Thank God there are a few sensible people teaching in the universities! Thank you Dr. HIcks!

@seanleith5312

2 жыл бұрын

Socialism killed 100 million people, destroyed more families. Do we need more reason? Those people who says Socialist cool should all sent Antarctica frozen do death, then they know what is cool.

Great in-depth analysis of Socialism by Mr. Hicks. Really enjoyed it.

@MrHobbes08

2 жыл бұрын

Mises has a free ebook by Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition: From Moses to Lenin, if you really want in depth. Encourage them commies to join a worker co-op

I thoroughly enjoyed listening to Professor Hicks comments. He is on a par with Peterson, Harris and Haidt. He has a brilliant mind whose rigorous arguments should be spread more widely on the internet. Thank you for producing and sharing this video. Please do more. Does Professor Hicks have a speaking tour?

@psychcowboy1

4 жыл бұрын

Hicks and Peterson are brilliant and rigorous? Can you give an example? Peterson is an absolute joke, and Hicks deviously presents unsupported straw man arguments like socialism wants to take away your right to date who you want and choose your religion. Only the most gullible fall for it. But rigorous and brilliant? You would have to point me to that.

@MrHobbes08

2 жыл бұрын

Peterson is a prime example of postmodernism He's not bad in the realm of his expertise. When he steps outside that he's mostly just telling people what they want to hear to sell his book.

Hi Elizabeth, I don't see the links you mentioned to click onto in the description.

When I was at high school my friends and I were convinced, as the smartest kids in the school, that we should be in control, we were the 'right' people to arrogate power to ourselves. We thought we could organize things better than hoi polloi. Missing from this equation was objectives, a 'telos' as to the purpose or goal of society, of people coming together in groups. We thought it was for 'efficiency' as we saw it, or to keep people from silly decisions, etc. We had no idea! We probably thought, like most socialists seem to that the economy was a zero-sum game. It's not. When I was at Uni. I was with a club that thought that economic growth was a universal and unmitigated moral bad. That it destroyed the environment and created waste, pollution and degradation of natural beauty. We had no idea that economic growth represented the value created by people inventing things, serving great ideas to their neighbors, broadly defined, and creating what had not previously existed. If you hate economic growth, you hate people, because their ideas, enterprise and imagination are the source of growth! And we come to Socialism, which of course, as a young ignorant, inexperienced, gormless easily led fool, thought was good. Heck I even voted Socialist at elections for a couple of cycles; after all, these guys would make everything (whatever that was) better. Better? For Whom? For we self-consciously proud know-it-alls. We were fascists, but didn't know it. The moral bad that is socialism exists because it fails to recognize that the locus of human satisfaction is not the group, it is the individual. If the individual is not free within a law that recognizes the inherent and natural worth of the individual, and the priority of the individual in the exercise of that freedom over the group, and the group as a collective is an excuse for the tyranny of the few, then the individual is being denied the natural right of self determining life. They become a plaything of the powerful. Industry fails to bring its rewards, its satisfactions, and natural creativity is crushed. Life goes backwards, even for the powerful. The individual is not only the locus of invention, of creativity but of motivation and real care for others. Free markets prevent individuals oppressing others because others will supply what the fascists don't; and no one can stop them. No one is forced to buy crap. People will only buy what brings them more value in the transaction than any alternative. That's why socialism is immoral. It denies the individual their freedom to meet their own needs and demands that they conform to the imaginary, invisible group. And yet, it is charity and properly regulated safety nets that work in free markets, not Socialist ones.

@lynnex17

Жыл бұрын

I thoroughly enjoyed reading your account of your experience and evolution. Thank you for sharing.

@louise7347

5 ай бұрын

Thank god for people like you and Prof Hicks. We need you to keep telling these stories! PS: thx for sharing your thoughts

Best advise ever! Go beyond your sides talking points. Educate yourself and listen to others.

canada and sweden are not socialist countries. They are free market economies and Hicks should have pointed that out.

@dagwould

Жыл бұрын

Just.

why low quality, only 360p?!

As a Torontonian and someone who absolutely reviles communism and post-modernism, I am so proud of Stephen Hicks!

The truth about Socialism, and the other Leftist socioeconomic systems for the implementation of Otherism, will never be widely shared; will never be Viral in a dry, 50+ minute, scholarly webinar. We must create compelling, moral, and Viral Art that people Want to share with their friends and neighbours and coworkers.

