold on a second though. We don't have capitalism because we need money to live, we need money to live because we have capitalism. Capitalism is one of the many economic systems that make money necessary, and it's even been argued that capitalism makes money uniquely necessary compared to other systems.
Control over the free market? Sounds like an oxymoron to me!
free market? sounds like oxymoron to me
Checkout the Fabian society who are at the forefront of socialism . Their emblem is a wolves in the skin of a lamb . For socialism is really communism slowed down but the destination is the same . Socialism and communism are a zionist jewish construct . Checkout the mind blowing research of author C J Bjerknes .
Socialism is not control over companies. It's government control over healthcare and education and providing basic needs for free, such as healthcare and education like I stated before. As an example Norway is a socialist country. I think that's what he meant by control over the market. Some parts of the market are free and some parts are controlled.
SolarPenguin Communism is socialism in a rush .
+SolarPenguin When has control by government ever been a good thing. Nothing works as efficiently or as fairly as the free market. Just look at the Dmv and Veteran healthcare. This is total rubbish. Hell, look at how Venezuelans are enjoying their Socialism. They have taken over businesses and farms because they think these businesses can't be run properly by their citizens.
Hi, thanks for the video's there great ! I've been showing them to my after-school Politics lessons to educate people about the society we live in and how others live and think. Thanks again !
Thank You again Mr. Hughes for your effort and time.
Be well
;)
Economic Left/Right: -9.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.41
So Libertarian Socialist. :)
ejcmoorhouse same
Only good socialist is a dead socialist
@@taliyaroshani809 I'll try not to take that as a death threat.
@@ejcmoorhouse no take it as a life encouragment
@@taliyaroshani809 Only a good dead socialist is a Marxist-Leninist not the others
“The goal of socialism is communism” -Vladimir Lenin
That’s the marxist definition. There are many different forms of socialism. You can have socialism while still having social classes, money, and a state.
Great job, guy; love this series.
Holding a bachelors degree in political science and being in my second year of graduate school this 6 minute video helped me more than most of my seminars to understand socialism. Thank you!
uhm... whats that at 0:46 o.0
*From* each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.
Right, if it's the "main quote in socialism" (2:32), Keith H. might as well get that first preposition right. Louis Blanc, 1851: De chacun selon ses facultés, à chacun selon ses besoins From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs
I am a member of AUF (Arbeidernes Ungdomsfylking), Workers Youth League, a sub party to AP (Arberiderpartiet), the Workers Party, which has strong democratic socialist values. I took the test, and my political compass there was just as in real life.
Great video! You have got a new subscriber!
I love these videos and your awesome teaching (:
I love you watching and your awesome comments! :)
I do love this channel and I thought generally it was accurate accept for the last bit in which you kinda summed up social democracy, not democratic socialism. To ms, as a socialist, the core of socialism has been about worker ownership of the means of production and economic democracy, still.
We need to abolish private property not become owners.
"They're gonna believe that the government has some sort of role in those welfare objectives for society."
Not if you're an Anarcho-Socialist. Too bad you didn't explain this type of socialism as you explained democratic socialism and Marxism-Leninism. I kind of understand that since these two were the most influential throughout the 20th century as well as in our present days, you'd want to focus on them more, but anarchist Socialism has had instances where it manifested itself on a mass scale for short periods of time in the Ukrainian free territories or during the Spanish revolution, and where it provided an alternative to the other two, at least until it was crushed by military force. But what's even more interesting, is that Anarcho-Socialism is what influences the Kurds in Rojava, who are currently fighting off ISIS, who wish to introduce local decentralized communalism/municipalism in their region.
Can you make a video about getting a political science degree and career opportunities ?
Thats a pretty decent idea, Ill add it to the list of to-dos.
@Hip Hughes great video, but just FYI it should be Michael Freeden: Ideologies and Political Theory :)
Great presentation, Mr. Hughes! Socialism is definitely a very misunderstood ideology in the United States, and so I think it's always good for people to have an honest discussion about it in a manner that's straightforward and open-minded. Socialists, like you say, are indeed very diverse and advocate different means of achieving their ideological goals, and so I would suggest that anybody who is sincerely interested in a well-rounded and sophisticated understanding of Socialist thought should read the actual works of socialist theoreticians.
