Not just old religions and capitalism tell people they get what they deserve, it's also new age and "Oprah." Ex. if you're not "positive enough," then you're not drawing good things to you. So it's your fault. And while they blame you, and make you feel bad about yourself (lost, moping in and incapacitated by depression and ego), you never realize that its the system that's actually done it to you. It's a broader, sociological perspective that's needed to see through all of the commercial, materialistic, superficial (social media, esp), capitalistic garbage we're mired in daily.
Indeed, I would say a huge uncoincidental part of this is the social mapping offered by Protestantism in particular, which similarly to capitalism sweeping away the feudal social order (with massive assistance from the black plague, leading to the enclosure movement) formed out of a breakaway with institutionalized religion and instead prefigured a personal, individualized, relationship with god, and is of course one of the hegemonic cultural understandings of the settler colonies (and a large part of the rationale many of them ventured into the unknown, to escape persecution...and establish their _own_ persecution unfortunately of course). Many more dimensions of this of course, but that built-in Protestant/Calvinist/Puritan predestination concept reifies itself into this notion of work and becomes sort of the "spirit of capitalism" as Weber put it famously in the appropriately titled The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. In its most precocious and insidious form, the synthesis of these social/material mappings becomes that "prosperity gospel" that all those megachurches preach (Mormons are probably the most interesting/insane yet simultaneously self-contained and thus pretty brilliant evolution of this, but that's a huge tangent in itself, I'll just note the Utah wars and such which are pretty nuts and the name Reed Smoot because it is hilarious; Matt Christman has a great/entertaining outline of some the history there for anyone intrigued in his "Inebriated Past" series). Thorstein Veblen also notable in terms of the last thing you're mentioning with his conception of "conspicuous consumption", and is also clearly the Justin Long of the early 20th century (googling a picture will make sense of this bad joke).
@@Bisquick Yes, but I think it's religion (or anything of societal makings) more broadly that's to blame. They all end up in about the same place. Catholics feel no remorse for harmful actions, because everything they do is easily forgiven. A different angle, but you can't say it doesn't play into capitalism. Perfect alignment, even.
@CEV12 "Ex. if you're not "positive enough," then you're not drawing good things to you. So it's your fault." - The antidote to that kind of mindset has always been (and will remain so, for the foreseeable future) this: *"What is your evidence of that (intrinsic) fault?"*
Nice post. I heard something last year, George Carlin: "It's the American Dream because you would have to be asleep to believe it." I call them the 50,000 homeless Elvis Pressleys in Hollywood!
Good writing, like a professor yourself. I studied Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and I thought everyone is stuck at level 3 belonging. If we watch CELEBRITY APPRENTICE and spend our time trying to out do others, or SEX AND THE CITY and invest in bizarre, creepy relationship ideas, we'll never be able to get together with others.
Благодарю Вас профессор. Я говорю и понимаю английский язык в достаточной мере. Но лучше я напишу Вам на языке, на котором я думаю. Вы как всегда убедительны, профессор. Ваши аргументы неожиданны и ориинальны даже для нас людей, которые пытались построить коммунизм в Советском Союзе. Ваши лекции интересны и нам бывшим советским людям своей логикой и оригинальностью, потому что Ваш взгляд на коммунизм происходит из современного капиталистического общества, тогда как мы пришли к марксизму другим путем, родившись и изучая марксизм и научный коммунизм в социалистическом обществе в СССР. Тем не менее мы приходим к одним и тем же выводам: Вы - профессор из капиталистических США и мы - бывшие советские люди. Марксизм и коммунизм - это будущее человечества. Вот этот вывод. Профессор, нам вместе надо объединить свои усилия и попробовать совместно развить марксизм. И конечно продолжать с обеих сторон пропагандировать марксизм. Как говорили классики: "Учение Маркса всесильно, потому что оно верно!". Тысячу благодарностей Вам, профессор.
On a much larger scale, Marx witnessed the failed revolutions of 1848. These were also attempts at socialism (at least on the part of the working class) which were eventually defeated by the forces of the Concert of Europe (a NATO-like reactionary alliance of kingdoms that was established after the shock of the original French Revolution). These revolutions kicked off in January of 1848 & by February of 1848, Marx & Engels had written the Communist Manifesto.
And just like as Wolff points out in how these attempts of community were attempted in other times in history, which he didn't have time to detail, the Paris commune fell short like those attempts because the minority used the state and violence to stop those attempts at being achieved and long lasting
Thank you Professor for educating people Slavery is alive and well in 2022 People over profits now 3/25/22 Be the change Or be enslaved by big corporate Want change Boycott
@@donrastar1579 "pLeAsE aNsWeR mY qUeStIoN, eVeN tHoUgH i'Ve ToLd YoU tHaT i'M tOo dUmB tO cOmPrEhEnD aNy AnsWeR!" 🤪 Some employees go through new kinds of difficulty when they first learn that they are slaves. Eventually, some employee-slaves strive to denounce the oppression under which they live, and some slaves seek to become the oppressor. Straighten out your cap, remove the blinders from your eyes, and choose wisely. You're being recorded. History will remember.
@@donrastar1579 Don't worry about it. Maybe, on your own time, when you are not trolling on your completely empty channel that started a few months ago, you can educate yourself. Good luck with that.
Workers' self directed enterprises are very important for the downtrodden human spirit. We have grown too much and struggled for too long to continue being dominated by another simply because "that's how it is". THIS is the way forward because it finally gets to the deep core of the issue. The employer-employee relationship. That same arrangement is what teaches everybody that it is okay for one human to arbitrarily rule another. IT IS NOT OKAY.
I think the best passage from Marx that encompasses both his thoughts on historical materialism, capitalism, and what he would like to see come out of the resolution of capitalism's contradictions comes from Capital Volume 3:
Thank you Professor, Marx pointed in the right direction, but in the US today, the power of the capital aristocracy is too strong, we can't overthrow their rule through violent revolution like Russia and China, we can only pray for the day when the empire collapses from the inside..
Plenty of 25-year-olds are getting starting salaries of $150K with huge quarterly bonuses. The system ensures there are just enough highly successful winners to keep all the losers fantasizing they'll make those big bucks someday.
Although I get the framing of “democracy in the workplace,” I tend to view Marx’s critique in behavioral terms (which Marx could not do because that vocabulary had not been invented yet): those who are subject to the contingencies of reinforcement (e.g., the conditions under which they get or don’t get at least some portion of the surplus) should be, to the extent possible, the ones who arrange those contingencies. If you don’t have that “identity,” you get what you get under slavery, feudalism, and capitalism: those doing the arranging arrange to get more of the reinforcer (e.g., in Marx’s terms, the surplus) than others and subject others to more aversive conditions (e.g., unsafe work environments, long hours, low pay, etc., under capitalism) if those conditions lead to more reinforcement for those doing the arranging.
Thank you Professor. The real difficulty here is convincing the very people who have a hold on the world power and decision making say and ability to make change to let go of their grip on their precious wealth and power. These peoples over-the-top greed and selfishness are a very difficult obstacle to resolve. Difficult, but not impossible. It will just take a lot of hard work.
We are the majority. It isn't about making the minority in power to give it up willingly. It's about convincing the majority to take that power from the minority by forced if necessary. We have the power if we choose to wield it.
One thing I really like about Marx is his imagining a better world for all. But I don't think we have that capacity in the US anymore. We have no community except maybe sports teams. Our God is money. It's every man for himself. How often do you hear someone say "I don't want to pay for someone else's healthcare"? The Tories have won.
I'm bothered by people on right wing sites nonchalantly posting we should go to war. Do they mean, "you should go to war, and I'll stay here and go get a pizza?" Like famous musicians saying "people need jobs." Oh, and meanwhile he'll be writing poetry? He means, "you need jobs."
Might be nice to have a 102 version of this lecture. I have been listen to Prof Wolff way before Democracy@Work. The high level Marx critique of Capitalism is a common topic. But once in awhile, Prof. Wolff would discuss other interesting theories of marx like alienation of gattungswesen. Another interesting insight I got and has kept in mind is that Governments are fundamentally a creation of all of us. It is not a separate entity that commoner might think (or at least I did). I think of it as a school project being done by a group of 10. And they way coordinate and make decisions is, I argue , a form of government. And the success of such government is dependent on it's members. Should majority of the members do not participate, then the project may likely end in failure. Picking your group leaders and leaving them be - is not gonna work ain't it? And this, I argue, is fundamentally similar to a group of people with a project called 'living together'. The more people, the more complex it gets. Simply voting during elections and leaving the leaders be is not gonna work. Identifying the problems of our government, one of which is the terrible influence of Capitalism, is fundamentally a problem we (living together in a small rock) all have to solve.
Thanks Prof' for your plain speaking way of explaining Marxist theory and its potential for improving on capitalism. The more we inform ourselves about the problems associated with a profit driven socio-economic system the more chance we have of reducing poverty, social inequality and indeed making our world a safer place; well done.
I like Prof Wolfe explanation that Marxism is merely a criticism of Capitalism. I live in old age and poverty, and there is a horror to seeing people all around me as if they have been somehow made fools of to believe each one can become rich and famous while secretly looking at family and friends thinking they cannot. So we can agree, there is no easy answer, but we know what we are living in needs improvement.
Thank you so much, Dr. Wolff! I appreciate your tireless devotion to untangling and elucidating these topics. Had I to do it again, I would’ve given much more attention to the study of economics. It’s fascinating-and affects us all.
