freeing them, and Marx had nothing at all against private property obtained by your personal labor either! Stalin's revisionism implemented agricultular collectivization, and yes, it was slavery, just like working in a western factory, where more than 50% of the value produced by your labor was going straight to the pockets of the entrepreneurs, was slavery...
@qhack: Oh yes, the old argument about private property... Did you ever read the communist maniesto? If you did, you would know that Marxism is not against earning profits by trading the products of your own labor (a.k farmers who grow food on their own, little family businesses and worker cooperatives), but it is against trading the products of other's people labor! Lenin actually gave the lands of the exploitative aristocrats to the people who were working on them as dependent peasants, thus
i respect Marx because at least he dreamt of equality one way or the other a glimmer of hope for people like me who do see capitalist as less having more and more having less!
A moneyless,classless,stateless communities of humanity sharing the Earth in cooperation harmony and wisdom for our common needs and well being.The market system of artificial scarcity and the wage slavery of the working class is the historic process of private property relationship of alienation,exploitation and suffering of our common humanity. A majority democratic movement of no leaders no followers to transcend the CLASS RULE.
Please explain to me how the UK gov could EVER succeed as a communist state and affectively remove all privately held enterprise. The gov has NEVER managed to run ANY business successfully - every venture is a complete disaster. The millennium dome, the olympics (4 fold over budget), you only have to look at the train network that had to be privatised in the 80's because it was at breaking point. The public sector is for the losers of society & the people who are rejected from real business...
@worldchangeNOW2012 Get rid of the Tory Party. Millennium dome was their baby and they were in power during the 80s when the train network was at 'breaking point.'
Let me just forward your comment to some NHS neurosurgeons, my dentist, all the highly trained engineers working in the public sector and all the people that are keeping the water, electricity and internet access working in my house.
Great example with the railroads though, the fact that Railtrack was terrible, then imploded and had to be bailed out by... the public, and Network Rail is a hugely expensive failure-in-progress really helps your argument.
@worldchangeNOW2012 It wouldnt be the same gov moron, it would be a new state altogather. Change will never come from above, history has shown that, and real change has to be forced on the bourgeois by a struggle by the toiling masses.
Value is whatever we decide it is - and can be subject to change without notice. -else we would not have such a large part of the labor force engaged in advertising and in sales.. If you build a theory to try cleverly to make value a 'scientific' concept, the economics built on that theory will rest on a bed of quicksand
@hilletehnoob: Once I red the words "ex-communist countries" in your comment, I lost any interest I previously had in its content. My advice for you? Get a brain, or read some books! (or at least the comment I posted below for a brief introduction on what communism is...) You are either an idiot, or a brainwashed economical illiterate... Send me a new reply when you grow up kid! I'm not interested in the rhetoric society implements in your head, so come back when you have an independent mind!
equality has been achieved and the monetary system which facilitates corruption does not exist anymore! In communism, goods would be directly distributed to the people, according to their needs and their labour. I hope this helped you a bit! Good bye, sir!
@Vict0r1984 Ah, yes, the old "each according to their needs" argument. Tell me, who determines my needs? Me, or the state? As a farmer, under Communism, there is no incentive for me to grow more than I need for my family to survive. With Capitalism, I have the incentive to grow more so that I may trade for other goods and services. If the state determines my needs, then they have to force me to grow more and that would be slavery.
@qhack but how long is it untill your small familly farm goes out of buisness and sells the land to a larger farm? Btw who wants to live on a substanance farm? You can obviously trade what you make for other things you want, however neither side in a transaction has any right to profit at the others expense.
ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE WORKING CLASS, since in socialism the human development and survival of civilization motives are principal, not the profit motive. In Stalinism, these principles are already extinct, and, in consequence, Chernobyl has nothing to do with socialist states, and even less than nothing with communist states. A communist state is a socialist society (where the state owns the means of production and the masses of people control the state) in which absolute economic
@Vict0r1984 : Let's devise a 5-yr. plan to distribute oleo to the burbs by appointed, party-savvy, central planners. They shall determine how much dog food & penicillin, sulfa & antiseptic will be appropriated to sector 32. Who needs free-market discipline? Let 1982-Czechoslovakia be the model. The Czechs loved waiting in line 7 hrs. for a tub of rancid hamburger. It broke the boredom of a trying day of idling 6 hours in line for 4 liters of petrol.
were just hyper-corporations because the profit motive was more important than human development in the Warsaw pact. Here in Romania, for example, there were huge shortages of meat and bread, but most of the produced bread and meat was exported in the Occidental hemisphere for bigger profits! A Stalinist economy is one giant national-company, not a communist or a socialist state, because a socialist state is based on big state control, but only as long as the state is led by THE DEMOCRATICALLY
domain of a lord did. It is also important to understand that the Stalinist powers of the cold war were state capitalist regimes, and not even socialist ones. Why? Because the state operated as a huge corporation in which the dictator was the only shareholder (the owner), the giant bureaucratic apparatus of the state was the hierarchic order of supervisors and managers of the capitalist corporation, and the peasants and the industrial workers were the production employees... Also, those states
@modernwar2ghostrp: Capitalism is incompatible with real democracy, as the capitalistic hierarchic structure is a very despotic one, and is almost identical with feudal law. The shareholders can dictate everything in a company, have absolute power over their employees, and can actually pass their share/domain in the company to the next generation. The corporation is, by itself, a despotic entity, a relic of the medieval era as form of organization, because it operates with the same laws the
Will you explain the correlation between the tiny capitalists and dehumanization. And or how capitalism creates artificial scarcity and how all this effects the war on the middle class and the small business owner. Amodena360@yahoo.com thank you so much.
Would communists use force to abolish the family, private property, etc.? If communists advocate force, they are no better than Stalin. Why is abolishing private property necessary? Property boils down to control: I control my body, as a sentient being, thus I "own" it, regardless of whether the state acknowledges my rights. The state, however, can exert force to remove any autonomy I have. For all practical purposes, if you can't defend yourself, it doesn't matter if you "own" yourself.
@amamerc 'Why is abolishing private property necessary?'
That's a caricature. Communists have nothing against private property per se. They are against a particular TYPE of private property, however: exploitative property, by which someone has a different relation to the means of production to someone else (ie. a value producer vs an expropriator).
@amamerc You should view the video. It's telling you the opposite. Capitalism advocates and uses force to exploit people, since it depends on the reduction of technology and the reduction of productivity of labor. Marx in the Communist Manifesto speaks of the abolition of private BURGUEOISE property, the abolition of the burgueoise property, not the destruction of all property. You should read and educate yourself.
African countries are not poor because of lack of efficiency, but they are poor because the developed nations need them to be poor, and mostly take care of the ones which dare to emerge!
Don't give us the same stupid propaganda about "commerce creates wealth", since you don't eat the VAT and the GDP! You eat and use goods which were produced by labor, and the virtual wealth of the markets is there only because of the production of goods! Fuck off unless you provide some logical
and productive exploited populations in the third world! Commerce only creates artificial wealth, as the profits brought by taxes wouldn't exist without an exchange of goods, and as a consequence, the western world needs slave states which create real wealth by producing goods. Thus capitalism condemns more than three quarters of the world population to dire poverty! If there would be no underdeveloped third world to fill the coffers of the west, then poverty would reign everywhere just like in
the system moving: creating vassals which produce for their masters! During the 19th century, as Marx pointed out, there was class exploitation, as the peasants and the proletarians produced goods for the bourgeois to consume, but after capitalism entered more and more in the process of globalization, the poverty of the proletariat and peasantry was moved away from the first world to the former colonial lands, creating consumerist populations in Europe and North America (+ a few Asian states)
demand anymore. As a consequence, several private enterprises would go bankrupt, the price of all government bonds and most of the private bonds would fall etc. We would see the same disaster as in 2008 until most of the countries become POOR AGAIN AND PRODUCE MUCH MORE THAN THEY CONSUME! Every developing third world country is a pain in the ass for the western corporations which monopolize its markets, and, in consequence, no capitalist would like Africa to evolve. This is the key which keeps
countries to be "efficient" at capitalism, because a high efficiency level of the African economies and the establishment of consumer economies there would impoverish the west and collapse the world economy! Why? The majority always has to be poor under capitalism so that the system would function, because if every third world countries becomes an efficient consumer economy like the USA, then there would be massive goods shortages everywhere, because the production couldn't satisfy the market
@codownni: If you believe that an ideology is "dead" then you are the idiot here... No economical ideology ever died in history, and you tell me that the only one based on moral principles is dead? :)) Look around you and you'll see thousands of Marxist demonstrations worldwide, and sooner or later, they will materialize again in revolutions, just like they did exactly in this day 94 years ago!
And regarding efficiency, you see, the major problem with it is that it is impossible for all the
Very nice, but I hardly think it was the accumulation of constant capital that led to the crisis recently, it was speculative gambling and goverment debt
@LogicalFlawDetector: When I saw the awesome combination of vulgarity, lack of arguments and anger towards my statement you created in this post, I just realized that your youtube user name is purely ironical. Your account is a spring of logical flaws and complete intellectual failures, just like this masterpiece of hate mail you posted... Grow up kid, and then we'll talk!
