Conservative FINALLY Debates A Student With Some Sense
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 бер 2024
- ___________________________
Ground News is a vital resource that focuses on fostering critical thinking, along with providing objective, fair, and accurate perspectives. Experience news in a new way that both motivates and educates you by trying Ground News today.
You can receive a 40% discount on their Vantage subscription, which I personally use for my news analysis. Just visit:
ground.news/LFRJojo
--ROAD TO 300K!--
LFR JOJO REACTION
0:36 - Beginning
1:12 - What's a Marxist
1:15- Critiques of the monopolistic Tendencies of multinational corporations
1:35 - To address the growing power of these monopolistic tendencies without using the federal government
2:35 - To not be afraid to use the government
4:13 - Entrepreneurial bottom up Focus Solutions is a beautiful thing
4:37 - Big companies exploiting and lying to people
6:47 - Amazing foundation of goodness in our markets
7:10 - Break up google
VIDEOS USED WHEN EDITING:
------------------
MY BROTHERS FIRST NOVEL!: The Tragedy of Madeline the Demon: Gluttony (Part I) (The Tragedy of Madeline the Demon Saga)
MERCHANDISE: lfr-jojo-merch.creator-spring...
LFR FAMILY: / lfrfamily
Like and subscribe!
Business Email: Jovaneconom@gmail.com
Follow Me On Instagram: LfrJojo
Follow Me On Twitter: TRNLVAN
THE PO BOX:
LFR JOJO
P.O. Box 262
Lothian, MD 20711
Cashapp: $JovanHall01
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use. No copyright infringement intended. ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS
[Beat Prod. by YoungBerry Beats]
Hashtags: - Розваги
I've always liked Ronald Reagan's definition. "A liberal is someone that has read Marx. A conservative is someone that understands Marx."
Yep, she will understand just as soon as she is the one having to do the work.
@@nickm9102 Yep, it always amuses me when these young people think and act like they are going to be the ones running things. It won't be them. They will be used as cannon fodder and laborers, much like Stalin did.
Conservatives never understood Marxism or Socialism. If they did, there would fair wages for the working class and universal Healthcare for all. As well, the corporations and the one percent would pay their fair share. If that would ever happen, the so-called social security crisis would be over. Regan's trickle down economics never worked and was a huge lie to us.
Great quote.
That is such a great quote. Conservatives understand why every time socialism or communism has been tried, the outcome is the same. Liberals just say ‘that wasn’t real communism’ or ‘it will be different this time’ because they don’t understand people.
I would much rather be lead by a cruel, evil despot than someone who seeks the common good. The first may be sated for a while, but the second will continue to perpetuate horrors upon you forever because they do so with the blessing of their clear conscience.
It's so frustrating to hear people say they want small business to be more popular. And they blame the Big companies for killing small businesses.
Walmart didn't run all the small business out of your town, You did. Every time you made the choice to go to Walmart because you could save .30 cents on a product.
Yes and no. As a consumer, when a business moves items in large quantities at a way cheaper price. Where will most consumers go? The place that sales an item at standard full price, or at Walmart for 75 to 50 percent less? Walmart has been know to underprice their items, so much that they’ll have actual loss, just out sale their competitors, and folding that small business. Walmart takes advantage of the vulnerability of people’s financial situation, amd exploit that to dominate their competitors. Which they do all across America. Which actually Amazon is doing that very same thing via internet.
@shanktrujank1294 1st and most importantly, Walmart has never sold products 50 to 75% less than market prices. 2nd, within 5 years of Walmart starting business, it became obvious that Walmart would end 70% of all small businesses in a 25-mile radius around each store. Yet even with this knowledge, people keep shopping there and electing politicians that make it easier for Walmart to set up stores.
No one is going to say big business is not to blame. But we as a society must take responsibility for our actions.
Walmart always was the equivalence of buying in bulk as a large business to pass a portion of their savings to the customers, in turn, benefitting Walmart by making their corporation more successful. It's just a form of competitive edge, but it's unfair to small businesses because they can't compete at that level, and stay afloat. They need a big enough % of sales total in order to stay afloat, but they can't afford quite as steep a dive in prices without damaging their bottom line, so for Walmart it's win/win, and smaller mom n pop shops, it's lose/lose, so yes it's partly the customers' fault for not being more loyal to small businesses, but most customers are always tempted by similar or same product for less price. At its core it's the same capitalist competitive nature, but with big businesses, they have an edge that wouldn't otherwise exist, and that edge is larger buying power. It allows for a corporate corruption of the capitalist ideals. Before big corporations had the power to do this, there was a sane and viable system that worked across the board. Now there's a corruption of that system brought upon by the advent of humongous corporate entities. Worsened by the stock market, not because the stock market itself is bad, but because by a corporation going public, the corporate leadership then has to follow the instructions given by the voting majority of the majority shareholders... Which due to things like proxy voters and people who's only investment in the company is to profit from trading of value in the stock market... You have a system where the shareholders care primarily and majorally about increasing profit margins, and aren't invested enough in the corporate leadership in general to care how it happens. More often than not, the problem is caused by publicly traded corporate empires, and not the entirety of capitalism.
