Socialism without democracy is just tyranny by another name and democracy without socialism is just a kind of sham, hollow liberation for a tiny privileged minority. -Elanor Penny
@FatAnteater why would anarchists do that? that makes no sense, anarchy is about flattening hierarchies and distribution of power, not chaos and destruction for no reason
"Okay then Democratic Socialist": Social Democracy As a Social Democrat I am willing to throw the Communists, nationalists, Socialists for the Center left to get into power.
@@TTBOn00bKiLleR no it's not, anarchy is about absence of government or rulers. That hierarchy stuff is pure Marxism and anarchism was around before Marx. Such as Lysander Spooner who outside of believing in labor theory of value had little in common ideologically.
Yes, but ideas are not segments between two points, and then find their exhaustion. But living arguments that have to find new meaning in reaching the dawns of new light. Much of the enlightened past has found there frustrations in todays failure to expand on them.
A very well written and produced documentary. Highly informative and entertaining, reminding us that neither Rosa or her ideals are forgotten. They both remain just as relevant today as they were in 1919, if not more so.
5:56 Luxemburg and Lenin did not diverge on this issue at all! Where do you get this idea? There was some disagreement on the issue of the popular support for the October Revolution, where Luxemburg, who was in prison at this time, thought that it should not have been conducted, since it did not have the support of the majority of the people, but she corrected this idea later when she was released from prison in 1918. Both Luxemburg and Lenin knew, though, that the ideas of Communists (insofar as they are Communists) were those of the proletariat itself - where those which represented the class interests of the proletariat, and those which sprung up after arduous class struggle as a proletarian. But even then, they also held that the whole proletariat might not believe in these ideas, in which case they must be taught and come to understand such ideas. The masses of the people are not 'stupid', as many counter-revolutionaries and liquidators accuse Lenin of thinking, but instead, and both Lenin and Luxemburg held this as well, simply not educated in class struggle. The goal of Communists is to carry on class struggle in the most effective and principled way possible, as to overthrow the capitalist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and to replace it with a dictatorship of the proletariat, which gradually diminishes as the proletariat, which eventually encompasses all individuals in society, becomes more and more educated and capable of waging struggle for their own interests on their own. That is the process, which we call _socialism._ If so-called Communists are scared of educating the proletariat and the masses of the people, then they are against the development of socialism and the abolition of classes. One does not look at a classroom's teacher and condemn them for treating the children in said classroom as 'stupid' and 'needing to have ideas come to them instead of from them'. Children do not always know the quadratic formula, in which case they must be taught it. Workers do not always know Marxism, in which case they must be taught it. If you disagree with any of this, then you disagree with Rosa Luxemburg, and the vast majority of revolutionaries worldwide. This Michael Brie is a liar, a liquidator, an opportunist and a revisionist! Do not let Rosa Luxemburg be claimed by the Social-Democrats and Reformists, who carry on class struggle on the side of the reactionary bourgeoisie! Uphold her real legacy, as a Spartikan, a Marxist and a close ally of Lenin and the Bolsheviks!
In 1922 when Paul Levi, a German Menshevik, planned to republish precisely those writings of Rosa Luxemburg where she had differed with Lenin, Lenin commented that Paul Levi's intention was to get into the good graces of the bourgeoisie and the leaders of the Second and the Second -and -half-Internationals. Lenin wrote, "We shall reply to this by quoting two lines from a Russian fable, 'Eagles may at times fly lower than hens but hens can never rise to the height of eagles'. Rosa Luxemburg was mistaken on the question of the independence of Poland; she was mistaken in 1903 in her appraisal of Menshevism; she was mistaken on the theory of accumulation of capital; she was mistaken in July 1914, when, together with Plekhanov, Vandervelde, Kautsky and others she advocated unity between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks; she was mistaken in what she wrote in prison in 1918 (She corrected most of these mistakes at the end of 1918 and the beginning of 1919 when she was released). But inspite of her mistakes she was and remains for us an eagle. And not only will Communists all over the world cherish her memory, but her biography and her complete works will serve as useful manuals for training many generations of communists all over the world. 'Since August 4, 1914, German social-democracy has become a stinking corpse' -- this statement will make Rosa Luxemburg's name famous in the history of the international working class movement. And, of course, in the backyard of the working class movement, among the dungheaps, hens like Paul Levi, Scheidemann, Kautsky and all their fraternity will cackle over the mistakes committed by the great Communist". (Notes of a Publicist, Vol. 33).
