*Video Sources (all 80 of them)* Aly, G. “Hitler’s Beneficiaries: How the Nazis Bought the German People.” Verso, 2016. (Original German 2005). Barkai, A. “Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy.” Yale University Press, 1990. Bel, G. "Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany." Universitat de Barcelona, PDF. Berkoff, K. "Harvest of Despair: Life and Death in Ukraine under Nazi Rule." Harvard University Press, 2004. Birchall, I. “The Spectre of Babeuf.” Haymarket Books, 2016. Bosworth, R. “Mussolini’s Italy: Life under the Dictatorship 1915-1945.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2006. Brown, A. "How 'socialist' was National Socialism?" Kindle, 2015. Engels, F “Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.” Written, 1880. Progress Publishers, 1970. Evans, R. “The Coming of the Third Reich.” Penguin Books, Kindle 2004. Dilorenzo, T. “The Problem with Socialism.” Regnery Publishing, Kindle 2016. Farrell, N. "Mussolini: A New Life." Endeavour Press Ltd, Kinde 2015. Feder, G. "The Programme of the NSDAP: The National Socialist German Worker's Party and its General Conceptions." RJG Enterprises Inc, 2003. Feder, G. "The German State on a National and Socialist Foundation." Black House Publishing LTD, 2015. Folson, B. "The Myth of the Robber Barons: A New Look at the Rise of Big Business in America." Young America's Foundation, 5th Edition, 2007. Friedman, M. “Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition.” university of Chicago, Kindle 2002. (originally published in 1962) Fustel de Coulanges, “The Ancient City: A Study of the Religion, Laws, and Institutions of Greece and Rome.” Pantianos Classics, Kindle 2017, first published in 1877. Grand, A. "Italian Fascism: It's Origins and & Development." University of Nebraska Press, 2000. Geyer, M. & Fitzpatrick, S. "Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared." Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2009. Hazlitt, H. “Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest & Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics.” Three Rivers Press, 1979. (originally published 1946) Hazlitt, H. "Man vs The Welfare State." PDF, 1970. mises.org/library/man-vs-welfare-state-0 Hibbert, C. “Mussolini: The Rise and Fall of Il Duce.” St Martin’s Press Griffin, 2008. Higgs, R. “Depression, War, and Cold War: Studies in Political Economy.” Oxford University Press, 2006. Hirschfeld, G. “The Policies of Genocide: Jews and Soviet Prisoners of War in Nazi Germany.” Routledge, Kindle 2015 (original 1986). Hitler. A. “Mein Kampf.” Jaico Books, 2017. Hitler, A. "Zweites Buch (Secret Book): Adolf Hitler's Sequel to Mein Kampf." Jaico Publishing House, 2017. Hobsbawm, E. "The Age of Extremes: 1914-1991." Abacus, 1995. Hoppe, H. “A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism.” Kindle. Joseph Goebbels and Mjölnir, Die verfluchten Hakenkreuzler. Etwas zum Nachdenken (Munich: Verlag Frz. Eher, 1932). (English translation) Kershaw, I. “Hitler: 1936-1945 Nemesis.” Penguin Books, 2001. Kershaw, I. “Stalinism and Nazism: Dictatorships in Comparison.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle 2003. Keynes, J. "National Self-Sufficiency," The Yale Review, Vol. 22, no. 4 (June 1933), pp. 755-769. Kobrak & Hansen. “European Business, Dictatorship, and Political Risk, 1920-1945.” Berghahn Books, 2004. von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, E. "Leftism: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse." Arlington House Publishers, PDF 1974. Livy, Ab Urbe Condita, The History of Rome, Kindle P22. Luxemburg, R. “The Accumulation of Capital.” Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd, 1951. (Originally written in 1913.) Luxemburg, R. “The National Question” 1910. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital.” PDF of 1887 English edition, 2015. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF of 1894, English edition, 2010. Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” PDF, English edition, 2010. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. “Capital: A Critique of Political Economy: Volume III Book One.” Penguin Classics, Kindle edition. (Originally written 1894) Marx, K. & Engels, F. "Manifesto of the Communist Party." PDF 1969, original 1848. Menger, C. "Principles of Economics." Ludwig von Mises Institute, PDF 2007. (Originally written in 1871.) mises.org/library/principles-economics Mises, L. “Human Action: A Treatise on Economics.” Martino Publishing, 2012. (Originally 1949) Mises, L. "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis." Liberty Fund, 1981. 1969 edition (roots back to 1932). Moorhouse, R. "The Devil's Alliance: Hitler's Pact with Stalin, 1939-1941." Random House Group, Ebook (Google Play) 2014. Mosley, O. "Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered." Black House Publishing, Kindle 2019. Muravchik, J. “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism.” Encounter Books, Kindle. Mussolini, B. “The Doctrine of Fascism.” Kindle, Originally published in 1932. Newman, M. “Socialism: A Very Short Introduction.” Kindle. Overy, R. “The Nazi Economic Recovery 1932-1938.” Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, 1996 (original 1982). Reimann, G. “The Vampire Economy: Doing Business under Fascism.” Kindle, Mises Institute, 2007. Originally written in 1939. Reisman, G. "Why Nazism was Socialism and why Socialism is Totalitarian." Kindle 2014. Siedentop, L. “Inventing the Individual: The Origins of Western Liberalism.” Penguin Books, Kindle. Smith, A. “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “Economic Facts and Fallacies: Second Edition.” Kindle. Sowell, T. “The Housing Boom and Bust.” Kindle. Spengler, O. “Prussianism and Socialism.” Isha Books, 2013. First Published 1920. Temin, P. “Soviet and Nazi Economic Planning in the 1930s.” From The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Nov., 1991), pp. 573-593 (21 pages). Jstor. Tooze, A. “Wages of Destruction: The Making & Breaking of The Nazi Economy.” Penguin Books, 2007. Young, Adam. "Nazism is Socialism." The Free Market 19, no. 9 (September 2001). Zitelmann, R. “Hitler: The Politics of Seduction.” London House, 1999. "The Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume III: Total War Economy, Society and Culture." Cambridge University Press, 2017. The American Economic Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, Papers and Discussions of the Twenty-third Annual Meeting (Apr., 1911), pp. 347-354 Hitler’s Confidential Memo on Autarky (August 1936) germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/English61.pdf Deficit Spending in the Nazi Recovery, 1933-1938: A Critical Reassessment personal.lse.ac.uk/ritschl/pdf_files/ritschl_dec2000.pdf Sir Oswald Mosley | Interview | Thames Television | 1975 kzread.info/dash/bejne/eoKcqJRxlt20aaw.html (Accessed 04/10/2018) de.wikisource.org/wiki/Reichstagsbrandverordnung home.wlu.edu/~patchw/His_214/_handouts/Weimar%20constitution.htm en.wikisource.org/wiki/Weimar_constitution www.zum.de/psm/weimar/weimar_vve.php www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.htm wiki.mises.org/wiki/Inflation_in_Nazi_Germany “A nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government.” en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/state Mises "Planned Chaos" (an excerpt from "Socialism: An Economic & Sociological Analysis) kzread.info/dash/bejne/aXmiqseTiK_ghMY.html TomWoodsTV - Ep. 1474 What Is Fascism? Published on 21 Aug 2019 kzread.info/dash/bejne/o4OnuNORfamnlMo.html Woods, The Forgotten Depression of 1920, mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920 Cambridge Dictionary dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/public Online Latin-Dictionary www.latin-dictionary.net/definition/32212/publicus-publica-publicum Online Etymology Dictionary www.etymonline.com/word/public Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford University Press, Third Edition 2010.

@StandingTNT

4 жыл бұрын

ok

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

Ok?

@gaslightstudiosrebooted3432

4 жыл бұрын

The NSDAP was socialist in the sense that one could only make money as a corporation if they wore the lapel pin of the Nazi Party.

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

Ok

@StandingTNT

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Nice that you embrace the almighty OK

TIK had taught me more about economics and the origins of society than all of my schooling has. Always backups his claims, level-headed, logical, and concise. Thank you so much, sir.

@sophiacristina

3 жыл бұрын

School is just an indoctrination system, we need forums! Also, my former leftists friends were all failed artists that decided to be teacher and discount their frustration with "capitalism" on their students... Let me just say, i don't know how old you are, but, once you are old enough that the teachers are younger than you, you are going to see how immature and juvenile is overall teachers...

@sophiacristina

2 жыл бұрын

@Glenn Krenz ty, gonna check it out... Also, ypu probably know Yuri Besmenov, don't? If not... Check him out...

@RGalindoM

2 жыл бұрын

@@sophiacristina How many people around this comments attended to free public schools that are available to everyone thanks to the hated letfish ones?

@lightinthedarkness8849

2 жыл бұрын

@@sophiacristina what did Glen respond with. He's been taking by the KZread

@sophiacristina

2 жыл бұрын

@@lightinthedarkness8849 Sadly i lost the name before i could do my research, but he was talking about a guy (and gave his name) which talks about how people indoctrinate people with marxism ideas.

I'm honestly amazed at the level of research that goes into this.

@johanisnotagamer

3 жыл бұрын

Many people don't bother. America is living in an era of cold war nostalgia right now and its influence is global. Scary times.

@spc2448

3 жыл бұрын

Me to a work of art really

@JFS61023

3 жыл бұрын

Just secure bitcoin

@Griede26

2 жыл бұрын

6min in and im fascinated, but i am staggered by the sheer depth of research.

@Torquemadia

2 жыл бұрын

Indeed. How can someone talk so long about something they clearly don't have the first clue about.

In the past I would say this video is public service but it actually is private service! Well done!

@TheImperatorKnight

3 жыл бұрын

Haha true! Thanks for watching!

@bagasitogitto.f1826

2 жыл бұрын

@@250txc Tax breaks are funding since it has the same effect: distorting the market. Either you have no taxes (which would be free market, mutatis mutandis) either you have taxes partially (which would be something like the USA after 1860) either you have taxes in everything yet in different scales and with tax breaks for some benefited ones (which would be something like we have today.)

@baddog2567

Жыл бұрын

It's public.

@chico9805

Жыл бұрын

​@@baddog2567Some people just never learn, eh?

@56jklove

Жыл бұрын

​@@TheImperatorKnightI would still say corporations and big businesses, are still capitalism cause it gets its money through people.

That explanation of the family was 100x better than what I had been taught in school and uni.

@corentinvillereal6975

11 ай бұрын

School is public, remember 😉

@jarodjohnson1605

11 ай бұрын

​@@corentinvillereal6975except for private schools, but you've got to be an evil capitalist to pay for a halfway decent education.

It's so refreshing to just hear straight forward honest definitions of things like public and private.

@Mike-ul7of

3 жыл бұрын

Truth sets you free

@theprinceofcrows8691

2 жыл бұрын

Sock puppets galore!!! I see TIK has no problem with dummy google accounts to gain views and heap praise on his self. Some are too obvious while others follow a pattern that is easy to see throughout his video commentary. Shameless!!!

@forsaken22

2 жыл бұрын

@@theprinceofcrows8691 would you calm down, it's okay to be wrong you know.

