Arise ye workers from your slumbers Arise ye prisoners of want For reason in revolt now thunders And at last ends the age of cant. Away with all your superstitions Servile masses arise, arise We’ll change henceforth the old tradition And spurn the dust to win the prize.
Thank you Prof Wolff! I'm incredibly grateful for the opportunity to be your student at this time in history. Please keep up the fantastic work you do here!
Jim Battersbee You are right that we aren't as free as we used to be, thanks to socialists like you hijacking our education system and infiltrating our government bureaucracies. Some of what you said is actually true. Some is just racist crap. The truth is, we aren't as good as we could be, but then I don't know of a place on Earth that is. Nice antiamerican rant. I see that you have been well indoctrinated in the socialist religion.
Jim Battersbee I have no problem with the government providing certain services. There are things, obviously, that only government can do well. The problem is when government becomes a nanny state that controls everything. That is socialism, and your example of just how incompetent the government can be is exactly why Americans want as little of it in our private lives as possible. Well done. I can agree with the idea that we have problems without going along with some of your more ridiculous ideas; like the idea that we can't provide clean drinking water for our people, or that American officials "pledge allegiance to Israel". But, I guess it doesn't matter if your socialist talking points are true or not, as long as they are antiamerican. That is all that matters, right?
@@bumblebee9337 The writing is in regard to factors that led to the election of Donald Trump being clearly visible long before the 2016 Presidential campaign. I begin with a historical assessment of reactionary groups in the US such as KKK, John Birch and later the Tea Party. I allude to the fact that reactionary groups have sometimes and generally had 'big money' support, but the fact that these groups also have genuine grassroots funding shows the meaningful diminishing of important economic issues. I argue that neoliberalism and post-materialism, the declining salience of economic mediation and its dictation of social relations on the supposed 'left' have allowed contradictory right-wing populists to take political power and that this has fuelled racial divides in America. Trump signifies the economic elite becoming more mainstream amongst the political elite. More are looking toward the end of neoliberalism, but a large part of our society is post-materialist whilst ideologically defending liberal policies. Obama must be critiqued in this manner too; and it does explain the failure of crooked Hillary. Americans are being told to be more accepting etc (which is not wrong at all) whilst their state enforces violatory immigration practices, constantly invades other nations and hegemonically controls their economies. Without addressing the exportation of domestic issues they will end up in a serious blowback i.e Trump. (economic elite move towards politics) I need to develop my thesis more and this is far from complete (but generally this is the gist of it) My own thoughts regarding this is that we must return to materialism, not see it as such crassness, to prevent the upsurge of right-wing populist movements such as Trump and return to major elements of the classical economic left whilst incorporating many new movements that are beginning to identify more and more with socialism or Marxism (marxism does deserve a contemporary meaningful reboot, Dr. Wolff is one important figure in this). We cannot afford to be ahistorical in how we analyse the rise of authoritarian capitalism (think Weimar 1920s and the BRILLIANT critical theorists who I believe we must return to conceptually, a re-conceptualisation of this kind is necessary)
this works really well as an overview. well done. but equalism strongly disagrees with 2 major points made here. 1) we most definitely do have fascism in the U.S. as does the rest of the world in varying degrees. 2) the soviets weren't socialist. what was stalin, or Mao for that matter, but "strong men" as defined by mr. wolff. equalism presents a more accurate view of the socialism/ fascism dichotomy. the elite on the left and right both misrepresent these 2 concepts. watch my 3 of my most recent videos and learn more: "equalism 143: Do We Really Have Socialism for the Rich?" - ua-cam.com/video/4Fdw1DuYl_s/v-deo.html - "equalism 141: Was Hitler a Socialist?" - ua-cam.com/video/bb0ieKj0CcQ/v-deo.html - "equalism 139: We Must Break The Fascist Stranglehold!" - ua-cam.com/video/uIEuOuT-SMc/v-deo.html - join the equalism movement and lets UNITE to fix this mess the elite have made for us.
As a Greek that hit me so hard.. we have a far right co-government and the third largest party is straight out fascist. We are closer to fascism than we ever were in this century. We desperetaly need education like this. Thank you Dr. Wolff and Democracy at Work!
Mr wolff you are right the world Is turning fascist in every nook and corner, in india we already have a Hindu nationalist right wing leader the moods of the country are very much inclined to have him elected the 2nd time
"Ningún gobierno lucha en contra del fascismo para destruirlo. Cuando la burguesía ve que el poder se les escapa de sus manos, alzan el fascismo para mantener sus privilegios." (No government fights against fascism to destroy it. When the bourgouis sees its power escaping their hands, they use fascism to maintain their privileges.) Buenaventura Durruti 1936
It seems to me the most noticeable difference between Socialism and Fascism is the role of government. In Socialism the role of government is to run business or at very least control what business does or does not do. In Fascism the role of government is to ally and partner with business ,giving business a considerable amount of bureaucratic powers. As usual Professor Wolff has earned his paycheck. I wish more voters would subscribe to this channel.
This is the discussion the country needs to have, with some direction including historical context that the left can use to move from a dramatically complex set of federal and state rules (often in conflict) that can be explained and campaigned on.
Just got my copy of "Understanding Marxism" in the mail yesterday... considering whether or not i should take it to work :P kind of a white cover for oily hands though... lol
You have inspired me to learn and grow. I just finished reading "Understanding Marxism" and started "Capitalism's Crisis Deepens: Essays on the Global Economic Meltdown". I am extremely grateful for your wisdom. You have sparked an interest within me that I didn't know existed. Thank you.
They are extension of Capitalism. All central banks are nothing but PRIVATELY OWNED BUSINESSES. Therr are only handful of them that are not, that are state run central banks) BOTH ECONOMIC and MONETARY SYSTEMS are SCAMS
Perhaps this global tendency towards facism is a manifestation of the the approaching end of the fossil fuel age. Its hard to run an industrial society with low EROEI. Ultimately, societies run on energy, not money.
Prof. Wolff, I see so many people who support Capitalism as if THEY were Capitalists or somehow benefit from it. Sometimes they get very angry when I try to remind them that they are NOT the Capitalists getting wealthy, they're instead, the Capitalist's source of wealth. >>> How many ACTUAL Capitalists are there, compared to those only trained to "identify" with Capitalism? And how do I explain it without them either running or me risking life and limb?
@madcheeseknightYou must feel that if you identify with the Capitalists, you will somehow morph from being a VICTIM of Capitalism and a source of it's wealth, becoming a beneficiary? You obviously are one of the people I commented about! >>> NOTHING in my post could possibly lead to your conclusion, "I'm sure you think you're gonna be one of the people in the government after your great revolution" >>> Based on nothing more than my post, can you also tell what I had for breakfast, in the same way you "divined" my supposed aspirations to a position in [the new] government? >>> I'm sure it would be just as valid, if you could.
@Andras Buzas What? We should only feel excitement when learning NEW concepts? Old or New are relative terms. (I am the center of my awareness, so, relative to my personal knowledge level, anything I learn, is a NEW concept.) >>> Perhaps you could save me some embarrassment next time, though, by cluing me in... What is the official or generally accepted date, after which excitement derived from learning is socially acceptable? I wouldn't want to be a recalcitrant recidivist.
@madcheeseknight You are arguing against a straw-man. I realize it's a lot easier to argue against the old Cold-War ideas of Socialism, than to listen and understand what is really being presented. We all know what happened with Cold-War Socialism, wouldn't we be incredibly stupid to suggest that we do it again? Before you unload all your venom on what YOU think we're talking about, learn about a Socialism you never heard of, "DEMOCRACY IN THE WORKPLACE".
28:30 Huey Long was no fascist and you know it. He preached for isolationism and was a lot more racially tolerant than many of his Southern comrades. You may dislike his populist rhetoric, but to paint him as a fascist is incredibly disingenuous.
Well as the fools in America would say, "just 4 more years", "the president can't stay for more than two terms that's unconstitutional". just because something is illegal just mean it can't happen anyway.
You know, there wasn't always a two-term limit. Thanks to Wolfe, I now know largely why the limit was set. FDR, the most popular president in US history as evinced by his serving not one, not two, not three, but _four_ (!) terms, is largely responsible for that limit. A number of interests did not enjoy the New Deal very much, namely the rich, and even a few fascists. Since then these interests have striven at great length to demonize and root out socialists or any critic of the capitalism that made them rich, starting with the communists in the US, as they were the weakest link, but it didn't end there. We've since been barraged with endless propaganda - especially in the last 40-50 years - to keep attitudes and beliefs surrounding critiques of capitalism all but unthinkable in the public mind. Reagan was among the first and certainly a great communicator of this neoliberal propaganda of mass deregulation for corporations and tax cuts for the rich, less benefits for the working class, etc., and the blatant lie that if the rich and corporations get richer, that will trickle down to the mass of people. We the people have not seen much trickle down at all in the last several decades, yet continue to oscillate between the two parties in the hope that the other side will implement any real and serious change. First a republican for 8 years (Reagan)+ H.W. Bush for 4 years, then a democrat for 8 years(Clinton), then a republican for 8 years(George W Bush), then democrat for 8 years(Barack Obama), and now, predictably a republican for (plausibly) 8 years again with Trump. Every single one has furthered neoliberal policies which benefit the rich, corporations, banks, _not_ the people. It's a sad state of affairs to see the failure of the two party system of late. It does seem more and more to be an illusion of choice.
