A great talk that explained very well the dynamics of metropolis and the connections with the emergence of a totalitarian financial oligarchy that drives almost every aspect of life. His critique of the view in the left to go towards localization is in part justified but he forgets that one of the biggest problems for people to reform the city for them rather than for the ruling class is their dependence on the city in its existing form. Ask yourself why very few from the inner city will make a move towards that "local health food" movement that exists mainly outside of the metropolis. Many of those would agree to Harvey's general analysis and sees itself as leftist, but they are usually not part of the underclass. For all the poor city dwellers, wouldn't it be great if one could, to get out of the misery of being unemployed and living in decaying inner cities, go on the land, build gardens and work for one's own sustenance? It's simple: The land is already carved up, the poor don't own any of it, nor do they own any of the city. But all progress for the rest of the 99 percent hinges on finding a solution that includes that underclass, probably 1/3 of the population. But I think that Harvey overlooks one thing: The city could never exist without all that it takes out of its environment, the entire network of corporations can only exist from the supply of what nature and people generate. At the same time, because of the extreme complexity of a tighter and tighter globally linked system that we would need to break to get to a more human society, we simply don't know how to do it, and neither does Harvey as he freely admits. As long as we think in the terms of the existing concentration in the big city, and in terms of "efficiency", we can only reproduce that monstrosity. It creates no way out, instead it creates a thoughts prison. Harvey should learn to go much more beyond Marx and study what Marx didn't know about, namely ecology, and understand that the system of a city and the entire economy is a part of ecology. So I still say, if you can, get out of the city, create living communities that are connected only by communication networks to each other and to the city, but less dependent on the city. We need to create something outside of the city, so that people have a place to go to if and when the whole shit comes down one day. Because that's were it's headed. And no one, including Harvey, knows how to fix it. That's my solution for the capitalist surplus problem: Instead of reinvesting it in the existing network, give it away to the poor and the activists who will build a new refuge outside the city.
You're right, it's not a corporation, but my point is that universities are forced to behave like corporations in their formatting of events. They have to put the name brands in center-view with Harvey, and structure everything in presentation on the capital of speaking events rather than the content or potential of a discussion. As another commenter put it, the introduction is like fellatio, which draws away from the point of the talk and emphasizes the mutual greatness of Harvey and the venue.
Apologies if I ever implied I don't agree with Harvey, this whole video explains why we got to this point....but that's the point of the irony, as he's talking about it he's also having to do it in the format. I think it's equally ironic that salesmen and advertisements tend to invoke a kind of communality with the audience that breaks down barriers. It's all created for the pitch and hopeful sale, but they imply that the communality is inherent in the market and continues after the purchase...
that is, the need for a school to even create a persona, logo, flag, have officials give overtures, etc...is because it's how you push your product. That's arbitrary competition when you're talking about scientific topics (which are universal by definition), especially social science (which economics happens to, at least halfway, be). Not all school officials prefer to be making asymmetrical profits off of others' studies and research, but it nevertheless continues with little internal dissent
Thank you. In (checks calender) 2012 I totally thought 2020 was going to be the future and so much different. I didn't predict that we'd have a major pandemic though... Stay well.
Kissinger a minion for the Rockefellers was the one that orchestrated the deal with Saudi Arabia that had them only accept USDs for oil. The way fiat works in a country that creates its own money, is that the money gets its value from people having to pay taxes in it (not from scarcity). But USD was world reserve currency and the US could not tax the world to make it hold USDs ----but World runs on oil and this why Kissinger made the deal and this is what gives the USD its value today.
"please read what I write, then familiarize yourself with socialism." == Unanswered question, "Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible?" This is yes or no question.
ugh, yes it's the same. Why are educational institutions and lecture halls in "desperation to just to cover the expense"? Because they are operating in a socio-economic system that expects competition in a business format. Either that or they have to appeal to philanthropists as a private institution. The irony isn't anything Harvey isn't aware of. The idea is that one of the goals of progressives and socialists generally is prioritizing and innovating education, without arbitrary competition.
Yes, world-renowned scholars like Harvey just grow on trees. And if you happen to be one yourself, I seriously doubt you'd have the time to be posting this kind of tripe on TH-cam.
@@TundrasIgloo It's not like stevh88 is lashing out at Harvey. He is lashing out at annoying people like yourself. If you have nothing interesting to say then remain quiet.