Namely, I'd recommend: "What is Property?" and "The Philosophy of Misery" both by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon; "Socialism, Utopian and Scientific" by Friedrich Engels; “The Working Man's Programme” by Ferdinand Lassalle; "Self-Government in Industry" and "Guild Socialism Restated" both by G.D.H. Cole; and "Progress and Poverty" by Henry George. All of these books can be downloaded for free onto your Kindles or as PDF docs from the Internet Archive.
thx :) bit of a socialist myself (through some idelogical ideas) but always good to also understand more about ideologies I think
@@zarafranke9259 I think you do better to Read "Socialism on Trial" Since it takes up the question of the Russian Revolution along with Stalinism. Marx answered Proudhon with The Poverty of Philosophy. The Russian and Cuba experience have answered many of those questions and books on those revolutions can be found at Pathfinder.
Great video, as a socialist myself I thought your explanation was very accurate, given the distorted view of socialism in the US. Even a person at the center of the ideological chart is considered a socialist by our standards.
Honestly, people to the right are commonly viewed as socialists in America. We have a left meaning nation, a right meaning news media, and a hard right political system. That's my opinion, at least. Lol.
spot on my friend.
impactofredemption
Alright Mr. Impact, please define what you view as Socialism and what you view as Fascism?
And, for shits and giggles, define Theocracy.
I'd appreciate it. :-)
impactofredemption " people on the left or liberal side are socialist" Liberalism is a distinct family of ideologies. It's all free market and shit. That's not socialism.
To bad socialists are idiots
Keep making these!!!
Nice. Very Informative.
How many more of these will be made. I love them!
you tell me. lol. Def. Anarchism.
Keith Hughes How about Centrism?
Kevalry Centrism isn't an ideology, its a vague political position or lack of one. Apathy and ignorance cannot constitute the heart of a set of ideas.
ComradeWinston
True, but there are some "centrist" parties around the world. Liberal Party of Canada and Liberal Democrats of UK.
Kevalry If the US Democratic party isn't centrist as well, apparently I don't know what the left is.
According to the political compass I am more left and more libertarian than Gandhi.
Captain Kamakazi Would you classify yourself as authoritarian?
Should the Government not mirror public opinion and by extension the people act as the moral compass?
Thank you for these videos! I use them all in my GOPO class, but these ideology videos are extra-aweseome.
Awesome! thanks for the kudos
Your videos are amazing you get to the point and I love that
I did the quiz, I'm just below Gandhi on the chart.
JoeMcfly Gaming I was virtually the same as Gandhi, I guess we are both good people.
+JoeMcfly Gaming You are Libertarian Socalist.
I came here trying to understand what socialism is and I still don't? All I see are people complaining about how its dumb in the comments section under Jimmy Kimmel videos. And when I ask them what it is and what's so bad about it, no one can answer me. Someone please. WHAT IS SOCIALISM?? And don't say its workers controlling means of production because I still won't understand.
Howling Wolfman Socialism is collective ownership of the means of production. It's the idea of trying to advocate for an equal society that puts the community's interests above the individual.
Brett Chappelear That still doesn't explain it. What is collective ownership of means of production? What is means of production?
Howling Wolfman This is something you can look up in like 5 minutes. The means of production are what is used to create goods/products. For example, under this capitalist system, what/when/ and how something gets produced is usually decided by a very small group of people. Under socialism, there would be no bosses and the workers would collectively decide these things.
Howling Wolfman This is something you can look up in like 5 minutes. The means of production are what is used to create goods/products. For example, under this capitalist system, what/when/ and how something gets produced is usually decided by a very small group of people. Under socialism, there would be no bosses and the workers would collectively decide these things.
Brett Chappelear Yes you can look it up in 5 minutes but the definition doesn't explain what it really is. Workers control means of production doesn't explain anything. Give me a real life example. Say I am a cashier at the socialist Walt mart. What makes me a socialist there? What do I control as a worker? And what are Walmart's means of production?
Really helped with my school work thank you, and its great that your un biased so people can learn then have theyre own ideas kepp it up!!!!!!
Nice vid man, subbed.
Hm, I think you got confused democratic sosialism, and socialdemocracy.
Democratic socialism is non-revolutionary socialism, and want's to create the socialist state through democratic means. Socialdemocracy is what you describe, to "controll capitalism."
That's wrong, there are revolutionary democratic socialists. They purely believe in an imposition of a democratic government in a socialist state, they may seek this through revolutionary or elective means.
all modern and industrialized countries embracing socialist values e.g denmark sweden are way ahead of usa in terms of quality of life lolz
They're up there in frickin cold, wet gawd-awful parts of the world. Why else did they go a-Viking for a few hundred years in the European medieval period? Irish & Scottish monks trying g to preserve Western civilization had to fend off (when possible) these homicidal marauders. Superior Aryans my okole!
