I am a capitalist and I don't own a yacht so you can take your own advice there. I run a business and provide employment to lower socioeconomic people. Hard work provides average incomes for them. I am the last to be paid as I pay myself from NET profit. People get jealous and wish they could share my profit but are unwilling in doing so to share my losses and liabilities. What services do you provide to people that increase their standard of living without taking it away from someone else?
One other side note: Marxism isn't "scientific" in any manner or form. Marxists appear to be impervious to empirical evidence that does not support their ideology - a typical characteristic of religion, not science. It is Machiavelli, not Marx, who is the first "modern" theorist to apply scientific analysis to political questions (see Burnham, "New Machiavellians"). Marxism is more like a secular religion that argues for a feudal state run by Marxists.
So James? Why Marxism? Why not Socialism? Why not Communism? I would love you to do a video to differentiate the three and where you fall into those categories -but I can dream I suppose :)
@GrowthSpiral Ha! Well, I appreciate the comment. After seeing the kind of response I had gotten to these two videos I barely have the stomach to speak on the subject again. Drop me a PM and I'd be glad to answer in private.
@DasAmericanAtheist If I decide to work for someone, and a third person agrees to provide the money for our enterprise in consideration of an agreed upon cut, Marxists claim they have the right to kill the investor, punish my boss, steal our proceeds and enslave me. My labor becomes the property of the "needy" - as defined by Marxists, which invariably ends up being themselves and their close relations and friends.
The appeal of Marx is that it morally justifies murder, theft and slavery.
Capitalism and its swinish profiteers will be brought down in the cleansing
glory of red terror. The pains of the oppressor will be the process towards our long denied pleasures. People over profits and proles over pigs! The new man of the Socialist Republic is already opening his joyless, shark-like eyes. Tonight we dine on Kulaks!
The problem you are avoiding is the idea that people will work without incentive is logically flawed. With no incentive to do well, one will eventually stat to slack in his performance, but because he has been declared entitled to his share, he can get away with it. This seeps all drive to do well from a man and the only choices while maintaining that system, are coercion, or let the productivity fall.
Are you really a Marxist? My initial understanding was you were merely interested in Marx as a philosopher and just wanted to run your interpretation of classical Marxism past the philosophically aware. I used to actually be a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, DasAmericanAtheist, and I have become disillusioned with those ideas. I am more of anarchist now but I'm trying to create my own philosophy. I strongly disagree with Marx's conclusions and ideology but I still value his observations of capitalism.
I'm curious your thoughts on the benefits of capitalism, e.g. encouragement of competition to produce more quality product. Would we have, for instance, state of the art health care facilities if there weren't profit to be had?
That aside, the idea of fulfilling need needn't be gov't induced. Isn't that kind of what Bon Secours, Red Cross and like organizations seek to acheive on at least some level? Why wait for some political dictum to begin living ideals? (I ask of myself as well...)
The ideal of communism has always seemed to me incredibly Biblically based, particularly the New Testament. It beats me that it's often the Christians fighting communism tooth and nail, not wanting to coerce giving, because then it's not "cheerful giving" - and yet, they'd just as soon crucify a homosexual. "That's fine. You can be gay. But I'm not helping you get equal rights." If there is a God, we're all going to hell - that's my call.
That capitalism is atrocious is apparent to me, but I still have trouble gathering from your videos what it is that makes this Marxist or post-Marxist model so compelling in your view, especially, in my case, as opposed to libertarian socialism alias social anarchism.
Do you consider the problem of calculation in a socialist commonwealth to be one of those valid criticisms? If not why, I'd love to see you put that brain to the task. Marxist.org doesn't touch upon the topic
There is also the Konkin/Carson version of class analysis which is official power vrs. powerless.
You say capitalism the ideal has never existed, and that capitalism necessarily verges on depression every few years? Are you sure it's not the holdovers from previous systems that cause it?
Labor is important because it makes one monetary economy instead of several. Labor can be substituted for many other types of labor, and every method of production requires some sort of labor. Thus the reason for one price system rather than several or more.
As for profit and labor, entrepreneurial profit (sourced from allocating resources to suit the consumers in a better way) drives up the price of the factors of production, especially when it comes to labor.
When a company outsources they use a relative surplus of labor in one region, increasing wages in that region, and reducing costs of their products in all others. In reality there is only one economy, those who are laid off are free to find more productive (socially valued) endeavors.
If capitalists are uncaring in their buying and selling, it is because consumers are likewise uncaring in their purchases. Charity cannot be given in agency of production, but only in the agency of consumption.
plz give me the last five minutes of my life back, cus thats all i watched and u made no point, about seems like ur defending your point before even telling it lol so most likely its full of shit :) have a nice day
This was very fascinating to watch and you made an interest for reading up on these areas (political theory and philosophy) spark up for me. Oh and look at that, didn't even have to ask for further reading material. Thanks!
It's very simple to determine which system is better regardless of your opinions and ideologies.
All you have to do is compare how many people are trying to get into a nation as opposed to how many are trying to get out. North Korea, Cuba, and all other of your socialist "worker's paradise" nations don't seem to have an illegal immigration problem and America does so there's your answer.
This guy is a pro bullshitter. Great speaking abilities, good rhythm changes, easy to follow. The trouble is that his ideas are entirely theoretical. Everything he says is not proven by reality. He is an artist of ideals. A master of seeing things as they COULD happen. He ignores what HAS happened. Marxism has proven time and again to be failure in a nutshell. Nothing good can come of it. Capitalism, however, has proven to match reality. With capitalism, you earn your value to others
@Penguillacious so you would ignore the countless human beings that are required to be sacrificed to the system in order for capitalism to "work" for a select few. Capitalism does not allow for the middle class or the lower class to move to the upper class, the top 2% of our country has a vested interest in keeping the rest of the country under the impression that they can rise to the top so that they do not rebel against their corporate overlords.
@ObservantObserver Do you think you're a more or less moral individual than somebody who went through all the shit to be elected to have extreme power over you? If you say more, why wouldn't you want to be the one deciding who the money goes to instead of a group of power hungry individuals whose goal is simply to reattain that power in the next election? With capitalism, you speak and vote with your money. The more you get away from capitalism, the more you hand power over to a completely
@ObservantObserver unregulated body (the gov't). A company always has to compete with another company to serve YOUR interests because YOU have the money. The more you give money to the government, the more you mitigate your vote. The government has no competition so it does NOT have to compete with ANYTHING to serve YOU. Deciding upon a system is not about eliminating all evil, it's about minimizing it. Ultimately, real people care more about other real people than a government figure ever
@ObservantObserver will. This is largely because a government figure does not HAVE to in order to get what he/she wants. In fact, it is usually not in a government individual's interest to think about you at all!
@ObservantObserver Don't hate corporate America. Hate the government for making so many bullshit rules and placing their hands in so many economic situations that it's difficult for a small company, no matter how well they server their customers' needs, to succeed. You and I hate the same end results; I just think you're incorrectly placing the blame.
@ObservantObserver "Capitalism does not allow for the middle class or the lower class to move to the upper class, "
You do realize that 2/3rds of billionaires started from scratch and are self made right? Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Ralph Lauren, James Cayne, and MANY others started from meager beginnings. Put down your rhetoric and join the real world. What you are saying is just demonstrably false.
Great video man!!! I'm so glad that you made this video. Many people fail to see that Marx was spot on as far as his analysis of capitalism is concerned. I would just like to add that Marx was an immoralist in opposition to the morality of his day. Corporations, and banks threaten our very livelyhood with the privatizations that go on when crisis emerge. This has happened time and time again in the third world countries and now we're seeing it in Europe and the United States.
Who are 'they'? We do not have central planners in a free market capitalistic society. Do you mean 'they' as the consumer decides who can achieve? Well shouldn't it be that way anyways? Shouldn't your success be based off of the consumers who freely pays for the goods/services you provide? Isn't it logical that free market rewards those who provide a service that people want, as opposed to rewarding a service that people don't?
"Socialism is nonsense. Its been proven to increase poverty and suffering."
Here:
"every socialist experiment of any significance in the 20th century has either been crushed, overthrown, or invaded, perverted, subverted, or destabilized by the U.S. Not one socialist government or movement ... was permitted to rise or fall on its own merits; not one was left secure enough to drop its guard against the all-powerful enemy abroad & freely & fully relax control at home." - William Blum
@SeaWolfe59 "if you want socialism, go live elsewhere"
I am an American. And I will work to make America a better place through socialism. You do not tell me where or how to live, it is for me to decide. It is not for you to decide.
You are a fascist. Only fascists tell others what they should or should not do, or where they should or should not live.
I loathe right-wingers with every molecule of my being. You will be loathed unendingly until I die, and by others after I die.
Youre right. You can live here if you want. But most people DONT want socialism here. Think about it. Who are you to vote for people that will take portions of what I EARN and give it to someone else? My property is MY property when it comes to this idea of "redistribution". I am a free man and it is MY right tol decide what charity my money goes to! Its NOT your place to decide for me. People like you do NOT know better how to use my resources...the PROPERTY that I earned!
" My property is MY property when it comes to this idea of "redistribution"."
