there are so much prejudices against communism these days. People automatically reject communism for few automatical reasons 1)It's totalitarian 2)Decrease incentives to work 3)Romantics 4)THEY'RE FUCKING COMMIES!
It's just laziness to not rethink communism and just accept what american economics tell us(they're usually pro capitalist)
We don't have large scale free market capitalism any more than we have wide spread free forms of voluntary socialism. The systems we have are exploitive oligarachy which gets passed off as "capitalism" and forced redistribution of wealth (theft) that gets passed off as "socialism". Then these two systems get played against each other in public while the controllers laugh at how gullible people are.
they're promoting for donations. They're talking about advertising from independent agencies and entrepreneurs who buy more than air time for their ads when they buy ads, they influence the content of programming through market pressure, ie don't advertise where they are criticized where opinions that threaten their way of doing business are presented generally like Exxon mobile not advertising on an environmentalism station unless it buys them reduced substance of that programming.
I can't stop laughing, them saying that Obama is free market capitalist, and assuming the last century in America was a free market. I haven't laughed so hard in years; thanks for that.
dont ever trust a prof from YORK haha... the system we had in place was not a result of what Hayek advocated. governments control interest rates and have monopolies on monetary systems... how is that capitalist?
Thats not the point, the point is that these people are blaming free market capitalism, when what we have had is corporatism & merchantiism and suppose that the answer is Marxism?
We haven't had free market for nearly 100 years. What are these people talking about. Marxism works as long as we are all robots. Of course who will want to work in the mine, Who will want to throw out the trash. Get real Free Market is the answer not corpratism/merchantilism nor socialism.
Marx was right about calling for revolution. Maybe today we can't apply a Communist revolution in the style of Russia 1917, but the people should rise up and get rid of the fatcats screwing us over, including Obama.
I initially was under the impression that TRNN was undiased and non partisan. Paul's admission of Green Party progressive thinking during the part 2 interview with Thom
Hartman really turned me off. Is there any such a thing as a unbiased / non biased reporter left in the US any longer?
Offcourse he is relevant today and so are many of the rest of the old economist, the value of labour and that there is an inherent value of labour that Marx talks about is something that we on the left side of the scale are going to fight for infinitely.
The green movement has been co-opted by big business to make money. But you have to realize that even if you don't believe in climate change, the degradation of the natural world by capitalism whether it's through pollution, deforestation, extinction etc, effects the ability for human subsistence.
We can't live without clean air, water and food. But all of this is being destroyed by capital. So you don't have to be a green-bot to care about the environment.
Actually it is communism that has taken over the modern environmentalism and capitalism has, as far as communism is concerned, done far less damage to the environment. Eastern Europe was a wasteland under Communist government.
If you're talking about China, it is not communist. China is an authoritarian state capitalist country.
Communism: classless society where the workers own the means of production.
Due to all the sweatshops, I highly doubt these people are in charge of their own workplaces. Are they voluntarily enslaves themselves and their own children to better their communities? Is everyone equal? NO. You don't know what communism is. There are no real examples of a true communist country.
Spain in 1936 was an example of a mixture of real communism and anarchism. If they had won the battle and kept their self organized society it would have looked much better and would have been a better example of an anarcho-communist society.
Yes that's true. I was only talking about the present; how many people think that certain countries are communist when they really aren't. I get tired of correcting them.
I love the Spanish civil war and I too wish they could have kept their anarcho-communist society. It's the most equal, just, and most fair type of human organization.
As an anarcho-syndicalist this is what I wish for the world. I'm actually reading Orwell's Homage to Catalonia right now.
That's aswome. I want to read that book sometime around. I learned about the spanish civil war a while back in high school but did not took a good interest until I read 'Anarchism: a very short introduction' by colin ward and 'Anarchism: from theory to practice' by Daniel Guerin. Both pretty short and easy to read. You should take a look at it, and everyone else reading this too. :)
Thanks! I've been meaning to read No Gods, No Masters by Guerin (its been on my shelf for a while now) but I never get to it. From Theory to Practice is on my wish list.
Another quick read is Anarcho-Syndicalism by Rudolf Rocker (less than 100 pages).
Anyone that leans toward socialism but with no-or-limited government instead of centrally planned state socialism should look into anarcho-syndicalism. Also participatory economics (parecon) is very interesting and thought provoking.
No they aren't. China is an authoritarian state capitalist country. The workers don't own the means of production and people aren't equal.
Like I said to someone else hear, especially because of sweatshops it is obvious that the Chinese workers do not control and own the means of production. If they did they wouldn't force children to work in those awful factories for pennies.
There are no real examples of communist countries except for Spain in 1936.
I guess your right !!! They were just a lot of power hungry men who used the words for there better being once they got into power or on their way to power. Few who wanted and believed in Marx theory for goodness sake got over powered by the coruptors
I agree. People are using the word capitalist to define what is actually corporatism or merchantilism which is the inverse or socialism & communism. They are two sides of the same coin. I urge people in this post to look up Austrian economics and fiat money with an open mind.
Yes we can't live without clean air water & food, But its not capital that is destroying this it is corporatism & merchantilism. You can have sustainable capitalism but corporatism dosn't care about the environment.
Currently I am personally continuing my education, learning about Austrian Economics (which has been predicting the problems of our current Kaynsean system for decades). Ideally the answer would begin in people enforcing their elected officials to follow the constitution, greatly minimize federal govenment control allowing decisions to be made as local as possible.
Check out von misses institute for more info on Austrian economics.
Its very difficult because government and business are so close today. If we limited government (by that I'm assuming you mean deregulation on business) then I feel that it would only lead to more power on behalf of the huge corporations that run our lives.
I'm no fan of the state but because of where we are today I don't see how that could work
I agree that decisions should be made locally. It seems like we're both libertarian but you're capitalist libertarian and I'm socialist libertarian.
Actually when I say limit government I mean bring it back to a constitutional government. The governments role is to protect individual rights, property rights & contract law. Thats basically it. Youve got to understand that our country was setup as a Republic not a Democracy. While not perfect a Republic is meant to protect the individual where a democracy is mob rule, the majority declares what is right even if it hurts some individuals. -continued-
When government gets involved in regulation the unintended consequences often is that they protect the big corporations in that industry and make a barrier of entry to smaller entrepreneurial companies, thus eliminating the cost & quality benefit to the consumer. For example the FDA gives the pharmaceutical companies approval on many dangerous drugs, then when people get sick or die from these drugs the FDA generally sides with the drug companies while closing the door on alternatives
I think as a people have to demand true democracy so the leaders have no other choice but to listen to the people who voted for them. We have to make them listen somehow. I think we agree there
It just seems to me that the only reason we need a state at all is because of capitalism. As wealth started accumulating earlier in our history, the government grew with it. Capital pushed for modern American liberalism and a bigger state
How do you stop monopolies from taking over in a free market?
First I think that in a Republic as our country is supposed to be, our elected officials swore an oath to the constitution. We should hold them to this contract. If they breach it then they should be fired.
I believe that special interests pushed for bigger government through the administrative branch of government (i.e. FDA, IRS, DOA, FEMA...) It is these agencies that help create monopolies. In a free market with no governmental barriers to entry the market will regulate monopolies.
Having limited government is good, but private enterprise would eventually be the ruler of the people, dictating what to earn and where to work pretty much. Certain parts of china people work and live at factory dorms for slave wage. They are deprived from their freedom because the companies, corporations own them for their labor. That is the problem with libertarianism. It is about certain individuals to hold freedom rather than everyone deciding what should be done.
Realistically we have to aim towards smaller countries like in europe (for example each US state becoming an independent state through very well protected state laws that would eventually get rid of federal gov)in order to know where the local taxes are spent. Income tax then would be used at the local level like counties (public trans, parks, rehabs, hospitals, infrastructure etc). For example California being its own gov, and protects the rights of the counties without taking any tax.
This economic crisis however, is the product of neoliberalism starting with the Reagan Regime. Trickle down, deunionization, falling wages etc.
The ruling capitalist class that has held down the working class has been having one big drunken orgy with our money (from our hard work) for long enough. Neoliberalism is dead! Good riddance.
Now it's time to replace this oppressive system with something new. Something truly democratic, fair and of the people. It must come from below.
We all know the role of the real estate, the subprime, the financial sector but saying what caused these... gd luck
You may think it is because of middle-class stagering wages(when adjusted to inflation) but you can't pretend it actually has anything to do with this crisis. Deregulation has played a role in this crisis because it allowed financial engineering but apart of that...
