Anti-Capitalist Chronicles: From Fordism to Neoliberalism and Beyond

[@charliebaylis4082]

Thank you Mr Harvey, you are very easy to listen to and I greatly appreciate your insights. You seem to be a very kind and thoughtful man, which is brilliant to see in an economist.

[@burden9809]

An excellent exercise in humility as well as economics. Share this, and the rest of his presentations at every opportunity.. RANKED CHOICE VOTING NOW!

[@p4rtan3n]

Share link to this video on mire popular channel's comment sections.. best way to share.. nowadays

[@sunray6673]

hasta la victoria siempre companeros!

[@omyogagal]

Would love to see Professor David Harvey and Shoshana Zuboff having a conversation about surveillance capitalism. Maybe talk about building a mass movement against Google, Facebook during this election year.

[@tanujSE]

I hope our teacher David Harvey is fine Revolutionries wish him good health

[@tanujSE]

I keep waiting for more of him

[@bernardheathaway9146]

Nice insights

[@wannesdemaeyer3343]

You should upload these to spotify

[@Achrononmaster]

"Printing money" does not revitalize, the way to go is to DIRECT SPEND more on social purpose, job guarantee, cancel all taxes on wage earners and social purpose businesses, this is not "printing money", it is social purpose fiscal injection. It is the only way to boost establishment of worker cooperatives --- if you (government) do not heavily bias the playing field to fund worker cooperatives, they will never be able to compete with the capitalist monopolies. Printing money is what a UBI amounts to, if not funded by taxation. We cannot rely on consumers to make the right moral choice to boycott corporates and only buy their goods from coops, that's a neoliberal framing of placing the entire burden on the individual.

[@tathagatsingh6634]

I just have a slight doubt though. According to the Phillips Curve if the inflation rate rises then the unemployment rate must fall but the opposite seems to be the case here. Can someone please help me out?

[@AsbestosMuffins]

could be these old fashioned economic 'rules' especially curves should be firmly re-evaluated with solid data instead of assumptions and logical reasoning

[@tanujSE]

I trust him most I hope he is fine

[@Jaredthedude1]

When are you going back on The Keiser Report?

[@nuthinasitseems5213]

I loved that humility "I'm not sure I'm right about - that; being taking back Control of Education Hospitals and Public transportation. WHY should we have to take back our Ports in California. WHY allow a foreign Nation 'Own up on something so strategic?

[@juliahenriques210]

Maybe the present can be better understood through a marxist lens with the help of old Kondratiev (with extremely accelerated cycles), Varoufakis (with the economic subjugation of the political sphere), and unfortunately Michael Mann (with his comprehensive study of fascism). Along with a serious consideration about how the very existence of the Soviet Union forced capitalism to give workers a measure of welfare they could lose in the chaos of a revolution, all these point to an upcoming era of extreme capitalism with a non-economic justification or façade. Be it the all time favourites nationalism & religion, be it any other, that's where were heading. That's a sure recipe for wars. Right now, pushed by the US military spending juggernaut, many countries are already preparing themselves for the probable wars to come. Germany, half of Eastern Europe, Russia, China, Turkey, Iran, Egypt, India, Pakistan, Venezuela, Ethiopia, Indonesia... All over, states are preparing for the coming storm. The right, especially the international authoritarian Bannon type, being the predominant side of warmongering, militaries, paramilitaries, supremacists, and generally favourable to the use of force, is preparing for it as well, and even instigating conflict, as they feel they'll naturaly come out on top. The left is not. The left today, especially in the US and the UK, is built upon moral authority. That's not enough. No moral authority today can withstand the onslaught of the internet warfare the right is willing to employ, as there's not yet an efficient direct counter to that. It'll always be an uphill battle, as misinformation and doubt are always the toughest rethorical enemies. The left today has very little power. Little economic power. Little political power. Little religious power. No military power. There's way too much to do. Political power is the easiest to achieve, but it stands to reason that it won't last long and must therefore do as much as possible as fast as possible. Economic power must come after, and the only ways seem to be investing in a huge coop sector and strenghten unions. Religious power can come frrom alliances with progressive denominations of any faith. Now... Military power only comes from the acceptance by the left that the use of military force is more than justified. It's necessary, mandatory, against those who go to war for profit. Military power comes from an interest in military affairs, from joining militaries, from understanding that you can't fight rifles and bombs with sticks and stones and protest signs. In the most places that flirt with neo-fascism today, the military massively votes on right wing parties. That's not a coincidence. Much can be said about how the vertical structures of military power can entice people into believing vertical authority can also be the solution to broader, civilian issues. However, in the present circumstances it's absolutely necessary to build a left wing military culture, and that won't be achieved unless the left understands what is at stake.