Wow, the first video that makes sense instead of people talking about the big bad greedy corporations and equality for all! God, those people are the biggest hippies that understand jack all. I have to disagree with him on a few points.
1. Money played a central role in determining the financial crisis. Too much cheap money. 2. Wages does not fall when there is a crisis. If I was at Walmart working, I won't get a 20% pay cut just because the unemployment is at 10%
a half people who live under capitalism in India, Indonesia, China, the middle east, Africa and South America barely survive, and you want a system which would work better than capitalism? Just look around you to see the disaster it creates! Capitalism is "the best economic system" only if you are an arrogant animal-like human who is controlled by the instincts of greed and hunger for power and who doesn't care that others starve for his wealth or that his grandchildren will die in radiation or
@Vict0r1984 You are so true. I wish the majority of the people in the West to see what you see. For the last 20 something years, the corrupted politicians in North America managed to destroy completely independent journalism and the freedom of the press has no meaning at all. The masses are ignorant and indoctrinated in capitalist propaganda. The history will remember the quartet that made the freedom of speech dead: Reagan, Clinton, Bush, and Obama. The lather sinister he promised change.
@Vict0r1984 ..... combined with democracy, (not a republic) people can regulate capitalistic peoples who plan to hurt others for profit. I also would like to mention that if your regarding to communism, then you allow a government control, which can also cause huge social problems leading to what you have just said. (chernobyl... ) Im not praising any country, because not one is perfect, but this is one that I think would be.
@Vict0r1984 on the contrary side you have south korea and ex communist countries that lived so great,i don't even know how they collapsed,must have been alliens or magic or something.
@Vict0r1984 Hahahah, you really use the word "intellectual" here?? :-)
Ok, since you are such a blossoming intellectucal, feel free to explain by using ARGUMENTS how communism is possible
WITHOUT
1) DICTATORSHIPS, FORCE; VIOLENCE; but in FEEDOM
2) POVERTY; FAMINES; INEFFICIENCIES, but PROSPERITY.
I pay you € 1.000.000 if you can this ... and another € 100.000, if you are able to name JUST ONE EXAMPLE where communism/socialism/leftish polcies EVER WORKED.
Dimwit, what China made successful for the past 30 years were NEOLIBERAL reforms, sth. communists/letftist IDIOTS would turn their back in their grave for:
Ok, to all LEFTIST DIMWITS, I give you € 1.000.000 to each of you if you are able to explain by using ARGUMENTS and FACTS, how communism can be realised
1) WITHOUT ending up in POVERTY; INEFFICIENCY, FAMINES, but PROSPERITY
2) WITHOUT ending up in DICTATORSHIPS; UN-FREEDOM, FORCE, TERROR, but FREEDOM
I give you another € 100.000, if you are able to name me ONE EXAMPLE where socialism/communism ever worked!!!
@Vict0r1984 One would require to know what despotism truly is when it comes within how anything is what it is, or how anything works or doesnt work when it comes within how anything began within any and all technological evolution which is any dispursment within any and all ancestry within any and all occupational transfers from any manner in forage, despotism can and does become any game of monopoly predicted within any knowing and the unknowing within how anything works; "Any Advantage Point"
mostly used slave-labor instead of employees because it was more profitable for them, but then again, isn't the profit motive the engine of the capitalist system? Sure, slavery generated huge unemployment, and unemployment bred high criminality in every roman city and poverty for more than 90% of the roman citizens, but who cared as long as the money and the gold were flowing? We'll soon face the same problems, but instead of slavery, the cause will be the robotization of labor... 5 billions and
@MrBigEnchilada: "Can you name another system that would be better than capitalism?" Of course I can. Socialism. And, just for your own general knowledge, if we reverse 3000 or 2000 years ago, we still find capitalism... Sure, there was no industry back then, and the whole economy was based on agriculture and urban handicraft goods, but if you look at the Roman Empire or Athens, we still find free markets, so you are the ones who praise ancient ideas! The only difference is that the land-owners
those who believe that the current system the u.s. and other developed countries have is capitalism and is the best it can be is just as wrong as those who believe we should give marxist economics a try to improve our society.
Profit is a cost, the cost of efficiency. Without profit, price action would be unable to function, and the allocation of scarce resources with different uses to their most demanded use would be neigh impossible. Scarcity would be rampant. Incentives for innovation would also disappear. This idea of class warfare is a huge distraction and ruining the world. Instead spend time researching your politicians and voting out any that violate their enumerated power by helping corporations.
profit and is leading to giant economic crises (if it manages to avoid the bankruptcy of Greece and pass this recession without collapsing...) and possibly even world wars because it is draining the finite resources (especially the oil deposits) of the Earth without providing any alternative fuels for the future as they are expensive, and yet it is the best economic system? If capitalism is indeed here to stay, civilization and our habitable world without radiation from nuclear wars aren't.
@Vict0r1984 can you name another system that would be better than capitalism?? sure, we can really reverse and go back to 3000, 2000, 1000, or 500 years ago, but what kind of systems are you looking for?
@Epicur100: No system is actually the best for every person on earth. But of course, you, as any right wing douche bag, fail to mention for whom capitalism is actually "the best economic system", and that, of course, because the numbers are below 1 billion of the 7 billion people on this planet... Capitalism created the poverty in the third world, (which is more than half of the world as population) capitalism dropped the human development level of eastern Europe, capitalism is driven only by
...lets see "the free market led to goverment being controlled at high levels by insiders" huh? That is a ridiculous position. NO, the establishment of a central bank and fractional reserve consolidation of power led to this.
North Korea is no alternative to capitalism. Free markets have made Norway and Switzerland rich. Stae ownership has made North Korean children very poor and their eladers very rich.
@TwoOldOaks Communism is state greed and corruption, povetry for people. wealth for politiicans and their friends. Just saying an ideology is perfect when we have no evidence of it does not work with me, grow up. Governments are corrupt and any power they have they abuse.
Try reading what communism is truly about, before commenting on it. You are clearly talking about capitalism. Capitalism means the poverty of all but the chosen few, communism is the equality of all.
@TwoOldOaks Capitlaism is whats made Switzerland,UK,USA,France and Norway rich. Communism/socialism...statism is what made Russia, North Korea and Cuba poor.
Try understanding capitlaism before you support evil. The state gets richer in statism and the people are slaves.
@warriorprince1010 You are confusing statism with communism, that's why you're a retard. I'm an anarcho-communist, so I don't like state controlled ANYTHING, just like you.
@TwoOldOaks I like giood governance to run schools and healthcare, energy and regulate. But most of the economy, copyrights, farms, music, the press, should be owned by people.
@TwoOldOaks Except the only way a group of people will accept communism is by being forced into it by a group powerful enough to impose their will on the rest...a state. The natural tendency of humanity is to liberty and a capitalist economy, so you will never get a communist state without force and deception.
This is why communist counties put production over human beings. A free market completely solves this problem. Unfortunately there has never been a free market because big well funded governments and central banks have always intervened on behalf of the interests of the "current business class" or "Elites" stopping the natural and orderly replacement of inferior business models and products. Fuck Marx.....inhuman beast.
@ScrapMetalBomb Capitalist system it is a product of the "free market" because it is based on greed and accumulation of wealth. it was inevitable in the progress of the "free market" to had a government ruled by the most powerful free marketers, "the capital" of marx it is an economic and sociological book, read it all.
This is a slight unmeritable man, meet to be sent on errands: And, though others lay labours on this man, to ease ourselves of divers slanderous loads, he shall but bear them as the ass bears gold, to groan and sweat under the business, either led or driven, as they point him the way; and having brought their treasure where they will, then take they down his load and turn him off, like to the empty ass, to shake his ears and graze in commons; being in the service of the Baron as Marx is.
@Peristerygr: Truth is a very dangerous word! Sweet Jesus did toddle around in a Roman province, telling folk that he speaks the truth; and because of this he was summoned to appear before the Roman governor and he put this one question to him: What is truth? But sweet Jesus could not answer and was send to crucifixion straight for the fault of it!
Moreover, labour can and often does destroy, rather than necessarily augment/add, value. Value can and does only come from individuals' subjective assessments, which are imputed back through the productive chain to all objects via the voluntary price mechanism in a market. Add to this the insuperable problem of quantifying labour-time according to a single, unitary objective standard of "labour", and you find that the labour theory of value really explains nothing at all.
@HugoNewman I find it interesting that you complain about the quantification of labor and then claim the solution is subjective preferences. Something completely unquantifiable. Also look into Abstract vs. Concrete Labor.
I really don't feel like arguing but to be quite honest you don't know what you're talking about. Read Marx, not about Marx.
@cogar488 I never claimed subjective preferences could be directly quantified. I agree, they can't be. All I said is that subjective preferences determine prices, which are an objective proxy for people's relative preferences in relation to the goods/services available.
Maybe now you could actually answer my criticisms of the labour theory and explain why I don't know what I'm talking about, instead of assuming I haven't read Marx.
@HugoNewman "Maybe now you could actually answer my criticisms of the labour theory and explain why I don't know what I'm talking about, instead of assuming I haven't read Marx."
Or I could not waste a great deal of my time in a fruitless discussion. Which is what I'm going to do.
