Idiot . If you take from capitalist hands and put it in State hands we end up like North Korea . Lazy ppl want to take in form of taxes others ppl money . Socialism is such a sistem . Wait until your wage is taxed 45% -65% as in Europe. The national health system, education sistem and what ever they say is free is very ineficient and black-holes of working ppl moneys in form of taxes . Wolf lives in La La Land as all academia as lazy ppl who never had a real JOB .
@@dixsusu I live in Germany and I don’t pay 50% taxes also our health care system and aducation system does a lot of good in my opinion and I can say that from personal experience. The reason why a lot of people who make way more than me pay 50% or something close to that is not that that would be necessary to pay for our systems it’s just that the People have to take on a lot of what large cooperations should be paying or the money that is spend on stupid wars or on saving banks and so many other ways the government is spending our money. Free health care and free education do not have to cost 50% of your income. Also not everything would have to go to the state just making laws that make sure every large company or at least those in the most important sectors like food production have to be owned by the people who work there would help a lot and then those people democratically decide what is going to be done.
@@dixsusu I live in The Netherlands, problems with our healthcare started when it got partially privatized, same for public transport, both cost more now and are less effective then they used to be, just saying...
@@dixsusu in socialism taxes dont exist. Juche doesnt have taxes. You work for a wage. But the surplus you make doesnt go to a boss but to society. Your salary isnt taken away in taxes. Just your surplus in which under capitalism your surplus is taken away to enrich the company
i work for a small plumbing shop in CA. i have seen the owner make $800 AN HOUR on some big jobs and turn around and give the plumbers $25 an hour. if thats not exploitation what is that?
It's not exploitation because he's the one who made the deal and the employees agreed to work for that wage. There aren't any special machines or real estate required to run a plumbing company. There's nothing, in terms of capital, stopping you from making the exact same deal and doing the same job. But first you need to establish sufficient trust and experience to put yourself in the position to negotiate the deal, you need to build the employee infrastructure. There is so much that goes into building a business that most people are completely ignorant of and those are the kind of people who get suckered into communist propaganda. If you want to read about exploitation, read about the experiences of people in the gulags, the soviet induced famine in Ukraine, the Cultural Revolution in China. Even as a "slave" in a neo-capitalist system you can change employers, you have an opportunity to start your own business. When Richard Wolff and his CPC buddies get their hands around your throat, you do what you're told or end up with a pistol against your skull.
@@frankvonfrauner the worker plumbers generate the value, the owner steals it while generating relatively little, if any value himself. Value doesn’t derive from deal making, since the price of a plumbing company’s service (and all goods and services) is based on supply and demand, not negotiating prowess. Take Econ 101
Some revolutionaries will object to reforms because an improvement of conditions within the system makes the total overthrow of the system appear less compelling and necessary to other parties. But it's certainly not a strictly necessary position among revolutionaries. (Though there will be arguments made that it ought to be.)
Absolutely. I'm a card-carrying Communist, and see one of the main values of reforms being that it educates those driving for them on the limits of reformism, as well as identifying 'who' opposes those reforms. Understanding of these things is key for the development of revolutionary consciousness.
Because some people like Richard Fraud, lust over the idea of blood everywhere. The problem is Richard Fraud will not be spilling his blood and neither will those that he's so jealous and envious of.
@@frankvonfrauner Exactly, and since many of those that are pushing for revolution are just not very competent and productive people, they will share the same fate as those that refuse to be enslaved.
An amendment for the separation of wealth and state, money and politics, pushed through at the state level would be a revolutionary act; showcasing a mass movement of people as both a power play of popular support and a latent threat of how many people would be angry if such an amendment was denied them.
@@RussCR5187 There has been a movement, for a while now, that has been pushing for calling for a state enacted constitutional convention that would be able to pass an amendment for the separation of money from politics; ending all corporate and private contributions to elections and making any such thing illegal/unconstitutional. Last I remember quire a few states have already called for a convention to be held to enact the amendment; they need a hefty majority of them to do so. Once the convention is called, an amendment can be passed without both congress, the supreme court, or the president. While this is a very unlikely path, if successful, it would imply quite a show of force of support for such a thing. It would be both reformist and revolutionary as well as a progressive form of accelerationism; as the capitalist class/ruling class would fight it tooth and nail but the public would broadly support it as an anti-corruption measure for strengthening US democracy; I'm nearly convinced that should such a thing actually pass it would lead to a Fort Sumter like event; as it would drastically disempower Capital on a political level.