[@juliahenriques210]

@Scott Covert Not exactly stop decrying these things as evils of the right (which they usually are), but embrace them as necessary tools of survival (which they also unfortunately are). There's no getting rid of religion, as it's an efficient engine of motivation, solace, and meaning to humans. It's been tried, and it failed miserably. The left needs to empower religious narratives whose core converges with its goals, exactly as the right does with their chosen denominations and theologies. Religious war must be countered by religious peace. Religious hate must be countered by religious ecumeny. Religious obscurantism must be countered by religious enlightenment. Religious oppression must be countered by religious freedom. As for the military, the left has a proud history of military achievements, from the French Revolution to the USSR to China to Cuba to many countries around the world. Its administrative skills to face the greater challenge of opposing capitalism have overall been less than stellar, but the left must be rational and separate those aspects from one another. Those fights were just, and those fights were won. What we need is to do better in the aftermath.

[@markgigiel2722]

If Chile is doing what he said, they can expect to be invaded by US sponsored militants or worse.

[@markgigiel2722]

@Thrunabulax I know, but, if they won't listen, Replay? While everyone is watching the Presidential Reality Show, we are doing bad shit everywhere including in the US. Eat, drink and be merry. Peace.

[@markgigiel2722]

@Thrunabulax We will be the last domino to fall, but it's all going down. They won't actually win anything, we will all just suffer and die. I hope they nuke me right on my head because I'm not a prepper survivor in a Mad Max world.

[@wayneatwood6561]

Holy Shit. If it took you a professor who taught Marx, 20 years to understand what was going on what hope does the working population have?

[@canyon9155]

"And this means, in general, that capital is too big to fail… We have to actually spend some time propping it up, trying to reorganize it, and maybe shift it around very slowly and over time to a different configuration. But a revolutionary overthrow of this capitalist economic system is not something that is conceivable at the present time. It will not happen, it cannot happen, and we must make sure that it does not happen…" Wow what a shitlib

[@troywalkertheprogressivean8433]

direct democracy. de-centralizes political power. also instantly employs every american by attaching a paycheck to political participation.

[@カスカディア国人]

Troy Walker The Progressive Proletarian I’m ok with having one body of government be direct democratic in nature but I certainly don’t want a full direct democracy any time soon.

[@amanitacastanea2435]

Also in 1975 you didn’t have the internet.

[@jondavid54]

Cobynism was emphatically rejected at the last election. They chose jingoistic nationalism via Brexit. We have to accept that however sad we may be. I dont see much to be happy about from a left viewpoint anywhere

[@bigdaz7272]

You need to look a little deeper. It was only the 60+ age group where Corbyn fared worse than in 2017 election, in fact he gained in other 2 age brackets even with the election being focused around Brexit. Older folks seem to be more easily swayed by the Old Media still and simple slogans or oft repeated smears.