You shouldn't be pointing out this lecture alone calling it irony but you should point out why we got to this point. Austerity, privatization, profit motive. Otherwise, it only gets worse
{([ A Bi, Je Hi ])} This is a sentence written in a northern Albanian dialect, it's possible translation is endless but as a foundational structural meaning the sentence refers to roots, more precisely the presence of roots, it's first part is in the form of a question which is not a question, and the second part is in the form of a affirmation, a statement of sorts that is neither a affirmation nor a statement of any sorts. It is a sentence as a question and affirmation simultaneously, made of two sentences that are neither a question nor a affirmation simultaneously and a direct translation is this. ((If and when it takes roots you are in)). It is a direct linguistic representation of a constant present. What is interesting to myself, has to do with the fact of the sentence existing as an exact pronunciation on almost the other side of the word. More precisely in the Indian subcontinent the sentence exists exactly as it does in the Mediterranean sea, more to it, the sentence means a direct representation of a constant present also, translated as (right now, here). I am using this sentence because I understand the core structural foundations of the West and East to be exactly and identically the same, yet this very present similarity is hidden, denied, obscured, but most of all used as a constant barrier. The identical similarity has to do with what is known as the individualism concept, a concept which for all the wrong reasons and logic is thought to be with and within existence more on the West side of the world than that of the East side of the world. In order to make this understanding of an identical structural foundation similarly between West and East, I will place my understanding of what is known as the Ying Yang structure. Once the object which gave me such an understanding came to be, then the understanding derived from fitted perfectly with many structures in nature, including all of life. One day I was looking at a charging cable, more precisely a short head phones charging cable. As all charging cables, it had an input and an output, but in this instance, and as a consequence of technological structure advancement, the input is in the form of a USB port, and the output is in the form of not USB port. What soon became apparent, is the fact of the input and the output of the charging cable being exactly the same thing simultaneously, the only difference I thought was the type of current, yet that was also not a difference, as the current was exactly the same at either end. The only difference remaining was the stating a located point as of what purpose, (use) making it also not a difference. Then I thought of standing at the foot or the top of a mountain, which would be the input or the output there, same with a tree, river, human being, road etc etc, more or less the understanding I got suddenly from a short charging cable, fitted with any physical structure, including life. If and when applying the question of good and bad, no difference can be found either, because what would be good or bad, input or output, the foot or the top of the mountain, same with a tree, road, rive, human being, life etc etc. Although not often taken as such, highlighting and emphasising the no difference between good and bad with and within such a structure as Ying Yang, are known and existing throughout the planet as the gateless gates, meaning you know you have entered or exited one, and you also know that have neither opened or closed one, a gateless gate which as with and within a Ying Yang structure is also a representation of a constant present. There are two very distinctive structural concepts that operate throughout the constant present continuously in the whole world no matter with and within who or what. One is a purpose with a structure, the other is a structure with purpose. In the West part of the world a known story is principally occupied in elaborating all of the possible facets of each structural concept. The story is known as the Trojan war. Troy is a structure with a purpose, what has come to be known as ancient Greece is a purpose with many structures. The purpose of Troy is it's structure, it's physical being as a structure, all and any possible individuality or unity can and only exist with and within it as a structure. Kings, princes, queens, princess, priests, art, heroes, warriors, intelligence, beauty, strength, power, prosperity, safety, etc etc as of and by Troy, can only be with and within Troy. What has come to be known as ancient Greece purpose, is itself as a purpose, being a purpose to begin with, then being is it's main structure, all of its possible ways of being, this way gives it as a purpose nature and life itself as a structure to make full use off in any and all possible ways, in this instance as much of the Mediterranean area as possible. And in complete difference to Troy, all and any possible individuality or unity can and only exist with and within it as a purpose, throughout all of its possible structures, giving a much wider of anything and everything for Kings, princes, queens, princess, priests, art, heroes, warriors, intelligence, beauty, strength, power, prosperity, safety, etc etc to exist in any and all possible ways. There are two more distinctive structural concepts that are with and within the story, one is very obvious and prominent, the other is not so obvious yet even more prominent. The concepts are known as a Trojan horse, and the Leviathan. Troy is a man made Leviathan, what has come to be known as ancient Greece is a natural made Leviathan. The man made Leviathan has a very physical tangible structure, you cannot miss