@@noheroespublishing1907 Aha, yes. Thanks for the clarification! I would enthusiastically support such an approach. But I also agree that it's unlikely in the current environment. The ruling elites, being of the mind to protect their wealth and power at any cost, would immediately recognize such a move for what it is and unleash their considerable skills in propaganda and media influence to quash it in the early stages. And "we the people", being who we are in the aggregate, would fall for the deception as usual.
i think even marx proposal had in consideration reforms together with the revolution, look Communist Manifesto chapter 2 Proletarians and communists how marx proposes 10 measures of focused transformation to capitalism; a system as the soviet system also had their own reforms...
Last month South Africa experienced widespread looting, destruction, and violence. Entire malls and stores were plundered. More than 350 people were killed. Cars were torched, and the streets are a mess. Mountains of trash etc. South Africa's government is notoriously corrupt. But so is ours. Economic inequality is as bad as ours. Do I see this coming to the US? Absolutely. Bigger than in the past.
Very powerful piece, Prof Wolfe. I really admire what you are doing. It made me think about permanent revolution, permanent reform and how the two are not mutually incompatible. We need to keep struggling to have the world that we would want to live in. We also need to know what that world looks like and how it would work. It is the absence of this sense of the possibility of a better future that is keeping many slaves in their place I think.
An amendment for the separation of wealth and state, money and politics, pushed through at the state level would be a revolutionary act; showcasing a mass movement of people as both a power play of popular support and a latent threat of how many people would be angry if such an amendment was denied them.
My takeaway from this, and Im opposed to reformist action most of the time just on principle, is that reform should be utilized for revolution. Revolution of thought first and foremost, changing minds vs laws, by distribution of the rhetoric that is required for the build-up to a reformist law. In other words post-ironic commie Bernie meme campaigns. Thanks for another great video prof wolff
What we need now is a revolutionary reform of the electoral systems to put the people in power, as it is supposed to be already but isn't. This can be done by all the candidates being elected, not just the winner.
If anyone from an organization that calls itself Reform and Revolution tries to recruit you, run in the opposite direction. I will not explain why I'm giving this warning. All I'll say is that the longer that attempt to recruit you goes on, the more you will understand why you might be warned not to join.
Fool you. That is how this world is now. Subtle reversionary practices by Corporate Practices, Banks. then the Gangs in communities work every which way to undermine, use, abuse the system.
I thought American slavery existed in a capitalist system. I guess that means we didn't live in a Capitalist system when women had no right either. "Disfranchisement, also called disenfranchisement, or voter disqualification is the revocation of suffrage (the right to vote) of a person or group of people, or a practice that has the effect of preventing a person exercising the right to vote." Peace! \o/
Slavery existed within the capitalist system just as worker co-ops currently exist within the capitalist system; as exceptions to the employer-employee paradigm.
This is equivelant to an abusive relationship..they breadcrumb you Until your happy with such a small amount and use intermittent rewards Then punishments..until they have your body AND your mind..it's time to make a change before it's too late.. BOSTON 🍀
i am always happy to see the word 'revolution' used, even if reform is always seen as preferable.. there was great reform done, in the 1930's, and it lasted about a generation. so here you are again, with even less resources and contending with greater problems. reform only satisfies the rulers, as a device to save their heads and ultimately their power. if you don't have power to do, talking about what 'should be done' is academic pot-boiling. first get democracy. then use the power of the electorate through initiative to shape the nation. getting democracy is a transfer of power from politicians [and their patrons] to the electorate, that is revolution, not reform. it will not happen until your masters see the business end of a gun. if you prefer living in servitude to possible death from struggle for citizenship, i can sympathize, but don't imagine that your life will improve through submission.