@theprinceofcrows8691

2 жыл бұрын

@@forsaken22 you have forsaken your brains and reason and trumpet nonsense as fact. Post in any of my comments where you want to post your objections to my facts and evidence. Even your friend TIK hides when I called him out directly.

It’s interesting how even though nationalism and patriotism in the west is declining and people are becoming more selfish, there is more of a push towards a centralized state now

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

Those who rule want more power to rule. And the people have no choice, but are fooled into thinking they do.

@ianjedi1282

4 жыл бұрын

As power stops growing those who hold it (the wealthy ruling capitalist class) go to greater lengths not to lose it. The state is the tool of the ruling class.

@jaykilbourne1110

3 жыл бұрын

@@ianjedi1282 found the Marxist idiot

@jeremiahduran7238

3 жыл бұрын

Ian jedi Dude, the “capitalist” ruling class, only exists because of big government at least in the US. You can tie half the billionaires back to some sort of government official within their family, bill gates grandpa. Or government contracts that gives them an advantage. That is not capitalism that’s state capitalism which in essence means. You guessed it, socialism. They were paid by your tax dollars to get to where they are at. A capitalist won’t have the ability to create armies and use them, but a socialist will. The government won’t save you, and if you spin a revolution to create a new one, you are gonna end up with the same problems, if not worse. The only solution is less government.

@dosran5786

3 жыл бұрын

the road to serfdom is a good read you should check out also frederic bastiats the law.

I always wondered why socialists are so anti Christian, christianity at it's root promotes the individual over the collective

@TheImperatorKnight

3 жыл бұрын

True. But they're not just anti-Christian they're anti-Semitic too kzread.info/dash/bejne/pI6ckpOxgrLFgco.html

@TheEmperorsChampion964

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight I'll give it a watch! Loved your video explaining why Hitler was actually a socialist, I knew he was but I really enjoyed hearing all of the evidence

@joegarrison5911

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight socialist being antisemitic HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

@thefrenchareharlequins2743

3 жыл бұрын

@@joegarrison5911 At this point a nazi would say "well you are gonna take the wealth of the 1% without being antisemitic"?

@thefrenchareharlequins2743

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Perhaps they are anti-religion?

A perfect place to paraphrase Thomas Sowell, and ask why it's greedy to want to keep money you earned by providing something valuable to another person, but not greedy to take money that another person earned- and is being forced to hand over- and give it to another person to the tune of praise? Just backwards and upside down?

I've never watched a more well researched and thought out video on this topic than this one. You made everything so much easier to understand. I love how each word and each definition, you made it a point to break it down, so we're all on the same page, and build it up again back to the main topic. Every other channel would just assume you have the pre requisite to understand some of these academic political and economic terms, however you explained them properly so that a beginner (such as myself) could understand. I also very much appreciate the color coding of the words which also just made things so much easier. All in all, just bravo sir, this presentation was amazing and I'll be sure to watch more of your content.

@jonathancullis9155

Жыл бұрын

I don't think I've watched a more well researched and thought out video on any topic.

Fascist gov't didn't need to own the means of production in a traditional sense, because they owned the people of the nation themselves.

@j.f.fisher5318

3 жыл бұрын

Well put, and I'd add in performative authoritarianism like what Putin does, and what Trump tries to do, takes this a step further back by not even owning the people but owning the culture that the people operate within.

@OkurkaBinLadin

3 жыл бұрын

@@j.f.fisher5318 You cannot "own" culture, thats marxist lie to promote tribalism at the expense of civic society.

@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding

3 жыл бұрын

@@j.f.fisher5318 You can change culture but not control it/own it.

@ddandymann

3 жыл бұрын

@@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding It is absolutely possible to control culture if the government has sufficient power, social engineering is a thing. Just look at any authoritarian state of the 20th century or even modern day China and you can see the effects of social engineering on culture.

@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding

3 жыл бұрын

@@ddandymann they mosified an existing one, not fully control it and made their own thing.

Public companies defined as state sector is certainly quite eye-opening and I think it can explain some of the ills in today's world. The lack of a single owner who is individually responsible for the company's actions and intends to stay for the long-term essentially means that company's management only cares about short-term gains because each owner is very small and can immediately sell their shares if needed. Not to mention "too big to fail" businesses that are essentially states in themselves which can extract resources from society for their own survival. Unsurprisingly, too big to fail companies are mostly publicly-listed banks, large industrial conglomerates and state-owned businesses which have a vast amount of owners and hence it is "moral" for the state to rescue them.

@jasoncuculo7035

10 ай бұрын

What state owned companies do you mean? All American evil supercorporations are private. Corporate reverse Robin Hood dystopia faces us now as is strengthening.

@robertdornan8611

9 ай бұрын

Corporations are evil creations under the law (State). The two pillars of corporations is Maximize Shareholder Value, and Limited Legal Liability. ( no morality, that 's why a corp can dump toxic waste, because it is cheaper therefore increase shareholder value. If a individual is hurt because of this action, and a the corp is sued, and the lawsuit is successful (doubtful), and there are not enough assets in the company, to make the individual whole. He is shit out of luck, as he cannot hold the shareholders of the corporation repsonsible.

@AverageAlien

9 ай бұрын

Same goes for governments, and this is why monarchies are superior and way more free and stable than democracies.

@CallanElliott

7 ай бұрын

@@AverageAlien Stable so long as you only look at less than a half-dozen or so examples that are still extent where the monarch doesn't exercise much executive authority, which means the monarch doesn't really control it, and therefore does not own the monarchy. And you're going to have to define what you mean by 'free' here because as far as I can see, it ain't any definition of free I'd see listed in the dictionary.

@AverageAlien

7 ай бұрын

@@CallanElliott Free as in more individual liberty. Monarchs cannot be tyrants without compromising their own rule.

Someone once asked Saddam Hussain, who had a picture of Stalin hanging in his office, why he had Uncle Joe displayed since he (Saddam) was not a communist. His reply: "well, neither was Stalin".

@mrillis9259

3 жыл бұрын

Sad how he died Hope it was a double an ol' Saddam is down south America way

@SteelValyrian

3 жыл бұрын

@GrayJacketWasp Whoosh?

@SteelValyrian

3 жыл бұрын

@GrayJacketWasp Me neither. Was my point ofc lol. Given the comment he was responding to.

@owlnyc666

3 жыл бұрын

Since Saddam was not a lasseiz faire capitalist washed a socialist ?

@sdporres

3 жыл бұрын

@@owlnyc666 did the government take control of the economy? Were private citizens free to start any business they wanted, hire who they wanted, pay the wages they wanted, et al? Or were there policies to limit that behavior?

These videos should be downloaded and distributed everywhere before they are taken down and deemed to shocking for us sheep to see. Amazing insight.

@theprinceofcrows8691

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, quick quick before they are gone. The source of his delusion has been around since the 40's and hasn't gone anywhere. Nor will it because it is useful to certain circles in maintaining a lie. It was baseless rhetoric then just as it is today despite an effort to push it over the last 2 decades. It is demonstrably false to equate government control = socialism; and equally so is capitalism= a complete absence of government regulation, oversight, nationalization, and planning. That is just a fact

@forsaken22

2 жыл бұрын

@@theprinceofcrows8691 you're just angry man calm down you offer no actual rebuttals because you know that would require you to actually look at his sources and you might accidentally change your mind. Capitalism isn't a government system it's an economic practice

@theprinceofcrows8691

2 жыл бұрын

@@forsaken22 Keep pretending I'm angry if you think it helps prop up your otherwise weak argument friend. The search feature is your friend and my evidence is all over the comments section refuting this farce. Do your due diligence and stop assuming things or alternatively being intellectually dishonest to fake like you have an argument. You like following me around from comment to comment so make a case somewhere and present something other than false claims.

@theprinceofcrows8691

2 жыл бұрын

@@forsaken22 Just because you cannot see the forest for the trees.... "You're just angry man calm down..." That is an assumption and you are making a bizarre attempt at mindreading "... you offer no actual rebuttals..." Oh but I did and just because that it is difficult for you to grasp doesn't mean I haven't thoroughly done so in a one paragraph post. The facts are I did with sound logic and objective fact. Just because you don't find your confirmation bias in my statement of facts doesn't mean I didn't factually offer a full rebuttal based in facts. "because you know that would require you to actually look at his sources..." More mindreading and assumptions and I could not only factually say I have looked at his whole video and his sources, but I could also make a strong case that I have read more of his sources than he has because of his poor grasp of these sources and the conclusions that many of them outright refute on their own merit. I could certainly say that I factually understand them better than he does and that I factually surpass his knowledge and understanding of the subject. "... and you might actually change your mind." More assumption masquerading as fact because the argument is an intellectual polished turd with conflicting sources and he cannot factually prove his premises. So NO! "Capitalism is not a government system.." You don't say? Are you assuming again? I never asserted that it was and it was TIK who asserted I would say that in another turd polishing segment. It is an economic system, that as a sum of it's parts, has a government as an obvious component. Do you see the important distinction and key difference? That is why this argument can be refuted so easily because it originates in broken logic and foolish beliefs misrepresented as facts. "...it is an economic practice." No the practice is just a repeated process that is a component and one that is economic in nature. As I have stated already it is an economic system, a sum of it's parts, and conflating distinctly different terms and concepts is as broken as the rest. NOW, my factual rebuttal was in the first post here and you can make your case or rebuttal here and now. Just as I told your buddy TIK and who has not made an appearance despite being called out and asked to refute a single sentence argument. I may not be able to factually back this statement that follows but he seems a lot like a little squirel who is quietly and unceremoniously guarding his nuts by refusing to even defend his extraordinary claim and simply keeps polishing more turds with sources as he posts more multi hour videos using sophistry to mask the deficiency of his work.

@TheManofthecross

2 жыл бұрын

Let’s

I enjoyed Friedman's answer when asked what sort of economic system is Capitalism. He said it WASN'T an economic system. It's merely allowing people to trade and contract freely. Capitalism is freedom. All the other "systems" are force.

@dosran5786

3 жыл бұрын

yes and he nailed it perfectly.

@dosran5786

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidjacobs8558 everything is ran by greed you absolute moron......and pride pride isnt a bad thing ... who isnt greedy david que you claiming we should all join a commune but youre not a socialist not a all.

@thanksfernuthin

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidjacobs8558 I prefer to think of Capitalism as being driven by providing value to your fellow man and being rewarded for it. The outcome is the same. Can we agree Capitalism requires freedom and Socialism requires tyranny?

@thanksfernuthin

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidjacobs8558 Eeehhhhh... I believe you're over thinking it.

@dosran5786

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidjacobs8558 pride makes a man do better than others? thats not a sin david and never has been, god provides all men with the means but not always the faculties.

The references to "1984" are just perfect. Keep the good work

Silver and gold are weighed in Troy ounces and Troy pounds. 12 Troy ounces = 1 Troy pound.

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

You are correct

" *BBC* , Goebbels's Ministry of Enlightenment..." - TIK, 2019.

@spudwesth

4 жыл бұрын

50 % of BBC info is lies - listener beware

@Lord-Inquisitor

4 жыл бұрын

@@flashgordon6670 Everything they said about Brexit ever?

