And it's rolling of their consciousness like water off a ducks back. Who cares about inequity when they are being treated equitably; And, their ability to defend themselves with incredible military equipment is affordable to them? These people don't need to care. The illusion of righteousness is intoxicating.
Wolff is complaining about Capitalism instead of explaining how to thrive. Lamenting that the Horse and Buggy is becoming obsolete, instead of explaining which is the most reliable, safe and efficient automobile... I think most people would agree that there is a need for some level of Social Safety Net , and there are important Government Agencies that are necessary to enforce Laws and Guidelines..... But innovation must never be stifled, and private property/wealth must be a cornerstone of Society.... No matter how good Marxist Ideas look theoretically or philosophically, they do not work in reality..... they do not promote the talent of the Best and the Brightest....they give no incentive to the working man.... they lead to strict oversight, loss of individual freedom, and economic disaster.
Tomato Pa.... More innovation in Mao's China or Stalin's USSR?Democratizing the work place is a vague notion... Super Rich by "simply sitting on to of a corporation" a CEO may be a share holder, but may or may not be a major shareholder... Mr. Tomato Pa has the option to buy shares, and potentially receive dividends, if he is willing to take the risk.... Marxism must be enforced, otherwise clever , productive, organize people will have a better quality of life then the rest.......www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/red-famine-anne-applebaum-ukraine-soviet-union/542610/
Tomato Pa ... Capitalism for me, some variety of Marxism for you... Cuba, North Korea, China for you, ...USA, UK, Canada for me.........I don't know what you mean when you use the phrase "the democratic workplace", but the point is moot... You correctly judged that I consider further response pointless... Also, that cunning UN prefix maneuver, that you formulated, demonstrates you are far too clever for me.
The fact that Google allowed this scares me as to how confident they are about unionization being impossible and the American working class being forever impotent and unable to exert the powers their numbers should reflect.
@@Leyenda1 *seeing John Deere being out-muscled by a union* No, they're not. If more workers belong to unions, corporations wouldn't be able to get away with doing what they are doing to our country and it's citizens.
@@JamieRobles1 I think John Deere is an anomaly in the whole of the thing. Boeing is leaving Seattle albeit at a snails pace. They have moved their HQs to Chicago and have built a plant in SC just to avoid union entanglements in the Seattle area. More companies are eating California for more business friendly ventures in Texas. There is nothing stopping this train...
@@michael5555ization you really think a person wouldn't work *harder* when they have an actual, tangible stake in the business? Your understanding of human nature is severely lacking and cloaked in years of hyper-individualist propaganda
Patricia Pandacoon you don’t even follow this man because he talks about all that, that argument is outdated. That is NOT human nature according to science. Why are you even on This video there are obvious people who live and love and will die for capitalism and will say that bullshit, mean while look at Basque🤣 hush
@@24POWERS and you think they are like this just naturally? No, they are propagandized by the American corporate establishment into thinking humans are selfish monsters. Read Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution to get an introductory understanding to what I'm talking about because *clearly* you are just talking out of your ass.
All fine and dandy until the day someone speaks about what they are being paid and what others are being paid. Because the ones pulling the wagon will always ask for more than the ones riding in it.
Great and well needed lecture! Even in former Yugoslavia there was an economic system 1950-1992 called "the socialst workers' self management". That was 99 % same as today's Cooperatives. I lived and worked in that system and I can tell you first hand that we, the workers, were very, very happy with it. To those who will immediately say that Yugoslavia crashed because of it, I say that cannot be farther from truth. Yugoslavia crashed and ended because of aggressive nationalism and religious hatred between major ethnic groups, and that's completely different story.
@@mickc6347The war happened mostly because Serbia, as the biggest country in the federation, stopped concerning itself with socialism, and started concerning itself with expansion. The socialist regimes were at an end in the late 80s/early 90s. Serbia knew it would lose out big losing Slovenia and Croatia for the infrastructure and industry (as well as the coastline), and Bosnia for the natural resources. They cooked up a rebellion in Croatia (which who knows what part was grassroots and what part seeded) to justify mobilizing the Yugoslav National Army (comprised mostly of serbs since they were the majority population, as well as overrepresented in the leadership) against Croatia and Bosnia to gain control.
I agree totally with you… I’ve been there when TITO was alive and saw 1st hand how the cooperatives worked… also I believe that the west contributed for the fragmentation of ex- YOUGOSLAVIA… SO SAD… DISGUSTING WEST INTERFERENCE, as they were afraid of the STRONG NATION/ COUNTRY YOUGOSLAVIA WAS… 22 million population and the strongest army in Europe after SOVIET UNION… MISLAM ISTO TAKA KAKO VÁS… ZAPAD E KRIVO DA GLEDAME FRAGMENTATSIA OF EX YOUGOSLAVIA… PITCHKUMATRINA TO ZAPADDDDDD KRIVE SE ZA BORBASSEKADE… POZGRAVI MNOGU…
John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires!
I am just dicovering these lectures and am learning a great deal. I always hated the world of work and am glad I am retired. I now realize better why I hated the world of work. Thank you for the knowledge.
@@BarrySlisk you cannot discern a stranger's character from a youtube comment. Disliking having a job does not mean you're lazy. There are other ways to contribute to society, like volunteering or being a good parent. You don't know how hard this person's job was, if it was soul sucking, etc. It is ok to be happy to get away from that. Also, you dont owe society anything, especially since our government thinks they don't owe us basics like healthcare, but billions on the military industrial complex is a-ok
We agree on one thing. Nobody owes anybody anything by default. The government only has the money it steals from us, so it makes no sense to say that it owes you anything because it can NEVER do anything for you without taking it from you in the first place.
@@BarrySlisk Huh? The government's job is to help its citizens, that's why we chose for it to exist, that's why we pay taxes. Taxation is an agreement to pool some of our money together for the public benefit, like roads, public schools, libraries, the fire department, etc. It only feels like "stealing" because currently that money is wasted on corruption in the U.S
Also check out Thomas Sowell to cancel out the crap you picked up from this video. This guy is so naive it hurts to listen to. He sounds exactly like Karl Marx, who didn’t account for the biggest aspect in ANY economic society… human behavior. His ideas are amazing, but that’s all they are, ideas. Once they’re put into action, or the praxis of their concepts, are tragic. All the evidence you need is Mao and Stalin. Nearly *100 million* dead.
Capitalism works great, central banks bailing out special interest zombie companies doesn’t work, and big business getting into bed with government.. for hand outs and special protection and laws doesn’t work. Capitalism with rules and checks, works. Letting banks use derivatives is a prime example of something that should be illegal.
@@kymd2738 Well, then you at least believe in something like or close to Keynesian economics. The thing is, a lot of the bailouts and so on really do save these institutions. And their collapsing or being allowed to fail does have negative consequences. Marxism-Leninism actually has quite a lot to say on these kinds of things. I recommend reading "The Principles of Communism" by Frederick Engels (1947). Take care.
Frederick Bastiat says: When plunder becomes the way of life for some people, after some time they will make rules to justify their actions and a moral code to glorify it.
@@valiyapurakkalNarayanankutty besides the it being necessarily the case that capitalists pay their employees a smaller amount than the value their work was worth to the capitalist, imperialist plundering of the resources of Africa, Asia, and South America. People may claim that wasn't capitalism as they define it, but it was certainly closer to their definition of capitalism than any socialist's definition of socialism, which has nothing to do with "the government doing things."
@Keaton no it isnt you loon, you can criticize society while in thats how it develops. but stating things and being a professor doesnt make them fact and he oddly never presents any for any of his claims. no one willing chose to buy clothes made by slaves and capitalism just because its in a poor country isnt slavery they arent property. the fundamental problem is you are misrepresenting free market capitalism as the current capitalist system we are not free market capitalists. so use all the clever sophistry you want i dare you to argue the points of people like ludwig mises, frederic bastiat or even a modern economist like thomas sowell. you wont and cant because they use facts and you use rhetoric and sophistry to ignore any kind of opposing view point if im so wrong invalidate the sources of my belief.
They used to be capitalist, now they can afford socialism and ask for a state monopoly. The guest speaker is right, however... systems are made to last X period and be changed.... the Chinese guy might retract today since China Communist Party is going back into having a Supreme leader and where high school exit exam is based on ''how great the leader is'' more than the ''scientific improvement you can make''. Democracy is a system that allows the power to move around players (known as institutions)... but when all institutions are going down... the system is too... About Wage he's right... a 12 kids family, 1 house wife, 1 working salary-men = You could live on that (but you weren't necessarily poor)! Debt is also new (not even 100 years old!)
@@vonb2792 lol no democracy is belief in the power of the state of the demos. im sorry institutions? what nonsense are you spewing lol. government doesnt have the right to institute anything but whats outlined in the constitution.... also no wolffe isnt right about wages he ignores wage mobility and devaluing of currency as well. absolute tripe from an absolute sophist believed by an absolute sheep.
I read this in a novel (I think ) For social justice, work, affordable housing, good unespensive Health care. Forget identity politics, have invisible brigades block crucial infrastructure (train tracks as an example) to promote claims.
Ronnie & Minh- The devil also has serious speaking skills and is a great communicator. So what? Go listen to a truth speaking free enterprise Misean economist instead of a Marxist. Marx was a Satan worshipper.
@@Kevin-jv7mz If you want to do what is right then you will always follow God's way and not the Devils for there is a way that seems right to man but the end thereof is the way of death.
Kevin-Whatever God says and does is right. God always does the right thing even though we might question His wisdom. Right doesn't exist apart from God's endorsement. Man says its okay or lawful to murder babies in the womb but God says that is wrong. God's law is transcendental and above man's law.
@@HenryBSilver-Henry you need to repent from your evil ways and seek the Lord while He may be found. My theology is very rational for rational minds. Now listen. The wages of sin is DEATH and the death that God has in view is Eternal DAMNATION. Romans 6:23. Your life is a vapor and like dew on the grass. Where will you be when you take your last breath? You sins will all come to remembrance unless you have a pure heart. Jesus said: "Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God." Amen.
Aside from his easy going teaching style and knowledge! The Man is one of the greatest speakers I've ever had the pleasure of listening to! Go Professor Wolff!
He doesn’t understand human nature. To take from someone who earned a reward and give the benefit to someone who does nothing to earn the benefit is fundamentally immoral. Socialism and Communism are both founded on envy which will never lead to equality, but does leave to cruelty with anyone who doesn’t buy into the leftist ideology.
I think many Republicans, at least working-class or non-corporate ones, see the problems caused by capitalism, but thanks to propaganda, indoctrination, cold-war trauma, etc. come to the wrong conclusions... Another problem, imho, is the red herring that is abortion rights, which is one of the things keeping Republican politicians in power. If we truly implemented what Mr. Wolff suggests, over time, much fewer women would even desire to or see the need to an abortion in the first place, because not only would their economic situation improve dramatically, access to stellar healthcare and paid maternity leave would too! I dare say, abortion numbers would go down more drastically than any ban on abortion could ever possibly achieve.
you should take a course on economics. capitalism is not evil nor is it somehow labour being manipulated this was proven false in the fucking 50s. consumers dont always buy producers always produce the employee of said producer gets paid whether that product sells or not even if the company paying for its production doesnt make a profit....marx was a drunk lying coward who fled his country when it got dangerous and then cheated on his wife and treated his bastard son like an animal. that is the founder of modern communism. look back too the british civil war for your first socialists the levellers and the first organized political socialists were in 1850s france. every single one of these organizations wanted the abolition of personal property and to LEVEL out society aka make everyone equally poor......except government and those enlightened party members. this is your grand utopia, we live in crony capitalism and no not all capitalism is crony capitalism marx was a fool who claimed a great recompense must be paid before true capitalism could flourish.......he never substantiated this with evidence of course. so ill ask since marx said " to sum up communism in one sentence it is the abolition of personal property" what do you support about the abolition of personal property? why do you think a centralized state government is inherently benevolent? also why do you ignore the mass charity of 19th century capitalism the highest in recorded history in fact? im seriously hoping for a discussion here i dont get what you see in it.
@@underhandcloud1414 Because they don't understand their own system of economics. They build a rigid cultural ideal around the idea of "capitalism" as something which it is not. Instead of looking towards a future, better system which actually rewards people by merit, they drool over the idea that individuals could play such a great role in affecting our society, and forget whether their work actually translates to billions of dollars worth of effort. It's insividualism on steroids. A very toxic individualist idea which inevitably causes people to turn on each other and be valued purely for the work they produce. It can be part of your identity to be a capitalist now. The word hasn't even been in common use for about 50 years now. It was just realized as a reaction to Russian communism. And since Russian communism counters the ideas individual liberty of power over society that also means it's against all the ideas of a meritocratic system. This is the idea which they use to counter the left. They say all anti-capitalism is anti-meritocracy, and then go on to associate it with Russian communism and how they weren't payed fairly and that's how their system failed. That's how we get such closed-mindedness to anti-capitalism. To even any kind of social programs at all when we've already seen what evils pure capitalism can do to us. Things like child labor, exploitation, unsafe working conditions, 12 hour working days, work alienation, and institutional racism.
Democracy at work+ please tell Mr Wolff that I truly love him. And thank him for the great work he's doing. Wish you all the best. Greetings from Norway
How much power do you have a Google? And do you know why google would let a Marxist talk? Do you sense that Google has an understanding of the importance of income inequality awareness? I’m a wage slave at Walmart that has seen the oppression of progressive politics specifically on Googles services. I would like Google to not oppress important voices such as Richard Wolff, Jimmy Dore, Mike Figueredo or Lee Camp.
I'm fortunate to live in a city with plenty of cooperatives and even I didn't know what a cooperative was until, like, a year ago. I'm glad more people are speaking about this business model, it really feels like the next logical step for humanity. Not the last step, but the next step
@@Riolupaireally depends, they are super broad. Could be 100% of the company being owned by all workers and sometimes 70/80% with a small group of private investors. Within how a company works you should imagine people having an actual say about their work place. So instead of firing people for an example in an economic crisis, people all cut their working hours so nobody has to lose their job.
I've been watching Richard D. Wolff for four years and I'm fascinated by his remarkable insight into U.S. economics and his vision for its economic troubles and collapse. He has excellent knowledge on many aspects that make an economy run efficiently, fairly and soluably.
If only we had the Internet in the late 1960's and heard talks given with such clarity, we possibly would have avoided our world economic crisis we see ourselves in now. This should be mandatory viewing in high schools as part of civic lessons around the world. Thank YOU!
I agree, but the likes of Betsy DeVos are hell bent on promoting religious based charter schools, which would advocate for the execution of Prof Wolfe. In their propaganda, they espouse that public schools teach nothing but socialism and ultimately communism. It is for this and other reasons that Betsy's brother, Prince, infiltrated the teachers unions of public schools with spies, the ultimate goal of dismantling those unions and public schools as a whole.
If we had the internet in the late 1960s, it would have been banned. We only got the internet because it 'sort of happened' - too quickly and unpredictably for governments to react. If you could send one of our history books back in time to the 60s, the politicians of the era would make sure it didn't happen in any form we would recognise today. Probably set up a system with server and client addresses, servers only available with government license, and clients unable to communicate directly with one another.
33:00 There's another factor: The employer could still be making well over twenty dollars in value on what an employee produces while being paid 20$ / hour for their labor. But if the employer can find somewhere to pay people 5 dollars, or a technology that can replace part of the labour force, they can make *even more* money. It's not always a matter of "we can't afford to stay open here or keep you on", in some cases it's "we're making good money here but we can make way more". But they've conditioned the public to treat every lay off and offshoring as a difficult choice between going broke and staying afloat. Sometimes that's the case, sometimes it's just going for an even better deal.
@Tom R It is not a two way. If a corporation pays you $5 and you know that in the US you'd get $20 for the same job it doesn't mean that you can easily immigrate to the US AND the corporation will bring your job with you. Are you saying that all offshored jobs are because they didn't make profit hiring locally?
@Tom R I was almost willing to entertain the notion that corporate/single employee employment negotiation is equitable (though it seems wildly inequitable on it's face). I even continued reading when you wrote that government created crony capitalism, even though anyone who bothers to look knows the US government is owned by corporate lobbyists, not the the other way around. But when you wrote "employers (aren't) greedy" you lost any and all credibility. Come on bruh, MAXIMIZING SHAREHOLDER VALUE is literally the bleated mantra of this post-Milton Friedman corporate dystopia lolz.
its possible google will make more money under Statist communism; theyre already quasi governmental; first in line for licensed monopolies worldwide. theyve acted as enforcement of govs: china censorship. i still use g apps reluctantly; good ui and overall design. theyve always had great software people, pushing minimalism (performance). they did convo-based emails, others copied. image search with thumbnails, others copied. the list goes on of great free apps.
He really only had one point that wasn't stating his resume next to his claims. Watch 5 interviews with him and find one where he doesn't just list his resume as proof
I don't have words to describe how brilliant this guy is, but the main thing is he is willing to tell truths to which most people, including scholars, won't even question.
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
@@dmonarredmonarre3076 - Incorrect. In the Scarcity Principle, there are 3 inputs: supply, demand & price. Of those, demand is the most important. Zero demand means price doesn't affect scarcity at any price level.
@@pd5826 That is wildly inaccurate. Nobody “creates demand.” Humans are BORN INTO SCARCITY, ergo, demand will forever exist. Demand is a function of scarcity, and scarcity perpetually transformers over time. As cars developed, new forms of demand developed, and old forms obliterated (How many horse and buggy manufacturers do we really need today?)As computers developed, new forms of demand were developed, and old forms obliterated (Not really sure how many type writer manufacturers we’re in need of today). Scarcity of energy, scarcity of information (Since every single decision we make is with missing information), scarcity of geography, scarcity of organization, scarcity of specialization, scarcity of development, scarcity of infrastructure, scarcity of TIME (That’s a big one),scarcity of scientific predictability, etc.. Companies simply POP INTO EXISTENCE to then serve that new scarcity (Cisco really wasn’t relevant in the 1830’s when there wasn’t the interconnectivity of advanced network technology y’know. Not too much of a necessity for people thousands of miles away to be sending emails to computers that didn’t exist). THAT’S’ how innovation and competition work. And as for what you are talking about in reference to macroeconomic policy, that is called CRONY CAPITALISM, not socialism. Socialism would have those owners completely voided out of the picture. Nationalized entities would be functioning under a centralized authority. Instead, when THE GOVERNMENT IS TOO BIG, they can pick winners of the privately owned institutions and choose who to prop up due to whatever the calls of political utility(irrespective of, and many times in direct contradiction to economic utility) compel them to so they can pander and narrate their “benevolence.” Yes, you are correct, with total free markets, MANY companies and firms would die(As they already due today. Look at the S&P 500 today and see how different is was from 50 ,35, 15 and 5 years ago. That is called COMPETITION. Competition drives away INEFFICIENCY, PRODUCTIVITY and LACK OF INNOVATION. ) But you know what also happens, NEW business would develop due to the changing nature of the market and the OPENING UP OF NEW DEMAND. The market doesn’t just REMAIN STAGNANT as is implicit in your comment. According to your forwarded positions, the market simply has competition, all the companies get out-competed away, and there is no growth, no shift in demands, NO INNOVATION, no NEW scarcity to contend with. That maintains that the market is STATIC and CONSTANT, which it absolutely is NOT. Scarcity doesn’t simply go away when market forces subside within an economic sector. Scarcity is driven by realizations of NEW market functions. Restaurants and small farms were all the rage when food was a lot more scarce. Nobody was really concerned with modern energy markets, biological innovation, smart phone development, online course companies, or any other modern operation we have . That is because the scarcity of food and its transportation and processing was still so LABOR INTENSVE that there was demand enough in it for the organization of profit generating institutions surrounding these functions that made it desirable enough amongst enough people for their to be demand for the private organizations. These organizations saw an intertemporal arbitrage opportunity and acted. Now that many of those margins have been competed away, the scarcity of food, thanks to capitalism, does not really exist anymore. THE FREE MARKET HAS LITERALLY SOLVED THE SINGLE GREATEST PROBLEM THAT HAS AFFLICTED MANKIND SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME. THE PURSUT OF, AND MAINTENANCE OF FOOD! We have solved the problem of famine. First civilization to ever do that, THANKS CAPITALISM! Now new markets are popping up around developing processes that are beyond food and rudimentary transportation. And yes, many firms have died along the way, with pesky government stepping in at times trying to prop up irrelevant, outdated, outcompeted but POLITICALLY CONVENIENT processes. Examples would be the highly inefficient and wasteful transportation and information networks forwarded by the DEMOCRATICALLY elected federal government [Hmmm, should I send a letter or simply email someone. Nah, USPS can kick rocks, GOOGLE gets my business. Hmmm, should I take the bus that has 45 different stops that are irrelevant to me, or should I take Uber, or Enterprise or lift, or any other ON DEMAND (Therefore time saving) service. Conversely, the REPUBLICAN offices are addicted to propping up agrarian based initiatives that are completely outdated since those positions speak to their base of supporters. The Libertarian party of the US has always had it right. The government ALWAYS makes things more inefficient due to the very nature of the political process. Say a few nice fuzzy things, get the crowd roaring by preying on their biases, and then gain control over things you have no idea about. That is the destructive function of political organizations. Strictly economic operating firms have no such luxury and NEW firms have popped up to contend with the NEW scarcities that have developed, such as scarcity of mathematical information [how much do you know about combinatorics, probability theory, discrete mathematics, linear programming, econometric Granger effects, etc.]scarcity of medical information, scarcity of psychological information (Social psychology, cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology, the necessity of specialization never ends!), scarcity of biological information, scarcity of network technology information, scarcity of space exploration information, scarcity of chemical information, scarcity of nutritional information, scarcity of physiological information. These are all new fields of effort that are perpetually changing and maintain the potential of presenting new sources of value that ECONOMIC ORGANIZATIONS can develop new, unseen, and unheard of value for everyone to consume CONSENSUALLY if they desire. Again, everything you said from the cause of demand to the role of macroeconomic policy is completely divorced from reality. You are so desperate to generate an oppression narrative that you engage in the acts of boldfaced lies. You are naively under the impression that economies DO NOT MOVE, DO NOT INNOVATE, DO NOT OPEN UP NEW MARKETS, but rather are stagnant, and once the economy reaches this point of stagnation, are completely run be a big central authority. That is blatant nonsense, scientifically inaccurate, and a radical misunderstanding of how markets operate and TRANSFORM. Before you respond, watch my hyperlinks attached. If I notice in your response that you didn’t and don’t comment on propositions forwarded there, I will not respond since I am not going to consume nonsensical media YOU support, WHICH I DID WITH THE ABOVE DRIVEL, without you doing the same for me. That is a one-sided time investment that I refuse to partake in. I won’t be the one doing all the work while you continuously put NEW burdens of proof on me after I have debunked your first economically illiterate proposition. Again, don’t bother if you don’t show signs of watching what I forward in the hyperlinks, BECAUSE I WON’T RESPOND IF YOU DON’T WATCH: ruclips.net/video/sGYl17DiEwo/видео.html ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
@Oscar Boman Dude...this is a stupid ass rebuttal. He said a shit ton of shit and you come back with this amateur garbage of an argument? Capitalism kills? Really?
