This video should be viewed in every high school and university in the land. It could be used as a platform for further debate and dialogue which is the product of a free society that promotes and advocates free speech. Thankyou you tube for allowing this interview to be presented on your channel.
I'm watching this interview some 5yrs after it was posted. An excellent conversation. It's a tragedy that western societies haven't moved on much in 5yrs, but instead the waters have become even more 'muddy'.
Yes, actually. I had observed the same thing. And John Anderson consistently makes his guests appear at their absolute most brilliant. Of course the long form interview lends itself to thorougness to a certain extent. Certainly more so than the typical 5 minute Cable interview. But indeed when interviewed properly, you end up with a coherent thesis, rather than a series of somewhat disconnected points. Anderson's interview of Jordan Peterson is maybe the most fascinating interview I've ever seen. Peterson is always really, really smart, but Anderson made him look like the smartest man that ever lived. And he did it by allowing him to build his entire argument in a very thorough way.
Excellent. It's access to conversations like this that acts as a counterbalance to fake, biased news. Unfortunately, the number of views is a drop in the ocean compared to the toxic waste of what passes for political discourse these days.
I only discovered John in the last couple of months. For an educated guy I admire his ability not to feel the need to butt in and to let his guests stay in their flow. I'd like to hear some more of his own opinions.
I agree. What a refreshing thing to listen to someone being interviewed without the interviewer continually butting in and trying to grab some of the glory for himself. Well done John! You're a true gentleman. A job well done . Great interview.
The speed of development in the digital realm has surpassed the control ability of the power structures.The time warp effect on social and cultural trends,customs and beliefs is astounding.It is going to be a bumpy ride.Great presentation.Many thanks Mr. Anderson!
We need these men thrust into our children's lives, their thoughts, opinions, wisdom, values. I'd go as far as to say our western culture to save it requires this atonement.
Excellent discussion, Gents. An honest teaching of history to succeeding generations is the best preventive medicine to repeating the patterns of folly from the past.
What is a foundation is for beloved? Likewise remember before utterance LEAVES our mouths has a true foundation is what gives the reason for the AIM. Remember all of you are worth more than anything nor everything that exists! Is like it will be hard to show off to my father God without you nor my neighbors. Humble to WASHERS of FEETS of neighbors and wiping tears from all eyes. Likewise humble to bound. Beloved rest thy FEETS upon a FOOTSTOOL of God. 1st Love God as a CHILDS with sincere conversations 2nd. Love thy neighbors as thyself. Upholders of God's Will. Any other foundations will pass but these 2 will remain. Not till then. Boundaries nor borders are in place. Untrust from one another and nations. As you see ! Truth and peace reunite. Nothing is wasted but increased beloved. Why we contribute? For whom for what nor reason? Understanding grace and works. Indeed many have not ENTERED. How to preserve new minds. What new minds truly deserve indeed. LAUGHTERS of thy innocents
Surely, the function of university history teaching is facilitate students ability to judge for themselves, not tell them which bits of history were catastophic.
Paying taxes doesn't give you the right to oppress others. Does anyone listening to this believe in ethics? Or do you use your political/economic beliefs to further silly agenda's which undermine democracy and the point of such an exercise?
Yes I am with you on that, not only you should teach young ppl this, but also what happened with communism before and the lessons ppl should learn from that!
It hasn't started but I've liked it. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. Western Civilization falls when, welfare, foreign debt, globalization, immigration, and politised changes to state religion.
Milk cream, I haven't watched the part you're referring to but I'm assuming Niall is paraphrasing the old adage "No taxation without representation". Apart from receiving services (sanitation, police, roads etc) the most direct contact you have with the state/government is through taxation. Of course you have a fair point about folks who don't pay tax but most of them will do and are aware their parents do etc.
milk cream, you blank-brained dunce , learn some history before asking cretinous questions. All the issues raised in this discussion are common knowledge.
Anita Quilty-maguire I agree but also learned that rich Romans, men and women, became very lazy and degenerate. I heard an anecdote of one of the Germanic soldiers being ridiculed by a lazy Roman citizen because of the table manners of the Germanic soldier, who had been fighting for the Roman Empire. Eventually most of the soldiers were not Roman citizens.
Protip: Because you rightly see long conversation as very much needed, Most people will listen to this whilst not looking at the video I suggest talking through the introduction, instead of having just the block of text. It's right of you to to think context is needed, but most people will listen whilst driving or ironing or some other activity.
An excellent point at the beginning. As an historian myself, I must admit that the pop cultured bubble gum flavored socialism offered up and sifted through current identitarianism as it wallows through the academy today, reflects a curious ambivalence at best, and an absolute horrific deferral of the twentieth century history of the practice of communism. As if students have adopted wholeheartedly the attitudes of Maoist and Stalinist regimes, that a hundred million casualties to a great common cause, was in fact, a small price to pay for whatever glory they deemed fit to their purpose. The moral and ethical questions are never asked, therefor the the answers are not to be found. But then, students don't appear to study history anymore. Historical illiteracy abounds. It sounds like a timeworn statement, but I'll repeat it anyway: Those who don't know (even their own) history, may very well be doomed to repeat it. The idea always was, in all of our realms, public, political, economic, social and educational - to learn from our mistakes. This works well in any private life. So too, in public life.
John or staff - please interview Rusty Reno of First Things in the US - his take on "moral deregulation" since the 1960s is spot on ... look up his speach to the students of Iona College a couple years back. The return of the "Strong gods" is happening and we must all prepare to shape the new era positively.
Not only did I go through both private and public education systems and am also now a qualified teacher. I can honestly say that we were taught that Hitler was bad but was never on Marxism. I am ashamed of the Australian education system. We aren't teaching children critical thought, honest intellectual argument and how to be respectful and responsible citizens. The school/university systems are now based on customer experience. They are but tools to focus on an individuals desire to fulfill their dream. Today, there is very little consideration that these institutions exist on the basis of truth, academic integrity, honest argument and accurate scientific method. Our education systems are failing because these systems have forgotten why they existed in the first place.
Excellent discussion. Can we please see an examination of corporate democracy and corporate cronyism. So many of our youth and 18-35s only go looking for alternatives when the current system leaves them out of the wealth building promise our capitalist democracies sell. If more could see an easier path to a better life without the hobbling effect of lifelong debt build in, the alternatives would not be as appealing.
I will say, that I obviously agree with the fact that the "social" media is polarizing society and has a great unintended (or otherwise) effect. The social media algorithms are curators of your content that's for sure, but what do you think is happening when you open a newspaper? Someone had to decide what goes in and what stays out. So you're left with the situation where you have to trust the integrity of news editors, which in today's ideologically-driven mainstream media sphere is not advisable (if not nearly impossible). Granted, the social media content recommendation algorithm is rather stupid, because it is designed with a singular goal - and that is to maximize a the company's metric of success without any regard for far-reaching unpredictable consequences on societal level. But the problem still persists on the human level as well. The way I see it, humanity needs to grow the hell up. That's the solution.
