They want you broke, fearful, helpless, fighting, dumb and ignorant. The system takes from hard working people and gives to the greedy, corrupt liars. Stand up, find your voice and fight back.
'the system' is the key. Free market capitalism is a system. Marxist critique is philosophy. The UK has a vestige of feudalism. How does a system come about and what system will displace capitalism in an era of climate catastrophe, mass migration, AI and robotics. The concept of the working class will likely disappear. What are we if we aren't slave, serf or employee?
‘Workers in a sector, that have expertise in that sector, do not need to be managed’. I completely agree. I started work at a large media organisation in the late ‘80s and had one person between me and director level. When I left there were seven people. Managers managing managers made no sense and made my job a ball ache.
Interesting. See on my side in tech, project managers are priceless. They facilitate communication between vastly different teams and views. We've worked a lot with teams that have flat hierarchy structures, and it's a mess. No decision can be made without full attendance, there's never full attendance. Professionals are often placed on the same level as amateurs on a particular topic. It also breeds a very clique attitude to work, where politics are rife and mob rule becomes a huge issue. I truly beleive management is a true skill, but it's based on communication and empathy, rather than force and position. Think of leaders over bosses. What do you think about all this? Very different experiences.
In my current job I do have managers but they are very hands off with us. They have the attitude that it is their role to enable us to produce value and that's what they spend most of their time doing. I reach out and contact my manager probably two or three times more often than he contacts me. They only care about the quality and quantity of our productivity. We are judged solely on the job performance rather than on our ability to make ourselves look busy. We've gotten a couple employees over the years that did take advantage of this paradigm but they were pretty easy to spot and get rid of in their first 90 days. For most of us this has been very a effective way of cultivating a workforce that takes pride in their work.
From what I see, the problem is not about the need of hierarchy or not, but about the autonomy of workers when given a certain task. That is why I trust in a system akin to SF military for work manageament - yes, there is hierarchy, but the hierarchy is defined not by politics, but by competence, and while there is defined timetables and objectives, HOW said things can be achieved is left on the hands of the people in the "field". And as a Marxist, I don't know if this is contradictory, but at least is efficient.
I've worked in engineering and research, and often times the projects I worked on were disrupted or sabotaged by management. Management was always the disruption in progress.
OMG. Any innovation that disrupted the office political hierarchies were always deep sixed, sometimes by sabotage or by literally destroying people's reputations, health, and careers. And on a larger scale, corruption in government, Brexit, and things like the TTIP negotiations, where the US bribed EU Commission functionaries to try and push through a treaty which would have ripped off EU taxpayers (Which the Tories supported, because it would have driven through NHS privatisation). The timely failure off precipitate American oligarchs persuading British Oligarchs that Brexit was necessary, is Techno feudalism writ large on the Global system. Nevermind the absurdities they try to make us believe, so that they can perpetrate atrocities on us and others pursuit of profit. No wonder the global economy is like an overripe fruit, slowly rotting and breaking down as the capitalist global central planning is failing to keep ordinary people healthy, happy, and fed everywhere.
@@browncow7113only tangentially. Managers need credit for success, not actual success. Thus they obsess over statistics they can present as achievements. And above all, they need to shift the blame for any failures downwards, even if they theoretically get paid more to accept responsibility.
While I agree democracy isn't perfect I would reverse that statement and say if voting didn't have the potential to make a difference authoritarians wouldn't work so hard to take it away from us. The right to vote wasn't handed down to us by benevolent elites. It's not something they 'let' us do. Mass movements fought for it over centuries, opposed every step of the way by wealthy conservative interests.
“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal,” is a famous quote by Emma Goldman, a Russian-born US political activist, anarchist and writer (1869-1940).
Grace is so fantastic, I could listen to her all day. She speaks about complex topics in an understandable way and does a good job at joining separate concepts and logical arguments together. I've put her book on my reading list!
She oversimplifies complex systems. Moreover she appears to believe that she both understands complex systems and that indeed they really are not even such things as complex systems or that they are competing with each other knowingly or unknowingly). Corporations, even those run by workers, will pursue profit. They too will engage in the same tactics that capitalists do. As she notes, this will require other layers of democracy; essentially other people managing them. And she explains that those managers themselves will also require layers of democracy ( more management). On and on, up and up, until as she discusses and writes in her book, some group of world leaders also make a democratic choice and that this choice is a acceptable to all parties involved even though they had little say at these highest levels. It’s all just management with people making choices and putting interests of others of interests of some other others with a belief that all these layers are acting in the best interest f he entirety of humanity as if we could even agree on what the “best interest” is.
I wonder did you read the book or you're outlining her whole philosophy based an hour long video, which I'm pretty sure you viewed rather pessimistically. You make the assumption about any corporation that is run workers would also pursue profit. I'm sure your argument is based on a logical fallacy and you offer no proof to support this argument, then you use that argument to pontificate and prove your point. Your argument boils down to a disagreement with her worldview and you not being properly equipped to debate it. The irony lies in the fact you state she doesn't understand complex systems but you don't even understand the point she was making. 😕
00:03 Individualism hampers collective organization 02:13 Exploring the impact of capitalism on freedom 06:12 Capitalism is a hybrid system with centralized planning 08:09 Debate between state command economy and free market capitalism 12:06 Neoliberal ideology fails to address concentration of power in big monopolistic institutions. 14:09 Capitalism promotes monopolies and concentrates economic power 17:55 Boeing's lack of regulation and corporate welfare showcase the flawed competitive market 19:42 Corruption and lobbying in American state intertwines with big corporations. 23:19 Boeing's cultural shift under Harry Stonecipher's leadership 25:20 Corporate Titans mismanagement and destruction of iconic American companies 28:46 Henry Ford's authoritarian control over workers and expansion into the Brazilian Amazon 30:32 Ford's Imperial Ambitions and the shift in power dynamics 34:04 Neoliberalism empowers capitalists in planning decisions 35:56 Capitalism promotes planned economies for business success 39:34 Capitalism creates a false dichotomy between entrepreneurs and workers. 41:17 Lucas plan transformed manufacturing towards socially useful technologies 44:38 Workers with expertise can self-manage under Democratic control. 46:17 Democratic socialism decentralizes and democratizes power. 49:41 Qualified individuals should have more power in budget allocation. 51:16 Trade unions can prioritize self-interest over members' interests 54:32 Empower society to make collective decisions on technology 56:08 Democratization of the international economy through policy shifts 59:39 Capitalism's impact on cultural decline and potential critique of China 1:01:22 Capitalism constrains freedom by imposing external constraints on individuals 1:04:43 Losing political agency to enlightened bureaucrats can lead to resentment and push towards far-right ideologies. 1:06:19 Decentralized decision-making leads to more progressive policy outcomes. Crafted by Merlin AI.
Aaron went down a really weird hole in the 2nd half of this. Essentially claiming that there are individuals so brilliant they have single handedly created their own billion dollar companies. But they haven't. The innovations within those companies, the manufacturing power, the systems and processes - they are all created by hundreds of people. The owner/ceo just had the money to pay to find those solutions. The owner/ceo doesn't have any of the intelligence or knowledge to do that. They're just the owner. They just have the money to pay someone else to be intelligent. Sure. Management is a thing. But it's no more skilled than a social worker. And CEO's/shareholders don't manage. They pay other people to manage. They pay other people to understand aspects of the company and to report their recommendations.
Don't forget, that money that Owner/ CEO/ Entrepreneur is using. Is probably someone else's. So even with all of their brilliance they still needed someone else's help. Which again undercut's this ridiculous notion of rugged individualism.
The average middle management and average Social worker do not have equal skill sets. And small (4 ppl) to larger (500+) businesses are built on hiring ppl to do the task as owner you don’t have the time for or not expert in. Accounting, plumbing and the list goes on.
Sure but if you think about the things in the last century that have made life better its internet, cheap computers and cheap food. The point isn't that the people single handedly made a company. The point is that the free market and greed allowed the investments to make this happen. If it was a central source that tried to make things fair it would just be a ration system of what already existed and nobody would be full. Not because central planning or decentralized planning is bad. Because decentralized planning can coexist with some freak visionary type founder. But it would be weird to plan for a society and also predict that everyone would have a computer. That is a smaller bet that an individual/ group of individuals should take. And then they got rewarded for it. Hating on gambling seems to be a religious thing.
@@kingcuckoo Just no, really. Invention and progression moved along just fine before capitalism. Over the last 20+ years we've seen an absolute stagnation of invention. The screen size in my pocket doesn't matter. A billionaire sending themselves into space doesn't matter. All of our housing is still 100 years old. We're still burning dirty fuel. The internet, which you've chosen as an example, wasn't created by some capitalist entity or a Musk like owner. Food isn't cheap right now is it? Why do we have so many foodbanks now? Food is not healthier than during WW2 either. The rest of what you've said is so far fetched and unattached it's not really possible to respond.
Dear Grace, I recently came across your book titled "Vulture Capitalism," wherein you make claims that, while not new, strike at the heart of a contentious issue. The term "vulture capitalism" itself carries connotations of contempt, depicting a system where individuals prey upon or exploit others for personal gain. It's worth considering the perspectives of notable figures in economic thought on this matter. Adam Smith, often hailed as the father of economics, notably identified self-interest, rather than benevolence, as the driving force behind market dynamics, a reflection of the cultural norms of his time. Economist Lord Maynard Keynes similarly characterized market behavior as being influenced by what he termed "animal spirits." In contrast, economist Milton Friedman famously suggested that greed plays a significant role in driving market forces. Now, to confront your argument at its strongest point, let me pose two questions posed by Friedman himself, along with one of my own: What kind of society isn't structured on greed? (Milton Friedman) Is there some society you know of that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? (Milton Friedman) Grace, why did you write "Vulture Capitalism"? The answer, according to your thesis, is greed. These questions and reflections invite deeper consideration into the nature of capitalism and its underlying motivations.
Can you entertain that economic theory from social sciences that claims the global economy thrives on the premise of perceived self-interest, greed, or selfishness? Or perhaps you lean towards a term that offers a gentler interpretation for the sake of mental turmoil? While we grapple with this notion, it's crucial to acknowledge the undeniable role greed plays in shaping both human economies and governmental policies. I understand that it can be difficult for many to accept that governments, too, are greedy in their actions. Despite their efforts to conceal or justify this greed, it often remains visible for all to see. It's natural for our ego developed in childhood to distance us from this characterization, perhaps placing ourselves low on the greed spectrum. However, the truth is far more nuanced. Each of us occupies a position on this spectrum, except for the very rare outlier with an extraordinary story that we would never hear. In our own unique ways, we engage in a subtle competition to satisfy our primal instincts. These deeply ingrained instincts have been skillfully obscured over time by the intricate web of societal norms, expectations, and constructs.
Grace is brilliant. I agree in any working place the shop floor will always be the place where innovation and improvements can be found. But it is also true that a good manager is vital and extremely rare and is always recognised by the shop floor workers .
This is an important point I think. You maybe box yourself into a bit of a corner if you try to get rid of managers and hierarchy. There are "collaborative" managers and there are dictatorial managers. Similarly there are cases where a hierarchy is just a necessary decision-making device, and other cases where it is a status game.
She really don't have a clue. Donald Trump is the working and middle classes only last hope in America. Back when that man was in office our groceries where affordable, housing was affordable, fuel was affordable, and we weren't involved in funding fools errand proxy wars/and west asian ethno states putting the world on the verge of ww3. He created Peace deals in the Middle east (Abraham accords)and withdrew or tried to withdraw troops out of Syria/Afghanistan. He did domestic Prison reform more than any Democrat ever did. And he had our economy BUMPING. BUT OOOH OH NOOO HE MADE MEAN TWEETS!!
@@browncow7113 Yes, it is an important point. And we shouldn't box ourselves into thinking that hierarchical management is the only way to do it. Or that all control should be vested in the management structure alone. Your acknowledgement of "collaborative" managers implies gathering viewpoints/input more widely, which is good, but still the sole decision-making power (i.e. control) vested in a single person (which might be good for simple accountability, but again, we shouldn't box ourselves in to just one model). We can be more innovative, more flexible, more contextual, in how we design decision-making processes. Objectifying or concentrating them in a single person is only *one* way to do it. Yes, yes. And agree: Grace is brilliant!
Dear Grace, I recently came across your book titled "Vulture Capitalism," wherein you make claims that, while not new, strike at the heart of a contentious issue. The term "vulture capitalism" itself carries connotations of contempt, depicting a system where individuals prey upon or exploit others for personal gain. It's worth considering the perspectives of notable figures in economic thought on this matter. Adam Smith, often hailed as the father of economics, notably identified self-interest, rather than benevolence, as the driving force behind market dynamics, a reflection of the cultural norms of his time. Economist Lord Maynard Keynes similarly characterized market behavior as being influenced by what he termed "animal spirits." In contrast, economist Milton Friedman famously suggested that greed plays a significant role in driving market forces. Now, to confront your argument at its strongest point, let me pose two questions posed by Friedman himself, along with one of my own: What kind of society isn't structured on greed? (Milton Friedman) Is there some society you know of that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? (Milton Friedman) Grace, why did you write "Vulture Capitalism"? The answer, according to your thesis, is greed. These questions and reflections invite deeper consideration into the nature of capitalism and its underlying motivations.
