Socialism DOES Work | Robert Griffiths | Oxford Union
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 гру 2013
- Robert Griffiths gives his argument that Socialism does work.
SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► is.gd/OxfordUnion
Robert Griffiths' first mentions Russian in 1917 when socialism was adopted by the country and ergo 20 years later were able to fight Nazi Germany's facist regime with their communist Red Army. He says that ""China and Cuba are beacons of social progress"" going on to list the countries services that have matched that of the richest capitalist nations.
Filmed on Thursday 28th November 2013
MOTION: This House Believes Socialism Will Not Work.
RESULT: Motion Defeated
STAY CONNECTED:
Facebook @ theoxfordunion
Twitter @ / oxfordunion
Oxford Union Website @ www.oxford-union.org/
ABOUT ROBERT GRIFFITHS:
Leader of the British Communist Party.
ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY:
The Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. It has been established for 190 years, aiming to promote debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.
Rights managed by Oxford Media Associates www.oxfordmediaassociates.com/
Filmed by Oxford Media Solutions www.oxfordmediasolutions.co.uk
That remark about Venezuelan progress did not age well.
@Reuben Thomasson demand is not dictated by an elite club. It is dictated by the people. The fact that oil dropped hard is because people (the majority) stopped buying as much. Saying that Venezuela's fall is because of the market is like saying that capitalism is to blame for the high prices of coffee in east Berlin in 1986. You can't exploit capitalism and blame it when you make and error in a socialist state running in international markets. The mistake is on you.
Hugo Chavez, God bless this hero of the working class and to hell with the USA who have done all they can to ruin the economies of all who try a better way-A socialist way!
all thanks to the CIA and nothing to do with socialism
@Reuben Thomasson it didn't bring down Norway, the Emirates or even its neighbor Colombia who have and export oil... care to explain why?.... Let me guess, CIA
"Venezuela and Bolivia are forging their own roads to socialism. Are you saying they are all doomed?"
That comment really didn't age well...
Bolivia has the fastest growing economy in all of Latin America so something is working right there.
I literally burst out laughing
Half wrong half right
If they're so doomed on their own, how come the US has to keep sponsoring coups and using sanctions to destroy them? I always wondered about that. Socialism doesn't work, but we still have to fight it as if it's the end of the world.
@@outdatedfarmequipment2702 It is easy to grow fast when you have nothing.
"Comrades and friends..."
*Tightens seatbelt*
Such a strong statement in the beginning
@@gronddd363 it's an immediate turnoff.
where problem, comrade?
Absolutely loved that intro. Long live Socialism.
The cited 1.5 Million deaths under Stalin only includes explicitly ordered executions. It does not include the substantial casualties resulting from forced collectivization, the Gulags, or purges.
Stalin's corpse total more like 20 million people
And he left out Lenin who threw millions still in the gulags where they undoubtedly were forced into brutal and extreme human rights violations if not death.
Hahahahaha you liberals make me laugh
i bet he questions the holocaust too!!! - probably an anti-semite that epitomises the labour party!
Delusion at its best. I have rarely heard such revisionism. It is widely estimated that approx 100 MILLION people died as a resort of communism in the 20th century (and that’s at the lower end of the estimates).
Funny to watch this now, "The people of venezuela and bolivia are taking their own roads to socialism, are we saying they are all doomed?"
HAhahahaha
That part definitely didn't age well
Bolivia under Morales has been tremendously successful.
@@batman76781 yep that's why the christian fascists and the CIA ousted him
Oof when you realise that Venezuela got fucked because of a collapse in oil prices not their social policies and that the DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED president of Bolivia was ousted by a right wing authoritarian backed by the CIA...nothing to do with the effectiveness of socialism or any variation of it
@@theLlamAbanna101 if their whole countries collapse because of intervention by one foreign power? doesnt sound very stable or successful to me
Would this debate be allowed to take place in a socialist society? I'll bet not.
Well, that's like uhh... Your opinion man
Yeah, and someone go ask this guy how Venezuela is doing lately. lol
@@RaginMjolnir A lot better than the capitalist dictatorships across South America
Dick splat only because they started so much higher. Venezuela, when a capatilist country ranked in the top 10 economies of the world. Now it barely makes the top 100.
Because every Socialist country is alike, and every capitalist party is alike.
"Chinese socialism has lifted 700M out of poverty" --- yeah, and how did they do that? By engaging in global capitalism.
Mathematically, 700 million are still in poverty
They engaged in global markets, not capitalism. If you check up on China you will notice it is becoming more and more state-owned, state-planned every year. I don't understand the notion that socialism is by definition autarkical. No, socialism and communism are international in idea and don't shun global markets. They, in fact, praise and engage in them.
