David Graeber Interview - Charlie Rose (On Debt, Occupy, Democracy, and Capitalism)

[@prunonz479]

Which year is this from?

[@TheBardPlays]

I believe late 2011/early 2012 since his book Debt had released in 2011 and Occupy was underway in late 2011 as well.

[@prunonz479]

@@TheBardPlays Thanks for clearing that out!

[@tuckerbugeater]

sheep@@MereAYT

[@markcarey67]

"We've managed to eliminate the corruption problem largely by legalizing it" - great line

[@georgesteele4838]

18:25 Graeber: "There is not enough metal in the crust of the Earth for everyone in China to have a car." Rose: "Then use plastic." Graeber: "That is still a petroleum product." Such a poignant flaw in large-scale consumer capitalism.

[@jonathanguevara3193]

Prof. Graeber is definitely missed. He continues to inspire even without being with us.

[@EmergencyButtons]

Definitely a founding father of whatever comes next if there is a next.

[@ibc53-y7g]

A tremendous loss for us all. RIP Professor.

[@somosknow1]

David- “Generally speaking when math and violence come together bad things ensue.”

[@myriotsmind]

Thanks for posting. Hadnt seen this.

[@sebolddaniel]

I like sitting here retired in Cambodia with my bicycle and watching people like Dave Graeber. There is probably enough metal in the Earth for everyone to have a bicycle. Let's invest in bicycles.

[@asherroodcreel640]

There's definitely enough carbon

[@phil8378]

Anarcho-cyclism

[@bradsmith6966]

Thank you for this upload - absolutely LOVE listening to Graeber's perspective

[@DandelionLakewood]

Thanks for sharing this, I hope more people get turned onto these ideas.

[@JakeLOL1111]

love graeber a lot of respect for Charlie Rose having him on even if he's not always getting it haha

[@briananderson8428]

Charlie Rose is the epitome of mediocrity. This was a terrible interview---but not because of Dave.

[@bryannoonan5454]

​@@briananderson8428 It's shocking that Charlie often had such excellent guests for the very reason you just mentioned. He's always struggling to hold on in the deeper interviews.

[@cherylaminahislam5601]

Thank you for posting this.

[@kahwigulum]

Thanks for digging this up!

[@gilbertwolford7774]

Interesting cut @18:00 ...

[@ClaytonBridges]

wow

[@josephc8440]

George Orwell had the foresight of Nostradamus.

[@borisbadinoff1291]

Thanks for the reupload. Would be great to add the actual date of the interview in the description.

[@TheBardPlays]

Apologies, I pulled this off of another site, so I'm not too sure. I mention in another comment this interview likely happened around late 2011 or early 2012.

[@shamirkeren3954]

❤thank you.

[@MikeGoodchild-zs9gk]

What an amazing man. he is missed. Who has taken up the torch from him, Chomsky are there no lions out there ?

[@alfiecdyson]

Very different but since David's passing I've found a lot of inspiration from Charles Eisenstein!

[@tewksbery]

Chapo Trap House

[@ximono]

17:45 they obviously had to cut there (18:00)

[@ClaytonBridges]

wow

[@scribl1]

it's crazy that charlie rose is such a well-regarded interviewer. he looks like he's barely listening here. same in the other graeber interview from 2006

[@mattcardarelli]

That’s his way of discrediting people. Tired old trick

[@MartinHNelson]

Graeber was right about green capitalism. It just took a bit longer than he predicted.

[@sulaimansyed1338]

This is awesome, thank you for uploading this.

[@blane.washere4226]

“The question is, why did they have to start with that if they don’t really believe it? *giggle*” beautiful.

[@paulreader1777]

This has turned out to be quite prescient.

[@Zetsubou738]

Rip to both of them in very different ways

[@josephc8440]

Over a decade later. Nothing has changed, the dystopia spans every corner of the country. Goodluck!

[@KMPR40]

Charlie missing the point hard with the not enough resources understanding, sadly I am not sure if it was intentional.

[@olisorenson]

Was this recorded in 2011 ? Seems he's wearing a Red Square, the symbol of Student strikers in Quebec...

[@popsceneblur06]

Charlie Rose demonstrating that deliberative democracy doesn't work because there is always someone who doesn't stfu and let the other person answer a question

[@josephc8440]

Lol

[@Muzikman127]

I love that thumbnail haha

[@davidwilkie9551]

Democratic decisions are made in individual consensus, ("it'll never work""), unless and until individuals are willing to learn, (built in), and willing to teach, with mutual respect, as often happens. More, and continuous, research is required, that is how the sausages are made.

[@ximono]

18:50 green capitalism didn't happen at the time, but they did eventually do it

[@briananderson8428]

Charlie Rose is insufferable with his constant interruptions and immediately trying to knock down Dave's researched argument that the US is a kleptocracy. Rose is such a corporate tool. This is unwatchable.

