Total gem. Exposed my ignorance! Loved the background to Marx, the French Revolution and it’s slogan, the commune etc. the misconception of there being one kind of socialism or Marxism. Using Bertolt Brecht to show how we sanitise socialism to fit our own capitalist agenda. The same with Gramsci, an Italian socialist, and his concept of hegemony pervading every aspect of politics , but in a sanitised capitalistic form. Revelations about the successes of Chinese and Russian socialism. Contrasting G7 and BRICS in terms of GDP…..wow! Robison this was an absolute banger! Thanks so much to you and imp Pins Podcat! Totally amped by this discussion. Prof is exceptional .. brilliant theorist and speaker💥
Wolff is fundamentally wrong. He mentions China's wage growth as a qualifier for socialism because of its rate of change in real wages compared to the US. But he overlooks that it coincides with China's economy opening up to the West. He could then argue that the West's higher wages are the result of Marx's ideas realized through Keynesianism, which is true, but he doesn't. Also, China was never really socialist. Being a planned, authoritarian economy doesn't equate to socialism. Per artificial intelligence, Marx proposed revolution only to wrestle power away from the elites, not as an economic model. Had he been alive he would've denounced Maoism in totality. That's what makes Wolff a Lenin apologist whether he knows it or not. He complains about Jordan Peterson, but what JBP has done is successfully politicize psychology. Wolff doesn't have a mind for the political sphere and it would be worthwhile to see him develop one. The intro to his Economics Update channel speaks for itself. He's less interested in connecting with his audience as much as indulging in his proclivities. That's why Krugman after all called him "self-indulgent."
Here's a thought...before believing that you are now less "ignorant" than you were, why not conduct an experiment...take notes of the significant factual points made by Wolff regarding Marx in this video...and then seek to verify them thru at least two other sources that you would cite as "factually objective". ( those that omit the obvious cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias exhibited by Wolff. )
@@margaritaorlova6697 ah yes, the local library system contains all of his work, and the waiting list..oh the waiting list. Meanwhile his "non profit" is truly one...so much so that he can't even get his wife back on youtube.
He's got a way with words! I wanted to add my "2 cents" independant of what you had to say here but this "chat" offers me no way in besides replying to a particular person's comment as I'm doing here so please forgive me for doing so using you as I am. No "Comment" box is available to me in which I'm facillitated in my desire to directly address the podcast itself! This is becoming increasingly common lately as well as is being denied the ability to edit my stuff once I've sent it! I've also been advised that my answers to individuals don't show up in the general chat-line! My take on this is that, as my commentary is often in line with opinions that are getting entire podcasts and channels expunged, demonetized and shadowbanned across the board I, even at my level of being a tiny "irritant" of one lone indivudual voice, may be being censored as well, maybe because the "algorythm" has now been strengthened to the degree that that amount of granular suppression is even possible! Whatever the case may be (and I can't think of a "benign" one!) it's just yet ANOTHER example of a formerly pleasant passtime becoming "problematic" over some control-freaks overzealous attempts to "police" EVERYTHING!
Amen. And the people listening to him have critical thinking therefore they're not narrow minded as the deep state are trying to make all the youth of the world and mainly in the USA.
I'm watching this again, carefully, after having seen it before. It's so rich! It depends where you start from, Wolff says. I started out growing up in a fundamentalist Chritian cult, exited that in the midst of a mass rebellion of minsters and members, and went to college where I ended up becoming a Marxist and Athiest. Before long, out in adult life, I came to see that I was a fundamentalist about Marxism and Athiesm, which was problematic. I embraced looking at the world from a variety of (sometimes aparently contradictory) perspectives, seeing being eclectic as an antidote to the universal human error of dogmatism. Now I endevour to start from seeing holistically: the parts of any system (it's all systems: body, planet, social, mechanical, etc.) are interrelated and must be understood in relation to the Whole. Thus, it is quite refreshing, reinforcing, and illuminating for me, how holistic and non-dogmatic the sense of Marxism that Professor Wolff rolls out here is! When I was taking Marxism as a dogma, I invalidated and rejected the wisdom and insight of all spirituality, psychology, and speculative fiction, for example, because I saw them as not supporting the primary truth about some classes of people having power over others, and the need for that to be overthrown. Feminism and black liberation passed my test, though. Now, I embrace a variety of contradictory approaches to life, the ones that work best for me, very much including the critiques of human decision-making power distributions. Thanks, Robinson, and Rick!
The first one was excellent. Thank you, Richard Erchart, for having Professor Richard Wolff on again. Dr. Fraad is a psychiatrist and Professor Richard Wolff's wife, whom I also admire. What an informative discussion on all these various subjects. What a contribution Professor Richard Wolff is to all of us. Professor Richard Wolff explains Carl Marx with his wisdom and education with philosophy and history, economics with articulation and arguments, and critical analysis. I care respectfully, Dr. Richard Wolff, but learning is seriously important. We grow as human beings. Jordan Peterson is intelligent, I can agree to disagree with him, respectfully. I will not allow him to teach me Nietzche. Professor Richard Wolff is the greatest writer on economics, history, philosophy with relevant information on religions. His PHD's are that he earned it with deep encouragement by the mentors he chose with sizzling fire as all governments of powers have had their own issues. BRAVO 👏 👏
Can you suggest a book to begin to learn about Marxism? I adore these conversations with Richard. He amazes me with his intellect. Gifted man. Thank you for this opportunity to hear him.
I would say cliodynamics is a subset of historical materialism. Or a tool in the methodological framework that is historical materialism. Check our What is Historical Materialism by Alan Woods for further explanation!
First off, I love the podcat. That got auto corrected three times. Cool idea! Cool looking cat. Second, thank you for letting the man speak. One question lasted about an hour. I love it. As always, Richard is spot on. Great explanations. Great descriptions as always. There is another way I Hope more people come to that conclusion. I'm leaving this comment early in the show. I still got a long way to go. I may leave another. Great pod!!!
I used live among the Taiwanese community in LA, the biggest settlement of them outside of Taiwan, upwards of half a million. I’m under the impression that Stanford has close relations to the Taiwanese community in California with Taiwanese teachers and associations. A lot of Taiwanese probably the majority migrated to the US in the late 80s and 90s. At that time it was completely different world. China was still poor and backwards but Taiwan was quite rich being one of the Asian tigers. The jacked up yen from the 1985 Plaza Accord pushed Japanese firms to invest in Asian countries and produced an economic boom for them. Most Taiwanese at that time looked down on their mainland counterparts for being poor. Even worse, the Taiwan political party had always had political problems with the Beijing since the Chinese civil war of the 1930 and 40s. Allen Dulles made Taiwan part of the US Pacific Grand Strategy in 1954, after the Korean War. When the son of Chiang Kai Shek passed away in 1988, the presidency was taken up by pro US Lee who eventually caused a big mess of tension by visiting the US. (Probably not his idea alone) The US sent carriers sailing thru the Taiwan Straight. Thereafter the CIA operation in Taiwan expanded. Sorry for the digress. The majority of today’s Taiwanese in California are second and third generations. They learned from their parents and grandparents old stories of China and on top of that US anti China of the past decade, tunnel vision has become nature. Well I happened to have moved to China for work a long time ago. It’s unbelievable but life in China today is better than most of California and still going. I am quite you have watched enough of Dr. Wolff discussions about the advancement of China thru 40 years. Yesterday heads of 150 countries and 30 international organisations gathered in Beijing for the Third Belt and Road Forum. I’m afraid measuring BRICS against the G7 is no longer appropriate. The rest of the world seems to have consolidated against the “Empire”.
This is one of several errors made by Wolff. Marx never held a university post, for instance. He was relying on Bruno Bauer to get him one but Bauer was kicked out for his views before he could secure it for him. There are several other errors. These are not big issues in themselves but Wolff should know better.
And maybe he would find it ironic that, despite the long history of misperceptions, we can now look to Artificial Intelligence to clarify that Stalin /Maoist policies are fundamentally different from actual Marxism in that Marx was not a proponent of centralized authority. This of course conflicts with the popular consensus, and yet I think it's doubtful that AI has a Marxist bias.
Michael Hudson says that the third volume of Das Capital is the most important--about how in late stage capitalism, the rentier class monopolizes all the land and property, driving up the rents intolerably high, what we are living in right now..
As a follower of Marx and a person who has great respect for Rick, I have to disagree with him on that we can't say some things important. In the sense that they affect us more than other things, like say being poor or having a bad childhood. And why, cus there's actual research backing those things up. So, you can say that the class you're born in is more important than your dreams, in the sense that how much it affects you and society.
I agree. Wolff is distorting the truth a little here. (He is prone to do that when it suits him, unfortunately.) Wolff says that nothing is more important than anything else, because he is an Althusserian and substitutes a theory of overdetermination for that of materialism. Marx's views on philosophical materialism are unclear, but he certainly didn't hold the view that Wolff tries to project onto him.
I like the t-shirt. And your new haircut is nice! I'm looking forward to this discussion. Sometimes I jusl listen, but this time I have to see it, since the pod-cat will make me laugh.
Robinson, if there is a Round 3, I hope you'll ask Professor Wolff (1) which version of Socialism he advocates (he is quite correct that people use words like socialism, capitalism, left, right, liberal, conservative, globalist, nationalist, populist of various flavors in different ways in different times and different places and different contexts), (2) if "socialism" (vs. capitalism) has an effect on the profit incentive and innovation, (3) how a "democratic" business wouldn't result in total chaos (in my experience in the business world, I've been in some unhealthy, uncompetitive situations, and I can't imagine "democracy" among the workers making it anything but far, far worse), and (4) why we shouldn't think of capitalism as "the worst economic system, except for all the others" (borrowing from Churchill's statement about democracy). Thank you for your interview and congratulations on getting such "big names" on your channel.
there is no such thing as versions of "socialism" this is revisionist nonsense, Socialism is a planned economy with the goal of abolishing all commodity production and money, anything else is liberalism disguised as marxism aka revisionism, and should be opposed. Wolff is a revisionist not a marxist, if you want to learn marxism read Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao.
@@boi9842, that's not true. Are planned and unplanned versions of socialism. There are market and non-market versions of socialism. Capitalism is not the only mode of production that utilizes markets for distribution. There are many socialist modes of production that utilize markets for distribution.