Good point, that’s true. I live in Greece and people use their small businesses to preserve them and you know where your food comes from. X
For some categories and some products buying from the small business is 100% more expensive. (Literally twice the cost.). There are various reasons for this which range from economics of scale, to the small business being used to a captured market. Greed definitely played a factor in certain small grocery markets pricing.
Knowledge = useful information
Wisdom = knowing how to use your knowledge
Experience = used to gain levels
@@heroinmom153Mana=used to cast spells
A Marxist is a specific kind of communist. Marx was a political theorist who advocated for communism and believed it would be achieved through violent revolution lead by a intellectual vanguard. Lenin (Soviet Union), Castro (Cuba) and Mao (China) were all heavily influenced by Marx. As a general rule, socialist, communist and Marxist all mean the same thing.
Actually Lenin turned Marx upside down and wrote his own version of Marxism as he rode the train back to Moscow from Berlin. The Germans thought they could control Russia through Lenin.
Marx was a rich kid who was a degenerate scumbag.
Don't forget the man with the funny moustache and Mussolini. Both those governments were influenced by class divide one racial and the other lead to Fascism. All these state came to power because of Marx's ideas utilising a class divide to form total power of the government of the entire countries just like communism. Even Hitler talked of solving the problems of Marxism by creating an Industrial state Germany and an Agri-state in Russia to trade between itself to create a self sustaining market. The ideas were all socialist Marxist and Communist.
Read Animal Farm. That sums it up nicely
Nowadays they call it Globalism, and Woke
John Stossel's been sounding that alarm for years-- big corps WANT regulations because it helps prevent competition. The more regulations, the harder it is for people to start up small businesses.
The only true more monopoly is the goverment
Marxism is worth learning about if for no other reason than to learn what systems to avoid.
man you got that right
For real
Sounds so good on paper but in reality, it never works.
@@aimeekeel It's pie in the sky utopianism for those naïve enough to believe that someone else can have their cake, while they eat it too.
A warning then - it's stultifying. Marx was someone who presented as an intellectual but in reality was thicker than mince. Instead of understanding that people are corrupted by money and power, and brought together through necessity in poverty, he actually believed - broadly speaking - that rich people are inherently evil and poor people inherently good.
Whilst watching this I kept thinking how nice to see and hear two people with non aligned view points having a calm civil discussion. Then I realised that it was unusual because it is so rare now that people on the left/liberals/insane label ideology aren't screaming and swearing. When I was young people disagreed on politics but it was never this viscious. Great vid as always brother, take care.
I wonder if that's why I had such a great time with a person I met the other day. I consider myself left wing, but enough dumb is enough dumb. So we had a broad conversation with this other one, also on the left, where we found common ground and also disagreed a lot. And it was civil and damn enjoyable.
I read Animal Farm in high school, which, for those who don't know, is a commentary of the Soviets and Stalin gaining power, just hidden as a farm story. One of the quotes in the book that still strikes me: all are equal, but some are more equal than others. That beautifully describes the true intentions of socialism. The ruling class gets most of the power while the citizens are left with a small proportion of resources. These topics should absolutely be taught in school (plus, it's a great book).
It is all a power grab. This is why the fervor of people who support it are the upper classes and privileged. All forms of leftist collectivism are all highly educated academics. And why when they lose an argument, the resort to academic credentials. If you thought everyone was equal, you wouldn't resort to academic exclusion or disguised eliteism. The Yahzees/Stalinists were also convinced of their moral superiority and thought they were saving the world.
If they actually were considerate of the working class status, they wouldn't be trying to iminate that systems that give them a voice such as the electoral college, the Supreme Court, and treating the redstates that feed them like the kulaks.
You can even petform an experiment by closing your eyes, removing any context such as feelings, ideology, and the crowd, and re-listen to what they are saying, wearing a Waffen uniform.
"We need to treat the disabled because it is a life not worth living."
"we need to treat gender dysphoria, or it is a life not worth living."
oh man, I remember reading Animal Farm in high school! That was over 40 years ago! I've forgotten much of what I read, but the one thing that stood out to me was that the animals (representing the people of Soviet Russia) fought hard to end the tyranny they were living under... only to, in the end, reestablish that tyranny under different leadership.
Which, if you think about it, is somewhat where we are today in our society. We threw off a tyrannical monarchy, and now 250 some odd years later, we are facing some of those exact same problems, with a RULING government, instead of a SERVING government. We have those few elitists in our government that think they know what is best for us, DESPITE what we feel is best for ourselves... and they are trying to tell us HOW we should live, instead of letting us choose that for ourselves. We've traded one tyranny for another...
I watched the cartoon when I was a kid
I think every high school student should read this book! The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
@@sdmcdaniel2255 We're living under an Oligarchic Corporatocracy. Our government is just a shell game filled with bribed or "lobbied" politicians.. Those actually calling the shots are the few super-rich, super powerful elitists from huge firms like BlackRock, proudly proclaiming "We must FORCE behavior".
And so shall it has been, with all this DEI, and ESG 'woke' cultural Marxist nonsense. Many people are pushing back.. But the unelected powers-that-be just keep forcing it harder.. Because they think they know better than us..
