Homelessness as a Feature of Capitalism
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- A Marxist analysis of the contradictions of capitalism, particularly those of Homelessness, the prison-industrial complex, and the position of the working class as wage slaves.
background music: Joseph Ryan Banks, sections of Jesus, Joy of Man's Desiring, Slowed down Chet Baker's Almost Blue
Social Links:
beacons.ai/jos...
Support me on Ko-fi: ko-fi.com/jose...
Links:
www.esgdive.co...
www.google.com...
www.bls.gov/ne...
www.marxists.o....
www.news4jax.c....
jaxtoday.org/2...
www.actionnews...
www.jacksonvil...
www.law.ufl.ed...
www.sentencing...
www.prisonpoli....
freedomnetwork...
@Badempanada posted a great video going over the biases in economics statistics, and I highly recommend taking a look at it.
ruclips.net/video/k12GGnTxyhI/видео.htmlsi=qWg987USrua0mrVr
Badempanada is a fool.
@@SlapShotTakes actually, he’s a great content creator. His videos are very well researched and he maintains a good perspective. You should check him out sometime with fresh eyes.
12:00 I remember thinking this when I was fired from Trader Joe's for keeping some food that was marked for the bin. During the unemployment hearing their lawyer successfully argued that it is TJ's property even in the trash and even up until it is at the landfill. I remember being shocked by this idea that you would want to claim ownership over something you have not only discarded, but are paying sanitary services to do so. 🤯
I used to work in multiple different grocery stores and witnessed the perfectly good food going to waste. I also kept food that was marked to be thrown out along with my coworker who was also a roommate at the time. It's absolutely disgusting that they did this to you and just shows how morally bankrupt the entire system is, the people who prop up and defend the actions of companies that do nothing to benefit the community. That lawyer must have been really proud of the chain TJ's had on them, licking the boot and so on. It also shines light on the problem of how little companies pay their employees, how utterly adversarial they are when you are forced to try to keep food that the company would rather claim even while they're tossing it in the dumpster. Solidarity my friend.
Under maritime law a discarded item is up for grabs under the right of salvage. US courts are in essence maritime courts. You have a right to salvage under maritime law and this is what should have been argued.
@@Novusod You miss every shot you don't take - and this is as good an argument as any.. 😂
fired from Trader Joe's for keeping some food that was marked for the bin. ! ? That is SO STUPID !!
They have the risk of that discarded food to cause contamination or other health risks to the public until the landfill management assigns that risk.
Your speaking speed is noticeably and admittedly discractingly faster than the captions that you show on the screen. You may want to slow down your speech or speed up the speed at which the captions show up, or sync up the captions to be a second ahead or so of what you are saying. I enjoyed the content of this video, as it showed me more behind the philosophy of socialism. However, I feel like you do rely on direct quotes (Up to paragraphs worth of quotes) far too much to explain your perspective of socialism and capitalism. There is nothing wrong with this. If you are trying to solely explain the perspective of socialism without any personal input on how it works, then it serves it's purpose as an informative video on what the general ideas of socialism is. If you are trying to spread a more complex and nuanced view about what socialism means in today's world, with your personal viewpoint, then I would suggest relying less on the writings of those from the past and injecting your own thoughts on what socialism can do to better this world. I'd like to state that I have no qualms with you referring to the writings of historical figures from the past. Just that if you are trying to go past the level of an informative video and instead to an analytical video I'd like you to inject more of your personal opinions on the topic or thoughts of other scholars whom you believe in terms of your thoughts on socialism. Thank you.
I was honestly having a bit of a hard time getting the captions to work well with my speaking pace, so this is useful advice. And I feel like a lot of Marx’s quotes are so rich and full of meaning, so it’s easy to give lots of examples through his work, which may lead to over reliance if not carefully considered and curated. I have many more essays planned and will take all you’ve said as well meaning critiques, writing is a passion of mine, and there’s never a point where we stop learning the craft. Thank you for the input, it means a lot.
@@Josephryanbanks I appreciate you taking my advice into account. I just watched your Napoleon Dynamite video which I thought was great. Yes, we do not ever stop learning our craft. I look forward to seeing more videos from you in the future.
As someone who likes to give in depth criticism and generally supportive comments to _"smaller"_ creators, I support your comment and wish you the best.
And as a commie that also goes for the content creator ofc. Keep it up comrade!
Turn them off.
When a comrade selects the Bard class.
Can’t choose which class under marxism.
In Shantou in China they don't do big businesses, they all run small family businesses. You are the capital and the worker. I like that. I opened my own living room as a training center for teaching English in Wuxi. And everyone was like "Wow! You're a business owner! How big is your school, how many teachers did you hire?"
Bitch, I don't want to exploit anyone and I don't want to be exploited. The whole point of a business is to gain freedom, to wake up at noon and set your own schedule, not to make a ton of money. Why can't people just do that? Small businesses everywhere. Small restaurants, small hotels like in Sanya. Why must giant shopping malls and giant hotel chains and giant convenience store chains take over? Why can't people recognize that small business are good?