Always A Joy to listen to him and getting a real education in the process. Since QE 1..... to Infinity, the feelings that something has had gone very wrong and very long was being explained in a simple way.
Thank so much for continuing to share your knowledge. We love watching/listening and sharing your information. I’m a middle school teacher and just wish I could straight play your videos to my classes without getting in trouble. It saddens me that even though it’s truth, it is considered by those brainwashed by the Right as opinion and rhetoric.
Part of being a civilized society is that we accept the unpopular opinions of others without the elements of antagonization or threats of violence , Bravo professor , I'm liking what you said beginning around 9 minutes and 35 seconds . It is well known amongst those who have a good working knowledge base I'm socioeconomic geopolitical as well as financials and monetary policies and the application thereof that Fascism was, is and always will be a means by which state and corporate power come together to monopolize the economy in such a way that it prevents the individual from competing so prohibitive regulations and other strategies to ensure that the Monopoly over the economy is maintained in a few hands at the expense of the majority. The massive Global monopolistic corporate machine provides the guidance by which the government will provide the direct initiation of violence, coercion and manipulation to bring about the ideal social economic and financial conditions that favor the fuel at the expense of the majority. It is after all economic freedom and sound the money that we are able to measure for True Value Freedom itself, there is no other way to measure your freedoms but through your ability to participate in the economy on an equal Level Playing Field with everybody else. Try competing what the grocery chains with your simple and price competitive horse and cart and see what happens, the grocery chain corporate ochracea will initiate the states authorized Force against you with one telephone call. Try and compete with the automotive industry and see what happens gamma the same thing will occur with each and every attempt by the individual to seek out their Universal right to participate in this world the same way that all other mammalian creatures do on the virtue of their right to compete in the natural world. For some reason we find it completely normal 4 animals in the wild to participate without hindrance molestation and interference yet when it comes to human beings we cannot find it within our human spirit to accept and Champion their inherent Universal rights to Simply Be. We ought to see this as a very disturbing Revelation, a very disturbing frame of reference by which we support unsubscribe to the initiation of force against individuals while they're simply trying to engage and what comes natural to them in the natural world. Only bad ideas and concepts by which to facilitate Society requires violence. We study and analyze ancient free markets we see the absence of this violence as there is no third party making demands for there fair share of the fruits labor of others. If this is the case and this is the path we want to continue to go on then we should reclassify human beings has hyena or any other scavenger oriented organism on the planet, or even parasites and or viruses for that matter. Yet for even some viruses they have a symbiotic relationship with their hosts. If we are to secure sound mind without the ability to build the very first elements of it we must understand the moral hazards abar ideologies time to come to terms with the fact that we have simply decided to follow the ideologies of others rather than doing necessary knowledge seeking research from which week and then and only then begin to establish a set of ideologies, because after all it is already ologies that will shape I'm determined the quality of our human spirit. And it just because we have failed to do our due diligence but we have submitted to supporting mainstream popularize systems on both the left and the right which will continue to deteriorate the quality of human Spirit beyond the shadow of any doubt. Economic freedom and sounds money is the only means by which we can measure Freedom itself for genuine value. Because it is economic freedom and sound the money that allows Humanity the ability to access the very proxy by which human beings can exercise their ability to reason and negotiate their lives on their terms. Consequently we are left having to leave the decision up to strangers as to what quality of life and human spirit we shall have access to. The very operating components of Economic freedom and sound money are the very components used to formulate the misery index. these two components are comprised of charting the unemployment rate and rate of inflation to derive the degree and level of misery around the planet, hence the misery index. And so it is these two very components that are monopolized for the benefit of a few at the expense of the majority that is responsible for the root cause of all misery related social problems. And what's this we see no need for a tinfoil hats or conspiracy theories do understand the psychosocial condition on the human species today. PS we must understand that whether you are operating on their communism socialism crony capitalism corporate capitalism or the non-existent ancient free markets, it all requires the utilization of capital for the purpose of taking a raw resource and turning it into a final product by which societies can maintain themselves through this wealth creation, there are some other things we must consider in that human beings do not naturally organize themselves around communities in excess of 100 people, human beings have the tendency to naturally Branch off at around 100 community members and start their own communities oh, and this process goes on in succession in a natural pattern just as it does was all other or most mammalian species of organisms. So it may be by the very virtue of human beings organizing themselves and Heidi and densely populated societal structures that will ensure the continuation of unsustainability and violence. It is then that we can see the application of ancient free markets being applied with smaller communities oh, and this way we avoid the moral and ethical Hazard of having to utilize as we have been utilizing for over 2000 years, the initiation of force, coercion, manipulation and acts of aggression. After all we do see much less violence and smaller communities versus densely populated ones. Ultimately whether it is crony capitalism, socialism, corporate capitalism or communism all of these systems are inefficient, unsustainable ultimately leads us into violence between the slaves on the left and the right as well as most importantly the confiscation of the fruits of humanities labor and all private property, everything from trinkets the musical instruments, books paper dollars, gold, silver food, Land brick and mortar structures, nearly anyting by which Humanity you can use for the exchange of other things that were created on the efforts of the labor is confiscated for the benefit of a few at the expense of the majority. Thus recreating the feudal Lord and Plantation slave relationship Paradigm over and over again. Other than the monopolization of the economy there is the second most important fundamental mechanism by which to transfer power and Wells and the elimination of freedoms and liberties oh, and that is through stealthy monetary policies of central banks. If one understands and has a good working knowledge base on how old a monetary system operates one of them able to see the intricate and crafty inner workings of such systems that confiscates everything by stealth.
This is a good learning tool for those who think they know things but don't know jack and a good refresher course for those who forgot what they learned in their school days.
funny how we have shades of fascism in this country for decades but now that trump checks MORE of the boxes on the fascist checklist (obama checked about half those boxes himself btw) now people are outraged
I agree with everything Prof. Wolff said about the reasons behind and purposes of fascism. At the very end, he just barely touches on the fact that socialists have also "done terrible things" and "violence is not unique to fascism." I would like to hear his analysis of why the communist world, well, let's talk about the USSR and its East European satellites, failed so miserably. I am very familiar with the history of East Germany which liked to call itself "real-existing socialism." After some initial success rebuilding East Germany from the devastation of WW 2, it descended into a nomenklatura-dominated dictatorship that brooked no independent expression, no independent unions, and proved incredibly incompetent at what it claimed to be competent at, namely a planned economy. Cronic shortages of mediocre consumer goods, manufacturing obsolescence, and even a two-tiered economy in which luxury goods, sometimes from the capitalist world, were only available to the top nomenklatura, all these things led to a very unhappy East German people who voted with their feet the first chance they got.
Based on this economic definition of facism, South Korea would technically be a fascist country. Because unlike the US, the government directly works with the chaebols and consolidates the big businesses like Samsung electronics and Hyundai to exist to compete in the global market. That said it has been effective economically as they have now taken the market from the Japanese in electronics and now eating the market share for consumer products like washing machines from US companies like Whirlpool.
thank you so much for this! people look at me like my head's on fire when we're talking politics or whatever and I say that there's an almost worldwide resurgence of fascism. these videos are very useful for explaining those notions in detailed yet easy to understand terms. maybe I should also work on just trying to explain it better without getting frustrated lol, but in the meantime, thank you again for these videos. it's very important that people know what we're up against.
Ross' Postulate Describing the Acquisition of Moral and Ethical Values by Societies Whereas: Every society orders itself according to a philosophy Every uttered Philosophy has within it an intrinsic value The intrinsic value of a philosophy can be ascertained by assaying the conditions under which the populace finds itself The intrinsic value of a philosophy is self revealing over time There exists an ideal human condition against which the intrinsic value of a philosophy can be rated With this in mind Ross' postulate states: "No society or the majority of the people living within it, can rise above the intrinsic value of the philosophy under which it chooses to operate." For instance if you want to understand the reason for the social ills which the industrialized west finds itself beset with, then you need look no further than the intrinsic value of the philosophy under which it operates; capitalism. If you were to rank all of the philosophies according to their intrinsic value with, for the sake of this argument, nihilism being a 0 and absolute humanism being a 10,( this being determined by the positivities that these systems return to the people living under them,) then the question is begged, "what is the intrinsic value of capitalism"? I would offer that it is not much more than a 5.This means that all of the societies that operate under capitalism will have an ethical and moral value of 5 out of 10. If we want a better world then we must choose a philosophy that has a high intrinsic value and encourage each other towards it. There will always be individuals in any society who rise above or sink below the intrinsic value of it's chosen philosophy but the mass of the people will be trapped at the intrinsic value until they change philosophies. Religion also falls to this rating system. When you look at the lives of people who suffer under the edicts of a particular religion you can see that the positivities that flow back to the people are almost always less than the promise of the system of belief. They promise peace, love, equality, and charity and instead deliver war, famine, death, separation from each other and a flow of wealth and privilege to those who stand at the beliefs core.