I posted this on the Liberalism video, but thought I'd have a better chance of getting your audience here, on your most recent video:
Could you make a video discussing moderate (economic and social) viewpoints, as well as the argument that moderate viewpoints cannot exist? I once heard someone say, "You can't stand still on a moving train". Could you examine the validity behind that statement? Thank you!
I watched you in class the other day loved it
everybody is different.... rich, poor, weak, strong. no matter vwhat you make it, there will always be unequality. lol
True however some characteristics are woven into work DNA perhaps our intelligence, our strength, or physical attributes… I don't think being rich or poor is in our DNA. I would like to think that whether someone is a socialist or not they would hold to the point that it shouldn't matter if you were born rich or poor in terms of the opportunity that should await your effort and skill.
+Joshua Zito Thing is, there doesn't have to be inequality. There will always be inequality (economic equality) if we choose to accept it. But we are the ones who invented the system that gave us inequality, we have the power to undo it. Sure, if you think doctors should get more than waitresses, some socialist think that's fine and that's how it should be, others do not. Meanwhile, every socialist is aware that a man-made system has made just 62 people as rich as half the world combined. And it doesn't need to be this way. We can and should change it. As to how differs from each type of socialism of course, but the goal remains the same.
I agree that there are certain people who make way too much money than they should. But, really it's a matter that should be taxed by any party because it's ridiculous. Money should be based on job, but not inhumanely accepted at 100 million dollars per year by a person.
***** Exactly, no one in their right mind can justify that someone has "earned" that much money. But taxing away that kind of wealth is considered socialism.
+Erik Le Blanc On a world scale guess where you are in relation to wealth? You are not in the half that the wealthiest 62 are richer than. You are in the other half.
If you make more than 32k a year you are a member of the 1% club.
There is not enough wealth in the world to make everyone equally wealthy. However, you can make everyone equally poor. Why you think that you should get what others have earned is absurd.
Given that we know that you are among the 1%, how much of your current wealth are you willing to donate for us to redistribute?
Well we are moving from a primarily industrial society to a information/computer based society not sure how you own to means of production in that we need new ideologys Although capitalism will still probably be the best
after having these assigned all last school year and suffering through it, I can't believe I'm here voluntarily now
Yup. Coerced learning has its drawbacks. But I'm glad you came back of ur own accord. So thanks for the warm Teacher fuzzy!
Omg, same but it was years ago haha
Very very good video.. Thanks you,,, Very clear and enough information to understand...
Socialism reminds me of this quote... "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"
So capitalism does
ok boomer
"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" JFK
Should be both ways!
This is a great video, needs more views
I just watched all the ideology videos, and can't tell the diff between what he calls an American "Liberal" and a "democratic socialist". They both seemed to be explained in almost the exact same words. Is there a diff in your mind Mr. Hughes?
As a democratic socialist, I believe that capitalism should still exist in a society, but it should be significantly controlled to prevent corporations from forming. I think that all employers should be restricted to employing no more then fifty employees, and if they'd like more they would have to seek written approval from a sort of "city council", or community gathering.
I think health care, education, and public transportation as well as electricity and water should be free to everyone, and that small, yet well built houses and basic food should be given [for free] to all lower class members - only those who NEED it. The houses would, again, be small enough to encourage the lower class member to work to afford a larger house, but big enough to support him and a few others (ie family members). Basic food (such as bread, fruits, and vegetables) should be delivered to him/her and his/her family weekly.
The middle class and upper class would still exist, and they shall receive no free housing or free food from the community, however, can sign a form to receive welfare/financial aid. Taxes would also be much higher on the rich then middle class.
I believe that there should be a community militia to protect the public from foreign invasion, and keep crime low, and there should be a smaller police force who can only carry tazors and have to call a militia patrol in the case of violent outbreak (ie gang shootings).
And lastly, I believe in a very small and democratic government, who are restricted from taking away gun rights and freedom of speech from the people. The government officials should be MIDDLE CLASS ONLY representatives who can only serve a maximum of 6 - 12 months in office.
What do you think?
Daddy Gibby you’re not a socialist, you’re a welfare capitalist
libertarian socialist is what I am and proud
Saaaame
Communism is what makes me proud!
+dinero rey Libertarian Leninist >>>
+dinero rey Libertarian and Socialist contradict, you cant be both you you're either one or the other.
+John Dough libertarian socialism is an ideology it is not contradictory like noam chomsky who is the famous linguist is one and yo can search it up if you want.
