Thank you Professor Wolff

Thank you, Professor Richard Wolff., I am so grateful for your wisdom, Professor Richard Wolff, going to college at Yale and being determined to think outside the box. I missed getting in the classes. But I hàve listened to you for years. It will benefit all who take part. I also have books of yours.

Yes China has lifted all millions of people out of extreme poverty. In the west one needs to use some imagination of what was extreme poverty. They lived in villages with no paved roads, huts built with mud, minimum electricity, coal burning stoves in the kitchen and under the bed, water taken from wells, children especially girls didn’t attend much school, didn’t have enough nutrition. Suburbs off the skirt of Beijing were like that 40 years ago, let alone remote provinces. Life expectancy was 63 in 1963. Today one can stroll the streets of Chinese cities for a month and not find a single homeless person. Earlier this year a US survey ranked China first in Happiest Countries. According to Marx, the proletariats will achieve final victory but capitalism of the world cannot go extinct overnight. Producing billionaires is just a logical step during economic growth. The US has some very bad billionaires of Big Banks, Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Food, Big Pharm, and Weapon. They are indirect or direct causes of poor people suffering in the US. These don’t exist in China because they are State Owned Enterprises. There is no profiteering military industrial complex in China. 10 years ago there were plenty of Chinese real estate developer billionaires. They were seen by the Chinese people as rich men and women who weren’t so special. Today the top billionaires of China produce EVs, batteries, super apps, logistics, internet sales, green energy, biotech and more. They work closely with the government who determines policies that can benefit society. The real estate developer did made their share of contribution in economic growth but they seemed to have kept more than their fair share. The new tech billionaires on the other hand are national heroes. The people love them for not only contributing to society and humanity but for being world champions in their fields. Things in China change so fast from decade to decade. Unless one has worked in or with China for an extended period, one simply doesn’t have the chance to know enough about China. Since the beginning of Covid, literally every line in the NY Times about China has been twisted facts, half truths, or outright lies; the same applies across the board of mainstream media. 9 out of 10 books about China are anti-China propaganda, and worse, outdated anti-China propaganda.

One thing I rarely hear but espouse myself as an expression (and positive radical concept) is that, instead of a palliative redistribution, what we need is a proper DISTRIBUTION to begin with so that no RE-distribution is then actually needed. Of course, the best "distribution" would be a massive and democratic ownership of the means of production by the workers, cooperatives, and on a larger scale (natural resources, international "police" activities) a global governance, national, regional, local, etc.

Brilliantly clear analysis, perfectly evenhanded, and yet completely accessible to the average person. Should be shared to everyone.

Thank you so much for making these videos! They're needed now more than ever.

I've been watching your videos this past year, I appreciate your youtube lectures on socialism. I have genuine hope for the future.

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

Why would you find hope in an economic system that has never worked anywhere it's been tried, at any time in history, under anybody's management. We even know why it doesn't work. Do you honestly believe that somebody has finally figured out the magic formula?

@achillespollo

7 ай бұрын

@@anthonymorris5084 Besides asking yourself why you're even here, ask yourself is Capitalism working? Do you think Capitalism is the magic formula for economic prosperity? You need to learn about your reality first before you question others.

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

@@achillespollo I'm here to defend my way of life that's being threatened, and to debunk the endless myths and ignorance socialists spew about capitalism. The entire Western world embraces capitalism. The West represents the most successful societies this planet has ever seen. Capitalism has proven to lift billions out of poverty. Socialism has proven to leave a swath of destruction wherever it's been instituted. Socialism is always born from dictatorship. It's an anti human authoritarian cult of envy. *"You need to learn about your reality first before you question others."* Spare me your sanctimony. You know nothing about me. Invalidation is not an argument. I am well versed in socialism and capitalism. Something I can never credit my opponents with.

I'll be back . Miss Profr Wolff. His wisdom is a necessity .

@adamsedaca9530

7 ай бұрын

I think you meant Mr Wolff. LOL

@georgefurman4371

7 ай бұрын

@@adamsedaca9530 lol!! You understand the meaning. solidarity!!

@raushaunrigsby1181

7 ай бұрын

He was saying he "misses" him.@@adamsedaca9530

Excellent class, thank you professor Wolff.

Very nice. I’m going to listen to it a few times so that I can promote these great ideas to others.

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

My friend there is nothing great about these ideas. They have been tried throughout history and failed every time. They are fundamentally flawed. Nowhere in the world, at any time in history, under anybody's management has Marxism/socialism ever produced a thriving economy or lifted people out of poverty, ever.

Thank you Proffesor Richard Wolff your clear and straight forward talking about the systems

Alphabet accurate and it was very excellent program of others. Thank you Richard Wolff professor. We like it.

There appears to be a stagnation in people's thinking, as they appear entrenched in the current system and struggle to imagine other possibilities. I wish there were a way to expedite the process of bringing democracy to our workplaces.

@asamanthinketh1937

5 ай бұрын

You can already have democracy in your workplace today

Appreciated.

I live in Canada and I am very much interested in taking these classes.

Greeting from Turkey! As a member of Worker's Party of Turkey, ı am learning a lot of things of your knowledge. Thank you for your hard work. Socialsm is the future so lets go comrades.

This was excellent, Professor Wolff. I would like to take the class but Capitalism and distance prohibit my ability to do so.

@anhumblemessengerofthelawo3858

7 ай бұрын

boo fckn hoo

@numbersix8919

6 ай бұрын

Ain't the classes free admission?

Beautiful presentation, thank you so much.

As Prof. Wolff has discussed in prior speeches or podcasts, I still maintain that what went on in the USSR wasn't what I'd consider true socialism or communism regardless of what the American right wing yells from the tops of their lungs. Marx himself wrote in Capital v2 that when the government owns the means of production, that's called _state capitalism_ because the workers are still oppressed and surplus value is still appropriated from them - instead of a director, manager or owner appropriating it, it's a government secretary or commissar or minister or whoever. Nevertheless, capitalism, like slavery and feudalism, is still at its core a system rooted in mass exploitation of the people by a relative few for the purpose of accruing wealth. It's the exploitation itself that must be addressed, which Prof. Wolff does regularly when he discusses worker co-ops.