Sure, this is USE value, which allegedly is compatible with labour value. But since labour value isn't in principle required to at least partially account for all use value at some point in any given object's material history, then it is utterly redundant as an explanatory concept. It is merely an ad hoc distinction incorporated to account for profit. However, profit can be explained cogently in another way, namely by applying the austrian school's theory of value, prices and interest.
The labour theory of value has been roundly refuted by von Mises, among others. Take a basic counterexample. Consider the whiteboard in the video. Its value can indeed change in the absence of any labour input. I may value it more than you do because I urgently require paper for whatever purpose I have in mind, regardless of how much labour time went into it. Indeed, completely unworked resources, such as water, have use value before any labour is ever applied to them.
hmm... so many people here who think they know what socialism and communism means, but clearly don't know anything about it, except what was told to them in the traditional educational system.
When you wanna discuss something, first learn about it, so that you don't come across like a ordinary parrot that tells whatever is told to him without knowing the meaning.
the haves have self-fulled conditions what's good for one is twos' recession through dialectical materialism. Aprosperous entertainment culture
with static anodyne compulsions where perched suburban vegas vultures pick the bones of the new dark-ages. The less the sweat the more the pelf the public service serves itself the bourgeois belt blames someone else the prols in cotton-pickn hell.
@61984sd: Troubling for who? The bastards who run the big corporations and the world? Wake up! Capitalism is crumbling before you and some people (like you) still believe in this criminal exploitative ideology! "THAT'S SHOCKING AND TROUBLING AT THE SAME TIME" to quote your statement and put it to a better use...
@Vict0r1984 yeah, sure. capitalism is crumbling.....capitalism has been crumbling for 100 years. wake the fuck up, leftard ! Capitalism is here to stay because it is the best economic system humans created ( not a perfect one, though)\
Oh do fuck off. How long have they been Capitalist how efficient at Capitalism are they? That is the cause of their poverty. Not to mention their cultures etc. Did Britain become the Worlds biggest Empire through Marxism? Did America become a superpower without being Capitalist? Brazil, India even china, are thy not using Capitalism? FFs man, Marxism is dead.
@61984sd You do realise that one of the main theorists who came up with the Marginal Theory of Value (which supposedly "replaces" the Labour Theory) actually noted that it DOESN'T CONTRADICT the labour theory of value? They are both compatible, because the marginal theory of "value" isn't actually about value at all - it ignores it and looks at supply and demand only.
Topics: Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc2.yolasite.com
figure4etc1.yolasite.com
etc.
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
and no mention of the role of credit? that is the largest hole in this theory. malinvestment caused by increased credit and the distortion that it causes in time preference has been proven time and time again, especially these days. do we need anymore proof than the housing crisis?
The only long term solution is drop the profit motivation for production of goods and services and replace it with filling needs. 1) clean air, 2) clean water, 3) nutritious food, 4) functional housing, 5) quality education, 6) quality healthcare, 7) meaningful work, 8) satisfying leisure, 9) human rights, 10) stability.
Without profit motivation, the above is possible for every person on this earth - those who can provide for themselves, use their resources develop the same capacity for others
@MrBigEnchilada where do people get off seriously saying bullshit oneliners like that. drop the "ly poor..." from the end of your sentence and you are heading toward a half logical conclusion. Does profit motivate you to eat, sleep, drink, breathe or care for your family? All it takes is a shift in your thought process to want to extend that same courtesy to those that slip through the cracks off this bullshit system.
@LazarusCato no, profit does not motivate me to eat, sleep, drink, breathe or care for my family. It just motivates people to focus on whats successful and what others want and need, it motivates people to go take a look in their customers' perspective, it motivates people to take risks and resist instant gratification, it motivates people to go invest and learn about new things that others haven't done before.
@LazarusCato I dont think profit will necessarily bring clean air, water, nutritious food, functional housing, quality education, quality healthcare, meaningful work, satisfying leisure,human rights, stability, but it offers the most possibility to. This is because companies will do more to focus on these needs if people decides that these needs are important and they want profit along with it.
So basically what this guy is suggesting to get out of the crises of capitalism is: to centralise and automate the production of goods & services - and pay workers less and reduce their conditions?
Awesome!! such short-term thinking - this will do nothing but create further instability (unless you can provide a standard of living people have become accustomed to and give them something productive to do with their time) - this also fails to take into account the rising oil prices etc.
@LazarusCato hes not arguing that this is what should happen, he is arguing that this is what will happen, as it has happened with previous crisis. This is how capitalism resolves its crisis; however the way in which capitalism tries to solve these crisis are not only harmful to people but seemingly becoming more and more difficult to realize, which (according to marx) will inevitably lead to revolution. Basically i think the guy in the video would agree with you.
@ShadowCookie point taken - I've got to learn to tone down my confrontational language.
I think the only way the current paradigm can continue (its still only a mid term solution at best) is wipe debt worldwide. We've turned into capital pretty much all the low hanging fruit, & we then moved onto credit - & now we've reached the limit of sustainable debt now also. So it can only crash - or reinvent itself for the whole world to witness what a ridiculous myth we've built our civilization on.
Our species is embarrassingly dualistic in our thinking. Communism is *not* the opposite of capitalism. Marx was a capitalist who identified 5 problematic attributes in the mechanics of capitalism, which he (probably wrongly) predicted would cause capitalism to evolve into a state he labeled communism. It was not a plan that that we should ditch capitalism for, but a resultant era in the evolution of capitalism. Soviet, Chinese and US propaganda supporting/opposing communism is not illuminating.
It was only in my Microeconomics course did we see a passing reference to Ricardo in respect to comparative advantage and the subsequent idea of a 'mixed' economy. I'd have taken a course or two in Marxist economics if it had been offered. When I was a student, it was before the dot com bust, and we were all gung ho 'bout websites and the online economy and the decline of the 'brick and motar'. Its a different world now.
Communism = State Capitalism! Will never work! (True) Karl Marx was never for what Lenin/Stalin had created in the Soviet Union. Read Karl Marx's books!
@cris750 Correct. Though Marxism/Communism could never exist without Gov't.. It's scary that we are entering a state capitalism period in the U.S.. It's will be unsustainable in a short period, Gov't is too inefficient at whatever it does.
Our world is hostage to the insatiable rampaging of the ruling class private gain and greed, dominating,dehumanising,devaluing everyone and everything in the midst. We can and must change the wage slavery of immense humanity in a market system of artificial scarcity . We can share the world for our common needs and well being in harmony within and without.
The Capitalist house of cards are all falen, the rulers cant believe their luck are still effectively in power , Workers are just asking for crumbs as their forefathers and are still devoid of a coherent view of their common interest in reclaiming the Earth in cooperation for our comon needs and well being. Capitalism is the class domination and destruction of our world.
@secretbonus It's too bad that your comment is completely irrelevant to the discussion or the video.
Stop regurgitating nonsense put about by people who cant be bothered to study his theories and just want to focus on the fact that they think Marx was some kind of genocidal mega-racist (probably due to deep-rooted anti Communist/Socialist mindset).
@LudicrousBarchart Don't forget he was Jewish. I imagine that antisemitism played some part in anti-Marxism, though I don't really know. For that matter I've yet to read any of Marx's works save for pamphlet he wrote.
@King100Joe So, according to you those who think Marx has things to teach us do not understand 'language' or 'reality'?
Have you got any arguments to make about Marx's theory of economic crisis or did you just come here to shout at people you disagree with? You scream that Marx is a 'moron' but I have a feeling you probably have not studied his works or theories objectively.
Wow I just looked back through your other comments on this video. You do know this video ISNT about communism right?
That's a hypothesis. You are claiming things without supplying proof. So why don't you give arguments? Also saying things like fool and stupid makes you look like a child.
Finally, the socialist system would be hard to sustain in pop. decline. In such a case, less workers will have to support more of their older fellow men, something unsustainable. Marx most likely did not take into account population decline which affects practically every developed nation today.
@redarrowhead2 I forgot to add that today in most developed nations population is sustained through immigration. There will be a time where that is no longer possible, whether because of immigration's unpopularity or because other nations do not have surplus populations. Either way, the socialist system assumes that every man does his part while in a case of population decline that is difficult to sustain.
There is no price mechanism to decide how goods, services, and/or capital should be distributed by central planners. In the end, they'll have to simply make estimates and if they lose money, they won't care as much as a business does. Then there is the problem of incentives and innovation; why would people invent if they cannot profit or why would they bother doing well in their job if, generally speaking, it won't help their wages?
Andrew. China and the former Soviet block never established Socialism/Communism.Do not confuse capitalism under the control of the state and not the free market,the workers in china remain wage slaves selling their labour power to the state employer.That is State Run Capitalism Folks,bugger all to do with common ownership.
At the beginning he just asserts the Labour Theory of Value. Marxists tend to gloss over the LTV because it has been thoroughly refuted by the likes of Menger. Marxists have been unable to show how Marxian 'use value' transforms into market value (the transformation problem), and therefore the LTV is invalid. It was shown with marginal utility that value is in fact derived from supply and demand, labour being merely a cost of production. The LTV and Marx's theory of exploitation stand refuted.
