Thank you for watching! We launched this project to counter right-wing disinformation like PragerU. The problem is, they have millions of dollars in oil billionaire money and we have nothing but our supporters and our ideas. Consider becoming a patron of the Institute and making these videos possible: www.patreon.com/gravelinstitute. We will be forever in your debt.
are you guys stupid? governments are literal cancer leeching off people, you work hard and they tax your ass, print money, cause inflation etc all those things that make you poorer. if there was no government everybody would be better off
@@sten260 You need a government under capitalism to enforce private property rights. The only way to have a stateless society is by having a worker owned socialist economy.
They also juuuuuuuuuust happened to have killed a bunch of people, including cops, Blown a bunch of stuff up, and launched full scale assaults on mines for the "crime" of hiring people who didn't join the union.... but usre, let's pretend they got shot for "trying to unionise."
Top reason is that the worker class became prosperous. It’s hard to get riled up for a socialist revolution when you have a job, house, car, you take family vacations in Florida.
@Justin Bradburn The profit motive, which these people detest, is bound in 2nd law of thermodynamics. Any living being must consume more calories than they expend in gathering it, aka profit. Human civilizations rose once there were enough agricultural surplus to afford specialization... more profit. And every step of the way towards human development, this process, this quest for profit from nature, has advanced. And now we have these idiots come along and tell us the whole thing is wrong... that they have a non thermodynamic type model that is better Then, of course, look at their track record of entropy wreckage and rot
@babykuzi82 Ey there, I am actually very knowledgeable on Vietnam's situation. I wouldn't call it a socialist government after Ho Chi Minh died, more of a state-capitalist mix, and yea the government there is corrupt. I agree on your taxation. As for the larger federal government for the US, not going to sugarcoat it but we actually do not have a big government. We barely spend on welfare contrary to popular belief. Setting a national healthcare system will not cause a USSR style party member elite, it will in fact aid our doctors and increase them per capita, as in any other nation who has done such policies. As a Libertarian Socialist I am not really a big fan of Marxist-Leninist policies (which is a very broad definition mind you) , such as the USSR, and post-Ho Chi Minh Vietnam.
Just go ahead and ask anybody you know who isn't invested in socialist ideas to define the difference between socialism and communism. Most can not, and especially those who say they're evil. The effects of that suppression are definitely felt today, and the right is very good at taking peoples ignorance on what it is and making people hate it before they can learn about it.
@harlaudata you're right I'm not an economist you're wrong about one thing I have enough empathy to realize that we have one in four children going hungry at night in the usa and that is a problem. Yes capitalism isn't "evil", but to be a good CO it requires that you become a psychopath, and highly narcissistic
"History isn't destiny" makes me think of that quote by Le Guin, "We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings."
@@tamirj.b.n9814 no matter which human beeing you give such power - hes going to become corrupt - not because hes weak, but a human beeing is just not made for this much power. imho anarchy is the only way to reduce centralized power and put the power into the hands of the community.
@@rodabanane giving power to the community isn't always good There needs to be a leader and if any Joe could just be nice to someone to convince the community to do something stupid, then what's the point
@@tamirj.b.n9814 i guess you unfortunately didnt get my point, so again: a human ALWAYS gets corrupt with this much power. in the majority of human time there have been "leaders", sending their "slaves" into wars which often were driven by their own interest. capitalism is no exception. these system will always allow people to expploit others. this needs to stop.
@@allenwilliams7367 if that's the case I'm not in favor of that. I haven't seen it, but I will admit it would not surprise me if there are some platforms that are right leaning and do ban or throttle the other side. And if so that's problematic, but it doesn't make it not problematic that trillion dollar corporations are doing it just because it favors your views
@@suspicious2delicious Not at all bro. It means that current developments may appear similar to historical events, but are never an exact 1:1 equivalent or copy. As you know, one letter at the front of a word can completely change it’s meaning and the consequences of its expression.
Absolutely no chance. This carcass promotes where the money flows, so it will do them well to delist Gravel and other left outlets. Just another reason why socialism is based, wouldn't you love to have a public RUclips funded by everyone?
And we also have the famous quote attributed to Steinbeck below. “John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” ― Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress
@John Spöner you’re missing the point, the quote is about how lots of US people see themselves as future millionaires and so vote for policies that benefit them instead of the average man or woman.
@@westg463 funny, but it is a shame that criticism of capitalism was for decades of the 20th Century very closely linked to murderous totalitarians who were more interested in ideological excuses to rule out kill than anything else.
Really important to bring up the parallels between how socialism and social democracy not taking off in America along with the Red Scare/McCarthyism. More people need to see this
Exactly, the left has been brutally suppressed in the United States, often with violent force. This, more than anything else, is what has made it so hard for them to build even a basic foothold.
@@TheGravelInstitute Social democracy & Nordic model aren't really "socialism" though, it's more like social fascism Scandinavia maintained their wealth inequality & their class hierarchy & their monarchies... doesn't really sound revolutionary iyam
@@wtfhah Yep, that's stupid. USSR had a hierarchy - of party bureaucrats. China has a hierarchy. Any dictatorship has a hierarchy. Also, another facet of this ludicrous idea of "social fascism" is pontential to fall in to fascism - real fascism. newsflash. Anything can fall to fascism. It's a cancer.
@@JukeboxTheGhoul No, USSR had a much more flourishing democracy than USA ever had. China also has a more responsive & better functioning democracy than the US. Notice there was no storming of the capitol that took place in USSR or PRC. You are living under "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie". And it's only the "DotP" that can prevent this Fascism is far more likely to result from liberalism & capitalism
I’m so glad the reaction to Prager U isn’t empty liberal platitudes and “gotchas” and ended up being actually leftist. Good. Fascism isn’t beaten with SNL.
@@connorschrock2883 Yes. A bureaucracy that serves to give endless incentives to corporatists be it from the liberals to right wing “populists” is fascism
As a European citizen, I think that the term "Social Democracy" in U.S.A. means "Communism" for the majority of the people ... but both terms are completely different ...
Where I'm from in Colorado, the largest coal miner's strike was led by the IWW, a socialist union. Over 12,000 miners went on strike in the autumn of 1927, shutting down all but one of the state's coal mines.
Not just the country. The world. Capitalism is everywhere, some systems are just slightly better than others. Cops still beat people to death in England.
@@funnylittlecreature Yea but the US is what I feel to be the worst. Many countries adopt some leftists policies like free healthcare or free education and the working class at least have a safety net above them. But in the US, anything even remotely close to the left instantly screams socialism to Americans
@@funnylittlecreature Yea totally agree with you man! I think it would be best if we take both positives and negatives into account so that we can to a more reasonable conclusion on how to better overcome the challenges in our country.
Keep putting the pressure on our politicians. Don’t become apathetic from the harsh realities we live in. Stay strong, call your politicians, don’t let them keep you silent!
And this especially accounts to the elected progressive politicians that were funded by regular people to fight for policies that benefit regular people.
“The harsh realities we live in” Have you studied human history or traveled the world? 2020 western society seems to be anything but a “harsh reality.”
@@jb8408 I have, in fact, but have you considered that US politics affects people *outside* of the US, and that the premise of a harsh reality applies to other countries, including US client states? I see your argument, but there’s not much to it.
Can we get some citations in the video description? This was one of the reasons why you guys have so much more legitimacy than PragerU, and I would hate to see this focus on using verifiable factual information to fade. Using sources is very important. Love you lot.
What's more, the 'European way' isn't limited to Europe, countries with massive populations like Japan, Taiwan, South Korea have very heavily subsidised universal healthcare, strong childcare laws such as paternal, not just maternal leave, and public pension funds. The only developed country (apart from the US) is Chile and that's only because a US backed dictator wrote the consititution.
@@bogdangiusca7431 They completely rejected neoliberlaism and are now rewriting the constitution. Unless this is forced down peoples throats through US backed coups or almost religious rhetoric, they opt for the social democratic way.
@@yuh1592 Taiwan and South Korea, the most imperialist of all countries. Nevertheless, even if in the past they had empires, like every other nation, now they are liberal democratic states.
@@ctrlaltdelmeir184 What are you talking about? Japan is imperialist today. South Korea isn’t even a legit country; it’s a U.S. puppet state established by the U.S. government. The DPRK is the rightful government of the entire Korean Peninsula.
yeah man, it is always funny to me how right wingers talk as if they're going against the status quo. by doing what exactly? lol, enforcing gender norms, keeping america capitalist, and trying to reintroduce other outdated shitty ideas.
