So this fine discussion is a meta-discussion of Losurdo's various techniques and approaches. A fairly in-depth and substantive account of salient elements of the Black Legend is in the first part. Thanks to everybody involved in these projects!
Really enjoying diving into Losurdo's work and the discussions yall hold. Muchas gracias 🙏🏽 Let me go ahead and join the Patreon since I'm watching and learning from every single video ✊🏽
Regarding intention. Black historians are working within a framework they can't control. Therefore, when white historians say, well we don't know the intent of the policy or those who created it... Black historians have to say well, then let's look at outcomes. Every time a policy is created it has a deleterious economic effect on black Americans so if white historians, who control this space, refuse to ascribe intent, then all we can analyze is the outcomes and the lack of any attempt to fix the system to change the deleterious effects, which can lead black historians to conclude that the effects were intentional, whether they were to create conditions for white success or black struggle. An example: building freeways to white suburbs that cut black neighborhoods in half. One can refuse to ascribe intention only if they're looking at one or even a few instances. However, if you see that this happened over and over again throughout the entire country with same disastrous immediate and downstream effects, then continued refusal to infer intent is purposeful ignorance, or intentional "not seeing."
Right I mean this is largely where the question came from. There's the sort of common, even liberal, slogan that intent =/= impact. And while that can be taken up in perhaps dubious interpersonal interactions, the overall meaning of it is important. And as I was saying, as materialists, we are most concerned with the material impacts of policies as opposed to their intent. As others within the policy space say, the outcome is the purpose. Especially if as you say it is repeated and uncorrected. Furthermore even if a society has the best intentions, if the impacts are repeatedly terrible then at some point we do have to assess that and learn from it. Nonetheless, I do take their point that if a society is attempting to enact broad scale positive material change through massive programs and along the way it creates errors, but tries to correct or to rectify or proceed in an overall progressive direction, then this is quite different from a society that is open about the fact that they see certain people as inferior and seeks to treat them as second class citizens or non-citizens or slaves or those to be ethnically cleansed or genocided, etc.
The "State of Exception" is what is understudied, and that is that the Soviet Union was, First, a Post Civil War Society. That informes everything going forward, the Russian Civil War and the War of Intervention, shapes the atmosphere of the Soviet Union going forward into Soviet Reconstruction, Modernization, Industrialization, and Collectivization. It explains the high Gulag population rates, as the White Russian Movement is the Soviet version of the Ex-Confederates and Klu Klux Klan, but different because the White Movement was funded and reinforced by the Imperialist Powers external to the Soviet Union, and was later given renewed power by the Nazis during the Second World War, after which the Second Soviet Reconstruction takes place. Marx's, Engels', and August Willich's works on the US Civil War and the other writers on it's aftermath should be studied and contrasted with the Stalin era of the Soviet Union. Understanding the Soviet Union as a Post Civil War Society explains the repressions and the difficulties of Reactionary uprisings, terrorism, assassination, and general violence against the Soviet state internally, as much as the War of Intervention explains the paranoia of spies, Infiltration, and economic sabotage against the Soviet Union.
4:18 on the embedded liberalism within Socialism, (including Losurdo and his interlocutors) - John Locke conceived of "The State of Exception" - not Schmitt (whose coinage of a phrase merely rebrands Lockean Liberalism). Carl Schmitt was influenced by John Locke's ideas in a number of ways, including: **Prerogative power** Locke's theory of prerogative power complicates the distinction between sovereign and commissarial, while Schmitt dissolves the tension by absorbing popular sovereignty into sovereign exceptionalism.
There are not many informed people who argue that the USSR and Nazi Germany were equivalent. However what they had in common is striking and disturbing: single party state, one man tyranny, powerful secret police (NKVD, RSHA), widespread use of forced labor, torture and murder, and a belief that state goals/interests can justify any kind of behavior no matter how vile and despicable. A good counterpoint to Losurdo's book is S. Kotkin's Stalin.
Most people are properly squeamish at what nations do in the competition for power. In my view the interests of a narrow plutocracy or the interests of a mass organization lead to more and less aggression because risk and reward are separated for a narrower ruling group. The more mass input into decision making there is, the less warmongering generally. Liberalism obfuscates how and why decisions are made and isn't an alternative to those concerns about authoritarianism. We could say liberal colonialism was just as destructive by the numbers and the cash crop system
@MAKCapitalism I don't know if you're serious or not. There's literally comments on this very video that you endorse of issues being unnecessarily viewed in a racial lens. Just own it, don't endorse it and then act ignorant when people point it out.
![Understanding Marxism: Q&A with Richard D. Wolff [June 2019]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eU-AkeOyiOQ/mqdefault.jpg)
So this fine discussion is a meta-discussion of Losurdo's various techniques and approaches. A fairly in-depth and substantive account of salient elements of the Black Legend is in the first part.
Thanks to everybody involved in these projects!
