 I think we'll jump into it and we're gonna we're gonna take these segments I think you guys I think you can see me in the corner there. There I am. Hey, hey everybody Newsy Cornell West in the in the main thing and we're just gonna we're just gonna play this out and see where it goes I think the beginning here. He's He's talking about You know people who somebody who went to jail for being a communist Now communism needs to be radically called into question now that that's good, right? So he's saying capital is a communism needs to be radically called into question and he's saying that because he just said well This guy went to jail because he was a communist and he realizes what he's saying. He's saying look, but look Communism is a bad thing communism is not a good thing But but there's a but of course with Cornell West in terms of its dominating forms like the Soviet Union and China on the mile And so forth and so are they non-dominant forms of communism? I Neverhood of any non-dominant forms of communism, but at the same time when you look at Karl Marx and his critique of capitalism He this is prior to let it prior to Stalin product He says capitalism is tied to this obsession with profit that puts profit before people Now this is the theme And you'll see Joe Rogan even catches on to this this obsession with profit The assumption and he makes this assumption just he just makes it naturally and It goes through the entire interview whenever he talks about economic issues and Joe Rogan just plays right into it And you see this on the left always and to some extent you see this even on the right With people like Stephen Bannon when they criticize capitalism it's Obsession with profit now what is profit and He assumes that obsession with profit is bad. He assumes that exception of profit is Evil is negative and he knows that you all think that Because he doesn't have to explain it. All he has to say is obsession with profit means bad stuff bad stuff Now what does it mean to be obsessed With profit and of course the other term he uses Which he uses over and over again, but not just him. This is a common term used on the left a Common term used on the left Profits before people profits before people, right? But what What are profits? What are profits where the profits come from now at least in a free market, right? And and and this is a he's critiquing capitalism so capitalism as core free market Where the profits actually come from well profits come from the production the creation of Goods and services at that are then sold freely voluntarily to consumers or to other providers of goods and services other businesses At a cost greater than what it cost you to produce greater than what it cost you to produce now Why? Why are people willing to pay you that? Why are we let people willing to pay you More than it cost you to produce well first they don't know how much it cost you to produce They're willing to pay you for it. Why well because They are getting more value out of whatever it is that you produced whatever it is that you made They're getting more value out of it Then you are charging them Because otherwise they would not engage in the transaction and this is kind of this is econ 101. This is not hard This is where intellectuals like cornell west Evade they're smart enough to get this this idea of the trader principle This idea of win-win relationships in economics and trade in free markets are not difficult Not difficult So you have a relationship here where A producer produces something a creator creates something and he sells it to person b and the reason person b is willing Is willing To pay for it is because whatever it is that they're buying What as a service they are getting it is worth more to them than the money they're giving up And if it wasn't they wouldn't engage in the transaction They wouldn't engage in the transaction You know I always use my iphone as example if you pay a thousand dollars for an iphone It means that you value the iphone more than a thousand dollars now. You might be right or you might be wrong you're probably right because Partially, you know the marketplace has spoken so many of us value the iphone is over a thousand dollars That we're willing to pay for it and It's hard to believe that so many of us are irrational so many of us just motivated by whim when it comes to A thousand dollar expenditure so profit Is a reflection of the value you're creating For whom For other people So they said yeah profit versus people Now we'll get to what he means by it in a minute because You know and he never explains it and the left almost never explains What they actually mean by it It's it's a term they throw out and they just assume you all get it. But the fact is you cannot make a profit Without making the lives of other people better Without creating value For other people an objective value If it is not an objective value, yes, some people might buy them whim, but it will not last any lasting any lasting profit Is a profit generated By producing something that is objectively valuable to the people consuming it. They are better off Now it's true. You can come up with examples where there's a few examples where that might not be True And I would argue that In a rational civilized society, you wouldn't be generating profits not significant profits from them think of drugs things of the sale of cocaine in a free market, well That is not a very profitable business Because you're not actually creating value And the people are better off in some subjective Momentary sense, but they're not better off long term and as a consequence They're not they repeat buyers for a while, but not for very long. They die or they overcome their addiction So you can't produce long term profits From selling at this value and objectively objective this value So profits against people is just absurd It's it's a complete misnomer Obsession with profits means an obsession for creating values That other people benefit from now I'm getting all these super chat questions, which I'm having to copy over so That slows me down a little bit so if the question is unrelated to what we're talking about I'd really appreciate if you could delay The question until we finish with cornel west because it it really does distract me um But I do want your questions In the super chat, you know, I I can't read the comments and I'm not going to answer questions that you're not willing to pay put a dollar amount towards so What does cornel west actually mean when he says profit ahead of people well Cornell is is fundamentally a marxist and he's talking here in the context of marxite He's just said we have to remember marx marx who came before communism He never mentions by the way never mentions that marx was the inspiration for starlin and lenin and mal That is never mentioned It's just there was there was these guys who did communism And and that's bad because authoritarianism is bad and they were authoritarian