Socialism is not about your personal property; socialism is about the control of resources on which society depends for its survival: Should those resources be used to profit the few? Or should they be used for the benefit of all? That s the basic idea behind socialism.
You're buying the standard line that's be propagated by the right wing since 1918, in the service of keeping them in power.
Ive had my say and I stand by it. I believe in hard work and incentive. Socialism is an abject failure in that regard.
I notice you use the word "resources". I call those resources earned property. And that property includes the money that I earn. Lets face it, youre talking about control of money. Its always about money.
I also notice you use the word "control". I think you mean to say "government control". And THAT level of control is in opposition to individual freedom.
"I notice you use the word "resources". I call those resources earned property. And that property includes the money that I earn."
No. You have the right-wing idiot's concept of socialism. No surprise.
Resources are land, minerals, water, etc. Money is an abstraction representing the real wealth of a nation. Many resources in the US, for instance, are publicly owned. The alternative is private ownership, which leads to despotism and greed, the "opposite of freedom."
Furthermore, while you say you loate me, I dont loathe YOU at all. I do, however, loathe your mentality of anti-freedom. I will fight against your mentality the rest of my life and I will work to change the minds of those that think like you. In fact, I have done so with a few people already. How sad that we have Marixists among us that have been fooled into thinking their ideas are superior. Capitalism is BOSS. It has made this country the most prosperous in history!
"I do, however, loathe your mentality of anti-freedom."
Socialism is not anti-freedom. You are entirely misinformed. In fact, the United States has done more to take away the freedom of peoples the world over than probabaly any nation that's ever existed.
One example: In 1953 the US overthrew the democratically-elected leader of Iran, Mohammad Mossadeq, placing the dictator Shah in power. Why do you think they chanted "Death to America" 1979 in Iran? you stupid dope?
"The Left always resorts to name-calling." Oh, boo-hoo, big boy. I called you a name!
FYI: I've been in 100s of YouTube exchanges w/ right-wingers wherein I've been called every fucking name in the book. And many not in the book. So take your sanctimonious attitude somewhere else; as if name-calling were the province of a political outllook. Give me a break.
"Socialism is anti-individual-freedom" The US has overthrown dozens of governments. It is anything but "pro-freedom."
Oh, one more thing. If Im a "fascist" for telling you WHERE you should or should not live, then YOU are a fascits for telling me HOW I should or should not live.
@bapyou for socialism to work everyone would have to agree. anyone who doesn't agree will be forced to agree. thats how it works. so when you say you want socialism that means u want us to do as you say. that's fascism by your definition. seeing as most people in this country don't want socialism that means you have to force them to agree. even if only 5 people don't want socialism that means you have to break the constitution and there rights to force them. i will fight to the end to be free.
@bapyou have you ever heard of starting a community? like the Mormons or something. you can all live in your own little place and share all ur money and get what you need that way. you can pull doctors in and all that stuff. there's nothing against you doing that for yourself. look at it now? there poor in our country are fat slobs. who have cars and fucking tvs. the poor in most other countries are skin and bones. we export our food we have so much.
@bapyou so if socialism and capitalism is alike in that it forces people to comply what happens when i try to sell my products at my own price and run my own company? the feds come knocking and throw my ass in jail. lets reverse that what happens when socialist try to do what they want. absolutely nothing. you yourself can do anything you want for yourself. we don't care. if socialism comes fully to america i will be in prison seeing as i will never comply.
"what happens when i try to sell my products at my own price and run my own company? the feds come knocking and throw my ass in jail."
What the hell are you talking about? Your hypotheticals are all such general nonsense. What products are you selling or trying to sell? What are you talking about?
@bapyou any product. maybe im a chair maker or a farmer. what happens when i want to sell my corn or chairs at a cheaper price then the government wants? i get arrested. what happens when i cant afford to produce corn and sell it at a government price so i have to sell it for more. i get arrested. and while that may be pure bullshit from my perspective there are hundreds of thousands of small business owners who will die under socialism. and that comment i made was a response to someone else.
its over regulation and government intervention which ruined our current system. the government is not good for you. no matter what ur Geo political nut job teachers will tell you. a good government should not interfere with its citizens life.
"a good government should not interfere with its citizens life"
Tell that to the whacko anti-abortion nuts who want the government to outlaw abortion & take away a woman's right to choose what she wishes to do with her own body.
Furthermore, corporations are not citizens. They are economic fictions who have been accorded the rights of citizens. They also enjoy protections & other benefits that you & I as citizens do not.
@bapyou WELL DID I EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ABORTION? THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE. YOU ARE DRAGGING OTHER THINGS INTO THIS WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WORD FUCKING ONE ABOUT WHAT I THINK. NO CORPORATION ARE NOT CITIZENS BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE SOME OF THE SAME RIGHTS AS ONES. AND ANY POWER THEY GAIN MORE THEN CITIZENS IS ONLY BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION. EMINENT DOMAIN IS JUST ONE OF MANY WAYS THE GOVERNMENT FUCKS US.
When speaking about government staying out of people's lives, right-wing goofs always leave their favorite hot-button cultural cause out of the discussion.
"CORPORATIONS .. SHOULD HAVE SOME OF THE SAME RIGHTS AS (citizens)"
Really? Do tell. Then I'd like the "right" to be able to pass off my expenses to the general public as well, which is what large corporations do to the general populace every day. They're called externalities.
@bapyou do you hear your self? passing of expenses on the people is not a citizens right. THAT'S what happens when government intervenes. they only do that because government wants or lets them. i don't believe abortion is right but i am also 50/50 of whether government should be allowed to intervene. but that has nothing to do with this argument because you only assumed to know what i think. you didn't ASK whether i think abortion should be allowed. so fuck off left wing nut libtard.
Great video man always good to see others who KNOW what Marxism is, Too bad so many are still unable to actually use Google to look it up instead of assuming Soviet Russia was it.
You're an idiot. If YOU have an extra room in your house then YOU should move a homeless person in. I see a few books behind you, how dare you hoard them when other people don't have books.
"I see a few books behind you, how dare you hoard them when other people don't have books."
Marxism allows for personal property. You make the same stupid argument which everyone makes when they haven't read Marx, parroting right-wing blather about Marxism because you lack the intellectual acumen to investigate it for yourself.
Marxist theory posits the control of resources under the control of society as a whole, not a few books in someone's home.
A friendly suggestion. Add links to videos you've made that you mention in your videos. You get more views, it's not too much work, and it benefits the lazy like me.
@Shydrow - Hong Kong didn't, previous to its assimilation into China. Thailand doesn't. Malaysia doesn't. India doesn't. Free trade countries with minimal regulation have no debt problems.
@Shydrow - He said Marxism was created in the wake of the Origin of Species. The timeline indicates otherwise. It's close, but the actual sequence of events was Marx had applied his theory to Human history but could not apply it to Natural history. This left a hole in his theory that was oft-exploited by proponents of Capitalism. So, Marx read the Origin of Species and thought of it as the explanation of Dialectical Materialism to Natural History. So it happened in reverse to DAA's storyline.
@Slipknotyk06 Point made i yield on that argument since your right on the time line and i was just over zealous to defend someone who knows communism to those i assume don't [assuming makes me an ass] Also i'm not sure what your getting at about natural vs human histroy and how an economic/political effects or changes due to it can you explain a little bit more on that so i have a better base of understanding
@Shydrow - Critics of Marx often questioned how his Materialistic Dialectic changed Natural History because Marx asserts that all progress comes through conflict. The Origin of Species supports Marx's assertion that biological progress comes through conflict for resources, and conflict against predators.
If you want to better understand this, watch The Bloody History of Communism.
ever notice how these guys and girls on you tube chating it up about how socialism is so great are always...... wicked young?............. like barley out of college. most of the time still in college.
@gibblets17 Yeah cause cold war era propaganda isn't forced on them and they aren't prosecuted or black listed for being it. You ever notice that Feudalism was the ruling system until the young started some crazy ideas about more freedom?
and now the bigger question on did you study communism/socialism and there abuse. Now i don't mean just the Mccarthy I'm also talking about Stalin and Mao who both abused the system and ideas and people who trusted it.
@Shydrow i cant seem to figure out if your 100 percent on topic with me? did i right another comment somewhere else here that i forgot about? other then the one commenting about the age of these video makers? and i cant figure out if you are with me or against me. sorry :(
@gibblets17 I sorta fell off my thought. The point is the reason there all young is cause the older generations were forced and blackmailed and exiled and had horrible things done to them for believing this. You can thank Mccarthy and his asshole anti-American tactics for that.
@Shydrow oh my. yeah all the old people are brain washed. these kids out of college are more brain washed then anyone. they take what there teacher teachers them and act like its fact of life. like they know more then people who have worked there entire life and have experienced all these thing. they talk like they have lived in a socialist society. but the fact is that plenty of people HAVE lived in a socialist society and most if not all eventually admit it was all shit.
@gibblets17 What one are you talking about? Europe is a fine socialist society. Oh you mean the Mother Land were the dictators ruled, Or China which is more captalist then most even if a so called communist party rules. You didn't research.
Also yes the old are brainwashed/afraid cause back when they were young there parents where ex-communicated for being even associated with communists regardless of if they were. The younger generation just looks at the idea alone.