it. The natural made Leviathan has and has not a very physical tangible structure simultaneously, meaning you can and cannot miss it simultaneously. If and when two such structures come face to face in a confrontation, the most magnificent and powerful man made Leviathan will be destroyed by a Trojan horse, which it as a structure has no choice but to accept it, as it (the Trojan horse) is exactly in structural existence, as the man made Leviathan, any man made Leviathan. The same goes in the case of the natural Leviathan, it can only destroy itself as itself. The main difference, one that makes the West part of the world, exactly the same as the East part of the world, is the natural Leviathan has many individual Trojan horses, whereas the man made Leviathan is it and only it, a Leviathan and a Trojan horse all in one, the most powerful one that can be which if and when faced in confrontation with a natural one, the man made one will always be destroyed by a Trojan horse exactly as itself. For what is natural in being as the main purpose, each and every diety is a Trojan horse, each and every way is a Trojan horse, each and every temple is a Trojan horse, each and every sage, guru, lama, saint, prophet, priest, gate, mountain, river, animals, stars, planets, signs, symbols, meditation, chanting, prayer, city is a Trojan horse, including all of the heroes, kings, queens, princesses, princess, priests, warriors, art, and intelligence etc etc. The emphasis on such individuality that unites only for the purpose of being, is highlighted by the story that follows the Trojan war, Odisea. After all is done, and the man made Leviathan is destroyed as one, the natural Leviathan exactly as nature does, goes about each and all of its individual ways, existing only unity as a purpose of being natural life, one that can only be destroyed by itself as itself. If planet earth is not the actual sea monster, then anything else taking that place instead will be confronted with it. If anything else is being with and within existence, as alive on planet earth, and is in direct confrontation with it under the concept of man made, the confrontation will end up in a self defeat through a Trojan horse, many Trojan horses. (((Jesus way is structurally and conceptually the same, throughout the gospels the constant present is emphasized, the miracles are now, the healings are now, the preaching is now, the forgiveness is, the judgment is now, the salvation is now, the punishment is now, the crucifixion is now, the resurrection is now, everything is now, birth and death is now, the past and the future are only in the form of reference points. That is why stating that if and when there is a end of ends, being that is always natural, you do not need to worry about it, as it is always now, meaning you cannot miss it as an end, impossible to do so, factually. In the meantime take what is precious with and within you or has been given to you, and make some interest on it, invest it, increase its value, double it, triple it, just in case it is always now, as it usually always is, and as Jesus points out, the owner comes now and asks for it. Whatever goes through to wherever, goes through no matter, whatever does not, does not, being now with both is the way.))) (Rraso Vaj Sa) in my understanding and translation is a happy song, a question or a lamentation simultaneously, among an infinite other possible understandings and translations, directed (that is between a human being and), at a flat stone used to grind anything for the purpose of making oil. The East and West are not different, not different at all.
"First of all, I'm not sure whether you mean a particular college or the essential goal of "the college" as an ideal. what kind of answer are you expecting? what would it accomplish in the discussion? I message you because it doesn't seem to be meaningful enough to clog up the comment board" == I do not allow you to clog up my private message box. People say stupid things where nobody's watching. . "what kind of answer are you expecting?" == Yes or no.
Perhaps the Basques have found a palatable solution to the darker side of capitalism.One certainly worth considering even if only as a stop gap to something else.
How is that relevant to my initial comment? I have no answer for it, is your goal to make as much profit as possible? The legitimate goal of education is not profit, whole idea is distributing the surplus knowledge of past generations. The irony is that this surplus is kept as profit, thus capital, and invested in perpetual growth/monotony. Put simply, if education is legitimate, most of what we teach should be public/common. But reaffirming scientific common knowledge doesn't compute in market
"How is that relevant to my initial comment?" == Your point is "it's ironic that Mr. Harvey is doing something against what he preaches." I'm pointing out the difference. What if the college received sufficient subsidy from the gov. like it used to, it'd be still asking for a sponsorship? . Unanswered question, "Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible?"
"ugh, yes it's the same." == Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible? Isn't that rue if keeping up the facility can be covered by the subsidy and the ticket sale covers the Mr. Harvey's expense, they won't ask any more from outside sponsor like the college used to do?
"I'm not sure whether you mean a particular college or the essential goal of "the college" as an ideal" == Colleges in general, like the one in this video. Is their goal making as much as money possible like oil company's?
Which part you don't understand. Tell me and I'll re-word it for you. . Unanswered question, "Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible?" . "Is it the speaker goal to make as much profit as possible?" No.
