What is Marxism? | Marxism Explained | Who was Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels? Communist Manifesto
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 มิ.ย. 2024
- In this video, we’ll take a look at the basics of what you should know about Marxism.
Marxism is a social, political, and economic philosophy. It is mostly about the battle between the working class and the ownership class and favors communism and socialism over capitalism. Marxism was first publicly formulated in 1848 in the pamphlet The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, which lays out the theory of class struggle and revolution. It inspects the effect of capitalism on labor, productivity, and economic development and argues for a worker revolution to overturn capitalism in favor of communism. Marxism hypothesizes that the struggle between social classes-specifically between the bourgeoisie, or capitalists, and the proletariat, or workers-defines economic relations in a capitalist economy and will inevitably lead to revolutionary communism.
Sources:
www.investopedia.com/terms/m/...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism
#Marxism #Communism #karlmarx
![[UNCUT]"เศรษฐา" โดนบีบให้ลาออก เผยดีลลับ "ทักษิณ" ต้องต่อโปร ไม่งั้นเจอจุดจบ! I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XlH3k81dxmE/mqdefault.jpg)
'Although markets have changed over time, they haven't led to the prevalence of monopolies.' Yes they have. A handful of giant corporations produce and distribute most of the world's food. And a handful of tech titans effectively control everything now - including, most importantly and drastically, our minds.
You're right, I don't get how someone can say monopolies are not prevalent.
Yeah...I take that back. That statement in the video is not correct (in my opinion, but I haven’t looked into the statistics to back it up what defines a “prevalence of monopolies)
@@IllustratetoEducate It's great that you acknowledged it. I would strongly recommend you learn more about the reality of capitalism.
A monopoly is impossible without a government force violating the free market.
Otherwise, how do you explain apple not making every phone on earth, despite being the ones who created the smart phone?
How do you explain Blackberrys death? Kodak's? Sega?
How do you explain the American auto makers going from dominant to garbage to forever playing catch up?
By your logic, this would all be impossible. Anyone who achieved a monopoly should rule its own world, and it is not the case.
The free markets are, without a doubt, the best economy system possible. Marxism is invariably flawed in every aspect, the mantra of envy and resent. Nothing good ever came from it.
@@IllustratetoEducateit's great that you acknowledge the mistake, but you really should correct the video as well. Otherwise, this mistake lives on forever to provide misinformation to people looking to learn and make their own decisions about what Marxism is.
You have made what must have taken a lot of work in learning and understanding, easy to understand for those who are not as knowledgeable. THANK YOU!
I appreciate that! These videos do take a lot of effort.
Exactly like another religion. Too much to read but to iterate one simple thing. For religion 'faith' and for Marxism 'struggle'. Comformative bias make devotees feel like learning deep.
The first two criticisms of what Marx predicted are completely true though lmao. Capitalism as it has matured has become increasingly consolidated in monopolies and the largest firms have more power than ever. His prediction of boom and bust cycles and depressions was also completely accurate. We're about to go through another recession right now and despite being told they were rare occurrences or would diminish in frequency, this will mark the 5th global economic crisis in just the 21st century. If anything Marx's ideas are more relevant in today's world than they were when he wrote it, because then the working class was not the majority and capitalism was not global. Also of course societies without money, private property, and competition have existed. Capitalism is the only time in history where markets are the central mechanism of production. They existed before in some societies, but it wasn't the foundation of the economy. That makes capitalism historically contingent, and it'd be odd to say the features of a capitalist economy are permanent. Was Rome or Egypt permanent? Was the divine right of kings permanent? Why would today be any different?
Monopolies were formed thanks to the government intervention in the market, lobbying and regulations are the most responsible for ruining the competition. Capitalism is the most compatible with humankind even despite it's flaws and as Rome and Egypt weren't permanent we are still referencing to those times and looking for inspiration from them, also fact is that true capitalism never meant state control over the stability of the market and this is something that currently is being supported by the biggest tycoons. Current system is the closest you can get to mix of socialism and capitalism.
Wtf? Back in times there was no middle class.
