Sources in order: Why Socialism is Literally Impossible ua-cam.com/video/KzHA3KLL7Ho/v-deo.html The Turning Point: Revitalizing the Soviet Economy amzn.to/3JNcati The Economic Transformation of the Soviet Union, 1913-1945 (chapter 2) www.cambridge.org/core/books/economic-transformation-of-the-soviet-union-19131945/crooked-mirror-of-soviet-economic-statistics/B34C66FA90EE486147F7B0F000FB9703 The Failure of the American Sovietological Economics Profession www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/713663450 Personal Consumption in the USSR and the USA amzn.to/3Jm8ygm Cuban infant mortality and longevity: health care or repression? academic.oup.com/heapol/article/33/6/755/5035051 Venezuela's official virus data is 'absurd': HRW and Johns Hopkins www.france24.com/en/20200526-venezuela-s-official-virus-data-is-absurd-hrw-and-johns-hopkins How Stable Is China’s Growth? Shedding Light on Sparse Data www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/epr/2020/epr_2020_china-lights_clark.pdf Estimating Chinese GDP Using Night-Lights Data www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2017/september/estimating-chinese-gdp-using-night-lights-data Rwanda documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/219651563298568286/pdf/Rwanda-Systematic-Country-Diagnostic.pdf Geography and Economic Development www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w6849/w6849.pdf About Landlocked Developing Countries www.un.org/ohrlls/content/about-landlocked-developing-countries Deep cultural ancestry and human development royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.171411 List of socialist states en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states The Syrian Constitution - 1973-2012 carnegie-mec.org/diwan/50255 Syria: a country study tile.loc.gov/storage-services/master/frd/frdcstdy/sy/syriacountrystud00coll_0/syriacountrystud00coll_0.pdf The Burmese ways to socialism www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01436599208420262 Renaissance and Decay: A Comparison of Socioeconomic Indicators in Pre-Castro and Current-Day Cuba www.ascecuba.org/asce_proceedings/renaisssance-and-decay-a-comparison-of-socioeconomic-indicators-in-pre-castro-and-current-day-cuba/ Synthetic control method en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_control_method The Cuban revolution and infant mortality www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014498320300784 The Cuban Experiment: Measuring the Role of the 1959 Revolution on Economic Performance www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Cuban-Experiment-%3A-Measuring-the-Role-of-the-on-Ribeiro-Stein/0ff6d726dc15d5e99bdd13b5f1e3c076d9f8b8fb Market, Socialist, and Mixed Economies amzn.to/3YZG81A The Causes of Ukrainian Famine Mortality, 1932-33 www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29089/w29089.pdf Forced Labor in Soviet Industry www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/0817939423_23.pdf Back in the USSR www.adamsmith.org/research/back-in-the-ussr?format=amp How Was Life? Volume II www.oecd.org/dev/how-was-life-volume-ii-3d96efc5-en.htm The Economic Effects of the Abolition of Serfdom www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20160144 The Russian Revolution 1917-1921 archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.178167 An Economic History of the USSR amzn.to/3JQBXke The CIA Did NOT Prove That Soviet Citizens Had A Higher Caloric Intake Than Americans praxben.substack.com/p/no-the-cia-did-not-prove-that-soviet The Socialist System amzn.to/3n0OGrC The Power of Capitalism amzn.to/42pyEaO Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies amzn.to/3TphTZi The economic consequences of Hugo Chavez: A synthetic control analysis www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167268116000020 Impact of the 2017 sanctions on Venezuela www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/impact-of-the-2017-sanctions-on-venezuela_final.pdf The economic consequences of durable left-populist regimes in Latin America www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167268120302237 Skills versus Luck: Bolivia and its recent Bonanza latinaer.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40503-019-0069-1 Macroeconomic populism www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/030438789090038D Assessing Economic Liberalization Episodes www.jstor.org/stable/43554807 Economic freedom of the world onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/coep.12010
You spent this entire video equivocating over sources rather than proving a scientifc basis for the market's supremacy. I could literally just do what you did to Hakim's video with this video.
good video, recently got into socialism (was kinda hardcore free-marketer before, even tho admittedly wasn't too educated on the topic) you made me think about that and now i'm even stronger in my beliefs, comrade
there is a south indian movie named aparachit , where the main character is a vigilante suffering multiple personality disorders and there is a scene where the main character talks about the rapid recovery and improvement of the japanese and singaporean economy and blames the stagnation of the indian economy on evil capitalism and corruption while ignoring india's socialist era which caused the stagnation in the first place
@@comradeconstantine1317Let me add this , protectionism in India is not the same kind of protectionism that you would have seen in USA.India essentially stopped trading with the west except for soviet allied countries which caused economic distress after USSR collapsed
I had to ask a question about ECP. How does added cost affect price formation? If a capitalist takes 5% of a sold commodity as revenue, do these 5% harm the price's informative value?
I saw your question and decided to try my hand at answering it to the best of my knowledge. Basically, no. While this is based on a few assumptions (he has the good in his possession currently, it has no upkeep/storage cost, he is not in a monopoly/cartel position, other standard market assumptions), the short answer is always no. The reason being is that his individual valuation is merely an input. If he is right and he can sell at that price, then he hasn't harmed the market, he has merely pushed it closer to the current equilbrium. If he is wrong then he cannot sell and his price doesn't do much on the market, it makes him into a submarginal seller, which are part of the market and thus taken into account. Saying his markup is harmful to the price information would be like saying that someone's overvaluation of their father's rusted out Ford Fiesta is harmful to the price information. Or if someone undervalues the Ming Vase collection they inherited from their Grandmother was harmful. That the capitalist's valuation is based on exchange value, rather than personal value, does not change anything.
Mrh Legacy's video "debunking every anti-Capitalist Argument ever" on the LTV is Sufficient enough. All he needs to do is to refute his "Empirical Evidence"
Marx's Ltv is none debunkable, its used by modern Capitalists to improve their situation, if you ever want a really good guide to succeed in a Capitalist system, just read Capital by Marx. All the cool billionaires already have
Hakim's tone throughout all his videos is condescending and mocking to any opposing arguments. Generally speaking, people interested in finding real truth are more concerned with the ideal objective than winning an argument and looking smarter.
I went to little havana , in florida, and I asked my uber driver what he thought about the cuban government. And his first response ... THE HUMAN GOVERNMENT IS MUTHAFUKA
@@0926001 I never spoke about your country, so don’t speak about mine. Also there is no voting system in Cuba don’t be ridiculous and stop believing that crap you saw from some tankie UA-cam video. You can vote for your CDR leader which is basically neighborhood level and is absolutely meaningless, no one gives two shits about it. I used to participate in activities where I carried the box with people’s votes from the neighborhood when I was a kid. The citizens have no saying in who the president is, no one voted for that clown who’s currently running the country. And it should go without saying that if you have a position that doesn’t align with the Revolution, you’ll never be allowed to have any effect, on anything, they’ll even blacklist you. You never experienced anything first hand, you get your info from people on the internet who are trying to reinforce your own biases by telling you what you wanna hear. Your credibility is zero, just like mine would be if I spoke about your country.
@@setsunatenma9467 That he is a clown and a scumbag who couldn’t care less about what’s actually going on in there, or the Cuban people, he cares about defending his ideology. His video is crap propaganda as always is with these people His video was also debunked by the channel Monolithic Ethos, if you care to look for it
yo what’s up ben. i don’t agree with you politically but i respect your ability to be mature and give a good debate. watching you has helped me a lot in my own work. keep it up
27:10 So EVEN if this 2016 paper and the studies in it removing Stalin's brutality, suppression, famine and the like, EVEN attempting to attribute some favor in Stalin's court, his economic policies STILL sucked. ☠️ Which has always been on my thought process, that even IF you factor OUT U.S. sanctions the communists say is holding Cuba and Russia back, their policies either had NO effect on existing trends prior to the communist takeovers on the economy and other aspects of their nations.... or made them worse. They are terrible on their own terms, pretty much. EVEN IF you try to give them some leeway and remove those factors listed above. (Also 28:40, I squealed that you indirectly mentioned Tsar Alexander II freeing the serfs. I love Romanov history!). Great video, Praxben! Welcome back to UA-cam!
Such terrible economic policies that the USSR became a competing super power with a 200 year old country (at the time) at half its age, and without slavery......insane......
