Пікірлер

• 
  @PetraKann6 күн бұрын

  The first question was a lecturer in its self. Amazing how people can attend talks and see it as a platform to make speeches followed by a mundane routine question. Thank the speaker for their talk and ask your question. It’s not a stage for people to deliver long irrelevant preambles to a routine question. The follow up question was also based on waffling on before getting to the point of the question. Poor Chalmers - he is a very patient person

• 
  @teomankarasimsek17569 күн бұрын

  a very boring read. written academically and only for academic asslickers. the book is the opposite of over-simplification.

• 
  @MaheshRawat-im8ed27 күн бұрын

  Hi

• 
  @bupe00728 күн бұрын

  I think Boehm has his points. The thing is, that 07.10.2023 is not acceptable. The consequences are Israel invading the Gaza Strip. What ist the future? As Palestianians only believe in Hamas and Iran we need a state of Israel in which Palestinians and Jewish/ Israel people live in ONE state. There is no 2 states solution, because poeple have their soil and their homes (inside Israel). Who wants to move, and who can move? Netanjahu should move in thinking. And all Israelis should. What is Gaza strip? What is a Palestinan state? The West Bank?

• 
  @imbariegh28 күн бұрын

  Lectio Magistralis. I have just bought the Audiobook and can't wait to start listening. Dr. Mattei explanation is brilliant, it is such a pity she is almost unknown to the Italian public

• 
  @user-ep6sq6kc5pАй бұрын

  Thanks very much

• 
  @nicka3382Ай бұрын

  Please find the program, flyer, and presentations in this folder: drive.google.com/drive/folders/102cRznCy4M12AEWzBOcRlQ5jnANu7KD8?usp=sharing

• 
  @nicka3382Ай бұрын

  Please find the program, flyer, and presentations in this folder: drive.google.com/drive/folders/102cRznCy4M12AEWzBOcRlQ5jnANu7KD8?usp=sharing

• 
  @nicka3382Ай бұрын

  Please find the program, flyer, and presentations in this folder: drive.google.com/drive/folders/102cRznCy4M12AEWzBOcRlQ5jnANu7KD8?usp=sharing

• 
  @sydneysymposia2 ай бұрын

  The fate of the human species literally hangs in the balance with respect to how we heed the message of this talk.

• 
  @richardlane54982 ай бұрын

  Right on in many respects. Also shows serious blindspots in terms of long term population size, and misstates Half Earth which is not about totally removing people, but rather removing industrial harmful extraction practices on enormous scale which exploit the poorest of the poor as "beastly" labor. That vile exploitation of people and vast natural habitats which is ever growing under current global systems.

• 
  @dreyfalex2 ай бұрын

  I wonder what Boehm has to say now that Israel has shown itself ready to decimate the structures of Gaza and both murder and starve the inhabitants? Is the possibility of peace dead in the region? Is Israel’s standing in the international community fatally wounded?

• 
  @user-ep6sq6kc5p2 ай бұрын

  Very good

• 
  @user-ep6sq6kc5p2 ай бұрын

  Great

• 
  @emeryroe24872 ай бұрын

  Great presentatiion plus the irony of automatic subtitles sometimes performatively confirming the actual points.

• 
  @ilgiardinonelcassetto41262 ай бұрын

  il made in Italy come sempre è un'eccellenza globale! ;-) Go Clara GO!!!

• 
  @gilbertocolten17893 ай бұрын

  promo sm

• 
  @carlofino46663 ай бұрын

  30:00 da appassionato di storia monetaria: applausi

• 
  @geoffreynhill28333 ай бұрын

  Semaphore Alert !

• 
  @m1ssw0rldwide3 ай бұрын

  why’d she misgender mckenzie at the start lmao😭😭

• 
  @waynemcmillan59703 ай бұрын

  Professor Geoff Harcourt was also a fan of Pasinetti.

• 
  @waynemcmillan59703 ай бұрын

  Good to see Professor Anwar Shaikh there at the talk.

• 
  @waynemcmillan59703 ай бұрын

  I love Professor Galbraith’s analogy of the bastardised version of Keynesianism. They put antlers on a horse and then called it a moose.

• 
  @harmoniousfrenchman87753 ай бұрын

  That's pretty vanilla, a discussion of Africa without Africans. You wouldn't have to look far to find African PhDs to join your conversation. This is laughable.

• 
  @andrew69novak4 ай бұрын

  So far I have enjoyed her book very much. The austrian school doesn't acknowledge any history running contrary to their maxims. She shed a light on events and attitudes that are not mentioned much at all. It appears that bullsh*t trickle down economics goes much further back than I realized. Austerity is an easy sell to an ignorant public that believe money to be real and static. Working within their reality they relate to the confines of a budget. The ephemeral fugazee printed up to bail out banks is talking extra dimensional physics to farm animals. The charade is intentionally obscured. Capitalism for thee and socialism for me is never discussed on MSM.

• 
  @lucanicolazzi49164 ай бұрын

  bravissima e bellissima

• 
  @dinnerwithfranklin24514 ай бұрын

  Clara has helped me make connections that I'd never made before. Brilliant presentation, thank you.

