Great sir Taimur Rahman Hmesha salamat rahein aap

Please more videos in English, I'm not even native English speaker, I'm Chilean. But your content is so good, I don't want to missed it, thank you btw, keep up the good work 👍🏼

@suwaami6704

Жыл бұрын

Este canal es particularmente dedicada por idioma Urdu hablada en Pakistan , entonces Este hombre es intentando enseñar la politica a Gente de país en su idioma . No sé pero no se VA a cambiar en El Ingles por que la moyoría de Gente no pueden entender inglez . Ciao❤️

@messagevibes

3 ай бұрын

​@@suwaami6704 His english channel also exists. Thanks!

@messagevibes

3 ай бұрын

His english channel also exists.

Your knowledge base is very authentic and thought provoking . Keep moving in this way because it is very important for future labour of future capitalism to rein in the future exploitation .

very interesting and explanatory of what capitalism is. The basics of capitalism are well explained.

Sir g please upload your videos as audio podcasts too so we can listen to them on the go too

I really enjoy your sessions at SDSB. Please keep the gates open while teaching so that i could listen while studying in my PhD cubicle

More power to you, sir. 😊 It will be immensely helpful if you could shed light on the role of Lenin, Antonio Gramsci, and Immanuel Wallerstein in the reinterpretation of capitalist system.

your lectures are great by the way

Sir, do you have any servants working for you, like driver, gardener, cook etc? If so then you are a Capitalist too as you say at 8:25

Thank you sir!

Dear sir agr es point py bat kijaye ye garam panyu tk rsaye ka means kia ye propadanga hy

Can you show us an alternative system to labour market that you are suggesting (that exists in modern times)?

Good lecture sir

Aoa sir! Start a lecture series on Das Capital.

great clarity.

What would be called the relation B/W Employer and AI robot?.

Sir your lectures are very informative, add fixed date and founder name of theory

Sir kindly make a short lecture on the difference between socialism and Communism

Bundle of thanks

If skill and labour will not be sold in market as commodity than what will be the alternate for these skilled workers?

@Faraz70

Жыл бұрын

This is an excellent point which Communists don't seen to understand.

Nice sir 👍

How I can join your cause. Regards peace and love from Peshawar 🙏🏻

What is market. What is bazaar? Read Rajni Bakshi.

Taimur Sir, What is the relationship between Capitalism amd Democracy? What is the alternative of Capitalism? And what are the possibilities of its occurrence?

Kindly discuss about "how old rental system"

Sir what about Shariyat? Shariy nizam?

Thanks

I am Dr. Prakash C.Rao from india. I was a medical practitioner for 42 years and now I am retired. I have been an ardent supporter of Marxist Lenninist Philosophy. I am a critic of indian communist movement . I have seen you have prepared a lot of videos on ML philosophy. I understand 20% of Urdu hence am not able to catch your valuable points. Do you have an English version of your articles? It is appreciable that you are spreading the msg of ML philosophy in Pakistan.

Thanks a lot

grate sir g

Sir kiyaa communism or capitalisms ek 7 ayye..

The richest 1% are not paying even half of their income taxes . The only problem is political-business class nexus that is impeding the regulating role of governments in markets and markets have now become the domain of capitalists .

Keep going

Wah sir wah

dr sahab ap capitalism aur scoialism ko explain to krtay lakin kabi solution nahi batatay matlab agar labour apna skill market may naa baichay aur socialism ho to wo kaha skill baichaig? 1 doctor ko agar socialism may same benifts milrae ho jo ak unskill ya small skill labour k too koe phd,mbbs q kraiga sab mil bant k ash krangay?

shukrya shukrya shukrya shukryA shukrya shukrya shukrya shukryA shukrya shukrya shukrya shukryA shukrya shukrya shukrya shukryA shukrya shukrya shukrya shukryA

I wish we had someone like you in Pashto to further the cause of socialism

@FlyboyOvi

Жыл бұрын

brother don't get fooled into thinking socialism is paradise. Ask a person who has lived in a socialist country. This man is completely deluded of his understanding of capitalism. Tell me one socialist country you would like to live in, North korea? venezuela ? or maybe Cuba? they are shit hole countries run by tyrants and force socialism on their people and themselves live like kings.

Market is one thing, bazaar another thing.

I love this guy

good video

sir ye merchant of venice novel nahi play hai Shakespeare kaa.

@Taimur_Laal

3 ай бұрын

Yes you are right. Slip of the tongue. It was one of my favourite plays growing up.