I'd like to remind you the amount of wealth that this system did produce for everyone.
When wages fall workers have a harder time affording what they produce. They must buy everything on CREDIT. We start accumulating debt and can't pay our bills.
Our wages were cut and the CEOs got a pay raise (starting in the 80s and grew to 50X then to 250X the $ their workers make, sometimes MUCH more). That means that cut we got, went straight to the CEOs. They stole OUR money. When is it going to trickle down? We are redistributing the wealth to the top!
GOD, That is so funny! ... omg, how jolly you are! :D You see, you took a part of a question I asked - this is great - and gave it your own little witty spin ... you took "dichotomy" and changed it to "dick to me" :D ... ROFL!!!
Boy, you're 37, really? Keep up that youthful spirit!
Man is a creature that exploits others; its human nature people Now if you understand this you can see how we come to where we are today, people exploiting the system for selfish purposes with short term profits and long term problems postponed.
To say that the "free" market being deregulated will fix all is nonsense! lack of oversight coupled with reality makes a clear outcome! Some people really dont get it and RON PAUL is one of them want slavery?the free market will provide
You just proved with 1 uniformed sentence that you are completely void of any facts about Ron Paul. Under Dr. Paul the military would only go to war after Congress has declared it. There would be no need for groups like blackwater. Sorry but your beat.
No moron, I'm saying that we would have a leader & a commander in chief that would respect the Constitution & we would'nt be going to war over lies like we are now. They don't even bother to declare war anymore. Congress has rendered itself useless! But that should please your socialist beliefs ay? Obama acting like a dictator (or Bush, pick 1) using his directives to send our troops to war! I don't think you realize exactly what you're saying.
Can you even freakin read? If thats your responce to my last comment then you're retarded. Stop wasting my time. Don't you have a WWE match to go watch or something?
your fetish constitution is no different in this respect- it is the historical manifesto of the ruling class of the USA.
of course property is a god-given right on paper and in law if 9/10ths of society owns none.
the entire course of the american corporate and state body is based on violence, lies, dispossession and theft. what the israelis are doing now, the europeans did a century or two ago: state-building.
The Constitution is just about the greatest thing ever written & the men who wrote it & defend it are the best of the best. PERIOD. And if it were'nt for America & Americans you Canadians would be French. Now go stick that in your mukluks.
hi! wat is the "contitution"? i'm chinese and i don't write Engrish good. is it a paper? toilet paper or something else? men in china must know what a con...ti....tu...tion is
"There would be no need for groups like blackwater."
Are you sure? Isn't the free market most effective at utilizing resources, and wouldn't it then also be most desirable to have the free market take case of defense contracts?
(Please stop referring to RP as "Dr. Paul", not only does the appeal to authority seem ineffective here for me, it is also just really dumb and irrelevant... )
Who cares if liberal idiots like you don't like him or the fact that he is a doctor. And if Dr. Paul decided to use an outfit like Blackwater I can assure you it would be in a manner that would be in line with the Constitution. Face it! Your comments are irrelevant. Change your name!
your so called "dr" believes in total deregulation of all markets.What do you thing will rise?Private armies.Congress has not declared war in forever because they are all lames, the president is a lame and the controllers are big global conglomerates with interests directly in American policy.Look who is getting paid from the turmoil and you will find the criminal!When will the people realize that capitalism unhinged has eroded the influence of the people to elect candidates worth shit
what you call "capitalism unhinged" is actually fascism, disguised as "democracy". in a nation of laws (a republic, our guaranteed form of government), and not of men - the law views all people (government or private, corporate executives, rich, poor, etc.) as equals. the government cannot be used to lift some and oppress others... only in collectivism (including a so-called "democracy") can this happen. having congress regulate in corporations favor is NOT capitalism.
Its no different than what we had before 1913! What the hell are you on? Private armies??? What kind of armies? Your a wackadoodle! Do some research about Dr. Ron Paul before you make foolish assumptions.
The effect would be the same if the money was spent on infrastructure (many examples here and abroad) like high speed railways, new bridges, parks etc. But wealthy people do not benefit nearly as much from that sort of spending.
I also see little evidence that the world governments are actually calling for capitalism in any sort of serious way. Chrony capitalism where only rich friends can make money sure. Or paying name homeage to it, fine. But actually promoting capitalism? There is no such thing as printing money to stimulate the economy in capitalism. Keynesianism sure. Capitalism doesnt know anything about this however. In fact, it wouldn't ever make sense.
I feel it's ironic both Marx and Fiscal Conservatives are advocating letting small groups come together and sort things out on their own. Giving them at least the freedom to do that. And although I'd never choose Marx's ways, the fact that the current administration is doing the opposite of what two polar opposite sides would be calling for is quite telling.
While I do like olbermann, and I like indepth reporting with lots of information, I do have to agree with you here. They do tend to beat their points into oblivion over the course of a much longer period of time than they really need to.
compare the drugs that stupify the civilized to entheogens like ayahuasca, psilocybin or even coca used by the people beyond "civilization"/class society.
cocaine, meth, speed and even coffee make the masses of slaves too dull or too busy to think about their realities.
the other drugs make you aware of who you really are.
Scandinavian social democracy can certainly improve the lives of the citizens of its countries, but it is still plugged in to the global capitalist economy and as such still dependent upon the continued exploitation of the third world
American Communism. Government became a bank owner with bank bailouts. It is now owns a large stake in the auto giant GM, they are secretly working on a bill to rummage through ALL your electronic devices without your consent. They want to take over healthcare, and agribuisness. they already own your retirement through social security
Of course like every fundamentalist believer you "know" the truth. Only you can see the truth because everyone else is confused by the mass media's propaganda machine ... How is your Alex Jones' show different from any kind of propaganda?
Come on, you can't imagine why they ran it? Because it is totally non-threatening, too far disconnected to command any adjustment in system mythology... Canned stuff from a period where it meant something. It may acquire meaning again in some future but it's out of it in the present. That's why they can run it.
The Real News isn't unbiased. It is very left-wing. It's "Real" in that it covers things that the mainstream media ignores, but its definitely biased (have you ever seen anyone interviewed that argues against their socialist viewpoints? Its a good channel for sure, but its not unbiased.
Well I didn't said anything about it being good or bad. I just replied to someone who said it was an unbiased news source (although after checking out his channel, I think he was being sarcastic anyways). I just don't like it when biased news pretends to be neutral- think Fox News, with their frequent claims of being "fair and balanced", and retards actually believing it. Although to Real News' credit, I don't know that I've ever seen truly unbiased coverage of politics.
The Real News is not submissive to the propaganda of the corporations. You see so much McCarthyism on the corporate media, that when you see a network that actually interviews competent scholars, you feel something is missing and that there is a "left-wing bias".
They state pretty clearly that they serve the interest of the public, as they are funded by the public, and not by "corporations, government or advertisement".
People fear Marxism because of the crazy Leninist branch and all its byproducts like relativism, postmodernism, snobby loud-mouthed celebrity talking heads etc.
However, Marx did make a huge contribution even if his approach was flawed--raising class consciousness on a massive scale. The Leninist jerks came later.
I don't see where the flaw is in raising class consciousness; you may not like it, but there's nothing inherently wrong about it.
By the way, Lenin was an incredibly intelligent and driven individual who loved his country, as you will know if you ever pick up one of his essays. It's easy for us to point fingers and say where he got it wrong, we have the privilege of hindsight...
And finally, I don't like the postmodernist garbage anymore than you do. :)
I didn't mean to imply that raising consciousness was the flaw, my bad. The flaw was the whole vanguard thing which Bakunin pointed out to Marx himself (they were friends) would lead to a "red bureaucracy." This is exactly what happened with Lenin who used a popular social movement to ride himself into power, then immediately dismantled the workers organizations because they threatened it., leading to the Soviet system.
Class as the focal point to any liberation movement was a huge achievement.
It's funny, I've been meaning to read Bakunin for years but never got to it, but I seem to have come to the same conclusion vis a vis the Party and its relationship with power.
On the same page but perhaps coming from different backgrounds as I came across Bakunin first and only recently have started in on Marx. :)
The whole managerial class hijacking popular social movements after they win concessions was best critiqued by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel who have an alternative model called Participatory Economics that is largely ignored by academia (a good sign) and is withstanding criticism. It looks very promising.