You gain that ability through risk. A person you fire can go somewhere else, and can demand a higher wage by threat of going somewhere else.
You do not ‘take’ their value, you increase it and then take some.
America where the rich do no work and pay none of the taxes and the middle/working class does all of the work and pays all the taxes and the impoverished and homeless are there as an unspoken threat that keeps the workers from getting out of line. 😅
The biggest misconception about being homeless is that it is not a mental illness. There are enough jobs and houses.
Some (I dare to say most) homeless people are there because they "want to" that is to say, drug abuse. Where I live at least, here in Brazil, people are going to get taken out of the roads and put into medical care and taken care of by the government.There are indeed enough houses and enough land for everyone, and there are enough jobs too, but most people don't wanna work them because of the conditions and wage offered.
As I'm in a bit of a ramble already, I'm not a leftist, and I think that they often complain about billionaires and the big bad money guys, but they don't even make a dent on the world's fortune and the money that is in the hand of the government, and honestly, it's not even that hard to understand why even without googling it, just think about it, it's a company selling a product that you want to, or dont want to buy, agaisnt a country with an army and power to put you on jail if you don't give them the money, which here in Brazil it's way more than half your salary, it doesn't come back in benefits, and then there's taxes on food and every and anything you buy. When I hear about the big bad money guys being the issue I just have this look in my face, they help us more than the govenment at times, the recent tragedy at Rio Grande do Sul was one of the biggest example of that. The craziest part of Brazil is that the government is the one bribing and lobbying companies most of the time, I'm so tired of this country.
Yeah they are homeless bc they don’t wanna play by societies rules, are mentally ill or are addicted to drugs. Or government policy has created impoverished conditions.
Research Javier Melei and his economics, he runs argentina and has saved the govt from debt spiraling.
LIBERTARIANISM IS THE WAY,
TAXATION IS THEFT BY GOVERNMENTS!
Absolutely love the video 💜 because I'm sick and tired of being told "you're just jealous and don't want to work hard" when I mention the acute wealth disparity due to CEOs and BOD salaries compared to employees. Especially because those parasitic CEOs and BOD don't do a damn thing.
You might like the book 'Survival of the Richest' by Donald Jeffries.
Thank you so much! It’s the gaslighting that’s been going on for far too long from the rich and privileged in society. And I love getting book recommendations, thank you for that.
This is the fixed pie fallacy. You aren’t selfish, you are just a simple person.
Say:
We both have 5 dollars, so inequality is 0
In a year, I have 5,000 dollars and you have 100 dollars
The inequality has grown massively, but we are both richer!
And if CEOs do nothing, then go be a CEO. Go manage a company of millions of workers if you think that it requires 0 work. And if your company goes broke, you are in debt! Your workers aren’t!
@@SlapShotTakes , I say this respectfully because I’m passionate about deprogramming brainwashing. Both of your comments are oozing out “wannabe” vibes. In the sense where you are regurgitating: the propaganda that is instilled into the population to blindly accept crony capitalism, and the ad hominem attacks to police those who criticize it, yet you do not truly benefit from unbridled capitalism.
Are you a CEO? Have you had privilege of amassing wealth from starting your own enterprise? If so, that’s terrific. Then be the shinning example of an ethical CEO who pays their employees sufficient wages to keep up with the costs of living and offers legitimate health insurance.
There are countless books to support that it has become nearly impossible and illogical to quantitively measure and justify the compensation ratio of most BODs and CEOs relative to the pay employees receive, and the over all damages their decisions have on the natural resources. I do not know which country you live in, but here in the USA all one needs to do is look around and see the proliferation of the homeless nearly everywhere, the contraction of jobs, the high cost of education and housing to realize that the plutocracy are immoral and greedy.
“It’s the willingness on the part of people who seek personal enrichment to destroy other human beings… And because the mechanisms of governance can no longer control them, there is nothing now within the formal mechanisms of power to stop them from creating essentially a corporate oligarchic state.” {Chris Hedges, Capitalism’s ‘Sacrifice Zones’}.
I'd like to dub your video in Russian, for those here who still think that we "simply have a wrong capitalism, we just need to copy the US's system more"
May I?
Send me an email, let’s talk about it there.
You have fuedalism really.
@@SlapShotTakes oh, yeah, please tell me what we have in here.
I simply forgot that we have castles, personal loyalty to the sovereign, land aristocracy and most of us live in a village under servitude.
Thank you, genius.
@@SlapShotTakes for those folks who are too smart for using common definitions I have to report from here.
We have a pretty basic late stage capitalism, with big monopolies, with oligarchy, financial capital and imperialistic/fascistic tendencies.
The audacity some folks have to call this feudalism is astonishing, but understandable. Some folks simply like to mess with definitions in order to prive their point.