Marx just pointed out that capitalism is not perfect so we should hand all power to corrupt states so they can control people and steal the wealth. Marx was merely a fashionable critic, with nothing to offer. All countries that turned their back on the free market became poor.
Let us all help to speed the day when this wonderful earth and its rich resources are held in common for the benefit of all humanity.Socialism/Communism has not failed its never been tried.
@majorMcpharter if u truly believe that the whole world can live in harmony and share all the resources for the betterment of the common good i think your extremely naive. Plus I don't want to live in a society where the government has more control over my life than i do, and this is why you always see people rebel for freedom, not for more government intervention.
@majorMcpharter And this is why you always see countries attempt to move toward Socialism/Communism at first because, and i agree that the idea sounds great, for everyone to work together for the betterment of the common good, but people yearn to pursue their own interests and this is why we've seen countries like China and India incorporate more of the free market in their economies and they've benefited from it greatly.
@AndrewD22242224 I think it's a false argument to claim that humans tend to simply pursue their own interests. In the 19th century there were many cooperative systems running in my country (Finland) as well as in Britain (I don't know in what scale). In a recent study, finnish people said that they'd be willing to pay more taxes in order to provide sufficient health care, education, social security etc. for all citizens. Humans are naturally social beings, in psychological & evolutionary sense
@qita0 yea i agree with the government to pay for certain things that are vital, im not an anarchist. But when it comes to the point that we greatly reduce the incentive to work you dismantle a societies economy.
@AndrewD22242224 Also, you say that China has benefitted from free markets, which is completely true, if you only think about the factory owners, stock owners etc. But you have to be strongly self deluded if you say that the average citizen has benefitted from it. China uses slave & child labour, in some parts of the country there's famine, at the same time billionares are driving around in limos... in Delhi there's 70 000 women working as prostitutes, they don't get anything from the government
@qita0 theirs a big difference, they have liberalized their economy but not their political structure. If they liberalize their political system then you would not see things such as child labor
@AndrewD22242224 I saw a documentary about them. There were girls, aged 11-15 who had to work as prostitutes because they were orphans.. And you're telling that India & China have benefitted from free markets?
@qita0 Yes, in the society i would prefer they would have the option to choose an education(something i think we can all agree should be provided by the government) or prostitution or any other activity that we consider immoral so long as it doesn't cause coercion against another person. They're free to chose their way as long as education is an option in my opinion. And both of those countries have benefited economically and have improved the average citizens quality of life where gov hasn't.
@AndrewD22242224 Wow, I'm speechless. I don't fucking care if you think child prostitution is "immoral", you think they WANT TO/ CHOSE TO become prostitutes?? That's beyond cruelty.
@AndrewD22242224 In India there's a place called Kerala. It has been governed by the democratic socialists (note: NOT the same thing as social democrats). Compared to all other provinces in India, Kerala is number one in: gender equality, decreasing poverty (Oh, I forgot, you don't care about such things), basic education, health care, life expectancy, literacy, decreasing corruption and in Human Development Index. Sounds like pretty "useless" to me.
@AndrewD22242224 But hey, you think everyone should have the FREEDOM of DYING HOMELESS under some bridge. You'd have orphans die of hunger because "it was their choice". Great prospect.
@AndrewD22242224 In Namibia, foreign organisations started a basic income guarantee project, as part of development aid programme. As a result, childrens starvation decreased from 23% to 17%, employment rate increased from 36% to 48%, school drop outs decreased by 1/3, crime decreased 60%. In a year, malnourishment rate dropped to 10%, school drop out level became zero (0) and entrepeneuing level increased by 10%. It would cost Namibia only 2% from their GPD to expand this to the whole country.
@HavidDagstrom I agree. :)
OverlordSzymmy 1 week ago
How bout kings and queens? I don't mind being a peasant rather than being forced to be pressured by economic failure. Correct me if I'm wrong. ;)
Asianboy7ful 1 week ago
freeing them, and Marx had nothing at all against private property obtained by your personal labor either! Stalin's revisionism implemented agricultular collectivization, and yes, it was slavery, just like working in a western factory, where more than 50% of the value produced by your labor was going straight to the pockets of the entrepreneurs, was slavery...
Vict0r1984 3 weeks ago 2
@qhack: Oh yes, the old argument about private property... Did you ever read the communist maniesto? If you did, you would know that Marxism is not against earning profits by trading the products of your own labor (a.k farmers who grow food on their own, little family businesses and worker cooperatives), but it is against trading the products of other's people labor! Lenin actually gave the lands of the exploitative aristocrats to the people who were working on them as dependent peasants, thus
Vict0r1984 3 weeks ago 3
i respect Marx because at least he dreamt of equality one way or the other a glimmer of hope for people like me who do see capitalist as less having more and more having less!
bloggerktm 3 weeks ago
Marx is the devil.
saberur66 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A moneyless,classless,stateless communities of humanity sharing the Earth in cooperation harmony and wisdom for our common needs and well being.The market system of artificial scarcity and the wage slavery of the working class is the historic process of private property relationship of alienation,exploitation and suffering of our common humanity. A majority democratic movement of no leaders no followers to transcend the CLASS RULE.
arzoyan 1 month ago
Please explain to me how the UK gov could EVER succeed as a communist state and affectively remove all privately held enterprise. The gov has NEVER managed to run ANY business successfully - every venture is a complete disaster. The millennium dome, the olympics (4 fold over budget), you only have to look at the train network that had to be privatised in the 80's because it was at breaking point. The public sector is for the losers of society & the people who are rejected from real business...
worldchangeNOW2012 1 month ago
@worldchangeNOW2012 Get rid of the Tory Party. Millennium dome was their baby and they were in power during the 80s when the train network was at 'breaking point.'
alieighty 1 month ago
@worldchangeNOW2012 Cool Story Bro.
Let me just forward your comment to some NHS neurosurgeons, my dentist, all the highly trained engineers working in the public sector and all the people that are keeping the water, electricity and internet access working in my house.
Great example with the railroads though, the fact that Railtrack was terrible, then imploded and had to be bailed out by... the public, and Network Rail is a hugely expensive failure-in-progress really helps your argument.
LudicrousBarchart 3 weeks ago
@worldchangeNOW2012 It wouldnt be the same gov moron, it would be a new state altogather. Change will never come from above, history has shown that, and real change has to be forced on the bourgeois by a struggle by the toiling masses.
HavidDagstrom 1 week ago
I think we need Capitalism and Communism .........
aniketkedare8 1 month ago
@aniketkedare8 I think we need socialism...
Tougemaster06 1 month ago
@Tougemaster06 I think we need a fascist monarchy.
Ebvardh 3 weeks ago
@Ebvardh O.o
Tougemaster06 3 weeks ago
@Tougemaster06 I knew I could get you to agree.
So, we have your support?
Ebvardh 3 weeks ago
@Ebvardh Umm..hell no. Death to fascism and to hell with monarchy!
Tougemaster06 3 weeks ago
Value is whatever we decide it is - and can be subject to change without notice. -else we would not have such a large part of the labor force engaged in advertising and in sales.. If you build a theory to try cleverly to make value a 'scientific' concept, the economics built on that theory will rest on a bed of quicksand
elquemando 1 month ago
Hello Sir Cliff Bowman. You are extra ordinary in your lecture. please upload more lectures soon kindly :-)
MrAsad10101 2 months ago
@hilletehnoob: Once I red the words "ex-communist countries" in your comment, I lost any interest I previously had in its content. My advice for you? Get a brain, or read some books! (or at least the comment I posted below for a brief introduction on what communism is...) You are either an idiot, or a brainwashed economical illiterate... Send me a new reply when you grow up kid! I'm not interested in the rhetoric society implements in your head, so come back when you have an independent mind!
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
equality has been achieved and the monetary system which facilitates corruption does not exist anymore! In communism, goods would be directly distributed to the people, according to their needs and their labour. I hope this helped you a bit! Good bye, sir!
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
@Vict0r1984 Ah, yes, the old "each according to their needs" argument. Tell me, who determines my needs? Me, or the state? As a farmer, under Communism, there is no incentive for me to grow more than I need for my family to survive. With Capitalism, I have the incentive to grow more so that I may trade for other goods and services. If the state determines my needs, then they have to force me to grow more and that would be slavery.
qhack 3 weeks ago
@qhack but how long is it untill your small familly farm goes out of buisness and sells the land to a larger farm? Btw who wants to live on a substanance farm? You can obviously trade what you make for other things you want, however neither side in a transaction has any right to profit at the others expense.
HavidDagstrom 1 week ago
@HavidDagstrom Farms that sell to larger farms do so because they see a better profit in not continuing to fail. There is nothing wrong with that.
Living on a farm appeals to many. Obviously not you. But for those who do, we enjoy the life style it provides.
If I grow corn and another farmer grows wheat and we trade, then both of us have profited at the expense of the other.
qhack 1 week ago
ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE WORKING CLASS, since in socialism the human development and survival of civilization motives are principal, not the profit motive. In Stalinism, these principles are already extinct, and, in consequence, Chernobyl has nothing to do with socialist states, and even less than nothing with communist states. A communist state is a socialist society (where the state owns the means of production and the masses of people control the state) in which absolute economic
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Vict0r1984 : Let's devise a 5-yr. plan to distribute oleo to the burbs by appointed, party-savvy, central planners. They shall determine how much dog food & penicillin, sulfa & antiseptic will be appropriated to sector 32. Who needs free-market discipline? Let 1982-Czechoslovakia be the model. The Czechs loved waiting in line 7 hrs. for a tub of rancid hamburger. It broke the boredom of a trying day of idling 6 hours in line for 4 liters of petrol.
