Freedom of the individual? What a joke! We no longer even have a right to decide how to spend our money after we have turned over a portion of that money to the government in the form of taxes. We are now being told we must buy a product (health ins) from private corporations. The federal government has no right to force us to do this under the constitution (10th amendment). So I go to work, get paid, give the money back in taxes and buy products I don't want, and left with nothing. Slavery
There is a continual attitude that the more individual freedom there is, the better off everyone is. This is true in several cases, but is far from a universal truth. If the actions of an individual affect more than just himself, it impinges upon others' freedom to simply allow him to act as he will. This is why we establish laws to begin with, it is the very basis of a social contract. You surrender some freedoms to obtain others. We surrender total economic freedom to evade economic abuse.
Unfortunately government intervention in todays world means that the US government will do everything it can to outsource whole industries overseas by providing companies with incentives to make 'investments overseas.'
it is a fact the fiendship pact between Stalin and Hitler called ribbentrop-molotov agreement of 1939, both were united in attacking polen, leftists not only helped hitler before they began to fight for power against each other, in my home land iran Leftist were the best helpers of ayatollah khomeini, they fighted FOR khomeini, they did everything for him, before the challenge for power between them began
@DrStevenz Fascism is hardly liberal. Fascists were brought to power in Germany, Italy and Spain by large landowners, industrialists, etc., because they allow for private property, outlawed unions, shot commies, & in general keep taxes low (Milton Freeman, the darling of the right in economics, once went to Chile & met with fascist dictator Pinochet, who was fiercly anti-socialist). Fascists also were supported by many of the bishops of the Lutheran & Catholic churches, hardly liberal.
@lannyusa Just because someone is a 'land owner and industrialist' does not automatically make them conservative. The commies completely forbade any unions at all, if anyone was caught or even so much as being suspected of trying to organize a union they were shot in the early days of communism or later on sent to siberia. Some so-called 'industrialists' would love nothing more than to get in to bed with the government and create a socialist state because they think it fits their agenda of
@lannyusa Because they believe that getting in to bed with the government will expand their power and enrich them. Some will indeed benefit from a communist regime because in their minds 'someone has to run things.' Communist is the political definition of evil.
Yes, the free market is good - it's record, particularly for the poor is universally better (especially for the poor) than the (inferior) socialism and the (ridiculously impossible) communism.
In economic reality, no corporation anywhere on the planet ever pays taxes. Corporate taxes, by their very nature, are passed on, in their entirety to consumers, built into the prices of their products.
Further, your 20% figure is pure bovine fecal matter. In fact, the vast majority of US corporations are taxed. While it is trye that, between 1998 and 2005, only 43% of US companies paid taxes EVERY year, 58% paid taxes in 6 of those 8 years, and of the 1,000 largest corporations (those arguably least likely to incur losses and thus be exempt from taxation for obvious reasons) 75% paid taxes in 2005. And most UK corporations pay taxes directly AND via the VAT.
that's because only profitable corporations pay tax, if you tax the ones that are in the negative year after year you kill them, it would be like taxing you even if you don't make money.
Oh, my the Capitalist-Boogey-Man is coming to get us! Please save us by taking away our freedom, rights and funds!
Oh, dear. Do you morons even realise what capitalism is? Employment is slavery? Class war? Seriously? You actually believe in that utter bullshit? You guys are hilarious. Oh, yes you are.
P.S:
NurofenUltraForte, I'll say this as nice as I can; May someone see to it that you'll burn alive you antisemitic fucktard. Thank you. :)
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The false claim that Socialism is a natural dictatorship, denies that Capitalism is in fact a NATURAL MONOPOLY, with DEMOCRACY FOR THE FEW as pointed out by Micheal PARENTI, a person I suggest viewers should consult, for the sake of balance. With Politicians in the pay and on the boards of vast cartels. THE so called FREE MARKET, IS EVEN A bigger fantasy TO SELL TO the CAPITALIST drones.
I also have had experience of business and lived well after dropping their wages.
THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION in the hands of Capitalists vast private Global,companies searching for cheap labour in the world. The lack of affordable homes,and extremely unsecure work in the paradise you call Capitalism.
Is not the experience of millions of people who do not own property.This includes the millions of CAPITALIST DRONES sold negitive
equity morgages. With NO JOB SECURITY for millions of people. CAPITALISM is a illusion of wealth.Only for the few is it real.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The Nazi evolved from the implosion of Capitalism,and in essence is Capiatlism with the gloves off, The EliteS use false images of socialist values on National terms,TO GIVE THE MASSES illusions that their needs are being
dealt with.
A welfare state is Socialist in real terms.
THE ONLY REAL QUESTION OF OUR AGE.
Is how do we defeat the corperate state,and evolve more substantial and technological Welfare states, in the means of production.
Not before my side eliminates your side completely. So bring it on Stalinist! Bring it on Nazi... because what you're talking about and what your dreaming of can only happen through Stalinist and Nazi tactics.
I am not a Stalinist nor a NAZI,and I hope beyond the banter,that the present economic crisis,will end in a more positive and less
self destructive manner as it did in past events. Any dictatorships are evil,and not what any rational human being would like to promote.We need checks and balances to make sure human egos do not imitate the past when they get access to power.If this present Capitalist system is all there is. THEN WE WILL BE just sophisticated slaves to the rich,at their mercy.
All socialism is slavery and totalitarian in its very nature. Capitalism isn't a political system... which is where you're hyperbole will not ever win any argument. Free markets revel in capitalism... as capitalism is just the act of ownership and capital investment... I practice capitalism in the free market.... and I practice democracy by voting for the representatives in DC... our biggest problem is liars like you obfuscating the truth about what Capitalism is.
Is it true this guy never left the concrete womb of the education institution. Did he ever meet a payroll? What basis does he have to judge the economy when he opted out of ever working in his whole life. Just another armchair businessman in his ivory towers jacking off to ayn rand. Guess he doesn't know what it means to be a self-made man. What a clown!
If it weren't for cooperation there could be no competition, but the opposite is not true, is it? It is amazing how non-competitive human spirit actually is. It amazes me to what extremes people go to to justify sociopathic market behavior. like the ole cliche "If i didn't do it, then someone else would have."
free markets lead to monopolies only by refereeing the game can govt keep marketws competitive. Do you know who Thruman arnold is, robert jackson, william o. douglas? If this guy thinks Nazism is socialism then why did Hitler put all the socialists in Dachau in 1933? Monpoly is the father of fascism? Capitalism put profits over people, but Fascism puts politics over profits. look at clear channel.
He put socialists in Dachau too, you don't know history do you? Plus your dumb enough to believe the title of his party. You should really research before you write, it would increase your self-esteem.
monopolies were always classically understood as relying upon government privledge. Even Chomskys work constantly points out the dependence of big business upon government intervention.
And here it is again. Capitalism is the voluntary exchange of goods and services in an open marketplace in the absence of state intervention and yet, since the countless attempts to implement socialism have (inevitably) failed, the socialists delude themselves into believing they can combine two diametrically opposed concepts so they can blame others for those failures. Brilliant!
Here's what I notice a lot... people like the mises folks, the austrian economics school people, they (very rightly) criticize government intervention and the problems with government in society and the economy without ever talking about the legal structure of corporations as being tyrannies or being legally required to maximize profits. This is a shortcoming of the ideology (I mean, arguably sort of hypocritical). Any thoughts on this?