Only fools believe that Billionaires get to be Billionaires by being honest, straightforward, trustworthy or supporting the interests of the common person. Admiring the rich, in the hope they will press for YOUR interests.
@@KevenHutchinson-gt1nn Trotters Independent Traders only became millionaires (made millions selling a rare timepiece originally dismissed as junk) and celebrated it in The Nag’s Head, so they were good. 😎 That was a good one...I didn't even think of "Only Fools" when writing it in the first place. 🎯
@Stoddardian this is techno feudalism, so they let the peasants be keyboard warriors... Nonetheless, our power to stop this is nonexistent if we can't work together
@@SuperZorgus capitalism is pretty much set to become corporatism and imperialism. And apparently, leading back into feudalism, which is essentially where we're at
To be sure, even a head of lettuce would lose such a debate; but, the head of lettuce would still last longer than would Truss. Then again, we already know that from the latter’s tenure as prime minister.
i mean that's down to capitalistic shortcuts in maintenance and upkeep, cutting corners and low priced parts any pilot; no matter how skilled, cannot fly a plane set up to break mid-flight it is gross negligence via economic greed, not ''DEI'' like some nutcases and swivel-eyed loons want to pretend it is; their way to defend that failing model of upkeep
Firsts sentence out of her mouth and that’s what I have been trying to articulate for SUCH A LONG TIME!!!!!!!! That was so succinct!! I’ve known that since I was a child, but I never had the words for it.
I think he isn’t understanding her critique on the entrepreneur genius leader. Yes they can problem solve and innovate to create new material progress for people. However, they are often not interested in the quality of lives of their actual workers and what sacrifices they are making for their employee. In Kant words they are of the ‘end justifies the means’ philosophy, not caring how things get done, just that they meet the deadline. Capitalism often denies the Buddhism truism of all we have is now, if we are working in bad conditions we are being robbed of life. Humans aren’t lazy to want a life that is balanced. As a teacher I see how overworked parents are, meaning they spend less time with their family. There is much more to life that just work and work should have a sense of dignity and humanity not just a focus on efficiency.
As the son of a teacher, I agree with you. I saw how overworked my dad was as a teacher. Granted, it was not the teaching in itself which caused that. Rather, it was the fact that ‘teachers don’t enter the profession for the money’, as the saying goes, (although he had to go fifteen rounds with the Board of Education on needed improvements to his classroom, the type of which only the Board could approve-improvements which weren’t even made until after he was forced to retire following the doctor’s ultimatum in the aftermath of his second heart attack) and he was there while raising a young and growing family during a time of double-digit inflation at the peak of the energy crisis. Consequently, he had to work a second job three nights per week and catering jobs on weekends. The result was three heart attacks within one week shy of ten years of each other (1984-94), the third of which claimed him at only fifty.
@@TueLesPigeonsthat's hard to actually say. If the worker had access to capital then THEY would likely be more willing to take the type of "risks" inherent in entrepreneurship..
Not sure I've ever disagreed more with Aaron's points than I have during this episode. Chiefly on managers: my brother, you're giving managers far too much credit, particularly middle management if you think this isn't an easily replaced group; most of these people take a business course that detaches them from reality and fluffs their ego until they simply make bad decisions confidently. Agree wholeheartedly with Grace's final point: power and autonomy for everyone is in and of itself a positive for the individual and society.
Exactly, and America specifically is by some estimates the most managerialized society on earth, with more people with the term “manager” in their occupational title than any other nation. It’s a structure that breeds toxicity, jealous intrigue, incompetence and exploitation, I’ve seen it in so many places I’ve worked.
Totally agree ! I really can't be done with Aaron or Grace whatsherface (does that girl ever stop to take a breath !?) A find them both rather contradictory and somewhat hypocritical
@@letsRegulateSociopathsBenefitting other people is the whole idea of Grace’s argument. Unfortunately, what we have now is indeed sociopathy-the sociopathy of the billionaire class.
What a brilliant interview!!!!!! My God that was good. I am ordering the book and definitely following Grace’s work. She articulated in so many ways things I’ve believe but have not been able to express. I learned so much and am in total agreement with her about management. Thanks Novara
more they have their cake and eat it to,they have both or the boot would of came down its we have socialism.And corporate wellfare has been on the uptick since the early 70s or way before
It's more like socialism for the super rich and select poor, unbridled capitalism for the working poor, middle class, and even the majority of the upper class.
Finished reading Vulture Capitalism not 10 minutes ago and this video drops! Moving forward with not just a clearer understanding of the world, but also how to change it!
Interesting. Do you realize that the "capitalism" to which words are attached is no longer "capitalism"? Also whatever an economic system turns out to be it is determined by the FORCE of the government in POWER. Finally, in those systems where those in POWER use FORCE, if there is not an equally opposing FORCE that can counter-act it, those without POWER are by definition "powerless"! All else is distraction. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH; it's just not the strength of the ignorant.
Socialism is the ultimate democracy. It extends down to community level, commune-ism. If everyone has the same means we can all have the same freedoms. Capitalism is only freedom if you have the money to be free: live rent free, have money to decide if you work or not, travel if you want. Not only capitalism but also our debt based monetary system were spending 30% of our labour paying the interest on all the money that's ever been created in this system. For the USA it's about a trillion $ a year!
The UK has a top heavy government model with the office of the PM being at the top of the hierarchy. We need to take power from the establishment and into our communities.
You need to do more than that. You need to stop believing absurdities before you stop the atrocities being carried out on you and others. You need to move from blame to accountability, and recognise that here is no free lunch. Unless you do, nothing will change.
Collectivism requires various things one of which is time, the most underrated asset, the asset which truly exemplifies freedom - which is increasingly being taken from us. For example our own admin which is ballooning, counter intuitively, with the increasing reliance on the internet. Business, or government, has moved their admin on to us under the guise of making things cheaper, or more empowering, when in reality is only making their profits greater and their control easier. In effect we are all now doing their admin for them for free, whilst at the same time giving away our freedom.
“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal,” is a famous quote by Emma Goldman, a Russian-born US political activist, anarchist and writer (1869-1940).
@@papunacrxalso those things don’t change the system. The legalization of cannabis created a harder market to be involved in for cannabis users. The taxes and permits the state now requires put a lot of people out of business and made it easier for corrupt businesses men to get involved in the industry.
@@lets7121 lots of things should be not like they are now, in my opinion, or your opinion... But quote said "changed anything" ... Weed market, this, that... It used to be a legal problem, especially as an excuse if popos wanna mess with you... That's a big ass change, even if your privilege makes you downplay it? 🤷♂️ And I'm sure gay ppl appreciate some human rights as well... I don't see your point here... Voting literally changed things... Shoulda, woulda, coulda ...
That's been the plan for almost 500 years now. The Enlightenment was focussed on *_individual_* free will, but it has gone way too far now. It is unbalanced and has become counter-productive.
I work in a climate change team in the public sector and our managers just want us to write endless policy documents whereas those of us on the ground understand how to start project managing and actually reduce carbon emissions rather than talking about it. Workers always know best!
Experts ( Scientist's, Engineers; ETC) know best, we should work together to bring the best 🙂 world about... Government and Corperations that are corrupt can get in the way as we have seen time and time again. People should hold their Governments, Corperations, Religions, Industry accountable and should be able to fire the corrupt ones out of power with a simple vote 😢 No gerrymandering, no college electorate and no BS, no gentrification = we the people and everyone's vote counts! 😮😅 It's not difficult,but they've made it sooo complicated, so slow, so broken for a reason; corruption makes BIG, BIG money... And Money = 💵💰 Wealth= power = influence & ETC 😮
Enticing vision of a system that takes some of the best notions from both the capitalist and socialist ideologies. Love listening to (and looking at) Grace! Keep up the good work!
One of the most fundamental points which was not discussed here, and I don't know if Grace addresses it in her book, is that believing in political agency comes from experiencing it. Experiencing it requires achieving it. Achieving it requires defeating and supplanting the current system of political agency in the form of the ruling class. That class will not tolerate even the slightest challenge and its power to suppress has gotten to the point where enormous violence will be required to overthrow it. Being willing to make mortal sacrifices in the class war requires a level of faith in the project and in such enormous numbers that is unimaginable. It seems like a chicken and egg problem.
And yet... we have (necessarily) both chickens and their eggs... Have faith. We will be free again. But we need to fight to our last breath. But hasn't this always been the way? Our strength is that we are not alone. And our imaginations are _free_ and Grace exemplifies this. We can explore new ideas and come up with *_better solutions_* than now. Don't forget that systems change has occurred before and what seemed like "eternal status quo systems" ended and new systems began. And this is inevitable since the failing system creates increasing amounts of suffering among the people and this first motivates questioning and then motivates action. The questioning and action need to be directed toward productive and useful change into an effective and efficient new system that works for the people. People such as Grace and organisations such as Novara are working towards discerning what will be productive and beneficial to aim for and to coalesce the questioning and action around. Stay aware. Support positive change. Resist the control over-compensation in the decline of the current system. And yes, the status quo will always resist in every way they contain (e.g. all the tea rolls in these comments) (e.g. a few of the Boeing whistleblowers ended up "dead in mysterious circumstances"...). The most dangerous time for the _status quo_ is when the people do not have anything left to lose. Why then do they continue to take everything from us? The ideology and system of Capitalism demand it. That is its inherent nature.
Fantastic conversation, I really love this channel. I really dig the concept that capitalism is this entity that wants to purport itself as a "natural" construct, which obviously is not, it has a history and a development and like it was mentioned in this video it has transformed certain ideas across time, to the point of becoming this "invisible, odourless" ideology as old Zizek often points out. Then this ideology creates its own narratives, but because it hinges on the illusion of total individual freedom, it hides the fact that, in time, some elites have formed that now do subtract freedom and limit the rest of society to their own advantage to a degree that has started to drain resources from the public sector. And that is where people sometimes have this wake up moment and notice that things aren't exactly as their politicians describe them. But then there are other countless small lies that are not a direct decision of the ruling elites, but that are a consequence of the system that has been put in place, and I'm talking for example about some appalling policies that companies have, the fact that in order to be competitive (read: save money) they prefer to do internal promotions and put incompetent people to in positions of higher responsibility, or the fact of paying less skilled workers and by doing so effectively reducing the quality of their production and so on. Which leads me to probably the biggest lie of all, that is the concept of the "unskilled worker". This is an outright lie, because if it's a job, and it has to be done at certain standards, there is a skill. If you're not fast enough with the bloody service you don't get a place at Costa. So that's a skill. People working with their own language get minimum pay because, again, this is portrayed as a "natural" asset, therefore devoid of skill. That is untrue, because whatever the job carried out in your natural language, it happens within a certain industrial framework, so there will be other skills that you are required to acquire and if you don't, you're out. In my eyes this all goes to the direction of telling us that we're worthless shits, when in reality the worthless shits are managers that don't recognise human value, that put quality behind profit, and that ultimately contribute to degradation, instead of improvement. But all this, is the consequence of a (economic) culture that by purporting its own pragmatism, being down-to-earth, intellectual freedom, non-ideological character... in reality promotes cynicism, low quality, subjugation, and individualism. It's not just making poorer in the wallet, it's making us poorer in the mind and in our values.
There seemed to be this suggestion that a group of mechanical engineers would be more capable of running a company than Aaron, which might be true, but isn't even the point. A company wouldn't just be run by engineers. There are accounting, and operations, sales, marketing, quality control, and logistics people, etc. They pool their knowledge, and the result is exponentially better than any group of executives could ever hope to achieve.
We need both specialization and generalization to be most effective. And we need to have philosophy to tell us what it is we want to value and to effect
@Stafus incorrect, you have college degrees on target markets and sales and market economics, understanding that is key, something a random might not have also nice generalization, good to know how you think of the people you deem ''lesser'' than yourself and a prospective employee by your standards
@@knuckles543now now Profit is a member of our organization and gets to have his opinion. Maybe it's just the 3 of us so his won't matter. But if we come up with a good socialist solution Grace's oversight committee will approve. Then we will know freedom.
Galbraith already wrote about the industrial state some 60 plus years ago.The symbiotic relationship between state power and capital is there from the beginning.
Thank you Aaron and Grace for this valuable discussion based on your new book. China's 'socialism with the market' is also well worth considering in the context of capitalism's contradictions. China is gradually distancing itself from capitalism in order to embody a genuinely alternative path for humanity. According to Chinese leaders, borrowing from capitalism has been no more than a way of “crossing the river,” and will never be more than a long “detour” in the socialist transition on the road to communism.