@Shydrow sure europe is fine. like Greece. or Spain. or all of the other ones. china is emerging as a powerful and economical power in the world fast approaching america as an economic giant. do you know why that is? because of capitalism! Greece is bankrupt because of its socialist hand out programs and begging for money from Germany. and the rest of the socialist Europe is begging for money too. its pathetic. Europe is not fine not fine at all. i have friends who live in europe and hate it!
@Shydrow India's wealth has grown by multiples in the last decade and its because of capitalism. socialism can work very well! till you run out of other peoples money to spend on hand out and entitlement programs. or some crazy government takes control. tell me one instance where true socialism worked. and don't say europe because that's not true socialism.
@gibblets17 Europe is a socialist government with a Social Capitalistic economic system. Also India is a horrible example since i doubt you wanna work the factories there at all.
Also Don't say the Republican tag line on socialism cause your not entitled or given shit unless you earn it or it can help you get on your feet. If you wont work even if offered a chance then you are removed or sent to prison.
@Shydrow removed or sent to prison? your fucked up in the head. someone who doesn't work..... dum dum dum doesn't eat. its simple as fuck. india is not a horrible example. yes working in a factory is hard work. not pleasant. better then being a shit scooper. or a farmer. or a slave. you act like factory jobs dont exist in socialist countries. the idea of equality is inane and retarded. some people work harder then others some people are smarter then others. why should the hard working pay?
@Shydrow in the end all socialism is is the lazy taking form the productive. those who do just what they need to get by make just as much as the person who works 15 hours a day trying to make the cure that saves lives. makes no sense to me. in the end socialism will never truly come to america and if it does it will be short lived. we already see changes in the way of socialism that people already hate. socialist agendas are what put us in our mess to begin with!
@Shydrow - China is a unique situation. It's a Communist government that after the death of Chairman Mao, decided to choose an other course. They didn't want to continue starving so they opened to trade, and opened somewhat to private enterprise. However, much of the Chinese public is still brutally oppressed, and struggling day to day.
As for Europe, you can't tell me Greece's struggles don't illustrate weakness in Socialism. Spain, Portugal, and Italy are still struggling.
@gibblets17 - I'm there with you on this one. If you've been in a Political Science class on today's college campuses, the form of government that is pushed is a "Free Market Socialism." I would know, I dropped out of a Political Science class because the teacher called me an idiot and refused to discuss my ideas in class. I nailed him citing Ukraine and Greece as failures of predominantly Socialist Governments.
It's really a bold move to make a video like this--and much-needed: we have a lot of open discussion of just about all issues on Youtube, but yours is a perspective that's still lacking. I thought you did a particularly good job of combining the moral and theoretical arguments for Marxism, something I think even "professional" Marxists don't always do well. I hope everyone doesn't jump down your throat for making these videos--but even if they do, I'm sure you can defend yourself. Cheers.
Marxism only works if everyone are marxists. Capitalism only works if everyone are fools. I am not too fond of Marx but he did get one thing right. In a global economy companies will move to those who will sell their services the cheapest in order to maintain profits. The solution, as Marx pointed out, is that the labour force must unite on a global level and show solidarity so that every worker in the same field receives roughly the same pay. I think he was right about that.
If you go to someone and agree on a set rate, and get paid at that rate, then you are receiving the full product of your work... I don't understand where this ideology of workers being entitled to all the profits of the person that hired them came from. Without that job, you wouldn't have any pay. The best part is, if it's true that you deserve the full product of your output, then why not go out and make something and sell it on your own? Why work for someone?
At around 14:30 you start talking about what it is that "capitalists" believe (or try to convince us of). You say that they think that marxism is founded on coercion or compulsory contribution. Instead, it's based on everyone being a person in need (whether it's food, or clothes, or shelter). In order to marxism to work, don't you agree that it requires everyone else to provide that food, clothes, shelter to the others in need (and if they don't want to, isn't it forced upon them)?
I like Marx, I think he is much understood and associated with unfortunate people.
However, I'm wondering if you can answer some of the shortcomings.
1)If the dialectic view of History is true, then how can you develop a thought which transcends the thought of History? (this is a question for Hegel as well).
2)You say it isn't morally acceptable to charge someone rent. Is it morally acceptable to just accept it?
3)Should the government be enforcing immorality at all?
Very good video, I think its important to highlight what Marxism is all about because nowadays people are more hung up about what leninism and stalinism actually did.
@wranglers575 you're right. we shouldn't look at the evils of communism, i.e. lenin and stalin. we should look to all the examples in history where communism has succeeded (sarcasm).
@cristoballs You've missed my point, people these days don't understand what marxism is, they simply judge it by what it inspired (i.e leninism and stalinism which is different to marxism). Seeing as marxism has never been implemented its not about looking at what it has achieved but what it actually means.
@wranglers575 when people say things like, "marxism has never been implemented", i wonder if they find it the least bit strange whenever implementing it has been attempted that it always leads to oppressive dictatorships such as stalinism and leninism.
@cristoballs I'm not a marxist i don't think pure marixism could ever work however i think its important for people to understand what it is about otherwise people will naively except capitalism as perfect. One of the problems that occurs in America is the fear mongering that conservatives do which makes people reject certain socialist programmes which would be a benefit to society. (Also its impossible for the implementation on marxism to lead to dictatorships if its never been implemented).
@wranglers575 "i don't think pure marixism could ever work however i think its important for people to understand what it is about otherwise people will naively except capitalism as perfect."
so you want people to understand a concept that can never exist in the real world, because otherwise they would favor the system that works best, or heaven forbid, think it's perfect?
@cristoballs I want people to understand it so people can understand how some aspects of it can be integrated into the current capitalist system to be make it more fair and even. People not understanding marxism look to what happened in countries such as Russia think thats what Marxism is and then simple say that everything in socialism is bad which isn't the case. Sorry if I'm being unclear its difficult to say everything in a 500 word limit
This was well put together and you are well spoken , although I've heard mixed reviews of this video I must say the build quality weather it be through your intelligent dialect or facts the video was well done. You should become a historian you would succeed well in a field of that matter.
You might have more of an impact on your viewer if you weren't fully engaged in the comforts of capitalism. Tons of books, nice home, nice computer, nice furniture, etc... I guess that is the "difference between theory and practice"
At least the "amazing atheist" only has a blank wall and some news clippings for his background. Which, by the way, is all Americans will have once we start redistributing our wealth to the rest of the world in order to achieve global equality.
Many assertions are made in this video, and simply not backed up by anything. ...And it would be great if I didn't feel like I was being lectured to...
wow, I consider myself a socialist, but you are getting a lot of criticism for this video. I am scratching my head as to why. I think I may make a response to one point you made regarding Kant and the Categorical Imperative.
thanks for the video, don't know why I wasn't subscribed to you in the first place...
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
Opponents of capitalism love to complain about the force and oppression the government does in collusion with the business world - but are fine with force and oppression when it's a form that they like. If you want to oppose the fascism of government/business collusion, you have to oppose the socialist oppression the government does on its own. We can have a market economy or we can have statism. There's no friendly statism.
Opponents of capitalism love to complain about the force and oppression the government does in collusion with the business world - but are fine with force and oppression when it's a form that they like. If you want to oppose the fascism of government/business collusion, you have to oppose the socialist oppression the government does on its own. We can have a market economy or we can have statism. There's no friendly statism.
My government answers to me, eh? Okay, I'll call it and tell it to stop stealing mine and my friend's and family's money to pay for the education system where it indoctrinates and mentally abuses children, and for the broken health care system, and for art and culture programs that represent everything I oppose. I'll get back to you on how well it works.
"And though the press is not entirely oppressed other variables like advertising-income-news undermine the free press." So the free press is hurt by the fact that people choose to pay for forms of press you consider inferior to the forms you'd have them support, and are free to support yourself, and evidently wish you could force them to support. You don't dislike capitalism because it oppresses the press - you dislike it because it doesn't.
Acting even-handily about capitalism and communism, saying "both have flaws, both lead to some forms of oppression" etc. is a complete distortion of the truth. The fact that capitalism hasn't led to everyone's life being absolutely perfect doesn't mean it's "failures" are anywhere in the same universe as communism's. Communism has, without fail, led to oppression and famine in every implementation. Capitalism is the only system in history that has led to widespread prosperity.
Capitalism has led to the depression, state assassinations of its citizens, corporate oppression of workers and unions, free-market oppression of the press, corporate oppression of civil liberties, but everyone can buy food and not everyone's hurt. Oh what a great argument for Capitalism: "It doesn't have as much oppression as Communism! Capitalism is better."
@thegillotine09 Unlike America in the Philippines rich men have private armies. And though the press is not entirely oppressed other variables like advertising-income-news undermine the free press. They only tell you what sells. You can see it in American news, how little they tell you about foreign affairs. I bet not a lot of Americans know that Turkey, unfriendly state to Iran, is helping Iran to get nuclear energy for the sake of peace(along with Brazil)...
@thegillotine09 CIA is known for breaking unions and socialist groups because it runs against capitalist ideologies. I'm not a libertarian but I'm flattered to be described as someone who identifies with freedom.