A couple things I saw in this that are worth bringing out clearer: 1 is that the end-goal, a kind of necessary telos for Fascism is that it eventually results in War. As was hinted at, the trifecta of Industry, Government and Military mutually support one-another and it seems to be great for the economy, especially when the necessary spur to consolidation is thrown into the mix, ie a scapegoat/other - but this trifecta is not enough to maintain profit because it is a closed loop, it always strives to expel its Other/scapegoat as a sort of incentive/boost/raison d'etre, but productivity towards that goal is empty, unproductive, and remains only potential until it is actualized and/or 'expands its markets' so-to-speak - in other words, as I understand it, it is part and parcel of the Fascist economic model that it necessarily turns to Warfare as an intrinsic part of its make-up, as a natural extension of its organizing principles (so, with all these Fascisms world wide, how can anyone not see a massive massive war on the horizon?!) . 2 Fascism thrives on blurring the boundaries between traditional political left and right - clearly it has the 'free-marketeers' calling it Socialism and the Socialists calling it Capitalism, - it really is a nasty hybrid technique of control. I see it as emptying the usual coordinates of understanding in the same way that economic value is stripped of use and specific contextual function and made abstract and universal in contemporary stage-Capitalism, and then that abstract universal value-form becomes the guiding principle of organization - it uses whatever is at hand, disregarding particularity, in order to consolidate its control - in that way it is sort-of Post-Ideology; it uses whatever helps tie its bonds tighter, no matter what the actual ideological flavor of said thing - that's why lies are it's mode of operating and not just a particular side-effect of personalities - with an environment so rife with untruths the only recourse is to rely on force as that which determines 'truth', we all wallow in gaslight while the Leader dictates what is true.
Nationalism, Protectionism, Direct Government Intervention -> Fascism Internationalism, Free Trade, Minimum Government Intervention in the Economy -> Neo-Liberalism
@@slimkickens in some ways but the state would need to interfere even more to insure private profits, the Military Industrial Complex is more so Fascist
This is good for people who watch corporate news who can't see any difference between social support programs within a capitalist state and state socialism. And it's good to highlight how the history of fascism appears to be repeating itself. As helpful as this is, it would be even more helpful to delve into the popular conscious to consider the complex rationales that make people support bad economic policies. The business cycle, monetary policy and international trade are where economics becomes too complicated for everyone to have well-informed opinions. Where expert opinions differ, laypeople are easily confused about what we want. This confusion must be chief among reasons desperate people turn to strongmen like proverbial lemmings. Protectionism takes four forms, tariffs, quotas, subsidies and inflationary monetary policy. All countries have used protectionism to gain productive capital. When people talk about free trade, they're usually only talking about eliminating tariffs. The US has advocated this concept of free trade strongly especially since the 1990s, but this has been a game that hurts a lot more Americans than it helps. Free trade benefits the financial sector and consumers but it liquidates manufacturing and undermines labor. From the perspective of big banks, eliminating tariffs is a way of increasing the other forms of protectionism involving debt inflation. This benefits them directly, which is why they advocate eliminating tariffs, but this is another instance where the most powerful sector of business works against the rest of the economy and the society as well as global society. Free trade is still much better than excessive protectionism, but maybe trade should not be too free. This line of thinking seems reasonable, so why does no one ever say it except for fringe characters like Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan and most recently Trump? Trump used protectionist rhetoric before he was elected, which could have boosted his campaign in the large parts of America hurt by deindustrialization, but his tariffs have been ridiculous, excessive, unpredictable, ineffective and worst of all belligerent. Most fundamentally, capitalism is debt inflation. There are good and and bad things about inflation and debt, but we should all recognize that throughout all human history, unchecked debt inflation has always lead to extreme inequality, economic collapse and war.
The outcomes one should logically expect from a well functioning democracy are largely utilitarian, thereby more economically socialist in nature. The outcomes one should reasonably expect from a "free-market" capitalistic economic system are largely fascist, driven by the concentration of wealth and power that naturally occurs. So, democracy and socialism are naturally synergistic as is capitalism with fascism.
As a fascist, I can actually confirm what he is saying. Its true, we are capitalists, we want to merge corporations and the state. The only thing he didn’t mention is the labout courts, where employers and employees can decide on wages, colective contracts and so on. With the mediation of the state, we seek class harmony, because we look towards emproving everyone’s life. Its just we use and trust private enterprise to do so
Ah American Fascism. If anyone has not watched the man in the high castle, do so. It is a science fiction show regarding an unrelated story but the exploration of American fascism within the context of an alternate world where the Nazi's won, is as fascinating as it is disturbingly relevant. You will be left with a deeply uneasy feeling.
BTW, big fan of yours, Dr. Wolff, but I'm from Louisiana and read many books about him. I always saw Huey as a man of the people and fighting the corporations, particularly Oil & Gas industry, on behalf of the people. The "strong man" thing I could see but it was on behalf of the people and is that not the main criteria you are citing?
On the subject of the State maintaining Capitalism: another angle. Marx himself was funded by enormous players of international finance while working for the New York media out of London. The Russian Revolution itself was funded by the same entities, and more. Trotsky and Lenin had very close ties to Wall Street investors like Jacob Schiff, and others at the London Bank and around the world. After the revolution, industrialists and capitalists like Ford, IBM, Archer-Daniels-Midland, Julius and son Army Hammer, JP Morgan, Charles Crane, the Warburg Brothers, and many many others had free reign to set up shop in the USSR. These weren't just investments, this was hands-on training and setup that propped up the Soviets clear through until it's end. The USSR didn't support "the workers". This was just a party line and a title. The new Party Oligarchy disdained the average Russian laborer and working class. Wolff is correct in saying that Communism is Capitalism's shadow. But it doesn't stop there. These concepts are hardly antithetical, but quite parallel. One not only created the other, but it set it loose on to the world to create chaos and power voids for the investment of finance Capital around the Globe, and still does. These are 2 spiritually void concepts that are maintained by a Cultic Science concept, and the human element is discounted. Fascism in it's true form raises the human up as the most essential piece.
Classical definition of economic options limited to two options, just like our political system that limits us to two corrupt parties. We need a new vision of an economy and political system that is based on human values first, not material wealth creation as the goal. Cooperation, not competition. Systems that self correct rather than allowing corruption take hold. We will get there, but not when our options are forced upon us to choose between two evils.
But it is a binary choice. Do you want to maintain capitalism? That’s a yes or no question. And a system that puts human value before profit? That’s socialism. There are lots of different ideas of what socialism can look like though, join the debate! Help define the new system. I suppose there is a third option: regression to a former system, like feudalism. But I think we can agree that we shouldn’t be going backwards. So let’s not stand still either. Let’s keep improving, let’s make the economy work for us rather than the other way around
Godspeed Prof Wolff, great historical analysis as usual. Today's fascists try to obfuscate this historical reading and we should always keep it at the centre of any debate/analysis. Cheers from France!
I find it very curious that the volume on Professor Wolff videos audio is low. I have to do full volume and hold the iPad to my ear. But other videos I have to reduce volume. This is the voice of reason and it’s being muted. Just an observance.
Volume/playback discrepancies are almost always the faults of the uploaders. Sometimes what plays back well through phone/tablet speakers might not do so as well as through laptop/desktop speakers, and vice-versa. Question: do you ever watch anything on normal (1x) speed? I'm certain that Wolff's (and others') videos are *throttled* for speed, something like what radio stations do for songs (i.e., _speeding them up_ by 10 seconds, so as to increase available time for advertisement-consumption). Although, I can't figure why some UA-cam videos would be _slowed down_ as they so clearly are. Specifically: some videos' "normal" speed is actually at 1.25x. Anyone accustomed to regularly watching at increased speeds, might not notice the throttling. Certain videos from certain channels are -- for me, anyway -- played back at speeds noticeably slower than is humanly possible (e.g., Wolff's D@W is a repeat-offender). I can't figure if it's what UA-cam does on a per-user basis (i.e., when a user consumes too much data over a certain time period) or on a *per-channel* basis, or at certain times of day, or during peak-traffic, or some combination thereof. Nor can I figure whether it's solely a UA-cam thing (and without involvement from ISPs, for example). I also can't see how anyone stands to gain from it, monetarily and in the short-term, except possibly with respect to some kind of 'savings' metric. But I'm dead certain it happens. (Maybe you can notice it too?)
Why do we accept the assumption of the economic discussion ... that we can only have ONE system? Socialism or capitalism. Why can't we have BOTH? Why can't we have a third alternative? Do you see how this assumption is limiting our discussion and creating unnecessary conflicts? What would be better? Sometimes the questions are more important than the answers.
We need a system which helps us address climate change. It can't be capitalist and it can't be based on taxes. It requires a new basic principle. If someone is producing a sustainable environment they deserve to be rewarded.