@Lord-Inquisitor

4 жыл бұрын

@@flashgordon6670 coverage Count Dankula's Nazi Pug joke.

@adrianshephard378

4 жыл бұрын

@@flashgordon6670 Maybe describing people like Alex jones as alt-right

@Lord-Inquisitor

4 жыл бұрын

@The Truth Remoaners still remoaning? bahhahahhaha

Whenever I looked more into WW2 with Communism and Fascism, I’ve always wondered what really made them different as they seemed pretty much the same to me in terms of how they functioned. Learning that they are the same thing but just on different scale is amazing. I’m glad you were able to put this together and confirm what I thought for last few years.

@stefanmilojkovic

Жыл бұрын

They are not the same. It is just presented that way. In communisam there are no race, purity of blood and other things. It's a simplification to the dumbest

@Web720

Жыл бұрын

@@stefanmilojkovic Nah they are, You're confusing Nazism with communism/socialism.

@stefanmilojkovic

Жыл бұрын

@@Web720 can you explain how they are the same!??

@Web720

Жыл бұрын

@@stefanmilojkovic He literally has videos on this topic. One nearly 5 hour video on why the Nazis are socialist. One that simplifies that 5 hour video in ~45 minutes. As well as a ~40 minute video on Fascism Defined. Heck, he even shows evidence of Fascism having its roots with Italian Socialism/Syndacalism in this video.

@stefanmilojkovic

Жыл бұрын

@@Web720 ok... But it's not the same thing anyway. Only similarities. Not the same...

Public vs Private | The Historic Definitions of Socialism & Capitalism 0:00 Intro 6:53 Gentle 10:20 Public Sector 30:00 Private Sector 38:15 Collectivism / Socialism 48:40 State Capitalism 1:07:10 The Real Political Spectrum

Whenever I listen/watch videos of yours like this one, I feel like I've been lied to for my whole life.

@SteelValyrian

3 жыл бұрын

Well we have. =D

@spoonsofdoom92

3 жыл бұрын

thats why public school exists. designed by the prussians. sold to the free world.

@odysseus2656

3 жыл бұрын

You have been lied to. I could never understand as a kid how a stock market downturn in 1929 could affect the whole world, especially since the market recovered within 6 months and then started a long decline as the government tried to help us more and more. I remember every teacher telling us we get a depression after a war ends, but they could not explain how we were living in a post-war boom in the 50's.In fact according to my teachers "post-war boom" was an oxymoron. The answer is that according to the government metrics on the economy we were in a really really deep depression until 1964, but we did not notice because the drop off in the economy was government spending. Shows you that the government statistics you have seen all your life are a lie, or at least do not measure what they claim to measure.

@SynerG4ce

3 жыл бұрын

You have been, systematically, since birth.

@Mike-ul7of

3 жыл бұрын

That’s bc you have been. We live in a matrix where most commonly believed theories/events are false.

Tik your work is solid and pure gold. I wish you a long and healthy life, you're a man with so much to enrich people's minds and hearts.

I don't know that I have ever seen something so informative and entertaining elsewhere at any time. You've absolutely killed it and I am immediately going to watch all your other videos, with a sub for future ones. Thank you.

@pixelatedbishop

3 жыл бұрын

I do hope you know it is biased and I think you should construct a critical theory against this. There are some logical fallacies that I felt I found.

@Biggiiful

Жыл бұрын

@Armand Cowell. Such as? (Genuinely asking. That's not meant as snark.)

@ikiyuz4344

Жыл бұрын

@@Biggiiful everyone has bias but as far as i have seen in tiks videos he has the lowest bias in any historical channel and speaks about topics he believes is true or right. Also he doesn't just tell us he has all the truths, he constantly told everyone to question his work, ideas and videos not follow them like ideologoes and research it ourselves by giving us sources at every opportune moment. And thats why even if i dont agree with some of tik's ideas i cant even be mad towards him because he truly believes on what he is saying and constantly researching, double checking and debating for his ideas which believes in.

@35:00 This seems to be a contradiction to your previous statement. You said that big businesses don't count as "private" or "capitalist" and cannot exist on their own because it would be too hard to internally manage them. But then praise Vanderbilt for competing with a state monopoly, thus becoming a big business monopolist himself, which I thought wasn't possible without state help? You also seem to inherently associate all corporations with publically traded ones, even though there are many privately traded large corporations like Koch Industries, IKEA, and Rolex. This seems to fly in the face of your assertion capitalism can only stand for small-scale, local, independently run businesses, and free competition will just naturally prevent large corporations from forming. Unless you are really going to try to say that Koch Industries is a small mom & pop operation. Furthermore, you say that big businesses find it extremely difficult to calculate internal prices efficiently, but is this inefficiency really large enough to hamper net growth of the company, and how does state funding even remedy this? As I've said, there are plenty of large, privately traded corporations that exist and turn a profit. Also, it doesn't really make sense to say that publically traded corporations don't count as capitalist simply because anyone can buy stocks. Sure, ostensibly anyone _can_ buy a share in the company, but ultimately, the *ownership* is still in private hands, and the majority shareholders that hold the actual *power* in the company, the ones who can make all the decisions, are ultimately private individuals. It really seems like you are stretching or restricting what counts as "capitalist" according to what you think is good or not, and relegate every bad outcome of capitalism to "not real capitalism." Is this not the exact same thing as the "not real socialism" argument that you decry from socialists? If, as you say at 59:32, that "left to free-market forces, the central state would collapse," what is stopping the "small private individuals" from banding together and forming unions, thus, by your definition, states? Is a stateless society even possible? As a historian, surely you realize the innate human proclivity to form groups and cooperate? If the state collapsed due to the power of the free market, then who would enforce claims to property or laws? Can there even _be_ laws without a state to enforce them? Would private security and firefighting agencies replace the tax-funded state ones? I'm not sure the Crassus model is something most people would like. This vehement opposition you have to seemingly anything government-related seems a bit counterproductive and not well thought out. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you really seem to define socialism as anytime a government or "state" has control and does something. If this is the case, then by that logic, are not absolute monarchies socialist? Wouold you really argue that monarchies are on the left side of the spectrum? Couldn't you say that socialism has always existed since the dawn of every human civilization? If so, then this seems to be a bit of a muddied definition of socialism and makes it an incredibly non-specific term, which I'm not sure was your intention.

@suddenuprising

3 жыл бұрын

Your comment points out fatal problems in TIK's theory. Don't expect a response. Instead just keep replaying his 5 hour long video on why the Nazis were socialist until you finally understand that TIK is the greatest intellectual of our time who has revolutionized our contemporary understanding of economics and political philosophy.

@TheSm1thers

3 жыл бұрын

A monarch would be socialist if they enforced socialist principles. Monarchies are not necessarily left or right.

@herbertwilkshire4265

2 жыл бұрын

I get it now.. he's an ancap propagandist. Makes sense now

@himedo1512

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah. I find his definition of socialist is way too broad to a laughable degree

@Zarastro54

2 жыл бұрын

@@TheSm1thers Problem is, “socialist principles” are incredibly broad if you use the definitions and logic that TIK uses.

TIK you’re making a real and substantive contribution to the historical understanding of the topics you cover. Thanks for all your hard work 😓

TIK, THANK YOU for firstly educating me on battles and events (and in greater depth) during the second part of the great war. We in school would get to WWII in my "advanced US History" class and just watch film after film watching Japan attack Pearl Harbor and pictures of Auschwitz. It means so much for me to have a strong grasp on history. Secondly, THANK YOU for breaking down the very fiber of each ideology as it is today by the history of how they were conceived. Please keep up all the great work! I love getting notifications for a new TIK video fresh out of editing! Thanks TIK

@MillenniumRP

3 жыл бұрын

I swear everytime my class discussed WW2, 75% of it was about the Holocaust, which while an important topic wasn't the only atrocity or event that occurred during that time.

@Nyet-Zdyes

2 жыл бұрын

Strangely, it seems as if my History classes went something like... "Dec. 7, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Then, there was a big navy battle called Midway, then we stormed the beaches at Normandy, then Germany surrendered and then we dropped atomic bombs on Japan and Japan surrendered." It probably took you longer to read it, than it did for us to "discuss" it, learn about it... even in the relevant COLLEGE History course... as if the teachers wanted to "gloss over it", skip it, for some reason... or maybe in a hurry to get to the next part.

This is an excellent video. It should be played to all students in every school.

@ScottOrr95

3 жыл бұрын

I wish this was the sort of stuff we were taught about in school, it's actually interesting and makes sense.

@MrMudslap

3 жыл бұрын

This video is CRUCIAL. I was TOTALLY wrong about a lot of this, naturally I will have to chase down the sources, however take what you hear here and map it over the far left in the US and you can hear the bell of truth ringing. Look this info up but I think he is completely right.

@npickle54

3 жыл бұрын

hello

@lasselarsen5449

3 жыл бұрын

@@ScottOrr95 but the state doesnt want you to know this ;-)

@theprinceofcrows8691

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely, as if the meager instruction they get now is not bad enough we must inject outright ludicrous positions of a different political bent to really make it worse. Every student needs a rhetoric driven political diatribe based kn false premises and intellectual dishonesty to really get them on the right path. After this video reduces every political and economic model that ever existed to being completely DEVOID OF ANY SIGNIFICANT MEANING we can all live in a world where political necessity dictates all meaning and definitions if it is necessary to bash something in a political way that we don't like 👍. We will be living in barbarism faster than TIK can say socialism = government control or "Hitler was a left wing socialist".

This channel should be a qualification. I degree in TIKhistory... i have learned more on this channel of history/politics/economics than my entire school education. Thank you for what you're doing.

@TheManofthecross

2 жыл бұрын

We all must learn here and then some.

@Charon-5582

Жыл бұрын

Just goes to show how much of a borderline useless, waste of time public (I am sure you now know what that means) schooling is.

Wow, TIK. What a head spinner. It's going to take me a while to absorb the content in this video.

@curiousindividual634

4 жыл бұрын

For me it's the opposite. This weird feeling "It's so obvious. Why does nobody see it? Why did I not see it?" Terrifyingly simple

@rolandfelice6198

4 жыл бұрын

@@curiousindividual634 I could wish for that clarity of vision, however, I suspect that it would be the stuff of nightmares. Somehow I'll muddle through in the hope that 'it will all work out in the end'. Assuming the end doesn't come too soon!

@realitymatters8720

4 жыл бұрын

Dont absorb it, just go to wikipedia and read the actuall facts, this guy is redefining both systems, making communication impossible !

@Hopgoodd

4 жыл бұрын

Exactly!!!

@MillenniumRP

3 жыл бұрын

@@realitymatters8720 no

This is the Fight Club of KZread videos.

If only my socialist and "anti-capitalist" friends would watch this video...

@Mike-ul7of

3 жыл бұрын

@@someonenew439 It’s all given off the backs of the working class. There is no moral superiority in asking 1 class of people to provide for another.

@someonenew439

3 жыл бұрын

@@Mike-ul7of yeah there is. There is nothing wrong with hierarchy when in makes the society function. Capitalism does that.