@Nades129 Unions, as voluntary organizations workers join for collective bargaining, are completely consistent with capitalism and a boon to it. Today, unions are thugs who propel themselves into a clandestine position using force. Anyway, the CIA "breaks" groups because our government operates on the premise that it can use force if it think it's better for society, and the CIA does believe what it's doing is better for society.
@Nades129 You can only battle the types of things the CIA is doing by defending individual rights (which can only exist in a capitalist economy.) Not by advocating for government force, but a kind that you find more appealing.
@Nades129 Capitalism did not lead to the depression. The Federal Reserve and the Sherman act led to it. All economic failures can be linked back to the mixed economy. Self-interested businessmen have no incentive to over-extend credit, and those who do will hurt only themselves. Government attempts to "tweak" the system leads to bubbles - and the ensuing bursts.
@Nades129 "corporate oppression of workers and unions, free-market oppression of the press, corporate oppression of civil liberties" If by any of these you mean "using its private property in a way I dislike" - that's not oppression. Ideological cliques don't have the right to enslave people just because they're wealthy. If by any of these you mean the use of force or fraud - that's not capitalism.
@thinkingisawesome Not just because they are wealthy, it's because they have reached a point in society where they are given power; a condition in a capitalist framework, a class exists. For example, Corporations buy politicians as a consequences of it's cheaper cost, and gain more profits from the tax cuts, and it goes circular. Then they use their resources to manipulate the public. News obey because they are for profit entities. These consequences of a system, it's not ideological.
@Nades129 Nothing wrong at all with profits or tax cuts. What's the difference between manipulation and persuasion? (Answer: "Manipulation" is when you disagree). You're free to express your own views with your own resources and hope people support you. And often they do - hence the massive, massive media and publishing power the left has despite the fact that the rich and powerful would disagree with those views.
Manipulation: The Iraq War, Cold War, War on Drugs, War on Terrorism, anti-American.
I don't disagree with anything. For all I care Anarcho-Capitalism would exist and I'd still argue about its injustices. As for your idea as the media as leftist is a myth. Besides, if I do advocate for a press then it's a free press; where EVERYTHING is in the topic despite corporate news loses and decline of viewers.
There is no left and right. Don't be dragged into an illusion of two sides.
Okay, so, you disagree with the conclusion the general media and the populace took on those things. Your conclusions may be right. I happen to agree about the Iraq war and the war on drugs. But a media controlled via coercion isn't going to magically make the best possible decisions. If you don't trust the people who control a media people aren't forced to support, what makes you think one you are forced to support is going to be any better?
@Nades129 Where "EVERYTHING" is in topic? What does that even mean? Every possible position should be given even space in every medium no matter how many people care? And how do you divide the ideologies? What if I think my particular sub-schism of whatever I believe in is its own and deserves space? And what gives you the right to force other people's resources to spread a certain idea - even if you're doing so in an attempt to be even-handed?
@Nades129 How about we have a system where "EVERYTHING" *can* be in topic by whoever chooses to put it in topic, for whoever wishes to listen - i.e., a free market.
@Nades129 Buying politicians? If the politicians didn't have so much power, they wouldn't have anything to buy. Guns and money are often linked. The mistake leftists make is assuming the first would be okay if it weren't for the second. It's actually the other way around.
@thinkingisawesome First: I'm not left or right. Second: If politicians can't be bought then people who are under poverty lines are bought. Look at the Philippines where private armies are made, and hired killers exist and the government can do little about it.
I'm arguing about the system. Power is very corrupting to the minds of men.
Illegal to use fraud? Wow, I wonder how those big banks who were too big to fail got those bail outs. They probably didn't use fraud. It must have been legal.
@Nades129 Wait - government gives it's friends billions of dollars stolen from the taxpayer - and you're blaming capitalism? Do you know what capitalism is? It's not "people I dislike with lots of money who smoke cigars and wear suits." It's a system of private property and voluntarily trade. Under capitalism the bail out would not have happened - the bail out was an act of socialism.
I'm sure that was my view of Capitalism in the first place, the same that I viewed monarchy as the noble divine prince serving the poor. We could have that system in some ideological experiment, but as far as we know with monarchy it only serves royalty.
The bail out was definitely an act of socialism, but it existed in a capitalist framework. Where the public were too stupid and too distracted to participate in the "Democracy."
I'm sure that was my view of Capitalism in the first place, the same that I viewed monarchy as the noble divine prince serving the poor. We could have that system in some ideological experiment, but as far as we know with monarchy it only serves royalty.
The bail out was definitely an act of socialism, but it existed in a capitalist framework. Where the public were too stupid and too distracted to participate in the "Democracy."
@Nades129 There's a distinction between economic power and physical power (or fraud.) The first is power people give you voluntarily because you offer a positive value. The second is a threat. Now, *businesses* (not capitalism, as they're contradicting capitalism by doing so), may sometimes use force or fraud - but that's what the government is there to stop. No one advocating free markets believe private thugs should be allowed to use force any more than the government should be allowed to.
I'm sure free marketerians believe that. I've read their work. But at best it's Utopian and mythological. Capitalism from the industrial age to modern society has always led private power to oppress society. It is a consequence of a system based on power and oppression.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
I am a capitalist and I don't own a yacht so you can take your own advice there. I run a business and provide employment to lower socioeconomic people. Hard work provides average incomes for them. I am the last to be paid as I pay myself from NET profit. People get jealous and wish they could share my profit but are unwilling in doing so to share my losses and liabilities. What services do you provide to people that increase their standard of living without taking it away from someone else?
treesbrisbane 9 months ago
One other side note: Marxism isn't "scientific" in any manner or form. Marxists appear to be impervious to empirical evidence that does not support their ideology - a typical characteristic of religion, not science. It is Machiavelli, not Marx, who is the first "modern" theorist to apply scientific analysis to political questions (see Burnham, "New Machiavellians"). Marxism is more like a secular religion that argues for a feudal state run by Marxists.
DrCruel 9 months ago
So James? Why Marxism? Why not Socialism? Why not Communism? I would love you to do a video to differentiate the three and where you fall into those categories -but I can dream I suppose :)
GrowthSpiral 10 months ago
@GrowthSpiral Ha! Well, I appreciate the comment. After seeing the kind of response I had gotten to these two videos I barely have the stomach to speak on the subject again. Drop me a PM and I'd be glad to answer in private.
DasAmericanAtheist 10 months ago
@DasAmericanAtheist If I decide to work for someone, and a third person agrees to provide the money for our enterprise in consideration of an agreed upon cut, Marxists claim they have the right to kill the investor, punish my boss, steal our proceeds and enslave me. My labor becomes the property of the "needy" - as defined by Marxists, which invariably ends up being themselves and their close relations and friends.
The appeal of Marx is that it morally justifies murder, theft and slavery.
DrCruel 9 months ago
Because capitalists neither consume nor labour.
TimothyBragan 1 year ago
I have a question. Marx seemed mostly preoccupied with the plight of the urban working class. What does marxism have to say about rural poverty?
rayogram2 1 year ago
Capitalism and its swinish profiteers will be brought down in the cleansing
glory of red terror. The pains of the oppressor will be the process towards our long denied pleasures. People over profits and proles over pigs! The new man of the Socialist Republic is already opening his joyless, shark-like eyes. Tonight we dine on Kulaks!
Renno45 1 year ago
@Renno45 You are insane.
ThaFreeMind 6 months ago
The problem you are avoiding is the idea that people will work without incentive is logically flawed. With no incentive to do well, one will eventually stat to slack in his performance, but because he has been declared entitled to his share, he can get away with it. This seeps all drive to do well from a man and the only choices while maintaining that system, are coercion, or let the productivity fall.
Valdrag 1 year ago 2
Are you really a Marxist? My initial understanding was you were merely interested in Marx as a philosopher and just wanted to run your interpretation of classical Marxism past the philosophically aware. I used to actually be a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, DasAmericanAtheist, and I have become disillusioned with those ideas. I am more of anarchist now but I'm trying to create my own philosophy. I strongly disagree with Marx's conclusions and ideology but I still value his observations of capitalism.
OneforEating 1 year ago
Comment removed
OneforEating 1 year ago
yyyyyyyyyyyyyawn
selfyeshua 1 year ago
Comment removed
kdheithaus 1 year ago
I'm curious your thoughts on the benefits of capitalism, e.g. encouragement of competition to produce more quality product. Would we have, for instance, state of the art health care facilities if there weren't profit to be had?
That aside, the idea of fulfilling need needn't be gov't induced. Isn't that kind of what Bon Secours, Red Cross and like organizations seek to acheive on at least some level? Why wait for some political dictum to begin living ideals? (I ask of myself as well...)
kdheithaus 1 year ago
The ideal of communism has always seemed to me incredibly Biblically based, particularly the New Testament. It beats me that it's often the Christians fighting communism tooth and nail, not wanting to coerce giving, because then it's not "cheerful giving" - and yet, they'd just as soon crucify a homosexual. "That's fine. You can be gay. But I'm not helping you get equal rights." If there is a God, we're all going to hell - that's my call.
kdheithaus 1 year ago
That capitalism is atrocious is apparent to me, but I still have trouble gathering from your videos what it is that makes this Marxist or post-Marxist model so compelling in your view, especially, in my case, as opposed to libertarian socialism alias social anarchism.
telofy 1 year ago
Do you consider the problem of calculation in a socialist commonwealth to be one of those valid criticisms? If not why, I'd love to see you put that brain to the task. Marxist.org doesn't touch upon the topic
There is also the Konkin/Carson version of class analysis which is official power vrs. powerless.
