Conversations with History: Perry Anderson

[@tylerlynch2849]

Perry Anderson's writing is just fantastic - the depth of his research is unrivalled

[@钱小济]

a Great thinker with comprehensiveness and width. Always beings me inspiration when I start a new research or observe a phenomenon.

[@mtc2054]

The greatest Anglophone essayist of his generation. One can only hope he has some major works yet to appear.

[@CarolPrice4p]

Thank you UCTV, for sharing this and so many of Harry Kreisler`s interesting interviews. 👍

[@FrancoMFT8]

Perry Anderson is a great marxist historian. I like a lot of his work about the feudalism. His books are great.

[@yonisgure7348]

You're an idiot and clearly not familiar with his work at all if you think that.

[@garymorgan3314]

Rather silly Yonis. His essays are especially good and while his Althusserian stuff is obscurantist but he's brilliant. Read his EU essay in the late February 2021 in the LRB, masterpiece of narrative history.

[@Xenublax2]

@@yonisgure7348 Lack of generosity rarely pays, in intellectual life.

[@yonisgure7348]

@@garymorgan3314 I agree, I'm not sure who I was responding to but there was someone who made a comment about Anderson being an agent of the British government or something

[@nohisocitutampoc2789]

One lovely and inspiring hour.

[@understandingthenews8147]

A fantastic and very insightful video. Very good and sadly still valid diagnosis of the stranglehold of neoliberalist ideology on media, politics, and the public mind of most major countries.

[@abhan111]

I didn't realize Perry had such an 'outsider' experience - it explains a lot but not how he occupies the exalted space above all other living historians in the way he does :-). May he thrive.

[@Vipashayana.]

This video got uploaded 10 years backs!! 🤔🤭

[@cuntsound]

That's not an argument against LTV, plus there has ever been nor ever will be a "truly free market".

[@jogobonito1234]

@Bastiat90 - really? Explain to us why the LTV is so wrong then. It's easy to dismiss something without elaborating in a logical way.

[@bapyou]

Wheat is the date of this interview?

[@TheSaft]

2001, I think.

[@Bastiat90]

It is a sound argument against LTV because prices are a value. And prices are the result of supply and demand.

[@doublenegation7870]

Prices aren't value, that's an obvious absurdity. Prices are meant to be an index of value, but assigning a price to something doesn't eo ipso give a thing value. Supposing it does is a fetish belief.

[@theH0UNDSofD00M]

@mmay2010 what is it that you disagree with in marxism? You might don't agree with the solution (most likely cuz you'd loose privilege) but you can't disagree with the marxist critique of capitalism...Marx has been prove right again and again.

[@hymnofashes]

*GASP* My mother forbids me from watching communism!

[@ahmadbazergan9070]

🌺

[@Bastiat90]

Because prices are set according to supply and demand in a truly free market.

[@Bastiat90]

What Marx said about capitalism bears little resemblance to what his followers claimed he said about it. Marx praised capitalism for destroying medieval feudalism and saw it as one more step on the road to socialism and then communism. Even so, his economic contributions remain wrong. The LTV is about as serious as the phlogiston theory of fire.

[@syedadeelhussain2691]

Marxist scholars are mostly brilliant people who cannot solve day-to-day problems.

[@tylerlynch2849]

a rather specious remark

[@distopiadnb]

Unfortunately, want it or not, a theory of value *has* to explain the formation of prices. Plus, it's not even remotely true that Marx did not intend to comply with the standard requirements of a theory of value (profit equalization and price formation). The problem of course is not about fluctuations, Marx had plenty of good explanations of that. LTV's problem is price formation, and you won't get away with it with naive "humanist" marxism. Bastitat90 can be better rebutted in other ways.