It’s great that Aaron refences Anarcho Syndicalism at 51:50 when talking about the failings of some trade unions. However Anarcho Syndicalim is more than just member run trade unions: neither Grace or Aaron make reference to the fact that many of the topics they are discussing are actually the basic tenets of Anarcho Sydicalism. I have ordered the book on the strength of the interview and am looking to reading it.
Capitalism is primarily based on distorted mindsets: it pathologises its own structural shortcomings as if they were isolated issues of the individual whilst distorting the meaning of individual differences until they're utilised to justify decontextualised and/or misplaced hierarchies. Seeing Grace explaining why those distortions are indeed distortions is always a pleasure, she's straight to the point, just let her talk you out of the mud and into actual adulthood.
@@musiqtee Please use it wherever and as much as you will then, just keep it as off from copyrights and distortions as the philosophy of the common good should be... This kind of paragraph is just as gold as it can stick to its purpose (:
@@janlaag I “am” that dichotomy… 40 y in music industry, including hearings for copyright law. Being snubbed, snubbing others, getting sick from that and realising I’m fine - The sickness is capitalism, not me… Thanks, I’m mentally unable to carry the burden of furthering that distortion… :)
So good to listen to Aaron and Grace's progressive discussions. Just want to add here, Rutger Bregman suggests in his book Humankind, A Hopeful History, that the Communist principle exists within the excellent running of a household and of the workplace. This fills with infinite hope that we will find the collective power to pull away from what appears now to be the archaic untethered neo liberal system.
I love how these people are so good a pointing out the most fundamental flaws of government and central planning, but then just falsely attribute these flaws to capitalism. So much effort put into identifying bad results, zero effort into explaining the why.
Omg, that is true. People that haven't lived in socialist country even one day talking how good it would be, and not saying that every single time it goes to communism, authoritarianism and terror. No, no, omg, no.
Yes, communism is the boogeyman that is used to instill fear in capitalist societies. What we need is alternatives to both..... Also it isn't communism that is the source of global warming ... it is the endless growth and consumption that is baked into capitalism
Regarding innovation...a huge majority of American innovation was based on massive government intervention. From direct financing to funding research universities. Its public money for private profit
"American innovation" is just a glorified term for plagiarism of German aesthetics, Japanese ideas, and global technology. E.g. Apple copied Braun's designs, Japanese phone functionality, Polaroid's hype. TSMC got kidnapped, and (Chinese) TikTok is in the process of being stolen by the US lol.
Not so. Most of our greatest inventions were created by individuals in their garage. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, radio, television, the airplane, etc. etc. Mostly the government just got in their way.
I always found one of the ugliest lies peddled by the right, by the free market disciples is the so called "freedom of choice". This lie is meant to appeal to people's innate fear of losing out. Based on the inane assumption that the players in a free market are not first and foremost preoccupied with making money. Of course, as most people know, the fear of losing out is the key ingredience of aggressive marketing.
@@jbob34345we don't have a say on what goes onto the shelf, we can only choose out of the products that are made available to us. There's no voting, not with the ""dollar", although libertarians and Neoliberals love to talk about that because they are terrified of letting people have meaningful choice at the ballot box
Agree and agree. They are all over the place. The Establishment/ancap fanboys/Atlas network ideologues must feel threatened by the powerful analysis, ideas and solutions that Novara, and here, specifically, Grace, are disseminating. They know they cannot win a fair open discussion or argument and like some unipolar hegemon that we won't name resorts to kneecapping any competition (e.g. Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, Indonesia, Russia, now China, and the list goes on and on) to stay number one. For an ideology that touts choice as a its key benefit it sure does a lot of choice/competition suppression... And Adam Smith saw this, as reflected in his many references to "monopoly" (a.k.a. no choice).
I studied Social Sciences in the nineties and nothing has changed in regards to system theory (Luhmann) or freedom of discussion (Habermas et.al.) or punishment (Lagasnerie) and many other things. But, this lass and many others her age and even younger people have my full! trust. I simply know, they will right the wrongs and bring together what has been, wrongly, separated. Love to this her being smart, eloquent and verbose.
40:00 even if you believed in entrepreneur exceptionalism, you'd have to prefer a system that enables as many as possible to recognise their potential. That can't be one that invests power & influence in an existing minority "elite".
I've got an offer to study Engineering at Cambridge, and Grace's arguments about empowering workers make far more sense to me than any idea that Engineers are more intelligent than the average worker or trade union. Aaron's train signalling problems could be solved far more quickly by the RMT if they had the power to, than by BAE systems.
We shouldn't even put a label on it. Just work on what's optimal and graduate from a very, very, very flawed democracy that we (USA) are ; to a full democracy ... Half of America doesn't understand and or care about socialism although we have socialist type programs and have ALWAYS had them... People need to be educated before You can label anything Socialism or what ever else. 😅
FREE MARKET: Refer Hudson's " J is for JUNK ECONOMICS " is the opposite of FREE. But free to exploit your fellow countrymen with overpriced services because you control a vital resource which once was publically owned and provided at cost or even really free. But is now used for rent extraction by extraction of profit on top and shareholder dividends and is not reinvested in such as water services: A rentier economy.
We once had the " mixed economy " and that worked really well. The essential services and goods for a healthy economy and society were controlled by the people the rest private economy could do as it wished governed by rules and regs.
I agree..... Wealth automatically prevents someone else's freedom to some extent. In techno feudalism, we have very little freedom. We are just wealth generating pawns for our overlords
"Hi I'm 27 years old and I've never had a job or do anything as an adult but be in college. Luckily for all of us I've figured out the world when I was getting high in the basement."
I had a brief conversation with a green councillor recently about proportional representation. He was guardedly supportive citing the risk that it would let right wing representation in as well. I am a great believer in Grace's trust in people. Diversity of opinion is a strength. Testing that opinion in discussion with others is how we develop our thinking and achieve meaningful progress. In the end there is an innate goodness in people which if allowed to will direct their decision making. What gets in the way of this is poverty and being shut out of decision making. This is what gives fascism a voice.
No one talks about how our society has now entered CLASS MONOPOLY. As monopoly is exclusion of competitors based upon a competitive advantage yielded by scale or State. Now the entire CLASS of rentiers or Owners have placed all other classes into noncompetitive state through the direct control of capital itself... CLASS MONOPOLY
💯% Absolutely correct. And don't forget the Capitalism/donor class capture of the people's monopoly too (i.e. government, monopoly over law/violence). Capitalism now wielding this powerful tool in its own self-interests (e.g. no Corporate tax/offshoring, privatisation, money-printing, endless wars, elimination of competition through regulation, sanctions and regime change or whole of country destruction (e.g. Libya, Syria, Gaza)).
No democratisation without education. William Edward Deming is to be studied and understood. Democracy means "rule by the people". We should consider that the decisions that need to be made are to that people's needs, without necessarily requiring their work of decision making.
The part about the Welsh city seems odd. I live in a small town, and I'd love to do projects, like say build a hydroelectric dam or massive solar farm. We have the tractors and know how to do it. The problem is, there is no way in hell we'd be allowed to do it. And even if you were, if you were forced to buy the land there is no way the cost to do the project would be feasible. How is that little Welsh city getting around the legal structures to actually be allowed to do things that serve their local community? Here in Canada the vast majority of that would be illegal. I agree that people should fix local problems, and it's not that we haven't thought of doing that... we're just not allowed to. 🤷♂️
@@antediluvianatheist5262 well that's what I mean... How did Wales do it? In my province in Canada the electric companies would be all over you for creating any sort of power station, it would be absolutely impossible
@@AlexWilkinsonYYC The Welsh Govt. is actively promoting community hydro projects to help meet its net zero goals. It often provides grants or business rate relief to help these projects. I couldn't quite make it out but I think the town she referred to is Blaenau Ffestiniog. I've found a few articles online about various community initiatives there (e.g. on ITV News, WalesOnline), but none that mention hydro power. The Community Energy Wales website talks about various community driven renewable energy projects (e.g. YnNi Teg Cyfyngedig (Fair Energy ltd)) but those are all over North Wales. I couldn't find anything specific to Blaenau Ffestiniog. Hopefully that's a good starting point for your own research.
We all know we live in a rigged system. They don't want ordinary people to have power or to be able to create their own solutions. Thats why we need system change. So that the people are empowered to improve their own lives and their own areas and situations.
Engineers vs Managers: I thought that Grace's response to Aaron's point about Managers was a good one, where she brought up 'Innovation' which she tied to her argument about Freedom. I could feel myself approaching the comments for feedback before she said that. I think that broadly she makes a very good response. Firstly, I haven't been employed for 20 years, but I did study Engineering at Uni. I think, from an Engineering perspective, the way I would frame it would be in terms of Manufacturing vs Products (which I think basically Grace does) rather than Engineers vs Managers the way Aaron posed the question. Or even Manufacturing vs Products like Parents vs Children (to relate it to the last interview with Galloway). For example, a company like Ford and the Managers working within it would place a lot more emphasis on Innovation in the Manufacturing process over Innovation of the Products (Cars) they make - a good example would be in reducing the amount of components they use to make their Cars. So here you could have a hugely 'Innovative' system of repression (as Grace describes) essentially in the way Ford controls the Manufacturing process, making a product that isn't very Innovative (maybe it doesn't push the boundaries of what is possible with Electric Vehicles for example). However, where this gets complicated is when the Technological Innovations in Manufacturing then start to be used in the Products themselves (on one level they'll be cheaper) - the ultimate example would be futuristic Food Replicators (with infinite menu possibilities) or Transporters where the Manufacture and the Product become one and the same entity. But I guess Grace would say here that, despite the infinite possibilities available, everyone would just end up eating Gruel, and maybe she would also say that when you get Transported and turned into a data stream you would actually be killed. Is the structure of our world an inevitable consequence of our connected world though? - to the extent it doesn't matter if we try to make it bottom up rather than top down, it won't change the structure itself? I've taken an interest in the coin flipping game 'winner takes it all' - its a very capitalist way of viewing the world, and the 'winner takes it all' only happens when you have an Authoritarian (knock out rounds) structure to the game where you're only allowed to play two people against each other at a time. Allow everyone to play at once and you'd never get 'winner takes it all' (purely due to probability). The world we have is where some people are allowed to play against more people than others - richer people can play against more people than poorer people can, and so poorer people have worse odds than richer people... So this is either rigged or extremely unlikely.
I highly recommend The Mystery of Capital, by Hernando de Soto if you REALLY want to understand what capital is, and what capitalism is all about. Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto is advising heads of state on how to reform their legal system in order to give poor people access to property rights. I'm not against what Blakely is proposing, as I certainly like what Richard Wolfe says about worker coops, but I think there is room for BOTH kinds of organizations: the hierchical, meritocratic kind (of which SpaceX is an example) and the worker coop kind that she's proposing.
it's like, why can't we buy a house that we live in for our entire lives? why we have to buy a 'starter house' and move and move again, and again. each time it costs 10k in fees and tax... Just another way we get ripped off. the way we live is so in-efficient, unless you're born into wealth though of course.
Maybe find some one that wants to swap houses. In USA you can do that. Pay off your mortgage and quit claim your properties. That's freedom. Oh... you took a mortgage. That's freedom too. Sorry freedom has consequences.
Im reading her book now. It’s really good, filled with real world cases and damning evidence against the form of capitalism that is applauded today. I’m sure she’ll tackle this later in the book, but my question is how can we give more power to the people when governments and corporations are and have been in bed together for such a long time now? I would love to see a world where social democracy exists, but can we really achieve it?
So glad this wasn't a circle jerk and Aaron pushed back on ideas. If I could buy a budget EV Porsche with a 700 mile range, sounds good. I suppose that's why they're gonna stick 100% "free market" tariffs on them! 😅
Due to resourcing issues, I went without a line manager for six months last year. It was brilliant, I could make decisions faster, innovate and pursue avenues of learning without challenge, taking responsibility for my own workload and training. And I felt less stressed.
If investigative media ever had a grand subject, it would be closely following the post death details of 2 Boeing whistleblowers ...the truth and the burden of ethical responsibility rests on the shoulders of potential crime scene professionals...are they doing their job? Or does Boeing have that figured out as well? Does anyone care?
