Criticism of Marxism | Douglas Murray and Lex Fridman
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- Lex Fridman Podcast full episode: • Douglas Murray: Racism...
Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:
- Brave: brave.com/lex
- BetterHelp: betterhelp.com... to get 10% off
- BiOptimizers: www.magbreakthr... to get 10% off
- Notion: notion.com/sta... to get up to $1000 off team plan
- ExpressVPN: expressvpn.com... and use code LexPod to get 3 months free
GUEST BIO:
Douglas Murray is an author and political commentator.
PODCAST INFO:
Podcast website: lexfridman.com...
Apple Podcasts: apple.co/2lwqZIr
Spotify: spoti.fi/2nEwCF8
RSS: lexfridman.com...
Full episodes playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast
Clips playlist: • Lex Fridman Podcast Clips
SOCIAL:
- Twitter: / lexfridman
- LinkedIn: / lexfridman
- Facebook: / lexfridman
- Instagram: / lexfridman
- Medium: / lexfridman
- Reddit: / lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: / lexfridman
This dude needs to be the voice of every villain in every Pixar movie going forward. All of them.
Lex? Come on, I wouldn't say he's that bad!
But enough about lex, what about Douglas Murray
He sounds and looks like Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lamms
@@dallascarlos6531 no actually
He is a real villain.
“Where’s my dam omelette” 😂
It doesn't sound like he's ever read anything Marx wrote
He hasn't ever read anything but confidentally goes around denouncing anything he doesn't like
@@Bruteforce765maybe you just don’t agree with him?
lex work is great the man could have deeb conversation with any person regardless of his ideology and the intellectual background
I wish they’d go deeber.
He does know how to get to the deebest level
I think this is an Obligatory Comment bot from the deeb web
@@cakeburps 😂😂😂
Lex's compassion (and therefore virtue) overflows and expands to civilization as a whole. All that is required is
1) it be implemented worldwide to prevent impurity and leakage.
2) it be managed by a series of angels that can read everyone's mind simultaneously.
3) the subjects of this angel ignore the upside-down incentives.
“Where is the omelette?”
Sincerely,
-100 million people killed by Communism
spoken like a true simpleton
@@ColorMatching I’m from a communist country. You’re probably from Princeton
@@artvandalay7632 I was born in Romania. You?
What does the Marxism in Marxism-Leninism mean? What did Marx have to say about how a government should be structured and ran? What was his view on central planning?
@@ColorMatching USSR, which absolutely obliterated your beautiful country along with the rest of Eastern Europe with its utopian vision for a classless society. Hundreds of thousands of Romanians shot dead or tortured through the 1950s and 60s. What a horrible picture for such a great people and culture. Absolutely decimated by the gift of collectivization.
@@cesarvarela go play with rocks, child.
Douglas Murray expects people to think he’s correct because he speaks in a smug British accent. He’s never debated a real intellectual.
Orwell was an anti-Stalinist socialist. Writers like Murray love to talk about Orwell's criticisms of Stalinism, but they rarely will ever mention Orwell's criticisms of capitalism. It's almost to the point of intellectual dishonesty. Almost.
They literally have a section in the full discussion, criticizing capitalism.
@@tensevo He literally still doesn't mention Orwell's politics in its fullest extent.
@@rypoelk997 why would he? The discussion wasn't about Orwell's politics...
@@rypoelk997 there’s no need to it’s irrelevant to the point that was being made. Diving into every crevice of every single person of topic would make for an 8-10 hour podcast atleast
oh yeah lets just re-evaluate every idea of every philosophers/writer/novelist that we even briefly mention, sounds like a great idea to have a discussion
"When things go wrong people reach for other options"
But hope so Mr Douglas otherwise you'll be stuck in that same problem until you find a solution.
@Terry What you're really doing is just like Tom Cruise in the film "Minority Report" after his eye transplant surgery..... chewing on a rotten green sandwich and then reaching for another rotten sandwich and then reaching for the spoiled milk...... eventually after you keep vomiting; you should just realize you're at the wrong fridge and you need to go back to the normal world where there are standards and checks and balances. Marxism is rotten and spoiled and belongs in the trash.
Lmafo that's a good analogy! However I would give you the option of there being more than just one refrigerator and one type of place to get the food whether it's Marxism, capitalism, socialism etc... There are always other options that could hold the possibility for a better outcome.
And like all things it comes down to the people that are maintaining what's in the refrigerator or what's in their community!
Got to be smart enough to check when the expiration date is 😂
@@terryedmondson2792 Well, marxism surely expired a long time ago…
@@terryedmondson2792 The marxism already spoiled and rotted away..... the real world has the checks and balances within those studying free market principles and capitalism to give confidence they will work if not violated.
@@pedrolafosse9166 seems to me sparking back up
Can’t say I like this guys smug sarcastic vibe - he doesn’t seem to take actual argument seriously
@@jaybrown8807 it is difficult to determine what his words truly mean when they are fraught with sarcasm. What he says hold some truth; however, his inference seems to be biased to a fault, and therefore misinformed in areas where he lacks understanding.
I love Lex's approach to this discussion despite his apparent recognition of the biases he is faced with. It's one of his greatest attributes in the conversations that hit incredibly nuanced topics.
He’s almost certainly a shill who believes 50% of what he’s saying
I mean... you can't take the idea of communism seriously to begin with.
@@marksage5722 you mean you can't take it seriously especially if all you got from the criticism of Marxism was "cOMMuNisM bad." Over a billion people take it seriously everyday. Anyone will take an idea seriously if they drink enough of the Kool aid, just look at yourself and your likely thought that "tHeRE iS No sySTeM bEtTEr ThaN cApITaLiSM."
@@Tygrus758 I mean... listen to yourself. 🤣
All these people claiming that someone needs to understand all of the nuances and fine points of marxism to criticize it are just plain wrong. It’s like saying that in order to criticize a school shooter we must study and debate the content of their manifesto.
