Marxism, What True Communism Looks Like
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 июл 2020
- In this video Ben Explains Marxism. We discuss what Marxism is, who Karl Marx was and his ideas, and how communist governments have misrepresented Marxist ideas in history.
Sources
europe.unc.edu/iron-curtain/h...
people.howstuffworks.com/comm...
www.britannica.com/topic/comm...
mises.org/library/marxs-theor...
Thanks for watching! This is the format of video I think i'm going to be using more in future videos, let me know how you like it. My next video will be coming out on Friday so stay tuned!
Marxism might work for ants and bees...not for humans
That last part where he says that the communist societies end up being exactly what Karl marx hated 😂
Plato did not propose the city in “Plato’s Republic” as a model of government people should follow. It was a thought experiment. I feel like 99% of people who reference Plato’s Republic have never even seen a copy of it.
I just had this discussion with my professor of philosophical politics
If you read the republic you would know it was more than a thought experiment.
Yeah they were just exploring what the ideal society would be like. He never advocated for it.
But like, why should we not model society off of something that works to benefit everyone? You're just using your understanding of this topic to feel superior. Regardless of whether or not it was a thought experiment has no value in this context.
Just a thought experiment of an ideal society... So we aren't trying to reach an ideal society!?
That's what i usually say to people that Communism itself isn't the issue it's human greed and stupidity, capitalism also suffers from greed and stupidity it just has less ways to directly control people.
Yes. Regulated capitalism accounts for human nature and serves to reward those who deliver value for society.
That's the thing though, Communist/socialist systems don't work because it goes against human nature. Capitalism takes into account Human nature. One swims against the current, the other flows with it.
yeah i always think that the world would be better if humans could change their natural minds.
Because the way we think in general is what shapes the world. that's why we have better lives now then in the past.
i think communism not exactly like the original document could work.
fully automatic society where work is a option is doable, it's just ik people are too self centered to let something like that happen.
it's complicated and doesn't have one answer, however i do know that the mind shapes the environment and if the mind is better at preventing stupidity and greed from seeding itself it'll improve the world maybe not for others but for itself and things it cares about. humanity itself is greedy and self absorbed and if you check how humans behave it's mostly about some sort of greed and self absorbtion, he hates her because she doesn't think this is that. Or she's wrong because she doesn't agree with that person. And so on. all government systems have massive potential but i think a perfect combo based on the situation could be the answer, changing the human mindset and preventing curtain behaviors from happening (by helping people in need and giving people a good learning environment Wich isn't biased), giving everyone the basic rights (basic livable house, decent food for local basic balanced diet, water supply with a max allowed amount meter, same with power and internet) would be a good start,
and it is true because I've seen how if you break people down who hurt and build em back up with a better perspective they'll be better off.
our world will never improve mentally unless we fix what's mentally wrong with it.
@UnusualBug I'm not a Marxist, but when I recently learned about what it actually is, I am shocked how most people have no idea about what it is yet still have the strongest opinions about it. lol
Wrong. It is the opposite because in communism state, class and capital are abolished. Those were state socialism because I agree should be authoritarian and there is nothing wrong about individual dictatorship if he tends to achieve dictatorship of proleteriat through Machiavelism.
Then I need to tell you what the main obstacles to achieving it are and how to overcome them without being decapitated
I believe I have read enough (both communist/socialist and anarchist) theory to warrant actually having an opinion on the matter. To my knowledge, there is no satisfactory answer to the following question of finding a practical way of achieving the desired post-revolution state of affairs ("state", non-state, free territory, free society, whatever you choose to call it).
Now at the risk of oversimplification for the sake of brevity, we can imagine more or less three ways of getting there, some of which are elaborated upon by other authors: 1) gradual societal change, 2) anarchic unhierarchical revolution and 3) organised authoritarian revolution.
If you chose option 1), you end up as either a forever compromising social democrat or as a practically impotent theoretical purist. Neither of these positions leads to any real revolutionary societal change within the next half a dozen generations, thus rendering both rather pointless.
If you go with option 2), there is an extremely high chance of your society's revolutionary potential becomming highjacked by any other more militaristic, hierarchical, power-hungry and straight-forward ideology. See various historical examples.