It is the unlimited excesses of capital that always seek and require ever greater growth, which eventually reach the abstractions of financialization, and push the system into extremis. The working class has always been the abused in this relationship, and served as the austerity shock absorbers for these "business cycles," and the other negative consequences of recession, depression, and inflation. Under neoliberalism, the abstractions of financialization have become absurd, the austerity institutionalized, and the corporate capture of government complete. Economics now truly governs politics. Nevertheless, the institution of politics is still capable of generating the political will that can reset the equation, and make politics govern economics once again. The New Deal is the quintessential example. I believe that FDR's New Deal Keynesianism pioneered a critical social design model to follow by establishing a secular egalitarian social democratic social contract. By heavily taxing and regulating capital, the excesses of capital accumulation were avoided, and the privatized investment/debt trap circumvented. Alternatively, government planning of infrastructure and labor programs provided the economy with smoothness and predictability, instead of wildly abusive business cycles. Taxing and regulating capital enabled the egalitarian sharing of wealth and power, including representative democratic government, which cosmopolitan environment cultivated secularism. Consequently, the promotions and benefits of egalitarianism, democracy, and secularism inversely suppressed the most retrograde, regressive, reactionary, authoritarian, pathological, and fundamentalist elements of society from exerting an undue degrading influence. Such a taxed and regulated social democracy promotes a harmonious steady-state national identity, which is loaded with the potential to perform progressive cultural evolution towards democratic socialism and beyond, including achieve rational responses and organization that meets the demands of our existential threats. The incremental global strategy then, is for the nation-state to achieve "social democracy with national characteristics," and from this workable position, perform any required additional cultural evolution and new modes of production in sustainable alignment with impinging environmental determinism. Imagine if spreading social democracy and FDR's "Bill of Economic Rights" had been the US post-WW2 strategy, instead of prosecuting full-spectrum geo-political domination - the most retrograde tribal determinism and Lifecycle Empire imaginable.
I know, it's the terrible truth, increasingly now in North Carolina. because of the funding structure, the message and means of doing anything with a message is put through the meat grinder. It's the same with the national media, the more potent the topic, the less time is given to it and A) the less time and public space we have to ingest its meaning and B) the less anyone is in a position to sustain attention to it and construct a holistic answer to it.
Unfortunately, there's no accounting for nationalism and its impulses, something far greater than any world-historical commitment to reorganisng the relations of production.
"as he's talking about it he's also having to do it in the format." == Two different natures looks the same from the distance. One is the result of desperation just to cover the expense, another is intention of making the profit, both from the sponsorship. "That looks funny, he's doing the opposite of what he preaches. How ironic!!" Is it?
What's with Harvey being placed 20 feet away from the audience? He's talking property rights and alienation while standing backed into the corner of a stage large enough for a small orchestra. Haha, great talk but attention to irony always seems to go out the window with these sponsored events (hence the comment on a General Motors Marx program!)
please read what I write, then familiarize yourself with socialism. The immediate situation isn't so ironic, they have little choice but to sell tickets like it's a concert, so they can pay Harvey, who's made himself a guru in absence of a public understanding of Marx. They use that money to build up the university as independently as possible--which wouldn't be necessary in democratic socialism, largely replacing (as far as I see) the "defense" budget w/ education. This makes long term irony.
this narrative is about to presenting a confident believe that human beings can design a engineering alternative to the actual social setting of what Hobbes identified as an ugly human wild place
How dare you say oil companies are purely for profit! They're just good folks providing us the freedom to drive wherever we want... Haha, but seriously, it's not in any organization's mission statement to be purely focused on profit, especially colleges because (as I said) education is a cultural activity, it's all about passing on surplus instead of hording it. It's just that it's easier to bias towards it from an organizational point of view. Ask the same question of medical professionals.
Neoliberalism means all surplus goes to the shareholders only. And most corporations work exactly that way, no matter what's in their mission statements. Just look at how they act.
I wish that education would remain a cultural phenomenon. It's becoming more and more about careers and getting into elite schools that look good on a resume (w/o considering the actual quality of the school or it's research) and more and more highly specialized training to better produce profits for capital while liberal arts departments are on the verge of collapse and many college graduates have very little understanding of economics, politics, or philosophy.
the safest guy i know, so safe brother david.
Wow, geography is so important to politics and economics!
Excellent presentation, thanks for posting
Interesting how the "disciplining" of NY city, echoes with what goes on in Greece right now.
+Mats Holmberg I had the exact same thought.
As Varoufakis said: "They wanted to send a message"
A great talk that explained very well the dynamics of metropolis and the connections with the emergence of a totalitarian financial oligarchy that drives almost every aspect of life. His critique of the view in the left to go towards localization is in part justified but he forgets that one of the biggest problems for people to reform the city for them rather than for the ruling class is their dependence on the city in its existing form. Ask yourself why very few from the inner city will make a move towards that "local health food" movement that exists mainly outside of the metropolis. Many of those would agree to Harvey's general analysis and sees itself as leftist, but they are usually not part of the underclass. For all the poor city dwellers, wouldn't it be great if one could, to get out of the misery of being unemployed and living in decaying inner cities, go on the land, build gardens and work for one's own sustenance? It's simple: The land is already carved up, the poor don't own any of it, nor do they own any of the city. But all progress for the rest of the 99 percent hinges on finding a solution that includes that underclass, probably 1/3 of the population.