You say capitalism the ideal has never existed, and that capitalism necessarily verges on depression every few years? Are you sure it's not the holdovers from previous systems that cause it?
WorBlux 1 year ago
Labor is important because it makes one monetary economy instead of several. Labor can be substituted for many other types of labor, and every method of production requires some sort of labor. Thus the reason for one price system rather than several or more.
As for profit and labor, entrepreneurial profit (sourced from allocating resources to suit the consumers in a better way) drives up the price of the factors of production, especially when it comes to labor.
WorBlux 1 year ago
When a company outsources they use a relative surplus of labor in one region, increasing wages in that region, and reducing costs of their products in all others. In reality there is only one economy, those who are laid off are free to find more productive (socially valued) endeavors.
If capitalists are uncaring in their buying and selling, it is because consumers are likewise uncaring in their purchases. Charity cannot be given in agency of production, but only in the agency of consumption.
WorBlux 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@WorBlux he's not going to reply
bigbaddeerhunter 1 year ago
Great video. Love your work!
myoldnamewasbadful 1 year ago
Iron your shirt next time, there are thousands watching you.
Unhealthydragon 1 year ago
Excellent talk, Das. Bravo.
bapyou 1 year ago
plz give me the last five minutes of my life back, cus thats all i watched and u made no point, about seems like ur defending your point before even telling it lol so most likely its full of shit :) have a nice day
ImpaledSilhouette 1 year ago
This was very fascinating to watch and you made an interest for reading up on these areas (political theory and philosophy) spark up for me. Oh and look at that, didn't even have to ask for further reading material. Thanks!
Terrayeah 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Without capitalism You wouldn't have your youtube channel
and I wouldn't have the free speech to tell you that your wrong.
PezCandyDispensers 1 year ago
Its funny how you speak in circles using different words...
douchbag collage campus commies are so funny... Its just too bad they change when they enter the real world and stop taking drugs.
QUESTED 1 year ago
It's very simple to determine which system is better regardless of your opinions and ideologies.
All you have to do is compare how many people are trying to get into a nation as opposed to how many are trying to get out. North Korea, Cuba, and all other of your socialist "worker's paradise" nations don't seem to have an illegal immigration problem and America does so there's your answer.
locksmithite 1 year ago
This guy is a pro bullshitter. Great speaking abilities, good rhythm changes, easy to follow. The trouble is that his ideas are entirely theoretical. Everything he says is not proven by reality. He is an artist of ideals. A master of seeing things as they COULD happen. He ignores what HAS happened. Marxism has proven time and again to be failure in a nutshell. Nothing good can come of it. Capitalism, however, has proven to match reality. With capitalism, you earn your value to others
Penguillacious 1 year ago
@Penguillacious so you would ignore the countless human beings that are required to be sacrificed to the system in order for capitalism to "work" for a select few. Capitalism does not allow for the middle class or the lower class to move to the upper class, the top 2% of our country has a vested interest in keeping the rest of the country under the impression that they can rise to the top so that they do not rebel against their corporate overlords.
ObservantObserver 1 year ago
@ObservantObserver Do you think you're a more or less moral individual than somebody who went through all the shit to be elected to have extreme power over you? If you say more, why wouldn't you want to be the one deciding who the money goes to instead of a group of power hungry individuals whose goal is simply to reattain that power in the next election? With capitalism, you speak and vote with your money. The more you get away from capitalism, the more you hand power over to a completely
Penguillacious 1 year ago
@ObservantObserver unregulated body (the gov't). A company always has to compete with another company to serve YOUR interests because YOU have the money. The more you give money to the government, the more you mitigate your vote. The government has no competition so it does NOT have to compete with ANYTHING to serve YOU. Deciding upon a system is not about eliminating all evil, it's about minimizing it. Ultimately, real people care more about other real people than a government figure ever
Penguillacious 1 year ago
@ObservantObserver will. This is largely because a government figure does not HAVE to in order to get what he/she wants. In fact, it is usually not in a government individual's interest to think about you at all!
Penguillacious 1 year ago
@ObservantObserver Don't hate corporate America. Hate the government for making so many bullshit rules and placing their hands in so many economic situations that it's difficult for a small company, no matter how well they server their customers' needs, to succeed. You and I hate the same end results; I just think you're incorrectly placing the blame.
Penguillacious 1 year ago
@ObservantObserver "Capitalism does not allow for the middle class or the lower class to move to the upper class, "
You do realize that 2/3rds of billionaires started from scratch and are self made right? Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Ralph Lauren, James Cayne, and MANY others started from meager beginnings. Put down your rhetoric and join the real world. What you are saying is just demonstrably false.
theradioschizo 1 year ago
Great video man!!! I'm so glad that you made this video. Many people fail to see that Marx was spot on as far as his analysis of capitalism is concerned. I would just like to add that Marx was an immoralist in opposition to the morality of his day. Corporations, and banks threaten our very livelyhood with the privatizations that go on when crisis emerge. This has happened time and time again in the third world countries and now we're seeing it in Europe and the United States.
Alberto2382 1 year ago
your so boring how the world works is atleast entertaining.
bbender1986 1 year ago
"in capitalism, you can achieve if 'they' say so"
Who are 'they'? We do not have central planners in a free market capitalistic society. Do you mean 'they' as the consumer decides who can achieve? Well shouldn't it be that way anyways? Shouldn't your success be based off of the consumers who freely pays for the goods/services you provide? Isn't it logical that free market rewards those who provide a service that people want, as opposed to rewarding a service that people don't?
kyler187 1 year ago
Socialism is nonsense. Its been proven to increase poverty and suffering. Get over it. Capitalism is BOSS.
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
"Socialism is nonsense. Its been proven to increase poverty and suffering."
Here:
"every socialist experiment of any significance in the 20th century has either been crushed, overthrown, or invaded, perverted, subverted, or destabilized by the U.S. Not one socialist government or movement ... was permitted to rise or fall on its own merits; not one was left secure enough to drop its guard against the all-powerful enemy abroad & freely & fully relax control at home." - William Blum
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou
BS. And if you want socialism, go live elsewhere.
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@SeaWolfe59 "if you want socialism, go live elsewhere"
I am an American. And I will work to make America a better place through socialism. You do not tell me where or how to live, it is for me to decide. It is not for you to decide.
You are a fascist. Only fascists tell others what they should or should not do, or where they should or should not live.
I loathe right-wingers with every molecule of my being. You will be loathed unendingly until I die, and by others after I die.
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou
Youre right. You can live here if you want. But most people DONT want socialism here. Think about it. Who are you to vote for people that will take portions of what I EARN and give it to someone else? My property is MY property when it comes to this idea of "redistribution". I am a free man and it is MY right tol decide what charity my money goes to! Its NOT your place to decide for me. People like you do NOT know better how to use my resources...the PROPERTY that I earned!
more...
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@SeaWolfe59
" My property is MY property when it comes to this idea of "redistribution"."
Socialism is not about your personal property; socialism is about the control of resources on which society depends for its survival: Should those resources be used to profit the few? Or should they be used for the benefit of all? That s the basic idea behind socialism.
You're buying the standard line that's be propagated by the right wing since 1918, in the service of keeping them in power.
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou
Ive had my say and I stand by it. I believe in hard work and incentive. Socialism is an abject failure in that regard.
I notice you use the word "resources". I call those resources earned property. And that property includes the money that I earn. Lets face it, youre talking about control of money. Its always about money.
I also notice you use the word "control". I think you mean to say "government control". And THAT level of control is in opposition to individual freedom.
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@SeaWolfe59
"I notice you use the word "resources". I call those resources earned property. And that property includes the money that I earn."
No. You have the right-wing idiot's concept of socialism. No surprise.
Resources are land, minerals, water, etc. Money is an abstraction representing the real wealth of a nation. Many resources in the US, for instance, are publicly owned. The alternative is private ownership, which leads to despotism and greed, the "opposite of freedom."
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou
And "public" or "government control" of those resourse leads to tyranny, corruption and rationing.
Stop bothering me with your blithering, name-calling nonsense.
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@bapyou
Furthermore, while you say you loate me, I dont loathe YOU at all. I do, however, loathe your mentality of anti-freedom. I will fight against your mentality the rest of my life and I will work to change the minds of those that think like you. In fact, I have done so with a few people already. How sad that we have Marixists among us that have been fooled into thinking their ideas are superior. Capitalism is BOSS. It has made this country the most prosperous in history!
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@SeaWolfe59 I'm glad that people still realize that being successful is not a bad thing.
OldManNick 1 year ago
@OldManNick
Thank you sir. These marxists/statists need to be put in their place.
DONT TREAD ON ME!
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@SeaWolfe59
"I do, however, loathe your mentality of anti-freedom."