Lenin's first and foremost preoccupation was the triumph of the Revolution in Russia and the survival of a Socialist Russia in a world of imperial capitalist powers. I gather you have absolutely no idea how difficult that was to achieve.
There is a time to dream and a time to survive. Lenin wanted Russia to survive.
While Marx's ideas are worth discussing, i think it's odd that when we discuss capitalism's flaws, we never include the fact that Adam Smith's version of capitalism was grossly misinterpreted, but rather focus solely on Marx's response.
For example, Smith was convinced corporations were very harmful in the long run of the economy. Don't most of our economic problems stem from Wall Street and the abuse of fiat money?
I agree that Smith is very misunderstood, like Marx.
I think Smith's strength lies in his highlighting of the undeniable potential of freer trade. But he was not a scientist, economy is not an exact science; his criticism of mercantilism was very fine, except that, from the English Empire to modern-day China, nations have prospered by adopting some form of mercantilism while impinging the open market talk on others.
His was a simpler world (and England) too, much simpler than Marx's and ours.
It's funny how the anti-Semitic lunatics blame every political system on rich families like the Rothschilds except that system where they actually thrive:
Most people ignore the fact that Karl Marx was a remarkable economist. He is the one who so rightly stated that capitalism contains the seed of its own demise.
Agreed. It's a bit sad. Still, every so often a great video does come out. I really want to donate but like previous comments say, TheRealNews seeps opinion.
The video interviews of competent scholars are great, I can't find this stuff anywhere else.
Clearly the content they feature will broaden as the membership increase will. They said the economic crisis had an impact on them too, so the membership numbers will growth at a slower pace.
This is true, but the forces are work are beyond our control. My argument was that Socialism as a system is no way more materialistic then Capitalism. An indigenous, grass roots movement in a third world country, provided they removed outside influences, can't be compared to another who does allow external forces to exert influence.
Awesome! Five stars (*****)! I love Leo Panitch and Paul Jay and The RealNews! I can't wait for Part 2! Your name fits you well. You always cover the REAL news! Thanks.
The "free market" doesn't exist, and it can't exist in capitalism. Grow or die doesn't allow for it, and if you're big enough, we'll fix our prices to block everyone else. This textbook "1,000s of competing businesses" doesn't exist and it never will, it still amazes me to hear people tout that the federal reserve or 'democrats' are the heart of all problems, please pick up a book that didn't come from the mises institute.
the regeanesque, hayekian mom and pop capitalism is also utter bullshit.
from vanderbilt, carnegie, duipont to exxon and lockheed martin, american capitalism was built by the state.
and let's not forget american capitalism is built on three things: native genocide, african slavery and european poverty. this is all to say violence is at root of inequality. not the market or god
as if the nebulous 'government' was a leftist power fetish alone, absolving the mechanics of the bourgeois.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There is no perfect economic system! Life is full of ups & downs no matter what type of system a country has. The difference between socialism & capitalism is that in a capitalist country, YOU get to reap what YOU sow. In a socialist country, the govmnt decides who gets what & if you complain they arrest you. I'll take my capitalism any day thanks.
You have in mind a certain form of Marxism as it was practiced by a dictatorship. I would point out that a capitalist system is just as destructive under a dictatorship as a socialist system is.
Uhhhh... I believe the biggest socialist expieriement in history was also the biggest example of why it does'nt work. The USSR. They were not a dictatorship & you still got arrested for speaking your mind. Please do not try to sell me on socialism because I will never buy it. I am very proud to live in the greatest country on earth & glad it is a capitalist one. Thats how it became the greatest ya know? Despite our current administrations views.
There has never been a socialist state, nor has there ever been a free market one. Marxist style governments may use the term "socialism" because it appeals to common folk in the same way that western polyarchy's use the term "democracy" even though there is very little "social" about the former, and very little "democratic" of the latter.
Look its real simple. Do you want to keep what you & your fellow Americans work for or have the govmnt take all the nations wealth & redistribute it however they want? Maybee they will be as good as the Post office!!! Socialism sucks!!! No thank you!
Again you are using the term socialism incorrectly. Furthermore, I never advocated "socialism" but instead pointed out the perversion of terminology by both the US and the old USSR. These "either this or that" arguments are fallacious and binary, alternative models exist, one of which I already mentioned.
You are also making the false assumption that the people and the government are some how two separate entities. This is not the case, the people are the highest office in the country.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"The people are the highest office in the country"- I doubt anyone who lived in the USSR or currently in China would agree. The problem with Marx is just that. His philosophy does'nt reflect reality.
Congrats on knowing nothing about Obamas policies! Socialism is the direction he is taking the US in. PERIOD. It started with Bush & Pulson & continues with Obama & Geitner. Thats just plain fact. You have no argument.
LOL! Am curious do you even knowb the difference between Democratic socialism and socialism? Or between socialism and Communism or are you just peddling what Glenn Beck told you on Fox News?
Do explain oh enlightened one. I know I like freedom & capitalism. Why all of the sudden is there all these socialists like you comming out of the woodwork? This is America! We became a great nation with freedom & prospered with capitalism!!! Socialism has a terrible record & reputation. What is your deal? Don't you believe in the fruits of your own labor? Do you enjoy the govmnt sticking its nose in every aspect of your life? I want more freedom, not less. I want smaller govmnt not bigger.
America was most prosperous after the New Deal, WW2 and the social programs that developed in that post-war period. But about 30 years ago they started to deregulate the financial system and dismantled social programs and since then wages stagnated or declined, benefits have declined, and wealth has become even more concentrated at the top.
By your reasoning it should be the opposite, but it isn't. And again you are using both socialism and capitalism incorrectly.
Define your timeline. Because from what you've said. The new deal started over a decade before recovery and the war. If you are saying it takes three terms for it to take effect, you don't make a good case compared to 1922, where there was a crash and recovery in the same year. No intervention involved.
You can tell if economic policies are working at very longest 2-3 years. Often far less than a year will show you. How many more people are buying for renovations with the new tax credit?
Yes the new deal predates WW2, it was the beginning of prosperity for the US, which amplified after we inherited 50% of the world's wealth after the war, as well as the social reforms during the civil rights era. It continued into about the early to mid 70's when the reversal began and exploded during the Reagan years. If you look at the ecomomy over the last 30 or so years when the deregulation began, you will see the steady decline of wages and living standards.
It seems as if war contracting and arms/munitions manufacturing, plus providing resources to economies destroyed by WII lifted the economy from the Depression, rather than FDR's New Deal and WPA programs.
It was false prosperity. Artificial interest rates created by an unconstitutional Federal Reserve was & is the reason we have these boom & bust cycles. When prosperity is falsley created with a pen stroke & a printing press the prosperity is much greater than reality & sound economic practices would allow. And so is the depressions. Like the 1 we are teetering on now. Then they act like socialism is the answer. What a giant con job. And no I'm not using anything incorrectly.
False prosperity was in the 90's when banks gave loans away to anyone regardless of financial disposition. The prosperity of the 60's was not false, wages went up as did the living standard as a result of increased regulation of not only finance, but of corporations, like their ability to ship jobs elsewhere which according to your logic is a good thing. Socialism is not a system of government, it just means sociality or equal contribution, equal benefit. You are thinking of Leninism.
Man you liberals sure do like to assume things don't you? "Acording to my logic shipping jobs elsewhere is a good thing"??? When did I ever say that. Free trade is what killed manufacturing in this country. You like to put words in peoples mouths. And prosperity is & has been false since 1918 when the Federal Reserve act was signed by Woodrow Wilson. You can't create real wealth from a printing press. The 60's was merely the boom before the bust of the 70's. Like I said, boom & bust cycles.
I apoligize for the jobs thing, I thought I read that you supported free trade. Speaking of making assumptions, I am not a liberal. Prosperity just means people are living well and secure, and the 60's was the most prosperous time in our history (for common people). The bust happened because of deregulation, and it correlates with the decline in wages.
Well you kinda sound like a liberal. My bad then. The whole system is doomed to fail. And the longer we wait to correct the mistakes the worse the collapse will be. There is too much regulation! Actually its regulation of an already manipulated market. Nature should always govern the market. Not a small group of dominant men with their own self interests wiich is exactly what the Federal Reserve is.
All systems are doomed to fail for man by nature is parasitic.Regulation moderates this innate drive for greed.If your all about deregulation guess what?Hello more wage slavery and child exploitation because the third world best describes capitalism's finest.Look at history or perhaps study people for a short time you will see the selfishness permeate their characters.regulation forces moderation in a well balanced society where industry and wealth are reciprocal.