This is a great work, I was quite surprised at how well connected this is to Marx's actual critique of political economy and Marx's humanism or naturalism. And furthermore gives more connections to Karl Marx's critiques of Proudhon in saying there can be a commodity production without poverty when Marx talks the fact that it is the system we live in as the mass accumulation of commodities started from the production of commodities themselves that produces poverty. Very well done and good luck on this channel man.
Trash economics and a lie.
@@SlapShotTakes Trash? Okay, how do you quantify something inherently quantitative? What would define a product produced for exchange-value from a natural product of use-value? If you were to try to explain this, you would have to use Marx's transformation equation to explain it that a commodity does have a utility, but it is a qualitative item that is made from a utility through a process qualifying it. Labor, specifically labor-time as production of commodities must be socially maximized as what is socially necessary to produce commodities.
I am not a communist, but you are spot on with this video
No he isn’t. ‘Wage slavery’ only exists if you have literally zero value in the marketplace, and if you have more skill, or you risk more, you are compensated accordingly.
To simplify,
Billions can be a 7/11 cashier but only a handful of people can be a 7/11 CEO
Instant sub bro. Ngl this is one of the best videos ive seen on youtube in a while🔥
thanks! That really means a lot!
Beautiful essay and analysis of today's conditions. Marx truly is timeless.
Marx is timeless and becomes more and more relevant as time goes on. Thanks for the kind words comrade.
Timelessly foolish.
This video really caught my attention. I live in one of several cities where the unhoused are many and apparent. Several years ago I started referring to areas where these people had set up their small communities (with much pearl clutching horror or moral disdain from the many well-fed people sitting comfortably in their warm homes) as Capitalist Housing Projects.
Really great stuff! Beautifully made and a great essay pointing out the violence brought upon us through capitalism.
Socialism has never existed without mass violence. It requires force to take from more productive people, and give it to less productive people. It is a violation of natural law.
I traded cool spears I made at summer camp for Mountain dew, and then we had a guy who got 1 dew per case but made little notes that would give you dew so you didn’t have to carry cans. This was good as my spears weren’t too hard to get, but the guy who got dew could bike 15 mi to the store and get it but I couldn’t walk there.
That is capitalism but everyone is happy.
this essay is definitely one for the educating the homies playlist. thank you for your time and effort establishing concise cause and effect with accessible language. keep up the good work comrade.
Glad it was helpful! I’ve got more essays discussing more Marxist concepts and philosophy etc. thanks for the supportive feedback.
You should read The Book of Chuang Tzu. It's pretty anarchistic. It is Taoist.
Towards a Theory of Ecological and Social Reality
Historical and Dialectical Materialism
• SUBJECTIVITY: CONSUMPTION
• ACTIVITIES: PRODUCTION
• SUBJECTIVITY: EXCHANGE
• MEANS: DISTRIBUTION
Colin and Clive Burgess
Captured the essence of Marx perfectly, really well done on this. I too truly believe Marx's economic theory work is timeless, and the more we can show how it serves the common man far better than the capitalist lie, the more likely we are to get the change we sorely need
Thanks for the kind words. I plan on touching on some more of his theories because there's just so much to dig into with his body of work. People in the United States have been taught to jump at red shadows, when the real threats to their existence are the ones signing their paychecks. Solidarity my friend.
@ChucklesMcGurk I do agree with your point, but I don't think it detracts from the basic principles of Marxist theory. He did not outline HOW we are to form this next stage of society in detail, but I do believe he accurately predicted the way society will continue to move over time, with further distribution of capital, and I would say is accurate in the analysis of it being those who work in forms of industry that will be the major leading force behind that change as opposed to it being top down or from the philosophical class.
Personally, for what it's worth, I think that Marx and Nietzsche were both on the same track with their lines of thought, and that they track too with your point; that we must build a society that can help nurture people into being better humans than those who came before them. The idea of the Ubermensch not being that there are singular great people that lead masses, but that the Ubermensch are the people that will come generations from now having benefited from the society we leave for them and they can in turn create the best form of human society, which ultimately would be communism, at least in the opinion of Marx and many of us leftists.
It is behind his times as it is based in mercantilism which was already outdated when he was alive. It is also based on the fixed pie fallacy, where constant economic growth, despite benefiting the organizers of labor more, still increase the wealth of the laborer.
You have a great voice for teaching this material, I appreciate the knowledge. Relating my experiences and attempting to negotiate my sanity over my morals, I am beside myself...quite literally with my heart sunk in, I wage upon my knees. Cognitive dissonance strangles my logic and reasoning when witnessing the layered contradictions at every threshold. Take homelessness and disability for example, a designed program, that produces poverty and homeless. Misdirected blame upon the elderly and disabled homeless all because SAA insufficient benefit payments. Supreme Court ruling added threat, allowing the deprivation of sleep, punishing humans for existing. This is abusive, and a form of torture.