In the case of the USA I think that voting or the "right" to vote is more of a trap or a hindrance to getting the real legal/policy changes we need for the freedom to actually pursuit peace, happiness, and to live long and fruitful lives with dignity and self-respect. Tho voting (which I was raised at home and taught in school to believe was a duty rather than privilege but whatever) and accurate talleying of votes is essential for representatives, lawmakers and such to KNOW what the majority of ppl prefer as they're SUPPOSED to know how to legislate and govern as representatives of the ppl. BUT too many of our govt. officials don't even wanna know what the ppl want and fully intend on representing themselves and those close to their interests. That's why a slew of state GOP legislators have so many limits on voting and put into place laws that allow election results to be approved or changed by the same law makers if the suggestive ads bought and subliminally engineered to get ppl to vote for the most & best advertised candidates. Candidates who in most cases will ignore the working ppl's needs to legislate according to the desires of the employers and the ruling class in general. But of course it's not put that way to the people that think that voting is actually doing something as if the results of elections are determined by voters and the election outcomes (current gov.policies) are a direct result from the ppl's choices at the polls... If we're choosing this shitty political situation then we have to blame ourselves or moreso our working class brethren who voted opposite of ourselves... Voting is a distracting self-defeating SCAM. Once politicians who aren't Bought, for sale (when law won't allow it) or able to personally benefit from the power,, and when voting is encouraged or required of all citizens, THEN it'll be different. It means for give me according to look people rather than a means to confuse distract and suppress the will of working ppl. I hope that makes sense please forgive me I'm very very tired but just can't sleep and probably should try now
Wtf is the point of telling us that? You're of the opinion that Mark Zuckerberg is one of the good billionaires?? Because he said that? Besides that it isnt even a question of deserving or not when it comes to having hundreds of billions of dollars. Its a matter of centralisation. Too much centralisation leads to the shit we're in now.. Its not the money itself, Its when that money is used to hold people down keeping people in chains basically through lobbying of politicians. Top procenters just can help themselves. They always use the excess money for evil and to further enrich themselves and we have to stop it before they literally kill us all as a mere bi product of their insane goals in life.
@@collybeans586 I definitely think that billionaires are often behind the scenes pushing to consolidate their power and influence. But let's not forget, that perhaps an even greater problem is that neoliberals are ALSO behind the scenes trying not to admit that their ideology is a failure and doubling down. Even if the billionaires themselves don't agree with how much money they have, the neoliberals still think that they need to lavish them with money, because incentives and all that.
@@PoliticalEconomy101 seems like communism with extra steps, If u r realistic even a bit u know this is never gonna happen even if it happens after revolution it won't hold, n such a system will collapse
I remember a couple of comments made when I was in grad school. The first was: WIIFM or What Is In It For Me. If there is nothing in it for you-you just won't do it. This is true in EVERYTHING that you do. The second are laws of economics: You can neither tax nor regulate yourself into prosperity. Also, you cannot have jobs without investment and profit. To have jobs someone must come up with a concept and figure out how to make it work, buildings must be built, tools or merchandise must be bought, people must be employed and trained and no one is going to give or loan you their hard earned money without getting a return n their investment. Pretty straight forward common sense concept. Most employees today work 40 hours a week but the boss frequently works more than 60
Unfortunately we are just primal animals so strength is more respected than morality. And without a Zardoz, ( mysterious god). We have nothing to keep us moral.
It seems to me that the state of disorder produced by anarchy would invite bad-actor opportunists to create an authoritarian, perhaps even fascist, regime by appealing to the inevitable "urgent need for order to be restored to the land".
@@RussCR5187 your first mistake is in equating anarchism with chaos, lawlessness, "disorder" as you put it. Anarchy is none of these. I recommend Emma Goldman and Pyotr Kropotkin to start with. Marx is often too "brainy" for most folk and his practical logic is often flawed but I recommend him as well once you get a taste. Cheers.
@@thedevilsadvocate8766 OK, I see. So "anarchism" does not result in the kind of "anarchy" that many people associate with disorder and lawlessness (as the dictionaries pretty much say). These terms are confusing to say the least! In any case, thanks for the references.
Yeah I wish the US were more like Communist China. They are not slaves at all and share evenly all the wealth that is produced. LOL. They are so free and prosperous in China. One thing you really can't talk about with slavery is that slaves in America probably had better lives than where they came from in Africa. Descendants from slavery certainly are far better off than where their ancestors came from. Slaves often were treated better than "free" people. Freedom to starve is not so great. Slave owners valued their slaves like livestock. Yes that sounds horrible, but in a time where no one gave a damn about you, having someone feed you and house you had some benefits. I'd argue many people were slaves without the official title back then. Go watch Grapes of Wrath and all the tenant farmers that owned nothing. They were essentially slaves. They were worse than slaves, they had to feed themselves.