Oh, it won’t last. Google (which owns RUclips) is already aggressively suppressing and de-monetizing left-leaning programs. They are essentially run by corporate sociopaths. It will continue to get worse, as we on the left point out how tied to the business world Joe Biden really is.
This talk was absolutely fascinating. I've never thought about this question as profoundly as he explains it and goes over it. The first audience question was a great one, but Richard Wolff's answer was an even more impressive one.
Excited About Learning yeah, it’s very impressive how little a Harvard professor understands about economics. Listen, he doesn’t understand inflation. The Federal Reserve Act in 1913 led to a massive debt bubble that crashed in 1921 and 1929. The federal reserve also paid for WW1 with paper currency. Capitalism is always an underlying force in the economy, but when massive banks and corporations infiltrate politics, we end up with this globalized corporate fascism that’s impoverishing us all. Learn a little bit about gold and silver and inflation. The Fed lies every day while they bailout their corporate buddies. Charles Lindbergh Sr. said in 1913, “from now on, depressions will be scientifically created”. Mark Twain said, “it is easier to be fooled than to admit you’ve been fooled”. The American Public has been fooled for over a century, and prof Wolff is as bad as Karl Marx in his misunderstanding on economics. No wonder Harvard hired him. “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act” -George Orwell. Truth is, Wolff is wrong. Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Milton Friedman, Murray rothbard, Mises, Ayn Rand are all correct. End the Fed. Buy gold buy silver buy crypto, or we will all starve like under Stalin when they abolished property rights to everybody. These problems are more complicated than “left vs right”. It’s more like “right vs wrong” and Wolff is WWWWRREEOOOONNNGGGG.
@@actualideas8078 It is trust, not assets. BitCoin is in use. Paper not used much in China. Just bits and bytes. Ends when lender figures out he is not going to get paid. Bubble bursts. Friedman admitted . . . greed is not good. Just say NO to austerity.
Memento Mori dude Orwell admitted on his death bed that he changed his mind about capitalism. So get your facts straight. And I do respect and read socialist also. We NEED social programs. Problem is, public offices are abused by the mafia and funded by the central bank (Federal Reserve). Look Ayn Rand and Alan Greenspan are NOT THE SAME. And most these people are Neoliberals anyways so what’s your problem man? Milton Friedman suggested a UBI, but it must be on a metallic standard of 40-100% reserve. Otherwise we allow the Central Bank to print currency, or counterfeit money; or better yet call it ALCHEMY. These are the darks arts we’re dealing with son. Epstein didn’t kill himself
But why would anyone have trust in the Dollar? There is no incentive for the bank to get its principle back..... because..... wait for it........ They created it out of THIN AIR. The lender has been a parasite on the people for about 107 years exactly. So wake up and realize why the USA funded the Russian military complex with the western bank’s “credit” in WW1 AND WW2. Churchill and the USA teamed up with Communist Russia. Did you miss that part? Then the KGB and CIA both funded by the Central Bank teamed up to kill JFK by hiring the mafia. This is your history lesson. Why would anyone have to pay back these debts? And why would any 401k or IRA have ANY credit whatsoever? Inflation is coming and so is communism. Dangerous times.
Memento Mori “George Orwell was a staunch anti-Stalinist like most libertarian communists” first article I looked up, so yes that’s accurate what you said. So he sounds more like an anarchy capitalist or neoliberal than a communist. In modern times, it’s obvious that we cannot simply abolish social programs. We need a UBI on a gold/silver standard to replace manipulative welfare programs used to obtain votes.
Thank you Professor Dr. Wolff for explaining the evolution of economics and the social imperatives for transforming classical capitalism in a lucid manner.
I have been listening to Richard Wolff's talks for some time now on his youtube channel 'Democracy At Work.' I just love this guy. He's speaks very eloquently and presents excellent facts.
I assume you are serious, rather than being sarcastic as the people replying assume? You are right, the depth of his answers to questions he hasn't prepared for beforehand show how smart the guy is. Anyone can prepare a speech and repeat it with enough practice.
@kezicss Why? Capitalism is an unstable exponential system on a finite planet which flies in the face of basic logic and basic maths! It has run its course .A new paradigm is needed!
Younger generation must be the power behind the movement and change. Most older folks set in their ways will be dead and gone soon. Let's make this move forward for a healthier and happier world.
Reversing inequality 2 /4 / 6 / 8 AGITATE A wide range of policies can help reduce inequality. Policies should be aimed at reducing inequalities both in market income and in the post-taxand-transfer incomes. The rules of the game play a large role in determining market distribution- in preventing discrimination, in creating bargaining rights for workers, in curbing monopolies and the powers of CEOs to exploit firms’ other stakeholders and the financial sector to exploit the rest of society. These rules were largely rewritten during the past thirty years in ways which led to more inequality and poorer overall economic performance. Now they must be rewritten once again, to reduce inequality and strengthen the economy, for instance, by discouraging the short-termism that has become rampant in the financial and corporate sector. Reforms include more support for education, including pre-school; increasing the minimum wage; strengthening earned-income tax credits; strengthening the voice of workers in the workplace, including through unions; and more effective enforcement of anti-discrimination laws. There are four areas in particular that could make inroads in the high level of inequality which now exists.
LOLOLOL highest quality of living highest quality of technology highest level of health care in history = trapped. wonder what you would call soviet russia?
@@argemirocarvajal7843 why would moore go their he has an 8 million dollar house in new jersey just like every other comkmunist its for everyone else not for him.
@@jamesmorton7881 so then why dol they let kids go to college with lower test scores to " help education" no its because it makes you feel good and you could give a shit about the consequences of your " socialist policies:" because once implemented they are never criticized or you cry racist sexist capitalist FASCIST! DESPITE THE COUNTER INTUITIVE RESULTS OF THESE POLICIES.
This was a very good presentation by Dr. Richard Wolff. I'm sure it will be eye-opening and educational to many viewers. I truly hope many will watch and learn something from it.
Or on the Rubin Report. If Dave can talk to far-right Ayn Rand types, he can at least talk to a real-life Marxist economist for the other side of the story.
@@Uarehere Rubin Report is a Koch brothers propaganda vehicle so I wouldn't count on Wolff being on any time soon. Rogan is a possibility, as actual leftism continues to spread through the US.
Joe Roggin is a clickbait hack. He doesn't offer any substantive analysis of the polarizing topics he discusses with his Koch brother funded guests who are nothing but provocateurs! It's a show for people who are sheep and can't develop an original thought of their own!
He's agreed to debate an actual market advocate at the soho forum later this year. You can see how well his lies and insinuations do when it isn't a monologue anymore.
Great speaker, great talk. The significance of the ideas Wolff presents as a way to bring democracy to the workplace will be felt for decades to come. As we all know, the world now is entering a new phase of development and the old ways of thinking and addressing problems have become outdated and worn. It is the boldness of individuals like Richard Wolff, to present ideas like these, that gives me hope for better times to come. Racial and religious equality, economic security, the equality of men and women, and the recognition of the unity of all mankind are but some of the many important things we should be fighting for.
This isn't really anything new however, it's just that it has been suppressed by one of the biggest misinformation campaigns in history. "As we all know, the world now is entering a new phase of development and the old ways of thinking and addressing problems have become outdated and worn." this is why Marx developed his philosophy and his analysis of capitalism, all the way back in the 19th century.
And the lecture you should never want again. Wolff is a 'wolf' in sheep's fur b/c he is irrational as he appeals to ego and emotion. He is obviously ignorant of economics more than anyone I've heard in a long time & if someone as ignorant of economics as I am can see through his BS, then others should be able to see this too.... How old are you? If over 30, you should be more educated than to be impressed w/ this fluff as he speaks to those who want their ears tickled and b/c your bias wants to hear this, your bias has been validated and this 'confirmation bias' is sad b/c most ppl don't want truth - they want their own version of it that fits into their fantasy life or idealistic dreams. While Wolff praises socialistic solutions to remedy capitalism, the situation is FAR MORE SERIOUS and much BIGGER than any of that. We must broaden our small-minded tunnel vision b/c our state of emergency right now is about how the GLOBALISTS want us to live in a Rockefeller world - and when we see this bigger picture of what the evil powers at this high up want us to do - give up all our rights and liberties eventually - and use a virus to justify such evil - then you start to change your worldview to the reality you never thought you'd have to take off your rose-colored glasses to see...This doc here tells you what you need to know: www.nommeraadio.ee/meedia/pdf/RRS/Rockefeller%20Foundation.pdf
Professor Wolff is an absolute treasure. The movement, ultimately, is towards cooperation instead of exploitation and that gives me hope for the future.
Thanks - I collaborated with Professor Wolff to organize this talk! Everyone in the audience was really attentive - I don't think I would describe the atmosphere as "uncomfortable". Most people have some inkling that the organization of our world isn't fair and are curious to understand exactly how and why. A huge group of people stayed after the talk was over to continue asking questions!
@Kit Carney so prosperous that it's existence is dependent of the mass impovershment and colonisation of the Global South and crashes once a decade give or take
It's so strange that the US, the nation that stands for freedom and democracy has no democracy at the place we spend most of our lives at, the workplace.
it is also strange that the US, with it´s emphasis on the individual´s responsibility is the country where there are more law suits and silly, common sense warning labels than anywhere else in the world.
@@tiendoan1333 Which is deteremined by elections, a democratic concept. Just because you heard on your favorite talk show somewhere that democrats are evil, that it's not a pure democracy because that's 'two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner', and that it's a constitutional republic instead, doesn't mean it's exclusively non-democratic.
This "Democracy" has contributed to the overthrowing of 85 democracies all over the world between 1951-2000 alone. This is not including the coups, dictators, genocides abroad the U.S has been responsible since then.
@@ciaranryan5265He tries to atleast create marginal change, while also still spreading his opinions. Isn't he like a chairman in a committee? Yes he caved and I can imagine that guy after 40 years of spreading the same opinion atleast wants to have created a bit of actual policy change before he dies. Lets not forget he pushed a lot of democrats towards social democracy and socialism.
This man has done his work well , Most Americans have Blind Faith in the goodness of Corporations . If You really understood American Business Values , it's all predatory and exploitative.
@@lambynighttrain that is supposed to be the great thing about a democracy - the government is ideally the transparent servant of the people, no blind faith needed
@@lambynighttrain Difference being, you can vote out a politician. How do you vote out a King? How do you vote out an oligarch? If you can't even vote to change the system? What good is that system?
Richard Wolff offers a more convincing argument for socialism than anybody I've ever heard. His understanding of Marx and Capitalism is total, and his critique of the American universities he studied at is very telling.
Does Richard Wolff have any idea about how socialism may be implemented equitably? Marx figured it couldn't be done with out meeting significant resistance. The communist eliminated or suppressed lots of seemingly resistant kulaks and profiteers. Pol Pot reasoned the classes in the cities would have to go. Mao reeducated lots educated folks. In the Cuban revolution Che Guevara would execute all those imagined impeding the revolution etc
@@rustyyb8450 I've upvoted your comment because you seem to be genuinely interested. In theory I am an anarchist, historically the anarchists were a left-wing branch of the socialist movement, today, anarchism tends to be perverted into some kind of an extreme individualism of anarcho-capitalist varitey, at least in the US (I am from southern/middle Europe). However, in Europe and elsewhere, anarchism has retained its status as a branch of socialism. Why is this important? I'll make a brief historical detour. During the first international, there were 2 dominant factions: the anarchists with Bakunin (google him) as the representative and the Marxist with Marx as the representative. Their goal, the same, the methods, however, differed. The Marxists branch wanted to win state power through elections and solidify themselves in order to transition to a socialist economy -- this strand spawned the places you've mentioned. It spawned Russia, however, Russia undertook an ideological change in the hands of Lenin. Marxist-Leninist thinking, then, influenced other revolutions and functioned as a model. The Leninist model is total state control of the economy and the political life. Now, we might say that the Marxist camp did not intend this to happen since social democratic parties are also part of the tradition. The economy of Soviet Russia was that of state-capitalism, in the sense that the state owned the economy through its government agencies (it was centralized). Lenin is explicit in this, he says that a form of state-capitalism is good because it will create a technologically strong society that could transition to a communist society. However, we know that this strategy is a total blunder and the left-wing branch of the socialist movement -- the anarchists were always skeptical of this. Okay, the left wing branch now. As opposed to the Marxist, the anarchists wanted to collectivize the economy through strikes and direct opposition to the owners. You might think of this as the direct approach, whereas the Marxists took a roundabout way. Undoubtedly, this is a more democratic approach, although a harder one since you need to have a politically critical general public, connected through various institutions and ready to act. Spain was influenced by this, it had an anarchist tradition for about, I think, a hundred years that ultimately spawned a revolution when Franco, a fascist leader, was going to usurp state power in Spain (you can read about it here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Revolution_of_1936). While there were killings of Priests and owners who were reluctant of letting their power go (since you have to understand that the working class in Spain saw the church and owners of business as oppressing them, which is true), at least the owners were offered to work with the revolutionaries or have their own land and do their own work but to never hire anyone since wage-labor was seen as wage-slavery. Furthermore, this was during a civil war, as I mentioned, the fascists versus the workers and anarchists. The dominant strand of anarchism was anarcho-syndicalism during that time. Anarcho-syndicalism is a strategy of winning over the economy through collective mass struggle, the workers were effectively connected through various syndicates that operated democratically. What anarchists want is a self-managed society, where the industry would be operated on democratic grounds with mutual aid and solidarity as generalized cultural principles (these principles need to be ingrained in the souls of the revolutionaries, but they would also be encouraged by the new economy). Self-management is a principle that says that if a decision affects you then you have a say in it. If a decision does not affect you then you don't have a say in it. If a decision affects you less than somebody else, then you have a less say in it than that somebody. It's a principle that's needed for a democracy to function well, otherwise you can have a tyranny of the majority. The economy proposed is a decentralized planned economy, and it worked rather well in Spain in terms of economic output, outranking the previous economy by tenfold. Keep in mind that this was during a civil war, with different socialistic tendencies kinda battling it out. The communists, influenced by Russia, worked against the anarchists. The fascists were supported by the US, Germany and other western liberal democracies (because these countries do not want true democracy (that is economic) to spread, since they will die out then). The outcomes of this support is the crushing of the collectivized economy and eventually Franco taking the state power, a fascist dictator. Just like the US today implants fascist dictators in other countries, because it is then easier to control those countries, so they did back in the day. It's the incentive that capitalism necessitates. Wars and imperialism are a logical outcome of a profit driven economy. You can read the rest in the wikipedia page or you can read true testimony from George Orwell in his Homage to Catalonia. Orwell was a socialist, sympathetic to anarchism, that fought against the fascists and witnessed the revolution. Personally haven't read it. A decentralized planned economy is an economy that functions like an organism. Think of it as a connection of small units that all function democratically internally. They are linked through institutions of representation -- councils. Each unit sends their delegate who will relay the information to other delegates. Then the whole of delegates will go back to their respective units and relay the information to others. In this sense it is decentralized, but planned. And it works! Today, with technology, it would work a lot better. No owners, just people working together and planning in order to fulfill the needs of everyone. Hope this helps you a bit, but note that I am not an expert. You can check Rojava today that is doing just this, in their own way. Again, it works.
A a Hey boy,your head is filled up some shit al right.Did you learned all this garbage in school?Or you are a special kind of stupid?What is your problem?
This guy is a overrated turd who sells populism and always argues on a moral level to morons who cant tell the difference, it's hillarious that Marxism WONT DIE, the literally worst thing to happen to humans since the 1900s. Classic Socialism is flat out retarded, it's a fantasy land made by a child with an adult filling in the details and you sheeps buy into it. Shit like this only helps creating another generation of Marxism.
Bring back Liberal Arts. Disparaging the study of philosophy and literature has brought us here. That, coupled with the absurd notion that education is job training. It's not and never should have been solely that. Otherwise, you end up with a vast employment base willing to maintain the status quo simply because it doesn't understand that there is a real alternative.
It is the Politically Correct crowd that hates the Lberal Arts. Shakespeare is called a misogynist, Columbus a monster and the Founding Fathers racists. This is all comes from Critical Theory or Marxism applied to Western Culture. Critical Theory was not allowed in the Soviet Union or the CCP, Chinese Communist Party. No one can criticize them. No Islamic country allows Political Correctness or Critical Theory.
@Aphrodite's Child how the shaman maintained mystical power over early civilizations. It's both depressing and frightening. Stalin and Hitler both eradicated their "intelligentsia" in the name of control. We're doing the same without the need for prisons and firing squads. We just make education about servitude and then price it as a desirable commodity like Air Jordans. If there's anything the American consumer loves, it's a product that makes them feel special without itself having any intrinsic value.
Liberal arts are here already you fool. Just because you want to justify your existence doesnt mean that the rest has to provide a job for you, from our pockets.
I also went to school during the cold war which took up half my life or more. I studied Marx for the first time in elementary school using books I got from the university library where my uncle went to school. I wanted to know what I was supposed to be afraid of and was very surprised to discover it was only a different economic system. I went back and read those books again later with a better understanding. I've always tried to understand things beyond what we learned from our school books so that university library was highly important to me. History was another subject that obviously required a deeper understanding in order to make sense of the world.. The teachers stopped calling on me for answers because they got a lot more than they bargained for.
this ''only a different economic system" commited genocide regularly. Russia killed almost as many Jews as Hitler, but they added any believers to their list. The Chinese starved MILLIONS.. yeah its harmless. and you're asleep.
he is great at explaining marxian analysis to liberals. it's wonderful to have it so accessible to people who would otherwise have nowhere good to learn ideas that are contrary to the current system. Michael Parenti is really good with the political analysis, and Wolff is great at explaining the economic stuff. they're a dream team the third pillar (component part) within Marxism is the philosophy, and I guess that'd be Noam Chomsky. three old guys explaining the three component parts of Marxism. love it.