Charlie Kirk gets a bad rap,he is usually pleasant until it's time to not be,notice how he complemented her for her Question and being educated.
its a nice change from the kids who rant and rave and think they have gotcha questions that they Googled before speaking
You will never get a lasting and accepted definition of Marxist, Socialist, or Communist from those who proclaim themselves to have those beliefs because, ultimately, their definitions are all personal smoke, and you can't nail smoke down. That is deliberate.
obfuscation
It's the same with "Woke," but at least with Marxism, Socialism, Communism, and Woke-ism, their definition is betrayed by their actions. Same with Fascism, which is just another form of Socialism.
Well Marxism specifically means agreeing to the principals described by Marx. They aren't changing his words, though maybe they ignore what they don't like
@@paraaxBut the definition of "agreeing with the economic and political philosophy of Karl Marx," needs to go on to say what those philosophies are.
@@enforcerridley158 Fascism is really just honest socialism. Most socialist states are just fascist under the guise of being for the people, but in reality it's for the State.
THIS is great! Yes! More of this kind of discussions in all of our societies! We can disagree on certain things, and insteadt of yelling and getting butthurt personally, we should find a common ground on which to build on. Awesome!
I see one comment knocking on the girl to move to north korea, cuba, etc. Im just glad to see someone not go off on charlie. This was a wholesome debate/conversation.
The best anti monopoly policy you can have is to encourage competition in everything. The hospitals in the USA are a perfect example. They restrict the number of doctors and the number of hospitals and deny competition.
Been watching you for a long time now. I don't always agree with your views or reactions, but I appreciate that you arrive at them by actually taking time to think and reflect. In a world where most people want someone else to tell them what to think and believe, you're different.
Fun Fact, I'm reading Marx's Capital. Its a wild ride. I cannot recommend AVOIDING it enough, but I'm definitely learning a lot of about his thinking.
Yup...Marx was a sociopathic powerhungry, liar type of ghoul.
@JLu20 I'm willing to call him a genius just because of how subtle his insanity is. It creeps in and is so easy to miss. But you read carefully and suddenly you notice that nobody is capable of changing their priced from the "socially set" price, or your pay is a reflection of how society values you, or a hundred other insanities.
@@s0ulwind Subtle deciept is the Marxist main tool to sway the foolish, innocent, nice people. They, themselves are not evil...so they fail to take note of these subtle things. ALSO, college students in USA tend to be too frickin' trusting of all they are given..(one-sided info by sneaky Marxist teachers).
There is one tidbit in that book that is a largely ignored gem. Marx discusses how national debt becomes the means of transferring wealth and power from one leading country to its successor. Now, since almost all countries have a national debt, it should become clear those national debts are the means of transferring wealth and power to the supranational corporations.
We are not entirely exploitative, but we are not growing where we need to grow. That's a section that must be fixed for us to thrive.
When it comes to small business vs big business it breaks down to simple profit and expenses. The small business owner cannot generate the level of consumer traffic to be able to buy product material in bulk that provides them the cheaper value for their product. Combine that with the overhead cost of employees, benefits, insurance and payroll taxes, the prices that a small business has to charge is often considerably higher than the larger corporations, and in an inflation economy the consumer is going to opt for the cheaper priced goods to make their money stretch further. So this drives the earnings of small businesses down and drives big businesses up.
Not to mention regulations by gov like minimum wage, or fbook example charlie gives, favors large corp
What I've been observing in the markets for a number of years now is that there is an aspect of the free market that a lot of people completely miss when discussing the monopolistic drive of the economy. Big businesses seem to have a difficult time adapting to radical market shifts. Monopolistic businesses are stagnant. Small businesses seem to generally have more flexibility, creativity, and drive. Monopolization is a cycle. A small business emerges that does something better than everyone else. It grows to dominate the market. The market shifts. New small businesses emerge which out compete the old business that have become complacent and are stuck relying on an outdated product/service. The new small businesses become the new monopoly. Rinse and repeat.
@@StageWatcher interesting
Marxism, Socialism, Capitalism, all of these are just different forms of a systematic way to run human society/market economy. What you shouldn't forget is that regardless of which one is being talked about, at the end of the day there will always be some form of governing body that will be implementing and upholding it. That's where the source of the problem is going to start, not the basic system itself.
A good example is how Capitalism is often being demonized as oppressing the poor, or taking advantage of the less wealthy and such by greedy corporate interests. What we don't get to hear these people often mention is that just like with any other system such as Socialism, the governing body---or the government in Capitalism's case, is supposed to be the entity that serves to regulate the system so that it does not go "unbridled" and out of control with egregious profiteering. Our main issue now with unbridled Capitalism is due in major part to the government---or rather the elected officials we have put in control of the government, letting themselves be bought and controlled by corporate greed. They are in collusion hence they let the Capitalist system go out of control for the sake of excessive profiteering by corporate interests. Waging of wars in foreign soil and the profiteering of the military industrial complex is a good example of this.