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 *🔥 Individualism is undermining our ability to demand change through collective action* - Individualism is the foundation of the idea that society is divided into rulers and the ruled. 00:41 *🌐 The myth of free markets and free people* - We are told we live in a free market system where people are free, but this is a false dichotomy. 01:24 *🤝 Challenging the free market vs. central planning narrative* - The author aims to challenge the common narrative that free markets are inherently more free than centrally planned economies. 02:22 *📚 The author's new book "Vulture Capitalism"* - The book is a compilation of anecdotes and real-world examples that support the author's theoretical arguments. 04:01 *🏦 The pandemic and the illusion of socialism* - During the pandemic, governments and central banks rushed to bail out large corporations, leading some to claim we were seeing a shift towards socialism. 06:05 *🌍 Reconsidering the free market vs. central planning dichotomy* - The author challenges the common dichotomy between free market capitalist societies and centrally planned socialist societies. 07:26 *📱 Extending the analysis to social media* - The author draws parallels between the centralized planning within the economy and the surveillance and control exercised by social media companies. 08:36 *🏛️ The origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy* - The author traces the origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy to the legacy of the Cold War and the debates between Keynesians and Hayekians. 11:50 *🏢 Applying Hayek's arguments to corporate power* - The author argues that Hayek's critiques of centralized planning could also be applied to the power of large, monopolistic corporations and financial institutions. 13:53 *🏪 The decline of the high street and the rise of monopolistic power* - The author uses the example of the high street to illustrate the decline of small and medium-sized enterprises in the face of concentrated corporate power. 00:00 *🔥 Individualism undermines collective action for change* - Individualism is the foundation of the idea that society is divided into rulers and the ruled. 00:41 *🌐 The myth of free markets and free people* - We are told we live in a free market system where people are free, but this is a false dichotomy. 01:24 *🤝 Challenging the free market vs. central planning narrative* - The author aims to challenge the common narrative that free markets are inherently more free than centrally planned economies. 02:22 *📚 The author's new book "Vulture Capitalism"* - The book is a compilation of anecdotes and real-world examples that support the author's theoretical arguments. 04:01 *🏦 The pandemic and the illusion of socialism* - During the pandemic, governments and central banks rushed to bail out large corporations, leading some to claim we were seeing a shift towards socialism. 06:05 *🌍 Reconsidering the free market vs. central planning dichotomy* - The author challenges the common dichotomy between free market capitalist societies and centrally planned socialist societies. 07:26 *📱 Extending the analysis to social media* - The author draws parallels between the centralized planning within the economy and the surveillance and control exercised by social media companies. 08:36 *🏛️ The origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy* - The author traces the origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy to the legacy of the Cold War and the debates between Keynesians and Hayekians. 11:50 *🏢 Applying Hayek's arguments to corporate power* - The author argues that Hayek's critiques of centralized planning could also be applied to the power of large, monopolistic corporations and financial institutions. 13:53 *🏪 The decline of the high street and the rise of monopolistic power* - The author uses the example of the high street to illustrate the decline of small and medium-sized enterprises in the face of concentrated corporate power. 20:52 *🛫 The case of Boeing and the limits of state regulation* - The author uses the example of Boeing and its scandals to illustrate how the state's ability to regulate powerful corporations is limited by the deep connections between the state and corporate interests. 25:12 *💼 The case of Henry Ford and the evolution of corporate planning* - The author examines the history of the Ford Motor Company to illustrate how planning has evolved within capitalist systems. 36:09 *🔍 Reassessing the role of planning in capitalism* - The author argues that planning has always been a fundamental aspect of capitalism, challenging the idea that it is limited to centralized, state-led models. 00:00 *🔥 Individualism undermines collective action for change* - Individualism is the foundation of the idea that society is divided into rulers and the ruled. 00:41 *🌐 The myth of free markets and free people* - We are told we live in a free market system where people are free, but this is a false dichotomy. 01:24 *🤝 Challenging the free market vs. central planning narrative* - The author aims to challenge the common narrative that free markets are inherently more free than centrally planned economies. 02:22 *📚 The author's new book "Vulture Capitalism"* - The book is a compilation of anecdotes and real-world examples that support the author's theoretical arguments. 04:01 *🏦 The pandemic and the illusion of socialism* - During the pandemic, governments and central banks rushed to bail out large corporations, leading some to claim we were seeing a shift towards socialism. 06:05 *🌍 Reconsidering the free market vs. central planning dichotomy* - The author challenges the common dichotomy between free market capitalist societies and centrally planned socialist societies. 07:26 *📱 Extending the analysis to social media* - The author draws parallels between the centralized planning within the economy and the surveillance and control exercised by social media companies. 08:36 *🏛️ The origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy* - The author traces the origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy to the legacy of the Cold War and the debates between Keynesians and Hayekians. 11:50 *🏢 Applying Hayek's arguments to corporate power* - The author argues that Hayek's critiques of centralized planning could also be applied to the power of large, monopolistic corporations and financial institutions. 13:53 *🏪 The decline of the high street and the rise of monopolistic power* - The author uses the example of the high street to illustrate the decline of small and medium-sized enterprises in the face of concentrated corporate power. 20:52 *🛫 The case of Boeing and the limits of state regulation* - The author uses the example of Boeing and its scandals to illustrate how the state's ability to regulate powerful corporations is limited by the deep connections between the state and corporate interests. 41:56 *🚇 The potential of worker-led innovation and planning* - The author argues that workers often have the expertise and ability to collectively manage and innovate within their industries, challenging the notion that they need to be tightly controlled. 49:34 *🤝 Balancing worker self-management and broader democratic oversight* - The author acknowledges the need to balance worker self-management with broader democratic oversight and accountability, rather than simply handing complete control to workers in any given firm or industry. 57:44 *💪 Overcoming individualism and building collective power* - The author argues that individualism is a key barrier to demanding and achieving systemic change, as it undermines our ability to organize collectively. 01:00:02 *🌍 Critiquing the decline of engineering culture in the West and the rise of China* - The author acknowledges the concerns about the perceived decline of engineering culture and problem-solving in the West, exemplified by examples like the film "Bridge Over the River Kwai." 01:01:09 *🤔 Defining freedom and the potential role of the state* - The author challenges the simplistic notion of freedom as the absence of external constraints, arguing that true freedom is more complex and multifaceted. 01:01:36 *🗽 Redefining freedom beyond just the absence of constraints* - The author challenges the narrow definition of freedom as simply the absence of external constraints. 01:03:27 *🤔 Skepticism about the potential for Labor government reforms* - The author is not particularly optimistic about a Labor government's ability to enact significant macroeconomic changes. 01:06:10 *🤝 Reconciling the tensions between different groups' notions of freedom* - The author acknowledges the potential for conflicts between different groups' understandings of freedom, such as the desire for lower immigration among some right-wing voters. 01:08:29 *🌟 Optimism for the future based on people's capacity for collective action* Made with HARPA AI
increasingly it is "work *_and_* starve" (a.k.a. the "working poor"). Capitalism opens up choices, but later starts closing them down - ending in Totalitarianism.
Amazing stuff. I am really worried now that the much used analogy of Starmerite Labour and the Tories being " two cheeks of the same arse" is maybe quite accurate! Help! I really enjoyed this and thanks for presenting so much food for thought.
Liked her giving the Blairite Lisa Nandy on Question Time a smack down for stealing Jeremy Corbyn's policy of taking the railways back in to public ownership!
Thats more of an argument that favors Nandy. Grace said it was an empty manifesto. Nandy pointed out, taking rail back into public ownership, which was also in the 2019 manifesto.
Always a great guest and I have her book on my birthday wish list. Community Interest Groups (CIGs) are definitely a great way to take back some control at a local level. If you get a chance to join or support a CIG do so with both hands....and if you're lucky enough to be able to financially support CIGs that's a great move also. Loving the new geeky student look Grace!
Good, someone with healthcare, a corporate job, good insurance and a state education is now telling me that I'm screwed and dependent on the system -- look in a mirror. Publishing a book by the way of mass production, media, ISBN, etc. -- but capitalism bad, wild.
I bet the corporate/governmental administrative elites are really worried by conversations like this; yeah right! Students and liberal elites have been talk-festing just so for decade upon decade. As a commentator below in the youtube comments remarks "When injustice becomes law, Resistance becomes duty". The latter is the only right comment in the face of the uniparty regimes in the UK, USA, NZ.
Yes, but we need *_more than_* just resistance. We need to move *forward* to a system of justice. This is why the work of people such as Grace is so important. The Resistance in WWII France was great and necessary, but it only _meant something_ within a larger plan for the *liberation* of Europe. D-Day was required. Today we need to continue to resist, but we need the larger context of a way forward to liberation from the unfreedoms of the current system.
They want you broke, fearful, helpless, fighting, dumb and ignorant. The system takes from hard working people and gives to the greedy, corrupt liars. Stand up, find your voice and fight back.
gives to lazy people or poltical class steal it for there own intrest taxes is theft
You left out isolated. That is the key aspect to it all.
@stevenredpath9332 that was exactly what I was going to say...
Now you know what Black people have been dealing with. How does it feel?
'the system' is the key. Free market capitalism is a system. Marxist critique is philosophy. The UK has a vestige of feudalism. How does a system come about and what system will displace capitalism in an era of climate catastrophe, mass migration, AI and robotics. The concept of the working class will likely disappear. What are we if we aren't slave, serf or employee?
‘Workers in a sector, that have expertise in that sector, do not need to be managed’. I completely agree. I started work at a large media organisation in the late ‘80s and had one person between me and director level. When I left there were seven people. Managers managing managers made no sense and made my job a ball ache.
Interesting. See on my side in tech, project managers are priceless. They facilitate communication between vastly different teams and views. We've worked a lot with teams that have flat hierarchy structures, and it's a mess. No decision can be made without full attendance, there's never full attendance. Professionals are often placed on the same level as amateurs on a particular topic. It also breeds a very clique attitude to work, where politics are rife and mob rule becomes a huge issue. I truly beleive management is a true skill, but it's based on communication and empathy, rather than force and position. Think of leaders over bosses.
What do you think about all this? Very different experiences.
You just rattled off the usual excuses for hierarchical systems, "I believe," the same as John Locke, !😮😅😊
In my current job I do have managers but they are very hands off with us. They have the attitude that it is their role to enable us to produce value and that's what they spend most of their time doing. I reach out and contact my manager probably two or three times more often than he contacts me. They only care about the quality and quantity of our productivity. We are judged solely on the job performance rather than on our ability to make ourselves look busy. We've gotten a couple employees over the years that did take advantage of this paradigm but they were pretty easy to spot and get rid of in their first 90 days. For most of us this has been very a effective way of cultivating a workforce that takes pride in their work.
From what I see, the problem is not about the need of hierarchy or not, but about the autonomy of workers when given a certain task.
That is why I trust in a system akin to SF military for work manageament - yes, there is hierarchy, but the hierarchy is defined not by politics, but by competence, and while there is defined timetables and objectives, HOW said things can be achieved is left on the hands of the people in the "field".
And as a Marxist, I don't know if this is contradictory, but at least is efficient.
Working for a blue chip company it was interesting that managers were categorised as overheads and operators as assets.
I've worked in engineering and research, and often times the projects I worked on were disrupted or sabotaged by management. Management was always the disruption in progress.
OMG. Any innovation that disrupted the office political hierarchies were always deep sixed, sometimes by sabotage or by literally destroying people's reputations, health, and careers. And on a larger scale, corruption in government, Brexit, and things like the TTIP negotiations, where the US bribed EU Commission functionaries to try and push through a treaty which would have ripped off EU taxpayers (Which the Tories supported, because it would have driven through NHS privatisation). The timely failure off precipitate American oligarchs persuading British Oligarchs that Brexit was necessary, is Techno feudalism writ large on the Global system. Nevermind the absurdities they try to make us believe, so that they can perpetrate atrocities on us and others pursuit of profit. No wonder the global economy is like an overripe fruit, slowly rotting and breaking down as the capitalist global central planning is failing to keep ordinary people healthy, happy, and fed everywhere.
Seagulls?
Chess Playing Pigeons:
They swoop in,
knock over all the pieces,
shit all over the board,
then stomp about like they've won the game
Interested to hear some examples, and WHY you think that happens - would it not be in the interests of management to have successful projects?
@@browncow7113only tangentially. Managers need credit for success, not actual success. Thus they obsess over statistics they can present as achievements.
And above all, they need to shift the blame for any failures downwards, even if they theoretically get paid more to accept responsibility.
Mark Twain - 'If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.'
While I agree democracy isn't perfect I would reverse that statement and say if voting didn't have the potential to make a difference authoritarians wouldn't work so hard to take it away from us. The right to vote wasn't handed down to us by benevolent elites. It's not something they 'let' us do. Mass movements fought for it over centuries, opposed every step of the way by wealthy conservative interests.
“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal,” is a famous quote by Emma Goldman, a Russian-born US political activist, anarchist and writer (1869-1940).
@@coreyc1685 just because people fought for a scenario where they get a imagined democracy doesn't change the reality of it being a placebo.
Cool it with the anti-Semitic remarks.
@@Stoddardiando you get paid to troll or is this something you do as an individualist in your free time?
"When injustice becomes law, Resistance becomes duty"
This country was built on hypocrisy. It’s was never based on justice, only domination.