@Daniel Green statist businesses which operates within interventionist economic framework. For example, American system.
@Daniel Green because before government financed them and helped them instead of comforming to the rules of the market, no bailouts.
@@bowwak5366 You forget it is the communists themselves that help the capitalists. Why? Because big corporations are needed to control/oppress citizens/consumers. Communism was never about equal share but all about control. Over everyone. They needed to sell the lie with lies about equality.
@@bowwak5366 "monopolies were formed thanks to government intervention in the market"
Very simply and nicely explained. Great effort has been put into making the video and it shows. Thanks a lot! This really helped.
Thank you so much! I’m really glad you found it to be high quality. I do spend a lot of time making these videos so I appreciate the compliment.
The definitive document of Marxism wasn't the Communist Manifesto, it was Das Kapital.
I think you can be a Marxist without being a Communist, that just means you agree with the description of the problem, but not necessarily the prescription being offered.
You can also be a Socialist without being either a Communist or Marxist. Socialism preexisted Marx (it produced Marx), and is an anti Capitalist movement born in capitalist UK.
Here I'm using a more specific, academic definition of Marxism, as a perspective in political economy.
It's difficult to understand anti Capitalism without understanding the history of Socialism in the UK and USA - it was there before Marx, after Marx and without Marx.
I'm not sure exactly why we still find this political economist from 19th century imperial UK so fascinating, must have been something he said...
Thanks for including your sources, helps a lot.
I'm currently watching this video December 30th of 2023 and I think the what Marx predicted is extremely relevant in today's society.
I disagree. The "class divide" is significantly closer together now than ever before. Almost everybody today has the opportunity to create wealth due to technological advances, whereas in previous generations it was impossible. We as a generation are far better off than our grandparents, or previous generations.
Communism will lead to corruption like in China, North Korea and Soviet Russia. Not nice places to live, stripped of all hope, ambition, quality of life and opportunity.
Capitalism is true power to the people as individuals have opportunity. Communism is power to the government where it will inevitably be corrupted and the people will suffer.
You mean how Russia and China is proving the whole world wrong?
"They have not led to monopolies."
Good joke as now more than ever there is an enormous high concentration in every possible industry.
A lot of the things that people call monopolies really aren't, but in that there actually are monopolies they are the result of government intervention: the granting of special privilege.
@@Nanofuture87 no you guys are just bootlickers
@@Nanofuture87 No, it's government intervention that prevents monopolies. You say they "grant special privilege" but that just means that they don't regulate those particular companies the same way they regulate other ones. The free market always leads to monopolies on its own, that's just basic economics.
@@AllHaiLKINGTIsHeRe3 I'm sorry, but that's simply false. The free market does not result in monopolies in any conceptually meaningful sense of that term. Monopolies in the real world are the result of the granting of special government privilege.
@@Nanofuture87 Are you gonna provide evidence for this, or just assert it? Let's just think about it conceptually. You have a few businesses competing on the market, one of them is more successful than the others, giving that company an advantage of resources over other competitors who will come later, and that special advantage that they have perpetuates itself until some other circumstance breaks up the monopoly. Why do you think monopolies have vastly increased in the US since antitrust regulations have been weakened? Just a coincidence?
I can't thank you enough for the great videos. As a visual learner, so far, this has been the best video I've ever watched. I learned so much from your way of explaining it. Please cover more economic lessons in your next videos.
You're very welcome!
I'm a Polisci student. I really like your videos. Subscribed!
That’s awesome! I’m really glad to know the videos are helpful to political science students. :)
Wow. Nicely done. Not any easy topic to handle without getting one side or the other a little riled. Bravo. Keep up the good work!
I try my best! Thanks for watching! 🙏🏼
Because his take on marxism is common textbook bullshit.
EXCELLENT video, it was very infomative, concise and easy to understand. You earned a new subscriber +1 👍🏽
I hope your channel blows up, you deserve way more views for the amount of effort/research you put into your videos. 😎
Nice Illustrated explanation!