@someonenew439

3 жыл бұрын

@@Mike-ul7of one doesn't provide for the other. They both provide for each other

@herbertwilkshire4265

2 жыл бұрын

@@someonenew439 lol at thinking capitalism functions well. The only capitalism functions at, is concentrating wealth and power into the hands of an elite minority.

@someonenew439

2 жыл бұрын

@@herbertwilkshire4265 solution then? If it's a problem of coarse. Karl Marx was right on the criticism of capitalism but dead wrong on the solution of communism or socialism. What is the solution comrade?

I swear you justify my positions so well. I had been making horrible arguments on these topics for years and my lack of education hurts me so but seeing these videos just keeps my fire for knowledge burning and I keep deep diving into this stuff and sharing your videos. Thank you so much for the insight! Keep up the great work!

@chadretention8024

2 жыл бұрын

And you just explained my position everytime I see communist and socialist propaganda and know they’re wrong but can’t argue cause I don’t know history very well, thank the public school system for that, so these videos are rlly rlly helpful

@AverageAlien

2 жыл бұрын

@@chadretention8024 I've always destroyed socialist arguments without using any arguments in this video with ease. Little did I know how much easier this video makes destroying pathetic socies

@Gvjrapiro

2 жыл бұрын

@@AverageAlien Oh my god, you're still bragging about imaginary arguments? Kid, whenever you get into an argument with anyone, you always end up running away after failing to make a single point. I've never even seen you make an argument, and you've spent hours spamming me. You've never destroyed an argument, they destroy you, with ease :)

@AverageAlien

2 жыл бұрын

@@Gvjrapiro Trash tier troll, get a life lmao, garbage quality bait not even slightly believable

@AverageAlien

2 жыл бұрын

@@Gvjrapiro either that or you're handicapped beyond all normal human functioning

Stalin would have liked this FinSoc guy during the invasion of Finland haha

@razorloboerrol

4 жыл бұрын

He would have shot him later.

@MillenniumRP

3 жыл бұрын

@@razorloboerrol As is natural in a socialist environment.

@dosran5786

3 жыл бұрын

@@MillenniumRP yea gotta do away with the informed so the uninformed dont stop believing the lie.

Another great video from TIK. Communism always delivers. Maybe not food, maybe not consumption goods. But it delivers one thing that counts.. Misery

@promethium-145

3 жыл бұрын

Absolutely!

@jaedanknickerbocker9596

2 жыл бұрын

Always.

@RGalindoM

2 жыл бұрын

Communism always delivers public and free schools for all. Did you attend to private schools the whole of your life?

@jaedanknickerbocker9596

2 жыл бұрын

@@RGalindoM I sure wish I did.

@donsink

2 жыл бұрын

@@Torquemadia but thats because of a enlarged govt. capitalism requires that govt can not have the power to do that.

3 years too late coming to this video but what a informative view of basic societal structures. Thanks TIK and well done. Keep up the good work.

@vandalcreed

7 ай бұрын

It's never too late to learn, like I did when I stumbled upon this.

After 40 years and a degree in political philosophy, you just turned my conceptual understanding of capitalism on its head. If big business is part of the state, albeit a different type or aspect of what we traditionall call 'the state', advocating capitalism is really about freedom for the broad base of society: individuals and small business, the private sector. Perhaps building a co-operative is now more capitalist than a proprietary company because it's less hierarchical in its power structure, and its objective is not to go public (not to mention Zombie companies) but to distribute profits among those that created the value. Which, following capitalism, would be actual value, not a financial hoax as more and more often associated with big business (again: zombie companies).

This is, in my opinion, the greatest and most important video on the internet.

"the holocaust is when no free markets" sounds so stupid on the surface, but it's actually incredibly based and true. Great vid, TIK. You are doing God's work.

The notion that capitalism is anti big corporations and anti-monopoly is absurdly ahistorical and not how business works. Every small businessman naturally seeks to monopolize his market and squeeze out all competiton. This would still happen even without any state involvment. And in fact, historically, it has taken the state to bust such monopolistic practices. If you actually study anything about how business and venture capital works, every venture captialist is looking to invest in a company that has monopoly potential. Companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, etc started out a small businesses and all became monopolies, not because of the state, but due to capitalism and free market forces. And the only reason these companies don't own your children is because the state has the size and power to stop them. If there was no strong state, all these corporations would hire private militaries and use them to enslave everyone else and monopolize the market even further until no free markets remained at all. The reason Facebook doesn't own nuclear weapons and tanks is because the state stops them. Don't forget that! This video presents a badly twisted, biased, and ahistorcial notion of capitalism, blaming all the evils of capitalism on socialism. Socialism has its evils, but that doesn't absolve the evils of capitalism. Small businesses are NOT motivated to feed hungry people, they are motivated to maximize profit and monopolize markets, making markets frozen and not free. If capitalists were truly motivated to feed hungry people, there would be no hungry people. Be careful listening to this guy. He sounds intelligent at first but if you actually understand history and business, this is a joke. Big business, especially in America, is pure capitalism, not socialism. In general, dividing society into capitalist/socialist, private/public, is a childishly oversimplified frame of how things works. Society had always been a complex mix of public and private agendas. Neither side of this distinction is good or bad. It's the balance which is crucial. Btw, given how broadly this guy defines "socialism", every society in human history was socialism, from the Greeks till today. You know you definition of things is twisted when not a single society on Earth fits your definition of "capitalism". This is the same mistake that socialists make when they claim that "real" socialism hasn't been tried. Well, likewise, "real" capitalism hasn't been tried because it would lead to Facebook owning nuclear weapons and enslaving your children in coal mines. As impractical as real socialism is, real capitalism is even less practical, which is why it doesn't exist. There has never been such a thing as a free market. All markets have alway been manipulated by state and non-state actors for personal gain. Because obviously. That's what all business boils down to: biased market manipulation in your favor.

@Prairielander

Жыл бұрын

I think you can see a free market with small groups of people. If you have a garage sale you are freely exchanging goods without government or interference.

@Web720

Жыл бұрын

I was okay until you said the US is "Pure Capitalism", now that is also a pretty bad take and shows your bias. Not to mention you contradict it later on when you said real, aka pure, capitalism doesn't exist.

No matter how hard you try to simplify the basics of capitalist economics Socialist will never understand!

This has been highly influential on my thinking, together with Economics in one lesson. Thank you very much TIK!

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

Glad to hear you found this useful! More to come soon on the topics covered here

@matteo.pilgrim

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight I've started writing my own philosophy book, ranging from evolution, to psychology, to economics, to history. Will need a few more years for it... Would love to get in touch with you one day. Kind regards.

@realitymatters8720

4 жыл бұрын

@@matteo.pilgrim And the ability to look things up in books instead of a political dillitant making videos on KZread.

@matteo.pilgrim

4 жыл бұрын

@@realitymatters8720 ok, midwit.

@realitymatters8720

4 жыл бұрын

@@matteo.pilgrim I had no idear what a midwit was, so I looked it up "individual of above average IQ 105-120 range, smart but lazy and lack nuance. Nice its been 20 years since I had an IQ test and the result was 115 and I allways was a lazy bugger. How did you know ? The lack of nuance seems to be more you, denying relevance of facts found in books etc. But damn good going...

Great video, thank you very much. I know all of this must be very time consuming but it’s amazing seeing someone with so much passion for truth and logic. Much appreciated, keep it up!

Awesome video! I've always naturally and internally understood this but am not as educated in history (which I believe is my own fault) or as good at wording things (probably also my fault) so thank you for now I see the proper way to explain my views and make a coherent case without confusion or contradiction. Instant subscribe and like.

This video is so amazing. I love how you show the definitions and differences between private and public 100 different ways and keep repeating yourself throughout the whole thing. Not only that, but you demonstrate practically how their definitions and differences affect the real world, no matter what lies someone might say about the words. My favorite part is about minute 42 where you say, "Oh look... There it goes! No more state. Marx and engels were Anarcho capitalists!" Man I died laughing that was so great

Dear Tik, Long time viewer, 1st time commentor. I hold a B.A. in history and work in precious metals. Of all of your great content, I feel, this is your most important work to date. Thank you for being a voice of reason in a world full of inflated egos, inflated currency, and hurt feelings. Liberty will prevail.

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

You should comment more often! I'm surprised by how many people are saying that this is one of my best videos. Of course, I have that faction which hates it. In regards to your degree and job, it sounds like you know what real money is. Liberty will prevail, but we might have to go through a rough patch to get there. Cheers!

@brucebartup6161

4 жыл бұрын

I am the the faction that hates this video I hate it because from about 26 minutes in it is not only wrong but hopelessly wrong and stated with such misplaced confidence that. some may actually fall for this. One highlight is to define Capitaluism in market terms then going right on to saying "we " as some corporate body (as Capitalists or Capitalism isn't quite clear) learn, know, believe etc. Using the terms right and left as in the modern but non--academic "political compass" but failing to acknowledge that in recent history (just about everyone outside this cabal of mis-informed Ayn Rand fans) it meant something completely different (progress towards equality for poor people vs freedom for established investors to do as they please)

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

"the terms right and left... progress towards equality for poor people vs freedom for established investors to do as they please" Yes, the Right is for equality of poor people (anti-slavery and anti-serfdom in favour of a free market) and freedom from established investors to do as they please. The Left is for identity politics (inequality, anti-bourgeois, anti-kulaks, anti-races, pro-gender conflicts) and pro-investors (state and corporations).

@brucebartup6161

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Dip[ariyin definkjinirtions noted. When you say Socialism you exclude workers co-operatives and the British Co-operative Wholesale Society? When you say Capitalism you exclude big bs and bivg government correct?

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

"When you say Socialism you exclude workers co-operatives and the British Co-operative Wholesale Society?" Is two-girls one-cup real socialism? A small group of workers working together is not socialism. That's just a very bad way of running a business. You can tell it's a bad way of running a business, otherwise all businesses would be running it that way, which they don't, and those that didn't would struggle to compete. In reality, "cooperatives" are inefficient and unfair, which is why they struggle to retain their managers and employees. If it's a large corporation which classifies itself as a cooperative, but has shareholders, then that's part of the public sector. If then all of society was a "cooperative" (aka, Corporatism) then that would be socialism (either Fascist or Marxist, depending on if it's a cooperative on the national level, or a cooperative on the international level). "When you say Capitalism you exclude big bs and bivg government " Yes, since Capitalism is Private Sector control of the economy, and corporations and governments are Public Sector entities.

Might not support his ideas but gotta admit his timeline and statements on the theory of the of each idea is 100% on the money

Definitions from Oxford Languages · private enterprise = business or industry managed by independent companies or private individuals rather than being controlled by the state. private sector = is the part of the national economy that is not under direct state control. free-market = an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses. capitalism = an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state. Big businesses and corporations that are independent and not controlled by the state are, by definition, private enterprises and part of the private sector. Your exclusion of big businesses and corporations from the private sector is warping the definition of these words

@TheImperatorKnight

Жыл бұрын

I've replied to you directly as part of my latest video kzread.info/dash/bejne/mqZttrech8bVibw.html

Why would a free market lead to monopolies not forming? If one company can grow why can't it grow to dominate the market?

