How Imperialism Caused World War I
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 дек 2024
- Suppport this Channel at:
patreon.com/redpenyoutube
Paypal: www.paypal.com...
Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.c...
#history #politics #imperialism #WWI #Russia #Soviet #Lenin #Hilferding #Hobson
This video is largely based on V. I. Lenin's (1917) Imperialism: The highest stage of Capitalism (www.marxists.o...)
and Nikolai Bukharin's (1915) Imperialism and the World Economy (www.marxists.o...)
Some images have been coloured by A.I. for cinematic effect and are not historically accurate.
Music by:
Run The Jewels 4 - a few words for the firing squad (instrumental)
Rise Up Dead Man - Female Version
my favourite thing about Engels was that he basically predicted WW1 30 years before it began through the analysis of the productive forces of prussia and other european empires using the historical materialist method.
Indeed! Back in the early 1990s, when I would teach a Marxist materialist class struggle historiographic interpretation and explanation of technological, social, and political events and developments of the 19th century leading to the immense shock of WWI to my North American university engineering students during their required year-long “Introduction to the History & Philosophy of Technology and Engineering” course most of them were quite perplexed and skeptical. They were all clever little kids who’d been taught the liberal capitalist historiography and history of this landmark event and their minds were full up with the typical idealist explanatory schema that proposed such intoxicating, delicious and screaming for detailed relativist investigation and sampling. Such notions as “clash of cultures” and “nationalism and coalescing of modern national identities” and “complex webs of contradictory treaties paired with age-old alliances and rivalries” and “a new thoroughly scientific world-view coupled with a growing mass manufacture capabilities and tolerances that permitted interchangeable parts resulting in a revolution in military technology”, the “Death of God” and the consequent “loss of moral standards” … the sheer number of explanatory hypotheses they had been taught and proposed (many of which were repeated in the material we were using a “textbook” for the course, made it seem to these clever kids that of course this World War was almost in a sense inevitable and just a necessary cost of all the progress the 19th century had undeniably been witness to (at least of course if one was a successful member of the bourgeois aristocracy of wealth and could afford to avail yourself of all these wonders!). And most of these phenomena they had been taught were “explanations” were hard to contest; most of these things had occurred or were happening. And I told the students I didn’t really contest much of any of these “facts”.
I told the students what I did contest was whether these things were all “causes” of World War I, or, and here’s where the most clever of these first-year 18 or 19 year olds who were all undeniably capable of an above average amount of intuitive logical thinking; a few of these scientific-minded clever students sat up a little straighter and it was like a lightbulb had been switched on. Maybe, I proposed most of what they had been taught was “causal” was really just an effect of something deeper; a more fundamental material cause that they all had in common with the other, most obvious effect of them all … the giant conflagration of WWI. I suggested that they had maybe been taught a version of history here of WWI, and more generally of much of European history, that was systematically incorporating this kind of category error. Mistaking effects for causes, and attributing powers and capabilities to immaterial phenomena like “culture” or “nationalism” that they cannot possess.
Of course it all seemed very interesting to the the liberally educated and intellectually curious first year students. And they followed along as I explained the general concepts of a materialist historical explanation (most of them, having been raised and educated in suburban or even rural high schools were so sheltered they didn’t yet recognize the practical real world political significance of what I was proposing … although a couple probably did … being from places like Poland or Egypt or a decolonized East African nation) that proposes the material, economic base versus the immaterial idealistic superstructure. They were all surprised just how ideologically idealist ALL of there history had been and how ideologically aligned such teaching about history … that changing ideas and culture explain historical events is with an aristocratic or oligarchic mentality and systems of political organization. By this point their poor heads were reeling but I delivered the final surprise by telling them that the materialist economic explanation of the growing political tension of the last couple decades of the 19th century, which finally exploded in a global conflict of WWI was caused by the normal functioning of capitalism and capitalist imperialism and that this was a Marxist interpretation of these events, but I found it to be the most compelling.
So many of these young students were still trying to get their heads around all that they’d just been asked to think about and have to deal with the fact their TA for this course might be … gasp … “a Marxist” (And did that mean he was a communist too??? Oh my! Was that allowed? They were first year engineering students after all … ). I knew most of them were still really skeptical, having received over a decade of North American liberal education that had either ignored the material and the economic altogether when teaching history or politics, and the material principles by which the ruling classes in history achieve and maintain they positions) or had included a basic assumption of capitalist principles whenever economics needed to mentioned at all in political discussions. They couldn’t be sure that this teaching assistant wasn’t just making this all up post-hoc and fitting the events and narrrative to his Marxist theory.
Until I read out Engels prediction and explanation aloud directly to the whole group. Very few engineers minds were changed since the majority of them were there back in the 1980s to learn science and math in order to work hard, invent a process or form a company and get rich, the capitalist way. But I hope these kids from mostly working-class families saw the difference between idealist and materialist modes of history, and realized that the hidden basic assumptions in the history they’d been taught and would read, and how the idealism in it is inherently an aristocratic and ruling class perspective that tends to reinforce the ruling class and the hierarchy.
@@B_Estes_Undegöetzthis was a wonderful read
.....
