Thank you so much, Prof. Wolff, for reminding us of these simple and profound truths ! For many years, you have been a beacon showing the way to a better future.
I don't suppose that you could be bothered to provide us YOUR LIST of these "profound truths" and YOUR REASONING as to what makes them profound or true? Also, please include what reasoning and evidence Wolff provided.
@@chrisgreene2623 Really? So where is it doing that and why? Wolff has no clue what capitalism is? Or capital? Or inflation? But feel free to explain it to us...just as Wolff has supposedly explained it to all of you. ( but none of you will because none of you can...so you will say nothing...or make some excuse to avoid answering. )
Yeah, that's what happens when you have no clue what the words mean in the first place and someone tells you you are wrong, and you believe them. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. It's just not the strength of the ignorant
Hey J, is there any difference between Michael Hudson and Prof W? Somehow i remember you saying that Prof W would never have a discussion with Michael Hudson who pretty much agrees with Prof Wolffs critique. I assume you like Michael Hudson, I do.
The truth is CAPITALISM IS THE BEST FORM OF SOCIALISM, as capitalism is economic financial power in the the hands of people. Capitalism is REAL DEMOCRACY not leftist communist marxist systems which are all run by a elite clique who have political power (politburo) and they decide who gets to produce what and who will consume / buy what and at what price. *In FREE MARKET FREE ENTERPRISE CAPITALISM with fair-go merit based laws, it is the people who decide what good are produced and sold and at what price, by the people's market PEOPLE"S DEMAND and people's producing capacity PEOPLE"S SUPPLY.* But the old rich ex nobility and ex royals and their puppies in politics do not like real democracy. So they have "democracy now' type channels to subvert the people away from real democracy and economic power. Hope i made sense to someone !
I was educated on Marxism and the critique of capitalism. I went to college in South America, where public universities are no strangers to Marxist analysis. But I have never seen Marxism and capitalism contradictions as well and profoundly explained as by professor Wolf. He is an incredible educator, and I'm sure this one talk is one of the most powerful and clearest descriptions of the Marxist approach. It is so powerful that it should be blared in public spaces everywhere!
@@nicadi2005 A FACT is only your opinion, and THE FACT that you call an opinion a FACT is also only your opinion, in other words, you just said some nice sounding but very meaningless words. I see all this FACT and OPINION bs all the time from madrasa branded islamists too. YAWN ❗
Outstanding presentation Prof. Wolff, we owe you a debt of gratitude for your contribution, time and energy, that is simply too great to ever be truly repaid. 👏
Now what can we practically do to change the system beyond capitalism? We need an integrated network of support to build local worker co-ops and bring back the Commons. See Library Socialism for more on that. For an integrated network of support, that's still in development, IMO, because there are many great technologies, organizations and platforms out there, but they lack a larger collaborative network that can link co-op communities together with best practices and supports they would need from time to time. Best leads I've found is One Small Town based on Contributionism. Some great elements and ideas also provided from "A Viable Society" talk that Peter Joseph gave and in his book, The New Human Rights Movement, but again, still waiting on the networked cooperative platform for us.
Huxley encapsulated capitalism well IMO “ perfect dictatorship would have the appearance of a democracy, but would basically be a prison without walls in which the prisoners would not even dream of escaping. It would essentially be a system of slavery where, through consumption and entertainment, the slaves would love their servitudes. " Aldous Huxley
Thats the worst anarchist argument i´ve ever heard@@jgalt308, in the end the day its the same dude. Anarchists just won´t understand that even revolution is a process, and not a simple coup d´etat.
@@fabio4465 And you just repeated the same mistake. Capitalism is not a form of government, nor is any other economic system. ( ism ) Knowing what the "archy" is, provides zero information regarding the economics within that system. I am also sure that Huxley was not referring to capitalism, nor does any economic system appear to be referenced. Nor was I making an argument for anything. But thanks for sharing.
Ok@@jgalt308, i´m sorry, i overestimated your comment, its even dumber. Its funny, you should be rly sad as it says more about yourself than the line itself. They are neither related to gov. or economy dude, they are just suffixes. Huxley was referring to capitalism, as he was certainly not reffering to the middle ages.🤣Just because you couldn´t formulate an argument doesn´t mean you didn´t try, don´t be silly. But thanks for sharing.
@@fabio4465 Things will get easier when you learn to read. archy Definition & Meaning Merriam-Webster The meaning of -ARCHY is rule : government. How to use -archy in a sentence. -archy in American English combining form. a combining form meaning “rule,” “government,” forming abstract nouns usually corresponding to personal nouns ending in -arch. monarchy. oligarchy. ARCHY definition in American English - Collins Dictionary --archy word-forming element of Greek origin meaning "rule," from Latin -archia, from Greek -arkhia "rule," from arkhos "leader, chief, ruler," from arkhē "beginning, origin, first place," verbal noun of arkhein "to be the first," hence "to begin" and "to rule" (see archon). xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx “The perfect dictatorship would have the appearance of a democracy, but would basically be a prison without walls in which the prisoners would not even dream of escaping. It would essentially be a system of slavery where, through consumption and entertainment, the slaves would love their servitude” is a quote attributed to Aldous Huxley. That is the entire quote and there is no reference to capitalism and the attribution to Huxley does not appear valid however we have this from Huxley. Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience. Huxley, Aldous (2014-07-01). Brave New World . HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. “There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.” Aldous Huxley The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him, the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective. The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles and mysteries. Nor did they possess a really effective system of mind-manipulation. In the past, free-thinkers and revolutionaries were often the products of the most piously orthodox education. This is not surprising. The methods employed by orthodox educators were and still are extremely inefficient. Under a scientific dictator education will really work -- with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx As the destruction of definition and meaning is the key component in perpetrating the Marxist delusion, this foolish attempt to equate "capitalism" to a dictatorship is to be expected, although "the private ownership of the means of production," including one's own "labor" stands in direct contradiction to that. Given that the goal is a "perfect dictatorship,"...one would be hard-pressed to suggest that "anarchy" would be how such a result could be achieved. But keep babbling.
I'm curious as to what the USSR would be like if it didn't have to compete in a 45 year arms race. I'm not saying communism is perfect. But it would be interesting to see a country actually implement socialism without molestation by world powers.
Very shrewd remark! also most of the countries in latin America had been boycotted and their socialist project thwarted by trade embargos or regime changes. At the same time you would have to own up to the question why the capitalist system was able to win over the socialist one and how it could afford the expensive arms race and not a socialist system?
Thank you so much M. Wolff, to you and your team, for articulating these terms in an clear and accessible way. I may have re-watched this episode 3 times. I know that it is possible to get lost in page after page of equations, but your explanations, with imagery and examples, for people who are completely new to all of this (talking about me here) are so very much appreciated. Thank you 🙏.
Fantastic lecture by Dr. Wolff! The extra hundred for the ladder, minus the wage to the workers, goes into the capitalist pocket, allowing the capitalist to remain a capitalist. However the wage of the worker is driven so low, so very low, that they cannot dream of accumulating enough wealth to become a capitalist. And in fact, the wage is often driven so low, that the worker cannot meet basic life needs, and must focus on survival, and cannot focus on wealth accumulation.
it's amazing how many people don't know the basics of marxian analysis .... all due to the propaganda of the employer class ... and will attack you for pointing out that you are being exploited as an employee ... people just don't want to admit they have been scammed
If this doesn’t wake up the most of us, I think we just not smart enough, brave enough, hungry enough to do anything for ourselves, so, America, we are doomed.
Americans are walking around like zombies in a bad movie and have chosen to be ignorant about the world and its people and culture. Just where your government wants you.
I have been longing for this forever! I am involved in writing on similar notions in my own language and often end up hoping Dr Wolff would speak on this!
I hope Prof. Wolff mentions the tie food has with keeping labor under control. It is Springtime. I hope he urges everyone to plant some food. That way if labor needs to go on a prolonged economic strike, they will be less suseptable to food extrotion/withholding.
not really practical when most of the productive farmland are owned by business owner to produce cheap food than any individual can do. There must be a concerted effort by people to act together and bypass market to avoid big cooperation to some degree for your idea to work out as intended.
@@whensonzhou4174, what you say has been the story since the nobility confiscated the common lands centuries ago. The concerted effort of which you speak is "labor needs to go on a prolonged economic strike". To avoid retaliation by big corporations, the masses must plant Victory Gardens in the Spring. If the masses do that, they won't get hungry and their children cry because of empty bellies, prompting the masses to accept a raw deal. Instead, they hold out in a general economic strike to the very end. I guarantee you that if the masses refuse to provide their labor and purchasing power, in time, the money grubbers will come crawling on their knees begging labor to return. Why? Because they would rather have some profit than zero profit. In fact, they would lose more than profit. They would lose a good part of the wealth they have today. Consider the chemical plants that dot the landscape in the Gulf States. All of them have processes that must be monitored constantly or they go "BOOM" with giant clouds of poisonous vapors. There are many processes in manufacturing and chemical plants that if people walked away, would break and cost the money grubbers a whole lot of money. Labor has ultimate power. They now have to realize it. They have to use their power to gain what they deserve. Always remember, labor is the primary wealth producer. Nothing is mined, manufactured, harvested, or served without the hands and minds of labor. The money grubbers have what they have because of the labor force and because labor allows it. When labor denies its vital force, the economy crashes. And don't think it would be easy. Corporations fear a general strike. They won't admit it, but they do. Labor and corporations would suffer because of a general strike. That's why labor must prepare first. It is Springtime. Plant some food.
Yes, fantastic explanation with consistency and clarity how the world economy and societies order works . Owning isn't as making. There is a huge difference. I agree with professor Richard Wolff! Thank you very much for your good and sustainable effort to rise the awareness of the peoples about this fundamental issue I would like to translate and explain your intervention to my Arabic fellow citizens. M.Ali Berrada Morocco Marrakech
Essential as it may be to explain something in basic terms, I always find that the relation between how Marxist philosophers explain material systems and the depth relativity of the relationship of the living and the physical (actuality of existence on a material plane) is very often a contradiction of the simplistic, in its explanation, and the profoundly complex that is part of our everyday experience of reality.