This type of analysis is the reason why ultimately the overwhelming majority of serious socialist, communist and adjacent revolutionary movements in the end leans towards some form of option 3), and forms a revolutionary vanguard party with the task of blowing up the current system and forcefully establishing the basic institutions of their desired form of revolution. This is realistically the only way of getting real life results in reasonable time-frame, however there are at least three massive problems with this approach, each of which alone is enough to make future generations go "tHiS wAsN't A rEaL cOmMuNiSm" whenever someone mentions it in a political debate. The three problens with option 3) "Authoritarian revolution" are:
A) The people who are willing to actively engage in this type of revolution are too far in the authoritarian end of the spectrum.
B) No matter how just and moral the principles of forced realocation of resources decided by the vanguard party are, the process itself requires a massive centralised authority backed by violence to enforce the function of this system.
C) Even if you had enough truly altruistic, morally incorruptible and ideologically pure individuals to run the whole apparatus (let's not call it a state), just the simple fact of there being a part of population employed in this (let's call it "societally managerial") role, given enough time the inherent incentives of such a set-up will end up creating a privileged class with different class motivations, fcking it all up again.
So you either 1) don't ever do sh!t, 2) serve the recolutionary potential on silver plate straight to the reactionary fash, or 3) create yet another tankie hellhole.
If you have any way out of this dilema, I'm all ears.
Any marx stans wanna debate this at all?? Anybody? No?
@commenterthe3rd the only way anything like this works is everybody is all in and nobody takes advantage via corruption, and that is simply impossible, there's way too many greedy and bad people in the world, and you're never going to be able to get an entire population 100% on board with it, there will always be opposition to any idea
resource based economy. Let the machines do the work.
I think you overlooked a solution. The problem with Marxism is it rejects the concept of private property, this limits the approaches to governments that as pointed out require force to work. On the other hand a non governmental approach that focused on production and keeping the goods within the community as a voluntary corporation might work. This would allow a real form of socialism without the attempts to force communism instead.
The main issue is people tend to value their contributions more than other people do. This leads to conflict and the need for an arbitrator.
@@danielward7747 About the only way his ideas work is in a small, voluntary community. Monasteries for example, or 60's style communes. Even then you can't have a purely classless, non-hierarchic system because there will always be disagreements about what needs to be produced for the benefit of the community and somebody has to be the deciding vote. Some people will have more "valuable" skills than others and won't want to be building all the houses and growing all the food while others are just trying to write poetry or make art. Some people will just be lazy and not produce "according to their ability" or will be greedy and not want to receive only "according to their needs". You have to have someone who can call those people out and enforce their compliance or else remove them from the community. In other words, a Boss. Otherwise you end up with the situation that causes the failure of most real life communes: some people end up doing all the work, get fed up, and leave, and the useless mouths can't or won't support themselves.
the issue is people just want to be left alone to live their lives how they see fit, they do not want to be told how to think or how to live, they just don't really care about a stupid political ideology, they just want to be left alone. They will come together and help each other out when it is needed, otherwise quit trying to control people. no matter the label, trying to force people to think your way, doesn't work.
No they will not come together and help when needed, at least I know I won't. Why would I help somebody I share nothing in common, also the reason why the states is falling apart btw
@@shinji1264 then you are part of the problem and do not represent the vast majority of the world.
@@shinji1264 yes they will come together, people do it all the time because, surprisingly many people can be selfless and have a genuine desire to help people.
@@mellohi6175 why is it that the communist enemy is always either a capitalist or a nazi...?
@@shinji1264That’s you. Most people are willing to help others, we wouldn’t be where we are now if this wasn’t the case.
Lennonism? I did not know John Lennon ruled the USSR!
Not John Lennon but Vladimir Lenin
How do you think a revolutionary would request a company owner to forfeit his or her wealth without some form of coercion? How do you compel workers to do productive work without serious consequences if they refuse? Lenin admitted that violence was necessary. BTW fascism is similar, however it pertains to a conviction towards the preservation of national identity, whereas communism calls for the elimination of nationhood in favour of a uniform proletariat class thorough all nations.
