Episode 42: There's more to it than just class - the importance of intersectionality
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- Yeah, yeah, we went there. Once you're done with this theory packed episode you'll never have the audacity to call us basic shitposters again B)
Episode 43 - No US, you need to finish your Ukraine before having Taiwan | Send New(d)s 2 is already available 1 week early for Patrons over at: / thedeprogram
Support the Podcast and get early as well as bonus episodes by donating.
Help us stay 100% independent.
www.patreon.com/TheDeprogram
Support the Podcast and get early as well as bonus episodes by donating.
Help us stay 100% independent.
Idpol without class analysis is liberalism. Class analysis without idpol is class reductionism. More theory dense episodes please.
Identity politics is cancer and so is class struggle.
What you want is class Harmony and that might involve tackling your elite and reconstructing them serve the interests of the people but to pretend hierarchy isn't inherent and needed is also foolish.
There needs to be a balance society needs to see itself is one whole and unified under strong national identity and striving.
@@TheEverFreeKing why would the elite serve the intrest of a class that can't theirs, let alone a class they need to exploit to gain the wealth they have??? You sound delusional!
And MuH NaTiOnAl IdEntItY means NOTHING if said identity is catered towards serving the aristocracy and backwards traditions.
@@TheEverFreeKing >identity politics is cancer
>unified national identity
Bruh
@@TheEverFreeKing Okay nationalist.
@@TheEverFreeKing Rejecting identity politics and embracing class collaboration... a certain short Italian man also believed that
Would be good to see y’all talk to FD Signifier about intersectionality one day
I’m not familiar with them, I’ll be sure to check them out
Love FD
That would be great, probably make for some really interesting conversations
Ew
I can just imagine JT loading his m60 machine gun before black Friday
Uh oh, that one's goin in the FBI file
@@cr4ckp1dgeonPage 761...
How dare you ridicule Black Friday? That's the core of US culture. Don't you know that Jesus went to the temple to beat the guy who took the last toaster.
Not the last toaster! 🤣
@@RedScareClair don't talk shit about the scared last toaster made by overworked and unpaid japanese worker
He did beat up all those merchants tbf
Black Friday Matters
“Thou shall fight thy neighbor for the last samsung 4K tv”
I think that asking if or stating that Marxism needs Intersectionality is a loaded question, one that assumes that up until 1989, when Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term, marxists were disregarding race, gender, etc and focusing solely on class. As a reply to that, we can go all the way back into 1890, to a letter from Engles to Joseph Bloch, that starts as such:
"According to the materialist conception of history, the ultimately determining element in history is the production and reproduction of real life. Other than this neither Marx nor I have ever asserted. Hence if somebody twists this into saying that the economic element is the only determining one, he transforms that proposition into a meaningless, abstract, senseless phrase. The economic situation is the basis, but the various elements of the superstructure - political forms of the class struggle and its results, to wit: constitutions established by the victorious class after a successful battle, etc., juridical forms, and even the reflexes of all these actual struggles in the brains of the participants, political, juristic, philosophical theories, religious views and their further development into systems of dogmas - also exercise their influence upon the course of the historical struggles and in many cases preponderate in determining their form."
So, Marx and Engels were already aware of class reductionism and were critical of it. Marxist feminists, marxist third world revolutionaries and marxists from oppressed social groups under capitalist exploitation, namely north american black revolutionaries, were taking into account, dialectically, race, gender, etc in their analysis. Comrade Louise Thompson Patterson coined the term "triple exploitation" in the 1930s to refer to the compounding exploitation of working class black women.
So, does marxism need intersectionality? Marxism was already doing what intersectionality proposes decades before the term was coined. To say that marxism needs intersectionality is to not know marxism at all.
Kimberlé Crenshaw actually uses intersectionality as a term to describe the kinds of theories that came out of the Marxist groups you described. Intersectionality's main argument is that theories that take into consideration intersecting identities and intersecting oppression should be at the center of liberation movements because the systems of oppression work together to uphold each other.
Well said comrade.
He's clearly talking about class as the base for oppression though
I always replay that intro what a banger.
That's what i call dialectical a composition.
This idea that the West is the only place where a truly Communist revolution could happen is so weird and out of place because the West has never managed to produce a successful Communist revolution. Actually, it was quite the opposite, all the revolutions have taken place in the Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America, basically the Third World
When they started saying yehaw and poptarts I was dying lol.
Same, I laughed so hard 🤣
Much love! Random thing I've taken away from this podcast: Hakim's laugh is so cute and contagious
Sorry to tell you this, but Hakim's heart already belongs to habibi Yugopnik
Flash backs to when I worked retail. PTSD. Always so gross when you see the same customers all the time AND on Black Friday. Like how much crap do they need?