[@thetruthoutside8423]

Well no, you are %200 right. And even more from an existential point of view no rational and logical justified reasons for any institution or any form of state to claim any right over our accumulative knowledge as a species and its products in the form of technology. Under what rational principles any person or any group justifying any claim that they have the right of ownership of this or that even the land? I found it very hard to accept the notion of the RIGHT itself. As if they talking about an absolute right as if it's out their has an independent existence like this stupid intellectual property rights and the laws that regulate them. Human knowledge is a historical accumulative process shared almost by all human and any one comes up with an idea was standing on the shoulders of the ones before him and so on and so forth, for someone to say I must have a RIGHT over this idea or that idea and should be protected to make profit is a very ridiculous notion. similarly with land and how one can claim he or she have a right over a land on earth just like saying I have a right of ownership over a land on Mars. This obsession with privatization is sickness and they want to impose it on the world as if it is the only solution to how we must deal with ourselves and the resources is another sickness. On the other hand who said that we needed these products from an existential point of view and why they keep pushing them on people and spend a lot of money to convince us that we need them ? More products or unnecessary products require more resources and more energy and more waste and more wars to get to the resources and more destruction and more killing and so on and so forth just for the sake of growth and profits. The entire system since its inception brought a lots of misery and destruction and I am not sure if the benefits have an absolute value, we become more and more dependent on technology and more of less movements and more of stressful life and running for nothing and trying to get more perishable products and we ourselves are perishable. They are very proud about how capitalism brought a lots technology and they forget about the human element. What is the use of technology if we become its slaves and machines to make profit like how chaplain in modern times clearly elaborated on this point.

[@jgalt308]

The reason you didn't understand what was going on in 1975 until later, was that you didn't and still don't understand what happened in the previous period either, which was duplicated in the ten years you cite, from 1972 to 82, but took longer....from 1939 to 1972, for both periods share an identical effect, and equal rise in commodity costs. This price increase was as follows, what cost $1.67 in 1939, cost $ 5.04 in 1972, and $11.63 in 1982. This represents a 300% inflation rate for the first period, and almost a 700% inflation rate for the entire period, and prices have risen continuously since 1939, so what $1.67 bought in 1939, now costs $30.99. Contrasting this to the period from 1860 thru 1939....with 1860 = $1.00 the purchasing power stayed fairly constant, because the dollar value stayed constant.....with the highest cost increases coming in 1865 at $1.96 but settled back to $1.00 by 1897, steadily rose again to $2.41 in 1920.....dropped to a low of $1.51 in 1933, and then began what was a basically uninterrupted increase to the present. Given 1933, the single fact that screams out is that this is the year "money" is de-commodified domestically, and the Federal Reserve achieves complete dominance over the money supply....and then becomes total fiat in 1972. ( and while the U.S.is the dominant economic and military power in the world ) www.in2013dollars.com/1860-dollars-in-2017?amount=1 What is also missing from the thinking of the "populist progressive democratic socialist" element, whatever that means or whoever they really are.....is the understanding that "solving income inequality" is a solution to inequality, because this line of thinking ignores the fact that, all of the developed economies are at this level because they have been exploiting the rest of the "world" to get there and stay there. www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/how-rich-am-i/ The movement for a $15 living wage minimum would yield an annual pre-tax income of 31,200 and the would place the earner in the top 4.4% of the global population, at 11.1 times the global median......while the current federal minimum wage of 7.25 yields an income of 15,080, is in the top 13.7% and 5.3 times the median. This would seem to suggest, and I'm just spit balling here, that the degree of exploitation, through economic and military dominance would have to increase, so policies that argue for a change in addition to the rest of the p.p.d.s. mantra seem somewhat contradictory. Whatever the tools of Magical Marxist Ideology, all it really is at its root is a critical observation of the historical dominance of some, and their exploitation of others, which has existed since the dawn of civilization......and given the present reality, as well as the additional problems that have arisen from industrialization, any expectation that "humans" are going to experience some moral epiphany with regards to the "other" is naive ignorance at its height. Both separatism and nationalism are exactly what one would expect, given the facts and the history of who and what we are......and the only reason to believe otherwise, is to actually ignorant of both, which seems to be the case.