🇺🇲⌚️
💯 Free Free Free Palestine 🇵🇸
Anymore clichés??😂
@@sufmeister786 mind control
Boeing made $60 Billion in stock buy backs rather than develop safety, better pay, or a new plane. . . ..
And you would be freer to choose other options if the regulators were not so captured by the industry, and vice versa.
The ills of corporatism and financial deregulation.
Yet peter schiff the lying jew claims capitalism is good and enriches us all!
Lok describe the purpose of a stock buy back? Shall we all just do away with stocks, or ownership in general 😂
Or paying back the tax subsidy they were given.
Grace is so fantastic, I could listen to her all day. She speaks about complex topics in an understandable way and does a good job at joining separate concepts and logical arguments together. I've put her book on my reading list!
I had never heard of her until today. I have been listening all day.
She oversimplifies complex systems. Moreover she appears to believe that she both understands complex systems and that indeed they really are not even such things as complex systems or that they are competing with each other knowingly or unknowingly).
Corporations, even those run by workers, will pursue profit. They too will engage in the same tactics that capitalists do. As she notes, this will require other layers of democracy; essentially other people managing them. And she explains that those managers themselves will also require layers of democracy ( more management). On and on, up and up, until as she discusses and writes in her book, some group of world leaders also make a democratic choice and that this choice is a acceptable to all parties involved even though they had little say at these highest levels.
It’s all just management with people making choices and putting interests of others of interests of some other others with a belief that all these layers are acting in the best interest f he entirety of humanity as if we could even agree on what the “best interest” is.
@@vinegarpisser2992with that I'm thinking ... I better watch this whole thing as opposition research.
@@vinegarpisser2992I'll follow that up with... your names sounds painful. 😂😅
I wonder did you read the book or you're outlining her whole philosophy based an hour long video, which I'm pretty sure you viewed rather pessimistically.
You make the assumption about any corporation that is run workers would also pursue profit. I'm sure your argument is based on a logical fallacy and you offer no proof to support this argument, then you use that argument to pontificate and prove your point. Your argument boils down to a disagreement with her worldview and you not being properly equipped to debate it. The irony lies in the fact you state she doesn't understand complex systems but you don't even understand the point she was making. 😕
00:03 Individualism hampers collective organization
02:13 Exploring the impact of capitalism on freedom
06:12 Capitalism is a hybrid system with centralized planning
08:09 Debate between state command economy and free market capitalism
12:06 Neoliberal ideology fails to address concentration of power in big monopolistic institutions.
14:09 Capitalism promotes monopolies and concentrates economic power
17:55 Boeing's lack of regulation and corporate welfare showcase the flawed competitive market
19:42 Corruption and lobbying in American state intertwines with big corporations.
23:19 Boeing's cultural shift under Harry Stonecipher's leadership
25:20 Corporate Titans mismanagement and destruction of iconic American companies
28:46 Henry Ford's authoritarian control over workers and expansion into the Brazilian Amazon
30:32 Ford's Imperial Ambitions and the shift in power dynamics
34:04 Neoliberalism empowers capitalists in planning decisions
35:56 Capitalism promotes planned economies for business success
39:34 Capitalism creates a false dichotomy between entrepreneurs and workers.
41:17 Lucas plan transformed manufacturing towards socially useful technologies
44:38 Workers with expertise can self-manage under Democratic control.
46:17 Democratic socialism decentralizes and democratizes power.
49:41 Qualified individuals should have more power in budget allocation.
51:16 Trade unions can prioritize self-interest over members' interests
54:32 Empower society to make collective decisions on technology
56:08 Democratization of the international economy through policy shifts
59:39 Capitalism's impact on cultural decline and potential critique of China
1:01:22 Capitalism constrains freedom by imposing external constraints on individuals
1:04:43 Losing political agency to enlightened bureaucrats can lead to resentment and push towards far-right ideologies.
1:06:19 Decentralized decision-making leads to more progressive policy outcomes.
Crafted by Merlin AI.
Thank you robot!
@@neighbor9672 I'm a man! 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭
@@carpediemcotidiem it says crafted by Merlin AI! Don’t take credit where robots did the work broski
@@neighbor9672 I'm not your broski pal ;)
Aaron went down a really weird hole in the 2nd half of this. Essentially claiming that there are individuals so brilliant they have single handedly created their own billion dollar companies.
But they haven't. The innovations within those companies, the manufacturing power, the systems and processes - they are all created by hundreds of people. The owner/ceo just had the money to pay to find those solutions.
The owner/ceo doesn't have any of the intelligence or knowledge to do that. They're just the owner. They just have the money to pay someone else to be intelligent.
Sure. Management is a thing. But it's no more skilled than a social worker. And CEO's/shareholders don't manage. They pay other people to manage. They pay other people to understand aspects of the company and to report their recommendations.
Don't forget, that money that Owner/ CEO/ Entrepreneur is using. Is probably someone else's. So even with all of their brilliance they still needed someone else's help. Which again undercut's this ridiculous notion of rugged individualism.
@@ahguitar1 I think Aaron is thinking ahead to when he is CEO of Novarra multinational conglomerate....
The average middle management and average Social worker do not have equal skill sets. And small (4 ppl) to larger (500+) businesses are built on hiring ppl to do the task as owner you don’t have the time for or not expert in. Accounting, plumbing and the list goes on.
Sure but if you think about the things in the last century that have made life better its internet, cheap computers and cheap food. The point isn't that the people single handedly made a company. The point is that the free market and greed allowed the investments to make this happen. If it was a central source that tried to make things fair it would just be a ration system of what already existed and nobody would be full. Not because central planning or decentralized planning is bad. Because decentralized planning can coexist with some freak visionary type founder. But it would be weird to plan for a society and also predict that everyone would have a computer. That is a smaller bet that an individual/ group of individuals should take. And then they got rewarded for it. Hating on gambling seems to be a religious thing.
@@kingcuckoo Just no, really.
Invention and progression moved along just fine before capitalism.
Over the last 20+ years we've seen an absolute stagnation of invention. The screen size in my pocket doesn't matter. A billionaire sending themselves into space doesn't matter. All of our housing is still 100 years old. We're still burning dirty fuel.
The internet, which you've chosen as an example, wasn't created by some capitalist entity or a Musk like owner.
Food isn't cheap right now is it? Why do we have so many foodbanks now?
Food is not healthier than during WW2 either.
The rest of what you've said is so far fetched and unattached it's not really possible to respond.
Ah I love Grace. We’re so lucky to have this smart woman fighting for us 🫶🏻
Dear Grace,
I recently came across your book titled "Vulture Capitalism," wherein you make claims that, while not new, strike at the heart of a contentious issue. The term "vulture capitalism" itself carries connotations of contempt, depicting a system where individuals prey upon or exploit others for personal gain.
It's worth considering the perspectives of notable figures in economic thought on this matter. Adam Smith, often hailed as the father of economics, notably identified self-interest, rather than benevolence, as the driving force behind market dynamics, a reflection of the cultural norms of his time. Economist Lord Maynard Keynes similarly characterized market behavior as being influenced by what he termed "animal spirits."
In contrast, economist Milton Friedman famously suggested that greed plays a significant role in driving market forces. Now, to confront your argument at its strongest point, let me pose two questions posed by Friedman himself, along with one of my own:
What kind of society isn't structured on greed? (Milton Friedman)
Is there some society you know of that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? (Milton Friedman)
Grace, why did you write "Vulture Capitalism"? The answer, according to your thesis, is greed.
These questions and reflections invite deeper consideration into the nature of capitalism and its underlying motivations.
Can you entertain that economic theory from social sciences that claims the global economy thrives on the premise of perceived self-interest, greed, or selfishness? Or perhaps you lean towards a term that offers a gentler interpretation for the sake of mental turmoil? While we grapple with this notion, it's crucial to acknowledge the undeniable role greed plays in shaping both human economies and governmental policies. I understand that it can be difficult for many to accept that governments, too, are greedy in their actions. Despite their efforts to conceal or justify this greed, it often remains visible for all to see.
It's natural for our ego developed in childhood to distance us from this characterization, perhaps placing ourselves low on the greed spectrum. However, the truth is far more nuanced. Each of us occupies a position on this spectrum, except for the very rare outlier with an extraordinary story that we would never hear. In our own unique ways, we engage in a subtle competition to satisfy our primal instincts. These deeply ingrained instincts have been skillfully obscured over time by the intricate web of societal norms, expectations, and constructs.
hm too much blah blah still
Grace is brilliant. I agree in any working place the shop floor will always be the place where innovation and improvements can be found. But it is also true that a good manager is vital and extremely rare and is always recognised by the shop floor workers .
This is an important point I think. You maybe box yourself into a bit of a corner if you try to get rid of managers and hierarchy. There are "collaborative" managers and there are dictatorial managers. Similarly there are cases where a hierarchy is just a necessary decision-making device, and other cases where it is a status game.
@browncow7113 the best management has support from below
Bad management has to be imposed from above
She really don't have a clue. Donald Trump is the working and middle classes only last hope in America. Back when that man was in office our groceries where affordable, housing was affordable, fuel was affordable, and we weren't involved in funding fools errand proxy wars/and west asian ethno states putting the world on the verge of ww3. He created Peace deals in the Middle east (Abraham accords)and withdrew or tried to withdraw troops out of Syria/Afghanistan. He did domestic Prison reform more than any Democrat ever did. And he had our economy BUMPING. BUT OOOH OH NOOO HE MADE MEAN TWEETS!!
@@browncow7113 Yes, it is an important point. And we shouldn't box ourselves into thinking that hierarchical management is the only way to do it. Or that all control should be vested in the management structure alone. Your acknowledgement of "collaborative" managers implies gathering viewpoints/input more widely, which is good, but still the sole decision-making power (i.e. control) vested in a single person (which might be good for simple accountability, but again, we shouldn't box ourselves in to just one model). We can be more innovative, more flexible, more contextual, in how we design decision-making processes. Objectifying or concentrating them in a single person is only *one* way to do it.
Yes, yes. And agree: Grace is brilliant!
Dear Grace,
I recently came across your book titled "Vulture Capitalism," wherein you make claims that, while not new, strike at the heart of a contentious issue. The term "vulture capitalism" itself carries connotations of contempt, depicting a system where individuals prey upon or exploit others for personal gain.
It's worth considering the perspectives of notable figures in economic thought on this matter. Adam Smith, often hailed as the father of economics, notably identified self-interest, rather than benevolence, as the driving force behind market dynamics, a reflection of the cultural norms of his time. Economist Lord Maynard Keynes similarly characterized market behavior as being influenced by what he termed "animal spirits."
In contrast, economist Milton Friedman famously suggested that greed plays a significant role in driving market forces. Now, to confront your argument at its strongest point, let me pose two questions posed by Friedman himself, along with one of my own:
What kind of society isn't structured on greed? (Milton Friedman)
Is there some society you know of that doesn't run on greed? You think Russia doesn't run on greed? You think China doesn't run on greed? What is greed? (Milton Friedman)
Grace, why did you write "Vulture Capitalism"? The answer, according to your thesis, is greed.
These questions and reflections invite deeper consideration into the nature of capitalism and its underlying motivations.
Thanks
Only fools believe that Billionaires get to be Billionaires by being honest, straightforward, trustworthy or supporting the interests of the common person. Admiring the rich, in the hope they will press for YOUR interests.
Whats Del and Rodney got todo with it.
@@KevenHutchinson-gt1nn Trotters Independent Traders only became millionaires (made millions selling a rare timepiece originally dismissed as junk) and celebrated it in The Nag’s Head, so they were good. 😎 That was a good one...I didn't even think of "Only Fools" when writing it in the first place. 🎯
Privatise the gains, socialise the losses: Capitalism in a nutshell.
It's brilliant though. All you can do about it is whine like a resentful peasant.
@Stoddardian this is techno feudalism, so they let the peasants be keyboard warriors...
Nonetheless, our power to stop this is nonexistent if we can't work together
@@Stoddardian not any more brilliant than a robber its just immoral
Isn’t that corporatism really?
@@SuperZorgus capitalism is pretty much set to become corporatism and imperialism.
And apparently, leading back into feudalism, which is essentially where we're at
A debate between Grace and Liz Truss would be cruel. Grace´s perspective on history is illuminating. Great guest.
To be sure, even a head of lettuce would lose such a debate; but, the head of lettuce would still last longer than would Truss. Then again, we already know that from the latter’s tenure as prime minister.
Ex workers will not fly on a Boeing plan.
That's a staggering piece of information
i mean that's down to capitalistic shortcuts in maintenance and upkeep, cutting corners and low priced parts
any pilot; no matter how skilled, cannot fly a plane set up to break mid-flight
it is gross negligence via economic greed, not ''DEI'' like some nutcases and swivel-eyed loons want to pretend it is; their way to defend that failing model of upkeep
@@knuckles543Diversity Equity and Inclusion?