EasingDifficulties 2 months ago
were just hyper-corporations because the profit motive was more important than human development in the Warsaw pact. Here in Romania, for example, there were huge shortages of meat and bread, but most of the produced bread and meat was exported in the Occidental hemisphere for bigger profits! A Stalinist economy is one giant national-company, not a communist or a socialist state, because a socialist state is based on big state control, but only as long as the state is led by THE DEMOCRATICALLY
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
domain of a lord did. It is also important to understand that the Stalinist powers of the cold war were state capitalist regimes, and not even socialist ones. Why? Because the state operated as a huge corporation in which the dictator was the only shareholder (the owner), the giant bureaucratic apparatus of the state was the hierarchic order of supervisors and managers of the capitalist corporation, and the peasants and the industrial workers were the production employees... Also, those states
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
@modernwar2ghostrp: Capitalism is incompatible with real democracy, as the capitalistic hierarchic structure is a very despotic one, and is almost identical with feudal law. The shareholders can dictate everything in a company, have absolute power over their employees, and can actually pass their share/domain in the company to the next generation. The corporation is, by itself, a despotic entity, a relic of the medieval era as form of organization, because it operates with the same laws the
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
@No2BHO: I will, but I was really busy the last 2 weeks. I'll email you Saturday or Sunday when I'll have some free time. Good day to you!
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
In other words, more working class people exploited. Of course Marx wrote his analysis as a critique, not as a tool to recycle explotation!
owenivor 2 months ago 3
@Vict0r1984
Will you explain the correlation between the tiny capitalists and dehumanization. And or how capitalism creates artificial scarcity and how all this effects the war on the middle class and the small business owner. Amodena360@yahoo.com thank you so much.
No2BHO 2 months ago
Would communists use force to abolish the family, private property, etc.? If communists advocate force, they are no better than Stalin. Why is abolishing private property necessary? Property boils down to control: I control my body, as a sentient being, thus I "own" it, regardless of whether the state acknowledges my rights. The state, however, can exert force to remove any autonomy I have. For all practical purposes, if you can't defend yourself, it doesn't matter if you "own" yourself.
amamerc 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@amamerc 'Why is abolishing private property necessary?'
That's a caricature. Communists have nothing against private property per se. They are against a particular TYPE of private property, however: exploitative property, by which someone has a different relation to the means of production to someone else (ie. a value producer vs an expropriator).
cayetanoluis 2 months ago
@amamerc You should view the video. It's telling you the opposite. Capitalism advocates and uses force to exploit people, since it depends on the reduction of technology and the reduction of productivity of labor. Marx in the Communist Manifesto speaks of the abolition of private BURGUEOISE property, the abolition of the burgueoise property, not the destruction of all property. You should read and educate yourself.
MGGoblin 2 months ago
Umm HugoNewman please explain how something has a use-value if it is not in use by humans. How did von Mises successfully refute this?
napoleonietzsche 2 months ago
arguments!
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
the 19th century.
African countries are not poor because of lack of efficiency, but they are poor because the developed nations need them to be poor, and mostly take care of the ones which dare to emerge!
Don't give us the same stupid propaganda about "commerce creates wealth", since you don't eat the VAT and the GDP! You eat and use goods which were produced by labor, and the virtual wealth of the markets is there only because of the production of goods! Fuck off unless you provide some logical
Vict0r1984 2 months ago 3
and productive exploited populations in the third world! Commerce only creates artificial wealth, as the profits brought by taxes wouldn't exist without an exchange of goods, and as a consequence, the western world needs slave states which create real wealth by producing goods. Thus capitalism condemns more than three quarters of the world population to dire poverty! If there would be no underdeveloped third world to fill the coffers of the west, then poverty would reign everywhere just like in
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
the system moving: creating vassals which produce for their masters! During the 19th century, as Marx pointed out, there was class exploitation, as the peasants and the proletarians produced goods for the bourgeois to consume, but after capitalism entered more and more in the process of globalization, the poverty of the proletariat and peasantry was moved away from the first world to the former colonial lands, creating consumerist populations in Europe and North America (+ a few Asian states)
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
demand anymore. As a consequence, several private enterprises would go bankrupt, the price of all government bonds and most of the private bonds would fall etc. We would see the same disaster as in 2008 until most of the countries become POOR AGAIN AND PRODUCE MUCH MORE THAN THEY CONSUME! Every developing third world country is a pain in the ass for the western corporations which monopolize its markets, and, in consequence, no capitalist would like Africa to evolve. This is the key which keeps
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
countries to be "efficient" at capitalism, because a high efficiency level of the African economies and the establishment of consumer economies there would impoverish the west and collapse the world economy! Why? The majority always has to be poor under capitalism so that the system would function, because if every third world countries becomes an efficient consumer economy like the USA, then there would be massive goods shortages everywhere, because the production couldn't satisfy the market
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
@codownni: If you believe that an ideology is "dead" then you are the idiot here... No economical ideology ever died in history, and you tell me that the only one based on moral principles is dead? :)) Look around you and you'll see thousands of Marxist demonstrations worldwide, and sooner or later, they will materialize again in revolutions, just like they did exactly in this day 94 years ago!
And regarding efficiency, you see, the major problem with it is that it is impossible for all the
Vict0r1984 2 months ago
Very nice, but I hardly think it was the accumulation of constant capital that led to the crisis recently, it was speculative gambling and goverment debt
JagjeetMann 2 months ago
This is cool video. thanks
daauus 3 months ago
@LogicalFlawDetector: When I saw the awesome combination of vulgarity, lack of arguments and anger towards my statement you created in this post, I just realized that your youtube user name is purely ironical. Your account is a spring of logical flaws and complete intellectual failures, just like this masterpiece of hate mail you posted... Grow up kid, and then we'll talk!
Vict0r1984 3 months ago
Wow, the first video that makes sense instead of people talking about the big bad greedy corporations and equality for all! God, those people are the biggest hippies that understand jack all. I have to disagree with him on a few points.
1. Money played a central role in determining the financial crisis. Too much cheap money. 2. Wages does not fall when there is a crisis. If I was at Walmart working, I won't get a 20% pay cut just because the unemployment is at 10%
drf7at1 3 months ago
an intoxicated atmosphere.
Vict0r1984 3 months ago 17
a half people who live under capitalism in India, Indonesia, China, the middle east, Africa and South America barely survive, and you want a system which would work better than capitalism? Just look around you to see the disaster it creates! Capitalism is "the best economic system" only if you are an arrogant animal-like human who is controlled by the instincts of greed and hunger for power and who doesn't care that others starve for his wealth or that his grandchildren will die in radiation or
Vict0r1984 3 months ago 31
@Vict0r1984 You are so true. I wish the majority of the people in the West to see what you see. For the last 20 something years, the corrupted politicians in North America managed to destroy completely independent journalism and the freedom of the press has no meaning at all. The masses are ignorant and indoctrinated in capitalist propaganda. The history will remember the quartet that made the freedom of speech dead: Reagan, Clinton, Bush, and Obama. The lather sinister he promised change.
cosmopolite66 3 months ago
@Vict0r1984 ..... combined with democracy, (not a republic) people can regulate capitalistic peoples who plan to hurt others for profit. I also would like to mention that if your regarding to communism, then you allow a government control, which can also cause huge social problems leading to what you have just said. (chernobyl... ) Im not praising any country, because not one is perfect, but this is one that I think would be.
modernwar2ghostrp 2 months ago 3
@Vict0r1984 on the contrary side you have south korea and ex communist countries that lived so great,i don't even know how they collapsed,must have been alliens or magic or something.
hilletehnoob 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Vict0r1984 Hahahah, you really use the word "intellectual" here?? :-)
Ok, since you are such a blossoming intellectucal, feel free to explain by using ARGUMENTS how communism is possible
WITHOUT
1) DICTATORSHIPS, FORCE; VIOLENCE; but in FEEDOM
2) POVERTY; FAMINES; INEFFICIENCIES, but PROSPERITY.
I pay you € 1.000.000 if you can this ... and another € 100.000, if you are able to name JUST ONE EXAMPLE where communism/socialism/leftish polcies EVER WORKED.
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"everything those commie writers talked"
Really, dimwit??
Yaaawwwwn ... only that Marx states very explicitely as his political goals and ideas
1) abolution of the market/private property/entreprenuership
2) material equality
3) classless society
4) collectivization/planned economy
Yaaaaaawnn ... are you really this stupid???
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dimwit, what China made successful for the past 30 years were NEOLIBERAL reforms, sth. communists/letftist IDIOTS would turn their back in their grave for:
- (relative) free markets
- competition
- private entreprenuership <nd property
- free trade
- investments of foreign CAPITAL
... in one word: CAPITALISM!! DImwit.
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
" i dont believe China is a 'true' communist "
Yeah, EXAXCTLY; dimwit.