Thank you, and you're absolutely correct. Capitalism creates mounting contradictions, and relies on its subjects to forget all human decency in favor of the profit motive. Liberal capitalism tries to tells us that its simply our human nature to seek profit at another's expense, but it is a system designed by the wealthy, for the wealthy, and relegates any human need to the backburner. It is an abusive torturous system.
Outstanding video my friend. It’s absurd here.
Thanks friend. It truly is, the US is in its throes.
It is absurd due to government interaction with the economy.
I love these new neo marxists.. read ask questions the people before you wanted to live in a lie.. it's time .. revolution..
This man is cooking ong
No cap(italism)
Modern capitalism decreased extreme poverty by 80% from the 85% it hovered at for all of human existence. It is a lie to say socialism can do better.
Commenting for the algorithm
Much appreciated!!!
Beautiful video, that puts into words what I've noticed but failed to dig into because of deeply-ingrained capitalist beliefs which I did not know I had. What to do next...
I would say to just start digging into some more Marxist theory, theres a great Marx & Engels reader compiled by Robert C. Tucker. Lenin has some good stuff too. We are in a prime revolutionary situation, and so the times must be acted upon by the masses.
Dude it is just a fixed pie fallacy. Digging a hole doesn’t make value, the labor theory of value is a wash.
@@SlapShotTakes I agree. I don't seem to understand the relationship your comment has to mine though?
Comrade is out here increasing my desire to work my way through Das Kapital. Keep on shouting into that void.
It’s a dense read in some parts but it’s definitely worth it! Thank you for the kind words!
Das Kapital is about Jews. Marx hated Jews and supported proto nazis to that end. He also has been quoted as an extreme antisemite having rejected his heritage as the basement dweller he was.
@@SlapShotTakes oof. You’re thinking of Bakunin who was an actual antisemite. Any problems with Marx that you may have are based in your own weird false reality.
I carry a lot of your sentiments, however I don't vilify capitalism itself, or private ownerships of land and homes, rather I blame interest and debt based economics, because interest by design siphons money from the bottom to the top, I also blame the fake money being injected into the system, and the lack of humanity in the policy making whether domestic or foreign
@@shalashtein you mean Capitalism without saying it
The interest and debt economics are because they serve the the purpose of gaining profit and siphoning said wealth. It's another piece inherent to the system.
It seems that (in the most polite way) you're doing the mental gymnastics to avoid blaming the system by seperating systems put in place by the unremovable incentives of capitalism from the system itself. It's no different than the classic, "it's not capitalism, it's cronyism!"
I used to do the same thing but one has to eventually accept that capitalism will capitalism. That's my opinion at least. Hope I didn't come off rude
bro really said "capitalism is not the problem captialisim is" lol.
No he means cronyism which isn’t the free market. Government intervention in the market is always terrible
Good explanation of how we’re being exploited. Also, love your kitty.
@@hisbigal thank you! And I love her too, her name is Luna. :)
Subscribed
I am rich and bourjois, no debth, hight income and a wage slave.
Then you aren't rich.
@@vebdaklu shut up peasant
all right
religion was the origin of scientific philosophy, and that marxists can't deny. All basement for dialectical materialism reigns on the idea of utopia, where all people didicated to the prosperity. It makes confused every rational-thinking person, and Austrian Economics School in Marx's times as well, that marxists call for anarchism to reach the utopia. Marxists are rationalizing marginalization, the old-known goal "to devide and conquer", it's their blody infinite struggle with the fact that no human civilization carries or carried morale of "material equality".
I take marxists fot hose who deny the history, the morale humanity achieved through years and they tried nothing but to return back to the stone age morality. If you disagree, create something better! Something better than Christianity. Then tell that you need a "new human" as Christ said, as marxism is essentially inspired with the "new human".
"I take marxists [for those] who deny the history"
as they more or less must. Marxist see history with the bias of class struggle, so they fall victim to a whig historiography, seeing humanity's purpose as one of progress. this is partially why Marxists let their economic system dictate their self. without any sense of self in one's control, they stare at the world and wait for others to tell them how to live, what to do. until the revolution comes, they onanistically reiterate theory until they get lost and forget their own agency, and autonomy.
Cool video, bro :)
Thanks 😁
Your writing is beautiful I wish to one day be able to articulate myself aswell as you ❤
Thank you so much! Those are very kind words and I very much appreciate them.
i Love almost blue by chet baker
Chet Baker is one of my favorite jazz musicians 😁 I could use his music for everything honestly
Great work so underrated
Thanks, I appreciate that
Well said
Slavery is an economic category like any other. Thus it also has its two sides. Let us leave alone the bad side and talk about the good side of slavery. Needless to say, we are dealing only with direct slavery, with Negro slavery in Surinam, in Brazil, in the Southern States of North America.
