@NietzscheanMan Abundance/technology/healthcare. These are the things that mean we are around today. Capitalism alone is not responsible for these. Interestingly, abundance and healthiness are -not- desirable in a profiteering system. The margins for profit become smaller that way. I'm interestingly not a communist, yet a basic understanding of economics reveals that capitalism doesn't economize. If it did, I would support it :) (deforestation/oil/war=profit) Many are dead because of Capitalism.
@metters4lyf You confuse corporatism (where companies get benefits over competitors through state enforcement and nepotism, as made possible by socialist systems) with capitalism (free market). I have no idea what you base your b"asic" understanding of economics on, but I can't say I hold it in high esteem given this comment :)
@NietzscheanMan And you confuse capitalism with some abstract ideal of capitalism as you think it should be, not as it actually is. Socialism doesn't involve what you're talking about because there aren't competing private companies under socialism!
How can you spot a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an Anti-communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin
To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, and the fruits acquired by it.’ — Thomas Jefferson
Equality is tyranny! Jefferson's "created equal" phrase applies only to fertilization. After fertilization the result is a unique Individual living in a relativistic universe where equality is only an abstract concept. Education in: virtue, Individual Rights of "Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," free market, and free republic is vital to any Civil Society reconciling the differences of humanity. Many ideologies tried equality and failed, such as Marxism, etc.
What did you even say in this that's of any substance? Just "equality is only an abstract concept," which Is true, but so are "virtue," "rights," and "liberty." Civil society, in contrast to political society, in itself testifies to an irreconcilable contradiction within society. How can anyone not totally delusional say that capitalism promotes "reconciling the differences of humanity"? It's built on the centralization of power and wealth in the hands of a minority of society.
@ZakeD3 Thanks for your interest. The Rights of "Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," they are part of the Laws of Nature. I have scientifically proven to myself that Jefferson was correct in associating these Rights as part of the Laws of Nature. If you are interested, I could youtube message the proof. Equality is an abstract concept not obtainable in the physical domain according to the Heisenberg principle. Simply put, how do you measure equality? How do you know when you have it?
The whole point of this video is that equality is an abstract concept that can't simply be foisted onto reality in whatever conditions we like. Marxists have never disagreed.
"But "all members of society" and "equal right" are obviously mere phrases."
"Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby. " ~ Marx etc.
You could have at least read the videos description: "These accusations of Marxists believing in the possibility of some "perfect equality" of outcome any time soon is nonsense."
On the other hand you raise up abstract principles above the reality that they're abstracted from. Abstract rights ignore the real conditions and situations in which people find themselves and the real limitations placed on them. In this case they could have no more content than "equality" as some abstract principle.
@ZakeD3 I stand corrected about the video’s objective on “perfect equality.” I got caught up with the title. I did not view it in its entirety because of the audio and I’m familiar with Marx’s ideology. I am not sure we are on the same page about Rights. Rights of "Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" are not abstractions they are real and can be proven as such. Equality is an abstraction, and becomes a burden or down fall to any society’s obsession in it.
Also, since you probably didnt notice the whole point of this video is that you can't simply "try equality." real equality, as opposed to equality of poverty, requires as its basis an advanced level of productivity.
Again, Did you do the factual analysis it would take to actually determine IF the policies of the chinese government were truly socialist or did you just accept that certain "sources" claim they are socialist
If the policies don't match the philosophy, it doesn't matter WHAT institution has labeled them as such-including the governments decreees that they are indeed socialist. And so fara s I know most sources just choose to let the nations declare.
The "numbers game" regarding Stalinist regimes is misleading. Historians have shown that most deaths resulted from famines, which were already a regular occurrence in, say, China. And in fact, deaths from famine declined as these regimes developed. The overall death rate markedly rose in Russia after 1991.
Moreover more people have died from famine in India than under all "communist" regimes combined, yet no-one calls this tyranny.
I'm glad you recognize that I don't "flatly disregard historical fact" since I'm "at stage 1." Sometimes you need to sit back and think your comments through.
My arguments? I haven't argued anything. Every single comment I've made was simply aimed at getting you to make a coherent argument. I failed.
I claimed Marxism isn't related to communism? lol, really?
Of course China is not communist. They've never claimed the name communist, they aren't democratic, they have less public ownership than India or Denmark... and you said you read the communist manifesto? Get the hell off of my video you fucking idiot.
Highly unlikely. under capitalism, we: Nuked a country, helped overthrow hundreds of DEMOCRATICALLY elected governments, we funded terrorist groups worldwide, we trained the man who orchestrated the most devastating terrorist attack to the USA to date, we liberated a country because were "nice guys" meanwhile killing a million+ civilians. we naturally toppled the legitimate socialist countries in the eastern bloc because they shared the same name as the evil Stalinist dictatorship.