@@LajtSejbr privatisation and increasing individual freedom is also happening, something not characteristic of socialism
Point of information ... Bullshit !
that is because they didnt have the resources to be a self reliant market, thus needed to participate in global markets. Same goes for Vietnam(i would say Vietnam is socialist though unlike china, where i don't really know what to call it)
I don't agree with mister Griffiths remarks, especially since he ignores the fact that putting anyone in power of a socialist system will inevitably corrupt him/her. BUT, it is amazing that OxfordUnion creates these debates where both sides get equal opportunity to express their ideas and to convince the public. Thank you for this conversation!
Ya know if you would have made some extreme capatilism of socialist belief remark, people of both sides would tear you apart or agree with you.....but you say this beautiful thing........and nothing lol.....shows you whos watching
@@greendragon2471 So you're saying that, for example, giving anyone vast powers will invariably corrupt them, right? So allowing people to hoard extreme amounts of money and thus gain immense political power because of the power of money under capitalism would have the same effect, right? I think you agree with social democracy there, pal.
@@Yesandsowhut what are you even saying dude? Did you know what I was even saying? Also I think I made a typo which probably made it sound different
Was thomas sankara corrupt?
Corruption, power, abuse? Ever heard of banks? Ever heard of defence equipment corporations? Ever heard of central banks? Ever heard of big pharma? Ever heard of big oil? Ever heard of big agro? Ever heard of big anything in the corporate world? The very principle capitalism works on is profit/money. Do you even see the potential of money/profit clouding a clean individual's mind to make the unethicial decision to, I dont know, may be cut down 100 hectares of forest to plant soya bean or corn? Or letting a colony of sea turtles die for a offshore drilling platform? How exactly socialism enables anyone to make them corrupt since the decisions are made on need basis and not profit basis. Even if something is needed but not profitable will be done under socialism, ranging from free health to financing innovation and experimentation to automate industry which may take decades. Profit (capitalist) making venture have to turn up a profit sooner or later or they are done for in a matter of years. Socialism will make mistakes and will correct itself as power of the people to decide their fate will ultimately lead to betterment for all. If you will have the ability to elect your boss you will. If your boss was accountable to you rather the other way round, they will stay clear of corruption. Sorry for the essay/rant. I dont mean it to come out like that, it is just that people commenting on socialism sometimes are not really bothered about even knowing the basic principles of how it works (including some of the people on that debate). And I am no expert either I must say, but I am familiar with the principles at least.
“Spirit of cooperation...” yeah, or death!
self aware wolf
You liberals make me laugh
@@acrimon3404 yeah and?
@@_Wakaz_ likewise
It's very interesting that he picked the case of Cuba: While those those against socialism use the comparison between East and West Germany, North and South Korea, etc., they miss the point about comparing Cuba and Haiti or the Dominican Republic, or even Puerto Rico, for instance.
socialism: the only time a wall was built to keep its citizens inside the country....."but don't worry, we're still learning!"
Cuba is awful. Clearly you’ve never been or see the world with corrupt eyes.
@@AtlasofInfoif Cuba is awful to you. Every Caribbean country, other capitalist nations, from Guatemala to Haiti. Is even worse, hope you understand.
@Rick55749 These nations are not Capitalist. There are no Capitalist nations today. There are crony socialist nations, authoritarian countries and other mixed economies like those we see in most of the developed world. Haiti and these other dumps are good examples of ignorant people in charge, dictating nonsense to other voodoo loving ignorant people.
Robert Griffiths is my personal hero, he pulled me out of the far right and into the far left. He turned me from an ignorant racist into a much better person, he transformed me from a Fascist into a Communist.
Comrade Rhys this is such a bait comment lol
I feel sorry for you. R.I.P.
Whats the difference?
@@Mnnwer far right; pro abortion, anti lgtb, pro corporations, pro free market economy, pro identity politics, pro nationalism, anti trade union, pro privatisation
Far left; pro trade union, pro lgbt, anti corporation, planned economy, internationalism, anti id politics, pro class politics, pro nationalisation.
I mean, that's just glossing over, but if you honestly can't see basic differences, I don't know what to suggest
Live in Cuba for a week, you’ll transformed back.
Yes, the Soviet Union was so wonderful that it’s citizens constantly tried to flee the oppressive dictatorship for decades until it finally fell due to its inability to maintain economic and political stability.
Ikr it was so awful in the USSR that when it was gone there were people fighting to get it back.
Oh yes how it collapsed when it was dismantled and illegally dissolved by Gorbachev.
@Damian wayne take a look at the 1991 Soviet referendum, you call that stockholm syndrome as well? 110 million of them?
people had no choice when decisions were already made by oligarchs. think before you talk, please.
@Damian wayne well, yes - which means it wasn't people's choice to give up the country.
interesting china's rise over the last 20 years came with its adoption if free market capitalism. how did it do in the first 40 years?
Okay, so you can't blame its problems on socialism?
And don’t forget stealing American businesses’ intellectual property.
Well it spent those first 40 years heavily industiralising
@@matthew5386 at the cost of the people.
@@billyb4790 yes because otherwise it would have ended up like india.