and bad consequences Okay, and then there was this car marx guy and he said some really cool stuff and he said some really true stuff And he came before them And the causal relationship blank out. No, no, we don't want to talk about that We don't want to talk about that So what does he mean? Well, he means he's talking about car marx theory of exploitation So he's really talking about the idea that marx Believes that profit comes on the back of labors that profit comes from exploiting The people who really make the stuff Really make the stuff Marx was a materialist A labor theory of value the people who really make the stuff are the laborers Other are the people in the assembly line the people using the muscles to move the levers to assemble things to screw stuff to use their hammers and nails They're the people who actually make the stuff And profit is exploitation because profit is above and beyond what you pay those laborers You the capitalist gets to keep but you have contributed nothing to the process That is the root of exploitation And that is the root of putting of the idea of putting profits before people because if you put people before profits Then you would pay your workers more And they would receive any excess They would receive or they at least as a socialist they would share in it Significantly and you as the capitalist or as the manager as the ceo would get nothing because you contributed nothing Or if you're a little bit more sophisticated democratic socialist you would get a little bit you would get something but not much Because maybe you contributed something But you didn't contribute much Now there's a lot I can say about this and I have Done lectures and courses about this, but this is a complete perversion and of course. I ran talked about this This is a complete reversal of cause and effect a complete reversal of cause and effect There is no such thing as labor without capitalists without entrepreneurs without ceos There was no such thing as spontaneous Production spontaneous creation by a group of laborers who just build a car just build a computer Somebody some entrepreneur some genius some inventor And then some capitalist have to get together believe in the idea willing to invest money in the idea willing to invest time resources and then Organize the means of production to make the idea of reality bang together labor equipment in order To build something to create something to make something Things don't just come into being But you'll notice and we'll see this later on with cornel west Socialists always just assume stuff is there wealth is just there And cornel west later on will say something to indicate this And then it's just an issue of how we distribute it how it's divvied up How much you grab or how much you get or how much you are allocated wealth is not created And that of course is the materialist materialist view of the world If all there is is muscle Then all there is is stuff out there Then it's just a matter of rearranging the stuff and the rearranging the stuff just happens It doesn't require thinking it doesn't require genius. It doesn't require Organization those are all conceptual activities The data recognizes as having any role any role In the productive activity In generally human activity, which is fascinating intellectuals who don't value The intellect But that's what socialists. That's what Marxists are The intellectuals who don't value the intellect So they view that everything is just The workers and the workers would know how to make a computer anyway You don't need the Steve Jobs's at all Or if you did once he had the idea and you know Big deal having the idea Then the workers would just make it You know, but really The real genius in this world Is not how to assemble Stuff It's how to It's how to design it How to structure even the means of production How to structure an assembly line, that's the genius It's not the work being done on the assembly line It's Ford who is the genius Not the guys in the assembly line It's Ford who is producing The guys in the assembly line are helping along a little bit Each one of them creating a tiny little bit But it is Ford that is creating The possibility for them to create And yes, Ford makes a lot more than all of them Maybe more than all of them put together But that's because he made It all possible Not just By being an engineer in terms of how I can assemble But being an engineer in terms of how the assembly line is assembled In terms of being a marketer But knowing how to sell the cars So showing people that the car is a real value to them And creating a car that is a real value to them Not just any other car And paying his workers An appropriate amount to get them in You know, Ford for example doubled the wages at some point In order to attract the best workers And every other aspect Every other aspect Of what it means to run a business Is where the real The real Geniuses and that's where the real production happens So yes, the capitalists, the CEOs, the managers Deserve what they get In a free market An obsession with profits Is an obsession With creating value Which is an obsession of making the world a better place For human beings to live in If you value human beings And I do I don't want to place anything above human beings But if you value human beings Then you value Then you value Profits Then profits are what you should value Profits A symbol A sign That human well-being is better That value is being created Now it looks like I don't know how to change it right now Maybe I can do that It was a typo In the Title of the show, so I think it's being fixed now Yep, it's being fixed I don't know if it's being fixed on YouTube At least on, yep, on YouTube, it's the same thing I don't know how to fix it On the fly on YouTube, on Facebook, it just would change Okay Let's see So that, let's go back a little bit And we'll listen to a little bit more Of West Dominating forms like the Soviet Union And China on the mile And so forth and so on But at the same time, when you look at Karl Marx And his critique of capitalism He says Look how he lights up when he says Karl Marx I mean this guy loves Karl Marx The true leftist intellectuals Really, particularly the Not so modern ones The ones The ones who are more interested in the poor Than they are interested in skin color Who admires of Karl Marx? It truly is sickening Prior to Lenin, prior to Stalin He says Capitalism is tied to This obsession with profit That puts profit before people And it will generate oligopolies In which there will be grotesque levels Of wealth inequality And the only way that poor and working people Will be able to gain access To any resources to do organizing And mobilizing None of that is true None of that is accurate depiction of Karl Marx And none of that of course actually happened He's suggesting it all happened The idea that capitalism Generates oligopolies Is fundamentally false It's just never happened