@@AlexiLaiho227 I don't think Prof. Chomsky is a Marxist-- I believe he's into anarchism, which is a different idea altogether. Although in a talk I just listened to from Dr. Wolff, he says that there is no such thing as just a "Marxist"-- that "Marxism" is a collection of *many* different ideas developed by a whole host of figures that range from right leaning (Lenin) to much further left.
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
Richard is always informed and informative, intuitive, influential and willing to go out on every limb, He's inspiring and he always makes me believe that I can understand what's going on instead of just feeling bewildered.
@@beck_to_future5529 Yup, always like discussion. Jobs are replaced by computers and automation: workers fired/jobs lost - there are more jobs in America now than almost any time in its history. He ignores that people work on computers and build automation. Odd considering this is a talk at Google. Technology does not lead to job loss, just changes which create jobs that may have never existed before. Innovation is not the enemy it is made out to be.
@@beck_to_future5529 Private corporations gain profit without paying costs. If we ignore payroll, capital investment, risk, time etc. It is not a magical process, it is not reasonable to ignore the rest of what happens.
@@beck_to_future5529 An employer will only give you money if you make more for them. He frames it as some sort of injustice, but it requires the zero sum fallacy. Both are discretionary players in the transaction, both will get more out than they put in. If not they would make different decisions.
To people who are anti-socialism/communism answer this, why is Mr.Wolff correct that it's not taught in schools? If it's such a bad idea, what's the harm in teaching people about why it doesnt work? We'd surely have fewer people misconstruing it as a good system if it were taught, so why the complete black out about it in the school systems? I don't think either system holds the answers, both have significant pro's and con's. It's interesting that for such a complex topic, people are so dogmatic about one system or the other.
+J P To the same degree as other organizational structures? To the same degree in different schools across countries? Many people have deficient knowledge of the kinds of political systems humans tend to engage in, as Mr.Wolff pointed out. My question, and perhaps Mr.Wolffs as well, might be better placed against the average person in society. The more people know, the less they can be misled.
The right is so obsessed now about purging Marxism from the humanities that nobody has bothered to examine why it was purged from economics departments 65 years ago. It was a threat to the moneyed interests to be taught in economics and so they conducted a nationwide witch hunt. The right is the side of the political spectrum that has lost track of all the lies that it has made to the point that it no longer knows when its making them. Indeed, they lack the vocabulary to understand why they're lying. They don't even know, for the most part, what the ideology of conservatism is and why it's an ideology of destruction. Always has been, always will be.
I love how socialists are constantly talking about how they never get a chance. WTF are you smoking? Billions of people lived under various forms of socialism. Marx is one of the most recognized and studied philosophers in history. Capitalism is constantly being critiqued. Be serious. Every academic department in every major college has one of these Marxist fools. The problem with socialism is not that it has not been tried. The problem with socialism is that it fails miserably and those who espouse it starve to death.
The problem with capitalism is that every time it fails, the state is there to bail it out. I get the impression that you're commenting without watching the whole thing. No one is defending Leninists and state capitalism.
But democracy in the workplace, aka seizing the means of production, would soon lead to democracy in the state. Without private corporations having a near monopoly on the means of production, how would they collude with the political establishment to keep the majority of workers politically impotent. If workers were economically empowered they just might have the resources necessary to influence the government to take action that benefitted them. And how would elected officials exploit the system for personal gain if they are being held accountable. It would make it so that in order to be elected and reelected politicians would have to work to serve their constituents. And by this point it would only make sense for people who intend on making a positive change to even run for office. And we couldn't have that now could we?
And where do you get the notion that "seizing the means of production" would make the company better off or more profitable and keep it from failure? The socialism you describe is based on nothing more than jealousy, anger, and greed. Yes, greed, the thought that you get to steal from the producers stuff that you didn't earn.
@@tomservo75 thnx for the critique. But I'll put it to you like this: imagine we work the same shift and get paid the same wage. If I slack off and you work harder we both get paid the same. That's not fair to you right. Then let's say we both work really hard, and through our work we increase sales and profits. We still get paid the same. Now let's say we both slack off. We don't increase sales and we don't decrease sales. Our employer sees us as technically profitable. And we still get paid the same. If workplaces were owned by the workers and profits were given to those who labored to generate them in accordance to how much labor they put it then things would change. If I could reliably expect to see more money when I worked hard I would reliably work hard. My boss may say if work really hard he'll give me a raise, but until then and if then, if I work harder any profits I generate through extra labor goes to my employer. If I hard work for a company for years, and they consistently make profits for years, and their value has been rising for years, and one day they decide to sell the company for a huge return on investments, I don't get anything but a box to put my stuff in. We should be valued for how much work we put in. And we should value the labor of others. If good honest hard working people show up everyday and make an operation possible they should be valued. A democratic workplace is not a rigid prescriptive structure that would be identical in every place. The would vary wildly depending on how their members decide to organize themselves. People would actually have some autonomy in their lives for once. Also it would bring the spirit of democratic participation back to our society. People arent voting in elections like they used to because for the most part elections don't change anything on a day to day basis for most people. So instead of waiting around for someone who doesn't know our name to make an effort on our behalf, why don't we just come together with the people we see everyday for years and say let's have a vote right here among us who are here five days a week. It's really not that radical.
@@booboodadfool8015 That's a fair reply. I would say a couple of things. First, I do agree, people who put more time and effort in for the same job should be paid more. Though if you and I BOTH slacked off on the job, I dare say sales would not increase, the company itself would suffer and we'd probably be replaced with more competent workers. I generally agree that those who put more labor in should be compensated better than those who don't, those who MAKE more for the company, in general, should get paid more in return. And for many people in large corporations, that compensation includes stock options, so they are in a sense owning a part of the company. But where I think some people (not necessarily you) get mixed up on this is that there's a difference between higher compensation and forced ownership, like when people like Bernie call for companies to put employees on the board. On its face it sounds good. But there's no reason for a Presidential candidate to be talking about that unless he wanted to make it law which would be immoral and constitutional to FORCE such a situation, and really, that type of law would be unenforceable anyway because I as the CEO would say, "No, Mr. Sanders I'll choose my own board members, what are you going to do about it?" Besides, what if those new owners have no idea how to manage a company and the whole thing goes bankrupt? Of course, maybe it might be a good experiment to put some of those employees on the board for a few months, just attend a couple of meetings, so that they can see first hand the tough decisions that must be made, how it's not always a matter of figuring out who deserves what, because running a company is far more complex than any of them realize, they look at it in a very simplistic way. The way that the socialists talk, they don't seem to even care if one is more productive than the other, that employee ownership is some kind of right. They don't at all take into account all the money and effort and work hours that the owner puts into it, they just think that if you're one of 20 workers you deserve 1/20 of the profit no matter what. Going back to your example, if we have the same position, the one who works better makes more money for the company and thus should be paid more. For your example of working hard and then the company gets sold, well I would think/hope that the buying company would want to keep as many workers as possible since they know the company and product, recognize my work and want to keep me on (with a raise to prevent me from going to their predator). Or, if I was compensated through stocks, then I'd profit some from the sale myself. But I think in your example, you're overlooking the fact that the owner put much more into it than me. I just showed up and got hired. I didn't have to start the company put up the money, the ideas, pay for all the expenses, etc. I think that gets left out of the equation too often. As I said, what if the company failed and went bankrupt, should I as an employee be expected to eat part of the loss too? That's something the people commenting here won't answer.
I have to add one more thing - I'd like to explore the sentence _"Without private corporations having a near monopoly on the means of production, how would they collude with the political establishment to keep the majority of workers politically impotent."_ There's a lot to unpack there. It's a VERY broad statement. 1. There are some companies that have monopolies on certain industries, and that's mainly due to sweetheart deals with governments. That's not capitalism, it's cronyism. Capitalism is about making free choice. If I can only choose one cable provider, that's not a free choice, and if the reason I can't choose one is because my town made an exclusive deal with them, then that's cronyism. But private companies in GENERAL do and should largely control the means of production, but that's not a monopoly. A monopoly is for a specific type of business or industry. And what's the alternative? Are you suggesting governmental bodies should control production? Because that's the ONLY alternative to what you're suggesting, and I think most Americans know that would be disastrous. One of the first moves that Chavez made in Venezuela was nationalizing industries. How did that go? Even if your alternative is bringing workers into management, then that's an idea that some companies may try. Though they have to be competent in that business to do so. As a President or CEO I would only want people on the board making decisions who have a stake and know what they're doing. Sometimes to keep the company afloat, businesses have to make decisions that some employees, who don't have the insight, experience, or information necessary to make those decisions, don't like. To pass laws requiring companies to involve all employees in management decisions is no better than letting your 8-year-old decide what's for dinner every night. 2. A huge portion of Americans (though not a majority) are politically impotent, but that has nothing to do with any type of collusion, unless you're talking about biased media providing mis-information. But this is on ourselves and our education system, which no longer teaches civics, history, and basic economics, who drum into children that America is bad, that capitalists are evil, people only hear one side of the story. There's a VERY EASY cure for "political impotence." Inform yourself! Listen to the news and diversify your sources. Think about issues, do some research, and make informed decisions rather than getting all your information from Facebook and Twitter. If I hear one more person talking about "fake news on Facebook or blogs," I want to scream, "WHY THE F*CK ARE YOU GETTING YOUR NEWS FROM BLOGS??!!" Watch one hour of CNN and one hour of Fox News and then a third hour from other reputable sources online. It's up to each and every one of us to make sure we're well-informed. Capitalism, if anything, provides MORE and better news sources to choose from.
This guy is just rehashing Marx's talking points, but he has not addressed any of the counter arguments made which can be found at the Mises institute. I wonder how he would fair in a debate, where the other side is represented. And I don't mean where rich people cry that it would be so unfair if things were fair. I mean economists who respond to the "work surplus" idea with the idea of "time preference of money". What about "the road to serfdom"? Marx writes 50 years after the capitalist french revolution. "the road to serfdom" is written in the fallout of Marx.
Sarah Isles he’s been in a few and normally he obliterates them, but debates aren’t the way to come up with an argument, debates are for soundbites of trying to “beat” the other person, like how Trump “won” the debates, but his ideas have been proven wrong time and time again since the Great Depression and the Great Recession.
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
@@thebrunoserge Sweet, that's why I sourced what I was saying WITH ACTUAL ECONOMISTS. Here's some more if you'd like: "The Anti-Capitalist Mentality," by Ludwig von Mises "Basic Economics," Thomas Sowell "Free to Choose," Milton Friedman "The Road to Serfdom," Friedrich Hayek "The Dao of Capital," Mark Spitznagel "Judgement Under Uncertainty," Daniel Kahneman "The Vision of the Anointed," by Thomas Sowell "The Birth of Plenty," Bernstein "The Ascent of Money," Niall Ferguson "The Rational Optimist," Matt Ridley "Classical Economics," Murray Rothbard "A Conflict of Visions," Thomas Sowell "Wealth Poverty and Politics," Thomas Sowell "Intellectuals and Society," Thomas Sowell “Marxism,” by Thomas Sowell "The Chicago School," Johan Van Overtveldt "A Short History of Man," Hans Hermann .NICE TRY IN PRESUMING THE HIGH GROUND.....BRO
@@dmonarredmonarre3076 Wolff IS an *actual economist*. Something tells me you hate the truth. You seem very desperate to cover it up. Means you're either very evil, or very stupid
They literally work themselves to death. Almost as if it you can't work enough to satisfy the system. Even robots, working 24/7 with 100 times a workers output won't be enough at some point. Capitalism will fail, question is when and how much suffering humans endure along the way.
Workaholic suggests that they enjoy it or it is fundamental to their person. It isn't. They fucking hate being worked to death, but leaving a company and starting at another means starting at the bottom of the ladder, and the bottom of that ladder is not really livable.
Let's see, to change over to a socialist/communist regime we will need to re-educate (KILL), about two million Americans .Duh, I'll take Capitalism. (really all ISM's are bad)
Again a real intellectual joy to be able to listen to but there is more than ideas, he does it with such virtuosity, such clarity that there is "art" in there too, as always.
"Two interesting rules that might excite you: Rule number one. The workers together hire and fire and evaluate the managers. I know, I have to let that sink in. In other words it’s the opposite of what you have. The workers decide whether the managers were successful and if they weren’t they’re gone. They also have another rule. The highest paid person cannot get more than 8x the income of the lowest paid person. That’s how they solve the problem of inequality. Just gone. Not an issue. There is some inequality. Eight to one is still a hefty ratio. But I assume you know that the ratio of corporate CEO’s to low paid workers in American corporations is around 350 to 1." ~Prof Richard Wolff at 50:00
Im pertty sure the managers still do the hiring and firing of the workers. Its just the workers votes who gets to be the manager. The biggest problem I see is who funds this co-op. Say a company is profitable and wants to sell, the government lends workers money to buy the company. Is it lending the money to the workers or the co-op? if the workers fail and the company goes broke, do the workers have to pay back the government for the loan. If they do thats ok in my book. If they dont and the workers go find new jobs same thing happens where does this unlimited supply of government money keep coming from to fund this. I think the odds of the business failing would be higher because people are greedy. What makes the people want to reinvest in the company to grow the company if it takes money off there paycheck and they wont personally see any returns from it.
@@Technics19 the government helps give small businesses loans because we know that the average positive effect on the economy will exceed the costs of the loans that fail, so functions as an intermediary for the society to make a distributed investment in its own economic benefit. What would be the difference between the government helping out small, private businesses and them helping put coops (through helping buy out a company looking to outsource via first right of refusal and/or helping start new ones)? As for investing, why wouldn't they see a return? The profits from reinvesting would return to the workers instead of going to shareholders, so what makes you think they wouldn't see a return that would make them want to reinvest in improving the company?
@@dynamicworlds1 well a small business is the owners and they reward if they succeed. Workers here's your choice we can pay you $30 an hour and maintain our business or $25 an hour and grow.
@@Technics19 all the workers in a coop are rewarded if the business succeeds. Your reply didn't actually answer the question. If the owners can be motivated by more money later to invest in improving the business, why wouldn't the workers (which, btw, real world worker coops have shown they will)? If this isn't special pleading, please explain the difference.
This is the third time over the years that I have watched this particular lecture from Prof. Wolff. I find it the single best, most understandable criticism of capitalism, the American economy, and the implications for our society. If only he could give this lecture without using the trigger words (capitalism, socialism, etc.) to an audience of Trump supporters. IMO most of Trump's base feel the brunt of our unequal system, but lack the education to understand the source of their woes. Prof. Wolff might be able to turn on some light bulbs, if only...
@rob Wait. You think there are no bread lines in the US, no hungry families? Do you not know that the US prison system is becoming more and more for profit, a very fascist idea? Are you aware that in Texas there is a new law creating vigilantes to inform on their neighbors for assisting a woman to obtain an abortion? OK, now that we have gotten your "one words" out of the way, allow me to point out to you that the gulags and the Stazi had nothing to do with the economic systems in their countries, and everything to do with the political systems. I do agree that capitalism is the best system for the oligarchs, but not so great for the people on the bottom except when it is tempered with a little socialism and a lot of regulation. Laissez faire capitalism has much in common with organized crime; those with the muscle prey on those without. Rules are needed to keep the mobsters from taking over. Surely you must agree. Or do you miss the Gilded Age?
@rob awesome work proving your lack of education 👍. Now let me describe US capitalism: no education, can't afford it, no healthcare, can't afford it, no industries. But hey anyone can open their own business and compete with Walmart and made in China, no one is stopping you. Except lack of capital and education and pretty hard to do without healthcare and when your in jail and when you have to work all day without a break to make profits for the shareholders who are mostly uber wealthy foreigners. What's even better is your working for them for free too by repeating thier capitalist propaganda. Your nation has been raped and usurped by and is now totally set up to protect foreign money while you get jailed in private jail's owned by foreigners and getting killed in wars to protect foreign capital. The only time USA was great was when it was socialist eg. moon landings. A huge effort by the government to educate people producing scientists, astronauts, machines, achieving something for humanity. Capitalism's achievements: worked out how to make a big Mac 5c cheaper to produce, tastes like crap now but who cares, count the savings as profit give profit to executives as bonus... repeat until business fails move on to next business repeat. You have confused free market for capitalism it is not the same thing. Capitalism is about capital who owns it and protecting it at all costs nothing less nothing more and as it fails it turns monopolistic and pressures the government to control people more and more to protect it. It's a hungry beast that wants more and more and now it's forsaken us and moved to China anyway. I realise this is way to much for you and I apologise but it's really for others to read.
@ DocZom I totally agree with you, so how do you make this happen? A true understanding of the other side would probably turn on alot of light bulbs. How do we make this happen. The main stream media is ultimately guided by profits so the real facts are never going to be reported on. This includes Right & left leaning media organizations . I still hold hope that educated/informed masses can do what's right for the greater good.
Such clarity! this should be taught Civics classes. What a breath of fresh air and hope! At least starting the conversation which till very recently has been a taboo
One take home point for me is that the inability of our government to critically examine and remedy our economic problems is due to the fact that we have been taught only one model of economics and don't have the skills to think outside that one framework.
It's called "hypernormalization": everyone sees and realizes the system is collapsing, but they are all such a deep part of it that no one can imagine any alternative. It happened to the Soviets in the 1980s which is why I believed that some manner of Socialism in the US would be regression. Then I realized that Russia went directly from feudalism to state capitalism and had merely rebranded it as "socialism", skipping the capitalist stage entirely.
Socialism has a rich history in the US, a people's history. And throughout our history the Capitalist class has done it's best to demonize socialism, equate it to communism or fascism and eliminate it's proponents and literature. In the 60's socialist professors were dragged from their classrooms and disappeared, and the books were burned. Not because it's an evil or horribly flawed system. They did their level best to eliminate every trace of it from our history so we have no record of ever fighting for ourselves, and no tools with which to wage that fight if we ever again get the notion on our own that we actually matter.
@@jarilocromlech1257 I've just realized more or less the same thing. Dr Wolff at some point has said the any solution to the current problems that leaves the cause ie capitalism in place is doomed to be taken over again in a couple generations and the same thing will happen again to our grand or great grandkids. I like the ideas of MMT and UBI but am afraid that any money that goes to the public without a change in they overall system will just be hoovered back up into the capitalist class' vaults
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
Super. Good to include education on capitalism and socialism, around the world, so eloquently presented, at schools as well as universities, alongside ethical management.
What???? Why has every one of the 27 Socialist regimes become autocratic? Socialism's actual track record sucks for democracy. Let's face the facts. There is no democracy in the One Party State. There is no democracy without freedom of speech. No Socialist country ever had that for long.
" Capitalist society is based upon the exploitation of labor. A small minority owns everything; the working masses own nothing. The capitalists command. The workers obey. The capitalists exploit. The workers are exploited. The very essence of capitalist society is found in this merciless and ever-increasing exploitation.Capitalist production is a practical instrument for the extraction of surplus value." Nikolai Bukharin
@Haile Selassie Amazing how Marxism boils down to the most irrational, poorly thought out dogmas of Christianity. In this instance, the sin of usury. 😏
@Haile Selassie If you replace "goods" by "services", the labor theory of value still works. A service is very similar to a perishable/consumable good. The capitalist can still hoard surplus value, and in many cases they have to in order to survive. The fact that is not always the case doesn't invalidate the theory, it only lessens the injustice a little bit.
You are participating in capitalism when you have a garage sale or trade illegal contraband for currency. In fact any consensual exchange of services for currency or other trade value are also capitalist. Governments create a system in which the proceeds of capitalism are funneled into a super minority. This speaker's plan is to hand more power to those governments.
In German, employer and employees are called "Arbeitgeber" ("work giver(s)") and "Arbeitnehmer" ("work taker(s)"). The funny thing is that Arbeitgeber refers to the emloyers, so our language reflects very closely the notion that it is the employer who "gives" us work. But if you think about it, it is actually the Arbeitnehmer (employee) who gives his work. This is why some German marxists now use the other way. F**k the system!