If your obvious reality is maintaining capitalist economic systems, not expanding on labor laws meaningfully, not regulating mega-corps especially on the emissions they produce, not supporting democratization of our current government assuming you're an American and don't want to remove the filibuster, not supporting an expansion of infrastructure as the progressives had wanted, then yea, you're supporting the status quo. You saying it is an obvious reality is meaningless. I might as well say Libertarian Socialism is a obvious reality and that stealing your worker's wages is why the status quo is bad. Overall it adds nothing to the conversation. Now when you say not stealing things, I get two reactions. First are you saying that socialism is when you steal things and the more things you steal is communism? If that's the case please read political theory or at the very least go back to middle school. If that is not the case, and you're dogwhistling to the BLM protests, well sorry to inform you but they were less violent than the civil rights protests, and most violent riots of the BLM protests were instigated by the police. So are you against the 1900s Civil Rights Protests, and you don't like MLK? Don't believe me? Then let Harvard show you how you're wrong. www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds I know I have very few to go off with your comment, so I am just putting a few pointers out there, but eh. One last thing, if you support regressing things like removing social security, or reducing government spending on welfare (which we already neglect), or support regressive policies on social issues like making abortion illegal, and putting a chokehold on LGBTQ+ rights, well sorry pal you aren't for the status quo, you are by definition a reactionary. If you want to reply and to disprove anything I have said, go for it. I may remember to look back at this comment (probably not) and reply. @Ken Abbott
The problem with that idea is that Canada, which is just as suburban a nation as America (if not moreso) has a fairly robust socialist party (the New Democratic Party, which has real political power at the provincial level, winning many elections, and forming the official opposition much of the time they're not in power*). Moreover, Canadians enjoy a lot of the social programs that Americans keep rejecting, including universal health care, paid family/maternal leave, as well as mandatory paid vacation days. And even amongst most conservative Canadians, there really isn't a push to get rid of these social programs. Most people realize that nearly EVERYONE is better off with them than without them. And while rich people do hold disproportionate political power here (as is the case pretty much everywhere), the situation isn't nearly as dire as it is in the USA. You are limited in how much you can donate to a party or politician, and (so far) our courts have not equated money with speech (a la Citizens United). No, I think racism has a lot more to do with why the US has rejected socialism. Back when socialism was gaining a foothold in Europe (and Canada), America was a deeply segregated, racist society. White people would've gladly embraced socialism...if it was socialism by white people, FOR white people. The fact that it would help EVERYONE was the reason it never took off (and IS the reason it is still not so popular today). *Even where I live, in Manitoba (which is a moderately conservative place, by Canadian standards), the New Democratic Party held power for 17 consecutive years recently (1999-2016) winning 4 consecutive elections, gaining 44-49% of the vote each time (with 3 major parties, it usually only takes around 40% of the popular vote to win an election here). And if they had strong leadership, I think they could easily win again next time (weak leadership lost them the 2016 AND 2019 elections - I think they would've stood a chance both times with a better leader).
It doesn’t make sense given unions exist in the US and the people without transportation to unionize are located in the cities where the jobs are located
Pedro Pascal (The Mandalorian) is also a good one. He's actually distantly related to Allende, the Chilean president killed by the US-backed coup that put Pinochet in power in 9/11/1973
@@1homelander179 Directly from Wikipedia: "His mother was the cousin of Andrés Pascal Allende (President Allende's nephew through his sister Laura), the leader of the Movement of the Revolutionary Left, an urban guerrilla movement dedicated to Pinochet's overthrow."
Americans used to achieve the dream on a single income. Then there wasn't a urgent need for it. But today is different, while executives wage increased with inflation the employees wages barely moved. As cost of living increases frozen wages are unsustainable. It won't be long before employees won't earn enough money to commute to work.
What this speaker is talking about is government interventionism (a dirty word on the current right) and not socialism (also a dirty word). Socialism was some kind of revolution of the proletariat to take control over the means of production and that would lead to communism, some kind of free republic with no private ownership over the means of production. Hannity's definition of socialism, that is government interventionism, has been adopted by the left to include social democracy. Social / liberal democracy, call it what you will, but democracy, one person one vote, is not socialism, the revolution of the proletariat. Democracy certainly is not communism. Why? You have more than one party to contend with in democracy. Deal with it.
Great video! I think another thing to point out is that most European countries were absolutely devastated after world war two and needed to rebuild. This required a lot of solidarity and some kind of welfare program. In the Netherlands for example, the first retirement programs were introduced so people didn't have to care for their parents alone anymore. The US came out of the war as the world's super power and was relatively untouched by the war so they didn't need to rebuild and thus missed a lot of these social reforms.
this is a very good point tbh. I'm Singaporean and you just helped me realise that a lot of the "socialist" and "communist" policies that sg is famous for are themselves a direct response to having to build up the nation after WWII/colonisation/independence
Okay, your country lacked misery for you to be better than Latin countries, I could talk about that, but if your capital hadn't worked out right, my brothers wouldn't be dying to pass your border, things are very socialist around here. (I AM ASSUMING THAT THE AMERICAN SEA, OR ANY OTHER TYPE)
Yeah WWII catapulted the US to being the worlds economic super power because we didn't have to fight in the war until the very end out of self interest and therefore didn't feel any of the devastation that other countries did. (The only places attacked were territories that we didn't want to hassle of defending anyways, except Alaska and maybe Hawaii cause they could be used to invade the mainland.) The US got rich off selling supplies to the rest of the world while they fought and were devastated. Then the US demanded that the industries of all other countries retool to the US set standards (sizes for nuts and bolts, screw threads, standard measurements, plane parts, language, etc.) which further held back and costed all other countries while the US gained more monopolistic control. This further entrenched US control over the territories (even if they got their independence) because we threatened to cut off aid and trade if they didn't do/elect who we wanted and in places like the Philippines that had been devastated repeatedly by the Spanish, then us, then the Japanese, then us again, were utterly reliant on the US because of our foreign policy (and killing them all). This also happened in Europe to places like Greece. We essentially held them politically captive and threatened to starve their children en masse if they didn't cooperate.
People who criticize communism always overlook the fact that communist countries came from absolutely nothing. While the US came from untouched fast resources and land and the original immigrants after the pilgrims were exceptionally wealthy Europeans, the US had any Normas Headstart on any other societies that ever existed before and after its founding.
Excellent video as always! US education hasn't covered labor rights well, which has allowed the effects of the Powell Memo and McCarthyism to continue and grow.
Continuing personal interests are subordinated to a broad non-specific pallet called freedom. You certainly have the freedom to be unemployed homeless and starve .
Well, there’s one event that working people around the world commemorate every year: the haymarket affair. Americans don’t. That says a lot about what American anarcho-socialism used to be and what has happened since.
That's because the Haymarket Affair was when a bunch of communists murdered some cops, and then pitched a fit because some of the cops dared to shoot back.
I'm an immigrant Vietnamese; my aunt and uncle fled the Communist party after the Vietnam war as boat people, and they sponsored my whole family came to the U.S in 2006. As a person grew up and fled a communist country, I confirm that whenever anyone or whoever mentions about socialism vs communism; then, my middle finger will automatically show up for that person! I have a Cuban friend, and he confirms the same thing as me!
Ppl don't seem to understand you don't fix the problem by giving the government MORE Control. Why anyone complains the Government is Corrupt and then ask for more of it I'll never know. The free Market must remain but we need better Healthcare and access to Education, otherwise the government can stay tf out of my Life.
And really it's not even that the younger generation is radical, they're just asking for more social rights like European countries. Our radicalism is European norm.
Also, US history kind of skips over the labor movement. I was an adult when I learned that turn of the century anti-Chinese racism was a deliberate tactic to pit striking American railroad workers against easily-exploitable Chinese immigrants.
The US has had a lot of immigration in the 19th century it wasn’t just the Chinese, blacks, Irish, Catholics, Chinese, immigration upset people as the immigrants took people’s jobs away because they were either underpaid as they easily replaced regular workers creating anti-immigrant sentiments
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." -John Steinbeck
this is a much better piece. it discusses school of thought without impressing conclusions onto the watcher. remember, the most important strategy is letting the one watching come to their own conclusions. don't tell people what to think.
Social democracy & Nordic model aren't really "socialism" though, it's more like social fascism Scandinavia maintained their wealth inequality & their class hierarchy & their monarchies... doesn't really sound revolutionary iyam
I resent this misconception put forward by neoliberals that socialism was never as popular in America as it was in the rest of the world, as it always comes across like a way of obfuscating the fact that those movements just "didn't catch on" when really they were actively suppressed. Here in Minnesota during the 1920's and 30's, the Republican-Democrat duopoly was interrupted by the rise of the explicitly left-wing Farmer-Labor Party. Despite intense resistance from both parties and most of the press, the FLP went on to be enormously popular for a time before it was tragically absorbed into the Democrats and all the radicals were kicked out of the newly-formed union. The most famous FLP governor, Floyd Olson, was an IWW member in his youth and he had copies of Lenin's books on his shelf. One of his grand political ambition was to nationalize all of Minnesota's electric utilities, iron mines, and oil fields, which you would never hear from a milquetoast lib like Tim Walz
Very scary to see city/state/federal government own utilities. Your house can be taken from you if you don't pay your water bill for a city-owned water company, but you won't have that problem if it was privately-owned
@@cantstanja How TF can you say that with a straight face when mere months ago there was that catastrophic power grid failure in Texas because it was all privately-owned and the companies didn't maintain it properly because it was cheaper than winterizing it? Public utilities aren't something that should be run like a business because it leads to disasters born of neglect and greed. Profit perverts purpose. When the Nazis coined the concept of "privatization" by selling off Germany's state-owned industries to their wealthy industrialist friends, they weren't doing it because they thought it would be more efficient. It was all to enrich the oligarchs at the expense of everyone else's well-being.
Very true. There is a rich history of support for the Socialist Party and for socialists active outside of the SP. It is remarkable just how effective socialists have been despite the Democratic-Republican joint efforts to weaken the movement. Duly elected socialist legislators were expelled from office for simply being socialist. Yet over 1000 socialists were elected to public office in the U.S during the first 20 years of the 20th century. Take a look at a map identifying successful socialist campaigns at depts.washington.edu/moves/SP_map-elected.shtml But for the bipartisan conspiracy to keep socialists out of office coupled with the "red scare", Socialists would have been even more successful.
@@cantstanja lol no, pretty much all communities here run their own water treatment plant and I've never heard of that happening ever. Also in Saskatchewan we have provincial phone, power, natural gas and insurance companies. What a joy. Thanks to Tommy Douglas.
@@cantstanja you mean like the privately owned housing millions got kicked out of during the pandemic because they couldnt afford the rent due to being unable to work due to covid? yeah privately owned essentials really protect you well
Americans… just imagine how much better your lives would be with social healthcare. No more Health insurance. So many lives would be saved and transformed
Neither Canada nor Australia have very good social support programs either. Medicare in Canada for example, is very minimal, and doesn't cover a lot, like long term care, dental, ambulances, vision and hearing, physiotherapy, prescription drugs, mental health, and a host of other things.