Actually your progression is both incorrect and incomplete. That would be ( government ) slavery, ( government ) serfdom ( not government ) capitalism ( government ) socialism ( government ) fascism
@@jgalt308 you’re silly for that. You truly believe that capitalism is an organization of the economy that is NOT controlled by the government? Who set up the tax code that rewards mega corporations and billionaires? It wasn’t me, and something tells me it wasn’t you either. Who then determines where the taxes are directed to and more importantly where they DON’T? Who restricts the bodily autonomy of people who can give birth? Not the doctors, not the people, but the government. Who determines whether or not we go to war in order to defend our way of organizing the economy? YOUR assessment of capitalism is incorrect and incomplete to just say “(not government)” is demonstrably false, ACTUALLY🤓
@@unluckypants6459 So you have no argument with government being the source of all of the above. I would agree with a single exception...that in the U.S. it is an unconstitutional, criminal government... and that applies to the tax laws and everything else you mention. This has nothing to do with 'capitalism"... Michael Hudson: fortunately, I’ve written all about this in my book, Killing the Host. What is Capitalism? What we have today is not the capitalism that we had either When Richard and I went to school or in the 19th century, the kind of capitalism that everyone was talking about in the 19th century, both from Adam Smith and Ricardo through Marx and everyone else, was industrial capitalism. The whole idea was that when they talked about capital, they were talking about industrial capital. They weren’t talking about land or rent, they weren’t talking about monopolies, they weren’t talking about finance. ( Marx ) Discussed this in volumes two and three. But he said, I don’t have to talk about rent and monopolies in finance. Industrial capitalism is going to get rid of that in order to become a low-cost economy and in order to compete with other economies. Because the good thing about capitalism is it’s evolving into socialism, that in order to be a successful industrial economy, you need government to start by investing in infrastructure. And then after you get rid of free lunch, rent, unearned income and real estate, rent, monopoly rent and finance, then you can get rid of exploitation. Finally, in the last fight between industrial employer and wage earner, what he was writing about, what everyone else had already written about various forms of economic rent, he was talking about that. So I agree...government has always been the problem...and in this case...it became a problem when it discarded the constitution completely and became criminal. ( 1939 )
@@unluckypants6459 Let's see...frist response was deleted......so we'll try another one. The word you are looking for is "economy"...not "capitalism"...the government drove that out too. And all the things you mention ARE because of the government...which has been operating unconstitutionally and criminally since 1939. Michael Hudson: fortunately, I’ve written all about this in my book, Killing the Host. What is Capitalism? What we have today is not the capitalism that we had either When Richard and I went to school or in the 19th century, the kind of capitalism that everyone was talking about in the 19th century, both from Adam Smith and Ricardo through Marx and everyone else, was industrial capitalism. The whole idea was that when they talked about capital, they were talking about industrial capital. They weren’t talking about land or rent, they weren’t talking about monopolies, they weren’t talking about finance. ( Marx ) Discussed this in volumes two and three. But he said, I don’t have to talk about rent and monopolies in finance. Industrial capitalism is going to get rid of that in order to become a low-cost economy and in order to compete with other economies. Because the good thing about capitalism is it’s evolving into socialism, that in order to be a successful industrial economy, you need government to start by investing in infrastructure. And then after you get rid of free lunch, rent, unearned income and real estate, rent, monopoly rent and finance, then you can get rid of exploitation. Finally, in the last fight between industrial employer and wage earner, what he was writing about, what everyone else had already written about various forms of economic rent, he was talking about that. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Capitalism is not a synonym for government...it was a threat to it, hence the description ( not government )
Something to chew on… McDonald’s USA - Employee: $9.00/hr, no benefits - Big Mac: $5.81 McDonald’s Denmark - Employee: $22/hr, 6 weeks vacation, 1 year paid maternity leave, life insurance, pension - Big Mac: $4.82 Tell us more about how raising the minimum wage would affect the cost of hamburgers.
People on the right call every single professor and politician they don't like "Marxist" as a sort of slur, so I tend to assume those critics know nothing at all about Marxist theory. It's a shame because it is such a useful lens with which to view economic relations, even if we disagree over what we should do about the faults revealed by a Marxist analysis of the world economy. I always appreciate Prof. Wolff's clear presentation of the challenges we face as individuals living in an exploitative and unequal system.
In far right prooaganda, marxists are rich elitists bent on centralizing power and taking personal property. They don't mean actual marxist views, they don't know what that is.
Most critiques from antimarx ppl rely on strawman arguments from ppl who don't know enough about what marx said to poke holes in it. They come off sounding like "don't read this, don't think about how the system works" or "everything works great, you're just mad because you lost at meritocracy".
Thanks Dr. Wolfe for your commitment and Dedication to Freedom, Justice and educating the Masses. I’m a little slow in grasping big ideas, but quick to intuit what’s right. And your right! Thanks for simplifying things. Your a master teacher. 🙏🏾❤️✊🏾
@@jgalt308 The New School and people who support his non-profit Democracy at Work. Previously University of Massachussetts for 27 years. Shows what you know.
@@someonenotnoone Sorry, your answer is incomplete...and then there is the question of; Paid for what? In his case, one also has to ask; Who is exploiting whom? Good luck with finding that info...but Wolff could easily provide it. BTW rather than waste time on this nonsense...try responding to the response to you that was blocked. select new...and scroll...
Perhaps Richard will touch on the fact that half America is owned by a small number of individuals, and most Americans own very little, a few thousand dollars at most....and many live in motor cars like their grandpa's did the 1930's , likè in of mice and men.
That is what happens when your government deliberately shuts down businesses in your country for months on end, ruining people’s livelihoods and destroying their life savings. Then it floods your country with millions of illegal immigrants, artificially raising home prices, draining public resources and taking the jobs that did come back. Who could have predicted?
There are also millions of people across most major western nations who every day are queuing up on a street corner to wait for work, just like in the great depression. Has been growing ever since 2008 without end, in far larger numbers now than were ever seen in 1929, across far more western nations, do you see them all? the millions on their street corners every morning hoping for work off of a passing employer? No, you don't, because technology allowed them all to be hidden so instead of being together communally on the street corner every day where their pains were shared amongst each other and their plight could not be ignored, they now sit individualised and isolated at home / in their cars, waiting for a text each morning to tell them if they have work that day. "The gig economy, / 0 hours contracts" are nothing more than the 2024 equivalent of masses waiting on corners looking for work every day. We are all so very blind.
@@bluewater454 that is what i am saying. we are literally starving so bad it is estimated that about 20% of americans are prediabetic. diabetes is caused by people not getting enough to eat. richard De wolff has made me so smart.
Since almost half of the Americans are overweight, they eat more than enough and where Carl Marx ideas are tried, like North Korea, for example, people are starving!
Professor Wolff has a gift for breaking down economics to make the general population understand the destructive nature of Capitalism. He’s a brilliant man and someday I hope to be able to see one of his brilliant lectures.
He is a lying idiot. He knows nothing on economics and gets it wrong consistently. “Surplus value” and “exploitation” are debunked Marxist nonsense concepts.
56:21 How do we educate people on democracy? Decades of muddying its definition has made people lose sight of what it truly means. I'd argue that too many people are democratically illiterate.
I read the book "Economics: Marxian versus Neoclassical", that you wrote with Stephen Resnick together and I found it very inspiring. I consider you a great educator. You did a great job at presenting Marxism to an American audiecence, that might be reluctant to Marxism. It may be, that coming from Germany, that our Marxist tradition is a little bit different, that there are some differences in interpretation between my own views and yours, but you do a great job at presenting Marxism at something useful and something that helps people to understand their ordinary daily lives from our perspective. We Marxists of the Wests often times have problems defending ourselves, because we're seen sometimes as a fringe political group as anachronistic outcasts, who wish the Soviet Union back. I'm forever graeteful, that you are a public voice, that helps to discharge that perception. As somebody, who organised a course on Marxism at a university, I know how difficult it is to draw people in, to engage people in the discourse and to motivate people from many intellectual backgrounds. In that regard you are a little bit of a hero and I appreciate, that you didn't stop after your academic career to enlighten the American public. I don't know if this comment will reach you, but I felt the need to say thank you, today!
@@juliansnei96 Of course there is no singular German Marxism, but I think that it is fair to say, that in Germany we spend more time to contextualize Marx with the German Idealism tradition. The impact of Althusserian structualism isn't as big, while Adorno and the Frankfurt school play a big role in intellectual discussion. There are bigger trends. For example in Germany one of the more recent discussions of Marxism centers around a rereading of Das Kapital. This trend analyses Marx theory of value very closely and generates insights by looking at the first edition of "Das Kapital" for clues. Generally Althussers interpretation, that there was an epistemological break between Marx' early more humanist work and Marx' later theory is rejected. This means, that question of Marx' philosophy of nature and history (Alfred Schmidt) and alienation are discussed. Something like "Marxian Economics" for example would for example have a bad time in Germany as we don't see Marx' work as an economic theory amongst others, but as a critique of political theory as a whole. Politically it is fair to say, that we're much more sceptical of any attempt to formulate a positive socialist program. Although we accept, that the point is to change the world, we as Marxists see our task in unveiling unfreedoms, whereever they lie, even within our own ranks. This however isn't universal. We have for example leading Marxist feminist theorists, who engage in developing collective ways of doing social research, that is tied by reconstructing recollections of how we reproduce in our actions our own conditions of unfreedom (Frigga Haug). These traditions of course are also reactions to the regime of East Germany one side and the rapid anti-communism in West Germany, which lead to an extreme intellectualisation of Marxism. Thirdly the failure of the biggest organised workers' movement in stopping WWI and the failure of the revolution in 1918 plus the rise of Nazis lead to a rise of the study of Authoritarianism and antisemitism. Theories usually revolve around the alieneted subject. Marxism in that regard is interpretated as a continuation of the enlightenment project. Psychology and Freudian psychoanalysis play a big role. Of course Germany isn't isolated from the developments in other countries and other countries are influenced by the German traditions, but I think it is fair to say, that these are some aspects, that are more deveopled in German Marxism than in other countries.
@@juliansnei96 Wolff begins his discussion of Marx with class struggle. This is the central theme of his work. He understands Marxian terms as a theory of the poltical struggle between the employee and the employer. Many Marxists in Germany don't begin with the economic struggle between classes. They look intensively at the question of what it means that our social interactions and our interactions with nature appear in commodity form. This question for examples opens up discussions around "socialist societies" in which commodities still play a central role, although capitalist behaviour and relation are supressed. Class society and capital as a social relation may be the unfolding of the commodity form, however the starting point of analysis of Value knows nothing of it and many social forms of alienation and social ills therefore can be understood within the framework of Marxist critique of Capital even without referring to class struggle and class relations. This leads to different theories of culture for example, but also to different political consequences.