Do you know Jesus Christ can set you free from sins and save you from hell today
Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven
There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today
Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell
Come to Jesus Christ today
Jesus Christ is only way to heaven
Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void
Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today
Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today
Romans 6.23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Mark 1.15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Jesus
@@B_Estes_Undegöetz amazing!!
The guy that predicted everything was Nietszche, not Engels.b
This work demands serious consideration, and I'm happy to oblige.
Excellent review. The best of Lenin's theory is no doubt the part on Imperialism. How confused are all those "libertarians" (fundamentalist capitalists) who imagine and stubbornly hammer a free-marketist utopia as "true Capitalism", when in reality Capitalism always tended to monopolism (and thus to Imperialism)!
this video has explained more than my history teacher in a month in an hour, thanks for helping with my revision
.....
Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven
There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today
Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell
Come to Jesus Christ today
Jesus Christ is only way to heaven
Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void
Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today
Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today
Holy Spirit Can give you peace guidance and purpose and the Lord will
John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Mark 1.15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Jesus
Arguably where Marxism had greatest impact was in the discipline of History, where it is like infinitely more productive than classical or conservative historiography, barely a sequence of events and "great men". "Materialist" (realistic socio-economic) facts matter much much more than the genius of a thousand Alexanders or the madness of a million Hitlers.
Your videos are among my all time favorites, and they are proving to go a long way as far as both solidifying my own radicalization as well as radicalizing some of my friends. Fantastic work, comrade
Thank you very much, comrade.
Great essay, a learnt a lot from it, thank you
Very good video comrade.
Your channel incredibly underrated
More like incredibly overrated.
@@craigdashjian2771 Ouch! It's a pity you didn't learn anything from this video, assuming you actually watched it.
The author doesn't explain why the Bolshevik Revolution erupted in an empire where the systemic problems of capitalism were the least present.
Check out my video on the Russian Revolution.
@@redpen1917 ruclips.net/video/_WXSsSgLpRE/видео.htmlsi=M_oggNa4CaZKEr8l
The Petrograd Soviet where it all started literally had the densest population of impoverished proleterian workers.
@@keepitflowyartem3973right industrialization was n full swing in Russia things were rapidly changing and nobody's system of capitalism was worse than imperial Russia.
@@autumnsierra2401not true.
Great video as always! Would you maybe consider one specifically about the falling rate of profit? About the predicitions, debunking and the article actually proving it. That would be cool :)
Every channel worth watching has under 100k subscribers.
Excellent Video. Fantastic on so many levels!
amazing, thank you
Such an informative and well-composed video, comrade! Many thanks.
this video is severly underrated and informative. Not only does it engage in the materialist analysis behind capitalist productive forces but the humane response to such and genuine horror capitalist left unchecked are. Excellent, excellent video.
Excellent work! Hope this reaches more people, I'm subscribed now :)
A correction: the Bolsheviks weren't necessarily the instigators of revolution. That began before lenin arrived and the party snowballed.
Absloutely true but I believe that it was already mentioned that the Russian (February) Revolution began quasi-spontaneously behind a feminist March 8th demonstration demanding "bread and peace". Further analysis of the Russian Revolution surely belongs to another video, not this one on Imperialism, which is not specifically about Russia at all.
This was really good. But what if i want more of a play by play. Who were the leaders, the lobbyers, the capitalists, the propagandists, the workers, the soldiers. I wanna see or read like a whole series on it. To understand it better.
It's all very abstract. I want/need more details. The nitty gritty.
Does anyone have any recommendations ?
There are some styles of history books & videos called peoples historical Ty?!where just for Liana examine lives of obscure regular people who at times joined mass movements.,Examples- Howard Zinn’ s People Hustiry if US, Bury My Heart. at Wiundrd Knee,
Thus grassroots bottom up history approach started in 1960s.
Hopefully those same or other historians produce same approach websites &’videos, The 2 mentioned above probably already have videos.? Eric Hibsbawm of England was 1 of 1st
study regular people vs. traditional focus on elite « great man »‘ history style.
You can consult your country's intelligence services archives for the real meat of nitty gritty. May God be with you, brother. Cheers ❤
I would recommend the book "The Sleepwalkers" from Cristopher Clark, I think it's the best book about the 1. World War :)
incredible work. bravo.
This is a very truthful and important video because it clearly documents how the basic principles of capitalism are in direct conflict with human growth, human development, and basic human morality. In order to make large corporations continually profitable, government intervention is necessary -- to the point of contriving wars. The northern industrialilsts in 1860 wanted a war with the South not due to the immorality of slavery but because of the fact that the southern, slave-plantation-agrarian society stood in the way of northern plans for U.S. global capitalism and the industrial revolution. The corporate-state hegemony has been doing everything it can to keep this information out of our schools, out of the mass media, and thus out of our heads.
In regard to your first sentence, it must be said that Capitalism unleashes the productive forces of Humanity... but at what cost both for Humanity ourselves as for Mother Earth! Eventually (and that "eventually" is now already) that "endless growth" which Capitalism has unleashed must come to an end. So it depends on how you define "human growth" and "human development" and also in what term, I'd concur with the "morality" part anyhow.