Client and investor is belong to two party system like man and women, sun and earth, ruling party and opposition etc so without of client, the investor can not adjust himself according to demsnd and supply. In case if someone buy machines and labor togather then that is not client and investor concept. So you have investor on one hand who is able to put is money, property, building etc or provide machine, its installation, building, license, while client can put his skill, labor etc for half and half profit while fuel also divided in half and half.

nice

Sir i want you to teach every subject for my exams.

Can you give lectures how to make more money to have better standard of living? And how to make capacity to make more competitive products to increase exports? How to deliver and expect better quality of service in any organization of our country and what mindset is needed to deliver good service? Teach this instead of teaching 100 more ways to increase poverty in already poor country.

All animals are equal but some animals are more than equal (George Orwell)🤣

@Taimur_Laal

Жыл бұрын

He worked for the MI5: www.spyculture.com/george-orwell-mi5-and-special-branch-files/

@MegaMindKhan

Жыл бұрын

Only if people knew that George Orwell was no different than Joseph Goebbels 😏

@Ahmad-jb2ex

Жыл бұрын

​@@Taimur_Laal Why is having a labor market exploitative...at least in this video you haven't elaborated on this... secondly, employing people for wages did exist before industrialization as well and this concept is known in Islamic terminology as ijarah... How do you differentiate between the labor markets of today with those of precapitalist era...does the difference lie in the possibility of mass employment and concentration of ownership in a few hands...if so when someone says they are anti-capitalist they are saying we are against this system of mass employment of labor and concentration of ownership in a few hands...

Sir please can u explain in some future videos that how America being capitalist society is such a successful state in the 21th century?

@Faraz70

Жыл бұрын

Not only US but all Capitalist countries, because Capitalism works. The laborers and farmers (mazdoor aur kisaan) are well paid and very productive. In many big cities the plumbers make equal or more than doctors. You will never see any Capitalist country where mazdoor and kissan are revolting against Capitalism. Communism failed misrebly, just look at USSR, North Korea, Cuba. Even China realized that Communism doesn't work and quickly adapted to diluted form of Capitalism.

@gumundurbenediktsson8379

Жыл бұрын

@@Faraz70 aur chaat

There should be a mix of systems. No capitalism no communism.

Shakespeare never wrote Novel😃 it is Shakespeare's drama" the merchant of Venice"

I love capitalism 💚💚💚💚

Marchent of Venice play hy novel nahi hy

plz tell us why communism or socialism failed to replace Capitalism. Thanks.

@morphingfaces

Жыл бұрын

Maybe it's because worker ownership of the means of production has been brutality snuffed out whenever it emerges because it is in the interests of the owners of capital to maintain dominance and systems of violence and exploitation they benefit from at the expense of the natural world and basic human rights

@Faraz70

Жыл бұрын

Very simple. Capitalism works and Communism does not. Whatever works, will be widely adopted by every one. Communism was tried but it failed misrebly.

@morphingfaces

Жыл бұрын

@@Faraz70 works for already grotesquely wealthy people while actively fucking over the rest of us and the future of the planet

@omairkhan8084

Жыл бұрын

I'd recommend you to read the book "The Jakarta Method" by an American journalist Vincent Bevins who has worked in The Washington Post, Financial Times and the Los Angeles Times. It would help you clear out many of your doubts regarding the "triumph" of capitalism over communism.

@zexploregalaxy

Жыл бұрын

Yes

Labour proportional to Market Exchange of both is capitalism.

Wow

I think you missed out on some important points regarding capitalism, such as: 1) Marx has analyzed capitalism as a progression in development of the productive forces historically (historical process). It has a positive role because it increases the output of human labor in an industrial society by treating human labor as a commodity in an industry, when compared to feudal and tribal societies which it replaces because they cannot increase productivity of human labor at their disposal. As per the principles of dialectics used in Marx analysis, every new system creates the seed of its own destruction; in capitalism this happens when labor as a commodity is replaced by finance capital to increase money (profit), thereby not increasing productivity because no labor is involved. This increase in money supply without increase in production tends to destroy the industrial relations of production. Marx develops the role of proletariat here to protect this system and to continue maximizing its efficiency by better control of the financial sector; this system he called socialism. So its all about scientific evolution of the historical process as the theoretical base, not moral grounds of ending exploitation and ending poverty. The latter aspect is an effect and not the main driving force of the communist struggles. However, in most places mistaking this effect as the main cause has led to the failure of left wing movements; the most glaring example is Pakistan where left wing was naively misled into feudal socialism, thereby finishing the fledgling communist forces for good. There are a couple of other points, but its too lengthy a comment for now.