'Now the people's of Venezuela and Bolivia are taking their own roads to their own forms of socialism. Are we saying they are all doomed?'
Just over two years later: Inflation in Venezuela at 450%, 80% of the population below the poverty line, GDP dropping by 7%, the government severely in debt and the people they aim to help facing food shortages largely blamed on expropriation of farms and food-processing plants, as well as government price controls that force farmers to sell at a loss.
What about Bolivia ?
@@seankelly378 ah, you are already asking too many questions, Luckily for Bolivian people and Evo Morales they are not sitting on the pile of natural resources, if that was the case Morales too would be presented by our media as brutal dictator who need to be deposed ASAP. going back to your question last time I checked Bolivia is doing OK poverty is going down and literacy and health is going up, you can look it up i Wiki LOL also you might wanna have a look on Thomas Sankara and his terrible brand of socialism who was ruining Burkina Faso LOL
That will happen to a country that has lost its ability to trade. If socialism is so doomed to fail, then why must the USA keep up a blockade over Venezuela?
Though I have respect for anyone who believes in Communism, this chap isn't at all sensible in basing his argument around the Soviet Union 23 years after its downfall.
It's similar to defending Christianity by talking only about the Crusades. Yes - it does need defending - but it is weak ground to pitch your argument.
Defending a supposed invisible man in the sky that had a son who was also him 2000 years ago is a little hard to do. I agree that Communism is horrible but Christianity has communist ideas in it when you think about it.
What he is doing is describing the extremely real phenomenon of socialist societies transforming into industrial powerhouses within the space of a generation. Here we in the West we remain wilfully ignorant of how a crumbling Tsarist empire became one of the world's superpowers through the power of collectivization and State-owned industry.
We need never follow the moral example of the monstrous politburo, but in following similar collectivist policies we have already created a generous welfare system, a National Health Service, expanded the voting franchise to total suffrage, and ensured protections for the most vulnerable members of society.
If it was not for socialism, our own society would have collapsed, and become obsolete, as indeed we saw in WW2, where we were utterly outclassed by the industrial power of Germany, and had to rely upon the industrial power of the USSR to keep them busy while we asked the US for help.
To ignore these realities is to remain guilty of tremendous hubris.
Eastern Europe and much of the middle east fell apart after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
My inherent gripe with CAPITALISM is that it places value on money not people. If people have the option to be selfish and live a life largely as close to royalty as possible, people will generally choose to do so. Also, social forces such as racism, sexism, and classism, adhere to the value of money, thus creating a society that devalues Afrikans for monetary benefit, for example. As ideologies yes they all work (socialism and capitalism specifically), whether they work well or not is dependent on the agreed upon values of the people (money, "freedom", preservation of humankind etc.)
Money and capital are two completely different things. Obviously you have no clue what you’re talking about other than repeating non-sence.
@@deanunterreiner6588 Technically you are correct. They are however symbiotic, as one is necessary to obtain the other, and visa versa!
Above all else, capitalism gives you the freedom to choose.
If that freedom stands alone, then it is enough. The other decides for you. If weak-minded or lazy then embrace it. I am neither.
Socialism does work....sorry the power went out...don't worry we were able to go down to the local community centre to pick up some bread for 80,000 Bolivars
Ingenious beginning! He says he won't rise to it, but then absolutely does by chucking a bunch of "bait" right back at them hahaha
So many holes in that arguement, oh plus Venezuela just tanked LMAO
So point them out for us
Bolivia on the other hand is the fastest growing Latin American country
state capitalism is not socialism as lenin himself said.
First time I've ever heard someone describe the positive elements of socialist states. Whether that's because Robert is making totally misleading/empty claims, or because our countries capitalism-biased think-tanks have dominated the debate, I've no idea :/ But he's certainly correct to claim that the slave trade was capitalist exploitation at it's most extreme. If socialism is being held responsible for the gulags, capitalism has to answer to this...
What part of "I own myself" from the previous speecher you didn't understand?
Slavery is a violation of capitalism, because it violates ownership.
Yea don't talk down to me like that. Totally unwarranted. Just because someone puts forward the "i own myself" argument does not make it definitive
Slaves can be bought and sold as commodities. Slaves also provide a source of cheap labor. Both aspects have been used historically to make the capitalists who controlled them a lot of money.
Capitalism is about the ownership and control of capital, and humans can be considered a form of capital. It is not some declaration of human rights.
The difference is nobody is calling for slavery to return! People ARE calling for a socialist states in the West.
And after slave trade ends in Western world, socialism brings it back. Incredible.
A good mix between capitalism and socialism is the best ideology
NO JUCHE IS BEST IDEOLOGY JUCHE GANG JUCHE GANG JUCHE GANG
If the Soviet Union was such a great place to be why did the satelite states secede the moment they had even a glimpse of the right to choose?
Though I agree with the motion result; this fellow's argument was bloody terrible.
Your argument, however, is sublime.