Well, you should give thought to the contest of that shooter, considering your contry has more of it than the rest of the world combined.
@@arthurrosa9403 why do you assume I am American? I’m not, my country had one school shooting in 99 where one person died and another was injured. We have quite strict gun control laws. I disagree that those clowns deserve a mere moment of consideration, their names should never be spoken of at all.
@@soulfuzz368 Refusing to look at the problem doesn't make it go away.
@@arthurrosa9403 I agree with that completely.
Sure, you can criticize Marxism if you know nothing about it, you're just very likely to be wrong. A lot of the criticism of Marx are based on misunderstandings and distortions - things people repeat because they've heard it before. Interestingly the most powerful critiques of Marxism are Marxists, because they understand the source material. So you're right, you don't need to be an expert to criticize Marx, but I'll bet you those criticisms aren't well supported.
If I could go gay for anyone, it would be Douglas Murray.
No. The fundamental idea Marx had was NOT to criticize capitalism. His fundamental idea was that history was on an inevitable march towards perfection and anything standing in the way will need to be destroyed. It was not a fair minded, pragmatic analysis that takes into account all the variables of objective reality and tries to come up with a workable solution to how people can get along. It starts with the premise that he is a prophet that has special vision to see the arc of history headed towards utopia. He then unfairly compares capitalism with an imaginary perfect utopia that doesn’t exist instead of comparing it to anything else that exists or has been tried. He has some vague notions about what might be better, but no concrete ideas about how to pull off his utopian vision. And he makes predictions about the future that failed.
I detest greed corporations that screw people over. But at least corporations can die. Most do. Others use the power of the state to prop themselves up unfairly. I’m fine with people who want to fight against corporations trying to influence the government to be their lapdogs, or who try to find novel, pragmatic ways to lessen suffering or improve quality of life for as many as possible. All problems will never be completely solved by humans, but we should peck away at improvement cautiously.
However, every time someone switches from that to, “I’m smart enough to eliminate problems from the fabric of reality if I could just make everyone do things my way,” that is when you end up with mass graves. Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba, Venezuela. Every time.
Yes. Every time Marxism has been tried it has led to a mountain of corpses from violence or mass starvation. Let’s not do that again.
I'd consider my self a socialist within a capitalist framework. I believe most of the inequality of today's world is rooted in neo liberal capitalism. If we could stop the constant cycke of socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor I think capitalism would work just fine.
@@robertpirsig5011 I think some inequality is a natural consequence of free will and differing ability. Tons of people will choose to spend large amounts of money to watch sports for instance. That means elite athletes will be make millions, and so I will never have as much as Lebron James. You can’t eliminate inequality without eliminating all freedom of choice and not allowing anyone to use their talents.
But you aren’t wrong that large companies get unfairly propped up and make things worse. The rich cry communism any time anyone tries to help poor people and hypocritically take billions in government handouts. Corruption is a monster that has to be fought constantly. And compassionate people should always be looking at pragmatic ways to help those in need that will have the least unintended negative consequences possible. But thinking that we can eliminate inequality and corruption requires warping reality and stamping out human nature in ways that are beyond human capacity.
Well said.
@@robertpirsig5011 inequality is rooted in human nature, not a system of economics/politics.
Marx said the final state is the dictatorship of the Proletariat. Lenin said the Proletariat is not ready to rule so the intellectuals will have to rule first. Then they created slave labor camps in the USSR.
When I was at school, in the 80’s under Thatcher, Mao was a cool Andy Warhol portrait.
The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different outcome.
Now the kids say Stalin saved the world.
Put this guy and Richard Wolfe in a room
In a "capitalist" free market/society what is stopping folks from forming worker co-ops and running their businesses however they like? Have at it! Just don't force other people into the same and we're golden 👌
I mean that's the problem bro... They are fundamentally at odds with each other... So they both try to sabotage and strawman the other... Capitalism just happens to have won... for now.
Where is a free market society stopping co-ops?
@@deanemarks8611 Capitalism isnt a thing so im not sure how that took place
A shame there are so many people who are judging somebody's character from their accent and cadence. Very strange that adults would equate it to a character from a children's film and in reality he sounds nothing like neither Palpatine or Hannibal. Americans really do live in an a bubble of ignorance.
The problem in civilisation that hasn’t been solved is the “Pareto Distribution” problem ………that unfortunately affects everything of value e.g. wealth, power, knowledge, art, resources, etc.
This is a ‘law of nature’ that hasn’t been solved yet.
No Socialism or Fascism can solve this problem. And it’s not a byproduct of capitalism either because it has been around for centuries and long before capitalism.
Unfortunately the experts don’t teach this because they all want their opportunity to rule and impose their grand ideas.
It’s a “Pareto Distribution” problem.
This comment section is a dumpster fire of people that came here to confirm their own bias.
No it’s not…
@@jlmur54 It clearly is. Douglas makes no arguments, only emotional language. For example:
"If everytime you bake it and it comes out shit, it means the recipe is shit" This doesn't tell you what specifically is 'shit' in Marxism's critique of capitalism, and what role that critique played in making economic experiments of the 20th century fail, but if you are biased to believe Marxism is bad, then you will repeat this quote as if it's saying anything.
@@ElectronicCalifornia what the rest of the video he makes other points
@@ElectronicCalifornia what role did capitalism make in making socialism fail...
Yes an in a marxiest/socialist society the government wouldn't allow you to send such comments 👍
He doesn't sound like a villain to me. Very interesting guy. Very smart and profound.
I think they just mean his voice, not what he is saying or his motivations.