12:11 during war the opposing armies have more in common with eachother than the fat cats they fight for, weather it be monarchy, facism, politicians or capitalists, and the people who don't do the fighting have more in common with eachother than their own soldiers. They just want power and resources. Think about that, as a soldier you have more in common with the "enemy" soldiers than the people sending you out to fight eachother, who in turn are closer to eachother than the soldiers they send to fight. Turn the guns around! Not on those *who are like you* but on *those who control* you! #EducationEndsOpression ✊ (In mincraft of course)
Social Democracy meant a lot of different things over the course of History, luxembourg was closer to lenin then anyone calling themselfs social democratic today
Not a leftist but I'm here for the educational value. Thanks for the very well done video, it was extremely informative. I believe that trying to put one's self in the shoes of others helps us all grow. Living in echo chambers has become an Olympic sport in our society. If you find yourself nodding along with everything said, you're in the wrong room.
Very informative 17 minutes. Listening to the contributors here emphasised for me how feeble and compromised mainstream 'leftwing' politics has become in the UK. The question occurs to me: how would Rosa have regarded the EU? An opportunity for nations to work together for justice and human rights, or a capitalist club dedicated to the preservation of existing social and economic relations? More the latter, I expect, far more.
Then she would be a fool since the EU has helped propel Europe into the 21th century. War between European countries (I’m not talking about the eastern part. The Russian don’t count) is unthinkable now a days and everyone under the EU prospers more than if they were left out (Look at brexit)
@@supergamergrill7734 This isnt a socialist way of thinking, especially not a Marxist one. Countries prospering on paper, GDP etc whilst still having sky high inequality is yet another raging issue of capitalism.
However, socialism for all its slogans and iconography has never worked anywhere. All it has produced is tens of millions dead. The only ones who benefit are a tiny political elite. And even they have to watch their backs vigilantly lest they be purged and sent the Gulag by their "comrades". Or opportunistic academics or spokespersons making a career in an ever growing "Grudge Industry" in wealthy capitalist countries like America. Anyone who supports this failed experiment in human endeavour makes a grievous error.
5:04 basically what I think he's is saying is, pure electoralism, with bougios(?) parliamentarianism, I'm not sure how to spell it but the word pronounced "boog-wah" (I'm bad with English spelling, so straight up f me when it come to French 😭😂👌 hopefully I was right or at least close tho 🤞) we need "permanent revolution" which means bringing the electoral environment as left as possible that way and when the material conditions are right to revolt against and out of capitalism into actual socialism. IMO in order to do that we can never forget the goal isn't to compromise but to EVENTUALLY achieve true stateless, classless, moneyless, COMMUNISM. Use whatever means nessisrary and never stop pushing. Take comprima d push electoralism but NEVER forget and never give up permanently even if you have to take a losses. TL;DR: Like Rosa herself might say #EducationEndsOpression ✊ keep learning, keep teaching, and keep MOVING
@@inovakovsky Yeah, the left and the SPD, both left parties, but since one could not decide how left the party / movement should be, it would be separated. At the end of the Kaiseereich, Phillip Scheidemann (SPD) proclaimed the Socialist Republic, while Liebknecht (Spartacus Bund) proclaimed the Soviet republic. Ultimately, the Weimar Republic became a socialist republic, also because Ebert (SPD) had an agreement with the Reichswehr General Groener (the Ebert-Groener Agreement). This said that the government should not interfere in the personal details of the Reichswehr. Which of course was a free ticket. Socialists, revolutionaries, and the 1918 desateurs were kicked out of the army, while many conservatives and right-wingers stayed in the army. For the Left under Luxemburg, the socialist republic was not enough, they wanted the Soviet republic and the everlasting revolution. Ebert wanted to prevent that and so sent the Reichswehr, who had a problem with leftists anyway, to fight them. Meanwhile, the Reichswehr avoided right-wing uprisings such as the Kapp Putsch. Unfortunately, Ebert did not notice that the real enemy was on the other spectrum and so played into Hitler's hands. Even if the SPD spoke out against Hitler to the last, it was too late at the time.