+Markus Pfeifer In Croatia we have similar language constructs. It's basically popularized after restoration of capitalism. I'm not conspiracy theorist but it seems that this language constructs are made to make working class think that they don't know how and what to work without "work givers".
@@ionezgb This has been mirrored in American/Canadian English for perhaps 10-20 years now, with the euphemism "job creators" being bandied about in every public discourse about corporate taxes, "payroll taxes", the unemployment rate, etc. Of course, it's not something you'll ever hear average people say to each other, but it stems from the same disgusting capitalist bullshit. Solidarity, comrades.
Labor creates demand and not the other way around. The economy should work for the people not the other way around. The economists should work for the economy. German economic tradition going back to guilds, through Bismark until 1945 (absent weimar) the economy was understood in this way. Neoliberalism is cancer. Usury is cancer.
Working together builds muscle memory. Corporations exist on brilliant people. Critical workforce skills atrophy if not used no matter how much you don't need that critical skill today. I'm very happy to have come across this video. Thank you Richard W. My comment comes at no cost ha ha
Brilliant analysis. Particularly relevant now during Covid crisis with thousands losing their jobs. Now is the time to start thousands of worker CO-OPs in UK.
@@hilaryporter7841 no your the usual democrat/Comi that doesn’t understand people will do whatever you motivate them to do. That is why Wolff’s Marxist ideas will never work.
The irony is that he gets rich off criticizing capitalism, much like other champagne socialists. Your admiration is misplaced. Clearly you can't see obvious grifters like Wolff and Reich. Their own home city is failing economically and yet you think they are the purveyors of truth? Pitiful.
@@Misaka-gt5yj How many of these 'experts' or prominent individuals do you see from any 'side' who aren't rich? It doesn't matter the subject or field of study. They have these rich people speak and decide the peasants fates.
@@youtuber6185 I've seen what you're referring to. Even as a lefty, it was pretty damn cringey. I think we'd agree that that level pedantry is silly. But not all of us are that insufferable. Cheers!
matthew labbe If you google the actual definition of democratic socialism it does require community ownership of companies. This sounds harmless but if you delve into questions about how you would transition private property of company ownership over there are no answers. In capitalism we already have coops and ESOPs but people decide to not donate their companies. So either we force out private ownership or stay like we are. Actually Karl Marxs called for abolishing ALL private property and Wolff reveres Marx. It’s clear why I’m anti DSA
Respect Sir. It's an outstanding discussion mixing economics and history. Being a chemist also I didn't find it difficult to understand the basics of economics!
Economics is baseless. Until it’s tied to the actual energy generating potential of our planet we are doomed. The economy must be tied to Molecular Biophysics of our globe. ruclips.net/video/ZSjNCPPY-1I/видео.html
Uni students in USA are not taught Karl Marx‘a economics, while in China, the students are taught all kinds of economics from the west, therefore they not only know Marx’s Capital(Das Kapital), but also know Adam Smith and Keynes etc as well
Was a boat captain and have said that the designer's should have to fix the boat themselves first to see if it's possible... This is the basis of employees running the country... Let those that do the work decide how things are to be...
Brilliant lecture. On radical differences between Keynesian and neo-classical economics [00:00] to 05:49]. On the failure of economics programs to discuss radical critique of economics [38:31] to [44:35]. On democratic capitalism [44:35] to [53:42].
Democratic capitalism? You sure missed the point. If there is no capitalist owning the corporation and, by the virtue of this ownership, deciding how to distribute results of labor, that fundamentally ain't no capitalism.
@@Alkis05 If you can't democratize the enterprise (with cooperatives), the state needs to regulate.The Netherlands or Sweden, for example, always had capitalist system, but they tax wealth progressively. As a result, the state has and uses the power to address the two weaknesses of unfettered capitalism: instability and crises are less severe, and at the same time inequality and poverty are consistently lower and at more acceptable levels than in the USA. This in fact is true for most of continental Europe.
I see we have the stem-majors who have a hard-on for libertarians in the comments. If you're a Capitalist and detest something because of the name Marx is included, this is the man you must listen to. Also, I'm very surprised google invited him. There is a lot of confusion in the comments unfortunately.....
I'm a stem-major and a strong advocate for a socialist mode of production and the reversal of bourgeois created and enforce property-relations. Some Stem-majors give us all a bad wrap - once the material conditions of this field start to diminish under late capitalism due to the falling rate of profit, we'll see which stem majors are still capitalist bootlickers.
Thanks for the great source and analysis! I agree - I love science and technology not because I'm in it to make a fat wage - I recognise i'm still having my surplus extracted regardless if my bourgeois boss pays me $60 or $10 an hour. I also believe that a socialist transition state and then full communism allows more innovations in the fields I am passionate about and thus I see not only the problems of capitalism but the advantages of socialism/communism for the STEM field! Anyways thanks comrade
Max Stirner lmao! But all u talk about has never worked in the history of mankind. See in order to know the future u need to look at passed results. The reason u feel this way is u live in a capitalist society and u live a great life. Funny people growing up in communist Russia would not feel the way u do. CAUSE THEY LIVED IT!! It’s not fun!! Lmao
WorldsGreatest Man lmao! So u think government wouldn’t hold back the tech field? Sooo Stalin’s Russia did all kind of innovative things to change the world? How bout Lennon’s Russia? Did a bunch of amazing things? Did they invent the microwave oven? Lmao! They were too busy begging for plain bread to eat that the government dished out to them. Great system. Equal misery. Perfect!
As a STEM major, these people do not represent me. If anything capitalism is a hinderance to scientific progress. Wealth in the hands of a few means that those few dictate the work of science and that is fundamentally unprincipled. If a breakthrough is made that hurts capitalists, they can easily shut it down. The makers of Oxycontin lied about its addictiveness and when people stepped up and showed them the proof of their lies, the company did everything in their power to silence them for as long as possible. Purdue Pharma opened lawsuits, they defamed them in scientific journals (which had conflicts of interest with big pharma), they attempted to get funding cut for other projects of theirs, etc. Millions of people have died as a result of the opioid crisis, and millions more have been crippled by the worst opioid epidemic since China's over a century ago, as a result of capitalists controlling the flow of information and the direction of science.
Another advantage of worker co-ops is that the experts of the field can directly involve in decision makings. While conventional enterprises the decision makers are not always experts of the field which means many of the times they dont fully understand what they are doing and always trying to cut the costs
@K Korona Are you asking me to name a technology conceived by a political system? Really? Maybe you should be more specific? lol Make your case and if It's remotely compelling I'll play.
To all Google employees, as well as all employees of corporations, and workers all around the world: Organize and unite. Understand our power. Dump the bosses off our backs.
Since I've heard many of his talks before, i kinda want to skip to the comments/QA. But I'm also scared because I know it probably isn't going to be good.
Yes, that is quite obvious. Kudos for him for doing it and why on God's green earth they would want Richard Wolff to lecture the Google guys on the shortcomings on the current predatory Capitalist system that has gone awry and has run amok since Reagan got elected is way, way beyond me.
@Gerry Atric he's a wackjob for promoting democracy at the workplace of which we spend A HUGE PORTION of our lives (monday through friday, from 9am to 5pm)? for pointing out the contradictions of capitalism? for calling out the greediness of billionaires? well, if that's what it means to be a 'wack-job' then i'll go ahead and join him.
@@Dillonthewinner What criticisms of capitalism of his do you not find accurate? What are your own criticisms of democratizing the workplace? Im new to this idea of socialism so im always curious to see what those who ferociously oppose it think about these ideas.
Fascinating critique of America's cold war capitalist ideology strangling free speech and open thought in education-and society overall-in it's effort to maintain it's dominance. His dissection of capitalism is really thought provoking relative to why we accept this arrangement and the alternatives he names like democratizing workforces through cooperatives is worth consideration. The critics falsely accusing him of advocating for "bigger government" have no problem fighting two unpaid for wars while preparing to start others, massive tax cuts for the wealthiest , cuts to social security and a border wall and seem to be able to find money for these projects without a problem, despite the deficits they're already causing.
Those critics are arguing in bad faith, they don't actually care to hear anything about any other systems. No one is that brain dead to see making worker places democratic as big government, they are acting in bad faith.
@@phil5569 of course, *_Richard D. Wolff, Professor of Economics Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, Amherst where he taught economics from 1973 to 2008_* is idiotic, but RUclips commenter, Phil556 is not.
@@phil5569 There is no evidence that weed makes anyone more 'idiotic' than anyone else (but there is a movie called 'Reefer Madness' that makes that debunked claim)... and much evidence to assume it may, in fact, enhance cognitive abilities (why creative people use it). And we do not NEED EVIDENCE to conclude that you are the idiot you project outside of itself... but you are the evidence of your own contradiction (that is, smoking 'less weed' has clearly done nothing for you).
@@neilwilliams2883 Careful with the sarcasm, irony and satire around the naive, the dumb and the narcissistic. Phil just MIGHT be taking you seriously!
My college economics teacher informed us he was required to teach this class, read from a textbook, and was basically a semester of hell which convinced me for many years that economics was something I wasn't at all interested in intellectually. Why did you have to bring that traumatic memory back to me right off the bat :P
But there’s a reason. There’s a reason. There’s a reason for this, there’s a reason education SUCKS, and it’s the same reason it will never, ever, EVER be fixed. It’s never going to get any better, don’t look for it, be happy with what you’ve got. Because the owners, the owners of this country don’t want that. I’m talking about the real owners now, the BIG owners! The Wealthy… the REAL owners! The big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions. Forget the politicians. They are irrelevant. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don’t. You have no choice! You have OWNERS! They OWN YOU. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought, and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls, they got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls. They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying, lobbying, to get what they want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else, but I’ll tell you what they don’t want: They don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. That’s against their interests. That’s right. They don’t want people who are smart enough to sit around a kitchen table and think about how badly they’re getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. They don’t want that! You know what they want? They want obedient workers. Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shitty jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime and vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it, and now they’re coming for your Social Security money. They want your retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street, and you know something? They’ll get it. They’ll get it all from you sooner or later cause they own this fucking place! It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it! You, and I, are not in the big club. By the way, it’s the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to think and what to buy. The table has tilted folks. The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care! Good honest hard-working people; white collar, blue collar it doesn’t matter what color shirt you have on. Good honest hard-working people continue, these are people of modest means, continue to elect these rich cock suckers who don’t give a fuck about you…. they don’t give a fuck about you… they don’t give a FUCK about you. They don’t care about you at all… at all… AT ALL. And nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That’s what the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue dick that’s being jammed up their assholes everyday, because the owners of this country know the truth. It’s called the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it. RIP GEORGE CARLIN
Capitalism won't have control over education forever. They are now at the point where most of their ill gotten gains are fictitious capital. Not sustainable.
Thrashaero yes there’s people out here that care and give a shit and have been speaking up and speaking out. We just need more that’s all. Hopefully people are beginning to realize what the truth really is. All these companies are ran by a certain group of people they have been running these companies forever including asshole bankers! They have set up the system to fail over and over again and they never use their own money but use ours and we the people are constantly screwed because of their stupidness! Co-ops do seem to be the best Way to go but I do not believe that anyone other than the workers make the rules for the company getting any government involved in anything is the worst thing anyone could think about! But they will try to rig that too but somehow someway we the people have to stand up and figure out the best way to handle us and make the rules for ourselves not let them make the rules for us. It’s going to be a fight and hopefully people are willing to stand up and start doing it otherwise the system is never going to change
There are more of us than there are of them. We know they don't care. We know all that. Time for us to pay attention to OUR wants and OUR cares. Screw them. We need to think about what the majority of us want and need.
Awesome lecture! Thank you, Teacher! I spent many years in Europe & Asia, & many countries have far superior systems than we do - political, economic & social systems that work a MILLION TIMES BETTER, for ALL of us, not just the 1 % of Oligarchs, like what we got goin' on in Amerikkka! I STRONGLY recommend everybody SHARE this video with all yer friends!
@@ediodimacaroni I already live in Denmark. People can exist their entire life here without working. My GF's mother has not worked for at least 40 years. She is now recently retired but that is also paid by the government, so....
don't confuse capitalism with corruption. Americans pay more than enough taxes to pay for the services you think the government ought to provide, but the money is wasted on...government
![Understanding Marxism: Q&A with Richard D. Wolff [June 2019]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eU-AkeOyiOQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Understanding Marxism: Q&A with Richard D. Wolff [June 2019]](/img/tr.png)
![Global Capitalism: The U.S. Election and Trump 2.0 in Historical Perspective [November 2024]](/img/1.gif)
he's takin it right to the workers in one of the biggest monopolies. respect
And it's rolling of their consciousness like water off a ducks back. Who cares about inequity when they are being treated equitably; And, their ability to defend themselves with incredible military equipment is affordable to them? These people don't need to care. The illusion of righteousness is intoxicating.
randomstuff911
Wolff is complaining about Capitalism instead of explaining how to thrive. Lamenting that the Horse and Buggy is becoming obsolete, instead of explaining which is the most reliable, safe and efficient automobile... I think most people would agree that there is a need for some level of Social Safety Net , and there are important Government Agencies that are necessary to enforce Laws and Guidelines..... But innovation must never be stifled, and private property/wealth must be a cornerstone of Society.... No matter how good Marxist Ideas look theoretically or philosophically, they do not work in reality..... they do not promote the talent of the Best and the Brightest....they give no incentive to the working man.... they lead to strict oversight, loss of individual freedom, and economic disaster.
Tomato Pa.... More innovation in Mao's China or Stalin's USSR?Democratizing the work place is a vague notion... Super Rich by "simply sitting on to of a corporation" a CEO may be a share holder, but may or may not be a major shareholder... Mr. Tomato Pa has the option to buy shares, and potentially receive dividends, if he is willing to take the risk.... Marxism must be enforced, otherwise clever , productive, organize people will have a better quality of life then the rest.......www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/red-famine-anne-applebaum-ukraine-soviet-union/542610/
Tomato Pa ... Capitalism for me, some variety of Marxism for you... Cuba, North Korea, China for you, ...USA, UK, Canada for me.........I don't know what you mean when you use the phrase "the democratic workplace", but the point is moot... You correctly judged that I consider further response pointless... Also, that cunning UN prefix maneuver, that you formulated, demonstrates you are far too clever for me.
The fact that Google allowed this scares me as to how confident they are about unionization being impossible and the American working class being forever impotent and unable to exert the powers their numbers should reflect.
You nailed it.
IMPERIALLY....Arrogant !
Unions are a relic of the oast.
@@Leyenda1 *seeing John Deere being out-muscled by a union* No, they're not. If more workers belong to unions, corporations wouldn't be able to get away with doing what they are doing to our country and it's citizens.
@@JamieRobles1 I think John Deere is an anomaly in the whole of the thing. Boeing is leaving Seattle albeit at a snails pace. They have moved their HQs to Chicago and have built a plant in SC just to avoid union entanglements in the Seattle area. More companies are eating California for more business friendly ventures in Texas. There is nothing stopping this train...
I worked at a shipyard that was bought by the employees. The employees used their 401K to buy shares in the employee owned company. It worked well.
Yeah, until the employees became complacent and non-competitive
@@michael5555ization you really think a person wouldn't work *harder* when they have an actual, tangible stake in the business? Your understanding of human nature is severely lacking and cloaked in years of hyper-individualist propaganda
Patricia Pandacoon you don’t even follow this man because he talks about all that, that argument is outdated. That is NOT human nature according to science. Why are you even on This video there are obvious people who live and love and will die for capitalism and will say that bullshit, mean while look at Basque🤣 hush
@@24POWERS and you think they are like this just naturally? No, they are propagandized by the American corporate establishment into thinking humans are selfish monsters. Read Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution to get an introductory understanding to what I'm talking about because *clearly* you are just talking out of your ass.
All fine and dandy until the day someone speaks about what they are being paid and what others are being paid. Because the ones pulling the wagon will always ask for more than the ones riding in it.
Great and well needed lecture! Even in former Yugoslavia there was an economic system 1950-1992 called "the socialst workers' self management". That was 99 % same as today's Cooperatives. I lived and worked in that system and I can tell you first hand that we, the workers, were very, very happy with it. To those who will immediately say that Yugoslavia crashed because of it, I say that cannot be farther from truth. Yugoslavia crashed and ended because of aggressive nationalism and religious hatred between major ethnic groups, and that's completely different story.
Also that hatred was also funded by capitalist forces... mainly from the west.
Yes but why exactly did the war happen
Because of America.
@@mickc6347The war happened mostly because Serbia, as the biggest country in the federation, stopped concerning itself with socialism, and started concerning itself with expansion. The socialist regimes were at an end in the late 80s/early 90s. Serbia knew it would lose out big losing Slovenia and Croatia for the infrastructure and industry (as well as the coastline), and Bosnia for the natural resources.
They cooked up a rebellion in Croatia (which who knows what part was grassroots and what part seeded) to justify mobilizing the Yugoslav National Army (comprised mostly of serbs since they were the majority population, as well as overrepresented in the leadership) against Croatia and Bosnia to gain control.
I agree totally with you… I’ve been there when TITO was alive and saw 1st hand how the cooperatives worked… also I believe that the west contributed for the fragmentation of ex- YOUGOSLAVIA… SO SAD… DISGUSTING WEST INTERFERENCE, as they were afraid of the STRONG NATION/ COUNTRY YOUGOSLAVIA WAS… 22 million population and the strongest army in Europe after SOVIET UNION… MISLAM ISTO TAKA KAKO VÁS… ZAPAD E KRIVO DA GLEDAME FRAGMENTATSIA OF EX YOUGOSLAVIA… PITCHKUMATRINA TO ZAPADDDDDD KRIVE SE ZA BORBASSEKADE… POZGRAVI MNOGU…
John Steinbeck once said that socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires!
😂😂 such a great writer
This is really true for poor white america, but most poor minority groups can see what's going on and how the system is stacked against them.
Like ELON MUSK ?
SOMETIMES HE HAD TO SLEEP UNDER A DESK.HE DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A BED - (OR A SHOWER)=
It was about temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
@@argemirocarvajal7843 oh for gods sake 😭
I've watched Wolff and read everything he has for 5 years... I never miss one of his economic updates... @ democracy at work
Down with democracy
@@fun_ghoul You first
@@coopsnz1 That all you've got, Ben 'Lest-A-Man?
@Paesan Control Centre
Karl Marx was a Luciferian
This guy is touting him, what more do we need to know.
@@sojournsojourntraveler1203 You used the word "Luciferian". What more do we need to know?
🖕🖕
I am just dicovering these lectures and am learning a great deal. I always hated the world of work and am glad I am retired. I now realize better why I hated the world of work. Thank you for the knowledge.
You are a lazy SOB. Nothing more to it.
@@BarrySlisk you cannot discern a stranger's character from a youtube comment. Disliking having a job does not mean you're lazy. There are other ways to contribute to society, like volunteering or being a good parent. You don't know how hard this person's job was, if it was soul sucking, etc. It is ok to be happy to get away from that. Also, you dont owe society anything, especially since our government thinks they don't owe us basics like healthcare, but billions on the military industrial complex is a-ok
We agree on one thing. Nobody owes anybody anything by default.
The government only has the money it steals from us, so it makes no sense to say that it owes you anything because it can NEVER do anything for you without taking it from you in the first place.
@@BarrySlisk Huh? The government's job is to help its citizens, that's why we chose for it to exist, that's why we pay taxes. Taxation is an agreement to pool some of our money together for the public benefit, like roads, public schools, libraries, the fire department, etc. It only feels like "stealing" because currently that money is wasted on corruption in the U.S
@@bubblegumBri
I never agreed to this.
Never have I had such a clear explanation of the way capitalism works and I have never been able to envision another system. This was amazing.
Be sure to check out Michael Parenti lectures here on RUclips as well. I think you'll like them.
Also check out Thomas Sowell to cancel out the crap you picked up from this video. This guy is so naive it hurts to listen to. He sounds exactly like Karl Marx, who didn’t account for the biggest aspect in ANY economic society… human behavior. His ideas are amazing, but that’s all they are, ideas. Once they’re put into action, or the praxis of their concepts, are tragic. All the evidence you need is Mao and Stalin. Nearly *100 million* dead.
Capitalism works great, central banks bailing out special interest zombie companies doesn’t work, and big business getting into bed with government.. for hand outs and special protection and laws doesn’t work. Capitalism with rules and checks, works. Letting banks use derivatives is a prime example of something that should be illegal.
