Full podcast episode: ruclips.net/video/NUkXluf3OYA/видео.html Lex Fridman podcast channel: ruclips.net/user/lexfridman Guest bio: Michael Malice is a political thinker, podcaster, author, and anarchist.
What is it about state socialism that makes people think that the state won't deny resources and oppurtunity to people it dosen't like or approve of or do not subscribe to its rules
@@Nugschris Yes, you need to pay insurance for it to cover claims. That example seems pretty basic. Regarding the gay cake, you missed the point: they will still bake you a cake (i.e. they won't deny you resources) -- the question is whether they decorate it the way you want, and the courts have ruled in favor of the customer (good lukc having that outcome in a totalitarian regime). The gay cake issue is a tough free speech issue in that it would be unreasonable to expect a bakery to decorate a Nazi cake. Capitalism doesn't deny resources out of hand; you need to provide a business case for an owner of resources to exchange them. Nobody can arrest you for demanding/owning assets.
@@Nugschris "If you are gay they will deny your wedding cake." That sentence doesn't make sense. However, given the fact that I know what it is you're trying to say my response is, so what?
@@Nugschris Insurance is not a "resource." Insurance is a service, and like all services it has to be paid for. The insurance company doesn't magically make health care appear. If it doesn't have people paying for the service it will go out of business... and that will ALSO deny care to people. And your gay wedding cake analogy is even worse. That cake isn't a resource either. It's baked by someone, and you would force them to bake it against their will. You may not agree with their views, but you are free to go elsewhere to get your cake.
@@donjulio420 lol no, wiki grouped the 2 in like 2018 (and then changed it again to conspiracy theory). if you know someone decent w the way back machine, wiki rationally laid it out in like 2016 or 2015
I was born in Cuba which is filled with communism or death and socialism or death banners. If anyone doubts how terrible those systems are, I know ppl in Cuba that would gladly trade places with you. Go live in that misery then tell me how you feel.
The classic university student response is "that's no real communism/socialism". I've suggested the same thing to peers during discussions but theyd rather live in Neverland.
why do you blame communism and socialism when the usa has cuba in an economic blockade for decades and is responsible for misery there as it is responsible for misery of the north koreans? pretty stupid to blame the victims and not the obvious aggressor.
@@mjakotka because those murderous systems are to blame. any more self evident questions? to begin, Cuba is not under a blockade. Thats just hyperbole on your part to support a weak argument. The US has an economic embargo on the Cuban communist dictatorship. The embargo that was placed on the Cuban dictatorship by the US Government AFTER the communists stole hundreds of millions of dollars in US industry from US companies in the 1960s? Let's dive into that topic. The embargo has exemptions for food and medicine. Still, Cubans die every day on the island due to a lack of those necessities. This happens because most of the economy in Cuba is controlled by el ”MININT” (military) They buy goods from all over the world including the US. For example, during the first half of last year, the Cuban government purchased 123 million dollars in chicken from the US. Source: White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki speaking to the press July 12, 2021. The MININT first supplies the government elite. Then they supply the hotels and hospitals that only foreign tourists Have access to. Only to sell the leftovers if any to the Cuban ppl at 10x retail prices in currencies that your everyday Cuban on the island doesn't have access to. Euros and dollars. Moreover, the embargo places severe restrictions against entities controlled by the Cuban government and is nonexistent against private Cuban nationals. In other words, the only ones blocking the Cuban ppl from doing business with each other and the world are the Castro-Canel tyranny. The tyrants in Havana are in this position not because of the embargo but rather because they have terrible monetary policies and never pay their debts. Therefore, nobody around the world wants to give them credit. Also, communism is unproductive and incompatible with today's global free enterprise. Finally, your 1970s talking points don't stand up to logic and the facts of the matter.
It is important to note that Marx and Engel never prescribed to the idea that communism would lead to heaven on earth. They believed it would be a better and more just society, but both were very against what was known as utopian socialism
An ex Soviet spy said the Hoover picture was a fake made by the KGB, if it was it was a monumental Troll. He gives me an extra sat in the restaurant on Twin Peaks, he'd just sit at the table staring forward and not moving while the scene played out around him.
Lex I love it now when Michael is on .... after all his quick witted put downs of you over the years, you have decided to rise to the challenge. You sometimes crucify him here and show you can match him in wit to the point where he doesn't even bother anymore. I really like this funny version of Lex. P.s. don't become CEO of Twitter. Right now it's the worst job in the world.
I can understand why people fell for communism 100 years ago when they knew no better. It's baffling why anyone would want it today. It has failed 100% of the time and caused nothing but poverty, death and suffering. Marxism has no redeeming features whatsoever. Capitalism, on the other hand, has lifted more people out of poverty than anyone ever thought possible. No other system in history (or now) has been more successful than American style capitalism combined with judeo-Christian values. People from all over the world leave communist tyranny, religious extremism and poverty to travel to the west for the freedom and opportunity it provides. There is almost zero migration the other way.
it's not about just some arbitrary choices of system to implement and see which one works the best. Marxism sees society as having necessary laws governing its stages of development/maturity. Capitalism emerged out of the decay and crisis of feudalism, but now it has exhausted its potential and will be superseded by socialism and communism: a planned economy, workers' democracy and eventually classless society, this is the next stage in the development of society that will come about through the elimination of capitalism and building of a global socialist planned economy.
yeah it so flawed system that the usa is trying to strangle Cuba to this day. how can you say that the “no other system…” when you and all your minions are trying your best to destroy the opponent? why so afraid?
@@mjakotka Do some research. It's been tried in lots of countries with the same results every time. Death. Mysery. Starvation. Authoritarianism. It's killed over 100 million people. Communist countries don't need America to be oppressed. They do it to themselves with brutal governments who steal any hope of a better life from their people.
14:20 but, Chávez the person who promised it, clearly said that the north was Cuba not Switzerland. Cuba was the lighthouse of democracy in Latin America, he said. The country, the state, the ideology and Fidel Castro the leader who has to be follow. Yes, the majority was stupid voting for a dream, without thinking, avoiding facts - reality. Not listening those who pointing out what the future will be.
Very true but to clarify. Today in many Western societies (& particularly in the US) Leftist ideologies are preached by & adopted by nearly always those among the privileged class who inherently lack a true understanding or real connection with the modern working class &/or the "oppressed." Of course they get some foot soldiers among the "proletariat" but the vast majority are always privileged today & there is a reason for this. This is due to the massive disconnect which the modern Leftist movements have, particularly in the US. The reason for this is because they have lost nearly all of their grassroots movements & have ideologically taken over the institutions of the privileged which include universities, corporate news media & tech corporations. These have become their primary centers of propagating Leftist thought. Evidence for this can be seen in changes of the basic make up of voters & ideological positioning in the US found through research polling over the past 6 years. Voters for the political right on avg earn less income than their counterparts, are more likely to work blue collar jobs & are far less likely to have attended university thus preventing them from attaining higher wages. Voters on the left are more likely to support the use of radical tactics such as suppressing rights & the use of force to enforce their policy positions. So basicly the modern socialist movement has largely become the movement of the privileged elite who believe they can dictate what is best for the working class & oppressed while falsely claiming these are the very ppl they represent. This massive disconnect is already starting to play out & will lead to some very hard times in the future.
@@BiblicallyAccurateToaster I'm one of the working class socialists and most of what you say here is right. Except the new "left" from the 70s onward and the democrats are not socialists. They disavow every successful socialist experiment. They only use Marx's words to soothe their guilt and in doing that rob them of their revolutionary soul. And Democrats aren't even the left. If you want to understand what happened to the working class socialists movement in the country look into what happened to Eugene V. Debs and Fred hampton
Probably because "blue collar" people don't have much of a platform and are ignorant, in denial or just don't want to bitch about how bad they're getting fucked over.