Direct slavery is just as much the pivot of bourgeois industry as machinery, credits, etc. Without slavery you have no cotton; without cotton you have no modern industry. It is slavery that gave the colonies their value; it is the colonies that created world trade, and it is world trade that is the precondition of large-scale industry. Thus slavery is an economic category of the greatest importance.
Without slavery North America, the most progressive of countries, would be transformed into a patriarchal country. Wipe North America off the map of the world, and you will have anarchy - the complete decay of modern commerce and civilization. Cause slavery to disappear and you will have wiped America off the map of nations. -Karl Marx
Is there no in between?
Capitalism and Communism are inherently in contradiction to one another, Communism as a social force rises in response to the mounting contradictions of capitalism, to correct the situation. Because human suffering grows at an ever increasing rate where capitalists are allowed to maintain their hierarchy and control over the means of production. Poverty and inequality furthers the suffering of the workers, and pushes the crisis further until it hits a breaking point. Workers who then become the owners of their own means of production, are emancipated from the chains of capitalism.
@@Josephryanbanks Even lenin himself put in reforms to allow some entrepreneurship, because he saw that the system wasnt doing well.
Unless machines take over everything, communism aint happening
The in between will eventually be dominated by capitalists through the influence of money. Just look at scandinavia that used to be social democracies and are now increasingly capitalist, with few owning their own homes or any capital.
Distributism
@@jamesgosling8491 What is that?
Commie detected, opinion rejected
bro really wants to be a slave to the ritch huh.
Marx had some good ideas but they weren't perfect either. Capitalism has issues for sure and it is easily corrupted by greed but it is better than the systems that came before it. The true progression from Capitalism is not Communism though, the correct progression is actually Social Capitalism in which the needs of the individual are maintained and provided by the state through equal taxation of profit margins of the industries. Social Capitalism would see basics like food, shelter, education, and medical provided to all citizens as a birth right and instead of working to provide those basic needs for themselves and their families they work to provide luxury. This would do away with the need for people to work so they don't end up homeless and starving to death and instead open the opportunities for the people to focus on what truly drives them. Social Capitalism would do away with one of the biggest faults of Capitalism in that someone always has to lose by instead making sure the hyper wealthy pay their fair share while still rewarding ambition and innovation. It would allow artists to be artists and scientists to be scientists by freeing the need for them to concern over basic needs and instead focus on the field that interests them most. The 'Means of Production' don't need to belong to the workers if those workers are provided for by taxation of those who own them. The primary issue of Social Capitalism can also be solved by paying higher wages for lower labors, no one wants to be a trash man but if being a trash man pays more than being a chef, people will do it if that is the path they see to obtaining the luxury they desire. Or they may be a chef despite it paying less because food is something they are passionate about. The only thing keeping society from moving toward this system is that every time someone suggests setting up the safety nets that help to progress toward it they are demonized by the upper class through lobbying and media who have systematically dismantled education to insure that people can be controlled and manipulated to their benefit. In reality Social systems benefit everyone, including the upper class by providing more income and systems for the lower class to elevate them out of a system of poverty. This in turn means the money they would have otherwise spent satisfying basic needs can be spent on an open market of other goods which inevitably still ends up in the hands of the upper class eventually if they are playing their cards right. This also means a market that is maintained by companies that provide goods and services people want rather than ones that people need. It eliminates one of the oldest "professions" in the world in the form of the "Landlord" but that isn't a bad thing considering many of the upper class don't even provide a service in modern societies and instead just own land that they inflate the rental prices on to abuse the middle and lower classes who cannot afford to also own land. The important take away from Marx is that systems of oppression exist around us and we should be aware of them and seek to enable all people to benefit from a system rather than a few by doing away with what makes those systems oppressive not by doing away with the system itself. Capitalism is a system, like all systems it is not oppressive on its own but it is made oppressive by those who play within it, the key is to adjust the system to limit the avenues of oppression and maximize the benefits to everyone. Capitalism would be the opposite if the system had a worker to CEO pay ration of 1:1 or near 1:1, the problem is greed corrupts.
The issue with Communism which Capitalism moved away from was a system in which people were given exactly the same value for different amounts of labor, a trash man is paid as much as an architectural engineer. That system incentivizes laziness because you get paid as much no matter what job you are doing. Capitalism solved this problem by incentivizing working hard by providing an increased income for that work but it did not account for the greed of those with wealth and power driving abuse of those without to maximize those profits through the commodification of basic needs of survival. Social Capitalism takes the improvements of Capitalism but then applies a system of guaranteed needs to remove the commodification from the things people need and moves it back to a market of luxuries that people spend their incomes on. Obviously there are problems with every system but it is important that we look to progress not regress, and while Marx for his time was an absolute genius in terms of progress we need to view his work as it should be viewed, in his time. Social Capitalism is the next logical progression to improve economic systems in favor of the majority. In theory Social Capitalism also has an issue where some people will just decide not to work but they are not being incentivized to do so because refusal to do anything means you just have your basic needs met. It isn't perfect but it is better than the current system and all it requires is that people like Elon Musk make 9 billion dollars a year instead of 10 billion a year. Oh no, he won't be able to buy ten super yachts in a year. What a shame that they will literally still have more money than they could ever possibly spend while everyone else at least has food, shelter, education, and medical care.
