I have the impression that Varoufakis is, despite being useful for entry-level Marxism, misleading the masses by saying we've gone beyond capitalism and being a best-selling author -he also admires the self-proclaimed anarchist Chomsky-, and is therefore not an intellectual threat to capitalism. But yeah, it would be interesting to see Rockhill and Varoufakis discussing the global state of affairs of Marxist struggle.
Particularly appalling is the episode on water. The entity's policy of acquifer expropriation and destruction and the deliberate dehydration of occupied population for decades is well known to left and red scholars some of whom, including Palestinian communists deemed ungrateful to the entity's belt and road sponsors, are the targets of GR's defamatory critique here, carried out on the aggressor rc's payroll.
Rockhill is PMC. Straight up. “I would be classified as…” is a non-admission which he immediately elides by trying to associate himself with the working class. He does this so you’ll disregard the self-serving nature of his provocations. He is an opportunist; here to sell his book. Bottom line.
Obviously you have little real knowledge of his work, or are intentionally misrepresenting it. Go read Gramsci to understand how this guys critique of the creation of a non-communist critical theory (and of course the Trotskyist perfectionist dead end) fits perfectly into Gramsci's work.
Can you unpack that? Because communism is when no iPhone isn't a material analysis of Rockhill's class loyalties nor a dialectical analysis of the failures of his thesis- Literally could have made that criticism of Marx or any of the academics at the Midwestern Marx Institute....Many Socialist and Communists have needed to sell books to live, because they are communists and socialists in a waged labor capitalist society even when they are in a bourgeois or aristocratic class...Class traitors were pretty critical to every liberatory revolution the last few centuries, so...?
Ya Lenin wouldn’t have much to say about your buddy Dominic Lusardo, or you for that matter. Your strategy for revolution is completely vague. Clearly some kind of apparatus means more to you than workers seizing power.
Workers might seize power but they won't maintain it without an ideological "apparatus". Personally, I don't see this in terms of 'socialism" vs 'capitalism' but in terms of 'public' vs 'private'. Capitalists would benefit from 'socialism', so called. Try telling them that, though.
An utter misrepresentation of the man's work and a pathetic attempt to diminish it. By the way its Losurdo. Perhaps not pure enough for your Trotskyist sensibilities? The man is talking about the need for the required War of Position that is required in modern bourgeois societies (Gramsci's arguments).
"Your strategy is vague" He isn't sharing a detailed plan, thats not his goal here. He's talking about the intricacies of the intelligentsia and the importance of ideas for revolution. Workers know they're oppressed subconsciously, but they can't explain it. Theory gives them a framework and a voice to understand their world. A revolution needs theory and needs the intelligentsia to help create it. Even after the revolution, the proletariat needs a system that pumps out education and ideas to analyze and understand the world and specifically that socialist experiment. This is what dialectics are all about.
Gabriel being a farmer, professor, construction worker, and socialist... really caught me by surprise. I'm new to him and he seems very interesting.
Damn! I like this guy. He's no "pointed-headed intellectual".
Sorry "Pointy-headed", as per George Wallace, was it?
Agreed
Refreshing video. Thanos for the upload. ✊🏽
Thanks for this video.
Would love to hear a discussion and/or debate between Rockhill and Yanis Varourfakis.
I have the impression that Varoufakis is, despite being useful for entry-level Marxism, misleading the masses by saying we've gone beyond capitalism and being a best-selling author -he also admires the self-proclaimed anarchist Chomsky-, and is therefore not an intellectual threat to capitalism. But yeah, it would be interesting to see Rockhill and Varoufakis discussing the global state of affairs of Marxist struggle.
Super! Gracias
Particularly appalling is the episode on water. The entity's policy of acquifer expropriation and destruction and the deliberate dehydration of occupied population for decades is well known to left and red scholars some of whom, including Palestinian communists deemed ungrateful to the entity's belt and road sponsors, are the targets of GR's defamatory critique here, carried out on the aggressor rc's payroll.
Every time I hear a RockHill discussion my IQ goes up 20 points
no, it seems like it does but it actually dips 5.
Es urgente la traducción con subtítulos. Gracias
I think there is a function on TH-cam that allows you to put captions in your language on the video. Hopefully this helps
Agree
Oh babe. You exemplify what you grieve.
Cope
Rockhill is PMC. Straight up. “I would be classified as…” is a non-admission which he immediately elides by trying to associate himself with the working class. He does this so you’ll disregard the self-serving nature of his provocations. He is an opportunist; here to sell his book. Bottom line.
Obviously you have little real knowledge of his work, or are intentionally misrepresenting it. Go read Gramsci to understand how this guys critique of the creation of a non-communist critical theory (and of course the Trotskyist perfectionist dead end) fits perfectly into Gramsci's work.
Can you unpack that? Because communism is when no iPhone isn't a material analysis of Rockhill's class loyalties nor a dialectical analysis of the failures of his thesis- Literally could have made that criticism of Marx or any of the academics at the Midwestern Marx Institute....Many Socialist and Communists have needed to sell books to live, because they are communists and socialists in a waged labor capitalist society even when they are in a bourgeois or aristocratic class...Class traitors were pretty critical to every liberatory revolution the last few centuries, so...?
This guy is a jargon machine.
By the time I figured out what this guy's jargon actually means I would have to become a brainwashed cult member.
I guess that makes me an anti-intellectual according to the cult members.
Ya Lenin wouldn’t have much to say about your buddy Dominic Lusardo, or you for that matter. Your strategy for revolution is completely vague. Clearly some kind of apparatus means more to you than workers seizing power.
Workers might seize power but they won't maintain it without an ideological "apparatus".
Personally, I don't see this in terms of 'socialism" vs 'capitalism' but in terms of 'public'
vs 'private'. Capitalists would benefit from 'socialism', so called. Try telling them that, though.
An utter misrepresentation of the man's work and a pathetic attempt to diminish it. By the way its Losurdo. Perhaps not pure enough for your Trotskyist sensibilities? The man is talking about the need for the required War of Position that is required in modern bourgeois societies (Gramsci's arguments).
"Your strategy is vague" He isn't sharing a detailed plan, thats not his goal here. He's talking about the intricacies of the intelligentsia and the importance of ideas for revolution. Workers know they're oppressed subconsciously, but they can't explain it. Theory gives them a framework and a voice to understand their world. A revolution needs theory and needs the intelligentsia to help create it. Even after the revolution, the proletariat needs a system that pumps out education and ideas to analyze and understand the world and specifically that socialist experiment. This is what dialectics are all about.
The state is an oppressor.