@@philpottkentucky4802 Medicare in the US doesn't cover dental, ambulances, vision or hearing. There is a gigantic donut hole which makes prescriptions cost an arm and two legs, and whole host of other things. Bernard has tried to improve it but he has to fight two political parties just to move forward one inch.
I think at least one of the reasons why America has never adopted socialism is because in Americas past many businesses were small businesses so although there were a few monocle wearing rich people in Americas past there are not as many as they're are today which is why I believe that America is taking a closer look at Socialism it now.
@@shalyfemusic no it hasn't. That statement is you not having access to better information about socialism that you're drawing that conclusion. Socialism as an approach to running a society works fine in lots of places in the world (as the video says) but there is no successful pure socialist society out there, just as there isn't a purely capitalist system out there either. People in the US think they live in free market capitalism, but it's just a particular configuration of it with less socialism. Ask anyone who lives outside of the US whether they would want to have its medical system which is built of free market principles, and no-one anywhere would say yes. No other country in the world has the medical system that the US has and all of us outside that society know we want socially funded medicine because we have it. If the US was pure free market capitalism you'd be able to buy and sell people, human organs, create your own nations without any government to stop you, be required to pay for all public services (i.e. pay for a fire service to come to your home if there's a fire, and if you don't you won't receive any help). The US has in nearly every state a socialist education system, police force, fire support service, infrastructure system, military... You already have socialism in some ways, but it's almost always applied in a way that incorporates privatisation as well. It's that bit that fucks it up. Read "21 things they don't tell you about capitalism" by economist Ha Joon Chang, you'll have better information to base your opinion on and you won't just need to accept mine.
@@alibushell6762 Not gonna lie you seem like you seem like a very smart guy. You are not wrong every country has some socialiist policies including the US. I think the key is balance but when you observe a more capitaliat country and the more socialist country, the capitalist ones are better. When a country turns socialism they always end up much eorse than they started, the opposite is true for capitalism.
@@shalyfemusic Thanks for the compliment, and what seems like a willingness to consider further your own position. What you're saying is, though, factually untrue. Quality of life is better in countries that embrace more socialism or integrate it into their culture and system in ways that work rather than doing it but not actually applying it properly. I suggest you do a bit of research about the Nordic countries (Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland). According to the capitalist mindset, they do things completely wrong, yet they have build societies in which people are not just happier, they have better social health outcomes (lower levels of mental and physical health problems, social exclusion and homelessness, poverty, teenage pregnancy - you name it). Finland used mixed socialism and capitalism skewed more towards socialism to rebuild their largely agrarian society that had been occupied and badly damaged by soviet occupation into a nation that is considered to be one of the best to live in today. If a socially democratic society didn't work they'd still all be farmers, rather than one of the leading tech and education centres of the world. The US by contrast? It is always one of the lowest of the developed nations in indicators such as happiness, social equity, access to political power, quality of life generally. Yes, it has one of the biggest economies in terms of the amount of money and GDP, but that model of measuring the success of a country wasn't supported even by the man who developed it (GDP was supposed to be a wartime measure of industrial output, now it's "how successful is a country?"). Are countries like Venezuela and North Korea places you'd want to live, or successful societies? No, but that's because they're essentially dictatorships with the first being corroded through mass corruption, and the latter being the personal property of the ruler who is more interested in his family reigning as a king than making sure the needs of his people are met. As long as they don't step out of line things are fine, if some people have to be disappeared to achieve that or they starve to death he and his supporters don't really care. So, again, it's not socialism, it's how it's applied. Finally, capitalism is the main cause of what we are experiencing as extreme climate change. Capitalist forces and perspective can't take responsibility for or care about how they damage the environment, or whether they do things sustainably, they just have to make profit, and that includes lowering their costs through not fixing the problems they create (environmentally or socially). I recommend you read the book "The spirit level" for more information on all of this.
Got it, we're working on our effects right now and I'll send this to our designer. We've moved past this style for future videos so this will be the last one with effects like this.
@@TheGravelInstitute I'm gonna suggest different animators if possible. I always feel like the content is so dense and the animation only does a nominal job to enhance the understanding. Please keep your options open.
From what I understand, another reason socialism never took hold in FDR's New Deal. We abandoned laissez-faire economics and solidified liberal Capitalism, or as my professor put it, "Capitalism in a box." FDR meeting Socialists halfway took a lot of steam out of the movement, which was never very strong in the first place
Another factor is that the early grades up through High school only teach you to be useful to someone else usually an employer and do not teach you to look out for your own future interest
@@josecipriano3048 Capitalism, while flawed, is, in my opinion, better than socialism. Of course, both hare deep problems and my preferred economic model is a mixed system-the Nordic social democratic model is a good example.
Great video as always. I'm thankful that channels like these always live on the prospect of hope, not just negativity. "History isn't destiny" are words to live by.
It seemed like Vigeland wasn't going to mention Wilson, the Espionage and Sedition Acts, the Palmer Raids, the first Red Scare, etc. Those all came at a critical time during WW1 and really gutted the socialist movement here. Thankfully she did mention the Red Scares and the state repression in broad terms. Anyone who's interested in looking into this subject further should look into those topics.
Seconded. One thing I wonder, is why there was not equivalent repression of socialism in Europe. Maybe they had a less entrenched economic elite, because of the recent turmoil with wars happening. Or just elites who felt the need to tread more carefully. (There were many factors though)
Also Sacco & Vanzetti as well as the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" doctrine the SC made up in order to throw people in jail for daring to hold a political meeting. See, acc'd to the "yelling fire" doctrine, speech is only free if it conforms to norms.
Well you can't exactly blame the fear surrounding it, what is often left out is that the prime representative of international socialism after ww1 was the USSR which at the time had, A. Fought a massive Civil War which killed any real attempt at a variety of political conversations outside of the Bolsheviks controlling practically everything, as well as directly or indirectly killing millions of the people they claimed to be wanting to help. B. Said nation then proceeded to invade multiple of its neighbors to reclaim newly independent nations which at times had more political freedom and representation then the USSR did. And C. Would then in the future have a leader get in to power who would build a cult of personality around him which would atleast result in the deaths of thousands more of its own people out of partial paranoia alone. With this being the biggest example of socialism, you can see why this may not be the choice that nations would start supporting the ideology.
@@generalamsel437 The USSR didn't kill millions of people, that's Western (often Nazi) propaganda. They didn't invade independent nations, those nations willingly joined the union. Stalin's supposed paranoia is yet again propaganda. You're making the mistake of relying on Western media for your knowledge of its greatest enemy.
@@kristoffer3000 you don't need western sources to confirm this, the Civil War and Russia's invasion of Poland, the Baltics, newly independent states like Armenia Georgia and other independent entities are well documented throughout the 1920s, well before the rise of Facism, and annexation of the Baltic states was basically an ultimatum during the 1940s with the unspecified threat of war, as evidence by the Soviet war with Finalnd after they rejected similar demands. Stalins paranioa and killing of who he perceived as potential threats is also well documented by Soviet sources in what was termed as the Great Purge and for higher officials, the Moscow trials. Some of these men had supported the communists for years before Stalins rise to power, such as Andrei Bubnov who was killed in 1938 after you don't need western sources to confirm this, the Civil War and Russia's invasion of Poland, the Baltics, newly independent states like Armenia Georgia and other independent entities are well documented throughout the 1920s, well before the rise of Facism. the Bolsheviks in some capacity since 1905. You don't need to rely on western sources for this information since it's been largely backed up by the opening of former USSR'S archives back in the 1990s.
As a person from the UK I find it mind boggling that Americans don’t want free healthcare, despite them spending some of the most in the world on it they are being beaten by countries who all use free healthcare, can people at least make it so just an ambulance doesn’t cost thousands
Here's the thing: Americans DO want free healthcare. Universal healthcare ALWAYS polls extremely well with Americans, almost across the board. The problem is that we have a very rich and powerful Insurance Industry lobby that is bound and determined to make sure that never happens.
It's not that we, the American people, don't want it. It's the insurance company CEOs that don't want it. And guess whose opinions get more things done.
Social Democracy is also about self-interest of business leaders. They know that well educated and healthy workers, are a benefit for companies. Check out the Rheinland Business Model. It is more focused on people than capital.
@@CrownRider Social democracy & Nordic model aren't really "socialism" though, it's more like social fascism Scandinavia maintained their wealth inequality & their class hierarchy & their monarchies... doesn't really sound revolutionary iyam "Mitbestimmung" in Germany still isn't really socialism
@John Spöner no, not "socialist" fascism, just "social fascism" it means that it's ultranationalist & class collaborationist, but with an element of a welfare state
I had no idea Emma possessed the telekinetic capacity to spontaneously render rich visual aids on an entirely different RUclips channel than The Majority Report! Cool stuff!!
This video should be called... "Why didn't American adopt social democracy?" because that's all this video talks about. There was no mention of worker cooperatives or other forms of worker owned socialist economic models, and unions were only mentioned for like 3 seconds.
It's kind of the case that the US didn't adopt either. That, and the disgruntlement of the 1960s that probably would've taken a leftward swing in another nation was basically co-opted by the capitalist class to justify dismantling the parts of the state meant to reign them in.
Its understandable, you cannot go full communist to the broad American audiences. Socialism was so demonized that a lot of people in that country still has to learn the basics and familiarize with the idea of a less individualistic mindset. I think of this channel as some sort of socialist online kindergarden and elementary school
@@wtfhah Socialism has been public ownership of the means of production long before Marx. Marx also never wrote much about socialism, most of his work was a socioeconomic critique of capitalism, and he also advocate for a stateless society... aka communism.