We plunged ourselved into not One, but two great recessions that cost the working class Billions of dollars in bailouts because the rich care only about making more money, than the welfare of the people that support their lifestyle, furthering the slavery that the American people find themselves in. we have sold our banks, our ports, our roads, our natural resources to the highest bidder, effectively ending our control over our own country, to multinational corporations.
So you've read the Communist Manifesto, but you think China is communist? But doesn't the manifesto say that communism means democratic control of the means of production? China is not democratic nor does it retain much public ownership...it employs a smaller public sector than places like India, Denmark, and Latvia. I guess Denmark is communist too, eh?
I've read the Communist Manifesto, yes. You just aren't saying anything coherent. The point is that you randomly telling me that Stalin killed people is completely off-topic, you're like fucking Glenn Beck. Can't deal with the issue? Bring up Stalin!
You still haven't said what human nature is, why it is in opposition to "Marxism as a system," why "Marxism" inevitably leads to an authoritarian elite, or pretty much anything.
"COMMUNISTS KILLED PEOPLE" is for you a substitution for argument.
Marx didnt invent Socialism or communism. they've existed in one form or another since the dawn of humanity. and you're talking about the same china that is outperforming America in every economic indicator right now? :)
What the hell? Born from Marx? What are you even talking about?
You're ignoring the whole point. You comment on my video saying some shit about human nature that you are unwilling to back up. When I point out that your so-called "lack of incentive" is bullshit you point out that China's government is authoritarian? Your arguments are incoherent, ignorant crap. China has nothing to do with communism.
This is my video. You are commenting on it. This is a video addressed at the myth that there is no incentive under Marx's conception of socialism, and you come on here saying that there is no incentive in socialism because you didn't even bother to watch the fucking video you're commenting on!
Your random statistics about people dying under Mao and whatnot are meaningless, an no, those deaths are not more than "all the wars combined." There have been 7 wars with over 20 million deaths.
So I ask what human nature is and why Marxism goes against it and you tell me how famines in "communism" killed people? Interesting.
I suspect you are commenting on my video without even watching it or bothering to read the description. No incentive? Really? So being payed according to the quantity and quality of your work is not incentive?
I'm still amazed every day that there are people out there flaunting their ignorance for the whole world to see.
Your comment is nothing but unsubstantiated assertions. You haven't said what "human nature" actually is or why it is in opposition to "Marxism as a philosophy and as a system." If you think human nature is static then you must not know anything about history, because all of the varied societal forms that have existed over the past hundred thousand years seem to indicate otherwise.
the trouble is much of the Left still sees socialism as being about the equality of outcomes (ie altering the mode of distribution/circulation), which is why we get "fair trade" and LETS, etc. Whereas the point is the abolition of commodity production itself. Ad, yes, I agree that this will not lead to equality of outcomes, nor should it.
Everyone is equal when they're dirt poor.
snukeattack 6 months ago
@snukeattack and this has what to do with this video...?
ZakeD3 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to Socialism. Karl Marx
You ever wonder why siberia was so popular?
ORACLE063 1 year ago
Socialism... when u absolutely have to have death tolls in the tens of millions.
ORACLE063 1 year ago
@ORACLE063
I think capitalism does that just fine.
ZakeD3 1 year ago
@ZakeD3 How do you figure? You're alive solely thanks to capitalism - given your comment I doubt it's thanks to your own efforts.
NietzscheanMan 1 year ago
@NietzscheanMan
I'm alive thanks to capitalism?
ZakeD3 1 year ago
@NietzscheanMan Abundance/technology/healthcare. These are the things that mean we are around today. Capitalism alone is not responsible for these. Interestingly, abundance and healthiness are -not- desirable in a profiteering system. The margins for profit become smaller that way. I'm interestingly not a communist, yet a basic understanding of economics reveals that capitalism doesn't economize. If it did, I would support it :) (deforestation/oil/war=profit) Many are dead because of Capitalism.
metters4lyf 9 months ago
@metters4lyf You confuse corporatism (where companies get benefits over competitors through state enforcement and nepotism, as made possible by socialist systems) with capitalism (free market). I have no idea what you base your b"asic" understanding of economics on, but I can't say I hold it in high esteem given this comment :)
NietzscheanMan 9 months ago
@NietzscheanMan And you confuse capitalism with some abstract ideal of capitalism as you think it should be, not as it actually is. Socialism doesn't involve what you're talking about because there aren't competing private companies under socialism!