The lesson is simple. No matter what system we try to implement in our society, the outcome will always be bad if the governing body responsible for keeping things in line and fair are overcome by interest in personal-gain. Greed is the enemy, and people are missing this point, instead blaming the system which simply acts as a general format, not the ones responsible for keeping the rules fairly enforced.
You nailed it
I appreciate your honesty in all your videos and how you have grown so much because of this. Keep it up!
Great, well done young man I’m enjoying your content every chance I get
You continue to encourage me for today’s youth. Keep growing young man!!!
Dude, your videos are getting so damn good. I swear you’re the only person on UA-cam that I not only don’t skip when they’re talking, I actually think your takes add value to the meat of the topic. Seriously, keep it up and keeping going cause you got something, not sure what yet, but definitely something.
Last thing, a point of observation just in case you ever read this. A part of what makes your seasoning special is how simple and to a useful point what you say tends to be in your videos; you don’t use 8 words when 3 will do, you use 3, and that’s power. Damn near everyone else talks too much (like I’m doing now lol) about their ideas, theories, hypotheses, and conspiracies, and that’s where I think people start skipping their content.
Anyway, just thought I’d leave that additional note for you cause it’s not often easy to see what you’re doing right when you’re doing it, so there you go
I enjoyed that! I agree a lot with Charlie! Surprised we all had common ground!
"we want to get rid of monopolies by increasing barrier to entry so only 1 company can do anything" - those people
Large multi-national monopolistic corporations would not exist without government.
Marxism is akin to Communism.
Karl Marx expected everyone to work according to their abilities, and receive according to their needs.
Raise your hand if you would work hard, knowing that what you produced would go to someone else.
So for Marx's vision to become a reality, forced labor would be required, and theft of your labor would be required.
In Marx's world, there would still be people that contribute nearly nothing, yet they would live like kings. They would be the ruling class. There will always be people that would be in charge of the forced labor, and people that had the criminal might to steal from your labor. They are the ruling class.
The end result is a handful of people living like kings, while everyone else fights over crumbs and lives in misery.
Note that using google or any other popular source for information will likely result in you not being told the truth.
These big tech companies are run by pro Marxist radicals. So of course they will make Marxism sound appealing.
It is like looking up "Hillary crimes". You will be given conspiracy theories and results pointing to false allegations.
Very nice definition. X
First read always looks great on paper lol
It's actually a running joke, I've written plans for trades work, military, and even in music and we'll all look at it and say
"Well, it looks good on paper" and some asshole will say
"Yeah, so did communism" and we give a chuckle lol
Which is to say "looks good on paper, but prepare for this shit to go as sideways as humanly possible"
I just started watching your channel, I am impressed. Watching a young person going places. He is very intelligent!! He has his own thoughts, gives me hope for our future.
My man thank you for digging up this clip. It is so beneficial to get things like that out to as many people as possible so, thank you. However, you must see why folks are really not interested in hearing your opinions on a subject you yourself name as “informative” while watching the same debate we all came to see.
Yeah but there is a whole genre of “reaction” videos out there, the majority of which involve people seeing something for the first time, often on a topic they know little about, and then offering their reaction/thoughts. (I don’t really understand why that’s such a popular thing, but it apparently is.) In defense of our guy LFR Jojo, he didn’t offer any authoritative opinions on Marxism. He simply gave his thoughts on the interaction between Charlie and the student.
Loved this!! This is the type of conversations we should be having, not the toxic yelling, screaming, and accusing that has been going on lately. People need to be able to have discussions on topics where they are not afraid of being canceled or being called a bigot or worse. Thomas Sowell I believe has spoken on Marxism so highly recommend him and much of the topics he speaks on.
I like your definition of 'intelligent'. You most likely didnt realize that by clearly explaining such a concept that you, yourself, show yourself to be intelligent! Thank you for your videos and insightlful commentary. I enjoy it every time I watch.
I also think that Charlie Kirk inadvertantly explained how any socio-economic system can be rooted in good ideas or concepts, but that when driven to the extreme or rather, when that solitary concept is implemented fully, turns bad.
I wish I didn't lose my copy of Mao's little red book when I returned home to USA from my 8 years of living in China. I had bought it in a book store with a couple other western foreigners as a souvenir, but over the years of changing apartments, moving to different parts of the Dongguan-Humen-Shenzhen metro area, I forgot it in one of those desks and kept forgetting to remind myself to buy another copy. A true, chinese copy, not some half-translated english version that has been watered down specifically to cater to American college students. It would've been a great source to refer to and show to the occasional american communist i've run into in the past few years
When a google search pulls up an answer like that, I think it's trying to tell you that a 2 minute google search isn't sufficient to understand the topic.
Your humble approach to knowledge will allow you to develop an expansive understanding of the world.
My question would be, why would the government put undo regulations on the number one provider of tax revenues being small businesses?
in theory in working democracy people might vote for those who would implement such regulations.
But that would require mechanism to get politicians who brake their promises out of the office and possibly punished.
Your definition of intelligence is well reasoned and accurate.
love seeing a polite exchange once in awhile got to get back to that. That what all this identity politics does it creates narrow mindedness resulting in an inability to think outside your political and social leanings. I am guilty of this as well from time to time. The thing to remember is to not lead your rationale with emotions but lead it with logic, otherwise you will reach irrational conclusions. It seems simple but it is hard in process, take a dose of humility.
