My parents were both Marxists, so I grew up on this, it was regularly discussed around the dinner table - I'm 70 years old now, and listening to Dr Wolff and his explanations, I felt like I was listening to my father! Thankyou
I like his dynamic style of explaining comparing and contrasting the two economies. Here in the US both are seen as being interchangeable which as Wolff points out is a false belief
@@M.Linoge So, YOU know what those words mean NOW????? Please share them, and DO IT in terms of who OWNS the "means of PRODUCTION." It doesn't seem that the "understanding" claimed by Wolff does that. But maybe I missed it, please HELP!!!!!!!!
It's incorrect to call Communism Utopian. Engels wrote an entire book on this. It will still come with it's own issues that will need to be worked through, but it will have the common interest of the people driving it.
Another term that better describes the ideals sought by those who embraced communism is "communitarianism." What is the distinction? The major distinction is the absence of permanent hierarchy among the population in a communitarian society.
@@pecan11 Regardless it misleads people on what communism is and also gives the opposition fuel which is often used by anti-communists to write it off as a fantasy.
China currently runs under socialism, which most people outside it don't know about, the reason that China jumped from communism to socialism in the late 70s is because they found out without prerequisites, such as wealthy and industrialized society, it is impossible to reach true communism, so they did what they called experimental socialism with Chinese characters, which absorbs some key elements from both communism and capitalism, with Chinese traditional ways of governance. And so far they are doing pretty good at it.
Really? I thought it was the stored energy in sunlight, and those who were intelligent enough to apply it? The mindset you are talking about would be one that demands dependence which self-contradicts the prime directive of every lifeform.
@@davidjairala69 Wow, it only required a few facts to prompt the use of labels as arguments under the continuous assumption that everyone knows what the words mean.
That it is a fantasy that doesn't exist and can't exist? That's the problem with all religions, although most of them delay "paradise" until after death.
@@jgalt308 You said “it is a fantasy that doesn’t exist and can’t exist”, and I just replied that this can be applied to the notion of freedom and democracy as well.
@@zhengguo3178 No, I said: " That it is a fantasy that doesn't exist and can't exist? " So, you are confused by all the words used by Wolff, which would contradict the claim of your original comment of it being..."by far the most accurate explanation of communism found on RUclips." Unless you are agreeing? ( that it is a fantasy ) As for democracy, there is no doubt as to its meaning, there is only doubt as to the number of people that can comprehend its meaning.
@@jgalt308 Because it is a totalitarian system and it doesn't work until everybody is communist. Nobody can be a communist until everyone is a communist
@@propanehuffer5859 It's magic...and the new variant simply requires the addition of with "Chinese characteristics." Part 2 spoiler alert. see "Lies my liberal teacher told me."...
@jgalt308 probably has something to do with the current system that is extremely hostile to social movements, having all the power, wealth, and resources. Massive propoganda campaigns by media conglomerates etc
I can't thank you enough for clarifying what communism, socialism and capitalism are all about - PRW. The gloomy world is saved thanks to people like you.
@@nirvanasq1464 If you try a bit harder I am sure you can find the substantive posts that offer such assistance, and you can then respond with any argument you have managed to learn here. Or you can simply provide the "definitions" of what you now "understand" for Marxism, Socialism, Capitalism, and Communism.
@ace9840in many indigenous communities throughout human history. A member of a tribe contributes what they can, and no one is forced to starve because they can’t contribute as much any more.
With artificial intelligence, repetitive machines, and robotic technologies, improving the means of production, the government will be forced to implement socialism_communism economic system as gradual processes as innovations absorb the responsibility for means of production.
@@Plarndude LOLOLOL.... as if people want to go back to living like primitives, get real. it's the 21st century now, we're not going back to that. And you can't make us.
He is mostly a partisan word-player who is too old to change his ways. So he is condemned by the gods to forever defend the fever of his younger years.
For those that ask me why am I comunist in the XXI century? Well I do often reply with a question my self ... How many poors are needed to make a rich person? No one, so far, could give me a straight answer because it is in fact impossible to say due to the simple logic of capitalism ... one is never rich enough Thank you professor Wolf, your way of explainning is indeed a priceless public service. Long leave the International ✊️ Greetings from Portugal 🇵🇹
Great explanation,very clear for all the ones that want to understand the real meaning of the word and not what some others try to make you believe, thanks 🙏.
@@swampsprite9 Time stamp please? BTW that would be a quote! If all workers ( employees ) are exploited, then, it doesn't matter what form that employment takes, for even self-employment would translate to self-exploitation. So, what is the real meaning of the word?
Welp! As a Christian I always thought Socialism was God's message. After seeing Professor Wolff's factual definition of what Communism is, it makes perfect sense God is Communist. Epic.
I appreciate Prof Richard Wolf explaining the whole concept of bringing community into the workplace since I'm sure many of us already feel the burden of having a board of directors/upper management dictating our fates at our jobs and getting rich from our labor. Now I'm not saying that an individual owner who started/invested in his or her own business and worked hard at it doesn't have the right to claim their wealth but how much more productive would the enterprise be if the workers themselves were more included beyond just trading their time for a salary? In a similar way imagine if the government itself allowed citizens to take more part in the decision making of the society beyond just casting a vote instead of having a small group of individuals deciding the fate of the nation. Like the professor said, it's not enough to change the ownership of enterprise from private hands to government hands. It needs to become the business of the collective workers there.
In Italy the basic territorial entity is called “comune”. “Comune di Milano” (Milan), “Comune di Roma” (Rome), “Comune di Genova” (where I live), “Comune di Venezia” (Venice), etc.
Well, nice, but this has nothing to do with communism. This guy is so misleading in introducing the subject with such linguistic take. Horrible explanation.
I think I have been a fan of Dr. Wollf . As a Chinese ,socialism, communism and communist party…, these words have been in my life since I was born, but in your videos I got fresh ,deep understanding of them. I have a feeling that one day the USA may become a socialism country through your videos. The reason is that according to Marxism, socialism replacing capitalism is a scientific theory which is not dependent on human willingness.
In the early 1980s, China undertook a massive reform that dismantled its socialist rural collectives and divided the land among millions of small peasant families. Known as the decollectivization campaign, it is one of the most significant reforms in China’s transition to a market economy.
@@hergandbiskell1546 Well, the response I got asking for an example of communism working was China.... which is bullcrap, because their emergence as an economic giant is because of capitalism...NOT communism. The decrease in poverty, and growth of their middle class is ENTIRELY due to their lurch towards a market economy, and away from commie bullshviet!!!
Actually the farmers did that on their own and at great risk...but the increase in production was so astounding that it caught the attention of the person in charge at the time. Shame that Wolff still hasn't caught on, and omits that story as well.
I grew up in the closing decade of the Cold War under the propaganda that anything "Unamerican" was "communist." Thank you for giving an objective stance on this.
I'm sure they would have asked "what money did the workers save to buy any of the equipment?" The money that the workers saved is of course not what they saved for themselves. How can you save much money at all when you are a way to save someone else money? The money they saved was saved by the investor class by emplying them at the lowest price possible for their time. Capitalism's essential nature is the belief that being able to accumulate makes you a savior of others who deserves to extract the value from their lives. Just as being able to win a war for a mineral rich mountain entitles you to its resources that would otherwise be squabbled over in a dangerous game of thief and merchant. After all, they argue, they COULD have squandered their savings on drink and games, much like the worker squanders his savings out of despair that they will ever be competitive against other accumulators. Instead through their restraint, "they" provide the foundation, they say, for the employment of anyone else. Whether it was they themselves who provided the value that had to be restrained as a future investment is quite a controversy in capitalist society. are we to believe they never got the sweet end of their previous deals to make their investments possible? Left nobody else behind who was doing the work, just because they were in too tight of a spot to argue? And why were they in such a tight spot? Did they throw their life away, long ago, and so deserve it? Or was a very big promise made to them by feudal society broken long ago? The proletariat is the wife of the old world, the old world which, in a sense, suddenly allowed itself to divorce them for no reason.