@@Alief.Prophet The gulags were basically slavery.... ya know being forced labor camps an all also competing with a 200 year old super power until it couldn't and its economy reminded in stagnation until it collapsed all together in the 90s so yeah the system works!
@@ThatBlueSkull .....yeah how many times did you repeat High School?? The economy of the USSR never remained in stagnation and it never collapsed. Actually, the U.S. employed the puppet Gorbachev as the new Soviet President. He switched the economy back to capitalism AND THEN it collapsed. You know cuz capitalism is that sustainable amazing system that doesn't destroy lives. Also Gulags were just prison......you all find such terror in foreign languages and I can't tell if it's racism or simply ignorance. I also find it hilarious you have the nerve to bring up forced labor when the 13th Amendment literally says its legal to make someone a slave if they committed a crime.......so basically anyone that smokes weed is liable enough to become a slave in 2023. Most of them ARE. But that's acceptable to you right??
@@ThatBlueSkull”The gulags were basically slavery” are you at all aware of the U.S prison system and what it generates through virtually unpaid labour?
This may be a stupid question but I don’t understand how a country does the conversion from a mixed economy like the USA or Canada into a socialist country. Specifically, if the means of production are under private ownership, does the government buy them out somehow like eminent domain? Trying to educate myself. Thank You.
If the objective was to actually build a socialist economy, the means of production would simply be expropriated. One moment there's a piece of paper that says it belongs to the capitalist, the next that piece of paper doens't exist enymore. So the state or whatever organization is interested in that property is simply gonna go in and start using it. Compensating the capitalist would be antithetical to socialist goals because 1) it would give them some form of priviledge in the new economy and 2) it makes no sense, they didn't build the thing alone (probably not at all), and didn't run it alone (probably not at all).
@@itsoktobehappy461 Well the major and minor shareholders are usually are not present in their companies, so they simply wouldn't even be there to respond. If they were present for some reason, I guess they would be informed that they no longer had control over that business. If they refused to leave their offices for an extended period, I think security would just remove them. What do you think would happen?
@@doctorinternet8695 Well, definitely not have their property taken at gunpoint without compensation. They did nothing wrong, so I think most would morally object to that.
@@itsoktobehappy461 Yeah, guns wouldn't be necessary, the only ties owners and shareholders have with their properties are the legal ones that make the property be enforced by the state. Once those ties are cut by a change in the legal system, there's simply nothing to be done, they become workers like erveryone else.This actually happened to china's last emperor, which lived the rest of his days as a gardener. You are right in saying the did nothing wrong, they were simply actors in a system, the system itself is wrong. Their moral objections would be of little concern. That's one of the things that's being combatted in the first place, the set of values that allows for such level of exploitation. They benefitted from an immoral system after all, they only got their property due to exploitation and the state, it's only to be expected that they would object to losing their priviledge.
@@salmanhaider3243 Damn, and all these days I've been wondering why hasn't he uploaded a video yet. Just found out that he deleted his UA-cam channel after getting caught on being a p3do on discord. You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain 😕 Used to admire that guy.
If economic liberalization is good as seen in the "Assessing Economic Liberalization Episodes" study, then why do neoliberal policies seen in structural adjustment policies mainly through IMF loans how come those economic liberalization policies in developing countries lead to less growth, more income inequality, more child mortality, lower life expectancy, less spending on education, less worker rights, and typically leads to civil unrest in those countries that accept them.
@@praxbenMy question wasn't really about liberalization about being bad, but the neoliberal policies being implemented through structural adjustment policies leading to bad results. Are structural adjustments not a form of economic liberalization?
@@ZachWelch-lx3ix I’m not a neo-liberal I don’t support the IMF. This is a defense of capitalism, not a defense of governmental organizations giving out loans and supporting Keynesian policies.
@@praxben I never said you were a neo liberal or supported the IMF. I am asking that the structural adjustment programs are a form of economic liberalization that usually harm that country rather than help Can you explain this?
Can you actually provide any evidence that capitalist reforms are bad for developing countries instead of going on and on with this rhetorical diarrhea?
so this is about the block of text you cited in Deep cultural ancestry and human development indicators across nation states. It doesn't say what you think it says. "*It should also be noted, however, that many of the former communist countries (largely those in the former Soviet Union) also suffered major economic turmoil following the demise of their communist governments [98], and that this too may play a role in explaining the apparent effect of communism on income.*" "*Moreover, it must be noted that the communist countries in the sample are all Eastern European and Central Asian, and that these areas were less wealthy than Western Europe even prior to communism [92,99], and indeed Russia saw rapid economic growth following the advent of communism, although this lessened over time [92,100].*" "*For all these reasons the results presented here must be treated with caution, and are primarily intended as a control in the context of examination of deep cultural effects on human development, not as a thoroughgoing analysis of the effects of communism on development.*" "* Most of the same caveats also apply here as to the economic effects of communism however, with lifespan decreasing rapidly in the former Soviet Union immediately following post-Soviet collapse [101], and lifespan having increased strongly in the Soviet Union prior to and immediately after World War II [103].*"
@@lawrencelu4109 communists are incapable of independent thought, research, and cross-referencing sources. A substantial body of evidence demonstrates ex-communists countries reformed more rapidly and maintained the reforms (as opposed to reversing some of them, as in Russia) grew more rapidly and experienced higher increased increases in quality of life. Further evidence of capitalism’s superiority. www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa795_2.pdf As for Russia’s economic growth, that is irrelevant. We are looking at indicators of quality of life, not empty economic growth.
@@praxben Also that study was also including democratization, as part of the criteria for being fast reformers. So they can do things like put Russia in the slow reformers group. So you can't use it to compare capitalism and communism
Im on the left and appreciate this analysis. But the paper on 12:25 doesn't even account for GDP per capita, years since industrializing, or former colonial status. So much for "taking account of more variables". It wasn't "Protestantism" that made Europe wealthy lol
Thanks for your opinion. It’s looking at Euroasian countries, so former colonial status doesn’t really matter. Also accounting for GDP per capita destroys the entire purpose of comparing countries. And speaking of comparing, this study isn’t actually comparing capitalist and socialist countries. It’s actually looking at the effects of being run by communist parties on these countries. This actually fixes all issues that come about from direct comparisons. The religion thing is a separate topic. Christianity, and especially Protestantism, has been shown time and time again to bring about institutions that bring about better economic growth and quality of life. My friend here on UA-cam “InspiringPhilosophy” covers this topic extensively.
@@praxben thanks for the reply! the colonial status part was because I saw India was included in a dataset with European countries. I disagree with your GDP per capita part. You can have a lower GDP per capita and have a higher HDI (think Finland compared to US). And that matters (not saying Finland is communist). But I guess the main gripe I have is that the study is pointing at poor countries that are more likely to be communist and sees the HDI is lower and you claim communism caused the lower HDI. You’re ignoring the possibility of faster economic growth that could occur in poor communist countries all else equal.
@@rubixpuzzlechamp India wasn’t a part of the sample of communist countries so it doesn’t matter much. But I would say having some diversity of history helps the study even more. The authors mention how they see the religious effects in India, which was effected by colonialism, were similar to other countries. Showing that a variable has the same effect across different samples is a pretty good thing in statistics. I think the main problem here is you’re viewing this study as like a mirror version of the 1986 pro-socialism study. And that’s fair enough since I probably didn’t distinguish them as much as I should. The study looks at these countries over time, unlike the PQL study, and looks and the actual effects of the given variables in that time. So the effects of communism are being observed in the context of those specific countries.
@@praxben Fair point on India. But the paper does seem to give a lot of caveats to the "history of communism"-HDI relationship, even saying that communist Russia saw massive growth and that they started in a worse economic position. Plus, there are no other economic control factors at all besides "communism". "For all these reasons the results presented here must be treated with caution, and are primarily intended as a control in the context of examination of deep cultural effects on human development, not as a thoroughgoing analysis of the effects of communism on development." The paper isn't isolating the effects of "communism" on HDI. If it was it wouldn't include post-Soviet Russia as "communist", but this paper does because it's only looking at countries with a "history" of communism - a big difference. I feel like you misrepresented the paper's findings a bit.
@@praxben because india isn't, wasn't and never was a socialist country The only socialism was when Nehru implemented socialist ideals yet there was privatized steel, a stock market, private companies and an ongoing monopoly of tata
It's not merely "citing le sources", it is applying logic. Maybe, just maybe, instead of being a bug brained hiveminded socialist you can make an attempt at using your own logical faculties.