@@123456789987o Thanks for your long comments. Sorry for my long comment. I guess you're aware of this history but others are not. You make no direct mention of Stalinism. As far as I know Adorno refused to address, let alone condemn the Moscow Trials even though he and other leading members of the Frankfurt School were quite aware of what was taking place in the Soviet Union. Althusser spent his entire life in the leadership of the Stalinist French Communist Party. Do the German Marxists you are referring to consider Stalinism a legitimate current in Marxism? (This issue doesn't just affect Stalinism. Lenin wrote in mid 1917, before the revolution, "Today, the bourgeoisie and the opportunists within the labor movement concur in this doctoring of Marxism. They omit, obscure, or distort the revolutionary side of this theory, its revolutionary soul. They push to the foreground and extol what is or seems acceptable to the bourgeoisie. All the social-chauvinists are now “Marxists” (don’t laugh!). And more and more frequently German bourgeois scholars, only yesterday specialists in the annihilation of Marxism, are speaking of the “national-German” Marx, who, they claim, educated the labor unions which are so splendidly organized for the purpose of waging a predatory war!") ------ You say "Thirdly the failure of the biggest organised workers' movement in stopping WWI and the failure of the revolution in 1918 plus the rise of Nazis lead to a rise of the study of Authoritarianism and antisemitism." Please direct us to what works you are referring to because the statement makes no sense to me. 1. Why was August 1914 a "failure"? Wasn't it a "betrayal"? War was anticipated and at the congresses of the Second International at Stuttgart in 1907, Copenhagen in 1910 and Basel in 1912, and anti-war resolutions were passed. The Basel resolution reads, in part, "This congress … calls upon the workers of all countries to oppose capitalist imperialism with the power of the international solidarity of the working class.” AND “It would be insane should governments not realize that the mere thought of the monstrosity of a world war would evoke the outrage and anger of the working class. The proletariat regards it as criminal if they be forced to shoot at one another in order to further the profits of capitalists and the ambitions of dynasties, or to honor secret diplomatic treaties.” As I'm sure you're aware the leaderships of almost all the sections of the Second International voted for the war and backed their respective capitalist class. The exceptions were the Bolsheviks under Lenin and the Serbian section. 2. Wasn't the November 1918 revolution, which was followed by the January 1919 Spartacist Uprising, defeated in part because of the determination of the Social Democratic Party to prevent revolution, including ordering the arrest and summary execution of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht. The passive term "failure" implies there was no class struggle underway. 3. Finally in Germany 1930-1933 there is a similar issue but you mention only the "study of Authoritarianism and antisemitism". Has there been any study of the response to the "rise of the Nazis" by the leaderships of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the German Communist Party (KPD) and the trade unions? In the November 1932 elections the Nazis lost 2 million votes compared to the July 1932 elections and the combined votes of the SPD and KPD was once again above the Nazi party vote. The Nazi party went into a crisis. On 30 January 1933 Hitler was legally appointed Chancellor with only two other Nazis in the cabinet. Why did the German capitalist class do this? More importantly this was 11 years after the "March on Rome" and the appointment of Mussolini as Prime Minister and 7 years the Italian fascists had consolidated the dictatorship, banned all other parties arrested the leadership of the Italian Communist Party, including Gramsci. The danger of fascism was no mystery. From 1928 the KPD and the Comintern maintained that social-democrats were "social-fascists" and insisted there could be no United Front against the Nazis. The SPD were little better. After January 1933 as repression by force escalated by the SPD and KPD put forward that the regime would spontaneously fall apart and socialism would emerge. Some in the SPD even used the slogan "Nach Hitler, Kommen Wir!" ("After Hiter, we come!"). On April 1 the Comintern in Moscow made its first public statement which said in part: "The establishment of an open Fascist dictatorship, which destroys all democratic illusions among the masses, and frees them from the influence of the social-democrats, will hasten Germany's progress towards the proletarian revolution.” Later the Stalinists said the policies of the KPD had been entirely correct. Do the German Marxists today agree with this? Just to finish on May Day 1933 there were mass marches of German workers organised by the trade unions, with government approval. The next day almost the entire trade union leadership was arrested. What do the German Marxists you're studying think of this?
28:17 Fishing Boats & Trawlers in India use the same mechanism as: "Division of Fruition", if I may call it; where after paying for the Costs (Diesel/Fuel, amortization of the boat or the assumed hire charges for as many days during fishing in high seas or taking tourists out etc the fruit of the labour is divided into 3 parts: 1 for the Boat Owner (Capitalist) and the remaining 2 parts to be handed equally among the Deck hands. Prof. Wolff you are such a complete teacher and so passionate about your own subjects that I feel very sad not to have been around you to learn more from. Thanks for doing these videos, they will be eternally stored somewhere. All my life I wondered about Marxism but was too lazy to pick up Das Kapital to begin with. Please suggest from where I can grab a copy of your book/s. Thanks Again!
When I took a first-year (entry level) Political Science course (POLS111) at Victoria University (Wellington, NZ), part of the course looked at Socialist/ Communist forms of governance (Peoples' Democracies). This course was a requirement for Bachelor of Commerce (Business Studies?) students. Apparently those types stayed away for that section of lectures. Too frightened, maybe? No surprises there. But at least the University presented, in abbreviated form, as comprehensive a half-year primer course on politics as could have been expected. The second half year, POLS112, a far more challenging course, presented a whole range of political philosophical writing from Plato to Fritz Hayek. Karl Marx was in there, of course (I don't recall that Gracchus Babeuf was, but I found out about him later). That was the sort of intellectual honesty and rigour one could expect from tertiary education 40 years ago...
Teaching economics without mentioning Marx is like teaching economics without Keynes. Americans are taught to have a Pavlovian response to the words Marxism, Fascism, Socialism, Capitalism and Democracy. They will attack anyone who suggests that they need to learn any details about any of those terms. 😵
I always look forward to your presentations but this one is in my opinion the most important one so far, put over in a way that anyone can understand. This should be shown on MSM (unlikely with the media owned and controlled by capitalists). I live in the UK and find many people who complain about the failure of social systems such as water supply, NHS, domestic power,& infrastructure cant be bothered to think for themselves and instead rely on the media for lies and pointing a finger in the wrong direction ie emigrants, ETC. If only people would realize the huge power we could have collectively to change thing for the better.
The solution to capitalism is the abolition of private property and the creation of a classless society. This is what people in the Soviet Union tried to do and experimented in this way. This is what people here think to do, what we need to do in the future, taking into account the lessons of the USSR.
Did you? I did not realize how traumatized I was by the anti-communism fervor I lived through growing up in the US until I noticed the fear I still have about that.
Tata is an awful company that often seems to by loss making key national interest businesses to milk bailouts from the governments of nations for those and if/when the bailouts/"subsidies" stop it then pulls out and writes the enterprise off as a loss against its profits from its other businesses while taking all the equipment and IP of that business which it got for practically free thanks to generous bailouts and tax breaks.
The Marxian critique of capitalism is still valid today. I have not read the three volumes of Marx's Das Kapital, nor is it on my bucket list. All this makes me think of a line in the movie, "Cocktail:" "In all the world there are the hustlers and the workers. The workers never hustle and the hustlers never work."
Professor Wolff, only one big detail, which affects the whole explanation of capitalism and particularly the lack of stability: NEOLIBERALISM Neoliberalism, not classic capitalism, is what has weakened the democratic state (the government), eliminated or underfunded public services which were common in every capitalist society, and privatised as many aspects of human life as possible. NEOLIBERALISM is the biggest current obstacle to collective prosperity and to the exercise of true democracy. I would say the result of 40 to 50 years of neoliberalism has taken us to something that’s more accurately called “neo-feudalism”
This Neoliberalism is a modern byproduct of classic capitalism and it is again promoted and fueled by capitalist society. Therefore, the democracy is being deteriorated by idea of capitalism for the benefits of capitalist.
Do you not understand that neoliberalism is the natural and logical development of previous forms that defend and glorify the capitalist system?!? Neoliberalism is a reactionary ideology used as an excuse to further plunder the people and to suppress any resistance to the system of capitalism!
The United States (US) is called the “land of the free and the home of the brave. North America was the home of the braves, until the English colonial settlers ethnically cleansed them from their homeland. This video brilliantly explains why only ones who are now free in the US are the oligarchs. The US today is pushing for World War III for the sole purpose of enriching even more its oligarchs. Today, as 38 million Americans live in poverty, 9 of the 10 richest men in the world are US citizens. That is why only 33% of Americans are satisfied with our government. The US has the audacity to accuse the People’s Republic of China as being a dictatorship, because she refuses to allow US oligarchs to do whatever they want in China. China, however, has already eliminated her poverty, despite having 4 times the US’ populations. Moreover, 90% of Chinese are satisfied with their government. And yet, of all people, America wants to lecture China on democracy and human rights! Here is another great example. The US hypocritically says that it is willing go to war against China to defend Taiwan’s inalienable right to self-determination and independence. Meanwhile, the US has consistently refused to comply with 42 United Nations’ resolutions demanding that it immediately return Puerto Rico’s sovereignty to the Puerto Ricans. US greed could lead to World War III.
16:17 if society were operating under a hard money standard (gold) then savings would not lose value and therefore people would save...and this also levels the negotiation between employer and employee. And where did employers come from? Did they not innovate and risk their savings to start a business? Sure there are many answers. But as often the case, communists/marxists/collectivists will vilify the innovator in order to justify stealing from them. However, in our society and monetary system many big businesses have and continue to gain an unfair advantage over the worker and smaller competition as they have access to ever increasing credit to buy up resources at the same time money printing devalues the employees savings. Debt based monetary system is the opposite of what society requires for a more just civilized society. The money supply should be a set amount. Its okay for a little expansion and contraction due to credit issue and payoff. But lenders must be allowed to fail or maybe even limited to only lending money they have in treasury not depositor funds...ie. savings banks vs investment banks
One of the main problems I have with Marxism is that ⬇ 38:55 "no matter how big it gets it needs to get bigger - No matter how rich the employer gets in has to get richer" Problem being the concept of the "rich" is purely a numbers game for *most Marxists rooted philosophies. What I mean is that for some (in their ways of thinking) money: is something of 🚩*material value. The truth is that money is NOT substantial beyond its value in paper or in gold (even if backed by a physical material). What money truly is, is a means to manipulate where the human capital of time goes into⏳. Do people build more construction materials for the giant pyramid of the rich; and do they have time left afterward to make their own houses or what not❓ The pyramid example is used to show historical frivolous EXTREME spending. The problem is the COST OF TIME. If a Rich person like Elon musk does not buy a Pyramid or 3 Houses like Bernie Sanders has - the question is where is the HUMAN Capital attached to the materials of his wealth? His Billions of dollars are more of a responsibility to do good when he has the power to - HOWEVER it is NOT a material wealth for the *most part. What some Marxists get right: we must be warry of giving too much economic driving power to the ultra rich.