I’m glad that you enjoyed it. Many hours went into it! 😅
4th 2:30
5th 2:43
1921
1 Introduction. Stimulation of the vagal nerve decelerates the heart rate due to release of acetylcholine (ACh). This was demonstrated for the first time by Otto Loewi in 1921 and the “Vagusstoff” (ACh) became the first neurotransmitter ever discovered (Loewi, 1921).
Nicely done. Can you also cover Psychology topics? Especially, psychological assessment and testing. Thank you and more power.
Sure! Can you give me a couple examples of topics that would be helpful in the Psychology area?
@@IllustratetoEducate Human, Tree, House psychological test
@@IllustratetoEducate Psychometrics
@@IllustratetoEducate MSE or mental status exam.
@griver007able interesting that you would request this as it is a niche related to clinical psychology. There is a neuropsychological compendium text book that you can buy that offers almost every single assessment you are looking for. TH-cam is NOT a great resource for such a topic especially since this is not a professional platform and can that kind of information can be misused by the general public. I recommend studying at the doctoral level to understand more about psychology assessment or find a just as a psychometrist.
thank you so much I have an essay due soon and this was very easy to understand great video :)
Glad it was helpful! Best of luck on your essay!
Do you think you understood marxism ?
wow! this was interesting and simple to understand😍
Bravo. Very well explained
Thank you so much. Glad you enjoyed it! 😊
Good job!
There have only been two real world experiments where a single society was split into a more socialist half and a more capitalist half. Those are East/West Germany and North/South Korea. Both experiments resulted in economic and humanitarian disaster for the unfortunate souls who found themselves on the socialist side.
True but there are benefits
And what we want is to bring those benefits without the concern of the bad stuff it also brought upon.
Venezuela went Socialist look where there at! They use to be one of the riches countries!
Very good description
Thank you
You're welcome
I love these videos! They are simple to understand and they’re very straightforward, thanks!
I guess the only thing that is becoming more of an issue with the criticism is the fact that some of it just not true anymore. Monopolies are in fact becoming more and more of an issue, and without the state intervening it would been a massive problem. And the state intervening is in fact a socialist approach not a capitalist approach. So saying that Marxism is wrong because it did not appear is both wrong, as well as the examples not being relevant to the capitalism it was referring to for its time.
And we are 100% seeing the disappearance of private property, being replaced by a rental and subscription economy
Think it works? Go review history. In theory, it's nice, but in real life it's not.
@@theropesofrenovation9352 Point to a couple instances then where socialism failed solely because of its own internal difficulties, with _no whatsoever_ interference by western nations. I'll wait. Maybe you'll review some history while I'm waiting
Great video you should do the difference of classical liberalism and libertarianism
4:56 Did you mean to say “Likely” or “Unlikely”? I can’t tell if you’re saying it’s a possible scenario or not.
Good catch. I meant to say it’s “likely and unworkable concept” but I did accidentally say “unlikely” in the video. My bad 😞
Thanks for sticking to the facts. This is something I can use in my class.
Glad it was helpful!
It is not wholly factual. Marx never said capitalism would be “led by enlightened leaders of the proletariat”. That is Leninist nonsense. Marx and Engels said it would be the working class themselves, united to achieve what’s in their best interests, who would overthrow capitalism and replace it with socialism/communism which were exactly the same thing for Marx and Engels. Socialism and communism are NOT different stages. That is also a Leninist distortion of Marxism. Also, a boom-bust cycle IS an inherent feature of capitalism.
Ur voice is too good nd impressive
Except that a. The proletariat can become the bouguizi in capitalism and b. What happens when the workers control the means of production? Mao, Stalin and Hitler.
what software does this illustrations
No special software. Just old fashioned whiteboard marker and an iPhone.
@@IllustratetoEducateI think it was a joke lol
thank you :)
You're welcome!
The problem is federal and state interest on new money entering the system. And each man or woman can only issue new money equally upon evidence of previous issuance is canceled.
The goal of the current regime. So obvious. 😮
It hasn’t let to monopolies because of laws put into place to prevent it. If it weren’t for the laws I’m pretty sure we would have one store for everything.