Thank you. Great vid. Too much to memorise but good to know when a socialist sites studies, there is an exhaustive list of studies that contradict all those that support socialism as an economic system.
The sources about cuban healtcare being flawed does also say that even if cuba and overall cubans are poorer, they have almost the same if not better healthcare than USA.
I'm a Communist but I really dislike Comrade Hakim's condescending tone. He also uses the common debate tactic of just "say what the person you're debating said, but in a silly voice!". I'd love to find more Marxist commentators who were more professional and courteous, such as yourself.
You too haven't got everything right. How can you say that India is falsely labelled as capitalist when it is without a doubt a capitalist country? I am from Nepal and we too have so called socialiat parties in power but our country has similar type of economy as India and very much capitalist. So I don't see your point at all. And after this misinformation I can't even trust your videos.
@@lawrencelu4109 can you provide a definition of socialism that includes all of the “socialist” countries in the paper Hakim is referencing, and includes none of the other countries I called socialist? Good luck.
china stopped being socialist in 1978 and Cuba stopped around the 2000's. this study was written in 1986, and you have to have at least one poor socialist country. This is a minor part anyways, the overall point still stands
Socialism is still inherently more capable of providing a better quality of life for its citizens compared to capitalist systsms. Even if the document hakim mentions can be considered unreliable this doesnt change the fact that socialist countries such as the DPRK historically have marginally outperformed capitalist counterparts such as South Korea for an example. Claiming all of this is copium in it of itself is you coping for the fact that socialism is still inherently more efficient. Also comparing the USSR to the US is completely intellectually dishonest and everyone with 2 braincells to rub together knows it. I could train an 8 year old to debunk this video
congratulations on creating the most retarded comment I have ever seen on UA-cam . how in the ever loving hell did you come to the conclusion that the DPRK outperformed south Korea in any way because I wouldn't call mass starvation a success never mind it's current state lmao
Socialism is less efficient for one reason - lack of prices. Prices set by the state equals to lack of rational economic calculation and a misallocation of scare resources, which is basically inputs being turned into outputs are a far less efficient rate. Socialism is a regressive, stunted system for the regressive and stunted.
These two countries were trying to compete over global influence. Of course, it makes sense to compare them. Also, North Korea isn't exactly known for having anything other than human rights violations. Unless you want to argue that arresting someone's grandchild because they committed a crime improves one's life conditions as opposed to their neighbors, you are completely wrong.
@A_Person7307 ah yes and your source on the "DPRK executed my neighbors dog because I had a dirty kim il sung portrait" is fake testimonies from "defectors" trying to make a living? Also claiming the DPRK isn't known for anything other than that isn't the fault of the DPRK itself but the fact that maybe you know nothing about the country??
Im a recent socialist, but these Marxist-Leninists are really keeping me from associating with many socialist communities. Defending communist regimes is ridiculous. (For anyone curious: I believe in syndicalism)
Check out "The Socialist Political Compass: Methods to create socialism" by @LuckyBlackCat. She has explained in great detail about the various strands of socialism, what each of them advocate and all of their disagreements. If you value civil liberties and democracy then you shouldn't be a Marxist-Leninist, Comrade 😅 Also, check out @Anark.
Funny how America backed the Khmer Rouge financially and diplomatically (persuading the Chinese to support them, look up Brzezinski's suggestion to the Chinese), while the Vietnamese communist party overthrew it with the help of the USSR, even Pol Pot admitted that he never overlooked Marx's manifesto, but i guess Pol Pot genocided his people for absolutely no reason = perfect communist.
It's been a joke in my country for decades, here in the Eastern block anyone could come in, but the locals would be shot if they tried to leave. To no one's surprise nobody was coming in and thousands were dying while trying to run away.
It annoys me that when you people says Socialism and Communism fails themselves while spending billions on Embargoes and to sabotage them, making their life Hell on earth,
@@fate8007 A country which is that corrupt politically unstable is not a good example of capitalism. If you want a good example, just look to Haiti's neighbor, the Dominican Republic, which has a higher life expectancy, GDP per capita, and literacy rate as a result of higher economic freedom and political stability. If capitalism is so bad, feel free to move out of the US/CA/EU/AU, or wherever you live.
@@person3070 A country that is facing an embargo is not a good example of socialism. Cuba has a highly developed healthcare system that is accessible to all citizens, and the country has made significant gains in reducing infant mortality rates and increasing life expectancy. The country also has a strong education system, with a high literacy rate and free education for all citizens. The government provides basic food rations to all citizens, and there is a strong social safety net that provides benefits such as free healthcare and pensions to those in need. In contrast, the Dominican Republic has a less developed healthcare system and lower life expectancy than Cuba. The country also has a higher poverty rate, with significant income inequality and a large informal economy. While the Dominican Republic has made progress in reducing poverty and improving access to education, healthcare, and other services, there is still a significant gap between the living standards of the rich and poor.
The points you made weren't strong enough points to complete debunk the points Hakim made in his video. Socialism has proven to be better than Capitalism with the results in socialist countries performing better than Capitalist country.
Yo there’s people who think that comparing comparing countries that were just decade before were some of the poorest in the world with the global hegemon is a fair comparison?
@@woodykrska9947Think about what you wrote for 10 seconds. How exactly do you think it is that USA was and is the richest country on Earth? And why exactly do you think it is Argentina, Sweden and every single country that practiced free market policy in the 19th century were the richest countries on Earth? How is it possible that free market Argentina was in top 5 richest countries in the 19th yet once they switched to socialism they became one of the poorest?
@@baph0met the US had rich farmland, and 300 years to develop. Russia, for example, was ruled by a corrupt, backwards, tsar, for most of its history. It only started modernizing after the Soviets took power. In that time (3 decades) it became a global superpower, from a nation of peasants. Vietnam became a tiger economy from a literal colony in 60 years. China became a super power in 60. Also, Argentina wasn’t socialist, idk where you got that from. It isn’t fair to compare, for example, China, which started socialism poorer than India, to the US, which was already a super power at the time. It would be more apt to compare it to a country that was on the same economic level when they had their revolution. In this case, India. Or, compare the USSR to Brazil, since they were at a similar level at the time of the revolution. And for your point about all the richest countries being capitalist, that’s because socialist revolutions happen more often in poor countries. More desperate. Poor countries that, mind you, make up the majority of capitalism, in terms of population.
@@woodykrska9947 What? Argentina wasn't socialist? Is this the "that wasn't real socialism" brainn tumor? Or was Peron proudly wearing socialism a halucination? US had 300 years to develop, Russia had over 2000 years, if we don't count native Americans that US government slaughtered. 60 milion people starved to death in China, and just like in Vietnam things started to get better when they applied more capitalist policies in the 90s. Bringing Brazil and India into this doesn't really help you, Brazil is pretty socialist and 80% of India openly has Marxist governments. In terms of population the poorest people are in China, India and african countries like Nigeria and Egypt. China and India aren't capitalist and 99% of Africa is either under a quado socialist dictatorship or some weirdass monarchy. Egypt will soon collapse due to this, economically due to socialist policies and socially due to overpopulation and the government wasting money, like socialists tend to do. When you exclude the huge socialist countries, you realize the 2 billion people left in capitalist countries are the richest people, just open stupid Wikipedia and look at top 100 richest countries, 99% are capitalist. Also don't forget the western standard for poverty keeps rising so the government can keep "fighting poverty", nowadays poverty in USA is when you have "only" 1 car, 1 TV and 1 house, unlike in the 60s when it was "lives under the bridge". I wonder why socialist revolutions happen in poor countries, it couldn't possibly be due to poor people being usually less educated and are more prone to be "intoxicated with bread" as we say in my country, aka poor people are very prone to support anyone that proclaims 'its the capitalist/blacks/America's/boogeyman's fault! Come give me your money and I will fix all your problems!" You do realize poorer people being more likely to support socialism is supporting my argument right? Except for the champagne socialist grifters with mansions like Cenk's nephew or Sanders of course, those are the ones doing the bread intoxication, exploiting uneducated struggling people for their own gain.