ZakeD3 9 months ago
@ZakeD3 Haha. You know where you can stick your communism, friend :) If you didn't have a state to hide behind, you'd be eaten alive.
NietzscheanMan 9 months ago
@NietzscheanMan lol, what are you talking about?
ZakeD3 9 months ago
How can you spot a Communist? Well, it’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an Anti-communist? It’s someone who understands Marx and Lenin
ORACLE063 1 year ago
To take from one, because it is thought that his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, ‘the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry, and the fruits acquired by it.’ — Thomas Jefferson
ORACLE063 1 year ago
Equality is tyranny! Jefferson's "created equal" phrase applies only to fertilization. After fertilization the result is a unique Individual living in a relativistic universe where equality is only an abstract concept. Education in: virtue, Individual Rights of "Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," free market, and free republic is vital to any Civil Society reconciling the differences of humanity. Many ideologies tried equality and failed, such as Marxism, etc.
Mike10four 1 year ago
@Mike10four
Inequality is freedom! Free yourself - give me all your money!
ZakeD3 1 year ago
What did you even say in this that's of any substance? Just "equality is only an abstract concept," which Is true, but so are "virtue," "rights," and "liberty." Civil society, in contrast to political society, in itself testifies to an irreconcilable contradiction within society. How can anyone not totally delusional say that capitalism promotes "reconciling the differences of humanity"? It's built on the centralization of power and wealth in the hands of a minority of society.
ZakeD3 1 year ago
@ZakeD3 Thanks for your interest. The Rights of "Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," they are part of the Laws of Nature. I have scientifically proven to myself that Jefferson was correct in associating these Rights as part of the Laws of Nature. If you are interested, I could youtube message the proof. Equality is an abstract concept not obtainable in the physical domain according to the Heisenberg principle. Simply put, how do you measure equality? How do you know when you have it?
Mike10four 1 year ago
@Mike10four
The whole point of this video is that equality is an abstract concept that can't simply be foisted onto reality in whatever conditions we like. Marxists have never disagreed.
"But "all members of society" and "equal right" are obviously mere phrases."
"Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby. " ~ Marx etc.
ZakeD3 1 year ago
You could have at least read the videos description: "These accusations of Marxists believing in the possibility of some "perfect equality" of outcome any time soon is nonsense."
On the other hand you raise up abstract principles above the reality that they're abstracted from. Abstract rights ignore the real conditions and situations in which people find themselves and the real limitations placed on them. In this case they could have no more content than "equality" as some abstract principle.
ZakeD3 1 year ago
@ZakeD3 I stand corrected about the video’s objective on “perfect equality.” I got caught up with the title. I did not view it in its entirety because of the audio and I’m familiar with Marx’s ideology. I am not sure we are on the same page about Rights. Rights of "Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" are not abstractions they are real and can be proven as such. Equality is an abstraction, and becomes a burden or down fall to any society’s obsession in it.
Mike10four 1 year ago
Also, since you probably didnt notice the whole point of this video is that you can't simply "try equality." real equality, as opposed to equality of poverty, requires as its basis an advanced level of productivity.
ZakeD3 1 year ago
Use your voice, this is silly.
TTDMFfreaknew 1 year ago
@CommonRaven
I will conceed this much. =p
Fireinthedawn 2 years ago
@CommonRaven
Again, Did you do the factual analysis it would take to actually determine IF the policies of the chinese government were truly socialist or did you just accept that certain "sources" claim they are socialist
If the policies don't match the philosophy, it doesn't matter WHAT institution has labeled them as such-including the governments decreees that they are indeed socialist. And so fara s I know most sources just choose to let the nations declare.
Fireinthedawn 2 years ago
I dispute that Mao, stalin and pol pot were socialist. I can walk around and claim i'm a black male til the cows come home. it doesn't make it so.
Fireinthedawn 2 years ago
If there's one thing we can learn from history it's that the 'natural order' so rarely is and that the eternal truths so rarely are.
Human nature is a reflection of the social order of the day. Just look at what Artistotle wrote on the subject .
RevolutionarySpectre 2 years ago
The "numbers game" regarding Stalinist regimes is misleading. Historians have shown that most deaths resulted from famines, which were already a regular occurrence in, say, China. And in fact, deaths from famine declined as these regimes developed. The overall death rate markedly rose in Russia after 1991.
Moreover more people have died from famine in India than under all "communist" regimes combined, yet no-one calls this tyranny.
barrymarshall 2 years ago 6
A point I ve been trying to make for the longest. Well said
blahblahblah8183 2 years ago
I'm glad you recognize that I don't "flatly disregard historical fact" since I'm "at stage 1." Sometimes you need to sit back and think your comments through.