@georgefurman4371

7 ай бұрын

What most people from the USA think of the USSR is relatively irrelevant to an honest study of the history of socialism and the perspective of that same evolutionary proposition started by Marx and then Lenin & Trotsky to later be derailed by the Stalin regime. The fact is that the Soviet leadership was murdered and persecuted not only in the USSR but world wide in a brutal and unstoppable permanent war since 1917. The ww2 success was the success of the wealthy class in using national borders division and nationalism in particular to reboot the cycle of accumulation of capital into the imperialist stage . Surviving the world's workers organized attempts at any independent socialist experiment. The wealthy class since then used fascism as a nationalist uprising to kill two birds in one shot while imposing a world market new leadership domination trough NATO and other national divisions. Suppressing the challenges of national within borders attempts at socialism and boosting the dependence on war economies of imperialist countries. Today destroying to rebuild us the last stage of the capitalist system. Trotsky was correct when he predicted that transformation.

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

The fundamental flaw of socialism starts with its characterization of worker "exploitation". Employment is not exploitation by any definition of the term. People actively seek out employment. Acquiring a job is cause for celebration. "Crap, I just got a job". What no one said ever. Admitting this reality though, causes the entire argument to implode, so socialists simply continue shrieking "exploitation" as if you can just call something that's green, yellow. Socialists also (willfully) fail to recognize is that the vast majority of people *prefer* employment. Most people have no interest in ownership. They have no interest in the risks involved or the capital required to start a business. They do not wish to be liable or on the hook for debts or company failures. Most people want a guaranteed paycheque at a guaranteed time. They want to be given specific tasks, duties, responsibilities and the tools required. They want structured hours. Socialists have this comical belief that businesses just fall into people's laps.

Thank you professor Wolff your amazing explanations of the system makes everything so clear

❤

Morning professor! Wish you a great day sir.

Solidarité

@sizzla123

7 ай бұрын

Solidarité

Thank you so so much for this amazing talk about Socialism in Todays World . A much needed critique at such a confusing time in our economy . 😅

I love Prof. Wolff

Thanks from Portugal

Prof Wolff, we need to get back to live programs like before in the church. If possible of course.

Very clear and understsandable presentation, thank you! ❤

Thank you ❤. Greetings from México City. I'm interested in your classes.

Thank you.

Thanks Prof, as always!! ✌🏾

Thank you so much. I am beginning to understand the different kiind of socialism.

I’m a Marxist and admirer of your work. Appreciate you’ll probably not see this but does anyone have any ideas about what would happen if the business failed. How would the employees/owners/ cooperatives reconcile?

@numbersix8919

6 ай бұрын

Be creative. There are vast possibilities. As in all socialist enterprises, human outcomes are the most important. Imagine different enterprises, assess their values (skilled labor, capital investment, real property, goodwill, etc) and the human outcomes you want (especially for the owners) and then work out what institutions and relations are necessary to support those outcomes. Why or how the business failed is essential as well. When you're done with your scenario, you'll have a snapshot of the social, economic, and legal environment that supports such enterprises. You have a world to gain, so get started! Plan YOUR dream enterprise! And your society. It's your democracy too.

I think this might be the first time ive heard Proff Wolff discuss fascism, at least discuss the way he did here. Would it be possible Prof Wolff to go a bit more in depth into the question: What IS fascism? People on the Right like to say that socialism and Marxism are fascism, or fascist. I know thats not true, but i dont have the rhetorical guns to take on that question

In capitalism there is competition for better qualities of goods and services in socialism by cooperation must preserve ultimate or best of it.Indeed it is achievable .

@ComradeBeer

7 ай бұрын

You're kidding

@jeromyrutter729

6 ай бұрын

there can be competition in socialism as well. There is market socialism (like market anarchism). There's cooperation in capitalism. it's just forced by supervisors and made "efficient". There's also cooperation when oligopolies collude to set prices, or lobby governments.

Right on, Prof Wolff.

Good evening Prof Wolff, it's evening here in the Philippines, I always watch your podcasts, and I want to ask you questions regarding the 4th type of socialism you've mentioned, which is the worker coops, where the worker-employer relationship is gone. My questions are: 1. Is this the same as getting from the capitalists the ownership of the means of production and handing it over to the working class, after a revolution? 2. Will the worker coop function without a government? And can it function without a government?

@Xthis1s4youX

7 ай бұрын

Sorry I'm not Professor Wolff, but I believe I might be able to answer your questions. 1. In short, yes. The long answer is that it's not quite the same. It's true that what a coop means is that the workers are themselves the owners of the means of production. And there is nothing dictating that you must have a capitalist (employer/employee) enterprise under the capitalist societies, so you can technically transition from the current top-down workplaces to worker coops, which would be a peaceful social revolution. However, as marxism teaches us, society evolves through struggle between entire classes, not specific people. So while some workers are becoming the owners of the means of production, it doesn't necessarily mean that the proletariat itself does. That would only happen if the worker coop became the dominant relation of production in society. So how does it become the dominant relation of production? We must analyse what allows for the employer/employee dichotomy to be the dominant relation of production in our present society. One interpretation is that what allows that is the state, which is a tool of oppression by one social class over all others, and in capitalist society, the state serves as a tool for the interests of the bourgeoisie (in other words, dictatorship of the bourgeoisie), one interest of which is its survival as a class. Since the worker coop eliminates the need for the bourgeoisie, it will not allow this new social relation to become dominant. It may occasionaly allow it to exist, but likely never to actually thrive. The way to subvert that resistance is through a proletariat capture and dismantling of the bourgeois state which, through legislation and media, makes sure that the employer/employee relation remains dominant. Only after dismantling the current state could the proletariat actually make sure that they get the means of production from the capitalists To conclude, while the worker coop is the most peaceful and desirable way of transitioning from a capitalist to a socialist economy, we must also be sure to be prepared for the resistance that we will most likely be met with. 2. During a transitionary period of social revolution, the use of a state might be needed to ensure the thrival of the new relation of production over the old one, of the new dominant class over the older one, meaning that the worker coops would still probably work with a government, but as this relation matures and evolves, that state would wither away and all that would remain of this government is merely its administrative role. I will add that even the anarcho-syndicalist movement in Catalonia had a sort of proletarian government to ensure its survival during the civil war For both of these questions I would recommend learning about the Paris Commune, for both Marx and Engels learned a lot from it, and which Lenin would then analyse at length. I would also recommend learning about the Soviet itself (not the USSR as a whole) and how it is structured

46:00 exactly. this is the dawn of the age of information, everything is illuminated now and things only get brighter from here on out. BRO IVE SEEN THAT LAMP ON ANTIQUES ROADSHOW

Workers of the world unite you have nothing to loose but your chains man

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

Workers of the world unite and start a business.