Statistically speaking, socialist companies are more Innovative, workers are more productive, more creative, they're happier, they take fewer sick days, there's less incidence of substance abuse, mental disorders, stress-related illnesses, Etc. There's no shortage of data. ▪ The Whitehall study found that workers at the bottom of the social ladder had greater concentrations of stress hormones than their counterparts in higher managerial positions. ▪ In contrast, a survey carried out by The Anxiety Disorder Association of America, in 2006, found that workers were far less stressed and anxious when they had more of a say over their own work. ▪The largest study comparing the productivity of worker co-operatives with that of conventional businesses finds that in several industries, conventional companies would produce more with their current levels of employment and capital if they behaved like employee-owned firms. The main findings from the analysis and review are: • Worker co-operatives are larger than conventional businesses and not necessarily less capital intensive. • Worker co-operatives survive at least as long as other businesses and have more stable employment. • Worker cooperatives are more productive than conventional businesses, with staff working “better and smarter” and production organised more efficiently. • Worker co-operatives retain a larger share of their profits than other business models. • Executive and non-executive pay differentials are much narrower in worker co-operatives than other firms. Let's look at some testimony from an extremely successful multi-billionaire business owner that corroborate some of the above statistics th-cam.com/video/35epDjB_7WE/w-d-xo.html
Why shouldn't capitalism be considered the best economic system compared to all the others? Because capitalism is one of the most wasteful and destructive systems ever devised. It's not conducive to free markets are thriving economies. In fact, it violates many basic economic principles. For example, one of the central goals of Economics is to achieve equilibrium between supply and demand. But the goal of capitalism is to maximize profit. How are profits maximized? By getting workers to produce as much as possible while paying them as little as possible. But that creates a situation where there's more goods and services in circulation than workers can actually afford to buy! Why do you think there's so much debt? The more successful a capitalist company is at maximizing profit, the less purchasing power workers have! You can't have an economic system where production output increases at a faster rate than income. Socialism doesn't have that problem because workers own the product of their labour and thus get the full value of their labour. To use extreme over-simplification, if workers produce billion dollars worth of product, they now have a million dollars worth of purchasing power. If labor-saving technology doubles their production output in the same amount of time, that will also double their purchasing power. However, at a capitals company if labor-saving technology doubles production output, workers income remains the same. One of the reasons why most workers at American car manufacturing plants can actually afford the very cars they are producing.
you have Mao on your profile picture yet you have no problem with Richard Wolff coop 'socialism' revisionist nonsense? Mao would put Wolff in a labor camp for his distortion of marxism, and i would agree with it.
That was a more sophisticated and nuanced talk from Pr. Wolff than most I have listened to. And I say that as a massive detractor and opponent of most of his talks. I have to say, his thinking has become better and less abrasive than years prior, I like it!
In a future discussion, I'd like to hear about visions of a sustainable, free, prosperous socialist future and realistic, non-violent ways we the viewers can help to start our society moving in that direction.
you should start by not listening to Richard Wolff liberalism. Read Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, and then join a maoist party. Also "non violient ways" is idealism, every revolution is violent, no class give up their power peacefully, read about France and others burgeois revolutions.
Prof. Wolff is one of my "hero's". What he shares is on point and high accuracy (articulate and verifiable). That said there are times when I would like to add things that I feel are pertinent. In the hour and seven minute range he is talking about the real wage in China and the U.S.A. and basically says real wages rose about 15% in the U.S. and 400% in China in the same 4 decade period. I can't speak as to what happened to income parity/inequality among classes in China, but in the U.S. I believe that the average increasing by 15% may hide a real life loss for many as basic labor and minimum wage no longer support renting an apartment today and C.E.O.'s went from earning around 20 times the average of people in their employ to something well over a couple hundred times more today. Real wage has to be an average when you are talking about large groups and averages of large groups often hide important issues and problems those groups face internally. (Prof. Wolff does address this one MANY places in his speaking, I just felt it should be added here as well.)
Why C.E.O earn 20 times the average? C. E. O earnings, maximun 9 times the lowest wage earner in the company. Only this can minimize the wage gap between the elites and the working class.
@@ExPwner 4 to 1 is supposedly the average of what? I can't get inside your mind to get the context. I don't believe in (absolute) equality and nothing in my comment suggested any mandate, or any "solution". My comment contained recognition of some conditions and the acknowledgement that there are also relevant conditions which I know that I don't know. As for what never works... trying to rent an apartment, feed and clothe a child or provide well for said child's development at or near minimum wage in the conditions of our current economy. Another thing that doesn't work is pretending there is anything just or moral about allowing any form of exploitation of one class by another whether it is being done by slavery, feudalism or capitalism (the three are basically the same). This COULD BE solved within corporations simply by putting the role of the board of directors into the hands of the hands of labor (or whoever is actively (physically) producing what the organization sells) in the form of direct democracy. One worker, one vote. IF the PURPOSE of economics is to provide better for the participants of the economic system, and that economic system keeps putting more and more of its participants into poverty despite their efforts and/or willingness to contribute... THEN no matter how EFFICIENT the system (ah yes, efficiency, the beloved squirrel of many wishing to distract themselves from more meaningful things) or even how abundantly that system produces, the system is not EFFECTIVE (something I find more meaningful) at fulfilling said PURPOSE.
@@sl-lz3dw 4 to 1 is the average CEO to worker compensation across all firms. Workers aren’t exploited. That’s Marxist nonsense. More people aren’t in poverty, fewer are. Also maybe don’t have a kid if you make in the bottom 1% of earners in the US. That’s your choice. Getting roommates, not living in a high cost of living area are also choices. The victim mentality helps no one. The system is not a failure here.
The Chinese exported rice for profit while their people starved under socialism! This is exactly what the British did in Ireland under capitalism, literally 1000's of tonnes of grains were exported from Ireland during the potato blight as voted for by parliament while the people died on the streets with grass-stained mouths, and then the gall to call it a famine in a country where it is almost geographically impossible to have a famine, leaving Ireland with the only population in Europe that is still to this day smaller than it was 200 years ago.
You are describing a problem with the monetary-market system that includes aspects of authoritarian governments pursuing profits that benefit the few instead of sharing the wealth with the many in a more directly democratic way, which wasn't observed very often in the past and not very much, still today, because we are in a late stage capitalist system in which wealth and resources are concentrated at the top few, while the many struggle to survive, paycheck to paycheck, or worse than that. We need system change that can get us off the monetary-market enslavement system. And if you look at the options for that, it is very technically possible, but it takes courage, it takes vision, it takes cooperation and local support. Like what is happening with One Small Town Contributionism, people are starting to take back their lives, the democratic control over the means of production and a better work/life balance, step by step. Town by town.
When your bureaucratic and governmental structures are in the process of revolutionary reconstruction, opportunism and corruption is allowed to run rampant. Lenin wrote about this and it was also prominent in Soviet Union. Hence Stalin's purges
Robinson I would love to hear you talk to Colin Drumm, he is a kind of post-marxist monetary theorist with profound critiques of large swaths of the western tradition. Really brilliant guy, he also runs a web based school of the humanities. He's got some videos with The New Centre on TH-cam if you want to see what he's about
We are all in this journey together but in a single lane profile; looking out the window of nature 😊, window of bias 😢, window of necessary hypocrisy😪. To survive we have to navigate the above in balance. The odds are against us, for now🙂
Enjoyed this discussion very much. Just one minor point (which doesnt contradict prof wolfs argument), more lives were lost in WWII than WWI, making that the more bloody and brutal conflict.
Come on Prof Wolff China and Russia may consider themselves as socialist societies but Marx definition clearly states they are not, they are not classless or stateless, nor do workers own the means of production. By Marx own definition NO working model outside of Basque has been implemented
There have emerged various top-down implementations of socialism which have not worked all that well. People know about these and use them against the very idea. There have been a myriad of bottom-up implementations which have worked quite well. From the basic marriage and family -- shared property, contribute what you can given your abilities, don't take more than your fair share of treats and indulgences, to the extended family, to the tribe. What has worked is when these families or tribes deal with other families and tribes in a framework of exchanging something which each tribe has something the other wants and so they trade. The problems arise when some families and tribes do not engage in mutually beneficial trade but simply take because they are more powerful and can. A full title search of a property may find the land claimed by right of conquest. Humans are apparently unable to resist the temptation to take because they can. This leads to defense forces. Incidentally, the US military operates following the maxim: 'To each according to his needs; from each according to his abilities -- as long as orders are obeyed..' Voluntary bottom-up socialism works. Top-down socialism (or any other top-down -ism) is doomed to failure as the takers figure out how to corrupt the system so as to take more than their fair share.
The “takers” (all of us) have been created by the corruptive forces of an all encompassing capitalist promoting hoarding and conditioning environment that we live and breathe daily and is constantly reinforced by everything we do.
“Voluntary bottom-up socialism works.” FALSE. There have been hundreds of such attempts recorded by historians in great detail from “New Harmony” in the mid-19th century middle west to Kibbutz in Israel. None of the former and very few of the latter have survived a half-century of time. Instead, successful ones have transmuted into Co-ops, or collectively organised businesses. Religious zealotry goes quiet over the decades.
The anthropology of this is that trading has always been a fraught experience. On current evidence, most anthropologists hold that our ancestral societies resembled those of present day immediate return hunter gatherers. These people do not trade; they share. They operate a system known as demand sharing. If you have something you are not using that I want, I demand it of you and you give it to, no questions asked. And this relation is extended to everyone, not just to those in a hunting band or a language group. (Pure hunter gatherers such as these are not tribal, by the way. Tribal organisation is a relatively recent development emerging in the neolithic period.) Trade/economic exchange by contrast, requires social relations based on property. And taking because you can also requires property relations. That's why property always has to be maintained by force or the threat of force. Property relations only began to emerge about 8,000 years ago in a few parts of the world.
9:53 -Britain had already begun the Industrial Revolution, in Manchester, at the time of the American and then French revolutions. Britain was, in terms of its means/relations of production, further away from Feudalusm than anywhere else, even though much of the symbolism of the old system and its values remained. For the latter point, look at the poetry of Thomas Carlisle and Blake ("dark satanic mills").
Addendum: I'm not a communist but I'm European and I have left-wing ideals, but I was born in the 70s and the "Left" and its basic principles of morals and ethics have changed since the end of the 20th century and the advent of the changes that are happening, namely and especially, with the consequences of the 911 and the development of online social networks that are distorting concepts and are even exacerbating and radicalizing ideas, adulterating history, such as blaming the Soviet Union for the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in addition to trying to exempt Nazism from its hideous role through what we see in Ukraine,so I advise you to educate yourself and research the past to avoid creating the same mistakes in the present with harmful consequences in the future. think about it! GODSPEED ( sorry for my terrible English language but I hope you understand what I mean and try to have critical thinking and don't believe in the MSM news and facts because " facts" are now just "opinions" and "reality-based assertions" are treated like " just comments"( i.e. "cancel Culture" and we are beginning to be brainwashed by propaganda with nefarious consequences to our way of living) Greetings from Portugal and all the best.