@@canadagoose8543 No, it's nothing about "ownership". "Ownership" is a bourgeois right. Marx wants to cross "bourgeois right" in its entirety. Socialism is about control and common usage & also about removing class distinctions & geographic/social distinction between city & country. Marx says this: " Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence." Marx did not advocate for a stateless society, and knew that it wasn't possible in the near term, hence why he outlined a series of stages of transition first from capitalism to socialism & then from socialism to communism. You seem like you haven't read any Marx whatsoever
Another reason America was not socialist compared to Europe was it was not bombed. Bombers came over smashing properties, killing and maiming people. What health insurance company would want to get involved with that ?? The risk was just too great, the Government would have to look after the returning wounded soldiers so it was not such a big step to include women and Children survivors of the bombing. This was just too big a risk for insurance companies who prefer to challenge than pay where possible. They now looking to Bojo Johnson to change this because the risk has fallen.
@@visorij3374 if they ask me that, no. The so called communist Pakistan People's Party is actually a corrupt organization for the Bhutto family. I supported Imran Khan who is center-left. In the US I supported Biden over Bernie until I saw his lack of action against the Republicans gutting every part of his original agenda that he got elected for.
I would also point out that in Pakistan all parties work the same way, the center-right Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz is just a source of funds for Nawaz Shareef. PTI(Pakistan Tahreek-e-Insaaf) and MQM(Mutheda Quomi Movement) are kind of the exception against dynastic politics but the two major ones are basically royal families in Pakistan.
A truly informative history lesson. That part aboutAmerican workers moving around kinda stuck out to me? It sounded like an early equivalent of the modern gig economy? Workers moving around that much would make it easier to see Human labor as just another despicable part of a uncaring machine.
The farmers are convinced, they just don't realize it. Farmer's co-ops, barn raising, government Farm Subsidies, price support for crops, being paid for not growing, and Welfare money is provided in amounts per capita comparable to big cities.
is there a reason why closed captions aren’t available on this video and the last one? because i feel like that’s important to making these videos more accessible.
Thank you for watching! We launched this project to counter right-wing disinformation like PragerU. The problem is, they have millions of dollars in oil billionaire money and we have nothing but our supporters and our ideas. Consider becoming a patron of the Institute and making these videos possible: www.patreon.com/gravelinstitute. We will be forever in your debt.
Dammit right winger why cant we have good life
You can combine all the leftist channels and you won’t even come close to the subscribers and views that Steven crowder has 😂😅
@@Rommie26 There is more than you think
@@sterlingmorse5409 not even close
I’m centrist so I’m subscribed to many channel from the right and left
It’s not even close
We will win...eventually. However, it is to be seen whether or not we win in time.
"Socialism never took root in America because the people were taught to believe they're simply temporarily embarrassed millionaires"
~John Steinbeck
This is exactly what Thorstein Veblen said in his books, particularly in "The Theory of the Leisure Class".
PSA - Join a union! It barely costs anything, and it'll help everyone!
Dude... That is just like the best comment I have seen in a while
@BorisH I totally believe you, random internet person with a totally believable anecdote. I am very convinced.
@BorisH Justice isn't Justice unless it is for everyone. I don't want to be rich. I want everyone to be rich. I want happiness for everyone.
Thank you to Emma for not doing the "when the government does stuff" meme unironically.
And if it does a real lot of stuff, it's communism!
@@zed6740 *ROBOT ROCK INTENSIFIES*
And to those who are afraid of government doing stuff: Problem?
are you guys stupid? governments are literal cancer leeching off people, you work hard and they tax your ass, print money, cause inflation etc all those things that make you poorer. if there was no government everybody would be better off
@@sten260 You need a government under capitalism to enforce private property rights. The only way to have a stateless society is by having a worker owned socialist economy.
Don't forget that the first time the US used airstrikes, was against striking miners trying to unionise in West Virginia.
yup this was a thing
Dont forget the time the government massacred a commune of people because they had guns and lived off on their own
What the fuck!?
They also juuuuuuuuuust happened to have killed a bunch of people, including cops, Blown a bunch of stuff up, and launched full scale assaults on mines for the "crime" of hiring people who didn't join the union....
but usre, let's pretend they got shot for "trying to unionise."
Can I get a source on that?
In my view, the reasons are :
Propaganda
Repression
A poor intellectual class
@Tej the irony is you believing that you are living in a country free of propaganda and intellectual repression
@Tej Im no expert, but I think those are different words..
Top reason is that the worker class became prosperous.
It’s hard to get riled up for a socialist revolution when you have a job, house, car, you take family vacations in Florida.
@Justin Bradburn
The profit motive, which these people detest, is bound in 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Any living being must consume more calories than they expend in gathering it, aka profit.
Human civilizations rose once there were enough agricultural surplus to afford specialization... more profit.
And every step of the way towards human development, this process, this quest for profit from nature, has advanced.
And now we have these idiots come along and tell us the whole thing is wrong... that they have a non thermodynamic type model that is better
Then, of course, look at their track record of entropy wreckage and rot
@babykuzi82 Ey there, I am actually very knowledgeable on Vietnam's situation. I wouldn't call it a socialist government after Ho Chi Minh died, more of a state-capitalist mix, and yea the government there is corrupt. I agree on your taxation. As for the larger federal government for the US, not going to sugarcoat it but we actually do not have a big government. We barely spend on welfare contrary to popular belief.
Setting a national healthcare system will not cause a USSR style party member elite, it will in fact aid our doctors and increase them per capita, as in any other nation who has done such policies.
As a Libertarian Socialist I am not really a big fan of Marxist-Leninist policies (which is a very broad definition mind you) , such as the USSR, and post-Ho Chi Minh Vietnam.
Just go ahead and ask anybody you know who isn't invested in socialist ideas to define the difference between socialism and communism. Most can not, and especially those who say they're evil. The effects of that suppression are definitely felt today, and the right is very good at taking peoples ignorance on what it is and making people hate it before they can learn about it.
Honestly I'm not sure most people on the right could tell you the difference between communism and liberalism
PSA - Join a union! It barely costs anything, and it'll help everyone!
@@imhappy5266 or addition and subtraction for that matter
@harlaudata Oh you mean capitalism that can not even work on paper in an ideal world. Yeah the left is bad for calling it what it is.
@harlaudata you're right I'm not an economist you're wrong about one thing I have enough empathy to realize that we have one in four children going hungry at night in the usa and that is a problem. Yes capitalism isn't "evil", but to be a good CO it requires that you become a psychopath, and highly narcissistic
"History isn't destiny."
Super powerful words to live by. Stay strong brothers and sisters.
Gave me a chill down my arms. We can always change, always improve.
Very nice words with context, but it remembers me of people denying white privilege
True.
Thank goodness because destiny is a liberal that thinks Palestinians are all terrorists ;)
PSA - Join a union! It barely costs anything, and it'll help everyone!
“The most revolutionary thing one can do is always to proclaim loudly what is happening.” - Rosa Luxemburg
Bernie killed rosa
@@KcarlMarXs ye I know lol
rosa was a queen
@Irked Imperial meanie
Freikorps voran!
Hi I'm from Vietnam - A Socialist Country!!!
Ho Chi Minh!!!
Wonderful country!!!
RIP brother ho
US had a strong Socialist movement but it was brutally repressed.
Yes. By both bourgeois liberal parties
@@vladimirlenin3562
Holy shit that's V.I. Lenin!!!!!
Big fan!
Please 🙏 give me ur autograph 😉😁
@@someesingh2827 ikr it is me
Thank god we are so blessed as to have no commies.
palmer sends his regards
I clicked on this as soon as I saw that notification pop up
+1 uwu
+1 ^
Babe, wake up, Gravel institute uploaded
Wake the fuck up samurai, we have a gravel institute video to watch
Congrats yurafag!
Maybe because America is a continent, actually two continents, North and South. The United States of America is the appropriate term.
"History isn't destiny" makes me think of that quote by Le Guin, "We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings."
Just need a few hundreds of deaths (Mostly news reporters and politicians) and we we'll get there
Long live the socialist revolution
@@tamirj.b.n9814 no matter which human beeing you give such power - hes going to become corrupt - not because hes weak, but a human beeing is just not made for this much power.
imho anarchy is the only way to reduce centralized power and put the power into the hands of the community.
@@rodabanane giving power to the community isn't always good
There needs to be a leader and if any Joe could just be nice to someone to convince the community to do something stupid, then what's the point
@@tamirj.b.n9814 i guess you unfortunately didnt get my point, so again: a human ALWAYS gets corrupt with this much power.
in the majority of human time there have been "leaders", sending their "slaves" into wars which often were driven by their own interest.
capitalism is no exception.
these system will always allow people to expploit others. this needs to stop.
@@rodabanane yes but I don't think the answer needs to be that radical
It’s always nice to see the Gravel Institute out perform Prager U in views, like with David Cross’ video.
Send this to your friends and we can get there!
Pfft..if you break even with them they're outperforming massively. Manipulated...try on a free speech platform and see
@@mostlyfoldersabitofeveryth1989 free speech platforms? You mean the type that bans liberals? Lmao
@@allenwilliams7367 if that's the case I'm not in favor of that. I haven't seen it, but I will admit it would not surprise me if there are some platforms that are right leaning and do ban or throttle the other side. And if so that's problematic, but it doesn't make it not problematic that trillion dollar corporations are doing it just because it favors your views
@@mostlyfoldersabitofeveryth1989 SOMEONE OTHER THAN ME WINNING??? MUST BE FAKE??? WAAAAAAA
One of the greatest RUclips channels I’ve come across
PSA - Join a union! It barely costs anything, and it'll help everyone!
Donate to their Patreon if you can. They don’t take billionaire money.
Same it is a great channel ^^
ruclips.net/channel/UCOInEMAm0Y4VXoAfbJMR3Wg
ruclips.net/user/BreakThroughNews
America did adopt socialism,just socialism for the rich.