Fascism dont allow free market and required a lots of economic controls, fascism is not capitalism, but state-capitalism near what there is in USA, and a bit everywhere in the world.
It is crucial to make a difference between state-capitalism and NONE-state-capitalism (free-market). To keep up primary anti-capitalism ideas is'nt critical thinking. By the way I was social-anarchist (as Chomsky) in my youth.
In Quebec we live under a social-democrat state, and it does'nt work because of the state control on economie. GET RID OF STATE CONTROLS PLEASE IT JUST DOES'NT WORK!!
Actually, Mises wrote at length a half century ago (quite correctly) how the nature of human decision making that underlies a capitalist system allows individuals to pursue their individual goals regarding social values (in "Human Action"). ACTUAL critical thinking must acknowledge the success of capitalism at improving the lot of the vast majority of people.
Soon after the Nazi party came to power, United Steel was reorganized so that the
government majority stake of 52 per cent was converted into a stake of less than 25 per cent, no longer sufficient in German law to give the government any privileges in company control. Nazis innovated with privitisation. Read Germa Bel Nazi Privitisation in the 1930.s
FREE MARKET means VOLONTARY EXCHANGE of goods and services. Wage war for oil at the expense of taxe payers for the profit of war and oil industries is obviously not VOLONTARY EXCHANGE, it is not free-market, but imperialism or state-capitalism. Mises and austrian are against such imperialism and state-capitalism because it is not VOLONTARY EXCHANGE, it is not free-market.
Note, it's really tough discern in this group who are serious and those who say anything to start a flame war.. That's because you can really have a honest discussion with people who are unaccountable, not much different than pranksters, and should be treated as such.
Second: Then, to say that socialism is the same as Nazism is a way of being fascist, it is an affirmation that pursue the goal of introducing confusion among the working class in order to dissuade it of fighting for its rights, to dissuade it in fighting for socialism, to dissuade it of adopting Marxism as an instrument in the struggle against bourgeois oppression.
Second: Then, to say that socialism is the same as Nazism is a way of being fascist, it is an affirmation that pursue the goal of introducing confusion among the working class in order to dissuade it of fighting for its rights, to dissuade it in fighting for socialism, to dissuade it of adopting Marxism as an instrument in the struggle against bourgeois oppression.
It is highly criminal and irresponsible to consider fascism (Nazism in its German version) to be the same as socialism. Fascism is the result of the failure of socialist revolution. It is a reaction against the proletariat revolutionary movement and has the goal of destroying all the means that the working class possesses to protect herself from the bourgeois oppression
Thank you for that wonderful demonstration of the level of inetellectual debate (or lack thereof) that charcterizes the typical response to messages that socialists dislike.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
you're welcome!!! here some other intellectual comments from me; Goerge Bush is being fuckt in the ass right now by his close friend Osama while Goerge is sucking Tony Blairs small dick who is sucking on Condoleeza rice pussy! and....inetellectual??....you can't even spell right!
Nazism the same as socialism? As far as I know during WWII there were 500 thousands jews in the red army among them 200 generals. Strange for ''Nazi'' USSR to have such a big amount of jews in the red army!!!
"Strange for ''Nazi'' USSR to have such a big amount of jews in the red army!!!"
Not at all, Socialism is not about hating jews, socialism is about getting power while finding somebody to blame. Russians simply did not blame jews, they blamed and killed 10 million of other "blame-grups" instead. It doesnt make them less like Hitler, it just proves socialism let you decide who to blame to get to power. Congrats they fooled you good.
Actually Stalin wanted to carry out a second holocaust and have all the Jewish officers of the Red Army shot in Red Square, but Stalin died just before he gave the final order to carry the operation thru.
Cuba's infant mortality rate is better than the US with 5 deaths per thousand in Cuba versus 7 per thousand in the US. Cuba has nearly twice as many physicians as the U.S. -- 5.91 doctors per thousand people compared to 2.56 doctors per thousand, according to World Health Organization
Again, the WHO and CIA do nothing more than COMPILE the official statistics reported by the countries. That the Soviet Union and its client states (including Cuba) manipulated the data to UNDERSTATE infant mortality by about 25% is thoroughly documented. That Cuba has NOT corrected its reporting is readily apparent. Therefore, the official data STILL significantly understates the data.
How dense are you? The CIA makes it quite clear that they are providing the officially reported numbers from ALL of the countries it lists in the World Fact Book. It expressly denies any responsiblity for the veracity of the claims made by those countries in the introduction. While the publication is primarily for use by people trained to know that, it is expected that people are intelligent enough to grasp it.
Another poor soul that actually believes what Castro tells the world. You are wrong, the NY times is wrong (again), the infant mortality rate in Cuba is unknown to those outside the circle, but, you can bet it is far higher than advertised.
Repeating the factually inaccurate nonsense that state ownership of the means of production is ANY tyoe of capitalism at all does not make it even remotely correct. It merely demonstrates an unimpeded willingness to prevaricate in defense of the indefensible: socialism.
I'm a socialist. I think I know more about my ideology than a laissez faire capitalist.
The main assumption he makes, which is the basis of his entire argument, is that socialism is synonymous with government control. That's false. While many socialists believe in government control, they believe in it to achieve classlessness and equality. It isn't the end in and of itself. It is simply a means.
And many socialists, including myself, are totally opposed to state control. I believe in the people locally controlling the means of production. It has nothing to do with dictatorship, fascism, or totalitarianism. I'm opposed to all three as much as he is. Does that make me not a socialist? Absolutely not. I'd take that as an insult. Some forms of socialism are authoritarian, but socialism isn't inheretly so.
And Nazism wasn't socialism. Claiming that it is only reflects ignorance of history. First of all, while socialists like to dismantle the establishment altogether and form a new one, the Nazis used the establishment to gain power. They came to power mainly due to Conservative support and through Alfred Hugenburg's (a Conservative) media machine.
They also crushed Leftist opposition, with the help of the Right, namely the Freikorps. Not to mention they crushed the socialist movement within the Nazi party on the Night of the Long Knives.
It is hardly ignorant of history. You yourself admitted several socialists believe in gov't control. Nazis certainly did, and they certainly did for collecitivist reasons. Were they conservatives? Not by a long shot. Nazism was a world ideology unlike anything before it.
Socialists believe in government intervention to represent the workers and fight against the bourgeoisie. The Nazis cooperated with the bourgeoisie (business owners) and even crushed socialist opposition within the Nazi movement when it called for a second (truly socialist) revolution, because Hitler did not want to antagonize the conservatives.
"I'm a socialist. I think I know more about my ideology than a laissez faire capitalist."
This is by no means necessary. Mises knew an awful lot more than most marxists about their own ideology, and I am sure Dr Reisman is no less informed. You seem to forget that many laissez-faire capitalists switch ideologies as well (e.g. Dr Hoppe, from Marxist to anarcho-capitalist), so they have a grounding in both viewpoints.
I think your confusion is in the semantics. You say you are a socialists and have certain wants and beliefs that are in conflict with what Dr. Reisman says. I can assure you that his lecture is not an attack on you. He is an economist, and an economists job is to explain what will happen when policies and/or regulations are adopted. And that is all he is doing... explaining what happens to a political system that adopts marxian/socialist philosophies.