Unfortunately, the countries with parliaments (representative democracy) are in fact oligarchies (few lead). In order to be a true democracy, the decisions of the Parliament should be submitted to the approval of the citizens. The "fatigue" of democracy occurs when there is a big difference between the interests of those elected and the voters, so people lose confidence in the way society function. As a result, the poor and desperate citizens will vote with whoever promises them a lifeline, i.e. the populists or demagogues. The democratic aspect is a side effect in societies where economies have a strong competitive aspect, where the interests of those who hold economic power in society are divergent. Thus, those with money, and implicitly with political power in society, are supervising each other so that none of them have undeserved advantages due to politics. Because of this, countries with large mineral resources, like Russia and Venezuela (their share in GDP is large), do not have democratic aspects, because a small group of people can exploit these resources in their own interest. In poor countries, the main resource exploited may even be the state budget, as they have converging interests in benefiting, in their own interest, from this resource. This is what is observed in Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, no matter which party comes to power, the result is the same. The solution is modern direct democracy in which every citizen can vote, whenever he wants, over the head of the parliamentarian who represents him. He can even dismiss him if most of his voters consider that their interests are not right represented. Those who think that democracy is when you choose someone to make decisions for you without him having to consult you, are either a fool or a scoundrel. It's like when you have to choose from several thieves who will steal from you. It's like when you have to build a house and you choose the site manager and the architect, but they don't have the duty to consult with you. The house will certainly not look the way you want it, but the way they want it, and even more surely you will be left without money and without the house. It is strange that outside of the political sphere, you will not find, in any economic or sports activity, someone elected to a leadership position and who has failure after failure and who is fired only after 4 years. We, the voters, must be consulted about the decisions and if they have negative effects we can dismiss them at any time, without to wait until the term to be fulfilled, because we pay, not them. In any company, the management team comes up with a plan approved by the shareholders. Any change in this plan must be re-approved by the shareholders and it is normal because the shareholders pay.
You can't have Democracy with a capitalist class whose class interests are diametrically opposed to the working class. The error of the Social Democracy and the Popular Fronts is the entry into the bourgeois government with a few posts for the Social Democrats that lead to the confusion that the capitalist state can be used by the workers.
@@kimobrien.If you just replace the capitalist oligarchy with the communist one, as happened in the former communist countries, you have done nothing. In fact, you are doing even worse because the communist oligarchy was even worse, because it sought to enter everyone's privacy. In a true democracy, people will be able to peacefully choose which solutions are better, because revolutions, like wars, have the great disadvantage that you never know how it will end. A very good idea is to bring democracy to the workplace and make income transparent for all those who work in a commercial company. But such measures can only be taken within a real democracy, when the majority of the population decides, so don't put the cart before the horse.
Wonderful because clear, nonpartisan and interestingly presented. But ... I must, must, know what breed Cat is! Those ears. And the white blazes from eye to ear interior. And so on. Also, very affectionate and responsive to you. A Cat to match the guest in interest! And thanks to Prof Wolff, as usual.
Yes marx is widespread as a topic of conversation amongst intellectuals...given the outcomes of Marxist ideas in real life history tells us the ideas need to stay hypothetical
Is there anything outside of "Class"? A lot of things are just as important as "class", I love reading Jung: he teaches a lot of things that Marx doesn't. I love Lao Tzu: he teaches a lot of things that I can't learn from Marx... However, if I feel that food/shelter/basic education comes before any other need... How can I say that "class" is equal to any other cultural aspect of my life? Class - in our society - is "my experience" (1) - includes all other parts of life. (1) "My experience" = working with different groups/tribes in capitalist societies.
Of course there are things outside of class. Class for Marx is the way in which people relate to the means of production. It's not that he denies that there's anything outside of this relationship that matters to people, just that it has a kind of analytic primacy if you want to understand how capitalist society functions
I'm a working class socialist, but anyone who describes his own side, but not himself, as the lumpenproletariat, deserves everything history throws at him. Surely he could have coined a better term than that?
There are different views and definitions of lumpenproletariat obviously, it only takes a basic overview of the subject to know that. For instance the insurrectionary Anarchists will define it very different then the Syndicalists, and they both have a very different view of lumpenproletariat.
As a european christian and socialist I can tell you that you actually hear the same dumb argument about christianity a lot - the one where people want to dismiss it out of hand because of some people that comitted violence in the name of christianity (usually the crusades). Yes, massacres and wars exist in all systems - religious, political and economical. We should focus on the militarism and colonianism aspects within capitalism and socialism, instead of blaming the overall system. Remember that Russia have been an empire with east-european and asian colonies three times: The Russian empire - under feaudalism. The USSR - under socialism. The Russian Federation - under capitalism. It is almost as if a colonial militarist mindset can easily survive a change of political and economical system...
I totally agree with Popper's critique of Marxism. I was a Marxist who went Math major. I figured out how to mathematically predict Major Revolutions. Book and TH-cam due out soon.⚒ 2025 +/-1year.
"I figured out how to mathematically predict Major revolutions." 😂 Yeah, ok, when's the next one? 😂 As if societies have so few variables that it is possible to mathematically calculate outbreaks of revolutions 😂
1:08:03 I think this would require more context; you cite percentage increases for real wage, and do not clarify any of the other factors such as current prosperity, contemporary geopolitical, economic, and natural challenges faced by said countries. This also does not explore more qualitative aspects of said society that would impact a viewer's "moral" opinion as to whether or not this would justify a regime worth "living under". This however is highly subject to cultural biases, but again is relevant. Capitalistic productivity is not the only standard by which we consider say the United States a "valid moral country" nor more "socialistic" aspects of European states. None of this invalidates Dr. Wolff's point but there is greater complexity that may make his point stronger.
His argumentation style seems more persuasive than it is factual - not that some things he says are not factual, but half of his answers involve him criticizing his opponents question and integrity instead of addressing the content of a question. Not an impressive intellect from this interview section @@ExPwner
@@thomabow8949yeah that is what lying Marxists do. They attack and insult the person who proves them wrong instead of addressing the argument and data that proves them wrong. Incredulity is their coping mechanism
@@ExPwnerThe idea that Friedman corrected the professor on anything concerning Communism is funny but the idea that a moron like Destiny did is ludicrous.
Marxism..... the Flat Earthers of Economics. Complete lack of falsifiability. Marx also has a misunderstanding of basic mathematical concepts such as large vs infinite.
@YoussefMohamed-wo9mc Marx misunderstood the concept of infinite and a large number. There's scientific errors and then there's misunderstanding of basic mathematical concepts. Marx was more wrong than flat earthers
Among others, Stalin and Mao are presented way out of context; The Russian Revolution was borne out of a the disastrous incompetence of Nicholas II (with whom the West bares a romantic memory) in the face of a devastating invasion by Germany, from this Stalin rose to power with a ruined country all too quickly beset by an even more devastating invasion by Germany through which Stalin beat the odds and held Russia as well as the Union together, we in the West have no concept of what that means, what happened to France and Britain was trivial in comparison but we wag our fingers like we have some sort of intellectual authority about it; Mao led a people’s Revolution between the utter ruin of the Opium Wars and the Kuomintang proxy invasion backed first by Japan and then the US, they literally built a new dynasty from the mud, practically no political framework or allied support, modern China was only made possible by this tremendous effort and sacrifice; After WWII a socialist government was formed in North Korea to replace the fascist government of South Korea formed by the Japanese but was then supported by the US military occupation with the additional support of the so called UN (which was nothing more the US-UK-France alliance) and completely destroyed the North and threatened it with nuclear genocide if the southern peninsula was not conceded to permanent occupation
Yes. You westerners have got no focking clue of what the society was like before Mao and Stalin. Just when the USSR was achieving many great things, World War 2 happened. At the end of WW2, many places in USSR and Eastern Europe didn't even have toilet for the people, as everything got destroyed. The only pragmatic and reasonable thing to build was the so called 'COMMIE BLOCKS'. How could you possibly criticize something that was absolutely necessary at that time, and when no other option was available? And Commie blocks were planned better than even the modern day Apartments. Kindergartens, Middle schools and Grocery stores were at a walking distance, which automatically prevents pollution. Every group of Apartment blocks had huge space between them, had children's parks and many trees. In terms of planning, they were far better than the Apartments in the west. Stalin and Moa to me are two of the greatest leaders of the 20th century.
You should stop studying burgeois economics since it's mostly disinformation, read the 'A Critique of crisis theory' blog to learn how the economy really works, not only he debunks all burgeois economists bur debunks vulgar marxist and keynesian economics as well, and yes, Richard Wolff is a vulgar 'marxist' economist.
@@michaelmappin1830 read the entire blog, it's brilliant and goes through the entire history of capitalism crises, start from "About Me and This Blog" to "The Problem: Marx Didn't Leave Us a Completed Crisis Theory" and keep going, what he debunks is the idea that token money is unrelated to gold today, he shows that like marx said money needs to be a commodity and gold still the commodity money of today capitalism, states can not print token money without cosequences like some MMT and keynesian vulgar economists says and crisis of overproduction is inevitable, if you're interest in this read his "Money as the Universal Equivalent" and "From Money as Universal Equivalent to Money as Currency"
Robinson, Wolff is an Academic Marxist. This means he looks at Marxism as a purely scholarly affair. Please talk with Alan Woods or contact the IMT to talk with revolutionary Marxists, to get a more complete view of Marx's ideas, the most important of which was:The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
Woods would have you believe that Revolutionary Marxism belongs to the IMT and by extension him but he's only trying to make money off of selling books and collecting membership dues. Revolutionary Marxism is a rich tradition that belongs to us all and is not for sale. I might add that as far as changing the world, the IMT has been a remarkably insignificant force in that regard for over 30 years now.
He's a Marxian economist, read his actual texts with Resnick And the irony of slamming a left academic activist talking about Marx who was largely a left academic activist is laughable and akin to right wing fear of acidemia 😂
Professor Wolff stokes my curiosity. He makes me want to read the writings of Karl Marx. I'll see if they have them at the local library. (It'll be interesting to see how the librarian reacts [!], because I'll need her help to find them!)
Any Marxist does. Maybe it is you who needs to read about it? I'll show you how fallacious your logic is. My mother grew up in a capitalist dictatorship where she as woman couldn't vote until 1975, where women were alienated from the concept of private property, divorce was illegal, men could murderous their wives and get away with a slap on the written under crimes of honor laws, where women needed their husband's permission to leave the country or work in some professions, where protesting farmers over slave wages, mistreatment, bad conditions were either murdered in cold blood by police or bombed with Napalm, where misery was widespread, you couldn't speak out against the government, etc... Now I'll go on another logical fallacy of whataboutism and say "what about the Irish Famine, the bengali famine, etc? Logic 101 and history 101. Theory 101
@@brunods4560there is no such thing as a “capitalist dictatorship” because dictatorship is political while capitalism is economics. Also capitalism did not cause the Irish or Bengal Famines.