Relying on individuals to become awakened in their own time is not viable. At least not without education. I don't completely disagree, some people are capable of self reflection and change, but most are not.
I despair with this professor's take on reality. He implies the "masters" are a fixed entity, they are not. He implies the Slave is a solid entity and cannot become a "master", but when i look at my stocks and shares this guy implies I'm a master. I thought he had a degree in economics?
Hmm... With all respect, this does not apply to the ancient slavery. If memory serves me, there were no 'reformists' trying to change THE SYSTEM (though, of course, there were many slave owners who, for various reasons, were improving the lives of their 'talking property,' and even freeing their slaves). Even the slaves revolting against their masters were not, in essence, against slavery as a system.
@@DualTasticToday equality doesn't mean we're all alike. it means we all can have self determination (no master) instead of a handful of wealthy assholes controlling our lives aka masters.
Most people I've kniwn are trying to master something. But to be The Master? No. Not really. I think that is a projection common in right wing assertions and a false generalisation of human nature.
@@r4ybc If ya want to master something try reality. Why was it that a master of bullshit can get elected to the highest office in the land? Oh this human condition.
Once again our esteemed professor misleads. You can literally analyze anything using his 4 kinds of people. For instance, being served ice cream. There are people who love to be given ice cream and think its magnificent; that they are lucky to have ice cream. Then there are people who feel resigned when they are given ice cream. They don't think there is any way for them to get anything else so they accept it and go forward. Then there are people who want to reform the ice cream. They are tired of plain vanilla. They want to be served Neapolitan or have sprinkles or whip cream and they fight hard to get those things. Then there are the revolutionaries - those who refuse to accept the ice cream. They want steak and bake potato and they will use all means necessary (remember, since they were forced to eat ice cream, they have every right to force the servers to give them steak) to end the service of ice cream and create a whole new system of service. CONCLUSION - Ice cream is exactly the same as slavery!!
Wolff seems by this tortured allegory to be advocating for an economic system in which 100% of the participants are employers. He hates systems where there are two classification, slave and master, and employer and employee. so he must want everybody to be an employer, a ridiculous idea even by the standards of a guy who once proclaimed that "Monopoly causes competition, and competition causes monopoly".
It's about time for this to be brought up. Great job professor Wolfe.
Idiot . If you take from capitalist hands and put it in State hands we end up like North Korea . Lazy ppl want to take in form of taxes others ppl money . Socialism is such a sistem . Wait until your wage is taxed 45% -65% as in Europe. The national health system, education sistem and what ever they say is free is very ineficient and black-holes of working ppl moneys in form of taxes . Wolf lives in La La Land as all academia as lazy ppl who never had a real JOB .
@@dixsusu I live in Germany and I don’t pay 50% taxes also our health care system and aducation system does a lot of good in my opinion and I can say that from personal experience. The reason why a lot of people who make way more than me pay 50% or something close to that is not that that would be necessary to pay for our systems it’s just that the People have to take on a lot of what large cooperations should be paying or the money that is spend on stupid wars or on saving banks and so many other ways the government is spending our money. Free health care and free education do not have to cost 50% of your income. Also not everything would have to go to the state just making laws that make sure every large company or at least those in the most important sectors like food production have to be owned by the people who work there would help a lot and then those people democratically decide what is going to be done.
@@dixsusu I live in The Netherlands, problems with our healthcare started when it got partially privatized, same for public transport, both cost more now and are less effective then they used to be, just saying...
@@dixsusu in socialism taxes dont exist. Juche doesnt have taxes. You work for a wage. But the surplus you make doesnt go to a boss but to society. Your salary isnt taken away in taxes. Just your surplus in which under capitalism your surplus is taken away to enrich the company
As Always another great video from you, Professor Wolff
Love and solidarity with you, comrade.
@@joshualittlewolfe8550 You as well tovarisch
Side note: slavery never ended, it just evolved.
The 13th Amendment…
Yep, they redefined it and refined it… In an effective ,productive manner.
Slavery lives on in our prisons, does it not?
classical slavery ended, what we have are new systems of domination that are not identical to slavery.