Now if only we could create a system of autonomous robots to do all the garbage collecting and basic maintenance work for us so we can all be artists and scientists and what not. Oh well, maybe in another fifty years.
Well-written insights. However, i have to mention that the instances outlined as inherent to your proposed "social capitalism," is better known and achieved via "democratic socialism", where a strong welfare state, robust public services, and market regulation are combined within a democratic political framework to promote social equity and economic stability (that is, elements of socialism are implemented within a democratic and market-based framework.
Furthermore, if you're very familiar with Marx's writings, you should be aware of how he actually outlined the stages to communism in which communism would be stateless & classless, achieved when society had attained abundance after capitalism, as well as the fact that the Soviets and Mao fell short of the aspect of a worker's democracy as Marx & Engels had emphasized (as seen in the 1871 Paris Commune), but for a vanguard party that will direct and lead the people to communism. The communists though had assumed correctly that condoning an opposition could deter their serious ambition to actualize prosperity & equality for all.
However, it was democracy's absence in the broad society of the communist republics & its political institutions, that resulted in the cult-like military hierarchy in which those with ulterior motives took advantage of as we've come to know. Moreover, the setup and incentives behind "to each according to his need" as stated by Marx & Engels, under Stalin's state led capitalism were very misguided and could have gone differently in practice.
Nonetheless, the point I'm here to make is that unlike Marx & Engels, traditional economic discourse has long neglected politics, how we govern ourselves in society.
Although a product of their time, Marx & Engels, devoted ample sessions to further emphasize the importance, relationship & dynamics between political institutions and prosperity in his writings but a focus more on class struggle & identity, whose insights are actually enlightening.
However, thanks to writings of David Acemoglu, i believe that we can attest that no matter the economic system and its variants (such as the various schools of capitalism: Austrain or Keynesian), the economic impediments we face, always stem from the way political power is exercised or rather, how our political institutions are organized for participation because it is these political institutions via those in command, whether free to popular participation or marginalised/authoritarian, or led by the bourgeoisie or proletariat, that ultimately decides how resources will be allocated and utilized.
Therefore, we can argue and suggest how to improve or upstage the system all day, but compared to European countries such as the countries, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland that can be cited as successful examples of democratic socialism, the United States and other market based democracies in Africa, Asia & Latin America are pretty politically fucked as persons and their concerns aren't effectively represented in statecraft and governance, rather for longevity, subservience, and stability of the state been prioritized far over.
Moreover, the co-option of "capitalism" which in itself isn't bad but arguably the best means to initially generate prosperity in our society, has its drawbacks depending on how political institutions direct its activities, based on the thoughts that guide their actions. For instance, I'll argue that the U.S Roosevelt's Keynesian economics which brought about the "New deal" was far preferable to the Miltonian free market idealism that came after, because it sort after inclusiveness rather than deepening inequality in society as we have seen.
Thus, also how we are made to interact with our institutions via political parties that have increasingly upend a system that continuously find means to exclude us from political participation as well as negate prosperity and upward mobility for the populace as easily attainable.
It will take a political revolution for a democratic socialist market economy before the measures for prosperity we so desire, can be achieved. Otherwise, we have to be patient and watch the system gradually shapeshift to accommodate our needs as it seems to be occuring as at these times.
Excellent video. Making my way through Marx and Engels work at the moment, and these types of videos really make me hungry to jump back in when I'm starting to get fatigued with hopelessness. Will be sending this to the next bootlicker that says homelessness is a personal failure.
Great to hear! Their work is chock full of insight and great philosophy and economics. And thanks for sharing.
exactly lol
Lets say ALL people are deserving of having their needs met for them. Lets say the government provides housing, electricity, food, clothes, transportation, and internet services to all homeless for free with no strings attached. How will we continue to fund the program when recipients increase to 40% of the population, 60%, 80%? What kind of lives will people live when they have no responsibilities and are cared for like an infant. Will they all become artists, inventors, and innovators? Or will they wallow in apathy and nihilism, succumbing to addictions and suicide? How will we continue to function as a society when we no longer have factory workers and cleaners, construction workers and soldiers?