@@HaganeHiryu IDK, he sounds like a villain to me. Confident ignorant English intellectual type. Notice how humble somebody thoughtful like Penrose is when approaching his theories and problem solving? This guy lectures like he knows the absolute truth, and he is talking about culture and social theories rather than physical properties and laws and mathematics and logic systems lol. This whole comment section makes me kinda sad, really. People patting themselves on the back because they like what this confident guy says. Just my take, not really even worth 2c in today's economy.
@@grantwilliams643 Confidence and intellectualism indicate a villain? I'm interested where that assumption from?
Does that mean uncertainty and stupidity indicate good?
@@grantwilliams643 problem is that he quite correct, and there is quite a bit of documentation and evidence on what he said about Marx/Marxism.
@@ltmund Confidence and intellectualism only indicate a villain, if they say uncomfortable truths or reasonably challenge that holy ideologies, Marx being one of them.
Marx: Hey I'm just the ideas guy. You ppl are crazy.
Dude said, “it never worked before and Marx said the n-word.”
I wouldn’t consider myself a Marxist but this was not a convincing argument at all IMO.
It never worked and led to millions of deaths everywhere it was tried is not a convincing argument? You judge a tree by the fruit it bears.
What more convincing do you Marxist fanatics need if not the evidence of how horrible it had been where it was tried?
He references countless experiments of Marxism across 120 years that point to consistent failure at a grandiose scale, that is a convincing argument. We have no convincing arguments otherwise.
@@artvandalay7632 Lex pushed back and told him they were all the following the soviet model, noticed how Douglas talks over him and ignores the point. Douglas refuses to acknowledge that there are multiple socialist models, economic democracy, lange-lerner model, self-managed economy, feasible socialism, pragmatic market socialism, participatory economy, computer-managed allocation, peer-to-peer economy and open source, negotiated coordiation.
BUT YES BECAUSE THE THE SOVIET MODEL WAS TRIED APPARENTLY WEVE TRIED THEM ALL.
Just because something sounds "convincing" doesn't make it a good argument, and this is the problem. All people like Douglas have to do is sound convincing, use emotional rhetoric, and anyone with a bias will believe him without question.
@@artvandalay7632 The most successful countries in the modern world are arguably the social democracies of North Europe, which came out of socialists movements. Marxists like Eduard Bernstein, went against the idea of a violent revolution, and instead sought to slowly reform capitalism through peaceful and incremental legislation. Mixing socialism with capitalism was not a failure.
We need to take what we have learned from the past and apply it today. We need to take the good of both socialism and capitalism and create something. We live in a totally different world now. The economic system in America is broken and wasteful. The richest country on earth can’t even give all its people healthcare. They have to argue for weeks just to bail the American people out with a one check. But if Wall Street or boeing needs help it’s done no questions asked. Tax cuts for the rich? No problem. Any and all economic systems are subject to flaws and failure because it’s it’s ran by humans. Humans are flawed. American almost because a capitalist dictatorship ..
I am thinking Bitcoin will crash further and just like with Wallstreet and the Auto industry bail out thanks to the taxpayers, will bail out the billionaires who invested in Bitcoin. The government is cruel, and politicians are bad actors, who give us one sided arguments. It's disgusting how much we here in the news about the rich getting richer from investing in MRNA shots. What would I do with all that money? Some people have to work, take care of sick people in the hospital, or take your order at Burger King.
The rich politicians really love their money
I don't think there are any philanthropists anymore. Not asking for handouts, rather fairness.
That's what Marx and all Marxists want - to create something new. Still trying. Capitalism arose from innovation. Marxism was a plan between two intellectuals - Marx and Engels. Certainly, capitalism is flawed, but would you have to choose which flaws you want
LOL the comment section is funny and filled with such lunatic uttering inane diatribes like this...."...good of both socialism.." there is no good...do you read? Have you paid attention to the conversation? America isn't broken. The narrative you are trying to push is what's broken. We can give all people healthcare but will never give healthcare for free. Then you go on like some leftist nut about tax cuts for the rich and Boeing...lol.
@Jessie Hydro - Sure, let's try Marxism just one more time! We'll get it right this time. ;)
@@lassyduckie8830 as the original commenter wrote, humans are flawed. I don’t believe capitalism is flawed, it’s the people. Capitalism is more successful historically because it allows power to be spread out through many flawed people, where as communism causes power to be centralized to just a few flawed people (a monopoly on power if you will).
Flawed, corrupt capitalist have to compete with other flawed corrupt capitalists. Flawed corrupt communists don’t (not much at least).
“Every time you try the recipe and it comes out as s***, then the recipe is s***”…
you’ve never had my wife’s cooking
When you speak the truth and you are a true believer of the truth and you look for the truth and you find the lies that’s when sad to say you find TRUTH. Tell the truth always.🦉❤️🕊
Never once in my education did I learn anything about Mao
@14:34 the workers haven't taken all of the financial risk of starting the business though. The one who owns the business likely didn't give themselves a paycheck for the first number of years.
Mate nobody gives two fucks about a little nobody who managed to get his little construction company or boat shop up and running. The issue is an entirely different class of people who have nothing in common with that guy and operate on a whole different level. So hold your horses, nobody has an issue with a guy who employees a few people and makes a few millions, those aren't the issue at all, and everybody gets that except some capitalist wannabes, ok? There's innumerable good reasons to criticise big business.
Marxist is a complex idea (theories) can't be forgotten but "Marxism" has two ways: the once is the theorietical and the other one is practical activist ideologues.... The second tendency is common from when he had born...
@14:04 Think of it as the 2 ends of Jung's type matrix, thinking and feeling, Haidt's Elephant (Moral intuition) and Rider (Moral Reasoning) and if you push those to the extreme there are 2 end points. Extreme compassion and openness/tolerance and extreme order.
These have been symbolized throughout time and our mythologies as the masculine and feminin archetypes. The Great mother symbolizes the compassion and loving care, but the negative side is the devouring mother. Empathy and compassion taken to their extreme leads to infantilizing and viewing the world as infants (people and groups you like) and predators (people and groups you don't like) and this distortion of the world is dangerous for the same reason why you don't get between a mother bear and her cubs.