You dumb ass! Derugulation of an already manipulated market! The manipulation in the 1st place is the problem! Nothing will ever prevent greed from exploitation. Thats human nature. The fact that Marx & you think that can be changed by socialism is the biggest laugh of all. Like I said before, Socialism is a philosophy that is not reflective of reality.
I dont think socialism will work as I have noted via human nature toward exploitation; you will always have rich and poor! Now thats not to say that some of Marx ideas cannot be explored as some free market theories are explored here.Whats wrong with standards?Fire safety, personal safety and libraries are just some things that are based on socialistic beliefs. With that being said I am personally happy if the government minds its own business and is as small as possible
And calling me a dumb ass will do nothing in support of your argumnet or lack therof. your theory of a manipulated market from what I gather is regulation?Knowing that the crisis stemmed from inflated non capital derivitives via hedge funds destroys your argument!Indeed man will never stop smart people from cheating but guess what?No regulation leads to full out exploitation of the general population.the power of industry can easily crush a uprising of the people with loads of capital.get a clue
You gather wrong! The manipulation started way back in 1918 with the secret, unconstitutional creation of the Federal Reserve. The Fed is nothing more than a small group of dominant bankers who manipulate the economy & answer to noone. Their interests are their own! Not yours, not mine, & sure as hell not Americas. To really understand the current economic calamity you need to brush up on some economic history. You also need to read father back on my comments instead of making usumptions.
Puritan society was communal. Everything was shared. That is the origin of American society. Socialism has become an issue because the conservatives helped revive it by proselytizing over it. And most Americans who aren't educated in progressive movements equate democratic socialism, and market socialism with Marxist-Leninist communism. It is the result of many years of massive misinformation campaigns conducted by U.S. Gov't during the Cold War to shore up faith in hands-off capitalism.
worse still, the essential lie that stalinism was exactly communism, which the forces of good and light fought against, stunted the socialist movement in north america where it had (and perhaps will have) the greatest potential.
See thats BS! There are plenty of very educated people telling us the truth about Socialism, free markets, & economics in general. There is more info on these topics available to the general public than ever before. I guess anyone who disagrees with you & your progressive, socialist friends are just uneducated huh? Typical liberal attitude. Sorry but thats laughable.
god damn its good to read things written by an intelligent person i disagree with. Im sorry I just spent an afternoon explaining the difference between socialism, and communism to angry rednecks on craigslist political forums. BTW I saw ratdog last year at swanee in florida...the dead still have it!
Sweet! I hav'nt had a chance to see them since Jerry died but I did see Phil Lesh & Friends last year. The band he put together was incredible! Phil was on it as well! Best Box of Rain I ever heard!
"Don't you believe in the fruits of your own labor?"
Yes! But with capitalism these things are not possible for the working class. The fruits of my labor go to my boss. The owners get over $30,000 a week from my labor and I get not much more than $200 a week if that since they cut hours again. They get the fruits of my labor, I get crumbs.
Thats a weak, un-American way of looking at it. Instead of going out & making a better living for yourself by getting a better job or forming a union, you cry & hold out your hand to the govmnt to come make your life better for you. I take it you're not much of a rugged individualist? You sound like one of those people in hurricane Katrina holding a sign that says HELP ME!!! Help yourself weakling.
"Do you enjoy the govmnt sticking its nose in every aspect of your life?"
Of course not, that's why I'm an anarcho-syndicalist. I'm not advocating centrally planned state socialism.
"I want more freedom, not less. I want smaller govmnt not bigger."
Me too. Why must you be a capitalist to want these things?
And as for being weak, you can't know me from reading a few sentences. My union is working against the workers and I AM CHANGING that. I am pushing them. I am forcing them to work for us.
there are so much prejudices against communism these days. People automatically reject communism for few automatical reasons 1)It's totalitarian 2)Decrease incentives to work 3)Romantics 4)THEY'RE FUCKING COMMIES!
It's just laziness to not rethink communism and just accept what american economics tell us(they're usually pro capitalist)
neonaction 1 year ago
We don't have large scale free market capitalism any more than we have wide spread free forms of voluntary socialism. The systems we have are exploitive oligarachy which gets passed off as "capitalism" and forced redistribution of wealth (theft) that gets passed off as "socialism". Then these two systems get played against each other in public while the controllers laugh at how gullible people are.
lorax2013 2 years ago
No advertising... then at 8:00 there is a long commercial... lol
MrBook8 2 years ago
they're promoting for donations. They're talking about advertising from independent agencies and entrepreneurs who buy more than air time for their ads when they buy ads, they influence the content of programming through market pressure, ie don't advertise where they are criticized where opinions that threaten their way of doing business are presented generally like Exxon mobile not advertising on an environmentalism station unless it buys them reduced substance of that programming.
mikesbodypolitic 2 years ago
I can't stop laughing, them saying that Obama is free market capitalist, and assuming the last century in America was a free market. I haven't laughed so hard in years; thanks for that.
puremilkgenius 2 years ago
dont ever trust a prof from YORK haha... the system we had in place was not a result of what Hayek advocated. governments control interest rates and have monopolies on monetary systems... how is that capitalist?
sexdrugsRnR 2 years ago
Thats not the point, the point is that these people are blaming free market capitalism, when what we have had is corporatism & merchantiism and suppose that the answer is Marxism?
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
We haven't had free market for nearly 100 years. What are these people talking about. Marxism works as long as we are all robots. Of course who will want to work in the mine, Who will want to throw out the trash. Get real Free Market is the answer not corpratism/merchantilism nor socialism.
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
There have been economic cricis' for more than 100 years
mjalloxxxx 2 years ago
I'm glad I unsubscribed from this channel. Nothing but hard socialist collectivism propaganda comes from these people.
kmg501 2 years ago
Marx was right about calling for revolution. Maybe today we can't apply a Communist revolution in the style of Russia 1917, but the people should rise up and get rid of the fatcats screwing us over, including Obama.
AndrewMann552 2 years ago
I initially was under the impression that TRNN was undiased and non partisan. Paul's admission of Green Party progressive thinking during the part 2 interview with Thom
Hartman really turned me off. Is there any such a thing as a unbiased / non biased reporter left in the US any longer?
miamistorm 2 years ago
Offcourse he is relevant today and so are many of the rest of the old economist, the value of labour and that there is an inherent value of labour that Marx talks about is something that we on the left side of the scale are going to fight for infinitely.
olof790217 2 years ago
Climate change is a hoax. And why does nobody mention the Federal Reserve and fiat currency?
piscesgutt 2 years ago
The green movement has been co-opted by big business to make money. But you have to realize that even if you don't believe in climate change, the degradation of the natural world by capitalism whether it's through pollution, deforestation, extinction etc, effects the ability for human subsistence.
We can't live without clean air, water and food. But all of this is being destroyed by capital. So you don't have to be a green-bot to care about the environment.
That's the way I look at it.
tink037 2 years ago
Actually it is communism that has taken over the modern environmentalism and capitalism has, as far as communism is concerned, done far less damage to the environment. Eastern Europe was a wasteland under Communist government.
fowzie777 2 years ago
You're an idiot, end of story. You really think north Korea pollutes more than America?
IIThesaviour 2 years ago
If you're talking about China, it is not communist. China is an authoritarian state capitalist country.
Communism: classless society where the workers own the means of production.
Due to all the sweatshops, I highly doubt these people are in charge of their own workplaces. Are they voluntarily enslaves themselves and their own children to better their communities? Is everyone equal? NO. You don't know what communism is. There are no real examples of a true communist country.
tink037 2 years ago 5
Spain in 1936 was an example of a mixture of real communism and anarchism. If they had won the battle and kept their self organized society it would have looked much better and would have been a better example of an anarcho-communist society.
neolestat13 2 years ago
Yes that's true. I was only talking about the present; how many people think that certain countries are communist when they really aren't. I get tired of correcting them.
I love the Spanish civil war and I too wish they could have kept their anarcho-communist society. It's the most equal, just, and most fair type of human organization.
As an anarcho-syndicalist this is what I wish for the world. I'm actually reading Orwell's Homage to Catalonia right now.
tink037 2 years ago
That's aswome. I want to read that book sometime around. I learned about the spanish civil war a while back in high school but did not took a good interest until I read 'Anarchism: a very short introduction' by colin ward and 'Anarchism: from theory to practice' by Daniel Guerin. Both pretty short and easy to read. You should take a look at it, and everyone else reading this too. :)
neolestat13 2 years ago
Thanks! I've been meaning to read No Gods, No Masters by Guerin (its been on my shelf for a while now) but I never get to it. From Theory to Practice is on my wish list.