Jacob011 Yes, and I think we can develop more sophisticated tools for navigating news , views and information than we ever had before. As you say, in the past we were completely dependent on the editor's curating of news. But now we have more choices. We can learn to play the algorithms to give us a wider sweep of the world than we ever got from the mainstream traditional media. Whenever I feel Google's trapping me in an echo chamber, I shake it up by initiating searches on different topics and selecting new information providers and creators. I subscribe to widely differing UA-cam channels and use the like button liberally. It tends to open up the variety of choices put before me.
How can we condense or create short story format of these historical concepts for high schoolers absolutely agree little to no literature providing a clear argument on the negative of Marxism and it’s failure. While capitalism isn’t perfect we live in balanced democracies and we need to promote the importance and gratitude for the systems we have .
I've been pondering the issue around the recent social awkwardness, a seeming reluctance to celebrate Australian culture and heritage that's facing us right now - at least publically. Niall's analysis of the Left's deconstruction of history and culture answers this quite well, as it becomes painfully apparent that indeed - we cannot celebrate our country because no one allows us to point out anything that's good about it, the discussion is always restricted to the negative parts.
29.45 Niall Ferguson plays down youth pessimism very much. But it may turn out to be a key player in the culture wars. Young people from the middle classes, now not being able to get a house, start a family, get work,. and having extreme study debts, may have ample reasons not being happy with the system they grew up in.
Interesting channel. As a hopefully reasonable lefty, it would be remiss of me to not listen to what reasonable non-lefties have to say. I like the lack of hyperbole and baiting in these discussions.
So fortunate for me and the intellectual world that Niall Ferguson decided to become a financial historian rather than pursue science like his parents or some other specialties. He has to be the #1 top of his field, which don't attract the best and the brightest due to the backward focus.
The brilliant prof and Anderson began attaching Marx, then proceeded to discuss various problems of Capitalism--young people being unable to enter the property market, jobs disappearing to technology, alienation, monopolies--that Marx had analysed 150 years ago. Marx of course wrote 5,000 pages critiquing capitalism and only about 300 pages on socialism. As evil as communism was, Marx is worth reading for what he has to say about capitalism. I am not yet convinced that Marx, who died in 1883, was responsible for the 100 million deaths by murderous totalitarian socialist regimes of the 20th century, who ignored his writing. I would like to hear the brilliant Ferguson address Marx's responsibility for this in more detail. This series by Anderson is the best thing he has ever done.
Are you saying "not real Marxism"? Marx gave the socialists the ideological cover, fatalism and moral righteousness/status to enact their great evil. His philosophy devalued human life by emphasising possession, consumption, relentless grasping and envious comparison of material goods. Marx's theory of alienation is only a self-fulfilling prophecy. When one sees life through the materialistic lens only, one will surely feel alienated. He transformed malevolent envy from a vice into a virtue and noble cause (he transvaluated value as Nietzsche would say). His dismissal of religion as just some form of conspiratorial mind control - rather than a rich system of time-tested ideas, relationships and experiences that bind a people together for a greater good - lead to a complete lack of any real morality.
"Not real Marxism" this is a familiar motif, perhaps derived from that bloviating blatherskite Jordan Peterson, regrettably he fails to analyse Marx's actual texts, but spouts rhetoric of socialist resentment, drawn from a line of Orwell's. There is a lot wrong with Marx, however Marx's critique of capitalism is extraordinary and immense, and at least worth a read. I would be very surprised if Anderson has even laboured through vol one of Capital, most critics from the right reveal little evidence of having actually read Marx, it's hard work, talk about oppression! Of course Ferguson has read him--probably when he was 12, which is why I would have enjoyed hearing more detail from him linking Marx's texts to the regimes of the 20th century,
I am a capitalist in terms of sell your wares for a profit, however, the law has been written in such a way that it grossly favors the very rich. It has been written for the rich by the rich. Justice is purchased rather than an absolute. The rich get off because they have the means to purchase justice. No competent government, elected by the people, should be able to be manipulated by anyone; but the rich and powerful routinely grease the wheels of law and government with what they have; the most money. This directly counters the freedom of the individual. (ie. Your Data, Isn't it yours??? apparently not.) Competents should hold power not the manipulating rich and their companies. 1 man 1 vote was supposed to mean something, but it only means something for a single day once every 5 years; and the rest of the 4 years and 364 days it is ruled by money. Simple capitalism of selling skills, products or services for a profit is absolutely correct but it should hold zero power over people, only a competent elected government should have permission to hold that power on the people's behalf . True democracy, proper simple capitalism, small competent government and straightforward law. String pulling needs to end. Notwithstanding the fact that this slightly flawed system (The West) has without a doubt is by far the most successful for freedom and the individual. LAW REFORM please
"Not real Marxism" is a familiar motif exactly because it is not only Jordan Peterson taking recourse in it (whatever you mean by "bloviating blatherskite"). To argue in hindsight that rulers that proclaimed to be inspired by Marx also led regimes responsible for the deaths of millions, yet detach the source that inspired such ruling from its consequences is disingenuous at best.
The move by the dominant platforms to be more proactive in censoring content is already driving a new phenomena where, unlike in China, people are free to set up private servers for communicating and sharing content, and this is being facilitated by services that make this very easy to do, customisable but otherwise ready to run solutions hosted wherever you want for little or no cost for the basic services. Everyone is becoming the writer, publisher, bookseller and reader at the same time and they are doing it in a mesh like structure that is very hard to disrupt or control. Soon they will have AI assistants to do the hard work for them and the effort required to enter the game will be minimal, everyone becomes an opinionated media tycoon who has no idea how their own empire really works at the nuts and bolts level. This means that while you sit there pondering what happened in 2016 you are failing to notice the dynamics that may well serve up a new surprise for you in another few years. It truly is a moving target and the only lesson history can teach you is that it is moving and that if you can't intuit where it will be in the future you will continue to miss it. The problems stem from the potentially mutually exclusive ideals of freedom and accountability, because without there being a truly benevolent and just system for ensuring they are equally protected both cannot coexist. There needs to be more than one internet with the most "disciplined" one being entirely free to access and strictly age appropriate, in many ways a replacement for free-to-air television, but you have to leave the original web alone or people will just tunnel under and through whatever you try to replace it with, because you can't tell them what software they are allowed to run or who they can connect with without becoming like China.
The past of society should be treated like the brain deals with our personal experience. The brain breaks our experience into components that are recombined to facilitate navigation of the future. That seems to be the political approach of the CPC.
Hitler was a member of the Socialist party. He said, “I’m a different type of Socialist.” It was only after he gained power and became an authoritarian(fascist) leader, that he was called a right wing, Fascist. He came from the left, something not known or taught in Western universities.