NEOLIBERAL reforms were applied 30 years ago. Thats why
- Chinese wages/BIP increased by the factor 65!!!
- 450 mio Chinese live in comfort and relative luxury
- 1.3 bn Chinese have enough to EAT AGAIN, after 45 mio. STARVED to DEATH under Mao 1958-62 alone
... the China example is a really good point ..... for CAPITALISM!!!
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ok, to all LEFTIST DIMWITS, I give you € 1.000.000 to each of you if you are able to explain by using ARGUMENTS and FACTS, how communism can be realised
1) WITHOUT ending up in POVERTY; INEFFICIENCY, FAMINES, but PROSPERITY
2) WITHOUT ending up in DICTATORSHIPS; UN-FREEDOM, FORCE, TERROR, but FREEDOM
I give you another € 100.000, if you are able to name me ONE EXAMPLE where socialism/communism ever worked!!!
joaquinveyron 2 months ago
@Vict0r1984 One would require to know what despotism truly is when it comes within how anything is what it is, or how anything works or doesnt work when it comes within how anything began within any and all technological evolution which is any dispursment within any and all ancestry within any and all occupational transfers from any manner in forage, despotism can and does become any game of monopoly predicted within any knowing and the unknowing within how anything works; "Any Advantage Point"
DrFruedienslip 1 month ago
@Vict0r1984 What is your solution to this problem? Marxism? Communism? Socialism?
Scarcity is the problem. So long as there is scarcity there will greater and lesser.
Peace to you.
globalModValue 4 weeks ago
@Vict0r1984 What should back the U.S. currency (dollar)?
AmazinglyAgnostic 4 weeks ago
mostly used slave-labor instead of employees because it was more profitable for them, but then again, isn't the profit motive the engine of the capitalist system? Sure, slavery generated huge unemployment, and unemployment bred high criminality in every roman city and poverty for more than 90% of the roman citizens, but who cared as long as the money and the gold were flowing? We'll soon face the same problems, but instead of slavery, the cause will be the robotization of labor... 5 billions and
Vict0r1984 3 months ago 4
@MrBigEnchilada: "Can you name another system that would be better than capitalism?" Of course I can. Socialism. And, just for your own general knowledge, if we reverse 3000 or 2000 years ago, we still find capitalism... Sure, there was no industry back then, and the whole economy was based on agriculture and urban handicraft goods, but if you look at the Roman Empire or Athens, we still find free markets, so you are the ones who praise ancient ideas! The only difference is that the land-owners
Vict0r1984 3 months ago 4
Comment removed
Vict0r1984 3 months ago
Marxist nonsense fluffed up with lighter terms by these intellectuals without intellect. Search: Ludwig von Mises
gta405421 3 months ago
those who believe that the current system the u.s. and other developed countries have is capitalism and is the best it can be is just as wrong as those who believe we should give marxist economics a try to improve our society.
MrBigEnchilada 3 months ago
people like carl marx had to destroy the pillars of human society
amine17360 3 months ago
Warrior prince, sadly you mistake state run capitalism with Socialism/Communism.Goverment and the state has no place in a system of society
with common ownership and the abolition of wage slavery. You need to take away your social blinkers.
majorMcpharter 3 months ago
Profit is a cost, the cost of efficiency. Without profit, price action would be unable to function, and the allocation of scarce resources with different uses to their most demanded use would be neigh impossible. Scarcity would be rampant. Incentives for innovation would also disappear. This idea of class warfare is a huge distraction and ruining the world. Instead spend time researching your politicians and voting out any that violate their enumerated power by helping corporations.
snarfels 3 months ago
profit and is leading to giant economic crises (if it manages to avoid the bankruptcy of Greece and pass this recession without collapsing...) and possibly even world wars because it is draining the finite resources (especially the oil deposits) of the Earth without providing any alternative fuels for the future as they are expensive, and yet it is the best economic system? If capitalism is indeed here to stay, civilization and our habitable world without radiation from nuclear wars aren't.
Vict0r1984 4 months ago
@Vict0r1984 can you name another system that would be better than capitalism?? sure, we can really reverse and go back to 3000, 2000, 1000, or 500 years ago, but what kind of systems are you looking for?
MrBigEnchilada 3 months ago
@Epicur100: No system is actually the best for every person on earth. But of course, you, as any right wing douche bag, fail to mention for whom capitalism is actually "the best economic system", and that, of course, because the numbers are below 1 billion of the 7 billion people on this planet... Capitalism created the poverty in the third world, (which is more than half of the world as population) capitalism dropped the human development level of eastern Europe, capitalism is driven only by
Vict0r1984 4 months ago
...lets see "the free market led to goverment being controlled at high levels by insiders" huh? That is a ridiculous position. NO, the establishment of a central bank and fractional reserve consolidation of power led to this.
ScrapMetalBomb 4 months ago
North Korea is no alternative to capitalism. Free markets have made Norway and Switzerland rich. Stae ownership has made North Korean children very poor and their eladers very rich.
warriorprince1010 4 months ago
@warriorprince1010 North Korea is not communist.
TwoOldOaks 4 months ago
@TwoOldOaks Yes it is. North korea is a state planned economy and is the best example of just how bad statism is.
warriorprince1010 4 months ago
@warriorprince1010 Communism = equality of all, in the economic sense and otherwise.
Communism =/= state planned economy.
TwoOldOaks 4 months ago
@TwoOldOaks Communism is state greed and corruption, povetry for people. wealth for politiicans and their friends. Just saying an ideology is perfect when we have no evidence of it does not work with me, grow up. Governments are corrupt and any power they have they abuse.
warriorprince1010 4 months ago
@warriorprince1010 *facepalm*
Try reading what communism is truly about, before commenting on it. You are clearly talking about capitalism. Capitalism means the poverty of all but the chosen few, communism is the equality of all.
TwoOldOaks 4 months ago
@TwoOldOaks Capitlaism is whats made Switzerland,UK,USA,France and Norway rich. Communism/socialism...statism is what made Russia, North Korea and Cuba poor.
Try understanding capitlaism before you support evil. The state gets richer in statism and the people are slaves.
warriorprince1010 4 months ago
@warriorprince1010 You are clearly retarded.
TwoOldOaks 4 months ago
@TwoOldOaks You are the retard. You clearly lost the debate. No country in the developed world has a state planned economy ALL have free markets.
warriorprince1010 4 months ago
@warriorprince1010 You are confusing statism with communism, that's why you're a retard. I'm an anarcho-communist, so I don't like state controlled ANYTHING, just like you.
TwoOldOaks 4 months ago 2
@TwoOldOaks I like giood governance to run schools and healthcare, energy and regulate. But most of the economy, copyrights, farms, music, the press, should be owned by people.
warriorprince1010 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TwoOldOaks Except the only way a group of people will accept communism is by being forced into it by a group powerful enough to impose their will on the rest...a state. The natural tendency of humanity is to liberty and a capitalist economy, so you will never get a communist state without force and deception.
tarossi400 4 months ago
This is why communist counties put production over human beings. A free market completely solves this problem. Unfortunately there has never been a free market because big well funded governments and central banks have always intervened on behalf of the interests of the "current business class" or "Elites" stopping the natural and orderly replacement of inferior business models and products. Fuck Marx.....inhuman beast.
ScrapMetalBomb 4 months ago
@ScrapMetalBomb Capitalist system it is a product of the "free market" because it is based on greed and accumulation of wealth. it was inevitable in the progress of the "free market" to had a government ruled by the most powerful free marketers, "the capital" of marx it is an economic and sociological book, read it all.
sicoticosandro 4 months ago
Christianity governs the world by keeping the truth for the wellborn few -and say bullshits to others!
Peristerygr 4 months ago
This is a slight unmeritable man, meet to be sent on errands: And, though others lay labours on this man, to ease ourselves of divers slanderous loads, he shall but bear them as the ass bears gold, to groan and sweat under the business, either led or driven, as they point him the way; and having brought their treasure where they will, then take they down his load and turn him off, like to the empty ass, to shake his ears and graze in commons; being in the service of the Baron as Marx is.
FireEyedMaidOfWar 4 months ago
@FireEyedMaidOfWar Yes I see! The problem with this man is that he didn't keep that truth for himself or just for the wellborn few!
Peristerygr 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Peristerygr: Truth is a very dangerous word! Sweet Jesus did toddle around in a Roman province, telling folk that he speaks the truth; and because of this he was summoned to appear before the Roman governor and he put this one question to him: What is truth? But sweet Jesus could not answer and was send to crucifixion straight for the fault of it!
FireEyedMaidOfWar 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@FireEyedMaidOfWar Yes I see! The problem with this man is that he didn't keep that truth for himself or just for the wellborn few!
Peristerygr 4 months ago
And without the labour theory of value, Marx's accounts of exploitation, profit and capitalism generally are totally baseless.
HugoNewman 4 months ago
Moreover, labour can and often does destroy, rather than necessarily augment/add, value. Value can and does only come from individuals' subjective assessments, which are imputed back through the productive chain to all objects via the voluntary price mechanism in a market. Add to this the insuperable problem of quantifying labour-time according to a single, unitary objective standard of "labour", and you find that the labour theory of value really explains nothing at all.