16000 people viewed this within 24 hours 🙏.the work "The Capital" is the most anti labour narrative in world. But those who don't read the text it is good work. 🙏
Thanks Prof. for your content...can you please clarify the chair manufacturing example, why you said that the security person is not producing a service, wouldn't his service be "security services"? Am I missing something? Please clarify, thanks 💗🍃
The security guard isn't producing anything, and in this context, they have no contributing value. It's a spiral of arguments to justify the existence of security guards that intersects many different academic fields.
Even if the workplace is democratized, there will still be hierarchy, and there will still be positions of status. Practically speaking, people aren't equal, although certain minimums can be supplied to everyone. People will still seek out status and wealth under any system, including socialism. This should be recognized, as capitalists will point to this as a reason why socialism is flawed in its striving for equality, while capitalism claims to deal with this flaw by embracing status and wealth rather than suppressing it. I don't agree with or support the dominance of capitalism, but rather I make this point because I want to find out how to counter it.
I hear this point a lot, too. The notion that people "naturally" behave in any kind of way, in this case that we seek wealth, reminds me of the way that people often misinterpret the phrase "survival of the fittest" to mean "survival of the strongest," when "fit" here is better understood as "fitting in." Humans have survived in many kinds of harsh conditions; we're pretty good at adapting. You're staring at a piece of plastic hearing a voice in your head because just a bit ago, I was tapping my thumbs against another piece of plastic. And for us this is mundane; I'm annoyed with myself for attempting to make it sound less so. We have organized a society that rewards wealth-seeking behavior. And it's been working this way for thousands of years. So we'd be forgiven for assuming that humans naturally seek wealth, when really we're just adapting to our surroundings. Ideas like socialism, communism, and anarchism ask us to build a new society that rewards more mutually beneficial activity in place of that wealth-seeking. This is already super long, but I recommend searching for "Emma Goldman human nature" and reading what she had to say on it. I'm really just badly regurgitating that passage.
@@kellythomas4432 based on personal observation, it seems there is a “range” of wealth-seeking. Some people have their sole eye upon “the main chance,” while more - possibly *many* more - look at it now and then. Often this second situation *only applies to the degree that hunger and privation goads one into doing so.* Finally, there is another portion of people who dislike the mere idea of that accursed “main chance,” and wished it did not exist!
No body complain over good feelings.i guess even if folks were seeing results from working the way they do, no complain. People complain because they work like machines just to maintain the basic, and alot of folks are still falling short. a roof over thy head and food on thy table.
I more like your just working 2-3 jobs to survive, not really living . It sucks, retired early and moved overseas. My quality of life is so much better and no constant stress and anxiety. Yes, I’ve had enough.even though I lived in a beautiful apartment in Waikiki, it used to be paradise, now it’s totally unaffordable, epidemic of homeless everywhere, crumbling infrastructure, horrible traffic.
I wonder how Richard Wolff feels seeing a resurgence of socialist ideas and people identifying as socialists. To go from people who still remember intense Cold War & Red Scare propaganda, to a generation of people begging those like Richard Wolff for answers and solutions. I hope it makes him hopeful. It must be a big change.
As always a succinct and informative commentary. Part of me thinks that we need to consider all of the workers of Southeast Asia who work for less per day than many of us spend on a fast food meal. If we did not have the upper hand in the global economy, our system would be different in ways that are hard to imagine -- some better, some worse I tend to think.
Thanks, Prof Wolff. i wish I'd known this - quite a while back! That Church-Capitalist analogy is too close for comfort. No wonder it isn't widely discussed - in the US. I'm also amused by the notion of a 'Protestant Work Ethic' - really, an acknowledgment of the link you're mentioning. As if those who built the Pyramids, or Renaissance Italy - must have been secret Protestants! And now on to Amazon for yr book. Thanks again!
@@CesarGarcia-og8rz it sure is. Thats why Wolff doesn't pay for his transportation, food,hotels,cloths,computers and anything else he can write off. This guy is a hypocrite at every level. "And of course if you could help us financially" lmao. His whole production costs about $12 a month hahaha
@@blogintonblakley2708 capitalism is an economic system of private property ownership and control. Slavery is a system of some people owning others. The difference is self explanatory to anyone who is not a blatant sophist.
Dr. Thomas Sowell was a Marxist in his youth. He wrote a book called “ Marxism “ philosophy and economics. His doctoral thesis was on Marx, and yet he didn't arrive at ( not even close ) the same conclusion on Marxism and capitalism as you have.
I enjoy this show on a regular basis. But as I was watching this episode, I realized something that is present in much Marxist discourse but somewhat absent in your particular discussion. And that is, the planning of a Marxist economy. For example, in Yugoslavia, there was a market economy with worker coops. So the means of production were controlled democratically by workers, but it was a market that determined the distribution of goods and services. Such a market can lead to competition and eventually monopolies where workers are exploited indirectly via the price of their labour in the marketplace. Therefore it arises the question, of what role the state should play in the revolution of the workplace. Should it be a centrally planned economy? Should it be planned decentrally via workers councils. We need to look at how the rich countries with workers coops will extract superprofits from the poor countries with worker coops. In other words, more than just workers coops are needed, to ensure globally the workers can create an equal and just world.
Marx said that productivity determines the relations of production. I think the level of human productivity today cannot support the market economy with workers’ cooperatives, or can’t compete with capitalism. What the government should do, look at China, it should be The best balance between socialism and capitalism can be achieved at the current level of productivity. btw, I don't believe that a one-person, one-vote democracy can manage a company or even a country well. Humans always need elite leaders. This is a natural law.
@@ashavahishta7023 Where this particular analysis falls apart, for example in the economic calculation problem, is when we examine the pitiful handling of the supply chain by market-driven distribution. Empty store shelves, expensive gas, and a nation without a functioning healthcare system, we may as well go back to living in caves. Socialism effectively removes the profit incentive to commodify goods and services, allowing an already grossly productive society to distribute goods and services more equitably. The problem is not that we don't need elites... it's that we can't oust them, due to people's stupidity in believing individualist bourgeois ideology.
Surplus redistribution largely happens across states under the name of geoarbittrage now. In that sense the community nowadays is cross state. Which one take the first move, forming up community own business or achieving true globalization?
I'd contend the answer isn't "Either-Or," but "Both-And." Community-owned businesses don't have to negate globalization, nor vice versa. Both are necessary to some extent. The bigger question is how would they work in conjunction.
A thought just occurred to me. If rich countries paid laborers better, goods could be produced by populations in the US and we would not have supply chain issues. Is that correct? However, if goods were produced in the US, wouldn’t their costs be astronomically high since laborers would have to be paid better?
Near the end, he mentions that accursed notion of Social Darwinism, aided abetted by “religion” - which is the precise opposite of what it should be doing!
I will say rather hilariously, as I had always assumed as well until I saw this in an interview with him, Piketty _wasn't_ cleverly nodding to Marx with his book Capital. Weirdly, and I don't even know how this is possible, but he said something like _"I wasn't aware of this, I haven't really looked into Marx."_ which is kinda bananas. But yeah, besides the point obviously, other than it shows one can arrive at the same conclusion entirely independently, just a little uh "fun" fact I guess.
You can't really comment on Marx until you've read him for yourself. Far too many people think they know better because they read someone who fit their narrative better (like Mises, Sowell), or, more likely, just heard "Marxism" attacked by prominent people supporting that narrative (as with Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and others). You can't just cherry-pick quotes someone else gave you and believe you understand anything beyond what that someone wanted you to think. Likewise, you can't criticize the ideas without first understanding them, which requires study, and if you're not willing to study, then you have no business acting like you know anything. Too many leftists bash their heads against walls trying to defend Marxism from people like I just described. It's important to help people become informed, but capitalists are brainwashed so hard that they can't imagine anything else being anything but worse, and many even see social democracy, a more "fair" version of capitalism, as a bad system that can only work in (and this is the part where they out themselves as bigots, even if they try to word it "safely") heterogenous white-people countries. I don't like everything Wolff says, particularly about "types of socialism" (he knows better, but he dumbs it down for the masses) and some other things, but he is one of a very few people who are reasonably good sources for this side of things in the United States. Right wingers dominate everything (Democrats are center-right with very few exceptions), even though they like to play the perpetual victim (and strongman), so their narrative is the only one that most people are ever exposed to, even if you account for the differences between Democrats and Republicans. Wolff's content on worker democracy, specifically worker cooperatives, is generally good (I haven't heard him mention Mondragon lately, which is good since they have changed for the worse). His criticisms of capitalism are very appropriate and relevant. He's not perfect, but we need more like him to make "balanced views" actually mean something beyond "center right vs far far far right." And on top of that, more people need to actually read what Marx, Lenin, and even Mao wrote, so that even if they don't agree, AT LEAST they'll know what was really said. It would be even better if they would also study to try and understand what was meant and what the historical context (what was going on at the time and why) was. That's what's needed...but in the United States, that's exactly what won't happen, because anything that runs counter to the pro-capitalist, imperialist, (white) ultra-nationalist narrative is rejected before ever letting a critical thought form.
Since Marx actually knew what capitalism was ( as does Michael Hudson ) and his predictions regarding it were wrong...as it did not result in the abolishment of the rentier class which was and is enabled by the government, his critiques are irrelevant...and since he had even less of an understanding of human behavior and what drives it, he really has nothing to offer and can be discarded completely. And worker co-ops are capitalist, with the democratic elements simply making them more inefficient, poorly adaptable and less competitive
One does not need to spend time reading tons of Marx to understand the central ideas put forth by Marx and Marxists and prove them wrong. We are not the propagandized ones, you are, and we prove it constantly through explaining what you got wrong, why you got it wrong and with hard data to back it up as well.