@@adamkay8507 Getting hurt on the job and not being paid for work missed, sucks. :(
i work for a small plumbing shop in CA. i have seen the owner make $800 AN HOUR on some big jobs and turn around and give the plumbers $25 an hour. if thats not exploitation what is that?
Sounds like time to steal his customer base, if you have the tools. Give them a better rate and cut out the middle-man!
It's not exploitation because he's the one who made the deal and the employees agreed to work for that wage.
There aren't any special machines or real estate required to run a plumbing company. There's nothing, in terms of capital, stopping you from making the exact same deal and doing the same job. But first you need to establish sufficient trust and experience to put yourself in the position to negotiate the deal, you need to build the employee infrastructure. There is so much that goes into building a business that most people are completely ignorant of and those are the kind of people who get suckered into communist propaganda.
If you want to read about exploitation, read about the experiences of people in the gulags, the soviet induced famine in Ukraine, the Cultural Revolution in China.
Even as a "slave" in a neo-capitalist system you can change employers, you have an opportunity to start your own business. When Richard Wolff and his CPC buddies get their hands around your throat, you do what you're told or end up with a pistol against your skull.
@@frankvonfrauner the worker plumbers generate the value, the owner steals it while generating relatively little, if any value himself. Value doesn’t derive from deal making, since the price of a plumbing company’s service (and all goods and services) is based on supply and demand, not negotiating prowess. Take Econ 101
@@frankvonfrauner "Just Start Your Own Business" is such a meme. It's petty bourgeois ideology and will only continue to perpetuate capitalism.
@@thereallegend4lyfe true but do it anyway
Some revolutionaries will object to reforms because an improvement of conditions within the system makes the total overthrow of the system appear less compelling and necessary to other parties. But it's certainly not a strictly necessary position among revolutionaries. (Though there will be arguments made that it ought to be.)
Absolutely. I'm a card-carrying Communist, and see one of the main values of reforms being that it educates those driving for them on the limits of reformism, as well as identifying 'who' opposes those reforms. Understanding of these things is key for the development of revolutionary consciousness.
@@samsonlovesyou the problem is, if the gap between a successful reform, and its inevitable failure, then there is no lesson learned.
Because some people like Richard Fraud, lust over the idea of blood everywhere.
The problem is Richard Fraud will not be spilling his blood and neither will those that he's so jealous and envious of.
Just do what they did during every other revolution. Kill anyone that resists, enslave everyone else.
@@frankvonfrauner Exactly, and since many of those that are pushing for revolution are just not very competent and productive people, they will share the same fate as those that refuse to be enslaved.
The time has come for pitchforks and another constitution
An amendment for the separation of wealth and state, money and politics, pushed through at the state level would be a revolutionary act; showcasing a mass movement of people as both a power play of popular support and a latent threat of how many people would be angry if such an amendment was denied them.
@@noheroespublishing1907 I'm having trouble visualizing what you describe. Could you elaborate just a bit further? Thanks.
@@RussCR5187 There has been a movement, for a while now, that has been pushing for calling for a state enacted constitutional convention that would be able to pass an amendment for the separation of money from politics; ending all corporate and private contributions to elections and making any such thing illegal/unconstitutional. Last I remember quire a few states have already called for a convention to be held to enact the amendment; they need a hefty majority of them to do so. Once the convention is called, an amendment can be passed without both congress, the supreme court, or the president. While this is a very unlikely path, if successful, it would imply quite a show of force of support for such a thing. It would be both reformist and revolutionary as well as a progressive form of accelerationism; as the capitalist class/ruling class would fight it tooth and nail but the public would broadly support it as an anti-corruption measure for strengthening US democracy; I'm nearly convinced that should such a thing actually pass it would lead to a Fort Sumter like event; as it would drastically disempower Capital on a political level.
@@noheroespublishing1907 Aha, yes. Thanks for the clarification! I would enthusiastically support such an approach. But I also agree that it's unlikely in the current environment. The ruling elites, being of the mind to protect their wealth and power at any cost, would immediately recognize such a move for what it is and unleash their considerable skills in propaganda and media influence to quash it in the early stages. And "we the people", being who we are in the aggregate, would fall for the deception as usual.
How many are you willing to kill? Just saying...
Wolff DESTROYS Breadtube radlibs with FACTS and LOGIC. Based.