I disagree with authoritarian-leftism, but he does a good job of arguing his position when the consensus is stacked against him. I agree with you though, overall his position is part of a dated left tradition that most modern socialists and the left-wing in general would reject.
He is a cretin
You should learn to be more critical of what your father told you.
samsonlovesyou It wasn't an argument, it was a comment genius, just like this isnt an argument.
China is a market economy. It's easier to transform a basic economy like 1917 Russia unlike the one like Germany with already organized production and higher curve of technology.
Interesting to watch this for the first time 5 years after it was filmed. I’m just going to look up Venezuela to see how socialism is working out there.
Nicely phrased. Very amusing
Sanctions are what fuck up socialist countries.
@@robertomartin59 Thanks
@@johncswheatleyfor his time Venezuela was doing great, and no one bats an eye. Now the Venezuelan economy has tanked with the oil prices. Suddenly it gets all the attention.
So this took place in 2013. Would be nice to hear this guy in 2019 and how socialism is working in Venezuela, Cuba and such.
Check the Morning Star online. Robert Griffiths has published many articles there
What planet is this guy on.
***** Robert Griffiths is not in the 'upper ranks' of the political world.
Earth.
*****
Not true. Robert Griffiths is active in trade unions, academia, the peace movement and journalism. Many of those that work with and respect him are not communists.
*****
they are not they are big money winning and although socialism has it's flaws capitalism is far worse.
6:04 - *"China and Cuba are like beacons of social progress..."*
Would he still say this in 2019 without any reservations when we see China having introduced its Orwellian social credit system?
tumarfa These people don't see the problem with that sort of society.
I'm very much on the free-market, liberty side, but can you tell me what is so terrible about a social credit system? Assuming that it wasn't hacked or used dishonestly.
@Thelema9331 Yes, but you're explaining practical problems, and problems when introduced by a oppressive regime. But what's wrong with a social credit rating in theory?
@@neoepicurean3772 Whats wrong with it? Seriously? It suppressing free thinking and free speach. Everyone is forced to follow one agenda or suffer the consequences. And in theory, it can lead a democratic system into your formally mentioned oppressive regime when the ruling party uses it "wisely" to stay in charge.
@@matteloht Again, you are saying that the problem is coming from following 'one agenda or suffer the consequences': I'm saying separate the issues. I agree that a oppressive regime using it as a tool to enforce obedience is bad... but.
What is wrong with the social credit rating in theory, without the regime control part. That is my question.
No more points of information... let me tell my lies unopposed.
Has anyone that’s ever lived in a socialist state shared these sentiments? I mean most of them are dead but seriously
Does the opinion poll mean nothing to you? It's not even that they share the sentiments - they gave the sentiment.
I am a former Soviet citizen. Live in US. Can say the difference. It was crap.
I love this guy he's a true comrade
And this guy is arguing FOR socialism??
Is there a problem with that
@@ianreynolds8552 yes it doesn't work
@@fuhleep7734 That means nothing, your repeating what your told.
@@scifispaceman1557 or what ive observed with other countries from now and the past. It's never been better than capitalism, the data is overwhelming on that. I doesn't work your ignorant
@@fuhleep7734 Yeah capitalism has definitely been better, I am being sarcastic, You ignore the poverty in the world and you only follow american propaganda
What exactly does the efforts of the Soviet army have to do with left-wing economic policy? It was the Russian soldiers that defeated the Nazis not socialism. That's like saying Cartesian philosophy won the battle of Jutland because Admiral Beatty was a great advocate of it.
You've never been to China, have you?
I had a hard time stomaching his appalling revision of recent Chinese history. It wasn't until Deng Xiaoping decided to embrace a mixed economy that China really began to lift out of poverty. Deng's famous quote, "It doesn't matter whether the cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice," really expresses this Chinese sentiment that they can be capitalists in actuality while continuing to claim that they are socialists. Don't get me started on his allusions to future Venezuelan greatness...
Exactly -- their embrace of capitalism on a global scale is what helped them out of poverty. My God this guy is an idiot.
Jennifer: sounds like you know a lot about China! I also left a comment 08/20/2030. Would like to chat more on this topic, especially in today’s US-China relationship. Would like to chat over email: jeffz0607@gmail.com
E M that guy is a real idiot. You said I tried to say!
I don't think YOU know the more recent Chinese history. On how China was constantly rising while the capitalist countries were declining during the 2007 crisis while reducing the amount of private ownership and increasing the amount of centralized state planning.
The fact China rose trough capitalism only happened because all the sanctions were slowly lifted off them and some hostility towards China disappeared. They purposely hampered their growth through capitalism only to be introduced to international communities. Now, as they are slowly becoming irreplaceable on the world stage they are getting rid of capitalism and are facing greater growth than anyone could predict.
Wrong China's economy started to grow after they joined the WTO
Cuba is still driving cars from the 50's
Who cares with common sense, history and reality? He has arguments!