But he rejected his "education"...and went in search of what he wasn't being taught, BECAUSE IT WASN'T BEING TAUGHT. That is the "opposite" of being educated.
Outstanding critique once again . Professor Wolff is a master at his craft . Bringing these ideas more clearly into focus for all to understand . I so appreciate the melding of history blending into the present time . This is fascinating stuff having tremendous potential if we can only embrace CHANGE !
But he's a professor, that is not an admirable thing. Just an academic clown. THINKS he has it figured out, all professors do. Always take their words with a grain of salt.
The rising interest rate can surely control inflation, but won't prevent erosion of the eroding purchasing power of the US dollar. I have learnt my lesson this time. The banks can't be making money off my money, while inflation eats into it. I have set aside 650k to invest in the stock market now, since that keeps up with inflation, but I don't know how to get started.
Financial consultants can help by recommending investments that outpace inflation, such as real estate or certain stocks. A client of mine followed this strategy and saw their savings grow by 15_% in just two years, effectively countering inflation.
Zachery M Demers is the licensed FA I work with, I can't speak much about him you should make a search with his name, you'd find the necessary details to schedule an appointment.
I wonder what Dr. Wolff thinks about the way things are organized in Vietnam. From what I've learned, the gov't has provided a lot of support towards the formation of various types of cooperatives. In my view, this is being done as a way to foster community level development and delivery of products and services - effectively turning communities into industries.
Luna Oi! and Non Compete are two channels on youtube (wife & husband) that may have some more info for you. they live in Vietnam and specifically make Marxist/Socialist educational content.
The road from capitalism to communism requires the removal of the small group of people who today make all the decisions, and installing in their place the people who themselves are involved in producing the profits. Today, while 9 of the 10 richest men in the world are United States (US) citizens, 38 million Americans live in poverty, and 60% live from paycheck to paycheck. Only 33% of Americans are satisfied with our Democratic or Republican governments, so why don’t we try a third political party candidate who promises to end US imperialism? The US has consistently refused to comply with 42 United Nations’ resolutions demanding that it immediately return Puerto Rico’s sovereignty to the Puerto Ricans. The world, instead of believing the US’ claim that it is “the champion of democracy”, considers the US as the biggest threat to peace. The People’s Republic of China has a win-win relationship with other nations, which means that she is not an imperial power. That has permitted China to have already eradicated poverty, despite having 4 times the US’ population. Unlike the US, China would never sponsor the genocide of the indigenous people of Palestine, or any other people! We need to learn about capitalism and communism in order to organize ourselves to engage in permanent resistance to save ourselves and our planet. Moving from imperialism to democracy is up to us. We don’t have much time!
What are your views on workers' self management in Yugoslavia? That sounds like something you describe in the end. Also cooperatives are a similar thing or how many libre/opensource software projects (Like Firefox, Linux, Wikipedia) are run today. What do you think about those?
FDR gave you socialism...but once again, it wasn't really socialism. Funny that Wolff's critique of capitalism which doesn't involve "government" seems to center on the socialist government programs that failed to solve the problems they were supposed to? Why is that?
Dear Professor Wolff, please identify or include a link to what you call here Lenin's most important speech about the necessity of making the work place a democratically run organization in order to achieve a revolution in alignment with Marx's goals.
@@samneibauer4241It’s the internet age. Far easier for you types to find eachother than ever before. Sounds like you’re making excuses to me. Why do you insist on forcing this insanity on everyone instead of going off and starting your own thing. The Amish have managed just fine.
1. knowing it's an option the first place and properly planning for making it sustainable(you barely hear of communes that work from the news after all) 2. getting the funds and manpower for the property. 3. keeping the property long-term which is not feasible if your goal is to separate from society. I'd also anticipate they'd attract police raids if one got to the size of a 1000 residents like with the one in Denmark. 1: People are generally unaware of the possibility of Co-op type businesses and even if they were they also sometimes need non-standard paperwork that's harder to get help on compared to more conventional small businesses. But if they do manage to last past the 1st year they are more resilient than traditional businesses. But this is just a form of business arrangement not the property owning. I recommend a recent video from the Johntheduncan youtube channel to see the limitations of worker Co-ops if you want a different perspective than what Richard Wolff shows. 2: Getting the property to make such communes is next. I have a Polish military friend who has a plan for a commune all plotted out and the plan to sustain it was deemed sound by his accountant but this hinges on getting cheaper low fertility property by the time he retires from service. Acquiring such low quality land even in Poland is pricy unless it's genuinely in bumfuck nowhere. At least the payment plans are generous. 3: While it technically didn't start as a commune since they only acquired 40 acres later on there was an alpaca ranch in Colorado where queer people only wanted to be left alone away from conservatives but due to harassment and threats of violence(including threats from right-wing militias) along with the Sheriff's department not being helpful(bodycam footage shows the department were not interested in helping) they entered a siege mentality and armed and armored themselves more thoroughly than they already were. This harassment escalated until they decided to sell what they have and then split up presumably so they can try again but somewhere less public facing. But this ranch inspired similar ranches in Arizona and Washington. you can never 100% separate yourself from wider society even if you somehow manage to an engineer a fully self-sustaining commune. While that's only situationally going to stop people from making communes it does apply to every attempt at making a commune from conservative to progressive ones. Personally i think complete isolation is poison and makes fertile ground for cult behavior so i much much much prefer actually engaging in society to some degree instead of solely relying on starting communes.
The goal of communism is not for individuals to liberate themselves from capitalism and form communes, it is total liberation of the global proletariat from all forms of oppression. If I somehow managed to live in a small commune in the woods for the rest of my life (which is already next to impossible under capitalism), I have still failed as a communist because imperialism, capitalism, racism, etc still exist for everyone else.
Very interesting; but have you looked at The NEW COMMUNISM; a book by Bob Avakian? This will differ considerably from some of the things in your lecture, but this new way of looking at the future is being promoted by others, who believe that the chance for REAL revolution in these times is upcoming, and want to gather forces are busy... thanks for reading this...Mali
Adam Smith and David Ricardo had arrived at the labor theory of value prior to Marx. What Marx did was to extend it to the theory of surplus value. Read Capital!
Comrade Richard: This talk is pitched at the right level for a mass audience. Good explanation of the difference between socialism and communism (based on Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme). Looking forward to Part 2. Just a few comments so far: Lenin and Trotsky, co-leaders of the Russian revolution of 1917, along with the majority in the party, said that the revolution in Russia cannot succeed without International support, since capitalism is an international system. Therefore it can only be overthrown internationally. But the revolution was betrayed by the German Socialist party led by Kautsky, who up until then was referred to as the 'pope of Marxism''; since Kautsky and the SPD had already thrown their support behind the German capitalist class, i.e. when they voted for imperialist war in 1914. When you begin talking about the need to go beyond the overthrow of the Bourgeois state and to change the way in which production, distribution and exchange is organised, you are talking about the need for social ownership, as well as for workers control over all of these aspects of society. Nationalis -ed property is not enough. As you imply, if no further steps are taken, this puts the socialised property in the hands of a bureaucracy, which means that privilege and inequality continues, both within the party and the state, at the expense of the working class and the peasantry, who are the majority. It leads to corruption and violent repression, i.e. Stalinism. The latter was also the negative consequence of the terrible price that Russia had to pay in order to defend the revolution against imperialism during a terrible civil war (1918-21). This left the country isolated and broken. Finally, you correctly say that there is no country in the world that ever called itself communist, either in the past or the present. At the same time there has never been 'existing socialism', either in the former Soviet Union or China today. In the latter, the state and the socialised property is under the control of a bureaucracy, i.e. the Communist party, inherited from the Stalinist tradition. Part of that tradition. is the idea of budding socialism in a single country (a form of nationalism, not internationalism). At the same time the CCP allows huge sections of the economy to be owned and controlled by large capitalist enterprises (e.g. real estate). Therefore, however much it has done to raise millions of peasants out of poverty, China is not following a trajectory that could be called socialist, therefore this will not lead it to communism. Perhaps you will say more about this in part 2?