• 
  @nikolaikrustev11595 ай бұрын

  Why is there no CCP logo anywhere in sight? If you are pedalling propaganda (albeit assisted by some useful western idiots) why be ashamed of your main 'brand'? For what it's worth I just hope the Africans wake up and realise who/what they've got themselves into bed with.

• 
  @johnbarrymore58277 ай бұрын

  First

• 
  @STUDIO95T47 ай бұрын

  why nobody watchin these videos ??

• 
  @abrazalves7 ай бұрын

  Very interesting to listen to a lecture from Professor Doctor Arjun Appadurai. Thank you for sharing

• 
  @rodrigoribeiro90577 ай бұрын

  I highlight the clarity with which Clara Mattei conveys her message.

• 
  @rodrigoribeiro90577 ай бұрын

  Under capital order, fiscal and monetary "mistakes" are, in fact, intentional class warfare through the imposition of austerity policies. Neoclassical economic policy continues to pave the way for fascism. The financialization of the economy implemented by the FIRE sector prioritizes rent-seeking to the detriment of the real economy, normalizing technofeudalism.

• 
  @frederickwalzer55558 ай бұрын

  Listening to her argument there is nothing different that people already heard in the news. That is the problem of social scientists they reduce knowledge. Even your thesis is not strong enough for a real thought. Again, the constant use of the word "austerity" and the word "allow" in your speech shows limitations on philosophical thought. Don't waste your money on this book. Just read a book by any historian and the economic news. That's it.

• 
  @gusmore268 ай бұрын

  What is missing in Professor Matei's brilliant scholarly work is the influence of Disruptive Technologies on when the Captial Order will implement austerity and to what degree, in some instances (i.e. recession or depression); and the influence that an overheated or underperforming economy caused by the speeding up or slowing down of sales has on the adjustments to interest rates. It may have been premature to mention those in her "The Capital Order" book, but they are a "must include" in her next book on Keynesian Economics. Here is a short essay on what I've mentioned here. gusmore-op-eds.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-capital-order-misses-imperative-set.html

• 
  @solallirico40639 ай бұрын

  and who invented hiper-inflation, do I dare ask her?

• 
  @emeryroe24879 ай бұрын

  totally remarkable! a thousand recastings of conventional and (some) queer theories

• 
  @hansfrankfurter290310 ай бұрын

  Can we define first what the hell we mean by "democracy" ? I think he means western style rep democracy, but that's not "the will of the ppl" or whatever, it never was.

• 
  @Grappapappa11 ай бұрын

  I want to know who I am. Please help.

• 
  @sigifredoromero14815 ай бұрын

  Just the sum of your particular natural condition plus your particular position in society (and history and so on) plus what you do with it while you are still alive.

• 
  @sigifredoromero14815 ай бұрын

  That is pretty much what you are.

• 
  @sigifredoromero14815 ай бұрын

  and "who" you are, naturally.

• 
  @caitape2002211 ай бұрын

  " Solvency was never the goal " !!!

• 
  @alexandermondry409511 ай бұрын

  Refreshingly accurate, beautifully presented. Love to hear your thoughts on South Africa.

• 
  @johnsmith513911 ай бұрын

  noice :D

• 
  @nunoalexandre640811 ай бұрын

  Thanks for Sharing!!!!!!!!!!!

• 
  @charlesmartino145611 ай бұрын

  Understand this, since 2008 the Fed flooded America with dollars trying to get inflation. Yet because the rich were taking too much of the economy during those times the FED could never hit the 2% goal for inflation. Covid for the first time since the insertion of supply side economics had the Government giving money to the people who needed more money, instead of giving it to the rich through tax cuts. That money given to the people who needed showed right back up in the economy, which started a higher cycle of inflation. Most of that caused by supply chain problems. Also for the first time since the 80's labor had power, contributing to the inflation. To counter that the FED started raising rates. Posing this question, why is it OK for the RICH to take too much of the economy to the point of monopolization. But it not OK for labor on the bottom to have enough power to advance in Society? These practices of our Government and the FED mathematically prove a RIGGED and Corrupt Capitalism that Supple Side Economics ushered in. In the 80's it was the expansion of personal credit and not unfunded tax cuts for the rich that moved the economy. By it's very nature the expansion of credit gives the rich your future money today. The tax cuts just gave the rich the win fall they would need to move the country to an Oligarchy. The Republicans once believed they had to control the Government (hold 2 branches or more) to serve the rich. Once the system describe was put in place all Republicans needed to do was break good government. The rich could do the rest with their win fall. The system now makes more people disenfranchised, but instead of blaming the rich they blame government. That in turn has the rich using Culture wars to keep people blind to what cause their real demise. Clearing the path for a Fascist leader that just has to BLAME OTHERS OF WHAT HE IS GUILTY OF DOING. Sadly that is where America is today.

• 
  @DeanRamser Жыл бұрын

  Slava Ukraine!

• 
  @biswadipdasgupta4204 Жыл бұрын

  Shame the discussion was not recorded - it may have clarified matters somewhat.