If we don't have fascism today can someone explain what component or components are missing? It was not clear to me after watching the video. It sure sounded like we are in a fascist state right now. Is it the killing of "others" that is missing? We may not have killing but the voices of others are certainly being squashed.
Social systems don't always replace each other overnight. Fascism has to slowly penetrate the social structure so the changes are not always felt with the same intensity for everyone. Like you get the war on drugs, then you get the war on terror, then they bail out the banks, then they'll throw debtors into prison etc. It's one step at a time and they're doing great...
A problem I’ve got is that professor wolf makes a very “wide-angle” analysis. Fascists aren’t necessarily capitalists, they are for hierarchy, one in which “they” (whoever “they” are) are brought back into power. Capitalism (being hierarchical) blends well with fascism so they will use it if necessary. Fascists are about power by any means necessary. It’s about saying that “we are an ancient people who were once great and we will rise again if we can only purge ourselves of those who are infecting our society. If we fail we will be destroyed”. So professor wolf isn’t “wrong”, he simply notes the visible actions of fascists. A fascist will try to save capitalism because that system can be wielded to achieve the desired hierarchy. That’s what is missed.
"Do we have fascism in the USA? Not yet" That actually triggered me, I mean, he just defined many economic policies of the USA as fascist, not saying it's a fascist state, but economically has behaved like one most of the time... What's that, you dont hunt down socialist anymore? Cause you already did a great purge in administration and culture in the 50s, that's why there is no need to do it today. None treats super rich like idols the way USA does. All the "deregulation" that occurred all over the globe is a mirror of USA policies, and talk about military spending... more than 2 million people live directly of the military-industrial complex.
This is truly useful in its straightforward simplicity: capitalism is an unwieldy adolescent and will always require the adult government to intercede when it (the economy) goes awry. The question is whether the gov't does so on behalf of the corporations, in which case, fascism or the people, in which case socialism. Unfortunately, we have those pesky examples of Stalinist Russia and Maoist China which support the right-wing argument that gov't intervention always comes to the same thing. On the other hand, does capitalism really work for the people: yes there is innovation but there is also job loss, recessions, interminable advertisement. It appears that in the end sociologist Max Weber was right: what societies need from time to time is the rise of a charismatic leader with the right values to settle the score, like Bernie Sanders and AOC vs., say, fascistic Trump.
RICHARD- Respectfully, in Regard to your last comments (last week)podcast about UBI(Universal Basic Income), I disagree with your view on that. I don’t think average working (we peasants) would be happier to have a part time job paid as full time rather than get a UBI which allows us to have freedom from fear of living in the street or going hungry or fear of leaving a job we dislike. Please rethink your ideology on that. I agree with most other things you speak of but on this I cannot agree. I do love most of your ideas and have listened to you regularly for past few years. I am surprised you would advocate against a UBI ...
Yes, UBI rebalances the power between employer and employee. You don't take extra work unless it pays sufficiently so employers are forced to raise wages.
Bourgeois democracy and fascism are two phases of the capitalist cycle. When the easy way is no longer enough to keep the slaves under control, the capitalists resort to the hard way. And then fascists complain when we call them that.
In order to defeat Fascism as efficiently and effectively as possible, you need to have a system that incentivizes the opposite. Capitalism has the incentives for Fascism built into it, whereas Social Democracy serves as a significantly better form of checks and balances on Capitalist activities because the public has direct control over public policy decisions. People who have power like this are almost certainly never going to vote for policies that favor a Fascist regime coming to power. Fascists understand this, which is why they always prove this point: Capitalism and Democracy are antithetical and neither one can coexist with the other.
Markets are not explicitly synonymous with Capitalism. Market forces have existed since the concept of human ownership first emerged. Fascists/Ultranationalists traditionally sought to protect Markets wherever possible and viable, but that doesn't make them Capitalist or pro-Capitalist. The key cornerstone of Fascist economics was the concept of the 'National Interest'. Accumulating profits within the marketplace was accepted, but only if that industry was serving the interests of the state. Industry that went against the narrative pushed by the Party or was not working in the 'National Interest' were often seized and then sold off again when viable (in Italy this was the IRI, the 'Institute of National Reconstruction'). Fascists in this sense were so called 'pro-capitalism' when it suited the national interest, and yet fundamentally anti-capitalist when it too suited the 'national interest'. Profit motive was never the goal of Fascist states and it actively intervened to prevent market forces for often arbitrary reasons. It was as anti-capitalist as often or more often than it was pro-capitalist. To say that Fascism is just Capitalism repurposed is ultimately asinine. To break down ideology into what sphere of the Economic Dichotomy it roughly correlates to is like walking around with tunnel vision goggles. Materialism was never the focus of the Fascists/Ultranationalists of the 20th century. That's why Marxists call Fascists "Capitalists", and Capitalists call Fascists "Basically Communists", because they're only looking at things through the lens of economics. Fascism is far removed from that entire debate of economic control as it prioritizes other things.
I agree that on a semantic level, equating Fascists to reactionary Capitalists is reductionist. However, you're framing this as "Christians are actually Atheists in relation to every other religion". A Capitalist is fundamentally anti-Capitalist towards every other Capitalist that challenge them for the same market. That doesn't make them any less Capitalist. Practically speaking all significant Fascist movements have sided with Capitalist agents.
As long as the greed for power, greed for resources, greed for money and the greed to feel superior over someone else is ruling humanity (in whatever political system they are in) Fascism will have a chance to rise again. If we don't ascend above this somehow I think we will ultimately destroy ourselves in one way or the other. It probably won't be in my lifetime or yours but in the long run the current mindsets and systems won't be sustainable.
Another excellent report from Prof. Wolff. However, I wonder, tongue-in-cheek, if it was intentional to talk about fascism whilst wearing a brown shirt and jacket?
Fascism is Capital taking fright at the increasing anger and resistance of the mass of the population. It is not explained by state aid to Capital which is a constant. Capital today relies on the state for its impetus and ultimate direction of travel.
Socialising is what happens when libertarian ideals fall apart. Whether it's democratic, or its authoritative is the difference. Socialism and libertaianism are the extremes. Together, or apart. Democratic or authoritarian is the 90 degrees of it. USA wanted a democratic, liberal government. It isn't working
Boy o boy this man is an asset to the working class.
Arise ye workers from your slumbers
Arise ye prisoners of want
For reason in revolt now thunders
And at last ends the age of cant.
Away with all your superstitions
Servile masses arise, arise
We’ll change henceforth the old tradition
And spurn the dust to win the prize.
@Phil King hahahahahahahahahahaa you're an idiot
@Phil King you have No idea what this guy is saying..... You're a complete and utter moron
Thank you Prof Wolff! I'm incredibly grateful for the opportunity to be your student at this time in history. Please keep up the fantastic work you do here!
yeah but he is giving Fascism a bad rap! Today is not like the 1930s, for Christ's sake.
@@redwine2664 No, it's worse. Much worse.
@@obsoleteoptics Its more widespread, but so is democracy and human dignity.
@@averayugen1371 Democracy? You mean the tyranny of the majority?
Thank God for people like Richard Wolf who are educating us!
I'm getting my education late. lol. So many things never taught in America.
Target Football
Probably why America has been such a great success. We didn't become one of the freest, richest places on Earth by being Marxist.
@Jim Battersbee
Christian Comrades are still comrades. We need all workers to unite.
Jim Battersbee
You are right that we aren't as free as we used to be, thanks to socialists like you hijacking our education system and infiltrating our government bureaucracies. Some of what you said is actually true. Some is just racist crap. The truth is, we aren't as good as we could be, but then I don't know of a place on Earth that is. Nice antiamerican rant. I see that you have been well indoctrinated in the socialist religion.
Jim Battersbee
I have no problem with the government providing certain services. There are things, obviously, that only government can do well. The problem is when government becomes a nanny state that controls everything. That is socialism, and your example of just how incompetent the government can be is exactly why Americans want as little of it in our private lives as possible. Well done.
I can agree with the idea that we have problems without going along with some of your more ridiculous ideas; like the idea that we can't provide clean drinking water for our people, or that American officials "pledge allegiance to Israel". But, I guess it doesn't matter if your socialist talking points are true or not, as long as they are antiamerican. That is all that matters, right?
This helped me get past a writer block that I was having. Thank you comrade Wolff
What are you writing about?