You may not want a totalitarian gov't or endorse one, but, as Dr. Riesman has shown, a socialist political/economic system eventually leads to it. This does not imply that the socialists behind the system intend it, it is in fact 'unintended consequences'.
The problem with capitalism is that it itself is totalitarian. People are forced to rent themselves on the market and have no control over their productive lives. Think about it - work is where you spend your life but you get no control over what's done there. This talk about capitalism being "the most free " is nonsense. One day though, the masses will realize this and the rich scum won't be laughing then.
The Exploitation theory has been proven wrong years ago. You should study more than misguided marxian based political science if you want to get any where in this world. Your suggestion that my labors are better allocated by the 'state or some other authority' than to use at my disposal is absurd.
Millions of people do not produce the puppet politicians,banks the stock exchange insurance companies salesmen the list is endless.are these socialists?
By your twisted logic your armed forces must be socialist/communist and totalitarian.They Are owned and controlled by the state which pays their wages.Nationalisation=state control.LOL
The armed forces don't produce, they consume at the cost of the citizenship. They are a necessary evil in this world. They have nothing to do with socialism or communism and they are not nationalized, for something to be nationalized it must first be privately owned.
Surely in the middle ages armies mercenaries where privately owned paid for by the highest bidder.George reisman is the truth the sate owned army of japan and the usa are socialist.They are owned by the state.
The armed forces of the usa and japan like other nation states are owned and controlled by the capitalist state.When the state takes control of any organisation it is nationalised, this is state capitalism.the goverment controls not the people.
Section 8 - Powers of Congress "...To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress..."
The russian revolution was a bolshevik coup.They took control of the state and introduced a brutal regime which was certainly not very social or communal.Did they abolish the wages system? NO.Sorry buddy they kept capitalism under the control of the state.
In a free market economy,how can we trust state owned armed forces.The goverment puppet politicians will control these socialist weapons of mass destruction.
In the next decade china and india will become super powers which will rival the economic power of japan and the usa.We must not allow the socialist state owned armed forces to be used by our goverments to launch an attack on these economic competitors.
Lets put an end to the nation state and its interference with our freedom.The nation state spends billions of our taxes on weapons.Worldwide we have 100s of millions unemployed.We must burst the state bubble.
This guy is full of hot air. He doesn't understand the history of Nazi Germany. If you read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer, it specifically states that Hitler included "Socialism" into the Nazi title in order to draw in factions from competing political parties, many of which were Socialist parties in nature, including the Social Democrats and the Communist Spartacists. That is why Hitler was considered by many to be a poliltical genius.
Yes. Marxist nonsense that stipulates that capitalism somehow alienates man from his true nature (as if such a thing could be objectively defined). Insults won't help you, by the way.
Unfortunately. Marx was right on that issue. Capitalism /does/ alienate man from his true nature, and such a thing CAN be objectively defined. It can be defined by the condition that makes humans most happy, and that's in a situation where a person is cooperating with others(There can still be a hierarchy in Cooperative measures). If you would look at the Birth of Sociology, it was born because there was a drastic, negative change in the mean quality of life.
I am very unhappy when I am cooperating with others. This doesn't make me anti-social, I just enjoy working alone. And Capitalism encorages cooperation, I would love an expaination to prove otherwise.
Wo pissed in your cheerios? Lighten up and be happy you live in a capitalist society instead of some totalitarian socialist haven where you have no individuality
Ha! It's capitalism that robbs us of individuality. Instead of producing things for us to use personally, and for the community, we are used by the system which is run the the rich scumbags who reassure us that "it's a free system". Free my ass. The upper class' day will come eventually though, mark my words.
Read the fucking comment again. Then if necessary once more, perhaps even again etc. Whe you think to yourself "I really don't know shit do I?" then you've cracked it.
Wow you have no idea what you are saying. socialism produces soley for need and not for wants, therefore if your want, for instance an Aston Martin, has no benefit(in the eyes of the State) for the community, then you wont get it. In a capitalist society, if you want an Aston Martin, well go freaking buy it, they will happily make it for you, the paying customer. Go get a better job you crybaby, there are opportunities everywhere
Nolimit, you're not describing Socialism. Most Socialist economies work with a proxy of my Energy Account system. Did everything I tell you just leak out of your ears? They use a type of "Marker" for their goods, and you "buy" what you want at a type of distribution facility. If many people "buy" an Aston Martin, then you distribute more Aston Martins to that distribution facility. There is no State declaration of what people can get. None.
How would they know what to produce in advance? Simple. How many are selling? If there are many selling, then you acquire goods in the same way and produce according to how many are being sold. Really, it's quite simple.
Why would someone produce them? Because they /want/ to. Because they /like/ to design cars. Because they /like/ to maintain machinery. It's quite simple. People like to further themselves, yes, but there are more ways to further yourself than just money.
What you're describing is technocracy, the most lofty and wishful branch of socialist branches, there was a reason technocracy was created and there is also a reason the initial movement died so quickly
"And for the community" What do I owe the community? I don't even really owe myself anything. I was brought into this world by force, not voluintary consent. I owe my existance and the products thereof to no one.
WTF are you talking about? Wealth, goods, profit etc. is/are produced by WORKERS. Workers are dictated to by the rich. If you don't like the opposition against it then fuck off and work your own factories.
I think state socialism is totalitarian. However I find this guy a bit offensive tbh. This video will be faved by thousands of right-wing pro-Israeli nutts wanting to make out that the Lefties were supportive of the Nazis, just like the Muslim brotherhood was responsible for the holocaust. Give us a break. It was the SOCIALISTS (not the conservative ass holes of the time) that often gave their lives in the fight for TRUE socialism.
I also would liek to apologise for my spelling especially now I see it FASCISM is mispelt, I have some spelling issues (got dyslexia) but please dont criticise my IQ because of this, if you want to know what it is ill tell you.
Socialists cannot really be socialist and also be ardent NATIONALISTS, although this hasnt stopped some trying (like apparant socialist Stalin). Its a contradiction in terms to call socialism facism, as socialism is a term in good faith that refers to caring of the general populace, FACISM is militaristic enforcement and nationalism. get a dictionary.
True, but it is a matter of economics not welfare policies concerning this presentation. If you listen to Dr. Reisman you will see that he highlights the policies of collectivism, severe price and wage controls, government seizure of major industry, public works projects, etc. which all are part of socialist doctrine.
Thats bollucks NAZISM started off as the national socialist party but almost immediately Hitler lost this idea and went FAR RIGHT WING, he was an ENEMY OF COMMUNISM which is advanced SOCIALISM. Socialism is not totalitarian, the defenition of total socialism is COMMUNISM, this guy dosent know what he is talking about.
You are the one who doesn't know what he is talking about! You are just stating Marx's fallacious positions. Hitler far right? Try listening to the lecture and commenting on the content, if you understand it.
Lol your a joker, I am NOT pro-marx in any way shape or form idiot, but then again from a right point of view anyone who is further left then centre right is a communist. the national socialist party started off with socialist policies it then became severly NATIONLIST which is a form of FACISM.
NATIONALIST & FASCISM - both forms of Socialism. The problem with most of the comments here, is that most people do not understand the meaning of socialism - gov't control of the means of production. You must understand this definition, otherwise your comments don't make sense.