Either turn the music and effects that happen randomly through the video DOWN, or talk LOUDER. I don't want to keep adjusting the volume.
What's the name of the song that plays before he defines socialism? It's the jazzy one
You cannot be truly free under socialism.
+Christian D maybe. but u can less be free in capitalism.
Hans Petersen How so?
+Christian D
Being born in a low-income family there's little to no opportunity for you to get out of that poverty. In capitalism you are only truly free if you are rich, but if you are poor you are stuck with the choices you have to make in order to get enough money to live. Yes, capitalism is truly free in theory but in practice most are slaves. This might be hard to understand for someone who comes from one of the western countries. But when the corporations outsource jobs overseas, that is capitalism enslaving people in poverty in other nations.
While in socialism you have things like minimum wage, universal healthcare, free eduecation. What is called positive freedom (right to...). You also have the necessities for true freedom like freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of the press. You'll also have the opportunity to do what you want with your life instead of doing what your economic class dictates you need to do. You could come from a poor family and still have the chance at an education and humane working conditions.
When you say you can't truly be free you're talking about high taxes right? Because there's nothing else that could be attributed to the lack of freedom in socialism. Well when the general income is lowered then so must the prices of products be lowered so that the customers can afford the products, if not the companies wont be able to sell their products. So in that sense you wont be poorer. You'll have less money but you're money will be worth more.
+Erik Le Blanc Being born in a poor family does not decide your future in a Capitalist state. Even the poorest of the poor can become rich with a little bit of hard work. No one ever became rich without donating sweat, blood and tears.
In fact, if the free market has taught us anything, to become rich, you must become poor a few times over and over before meeting success.
In theory and in practice, in Capitalism, you are completely free. You are free to do what you want, you are free to think what you want, you are free to say what you think about. In a Socialist state, you have none of those freedoms and in a Socialist state, you are essentially a slave to the government that shapes your own future. Or did you forget the most notable Socialist country there has ever been? Have you ever been to Russia, or ex-Socialist Republics?
+Doctor Life MD oh there is one very very stupid comment... yes everyone can be rich, but not all. thats hard to get i know. this system is not fair. its about fairness. its not fair if some have billions and some live on the street with nothing to eat. if u think thats good, i would say u have antisocial disorder.
I think, we as a society need to aim and find a balance between capitalism and socialism.
Either extreme is bad and I think the US and many countries on the extreme side of capitalism are as bad as any extreme communist country.
Great video, easy to understand and short.
What is the name of the openingmusic?
What if im pretty much in the middle of that chart?
then you would be a moderate, and perhaps a consequentialist. Someone not tied down to party politics and free to choose which politician you think would be best regardless of their partisanship. A rational human.
Hell no to Socialism
Exactly!!!
Capitalism forever!
+Deadscrin why?
+Odd Mahtte Sara why not?
robots
+Michael vito That's not an argument.
lol 40 hour work week wasn't always so, it took a progressive Teddy Roosevelt to institute it against big business, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are all considered to be socialist programs, the problem that I have with capitalism as it is right now is with the wealth distribution, I just think it should be more fair, when wages have stagnated and stayed the same since the 70s, and CEOs are taking home 25% of the wealth created.....it should change, its about time the rich started paying their fair share....
When they say "control the means of production" can you xplain it more? Does it mean the government controls products, as in food, clothing brands, types of cars etc? Are there brand names or is it all government branded products? Like if we get a candy bar it is a government issued candy bar that is produced by the government and not a private company? And the government would control what things we are allowed to eat or use and what we are not allowed to eat or use?
Excellent once again Keith. I did some learnin on the many kinds of socialism. The five attributes you listed could be part of other ideologies. For example, what distinguishes socialism from the more laissez faire ideologies in No. 3 is, that the “contribution” and the “to each” is judged and distributed by a huge bureaucracy with the ability to force those decisions… as opposed to the “contribution” and the “to each” judged and distributed by spontaneous order which we call the free market.
omg what was that noise when the political compass came up lmfao I relistened to it 5 times.
can u pls explain to me the basic definition on socialism ? still don't really understand it. tried to look it up on wikipedia but they explain the complicated version.
Socialists believe that the government has regulations over businesses, but socially are free.
Example. A Socialist would say that $8 minimum wage is too low, and that abortion should be accepted in certain scenarios. Feel free to ask any more questions.
+YAOES is it a good or bad thing ?
+iman98only It's not either. It's an ideology, an opinion on how government should work. I, personally believe that it is pretty awesome.