Fergusson is technically right when he says socialism means state ownership of the means of production, but I think most people associate that with Marxism/Communism, whereas the "demotic" definition of socialism is all the benefits that a greedy ultracapitalist boss would refuse to give workers: child labor and minimum wage laws, accident/disability/old-age/pension insurance, safe/non-toxic working conditions, etc. That's what comes to mind when I hear "socialist", not nationalization of industries (although all the dictionaries confirm the state ownership criterion),
I studied history at a very progressive university in Melbourne 2013 - 2016. I don’t know where this idea that we’re not taught about the horrors of communism comes from, it was there in the lectures and prescribed reading.
Not everyone studies history I guess. I have two undergraduate degrees with the only history component being the history of mathematics. What I do know about general history is self taught or picked up in podcasts such as these.
I can assure you that you're lucky. My university did *not* explicitly teach about the horrors of communism. It probably all comes down to your professor. I would also add, even if a person is taught about the negatives of communism, how is it framed? Some people will always use the old "yes, this turned out poorly but that's not because of anything wrong with communism - it was the people in charge or outside factors that led to these atrocities" trick.
In the book of Danial, the angel that appeared to Danial says "The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, ....". This implies that there are 'principalities and powers' i.e. very powerful demonic spirits or fallen angels that control human governments or geographical regions. Ephesians 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Many people believe that the word 'principality' also represents ideologies.
Yes there is no absolute equality that’s exactly like there is no absolute freedom because to maintain the society into order, there must be rules to obey but in a relatively fair and equal fashion that benefit majority of the ppl, but not just benefit the few like most authoritarian countries!
I largely agree with his suggestion. Leaving it to the markets I think will work in the long run, but requiring near monopolies to not censor is something I see can't hurt and may even help. Fact is that states are doing the opposite already and wanting to censor, so that is why this suggestion seems like a fantasy and only the markets can do this when looking at the practical reality.
Freedom leads to competition. In every competition there are winners and losers. There are always more loosers then winners. Loosers hate winners. This why they like socialism. Pure capitalism is like a car without brakes,it leads to revolutions. Thus the trick is to find the right balance between two.
I like Niall Ferguson in many ways. Not just because he’s a fellow Scot (despite having lost his accent almost completely, though you can still hear a bit of Glasgow in it), but because he is honest, smart and clearly cares about the subjects. I am also rather sympathetic to his basic point that there is a lack of open, critical consideration of ideas of race, empire and history in general. I also agree that most young people dont really understand communism. However, I sharply disagree with him on other, major points. The problem is not that young people have not learned about communism, its that they have not learned about almost ANY aspect of how society is run at all or the different approaches to that. Knowledge of both communism and capitalism ( and anarchism, liberalism, etc) is very much lacking. So the idea that he puts forward that left wingers have deliberately decreased consideration of the bad affects of communism seems quite inaccurate. It’s part of a wider lack of understanding, which is caused, at root, by the capitalist liberal society he seems to like so much. The result of a focus in media and education and work place away from critical thinking and in-depth thinking, towards frivolous entertainment. Towards learning that is only focused on one narrow subject or on job related information, rather than a rounded critical education. We very much should have more knowledge about society and critical consideration of how to run society. but it is capitalism that is holding that back, not the left wing. In general its left wing people who are tying to push for more knowledge and critical thought, not the opposite. He also commits an act of incredible blindness for one who has investigated history so deeply and admirably of accepting uncritically that what Stalin and Mao SAID was communism actually was communism. Even a moderate consideration of history shows that to be a very weak hypothesis and at odds with various documented facts from history. So its odd that he would let that go by when he is so dogged in pursuing other points. He says that present day China is, at best, partially communist, so why cant he also admit that under Mao they were also , for the most part, only nominally communist? ....It seems that the state dictatorship of Stalin, Mao etc was a very distorted version of communism, at best. How much we can call that the communism imagined in the 19thC is strongly in doubt. And it is certainly not the kind of communism or socialism or anarchism that 99% of left wing people want now. Lastly, the key reason young people are turning towards communism, socialism or anarchism - despite the lack of understanding of all these - is that they see that capitalism is not working well and they are fumbling around, however awkardly, for something better. Whatever we call that better economic and social system (BESS) , the desire to have something better is genuine.
@Sean Michael My reply concerns your second point, about the experience with communism. Slavoj Zizek, who describes himself as a Communist, says Communism was a total failure. When the model fails in reality, it is the model's fault, not reality's, because the model omits human nature. You might argue that Stalin's, or Mao's, version of communism differs from the model but that's how it is inevitably applied in reality.
Isn't it about time we had our politicians on taget based empolyment like they did to the teachers. Enough of theyre exuses live up to youre word or be expelled from politics.we deserve no less.
So this interview is almost two years old, but I'm still surprised that a mind of Dr. Ferguson's caliber didn't identify *famine* or *plague* as the top two threats we face (with war no longer a dominant threat, although terrorism is a related issue). For several years now, I've been baffled that people can be so nasty and uncivil in social media (and in political power struggles) with plentiful food, work, and access to healthcare. Just a stone's throw away from Stanford is not only the world's most powerful tech industry, but a badly mismanaged one-party city that has allowed the grossest inequalities to degenerate to the point of dangerously exposing the public to human bodily fluids and waste--something unthinkable in Western cities for over a hundred years now. Maybe Dr. Ferguson doesn't listen to the plentiful doomsday prophets that populate UA-cam and keep their eyes on our old Four Horsemen enemies (along with the worldwide System of the Beast scenario we will likely face as this cybernetic, transhumanist technocracy continues to develop).
1. Countries are sovereign. They make their own decisions. 2. The US breaches countries’ sovereignty again and again and that is illegal. 3. The US perpetrates violent regime change, and that is illegal. 4. It is not up to the US to determine what economies, politics and governments are allowed in the world; the US acts as world dictator. 5. Some say: “The Vietnam war was to stop communism”. That is vague and therefore meaningless. What did Vietnam exactly do, according to some, that justified the US democide? 6. John Kenneth Galbraith, the economist and US ambassador to India in the early 1960s, quipped: “I don’t see a difference between a capitalist rice field and a communist rice field”. Please explain what is the difference between rice fields that is the business of the US? 7. The US exterminated 3 million people in Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos). What is it exactly about these people that, according to some, justified exterminating them? 8. North and South Vietnam never really existed - the people generally considered themselves one people. That some outside country, the US, drew an artificial demarcation line, did not determine the state of facts. That’s an important cause why the Vietnamese could defeat and kick out the US aggressors. 9. The US tried to destroy them by carpet bombing them, throwing napalm on them, defoliating their forests with agent orange, destroying their rice fields, terrorizing their villages, displacing them and depopulating parts of the country. But the US could not submit them. The Vietnamese are a heroic people. 10. Vietnam as a communist country, reunited in 1976, never was a threat to the US or other countries. It ended the khmer rouge regime in Cambodia in 1978. It disproves the domino pretext. 11. This was not “the war in Vietnam”, as US propaganda falsely frames it. It was the PREEMPTIVE DEMOCIDE IN INDOCHINA, where the US led by Heinz Kissinger and others preemptively exterminated 3 million innocent people. 12. Heinz Kissinger is one of the worst war criminals, mass murderers and terrorists in the past century - in such a way and to such a degree that he may have to be considered to have been a psychopath. 13. In the past 70 years, many US politicians, in their foreign policy, have been as evil as any politicians in dictatorships.