A teacher's hypothesis to his MA students in response to a more or less the same question: capitalism with its logical form, i.e., some European democracies (liberal democracy vs. Social democracy) continue till the forces of history such as natural limitations produce the "necessary" system. This does not happen by Marx's Manifesto as that tactic belongs to the past centuries, but by Marx's science of real historical changes, hence post-Marxism.
One of the problems I find with all the various organizational strategies tried by civilization is that none of them really come to terms with the fundamental flaws in civilization. For example, systems of hierarchical authority inevitably elevate the most ruthless and self interested individuals into positions of authority. We've watched civilization after civilization fall apart from internal rot for precisely this reason. The other two examples of fatal flaws that generally aren't addressed are agriculture and how property/ownership play into xenophobia to cause conflict, stratification and system instability. Because of this civilization is facing the distinct possibility of CAUSING human extinction. Seen in these terms, it becomes difficult to consider civilization as progress from 188,000 years of hunter gatherer living.
the way out of capitalism would be to make it financially worthwhile for people to SHARE the jobs we can agree we NEED people to do and work much less...no more uselessly working and doing anything FOR money. ...and no such thing as unemployment for anyone fit and healthy. It isn't really hard to work out the difference between the jobs we NEED people to do compared to all the millions of jobs we don't NEED to have done. There are no slaves when people are sharing the work they NEED to have done.
We don't even need to make it financially worthwhile. We just need it to give people a better incentive than the threat of violence. Humans don't actually need more than that. We can organize just fine without a financial incentive
@@LexiH36 but the type of society Wolfe advocates for would require exactly that ( threat of violence)in order to implement it. If there is no financial incentive then how would there ever be any progress? Do you think cattle ranchers would work their hands to the bone to get beef and milk to NYC out of the goodness of their heart?
@@LexiH36 All the time we use money there is no other way possible to get people to ever be willing to share the jobs we NEED people to do...they will all tell you (almost regardless of how much they earn) they cannot afford to live on any less money.
@@nobonesaboutit7639 yes actually. Most people don't want to see other people go hungry. Farmers did this during the great depression actually. If it didn't cost them anything to farm then they would not mind giving away their surplus. Especially to their neighbors.
@@LexiH36 but if you eliminate the dollar then hiw do you measure supply and demand? You would then need to appoint someone to dictate peoples needs and wants which is basically impossible.
With the power of the workforce of the US the transition to socialism would be a cinch. If you don’t have the money to buy from the capitalist the working class goes without and the capitalists do not have the buyers in the working class. Money makes the working class a class of buyers for the capitalists and the capitalist class, a class of sellers, to the working class in the market. But in production both social classes of employers and employees are dependent on the productivity of the working class and in this dependency arises a contradiction that neither of the social classes are fully emancipated from class and productivity is not freed from its constant tension between work and the commodity labor-power for the working class, always working to live while the other social class lives to work constructing a social, political, and economic superstructure with the free time the working class produces. The question by what political right is the free time produced by the working class the property of the capitalist class has one answer found in the social transformation of society not in the library or law books but in society itself. An excellent video, thank you professor.
The employer doesn't work, like the CEO of that chair factory? I don't like our system and I think Basic Income should be in place. But isn't that going too far to say employers are like feudal lords who don't work?
It's amazing how many mix Marx with Lenin, Stalin and China. Until you realize how nobody teaches about Marx or how economics and government may be two separate things. Really amazing is how economics and government are so intertwined in the USA that many see it as different from other capitalism, especially China, these days.
Most people, even many who call themselves "Marxists," haven't actually read any of those authors, but instead let other people tell them what they said. Uncritically accepting second/third-hand sources as the truth has caused many leftists to believe a lot of the propaganda, so it's no wonder that people mix things up. Not many people teach Marx in the US, but even fewer teach Lenin or Mao, or dissect what actually happened under Stalin beyond what US propaganda sold everyone on (I suggest checking out Michael Parenti on some of that media manipulation, but also looking at criticisms of The Gulag Archipelago, the Black Book of Communism, declassified intelligence reports, and other stuff).
The environmental collapse that is currently playing itself out will push global trade towards collapse. Countries will be forced to rely on locally made goods. If a workers coop company becomes the dominant business model, it will have to operate under a stricter government regime. The existing Capitalist model supports a low regulation small government society. This is failing society. The Capitalist model needs to address these issues: * All countries must move to a fossil free society with an environmentally sustainable, renewable energy society. * Carbon emissions dictates limits on personal consumption. There is a need for governmental control over what gets produced, how it is produced and the extent to which it is consumed. * Over population is driving consumption, pollution and emigration. The global community needs to agree universal laws on strict birth control, family size and marriage age. Immigration grows a society like Capitalism creates inequality and needs to stop. Economic Update should widen the discussion on future economic models to include these competing pressures. How will we move to an environmentally constrained, low carbon, low consumption, low population society? You should keep in mind that a failure meet these criteria, will result in the extinction of the human race, putting Marxist theory in the academically irrelevant basket. Ie. Don't be too fixated with Marxist Theory to the exclusion of all else.
We are in the final stages of capitalism when it's a career to be paid to walk with someone, a service that was between family and friends, or family hire a death doula because they are too tightly committed to take time of to comfort their dying.
"Capitalism is transitory". This is a key point. Capitalist realism has convinced us that the world will end before capitalism ends, but we need to realize that serfs living in the 16th century could probably not foresee a society without monarchs and lords.
WHAT IS CHINA AND USA MEETING FOR IN ROME? MY GUESS : US: Don't sell Weapons alone. We need 60-40 partnership. CHINA : 50-50. We need win win cooperation. US: OK but we need raw materials for our Weapon companies which you sanctioned. China : OK, withdraw sanctions on our TECH Companies. US: Agreed but don't disclose the agreement as we didn't disclose Yuan Lab cooperation between China and USA.
I agree with what you say on the most part but there is only one problem and that is the human condition there being no one to blame for the ills of everything. At the moment workers can blame employers but if we are all happy who can we blame. People are very aggressive and they like to fight and argue and that is why there are bosses because they keep the people from arguing and fighting at work otherwise we would not need a police force. So I think the Community theory is good in theory but wont work in practice, it should be able to, but it simply wont work. There will always be someone that thinks I am better than you and I can do it better than you and they will challenge you unless you can drive that out of our psyche then it wont work. Perhaps capitalism made us that way idk. It's like that with countries the US always prides itself with being No 1 what if all countries were equal.
China's Xi JinPing.. has the answer... The wealth of the nation belongs to the people.. Corporations can make huge sums of money...but at some point there is a limit and all the profit above the limit is turned over to the government to care for the people...
An excellent lecture! Not to say I agree with everything said. But I do, now more than ever, believe it needs to be heard. I was brought up to believe that Capitalism and Democracy were of the same coin. Now, as I enter old age, I have discovered that this is not necessary the case. In fact, it seems more and more obvious that, at least right now, the two are contradicting one another. I am not sure that this is necessarily because of the faults of capitalism, or if it is just due to the tendency in human nature for those, who have power and access to opportunity, to hoard such power and access to opportunity for themselves and their children. This trait seems to be universal. Getting rid of capitalism will not likely cure it. Why? I'll tell youbtwo stories. First. When I wasvin my early 20's, I worked in a vitamin factory, in which we the workers were represented by The Teamsters union. Contract time was coming up, and the usual corrupt ploy was was in play. The steward would become a supervisor, and maybe one or two committee members too, after the contract talks ended. The Union local leadership would get a payoff of a few thousand dollars, and the deal would be done. Little did I know, when this started, that I would end up being the first button to pop, upending this scheme. And that I would be black listed for over two years for my trouble. Anyway, I soon found myself in the center of the fire storm I had unwittingly ignited. While this was going on, I spoke with a truck driver, who was there to pick up a load. I asked him why (when we are both in the same union) he should make considerably more money doing his job than we should doing ours. I will never forget his answer. He said that his job was more complicated and important than ours. And this was the reason. I immediately realized two truths: 1.) That he wanted to always make more than us, and 2.) That he wouldn't likely be above cooperating with a system that kept this so. It was then I realized that the union movement was doomed. The PATCO strike, which happened just two years later, confirmed my suspicions. Second. A year or two ago, I asked an immigrant co-worker why he risked so much to not only leave his country, Cameroon, but insist on coming to The US, even after successfully immigrating to Western Europe. He told me that, in Europe, he was offered security. And that here, in The US, he was offered opportunity. Most likely not for himself, but for his children. And almost certainly not EQUAL opportunity, but at least SOME opportunity. And he is not the first or only immigrant I worked with to tell me this.
Marxism has a lot to offer us. He's dated, for sure. Where I live we have Hutterite Communities who practice feudalism. Gas station who operate as local co-ops. We have small businesses who are capitalistic. We have health care that is high grade socialist. We have corporations who are owned by shareholders and rely on government support. Their are farmers who are family enterprises where the profits are shared by family members who don't take the operation. What would Marx think? Well he would be happy to compare these disparate systems within a free society.