@@ignatiushazzard Well, Dissolution of Tsardom isn't the same as the Revolution itself, that one I think was the moment they murdered them all. Not that I have a tear to shed for the Tsar.
@@okyouknowwhatever Nicholas had a God complex, sent millions into their death for nothing.. For aa Serbian anarchist killing theArchduke.. He was toppled peacfully, in March.. and the October revolution started in October..Russia was the most backward country in Europe at the time, having abolished serfdom 50 years prior.. in 40 years from getting rid of the Tzardom, they went to space and had nuclear bombs, one of the two superpowers on the Globe..
@@peterblacksmith3817 I'm not saying people don't lack flaws. I'm saying Ayn Rand's are so glaringly obvious that it's hard to overlook them without invoking nonsense like cognitive dissonance. It's like who cares what her favorite holiday was? Caring what her favorite holiday was is like a Communist caring about what Pol Pot's or Mao's favorite holiday was, and I'm sure neither of us gives a shit about that either for the exact same reasons. She's a philosopher, but that doesn't make her a good one. For example, I think anyone who is going to sit there and agree with her interpretation of private property rights as they apply to groups like indigenous tribes in the United States while at the same time claiming that they subscribe to some kind of "objective" morality system is a prime example of a person whose tongue wags out of both sides of their mouths. There's a reason people grow out of Ayn Rand and why people don't take Leonard Peikoff as seriously as people like Michael Sandel, Paul Bloom or Sam Harris. It's not even everyone else's standards. It's the standards in which Objectivism presents itself as a closed system that it fails. How many times does a system need to fail itself in order for you to admit it failed? And this doesn't even bring up the super obvious critique. It's like Frank Fontaine says in BioShock about the Sad Saps. "... somebodies gotta scrub the toilets." ruclips.net/video/APlp5ujr8yw/видео.html
Oh but he does lol that's his thing. You shouldn't disregard someone's opinion just for what they look like or side they are on, as long as they are genuine in my opinion.
Does anyone else get enjoyment out of the "modernist" movement having absolutely ZERO foresight? Or is it more hilarious that there was a new almost immediate shift into the "post-modernist" era? Also, did these people not understand what the word "modern" meant? You can't have a _post_ modern era until after society has fallen. Because for as long as society is extant, each era is always "modern."
i mean for one thing they never really expected the name modernity or modernism to stick the way it has to that particular time. when nietchze wrote about the modern world he just meant his contemporary world really, same for flaubert's painter of modern life and so on. postmodernism in as much as you can say it has a specific meaning is just a response to the thought, art etc. of that period. we have post-punk but punk still exists.
Very much enjoy your work, would love to converse with you on the topics of the day or yesterday. Wish more people looked outside themselves to have understanding of themselves from outside as you do with your guests. Keep up the excellent work and Happy holidays Lex, thank you for your odd perverse intellectual insight. Perversechimp3 greatly appreciates your perspective and honest hope in humanity's future.
Through rational public and private discourse where one can debate the merits or lack thereof for the differing views. Only by shining a light on the fallacies and, if any, the pros of the commie worldview and countering with relevant facts and rationale. Freedom of Speech and assembly...this is the way.
There were two revolutions in Russia. The first one was quite bloodless as revolutions go. They formed sort of a coalition government, tried making it work, but it was weak and ineffective. That's when the Bolsheviks came in, staged a coup and dismissed the constitutional assembly after a referendum in which the people overwhelmingly voted for the Socialist Revolutionary party instead of them. The rest, how they say, is history.
@@tommythecat4961 The Tsar and his family were literally executed, with the blessings of Lenin himself. There is nothing peaceful about executing the old regime, including their 5 children.
@@tommythecat4961 What about the election in the soviets? Wasn't the constitutional assembly superfluous, sterile and had no authority amongst the masses, and the soviets did?
@@Zayden. historians are divided on the subject. Another problem was that the Socialist Revolutionary Party was divided into left and right, with the left allied to the Boksheviks and the right against. But when people voted, the SR was not divided into left and right on the ballots, so the Boksheviks called the election unfair and ignored the results. Thing is, those were chaotic times, Russia was in a civil war, a mess. But I just wanted to answer the OP, many people don't know about the February Revolution, which, as I said, was quite bloodless compared to the carnage that came after (whites against reds, etc).
@@tommythecat4961 The October Revolution was also peaceful, with soviets overwhelmingly voting to become the new government, and soviets represented a majority of the masses. The civil war didn't break out until June 1918, over 7 months after the Bolsheviks led the workers to power.
Socialism's biggest problem is the free rider. As we have seen after covid, a generous welfare state creates a work ethic in which more and more people expect to sit around, do nothing, and yet have their basic needs provided for by others. Socialism creates layabouts.
What are you talking about? Other than a brief period of high unemployment, levels dropped down under 4%. People only "laid about" when they were told to isolate.
Welfare for the airline industry $1600 to be repaid for the peasants. Let's worry about a single mother of three with two jobs getting a free steak instead of those hard working billionaires that can fly to the south of France or Hawaii whenever they chose, and no TSA.
@@breadfan1071 Now multiply that "single mother" by millions and you have a real debt problem. If you don't like corporate welfare, tell the democrats to stop giving it to their donors.
Marx didn't want the state to run everything (although Engles did express that view), Marx wanted to change the state into an administrative institution that's purpose was to actualise the will of the people AKA the proletariat. Until a time, of course, when 'the state' could be dismantled. Bakunin did frame things the way in which Michael states but he had to call Marx a liar to do it. Marx himself didn't write about the state much at all. Apart to say, of course, we should move towards a stateless, classless society.
@Jamie DeLorenzo Marx wanted the state to act as administrator. Basically a collection of civil servants carrying out the will of the people. Democracy basically. He said nothing of central planning or vanguards. That came later with Lenin who admitted that what he created was actually state capitalism. Eventually, capitalism would fall and the state would become obsolete as democracy in the workplace would take over. Although Marx didn't actually write a lot about the state or what would happen after the revolution. Most of his writings were about capitalism, historical materialism, sociology, etc. If you're not aware of how this relates to the sciences then you have problems beyond your comprehension of Marx.
@Jamie DeLorenzo It represents the will of the people because the people get an actual say on policy. Saying anything doesn't make it so. What a vapid statement. Through worker democracy. How would you define hunter-gather society? Your critiques are laughable and show a fundamental lack of understanding when it comes to conflict theory, historical materialism, dialectical materialism and so on.
@Jamie DeLorenzo Communes are centrally planned? Stop. You're embarrassing yourself. Cooperatives play by the same rules as any other company. Rules that are dictated by the market. There is no central planning. Nice to know you're against the concept of democracy though. Although not at all surprising.
Good explanation but just one note: Marx didn’t think we would eventually snap our fingers and abolish the state. That time would come gradually and naturally, just like the introduction of feudalism to replace slave economics, or capitalism to replace feudalism
What is the subject matter, area of expertise, or field of study and inquiry as part of your magnum opus which you're going to discuss, debate, and resolve as part of your appearance ? I'd like to know in advance so that I may have my notes ready. I pray that you'll convince Lex to conduct his interviews as part of a live streaming event so that the audience may submit questions to you.
@@ArchimedesDaVinci oof, my bad. I was stoned AF when I wrote this, so I wouldn't take it too seriously. That said, I'm a software consultant , and worked on a variety of projects. I'd likely keep up with Lex on tech level. Done Q and A before to large corporate audiences, so likely not to shit myself (too much). Magnus opus? I might be working on it right now for all I know. Making a personal app to make it easier to organise meetups with a large group of friends or family. I'd really like it if it could be used to bring other people together. All that said, sobre me knows its more important to actually BE a person worthy of being invited on this podcast than it is to actually be on it. Allow me one ego filled comment 😉
They both pretend to be for statelessness? Interestingly, creating anarchy (statelessness) is the fastest method of taking control of a country. Whether statelessness is achieved through collapse, force, or votes, it always ends in a power vacuum ripe for exploitation.