Nice to see folks have a rational conversation without going emotional. Love seeing folks discussing instead of just talking and not listening. Nice vid.
I enjoy your comments! I realize you are young and Learning! I think you help people see the Truth!
It was a shift from one topic to another topic in order avoid to addressing the obvious reality if of "the free market cannot regulate itself".
Also, small businesses are only 44% of the total economy and have outsized power in politics, which is inherent to capitalism.
I own a small business. I do not directly compete against big established companies simply for one reason; I do a better work. Often large companies sacrifice quality for quantity, life is one giant balancing act.
I think the reason this was such a good exchange simply because of what we never see anymore. Agreeing to Disagree. Most are too fixated on staying on their own side that any disagreement is met with anger and an inability to understand the others point. And look what happened they came to an agreement!!!!
The biggest scariest monopoly started decades ago when Amazon took over publishing so effectively, and very few people noticed
Amazon did NOT "take over publishing" by any stretch of the imagination nor are they a monopoly. Amazon is NOT a publishing house, such as Tor, Ace, Harper Collins, or Holt, Rhinehart & Winston. It merely is ONE platform where one can purchase books and have them shipped/mailed to an address (aka "mail ordered"). Amazon increased its market share by including other goods (along the lines of the former mail order giants such as Mongomery Wards, and Sears & Roebuck, for example) as well as forming partnerships by allowing others to sell goods via their online "storefront/catalogue." Walmart is another company that has embraced the online catalogue marketplace idea. As far as specifically book sellers are concerned, Alibris, Barnes & Noble, Powells, and others sell online, as well as many independents. B&N and a lot of independents also maintain "brick & mortar" stores as well.
@@eriolduterion8855 if I publish something traditionally- I can only make money by going through the channels that lead me to being available on Amazon to achieve real sales
If I publish independently, they pretty much have monopolized that completely
Same for audiobooks with funneling you into audible
I don’t know who’s stance you’re taking, but if you want to try and publish a book you will be faced with the inevitable Great Wall of Amazon
Phones are a great example of where competition works. Thirty years ago Apple had no foot in the cellar market, now they are the biggest. Companies like BlackBerry just couldn't compete. Motorola is still around as an example, and as Apple raises prices without adding value they loose market share.
Kudos to both for having a legitimate debate. Both are intellectually debating because they respectfully give each other the time to answer each other. Charlie is amazing at finding a middle ground to agree on. She did amazing at being inquisitive but standing her belief and convinced me to research her position further. Great content from three incredible people on this one.
Yeah lots of debate videos where one side dominates but they are civil. But, while I disagree with her, she ACTUALLY made good comments and had great questions that get to the root of the problems at hand instead of the symptoms. That’s not a trait you see often today, on either side. Very, very good discussion and debate.
This is a whole lot better than blind “muh seize the means of production” or “muh free markets” and looking for changes that could fix issues, without rigidly being in one camp.
One of the problems today is that large corporations have the financial means to lobby government to game the regulatory process to their benefit and shut out competition. That's not capitalism, that's corporatism.
I really didn’t know she was a Marxist when I wrote that. I guessed
I like your channel and have subscribed to it. You are a very smart young man whose hand I would like to shake on day.
Young folks are supposed to be passionate and believe. I fully applaud her for saying what she believes but also saying she is here to find some common ground. Her mind is open and she is ready to back her beliefs and convictions. She is the type of person who will continue to grow and evolve. That should be celebrated because our schools indoctrinate towards those beliefs but she has remained open.
Karl Marx is one of the founders of Socialism and Communism. So Marxist is another term for Socialist or Communist.
Socialism is the "collective" or in reality government ownership of industries. As a means to distribute the resources amongst all people equally. Marx saw this as an in-between step toward Communism where all people would share all things with all people.
So when people say communism has never been done they are technically correct because true communism has no borders, no counties, and no governments.
I tried to be as unbiased as I could giving you a basic definition of the phrase. I hope it helped.
Yeah...People who do less or a less valuable job should not be paid or get the same as those who do more..or more valuable jobs
@@Silencedfixer I don't disagree with you. I think Marxism, Socialism, and Communism are horrible ideas. The only thing that's killed more people in history is infectious disease.
Because the state, run by people, with power over anything and everything you do never turns out badly........
Giving up all of your rights to the state will NEVER work.
LOL... back in the day (per-90s) there was AT&T and your local Bell telephone provider.
Marx taught that capitalism was inherently flawed because people who were "not working"* were making money off the backs of the working class. He taught that in a perfect society that the people who worked would get paid and those who did not would starve and that was survival of the fittest in action. In his views everyone who was contributing to society should own everything equally and that the idea of private companies and private property made no sense and would only lead to disparity among the classes.
While what he taught sounds good at first glance he did not have a solution that directed his perfect classless society without installing some form of ruling class who directed the workers and decided who got paid what for what work.
Further, in practice his perfect society actually led to abject poverty and cultural stagnation because when everyone is equal and there is no reward for creating something new or working harder/longer/more than anyone else everyone puts in only the amount of work required by society and nothing more.