"History isn't destiny." These words will remain in my head as a valuable advice. Thank you.
but it's constantly repeating so it becomes destiny. lol
@@suspicious2delicious Nah, it is as Mark Twain described: “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”
@@joshualittlewolfe8550 That's just a play on words.
@@suspicious2delicious Not at all bro. It means that current developments may appear similar to historical events, but are never an exact 1:1 equivalent or copy.
As you know, one letter at the front of a word can completely change it’s meaning and the consequences of its expression.
@@joshualittlewolfe8550 So you're saying there's never been an event that was ever exact? lol
Can’t wait until the algorithm starts picking up this channel consistently
It won't, for mysterious reasons...
Absolutely no chance. This carcass promotes where the money flows, so it will do them well to delist Gravel and other left outlets.
Just another reason why socialism is based, wouldn't you love to have a public RUclips funded by everyone?
@@eldizo_ Yes, I would. I'd love to be able to use and support an Internet not of companies, but of people.
I keep getting them in my recommendations after a new video comes out.
I can't even ring the bell, like RUclips disabled it on this channel..
And we also have the famous quote attributed to Steinbeck below.
“John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
― Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress
@John Spöner you’re missing the point, the quote is about how lots of US people see themselves as future millionaires and so vote for policies that benefit them instead of the average man or woman.
@@dominictemple they say in capitalism man exploits man well in socialism it’s vice versa
@@westg463 funny, but it is a shame that criticism of capitalism was for decades of the 20th Century very closely linked to murderous totalitarians who were more interested in ideological excuses to rule out kill than anything else.
@@dominictemple and it’s funny how people blame capitalism for what’s happening now it’s not capitalism it’s GOVERNMENT filled with incompetent people
Historically Socialists have always been very fun! I am young and I love it!
Join us watch this video! ruclips.net/video/y2pxMM1He9A/видео.html
It's simple, greedy corporations, rich people, and politicians.
Really important to bring up the parallels between how socialism and social democracy not taking off in America along with the Red Scare/McCarthyism. More people need to see this
Exactly, the left has been brutally suppressed in the United States, often with violent force. This, more than anything else, is what has made it so hard for them to build even a basic foothold.
Bingo!
@@TheGravelInstitute Social democracy & Nordic model aren't really "socialism" though, it's more like social fascism
Scandinavia maintained their wealth inequality & their class hierarchy & their monarchies... doesn't really sound revolutionary iyam
@@wtfhah Yep, that's stupid. USSR had a hierarchy - of party bureaucrats. China has a hierarchy. Any dictatorship has a hierarchy.
Also, another facet of this ludicrous idea of "social fascism" is pontential to fall in to fascism - real fascism.
newsflash. Anything can fall to fascism. It's a cancer.
@@JukeboxTheGhoul No, USSR had a much more flourishing democracy than USA ever had.
China also has a more responsive & better functioning democracy than the US.
Notice there was no storming of the capitol that took place in USSR or PRC.
You are living under "dictatorship of the bourgeoisie". And it's only the "DotP" that can prevent this
Fascism is far more likely to result from liberalism & capitalism
I’m so glad the reaction to Prager U isn’t empty liberal platitudes and “gotchas” and ended up being actually leftist. Good. Fascism isn’t beaten with SNL.
"Fascism" ok bud
@@connorschrock2883 Yes. A bureaucracy that serves to give endless incentives to corporatists be it from the liberals to right wing “populists” is fascism
Utterly hilarious. You simpletons throw around the word fascism like confetti.
Anyone right of Trotsky is a fascist to you.
@@harrymail7 true and based. anyone right of trotsky is a fascist
@@harrymail7 the modern republican party is openly fascist, as is anyone who supports then blindly like Prager u and company.
As a European citizen, I think that the term "Social Democracy" in U.S.A. means "Communism" for the majority of the people ... but both terms are completely different ...
it's crazy how democrats are seen as leftist to americans, but far right to europeans
即使是中国，在我们的课本中，我们现在使用的也是中国特色社会主义，从1978年开始，共产主义被描述为无限遥远的理想状态。事实上是中国人在几十年的实践中认识到社会主义是真正符合人性和客观规律的生产模式。我们真的吸取了前苏联和中国文化大革命时期的教训。
Where I'm from in Colorado, the largest coal miner's strike was led by the IWW, a socialist union. Over 12,000 miners went on strike in the autumn of 1927, shutting down all but one of the state's coal mines.
Oh no. Can’t wait to be flattened by depression about how bad my country is. :(
I know the feels. As you learn more about how flawed our system is, it soon just becomes depressing tbh.
Not just the country. The world. Capitalism is everywhere, some systems are just slightly better than others. Cops still beat people to death in England.
@@funnylittlecreature Yea but the US is what I feel to be the worst. Many countries adopt some leftists policies like free healthcare or free education and the working class at least have a safety net above them. But in the US, anything even remotely close to the left instantly screams socialism to Americans
@@zed6740 Of course! What I’m saying is that we should hold other countries accountable too, lest we become like neoliberals or tankies.
@@funnylittlecreature Yea totally agree with you man! I think it would be best if we take both positives and negatives into account so that we can to a more reasonable conclusion on how to better overcome the challenges in our country.
I’m glad we got the Gravel Institute. We need change in America.
Socialist is NOT the answer the USA will never be socialist
No
@@Steve-zc9ht sorry we are already socialist lol
Yes we need more socialism to fightback the socialism that isn't working now and then we can put more socialism in
@@Steve-zc9ht
Neither is the Fascism both major parties have in mind.
Keep putting the pressure on our politicians. Don’t become apathetic from the harsh realities we live in. Stay strong, call your politicians, don’t let them keep you silent!
I knew it was a good idea to look up to you, Dodge
And this especially accounts to the elected progressive politicians that were funded by regular people to fight for policies that benefit regular people.
“The harsh realities we live in”
Have you studied human history or traveled the world? 2020 western society seems to be anything but a “harsh reality.”
@@jb8408 I have, in fact, but have you considered that US politics affects people *outside* of the US, and that the premise of a harsh reality applies to other countries, including US client states? I see your argument, but there’s not much to it.
@@Official_Doge well, I’m sure your political ideas will bring the global utopia you desire 👍
“But capital goes wherever there are men, poor enough to be exploited.”
-Peter Kropotkin
Makes sense. It went to Asia. Now it's in Africa I hear.
Can we get some citations in the video description? This was one of the reasons why you guys have so much more legitimacy than PragerU, and I would hate to see this focus on using verifiable factual information to fade. Using sources is very important. Love you lot.
Exactly, citing your sources is what differentiates the educators from the grifters.
Boosting this excellent point.
They’ve put citations in all their other vids idk why they’re not here
It’s 90% opinion in this video there isn’t much to link to
indeed
What's more, the 'European way' isn't limited to Europe, countries with massive populations like Japan, Taiwan, South Korea have very heavily subsidised universal healthcare, strong childcare laws such as paternal, not just maternal leave, and public pension funds. The only developed country (apart from the US) is Chile and that's only because a US backed dictator wrote the consititution.
And even Chile is slowly changing its ways.
@@bogdangiusca7431 They completely rejected neoliberlaism and are now rewriting the constitution. Unless this is forced down peoples throats through US backed coups or almost religious rhetoric, they opt for the social democratic way.
You just named imperialist countries, literally the antithesis of socialism. 🤦♂️
@@yuh1592 Taiwan and South Korea, the most imperialist of all countries. Nevertheless, even if in the past they had empires, like every other nation, now they are liberal democratic states.
@@ctrlaltdelmeir184 What are you talking about? Japan is imperialist today. South Korea isn’t even a legit country; it’s a U.S. puppet state established by the U.S. government. The DPRK is the rightful government of the entire Korean Peninsula.
The Gravel Institute is the most important RUclips channel.
Yes
Yes
yes
Yes
Ya
Because in US, corruption is legal and called "lobbying". Anyone who tries to fight against corporations will be either suppressed or bought.
I became a socialist 14 years ago after college when I entered the corporate world. Proudly raising 2 kids under socialist ideals.
UwU
Good. Capitalism must fall.
@Ryan Alex college gives knowledge, intelligence must be developed through life experiences
This is a sacrifice for the algorithm gods
Same, let's make this happen.
Yupp that’s what I’m here for too.
Yeet
Sacrifice for the algorithm
Amen brother
An anti-USSR capitalist dodo I know of ironically said it best: "as soon as you do something the rich don't like, you're labeled a fascist."
yeah man, it is always funny to me how right wingers talk as if they're going against the status quo. by doing what exactly? lol, enforcing gender norms, keeping america capitalist, and trying to reintroduce other outdated shitty ideas.
@@milesbrown2261
LOL. Acknowledging obvious reality and not stealing things is the 'status quo'?
If your obvious reality is maintaining capitalist economic systems, not expanding on labor laws meaningfully, not regulating mega-corps especially on the emissions they produce, not supporting democratization of our current government assuming you're an American and don't want to remove the filibuster, not supporting an expansion of infrastructure as the progressives had wanted, then yea, you're supporting the status quo. You saying it is an obvious reality is meaningless. I might as well say Libertarian Socialism is a obvious reality and that stealing your worker's wages is why the status quo is bad. Overall it adds nothing to the conversation.
Now when you say not stealing things, I get two reactions. First are you saying that socialism is when you steal things and the more things you steal is communism? If that's the case please read political theory or at the very least go back to middle school. If that is not the case, and you're dogwhistling to the BLM protests, well sorry to inform you but they were less violent than the civil rights protests, and most violent riots of the BLM protests were instigated by the police. So are you against the 1900s Civil Rights Protests, and you don't like MLK?