Socialism is not anti-freedom. You are entirely misinformed. In fact, the United States has done more to take away the freedom of peoples the world over than probabaly any nation that's ever existed.
One example: In 1953 the US overthrew the democratically-elected leader of Iran, Mohammad Mossadeq, placing the dictator Shah in power. Why do you think they chanted "Death to America" 1979 in Iran? you stupid dope?
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou
Oh, now Im a stupid dope eh. It never fails. The Left always resorts to name-calling.
Socialism is anti-individual-freedom and pro-big-governement-control. PERIOD.
Now, youre dismissed. Go away, Whats the point in talking to a "stupid dope" anyway?
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@SeaWolfe59
"The Left always resorts to name-calling." Oh, boo-hoo, big boy. I called you a name!
FYI: I've been in 100s of YouTube exchanges w/ right-wingers wherein I've been called every fucking name in the book. And many not in the book. So take your sanctimonious attitude somewhere else; as if name-calling were the province of a political outllook. Give me a break.
"Socialism is anti-individual-freedom" The US has overthrown dozens of governments. It is anything but "pro-freedom."
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou
Just hit the road. Go away. Youre bothering me now.
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@bapyou
You continually complain about the actions of the US government but in the next breath you want to give that same government more control?
thegillotine09 1 year ago
@bapyou
Oh, one more thing. If Im a "fascist" for telling you WHERE you should or should not live, then YOU are a fascits for telling me HOW I should or should not live.
Hypocrite.
SeaWolfe59 1 year ago
@bapyou for socialism to work everyone would have to agree. anyone who doesn't agree will be forced to agree. thats how it works. so when you say you want socialism that means u want us to do as you say. that's fascism by your definition. seeing as most people in this country don't want socialism that means you have to force them to agree. even if only 5 people don't want socialism that means you have to break the constitution and there rights to force them. i will fight to the end to be free.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17
"for socialism to work everyone would have to agree. anyone who doesn't agree will be forced to agree."
You could say the eact same thing about capitalism as well. I don't agree with it, and it's forced on me everyday. So there!
Capitalism is a heinous, brutal, inhuman economic system that works well for a few, and works terribly for a majority. Look at it now.
"i will fight to the end to be free."
You will fight to the end for the rights of the few to own the many.
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou have you ever heard of starting a community? like the Mormons or something. you can all live in your own little place and share all ur money and get what you need that way. you can pull doctors in and all that stuff. there's nothing against you doing that for yourself. look at it now? there poor in our country are fat slobs. who have cars and fucking tvs. the poor in most other countries are skin and bones. we export our food we have so much.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@bapyou so if socialism and capitalism is alike in that it forces people to comply what happens when i try to sell my products at my own price and run my own company? the feds come knocking and throw my ass in jail. lets reverse that what happens when socialist try to do what they want. absolutely nothing. you yourself can do anything you want for yourself. we don't care. if socialism comes fully to america i will be in prison seeing as i will never comply.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17 "if socialism comes to america I will be in prison"
Would being in prison under socialism be any different than not being in prison?
thegillotine09 1 year ago
@gibblets17
"what happens when i try to sell my products at my own price and run my own company? the feds come knocking and throw my ass in jail."
What the hell are you talking about? Your hypotheticals are all such general nonsense. What products are you selling or trying to sell? What are you talking about?
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou any product. maybe im a chair maker or a farmer. what happens when i want to sell my corn or chairs at a cheaper price then the government wants? i get arrested. what happens when i cant afford to produce corn and sell it at a government price so i have to sell it for more. i get arrested. and while that may be pure bullshit from my perspective there are hundreds of thousands of small business owners who will die under socialism. and that comment i made was a response to someone else.
gibblets17 1 year ago
its over regulation and government intervention which ruined our current system. the government is not good for you. no matter what ur Geo political nut job teachers will tell you. a good government should not interfere with its citizens life.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17
"a good government should not interfere with its citizens life"
Tell that to the whacko anti-abortion nuts who want the government to outlaw abortion & take away a woman's right to choose what she wishes to do with her own body.
Furthermore, corporations are not citizens. They are economic fictions who have been accorded the rights of citizens. They also enjoy protections & other benefits that you & I as citizens do not.
bapyou 1 year ago
Comment removed
gibblets17 1 year ago
@bapyou WELL DID I EVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT ABORTION? THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE. YOU ARE DRAGGING OTHER THINGS INTO THIS WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WORD FUCKING ONE ABOUT WHAT I THINK. NO CORPORATION ARE NOT CITIZENS BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE SOME OF THE SAME RIGHTS AS ONES. AND ANY POWER THEY GAIN MORE THEN CITIZENS IS ONLY BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION. EMINENT DOMAIN IS JUST ONE OF MANY WAYS THE GOVERNMENT FUCKS US.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17
"ABORTION ... A SEPARATE ISSUE"
When speaking about government staying out of people's lives, right-wing goofs always leave their favorite hot-button cultural cause out of the discussion.
"CORPORATIONS .. SHOULD HAVE SOME OF THE SAME RIGHTS AS (citizens)"
Really? Do tell. Then I'd like the "right" to be able to pass off my expenses to the general public as well, which is what large corporations do to the general populace every day. They're called externalities.
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou do you hear your self? passing of expenses on the people is not a citizens right. THAT'S what happens when government intervenes. they only do that because government wants or lets them. i don't believe abortion is right but i am also 50/50 of whether government should be allowed to intervene. but that has nothing to do with this argument because you only assumed to know what i think. you didn't ASK whether i think abortion should be allowed. so fuck off left wing nut libtard.
gibblets17 1 year ago
Great video man always good to see others who KNOW what Marxism is, Too bad so many are still unable to actually use Google to look it up instead of assuming Soviet Russia was it.
Shydrow 1 year ago
You're an idiot. If YOU have an extra room in your house then YOU should move a homeless person in. I see a few books behind you, how dare you hoard them when other people don't have books.
erebus463 1 year ago
@erebus463 not how it works.
Shydrow 1 year ago
@erebus463
"I see a few books behind you, how dare you hoard them when other people don't have books."
Marxism allows for personal property. You make the same stupid argument which everyone makes when they haven't read Marx, parroting right-wing blather about Marxism because you lack the intellectual acumen to investigate it for yourself.
Marxist theory posits the control of resources under the control of society as a whole, not a few books in someone's home.
bapyou 1 year ago
A friendly suggestion. Add links to videos you've made that you mention in your videos. You get more views, it's not too much work, and it benefits the lazy like me.
WithANameLike 1 year ago
FAIL: Communist Manufesto: 1848, Darwin's Origin of Species 1859.
I don't know a system which sets up equality of opportunity better than capitalism. Equality of outcome is what Marxism is more concerned with.
Socialist Reforms DO bankrupt governments. Hence Venezuela.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 What government doesn't have a debt problem?
Shydrow 1 year ago
@Shydrow - Hong Kong didn't, previous to its assimilation into China. Thailand doesn't. Malaysia doesn't. India doesn't. Free trade countries with minimal regulation have no debt problems.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 Also a 11 year difference is in the same ballpark of time frame that both would have been known.
Shydrow 1 year ago
@Shydrow - He said Marxism was created in the wake of the Origin of Species. The timeline indicates otherwise. It's close, but the actual sequence of events was Marx had applied his theory to Human history but could not apply it to Natural history. This left a hole in his theory that was oft-exploited by proponents of Capitalism. So, Marx read the Origin of Species and thought of it as the explanation of Dialectical Materialism to Natural History. So it happened in reverse to DAA's storyline.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@Slipknotyk06 Point made i yield on that argument since your right on the time line and i was just over zealous to defend someone who knows communism to those i assume don't [assuming makes me an ass] Also i'm not sure what your getting at about natural vs human histroy and how an economic/political effects or changes due to it can you explain a little bit more on that so i have a better base of understanding
Shydrow 1 year ago
@Shydrow - Critics of Marx often questioned how his Materialistic Dialectic changed Natural History because Marx asserts that all progress comes through conflict. The Origin of Species supports Marx's assertion that biological progress comes through conflict for resources, and conflict against predators.
If you want to better understand this, watch The Bloody History of Communism.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
ever notice how these guys and girls on you tube chating it up about how socialism is so great are always...... wicked young?............. like barley out of college. most of the time still in college.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17 Yeah cause cold war era propaganda isn't forced on them and they aren't prosecuted or black listed for being it. You ever notice that Feudalism was the ruling system until the young started some crazy ideas about more freedom?
and now the bigger question on did you study communism/socialism and there abuse. Now i don't mean just the Mccarthy I'm also talking about Stalin and Mao who both abused the system and ideas and people who trusted it.
Shydrow 1 year ago
@Shydrow i cant seem to figure out if your 100 percent on topic with me? did i right another comment somewhere else here that i forgot about? other then the one commenting about the age of these video makers? and i cant figure out if you are with me or against me. sorry :(
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17 I sorta fell off my thought. The point is the reason there all young is cause the older generations were forced and blackmailed and exiled and had horrible things done to them for believing this. You can thank Mccarthy and his asshole anti-American tactics for that.