@Bob the Slacker yep we might as well collectivise agriculture at this point. Start communes and take everyone land. We're practically communist already. Brilliant!
At that point the majority of the people wanted to do what ever was necessary, which is crucial. When such a program is agreed upon by the overwhelming majority it's more of an act of commonwealth/welfare rather than top down socialism. There are key differences between commonwealth and socialism. With today's Socialist there are many Marxist and democratic socialist aligning. When that occurs the divisive cultural marxist rhetoric and policies are able to be created that illuminates the supposed "suppressors", even if they're just as poor or even poorer. The democrat party will lose more and more support, until they publicly denounce the Marxist rhetoric and policies. Once they do they'll become the socialist democrat party on the national level (it'll be more of a commonwealth stance). They'll play a key role in a basic income based off the traditional fiat (which may become a cryptocurrency currency). We're also seeing a parallel economy based off of cryptocurrency and free market capitalism which offers the incentives for innovation in new technology products and production processes. Matured products, I believe we'll see the end of planned adolescence. As for the Republican Party, it's being reshaped into the new National Populists Republican Party. National populism has some overlappiings with liberal/civic nationalism. Nationalism isn't an inherently bad thing. We're also seeing the faltering of the unipolar liberal international order. There's a new multipolar international order rising. Which encompasses the rise of civilization states. There's a lot of moving parts, and we're at an extremely unique time in history.
@@sleazypolar A lot of the things FDR did came from his predecessor Hoover, who was president when the depression started.... And FDR basically confiscated people's gold for christ's sake, which didn't help anyone. Fuck outta here!
Looking back it's easy to understand popular support for socialist ideas. People were illiterate, had no rights, they worked 16h shifts for decades then they died, and their children (the ones who survived to adulthood anyway) would do the same. Then comes a guy who tells them there's a better way, they can unite, be the masters of their destiny, create a better, more egalitarian society, not only for them but for all humanity. Wouldn't you have tried? Of course it's different with today's overprivileged college students, who know nothing and understand nothing, they're just morons. But factory workers of 100 years ago? I totally get them.
I mean nothing much has changed... we're still overworked and underpaid... the ability to buy a home and create a family is a thing of the past... but today we're distracted by the toys that capitalism created to ever fix that.
@@aztech101la let's be fair, the poverty rates, working conditions, wages and hours have improved dramatically from 100 years ago, and continue to do so. There's still a long way to go and injustice is rampant, but we've come far. These things take time.
@@tommythecat4961 yes but the market itself didn't make those improvements... it's only through government intervention that we have better working conditions, hours, and wages... it's the socialist approach that created these improvements.
@@aztech101la absolutely I think government intervention is fundamental, but the free market provided the funds that allowed the reforms to be implemented. I'm not a big fan of capitalism, it has many contradictions and injustice is inherent in it, but it does produce. I think the Nordic model is a good approach, you get the best of both worlds... But it's a complex issue about which whole books have been written, well beyond what can be expressed in a yt comment.
@@tommythecat4961 I'm with you on the Nordic models. Anytime anyone in Congress proposes those ideas like Bernie did the right immediately labels them a full blown socialist and brings up how the Nazi party had socialist in their name. People who would benefit from those concepts always seem to vote against them. It's an ugly circle in the US how do we change it?
A lot of people fall between the cracks under Socialism. Due to equity, if Einstein was born into equity he never would have been allowed to spread his wings and fly. So basically, everyone and society would remain stagnant.
If voting changed anything they wouldn't let us do it, that kind of seems like where we're at now! That won't let Trump have a chance they won't let kari lake have a chance.. they're pulling shenanigans against certain people
@@wullahblack6452 the point is not whether their best or not, it's that the establishment is actively shutting people down they do not like!.. with trickery and shenanigans! It doesn't matter if they're good, for some reason the establishment, neocons, warhawk Democrats, and uni party in general is scared of them!!! Do you get the important part of the comment now?
@@littlegreenbud2067 They aren't scared of them. They both just lost their elections. Why would neo cons be afraid of Trump? His policies were exactly the same as Dubya and Obama. Why do you think they supported everything he did? He literally is part of the uniparty!
There are many kinds of Socialism, one of them were Bureaucratic and Authoritarian Socialism (Communism) which developed in Russia and China that has political traditions in terms of systems of government as Imperial States ruled by Centralized Authoritarian Bureaucracies since the middle ages and ancient times respectively, there are other and much better forms of Socialism; Progressive Reforms of Liberal Economic Policies/Capitalism within the framework of the Constitutions of Burgeois Republics; within the framework of Liberal Democracy, Rule of Law, Checks and Balances and Civil Rights as in Scandinavia
Those assumptions come from the western cannon. We've gotten to far away from our roots. As we progress towards a new direction (different than today's"progressive way) we'll be getting back to our roots.
Welfare States and Free Markets are not in conflict. Most of the nations with the most expansive welfare states also have the freest markets. The Nordic states are the most obvious example, but it's on display throughout the world. The public and private sectors of a capitalist economy are not in any real conflict outside of politics. Economically speaking, they are symbiotic.
The functional ideas of communism will be realized within the open source and other similar movements of applied and transparant voluntary development of production. Especially when we reach AI that can do physical productive labour.
@@billjohnson6863 Yeah. The main issues plaguing attempts at communism (authoritarian use of force, corruption, efficiency etc) is sidestepped by open and voluntary productive and distributed organization of freeware, made possible over large scales by technology.
Not at all. Achieving socialism is a question of the arrangement of political and economic structures it will never be achieved through anything else especially if that change is centered on individual advancement.
@@chins9217 I am not talking about socialism... But open source development is very much a practice based on participatory democratisation of productive capacity and free distribution of both tools and products. By each according to (voluntary application of ) ability... With that being said, this will if course also require organisation to build the material foundation and infrastructure for applied physical production associated with open hardware, required resources etc, but this too can arguably be achieved without much involvement of the state.
Wow, a relevant yet understandable discussion abt communism and socialism. Without some shallow "communism baaaad" bs. And in Santa / Kraftwerk outfits, no less. This was 🔥🔥🔥
Justice, that is the answer!!!!! In Sweden you had more justice under the socialist system than in Venezuela and therefor it ran better, even with the same ideology. Enormos amounts of justice will allow you to create a good system with communism, or capitolism or even socialism.
Good and evil is just defacto contradiction, since they are in direct opposition to one another on the same spectrum. If you could see a visual representation of them/it, it would look like a two point source interference pattern. It's the assimilation of contradiction. Biases are contradictions. We're all so afraid not to be anchored to anything, and so we anchor to everything that merely feels right. People have almost totally forgotten how to think linearly. Their thinking is so polarized, they see no alternative means to an end other than to wallow in it. Right and wrong is merely a spectrum, a duality, a contradiction. Completely and utterly dependent upon the observer. Therefore, 'the greater good' is just an illusion. It couldn't possibly be anything else, as it is entirely dependent upon relative bias. Bias is just lack of proper tuning. It's out of key. Bias, is always, and forever will be, wrong. To believe in good and evil is to be a biased extremist.. Duality has enslaved us, and it's only going to get worse until this is fully assimilated. That's why the world changes so fast. So that YOU never have the time to catch on. Constant flux prevents us from finding true north. That's why you need to anchor yourself to The Eternal. It's the only thing that doesn't change.