@@kymd2738 Well, then you at least believe in something like or close to Keynesian economics. The thing is, a lot of the bailouts and so on really do save these institutions. And their collapsing or being allowed to fail does have negative consequences. Marxism-Leninism actually has quite a lot to say on these kinds of things. I recommend reading "The Principles of Communism" by Frederick Engels (1947). Take care.
If you enjoyed this check out Noam Chomsky's free market fantasies lecture, he absolutely brutalizes neoliberalism.
Frederick Bastiat says: When plunder becomes the way of life for some people, after some time they will make rules to justify their actions and a moral code to glorify it.
correct, that is what capitalism is.
@@DirkDjently As long as any society promotes a permanent governing body, it's all plunder, regardless of its label.
I still dont get how exactly is capitalism plunder.
@@bdev8480 what's all plunder? It is unclear what "it's all plunder" is referring to. All profits? All economic activity?
@@valiyapurakkalNarayanankutty besides the it being necessarily the case that capitalists pay their employees a smaller amount than the value their work was worth to the capitalist, imperialist plundering of the resources of Africa, Asia, and South America. People may claim that wasn't capitalism as they define it, but it was certainly closer to their definition of capitalism than any socialist's definition of socialism, which has nothing to do with "the government doing things."
Criticism of Capitalism in one of the largest tech monopolies today? I dig it
the fact your heroes are hypocrites is telling...
@Keaton no it isnt you loon, you can criticize society while in thats how it develops. but stating things and being a professor doesnt make them fact and he oddly never presents any for any of his claims. no one willing chose to buy clothes made by slaves and capitalism just because its in a poor country isnt slavery they arent property. the fundamental problem is you are misrepresenting free market capitalism as the current capitalist system we are not free market capitalists. so use all the clever sophistry you want i dare you to argue the points of people like ludwig mises, frederic bastiat or even a modern economist like thomas sowell. you wont and cant because they use facts and you use rhetoric and sophistry to ignore any kind of opposing view point if im so wrong invalidate the sources of my belief.
They used to be capitalist, now they can afford socialism and ask for a state monopoly. The guest speaker is right, however... systems are made to last X period and be changed.... the Chinese guy might retract today since China Communist Party is going back into having a Supreme leader and where high school exit exam is based on ''how great the leader is'' more than the ''scientific improvement you can make''. Democracy is a system that allows the power to move around players (known as institutions)... but when all institutions are going down... the system is too... About Wage he's right... a 12 kids family, 1 house wife, 1 working salary-men = You could live on that (but you weren't necessarily poor)! Debt is also new (not even 100 years old!)
@@vonb2792 lol no democracy is belief in the power of the state of the demos. im sorry institutions? what nonsense are you spewing lol. government doesnt have the right to institute anything but whats outlined in the constitution.... also no wolffe isnt right about wages he ignores wage mobility and devaluing of currency as well. absolute tripe from an absolute sophist believed by an absolute sheep.
I read this in a novel (I think ) For social justice, work, affordable housing, good unespensive Health care. Forget identity politics, have invisible brigades block crucial infrastructure (train tracks as an example) to promote claims.
Professor Wolff has some serious speaking skills and is a great communicator. Really enjoy listening to him.
Ronnie & Minh- The devil also has serious speaking skills and is a great communicator. So what? Go listen to a truth speaking free enterprise Misean economist instead of a Marxist. Marx was a Satan worshipper.
@@Kevin-jv7mz If you want to do what is right then you will always follow God's way and not the Devils for there is a way that seems right to man but the end thereof is the way of death.
Kevin-Whatever God says and does is right. God always does the right thing even though we might question His wisdom. Right doesn't exist apart from God's endorsement. Man says its okay or lawful to murder babies in the womb but God says that is wrong. God's law is transcendental and above man's law.
@@HenryBSilver-Certainly not but you should eschew obfuscation.
@@HenryBSilver-Henry you need to repent from your evil ways and seek the Lord while He may be found. My theology is very rational for rational minds. Now listen. The wages of sin is DEATH and the death that God has in view is Eternal DAMNATION. Romans 6:23. Your life is a vapor and like dew on the grass. Where will you be when you take your last breath? You sins will all come to remembrance unless you have a pure heart. Jesus said: "Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God." Amen.
Aside from his easy going teaching style and knowledge! The Man is one of the greatest speakers I've ever had the pleasure of listening to! Go Professor Wolff!
@@vivalaleta why the ? mark?
@@daniellucero6036 The "I know" was implied as in "I know, right?
@@vivalaleta, I see. The ? mark kinda threw me off. Good deal. God bless.
He doesn’t understand human nature. To take from someone who earned a reward and give the benefit to someone who does nothing to earn the benefit is fundamentally immoral. Socialism and Communism are both founded on envy which will never lead to equality, but does leave to cruelty with anyone who doesn’t buy into the leftist ideology.
@@johnproud9163 You simply do not understand Marxism if that's your silly picture of it.
I was a Republican 3 years ago and somehow I’m here and supporting everything he is saying
Soon to be a socialist/progressive... it's the only way.
I think many Republicans, at least working-class or non-corporate ones, see the problems caused by capitalism, but thanks to propaganda, indoctrination, cold-war trauma, etc. come to the wrong conclusions...
Another problem, imho, is the red herring that is abortion rights, which is one of the things keeping Republican politicians in power. If we truly implemented what Mr. Wolff suggests, over time, much fewer women would even desire to or see the need to an abortion in the first place, because not only would their economic situation improve dramatically, access to stellar healthcare and paid maternity leave would too! I dare say, abortion numbers would go down more drastically than any ban on abortion could ever possibly achieve.
@@ellinmara5997 abstinence would work better than anything and personal responsibility.
@@stolenjunk if it works for you, that's great! But don't expect it to work for everybody else, especially inexperienced, hormonal teenagers
you should take a course on economics. capitalism is not evil nor is it somehow labour being manipulated this was proven false in the fucking 50s. consumers dont always buy producers always produce the employee of said producer gets paid whether that product sells or not even if the company paying for its production doesnt make a profit....marx was a drunk lying coward who fled his country when it got dangerous and then cheated on his wife and treated his bastard son like an animal. that is the founder of modern communism. look back too the british civil war for your first socialists the levellers and the first organized political socialists were in 1850s france. every single one of these organizations wanted the abolition of personal property and to LEVEL out society aka make everyone equally poor......except government and those enlightened party members. this is your grand utopia, we live in crony capitalism and no not all capitalism is crony capitalism marx was a fool who claimed a great recompense must be paid before true capitalism could flourish.......he never substantiated this with evidence of course. so ill ask since marx said " to sum up communism in one sentence it is the abolition of personal property" what do you support about the abolition of personal property? why do you think a centralized state government is inherently benevolent? also why do you ignore the mass charity of 19th century capitalism the highest in recorded history in fact? im seriously hoping for a discussion here i dont get what you see in it.
This speech aged well. It will continue to age well.
c suckin commie says what? oh yeah what you just said, go fk yourself commie
@@nickcarducci3413 why do you hate communism?
@@underhandcloud1414 Because they don't understand their own system of economics. They build a rigid cultural ideal around the idea of "capitalism" as something which it is not. Instead of looking towards a future, better system which actually rewards people by merit, they drool over the idea that individuals could play such a great role in affecting our society, and forget whether their work actually translates to billions of dollars worth of effort. It's insividualism on steroids. A very toxic individualist idea which inevitably causes people to turn on each other and be valued purely for the work they produce. It can be part of your identity to be a capitalist now. The word hasn't even been in common use for about 50 years now. It was just realized as a reaction to Russian communism. And since Russian communism counters the ideas individual liberty of power over society that also means it's against all the ideas of a meritocratic system. This is the idea which they use to counter the left. They say all anti-capitalism is anti-meritocracy, and then go on to associate it with Russian communism and how they weren't payed fairly and that's how their system failed. That's how we get such closed-mindedness to anti-capitalism. To even any kind of social programs at all when we've already seen what evils pure capitalism can do to us. Things like child labor, exploitation, unsafe working conditions, 12 hour working days, work alienation, and institutional racism.
@@nickcarducci3413 lmao talk about being an uneducated moron
shit is even aged is still shit
And that was my first time hearing Prof. Wolff live. It was great conversing with him after the talk.
Glad you enjoyed the talk!
Democracy at work+ please tell Mr Wolff that I truly love him. And thank him for the great work he's doing. Wish you all the best.
Greetings from Norway
Been watching him religiously for 5 years... I never miss a economic update by Wolff...
Soham Sinha you need to listen to his weekly economic update. the man and people behind the scenes...are brilliant.
How much power do you have a Google? And do you know why google would let a Marxist talk? Do you sense that Google has an understanding of the importance of income inequality awareness? I’m a wage slave at Walmart that has seen the oppression of progressive politics specifically on Googles services. I would like Google to not oppress important voices such as Richard Wolff, Jimmy Dore, Mike Figueredo or Lee Camp.
I'm fortunate to live in a city with plenty of cooperatives and even I didn't know what a cooperative was until, like, a year ago. I'm glad more people are speaking about this business model, it really feels like the next logical step for humanity. Not the last step, but the next step
What is a cooperative like, if i may ask
@@Riolupaireally depends, they are super broad. Could be 100% of the company being owned by all workers and sometimes 70/80% with a small group of private investors.
Within how a company works you should imagine people having an actual say about their work place. So instead of firing people for an example in an economic crisis, people all cut their working hours so nobody has to lose their job.
I've been watching Richard D. Wolff for four years and I'm fascinated by his remarkable insight into U.S. economics and his vision for its economic troubles and collapse. He has excellent knowledge on many aspects that make an economy run efficiently, fairly and soluably.
If only we had the Internet in the late 1960's and heard talks given with such clarity, we possibly would have avoided our world economic crisis we see ourselves in now. This should be mandatory viewing in high schools as part of civic lessons around the world. Thank YOU!
I agree, but the likes of Betsy DeVos are hell bent on promoting religious based charter schools, which would advocate for the execution of Prof Wolfe. In their propaganda, they espouse that public schools teach nothing but socialism and ultimately communism. It is for this and other reasons that Betsy's brother, Prince, infiltrated the teachers unions of public schools with spies, the ultimate goal of dismantling those unions and public schools as a whole.
If we had the internet in the late 1960s, it would have been banned. We only got the internet because it 'sort of happened' - too quickly and unpredictably for governments to react. If you could send one of our history books back in time to the 60s, the politicians of the era would make sure it didn't happen in any form we would recognise today. Probably set up a system with server and client addresses, servers only available with government license, and clients unable to communicate directly with one another.
@@vylbird8014 agreed, any content shared would have been highly regulated... just like this comment, HI NSA!
@@BADALICE lurn 2 eenglish u dum fuc
What a ridiculous reply. Truly highlights why socialism is only popular once the population is dumb enough to go along with it.
33:00 There's another factor: The employer could still be making well over twenty dollars in value on what an employee produces while being paid 20$ / hour for their labor. But if the employer can find somewhere to pay people 5 dollars, or a technology that can replace part of the labour force, they can make *even more* money. It's not always a matter of "we can't afford to stay open here or keep you on", in some cases it's "we're making good money here but we can make way more". But they've conditioned the public to treat every lay off and offshoring as a difficult choice between going broke and staying afloat. Sometimes that's the case, sometimes it's just going for an even better deal.
@Tom R don't expect Marxists to use logic in their thinking. their whole philosophy is driven by envy
@Tom R It is not a two way. If a corporation pays you $5 and you know that in the US you'd get $20 for the same job it doesn't mean that you can easily immigrate to the US AND the corporation will bring your job with you.
Are you saying that all offshored jobs are because they didn't make profit hiring locally?
@Tom R I was almost willing to entertain the notion that corporate/single employee employment negotiation is equitable (though it seems wildly inequitable on it's face). I even continued reading when you wrote that government created crony capitalism, even though anyone who bothers to look knows the US government is owned by corporate lobbyists, not the the other way around. But when you wrote "employers (aren't) greedy" you lost any and all credibility. Come on bruh, MAXIMIZING SHAREHOLDER VALUE is literally the bleated mantra of this post-Milton Friedman corporate dystopia lolz.
LOL oh no he may go for the best deal that monster.... what socialists call evil normal people with a brain call common sense.
@Tom R call it what it is tom keynesian economics aka socialism lite.
Mad respect for a man who can walk straight up to the beast and tell it like it is.
Mad respect to you who actually are inside the beast and tell it like that.
Mad respect for someone that can lie that way and get away with it... he is a resentful and stupid old man, that's all
of course, he feeds its daily.
its possible google will make more money under Statist communism; theyre already quasi governmental; first in line for licensed monopolies worldwide. theyve acted as enforcement of govs: china censorship. i still use g apps reluctantly; good ui and overall design. theyve always had great software people, pushing minimalism (performance). they did convo-based emails, others copied. image search with thumbnails, others copied. the list goes on of great free apps.
He really only had one point that wasn't stating his resume next to his claims. Watch 5 interviews with him and find one where he doesn't just list his resume as proof
I don't have words to describe how brilliant this guy is, but the main thing is he is willing to tell truths to which most people, including scholars, won't even question.
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism
ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
@@dmonarredmonarre3076 - Incorrect. In the Scarcity Principle, there are 3 inputs: supply, demand & price. Of those, demand is the most important. Zero demand means price doesn't affect scarcity at any price level.
@@pd5826
That is wildly inaccurate. Nobody “creates demand.” Humans are BORN INTO SCARCITY, ergo, demand will forever exist. Demand is a function of scarcity, and scarcity perpetually transformers over time. As cars developed, new forms of demand developed, and old forms obliterated (How many horse and buggy manufacturers do we really need today?)As computers developed, new forms of demand were developed, and old forms obliterated (Not really sure how many type writer manufacturers we’re in need of today). Scarcity of energy, scarcity of information (Since every single decision we make is with missing information), scarcity of geography, scarcity of organization, scarcity of specialization, scarcity of development, scarcity of infrastructure, scarcity of TIME (That’s a big one),scarcity of scientific predictability, etc.. Companies simply POP INTO EXISTENCE to then serve that new scarcity (Cisco really wasn’t relevant in the 1830’s when there wasn’t the interconnectivity of advanced network technology y’know. Not too much of a necessity for people thousands of miles away to be sending emails to computers that didn’t exist). THAT’S’ how innovation and competition work. And as for what you are talking about in reference to macroeconomic policy, that is called CRONY CAPITALISM, not socialism. Socialism would have those owners completely voided out of the picture. Nationalized entities would be functioning under a centralized authority. Instead, when THE GOVERNMENT IS TOO BIG, they can pick winners of the privately owned institutions and choose who to prop up due to whatever the calls of political utility(irrespective of, and many times in direct contradiction to economic utility) compel them to so they can pander and narrate their “benevolence.”
Yes, you are correct, with total free markets, MANY companies and firms would die(As they already due today. Look at the S&P 500 today and see how different is was from 50 ,35, 15 and 5 years ago. That is called COMPETITION. Competition drives away INEFFICIENCY, PRODUCTIVITY and LACK OF INNOVATION. ) But you know what also happens, NEW business would develop due to the changing nature of the market and the OPENING UP OF NEW DEMAND. The market doesn’t just REMAIN STAGNANT as is implicit in your comment. According to your forwarded positions, the market simply has competition, all the companies get out-competed away, and there is no growth, no shift in demands, NO INNOVATION, no NEW scarcity to contend with. That maintains that the market is STATIC and CONSTANT, which it absolutely is NOT. Scarcity doesn’t simply go away when market forces subside within an economic sector. Scarcity is driven by realizations of NEW market functions. Restaurants and small farms were all the rage when food was a lot more scarce. Nobody was really concerned with modern energy markets, biological innovation, smart phone development, online course companies, or any other modern operation we have . That is because the scarcity of food and its transportation and processing was still so LABOR INTENSVE that there was demand enough in it for the organization of profit generating institutions surrounding these functions that made it desirable enough amongst enough people for their to be demand for the private organizations. These organizations saw an intertemporal arbitrage opportunity and acted. Now that many of those margins have been competed away, the scarcity of food, thanks to capitalism, does not really exist anymore. THE FREE MARKET HAS LITERALLY SOLVED THE SINGLE GREATEST PROBLEM THAT HAS AFFLICTED MANKIND SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME. THE PURSUT OF, AND MAINTENANCE OF FOOD! We have solved the problem of famine. First civilization to ever do that, THANKS CAPITALISM! Now new markets are popping up around developing processes that are beyond food and rudimentary transportation. And yes, many firms have died along the way, with pesky government stepping in at times trying to prop up irrelevant, outdated, outcompeted but POLITICALLY CONVENIENT processes. Examples would be the highly inefficient and wasteful transportation and information networks forwarded by the DEMOCRATICALLY elected federal government [Hmmm, should I send a letter or simply email someone. Nah, USPS can kick rocks, GOOGLE gets my business. Hmmm, should I take the bus that has 45 different stops that are irrelevant to me, or should I take Uber, or Enterprise or lift, or any other ON DEMAND (Therefore time saving) service. Conversely, the REPUBLICAN offices are addicted to propping up agrarian based initiatives that are completely outdated since those positions speak to their base of supporters. The Libertarian party of the US has always had it right. The government ALWAYS makes things more inefficient due to the very nature of the political process. Say a few nice fuzzy things, get the crowd roaring by preying on their biases, and then gain control over things you have no idea about. That is the destructive function of political organizations. Strictly economic operating firms have no such luxury and NEW firms have popped up to contend with the NEW scarcities that have developed, such as scarcity of mathematical information [how much do you know about combinatorics, probability theory, discrete mathematics, linear programming, econometric Granger effects, etc.]scarcity of medical information, scarcity of psychological information (Social psychology, cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology, the necessity of specialization never ends!), scarcity of biological information, scarcity of network technology information, scarcity of space exploration information, scarcity of chemical information, scarcity of nutritional information, scarcity of physiological information. These are all new fields of effort that are perpetually changing and maintain the potential of presenting new sources of value that ECONOMIC ORGANIZATIONS can develop new, unseen, and unheard of value for everyone to consume CONSENSUALLY if they desire. Again, everything you said from the cause of demand to the role of macroeconomic policy is completely divorced from reality. You are so desperate to generate an oppression narrative that you engage in the acts of boldfaced lies. You are naively under the impression that economies DO NOT MOVE, DO NOT INNOVATE, DO NOT OPEN UP NEW MARKETS, but rather are stagnant, and once the economy reaches this point of stagnation, are completely run be a big central authority. That is blatant nonsense, scientifically inaccurate, and a radical misunderstanding of how markets operate and TRANSFORM.
Before you respond, watch my hyperlinks attached. If I notice in your response that you didn’t and don’t comment on propositions forwarded there, I will not respond since I am not going to consume nonsensical media YOU support, WHICH I DID WITH THE ABOVE DRIVEL, without you doing the same for me. That is a one-sided time investment that I refuse to partake in. I won’t be the one doing all the work while you continuously put NEW burdens of proof on me after I have debunked your first economically illiterate proposition. Again, don’t bother if you don’t show signs of watching what I forward in the hyperlinks, BECAUSE I WON’T RESPOND IF YOU DON’T WATCH:
ruclips.net/video/sGYl17DiEwo/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
@Terrence Anderson
AMEN!
@Oscar Boman Dude...this is a stupid ass rebuttal. He said a shit ton of shit and you come back with this amateur garbage of an argument? Capitalism kills? Really?
Why the fuck did Google give Wolf an audience. This is amazing
Must have made a mistake 😂
Oh, it won’t last. Google (which owns RUclips) is already aggressively suppressing and de-monetizing left-leaning programs. They are essentially run by corporate sociopaths. It will continue to get worse, as we on the left point out how tied to the business world Joe Biden really is.
Yes he s cosmic
@@briananderson8428 yes its a sighn that capitalism is ending
. Maybe it's the revenge of some guy that got fired and at the last moment arranged Wolff as a speaker. Management behind the scenes...WTF 😉
This talk was absolutely fascinating. I've never thought about this question as profoundly as he explains it and goes over it. The first audience question was a great one, but Richard Wolff's answer was an even more impressive one.
