The idea of illustrating the economy like the water cycle is a brilliant one, however he should hire a graphic designer to make his little diagram more legible and visually appealing, it will have more impact that way.
Jihad Jordan bin Peterson is beloved by Saudi Arabia where they think that he's a political prisoner for Bill c-16. Plus, you can't tell bin Peterson from radical Islam. twitter.com/jbporcleric?lang=en
marx was an important voice in the development of the science of economics. as a revolutionary, too optimistic- cannon fire answered his revolution, and ended it, for awhile. in the end, it needs a large majority of people to support revolution and a large minority willing to die for it, otherwise the cannons will always win. but his writings provided the 'holy scripture' around which two important revolutions succeeded, in russia and china. the scripture was necessary, as a rally point and incendiary, but both revolutions twisted marx to suit local conditions, almost out of recognition in china. marx made no mention of democracy, for there was none when he wrote. except the near unnoticeable case of switzerland. but without democracy, lenin's idea of leading party led inexorably to tyranny. even so, in china and russia, the life of most people was greatly improved by 'communism.' public education and public health laid the base for today's educated nations, in the case of china such a good base that china will soon be the richest nation in the world. whatever the failures of mao and lenin, the good they did for their nation was great. even today, mao would win any election for president, if china had an election. and don't laugh at the 'dictatorship' of the communist party of the people's republic of china: no other nation can compare with the results gained by the chinese leadership over the last 30 years.
only in the sense that they are trying hard to work for all the people of china, and manage the state economy in a scientific fashion. so call them 'socialist, with chinese characteristics'. marx might approve, as he envisioned the need for social evolution, rather than over-night transformation. blame lenin and mao for trying violent transformation if you wish, but they had powerful enemies.. the label is not too important, the result, on balance, is a chinese nation taking its rightful place at the forefront of human society. where, unlike capitalist society, everyone is by right, entitled to some share in the national wealth. xi jin ping is saying the right things about the remaining very poor people, and doing things for them too. compare and contrast with the degenerates at the top of usa.
You seem very confused about the people's republic of china, it is very easy to see that it has a hypercapitalist crisis driven economy without any semblance of workers power. Communism is not some sort of moral philosophy about ''poor people's rights'', it is a political philosophy of the actuality of worker's power and takeover in the capitalist mode of production. I can tell you that what Marx would be interested in when it comes to China would be how crisis has driven it to insane overproduction and how a former socialist political system could destabilize into the most severe large bourgeois economy on the planet. Maybe you should read 'Der Bürgerkrieg in Frankreich' if you want to know how Marx actually viewed revolution. Besides this it is most definitely not true that Marx was an ''economist'' or developed the ''science of economics'', economics is most definitely not a science (that's coming from a mathematician by the way) and Marx certainly did not contribute to it, to the contrary, he destroyed it with his theories of crisis and surplus value.
No system is perfect. Overproduction is not a problem in a communist society, except if it depletes one's resources. The Peoples Republic of China uses the capitalist machine to fuel its development of communism. While many Americans and people in European nations ridicule China and consign communism to history, their homes and workspaces and retail sectors are full of products made in China. The Peoples Republic of China is buying vast areas of agricultural land in various parts of the world. In reality, China is vastly more important politically and economically than the United States of America and is not only the world's largest economy but is an economic T-rex while the USA is only an elephant. The United States of America as a political state owns vertical nothing while the Peoples Republic of China owns everything in China and so much outside.
Perhaps we could have another one of these on Marx's influential essay "Zur Judenfrage" (On the Jewish Question). Those ideas were hugely influential in the 20th century, particularly in his own Fatherland. Even today we can see these ideas simmering below the surface in many of his most enthusiastic followers. His pro-colonial arguments are not so relevant nowadays, and his use of the N-word in English (even when writing German) is a little problematic, so perhaps don't do one of these on his personal correspondence with Engels.
Read what Marx has to say about how the economy should be structured to find out what is the most effective way to bring a country into poverty and humiliation in the shortest time possible
If we are too deep in to the details, we tend to miss the bigger picture. @Kant Touch This, just because i find marx a naiv and most of his ideas as wishful thinking detached from reality and sometimes in complete contradiction with human nature, doesn't mean i don't understand... In "The Communist Manifesto" , while the problems of capitalism described are, a very good way tho actually understand how capitalism work, the solutions and predictions , in time and after countless unsuccessful attempts, were proved tho be deeply flawed. On the ader hand , Adam Smith , has a better understanding of how people think , for me he's making a lot more sense even if i don't agree with everything his saying.
What is the popular perception of Hegel in US and Western Europe?
Mostly used by the left
The idea of illustrating the economy like the water cycle is a brilliant one, however he should hire a graphic designer to make his little diagram more legible and visually appealing, it will have more impact that way.
He is not illustrating water cycle for economy. He is illustrating it to explain circulation of money and he does it briefly and brilliantly.
Jordan Peterson disliked this video lol
KROOL so did his pet lobster... 😉
Lobsters are not humans. They have much smaller brains.