Another quick read is Anarcho-Syndicalism by Rudolf Rocker (less than 100 pages).
Anyone that leans toward socialism but with no-or-limited government instead of centrally planned state socialism should look into anarcho-syndicalism. Also participatory economics (parecon) is very interesting and thought provoking.
tink037 2 years ago 2
China, Soviet Russia Vietnam, North Korea are examples of communism Tink.
stevemtc1 2 years ago
No they aren't. China is an authoritarian state capitalist country. The workers don't own the means of production and people aren't equal.
Like I said to someone else hear, especially because of sweatshops it is obvious that the Chinese workers do not control and own the means of production. If they did they wouldn't force children to work in those awful factories for pennies.
There are no real examples of communist countries except for Spain in 1936.
(hey Steve ;)
tink037 2 years ago 2
stevemtc1, Soviet Russia was actually Capitalist in its structure.
Soviet Russia went against all the most basic tenets of socialism.
DaviidHill 2 years ago 9
I guess your right !!! They were just a lot of power hungry men who used the words for there better being once they got into power or on their way to power. Few who wanted and believed in Marx theory for goodness sake got over powered by the coruptors
stevemtc1 2 years ago
I agree. People are using the word capitalist to define what is actually corporatism or merchantilism which is the inverse or socialism & communism. They are two sides of the same coin. I urge people in this post to look up Austrian economics and fiat money with an open mind.
Peace!
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
Yes we can't live without clean air water & food, But its not capital that is destroying this it is corporatism & merchantilism. You can have sustainable capitalism but corporatism dosn't care about the environment.
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
What would be your first steps to turn corporatism into the type of capitalism that you would prefer?
tink037 2 years ago
Currently I am personally continuing my education, learning about Austrian Economics (which has been predicting the problems of our current Kaynsean system for decades). Ideally the answer would begin in people enforcing their elected officials to follow the constitution, greatly minimize federal govenment control allowing decisions to be made as local as possible.
Check out von misses institute for more info on Austrian economics.
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
Its very difficult because government and business are so close today. If we limited government (by that I'm assuming you mean deregulation on business) then I feel that it would only lead to more power on behalf of the huge corporations that run our lives.
I'm no fan of the state but because of where we are today I don't see how that could work
I agree that decisions should be made locally. It seems like we're both libertarian but you're capitalist libertarian and I'm socialist libertarian.
tink037 2 years ago
Actually when I say limit government I mean bring it back to a constitutional government. The governments role is to protect individual rights, property rights & contract law. Thats basically it. Youve got to understand that our country was setup as a Republic not a Democracy. While not perfect a Republic is meant to protect the individual where a democracy is mob rule, the majority declares what is right even if it hurts some individuals. -continued-
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
When government gets involved in regulation the unintended consequences often is that they protect the big corporations in that industry and make a barrier of entry to smaller entrepreneurial companies, thus eliminating the cost & quality benefit to the consumer. For example the FDA gives the pharmaceutical companies approval on many dangerous drugs, then when people get sick or die from these drugs the FDA generally sides with the drug companies while closing the door on alternatives
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
I think as a people have to demand true democracy so the leaders have no other choice but to listen to the people who voted for them. We have to make them listen somehow. I think we agree there
It just seems to me that the only reason we need a state at all is because of capitalism. As wealth started accumulating earlier in our history, the government grew with it. Capital pushed for modern American liberalism and a bigger state
How do you stop monopolies from taking over in a free market?
tink037 2 years ago 3
First I think that in a Republic as our country is supposed to be, our elected officials swore an oath to the constitution. We should hold them to this contract. If they breach it then they should be fired.
I believe that special interests pushed for bigger government through the administrative branch of government (i.e. FDA, IRS, DOA, FEMA...) It is these agencies that help create monopolies. In a free market with no governmental barriers to entry the market will regulate monopolies.
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
Having limited government is good, but private enterprise would eventually be the ruler of the people, dictating what to earn and where to work pretty much. Certain parts of china people work and live at factory dorms for slave wage. They are deprived from their freedom because the companies, corporations own them for their labor. That is the problem with libertarianism. It is about certain individuals to hold freedom rather than everyone deciding what should be done.
neolestat13 2 years ago
So what is your solution?
StorminNormin1977 2 years ago
Realistically we have to aim towards smaller countries like in europe (for example each US state becoming an independent state through very well protected state laws that would eventually get rid of federal gov)in order to know where the local taxes are spent. Income tax then would be used at the local level like counties (public trans, parks, rehabs, hospitals, infrastructure etc). For example California being its own gov, and protects the rights of the counties without taking any tax.
neolestat13 2 years ago
Smaller countries have a better chance to lean towards a form of more direct democracy instead of a representative.
neolestat13 2 years ago
This economic crisis however, is the product of neoliberalism starting with the Reagan Regime. Trickle down, deunionization, falling wages etc.
The ruling capitalist class that has held down the working class has been having one big drunken orgy with our money (from our hard work) for long enough. Neoliberalism is dead! Good riddance.
Now it's time to replace this oppressive system with something new. Something truly democratic, fair and of the people. It must come from below.
tink037 2 years ago
We all know the role of the real estate, the subprime, the financial sector but saying what caused these... gd luck
You may think it is because of middle-class stagering wages(when adjusted to inflation) but you can't pretend it actually has anything to do with this crisis. Deregulation has played a role in this crisis because it allowed financial engineering but apart of that...
I'd like to remind you the amount of wealth that this system did produce for everyone.
sentenced988 2 years ago
When wages fall workers have a harder time affording what they produce. They must buy everything on CREDIT. We start accumulating debt and can't pay our bills.
Our wages were cut and the CEOs got a pay raise (starting in the 80s and grew to 50X then to 250X the $ their workers make, sometimes MUCH more). That means that cut we got, went straight to the CEOs. They stole OUR money. When is it going to trickle down? We are redistributing the wealth to the top!
tink037 2 years ago 2
The system produced for the already wealthy and some middle class people. It did nothing for the lower class.
tink037 2 years ago
I look forward to hearing about the marxist perspective.
DeraJa 2 years ago
Marxism is mostly BS, but I can't help but feel if people are becoming more radical it can't be a bad thing.
DeraJa 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the real news is completely discredited now.
RoyalDemonforChrist 2 years ago
Care to elaborate? In what way does this dicredit the real news?
p.s. "RoyalDemonforChrist"...doesn't lend credit to anything you say.
tristanlaycock 2 years ago
it's called a dichotomy dipshit. the real news is leftist controlled opposition.
RoyalDemonforChrist 2 years ago
What's called a dichotomy?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
You're a dick to me!.......And a dick to everyone else! LOL!!!
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
GOD, That is so funny! ... omg, how jolly you are! :D You see, you took a part of a question I asked - this is great - and gave it your own little witty spin ... you took "dichotomy" and changed it to "dick to me" :D ... ROFL!!!
Boy, you're 37, really? Keep up that youthful spirit!
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago 3
I can't help it that you're easy to make fun of!
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
wow, you actually managed to outlame yourself with that response.
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago 2
here is reality,
Man is a creature that exploits others; its human nature people Now if you understand this you can see how we come to where we are today, people exploiting the system for selfish purposes with short term profits and long term problems postponed.
To say that the "free" market being deregulated will fix all is nonsense! lack of oversight coupled with reality makes a clear outcome! Some people really dont get it and RON PAUL is one of them want slavery?the free market will provide
zoticus1 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ron Paul is the only person who really seems to have the right answers. Maybee you should start listsning.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
Ron Paul is a wacky old man. If he ran things the police force would be ran by rich people.
mitchrix31 2 years ago 2
You obviously don't know a thing about Dr Paul. His ideas are growing in popularity every day. Why don't you go watch some of his videos?