Service work turned me into a misanthrope for several years! On the plus side, I figured out LTV on my own, years before I got into Marx.
@@josephgeorge5741 Always interesting to see different people draw the same conclusions through separate circumstances.
@@Ghdfshhs My first job was at a grocery store, it was pretty appearant when people rolled in a bought my entire week's salary in one go!
I really appreciate you take your time to speak about intersectionality on the Deprogram. There are lots of class reductionists Marxists (especially in online spaces, from both the English-speaking and Spanish-speaking Western cyberspace) with huge influence in the leftist public discourse who propagate erroneous thoughts like _"intersectionality is posmodernist bullsheet"_ or _"intersectionality is not materially based",_ as well as the typical left-liberals with their overfixation on identitary politics polluting leftist spaces.
Having said that, I feel the urge to make some clarifications on certain issues you mentioned:
25:33 While I totally agree Marxists need to criticize and detach ourselves from eurocentric thoughts (even those who were still prevalent in Marx and Engels themselves), we shouldn't be callous to criticize currently existing socialist experiments' mistakes from a principled Marxist standpoint. Not because you recognize the limitations and "deformations" inherent to siege-socialist experiences in underdeveloped countries (or even criticize some particular measures taken in their particular contexts), it means you are necessarily rejecting or denouncing them. Lenin himself admitted (for example, in _"The Trade Unions, The Present Situation And Trotsky’s Mistakes"_ in 1920) that the Soviet state had bureaucratic deformations, due to the backwardness of Russian material conditions, which could only be surpassed by the development of the productive forces after decades of revolutionary struggle.
Also, I think it's very valid to recognize that the world revolution will need to extend to (or, at least, have anti-imperialist allied governments in) the most developed countries in order to seal its success once and for all. The constant aggression from the imperialist core is precisely the reason why most Third World socialist revolutions have failed, become stagnant, or are currently unable to develop normally (being under siege economies, having to invest substantial amount of resources in defense, being disconnected from world trade...), and that aggression can only be definitely toppled with the success of anti-imperialist movement in the imperial core.
40:08 There were actually Jews who collaborated with the Nazis (called "kapos"), most of which came from privileged classes; many other Jews fleed Germany before the Nuremberg laws came to be, so their class privileges allowed them to surpass repression. So, even in the context of Nazism, class superceeds racial lines.
1:03:26 And finally, we must remember that labour aristocracy doesn't appear only under international/imperialist lines, but also even in the national context of peripheric countries you can find a labour-aristocratic strata of the working class (wider or tighter, depending on the success of the social-democratic establishment of their national bourgeoisie), which benefits indirectly from the super-exploitation of an important segment of their own working class conationals (or even from immigrant labour from neighbour underdeveloped countries).
Thanks again for all your insightful comments.
As the boys would say, beautifully put
Well put, and thanks for the relevant timestamps for easy comparison!
"Labor aristocracy" is a really good example of how Marxist black and white, us or them class identity fails. You then add intersectionality in to try to fix all the glaring problems with Marxist class theory, the end result is a convoluted mush of point scoring of who is the most oppressed in the hierarchy of society.
The sad thing is that even the conceptualization of the end goal of class struggle is fundamentally flawed. "The workers owning the means of production" is intended to be accomplished by the workers, as a class running the state and society but that's utter nonsense. You can make a worker a leader but by becoming a leader he joins a new class and ceases to be a worker. Want proof of this? In 1932 when the whole of the Soviet Union had to contend with hunger did the communist party bosses ever, once go hungry unwillingly? Nope. In the early post war era did the communist party bosses have to personally deal with the consequences of the massive housing shortage? Nope. Because they were a different class.
This of course marked the end. Without Stalin to unify the whole of the party behind a goal the enclaves of power began to separate. When the whole of the party agreed that cyberization was a good idea (computerizing the economy) the actual implementation failed because the army adamantly refused to share it's superior computer technology and each base of power believed that everyone else should submit to their plan for how it should be done. They had their own spheres of power and were separating their fiefdoms. By the 1970s central planning was abandoned ceding these fiefdoms completely to them. By the 1980s these fiefdoms were transitioned to a for profit model as the party bosses began exporting the workers produce to international markets for their own personal profit. By 1990 they formalized what was already happening by dividing the empire's borders.
None of these things the workers wanted, but the workers were not in power for they were workers and by definition out of power.
@@colonel__klink7548 You seem to be quite ignorant in Marxism to be speaking here.
Labour aristocracy, as well as any other class category, is not an "identity" but a material reality. You don't need to identify yourself or someone else as a labour aristocrat for you/them to be so, its existence is independent of self-appreciation; it's their material characteristics who defines them, not their subjective perception. The same has to be said about other social conditions like gender, race, sexual orientation, national origin... with their obvious differences in degree and weight in class struggle.