Here is what your last comment says, (excluding the name calling):
"...but then again from a right point of view anyone who is further left then center right is a SOCIALIST. the socialist party started off with socialist policies it then became severely SOCIALIST which is a form of SOCIALISM."
Socialism dosent mean government control of the means of production, it sometimes leads to that like in communism. Socialism is more of an action or a belief than anything, it actually means standing out for the average 'guy' usually from the working class. Fascis doesnt have to be the opposite of this, but socialism is not an extreme where fascism is an extreme.
Gov't ownership of the means of production is the definition of socialism. Common ownership and gov't ownership are the same... Dr. Reisman explains this in the lecture and further in his book, Capitalism. What part of his proof do you disagree with?
If you're looking for an intelligent debate about socialism, feel free to visit the socialism group on myspace. We wouldn't mind a debate as long as it's in a civil manner.
I should've been more thourough, everyone having a voice in the public is democracy, and some forms of socialism embrace democracy, but socialism's ultimate goal is direct democracy which leads to mobocracy which is bad.
I think that I lean more towards stunted democratic Socialism, but w/ private property still allowed. Right now I'm studying the effects dem. socialism had on the UK, and it looks fairly good.
Ah that clears a whole lot up, you should've said u were a demo socialist in the beginning, lol. From what I have observed, deomocratic socialism tends to be far to weak to sustain itself for long periods of time, unless the country is left alone from things like external shock. Any democratic socialist state would see the economy crumble if any major shock to the economy occured, IE Sweden
We have lost free elections too.
oneyaker 1 week ago
Freedom of the individual? What a joke! We no longer even have a right to decide how to spend our money after we have turned over a portion of that money to the government in the form of taxes. We are now being told we must buy a product (health ins) from private corporations. The federal government has no right to force us to do this under the constitution (10th amendment). So I go to work, get paid, give the money back in taxes and buy products I don't want, and left with nothing. Slavery
ChulaKirby 1 month ago in playlist More videos from sp3tt
There is a continual attitude that the more individual freedom there is, the better off everyone is. This is true in several cases, but is far from a universal truth. If the actions of an individual affect more than just himself, it impinges upon others' freedom to simply allow him to act as he will. This is why we establish laws to begin with, it is the very basis of a social contract. You surrender some freedoms to obtain others. We surrender total economic freedom to evade economic abuse.
SocialistCatgirl 7 months ago
Overall, this is one of the best instructional videos to educate the average person on the realities of socialist style Governments.
sactownbulldog 1 year ago
@sactownbulldog
Reisman would have been a nazi if he had lived in the 30s-40s.
MrReco12 9 months ago
Unfortunately government intervention in todays world means that the US government will do everything it can to outsource whole industries overseas by providing companies with incentives to make 'investments overseas.'
ThunderAppeal 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
it is a fact the fiendship pact between Stalin and Hitler called ribbentrop-molotov agreement of 1939, both were united in attacking polen, leftists not only helped hitler before they began to fight for power against each other, in my home land iran Leftist were the best helpers of ayatollah khomeini, they fighted FOR khomeini, they did everything for him, before the challenge for power between them began
Fravahar 1 year ago
4:22 - "ignorant intellectual" - That's a good phrase. When I hear it I think: Noam Chomsky.
BeethovenWannabe 1 year ago
We have now taken another step in the direction of Liberal Fascism.
DrStevenz 1 year ago
@DrStevenz Fascism is hardly liberal. Fascists were brought to power in Germany, Italy and Spain by large landowners, industrialists, etc., because they allow for private property, outlawed unions, shot commies, & in general keep taxes low (Milton Freeman, the darling of the right in economics, once went to Chile & met with fascist dictator Pinochet, who was fiercly anti-socialist). Fascists also were supported by many of the bishops of the Lutheran & Catholic churches, hardly liberal.
lannyusa 1 year ago
@lannyusa Just because someone is a 'land owner and industrialist' does not automatically make them conservative. The commies completely forbade any unions at all, if anyone was caught or even so much as being suspected of trying to organize a union they were shot in the early days of communism or later on sent to siberia. Some so-called 'industrialists' would love nothing more than to get in to bed with the government and create a socialist state because they think it fits their agenda of
ThunderAppeal 1 year ago
@lannyusa Because they believe that getting in to bed with the government will expand their power and enrich them. Some will indeed benefit from a communist regime because in their minds 'someone has to run things.' Communist is the political definition of evil.
ThunderAppeal 1 year ago
@lannyusa
Agreed!
MrReco12 1 year ago
You know only 20 percent of corporations pay tax! wtf is that! and your saying free market is good?
Jasonthegaiface 2 years ago
Yes, the free market is good - it's record, particularly for the poor is universally better (especially for the poor) than the (inferior) socialism and the (ridiculously impossible) communism.
In economic reality, no corporation anywhere on the planet ever pays taxes. Corporate taxes, by their very nature, are passed on, in their entirety to consumers, built into the prices of their products.
FletchforFreedom 2 years ago
Further, your 20% figure is pure bovine fecal matter. In fact, the vast majority of US corporations are taxed. While it is trye that, between 1998 and 2005, only 43% of US companies paid taxes EVERY year, 58% paid taxes in 6 of those 8 years, and of the 1,000 largest corporations (those arguably least likely to incur losses and thus be exempt from taxation for obvious reasons) 75% paid taxes in 2005. And most UK corporations pay taxes directly AND via the VAT.
Your assertions are false.
FletchforFreedom 2 years ago
@Jasonthegaiface
that's because only profitable corporations pay tax, if you tax the ones that are in the negative year after year you kill them, it would be like taxing you even if you don't make money.
kronosgyros 2 years ago
Oh, my the Capitalist-Boogey-Man is coming to get us! Please save us by taking away our freedom, rights and funds!
Oh, dear. Do you morons even realise what capitalism is? Employment is slavery? Class war? Seriously? You actually believe in that utter bullshit? You guys are hilarious. Oh, yes you are.
P.S:
NurofenUltraForte, I'll say this as nice as I can; May someone see to it that you'll burn alive you antisemitic fucktard. Thank you. :)
PirroV90 3 years ago 9
This comment has received too many negative votes show
FOOL
he ran out of time
eleanor7rigby 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The false claim that Socialism is a natural dictatorship, denies that Capitalism is in fact a NATURAL MONOPOLY, with DEMOCRACY FOR THE FEW as pointed out by Micheal PARENTI, a person I suggest viewers should consult, for the sake of balance. With Politicians in the pay and on the boards of vast cartels. THE so called FREE MARKET, IS EVEN A bigger fantasy TO SELL TO the CAPITALIST drones.
I also have had experience of business and lived well after dropping their wages.
Is this the world we want.?
nbm34 3 years ago
A reply to evil monkey.
THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION in the hands of Capitalists vast private Global,companies searching for cheap labour in the world. The lack of affordable homes,and extremely unsecure work in the paradise you call Capitalism.
Is not the experience of millions of people who do not own property.This includes the millions of CAPITALIST DRONES sold negitive
equity morgages. With NO JOB SECURITY for millions of people. CAPITALISM is a illusion of wealth.Only for the few is it real.
nbm34 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The Nazi evolved from the implosion of Capitalism,and in essence is Capiatlism with the gloves off, The EliteS use false images of socialist values on National terms,TO GIVE THE MASSES illusions that their needs are being
dealt with.
