G. A. Cohen - Against Capitalism - Part 1

Gerald (Jerry) Cohen was a Marxist political philosopher. He was Chichele Professor of Social and Political Theory at Oxford and subsequently Quain Professor of Jurisprudence at University College London.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_C...

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD1YEz...

• Category

  News & Politics

[Lukas K]

what a unsophisticated moron you are.

He's not talking about what you consider private property (homes,cars, other forms of personal property etc), he's talking about the private ownership of society's productive resources- it is this ownership that allows 'some humans to rule everyone else' as you put it. The 'freedom' for a minority to own these, to set the terms on which we must live, makes everyone else unfree.

[Davidius Doremouseius]

Only a few weeks ago I read 1in 3 (sounds way too many, but that was what was reported) people in the UK are on sleeping tablets because of money and work worries. Hey, capitalism gives people sleepless nights, but that's ok because other capitalists own the factories that make sleeping tablets for us all !!!!!!

[kennstedas]

Dont you think the interaction goes both ways. The media reports what poeple talk about?

[OBIEL HOI]

i want shmoos and i love you for making this clip very greatful for this explanation

[BenkaiDebussy]

Everyone has their worldview heavily influenced by the (mostly privately owned) media; research has actually been done on the topic. Some people may be more influenced than others, but national discourse will generally focus on what the most popular media sources choose to report (and how they report it). This is especially true due to the information saturation (through mobile phones, social networks, etc) that exists now; if a topic isn't covered by the media, people will discuss it less.

[BenkaiDebussy]

And just about every single member of Congress + the President is funded by private interests. It is dumb to act like the interests of the government are somehow separate from the interests of those who fund its leaders' campaigns. It is pretty obvious that the government will act in the interests of wealthy individuals/businesses in a system where huge sums of money can be contributed to political candidates; they have the most money to contribute!

[xsickzackx]

are you a sucker for advertisements? why not? because youre educated? do you think the masses fall suckers to bad advertising because they are simply inferior organisms? na, they are indoctrinated to become followers by the government education system. not taught to value of thinking or analysis. it still all stems from government.

[James Foster II]

WRONG. Ever heard of Advertising? Capitalists are just as capable of manipulating the public by their own means. Their marriage with government only further complicates, but elimination of government would not eliminate the negative effects of profit-seeking.

[Tia Libertia]

@WorkersPower2008 And in the real world that is a distinction without a difference,where a computer at home can be used generate revenue.The very fact that people earn an income from selling their blood,sperm,ovaries etc further attests to the failed definition.Indeed for the Marxian distinction to be valid it must concur empirically ,and it just does not.

[Simon Hardy]

There is a clear distinction in political theory between possessions (your pen, car, clothes, house) and property. Property in Marxism relates to capital production. The distinction between possessions and property is a social relation, for instance a computer at home has a different social relation to a computer at work.