Political representatives in a Soviet demoracy are not a different class from the rest of the workers either. They also earn a wage from their work, they also live in the same social conditions as the rest of the population, they come directly from the working spaces (they are elected in the workshops from within the workers themselves). Soviet representatives DID endure the famine in 1932, and DID endure housing shortage after WWII; that's why the state was so quick in aliviating both problems in the USSR (unlike liberal-borugeois representatives, who distance themselves from the experience of the masses and can't properly solve the chronic issues they suffer daily - like malnourishment, or the housing crisis of today).
There was never a consensus in the party over cyberization, as revisionists and opportunists took over and implemented decentralizing/market reforms before projects like OGAS could ever be properly developed. There was never an actual implementation, the application of cumputarization in the revisionist Soviet economy was always limited (both technically -due to economic blockades by Western economies in the access to microprocessors- and politically -due to the interests of revisionist party bureaucracy to keep their privileges-). You're painting a historical revisionist interpretation of what actually happened.
If you think that workers by definition can't be in power, what are you even doing in a leftist space like this?
@@Ajente02 I'm not ignorant of marxism, these critiques only came from being in these spaces all this time and having my precious conceptualization shattered. Hakim put together some great arguments on his channel.
And no, marxism does not consider labor aristocracy a true "class", as their material conditions (not owning means of production) is the same as the rest of the population. The black and white dichotomy I spoke of. However as you mentioned we see a material and lived difference of those people as a different class but marxism refuses to accept that anything more than two classes can exist.
And no, Stalin who had a dacha did not live the same material conditions as the coal miner choking to death in the Urals.... thats utter nonsense on its face. The man making the decisions and the person getting black lung working twelve hours a day in a mineshaft are not the same class and telling me so is straight up lying to me if not yourself as well.
What I'm doing in leftist spaces? It's far more interesting than the right. There's a lot to discuss from the surface level theory we are doing now to the real critique of the hegelian metaphysical nonsense underneath that all the modern marxists spend every ounce of energy they can to pretend it doesn't exist even though Stalin, Mao and Lenin all openly discussed it.
I have more affinity for the left being gay too. Communists were the only ones who stood by us in the US in the beginning (even as globally communists were trying to wipe us out. ) we did see what this was recently as in recent years many of us were legally and socially able to better integrate into greater society and called traitors for doing so. Meaning it was never about helping us, never true solidarity. My spaces are full of leftist ideology and I can see this sort of attack ongoing. Lesbian artists attacked for "catering to the male gaze" ( Ie the artist is drawing women shes attracted to rather than being politically lesbian, a grave sin apparnetly. ) So on...
You can say I'm intellectually stimulated by these conversations but I am also more or less due to conditions existing continually in these spaces. We all know the world needs change from what it is, so when discussing change I open my mouth when I see nonsense, like telling me the lumber jack risking life and limb, literally is the same class as the guy sitting sipping tea and deciding rbe number of dismemberment and fatalities due to logging are worth it for the progress of society. They are not the same class at all. Their material conditions and social relations are entirely different.
Been a fan of Hakim for a while, new to the podcast and only heard a few minutes and can't finish it right now, but seems great. I may have to go all the way to the start and catch-up! :D
In short for me, if we are not working for liberation of all workers, we won't liberate any workers.
One of the factors making Black Friday what it is is the timing.
American Thanksgiving is always the fourth Thursday in November, and many workplaces that give you the holiday off also give you the day after it off as well. So a pretty substantial chunk of the population which would otherwise be working at their own jobs are free to shop 'till they drop.
"I don't want to name any names..."
Every time you say that, I feel like you are talking about is mister socialism-is-when-nato Vaush.
Mister I-am-a-fw4gg0t-who-likes-children u mean?
Honestly I've almost experienced an inverse upside down version of this where I had liberals insist to me that because someone existed at an intersection, then they *must* by projection have a proletarian class background despite the person in question being from an at least petite bourgeois background (father got them a legacy hire position and all), and then used that to justify them acting in an unacceptable manner in order to 'stave off' imaginary poverty they almost might have landed in due to their non-existent intersectional proletarian background! Americans are so strangely offensive sometimes.
Liberals and psudeo-leftist reductionist identity politics, name a better combo
Yes! Deprogram to Save me from boring commute home after capitalism absolutely ravaged my body all week!
I personally love more theory heavy episodes :)
love this pod, been here since the start. i was selected by DW news for a survey and was praising you lot in the questionnaire. so maybe the new DW podcast newsroom will be listening in!! keep it up guys best pod around.