Those are all great points that illustrate why Marxism is more theoretical in nature, rather than practical. More specifically to answer you question on company owners forfeiting wealth without coercion and workers being incentivized to work without consequences, unless we live in a fairytale, it's probably not possible. Excellent points.
@sl1ck I expected a comment and instead witnessed a full blown article with citations and a reference list. This is unexpected yet i didnt regret reading it.
@@benexplains6357 There are some people... But these dont work in companies
Exactly the comment i was looking for...like boss man said , Excellent points!
@@benexplains6357 You don't work then you're sent to the gulag... I don't get why anyone would want a selfish/lazy person around them 😂😂😂😂
Liked & subscribed
Welcome aboard!
People saying it was not real comunism to us people who lived in comunism countries is absurd. Make your commune. Se how is it working
Pai nu a fost comunism adevărat la noi pe vremea lu Ceașcă
@@cris7i Why should anyone care that you grew up in a country governed according to principles they reject? Why should they care that you think you own a label they are using? Your background hasn't made you any better at this shell game then the typical subsapient American.
What makes your experience relevant to them?
People i know who are communist keep saying it's not real Communism...
@@BSenta Denying empirical evidence is something communists are good at doing. They use empirical and historical events to discredit capitalism but their ideology can only be judged by some idealized utopic vision that can never be implemented in reality
@@BSenta Because it negates factual information that shows why it fails. They just don’t wanna admit they’re wrong.
informative ❤
Sounds right.!. The only people that are afraid, is the one who hates there friends!.
It's like kohn Academy only for politics
I know what they didn't know lennin starling all lacked the overhead view we have today all nr it scary to see it is crucial to see your opponent to face him
Surely it would work this time.
When I was almost killed in a vicious sly snake lol armed street robbery and was lured into letting my guard down by what appeared to be a plea for help from a young couple trying to make a few quid when actually it was a fight for my life this is relevant and I will explain why
Hi I'm a full circle 2nd lap Marxist "I was born into a poor working class family and yearned for Marxism before I even knew of its existence, but then I was mind fucked into 15 years of defending capitalism while at the same time feeling smarter and wiser than many people around me for ridiculing Marxism, but then I realised that I didn't have a good working definition of the thing I was ridiculing 2 months ago I dug deep really really deep and I realised I have been stupid and I need to become a modern day proponent of a official system of Marxism in great full detail more detail than Marx himself ever could or would and did
Same, I thought my drive to want an equal and a fair world everybody was a drive everyone had, but apparently not, some even think it's a radical idea, crazy world we live in.
Interacting with people who think they're way too clever for Marxism... I'd say your not actually knowing what it is approach was the norm.
Screw marx
Like @@fasttheplayer2535 . Somehow convinced himself he's way too clever for Marx... couldn't tell you a single thing about Marx, though.
@@paulsmart4672 Communism/Marxism never works in a society. Look at the USSR. It always brings violent ends.
0:09 If you told me this, you'd sound like Brazilian liberals who insist liberalism never really took place here cuz it wasn't what liberal philosophers had in mind. This isn't true: Brazilian liberalism is whatever shit it is we have. That may be disappointing, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen
Infinite Resources are required
And every human has to be the most moral and kind and selfless person imaginable
can you make a video on JoeBidenism
Come on man!
Its actually called dementia
So is this true capitalism?
So socialism is state / public ownership? How would that turn out any differently then the ussr? Genuine question, I hear this rebuttal constantly, maybe someone smarter than I, can answer it
I hope I understand your question properly, if not my apologies. So socialism is a step towards communism (although socialism can be an ends in itself). Engels specifically wrote about the idea of a withering away of the State which meant that as the people had their needs met and worked towards the common goal of a utopian society (their communist society), the State would just disappear as there would be no need for it. This of course goes against human nature as I don't know about you, but I can't find five friends with a common vision and without self interest let alone an entire nation. So to answer your question the truth is that if the goal is communism, a socialist State will likely not turn out any different than the USSR because of human nature.
@@jessegoldfinger5645 why though? It's my understanding that ussr is bad because it had dictators, and because it was a developing country when it underwent marxist-leninism, why would socialism be the same in the US as the marxist-leninism was there? I still don't follow.