@lemond2007

5 ай бұрын

What the actual fuck are you talking about? There is SO MUCH to lose, thanks to living in a capitalist society.

M8 I totally agree with you, the only problem is who end's up in charge, from what I have learnt from reading history- it's usually low-life scumbag's who should be selling used cars in a low rent suburb. Hey M8 like you I hope/wish for the best- But I wouldn't put money on that outcome. Thanks for your input Proffessor.

@stevenbrassey3540

7 ай бұрын

No one is in charge and everyone is in charge. Once we’re adults. Educated, skilled, producing the war and if production, making democratic decisions, dialectics in train etc, why do we need anyone else in charge?

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

@@stevenbrassey3540 Are you seriously trying to tell me that anybody can simply achieve the mind boggling creations of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk? If people were given a thousand years, they wouldn't be able to achieve what these people have achieved.

@peterkerruish8136

6 ай бұрын

"No one is in charge + everyone is in charge " - ??? M8 you need to have a serious look at yourself...

@stevenbrassey3540

6 ай бұрын

I meant to say no one person is in charge and I meant producing the wealth. Just typos. No need for me to take look at myself m8!

Love from Pakistan to Professor

Am ammused. Well Because i am ignorant. ..but so interesting most especially when you think about justice and fairness for humans.

Realy I have enjoyed this lecture

Because of capitalism we are in under times which have many people. Socialism searches for new technical helps and discovery now

PhD Wolff: In the 4thSocialism/Cooperatives - How are the Leadership/Management selected? How do the Cooperatives determine the course(s) of their Divisional and Collective Operations? Ideally, the Democratized Employer-Employees PhD Wolff speaks of have similar talents and levels of intellect. That doesn't happen in most organizations. Levels of Experience/Competence vary. How are those Talents Coordinated?

Never Miss for years since began.

24:12 "If you steal from the Government you go to prison. If the Government steals from you they call it taxes" _ Dr Ron Paul

Final one is coming up is communalism ideology the original definition Loving carrying and sharing all equal

China has tried different kinds of 'Socialism', including what Dr. Wolff is describing before settling in the current format. China's leadership has concluded that a complete democratic socialism would not function without sufficient material foundation.

@morningstararun6278

7 ай бұрын

A complete domocratic Socialism is not possible, as long as there is a country called United Snakes of America.

Interested in the class, what's the best way to register?

@uriustosh

7 ай бұрын

No info in video or description, no info on either groups website. Id love to know as well.

@Irosm

7 ай бұрын

@@uriustosh found on D@W Twitter page, posted 3 days ago. $75-125

Peace ☮️ to all 🇮🇱 🇵🇸

So in other words I'm an ultra Capitalist, a true Capitalist per se.

How to achieve (in a practical, realistic way) a corporation where everyone has a say - The Great Game of Business by Jack Stack. A possibility.

Is there a peaceful corner on this earth......☮☮☮

Do participants in the course get a certificate of completion?

PREACH

“The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.” ― Ronald Reagan

@oswarz

7 ай бұрын

Hmm....Ronald Reagan wasn't very smart.

I would be interested in your class

Can we do the workshop if we can't afford the book

What would be the fee for the four professor Richard Wolff classes?

I find it hard to believe theres only 5 likes but 22000 views. Distracting .

Also this is great Unintentional ASMR..

It doesn't matter if your economy is done with capitalism, communism or socialism. As long as there is insufficient transparency and little to no tools for people to contribute to the process we will be left with corruption. Then it doesn't matter what system you have, it will fail.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

Oh, indeed, why didn't we think of that before? What a revolutionary concept! Surely, it has absolutely nothing to do with the systemic oppressions deeply ingrained in capitalism. Why blame the system when we can simply hold our own selves accountable? It's simply our fault for not demanding more transparency and more tools to contribute, not the system's fault that inherently rewards the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few people, with exploitation as a core aspect of its design. But, oh no, the answer must lie in something as basic as just better communication and openness. It's nothing to do with needing a complete systemic overhaul or shifting towards an economic model that promotes equitable distribution of wealth. Transparency and participation, surely those two things can save us from any form of exploitation and oppression, how simplistic and dismissive of a response to the far more complicated issue at hand!

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

Oh, and how delightful! To hear the voice of wisdom simply lay down the plain truth of it all! Thank heavens, because we were sitting here blindly believing that Marx's profound dialectical and historical materialism was the lens to understanding human societal progression and economic development. Your astute remark - that all we need to dismantle years of oppressive systems and usher in equality, is 'transparency' and some 'tools' - has turned everything on its head! Indeed, we can overlook the means of production, class struggle, or surplus value! All trivial aspects compared to this earth-shattering revelation! Surely, once there's 'transparency', labour exploitation will cease to exist. The alienation of workers in the capitalist economy will miraculously disappear. Your clarion call to action will also level income disparities, stabilise an unstable market, and hold profiteering tycoons accountable. Ah, a vision to behold! And how trivial we Marxists were! Yearning for the transformation of society through class consciousness, and yet all we needed were a handful of ‘tools’ to have people chip in to rectify an unjust economic system. We Marxists are now absolutely shaken. The cornerstones of Marxism - that societal changes occur because of the tensions between social classes - may as well be scrapped. Because after all, it's 'transparency' and 'tools', not class struggles or economic relations, that determine societal development, isn't it? How foolish of us to forget! I'm just taken aback at your oversimplification. Clearly, this proves we Marxists have been overthinking all along, pouring over theories of capitalism, socialism, communism, and historical dialectic. Thank you for this valuable lesson in economics. I will be sure to write it down in my 'Dummies Guide to Solving World Corruption and Economic Inequality'. I can't wait to break this news to the next Marxist meet-up. What a game-changer you've been! Well done!

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

I think I may have been overreacting when I posted this earlier, as I was assuming you were a reactionary, though I'm sure you get the gist of what I was saying here.