@beardedemperor

Жыл бұрын

@@slaterslater5944 Exactly. He also claims capitalism is anti-big-business, and defines left- and right-wing politics by whether they are pro-state or pro-individual respectively rather than anti- or pro-hierarchy which makes anarchists right-wing and Nazis leftists. I can see why he thinks Tim "Predicted Trump Supporters Would Do Nothing On Jan 6" Pool is a threat to mainstream media.

@marcofogli4317

14 күн бұрын

Because to have a monopoly you need to form a cartel, a syndicate a corporation (all public entities), that lobbies the state to cut off competition or try to make it almost impossible for newcomers to enter and undercut them with a better, cheaper product or service. It is a despicable thing and if a private company would ever try that you can just pick the private individual and investigate or punish him. Public companies have no fear of that (also the risk is shared with the public), and they put politicians in power to prevent or minimize this risk.

@marcofogli4317

14 күн бұрын

just to clarify monopolies is different from a dominant position: one is exclusive control, the other is the most successful on the market (the market finds their product or services as the most beneficial and rewards that by choosing them over the competition). A monopoly can be one company or a cartel (tobacco, alcohol in some countries are an example) of several companies (either openly or just with a shared agenda pretending to compete to avoid anti monopoly regulations), in this case you have no choice, you must consume from the cartel or resign completely from benefiting from the product or service: they take your choices away. Most monopolies are actually covert cartels because corporations control indirectly many different companies so when they are accused of monopolistic behavior they can get away with it with only neglectable damages and maintain the monopolistic cartel alive (several computer software, media, internet, telephone, credit corporations use this strategy). I think monopolies and corporations in general are a dirty evil thing.

@marcofogli4317

14 күн бұрын

In a sentence free market dominant position = best value for your money that you can choose among many similar options (or choose a competitor). Monopoly = you are forced to get it from the cartel (no choice, zero option). One out of 2 is definitely bad in my eyes.

Wait!!.. The moon is not made of cheese??.. Then why the hell do we even wanna go there!!!

@REDVETTExxx

4 жыл бұрын

Anacronian better question is “ why wouldnt we wanna go there” sharp cheddar, nom nom nom 🤪

@DzheiSilis

4 жыл бұрын

To fight the moon Nazis

@berndberndsen5680

4 жыл бұрын

Because it's made of cocaine.

@diedertspijkerboer

4 жыл бұрын

Don't let people tell you that the moon isn't made of cheese. They just say that because they want the cheese for themselves. There are various reliable sources which confirm the cheese hypothesis (e. g. the Wallace and Gromit film "A Grand Day Out"). The same source also confirms the variety: Wensleydale.

@diedertspijkerboer

4 жыл бұрын

@chris younts MAGA: Make America Grated Again?

I really enjoyed this! I watched it a few weeks ago, but its been on my mind and stuck with me. Thought I should come back and have a few words. I had a rudimentary understanding before, but now I feel I have a more solid grasp. This video has changed the way I view the world and it kind of scares me, I guess being naive is easy.

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

The same happened to me. Discovering that Nazism was a version of Socialism forced me to change my perspective of the world, and it was scary for a while, but that was until you realise that everything comes down to you. You're not being "oppressed" by some unseen entity, and you don't "deserve" more just for showing up. It turns out that other individuals (not groups) are standing in your way - and they can be pushed aside by you if you work hard. You're poor because you're not creating/producing something that the rest of society values. Once you realise that, all you have to do is figure out what the rest of society really needs, work hard to produce it and sell it, and prosper. Some videos (not mine) that will hopefully make you think :) probably best to watch them in this order kzread.info/dash/bejne/n2qkuaezm8XUdKg.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/YoSWzLxpYbLIfKQ.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/eWqHl8VvqMu-hLw.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/mYN-y8OyitK0dKw.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/YpqnuKtsddC7nrQ.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/YqmExs2hfbnKfbQ.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/iI2YqJKHacvTqMY.html kzread.info/dash/bejne/loWdpKZmk9XYpqQ.html

@mrplague9881

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Sounds good! I'll go down the rabbit hole a little more. Wish me luck!

@legalfictionnaturalfact3969

3 жыл бұрын

No, we are not being oppressed by an unknown entity. But by a known one. There are families who have worked to create Empires via their militaries and a churches, which are inextricable, for many hundreds of years.

@emanueledionisi9359

Жыл бұрын

​@@TheImperatorKnightFinding out that Nazism exploited socialist socialist ideology more than anything else. I don't understand how by pure ideology one cannot distinguish ideologues like Gramsci from ideologues like Stalin or Hitler. By the way, the so-called "libertarian socialism" is a term used in political science. More than opening your eyes you have simply started repeating what every liberal says. In doubt, since we like to associate without any distinction socialism to Hitler (And no, doing public works and nationalizing and creating social groups and having a "workers" party does not mean being a Marxist, at best it is a heavy form of revisionism),I advise everyone to read "counter-history of liberalism" by domenico losurdo. You will discover many shocking things that liberals generally deny about their ideology

The Irony of Socialism 🟥⚒️

Really great content. This concept between public and private is one of the most important topics for our society to grasp. This video lays it out perfectly and in historical contextual form. Thank you

A much clearer video about the subject than your Q&A rants, the part about families and individuals was really interesting as well.

Thanks for creating and uploading this video. I wish university lecturers in Arts faculties would consider your arguments.

I can agree with the fundamental position of private ownership being efficient through functioning prices, and I'm really glad you brought up the increasing similarity between increasingly larger companies and states. However, from a philosophical standpoint, and outside the additional reliance on price, a small and large company are fundamentally the same in that they are internally authoritarian. The market as a whole may avoid totalitarian control through choice and competition and so I can come to terms with this as a whole, but every business is otherwise it's own unit dictatorship. I find that this presents a danger much the same as the socialist state. If companies are able to naturally grow to their current sizes absent of the influence of the state, then any element of the private sector may become public as the company effectively assumes the role of THE state. You say that companies naturally collapse to smaller forms due to the inefficiencies of central planning, but there are other competing factors, such as mass markets, or the simplicity of interacting with fewer suppliers and buyers, or even chance, that will favour larger corporate structures that may propel them to the scale of overriding the government. While I certainly agree that the government certainly has abused it's power to create or maintain monopolies in the past, it may at least in theory serve as a protector from such companies with ambitions of attaining power. Do you think the presence of a state placed under obligations and limitations is necessary to prevent an economically-elected unaccountable dictatorship? For example many tech companies have free reign right now due to them occupying an entirely new market. As such they've become extremely powerful and abuse their power with harsh penalties, selective application of their rules, and ideological and partisan activism. Even though some of these companies received public funding in the past, they're certainly serving the private sector right now aren't they? As such I can't help but see a need for and welcome regulation restricting them. Alternatively consumers may simply choose not to use these services, or use alternatives from competition, but many simply do not or can not, and as such it becomes similar to a tyranny of the majority, wherein the majority is whatever proportion of people supporting the company that it takes to keep it afloat, except that it needn't even be a majority. And then these companies can remove their competition (eg. Parler) not through the government state, but through pressuring other companies. As you put it, they become the state; the state of the internet.

@AverageAlien

2 жыл бұрын

the state has no right to regulate anything or anyone. Why would you trust one state to have the power over others?

@nomoturtle1788

2 жыл бұрын

@@AverageAlien They don't by themselves, and no I don't trust them, but the current state is at least ostensibly under democratic control. And even if that isn't wholly true, it still means they have to manoeuvre in a more restricted manner so as to pretend it is. Meanwhile, wouldn't a corporate state would be no different to what we have now without the make-up and perfume?

@AverageAlien

2 жыл бұрын

@@nomoturtle1788 democracy means nothing. It's a sham. It's mob rule. As stupid as letting the uneducated masses decide someone's fate at their trial. And you can never vote to weaken the state. You can only vote another state actor into power to rule over you. Monarchy is more moral.

@nomoturtle1788

2 жыл бұрын

@@AverageAlien I pre-empted that. I'm not a believer in democracy, but the limitation of the government having to pretend to be good is a limitation of their evil.

Even the simple idea of Abolition of all rights of inheritance could lead to collapse of society and social structure and relation in terrifying ways.

although I'm no fan of communism and socialism, the idea of totally unrestricted free market capitalism being the solution to all problems is equally stupid. all social problems aside, there's the simple fact that with limited space and resources, a growth based economy cannot be sustained indefinitely.

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

"the idea of totally unrestricted free market capitalism being the solution to all problems is equally stupid." I never said it was the solution to all problems. I said it was better than socialism and communism, especially for the workers. "here's the simple fact that with limited space and resources, a growth based economy cannot be sustained indefinitely." So you need to make the best of the limited resources you have. This is what capitalism does many times better than socialism. Also, a capitalism economy corrects itself all the time. The boom bust cycle though is a central-banking / fractional reserve banking / government exasperated problem (thus a public sector problem), not a problem with capitalism. I explained this in the video.

@oddballsok

4 жыл бұрын

actual problem of the moment: Pharmaceutical companies without restrictions ask ridiculous expensive prices..and certain medical insurance companies are OBLIGED to buy them (or not , and leave the patients to ..rot)..and the government/taxpayer HAS to fund it...or not.. Different countries, different solutions.

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

"actual problem of the moment: Pharmaceutical companies without restrictions ask ridiculous expensive prices..and certain medical insurance companies are OBLIGED to buy them (or not , and leave the patients to ..rot)..and the government/taxpayer HAS to fund it...or not.. Different countries, different solutions." The reason they're charging more is because government regulation costs them so much that they have to cover that expense by charging more. Then the government decides to 'socialize' the health service. My solution is to get the damn government out of the economy and let it function as it's supposed to do: smart and cheaply.

@SinStar87

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight idk about uk, but the big problem with pharmaceuticals here in the US certainly isn't regulations increasing cost of production. It is patents, which is public protection of individual right to profit. Thus unscrupulous and greedy people have taken advantage of their protection of profit by jacking up life or death medicine.(Such as insulin and hiv med companies price hiking that has been in the news recently) Based on your argument here, the answer would be to dissolve ip protections and let anyone who can produce anything they want. That's a common idea but is it not a communist one, where individual rights(in this case the individuals right to profit off of their own ideas) are forfeit for the greater good? Interesting thought but to the point, where does the dismantling of idea protections stop? For example, without ip protections someone more charismatic could take all your work on these videos and publish it as their own for profit, would you not have a problem with that?The only alternatives I can see are let people continue getting squeezed as is happening or add MORE regulations so companies can't skyrocket prices for profit up to having a nationalizing of the industry so it's no longer for-profit. Did I miss any other possibilities?

@Davidh41690

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight, I'm also very curios to know about your position on intellectual property (IP). I have a nuanced view on the subject. While I don't consider IP to be tangible property and hence not legitimately protected under natural law, an individual should be able to retain ideas they keep secret. Once shared you can always claim to be the original author and substantiate that claim for the purpose of recognition and business, but cannot claim monopoly. Using Cody's example, you could freely expose any blatant plagiarism but have no legal recourse. I believe this keeps a much freer and fairer market place where reputation is more important than what patents you hold.

