For all its historical faults, the real left traditions as a broader coalition have always maintained a legacy of intellectual excellence and cognitive seriousness. Happy to see even statist parties like CPIM continue that legacy especially under current politico - cultural conditions of mediocrity and decadence. Prof. Patnaik was an absolute treat to listen to, how succinct and how valid and how topically relevant. Long Live Free Speech Jai Hind 🇮🇳🙏
After 1982, the Western world shifted away from the successful Keynesian economic model, embracing a new ideology: neo-liberalism. This shift, driven by a rejection of government intervention in favor of market-driven policies, marked the end of the post-war economic boom that had uplifted the middle class. Since that day, middle-class wages have stagnated, with rising inequality becoming a hallmark of these policies. But the solution to this issue is remarkably simple: return to the principles of classic Keynesian economics, which had once built strong, inclusive economies. John Maynard Keynes, whose ideas shaped the global economy after World War II, argued for a balance between government intervention and market freedom. Under Keynesian principles, government spending in downturns and prudent saving during booms would smooth economic cycles and prevent the inequality that now plagues modern economies. It doesn’t matter which political or economic ideology a country follows-whether it’s capitalism, socialism, or even authoritarianism. What matters is adhering to sound economic principles. China, despite its communist system, is one of the largest beneficiaries of the U.S.-made Keynesian model. The country’s rise is a testament to the effectiveness of Keynesian intervention, with infrastructure spending and economic stimulus fueling its rapid growth. In conclusion, it’s not about choosing between “isms”-whether neoliberalism, socialism, or capitalism-but about adopting a balanced approach. Keynes understood this, and those who embrace his school of thought, be it the West or China, are the ones who succeed.
you mentioned that modern neo-fascist regimes would struggle to drive development due to a lack of support from the international monopolies or banking system. However, historical evidence provides a stark contrast to this assumption. Take, for instance, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi regime. Despite its fascist nature, it received substantial financial backing from international banks, including notable institutions such as Deutsche Bank, J.P. Morgan, and Brown Brothers Harriman. These financial ties were instrumental in funding Nazi infrastructure projects, such as the autobahn and military rearmament, especially during the 1930s. This collaboration between banks and the regime reveals that economic interests can sometimes surpass political and moral considerations. These banks helped facilitate the financing necessary for Hitler’s government to carry out its ambitious infrastructure and military development plans. This historical precedent reminds us that even oppressive regimes can secure international financial backing when it aligns with the profit motives of financial institutions. Although the dynamics of today’s financial systems might differ, the past shows us that economic incentives often influence the availability of funds, even for authoritarian or neo-fascist regimes.
Comrade, the examples you cited to assert rise of fascism are all from Western Europe and US. Asia, Africa and South America were 85% of the planet's population lives this surge is not as much apparent : with the exception of India and Turkey.
Simple. CPIM is the organization that hosted this scholar on this occasion and for this lecture. It makes everything perfectly in place and is as expected from the Communist party to make spaces for intellectual discourses. The only rotten and out of place thing in the context of this video is the presence of prejudiced people on moral high horses like yourself lamenting about the host's name being seen on a video hosted on their own channel.
Lol hundreds, millions of things were not discussed or can be discussed by one speaker in one setting, so? That doesn't mean the speaker was evading or incompetent or fraudulent 😂
As far as state repression is concerned - a Fascist and a Leninist state have certain similarities. But in terms of economic programs and their relevance to social development, communism and fascism are at two opposite ends. They just don't match.
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
For all its historical faults, the real left traditions as a broader coalition have always maintained a legacy of intellectual excellence and cognitive seriousness. Happy to see even statist parties like CPIM continue that legacy especially under current politico - cultural conditions of mediocrity and decadence.
Prof. Patnaik was an absolute treat to listen to, how succinct and how valid and how topically relevant.
Long Live Free Speech
Jai Hind 🇮🇳🙏
Very important ❤ classical delivery.🎉✊
Red salute comrade
This was what we lacked in the public sphere wrt the understanding of neofascism or fascism in general for that matter.
Very good speech.
This is pure knowledge 😊
Listening from kashmir
Ask kashmiri pundits whom you killed they will tell you
Red Salute ! All none Hindi speeches must be translated into Hindi on the screen.
Why only Hindi? All Indian Languages.
unfortunately many will not understand or they'll neglect it. But I am proud to be a member of CPI
@@bauwnduleहिंदी में इसलिए क्योंकि आप आधे भारत तक डायरेक्ट पहुंच सकते हैं। बाकी भाषाएं भी कीमती हैं।
Thanks for your,simply to understand the complex global people's situation....
সোনায় বাঁধিয়ে রাখার মত বক্তৃতা
একদম
Lal Selam
What an enlightening speech!
इस विशिष्ट व्याख्यान का हिन्दी अनुवाद अति आवश्यक है। वैसे यह सब आम बातें नहीं बुद्धिजीवियों के लिए है।
asehmat ..ye aam janta ke liye hain kyonki is se ek aam insaan ka jeevan sabse jyada prabhawit hota hai
❤
After 1982, the Western world shifted away from the successful Keynesian economic model, embracing a new ideology: neo-liberalism. This shift, driven by a rejection of government intervention in favor of market-driven policies, marked the end of the post-war economic boom that had uplifted the middle class. Since that day, middle-class wages have stagnated, with rising inequality becoming a hallmark of these policies.