@@ExPwner well you say that, but historians agree they do exist, and that my mother lived in one. Are you saying there is no socialist dictatorship either then? It is also an economic system. See where I was going with this? Thanks for making my point for me. Saved me time
@@brunods4560 I am talking about facts that the logics you believe do not support. Your mother was unfortunately grew up in a capitalist world and could not vote until 1975, but right now in the 21st century, in the countries likes North Korea and People's Republic of China under the socialist regimes, voting is still totally manipulated and people could not express their political views freely. They have no ways of accessing to Apps like Twitter, Google and Facebook but are given the information totally fabricated by the ruling party. In China, the famine in 1960s took away around 30 million lives and in the follow-up Cultural Revolution, the class struggle adopted by Mao who learned the theory from Maxism led millions of the party members to die, even the Chinese President Liu Shaoqi who ranked second in the Chinese Communist Party died like a rat. Deng Xiaoping gave up the theory of class struggle and adopted the capitalist doctrines when he came back to power in 1978, his strategy of opening up to capitalism turned China to a different practice, his successor Jiang Zemin joined WTO, he promised to create capitalist market mechanism in China and made China to get rich after then. Now Xi Jinping wants to go back to Mao's model but economic development figures are coming down since he took office in 2012.
Add about five minutes into the conversation I’m not positive which side of the argument Mr. Wolf is on. I do have one thought which leads to a question so far I’ve only been able to clearly identify in my mind three big revolutions for counting the French end of those four revolutions, my question is first, Which method of government has killed the most people after it emerged, the power communist China and Stalin us Leninist communist. Russia also comes to mind the French revolution seems to me made its own after a time. In my mind only the American revolution based on the liberty and justice for all produced a new form of government without killing its own people down the line.
Why spread fast because the colonial powers had put humanity in a deadly situation, so liberation is dear to everyone. However, after the success of revolution, Marist government or communist governments usurped power and ruled ruthlessly viciously and in suppression
OK, so let me see if I understand Mr. Wolf‘s statement about Mark‘s being a great inspiration for the great Chinese communist movement. When Marx was running the show for the communists in China, how many million people were killed by that regime? Unless I missed my six grade economics lesson on a certain day, the reason that the communist Chinese have become so much of a light to the world is because the stupid capitalist in the United States decided that they could Bring China into the regular world by giving them lots of manufacturing, so seems to be like that it was capitalism that was communist China’s big success story. And oh by the way, how many million people did the communist party in China kill to be able to run the system. And oh by the way, aren’t Commies run in Venezuela? And how is that working out? They don’t even have toilet paper for Pete sake’s come on Mr. Wolf wake up and smell the coffee.
Socialist and communist experiments in central and south America fail largely due to CIA/US govt interventions to prevent them from being too successful. As for the Chinese, they're not even really communist or even fully socialist for that matter. They're a communist party running a semi-socialist country with a state capitalist economy.
@@XandarionSunrisenope they failed on their own. This whole “Hurr durr it would be utopia except for intervention making it fail” is nothing but pure cope and revisionist nonsense
@@ExPwner Dumba55. It is like a group of thugs beating up a Boxer on his training schedule. And when the Boxer underperforms, somehow it becomes his fault? Great Logic and Reasoning as expected of a Crapitalist.
@@morningstararun6278 it is nothing like that. It is like the socialist side getting into the ring, losing the fight and then saying the game was rigged after he lost
@@ExPwner Did USSR enter the ring? One has to be a real b*tch to say that USSR fighting US, and other 13 Capitalist countries within its borders is deliberately entering the fight. Did Laos invade US or was it vice versa? Did Vietnam invade the US or was it vice versa? Did Libya invade the war or was it vice versa? Did Chile invade USA or was it vice versa? Ok. If this is really your way of thinking. Then what I am about to say should be perfectly alright to you. One day I might come and harass your wife, and blame everything on you. I could even say that you were too cucky to protect your own woman.
1:05:51 thats a problem. Developing country. Humans think they can still do that on their own judgement, assessment, graphs, data, numbers and revolving door. Or closed door.
❤GREAT podcast. Peter Joseph proposed an alternative to capitalism. The Resource Based Economy. Have you done a podcast on the pros and cons of that global economic model?
RBE is economically illiterate nonsense. It’s just repackaging communism to pretend to be intelligent when it really isn’t. It fails to the economic calculation problem.
@@ExPwner , that's your opinion. And we both know that your opinion is not worth much. You don't even know the difference between a worker and a capitalist. I had to explain to you that a teacher is a worker and not a capitalist. I also had to explain to you that in general, labor costs constitute the most significant portion of production expenses, so the greater the amount of labor required, the higher the overall cost tends to be. And then you said that wasn't true because of subjective value. You're not even capable of understanding that labor costs and production expenses relates to the objective aspect of production costs. Subjective value, on the other hand, pertains to the perceived worth or value of a product or service by individuals, which can vary from person to person. I feel sorry for you. I guess you spend most of your time writing comments on TH-cam in order to gain some measure of self-worth.
@@michaelmappin1830 nope that is not my opinion, that is economic fact, just like it is a fact that Wolff is not working class just because he is a teacher dumbass
@@michaelmappin1830 you didn’t explain anything. You spewed a bunch of idiotic economically illiterate nonsense, made up a bunch of claims I never made and still failed to make any argument against what I actually said. You’re not only a pathetic liar but you are also projecting your own idiocy because you are a loser who spends his days spamming Marxist claptrap on the internet for a living.
ITS EASY LIKE FOOD NOT BOMBS-FREE STUFF CHANGE THE WORLD INSTANTLY PROVIDE FREE COMMUNITY, FREE SKILLS, FREE RESCOURCES, FREE THINGS TO DO AND FREE STUFF.
Yeah, Anwar Shaikh is also great. I love the debate he did on a right-wing libertarian TH-cam channel called Emergent Order. He completely exposes the idiocy of right-wing libertarianism, in his usual kind manner.
@@emergenthub305 yeah my instincts tend strongly toward the autonomous libertarian impulse but reality intervened and told me the world doesn't work that way.
@@paigemcloughlin4905 Real libertarianism comes out of the socialist tradition, is anti-capitalist, and is cogent. Right-wing libertarianism is something entirely different, is pro-capitalist, and makes no logical sense. I don't know what being an autonomous libertarian entails, but as long as it's compatible with the libertarianism that comes out of the socialist tradition, you aren't going to encounter the enormous logical gaps one finds with right-wing libertarianism.
I'm so glad you brought him back for another round! Thanks Robinson...
Of course!
Total gem. Exposed my ignorance! Loved the background to Marx, the French Revolution and it’s slogan, the commune etc. the misconception of there being one kind of socialism or Marxism. Using Bertolt Brecht to show how we sanitise socialism to fit our own capitalist agenda. The same with Gramsci, an Italian socialist, and his concept of hegemony pervading every aspect of politics , but in a sanitised capitalistic form. Revelations about the successes of Chinese and Russian socialism. Contrasting G7 and BRICS in terms of GDP…..wow! Robison this was an absolute banger! Thanks so much to you and imp Pins Podcat! Totally amped by this discussion. Prof is exceptional .. brilliant theorist and speaker💥
Wolff is fundamentally wrong. He mentions China's wage growth as a qualifier for socialism because of its rate of change in real wages compared to the US. But he overlooks that it coincides with China's economy opening up to the West. He could then argue that the West's higher wages are the result of Marx's ideas realized through Keynesianism, which is true, but he doesn't. Also, China was never really socialist. Being a planned, authoritarian economy doesn't equate to socialism. Per artificial intelligence, Marx proposed revolution only to wrestle power away from the elites, not as an economic model. Had he been alive he would've denounced Maoism in totality. That's what makes Wolff a Lenin apologist whether he knows it or not. He complains about Jordan Peterson, but what JBP has done is successfully politicize psychology. Wolff doesn't have a mind for the political sphere and it would be worthwhile to see him develop one. The intro to his Economics Update channel speaks for itself. He's less interested in connecting with his audience as much as indulging in his proclivities. That's why Krugman after all called him "self-indulgent."
Here's a thought...before believing that you are now less "ignorant" than you were,
why not conduct an experiment...take notes of the significant factual points made by Wolff
regarding Marx in this video...and then seek to verify them thru at least two other sources
that you would cite as "factually objective". ( those that omit the obvious cognitive dissonance
and confirmation bias exhibited by Wolff. )
@@jgalt308 You're not just ready to accept the meanings of the Prof. But my hopes are with you. 😍
impcat!!!
@@margaritaorlova6697 ah yes, the local library system contains all of his work,
and the waiting list..oh the waiting list.
Meanwhile his "non profit" is truly one...so much so that he can't even
get his wife back on youtube.
An amazing listen, professor Wolff is an absolute legend!
He's got a way with words! I wanted to add my "2 cents" independant of what you had to say here but this "chat" offers me no way in besides replying to a particular person's comment as I'm doing here so please forgive me for doing so using you as I am. No "Comment" box is available to me in which I'm facillitated in my desire to directly address the podcast itself! This is becoming increasingly common lately as well as is being denied the ability to edit my stuff once I've sent it! I've also been advised that my answers to individuals don't show up in the general chat-line! My take on this is that, as my commentary is often in line with opinions that are getting entire podcasts and channels expunged, demonetized and shadowbanned across the board I, even at my level of being a tiny "irritant" of one lone indivudual voice, may be being censored as well, maybe because the "algorythm" has now been strengthened to the degree that that amount of granular suppression is even possible! Whatever the case may be (and I can't think of a "benign" one!) it's just yet ANOTHER example of a formerly pleasant passtime becoming "problematic" over some control-freaks overzealous attempts to "police" EVERYTHING!
absolute madman
@@richardsawicki8521 k kk nñng my ihy buy j
Koxy
Amen. And the people listening to him have critical thinking therefore they're not narrow minded as the deep state are trying to make all the youth of the world and mainly in the USA.
Too bad he's completely economically and historically illiterate.
Great discussion, as it turns every time when Prof. Wolff is able to engage with history and philosophy, and go into depths of questions.
Great to see Dr. Wolff back!
Agreed.
Dr Nazi and the groomer talk about their grievances..
@@m3gAnac0nda Are you understanding anything? Your comment looks exstremly childish. Are you 3 year old?
@@m3gAnac0nda Conspiracy theory? Sounds more like your the NAZI the were BIG on blaming the Jews for everything.
There should be a super thumbs-up button.
I agree.
Prof. is NOT a national treasure... he is an INTERNATIONAL treasure, so vigorous & cogent at 82!!!
I'm watching this again, carefully, after having seen it before. It's so rich!