@@knuckles543 thank you!
@@knuckles543 DEI= 1970's quota system.
I wont go Boeing anymore ... maybe dire emergency
Good someone else is finally saying this; ive been marginalized all my life as socially maladapted for voicing these realities.
So do something different. Make different choices. Only you are stopping you, not the system.
Firsts sentence out of her mouth and that’s what I have been trying to articulate for SUCH A LONG TIME!!!!!!!! That was so succinct!! I’ve known that since I was a child, but I never had the words for it.
Grace always has an amazing view point
Yes amazing, and totally daft;
An 'Individual' and sees herself as one. Which is Ok IMO.
@@tomasstride9590 I bet you have very clean windows at home.
BIG fan of Grace, looking forward to this… Go on girl….
I think he isn’t understanding her critique on the entrepreneur genius leader. Yes they can problem solve and innovate to create new material progress for people. However, they are often not interested in the quality of lives of their actual workers and what sacrifices they are making for their employee. In Kant words they are of the ‘end justifies the means’ philosophy, not caring how things get done, just that they meet the deadline. Capitalism often denies the Buddhism truism of all we have is now, if we are working in bad conditions we are being robbed of life. Humans aren’t lazy to want a life that is balanced. As a teacher I see how overworked parents are, meaning they spend less time with their family. There is much more to life that just work and work should have a sense of dignity and humanity not just a focus on efficiency.
As the son of a teacher, I agree with you. I saw how overworked my dad was as a teacher. Granted, it was not the teaching in itself which caused that. Rather, it was the fact that ‘teachers don’t enter the profession for the money’, as the saying goes, (although he had to go fifteen rounds with the Board of Education on needed improvements to his classroom, the type of which only the Board could approve-improvements which weren’t even made until after he was forced to retire following the doctor’s ultimatum in the aftermath of his second heart attack) and he was there while raising a young and growing family during a time of double-digit inflation at the peak of the energy crisis. Consequently, he had to work a second job three nights per week and catering jobs on weekends. The result was three heart attacks within one week shy of ten years of each other (1984-94), the third of which claimed him at only fifty.
The difference between a smart worker and an entrepreneur? Access to capital. THAT'S IT.
That, and personality.
@@TueLesPigeonsthat's hard to actually say. If the worker had access to capital then THEY would likely be more willing to take the type of "risks" inherent in entrepreneurship..
Unfreedom... Good concept to capture contemporary illusory senses of freedom
Not sure I've ever disagreed more with Aaron's points than I have during this episode. Chiefly on managers: my brother, you're giving managers far too much credit, particularly middle management if you think this isn't an easily replaced group; most of these people take a business course that detaches them from reality and fluffs their ego until they simply make bad decisions confidently. Agree wholeheartedly with Grace's final point: power and autonomy for everyone is in and of itself a positive for the individual and society.
Exactly, and America specifically is by some estimates the most managerialized society on earth, with more people with the term “manager” in their occupational title than any other nation. It’s a structure that breeds toxicity, jealous intrigue, incompetence and exploitation, I’ve seen it in so many places I’ve worked.
Totally agree ! I really can't be done with Aaron or Grace whatsherface (does that girl ever stop to take a breath !?) A find them both rather contradictory and somewhat hypocritical
As long as they use that power and autonomy to benefit other people we will as yourself, otherwise you're a sociopath...
@@letsRegulateSociopathsBenefitting other people is the whole idea of Grace’s argument. Unfortunately, what we have now is indeed sociopathy-the sociopathy of the billionaire class.
What a brilliant interview!!!!!! My God that was good. I am ordering the book and definitely following Grace’s work. She articulated in so many ways things I’ve believe but have not been able to express. I learned so much and am in total agreement with her about management. Thanks Novara
Grace is refreshing on a Monday morning. Great interview.
Just discovered Grace Blakely.
Agree or disagree, one gains IQ points just by listening to her.
Capitalism for the poor; socialism for the rich. Very sad but very true, unfortunately.
more they have their cake and eat it to,they have both or the boot would of came down its we have socialism.And corporate wellfare has been on the uptick since the early 70s or way before
It's more like socialism for the super rich and select poor, unbridled capitalism for the working poor, middle class, and even the majority of the upper class.
interesting comment
Finished reading Vulture Capitalism not 10 minutes ago and this video drops! Moving forward with not just a clearer understanding of the world, but also how to change it!
Interesting. Do you realize that the "capitalism" to which words are attached is no longer "capitalism"?
Also whatever an economic system turns out to be it is determined by the FORCE of the government in POWER.
Finally, in those systems where those in POWER use FORCE, if there is not an equally opposing FORCE
that can counter-act it, those without POWER are by definition "powerless"!
All else is distraction.
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH; it's just not the strength of the ignorant.
Socialism is the ultimate democracy. It extends down to community level, commune-ism. If everyone has the same means we can all have the same freedoms.
Capitalism is only freedom if you have the money to be free: live rent free, have money to decide if you work or not, travel if you want. Not only capitalism but also our debt based monetary system were spending 30% of our labour paying the interest on all the money that's ever been created in this system. For the USA it's about a trillion $ a year!
Socialism, communism, and democracy are all the same thing, voting for free stuff from the public Treasury.
The UK has a top heavy government model with the office of the PM being at the top of the hierarchy. We need to take power from the establishment and into our communities.
You need to do more than that. You need to stop believing absurdities before you stop the atrocities being carried out on you and others. You need to move from blame to accountability, and recognise that here is no free lunch. Unless you do, nothing will change.
British PMs don't inherit the job from their parents or family. That is a QI 27 comment.
another great adult discussion and conversation covering lots of issues. If only the world of politics could be like this.
Collectivism requires various things one of which is time, the most underrated asset, the asset which truly exemplifies freedom - which is increasingly being taken from us. For example our own admin which is ballooning, counter intuitively, with the increasing reliance on the internet. Business, or government, has moved their admin on to us under the guise of making things cheaper, or more empowering, when in reality is only making their profits greater and their control easier. In effect we are all now doing their admin for them for free, whilst at the same time giving away our freedom.
💯% Absolutely true!! Yet more cost, profit and risk shifting.
“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal,” is a famous quote by Emma Goldman, a Russian-born US political activist, anarchist and writer (1869-1940).
Legal weed, gay marriage 🤷♂️
They made it illegal in socialist countries.
@@papunacrxboth never should have been illegal, hence not really any special achievements to be grateful for.
@@papunacrxalso those things don’t change the system. The legalization of cannabis created a harder market to be involved in for cannabis users. The taxes and permits the state now requires put a lot of people out of business and made it easier for corrupt businesses men to get involved in the industry.
@@lets7121 lots of things should be not like they are now, in my opinion, or your opinion... But quote said "changed anything" ... Weed market, this, that... It used to be a legal problem, especially as an excuse if popos wanna mess with you... That's a big ass change, even if your privilege makes you downplay it? 🤷♂️
And I'm sure gay ppl appreciate some human rights as well... I don't see your point here... Voting literally changed things... Shoulda, woulda, coulda ...
great commentary, thanks for always introducing us all to such brilliant new thinkers.
Management is not decision-making. Thank you for this Grace and Aaron.
Absolutely correct. Many things have been conflated in the ideology and propaganda of Capitalism to pre-emptively close down debates and options.
Found this interview so inspirational. Self conscious how bad my individualism is covering my understanding of things
That's been the plan for almost 500 years now. The Enlightenment was focussed on *_individual_* free will, but it has gone way too far now. It is unbalanced and has become counter-productive.
I work in a climate change team in the public sector and our managers just want us to write endless policy documents whereas those of us on the ground understand how to start project managing and actually reduce carbon emissions rather than talking about it. Workers always know best!
Experts ( Scientist's, Engineers; ETC) know best, we should work together to bring the best 🙂 world about... Government and Corperations that are corrupt can get in the way as we have seen time and time again. People should hold their Governments, Corperations, Religions, Industry accountable and should be able to fire the corrupt ones out of power with a simple vote 😢
No gerrymandering, no college electorate and no BS, no gentrification = we the people and everyone's vote counts! 😮😅
It's not difficult,but they've made it sooo complicated, so slow, so broken for a reason; corruption makes BIG, BIG money... And Money = 💵💰 Wealth= power = influence & ETC 😮
Enticing vision of a system that takes some of the best notions from both the capitalist and socialist ideologies. Love listening to (and looking at) Grace! Keep up the good work!
One of the most fundamental points which was not discussed here, and I don't know if Grace addresses it in her book, is that believing in political agency comes from experiencing it. Experiencing it requires achieving it. Achieving it requires defeating and supplanting the current system of political agency in the form of the ruling class. That class will not tolerate even the slightest challenge and its power to suppress has gotten to the point where enormous violence will be required to overthrow it. Being willing to make mortal sacrifices in the class war requires a level of faith in the project and in such enormous numbers that is unimaginable. It seems like a chicken and egg problem.
And anyway, in a multi-cultural society, there will never be consensus or solidarity. It's a fait accompli...
And yet... we have (necessarily) both chickens and their eggs...
Have faith. We will be free again. But we need to fight to our last breath. But hasn't this always been the way? Our strength is that we are not alone. And our imaginations are _free_ and Grace exemplifies this. We can explore new ideas and come up with *_better solutions_* than now.
Don't forget that systems change has occurred before and what seemed like "eternal status quo systems" ended and new systems began.
And this is inevitable since the failing system creates increasing amounts of suffering among the people and this first motivates questioning and then motivates action. The questioning and action need to be directed toward productive and useful change into an effective and efficient new system that works for the people. People such as Grace and organisations such as Novara are working towards discerning what will be productive and beneficial to aim for and to coalesce the questioning and action around. Stay aware. Support positive change. Resist the control over-compensation in the decline of the current system. And yes, the status quo will always resist in every way they contain (e.g. all the tea rolls in these comments) (e.g. a few of the Boeing whistleblowers ended up "dead in mysterious circumstances"...).
The most dangerous time for the _status quo_ is when the people do not have anything left to lose. Why then do they continue to take everything from us? The ideology and system of Capitalism demand it. That is its inherent nature.
Fantastic conversation, I really love this channel. I really dig the concept that capitalism is this entity that wants to purport itself as a "natural" construct, which obviously is not, it has a history and a development and like it was mentioned in this video it has transformed certain ideas across time, to the point of becoming this "invisible, odourless" ideology as old Zizek often points out. Then this ideology creates its own narratives, but because it hinges on the illusion of total individual freedom, it hides the fact that, in time, some elites have formed that now do subtract freedom and limit the rest of society to their own advantage to a degree that has started to drain resources from the public sector. And that is where people sometimes have this wake up moment and notice that things aren't exactly as their politicians describe them. But then there are other countless small lies that are not a direct decision of the ruling elites, but that are a consequence of the system that has been put in place, and I'm talking for example about some appalling policies that companies have, the fact that in order to be competitive (read: save money) they prefer to do internal promotions and put incompetent people to in positions of higher responsibility, or the fact of paying less skilled workers and by doing so effectively reducing the quality of their production and so on. Which leads me to probably the biggest lie of all, that is the concept of the "unskilled worker". This is an outright lie, because if it's a job, and it has to be done at certain standards, there is a skill. If you're not fast enough with the bloody service you don't get a place at Costa. So that's a skill. People working with their own language get minimum pay because, again, this is portrayed as a "natural" asset, therefore devoid of skill. That is untrue, because whatever the job carried out in your natural language, it happens within a certain industrial framework, so there will be other skills that you are required to acquire and if you don't, you're out. In my eyes this all goes to the direction of telling us that we're worthless shits, when in reality the worthless shits are managers that don't recognise human value, that put quality behind profit, and that ultimately contribute to degradation, instead of improvement. But all this, is the consequence of a (economic) culture that by purporting its own pragmatism, being down-to-earth, intellectual freedom, non-ideological character... in reality promotes cynicism, low quality, subjugation, and individualism. It's not just making poorer in the wallet, it's making us poorer in the mind and in our values.
There seemed to be this suggestion that a group of mechanical engineers would be more capable of running a company than Aaron, which might be true, but isn't even the point. A company wouldn't just be run by engineers. There are accounting, and operations, sales, marketing, quality control, and logistics people, etc. They pool their knowledge, and the result is exponentially better than any group of executives could ever hope to achieve.
We need both specialization and generalization to be most effective.
And we need to have philosophy to tell us what it is we want to value and to effect
@Stafus incorrect, you have college degrees on target markets and sales and market economics, understanding that is key, something a random might not have
also nice generalization, good to know how you think of the people you deem ''lesser'' than yourself and a prospective employee by your standards
Really? Why do you think this?
@@knuckles543colleges offer courses in gender studies also.. doesn’t make it a legitimate study.
@@knuckles543now now Profit is a member of our organization and gets to have his opinion. Maybe it's just the 3 of us so his won't matter. But if we come up with a good socialist solution Grace's oversight committee will approve. Then we will know freedom.