Let me make a reservation that I am from Russia. Many people in Russia, including those who do not like communists, understand that many repressions were justified when they see the so-called representatives of the Russian opposition (in quotes Russian, since they are not Russian by blood or by their actions) Let me give you a very recent example. Navalny studied at Yale University in a faculty with other foreigners who are trained by various US NGOs for destructive activities under the guise of democracy. His daughter was now in the United States working for the Democratic hq. The Anti-Corruption Foundation he created, in addition to facts exposing corrupt officials, attributes many lies. Now these people have fled to the Baltics, they are helping the West to compile sanctions lists. A number of bankers who stole money from Russia are hiding abroad, including in England and the US, and have received some kind of indulgence from Navalny's foundation for sponsorship. Imagine that the West calls outright banker thieves oppositionists thanks to Navalny's foundation. The West does not extradite them or freeze their accounts. Yesterday's thieves signed up as oppositionists only when they fled to the West. Almost 90% of the so-called Russian opposition visits the embassies of the USA, England and other European countries for so-called consultations. What is this if not betrayal? Imagine that in the USA someone from the opposition would constantly visit the Russian embassies for consultations with the Russians. You, being across the ocean and literally isolated from the processes and information in our country, are completely unable to soberly assess the state of affairs. The so-called opposition media in Russia were sponsored through Western funds literally with cryptocurrency to hide their connection with the State Department. I will give an incomplete list of the so-called oppositionists - Zibeltrud, Sobchak, Golts, Katz, Roizman, Gozman, Koch, Albats, Sheitman, Gerber, Buntman, Gelman, Urin, Fishman, Eidman, Makarevich, Melman, Gelfand, Nevzlin, Kiperman, Feigin, Heidiz, Yeneman, Felgengauer, Weinstein, Kararlitsky, Bubinstein, Khodorkovksy, Gessen, Kaplan, Shlosberg, Shatz, Shenderovich. Did anything catch your eye about these names? In 99% of cases these are not Russian people, I think their nationality does not need to be explained to you. The Trotskyists who wanted a world revolution instead of restoring order in the USSR did not suffer in vain! Now, due to the limitation of their influence and the reduction of support from Western NGOs, these people have begun squabbling with each other. Imagine that the bankers who stole the money fled to the West, gave part of the stolen money to the so-called opposition, and in gratitude they enrolled them in their ranks so that the West would not hand them over to our justice system. I have no doubt, seeing these names (the so-called Russian opposition) and comparing them with the names of the early Bolshevik-Trotskyists, that Stalin's repressions were justified in most cases. Just think about it, a person who lost his bank deposits in Russia thanks to these rogue bankers cannot file claims in Western courts against these fugitive bankers, because the so-called oppositionists with dual and triple citizenship have put them on the white lists of the US State Department as dissidents. I do not justify the deportation of various peoples by Stalin, but I want to emphasize that you in the West like to remember the events of 100 years ago, but never mention that you had camps for leftists, for the Japanese and others. In the USA, cases were filed against journalists, workers and others simply for their leftist views. Tell me this didn't happen? You stubbornly do not want to remember how back in the 60s blacks were not allowed into various establishments, you did not allow them to take seats on public transport, allowing them to sit only in the back rows and not in all states. We have a saying: In someone else’s eye we see a speck, but in our own we cannot see a log. Moreover, when Russia opened up to the West in the early 90s, it was ready to make any concessions, including the loss of industry, many weapons systems, it ceded its spheres of influence, supported the West in every possible way, the West simply did not accept it into its club. What Western influence you ask? It was your agents in civilian clothes in the early 90s who taught our so-called oligarchs how to rob the country and privatize the people's wealth. You do not understand that now in our country at the very grassroots level there is a need in society not for Putin but for a tougher leader who would begin repressions in order to cleanse the country. Let me give you another banal example of double standards. The West constantly calls the Russian Tsar Ivan IV terrible, although no one compares the number of victims of death sentences of our Tsar by comparing them with the number of sentences of Western monarchs of that time. If you compare the numbers, Ivan IV is completely harmless against the background of European monarchs. Almost every European city had a chopping block in the center of town when death sentences were a rare occurrence in our country. When someone in the West tries to assess what is happening in Russia, they usually rely on the opinion of some people offended by the authorities, and not the opinion of the people inside Russia. When Putin let Khodorkovsky go, many were shocked, he is a real mafia boss, a bloody trail and fraudulent privatization schemes have been following him since the 90s, and the president did this to please the West. Now in the West he is called some kind of fighter against the regime and a victim. Now many patriots in Russia are surprised that Putin does not use all available weapons in (Censored country name starting with U) , that he tried to reach an agreement with someone in the West until the very end. I will repeat that in our society the demand is for a very tough leader and not someone like him!
Yup. Down with the corrupt wealthy-class & their corrupt RW-politics, and with the working-class dupes who support the corrupt wealthy-class & their corrupt RW-politics.
That is not the etymological definition, it is the interpretive definition. Be a good student and take in the etymology that prof Richard giving away for free...it gives u the french roots of word and the culmulative thought of that experience making the ism.
Great insights, Professor Wolff!!Could you please the changes from factories that were run by factiry commuters vs. factories run by appointed managers(?) after 1921 or so?
I like lectures, but my younger friends learn through social media reels, etc. I have some reels from Richard, but I was wondering if a series of reels for Facebook or RUclips etc. could be made to deliver key points about communism and socialism that are misunderstood. For example, The Soviet Union was not practicing communism, Capitalism is not the same as Democracy, Communism is not the same as a Dictatorship, Economics Systems are not Governments and Vice versa. I am sure you would know better what issues to address, but It's just a thought.
It’s important to note that for some, socialism, communism, and anarchism all meant the same thing. The “stages” version of communism was adopted by some but not all.
@@authenticallysuperficial9874violence by who against whom? Non directly violent coercion backed by military, economical, political, religion and media forces from who to whom? It’s weird that you believe you can form a big ‘community’ without confronting the military force of the current rulers of the land (territory of a country not exactly the same as your community) your ‘community’ live on. And it’s delusional to think that a small ‘community’ can thrive when it depends on the utilities including transportation, resources and market provided by the country it’s in, and it pays tax to this country. Either it’s poor and nobody cares, or it’ll face greedy outsiders requesting more tax/bribe or worrying outsiders wanting it to be poor (sanction etc. by any reason as a facade) and defamed. If the world is free to create ‘community’ as you like, it must be an anarchy. And anarchy means more violence to all.
@@graceli6886 Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more an·ar·chy /ˈanərkē/ noun 1. a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority or other controlling systems. 2. the organization of society on the basis of voluntary cooperation, without political institutions or hierarchical government; anarchism. the use of the term "disorder" in the first definition is an "assumption" and can be removed to match the second definition. 1.) a state with the absence or nonrecognition of authority or other controlling systems.
Of course not...nor will he talk about "the robber barons" as employer's or monopolies who raised prices because they could. ( those "prices being the cause of inflation ) Even Marx knew "money" was a commodity...and that hasn't been true since FDR gave the world fiat in 1934...the greatest of all cons, which lasted until 1971, and forcing everyone to still believe it didn't happen.
if democracy and caapitalism is what we are living under as long as I can remember than please please let's try another strategy because it does not work. Our society started with land grabbing pirates, and even today, right now we are still one way or the other acting as pirates, and only justifying in a different context using today's narrative, but leading to the same outcome. Insanity indeed.
