Watching this as a big star wars fan, it's amazing to see the links between the fall of classical liberalism leading up and through WW1 with the the fall of the Jedi & Galactic Republic through the Clone Wars. No wonder the movies themes feel so subconscious.
I'm liberal and I find this course helpful and clear to me many point about the history of Liberalism. I find it incarnated in human nature. In all the societies there're liberal people. It's not limited to the west, but it's a universal project. Nationalism contradict liberalism because we are ruled under one idea, culture, religion, and we identify ourselves with the government. Suppose that a state who rules many ethnics groups as Serbia, those ethnics groupe will never tolerate to be unrecognized by the government and they suffer from the forced annihilation into a strange nation. The former Iraqi regime wanted to arabise the Kurdish people and that went to many wars that endure more than one hundred years of war between Kurds and the fourth state sharing their land. Wars were between liberal and conservative parties in latine america, as in Mexico and Colombia.
The only thing is, Jersey shore is easy to watch and understand. This video uses big words and bigger ideas. Ten minutes of this video equals more content than three Jersey Shore episodes, possibly seasons.
It is obvious to me why things didn't get steadily worse from the 40's onward. 1: The Holocaust, the Gulag Archipelago, Pol Pot's Mountain of Skulls, etc. 2: The Cold War created a contrast between freedom (as in classical liberalism) and a totalitarian collectivism, 3: The writings of individuals such as Mises, Hayek, Hazlitt, Muggeridge, Kolakowski, Solzenitzyn, etc, 4: the more recent collapse of collectivism overtly (Eastern Europe, USSR) and discreetly (China, Vietnam, India).
At least he gets the importance of the shift in the labeling of the left and the right. It creates a lot of false dilemmas which keep the argument over heated and prevents charitable argument.
44:09 can someone show me the data for that? That is an extremely compelling statement, as I feel like the traditional story is that WWII is the reason economies exploded with wealth [or at least with the US leading the way.. it's a very Keynesian story as well obviously]
Keynesian story? Keynes (who was a mathematician not an economist) was proven utterly wrong by the banking panic arbitrarily named the "Great Depression." Everything Keynes stood for was proven wrong then when Govt spent massive sums on public works projects, became the nation's largest employer, and we had 8 years of double-digit inflation. America prospered after WWII because she cut taxes and we were no longer spending 40% of GDP on war, duh!!
@rosihantu1 I don't know what you see, but the fact is that the poverty rate in the US is generally accepted to be around 20%. I also don't know what country you're from, but there are very few jobs in the US. There are 6 unemployed people for every 1 job opening. Also, most people who live in poverty ARE employed! The problem is that the greedy corporations and rich bosses pay very little in the US, mainly because we don't have many unions.
10000 % a king pin. If you are a new thinker, Dear Citizen of the world, you can try this video for your ,trailer full of your mental processing. Everything is said inside his intro who finish at 4:48 !
@rosihantu1 In places like Sweden, everyone has a job that pays well, but if not, they get help from the government like subsidized housing, food, healthcare, etc. The welfare system is skeletal in the US, therefore there are more people in poverty and homeless.
Portugal is social democrat and socialist to an extent. Sweden is not. Sweden government does not control the economy and media as we do. Sweden as its minister said: "We are a capitalist economy with welfare". Whereas Portuguese is the poorest Western EU country, Sweden is one of the wealthiest. A country does not become socialist by having social welfare. It becomes socialist when the state controls the economy and much more.
@rosihantu1 There's a reason the United States, the richest nation in the history of the world has a 15-20% poverty rate that is rapidly increasing, and Finland, a nation with virtually no natural resources but a very democratic government with a great welfare system has poverty below 2% and the world's best (public) education system.
@rosihantu1 We need taxes to pay for public schools, healthcare for the poor etc. The reason the Koch get subsidized by the government isn't because we collect taxes whatsoever, its because the government is corrupted and undemocratic. I don't keep what I earn, the multi-millionaire that owns the company I work at steals a large share of what I produce. Same with the people who have to work for the Koch's companies. We need the government to care for the needy, private charities don't cut it.
Its not bunk its just not delivering on what you think govt. should deliver. Some people believe that the quality of life rising for all people and being free are inherently good. Others believe that quality of life being similar or equal amongst all citizens is more important and justifies loss of freedom. So when you say it does not benefit all, what do you really mean? No system benefits everybody financially, so considering that, isnt it better to be broke and free not broke and enslaved.
27 minutes into this, he keeps casting individual freedom as being connected to industrialization, which to me means the labor movement, from this perspective, is a negative. I see no reason to give him more of my time if he's going to ignore the fact that the rich who owned the factories had the power, and abused it, thus creating situations such as we see described in something like The Jungle. This power difference continues, with labor regulations helping, but not solving, the problem.
