Hey dude, I have no idea what point you are trying to make dude.

@@barrymurdaco8139 I'm empathetic to the necessary pursuit of comprehension of labor organization, but we have some of the best examples of successful organized labor standards in the world, and people let them crumble to read books about marxism. I laugh, but I also do not know the answer.

@@barrymurdaco8139 It's almost as if the study of marxism, has been rooted in the idea of the working class not getting along in the first place in my mind.

@theflexitech Well, I agree that there are many sectarian disputes among Marxists who fight about almost everything. I do think it is important to have a correct understanding of theory, especially given all the horrible atrocities that have been committed in the name of Marxism. This includes the dead end of reformist politics which are weak when it comes to calling out imperialism, and, in my view, reforming capitalism has been tried and failed. I would also add, going back to the 1930s, the origins of mass labor organization in this country were largely driven by Marxists, who were then later purged. Of course, as you said, labor has been on the defensive for a long time now.

@@barrymurdaco8139 People are no longer voting on things by showing up educated and ready to conduct themselves and share their perspective. People vote with their attention to social media now.

Thanks! Do you mean you don't agree about Marx?

I think there's a difference in the role the parties play, but they both ultimately serve to support this inverted totalitarian system. While Republicans go on the attack to dismantle the administrative/welfare state, the Democrats function to absorb the people's anger and channel it into harmless directions that do not challenge the system as a whole. At best, Dems propose moderate reforms which is like putting a band aid on a big, gaping wound. They are also opposed to single-payer healthcare, support imperialism, etc., as do the GOP. In other words the role of Dems is to stifle the development of any truly revolutionary movement in this country and keep people asleep and enslaved to the system of wage labor and capitalist production.

@ Steps towards a more socialized system is always good. The ACA for example was a landmark piece of legislation; it was a single vote from a public option but I’m pretty sure Manchin stifled it. (might be wrong about the person who voted but it lost by 1) Anyway i’m my opinion the democrats aren’t perfect but they’re the best option, republicans are literally threatening are allies right now, Ukraine is screwed and any common sense solution in Palestine is screwed. The right has created an environment where no one knows what’s true, and no one knows what’s gonna happen. I just disagree that the democrats serve that system, in the 40s, 50s, and 60s it was new deal democrats who pushed for social security, no college tuition, (a Reagan invention) safety nets for poor people, it was republicans who gutted all of that crap. Clinton was fairly similar in that he pushed for budget cuts but he oversaw the internet boom so. Anyway about the imperialism what would you prefer? I think America should protect its interest, that being said I don’t think we should over throw governments like Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq. I do however think arming Ukraine is good

I think we need more than incremental steps toward a socialized system. The ACA, for example, was touted as a significant achievement in expanding access to healthcare. However, it was less a victory for working people and more a boon for private health insurance companies, ensuring their continued profitability through mandates and subsidies without addressing the root problem: the commodification of healthcare. A genuinely socialized healthcare system would dismantle the profit motive entirely, something the ACA deliberately avoided. The Democratic Party, as it exists today, does not have what it takes to challenge the Republican Party's overt reactionary policies. Historically, the New Deal reforms of the 1930s-1960s were not gifts from benevolent Democrats but concessions made in response to militant labor movements and the threat of systemic upheaval. These reforms, while improving the conditions of many workers, were still aimed at stabilizing capitalism, not transcending it. By the 1970s, these gains began to erode as the ruling class, facing crises of profitability, pivoted toward neoliberalism. Figures like Bill Clinton continued this trend, gutting welfare, deregulating finance, and pushing globalization under the guise of economic growth. Today's Democratic Party is far more conservative than its mid-20th-century counterpart, and its leadership consistently prioritizes maintaining capitalist stability over meaningful systemic change. This is why they fail to address issues like universal healthcare or meaningful solutions for Palestine-they are fundamentally constrained by the interests of capital. From a Marxist perspective, the U.S. does not have "allies" in the traditional sense but strategic partners aligned with its imperialist interests. Ukraine, for example, has become a battleground for U.S. attempts to counter Russia’s influence, not because of a principled stand for democracy but because of geopolitical competition. Arming Ukraine serves U.S. imperialist objectives, not the Ukrainian people, who suffer the consequences of this proxy war. Instead of aligning with the ruling class's framing of these conflicts, a Marxist approach would prioritize international solidarity with workers in Ukraine, Russia, and beyond, opposing both Russian aggression and U.S. imperialism. On Palestine, the Democratic Party’s failure is obvious. They offer no substantive challenge to Israeli genocide, and in fact enable it, even as they pay lip service to a ceasefire. This mirrors their broader inability to confront imperialism because doing so would require dismantling the structures that sustain U.S. hegemony globally. True liberation for Palestine-and all oppressed peoples-requires dismantling the capitalist-imperialist system that the Democratic Party upholds. The right's attacks on truth and stability are undeniable, but the Democrats' inability to provide an alternative is rooted in their commitment to the same capitalist framework. The only viable path forward is one that transcends these parties entirely, building movements that prioritize working-class power and solidarity over imperialism and the interests of the ruling class. A truly revolutionary movement towards socialism must challenge the system at its root, not simply reform its most egregious symptoms.

So that means Donald Trump is a slave?😅

Where was it confirmed?

@@barrymurdaco8139 Sharri Markson Donald McNeil Jr.