@@Oborowatabinostk It's clear you haven't. The war did not affect the type of government that would emerge from it. It ended on Sept 3, 1783. This was a war for independence, ( the right to determine its own government ) and George III surrendered to each "state" separately. June 21, 1788 As soon as 9 states had ratified the Constitution (June 21, 1788) it went into effect. On March 4, 1789 the 1st Congress of the new Constitution was seated, and in early April George Washington was elected as the 1st President. So again, what force was used to compel its ratification? Or the ratification of those "states" that had not ratified it on the above date? Clearly, you have a lot more books to read. ( and maybe learn what the words "constitutional republic" mean. Hint: it does not mean "democracy" )
Pretty obvious, it's what millions do not have at the moment due to the corrupt system we live under. Good food, a home, clean water, free healthcare would be excellent starting points.
If the co-ops or community businesses are so much better why it’s not a norm in US and EU? And why there is zero high-tech co ops? Only low-tech.. agriculture, retail etc.
I see a huge problem with mocking American right wingers for claiming 'socialism is when the government does stuff', but then turning around and claiming that the mirror image of it, 'capitalism is when the government does stuff'. Two wrongs do not make a right. Prof. Woff is taking a stance not supported by, Marx, Engels or Lenin (despite his claims), in that centralized socialist production is still largely capitalist, when there is no significant private ownership of the means of production to speak of, but social ownership instead. Orthodox Marxists call this type of position 'revisionism', and is also one of the main Anarchist criticisms of 20th century Socialist states. Also, Wolff is strongly supportive of workers' cooperatives as a way to introduce socialist production within a capitalist society. He does not talk much about it, unless I'm wrong, but the Yugoslavian socialists, led by Tito, based their 'market socialism' economy on workers' co-operatives. See how that built-in competition ended for them and their system.
''See how that built-in competition ended for them and their system.'' It ended with a grotesque machination from the West, Corporate Power, hard power attack in illegal war. A nation now in significant debt to the usual suspects. See Michael Parenti's work on this topic.
I’m not all the way through the video yet, but I find it hard to believe that Professor Wolff defined “capitalism” as “when the government does stuff”. Government as a concept is orthogonal to the economic system. The issue with capitalism is that wealth-hoarders use their wealth to _buy and control_ what government does in order to ensure that government policies benefit their bottom line. It is undemocratic because the majority of people (esp. workers) are not represented.
BTW, I agree that right-wingers should not be mocked for holding heavily propagandized views on “socialism”. The challenge is to educate and persuade-that’s what free speech is for. Working class “right-wingers” are our allies in the class struggle and we should treat them as such.
@@chaosinfusion8127 Well, he doesn't state it literally in the video, but that's what his take on the Soviet Union's economic system amounts to. He claims its system, even after the end of the NEP, was 'state capitalism', which is what I am challenging.
I’m grateful to now, have the language to describe and understand the three modern systems of government. It’s an essential tool for fighting misinformation. Thank you.
Well, Communism isn't a system of government, Socialism is the word for that. Communism is a classless and stateless society and mode of production. Socialism is the path, Communism is the goal.
Well, Communism isn't a system of government, Socialism is the word for that. Communism is a classless and stateless society and mode of production. Socialism is the path, Communism is the goal.
My parents were both Marxists, so I grew up on this, it was regularly discussed around the dinner table - I'm 70 years old now, and listening to Dr Wolff and his explanations, I felt like I was listening to my father! Thankyou
Love the way Dr. Wolff explains all this so clearly
I like his dynamic style of explaining comparing and contrasting the two economies. Here in the US both are seen as being interchangeable which as Wolff points out is a false belief
@@el-Cu9432 which two economies would those be?
This isn't a "capitalist" economy...so?
If only college was like this, hehe.
Lol, he’s an unhinged psychopath
@@M.Linoge So, YOU know what those words mean NOW?????
Please share them, and DO IT in terms of who OWNS the "means of PRODUCTION."
It doesn't seem that the "understanding" claimed by Wolff does that.
But maybe I missed it, please HELP!!!!!!!!
It's incorrect to call Communism Utopian. Engels wrote an entire book on this. It will still come with it's own issues that will need to be worked through, but it will have the common interest of the people driving it.
Compared to what we have now, it kinda is a utopia
U didn’t call it utopian He said ‘a kind of..’
Another term that better describes the ideals sought by those who embraced communism is "communitarianism." What is the distinction? The major distinction is the absence of permanent hierarchy among the population in a communitarian society.
@@pecan11 Regardless it misleads people on what communism is and also gives the opposition fuel which is often used by anti-communists to write it off as a fantasy.
China currently runs under socialism, which most people outside it don't know about, the reason that China jumped from communism to socialism in the late 70s is because they found out without prerequisites, such as wealthy and industrialized society, it is impossible to reach true communism, so they did what they called experimental socialism with Chinese characters, which absorbs some key elements from both communism and capitalism, with Chinese traditional ways of governance. And so far they are doing pretty good at it.
For those of us raised amid Capitalism, Communism requires an extensive mental reset. The same 'reset' created Capitalism itself.
Really? I thought it was the stored energy in sunlight, and those who were
intelligent enough to apply it?
The mindset you are talking about would be one that demands dependence
which self-contradicts the prime directive of every lifeform.
Wow it took one comment to get to the revisionist history and pseudo-anthropology lol
@@davidjairala69 Wow, it only required a few facts to prompt the use of
labels as arguments under the continuous assumption that everyone knows
what the words mean.
Well, what if such a reset is impossible for humans? What if humans arn't perfectible?
@@polybian_bicycle Then we would have to STOP employing the excuse that he, she, it, they, are, were ONLY HUMAN.
He doesn't look evil at all. His words are so full of care. Wow. I'm sold.
Definitely the image of the poor downtrodden worker...you wonder where he finds the time?
This is by far the most accurate explanation of communism found on RUclips. Thank you, professor.
That it is a fantasy that doesn't exist and can't exist? That's the problem with all religions,
although most of them delay "paradise" until after death.
@@jgalt308 The same can be said to the so called freedom and democracy.
@@zhengguo3178 That was Wolff's description or did the words confuse you?
That is not his description of democracy, nor is democracy freedom.
@@jgalt308 You said “it is a fantasy that doesn’t exist and can’t exist”, and I just replied that this can be applied to the notion of freedom and democracy as well.
@@zhengguo3178 No, I said: " That it is a fantasy that doesn't exist and can't exist? "
So, you are confused by all the words used by Wolff, which would contradict the
claim of your original comment of it being..."by far the most accurate explanation of
communism found on RUclips."
Unless you are agreeing? ( that it is a fantasy )
As for democracy, there is no doubt as to its meaning, there is only doubt as
to the number of people that can comprehend its meaning.
Thank you for all your hard work in trying to enlighten the world on the truth of a system that can benefit the 99%
So why hasn't it?
@@jgalt308 Because it is a totalitarian system and it doesn't work until everybody is communist. Nobody can be a communist until everyone is a communist
@@jgalt308isnt it so insane how there’s this system that folks swear is near perfect and it somehow has yet to do anything
@@propanehuffer5859 It's magic...and the new variant simply requires the
addition of with "Chinese characteristics." Part 2 spoiler alert.
see "Lies my liberal teacher told me."...
@jgalt308 probably has something to do with the current system that is extremely hostile to social movements, having all the power, wealth, and resources. Massive propoganda campaigns by media conglomerates etc
I can't thank you enough for clarifying what communism, socialism and capitalism are all about - PRW. The gloomy world is saved thanks to people like you.
But you still have "no idea"...and your listening to his talking saves nothing.