New ML here, this is such a good video
Great video but please don’t use England as an interchangeable term for the United Kingdom. The UK is not England, it is Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland.
If you look at the old literature including writings from the Indian subjects of the British empire, you'll see them using England and Britain interchangeably. The term 'UK' was hardly used. It's quite a recent usage. Back in the colonial times, it was hardly used.
well this is about to send me in a deep rabbit hole , this needs to reach everyone
this channel is so fucking underrated it’s not even funny
All wars have a surface cause and an underlying cause. Safe to say the assassination was the surface cause. Good video 👍👍♥️
....
Do you know Jesus Christ can set you free from sins and save you from hell today
Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven
There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today
Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell
Come to Jesus Christ today
Jesus Christ is only way to heaven
Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void
Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today
Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today
Romans 6.23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Mark 1.15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Jesus
Red Pen and RTJ. What a crossover
It wasn't just England, but Scotland too - especially the industrial powerhouse of Glasgow. Then the workers were shat on by Churchill. Red Clydeside is the stuff of legend.
These video essays are excellent. The music choices, though, are honestly sometimes rather distracting.
45:32 and I’m crying. That was so powerful
I believe in the State. But also I believe that the Capitalism and the private sector is the one who corrupts the State. The new government here in Mexico stablished a new way of politics called “Mexican Humanism” lead by an anti Neo Liberal Benefactor State
Napoleon III hesitated to start a war against Prussia and her German allies in 1870. But the 23:27 bourgeois french media and a strong opposition in parliament forced him to do so. It was clear that a united Germany would finish the dominance of France in continental Europe. Sooner or later war was inevitable. Bismarck and the French nationalist wanted the decision immediately and they got it.
So good wow. Big up!
Fantastic work.
Your subscribers count is heartbreakingly disproportionate to the quality of your content.
History enables us to make accurate generalizations about the causes of big events, like wars and depressions. Engulfs and Lenin and Keynes and a few others of their generation were astute observers of events.
27:20 A fellow Hunt Showdown player?? Fantastic video essay btw, great work
I’ve always said WW1 was the “first imperialist interregnum”
Yeerrr we up
This is great.
When Systems failed starting WW1, WW2 and................................... "Then WW3"
Ahh, you see it. The same factors that produced the two wars are still playing out today! Capitalist expansion and imperialism, resource exploitation and territorial disputes. Basically, the same game. The one glaring difference this time is the bomb. Instead of killing tens of millions of people, now we have the ability to kill hundreds of millions or even billions in a very short time. This is accelerationism at work. I don’t have to elaborate on what that means, but i will anyway. We are rushing toward the finish line of our species. My question is: Why?
@@kensurrency2564because man is weak and weakness breeds dominance in self preservation.
WW3 by Proxy is already going on. Nuclear deterrance is the only and very dangerous containment, we'd be in full WW3 (or WW7?) wouldn't be for that.
Nobody fought for "a higher cause."
Europeans were coming into conflict outside Europe already. Example Middle of the 18th century the Carnatic Wars involved the British East India Company Vs French East India Company in India .
Those were minor skirmishes compared to the Franco-Prussian War which killed over 900,000 people and had a direct influence on the shape WWI took between France-Germany. But you are correct.
I think you're right: monopolism and Imperialism is not exclusive of Lenin's era but a bug/feature of Capitalism in general, one that manifested before that time and manifests again nowadays. It can well be argued that Capitalism largely coalesced as slaveist mercantilism in the first colonial period (first colonization of the Americas, triangular Atlantic trade, pirate wars and associated European ones beginning with the 30 and 80 years' wars), it can be argued that a more mature Capitalism was at play in the Napoleonic (and French Revolutionary) wars, which is when Britain conquered India faster than Alexander invaded Persia (and then added several strategical ex-Dutch colonies to their suddenly massive colonial empire, eyeing China as next target) and it's clear that, no matter how "most advanced" or "ultimate" stage of Capitalism Lenin thought that Imperialism was, it is still a major factor and a driving force of global Imperialist wars which are not too dissimilar to what Lenin's analyzed (except for nuclear deterrance), with the USA now in the role of Britain and (post-socialist, almost fully capitalist) China in that of the rising star, "overproducing" and "silk gloved imperialist" Germany of Chancellor Bismarck.
Of course, technology, corporate structure and financial institutions have evolved but BlackRock or Goldman Sachs are not that different from the Fuggers or the Genoese loan sharks of five centuries ago. Maybe Lenin was seeing change where there was continuity rather.
A very good analysis.
Damn good vid!
most important non-religious video on youtube.
Where can i get this soundtrack
China, today, is a perfect example of why this is so important for us all to understand. China has a communist government, and they've sat back, and they've watched everything the west has done over these last 80 years. They've watched, and they've seen every mistake we've made in the West, and they've seen, and they understand how and why, we made those mistakes (massive corporate corruption).
So today, what we really see, is China with a communist government, running an (almost capitalist system), only with one, very big, and very important difference, to us in the west. China will never allow any multibillion-dollar corporation, company, organization, or any wealthy individual, (elite), to become influential to the leading party! Nothing, and nobody, will ever be able to dictate government policy, not by being super rich, or being a major business/corporation today. And that alone, will see China succeed.