Luxemburg's economic analysis of capitalism was wrong and not consistent with Marx's models of expanded reproduction, which demonstrated how caputalism considered as a closed system could certainly expand economically. The system expanded geographically simply because that was a relatively easy option on the one hand, and because, on the otger, raw materials from foreign countries facilitated the development of industry and technology. Lenin's economic models avoided Luxemburg's mistakes.
Marx focused too much on the idea of class struggle and revolution. There was no class revolt or revolution that caused the Age of Feudalism to transition into the Age of Capitalism. He also stated that revolution and the building of Socialism in agrarian societies was not possible. But yet those are the societies where Socialism (Russia, China, Cuba, etc.) took root. They bypassed the Capitalist stage. So not unsurprisingly struggled. The Soviet Communist Party realized this error so disbanded. The Chinese Communist Party did as well, but took a different route. (Marx was talked into amending his beliefs concerning agrarian Russia by Russian revolutionaries. Marx showed impatience here as not much was happening in the way of revolution in the industrialized western Europe). One industrialized country where Socialism was successful was Germany under the NSDAP. But it wasn't the "right kind" of Socialism so couldn't be tolerated. To this day, Leftist adherents dote on Auschwitz while ignoring the Gulag. Because too much of this comes down to feelings and personal prejudice rather than examining historical fact, economic truths and reality. That doesn't mean I support NSDAP, but I think that aspects of this revolution (along with the Italian Fascist movement) warrants a more even-handed analysis.
Yes, people should be made to live their lives how other people deem what is best for them. The individual shouldn't be allowed to have thus ability. Individualism is bourgeoisie!
@@markvolker1145 "people should be made to live their lives how other people deem what is best for them": This is literally cápítàlì$m. The amount of money a person has is the only decider of what they can and cannot do. Lack of money means lifelong poverty and therefore the individual is severly restricted and can't participate in society.
She's right about socialism and barbarism to a certain extent. The demiocratic systems will eventually be subverted by those who are willing to trade their individual liberties for some resemblence of safety. Therefore, the only way to stay free is to invoke barbaric instincts. In this sense her pov is quite close to that of Hoppe's
Nevermind the fact that it's social democrats that killed her lmao. If you're interested in learning why social democracy isn't that good, you should research the law of unequal exchange.
Rosa Luxembourg was a hero for all mankind. We must never forget her struggle for true democracy and liberty for all, a struggle that we should all carry on today.
important for the disestablishment of the corruption of the age, but ultimately an expansion of failed ideology. today the best use of her work is as an example of a counter opinion. [2:00] your speaker clearly doesn't know what capital is. capital is literally wealth and value and is a object. what capitalist seek to do is to increase their existing capital by investing capital into different markets to produce value. this can either be domestic or abroad. globalism is a belief that capitalist should always invest in heavily foreign market as a means of market manipulation. these are intrinsically two different ideas because a capitalist doesn't care where he invests only that it is profitable, a globalist wants to invest in foreign markets. so here is what you do need to know about socialism. as a governing system it is failed it causes extreme overhead, massive corruption, and a leads to a general lack of ethics. however as a soft system it works, but that is normally called community effort and communication. to separate the hard system of social-governance, i.e. fascism and communism, from the softer more personal system of community the term socialism is wholly dropped. socialization in economics just means to purchase as a whole-collective. there are problems with this, because the opportunity advantage of the individual purchase of a good decreases to being worthless and leads to an abuse by consumption. what we find is that isolated collective purchases are more effective and create an optimal exchange. that is opt-in/opt-out collective purchases allow for negotiations and optimized exchanges. an example of this which mostly works at the government level is roads. roads meet the requirements of socializing, it is equally demanded by all apart and no party unwilling participates, the good is not tangible and dividable at the personal level, and there is no means of abuse by consumption. the same goes for "national defense" but not "personal defense." she called herself socialist but all she really wanted was representation against immoral demands.
Socialism without democracy is just tyranny by another name and democracy without socialism is just a kind of sham, hollow liberation for a tiny privileged minority.