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
Yes i understand his views on free markets and the federal reserve, and yes it is koooooooooooooooo koooooooooooo!
mitchrix31 2 years ago
Yea............sure you do.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
Under Ron Paul's ideology blackwater would be an improvement on the Army. Kooooooooooo Koooooooo!!!
mitchrix31 2 years ago
You just proved with 1 uniformed sentence that you are completely void of any facts about Ron Paul. Under Dr. Paul the military would only go to war after Congress has declared it. There would be no need for groups like blackwater. Sorry but your beat.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
So your saying Congress would stop all wars?hahahahahahahaha
mitchrix31 2 years ago
No moron, I'm saying that we would have a leader & a commander in chief that would respect the Constitution & we would'nt be going to war over lies like we are now. They don't even bother to declare war anymore. Congress has rendered itself useless! But that should please your socialist beliefs ay? Obama acting like a dictator (or Bush, pick 1) using his directives to send our troops to war! I don't think you realize exactly what you're saying.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
So Congress would prevent us from going to Wars on lies because they are good people. Uh i think your the moron if you believe that.
mitchrix31 2 years ago
Can you even freakin read? If thats your responce to my last comment then you're retarded. Stop wasting my time. Don't you have a WWE match to go watch or something?
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
responce? haha
mitchrix31 2 years ago
those that own the country, write the laws.
your fetish constitution is no different in this respect- it is the historical manifesto of the ruling class of the USA.
of course property is a god-given right on paper and in law if 9/10ths of society owns none.
the entire course of the american corporate and state body is based on violence, lies, dispossession and theft. what the israelis are doing now, the europeans did a century or two ago: state-building.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
The Constitution is just about the greatest thing ever written & the men who wrote it & defend it are the best of the best. PERIOD. And if it were'nt for America & Americans you Canadians would be French. Now go stick that in your mukluks.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago 2
hi! wat is the "contitution"? i'm chinese and i don't write Engrish good. is it a paper? toilet paper or something else? men in china must know what a con...ti....tu...tion is
nartin86 2 years ago
Actually its constitution! But in your case its constitutional! On your dinner plate! LOL!!!
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
"There would be no need for groups like blackwater."
Are you sure? Isn't the free market most effective at utilizing resources, and wouldn't it then also be most desirable to have the free market take case of defense contracts?
(Please stop referring to RP as "Dr. Paul", not only does the appeal to authority seem ineffective here for me, it is also just really dumb and irrelevant... )
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Who cares if liberal idiots like you don't like him or the fact that he is a doctor. And if Dr. Paul decided to use an outfit like Blackwater I can assure you it would be in a manner that would be in line with the Constitution. Face it! Your comments are irrelevant. Change your name!
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
Comment removed
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
really?
your so called "dr" believes in total deregulation of all markets.What do you thing will rise?Private armies.Congress has not declared war in forever because they are all lames, the president is a lame and the controllers are big global conglomerates with interests directly in American policy.Look who is getting paid from the turmoil and you will find the criminal!When will the people realize that capitalism unhinged has eroded the influence of the people to elect candidates worth shit
zoticus1 2 years ago
what you call "capitalism unhinged" is actually fascism, disguised as "democracy". in a nation of laws (a republic, our guaranteed form of government), and not of men - the law views all people (government or private, corporate executives, rich, poor, etc.) as equals. the government cannot be used to lift some and oppress others... only in collectivism (including a so-called "democracy") can this happen. having congress regulate in corporations favor is NOT capitalism.
PwndByTheFed 2 years ago 2
Its no different than what we had before 1913! What the hell are you on? Private armies??? What kind of armies? Your a wackadoodle! Do some research about Dr. Ron Paul before you make foolish assumptions.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
The effect would be the same if the money was spent on infrastructure (many examples here and abroad) like high speed railways, new bridges, parks etc. But wealthy people do not benefit nearly as much from that sort of spending.
marcus3379 2 years ago
Bbrraps! York U, represent.
NwZ2 2 years ago
I also see little evidence that the world governments are actually calling for capitalism in any sort of serious way. Chrony capitalism where only rich friends can make money sure. Or paying name homeage to it, fine. But actually promoting capitalism? There is no such thing as printing money to stimulate the economy in capitalism. Keynesianism sure. Capitalism doesnt know anything about this however. In fact, it wouldn't ever make sense.
sirellyn 2 years ago
I feel it's ironic both Marx and Fiscal Conservatives are advocating letting small groups come together and sort things out on their own. Giving them at least the freedom to do that. And although I'd never choose Marx's ways, the fact that the current administration is doing the opposite of what two polar opposite sides would be calling for is quite telling.
sirellyn 2 years ago
yawn.. this is why real news lags other channels. they report similar to keith olbermann... they take 10 minutes to say what others can say in 2.
DennyMclain2008 2 years ago
While I do like olbermann, and I like indepth reporting with lots of information, I do have to agree with you here. They do tend to beat their points into oblivion over the course of a much longer period of time than they really need to.
Etimos 2 years ago
great video.
Marx knew it was coming. The cap and trade system is just pathetic
alexkennedy92 2 years ago 2
Comment removed
mak2675 2 years ago
How would you, an uncivilized fascist, understand what us civilized people need?
Propagandhi900 2 years ago 3
Comment removed
mak2675 2 years ago
astute that you should add the last one.
compare the drugs that stupify the civilized to entheogens like ayahuasca, psilocybin or even coca used by the people beyond "civilization"/class society.
cocaine, meth, speed and even coffee make the masses of slaves too dull or too busy to think about their realities.
the other drugs make you aware of who you really are.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
Long live Marx & Bakunin! All power to the working class. Overthrow the nation-state system and replace corporations with co-ops.
Xenu 2 years ago 4
im down.
there's no one like those bearded cats.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
I agree. Good post.
bootleg42 2 years ago
Scandinavian social democracy can certainly improve the lives of the citizens of its countries, but it is still plugged in to the global capitalist economy and as such still dependent upon the continued exploitation of the third world
psionicman 2 years ago
Someone's been watching too much Expelled and Jones lately.
studio7manga 2 years ago
Very interesting segment. I'm looking forward to the next in the series!
studio7manga 2 years ago 2
Oh, ok.
There should be conspiracy categories. Its just way too confusing sometimes. Proposal:
Cat. 1: 911 was an inside job.
Cat. 2: 911 = inside job planned and executed by the NWO.
Cat. 3: 911 = inside job, NWO leaders, AND world bankers have been ruling the world forever, national socialism, socialism, communism = All them.
Cat.4: Zionist have always been ruling this planet.
Cat.5: Giant shapshifting lizards have created and are ruling all societies of this planet.
You are Cat 4, right?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago 3
lol
marcus3379 2 years ago
American Communism. Government became a bank owner with bank bailouts. It is now owns a large stake in the auto giant GM, they are secretly working on a bill to rummage through ALL your electronic devices without your consent. They want to take over healthcare, and agribuisness. they already own your retirement through social security
sugarbliss3 2 years ago
You really should look up the definition of communism. It would greatly improve your reasoning.
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago 6
Of course like every fundamentalist believer you "know" the truth. Only you can see the truth because everyone else is confused by the mass media's propaganda machine ... How is your Alex Jones' show different from any kind of propaganda?
0800RelevantElephant 2 years ago
Come on, you can't imagine why they ran it? Because it is totally non-threatening, too far disconnected to command any adjustment in system mythology... Canned stuff from a period where it meant something. It may acquire meaning again in some future but it's out of it in the present. That's why they can run it.
DenisRancourt 2 years ago
Nothing like starting off a Monday with Marxist propaganda.
MooseOfReason 2 years ago
Don't like it, don't watch it.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
rather than capitalist propaganda?
soccerbum259 2 years ago 3
How about unbiased journalism? Watch Real News' introductory video:
watch?v=rAXtLgMedyI
"Independent, uncompromising video journalism."
If they fail to deliver that, it's right for me to question it.
MooseOfReason 2 years ago
The Real News isn't unbiased. It is very left-wing. It's "Real" in that it covers things that the mainstream media ignores, but its definitely biased (have you ever seen anyone interviewed that argues against their socialist viewpoints? Its a good channel for sure, but its not unbiased.
jkerouac02 2 years ago
Having a point of view means deciding what is more and less important, and stressing one angle over all others.
The Real News has a left-wing point of view, bias, whatever you choose to call it, and I for one am glad it does.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Well I didn't said anything about it being good or bad. I just replied to someone who said it was an unbiased news source (although after checking out his channel, I think he was being sarcastic anyways). I just don't like it when biased news pretends to be neutral- think Fox News, with their frequent claims of being "fair and balanced", and retards actually believing it. Although to Real News' credit, I don't know that I've ever seen truly unbiased coverage of politics.
jkerouac02 2 years ago
The Real News is not submissive to the propaganda of the corporations. You see so much McCarthyism on the corporate media, that when you see a network that actually interviews competent scholars, you feel something is missing and that there is a "left-wing bias".
bonobo80 2 years ago
They state pretty clearly that they serve the interest of the public, as they are funded by the public, and not by "corporations, government or advertisement".
bonobo80 2 years ago
People fear Marxism because of the crazy Leninist branch and all its byproducts like relativism, postmodernism, snobby loud-mouthed celebrity talking heads etc.