Whereas in the west, we've created a 1% of our population holding over 90% of all the wealth. And that has seen all the real power slipping away from our western governments, and slipping into the hands of those multi-billion dollar corporations and elites. So, as we're all shortly going to be finding out, that has seen us in the west, fail.
The USA isn't the entirety of the West. Have a look at the wealth inequality and corruption indexes of the EU, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. These are the places that have come the closest to eliminating class struggle. They're still flawed, but better than the USA and China.
The key difference between China and the USA, is that in China things like bribery and graft are _legally_ unacceptable, instead of just being called "lobbying". But it still happens en masse at all levels in the party, to a disgusting degree.
Not to mention the billionaires (who shouldn't even exist) and the government are still fundamentally interlinked and benefitting from worker exploitation. The CPC utterly betrayed socialist values, instead adopting hypercapitalism with a political structure that seeks to suppress the individual rather than empower them. They're not a model to follow, unless your desire is to turn a nation into a factory at the expense of quality of life.
Well said
Yeah, China is a great place to live... why don't you move there lol
@@sean6775 If only I could, I'd be gone like a shot, as far away from all you clueless dunces we're really suffering from in this country, today, there is just nothing British about you people today, as for any understanding of our own country's history? Please, you'd have no idea!
@@sean6775 You sound like an American, not any Brit? So why don't you live over there, see how well you get on, LOL. Idiot.
is it bad that i laughed at the sound effects for the assassination of Ferdinand
😆
Yes. That’s the best part BECAUSE of the sound effects.
Great vid, but did Lenin make that quote in 1095? 52:41 in
Algorithm food
What books do you recommend on Imperialism.
I’m a social democrat who believes all countries can engage in state capitalism and social democracy, where eventually the whole world can have a similar system. Where the state levies markets for profit and doesn’t need to export via imperialism.
What books do you recommend to disprove or challenge this viewpoint so I can learn. I have no problem to be open to socialism and communism.
www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/
Lenin's 1916 work on Imperialism was in fact a vehement rebuttal of Kautsky's one ("super-imperialism"), which seems to fit with your utopian reformist ideas. Read both.
Interestingly I'm of the opinion that Kautsky's "super-imperialism" concept (which is not really his own but owes to earlier work by some Scottish socialist whose name I've forgotten) actually manifested to some extent in the 1st Cold War under Keynesianism but only because of the defeat of alt-imperialist powers like Nazi Germany (which at some point threatened even the advantage of the joint US-British empire) and the obvious need to contain USSR "contagion" by means of state charities (reigning on the excesses of Capitalism, redistribuiting downwards some 10% of the wealth in the developed world) and can probably be said that it lingered into the 90s and even earliest 2000s. But it's not anymore: with the rise of China and to lesser extent other powers like Russia, Iran and a large array of growingly industrialized southern countries (Indonesia, Mexico... you name them), we're back to Lenin's classical Financiarization > Monopolism > Imperialism > War equation.
"Capitalist history" is non existent
And what the hell the score?
❤
How can any presentation of Lenin be given efficaciously in this video
The devils of the world
Calling out problems, inequalities, exploitation, etc.. is one thing. To purport that you have the solutions and know how to balance the scales.. quite the other.
Yes. As communist I can only concur: Marx, Engels and even Lenin... lived at a time when Capitalism and class war was only beginning to be recognized as a reality (a dialectic one) and thus for them it was urgent to understand the inner workings of Capitalism and were maybe not that good at understanding how to overcome it. We however, 100-150 years later, stand at the very end of Capitalism (necessarily so: Earth itself, its ecological balance, is collapsing as we speak under so much predatory pressure, also the working class is now fully developed: educated, connected in real time, almost completely removed from rural-religious background inherited from pre-Capitalist society) and thus we should be considering what you say: how to solve (end) Capitalism for good, how to build a functional eco-communist society.
What this does not elaborate on is that Marxism can also evolve onto its own form of Imperialism.
How about you elaborate?
Not really. Literally zero Marxist countries were imperialists. The only concrete example is Che Guevara and he was fighting against imperialism objectively
What's your reason for living...
The revolutions that are bound to happen this next decade (2025-35). I want to see that, and possibly do something as well, before I die (I'm 56 and I feel already very old).
Religious conversion and imperialism are linked ??
Only to some extent. Britain particularly was very good at not converting almost anyone and exploiting religious, ethnic and cultural factors to the advantage of their colonial empire. For example they reinforced the Hindu caste system to their advantage, co-opting the local upper classes in the exploitation of the Indian masses, later they would exploit sectarian strife to get India partitioned and weakened, etc.
@LuisAldamiz thanks for new insight
Funny how you're video being on youtube proves you wrong with what you disclaimed in the beginning of this video.
im sorry but your description of the February and October revolutions are laughable
Thanks, loser.
@@redpen1917 How mature of you. Just another reason not to watch your communist, BS channel.