We're under a socio-fascist system at this point from my shared opinion. It's even more highlighted with the latest revelations in regards to #TwitterFiles
People feel safe, comforted in the Bossom of the Fascist masters. . Safe, and yet they know if they step beyond their allocated place in society they'll be punished / destroyed by their fa!illy / friends/ Govt. . And they'll punish / destroy others who they believe are close to have moved outside societies norms. .
@@java4653 Yes socio-fascism, that's what wokeness is they've demonized us by falsely claiming we're deplorables fascists racists etc. Elons rocks, it's now confirmed that the DNC, FBI, DOJ, DHS etc conspired to target suppress and censor us the American people violating our rights and interfering with an election. They're internal enemy is the majority. If you express anything outside of their view they'll use weaponised legalism to destroy you in every way possible. Do you know anything about fascism? Why has the institutions left this out a whole section of political theory? Idiotical subversion!
@@projectw.a.a.p.f.t.a.d7762 "It's now confirmed'...nope. That's the coup attempt, that's Russia, the NRA & the Republicans. Musk was at the World Cup with members of Putin's inner circle buddy....which means you are helping kill Ukrainians & undermine the USA with this crap. It's McCarthyism all over again. Why do you hate America?.
These guys literally have a 1950’s understanding of communism. With Lex constantly talking about a “stateless society” and Michael blending together many different concepts from socialism to anarchism to Woodrow Wilson and progressivism. Not to mention how he brings up the Fabians as a representation of what communism means, just ridiculous
@@samuelprice2461 yeah, and big C communism never said anything about abolishing the state in any affirmative, action based way. That’s faaaaaaar off in the future when money and profit and by extension government itself will not have the same standing as they do now in our society
Michael Malice always gave me bad vibes. The way he subtly defends totalitarian ideologies like communism/anarchism/socialism solidifies it. Some commies, the more likeable anti-woke ones at least, saw how a good segment of capitalism went woke and are now, no pun intended, capitalizing on it. Don't fall for it.
@@thomaspollack7451 Sure, the US in 2023 is just like Italy circa 1935. That guy down the street with his "FJB" flag? He's totally screwed, I'm sure the secret police will pay him a visit any day now /sarc.
Dude no disrespect to you but you clearly don't know what you're talking about. How the fuck can stateless anarchist society also be centralized? Additionally totalitarianism isn't exclusive to economic ideologies. There's as many totalitarian capitalist societies as there where communist. Look at modern day Russia for example. And lastly most Totalitarian communist countries came to be because of America's intervention in those countries during the cold war that put dictators in power all in the name of stopping communism.
Full podcast episode: ruclips.net/video/NUkXluf3OYA/видео.html
Lex Fridman podcast channel: ruclips.net/user/lexfridman
Guest bio: Michael Malice is a political thinker, podcaster, author, and anarchist.
Santa discusses socialism in Russia with a manager from Applebees.
Trans Applebees manager* lol
Bahahhahahaahahah
Lol!!!
Holy shit malice is a Applebee's manager 😳
🏆
“Violence sings its own song” powerful
Violence can solve every problem, but it always breeds more violence.
I love your guys’ back and forth. It’s awesome to see two friends take the piss out of each other.
Michael Malice used my analogy for Communism: Underpants Gnomes
What is it about state socialism that makes people think that the state won't deny resources and oppurtunity to people it dosen't like or approve of or do not subscribe to its rules
@@Nugschris Yes, you need to pay insurance for it to cover claims. That example seems pretty basic. Regarding the gay cake, you missed the point: they will still bake you a cake (i.e. they won't deny you resources) -- the question is whether they decorate it the way you want, and the courts have ruled in favor of the customer (good lukc having that outcome in a totalitarian regime). The gay cake issue is a tough free speech issue in that it would be unreasonable to expect a bakery to decorate a Nazi cake.
Capitalism doesn't deny resources out of hand; you need to provide a business case for an owner of resources to exchange them. Nobody can arrest you for demanding/owning assets.
💯
@@Nugschris "If you are gay they will deny your wedding cake." That sentence doesn't make sense. However, given the fact that I know what it is you're trying to say my response is, so what?
@@Nugschris Insurance is not a "resource." Insurance is a service, and like all services it has to be paid for. The insurance company doesn't magically make health care appear. If it doesn't have people paying for the service it will go out of business... and that will ALSO deny care to people.
And your gay wedding cake analogy is even worse. That cake isn't a resource either. It's baked by someone, and you would force them to bake it against their will. You may not agree with their views, but you are free to go elsewhere to get your cake.
Capitalism already does that
“Dynamite doesn’t care about your size”
The anarchist version of “facts don’t care about your feelings”
People confuse comfort with enlightenment. We aren’t any better than people three hundred years ago, we just experience less survival stress.
Very true. Their principles are so vague people fall for it all the time
LEX please get James Lindsay on to talk about socialist theory- or his interpretation of it- and his readings of marx and the cultural marxists
That guy is fucking crazy. Cultural Marxism is just a repackaging of Cultural Bolshevism. You’re literally using Nazi talking points.
@@donjulio420 lol no, wiki grouped the 2 in like 2018 (and then changed it again to conspiracy theory). if you know someone decent w the way back machine, wiki rationally laid it out in like 2016 or 2015
@@lifes3ps Wikipedia's been hijacked for a while. I feel good every time I click no when they beg me to donate
Or you could just invite someone who’s actually honest about Marxism
@@samsca8529 great reply by not saying how or where he's wrong/dishonest. just argue by assertion. something a marxist would do
I was born in Cuba which is filled with communism or death and socialism or death banners. If anyone doubts how terrible those systems are, I know ppl in Cuba that would gladly trade places with you. Go live in that misery then tell me how you feel.
The classic university student response is "that's no real communism/socialism".
I've suggested the same thing to peers during discussions but theyd rather live in Neverland.
That's because Cuba has a dictatorship.
Somehow *your* "lived experience" will be illegitimate to them because it doesnt validate their views
why do you blame communism and socialism when the usa has cuba in an economic blockade for decades and is responsible for misery there as it is responsible for misery of the north koreans? pretty stupid to blame the victims and not the obvious aggressor.
@@mjakotka because those murderous systems are to blame. any more self evident questions?
to begin, Cuba is not under a blockade. Thats just hyperbole on your part to support a weak argument.
The US has an economic embargo on the Cuban communist dictatorship.
The embargo that was placed on the Cuban dictatorship by the US Government AFTER the communists stole hundreds of millions of dollars in US industry from US companies in the 1960s? Let's dive into that topic. The embargo has exemptions for food and medicine. Still, Cubans die every day on the island due to a lack of those necessities. This happens because most of the economy in Cuba is controlled by el ”MININT” (military) They buy goods from all over the world including the US. For example, during the first half of last year, the Cuban government purchased 123 million dollars in chicken from the US. Source: White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki speaking to the press July 12, 2021. The MININT first supplies the government elite. Then they supply the hotels and hospitals that only foreign tourists Have access to. Only to sell the leftovers if any to the Cuban ppl at 10x retail prices in currencies that your everyday Cuban on the island doesn't have access to. Euros and dollars. Moreover, the embargo places severe restrictions against entities controlled by the Cuban government and is nonexistent against private Cuban nationals. In other words, the only ones blocking the Cuban ppl from doing business with each other and the world are the Castro-Canel tyranny. The tyrants in Havana are in this position not because of the embargo but rather because they have terrible monetary policies and never pay their debts. Therefore, nobody around the world wants to give them credit. Also, communism is unproductive and incompatible with today's global free enterprise. Finally, your 1970s talking points don't stand up to logic and the facts of the matter.