But I think that Harvey overlooks one thing: The city could never exist without all that it takes out of its environment, the entire network of corporations can only exist from the supply of what nature and people generate. At the same time, because of the extreme complexity of a tighter and tighter globally linked system that we would need to break to get to a more human society, we simply don't know how to do it, and neither does Harvey as he freely admits. As long as we think in the terms of the existing concentration in the big city, and in terms of "efficiency", we can only reproduce that monstrosity. It creates no way out, instead it creates a thoughts prison. Harvey should learn to go much more beyond Marx and study what Marx didn't know about, namely ecology, and understand that the system of a city and the entire economy is a part of ecology. So I still say, if you can, get out of the city, create living communities that are connected only by communication networks to each other and to the city, but less dependent on the city. We need to create something outside of the city, so that people have a place to go to if and when the whole shit comes down one day. Because that's were it's headed. And no one, including Harvey, knows how to fix it. That's my solution for the capitalist surplus problem: Instead of reinvesting it in the existing network, give it away to the poor and the activists who will build a new refuge outside the city.
Thanks for letting me know.
Thanks for the upload. Listening to Prof. Harvey is fascinating.
very insightful
You're right, it's not a corporation, but my point is that universities are forced to behave like corporations in their formatting of events. They have to put the name brands in center-view with Harvey, and structure everything in presentation on the capital of speaking events rather than the content or potential of a discussion. As another commenter put it, the introduction is like fellatio, which draws away from the point of the talk and emphasizes the mutual greatness of Harvey and the venue.
I wonder whatever happened with that derivatives market he was talking about.
Apologies if I ever implied I don't agree with Harvey, this whole video explains why we got to this point....but that's the point of the irony, as he's talking about it he's also having to do it in the format.
I think it's equally ironic that salesmen and advertisements tend to invoke a kind of communality with the audience that breaks down barriers. It's all created for the pitch and hopeful sale, but they imply that the communality is inherent in the market and continues after the purchase...
that is, the need for a school to even create a persona, logo, flag, have officials give overtures, etc...is because it's how you push your product. That's arbitrary competition when you're talking about scientific topics (which are universal by definition), especially social science (which economics happens to, at least halfway, be). Not all school officials prefer to be making asymmetrical profits off of others' studies and research, but it nevertheless continues with little internal dissent
"with these sponsored events"
==
I don't get what you mean.
Who's sponsoring this event?
Lecture starts at 3.00
Thank you. In (checks calender) 2012 I totally thought 2020 was going to be the future and so much different. I didn't predict that we'd have a major pandemic though... Stay well.
Kissinger a minion for the Rockefellers was the one that orchestrated the deal with Saudi Arabia that had them only accept USDs for oil. The way fiat works in a country that creates its own money, is that the money gets its value from people having to pay taxes in it (not from scarcity). But USD was world reserve currency and the US could not tax the world to make it hold USDs ----but World runs on oil and this why Kissinger made the deal and this is what gives the USD its value today.
"please read what I write, then familiarize yourself with socialism."
==
Unanswered question,
"Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible?"
This is yes or no question.
ugh, yes it's the same. Why are educational institutions and lecture halls in "desperation to just to cover the expense"? Because they are operating in a socio-economic system that expects competition in a business format. Either that or they have to appeal to philanthropists as a private institution. The irony isn't anything Harvey isn't aware of. The idea is that one of the goals of progressives and socialists generally is prioritizing and innovating education, without arbitrary competition.
1:26:37 stop smacking your chops, think and then speak. Why do these people ramble for so long to sound more intelligent than they are.
yeah that was kind of annoying
get up there and do better, then
stevh88 Not everyone can be a pro speaker. Pull your head in.
Yes, world-renowned scholars like Harvey just grow on trees. And if you happen to be one yourself, I seriously doubt you'd have the time to be posting this kind of tripe on TH-cam.
@@TundrasIgloo It's not like stevh88 is lashing out at Harvey. He is lashing out at annoying people like yourself. If you have nothing interesting to say then remain quiet.
awesome.
You shouldn't be pointing out this lecture alone calling it irony but you should point out why we got to this point. Austerity, privatization, profit motive.