It is true that the civilized cosmopolitan lifestyle does not come naturally to Humans. The Ant and Bee do not question their place in society nor their role in maintaining it. They either understand the importance of their work in keeping the system running, or were never given the capacity to question it. Contrarily, humans are tribal in nature, much more akin to our primate relatives. While working together is still a key part of their survival, they are also capable of jealousy and selfishness. Indeed, time and again it has been humanity's competitive drive to do better than others that has brought about most of the inventions that allow for our modern civilization to exist. Yet it is the balance of selfish desires to take from others with a tacit understanding that more can be accomplished by working as part of a society that has truly allowed humanity to flourish. Instead of all of our time being consumed trying to capture the next meal we can live far easier lives with far more safety than at any other time in history. I'm not saying modern capitalist society is perfect. But taking away people's motivation to indirectly contribute to society and feel useful and fulfilled will only make life worse not better.
Do all the mental gymnastics you want, allowing the most vulnerable among us to rot in the streets is not a feature of a flourishing and virtuous society. giving my life to a system that is designed to be indifferent to or outright promote human suffering makes me wallow in apathy. What is the point of doing anything other then selfishly survive in a country with no safety net?
Moreover, the implication that some people don't deserve to have their basic needs met is disturbing to say the least, but lets run with it. Lets say only the productive worker bees of society are allowed to live in dignity. What purpose would it serve to let the 'undesirables' spread squalor and crime among the obedient masses? Wouldn't it be better to subsidize housing for all of them to keep them away from the general public, and possibly provide services to get them back working? Your tax dollars already subsidize first responders, prisons, jails, courts, crisis centers, shelters and countless other services for the homeless. Why not streamline the process and physically quarantine those not "deserving of having their needs met".
@@isaiahcoleman967 While I do not see it as society's obligation to take care of those who refuse to fulfill their social contract, it is obvious doing nothing about the issue is not fair to anyone since they have nowhere else to be and others should not have to be subjected to their crime, and occupation of public property. Typical methods of fixing the issue such as providing all their needs for them and making their life as comfortable as possible, or destroying their encampments and forcing them to relocate somewhere else do nothing to solve it.
It must be understood that not everyone wants to or is capable of working to provide for themselves. While there are not definitive statistics on the rate, preliminary studies have found that around 35-40% of homeless would gladly work and provide for themselves if given the opportunity, and some already do work. Food and subsidized shelter should be available to them, job skill training and drug rehab classes should be a vital part of this effort. The goal should be to reintegrate those who are willing to work for it and want to improve. We also should address the root causes that lead these people to become destitute in the first place, affordable housing is top of the list, in addition, criminal records for non-violent crime should be forgiven upon the completion of community service, allowing those with unsavory pasts a chance to show they have changed for the better. Additionally the influx of dangerous drugs at the border should be stopped to prevent them from proliferating into vulnerable communities. We should work with local enforcement agencies in countries where they come from to stop the production of these drugs at the source, and we should sanction any country unwilling to help fight the illicit drug industry.
As for the 65% of homeless who are either incapable or unwilling to work, they shouldn't be left behind on the streets either. If someone is so mentally or physically disabled that no amount of job training will ever make them self sufficient, they should not be sitting on the streets with criminals and drugs, they should be institutionalized somewhere where they can receive proper care and get the resources they need to ensure they are not a risk to themselves or others. If someone is so lazy or drug addicted that they refuse to get clean or improve themselves in any capacity, they should not be taking resources from those who want to get better. We have plenty of empty land in this country, there should be a few reservations where they can go to live how they want, outside of society, free from imprisonment or indignity of living on the streets. They can build their own houses, find their own food, and generally do what they want, as long as it stays within the confines of their reservation. If they ever decide they are done living like this they can rejoin society and apply for the same hypothetical programs to help those who want to improve, but it is a decision they will have to commit to and work towards of their own will.
These are the suggestions I would use to fix the homeless problem. It clearly is an issue that effects many in society, however I think the evidence from programs in California and other Sanctuary Cities has proven that the give a man a fish approach that is the most commonly applied effort to solving it is an unsustainable waste of resources at best and a counterproductive negative incentive structure that harms the people it is supposed to help at worse.
I feel as if you are trying to emulate the essays of the channel horses, and you do have the potential to be honest, i dont see any issue with this however there are some aspects i feel you are not grasping in what makes his content so good, horses seem to have a very comprehensive and inherent understanding of the subjects he speaks of, i feel more when i listen to you and your numerous quotings that you are making a college essay rather than truthfully and passionately trying to educate me on a subject you have a good understanding of.
i still enjoyed it, and i hope i make sense :)
sounds like a religious fanatic who reads passages from their holy text😂😂😂
If you think the CEO themselves for "doing nothing" , become a CEO, lmfao
To become a privatised CEO one must exploit labour value first, CEOs are middlemen and redundant
“Religion is the opium of the people. It is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of our soulless conditions.” Funny you should compare my readings of Marx to a religious fanatic, when in reality thats the way certain people treat the bourgeoisie and the capitalist system as a whole.
Marx viewed religion as a symptom of a sickened society, it’s clawing for meaning within the confines of capitalisms anti-human conditions.