@@bumblebee9337 The writing is in regard to factors that led to the election of Donald Trump being clearly visible long before the 2016 Presidential campaign. I begin with a historical assessment of reactionary groups in the US such as KKK, John Birch and later the Tea Party. I allude to the fact that reactionary groups have sometimes and generally had 'big money' support, but the fact that these groups also have genuine grassroots funding shows the meaningful diminishing of important economic issues. I argue that neoliberalism and post-materialism, the declining salience of economic mediation and its dictation of social relations on the supposed 'left' have allowed contradictory right-wing populists to take political power and that this has fuelled racial divides in America. Trump signifies the economic elite becoming more mainstream amongst the political elite. More are looking toward the end of neoliberalism, but a large part of our society is post-materialist whilst ideologically defending liberal policies. Obama must be critiqued in this manner too; and it does explain the failure of crooked Hillary. Americans are being told to be more accepting etc (which is not wrong at all) whilst their state enforces violatory immigration practices, constantly invades other nations and hegemonically controls their economies. Without addressing the exportation of domestic issues they will end up in a serious blowback i.e Trump. (economic elite move towards politics)
I need to develop my thesis more and this is far from complete (but generally this is the gist of it) My own thoughts regarding this is that we must return to materialism, not see it as such crassness, to prevent the upsurge of right-wing populist movements such as Trump and return to major elements of the classical economic left whilst incorporating many new movements that are beginning to identify more and more with socialism or Marxism (marxism does deserve a contemporary meaningful reboot, Dr. Wolff is one important figure in this). We cannot afford to be ahistorical in how we analyse the rise of authoritarian capitalism (think Weimar 1920s and the BRILLIANT critical theorists who I believe we must return to conceptually, a re-conceptualisation of this kind is necessary)
Hey Richard when will you interview Andrew Yang?
Michael Parenti wrote a book "Blackshirts and Reds". Everyone should read it. Great talk again, thank you very much.
Parenti is our greatest living intellectual. I'm shocked that more people, especially in Progressive circles, don't know who he is.
I’m headed to the library! Thanks.
this works really well as an overview. well done. but equalism strongly disagrees with 2 major points made here. 1) we most definitely do have fascism in the U.S. as does the rest of the world in varying degrees. 2) the soviets weren't socialist. what was stalin, or Mao for that matter, but "strong men" as defined by mr. wolff. equalism presents a more accurate view of the socialism/ fascism dichotomy. the elite on the left and right both misrepresent these 2 concepts. watch my 3 of my most recent videos and learn more:
"equalism 143: Do We Really Have Socialism for the Rich?" - ua-cam.com/video/4Fdw1DuYl_s/v-deo.html -
"equalism 141: Was Hitler a Socialist?" - ua-cam.com/video/bb0ieKj0CcQ/v-deo.html -
"equalism 139: We Must Break The Fascist Stranglehold!" - ua-cam.com/video/uIEuOuT-SMc/v-deo.html -
join the equalism movement and lets UNITE to fix this mess the elite have made for us.
The Great Dr. Michael Parenti!!!
@Soul Mission Dr. Parenti is the greatest ever! His books and talks could educate the working class, only if they opened their eyes!
As a Greek that hit me so hard.. we have a far right co-government and the third largest party is straight out fascist. We are closer to fascism than we ever were in this century. We desperetaly need education like this. Thank you Dr. Wolff and Democracy at Work!
Thank you for reaching out, my heart breaks for what happened to your noble country,
Excellent lecture! The current death threats being made against AOC reminded me of Rosa Luxemburg and her terrible fate.
@Ossie Weinert Yes and the threats against Ilhan! Omg! Do NOT harm these beautiful women!
@Dennis Young whats a women
I did not understand the term fascism fully before watching this. I've heard it described so many different ways! Thank you Professor Wolff!
Mr wolff you are right the world Is turning fascist in every nook and corner, in india we already have a Hindu nationalist right wing leader the moods of the country are very much inclined to have him elected the 2nd time
"Ningún gobierno lucha en contra del fascismo para destruirlo. Cuando la burguesía ve que el poder se les escapa de sus manos, alzan el fascismo para mantener sus privilegios."
(No government fights against fascism to destroy it. When the bourgouis sees its power escaping their hands, they use fascism to maintain their privileges.)
Buenaventura Durruti 1936
One aspect America’s schools and higher learning failed: The education of Political Economy.
I look forward to these every week! thanks for sharing this
Excellent analysis. This man should be president.
The primary issue is currency management. If "the people" don't have control of the currency, Public vs. Private contrl, they don't control anything.
It seems to me the most noticeable difference between Socialism and Fascism is the role of government. In Socialism the role of government is to run business or at very least control what business does or does not do. In Fascism the role of government is to ally and partner with business ,giving business a considerable amount of bureaucratic powers. As usual Professor Wolff has earned his paycheck. I wish more voters would subscribe to this channel.
This is the discussion the country needs to have, with some direction including historical context that the left can use to move from a dramatically complex set of federal and state rules (often in conflict) that can be explained and campaigned on.
@Dennis Miller Isn't that what Bernie is doing?
Thank you; as always, very clear, informative and on point.
Except that it is all absolute horseshit!
@@cnelsonlv999 How so?
30 minutes well spent. Thanks for your work!
Great video
Just got my copy of "Understanding Marxism" in the mail yesterday... considering whether or not i should take it to work :P kind of a white cover for oily hands though... lol
You have inspired me to learn and grow. I just finished reading "Understanding Marxism" and started "Capitalism's Crisis Deepens: Essays on the Global Economic Meltdown". I am extremely grateful for your wisdom. You have sparked an interest within me that I didn't know existed. Thank you.
Anyone who fails to recognize how central banking stacks the deck is destined to lose at the table.
They are extension of Capitalism. All central banks are nothing but PRIVATELY OWNED BUSINESSES. Therr are only handful of them that are not, that are state run central banks)
BOTH ECONOMIC and MONETARY SYSTEMS are SCAMS
Perhaps this global tendency towards facism is a manifestation of the the approaching end of the fossil fuel age. Its hard to run an industrial society with low EROEI. Ultimately, societies run on energy, not money.
Prof. Wolff, I see so many people who support Capitalism as if THEY were Capitalists or somehow benefit from it. Sometimes they get very angry when I try to remind them that they are NOT the Capitalists getting wealthy, they're instead, the Capitalist's source of wealth.
>>> How many ACTUAL Capitalists are there, compared to those only trained to "identify" with Capitalism? And how do I explain it without them either running or me risking life and limb?
@madcheeseknightYou must feel that if you identify with the Capitalists, you will somehow morph from being a VICTIM of Capitalism and a source of it's wealth, becoming a beneficiary? You obviously are one of the people I commented about!
>>> NOTHING in my post could possibly lead to your conclusion, "I'm sure you think you're gonna be one of the people in the government after your great revolution"
>>> Based on nothing more than my post, can you also tell what I had for breakfast, in the same way you "divined" my supposed aspirations to a position in [the new] government?
>>> I'm sure it would be just as valid, if you could.
@Andras Buzas YOU NAILED IT, and I LOVE learning, Thank You! (68 yrs and I've never heard that word before!)
@Andras Buzas What? We should only feel excitement when learning NEW concepts?
Old or New are relative terms. (I am the center of my awareness, so, relative to my personal knowledge level, anything I learn, is a NEW concept.)
>>> Perhaps you could save me some embarrassment next time, though, by cluing me in... What is the official or generally accepted date, after which excitement derived from learning is socially acceptable? I wouldn't want to be a recalcitrant recidivist.
@madcheeseknight You are arguing against a straw-man. I realize it's a lot easier to argue against the old Cold-War ideas of Socialism, than to listen and understand what is really being presented. We all know what happened with Cold-War Socialism, wouldn't we be incredibly stupid to suggest that we do it again? Before you unload all your venom on what YOU think we're talking about, learn about a Socialism you never heard of, "DEMOCRACY IN THE WORKPLACE".
28:30 Huey Long was no fascist and you know it. He preached for isolationism and was a lot more racially tolerant than many of his Southern comrades. You may dislike his populist rhetoric, but to paint him as a fascist is incredibly disingenuous.
As always, Prof. Wolff makes great sense of the complex phenomena which transition Capitalism into Fascism. Thank you, Prof. Wolff!
Well as the fools in America would say, "just 4 more years", "the president can't stay for more than two terms that's unconstitutional". just because something is illegal just mean it can't happen anyway.
Nobody cares about constitution, it's just a toilet paper.
@@alexsilent5603 And that's a problem.
You know, there wasn't always a two-term limit. Thanks to Wolfe, I now know largely why the limit was set. FDR, the most popular president in US history as evinced by his serving not one, not two, not three, but _four_ (!) terms, is largely responsible for that limit. A number of interests did not enjoy the New Deal very much, namely the rich, and even a few fascists. Since then these interests have striven at great length to demonize and root out socialists or any critic of the capitalism that made them rich, starting with the communists in the US, as they were the weakest link, but it didn't end there. We've since been barraged with endless propaganda - especially in the last 40-50 years - to keep attitudes and beliefs surrounding critiques of capitalism all but unthinkable in the public mind.
Reagan was among the first and certainly a great communicator of this neoliberal propaganda of mass deregulation for corporations and tax cuts for the rich, less benefits for the working class, etc., and the blatant lie that if the rich and corporations get richer, that will trickle down to the mass of people.
We the people have not seen much trickle down at all in the last several decades, yet continue to oscillate between the two parties in the hope that the other side will implement any real and serious change. First a republican for 8 years (Reagan)+ H.W. Bush for 4 years, then a democrat for 8 years(Clinton), then a republican for 8 years(George W Bush), then democrat for 8 years(Barack Obama), and now, predictably a republican for (plausibly) 8 years again with Trump. Every single one has furthered neoliberal policies which benefit the rich, corporations, banks, _not_ the people. It's a sad state of affairs to see the failure of the two party system of late. It does seem more and more to be an illusion of choice.