The masculine usually was a symbol for knowledge which is like ordered or organized thoughts. This on the negative, brings us fascism and the state being correct above all else. The state being that symbol of order.
It can be simplified like this, people who listen more to their thoughts, or their rider, can reach a negative point on the spectrum that causes them to believe that they know so much that they should be in charge because they know what's best for people. Likewise people who listen more to their feelings and their elephant, have a spot on their spectrum that leads to believing that they love and care about others so much that they could do no wrong and know what's best.
One just feels like marxism and one just feels like orderly fascists.
You reminded me of thinking on something like this. Marxism/communism having that 'feminine' quality by being widespread and 'fair', having this appearance of nurturing that can turn devouring.
I wonder if Lex will have a Jungian analyst on his show sometime, if he hasn't already.
@@istivanp8747 Exactly. That's why it's so easy to indoctrinate people into it and why it can become so consuming and dangerous.
I'd love to see Lex have a Jungian on.
You have a good idea there. I wonder though because fascism and communism are both authoritarian. Could it be that authoritarian is feminine and libertarian is masculine?
@@HaganeHiryu I don't believe so, to me it appears as though both masculine and feminine, or thinking and feeling, (people of both genders can lean more heavily towards one or the other) both lead to different forms of authoritarianism. If you lean more into rationality and reason you seem more likely to fall into the trap of believing you know so much and can think so well that you know what is best for others. But if you lean more into your feelings and emotions you seem more likely to fall into the trap of believing you care so much and your heart is so pure that you know what's best for others.
I would say this is what happens when you move too far to the left ( personality trait predictor of left leaning values being openness) or the right ( personality trait predictor of right leaning values being orderliness).
Libertarian seems to be a different dimension of the same spectrum. Perhaps when there is a balance people will feel or understand that people need freedom and to be helped and supported by government in moderation. Instead of allowing your thinking or feeling to become so consuming that you blind yourself of this.
Capitalism and socialism shouldn't be mutually exclusive.
If you have decentralised banking, supporting small/medium sized local/national businesses, with decentralised government - and eliminate corporations, globalism and the free movement of capital to avoid taxation - socialist policies can be adopted without the state having control of the means of production.
Its called socialism by reform
@@Joe-sg9ll you really think the wealthiest companies and individuals, at any point in history, are going to allow reforms that take away the very means that allowed them to get wealthy?
Politicians make legislation, and they all sit as non-executive directors on the boards, or are 'consultants' to these very companies.
Do really think MP's or Senators are going to work for you or I for $100K a year when they can work for BAE/Northop/MS for millions of dollars?
@@Joe-sg9ll no, I am talking about corporate tax avoidance - and moving profits to Luxembourg or the Virgin Islands.
If these corporations paid their fair share in taxes - pensions, unemployment, healthcare, childcare, education, care for the elderly - would all be trivial issues.
As long as these big businesses can move their money and lobby politicians - the tax liability is left with the lower and middle classes.
Someone in the UK earning £65K a year in the UK has pretty much a tax rate of close to 40% (by the time you factor in income tax, National Insurance, Council Tax, child benefit penalties).
Apple paid 12% tax on UK profits last year, and even then there was accountancy tricks with asset depreciation/carrying of paper losses - the real number is probably less than 1%.
Yeah this seems more sensible to me 👍
@@Joe-sg9ll the reason we as working people are all taxed to the hilt is because of the shortfall in corporate taxes.
Yes, a tax is a penalty - one that we don't have the means to avoid but Google, Apple and Amazon do.
Again from wiki: Murray is known for his association with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. In March 2018, Orbán posted a photo on his official Facebook account of himself reading the Hungarian-language edition of The Strange Death of Europe.[93][94] Murray has disputed the claim that Hungary is experiencing significant democratic backsliding under Orbán, and has called Freedom House's comparisons of Orbán's government to a dictatorship as "increasingly off-kilter".[95] In May 2018, Murray was personally received by Orbán in Budapest as part of the "Future of Europe" conference along with other conservative figures like Steve Bannon, and according to Hungarian state media had an individual discussion and photograph with Orbán.[96][97]
Okay, and? Other than trying to smear Douglas Murray, exactly what point are you trying to make with these innuendos?
If any of that is true, how is it significant? Does it change what Murray is saying?
Gustave le bon
The Crowd:
A Study of the Popular Mind published in 1895
Contrary to the title I don't hear any critique of marxism, bro just pointing finger saying bad as usual. If he truly would try to debate the marx view on capitalism he would have a difficult time painting it in a way better than he describes marxism.
I like how Murray’s big concern (radical income inequality) is also one of the chief points raised by Marxism. It’d be fascinating to see Murray in a debate with Richard Wolff. Wolff highlighted the evolution of Marxist and socialist thinking, whereas Murray mistakenly treats it as monolithic. Murray also doesn’t understand Marx and Engels thought socialists would first come to power in the industrialized world, not the underdeveloped world. The necessity for rapid industrialization this brought about, particularly in Russia and China, accounts for much of the suffering.
Yes and when he says that Marxist ideologies have not work, well with harsh international sanctions and blockades can it flourished?
Every time it was working it has been destroyed, as in the former Yugoslavia.
I think this guy as Peter Jordan, are full of shit.
@@suzysocas3070 Agreed. I think Murray demonstrated his knowledge of Marxism, and of socialism more broadly, is pretty shallow.
@@suzysocas3070 wolff already laid out how centrally planned economies are NOT marxist. Your example was not socialism according to wolff
@@geopoliticsweekly most people have shallow understandings of the things they oppose. Wolff knows absolutely nothing about capitalism for example.