[@jgalt308]

I didn't quite get the reference to Fordism in the title, but I found this....which might be interesting in the "mythology" dept. www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/04/the-story-of-henry-fords-5-a-day-wages-its-not-what-you-think/#30b5cc8f766d

[@FourtyParsecs]

You skipped an awful lot of Marxist theory there and didn't seem to mention anything about the real socialist agenda. For one, abolishing capitalism, and thus the very ENGINE of the inequality you pointed out, is on the docket. Socialism is a GLOBAL project or is nothing at all. The $15/hr wage increase isn't socialism. It's just what can be demanded and achieved still under capitalism. For the socialist, it doesn't solve any economic problems (we are well-aware that inflation is an issue ...). What it does do is alleviate some human suffering caused by capitalism in the short term and, more strategically, it raises class consciousness and builds solidarity, two vitally necessary pre-conditions for revolution and abolishing capitalism (and the insane inflation and inequality with it). Stay calm. Smash capitalism.

[@rocketsurgeon5758]

@@jgalt308 What a train-wreck of a comment. I am not surprised it was written by someone using the moniker John Galt. Your math is very fuzzy, comparing prices in 1930 is not a proper measure of inflation. It is ridiculous to suggest that Marx, Harvey, and other Socialist thinkers have not thoroughly dissected issues like inflation, inequality, militarism and the rest of your vague argument.

[@jgalt308]

@@FourtyParsecs I pretty much covered marxist theory by reducing it to its essence, and you are free to argue against it assuming you you understood the reduction, which you apparently did not. This would also apply to the rest of your reply because it ignores the rest of the "facts" presented......and this is simple math, because once you stop the means by which the developed world exploits the non developed world, you no longer have a way to maintain the standard of living that such economies enjoy. All economic theory is based on continued growth.....the exploitation is systemic....and if you make the attempt to alleviate "suffering" of any kind "everywhere" you will reduce the median income of those "benefiting" to raise that of those suffering....and the poverty line in the US is 12, 500....which put you in the top 16.8% and 4.4 times the global median....and this doesn't cover correcting the damage that must be repaired, asa well as the drastic alteration of the systems already in place. You can't just ignore this, and it doesn't matter what "isms" you prefer.....all of them will have to deal with this if "income inequality" and "exploitation" is something you truly are going to address globally. Of course if your interests are more parochial.....and most are.....then your solutions simply address "domestic" inequality.....which is not very egalitarian nor very marxist, in it's ideological result, now is it?

[@jgalt308]

@@rocketsurgeon5758 So then properly measure it, or show me where anyone you are allowing to think for you, has? When you have something other than fallacy or vague allusion, feel free to try again.

[@Diamat1917]

*Prof. Harvey when it comes to Poland you're talking complete nonsense* *Read the letter from Odrodzenie Komunizmu and learn something*

[@kirazare6622]

Yep! Absolute nonesense! Full employment? "Good wages"?... Seriously? You know that in Poland cost of rent small aprt (1 room) is more than minimal wage of 1 person? And this one about socialism... we have almost authocratic gov that is taking almost all the human rights from women and lgbtq community. We don't have socialism in Poland...

[@clarestucki5151]

Re "Bailing out bondholders (banks) vs bailing out people", it's noteworthy that the bondholders (lenders) were not doing anything dishonest/immoral (stupid maybe, but not dishonest), rather the people were living on borrowed money rather than paying their own way. So who deserved more to be bailed out???

[@waldemarrognes8844]

He speaks very monotonous and boring!

[@rowdy3837]

Waldemar Rognes The truth isn’t sexy. The process of learning isn’t always exciting. If it were, there would be no need for videos like this. You would already have this info. Especially in America where the opposite of “boring and monotonous” always wins out over hard truths.

[@waldemarrognes8844]

Clay Allen You are right! My comment was stupid. I shall try to listen better next time!

[@markgigiel2722]

You should listen to Chomsky.

[@ppazpppaz8618]

Waldemar Rognes Maybe reading is your thing, try www.wsws.org/

[@Knifymoloko]

@@markgigiel2722 lol be sure to turn the CC on