03:50 Russia's previous full employment, and order/stability? When he mentions employment, does he mean the mass Soviet conscription or the forced labour. The misappropriation of the idea of stability should then be self-explanatory...
Only took 3 years for socialism to destroy Venezuela, we should totally let it into our thriving countries. >_>
It actually started in the 90s
Again, this is what the press told you, you bought it without question because you quit thinking whenever it is pleasant, and in your favor.
Okay, got anything to prove the press wrong other than articles on dodgy conspiracy blogs attributing all miseries of humankind to reptilians in Washington?
I don't understand why people like you and Griffiths keep using monstrous authoritarian regimes like the USSR and Venezuela to defend socialism. I grew up amidst the ruins of Soviet-style socialism, among families who have been robbed of their modest farms, businesses, and savings after 1948. I've seen the border fences that used to be charged with 2000V current that nobody knew of until after the revolutions. People disappearing in the middle of the night because they said something negative about the Party in the pub. There was no joy, no security, only the grim certainty of continued hopelessness.
Of course socialism does work, if coupled with common sense economic freedoms and accountability of the government - like in Scandinavia. Those countries are living proof that socialist healthcare and education with capitalist justice and market systems result in wealthy, egalitarian and happy societies. I don't understand why we still need debates like the above, why we can't just admit both systems need to work together for the benefit of both the disadvantaged and the ambitious.
***** Scandinavia became more and more left through out the years, and now this land has nothing else to offer than men that are so or even more feminine than the women and a bunch of people that decided to join the religion of feelings, where the government is their god, and will provide them with safe spaces, and forever security. All that for the cheap price of their own humanity, the freedom of being a human being as it is, and the lack of opportunity to become better versions of themselves, because if you better than someone else, you are definitely oppressing someone else. It is sad.
I've heard of what scandinavian lifestyle has done to their societies. I'd still choose lack of masculinity and reliance on a benevolent state over lack of basic human dignity and reliance on a malignant state.
Oh snap we got a tankie
This aged like milk💔😂
Typing error: 'China' not 'china'.
He knows so much about socialism because he lives in England, not in those countries that he has glorified as being "beacons". Beacons? Really? This explains why so many Cubans have made it a point to escape on boats and come to the US. Public ownership? It's state ownership, not public ownership. As for China, it's because they have had to adopt capitalist methods in order to survive. Socialism is a failure and always has been. His argument was typical socialist/communist rhetoric that has no basis in reality.
Feliks Gailitis You don't think that the economic blockade, designed to impoverish Cuba, has something to do with people leaving?
*****
Of course the gangsters, pimps and plantation owners fought against the Revolution. Their ill-gotten plunder was being confiscated by the people.
***** You still haven't responded to my original point: to what extent has the US imposed economic blockade contributed to the challenges that Cuba faces?
*****
Americans (and Cubans, and they certainly weren't "pimps and gangsters" as was said earlier) had property stolen by the communists. After that they allowed the Soviets to bring nuclear missiles into their country to attack America and kill millions of innocent people.
Anything that America did to Cuba was warranted.
Feliks Gailitis he lives in Wales actually
"Without slavery in the Society Union" - good one! I'm having good loughs 😅 Have You ever talked to eastern europeans how they feel about this enforced "friendship" that led to absolute erosion of economy, good working ethics and decrease in innovation????
In what world is establishing a satellite state (which is obviously open for criticism) in anyway comparable to physically capturing, exporting and selling humans for your own economic growth for over a hundred years
Wow,what an argument! 1,Presenting Soviet Union,Cuba as positive examples.Why not bring up North Korea too? 2,China's economy began to grow since 1976 when it began to abandon socialism.If you want to use China in your favour ,I'm afraid you can only present it before 1976,when tens of millions died out of starvation,political persecution and mob violence.This gentleman so far has done better than any of the proposers of the motion to argue against socialism,in my humble opinion.
***** thank you for your reply.I would appreciate it if you had used "you've"instead of"they've" since It seems your main point is that China has progressed since "1949".As I in my first comment,tens of millions died under Mao's regime,from starvation between 1956 and 1966,and persecution between 1966 and 1976.How can you call that "progress"?I also pointed out that China began to progress economically after 1976 when we gradually abandoned socialism.With my own experience I can assure you we are more capitalist than any other state of the world.We have quasi-0 welfare ,All classes only worship money.I am not saying it's good but it's still better than the populus having no food to survive.To conclude,I am not biggoted against socialism,that's why I only attack this communist not the rest of the speakers.I agree that capitalism has problems.But we don't replace a system whose flaw is having tens of thousands of people living on the street with a system where millions die without food,millions in labour camps slowly tortured to death ,where you can be killed just because you forget wear the the badge with your dear leader's image(This literally happend under Mao's China).In short ,you don't replace a system which is not heaven with a system which is 100% hell on earth.That's why this communist disgusts me.Thank you for reading the words of a person who lived in a communist state for 18 years.