@suhailhamid8245

8 күн бұрын

The second point to explain the point regarding shifting of industry from US and Europe to 3rd world: 2) For simplicity in explaining Marx's analysis, the first "progressive" part of capitalism is money buying labor to generate money and in the process increasing production (manufacturing), while the second "self-destructive" part of capitalism is using money (instead of labor) to generate more money without increasing production (financial sector). The top capitalist economies of US and Europe have moved from the first part to the second wherein they've shifted manufacturing to cheaper 3rd world countries, increasing their profits, which money finds its way back to the US or European financial markets, thereby hugely increasing their money supply / profits. However, the industrial working classes of these economies lose jobs and suffer, which factor was the cause for Bernie Sanders and Trump's dissenting policy line. Sanders has effectively been sidelined by the so called "liberal" Democratic Party, while Trump charisma is still going on. Time will tell whether Trump succeeds in effecting a change but its not likely or not easy if it makes some headway. Left wingers across the world have yet to fully understand the phenomenon. The great exception is China which has fully utilized the "progressive" part of capitalism with their private sector manufacturing / services sectors, while the financial sector is in state control to channel spending this immense wealth generated as per their country's development objectives; exactly what Marx expected of the Communist party. The newer entrant is Russia, which has of late realized that it will never be accepted by US and Europe as a partner in their capitalist domain. So these are changing times, which need to be understood by whatever left wing remains by an effective analysis for which Marxist dialectics is perhaps still the most relevant. Again too long for now.

@suhailhamid8245

6 күн бұрын

Since I'm at it, let me conclude the last point about definition of capitalism. The defining characteristic of capitalistic activity is using money to make more money. This activity has a history as long as the civilization itself, evidenced in debt credit systems, profits variously named as usury, interest or mark ups for deferred payments etc etc. Shylock was such a character in Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice and can be called a capitalist in modern terms. However, the system prevailing was feudal monarchies, and remained so till about 200 years ago when French and industrial revolutions led to demise of monarchies and feudal system. This was mainly because with the industrial revolution, capitalists employing labor as commodity started wealth generation that the feudals could not match and so were replaced by the capitalists as the wealthy elites. With the weakening monarchies, the political system introduced by the rich and powerful classes was democracy (or western democracy) as we call it till today. With both the political and economic domination, the system coming into place was called capitalism. Two specifically defining aspects of modern capitalism with olden times: 1) On the economy side, historically capitalists (Shylock like) had a personal face to them and were despised and kept lower down in the social ranking. Rulers were from the royalty or warriors who replaced the royalty occasionally. Christian Europe banned this usury instilled debt credit activity for Christians, and it was left to Jews who were outcasts otherwise. The Indian system had bania as the equivalent who were lower down in rank to Brahmins and the warriors. In China, debt credit was accepted as a necessary evil, so strictly controlled by their ruling classes. With the advent of faceless banks to control money in industrial age, the lenders became the working-class people putting in their extra cash into banks, while the borrowers became the influential capitalist-class. This was exactly the opposite of old times when lenders were the rich capitalists, lending money to the needy personal citizens or rich royalty for meeting war and administrative expenses. 2) On the political side, democracy is a faceless system, unlike old time monarchies who were "persons" who were replaced by their successors, so quickly producing an identifiable ruling class. The democratic system is run and controlled by the capitalist generated money, but people made to believe that they have a power to effect change. The faces do change but all belong to the same faceless capitalist ruling classes. Naturally every government protects the interests of capitalists, which was not so in olden times when monarchy and feudal elites worked to promote their interests and the old capitalists were at their mercy in a way. Often a new ruling monarchy would come in and cancel all the previous debt credit records, releasing debtors of their liabilities. Doesn't happen in modern capitalism, all state institutions are structured to protect the lenders. Very evident in the way US handles its great depressions. So capitalism sets in when the capitalists controlling the economy also control the government, usually through democracies in the developed world.

👍👍

سوشلزم کے نعرے لگتے تو اچھے ہیں، پر حقیقت میں ممکن نہیں

Sir but I would say that capitalism enabled compitition in the market which in turn speeds up the goods manufacturing. Besides exploitation of workers, buyers are happy because they can benefit from the competition and get the best of what they want but communism based economy does not have the pace to produce cutting edge technology.