@@baph0met Argentina had a free market, no cultural revolution, nothing. They were trying to transition to socialism, but they weren’t socialist. And Kerala is the only Marxist stronghold in India, despite the fact that India has a large socialist movement. And same with Brazil. No suppression of the free market, no cultural revolution, no ousting of the bourgeoisie from power, no dictatorship of the proletariat, nothing. If anything they are social democratic, like Norway, or Denmark. And where did you get “most of Africa is a quasi socialist dictatorship”, like, free market, no cultural revolution, no dictatorship of the proletariat, no ousting of the bourgeoisie. Not socialist. They just don’t fit the definition. In Africa, it’s mostly right wing dictatorships. Post Cold War at least. It can’t be “80% socialist”. It’s either socialist, capitalist, or social democracy. Or any other range of things in between. Also, calling Egypt a socialist country is the stupidest thing somebody has said all day.
I don't know what constitutes a wokie but I'd argue centrists, liberals, and conservatives all love being walked on, just in different ways. Centrists are the most masochistic though.
People who say Wokie or/ and use woke unironically have the intelligence of a ferrit and the worldviews of an large language Model trained on football chants
@@bigmouthstrikesagain4056 capitalist There is nothing like a mixed economy only capitalist and socialist/communist. What they are is a welfare state which exploited/exploits the global South for their own benefit which allows them to be welfare states
People really need to stop using terms like "better" and "works" when describing ideas. We don't use these terms when describing the universe because this implies knowledge of things that do not exist for comparisons. Why would we use them to describe systems of social interactions? Both you and Hakim fall into the mire of thinking about capitalism and socialism as economic theories. They're not. They're political theories about which group of any social body should have the most political power. As far as the calculation problem goes this is wholly a red herring. It implies that socialism has already achieved a point of development wherein money is no longer needed, i.e. communism, so every argument put forward against it is going to fail as it is not addressing the actual claim of socialism. (Socialists like Hakim are forced to argue for positions that ultimately have nothing to do with socialism). The political philosophy of socialism was meant to solve one problem that capitalism has never and can never solve, and that is distribution of ideas and opportunities to every working body in a social system, be it a city, a nation, etc. You might have degrees of personal autonomy but that is wholly dependent upon of forces of production in which you yourself do not control. As capital absorbs ever more resources, land, and material, the workers are forced into positions that they themselves do not decide and do not control. Capitalism, no matter the amount of material wealth it produces can never distribute it out according to the wants and contributions of every participating hand. Further more, the very thing that makes communism impossible is also what makes libertarianism impossible as a theory. Since the problem with any producing system is distribution, the libertarian position is on ever worse ground since it claims there isn't a problem. It requires, like communism, that every one in the social system already think in terms of libertarian dogma. In that regard both are utopian as you envision a world of human interaction of your own personal biases. Socialism already develops within capitalism as capitalism is what condenses material forces of production and the population together. Be that as it may, the notion of a "mature" capitalism" is utterly preposterous. This brings us to the overall point. There is no such thing as either capitalism and socialism. These are entirely ad hoc theories and explanations that ignore basic principles of social relations, which is that people want what they want and live in a world where they cannot have what they want. An elite few are able to fill their needs, the rest of us are not. In that regard, both you and Hakim are naïve in thinking that your particular ideology is what the world needs. There is only winners and losers in the world and nobody choose where they are, only allowed.
@@danieljliverslxxxix1164 typical ideologues, they have this emotional and identity connection to their ideology be it socialist or libertarian, which they defend with everything they got and never really question that shit. I agree with you both socialism and libertarianism and retarded, but I definitely think socialism comes closer to the meaning of the economy than something like capitalism and libertarianism in theory ever can, which is the idea that we created they economy, and it should be there to service our needs and wants, which capitalism and libertarianism never can to a large degree, around 75 percent of the planets population lives in poverty, and most third world economies resources labor and other assets do not go to building their own economies, as in strong internal economies, but are stolen by western capitalists supported by their nations like the USA, who use the resources of the third world to support western consumption. Internally in the countries of the first world, something similar plays out most of our economic resources and might go to service the needs of our rich top 11 percent, whilst the rest of the majority have diminishing buying allotment, money and their needs are not met. IDK honestly no one knows what truly can work for the economy but I know for a fact it isn't some libertarian bullshit itll drag us even furthur back and definitely not some tankie communist bullshit of hakim that shits insane, ah yes just plan the economy, !!!cheeerrs!!!
If there’s one thing communists are good at its charisma. They have the same confidence and authority of a triple bachelors degree student but what they say is similar to that of chat GPT.
Sources in order:
Why Socialism is Literally Impossible
ua-cam.com/video/KzHA3KLL7Ho/v-deo.html
The Turning Point: Revitalizing the Soviet Economy
amzn.to/3JNcati
The Economic Transformation of the Soviet Union, 1913-1945 (chapter 2)
www.cambridge.org/core/books/economic-transformation-of-the-soviet-union-19131945/crooked-mirror-of-soviet-economic-statistics/B34C66FA90EE486147F7B0F000FB9703
The Failure of the American Sovietological Economics Profession
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/713663450
Personal Consumption in the USSR and the USA
amzn.to/3Jm8ygm
Cuban infant mortality and longevity: health care or repression?
academic.oup.com/heapol/article/33/6/755/5035051
Venezuela's official virus data is 'absurd': HRW and Johns Hopkins
www.france24.com/en/20200526-venezuela-s-official-virus-data-is-absurd-hrw-and-johns-hopkins
How Stable Is China’s Growth? Shedding Light on Sparse Data
www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/epr/2020/epr_2020_china-lights_clark.pdf
Estimating Chinese GDP Using Night-Lights Data
www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2017/september/estimating-chinese-gdp-using-night-lights-data
Rwanda
documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/219651563298568286/pdf/Rwanda-Systematic-Country-Diagnostic.pdf
Geography and Economic Development
www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w6849/w6849.pdf
About Landlocked Developing Countries
www.un.org/ohrlls/content/about-landlocked-developing-countries
Deep cultural ancestry and human development
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.171411
List of socialist states
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states
The Syrian Constitution - 1973-2012
carnegie-mec.org/diwan/50255
Syria: a country study
tile.loc.gov/storage-services/master/frd/frdcstdy/sy/syriacountrystud00coll_0/syriacountrystud00coll_0.pdf
The Burmese ways to socialism
www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01436599208420262
Renaissance and Decay: A Comparison of Socioeconomic Indicators in Pre-Castro and Current-Day Cuba
www.ascecuba.org/asce_proceedings/renaisssance-and-decay-a-comparison-of-socioeconomic-indicators-in-pre-castro-and-current-day-cuba/
Synthetic control method
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_control_method
The Cuban revolution and infant mortality
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014498320300784
The Cuban Experiment: Measuring the Role of the 1959 Revolution on Economic Performance
www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Cuban-Experiment-%3A-Measuring-the-Role-of-the-on-Ribeiro-Stein/0ff6d726dc15d5e99bdd13b5f1e3c076d9f8b8fb
Market, Socialist, and Mixed Economies
amzn.to/3YZG81A
The Causes of Ukrainian Famine Mortality, 1932-33
www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29089/w29089.pdf
Forced Labor in Soviet Industry
www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/0817939423_23.pdf
Back in the USSR
www.adamsmith.org/research/back-in-the-ussr?format=amp
How Was Life? Volume II
www.oecd.org/dev/how-was-life-volume-ii-3d96efc5-en.htm
The Economic Effects of the Abolition of Serfdom
www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20160144
The Russian Revolution 1917-1921
archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.178167
An Economic History of the USSR
amzn.to/3JQBXke
The CIA Did NOT Prove That Soviet Citizens Had A Higher Caloric Intake Than Americans
praxben.substack.com/p/no-the-cia-did-not-prove-that-soviet
The Socialist System
amzn.to/3n0OGrC
The Power of Capitalism
amzn.to/42pyEaO
Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies
amzn.to/3TphTZi
The economic consequences of Hugo Chavez: A synthetic control analysis
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167268116000020
Impact of the 2017 sanctions on Venezuela
www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/impact-of-the-2017-sanctions-on-venezuela_final.pdf
The economic consequences of durable left-populist regimes in Latin America
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167268120302237
Skills versus Luck: Bolivia and its recent Bonanza
latinaer.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40503-019-0069-1
Macroeconomic populism
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/030438789090038D
Assessing Economic Liberalization Episodes
www.jstor.org/stable/43554807
Economic freedom of the world
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/coep.12010
pls pin this
Gotta Hakim haters getting ratioed in the view count.
When do we discuss failed capitalist countries like Congo, Peru?
@@carkawalakhatulistiwa Neither failed because of private property rights and free trade. You are nonsense and ontologically evil.
There’s a few missing sources in the description, because I ran out of characters. But they’re all easy enough to find online.