If you got no recognition and no reward for creating a new product, inventing a new process, etc. you would not put in the effort.
* Marx did not believe that putting up capital, starting a company, organizing a business, or being an administrator was actual work compared to the people assembling things in factories or growing things on farms. He saw entrepreneurs as a scam to make someone else work and still get paid.
That's the discussion/debate should be. Both parties are civil & try to find common ground.
It's almost like Google doesn't want you to know what Marxism actually means.
The reason they sent most business over seas kis because the Fed dollar is almost worthless and Americans could not afford the products if made in America, also why they cam up with credit cards, car leasing and buy now pay later.
The milieus are totally currupt and beyond the capacity of amy individuals....elites , public decision makers , etc are not making a fair milieu for doing business
“Left leaning” Marxist is redundant.
Large business have the advantage of going to where the cheap labor and cheap manufacturing costs are. Therefore, they can take jobs overseas, pay people pennies on the dollar, take those local resources, and sell them to "richer" consumers. (They also get military protection, but that's another topic). That is exploitation. Small businesses do not have the ability to do that. We should be trying to come up with a way to prioritize keeping businesses in the Western hemisphere and punish those driving manufacturing overseas (through a graduated tax).
I keep hearing about i wish there was more small business while going to the biv box supercenter and chain restaurant
Imagine how far he will be when it’s he is typical age to run for president?
The problem is gigantism, that's what they are both against.
Nothing like a respectul exchange in these clips for once.
use cash, keep America free
Finally my man dealing with someone with sense and got a chance to discuss meaningfully.
Hey, there are still some kicking small businesses out there. I've been lucky enough to be full time employed by a small family owned business for the last 18 years and it's a great place to work. 👍
Karl Marx was a Communist. He thought that Capitalism was full of contradictions and that it inherently produced class struggle between the working class and the bourgeoisie, the class that owned most of the wealth and means of production (factories, etc.). He believed in something called the labour theory of value, that the profit from the sale of some product (the extra value beyond raw materials) came from the labour of the workers. He believed that Capitalism was exploitative of the working class, partially because the profits of the bourgeoisie relied upon the workers selling their labour for less than it was worth, and that this process alienated them from the things they produced. He believed that the basic social structure would reorient itself to resolve the class conflict inherent within Capitalism; that the proletariat (the working class) would gain class consciousness (awareness of their condition and place in society) and abolish private ownership of the means of production.
He believed that there would be a transitory stage between Capitalism and Communism called the dictatorship of the proletariat, in which the working class (proletariat) would lead the state, and the state would seize the means of production (take over the factories and whatnot), making them publicly/socially owned. Marx believed that state exercise of power was a coercive tool used by those who owned the means of production. In Capitalism, that would be the bourgeoisie who exercised state power, and under Socialism (the stage preceding Communism), it would be the proletariat. At first, the state would have to leverage this power to preserve the revolution against the bourgeoisie. He believed that, eventually, as society became classless, the state would "wither away" as people would work for the common good without coersion. People would do what they could to help society, and resources would be distributed to people based on need. This final stage would be called Communism.
Inteligence isn't equal to being lettered
I have argued this point multiple times before, I believe in free market capitalism and less government regulations that stifle innovation and small business start ups. Government should play a role in maintaining and protecting the “free market” for those that would attempt to cheat or monopolize. Let the game be played, monitor and watch for the fouls.
Like imagine if Mormons were called "John smith-ites", and you asked what a "John Smithite" is and they told you "a follower of john smith"
Its not a meaningful definition, but it _is_ a definition.
Dude. Samsung and Apple being two separate companies tells you automatically that it's not a monopoly
Top thing result googling break up google is the main one to suffer is the consumer....
i wouldn't call this girl woke. i would actually call her just an ordinary person who simply has an opposing view. both are obviously well educated in their political views and stances, they're both calm and collected, and the main point of why i think so is because she actually decided, and respectfully, to agree to disagree and move on. a woke person will NEVER do that.
Those that scream the most about exploitation do nothing to solve it as in start their own company. They expect others to fix the issue.
Adam Smith, writer of the capitalist 'bible' Wealth of Nations, pointed out many of the problems that could result from capitalism, that could create an non-capitalist economy. He noted that governments had to beware of monopolies and cartels. He also, most interestingly in my opinion, that people should beware when politicians and businesspeople become too close.
They could have a conversation because she was actually educated and willing to have a good faith conversation. We could find solutions if we were more like her!
I enjoy your reactions because you seem sincere and humble and willing to learn...
There are almost no "pure" Marxists any longer. Towards the end of his life Karl Marx quipped that he'd lived long enough to realize that he wasn't a Marxist (this was in reaction to a French group calling itself Marxist and saying a lot of stuff Marx thought was wrong). Marx was a brilliant analyst; his Hegel-inspired Progressive view that "history" itself has some kind of "consciousness" tending towards "freedom" (whose freedom to do what?) was ummm.... disconnected from reality. Even Lenin knew his Communism wasn't Marxist -- he himself called it State Capitalism. By the time of the Bolshevik Revolution Marxism and Communism had become brand-names that didn't have much specific content. It's gotten worse since then. We can get a lot out of studying Marx without being Marxist in the classic 1880, Continental Socialist sense. We can ask about property itself, as an institution. Is there any limit to how much should be under one person/organization's control? We can ask about social class, and whether negotiation is possible between parties with wildly different amounts of power; even Adam Smith knew that wages were about power, not a "fair exchange".