I'm not trying to be bad faith, I just think they are two entirely different things and I think there is nothing inherently wrong with the idea at least of "We should have a system that works for everybody"
Wach youtube video with Michael Parenti,to kill a nation,war against yugoslavia.That should help you to understand few things,okay.Now here few things that i know about SFRYugoslavia.1.SFRYugoslavia was realisation of long planed unity and freedom of the south slavs.2.SFRYugoslavia was asked financial help of 100 billion dollars from USA in 1945 to rebuild its economy,but has get Truman's eggs instede.3.Since then SFRYugoslavia has rebuilded it self,by the youth work actions,and leadership of Tito.4.In 1950 1 dollar was 100 dinars,and in 1960 1 dollar was 10 dinars.5.SFRYugoslavia has provided to its people,afordable housing,free health care and education,employment after graduation,internationaly recognised passport,third bigest military,industry,and economy in europe.6.SFRYugoslavia haved 3000 companies and factories in public non profit sector,and annual income per company and factory was 700 millions dollars.7.SFRYugoslavia has exported its products and services to 150 countries.8.SFRYugoslavia was first who has developed color tv,years before sony.9.Debt of the SFRYugoslavia in 1989 was 25 billion dollars,or 1000 dollars per yugoslav,whyle american debt was 10.000 per american.10.Manny things are made by yugoslavs,but others has stole it from them.11.SFRYugoslavia in 1990 has created Secma new fighter jet,that has outperformed american F18,was planed for mass production,and employment of 100.000 workers.12.SFRYugoslavia was destroyed by the eu and usa,becouse SFRYugoslavia was fast growing secessful economy.13.Thirty years after war in SFRYugoslavia,people has admited that they haved best life standard in SFRYugoslavia,and that theys life standard is worst since 1995.
USSR was authoritarian, but some democratic socialists want both socialism and democratically elected leaders
@@porsche911sbs true but my question I guess more is if there's common and cooperative ownership as well and if that also counts as socialism?
Marxism/Communism sounds like a good idea, but unfortunately, reality refuses to cooperate.
This may be because it does not take into account the degree of selfishness, laziness and level of self-delusion that humans have. It also does not take into account the degree to which power corrupts. It also does not take into account that 7% of people are entrepreneurial, and therefore will resist the move to communism. Therefore, to be inplemented, it requires some form of oppressive dictatorship, that ultimately necessitates a incarceration ofnproductive people, violence and death of opponents. 😢
Looks like RUclips management .
My favourite mistake in this video. Lennonism.
#imagine
I like communism, however, some private ownerships should stay and not turn into public property, centrism is the way lads.
Industrial development makes this improbable to work now a days.
not really, it's just impossible due to human's nature of manipulative, greed, and domineering
@@wazitooya exactly, but the thing is that even if people were like that. The idea stems from a time where unions didnt exist yet and wages were garbage.
@@wazitooya how so?
@@dokitachi everyone owns everything is just impossible, there WILL be some people who's greedy enough to manipulate so they can get more. aint no way everyone would be satisfied by being equal, greed is just inherently humane
@@wazitooya "greed is just inherently humane"
This statement is wrong on so many levels, yet has been used as an argument against communism thousands of times. We are social animals, and like all social animals we are actually inherently wired to share our fruit. Think about this: in a hunter-gatherer society, in which food has to be shared with those who were unable to hunt in order to not let them starve, how would greed serve us? The first day you get all the food for yourself, sure, but the next day you are the only person left on the tribe. Suddenly, you are alone and your tribe is virtually destroyed. In that society, greedy individuals would have probably been disciplined by the other members and natural selection would have killed greedy societies. The only reason why greed is so prevalent now is that the current system, capitalism, REWARDS greed instead of punishing it. That's why there are so many greedy people at the top. It rewards those who are willing to step over others with money and political power. Yet, there are still people who want equality for everyone and for everyone to have an equal voice. Shouldn't that be a testament to the egalitarian nature of human psychology?