Excited About Learning yeah, it’s very impressive how little a Harvard professor understands about economics. Listen, he doesn’t understand inflation. The Federal Reserve Act in 1913 led to a massive debt bubble that crashed in 1921 and 1929. The federal reserve also paid for WW1 with paper currency. Capitalism is always an underlying force in the economy, but when massive banks and corporations infiltrate politics, we end up with this globalized corporate fascism that’s impoverishing us all. Learn a little bit about gold and silver and inflation. The Fed lies every day while they bailout their corporate buddies. Charles Lindbergh Sr. said in 1913, “from now on, depressions will be scientifically created”. Mark Twain said, “it is easier to be fooled than to admit you’ve been fooled”. The American Public has been fooled for over a century, and prof Wolff is as bad as Karl Marx in his misunderstanding on economics. No wonder Harvard hired him. “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act” -George Orwell. Truth is, Wolff is wrong. Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Milton Friedman, Murray rothbard, Mises, Ayn Rand are all correct. End the Fed. Buy gold buy silver buy crypto, or we will all starve like under Stalin when they abolished property rights to everybody. These problems are more complicated than “left vs right”. It’s more like “right vs wrong” and Wolff is WWWWRREEOOOONNNGGGG.
@@actualideas8078 It is trust, not assets. BitCoin is in use. Paper
not used much in China. Just bits and bytes. Ends when lender figures out he is not going to get paid. Bubble bursts. Friedman admitted . . . greed
is not good. Just say NO to austerity.
Memento Mori dude Orwell admitted on his death bed that he changed his mind about capitalism. So get your facts straight. And I do respect and read socialist also. We NEED social programs. Problem is, public offices are abused by the mafia and funded by the central bank (Federal Reserve). Look Ayn Rand and Alan Greenspan are NOT THE SAME. And most these people are Neoliberals anyways so what’s your problem man? Milton Friedman suggested a UBI, but it must be on a metallic standard of 40-100% reserve. Otherwise we allow the Central Bank to print currency, or counterfeit money; or better yet call it ALCHEMY. These are the darks arts we’re dealing with son. Epstein didn’t kill himself
But why would anyone have trust in the Dollar? There is no incentive for the bank to get its principle back..... because..... wait for it........
They created it out of THIN AIR. The lender has been a parasite on the people for about 107 years exactly. So wake up and realize why the USA funded the Russian military complex with the western bank’s “credit” in WW1 AND WW2. Churchill and the USA teamed up with Communist Russia. Did you miss that part? Then the KGB and CIA both funded by the Central Bank teamed up to kill JFK by hiring the mafia. This is your history lesson. Why would anyone have to pay back these debts? And why would any 401k or IRA have ANY credit whatsoever? Inflation is coming and so is communism. Dangerous times.
Memento Mori “George Orwell was a staunch anti-Stalinist like most libertarian communists” first article I looked up, so yes that’s accurate what you said. So he sounds more like an anarchy capitalist or neoliberal than a communist. In modern times, it’s obvious that we cannot simply abolish social programs. We need a UBI on a gold/silver standard to replace manipulative welfare programs used to obtain votes.
Thank you Professor Dr. Wolff for explaining the evolution of economics and the social imperatives for transforming classical capitalism in a lucid manner.
I have been listening to Richard Wolff's talks for some time now on his youtube channel 'Democracy At Work.' I just love this guy. He's speaks very eloquently and presents excellent facts.
HE HAS A LOT GRATE IDEA's HE KNOW's A FUCKTON A SHIT ALL RIGHT!!!
@@thelastwildone6162 dude, chill with the caps
he presents no facts he presents contextualized information he describes as facts.
@@thelastwildone6162 he like you is a moron who follows a militant ideology unironically to promote peace.
He even says no other economists agree with him. Why would you ever listen to this comi? 😂🤣
You know you have a great mind when the Q&A is better than the original speech!
Robert Lucas he's just avoiding answers and heads straight into demagoguery, sometimes in rude and arrogant way.
This must be the only video you've seen of his...
His answers were as direct and on point as it is possible to be. You are speaking through an ideological filter.
I assume you are serious, rather than being sarcastic as the people replying assume?
You are right, the depth of his answers to questions he hasn't prepared for beforehand show how smart the guy is. Anyone can prepare a speech and repeat it with enough practice.
Richard Wolff, who is one of the best minds of our times.
He is fuxking stupid
Sad times. 😔
Im not the defender of the capitalist system, but RIchard Wolff is fucking thick as a brick and not the best representative for the alternatives
@Axmed Bahjad
Hear, Hear!
@kezicss
Why? Capitalism is an unstable exponential system on a finite planet which flies in the face of basic logic and basic maths! It has run its course .A new paradigm is needed!
Most enlightening and instructive talk by one who is a great economist and teacher. Thank you Prof. Wolffe.
Younger generation must be the power behind the movement and change. Most older folks set in their ways will be dead and gone soon. Let's make this move forward for a healthier and happier world.
That is the plan, yes
LMAOOOOO. So go start a business and pay your employees $30 an hour.
and that moving forward never arrives at the future moment
An astounding description of the system we are trapped in.
Escape from this system .
GO TO CUBA !
It is NOT FAR. Moore was VERY well received there.
I RECOMMEND
Reversing inequality 2 /4 / 6 / 8 AGITATE
A wide range of policies can help reduce inequality. Policies should be aimed at reducing inequalities both in market income and in the post-taxand-transfer incomes.
The rules of the game play a large role in determining market distribution- in preventing discrimination, in creating bargaining rights for workers, in curbing monopolies and the powers of CEOs to exploit firms’ other stakeholders and the financial sector to exploit the rest of society.
These rules were largely rewritten during the past thirty years in ways which led to more inequality and poorer overall economic performance.
Now they must be rewritten once again, to reduce inequality and strengthen the economy, for instance, by discouraging the short-termism that has become rampant in the financial and corporate sector.
Reforms include more support for education, including pre-school; increasing the minimum wage; strengthening earned-income tax credits; strengthening the voice of workers in the workplace, including through unions; and more effective enforcement of anti-discrimination laws.
There are four areas in particular that could make inroads in the high level of inequality which now exists.
LOLOLOL highest quality of living highest quality of technology highest level of health care in history = trapped. wonder what you would call soviet russia?
@@argemirocarvajal7843 why would moore go their he has an 8 million dollar house in new jersey just like every other comkmunist its for everyone else not for him.
@@jamesmorton7881 so then why dol they let kids go to college with lower test scores to " help education" no its because it makes you feel good and you could give a shit about the consequences of your " socialist policies:" because once implemented they are never criticized or you cry racist sexist capitalist FASCIST! DESPITE THE COUNTER INTUITIVE RESULTS OF THESE POLICIES.
This is a major step forward in cultural communications. Thank you Google Talks!
Cultural communication?
This was a very good presentation by Dr. Richard Wolff. I'm sure it will be eye-opening and educational to many viewers. I truly hope many will watch and learn something from it.
Get Richard Wolff on the Joe Rogan podcast!!!!!
Or on the Rubin Report. If Dave can talk to far-right Ayn Rand types, he can at least talk to a real-life Marxist economist for the other side of the story.
@@Uarehere Rubin Report is a Koch brothers propaganda vehicle so I wouldn't count on Wolff being on any time soon. Rogan is a possibility, as actual leftism continues to spread through the US.
right on!! but change your profile pic!!!
Joe Roggin is a clickbait hack. He doesn't offer any substantive analysis of the polarizing topics he discusses with his Koch brother funded guests who are nothing but provocateurs! It's a show for people who are sheep and can't develop an original thought of their own!
He's agreed to debate an actual market advocate at the soho forum later this year. You can see how well his lies and insinuations do when it isn't a monologue anymore.
Great speaker, great talk. The significance of the ideas Wolff presents as a way to bring democracy to the workplace will be felt for decades to come. As we all know, the world now is entering a new phase of development and the old ways of thinking and addressing problems have become outdated and worn. It is the boldness of individuals like Richard Wolff, to present ideas like these, that gives me hope for better times to come. Racial and religious equality, economic security, the equality of men and women, and the recognition of the unity of all mankind are but some of the many important things we should be fighting for.
This isn't really anything new however, it's just that it has been suppressed by one of the biggest misinformation campaigns in history.
"As we all know, the world now is entering a new phase of development and the old ways of thinking and addressing problems have become outdated and worn."
this is why Marx developed his philosophy and his analysis of capitalism, all the way back in the 19th century.
He even says no other economists agree with him. Why would you ever listen to this comi? 😂🤣
@@ccpj0eyb319 the same economists that said there nothing to worry about pre-2008?
@@ccpj0eyb319 they don't have counter arguments and run away scared disagreeing. Wolff is just too right.
Richard Wolff- The Lecturer I never had.
Also the lecture no one wanted.
Good history lesson about HUMAN failure and a GOOD reminder than HUMANS are NOT PERFECT.
BUT GIVE ME A BREAK IF YOU THINK COMMUNISM IS THE ANSWER
@Schnbl Apparently a lot of people are gullible and stupid then, sheep.
@Flash Gordon Awww what a cute little sheeple, go on now join your heard lost little lamb.
And the lecture you should never want again. Wolff is a 'wolf' in sheep's fur b/c he is irrational as he appeals to ego and emotion. He is obviously ignorant of economics more than anyone I've heard in a long time & if someone as ignorant of economics as I am can see through his BS, then others should be able to see this too.... How old are you? If over 30, you should be more educated than to be impressed w/ this fluff as he speaks to those who want their ears tickled and b/c your bias wants to hear this, your bias has been validated and this 'confirmation bias' is sad b/c most ppl don't want truth - they want their own version of it that fits into their fantasy life or idealistic dreams.
While Wolff praises socialistic solutions to remedy capitalism, the situation is FAR MORE SERIOUS and much BIGGER than any of that. We must broaden our small-minded tunnel vision b/c our state of emergency right now is about how the GLOBALISTS want us to live in a Rockefeller world - and when we see this bigger picture of what the evil powers at this high up want us to do - give up all our rights and liberties eventually - and use a virus to justify such evil - then you start to change your worldview to the reality you never thought you'd have to take off your rose-colored glasses to see...This doc here tells you what you need to know:
www.nommeraadio.ee/meedia/pdf/RRS/Rockefeller%20Foundation.pdf
Professor Wolff is an absolute treasure. The movement, ultimately, is towards cooperation instead of exploitation and that gives me hope for the future.
He even says no other economists agree with him. Why would you ever listen to this comi? 😂🤣
He is a Marxist. So he is not to be trusted. Marxism had equality in the USSR and China. Every was poor and miserable.
This guys is “fundamentally”wrong
Is a person exploited if he is born into a system in which he must pay for other people’s retirement with no likelihood that anyone will pay for his?
@@Shozb0t yes!
Hmm. Some people must have become quite uncomfortable during this talk. Kudos to whoever brought the Wolff to town...
Thanks - I collaborated with Professor Wolff to organize this talk! Everyone in the audience was really attentive - I don't think I would describe the atmosphere as "uncomfortable". Most people have some inkling that the organization of our world isn't fair and are curious to understand exactly how and why. A huge group of people stayed after the talk was over to continue asking questions!
@@maxrebuschatis5603 Thank you for your efforts. This was a fantastic talk. I wish I could have listened to him answer more questions.
@@maxrebuschatis5603 what do you think about the news of Union busting today at Google?
@@Herr2Cents No sir, I don't like it.
@Kit Carney so prosperous that it's existence is dependent of the mass impovershment and colonisation of the Global South and crashes once a decade give or take
It's so strange that the US, the nation that stands for freedom and democracy has no democracy at the place we spend most of our lives at, the workplace.
it is also strange that the US, with it´s emphasis on the individual´s responsibility is the country where there are more law suits and silly, common sense warning labels than anywhere else in the world.
The US was never a democracy nor did it fought for democracy. We fought for individual freedom, rights, and liberty.
@@tiendoan1333 Which is deteremined by elections, a democratic concept. Just because you heard on your favorite talk show somewhere that democrats are evil, that it's not a pure democracy because that's 'two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner', and that it's a constitutional republic instead, doesn't mean it's exclusively non-democratic.
This "Democracy" has contributed to the overthrowing of 85 democracies all over the world between 1951-2000 alone. This is not including the coups, dictators, genocides abroad the U.S has been responsible since then.
You have democracy in the workplace... you can quit.
Came here looking for _Howlin' Wolf_ and stayed to the end. Now them's the blues.
we'll all be howlin' pretty soon
Richard Wolff, Michael Hudson, Noam Chomsky, and Bernie Sanders, thank you all for everything you've done and continue to do for us 🇺🇸
What did Bernie Sanders ever do except cave to the corporate wing of his party.
@@ciaranryan5265He tries to atleast create marginal change, while also still spreading his opinions. Isn't he like a chairman in a committee? Yes he caved and I can imagine that guy after 40 years of spreading the same opinion atleast wants to have created a bit of actual policy change before he dies. Lets not forget he pushed a lot of democrats towards social democracy and socialism.
Chomsky revealed his true colors during the pandemic. Hypocrite and bully.
This man has done his work well , Most Americans have Blind Faith in the goodness of Corporations . If You really understood American Business Values , it's all predatory and exploitative.
the answer isn't putting blind faith in the goodness of government to do the right thing...
@@lambynighttrain I never suggested we should trust Corporations to do the right thing
ruclips.net/video/-v4NvQqVrF0/видео.html
@@lambynighttrain that is supposed to be the great thing about a democracy - the government is ideally the transparent servant of the people, no blind faith needed
@@lambynighttrain Difference being, you can vote out a politician.
How do you vote out a King? How do you vote out an oligarch?
If you can't even vote to change the system? What good is that system?
Richard Wolff offers a more convincing argument for socialism than anybody I've ever heard. His understanding of Marx and Capitalism is total, and his critique of the American universities he studied at is very telling.
Does Richard Wolff have any idea about how socialism may be implemented equitably? Marx figured it couldn't be done with out meeting significant resistance. The communist eliminated or suppressed lots of seemingly resistant kulaks and profiteers. Pol Pot reasoned the classes in the cities would have to go. Mao reeducated lots educated folks. In the Cuban revolution Che Guevara would execute all those imagined impeding the revolution etc
@@rustyyb8450 I've upvoted your comment because you seem to be genuinely interested. In theory I am an anarchist, historically the anarchists were a left-wing branch of the socialist movement, today, anarchism tends to be perverted into some kind of an extreme individualism of anarcho-capitalist varitey, at least in the US (I am from southern/middle Europe). However, in Europe and elsewhere, anarchism has retained its status as a branch of socialism. Why is this important? I'll make a brief historical detour.
During the first international, there were 2 dominant factions: the anarchists with Bakunin (google him) as the representative and the Marxist with Marx as the representative. Their goal, the same, the methods, however, differed. The Marxists branch wanted to win state power through elections and solidify themselves in order to transition to a socialist economy -- this strand spawned the places you've mentioned. It spawned Russia, however, Russia undertook an ideological change in the hands of Lenin. Marxist-Leninist thinking, then, influenced other revolutions and functioned as a model. The Leninist model is total state control of the economy and the political life. Now, we might say that the Marxist camp did not intend this to happen since social democratic parties are also part of the tradition. The economy of Soviet Russia was that of state-capitalism, in the sense that the state owned the economy through its government agencies (it was centralized). Lenin is explicit in this, he says that a form of state-capitalism is good because it will create a technologically strong society that could transition to a communist society. However, we know that this strategy is a total blunder and the left-wing branch of the socialist movement -- the anarchists were always skeptical of this.
Okay, the left wing branch now. As opposed to the Marxist, the anarchists wanted to collectivize the economy through strikes and direct opposition to the owners. You might think of this as the direct approach, whereas the Marxists took a roundabout way. Undoubtedly, this is a more democratic approach, although a harder one since you need to have a politically critical general public, connected through various institutions and ready to act. Spain was influenced by this, it had an anarchist tradition for about, I think, a hundred years that ultimately spawned a revolution when Franco, a fascist leader, was going to usurp state power in Spain (you can read about it here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Revolution_of_1936).
While there were killings of Priests and owners who were reluctant of letting their power go (since you have to understand that the working class in Spain saw the church and owners of business as oppressing them, which is true), at least the owners were offered to work with the revolutionaries or have their own land and do their own work but to never hire anyone since wage-labor was seen as wage-slavery.
Furthermore, this was during a civil war, as I mentioned, the fascists versus the workers and anarchists. The dominant strand of anarchism was anarcho-syndicalism during that time. Anarcho-syndicalism is a strategy of winning over the economy through collective mass struggle, the workers were effectively connected through various syndicates that operated democratically. What anarchists want is a self-managed society, where the industry would be operated on democratic grounds with mutual aid and solidarity as generalized cultural principles (these principles need to be ingrained in the souls of the revolutionaries, but they would also be encouraged by the new economy).
Self-management is a principle that says that if a decision affects you then you have a say in it. If a decision does not affect you then you don't have a say in it. If a decision affects you less than somebody else, then you have a less say in it than that somebody. It's a principle that's needed for a democracy to function well, otherwise you can have a tyranny of the majority.
The economy proposed is a decentralized planned economy, and it worked rather well in Spain in terms of economic output, outranking the previous economy by tenfold. Keep in mind that this was during a civil war, with different socialistic tendencies kinda battling it out. The communists, influenced by Russia, worked against the anarchists. The fascists were supported by the US, Germany and other western liberal democracies (because these countries do not want true democracy (that is economic) to spread, since they will die out then). The outcomes of this support is the crushing of the collectivized economy and eventually Franco taking the state power, a fascist dictator. Just like the US today implants fascist dictators in other countries, because it is then easier to control those countries, so they did back in the day. It's the incentive that capitalism necessitates. Wars and imperialism are a logical outcome of a profit driven economy.
You can read the rest in the wikipedia page or you can read true testimony from George Orwell in his Homage to Catalonia. Orwell was a socialist, sympathetic to anarchism, that fought against the fascists and witnessed the revolution. Personally haven't read it.
A decentralized planned economy is an economy that functions like an organism. Think of it as a connection of small units that all function democratically internally. They are linked through institutions of representation -- councils. Each unit sends their delegate who will relay the information to other delegates. Then the whole of delegates will go back to their respective units and relay the information to others. In this sense it is decentralized, but planned. And it works! Today, with technology, it would work a lot better. No owners, just people working together and planning in order to fulfill the needs of everyone.
Hope this helps you a bit, but note that I am not an expert. You can check Rojava today that is doing just this, in their own way. Again, it works.
A a
Hey boy,your head is filled up some shit al right.Did you learned all this garbage in school?Or you are a special kind of stupid?What is your problem?
It does not dwell on the question why, that Liberty, equality, fraternity led to oceans of blood within a few years.
This guy is a overrated turd who sells populism and always argues on a moral level to morons who cant tell the difference, it's hillarious that Marxism WONT DIE, the literally worst thing to happen to humans since the 1900s. Classic Socialism is flat out retarded, it's a fantasy land made by a child with an adult filling in the details and you sheeps buy into it. Shit like this only helps creating another generation of Marxism.
Bring back Liberal Arts. Disparaging the study of philosophy and literature has brought us here. That, coupled with the absurd notion that education is job training. It's not and never should have been solely that. Otherwise, you end up with a vast employment base willing to maintain the status quo simply because it doesn't understand that there is a real alternative.
But if we do that, we might have people questioning the established institutions and developing class consciousness!
It is the Politically Correct crowd that hates the Lberal Arts. Shakespeare is called a misogynist, Columbus a monster and the Founding Fathers racists. This is all comes from Critical Theory or Marxism applied to Western Culture. Critical Theory was not allowed in the Soviet Union or the CCP, Chinese Communist Party. No one can criticize them. No Islamic country allows Political Correctness or Critical Theory.
@Aphrodite's Child how the shaman maintained mystical power over early civilizations. It's both depressing and frightening. Stalin and Hitler both eradicated their "intelligentsia" in the name of control. We're doing the same without the need for prisons and firing squads. We just make education about servitude and then price it as a desirable commodity like Air Jordans. If there's anything the American consumer loves, it's a product that makes them feel special without itself having any intrinsic value.
As someone who fell for this propaganda most of his whole life, thanks for pointing that out!
Liberal arts are here already you fool. Just because you want to justify your existence doesnt mean that the rest has to provide a job for you, from our pockets.
I also went to school during the cold war which took up half my life or more. I studied Marx for the first time in elementary school using books I got from the university library where my uncle went to school. I wanted to know what I was supposed to be afraid of and was very surprised to discover it was only a different economic system. I went back and read those books again later with a better understanding. I've always tried to understand things beyond what we learned from our school books so that university library was highly important to me. History was another subject that obviously required a deeper understanding in order to make sense of the world.. The teachers stopped calling on me for answers because they got a lot more than they bargained for.