However, Marx did make a huge contribution even if his approach was flawed--raising class consciousness on a massive scale. The Leninist jerks came later.
marcus3379 2 years ago
I don't see where the flaw is in raising class consciousness; you may not like it, but there's nothing inherently wrong about it.
By the way, Lenin was an incredibly intelligent and driven individual who loved his country, as you will know if you ever pick up one of his essays. It's easy for us to point fingers and say where he got it wrong, we have the privilege of hindsight...
And finally, I don't like the postmodernist garbage anymore than you do. :)
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
I didn't mean to imply that raising consciousness was the flaw, my bad. The flaw was the whole vanguard thing which Bakunin pointed out to Marx himself (they were friends) would lead to a "red bureaucracy." This is exactly what happened with Lenin who used a popular social movement to ride himself into power, then immediately dismantled the workers organizations because they threatened it., leading to the Soviet system.
Class as the focal point to any liberation movement was a huge achievement.
marcus3379 2 years ago
We're on the same page, then.
It's funny, I've been meaning to read Bakunin for years but never got to it, but I seem to have come to the same conclusion vis a vis the Party and its relationship with power.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
On the same page but perhaps coming from different backgrounds as I came across Bakunin first and only recently have started in on Marx. :)
The whole managerial class hijacking popular social movements after they win concessions was best critiqued by Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel who have an alternative model called Participatory Economics that is largely ignored by academia (a good sign) and is withstanding criticism. It looks very promising.
marcus3379 2 years ago
Thank you for getting this correct. REally.
soccerbum259 2 years ago
Lenin was against the council communists, and against to giving actual power to the workers' councils.
This says a thing or two on how much he cared about the interests of the people and how much about his own power.
bonobo80 2 years ago
Lenin's first and foremost preoccupation was the triumph of the Revolution in Russia and the survival of a Socialist Russia in a world of imperial capitalist powers. I gather you have absolutely no idea how difficult that was to achieve.
There is a time to dream and a time to survive. Lenin wanted Russia to survive.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Russia wasnt socialist back then, nobody dared to call it like that back then.
SKClouD 2 years ago
Marx diagnosis was correct, his perscription was flawed.
killerbandit 2 years ago 2
Marx still gives little right-wingers nightmares for the simple reason that he got capitalism down to a T.
Remember kids, you can stab him with your steely knives, but you can't kill the beast. ;-)
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago 5
While Marx's ideas are worth discussing, i think it's odd that when we discuss capitalism's flaws, we never include the fact that Adam Smith's version of capitalism was grossly misinterpreted, but rather focus solely on Marx's response.
For example, Smith was convinced corporations were very harmful in the long run of the economy. Don't most of our economic problems stem from Wall Street and the abuse of fiat money?
frostwolf1 2 years ago
I agree that Smith is very misunderstood, like Marx.
I think Smith's strength lies in his highlighting of the undeniable potential of freer trade. But he was not a scientist, economy is not an exact science; his criticism of mercantilism was very fine, except that, from the English Empire to modern-day China, nations have prospered by adopting some form of mercantilism while impinging the open market talk on others.
His was a simpler world (and England) too, much simpler than Marx's and ours.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
forcing not impinging
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
It's funny how the anti-Semitic lunatics blame every political system on rich families like the Rothschilds except that system where they actually thrive:
Capitalism.
MarquisdeBarrabas 2 years ago
Most people ignore the fact that Karl Marx was a remarkable economist. He is the one who so rightly stated that capitalism contains the seed of its own demise.
Vierotchka 2 years ago
The guy looks to be growing more and more tired day by day...
He might die if we don't make significant donation.
nurbsenvi 2 years ago
Ok, I don't like that you said that, but I have to say I did chuckle ;)
SwobyJ 2 years ago
Seriously though
I like this network and I have observed his initial spirit diminishing noticeably.
nurbsenvi 2 years ago
Agreed. It's a bit sad. Still, every so often a great video does come out. I really want to donate but like previous comments say, TheRealNews seeps opinion.
SwobyJ 2 years ago
The video interviews of competent scholars are great, I can't find this stuff anywhere else.
Clearly the content they feature will broaden as the membership increase will. They said the economic crisis had an impact on them too, so the membership numbers will growth at a slower pace.
bonobo80 2 years ago
Marx fails
Bakunin is much better
Christ724 2 years ago
This is true, but the forces are work are beyond our control. My argument was that Socialism as a system is no way more materialistic then Capitalism. An indigenous, grass roots movement in a third world country, provided they removed outside influences, can't be compared to another who does allow external forces to exert influence.
bulldogger 2 years ago
They funded Communism, not a Socialist idea, ideas aren't tangible. A Socialist state isn't materialistic in and of itself, a Capitalist state is.
bulldogger 2 years ago
Awesome! Five stars (*****)! I love Leo Panitch and Paul Jay and The RealNews! I can't wait for Part 2! Your name fits you well. You always cover the REAL news! Thanks.
JixMa 2 years ago 4
The "free market" doesn't exist, and it can't exist in capitalism. Grow or die doesn't allow for it, and if you're big enough, we'll fix our prices to block everyone else. This textbook "1,000s of competing businesses" doesn't exist and it never will, it still amazes me to hear people tout that the federal reserve or 'democrats' are the heart of all problems, please pick up a book that didn't come from the mises institute.
abortabraham 2 years ago 5
the regeanesque, hayekian mom and pop capitalism is also utter bullshit.
from vanderbilt, carnegie, duipont to exxon and lockheed martin, american capitalism was built by the state.
and let's not forget american capitalism is built on three things: native genocide, african slavery and european poverty. this is all to say violence is at root of inequality. not the market or god
as if the nebulous 'government' was a leftist power fetish alone, absolving the mechanics of the bourgeois.
mikezephyr 2 years ago 5
ps, your user name is brilliant.
that mofo is sickening.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
Your a fool if you believe a society like the US is less materialistic then a society like Boliva.
bulldogger 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There is no perfect economic system! Life is full of ups & downs no matter what type of system a country has. The difference between socialism & capitalism is that in a capitalist country, YOU get to reap what YOU sow. In a socialist country, the govmnt decides who gets what & if you complain they arrest you. I'll take my capitalism any day thanks.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
You have in mind a certain form of Marxism as it was practiced by a dictatorship. I would point out that a capitalist system is just as destructive under a dictatorship as a socialist system is.
killerbandit 2 years ago 5
Uhhhh... I believe the biggest socialist expieriement in history was also the biggest example of why it does'nt work. The USSR. They were not a dictatorship & you still got arrested for speaking your mind. Please do not try to sell me on socialism because I will never buy it. I am very proud to live in the greatest country on earth & glad it is a capitalist one. Thats how it became the greatest ya know? Despite our current administrations views.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
There has never been a socialist state, nor has there ever been a free market one. Marxist style governments may use the term "socialism" because it appeals to common folk in the same way that western polyarchy's use the term "democracy" even though there is very little "social" about the former, and very little "democratic" of the latter.
marcus3379 2 years ago
Look its real simple. Do you want to keep what you & your fellow Americans work for or have the govmnt take all the nations wealth & redistribute it however they want? Maybee they will be as good as the Post office!!! Socialism sucks!!! No thank you!
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
Again you are using the term socialism incorrectly. Furthermore, I never advocated "socialism" but instead pointed out the perversion of terminology by both the US and the old USSR. These "either this or that" arguments are fallacious and binary, alternative models exist, one of which I already mentioned.
marcus3379 2 years ago 3
You are also making the false assumption that the people and the government are some how two separate entities. This is not the case, the people are the highest office in the country.
studio7manga 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"The people are the highest office in the country"- I doubt anyone who lived in the USSR or currently in China would agree. The problem with Marx is just that. His philosophy does'nt reflect reality.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
His policy doesn't reflect China or the USSR.
Congrats on knowing nothing about Marxism. I assume you think Obama is the love child of Marx and Engels?