Just found your channel. You have some very interesting content. Is there any way you could shorten it to 1 minute and post on TikTok? They’re also working on allowing 3 minute vids on TT, but I don’t know when that will go wide.
why would you ask him to go to that retched platform
Why waste time watching 1 min vids
When u can explain stuff more properly in longer ones. making short edits or memes i can get that but documentaries or stuff?
Personally i hate TikTok but not the platform itself, the government who controls it.
But i respect ur choice to be on it.
Anyway that's All from me, have a nice day
@@cupcakegiver popularity = more people learn abt communism
The greatest trick the united states pulled off was convincing the poor that capitalism was good for them. Lmfao.
it was, then it is not
@Nathan Hoffman they always do, sometimes it’s just harder to see it
The problem isn't capitalism, the problem is inflation do too careless government spending, printing of money that make the dollar worth less and less every year, driving up the housing prices, as well as uncontrollable immigration. which is pretty anti capitalist practices.
Poor people tend to be poor for a few reasons-
1. Lack of education on good financial practices and habbits.
2. Addictions or mental illnesses that lead to poor financial habits.
3. The market/economy dropping.
4. Employment shortages do to a high population and high demand for work.
5. Not finishing school.
6. Not having career goals.
@UnusualBug Disagreeing with Ideas isn't an attack. Show me a country that has successfully implemented communism. Market Anarchist?
@Make America Gay Again the USSR treated their workers like shit as well.
"Relolution"
I think you mix what Engles wants over what Marx wanted. Marx's thoughts depart from Engles in future writings.
Small critique but it's "LENINism" not "LENNONism" we don't want to confuse a member of the beetles with a Russian revolutionary
Dear latex beep, Thank you for pointing this out. I noticed it too, but there were several other spelling mistakes. By the way, I believe the pop group was called the Beatles (as in beat of the drum or something)! Best wishes!!
You reference the communist manifesto yet contradict it in the same video.
In the Communist Manifesto Marx said there was no 'true' form of socialist governing as this would vary wildly depending on the material conditions of the state in question. Instead he outlined 'general characteristics' of most !advanced! socialist states:
1. Centralization of credit, communication, transport and private property in the state
2. Progressive income tax
3. Abolition of inheritance
4. Confiscation of the property of defectors
5. Equal liability to labor
6. Fusion of agriculture and manufacturing industries
7. Free education
Where do you think states like the USSR or China rejected these virtues?
Are they authoritarian?: Yes, as is every state by definition. Reserving the term for states with a lack of free market/private sectors requires subscribing to the propagandistic notion that there is such a thing as liberty under the state system of capitalism. It means you don't understand the fundamental concept of the state being the tool through which one class oppresses the other.
Are they fascist?: Not even remotely. Fascism itself is simply the reactionary movement glorifying corporatism without the thin veil of liberty that would typically pacify the proletariat. It's the antithesis of communism, designed specifically as a means to indoctrinate the disenfranchised proletariat in support of capitalist class relations.
Where communists believe in a classless society, fascists believe in a society where class stands at the front and center of someone's value and identity. Where communists believe in state occupation of corporations, fascists believe in the corporate occupation of the state. Where communists are intrinsically internationalists who do away with the concept of borders, fascists are nationalists who believe service to the state to be the purpose of life. Hence you can understand the particularly severe antagonism between Nazi Germany and the USSR that was not present between Nazi Germany and capitalist countries.
Denying the socialist foundation of failed states only gives ammunition to capitalists. If you want to be taken seriously, you should be emphasizing where (you believe) these socialist states failed instead of trying to deny every failure. Additionally it's important to understand that progress does not need to be perfect to be progress. No socialist state can be successful without a global revolution, which can't happen as long as the US remains as the global enforcer of capitalism.
Very rarely do I find people on RUclips who have a deeper understanding of the history and meaning of communism and not just a bunch of parrots. I would actually like to discuss a few things with you in a little bit when I'm not as busy, if that's ok with you
In other words, socialism/communism has to be the very imperialist capitalism is routinely accused of.
Bureaucracy.
that’s capitalism
Severed at least for now that is
Hot take: true communism in the long run would just end up looking identical to true capitalism (ancap)
HELL ON EARTH AND BREAD LINES
LEE KUN YEW FATHER OF SINGAPORE INSPIRED DENG XIAOPING TO CHANGE CHINA COMUNISM AND LET CAPITALISM RISE.