Don't believe me? Then let Harvard show you how you're wrong.
www.radcliffe.harvard.edu/news-and-ideas/black-lives-matter-protesters-were-overwhelmingly-peaceful-our-research-finds
I know I have very few to go off with your comment, so I am just putting a few pointers out there, but eh.
One last thing, if you support regressing things like removing social security, or reducing government spending on welfare (which we already neglect), or support regressive policies on social issues like making abortion illegal, and putting a chokehold on LGBTQ+ rights, well sorry pal you aren't for the status quo, you are by definition a reactionary.
If you want to reply and to disprove anything I have said, go for it. I may remember to look back at this comment (probably not) and reply.
@Ken Abbott
@@kenabbott8585 you are clearly a troll, lol.
@@Tsuzana397
"you are clearly a troll, lol."
You clearly can't come up with an actual argument.
LOL.
Every country has large corporations.
In the US, large corporations have their own country.
That point about how suburbs act to physically separate working class people preventing unity is a great one.
The problem with that idea is that Canada, which is just as suburban a nation as America (if not moreso) has a fairly robust socialist party (the New Democratic Party, which has real political power at the provincial level, winning many elections, and forming the official opposition much of the time they're not in power*). Moreover, Canadians enjoy a lot of the social programs that Americans keep rejecting, including universal health care, paid family/maternal leave, as well as mandatory paid vacation days. And even amongst most conservative Canadians, there really isn't a push to get rid of these social programs. Most people realize that nearly EVERYONE is better off with them than without them. And while rich people do hold disproportionate political power here (as is the case pretty much everywhere), the situation isn't nearly as dire as it is in the USA. You are limited in how much you can donate to a party or politician, and (so far) our courts have not equated money with speech (a la Citizens United).
No, I think racism has a lot more to do with why the US has rejected socialism. Back when socialism was gaining a foothold in Europe (and Canada), America was a deeply segregated, racist society. White people would've gladly embraced socialism...if it was socialism by white people, FOR white people. The fact that it would help EVERYONE was the reason it never took off (and IS the reason it is still not so popular today).
*Even where I live, in Manitoba (which is a moderately conservative place, by Canadian standards), the New Democratic Party held power for 17 consecutive years recently (1999-2016) winning 4 consecutive elections, gaining 44-49% of the vote each time (with 3 major parties, it usually only takes around 40% of the popular vote to win an election here). And if they had strong leadership, I think they could easily win again next time (weak leadership lost them the 2016 AND 2019 elections - I think they would've stood a chance both times with a better leader).
@@VoIcanoman You made a key point I wish the video would've also addressed, as to why socialism or any left party or even left policy failed to pass.
It doesn’t make sense given unions exist in the US and the people without transportation to unionize are located in the cities where the jobs are located
So u wanna live among bumbs and criminals?
@@ericayala7387 I think I'd prefer them over living near you at the very least.
Meanwhile PragerU : rObErT e. lEe wAs gOoD
He PuT DoWN A SLavE ReBElLiOn
ThE GovERnmEnT Is NOt MEAnT tO ImPrOVE SoCiEtY
Y’all should get Mark Ruffalo to narrate a video! He is a vocal progressive who’s name would bring a lot of attention to the channel.
Hm? I didn't know big green mad man thought socialism is based.
@@ARandomSpace
Me neither
Pedro Pascal (The Mandalorian) is also a good one. He's actually distantly related to Allende, the Chilean president killed by the US-backed coup that put Pinochet in power in 9/11/1973
@@Sam_Hetfield what is the relationship between them?
Some uncle grandpa cousin stuff?
@@1homelander179 Directly from Wikipedia: "His mother was the cousin of Andrés Pascal Allende (President Allende's nephew through his sister Laura), the leader of the Movement of the Revolutionary Left, an urban guerrilla movement dedicated to Pinochet's overthrow."
Americans used to achieve the dream on a single income. Then there wasn't a urgent need for it. But today is different, while executives wage increased with inflation the employees wages barely moved. As cost of living increases frozen wages are unsustainable. It won't be long before employees won't earn enough money to commute to work.
Don’t mind me, just feeding the algorithm gods
UwU
lol
Agreed.
Praise be!
@jvpiter thanks for the algorithm fact!
I CAME AS SOON AS I SAW THE NOTIF!
NOW I COMMENT TO BOOST THE ALGORITHM, GOD SPEED GRAVEL, GOD SPEED!!
Your pfp looks like you just got caught trying to hide a body.
@@omegahaxors3306
i got caught trying to bury elon
@@mush1e979 Epic.
What this speaker is talking about is government interventionism (a dirty word on the current right) and not socialism (also a dirty word). Socialism was some kind of revolution of the proletariat to take control over the means of production and that would lead to communism, some kind of free republic with no private ownership over the means of production. Hannity's definition of socialism, that is government interventionism, has been adopted by the left to include social democracy. Social / liberal democracy, call it what you will, but democracy, one person one vote, is not socialism, the revolution of the proletariat. Democracy certainly is not communism. Why? You have more than one party to contend with in democracy. Deal with it.
Communism is democratic by definition, it's the only true form of democracy, where everyone has a vote and every vote is worth the same.
Great video! I think another thing to point out is that most European countries were absolutely devastated after world war two and needed to rebuild. This required a lot of solidarity and some kind of welfare program. In the Netherlands for example, the first retirement programs were introduced so people didn't have to care for their parents alone anymore. The US came out of the war as the world's super power and was relatively untouched by the war so they didn't need to rebuild and thus missed a lot of these social reforms.
Good points
this is a very good point tbh. I'm Singaporean and you just helped me realise that a lot of the "socialist" and "communist" policies that sg is famous for are themselves a direct response to having to build up the nation after WWII/colonisation/independence
Okay, your country lacked misery for you to be better than Latin countries, I could talk about that, but if your capital hadn't worked out right, my brothers wouldn't be dying to pass your border, things are very socialist around here. (I AM ASSUMING THAT THE AMERICAN SEA, OR ANY OTHER TYPE)
Yeah WWII catapulted the US to being the worlds economic super power because we didn't have to fight in the war until the very end out of self interest and therefore didn't feel any of the devastation that other countries did. (The only places attacked were territories that we didn't want to hassle of defending anyways, except Alaska and maybe Hawaii cause they could be used to invade the mainland.) The US got rich off selling supplies to the rest of the world while they fought and were devastated. Then the US demanded that the industries of all other countries retool to the US set standards (sizes for nuts and bolts, screw threads, standard measurements, plane parts, language, etc.) which further held back and costed all other countries while the US gained more monopolistic control. This further entrenched US control over the territories (even if they got their independence) because we threatened to cut off aid and trade if they didn't do/elect who we wanted and in places like the Philippines that had been devastated repeatedly by the Spanish, then us, then the Japanese, then us again, were utterly reliant on the US because of our foreign policy (and killing them all). This also happened in Europe to places like Greece. We essentially held them politically captive and threatened to starve their children en masse if they didn't cooperate.
People who criticize communism always overlook the fact that communist countries came from absolutely nothing. While the US came from untouched fast resources and land and the original immigrants after the pilgrims were exceptionally wealthy Europeans, the US had any Normas Headstart on any other societies that ever existed before and after its founding.
"But that doesn't mean it can't now"
Let's get to work comrades!
no time like the present.
Young people are becoming progressive and wanting real change !
✊🏽✊🏽✊🏽
You can blow out a candle but you cannot blow out the fire of the socialist movement.
😂😂🤣
Excellent video as always! US education hasn't covered labor rights well, which has allowed the effects of the Powell Memo and McCarthyism to continue and grow.
@harlaudata they'd no doubt get angry calls from parents about teachers 'indoctrinating' the children
Continuing personal interests are subordinated to a broad non-specific pallet called freedom.
You certainly have the freedom to be unemployed homeless and starve .
GUYS WAKE UP NEW GRAVEL I JUST DROPPED
i wish Bernie and Mike had super-powers.
@@donHooligan why? what kind of infantile shit are you on?
@@wtfhah
to stop fascism, ass-puddle.
Commenting for the algorithm! Love the Gravel Institute and what they’re trying to do.
UwU
Well, there’s one event that working people around the world commemorate every year: the haymarket affair. Americans don’t. That says a lot about what American anarcho-socialism used to be and what has happened since.
i'm an american anarchist. i had to look up the haymarket affair, i'd never heard of it before. that seems like a pretty strong sign.
That's because the Haymarket Affair was when a bunch of communists murdered some cops, and then pitched a fit because some of the cops dared to shoot back.
I'm an immigrant Vietnamese; my aunt and uncle fled the Communist party after the Vietnam war as boat people, and they sponsored my whole family came to the U.S in 2006. As a person grew up and fled a communist country, I confirm that whenever anyone or whoever mentions about socialism vs communism; then, my middle finger will automatically show up for that person! I have a Cuban friend, and he confirms the same thing as me!
Ppl don't seem to understand you don't fix the problem by giving the government MORE Control. Why anyone complains the Government is Corrupt and then ask for more of it I'll never know. The free Market must remain but we need better Healthcare and access to Education, otherwise the government can stay tf out of my Life.
I'm happy crying right now. Thank you for the informative content you publish. It is so refreshing and gives me hope.
I've heard it said that the up-and-coming generation is some of the most radical to date, and I certainly hope it's true.
And really it's not even that the younger generation is radical, they're just asking for more social rights like European countries. Our radicalism is European norm.
Why are you hoping for radical leftism
Because conservatism is an inherently self-destructive ideology.
@@Mythil I think you mean relativism
Same "horror" of "Radical Militant Youth" was exploited for "Law and Order" in the 60's~70s. Private Prison Industry Won.
Also, US history kind of skips over the labor movement. I was an adult when I learned that turn of the century anti-Chinese racism was a deliberate tactic to pit striking American railroad workers against easily-exploitable Chinese immigrants.