THERE IS NO SOCIAL UTILITY IN TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS
> Load Dawn of War
Space Marines: Purge the Xenos scum!
Tau: How could they ignore the Greater Good?
And here i thought games were just fiction. Damn.
Tau ftw!
Always A Joy to listen to him and getting a real education in the process. Since QE 1..... to Infinity, the feelings that something has had gone very wrong and very long was being explained in a simple way.
Thanks for making clear, distinctions that I vaguely knew. You've helped sharpen my ideas considerably.
THANK YOU!! I finally feel like I understand!!!!
Thank so much for continuing to share your knowledge. We love watching/listening and sharing your information. I’m a middle school teacher and just wish I could straight play your videos to my classes without getting in trouble. It saddens me that even though it’s truth, it is considered by those brainwashed by the Right as opinion and rhetoric.
Part of being a civilized society is that we accept the unpopular opinions of others without the elements of antagonization or threats of violence , Bravo professor , I'm liking what you said beginning around 9 minutes and 35 seconds . It is well known amongst those who have a good working knowledge base I'm socioeconomic geopolitical as well as financials and monetary policies and the application thereof that Fascism was, is and always will be a means by which state and corporate power come together to monopolize the economy in such a way that it prevents the individual from competing so prohibitive regulations and other strategies to ensure that the Monopoly over the economy is maintained in a few hands at the expense of the majority. The massive Global monopolistic corporate machine provides the guidance by which the government will provide the direct initiation of violence, coercion and manipulation to bring about the ideal social economic and financial conditions that favor the fuel at the expense of the majority. It is after all economic freedom and sound the money that we are able to measure for True Value Freedom itself, there is no other way to measure your freedoms but through your ability to participate in the economy on an equal Level Playing Field with everybody else. Try competing what the grocery chains with your simple and price competitive horse and cart and see what happens, the grocery chain corporate ochracea will initiate the states authorized Force against you with one telephone call. Try and compete with the automotive industry and see what happens gamma the same thing will occur with each and every attempt by the individual to seek out their Universal right to participate in this world the same way that all other mammalian creatures do on the virtue of their right to compete in the natural world. For some reason we find it completely normal 4 animals in the wild to participate without hindrance molestation and interference yet when it comes to human beings we cannot find it within our human spirit to accept and Champion their inherent Universal rights to Simply Be. We ought to see this as a very disturbing Revelation, a very disturbing frame of reference by which we support unsubscribe to the initiation of force against individuals while they're simply trying to engage and what comes natural to them in the natural world. Only bad ideas and concepts by which to facilitate Society requires violence. We study and analyze ancient free markets we see the absence of this violence as there is no third party making demands for there fair share of the fruits labor of others. If this is the case and this is the path we want to continue to go on then we should reclassify human beings has hyena or any other scavenger oriented organism on the planet, or even parasites and or viruses for that matter. Yet for even some viruses they have a symbiotic relationship with their hosts. If we are to secure sound mind without the ability to build the very first elements of it we must understand the moral hazards abar ideologies time to come to terms with the fact that we have simply decided to follow the ideologies of others rather than doing necessary knowledge seeking research from which week and then and only then begin to establish a set of ideologies, because after all it is already ologies that will shape I'm determined the quality of our human spirit. And it just because we have failed to do our due diligence but we have submitted to supporting mainstream popularize systems on both the left and the right which will continue to deteriorate the quality of human Spirit beyond the shadow of any doubt. Economic freedom and sounds money is the only means by which we can measure Freedom itself for genuine value. Because it is economic freedom and sound the money that allows Humanity the ability to access the very proxy by which human beings can exercise their ability to reason and negotiate their lives on their terms. Consequently we are left having to leave the decision up to strangers as to what quality of life and human spirit we shall have access to. The very operating components of Economic freedom and sound money are the very components used to formulate the misery index. these two components are comprised of charting the unemployment rate and rate of inflation to derive the degree and level of misery around the planet, hence the misery index. And so it is these two very components that are monopolized for the benefit of a few at the expense of the majority that is responsible for the root cause of all misery related social problems. And what's this we see no need for a tinfoil hats or conspiracy theories do understand the psychosocial condition on the human species today. PS we must understand that whether you are operating on their communism socialism crony capitalism corporate capitalism or the non-existent ancient free markets, it all requires the utilization of capital for the purpose of taking a raw resource and turning it into a final product by which societies can maintain themselves through this wealth creation, there are some other things we must consider in that human beings do not naturally organize themselves around communities in excess of 100 people, human beings have the tendency to naturally Branch off at around 100 community members and start their own communities oh, and this process goes on in succession in a natural pattern just as it does was all other or most mammalian species of organisms. So it may be by the very virtue of human beings organizing themselves and Heidi and densely populated societal structures that will ensure the continuation of unsustainability and violence. It is then that we can see the application of ancient free markets being applied with smaller communities oh, and this way we avoid the moral and ethical Hazard of having to utilize as we have been utilizing for over 2000 years, the initiation of force, coercion, manipulation and acts of aggression. After all we do see much less violence and smaller communities versus densely populated ones. Ultimately whether it is crony capitalism, socialism, corporate capitalism or communism all of these systems are inefficient, unsustainable ultimately leads us into violence between the slaves on the left and the right as well as most importantly the confiscation of the fruits of humanities labor and all private property, everything from trinkets the musical instruments, books paper dollars, gold, silver food, Land brick and mortar structures, nearly anyting by which Humanity you can use for the exchange of other things that were created on the efforts of the labor is confiscated for the benefit of a few at the expense of the majority. Thus recreating the feudal Lord and Plantation slave relationship Paradigm over and over again. Other than the monopolization of the economy there is the second most important fundamental mechanism by which to transfer power and Wells and the elimination of freedoms and liberties oh, and that is through stealthy monetary policies of central banks. If one understands and has a good working knowledge base on how old a monetary system operates one of them able to see the intricate and crafty inner workings of such systems that confiscates everything by stealth.
jah bless the wolff
This is a good learning tool for those who think they know things but don't know jack and a good refresher course for those who forgot what they learned in their school days.
funny how we have shades of fascism in this country for decades but now that trump checks MORE of the boxes on the fascist checklist (obama checked about half those boxes himself btw) now people are outraged
I tip my hat to you Democracy at Work and Rochard D. WOLF
I agree with everything Prof. Wolff said about the reasons behind and purposes of fascism. At the very end, he just barely touches on the fact that socialists have also "done terrible things" and "violence is not unique to fascism." I would like to hear his analysis of why the communist world, well, let's talk about the USSR and its East European satellites, failed so miserably. I am very familiar with the history of East Germany which liked to call itself "real-existing socialism." After some initial success rebuilding East Germany from the devastation of WW 2, it descended into a nomenklatura-dominated dictatorship that brooked no independent expression, no independent unions, and proved incredibly incompetent at what it claimed to be competent at, namely a planned economy. Cronic shortages of mediocre consumer goods, manufacturing obsolescence, and even a two-tiered economy in which luxury goods, sometimes from the capitalist world, were only available to the top nomenklatura, all these things led to a very unhappy East German people who voted with their feet the first chance they got.
Based on this economic definition of facism, South Korea would technically be a fascist country. Because unlike the US, the government directly works with the chaebols and consolidates the big businesses like Samsung electronics and Hyundai to exist to compete in the global market. That said it has been effective economically as they have now taken the market from the Japanese in electronics and now eating the market share for consumer products like washing machines from US companies like Whirlpool.
thank you so much for this! people look at me like my head's on fire when we're talking politics or whatever and I say that there's an almost worldwide resurgence of fascism. these videos are very useful for explaining those notions in detailed yet easy to understand terms. maybe I should also work on just trying to explain it better without getting frustrated lol, but in the meantime, thank you again for these videos. it's very important that people know what we're up against.
Ross' Postulate Describing the Acquisition of Moral and Ethical Values by
Societies
Whereas:
Every society orders itself according to a philosophy
Every uttered Philosophy has within it an intrinsic value
The intrinsic value of a philosophy can be ascertained by assaying the
conditions under which the populace finds itself
The intrinsic value of a philosophy is self revealing over time
There exists an ideal human condition against which the intrinsic value of
a philosophy can be rated
With this in mind Ross' postulate states:
"No society or the majority of the people living within it, can rise above
the intrinsic value of the philosophy under which it chooses to operate."
For instance if you want to understand the reason for the social ills which
the industrialized west finds itself beset with, then you need look no
further than the intrinsic value of the philosophy under which it operates;
capitalism. If you were to rank all of the philosophies according to their
intrinsic value with, for the sake of this argument, nihilism being a 0 and
absolute humanism being a 10,( this being determined by the positivities
that these systems return to the people living under them,) then the
question is begged, "what is the intrinsic value of capitalism"? I would
offer that it is not much more than a 5.This means that all of the
societies that operate under capitalism will have an ethical and moral
value of 5 out of 10. If we want a better world then we must choose a
philosophy that has a high intrinsic value and encourage each other towards
it.