I agree, brilliant!! The people must come together to rebuild communities and fight back against big business and monopoly.
Great idea. Unfortunately nothing she talks about will help improve that.
Belief that one is powerless makes one less free.
it makes slave of own mind created limits
power isnt about beliefs, its projection of one's wealth
@@Ankhar2332 Jesus was a poor man.
@@farinshore8900 he was tortured to d. that was why
Galbraith already wrote about the industrial state some 60 plus years ago.The symbiotic relationship between state power and capital is there from the beginning.
We need Grace Blakeley in Italy too
In Italy you need capitalism, first.
Excellent genuine Marxist analysis, not distracted by form but rooted in the material substance of power.
I'm so happy to hear that Marxists are immune to cravings for or abuses of power. Is that written down somewhere? Teacher wants a citation.
Thank you, Grace. Very interesting and informative.
Grace for Prime Minister. Her book is excellent, and so is this talk. Thanks.
Lenin, Stalin & Mao would agree wholeheartedly.
Thank you Aaron and Grace for this valuable discussion based on your new book. China's 'socialism with the market' is also well worth considering in the context of capitalism's contradictions. China is gradually distancing itself from capitalism in order to embody a genuinely alternative path for humanity. According to Chinese leaders, borrowing from capitalism has been no more than a way of “crossing the river,” and will never be more than a long “detour” in the socialist transition on the road to communism.
It’s great that Aaron refences Anarcho Syndicalism at 51:50 when talking about the failings of some trade unions. However Anarcho Syndicalim is more than just member run trade unions: neither Grace or Aaron make reference to the fact that many of the topics they are discussing are actually the basic tenets of Anarcho Sydicalism.
I have ordered the book on the strength of the interview and am looking to reading it.
Grace fan here ☝️😎🏴🙏
Grace Blakeley is my favorite guest, though Novara has many I enjoy
Capitalism is primarily based on distorted mindsets: it pathologises its own structural shortcomings as if they were isolated issues of the individual whilst distorting the meaning of individual differences until they're utilised to justify decontextualised and/or misplaced hierarchies.
Seeing Grace explaining why those distortions are indeed distortions is always a pleasure, she's straight to the point, just let her talk you out of the mud and into actual adulthood.
This first paragraph is philosophical ‘gold’.
“Individualisation of Failure” & “Manufacture of Consent” well explained - Thanks…!
@@musiqtee Please use it wherever and as much as you will then, just keep it as off from copyrights and distortions as the philosophy of the common good should be... This kind of paragraph is just as gold as it can stick to its purpose (:
You talk an awful lot of bollocks.
@@janlaag I “am” that dichotomy… 40 y in music industry, including hearings for copyright law. Being snubbed, snubbing others, getting sick from that and realising I’m fine - The sickness is capitalism, not me…
Thanks, I’m mentally unable to carry the burden of furthering that distortion… :)
So good to listen to Aaron and Grace's progressive discussions. Just want to add here, Rutger Bregman suggests in his book Humankind, A Hopeful History, that the Communist principle exists within the excellent running of a household and of the workplace. This fills with infinite hope that we will find the collective power to pull away from what appears now to be the archaic untethered neo liberal system.
I love how these people are so good a pointing out the most fundamental flaws of government and central planning, but then just falsely attribute these flaws to capitalism.
So much effort put into identifying bad results, zero effort into explaining the why.
Are you familiar with Kevin Carson?
@@alicec1533 He seems like a confused ancap to me.
@@yarvae He's certainly not ancap
@@alicec1533Because he redefines capitalism and refuses to ground his ethical claims I get it
@@yarvae Just to be clear, are you yourself an ancap? And were you familiar with Carson prior to my mentioning him?
I was born in a communist country. Ill take not being free in capitalism over not being free in communism any day.
Exactly 😁
What are you talking about? They are not talking about bringing in Communism.
@@fixmypc3798 Yeah... that's how it starts... by "not talking about it"😁
Omg, that is true. People that haven't lived in socialist country even one day talking how good it would be, and not saying that every single time it goes to communism, authoritarianism and terror. No, no, omg, no.
Yes, communism is the boogeyman that is used to instill fear in capitalist societies. What we need is alternatives to both..... Also it isn't communism that is the source of global warming ... it is the endless growth and consumption that is baked into capitalism
Regarding innovation...a huge majority of American innovation was based on massive government intervention. From direct financing to funding research universities. Its public money for private profit
And same happening in Big Pharma. Most of the innovation happening in Unis under public funding, then privatised to extract the profits in Big Pharma.
"American innovation" is just a glorified term for plagiarism of German aesthetics, Japanese ideas, and global technology. E.g. Apple copied Braun's designs, Japanese phone functionality, Polaroid's hype. TSMC got kidnapped, and (Chinese) TikTok is in the process of being stolen by the US lol.
Say it again please. The vaccines created during the pandemic where government funded.
Not so. Most of our greatest inventions were created by individuals in their garage. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, radio, television, the airplane, etc. etc. Mostly the government just got in their way.
I always found one of the ugliest lies peddled by the right, by the free market disciples is the so called "freedom of choice".
This lie is meant to appeal to people's innate fear of losing out. Based on the inane assumption that the players in a free market are not first and foremost preoccupied with making money.
Of course, as most people know, the fear of losing out is the key ingredience of aggressive marketing.
@@jbob34345we don't have a say on what goes onto the shelf, we can only choose out of the products that are made available to us.
There's no voting, not with the ""dollar", although libertarians and Neoliberals love to talk about that because they are terrified of letting people have meaningful choice at the ballot box
Positive vs. Negative Freedom
Great information from Grace as per, I wish she spoke at the same rate as Norman Finkelstein. And give my brain time to take it all in.
We love you grace
Thanks Grace and Aaron. Looking forward to reading the book.
Sad that Novara attracts so many trolls in the comments.
Agree and agree.
They are all over the place. The Establishment/ancap fanboys/Atlas network ideologues must feel threatened by the powerful analysis, ideas and solutions that Novara, and here, specifically, Grace, are disseminating. They know they cannot win a fair open discussion or argument and like some unipolar hegemon that we won't name resorts to kneecapping any competition (e.g. Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, Indonesia, Russia, now China, and the list goes on and on) to stay number one. For an ideology that touts choice as a its key benefit it sure does a lot of choice/competition suppression... And Adam Smith saw this, as reflected in his many references to "monopoly" (a.k.a. no choice).
I studied Social Sciences in the nineties and nothing has changed in regards to system theory (Luhmann) or freedom of discussion (Habermas et.al.) or punishment (Lagasnerie) and many other things. But, this lass and many others her age and even younger people have my full! trust. I simply know, they will right the wrongs and bring together what has been, wrongly, separated. Love to this her being smart, eloquent and verbose.
40:00 even if you believed in entrepreneur exceptionalism, you'd have to prefer a system that enables as many as possible to recognise their potential. That can't be one that invests power & influence in an existing minority "elite".
that was fantastic. thank you!
Brilliant interview
Wow. Grace Blakely is superb.
I've got an offer to study Engineering at Cambridge, and Grace's arguments about empowering workers make far more sense to me than any idea that Engineers are more intelligent than the average worker or trade union. Aaron's train signalling problems could be solved far more quickly by the RMT if they had the power to, than by BAE systems.
Great analysis of our condition ! We will manifest socialism .
We shouldn't even put a label on it. Just work on what's optimal and graduate from a very, very, very flawed democracy that we (USA) are ; to a full democracy ... Half of America doesn't understand and or care about socialism although we have socialist type programs and have ALWAYS had them... People need to be educated before You can label anything Socialism or what ever else. 😅
FREE MARKET: Refer Hudson's " J is for JUNK ECONOMICS " is the opposite of FREE. But free to exploit your fellow countrymen with overpriced services because you control a vital resource which once was publically owned and provided at cost or even really free. But is now used for rent extraction by extraction of profit on top and shareholder dividends and is not reinvested in such as water services: A rentier economy.
We once had the " mixed economy " and that worked really well. The essential services and goods for a healthy economy and society were controlled by the people the rest private economy could do as it wished governed by rules and regs.
@darrylsugg7230
18 minutes ago
How can we be free when wealth controls everything?
I agree.....
Wealth automatically prevents someone else's freedom to some extent.
In techno feudalism, we have very little freedom.
We are just wealth generating pawns for our overlords
"Hi I'm 27 years old and I've never had a job or do anything as an adult but be in college. Luckily for all of us I've figured out the world when I was getting high in the basement."
That's Marx for you
I had a brief conversation with a green councillor recently about proportional representation. He was guardedly supportive citing the risk that it would let right wing representation in as well. I am a great believer in Grace's trust in people. Diversity of opinion is a strength. Testing that opinion in discussion with others is how we develop our thinking and achieve meaningful progress. In the end there is an innate goodness in people which if allowed to will direct their decision making. What gets in the way of this is poverty and being shut out of decision making. This is what gives fascism a voice.
PR should be against national and international law
I am an engineer ... its a wonderful thing ... BUT .... it will not solve the worlds problems ..... The problems we face are moral, not technological.
No one talks about how our society has now entered CLASS MONOPOLY. As monopoly is exclusion of competitors based upon a competitive advantage yielded by scale or State. Now the entire CLASS of rentiers or Owners have placed all other classes into noncompetitive state through the direct control of capital itself... CLASS MONOPOLY
💯% Absolutely correct. And don't forget the Capitalism/donor class capture of the people's monopoly too (i.e. government, monopoly over law/violence). Capitalism now wielding this powerful tool in its own self-interests (e.g. no Corporate tax/offshoring, privatisation, money-printing, endless wars, elimination of competition through regulation, sanctions and regime change or whole of country destruction (e.g. Libya, Syria, Gaza)).
No democratisation without education. William Edward Deming is to be studied and understood. Democracy means "rule by the people". We should consider that the decisions that need to be made are to that people's needs, without necessarily requiring their work of decision making.
Walk into any Jobcentre and you will instantly understand we are not free, I figured this moons ago.✌
I don’t understand. Please explain.
True up to a point but neither socialism and absolutely not communism make us the slightest more free in any way.
The part about the Welsh city seems odd. I live in a small town, and I'd love to do projects, like say build a hydroelectric dam or massive solar farm. We have the tractors and know how to do it. The problem is, there is no way in hell we'd be allowed to do it. And even if you were, if you were forced to buy the land there is no way the cost to do the project would be feasible. How is that little Welsh city getting around the legal structures to actually be allowed to do things that serve their local community? Here in Canada the vast majority of that would be illegal. I agree that people should fix local problems, and it's not that we haven't thought of doing that... we're just not allowed to. 🤷♂️
If THEY can't make enough money off of it, it won't happen.
@@antediluvianatheist5262 well that's what I mean... How did Wales do it? In my province in Canada the electric companies would be all over you for creating any sort of power station, it would be absolutely impossible
@@AlexWilkinsonYYC The Welsh Govt. is actively promoting community hydro projects to help meet its net zero goals. It often provides grants or business rate relief to help these projects.
I couldn't quite make it out but I think the town she referred to is Blaenau Ffestiniog. I've found a few articles online about various community initiatives there (e.g. on ITV News, WalesOnline), but none that mention hydro power.
The Community Energy Wales website talks about various community driven renewable energy projects (e.g. YnNi Teg Cyfyngedig (Fair Energy ltd)) but those are all over North Wales. I couldn't find anything specific to Blaenau Ffestiniog.
Hopefully that's a good starting point for your own research.
We all know we live in a rigged system. They don't want ordinary people to have power or to be able to create their own solutions.
Thats why we need system change. So that the people are empowered to improve their own lives and their own areas and situations.
Of course, why would it? Not making money means it would fail and be bankrupt.
Engineers vs Managers: I thought that Grace's response to Aaron's point about Managers was a good one, where she brought up 'Innovation' which she tied to her argument about Freedom. I could feel myself approaching the comments for feedback before she said that. I think that broadly she makes a very good response. Firstly, I haven't been employed for 20 years, but I did study Engineering at Uni. I think, from an Engineering perspective, the way I would frame it would be in terms of Manufacturing vs Products (which I think basically Grace does) rather than Engineers vs Managers the way Aaron posed the question. Or even Manufacturing vs Products like Parents vs Children (to relate it to the last interview with Galloway). For example, a company like Ford and the Managers working within it would place a lot more emphasis on Innovation in the Manufacturing process over Innovation of the Products (Cars) they make - a good example would be in reducing the amount of components they use to make their Cars. So here you could have a hugely 'Innovative' system of repression (as Grace describes) essentially in the way Ford controls the Manufacturing process, making a product that isn't very Innovative (maybe it doesn't push the boundaries of what is possible with Electric Vehicles for example). However, where this gets complicated is when the Technological Innovations in Manufacturing then start to be used in the Products themselves (on one level they'll be cheaper) - the ultimate example would be futuristic Food Replicators (with infinite menu possibilities) or Transporters where the Manufacture and the Product become one and the same entity. But I guess Grace would say here that, despite the infinite possibilities available, everyone would just end up eating Gruel, and maybe she would also say that when you get Transported and turned into a data stream you would actually be killed. Is the structure of our world an inevitable consequence of our connected world though? - to the extent it doesn't matter if we try to make it bottom up rather than top down, it won't change the structure itself? I've taken an interest in the coin flipping game 'winner takes it all' - its a very capitalist way of viewing the world, and the 'winner takes it all' only happens when you have an Authoritarian (knock out rounds) structure to the game where you're only allowed to play two people against each other at a time. Allow everyone to play at once and you'd never get 'winner takes it all' (purely due to probability). The world we have is where some people are allowed to play against more people than others - richer people can play against more people than poorer people can, and so poorer people have worse odds than richer people... So this is either rigged or extremely unlikely.