@Jari Honkaniemi Capitalism kills... Two world wars... climate change... genocide after genocide. But ultimately it's a silly way to evaluate systems that all operate on basically the same three principles. 1) Agriculture 2) Hierarchical authority 3) Property/ownership
The most dishonest, manipulative and deceitful monologue I have heard in a long time. I enjoy much of RT in spite of this poor misguided soul. I hope the current and emerging generation Z is astute enough to not be beguiled by this kind of nonsense.
Side bar, your honor? What was the point about your illustration of the “guy in the jeep” doing apparently security for the company? Are you saying that he doesn’t produce anything of value? You seemed to indicate that he simply fed off the surplus of the other workers without producing anything.
I think his main point is that the employees should get to decide which services the company would need and not the employer and at what price. Providing a service, like security, is a service and there is value to it. You could have an entire company that provides security, but it can be wholly owned by the workers that provide that service.
the contradictions of labor and capital are such that it breeds the need for capital to have hired security. Adam Smith actually wrote something similar in The Wealth of Nations :
61% of United States (US) citizens are dissatisfied with our government. The US government (USG), therefore, has a big fat “F” grade from “We the People”! Why? Capitalism is not the correct economic system for a democracy. In fact, capitalism is the worst system for a democracy. Do you know that 9 of the 10 richest men in the world are US citizens, while, at the same time, the US was the epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic? Democracy requires a system, whereby the workers decide what to do with the surplus of their labor. Democracy would, therefore, be inevitable if the community were in charge of the workplace. If that were possible, the USG would then get a big fat “A”. We must abolish capitalism to get a democracy!
The element of religion runs throughout human instincts, psychology, and institutions, because the unique exceptionalistic self-interested identities endemic to human tribalism synthesize ethnocentrism, monotheism, and ultra-nationalism into a single integrated identity, such as white Christian nationalism, and white supremacy. This non-negotiable identity remains endemic to the hegemony of elites, oligarchy, and plutocracy, and to approximately forty percent of populism - more if the white gentrified reactionary authoritarian liberal technocrats are included - including all those that eagerly consume false flags, imperial greatness, and pay reactionary tribal fealty to Party and state authority (i.e. the tribal causality for Gramscian hegemony). Consequently, because of this single integrated identity, the routine authoritarian policing of tribal purity, sanctity, and exceptionalism inflicts religious moralizing that makes value decisions about individuals, and then those moral values are made a material reality through direct actions, and through entire systems of structural violence, where the economic structural violence of capitalism performs this social control function. Immediate tribal calculus determines yes/no status on possessing the correct ethnocentrism and monotheism, and relatedly, if one is sufficiently territoriality nationalist, where non-pass and low anti-imperialist marks are punished, and processed through the system of structural violence. For example, the extreme degree of profits and inequality that capitalism produces were never a problem for capitalism, because these abstractions perform a function of social control. The more these abstractions scale upwards, the greater white supremacy achieves the authoritarian ability to control the narrative. Bear in mind the total systemic function of a tribe, or nation, where a nation must preserve the certain predictable ability to rapidly scale-up the cannon fodder mobilization of populations to war. This ability is greatly enhanced by a god-fearing people responding to defending a god-favored nation, remaining authority-compliant, and dummied-down by poverty with lack of sophistication and options, including by remaining easily inflamed by nationalist rhetoric. Nature itself, may design Homo sapiens tribal success through a regrettably narrow regressive violent filter. The only hope Homo sapiens may have is using our big brains sentience and intelligence to objectify and transcend the degree to which nature determined us poorly, and achieve a sustainable paradigm-shift in the direction of systems-based science-based eco-socialism. Meanwhile, the flow of godly blessings has always been funneled through the tribal element that retains ownership (both establishment and defense of) the founding tribal identity and organizational relationship with deistic exceptionalism, specifically the authoritarian and theocratic symbiosis representative of the church-state system. The church-state system has found a variety of expressions, spanning Tribal Chieftain and Shaman; Warlords and Spiritual Advisor; Egyptian Pharaoh God-Kings and Priest-Class; Military Dictatorships; Theocracies; God-favored King Feudalism; and even the Western experiment faux-secularization of the church-state system. A legacy system that unfortunately reproduces the exact same anthill authoritarian institutional hierarchy, demonstrating militarism, religion, politics, economics, and culture; where militarism and religion are always prioritized and subsidized; and where regressive authoritarian right-wing organization is normalized within politics, economics, and culture. If progressive socialism representing cultural evolution learned anything useful it would be that while this regressive reactionary authoritarian theocratic right-wing element exists (in point of fact, the entirety of tribal causality actually responsible for Gramscian hegemony), this elements raison d'etre will continue to undermine both egalitarian democracy and economics, and only through absence of its influence can progress ever be achieved. Otherwise, Western liberalism that manufactures consent for capital and the church-state, and establishment social science, will frame human state of nature theory through establishment-friendly reductionism to individualism, and Marxism will remain philosophical constructionism that exists in contradiction to the evolutionary biology and biological determinism of self-interested human tribalism. Moreover, capitalism will remain ubiquitously ruled/inflicted by patriarchal authoritarians (elites, oligarchs, and billionaire plutocrats) whom represent the regressive fundamentalist identities of white Christian nationalism, and white supremacy, or whatever tribal identity exceptionalism and supremacy they might represent. Endemic to this tribal identity and authoritarian infliction is the libertarian and religious moralizing that perceives the multiracial multicultural wage-labor working class as an out-group identity, which to tribal instincts remains indistinguishable from any other out-group identity that constitute evil subhuman enemies. Consequently, it is easy for tribal identity elites, oligarchs, and plutocrats, to become ideologically disassociated and disconnected from the working class, to develop anti-social pathologies directed at the working class, and to rationalize subjecting the multiracial multicultural wage-labor working class to lesser fates, to second-class status, and to the destitution, sickness, and death resulting from austerity, artificial scarcity, and abject abuse. The biologically deterministic imperative for tribal identity hegemony to dominate - demonstrating the anatomy and regrettable expressions of tribal instincts with authoritarian characteristics - can easily insatiably and recklessly escalate a system into extremis, where a zero-sum game guarantees mutually assured destruction. Whatever comes next will continue to serve the beast of hegemonic tribal identity, by providing an equivalent system of social control structural violence. The replacement will certainly remain regressive through the retention of church-state system organization, which appears to be superimposing surveillance capitalism and techno-feudalism over the mythology and propaganda of Western liberalism, and the faux-secularization of the church-state system, until presumptive eventual Geo-political and ecocidal dissolution.
![Global Capitalism: A Marxist Critique of Capitalism for 2024 [May 2024]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HBLJ7UAqXSo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thank you, Professor! So helpful in helping us put these ideas forward, I'll be sharing this one with a lot of people for sure.
Not just old religions and capitalism tell people they get what they deserve, it's also new age and "Oprah." Ex. if you're not "positive enough," then you're not drawing good things to you. So it's your fault. And while they blame you, and make you feel bad about yourself (lost, moping in and incapacitated by depression and ego), you never realize that its the system that's actually done it to you.
It's a broader, sociological perspective that's needed to see through all of the commercial, materialistic, superficial (social media, esp), capitalistic garbage we're mired in daily.
Indeed, I would say a huge uncoincidental part of this is the social mapping offered by Protestantism in particular, which similarly to capitalism sweeping away the feudal social order (with massive assistance from the black plague, leading to the enclosure movement) formed out of a breakaway with institutionalized religion and instead prefigured a personal, individualized, relationship with god, and is of course one of the hegemonic cultural understandings of the settler colonies (and a large part of the rationale many of them ventured into the unknown, to escape persecution...and establish their _own_ persecution unfortunately of course). Many more dimensions of this of course, but that built-in Protestant/Calvinist/Puritan predestination concept reifies itself into this notion of work and becomes sort of the "spirit of capitalism" as Weber put it famously in the appropriately titled The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. In its most precocious and insidious form, the synthesis of these social/material mappings becomes that "prosperity gospel" that all those megachurches preach (Mormons are probably the most interesting/insane yet simultaneously self-contained and thus pretty brilliant evolution of this, but that's a huge tangent in itself, I'll just note the Utah wars and such which are pretty nuts and the name Reed Smoot because it is hilarious; Matt Christman has a great/entertaining outline of some the history there for anyone intrigued in his "Inebriated Past" series).
Thorstein Veblen also notable in terms of the last thing you're mentioning with his conception of "conspicuous consumption", and is also clearly the Justin Long of the early 20th century (googling a picture will make sense of this bad joke).
@@Bisquick Yes, but I think it's religion (or anything of societal makings) more broadly that's to blame. They all end up in about the same place.
Catholics feel no remorse for harmful actions, because everything they do is easily forgiven. A different angle, but you can't say it doesn't play into capitalism. Perfect alignment, even.
@CEV12 "Ex. if you're not "positive enough," then you're not drawing good things to you. So it's your fault." - The antidote to that kind of mindset has always been (and will remain so, for the foreseeable future) this: *"What is your evidence of that (intrinsic) fault?"*
Nice post. I heard something last year, George Carlin: "It's the American Dream because you would have to be asleep to believe it." I call them the 50,000 homeless Elvis Pressleys in Hollywood!
Good writing, like a professor yourself. I studied Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and I thought everyone is stuck at level 3 belonging. If we watch CELEBRITY APPRENTICE and spend our time trying to out do others, or SEX AND THE CITY and invest in bizarre, creepy relationship ideas, we'll never be able to get together with others.
We're so lucky to have you! I wish Prof Wolff were our Secretary of Labor.
Благодарю Вас профессор. Я говорю и понимаю английский язык в достаточной мере. Но лучше я напишу Вам на языке, на котором я думаю.