-Elanor Penny
FatAnteater oh so every thing happened because of anarchist :))) here we go again :))
@FatAnteater... Tankies man smh
@FatAnteater why would anarchists do that? that makes no sense, anarchy is about flattening hierarchies and distribution of power, not chaos and destruction for no reason
"Okay then Democratic Socialist": Social Democracy
As a Social Democrat I am willing to throw the Communists, nationalists, Socialists for the Center left to get into power.
@@TTBOn00bKiLleR no it's not, anarchy is about absence of government or rulers. That hierarchy stuff is pure Marxism and anarchism was around before Marx. Such as Lysander Spooner who outside of believing in labor theory of value had little in common ideologically.
We simp for Rosa round here
She's literally me
@@dreadedworld8864 she just like me fr
nose check
Okay Leon Trotsky
🤔
A brilliant woman who pissed off so many by speaking out against injustice and fighting for those without a voice.❤
Holy sh*t, this was very educational and the end ripped my heart apart.
Yes, but ideas are not segments between two points, and then find their exhaustion. But living arguments that have to find new meaning in reaching the dawns of new light. Much of the enlightened past has found there frustrations in todays failure to expand on them.
A very well written and produced documentary. Highly informative and entertaining, reminding us that neither Rosa or her ideals are forgotten. They both remain just as relevant today as they were in 1919, if not more so.
5:56
Luxemburg and Lenin did not diverge on this issue at all! Where do you get this idea?
There was some disagreement on the issue of the popular support for the October Revolution, where Luxemburg, who was in prison at this time, thought that it should not have been conducted, since it did not have the support of the majority of the people, but she corrected this idea later when she was released from prison in 1918.
Both Luxemburg and Lenin knew, though, that the ideas of Communists (insofar as they are Communists) were those of the proletariat itself - where those which represented the class interests of the proletariat, and those which sprung up after arduous class struggle as a proletarian. But even then, they also held that the whole proletariat might not believe in these ideas, in which case they must be taught and come to understand such ideas. The masses of the people are not 'stupid', as many counter-revolutionaries and liquidators accuse Lenin of thinking, but instead, and both Lenin and Luxemburg held this as well, simply not educated in class struggle.
The goal of Communists is to carry on class struggle in the most effective and principled way possible, as to overthrow the capitalist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, and to replace it with a dictatorship of the proletariat, which gradually diminishes as the proletariat, which eventually encompasses all individuals in society, becomes more and more educated and capable of waging struggle for their own interests on their own. That is the process, which we call _socialism._
If so-called Communists are scared of educating the proletariat and the masses of the people, then they are against the development of socialism and the abolition of classes. One does not look at a classroom's teacher and condemn them for treating the children in said classroom as 'stupid' and 'needing to have ideas come to them instead of from them'. Children do not always know the quadratic formula, in which case they must be taught it. Workers do not always know Marxism, in which case they must be taught it.
If you disagree with any of this, then you disagree with Rosa Luxemburg, and the vast majority of revolutionaries worldwide.
This Michael Brie is a liar, a liquidator, an opportunist and a revisionist!
Do not let Rosa Luxemburg be claimed by the Social-Democrats and Reformists, who carry on class struggle on the side of the reactionary bourgeoisie! Uphold her real legacy, as a Spartikan, a Marxist and a close ally of Lenin and the Bolsheviks!
Exactly. Thank you!
In 1922 when Paul Levi, a German Menshevik, planned to republish precisely those writings of Rosa Luxemburg where she had differed with Lenin, Lenin commented that Paul Levi's intention was to get into the good graces of the bourgeoisie and the leaders of the Second and the Second -and -half-Internationals.