• 
  @emeryroe2487 Жыл бұрын

  Sound?!

• 
  @granitesevan6243 Жыл бұрын

  Her argument is flawed in a few critical ways. Fascism may have been supported by protagonists of the free market, just as it was supported by many traditional Catholic and monarchist conservatives, but this doesn't automatically mean fascist equated to dyed-in-the-wool free-market capitalism. Corporatism is a much more accurate characterisation of their economic philosophy, indicating the non-marxist socialist heritage of the fascist movement (remember, fascism had deep, pan-European roots - think French Proudhonism). Also, for her thesis of a symbiosis between austerity and fascism to be as rigorous as she claims, it would have to be universally observable. Austerity affected every industrial economy in the '20s, but there were myriad responses beyond fascism. For example, the New Deal shared some of the Keynesian doctrines of German National Socialism, but that didn't make FDR a fascist. One could quite easily expand on this with further examples... The argument that fascism was a violent, authoritarian defence of capitalism - one that suppressed left-leaning alternative systems - is as old as the road. It was labelled as such by supporters of these latter movements in their day. However, one was not faced with the choice between free-market, naked capitalism or utopian, propertyless socialism on the other hand, despite what the latter purported. The ideologies are much more complex. I would suggest more knowledge of scholarship concerning fascism from actual historians is in order. At the moment, the ahistorical aspects of this argument betray the very obvious present-day political bias that is being upheld. *Incidentally, virtually all of the left-wing movements of the 1920s and beyond (from Stalinism through to British communism) never actually proposed nor exercised an alternative to capitalism; they all fundamentally accepted the idea of a "work society" and industrially-facillitated, international exchange of wealth, just with different accents on the means by which that was organised.

• 
  @bashful228 Жыл бұрын

  You’re really confused and grasping at so many straws here. FDR New Deal was pretty much an opposite of austerity. Corporatism didn’t exist in 1920s Italy. Mattie (the she to which you keep referring) is not saying a symbiosis bw fascism and austerity so much as austerity as a tool to be used in a counter-revolutionary way to suppress movements towards workers rights by making a bunch of them unemployed and the rest scrambling to stay employed. As Mattie has said elsewhere, It’s hard to fight capitalism when you’re dependent on markets for survival, Uber Eats and drivers striking anywhere you’ve heard of in spite of terrible conditions. I could go on but that’s enough.

• 
  @bashful228 Жыл бұрын

  Mattei’s not saying that “fascism equates to capitalism”, that is a reduction or collapsing you invented and use as a strawman arguement of your own making. We know many capitalists everywhere in the world supported Hitler and Mussolini, including many US and UK banks, like the Bank of England who wrote to Hitler and asked if they should fire all their Jewish staff (Hitler wrote back that was a matter for them to decide). Presidents Bush’s grandfather was a private banker for Hitler and others in the fascist elite. It’s not that they are one and the same thing and Mattei didn’t say that. She’s pointing to the connnnections between austerity measures encouraged in neoclassical economic theory and praised by captialism then and today are tools for putting down movements for workers rights and classical liberalism and fascism are but a cigarettes papers difference when push comes to shove around who benefits from the economy and who keeps it going.

• 
  @granitesevan6243 Жыл бұрын

  @@bashful228 if you read my statement properly you will see that I cited the New Deal as a response to austerity - "an opposite", indeed. I mentioned that as an example of an alternative response to austerity because she is implying that fascism was a development of a counter-revolutionary conspiracy engendered by austerity. I am arguing that fascism was a product of nebulous, pan-European ideologies that found an opportune moment in time. It was NOT the cutting edge of capitalism, as so many contemporary Left-wing opponents stated. I'm also stating that this "alternative to the capital order" is a complete fallacy as well, given that the revolutionary movements of the Left maintained the KEY foundations of capitalism - ie. a work-society and a system of material exchange. Lastly, whether or not Italian fascism had time to develop its corporatist practices does not detract from the fact that corporatism was much more in the wheelhouse of its economic ideology, not laissez-faire capitalism. This argument is actually pretty clear and based on a lot of sound historiography. Not a grasp for any straw in sight here.

• 
  @granitesevan6243 Жыл бұрын

  @@bashful228 neo-classical economic theory and austerity are like oil and water, so you might want to think again. Also there are only two "n" in connections, seeing as you want to take a condescending tone with me.

• 
  @bashful228 Жыл бұрын

  @@granitesevan6243 "neo-classical economic theory and austerity are like oil and water"?!? austerity is a political choice, neoclassical economics is an abstract collection of formulas and assumptions that over 100 years have been proven deficient in almost any angle you care to consider them from. oil & water can coexist, even if one doesn't dissolve into the other. your comment is bizarre to say the least.

• 
  @Achrononmaster Жыл бұрын

  @11:00 capitalism in the sense Clara uses the word does not really "stabilize" class relations, it imposes them by force, which creates instability, but it can be more static, not so much dynamic. That's a critical difference. The same as a tension in a glass sheet as opposed to a crack that is about to propagate and shatter the mess.

• 
  @garysantos7053 Жыл бұрын

  "Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The Senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability." -James Madison