Gentlemen, every time I hear you, you are closer to a self-determination podcast session. Cheers.
Need a black version of the deprogram eventually when im done with my long ass reading list ill get my homies on it
That would be dope
Please look into how Osha was formed and how the U.S. got rid of the union influence by overseas jobs
Trans woman here, great video, but please don't deadname bad trans people. I know you didn't mean any harm but you guys should at least censor it. She's shit and a traitor to the trans community but misgendering or deadnaming ANYONE on purpose just creates an excuse for other people to do the same with way worse intentions. Please try to avoid it next time.
I second this
Trans here, I agree with you ! 👍💓
Filthy Speech is Sacred.
Tag yourself! I'm "working class gay"!
I'm poptarts 😂
Proletarian trans
Working class cishet white scum 😎🤙
Yay to gay!
I loved this new piece of work you guys made
A question for the Deprogram crew;
I believe that a communist revolution in the US and countries in the EU (and other military powerhouses) is needed for a communist world. The reason I believe that is because I believe that another Cold War-esque situation isn't good for communism globally if the major powers havent already become communist. This isn't because they are enlightened or something, but just because the global north has a far more developed military and thus power to push their stance on other countries. While this shouldn't dishearten communist revolutions in the global south, as they are more engaged than communist in the global north, shouldn't we at least admit that military power will matter in the likely case that not all countries would have a successful communist revolution at the same time?
Communism was doing a lot better worldwide during the Cold War than after it.
The way I see it, these intersections only matter within class.
A black bourgeois billionaire will still always be more privileged and have a better life than a white worker for example (in a non fascist capitalist society).
But a black worker will have it worse than a white worker.
It doesn't matter how many intersections you are in, if you are bourgeois you will have it better than any proletarian, a black female LGBT capitalist will be more privileged than a white male cishet worker but this isn't the case within a class.
I wouldn't say they only matter within class. Rich and famous members of minorities have to deal with shit that white men in the same positions just don't. Being rich doesn't stop trans people from suffering transphobia and massive harassment campaigns, or stop black people from suffering racism.
Yes, their life will be better than if they weren't bourgeois, by a huge amount, but it will never truly disappear. They will suffer things no white male cishet worker has to endure, while still being much more privileged in many other ways.
It's not that it only matters within class, it's that the further up you go in class the less vulnerable you are to other axis of opression, but there will always be some.
@@aliasmcgames This is it. The identity of people have brought problems for them long before capitalism’s existence. Just like men oppressing women and sexism is older than capitalism itself as well.
@@aliasmcgames A lot of these structures of oppression are not older than capitalism, and the ones that are are remnants from other class based systems where members of the upper classes didn't suffer from them.
They did not just appear from no where and didn't exist before class.
@@_Ve_98 A trans bourgeois will have it worse than a cis bourgeois, but better than literally any cis or trans proletarian.
If you think anyone in the bourgeoisie, trans, gay, female etc can be less privileged than anyone in the working class then you are a liberal or socdem, not a Marxist or anarchist.
The fact that a trans, female billionaire will have an easier life and suffer less oppression than a cis, male worker is a fact. That bourgeois person may not have it as good as a cis, male member of their own class, but have it better than anyone else.
If you don't then you agree with me but just didn't understand my comment because I didn't add some relevant information.
@@_Ve_98 Yes, but being rich stops any systemic injustice from touching you, just rare individual injustice.
A black billionaire won't be equally privileged as a white billionaire, but will always have more power and privilege than a white worker by virtue of their class.
I see intersectionality as a hierarchy (ironically), like a pyramid. At the base of the pyramid, as with other such models, is the most important, the foundation, class. Everything above it is the remaining social factors such as race, gender, religion, age, etc. Not all societies will have the same pyramid though. For example, race plays a bigger role amongst the USA working class than it might in a country without the same kind of history of racism and slavery and so on. The reason why class is the foundation though is that it is the common denominator amongst all people, your class or your relationship to production.
So in my view class is the most important thing from which other social factors are layered based on the relative significance of those factors in a given time and place.
Rather than a pyramid, I see intersectionality as a Venn diagram (where the central circle -the main contradiction- is class, and other circles -secondary contradictions- only reinforce the precarity of the already established central circle). Seeing intersectionality as a pyramid gives you the erroneous idea that there are intersections more important than others (here referring to the secondary contradictions, like gender, race, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, physical abilities, neurologic condition, etc. -not to the primary or main contradiction, which is and always will be class).
Not bad, although I did cringe a bit when you mentioned Caitlyn Jenner as representative of white trans people's experience-- I think it would have been prudent at that point to mention her class! Otherwise, appreciate you highlighting intersectionality and how starkly important class is within that.