@@redpen1917 you don't even mention the tzar abdicating in February beacuse Petrograd march started by the women and im the loser
for the October revolution you say the people toppled the provisional government when it was explicitly lenin and his cohort, it was quite a limp coup , because no one was defending the provisional government after the spring offensive
you are laughable
@@banurobymusic you sound like a young and new comrade…Just watch my other videos on those subjects if you really care about those aspects of history.
@@redpen1917always the unread anarchists repeating their “original ideas”
3:06
discovery of coal? what
There was a time when coal was 100% charcoal, mind you. Here in Biscay, which had an extensive proto-capitalist metallurgical development, this was surely favored by very large iron ore reserves (later depleted by voracious British semi-colonialism) but the smitheries were not generally built near the iron mines but scattered through the landscape in palces were streams (for energy in the form of water mills) and forestry (largely for charcoal) was abundant (which is pretty much all the landscape over here). The ore was exported from near Bilbao to the many scattered such smithies, which were usually extensions of the farmhouses, which were efficient because of a legal framework established by the 5th century Bagauda (anti-feudal peasant revolution, which only succeeded in the Basque Country). My own ancestors owned one such smithy in Ibarrangelua but there were many.
The discovery of mineral coal actually changed that, favoring the concentration of metallurgy and, when I was a kid and we still had some significant metallurgic industry, coal was imported from Asturias and the charcoal-making economy had become residual or totally vanished. Many beech forests still bear the scars of such activity (copping) anyhow.
5:19 social labour?
social division of labour?
Maybe related but different things. "Social labor" means the product of society, most of which are working class (proletarians). "Division of labor" is about the specialization of individuals and groups into specific roles in the economy (farmer, smith, landlord...)
Wait isn’t Marxism totally evil and thus wrong fundamentally wrong! So but wait why does it make such good sense complete with accurate political forecasting when most people couldn’t read?
Working class people was growingly literate already in Marx' era, at least in the more industrialized parts of Europe (and the USA) and Marx himself made an effort to get his work, especially "Capital", reaching to as many workers as possible by publishing it in parts. Notice that the printing press was already an old invention in those days and that pamphlets and newspapers were already common issue decades earlier in the days of the French and subsequent (1832, 1848) revolutions. It was in fact in 1948 when Marx and Engels published their influential Communist Manifesto, exposing the limits of the bourgeois revolutions (bourgeois-led but proletarian-manned) and the need to go further in proletarian parameters that were not exclusive of what would be called Marxism (so called utopian socialism, proto-anarchism and reform socialism were already a thing, even as early as the French Revolution the Sans-Coulottes were pretty much a proletarian faction, even if their demands were surely limited and even if Lenin rather preferred the more bourgeois-centrist Jacobins).
In any case a central part of Marx ideas was not so much directed to workers but to philosophers (i.e. highly educated semi-privileged echelons of society, as was Marx himself) when he said (from memory) that "to this day philosophers have tried to understand the world, now they must strive to change it". And in fact Marxism and other socialisms were led by non-proletarians often enough, especially at the beginning. This leads to many serious contradictions anyhow, from that Dutch "socialist" who was a plantation owner in Java proposing to the 2nd International that colonialism was a force of "progress", through the questionable "Platonist aristocratic" (rule of the philosophers) that Bolshevism implemented in the USSR and copycat systems to the modern debate about the destructive role of the "professional managerial class" (worker aristocracy) in the broader political left.
In any case gigantic intellectual and socio-political work that very much helped to change our world. More research is needed, as they say.
Wait are we the badguys?!
We the proletarians? Nope.
We the Westerners as "collective" (bourgeois rather) state or imperial institutions? Yes, pretty much. As a US volunteer in Ukraine learned after arrival: "we are the nazis".
@ I think that’s super disingenuous to say we are Nazis especially in the context of Ukraine, smells too much of what Russia’s propaganda has been. It also crushes down the differences between western capitalist imperialism and fascism which comes from it. I lived in Ukraine before the war and we are not shooting people in the back of the head and throwing them into ditches by the tens of thousands like the actual nazis did in Ukraine.
I don't think imperialism generated 1914-18, rivalry means competition, and rivalry can heat up, generating war. I agree the French dearly wanted their provinces back, and in 1939 Germany wanted revenge, however imperialist the nations were, what bothered them was status and security.
Imperialism is the competition of capitalist powers for the markets and resources of the world. WW1 was triggered by "accident" (sorta) but the buildup to WW1 was organized competition by great bourgeois powers in the frame of Imperialism as described by Lenin. Britain was always about containing the rise of any continental power (first the Habsburgs/Spain, then France, later Germany, now Russia) and was building for that a coalition hostile to Germany, while Germany, once that wise bourgeois leader that was Bismarck was removed, was also building for war, especially after failing to outcompete France in Morocco and to gain access to the British colonial empire.
@LuisAldamiz containing the rise of one dominant continental power had less appeal once great power war was inconsistent with becoming more powerful, so England attempted friendship with Germany prior to 1914, but Germany saw no great value in friendship until after being starved by the British blockade, and Hitler wrote of the Kaiser as having mistakenly provoked a naval race with England, encouraging her to be friends with France.