The thing about communism is that in the west communism is portrayed as a bad thing. In reality it's not and is the ideal way to lead to a better and more functional and fair society. At the moment communism doesn't work because of how corrupted the system is within countries. Capitalists generally rule over most country's and are exactly like what Karl Marx said, they give the idea that working 9 to 5 is good and that everything runs fine. That's how the world has been run for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of years and the main source of payment is money. Money is bad across all borders, it's a horrible way of making payments, capitalists have forced people to work their asses just for the smallest of money and then have to give back to them and then pay for everything else just to repeat this process over and over again Communism creates a society where everything is almost completely fair, no upper or lower class, no money, work is still needed but used differently and don't need to pay for anything. If we were to just start a communist world it wouldn't work because we wouldn't know how to deal with all the problems at once so the world would need to take it in small steps, for example just by making bread free and not cost anything would make a huge difference. But in order for communism to actually work the world would need to come together and work with each other. However because of hoe different each snd every country is it would most likely not work or would need a lot of time. I am a communist and I believe that if we try hard enough we can make it work but it would definitely be tough and needs time.
Do a good job and I will.
not that i’m saying you are wrong but the meaning of communism is authoritarian left so i think they should choose a new name as communism has been badly represented by countries like soviet union etc
@Radical Content ohhh so a fairytale society ok ok gotcha
@Radical Content ok i get what your trying to say , but my friend even back in primal time's there were leaders. And classes. It wasnt just you are hunter and i are gather mate. That's the main problem as long as humanity still has the primal urges of wanting to be better than the other , wanting to be the alpha which wheter you want to admit to it or not is going to have to be broken from our way of thinking if we ever want to become an advanced civilization. I really want what you state to be possible but alot will have to change for it to happen.
@Radical Content very well worded and brought over by you , thanks i will definitely check the video later once im off work (ur statement is correct btw ;) ). Truly we have alot of work to do , but as long as humanity tries to understand one another instead of immediately wanting to off another just because they don't agree. There's still hope.
@Radical Content also side note when i meant classes i meant in more of a king/leader and peasants kind of way. Eg tribes back then who had land and were fought over by driving/exterminating other tribes for the better piece of land. But i will admit my view is quite narcissistic based only of the pure being of humans themselves.
@Radical Content "Not really a fairytale, humanity has already been a communist society, it's called hunter-gathering or primitive communism. Many Indigenous peoples were a communist society until they getting murked by European colonizers. They had a stateless, moneyless, and classless society."
So, in other words, you want to regress society back to tribal times because you think advanced society is too hard and unfair? You know you'll still have to work for your food right?
If you truly want a commune society go and join a cult. And by the way, look up the history of cults. LMAO
Jonestown.
You spelled fascism incorrectly.
Fascism is communism's offspring.
@@shauncameron8390 no fascism is literally just strong patriotism, the only reason it's frowned upon is because jews convinced everyone it's evil
If only we could change human nature... 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
By stripping him of his individuality and personal agency/autonomy.
@@shauncameron8390 what are you talking about specifically?
@@MrSteveyz
What Marx advocated and communists/socialists routinely practiced to bring about "a new man."
@shauncameron8390 that's nice. I don't think marx understood the evolution of organisms.
"Human nature" isn't natural at all and can easily be changed when social means and structures change
Think of this, people used to believe that women's "nature" was to cook, clean, and do whatever for her man. And yet, this isn't actually true. rather it is an idea that was socially and culturally developed throughout time. Our only "nature" is the one we created thousands of years ago
A communist not being able to spell revolution is a beautiful irony
I don't think this guy is a communist I think he just made a video about communist theory to illustrate what it is to people who don't know.
If you think marxism-leninism is not real marxism because it's "fascist" then im sorry but you are completely illiterate on both marxist ideas and history
"A revolution is the most authoritarian thing there is" -Friedrich Engels
"We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we will not apologize for the terror"
-Karl Marx
It was real communism, and it was glorious
Marx didn't understand incentive structures.
He was a grifter all his life. Why would he understand?