@NaiBaatt23

Жыл бұрын

There is a contradiction in capitalist mode of production. Yes, capitalism speed up the manufacturing but at the same time, buyers, majority of those are wage labors cannot afford to to buy products as capitalist already have stolen a big chunk of due wage of the labours or due to unemployment mainly caused by innovation in technologies.. That is why the capitalism is denounced by socialists. They want to replace this system with an economic system in which worker will control mean of productions(machines, land, raw material etc.) collectively and work place (factories etc) and get fair wage of their contribution in production. On the market side there will be equitable exchange of good and services. Those who criticize socialist solution fear that innovation and technological development will be stopped in socialism but their fear is baseless as democratic centralized government in socialism will ensured that technological and scientific advancement remain in pace. In fact ,in socialism more brilliant minds would be available to authorities as people will free from harsh labour hours inflicted by capitalist mode of production.

@pankaja7974

Жыл бұрын

@@NaiBaatt23 no. socialism breeds inefficiency. workers want more pay and less hours of work. poeple inherently dont want to work hard. however working hard is natural order. the chinese worked hard for several years and got themselves out of poverty. Wrking 12 hours per day looks like exploitation to people who are lazy. But for people who want to better their lot it is an opportunity to make more money. The critics never imagine a situation where people are willing to work hard and yet there is no opportunity. The markets need cheaper products to buy and this is possible by keeping labour costs low which in turn is done with lower wages and longer hours. The alternative is expensive products that no one wants to buy - expensive products are produced by people who work 4 hours a day, call in sick frequently, needs frequent vacations etc etc. There is no market for the expensive products and they then lose their jobs and then they ask govt for unemployment benefits and more free money thus making money worthless 🤣🤣🤣🤣

🖤🖤

Sir Are u Non-muslim?

I didn't get your point.

" Niji" is Hindi word 😃😃

@gumundurbenediktsson8379

Жыл бұрын

and?

سر مخالفت کرنا تو اسان ھے، لیبر اگر لیبر پاور نہیں ھوگی، لیبر کی قیمت نہیں ھوگی تو اسکا متبادل کیا ھوگا، کیا ملے گا ایک لیبر کو؟

2nd comment

kya lafz borgor borgeosie se nikalta hai ya khane wale burger se?😆

respectful sir should i say in Pakistan capitalism is 8 hours slavery of proletariat's

@Taimur_Laal

Жыл бұрын

Yes

@ahtarzaib4419

Жыл бұрын

Why USA is against the communism ?

@baruchthinker334

Жыл бұрын

@@ahtarzaib4419 not only USA but all bourgeois state are against communism dear

When Marxist gives Islamic touch 😁😁😁

Dr Taimur, the issue is not that you live and consume in a Capitalist system, you have no choice, even if you had a choice I bet you'd prefer to live in a Capitalist system rather than in a Communist/Socialist system, just as Faiz Ahmed Faiz preferred to live in London and not in Moscow. The main issue I have is the Hypocrisy of Pakistani Surkhas, many of whom run very successful businesses under the very evil Capitalist system while romanticizing and peddling the proven failed ideology of Communism/Socialism. By the way, have you Monetized your KZread channel? If so, please have some courtesy to give credit where it is due - the Evil Capitalist system.

@Taimur_Laal

Жыл бұрын

Firstly, I had the choice of moving abroad (since I have a Phd). I chose to live in Pakistan. Because it is my country. Second, Faiz never chose to live in London. He was in exile in London. He lived most of his life in Pakistan. Third, for us capitalism is not a sin (like religion) but a historically constituted mode of production. We have no problem with people from any class as long as they help to strengthen the labour movement. Please note that Engels himself was the owner of a factory. Last, you still have not heard my lecture because if you had you would have realised that earning money from my own labour is not capitalism.

@Faraz70

Жыл бұрын

@@Taimur_Laal What I meant when I say that you had no choice is that, there is no Communist Utopia where you could move to, living aboard and in Pak would both be Capitalist systems (though Pak is dysfunctional). And you cannot move to North Korea (the only Laborer's Paradise). As for Faiz, I know he was in exile, what I meant was that he chose to live in exile in a Capitalist country (UK) and not in a Communist country (USSR). He could have lived in exile in USSR, but he did not. Hundred and thousand of people are making money on KZread and other social media, thanks to Capitalism. What is wrong in raising capital from Capital markets. Where do many start ups raise funding from? I do listen to your lectures. To me it seems that you are talking about labour rights and welfare and and blaming the lack of it to Capitalism. I agree labors are not treated and compensated fairly in many developing countries including Pak. There should be laws for labors rights and welfare and be enforced.

@Taimur_Laal

Жыл бұрын

@@Faraz70 actually Faiz was in exile in Lebanon.