Totally based!
Hmm … The Masters have gotten Greedy! Time to tweak this!
This system isn’t reformable
i think even marx proposal had in consideration reforms together with the revolution, look Communist Manifesto chapter 2 Proletarians and communists how marx proposes 10 measures of focused transformation to capitalism; a system as the soviet system also had their own reforms...
SLAVERY never was abolished, it was expanded & rebranded into CAPITALISM.
Last month South Africa experienced widespread looting, destruction, and violence. Entire malls and stores were plundered. More than 350 people were killed. Cars were torched, and the streets are a mess. Mountains of trash etc.
South Africa's government is notoriously corrupt. But so is ours. Economic inequality is as bad as ours.
Do I see this coming to the US?
Absolutely. Bigger than in the past.
thank you Richard.
Very powerful piece, Prof Wolfe. I really admire what you are doing. It made me think about permanent revolution, permanent reform and how the two are not mutually incompatible. We need to keep struggling to have the world that we would want to live in. We also need to know what that world looks like and how it would work. It is the absence of this sense of the possibility of a better future that is keeping many slaves in their place I think.
“Some men see things as they are and say why? I dream things that never were and say why not?”
― Robert Kennedy
@@chuckwilliams6261 Thank you Chuck. I love that quote.
Perfect analysis.
Reform & Revolution! 👽♥️♥️♥️
An amendment for the separation of wealth and state, money and politics, pushed through at the state level would be a revolutionary act; showcasing a mass movement of people as both a power play of popular support and a latent threat of how many people would be angry if such an amendment was denied them.
My takeaway from this, and Im opposed to reformist action most of the time just on principle, is that reform should be utilized for revolution. Revolution of thought first and foremost, changing minds vs laws, by distribution of the rhetoric that is required for the build-up to a reformist law. In other words post-ironic commie Bernie meme campaigns.
Thanks for another great video prof wolff
I'm a white woman, I was a slave for 23 years to 2 Narcassists. I finally broke free from the chains that bound me.
Blessed to be alive 😇😍🤩😎🙏✌✍🤍💪
What we need now is a revolutionary reform of the electoral systems to put the people in power, as it is supposed to be already but isn't. This can be done by all the candidates being elected, not just the winner.
Brilliant Professor Wolff!
SALUTE 💯💪🏾👍🏾
Bravo
Profesor Wolff gracias por los videos tan enriquecedores
as the price of goods goes up only a matter of time before people start robbing delivery trucks just like the good old days
grow some balls people
If anyone from an organization that calls itself Reform and Revolution tries to recruit you, run in the opposite direction.
I will not explain why I'm giving this warning. All I'll say is that the longer that attempt to recruit you goes on, the more you will understand why you might be warned not to join.
Fool you. That is how this world is now. Subtle reversionary practices by Corporate Practices, Banks. then the Gangs in communities work every which way to undermine, use, abuse the system.
@@lorrainewest7408 sorry, but I have no idea what you mean
if we live in a democracy we don't need violence. If we had popular consent we can win peacefully
Ty
Great ! thanks
I thought American slavery existed in a capitalist system.
I guess that means we didn't live in a Capitalist system when women had no right either.
"Disfranchisement, also called disenfranchisement, or voter disqualification is the revocation of suffrage (the right to vote) of a person or group of people, or a practice that has the effect of preventing a person exercising the right to vote."
Peace!
\o/
Slavery existed within the capitalist system just as worker co-ops currently exist within the capitalist system; as exceptions to the employer-employee paradigm.
We need a revolution
this is the most based i've seen the Doc in a while
This is equivelant to an abusive relationship..they breadcrumb you
Until your happy with such a small amount and use intermittent rewards
Then punishments..until they have your body AND your mind..it's time to make a change before it's too late.. BOSTON 🍀
Should we buy stock in rope?
i am always happy to see the word 'revolution' used, even if reform is always seen as preferable..
there was great reform done, in the 1930's, and it lasted about a generation. so here you are again, with even less resources and contending with greater problems. reform only satisfies the rulers, as a device to save their heads and ultimately their power.
if you don't have power to do, talking about what 'should be done' is academic pot-boiling.
first get democracy. then use the power of the electorate through initiative to shape the nation.
getting democracy is a transfer of power from politicians [and their patrons] to the electorate, that is revolution, not reform. it will not happen until your masters see the business end of a gun. if you prefer living in servitude to possible death from struggle for citizenship, i can sympathize, but don't imagine that your life will improve through submission.