How is Grace not a model. She is stunning
I'm gay (so I can't feel sexual attraction to women) but she's seems to be a pretty smart and sweetheart lady.
🙄
She has a first class degree from Oxford. Why would someone like that want to be a model?
I highly recommend The Mystery of Capital, by Hernando de Soto if you REALLY want to understand what capital is, and what capitalism is all about.
Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto is advising heads of state on how to reform their legal system in order to give poor people access to property rights.
I'm not against what Blakely is proposing, as I certainly like what Richard Wolfe says about worker coops, but I think there is room for BOTH kinds of organizations: the hierchical, meritocratic kind (of which SpaceX is an example) and the worker coop kind that she's proposing.
Grace has a mind like a diamond! 😁
Absolutely excellent interview.
1 more copy sold. engaging, clear explanation of what to expect.
Great show, great guest!
it's like, why can't we buy a house that we live in for our entire lives? why we have to buy a 'starter house' and move and move again, and again. each time it costs 10k in fees and tax... Just another way we get ripped off. the way we live is so in-efficient, unless you're born into wealth though of course.
And that's if you're even lucky enough to afford a house at all
Their are certain communities in our society that have always circumvented this, getting relatively richer as a consequence
Maybe find some one that wants to swap houses. In USA you can do that. Pay off your mortgage and quit claim your properties. That's freedom. Oh... you took a mortgage. That's freedom too. Sorry freedom has consequences.
Im reading her book now. It’s really good, filled with real world cases and damning evidence against the form of capitalism that is applauded today.
I’m sure she’ll tackle this later in the book, but my question is how can we give more power to the people when governments and corporations are and have been in bed together for such a long time now? I would love to see a world where social democracy exists, but can we really achieve it?
_"the form of capitalism that is applauded today. "_
The form we have today is called a Mixed economy system. It is not capitalism at all.
So glad this wasn't a circle jerk and Aaron pushed back on ideas. If I could buy a budget EV Porsche with a 700 mile range, sounds good. I suppose that's why they're gonna stick 100% "free market" tariffs on them! 😅
Due to resourcing issues, I went without a line manager for six months last year. It was brilliant, I could make decisions faster, innovate and pursue avenues of learning without challenge, taking responsibility for my own workload and training. And I felt less stressed.
If investigative media ever had a grand subject, it would be closely following the post death details of 2 Boeing whistleblowers ...the truth and the burden of ethical responsibility rests on the shoulders of potential crime scene professionals...are they doing their job? Or does Boeing have that figured out as well? Does anyone care?
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 *🔥 Individualism is undermining our ability to demand change through collective action*
- Individualism is the foundation of the idea that society is divided into rulers and the ruled.
00:41 *🌐 The myth of free markets and free people*
- We are told we live in a free market system where people are free, but this is a false dichotomy.
01:24 *🤝 Challenging the free market vs. central planning narrative*
- The author aims to challenge the common narrative that free markets are inherently more free than centrally planned economies.
02:22 *📚 The author's new book "Vulture Capitalism"*
- The book is a compilation of anecdotes and real-world examples that support the author's theoretical arguments.
04:01 *🏦 The pandemic and the illusion of socialism*
- During the pandemic, governments and central banks rushed to bail out large corporations, leading some to claim we were seeing a shift towards socialism.
06:05 *🌍 Reconsidering the free market vs. central planning dichotomy*
- The author challenges the common dichotomy between free market capitalist societies and centrally planned socialist societies.
07:26 *📱 Extending the analysis to social media*
- The author draws parallels between the centralized planning within the economy and the surveillance and control exercised by social media companies.
08:36 *🏛️ The origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy*
- The author traces the origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy to the legacy of the Cold War and the debates between Keynesians and Hayekians.
11:50 *🏢 Applying Hayek's arguments to corporate power*
- The author argues that Hayek's critiques of centralized planning could also be applied to the power of large, monopolistic corporations and financial institutions.
13:53 *🏪 The decline of the high street and the rise of monopolistic power*
- The author uses the example of the high street to illustrate the decline of small and medium-sized enterprises in the face of concentrated corporate power.
00:00 *🔥 Individualism undermines collective action for change*
- Individualism is the foundation of the idea that society is divided into rulers and the ruled.
00:41 *🌐 The myth of free markets and free people*
- We are told we live in a free market system where people are free, but this is a false dichotomy.
01:24 *🤝 Challenging the free market vs. central planning narrative*
- The author aims to challenge the common narrative that free markets are inherently more free than centrally planned economies.
02:22 *📚 The author's new book "Vulture Capitalism"*
- The book is a compilation of anecdotes and real-world examples that support the author's theoretical arguments.
04:01 *🏦 The pandemic and the illusion of socialism*
- During the pandemic, governments and central banks rushed to bail out large corporations, leading some to claim we were seeing a shift towards socialism.
06:05 *🌍 Reconsidering the free market vs. central planning dichotomy*
- The author challenges the common dichotomy between free market capitalist societies and centrally planned socialist societies.
07:26 *📱 Extending the analysis to social media*
- The author draws parallels between the centralized planning within the economy and the surveillance and control exercised by social media companies.
08:36 *🏛️ The origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy*
- The author traces the origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy to the legacy of the Cold War and the debates between Keynesians and Hayekians.
11:50 *🏢 Applying Hayek's arguments to corporate power*
- The author argues that Hayek's critiques of centralized planning could also be applied to the power of large, monopolistic corporations and financial institutions.
13:53 *🏪 The decline of the high street and the rise of monopolistic power*
- The author uses the example of the high street to illustrate the decline of small and medium-sized enterprises in the face of concentrated corporate power.
20:52 *🛫 The case of Boeing and the limits of state regulation*
- The author uses the example of Boeing and its scandals to illustrate how the state's ability to regulate powerful corporations is limited by the deep connections between the state and corporate interests.
25:12 *💼 The case of Henry Ford and the evolution of corporate planning*
- The author examines the history of the Ford Motor Company to illustrate how planning has evolved within capitalist systems.
36:09 *🔍 Reassessing the role of planning in capitalism*
- The author argues that planning has always been a fundamental aspect of capitalism, challenging the idea that it is limited to centralized, state-led models.
00:00 *🔥 Individualism undermines collective action for change*
- Individualism is the foundation of the idea that society is divided into rulers and the ruled.
00:41 *🌐 The myth of free markets and free people*
- We are told we live in a free market system where people are free, but this is a false dichotomy.
01:24 *🤝 Challenging the free market vs. central planning narrative*
- The author aims to challenge the common narrative that free markets are inherently more free than centrally planned economies.
02:22 *📚 The author's new book "Vulture Capitalism"*
- The book is a compilation of anecdotes and real-world examples that support the author's theoretical arguments.
04:01 *🏦 The pandemic and the illusion of socialism*
- During the pandemic, governments and central banks rushed to bail out large corporations, leading some to claim we were seeing a shift towards socialism.
06:05 *🌍 Reconsidering the free market vs. central planning dichotomy*
- The author challenges the common dichotomy between free market capitalist societies and centrally planned socialist societies.
07:26 *📱 Extending the analysis to social media*
- The author draws parallels between the centralized planning within the economy and the surveillance and control exercised by social media companies.
08:36 *🏛️ The origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy*
- The author traces the origins of the free market vs. central planning dichotomy to the legacy of the Cold War and the debates between Keynesians and Hayekians.
11:50 *🏢 Applying Hayek's arguments to corporate power*
- The author argues that Hayek's critiques of centralized planning could also be applied to the power of large, monopolistic corporations and financial institutions.
13:53 *🏪 The decline of the high street and the rise of monopolistic power*
- The author uses the example of the high street to illustrate the decline of small and medium-sized enterprises in the face of concentrated corporate power.
20:52 *🛫 The case of Boeing and the limits of state regulation*
- The author uses the example of Boeing and its scandals to illustrate how the state's ability to regulate powerful corporations is limited by the deep connections between the state and corporate interests.
41:56 *🚇 The potential of worker-led innovation and planning*
- The author argues that workers often have the expertise and ability to collectively manage and innovate within their industries, challenging the notion that they need to be tightly controlled.
49:34 *🤝 Balancing worker self-management and broader democratic oversight*
- The author acknowledges the need to balance worker self-management with broader democratic oversight and accountability, rather than simply handing complete control to workers in any given firm or industry.
57:44 *💪 Overcoming individualism and building collective power*
- The author argues that individualism is a key barrier to demanding and achieving systemic change, as it undermines our ability to organize collectively.
01:00:02 *🌍 Critiquing the decline of engineering culture in the West and the rise of China*
- The author acknowledges the concerns about the perceived decline of engineering culture and problem-solving in the West, exemplified by examples like the film "Bridge Over the River Kwai."
01:01:09 *🤔 Defining freedom and the potential role of the state*
- The author challenges the simplistic notion of freedom as the absence of external constraints, arguing that true freedom is more complex and multifaceted.
01:01:36 *🗽 Redefining freedom beyond just the absence of constraints*
- The author challenges the narrow definition of freedom as simply the absence of external constraints.
01:03:27 *🤔 Skepticism about the potential for Labor government reforms*
- The author is not particularly optimistic about a Labor government's ability to enact significant macroeconomic changes.
01:06:10 *🤝 Reconciling the tensions between different groups' notions of freedom*
- The author acknowledges the potential for conflicts between different groups' understandings of freedom, such as the desire for lower immigration among some right-wing voters.
01:08:29 *🌟 Optimism for the future based on people's capacity for collective action*
Made with HARPA AI
Work or starve, there is no choice in capitalism.
increasingly it is "work *_and_* starve" (a.k.a. the "working poor"). Capitalism opens up choices, but later starts closing them down - ending in Totalitarianism.
That's exactly why capitalism works so well.
@@fleetinghopes6448work and starve. You just described communism.
Work or starve. That's called reality. See any ancestor for all time of life on this planet.
In life.
What a treat this interview!
Amazing stuff. I am really worried now that the much used analogy of Starmerite Labour and the Tories being " two cheeks of the same arse" is maybe quite accurate! Help!
I really enjoyed this and thanks for presenting so much food for thought.
Such an Intelligent woman. Eloquent and smart 🙌🙌🙌
Liked her giving the Blairite Lisa Nandy on Question Time a smack down for stealing Jeremy Corbyn's policy of taking the railways back in to public ownership!
Thats more of an argument that favors Nandy. Grace said it was an empty manifesto. Nandy pointed out, taking rail back into public ownership, which was also in the 2019 manifesto.
@@KevenHutchinson-gt1nnso the only thing they had was stolen - it’s empty of any content from Blairites
DO NOT SURRENDER YOUR POLITICAL AGENCY - YOU KNOW BEST
Always a great guest and I have her book on my birthday wish list. Community Interest Groups (CIGs) are definitely a great way to take back some control at a local level. If you get a chance to join or support a CIG do so with both hands....and if you're lucky enough to be able to financially support CIGs that's a great move also.
Loving the new geeky student look Grace!
Good, someone with healthcare, a corporate job, good insurance and a state education is now telling me that I'm screwed and dependent on the system -- look in a mirror. Publishing a book by the way of mass production, media, ISBN, etc. -- but capitalism bad, wild.
I bet the corporate/governmental administrative elites are really worried by conversations like this; yeah right! Students and liberal elites have been talk-festing just so for decade upon decade. As a commentator below in the youtube comments remarks "When injustice becomes law, Resistance becomes duty". The latter is the only right comment in the face of the uniparty regimes in the UK, USA, NZ.
Yes, but we need *_more than_* just resistance. We need to move *forward* to a system of justice. This is why the work of people such as Grace is so important.
The Resistance in WWII France was great and necessary, but it only _meant something_ within a larger plan for the *liberation* of Europe. D-Day was required.
Today we need to continue to resist, but we need the larger context of a way forward to liberation from the unfreedoms of the current system.
More grace please ❤❤❤❤❤