Lenin wrote, "We shall reply to this by quoting two lines from a Russian fable, 'Eagles may at times fly lower than hens but hens can never rise to the height of eagles'. Rosa Luxemburg was mistaken on the question of the independence of Poland; she was mistaken in 1903 in her appraisal of Menshevism; she was mistaken on the theory of accumulation of capital; she was mistaken in July 1914, when, together with Plekhanov, Vandervelde, Kautsky and others she advocated unity between the Bolsheviks and Mensheviks; she was mistaken in what she wrote in prison in 1918 (She corrected most of these mistakes at the end of 1918 and the beginning of 1919 when she was released). But inspite of her mistakes she was and remains for us an eagle. And not only will Communists all over the world cherish her memory, but her biography and her complete works will serve as useful manuals for training many generations of communists all over the world. 'Since August 4, 1914, German social-democracy has become a stinking corpse' -- this statement will make Rosa Luxemburg's name famous in the history of the international working class movement. And, of course, in the backyard of the working class movement, among the dungheaps, hens like Paul Levi, Scheidemann, Kautsky and all their fraternity will cackle over the mistakes committed by the great Communist". (Notes of a Publicist, Vol. 33).
I love you Rosa 💓💓💓
Absolutely first rate and heartfelt introduction to the life and writings of Rosa Luxemburg. A tribute worthy of a great socialist hero.
This is an excellent short film, thank you for posting
Thank you for introducing me to the great Rosa.
12:11 during war the opposing armies have more in common with eachother than the fat cats they fight for, weather it be monarchy, facism, politicians or capitalists, and the people who don't do the fighting have more in common with eachother than their own soldiers. They just want power and resources.
Think about that, as a soldier you have more in common with the "enemy" soldiers than the people sending you out to fight eachother, who in turn are closer to eachother than the soldiers they send to fight.
Turn the guns around! Not on those *who are like you* but on *those who control* you!
#EducationEndsOpression ✊
(In mincraft of course)
she didn't write the first quote. that was engles...
Thank you for this heart-felt and profound short film!
I don't agree with everything she wrote, but I LOVE ROSA LUXEMBOURG 🌹🌹🌹
Yes. long live Social Democracy.
🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹
@@johnpijano4786 what..wut?
@@johnpijano4786 missed her points by a mile...
@@bhomikacharya2527 she was literally a social democrat. you either dont know what social democracy means or you misunderstood Luxembourg
Social Democracy meant a lot of different things over the course of History, luxembourg was closer to lenin then anyone calling themselfs social democratic today
oh rosa, we’re really in it now
This was extremely well done
What a fantastic video!
Ich finde eure Videos sehr interessant.
Wonderful and informative.
I was. I am. I shall be
I STAN HER SO HARD
Rosa luxmburg is my ideal ❤️✊
She will always Alive in Our Hearts ❤️
Long live Rosa luxmburg ❤️💔
Long live Revolution ✊
Not a leftist but I'm here for the educational value. Thanks for the very well done video, it was extremely informative.
I believe that trying to put one's self in the shoes of others helps us all grow. Living in echo chambers has become an Olympic sport in our society. If you find yourself nodding along with everything said, you're in the wrong room.
best comment I've seen anywhere in years!
thank you for sharing!
LONG LIVE ROSA LUXEMBURG!
Warum gibt es keine neue Ausgabe von Akkumulation des Kapitals?
bit.ly/2TIkoIe
@@rosaluxstiftung Vielen dank!
Excellent video.
Very informative 17 minutes. Listening to the contributors here emphasised for me how feeble and compromised mainstream 'leftwing' politics has become in the UK. The question occurs to me: how would Rosa have regarded the EU? An opportunity for nations to work together for justice and human rights, or a capitalist club dedicated to the preservation of existing social and economic relations? More the latter, I expect, far more.
Lol do you even know what capitalism is? You may be as delusional as Rosa herself.
Then she would be a fool since the EU has helped propel Europe into the 21th century. War between European countries (I’m not talking about the eastern part. The Russian don’t count) is unthinkable now a days and everyone under the EU prospers more than if they were left out (Look at brexit)
@@supergamergrill7734 This isnt a socialist way of thinking, especially not a Marxist one. Countries prospering on paper, GDP etc whilst still having sky high inequality is yet another raging issue of capitalism.
What a great woman
Well presented.
However, socialism for all its slogans and iconography has never worked anywhere. All it has produced is tens of millions dead. The only ones who benefit are a tiny political elite. And even they have to watch their backs vigilantly lest they be purged and sent the Gulag by their "comrades". Or opportunistic academics or spokespersons making a career in an ever growing "Grudge Industry" in wealthy capitalist countries like America. Anyone who supports this failed experiment in human endeavour makes a grievous error.