Propagandhi900 2 years ago
Congrats on knowing nothing about Obamas policies! Socialism is the direction he is taking the US in. PERIOD. It started with Bush & Pulson & continues with Obama & Geitner. Thats just plain fact. You have no argument.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
LOL! Am curious do you even knowb the difference between Democratic socialism and socialism? Or between socialism and Communism or are you just peddling what Glenn Beck told you on Fox News?
AmNotHere911 2 years ago 4
Do explain oh enlightened one. I know I like freedom & capitalism. Why all of the sudden is there all these socialists like you comming out of the woodwork? This is America! We became a great nation with freedom & prospered with capitalism!!! Socialism has a terrible record & reputation. What is your deal? Don't you believe in the fruits of your own labor? Do you enjoy the govmnt sticking its nose in every aspect of your life? I want more freedom, not less. I want smaller govmnt not bigger.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
America was most prosperous after the New Deal, WW2 and the social programs that developed in that post-war period. But about 30 years ago they started to deregulate the financial system and dismantled social programs and since then wages stagnated or declined, benefits have declined, and wealth has become even more concentrated at the top.
By your reasoning it should be the opposite, but it isn't. And again you are using both socialism and capitalism incorrectly.
marcus3379 2 years ago
Define your timeline. Because from what you've said. The new deal started over a decade before recovery and the war. If you are saying it takes three terms for it to take effect, you don't make a good case compared to 1922, where there was a crash and recovery in the same year. No intervention involved.
You can tell if economic policies are working at very longest 2-3 years. Often far less than a year will show you. How many more people are buying for renovations with the new tax credit?
sirellyn 2 years ago
Yes the new deal predates WW2, it was the beginning of prosperity for the US, which amplified after we inherited 50% of the world's wealth after the war, as well as the social reforms during the civil rights era. It continued into about the early to mid 70's when the reversal began and exploded during the Reagan years. If you look at the ecomomy over the last 30 or so years when the deregulation began, you will see the steady decline of wages and living standards.
marcus3379 2 years ago
It seems as if war contracting and arms/munitions manufacturing, plus providing resources to economies destroyed by WII lifted the economy from the Depression, rather than FDR's New Deal and WPA programs.
Sociocognitivism 2 years ago
It was false prosperity. Artificial interest rates created by an unconstitutional Federal Reserve was & is the reason we have these boom & bust cycles. When prosperity is falsley created with a pen stroke & a printing press the prosperity is much greater than reality & sound economic practices would allow. And so is the depressions. Like the 1 we are teetering on now. Then they act like socialism is the answer. What a giant con job. And no I'm not using anything incorrectly.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
False prosperity was in the 90's when banks gave loans away to anyone regardless of financial disposition. The prosperity of the 60's was not false, wages went up as did the living standard as a result of increased regulation of not only finance, but of corporations, like their ability to ship jobs elsewhere which according to your logic is a good thing. Socialism is not a system of government, it just means sociality or equal contribution, equal benefit. You are thinking of Leninism.
marcus3379 2 years ago
Man you liberals sure do like to assume things don't you? "Acording to my logic shipping jobs elsewhere is a good thing"??? When did I ever say that. Free trade is what killed manufacturing in this country. You like to put words in peoples mouths. And prosperity is & has been false since 1918 when the Federal Reserve act was signed by Woodrow Wilson. You can't create real wealth from a printing press. The 60's was merely the boom before the bust of the 70's. Like I said, boom & bust cycles.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
I apoligize for the jobs thing, I thought I read that you supported free trade. Speaking of making assumptions, I am not a liberal. Prosperity just means people are living well and secure, and the 60's was the most prosperous time in our history (for common people). The bust happened because of deregulation, and it correlates with the decline in wages.
marcus3379 2 years ago
Well you kinda sound like a liberal. My bad then. The whole system is doomed to fail. And the longer we wait to correct the mistakes the worse the collapse will be. There is too much regulation! Actually its regulation of an already manipulated market. Nature should always govern the market. Not a small group of dominant men with their own self interests wiich is exactly what the Federal Reserve is.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
You kind of sound like a moron,
All systems are doomed to fail for man by nature is parasitic.Regulation moderates this innate drive for greed.If your all about deregulation guess what?Hello more wage slavery and child exploitation because the third world best describes capitalism's finest.Look at history or perhaps study people for a short time you will see the selfishness permeate their characters.regulation forces moderation in a well balanced society where industry and wealth are reciprocal.
zoticus1 2 years ago
You dumb ass! Derugulation of an already manipulated market! The manipulation in the 1st place is the problem! Nothing will ever prevent greed from exploitation. Thats human nature. The fact that Marx & you think that can be changed by socialism is the biggest laugh of all. Like I said before, Socialism is a philosophy that is not reflective of reality.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
I dont think socialism will work as I have noted via human nature toward exploitation; you will always have rich and poor! Now thats not to say that some of Marx ideas cannot be explored as some free market theories are explored here.Whats wrong with standards?Fire safety, personal safety and libraries are just some things that are based on socialistic beliefs. With that being said I am personally happy if the government minds its own business and is as small as possible
zoticus1 2 years ago
And calling me a dumb ass will do nothing in support of your argumnet or lack therof. your theory of a manipulated market from what I gather is regulation?Knowing that the crisis stemmed from inflated non capital derivitives via hedge funds destroys your argument!Indeed man will never stop smart people from cheating but guess what?No regulation leads to full out exploitation of the general population.the power of industry can easily crush a uprising of the people with loads of capital.get a clue
zoticus1 2 years ago
You gather wrong! The manipulation started way back in 1918 with the secret, unconstitutional creation of the Federal Reserve. The Fed is nothing more than a small group of dominant bankers who manipulate the economy & answer to noone. Their interests are their own! Not yours, not mine, & sure as hell not Americas. To really understand the current economic calamity you need to brush up on some economic history. You also need to read father back on my comments instead of making usumptions.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
Puritan society was communal. Everything was shared. That is the origin of American society. Socialism has become an issue because the conservatives helped revive it by proselytizing over it. And most Americans who aren't educated in progressive movements equate democratic socialism, and market socialism with Marxist-Leninist communism. It is the result of many years of massive misinformation campaigns conducted by U.S. Gov't during the Cold War to shore up faith in hands-off capitalism.
Sociocognitivism 2 years ago
word.
worse still, the essential lie that stalinism was exactly communism, which the forces of good and light fought against, stunted the socialist movement in north america where it had (and perhaps will have) the greatest potential.
mikezephyr 2 years ago
See thats BS! There are plenty of very educated people telling us the truth about Socialism, free markets, & economics in general. There is more info on these topics available to the general public than ever before. I guess anyone who disagrees with you & your progressive, socialist friends are just uneducated huh? Typical liberal attitude. Sorry but thats laughable.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
god damn its good to read things written by an intelligent person i disagree with. Im sorry I just spent an afternoon explaining the difference between socialism, and communism to angry rednecks on craigslist political forums. BTW I saw ratdog last year at swanee in florida...the dead still have it!
Nilopollis 2 years ago
Sweet! I hav'nt had a chance to see them since Jerry died but I did see Phil Lesh & Friends last year. The band he put together was incredible! Phil was on it as well! Best Box of Rain I ever heard!
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
"Don't you believe in the fruits of your own labor?"
Yes! But with capitalism these things are not possible for the working class. The fruits of my labor go to my boss. The owners get over $30,000 a week from my labor and I get not much more than $200 a week if that since they cut hours again. They get the fruits of my labor, I get crumbs.
tink037 2 years ago
Thats a weak, un-American way of looking at it. Instead of going out & making a better living for yourself by getting a better job or forming a union, you cry & hold out your hand to the govmnt to come make your life better for you. I take it you're not much of a rugged individualist? You sound like one of those people in hurricane Katrina holding a sign that says HELP ME!!! Help yourself weakling.
Dedhedted71 2 years ago
"Do you enjoy the govmnt sticking its nose in every aspect of your life?"
Of course not, that's why I'm an anarcho-syndicalist. I'm not advocating centrally planned state socialism.
"I want more freedom, not less. I want smaller govmnt not bigger."
Me too. Why must you be a capitalist to want these things?
And as for being weak, you can't know me from reading a few sentences. My union is working against the workers and I AM CHANGING that. I am pushing them. I am forcing them to work for us.
tink037 2 years ago 2
What do you suggest other than capitalism? If you indeed want smaller govmnt & less intrusion in our lives then what system do you like?
Dedhedted71 2 years ago