It depends where you start from, Wolff says. I started out growing up in a fundamentalist Chritian cult, exited that in the midst of a mass rebellion of minsters and members, and went to college where I ended up becoming a Marxist and Athiest. Before long, out in adult life, I came to see that I was a fundamentalist about Marxism and Athiesm, which was problematic.
I embraced looking at the world from a variety of (sometimes aparently contradictory) perspectives, seeing being eclectic as an antidote to the universal human error of dogmatism.
Now I endevour to start from seeing holistically: the parts of any system (it's all systems: body, planet, social, mechanical, etc.) are interrelated and must be understood in relation to the Whole.
Thus, it is quite refreshing, reinforcing, and illuminating for me, how holistic and non-dogmatic the sense of Marxism that Professor Wolff rolls out here is!
When I was taking Marxism as a dogma, I invalidated and rejected the wisdom and insight of all spirituality, psychology, and speculative fiction, for example, because I saw them as not supporting the primary truth about some classes of people having power over others, and the need for that to be overthrown. Feminism and black liberation passed my test, though.
Now, I embrace a variety of contradictory approaches to life, the ones that work best for me, very much including the critiques of human decision-making power distributions.
Thanks, Robinson, and Rick!
I’ve been listening to Professor Wolff since the early 2000s. This is the interview/lecture I have been waiting for!! Ever many thanks 🙏🏼
The first one was excellent. Thank you, Richard Erchart, for having Professor Richard Wolff on again. Dr. Fraad is a psychiatrist and Professor Richard Wolff's wife, whom I also admire.
What an informative discussion on all these various subjects. What a contribution Professor Richard Wolff is to all of us.
Professor Richard Wolff explains Carl Marx with his wisdom and education with philosophy and history, economics with articulation and arguments, and critical analysis.
I care respectfully, Dr. Richard Wolff, but learning is seriously important. We grow as human beings.
Jordan Peterson is intelligent, I can agree to disagree with him, respectfully. I will not allow him to teach me Nietzche.
Professor Richard Wolff is the greatest writer on economics, history, philosophy with relevant information on religions. His PHD's are that he earned it with deep encouragement by the mentors he chose with sizzling fire as all governments of powers have had their own issues.
BRAVO 👏 👏
Someone's last name is really "Fraud"? And they work as a psychiatrist? 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@Vrailly
Ignorance is not acceptable 😊
Misspelling can be corrected.
Did you erase my last comments on the first one? LOL 😊
I was genuinely curious. Fraad makes a lot more sense.@@cheri238
Definitely not!
Love this! Thank you to both of you. Great questions and Professor Wolfe, as always is brilliant!
Can you suggest a book to begin to learn about Marxism?
I adore these conversations with Richard. He amazes me with his intellect. Gifted man. Thank you for this opportunity to hear him.
Wolff wrote a very simple book on Marxism called Understanding Marxism. I have it myself.
Read Marx, Lenin, Engels, etc.
If there is a next chat with Wolff, a question I have would be: Is cliodynamics related to historical materialism and is Wolff knowledgeable about it?
I would say cliodynamics is a subset of historical materialism. Or a tool in the methodological framework that is historical materialism. Check our What is Historical Materialism by Alan Woods for further explanation!
@@Zayden.Marxist Thanks!
1:39:45 - Shades of Harold Bloom in "How to Read and Why"
Excellent conversation, thank you
First off, I love the podcat. That got auto corrected three times. Cool idea! Cool looking cat. Second, thank you for letting the man speak. One question lasted about an hour. I love it. As always, Richard is spot on. Great explanations. Great descriptions as always. There is another way I Hope more people come to that conclusion. I'm leaving this comment early in the show. I still got a long way to go. I may leave another. Great pod!!!
great talk i love the way you enthuse your talks i try to listen to all prof walffs talks thankyou
Tdahbs!!
Thanks for sharing Richard & your cat with us.
Thanks for watching!
Thank you🙏Mr. Richard Wolff for educating and clarifying the issues.
Can’t wait for a deep dive into this and the last episode …. Asap. Love the shirt, Robinson and Pins pod 🐈
Knowing what not to do is very important to those smart enough to learn from others mistakes
Listening to professor Wolff is a history lesson, please bring back Mr Wolff and discuss the economy of America and the rest of the world, thank you
Wolff gets history wrong constantly. Just like how wrong he is on economics
I used live among the Taiwanese community in LA, the biggest settlement of them outside of Taiwan, upwards of half a million. I’m under the impression that Stanford has close relations to the Taiwanese community in California with Taiwanese teachers and associations. A lot of Taiwanese probably the majority migrated to the US in the late 80s and 90s. At that time it was completely different world. China was still poor and backwards but Taiwan was quite rich being one of the Asian tigers. The jacked up yen from the 1985 Plaza Accord pushed Japanese firms to invest in Asian countries and produced an economic boom for them. Most Taiwanese at that time looked down on their mainland counterparts for being poor. Even worse, the Taiwan political party had always had political problems with the Beijing since the Chinese civil war of the 1930 and 40s. Allen Dulles made Taiwan part of the US Pacific Grand Strategy in 1954, after the Korean War. When the son of Chiang Kai Shek passed away in 1988, the presidency was taken up by pro US Lee who eventually caused a big mess of tension by visiting the US. (Probably not his idea alone) The US sent carriers sailing thru the Taiwan Straight. Thereafter the CIA operation in Taiwan expanded.
Sorry for the digress. The majority of today’s Taiwanese in California are second and third generations. They learned from their parents and grandparents old stories of China and on top of that US anti China of the past decade, tunnel vision has become nature. Well I happened to have moved to China for work a long time ago. It’s unbelievable but life in China today is better than most of California and still going. I am quite you have watched enough of Dr. Wolff discussions about the advancement of China thru 40 years. Yesterday heads of 150 countries and 30 international organisations gathered in Beijing for the Third Belt and Road Forum. I’m afraid measuring BRICS against the G7 is no longer appropriate. The rest of the world seems to have consolidated against the “Empire”.
Cleaning up a drawer is easy and fast. To fix a broken house and clean it is hard and takes a long time.
10:46 Marx's doctoral subject was on Epicurean philosophy, not on Epictetus.
This is one of several errors made by Wolff. Marx never held a university post, for instance. He was relying on Bruno Bauer to get him one but Bauer was kicked out for his views before he could secure it for him. There are several other errors. These are not big issues in themselves but Wolff should know better.
It's a theoretical perspective I have come to accept as more realistic and reasonable unified approach for understanding civilization!
Great talk again! Especially the part about Karl Popper's criticism and Wolff's response to it.
Thanks!!
you're doing a fantastic job Mother Goose. Great talk.
ty my geeseling!
Happy to be in the gaggle!!
Marx once exclaimed “I am not a Marxist!” And of Jesus had survived, he would have similarly exclaimed “I am not a Christian!” 😂
And maybe he would find it ironic that, despite the long history of misperceptions, we can now look to Artificial Intelligence to clarify that Stalin /Maoist policies are fundamentally different from actual Marxism in that Marx was not a proponent of centralized authority. This of course conflicts with the popular consensus, and yet I think it's doubtful that AI has a Marxist bias.
He was a free thinker. It was daid at the begining.
@shevashevasheva777 Actually he said, "If he is a Marxist I am not."
He never said that
@@MsMattmatt24 Coming from someone pretending to be an Indian Chief that is really rich.
Michael Hudson says that the third volume of Das Capital is the most important--about how in late stage capitalism, the rentier class monopolizes all the land and property, driving up the rents intolerably high, what we are living in right now..
"You're a genius." Thank you
As a follower of Marx and a person who has great respect for Rick, I have to disagree with him on that we can't say some things important. In the sense that they affect us more than other things, like say being poor or having a bad childhood. And why, cus there's actual research backing those things up. So, you can say that the class you're born in is more important than your dreams, in the sense that how much it affects you and society.
I agree. Wolff is distorting the truth a little here. (He is prone to do that when it suits him, unfortunately.) Wolff says that nothing is more important than anything else, because he is an Althusserian and substitutes a theory of overdetermination for that of materialism. Marx's views on philosophical materialism are unclear, but he certainly didn't hold the view that Wolff tries to project onto him.
Robinson, thank you for hosting Professor Wolff.
RDW is a mesmerizing speaker.
he's great
I envy your conversational interlocutor & your cat. I suppose I will subscribe to see if I can learn how you achieved so much.
Yeah, we’re only at 12:18… Dr. Wolff has so much to teach us! He is the reason why I am looking at this channel.
Teach you a bunch of lies and nonsense
Thanks for sharing this
Outstanding! Thank-you!
Very welcome!
Can you get Dr Wolff and Prof Kotkin together?
Kotkin is a filthy racist right wing bigot.
58:48 1:25:20 Jordon Peterson critiques start here.
Thank you,prof.Wolff.God blessed you lived healthy and longevity.Because you deliver truth and quality lectured as always.
Truth? The dude lies constantly.
I like the t-shirt. And your new haircut is nice! I'm looking forward to this discussion. Sometimes I jusl listen, but this time I have to see it, since the pod-cat will make me laugh.
Hahahah thank you!
Robinson, if there is a Round 3, I hope you'll ask Professor Wolff (1) which version of Socialism he advocates (he is quite correct that people use words like socialism, capitalism, left, right, liberal, conservative, globalist, nationalist, populist of various flavors in different ways in different times and different places and different contexts), (2) if "socialism" (vs. capitalism) has an effect on the profit incentive and innovation, (3) how a "democratic" business wouldn't result in total chaos (in my experience in the business world, I've been in some unhealthy, uncompetitive situations, and I can't imagine "democracy" among the workers making it anything but far, far worse), and (4) why we shouldn't think of capitalism as "the worst economic system, except for all the others" (borrowing from Churchill's statement about democracy).
Thank you for your interview and congratulations on getting such "big names" on your channel.
there is no such thing as versions of "socialism" this is revisionist nonsense, Socialism is a planned economy with the goal of abolishing all commodity production and money, anything else is liberalism disguised as marxism aka revisionism, and should be opposed. Wolff is a revisionist not a marxist, if you want to learn marxism read Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao.
@@boi9842, that's not true. Are planned and unplanned versions of socialism. There are market and non-market versions of socialism.
Capitalism is not the only mode of production that utilizes markets for distribution. There are many socialist modes of production that utilize markets for distribution.
Statistically speaking, socialist companies are more Innovative, workers are more productive, more creative, they're happier, they take fewer sick days, there's less incidence of substance abuse, mental disorders, stress-related illnesses, Etc.
There's no shortage of data.
▪ The Whitehall study found that workers at the bottom of the social ladder had greater concentrations of stress hormones than their counterparts in higher managerial positions.
▪ In contrast, a survey carried out by The Anxiety Disorder Association of America, in 2006, found that workers were far less stressed and anxious when they had more of a say over their own work.