When I became a Graduate Assistant at Miami University in the 80's--to teach Freshman English-- I had to sign a Loyalty Oath swearing that I had never been a member of the Communist Party. Still makes me angry.
He has a great way of putting across Marx's ideas in a simpler way. I've read all of Captal quickly and Theories of Surplus Value but in my inimitable way still no expert ;(
I'd guess that the faux-left in the United Kingdom are just as dismissive of Professor Wolff and Marxian theory as the faux-left in the United States...
Because I am in Britain and we have... 2. The Canary, and the Communists. Everything else is centre left at best, with the overwhelming bulk being centre right to right wing. Though by American standards centre left = Marx.
I’ll say this, right before Marie Antoinette’s head was uninstalled, the French complained about difficulty in procuring food - just like Americans complain now.
@@pokemercenary6511 definitely. i was in a grocery store the other day and it was just funyons and fudge rounds as far as the eye can see. people in socialist countries eat really well. that is why i am moving to mexico - so obrador can feed me properly.
@@pokemercenary6511 people are allowed to buy what they want to buy. but yes there is definitely no nutritious food in america. i was in wal-mart the other day and there was no nutritious food to be found. just funyons and fudge rounds as far as the eye can see. that is why i am moving to venezuela. so i can eat properly under TRUE socialism!
@@pokemercenary6511 people are allowed to buy what they want to buy. but yes there is definitely no nutritious food in america. i was in wal-mart the other day and there was no nutritious food to be found. just funyons and fudge rounds as far as the eye can see. that is why i am moving to venezuela. so i can eat properly under TRUE socialism!
i only have fair knowledge of economic systems , if you might hear me, i think that the main problem in Capitalism is that the rich keep getting richer with no boundary for their wealth expansion and that they can get away with the wealth they collect if they decided the shut down the market with no legal consequences at all, socialism on the other hand doesn't present any kind of incentive to encourage wealthy people to get engaged in the financial market. i think the the Islamic financial system might provide the correct answer on how to deal with different groups of people, although it is not implemented nowadays, it philosophy stand midway between socialism and capitalism. Islamic system encourage wealthy people via temptation and the fear of losing their wealth through taxation to participate in the investment and at the same time doesn't allow the rich to get richer with no boundaries . there are too many details in the Islamic financial system and there are many books about it. i am not so much expert about it but i like the philosophy of taxation in Islamic finance.
Imagine if the professor got a dollar from every working person in America. That would add up to 132 million dollars. The professor would be a serious contender creating a new path for growth and development. The thought that Capitalism is nothing more than collection of commodities relating to each other is a mind blowing revelation that challenges our basic premises of life right from the get go, why products should be commodities in the first place! Commodities obscure the work process in society. Makes mysterious the role of industry, science and technology in a work process and obscures the material exchanges between humans and nature, a relation of perpetual transformation, and when the work process consists of 3 billion humans on the planet, transformation happens quick! One commodity is the same as a any other commodity, so dissecting one commodity is all it takes to expose these general laws of capitalism is a challenging position. This means... Workers are bossed into making commodities every day from 9 to 5. A fixed period of time rules work, they have to make enough commodities that a profit motive becomes the end and aim of production, or there is no work at all, humanity is a hostage to a social condition. Before this happened there wasn’t a social condition to work, a watch was a town crier or a church bell, a time element was not a social program all members of society would participate with. Before a time element came into the work process, if a thing had to be made, or food had to be harvested, it was done by slaves, serfs, artisans, but when the same work had to be done after a time element took over work, and how people harvested the soil and made coats, hats, shoes, clocks, guns, they had to become free people, before they can be hired as free workers, before slaves and serfs can become known as a family of tailors, milliners, clocksmiths, gunsmiths, their very sustenance has to be torn out from under them by means of economic conquest.
I enjoyed trying to understand your thoughts... You had me hooked on your first sentence,,, and your twist on time had me reread three times to understand where you are going with that... Check out Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel economic theory,,, "participatory economics"... If you haven't heard of it,,, I think you will find it interesting... Namaste...
So, what is the basic premise of life? If you are going to present a reasoned progression that is consistent...and based on factual evidence, you should be able to state the first one, no? Of course, like most rhetoric seeking to end with their pre-determined conclusion, that path to that conclusion is littered with "assumptions" that "everyone Knows" what all the words mean and they are in complete agreement regarding that meaning. Yet, avoidance of definition and linguistic precision is what you strive for...and produce.
One moral take from this is read every book that is banned. Read them because they present knowledge that is kept hidden to avoid turning you into a rational thinking human being
"No other theory of how society works is as tabooed and banned as the Marxist approach." However writers of the 19th and 20th centuries have written about it a lot. Silvio Gesell wrote in the 20s "How was it that the Marxian theory of capital succeeded in ousting that of Proudhon and in giving sovereign sway to communistic socialism ? How is it that Marx and his theory are spoken of by every newspaper in the world ? Some have suggested as a reason the hopelessness, and the corresponding harmlessness, of the Marxian doctrine. "No capitalist is afraid of his theory, just as no capitalist is afraid of the Christian doctrine; it is therefore positively an advantage to capital to have Marx and Christ discussed as widely as possible, for Marx can never damage capital. But beware of Proudhon; better keep him out of sight and hearing!" Talk about suppressed works, even if it was praised by Keynes and Fisher, how many have even heard of Silvio Gesell who had a much better grasp on how the world works as did Frederick Soddy. "To allow money to become a source of revenue to private issuers is to create, first, a secret and illicit arm of the government and, last, a rival power strong enough ultimately to overthrow all other forms of government." We need to end capitalism's money system in favor of sovereign money. monetaryalliance.org
Dr. Wolff, You are the most prominent living Marxist in the world. I'm glad to live with you in this century. Along with your living theory, I always keep in mind of these cardinal concepts; dialectical materialism which concerns the development of technology will later cause a change in the productive relationship as a super structure. The other is the theory of surplus value, which must stay with the labor value behind the free-and-equal exchange in the capitalist mode of production. As you Dr. mention somewhere that the democratic cooperative mode of production will replace the previous production in the future.
The relations of production do not change without revolution. Marx studied capitalism and Lenin added the revolutionary struggle of the working class. Therefore, Marxism-Leninism was formed.
@@Googlag Thanks for replying to my letter. I love Lenin, too. However, I would not agree to your idea that the sudden change in politics may cause a huge victim as we have been experiencing right now. While admitting what capitalists want more, we, workers must overcome the basic requests in accordance with the local capitalists and the local municipal government, which the democratic cooperative mode should be like, as far as I know. I am a Japanese educated in USA under Dr. Karl Niebyl . If you know about him, please let me know.
![Global Capitalism: On Labor - A May Day 2024 Special [May 1st, 2024]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/p2w7q_ssCZc/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you so much, Prof. Wolff, for reminding us of these simple and profound truths ! For many years, you have been a beacon showing the way to a better future.
I don't suppose that you could be bothered to provide us YOUR LIST
of these "profound truths" and YOUR REASONING as to what makes
them profound or true? Also, please include what reasoning and
evidence Wolff provided.
@@jgalt308 Who is this charlatan? Bro, do you see how Capitalism is failing the majority or is ignorance your forte.
@@chrisgreene2623 Really? So where is it doing that and why?
Wolff has no clue what capitalism is? Or capital? Or inflation?
But feel free to explain it to us...just as Wolff has supposedly explained it to all of you.
( but none of you will because none of you can...so you will say nothing...or make
some excuse to avoid answering. )
A big hug for you for the person you are and the work you do Prof Wolf
I can't thank DRW enough because I've found out that I was miseducated on Marxism and Capitalism . Thanks to him, I've been re-educating myself.
Yeah, that's what happens when you have no clue what the words mean in the
first place and someone tells you you are wrong, and you believe them.
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. It's just not the strength of the ignorant
Ignore the troll. Dr Wolff helped open my eyes as well. It is mad to remember the crap I believed before.
@@dinnerwithfranklin2451 Yeah, Michael Hudson is such an idiot, I can't believe anybody
listens to him when he corrects Wolff.
Wolff is a lying idiot debunked by just looking up refutations of his Marxist nonsense. It takes seconds to do.
Hey J, is there any difference between Michael Hudson and Prof W? Somehow i remember you saying that Prof W would never have a discussion with Michael Hudson who pretty much agrees with Prof Wolffs critique. I assume you like Michael Hudson, I do.
Thank you profesor Wolff.
Thank you for the comedy 😂
The truth is CAPITALISM IS THE BEST FORM OF SOCIALISM, as capitalism is economic financial power in the the hands of people. Capitalism is REAL DEMOCRACY not leftist communist marxist systems which are all run by a elite clique who have political power (politburo) and they decide who gets to produce what and who will consume / buy what and at what price. *In FREE MARKET FREE ENTERPRISE CAPITALISM with fair-go merit based laws, it is the people who decide what good are produced and sold and at what price, by the people's market PEOPLE"S DEMAND and people's producing capacity PEOPLE"S SUPPLY.* But the old rich ex nobility and ex royals and their puppies in politics do not like real democracy. So they have "democracy now' type channels to subvert the people away from real democracy and economic power. Hope i made sense to someone !
@@flavioc5389 Go away and keep your ignorant ways
@@flavioc5389 HA,HA,HA...........................................
I am addicted to this channel! My mind has expanded tenfold since I started listening to Dr. Wolff
I was educated on Marxism and the critique of capitalism. I went to college in South America, where public universities are no strangers to Marxist analysis.
But I have never seen Marxism and capitalism contradictions as well and profoundly explained as by professor Wolf. He is an incredible educator, and I'm sure this one talk is one of the most powerful and clearest descriptions of the Marxist approach.
It is so powerful that it should be blared in public spaces everywhere!
You have been sold a load of bullshit.
@@ExPwner and you ate it
@@pedroghirottino I didn’t, because I am not a Marxist
@@ExPwner КГБ тебя запомнил.
@@ExPwner Says the person who believes in homesteading
Thanks again, Mr. Wolff, for sharing your wisdom and this analysis. They are much appreciated by this viewer and all of us here 😊
Thank you professor, it was very useful.
I love Dr. Wolff, he always angers me to the point where I must go to the gym. A true revolutionary and hero of the people.
i'd say you Sir have lost you mind's abilities a bit, when you start loving (or hating) the person who is presenting a position/logic/idea/opinion.
@@aMutantMind This is NOT a matter of opinion, it's one of FACT. You'd do well to learn the difference...
@@aMutantMind I suggest you look up the meaning "figure of speach"
@@nicadi2005 A FACT is only your opinion, and THE FACT that you call an opinion a FACT is also only your opinion, in other words, you just said some nice sounding but very meaningless words. I see all this FACT and OPINION bs all the time from madrasa branded islamists too. YAWN ❗
@@dinnerwithfranklin2451 Rejected, what i said STANDS !