1 name I only need to mention to destroy this argument YURI BEZMENOV
Venezuela 2019. Case Closed. Its over, no more debate.
But let me guess, they did not implement it correctly......
I believe in Socialism in One Pub - which is another way of saying it's your bluddy round lol
Red Emrys Socialism works only at family level. i.e a father giving money to his daughter. It sort of works at friend level with getting rounds but there is a sort of expectation and code of honour about getting a reciprocal round in. It stops working if you know someone who doesn't pay as much. Which is what happens with full scale socialism.
@@Tom_Hadler
Guess what Lenin’s favourite drink was? Vodka? - Wrong . Lenin did not care much about food but loved a good beer. His favourite: the Russian-brewed brand “Жигулeвское,” or “Zhigulyovskoe.” It was practically the only mass-produced beer during Soviet times and is still very popular in Russia. It is available pretty much everywhere , although unfortunately not in the USA. Why have I inserted this anecdote? To illustrate that, by asserting that the provision of beer is dependent on bourgeois ideas (concepts) of honour and code, you have completely missed the point. Non-market socialism involves replacing factor markets and money with engineering and technical criteria based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing an economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws from those of capitalism. Non-market socialism aims to circumvent the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system and provide the workers with better ale!
Red Emrys Your comment reads like a bot wrote it! Unsure of the point you're trying to make. Let's just agree that beer is great and so is vodka
@@Tom_Hadler
You are not friendly, Tom. Goodbye
He obviously has not spoken to a Cuban national like I have. The Cuban national that I have spoken to HATES the Cuban government and would rip this man to pieces.
Cuba is going hungry now, since Russia pulled all its funding & all its work projects out of there. There isn't no food in the refrigerators, they aren't starving. But there is very little food & they are undernourished.
Venezuela just went to shit
Not because if socialism, you're an obtuse twit if you buy the neoliberal propaganda.
+Max Stirner
of*
Actually it was entirely because of socialism. Chavez made the country entirely reliant on oil, a finite resource. When oil prices dropped a few years ago their economy tanked since he had chased out all of the industry with threats of seizure. Now the Venezuelans want change. Stop watching cancerous trash like TeleSur and RT, state run anti-western propaganda sites, and realize that Noam Chomsky has gone fucking senile.
Spot on.
Nick Venezuela isn't socialist
i've never heard the terrors called "social security."
"The people of Venezuela and Bolivia are taking their own roads to their own forms of socialism"... Just about says it all really.
since socialism is so bad and will fail either way why does america spend billions embargoing the socialist nations?
Venezuela did become such a beacon as well, right?
Unfortunately, he is describing examples of state capitalism.
He’s not a exactly the brightest spark is he
Alright Mr Torrance, are YOU the brightest spark? Mr Griffiths is much cleverer than you’ll ever be.
Forced myself to listen to this, he spoke well I thought, but no, imho I see NO evidence that socialism works as an economic model. I DO think that it has a role to play in society though, unbridled capitalism can be disastrous.
I think that's the problem of our time. The best model probably is a marriage of a few different ones and not outright capitalism or socialism. But nowadays it's all about the team and step one toe over the line to the other side and you'll burn for it.
He talked about Socialism in Venezuela 🇻🇪. Well we all know how horrible now in there.
"without a slave trade" - that's arrant nonsense - they may not have been dragged out of their homes in Africa, but the USSR was FULL of slaves.
The slave trade allied the squadron of capital that funded capitalism I think was his point, as was the enclose acts that kicked the independent peasants(and that is no derogatory term) off the land they lived and into destitution that provided the labour for the capitalists in the UK particularly.
Did he just say that about Cuba, omg.
I couldn't watch it all, without wanting to smack my head against a wall. He mentions over a million executions; and left out the hundred million who died as a result of the various socialist/communist policies throughout the world!
@@tomasmccauley569 I'm not sure what your point is.
@@tomasmccauley569 And Mao's communism? I grant you that untrammeled capitalism is also bad, but I wouldn't say it was anywhere near as bad as the awful policies of socialism and communism that always lead to millions of deaths.
Venezuela@2018...
Fantastic speech.
Yeah...because Cuba’s still using cars manufactured 50 years ago. Real economic growth and productivity...
@@situational476 A poorer form of capitalism.
Oh man...it would take hours to unpack the manure this fellow is spreading...
Shush
Robert really needs a lesson in Attunement.
Introducing Stalin in a debate as a defence for Socialism? 🤨
Yea: nice one. 🙄
Red salute comrade! Exceptional guy
Daniel Hannan put forward an excellent speech without badmouthing the opposition and took numerous questions.
Robert Griffiths opened with ad hominem attacks on those in favour of the motion, dictated his point of view and declined all but one question - just as a socialist dictator would.
Daniel Hannan resorted to Godwins law....laughable considering that the Nazis were the first to privatize state owned industries.