@@robertewing3114 - All the opposite: Germany's leadership was all the time incredibly anglophile (so was the last Kaiser, a close relative of the Tudors, and Adolf Hitler himself, to the point of ridicule). Prior to WW1, Germany tried to make a British alliance and hoped for some degree of access to the British colonial empire... they were totally denied by London, which built alliances with France and, indirectly, with Russia instead.
@LuisAldamiz Hitler and the Kaiser had different relationships with England, you are over-simplyfing the history, and you exaggerate the readiness of all involved to go to war, the Austrian empire began the war over Franz Ferdinand, the imperialist competition wasn't involved.
@@robertewing3114 - Of course I'm slightly oversimplifying: it's a YT comment sections' discussion not an erudite academic debate. But I'm not simplifying in excess, just enough to have the message clear.
Austria-Hungary pushed such extreme "ultimatum" on Serbia that everybody concurs that it wanted war. If Germany did not want war, they shouldn't have backed AH or, at the very least, they should have only attacked Russia, not Belgium.
“There may be much to learn about history through capitalist media but as a general tendency it will not include narratives or histories that fundamentally challenge the capitalist system.”
The utter irony of this statement is staggering.
A video on a capitalist media platform, criticizing the capitalist system by saying that media in a capitalist system will not allow the capitalist system to be challenged.
Wild.
The platform may be capitalist but the channel is clearly not. Nobody said that proletarians can't use what is controlled by capitalists (but produced by us to the last bolt or circuit) as much as we can. It's getting difficult because of growing censorship but we always thrive in the cracks. Remember that Marx, persecuted in capitalist Germany, got exiled to capitalist France and later England, that Lenin accepted the offer of capitalist Germany to help him return to Russia (but remained a vocal critic of Germany anyhow). We are entitled to use everything at hand (we collectively produced it as proletarian class, it's our natural right) and we thrive in the cracks of Capitalism infighting, where else?
@ the sentiment that communist ideology cannot be proliferated in a capitalist. Society is utterly out of touch with reality.
Why does the capitalist platform allow the communist channel to exist? according to the claim made in the video it shouldn’t.
Please don't be an advocate for the Soviets. They weren't less imperialist than the Russian, Austrian, Ottoman or German Empire.
You’re joking.
@@redpen1917 I am a Bulgarian, and you should know that Bulgaria was a Soviet satellite. Another thing you should know is that Bulgaria was not at war with the Soviets and kept diplomatic relations with them until September 5 1944. We didn't send a single person to fight for the Nazis, yet Stalin and Churchill decided that Bulgaria would be a Soviet satellite so the Soviets eventually declared war and occupied us for 3 years. Later we were a puppet of theirs no different from a British colony in Africa, an Ottoman vassal or an Austrian province. We couldn't decide anything for ourselves and our army and economy were both controlled by and dependent on the Soviets. If that isn't imperialism then idk what is.
Bulgaria was an ally of Nazi Germany no matter how you put it and participated in the partition of Yugoslavia in 1941, annexing also parts of Greece, as well as in the Holocaust. I can grant you that those annexations can be to some extent or another be considered ethno-historically "legitimate" but there is no question that Bulgaria was a belligerant in the Axis camp and was under a fascist regime, no excuses therefore to claim "neutrality".
I can also grant you that the USSR-led economic policies of CAME were arguably "imperialist", favoring the continuity of historically entrenched development differences between countries and thus causing the continuity of Bulgarian underdevelopment (as well as that of other countries from Rumania to Central Asia, and even Cuba, which also joined the club and did not get any industrialization as result). This is where you could indeed argue that USSR/CAME policies were "imperialist" or at the very least that they left much to be desired in terms of internationalism and egalitarianism. By contrast nearby Yugoslavia had a vibrant and quite interesting development under socialism but with emphasis in cooperativism and access to western markets.
Amazing video, and well may you say all the european powers scrambled for partitioning africa, but NOT Russia...a truly christian nation and fiercely anti colonist Russia took no part in the division and exploitation of the continent of Africa.
Germany definitely wanted to annex or vassalize parts of the Russian Empire. In WW1 they effectively vassalized Ukraine (Hetmanate) and other ex-Russian nations all the way to Estonia for months (but then Bulgaria collapsed and WW1 ended and a power vacuum ensued leading to the formation of the USSR after two years of war). In WW2, the whole Nazi plan was to annex the USSR at least to the AA line (Arkangelsk-Astrakhan) and turn it into "the India of Germany". That was probably the main reason why Britain and their French ally declared war on Germany upon the invasion of Poland, quite ironically to defend the USSR, not because of love of it but out of fear of Germany becoming such a major power that it would have threatened the global Anglosaxon hegemony. US think tanks estimated that such a expanded III Reich would dwarf all their area of influence, including Latin America and the whole British Empire, in terms of economic self-sufficiency, that they needed to control China to re-balance and thus that they needed to go to war against Japan.
It has nothing to do with religion.