@JackBlair2 I'm not sure if I follow your comments. Is the one about Jesus in agreement or disagreeing with my comments? And what are you getting at with the Emancipation Proclamation, you completely lost me with that one.
Liked the video for the most part but I was disappointed that he has bought into the myth of Lincoln and the Yankee caricature of the antebellum south, slaver did exist but was dying only a small number of the population owned slaves, southern society at the time lacked the wide spread racism of the north and were extremely liberal when compared to new england, I am using liberal in its classical usage.
@rosihantu1 The reality is that the countries with the lowest poverty and homelessness rates have the most extensive welfare systems- all the Scandinavian nations, France, Germany and Israel from close to its founding until the 1980's when it undertook neoliberal reforms.
35:07 "the replacement of a large degree of self-employment by mass employment in large, integrated productive facilities creates a kind of experience of collectivism in people's daily life which tends to affect the way the see the world." No. Working for 14 hours a day for a meager pay and in horrible conditions creates a whole different kind of experience. What a sly and dishonest way to describe the miserable working conditions in which newly emerging industrial capitalists put their workers into, not even mentioning the suffering of the peoples of imperial colonies. Basically proves how easily you can take human pain and turn it into a reasonably sounding self-justifying sentence. I'm not an opponent of liberalism, but I was hoping to hear a more credible lecture on how the classical liberal ideology of the first half of the 19th century - that is looking for ways to oppose the "divine" right of monarchy and make people more free - has repetitively undergone a vast paradigm shift by transforming into an ideology of oppression, this time in the hands of private business. Back in the aftermath of the Industrial revolution it was the emerging class of industrial capitalists exploiting the factory workers and destroying the colonies; today the picture is more complicated with financiers, bankers, good old industrial capitalists, tech billionaires, etc.-- altogether buying politicians and basically writing legislation. Europe is doing slightly better than the US, but not radically differently. Power has shifted from the state into private (corporate more recently) business--John Stuart Mill or Adam Smith would be very surprised to see the kind of outcome the philosophy they nourished has produced. This should be obvious, even just by looking at the business press these days.
Nobody thinks that the advent of petroleum as a fuel source in the 1850s had anything to do with that economic growth spike he's talking about? This instructor needs to rethink his role as an educator. Be a free thinker, but make sure you know who was right!
@spartan2600 Everybody is greedy. Corporations, rich bosses, employees, me, you and evrybody else. We all want to pay as little as possible for the services we receive. If I invest money in a business, I expect a certain return on investment. That means operating at the lowest cost possible including employee cost. That is sound business practice as long as corporations are not using force to compel people to work for them. But u can't compel corporations to hire unionize worker as well.
@spartan2600 Well bless your liberal heart. You know how best to prevent taxpayer largess from falling into the hands ofthe Koch billionaire (assuming that is true in the firt place)? Don't collect so much tax that you can simply give it away willi nilly. You keep what you earn. I keep what I earn. If you want to help out your fellow man, do it out of your own pocket.
@spartan2600 What you are proposing is the redistribution of wealth in the interest of fairness. I want fairness as well. You know what pisses me off, good looking girls tends to have sex with good looking guys or guys with money. I have neither. In the interest of fairness, can this utopia of yours compel good looking girls to have sex with me? Personally, I don't care much about housing or money. If you can redistribute sex, I'm right with you.
Thanks for never explaining how you happen to know “what most people thought” centuries ago. Did you talk to these people? To people from all walks of life? Or are you just gathering this from the writings of people who had time and money and willingness to write. Sorry but I can’t take this seriously when you claim to know “what people thought” without explaining how.
wow! I dropped out of high school; now here I am taking notes at my computer desk.
Watching this as a big star wars fan, it's amazing to see the links between the fall of classical liberalism leading up and through WW1 with the the fall of the Jedi & Galactic Republic through the Clone Wars. No wonder the movies themes feel so subconscious.
brilliant, and a pleasure to listen this beautiful English accent
I'm liberal and I find this course helpful and clear to me many point about the history of Liberalism. I find it incarnated in human nature. In all the societies there're liberal people. It's not limited to the west, but it's a universal project. Nationalism contradict liberalism because we are ruled under one idea, culture, religion, and we identify ourselves with the government. Suppose that a state who rules many ethnics groups as Serbia, those ethnics groupe will never tolerate to be unrecognized by the government and they suffer from the forced annihilation into a strange nation. The former Iraqi regime wanted to arabise the Kurdish people and that went to many wars that endure more than one hundred years of war between Kurds and the fourth state sharing their land.
Wars were between liberal and conservative parties in latine america, as in Mexico and Colombia.
Correction on the captions: "Ballypark" should be "Belle Epoch."