Its funny how when people talk about scandinavia our economic system, they always look to Finland to make the argument that the system will fail. conveniently they forget that Norway is one of the richest countries in the world. Or that Denmark has surplus on its budgets, low foreign debt and the debt is falling. They do in no way look like failing stats on the contrary forring money looks to us for security and stability. I agree that there is an imbalance in the way history is presented, bud that goes for both sides apparently. Way not try to understand way Scandinavia is one of the most stable regions in the world, instead of trying to discredit it, to serve an argument with a one sided view.
Collective inconscious is too often misunderstood and downplayed in civilizations evolution and it represents a bias in human interactions in a globalized world.
In another words, the truth is found in majority votes. The basis for a good governance is democracy. The best practice for business is privatization. so on and so forth... I expect a better analysis with what's happening in the states.
Ying Zhang bias and bigotry without active policy to prevent it is often found in majority vote. It's why even Socrete asked if you are sick would you go to the mass to vote for a diagnosis or to the doctor? It's not hard to see this professor is arguing for the liberals western values, but he doesnt have to take his audience as fools with such a superficial analysis.
'The only sane response is'...Ferguson is speaking millennial fb speech. I agree colonialism needs to be seen in balance but the balance has to take into account devastating famines in India.
re Colonialism. Sikhs likely have better view of UK than hindus, nevertheless i do know some sikhs can can talk about the benefits and costs for british empire. Maybe the pcwest needs to do little bit of catching up.
vaultsjan My personal view as a Sikh is that the British empire was more a liability to our history. We lost our ability to determine our future after our empire was annexed and then our ancestral land (Panjab) split half. The empire could deal with the Hindus who were subservient to the British as oppose to the Sikhs who value individual liberty and autonomy. Not putting all the blame to the British of course, the Sikh empire had plenty of treacherous people within that even the British despised. If our empire wasn’t annexed, given the alignment of values that Sikhs have with Judeo-Christian values, the Asian subcontinent would have been really prosperous and the west would have had a very strong ally.
I heard that Sikh language was-is not considered one of the state languages in India. Is-was this due to some kind of Hindu-Sikh animosity, where do the Mughals come into play?
vaultsjan After partition, Nehru promised the Sikhs autonomy as long as they fought against Pakistan, which they did with majority sacrifice despite being only 2% of the population. Sikhs bought the idea of secular India. However, the Hindu elite backstabbed the Sikhs after the war. We then organised civil rights movement to have the freedom to speak our own language, control of our water resources, and many other rights that were promised (Anandpur Sahib resolution). The result of that was 1984 Sikh Genocide by the Hindu elite that controlled brainless mobs which i’m sad to say the Britain had a helping hand in per the documents revealed recently. The Mughals were pre-British colonisation era. If it wasn’t for the Sikhs, the whole of Indian subcontinent would have been Muslim. Our struggle for independent homeland continues today, and I hope the west realises that we have much more to benefit together in the long run than helping the communal minded people. The same people who are at your shores today subverting/diluting the western individualist values.
They had multiple concerns. The Indo-Pak war was fought because of dispute of Kashmir territory. This is right above Panjab, so If Sikhs become independent, India would probably lose Kashmir to Pak (a reasonable concern, which is why Sikhs fought on the side of India). Second, water and food supply was coming from Panjab (i think 70-80%). So when India didn't reciprocate, even after year of peaceful protest, India lost its goodwill, and Sikhs cut food supply to India unless human-rights and state-rights demand were met. India (under orders of the tyrant Indira), brought in the military to subdue the Sikh freedom fighters (they called terrorists lol), and in process desecrated the Golden Temple (equivalent to Mecca or Vatican to put in perspective), killed innocent civilians, banned foreign journalist, complete black out. 5 Months later, the Sikhs retaliated by assassinating Indira Gandhi. After which, the Hindu elite unleashed the brainless Hindutva/RSS mob and committed Genocide. Don't take my word for it, i'd encourage you to do your own research.
This video should be viewed in every high school and university in the land. It could be used as a platform for further debate and dialogue which is the product of a free society that promotes and advocates free speech. Thankyou you tube for allowing this interview to be presented on your channel.
I'm watching this interview some 5yrs after it was posted. An excellent conversation. It's a tragedy that western societies haven't moved on much in 5yrs, but instead the waters have become even more 'muddy'.
Has anyone else noticed that the "brightest" interviewers allow their guests to develop their argument??
Yes, actually. I had observed the same thing. And John Anderson consistently makes his guests appear at their absolute most brilliant. Of course the long form interview lends itself to thorougness to a certain extent. Certainly more so than the typical 5 minute Cable interview. But indeed when interviewed properly, you end up with a coherent thesis, rather than a series of somewhat disconnected points.
Anderson's interview of Jordan Peterson is maybe the most fascinating interview I've ever seen. Peterson is always really, really smart, but Anderson made him look like the smartest man that ever lived. And he did it by allowing him to build his entire argument in a very thorough way.
@@cryptoskywalker6000 If you like Jordan Peterson i tell you the sickest Interview he's given is this one:
ua-cam.com/video/07Ys4tQPRis/v-deo.html
@@eliteakm Thanks.
the only ones worth to listening.
Excellent. It's access to conversations like this that acts as a counterbalance to fake, biased news. Unfortunately, the number of views is a drop in the ocean compared to the toxic waste of what passes for political discourse these days.
Excellent interview. Real intellectual conversation is rare these days
I only discovered John in the last couple of months. For an educated guy I admire his ability not to feel the need to butt in and to let his guests stay in their flow. I'd like to hear some more of his own opinions.
Australian Parliament Hansard
I agree. What a refreshing thing to listen to someone being interviewed without the interviewer continually butting in and trying to grab some of the glory for himself. Well done John! You're a true gentleman. A job well done . Great interview.
Great conversation. Love Niall's approach and insights
The speed of development in the digital realm has surpassed the control ability of the power structures.The time warp effect on social and cultural trends,customs and beliefs is astounding.It is going to be a bumpy ride.Great presentation.Many thanks Mr. Anderson!
This man is an international treasure.
William Feldner Both men, I’d say.
International twat.
@@coolhand1966 Fox News, trump supporter? Thought so.
Wow, this was a brilliant interview! Thank you John Anderson for having Niall Ferguson on board. I really enjoyed this =)
We need these men thrust into our children's lives, their thoughts, opinions, wisdom, values. I'd go as far as to say our western culture to save it requires this atonement.
Excellent discussion, Gents. An honest teaching of history to succeeding generations is the best preventive medicine to repeating the patterns of folly from the past.
Quality time spent here. Thank you!