Oh, and all Capitalism is Crony Capitalism -- it's the only kind there's ever been. People confuse Free Markets with Competitive Markets; they're not the same thing. You can have a Free Market or you can have a Competitive Market, but not both. If you try to have a Free Market very shortly Cronies will make it non-competitive. You have to WORK to keep a market Competitive, with a regulator big enough there's nothing (frankly) too big for it to destroy. See Kenneth Arrow on Regulatory Capture. This is one of the things we suffer now but we're not too far gone to recover.
Irony In first min and a half 😂 I love your videos man , but did you mean to script that 😅
Don't trust Google, use alternatives first, then compare all of them.
This shows how 2 individuals can come from different ideologies, but find common ground. Props to doing so without hateful rhetoric. This is how conversations should happen.
A Marxist believes in the theories and principles of Karl Marx, a 19th-century philosopher, economist, and political theorist. Here are some of the core beliefs and principles associated with Marxism:
1. Class Struggle: Marxists view history and social changes through the lens of class struggle, primarily between the bourgeoisie (capitalist class who own the means of production) and the proletariat (working class who sell their labor). They believe that this struggle is the driving force behind historical development and social change.
2. Materialist Conception of History: Marxism holds a materialist understanding of societal development, arguing that material conditions and economic factors are the primary influences on the structure of society, its politics, and its major events, rather than ideals or ethics.
3. Capitalism Critique: Marxists critically analyze capitalism, highlighting its inherent contradictions and crises. They argue that capitalism is exploitative, leading to alienation (where workers are alienated from their labor, the products they produce, and their fellow workers) and unequal distribution of wealth, eventually necessitating a transition to socialism.
4. Socialism and Communism: Marxists advocate for the establishment of a socialist society as a transition phase towards communism. In socialism, the means of production are owned collectively, aiming to distribute resources and wealth more equitably among the population. The ultimate goal is communism, a classless and stateless society where goods are distributed according to need.
5. Revolution: Many Marxists believe that a revolution is necessary to overthrow the capitalist system and establish a socialist state. This perspective varies among Marxists, with some advocating for a more peaceful transition through democratic means.
6. Dialectical Materialism: Marxists use dialectical materialism as a method of analysis, which considers the contradictions within historical and social processes that lead to change through conflict and resolution. This methodology is used to analyze and predict the directions of societal changes.
7. Internationalism: Marxism often emphasizes international solidarity among the working class, opposing nationalism and imperialism, which are seen as divisive and exploitative.
Marxism has evolved over time, leading to various schools of thought that interpret Marx’s ideas differently. These include Leninism, Maoism, Trotskyism, and more, each adding their own perspectives and strategies for achieving the goals outlined by Marx and Engels.
The definition of marxism is kept purposefully vague because it is mainly a tool to assert power over others. You cant do anything to assurt power if you are constrained by principles, which are found in a tight definition. The idea of marxism is you do not have the right to property and ownership of property is inherently evil. They are right that a lot of conflicts are caused by ownership, but where marxism fails is always in practice because ownership is natural.
In my view there is a difference between knowledge and intelligence. Leftists tend to try to convolute the two, believing that if you have a degree, you must be more intelligent than someone without one. Nowadays, what I see as 'knowledge' today is little more than repeating the 'what' without understanding the 'why'. This leads to a narrowing of options in applications. Unfortunately, this means that in order to apply this knowledge into other fields, it must be done with force, rather than adapting the knowledge to a new situation. "My way or the highway."
Intelligence, on the other hand, is the ability to take knowledge of facts and the principles behind them and apply them to different sets of variables or situations to fix a problem.
Now, you didn't mention which field of engineering you are studying, so for the sake of argument, I'll presume mechanical engineering. But, in any of the engineering fields, you learn the principles behind the data. The thing is, most of these principles can be used in other fields, as well as fields outside of mechanical engineering. Vector analysis, for instance, can be used in the design of a building to understand the stress caused by wind, or the orbit of a satellite around a distant world.
Phones have an interesting place in economics where things like the processors used to make phones are only available to one company, and the core ip of the cpu is only available under strict licenses - effectively an anti-competitor situation. But it's not so clear cut. If you need a metal part stamped out from steel, you'll send it off to be manufactured and a tool and die company will make the pieces for the stamping process, These stamps while available at the tool and die company are not allowed to be used for someone else's parts. This situation is IMHO similar to the previous one. For some reason the first one seems to raise eyebrows for some people, but the second one does not.
I'm fairly confident that the reason they use the word in the definition, is because Marxism is an ideal, and Marx was a person. The reason they don't give a more specific definition, is because there is no short answer for "what is Marxism?".
If you play C. Kirk at x2 speed, he sounds like B. Shapiro on normal playback.