@dagwould

Жыл бұрын

I've got to agree with you. Soundbites like: the group experiences nothing, it is the individual who is crushed every time the group's 'leader' tells everyone what they have to do.

Hicks at 46:00: 'If you are a decent liberal minded person you should be willing to have your mind changed, I don't think socialists have a good point... Fade to Libertarian comic book. 'Socialism, in the modern world the big question is what is going to replace feudalism, three alternatives liberal democratic, socialism, left wing socialism, and some sort of fascism, it is a three way debate, national socialism making a fresh comeback...' [I watch a fair amount of news and internet media. I have never heard of this big debate on three alternatives to replace feudalism. Does anyone know where it is happening? Somewhere in the real world, seems doubtful, or just in the insular talking head world of philosophers? The latter seems more likely,]

congratulations. Thanks for sharing those ideas with us.

Oh, and a tip for the host/interviewer: it is 'corny' to say 'I agree' with the interview subject. You are not his cheer squad, or his mom; if you agree, who cares? Move on to the next question: enlarge, put up a counter view, extend the previous remarks interrogate the answer he's just given, but keep the focus on the guest; not you.

Right? Right? Right? If i had a $1 for everytime he said right, i could retire today, right?

@biancavonmuhlendorf2608

3 жыл бұрын

everyone has weaknesses. But his thinking is bright all the time. Can´t you foucs on that?

@bktwins108

3 жыл бұрын

Ugh I didn't hear it until I read this comment

@blakemasterson8590

3 жыл бұрын

You're probably a Socialist who really doesn't like his content , right ?

@morphinmartian6266

3 жыл бұрын

Right

I usually like your work in the videos pretty good but that beginning just what is that

@WillKriski

5 жыл бұрын

Looks like it was a live broadcast so that's the intro loop that played before they went live.

He mentions Sweden but describes Norway. Also, are we saying that mess of an American health system is better than the UK national health service? Seriously

I would like to correct one point, I'm from Finland and we're not free-market friendly, the economy is fully capitalist, a while back the government could no longer afford complete free healthcare, now we only have partial free healthcare and even that is struggling. Capitalism doesn't mean you should not support your citizens when ill and unemployed, you can have an individualistic society and help your neighbours when you can when in need.

Conflating democratic socialism with dictatorial socialism is just plain pointless. 2 completely different things.

@tabanjoman24

2 жыл бұрын

Eric, when you are being burned at the stake will it matter whether your torturers were elected democratically or appointed by a dictator?

I hope he never has an accident that is out of his control or gets sick and can't work. I wonder where his "morals" will be then? I guess he should live in the streets because he should know better than to have something happen to him out of his control. The US isn't wealthy enough to redistribute? since when? This guy is constantly contradicting himself.

long live the communist international!

Question to Atlas and Students for Liberty: Does Hicks provide any evidence for his simplified black and white theories here? It seems like he simply makes stuff up and then delivers it as truth, with the criteria being if he says it, it becomes truth. I assume Students for Liberty swallow this without question; but if Hicks provided any evidence for anything I didn't see it. Point it out to me if I missed it.

At 13:00 Elizabeth states that student socialists have an ideal that they want everyone to be cared for and to thrive. Elizabeth asks Hicks 'what is their motivation?' Hicks: There are two categories, a) there are problems and corruption, problems should be solved, idealistic people say we should solve them, therefor capitalism is corrupt. b) the important values should be caring for other people, everyone has a roof over your head, if there is no guarantee then that system is not moral, socialism delivers on those goods. [Help me out here. Are these two categories? They look like the same thing. We should have idealistic people solve problems such as caring for people and people not having a roof over their head is two categories?] Hicks statements on the alleged two categories apparently flew right over Elizabeth's head because she then starts talking about Sweden. Then Hicks claims 'socialism doesn't work'. Probably Elizabeth could wrap her mind around that black and white one concept anyway, just not when it expands to two actual categories. Apparently Hicks is attempting to define socialism here, but I must have missed it? What exactly is socialism in Hicks mind, and where is it happening? Certainly some very successful countries have some level of socialism, Canada, Sweden, China... Maybe we can simplify this whole interview down to Hicks repeatedly saying 'socialism doesn't work', and Elizabeth happily nodding for 10 minutes.