@@soulfuzz368 Murray said that Marxist ideas have not worked in practice, as if they were unviable. What I am saying is: how anything that smells Marxist, Leninist, Socialist, Communist or even Anarchist ideas and systems are going to work with so much antagonism from imperial capitalism; or what is the meaning of McCarthyism then?
I am not talking about centralised or decentralised economies nope, I am talking about the fact of over a century in demonising, embargo, blockade and destruction of any movement that is not capitalism, predatory capitalism.
I like Douglas but how he speaks is gonna turn a lot of ppl off. He's too toffer, too proper, at times he embelishes it. He needs to loosen up and shake off the pomp.
This man is talking about Marxism as if it’s some ideology. It’s not.
@Big Al at its core it’s not even an economic model.
@Big Al its not difficult to comprehend, Marxism is merely a critique of capitalism. Of course the theory relates to economics because it’s based on a redistribution of wealth. Though, there is not a strict base model on how to achieve this. Anything that descends into a communist/nationalist authoritarian madness is just that and does not relate to Marxist theory.
Ask this guy why capitalism seems to collapse every decade, why millions of people starve to death despite the abundance of food, and why millions die from preventable disease, and he'll tell you "the free market has never been tried."
Oh it has been tried, those are just acceptable faults of the system to him, instead he'll probably argue that the solution to our current issues is to just ban immigration or something. A lot of these types mistake the aesthetic superstructure of society for analysis of the superstructure itself, so their solution is usually some essentialist spiritualized bullshit about changing culture without changing economy at the same time.
@@jcivilis533 Agreed. It's this attitude of humanity having failed Capitalism instead of the other way around.
This is what a mature intellectual sounds like.
Who? Lex barely spoke…
Apart from “The Unique and Its Property “, Max Stirner,1844/2017 Landstreicher translation this wishy washy capitalism/ communism dispute will continue. Fixed ideas from the human brain remain rubbish.
Its dissapointing that none of the themes from prof wolf were mentioned, like democratisation of the workplace, unfairness of the free market, or exploitation of labour.
As always. Just strawmanning and joking. This was a disgrace of a "discussion" even Lex can't keep his face straight.
Maybe they didn’t mention those because those are all dumb ideas.
I disagree that a free market is unfair, but for the sake of argument let’s say that it is. A fair economic system isn’t inherently good. That system might provide $5 and one meal a day to every person. That’s fair but it’s terrible.
Marxism does not mean Communism
Quantitative easing isn't capitalism.
Karl Marx descended from rabbi families on both his mother's and father's side. His father Heinrich converted to Christianity, otherwise he would not have been able to continue working as a lawyer in Trier, which had been Prussian since 1815. Karl Marx was already accused during his lifetime that his view of the "working class", which was supposed to bring about salvation from the contradictions of capitalism and bring humanity blessed, peaceful communism, meant a deeply religious return to paradise lost. Karl Marx's later disciples then had to experience that "the workers" were by no means so keen on the new paradise of communism, but were more interested in tangible, concrete improvements in their living conditions in the "here and now". Therefore, the "Party" was declared the vanguard of the working class, and its leaders knew only what is good for the "workers" and what is good for humanity. This presumption and arrogance led to Lenin and Stalin and, in my opinion, clearly has religious traits of the worst kind.
Hey Lex you might like to invite Hakim to talk on marxism. And Not just bikes, Adam something to talk on urban planning and transportation. Also you should read Maurice Cornforth's 📕 Dialectical materialism, written as an introduction to some key aspects of marxist philosophy for British workers.
Why would Lex give a platform to a ideological d rider? And also why would he spend 3 hours talking with people trying to fit the would into an ideological framework and not vice-versa?
If socialism does not work and has to fail why West uses economical sanctions and blocades to tackle socialist regimes? I mean, if socialist countries will inevetibly fail why even bother?
To be honest, I don't see justification of either capitalism or socialism, communication, democracy, republics or what have you.
If you look at the world today you don't just see pure Communism or socialism. The capitalist societies we see prevailing today are blends of capitalist republics and democracy and humanitarian are left at the way side. This is what truly fuels the ratchet effect in my opinion.
What is humanitarianism? Why is it good? How should it be achieved?
Most of us agree that capitalism is the best form of economy, providing the most freedom and quality of life, if you work for it. It also produces the most ingenuity of any economic system. So one has to wonder, why don’t the powers that be favor a more capitalistic approach to society, as it benefits not only themselves more, but their fellow human? *POWER AND CONTROL*
Always has been.
Ok then. Murray descarted marxism without saying the words: "Theory of Value, abstract labor, concrete labor, fetishism, use value, exchange value, dialetics, materialism, productive forces, relations of production, alienation, variable capital, constant capital, class struggle, mode of production, burgeois democracy, proletariat dictatorship, capital crisis, abstract accumulation" and others
People seems to think is easy to refute marxism because they never feel obligated to study it
Sure, most people didn't study Marx.
But most people know about Soviet Russia, Red China, Cambodia, Vietnam, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea.
And then there's the West.
Where would you rather live in?
@@kunipeg8706 That's not refuting marxism. That's just a convenient change of subject
It’s been tried many times. Sadly they will keep on trying it … over and over
Weird when Lex looks right in the camera
What zealots arguing for their imagined utopia never openly confront is the single historical lesson which zealots have taught us, which is that their delusional utopia/nirvana is always right over THERE, on the other side of that OCEAN OF BLOOD, and all we must do is swim across it. Some brain dead fanatics, mourning the failure of the Soviet Union, have actually suggested that Russian Communism might have succeeded, if only the Bolsheviks had killed just one million more people. After all, Stalin taught us that while the death of one man is a tragedy, but the deaths of a million people is just a statistic.
Love the ending
I've listened to douglas murray for years being from the u.k. He was a prominent figure on mainstream political programmes. I've always gave him opportunity to change my mind on certain political positions but as always, he omits facts (his Venezuela argument) and gives no context to his criticism. He just gives tired examples of it's failure with again no context. Asking him to give a critique on unfettered capitalism I'm sure would cause him an aneurysm.