Right on ! I'm getting deeper into the book and am really enjoying it. Can't wait to listen to this ! ❤
Really enjoying diving into Losurdo's work and the discussions yall hold. Muchas gracias 🙏🏽 Let me go ahead and join the Patreon since I'm watching and learning from every single video ✊🏽
@@PeruChris ❤️🔥
Regarding intention. Black historians are working within a framework they can't control. Therefore, when white historians say, well we don't know the intent of the policy or those who created it... Black historians have to say well, then let's look at outcomes. Every time a policy is created it has a deleterious economic effect on black Americans so if white historians, who control this space, refuse to ascribe intent, then all we can analyze is the outcomes and the lack of any attempt to fix the system to change the deleterious effects, which can lead black historians to conclude that the effects were intentional, whether they were to create conditions for white success or black struggle. An example: building freeways to white suburbs that cut black neighborhoods in half. One can refuse to ascribe intention only if they're looking at one or even a few instances. However, if you see that this happened over and over again throughout the entire country with same disastrous immediate and downstream effects, then continued refusal to infer intent is purposeful ignorance, or intentional "not seeing."
Right I mean this is largely where the question came from. There's the sort of common, even liberal, slogan that intent =/= impact. And while that can be taken up in perhaps dubious interpersonal interactions, the overall meaning of it is important. And as I was saying, as materialists, we are most concerned with the material impacts of policies as opposed to their intent. As others within the policy space say, the outcome is the purpose. Especially if as you say it is repeated and uncorrected. Furthermore even if a society has the best intentions, if the impacts are repeatedly terrible then at some point we do have to assess that and learn from it. Nonetheless, I do take their point that if a society is attempting to enact broad scale positive material change through massive programs and along the way it creates errors, but tries to correct or to rectify or proceed in an overall progressive direction, then this is quite different from a society that is open about the fact that they see certain people as inferior and seeks to treat them as second class citizens or non-citizens or slaves or those to be ethnically cleansed or genocided, etc.
The "State of Exception" is what is understudied, and that is that the Soviet Union was, First, a Post Civil War Society. That informes everything going forward, the Russian Civil War and the War of Intervention, shapes the atmosphere of the Soviet Union going forward into Soviet Reconstruction, Modernization, Industrialization, and Collectivization. It explains the high Gulag population rates, as the White Russian Movement is the Soviet version of the Ex-Confederates and Klu Klux Klan, but different because the White Movement was funded and reinforced by the Imperialist Powers external to the Soviet Union, and was later given renewed power by the Nazis during the Second World War, after which the Second Soviet Reconstruction takes place. Marx's, Engels', and August Willich's works on the US Civil War and the other writers on it's aftermath should be studied and contrasted with the Stalin era of the Soviet Union. Understanding the Soviet Union as a Post Civil War Society explains the repressions and the difficulties of Reactionary uprisings, terrorism, assassination, and general violence against the Soviet state internally, as much as the War of Intervention explains the paranoia of spies, Infiltration, and economic sabotage against the Soviet Union.
@@noheroespublishing1907 yeah we go into all of that in part 1
Did you think about getting on means TV
I hadn't thought about it
My favorite pods collaborating!!
4:18 on the embedded liberalism within Socialism, (including Losurdo and his interlocutors) -
John Locke conceived of "The State of Exception" - not Schmitt (whose coinage of a phrase merely rebrands Lockean Liberalism). Carl Schmitt was influenced by John Locke's ideas in a number of ways, including:
**Prerogative power**
Locke's theory of prerogative power complicates the distinction between sovereign and commissarial, while Schmitt dissolves the tension by absorbing popular sovereignty into sovereign exceptionalism.
There are not many informed people who argue that the USSR and Nazi Germany were equivalent. However what they had in common is striking and disturbing: single party state, one man tyranny, powerful secret police (NKVD, RSHA), widespread use of forced labor, torture and murder, and a belief that state goals/interests can justify any kind of behavior no matter how vile and despicable. A good counterpoint to Losurdo's book is S. Kotkin's Stalin.
Most people are properly squeamish at what nations do in the competition for power. In my view the interests of a narrow plutocracy or the interests of a mass organization lead to more and less aggression because risk and reward are separated for a narrower ruling group. The more mass input into decision making there is, the less warmongering generally. Liberalism obfuscates how and why decisions are made and isn't an alternative to those concerns about authoritarianism. We could say liberal colonialism was just as destructive by the numbers and the cash crop system
S Kotkins Stalin is a pack of bs. Also you really could be describing US capitalism minus the "one man tyranny" which the USSR never was btw.
You're a bit too obsessed with race for your project to take off
@@timjkoala7556 lol
@@timjkoala7556 very weird episode for you to make that argument lol.
@MAKCapitalism I didn't make the comment because of this episode, it's more from reading your comments and engagements with your followers.
@@timjkoala7556 such as?
@MAKCapitalism I don't know if you're serious or not. There's literally comments on this very video that you endorse of issues being unnecessarily viewed in a racial lens. Just own it, don't endorse it and then act ignorant when people point it out.