Prove it
nigga
Can you debate second thought too because I want to see what you think of him
@@me8478 he is too scared to debate @Praxben6672
You could link them in a pinned comment for convenience sake.
You spent this entire video equivocating over sources rather than proving a scientifc basis for the market's supremacy. I could literally just do what you did to Hakim's video with this video.
good video, recently got into socialism (was kinda hardcore free-marketer before, even tho admittedly wasn't too educated on the topic)
you made me think about that and now i'm even stronger in my beliefs, comrade
Please tell me what are the rebuttals to the argument
I'm a socialist and I don't know any
Enlighten me
Read theory bro
@@panoskatrin4910 "read theory" is a nothing argument
@@buoyant257 i know but its true
@@HarryLincoln-cd4wy bro just read theory , yes i am both serious and trying to trigger you fucking debate bro
there is a south indian movie named aparachit , where the main character is a vigilante suffering multiple personality disorders and there is a scene where the main character talks about the rapid recovery and improvement of the japanese and singaporean economy and blames the stagnation of the indian economy on evil capitalism and corruption while ignoring india's socialist era which caused the stagnation in the first place
"Socialist era" Protectionist taxation and building dams and half hearted land reforms is socialism now?
@@comradeconstantine1317Let me add this , protectionism in India is not the same kind of protectionism that you would have seen in USA.India essentially stopped trading with the west except for soviet allied countries which caused economic distress after USSR collapsed
singapore got stalin inspired 5 year plans, same with south korea, japan was extremely controlled growth by the stare
I had to ask a question about ECP. How does added cost affect price formation? If a capitalist takes 5% of a sold commodity as revenue, do these 5% harm the price's informative value?
I saw your question and decided to try my hand at answering it to the best of my knowledge.
Basically, no. While this is based on a few assumptions (he has the good in his possession currently, it has no upkeep/storage cost, he is not in a monopoly/cartel position, other standard market assumptions), the short answer is always no. The reason being is that his individual valuation is merely an input. If he is right and he can sell at that price, then he hasn't harmed the market, he has merely pushed it closer to the current equilbrium. If he is wrong then he cannot sell and his price doesn't do much on the market, it makes him into a submarginal seller, which are part of the market and thus taken into account.
Saying his markup is harmful to the price information would be like saying that someone's overvaluation of their father's rusted out Ford Fiesta is harmful to the price information. Or if someone undervalues the Ming Vase collection they inherited from their Grandmother was harmful. That the capitalist's valuation is based on exchange value, rather than personal value, does not change anything.
No its just a part of the equation. Owners do in fact work.
Can you debunk hakim on the labor theory of value I am looking for responses for the studies cited in the academic agent response video
Mrh Legacy's video "debunking every anti-Capitalist Argument ever" on the LTV is Sufficient enough. All he needs to do is to refute his "Empirical Evidence"
@@RIGEL.K well when someone says they debunked every single one then they’re lying
Marx's Ltv is none debunkable, its used by modern Capitalists to improve their situation, if you ever want a really good guide to succeed in a Capitalist system, just read Capital by Marx. All the cool billionaires already have
@@limeslyx-z9453 citation needed and subjective value debunks the ltv
@@limeslyx-z9453 Literally no one uses LTV for anything.
Hakim's tone throughout all his videos is condescending and mocking to any opposing arguments. Generally speaking, people interested in finding real truth are more concerned with the ideal objective than winning an argument and looking smarter.
As a Cuban, it’s very easy for me to see how little credibility these tankies have when they praise my country
How do you feel about hakim video about not supporting the cuban protests
I went to little havana , in florida, and I asked my uber driver what he thought about the cuban government. And his first response ...
THE HUMAN GOVERNMENT IS MUTHAFUKA
@@0926001 I know people who fled the island. You don’t wanna go to Cuba. Trust me on that one.
@@0926001 I never spoke about your country, so don’t speak about mine.
Also there is no voting system in Cuba don’t be ridiculous and stop believing that crap you saw from some tankie UA-cam video. You can vote for your CDR leader which is basically neighborhood level and is absolutely meaningless, no one gives two shits about it. I used to participate in activities where I carried the box with people’s votes from the neighborhood when I was a kid. The citizens have no saying in who the president is, no one voted for that clown who’s currently running the country. And it should go without saying that if you have a position that doesn’t align with the Revolution, you’ll never be allowed to have any effect, on anything, they’ll even blacklist you.
You never experienced anything first hand, you get your info from people on the internet who are trying to reinforce your own biases by telling you what you wanna hear. Your credibility is zero, just like mine would be if I spoke about your country.
@@setsunatenma9467 That he is a clown and a scumbag who couldn’t care less about what’s actually going on in there, or the Cuban people, he cares about defending his ideology. His video is crap propaganda as always is with these people
His video was also debunked by the channel Monolithic Ethos, if you care to look for it
yo what’s up ben. i don’t agree with you politically but i respect your ability to be mature and give a good debate. watching you has helped me a lot in my own work. keep it up
Yeah man totally man
27:10
So EVEN if this 2016 paper and the studies in it removing Stalin's brutality, suppression, famine and the like, EVEN attempting to attribute some favor in Stalin's court, his economic policies STILL sucked. ☠️
Which has always been on my thought process, that even IF you factor OUT U.S. sanctions the communists say is holding Cuba and Russia back, their policies either had NO effect on existing trends prior to the communist takeovers on the economy and other aspects of their nations.... or made them worse.
They are terrible on their own terms, pretty much. EVEN IF you try to give them some leeway and remove those factors listed above.
(Also 28:40, I squealed that you indirectly mentioned Tsar Alexander II freeing the serfs. I love Romanov history!).
Great video, Praxben! Welcome back to UA-cam!
How do you factor out US sanctions bruther
Such terrible economic policies that the USSR became a competing super power with a 200 year old country (at the time) at half its age, and without slavery......insane......
@@Alief.Prophet The gulags were basically slavery.... ya know being forced labor camps an all also competing with a 200 year old super power until it couldn't and its economy reminded in stagnation until it collapsed all together in the 90s so yeah the system works!
@@ThatBlueSkull .....yeah how many times did you repeat High School?? The economy of the USSR never remained in stagnation and it never collapsed. Actually, the U.S. employed the puppet Gorbachev as the new Soviet President. He switched the economy back to capitalism AND THEN it collapsed. You know cuz capitalism is that sustainable amazing system that doesn't destroy lives.
Also Gulags were just prison......you all find such terror in foreign languages and I can't tell if it's racism or simply ignorance. I also find it hilarious you have the nerve to bring up forced labor when the 13th Amendment literally says its legal to make someone a slave if they committed a crime.......so basically anyone that smokes weed is liable enough to become a slave in 2023. Most of them ARE. But that's acceptable to you right??
@@ThatBlueSkull”The gulags were basically slavery” are you at all aware of the U.S prison system and what it generates through virtually unpaid labour?
Government existing = communism, thus he says “actually this is an argument in my favor” 7:05
I never made the argument that it was communist lmao
This may be a stupid question but I don’t understand how a country does the conversion from a mixed economy like the USA or Canada into a socialist country. Specifically, if the means of production are under private ownership, does the government buy them out somehow like eminent domain? Trying to educate myself. Thank You.
If the objective was to actually build a socialist economy, the means of production would simply be expropriated. One moment there's a piece of paper that says it belongs to the capitalist, the next that piece of paper doens't exist enymore. So the state or whatever organization is interested in that property is simply gonna go in and start using it. Compensating the capitalist would be antithetical to socialist goals because 1) it would give them some form of priviledge in the new economy and 2) it makes no sense, they didn't build the thing alone (probably not at all), and didn't run it alone (probably not at all).
@@doctorinternet8695 Ok, then what happens if the owners or shareholders refuse to give it up? Which I assume would be all.
@@itsoktobehappy461 Well the major and minor shareholders are usually are not present in their companies, so they simply wouldn't even be there to respond. If they were present for some reason, I guess they would be informed that they no longer had control over that business. If they refused to leave their offices for an extended period, I think security would just remove them.
What do you think would happen?
@@doctorinternet8695 Well, definitely not have their property taken at gunpoint without compensation. They did nothing wrong, so I think most would morally object to that.
@@itsoktobehappy461 Yeah, guns wouldn't be necessary, the only ties owners and shareholders have with their properties are the legal ones that make the property be enforced by the state. Once those ties are cut by a change in the legal system, there's simply nothing to be done, they become workers like erveryone else.This actually happened to china's last emperor, which lived the rest of his days as a gardener.