▪The largest study comparing the productivity of worker co-operatives with that of conventional businesses finds that in several industries, conventional companies would produce more with their current levels of employment and capital if they behaved like employee-owned firms.
The main findings from the analysis and review are:
• Worker co-operatives are larger than conventional businesses and not necessarily less capital intensive.
• Worker co-operatives survive at least as long as other businesses and have more stable employment.
• Worker cooperatives are more productive than conventional businesses, with staff working “better and smarter” and production organised more efficiently.
• Worker co-operatives retain a larger share of their profits than other business models.
• Executive and non-executive pay differentials are much narrower in worker co-operatives than other firms.
Let's look at some testimony from an extremely successful multi-billionaire business owner that corroborate some of the above statistics
th-cam.com/video/35epDjB_7WE/w-d-xo.html
Why shouldn't capitalism be considered the best economic system compared to all the others? Because capitalism is one of the most wasteful and destructive systems ever devised. It's not conducive to free markets are thriving economies. In fact, it violates many basic economic principles. For example, one of the central goals of Economics is to achieve equilibrium between supply and demand. But the goal of capitalism is to maximize profit. How are profits maximized? By getting workers to produce as much as possible while paying them as little as possible. But that creates a situation where there's more goods and services in circulation than workers can actually afford to buy! Why do you think there's so much debt? The more successful a capitalist company is at maximizing profit, the less purchasing power workers have!
You can't have an economic system where production output increases at a faster rate than income.
Socialism doesn't have that problem because workers own the product of their labour and thus get the full value of their labour. To use extreme over-simplification, if workers produce billion dollars worth of product, they now have a million dollars worth of purchasing power. If labor-saving technology doubles their production output in the same amount of time, that will also double their purchasing power. However, at a capitals company if labor-saving technology doubles production output, workers income remains the same. One of the reasons why most workers at American car manufacturing plants can actually afford the very cars they are producing.
@@michaelmappin1830 market socialism only exist in wikipedia pages, socialism is anti commodity production, just say you want keynesianism instead.
Thumbs up for your guest. Subscribed for pod cat.
you have Mao on your profile picture yet you have no problem with Richard Wolff coop 'socialism' revisionist nonsense? Mao would put Wolff in a labor camp for his distortion of marxism, and i would agree with it.
Thanks!
That was a more sophisticated and nuanced talk from Pr. Wolff than most I have listened to. And I say that as a massive detractor and opponent of most of his talks.
I have to say, his thinking has become better and less abrasive than years prior, I like it!
Thank you. I learned so much.
I'm so glad!
In a future discussion, I'd like to hear about visions of a sustainable, free, prosperous socialist future and realistic, non-violent ways we the viewers can help to start our society moving in that direction.
you should start by not listening to Richard Wolff liberalism. Read Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, and then join a maoist party. Also "non violient ways" is idealism, every revolution is violent, no class give up their power peacefully, read about France and others burgeois revolutions.
@@boi9842 Troll alert.
@@FirstRisingSouI LOL. most blatant pice of Maoist propaganda I've seen for a while.
Omg love the Pod Cat! 😻😻😻
I miss my kitties 🐈⬛
What kind of cat is that? 🤷♀️
Great tshirt! Well done 👍
Excellent presentation. Thank you.
Thanks!!
Prof. Wolff is one of my "hero's". What he shares is on point and high accuracy (articulate and verifiable). That said there are times when I would like to add things that I feel are pertinent. In the hour and seven minute range he is talking about the real wage in China and the U.S.A. and basically says real wages rose about 15% in the U.S. and 400% in China in the same 4 decade period. I can't speak as to what happened to income parity/inequality among classes in China, but in the U.S. I believe that the average increasing by 15% may hide a real life loss for many as basic labor and minimum wage no longer support renting an apartment today and C.E.O.'s went from earning around 20 times the average of people in their employ to something well over a couple hundred times more today.
Real wage has to be an average when you are talking about large groups and averages of large groups often hide important issues and problems those groups face internally. (Prof. Wolff does address this one MANY places in his speaking, I just felt it should be added here as well.)
Nope Wolff is a liar and his claims on real wages are wrong as are yours on pay disparities and wage increases.
Why C.E.O earn 20 times the average?
C. E. O earnings, maximun 9 times the lowest wage earner in the company.
Only this can minimize the wage gap between the elites and the working class.
@@pariahyindie3641the average is already around 4 to 1 but trying to mandate equality never works.
@@ExPwner 4 to 1 is supposedly the average of what? I can't get inside your mind to get the context.
I don't believe in (absolute) equality and nothing in my comment suggested any mandate, or any "solution". My comment contained recognition of some conditions and the acknowledgement that there are also relevant conditions which I know that I don't know.
As for what never works... trying to rent an apartment, feed and clothe a child or provide well for said child's development at or near minimum wage in the conditions of our current economy. Another thing that doesn't work is pretending there is anything just or moral about allowing any form of exploitation of one class by another whether it is being done by slavery, feudalism or capitalism (the three are basically the same). This COULD BE solved within corporations simply by putting the role of the board of directors into the hands of the hands of labor (or whoever is actively (physically) producing what the organization sells) in the form of direct democracy. One worker, one vote.
IF the PURPOSE of economics is to provide better for the participants of the economic system, and that economic system keeps putting more and more of its participants into poverty despite their efforts and/or willingness to contribute... THEN no matter how EFFICIENT the system (ah yes, efficiency, the beloved squirrel of many wishing to distract themselves from more meaningful things) or even how abundantly that system produces, the system is not EFFECTIVE (something I find more meaningful) at fulfilling said PURPOSE.
@@sl-lz3dw 4 to 1 is the average CEO to worker compensation across all firms.
Workers aren’t exploited. That’s Marxist nonsense.
More people aren’t in poverty, fewer are. Also maybe don’t have a kid if you make in the bottom 1% of earners in the US. That’s your choice. Getting roommates, not living in a high cost of living area are also choices. The victim mentality helps no one. The system is not a failure here.
Thank you Robinson.
Impeccable. From an 'objective / realistic conservative'.
The Chinese exported rice for profit while their people starved under socialism! This is exactly what the British did in Ireland under capitalism, literally 1000's of tonnes of grains were exported from Ireland during the potato blight as voted for by parliament while the people died on the streets with grass-stained mouths, and then the gall to call it a famine in a country where it is almost geographically impossible to have a famine, leaving Ireland with the only population in Europe that is still to this day smaller than it was 200 years ago.
You are describing a problem with the monetary-market system that includes aspects of authoritarian governments pursuing profits that benefit the few instead of sharing the wealth with the many in a more directly democratic way, which wasn't observed very often in the past and not very much, still today, because we are in a late stage capitalist system in which wealth and resources are concentrated at the top few, while the many struggle to survive, paycheck to paycheck, or worse than that.
We need system change that can get us off the monetary-market enslavement system. And if you look at the options for that, it is very technically possible, but it takes courage, it takes vision, it takes cooperation and local support. Like what is happening with One Small Town Contributionism, people are starting to take back their lives, the democratic control over the means of production and a better work/life balance, step by step. Town by town.
You are a capitalism liar.
When your bureaucratic and governmental structures are in the process of revolutionary reconstruction, opportunism and corruption is allowed to run rampant. Lenin wrote about this and it was also prominent in Soviet Union. Hence Stalin's purges
Robinson I would love to hear you talk to Colin Drumm, he is a kind of post-marxist monetary theorist with profound critiques of large swaths of the western tradition. Really brilliant guy, he also runs a web based school of the humanities. He's got some videos with The New Centre on TH-cam if you want to see what he's about
We are all in this journey together but in a single lane profile; looking out the window of nature 😊, window of bias 😢, window of necessary hypocrisy😪. To survive we have to navigate the above in balance. The odds are against us, for now🙂
Awesome guest!
Thanks!
Enjoyed this discussion very much. Just one minor point (which doesnt contradict prof wolfs argument), more lives were lost in WWII than WWI, making that the more bloody and brutal conflict.
But WW1 was stupid. People died for nothing.
@@vivalaletathey died for capitalist empire in both world wars.
@@Glumclam But WW2 was about stopping a genocide and a fascist who wanted to rule the world... wasn't it?
wolff is amazing! and presenter so handsome it is actually distracting
the presenter is pleased to hear this
Come on Prof Wolff China and Russia may consider themselves as socialist societies but Marx definition clearly states they are not, they are not classless or stateless, nor do workers own the means of production. By Marx own definition NO working model outside of Basque has been implemented
Loved this! Thsnk you!
LOVE THE PROF
Word to the wise: play on 1.5x speed, at least.
There have emerged various top-down implementations of socialism which have not worked all that well. People know about these and use them against the very idea.
There have been a myriad of bottom-up implementations which have worked quite well. From the basic marriage and family -- shared property, contribute what you can given your abilities, don't take more than your fair share of treats and indulgences, to the extended family, to the tribe.
What has worked is when these families or tribes deal with other families and tribes in a framework of exchanging something which each tribe has something the other wants and so they trade. The problems arise when some families and tribes do not engage in mutually beneficial trade but simply take because they are more powerful and can.
A full title search of a property may find the land claimed by right of conquest. Humans are apparently unable to resist the temptation to take because they can. This leads to defense forces. Incidentally, the US military operates following the maxim: 'To each according to his needs; from each according to his abilities -- as long as orders are obeyed..'
Voluntary bottom-up socialism works. Top-down socialism (or any other top-down -ism) is doomed to failure as the takers figure out how to corrupt the system so as to take more than their fair share.
Great synthesis of the fact that nobody likes to be forced into something against his/he rwill.
The “takers” (all of us) have been created by the corruptive forces of an all encompassing capitalist promoting hoarding and conditioning environment that we live and breathe daily and is constantly reinforced by everything we do.
“Voluntary bottom-up socialism works.” FALSE. There have been hundreds of such attempts recorded by historians in great detail from “New Harmony” in the mid-19th century middle west to Kibbutz in Israel. None of the former and very few of the latter have survived a half-century of time. Instead, successful ones have transmuted into Co-ops, or collectively organised businesses. Religious zealotry goes quiet over the decades.
The anthropology of this is that trading has always been a fraught experience. On current evidence, most anthropologists hold that our ancestral societies resembled those of present day immediate return hunter gatherers. These people do not trade; they share. They operate a system known as demand sharing. If you have something you are not using that I want, I demand it of you and you give it to, no questions asked. And this relation is extended to everyone, not just to those in a hunting band or a language group. (Pure hunter gatherers such as these are not tribal, by the way. Tribal organisation is a relatively recent development emerging in the neolithic period.) Trade/economic exchange by contrast, requires social relations based on property. And taking because you can also requires property relations. That's why property always has to be maintained by force or the threat of force. Property relations only began to emerge about 8,000 years ago in a few parts of the world.