Exactly. His criticism is just slander. It doesn’t have any real basis or critical examination. I do not know how I feel about Marxism nor capitalism but I at least know not to take Murray’s views serious. His remarks seem much more personal than logical. He cannot go a sentence criticizing Marx without referring to red herrings or name calling. The crazy thing is that Murray may be right, but the way he makes arguments are terrible. Firstly, he makes an analogy to fascism. First of all, systems akin to fascism were the modus operandi for at least a millennia so there is something to be said about retrying previously experimented systems of governance.
@@ameenomar1911 he’s talked about it so many times though. It’s probably getting inherently exhausting at this point. The way he talks about this is as if it should be obvious to the audience
@@keithremedy Can you please share with me a sober critique of capitalism offered by Murray. Has he critiqued anything for that matter, I am genuinely interested
The same thing we can say for capitalism ,, has been tried and look at the world .. Whatever progress has been achieved is not because of the market economy but because of the state intervention.
Appreciate you bringing Douglas Murray on and esp getting him to critique Marxism. Esp after the last series…👊
Agreed. Really surprised how narrow minded the comments are on here. "The rich car salesman who says the fake dog money is real says we're all going to MARS" Bunch of crazy losers.
Indoctrination is one hell of drug
@@vampirepvssy it’s terrifying to witness
Tyranny of the worker. What ? This cannot happen ?
In my country the unions and workers are exploiting the government and the public.
The state enterprise sector has the highest pay, the largest amount of workers and the least amount of work getting done. The state enterprises are losing money and need to be supported by the government which in turn is taxing the private sector. The unions threaten the political parties with strikes and their votes. So the suffering ordinary citizens and private sector must accept this ? Why is it that we must accept communism ? Every worker is now their own little dictator….total failure is inevitable.
@@tropics8407 This is ridiculous nonsense. Every statistic shows that the rich have gotten richer, and the richer the very few get, the worse the lives of workers become. What you're saying is the exact opposite of the facts of the world.
lol 'what you are saying is that you're a marxist' ... almost spit my coffee out...belly laughed!!
Someone had to say it
So he basically agreed with Marx critique in yhe end. That is the whole point of what Marx was saying.
He is talking about how Marxism failed while ignoring the fact that how Capitalism succeeded ! Let's pretend he doesn't know the history
"It never worked because the recipe is shit."
With the great recipe of capitalism we have which so clearly works out, we are heading towards inevitable climate catastrophe. Hoorrayy! Long live capitalism!
It is easier to imagine the end of humanity rather than the end of capitalism
Or we could take down all trees and produce energy that way, or with carbon. That's what most third world countries do it, most of them devoid of the capitalism of the developed world.
Just like when they call out modern agriculture practices, when the alternative, "more naturalistic" way, pollutes more on account of more land required, more deforestation, more everything.
@@Guevorkyan third world countries are not devoid of capitalism, they literally suffer from capitalism. A capitalist world order is not possible without the existence of third world countries.
@@emrebarsismailoglu5829 I live in one, and capitalism was not the problem we are in the third world. Rather, going against it is what brought us down here. State driven production is what causes poverty and most problems associated with the creation of pollution.
The 'climate catastrophe' is not caused by capitalism, i.e., climate change is the result of industrialization independent from whatever economic system a country is using. In our modern age, the consumer has the freedom to not purchase products that are detrimental to the environment. Unfortunately, the vast majority of humans are simply unwilling to make the personal sacrifices necessary to make environmentally unfriendly processes unprofitable for companies. That is how a free market is supposed to work, but note that there is not a single country on Earth that exhibits pure capitalism; no matter where you look, there is government regulation and interference in all markets.
If you look now at the global CO2 emissions by country, you will see that China (an authoritarian socialist state) contributes to 30% of the global CO2 emission. The particular economic system is not relevant and instead, factors like population size, level of industrialization, and lifestyle choices (i.e., supply and demand for carbon producing products) are more meaningful to analyze. As Milton Friedman said in one of his speeches, "governments don't make decisions, people make decisions." You cannot just blame an economic system for your troubles when it is individuals that make decisions, and individuals make decisions based on their values. Magically implementing socialism or communism won't make all our troubles go away; individuals will still make shitty decisions, except now they'll have greater power than before. You're then relying on a perfect leader to fix everything, and those kinds of leaders are exceptionally rare and you're more likely to end up with a tyrant in charge.
@@9Plaka Thank you for pointing this out. I love when the Commie apologists babble about climate change utterly ignoring the ecological disasters that took place during the Soviet Union.
Conservatives displaying their ignorance about what they love to criticize the most never gets old…
Go on that
I dont have to be a doctor to diagnose a broken leg. This is the same argument that someone must be a biologist to be able explain what a "woman" is.
“The receipy is shit”. Si, true.
What we have now is not capitalism but socialism forcthe rich
This guy sounds like Emperor Palpatine
I’m not so sure we’ve learned the lessons of fascism. The Republican party in the US is embracing fascist ideology and this is happening in other countries as well via Bolsonaro, Modi, Erdrogan, Orban, and Putin amongst others. I don’t think we’ve learned a damn thing.
@@CallOfEuropeanSpirit You sound sensitive. Must be your nationalistic sounding user name and fascist iconography profile image.
This was so needed after the raving socialist that was on previously. Lex is inclusive at least.
Hell yea!
Next we need another socialist to clean up the messy arguments offered by this lunatic.
@@Supernautiloid I'll pass, the last one pretty much said all the dumb stuff that socialists can come up with.
@@michaellowe3665
Even if that was true, Murray makes Wolff look like Einstein. 😂
@@michaellowe3665 like what?