+YAOES thanks for the explanation. Now I have a better understanding on Socialism 👍👌
+iman98only I don't think you got such a good explanation on socialism. Socialism doesn't need to have something to do with the government. The core idea of socialism is workers control over the means of productions. This means that the workers should collectively own stuff like factories, machines, tools etc. No single person should own all the capital. Socialism is a economic system which opposes what we have in todays society, capitalism.
keith, I have a very real question for you. Do you still actually believe that these specific catagories apply to most of the public? Or would you agree that now adays, every a few shared views in each political group?
+Iron_MyTie nothing is black and white. So I do believe most people blend them, being pragmatic more than ideological.
As a socialist
I can say they
More
Or
Less
Are the
More simple definitions
If socialist
That logo of yours, you realize it stands for the state starving millions of people right?
Hi, I am from spain and this is the logo of the PSOE, the socialist party in spain right now in the government. Have you got any relationship with spain? I voted several times socialist in 1990s until I changed at 30 years old more or less and since then I vote center-right. Basically I think i am a radical democrat and it is better for us to be with the center-right.
Can you make a video more on social democrats
Your video is good and in-depth thank you
Thx for that test link, however, I didn't enjoy the absence of a "neutral" option, especially when it came to questions, that can be seen in more than a single way
How a social society can motivate people to work, and how it gives value to their talents and new ideas? Also, how it can mange the process of manufacturing and production by just the labor power itself? Are NGO's the solution? Is the money the key point here as well?
Thank you,
I've been really enjoying these videos. I definitely appreciate your balanced approach and I'm digging the use of the political matrix. I look forward to more videos!
One thing, the sound effects in the video seem too loud for the volume of your voice and it's pretty jarring at times.
Thanks for taking the time to make these.
Thanks. I just wanted to make sure you were paying attention. (but I'll lower them in future videos)
Keith Hughes so just to be clear, the Nazi's were in fact socialists and leftists right?
SuperElite27000000
Nazis, "national socialists" were far right fascists. Where your typical socialist is an internationalist, national socialists are very nationalist. Where a typical socialist might want the transfer of societies productive means to the worker, under the Nazis corporatism flourished under the condition that the nation was served first. Many socialists are very anti-war on the grounds that war is very typically fought for reasons that have nothing to do with your average citizen, national socialists are completely willing to fight any possible humiliation and thus typically have strong militaries.
There are many reasons why socialists tend to call national socialists, and all fascism in general, "bourgeois reaction". Most notably: the saving grace of fascism in protecting private property and the place of the superior men as opposed to socialist goals of equality and redistribution of private property.
h3lblad3 you sure? i think fascism is a type of socialism
h3lblad3
You're wrong. Fascism is far left.
1:52 who's michael freedom
I also love that political matrix. I will be sharing that with my history students for sure!
Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64
great information, but the volume on the segues are damaging my speakers and hearing. you don't need that mess. your information is what makes your video awesome.
Pov: This is your 27 day of elearning you were assigned this...
Nope, just curious
Surprised your school teaches you something important
wheres that intro song came from
Great video !
Thank you. Great to have this to instruct grandchildren since schools dont teach it.
What would happen if a Socialist republic was established in the Sahara Desert? Within 3 years it would have to import sand.
There are a lot of misconceptions in this video, but it's better than most videos about socialism.
THANK YOU!
Do you have a video on communism?
Do you mention the hand holding the rose? It seems a latter half of the 20th C. British Labour (Socialist) party trademark. Socialism puts some sort of authority figure in the "Adult" role in Society. What sort of person rises to the top of political constructs?
Can you please learn to use audio levels so my whole class doesn’t go deaf
Was kinda hoping for some mention of the phrase "Worker ownership of the means of production."
what is that beat in the intro I love it
In Germany we make a difference between social democracies, socialism, anarchism and communism.
so I have one question. is the difference between socialism and communism is that they both want equality in the outcome but one gives you the opportunity to make money and the other you don't have a choice?
Sorry, but your attribution is incorrect. The person's name is Michael FREEDEN. Helpful video. Thanks!
His videos make me MORE confused than before
Corruption is the problem in any system.
+reksub Amen. But also corruption only comes when people are in need of help
Odd Mahtte Sara corruption causes people to need help in the 1st place.its a viscous circle.
AMEN BROHTER
I thought this was going to be one of those "hurr durr obama iz socialist" videos that youtube is so plagued with. Nicely done.
I try my best not to make stupid videos. Of course, this exists.... MONSTER breath
Though very broad, this was a really good video for explaining how socialism works.