When Charlie speaks to someone who has differing opinions but actually seeks real answers rather than sound bites, he is very good about trying to find out their beliefs and finding common ground. But if they are grifting he will bury them six feet down with facts.
Marxism: 'the political, economic, and social theories of Karl Marx, including the belief that struggle between social classes is a major force in history, and there should eventually be a society in which there are no classes.
Just one question, in which class was marx….and had marx worked a single day in his life?
marx basicly lived off his wife's money@@dysvanlist
@@ericarachel55 not just that. He constantly borrowed money from rich friends to fund himself.
I was being brief....@@dysvanlist
You forgot to add all of his ideas of how to implement his system. Once again the ends don't justify the fucking means, stop trying to tell others how to live, and seriously explain the seizure of the means of production? No Marxist can explain that last one without your implementation being exploitative of the same people you are trying to save.
While I agree with the classless society part, all forms of rule following Marxism absolutely became a totalitarian shit show, I Like not being hungry Melody, I'm sure you like to not be starving, cause ya know Marxism means someone seizes the food, the resources, and the labour. You yourself are the labourer, literally think for five seconds about it and you should come to the logical conclusion that these systems lead to straight up state sponsored slavery.
An example of a company creating a monopoly by legal means is, Company A is stuggling. Company B offers to help Company A via a loan. Contract of loan will state that Company A has a certain amount of time to pay back the loan. Ii Company A can not pay back the loan in time, Company B will assume ownership of Company A, however Company A will retain the same name and all employees. Then Company B will go out and find Company C, that is struggling, and offer to help them in the same way BUT, they will use Company As name to issue the loan and possibly assume ownership of Company C. This is done over and over so, the owner of Company B will slowly start to take over all other companies creating a monopoly.
Some corporations are very large because they require massive integration, capital and professional depth to operate at all in their field (think Boeing, Northrup, Caterpillar, Toyota, etc.). Retail & service conglomerates exist mostly because of their purchase power advantages. Mass purchasing power creates an uneven playing field. Interesting side note; the average Walmart supercenter has over 4 acres under-roof, there are 3640 Supercenters in the US alone. Total of +-15000 acres of enclosed retail space:)
If there were to be trust-busting, I'd like to see it in the retail/service spaces (think Ma Bell). Try to imagine the effect if each Walmart or Taco Bell store was owned and operated independently, or even in groups of 5-10 stores. Actually I doubt anyone has a clue of what would happen...
BTW, Walmart and Bezos didn't just kill main street, also Sears and a slew of other large conglomerate retailers. Conglomerates can fall victim to each other as well. I personally think that companies like Macdonald's and Ford will begin sputtering in the not to distant future (this is not investment advice people:)
The terms socialism, communism, marxism, etc have the general 'same' goal, but they differentiate on how and where they applied/perceived and also their own interpretation of marx/engels work.
YET, I'M AN IDIOT AND BOUGHT A MOTOROLA. 😂😂🤣🤣😂😂
Tuttle twins actually has a fun simple episode that talks about carl marx and how his system has worked out in history verse how he imagined it would work when he wrote out his manifesto.
Samsung vs Apple is the top-shelf hardware but they are at the top but there are many others in the middle and lower tiers AND neither is worth much of anything without so many of the service options that are available. BTW one of the many tricks that are designed to get you to replace your core phone every 12-18 months is BEATABLE by having the battery replaced as needed professionally (about 150ish for Samsung) My S-4 back in the day hero phone lasted 10 years and 2-3 batteries before it TRULY became out of date. btw ... that battery replacement is handled LOCALLY by a person you see.
So monopolies are illegal, but there are loopholes are ever present. Same thing with data collection like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Disney, etc. Have no right to actively track or otherwise spy on civilians ( think nasa in the Watergate scandal ) but yet get consent and constantly track moniter everything you do regardless of legalities.
This also applies with monopolies. They can have it under the guise of sister or daughter company's leaving them under the management of the original group to make it so that they "don't own" the business or brand but rather manage it but take all the money.
Charlie is correct, it's just like when there was a big "fight for 15" push. Corporations like McDonald's were all for them passing a law, but wouldn't just make that the minimum across their stores. Why? Because smaller competition couldn't afford that, and they could offset the cost with kiosks
LFR Jojo: Marxism = The socioeconomic philosophy and political program developed by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. For the full picture read The Communist Manifesto -which is actually very short- 48 pages. The various implementations of Socialism and Communism have resulted in MILLIONS of deaths and with few exceptions have been total failures.
To understand Marxism, you are going to have to, as he mentioned, take the time to read Marx. While it is essentially the precursor to communism, communism in reality is very different from theory. Like many things reality is very different than ivory tower theory. The other part is you also have to understand the history and economic culture of the part of the world Marx was from and the words as he meant them at the time. Very simply, without going into all the background, Marx was describing an ideal world that simply doesn't work with real people in a real economy. But it sounds so good it draws people into believing it basically as a religion.
Look at the role the Federal government plays in facilitating these monopolies under the guise of subsidizing corporate products as "rights"
The reality the gov't is forced to have a MINIMUM wage, expresses a reality of exploitation.