There will always be individuals in any society who rise above or sink
below the intrinsic value of it's chosen philosophy but the mass of the
people will be trapped at the intrinsic value until they change
philosophies.
Religion also falls to this rating system. When you look at the lives of
people who suffer under the edicts of a particular religion you can see
that the positivities that flow back to the people are almost always less
than the promise of the system of belief. They promise peace, love,
equality, and charity and instead deliver war, famine, death, separation
from each other and a flow of wealth and privilege to those who stand at
the beliefs core.
A couple things I saw in this that are worth bringing out clearer: 1 is that the end-goal, a kind of necessary telos for Fascism is that it eventually results in War. As was hinted at, the trifecta of Industry, Government and Military mutually support one-another and it seems to be great for the economy, especially when the necessary spur to consolidation is thrown into the mix, ie a scapegoat/other - but this trifecta is not enough to maintain profit because it is a closed loop, it always strives to expel its Other/scapegoat as a sort of incentive/boost/raison d'etre, but productivity towards that goal is empty, unproductive, and remains only potential until it is actualized and/or 'expands its markets' so-to-speak - in other words, as I understand it, it is part and parcel of the Fascist economic model that it necessarily turns to Warfare as an intrinsic part of its make-up, as a natural extension of its organizing principles (so, with all these Fascisms world wide, how can anyone not see a massive massive war on the horizon?!) .
2 Fascism thrives on blurring the boundaries between traditional political left and right - clearly it has the 'free-marketeers' calling it Socialism and the Socialists calling it Capitalism, - it really is a nasty hybrid technique of control. I see it as emptying the usual coordinates of understanding in the same way that economic value is stripped of use and specific contextual function and made abstract and universal in contemporary stage-Capitalism, and then that abstract universal value-form becomes the guiding principle of organization - it uses whatever is at hand, disregarding particularity, in order to consolidate its control - in that way it is sort-of Post-Ideology; it uses whatever helps tie its bonds tighter, no matter what the actual ideological flavor of said thing - that's why lies are it's mode of operating and not just a particular side-effect of personalities - with an environment so rife with untruths the only recourse is to rely on force as that which determines 'truth', we all wallow in gaslight while the Leader dictates what is true.
Wooow! This was a really good episode.
Brief, Brilliant and to the point, thank you Richard!
workers of the world unite against capital
Wait, Huey P. Long wasn't fascist. Did I misunderstand?
No matter what new philosophy comes out. There will always be those that desire power and domination over others.
That's Human nature!
So, from an economic standpoint, is there any substantial difference between fascism and neoliberalism? Or is it a matter of degree, not kinds?
Nationalism, Protectionism, Direct Government Intervention -> Fascism
Internationalism, Free Trade, Minimum Government Intervention in the Economy -> Neo-Liberalism
Otherwise yes
@@petunia9106 so was the wall street bailout a fascist tactic?
@@slimkickens in some ways but the state would need to interfere even more to insure private profits, the Military Industrial Complex is more so Fascist
@@petunia9106 thank you, that helps clarify.
Umberto Eco's Ur-Fascism rings true today sadly
I disagree that we don't have Fascism in the United states, by Umberto Eco's model, we are in the 3rd phase of its growth.
This is good for people who watch corporate news who can't see any difference between social support programs within a capitalist state and state socialism. And it's good to highlight how the history of fascism appears to be repeating itself. As helpful as this is, it would be even more helpful to delve into the popular conscious to consider the complex rationales that make people support bad economic policies.
The business cycle, monetary policy and international trade are where economics becomes too complicated for everyone to have well-informed opinions. Where expert opinions differ, laypeople are easily confused about what we want. This confusion must be chief among reasons desperate people turn to strongmen like proverbial lemmings.
Protectionism takes four forms, tariffs, quotas, subsidies and inflationary monetary policy. All countries have used protectionism to gain productive capital. When people talk about free trade, they're usually only talking about eliminating tariffs. The US has advocated this concept of free trade strongly especially since the 1990s, but this has been a game that hurts a lot more Americans than it helps. Free trade benefits the financial sector and consumers but it liquidates manufacturing and undermines labor.
From the perspective of big banks, eliminating tariffs is a way of increasing the other forms of protectionism involving debt inflation. This benefits them directly, which is why they advocate eliminating tariffs, but this is another instance where the most powerful sector of business works against the rest of the economy and the society as well as global society.
Free trade is still much better than excessive protectionism, but maybe trade should not be too free. This line of thinking seems reasonable, so why does no one ever say it except for fringe characters like Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan and most recently Trump? Trump used protectionist rhetoric before he was elected, which could have boosted his campaign in the large parts of America hurt by deindustrialization, but his tariffs have been ridiculous, excessive, unpredictable, ineffective and worst of all belligerent.
Most fundamentally, capitalism is debt inflation. There are good and and bad things about inflation and debt, but we should all recognize that throughout all human history, unchecked debt inflation has always lead to extreme inequality, economic collapse and war.
Worker Co-ops are the answer.
The outcomes one should logically expect from a well functioning democracy are largely utilitarian, thereby more economically socialist in nature. The outcomes one should reasonably expect from a "free-market" capitalistic economic system are largely fascist, driven by the concentration of wealth and power that naturally occurs. So, democracy and socialism are naturally synergistic as is capitalism with fascism.
As a fascist, I can actually confirm what he is saying. Its true, we are capitalists, we want to merge corporations and the state. The only thing he didn’t mention is the labout courts, where employers and employees can decide on wages, colective contracts and so on. With the mediation of the state, we seek class harmony, because we look towards emproving everyone’s life. Its just we use and trust private enterprise to do so
Enlightenment has come to me! Thank you 😊
Ah American Fascism. If anyone has not watched the man in the high castle, do so. It is a science fiction show regarding an unrelated story but the exploration of American fascism within the context of an alternate world where the Nazi's won, is as fascinating as it is disturbingly relevant. You will be left with a deeply uneasy feeling.
Referring to what you say at 22:28 Professor: While Hitler did attack the Soviet Union, he most certainly did not destroy it.
BTW, big fan of yours, Dr. Wolff, but I'm from Louisiana and read many books about him. I always saw Huey as a man of the people and fighting the corporations, particularly Oil & Gas industry, on behalf of the people. The "strong man" thing I could see but it was on behalf of the people and is that not the main criteria you are citing?
On the subject of the State maintaining Capitalism: another angle. Marx himself was funded by enormous players of international finance while working for the New York media out of London. The Russian Revolution itself was funded by the same entities, and more. Trotsky and Lenin had very close ties to Wall Street investors like Jacob Schiff, and others at the London Bank and around the world. After the revolution, industrialists and capitalists like Ford, IBM, Archer-Daniels-Midland, Julius and son Army Hammer, JP Morgan, Charles Crane, the Warburg Brothers, and many many others had free reign to set up shop in the USSR. These weren't just investments, this was hands-on training and setup that propped up the Soviets clear through until it's end. The USSR didn't support "the workers". This was just a party line and a title. The new Party Oligarchy disdained the average Russian laborer and working class.
Wolff is correct in saying that Communism is Capitalism's shadow. But it doesn't stop there. These concepts are hardly antithetical, but quite parallel. One not only created the other, but it set it loose on to the world to create chaos and power voids for the investment of finance Capital around the Globe, and still does. These are 2 spiritually void concepts that are maintained by a Cultic Science concept, and the human element is discounted.
Fascism in it's true form raises the human up as the most essential piece.
Classical definition of economic options limited to two options, just like our political system that limits us to two corrupt parties. We need a new vision of an economy and political system that is based on human values first, not material wealth creation as the goal. Cooperation, not competition. Systems that self correct rather than allowing corruption take hold. We will get there, but not when our options are forced upon us to choose between two evils.
But it is a binary choice. Do you want to maintain capitalism? That’s a yes or no question. And a system that puts human value before profit? That’s socialism. There are lots of different ideas of what socialism can look like though, join the debate! Help define the new system.
I suppose there is a third option: regression to a former system, like feudalism. But I think we can agree that we shouldn’t be going backwards.
So let’s not stand still either. Let’s keep improving, let’s make the economy work for us rather than the other way around
@@Akatoriful And a fourth option: resource-based economy.
"Until you change the way money works, you change nothing." - Michael C. Ruppert
@@obsoleteoptics a resource based economy is literally a communist economy with a different name.
@@Red-rj7sr lol ok boomer
Yes we do have fascism in the United States you are wrong on that point .
Fascism was functionalism rather than both capitalist and Marxist conflict theory.
Godspeed Prof Wolff, great historical analysis as usual. Today's fascists try to obfuscate this historical reading and we should always keep it at the centre of any debate/analysis. Cheers from France!
very clear, informative and on point.
I find it very curious that the volume on Professor Wolff videos audio is low. I have to do full volume and hold the iPad to my ear. But other videos I have to reduce volume. This is the voice of reason and it’s being muted. Just an observance.