In the case of the USA
I think that voting or the "right" to vote is more of a trap or a hindrance to getting the real legal/policy changes we need for the freedom to actually pursuit peace, happiness, and to live long and fruitful lives with dignity and self-respect. Tho voting (which I was raised at home and taught in school to believe was a duty rather than privilege but whatever) and accurate talleying of votes is essential for representatives, lawmakers and such to KNOW what the majority of ppl prefer as they're SUPPOSED to know how to legislate and govern as representatives of the ppl. BUT too many of our govt. officials don't even wanna know what the ppl want and fully intend on representing themselves and those close to their interests. That's why a slew of state GOP legislators have so many limits on voting and put into place laws that allow election results to be approved or changed by the same law makers if the suggestive ads bought and subliminally engineered to get ppl to vote for the most & best advertised candidates. Candidates who in most cases will ignore the working ppl's needs to legislate according to the desires of the employers and the ruling class in general. But of course it's not put that way to the people that think that voting is actually doing something as if the results of elections are determined by voters and the election outcomes (current gov.policies) are a direct result from the ppl's choices at the polls... If we're choosing this shitty political situation then we have to blame ourselves or moreso our working class brethren who voted opposite of ourselves... Voting is a distracting self-defeating SCAM. Once politicians who aren't Bought, for sale (when law won't allow it) or able to personally benefit from the power,, and when voting is encouraged or required of all citizens, THEN it'll be different. It means for give me according to look people rather than a means to confuse distract and suppress the will of working ppl.
I hope that makes sense please forgive me I'm very very tired but just can't sleep and probably should try now
alas why i ❤ NALC.
Feed the algorithm
Scientific Field Theory is being unified. Hope is coming!
Based
"The Fourth Way"
Billionaire Mark Zuckerberg: “I don’t know what the exact limit on top incomes should be, but at some point no one deserves to have that much money.”
Wtf is the point of telling us that?
You're of the opinion that Mark Zuckerberg is one of the good billionaires?? Because he said that?
Besides that it isnt even a question of deserving or not when it comes to having hundreds of billions of dollars. Its a matter of centralisation. Too much centralisation leads to the shit we're in now.. Its not the money itself, Its when that money is used to hold people down keeping people in chains basically through lobbying of politicians. Top procenters just can help themselves. They always use the excess money for evil and to further enrich themselves and we have to stop it before they literally kill us all as a mere bi product of their insane goals in life.
Abolish billionaires. And the exact limit on top incomes in the US should be $10 million. Lets cut Richard Wolff in half!
@@collybeans586 I definitely think that billionaires are often behind the scenes pushing to consolidate their power and influence. But let's not forget, that perhaps an even greater problem is that neoliberals are ALSO behind the scenes trying not to admit that their ideology is a failure and doubling down. Even if the billionaires themselves don't agree with how much money they have, the neoliberals still think that they need to lavish them with money, because incentives and all that.
@@PoliticalEconomy101 seems like communism with extra steps,
If u r realistic even a bit u know this is never gonna happen even if it happens after revolution it won't hold, n such a system will collapse
@WTFViewer No government, no lobbyist, no billionaires. Revolution = instant equality.
👍👍👍
I remember a couple of comments made when I was in grad school. The first was: WIIFM or What Is In It For Me. If there is nothing in it for you-you just won't do it. This is true in EVERYTHING that you do. The second are laws of economics: You can neither tax nor regulate yourself into prosperity. Also, you cannot have jobs without investment and profit. To have jobs someone must come up with a concept and figure out how to make it work, buildings must be built, tools or merchandise must be bought, people must be employed and trained and no one is going to give or loan you their hard earned money without getting a return n their investment. Pretty straight forward common sense concept. Most employees today work 40 hours a week but the boss frequently works more than 60
Unfortunately we are just primal animals so strength is more respected than morality. And without a Zardoz, ( mysterious god). We have nothing to keep us moral.
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾
❤️❤️❤️🔥🍃
The center cannot hold. Anarchy is the only way.
It seems to me that the state of disorder produced by anarchy would invite bad-actor opportunists to create an authoritarian, perhaps even fascist, regime by appealing to the inevitable "urgent need for order to be restored to the land".