Another ACE
9:53 -Britain had already begun the Industrial Revolution, in Manchester, at the time of the American and then French revolutions. Britain was, in terms of its means/relations of production, further away from Feudalusm than anywhere else, even though much of the symbolism of the old system and its values remained. For the latter point, look at the poetry of Thomas Carlisle and Blake ("dark satanic mills").
Prof. Wolff is The Ultimate Teacher!
#LongHealthyLifetoProfWolff
He is a lying buffoon. You’re only being indoctrinated
Can I just mention the crazy adds that interrupt this broadcast! Right as an important point is being made! Seriously!
good work
Addendum: I'm not a communist but I'm European and I have left-wing ideals, but I was born in the 70s and the "Left" and its basic principles of morals and ethics have changed since the end of the 20th century and the advent of the changes that are happening, namely and especially, with the consequences of the 911 and the development of online social networks that are distorting concepts and are even exacerbating and radicalizing ideas, adulterating history, such as blaming the Soviet Union for the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in addition to trying to exempt Nazism from its hideous role through what we see in Ukraine,so I advise you to educate yourself and research the past to avoid creating the same mistakes in the present with harmful consequences in the future. think about it! GODSPEED
( sorry for my terrible English language but I hope you understand what I mean and try to have critical thinking and don't believe in the MSM news and facts because " facts" are now just "opinions" and "reality-based assertions" are treated like " just comments"( i.e. "cancel Culture" and we are beginning to be brainwashed by propaganda with nefarious consequences to our way of living)
Greetings from Portugal and all the best.
Inteligentissimo e muito pteparado !
Obrigada!
what a good cat
Unfortunately, the countries with parliaments (representative democracy) are in fact oligarchies (few lead). In order to be a true democracy, the decisions of the Parliament should be submitted to the approval of the citizens. The "fatigue" of democracy occurs when there is a big difference between the interests of those elected and the voters, so people lose confidence in the way society function. As a result, the poor and desperate citizens will vote with whoever promises them a lifeline, i.e. the populists or demagogues. The democratic aspect is a side effect in societies where economies have a strong competitive aspect, where the interests of those who hold economic power in society are divergent. Thus, those with money, and implicitly with political power in society, are supervising each other so that none of them have undeserved advantages due to politics. Because of this, countries with large mineral resources, like Russia and Venezuela (their share in GDP is large), do not have democratic aspects, because a small group of people can exploit these resources in their own interest. In poor countries, the main resource exploited may even be the state budget, as they have converging interests in benefiting, in their own interest, from this resource. This is what is observed in Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, no matter which party comes to power, the result is the same. The solution is modern direct democracy in which every citizen can vote, whenever he wants, over the head of the parliamentarian who represents him. He can even dismiss him if most of his voters consider that their interests are not right represented.
Those who think that democracy is when you choose someone to make decisions for you without him having to consult you, are either a fool or a scoundrel. It's like when you have to choose from several thieves who will steal from you. It's like when you have to build a house and you choose the site manager and the architect, but they don't have the duty to consult with you. The house will certainly not look the way you want it, but the way they want it, and even more surely you will be left without money and without the house. It is strange that outside of the political sphere, you will not find, in any economic or sports activity, someone elected to a leadership position and who has failure after failure and who is fired only after 4 years. We, the voters, must be consulted about the decisions and if they have negative effects we can dismiss them at any time, without to wait until the term to be fulfilled, because we pay, not them. In any company, the management team comes up with a plan approved by the shareholders. Any change in this plan must be re-approved by the shareholders and it is normal because the shareholders pay.
You can't have Democracy with a capitalist class whose class interests are diametrically opposed to the working class. The error of the Social Democracy and the Popular Fronts is the entry into the bourgeois government with a few posts for the Social Democrats that lead to the confusion that the capitalist state can be used by the workers.
@@kimobrien.If you just replace the capitalist oligarchy with the communist one, as happened in the former communist countries, you have done nothing. In fact, you are doing even worse because the communist oligarchy was even worse, because it sought to enter everyone's privacy. In a true democracy, people will be able to peacefully choose which solutions are better, because revolutions, like wars, have the great disadvantage that you never know how it will end. A very good idea is to bring democracy to the workplace and make income transparent for all those who work in a commercial company. But such measures can only be taken within a real democracy, when the majority of the population decides, so don't put the cart before the horse.
Agreed 100% .
Wonderful because clear, nonpartisan and interestingly presented. But ... I must, must, know what breed Cat is! Those ears. And the white blazes from eye to ear interior. And so on. Also, very affectionate and responsive to you. A Cat to match the guest in interest! And thanks to Prof Wolff, as usual.
Yes marx is widespread as a topic of conversation amongst intellectuals...given the outcomes of Marxist ideas in real life history tells us the ideas need to stay hypothetical
No country actually handed the power over to the people which is at the very heart of Marxism. All they achieved was Statism and/or Dictatorship.
Is there anything outside of "Class"?
A lot of things are just as important as "class", I love reading Jung: he teaches a lot of things that Marx doesn't. I love Lao Tzu: he teaches a lot of things that I can't learn from Marx... However, if I feel that food/shelter/basic education comes before any other need... How can I say that "class" is equal to any other cultural aspect of my life?
Class - in our society - is "my experience" (1) - includes all other parts of life.
(1) "My experience" = working with different groups/tribes in capitalist societies.
Of course there are things outside of class. Class for Marx is the way in which people relate to the means of production. It's not that he denies that there's anything outside of this relationship that matters to people, just that it has a kind of analytic primacy if you want to understand how capitalist society functions
so many ads
I'm a working class socialist, but anyone who describes his own side, but not himself, as the lumpenproletariat, deserves everything history throws at him. Surely he could have coined a better term than that?
The problem with the lumpen is they often resort to petti crimes against other proletarians when they lose a job.
There are different views and definitions of lumpenproletariat obviously, it only takes a basic overview of the subject to know that. For instance the insurrectionary Anarchists will define it very different then the Syndicalists, and they both have a very different view of lumpenproletariat.
@@kimobrien.
You're generalizing to the point of creating an imaginary sub class in your head.
As a european christian and socialist I can tell you that you actually hear the same dumb argument about christianity a lot - the one where people want to dismiss it out of hand because of some people that comitted violence in the name of christianity (usually the crusades).
Yes, massacres and wars exist in all systems - religious, political and economical.
We should focus on the militarism and colonianism aspects within capitalism and socialism, instead of blaming the overall system.
Remember that Russia have been an empire with east-european and asian colonies three times:
The Russian empire - under feaudalism.
The USSR - under socialism.
The Russian Federation - under capitalism.
It is almost as if a colonial militarist mindset can easily survive a change of political and economical system...
you should bring on Chris Cutrone. He is, after all, the last Marxist.
Not really we need those who are willing to bring the ideas of Marxism to the working class not more Professors talking about Marxism.
I totally agree with Popper's critique of Marxism. I was a Marxist who went Math major. I figured out how to mathematically predict Major Revolutions. Book and TH-cam due out soon.⚒ 2025 +/-1year.
Popper's characterization of science in the aspect of Marx's critique has been abandoned by philosophy of science as non sequitur or true.
"I figured out how to mathematically predict Major revolutions."
😂 Yeah, ok, when's the next one? 😂
As if societies have so few variables that it is possible to mathematically calculate outbreaks of revolutions 😂
1:08:03 I think this would require more context; you cite percentage increases for real wage, and do not clarify any of the other factors such as current prosperity, contemporary geopolitical, economic, and natural challenges faced by said countries. This also does not explore more qualitative aspects of said society that would impact a viewer's "moral" opinion as to whether or not this would justify a regime worth "living under". This however is highly subject to cultural biases, but again is relevant. Capitalistic productivity is not the only standard by which we consider say the United States a "valid moral country" nor more "socialistic" aspects of European states. None of this invalidates Dr. Wolff's point but there is greater complexity that may make his point stronger.
He is also lying. The USSR did not have the highest growth and he was corrected on this by David Friedman and again months later by Destiny.
His argumentation style seems more persuasive than it is factual - not that some things he says are not factual, but half of his answers involve him criticizing his opponents question and integrity instead of addressing the content of a question. Not an impressive intellect from this interview section @@ExPwner
@@thomabow8949yeah that is what lying Marxists do. They attack and insult the person who proves them wrong instead of addressing the argument and data that proves them wrong. Incredulity is their coping mechanism
@@ExPwnerThe idea that Friedman corrected the professor on anything concerning Communism is funny but the idea that a moron like Destiny did is ludicrous.
I think we start with our senses. Our perception underlies all the conclusions we come to.
Even then, your ma has got to feed, clothe and house you before you can use them.
Marxism..... the Flat Earthers of Economics. Complete lack of falsifiability. Marx also has a misunderstanding of basic mathematical concepts such as large vs infinite.
Bingo
You can disagree with Marx as you want, but comparing him to flat earthers is so dishonest.
@YoussefMohamed-wo9mc Marx misunderstood the concept of infinite and a large number. There's scientific errors and then there's misunderstanding of basic mathematical concepts. Marx was more wrong than flat earthers
@@YoussefMohamed-wo9mcit is not at all dishonest because Marxism is anti scientific and denies logic and evidence to push its own garbage ideology
@@ExPwneryou have to deny evidence and logic in order to ignore many of Marx's fundamental points.
Among others, Stalin and Mao are presented way out of context;
The Russian Revolution was borne out of a the disastrous incompetence of Nicholas II (with whom the West bares a romantic memory) in the face of a devastating invasion by Germany, from this Stalin rose to power with a ruined country all too quickly beset by an even more devastating invasion by Germany through which Stalin beat the odds and held Russia as well as the Union together, we in the West have no concept of what that means, what happened to France and Britain was trivial in comparison but we wag our fingers like we have some sort of intellectual authority about it;
Mao led a people’s Revolution between the utter ruin of the Opium Wars and the Kuomintang proxy invasion backed first by Japan and then the US, they literally built a new dynasty from the mud, practically no political framework or allied support, modern China was only made possible by this tremendous effort and sacrifice;
After WWII a socialist government was formed in North Korea to replace the fascist government of South Korea formed by the Japanese but was then supported by the US military occupation with the additional support of the so called UN (which was nothing more the US-UK-France alliance) and completely destroyed the North and threatened it with nuclear genocide if the southern peninsula was not conceded to permanent occupation
We carry no memory at all of South Koreans fleeing North after the war and the monumental effort of the Soviets rebuilding it
Yes. You westerners have got no focking clue of what the society was like before Mao and Stalin. Just when the USSR was achieving many great things, World War 2 happened. At the end of WW2, many places in USSR and Eastern Europe didn't even have toilet for the people, as everything got destroyed. The only pragmatic and reasonable thing to build was the so called 'COMMIE BLOCKS'. How could you possibly criticize something that was absolutely necessary at that time, and when no other option was available? And Commie blocks were planned better than even the modern day Apartments. Kindergartens, Middle schools and Grocery stores were at a walking distance, which automatically prevents pollution. Every group of Apartment blocks had huge space between them, had children's parks and many trees. In terms of planning, they were far better than the Apartments in the west.