Outstanding presentation Prof. Wolff, we owe you a debt of gratitude for your contribution, time and energy, that is simply too great to ever be truly repaid. 👏
Yes, convincing people they are "exploited victims" is not without its drawbacks.
Now what can we practically do to change the system beyond capitalism? We need an integrated network of support to build local worker co-ops and bring back the Commons. See Library Socialism for more on that. For an integrated network of support, that's still in development, IMO, because there are many great technologies, organizations and platforms out there, but they lack a larger collaborative network that can link co-op communities together with best practices and supports they would need from time to time. Best leads I've found is One Small Town based on Contributionism. Some great elements and ideas also provided from "A Viable Society" talk that Peter Joseph gave and in his book, The New Human Rights Movement, but again, still waiting on the networked cooperative platform for us.
@@jgalt308 Yeah like slave revolts are a drawback to slaveowners.
@@someonenotnoone What slaves?
@@jgalt308 all the people working for others that would rather work for themselves, i.e. most people.
Great job comrade
Huxley encapsulated capitalism well IMO
“ perfect dictatorship would have the appearance of a democracy, but would basically be a prison without walls in which the prisoners would not even dream of escaping. It would essentially be a system of slavery where, through consumption and entertainment, the slaves would love their servitudes. "
Aldous Huxley
Very sad...the inability to distinguish an "ism" from an "archy"..
Thats the worst anarchist argument i´ve ever heard@@jgalt308, in the end the day its the same dude. Anarchists just won´t understand that even revolution is a process, and not a simple coup d´etat.
@@fabio4465 And you just repeated the same mistake.
Capitalism is not a form of government, nor is any other economic system. ( ism )
Knowing what the "archy" is, provides zero information regarding the economics within that system.
I am also sure that Huxley was not referring to capitalism, nor does any economic system appear to be referenced.
Nor was I making an argument for anything.
But thanks for sharing.
Ok@@jgalt308, i´m sorry, i overestimated your comment, its even dumber. Its funny, you should be rly sad as it says more about yourself than the line itself. They are neither related to gov. or economy dude, they are just suffixes. Huxley was referring to capitalism, as he was certainly not reffering to the middle ages.🤣Just because you couldn´t formulate an argument doesn´t mean you didn´t try, don´t be silly. But thanks for sharing.
@@fabio4465 Things will get easier when you learn to read.
archy Definition & Meaning
Merriam-Webster
The meaning of -ARCHY is rule : government. How to use -archy in a sentence.
-archy in American English
combining form. a combining form meaning “rule,” “government,” forming abstract nouns usually corresponding to personal nouns ending in -arch. monarchy. oligarchy.
ARCHY definition in American English - Collins Dictionary
--archy
word-forming element of Greek origin meaning "rule," from Latin -archia, from Greek -arkhia "rule," from arkhos "leader, chief, ruler," from arkhē "beginning, origin, first place," verbal noun of arkhein "to be the first," hence "to begin" and "to rule" (see archon).
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
“The perfect dictatorship would have the appearance of a democracy, but would basically be a prison without walls in which the prisoners would not even dream of escaping. It would essentially be a system of slavery where, through consumption and entertainment, the slaves would love their servitude” is a quote attributed to Aldous Huxley.
That is the entire quote and there is no reference to capitalism and the attribution to Huxley does not appear valid
however we have this from Huxley.
Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
Huxley, Aldous (2014-07-01). Brave New World . HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.
“There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.” Aldous Huxley
The nature of psychological compulsion is such that those who act under constraint remain under the impression that they are acting on their own initiative. The victim of mind-manipulation does not know that he is a victim. To him, the walls of his prison are invisible, and he believes himself to be free. That he is not free is apparent only to other people. His servitude is strictly objective.
The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles and mysteries. Nor did they possess a really effective system of mind-manipulation. In the past, free-thinkers and revolutionaries were often the products of the most piously orthodox education. This is not surprising. The methods employed by orthodox educators were and still are extremely inefficient. Under a scientific dictator education will really work -- with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
As the destruction of definition and meaning is the key component in perpetrating the Marxist delusion, this foolish attempt to
equate "capitalism" to a dictatorship is to be expected, although "the private ownership of the means of production," including
one's own "labor" stands in direct contradiction to that.
Given that the goal is a "perfect dictatorship,"...one would be hard-pressed to suggest that "anarchy" would be
how such a result could be achieved.
But keep babbling.
Спасибо за труды Вам!
Thank you for your efforts
I'm curious as to what the USSR would be like if it didn't have to compete in a 45 year arms race. I'm not saying communism is perfect. But it would be interesting to see a country actually implement socialism without molestation by world powers.
And the space race
One of the smartest things I've read .. Interventions and tariffs by outside, you know who's?
Very shrewd remark! also most of the countries in latin America had been boycotted and their socialist project thwarted by trade embargos or regime changes. At the same time you would have to own up to the question why the capitalist system was able to win over the socialist one and how it could afford the expensive arms race and not a socialist system?
Thank you Richard Wolff. 😊
Thanks
Thank you so much M. Wolff, to you and your team, for articulating these terms in an clear and accessible way. I may have re-watched this episode 3 times. I know that it is possible to get lost in page after page of equations, but your explanations, with imagery and examples, for people who are completely new to all of this (talking about me here) are so very much appreciated. Thank you 🙏.
Great video. Thanks profesor Wolff.
Thanks, professor
As always, brilliant! Thank you.
💯Thank you Prof Wolff 🙏for your persistence, but I don’t think enough people are getting it yet, hopefully soon.
Well, they definitely don't want to "pay" to get it.
@@jgalt308 ai'nt necessarialy so, Duff.
sorry i meant DOOFF.
Excellent episode
Thank you very much
💙💙👍💙💙
Fantastic lecture by Dr. Wolff! The extra hundred for the ladder, minus the wage to the workers, goes into the capitalist pocket, allowing the capitalist to remain a capitalist. However the wage of the worker is driven so low, so very low, that they cannot dream of accumulating enough wealth to become a capitalist. And in fact, the wage is often driven so low, that the worker cannot meet basic life needs, and must focus on survival, and cannot focus on wealth accumulation.
I'm a 72 year old retired Brazilian teacher and appreciate very much your program. Greetings.
it's amazing how many people don't know the basics of marxian analysis .... all due to the propaganda of the employer class ... and will attack you for pointing out that you are being exploited as an employee ... people just don't want to admit they have been scammed
BRAVO!
Love this channel!
If this doesn’t wake up the most of us, I think we just not smart enough, brave enough, hungry enough to do anything for ourselves, so, America, we are doomed.
Sad but true...
Americans are walking around like zombies in a bad movie and have chosen to be ignorant about the world and its people and culture. Just where your government wants you.
It already feels too late…
Never too late, maybe just too old,.
Thank goodness, the world is just changing every second, we , too, deserve a second chance.
or stop with the doomerspeak and get organized
Thank you professor 🙏🙏
M8 your a legend!. You explain the "system" we live in so clearly.Thankyou.
And what system would that be?
I have been longing for this forever! I am involved in writing on similar notions in my own language and often end up hoping Dr Wolff would speak on this!
Wow! I ❤ this guy.
Fantastics presentation!!
a clear and concise masterclass
I hope Prof. Wolff mentions the tie food has with keeping labor under control. It is Springtime. I hope he urges everyone to plant some food. That way if labor needs to go on a prolonged economic strike, they will be less suseptable to food extrotion/withholding.
not really practical when most of the productive farmland are owned by business owner to produce cheap food than any individual can do. There must be a concerted effort by people to act together and bypass market to avoid big cooperation to some degree for your idea to work out as intended.
@@whensonzhou4174, what you say has been the story since the nobility confiscated the common lands centuries ago.
The concerted effort of which you speak is "labor needs to go on a prolonged economic strike". To avoid retaliation by big corporations, the masses must plant Victory Gardens in the Spring. If the masses do that, they won't get hungry and their children cry because of empty bellies, prompting the masses to accept a raw deal.
Instead, they hold out in a general economic strike to the very end. I guarantee you that if the masses refuse to provide their labor and purchasing power, in time, the money grubbers will come crawling on their knees begging labor to return.
Why? Because they would rather have some profit than zero profit. In fact, they would lose more than profit. They would lose a good part of the wealth they have today. Consider the chemical plants that dot the landscape in the Gulf States. All of them have processes that must be monitored constantly or they go "BOOM" with giant clouds of poisonous vapors. There are many processes in manufacturing and chemical plants that if people walked away, would break and cost the money grubbers a whole lot of money.
Labor has ultimate power. They now have to realize it. They have to use their power to gain what they deserve. Always remember, labor is the primary wealth producer. Nothing is mined, manufactured, harvested, or served without the hands and minds of labor. The money grubbers have what they have because of the labor force and because labor allows it. When labor denies its vital force, the economy crashes.
And don't think it would be easy. Corporations fear a general strike. They won't admit it, but they do. Labor and corporations would suffer because of a general strike. That's why labor must prepare first. It is Springtime. Plant some food.
Fantastic video ❤ thank you 👍
Super Overview!
As a non-native English speaker, i love the pace of these lectures, he gives me the time to understand and also process the information. subscribed
You are embracing the world and our common future :) This is the good and constructive approach. Thank you so much :)
Bravo!
Yes, fantastic explanation with consistency and clarity how the world economy and societies order works . Owning isn't as making. There is a huge difference. I agree with professor Richard Wolff!
Thank you very much for your good and sustainable effort to rise the awareness of the peoples about this fundamental issue
I would like to translate and explain your intervention to my Arabic fellow citizens.
M.Ali Berrada
Morocco
Marrakech
You are so right!
Thank you very much for your great efforts towards building a peaceful and prosperous community.
this is NECESSARY LISTENING, VIEWING ETC... THANK U
Essential as it may be to explain something in basic terms, I always find that the relation between how Marxist philosophers explain material systems and the depth relativity of the relationship of the living and the physical (actuality of existence on a material plane) is very often a contradiction of the simplistic, in its explanation, and the profoundly complex that is part of our everyday experience of reality.
You highlighting the natural progression from serfdom to slavery to capitalism (then finally, to fascism) is beautiful.
Actually your progression is both incorrect and incomplete.