He really cut mike off mid sentence to ask how his hat looks😂
It is important to note that Marx and Engel never prescribed to the idea that communism would lead to heaven on earth. They believed it would be a better and more just society, but both were very against what was known as utopian socialism
Thank you
Sweden is free market capitalism, not democratic "socialism".
And if any of these so called 'democratic socialist' supporting shape shifters were living in Sweden they would be saying it is a horrible country.
@@sundaynight1987 Yep. Ignorant Marxist cucks that know nothing about the world and history.
And is one of the most dangerous places on Earth for women due to mass immigration. 🥂
It’s a mixed economy/social democracy
semantics
Michael gives me J Edgar Hoover vibes.
It’s the fuck me pumps.
An ex Soviet spy said the Hoover picture was a fake made by the KGB, if it was it was a monumental Troll. He gives me an extra sat in the restaurant on Twin Peaks, he'd just sit at the table staring forward and not moving while the scene played out around him.
Gay FBI director vibes?
My guy look like Kraftwerk
m.ruclips.net/video/0hoa9tXnZX8/видео.html
thats the point!
Totally!🤣
Somehow, the beardless Santa look works for Lex😂
A festive weirdo 😂😂
"The problem with white gloves is the blood, you need a new pair every time" 💀
Malice is wonderful ❤️
The point is to push the state to use more force. They will over react and make it worse thus pushing more people towards those against them.
Lex I love it now when Michael is on .... after all his quick witted put downs of you over the years, you have decided to rise to the challenge.
You sometimes crucify him here and show you can match him in wit to the point where he doesn't even bother anymore.
I really like this funny version of Lex.
P.s. don't become CEO of Twitter. Right now it's the worst job in the world.
Lex is a Rockstar
I bet lex is wearing his traditional agent 47 suit under the Santa costume.
That red 💄 👄. Lmao 🤣 I can't stop looking at it
Michael's take on Christmas surprises me. Not sure why. Great conversation gents!
Didn't hesitate at all with the veronica lake reference. Sharp guy
I can understand why people fell for communism 100 years ago when they knew no better. It's baffling why anyone would want it today.
It has failed 100% of the time and caused nothing but poverty, death and suffering. Marxism has no redeeming features whatsoever.
Capitalism, on the other hand, has lifted more people out of poverty than anyone ever thought possible.
No other system in history (or now) has been more successful than American style capitalism combined with judeo-Christian values.
People from all over the world leave communist tyranny, religious extremism and poverty to travel to the west for the freedom and opportunity it provides.
There is almost zero migration the other way.
it's not about just some arbitrary choices of system to implement and see which one works the best. Marxism sees society as having necessary laws governing its stages of development/maturity. Capitalism emerged out of the decay and crisis of feudalism, but now it has exhausted its potential and will be superseded by socialism and communism: a planned economy, workers' democracy and eventually classless society, this is the next stage in the development of society that will come about through the elimination of capitalism and building of a global socialist planned economy.
@@Zayden. how foolish.
double digit iq post
yeah it so flawed system that the usa is trying to strangle Cuba to this day. how can you say that the “no other system…” when you and all your minions are trying your best to destroy the opponent? why so afraid?
@@mjakotka Do some research. It's been tried in lots of countries with the same results every time. Death. Mysery. Starvation. Authoritarianism.
It's killed over 100 million people.
Communist countries don't need America to be oppressed. They do it to themselves with brutal governments who steal any hope of a better life from their people.
This guy seems atleast educated, but I just saw him promote Jimmy Dore, who's a fool.
"They were all drunks" You mean everybody on the planet. Alcoholism was rampant up until the recent past.
14:20 but, Chávez the person who promised it, clearly said that the north was Cuba not Switzerland. Cuba was the lighthouse of democracy in Latin America, he said. The country, the state, the ideology and Fidel Castro the leader who has to be follow. Yes, the majority was stupid voting for a dream, without thinking, avoiding facts - reality. Not listening those who pointing out what the future will be.
Chavez made Venezuela better
Everyone who’s hating. It sounds like two friends having fun and BSing. Chill nerds
The people who talk about how bad the workers have it and can't eat are always people who have never had a job that involves more than a pencil
Lmao so not true
Honestly
Very true but to clarify. Today in many Western societies (& particularly in the US) Leftist ideologies are preached by & adopted by nearly always those among the privileged class who inherently lack a true understanding or real connection with the modern working class &/or the "oppressed." Of course they get some foot soldiers among the "proletariat" but the vast majority are always privileged today & there is a reason for this.
This is due to the massive disconnect which the modern Leftist movements have, particularly in the US. The reason for this is because they have lost nearly all of their grassroots movements & have ideologically taken over the institutions of the privileged which include universities, corporate news media & tech corporations. These have become their primary centers of propagating Leftist thought.
Evidence for this can be seen in changes of the basic make up of voters & ideological positioning in the US found through research polling over the past 6 years. Voters for the political right on avg earn less income than their counterparts, are more likely to work blue collar jobs & are far less likely to have attended university thus preventing them from attaining higher wages. Voters on the left are more likely to support the use of radical tactics such as suppressing rights & the use of force to enforce their policy positions.
So basicly the modern socialist movement has largely become the movement of the privileged elite who believe they can dictate what is best for the working class & oppressed while falsely claiming these are the very ppl they represent. This massive disconnect is already starting to play out & will lead to some very hard times in the future.
@@BiblicallyAccurateToaster I'm one of the working class socialists and most of what you say here is right. Except the new "left" from the 70s onward and the democrats are not socialists. They disavow every successful socialist experiment. They only use Marx's words to soothe their guilt and in doing that rob them of their revolutionary soul.
And Democrats aren't even the left.
If you want to understand what happened to the working class socialists movement in the country look into what happened to Eugene V. Debs and Fred hampton
Probably because "blue collar" people don't have much of a platform and are ignorant, in denial or just don't want to bitch about how bad they're getting fucked over.
Definitely Bad Santa meeting reincarnated redshirt shaved Bakuninitche
This guy doesn't live in the real world I've never heard such flawed views
I've never fully understood the appeal of either of these beta soibois but I'm still trying.
He probably wouldn't be an anarchist at all. Anarcho-Capitalism wasn't a thing. He'd probably just be a Lazzie-Faire Capitalist.
Depends where he'd be.. if in Europe pre-ww1, then probably just "anarchist", like Gavrilo Princip
Wait a second, was dissolution of Tsardom peaceful?
As far as I know only the royalty was killed, right? I believe they even spared the children
@@ignatiushazzard Well, Dissolution of Tsardom isn't the same as the Revolution itself, that one I think was the moment they murdered them all. Not that I have a tear to shed for the Tsar.
@@PedroElPolako you weren't there, the Tsar was better than what came after him
@@okyouknowwhatever Never said it was better but they absolutely had it coming
@@okyouknowwhatever Nicholas had a God complex, sent millions into their death for nothing.. For aa Serbian anarchist killing theArchduke.. He was toppled peacfully, in March.. and the October revolution started in October..Russia was the most backward country in Europe at the time, having abolished serfdom 50 years prior.. in 40 years from getting rid of the Tzardom, they went to space and had nuclear bombs, one of the two superpowers on the Globe..
It always befuddles me how such intelligent people can revere someone so obviously flawed in not-so-great ways, like Ayn Rand.
who is not flawed?
@@peterblacksmith3817 I'm not saying people don't lack flaws. I'm saying Ayn Rand's are so glaringly obvious that it's hard to overlook them without invoking nonsense like cognitive dissonance. It's like who cares what her favorite holiday was? Caring what her favorite holiday was is like a Communist caring about what Pol Pot's or Mao's favorite holiday was, and I'm sure neither of us gives a shit about that either for the exact same reasons.