Jihad Jordan bin Peterson is beloved by Saudi Arabia where they think that he's a political prisoner for Bill c-16. Plus, you can't tell bin Peterson from radical Islam. twitter.com/jbporcleric?lang=en
So did i
@@MichaelShulski lol your answer is socialism or communism? Fruit loop
Economics for environmentalists.
Arabic sub pleaaaassssseeeesee
Thenk you. Mr... Harvey
thenk
marx was an important voice in the development of the science of economics. as a revolutionary, too optimistic- cannon fire answered his revolution, and ended it, for awhile. in the end, it needs a large majority of people to support revolution and a large minority willing to die for it, otherwise the cannons will always win.
but his writings provided the 'holy scripture' around which two important revolutions succeeded, in russia and china. the scripture was necessary, as a rally point and incendiary, but both revolutions twisted marx to suit local conditions, almost out of recognition in china.
marx made no mention of democracy, for there was none when he wrote. except the near unnoticeable case of switzerland. but without democracy, lenin's idea of leading party led inexorably to tyranny. even so, in china and russia, the life of most people was greatly improved by 'communism.' public education and public health laid the base for today's educated nations, in the case of china such a good base that china will soon be the richest nation in the world. whatever the failures of mao and lenin, the good they did for their nation was great. even today, mao would win any election for president, if china had an election.
and don't laugh at the 'dictatorship' of the communist party of the people's republic of china: no other nation can compare with the results gained by the chinese leadership over the last 30 years.
only in the sense that they are trying hard to work for all the people of china, and manage the state economy in a scientific fashion. so call them 'socialist, with chinese characteristics'. marx might approve, as he envisioned the need for social evolution, rather than over-night transformation. blame lenin and mao for trying violent transformation if you wish, but they had powerful enemies.. the label is not too important, the result, on balance, is a chinese nation taking its rightful place at the forefront of human society. where, unlike capitalist society, everyone is by right, entitled to some share in the national wealth. xi jin ping is saying the right things about the remaining very poor people, and doing things for them too. compare and contrast with the degenerates at the top of usa.
You seem very confused about the people's republic of china, it is very easy to see that it has a hypercapitalist crisis driven economy without any semblance of workers power. Communism is not some sort of moral philosophy about ''poor people's rights'', it is a political philosophy of the actuality of worker's power and takeover in the capitalist mode of production. I can tell you that what Marx would be interested in when it comes to China would be how crisis has driven it to insane overproduction and how a former socialist political system could destabilize into the most severe large bourgeois economy on the planet. Maybe you should read 'Der Bürgerkrieg in Frankreich' if you want to know how Marx actually viewed revolution.
Besides this it is most definitely not true that Marx was an ''economist'' or developed the ''science of economics'', economics is most definitely not a science (that's coming from a mathematician by the way) and Marx certainly did not contribute to it, to the contrary, he destroyed it with his theories of crisis and surplus value.
No system is perfect.
Overproduction is not a problem in a communist society, except if it depletes one's resources.
The Peoples Republic of China uses the capitalist machine to fuel its development of communism.
While many Americans and people in European nations ridicule China and consign communism to history, their homes and workspaces and retail sectors are full of products made in China.
The Peoples Republic of China is buying vast areas of agricultural land in various parts of the world.
In reality, China is vastly more important politically and economically than the United States of America and is not only the world's largest economy but is an economic T-rex while the USA is only an elephant. The United States of America as a political state owns vertical nothing while the Peoples Republic of China owns everything in China and so much outside.
Communism isn't a economic concept as much as a rejection of economics. Take capital out of the equation and you don't have a economic model.
Perhaps we could have another one of these on Marx's influential essay "Zur Judenfrage" (On the Jewish Question). Those ideas were hugely influential in the 20th century, particularly in his own Fatherland. Even today we can see these ideas simmering below the surface in many of his most enthusiastic followers.
His pro-colonial arguments are not so relevant nowadays, and his use of the N-word in English (even when writing German) is a little problematic, so perhaps don't do one of these on his personal correspondence with Engels.
Read what Marx has to say about how the economy should be structured to find out what is the most effective way to bring a country into poverty and humiliation in the shortest time possible
He hasn't written about "how the economy should be structured" you brainless worm.
"brainless worm", coming from a sympathizer of marx's theories, oh the irony :DD
Do you understand even the barest basics of marx?
If we are too deep in to the details, we tend to miss the bigger picture.
@Kant Touch This, just because i find marx a naiv and most of his ideas as wishful thinking detached from reality and sometimes in complete contradiction with human nature, doesn't mean i don't understand...
In "The Communist Manifesto" , while the problems of capitalism described are, a very good way tho actually understand how capitalism work, the solutions and predictions , in time and after countless unsuccessful attempts, were proved tho be deeply flawed. On the ader hand , Adam Smith , has a better understanding of how people think , for me he's making a lot more sense even if i don't agree with everything his saying.
Rewrite this but in coherent english.
About the human nature part: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_Aid:_A_Factor_of_Evolution