Great video, thank you very much , note to self(nts) watched all of it 5:05
Glad you enjoyed it! I like the nts. 👍🏼
I believe UBI si the effective compromise in the two economic systems. Industries have to compete for labor and consumer while the people is given the choice to work 80 hour weeks.
UBI is garbage, people don't need handouts, they need the actual fruit of their labor by raising minimum wages and providing public services like health care for free instead of forcing workers to pay monopoly prices.
let's work this in reverse, which political system has led to the most deaths and malfunctioning economies? there is no need to ponder over this question, the result are out!
Capitalism by a mile
@@ryanmclaughlin2678 "climate change" tells us everything we need to know about marxism
The problem isn't capitalism. The solution most certainly isn't communism.
Corruption. Greed. Immorality. Those are the problems.
@@andyperez2742which capitalism allows power to be given to those things. It’s not a part of capitalism it is the effect of capitalism
@@matteobtch2690Eh I’d argue that people were greedy, immoral and power hungry even before capitalism existed. I think those characteristics are flaws in humans that we must battle.
i've only heard of the man. nothing else, until this.
Well Done. Show and Tell. Beautifully illustrated and distilled summary. Intellectually-honest.
Thank you! I appreciate it. Glad you found it to be that way. 👍🏼
No monopolies, you say? Might want to take a closer look at that.
Based on how one defines a monopoly, I would agree with you.
A few counter points. "Lowest possible wages" is misleading. Competition between industries and market demand determine wages. Those companies who offer the best wages will attract the best skills, which lead to productivity gains over their competition. It's a cost-benefit calculation. And another factor overlooked, turnover is expensive. Onboarding and training are expensive and time consuming, and it's a wise employer who seeks to retain employees by financial incentives.
Bottom line, Marx didn't understand the free market, he was wrong about competition, and never got to see the prosperity that capitalism would create.
You're the best 😘
I think a breakdown of Marxism should, by default, include the "features" said ideology comes with.
Socialism requires the creation of an all-powerful bureaucrat state. One that can at will remove everything from its people, backed by the threat of violence.
It also requires this new party to somehow be kind and incorruptible so as not to abuse its absolute power(lol).
All Marxist movements have led to enormous misery, loss of rights, loss of culture, and caused the greatest genocides we have knowledge of in history.
Far more useful facts to include than the 3 "critiques" you detailed in the video.
When you live in the abstract world of a classroom, theories and critiques are all you have, but when history has already provided you with real-life experiments, that's what you should focus on.
That's outstanding but you didn't say anything about religion being the opiate of the people, which helps ease them into complacency before a rebellion can occur.
Monopolies can only be created and held in place by the strong central governments that Marie favored.
I am not Marxist.However I contemplate that most of these ideas just illustrate reality in modern society.
Never before have so many people had so much money, yet we have people living in tent cities, which doesn't shock anyone over the last 8-10 years.
These tent cities are getting bigger not smaller...... this cannot be a good sign in our capitalist world.
In the fascism video you talked about the killings and authoritarianism, but in this video you make no mention of genocides or the authoritarianism that came with marxist ideology.
ok, tell us about the genocides of marxist ideology, but please don't come with the The Black Book Of Communism
Because Marxism wasn't intended to do that
marxism results in fascism but its not part of the ideology
@@Angel_559_ You can blanket anything with any term but what actually happened, is what actually happened. This can be said about fascism as well. So why was it not mentioned in this video that there was also mass killings of people; let alone it be that there were millions upon millions MORE killed under Marxist ideologic rulings.
There are many errors in this video. Socialism and communism are the same thing, Marx and Engels used the two terms interchangeably.