Shydrow 1 year ago
@Shydrow oh my. yeah all the old people are brain washed. these kids out of college are more brain washed then anyone. they take what there teacher teachers them and act like its fact of life. like they know more then people who have worked there entire life and have experienced all these thing. they talk like they have lived in a socialist society. but the fact is that plenty of people HAVE lived in a socialist society and most if not all eventually admit it was all shit.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17 What one are you talking about? Europe is a fine socialist society. Oh you mean the Mother Land were the dictators ruled, Or China which is more captalist then most even if a so called communist party rules. You didn't research.
Also yes the old are brainwashed/afraid cause back when they were young there parents where ex-communicated for being even associated with communists regardless of if they were. The younger generation just looks at the idea alone.
Shydrow 1 year ago
@Shydrow sure europe is fine. like Greece. or Spain. or all of the other ones. china is emerging as a powerful and economical power in the world fast approaching america as an economic giant. do you know why that is? because of capitalism! Greece is bankrupt because of its socialist hand out programs and begging for money from Germany. and the rest of the socialist Europe is begging for money too. its pathetic. Europe is not fine not fine at all. i have friends who live in europe and hate it!
gibblets17 1 year ago
@Shydrow India's wealth has grown by multiples in the last decade and its because of capitalism. socialism can work very well! till you run out of other peoples money to spend on hand out and entitlement programs. or some crazy government takes control. tell me one instance where true socialism worked. and don't say europe because that's not true socialism.
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17 Europe is a socialist government with a Social Capitalistic economic system. Also India is a horrible example since i doubt you wanna work the factories there at all.
Also Don't say the Republican tag line on socialism cause your not entitled or given shit unless you earn it or it can help you get on your feet. If you wont work even if offered a chance then you are removed or sent to prison.
Shydrow 1 year ago
@Shydrow removed or sent to prison? your fucked up in the head. someone who doesn't work..... dum dum dum doesn't eat. its simple as fuck. india is not a horrible example. yes working in a factory is hard work. not pleasant. better then being a shit scooper. or a farmer. or a slave. you act like factory jobs dont exist in socialist countries. the idea of equality is inane and retarded. some people work harder then others some people are smarter then others. why should the hard working pay?
gibblets17 1 year ago
Comment removed
gibblets17 1 year ago
@Shydrow in the end all socialism is is the lazy taking form the productive. those who do just what they need to get by make just as much as the person who works 15 hours a day trying to make the cure that saves lives. makes no sense to me. in the end socialism will never truly come to america and if it does it will be short lived. we already see changes in the way of socialism that people already hate. socialist agendas are what put us in our mess to begin with!
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17
"India's wealth has grown by multiples in the last decade and its because of capitalism."
The wealth is in the hands of a few. So, don;t say "india," becasue the majority of Indians live inwretchedly poor conditions.
"socialism can work very well! till you run out of other peoples money to spend on hand out and entitlement programs."
In fact, it is capitalists who live off other's work, not socialists. You are a stupid idiot who knows nothing but propaganda.
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou And you're an idiot who has never been to India.
OldManNick 1 year ago
@OldManNick
"you're an idiot who has never been to India."
I'm not sure exactly to what this comment is meant to infer, but India has a thriving Marxist party which controls many of the southern states.
bapyou 1 year ago
@bapyou and that means what? gtfo
gibblets17 1 year ago
@gibblets17 "and that means what?"
And what means what? Your question doesn't have a subject, therefore, I can't answer it.
bapyou 1 year ago
@Shydrow - China is a unique situation. It's a Communist government that after the death of Chairman Mao, decided to choose an other course. They didn't want to continue starving so they opened to trade, and opened somewhat to private enterprise. However, much of the Chinese public is still brutally oppressed, and struggling day to day.
As for Europe, you can't tell me Greece's struggles don't illustrate weakness in Socialism. Spain, Portugal, and Italy are still struggling.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
@gibblets17 - I'm there with you on this one. If you've been in a Political Science class on today's college campuses, the form of government that is pushed is a "Free Market Socialism." I would know, I dropped out of a Political Science class because the teacher called me an idiot and refused to discuss my ideas in class. I nailed him citing Ukraine and Greece as failures of predominantly Socialist Governments.
Slipknotyk06 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HTWW is foaming at the mouth...
hyperseauton 1 year ago
It's really a bold move to make a video like this--and much-needed: we have a lot of open discussion of just about all issues on Youtube, but yours is a perspective that's still lacking. I thought you did a particularly good job of combining the moral and theoretical arguments for Marxism, something I think even "professional" Marxists don't always do well. I hope everyone doesn't jump down your throat for making these videos--but even if they do, I'm sure you can defend yourself. Cheers.
RayBobb 1 year ago
Marxism only works if everyone are marxists. Capitalism only works if everyone are fools. I am not too fond of Marx but he did get one thing right. In a global economy companies will move to those who will sell their services the cheapest in order to maintain profits. The solution, as Marx pointed out, is that the labour force must unite on a global level and show solidarity so that every worker in the same field receives roughly the same pay. I think he was right about that.
GeminiPrimeX 1 year ago
This is gonna be one of those videos where people keep commenting for months and months ...
threeofwands 1 year ago
@UdamnedFOOL
If you go to someone and agree on a set rate, and get paid at that rate, then you are receiving the full product of your work... I don't understand where this ideology of workers being entitled to all the profits of the person that hired them came from. Without that job, you wouldn't have any pay. The best part is, if it's true that you deserve the full product of your output, then why not go out and make something and sell it on your own? Why work for someone?
nicolasfinn 1 year ago
At around 14:30 you start talking about what it is that "capitalists" believe (or try to convince us of). You say that they think that marxism is founded on coercion or compulsory contribution. Instead, it's based on everyone being a person in need (whether it's food, or clothes, or shelter). In order to marxism to work, don't you agree that it requires everyone else to provide that food, clothes, shelter to the others in need (and if they don't want to, isn't it forced upon them)?
nicolasfinn 1 year ago
I like Marx, I think he is much understood and associated with unfortunate people.
However, I'm wondering if you can answer some of the shortcomings.
1)If the dialectic view of History is true, then how can you develop a thought which transcends the thought of History? (this is a question for Hegel as well).
2)You say it isn't morally acceptable to charge someone rent. Is it morally acceptable to just accept it?
3)Should the government be enforcing immorality at all?
insidetrip101 1 year ago
Very good video, I think its important to highlight what Marxism is all about because nowadays people are more hung up about what leninism and stalinism actually did.
wranglers575 1 year ago
@wranglers575 you're right. we shouldn't look at the evils of communism, i.e. lenin and stalin. we should look to all the examples in history where communism has succeeded (sarcasm).
cristoballs 1 year ago
@cristoballs You've missed my point, people these days don't understand what marxism is, they simply judge it by what it inspired (i.e leninism and stalinism which is different to marxism). Seeing as marxism has never been implemented its not about looking at what it has achieved but what it actually means.
wranglers575 1 year ago
@wranglers575 when people say things like, "marxism has never been implemented", i wonder if they find it the least bit strange whenever implementing it has been attempted that it always leads to oppressive dictatorships such as stalinism and leninism.
cristoballs 1 year ago
@cristoballs I'm not a marxist i don't think pure marixism could ever work however i think its important for people to understand what it is about otherwise people will naively except capitalism as perfect. One of the problems that occurs in America is the fear mongering that conservatives do which makes people reject certain socialist programmes which would be a benefit to society. (Also its impossible for the implementation on marxism to lead to dictatorships if its never been implemented).
wranglers575 1 year ago
@wranglers575 "i don't think pure marixism could ever work however i think its important for people to understand what it is about otherwise people will naively except capitalism as perfect."
so you want people to understand a concept that can never exist in the real world, because otherwise they would favor the system that works best, or heaven forbid, think it's perfect?
cristoballs 1 year ago
@cristoballs I want people to understand it so people can understand how some aspects of it can be integrated into the current capitalist system to be make it more fair and even. People not understanding marxism look to what happened in countries such as Russia think thats what Marxism is and then simple say that everything in socialism is bad which isn't the case. Sorry if I'm being unclear its difficult to say everything in a 500 word limit
wranglers575 1 year ago
This was well put together and you are well spoken , although I've heard mixed reviews of this video I must say the build quality weather it be through your intelligent dialect or facts the video was well done. You should become a historian you would succeed well in a field of that matter.
binty47 1 year ago
You might have more of an impact on your viewer if you weren't fully engaged in the comforts of capitalism. Tons of books, nice home, nice computer, nice furniture, etc... I guess that is the "difference between theory and practice"
At least the "amazing atheist" only has a blank wall and some news clippings for his background. Which, by the way, is all Americans will have once we start redistributing our wealth to the rest of the world in order to achieve global equality.
csgforme 1 year ago
Many assertions are made in this video, and simply not backed up by anything. ...And it would be great if I didn't feel like I was being lectured to...
robman419 1 year ago
Lee Doren took you to school! EVERYONE GO TO "HOW THE WORLD WORKS" LISTEN TO LEE DOREN!! He tears this whole thing apart in about 11 mins.
guthunk 1 year ago
@DasAmericanAtheist,
wow, I consider myself a socialist, but you are getting a lot of criticism for this video. I am scratching my head as to why. I think I may make a response to one point you made regarding Kant and the Categorical Imperative.
thanks for the video, don't know why I wasn't subscribed to you in the first place...
bubbamickmac 1 year ago
Honestly dude... What truly leads you to believe that Socialism will work in America?