@@yogikarl The credibility of both sources raises concerns. Sherry Markson is a reporter for Sky News, which is often compared to Fox News in terms of its conservative editorial stance. According to Wikipedia: “In May 2020, reporting by Markson in The Daily Telegraph claimed that the Wuhan Institute of Virology could be the source of COVID-19, citing a 15-page government dossier. The Sydney Morning Herald critiqued the reporting as intimating the dossier as originating from a Five Eyes intelligence source.” It also notes, “Her reporting has been described by the Sydney Morning Herald as being part of a counter-narrative that advances the case that the COVID-19 pandemic originated from a laboratory leak in opposition to the findings of the World Health Organization in March 2021 on the origins of the virus.” Regarding Donald G. McNeil Jr., here is what ChatGPT says about him: “A former science and health reporter for The New York Times, he expressed skepticism about the origins of COVID-19, including the lab leak theory. While he initially supported the idea that the virus likely originated from a natural source, he later acknowledged the possibility of a lab leak as new evidence emerged.” It goes on to say, “In his writings and public comments, McNeil highlighted the need for a thorough investigation into the virus's origins, considering both zoonotic spillover (natural transmission from animals to humans) and the potential for a lab-related incident. However, he has not been a staunch advocate for the lab leak theory, instead emphasizing a balanced approach to understanding all possible origins of COVID-19. This perspective does not equate to confirming the theory. McNeil was also dismissed from The New York Times in 2021. He was criticized for using racially insensitive language and for how he handled discussions about race during a trip to Peru with high school students. His departure raised questions about journalistic integrity and accountability, but it should be noted that these issues do not directly pertain to his reporting on COVID-19.” The World Health Organization still leans towards a natural origin as the most likely scenario. Here’s a link to a recent article that argues against the lab leak theory: bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/gain-of-function-research-covid-19/?s=09 Given this context, I don’t see how the lab leak theory has been confirmed.

Utter nonsense. Not one thing you said is even remotely true. It would take more effort than it's worth to respond to everything here. Please try to find something new to talk about. All I ever hear from conservatives are the same old talking points about Clinton and the Democrats. I couldn't care less what you say about them. But to rewrite history, as if the Republicans have no responsibility for wars this country has fought is absurd. Besides starting wars, I guess it is the life-affirming instincts of conservatives that makes them fetishize guns and the death penalty. Their views on climate change alone are enough to make a case they are a death cult pretending to be a political party. Also, for the record-and for anyone else who might happen to see this comment-the point of Marcuse's argument isn't that Eros is good and Thanatos is bad, it's about how they are both utilized to sustain domination in modern society. Conversely, he wants to explore the possibilities of how both could be redirected into creating a truly liberated society.

@@barrymurdaco8139 You're not thinking. I didn't say that Republicans have no responsibility for wars. In fact, they love wars, and they love the rich and enjoy keeping the poor down. Yeah, they're nasty. I didn't say anything about Thanatos, though, like Freud, I see any death drive there might be as a very bad thing. And you certainly can't now say my last sentence was "not even remotely true"; it was -- as it turns out-- spot on!

You might want to re-edit this post. Thanatos is another name for the death drive and I have no idea what you are saying here, "I see any death drive there might be as a very bad thing," what does that even mean? If you are trying to say the death drive is "bad," that is a simplistic argument and does not match with what Freud or Marcuse said. You keep criticizing me, but I am not exactly impressed by anything you've said so far. You said, Democrats are the "biggest masters of war," which is an absurd comment. What is the point of saying that, if not to suggest they are worse than Republicans? You are whitewashing the crimes of the Bush administration, who also helped expand NATO by the way. They are escalating tensions with China, not to mention their support for Israel. Democrats are hardly any better, but your comment was obviously meant to suggest they are worse. If you think both parties are bad you should have just said that, instead of singling out "liberal democrats," while also making insane comments about "celebrating" abortion. You also avoided responding to a lot of what I said, i.e., fetishizing guns, climate change denial.

Thanks

@@barrymurdaco8139 it's not easy to find youtube channel or content that explain German philosophy in lay language

It is supposed to be public and I am glad it helps.

See above comments. This is too stupid to respond to.

@@barrymurdaco8139enjoy your day Barry.-:)

@@tam-tam1970 Lucky for you, I already made an example of that other idiot ranting about leftists. By the way, another Freudian concept you might want to familiarize yourself with is projection. Most people who read your comment are going to think you’re the one jerking off about "homosexuals."

@@barrymurdaco8139 If every statement we make is only or mostly projection than there is hardly anything to say about anything without being accused of projecting. Of course this does not apply to the leftists. Make America Great again - vote for Trump, Barry! -:)

@@tam-tam1970 Who are you, Mark Robinson? Not everything, of course, but vile homophobic comments like yours are tailor-made for this concept.

Sure, glad you like them.

Glad it was helpful!

You are correct but it is also appropriate to pronounce it "BEN-juh-min" in an English-speaking context. I tend to use both, but I should be more consistent, thanks for pointing that out.

@@Bmurdacosure. And you're right. I commented only because you were trying out a couple of pronunciations and I thought you were shooting for the German one.

My first troll! Thank you!

Thank you. Yes, I recorded this from a class I taught.

I don't, but I did upload the powerpoint I used for this class which you can now see under the description for this video (I only had four more slides to go). I am also posting it below. I also have lectures on Horkheimer and Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment. docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Qcc-YSaVdDc8KXeDbWwCtrXnBc6VaCrc/edit?usp=share_link&ouid=116905106839301483489&rtpof=true&sd=true

@@barrymurdaco8139 thank you so much! you're really helpful