There is no inevitability in the argument presented by Marx and Engels. They recognised that the only end for capitalism will happen only with a conscious and democratic majority ending it to replace capitalism with socialism, not by a vanguard leading the majority (that's Leninism). The makers of the video needs to re-asses their understanding of the word "alienation". It does not refer to workers becoming resentful and unhappy, although this could and does happen. The speaker then continues to make substantial errors in critical understanding. Competition does indeed lead to monopolies. Despite the best efforts of capitalist governments they do arise on a regular basis. And again Marx does not claim that such monopolies could or would lead to a collapse of capitalism. The speaker then informs us that crisis are not an inherent feature of capitalism when quite clearly crisis, collapse and depression are. Again Marx points out that this will not bring about the end of capitalism but merely a re-alignment of the same system that destroys the lives of workers all over the world. Best to go to the original and decide for yourselves.
Marxism is open to different forms of interpretation
Did he explained what Marxism is?
The last part is the biggest fact.
Hows this helping me tomorrow is my exam
Like it
Marx didnt say that there weerw only two classes, but there where two antagonist classes, he admitted that there were (and there are) other classes.
I think there are more substantial criticisms of Marxism than the three presented. Class conflict theory is disputed. Dialectic and historical materialism have been strongly critiqued. Very few non-Marxists support the labor theory of value. The inevitability of any system is highly suspect as well. History is not teleological, but evolutionary, constantly adapting to present conditions. The complexity inherent to evolutionary processes makes it nonlinear and nondeterministic.
Is no-one else here gonna make a joke about Marx from Kirby Super Star/Super Star Ultra?
The vanguard is Lenin not marx.
Also marx didn't differentiate between socialism and communism
Yeah he did. I think it’s actually in the introduction to the Communist Manifesto.
A society without money, competition, and private property actually HAS materialized
😂😂
@Dan Zimmerman - produce & illustrate a vedio to describe the current Events on the political stage, utilizing the ideology, & tactics of the left & right.
Utilize most recent past events from foreign policies to National current events highlight culture, political, race, sex/Gender, and ethnicity
We believe that what you will find will be shocking. It will be educational for the Public at large.
Hasn’t lead to monopolies…right
You left out some of the more salient aspects of Marxism, like the violence needed to separate the people from their property, the inevitable starvation of millions of people because communal farming is always an abject failure, the need to force people to work at the point of a gun because people are not inherently altruistic and willing to work for the benefit of others, etc.
They always leave that part out.
The pitchforks are coming TED TALK
I didn’t know what Marxism was until I watched this video
“An unworkable concept”. Explain that to the college kids who are screaming about capitalism.
I laughed out loud at the criticisms bc they’re something that do happen continuously within capitalism
Frantz Fanon
As a Marxist, this video is incredibly accurate, thank you!
Yes, it is an unworkable concept. There's no incentive to work and innovate.
Money is not the only spur that incites innovation
"We" have to keep trending until the government gives us a chatbot for our problems. It seems as obvious as the classic suggestion box.
*Wishing you all a Wonderful Winter Solstice.*
A traditional celebration dating well over 5000 years ago where the Sun is literally rebirthed in the passageway of an ancient tomb.
"The Grand Passage Tomb." A World Heritage site. Witness the rebirth in person.
A celebration of life and renewal, peace and camaraderie with food, song, dance, drink and good cheer.
Happy Holidays.
Let the Sunshine In...
*Be Happy*
"Solstice Night by S J Tucker"
thank you
Can Christianity be in Communism / Marxism
Yes of course!
Look at Methodism
Yes
Seems extremely complex yet extremely simple at the same time 😂
I looked up Kirby Marx….
Many people in this thread don't understand what monopoly means. To be in monopoly a company must control more than 80% of the market. That's nearly impossible in a global economy. The only monopolies are the ones that are closely intertwined with government.
Marx predicted the end of Capitalism within his lifetime. After Marx died economic growth went through the roof. The best 150 years have been incredible with massive new technologies and huge improvements in child mortality rates. We live in the best time of all human history and people want to whine about it on the internet on their $1,000 iPhone.
I think you bring up excellent points about what a monopoly is. Thanks for your clarification that.
Economic growth for who? And how can you explain now that standards of living on the USA are now more expensive?