Otherwise, it only gets worse
{([ A Bi, Je Hi ])}
This is a sentence written in a northern Albanian dialect, it's possible translation is endless but as a foundational structural meaning the sentence refers to roots, more precisely the presence of roots, it's first part is in the form of a question which is not a question, and the second part is in the form of a affirmation, a statement of sorts that is neither a affirmation nor a statement of any sorts. It is a sentence as a question and affirmation simultaneously, made of two sentences that are neither a question nor a affirmation simultaneously and a direct translation is this. ((If and when it takes roots you are in)). It is a direct linguistic representation of a constant present. What is interesting to myself, has to do with the fact of the sentence existing as an exact pronunciation on almost the other side of the word. More precisely in the Indian subcontinent the sentence exists exactly as it does in the Mediterranean sea, more to it, the sentence means a direct representation of a constant present also, translated as (right now, here).
I am using this sentence because I understand the core structural foundations of the West and East to be exactly and identically the same, yet this very present similarity is hidden, denied, obscured, but most of all used as a constant barrier. The identical similarity has to do with what is known as the individualism concept, a concept which for all the wrong reasons and logic is thought to be with and within existence more on the West side of the world than that of the East side of the world. In order to make this understanding of an identical structural foundation similarly between West and East, I will place my understanding of what is known as the Ying Yang structure. Once the object which gave me such an understanding came to be, then the understanding derived from fitted perfectly with many structures in nature, including all of life. One day I was looking at a charging cable, more precisely a short head phones charging cable. As all charging cables, it had an input and an output, but in this instance, and as a consequence of technological structure advancement, the input is in the form of a USB port, and the output is in the form of not USB port. What soon became apparent, is the fact of the input and the output of the charging cable being exactly the same thing simultaneously, the only difference I thought was the type of current, yet that was also not a difference, as the current was exactly the same at either end. The only difference remaining was the stating a located point as of what purpose, (use) making it also not a difference. Then I thought of standing at the foot or the top of a mountain, which would be the input or the output there, same with a tree, river, human being, road etc etc, more or less the understanding I got suddenly from a short charging cable, fitted with any physical structure, including life. If and when applying the question of good and bad, no difference can be found either, because what would be good or bad, input or output, the foot or the top of the mountain, same with a tree, road, rive, human being, life etc etc. Although not often taken as such, highlighting and emphasising the no difference between good and bad with and within such a structure as Ying Yang, are known and existing throughout the planet as the gateless gates, meaning you know you have entered or exited one, and you also know that have neither opened or closed one, a gateless gate which as with and within a Ying Yang structure is also a representation of a constant present.
There are two very distinctive structural concepts that operate throughout the constant present continuously in the whole world no matter with and within who or what. One is a purpose with a structure, the other is a structure with purpose. In the West part of the world a known story is principally occupied in elaborating all of the possible facets of each structural concept. The story is known as the Trojan war. Troy is a structure with a purpose, what has come to be known as ancient Greece is a purpose with many structures. The purpose of Troy is it's structure, it's physical being as a structure, all and any possible individuality or unity can and only exist with and within it as a structure. Kings, princes, queens, princess, priests, art, heroes, warriors, intelligence, beauty, strength, power, prosperity, safety, etc etc as of and by Troy, can only be with and within Troy. What has come to be known as ancient Greece purpose, is itself as a purpose, being a purpose to begin with, then being is it's main structure, all of its possible ways of being, this way gives it as a purpose nature and life itself as a structure to make full use off in any and all possible ways, in this instance as much of the Mediterranean area as possible. And in complete difference to Troy, all and any possible individuality or unity can and only exist with and within it as a purpose, throughout all of its possible structures, giving a much wider of anything and everything for Kings, princes, queens, princess, priests, art, heroes, warriors, intelligence, beauty, strength, power, prosperity, safety, etc etc to exist in any and all possible ways.
There are two more distinctive structural concepts that are with and within the story, one is very obvious and prominent, the other is not so obvious yet even more prominent. The concepts are known as a Trojan horse, and the Leviathan. Troy is a man made Leviathan, what has come to be known as ancient Greece is a natural made Leviathan. The man made Leviathan has a very physical tangible structure, you cannot miss it. The natural made Leviathan has and has not a very physical tangible structure simultaneously, meaning you can and cannot miss it simultaneously. If and when two such structures come face to face in a confrontation, the most magnificent and powerful man made Leviathan will be destroyed by a Trojan horse, which it as a structure has no choice but to accept it, as it (the Trojan horse) is exactly in structural existence, as the man made Leviathan, any man made Leviathan. The same goes in the case of the natural Leviathan, it can only destroy itself as itself.