It just doesn't happen And it didn't happen In the 19th century as if people As if people Anyway it didn't happen In the 19th century You didn't see these monopolistic oligarchs created Yes, wealth inequality Explodes But so does The The wealth That everybody The poor have So everybody gets richer And it's true The people who create greater value Get richer at a far faster rate Than the people who don't But again he's not going to explain why that's a bad thing Nobody ever today Needs to explain why Wealth inequality is a bad thing They just state it It just is a bad thing We just know that it's a bad thing Marx didn't really talk much About organizing and mobilizing Oh I mean ultimately that happened It happened organically When capitalism matured and the working class rebelled But he's suggesting that Marx Was an advocate of labor unions Labor unions are a very primitive form For Marx Marx is much more about The big collective Proletarian And the change They will bring about But this idea Which he says right That the poor stay poor Nothing happens to them Without This organization Even Karl Marx never says that Karl Marx says The poor have gotten richer There's a middle class Capitalism is brilliant At bringing people out of poverty That's not the fundamental Marxist critique Of capitalism But it's what they latch onto And they use it primarily to justify The labor movement Prior to Stalin He says capitalism Is tied to This obsession with profit That puts profit before people And it will generate oligopolies In which there will be grotesque levels Of wealth and equal What is grotesque levels of wealth and equality As compared to ungrotesque levels of wealth and equality And the only way that poor and working people Will be able to gain access To any resources But that's again access to resources So here this is important Access to resources This is what I meant before by saying They think stuff is just there Stuff is just out there Reality is just full of wealth It's just there The capitalists grab a big Part of that, their obsession with profits And the only way poor people Can get access to resources Access to this stuff That's not created It's just there Is by mobilizing Is by getting together And mobilizing And organizing Against Or to fight Because it's all a zero sum world kind of thing You know the capitalists have got all the stuff And now the working class Has to organize, has to mobilize Through labor unions primarily Or through democracy To grab their stuff No recognition Of where wealth comes from Who creates it Allocated in a free market Where it comes from in a free market None of them None of them Organizing and mobilizing Now you can accept that Marx is inside Without being a Marxist He's just telling the truth Is he telling the truth now? Watch Joe Rogan You think that socialism just hasn't been implemented correctly? Is that what you think? Because the argument has always been Show me a socialist economy The government that ever worked But there's so many people That find the idea of socialism attractive Because it combines This idea of a community With a nation And that we're all tied together And we obviously have some socialist Okay before I go on Because now he goes on I mean Joe Rogan's He's asking the question What sounds like real Sincerity He says socialism is attractive And he's right And this is the key question That anybody who's advocating against socialism And advocating for capitalism Has to come to grips with Why is socialism so appealing? Why is it so attractive? And Joe Rogan says it It's because of this Community Tied to nation, tied to It's because of the appeal of collectivism And deeper than that Socialism is attractive Because altruism is attractive And altruism is attractive It's because all we know It's what we've been taught It's what we've been raised on There is nothing else Nothing else From a moral perspective Other than altruism We've been taught that it's right to sacrifice That it's right To focus on those who don't have That they are the standard Of good And this comes from Christianity It comes from secular philosophy It comes from everywhere Altruism is a moral standard And socialism is consistent With altruism And this is why We'll come back to this Christians Cannot defend capitalism And many libertarians Can't defend capitalism Because they assume altruism And altruism is socialism And Joe Rogan here Is identifying it Not as explicitly terms As I wish he would But he identifies it He sees it It gives you this warm fuzzy feeling What's that warm fuzzy feeling It's that feeling of Oh, caring about your brother Caring about the group Caring about other people And putting their well-being ahead of yours But yeah, that feels good That's what morality really means Respects to our civilization In terms of like utilities And military Now notice The equivocation here And again, this is kind of equivocation That is childish And you'd expect better Both from Joe Rogan and From Connell West So Well, he mentions utilities But the military Police These things are socialism So And this is maybe the damage Some of these anarchists have done Capitalism Is that people associate capitalism With everything as private There is no government And that's the danger these so-called The narco-capitalists have done to us They have no conception of what Government is for under capitalism Actually is They have no definition of it They indeed never define it And if you never define something Capitalism is private stuff And oh yeah, we don't have Private police and private military So that must mean Those things are socialist No Capitalism is 100% consistent Actually capitalism Requires A government And a military An narco-capitalism Is a contradiction in terms You cannot have capitalism If you have anarchy But again, notice how the culture And Joe Rogan I think represents the culture And I think to a large extent Connell West certainly more than I do More than you do most of you They represent the culture They just take this for granted All the stuff the government provides That's socialism That should provide stuff it doesn't provide It's all this mishmash That's all socialism And then it's just a question of Which parts of it do we think should be privatized? There's no principle, there's no idea here And Iron Man's idea of course That government is instituted For the sole purpose The sole purpose of protecting individual rights And then the question is What therefore Is Should the government do There's a standard now But there's no when you don't define things Like these guys do or where your definitions Are so fuzzy That kind of meaningless Then what you get is this Mishmash of stuff Not by feelings, wishes, wins Or mystic revelations Any man or woman who values his life And who does not Want to give in To today's cult of despair Cynicism and impotence And does not intend to give up The world to the dark ages And to the role of the collectivist Brutes