Вы как всегда убедительны, профессор. Ваши аргументы неожиданны и ориинальны даже для нас людей, которые пытались построить коммунизм в Советском Союзе. Ваши лекции интересны и нам бывшим советским людям своей логикой и оригинальностью, потому что Ваш взгляд на коммунизм происходит из современного капиталистического общества, тогда как мы пришли к марксизму другим путем, родившись и изучая марксизм и научный коммунизм в социалистическом обществе в СССР. Тем не менее мы приходим к одним и тем же выводам: Вы - профессор из капиталистических США и мы - бывшие советские люди.
Марксизм и коммунизм - это будущее человечества. Вот этот вывод.
Профессор, нам вместе надо объединить свои усилия и попробовать совместно развить марксизм. И конечно продолжать с обеих сторон пропагандировать марксизм.
Как говорили классики:
"Учение Маркса всесильно, потому что оно верно!".
Тысячу благодарностей Вам, профессор.
Thank you 🌎 ✊️ 🌹 🗽
Well, to be fair, Marx did see in his life an attempt at establishing an alternative to capitalism. The 1871 Paris Commune.
🎶Too be fair...🎶
On a much larger scale, Marx witnessed the failed revolutions of 1848. These were also attempts at socialism (at least on the part of the working class) which were eventually defeated by the forces of the Concert of Europe (a NATO-like reactionary alliance of kingdoms that was established after the shock of the original French Revolution).
These revolutions kicked off in January of 1848 & by February of 1848, Marx & Engels had written the Communist Manifesto.
And just like as Wolff points out in how these attempts of community were attempted in other times in history, which he didn't have time to detail, the Paris commune fell short like those attempts because the minority used the state and violence to stop those attempts at being achieved and long lasting
We make communism the guestion is how much more money we will see so far is no answer to that.
Prof. Wolff has a remarkable way if explaining things. This video is a half hour spent in a worthwhile way if you want to understand socialism.
Thank you Professor for educating people
Slavery is alive and well in 2022
People over profits now 3/25/22
Be the change
Or be enslaved by big corporate
Want change Boycott
Thank you, Dr. Wolff, once again, for the invaluable service you continue to provide! Our country can and should do better.
I love RICHARD WOLFF!!
Excellent video Prof. Wolff! I love your simple, but profound, explanations of capitalism, feudalism, Marxism etc.
Please explain to me wolffs simple explanation of capitalism? I am stating it clearly right now that any comment made will not answer my question
@@donrastar1579 You think it was too complicated?
@@donrastar1579 "pLeAsE aNsWeR mY qUeStIoN, eVeN tHoUgH i'Ve ToLd YoU tHaT i'M tOo dUmB tO cOmPrEhEnD aNy AnsWeR!" 🤪
Some employees go through new kinds of difficulty when they first learn that they are slaves.
Eventually, some employee-slaves strive to denounce the oppression under which they live, and some slaves seek to become the oppressor.
Straighten out your cap, remove the blinders from your eyes, and choose wisely. You're being recorded. History will remember.
I thought this was a simple explanation yet in 3 days. Still no simple explanation.
@@donrastar1579 Don't worry about it. Maybe, on your own time, when you are not trolling on your completely empty channel that started a few months ago, you can educate yourself. Good luck with that.
Workers' self directed enterprises are very important for the downtrodden human spirit. We have grown too much and struggled for too long to continue being dominated by another simply because "that's how it is". THIS is the way forward because it finally gets to the deep core of the issue. The employer-employee relationship. That same arrangement is what teaches everybody that it is okay for one human to arbitrarily rule another. IT IS NOT OKAY.
Absolutely not . Finally some one who makes a lot of sense ........
A "worker self directed enterprise " is call a corporation. And as long as any entity seeks profits,it is a capitalist entity.
I think the best passage from Marx that encompasses both his thoughts on historical materialism, capitalism, and what he would like to see come out of the resolution of capitalism's contradictions comes from Capital Volume 3:
Muchas Gracias por compartir sus conocimientos Prof. Wolff.
Thx for sharing your knowledge Prof. Wolff.
Richard you are such a gift, unfortunately not the light at the end of the tunnel!!!
We love you🙏🙏
Thank you Professor, Marx pointed in the right direction, but in the US today, the power of the capital aristocracy is too strong, we can't overthrow their rule through violent revolution like Russia and China, we can only pray for the day when the empire collapses from the inside..
Plenty of 25-year-olds are getting starting salaries of $150K with huge quarterly bonuses. The system ensures there are just enough highly successful winners to keep all the losers fantasizing they'll make those big bucks someday.
Although I get the framing of “democracy in the workplace,” I tend to view Marx’s critique in behavioral terms (which Marx could not do because that vocabulary had not been invented yet): those who are subject to the contingencies of reinforcement (e.g., the conditions under which they get or don’t get at least some portion of the surplus) should be, to the extent possible, the ones who arrange those contingencies. If you don’t have that “identity,” you get what you get under slavery, feudalism, and capitalism: those doing the arranging arrange to get more of the reinforcer (e.g., in Marx’s terms, the surplus) than others and subject others to more aversive conditions (e.g., unsafe work environments, long hours, low pay, etc., under capitalism) if those conditions lead to more reinforcement for those doing the arranging.
thx Richard for taking the time to offer a fresh perspective on these ideas! very helpful.
Nice returning to the roots. More of this please and thank you.
Always informative, always truthful, thank you sir.
Thank you Professor.
The real difficulty here is convincing the very people who have a hold on the world power and decision making say and ability to make change to let go of their grip on their precious wealth and power.
These peoples over-the-top greed and selfishness are a very difficult obstacle to resolve.
Difficult, but not impossible. It will just take a lot of hard work.
We are the majority. It isn't about making the minority in power to give it up willingly. It's about convincing the majority to take that power from the minority by forced if necessary. We have the power if we choose to wield it.
Naaah, just eat them..
Thank you
Excellent talks thank you professor.
Comrade Wolff you are a force for change. You have defused all of the capitalist promoters, and apologists arguments.
Thank you, Prof. Wolff!
One thing I really like about Marx is his imagining a better world for all. But I don't think we have that capacity in the US anymore. We have no community except maybe sports teams. Our God is money. It's every man for himself. How often do you hear someone say "I don't want to pay for someone else's healthcare"?
The Tories have won.
I'm bothered by people on right wing sites nonchalantly posting we should go to war. Do they mean, "you should go to war, and I'll stay here and go get a pizza?" Like famous musicians saying "people need jobs." Oh, and meanwhile he'll be writing poetry? He means, "you need jobs."
Ty
Might be nice to have a 102 version of this lecture. I have been listen to Prof Wolff way before Democracy@Work. The high level Marx critique of Capitalism is a common topic. But once in awhile, Prof. Wolff would discuss other interesting theories of marx like alienation of gattungswesen.
Another interesting insight I got and has kept in mind is that Governments are fundamentally a creation of all of us. It is not a separate entity that commoner might think (or at least I did). I think of it as a school project being done by a group of 10. And they way coordinate and make decisions is, I argue , a form of government. And the success of such government is dependent on it's members. Should majority of the members do not participate, then the project may likely end in failure. Picking your group leaders and leaving them be - is not gonna work ain't it?
And this, I argue, is fundamentally similar to a group of people with a project called 'living together'. The more people, the more complex it gets. Simply voting during elections and leaving the leaders be is not gonna work. Identifying the problems of our government, one of which is the terrible influence of Capitalism, is fundamentally a problem we (living together in a small rock) all have to solve.
Thanks Prof' for your plain speaking way of explaining Marxist theory and its potential for improving on capitalism. The more we inform ourselves about the problems associated with a profit driven socio-economic system the more chance we have of reducing poverty, social inequality and indeed making our world a safer place; well done.
Amazing
I like Prof Wolfe explanation that Marxism is merely a criticism of Capitalism. I live in old age and poverty, and there is a horror to seeing people all around me as if they have been somehow made fools of to believe each one can become rich and famous while secretly looking at family and friends thinking they cannot. So we can agree, there is no easy answer, but we know what we are living in needs improvement.
Start a commune
Waiting for your program... From india
Bingo!!!!!!!!!! Prof. Wolff Bravo ..........Working Slaves ............
Thank you so much, Dr. Wolff! I appreciate your tireless devotion to untangling and elucidating these topics. Had I to do it again, I would’ve given much more attention to the study of economics. It’s fascinating-and affects us all.
16000 people viewed this within 24 hours 🙏.the work "The Capital" is the most anti labour narrative in world. But those who don't read the text it is good work. 🙏
Thanks for explaining this. I hear Conservatives say Marxist or Marxism all the time, & they have absolutely no clue what those terms mean.
What a great video 👏👏👏👏
Thanks Prof. for your content...can you please clarify the chair manufacturing example, why you said that the security person is not producing a service, wouldn't his service be "security services"? Am I missing something? Please clarify, thanks 💗🍃
The security guard isn't producing anything, and in this context, they have no contributing value. It's a spiral of arguments to justify the existence of security guards that intersects many different academic fields.
@@Tetragrammaton22 thanks 💗🍃, I had a feeling is a rabbit hole of arguments to justify the "security services" lol
Even if the workplace is democratized, there will still be hierarchy, and there will still be positions of status. Practically speaking, people aren't equal, although certain minimums can be supplied to everyone. People will still seek out status and wealth under any system, including socialism. This should be recognized, as capitalists will point to this as a reason why socialism is flawed in its striving for equality, while capitalism claims to deal with this flaw by embracing status and wealth rather than suppressing it. I don't agree with or support the dominance of capitalism, but rather I make this point because I want to find out how to counter it.