I don't know who this guy is, but these videos should be lessons taught in schools to little kids. The guy is absolutely amazing at explaining things

I feel as though I have been circling this channel algorithmically for at least two years. I am fully immersed in the history/battles side of YT, but have somehow only landed on your channel in the last week. Obviously I haven’t crunched or even seen the numbers, I’m just a lemming looking for an educated point of view, but it seems obvious that your videos are disfavored by the algorithms. Award winning work imo, whatever donations you have received could be doubled and it still wouldn’t be enough. The tremendous effort and research put into your videos are unparalleled. Thank you immensely.

@TheImperatorKnight

2 жыл бұрын

Wow, thank you Joshua! Welcome, and I'm glad you finally found the channel, despite KZread's best efforts to stop you 😂

Marx playing 4D chess with the entire world to bring about anarcho-capitalism 43:20

You're quickly becoming my favorite history youtuber

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

:)

@koismiah30

4 жыл бұрын

TIK is my favourite channel on KZread. Second to none. I just need to start donating and spreading the word 🤔

@1815MichelNey

4 жыл бұрын

@@omega0195 Why the aggression? Try to maintain a little of civility mate, TIK is not forcing you to agree with him.

TIK thank you very much for educating me these are some of the things i've been trying to understand for a while and you've explained them so clearly

Wow, sir you have made such a service and contribution to the well being! Im not even half way through both videos of yours this and why hitler is a socialist, but you have made a new patreon supporter!

@TheImperatorKnight

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for deciding to support! I may be doing another video on this subject soon... Someone did a video response to my Hitler's Socialism video rejecting everything and being hostile. I'm going to reply in the hope I can get through to them, or educate others in the process

@edcarson3113

Жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight you have the patience of a Saint.

TIK, You put such care and energy and passion into your explanation of our world. Please don't let the haters get to you. They are passionate but wrong-headed. You're doing a great job, much more understandable than less able folk. Thank you from Australia.

Capitalism is NOT limited just to small ma and pa stores and it will apply to big corporations as well. Because in the end, profit is a major goal in any liberal, capitalist, free market economy. You an have a small ma and pa store... but if it doesn't sell anything... it can and will go under. They still have to make a profit in order to keep the business running. That doesn't change, regardless of the size or scale of the company in question. Saying that a large corporation isn't Capitalist because is large or has a larger group that supports it is like trying to argue that a Lutheran isn't Christian because they have some differences of theology from Catholics. For in the end, while many of the specific actions and functions in a large company may be different than a small ma and pa store, they're still having to respond to fluctuations in the market based on price, supply, and demand. Back in the late 80s to early 90s America used to have a relatively thriving comic market. All the major companies were doing well in Marvel, DC, and some others. They sold well and capitalized on that boom. In this, you had a fair number of stores that opened up that sold comics and sold them exclusively. You could go to any gas station or grocery store and their magazine section would also likely include some comics as part of their selection. Flashforward to today though... those companies are vanishing. The demand for comics has gone down, and while Marvel and DC are still highly popular... they're about the only ones that have really survived and much of this has been more due to going digital with regard to their comics and diversifying into movies... particularly with the MCU. About the only place where you can reliably buy physical copies (outside of a direct subscription) of comics today are in major bookstores... and many of them are beginning to close out to both electronic books and mail order companies like Amazon. If this continues... I'd think that eventually, the only way to read comics will be on a computer PDF file, saving on paper, and that most of the money that companies like Marvel and DC make will be through movies. Which shows that despite being big companies, they're still having to respond to changes in the market and the law of supply and demand... If being big made them some form of "Socialism," Marvel and DC would just show up at random teenager's door with a gun in one hand, a paper comic in the other and saying, "buy this, or else." In this, big companies can be just as capitalistic as ma and pa stores. The exact methods may differ, but their core responsibility in responding to the market is the same. And then highlights the issue where large companies like Walmart in America have put lots of small businesses in America out of business because the small businesses couldn't compete with Walmart's prices... And now Amazon seems to be doing that to Walmart in the latest episode of "as the market turns." And a "free market" does NOT prevent monopolies from forming. Things like greed can be a very human condition. That isn't something that is attributable to only one group. Which means if the market is free and devoid of any interference there is every bit the potential that someone who is greedy can come in and work within it to ultimately build his own monopoly to the point where his business has either outspent or undercut its competition. Now, this may fundamentally change the nature of the market in question... and thus the market isn't "free" once the monopoly is established, but without someone saying that you can't try to crush your opposition at all costs... that means that a "free market" is inherently vulnerable to that very possibility. And thus why during America's Progressive Era there are various anti-trust laws that were passed that were designed to protect competition within the economy. Thus essentially trying to preserve what makes Capitalism work, competition. Those anti-trust laws wouldn't be on the books if a "free market" was invulnerable to monopolies... Though... the interpretation of these laws are often mixed. In 1915 the Federal League, following interference from the Major Leagues (American and National League) folded as a business. The last gasp of the league was to sue Major League Baseball under the charge that MLB was in violation of Federal Anti-Trust laws. The case was decided in 1922 and the end ruling was that the law that the Federal League had sued on the basis of did not apply to Major League Baseball. See: supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/259/200/ Does this make MLB "Socialist" because its free of competition? Most of the owners would probably disagree and the ruling probably wouldn't be an endorsement of Socialism, either. It's more representative that we are all human and some times humans will make mistakes and errors in judgement or have different interpretations of specific issues... Because capitalism is not small ma and pa stores. And the political spectrum should not be mapped on what one's economics are.

@SamuelJamesNary

4 жыл бұрын

@@lzsz7168 - Maybe... but it should also be remembered the potential flaws in Capitalism will also be its greatest strength. The flexibility allowed by competition enables it to better respond to changes in the market as they arrive. A command economy of any time is going to be utterly dependent on whoever is in control of it accurately predicting the future and what the demand will be... and that's never happened. And its that inflexibility is what set the Nazis up needing to go to war in 1939 and ultimately killed the Soviet Union by 1989/1991.

@rikhoogendam7560

4 жыл бұрын

Dude, he even took the time to explain this to you using half a fuckin dictionary, and you - somehow talking like a lawyer - still refuse to accept the problem is language? Or you just don't get it? Watch it again, take notes when he talks you through the definitions and concepts, and then start your arguments using the same definitions please - instead of filling them in on your own or according to your agenda.

@SamuelJamesNary

4 жыл бұрын

@@rikhoogendam7560 - The ability to use a dictionary is ultimately irrelevant to the fact that he attempting to try and paint a picture designed to favor one particular and trying to manipulate it so that anyone who argues is automatically wrong. Capitalism as an economic system has proven highly successful, largely due to its flexibility. TIK, though, has talked about it as though it were some perfect system with no flaws in it. That is impossible, as like many things man has made... it has its flaws in it. The issue of greed is one of those potential flaws, regardless of whether or not the market is completely free or not. Just as things like greed would also be a flaw for things related to government corruption. Because greed is in and of itself a very human flaw. Thus its something that transcends all things. Now one can argue that for the most part things like competition and the inherent flexibility of the capitalist economic system have helped combat those that are greedy from manipulating the system, but that still doesn't mean that the potential flaw isn't there regardless. And one cannot understand the whole of a concept without understanding both its potential strengths and weaknesses. Thus neither can one fully defend the same concept without understanding how a system's strengths overcome its weaknesses.

@rikhoogendam7560

4 жыл бұрын

@@SamuelJamesNary but if you take into account that capitalism basically means that private persons or companies trade stuff, you can't deny that the bigger the system becomes, the more complicated, the more public, the more prone it becomes to corruption and abuse of power. So yes, everything is flawed because we're dealing with human beings, but at least the trade between smaller private parties is more fair.

@SamuelJamesNary

4 жыл бұрын

@@rikhoogendam7560 - On the small level agree. Often because at the smaller levels, that's where the flexibility and competition that's built into the Capitalist system is naturally stronger. But that doesn't necessarily mean that once things become "bigger" that they suddenly become "not-capitalism." The specific system for the company becomes more complex, yes, as more is needed to manage the larger company. And often the individual "in charge" of the company still has a fair amount of control over it and makes money from it. The point where a major company becomes "socialized" would be when the government directly takes ownership of it. And I'm sure that will happen with some specific businesses from time to time, but not with EVERY business. And that's where things can become complicated.

This video is extremely biased and many arguments and thesis' are factually incorrect. I like your history videos, but this is just bad

@lukzloty

4 жыл бұрын

Share with us, what exactly was factually incorrect

@kalks4334

4 жыл бұрын

@@lukzloty The biggest part is that state authority and ownership of the means of production are not the same thing and can not be represented on a line from left to right. This is common knowledge amongst experts for decades and as such the two dimensional political graph was born. The old left-right distinction was born during the French Revolution and on the right were the authoritarians and on the left the liberals. I am trying to not fit a political agenda here, as TIK did

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

"The biggest part is that state authority and ownership of the means of production are not the same thing" Of course they are. "and can not be represented on a line from left to right." Yes, they can be. "This is common knowledge amongst experts for decades and as such the two dimensional political graph was born." You mean the political compass en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_spectrum#/media/File:Political_Compass_yellow_LibRight.svg The problem is that it's a load of rubbish. If a king taxes you, you're not economically free. Therefore you cannot have authoritarian right. You also cannot be free if the collective is in control over your economy. Thus you cannot have left libertarian. Thus, what you do have is a line - the same line that I showed in my video - a Left and Right political spectrum. "I am trying to not fit a political agenda here, as TIK did" No, you were trying to say how I was biased (which is fine because we're all private citizens with our own personal perspectives on the world, and the theory of history accepts bias) and how I was factually incorrect (which you haven't proven in your response, since even if I was incorrect on the political spectrum vs compass debate, that's not a fact, that's an interpretation).

@kalks4334

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Social ownership of the means of production has never meant state ownership and control. Worker cooperatives for example are controlled by the workers working there and thus are socially owned (by a social body, as in the definition of public ownership en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_ownership ), but in no way the state owns these companies. You make up your own definition of public ownership in the video, but that is not the actually used and accepted one, as in the Oxford dictionary, and thus holds no value. The state is not the only social instance that can control things, you know? Companies can be democratically owned and managed, which is a socialist concept, as it involves no private ownership. The left/right split, that originates from the french revolution and is the most common left/right split actually had authoritarians sitting on the right and liberals sitting on the left, as it was not a economically free/unfree split. It was a split between people believing in the values of the enlightenment and the ones that don't. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum All our modern Politics can not be put into a one-dimensional model, you are delusional, if you really think so. Not even the two-dimensional model is enough, Politics will never fit on a simple diagram. Economics is just a part of politics, it should never constitute the biggest part of an ideology, as it is just a way to distribute resources, but you make it your whole ideology. Economically free/unfree does not mean socially free/unfree. Free market economies produce huge monopolies and these companies can buy competition with the riches of whole nations. We can observe this in the US, compared to most european countries it is very economically free and it produced the biggest monopolies in the world. Companies influence US politics with huge amounts of money (bribery is also a thing), is this really democratic? I don't think so The reality is that many people do not have the freedom to just quit their job, when they are exploited, as their social and economical status makes them dependent and all this just because they were born into a poor family. All the rights that protect these people come from socialist ideas. Capitalists care for the riches and will only give the worker an amount of money that makes him happy enough to not rebel in large quantities. Companies are aiming for the largest profit and constantly underbid each other when it comes to payment of workers. Why did the average efficiency of a worker increase by 80 percent over the last 20 years, but the wages stayed the same (www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/)? Because profit counts and without state protection the wages would have probably even went down. The average living standard in countries with bigger social policies (Denmark, Norway, Sweden...) is higher than in more free market economies (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index I know it is not a perfect index, but better than nothing), which also shows the effectiveness of social policies and that free markets do not mean free people.