That would be ( government ) slavery, ( government ) serfdom ( not government ) capitalism ( government ) socialism ( government ) fascism
@@jgalt308 you’re silly for that. You truly believe that capitalism is an organization of the economy that is NOT controlled by the government? Who set up the tax code that rewards mega corporations and billionaires? It wasn’t me, and something tells me it wasn’t you either. Who then determines where the taxes are directed to and more importantly where they DON’T? Who restricts the bodily autonomy of people who can give birth? Not the doctors, not the people, but the government. Who determines whether or not we go to war in order to defend our way of organizing the economy? YOUR assessment of capitalism is incorrect and incomplete to just say “(not government)” is demonstrably false, ACTUALLY🤓
@@unluckypants6459 So you have no argument with government being the source of all of the above.
I would agree with a single exception...that in the U.S. it is an unconstitutional, criminal government...
and that applies to the tax laws and everything else you mention.
This has nothing to do with 'capitalism"...
Michael Hudson: fortunately, I’ve written all about this in my book, Killing the Host. What is Capitalism? What we have today is not the capitalism that we had either When Richard and I went to school or in the 19th century, the kind of capitalism that everyone was talking about in the 19th century, both from Adam Smith and Ricardo through Marx and everyone else, was industrial capitalism.
The whole idea was that when they talked about capital, they were talking about industrial capital. They weren’t talking about land or rent, they weren’t talking about monopolies, they weren’t talking about finance. ( Marx ) Discussed this in volumes two and three. But he said, I don’t have to talk about rent and monopolies in finance. Industrial capitalism is going to get rid of that in order to become a low-cost economy and in order to compete with other economies.
Because the good thing about capitalism is it’s evolving into socialism, that in order to be a successful industrial economy, you need government to start by investing in infrastructure. And then after you get rid of free lunch, rent, unearned income and real estate, rent, monopoly rent and finance, then you can get rid of exploitation. Finally, in the last fight between industrial employer and wage earner, what he was writing about, what everyone else had already written about various forms of economic rent, he was talking about that.
So I agree...government has always been the problem...and in this case...it became a problem when it discarded
the constitution completely and became criminal. ( 1939 )
@@unluckypants6459 Let's see...frist response was deleted......so we'll try another one.
The word you are looking for is "economy"...not "capitalism"...the government drove that out too.
And all the things you mention ARE because of the government...which has been operating unconstitutionally and criminally
since 1939.
Michael Hudson: fortunately, I’ve written all about this in my book, Killing the Host. What is Capitalism? What we have today is not the capitalism that we had either When Richard and I went to school or in the 19th century, the kind of capitalism that everyone was talking about in the 19th century, both from Adam Smith and Ricardo through Marx and everyone else, was industrial capitalism.
The whole idea was that when they talked about capital, they were talking about industrial capital. They weren’t talking about land or rent, they weren’t talking about monopolies, they weren’t talking about finance. ( Marx ) Discussed this in volumes two and three. But he said, I don’t have to talk about rent and monopolies in finance. Industrial capitalism is going to get rid of that in order to become a low-cost economy and in order to compete with other economies.
Because the good thing about capitalism is it’s evolving into socialism, that in order to be a successful industrial economy, you need government to start by investing in infrastructure. And then after you get rid of free lunch, rent, unearned income and real estate, rent, monopoly rent and finance, then you can get rid of exploitation. Finally, in the last fight between industrial employer and wage earner, what he was writing about, what everyone else had already written about various forms of economic rent, he was talking about that.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Capitalism is not a synonym for government...it was a threat to it, hence the description ( not government )
@@unluckypants6459capitalism is not when the government does stuff you don’t like dumbnuts. Capitalism has nothing to do with government
Something to chew on…
McDonald’s USA
- Employee: $9.00/hr, no benefits
- Big Mac: $5.81
McDonald’s Denmark
- Employee: $22/hr, 6 weeks vacation, 1 year paid maternity leave, life insurance, pension
- Big Mac: $4.82
Tell us more about how raising the minimum wage would affect the cost of hamburgers.
citation please
@@EonSlempthe Citation is on this channel.
Also Google. Prices are freely dicoverable, as are Denmark labour policy.
@@EonSlemp look it up
Wrong numbers, not adjusted for purchasing power or taxes.
Good point! How do you think they do it?
I can't like his videos enough!!
excellant!
Thank you for sharing
The USA glory days are over full stop.
Bandits mafia gangsterism obnoxious bully - better word than glory usually refers to hero patriotism
People on the right call every single professor and politician they don't like "Marxist" as a sort of slur, so I tend to assume those critics know nothing at all about Marxist theory. It's a shame because it is such a useful lens with which to view economic relations, even if we disagree over what we should do about the faults revealed by a Marxist analysis of the world economy. I always appreciate Prof. Wolff's clear presentation of the challenges we face as individuals living in an exploitative and unequal system.
In far right prooaganda, marxists are rich elitists bent on centralizing power and taking personal property. They don't mean actual marxist views, they don't know what that is.
Well said, at the very least Marxist critique is a fine lens to view the dominant system
Nah just the ones who actually peddle the debunked nonsense like Wolff does here
Most critiques from antimarx ppl rely on strawman arguments from ppl who don't know enough about what marx said to poke holes in it. They come off sounding like "don't read this, don't think about how the system works" or "everything works great, you're just mad because you lost at meritocracy".
@@drphosferrous Very well said.
Thanks Dr. Wolfe for your commitment and Dedication to Freedom, Justice and educating the Masses. I’m a little slow in grasping big ideas, but quick to intuit what’s right. And your right! Thanks for simplifying things. Your a master teacher. 🙏🏾❤️✊🏾
Fitting for someone who can't do anything and never has.
@@jgalt308 Weird comment to make about someone who gets paid to do what he does.
@@someonenotnoone Paid? By whom, how, and how much?
@@jgalt308 The New School and people who support his non-profit Democracy at Work. Previously University of Massachussetts for 27 years. Shows what you know.
@@someonenotnoone Sorry, your answer is incomplete...and then there is the
question of; Paid for what?
In his case, one also has to ask; Who is exploiting whom?
Good luck with finding that info...but Wolff could easily provide it.
BTW rather than waste time on this nonsense...try responding to the response to you that was blocked.
select new...and scroll...
wow, best explanation of our economic system ever... not sure if I agree with his conclusion, but very good explanation.
Perhaps Richard will touch on the fact that half America is owned by a small number of individuals, and most Americans own very little, a few thousand dollars at most....and many live in motor cars like their grandpa's did the 1930's , likè in of mice and men.
That is what happens when your government deliberately shuts down businesses in your country for months on end, ruining people’s livelihoods and destroying their life savings. Then it floods your country with millions of illegal immigrants, artificially raising home prices, draining public resources and taking the jobs that did come back.
Who could have predicted?
There are also millions of people across most major western nations who every day are queuing up on a street corner to wait for work, just like in the great depression. Has been growing ever since 2008 without end, in far larger numbers now than were ever seen in 1929, across far more western nations, do you see them all? the millions on their street corners every morning hoping for work off of a passing employer?
No, you don't, because technology allowed them all to be hidden so instead of being together communally on the street corner every day where their pains were shared amongst each other and their plight could not be ignored, they now sit individualised and isolated at home / in their cars, waiting for a text each morning to tell them if they have work that day.
"The gig economy, / 0 hours contracts" are nothing more than the 2024 equivalent of masses waiting on corners looking for work every day. We are all so very blind.
It sounds like you see the world the way it is.
Thanks for the fabulous commentary. Could we talk you into becoming a 3rd party candidate, so we`d have somebody to vote for?
one thing i know for sure, because richard wolff taught me - americans don't get enough to eat because of the free market.
Right. That’s why America has an obesity problem 😄
@@bluewater454 that is what i am saying. we are literally starving so bad it is estimated that about 20% of americans are prediabetic. diabetes is caused by people not getting enough to eat. richard De wolff has made me so smart.
Since almost half of the Americans are overweight, they eat more than enough and where Carl Marx ideas are tried, like North Korea, for example, people are starving!
12.8% of Americans faced food insecurity last year. A pretty large number for a nation with so much wealth and resources
@@Cheaken2 Food insecurity is a hell lot better than starvation, which is what happens everywhere where Marx ideas were put to the test!
Masterclass!
Thank you
thank you!
Was curious about your thoughts on Stephanie Kelton and the Deficit Myth and MMT.
Professor Wolff has a gift for breaking down economics to make the general population understand the destructive nature of Capitalism. He’s a brilliant man and someday I hope to be able to see one of his brilliant lectures.
He is a lying idiot. He knows nothing on economics and gets it wrong consistently. “Surplus value” and “exploitation” are debunked Marxist nonsense concepts.
@@ExPwner...YR MEDICAL DISNOSTIC:-PLEASE CHECK YRSELF INTO MENTAL ASYLUM ASAP .....😢😢😢😢😢😢😢
@@kennyyap9745 😂 nope
56:21 How do we educate people on democracy? Decades of muddying its definition has made people lose sight of what it truly means. I'd argue that too many people are democratically illiterate.
I read the book "Economics: Marxian versus Neoclassical", that you wrote with Stephen Resnick together and I found it very inspiring. I consider you a great educator. You did a great job at presenting Marxism to an American audiecence, that might be reluctant to Marxism. It may be, that coming from Germany, that our Marxist tradition is a little bit different, that there are some differences in interpretation between my own views and yours, but you do a great job at presenting Marxism at something useful and something that helps people to understand their ordinary daily lives from our perspective. We Marxists of the Wests often times have problems defending ourselves, because we're seen sometimes as a fringe political group as anachronistic outcasts, who wish the Soviet Union back. I'm forever graeteful, that you are a public voice, that helps to discharge that perception.
As somebody, who organised a course on Marxism at a university, I know how difficult it is to draw people in, to engage people in the discourse and to motivate people from many intellectual backgrounds. In that regard you are a little bit of a hero and I appreciate, that you didn't stop after your academic career to enlighten the American public.
I don't know if this comment will reach you, but I felt the need to say thank you, today!
Interesting, what are the diferentes that You find betwren the marxista german tradition and the american one?
@@juliansnei96 Of course there is no singular German Marxism, but I think that it is fair to say, that in Germany we spend more time to contextualize Marx with the German Idealism tradition. The impact of Althusserian structualism isn't as big, while Adorno and the Frankfurt school play a big role in intellectual discussion.
There are bigger trends. For example in Germany one of the more recent discussions of Marxism centers around a rereading of Das Kapital. This trend analyses Marx theory of value very closely and generates insights by looking at the first edition of "Das Kapital" for clues. Generally Althussers interpretation, that there was an epistemological break between Marx' early more humanist work and Marx' later theory is rejected. This means, that question of Marx' philosophy of nature and history (Alfred Schmidt) and alienation are discussed. Something like "Marxian Economics" for example would for example have a bad time in Germany as we don't see Marx' work as an economic theory amongst others, but as a critique of political theory as a whole.