You are right in saying the did nothing wrong, they were simply actors in a system, the system itself is wrong. Their moral objections would be of little concern. That's one of the things that's being combatted in the first place, the set of values that allows for such level of exploitation. They benefitted from an immoral system after all, they only got their property due to exploitation and the state, it's only to be expected that they would object to losing their priviledge.
Gee, what if we could use the best of both worlds…
You mean social democracy? The exploitation of the third world and flobal south for the gain of a few countries?
Could you Debunk Hakim or BadEmpanada on Che Guevara or Refute Unlearning Economics or Some more News
JustTheFacts already responded to Unlearning economics on housing crisis.
@@mr.normalguy69 his channel is no more sadly
@@salmanhaider3243 Damn, and all these days I've been wondering why hasn't he uploaded a video yet. Just found out that he deleted his UA-cam channel after getting caught on being a p3do on discord.
You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain 😕
Used to admire that guy.
@@mr.normalguy69 JustTheFacts is Pedophile
@@mr.normalguy69 Is this real?
Damn, I wondered the same thing too. What happened.
Shit, things arent what they seem.
If economic liberalization is good as seen in the "Assessing Economic Liberalization Episodes" study, then why do neoliberal policies seen in structural adjustment policies mainly through IMF loans how come those economic liberalization policies in developing countries lead to less growth, more income inequality, more child mortality, lower life expectancy, less spending on education, less worker rights, and typically leads to civil unrest in those countries that accept them.
I’m not seeing any evidence here that backs up claims about liberalization being bad.
@@praxbenMy question wasn't really about liberalization about being bad, but the neoliberal policies being implemented through structural adjustment policies leading to bad results. Are structural adjustments not a form of economic liberalization?
@@ZachWelch-lx3ix I’m not a neo-liberal I don’t support the IMF. This is a defense of capitalism, not a defense of governmental organizations giving out loans and supporting Keynesian policies.
@@praxben I never said you were a neo liberal or supported the IMF. I am asking that the structural adjustment programs are a form of economic liberalization that usually harm that country rather than help Can you explain this?
Can you actually provide any evidence that capitalist reforms are bad for developing countries instead of going on and on with this rhetorical diarrhea?
so this is about the block of text you cited in Deep cultural ancestry and human development indicators across nation states. It doesn't say what you think it says.
"*It should also be noted, however, that many of the former communist countries (largely those in the former Soviet Union) also suffered major economic turmoil following the demise of their communist governments [98], and that this too may play a role in explaining the apparent effect of communism on income.*"
"*Moreover, it must be noted that the communist countries in the sample are all Eastern European and Central Asian, and that these areas were less wealthy than Western Europe even prior to communism [92,99], and indeed Russia saw rapid economic growth following the advent of communism, although this lessened over time [92,100].*"
"*For all these reasons the results presented here must be treated with caution, and are primarily intended as a control in the context of examination of deep cultural effects on human development, not as a thoroughgoing analysis of the effects of communism on development.*"
"* Most of the same caveats also apply here as to the economic effects of communism however, with lifespan decreasing rapidly in the former Soviet Union immediately following post-Soviet collapse [101], and lifespan having increased strongly in the Soviet Union prior to and immediately after World War II [103].*"
@@lawrencelu4109 communists are incapable of independent thought, research, and cross-referencing sources.
A substantial body of evidence demonstrates ex-communists countries reformed more rapidly and maintained the reforms (as opposed to reversing some of them, as in Russia) grew more rapidly and experienced higher increased increases in quality of life. Further evidence of capitalism’s superiority.
www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa795_2.pdf
As for Russia’s economic growth, that is irrelevant. We are looking at indicators of quality of life, not empty economic growth.
@@praxben I'm quoting the article my guy.
@@praxben Also that study was also including democratization, as part of the criteria for being fast reformers. So they can do things like put Russia in the slow reformers group. So you can't use it to compare capitalism and communism
Debate him on the pod
Gladly
@@praxben capitalism is lame as hell
Is way better listening this from you than listening this from a Scottish
Im on the left and appreciate this analysis. But the paper on 12:25 doesn't even account for GDP per capita, years since industrializing, or former colonial status. So much for "taking account of more variables". It wasn't "Protestantism" that made Europe wealthy lol
Thanks for your opinion. It’s looking at Euroasian countries, so former colonial status doesn’t really matter. Also accounting for GDP per capita destroys the entire purpose of comparing countries. And speaking of comparing, this study isn’t actually comparing capitalist and socialist countries. It’s actually looking at the effects of being run by communist parties on these countries. This actually fixes all issues that come about from direct comparisons.
The religion thing is a separate topic. Christianity, and especially Protestantism, has been shown time and time again to bring about institutions that bring about better economic growth and quality of life. My friend here on UA-cam “InspiringPhilosophy” covers this topic extensively.
@@praxben thanks for the reply! the colonial status part was because I saw India was included in a dataset with European countries.
I disagree with your GDP per capita part. You can have a lower GDP per capita and have a higher HDI (think Finland compared to US). And that matters (not saying Finland is communist).
But I guess the main gripe I have is that the study is pointing at poor countries that are more likely to be communist and sees the HDI is lower and you claim communism caused the lower HDI. You’re ignoring the possibility of faster economic growth that could occur in poor communist countries all else equal.
@@rubixpuzzlechamp India wasn’t a part of the sample of communist countries so it doesn’t matter much. But I would say having some diversity of history helps the study even more. The authors mention how they see the religious effects in India, which was effected by colonialism, were similar to other countries. Showing that a variable has the same effect across different samples is a pretty good thing in statistics.
I think the main problem here is you’re viewing this study as like a mirror version of the 1986 pro-socialism study. And that’s fair enough since I probably didn’t distinguish them as much as I should.
The study looks at these countries over time, unlike the PQL study, and looks and the actual effects of the given variables in that time. So the effects of communism are being observed in the context of those specific countries.
@@praxben Fair point on India. But the paper does seem to give a lot of caveats to the "history of communism"-HDI relationship, even saying that communist Russia saw massive growth and that they started in a worse economic position. Plus, there are no other economic control factors at all besides "communism".
"For all these reasons the results presented here must be treated with caution, and are primarily intended as a control in the context of examination of deep cultural effects on human development, not as a thoroughgoing analysis of the effects of communism on development."
The paper isn't isolating the effects of "communism" on HDI. If it was it wouldn't include post-Soviet Russia as "communist", but this paper does because it's only looking at countries with a "history" of communism - a big difference. I feel like you misrepresented the paper's findings a bit.
@@praxben because india isn't, wasn't and never was a socialist country
The only socialism was when Nehru implemented socialist ideals yet there was privatized steel, a stock market, private companies and an ongoing monopoly of tata
So basically…tankie cites sources debunking capitalism and ancap cites sources debunking socialism…
And round and round we go…
@@Geek37664 except no one has refuted me
@@praxben that’s the trend I’ve noticed after ingesting a lot of tankie/ancap takedown content over the last year or so…
It's not merely "citing le sources", it is applying logic. Maybe, just maybe, instead of being a bug brained hiveminded socialist you can make an attempt at using your own logical faculties.
Can you upload a video teaching me how to do research?
This man has no idea how to research, he’s bullshitting.
Thank you. Great vid. Too much to memorise but good to know when a socialist sites studies, there is an exhaustive list of studies that contradict all those that support socialism as an economic system.
The sources about cuban healtcare being flawed does also say that even if cuba and overall cubans are poorer, they have almost the same if not better healthcare than USA.
What a terribly dishonest takeaway. You act as if no one can read it and see that you’re lying.
I'm a Communist but I really dislike Comrade Hakim's condescending tone. He also uses the common debate tactic of just "say what the person you're debating said, but in a silly voice!".
I'd love to find more Marxist commentators who were more professional and courteous, such as yourself.
Just stop being a communist
@@antonionegron3230 how will communism solve that "bud", will communism somehow stop the human needs for water or food or other finite thigs
@@praxben what a disgusting myopic perspective
It's hilarious to see this comment followed up by praxben being totally wrong and then saying "maybe read a book" lmao what an asshole
Have you seen this guys thumbnails? He literally makes communists look like soyjaks
This was so much better than your previous video. Way more elaboration and analysis of the sources. Thank you for this amazing resource.