@@jgalt308 And you help so much
@@nirvanasq1464 If you try a bit harder I am sure you can find
the substantive posts that offer such assistance, and you can then
respond with any argument you have managed to learn here.
Or you can simply provide the "definitions" of what you now "understand" for
Marxism, Socialism, Capitalism, and Communism.
No one can explain better than Richard Wolff who has committed his life to the noble cause of opening up of our eyes and minds to the true Marxism.
@@eyeamraj And like Marx he will reap what he has sown.
'Enough for everyones need but not enough for everyones greed.' 😮
@ace9840in many indigenous communities throughout human history. A member of a tribe contributes what they can, and no one is forced to starve because they can’t contribute as much any more.
Who decides what's a "need"? Do you really need the device you're using to browse the web?
With artificial intelligence, repetitive machines, and robotic technologies, improving the means of production, the government will be forced to implement socialism_communism economic system as gradual processes as innovations absorb the responsibility for means of production.
@@Plarndude LOLOLOL.... as if people want to go back to living like primitives, get real. it's the 21st century now, we're not going back to that. And you can't make us.
@@peaceleader7315 Ok, sure, the promise that technology will bless us with utopia, that's a new one, LOL.
Fascinating! I am very moved by the last Lenin quote; it feels so much like looking in a distant mirror 😮.
Such a clear, interesting and passionate explanation as always!
but not logically reasoned or critically thought.
Brilliance is making the incomprehensible comprehensible. This man is brilliant. And a joy to listen to.
Especially at 1.25x speed 😅
he's a good teacher
He is mostly a partisan word-player who is too old to change his ways.
So he is condemned by the gods to forever defend the fever of his younger years.
😅😮😅😮😮😮😢😮😅😅😮😅😅😮😮😅😮 2:16 😮😅😮
Thank you, I have learnt something today. Pls keep up the good work
Thank you Prof Wolff and the team behind Economic update. You guys have taught me so much
Great video! I was having a hard time explaining communism vs socialism to my kids. This helped.
I always enjoy Professor Wolff speak. Thank you!
For those that ask me why am I comunist in the XXI century? Well I do often reply with a question my self ... How many poors are needed to make a rich person?
No one, so far, could give me a straight answer because it is in fact impossible to say due to the simple logic of capitalism ... one is never rich enough
Thank you professor Wolf, your way of explainning is indeed a priceless public service.
Long leave the International ✊️
Greetings from Portugal 🇵🇹
Thank you, Professor Wolff for shedding light on such an incredibly important topic. Looking forward to the next “chapter” as you keep unwrapping it.
Great explanation,very clear for all the ones that want to understand the real meaning of the word and not what some others try to make you believe, thanks 🙏.
So, what is the real meaning of the word?
@@jgalt308 Workers take over
@@swampsprite9 Time stamp please? BTW that would be a quote! If all workers ( employees ) are exploited,
then, it doesn't matter what form that employment takes, for even self-employment would translate to self-exploitation.
So, what is the real meaning of the word?
Спасибо. Как я вас понимаю прожив в последние годы в СССР. Наши элиты посчитали за нас как дальше жить.
Вот почему нам нужен ИИ, чтобы заменить элиту
Welp! As a Christian I always thought Socialism was God's message. After seeing Professor Wolff's factual definition of what Communism is, it makes perfect sense God is Communist. Epic.
Many religions have pro poor people tendencies.
Communism is the goal, Socialism is the path.
Communism is the goal, Socialism is the path.
@@whatabouttheearth F*cking A right!
Seek therapy
I appreciate Prof Richard Wolf explaining the whole concept of bringing community into the workplace since I'm sure many of us already feel the burden of having a board of directors/upper management dictating our fates at our jobs and getting rich from our labor. Now I'm not saying that an individual owner who started/invested in his or her own business and worked hard at it doesn't have the right to claim their wealth but how much more productive would the enterprise be if the workers themselves were more included beyond just trading their time for a salary? In a similar way imagine if the government itself allowed citizens to take more part in the decision making of the society beyond just casting a vote instead of having a small group of individuals deciding the fate of the nation. Like the professor said, it's not enough to change the ownership of enterprise from private hands to government hands. It needs to become the business of the collective workers there.
In Italy the basic territorial entity is called “comune”. “Comune di Milano” (Milan), “Comune di Roma” (Rome), “Comune di Genova” (where I live), “Comune di Venezia” (Venice), etc.
Same thing in France.
Well, nice, but this has nothing to do with communism. This guy is so misleading in introducing the subject with such linguistic take. Horrible explanation.
Very clear and precise appreciate you sharing your knowledge.
Thank you so much for this lecture, Prof Wolff.
I think I have been a fan of Dr. Wollf . As a Chinese ,socialism, communism and communist party…, these words have been in my life since I was born, but in your videos I got fresh ,deep understanding of them. I have a feeling that one day the USA may become a socialism country through your videos. The reason is that according to Marxism, socialism replacing capitalism is a scientific theory which is not dependent on human willingness.
Economic update is one of my weekly highlights, thank you as always professor
Thank you Professor.
In the early 1980s, China undertook a massive reform that dismantled its socialist rural collectives and divided the land among millions of small peasant families. Known as the decollectivization campaign, it is one of the most significant reforms in China’s transition to a market economy.
D'oh!
@@hergandbiskell1546 Well, the response I got asking for an example of communism working was China.... which is bullcrap, because their emergence as an economic giant is because of capitalism...NOT communism. The decrease in poverty, and growth of their middle class is ENTIRELY due to their lurch towards a market economy, and away from commie bullshviet!!!
Actually the farmers did that on their own and at great risk...but the increase in
production was so astounding that it caught the attention of the person in charge
at the time.
Shame that Wolff still hasn't caught on, and omits that story as well.
@@jgalt308 Communism is not an economic system, that is the great lie. It's a religious belief of how people should live and work together
@@sdrc92126 Sorry but reply is being deleted...see original comment for
a complete analysis of this video.
谢谢！
Ευχαριστούμε!
Thank you!
Very good! looking forward to part two.
If communism isn't one that is practical in reality...there is NO PART 2!
I grew up in the closing decade of the Cold War under the propaganda that anything "Unamerican" was "communist." Thank you for giving an objective stance on this.
Thanks
In the 70's when I was working for Chrysler--tried to push the Union to have workers participate in ownership, they didn't want it!!!
I'm sure they would have asked "what money did the workers save to buy any of the equipment?"
The money that the workers saved is of course not what they saved for themselves. How can you save much money at all when you are a way to save someone else money? The money they saved was saved by the investor class by emplying them at the lowest price possible for their time.
Capitalism's essential nature is the belief that being able to accumulate makes you a savior of others who deserves to extract the value from their lives. Just as being able to win a war for a mineral rich mountain entitles you to its resources that would otherwise be squabbled over in a dangerous game of thief and merchant. After all, they argue, they COULD have squandered their savings on drink and games, much like the worker squanders his savings out of despair that they will ever be competitive against other accumulators. Instead through their restraint, "they" provide the foundation, they say, for the employment of anyone else. Whether it was they themselves who provided the value that had to be restrained as a future investment is quite a controversy in capitalist society. are we to believe they never got the sweet end of their previous deals to make their investments possible? Left nobody else behind who was doing the work, just because they were in too tight of a spot to argue? And why were they in such a tight spot? Did they throw their life away, long ago, and so deserve it? Or was a very big promise made to them by feudal society broken long ago? The proletariat is the wife of the old world, the old world which, in a sense, suddenly allowed itself to divorce them for no reason.
@@ct-hv1uz and yet FIAT guaranteed that the costs of production would always increase
and eventually render anything produced non-competitive.
When educated people speak the truth the future of the world is bright thanks
But he rejected his "education"...and went in search of what he wasn't being taught,
BECAUSE IT WASN'T BEING TAUGHT.