Politically it is fair to say, that we're much more sceptical of any attempt to formulate a positive socialist program. Although we accept, that the point is to change the world, we as Marxists see our task in unveiling unfreedoms, whereever they lie, even within our own ranks. This however isn't universal. We have for example leading Marxist feminist theorists, who engage in developing collective ways of doing social research, that is tied by reconstructing recollections of how we reproduce in our actions our own conditions of unfreedom (Frigga Haug).
These traditions of course are also reactions to the regime of East Germany one side and the rapid anti-communism in West Germany, which lead to an extreme intellectualisation of Marxism. Thirdly the failure of the biggest organised workers' movement in stopping WWI and the failure of the revolution in 1918 plus the rise of Nazis lead to a rise of the study of Authoritarianism and antisemitism. Theories usually revolve around the alieneted subject. Marxism in that regard is interpretated as a continuation of the enlightenment project. Psychology and Freudian psychoanalysis play a big role.
Of course Germany isn't isolated from the developments in other countries and other countries are influenced by the German traditions, but I think it is fair to say, that these are some aspects, that are more deveopled in German Marxism than in other countries.
@@juliansnei96 Wolff begins his discussion of Marx with class struggle. This is the central theme of his work. He understands Marxian terms as a theory of the poltical struggle between the employee and the employer. Many Marxists in Germany don't begin with the economic struggle between classes.
They look intensively at the question of what it means that our social interactions and our interactions with nature appear in commodity form. This question for examples opens up discussions around "socialist societies" in which commodities still play a central role, although capitalist behaviour and relation are supressed. Class society and capital as a social relation may be the unfolding of the commodity form, however the starting point of analysis of Value knows nothing of it and many social forms of alienation and social ills therefore can be understood within the framework of Marxist critique of Capital even without referring to class struggle and class relations. This leads to different theories of culture for example, but also to different political consequences.
@@123456789987o Dr Gabriel Rockhill is a pretty good source for trying to differentiate between "Western Marxism" and "Eastern Marxism".
@@123456789987o Thanks for your long comments. Sorry for my long comment. I guess you're aware of this history but others are not.
You make no direct mention of Stalinism. As far as I know Adorno refused to address, let alone condemn the Moscow Trials even though he and other leading members of the Frankfurt School were quite aware of what was taking place in the Soviet Union. Althusser spent his entire life in the leadership of the Stalinist French Communist Party. Do the German Marxists you are referring to consider Stalinism a legitimate current in Marxism?
(This issue doesn't just affect Stalinism. Lenin wrote in mid 1917, before the revolution, "Today, the bourgeoisie and the opportunists within the labor movement concur in this doctoring of Marxism. They omit, obscure, or distort the revolutionary side of this theory, its revolutionary soul. They push to the foreground and extol what is or seems acceptable to the bourgeoisie. All the social-chauvinists are now “Marxists” (don’t laugh!). And more and more frequently German bourgeois scholars, only yesterday specialists in the annihilation of Marxism, are speaking of the “national-German” Marx, who, they claim, educated the labor unions which are so splendidly organized for the purpose of waging a predatory war!")
------
You say "Thirdly the failure of the biggest organised workers' movement in stopping WWI and the failure of the revolution in 1918 plus the rise of Nazis lead to a rise of the study of Authoritarianism and antisemitism." Please direct us to what works you are referring to because the statement makes no sense to me.
1. Why was August 1914 a "failure"? Wasn't it a "betrayal"? War was anticipated and at the congresses of the Second International at Stuttgart in 1907, Copenhagen in 1910 and Basel in 1912, and anti-war resolutions were passed. The Basel resolution reads, in part,
"This congress … calls upon the workers of all countries to oppose capitalist imperialism with the power of the international solidarity of the working class.” AND “It would be insane should governments not realize that the mere thought of the monstrosity of a world war would evoke the outrage and anger of the working class. The proletariat regards it as criminal if they be forced to shoot at one another in order to further the profits of capitalists and the ambitions of dynasties, or to honor secret diplomatic treaties.”
As I'm sure you're aware the leaderships of almost all the sections of the Second International voted for the war and backed their respective capitalist class. The exceptions were the Bolsheviks under Lenin and the Serbian section.
2. Wasn't the November 1918 revolution, which was followed by the January 1919 Spartacist Uprising, defeated in part because of the determination of the Social Democratic Party to prevent revolution, including ordering the arrest and summary execution of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht. The passive term "failure" implies there was no class struggle underway.
3. Finally in Germany 1930-1933 there is a similar issue but you mention only the "study of Authoritarianism and antisemitism". Has there been any study of the response to the "rise of the Nazis" by the leaderships of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the German Communist Party (KPD) and the trade unions?
In the November 1932 elections the Nazis lost 2 million votes compared to the July 1932 elections and the combined votes of the SPD and KPD was once again above the Nazi party vote. The Nazi party went into a crisis. On 30 January 1933 Hitler was legally appointed Chancellor with only two other Nazis in the cabinet. Why did the German capitalist class do this?
More importantly this was 11 years after the "March on Rome" and the appointment of Mussolini as Prime Minister and 7 years the Italian fascists had consolidated the dictatorship, banned all other parties arrested the leadership of the Italian Communist Party, including Gramsci. The danger of fascism was no mystery. From 1928 the KPD and the Comintern maintained that social-democrats were "social-fascists" and insisted there could be no United Front against the Nazis. The SPD were little better. After January 1933 as repression by force escalated by the SPD and KPD put forward that the regime would spontaneously fall apart and socialism would emerge. Some in the SPD even used the slogan "Nach Hitler, Kommen Wir!" ("After Hiter, we come!"). On April 1 the Comintern in Moscow made its first public statement which said in part: "The establishment of an open Fascist dictatorship, which destroys all democratic illusions among the masses, and frees them from the influence of the social-democrats, will hasten Germany's progress towards the proletarian revolution.” Later the Stalinists said the policies of the KPD had been entirely correct. Do the German Marxists today agree with this?
Just to finish on May Day 1933 there were mass marches of German workers organised by the trade unions, with government approval. The next day almost the entire trade union leadership was arrested. What do the German Marxists you're studying think of this?
28:17 Fishing Boats & Trawlers in India use the same mechanism as: "Division of Fruition", if I may call it; where after paying for the Costs (Diesel/Fuel, amortization of the boat or the assumed hire charges for as many days during fishing in high seas or taking tourists out etc the fruit of the labour is divided into 3 parts: 1 for the Boat Owner (Capitalist) and the remaining 2 parts to be handed equally among the Deck hands.
Prof. Wolff you are such a complete teacher and so passionate about your own subjects that I feel very sad not to have been around you to learn more from. Thanks for doing these videos, they will be eternally stored somewhere. All my life I wondered about Marxism but was too lazy to pick up Das Kapital to begin with. Please suggest from where I can grab a copy of your book/s. Thanks Again!
Try "the theory of money and credit" by Von Mises or "principles of economics" by Saif Ammous
Break it down for us Professor!
When I took a first-year (entry level) Political Science course (POLS111) at Victoria University (Wellington, NZ), part of the course looked at Socialist/ Communist forms of governance (Peoples' Democracies). This course was a requirement for Bachelor of Commerce (Business Studies?) students. Apparently those types stayed away for that section of lectures. Too frightened, maybe?
No surprises there. But at least the University presented, in abbreviated form, as comprehensive a half-year primer course on politics as could have been expected. The second half year, POLS112, a far more challenging course, presented a whole range of political philosophical writing from Plato to Fritz Hayek. Karl Marx was in there, of course (I don't recall that Gracchus Babeuf was, but I found out about him later). That was the sort of intellectual honesty and rigour one could expect from tertiary education 40 years ago...
Teaching economics without mentioning Marx is like teaching economics without Keynes. Americans are taught to have a Pavlovian response to the words Marxism, Fascism, Socialism, Capitalism and Democracy. They will attack anyone who suggests that they need to learn any details about any of those terms. 😵
How do we organize labor so that it can be withheld during disputes. Any good books on this?
I always look forward to your presentations but this one is in my opinion the most important one so far, put over in a way that anyone can understand. This should be shown on MSM (unlikely with the media owned and controlled by capitalists). I live in the UK and find many people who complain about the failure of social systems such as water supply, NHS, domestic power,& infrastructure cant be bothered to think for themselves and instead rely on the media for lies and pointing a finger in the wrong direction ie emigrants, ETC. If only people would realize the huge power we could have collectively to change thing for the better.
The solution to capitalism is the abolition of private property and the creation of a classless society. This is what people in the Soviet Union tried to do and experimented in this way. This is what people here think to do, what we need to do in the future, taking into account the lessons of the USSR.
9:12 Get through another day gang, represent!
1:47 after reading about the labor theory as explained by Marx, I wonder how anyone could think his theories have merit
❤ greetings from the Netherlands
Greetings to you from Pacific Coast, USA!
Obrigada, desde o Brasil.
It’s opened my eyes in a clear, straightforward way. I tried to read Marx, but found it quite complex.
Did you? I did not realize how traumatized I was by the anti-communism fervor I lived through growing up in the US until I noticed the fear I still have about that.
Tata has 4 airlines and all aren't profitable and flights cancelled because the workers not happy with the new wages because of consolidated.
Tata is an awful company that often seems to by loss making key national interest businesses to milk bailouts from the governments of nations for those and if/when the bailouts/"subsidies" stop it then pulls out and writes the enterprise off as a loss against its profits from its other businesses while taking all the equipment and IP of that business which it got for practically free thanks to generous bailouts and tax breaks.
The Marxian critique of capitalism is still valid today. I have not read the three volumes of Marx's Das Kapital, nor is it on my bucket list. All this makes me think of a line in the movie, "Cocktail:" "In all the world there are the hustlers and the workers. The workers never hustle and the hustlers never work."
Professor Wolff, only one big detail, which affects the whole explanation of capitalism and particularly the lack of stability: NEOLIBERALISM
Neoliberalism, not classic capitalism, is what has weakened the democratic state (the government), eliminated or underfunded public services which were common in every capitalist society, and privatised as many aspects of human life as possible.
NEOLIBERALISM is the biggest current obstacle to collective prosperity and to the exercise of true democracy.
I would say the result of 40 to 50 years of neoliberalism has taken us to something that’s more accurately called “neo-feudalism”
This Neoliberalism is a modern byproduct of classic capitalism and it is again promoted and fueled by capitalist society. Therefore, the democracy is being deteriorated by idea of capitalism for the benefits of capitalist.
Do you not understand that neoliberalism is the natural and logical development of previous forms that defend and glorify the capitalist system?!?
Neoliberalism is a reactionary ideology used as an excuse to further plunder the people and to suppress any resistance to the system of capitalism!