Humane views. Liked it. Industrial units outclassed feudalism by investing in newer technology, there was an corresponding freedom given to workers to opt out of work if they get a better deal elsewhere, feudal lord could not see the merit of freeing his labor force. Industrial units were always hungry for innovation and mechanization, they could not stagnate, stagnation meant more resources to create output, they wanted smart methods to improve their productivity in comparison to slow moving feudal workshops. They created demand for new products by making their products affordable. Under feudalism a grand coat could cost a rich man a big sum, he had fewer too. Industrialisation could offer same grand coat at lower rates. It had a system to protect as much the output. Feudalism emulated Industrial structures to become viable. Capitalism and feudalism are not much different, it is Industrial technology that differentiated the two. Social inequality and resultant dehumanisation under feudalism was resisted too, it changed a few feudals but not all. There were inventive rebels and runaways always forcing the lords to check their violent behavior. Violence breeds violence, dehumanisation results in reverse dehumsnisation. Has Capitalism failed to secure growth of Industrial institution? Industrialisation has its own merit, it will reject the demerits of capitalism (crony more) if it can not keep pace. Socialism may fail to change the extravagant life of capitalists, it however sees the human as deserving a certain dignity. It prevents the complete collapse of the capitalist order. It will however fail as Capitalism/capitalist society fails to embrace humanism.u

Based.

It is quite easy to argue against the Soviet and Chinese socialism as "reinforcing" capitalism, since neither have finished (yet).

Almost 200 hundred years.

Listening to Wolff one would think we live in a caste society.

I would appreciate hearing about alternatives that are neither capitalism or socialism.

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

Wouldn't we all. Capitalism has proven to be the greatest economic system ever developed by humans. Over the last 200 years, capitalism has evolved, becoming increasingly better and lifting billions out of poverty.

@someonenotnoone

7 ай бұрын

@@anthonymorris5084Right, as long as you ignore everything other than capitalism, capitalism is to thank for all progress.

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

@@someonenotnoone The entire Western world embraces capitalism. The West represents the most successful societies this planet has ever seen.

@someonenotnoone

7 ай бұрын

@@anthonymorris5084 The entire western world also embraces central governments, central planning, and social programs. Nonsensical to say all of that is "capitalism."

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

@@someonenotnoone This really isn't true. Every Western nation has its economic foundation in free market economics - capitalism. The only difference is the amount of social programs they embrace, how much regulation they employ and how much they tax. A social program is not "socialism". Governments clearly make roads, provide police etc. No economy in the West is "centrally planned". The governments throughout the West are democratic, so I'm not certain what point you're trying to make about "central governments".

Originally, capitalism developed from small entrepreneurs to prosperous slightly larger entrepreneurs and deeper and higher decisions whose trade in the market served in a deep/less sales developments in technical areas through creativity with well-prepared school knowledge But there were always speculative ideologies specially created around parts of society that had integration problems for a variety of reasons (drinkers, good-for-nothings, depressive envious people / scum) who were “specifically “enthusiastic” and “trained” towards power-hungry tendencies. And so the socialists started using invented facts to push the power and was to implement different kind of governance by politicians & propagandists idealism and the only merit belongs to them And fascism could be a dictatorial and more aggressive branch of socialists with liberal tendencies where of course there should be no limits, which are also controlled by power-hungry instincts And what's going down now after the last two wars? A larger part of all the looted fortunes is topped by more shady dealings brought about by the interests of far too many vultures in the game who wanted absolute power over everything Well what? Everything is uncertain? 😝 Excellent finish 😉

It's always interesting to see how capitalists respond to critiques of the system. One main difference between proponents and critics of capitalism lies in the area of "victimization." Critics blame the system, and claim that capitalism itself is responsible for poverty. Pro-capitalists respond by saying there's no such thing as victimization, and that the poor have nothing to blame but themselves. This response is based on the idea of meritocracy, which says that the poor are too lazy and irresponsible to "earn" their way out of poverty. It's a simplistic response, given that most poor people lack the talent, luck, or opportunity to rise in the hierarchy. But capitalists, while they talk all the time about "opportunity," never acknowledge that opportunity depends as much on objective factors as it does on subjective ones. In other words, pro-capitalists typically reduce everything to willpower and hard work. This is a "mind over matter" argument, and if you believe it, then there's no such thing as a lack of opportunity. But of course, those of us who know history, as well as the conditions of society, realize how flawed this argument is. If all of us had total control of our destiny, the "mind over matter" argument would hold up. Unfortunately, life doesn't work that way, not even for the rich.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

When you say capitalist, do you mean someone who follows a political ideology that believes in the supremacy of capital? That doesn't actually make them a member of the capitalist class. Though, let's not split hairs.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

You correctly point out that the concept of meritocracy is largely an illusion used by the capitalist system to mask systemic inequality. This illusion also assumes everyone begins on an equal footing, disregarding historical disparities, geographical restrictions, racial or ethnic bias, lack of education, or other social determinants of opportunity. The issue with the capitalist belief in self-victimisation in fact lies in the system's fundamental principle: exploiting labour for profit. The less the capitalists pay for labour, the more profits they accumulate. As a result, many people find themselves trapped in poverty because the capitalist system requires a mass of cheap labour to sustain its prosperity. Capitalism also concentrates wealth and power in the hands of a few people, reinforcing class divisions and inhibiting upward mobility. And poverty isn't due to the individual's lack of hard work or willpower but is structurally engineered by the capitalist mode of production. So, the argument isn't simply about the subjectivity of opportunity, but more importantly, it's about the exploitative system that creates these opportunities and their associated inequalities in the first place. So, like you, I too also reject the argument of mind over matter. Class struggle is in fact inherent in capitalism and that the path to true social equality lies in collective ownership of production. By dismantling the structures that create and exacerbate social inequities, we can ensure a fair distribution of resources and create a society where one's success is not dictated by birthright, geography, or arbitrary societal divisions. And the question isn't simply whether one can rise through hard work and perseverance. The more crucial question should be: Why must poverty exist in the first place? And how can we establish a society where each individual's well-being and self-fulfilment are not subject to capitalist exploitation but rather ensured by the cooperative and equitable organisation of economic and social life?