MrReco12 Yes he briefly pointed out the Nazis were socialists - which they were - but the majority of Hannan's talk was around the conclusive evidence that free market capitalism, despite it's flaws, is vastly superior to socialism.
The Nazis were socialists were they? Cool. I guess if I go around saying I have a 12 inch cock that becomes true as well.
@@Starsandfunk
£ucktard
read the awful mein Kampf and then say again your lie that Hitler was a socialist.
Wow this is not a good argument. Socialism is not defined by the USSR. Just as much as Iran is not an ideal democracy. Or for that matter the US as well.... Any country can become a fascist plutocracy regardless of the particular configuration of that system. The traits that all fascist plutocracies have in common is mass detrimental inequality and poverty. And society in legislation etc makes choices like extreme austerity while simultaneously empowering the rich and disenfranchising the poor and eventually everyone else .
FORD built the Gorky plants. The lend lease program built up the Soviet Union.
Sorry, professor, but "we're still learning, give us a break" is not an argument.
The problem with socialism though is that eventually you run out of other people's money
*slow clap*
every time i read this quote i cringe hard. if anything this applies much better to capitalism seeing as it bases itself on the bourgeoisie stealing the value that workers have created.
***** No. You need to step out of that tiny Marxist box for a minute and understand a little bit of history. It's embarrassing that you know so little about the ideology that you subscribe to.
Pre-communist Russian plutocracy, which forms the basis of marxist class warfare in such terms as the one you just used, is nothing like western liberal capitalism. The former is based on violent coercion to steal from the poor while the latter is based on mutual benefit and voluntary transaction.
Capitalists only have so much power as you willingly choose to give them. Does coca cola force you to buy a can of coke at the barrel of a gun, or do you buy it because you value the product more than the money you hold.
tsarist russia didn't form the basis of marxist class warfare, what are you talking about? tsarist russia formed the basis of the bolshevik revolution sure but not marxist class warfare itself. marx developed his economics off the back of the conditions under which workers lived in britain during the industrial revolution. entirely different side of europe.
capitalism distributes resources so 62 people own the same level of wealth as the bottom 50% of the world's population (rougly 3.7 billion people), there can be no mutually beneficial relationship in those circumstances. transactions within developed capitalist countries are as 'voluntary' as they can be but there is nothing voluntary about people working for these companies in sweatshop conditions to bring us our 'voluntary' choices.
the claim that capitalists simply have as much power as you willingly give them is just plain false though. how does that explain the conditions of workers in the third world and in britain during the industrial revolution? these people have no choice but to 'give' power to capitalists, so it's not exactly a willing choice. also history shows us that when people collectively decide to stop giving power to capitalists fascist movements start in order to protect the power of capitalists so it's not like it would simply cease to exist if people decided to stop supporting capitalism.
oh, you just explained how the capitalist brakedown of 2008 happened. Bravo!
The working class held no power in the Soviet Union. The state pumped surplus value out of them at an even greater rate than in the industrial western countries. The Soviet Union was state capitalist and had become so in its efforts to industrialize or face being overthrown by foreign intervention. The same goes for China and despite all the good intentions Cuba. The litmus test for whether a country is socialist, based on Marx's writings is, whether through their own self emancipation, the working class hold power and have smashed the capitalist state. I notice Griffiths says absolutely nothing about the 5-6 million people who starved to death in the Ukraine in the early 1930's. Stalin surrounded the grain and food storage facilities with soldiers and forcibly starved the Ukraine into submission to the collectivization of agriculture. Nor how Stalin's policy towards the Nazis in the late 20's and early 30's led to the failure of the German communist party and the Social Democrats to form a voting block that would have stopped the Nazis gaining the most seats in the Reichstag in 1932 and Hitler becoming Chancellor in January 1933.
I can’t figure this out. Is the motion, “socialism doesn’t work?” Who won the debate?
Why does the comment section ignore that socialistic countries had no historic background of empires or slavery to base its resources on..Most of them started from scratch , and developed amid strict economic sanctions....It sounds like everybody is afraid of socialism , afraid of letting it grow and it showing what it’s capable of, I’m not arguing for it rather to see what it’s actually capable of...This guys main point is that...Socialism has developed many countries...But just as capitalistic countries go broke socialists countries have also gone broke too ,but at the same time the best socialist country has beaten most capitalist countries in terms of growth too...It just shows that socialism is not a failure from the start as some ppl make it out to be....It has its own merits too..Plus i rather the state coerce than economic powers coerce...Cos if it doesn’t works at least theoretically we can elect other ppl while in economic coercion we have to elect ppl then coerce them to change the economic policies, (I.e. the politicians have a necessity to listen to ppl while economic powers have to listen to politicians who listen to us , there is one level here and two Levels there...)
Stalin enslaving the populace enabled the soviet union to become a super power , which he just said he was against when citing that capitalism made slavery which made the industrial revolution happen . not a consistent thinker
From 2013 to present, 2019, did we see more failing Socialism or Capitalism? Guess Socialism in Venezuela has made plenty of millionaires....