A welfare state is Socialist in real terms.
THE ONLY REAL QUESTION OF OUR AGE.
Is how do we defeat the corperate state,and evolve more substantial and technological Welfare states, in the means of production.
nbm34 3 years ago
You'll have to kill me first... that's how... War is the only way you'll ever succeed.
EvilMongrelMonkey 3 years ago 2
dear EVIL MONKEY A APT TITLE for a conservative
beast. I would happily oblige your demise for the change proposed,should you oppose it,if the conditions are aligned for the class war in question.
nbm34 3 years ago
Not before my side eliminates your side completely. So bring it on Stalinist! Bring it on Nazi... because what you're talking about and what your dreaming of can only happen through Stalinist and Nazi tactics.
EvilMongrelMonkey 3 years ago 2
I am not a Stalinist nor a NAZI,and I hope beyond the banter,that the present economic crisis,will end in a more positive and less
self destructive manner as it did in past events. Any dictatorships are evil,and not what any rational human being would like to promote.We need checks and balances to make sure human egos do not imitate the past when they get access to power.If this present Capitalist system is all there is. THEN WE WILL BE just sophisticated slaves to the rich,at their mercy.
nbm34 3 years ago
All socialism is slavery and totalitarian in its very nature. Capitalism isn't a political system... which is where you're hyperbole will not ever win any argument. Free markets revel in capitalism... as capitalism is just the act of ownership and capital investment... I practice capitalism in the free market.... and I practice democracy by voting for the representatives in DC... our biggest problem is liars like you obfuscating the truth about what Capitalism is.
EvilMongrelMonkey 3 years ago 2
Count me in...I'll fight against any person or group that will TRY to "change" what made America great and free - property rights etc.
surfstang 3 years ago
Is it true this guy never left the concrete womb of the education institution. Did he ever meet a payroll? What basis does he have to judge the economy when he opted out of ever working in his whole life. Just another armchair businessman in his ivory towers jacking off to ayn rand. Guess he doesn't know what it means to be a self-made man. What a clown!
freespeeeech 4 years ago
If it weren't for cooperation there could be no competition, but the opposite is not true, is it? It is amazing how non-competitive human spirit actually is. It amazes me to what extremes people go to to justify sociopathic market behavior. like the ole cliche "If i didn't do it, then someone else would have."
freespeeeech 4 years ago
free markets lead to monopolies only by refereeing the game can govt keep marketws competitive. Do you know who Thruman arnold is, robert jackson, william o. douglas? If this guy thinks Nazism is socialism then why did Hitler put all the socialists in Dachau in 1933? Monpoly is the father of fascism? Capitalism put profits over people, but Fascism puts politics over profits. look at clear channel.
freespeeeech 4 years ago
He put Bolsheviks in Dachau you retard.
Nazism stands for the National Socialist German Worker's Party.
Sounds pretty socialist to me....
IDNeon 4 years ago
He put socialists in Dachau too, you don't know history do you? Plus your dumb enough to believe the title of his party. You should really research before you write, it would increase your self-esteem.
wlaaaaa 4 years ago
monopolies were always classically understood as relying upon government privledge. Even Chomskys work constantly points out the dependence of big business upon government intervention.
LibertineMachine 3 years ago
Define Socialism as Totalitarian by calling it state ownership instead of social ownership c0-0ps etc.
Corruption is endemic to capitalism but of course Reisman defends that at well -crony of cronies - what theology we are getting !
nickglais 4 years ago
state socialism IS totalitarian, and communal ownership is no different if it leaves no room for any individual to opt out.
LibertineMachine 3 years ago
Mises state capitalism is not socialism.
majorMcpharter 4 years ago
And here it is again. Capitalism is the voluntary exchange of goods and services in an open marketplace in the absence of state intervention and yet, since the countless attempts to implement socialism have (inevitably) failed, the socialists delude themselves into believing they can combine two diametrically opposed concepts so they can blame others for those failures. Brilliant!
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago
Here's what I notice a lot... people like the mises folks, the austrian economics school people, they (very rightly) criticize government intervention and the problems with government in society and the economy without ever talking about the legal structure of corporations as being tyrannies or being legally required to maximize profits. This is a shortcoming of the ideology (I mean, arguably sort of hypocritical). Any thoughts on this?
fusionguitar 4 years ago
Von Mises did not understand the social character of value and similarly did not understand the social character of Fascism as capitalist.
He is a hero of a thug tank not a think tank
Critical thinking is necessity at this dangerous hour - meet the challenge
nickglais 4 years ago
Fascism dont allow free market and required a lots of economic controls, fascism is not capitalism, but state-capitalism near what there is in USA, and a bit everywhere in the world.
anarkoFred 4 years ago
It is crucial to make a difference between state-capitalism and NONE-state-capitalism (free-market). To keep up primary anti-capitalism ideas is'nt critical thinking. By the way I was social-anarchist (as Chomsky) in my youth.
anarkoFred 4 years ago
In Quebec we live under a social-democrat state, and it does'nt work because of the state control on economie. GET RID OF STATE CONTROLS PLEASE IT JUST DOES'NT WORK!!
anarkoFred 4 years ago
Actually, Mises wrote at length a half century ago (quite correctly) how the nature of human decision making that underlies a capitalist system allows individuals to pursue their individual goals regarding social values (in "Human Action"). ACTUAL critical thinking must acknowledge the success of capitalism at improving the lot of the vast majority of people.
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago
Soon after the Nazi party came to power, United Steel was reorganized so that the
government majority stake of 52 per cent was converted into a stake of less than 25 per cent, no longer sufficient in German law to give the government any privileges in company control. Nazis innovated with privitisation. Read Germa Bel Nazi Privitisation in the 1930.s
ZEPANIAHW 4 years ago
Propagandists for the free market for the poor and corporate subsidies for the rich.
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for truth to come from Von Mises.
ZEPANIAHW 4 years ago
Austrian economist will say that subsidies are theft and they won't promote it.
anarkoFred 4 years ago
FREE MARKET means VOLONTARY EXCHANGE of goods and services. Wage war for oil at the expense of taxe payers for the profit of war and oil industries is obviously not VOLONTARY EXCHANGE, it is not free-market, but imperialism or state-capitalism. Mises and austrian are against such imperialism and state-capitalism because it is not VOLONTARY EXCHANGE, it is not free-market.
anarkoFred 4 years ago
Note, it's really tough discern in this group who are serious and those who say anything to start a flame war.. That's because you can really have a honest discussion with people who are unaccountable, not much different than pranksters, and should be treated as such.
rofthorax 4 years ago
Second: Then, to say that socialism is the same as Nazism is a way of being fascist, it is an affirmation that pursue the goal of introducing confusion among the working class in order to dissuade it of fighting for its rights, to dissuade it in fighting for socialism, to dissuade it of adopting Marxism as an instrument in the struggle against bourgeois oppression.
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
"Then, to say that socialism is the same as Nazism is a way of being fascist" is to be correct.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Second: Then, to say that socialism is the same as Nazism is a way of being fascist, it is an affirmation that pursue the goal of introducing confusion among the working class in order to dissuade it of fighting for its rights, to dissuade it in fighting for socialism, to dissuade it of adopting Marxism as an instrument in the struggle against bourgeois oppression.