“Pseudo-scientific” dawg literally
cope
You too haven't got everything right. How can you say that India is falsely labelled as capitalist when it is without a doubt a capitalist country? I am from Nepal and we too have so called socialiat parties in power but our country has similar type of economy as India and very much capitalist. So I don't see your point at all. And after this misinformation I can't even trust your videos.
India was socialist at the time
India was far from capitalist at the time infact China had a much freer market at The time
India had a planned economy up until recently
36 minutes? Challenge accepted, I can last that long lmao
🤨
🤔🤔....😮....🫢
Pause
You owned him like he was the means of production in a capitalist society
Haha Haha, hope Ben sees this comment.
This needs more likes.
BASED
15:46 so that is not socialism that is social democracy
Dictator ship are democracy 😂😂😂
Ben out here doing the Lord’s work
Lol wtf
Your God is money, wretched fool
15:13 just cause a country calls itself socialist the doesn't mean it's socialist
@@lawrencelu4109 can you provide a definition of socialism that includes all of the “socialist” countries in the paper Hakim is referencing, and includes none of the other countries I called socialist? Good luck.
@@lawrencelu4109 how do you quantify that?
@@praxben when all corporations are gone. No I don't think china is socialist. Cuba is pretty close to socialism but it's not socialist yet
@@lawrencelu4109 so you if you disagree with the study, why are you defending it? You are nonsense. Go away now.
china stopped being socialist in 1978 and Cuba stopped around the 2000's. this study was written in 1986, and you have to have at least one poor socialist country. This is a minor part anyways, the overall point still stands
No wonder hakim hasn’t responded to this. Hardly worth his time 😂
Massive cope
Eeeewwww this smells some insane smugness
No arguments?
😛🥾
Socialism is still inherently more capable of providing a better quality of life for its citizens compared to capitalist systsms. Even if the document hakim mentions can be considered unreliable this doesnt change the fact that socialist countries such as the DPRK historically have marginally outperformed capitalist counterparts such as South Korea for an example. Claiming all of this is copium in it of itself is you coping for the fact that socialism is still inherently more efficient. Also comparing the USSR to the US is completely intellectually dishonest and everyone with 2 braincells to rub together knows it. I could train an 8 year old to debunk this video
congratulations on creating the most retarded comment I have ever seen on UA-cam . how in the ever loving hell did you come to the conclusion that the DPRK outperformed south Korea in any way because I wouldn't call mass starvation a success never mind it's current state lmao
Socialism is less efficient for one reason - lack of prices. Prices set by the state equals to lack of rational economic calculation and a misallocation of scare resources, which is basically inputs being turned into outputs are a far less efficient rate. Socialism is a regressive, stunted system for the regressive and stunted.
@@adididavidi6185South Korea wasn’t bombed back to the Stone Age you fucking troglodyte
These two countries were trying to compete over global influence. Of course, it makes sense to compare them. Also, North Korea isn't exactly known for having anything other than human rights violations. Unless you want to argue that arresting someone's grandchild because they committed a crime improves one's life conditions as opposed to their neighbors, you are completely wrong.
@A_Person7307 ah yes and your source on the "DPRK executed my neighbors dog because I had a dirty kim il sung portrait" is fake testimonies from "defectors" trying to make a living? Also claiming the DPRK isn't known for anything other than that isn't the fault of the DPRK itself but the fact that maybe you know nothing about the country??
Im a recent socialist, but these Marxist-Leninists are really keeping me from associating with many socialist communities. Defending communist regimes is ridiculous. (For anyone curious: I believe in syndicalism)
Check out "The Socialist Political Compass: Methods to create socialism" by @LuckyBlackCat. She has explained in great detail about the various strands of socialism, what each of them advocate and all of their disagreements. If you value civil liberties and democracy then you shouldn't be a Marxist-Leninist, Comrade 😅 Also, check out @Anark.
@@crazygamer93000 for the past week I have been watching the Lucky Black Cat channel, and I gotta thank you for showing it to me
Read marx
Could you talk about Pol Pot or China next? Tankies, who usually don't pull the "not real communism" card do with Pol Pot.
Funny how America backed the Khmer Rouge financially and diplomatically (persuading the Chinese to support them, look up Brzezinski's suggestion to the Chinese), while the Vietnamese communist party overthrew it with the help of the USSR, even Pol Pot admitted that he never overlooked Marx's manifesto, but i guess Pol Pot genocided his people for absolutely no reason = perfect communist.
Pol Pot's anti-Vietnamese army was backed by many capitalist countries while the Vietnamese were backed by most Marxist-governed countries.
pol pot was a commie but many other commies like vietnam opposed pol pot
@@fate8007 If Pol Pot was communist then you have to acknowledge that North Korea is democratic, you can't just pick and choose
@@cornamenpython6760 wdym. North korea is not democratic or communist anymore, they are Juche.
My actual reaction when he said socialism improves quality of life, access to health care, and nutrition: 🤨
What annoys me is that those people envy countries like the USSR, Cuba, etc.. while so many thousands of people fled from said nations
Meanwhile millions fled from capitalist nations exploited by capitalist nations to be again exploited by capitalist nations
It's been a joke in my country for decades, here in the Eastern block anyone could come in, but the locals would be shot if they tried to leave. To no one's surprise nobody was coming in and thousands were dying while trying to run away.
@@HarryLincoln-cd4wyLiterally any immigrants from latin america going to the US
It annoys me that when you people says Socialism and Communism fails themselves while spending billions on Embargoes and to sabotage them, making their life Hell on earth,
*looks at all the immigrants from capitalist latin america and africa* Yeah.............
They won't move to Cuba, but there's plenty of rafts made of garbage on the Florida coast they could take there
move to Haiti if capitalism is so good
@@fate8007hell I’d say go to the DRC too if you wanna experience capitalism at its finest
@@fate8007
A country which is that corrupt politically unstable is not a good example of capitalism. If you want a good example, just look to Haiti's neighbor, the Dominican Republic, which has a higher life expectancy, GDP per capita, and literacy rate as a result of higher economic freedom and political stability. If capitalism is so bad, feel free to move out of the US/CA/EU/AU, or wherever you live.
@@person3070 A country that is facing an embargo is not a good example of socialism. Cuba has a highly developed healthcare system that is accessible to all citizens, and the country has made significant gains in reducing infant mortality rates and increasing life expectancy. The country also has a strong education system, with a high literacy rate and free education for all citizens. The government provides basic food rations to all citizens, and there is a strong social safety net that provides benefits such as free healthcare and pensions to those in need.
In contrast, the Dominican Republic has a less developed healthcare system and lower life expectancy than Cuba. The country also has a higher poverty rate, with significant income inequality and a large informal economy. While the Dominican Republic has made progress in reducing poverty and improving access to education, healthcare, and other services, there is still a significant gap between the living standards of the rich and poor.
@@chriss5821 DRC is the pinnacle of libertarian capitalism. Private capitalists use slave like labor to mine cobalt for Tesla.
socialism is the sequel of capitalism
the failed sequel
@@heartsofiron4ever
no, the interupt sequel actually...
@@levelzanimations Fascism is the sequel to capitalism*
@@UmQasaann
no fascism is capitalism in decay to counter socialism
Makes sense.... seeing as though fascism is just trade unionism based on national identity.
Excellent and thorough analysis, as always. Thanks for this gem.
The points you made weren't strong enough points to complete debunk the points Hakim made in his video. Socialism has proven to be better than Capitalism with the results in socialist countries performing better than Capitalist country.
Not even true. Stop reading Socialist propaganda.
@danieljliverslxxxix1164 jfc you're such a politically illiterate chud. Stop buying into capitalist propaganda and use your goddamn brain.
obinnachris5178
Where?
Where exactly?
@@IGetIntoArgumentsForFun.67 Exactly!
Happy to see you again😁
Where WERE YOU MY GUY. Also Hell yea ur back
I’ve been around. UA-cam just isn’t my main priority. My other platforms are used much more often.
Yo there's people who think starvation nation ate more food than Obese USA?
Yo there’s people who think that comparing comparing countries that were just decade before were some of the poorest in the world with the global hegemon is a fair comparison?
@@woodykrska9947Think about what you wrote for 10 seconds. How exactly do you think it is that USA was and is the richest country on Earth? And why exactly do you think it is Argentina, Sweden and every single country that practiced free market policy in the 19th century were the richest countries on Earth? How is it possible that free market Argentina was in top 5 richest countries in the 19th yet once they switched to socialism they became one of the poorest?