That is the "opposite" of being educated.
@@jgalt308Bro you're on every Wolff's video. Noticing it from years now. Do you not have life? 😂😂
@@neurodivtries4101 and you're following me around?
The Blues had Howlin' Wolf. But economics has Professor Wolff. Both pinnacles in their realms.
Such a clear, cogent explanation. Share this with every libertarian talking point machine you know!
There we lbertarian right vs.
libertarian left. See Wikipedia article (still?) on
“Libertarian Socialism”
@. Communism”
“. Anarchism”
@@samaval9920 huh?
@@falsificationism Sucks when you don't know what the words mean,
even after a supposedly "clear, cogent" explanation.
@@jgalt308 yep
@@falsificationism so the definitions are?
Tak!
*Great topic and explanation.*
Thank you for explaining those concepts.
Outstanding critique once again .
Professor Wolff is a master at his craft .
Bringing these ideas more clearly into focus for all to understand .
I so appreciate the melding of history blending into the present time .
This is fascinating stuff having tremendous potential if we can only embrace CHANGE !
But he's a professor, that is not an admirable thing. Just an academic clown. THINKS he has it figured out, all professors do. Always take their words with a grain of salt.
Critique? This is an utterly uncritical glimpse at communism in which Wolff supposes that scarcity will disappear.
@@peterbelanger4094- is it the voice of experience or that of prejudice?
@@fernandgutez2383 What experience?
Always appreciate your prospective, Thank You Proessor Wolff.
The rising interest rate can surely control inflation, but won't prevent erosion of the eroding purchasing power of the US dollar. I have learnt my lesson this time. The banks can't be making money off my money, while inflation eats into it. I have set aside 650k to invest in the stock market now, since that keeps up with inflation, but I don't know how to get started.
Financial consultants can help by recommending investments that outpace inflation, such as real estate or certain stocks. A client of mine followed this strategy and saw their savings grow by 15_% in just two years, effectively countering inflation.
That makes sense. Unlike us, you seem to have the market figured out. Who is your fiduciary?
Zachery M Demers is the licensed FA I work with, I can't speak much about him you should make a search with his name, you'd find the necessary details to schedule an appointment.
Increasing the interest rate has no advantages. It only makes everyone poorer instantly, and increases inflation.
@@Simboiss Increasing the interest rate reduces inflation... a simple online search will tell you as much.
I wonder what Dr. Wolff thinks about the way things are organized in Vietnam. From what I've learned, the gov't has provided a lot of support towards the formation of various types of cooperatives. In my view, this is being done as a way to foster community level development and delivery of products and services - effectively turning communities into industries.
Luna Oi! and Non Compete are two channels on youtube (wife & husband) that may have some more info for you. they live in Vietnam and specifically make Marxist/Socialist educational content.
The road from capitalism to communism requires the removal of the small group of people who today make all the decisions, and installing in their place the people who themselves are involved in producing the profits. Today, while 9 of the 10 richest men in the world are United States (US) citizens, 38 million Americans live in poverty, and 60% live from paycheck to paycheck. Only 33% of Americans are satisfied with our Democratic or Republican governments, so why don’t we try a third political party candidate who promises to end US imperialism? The US has consistently refused to comply with 42 United Nations’ resolutions demanding that it immediately return Puerto Rico’s sovereignty to the Puerto Ricans. The world, instead of believing the US’ claim that it is “the champion of democracy”, considers the US as the biggest threat to peace. The People’s Republic of China has a win-win relationship with other nations, which means that she is not an imperial power. That has permitted China to have already eradicated poverty, despite having 4 times the US’ population. Unlike the US, China would never sponsor the genocide of the indigenous people of Palestine, or any other people! We need to learn about capitalism and communism in order to organize ourselves to engage in permanent resistance to save ourselves and our planet. Moving from imperialism to democracy is up to us. We don’t have much time!
china was dirt poor until they embraced capitalism ...
This is a "constitutional republic"...maybe you should read it and the history regarding it.
thank you ,Professor Wolff
love you great sir!❤
Fantastic talk, Prof. Wolff!
The opening theme is great.
What are your views on workers' self management in Yugoslavia? That sounds like something you describe in the end. Also cooperatives are a similar thing or how many libre/opensource software projects (Like Firefox, Linux, Wikipedia) are run today. What do you think about those?
Well said. Best half hour explanation of socialism and communism I ever heard.
FDR gave you socialism...but once again, it wasn't really socialism.
Funny that Wolff's critique of capitalism which doesn't involve "government"
seems to center on the socialist government programs that failed to solve the
problems they were supposed to?
Why is that?
@@jgalt308 the new deal was not socialism, but one shouldn't expect a Rand enjoyer to understand words or present a good-faith or honest argument.
Dear Professor Wolff, please identify or include a link to what you call here Lenin's most important speech about the necessity of making the work place a democratically run organization in order to achieve a revolution in alignment with Marx's goals.
What’s stopping free individuals from starting their own “communes”?
Funds, laws, logistics and having enough people
Anything else?
@@samneibauer4241It’s the internet age. Far easier for you types to find eachother than ever before. Sounds like you’re making excuses to me. Why do you insist on forcing this insanity on everyone instead of going off and starting your own thing. The Amish have managed just fine.
1. knowing it's an option the first place and properly planning for making it sustainable(you barely hear of communes that work from the news after all)
2. getting the funds and manpower for the property.
3. keeping the property long-term which is not feasible if your goal is to separate from society. I'd also anticipate they'd attract police raids if one got to the size of a 1000 residents like with the one in Denmark.
1: People are generally unaware of the possibility of Co-op type businesses and even if they were they also sometimes need non-standard paperwork that's harder to get help on compared to more conventional small businesses. But if they do manage to last past the 1st year they are more resilient than traditional businesses. But this is just a form of business arrangement not the property owning. I recommend a recent video from the Johntheduncan youtube channel to see the limitations of worker Co-ops if you want a different perspective than what Richard Wolff shows.
2: Getting the property to make such communes is next. I have a Polish military friend who has a plan for a commune all plotted out and the plan to sustain it was deemed sound by his accountant but this hinges on getting cheaper low fertility property by the time he retires from service. Acquiring such low quality land even in Poland is pricy unless it's genuinely in bumfuck nowhere. At least the payment plans are generous.
3: While it technically didn't start as a commune since they only acquired 40 acres later on there was an alpaca ranch in Colorado where queer people only wanted to be left alone away from conservatives but due to harassment and threats of violence(including threats from right-wing militias) along with the Sheriff's department not being helpful(bodycam footage shows the department were not interested in helping) they entered a siege mentality and armed and armored themselves more thoroughly than they already were. This harassment escalated until they decided to sell what they have and then split up presumably so they can try again but somewhere less public facing. But this ranch inspired similar ranches in Arizona and Washington.
you can never 100% separate yourself from wider society even if you somehow manage to an engineer a fully self-sustaining commune. While that's only situationally going to stop people from making communes it does apply to every attempt at making a commune from conservative to progressive ones. Personally i think complete isolation is poison and makes fertile ground for cult behavior so i much much much prefer actually engaging in society to some degree instead of solely relying on starting communes.
The goal of communism is not for individuals to liberate themselves from capitalism and form communes, it is total liberation of the global proletariat from all forms of oppression. If I somehow managed to live in a small commune in the woods for the rest of my life (which is already next to impossible under capitalism), I have still failed as a communist because imperialism, capitalism, racism, etc still exist for everyone else.
Amazing dr wolf thank you
Please do Democratic Socialism next! 🌹
Very interesting; but have you looked at The NEW COMMUNISM; a book by Bob Avakian?
This will differ considerably from some of the things in your lecture, but this new way of looking at the future is being promoted by others, who believe that the chance for REAL revolution in these times is upcoming, and want to gather forces are busy... thanks for reading this...Mali
How do you improve people's lives in a time of human overshoot, depleting resources and biosphere destroying heat?