"the effects of communism was catastrophic, yet how few university courses actually teach this"
It would appear that the “management “ at universities doesn’t want to show the dark side of socialism and the follow on, communism.
It’s the infamous ‘long march through the institutions’ finally here…
What is a foundation is for beloved? Likewise remember before utterance LEAVES our mouths has a true foundation is what gives the reason for the AIM. Remember all of you are worth more than anything nor everything that exists! Is like it will be hard to show off to my father God without you nor my neighbors. Humble to WASHERS of FEETS of neighbors and wiping tears from all eyes. Likewise humble to bound. Beloved rest thy FEETS upon a FOOTSTOOL of God. 1st
Love God as a CHILDS with sincere conversations 2nd. Love thy neighbors as thyself. Upholders of God's Will. Any other foundations will pass but these 2 will remain. Not till then. Boundaries nor borders are in place. Untrust from one another and nations. As you see ! Truth and peace reunite. Nothing is wasted but increased beloved. Why we contribute? For whom for what nor reason? Understanding grace and works. Indeed many have not ENTERED. How to preserve new minds. What new minds truly deserve indeed. LAUGHTERS of thy innocents
Surely, the function of university history teaching is facilitate students ability to judge for themselves, not tell them which bits of history were catastophic.
Great in-depth talk! Common sense and lived experience tell me what you two gentlemen concerned and conversed are really making lot of sense indeed!
Excellent thoughtful conversation.
I love this long form discussion format. You can learn so much more and consider the issues in a calm atmosphere. That you John for that opportunity.
always refreshing to hear a man like Niall Ferguson.
I took a course entitled, "History of the British Empire", at UBC in 1980. It was a fascinating and enlightening experience.
Need to get Peterson and Niall to have a conversation.
agreed
Peterson should talk with Victor D Hanson.
Make this happen
Terry Price See Dr. Peterson’s most recent appearance on his daughter’s podcast. He’s been very, very ill.
I remember fondly my year-long "Great Works of Western Civilization" class at Stanford. Pity that it's gone nowadays.
It's a shame that we lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 nearly five decades ago. Only those in the military who aren't yet 21 should vote.
That excludes the unemployed
Paying taxes doesn't give you the right to oppress others.
Does anyone listening to this believe in ethics? Or do you use your political/economic beliefs to further silly agenda's which undermine democracy and the point of such an exercise?
@@AvatarOfBhaal That's a bit ridiculous. The right to vote =/= the right to oppress.
@@markaurelius61 As if being unemployed qualifies you to vote?
Fabulous conversation ❤️🫶 I thoroughly enjoyed it. Thank you 🙏
John, you continue to produce stunning content. Thank you so much.
Fantastic articulate conversation! :) Thanks so much for posting
Great Conversation, if only there were more like this.
Yes I am with you on that, not only you should teach young ppl this, but also what happened with communism before and the lessons ppl should learn from that!
Pleasure to listen to a beautiful mind... Congrats and thanks for sharing
Fascinating interview - thank you!
It hasn't started but I've liked it. Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. Western Civilization falls when,
welfare, foreign debt, globalization, immigration, and politised changes to state religion.
Anita, that sounds like a foolish observation. You start with a platitude
and finish with some half-baked ideas.
Milk cream, I haven't watched the part you're referring to but I'm
assuming Niall is paraphrasing the old adage "No taxation without representation".
Apart from receiving services (sanitation, police, roads etc) the most
direct contact you have with the state/government is through taxation.
Of course you have a fair point about folks who don't pay tax but
most of them will do and are aware their parents do etc.
milk cream, you blank-brained dunce , learn some history
before asking cretinous questions.
All the issues raised in this discussion are common knowledge.
Anita Quilty-maguire I agree but also learned that rich Romans, men and women, became very lazy and degenerate. I heard an anecdote of one of the Germanic soldiers being ridiculed by a lazy Roman citizen because of the table manners of the Germanic soldier, who had been fighting for the Roman Empire. Eventually most of the soldiers were not Roman citizens.
Open door immigration is not the answer.
33:00 relative effects of printing press vs. Internet. VERY interesting.
Protip:
Because you rightly see long conversation as very much needed,
Most people will listen to this whilst not looking at the video
I suggest talking through the introduction, instead of having just the block of text.
It's right of you to to think context is needed, but most people will listen whilst driving or ironing or some other activity.
Just found this so informative will watch every night
Ordering clash of civilzation and a book from frank dikotter from this interview. Thank u
Very impressive how you never interrupt... it must be very tempting as your guests make key points. Same with Jordan Peterson. Classy Anderson!
A good conversation, thank you
EXCELLENT interviewer.
An excellent point at the beginning. As an historian myself, I must admit that the pop cultured bubble gum flavored socialism offered up and sifted through current identitarianism as it wallows through the academy today, reflects a curious ambivalence at best, and an absolute horrific deferral of the twentieth century history of the practice of communism.
As if students have adopted wholeheartedly the attitudes of Maoist and Stalinist regimes, that a hundred million casualties to a great common cause, was in fact, a small price to pay for whatever glory they deemed fit to their purpose. The moral and ethical questions are never asked, therefor the the answers are not to be found.
But then, students don't appear to study history anymore. Historical illiteracy abounds.
It sounds like a timeworn statement, but I'll repeat it anyway: Those who don't know (even their own) history, may very well be doomed to repeat it.
The idea always was, in all of our realms, public, political, economic, social and educational - to learn from our mistakes. This works well in any private life. So too, in public life.
Whoever said ignorance is bliss has got a lot to answer for.
John or staff - please interview Rusty Reno of First Things in the US - his take on "moral deregulation" since the 1960s is spot on ... look up his speach to the students of Iona College a couple years back. The return of the "Strong gods" is happening and we must all prepare to shape the new era positively.
Not only did I go through both private and public education systems and am also now a qualified teacher. I can honestly say that we were taught that Hitler was bad but was never on Marxism. I am ashamed of the Australian education system. We aren't teaching children critical thought, honest intellectual argument and how to be respectful and responsible citizens. The school/university systems are now based on customer experience. They are but tools to focus on an individuals desire to fulfill their dream. Today, there is very little consideration that these institutions exist on the basis of truth, academic integrity, honest argument and accurate scientific method. Our education systems are failing because these systems have forgotten why they existed in the first place.
If the education system is focused on customer experience then isn't that the result of capitalism?
Excellent discussion. Can we please see an examination of corporate democracy and corporate cronyism. So many of our youth and 18-35s only go looking for alternatives when the current system leaves them out of the wealth building promise our capitalist democracies sell. If more could see an easier path to a better life without the hobbling effect of lifelong debt build in, the alternatives would not be as appealing.
I will say, that I obviously agree with the fact that the "social" media is polarizing society and has a great unintended (or otherwise) effect. The social media algorithms are curators of your content that's for sure, but what do you think is happening when you open a newspaper? Someone had to decide what goes in and what stays out. So you're left with the situation where you have to trust the integrity of news editors, which in today's ideologically-driven mainstream media sphere is not advisable (if not nearly impossible).