To be fair, her class hasn't saved her from the transphobic hatred that's so popular in the US right now. Even if you're rich, bigots are going to seethe with contempt for you if you're in a group they've decided is their enemy. Part of intersectionality is realizing some people will actually overlook all other intersections if they're bigoted enough against one group.
This is why I'm a class essentialist.
A comment on the tendency of Western communists to center the struggle in the West rather than view it as a global process: it's good to criticize this in most of its forms but there is a degree to which we should be prepared to recognize that the world will not be truly safe for socialism while the United States, in its current cultural/ideological formation, exists at all. I hope I am wrong but I have a deep suspicion that, if faced with a global trend toward the left, the US would eventually respond with nuclear options.
Communism is when 480p backround video
Sadly, the Eye of Sauron has already moved the goalpost and is extending the hatred towards gay people and women (just look at the recent "groomer" discourse and abortion bans). And the worst part is that we told cis people that this would happen and they didn't listen.
But i don't think the trans community will abandon others in their fights because we know better than most how our fights are related. Most of us are gay or bi, have experienced misogyny at some point, suffer mental disorders caused by trauma and need expensive treatments just to fix the damage others did to us.
There is no trans liberation without an intersectional socialist liberation. There is no trans liberation under capitalism.
sorry, ik this post is from ages ago. but can someone explain why there cant be trans liberation under capitalism? genuine question :)
@@shaymingreen1107trans people will always be targeted by bigotry under capitalism, simply because transphobia is an incredibly useful tool for the ruling class. Transphobia will be pushed in the media until the end of capitalism, othering trans people is simply one of the easiest and most effective fascistsic propaganda methods. And as long as the media and therefore the social conscience is filled with transphobia Trans people will experience discrimination on a personal, bureocratic and systemic level.
Let's go!
You guys are amazing. thank you for both entertaining me and educating me. here is a comment for the algorithm
Commenting for the algorithm.
Me too
Me 3
me 4
In the UK we now have Black Friday but no Thanksgiving (kinda the thing that started it off in the US) so we're peak capitalist over here. 🙃
At 46:00:00, the answer that JT gives reminds me, a 27 y/o queer Wisconsinite, of college. I hung out a bit in the LGBT+ designated space(which was probably 60m^2 for an 11,000 students/staff). After a while, I realized everyone there wasn't really anyone I jived with, and realized that the best queer friends I'd had before then, I had met just living life in general. That place on campus was so alienating
Black friday is actually a thing? I thought south park made that shit up
South Park may embellish. . . often irresponsibly so. . . but they almost always start from the truth.
Biggest retail day of the year. It "kicks off the Christmas shopping season"
"Funnily" enough, the historical origin of the Black Friday "holiday" comes after Thanksgiving Day, a "festivity" honouring how Native Americans were deprived of their lands by White Anglo-Saxon Protestant settle colonists.
I worked 12 yrs in retail in US 7 yrs at best buy selling tvs🙃🤪
Black Friday disgusts me.
Great work boys
Hell yes intersectionality the great merger of humanity. It's great to finally have an episode on it.
Just started listening to the podcast and love it, you guys are great! Do you all have any book recommendations for listeners?
Your guys podcast was just interrupted for a Kraft Mayonnaise ads 😂
I forgot my headphones at home today so I'm at work with the video on full blast in my pocket and then the new podcast episode comes on and I forget nearly every episode starts with talking about testicles so now I'm known as the guy who listens to men talk about "really touching their nuts"
😂BRUH this podcast really isn't for our puritan society.
That's hilarious omg 🤣
We in the UK haf Aneurin Bevan who vociferously advocated for an Anglo-Soviet Alliance to the supreme annoyance of Churchill...
He was the main drafter of the NHS as well, which while being part of the social-democratic compromise to make sure a revolution didn't happen, is also the best thing this country's ever done. Here in Wales history teachers talk about him with great pride.
Nice
You maybe could include some Black feminist thought to recommend in the episode about intersectionality.
Western feminism is incompatible with Marxism
At one of my old retail jobs, one of the assistant store managers was trampled by a stampeding crowd of humans on Black Friday and broke her arm, a leg, and a rib.
Honestly I’d love to have my summary of a work of theory graded by Hakim
Great discussion on a not so easy to get correctly subject.
Luckily I followed hakim’s advice before I heard it
Thanks Dr. hakim for reminding me to touch my balls. I just checked them and they are completely fine, but I will remember to check routinely in the future!
Just wondering, but I think the precariat discussion is actually a little more in-depth. Here in Finland (atleast) there is a clear link with the "new modes" of employment (such as part-time jobs etc.) and the diminished union participation. ik, the unions in Finland are mostly entities that lack class consciousness, but I think the problem with precarious work is that people DO NOT connect with their fellow workers for as long, which leads to worsening work conditions, worse collective bargaining agreements and the lack of development of class consciousness within the work environment. Does this make sense?