Very interesting and informative!
Excellent. Looking forward to part two.
If communism isn't one that is practical in reality...there is NO PART 2!
Thanks!
Thank you dr. Wolff
It's a first time for me but I am clear about socialism and communism.
Great clearification
Merci Professeur Wolff.
Adam Smith and David Ricardo had arrived at the labor theory of value prior to Marx. What Marx did was to extend it to the theory of surplus value. Read Capital!
Sure, but both they and marx were wrong.
allysuperficial9874
@@authenticallysuperficial9874
I'm sure your intellectual analysis is vastly superior to that of these giants.
25:36 can anyone share the original speech?
Comrade Richard: This talk is pitched at the right level for a mass audience. Good explanation of the difference between socialism and communism (based on Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme). Looking forward to Part 2. Just a few comments so far: Lenin and Trotsky, co-leaders of the Russian revolution of 1917, along with the majority in the party, said that the revolution in Russia cannot succeed without International support, since capitalism is an international system. Therefore it can only be overthrown internationally. But the revolution was betrayed by the German Socialist party led by Kautsky, who up until then was referred to as the 'pope of Marxism''; since Kautsky and the SPD had already thrown their support behind the German capitalist class, i.e. when they voted for imperialist war in 1914. When you begin talking about the need to go beyond the overthrow of the Bourgeois state and to change the way in which production, distribution and exchange is organised, you are talking about the need for social ownership, as well as for workers control over all of these aspects of society. Nationalis -ed property is not enough. As you imply, if no further steps are taken, this puts the socialised property in the hands of a bureaucracy, which means that privilege and inequality continues, both within the party and the state, at the expense of the working class and the peasantry, who are the majority. It leads to corruption and violent repression, i.e. Stalinism. The latter was also the negative consequence of the terrible price that Russia had to pay in order to defend the revolution against imperialism during a terrible civil war (1918-21). This left the country isolated and broken. Finally, you correctly say that there is no country in the world that ever called itself communist, either in the past or the present. At the same time there has never been 'existing socialism', either in the former Soviet Union or China today. In the latter, the state and the socialised property is under the control of a bureaucracy, i.e. the Communist party, inherited from the Stalinist tradition. Part of that tradition. is the idea of budding socialism in a single country (a form of nationalism, not internationalism). At the same time the CCP allows huge sections of the economy to be owned and controlled by large capitalist enterprises (e.g. real estate). Therefore, however much it has done to raise millions of peasants out of poverty, China is not following a trajectory that could be called socialist, therefore this will not lead it to communism. Perhaps you will say more about this in part 2?
Let me make a reservation that I am from Russia. Many people in Russia, including those who do not like communists, understand that many repressions were justified when they see the so-called representatives of the Russian opposition (in quotes Russian, since they are not Russian by blood or by their actions) Let me give you a very recent example. Navalny studied at Yale University in a faculty with other foreigners who are trained by various US NGOs for destructive activities under the guise of democracy. His daughter was now in the United States working for the Democratic hq. The Anti-Corruption Foundation he created, in addition to facts exposing corrupt officials, attributes many lies. Now these people have fled to the Baltics, they are helping the West to compile sanctions lists. A number of bankers who stole money from Russia are hiding abroad, including in England and the US, and have received some kind of indulgence from Navalny's foundation for sponsorship. Imagine that the West calls outright banker thieves oppositionists thanks to Navalny's foundation. The West does not extradite them or freeze their accounts. Yesterday's thieves signed up as oppositionists only when they fled to the West. Almost 90% of the so-called Russian opposition visits the embassies of the USA, England and other European countries for so-called consultations. What is this if not betrayal? Imagine that in the USA someone from the opposition would constantly visit the Russian embassies for consultations with the Russians. You, being across the ocean and literally isolated from the processes and information in our country, are completely unable to soberly assess the state of affairs. The so-called opposition media in Russia were sponsored through Western funds literally with cryptocurrency to hide their connection with the State Department. I will give an incomplete list of the so-called oppositionists - Zibeltrud, Sobchak, Golts, Katz, Roizman, Gozman, Koch, Albats, Sheitman, Gerber, Buntman, Gelman, Urin, Fishman, Eidman, Makarevich, Melman, Gelfand, Nevzlin, Kiperman, Feigin, Heidiz, Yeneman, Felgengauer, Weinstein, Kararlitsky, Bubinstein, Khodorkovksy, Gessen, Kaplan, Shlosberg, Shatz, Shenderovich. Did anything catch your eye about these names? In 99% of cases these are not Russian people, I think their nationality does not need to be explained to you. The Trotskyists who wanted a world revolution instead of restoring order in the USSR did not suffer in vain! Now, due to the limitation of their influence and the reduction of support from Western NGOs, these people have begun squabbling with each other. Imagine that the bankers who stole the money fled to the West, gave part of the stolen money to the so-called opposition, and in gratitude they enrolled them in their ranks so that the West would not hand them over to our justice system. I have no doubt, seeing these names (the so-called Russian opposition) and comparing them with the names of the early Bolshevik-Trotskyists, that Stalin's repressions were justified in most cases. Just think about it, a person who lost his bank deposits in Russia thanks to these rogue bankers cannot file claims in Western courts against these fugitive bankers, because the so-called oppositionists with dual and triple citizenship have put them on the white lists of the US State Department as dissidents.
I do not justify the deportation of various peoples by Stalin, but I want to emphasize that you in the West like to remember the events of 100 years ago, but never mention that you had camps for leftists, for the Japanese and others. In the USA, cases were filed against journalists, workers and others simply for their leftist views. Tell me this didn't happen? You stubbornly do not want to remember how back in the 60s blacks were not allowed into various establishments, you did not allow them to take seats on public transport, allowing them to sit only in the back rows and not in all states. We have a saying: In someone else’s eye we see a speck, but in our own we cannot see a log.
Moreover, when Russia opened up to the West in the early 90s, it was ready to make any concessions, including the loss of industry, many weapons systems, it ceded its spheres of influence, supported the West in every possible way, the West simply did not accept it into its club. What Western influence you ask? It was your agents in civilian clothes in the early 90s who taught our so-called oligarchs how to rob the country and privatize the people's wealth. You do not understand that now in our country at the very grassroots level there is a need in society not for Putin but for a tougher leader who would begin repressions in order to cleanse the country. Let me give you another banal example of double standards. The West constantly calls the Russian Tsar Ivan IV terrible, although no one compares the number of victims of death sentences of our Tsar by comparing them with the number of sentences of Western monarchs of that time. If you compare the numbers, Ivan IV is completely harmless against the background of European monarchs. Almost every European city had a chopping block in the center of town when death sentences were a rare occurrence in our country. When someone in the West tries to assess what is happening in Russia, they usually rely on the opinion of some people offended by the authorities, and not the opinion of the people inside Russia. When Putin let Khodorkovsky go, many were shocked, he is a real mafia boss, a bloody trail and fraudulent privatization schemes have been following him since the 90s, and the president did this to please the West. Now in the West he is called some kind of fighter against the regime and a victim.
Now many patriots in Russia are surprised that Putin does not use all available weapons in (Censored country name starting with U) , that he tried to reach an agreement with someone in the West until the very end. I will repeat that in our society the demand is for a very tough leader and not someone like him!
Workers of the world unite 🌎
Unite to commit crimes as a band of plunderers? Or unite to voluntarily work together and create something awesome?
Yup. Down with the corrupt wealthy-class & their corrupt RW-politics, and with the working-class dupes who support the corrupt wealthy-class & their corrupt RW-politics.
Will hunt and gather for food!
@@authenticallysuperficial9874 there is nothing voluntary about capitalism
"Communism is the doctrine of the conditions of the liberation of the proletariat..." -Fred Engels. See his "Principles of Communism".