The US has had a lot of immigration in the 19th century it wasn’t just the Chinese, blacks, Irish, Catholics, Chinese, immigration upset people as the immigrants took people’s jobs away because they were either underpaid as they easily replaced regular workers creating anti-immigrant sentiments
That anti-China hate is still thriving today, being drummed up by the US gov.
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."
-John Steinbeck
Naw, because it was a stupid idea
@@visorij3374 exactly. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Talk to your neighbors, talk to amazon and ups drivers, talk to people about organizing and defending each other.
this is a much better piece. it discusses school of thought without impressing conclusions onto the watcher. remember, the most important strategy is letting the one watching come to their own conclusions. don't tell people what to think.
History isn't destiny
And Destiny doesn't want to know about history
The circle is complete
As a kid, they told me that only the young are liberal and that I would become conservative when I got older...well, I'm 71 and still progressive.
Progressive = keep changing = no values.
Woah ... This was uploaded an hour ago 😮😮😮 ... Thank goodness for my recommended
America needs an FDR/Teddy Roosevelt type president again. They made America great and social democracy will make America great again.
so it just needs a Roosevelt
HUEY LONG EVERY MAN A KING
We need to go further. We still can’t be extracting wealth from around the world.
Social democracy & Nordic model aren't really "socialism" though, it's more like social fascism
Scandinavia maintained their wealth inequality & their class hierarchy & their monarchies... doesn't really sound revolutionary iyam
Teddy was a bit racist and imperialist, not to mention having a social Darwinism attitude, but he did many good things.
I resent this misconception put forward by neoliberals that socialism was never as popular in America as it was in the rest of the world, as it always comes across like a way of obfuscating the fact that those movements just "didn't catch on" when really they were actively suppressed. Here in Minnesota during the 1920's and 30's, the Republican-Democrat duopoly was interrupted by the rise of the explicitly left-wing Farmer-Labor Party. Despite intense resistance from both parties and most of the press, the FLP went on to be enormously popular for a time before it was tragically absorbed into the Democrats and all the radicals were kicked out of the newly-formed union. The most famous FLP governor, Floyd Olson, was an IWW member in his youth and he had copies of Lenin's books on his shelf. One of his grand political ambition was to nationalize all of Minnesota's electric utilities, iron mines, and oil fields, which you would never hear from a milquetoast lib like Tim Walz
Very scary to see city/state/federal government own utilities. Your house can be taken from you if you don't pay your water bill for a city-owned water company, but you won't have that problem if it was privately-owned
@@cantstanja How TF can you say that with a straight face when mere months ago there was that catastrophic power grid failure in Texas because it was all privately-owned and the companies didn't maintain it properly because it was cheaper than winterizing it? Public utilities aren't something that should be run like a business because it leads to disasters born of neglect and greed. Profit perverts purpose. When the Nazis coined the concept of "privatization" by selling off Germany's state-owned industries to their wealthy industrialist friends, they weren't doing it because they thought it would be more efficient. It was all to enrich the oligarchs at the expense of everyone else's well-being.
Very true. There is a rich history of support for the Socialist Party and for socialists active outside of the SP. It is remarkable just how effective socialists have been despite the Democratic-Republican joint efforts to weaken the movement. Duly elected socialist legislators were expelled from office for simply being socialist. Yet over 1000 socialists were elected to public office in the U.S during the first 20 years of the 20th century. Take a look at a map identifying successful socialist campaigns at depts.washington.edu/moves/SP_map-elected.shtml But for the bipartisan conspiracy to keep socialists out of office coupled with the "red scare", Socialists would have been even more successful.
@@cantstanja lol no, pretty much all communities here run their own water treatment plant and I've never heard of that happening ever. Also in Saskatchewan we have provincial phone, power, natural gas and insurance companies. What a joy. Thanks to Tommy Douglas.
@@cantstanja you mean like the privately owned housing millions got kicked out of during the pandemic because they couldnt afford the rent due to being unable to work due to covid?
yeah privately owned essentials really protect you well
Americans… just imagine how much better your lives would be with social healthcare. No more Health insurance. So many lives would be saved and transformed
Universal Healthcare is not socialism.
Like cubans and venezuelans lives?
Another great video, awesome job Gravel Gang!
The American socialist movement is... NOW!!!
The problem with the sprawl theory is that it was never a problem in Canada or Australia.
Neither Canada nor Australia have very good social support programs either. Medicare in Canada for example, is very minimal, and doesn't cover a lot, like long term care, dental, ambulances, vision and hearing, physiotherapy, prescription drugs, mental health, and a host of other things.
@@philpottkentucky4802 Medicare in the US doesn't cover dental, ambulances, vision or hearing. There is a gigantic donut hole which makes prescriptions cost an arm and two legs, and whole host of other things. Bernard has tried to improve it but he has to fight two political parties just to move forward one inch.
I think at least one of the reasons why America has never adopted socialism is because in Americas past many businesses were small businesses so although there were a few monocle wearing rich people in Americas past there are not as many as they're are today which is why I believe that America is taking a closer look at Socialism it now.
"History isn't destiny" - a phrase that needs to be said more so that hope lifts people out of apathy and despair.
No, but discontinuity of American capitalism will turn the country into something distinctly inferior
Yeah Socialism has failed everytime in history but it will work one day😂
@@shalyfemusic no it hasn't. That statement is you not having access to better information about socialism that you're drawing that conclusion. Socialism as an approach to running a society works fine in lots of places in the world (as the video says) but there is no successful pure socialist society out there, just as there isn't a purely capitalist system out there either. People in the US think they live in free market capitalism, but it's just a particular configuration of it with less socialism.
Ask anyone who lives outside of the US whether they would want to have its medical system which is built of free market principles, and no-one anywhere would say yes. No other country in the world has the medical system that the US has and all of us outside that society know we want socially funded medicine because we have it.
If the US was pure free market capitalism you'd be able to buy and sell people, human organs, create your own nations without any government to stop you, be required to pay for all public services (i.e. pay for a fire service to come to your home if there's a fire, and if you don't you won't receive any help).
The US has in nearly every state a socialist education system, police force, fire support service, infrastructure system, military... You already have socialism in some ways, but it's almost always applied in a way that incorporates privatisation as well. It's that bit that fucks it up.
Read "21 things they don't tell you about capitalism" by economist Ha Joon Chang, you'll have better information to base your opinion on and you won't just need to accept mine.
@@alibushell6762 Not gonna lie you seem like you seem like a very smart guy.
You are not wrong every country has some socialiist policies including the US.
I think the key is balance but when you observe a more capitaliat country and the more socialist country, the capitalist ones are better.
When a country turns socialism they always end up much eorse than they started, the opposite is true for capitalism.
@@shalyfemusic Thanks for the compliment, and what seems like a willingness to consider further your own position.
What you're saying is, though, factually untrue. Quality of life is better in countries that embrace more socialism or integrate it into their culture and system in ways that work rather than doing it but not actually applying it properly. I suggest you do a bit of research about the Nordic countries (Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland). According to the capitalist mindset, they do things completely wrong, yet they have build societies in which people are not just happier, they have better social health outcomes (lower levels of mental and physical health problems, social exclusion and homelessness, poverty, teenage pregnancy - you name it).
Finland used mixed socialism and capitalism skewed more towards socialism to rebuild their largely agrarian society that had been occupied and badly damaged by soviet occupation into a nation that is considered to be one of the best to live in today. If a socially democratic society didn't work they'd still all be farmers, rather than one of the leading tech and education centres of the world.
The US by contrast? It is always one of the lowest of the developed nations in indicators such as happiness, social equity, access to political power, quality of life generally. Yes, it has one of the biggest economies in terms of the amount of money and GDP, but that model of measuring the success of a country wasn't supported even by the man who developed it (GDP was supposed to be a wartime measure of industrial output, now it's "how successful is a country?").
Are countries like Venezuela and North Korea places you'd want to live, or successful societies? No, but that's because they're essentially dictatorships with the first being corroded through mass corruption, and the latter being the personal property of the ruler who is more interested in his family reigning as a king than making sure the needs of his people are met. As long as they don't step out of line things are fine, if some people have to be disappeared to achieve that or they starve to death he and his supporters don't really care.
So, again, it's not socialism, it's how it's applied. Finally, capitalism is the main cause of what we are experiencing as extreme climate change. Capitalist forces and perspective can't take responsibility for or care about how they damage the environment, or whether they do things sustainably, they just have to make profit, and that includes lowering their costs through not fixing the problems they create (environmentally or socially).
I recommend you read the book "The spirit level" for more information on all of this.
Nice video, but the yellow moving behind the blue type made my eyes hurt and made me feel like I was beginning one of my vertigo spells.
Got it, we're working on our effects right now and I'll send this to our designer. We've moved past this style for future videos so this will be the last one with effects like this.
@@TheGravelInstitute I'm gonna suggest different animators if possible. I always feel like the content is so dense and the animation only does a nominal job to enhance the understanding. Please keep your options open.
@@gueverdura6717 I like the animators style, and I think it gets better with each video
Yeah, take a page from the Vox videos playbook. They have the best animations of any channel IMHO.
@@zigfreidbop Kurzgesagt? Alan Becker? And many other channels I forgot?
If we got this channel before Prager the internet would be a much better place.
+1
From what I understand, another reason socialism never took hold in FDR's New Deal. We abandoned laissez-faire economics and solidified liberal Capitalism, or as my professor put it, "Capitalism in a box." FDR meeting Socialists halfway took a lot of steam out of the movement, which was never very strong in the first place
Awesome videos as always
"History isn't destiny" is has such a great message. Simple.
Just so important to see.
Another factor is that the early grades up through High school only teach you to be useful to someone else usually an employer and do not teach you to look out for your own future interest
Wow I was taught to look out for my own future interests from an early age , like birth.