This Lex guy seems completely checked out or high. And saying something like 'crowds are dangerous' isn't a useful insight when you're structuring societies, which by their nature involve crowds. So it's a complete nonsequitar. Murray's focus on communism and fascism is more to the point.
Did you guys know jesus was a venture capitalist? He preached about the free market all the time. So did Buddha!... the free market is the only true way to achieve a state of enlightenment. Material items = happiness.
Close. Capitalism promotes individual liberty. Individual liberty = happiness
@@HaganeHiryu well seeing as the majority of the US society is now living paycheck to paycheck and is basically guaranteed to lose what little life-savings they have to insurance companies and hospital bills once they get sick and are forced to work 2 or 3 jobs to just barely survive... I'd say capitalism has been a failure for America. And that's not even touching upon the fact that capitalism relies on child and slave labor. Is capitalism liberating the child in the sweatshop that made your clothing?
@@mr.giggles4995 none of that is the result of capitalism. It is the result of corrupt government. Healthcare in the US is probably the least free part of the market here.
Blackrock gave me enlightenment! Thanks Jesus!
I wonder what is going on in lex head after talking to Steve Keen.
4:20 Beautiful
I demand you understand me,
but,
you will never understand me.
My argument simply would be, point me to a socialist country that was allowed to develop itself without interference from capitalist powers.
@Stefano 1950-1972 trade embargo. Please try again.
This guy doesn't sound like he knows much. Just pure ideology and emotional language
I had to scroll way too far for a comment like this. I'm all for having both sides discuss their views but this guy is a bit slanted.
@@breakupnotdown yeah the dude doesn't say anything specific about Marxism... His criticism is just empty rhetoric that could apply to anything
@@jaybrown8807 what do you mean by "never worked"? Economic failure? Political violence? Social repression? None of these things are unique to Marxist economic approaches. All of them have also existed in capitalist economic approaches. Capitalist states have failed too - so the question is why? Was it inherent to the system itself or was it related to other circumstances. I don't think it's the system itself, I think it's the circumstances. Same reason capitalism fails sometimes too - both are heavily influenced by the material conditions they form in
@@jaybrown8807 I would also add that it's important to consider the socialist experiments against the governments they overthrew. In Russia, an authoritarian tsar who sent millions to die in a war to benefit the elite. In Cuba, it was an island dominated by US corporate interests that left 97 percent of the population poor and landless. The revolution took that land and gave it to the people, which is why 60 years later the US embargoes Cuba. Who knows how much this ostracizing of Cuba has made the experiment suffer
It’s hard to believe this guy has read anything, ever. Almost all of his rhetoric sounds like what you’d expect to hear from asking a random guy at the pub what he thinks about the world. I’m just listening to constant pedestrian takes with the most smug tone ever.
"So grossly failed." Hmm, wonder if the richest country in the history of the world implementing global sanctions against any attempts had anything to do with it.
The USSR literally chose to not trade, the sanctions are just against cuba +other communist countries weren't blocked they literally have at their core that they don't participate in capitalism/trading
@@nicolasmartinez7302 Saying 'literally' doesn't make a statement literal
Lol, you do know what a sanction is right? You're literally saying socialist countries failed because they couldn't rely on investments and goods from capitalist countries lmaooooo
@@Daniel-ih4zh So not 'grossly failed' and instead intervened with. Thanks for agreeing
@@danoriron4975 not giving you shit is literally not intervening.
Cuba has the most literate population and no homeless people
Yeah and shit economy and living standard that make their doctors want to migrate. So much so that cuba has to reduce immigration
This is such a basic conservative 101 critique of Marx.
Last week guy - socialism is the ONLY way, this week it's the polar opposite. Someone needs to dose these guys up or something, try to get them to open their ears, maybe one day their minds, so that rational open-minde discussion may flow.
I guess Murray has never heard of a little club called the CIA
MOM, THE C-C-CIA IS THE REASON WHY I FAILED ECONOMICS, I SWAER 😢😢
Yea, they seem to have a problem with 3rd world nations developing and deciding their own destinies.
Unfortunate to follow Richard Wolff up with this nonsense. It's not just that he's wrong, he's so sure that he couldn't possibly be.
Yes the venerable richard wolff... who couldn't explain how his revolutionary coops would operate...
@@Daniel-ih4zh One person, one vote.
@@Lucas-fh5dl wow you clearly have this thought out. I wonder do you have such good answers for how you can even generate investment capital for these coops. What happens to your share when you join the business or leave it.
@@Daniel-ih4zh I think he explains that on his channel. Also, cooperatives already exist in this world, he mostly wants more of them.
@@thesystem5980 no, the cooperatives he talks about in spain are not the same thing he pruposes.
I like how he never says what the "thing" is
Anyone who still says Marxism would never work also believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with the crony Capitalism we currently have here! It's never been about going 100% Marxist, it's always been about merging concepts, not leaving the current system the way it is cause some imperialist English narrator thinks we should!
I would say that Marxism would never work (insofar as transferring ownership of the means of production), and that crony Capitalism is a scourge that is best corrected by bettering Capitalism.
@@alphonsis6183 Wouldn't that same logic apply to Marxism? We've never exercised Marxism nor have we attempted to better it so how do you presume bettering a provably failed concept such as capitalism? I have the same faith in the capitalist slave train as I do any other failed alternative, the point is that it's not Marx or 100% of his teachings that should be taught, it's that he had a more social viewpoint that could easily be intertwined with a refined version of capitalism. There is a reason we should consider this alternative, it just can't be done any way we've seen/done it before. Personally I believe we should have "Human-Centered-Capitalism" where we are all shareholders of this country in some sort or as Yang would say, trickle up economics rather than the trickle down garbage we still use today.
Capitalism isn't the problem, it's the regulations that picks who's going to be the winner or loser in the pretext of keeping us safe 😉
Yeah, unregulalted free marked is your answer? Now that's something we have precedent for, and you wouldn't like it.