@mcfontaine

4 жыл бұрын

Kalks well said. What we are seeing here is someone unraveling in public. For example why did he find it necessary to say ‘The National Socialist Health Service’ twice? It’s the National Health Service. It’s too expensive? Really, now stop me if I’m wrong but as someone living in the UK most of their life I’m guessing you will have made at least one trip to A&E TiK ... yes? How much money did you have to hand over to get in the doors of the hospital, or did they invoice you afterwards. Free at the point of use.

About 6 months ago I read thought all of Hitlers speeches that I could find. He definitely hated Capitalism. Not once did I find him saying something good about the free market and Capitalism.

@herbertwilkshire4265

2 жыл бұрын

Read more about his policies instead of his speeches genius

@robertrenk7074

2 жыл бұрын

@@herbertwilkshire4265 Did it ever occur to you that I have…?

@robertrenk7074

2 жыл бұрын

@@herbertwilkshire4265 Without doubt he hated capitalism

@robertrenk7074

2 жыл бұрын

@@herbertwilkshire4265 Mister genius can you tell me if Hitler allowed laissez-faire capitalism or was the economy controlled by the government?

@herbertwilkshire4265

2 жыл бұрын

@@robertrenk7074 both and its completely irrelevant to the question as the definition of socialism is not synonymous with state centralization and that would be redundant. we already have terms to describe that and those totalitarian governments do not denote any particular economic model. you are really stupid just like everyone else on this comment board.

What a brilliant production, you've hit the nail squarely on the head. Thank you for the education, GO TIK!

About Jesus: the teachings as they stand in the new testament came from somewhere. They did not come up from a vacum, but rather in the oldest Jewish law. As it stands in the bible, that law clearly states that the indiviual was responsible for their own actions - in a fashion. For example, it stated that a parent could not be punished for their childerns crimes. And vice versa - a child could not be punished for its parents crime. That said, it was a largley tribal society. But the Jews were fairly odd for the time, and stood out like a sour thumb for the Romans and Greeks.

@tomogburn2462

4 жыл бұрын

Yeah and the Melqart blood cults we (us Jews) came from, also had the same ideas about individuality. The Phoenicians were traders and sailors. Money and adventure is either the breeding ground of the ideas of individuality, or the result of them. Its well before Jesus. These ideas predate Jews and ancient Greece too.

@QuizmasterLaw

4 жыл бұрын

SMH NT Xtianity is nothing other than a reaction AGAINST and Rejection Of Talmudic legalism. Go read ur bible noob.

@tomogburn2462

4 жыл бұрын

@@QuizmasterLaw The New Testament doesnt tell the story of the creation of the Christian church tho. Christianity as a religion wouldnt exist for another few hundred years. Paul started the first "Jews for Jesus" sect. The modern interpretation doesnt even come about for over a thousand years. The rest of the bible, the old testament, is literally just the Jewish bible. The early Christians were Jews, that were reformers. Thats really all you get from the bible, and all they were until Constantine converted.

@sorsocksfake

4 жыл бұрын

​@@QuizmasterLaw By no means. "Read your bible" is a particularly bad argument, since "the bible" only reflects the christianity that emerged later. There was no bible in 70 AD. Even the NT books mostly hadn't been composed, let alone written yet (Mark writes in response to 70; Luke and Matthew evolve on it later). There's some question to what extent Paul's earlier writings reflect the Jesus cult, or a separate branch, as Acts does clearly hint at. We further know that there were other versions of the gospels. A few other gospels are preserved; alternatives to the main gospels existed, but are only known from church fathers writing against them. We further see that the fundamental story changes as the gospels are written. Under Paul, Jesus' life is irrelevant, he becomes divine through martyrdom. Under Mark, he is adopted by god with his baptism. To Matthew and Luke, Jesus' divinity follows Graeco-Roman tradition of being literally god's child. And to John, Jesus pre-existed and incarnated. What Jesus actually said or believed is in some question. He probably started as a preacher following the (at the time far more famous) Baptist, ended up believing himself Messiah ("Christ", "anointed", to become king of the Jews) and executed for trying to start a rebellion. We may trust some sayings are authentic; we know some are not (because they rely on the Greek language they were written in, and don't work in Aramaic that Jesus spoke). We know the gospel writers told a story, not history; and that some stories are meant as examples - parables in their own right - not as histories. But as for your claim: it would seem even from the scripture that Jesus did not reject legalism. Indeed he outright endorses it and doubles down on it ("not a yod or tittle"), consistently denouncing the pharisees for not following the law well enough, though at times injecting some pragmatism ("sabbath was made for man"). This would fit with his probable Essene background. He mainly rebelled against the Judaic "church" and its lust for power, but was religiously more strict than they, although also with some theological disputes. Probably the most famous story for anti-legalism, of the adulteress - aside from being a later addition - is actually very legalistic. By Judaic law, the man she slept with should also have been indicted. Hence Jesus can tell them that, yes, she should be executed - but they themselves broke the law, and thus they can't punish her as it's a mistrial by prosecutorial wrongdoing. That's exactly what a lawyer would point out.

@erikgranqvist3680

4 жыл бұрын

@@tomogburn2462thats my point: to the Roman and Greek society, those people were harbaric, with odd culture that no one could take serious. That mostly proves that Romans and Greeks were jackassess in some ways, not that the jews, phonesians etcetera were wrong.

This pushing of your political views is getting seriously boring.. when is the next battlefield series coming out

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

This isn't politics. This is economics and history, not politics. As for Stalingrad, probably 2 weeks, maybe more.

@crobert79

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight brilliant looking forward to it

@askebochristensen6198

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Okay, but you do begin to sound political in the way you read some of the quotes. You're undercutting your own point when you read Engels in a sarcastic/derisive tone (even when he contradicts himself). And you can't really say it's not politics when a good bit of the video is about redefining the political spectrum. I'm actually glad that you have spent time on this subject since it has helped me get a better understanding. Just a thought. Maybe make a short video explaining your worldview, eg. where you stand on the spectrum you yourself have defined and how you would like things. The reason I'm proposing this is that from the comments you find annoying, it seems like you see the world from a non-traditional point of view. And are therefore being grouped in with more traditional groups, by people locked into more traditional worldviews. You can't just expect people to change their view of Hitler's position on the traditional spectrum, even with good arguments and his own quotes. Thanks for the non-conformist attitude.

@nexus6755

4 жыл бұрын

@@askebochristensen6198 TIK is a republican 10/10 no doubt took a screenshot of TIK saying Tim Pool is pretty good lmao.

I don't know from where you are from. But here, in Brasil, Left is Socialist~Marxist while Right is Social-democratic~Fascist. I hold the notion that if you're against the state you're not in some part of the political spectrum, but outside of it. More accurately, AGAINST IT.

@TheImperatorKnight

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, that's how the spectrum is seen in the UK too. The spectrum has become a spectrum for Leftwing parties only. "Far Right" just means "rightwing of the Left", not actual Right (anarchy)

This is perhaps one of the best videos I've ever watched on socialism. I can't even think of any better than this

Content aside, I think what you're doing with the sourcing is excellent. Any parts where you make claims you have the reference at the bottom, but when you make your own conclusions it's your own content.

I'd like to see you do a video one day or even a series of videos on Technocracy and the various hidden forms of Technocratic models disguised in modern society. You've done such a damn good and thorough job of articulating this distinction of Public Vs Private I have a feeling you'd have an even BIGGER field day going over Technocracy.

@markschneider7794

11 ай бұрын

Im of the opinion that the eastern front was a socialist religious war, with two different sects fighting each other. Thats part of why it was so brutal.

This perfectly encapsulate my issue with the left-right political spectrum. I always found it difficult to believe that communism and fascism are direct opposites when they accomplish the same thing. This is why, they are essecially the same, just with different heiarchies and reasons.

48:00 re "Soil" Also worth noting that in Das Kapital, Marx has a malthusian streak, speaking about soil degredation leading to mass starvation, and hence leading to a socialist overthrow. Of course, Marx never understood that if soil degredation occured, this would create a market incentive to to create good soil, leading to innovation and investment.

The dawn of civilisation, you mean last Wednesday?

@toastytoast9800

4 жыл бұрын

Thursday

Surely Anarcho-capitilism can't be a good thing? Like state healthcare, infrastructure, welfare, pension, emergency services and education are pretty important in modern day systems. Right now we are having terrible bushfires in Australia, and if we had no public emergency services, who would be helping all the people losing their homes? Would they have to hire a bushfire service to come help? Would be great to hear your thoughts on the rights of humans, and what you think the best balance of public and private control would be!

@dickie9502

4 жыл бұрын

Not replying because I know the answer, just to say I'm interested in the answer as well. I guess no "society" can be truly capitalist. It would just invite the nearest authoritarian regime to Blitzkrieg your arses into the history books! (same with other "community" emergencies! Sorry I didn't help

@juanthomasangelmontilla5738

4 жыл бұрын

I think that could be as the Brotherhood un the USA, that were a common place were people share it Money (voluntary) in order to take café each other.

@Heinrich2awsome

3 жыл бұрын

@@dickie9502 Well NSDAP was kind of socialists.

@michaelharvey75

Жыл бұрын

The bushfires in Australia - why do they not clear nearby flammable materials that if on fire would threaten their property? .

Do you upload to any other platforms? I’d rather watch these incredibly well defined essays somewhere else.

@michaelharvey1197

3 жыл бұрын

www.bitchute.com/channel/aqCvYwXmjslI/

Amazing job you did here. I wish I found it earlier. You need to put this on books in order to escape KZread censorship and make your point widespread. Can't wait for more of this

Longtime fan, exceptional work TIK. Thank you for your deep, well sourced discussions. They're extremely valuable to me.

This is an amazing video and I'm really grateful for how much knowledge and insight is shared. Question though: I understand why corporations should be considered public if they are sustained by regulation and state intervention, but I don't understand why being publicly traded would necessarily make a company "public." Isn't the stock market and the corporation - assuming an actually free market - merely many individuals making individual free decisions? And a company that loses money for a long time, can still be an investment. Perhaps an entrepreneur building a giant, massively complex interconnected theme park, who loses money for many many years while it is in development before becoming massively successful (or not). Perhaps the point is just that in reality it is almost always the case that large corporations are in fact surviving off of regulation and handouts? Would love to hear more on this! Thanks

@AverageAlien

2 жыл бұрын

I don't think individual investments are the problem. Like he said, if individuals make bad investments, they lose money. It's government investments, which basically just use our stolen wages, that are the problem

1:34:53 This is just the "mud pie" interpretation of the Labor Theory of Value. I want better Libertarian critiques but this is not it. The "Socially necessary labour time" was added by Marx to Adam Smith's conceptualization which makes the "mud pie" interpretation invalid. Socially Necessary Labor being the composite labor necessary to do something at average levels of productivity. So using a shovel to move 5 tons of dirt is unnecessary and far below average compared to using a landscaping machine. Same for taking 5 hours to do a task that on average takes 1 hour if you factor in the environment. As for finding a diamond you'll have lucked out since you got it done under the average amount of work that needs to be sustained to get one and can now undercut other sellers as much as you want since you skipped all the labor sustaining. This is also why prices go down(or profits go up) as industries manage to find new ways to cut costs. Marx also stated that value comes from nature so that can also cover the diamond findings as valuable. Even without the labor theory of value i think they can still substantially prop up with their law of falling profits instead.