I know there's almost no chance of them reading the comments on an old episode but I would pay so much money to have these three watch the Black Friday horror musical.
Being a trans communist is an "interesting" experience
Explain your experience
@@endcaps1917 people that claim to be communist tell me i should be purged or that when communism wins I'll be one of the first lined up and shot. Just for being trans. On top of all the other hate
Hi, trans communist comrade 👋 I'm also a trans communist comrade
No it isn't
@@tankiegirl are you trans or a communist? I'm both
I am aware that I might be kind of biased as a European but I think those people saying “a global and permanent transition towards socialism is only possible with the US or Europe leading it” aren’t completely wrong.
This has nothing to do with any kind of cultural or intellectual superiority but those capitalist nations have proven again and again that they will do whatever is necessary to suppress workers movements around the world.
It’s not completely impossible to end capitalism without the support of the US and Europe, but is it likely? I don’t think so. But I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
I had heard Idpol criticized as euro-centric, but I hadn’t considered that class reductionism is as well.
I'm so glad I found this podcast. I thought I was going insane trying to explain to class reductionists that being disabled or racialised also affects someone's material conditions but also trying to explain to the idpol purists that actually it doesn't matter that much that you are gay if you don't have any understanding of how much class affects things too.
I have seen videos recently where black people talk about something i noticed happen years ago where white people will bring up mental health issues or being gay the person called it 'gentrifying marginalised identities' and 'weaponisation of identity politics' . I definitely have noticed this happen it seems like certain types of people list their marginalisations as credentials to 'prove' their politics? That basicslly means that they understand being nice pelple bit not so much capitalism basically?
which one d u agree with?
labour aristocracy theory(that rich/core countries and their working class exploits the periphery countries and their working class of periphery)
VS
Wallerstein's World Systems Theory (in world-systems theory any analysis of
world history and economic development
should be studied from the position of
the total world system not through
individual states or isolated events
this is because is the very nature of
the world system the creates and quality
for Wallerstein there are still core and
periphery countries but there are also
semi-periphery countries which
represents developing periphery
countries and declining core countries
in his analysis Wollaston sees history
and cycles through which a hegemonic
core emerges like the US or previously
Britain and before that the Netherlands
which then for a period dominates the
capitalist system for Wollaston though
it's not necessarily rich countries that
exploit poorer ones but capitalists
exploiting workers in core and periphery).
Yes a Appalachian mention!
"why are US houses made of paper?"
"It's drywall. It's not the best, but it is cheaper and easier to mass.produce."
Me: "Then why does the US have the worst housing crisis in the developed world?"
The real questions.
Let's gooo
Ridiculous american stories, Yugoslavian comedy and medical advice so good, it'll have you feeling up your own balls. What more could you want from a pod cast. This is fine entertainment comrades.
I wanna support you folks on Patteon but I'm poor (TwT)
theory heavy is good
Vizio is bad? I've always thought they were decent, but I'm not sure. I did a cursory search of "Best and Worst TV brands" and looks like Vizio was alright or good according to most. Not arguing with J.T., but want to know what are good to use.
Yeah I have a Vizio I use for my computer monitor, it serves its purpose. But he worked in the retail end of the field, so I imagine like anyone with experience in a particular field when they weigh "good" and "bad" it includes a number of qualifiers beyond "does it work". As an audio engineer, I have some thoughts on brands and equipment that a casual consumer would be like "aight but it works" so 🤷♂️
Comment for the algorithm
I love you guys
10:07
10:51
17:45
18:33
22:24
42:24
I’d really, REALLY like to know what your problem is with Trotsky. He’s such a central player in the Russian Revolution. I’m an ML and a student of that period, and I am thoroughly enjoy reading Trotsky’s “History of the Russian Revolution”. He strikes me as an incisive writer, and wonderful analyst and historian. I know he was rather difficult in person, but I’ve always thought his Marxist credentials were unimpeachable. I know “Trotskyist” is kind of a dirty word nowadays on the Left, but I don’t know enough about the history of the Left to know why. What don’t I know? Someone fill me in!
There's evidence that Trotsky was willing to collaborate with the Nazis and Japan to come to power in the USSR. Grover furr made a pretty detailed dive into it if you just Google it. That isn't to say Trotsky didn't contribute to the revolution initially, but he definitely put his own interests before the socialist project imo.