Granted, the social media content recommendation algorithm is rather stupid, because it is designed with a singular goal - and that is to maximize a the company's metric of success without any regard for far-reaching unpredictable consequences on societal level. But the problem still persists on the human level as well.
The way I see it, humanity needs to grow the hell up. That's the solution.
Jacob011 Yes, and I think we can develop more sophisticated tools for navigating news , views and information than we ever had before.
As you say, in the past we were completely dependent on the editor's curating of news. But now we have more choices. We can learn to play the algorithms to give us a wider sweep of the world than we ever got from the mainstream traditional media.
Whenever I feel Google's trapping me in an echo chamber, I shake it up by initiating searches on different topics and selecting new information providers and creators. I subscribe to widely differing UA-cam channels and use the like button liberally. It tends to open up the variety of choices put before me.
I just finished War and Peace, a warm reccommendation, especialy as a audiobook, mere 60hrs
Niall needs to revisit his "Square and Tower" analysis in light of the IDW. Interesting parallels between Martin Luther and Jordan Peterson.
Excellent discussion.
It offers greater opportunity for gifted people to innovate to be original.
Amazing interviews... subbed!
It’s easy to see why young people are pessimistic. They’ve grown up in a world where materialism is king and a higher priority than life itself.
How can we condense or create short story format of these historical concepts for high schoolers absolutely agree little to no literature providing a clear argument on the negative of Marxism and it’s failure. While capitalism isn’t perfect we live in balanced democracies and we need to promote the importance and gratitude for the systems we have .
I've been pondering the issue around the recent social awkwardness, a seeming reluctance to celebrate Australian culture and heritage that's facing us right now - at least publically. Niall's analysis of the Left's deconstruction of history and culture answers this quite well, as it becomes painfully apparent that indeed - we cannot celebrate our country because no one allows us to point out anything that's good about it, the discussion is always restricted to the negative parts.
What IS that intro music!? I love it...
great stuff, thanks john
They that know not history are doomed to revisit it in the future.
Great discussion, this!
wonderful conversation. key topics
29.45 Niall Ferguson plays down youth pessimism very much. But it may turn out to be a key player in the culture wars. Young people from the middle classes, now not being able to get a house, start a family, get work,. and having extreme study debts, may have ample reasons not being happy with the system they grew up in.
Sam Bankman-Fried followed the George Soro´s "rule of the game" and it worked (and is still working).
Interesting channel. As a hopefully reasonable lefty, it would be remiss of me to not listen to what reasonable non-lefties have to say. I like the lack of hyperbole and baiting in these discussions.
Jordan Peterson recommended this, great find!
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.
So fortunate for me and the intellectual world that Niall Ferguson decided to become a financial historian rather than pursue science like his parents or some other specialties. He has to be the #1 top of his field, which don't attract the best and the brightest due to the backward focus.
The brilliant prof and Anderson began attaching Marx, then proceeded to discuss various problems of Capitalism--young people being unable to enter the property market, jobs disappearing to technology, alienation, monopolies--that Marx had analysed 150 years ago. Marx of course wrote 5,000 pages critiquing capitalism and only about 300 pages on socialism. As evil as communism was, Marx is worth reading for what he has to say about capitalism.
I am not yet convinced that Marx, who died in 1883, was responsible for the 100 million deaths by murderous totalitarian socialist regimes of the 20th century, who ignored his writing. I would like to hear the brilliant Ferguson address Marx's responsibility for this in more detail.
This series by Anderson is the best thing he has ever done.
Are you saying "not real Marxism"? Marx gave the socialists the ideological cover, fatalism and moral righteousness/status to enact their great evil. His philosophy devalued human life by emphasising possession, consumption, relentless grasping and envious comparison of material goods. Marx's theory of alienation is only a self-fulfilling prophecy. When one sees life through the materialistic lens only, one will surely feel alienated. He transformed malevolent envy from a vice into a virtue and noble cause (he transvaluated value as Nietzsche would say). His dismissal of religion as just some form of conspiratorial mind control - rather than a rich system of time-tested ideas, relationships and experiences that bind a people together for a greater good - lead to a complete lack of any real morality.
"Not real Marxism" this is a familiar motif, perhaps derived from that bloviating blatherskite Jordan Peterson, regrettably he fails to analyse Marx's actual texts, but spouts rhetoric of socialist resentment, drawn from a line of Orwell's.
There is a lot wrong with Marx, however Marx's critique of capitalism is extraordinary and immense, and at least worth a read. I would be very surprised if Anderson has even laboured through vol one of Capital, most critics from the right reveal little evidence of having actually read Marx, it's hard work, talk about oppression!
Of course Ferguson has read him--probably when he was 12, which is why I would have enjoyed hearing more detail from him linking Marx's texts to the regimes of the 20th century,
I am a capitalist in terms of sell your wares for a profit, however, the law has been written in such a way that it grossly favors the very rich. It has been written for the rich by the rich. Justice is purchased rather than an absolute. The rich get off because they have the means to purchase justice. No competent government, elected by the people, should be able to be manipulated by anyone; but the rich and powerful routinely grease the wheels of law and government with what they have; the most money. This directly counters the freedom of the individual. (ie. Your Data, Isn't it yours??? apparently not.) Competents should hold power not the manipulating rich and their companies.
1 man 1 vote was supposed to mean something, but it only means something for a single day once every 5 years; and the rest of the 4 years and 364 days it is ruled by money. Simple capitalism of selling skills, products or services for a profit is absolutely correct but it should hold zero power over people, only a competent elected government should have permission to hold that power on the people's behalf . True democracy, proper simple capitalism, small competent government and straightforward law. String pulling needs to end.
Notwithstanding the fact that this slightly flawed system (The West) has without a doubt is by far the most successful for freedom and the individual. LAW REFORM please
"Not real Marxism" is a familiar motif exactly because it is not only Jordan Peterson taking recourse in it (whatever you mean by "bloviating blatherskite"). To argue in hindsight that rulers that proclaimed to be inspired by Marx also led regimes responsible for the deaths of millions, yet detach the source that inspired such ruling from its consequences is disingenuous at best.
You forget that Marx was a revolutionist, too.Das Kapitel is also a plan of action. A continuation of the negative impulses of the French Revolutions.
How right he was.
Anyone know what the intro piece of music is called?
John, you've got to find someone to sort out the sound on your videos. It's far too quiet. I can barely hear it over a running tap.