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
First:
It is highly criminal and irresponsible to consider fascism (Nazism in its German version) to be the same as socialism. Fascism is the result of the failure of socialist revolution. It is a reaction against the proletariat revolutionary movement and has the goal of destroying all the means that the working class possesses to protect herself from the bourgeois oppression
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
Nazism lives in the heart of capitalism and 'democracy'!
Not only the Bush family is linked to Nazism but Schwarzenegger, the governor of California is the son of a former Nazi commander.
So don't blame socialists for your own shit.
Capitalism, German and foreign is behind Nazism.
And if you want to fight Nazism, start in the US.
Socialists we are not responsible for your own crimes
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
You americans think you know everything, the man who's speaking looks like a pigg with glasses, oh i say can't you see....a lott of fat poeple!
remcojetten 4 years ago
Thank you for that wonderful demonstration of the level of inetellectual debate (or lack thereof) that charcterizes the typical response to messages that socialists dislike.
Well done!
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you're welcome!!! here some other intellectual comments from me; Goerge Bush is being fuckt in the ass right now by his close friend Osama while Goerge is sucking Tony Blairs small dick who is sucking on Condoleeza rice pussy! and....inetellectual??....you can't even spell right!
remcojetten 4 years ago
Yes, I do ocassionally make typographical errors when my thoughts exceed my typing speed. Clearly, you will never have that particular problem.
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago 2
capitalism is an exploitation system, and since it needs constant expansion, imperialism is its natural state.
Crisis are natural in capitalism just as seasons in nature.
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
Nazism the same as socialism? As far as I know during WWII there were 500 thousands jews in the red army among them 200 generals. Strange for ''Nazi'' USSR to have such a big amount of jews in the red army!!!
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
"Strange for ''Nazi'' USSR to have such a big amount of jews in the red army!!!"
Not at all, Socialism is not about hating jews, socialism is about getting power while finding somebody to blame. Russians simply did not blame jews, they blamed and killed 10 million of other "blame-grups" instead. It doesnt make them less like Hitler, it just proves socialism let you decide who to blame to get to power. Congrats they fooled you good.
benattis 4 years ago 8
@benattis
Actually Stalin wanted to carry out a second holocaust and have all the Jewish officers of the Red Army shot in Red Square, but Stalin died just before he gave the final order to carry the operation thru.
Read 'Stalin Against the Jews' by Arkady Vaksberg
givinitsome 8 months ago
@benattis very good.
bluediablo9 1 month ago
Cuba's infant mortality rate is better than the US with 5 deaths per thousand in Cuba versus 7 per thousand in the US. Cuba has nearly twice as many physicians as the U.S. -- 5.91 doctors per thousand people compared to 2.56 doctors per thousand, according to World Health Organization
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
The posting doesn't magically become accurate (your numbres are wrong) or the Cuba data more credible becasue you post it several times.
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago
WHO numbers and also CIA numbers, why would CIA publish something that helps Casto?
Is CIA working for Castro?
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
Lest some poor lurker belive your nonsense...
Again, the WHO and CIA do nothing more than COMPILE the official statistics reported by the countries. That the Soviet Union and its client states (including Cuba) manipulated the data to UNDERSTATE infant mortality by about 25% is thoroughly documented. That Cuba has NOT corrected its reporting is readily apparent. Therefore, the official data STILL significantly understates the data.
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago
Why would CIA publish numbers that they know to be wrong? Why would CIA publish those numbers if they help Castro?
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
How dense are you? The CIA makes it quite clear that they are providing the officially reported numbers from ALL of the countries it lists in the World Fact Book. It expressly denies any responsiblity for the veracity of the claims made by those countries in the introduction. While the publication is primarily for use by people trained to know that, it is expected that people are intelligent enough to grasp it.
But then there are socialists...
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago
By N.D. KRISTOF
New York Times
January 12, 2005
'Here's a wrenching fact: If the U.S. had an infant mortality rate as good
as Cuba's we would save an additional 2,212 American babies a year.
Yes, Cuba's Babies are less likely to survive in America, with a health
care system that we think is the best in the world, than in impoverished
and autocratic Cuba According to the latest C.I.A. World Factbook, Cuba is
one of 41 countries that have better infant mortality rates than the U.S''
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
Repeat from part 1, so here is a repeat response:
Another poor soul that actually believes what Castro tells the world. You are wrong, the NY times is wrong (again), the infant mortality rate in Cuba is unknown to those outside the circle, but, you can bet it is far higher than advertised.
Mbowster 4 years ago
Cuba even helps other countries with medical care.
In that aspect Cuba is better than many third world countries. The NY times is not communist?!
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
Are you kidding? The NYT is a communist rag!
You have been duped by the Cuban propaganda. Their data is fake!
Mbowster 4 years ago
I know Cuba myself and USA, so shut up!
wladimirlenin 4 years ago
Yeah right!
You live in a fantasy world...
Mbowster 4 years ago
Repeating the factually inaccurate nonsense that state ownership of the means of production is ANY tyoe of capitalism at all does not make it even remotely correct. It merely demonstrates an unimpeded willingness to prevaricate in defense of the indefensible: socialism.
FletchforFreedom 4 years ago
Nationalisation is state capitalism not socialism.Reisman is wrong.
majorMcpharter 4 years ago
That guy has ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what socialism is.
88Abood88 4 years ago
Dr. Reisman knows more than you could ever hope to know
Nolimit75 4 years ago
I'm a socialist. I think I know more about my ideology than a laissez faire capitalist.
The main assumption he makes, which is the basis of his entire argument, is that socialism is synonymous with government control. That's false. While many socialists believe in government control, they believe in it to achieve classlessness and equality. It isn't the end in and of itself. It is simply a means.
88Abood88 4 years ago
And many socialists, including myself, are totally opposed to state control. I believe in the people locally controlling the means of production. It has nothing to do with dictatorship, fascism, or totalitarianism. I'm opposed to all three as much as he is. Does that make me not a socialist? Absolutely not. I'd take that as an insult. Some forms of socialism are authoritarian, but socialism isn't inheretly so.
88Abood88 4 years ago
And Nazism wasn't socialism. Claiming that it is only reflects ignorance of history. First of all, while socialists like to dismantle the establishment altogether and form a new one, the Nazis used the establishment to gain power. They came to power mainly due to Conservative support and through Alfred Hugenburg's (a Conservative) media machine.
88Abood88 4 years ago
They also crushed Leftist opposition, with the help of the Right, namely the Freikorps. Not to mention they crushed the socialist movement within the Nazi party on the Night of the Long Knives.
88Abood88 4 years ago
It is hardly ignorant of history. You yourself admitted several socialists believe in gov't control. Nazis certainly did, and they certainly did for collecitivist reasons. Were they conservatives? Not by a long shot. Nazism was a world ideology unlike anything before it.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Socialists believe in government intervention to represent the workers and fight against the bourgeoisie. The Nazis cooperated with the bourgeoisie (business owners) and even crushed socialist opposition within the Nazi movement when it called for a second (truly socialist) revolution, because Hitler did not want to antagonize the conservatives.
88Abood88 4 years ago
I'm sorry, but how in the name of god (If he exists) can you be an Anarchist, AND a socialist?
MatthewLeee 4 years ago
"I'm a socialist. I think I know more about my ideology than a laissez faire capitalist."