@@Josephryanbanks
iornically relgion exploded at end of socislit societies as supposed new paradigm failed.
heck now you can find quite a lot of religious socialist whcih see modenr life as sinful and degenrated as per abortions,lgbt,hook ups...
Are you a ceo yourself ?
@@Josephryanbanks religion was the origin of scientific philosophy, and that marxists can't deny. All basement for dialectical materialism reigns on the idea of utopia, with all people didicated to the prosperity. It makes confused every rational-thinking person, and Austrian Economics School (I mention Ludwig von Mises) in Marx's times as well, that marxists call for anarchism and abolishment of any morale to achive the utopia. Marxists are rationalizing marginalization, your, marxists', goal is a common "to devide and conquer", and that's your bloody infinite struggle with the fact that no human civilization carries or ever carried morale of "material equality".
I condemn anarchists like marxists that in practice deny the history, the morale humanity achieved through years and anarchists have tried nothing but to abolish what they disagreed with, since marxists are unable to build anything better in reality. If you disagree, do create something better! Something better than Judaism and Christianity. Then tell that you need "a new human" as Christ said, as he essentially was an inspirator of marxism.
The thing about supply and demand is that when you produce too much of something you kill the price per unit, so the capitalist has no incentive to over produce
Why, then, have the Chinese flooded the market with cheap goods if there was no incentive to increased production? The answer is simply that you don't understand a thing about basic economy. Sure, if you control the market then you don't have as big of an incentive to produce more, but in a Laissez-faire economy that is pretty much impossible.
@@alexkokid8114 Because Chinese are non-capitalist by nature and their motivation is to overthrow existing world order as a form of historical revenge, so, by overproducing they are trying to kill established market conditions in the west. Cheap EVs and $1 T-shirts with 3 week delivery are prime example.
@@alexkokid8114 exactly this. weaponize overproduction to kill competition and generate monopoly
And capitalism is a feature of overpopulation.
This is up there with the stupidest takes I’ve ever seen on the internet, and I used to have a Twitter AND Quora account. You’re really punching above your weight
???
eco facist detected
I mean, in a capitalist society there is no difference between the laborer and the Capitalist, as the Laborer will always own things that they can invest, the main one of this being their time? It would be nice to live in a society where there are no losers, but a society that tries to not have any losers, but fails, is vastly worse than one that from the beginning supposes this is impossible. At least, in the latter, measures can be taken for that inevitability.
You see, Marx was wrong that the biggest determinator of social relationships in a society was Economics.
Marx did not say that at all. Class is not just economics. It's societal structure.
Property owners and property-less owners are very much distinguished. Just because workers can buy stocks or eventually become peti bourgeois, does not do away with these contradictions.
Bro you need to read some material before you spouting off nonsense online embarrassing yiurself
@@johnjackson8545 Class, in Marxist thought, is determined by economics. If the difference between who owns what is what separates the classes, if Burgeios and Proletariat are who controls the labor and the land, then YES Marx is saying that Class is economics.
Mind, Property doesn't matter as much as Marx thought it does. And Capital can be acrued without property. It is then, that everyone is a capitalist of some sort because, in a Capitalist society, everyone always have something worth the labors of others.
Wrong and completely ignorant about basic Marxist theory, yet you feel inclined to argue.
No sources, no information, no valid argument at all, just repeating idealistic capitalist 💩💩
so sick of you people
@@BS-cc4ksgood to see an actual dialogue between perspectives
Homelessness caused.by disfunctional drug addicts
People who refuse to get help. People who can't get along with anybody 3:28
There you go blaming the individual for larger systematic social problems. This is a limited way of viewing the world and is completely unhelpful.
Essay on how homelessness is representative of Communism.
@@PeggyPierron what? Are you high? For example; go to Cuba and Vietnam and try to find ONE homeless person.
The USSR virtually eliminated homelessness and unemployment, capped rents at 3% of paychecks and had Universal Healthcare and Education while becoming the FIRST SPACEFARING CIVILIZATION on Earth after just a few decades of Communist Party control of a Socialist government.
F*cking beat that!
Capitalist is just the label communists slap on everyone who deosnt think like themselves
Well, no not really. Capitalists are parasites who suck the labour of the working class. Were you homeschooled by evangelicals?
A capitalist is a specific thing - a person who sets up/buys a production/service for the sole purpose of profit. Capitalists call themselves capitalists, proudly. So, no, it is not "just a label".
How do you say you are against the constitution without saying it?😂
Yeah. The U.S. Constitution is contradictory, props up the parasitic rich, and only legitimizes all the things I discussed in the video. It’s a violent work of writing.
@@Josephryanbanks Move somewhere else. Everyone deserves to be happy.
Yes lol. Your 200 year old legal document isn't infallible
@@PeggyPierronmove where? The contradictions of capitalism always follow
@@PeggyPierronwhere pig? Where do you suggest a Socialist move since you’re so knowledgeable?
bah, cry me a river
You had me at parasites. ¡Im in!✊🏽