She's a philosopher, but that doesn't make her a good one. For example, I think anyone who is going to sit there and agree with her interpretation of private property rights as they apply to groups like indigenous tribes in the United States while at the same time claiming that they subscribe to some kind of "objective" morality system is a prime example of a person whose tongue wags out of both sides of their mouths.
There's a reason people grow out of Ayn Rand and why people don't take Leonard Peikoff as seriously as people like Michael Sandel, Paul Bloom or Sam Harris. It's not even everyone else's standards. It's the standards in which Objectivism presents itself as a closed system that it fails.
How many times does a system need to fail itself in order for you to admit it failed?
And this doesn't even bring up the super obvious critique. It's like Frank Fontaine says in BioShock about the Sad Saps.
"... somebodies gotta scrub the toilets."
ruclips.net/video/APlp5ujr8yw/видео.html
@@peterblacksmith3817 LOL. What a dumb question. "Who does not breath air?"
No wonder Musk is popular.
@@ollaitsrealgood you're not saying that because no one rational would ever think such a thing. This is lex's crowd....not the smartest bunch.
@@X9523-z3v LOL. 'Thats so deep".
NOT.
There is such a similarity between narcissists and Communist/Marxist type folks.
How so?
Yup and Bakunin predicted it.
Lex in Communist Christmas you give Santa Lenin gifts.
Lenin gets Syphilis.
He can't expect us to take him seriously with that lipstick on
He can, does, and you should 🙂
He could dress up in a bozo the clown suit and I would take him more seriously than 90% of people.
The look matches the crazy ideas... they exist in harmony.
Ideas dont get better or worse regardless of who says them or what they look like.
Oh but he does lol that's his thing. You shouldn't disregard someone's opinion just for what they look like or side they are on, as long as they are genuine in my opinion.
The czar overthrow was peaceful? Am I missing something?
Yeah the original Russian Revolution was actually a peaceful transition
Does anyone else get enjoyment out of the "modernist" movement having absolutely ZERO foresight? Or is it more hilarious that there was a new almost immediate shift into the "post-modernist" era? Also, did these people not understand what the word "modern" meant? You can't have a _post_ modern era until after society has fallen. Because for as long as society is extant, each era is always "modern."
i mean for one thing they never really expected the name modernity or modernism to stick the way it has to that particular time. when nietchze wrote about the modern world he just meant his contemporary world really, same for flaubert's painter of modern life and so on. postmodernism in as much as you can say it has a specific meaning is just a response to the thought, art etc. of that period. we have post-punk but punk still exists.
It appears to me that you don't know what any of what you mentioned means.
Very much enjoy your work, would love to converse with you on the topics of the day or yesterday. Wish more people looked outside themselves to have understanding of themselves from outside as you do with your guests. Keep up the excellent work and Happy holidays Lex, thank you for your odd perverse intellectual insight. Perversechimp3 greatly appreciates your perspective and honest hope in humanity's future.
So at what point does Malice pull out an ARP Odyssey?
The big question is how do you get these awful ideas to go away?
Through rational public and private discourse where one can debate the merits or lack thereof for the differing views. Only by shining a light on the fallacies and, if any, the pros of the commie worldview and countering with relevant facts and rationale.
Freedom of Speech and assembly...this is the way.
@michael malice is this a kraftwerk reference that I see?
Kanye please call and do a podcast with michael
@3:08 ...Santa re-joins the free masons 🧐
Overthrowing the Tsar was done “peacefully”? 😂
There were two revolutions in Russia. The first one was quite bloodless as revolutions go. They formed sort of a coalition government, tried making it work, but it was weak and ineffective. That's when the Bolsheviks came in, staged a coup and dismissed the constitutional assembly after a referendum in which the people overwhelmingly voted for the Socialist Revolutionary party instead of them. The rest, how they say, is history.
@@tommythecat4961 The Tsar and his family were literally executed, with the blessings of Lenin himself. There is nothing peaceful about executing the old regime, including their 5 children.
@@tommythecat4961 What about the election in the soviets? Wasn't the constitutional assembly superfluous, sterile and had no authority amongst the masses, and the soviets did?
@@Zayden. historians are divided on the subject. Another problem was that the Socialist Revolutionary Party was divided into left and right, with the left allied to the Boksheviks and the right against. But when people voted, the SR was not divided into left and right on the ballots, so the Boksheviks called the election unfair and ignored the results. Thing is, those were chaotic times, Russia was in a civil war, a mess. But I just wanted to answer the OP, many people don't know about the February Revolution, which, as I said, was quite bloodless compared to the carnage that came after (whites against reds, etc).
@@tommythecat4961 The October Revolution was also peaceful, with soviets overwhelmingly voting to become the new government, and soviets represented a majority of the masses. The civil war didn't break out until June 1918, over 7 months after the Bolsheviks led the workers to power.
Socialism's biggest problem is the free rider. As we have seen after covid, a generous welfare state creates a work ethic in which more and more people expect to sit around, do nothing, and yet have their basic needs provided for by others. Socialism creates layabouts.
not sure if you are talking about the USA because a million people died and no one got any help besides a check.
What are you talking about? Other than a brief period of high unemployment, levels dropped down under 4%. People only "laid about" when they were told to isolate.
It was illegal to not work if you were able bodied in the USSR
Welfare for the airline industry $1600 to be repaid for the peasants.
Let's worry about a single mother of three with two jobs getting a free steak instead of those hard working billionaires that can fly to the south of France or Hawaii whenever they chose, and no TSA.
@@breadfan1071 Now multiply that "single mother" by millions and you have a real debt problem. If you don't like corporate welfare, tell the democrats to stop giving it to their donors.
The UK labour party and the Fabians, never stood for the abolition of capitalism, at best a lefty reformist movement.
Marx didn't want the state to run everything (although Engles did express that view), Marx wanted to change the state into an administrative institution that's purpose was to actualise the will of the people AKA the proletariat. Until a time, of course, when 'the state' could be dismantled. Bakunin did frame things the way in which Michael states but he had to call Marx a liar to do it. Marx himself didn't write about the state much at all. Apart to say, of course, we should move towards a stateless, classless society.
@Jamie DeLorenzo Marx wanted the state to act as administrator. Basically a collection of civil servants carrying out the will of the people. Democracy basically. He said nothing of central planning or vanguards. That came later with Lenin who admitted that what he created was actually state capitalism.
Eventually, capitalism would fall and the state would become obsolete as democracy in the workplace would take over. Although Marx didn't actually write a lot about the state or what would happen after the revolution. Most of his writings were about capitalism, historical materialism, sociology, etc. If you're not aware of how this relates to the sciences then you have problems beyond your comprehension of Marx.
@Jamie DeLorenzo It represents the will of the people because the people get an actual say on policy.
Saying anything doesn't make it so. What a vapid statement.
Through worker democracy.
How would you define hunter-gather society? Your critiques are laughable and show a fundamental lack of understanding when it comes to conflict theory, historical materialism, dialectical materialism and so on.
@Jamie DeLorenzo Central planning is not the same as worker democracy. You don't know what you're talking about.
@Jamie DeLorenzo Communes are centrally planned? Stop. You're embarrassing yourself.
Cooperatives play by the same rules as any other company. Rules that are dictated by the market. There is no central planning. Nice to know you're against the concept of democracy though. Although not at all surprising.
Good explanation but just one note: Marx didn’t think we would eventually snap our fingers and abolish the state. That time would come gradually and naturally, just like the introduction of feudalism to replace slave economics, or capitalism to replace feudalism
One day I'll be on here.
What is the subject matter, area of expertise, or field of study and inquiry as part of your magnum opus which you're going to discuss, debate, and resolve as part of your appearance ? I'd like to know in advance so that I may have my notes ready. I pray that you'll convince Lex to conduct his interviews as part of a live streaming event so that the audience may submit questions to you.