I think Marx made some good points, however he instead of a revolution (un-)intentionally made a neo-religion of severely dangerous people like Stalin, Mao and Castro, who ended up killing more than two world wars combined.
Excellent video. In my opinion Communism/socialism doesn't work. You should do a video about fascism.
Great idea! I’m always looking for more ideas! Good to hear from you! :)
@Max what do you mean they were allowed to work for most of the 20th century and in Venezuela has been since 1998. So what are you talking about?
@Max what is the definition of socialism?
@Max basically that the state owns the means of productions in socialism. While in capitalism is private property. You are against private property in favor of the state owns and run your life?
@Max I disagree. Capitalism does not have a class system is not stagnant anyone can succeed, you can be in the 1% while people that are the 1% can lose their place, etc. Socialism is a dictatorship becuase the Government has to control the means of production . Slavery and feudalism don't go together with capitalism.
As being born in USSR and educated there, author missed one important concept: prehistoric society had no classes. Al persons were equal. Then slavery developed, became inefficient and changed to feudalism, which became inefficient and turned into capitalism. Capitalism also will become inefficient and need to be changed to communism.
Exactly, prehistoric societies were classless, moneyless, and stateless societies, which is exactly what communism is. Also, did you enjoy the USSR? Would you like to bring it back?
@@VON-O5 It's not exactly true. Even animal packs have some kind of hierarchy. Bees and ants have it too. It's a matter of survival. I'm not sure about classes, but I already told you about hierarchy. If you're talking about states, it used to be territory. Even animals protect their own territory. Money is needed for the trade. It developed later when more and more things needed to be exchanged, so trade needs a common denominator, which is money. I can't go back to the USSR because it doesn't exist anymore. I'm from Uzbekistan which is Central Asia. Don't want to leave there.
@@lenyaistashkenta When I am talking about states, I am talking about a beauracratic, top-down structured government. Prehistoric societies did not have that, therefore they are stateless. In a communist society, there would not be anarchy, there would still be order, but instead of organizations being structured in a top down beauracratic way, organizations would be collectively managed by the workers. For example, a brand new communist society would need a strong military to defend itself from capitalist empires such as the United States. This military would be collectively managed by the entire society rather than managed by an exploitative ruling class that then forces the proletariat to carry out it's will. The actions of a military affect the entire society, it is only logical that the entire society has a say in what the military does. There could still be "commanders" but those commanders would need to be voted in by the proletariat through a DIRECT democracy. Those "commanders" would have to be accountable to the proletariat and they can be removed immediately if they do a bad job. When I say moneyless, I am talking about having the ability to purchase the means of production and privately own the means of production. In a communist society, money would technically still exist, but you wouldn't be able to use that "money" to purchase the means of production and privately own them. But you would still be able to purchase unnecessary commodities with that "money" such as video games, movie tickets, earbuds, etc. However, this "money" cannot be used to purchase necessities such as food, water, housing, and healthcare. This is because necessities such as food, water, housing, and healthcare would be guaranteed human rights that are completely free to every human. You would not need to spend any money on necessities because they would be human rights. For the classless part, I am referring to the existence of a ruling class. In a communist society, everyone would be a worker, there would not be any exploitative ruling class that leeches off of workers. Lastly, I am well aware that the USSR no longer exists, I was just asking if you would like for the USSR to exist once again.
Also, if you get confused by "commanders" or "managers" still being able to exist in a classless society, let me explain. These commanders or managers are still apart of the proletariat (proletariat=worker). They are not exploitative, and they do not have private ownership of the means of production. These commanders or managers have added responsibilities that can affect the rest of the proletariat. Which is why they are put into their positions through a DIRECT democracy because the rest of the proletariat need to know who will be handling these added responsibilities. The moment these managers or commanders try to be abusive or just do a bad job, the rest of the proletariat can remove them from their position and collectively decide who to replace them with. Managers or commanders in a communist society are still members of the proletariat, they just have added responsibilities, but added responsibilities does not necessarily mean added power. Remember, a communist society is a dictatorship of the proletariat, meaning that the ENTIRE society dictates what happens. Currently, we live in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie (bourgeoisie=ruling class, 0.1% of the population). Meaning that 0.1% of the population dictates what happens. This is not natural, human society is not supposed to be hierarchical, it is supposed to be a collective effort where EVERYONE has a say, not just 0.1% of humanity.