You’re clearly wrong, but good video
Enlight us pls
No @@angelzuniga1057
@@angelzuniga1057 oy vey, ofc he can’t
Any m0r0n can plainly figure out with a map and basic facts that this premise is true not just for WW1 but the whole of human history until now. Empires have been what thrived. The US empire provided its citizens with the greatest quality of living. Its citizens lived better than traditional royalty. It was freedom on an unprecedented scale. It came at an expense to others. It was always that way. That paradigm might be ending now. *The paradigm of empire will be replaced by mutual symbiotic relationships. To what extant remains to be seen.
But they said the same thing before WW1. BRICS is the only thing that might do what you say, and the old powers are fighting it every step of the way.@aachoocrony5754
I don’t know anyone who doesn’t blame WW1 on the people in power in the respective governments.
Everything mentioned toward beginning of the video is equally true of societies before the Industrial Revolution, just with far higher death rates, & the material standard of living of the working class increased enormously over the 1820-1940 period (moreso than all 1,820 years of AD history before then). Nor are laborers the only ones who contribute to the value of production, for the physical capital in a business is not payed for by the workers.
Keep telling yourself that
@@cbyroads100 Yes, and keep being unable to refute it
@@Cotswolds1913It is absolutely being paid for by the workers because they produce both the material goods needed for investment and the value that the investment comes from. It's just not being paid by the workers that operate in this given factory. The working class as a collective, however, absolutely does pay for every capital investment ever made.
@@paulussturm6572 the money that purchases those capital goods comes from savings, not workers. The savings of the entrepreneur creates the demand for the capital stock. Every productive endeavor of any scale whatsoever, traces back to saved resources, which again, the workers didn’t pay for.
@@Cotswolds1913 The workers produce the saved resources. That's the entire point of my comment. In fact, saved resources and investment capital are functionally synonyms in this case.
This is a very sketchy explanation of the whole situation. Dig deeper my friend. Who are the forces behind politicians, the capital and the rulers?
Who are they? Please have the courage to say it out loud.
@@redpen1917 please man. Research yourself! Are you a child or a grown up?
@@bbb1081703 got any good sources?
@@redpen1917 ruclips.net/video/QZolDMLHJGE/видео.html&si=wcqKpnja92a9Xby-
ruclips.net/video/pd9B3cilgHY/видео.htmlsi=7GELE4Y5ApIVpI3s
“lower races”
Bagdad ban.
Are you a Marxist?
Obviously. I'm too, at least to a great extent.
stalin’s imperialism in the name of communism contradicts this one
@@ejardiente1741 “Stalin’s Imperialism”
That was so dumb i wonder how are you literally alive 😭🙏
@@redpen1917im sorry my dude the russian army took over easten europe and stayed there for 40 years, what else do you call that?
for fuck sake im an anticapitalist from eastern europe, makes my skin crawl that i have the rub shoulder with people who defend the soviet union as if it didnt have any fault
AES my fucking ass, please strive for sth better than the """soviet""" union
And communism lasted till 1990 and whole thing collapsed upon itself. People were worse off and had less.
No
@@bobsbigboy_ Oh really !?
@@tml721 yes
Source: trust me bro
@@unovasfinest2623 NO I don't. I don't trust someone thinks the government controlling everything is a good thing
Imperialism is more than just capitalism. I think nationalism and failed diplomacy caused WW1 more, and the war itself harmed the markets of nations involved.
That's the only conclusion when you abstract our societal relation and society from material conditions.
@@Nancy-mq4uc WW1 wasn't started by material conditions, it was started due to para-social relations between nations.
Marxists don't understand WW1, you virtue signal the everlasting heck out of it, but you don't understand it. It goes even further than just Entente v Central Powers.
You're not really understanding that, at least in Lenin's excellent work on the matter, financier capitalism leads to monopolism, which leads to the formation of hierarchical blocs of capitalist powers competing for world's resources and markets (Imperialism), which leads to war. "Nationalism" is a factor but belongs almost strictly to Imperialism as such wider concept (there's also liberation nationalism, which is an antagonist of imperialist nationalism).
hyt
Incredibly good job comrade
What is imperialism? Britain!
J’s
"The genius of Lenin's theory"..... personally I fail to see the "genius" in his theory (on the causes of WW1) . Nor is there any genius in Marxism....it's a commentary on the evolution of capitalism with some suggestions as to how it can be overcome. Including violence.
Have you even read Lenin's work on Imperialism (freely available online)? Do it, then comment.
Iam convinced this video presentation was made for simpletons
@@chrislambert9435 it is meant to be accessible. Read the comment section to measure its reception.
@@redpen1917 How dare you quote or mention Lenin ? as if He were such a great person !
@@chrislambert9435 Lenin walks around the world.
Frontiers cannot bar him.
Neither barracks nor barricades impede.
Nor does barbed wire scar him.
Lenin walks around the world.
Black, brown, and white receive him.
Language is no barrier.
The strangest tongues believe him.
Lenin walks around the world.
The sun sets like a scar.
Between the darkness and the dawn
There rises a red star.
@@redpen1917 But He did not and He does not, its a delusion like the delusions of Communism
@@redpen1917 You showed a Photo of Lenin with Stalin, are you proud of that ?
Funny that famine only broke out in the Empire that did have a socialist revolution lol.
Famines occurred throughout Russian and Chinese history well before their socialist revolutions. And while famine did in fact occur up until the 1960s, under socialism both of these countries put an end to their history or famine.