Communism is one of the most successful forms of living if you don't include humans. Think ant colonies and beehives but humans have egos and egos make communism terrible for human kind. As for socialism, we have plenty of that already in America i.e. Social Security, education K-12th, Police, Fire Department etc... America is a mixed economy, some capitalism and some socialism. Hell taxes are a form of socialism. I want nothing to do with communism but life with zero socialism would be down right scary.
Jiu no?
Joe all well?
It's unimaginable to me how someone with such little knowledge of a subject can speak this confidently. Hollywood should get him in a movie soon cause he is a great actor.
“If the Marxist Bible cannot be taken as a guide to parliamentary tactics, the same may be said of those very revolutionary documents the Gospels. We do not on that account burn the Gospels and conclude that the preacher of The Sermon on the Mount has nothing to teach us; and neither should we burn Das Kapital and ban Marx as a worthless author whom nobody ought to read. Marx did not get his reputation for nothing. He was a very great teacher. And the people who have not yet learn his lessons make most dangerous stateswomen and statesmen.”
I like to share what Bernard Shaw said about Marx.
Yes! I love Douglas. So well spoken and intelligent.
In paper ofc socialism is a superior idea. We need to think, why it doesn't work and how we can make it work. Rather than wage slavery, people would love to work half the time than right now, and still be able to live happily. Managers, And other business and techy guys can be given some incentives for their expertise.The problem with socialism is more of a political one. We are already trying different versions of democratic socialism or state capitalism in different states. We are unnecessarily trying to make it look like two separate camps, antagonistic to each other.
@@Joe-sg9ll First technological capacity of any society does not simply increase because of profit motive.
Based on present technological capacity if we can provide shoes and flush toilet to everyone (think about a bundle of basic necessities), Than everyone should have it after doing min. Work hours per capita that are required to produce those goods. But capitalism sucks at doing this basic allocation. In various parts of the world, people still don't have toilets at all (with or without flushes), cause it is too expensive for them, even after working their asses off. Let people decide if they want to work extra hours -producing the next luxury or enjoy leisure time. A starving man has no free choice.
@@Joe-sg9ll so? We're talking about working hours and on which wage they want to work. They don't decide it.
@@Joe-sg9ll hahaa a polite way of saying profit motive of the capitalist does. Depends on how much he can squeeze. If there are unions and regulations or not. Read some history dude.
By the way Lex you are going to have to moderate debates with Murray and Wolff.
These conversations are ruined by the overarching desire to agree and make the guest feel welcome.
Murray is just too rigid and inflexible.
His mind is closed.
🤣
I like what he said and how he said it. Very entertaining and correct. However it would be also nice to include some arguments from first principles. For instance that core to communism working it requires a concentration of power, top down hierarchy, and state sponsored authoritarianism.
I agree and I think that discussion would be pretty simple. If you make a venn diagram of "jobs people want to do" and "jobs society needs" then you'll find those circles don't overlap. So the question is, how do you get people to do things they don't want to do? Capitalism does it with money but how does marxism do it? The answer is centralized power and authoritarianism.
Marxists (like the the one Lex recently interviewed) love to claim that soviet russia, china, etc. Were just one flavor of marxism. However, they fail to see that those examples are inevitable.
@@billjohnson6863 just look at anarchist Spain in the 30s to prove how that isn't true.
@@jdonthepc9831 anarchism won’t function without a free market unless everyone is 100% self sufficient. Even then a free market would still be utilized.
Marxism, Socialism, and Communism all revolve around one core belief, that central planning is superior to free trade and human collaboration. We don't have Capitalism here in the West, we have Statism, with private property rights, some individual rights and liberties, and regulated trade. More free than the developing world and any "Socialist" nation, but certainly not totally free. Too many of the "ism" words are thrown around, distracting with their ill definitions inviting subjective abstracts.
Not true from what I gather. They revolve around the central concept that if you work for a company and produce a product, your pay should be proportional to the share of work you did, not to what the ‘free market’ dictates.
Agreed. Fair to lay out the start of a very involved and important conversation. Central planning does not work and have never been shown to work. It also doesn't scale.
@@Shahpo Sorry but historically all those Marx centric "isms" involve central planning. The use of force to "regulate" anything or anyone involves policy inflicted by government.
@@samharkin9981 Yea but that’s because they were all communist states. Socialism and Marxism are different, albeit related, ideas. Marxism is a criticism of capitalism, not an economic theory.
Socialism can mean collectivisation or government control of public assets, but not necessarily. In my view, perfect socialism is a system where if you work for a company long term, you should get to own shares in the company proportional to your output.
@@Shahpo if you spend time digging a hole no asked for, you should be compensated?
How can Douglas Murray use a quote from Orwell to - in his mind - disprove the argument that “ Marxism has never been fully practiced” and just ignore the interpretation of Animal Farm?
So intellectually lazy and disingenuous.
Communists should be viewed in the same vein as Fascists, it's an ideology for angry and lost individuals which should be treated as a sign of mental distress rather than any legitimate political solution.
They are polar opposites
This guy is not a serious person.
I love Murray and I agree with him, but not the best for this question. He’s not an acute scholar in economics. Can you get Thomas Sowell? That’s a guy who’d offer an excellent critique to Marx.
Marxism is the only cogent, thorough critique of capitalism which is necessary given that, by and large, capitalists tend to be a-critical and lacking in insight, lacking in self-critical introspection and driven by their base impulses - the way a child is. Also, there's very little discussion about the connection between capitalist consumerism and the destruction of nature we have been seeing for decades and decades, it's taboo to discuss that.
That does not negate the fact that Marxism is a philosophy inherit with racism and until you can prove otherwise it is incumbent tragically with every other human impulse to include use of land for the betterment of the state at the sole discretion of the state in communism