Stalin and Moa to me are two of the greatest leaders of the 20th century.
Lovely cat
i used to listen to richard wolff. before i started studying economics. 😂😂😂😂
Dr Nazi
You should stop studying burgeois economics since it's mostly disinformation, read the 'A Critique of crisis theory' blog to learn how the economy really works, not only he debunks all burgeois economists bur debunks vulgar marxist and keynesian economics as well, and yes, Richard Wolff is a vulgar 'marxist' economist.
@@boi9842, are you referring to
The Political Crisis of U.S. Capitalism - A Critique of Crisis Theory?
@@michaelmappin1830 read the entire blog, it's brilliant and goes through the entire history of capitalism crises, start from "About Me and This Blog" to "The Problem: Marx Didn't Leave Us a Completed Crisis Theory" and keep going, what he debunks is the idea that token money is unrelated to gold today, he shows that like marx said money needs to be a commodity and gold still the commodity money of today capitalism, states can not print token money without cosequences like some MMT and keynesian vulgar economists says and crisis of overproduction is inevitable, if you're interest in this read his "Money as the Universal Equivalent" and "From Money as Universal Equivalent to Money as Currency"
Do you have an argument?
Robinson, Wolff is an Academic Marxist. This means he looks at Marxism as a purely scholarly affair. Please talk with Alan Woods or contact the IMT to talk with revolutionary Marxists, to get a more complete view of Marx's ideas, the most important of which was:The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
IMT are useless trotskysts liberals, they are anything but revolutionary marxists.
Take the plunge join working class read "The Militant" and get in touch with the Communist League.
Woods would have you believe that Revolutionary Marxism belongs to the IMT and by extension him but he's only trying to make money off of selling books and collecting membership dues. Revolutionary Marxism is a rich tradition that belongs to us all and is not for sale. I might add that as far as changing the world, the IMT has been a remarkably insignificant force in that regard for over 30 years now.
He's a Marxian economist, read his actual texts with Resnick
And the irony of slamming a left academic activist talking about Marx who was largely a left academic activist is laughable and akin to right wing fear of acidemia 😂
Professor Wolff stokes my curiosity. He makes me want to read the writings of Karl Marx. I'll see if they have them at the local library. (It'll be interesting to see how the librarian reacts [!], because I'll need her help to find them!)
That which is called "swearing" is strictly relative, Let it rip.
59:37 To be quite honest, I find his rhetoric so far equal to that of Jordan Peterson in the context of these criticisms.
Prof Wolff really needs to learn about the Great Forward Movement, the Great Famine and the Cultural Revolution in China.
He knows about them. Even worse is how he tries to brush them under the rug.
Any Marxist does. Maybe it is you who needs to read about it? I'll show you how fallacious your logic is. My mother grew up in a capitalist dictatorship where she as woman couldn't vote until 1975, where women were alienated from the concept of private property, divorce was illegal, men could murderous their wives and get away with a slap on the written under crimes of honor laws, where women needed their husband's permission to leave the country or work in some professions, where protesting farmers over slave wages, mistreatment, bad conditions were either murdered in cold blood by police or bombed with Napalm, where misery was widespread, you couldn't speak out against the government, etc...
Now I'll go on another logical fallacy of whataboutism and say "what about the Irish Famine, the bengali famine, etc?
Logic 101 and history 101. Theory 101
@@brunods4560there is no such thing as a “capitalist dictatorship” because dictatorship is political while capitalism is economics. Also capitalism did not cause the Irish or Bengal Famines.
@@ExPwner well you say that, but historians agree they do exist, and that my mother lived in one. Are you saying there is no socialist dictatorship either then? It is also an economic system. See where I was going with this? Thanks for making my point for me. Saved me time
@@brunods4560 I am talking about facts that the logics you believe do not support. Your mother was unfortunately grew up in a capitalist world and could not vote until 1975, but right now in the 21st century, in the countries likes North Korea and People's Republic of China under the socialist regimes, voting is still totally manipulated and people could not express their political views freely. They have no ways of accessing to Apps like Twitter, Google and Facebook but are given the information totally fabricated by the ruling party. In China, the famine in 1960s took away around 30 million lives and in the follow-up Cultural Revolution, the class struggle adopted by Mao who learned the theory from Maxism led millions of the party members to die, even the Chinese President Liu Shaoqi who ranked second in the Chinese Communist Party died like a rat. Deng Xiaoping gave up the theory of class struggle and adopted the capitalist doctrines when he came back to power in 1978, his strategy of opening up to capitalism turned China to a different practice, his successor Jiang Zemin joined WTO, he promised to create capitalist market mechanism in China and made China to get rich after then. Now Xi Jinping wants to go back to Mao's model but economic development figures are coming down since he took office in 2012.
omg that is a good cat!
Thanks!
Add about five minutes into the conversation I’m not positive which side of the argument Mr. Wolf is on. I do have one thought which leads to a question so far I’ve only been able to clearly identify in my mind three big revolutions for counting the French end of those four revolutions, my question is first, Which method of government has killed the most people after it emerged, the power communist China and Stalin us Leninist communist. Russia also comes to mind the French revolution seems to me made its own after a time. In my mind only the American revolution based on the liberty and justice for all produced a new form of government without killing its own people down the line.
Why spread fast because the colonial powers had put humanity in a deadly situation, so liberation is dear to everyone. However, after the success of revolution, Marist government or communist governments usurped power and ruled ruthlessly viciously and in suppression
OK, so let me see if I understand Mr. Wolf‘s statement about Mark‘s being a great inspiration for the great Chinese communist movement. When Marx was running the show for the communists in China, how many million people were killed by that regime? Unless I missed my six grade economics lesson on a certain day, the reason that the communist Chinese have become so much of a light to the world is because the stupid capitalist in the United States decided that they could Bring China into the regular world by giving them lots of manufacturing, so seems to be like that it was capitalism that was communist China’s big success story. And oh by the way, how many million people did the communist party in China kill to be able to run the system. And oh by the way, aren’t Commies run in Venezuela? And how is that working out? They don’t even have toilet paper for Pete sake’s come on Mr. Wolf wake up and smell the coffee.
Socialist and communist experiments in central and south America fail largely due to CIA/US govt interventions to prevent them from being too successful. As for the Chinese, they're not even really communist or even fully socialist for that matter. They're a communist party running a semi-socialist country with a state capitalist economy.
@@XandarionSunrisenope they failed on their own. This whole “Hurr durr it would be utopia except for intervention making it fail” is nothing but pure cope and revisionist nonsense
@@ExPwner Dumba55. It is like a group of thugs beating up a Boxer on his training schedule. And when the Boxer underperforms, somehow it becomes his fault? Great Logic and Reasoning as expected of a Crapitalist.
@@morningstararun6278 it is nothing like that. It is like the socialist side getting into the ring, losing the fight and then saying the game was rigged after he lost
@@ExPwner Did USSR enter the ring? One has to be a real b*tch to say that USSR fighting US, and other 13 Capitalist countries within its borders is deliberately entering the fight. Did Laos invade US or was it vice versa? Did Vietnam invade the US or was it vice versa? Did Libya invade the war or was it vice versa? Did Chile invade USA or was it vice versa?
Ok. If this is really your way of thinking. Then what I am about to say should be perfectly alright to you. One day I might come and harass your wife, and blame everything on you. I could even say that you were too cucky to protect your own woman.
There's a great walkthrough on Marx thinking here: th-cam.com/video/0bmX0hZoiJM/w-d-xo.html
1:05:51 thats a problem. Developing country. Humans think they can still do that on their own judgement, assessment, graphs, data, numbers and revolving door. Or closed door.
❤GREAT podcast.
Peter Joseph proposed an alternative to capitalism.
The Resource Based Economy.
Have you done a podcast on the pros and cons of that global economic model?
RBE is economically illiterate nonsense. It’s just repackaging communism to pretend to be intelligent when it really isn’t. It fails to the economic calculation problem.
@@ExPwner , that's your opinion. And we both know that your opinion is not worth much.
You don't even know the difference between a worker and a capitalist. I had to explain to you that a teacher is a worker and not a capitalist. I also had to explain to you that in general, labor costs constitute the most significant portion of production expenses, so the greater the amount of labor required, the higher the overall cost tends to be. And then you said that wasn't true because of subjective value. You're not even capable of understanding that labor costs and production expenses relates to the objective aspect of production costs. Subjective value, on the other hand, pertains to the perceived worth or value of a product or service by individuals, which can vary from person to person.
I feel sorry for you. I guess you spend most of your time writing comments on TH-cam in order to gain some measure of self-worth.
@@michaelmappin1830 nope that is not my opinion, that is economic fact, just like it is a fact that Wolff is not working class just because he is a teacher dumbass
@@michaelmappin1830 you didn’t explain anything. You spewed a bunch of idiotic economically illiterate nonsense, made up a bunch of claims I never made and still failed to make any argument against what I actually said.
You’re not only a pathetic liar but you are also projecting your own idiocy because you are a loser who spends his days spamming Marxist claptrap on the internet for a living.
ITS EASY LIKE FOOD NOT BOMBS-FREE STUFF CHANGE THE WORLD INSTANTLY PROVIDE FREE COMMUNITY, FREE SKILLS, FREE RESCOURCES, FREE THINGS TO DO AND FREE STUFF.
Ha ha: ‘it’s pathetic’ says Professor Wolff. Well said of those institutions that fear reading Marx.
D-Day. Whereabouts unknown.
Richard Wolfe is great. Another Marxian economist I find interesting is Anwar Shaikh.
Yeah, Anwar Shaikh is also great. I love the debate he did on a right-wing libertarian TH-cam channel called Emergent Order. He completely exposes the idiocy of right-wing libertarianism, in his usual kind manner.
@@emergenthub305 yeah my instincts tend strongly toward the autonomous libertarian impulse but reality intervened and told me the world doesn't work that way.
@@paigemcloughlin4905 Real libertarianism comes out of the socialist tradition, is anti-capitalist, and is cogent. Right-wing libertarianism is something entirely different, is pro-capitalist, and makes no logical sense. I don't know what being an autonomous libertarian entails, but as long as it's compatible with the libertarianism that comes out of the socialist tradition, you aren't going to encounter the enormous logical gaps one finds with right-wing libertarianism.
@@emergenthub305 No I got Hayek and god help me, Rand in college and chafed under its assumptions.
@@paigemcloughlin4905 Haha.