HugoNewman 4 months ago
@HugoNewman I find it interesting that you complain about the quantification of labor and then claim the solution is subjective preferences. Something completely unquantifiable. Also look into Abstract vs. Concrete Labor.
I really don't feel like arguing but to be quite honest you don't know what you're talking about. Read Marx, not about Marx.
cogar488 4 months ago
@cogar488 I never claimed subjective preferences could be directly quantified. I agree, they can't be. All I said is that subjective preferences determine prices, which are an objective proxy for people's relative preferences in relation to the goods/services available.
Maybe now you could actually answer my criticisms of the labour theory and explain why I don't know what I'm talking about, instead of assuming I haven't read Marx.
HugoNewman 4 months ago
@HugoNewman "All I said is that subjective preferences determine prices, "
Prices are a quantification. If subjective preferences can't be quantified then they can't be the basis for price.
cogar488 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HugoNewman "Maybe now you could actually answer my criticisms of the labour theory and explain why I don't know what I'm talking about, instead of assuming I haven't read Marx."
Or I could not waste a great deal of my time in a fruitless discussion. Which is what I'm going to do.
cogar488 4 months ago
Sure, this is USE value, which allegedly is compatible with labour value. But since labour value isn't in principle required to at least partially account for all use value at some point in any given object's material history, then it is utterly redundant as an explanatory concept. It is merely an ad hoc distinction incorporated to account for profit. However, profit can be explained cogently in another way, namely by applying the austrian school's theory of value, prices and interest.
HugoNewman 4 months ago
The labour theory of value has been roundly refuted by von Mises, among others. Take a basic counterexample. Consider the whiteboard in the video. Its value can indeed change in the absence of any labour input. I may value it more than you do because I urgently require paper for whatever purpose I have in mind, regardless of how much labour time went into it. Indeed, completely unworked resources, such as water, have use value before any labour is ever applied to them.
HugoNewman 4 months ago
@HugoNewman Water is not sold until labor is applied to it. Bottling it, transporting it, filtering it, etc.
cogar488 4 months ago
@cogar488 Sure, but it can be valued before labour is applied to it.
HugoNewman 4 months ago
@cogar488 *valued and consumed.
HugoNewman 4 months ago
hmm... so many people here who think they know what socialism and communism means, but clearly don't know anything about it, except what was told to them in the traditional educational system.
When you wanna discuss something, first learn about it, so that you don't come across like a ordinary parrot that tells whatever is told to him without knowing the meaning.
kittyminty 5 months ago
Marxism, the ideology of the inexperienced.
jjrglobal 5 months ago
@jjrglobal You know jack shit about Marxism. Have you even read Capital?
MegaLotusEater 5 months ago
The bit I get confused about is why he divided everything by v
MegaLotusEater 5 months ago
what a bunch of bullocks
GustavoUfpa 5 months ago
QUANTATIVE EASING
Through a class selective prism
the haves have self-fulled conditions what's good for one is twos' recession through dialectical materialism. Aprosperous entertainment culture
with static anodyne compulsions where perched suburban vegas vultures pick the bones of the new dark-ages. The less the sweat the more the pelf the public service serves itself the bourgeois belt blames someone else the prols in cotton-pickn hell.
poetinapaperbag 5 months ago
@61984sd: Troubling for who? The bastards who run the big corporations and the world? Wake up! Capitalism is crumbling before you and some people (like you) still believe in this criminal exploitative ideology! "THAT'S SHOCKING AND TROUBLING AT THE SAME TIME" to quote your statement and put it to a better use...
Vict0r1984 5 months ago 4
@Vict0r1984 yeah, sure. capitalism is crumbling.....capitalism has been crumbling for 100 years. wake the fuck up, leftard ! Capitalism is here to stay because it is the best economic system humans created ( not a perfect one, though)\
Epicur100 4 months ago
@Vict0r1984
Yeah faggot, choke on Maddow's dick.
LogicalFlawDetector 3 months ago
@Vict0r1984
Oh do fuck off. How long have they been Capitalist how efficient at Capitalism are they? That is the cause of their poverty. Not to mention their cultures etc. Did Britain become the Worlds biggest Empire through Marxism? Did America become a superpower without being Capitalist? Brazil, India even china, are thy not using Capitalism? FFs man, Marxism is dead.
codownni 2 months ago
WOW... PEOPLE STILL BELIEVE IN LABOR THEORY OF VALUE?! THATS SHOCKING AND TROUBLING AT THE SAME TIME! :)
61984sd 5 months ago
@61984sd You do realise that one of the main theorists who came up with the Marginal Theory of Value (which supposedly "replaces" the Labour Theory) actually noted that it DOESN'T CONTRADICT the labour theory of value? They are both compatible, because the marginal theory of "value" isn't actually about value at all - it ignores it and looks at supply and demand only.
joebidenjoe 5 months ago
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balancedway.yolasite.com
etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc2.yolasite.com
figure4etc1.yolasite.com
etc.
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com
announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 5 months ago
and no mention of the role of credit? that is the largest hole in this theory. malinvestment caused by increased credit and the distortion that it causes in time preference has been proven time and time again, especially these days. do we need anymore proof than the housing crisis?
bmay1000 5 months ago
The only long term solution is drop the profit motivation for production of goods and services and replace it with filling needs. 1) clean air, 2) clean water, 3) nutritious food, 4) functional housing, 5) quality education, 6) quality healthcare, 7) meaningful work, 8) satisfying leisure, 9) human rights, 10) stability.
Without profit motivation, the above is possible for every person on this earth - those who can provide for themselves, use their resources develop the same capacity for others
LazarusCato 6 months ago
@LazarusCato But that will only work if you execute a lot of people.
You see me kind of people don't give a flying fuck about others and couldn't care less what happens to the rest, as long as we have it good.
And if i don't need to work to stay alive i wont work period. Gaming is my passion.
And yes i know you all think I'm an ass and so on, but you fail to realize that 80% give or take thinks this way consciously or subconsciously.
PS to hell whit the US and Soviet type country's
Partyffs 5 months ago
@LazarusCato without profit motivation, we will all be equally poor...
MrBigEnchilada 3 months ago
@MrBigEnchilada where do people get off seriously saying bullshit oneliners like that. drop the "ly poor..." from the end of your sentence and you are heading toward a half logical conclusion. Does profit motivate you to eat, sleep, drink, breathe or care for your family? All it takes is a shift in your thought process to want to extend that same courtesy to those that slip through the cracks off this bullshit system.
LazarusCato 3 months ago
@LazarusCato no, profit does not motivate me to eat, sleep, drink, breathe or care for my family. It just motivates people to focus on whats successful and what others want and need, it motivates people to go take a look in their customers' perspective, it motivates people to take risks and resist instant gratification, it motivates people to go invest and learn about new things that others haven't done before.
MrBigEnchilada 3 months ago
@LazarusCato I dont think profit will necessarily bring clean air, water, nutritious food, functional housing, quality education, quality healthcare, meaningful work, satisfying leisure,human rights, stability, but it offers the most possibility to. This is because companies will do more to focus on these needs if people decides that these needs are important and they want profit along with it.
MrBigEnchilada 3 months ago
So basically what this guy is suggesting to get out of the crises of capitalism is: to centralise and automate the production of goods & services - and pay workers less and reduce their conditions?
Awesome!! such short-term thinking - this will do nothing but create further instability (unless you can provide a standard of living people have become accustomed to and give them something productive to do with their time) - this also fails to take into account the rising oil prices etc.
LazarusCato 6 months ago
@LazarusCato hes not arguing that this is what should happen, he is arguing that this is what will happen, as it has happened with previous crisis. This is how capitalism resolves its crisis; however the way in which capitalism tries to solve these crisis are not only harmful to people but seemingly becoming more and more difficult to realize, which (according to marx) will inevitably lead to revolution. Basically i think the guy in the video would agree with you.
ShadowCookie 5 months ago
@ShadowCookie point taken - I've got to learn to tone down my confrontational language.
I think the only way the current paradigm can continue (its still only a mid term solution at best) is wipe debt worldwide. We've turned into capital pretty much all the low hanging fruit, & we then moved onto credit - & now we've reached the limit of sustainable debt now also. So it can only crash - or reinvent itself for the whole world to witness what a ridiculous myth we've built our civilization on.
LazarusCato 5 months ago
Our species is embarrassingly dualistic in our thinking. Communism is *not* the opposite of capitalism. Marx was a capitalist who identified 5 problematic attributes in the mechanics of capitalism, which he (probably wrongly) predicted would cause capitalism to evolve into a state he labeled communism. It was not a plan that that we should ditch capitalism for, but a resultant era in the evolution of capitalism. Soviet, Chinese and US propaganda supporting/opposing communism is not illuminating.
easilyremembered11 6 months ago
It was only in my Microeconomics course did we see a passing reference to Ricardo in respect to comparative advantage and the subsequent idea of a 'mixed' economy. I'd have taken a course or two in Marxist economics if it had been offered. When I was a student, it was before the dot com bust, and we were all gung ho 'bout websites and the online economy and the decline of the 'brick and motar'. Its a different world now.
peterpeterification 6 months ago
I didn't learn this at the University of Washington Business School.
peterpeterification 6 months ago
Communism = State Capitalism! Will never work! (True) Karl Marx was never for what Lenin/Stalin had created in the Soviet Union. Read Karl Marx's books!
cris750 6 months ago
@cris750 Correct. Though Marxism/Communism could never exist without Gov't.. It's scary that we are entering a state capitalism period in the U.S.. It's will be unsustainable in a short period, Gov't is too inefficient at whatever it does.
classicallyliberal 6 months ago
Communism will never work
brandenrandleman9 6 months ago
@brandenrandleman9 This video has nothing to do with communism, watch it and read the description.