@@baph0met the US had rich farmland, and 300 years to develop. Russia, for example, was ruled by a corrupt, backwards, tsar, for most of its history. It only started modernizing after the Soviets took power. In that time (3 decades) it became a global superpower, from a nation of peasants. Vietnam became a tiger economy from a literal colony in 60 years. China became a super power in 60. Also, Argentina wasn’t socialist, idk where you got that from. It isn’t fair to compare, for example, China, which started socialism poorer than India, to the US, which was already a super power at the time. It would be more apt to compare it to a country that was on the same economic level when they had their revolution. In this case, India. Or, compare the USSR to Brazil, since they were at a similar level at the time of the revolution. And for your point about all the richest countries being capitalist, that’s because socialist revolutions happen more often in poor countries. More desperate. Poor countries that, mind you, make up the majority of capitalism, in terms of population.
@@woodykrska9947 What? Argentina wasn't socialist? Is this the "that wasn't real socialism" brainn tumor? Or was Peron proudly wearing socialism a halucination?
US had 300 years to develop, Russia had over 2000 years, if we don't count native Americans that US government slaughtered.
60 milion people starved to death in China, and just like in Vietnam things started to get better when they applied more capitalist policies in the 90s.
Bringing Brazil and India into this doesn't really help you, Brazil is pretty socialist and 80% of India openly has Marxist governments.
In terms of population the poorest people are in China, India and african countries like Nigeria and Egypt. China and India aren't capitalist and 99% of Africa is either under a quado socialist dictatorship or some weirdass monarchy. Egypt will soon collapse due to this, economically due to socialist policies and socially due to overpopulation and the government wasting money, like socialists tend to do.
When you exclude the huge socialist countries, you realize the 2 billion people left in capitalist countries are the richest people, just open stupid Wikipedia and look at top 100 richest countries, 99% are capitalist. Also don't forget the western standard for poverty keeps rising so the government can keep "fighting poverty", nowadays poverty in USA is when you have "only" 1 car, 1 TV and 1 house, unlike in the 60s when it was "lives under the bridge".
I wonder why socialist revolutions happen in poor countries, it couldn't possibly be due to poor people being usually less educated and are more prone to be "intoxicated with bread" as we say in my country, aka poor people are very prone to support anyone that proclaims 'its the capitalist/blacks/America's/boogeyman's fault! Come give me your money and I will fix all your problems!"
You do realize poorer people being more likely to support socialism is supporting my argument right?
Except for the champagne socialist grifters with mansions like Cenk's nephew or Sanders of course, those are the ones doing the bread intoxication, exploiting uneducated struggling people for their own gain.
@@baph0met Argentina had a free market, no cultural revolution, nothing. They were trying to transition to socialism, but they weren’t socialist. And Kerala is the only Marxist stronghold in India, despite the fact that India has a large socialist movement. And same with Brazil. No suppression of the free market, no cultural revolution, no ousting of the bourgeoisie from power, no dictatorship of the proletariat, nothing. If anything they are social democratic, like Norway, or Denmark. And where did you get “most of Africa is a quasi socialist dictatorship”, like, free market, no cultural revolution, no dictatorship of the proletariat, no ousting of the bourgeoisie. Not socialist. They just don’t fit the definition. In Africa, it’s mostly right wing dictatorships. Post Cold War at least. It can’t be “80% socialist”. It’s either socialist, capitalist, or social democracy. Or any other range of things in between. Also, calling Egypt a socialist country is the stupidest thing somebody has said all day.
Most people say Don't Tread on Me, wokies say Walk all Over Me.
I don't know what constitutes a wokie but I'd argue centrists, liberals, and conservatives all love being walked on, just in different ways. Centrists are the most masochistic though.
People who say Wokie or/ and use woke unironically have the intelligence of a ferrit and the worldviews of an large language Model trained on football chants
People who say “wokies” get walked on the most lol
12:56 Yes.
Thanks Ben! Finally Hakim debunking again!
28:36 ah yes because 1.90 dollars a day is Cleary enough to survive
stuff improving under capitalism: 😡😡😡💢💢💢
stuff ***improving under socialism: 😀😀😀😀
gemerald. thanks ben
Lmfao capitalism is objectively the blackest brimstone known to man
@@Lucretia916alongside communism… both are ploys created by fake (white) jews to try to psyop whites and blacks into some mixed race dystopia
i edge to this
Are france and Uk capitalists?
No.... I think they're mixed economies
@@bigmouthstrikesagain4056 lmao....
Yes they are.
@@kylezo are what? Capitalist, or mixed economies?
Yes
@@bigmouthstrikesagain4056 capitalist
There is nothing like a mixed economy only capitalist and socialist/communist. What they are is a welfare state which exploited/exploits the global South for their own benefit
which allows them to be welfare states
Didn't realize they falsified info.
Thanks
W your back
There was one thing he was correct about capitalism has never been tried
People really need to stop using terms like "better" and "works" when describing ideas. We don't use these terms when describing the universe because this implies knowledge of things that do not exist for comparisons. Why would we use them to describe systems of social interactions?
Both you and Hakim fall into the mire of thinking about capitalism and socialism as economic theories. They're not. They're political theories about which group of any social body should have the most political power.
As far as the calculation problem goes this is wholly a red herring. It implies that socialism has already achieved a point of development wherein money is no longer needed, i.e. communism, so every argument put forward against it is going to fail as it is not addressing the actual claim of socialism. (Socialists like Hakim are forced to argue for positions that ultimately have nothing to do with socialism).
The political philosophy of socialism was meant to solve one problem that capitalism has never and can never solve, and that is distribution of ideas and opportunities to every working body in a social system, be it a city, a nation, etc. You might have degrees of personal autonomy but that is wholly dependent upon of forces of production in which you yourself do not control. As capital absorbs ever more resources, land, and material, the workers are forced into positions that they themselves do not decide and do not control. Capitalism, no matter the amount of material wealth it produces can never distribute it out according to the wants and contributions of every participating hand.
Further more, the very thing that makes communism impossible is also what makes libertarianism impossible as a theory. Since the problem with any producing system is distribution, the libertarian position is on ever worse ground since it claims there isn't a problem. It requires, like communism, that every one in the social system already think in terms of libertarian dogma. In that regard both are utopian as you envision a world of human interaction of your own personal biases. Socialism already develops within capitalism as capitalism is what condenses material forces of production and the population together. Be that as it may, the notion of a "mature" capitalism" is utterly preposterous.
This brings us to the overall point. There is no such thing as either capitalism and socialism. These are entirely ad hoc theories and explanations that ignore basic principles of social relations, which is that people want what they want and live in a world where they cannot have what they want. An elite few are able to fill their needs, the rest of us are not. In that regard, both you and Hakim are naïve in thinking that your particular ideology is what the world needs. There is only winners and losers in the world and nobody choose where they are, only allowed.
I’m not reading all that
@@praxben Okay, I didn't need to know that.
@@danieljliverslxxxix1164 typical ideologues, they have this emotional and identity connection to their ideology be it socialist or libertarian, which they defend with everything they got and never really question that shit. I agree with you both socialism and libertarianism and retarded, but I definitely think socialism comes closer to the meaning of the economy than something like capitalism and libertarianism in theory ever can, which is the idea that we created they economy, and it should be there to service our needs and wants, which capitalism and libertarianism never can to a large degree, around 75 percent of the planets population lives in poverty, and most third world economies resources labor and other assets do not go to building their own economies, as in strong internal economies, but are stolen by western capitalists supported by their nations like the USA, who use the resources of the third world to support western consumption. Internally in the countries of the first world, something similar plays out most of our economic resources and might go to service the needs of our rich top 11 percent, whilst the rest of the majority have diminishing buying allotment, money and their needs are not met. IDK honestly no one knows what truly can work for the economy but I know for a fact it isn't some libertarian bullshit itll drag us even furthur back and definitely not some tankie communist bullshit of hakim that shits insane, ah yes just plan the economy, !!!cheeerrs!!!
I read it
this nigga really said socialism and capitalism are all in le head and the world is based on social darwinism lmfaoooo.
why are they all like that. every single one of them. always so ironic and smug. it's so annoying
W
Thank you for your work !
cool vid
More absolute nonsense from libertarians, nothing new then
No arguments? lol😂😂
Yay, your back
If there’s one thing communists are good at its charisma. They have the same confidence and authority of a triple bachelors degree student but what they say is similar to that of chat GPT.
you earned a sub