I can't believe I'm watching a 3 hour lecture voluntarily.
Minor correction: 12:47 The berlin conference took place in 1885
The only thing is, Jersey shore is easy to watch and understand. This video uses big words and bigger ideas.
Ten minutes of this video equals more content than three Jersey Shore episodes, possibly seasons.
It is obvious to me why things didn't get steadily worse from the 40's onward. 1: The Holocaust, the Gulag Archipelago, Pol Pot's Mountain of Skulls, etc. 2: The Cold War created a contrast between freedom (as in classical liberalism) and a totalitarian collectivism, 3: The writings of individuals such as Mises, Hayek, Hazlitt, Muggeridge, Kolakowski, Solzenitzyn, etc, 4: the more recent collapse of collectivism overtly (Eastern Europe, USSR) and discreetly (China, Vietnam, India).
At least he gets the importance of the shift in the labeling of the left and the right. It creates a lot of false dilemmas which keep the argument over heated and prevents charitable argument.
He is so exact, true, je suis heureux qu'un professeur de son type est pin-point sur ma critique social que j'ai commencé à crier depuis l'an 2008.
Liberalism is growing in Portugal.
44:09 can someone show me the data for that? That is an extremely compelling statement, as I feel like the traditional story is that WWII is the reason economies exploded with wealth [or at least with the US leading the way.. it's a very Keynesian story as well obviously]
Keynesian story? Keynes (who was a mathematician not an economist) was proven utterly wrong by the banking panic arbitrarily named the "Great Depression." Everything Keynes stood for was proven wrong then when Govt spent massive sums on public works projects, became the nation's largest employer, and we had 8 years of double-digit inflation. America prospered after WWII because she cut taxes and we were no longer spending 40% of GDP on war, duh!!
actually i think ayn rand and milton freidman had a lot to do with the 20th century revival of libertarianism
To the guy coughing every minute: I want to give you a rufie.
@rosihantu1 I don't know what you see, but the fact is that the poverty rate in the US is generally accepted to be around 20%. I also don't know what country you're from, but there are very few jobs in the US. There are 6 unemployed people for every 1 job opening. Also, most people who live in poverty ARE employed! The problem is that the greedy corporations and rich bosses pay very little in the US, mainly because we don't have many unions.
We all have our coping mechanisms. What's a good way you could reach out to people without insulting them or making them defensive?
Three hour lecture? I hope this was at 8AM on a Monday morning. or 3PM on a Friday.
Man! Jeff Bezos came a long way from being a Libertarian British teacher in 2011 to the CEO of Amazon today!
I'm curious how you would define "quality of life"? [as opposed to "standard of living", is what I'm thinking, if that helps]
give it time man, give it time
10000 % a king pin. If you are a new thinker, Dear Citizen of the world, you can try this video for your ,trailer full of your mental processing. Everything is said inside his intro who finish at 4:48 !
I'd like to hear him talk more about that "great debate" mentioned around 25:30. Why was it so "decisively" won by the (now-) left?
who the hell thumbs this down? i don't get that.
@rosihantu1 In places like Sweden, everyone has a job that pays well, but if not, they get help from the government like subsidized housing, food, healthcare, etc. The welfare system is skeletal in the US, therefore there are more people in poverty and homeless.
Portugal is social democrat and socialist to an extent. Sweden is not. Sweden government does not control the economy and media as we do. Sweden as its minister said: "We are a capitalist economy with welfare". Whereas Portuguese is the poorest Western EU country, Sweden is one of the wealthiest. A country does not become socialist by having social welfare. It becomes socialist when the state controls the economy and much more.
@rosihantu1 There's a reason the United States, the richest nation in the history of the world has a 15-20% poverty rate that is rapidly increasing, and Finland, a nation with virtually no natural resources but a very democratic government with a great welfare system has poverty below 2% and the world's best (public) education system.
@rosihantu1 We need taxes to pay for public schools, healthcare for the poor etc. The reason the Koch get subsidized by the government isn't because we collect taxes whatsoever, its because the government is corrupted and undemocratic.
I don't keep what I earn, the multi-millionaire that owns the company I work at steals a large share of what I produce. Same with the people who have to work for the Koch's companies. We need the government to care for the needy, private charities don't cut it.
So free trade is tyrannizing.... Freeness is controling...... Being free is constricting. Are you noticing any incongruities in your thinking.
Classical liberalism died but is being revived by the good Dr Paul. Ron Paul 2012
I think I know who the bad guy's were, but it may be illegal to say in the UK.