Unfortunately we have socialism in Germany. It is a cultural and economic mess.

I smell an echo chamber

Let's see if Hicks can pin down socialism for us: 'We are social groups, what are we trying to achieve, there is a communal ethic, the individual is part of society, for society of a whole the government can work for the society, individuals should serve society, there was facism in Italy during Mussolini, how do we get to socialism, we want socialism but we are in favor of democracy, that is still a kind of tyranny, some think we should jettison democracy...socialism is immoral, humans are individuals, you have goals for happiness, you think for yourself, you get a job, socialism argues that individuals are not responsible, ... [Let me help you out here Stephen since you seem to be floundering. You are of course boxing socialism into an easy black and white unsubstantiated thing, identifying no current examples, because if you keep your target ambiguous and in a non-nuanced box then you can easily point to it as immoral. Try this, give an example of current socialism that meets your definition of 'individuals are not responsible and we should jettison democracy'. I don't give you much of a chance of verifying your claims, but I wish you good luck.] 'I have ideas, you have ideas, we respect each other's goals. Socialism argues that there is one social agenda it can be imposed on all individuals and everyone has to conform. Do we tolerate different ideas, we can get together, people might fall in love or go to church, that should be voluntary, a person mandates force, under socialism government is compulsory on individuals, you have to be a part of it, that is immoral socialism...' [Dear Atlas and Students for Liberty; you seriously can't see through this guys flimsy tricks? He is, with no evidence whatsoever, speculating that socialism is an immoral force that wants to jettison democracy and tell you who you can be in a relationship with or what church you can go to or what ideas you can have... Dear Atlas and SFL, what is this one social agenda that is imminent? Hicks argument here, like many of his, is a strawman; attack some terrible antagonist as destroying society and liberty; the problem of course is that the antagonist he props up does not exist.]

@usada3027

3 жыл бұрын

doesnt matter socialism will never work

Let's punch in again at around 10:00: 'Socialism compels people to believe and to act and to belong to certain social organizations whether they chose to or not.' 'Socialism is immoral and impractical.' 'People's understanding of socialism varies from a little to a lot, I cut young people a lot of slack, older people deserve less sympathy, I am harsh on intellectuals, to know the politics, the bar is higher...' [Ok let's apply Hicks standard that old intellectuals deserve no sympathy or excuse. Hicks is an older intellectual, but he is attacking this unspecified immoral movement that compels people to believe and act and belong to approved organizations. I guess he can convince this college student, or anyone else with massive amounts of gullibility. Anyone remotely paying attention however offers up this simple question; Who precisely Stephen is advocating for compelled belief, action, and obligatory membership in approved organizations? Should I excuse Hicks for being effectively a dictionary definition of Straw Man? According to his own standards, No. Stephen 'straw man' Hicks.]

Let's try at 42:00 'There is no socialist who has actually studied socialism, it is moral commitment, capitalism is repugnant, socialists buy into moral beliefs, how to combat socialism, enjoy your life, focus on happiness, politics varies from individual, you can focus on the positive, if you are a fighter, socialism is coming back, be a decent person, don't stoop to nasty arguments, become an expert, know where your opponents are coming from better than they do, be smart and decent.... [So Hicks is claiming to be smart and decent, and understands socialist arguments better that even the socialists? Give me a break. If he understands it why does he never provide an example of this mysterious and immoral movement that is coming back that wants to control your mind, your relationships, your church, your organizations? I can answer that Elizabeth and Atlas; the post modern social libtards that Hicks builds up to tear down do not exist. As to Hicks being smart; maybe, e.g. he may be smart enough to recognize what a monster straw man his argument is, or maybe he isn't, but not decent enough to not deceive fans who are not sophisticated enough to notice. By enjoying your life and happiness and focus on the positive you are thus fighting socialism? What does that mean? Socialists don't try and enjoy their life? Pretty dubious argument Stephen.] A couple themes become quickly apparent when examining Hicks content: 1. Post modernists reject evidence, i.e. post modernists are stupid. 2. The Left and Socialism are synonymous with post modernism. 3. Socialism wants to control your mind, your actions, your church, your love life, your organizations. 4. Socialism doesn't believe in enjoying your life, focusing on the positive, or being smart and decent. In effect, conservatives are smart and happy and liberals are stupid and unappreciative. The problem with this is that the only people gullible enough to fall for Hicks straw man are conservatives, the same objective reality denying sheep that don't notice what an arrogant idiot Jordan Peterson is. In effect Hicks efforts to deliver his subliminal message that conservatives are smart and liberals are stupid, actually is more effective at proving the opposite, because it is an argument only mentally unsophisticated people fall for.