Come back when you're ready to abandon all the propaganda you've been fed all your life.
5:04 basically what I think he's is saying is, pure electoralism, with bougios(?) parliamentarianism, I'm not sure how to spell it but the word pronounced "boog-wah" (I'm bad with English spelling, so straight up f me when it come to French 😭😂👌 hopefully I was right or at least close tho 🤞) we need "permanent revolution" which means bringing the electoral environment as left as possible that way and when the material conditions are right to revolt against and out of capitalism into actual socialism.
IMO in order to do that we can never forget the goal isn't to compromise but to EVENTUALLY achieve true stateless, classless, moneyless, COMMUNISM. Use whatever means nessisrary and never stop pushing. Take comprima d push electoralism but NEVER forget and never give up permanently even if you have to take a losses.
TL;DR: Like Rosa herself might say #EducationEndsOpression ✊ keep learning, keep teaching, and keep MOVING
If only she had succeeded...
Viva Rosa Luxemburg. A defenceless woman kill by German soldiers in the head .
Man she was what marx predicted, if only...
would’ve saved germany from retarded hitler
@@treeman12815 But Ebert (the Bernie Sanders of his time) indirectly killed her.
@@inovakovsky Yeah, the left and the SPD, both left parties, but since one could not decide how left the party / movement should be, it would be separated. At the end of the Kaiseereich, Phillip Scheidemann (SPD) proclaimed the Socialist Republic, while Liebknecht (Spartacus Bund) proclaimed the Soviet republic. Ultimately, the Weimar Republic became a socialist republic, also because Ebert (SPD) had an agreement with the Reichswehr General Groener (the Ebert-Groener Agreement). This said that the government should not interfere in the personal details of the Reichswehr. Which of course was a free ticket. Socialists, revolutionaries, and the 1918 desateurs were kicked out of the army, while many conservatives and right-wingers stayed in the army. For the Left under Luxemburg, the socialist republic was not enough, they wanted the Soviet republic and the everlasting revolution. Ebert wanted to prevent that and so sent the Reichswehr, who had a problem with leftists anyway, to fight them. Meanwhile, the Reichswehr avoided right-wing uprisings such as the Kapp Putsch. Unfortunately, Ebert did not notice that the real enemy was on the other spectrum and so played into Hitler's hands. Even if the SPD spoke out against Hitler to the last, it was too late at the time.
Luxemburg's economic analysis of capitalism was wrong and not consistent with Marx's models of expanded reproduction, which demonstrated how caputalism considered as a closed system could certainly expand economically. The system expanded geographically simply because that was a relatively easy option on the one hand, and because, on the otger, raw materials from foreign countries facilitated the development of industry and technology. Lenin's economic models avoided Luxemburg's mistakes.
Marx focused too much on the idea of class struggle and revolution. There was no class revolt or revolution that caused the Age of Feudalism to transition into the Age of Capitalism. He also stated that revolution and the building of Socialism in agrarian societies was not possible. But yet those are the societies where Socialism (Russia, China, Cuba, etc.) took root. They bypassed the Capitalist stage. So not unsurprisingly struggled. The Soviet Communist Party realized this error so disbanded. The Chinese Communist Party did as well, but took a different route.
(Marx was talked into amending his beliefs concerning agrarian Russia by Russian revolutionaries. Marx showed impatience here as not much was happening in the way of revolution in the industrialized western Europe).
One industrialized country where Socialism was successful was Germany under the NSDAP. But it wasn't the "right kind" of Socialism so couldn't be tolerated. To this day, Leftist adherents dote on Auschwitz while ignoring the Gulag. Because too much of this comes down to feelings and personal prejudice rather than examining historical fact, economic truths and reality. That doesn't mean I support NSDAP, but I think that aspects of this revolution (along with the Italian Fascist movement) warrants a more even-handed analysis.
Great video. Her memory lives on, as does the fight against fascism and for a better world of peace, understanding and mutualism.
Thank you. this corrupted and misled world needs to know more about its prophets.