"climate change" tells us everything we need to know about marxism
I pray the proletariat of America wakes up, sees their naivety and stand up for theirs.
They're to busy on Tick Tock!
Capitalism has led to the most wealth creation in the history of the world. As any student of History will tell you, there has never been more prosperity in the history of humanity than there is right now, and this is due to capitalism.
Conversely, socialism and communism have led to more oppression, death, and starvation than any other economic system.
Dont end up in monopolies? Ever heard of Blackrock?
Marx stars with plato , Aristotle, kant, hegel . Then you can do marx...
All this everyone is equal crap is a joke. No competition means no quality, no effort and that means no proggression. To anyone that needs this. I spent 14 years slaving away in a warehouse literally brain washed thinking I had a good gig made decent money with decent benefits.😂 I got brave took a risk and left. I am now in sales my income has doubled almost over night. My credit is good for the 1st time in my life and I am genuenly happy. I heard a man one time say there are 4 paths to success.
1. Medicine
2. Law
3. Sales
4. Business owner
Guys break out of the matrix and start living. Stop expecting other people to take care of you. That's exactly what I was doing for 14 years working for that warehouse. I show up slave away and my master gave me my bare necessities. The day I left was the day I started taking care of myself and iv flurrished. If I can do it anyone can!
mho
Marx used the word 'depreciation' 35 times in the first two volumes of his major work. He never made any mention of Planned Obsolescence. He never saw automobiles or refrigerators.
The concept of GNP/GDP was developed in the late 1930s. Economists do not mention NNP/NDP very much. Almost never in fact. They only subtract the depreciation of Capital Goods like industrial robots and 18-wheel. The depreciation of durable consumer goods which may be subject to Planned Obsolescence is not worthy of their notice.
Socialists do not seem to be able to figure out that we are running the planet on defective algebra. Where is the data on the annual depreciation of automobiles since Sputnik?
Find it interesting that the naysayers of Marxism were simply referred to as "experts." Sounded to me like much of what Marx predicted IS true. This topic requires a much longer conversation. Hopefully, people will seek out other sources for a more comprehensive coverage.
I hope people will look for more information on it as well. This is only a starting point.
Marxism is too simplistic, it takes no account of human nature, and the need for checks and balances. It ignores the fact that business owners often take great risks and work incredibly hard to establish their businesses. Some workers are highly skilled, and in demand. Companies that treat staff well may see lower turnover. The command economy has been shown to fail, free enterprise is needed to respond to demand and drive innovation and efficiency. Competition allows better products that benefit society. We’ve seen that all communist states become hell holes, led by a psychopath, with a privileged elite, and an oppressed mass. That is because they lack checks and balances, they lack independent scrutiny of the legislature, and a way to defenestrate a poor leader. Instead corruption runs rife.
Capitalism is not monarchism, it’s principle good is labor is a capital hood and all those who give their labor have a right to property of equal value. The other economic structures insist that only those with access to power or precious metals can own property. The communist failure is that nobody has a right to property and so nobody has insentive to work. As John Locke said government exists to protect property and each of us has a property in our body and minds that is inherently ours.
Capitalism and socialism are codependents. During Marx's time there were few if any social safety nets.
THE DEMOCRITIZATION OF ECONOMICS
I thank God for Javier Milei who encapsulated everything that you put forth in this video.
Milei was a university professor of economics in Argentina before running for the top office as its president.
I have to confess that I know nothing about politics or economics...until not long after Justin Trudeau became our PM of Canada back in 2015. Talk about a socialist government! Now I've begun to pay attention to politics bigtime!
Thank you so much for this post, and as Javier Milei summed up in his speech at the World Economic Forum near the end of January, 2024, "Long live freedom, damn it!".
Native Americans and multiple tribes around the world lived in communes where they shared everything.