I hear this point a lot, too. The notion that people "naturally" behave in any kind of way, in this case that we seek wealth, reminds me of the way that people often misinterpret the phrase "survival of the fittest" to mean "survival of the strongest," when "fit" here is better understood as "fitting in."
Humans have survived in many kinds of harsh conditions; we're pretty good at adapting. You're staring at a piece of plastic hearing a voice in your head because just a bit ago, I was tapping my thumbs against another piece of plastic. And for us this is mundane; I'm annoyed with myself for attempting to make it sound less so.
We have organized a society that rewards wealth-seeking behavior. And it's been working this way for thousands of years. So we'd be forgiven for assuming that humans naturally seek wealth, when really we're just adapting to our surroundings.
Ideas like socialism, communism, and anarchism ask us to build a new society that rewards more mutually beneficial activity in place of that wealth-seeking.
This is already super long, but I recommend searching for "Emma Goldman human nature" and reading what she had to say on it. I'm really just badly regurgitating that passage.
@@kellythomas4432 based on personal observation, it seems there is a “range” of wealth-seeking. Some people have their sole eye upon “the main chance,” while more - possibly *many* more - look at it now and then. Often this second situation *only applies to the degree that hunger and privation goads one into doing so.*
Finally, there is another portion of people who dislike the mere idea of that accursed “main chance,” and wished it did not exist!
No body complain over good feelings.i guess even if folks were seeing results from working the way they do, no complain. People complain because they work like machines just to maintain the basic, and alot of folks are still falling short. a roof over thy head and food on thy table.
I more like your just working 2-3 jobs to survive, not really living . It sucks, retired early and moved overseas. My quality of life is so much better and no constant stress and anxiety. Yes, I’ve had enough.even though I lived in a beautiful apartment in Waikiki, it used to be paradise, now it’s totally unaffordable, epidemic of homeless everywhere, crumbling infrastructure, horrible traffic.
Explains the democratic nature of socialism. There are no bosses in socialism.
Is there a transcript of the entire talk available? If so, could you post a link to it? It would be much appreciated.
Thank you Professor, I disagree with your ideas but will always respect you.
@Nes Danziger "I disagree with your ideas" - Really? In what way?
I wonder how Richard Wolff feels seeing a resurgence of socialist ideas and people identifying as socialists. To go from people who still remember intense Cold War & Red Scare propaganda, to a generation of people begging those like Richard Wolff for answers and solutions. I hope it makes him hopeful. It must be a big change.
As always a succinct and informative commentary. Part of me thinks that we need to consider all of the workers of Southeast Asia who work for less per day than many of us spend on a fast food meal. If we did not have the upper hand in the global economy, our system would be different in ways that are hard to imagine -- some better, some worse I tend to think.
Thanks, Prof Wolff. i wish I'd known this - quite a while back! That Church-Capitalist analogy is too close for comfort. No wonder it isn't widely discussed - in the US. I'm also amused by the notion of a 'Protestant Work Ethic' - really, an acknowledgment of the link you're mentioning. As if those who built the Pyramids, or Renaissance Italy - must have been secret Protestants! And now on to Amazon for yr book. Thanks again!
Old age and trickery will always outdo youth and ambition. There's always that.
Wish to see Prabhat Patnaik as a guest in the show someday
Mr. Wolff,is "Democracy at work " an LLC?
It think it's a tax exempt 501(c)(3)
@@CesarGarcia-og8rz it sure is. Thats why Wolff doesn't pay for his transportation, food,hotels,cloths,computers and anything else he can write off. This guy is a hypocrite at every level. "And of course if you could help us financially" lmao. His whole production costs about $12 a month hahaha
Συγχαρητήρια.. RICHARD WOLFF..Τα..εξηγας.. τόσον..οραια.. τόσον.. απλά..που..δεν . υπάρχει περίπτωσης να..μην..το..καταλαβενουν.. Είστε..και.. ο.πρωτος..πραβο..και.....εις..ανωτερα..ειστε..σπουδεος...απο..κυπρο..
Red salute to Professor Richard Wolff
With him good times with struggle
Why don't you use the therm bourgeoisie? Isn't that more correct than employer?
Slavery sounds just like capitalism
both are rooted in the historical development of "property"
The two are nothing alike, but as usual commies cannot understand what false equivalence means.
@@ExPwner Explain how they are different... Just trying to insult people isn't helpful.
@@blogintonblakley2708 capitalism is an economic system of private property ownership and control. Slavery is a system of some people owning others. The difference is self explanatory to anyone who is not a blatant sophist.
@Jari Honkaniemi exactly. These people are delusional.
Marx is easier to understand once you realize that money is not the fuel, but the lubricant of an economy.
Capitalism is "running out if gas" indeed. Great work Professor and greetings from Germany.
Dr. Thomas Sowell was a Marxist in his youth. He wrote a book called “ Marxism “ philosophy and economics. His doctoral thesis was on Marx, and yet he didn't arrive at ( not even close ) the same conclusion on Marxism and capitalism as you have.
Is it just me or did Prof. Wolff jack that Eminem beat for his into music from "Moment of Clarity" off the Black Album" 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
You should do a collaboration with Yanis Varoufakis and explore his idea of Corpo-Syndicalism.
I enjoy this show on a regular basis. But as I was watching this episode, I realized something that is present in much Marxist discourse but somewhat absent in your particular discussion. And that is, the planning of a Marxist economy. For example, in Yugoslavia, there was a market economy with worker coops. So the means of production were controlled democratically by workers, but it was a market that determined the distribution of goods and services. Such a market can lead to competition and eventually monopolies where workers are exploited indirectly via the price of their labour in the marketplace. Therefore it arises the question, of what role the state should play in the revolution of the workplace. Should it be a centrally planned economy? Should it be planned decentrally via workers councils. We need to look at how the rich countries with workers coops will extract superprofits from the poor countries with worker coops. In other words, more than just workers coops are needed, to ensure globally the workers can create an equal and just world.
Marx said that productivity determines the relations of production. I think the level of human productivity today cannot support the market economy with workers’ cooperatives, or can’t compete with capitalism. What the government should do, look at China, it should be The best balance between socialism and capitalism can be achieved at the current level of productivity.
btw, I don't believe that a one-person, one-vote democracy can manage a company or even a country well. Humans always need elite leaders. This is a natural law.
@@ashavahishta7023 Where this particular analysis falls apart, for example in the economic calculation problem, is when we examine the pitiful handling of the supply chain by market-driven distribution. Empty store shelves, expensive gas, and a nation without a functioning healthcare system, we may as well go back to living in caves. Socialism effectively removes the profit incentive to commodify goods and services, allowing an already grossly productive society to distribute goods and services more equitably. The problem is not that we don't need elites... it's that we can't oust them, due to people's stupidity in believing individualist bourgeois ideology.
I would be interested in whether globalization complicates the issue that the Prof spoke about here.
Where do I sign up to be one of those who do not work? That is something I can get behind!
Do a progam about scabs. Scabs destroy the systems. Greed is more powerful than fairness.
Wait a minute. Isn't the security dude providing a service?
Surplus redistribution largely happens across states under the name of geoarbittrage now. In that sense the community nowadays is cross state. Which one take the first move, forming up community own business or achieving true globalization?
I'd contend the answer isn't "Either-Or," but "Both-And." Community-owned businesses don't have to negate globalization, nor vice versa. Both are necessary to some extent. The bigger question is how would they work in conjunction.
CEO , Board of Directors ,Vice President , Stock Holders , Slaves .........
A thought just occurred to me. If rich countries paid laborers better, goods could be produced by populations in the US and we would not have supply chain issues. Is that correct?
However, if goods were produced in the US, wouldn’t their costs be astronomically high since laborers would have to be paid better?
Depends on how much the board members and CEOs were determined to keep for themselves.
Near the end, he mentions that accursed notion of Social Darwinism, aided abetted by “religion” - which is the precise opposite of what it should be doing!
General. Delivery zip code postage stamp
I will say rather hilariously, as I had always assumed as well until I saw this in an interview with him, Piketty _wasn't_ cleverly nodding to Marx with his book Capital. Weirdly, and I don't even know how this is possible, but he said something like _"I wasn't aware of this, I haven't really looked into Marx."_ which is kinda bananas. But yeah, besides the point obviously, other than it shows one can arrive at the same conclusion entirely independently, just a little uh "fun" fact I guess.
Collective sharing is logical imo
Correction: Not the whole sheep into a sweater, just the wool.
You can't really comment on Marx until you've read him for yourself. Far too many people think they know better because they read someone who fit their narrative better (like Mises, Sowell), or, more likely, just heard "Marxism" attacked by prominent people supporting that narrative (as with Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro and others). You can't just cherry-pick quotes someone else gave you and believe you understand anything beyond what that someone wanted you to think. Likewise, you can't criticize the ideas without first understanding them, which requires study, and if you're not willing to study, then you have no business acting like you know anything.
Too many leftists bash their heads against walls trying to defend Marxism from people like I just described. It's important to help people become informed, but capitalists are brainwashed so hard that they can't imagine anything else being anything but worse, and many even see social democracy, a more "fair" version of capitalism, as a bad system that can only work in (and this is the part where they out themselves as bigots, even if they try to word it "safely") heterogenous white-people countries.