The move by the dominant platforms to be more proactive in censoring content is already driving a new phenomena where, unlike in China, people are free to set up private servers for communicating and sharing content, and this is being facilitated by services that make this very easy to do, customisable but otherwise ready to run solutions hosted wherever you want for little or no cost for the basic services. Everyone is becoming the writer, publisher, bookseller and reader at the same time and they are doing it in a mesh like structure that is very hard to disrupt or control. Soon they will have AI assistants to do the hard work for them and the effort required to enter the game will be minimal, everyone becomes an opinionated media tycoon who has no idea how their own empire really works at the nuts and bolts level. This means that while you sit there pondering what happened in 2016 you are failing to notice the dynamics that may well serve up a new surprise for you in another few years. It truly is a moving target and the only lesson history can teach you is that it is moving and that if you can't intuit where it will be in the future you will continue to miss it. The problems stem from the potentially mutually exclusive ideals of freedom and accountability, because without there being a truly benevolent and just system for ensuring they are equally protected both cannot coexist. There needs to be more than one internet with the most "disciplined" one being entirely free to access and strictly age appropriate, in many ways a replacement for free-to-air television, but you have to leave the original web alone or people will just tunnel under and through whatever you try to replace it with, because you can't tell them what software they are allowed to run or who they can connect with without becoming like China.
Inflation destroys debt. Deflation increases debt.
What is the opening theme music please?
when exactly did this discussion occur ...
The past of society should be treated like the brain deals with our personal experience. The brain breaks our experience into components that are recombined to facilitate navigation of the future. That seems to be the political approach of the CPC.
Hitler was a member of the Socialist party. He said, “I’m a different type of Socialist.” It was only after he gained power and became an authoritarian(fascist) leader, that he was called a right wing, Fascist. He came from the left, something not known or taught in Western universities.
Fergusson is technically right when he says socialism means state ownership of the means of production, but I think most people associate that with Marxism/Communism, whereas the "demotic" definition of socialism is all the benefits that a greedy ultracapitalist boss would refuse to give workers: child labor and minimum wage laws, accident/disability/old-age/pension insurance, safe/non-toxic working conditions, etc. That's what comes to mind when I hear "socialist", not nationalization of industries (although all the dictionaries confirm the state ownership criterion),
Fascists and Communists did the same thing - the subjugation of the proletariat ( middle and working classes)
I studied history at a very progressive university in Melbourne 2013 - 2016. I don’t know where this idea that we’re not taught about the horrors of communism comes from, it was there in the lectures and prescribed reading.
Not everyone studies history I guess. I have two undergraduate degrees with the only history component being the history of mathematics. What I do know about general history is self taught or picked up in podcasts such as these.
I can assure you that you're lucky. My university did *not* explicitly teach about the horrors of communism. It probably all comes down to your professor. I would also add, even if a person is taught about the negatives of communism, how is it framed? Some people will always use the old "yes, this turned out poorly but that's not because of anything wrong with communism - it was the people in charge or outside factors that led to these atrocities" trick.
“The Left’s own imperialism”. A phrase that summarizes the current milieu.
In the book of Danial, the angel that appeared to Danial says "The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days, ....". This implies that there are 'principalities and powers' i.e. very powerful demonic spirits or fallen angels that control human governments or geographical regions.
Ephesians 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.
Many people believe that the word 'principality' also represents ideologies.
Yes there is no absolute equality that’s exactly like there is no absolute freedom because to maintain the society into order, there must be rules to obey but in a relatively fair and equal fashion that benefit majority of the ppl, but not just benefit the few like most authoritarian countries!
I largely agree with his suggestion. Leaving it to the markets I think will work in the long run, but requiring near monopolies to not censor is something I see can't hurt and may even help. Fact is that states are doing the opposite already and wanting to censor, so that is why this suggestion seems like a fantasy and only the markets can do this when looking at the practical reality.
"Leaving it to the markets I think will work in the long run"
Why hasn't that worked so far?
Yeah, and on the Cool-Aid thing, just so you know, the cordial that killed the Jonestown crew was Flavor-Aid, a cheap local knock-off.
Best I’ve seen since Charlie Rose was removed from his space ...
Freedom leads to competition. In every competition there are winners and losers. There are always more loosers then winners. Loosers hate winners. This why they like socialism. Pure capitalism is like a car without brakes,it leads to revolutions. Thus the trick is to find the right balance between two.
To a hammer, every problem is a nail. Nonetheless, Niall's parting words were fit.
Alvaro Neto Have you been reading Charlie Munger's almanac?
Wha a concept! 🤗
We are almost assuredly going backwards into fascism
I like Niall Ferguson in many ways. Not just because he’s a fellow Scot (despite having lost his accent almost completely, though you can still hear a bit of Glasgow in it), but because he is honest, smart and clearly cares about the subjects. I am also rather sympathetic to his basic point that there is a lack of open, critical consideration of ideas of race, empire and history in general. I also agree that most young people dont really understand communism.
However, I sharply disagree with him on other, major points. The problem is not that young people have not learned about communism, its that they have not learned about almost ANY aspect of how society is run at all or the different approaches to that. Knowledge of both communism and capitalism ( and anarchism, liberalism, etc) is very much lacking. So the idea that he puts forward that left wingers have deliberately decreased consideration of the bad affects of communism seems quite inaccurate. It’s part of a wider lack of understanding, which is caused, at root, by the capitalist liberal society he seems to like so much. The result of a focus in media and education and work place away from critical thinking and in-depth thinking, towards frivolous entertainment. Towards learning that is only focused on one narrow subject or on job related information, rather than a rounded critical education.
We very much should have more knowledge about society and critical consideration of how to run society. but it is capitalism that is holding that back, not the left wing. In general its left wing people who are tying to push for more knowledge and critical thought, not the opposite.
He also commits an act of incredible blindness for one who has investigated history so deeply and admirably of accepting uncritically that what Stalin and Mao SAID was communism actually was communism. Even a moderate consideration of history shows that to be a very weak hypothesis and at odds with various documented facts from history. So its odd that he would let that go by when he is so dogged in pursuing other points. He says that present day China is, at best, partially communist, so why cant he also admit that under Mao they were also , for the most part, only nominally communist? ....It seems that the state dictatorship of Stalin, Mao etc was a very distorted version of communism, at best. How much we can call that the communism imagined in the 19thC is strongly in doubt. And it is certainly not the kind of communism or socialism or anarchism that 99% of left wing people want now.
Lastly, the key reason young people are turning towards communism, socialism or anarchism - despite the lack of understanding of all these - is that they see that capitalism is not working well and they are fumbling around, however awkardly, for something better. Whatever we call that better economic and social system (BESS) , the desire to have something better is genuine.
@Sean Michael My reply concerns your second point, about the experience with communism. Slavoj Zizek, who describes himself as a Communist, says Communism was a total failure. When the model fails in reality, it is the model's fault, not reality's, because the model omits human nature. You might argue that Stalin's, or Mao's, version of communism differs from the model but that's how it is inevitably applied in reality.
Conversations...WHAAAAAT! People still do that?
brilliant
Isn't it about time we had our politicians on taget based empolyment like they did to the teachers. Enough of theyre exuses live up to youre word or be expelled from politics.we deserve no less.
They are platforms and should be required by law to allow free speech but they are publishers and need regulation. Conflict much.