The main difference, one that makes the West part of the world, exactly the same as the East part of the world, is the natural Leviathan has many individual Trojan horses, whereas the man made Leviathan is it and only it, a Leviathan and a Trojan horse all in one, the most powerful one that can be which if and when faced in confrontation with a natural one, the man made one will always be destroyed by a Trojan horse exactly as itself. For what is natural in being as the main purpose, each and every diety is a Trojan horse, each and every way is a Trojan horse, each and every temple is a Trojan horse, each and every sage, guru, lama, saint, prophet, priest, gate, mountain, river, animals, stars, planets, signs, symbols, meditation, chanting, prayer, city is a Trojan horse, including all of the heroes, kings, queens, princesses, princess, priests, warriors, art, and intelligence etc etc.
The emphasis on such individuality that unites only for the purpose of being, is highlighted by the story that follows the Trojan war, Odisea. After all is done, and the man made Leviathan is destroyed as one, the natural Leviathan exactly as nature does, goes about each and all of its individual ways, existing only unity as a purpose of being natural life, one that can only be destroyed by itself as itself. If planet earth is not the actual sea monster, then anything else taking that place instead will be confronted with it. If anything else is being with and within existence, as alive on planet earth, and is in direct confrontation with it under the concept of man made, the confrontation will end up in a self defeat through a Trojan horse, many Trojan horses.
(((Jesus way is structurally and conceptually the same, throughout the gospels the constant present is emphasized, the miracles are now, the healings are now, the preaching is now, the forgiveness is, the judgment is now, the salvation is now, the punishment is now, the crucifixion is now, the resurrection is now, everything is now, birth and death is now, the past and the future are only in the form of reference points. That is why stating that if and when there is a end of ends, being that is always natural, you do not need to worry about it, as it is always now, meaning you cannot miss it as an end, impossible to do so, factually. In the meantime take what is precious with and within you or has been given to you, and make some interest on it, invest it, increase its value, double it, triple it, just in case it is always now, as it usually always is, and as Jesus points out, the owner comes now and asks for it. Whatever goes through to wherever, goes through no matter, whatever does not, does not, being now with both is the way.)))
(Rraso Vaj Sa) in my understanding and translation is a happy song, a question or a lamentation simultaneously, among an infinite other possible understandings and translations, directed (that is between a human being and), at a flat stone used to grind anything for the purpose of making oil. The East and West are not different, not different at all.
"First of all, I'm not sure whether you mean a particular college or the essential goal of "the college" as an ideal.
what kind of answer are you expecting? what would it accomplish in the discussion?
I message you because it doesn't seem to be meaningful enough to clog up the comment board"
==
I do not allow you to clog up my private message box.
People say stupid things where nobody's watching.
.
"what kind of answer are you expecting?"
==
Yes or no.
Perhaps the Basques have found a palatable solution to the darker side of capitalism.One certainly worth considering even if only as a stop gap to something else.
How is that relevant to my initial comment? I have no answer for it, is your goal to make as much profit as possible? The legitimate goal of education is not profit, whole idea is distributing the surplus knowledge of past generations. The irony is that this surplus is kept as profit, thus capital, and invested in perpetual growth/monotony. Put simply, if education is legitimate, most of what we teach should be public/common. But reaffirming scientific common knowledge doesn't compute in market
"How is that relevant to my initial comment?"
==
Your point is "it's ironic that Mr. Harvey is doing something against what he preaches."
I'm pointing out the difference.
What if the college received sufficient subsidy from the gov. like it used to, it'd be still asking for a sponsorship?
.
Unanswered question,
"Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible?"
"ugh, yes it's the same."
==
Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible?
Isn't that rue if keeping up the facility can be covered by the subsidy and the ticket sale covers the Mr. Harvey's expense, they won't ask any more from outside sponsor like the college used to do?
"I'm not sure whether you mean a particular college or the essential goal of "the college" as an ideal"
==
Colleges in general, like the one in this video.
Is their goal making as much as money possible like oil company's?
this is what Bernie Sanders is trying to do. For the people of the people, by the.people.
+JakeHMW He's a social democrat that leans to syndicalism. He has some syndicalist policies.
Which part you don't understand.
Tell me and I'll re-word it for you.
.
Unanswered question,
"Is the college goal to make as much profit as possible?"
.
"Is it the speaker goal to make as much profit as possible?"
No.
Big time!