( I wonder what the difference in net revenues and expenses was between the church and the monarchies. )
Its not bunk its just not delivering on what you think govt. should deliver. Some people believe that the quality of life rising for all people and being free are inherently good. Others believe that quality of life being similar or equal amongst all citizens is more important and justifies loss of freedom. So when you say it does not benefit all, what do you really mean? No system benefits everybody financially, so considering that, isnt it better to be broke and free not broke and enslaved.
Does any one know any videos like this, im studying the decline of the liberals in A level history
what's this guy's full name? has he written any books?
27 minutes into this, he keeps casting individual freedom as being connected to industrialization, which to me means the labor movement, from this perspective, is a negative. I see no reason to give him more of my time if he's going to ignore the fact that the rich who owned the factories had the power, and abused it, thus creating situations such as we see described in something like The Jungle. This power difference continues, with labor regulations helping, but not solving, the problem.
@JackBlair2 I'm not sure if I follow your comments. Is the one about Jesus in agreement or disagreeing with my comments? And what are you getting at with the Emancipation Proclamation, you completely lost me with that one.
@theneedledictator they never will
I had to do a double take at 24:12
144p... great lecture tho
@suitabledude Stephen Davies.
26:10
that last sentence was sarcasm...just so we're clear :P
beli'e dat!
Pardon me.....but do u have any grey poupon?
Liked the video for the most part but I was disappointed that he has bought into the myth of Lincoln and the Yankee caricature of the antebellum south, slaver did exist but was dying only a small number of the population owned slaves, southern society at the time lacked the wide spread racism of the north and were extremely liberal when compared to new england, I am using liberal in its classical usage.
@rosihantu1 The reality is that the countries with the lowest poverty and homelessness rates have the most extensive welfare systems- all the Scandinavian nations, France, Germany and Israel from close to its founding until the 1980's when it undertook neoliberal reforms.
the classical liberal party
RESTORE CLASSICAL LIBERALISM
35:07 "the replacement of a large degree of self-employment by mass employment in large, integrated productive facilities creates a kind of experience of collectivism in people's daily life which tends to affect the way the see the world." No. Working for 14 hours a day for a meager pay and in horrible conditions creates a whole different kind of experience. What a sly and dishonest way to describe the miserable working conditions in which newly emerging industrial capitalists put their workers into, not even mentioning the suffering of the peoples of imperial colonies.
Basically proves how easily you can take human pain and turn it into a reasonably sounding self-justifying sentence.
I'm not an opponent of liberalism, but I was hoping to hear a more credible lecture on how the classical liberal ideology of the first half of the 19th century - that is looking for ways to oppose the "divine" right of monarchy and make people more free - has repetitively undergone a vast paradigm shift by transforming into an ideology of oppression, this time in the hands of private business. Back in the aftermath of the Industrial revolution it was the emerging class of industrial capitalists exploiting the factory workers and destroying the colonies; today the picture is more complicated with financiers, bankers, good old industrial capitalists, tech billionaires, etc.-- altogether buying politicians and basically writing legislation. Europe is doing slightly better than the US, but not radically differently.
Power has shifted from the state into private (corporate more recently) business--John Stuart Mill or Adam Smith would be very surprised to see the kind of outcome the philosophy they nourished has produced.
This should be obvious, even just by looking at the business press these days.
Nobody thinks that the advent of petroleum as a fuel source in the 1850s had anything to do with that economic growth spike he's talking about?
This instructor needs to rethink his role as an educator. Be a free thinker, but make sure you know who was right!
@spartan2600 Everybody is greedy. Corporations, rich bosses, employees, me, you and evrybody else. We all want to pay as little as possible for the services we receive. If I invest money in a business, I expect a certain return on investment. That means operating at the lowest cost possible including employee cost. That is sound business practice as long as corporations are not using force to compel people to work for them. But u can't compel corporations to hire unionize worker as well.
Karl Marx was an imperialist.... Wow
@spartan2600 Well bless your liberal heart. You know how best to prevent taxpayer largess from falling into the hands ofthe Koch billionaire (assuming that is true in the firt place)? Don't collect so much tax that you can simply give it away willi nilly. You keep what you earn. I keep what I earn. If you want to help out your fellow man, do it out of your own pocket.
test
@spartan2600 What you are proposing is the redistribution of wealth in the interest of fairness. I want fairness as well. You know what pisses me off, good looking girls tends to have sex with good looking guys or guys with money. I have neither. In the interest of fairness, can this utopia of yours compel good looking girls to have sex with me? Personally, I don't care much about housing or money. If you can redistribute sex, I'm right with you.
How much did the Koch Billionaires pay this guy?
Thanks for never explaining how you happen to know “what most people thought” centuries ago. Did you talk to these people? To people from all walks of life? Or are you just gathering this from the writings of people who had time and money and willingness to write. Sorry but I can’t take this seriously when you claim to know “what people thought” without explaining how.