Volume/playback discrepancies are almost always the faults of the uploaders. Sometimes what plays back well through phone/tablet speakers might not do so as well as through laptop/desktop speakers, and vice-versa.
Question: do you ever watch anything on normal (1x) speed?
I'm certain that Wolff's (and others') videos are *throttled* for speed, something like what radio stations do for songs (i.e., _speeding them up_ by 10 seconds, so as to increase available time for advertisement-consumption).
Although, I can't figure why some UA-cam videos would be _slowed down_ as they so clearly are. Specifically: some videos' "normal" speed is actually at 1.25x. Anyone accustomed to regularly watching at increased speeds, might not notice the throttling. Certain videos from certain channels are -- for me, anyway -- played back at speeds noticeably slower than is humanly possible (e.g., Wolff's D@W is a repeat-offender).
I can't figure if it's what UA-cam does on a per-user basis (i.e., when a user consumes too much data over a certain time period) or on a *per-channel* basis, or at certain times of day, or during peak-traffic, or some combination thereof. Nor can I figure whether it's solely a UA-cam thing (and without involvement from ISPs, for example). I also can't see how anyone stands to gain from it, monetarily and in the short-term, except possibly with respect to some kind of 'savings' metric.
But I'm dead certain it happens. (Maybe you can notice it too?)
Why do we accept the assumption of the economic discussion ... that we can only have ONE system? Socialism or capitalism. Why can't we have BOTH? Why can't we have a third alternative? Do you see how this assumption is limiting our discussion and creating unnecessary conflicts?
What would be better?
Sometimes the questions are more important than the answers.
We need a system which helps us address climate change. It can't be capitalist and it can't be based on taxes. It requires a new basic principle. If someone is producing a sustainable environment they deserve to be rewarded.
As always excellent analysis
Put this on as a slight interest, but after the video he’s earned a subscription for sure
If we don't have fascism today can someone explain what component or components are missing? It was not clear to me after watching the video. It sure sounded like we are in a fascist state right now. Is it the killing of "others" that is missing? We may not have killing but the voices of others are certainly being squashed.
Social systems don't always replace each other overnight. Fascism has to slowly penetrate the social structure so the changes are not always felt with the same intensity for everyone. Like you get the war on drugs, then you get the war on terror, then they bail out the banks, then they'll throw debtors into prison etc. It's one step at a time and they're doing great...
A problem I’ve got is that professor wolf makes a very “wide-angle” analysis. Fascists aren’t necessarily capitalists, they are for hierarchy, one in which “they” (whoever “they” are) are brought back into power. Capitalism (being hierarchical) blends well with fascism so they will use it if necessary. Fascists are about power by any means necessary. It’s about saying that “we are an ancient people who were once great and we will rise again if we can only purge ourselves of those who are infecting our society. If we fail we will be destroyed”. So professor wolf isn’t “wrong”, he simply notes the visible actions of fascists. A fascist will try to save capitalism because that system can be wielded to achieve the desired hierarchy. That’s what is missed.
"Do we have fascism in the USA? Not yet" That actually triggered me, I mean, he just defined many economic policies of the USA as fascist, not saying it's a fascist state, but economically has behaved like one most of the time... What's that, you dont hunt down socialist anymore? Cause you already did a great purge in administration and culture in the 50s, that's why there is no need to do it today. None treats super rich like idols the way USA does. All the "deregulation" that occurred all over the globe is a mirror of USA policies, and talk about military spending... more than 2 million people live directly of the military-industrial complex.
This is truly useful in its straightforward simplicity: capitalism is an unwieldy adolescent and will always require the adult government to intercede when it (the economy) goes awry. The question is whether the gov't does so on behalf of the corporations, in which case, fascism or the people, in which case socialism. Unfortunately, we have those pesky examples of Stalinist Russia and Maoist China which support the right-wing argument that gov't intervention always comes to the same thing. On the other hand, does capitalism really work for the people: yes there is innovation but there is also job loss, recessions, interminable advertisement. It appears that in the end sociologist Max Weber was right: what societies need from time to time is the rise of a charismatic leader with the right values to settle the score, like Bernie Sanders and AOC vs., say, fascistic Trump.
RICHARD- Respectfully, in Regard to your last comments (last week)podcast about UBI(Universal Basic Income), I disagree with your view on that. I don’t think average working (we peasants) would be happier to have a part time job paid as full time rather than get a UBI which allows us to have freedom from fear of living in the street or going hungry or fear of leaving a job we dislike. Please rethink your ideology on that. I agree with most other things you speak of but on this I cannot agree. I do love most of your ideas and have listened to you regularly for past few years. I am surprised you would advocate against a UBI ...
Yes, UBI rebalances the power between employer and employee. You don't take extra work unless it pays sufficiently so employers are forced to raise wages.
Bourgeois democracy and fascism are two phases of the capitalist cycle. When the easy way is no longer enough to keep the slaves under control, the capitalists resort to the hard way. And then fascists complain when we call them that.
In order to defeat Fascism as efficiently and effectively as possible, you need to have a system that incentivizes the opposite. Capitalism has the incentives for Fascism built into it, whereas Social Democracy serves as a significantly better form of checks and balances on Capitalist activities because the public has direct control over public policy decisions. People who have power like this are almost certainly never going to vote for policies that favor a Fascist regime coming to power. Fascists understand this, which is why they always prove this point: Capitalism and Democracy are antithetical and neither one can coexist with the other.
Thank you. This explains what fascism and communism have in common.
Very good program.
Recess coordinator reporting for duty!
Markets are not explicitly synonymous with Capitalism. Market forces have existed since the concept of human ownership first emerged. Fascists/Ultranationalists traditionally sought to protect Markets wherever possible and viable, but that doesn't make them Capitalist or pro-Capitalist. The key cornerstone of Fascist economics was the concept of the 'National Interest'. Accumulating profits within the marketplace was accepted, but only if that industry was serving the interests of the state. Industry that went against the narrative pushed by the Party or was not working in the 'National Interest' were often seized and then sold off again when viable (in Italy this was the IRI, the 'Institute of National Reconstruction'). Fascists in this sense were so called 'pro-capitalism' when it suited the national interest, and yet fundamentally anti-capitalist when it too suited the 'national interest'. Profit motive was never the goal of Fascist states and it actively intervened to prevent market forces for often arbitrary reasons. It was as anti-capitalist as often or more often than it was pro-capitalist.
To say that Fascism is just Capitalism repurposed is ultimately asinine. To break down ideology into what sphere of the Economic Dichotomy it roughly correlates to is like walking around with tunnel vision goggles. Materialism was never the focus of the Fascists/Ultranationalists of the 20th century. That's why Marxists call Fascists "Capitalists", and Capitalists call Fascists "Basically Communists", because they're only looking at things through the lens of economics. Fascism is far removed from that entire debate of economic control as it prioritizes other things.
I agree that on a semantic level, equating Fascists to reactionary Capitalists is reductionist. However, you're framing this as "Christians are actually Atheists in relation to every other religion". A Capitalist is fundamentally anti-Capitalist towards every other Capitalist that challenge them for the same market. That doesn't make them any less Capitalist. Practically speaking all significant Fascist movements have sided with Capitalist agents.
Thank you Richard
Excellent Mr Wolff!
Why does capitalism allow the greediest among us to be in charge of the distribution of wealth?
Truly excellent analysis
FDR saved the capitalists with a little socialism but it was a tenuous, short term agreement...probably saving us from fascism at the time.
state capitalism and fascism are about the same
As long as the greed for power, greed for resources, greed for money and the greed to feel superior over someone else is ruling humanity (in whatever political system they are in) Fascism will have a chance to rise again.
If we don't ascend above this somehow I think we will ultimately destroy ourselves in one way or the other. It probably won't be in my lifetime or yours but in the long run the current mindsets and systems won't be sustainable.
Hey!!!! You forgot something, ANARCHISM!!!!!! The true cure for capitalism. Gramsci!!!
Another excellent report from Prof. Wolff. However, I wonder, tongue-in-cheek, if it was intentional to talk about fascism whilst wearing a brown shirt and jacket?
No More War
Fascism is Capital taking fright at the increasing anger and resistance of the mass of the population. It is not explained by state aid to Capital which is a constant. Capital today relies on the state for its impetus and ultimate direction of travel.
I love your set.
I would say that most socialists don’t want the modern bourgeois state to step in. I don’t trust it, and not many others do either.
The Good Doctor Wolff 👍❤️
THANK YOU
I love the refrigerator metaphor
Socialising is what happens when libertarian ideals fall apart. Whether it's democratic, or its authoritative is the difference. Socialism and libertaianism are the extremes. Together, or apart. Democratic or authoritarian is the 90 degrees of it. USA wanted a democratic, liberal government. It isn't working
Professor Wolff, I would really like to see Paul Cockshott on your show in the future!
you should consider being a Mao-Spontex
Huey Long a fascist? Is there some aspect of his history I'm not aware of? He didn't seem particularly fond of the ruling class.
Richard wore a brown suit jacket while he talked about brown shirts lol