So this interview is almost two years old, but I'm still surprised that a mind of Dr. Ferguson's caliber didn't identify *famine* or *plague* as the top two threats we face (with war no longer a dominant threat, although terrorism is a related issue). For several years now, I've been baffled that people can be so nasty and uncivil in social media (and in political power struggles) with plentiful food, work, and access to healthcare. Just a stone's throw away from Stanford is not only the world's most powerful tech industry, but a badly mismanaged one-party city that has allowed the grossest inequalities to degenerate to the point of dangerously exposing the public to human bodily fluids and waste--something unthinkable in Western cities for over a hundred years now. Maybe Dr. Ferguson doesn't listen to the plentiful doomsday prophets that populate UA-cam and keep their eyes on our old Four Horsemen enemies (along with the worldwide System of the Beast scenario we will likely face as this cybernetic, transhumanist technocracy continues to develop).
1. Countries are sovereign. They make their own decisions.
2. The US breaches countries’ sovereignty again and again and that is illegal.
3. The US perpetrates violent regime change, and that is illegal.
4. It is not up to the US to determine what economies, politics and governments are allowed in the world; the US acts as world dictator.
5. Some say: “The Vietnam war was to stop communism”. That is vague and therefore meaningless. What did Vietnam exactly do, according to some, that justified the US democide?
6. John Kenneth Galbraith, the economist and US ambassador to India in the early 1960s, quipped: “I don’t see a difference between a capitalist rice field and a communist rice field”.
Please explain what is the difference between rice fields that is the business of the US?
7. The US exterminated 3 million people in Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos).
What is it exactly about these people that, according to some, justified exterminating them?
8. North and South Vietnam never really existed - the people generally considered themselves one people. That some outside country, the US, drew an artificial demarcation line, did not determine the state of facts. That’s an important cause why the Vietnamese could defeat and kick out the US aggressors.
9. The US tried to destroy them by carpet bombing them, throwing napalm on them, defoliating their forests with agent orange, destroying their rice fields, terrorizing their villages, displacing them and depopulating parts of the country. But the US could not submit them. The Vietnamese are a heroic people.
10. Vietnam as a communist country, reunited in 1976, never was a threat to the US or other countries. It ended the khmer rouge regime in Cambodia in 1978. It disproves the domino pretext.
11. This was not “the war in Vietnam”, as US propaganda falsely frames it.
It was the PREEMPTIVE DEMOCIDE IN INDOCHINA, where the US led by Heinz Kissinger and others preemptively exterminated 3 million innocent people.
12. Heinz Kissinger is one of the worst war criminals, mass murderers and terrorists in the past century - in such a way and to such a degree that he may have to be considered to have been a psychopath.
13. In the past 70 years, many US politicians, in their foreign policy, have been as evil as any politicians in dictatorships.
Its funny how when people talk about scandinavia our economic system, they always look to Finland to make the argument that the system will fail. conveniently they forget that Norway is one of the richest countries in the world. Or that Denmark has surplus on its budgets, low foreign debt and the debt is falling. They do in no way look like failing stats on the contrary forring money looks to us for security and stability. I agree that there is an imbalance in the way history is presented, bud that goes for both sides apparently. Way not try to understand way Scandinavia is one of the most stable regions in the world, instead of trying to discredit it, to serve an argument with a one sided
view.
In Europe social democracy works just fine. Take Sweden for example.
Collective inconscious is too often misunderstood and downplayed in civilizations evolution and it represents a bias in human interactions in a globalized world.
Isn't he the guy who gets his predictions wrong?
In another words, the truth is found in majority votes. The basis for a good governance is democracy. The best practice for business is privatization. so on and so forth... I expect a better analysis with what's happening in the states.
Ying Zhang bias and bigotry without active policy to prevent it is often found in majority vote. It's why even Socrete asked if you are sick would you go to the mass to vote for a diagnosis or to the doctor? It's not hard to see this professor is arguing for the liberals western values, but he doesnt have to take his audience as fools with such a superficial analysis.
'The only sane response is'...Ferguson is speaking millennial fb speech. I agree colonialism needs to be seen in balance but the balance has to take into account devastating famines in India.
Jordan Peterson sent me
More truth in this video than 1000 tweets
re Colonialism. Sikhs likely have better view of UK than hindus, nevertheless i do know some sikhs can can talk about the benefits and costs for british empire. Maybe the pcwest needs to do little bit of catching up.
vaultsjan My personal view as a Sikh is that the British empire was more a liability to our history. We lost our ability to determine our future after our empire was annexed and then our ancestral land (Panjab) split half. The empire could deal with the Hindus who were subservient to the British as oppose to the Sikhs who value individual liberty and autonomy. Not putting all the blame to the British of course, the Sikh empire had plenty of treacherous people within that even the British despised. If our empire wasn’t annexed, given the alignment of values that Sikhs have with Judeo-Christian values, the Asian subcontinent would have been really prosperous and the west would have had a very strong ally.
I heard that Sikh language was-is not considered one of the state languages in India. Is-was this due to some kind of Hindu-Sikh animosity, where do the Mughals come into play?
vaultsjan After partition, Nehru promised the Sikhs autonomy as long as they fought against Pakistan, which they did with majority sacrifice despite being only 2% of the population. Sikhs bought the idea of secular India. However, the Hindu elite backstabbed the Sikhs after the war. We then organised civil rights movement to have the freedom to speak our own language, control of our water resources, and many other rights that were promised (Anandpur Sahib resolution). The result of that was 1984 Sikh Genocide by the Hindu elite that controlled brainless mobs which i’m sad to say the Britain had a helping hand in per the documents revealed recently.
The Mughals were pre-British colonisation era. If it wasn’t for the Sikhs, the whole of Indian subcontinent would have been Muslim.
Our struggle for independent homeland continues today, and I hope the west realises that we have much more to benefit together in the long run than helping the communal minded people. The same people who are at your shores today subverting/diluting the western individualist values.
Do you know what is the Hindu side of the story, fear of Sikhs-Punjab becoming own state and they lose control over its wealth?
They had multiple concerns. The Indo-Pak war was fought because of dispute of Kashmir territory. This is right above Panjab, so If Sikhs become independent, India would probably lose Kashmir to Pak (a reasonable concern, which is why Sikhs fought on the side of India). Second, water and food supply was coming from Panjab (i think 70-80%). So when India didn't reciprocate, even after year of peaceful protest, India lost its goodwill, and Sikhs cut food supply to India unless human-rights and state-rights demand were met. India (under orders of the tyrant Indira), brought in the military to subdue the Sikh freedom fighters (they called terrorists lol), and in process desecrated the Golden Temple (equivalent to Mecca or Vatican to put in perspective), killed innocent civilians, banned foreign journalist, complete black out. 5 Months later, the Sikhs retaliated by assassinating Indira Gandhi. After which, the Hindu elite unleashed the brainless Hindutva/RSS mob and committed Genocide. Don't take my word for it, i'd encourage you to do your own research.