You haven't given any real proof in this vid. Just university style theorizing.
Every society that's done Socialism has generally sucked. It's creeped into American practices and the last fifty years are a good indication of that.
Most people don't want Socialism here, bud. Not even the Russians, as Putin's reaction to Obama's stupid stimulus package proves.
Zucca101 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Opponents of capitalism love to complain about the force and oppression the government does in collusion with the business world - but are fine with force and oppression when it's a form that they like. If you want to oppose the fascism of government/business collusion, you have to oppose the socialist oppression the government does on its own. We can have a market economy or we can have statism. There's no friendly statism.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
Opponents of capitalism love to complain about the force and oppression the government does in collusion with the business world - but are fine with force and oppression when it's a form that they like. If you want to oppose the fascism of government/business collusion, you have to oppose the socialist oppression the government does on its own. We can have a market economy or we can have statism. There's no friendly statism.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
My government answers to me, eh? Okay, I'll call it and tell it to stop stealing mine and my friend's and family's money to pay for the education system where it indoctrinates and mentally abuses children, and for the broken health care system, and for art and culture programs that represent everything I oppose. I'll get back to you on how well it works.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
"And though the press is not entirely oppressed other variables like advertising-income-news undermine the free press." So the free press is hurt by the fact that people choose to pay for forms of press you consider inferior to the forms you'd have them support, and are free to support yourself, and evidently wish you could force them to support. You don't dislike capitalism because it oppresses the press - you dislike it because it doesn't.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
Acting even-handily about capitalism and communism, saying "both have flaws, both lead to some forms of oppression" etc. is a complete distortion of the truth. The fact that capitalism hasn't led to everyone's life being absolutely perfect doesn't mean it's "failures" are anywhere in the same universe as communism's. Communism has, without fail, led to oppression and famine in every implementation. Capitalism is the only system in history that has led to widespread prosperity.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@thinkingisawesome
Capitalism has led to the depression, state assassinations of its citizens, corporate oppression of workers and unions, free-market oppression of the press, corporate oppression of civil liberties, but everyone can buy food and not everyone's hurt. Oh what a great argument for Capitalism: "It doesn't have as much oppression as Communism! Capitalism is better."
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129 please explain how privately owned capital leads to oppression of the press and "state assassinations"
thegillotine09 1 year ago
@thegillotine09 Unlike America in the Philippines rich men have private armies. And though the press is not entirely oppressed other variables like advertising-income-news undermine the free press. They only tell you what sells. You can see it in American news, how little they tell you about foreign affairs. I bet not a lot of Americans know that Turkey, unfriendly state to Iran, is helping Iran to get nuclear energy for the sake of peace(along with Brazil)...
Read the history of the CIA.
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129
The CIA is not capitalism, that's the US gov't. Congratulations, you're a libertarian.
thegillotine09 1 year ago
@thegillotine09 CIA is known for breaking unions and socialist groups because it runs against capitalist ideologies. I'm not a libertarian but I'm flattered to be described as someone who identifies with freedom.
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129 Unions, as voluntary organizations workers join for collective bargaining, are completely consistent with capitalism and a boon to it. Today, unions are thugs who propel themselves into a clandestine position using force. Anyway, the CIA "breaks" groups because our government operates on the premise that it can use force if it think it's better for society, and the CIA does believe what it's doing is better for society.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@Nades129 You can only battle the types of things the CIA is doing by defending individual rights (which can only exist in a capitalist economy.) Not by advocating for government force, but a kind that you find more appealing.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@Nades129 Capitalism did not lead to the depression. The Federal Reserve and the Sherman act led to it. All economic failures can be linked back to the mixed economy. Self-interested businessmen have no incentive to over-extend credit, and those who do will hurt only themselves. Government attempts to "tweak" the system leads to bubbles - and the ensuing bursts.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@Nades129 "corporate oppression of workers and unions, free-market oppression of the press, corporate oppression of civil liberties" If by any of these you mean "using its private property in a way I dislike" - that's not oppression. Ideological cliques don't have the right to enslave people just because they're wealthy. If by any of these you mean the use of force or fraud - that's not capitalism.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@thinkingisawesome Not just because they are wealthy, it's because they have reached a point in society where they are given power; a condition in a capitalist framework, a class exists. For example, Corporations buy politicians as a consequences of it's cheaper cost, and gain more profits from the tax cuts, and it goes circular. Then they use their resources to manipulate the public. News obey because they are for profit entities. These consequences of a system, it's not ideological.
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129 Nothing wrong at all with profits or tax cuts. What's the difference between manipulation and persuasion? (Answer: "Manipulation" is when you disagree). You're free to express your own views with your own resources and hope people support you. And often they do - hence the massive, massive media and publishing power the left has despite the fact that the rich and powerful would disagree with those views.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@thinkingisawesome
Manipulation: The Iraq War, Cold War, War on Drugs, War on Terrorism, anti-American.
I don't disagree with anything. For all I care Anarcho-Capitalism would exist and I'd still argue about its injustices. As for your idea as the media as leftist is a myth. Besides, if I do advocate for a press then it's a free press; where EVERYTHING is in the topic despite corporate news loses and decline of viewers.
There is no left and right. Don't be dragged into an illusion of two sides.
Nades129 1 year ago
Okay, so, you disagree with the conclusion the general media and the populace took on those things. Your conclusions may be right. I happen to agree about the Iraq war and the war on drugs. But a media controlled via coercion isn't going to magically make the best possible decisions. If you don't trust the people who control a media people aren't forced to support, what makes you think one you are forced to support is going to be any better?
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@Nades129 Where "EVERYTHING" is in topic? What does that even mean? Every possible position should be given even space in every medium no matter how many people care? And how do you divide the ideologies? What if I think my particular sub-schism of whatever I believe in is its own and deserves space? And what gives you the right to force other people's resources to spread a certain idea - even if you're doing so in an attempt to be even-handed?
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@Nades129 How about we have a system where "EVERYTHING" *can* be in topic by whoever chooses to put it in topic, for whoever wishes to listen - i.e., a free market.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@Nades129 Buying politicians? If the politicians didn't have so much power, they wouldn't have anything to buy. Guns and money are often linked. The mistake leftists make is assuming the first would be okay if it weren't for the second. It's actually the other way around.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@thinkingisawesome First: I'm not left or right. Second: If politicians can't be bought then people who are under poverty lines are bought. Look at the Philippines where private armies are made, and hired killers exist and the government can do little about it.
I'm arguing about the system. Power is very corrupting to the minds of men.
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129 It is illegal in a free society to use force or fraud. That is one of the primary purposes of legitimate government.
"Power is very corrupting to the minds of men." DEFINITELY. Socialism gives MORE POWER to government officials.
thegillotine09 1 year ago
@thegillotine09
Illegal to use fraud? Wow, I wonder how those big banks who were too big to fail got those bail outs. They probably didn't use fraud. It must have been legal.
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129 Wait - government gives it's friends billions of dollars stolen from the taxpayer - and you're blaming capitalism? Do you know what capitalism is? It's not "people I dislike with lots of money who smoke cigars and wear suits." It's a system of private property and voluntarily trade. Under capitalism the bail out would not have happened - the bail out was an act of socialism.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@thinkingisawesome
I'm sure that was my view of Capitalism in the first place, the same that I viewed monarchy as the noble divine prince serving the poor. We could have that system in some ideological experiment, but as far as we know with monarchy it only serves royalty.
The bail out was definitely an act of socialism, but it existed in a capitalist framework. Where the public were too stupid and too distracted to participate in the "Democracy."
Try and have some lil doubt of the free market.
Nades129 1 year ago
@thinkingisawesome
I'm sure that was my view of Capitalism in the first place, the same that I viewed monarchy as the noble divine prince serving the poor. We could have that system in some ideological experiment, but as far as we know with monarchy it only serves royalty.
The bail out was definitely an act of socialism, but it existed in a capitalist framework. Where the public were too stupid and too distracted to participate in the "Democracy."
Try and have some lil doubt of the free market.
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129 There's a distinction between economic power and physical power (or fraud.) The first is power people give you voluntarily because you offer a positive value. The second is a threat. Now, *businesses* (not capitalism, as they're contradicting capitalism by doing so), may sometimes use force or fraud - but that's what the government is there to stop. No one advocating free markets believe private thugs should be allowed to use force any more than the government should be allowed to.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@thinkingisawesome
I'm sure free marketerians believe that. I've read their work. But at best it's Utopian and mythological. Capitalism from the industrial age to modern society has always led private power to oppress society. It is a consequence of a system based on power and oppression.
Nades129 1 year ago
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force - i.e., what a socialist economy uses.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Nades129 Power over what? Yourself and those who wish to trade with you voluntarily? How do you "oppress" people by offering them positive values on a free market on the condition they give you value in return? Oppression means force. Socialism is force.
thinkingisawesome 1 year ago