Trotsky contributed to the revolution and its success, that cannot be denied, he was a talented revolutionary and a decent writer, but at the same time he had quite significant personality flaws and was ideologically not the most solid to say the least. Lenin frequently criticized him. And that was before he went off the rails due to Stalin being more respected and his ideas more widely adopted within the Bolshevik party. There is significant evidence that the faction he formed within the party conspired to commit acts of sabotage and assassination. After his exile his rhetoric against Stalin and the USSR contributed significantly to bourgeois and fascist anti-communist propaganda. His claims keep being repeated to this day to discredit and demonize not just Stalin but the entire Soviet system, and his book was used by the Nazis to inculcate their soldiers with anti-Soviet ideology. Whether he intended this to happen is irrelevant, the damage was done regardless.
But the problem most communists today have is not with Trotsky himself, whom most can see needs to be treated with nuance as a complicated historical figure, but with his followers, those who self-identity as Trotskyists and align with the fourth international. These tend to be ultra-left and very sectarian and also almost universally reject Actually Existing Socialist (AES) states. They tend to be very idealistic and unrealistic in their ideas and very frequently parrot anti-communist and imperialist propaganda and have been used many times by the CIA as either willing or unwitting stooges of imperialism against socialists and socialist states. Many former Trotskyists have also post 1990 turned into hardcore pro-imperialist interventionists.
Trotsky had such a bad dick game he turned Frida Kahlo into a stalinist lmfao
@@transsylvanian9100 Wouldn’t the accusations against Trotsky and the LO only be proper indictments if you think he was wrong to criticize Stalin? I’m an ML, but definitely not a Tankie. I think Stalin pretty much ruined the USSR, and dealt it a blow from which it never fully recovered. If the Bolsheviks and SRs were committing acts of sabotage, sedition, and assassination during the Imperial period, and that’s accepted to be necessary, maybe even lauded, why wouldn’t such acts against Stalinist bureaucratic degeneracy also be accepted?
As for Trotsky’s works being used as indoctrination against the SU by the Nazis, I do not in any way hold that against Trotsky, unless his intent was indeed to stir up the fascist war machine. The right distorts and twists philosophies and ideologies all the time in its pursuit of power; if it hadn’t been Trotsky’s works, it would have been something else.
Finally, if modern-day Trotskyists are pseudo-Left reactionaries, yeah, that’s not great. Whereas Trotsky was right to criticize Stalinism, that doesn’t mean all forms of socialism are deserving of such reactions.
@@michaelslowmin interesting, I’ll definitely look into it. But what strikes me just off the top of my head is: Lenin collaborated with Imperialist Germany to get back into Russia in April 1917, on his way to October. The accusations by liberals and right socialists like the Mensheviks and SRs that summer that Lenin was a German agent were widespread, but false. I’d like to know if Trotsky was willing to collaborate with fascists in order to bring fascism to the USSR, or if, like Lenin, he wanted to form a temporary alliance of convenience in pursuit of an ultimate goal, which included ultimately defeated fascism once in power, similar to how Lenin’s ultimate goal was to bring socialist revolution right back to the Kaiser (even if he was ultimately unsuccessful). I don’t know that that makes it okay to collaborate with Nazis and other fascists, but it is certainly a distinction worth making, imo.
17 Episodes of 4 hours each just talking about intersectionality when?
35:27 don’t stereotype people, bro
Allen Gore Rithim
26:21
1:18:36
5:50
I prefer the theory ngl bois
I have suggestions for u (how about you guys co stream the episode on Twitch and use virtual models for your Faces end at the end you could add a Q&A with the Boys
They already stream monthly on this very channel. What would they win by becomming political streamers (apart from attracting very a problematic userbase, and loosing the reach potential that podcast multiplatforming has)?
Besides, you can listen podcasts anywhere, anytime you want. But you can only listen Twitch streams while they're live, and sometimes if they're saved (which isn't all the time, and isn't permanent).
@@Ajente02 they could costream it on youtube and it would attract a younger audience, I think
@@Ajente02 zoomers need someting on screen that moves ....^^
Would it be ideal to treat all aspects of intersectionality equally? Im asking as a socialist.
In response to Haz
should I be afraid to ask you what random combination of buzzwords he used?
@@sebastienmedard406 who haz orrrrrr?
@@billdipperly6435 haz, the infrared guy i assumed
@@sebastienmedard406 oh, nah he's just been desperately trying to get Hakeem's attention for some reason. Kinda sad.
Literal who?
Unity among all non-exploiters and non-oppressors > "Intersectionality" *OR* "class unity" with exploiters and oppressors.
I don't care about the alleged relative woes of *ANY* [insert any "identity" or class here] exploiters/oppressors. Not the capitalist predators. Not the "workers" who do their criminal bidding. I uphold the Nuremberg Accords and apply them broadly; from generals and managers, to every bottom-rung, low-rent co-conspirator (a large and quickly growing portion of "workers" in every capitalist-controlled country). They are my enemies and I celebrate when they cannibalize each other, rather than their victims.