This is by no means necessary. Mises knew an awful lot more than most marxists about their own ideology, and I am sure Dr Reisman is no less informed. You seem to forget that many laissez-faire capitalists switch ideologies as well (e.g. Dr Hoppe, from Marxist to anarcho-capitalist), so they have a grounding in both viewpoints.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Well, I know for a fact that he's wrong in saying that socialism is necessarily totalitarian. I, for one, am an anarcho-socialist. Read: ANARCHO.
88Abood88 4 years ago
I think your confusion is in the semantics. You say you are a socialists and have certain wants and beliefs that are in conflict with what Dr. Reisman says. I can assure you that his lecture is not an attack on you. He is an economist, and an economists job is to explain what will happen when policies and/or regulations are adopted. And that is all he is doing... explaining what happens to a political system that adopts marxian/socialist philosophies.
Mbowster 4 years ago
You may not want a totalitarian gov't or endorse one, but, as Dr. Riesman has shown, a socialist political/economic system eventually leads to it. This does not imply that the socialists behind the system intend it, it is in fact 'unintended consequences'.
Mbowster 4 years ago
The problem with capitalism is that it itself is totalitarian. People are forced to rent themselves on the market and have no control over their productive lives. Think about it - work is where you spend your life but you get no control over what's done there. This talk about capitalism being "the most free " is nonsense. One day though, the masses will realize this and the rich scum won't be laughing then.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
The Exploitation theory has been proven wrong years ago. You should study more than misguided marxian based political science if you want to get any where in this world. Your suggestion that my labors are better allocated by the 'state or some other authority' than to use at my disposal is absurd.
Mbowster 4 years ago
Don't ask them to think for themselves. Too much work. And work is evil. Very evil.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
I agree they and the police are the state.they are socialists.
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
Government control is dictatorship.We must end the control of the puppet politicians
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
State ownership is totalitarian and socialism,we must believe in george reisman and destroy the socialist army of the puppet politicians.
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
Millions of people do not produce the puppet politicians,banks the stock exchange insurance companies salesmen the list is endless.are these socialists?
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
Politicians do not. Middlemen facilitate exchanges, saving invaluable time - this is a productive service.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
By your twisted logic your armed forces must be socialist/communist and totalitarian.They Are owned and controlled by the state which pays their wages.Nationalisation=state control.LOL
worldoffreeaccess 4 years ago
The armed forces don't produce, they consume at the cost of the citizenship. They are a necessary evil in this world. They have nothing to do with socialism or communism and they are not nationalized, for something to be nationalized it must first be privately owned.
Mbowster 4 years ago
Surely in the middle ages armies mercenaries where privately owned paid for by the highest bidder.George reisman is the truth the sate owned army of japan and the usa are socialist.They are owned by the state.
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
The army of the usa is owned by the state it is socialist
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
The US armed forces ARE the state!
Mbowster 4 years ago
The armed forces of the usa and japan like other nation states are owned and controlled by the capitalist state.When the state takes control of any organisation it is nationalised, this is state capitalism.the goverment controls not the people.
majorMcpharter 4 years ago
State capitalism is an oxymoron and abusively used.
The armed forces are not nationalized, they are required by the Constitution:
Preamble "... provide for the common defense ..."
Mbowster 4 years ago
Section 8 - Powers of Congress "...To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress..."
Mbowster 4 years ago
Check again no limit.
majorMcpharter 4 years ago
The russian revolution was a bolshevik coup.They took control of the state and introduced a brutal regime which was certainly not very social or communal.Did they abolish the wages system? NO.Sorry buddy they kept capitalism under the control of the state.
majorMcpharter 4 years ago
In a free market economy,how can we trust state owned armed forces.The goverment puppet politicians will control these socialist weapons of mass destruction.
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
In the next decade china and india will become super powers which will rival the economic power of japan and the usa.We must not allow the socialist state owned armed forces to be used by our goverments to launch an attack on these economic competitors.
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
Lets put an end to the nation state and its interference with our freedom.The nation state spends billions of our taxes on weapons.Worldwide we have 100s of millions unemployed.We must burst the state bubble.
GreetingsEarthPeople 4 years ago
This guy is full of hot air. He doesn't understand the history of Nazi Germany. If you read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William Shirer, it specifically states that Hitler included "Socialism" into the Nazi title in order to draw in factions from competing political parties, many of which were Socialist parties in nature, including the Social Democrats and the Communist Spartacists. That is why Hitler was considered by many to be a poliltical genius.
lightstab 4 years ago
Yes. Marxist nonsense that stipulates that capitalism somehow alienates man from his true nature (as if such a thing could be objectively defined). Insults won't help you, by the way.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Unfortunately. Marx was right on that issue. Capitalism /does/ alienate man from his true nature, and such a thing CAN be objectively defined. It can be defined by the condition that makes humans most happy, and that's in a situation where a person is cooperating with others(There can still be a hierarchy in Cooperative measures). If you would look at the Birth of Sociology, it was born because there was a drastic, negative change in the mean quality of life.
Caliburnis 4 years ago
I am very unhappy when I am cooperating with others. This doesn't make me anti-social, I just enjoy working alone. And Capitalism encorages cooperation, I would love an expaination to prove otherwise.
MatthewLeee 4 years ago
Do you even know what the labour theory of value is?
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Yes. Do you even know what the theory of alienation is? Dipshit.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
"charactarized by an loss of individual freedom"
Yeah tell that to the working man whose sweat you live off you fucking cunt.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
Wo pissed in your cheerios? Lighten up and be happy you live in a capitalist society instead of some totalitarian socialist haven where you have no individuality
Nolimit75 4 years ago
Ha! It's capitalism that robbs us of individuality. Instead of producing things for us to use personally, and for the community, we are used by the system which is run the the rich scumbags who reassure us that "it's a free system". Free my ass. The upper class' day will come eventually though, mark my words.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
Umm, are you one of those idiots that still believes in the Labour Theory of Value? It's been refuted. Over. And. Over. Again.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Read the fucking comment again. Then if necessary once more, perhaps even again etc. Whe you think to yourself "I really don't know shit do I?" then you've cracked it.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
I read it. Now tell me, how does capitalism fail to produce personal goods for consumption?
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Wow you have no idea what you are saying. socialism produces soley for need and not for wants, therefore if your want, for instance an Aston Martin, has no benefit(in the eyes of the State) for the community, then you wont get it. In a capitalist society, if you want an Aston Martin, well go freaking buy it, they will happily make it for you, the paying customer. Go get a better job you crybaby, there are opportunities everywhere
Nolimit75 4 years ago
Nolimit, you're not describing Socialism. Most Socialist economies work with a proxy of my Energy Account system. Did everything I tell you just leak out of your ears? They use a type of "Marker" for their goods, and you "buy" what you want at a type of distribution facility. If many people "buy" an Aston Martin, then you distribute more Aston Martins to that distribution facility. There is no State declaration of what people can get. None.
Caliburnis 4 years ago
This assumes an unlimited supply of Austin Martin's, which is ridiculous.
How would they know, in advance, what to produce?
There is no risk or reward. It just wouldn't work.
Mbowster 4 years ago
How would they know what to produce in advance? Simple. How many are selling? If there are many selling, then you acquire goods in the same way and produce according to how many are being sold. Really, it's quite simple.