No
@@ArchimedesDaVinci oof, my bad. I was stoned AF when I wrote this, so I wouldn't take it too seriously.
That said, I'm a software consultant , and worked on a variety of projects. I'd likely keep up with Lex on tech level. Done Q and A before to large corporate audiences, so likely not to shit myself (too much).
Magnus opus? I might be working on it right now for all I know. Making a personal app to make it easier to organise meetups with a large group of friends or family. I'd really like it if it could be used to bring other people together.
All that said, sobre me knows its more important to actually BE a person worthy of being invited on this podcast than it is to actually be on it. Allow me one ego filled comment 😉
You're just a paperclip, you'll never been anything more!
Wait why is he wearing lipstick
Because he just got done makin out with ya motha.
& is it Covid-related?
Why not
Don't YOU?
he is gay , that's why
The problem is thouy you don't put rich boys in charge of the revolution. 😮😮😮
Dude Santa feelin some kinda way
Micheal looks fabulous
Its the lipstick
how did he not get lipstick on his teeth? lol, what's his secret?
Funny how goofy they look, yet talking about serious topics 💋🧑🎄 😂
Marxism/Communism have common denominator… 🧃😃
Found the anti-semite
Death…
Are we not in Corporate-Communism now? I don't have $40 million per political party to donate.
They both pretend to be for statelessness?
Interestingly, creating anarchy (statelessness) is the fastest method of taking control of a country. Whether statelessness is achieved through collapse, force, or votes, it always ends in a power vacuum ripe for exploitation.
@Bob the Slacker yep we might as well collectivise agriculture at this point. Start communes and take everyone land. We're practically communist already. Brilliant!
Hmm, so "FDR made the Depression worse.."?
yes
At that point the majority of the people wanted to do what ever was necessary, which is crucial. When such a program is agreed upon by the overwhelming majority it's more of an act of commonwealth/welfare rather than top down socialism. There are key differences between commonwealth and socialism. With today's Socialist there are many Marxist and democratic socialist aligning. When that occurs the divisive cultural marxist rhetoric and policies are able to be created that illuminates the supposed "suppressors", even if they're just as poor or even poorer. The democrat party will lose more and more support, until they publicly denounce the Marxist rhetoric and policies. Once they do they'll become the socialist democrat party on the national level (it'll be more of a commonwealth stance). They'll play a key role in a basic income based off the traditional fiat (which may become a cryptocurrency currency). We're also seeing a parallel economy based off of cryptocurrency and free market capitalism which offers the incentives for innovation in new technology products and production processes. Matured products, I believe we'll see the end of planned adolescence. As for the Republican Party, it's being reshaped into the new National Populists Republican Party. National populism has some overlappiings with liberal/civic nationalism. Nationalism isn't an inherently bad thing. We're also seeing the faltering of the unipolar liberal international order. There's a new multipolar international order rising. Which encompasses the rise of civilization states. There's a lot of moving parts, and we're at an extremely unique time in history.
@@scalp340 No. He didn't.
@@sleazypolar A lot of the things FDR did came from his predecessor Hoover, who was president when the depression started.... And FDR basically confiscated people's gold for christ's sake, which didn't help anyone.
Fuck outta here!
@@scalp340 try to eat gold broski, see how far you get
order out of chaos.
NO GOVERNMENT ABOVE GOD
NO GOVERNMENT ABOVE FAMILY
NO GOVERNMENT ABOVE THE INDIVIDUAL
Calm down, son. You’d starve without a McDonald’s coupon.
No one above imagined sky daddy? :(
Who's god? There are thousands.
@@Nugschris you kinda miss the point.
who do you pray for?
@@Nugschris finally someone gets it. People with thier ant brain can't describe God.
Lex interviews his Uncle Mike.
Looking back it's easy to understand popular support for socialist ideas. People were illiterate, had no rights, they worked 16h shifts for decades then they died, and their children (the ones who survived to adulthood anyway) would do the same. Then comes a guy who tells them there's a better way, they can unite, be the masters of their destiny, create a better, more egalitarian society, not only for them but for all humanity. Wouldn't you have tried? Of course it's different with today's overprivileged college students, who know nothing and understand nothing, they're just morons. But factory workers of 100 years ago? I totally get them.
I mean nothing much has changed... we're still overworked and underpaid... the ability to buy a home and create a family is a thing of the past... but today we're distracted by the toys that capitalism created to ever fix that.
@@aztech101la let's be fair, the poverty rates, working conditions, wages and hours have improved dramatically from 100 years ago, and continue to do so. There's still a long way to go and injustice is rampant, but we've come far. These things take time.
@@tommythecat4961 yes but the market itself didn't make those improvements... it's only through government intervention that we have better working conditions, hours, and wages... it's the socialist approach that created these improvements.
@@aztech101la absolutely I think government intervention is fundamental, but the free market provided the funds that allowed the reforms to be implemented. I'm not a big fan of capitalism, it has many contradictions and injustice is inherent in it, but it does produce. I think the Nordic model is a good approach, you get the best of both worlds... But it's a complex issue about which whole books have been written, well beyond what can be expressed in a yt comment.
@@tommythecat4961 I'm with you on the Nordic models. Anytime anyone in Congress proposes those ideas like Bernie did the right immediately labels them a full blown socialist and brings up how the Nazi party had socialist in their name. People who would benefit from those concepts always seem to vote against them. It's an ugly circle in the US how do we change it?
Overthrowing the tsar was not a good thing. What came after was infinitely worse than tsarist Russia. Love Michael though
A lot of people fall between the cracks under Socialism. Due to equity, if Einstein was born into equity he never would have been allowed to spread his wings and fly. So basically, everyone and society would remain stagnant.
It is not about equity in that sense. Also, fun fact: Einstein loved socialism.
If voting changed anything they wouldn't let us do it, that kind of seems like where we're at now! That won't let Trump have a chance they won't let kari lake have a chance.. they're pulling shenanigans against certain people
Haha holy shit you're delusional if you think Trump or Lake are best for anything in this country.
@@wullahblack6452 the point is not whether their best or not, it's that the establishment is actively shutting people down they do not like!.. with trickery and shenanigans! It doesn't matter if they're good, for some reason the establishment, neocons, warhawk Democrats, and uni party in general is scared of them!!! Do you get the important part of the comment now?
@@littlegreenbud2067 They aren't scared of them. They both just lost their elections. Why would neo cons be afraid of Trump? His policies were exactly the same as Dubya and Obama. Why do you think they supported everything he did? He literally is part of the uniparty!
Red Lipstick 💄? Maybe he wanted to feel festive.
There are many kinds of Socialism, one of them were Bureaucratic and Authoritarian Socialism (Communism) which developed in Russia and China that has political traditions in terms of systems of government as Imperial States ruled by Centralized Authoritarian Bureaucracies since the middle ages and ancient times respectively, there are other and much better forms of Socialism; Progressive Reforms of Liberal Economic Policies/Capitalism within the framework of the Constitutions of Burgeois Republics; within the framework of Liberal Democracy, Rule of Law, Checks and Balances and Civil Rights as in Scandinavia
Malice has on red lipstick? 💄 Anarchy.
Bakunin’s still right!!!!!
If Lex is Ross, Malice is Russ
Why is he wearing red lipstick though?
to trigger smooth brains who think it matters.
Because he's clearly gay/trans/confused about who/what will find him attractive... a really sad, angry lesbian who never got his chance on The View. 🤔
Malice looks like one of the nihilists from The Big Lebowski.
things are only obvious if you share the same fundamental assumptions.
Those assumptions come from the western cannon. We've gotten to far away from our roots. As we progress towards a new direction (different than today's"progressive way) we'll be getting back to our roots.