This video told us what communism doesnt look like (Stalinism, Maoism, etc) but it didnt tell us what true communism actually looks like.
A stateless moneyless classless society aka a pipe dream. Ask any communist how they decide who gets to live in nice areas or who determines your rations and the response is usually a party member contradicting the idea it's a stateless society.
did you watch the video??? 2:00 3:03
@@batviolence what is true communism? Because it wasn't in the video
I enjoyed the content, but please for the love of God find an editor or perform a grammar check prior to publishing your video. You lost of a lot of credibility. You had significant grammar/spelling issues. For example, you said "Relolution" when it should've been spelled "Revolution". You misspelled "Beurocracy" twice in the video when it should have been spelled "Bureaucracy". "Lennonism" when it should have been spelled "Leninism". "Maosim" wasn't even capitalized. You also had capital letters mixed in which non-capital letters such as when you said "COmmunism". I guess when you're ceasing the means of production, spelling grammar come second. LOL!
Lol - what a bunch of BS! I grew up in communist Slovakia, I get PTSD listening to this guy!
Slovakia wasnt communist lol. It was state capitalism but they were only called "communist"
what part was BS, the video simply explained what marx thought.
Marx never thought a society would immediately become communist. He believed there were transitionary periods and stages until reaching the final end result: a classless, moneyless and stateless society. And this has never been achieved yet. So any of these countries were in a transitionary period and far from classless, but working on the goal.
It's anarcho-communists who believe that a fully communist society can be achieved immediately. They vehemently disagreed with Marx, even in his time of writing and before. And Marx and Engels were shocked of what the Paris Commune suddenly achieved right before their eyes. But they were violently destroyed within months by the capitalist state.
Wrong you did not. It is the opposite because in communism state, class and capital are abolished. Those were state socialism because I agree should be authoritarian and there is nothing wrong about individual dictatorship if he tends to achieve dictatorship of proleteriat through Machiavelism.
No one knows you're a dog on the internet.
But do you feel like Slovakia at the time in question was ruled by honest people who truly lived and acted as they spoke?
Why would I work harder than other people if I get the same outcome??? Unless you WANT to work harder than someone else but get paid the same, you are a capitalist.
Ok but how do you solve the fact that a few people own most of the wealth, assets and ability to create more wealth..... Due to centuries of fairly unearned privilege and familial inheritance
@@penderyn8794
Simple. Leave them alone. It isn't your money, so who are you to decide what they should have?
Because the existence of super rich people requires and is the reason why most other people have terrible living conditions and homeless @@shauncameron8390
Things need to reset every once and a while
@@shauncameron8390 because at a certain point they own everything and because of their priviledged position can make it that despite putting in extraodinary effort and having extraordinary expertise, I am still compensated the same as all other workers, and have no perspective of creating independence for myself?
Especially if we accept that one can own land, than there is a finite resource, that is necessary for existance (space) that can be owned by one person. Hypothetically, lets say there is one ubermensch, he grinds hardest anyone ever grinded, is the smartest person ever, and he managed to buy up all land. What do we do, if he decides to arbitrarily hike up the price of rent? Can I violate his right of ownership, and remain on his land, despite not paying him? Or does he gets to kill me because i am tresspassing, now that I am unable to rent?
It is so fucking simple. Don't go 100% on one system. Pick and chose the best part of each system you can.
I feel like that worked well here in Denmark. We have liberalist ideas, socialist ideas, capitalism and state owned things too. You gotta find a good mix. Having educated population and democracy so the people can pick and chose the mix/direction of the combined system can then create a great system, gotta have low corruption too.
All those businesses flocking to Denmark to make money, all that research and space exploration. The utopia is real!
Marx may be world's first shitposter
Sounds like Marx wrote the first communist fan fiction. Then Lennin, Stalin, and Mao actually made Communism happen in the real world.
Not really, i dont think political philosophy can be reduced to fan fiction lol
it's the opposite, they were 'socialist' in name only and they weren't even close to achieving communism. I don't think they had any plans to get there in the first place (I highly doubt they were going to dissolve their power and the states they led).
Lenin, Stalin and Mao were the opposite of what Marx envisioned.