Also, nowhere in Marxism says that there can't be competition.
No one says that something like so-called primitive communism is impossible. That just isn't how most people want to live. Most people want the higher standards of living made possible by the wealth creation that occurs with capitalism.
You believe that a person doesn't have the right to own things?
The challenge here is the central standard for Marxism is Karl Marx. Power and control are part of the centralized communal attempt at progress. With capitalism, the central standard is a free market mystically governed by supply and demand and the drive for wealth, power and control. Neither takes into consideration the Living God who created all things and all people to Whom all people will give an account. He alone sets the standard for the most vibrant society. However, this takes a living relationship with Him. How does that happen? Plead with Him to transform your heart of stone into a heart of flesh. The truth will set you free. Call on the name of Jesus Christ for eternal salvation that will be reflected in history. National repentance is needed. Without it, no nation can stand as it will be divided against itself.
There are still people who believe in this garbage??
Competition doesn't create better goods for consumers?? What about technology, Apple vs Android, Tesla pioneering sustainable vehicles, literally every brand or product in existence. In business the best products/companies win, it's survival of the fittest because a capitalism market is consumer-driven, therefore forcing better goods for consumers and driving innovation.
Marxism is entirely based entirely on the assumption of worker exploitation by pointing the finger at capitalism and private companies.
Business owners 100% deserve more as they're investing their entire lives and bear a significant risk if it fails (loss of home, loss of family, health risks etc.), something workers can just walk away from and find another job.
Capitalism just forces fair pay by getting what you earn. If you believe you deserve more but aren't adding at least the equivalent value (or more) for what you're being paid, you're deluded and entitled.
Think you deserve more? Stop complaining and start your own business, but you won't because you're lazy AF...
I prefer Georgism, tax land not people.
It belongs into a museum!! Outdated and wrong anyway
If you reduce Marx's thought to the communist manifesto, you will get it all wrong. It would be like studying a plan for a kitchen and claiming it's what cooking is about.
The main issue is not class struggle, that is the material cause.
The main issue that makes Marxism justified is a redefinition of humans as "working men", or the proletariat. So "work" is part of human nature, and giving away your work is like going against that very nature, it alienates people from their own desires and nature, and the work becomes meaningless. So if they revolt, it's not out of jealousy as you claim, it's out of nihilism. That's the real first principle of Marxism.
The other reason is that it is democratic, it want everybody to be their own man fully, with the same rights as others. So the issue about justice is that the capitalist has a right to other people's work, based on the idea of private property, so every work that is done using his machinery or land is his. He did not earn anything from his own work, and he himself is alienated as well. If people don't understand those things, they will get it wrong.
His solution was to abolish private property and it would magically fix things. The criticism you show are very superficial and don't go to the heart of it. They all seem wrong anyway, so they would prove Marx right.
A better critique would be to deny that work is what constitutes a man, that it is quite external to him. Things can be improved that diminish that alienation and lots of people did that.. Factory work is not what it used to be, not even close. No need to uproot everything.
The second critique that could be made is that he underestimate market forces and the need for specialization. Market forces did not create the monopolies he thought would happen, there are individual entrepreneurs that find new things to do all the time. He thought the petit bourgeois was dead or would die. He was completely wrong. If anything it is growing, but it's not for everybody, and that is the third criticism, he thinks people are equal in decision making and abilities.
Unfortunately, not everybody is a salesman, not everybody is able to raise capital to invest, or organize things that work. Those are special skills that the capitalist do as well as provide leadership. Or course that means he can't actually do the production when he does that. So the whole idea of everybody being a proletariat is nonsensical and not desirable. Specialization is the heart of liberalism and democracy, and it is the only way to actual economical success. You can't get rid of it and think it will be the same, it's just not possible. That's also why it was never implemented, it does not work if you want something like a civilization.
So that's what I am thinking about Marxism. It has some validity, but is the wrong solution to a wrong problem. And it's false historically, the necessity is just not true.
my fbi agent’s gonna hunt me down for watching this video 💀