The United States (US) is called the “land of the free and the home of the brave. North America was the home of the braves, until the English colonial settlers ethnically cleansed them from their homeland. This video brilliantly explains why only ones who are now free in the US are the oligarchs. The US today is pushing for World War III for the sole purpose of enriching even more its oligarchs. Today, as 38 million Americans live in poverty, 9 of the 10 richest men in the world are US citizens. That is why only 33% of Americans are satisfied with our government. The US has the audacity to accuse the People’s Republic of China as being a dictatorship, because she refuses to allow US oligarchs to do whatever they want in China. China, however, has already eliminated her poverty, despite having 4 times the US’ populations. Moreover, 90% of Chinese are satisfied with their government. And yet, of all people, America wants to lecture China on democracy and human rights! Here is another great example. The US hypocritically says that it is willing go to war against China to defend Taiwan’s inalienable right to self-determination and independence. Meanwhile, the US has consistently refused to comply with 42 United Nations’ resolutions demanding that it immediately return Puerto Rico’s sovereignty to the Puerto Ricans. US greed could lead to World War III.
Good stuff.
16:17 if society were operating under a hard money standard (gold) then savings would not lose value and therefore people would save...and this also levels the negotiation between employer and employee.
And where did employers come from? Did they not innovate and risk their savings to start a business? Sure there are many answers. But as often the case, communists/marxists/collectivists will vilify the innovator in order to justify stealing from them. However, in our society and monetary system many big businesses have and continue to gain an unfair advantage over the worker and smaller competition as they have access to ever increasing credit to buy up resources at the same time money printing devalues the employees savings.
Debt based monetary system is the opposite of what society requires for a more just civilized society. The money supply should be a set amount. Its okay for a little expansion and contraction due to credit issue and payoff. But lenders must be allowed to fail or maybe even limited to only lending money they have in treasury not depositor funds...ie. savings banks vs investment banks
One of the main problems I have with Marxism is that ⬇
38:55 "no matter how big it gets it needs to get bigger - No matter how rich the employer gets in has to get richer"
Problem being the concept of the "rich" is purely a numbers game for *most Marxists rooted philosophies.
What I mean is that for some (in their ways of thinking) money: is something of 🚩*material value. The truth is that money is NOT substantial beyond its value in paper or in gold (even if backed by a physical material).
What money truly is, is a means to manipulate where the human capital of time goes into⏳. Do people build more construction materials for the giant pyramid of the rich; and do they have time left afterward to make their own houses or what not❓
The pyramid example is used to show historical frivolous EXTREME spending. The problem is the COST OF TIME. If a Rich person like Elon musk does not buy a Pyramid or 3 Houses like Bernie Sanders has - the question is where is the HUMAN Capital attached to the materials of his wealth? His Billions of dollars are more of a responsibility to do good when he has the power to - HOWEVER it is NOT a material wealth for the *most part.
What some Marxists get right: we must be warry of giving too much economic driving power to the ultra rich.
43:39
When I became a Graduate Assistant at Miami University in the 80's--to teach Freshman English-- I had to sign a Loyalty Oath swearing that I had never been a member of the Communist Party. Still makes me angry.
I love having 24 apartments. The tenants pay my properties off for me.
Why doesn't Richard feature more in British Left-Wing papers more?
He has a great way of putting across Marx's ideas in a simpler way.
I've read all of Captal quickly and Theories of Surplus Value but in my inimitable way still no expert ;(
I'd guess that the faux-left in the United Kingdom are just as dismissive of Professor Wolff and Marxian theory as the faux-left in the United States...
Because I am in Britain and we have... 2. The Canary, and the Communists.
Everything else is centre left at best, with the overwhelming bulk being centre right to right wing. Though by American standards centre left = Marx.
I’ll say this, right before Marie Antoinette’s head was uninstalled, the French complained about difficulty in procuring food - just like Americans complain now.
yeah. that is so true. americans just don't get enough to eat.
@@EonSlemp definitely not enough quality food. Just things like Funyuns fudge rounds.
@@pokemercenary6511 definitely. i was in a grocery store the other day and it was just funyons and fudge rounds as far as the eye can see. people in socialist countries eat really well. that is why i am moving to mexico - so obrador can feed me properly.
@@pokemercenary6511 people are allowed to buy what they want to buy. but yes there is definitely no nutritious food in america. i was in wal-mart the other day and there was no nutritious food to be found. just funyons and fudge rounds as far as the eye can see. that is why i am moving to venezuela. so i can eat properly under TRUE socialism!
@@pokemercenary6511 people are allowed to buy what they want to buy. but yes there is definitely no nutritious food in america. i was in wal-mart the other day and there was no nutritious food to be found. just funyons and fudge rounds as far as the eye can see. that is why i am moving to venezuela. so i can eat properly under TRUE socialism!
Adam Smith's capitalism economy failed to complete with Karl Marx's socialism economy.
Adam imagine an utopia and they never work
i only have fair knowledge of economic systems , if you might hear me, i think that the main problem in Capitalism is that the rich keep getting richer with no boundary for their wealth expansion and that they can get away with the wealth they collect if they decided the shut down the market with no legal consequences at all, socialism on the other hand doesn't present any kind of incentive to encourage wealthy people to get engaged in the financial market. i think the the Islamic financial system might provide the correct answer on how to deal with different groups of people, although it is not implemented nowadays, it philosophy stand midway between socialism and capitalism. Islamic system encourage wealthy people via temptation and the fear of losing their wealth through taxation to participate in the investment and at the same time doesn't allow the rich to get richer with no boundaries . there are too many details in the Islamic financial system and there are many books about it. i am not so much expert about it but i like the philosophy of taxation in Islamic finance.
42:50 There you have the answer… and root of all those things since this system exists.
Workers under capitalism for 500 years have social etc. amnesia of
constant business cycles? Or they knew, but resigned selves if they did not resist?
If not for professors Wolff, Sachs, Mearsheimer, where else would we see and learn the real TRUTH and nothing BUT?
Imagine if the professor got a dollar from every working person in America. That would add up to 132 million dollars. The professor would be a serious contender creating a new path for growth and development.
The thought that Capitalism is nothing more than collection of commodities relating to each other is a mind blowing revelation that challenges our basic premises of life right from the get go, why products should be commodities in the first place!
Commodities obscure the work process in society. Makes mysterious the role of industry, science and technology in a work process and obscures the material exchanges between humans and nature, a relation of perpetual transformation, and when the work process consists of 3 billion humans on the planet, transformation happens quick!
One commodity is the same as a any other commodity, so dissecting one commodity is all it takes to expose these general laws of capitalism is a challenging position. This means... Workers are bossed into making commodities every day from 9 to 5. A fixed period of time rules work, they have to make enough commodities that a profit motive becomes the end and aim of production, or there is no work at all, humanity is a hostage to a social condition.
Before this happened there wasn’t a social condition to work, a watch was a town crier or a church bell, a time element was not a social program all members of society would participate with. Before a time element came into the work process, if a thing had to be made, or food had to be harvested, it was done by slaves, serfs, artisans, but when the same work had to be done after a time element took over work, and how people harvested the soil and made coats, hats, shoes, clocks, guns, they had to become free people, before they can be hired as free workers, before slaves and serfs can become known as a family of tailors, milliners, clocksmiths, gunsmiths, their very sustenance has to be torn out from under them by means of economic conquest.
I enjoyed trying to understand your thoughts... You had me hooked on your first sentence,,, and your twist on time had me reread three times to understand where you are going with that... Check out Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel economic theory,,, "participatory economics"... If you haven't heard of it,,, I think you will find it interesting... Namaste...
So, what is the basic premise of life? If you are going to present a reasoned progression
that is consistent...and based on factual evidence, you should be able to state the
first one, no?
Of course, like most rhetoric seeking to end with their pre-determined conclusion, that
path to that conclusion is littered with "assumptions" that "everyone Knows" what all
the words mean and they are in complete agreement regarding that meaning.
Yet, avoidance of definition and linguistic precision is what you strive for...and produce.
@@jgalt308 Your rhetoric is just as set on a pre-determined conclusion. It's just "homesteading" instead of "not homesteading."
Конкуренция...Лучший Алимп..честно!!!..нет...Гегемон не терпит ..конкуренции..Цена и качество!!!
I hate when I'm busy and the next video plays and it's this.
One moral take from this is read every book that is banned. Read them because they present knowledge that is kept hidden to avoid turning you into a rational thinking human being
We can and we should do better.
44:00
"No other theory of how society works is as tabooed and banned as the Marxist approach." However writers of the 19th and 20th centuries have written about it a lot. Silvio Gesell wrote in the 20s "How was it that the Marxian theory of capital succeeded in ousting that of Proudhon and in giving sovereign sway to communistic socialism ? How is it that Marx and his theory are spoken of by every newspaper in the world ? Some have suggested as a reason the hopelessness, and the corresponding harmlessness, of the Marxian doctrine. "No capitalist is afraid of his theory, just as no capitalist is afraid of the Christian doctrine; it is therefore positively an advantage to capital to have Marx and Christ discussed as widely as possible, for Marx can never damage capital. But beware of Proudhon; better keep him out of sight and hearing!" Talk about suppressed works, even if it was praised by Keynes and Fisher, how many have even heard of Silvio Gesell who had a much better grasp on how the world works as did Frederick Soddy. "To allow money to become a source of revenue to private issuers is to create, first, a secret and illicit arm of the government and, last, a rival power strong enough ultimately to overthrow all other forms of government." We need to end capitalism's money system in favor of sovereign money. monetaryalliance.org
Dr. Wolff,
You are the most prominent living Marxist in the world. I'm glad to live with you in this century. Along with your living theory, I always keep in mind of these cardinal concepts; dialectical materialism which concerns the development of technology will later cause a change in the productive relationship as a super structure. The other is the theory of surplus value, which must stay with the labor value behind the free-and-equal exchange in the capitalist mode of production. As you Dr. mention somewhere that the democratic cooperative mode of production will replace the previous production in the future.
The relations of production do not change without revolution. Marx studied capitalism and Lenin added the revolutionary struggle of the working class. Therefore, Marxism-Leninism was formed.
@@Googlag Thanks for replying to my letter. I love Lenin, too. However, I would not agree to your idea that the sudden change in politics may cause a huge victim as we have been experiencing right now. While admitting what capitalists want more, we, workers must overcome the basic requests in accordance with the local capitalists and the local municipal government, which the democratic cooperative mode should be like, as far as I know. I am a Japanese educated in USA under Dr. Karl Niebyl . If you know about him, please let me know.
amazing vid! more china-related content please!!!
Good, but some parts are awfully slow. As if assuming the audience are slow learners or something...