That is not the etymological definition, it is the interpretive definition. Be a good student and take in the etymology that prof Richard giving away for free...it gives u the french roots of word and the culmulative thought of that experience making the ism.
Very informative Indeed👍👍
Great insights, Professor Wolff!!Could you please the changes from factories that were run by factiry commuters vs. factories run by appointed managers(?)
after 1921 or so?
Big up Charlie every time
I like lectures, but my younger friends learn through social media reels, etc. I have some reels from Richard, but I was wondering if a series of reels for Facebook or RUclips etc. could be made to deliver key points about communism and socialism that are misunderstood. For example, The Soviet Union was not practicing communism, Capitalism is not the same as Democracy, Communism is not the same as a Dictatorship, Economics Systems are not Governments and Vice versa. I am sure you would know better what issues to address, but It's just a thought.
Thx Dr Wolff
Hello Professor, do you had any contact to the Revolutionary Communist Party of America? Greetings from Leipzig, Germany!
It’s important to note that for some, socialism, communism, and anarchism all meant the same thing.
The “stages” version of communism was adopted by some but not all.
Root word is community , strong community is what people need, ain’t it?
LOL, what's that? "community" is a myth. Nobody cares.
Community and society is voluntary. Communism is violent coercion, and therefore directly opposed to community.
@@authenticallysuperficial9874, Who told you it was forced coercion?
@@authenticallysuperficial9874violence by who against whom? Non directly violent coercion backed by military, economical, political, religion and media forces from who to whom?
It’s weird that you believe you can form a big ‘community’ without confronting the military force of the current rulers of the land (territory of a country not exactly the same as your community) your ‘community’ live on. And it’s delusional to think that a small ‘community’ can thrive when it depends on the utilities including transportation, resources and market provided by the country it’s in, and it pays tax to this country. Either it’s poor and nobody cares, or it’ll face greedy outsiders requesting more tax/bribe or worrying outsiders wanting it to be poor (sanction etc. by any reason as a facade) and defamed.
If the world is free to create ‘community’ as you like, it must be an anarchy. And anarchy means more violence to all.
@@graceli6886 Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
an·ar·chy
/ˈanərkē/
noun
1.
a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority or other controlling systems.
2.
the organization of society on the basis of voluntary cooperation, without political institutions or hierarchical government; anarchism.
the use of the term "disorder" in the first definition is an "assumption" and can be removed to match the second definition.
1.) a state with the absence or nonrecognition of authority or other controlling systems.
Would like you to talk about when money was backed by gold.???
Of course not...nor will he talk about "the robber barons" as employer's or monopolies
who raised prices because they could. ( those "prices being the cause of inflation )
Even Marx knew "money" was a commodity...and that hasn't been true since
FDR gave the world fiat in 1934...the greatest of all cons, which lasted until 1971,
and forcing everyone to still believe it didn't happen.
Is the speech of Lenin at the IV Congress of the Komintern? He explains the situation but I can't find the advice.
Awesome
Thank you so much Prof.Wolff, for your always clarifying communication.
It is useful to have these terms clearly delineated, thank you!
So you have all the definitions now? Care to share them with us?
Professor Wolff the goat
if democracy and caapitalism is what we are living under as long as I can remember than please please let's try another strategy because it does not work. Our society started with land grabbing pirates, and even today, right now we are still one way or the other acting as pirates, and only justifying in a different context using today's narrative, but leading to the same outcome. Insanity indeed.
30:12 love listening to you....i am learning so much. You are axgreat lecturer and you are so knowledgeable. Thank you
How you organize the new system that Lenin was trying to create.
By FORCE, just like he did.
@@jgalt308That's any government, buddy
@@christopherbrice5473 I wasn't aware that the Articles of Confederation
or The Constitution required FORCE?
@@jgalt308you never heard of the American Revolutionary war? Read a book brother
@@Oborowatabinostk It's clear you haven't. The war did not affect the type of government
that would emerge from it. It ended on Sept 3, 1783. This was a war for independence,
( the right to determine its own government ) and George III surrendered to each "state" separately.
June 21, 1788
As soon as 9 states had ratified the Constitution (June 21, 1788) it went into effect. On March 4, 1789 the 1st Congress of the new Constitution was seated, and in early April George Washington was elected as the 1st President.
So again, what force was used to compel its ratification? Or the ratification of those "states"
that had not ratified it on the above date?
Clearly, you have a lot more books to read. ( and maybe learn what the words "constitutional republic" mean.
Hint: it does not mean "democracy" )
People NEED Love.
Who will be in charge of redistributing it?
Who gets to determine what is a NEED?
Pretty obvious, it's what millions do not have at the moment due to the corrupt system we live under.
Good food, a home, clean water, free healthcare would be excellent starting points.
If the co-ops or community businesses are so much better why it’s not a norm in US and EU? And why there is zero high-tech co ops? Only low-tech.. agriculture, retail etc.
Get Charlie on screen, I want to see this guy!
Wolff can you put out some videos that are more advanced?
No. Because if he does, he will be shut down, or Fred Hampton'D.
Look up his books with his partner Resnick on Marxian economic theory
And China is properly called the People’s Republic of China.
Do understanding Anarchism
To be both borrower and lender ?
Tks. much
You will prevail
I see a huge problem with mocking American right wingers for claiming 'socialism is when the government does stuff', but then turning around and claiming that the mirror image of it, 'capitalism is when the government does stuff'. Two wrongs do not make a right. Prof. Woff is taking a stance not supported by, Marx, Engels or Lenin (despite his claims), in that centralized socialist production is still largely capitalist, when there is no significant private ownership of the means of production to speak of, but social ownership instead. Orthodox Marxists call this type of position 'revisionism', and is also one of the main Anarchist criticisms of 20th century Socialist states.
Also, Wolff is strongly supportive of workers' cooperatives as a way to introduce socialist production within a capitalist society. He does not talk much about it, unless I'm wrong, but the Yugoslavian socialists, led by Tito, based their 'market socialism' economy on workers' co-operatives. See how that built-in competition ended for them and their system.
''See how that built-in competition ended for them and their system.''
It ended with a grotesque machination from the West, Corporate Power, hard power attack
in illegal war. A nation now in significant debt to the usual suspects.
See Michael Parenti's work on this topic.
@@kwakkers68Parenti is a hack taken seriously by absolutely no one in the academic world.
I’m not all the way through the video yet, but I find it hard to believe that Professor Wolff defined “capitalism” as “when the government does stuff”. Government as a concept is orthogonal to the economic system. The issue with capitalism is that wealth-hoarders use their wealth to _buy and control_ what government does in order to ensure that government policies benefit their bottom line. It is undemocratic because the majority of people (esp. workers) are not represented.
BTW, I agree that right-wingers should not be mocked for holding heavily propagandized views on “socialism”. The challenge is to educate and persuade-that’s what free speech is for. Working class “right-wingers” are our allies in the class struggle and we should treat them as such.
@@chaosinfusion8127 Well, he doesn't state it literally in the video, but that's what his take on the Soviet Union's economic system amounts to. He claims its system, even after the end of the NEP, was 'state capitalism', which is what I am challenging.
'Commune' etc derived from the Latin 'com' - with and 'unum'' - one.
I’m grateful to now, have the language to describe and understand the three modern systems of government. It’s an essential tool for fighting misinformation. Thank you.
Just the fact you use that word shows how brainwashed you are.
Well, Communism isn't a system of government, Socialism is the word for that.
Communism is a classless and stateless society and mode of production. Socialism is the path, Communism is the goal.
Well, Communism isn't a system of government, Socialism is the word for that.
Communism is a classless and stateless society and mode of production. Socialism is the path, Communism is the goal.
Capitalism is NOT a form of government.