@SeekingNamelessly

3 жыл бұрын

When he says "enjoy your life", he means count your blessings and don't look at other people and say "you shouldn't have that" or "I want a piece of that because [emotion]." It goes in line with why socialism broods mediocrity, and how people of high skill would hide their skill in order to do less work. He is saying pursue your dreams and assert your rights while doing it and don't let your right get taken away. Everyone is trying to enjoy their life, but it is usually the far Left that comes in demanding whatever, usually funding for some program, when in reality the funding goes into a hole, and what is really needed are innovative and creative individuals who deserve compensation for their achievements and good/fruitful actions. He has provided examples - the guy has clearly read up on as many Socialism experiments that he could find and the only one with any merit was a religious example, the Amish. And what a great, logicless segway to take a potshot at Jordan Peterson. Go somewhere else to spread your willfully ignorant negativism; no one here cares.

@psychcowboy1

3 жыл бұрын

@@SeekingNamelessly who are these mysterious post modernist socialists? Using Hicks definition.

@SeekingNamelessly

3 жыл бұрын

There is evidence that they are there. There is a force making everyone fight and kill each other. There's always some orchestrated event designed to polarize the population into the respective political parties. They seem to be there, and to say who they are would be theorizing. Basically psychopaths that no longer enjoy their wealth and need to find other ways to feel alive, such as using their influence to make people fight each other in covert ways. Imagine how satisfying it must be for some truly sociopathic billionaires to know that their actions made "X" amount of persons fight and kill each other on any given day. Follow the money.

@SeekingNamelessly

3 жыл бұрын

In short: post modernism is a lazy-convenient frame of mind that is alluring for young people to latch onto while the world burns. What a perfect setup to have a generation of apathetic pacifist potheads while the world endures the current crises

@psychcowboy1

3 жыл бұрын

@@SeekingNamelessly Names? Where do they work? Hicks says the average post modernist has a PhD. So what does the above average post modernist have? It sounds made up. The psychopaths you are describing have always been around. So why are they post modern if they existed during modern?

Lets check into some more of Hicks putting socialism as impractical and immoral: At: 15:30 -- 'Socialism doesn't work, Sweden is in the top 20, the elite countries, how did they get there, civil rights respecting, they built up lots of wealth, now they can redistribute wealth, they have excess cash so they can redistribute without destroying their economy, public schools are not good, healthcare system in Canada, compare the post office with fedex, there are nuances, current west economies are a mix of capitalism and socialism...the bottom 20% of countries, Cuba, North Korea, Argentina...' [So according to Hicks most of the most successful countries are part socialist, but socialism just plain doesn't work? Here is a breakdown for anyone swallowing Hicks entire pill: In the US anyway, the foundation of socialist ideas is noticing the massive negative impact of unregulated greed. We are not arguing for the US to turn into North Korea, we are arguing for a regulation of greed, so the working poor are not continually under the thumb of wealthy investors, who don't work to make their millions, they invest in the work of others to make their millions. You mentioned nuances Stephen. Maybe you should acknowledge the nuances of social democracy, rather just paint it in black and white for your gullible fans who simply see socialism as evil and stupid post modernism. Maybe your conservative fan base cannot grasp the concept of nuance, so maybe that is why you don't deal with it.]

@blakemasterson8590

3 жыл бұрын

Sweden has to now borrow to pay for its social welfare system that's been abused by its open border policy for the past 30 years ,

@usada3027

3 жыл бұрын

what? since when was sweden or these nordic countries considered part socialist

@psychcowboy1

3 жыл бұрын

@@usada3027 Their policies are social democracy... Social health care, social child care, social education, high marginal tax rate...

@MrHobbes08

2 жыл бұрын

@@psychcowboy1 still not socialism. They did try it and reigned it back.

@psychcowboy1

2 жыл бұрын

@@MrHobbes08 What is your solution to regulating greed in the US?