But the solution to this issue is remarkably simple: return to the principles of classic Keynesian economics, which had once built strong, inclusive economies. John Maynard Keynes, whose ideas shaped the global economy after World War II, argued for a balance between government intervention and market freedom. Under Keynesian principles, government spending in downturns and prudent saving during booms would smooth economic cycles and prevent the inequality that now plagues modern economies.
It doesn’t matter which political or economic ideology a country follows-whether it’s capitalism, socialism, or even authoritarianism. What matters is adhering to sound economic principles. China, despite its communist system, is one of the largest beneficiaries of the U.S.-made Keynesian model. The country’s rise is a testament to the effectiveness of Keynesian intervention, with infrastructure spending and economic stimulus fueling its rapid growth.
In conclusion, it’s not about choosing between “isms”-whether neoliberalism, socialism, or capitalism-but about adopting a balanced approach. Keynes understood this, and those who embrace his school of thought, be it the West or China, are the ones who succeed.
Lal Salam, Comrades. ❤
Compares want destroy jesus first they don't want religion 😂😂😂 tell me which church you want gets finished
Nice ❤❤🎉🎉❤❤
और एक बात मैं यह बाएं और दाहिने दालों में विश्वास नहीं रखना यह यूरोप की संकल्पना है भारत पर लागू नहीं होती। भारत धर्म कर्म के सिद्धांत पर चलेगा।
Bharat dharam khata aur punya hagta hai. Hum biological hi nhi hai 😂
you mentioned that modern neo-fascist regimes would struggle to drive development due to a lack of support from the international monopolies or banking system. However, historical evidence provides a stark contrast to this assumption. Take, for instance, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi regime. Despite its fascist nature, it received substantial financial backing from international banks, including notable institutions such as Deutsche Bank, J.P. Morgan, and Brown Brothers Harriman. These financial ties were instrumental in funding Nazi infrastructure projects, such as the autobahn and military rearmament, especially during the 1930s.
This collaboration between banks and the regime reveals that economic interests can sometimes surpass political and moral considerations. These banks helped facilitate the financing necessary for Hitler’s government to carry out its ambitious infrastructure and military development plans.
This historical precedent reminds us that even oppressive regimes can secure international financial backing when it aligns with the profit motives of financial institutions. Although the dynamics of today’s financial systems might differ, the past shows us that economic incentives often influence the availability of funds, even for authoritarian or neo-fascist regimes.
Nothing works on ground
11:46
Current political apparatus is also a potential persona of fascism
5:10
"Neo chotichaatism & neo vaamchaatism" is the basic characteristics of vaamchatamaal and chotichaatamaal in West Bengal .
Comrade, the examples you cited to assert rise of fascism are all from Western Europe and US. Asia, Africa and South America were 85% of the planet's population lives this surge is not as much apparent : with the exception of India and Turkey.
Explain stalin and putin
Explain Modi and Trump.
Stalin was a perversion of the left to me. He sold out to authoritarians. Many on the left loathe large state socialism of the authoritarian type.
"Tyranny of the just" explains all
I forget one name that is Kim Jo Un
Red salute
A great scholar, speaker and academician. But why is the word 'CPIM' etched in the video? It spoils everything.
Simple. CPIM is the organization that hosted this scholar on this occasion and for this lecture. It makes everything perfectly in place and is as expected from the Communist party to make spaces for intellectual discourses. The only rotten and out of place thing in the context of this video is the presence of prejudiced people on moral high horses like yourself lamenting about the host's name being seen on a video hosted on their own channel.
Why do disturbìng elèments allowed to come and go fŕom ɓèhìnd the speaker who need undivided attention
😅😅😅..Pinarayis kerala is the perfect place to talk on fascism 😂😂
Why Lenin Stalin gruesome aggression in Germany not talked about.
Why Khemer Rouse,Mao Ze Dong,Xi Jinping not discussed.
Why do stupids use the internet?
Lol hundreds, millions of things were not discussed or can be discussed by one speaker in one setting, so? That doesn't mean the speaker was evading or incompetent or fraudulent 😂
They are not fascists stupid
What are you going on about? Name dropping and expecting what exactly?
Because Dictatorship =/= Fascism. There are a lot of dictatorshiips and some of them very tragic but it doesn't make them automatically fascistic.
❤❤😂😂🎉🎉🎉😂😂❤❤😂😂😂🎉🎉😂❤❤🎉🎉
Why can't the same fascism is applicable to Chinese political developments and party.
You can just replace fascism with communists , all the sentences fits to both sides 😅
China / Russia / North Korea all are living examples
As far as state repression is concerned - a Fascist and a Leninist state have certain similarities.
But in terms of economic programs and their relevance to social development, communism and fascism are at two opposite ends. They just don't match.
❤