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

You are basing this on reinforced stereotypes, of big fat avaricious capitalists sitting back and smoking their cigars reciting "money, money, money". Firstly, capitalism has lifted billions out of poverty. The entire society benefits. Capitalism creates opportunity. Wealthy people also give away more money than most countries. In the 1980's Ted Turner gave away a record 40 million dollars to the UN. Bill Gates charities today has given away more than 40 billion. While the willingness to engage in hard work and risk taking plays a fundamental role, the entire society benefits from the products and services that are created, the larger tax revenues generated, and the opportunities that business growth creates.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

​@@anthonymorris5084Oh, of course! The whole benevolent capitalist myth, I'd almost forgotten. The inherent magnanimity of billionaires lifting billions out of poverty. That's really one for the history books. Yes, certainly, capitalism has had absolutely no negative impact on the global South or the impoverished people within the industrialised world, or our delicate and dying ecosystems, for that matter. It's merely uplifted them like a fairy godmother. How very endearing of it! Your mention of wealth redistribution is especially comical. True, a select few generous souls donate some minuscule fraction of their massive fortunes. So why then, in 2019, were there still 690 million people facing hunger, as the United Nations reported? It must be sheer laziness, not systemic failures, right? They simply aren't making use of these golden opportunities capitalists are supposedly sprinkling like stardust. You also speak about the entire society benefitting, but are you referring to the workers whose labour is undervalued, the ones working multiple jobs to make ends meet? Or the shrinking middle class crushed under student debt? It appears your perspective doesn't seem to consider the ones really paying the price of your benevolent capitalism. It's also interesting, your note about tax revenues. Yet, somehow corporations and the mega-rich manage to skip around tax loopholes, offshore their wealth and dodge taxes like it's a sport, resulting in diminished public funds that are, quite ironically, supposed to be uplifting those very same billions out of poverty. As per the data by Gabriel Zucman, 40% of multinational profits are shifted to tax havens each year. One could almost appreciate the irony. Ah yes, capitalism creates opportunities. Like the opportunity for the 1% to amass wealth at an unconscionable rate. As stated in Oxfam's report in 2020, the world's 2,153 billionaires have more wealth than 4.6 billion people combined. Quite a phenomenal balancing act! Now, I don't know about you, but I prefer to base my arguments on concrete evidence and glaring socioeconomic disparities rather than archetypal cigar-smoking capitalists, even though, if the cap fits…

@paulkesler1744

7 ай бұрын

@@JP-fb8ni By "capitalist," I simply means the owners of capital, whether expressed in the form of money, real estate, or "intellectual property." We can also call them the employer class (which Wolff often does), as contrasted with the employee class (the rest of us --- at least, those of us still "lucky" enough to have jobs). Even capitalists differ vastly in terms of power, so for the sake of argument, I'll leave out small business owners and what Michael Albert calls the coordinator class. The latter may serve as "vassals" of capitalism, but have comparatively minimal influence on the overall power structure. Generally speaking, capitalists espouse an ideology which, as you put it, believes "in the supremacy of capital." But I wouldn't say that ideology is limited to large-scale owners, though as a leftist I wish it were. Of course, we occasionally see this ideology expressed in more crude and prosaic terms: "Them as has, gits."

If we get rid of the master-slave relation, how will the banking system work? Currently we have "fractional" reserve banking with the fraction now being 0% in the US, 1% I believe in the EU. Who will decide how this will work, what will the effect be worldwide, how do you ever explain this system so it's democratic in nature as opposed to controlled by a few?

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

Under the current capitalist system, the banking system operates within a structure designed to uphold the economic power of a minority - the capitalist class. This can be observed in the reserve banking model where money is effectively created by commercial banks through lending, leading to significant concentration of power and wealth in the hands of financial institutions. This is the essence of what you call a 'master-slave' relationship. In a socialist society, the role of banks and the overall monetary system would radically transform. Money would no longer act as capital to generate more wealth for a capitalist elite but rather a tool to enable exchange and satisfy social needs. As part of a democratically-planned economy, financial decisions, such as interest rates, reserve requirements, and lending policies would be made collectively and in the best interest of society. Instead of a banking system built upon speculation, investment would focus on long-term social gains like infrastructure, housing, and renewable energy. This shift to public banking would also create a financial system that serves the public interest rather than private profits. Worldwide, the impact of such changes would largely depend on the dynamics of global socialism and international solidarity. Ideally, it would result in a more equitable redistribution of wealth, a lessening of economic exploitation and oppression, and a boost in worldwide cooperation. Explaining this system so that it's understood in a democratic nature also requires transparency, comprehensive financial education, and active engagement from all parts of society. As Marxists, we believe that democratic control and participation is a fundamental part of building socialism. People would also need to be educated about these new financial systems, and participatory processes would need to be put in place to ensure their voice is heard. This would also be a substantial departure from the current system which is largely controlled by an unaccountable few people.

@peterbeer8657

7 ай бұрын

Btw: Lower interest rates means cheaper money for entrepreneurs and higher housing prices for workers at the same wages. So it's clear that this is relevant to the distribution equality of excess produces in the economy.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

@@peterbeer8657 You're correct in pointing out the impact of lower interest rates in our current system - that is indeed one of the consequences of a capitalist economy, which prioritises profits over people's needs. However, in the scenario I previously outlined where the banking system is democratically controlled, the aim would be to maintain a balance, where neither the entrepreneurs are disproportionately benefitted nor are the workers burdened excessively. In this system, decisions about interest rates, lending policies etc., would be taken based on the larger goal of social welfare. Further, the surplus produced wouldn't be inequitably hoarded by a few capitalists, but instead used for social investment - to enhance infrastructure, healthcare, education, etc., directly benefitting workers and the broader community. And lowering the interest rates in such a scenario wouldn't be intended to inflate asset prices or cause disparity but to enable fair access to resources, sustainable development, and broader economic wellbeing.

@peterbeer8657

7 ай бұрын

@@JP-fb8niI see. Transparency, educating people, overall democracy. That is a lot to want! How will you achieve the gigantic goal? Especially that last sentence. I agree that education is absolute key!

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

@@peterbeer8657 Yes, the goal of establishing a democratically-run financial system based on socialist principles is certainly a big one! It would require systematic, structural changes on a global scale. However, just because something is difficult, doesn't mean we shouldn't aspire to it, especially when it could lead to greater equality, transparency, and fairness in society. Achieving this vision will also require a multifaceted approach. We would need to encourage widespread engagement in economic decision-making, establish systems that facilitate that, and actively dismantle structures of economic domination and inequality. Equally important is developing a comprehensive financial education programme. If we want people to participate actively in economic decision-making, they must also understand how these systems work. The key here isn't to underestimate the power of collective action and education. By empowering people with knowledge and giving them the tools to participate actively in the system that governs their lives, we can start moving towards a society that is more equitable, fair, and democratic.