I don't like everything Wolff says, particularly about "types of socialism" (he knows better, but he dumbs it down for the masses) and some other things, but he is one of a very few people who are reasonably good sources for this side of things in the United States. Right wingers dominate everything (Democrats are center-right with very few exceptions), even though they like to play the perpetual victim (and strongman), so their narrative is the only one that most people are ever exposed to, even if you account for the differences between Democrats and Republicans. Wolff's content on worker democracy, specifically worker cooperatives, is generally good (I haven't heard him mention Mondragon lately, which is good since they have changed for the worse). His criticisms of capitalism are very appropriate and relevant. He's not perfect, but we need more like him to make "balanced views" actually mean something beyond "center right vs far far far right." And on top of that, more people need to actually read what Marx, Lenin, and even Mao wrote, so that even if they don't agree, AT LEAST they'll know what was really said. It would be even better if they would also study to try and understand what was meant and what the historical context (what was going on at the time and why) was.
That's what's needed...but in the United States, that's exactly what won't happen, because anything that runs counter to the pro-capitalist, imperialist, (white) ultra-nationalist narrative is rejected before ever letting a critical thought form.
Since Marx actually knew what capitalism was ( as does Michael Hudson ) and
his predictions regarding it were wrong...as it did not result in the abolishment
of the rentier class which was and is enabled by the government, his critiques are
irrelevant...and since he had even less of an understanding of human behavior
and what drives it, he really has nothing to offer and can be discarded completely.
And worker co-ops are capitalist, with the democratic elements simply making them
more inefficient, poorly adaptable and less competitive
One does not need to spend time reading tons of Marx to understand the central ideas put forth by Marx and Marxists and prove them wrong. We are not the propagandized ones, you are, and we prove it constantly through explaining what you got wrong, why you got it wrong and with hard data to back it up as well.
Corporations ruined this country.
Red Salute
A teacher's hypothesis to his MA students in response to a more or less the same question: capitalism with its logical form, i.e., some European democracies (liberal democracy vs. Social democracy) continue till the forces of history such as natural limitations produce the "necessary" system. This does not happen by Marx's Manifesto as that tactic belongs to the past centuries, but by Marx's science of real historical changes, hence post-Marxism.
One of the problems I find with all the various organizational strategies tried by civilization is that none of them really come to terms with the fundamental flaws in civilization. For example, systems of hierarchical authority inevitably elevate the most ruthless and self interested individuals into positions of authority. We've watched civilization after civilization fall apart from internal rot for precisely this reason. The other two examples of fatal flaws that generally aren't addressed are agriculture and how property/ownership play into xenophobia to cause conflict, stratification and system instability.
Because of this civilization is facing the distinct possibility of CAUSING human extinction.
Seen in these terms, it becomes difficult to consider civilization as progress from 188,000 years of hunter gatherer living.
the way out of capitalism would be to make it financially worthwhile for people to SHARE the jobs we can agree we NEED people to do and work much less...no more uselessly working and doing anything FOR money. ...and no such thing as unemployment for anyone fit and healthy. It isn't really hard to work out the difference between the jobs we NEED people to do compared to all the millions of jobs we don't NEED to have done. There are no slaves when people are sharing the work they NEED to have done.
We don't even need to make it financially worthwhile. We just need it to give people a better incentive than the threat of violence.
Humans don't actually need more than that. We can organize just fine without a financial incentive
@@LexiH36 but the type of society Wolfe advocates for would require exactly that ( threat of violence)in order to implement it. If there is no financial incentive then how would there ever be any progress? Do you think cattle ranchers would work their hands to the bone to get beef and milk to NYC out of the goodness of their heart?
@@LexiH36 All the time we use money there is no other way possible to get people to ever be willing to share the jobs we NEED people to do...they will all tell you (almost regardless of how much they earn) they cannot afford to live on any less money.
@@nobonesaboutit7639 yes actually. Most people don't want to see other people go hungry. Farmers did this during the great depression actually. If it didn't cost them anything to farm then they would not mind giving away their surplus. Especially to their neighbors.
@@LexiH36 but if you eliminate the dollar then hiw do you measure supply and demand? You would then need to appoint someone to dictate peoples needs and wants which is basically impossible.
With the power of the workforce of the US the transition to socialism would be a cinch.
If you don’t have the money to buy from the capitalist the working class goes without and the capitalists do not have the buyers in the working class.
Money makes the working class a class of buyers for the capitalists and the capitalist class, a class of sellers, to the working class in the market. But in production both social classes of employers and employees are dependent on the productivity of the working class and in this dependency arises a contradiction that neither of the social classes are fully emancipated from class and productivity is not freed from its constant tension between work and the commodity labor-power for the working class, always working to live while the other social class lives to work constructing a social, political, and economic superstructure with the free time the working class produces. The question by what political right is the free time produced by the working class the property of the capitalist class has one answer found in the social transformation of society not in the library or law books but in society itself. An excellent video, thank you professor.
The employer doesn't work, like the CEO of that chair factory?
I don't like our system and I think Basic Income should be in place. But isn't that going too far to say employers are like feudal lords who don't work?
It's amazing how many mix Marx with Lenin, Stalin and China. Until you realize how nobody teaches about Marx or how economics and government may be two separate things. Really amazing is how economics and government are so intertwined in the USA that many see it as different from other capitalism, especially China, these days.
Most people, even many who call themselves "Marxists," haven't actually read any of those authors, but instead let other people tell them what they said. Uncritically accepting second/third-hand sources as the truth has caused many leftists to believe a lot of the propaganda, so it's no wonder that people mix things up. Not many people teach Marx in the US, but even fewer teach Lenin or Mao, or dissect what actually happened under Stalin beyond what US propaganda sold everyone on (I suggest checking out Michael Parenti on some of that media manipulation, but also looking at criticisms of The Gulag Archipelago, the Black Book of Communism, declassified intelligence reports, and other stuff).
Most people even the ones that call themselves " capitalist" have never read the wealth of nations..
The environmental collapse that is currently playing itself out will push global trade towards collapse. Countries will be forced to rely on locally made goods. If a workers coop company becomes the dominant business model, it will have to operate under a stricter government regime. The existing Capitalist model supports a low regulation small government society. This is failing society. The Capitalist model needs to address these issues:
* All countries must move to a fossil free society with an environmentally sustainable, renewable energy society.
* Carbon emissions dictates limits on personal consumption. There is a need for governmental control over what gets produced, how it is produced and the extent to which it is consumed.
* Over population is driving consumption, pollution and emigration. The global community needs to agree universal laws on strict birth control, family size and marriage age. Immigration grows a society like Capitalism creates inequality and needs to stop.
Economic Update should widen the discussion on future economic models to include these competing pressures. How will we move to an environmentally constrained, low carbon, low consumption, low population society? You should keep in mind that a failure meet these criteria, will result in the extinction of the human race, putting Marxist theory in the academically irrelevant basket. Ie. Don't be too fixated with Marxist Theory to the exclusion of all else.
We are in the final stages of capitalism when it's a career to be paid to walk with someone, a service that was between family and friends, or family hire a death doula because they are too tightly committed to take time of to comfort their dying.
"Capitalism is transitory". This is a key point. Capitalist realism has convinced us that the world will end before capitalism ends, but we need to realize that serfs living in the 16th century could probably not foresee a society without monarchs and lords.
WHAT IS CHINA AND USA MEETING FOR IN ROME?
MY GUESS :
US: Don't sell Weapons alone. We need 60-40 partnership.
CHINA : 50-50. We need win win cooperation.
US: OK but we need raw materials for our Weapon companies which you sanctioned.
China : OK, withdraw sanctions on our TECH Companies.
US: Agreed but don't disclose the agreement as we didn't disclose Yuan Lab cooperation between China and USA.
I agree with what you say on the most part but there is only one problem and that is the human condition there being no one to blame for the ills of everything. At the moment workers can blame employers but if we are all happy who can we blame. People are very aggressive and they like to fight and argue and that is why there are bosses because they keep the people from arguing and fighting at work otherwise we would not need a police force. So I think the Community theory is good in theory but wont work in practice, it should be able to, but it simply wont work. There will always be someone that thinks I am better than you and I can do it better than you and they will challenge you unless you can drive that out of our psyche then it wont work. Perhaps capitalism made us that way idk. It's like that with countries the US always prides itself with being No 1 what if all countries were equal.
So you’re saying that the original plantation owners that have passed on their family corporations aren’t trying to enslave citizens today globally?
Marx's main mistake is to believe that all people are the same.
When did he say that? Quite the opposite. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" - Marx
What about the bum & leach
C'mon man, stop talking about "real human behavior" it messes up the fantasy
these "mystics" are trying to sell.
Marx died on march 14th, so this would be a tribute payed to him.
China's Xi JinPing.. has the answer... The wealth of the nation belongs to the people.. Corporations can make huge sums of money...but at some point there is a limit and all the profit above the limit is turned over to the government to care for the people...
Unearned income, rent seeking society
You have to be kidding. Is this a skit for a theatre group?
He is just that much of a hack.
An excellent lecture!
Not to say I agree with everything said. But I do, now more than ever, believe it needs to be heard.
I was brought up to believe that Capitalism and Democracy were of the same coin. Now, as I enter old age, I have discovered that this is not necessary the case. In fact, it seems more and more obvious that, at least right now, the two are contradicting one another.