Where do we see failing Capitalism? Oh thats right, the countries that are moving more towards a Socialism based economy, looking at you America.
I'd like to know who won the debate ?
That Venezuela line sure did Age well.
Ur dumb
The idea that this guy was born in the UK- in the same lifetime as Joseph Stalin's reign, grew up alongside Khrushchev's Soviet rule and purportedly studied Economics at the University of Bath, makes it even more astounding that he can downplay the eventual atrocities of Communist government.
Why do 'The Intellectual Left' never turn up to these occasions?
sounds like Cuba is a great place! That's why everyone migrates there.
Name me 1 good point he made
Comments section's a bit trotty.
Yeah, I'm sure UA-cam commentators know more than an Oxford Union member.
Not everyone is ignorant on this subject. Just because somebody goes to Oxbridge doesn't make them any better than you or myself. You must have heard of the saying "intellectual idiot". Well I have met plenty of those along the way nolanatm, plenty.
Millions died in Soviet Russia. .
Compare his balanced, reasonable arguments to the emotional diarrhea from the other side
You’re nuts!
I lived in China and I’ve been in Cuba and neither are as he described. Lifted out of absolute poverty maybe… but languishing in poverty still. Compare that to the West.
Has this guy ever held an honest job? Being a "thinker" and "professor" is not honest work.
What was the result of the debate?
I'm not sure why I hate emotional speakers, but I give up trying on trying to find one for this debate
Why is no one mentioning Sweden, Denmark, Norway???? etc....
thomuk2006 Because they actually have some of the most free economies in Europe, Sure they have High taxes and Social programs but their economy is still capitalist, They don't have heavy Regulation/Nationalization or Protectionism.
Also these countries arnt as prosperous as Socialists and Liberals like to claim. With a sluggish GDP and most people making less money than Americans before and after taxes.
No, They are Capitalist. Care to explain why you think they are Socalist? Im 100% sure they don't use a Planned centralized economic model. Just a lot of State programs, And very Liberal social policy.
thomuk2006 Yikes, THAT'S the best you've got?
My Hungarian tour guide explained it is this way in 1989: the young people were all excited & were in a fervor to go out & start businesses & get jobs in what they wanted to. The old people did not like it when that monthly stipend for doing little stopped. It meant they had to put more effort into life. Simply put, the baker who made 40 loaves of bread a day got the same stipend from the govt. than the baker who made only 9 loaves. Same outcome but remarkably different levels of work.
socialism: where everything is free except the people.
Phenomenal. Each argument made convincing with well chosen words.
What’s a great example of a socialist country?
What’s a great example of a capitalist one??
Eh.. I'm good. I think I'll keep ownership of my shit.
Absolutely love this. What an intelligent man. The only people who hate this are either willfully ignorant with their realities being challenged, or simply rich and selfish.
Or just wanna be free?
@@Gnashercide Being free is the constant looming worry of your house being taken from you, your inability to pay for food on your table, to feed your kids, to pay your bills, to pay for your own physical quality of life, because if you don't work for your boss who exploits you and owns the fruits of your own labour, you won't have these things? Being free is working all your life doing a job just so you can live? Not being able to focus on your passions otherwise you'll be homeless and starve, you call that free? I don't think that's freedom at all.
@@_Wakaz_ uh it's called being responsible for myself, nothing is free . Freedom is a rigth of speech, propriety
@@_Wakaz_ freedom doesn't mean being a burden and living with other people money
Or have actually experienced communism instead of reading about it in university
I wish I lived in socialist China, where they have to wear coats, hats and gloves INDOORS until the local government say its cold enough to turn the comunual heating on. And the fridges were not empty or full in the USSR, no one had a fridge.
For a man who looks like a fish, he makes an interesting point. Simply because of the impeachment on civil liberties in historic socialist countries doesn't mean we should turn bling eye to the advantages of living under socialism.
+British socialist I'll gladly put up with the unequal blessings of Capitalism rather than put up with the equal sharing of the miseries of Socialism.
+Snowcrest yet another narrow minded twat with his Churchill quote
British socialist Do you have anything relevant to say?!...I'd like to keep the fruits of my labor. You want to get at the fruits of my labor. I intend to prevent that.
+Snowcrest I'm not taking the fruits of your labour, if you honestly believe that you are already reaping them, then you are unfortunately very wrong, it's the entrepreneurial bourgeoise class that's taking that from you, the sooner you realise that we socialists aren't the thieves the better
British socialist Anything relevant to say?!?
When social democracies or Communist nations support dictatorships, the country supported is broken before we know it. When capitalist nations support dictatorships, they develop. See the example of Brazil supporting Venezuela, Bolivia and Cuba here in South America and confront that with what happened in Chile.
Mr Griffiths, you know nothing about Cuba....what you said about it, it's nonsense. Please, pay a visit to it before you talk.