No, those countries were on a transitional path. They all admitted that. No country has ever achieved communism YET. These countries fell because they actually abandoned the path and turned more economically liberal. Keep in mind also, that Marxism requires the whole world economy to be Marxist, so an isolated Marxist country cannot trade with capitalist countries. Look at what the biggest capitalist country did to Cuba.
@@cHills556 Yeah because what Marx envisioned is functionally impossible
@@LordVader1094 just like a 'free market' is impossible
If you are new to marxsism or politics in general DO NOT pay too much attention to this video, it made several mistakes
Breaking news: marxist jumps of a building, because he knows that other marxists all did it wrong and that he’s sure he will be able to fly this time around.
You almost accidentally managed a metaphor, there.
Here, I'll get you the rest of the way.
Breaking news: Marxist jumps off building. Dies.
Editorial: Walking around at street level is Marxism. If you keep doing Marxism, you're gonna die exactly the same way as that guy who jumped off a building.
So hated, yet so misunderstood.
Concept: Eliminate private property, give everyone a job, distribute and treat everyone equally
Implementation: Does as the concept says
Goal: Reach a stateless society, everyone is equal to each other and no one's unemployed
The goal was never achieved, so...
"That wasn't real communism!"
Concept: Study hard through your entire life learning about mathematics
Implementation: Study hard through your life learning about mathematics
Goal: Get a PHD on mathematics
The goal wasn't reached, so...
"He's not a real mathematician!"
It is the opposite because in communism state, class and capital are abolished. Those were state socialism because I agree should be authoritarian and there is nothing wrong about individual dictatorship if he tends to achieve dictatorship of proleteriat through Machiavelism.
@@farixxx5555 Complete abolishment of both government and private property is absolutely and completely impossible. There's billions of people, at bare minimum a million of them are gonna attempt to get something private for themselves.
As for the countries, it's the closest you can ever wish to get to, and even then it's not illogical to say they were because of this.
@@Correction_Guy it is possible but only using just that: Government and authoritarian system. With the help of that system, polica and yes, riot control, for long time it is possible to abolish them. It only takes time, that is very long process.
@@farixxx5555 police*
Dude, you sound more like my philosophy teacher. She said that in order for communism to be the norm, it'll take at least 600 more years. Mind you that people aren't that dumb nor are they gonna live within a dictatorship that constantly restrains them from being anything better than a background NPC even in their own personal lives. They're either going to rise up against their own government (as ironic enough as it sounds) or completely flee. You can even see this in real life, if people had the chance to escape to a place better than the one they were currently in, they were going to take it.
Putting others constantly before you to that extreme is also bad. You have to forget yourself in order to think for the others? That's how you fall, you don't watch where you are or how you're doing, and out of nowhere you find yourself improvished or outright dead
@@Correction_Guy That's right because you exclude thr fact people can rise against their government. Once done the organized state will tend to spread influence on others. Withdrawal of state is not the same thing as its abolishment because after the revolt is is already withdrawed but not yet abolished, the process of its abolishment only begins than when using government people tend to destroy that same government. Goal is approved on any way if the people tend to establish what they call a peace (even though good nor bad don't actually exist). What Nicholo Machiavelli said.
Saying that North Korea is an example of communist country is like saying that Fascism is a good ideology because Nietzsche and D'Annunzio inspired it
Bro nobody mentioned North Korea what are you on about😭
In communism state, class and capital are abolished. Those were state socialism because I agree should be authoritarian and there is nothing wrong about individual dictatorship if he tends to achieve dictatorship of proleteriat through Machiavelism.
I believe in marxism
Ok, i don't
@@raulgurzau9301 and i respect that if i may ask what ideology do you follow?
@@alex-ny2mf I follow systems that flow with the nature of man, not against it.
@@VulpinetideCuteTimes0w0 alright good for you
@UnusualBug You don't know what I read. Don't act like you know me.
@praxben
Guess what Karl Marx was? Jewish.
No he was an atheist religiously. He was only ethnically Jewish
So was Leon Trotsky.
@@Tooinsecuretousemyrealname Which makes him Jewish.. My comment holds true. What was the point of your comment lol..?
@@shauncameron8390 yep.