Man, You can't just change the definition of ideologies as you want just because it suits more your ideas...

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

That's exactly my point. Socialists changed the definitions, and they don't work. The historical definitions do work, and make more sense

@realitymatters8720

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight The deffinitions are the same, in the case of Socialism, it is social/democratic control over the means of production, thats it, nothing else ! Lenin called the system he ceated "State Capitalism" a consept he took from the wartime economies of the great powers during the 1.st. world war. That system was not Socialist, but I suspect it was intended as a placeholder system until the revolution happend in German(never happend), or Soviet Russia itself had changed into an industrial nation, and could transition into a Socialist system(never happend either at least the transition). Instead they ended up with a undemocratic system without social control over the means of production, and run by a small group, and later under Stalin only one man ! Not Socialism by any definition !

@TREDxMUSIC

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight You have certainly changed definitions, as you have accused others of doing even using nonsense terms such as "marxist syndicalism" - syndicalism is not a marxist idealogy. Take the definition of socialism. You note that there were theories of socialism before marx, but the fact you don't point out these theories either oppose the state or effectively leave it unchanged. You chose to interpret quotes from Marx and Engels for the viewers, instead of letting them interpret them themselves, because it's quite clear to anyway who reads them properly you have massively misinterpreted them. Seeing as you think capitalism is 'anti state' (ridiculous claim), why dont you ask the first capitalists, the assyrian merchants, how their stateless capitalism worked out. You even tried to claim that companies on the stock market were public and therefore socialist. These public LIMITED companies allow members of the public to buy in to private partial ownership. They do not own the means of production. They own shares in (limited) parts of the private companies made available to the public. In this example; There are limitations on public peoples ownership (can only buy the portion of the company available to the public) To own, payment is required The individuals influence is lesser than that of others So in other words, not equal, common ownership. You also fail to recognise the distinction between a public service and a public enterprise. A public enterprise is simply a partly or fully nationalised company. It operates in the free market and is not administered by the government. Therefore it cannot be subject to the public. Socialism is about changing the relations between individuals and the wider economy to prevent exploitation and conflicts within society. Marxism is an example which argues that socialism must be conducted via the state. Many prior and forms do not insist on this measure. This is not to say Marxism is wrong to do so, but that state control does not define socialism. For some examples, see fourierism or anarcho syndicalism

@ptkiller26

3 жыл бұрын

@@TREDxMUSIC How are you going to enforce public ownership without a state? How are you going to prevent a private sector without a state/public hierarchy?

42:47 Engel’s claim here is incredibly naive. The state won’t «die out», it will be replaced by the most ambitious and ruthless, as always through history. The whole idea of socialism is naive dreaming.

@aaronwalters1569

2 жыл бұрын

He's not naive, he's lying. A monarchy is a "corporation sole", it's structure, by design, is to have a human interchange the previous human. 'the king us dead, long live the (next) king' is the expression which defines this. Socialism will always have a state, you don't have socialism without statists, and the purpose of a statist is to rule over another. Without the state interfering with all aspects of the individual, then you allow individualism. If you allow it, you threaten the state, thus the state will always exist, to perpetuate itself. Just look at bureaucracy's as a case in point

I still like your history videos but increasingly find your political videos don't follow the same level of self scrutnisation. You use dictionary definitions to try to prove real world outcomes, that isn't how it works. If it wasn't for people with a social conscience, not driven by personal advancement or free market profit we would be living in an even more uncaring world then we live in now.

@hq21

4 жыл бұрын

If it wasn't for people driven by personal advancement or free market profit then you'd be writing your reply on some crumpled parchment instead of typing it out here. Caring and "social conscience" have nothing to do with it one way or the other. Such virtue signaling utterances are vestiges of the Medieval church.

@ledzep331

4 жыл бұрын

@@hq21 No. If it wasn't for these people I probably wouldn't be able to read or write at all and would be working 18hrs a day in some rich capitalist's mill right next to you.

@hq21

4 жыл бұрын

@@ledzep331 Mmhmm. That's why people worked a hell of lot harder and longer hours, for a hell of a lot less, before capitalism became a "thing". Good job not letting reason get in the way of your dogma.

@Feffdc

4 жыл бұрын

@@hq21 They still work a lot harder for less

This is a message I got from a confused human on Twitter today: "Yes, using capital to buy shares of a company is the exact opposite of capitalism. It disturbs me that you can vote" He or she doesn't understand public ownership. Another tweet said "That isn't what public ownership means. What you are describing is private ownership. If you buy a house, it's private property. If you buy a timeshare, it's still private property just owned by multiple entities. If you don't want to be mocked, do the bare minimum research" This is what I see when I try to educate people. I cannot even imagine TIK's frustration at trying to help, but people are showing that they may be beyond help.

In ancient Rome, most free people's homes DID share walls: most people lived in tenament blocks, not mansions.

I remember TIK telling time ago that he was 'a liberal', well that was an understatement : D

@TheImperatorKnight

4 жыл бұрын

The term "Liberal" used to mean for Liberty - meaning the Right. However, the socialists started appropriating the terms. First they took the term "scientific", even though the ideology comes before the truth. Then they took the term "democracy", even though the individual has no power under the boot of a socialist society. Then they took the term "Liberal", even though slaves of the group-state cannot be free. So I am still a Liberal. I'm a Classic British Liberal.

@purrcatharsis

4 жыл бұрын

Those sure are words.

@Swift-mr5zi

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Same here boi

@spudwesth

4 жыл бұрын

If Stalin had run France Hitler would have been squashed in the Rhineland. Democracies have too many chefs spoiling the broth.

@toocool.conservative3632

4 жыл бұрын

@@TheImperatorKnight Libertarian

Most people: *confused noises on what to call Tik (has to be the opposite of what they like) after watching the video*

@bhaskarsingh1564

3 жыл бұрын

You do realize that the like to dislike ratio is 3.6k to 500?

Question. If a company goes “public” but all shares are purchased by private individuals, what would you class that business as? Part of “the state” (government)? Or simply it’s own state?

@ladosdominik1506

2 жыл бұрын

It is it's own public hierarchy, it's own state not part of the government.

Your entire playlist of these videos are a treasure trove of knowledge. I like to ask you about patents and whether or not you believe that securing ownership of a certain invention would allow one company to gain an advantage over another, or monopolising the product

Real capitalism is just as utopian as real communism. Real world has physical limitations, people have also psychological limitations. Ultimately a non-utopian world does need regulatory control in one way or another. Sooner or later monopolies will spoil your cool little capitalistic system.

@darthcalanil5333

4 жыл бұрын

hence the success of the modern european political systems

@misium

4 жыл бұрын

@@darthcalanil5333 Let's just say it's work in progress, to soon to claim success. But yeah - it's been more good than bad.

You could replace half the curriculum in public schools with this one video. Upvotes = profits = demand = more videos

The usual suspects got triggered when TIK said that Hitler was a hard socialist. However the evidence shows that Hitler was actually far closer to Stalin than he was any other dictator. As were Mussolini and Franco.

@suddenuprising

3 жыл бұрын

By defining socialism and totalitarianism so broadly as to include every government that has ever existed the claim that the Nazis were socialist becomes almost meaningless.

@DoctorOzelot

2 жыл бұрын

@@suddenuprising There is another way in which TIKs extremely bias and uncritical perspective is harmful. In the beginning, when the nazis were a small populist movement of patriots and nationalists, they intermixed - personally and ideologically - with the political left. Later when they rose to power those elements were mostly rejected, people were kicked out or murdered. I fear that people who condition themselves to the dogma that nazis were just a different kind of communist, can never learn the details of what led us to the horrors of nazi ideology. A fairly free and progressive society (for the time) turned into a totalitarian nightmare in less than a generation. The sociological aspects of this rapid transformation and the historical background of it is a lesson we paid for dearly - literally with over 100 million lives. Flushing this lesson down the toilet of ideology is so horrible...

I've been reading history my whole life, and the contributions you made in this video are amazing, honestly I'm astonished by the level of detail in this video Thanks for the great content

Think this video is much better than the one you did were you explained capitalism using a small factory as an example. I understand why you simplified it so much but by doing so I think it was rather easy to critisize it, like "yes, any model works until you put it into real world". I really enjoy your channel, keep up the good work!

I cant believe I lasted through the whole video, but I'm glad I did, well done again. You do an amazing job at presenting the history, both ancient and recent, and current economic situation that most countries are in and the problems with it - especially regarding socialism or inefficient large public companies which exist in capital economies. My question is - what can be done about it? It's not a rethorical question, I actually would like you to present videos on solutions because I think you are an incredibly smart and well researched person. Some people may think "easy, vote for the more private-friendly/encouraging party", but as far as I can understand it, in the US at least, Democrats are "for the state" and Republicans are more "pro-business" which generally highly favors large businesses which are public anyway. Another important question, what do you see should be the role of the state, if any at all? Again, you mention the problem (inefficiency) but not the solution, and I would be very interested to know your views on it. Especially when it comes to healthcare, education, public works, etc. Regarding healthcare, it seems to me that given two options (a) state-governed healthcare provider vs (b) large publicly-funded inefficient insurance companies the choices are both bad. Also, what to do with families with kids with high special needs that require high levels of care? I dont pose these questions to troll, really just hope to have a discussion and to know your views.

Hello TIK, i enjoy watching your videos, as many others i too am grateful for these videos, truly taught me more history than any history book in school, with an actual explanation for the statements said. You make excellent videos, and i wish to see more like these, unbiased, truthful, academic viewpoints presented in a comprehensible video. All the best from Slovakia. Also if i may, i have a question regarding what you stated about the 'private' schooling system, i also happen to be working at school which is classified as private. We as a school receive some money in taxes as do other state schools meaning from your definition that this is a state school, but we also get tuition fees paid directly by the parents of the children attending, private individuals, therefore it is also privately funded. The school which is regarded in our state as a company which provides education, and yes the education is to some degree dictated by the curriculum given by the state. So i need to ask if the school is funded both by private sector, the parents and also the state through taxation and some state grants, if such an institution is a private institution or a state one, and also to add the school is owned by two private individuals, the founder and her husband. Thank you very much for your videos and also your reply if possible.

I wonder, was this Woodrow Wilson's ideal? Or Franklin Roosevelt's? American progressives certainly had a mindset not unlike Friedrich Ebert's majority socialism.