What does wolf think about trump

❤❤ i love it ..but still confused or hopeless ..hope we will be able to find the way to true justice. Or as i believe now when Jesus comes. 🙏

I have severe doubts about an absolute workplace democracy. I think such would lack the ability to maneuver. Also, there is the problem of differing levels of expertise among the employees. On top of that, there is a need for an investment class, lest we let politicians decide exclusively which enterprises get funded and which don't. Maybe this is why we see so few cooperatives. I suggest, as an alternative, a company where each employee gets a vote, but the votes are not equal. The system I am thinking of will grant votes based on an employee's rank in the company multiplied by the time she/he has held that rank. This way, an abusive CEO could easily be fired by his employees. Investors (who could also be employees) would be granted a sum of 45% of the total company vote with the shares apportioned by the percentage of the company they hold multiplied by the time they have held it. Hostile takeovers would be nearly impossible under this system.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

Labour is the most important determinant of value in society, and as such, any form of capitalism, no matter how democratised, would inherently exploit labour. The system you propose, although aiming to provide fair distribution of voting rights, is still exploitative and unjust. And while a weighted vote might look like it represents different expertise levels and time commitment, it's ultimately just another means of enforcing the hierarchical capitalist system where power concentrates among just a few people. Furthermore, granting 45% voting power to investors actually gives a lot of control to those who have simply given capital to the enterprise, ignoring those who create value - the workers. This also preserves capitalist power dynamics and denies workers the full fruits of their labour. You also seem to focus on efficiency, agility, and protecting from 'hostile takeovers', but these concerns are irrelevant. The ultimate goal should be to liberate workers from exploitation, to abolish capitalist relations of production, not to find better ways to administer them. It’s also important to note that there shouldn't be an investment class, nor a privileged political class deciding economic priorities. Common ownership and control of the means of production would be a better option, not some more benign version of the same class structures inherent in capitalism. So, your model is still embedded in the capitalist paradigm, making it incapable of rectifying fundamental social inequalities. Instead, workers should have control and benefit from the full value they produce.

@SvalbardSleeperDistrict

7 ай бұрын

"such would lack the ability to maneuver" This is not an argument - it is a vague claim. Ability to manoeuvre in what way and what context? What for? Do they even need that ability in that alternate economy? "there is the problem of differing levels of expertise among the employees" That difference is very much recognised in a democratic organisation of workplace through managerial structures, pay and so on. The principle is that all of that needs to be democratically decided, not imposed from above. "there is a need for an investment class, lest we let politicians decide exclusively which enterprises get funded and which don't" Why should anyone trust "investment class" more about anything than "politicians"? Especially in an alternate economy where politicians are not allied with the private capital in deciding what should be invested into? As the other response mentioned, this comment is looking at workplace democracy from the same set of assumptions that capitalism is based on. That will not work. This is not simply about workers having votes - this is about a fundamental transformation of society away from capitalism and all the damaging outcomes it comes with.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

Yes, we would generally challenge the notions implicit in this argument, which uphold capitalist hierarchies and profit motivations. Marxism actually envisions an economic and social system where decisions are democratically made by all workers rather than a separate investment class or an elite group of politicians. Marxism also asserts that workers are capable of running their workplaces and societies, contrary to assumptions that workers lack the necessary expertise. In this vision, managerial structures and differential pay scales would also be decided by democratic means rather than being dictated by capitalistic forces or an employer. As for the concern over funding for enterprises, we also question why the decision-making power should lie with the 'investment class' who primarily seek to maximise profits, instead of being in the hands of a democratically accountable political system. However, this isn't about simply substituting one form of leadership with another, but rather, it's about changing the foundations of the economy away from the unequal system of capitalism. This includes redefining the ways we evaluate and distribute resources, decisions, and authority. And finally, it's also important to note that Marxism isn't simply about worker votes, but about radically transforming the systems of economy and governance to ensure the fair distribution of wealth and decision-making power. The critique here isn't just about a few problems within capitalism, but the core elements that allow exploitation and inequality to exist in the first place.

@bobcornwell403

7 ай бұрын

@JP-fb8ni I would agree with most of what you are saying, but I have never seen a successful worker run enterprise in my life. Even the credit union I belong to has a hierarchical management structure. There are certain workplace realities that transcend drawing room fantasies such as absolute equality. And it seems that every society that tries to institute such equality ends up with the opposite. What we have today (in the US) is an extreme, predatory form of capitalism, where those on top face zero accountability. What we have in China (as far as I know) has evolved into a form of crony-capitalism with non-accountable government elites on top. This is very similar to what is going on in Russia.. no obliarch there dare cross Putin (unless he manages to kill him). The criticisms of capitalism are quite valid, but the societies that have it tend to do better. This is especially true if they manage to set up effective guard rails against its inevitable abuses. Show me an absolute socialist society (other than a hunter-gathring one) that works and I will change my tune in an instant.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

@@bobcornwell403 While I acknowledge your observations, it's important to remember that Marxist thought doesn't actually demand an instant and absolute transition into a stateless, classless society with perfect equality. That's a romanticised perspective. However, it strongly believes that the working class has the potential to lead enterprises. And just because we haven't seen a large number of successful worker-led initiatives, doesn't mean they are impossible. It actually reflects more on our system which systematically disempowers and underfunds such initiatives. As for the apparent failure of socialist societies, it's not actually so simple to conclude. A lot of these 'failures' are less about socialism and more about their particular contexts, the mistakes of their leaders (Gorbachev, for example), the influence and interference of powerful capitalist nations, and much more. And when it comes to today's 'predatory' capitalism, as you rightfully call it, it isn't so much an 'extreme' version but a logical result of a system built on profit-seeking. And no amount of 'guard rails' can contain the inherent inequities of capitalism. Our goal is to continuously challenge, critique and transform such a system towards a more equitable arrangement. And I wouldn't recommend to just 'show you' a socialist society that 'works' because how we define 'working' and 'successful' are heavily influenced by capitalist ideology. If you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will spend its whole life believing that it's stupid. Similarly, if we judge socialism based on the values and metrics set by capitalism, it may not seem as 'successful.' Our focus should be less on hunting for pre-packaged 'successful' examples of socialism, but more on striving for social and economic justice, with tools, principles, and perspectives that socialism and Marxism provide. And this also involves engaging with the challenges, mistakes and lessons of previous socialist attempts, not just rejecting them outright because they didn't quite 'work.'

Do we still call the fourth one Socialism? We are tired of Socialism, which still divides between employers an employees as Dr. Wolf says. I hope Democratic Socialism will be prevailed throughout the world. The workers are responsible for productions. At the same they must have rights to be involved in the distribution. If democracy proceeds farther among the producers, they can have the fourth economic system.