It is the unlimited excesses of capital that always seek and require ever greater growth, which eventually reach the abstractions of financialization, and push the system into extremis. The working class has always been the abused in this relationship, and served as the austerity shock absorbers for these "business cycles," and the other negative consequences of recession, depression, and inflation. Under neoliberalism, the abstractions of financialization have become absurd, the austerity institutionalized, and the corporate capture of government complete. Economics now truly governs politics.
Nevertheless, the institution of politics is still capable of generating the political will that can reset the equation, and make politics govern economics once again. The New Deal is the quintessential example. I believe that FDR's New Deal Keynesianism pioneered a critical social design model to follow by establishing a secular egalitarian social democratic social contract. By heavily taxing and regulating capital, the excesses of capital accumulation were avoided, and the privatized investment/debt trap circumvented. Alternatively, government planning of infrastructure and labor programs provided the economy with smoothness and predictability, instead of wildly abusive business cycles.
Taxing and regulating capital enabled the egalitarian sharing of wealth and power, including representative democratic government, which cosmopolitan environment cultivated secularism. Consequently, the promotions and benefits of egalitarianism, democracy, and secularism inversely suppressed the most retrograde, regressive, reactionary, authoritarian, pathological, and fundamentalist elements of society from exerting an undue degrading influence. Such a taxed and regulated social democracy promotes a harmonious steady-state national identity, which is loaded with the potential to perform progressive cultural evolution towards democratic socialism and beyond, including achieve rational responses and organization that meets the demands of our existential threats.
The incremental global strategy then, is for the nation-state to achieve "social democracy with national characteristics," and from this workable position, perform any required additional cultural evolution and new modes of production in sustainable alignment with impinging environmental determinism. Imagine if spreading social democracy and FDR's "Bill of Economic Rights" had been the US post-WW2 strategy, instead of prosecuting full-spectrum geo-political domination - the most retrograde tribal determinism and Lifecycle Empire imaginable.
I know, it's the terrible truth, increasingly now in North Carolina. because of the funding structure, the message and means of doing anything with a message is put through the meat grinder. It's the same with the national media, the more potent the topic, the less time is given to it and A) the less time and public space we have to ingest its meaning and B) the less anyone is in a position to sustain attention to it and construct a holistic answer to it.
ONLY CONNECT
Unfortunately, there's no accounting for nationalism and its impulses, something far greater than any world-historical commitment to reorganisng the relations of production.
"as he's talking about it he's also having to do it in the format."
==
Two different natures looks the same from the distance.
One is the result of desperation just to cover the expense, another is intention of making the profit, both from the sponsorship.
"That looks funny, he's doing the opposite of what he preaches. How ironic!!"
Is it?
What's with Harvey being placed 20 feet away from the audience? He's talking property rights and alienation while standing backed into the corner of a stage large enough for a small orchestra. Haha, great talk but attention to irony always seems to go out the window with these sponsored events (hence the comment on a General Motors Marx program!)
Well, everything you said is pretty much the same in any speech in any college.
Ever heard of education budget cut back?
He sounds just like Alan Watts!
please read what I write, then familiarize yourself with socialism. The immediate situation isn't so ironic, they have little choice but to sell tickets like it's a concert, so they can pay Harvey, who's made himself a guru in absence of a public understanding of Marx. They use that money to build up the university as independently as possible--which wouldn't be necessary in democratic socialism, largely replacing (as far as I see) the "defense" budget w/ education. This makes long term irony.
this narrative is about to presenting a confident believe that human beings can design a engineering alternative to the actual social setting of what Hobbes identified as an ugly human wild place
How dare you say oil companies are purely for profit! They're just good folks providing us the freedom to drive wherever we want...
Haha, but seriously, it's not in any organization's mission statement to be purely focused on profit, especially colleges because (as I said) education is a cultural activity, it's all about passing on surplus instead of hording it. It's just that it's easier to bias towards it from an organizational point of view. Ask the same question of medical professionals.
Neoliberalism means all surplus goes to the shareholders only.
And most corporations work exactly that way, no matter what's in their mission statements.
Just look at how they act.
I wish that education would remain a cultural phenomenon. It's becoming more and more about careers and getting into elite schools that look good on a resume (w/o considering the actual quality of the school or it's research) and more and more highly specialized training to better produce profits for capital while liberal arts departments are on the verge of collapse and many college graduates have very little understanding of economics, politics, or philosophy.
46:00 is where I am to have left off.
56:00
Dr. Harvey affirms what I have long thought: "Think globally, act locally" is a crock of shit.
dbz song
dbz aong
Who is the bozo who dislikes this ?
HI, I have a lab coat and I am an idiot.