If I can accept poverty with integrity over being a "respectable" scoundrel with somewhat reduced poverty, so can everybody else. Better to choose to struggle innocently than to strangle innocents and pretend to not have a choice in the matter. I do have a choice, and so does everybody else. It's not a choice with options that I like, but it's still a choice.
Conscripted stormtroopers in 20th century fascist countries had a choice. Not a pleasant choice (murder or be murdered), but they had a choice. Same goes for "workers" today when they're ordered to lie, cheat, steal, and kill. Saying, "No!" is always an option, and if more "workers" would choose that option we could quickly put an end to this psychopathic system based on hyper-exploitation and hyper-oppression once and for all!
Class as a overall concept is just your position in society. In a capitalist society your class is based on your means of production. In a fascist society your class is based on how close to the "ideal person or people" you are. The best thing about class is It's ultimately recognized without being said.
Class in fascism is also based on your means of production, because fascism IS a capitalist society (in decay, but capitalist nonetheless). Social position isn't always interchangeable with class (for example, you could have very famous and economically well-off people who are still working class).
@@Ajente02 true, however I think you misunderstood me your "race" is the primary class identification in a facist society. It doesn't matter if you're a Jew capital owner in Nazi Germany you're not of the in group.
@@nearby222 As I said in my most recent comment, there were Jewish collaborators with the Nazi regime inside the guettos and concentration camps (called "kapos"). Also, the allegiance to the bourgeoisie allowed lots of elements from the German Jewish community to flee from the Third Reich while continuing to live as capitalists in other countries.
Fascism, even with their overfixation in race (which, btw, it's not universal in all fascist tendencies -it was more of a Nazi particularity) and "class collaboration", still have class struggle as the main contradiction in their societies.
@@Ajente02 Jewish collaborators don't really matter because they would be eliminated anyway due to being Jews. In fascism you're distance from the "other" is your societal class. The state will eventually consolidate all the means production to better the state's agenda. Your capital does matter in the initial stages but in late stages the state will own everything and it will be used strictly for the state so it doesn't matter in the end and the only thing differentiating you from your other societal members is how far you distance yourself from the "other"
Enjoyed the episode but disappointed in the Proudhon/Kropotkin bashing. Thought Hakim (and by extension, the rest) were better than the blindness lots of MLs have, but I guess not.
It doesn't actually matter, most capitalists already support LGBT and Feminism so there is nothing to gain and much to lose by associating socialism with that, some intersectional things like the oppression and impoverishment of afro-americans make sense but that retoric alienates poor whites.
Most capitalist do not support lgbt and femininism. If they did why are workplace accommodations and medical treatment lacking for women and trans people? Pro lgbt and girl boss ads isn't real support. Especially in the US when there's currently attacks on reproductive autonomy and rights of lgbt+ people. Rhetoric about oppression doesn't alienate poor white people, their own bigotry does. The discourse isn't stopping them, it's their fault for choosing racism and misogyny over their own material well being. They do that because too many of them are not interested in equity, they rather cling to the delusion of becoming the next Jeff Bezos.
They don't though, they just sell us pride merch in June, not real protections.
Also, if someone is "alienated" by hearing about racism, that's a them problem.
In a fascist society your race is your class. Or your class is determined based on how far from the "in group" you are.
What about Mussolini style fascism? It's usually less race based from what I understand.
@@biodiversityfanatic2454 fascism tends to focus on hypernationalism even with Mussolini's fascism his "in group" was Italians so if you were not Italian or from Italy you would have been considered the "other". Racism is just a method for in groups and out groups. Mussolini was also anti-semitic...... so yeah
@@biodiversityfanatic2454 fascism is an uroboros within a uroboros. It's an ever-consuming cycle that eventually destroys everything within its path because the "in group" is constantly getting smaller. Pure is never pure enough kinda deal.
@@nearby222 the divide between liberalism and fascism confuses me. The lines really do seem to be very blurred. For example I'd consider neoliberalism a push if not almost fully to fascist economics. Then again it's so close to Chicago school liberalism that I don't know what to do with it. What I'm getting at is can their be a less racist fascism, could illiberal governments rise with all the other tenets of fascism without these aspects? Theoretically I'd say yes but these race/sexual divides they place are so essential to destroying the class struggle, I doubt we'd see this sorta fascism.
@@biodiversityfanatic2454 The true issue behind fascism is the fact that it constantly relies on another group to fight against, Even if it was the same ethnicity, religion and/or whatever there will be a constant drive to be the purest of the pure within that, It will eventually lead to self-destruction in of itself because the ideal is never good enough.