LudicrousBarchart 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Our world is hostage to the insatiable rampaging of the ruling class private gain and greed, dominating,dehumanising,devaluing everyone and everything in the midst. We can and must change the wage slavery of immense humanity in a market system of artificial scarcity . We can share the world for our common needs and well being in harmony within and without.
arzoyan 6 months ago
The Capitalist house of cards are all falen, the rulers cant believe their luck are still effectively in power , Workers are just asking for crumbs as their forefathers and are still devoid of a coherent view of their common interest in reclaiming the Earth in cooperation for our comon needs and well being. Capitalism is the class domination and destruction of our world.
arzoyan 6 months ago
Comment removed
arzoyan 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Many people watch your videos, why not post your link to EZHUH.COM get paid for the people watch and make videos.
congchuavideo 7 months ago
It's too bad that Marx was a failing, racist, rich hating bastard...
secretbonus 7 months ago
@secretbonus It's too bad that your comment is completely irrelevant to the discussion or the video.
Stop regurgitating nonsense put about by people who cant be bothered to study his theories and just want to focus on the fact that they think Marx was some kind of genocidal mega-racist (probably due to deep-rooted anti Communist/Socialist mindset).
LudicrousBarchart 7 months ago
@LudicrousBarchart Amen. Preach it, man. EVERYBODY is soooo quick to point fingers and NOBODY wants to take a freaking legitimate look at his works.
And I actually didn't realize the irony of "Preach it" on a video of Marxist Economic Theory. LOL.
lenlee14 7 months ago
@LudicrousBarchart Don't forget he was Jewish. I imagine that antisemitism played some part in anti-Marxism, though I don't really know. For that matter I've yet to read any of Marx's works save for pamphlet he wrote.
BuddhaBebop 6 months ago
@King100Joe So, according to you those who think Marx has things to teach us do not understand 'language' or 'reality'?
Have you got any arguments to make about Marx's theory of economic crisis or did you just come here to shout at people you disagree with? You scream that Marx is a 'moron' but I have a feeling you probably have not studied his works or theories objectively.
Wow I just looked back through your other comments on this video. You do know this video ISNT about communism right?
LudicrousBarchart 7 months ago
@King100Joe
Very mature.
pulsatingremedy 7 months ago
@King100Joe
That's a hypothesis. You are claiming things without supplying proof. So why don't you give arguments? Also saying things like fool and stupid makes you look like a child.
pulsatingremedy 7 months ago
Communism could work if everybody was a robot.
AgrivatedKillah 8 months ago
Finally, the socialist system would be hard to sustain in pop. decline. In such a case, less workers will have to support more of their older fellow men, something unsustainable. Marx most likely did not take into account population decline which affects practically every developed nation today.
redarrowhead2 8 months ago
@redarrowhead2 I forgot to add that today in most developed nations population is sustained through immigration. There will be a time where that is no longer possible, whether because of immigration's unpopularity or because other nations do not have surplus populations. Either way, the socialist system assumes that every man does his part while in a case of population decline that is difficult to sustain.
redarrowhead2 8 months ago
There is no price mechanism to decide how goods, services, and/or capital should be distributed by central planners. In the end, they'll have to simply make estimates and if they lose money, they won't care as much as a business does. Then there is the problem of incentives and innovation; why would people invent if they cannot profit or why would they bother doing well in their job if, generally speaking, it won't help their wages?
redarrowhead2 8 months ago
@redarrowhead2 You can search for Dan Pink about motivation (on YouTube). If you haven't seen that, it might surprise you.
raxsade 6 months ago
Andrew. China and the former Soviet block never established Socialism/Communism.Do not confuse capitalism under the control of the state and not the free market,the workers in china remain wage slaves selling their labour power to the state employer.That is State Run Capitalism Folks,bugger all to do with common ownership.
majorMcpharter 9 months ago
At the beginning he just asserts the Labour Theory of Value. Marxists tend to gloss over the LTV because it has been thoroughly refuted by the likes of Menger. Marxists have been unable to show how Marxian 'use value' transforms into market value (the transformation problem), and therefore the LTV is invalid. It was shown with marginal utility that value is in fact derived from supply and demand, labour being merely a cost of production. The LTV and Marx's theory of exploitation stand refuted.
steveuk89 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
sexy and Asian women Meet lushfmlk.info
SHIRELYQUESINB 9 months ago
Marx just pointed out that capitalism is not perfect so we should hand all power to corrupt states so they can control people and steal the wealth. Marx was merely a fashionable critic, with nothing to offer. All countries that turned their back on the free market became poor.
warriorprince1010 10 months ago
Let us all help to speed the day when this wonderful earth and its rich resources are held in common for the benefit of all humanity.Socialism/Communism has not failed its never been tried.
majorMcpharter 10 months ago 52
@majorMcpharter All politicians that claim to be socialism believe in a state greed and power over people, ALL.
warriorprince1010 9 months ago
@majorMcpharter if u truly believe that the whole world can live in harmony and share all the resources for the betterment of the common good i think your extremely naive. Plus I don't want to live in a society where the government has more control over my life than i do, and this is why you always see people rebel for freedom, not for more government intervention.
AndrewD22242224 9 months ago
@majorMcpharter And this is why you always see countries attempt to move toward Socialism/Communism at first because, and i agree that the idea sounds great, for everyone to work together for the betterment of the common good, but people yearn to pursue their own interests and this is why we've seen countries like China and India incorporate more of the free market in their economies and they've benefited from it greatly.
AndrewD22242224 9 months ago
@AndrewD22242224 I think it's a false argument to claim that humans tend to simply pursue their own interests. In the 19th century there were many cooperative systems running in my country (Finland) as well as in Britain (I don't know in what scale). In a recent study, finnish people said that they'd be willing to pay more taxes in order to provide sufficient health care, education, social security etc. for all citizens. Humans are naturally social beings, in psychological & evolutionary sense
qita0 9 months ago
@qita0 yea i agree with the government to pay for certain things that are vital, im not an anarchist. But when it comes to the point that we greatly reduce the incentive to work you dismantle a societies economy.
AndrewD22242224 8 months ago
@AndrewD22242224 Also, you say that China has benefitted from free markets, which is completely true, if you only think about the factory owners, stock owners etc. But you have to be strongly self deluded if you say that the average citizen has benefitted from it. China uses slave & child labour, in some parts of the country there's famine, at the same time billionares are driving around in limos... in Delhi there's 70 000 women working as prostitutes, they don't get anything from the government
qita0 9 months ago
@qita0 theirs a big difference, they have liberalized their economy but not their political structure. If they liberalize their political system then you would not see things such as child labor
AndrewD22242224 8 months ago
@AndrewD22242224 I saw a documentary about them. There were girls, aged 11-15 who had to work as prostitutes because they were orphans.. And you're telling that India & China have benefitted from free markets?
qita0 9 months ago
@qita0 Yes, in the society i would prefer they would have the option to choose an education(something i think we can all agree should be provided by the government) or prostitution or any other activity that we consider immoral so long as it doesn't cause coercion against another person. They're free to chose their way as long as education is an option in my opinion. And both of those countries have benefited economically and have improved the average citizens quality of life where gov hasn't.
AndrewD22242224 8 months ago
@AndrewD22242224 Wow, I'm speechless. I don't fucking care if you think child prostitution is "immoral", you think they WANT TO/ CHOSE TO become prostitutes?? That's beyond cruelty.
qita0 8 months ago
@AndrewD22242224 In India there's a place called Kerala. It has been governed by the democratic socialists (note: NOT the same thing as social democrats). Compared to all other provinces in India, Kerala is number one in: gender equality, decreasing poverty (Oh, I forgot, you don't care about such things), basic education, health care, life expectancy, literacy, decreasing corruption and in Human Development Index. Sounds like pretty "useless" to me.
qita0 8 months ago
@AndrewD22242224 But hey, you think everyone should have the FREEDOM of DYING HOMELESS under some bridge. You'd have orphans die of hunger because "it was their choice". Great prospect.
qita0 8 months ago
@AndrewD22242224 In Namibia, foreign organisations started a basic income guarantee project, as part of development aid programme. As a result, childrens starvation decreased from 23% to 17%, employment rate increased from 36% to 48%, school drop outs decreased by 1/3, crime decreased 60%. In a year, malnourishment rate dropped to 10%, school drop out level became zero (0) and entrepeneuing level increased by 10%. It would cost Namibia only 2% from their GPD to expand this to the whole country.
qita0 8 months ago
@qita0
Good comments.
pulsatingremedy 8 months ago
@majorMcpharter
The only reason communism/socialism hasn't been properly tested is because of the human greed.
RashidAlBarwani 8 months ago