Did you figure out how to start a worker coop??? If so please contact me and we can work together maybe
@@averayugen8462 Hey there ! What do you do ??
this ''only a different economic system" commited genocide regularly. Russia killed almost as many Jews as Hitler, but they added any believers to their list. The Chinese starved MILLIONS.. yeah its harmless. and you're asleep.
Very informative and thought provoking talk.
True. Hope some listen.
he is great at explaining marxian analysis to liberals. it's wonderful to have it so accessible to people who would otherwise have nowhere good to learn ideas that are contrary to the current system.
Michael Parenti is really good with the political analysis, and Wolff is great at explaining the economic stuff. they're a dream team
the third pillar (component part) within Marxism is the philosophy, and I guess that'd be Noam Chomsky.
three old guys explaining the three component parts of Marxism. love it.
@@AlexiLaiho227 I don't think Prof. Chomsky is a Marxist-- I believe he's into anarchism, which is a different idea altogether.
Although in a talk I just listened to from Dr. Wolff, he says that there is no such thing as just a "Marxist"-- that "Marxism" is a collection of *many* different ideas developed by a whole host of figures that range from right leaning (Lenin) to much further left.
Rofl only a blind fool thinks that this clown provides any information.
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism
ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
Life still stinks under the yoke, but Richard Wolff makes it tolerable and he knows what Time it is!
Professor Wolff opened my eyes .
Richard is always informed and informative, intuitive, influential and willing to go out on every limb, He's inspiring and he always makes me believe that I can understand what's going on instead of just feeling bewildered.
I really like the way Wolff lays things out so simply and understandably.
But he's wrong and selective.
@@criticality2056 could you give a couple examples?
@@beck_to_future5529 Yup, always like discussion.
Jobs are replaced by computers and automation: workers fired/jobs lost - there are more jobs in America now than almost any time in its history. He ignores that people work on computers and build automation. Odd considering this is a talk at Google. Technology does not lead to job loss, just changes which create jobs that may have never existed before. Innovation is not the enemy it is made out to be.
@@beck_to_future5529 Private corporations gain profit without paying costs. If we ignore payroll, capital investment, risk, time etc. It is not a magical process, it is not reasonable to ignore the rest of what happens.
@@beck_to_future5529 An employer will only give you money if you make more for them. He frames it as some sort of injustice, but it requires the zero sum fallacy. Both are discretionary players in the transaction, both will get more out than they put in. If not they would make different decisions.
To people who are anti-socialism/communism answer this, why is Mr.Wolff correct that it's not taught in schools? If it's such a bad idea, what's the harm in teaching people about why it doesnt work? We'd surely have fewer people misconstruing it as a good system if it were taught, so why the complete black out about it in the school systems?
I don't think either system holds the answers, both have significant pro's and con's. It's interesting that for such a complex topic, people are so dogmatic about one system or the other.
Paget Vido
Seriously? Read the comments.
+J P To the same degree as other organizational structures? To the same degree in different schools across countries? Many people have deficient knowledge of the kinds of political systems humans tend to engage in, as Mr.Wolff pointed out. My question, and perhaps Mr.Wolffs as well, might be better placed against the average person in society. The more people know, the less they can be misled.
The right is so obsessed now about purging Marxism from the humanities that nobody has bothered to examine why it was purged from economics departments 65 years ago. It was a threat to the moneyed interests to be taught in economics and so they conducted a nationwide witch hunt.
The right is the side of the political spectrum that has lost track of all the lies that it has made to the point that it no longer knows when its making them. Indeed, they lack the vocabulary to understand why they're lying. They don't even know, for the most part, what the ideology of conservatism is and why it's an ideology of destruction. Always has been, always will be.
I love how socialists are constantly talking about how they never get a chance. WTF are you smoking? Billions of people lived under various forms of socialism. Marx is one of the most recognized and studied philosophers in history. Capitalism is constantly being critiqued. Be serious. Every academic department in every major college has one of these Marxist fools. The problem with socialism is not that it has not been tried. The problem with socialism is that it fails miserably and those who espouse it starve to death.
The problem with capitalism is that every time it fails, the state is there to bail it out. I get the impression that you're commenting without watching the whole thing. No one is defending Leninists and state capitalism.
But democracy in the workplace, aka seizing the means of production, would soon lead to democracy in the state. Without private corporations having a near monopoly on the means of production, how would they collude with the political establishment to keep the majority of workers politically impotent. If workers were economically empowered they just might have the resources necessary to influence the government to take action that benefitted them. And how would elected officials exploit the system for personal gain if they are being held accountable. It would make it so that in order to be elected and reelected politicians would have to work to serve their constituents. And by this point it would only make sense for people who intend on making a positive change to even run for office. And we couldn't have that now could we?
You are bang on.
And where do you get the notion that "seizing the means of production" would make the company better off or more profitable and keep it from failure? The socialism you describe is based on nothing more than jealousy, anger, and greed. Yes, greed, the thought that you get to steal from the producers stuff that you didn't earn.
@@tomservo75 thnx for the critique. But I'll put it to you like this: imagine we work the same shift and get paid the same wage. If I slack off and you work harder we both get paid the same. That's not fair to you right.
Then let's say we both work really hard, and through our work we increase sales and profits. We still get paid the same.
Now let's say we both slack off. We don't increase sales and we don't decrease sales. Our employer sees us as technically profitable. And we still get paid the same.
If workplaces were owned by the workers and profits were given to those who labored to generate them in accordance to how much labor they put it then things would change. If I could reliably expect to see more money when I worked hard I would reliably work hard.
My boss may say if work really hard he'll give me a raise, but until then and if then, if I work harder any profits I generate through extra labor goes to my employer.
If I hard work for a company for years, and they consistently make profits for years, and their value has been rising for years, and one day they decide to sell the company for a huge return on investments, I don't get anything but a box to put my stuff in.
We should be valued for how much work we put in. And we should value the labor of others. If good honest hard working people show up everyday and make an operation possible they should be valued.
A democratic workplace is not a rigid prescriptive structure that would be identical in every place. The would vary wildly depending on how their members decide to organize themselves. People would actually have some autonomy in their lives for once.
Also it would bring the spirit of democratic participation back to our society. People arent voting in elections like they used to because for the most part elections don't change anything on a day to day basis for most people. So instead of waiting around for someone who doesn't know our name to make an effort on our behalf, why don't we just come together with the people we see everyday for years and say let's have a vote right here among us who are here five days a week. It's really not that radical.
@@booboodadfool8015 That's a fair reply. I would say a couple of things. First, I do agree, people who put more time and effort in for the same job should be paid more. Though if you and I BOTH slacked off on the job, I dare say sales would not increase, the company itself would suffer and we'd probably be replaced with more competent workers.
I generally agree that those who put more labor in should be compensated better than those who don't, those who MAKE more for the company, in general, should get paid more in return. And for many people in large corporations, that compensation includes stock options, so they are in a sense owning a part of the company.
But where I think some people (not necessarily you) get mixed up on this is that there's a difference between higher compensation and forced ownership, like when people like Bernie call for companies to put employees on the board. On its face it sounds good. But there's no reason for a Presidential candidate to be talking about that unless he wanted to make it law which would be immoral and constitutional to FORCE such a situation, and really, that type of law would be unenforceable anyway because I as the CEO would say, "No, Mr. Sanders I'll choose my own board members, what are you going to do about it?" Besides, what if those new owners have no idea how to manage a company and the whole thing goes bankrupt? Of course, maybe it might be a good experiment to put some of those employees on the board for a few months, just attend a couple of meetings, so that they can see first hand the tough decisions that must be made, how it's not always a matter of figuring out who deserves what, because running a company is far more complex than any of them realize, they look at it in a very simplistic way. The way that the socialists talk, they don't seem to even care if one is more productive than the other, that employee ownership is some kind of right. They don't at all take into account all the money and effort and work hours that the owner puts into it, they just think that if you're one of 20 workers you deserve 1/20 of the profit no matter what. Going back to your example, if we have the same position, the one who works better makes more money for the company and thus should be paid more.
For your example of working hard and then the company gets sold, well I would think/hope that the buying company would want to keep as many workers as possible since they know the company and product, recognize my work and want to keep me on (with a raise to prevent me from going to their predator). Or, if I was compensated through stocks, then I'd profit some from the sale myself. But I think in your example, you're overlooking the fact that the owner put much more into it than me. I just showed up and got hired. I didn't have to start the company put up the money, the ideas, pay for all the expenses, etc. I think that gets left out of the equation too often. As I said, what if the company failed and went bankrupt, should I as an employee be expected to eat part of the loss too? That's something the people commenting here won't answer.
I have to add one more thing - I'd like to explore the sentence _"Without private corporations having a near monopoly on the means of production, how would they collude with the political establishment to keep the majority of workers politically impotent."_ There's a lot to unpack there. It's a VERY broad statement.
1. There are some companies that have monopolies on certain industries, and that's mainly due to sweetheart deals with governments. That's not capitalism, it's cronyism. Capitalism is about making free choice. If I can only choose one cable provider, that's not a free choice, and if the reason I can't choose one is because my town made an exclusive deal with them, then that's cronyism.
But private companies in GENERAL do and should largely control the means of production, but that's not a monopoly. A monopoly is for a specific type of business or industry. And what's the alternative? Are you suggesting governmental bodies should control production? Because that's the ONLY alternative to what you're suggesting, and I think most Americans know that would be disastrous. One of the first moves that Chavez made in Venezuela was nationalizing industries. How did that go? Even if your alternative is bringing workers into management, then that's an idea that some companies may try. Though they have to be competent in that business to do so. As a President or CEO I would only want people on the board making decisions who have a stake and know what they're doing. Sometimes to keep the company afloat, businesses have to make decisions that some employees, who don't have the insight, experience, or information necessary to make those decisions, don't like. To pass laws requiring companies to involve all employees in management decisions is no better than letting your 8-year-old decide what's for dinner every night.
2. A huge portion of Americans (though not a majority) are politically impotent, but that has nothing to do with any type of collusion, unless you're talking about biased media providing mis-information. But this is on ourselves and our education system, which no longer teaches civics, history, and basic economics, who drum into children that America is bad, that capitalists are evil, people only hear one side of the story. There's a VERY EASY cure for "political impotence." Inform yourself! Listen to the news and diversify your sources. Think about issues, do some research, and make informed decisions rather than getting all your information from Facebook and Twitter. If I hear one more person talking about "fake news on Facebook or blogs," I want to scream, "WHY THE F*CK ARE YOU GETTING YOUR NEWS FROM BLOGS??!!" Watch one hour of CNN and one hour of Fox News and then a third hour from other reputable sources online. It's up to each and every one of us to make sure we're well-informed. Capitalism, if anything, provides MORE and better news sources to choose from.
I love watching someone who knows that they're talking about. He answers questions well because he's asked them to himself already.
No he is a Marxist. So he is lying.
This guy is brilliant! Brilliant and brilliant. People will eventually understand when the music stops
And BTW it’s about to stop! It’s taken to the extreme that when you scream you will only hear your echo. THINK
Not really. Try being a economics major you will see through it
@@stevehas1861 you mean how the internet has turned everyone's lives into echo chambers? XD
This guy is just rehashing Marx's talking points, but he has not addressed any of the counter arguments made which can be found at the Mises institute. I wonder how he would fair in a debate, where the other side is represented. And I don't mean where rich people cry that it would be so unfair if things were fair. I mean economists who respond to the "work surplus" idea with the idea of "time preference of money". What about "the road to serfdom"? Marx writes 50 years after the capitalist french revolution. "the road to serfdom" is written in the fallout of Marx.
Sarah Isles he’s been in a few and normally he obliterates them, but debates aren’t the way to come up with an argument, debates are for soundbites of trying to “beat” the other person, like how Trump “won” the debates, but his ideas have been proven wrong time and time again since the Great Depression and the Great Recession.
There were 2 other reasons for the great migration: 1) business wanted to neutralize unions and 2) environmental laws were choking profits.
That’s when tariffs should have been attached to imports. The funds could have gone towards employing workers for work on infrastructure
Richard Wolff, you never fail to inspire me and give me hope.
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism
ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
@@dmonarredmonarre3076 I'll trust the *actual economist* instead. Sorry bro, nice try
@@thebrunoserge
Sweet, that's why I sourced what I was saying WITH ACTUAL ECONOMISTS. Here's some more if you'd like:
"The Anti-Capitalist Mentality," by Ludwig von Mises
"Basic Economics," Thomas Sowell
"Free to Choose," Milton Friedman
"The Road to Serfdom," Friedrich Hayek
"The Dao of Capital," Mark Spitznagel
"Judgement Under Uncertainty," Daniel Kahneman
"The Vision of the Anointed," by Thomas Sowell
"The Birth of Plenty," Bernstein
"The Ascent of Money," Niall Ferguson
"The Rational Optimist," Matt Ridley
"Classical Economics," Murray Rothbard
"A Conflict of Visions," Thomas Sowell
"Wealth Poverty and Politics," Thomas Sowell
"Intellectuals and Society," Thomas Sowell
“Marxism,” by Thomas Sowell
"The Chicago School," Johan Van Overtveldt
"A Short History of Man," Hans Hermann
.NICE TRY IN PRESUMING THE HIGH GROUND.....BRO
@@thebrunoserge
ruclips.net/video/dQiBD-crrvA/видео.html
@@dmonarredmonarre3076 Wolff IS an *actual economist*. Something tells me you hate the truth. You seem very desperate to cover it up. Means you're either very evil, or very stupid
Thankyou prof.Wolff for your excellent discussions, i appreciate you.
Thank you Richard Wolff.
I guess you can't argue with the guy if it's declining even in Japan while those folk are workaholics.
The problem is still more about the currencies [no-modularity/diversification in the bedrock-for every country].
They literally work themselves to death. Almost as if it you can't work enough to satisfy the system. Even robots, working 24/7 with 100 times a workers output won't be enough at some point. Capitalism will fail, question is when and how much suffering humans endure along the way.
Workaholic suggests that they enjoy it or it is fundamental to their person. It isn't. They fucking hate being worked to death, but leaving a company and starting at another means starting at the bottom of the ladder, and the bottom of that ladder is not really livable.
Let's see, to change over to a socialist/communist regime we will need to re-educate (KILL), about two million Americans .Duh, I'll take Capitalism. (really all ISM's are bad)
criticizing Capitalism in front of one of the largest Capitalist Corporation on Earth. impressive!
he got paid to do it...he is a hypocrite. its ok when we do it just like every other socialist in history.
@@dosran5786 sit down, bootlicker!
Well what do we have here, a critic of the capitalist system yet he's using a capitalist platform. Curious!
@@dosran5786 so when banker give money to Slave master in Lybia, is it considered hypocrite or not?
@@rickardedman8836right? Like all socialists must be silent until we have built a new world with no exploitation built into it. Wait... What?
Again a real intellectual joy to be able to listen to but there is more than ideas, he does it with such virtuosity, such clarity that there is "art" in there too, as always.
"Two interesting rules that might excite you:
Rule number one. The workers together hire and fire and evaluate the managers. I know, I have to let that sink in. In other words it’s the opposite of what you have. The workers decide whether the managers were successful and if they weren’t they’re gone.
They also have another rule. The highest paid person cannot get more than 8x the income of the lowest paid person. That’s how they solve the problem of inequality. Just gone. Not an issue. There is some inequality. Eight to one is still a hefty ratio. But I assume you know that the ratio of corporate CEO’s to low paid workers in American corporations is around 350 to 1."
~Prof Richard Wolff at 50:00
Im pertty sure the managers still do the hiring and firing of the workers. Its just the workers votes who gets to be the manager. The biggest problem I see is who funds this co-op. Say a company is profitable and wants to sell, the government lends workers money to buy the company.
Is it lending the money to the workers or the co-op? if the workers fail and the company goes broke, do the workers have to pay back the government for the loan. If they do thats ok in my book. If they dont and the workers go find new jobs same thing happens where does this unlimited supply of government money keep coming from to fund this.
I think the odds of the business failing would be higher because people are greedy. What makes the people want to reinvest in the company to grow the company if it takes money off there paycheck and they wont personally see any returns from it.
@@Technics19 the government helps give small businesses loans because we know that the average positive effect on the economy will exceed the costs of the loans that fail, so functions as an intermediary for the society to make a distributed investment in its own economic benefit.
What would be the difference between the government helping out small, private businesses and them helping put coops (through helping buy out a company looking to outsource via first right of refusal and/or helping start new ones)?
As for investing, why wouldn't they see a return? The profits from reinvesting would return to the workers instead of going to shareholders, so what makes you think they wouldn't see a return that would make them want to reinvest in improving the company?
@@dynamicworlds1 well a small business is the owners and they reward if they succeed.
Workers here's your choice we can pay you $30 an hour and maintain our business or $25 an hour and grow.
@@Technics19 all the workers in a coop are rewarded if the business succeeds.
Your reply didn't actually answer the question. If the owners can be motivated by more money later to invest in improving the business, why wouldn't the workers (which, btw, real world worker coops have shown they will)?
If this isn't special pleading, please explain the difference.
That depends, does it not, on the competence of the workers, does it not?
This is the third time over the years that I have watched this particular lecture from Prof. Wolff. I find it the single best, most understandable criticism of capitalism, the American economy, and the implications for our society.
If only he could give this lecture without using the trigger words (capitalism, socialism, etc.) to an audience of Trump supporters. IMO most of Trump's base feel the brunt of our unequal system, but lack the education to understand the source of their woes. Prof. Wolff might be able to turn on some light bulbs, if only...
good point - a spoonful of sugar and all that
@rob Wait. You think there are no bread lines in the US, no hungry families? Do you not know that the US prison system is becoming more and more for profit, a very fascist idea? Are you aware that in Texas there is a new law creating vigilantes to inform on their neighbors for assisting a woman to obtain an abortion?
OK, now that we have gotten your "one words" out of the way, allow me to point out to you that the gulags and the Stazi had nothing to do with the economic systems in their countries, and everything to do with the political systems.
I do agree that capitalism is the best system for the oligarchs, but not so great for the people on the bottom except when it is tempered with a little socialism and a lot of regulation. Laissez faire capitalism has much in common with organized crime; those with the muscle prey on those without. Rules are needed to keep the mobsters from taking over. Surely you must agree. Or do you miss the Gilded Age?
@rob awesome work proving your lack of education 👍. Now let me describe US capitalism: no education, can't afford it, no healthcare, can't afford it, no industries. But hey anyone can open their own business and compete with Walmart and made in China, no one is stopping you. Except lack of capital and education and pretty hard to do without healthcare and when your in jail and when you have to work all day without a break to make profits for the shareholders who are mostly uber wealthy foreigners. What's even better is your working for them for free too by repeating thier capitalist propaganda. Your nation has been raped and usurped by and is now totally set up to protect foreign money while you get jailed in private jail's owned by foreigners and getting killed in wars to protect foreign capital. The only time USA was great was when it was socialist eg. moon landings. A huge effort by the government to educate people producing scientists, astronauts, machines, achieving something for humanity. Capitalism's achievements: worked out how to make a big Mac 5c cheaper to produce, tastes like crap now but who cares, count the savings as profit give profit to executives as bonus... repeat until business fails move on to next business repeat. You have confused free market for capitalism it is not the same thing. Capitalism is about capital who owns it and protecting it at all costs nothing less nothing more and as it fails it turns monopolistic and pressures the government to control people more and more to protect it. It's a hungry beast that wants more and more and now it's forsaken us and moved to China anyway. I realise this is way to much for you and I apologise but it's really for others to read.
@@tonyv5202 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
@ DocZom
I totally agree with you, so how do you make this happen?
A true understanding
of the other side would probably turn on alot of light bulbs.
How do we make this happen.
The main stream media is ultimately guided by profits so the real facts are never going to be reported on. This includes Right & left leaning media organizations .
I still hold hope that educated/informed masses can do what's right for the greater good.
Very insightful watching in 2020
Such clarity! this should be taught Civics classes. What a breath of fresh air and hope! At least starting the conversation which till very recently has been a taboo
Goog talk. thanks Mr. Wolff people need to listen to this. Greetings from Turkey.
A corporation is similar to a feudal manor and a waged employee is similar to a serf
Socialism is the SLAVE MASTER.