@@redpen1917 Not in any other power during WW1, which was the context of my reply. Btw societies like China’s were feudal, at less than 1/3 of the per capita income of Russia, barely at subsistence level, and in a geography prone to both flooding & droughts (the latter also Russia).
Ever heard of the potato famine in Ireland? They always leave that out I wonder why? 🤔
@@Cotswolds1913 The German Empire aswell as it's Colonies also Experienced Famine during the first World War, there was Famine in Austria Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire (Google the Famine of Mount Lebanon), the Iranians Experienced Famine Aswell. The only nations which had Adequate food supplies were the foremost Imperial Powers who had the backing of the vast British and French Empires compounded with the support of the Rising American Empire
@@not_james66live72 famines caused by war are a totally different kettle of fish, anyone can have their access to trade cut off, even very wealthy countries today, that has no bearing on the inability of the economic system to provide for its people. Famines in socialist countries meanwhile, or in feudal societies, occurred because of a domestic inability to produce and/or trade for food
There's plenty of 3rd world countries that imperialism were never involved or very little intervention, they're all in tribal wars of their own til this day. There's also colonized nations that did very well like South Korea, Singapore, India. It's not imperialism that is the problem, it's the lack of adaptation to the rest of the world.
Yes? Name these countries please.
Name them then....
I don't think any country asked Britain to come steal all their resources..crown jewels and idk LIVES becuz they needed help modernizing. Nobody asked king Leopold to do what he did...nobody asked the French to do what they did to Indonesia, Thailand etc...and nobody asked ANY BODY in India if they wanted to replace their raj for empress Victoria ...nobody asked Britain to steal from them and starve them out of their own countries. Yet every uprising, every stand to be independent and every effort to get away from the British no ..they try to force, enslave even kill becuz they are greedy, selfish and STUFFY ppl that only gained with their boots on another countries back. Russia is not trying to over power Italy...India doesn't want to rule Spain...and I don't think any one in south America is looking to capitalize off of British tea. The ppl of Africa helped the British with medicine, math and astrology yet ..the British has gained all this by force, ruthless murder and enslavement. No other country should ever be colonized and tbh Britain needs to let all NON british countries aka NO COUTNRY THAT IS IN EUROPE should have ownership of any country. Every country/continent can survive with our the British FORCING others to be slaves for their greedy tea drinking gain.
Imperialism didn't cause World War I, Serbs and Serbia did. In fact they have a history of starting wars.
watch the. video
@@nolo5220 I did.
Princip, who was Bosnian BTW, was just an accidental trigger of a war that was being built up for since much earlier. The first embassy of Japan to Europe, decades before, already accounted for the constant talk of imminent war. Britain was angry at Germany for surpassing them in terms of industrial production c. 1900, France was angry at Germany on the Alsace-Lorraine issue and their own desire to control the coal of Saarland, Russia and Austria-Hungary were angry at each other on who would control the Balcans, Italy was angry at both Austria and France on irredentist claims, etc. And I haven't even mentioned the colonial tensions such as the Moroccan protectorate (German-French crisis of 1911), Tunisia (French-Italian conflict), the Balfour Declaration aiming to partition the Ottoman Empire (which was pretty much German semi-colonian turf), the tensions about the projected but never actually implemented partition of China, etc.
@@LuisAldamiz Princip was a Bosnian Serb who considered himself Serb above anything else.
In the past 100 years or so, Serbia has launched at least 4 wars. This is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact.
@@tarik6990 - I'm perfectly aware of the brutal genocides made or attempted by Serbian ultra-nationalism. What I say is that such thing was not clear at all in 1914 (Serbocroat ethnicity is a thing, a secularist thing, can you imagine if Germans went to genocidal civil war on Protestantism vs Catholicism?, it actually happened but in the 16th century, it was a disaster) and that anyhow it was not the deep, real cause of the war. If Princip would have been arrested or decided to do otherwise, the war would have still happened under other specific circumstances, the build-up for war was clear and very strong already.
the author is delirious, - read a lot of Marx)
Bolshies gonna bolsh. Your hero Karl Marx was a monster. Look up his personal life.
Working on his biography now. There’s a reason ppl love his writings despite his personal affinities.
@@redpen1917 He was still a POS - and by your own standards.
@@TheLoyalOfficer he was still a genius whose ink and pen had a greater impact on world history than the greatest generals.
@@redpen1917 At least you admit it. Go spread the word to your lefty pals who think he was a saint. Thanks.
@@TheLoyalOfficertriggered white crusader..🙄
Rebellious against God’s literal teachings and craving for earthly interest cause war
political memes were fire back then
If you’re referring to the cartoon illustrations of Uncle Sam and the military; all of those came from publications by the Anti-Imperialist league. I also found them quite interesting when i discovered them. Such art seems scant these days. Then again maybe it always was.
@@redpen1917 i saw the one with rent and low wages before, but the way you present it, with serious narration, just makes one chuckle.
Juice?
Imperialism was not the cause of WW1. Money lending was.
Imperialism is the highest stage of capitalism. Money lending is only a small part of the capitalist system.