This is a bunch of tap dancing and word salad
I know good or bad
Why is he wearing lipstick im so confused
Welfare States and Free Markets are not in conflict. Most of the nations with the most expansive welfare states also have the freest markets. The Nordic states are the most obvious example, but it's on display throughout the world. The public and private sectors of a capitalist economy are not in any real conflict outside of politics. Economically speaking, they are symbiotic.
This guy should call himself a libertarian now a Anarchist. He does not follow the Anarchists traditions at all.
What are THE anarchist traditions you’re referring to?
@@MaxFenrir some commie BS I’m sure
Isnt "anarchist tradition" somewhat of an oxymoron?
@@MaxFenrir socialism
Anarchists have a centralized code of ethics? Doesnt that sound... authoritarian?
That dude is wearing lipstick
These guys were totally drinking.
Der Mensch Maschine
Is Malice wearing lipstick?
The functional ideas of communism will be realized within the open source and other similar movements of applied and transparant voluntary development of production. Especially when we reach AI that can do physical productive labour.
Bruh just say communism will be more practical as technology improves.
Open-source has been a huge inspiration for me. The fact that so much of the world has been built on free and open collaboration is amazing.
@@billjohnson6863 Yeah. The main issues plaguing attempts at communism (authoritarian use of force, corruption, efficiency etc) is sidestepped by open and voluntary productive and distributed organization of freeware, made possible over large scales by technology.
Not at all. Achieving socialism is a question of the arrangement of political and economic structures it will never be achieved through anything else especially if that change is centered on individual advancement.
@@chins9217
I am not talking about socialism...
But open source development is very much a practice based on participatory democratisation of productive capacity and free distribution of both tools and products. By each according to (voluntary application of ) ability...
With that being said, this will if course also require organisation to build the material foundation and infrastructure for applied physical production associated with open hardware, required resources etc, but this too can arguably be achieved without much involvement of the state.
Wow, a relevant yet understandable discussion abt communism and socialism. Without some shallow "communism baaaad" bs. And in Santa / Kraftwerk outfits, no less. This was 🔥🔥🔥
Justice, that is the answer!!!!! In Sweden you had more justice under the socialist system than in Venezuela and therefor it ran better, even with the same ideology. Enormos amounts of justice will allow you to create a good system with communism, or capitolism or even socialism.
Why tf is malice wearing lipstick?
Good and evil is just defacto contradiction, since they are in direct opposition to one another on the same spectrum. If you could see a visual representation of them/it, it would look like a two point source interference pattern. It's the assimilation of contradiction. Biases are contradictions. We're all so afraid not to be anchored to anything, and so we anchor to everything that merely feels right. People have almost totally forgotten how to think linearly. Their thinking is so polarized, they see no alternative means to an end other than to wallow in it. Right and wrong is merely a spectrum, a duality, a contradiction. Completely and utterly dependent upon the observer. Therefore, 'the greater good' is just an illusion. It couldn't possibly be anything else, as it is entirely dependent upon relative bias. Bias is just lack of proper tuning. It's out of key. Bias, is always, and forever will be, wrong. To believe in good and evil is to be a biased extremist..
Duality has enslaved us, and it's only going to get worse until this is fully assimilated. That's why the world changes so fast. So that YOU never have the time to catch on. Constant flux prevents us from finding true north. That's why you need to anchor yourself to The Eternal. It's the only thing that doesn't change.
Can someone tell me why this man… I mean guy.. has lipstick on?
Ahh.. Ho ho hoooo you have foung your calling Lex!
We're under a socio-fascist system at this point from my shared opinion. It's even more highlighted with the latest revelations in regards to #TwitterFiles
🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣
People feel safe, comforted in the Bossom of the Fascist masters.
.
Safe, and yet they know if they step beyond their allocated place in society they'll be punished / destroyed by their fa!illy / friends/ Govt.
.
And they'll punish / destroy others who they believe are close to have moved outside societies norms.
.
LOL. "Socio-Fascist". And you still trust Elon Musk? This insanity is how Iraq happened folks....
@@java4653 Yes socio-fascism, that's what wokeness is they've demonized us by falsely claiming we're deplorables fascists racists etc. Elons rocks, it's now confirmed that the DNC, FBI, DOJ, DHS etc conspired to target suppress and censor us the American people violating our rights and interfering with an election. They're internal enemy is the majority. If you express anything outside of their view they'll use weaponised legalism to destroy you in every way possible. Do you know anything about fascism? Why has the institutions left this out a whole section of political theory? Idiotical subversion!
@@projectw.a.a.p.f.t.a.d7762 "It's now confirmed'...nope. That's the coup attempt, that's Russia, the NRA & the Republicans. Musk was at the World Cup with members of Putin's inner circle buddy....which means you are helping kill Ukrainians & undermine the USA with this crap. It's McCarthyism all over again. Why do you hate America?.
Damn why is Lex so confrontational in this? Even tho it's playful he's being more agro than usual.
Maybe because he’s talking to someone who lives in their own reality.
@@justin2956 just because you don’t agree with him
Look at who he’s talking to. Lex said one thing about the guy in lipstick and he/she got defensive and tried to start being “witty”
@9:50
These guys literally have a 1950’s understanding of communism. With Lex constantly talking about a “stateless society” and Michael blending together many different concepts from socialism to anarchism to Woodrow Wilson and progressivism. Not to mention how he brings up the Fabians as a representation of what communism means, just ridiculous
He’s literally talking about big C Communism in the late 19th and early 20th century.
No True Scotsman
@@samuelprice2461 yeah, and big C communism never said anything about abolishing the state in any affirmative, action based way. That’s faaaaaaar off in the future when money and profit and by extension government itself will not have the same standing as they do now in our society
@@RobClayJoker …..Yes? That’s what he said.
@@samuelprice2461 I think you might be the R word if you haven’t been following along
is that lipstick?
Michael Malice always gave me bad vibes. The way he subtly defends totalitarian ideologies like communism/anarchism/socialism solidifies it. Some commies, the more likeable anti-woke ones at least, saw how a good segment of capitalism went woke and are now, no pun intended, capitalizing on it. Don't fall for it.
What is totalitarianism?
@@thomaspollack7451 Il Duce summed it up best: "All within the State, Nothing outside the State, Nothing against the State". That's pretty much it.
@@pavelowjohn9167 like how the military industrial complex has it's tentacles around every facet of US politics, culture, and industry?
@@thomaspollack7451 Sure, the US in 2023 is just like Italy circa 1935. That guy down the street with his "FJB" flag? He's totally screwed, I'm sure the secret police will pay him a visit any day now /sarc.
Dude no disrespect to you but you clearly don't know what you're talking about. How the fuck can stateless anarchist society also be centralized? Additionally totalitarianism isn't exclusive to economic ideologies. There's as many totalitarian capitalist societies as there where communist. Look at modern day Russia for example.
And lastly most Totalitarian communist countries came to be because of America's intervention in those countries during the cold war that put dictators in power all in the name of stopping communism.
Keep glancing
Struggling to take political argument with the strange outfits funny though
Is malice wearing lipstick?...
This dude has on lipstick!! Kudos for trying to hide in plain sight. We need more people who identify as men to do this.
селёдка)))
Is he wearing lipstick?
Why is this dude wearing red lipstick?
Same reason Lex is wearing a santa outfit
@@ScandinavianHeretic which would be?
@@Ezekiel336-16 The usual reason you wear a santa outfit.
@@ScandinavianHeretic So, you're saying they're talking about Marxism and Communism during Christmas (while one is wearing red lipstick)
@@Ezekiel336-16 Seems that way, doesn't it.
why is malice wearing lipstick?
Have on Cornell west