Capitalism is like having a $1,000 split unevenly between 100 people and without redistribution eventually one person will have everything. The game Monopoly has thought of this almost 100 years ago. If the complicated capitalism we have was simplified down to the rules of that game the economic system we value so much would have collapsed years ago. Why do you think we invented inflation and the thousands of new rules to our capitalist system? We’ve had to for the simple fact that if we didn’t the system would have collapsed. And if you understand this you may start to realize how unequal in a, pick the winners system, we have. True capitalism doesn’t exist because it has collapsed many years ago. What we have now is a religion which runs on the belief that everyone has the opportunity to rise up when the reality is the elites are the ones who pick who gets to rise. Not much different than our so called democracies. Where the elites with their money pay to choose our leadership and then allow the rest of us to pretend we’ve voted for who we think represents us the best. We don’t choose anything in our democracy, just like our hard work in capitalism can’t make us rich without elites selecting who makes it or not. I don’t understand why so few of us see it but here we are. No democracy and capitalism the greatest form of power the elites could wish for. Everyone thinks they are free with countless paying fines and being jailed for supposedly breaking the law for things in the most part none of us are affected by. Is stealing food to feed yourself truly a crime? Is robbing truly a crime when you don’t have a job? The only real crimes we have aren’t taken seriously because they don’t teach us anything about capitalism. At this point some places have even made being homeless a crime. If you do as the bankers did in 2008 and rob millions of people out of house and retirement you get a bailout and it’s swept under the rug. If you steal food to feed yourself you’re sentenced to jail. lol what a beautiful brainwashing the elites have pulled on us all.

I usually like dogs but this is one sexy Wolff.

I would beg to differ on our form of capitalism isn’t a form of slavery or at least serfdom. When people don’t get a minimum living standard of living all three of the systems are basically the same. The only system which has a difference is the tribal system and we don’t believe it can be expanded to the size of a country. Like countries are no different from empires on its whole because like empires, the country works to dominate economically other countries. Our economic system hasn’t changed since the first empire except for changing name and how much abuse the elites are allowed to push on its people. Capitalism just used the enlightenment to invent mathematical formulas to convince people of ideas which aren’t actually true in practice. The abuse of the lowest status in society is identical to slavery even today. How many homeless are killed or die from the system? I’ll put forward that it’s as many as slavery killed. Injuring workers is also a part of the system which is diluted by regulations as if the worker doesn’t want to be there but has to to survive. Why do you think we need safety officers? Because without them some people will do anything to be the greatest worker and if they get hurt it’s because they didn’t follow safety guidelines. How does that not illuminate how involuntary our system is with the use of financial gains to do as your told. We are deluding ourselves pretending more things have change than they truly have. In 3000 years we live in a world with empires, slavery, feudalism, capitalism and for the elites socialism. We haven’t really changed at all but we all think we’ve evolved. lol

No capitalist system has ever worked without land to grow on. Every nation which made capitalism work at some point in history had an empire to support that capitalist system and now that there’s no more land to conquer we are entering the war growth of capitalism area. If we don’t realize this soon war will be our future because capitalism can’t make anyone richer with making many poorer. Capitalism only works for some with massive growth and we are seeing it now. America has no more land to grow into and is on the war path. China will soon run into the same problem unless it falls back on its roots of socialism and even Russia eventually will run out of land and have to go back to a form of socialism also. Capitalism is the same as empiriallism both are one and the same. Without redistribution from the wealthiest to the poorest there’s no way to avoid collapse without growth and conquest. The lie of capitalism is that it can grow for ever and we all understand it can’t. Once the growth stops all the gains of capitalism run to a few elites at the top.

Start a business Richard, hire some workers. Show us how it's done.

@asamanthinketh1937

5 ай бұрын

That would require some effort, thats not going to happen

@CesarGarcia-og8rz

4 ай бұрын

He's a PhD, his job is to convince useful idiots to do his dirty work

It always concerns me when guys like this are pro mass migration then claim they care about the working class, it stinks of virtue chasing as they are intelligent enough to know the reality of the impact mass migration has on the working class and services offered by the government. Dentistry on the NHS literally only exists on paper in the UK. Housing is strictly for migrants only - genuinely an actual policy, but we can't draw attention to this literal racism in the UK as the whistleblowers are accused of being far right and we are told it doesn't matter if it is true, it matters that it's wrong to point out that it is true.

@arostwocents

4 ай бұрын

Emergency housing line in the UK (I am ex homeless) asks your ethnicity as the first question and declines to help if you say British. I called back and pretended to be Iraqi and got offered a taxi to a hotel that night. This is genuine racism and like 1984, the working class are damned as far right and racist for pointing out the racist policies the state operates. And then guys like this support mass migration and therefore support the associated racism against the working class (who are not only white)

@arostwocents

4 ай бұрын

Emergency housing line in the UK (I am ex homeless) asks your ethnicity as the first question and declines to help if you say British. I called back and pretended to be Iraqi and got offered a taxi to a hotel that night. This is genuine racism and like 1984, the working class are damned as far right and racist for pointing out the racist policies the state operates. And then guys like this support mass migration and therefore support the associated racism against the working class (who are not only white)

@arostwocents

4 ай бұрын

The E in DEI actually represents racism being a good thing. Look into DEI if you are not familiar with it.

sik vid

I hate that when you point out a problem, people think you are the problem

Wolff is living proof that wisdom does not necessarily come with age.

Профессор Вольф, а где в вашем понимании марксизма существование социальных классов и классовая борьба? Почему вы не рассказываете о существовании классов и классовой борьбе между собственниками и рабочим классом? Почему вы, профессор, не говорите об историческом и диалектическом материализме, который был создан К. Марксом и Ф. Энгельсом? Ведь марксизм - это не только экономика, но это и политика и философия, не так ли? Но вы говорите только об экономике и экономических изменениях, но не говорите о классовой и политической борьбе. Professor Wolf, where in your understanding of Marxism is the existence of social classes and class struggle? Why don't you talk about the existence of classes and the class struggle between the owners and the working class? Why don’t you, professor, talk about historical and dialectical materialism, which was created by K. Marx and F. Engels? After all, Marxism is not only economics, but it is also politics and philosophy, isn’t it? But you only talk about economics and economic change, but do not talk about class and political struggle.

How about Islamic economies? Aren’t you interested in?

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

Their economies are stagnating. All of them. The GDP per capita of Jordan and Egypt are $4,000. The GDP per capita of Lebanon is $3,000. Israel's is at $52,000

Richard, the only critic at socialism is that socialism distributes the poverty equally between all!

The Socialist Professor made His Millions Has a Capitalist! Socialism for us Capitalism for him and his Family!

Oops Wolff

Run for president?