Why would someone produce them? Because they /want/ to. Because they /like/ to design cars. Because they /like/ to maintain machinery. It's quite simple. People like to further themselves, yes, but there are more ways to further yourself than just money.
Caliburnis 4 years ago
Your logic is "quite simply" wrong. How many citizens of the USSR drove Ferrari's? NONE
Mbowster 4 years ago
Once again, the USSR, is NOT a Socialist system. Prove my logic to be "quite simply" wrong using relevent examples.
Caliburnis 4 years ago
Yes - it was Socialist, what planet are you from?
Mbowster 4 years ago
Earth.
Caliburnis 4 years ago
last time I checked the Bolshevik Revolution was a socialist revolution
Nolimit75 4 years ago
like what? Yes people do many things purely from enjoyment but if they become elite in that field any sane human would want more out of it
Nolimit75 4 years ago
What you're describing is technocracy, the most lofty and wishful branch of socialist branches, there was a reason technocracy was created and there is also a reason the initial movement died so quickly
Nolimit75 4 years ago
I learned a great deal from you, I simply just disagree with technocrat doctrine-its so outlandish it is almost comical
Nolimit75 4 years ago
"And for the community" What do I owe the community? I don't even really owe myself anything. I was brought into this world by force, not voluintary consent. I owe my existance and the products thereof to no one.
MatthewLeee 4 years ago
Hey, don't forget. Capitalism doesn't produce things for him to consume personally. His computer? Fictional!!!
Elhan2005 4 years ago
WTF are you talking about? Wealth, goods, profit etc. is/are produced by WORKERS. Workers are dictated to by the rich. If you don't like the opposition against it then fuck off and work your own factories.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
Fine, quit and starve, that leaves more for hard-working people
Nolimit75 4 years ago
You could hardly count yuppy cunts as "hard working".
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
Why not?
Elhan2005 4 years ago
hahahahahahahaha
Nolimit75 4 years ago
I think state socialism is totalitarian. However I find this guy a bit offensive tbh. This video will be faved by thousands of right-wing pro-Israeli nutts wanting to make out that the Lefties were supportive of the Nazis, just like the Muslim brotherhood was responsible for the holocaust. Give us a break. It was the SOCIALISTS (not the conservative ass holes of the time) that often gave their lives in the fight for TRUE socialism.
TrystanCJ 4 years ago
TRUE Socialism is utopia, TRUE socialism is unreachable, TRUE socialism is a flat out joke, TRUE socialism will never happen
Nolimit75 4 years ago
Good. I love Reisman. Hopefully one day the sham that is socialism will be reduced to collecting dust in old forgotten libraries.
Elhan2005 4 years ago
Anyone that loves freedom(and uses their brain) is right there with you
Nolimit75 4 years ago
Forgive the space taken up, Im also the same guy as RobiXD im just using my accoutn which is on my laptop.
Robiboi11 4 years ago
I also would liek to apologise for my spelling especially now I see it FASCISM is mispelt, I have some spelling issues (got dyslexia) but please dont criticise my IQ because of this, if you want to know what it is ill tell you.
Robiboi11 4 years ago
Socialists cannot really be socialist and also be ardent NATIONALISTS, although this hasnt stopped some trying (like apparant socialist Stalin). Its a contradiction in terms to call socialism facism, as socialism is a term in good faith that refers to caring of the general populace, FACISM is militaristic enforcement and nationalism. get a dictionary.
Robiboi11 4 years ago
True, but it is a matter of economics not welfare policies concerning this presentation. If you listen to Dr. Reisman you will see that he highlights the policies of collectivism, severe price and wage controls, government seizure of major industry, public works projects, etc. which all are part of socialist doctrine.
Nolimit75 4 years ago
Thats bollucks NAZISM started off as the national socialist party but almost immediately Hitler lost this idea and went FAR RIGHT WING, he was an ENEMY OF COMMUNISM which is advanced SOCIALISM. Socialism is not totalitarian, the defenition of total socialism is COMMUNISM, this guy dosent know what he is talking about.
RobiXD 4 years ago
You are the one who doesn't know what he is talking about! You are just stating Marx's fallacious positions. Hitler far right? Try listening to the lecture and commenting on the content, if you understand it.
I venture to say that you don't!
Mbowster 4 years ago
Lol your a joker, I am NOT pro-marx in any way shape or form idiot, but then again from a right point of view anyone who is further left then centre right is a communist. the national socialist party started off with socialist policies it then became severly NATIONLIST which is a form of FACISM.
Robiboi11 4 years ago
NATIONALIST & FASCISM - both forms of Socialism. The problem with most of the comments here, is that most people do not understand the meaning of socialism - gov't control of the means of production. You must understand this definition, otherwise your comments don't make sense.
Mbowster 4 years ago
Here is what your last comment says, (excluding the name calling):
"...but then again from a right point of view anyone who is further left then center right is a SOCIALIST. the socialist party started off with socialist policies it then became severely SOCIALIST which is a form of SOCIALISM."
Mbowster 4 years ago
Socialism dosent mean government control of the means of production, it sometimes leads to that like in communism. Socialism is more of an action or a belief than anything, it actually means standing out for the average 'guy' usually from the working class. Fascis doesnt have to be the opposite of this, but socialism is not an extreme where fascism is an extreme.
Robiboi11 4 years ago
Gov't ownership of the means of production is the definition of socialism. Common ownership and gov't ownership are the same... Dr. Reisman explains this in the lecture and further in his book, Capitalism. What part of his proof do you disagree with?
Mbowster 4 years ago
Socialism goes hand in hand with Communism, they are the same thing
Nolimit75 4 years ago
Well, I suppose time will tell.
If you're looking for an intelligent debate about socialism, feel free to visit the socialism group on myspace. We wouldn't mind a debate as long as it's in a civil manner.
ParticleMan 4 years ago
Socialism/communism has not failed its never been tried.Nazi germany/soviet union both state capitalist dictatorships
majorMcpharter 4 years ago
Just repeating this will never make it true.
Mbowster 4 years ago
I love how people with misconceptions of Marxism (and thus, Socialism and Communism) try to criticize it.
As for Europe, they are Social Democrats, not Democratic Socialists.
ParticleMan 4 years ago
I despise how people with conceptions "of Marxism (and thus, Socialism and Communism)" promote it with a complete disregard to logic or scholarship.
Mbowster 4 years ago
Some people to laugh at, at least.
bonkers45 4 years ago
True.
But, it's sad that so many are misguided and unknowingly led into the world of imaginary socialist utopias that will never exist.
Mbowster 4 years ago
I should've been more thourough, everyone having a voice in the public is democracy, and some forms of socialism embrace democracy, but socialism's ultimate goal is direct democracy which leads to mobocracy which is bad.
Nolimit75 4 years ago
I think that I lean more towards stunted democratic Socialism, but w/ private property still allowed. Right now I'm studying the effects dem. socialism had on the UK, and it looks fairly good.
http69ing 4 years ago
Ah that clears a whole lot up, you should've said u were a demo socialist in the beginning, lol. From what I have observed, deomocratic socialism tends to be far to weak to sustain itself for long periods of time, unless the country is left alone from things like external shock. Any democratic socialist state would see the economy crumble if any major shock to the economy occured, IE Sweden
Nolimit75 4 years ago