65 down votes from multi millionaires who can't get that 30th house ☹️
Great video, super short but sweet. Looking forward to more because the Gravel Institute hasn’t missed yet!
Great video, can't wait to engage with the next one
Pre-video guess: For the same reason we rejected the metric system...we're contrarian and like making things harder on ourselves
Embracing capitalism doesn’t make it harder on yourself. Capitalism is better than socialism.
@@grunklesmuffreally? Stay at the starting point if you want, but at this stage it's not even worth debating that, it's just a nuisance.
@@josecipriano3048 Capitalism, while flawed, is, in my opinion, better than socialism. Of course, both hare deep problems and my preferred economic model is a mixed system-the Nordic social democratic model is a good example.
Great video as always. I'm thankful that channels like these always live on the prospect of hope, not just negativity. "History isn't destiny" are words to live by.
It seemed like Vigeland wasn't going to mention Wilson, the Espionage and Sedition Acts, the Palmer Raids, the first Red Scare, etc. Those all came at a critical time during WW1 and really gutted the socialist movement here. Thankfully she did mention the Red Scares and the state repression in broad terms. Anyone who's interested in looking into this subject further should look into those topics.
Seconded. One thing I wonder, is why there was not equivalent repression of socialism in Europe. Maybe they had a less entrenched economic elite, because of the recent turmoil with wars happening. Or just elites who felt the need to tread more carefully. (There were many factors though)
Also Sacco & Vanzetti as well as the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" doctrine the SC made up in order to throw people in jail for daring to hold a political meeting. See, acc'd to the "yelling fire" doctrine, speech is only free if it conforms to norms.
Well you can't exactly blame the fear surrounding it, what is often left out is that the prime representative of international socialism after ww1 was the USSR which at the time had, A. Fought a massive Civil War which killed any real attempt at a variety of political conversations outside of the Bolsheviks controlling practically everything, as well as directly or indirectly killing millions of the people they claimed to be wanting to help. B. Said nation then proceeded to invade multiple of its neighbors to reclaim newly independent nations which at times had more political freedom and representation then the USSR did. And C. Would then in the future have a leader get in to power who would build a cult of personality around him which would atleast result in the deaths of thousands more of its own people out of partial paranoia alone. With this being the biggest example of socialism, you can see why this may not be the choice that nations would start supporting the ideology.
@@generalamsel437 The USSR didn't kill millions of people, that's Western (often Nazi) propaganda.
They didn't invade independent nations, those nations willingly joined the union.
Stalin's supposed paranoia is yet again propaganda.
You're making the mistake of relying on Western media for your knowledge of its greatest enemy.
@@kristoffer3000 you don't need western sources to confirm this, the Civil War and Russia's invasion of Poland, the Baltics, newly independent states like Armenia Georgia and other independent entities are well documented throughout the 1920s, well before the rise of Facism, and annexation of the Baltic states was basically an ultimatum during the 1940s with the unspecified threat of war, as evidence by the Soviet war with Finalnd after they rejected similar demands.
Stalins paranioa and killing of who he perceived as potential threats is also well documented by Soviet sources in what was termed as the Great Purge and for higher officials, the Moscow trials. Some of these men had supported the communists for years before Stalins rise to power, such as Andrei Bubnov who was killed in 1938 after you don't need western sources to confirm this, the Civil War and Russia's invasion of Poland, the Baltics, newly independent states like Armenia Georgia and other independent entities are well documented throughout the 1920s, well before the rise of Facism. the Bolsheviks in some capacity since 1905.
You don't need to rely on western sources for this information since it's been largely backed up by the opening of former USSR'S archives back in the 1990s.
Socialism has never took root in America until now. We are about to change that.
people during the progressive era tried, don't discount the lives lost in this fight
Except the white supremacists have become openly fascist. And they have vastly more influence...
I asked a friend what he thought the definition of socialist was . He said what if the definition is wrong? WTF where do you even start..
As a person from the UK I find it mind boggling that Americans don’t want free healthcare, despite them spending some of the most in the world on it they are being beaten by countries who all use free healthcare, can people at least make it so just an ambulance doesn’t cost thousands
Here's the thing: Americans DO want free healthcare. Universal healthcare ALWAYS polls extremely well with Americans, almost across the board. The problem is that we have a very rich and powerful Insurance Industry lobby that is bound and determined to make sure that never happens.
It's not that we, the American people, don't want it. It's the insurance company CEOs that don't want it. And guess whose opinions get more things done.
Man, seeing Emma on here makes me think about how great it would've been to have Michael Brooks do a video on the channel, rest in peace.
yo blue album wassup
How does it feel to be worse than Pinkerton?
Social Democracy is also about self-interest of business leaders. They know that well educated and healthy workers, are a benefit for companies. Check out the Rheinland Business Model. It is more focused on people than capital.
If that what the Germans call “Rhineland capitalism” and “ordoliberalism”?
@@blackflagsnroses6013 Yes, it's the same thing.
@@CrownRider Social democracy & Nordic model aren't really "socialism" though, it's more like social fascism
Scandinavia maintained their wealth inequality & their class hierarchy & their monarchies... doesn't really sound revolutionary iyam
"Mitbestimmung" in Germany still isn't really socialism
@John Spöner no, not "socialist" fascism, just "social fascism"
it means that it's ultranationalist & class collaborationist, but with an element of a welfare state
America: becomes a socialist country
Canada: Maybe I will build a gate here
I had no idea Emma possessed the telekinetic capacity to spontaneously render rich visual aids on an entirely different RUclips channel than The Majority Report! Cool stuff!!
Gotta be quick!
Great work on the history. Keep the conversations coming!
This video should be called... "Why didn't American adopt social democracy?" because that's all this video talks about. There was no mention of worker cooperatives or other forms of worker owned socialist economic models, and unions were only mentioned for like 3 seconds.
It's kind of the case that the US didn't adopt either. That, and the disgruntlement of the 1960s that probably would've taken a leftward swing in another nation was basically co-opted by the capitalist class to justify dismantling the parts of the state meant to reign them in.
Its understandable, you cannot go full communist to the broad American audiences. Socialism was so demonized that a lot of people in that country still has to learn the basics and familiarize with the idea of a less individualistic mindset. I think of this channel as some sort of socialist online kindergarden and elementary school
Marx never writes about "worker ownership" either
@@wtfhah Socialism has been public ownership of the means of production long before Marx. Marx also never wrote much about socialism, most of his work was a socioeconomic critique of capitalism, and he also advocate for a stateless society... aka communism.
@@canadagoose8543 No, it's nothing about "ownership". "Ownership" is a bourgeois right. Marx wants to cross "bourgeois right" in its entirety. Socialism is about control and common usage & also about removing class distinctions & geographic/social distinction between city & country.
Marx says this:
" Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence."
Marx did not advocate for a stateless society, and knew that it wasn't possible in the near term, hence why he outlined a series of stages of transition first from capitalism to socialism & then from socialism to communism.
You seem like you haven't read any Marx whatsoever
Still waiting for the Bernie/Zizek/Gravel episodes. For now, these are pretty cool.
A contemporary anarchist would be cool too.
An ML one too
no please not MLs
@@vladimirlenin3562 That's a bad idea if we want to bring Americans over to leftism. People would sooner subscribe to anarchism.
@@comradefreedom8275 how?
Great video! Keep it up Gravel Institute!
+1 uwu
Gravel institute time babeeeeee
Another reason America was not socialist compared to Europe was it was not bombed. Bombers came over smashing properties, killing and maiming people. What health insurance company would want to get involved with that ?? The risk was just too great, the Government would have to look after the returning wounded soldiers so it was not such a big step to include women and Children survivors of the bombing. This was just too big a risk for insurance companies who prefer to challenge than pay where possible. They now looking to Bojo Johnson to change this because the risk has fallen.
Venezuela iPhone basic economics China. Also millions of corporate dollars.
When I became a US citizen, one of the questions on the naturalization application asked if I belonged to a Communist party...
What did you say
@@visorij3374 if they ask me that, no. The so called communist Pakistan People's Party is actually a corrupt organization for the Bhutto family. I supported Imran Khan who is center-left. In the US I supported Biden over Bernie until I saw his lack of action against the Republicans gutting every part of his original agenda that he got elected for.
I would also point out that in Pakistan all parties work the same way, the center-right Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz is just a source of funds for Nawaz Shareef. PTI(Pakistan Tahreek-e-Insaaf) and MQM(Mutheda Quomi Movement) are kind of the exception against dynastic politics but the two major ones are basically royal families in Pakistan.
Why did you even become a US citizen?
You can be deported if you lie.
A truly informative history lesson.
That part aboutAmerican workers moving around kinda stuck out to me? It sounded like an early equivalent of the modern gig economy?
Workers moving around that much would make it easier to see Human labor as just another despicable part of a uncaring machine.
This is a sign of economic activity though. I'm guessing there were opportunities as well as turmoil that lead to this.
You guys need to convince the rural areas just focusing on cities ain’t gonna do anything
Lots of them are already convinced, they're just confused about branding. The original People's Party was formed by a bunch of farmers.
The farmers are convinced, they just don't realize it. Farmer's co-ops, barn raising, government Farm Subsidies, price support for crops, being paid for not growing, and Welfare money is provided in amounts per capita comparable to big cities.
Build HSR and say hay wanna get to a nice city in 30 minutes flat?
is there a reason why closed captions aren’t available on this video and the last one? because i feel like that’s important to making these videos more accessible.
I wish community captioning was still allowed so I could add them myself, it should be a requirement for posted videos honestly
Historically Socialists have always been very fun! I am young and I love it!
Join us watch this video! ruclips.net/video/y2pxMM1He9A/видео.html
Good point