The U.S. Congress and military and any government official, all use socialism system for themselves benefited tremendously. The U.S. corp use cheap labors in China. The I.S. are the employers and Chinese worker has poor income and hard labors for a long time. The big corp in the U.S. getting assistance funding from u.s. government but not the regular citizen except minorities welfare programs benefits free money for not working. The U.S. workers are mostly under pay in America til today nothing change. It is like master and slavery relationship. China itself after major sanctions from the U.S. that makes China wants to help its own people create their own companies to produce it's own products instead let the U.S. companies to make all the profits for themselves. Union in America is not helping the workers because they are not inclusive and bias toward some other races. It is failing system not up lifting everybody. So I don't agree many things you said.

I appeal to all intellectuals of the world to halt their ideas and creativity to zero.

Try, the private ownership of the means of production...with voluntary transactions between a willing buyer and a willing seller. So, not even close to your necessary distortion and misrepresentations. Interesting that we now have four kinds of socialism when a few years ago there were only 3. Capitalism also reduced poverty more than any other system. It didn't promise anything except the incentive to produce goods and services that consumers desired and could afford. One thing that has been consistent throughout the history of civilization is GOVERNMENT. Eventually, socialism will evolve into capitalism. ( as soon as you figure out what the words mean and the following. ) "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action."

@ColorMatching

7 ай бұрын

take your libertarian bs somewhere else. Don't let the door hit you on your way out.👉🚪✌️

@Fake_Robot

7 ай бұрын

Crazy how capitalists would rather regurgitate propaganda than read its own founding philosopher, who described everything Prof Wolff is saying about capitalism. Truth is, they feed you propaganda because they don’t want you to read Adam Smith. He was his own best critic…

@Marius_vanderLubbe

7 ай бұрын

Hhahahaha. And the Russia/ukraine war is at a stalemate, right? And Hamas is the reason Israel is mudering women and children since 1948, right?

@jgalt308

7 ай бұрын

@@Fake_Robot Too bad "capitalism" hadn't even made much of an impression, and I find "sometimes, as if by an invisible hand", less than compelling. Like everything else about Wolff, his economic and historical ignorance is unsurpassed and it seems he will repeat "all his lies" and maybe some new ones in this offering. Exposing them all again will take some time... as I am already bored and we have only reached the "capitalism crashes every 4 to 7 years" b.s. But thanks for the irrelevant attempt to change the subject...BTW are you claiming "poverty"...because if the answer is yes...then please let us know...compared to what era?

@earlviney5212

7 ай бұрын

Private ownership of the means of production negotiating with the buyer (consumer). What about the labor (workers) who work in this economic model? You made no mention of this. You do know that in capitalism 90 percent of people involved in this economic model are workers.

He never mentions that the capitalism which he hates has provided the greatest number of people with the highest standard of living of any system throughout history. I presume he's jealous of the "employers" because he's always been an "employee". And as always, he claims that income and wealth are "distributed" (he implies 'MAL'-distributed). He hates the fact that income and wealth have to first be PRODUCED, at which time they belong to the person responsible for their production..

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

Well, certainly the illusion of wealth trickling down from the top has been a great comfort to all those just scraping by paycheck to paycheck, hasn't it? Clearly, anyone who questions the apparent 'bounty' of capitalism must simply be envious of those at the top and completely unaware that wealth must first be 'produced.' But, we, on the other hand, fail to understand how one can 'produce' billions off the backs of underpaid workers while still claiming that the wealth 'belongs' solely to the top. And as for the distribution, I'd like to hear more about how perfectly equitable the current situation is, as wealth continues to accumulate in the hands of a tiny amount of people.

@jgalt308

7 ай бұрын

@@JP-fb8ni No such theory exists...but when you can cite any "economist" that has actually advanced "that theory" please let us and Thomas Sowell know. You could become famous!!!!

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

@@jgalt308 Ah yes, my apologies. Clearly, we're deluded for even hinting at the idea that wealth accumulation and exploitation could ever exist in our faultless capitalist system. You're right, there's absolutely no economic theory or eminent economist - take Thomas Piketty, for instance - who has dared suggest such an absurdity. Oh wait! What's that about Piketty's work on 'Capital in the Twenty-First Century' where he discussed how increasing wealth concentration leads to social and economic instability? But never mind all that! This highly-regarded scholar probably got it wrong. And this increasing income inequality we're seeing, I guess it's all just a figment of our imaginations, isn't it?

@jgalt308

7 ай бұрын

@@JP-fb8ni What wealth????? Fiat money is NOT wealth!!!!! Money is a commodity...people seeking to acquire money are capitalists as money is capital. Das Kapital v1 p27, p63, p 104-107 Fiat money is debt!!!! You would have to be an idiot to save it...or hold it, unless it was earning more than it was losing value. Funny Marx was right about "one thing" and you are calling him a liar. Keep babbling...enjoy the tyranny.

@JP-fb8ni

7 ай бұрын

​@@jgalt308Oh, of course, my sincerest apologies for such an egregious mistake! You see, in my innocent naiveté, I seem to have foolishly equated fiat money with wealth - what a grave error! My admiration for the workings of our capitalistic system obviously overwhelmed my reason, making me disregard the valuable wisdom Marx graciously provides in 'Das Kapital'. Yes, Marx, who clearly understands capital better than anyone else - oh wait, isn't capitalism something Marx spent his life critiquing? And let me get this straight - so now fiat money is a debt? And not only that, but we're apparently foolish for even thinking about saving it! My, what groundbreaking information you've given us today. So I guess in your capitalist utopia, the goal should be to hoard physical commodities instead, correct? Oh, that will surely be more manageable for all of us - trading in cattle and crops like we're back in the Stone Age. It is always so inspiring to engage with forward-thinking minds like yours. And oh yes, 'enjoy the tyranny.' We are certainly being oppressed by all this capitalism that you adore. Please do keep enlightening us with your insight - I'm learning so much!

I understand why Prof. Wolff is rewording socialism into a fixed or better capitalism. Americans freak out whenever they heard communism and socialism😂😂😂.

@numbawan9527

7 ай бұрын

Years of anti communism propaganda worked.

@jgalt308

7 ай бұрын

Yup, he created co-op capitalism to replace what is not 'capitalism"... complete with "democratic tyranny"...now you get to "enslave" yourself... with no escape. Too bad the government has "other" plans.

@anthonymorris5084

7 ай бұрын

For good reason. Socialism as an economic system has left a swath of destruction wherever, and whenever it's been tried.

None of those aspirations can come into being if and as we get choked out by the bottleneck of climate emergency and overshoot.

❤