We are with Rosa. We are with socialism ✊❤️
Yes, people should be made to live their lives how other people deem what is best for them. The individual shouldn't be allowed to have thus ability. Individualism is bourgeoisie!
@@markvolker1145 "people should be made to live their lives how other people deem what is best for them": This is literally cápítàlì$m. The amount of money a person has is the only decider of what they can and cannot do. Lack of money means lifelong poverty and therefore the individual is severly restricted and can't participate in society.
She is one a great women in Our human's history after Hibatya. Long live camarade Rosa
True revolutionary!!
非常好视频，爱来自赛里斯❤❤❤
very good video
Red salute
comrade Rosa Luxemburg.
❤️❤️❤️❤️
Hey. Good video. Think it could be even better with a few more clips of her. I get that those are difficult to find tho. Well done!
Viva Rosa, grande mulher revolucionária
As a reformed and still curious former libertarian... is this just a circle jerk or can we really get together and create a new system?
nah, too much of the proletariat doesn't follow Marxist ideology and aren't for collectivization and will resist it.
circlejerk mostly
Female empowerment is everything
Very well done video. I think you should do more videos in this style.
And then suddenly, for no reason...
she was a hero ❤
beautiful
Great vidéo 👍
neoliberal right... why have i only just now heard this term?!
Neoliberalism is inherently a right wing ideology.
@@seve7766 good
I'm crying
Tolle und mutige Frau...!
Thank you Hermann Souchen
💔💔💔
She's right about socialism and barbarism to a certain extent.
The demiocratic systems will eventually be subverted by those who are willing to trade their individual liberties for some resemblence of safety.
Therefore, the only way to stay free is to invoke barbaric instincts.
In this sense her pov is quite close to that of Hoppe's
Excellent video. The social Democrats. What can I say?
Is my school l am from 🇪🇸
5:49 best accent ever😂😂😂😂
Was he saying the "marxists" or "masses"😂
😂😂😂
👍👍
Social democracy is the best ideology, communism got wrecked by social democracy 😳😳😳😙😙😙😙🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹✨
Nevermind the fact that it's social democrats that killed her lmao. If you're interested in learning why social democracy isn't that good, you should research the law of unequal exchange.
packwacth
😻😵💫
Rosa Luxembourg was a hero for all mankind. We must never forget her struggle for true democracy and liberty for all, a struggle that we should all carry on today.
Than you
Lower middle class:false
Kosher
Gute Doku! An einigen Stellen in Interviews waren mir zu viele Kamerawechsel zwischen Eleanor und dem Iviewpartner. Ansonsten super. Danke!
Lol'd at the least of grievances portrayed as merits at 1:10
I bet none of the people commenting think they’re proletarian.
👍️👍️👍️
Haha
important for the disestablishment of the corruption of the age, but ultimately an expansion of failed ideology. today the best use of her work is as an example of a counter opinion.
[2:00] your speaker clearly doesn't know what capital is. capital is literally wealth and value and is a object. what capitalist seek to do is to increase their existing capital by investing capital into different markets to produce value. this can either be domestic or abroad. globalism is a belief that capitalist should always invest in heavily foreign market as a means of market manipulation. these are intrinsically two different ideas because a capitalist doesn't care where he invests only that it is profitable, a globalist wants to invest in foreign markets.
so here is what you do need to know about socialism. as a governing system it is failed it causes extreme overhead, massive corruption, and a leads to a general lack of ethics. however as a soft system it works, but that is normally called community effort and communication. to separate the hard system of social-governance, i.e. fascism and communism, from the softer more personal system of community the term socialism is wholly dropped.
socialization in economics just means to purchase as a whole-collective. there are problems with this, because the opportunity advantage of the individual purchase of a good decreases to being worthless and leads to an abuse by consumption. what we find is that isolated collective purchases are more effective and create an optimal exchange. that is opt-in/opt-out collective purchases allow for negotiations and optimized exchanges. an example of this which mostly works at the government level is roads. roads meet the requirements of socializing, it is equally demanded by all apart and no party unwilling participates, the good is not tangible and dividable at the personal level, and there is no means of abuse by consumption. the same goes for "national defense" but not "personal defense."
she called herself socialist but all she really wanted was representation against immoral demands.