@@RussCR5187 your first mistake is in equating anarchism with chaos, lawlessness, "disorder" as you put it. Anarchy is none of these. I recommend Emma Goldman and Pyotr Kropotkin to start with. Marx is often too "brainy" for most folk and his practical logic is often flawed but I recommend him as well once you get a taste. Cheers.
@@thedevilsadvocate8766 OK, I see. So "anarchism" does not result in the kind of "anarchy" that many people associate with disorder and lawlessness (as the dictionaries pretty much say). These terms are confusing to say the least! In any case, thanks for the references.
👍🤶🗡️💢🌹🦃‼️❣️🌠🌠🌠
🌱🌳❤3
Yeah I wish the US were more like Communist China. They are not slaves at all and share evenly all the wealth that is produced. LOL. They are so free and prosperous in China. One thing you really can't talk about with slavery is that slaves in America probably had better lives than where they came from in Africa. Descendants from slavery certainly are far better off than where their ancestors came from. Slaves often were treated better than "free" people. Freedom to starve is not so great. Slave owners valued their slaves like livestock. Yes that sounds horrible, but in a time where no one gave a damn about you, having someone feed you and house you had some benefits. I'd argue many people were slaves without the official title back then. Go watch Grapes of Wrath and all the tenant farmers that owned nothing. They were essentially slaves. They were worse than slaves, they had to feed themselves.
Reform others, revolutionize others, why not change yourself?
The revolution has begun
Relying on individuals to become awakened in their own time is not viable. At least not without education.
I don't completely disagree, some people are capable of self reflection and change, but most are not.
@@IosuamacaMhadaidh It's just a fantasy to revolutionize others to make youselves better
If the revolution is so good, please take your own life first
You know that meme of the clown putting on makeup in each frame?
Many problems can't be solved on an individual basis.
I despair with this professor's take on reality. He implies the "masters" are a fixed entity, they are not. He implies the Slave is a solid entity and cannot become a "master", but when i look at my stocks and shares this guy implies I'm a master. I thought he had a degree in economics?
Hmm... With all respect, this does not apply to the ancient slavery. If memory serves me, there were no 'reformists' trying to change THE SYSTEM (though, of course, there were many slave owners who, for various reasons, were improving the lives of their 'talking property,' and even freeing their slaves). Even the slaves revolting against their masters were not, in essence, against slavery as a system.
But human nature is difficult to reform when everyone wants to be the master.
capitalism says everyone wants to be the master but not everyone wants to be a master. i want equality.
@@zia_kat The problem with that is no one is equal. I don't think neither one of us will ever play in the NBA. Cheers
@@DualTasticToday equality doesn't mean we're all alike. it means we all can have self determination (no master) instead of a handful of wealthy assholes controlling our lives aka masters.
Most people I've kniwn are trying to master something. But to be The Master? No. Not really. I think that is a projection common in right wing assertions and a false generalisation of human nature.
@@r4ybc If ya want to master something try reality. Why was it that a master of bullshit can get elected to the highest office in the land? Oh this human condition.
Once again our esteemed professor misleads. You can literally analyze anything using his 4 kinds of people. For instance, being served ice cream. There are people who love to be given ice cream and think its magnificent; that they are lucky to have ice cream. Then there are people who feel resigned when they are given ice cream. They don't think there is any way for them to get anything else so they accept it and go forward. Then there are people who want to reform the ice cream. They are tired of plain vanilla. They want to be served Neapolitan or have sprinkles or whip cream and they fight hard to get those things. Then there are the revolutionaries - those who refuse to accept the ice cream. They want steak and bake potato and they will use all means necessary (remember, since they were forced to eat ice cream, they have every right to force the servers to give them steak) to end the service of ice cream and create a whole new system of service.
CONCLUSION - Ice cream is exactly the same as slavery!!
Wolff seems by this tortured allegory to be advocating for an economic system in which 100% of the participants are employers. He hates systems where there are two classification, slave and master, and employer and employee. so he must want everybody to be an employer, a ridiculous idea even by the standards of a guy who once proclaimed that "Monopoly causes competition, and competition causes monopoly".
@@jamesg7016 Seema like you're too ignorant of economics to understand what he's saying.