I am not sure that this is necessarily because of the faults of capitalism, or if it is just due to the tendency in human nature for those, who have power and access to opportunity, to hoard such power and access to opportunity for themselves and their children.
This trait seems to be universal.
Getting rid of capitalism will not likely cure it.
Why?
I'll tell youbtwo stories.
First.
When I wasvin my early 20's, I worked in a vitamin factory, in which we the workers were represented by The Teamsters union.
Contract time was coming up, and the usual corrupt ploy was was in play. The steward would become a supervisor, and maybe one or two committee members too, after the contract talks ended. The Union local leadership would get a payoff of a few thousand dollars, and the deal would be done. Little did I know, when this started, that I would end up being the first button to pop, upending this scheme. And that I would be black listed for over two years for my trouble.
Anyway, I soon found myself in the center of the fire storm I had unwittingly ignited.
While this was going on, I spoke with a truck driver, who was there to pick up a load. I asked him why (when we are both in the same union) he should make considerably more money doing his job than we should doing ours.
I will never forget his answer.
He said that his job was more complicated and important than ours. And this was the reason.
I immediately realized two truths:
1.) That he wanted to always make more than us, and
2.) That he wouldn't likely be above cooperating with a system that kept this so.
It was then I realized that the union movement was doomed. The PATCO strike, which happened just two years later, confirmed my suspicions.
Second.
A year or two ago, I asked an immigrant co-worker why he risked so much to not only leave his country, Cameroon, but insist on coming to The US, even after successfully immigrating to Western Europe.
He told me that, in Europe, he was offered security. And that here, in The US, he was offered opportunity. Most likely not for himself, but for his children. And almost certainly not EQUAL opportunity, but at least SOME opportunity.
And he is not the first or only immigrant I worked with to tell me this.
Are you sure we can’t throw our sullen and surly teenagers in the woods?
Only if you throw their greedy and unrestrained parents in a cave.
Marxism has a lot to offer us. He's dated, for sure. Where I live we have Hutterite Communities who practice feudalism. Gas station who operate as local co-ops. We have small businesses who are capitalistic. We have health care that is high grade socialist. We have corporations who are owned by shareholders and rely on government support. Their are farmers who are family enterprises where the profits are shared by family members who don't take the operation. What would Marx think? Well he would be happy to compare these disparate systems within a free society.
@Jari Honkaniemi Capitalism kills... Two world wars... climate change... genocide after genocide. But ultimately it's a silly way to evaluate systems that all operate on basically the same three principles. 1) Agriculture 2) Hierarchical authority 3) Property/ownership
The most dishonest, manipulative and deceitful monologue I have heard in a long time. I enjoy much of RT in spite of this poor misguided soul. I hope the current and emerging generation Z is astute enough to not be beguiled by this kind of nonsense.
Workers of the wo4ld...
….stop wasting time listening to Marxists. Get to work and produce something of value.
@@bluewater454 Like climate change?
@@blogintonblakley2708
That is another thing I don’t waste my time over, worrying about the weather.
Side bar, your honor?
What was the point about your illustration of the “guy in the jeep” doing apparently security for the company? Are you saying that he doesn’t produce anything of value? You seemed to indicate that he simply fed off the surplus of the other workers without producing anything.
There's a productive Working class and the non-productive working class ...
@@rogerioseabra1420 So, keeping your work safe from theft and vandalism is not productive work?
@@bluewater454 nope ...is not .
I think his main point is that the employees should get to decide which services the company would need and not the employer and at what price. Providing a service, like security, is a service and there is value to it. You could have an entire company that provides security, but it can be wholly owned by the workers that provide that service.
the contradictions of labor and capital are such that it breeds the need for capital to have hired security. Adam Smith actually wrote something similar in The Wealth of Nations :
Master of deception
61% of United States (US) citizens are dissatisfied with our government. The US government (USG), therefore, has a big fat “F” grade from “We the People”! Why? Capitalism is not the correct economic system for a democracy. In fact, capitalism is the worst system for a democracy. Do you know that 9 of the 10 richest men in the world are US citizens, while, at the same time, the US was the epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic? Democracy requires a system, whereby the workers decide what to do with the surplus of their labor. Democracy would, therefore, be inevitable if the community were in charge of the workplace. If that were possible, the USG would then get a big fat “A”. We must abolish capitalism to get a democracy!
Splish splash, democracy is trash.
And “surplus labor value” doesn’t exist. See Bohm Bawerk and the last century of economic thought.
What happens when you a bunch of lazy people that are able that don't work?
The element of religion runs throughout human instincts, psychology, and institutions, because the unique exceptionalistic self-interested identities endemic to human tribalism synthesize ethnocentrism, monotheism, and ultra-nationalism into a single integrated identity, such as white Christian nationalism, and white supremacy. This non-negotiable identity remains endemic to the hegemony of elites, oligarchy, and plutocracy, and to approximately forty percent of populism - more if the white gentrified reactionary authoritarian liberal technocrats are included - including all those that eagerly consume false flags, imperial greatness, and pay reactionary tribal fealty to Party and state authority (i.e. the tribal causality for Gramscian hegemony).
Consequently, because of this single integrated identity, the routine authoritarian policing of tribal purity, sanctity, and exceptionalism inflicts religious moralizing that makes value decisions about individuals, and then those moral values are made a material reality through direct actions, and through entire systems of structural violence, where the economic structural violence of capitalism performs this social control function. Immediate tribal calculus determines yes/no status on possessing the correct ethnocentrism and monotheism, and relatedly, if one is sufficiently territoriality nationalist, where non-pass and low anti-imperialist marks are punished, and processed through the system of structural violence. For example, the extreme degree of profits and inequality that capitalism produces were never a problem for capitalism, because these abstractions perform a function of social control. The more these abstractions scale upwards, the greater white supremacy achieves the authoritarian ability to control the narrative.
Bear in mind the total systemic function of a tribe, or nation, where a nation must preserve the certain predictable ability to rapidly scale-up the cannon fodder mobilization of populations to war. This ability is greatly enhanced by a god-fearing people responding to defending a god-favored nation, remaining authority-compliant, and dummied-down by poverty with lack of sophistication and options, including by remaining easily inflamed by nationalist rhetoric. Nature itself, may design Homo sapiens tribal success through a regrettably narrow regressive violent filter. The only hope Homo sapiens may have is using our big brains sentience and intelligence to objectify and transcend the degree to which nature determined us poorly, and achieve a sustainable paradigm-shift in the direction of systems-based science-based eco-socialism.
Meanwhile, the flow of godly blessings has always been funneled through the tribal element that retains ownership (both establishment and defense of) the founding tribal identity and organizational relationship with deistic exceptionalism, specifically the authoritarian and theocratic symbiosis representative of the church-state system. The church-state system has found a variety of expressions, spanning Tribal Chieftain and Shaman; Warlords and Spiritual Advisor; Egyptian Pharaoh God-Kings and Priest-Class; Military Dictatorships; Theocracies; God-favored King Feudalism; and even the Western experiment faux-secularization of the church-state system. A legacy system that unfortunately reproduces the exact same anthill authoritarian institutional hierarchy, demonstrating militarism, religion, politics, economics, and culture; where militarism and religion are always prioritized and subsidized; and where regressive authoritarian right-wing organization is normalized within politics, economics, and culture.
If progressive socialism representing cultural evolution learned anything useful it would be that while this regressive reactionary authoritarian theocratic right-wing element exists (in point of fact, the entirety of tribal causality actually responsible for Gramscian hegemony), this elements raison d'etre will continue to undermine both egalitarian democracy and economics, and only through absence of its influence can progress ever be achieved. Otherwise, Western liberalism that manufactures consent for capital and the church-state, and establishment social science, will frame human state of nature theory through establishment-friendly reductionism to individualism, and Marxism will remain philosophical constructionism that exists in contradiction to the evolutionary biology and biological determinism of self-interested human tribalism. Moreover, capitalism will remain ubiquitously ruled/inflicted by patriarchal authoritarians (elites, oligarchs, and billionaire plutocrats) whom represent the regressive fundamentalist identities of white Christian nationalism, and white supremacy, or whatever tribal identity exceptionalism and supremacy they might represent.
Endemic to this tribal identity and authoritarian infliction is the libertarian and religious moralizing that perceives the multiracial multicultural wage-labor working class as an out-group identity, which to tribal instincts remains indistinguishable from any other out-group identity that constitute evil subhuman enemies. Consequently, it is easy for tribal identity elites, oligarchs, and plutocrats, to become ideologically disassociated and disconnected from the working class, to develop anti-social pathologies directed at the working class, and to rationalize subjecting the multiracial multicultural wage-labor working class to lesser fates, to second-class status, and to the destitution, sickness, and death resulting from austerity, artificial scarcity, and abject abuse.
The biologically deterministic imperative for tribal identity hegemony to dominate - demonstrating the anatomy and regrettable expressions of tribal instincts with authoritarian characteristics - can easily insatiably and recklessly escalate a system into extremis, where a zero-sum game guarantees mutually assured destruction. Whatever comes next will continue to serve the beast of hegemonic tribal identity, by providing an equivalent system of social control structural violence. The replacement will certainly remain regressive through the retention of church-state system organization, which appears to be superimposing surveillance capitalism and techno-feudalism over the mythology and propaganda of Western liberalism, and the faux-secularization of the church-state system, until presumptive eventual Geo-political and ecocidal dissolution.
What is this copypasta
@@OddMeterMusic Yes, I copied the text from my word processor, and then pasted it into the comments text box.