@@TRUTHandLIGHT4809 Socialism is the pro-social, ethical and moral way to live.
The new world is corporate feudalism. Governments are their vassals and workers are their serfs.
@@joeldwest So you are saying--a CENTRAL GOVERNMENT enslaving people is moral and ethical? How?
@Daniel Brown If the STATE does not control ALL--and OWN all--it is NOT SOCIALISM.
One take home point for me is that the inability of our government to critically examine and remedy our economic problems is due to the fact that we have been taught only one model of economics and don't have the skills to think outside that one framework.
It's called "hypernormalization": everyone sees and realizes the system is collapsing, but they are all such a deep part of it that no one can imagine any alternative. It happened to the Soviets in the 1980s which is why I believed that some manner of Socialism in the US would be regression. Then I realized that Russia went directly from feudalism to state capitalism and had merely rebranded it as "socialism", skipping the capitalist stage entirely.
Socialism has a rich history in the US, a people's history. And throughout our history the Capitalist class has done it's best to demonize socialism, equate it to communism or fascism and eliminate it's proponents and literature. In the 60's socialist professors were dragged from their classrooms and disappeared, and the books were burned. Not because it's an evil or horribly flawed system. They did their level best to eliminate every trace of it from our history so we have no record of ever fighting for ourselves, and no tools with which to wage that fight if we ever again get the notion on our own that we actually matter.
@@jarilocromlech1257 I've just realized more or less the same thing. Dr Wolff at some point has said the any solution to the current problems that leaves the cause ie capitalism in place is doomed to be taken over again in a couple generations and the same thing will happen again to our grand or great grandkids. I like the ideas of MMT and UBI but am afraid that any money that goes to the public without a change in they overall system will just be hoovered back up into the capitalist class' vaults
For anyone that takes this serious, well, uhhh, no. Prices dictate scarcity and mobilization of energy's. You can't "plan" economies dude:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodological_individualism
ruclips.net/video/gPJWwiKnYGs/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Q-ybKwCkZDo/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/RY0R0NpIdQQ/видео.html
The government WANTS SOCIALISM--they have enacted much of it in USA today. You are correct--they can't think outside that framework.
Super. Good to include education on capitalism and socialism, around the world, so eloquently presented, at schools as well as universities, alongside ethical management.
So true this. Capitalism and democracy are polar opposites.
Well thank dog we have a republic!
You’re a moron.
what a resounding condemnation of democracy! cheers!
What???? Why has every one of the 27 Socialist regimes become autocratic? Socialism's actual track record sucks for democracy. Let's face the facts. There is no democracy in the One Party State.
There is no democracy without freedom of speech. No Socialist country ever had that for long.
Saying socialism and democracy are polar opposites is more accurate.
" Capitalist society is based upon the exploitation of labor. A small minority owns everything; the working masses own nothing. The capitalists command. The workers obey. The capitalists exploit. The workers are exploited. The very essence of capitalist society is found in this merciless and ever-increasing exploitation.Capitalist production is a practical instrument for the extraction of surplus value." Nikolai Bukharin
Yes your right, now its a addiction out of control.
@Haile Selassie Because it an old and failed way of thinking.
@Haile Selassie
Amazing how Marxism boils down to the most irrational, poorly thought out dogmas of Christianity. In this instance, the sin of usury. 😏
@Haile Selassie If you replace "goods" by "services", the labor theory of value still works. A service is very similar to a perishable/consumable good. The capitalist can still hoard surplus value, and in many cases they have to in order to survive. The fact that is not always the case doesn't invalidate the theory, it only lessens the injustice a little bit.
You are participating in capitalism when you have a garage sale or trade illegal contraband for currency. In fact any consensual exchange of services for currency or other trade value are also capitalist.
Governments create a system in which the proceeds of capitalism are funneled into a super minority. This speaker's plan is to hand more power to those governments.
In German, employer and employees are called "Arbeitgeber" ("work giver(s)") and "Arbeitnehmer" ("work taker(s)"). The funny thing is that Arbeitgeber refers to the emloyers, so our language reflects very closely the notion that it is the employer who "gives" us work. But if you think about it, it is actually the Arbeitnehmer (employee) who gives his work. This is why some German marxists now use the other way. F**k the system!
+Markus Pfeifer In Croatia we have similar language constructs. It's basically popularized after restoration of capitalism. I'm not conspiracy theorist but it seems that this language constructs are made to make working class think that they don't know how and what to work without "work givers".
@@ionezgb This has been mirrored in American/Canadian English for perhaps 10-20 years now, with the euphemism "job creators" being bandied about in every public discourse about corporate taxes, "payroll taxes", the unemployment rate, etc. Of course, it's not something you'll ever hear average people say to each other, but it stems from the same disgusting capitalist bullshit. Solidarity, comrades.
@@fun_ghoul Well, typical capitalism Orwellians :v They just change the word to make a delusion :v
relabel as labor giver / taker ...
Labor creates demand and not the other way around. The economy should work for the people not the other way around. The economists should work for the economy. German economic tradition going back to guilds, through Bismark until 1945 (absent weimar) the economy was understood in this way. Neoliberalism is cancer. Usury is cancer.
Working together builds muscle memory. Corporations exist on brilliant people. Critical workforce skills atrophy if not used no matter how much you don't need that critical skill today. I'm very happy to have come across this video. Thank you Richard W.
My comment comes at no cost ha ha
Brilliant analysis. Particularly relevant now during Covid crisis with thousands losing their jobs. Now is the time to start thousands of worker CO-OPs in UK.
He even says no other economists agree with him. Why would you ever listen to this comi? 😂🤣
@@ccpj0eyb319 Strangely enough, I recognise intelligence and humanity when I see it, call me unusual!
@@hilaryporter7841 no your the usual democrat/Comi that doesn’t understand people will do whatever you motivate them to do. That is why Wolff’s Marxist ideas will never work.
@@hilaryporter7841
Lemming
Still one of his best lectures.
My admiration for Prof. Wolff is....Boundless!
He even says no other economists agree with him. Why would you ever listen to this comi? 😂🤣
The irony is that he gets rich off criticizing capitalism, much like other champagne socialists. Your admiration is misplaced. Clearly you can't see obvious grifters like Wolff and Reich. Their own home city is failing economically and yet you think they are the purveyors of truth? Pitiful.
@@Misaka-gt5yj How many of these 'experts' or prominent individuals do you see from any 'side' who aren't rich? It doesn't matter the subject or field of study. They have these rich people speak and decide the peasants fates.
One of the best orations I have heard.
He's an unusually good speaker. Almost felt like I was watching a speech in a movie.
Point of personal privledge , once again , please don’t use gendered pronouns such as he , him. Ok comrade ?
@@youtuber6185 haha. Nice troll. You almost got me.
matthew labbe You should watch the democratic socialist 2019 national convention, then you will get it.
@@youtuber6185 I've seen what you're referring to. Even as a lefty, it was pretty damn cringey. I think we'd agree that that level pedantry is silly. But not all of us are that insufferable. Cheers!
matthew labbe If you google the actual definition of democratic socialism it does require community ownership of companies. This sounds harmless but if you delve into questions about how you would transition private property of company ownership over there are no answers. In capitalism we already have coops and ESOPs but people decide to not donate their companies. So either we force out private ownership or stay like we are. Actually Karl Marxs called for abolishing ALL private property and Wolff reveres Marx. It’s clear why I’m anti DSA
Respect Sir. It's an outstanding discussion mixing economics and history. Being a chemist also I didn't find it difficult to understand the basics of economics!
He even says no other economists agree with him. Why would you ever listen to this comi? 😂🤣
Economics is baseless. Until it’s tied to the actual energy generating potential of our planet we are doomed. The economy must be tied to Molecular Biophysics of our globe. ruclips.net/video/ZSjNCPPY-1I/видео.html
Uni students in USA are not taught Karl Marx‘a economics, while in China, the students are taught all kinds of economics from the west, therefore they not only know Marx’s Capital(Das Kapital), but also know Adam Smith and Keynes etc as well
Alot of Chinese have read Mises as well, I'm impressed.
Was a boat captain and have said that the designer's should have to fix the boat themselves first to see if it's possible... This is the basis of employees running the country... Let those that do the work decide how things are to be...
Brilliant lecture. On radical differences between Keynesian and neo-classical economics [00:00] to 05:49]. On the failure of economics programs to discuss radical critique of economics [38:31] to [44:35]. On democratic capitalism [44:35] to [53:42].
Democratic capitalism? You sure missed the point. If there is no capitalist owning the corporation and, by the virtue of this ownership, deciding how to distribute results of labor, that fundamentally ain't no capitalism.
@@Alkis05 If you can't democratize the enterprise (with cooperatives), the state needs to regulate.The Netherlands or Sweden, for example, always had capitalist system, but they tax wealth progressively. As a result, the state has and uses the power to address the two weaknesses of unfettered capitalism: instability and crises are less severe, and at the same time inequality and poverty are consistently lower and at more acceptable levels than in the USA. This in fact is true for most of continental Europe.
@@AlbertSchram lol. hearing my country sweden and UNFETTERED capitalism casually like that is just hilarious
yea i fkn wish
I see we have the stem-majors who have a hard-on for libertarians in the comments. If you're a Capitalist and detest something because of the name Marx is included, this is the man you must listen to. Also, I'm very surprised google invited him. There is a lot of confusion in the comments unfortunately.....
I'm a stem-major and a strong advocate for a socialist mode of production and the reversal of bourgeois created and enforce property-relations. Some Stem-majors give us all a bad wrap - once the material conditions of this field start to diminish under late capitalism due to the falling rate of profit, we'll see which stem majors are still capitalist bootlickers.
Thanks for the great source and analysis!
I agree - I love science and technology not because I'm in it to make a fat wage - I recognise i'm still having my surplus extracted regardless if my bourgeois boss pays me $60 or $10 an hour. I also believe that a socialist transition state and then full communism allows more innovations in the fields I am passionate about and thus I see not only the problems of capitalism but the advantages of socialism/communism for the STEM field!
Anyways thanks comrade
Max Stirner lmao! But all u talk about has never worked in the history of mankind. See in order to know the future u need to look at passed results. The reason u feel this way is u live in a capitalist society and u live a great life. Funny people growing up in communist Russia would not feel the way u do. CAUSE THEY LIVED IT!! It’s not fun!! Lmao
WorldsGreatest Man lmao! So u think government wouldn’t hold back the tech field? Sooo Stalin’s Russia did all kind of innovative things to change the world? How bout Lennon’s Russia? Did a bunch of amazing things? Did they invent the microwave oven? Lmao! They were too busy begging for plain bread to eat that the government dished out to them. Great system. Equal misery. Perfect!
As a STEM major, these people do not represent me. If anything capitalism is a hinderance to scientific progress. Wealth in the hands of a few means that those few dictate the work of science and that is fundamentally unprincipled. If a breakthrough is made that hurts capitalists, they can easily shut it down. The makers of Oxycontin lied about its addictiveness and when people stepped up and showed them the proof of their lies, the company did everything in their power to silence them for as long as possible. Purdue Pharma opened lawsuits, they defamed them in scientific journals (which had conflicts of interest with big pharma), they attempted to get funding cut for other projects of theirs, etc. Millions of people have died as a result of the opioid crisis, and millions more have been crippled by the worst opioid epidemic since China's over a century ago, as a result of capitalists controlling the flow of information and the direction of science.
I work at a place where the more the employees produce, the shorter the boss makes the lunches. Crazy.
Is that Amazon?
You should be running that place with the other workers
Another advantage of worker co-ops is that the experts of the field can directly involve in decision makings. While conventional enterprises the decision makers are not always experts of the field which means many of the times they dont fully understand what they are doing and always trying to cut the costs
There's a Wolff amongst the corporate flock.
@K Korona thanks for that. Here's your gold star for participating ⭐
@K Korona Are you asking me to name a technology conceived by a political system? Really? Maybe you should be more specific? lol Make your case and if It's remotely compelling I'll play.
@K Korona Satelites
We need a pack of Wolffs!
@Truth Seeker can you tell me how workers owning the buisness together and voting on their manager leads to genocide?
To all Google employees, as well as all employees of corporations, and workers all around the world: Organize and unite. Understand our power. Dump the bosses off our backs.
Richard Wolff going to Google? Talk about Daniel going into the Lion's den!
Since I've heard many of his talks before, i kinda want to skip to the comments/QA. But I'm also scared because I know it probably isn't going to be good.
Erich Bishop the Q&A wasn't bad actually (except maybe for the one guy at the very end who went on and on about China).
Wolff isn't afraid of lions.
Yes, that is quite obvious. Kudos for him for doing it and why on God's green earth they would want Richard Wolff to lecture the Google guys on the shortcomings on the current predatory Capitalist system that has gone awry and has run amok since Reagan got elected is way, way beyond me.
...and. like Daniel, he escapes unscathed because he has the truth on his side.
Thank you for important information about economics. Light destroys the darkness. Truth will win.🌼🌺🌸
Richard Wolff is brilliant mind, big bravo, we need more peoples like him... 90 % of peoples does not understand Marx
it doesn't matter if people understand it as long as we remember communism has become genocidal every time
@Gerry Atric he's a wackjob for promoting democracy at the workplace of which we spend A HUGE PORTION of our lives (monday through friday, from 9am to 5pm)? for pointing out the contradictions of capitalism? for calling out the greediness of billionaires? well, if that's what it means to be a 'wack-job' then i'll go ahead and join him.
@@Dillonthewinner What criticisms of capitalism of his do you not find accurate? What are your own criticisms of democratizing the workplace? Im new to this idea of socialism so im always curious to see what those who ferociously oppose it think about these ideas.
@@Dillonthewinner Focus on Venezuela and forget the Congo
@Gerry Atric if it's "whack jobs" you are looking for try the current POTUS.
The definition of "cogent" has to be this lecture! Bravo Professor Wolff!!!!!
Delusional
@@googlefashists4986 out of all the comments here you pick on this person about a year later.
@@melelconquistador
shake heads.
Fascinating critique of America's cold war capitalist ideology strangling free speech and open thought in education-and society overall-in it's effort to maintain it's dominance. His dissection of capitalism is really thought provoking relative to why we accept this arrangement and the alternatives he names like democratizing workforces through cooperatives is worth consideration.
The critics falsely accusing him of advocating for "bigger government" have no problem fighting two unpaid for wars while preparing to start others, massive tax cuts for the wealthiest , cuts to social security and a border wall and seem to be able to find money for these projects without a problem, despite the deficits they're already causing.
Those critics are arguing in bad faith, they don't actually care to hear anything about any other systems. No one is that brain dead to see making worker places democratic as big government, they are acting in bad faith.
My only critique, is the amount of time given. Amazing
For quality talk, time is priceless with possibilities. Flashy aplombs are addictions for tweeters, just a nit of wit will impress.
I'm super high right now and this stuff is just mind bending. I love it.
It's mind bending because it's idiotic. Smoke less weed.
@@phil5569 of course, *_Richard D. Wolff, Professor of Economics Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, Amherst where he taught economics from 1973 to 2008_* is idiotic, but RUclips commenter, Phil556 is not.
@@neilwilliams2883 Correct. I'm glad you understand. ;)
@@phil5569 There is no evidence that weed makes anyone more 'idiotic' than anyone else (but there is a movie called 'Reefer Madness' that makes that debunked claim)... and much evidence to assume it may, in fact, enhance cognitive abilities (why creative people use it). And we do not NEED EVIDENCE to conclude that you are the idiot you project outside of itself... but you are the evidence of your own contradiction (that is, smoking 'less weed' has clearly done nothing for you).
@@neilwilliams2883 Careful with the sarcasm, irony and satire around the naive, the dumb and the narcissistic. Phil just MIGHT be taking you seriously!
My college economics teacher informed us he was required to teach this class, read from a textbook, and was basically a semester of hell which convinced me for many years that economics was something I wasn't at all interested in intellectually. Why did you have to bring that traumatic memory back to me right off the bat :P
Did you learn anything? Just asking.
Obsessed w Richard Wolff! Thanks for all the lessons 🙌
He even says no other economists agree with him. Why would you ever listen to this comi? 😂🤣
This was over 4 years ago, and this man's message has been gaining a lot of traction. Thank you Prof. for the clarity and context.
But there’s a reason. There’s a reason. There’s a reason for this, there’s a reason education SUCKS, and it’s the same reason it will never, ever, EVER be fixed.
It’s never going to get any better, don’t look for it, be happy with what you’ve got.
Because the owners, the owners of this country don’t want that. I’m talking about the real owners now, the BIG owners! The Wealthy… the REAL owners! The big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions.
Forget the politicians. They are irrelevant. The politicians are put there to give you the idea that you have freedom of choice. You don’t. You have no choice! You have OWNERS! They OWN YOU. They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought, and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls, they got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls.
They spend billions of dollars every year lobbying, lobbying, to get what they want. Well, we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for everybody else, but I’ll tell you what they don’t want:
They don’t want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don’t want well informed, well educated people capable of critical thinking. They’re not interested in that. That doesn’t help them. That’s against their interests.
That’s right. They don’t want people who are smart enough to sit around a kitchen table and think about how badly they’re getting fucked by a system that threw them overboard 30 fucking years ago. They don’t want that!
You know what they want? They want obedient workers. Obedient workers, people who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork. And just dumb enough to passively accept all these increasingly shitty jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime and vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it, and now they’re coming for your Social Security money. They want your retirement money. They want it back so they can give it to their criminal friends on Wall Street, and you know something? They’ll get it. They’ll get it all from you sooner or later cause they own this fucking place! It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it! You, and I, are not in the big club.
By the way, it’s the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to think and what to buy. The table has tilted folks. The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care! Good honest hard-working people; white collar, blue collar it doesn’t matter what color shirt you have on. Good honest hard-working people continue, these are people of modest means, continue to elect these rich cock suckers who don’t give a fuck about you…. they don’t give a fuck about you… they don’t give a FUCK about you.
They don’t care about you at all… at all… AT ALL. And nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That’s what the owners count on. The fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant of the big red, white and blue dick that’s being jammed up their assholes everyday, because the owners of this country know the truth.
It’s called the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.
RIP GEORGE CARLIN
Capitalism won't have control over education forever. They are now at the point where most of their ill gotten gains are fictitious capital. Not sustainable.
Thrashaero yes there’s people out here that care and give a shit and have been speaking up and speaking out. We just need more that’s all. Hopefully people are beginning to realize what the truth really is. All these companies are ran by a certain group of people they have been running these companies forever including asshole bankers! They have set up the system to fail over and over again and they never use their own money but use ours and we the people are constantly screwed because of their stupidness! Co-ops do seem to be the best Way to go but I do not believe that anyone other than the workers make the rules for the company getting any government involved in anything is the worst thing anyone could think about! But they will try to rig that too but somehow someway we the people have to stand up and figure out the best way to handle us and make the rules for ourselves not let them make the rules for us. It’s going to be a fight and hopefully people are willing to stand up and start doing it otherwise the system is never going to change
Thrashaero NAME THE JEW DAMNIT!
There are more of us than there are of them. We know they don't care. We know all that. Time for us to pay attention to OUR wants and OUR cares. Screw them. We need to think about what the majority of us want and need.
Than you BRILLIANT.
You are a true inspiration mr!! You deserve a Nobel prize...
A Nobel prize for believing in Marxism? Really? laughable.
@@phil5569 HAHAHA
He's a crank and promoting fairy tales
:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Awesome lecture! Thank you, Teacher! I spent many years in Europe & Asia, & many countries have far superior systems than we do - political, economic & social systems that work a MILLION TIMES BETTER, for ALL of us, not just the 1 % of Oligarchs, like what we got goin' on in Amerikkka!
I STRONGLY recommend everybody SHARE this video with all yer friends!
Superior if you are a lazy lowlife.
@@BarrySlisk move to Denmark without a job and see how long you can last
@@ediodimacaroni
I already live in Denmark. People can exist their entire life here without working. My GF's mother has not worked for at least 40 years. She is now recently retired but that is also paid by the government, so....
don't confuse capitalism with corruption. Americans pay more than enough taxes to pay for the services you think the government ought to provide, but the money is wasted on...government
Then why'd you come back and why do so many people around the world fight to come to America and not those other countries dumbass?
Love this guy ! Love the approachability and engagement found in teachers . A gift ! I keep looking for most recent appearances.