ZakeD3 2 years ago
My arguments? I haven't argued anything. Every single comment I've made was simply aimed at getting you to make a coherent argument. I failed.
I claimed Marxism isn't related to communism? lol, really?
Of course China is not communist. They've never claimed the name communist, they aren't democratic, they have less public ownership than India or Denmark... and you said you read the communist manifesto? Get the hell off of my video you fucking idiot.
ZakeD3 2 years ago
so you can take your "ant lived in the real world, don't know shot" and shove it.
TheronHoward 2 years ago
Highly unlikely. under capitalism, we: Nuked a country, helped overthrow hundreds of DEMOCRATICALLY elected governments, we funded terrorist groups worldwide, we trained the man who orchestrated the most devastating terrorist attack to the USA to date, we liberated a country because were "nice guys" meanwhile killing a million+ civilians. we naturally toppled the legitimate socialist countries in the eastern bloc because they shared the same name as the evil Stalinist dictatorship.
TheronHoward 2 years ago
We plunged ourselved into not One, but two great recessions that cost the working class Billions of dollars in bailouts because the rich care only about making more money, than the welfare of the people that support their lifestyle, furthering the slavery that the American people find themselves in. we have sold our banks, our ports, our roads, our natural resources to the highest bidder, effectively ending our control over our own country, to multinational corporations.
TheronHoward 2 years ago
So you've read the Communist Manifesto, but you think China is communist? But doesn't the manifesto say that communism means democratic control of the means of production? China is not democratic nor does it retain much public ownership...it employs a smaller public sector than places like India, Denmark, and Latvia. I guess Denmark is communist too, eh?
Oh, right, I forgot "MAO KILLED PEOPEL LOLZ."
ZakeD3 2 years ago
I've read the Communist Manifesto, yes. You just aren't saying anything coherent. The point is that you randomly telling me that Stalin killed people is completely off-topic, you're like fucking Glenn Beck. Can't deal with the issue? Bring up Stalin!
You still haven't said what human nature is, why it is in opposition to "Marxism as a system," why "Marxism" inevitably leads to an authoritarian elite, or pretty much anything.
"COMMUNISTS KILLED PEOPLE" is for you a substitution for argument.
ZakeD3 2 years ago
Marx didnt invent Socialism or communism. they've existed in one form or another since the dawn of humanity. and you're talking about the same china that is outperforming America in every economic indicator right now? :)
TheronHoward 2 years ago
What the hell? Born from Marx? What are you even talking about?
You're ignoring the whole point. You comment on my video saying some shit about human nature that you are unwilling to back up. When I point out that your so-called "lack of incentive" is bullshit you point out that China's government is authoritarian? Your arguments are incoherent, ignorant crap. China has nothing to do with communism.
ZakeD3 2 years ago
This is my video. You are commenting on it. This is a video addressed at the myth that there is no incentive under Marx's conception of socialism, and you come on here saying that there is no incentive in socialism because you didn't even bother to watch the fucking video you're commenting on!
Your random statistics about people dying under Mao and whatnot are meaningless, an no, those deaths are not more than "all the wars combined." There have been 7 wars with over 20 million deaths.
ZakeD3 2 years ago
So I ask what human nature is and why Marxism goes against it and you tell me how famines in "communism" killed people? Interesting.
I suspect you are commenting on my video without even watching it or bothering to read the description. No incentive? Really? So being payed according to the quantity and quality of your work is not incentive?
ZakeD3 2 years ago
I'm still amazed every day that there are people out there flaunting their ignorance for the whole world to see.
Your comment is nothing but unsubstantiated assertions. You haven't said what "human nature" actually is or why it is in opposition to "Marxism as a philosophy and as a system." If you think human nature is static then you must not know anything about history, because all of the varied societal forms that have existed over the past hundred thousand years seem to indicate otherwise.
ZakeD3 2 years ago
Brilliant video my friend! Great background 2 Marx and his colleagues/predecessors. Thank you for clearing this up with the critics.
blahblahblah8183 2 years ago 2
I hope you create more videos like this. Thanks.
TheLeftLibertarian 2 years ago 2
the trouble is much of the Left still sees socialism as being about the equality of outcomes (ie altering the mode of distribution/circulation), which is why we get "fair trade" and LETS, etc. Whereas the point is the abolition of commodity production itself. Ad, yes, I agree that this will not lead to equality of outcomes, nor should it.
barrymarshall 2 years ago 2