[@Endoterrestrials]

It's crazy how he predicted the end of capitalism back then

[@josephc8440]

Not that long ago, it’s just that things are moving at such a blisteringly blinding speed. That 10 years feels much longer.

[@chonbaquer]

What date did this interview occur?

[@TheBardPlays]

@chonbaquer I believe late 2011/early 2012 since his book Debt had released in 2011 and Occupy was underway in late 2011 as well. I don't have a more specific date on hand, sorry.

[@davidstrumsky7012]

When did this first air?

[@tharindukottegoda989]

2011 to 2012 ish, according to the guy that uploaded the video, he said that in a different comment thread.

[@ChannelMath]

I actually think Graeber is slightly wrong, maybe: INTERNATIONAL debts are different, because the international society of countries is anarchic, with the US basically being a thug that decides what the "rules-based order" is, using debt as one mechanism. PERSONAL, informal debts are also different, for the same reason (one of my favorite insights of Graeber's is that personal informal life is anarcho-communist) BUT, in my (limited) experience, professional people, investors, lawyers, etc. don't look at debt as morality. Sure, they're happy to use morality as a rhetorical weapon against debtors, but when you buy or sign a debt contract, like all contracts, IT MUST SPECIFY what happens if the debtor doesn't pay. Also, the debtor IS ALREADY PAYING EXTRA for his likelihood of defaulting. So this possibility of not getting paid is reflected both in the price AND the contract itself. So it's dishonest to say "well, but surely one must pay one's debts", because the debtor can default and still be behaving lawfully, which is usually what happens. (Not to mention it is often an artificial entity, not a person, that fails to pay). Successful businessmen have bragged about how many times they (or their companies) went bankrupt before one made him rich.

[@josephc8440]

Wow. I appreciate such a sober and polite response to this conversation. Really made me think about what I haven’t thought about lol. Anyways I’m curious to hear your thoughts on the current state of affairs regarding oligarchs commandeering our political system. Cheers!

[@Rppatil001]

south europe? where?

[@sidekickstreams]

Man Charlie Rose became obnoxious at the end, just forcing words in and out of people's mouths constantly. Not that he didn't do that in the beginning, but in this case it's SO pronounced.

[@BlackAutonomist]

Charlie rose is so annoying and he’s always interrupting people.

[@Ugfromumantman]

Its heavily edited.

[@AnfalArshadCh]

David Graeber is duly missed

[@suspendedhatch]

Democracy is not a utopic panacea. Democracy is overrated. Democracy doesn't scale. The underlying assumption of democracy is that everyone will use their vote in their own self interest. When in fact the majority not only vote against their interests, but vote themselves into wage slavery, depravation of basic needs, and for the continued dead heat sprint toward human extinction. Without an unbiased education, without independent news, without equality- you can't expect anyone to understand what their own self-interest is. Even if you could, you couldn't get a majority to sustain cooperation toward a common goal. People are easily influenced by maniacal, self-interested authoritarians, charlatans, pied-pipers. Instead of democracy what we need is a self-enforcing system that suppresses the base antisocial behaviors humanity is prone to, and incentivizes and elevates the most altruistic ones.

[@chonbaquer]

but who gets to decide which values are antisocial and which values are altruistic? you’re just advocating for serfdom here.

[@josephc8440]

Hey, I find your comment very poignant and thought provoking. May I ask what your favorite top 5 books on this subject are? I would truly love to learn from your realm of influence!

[@josephc8440]

⁠​⁠@@chonbaquerLogical reasoning and scientific reductionism, sprinkle in ethics and a democratic moral litmus test. This could lead society to work on agreeing what values are antisocial and which are altruistic.

[@donbell8187]

Peaceful anarchy seems like it might work.

[@legalfictionnaturalfact3969]

Peaceful Anarchy is a redundant phrase.. Anarchy means no rulers. Nothing more and nothing less. It is inherently peaceful.

[@coreycox2345]

@@legalfictionnaturalfact3969 Some recent experiments have resulted in criminals taking over. Which is what we have under our existing systems.

[@ice9055]

Although he had the stereotypical perspectives on both the definition of American democracy, what a "free society" is in a world of an anarchic international system, the concept of lobbying, capitalism and democracy, and the founding documents with its relations toward democracy, but it still doesn't degrade his work within the field of anthropology or sociology.

[@bgiv2010]

* after being asked loaded questions about "democracy" and "anarchism" * "Charlie... can I call you 'Charlie'? You don't seem to know what any of these terms mean. Have you considered that maybe capitalists like that you're so ignorant?"

[@frederickburke9944]

Graeber is basically lying here. He knows why debt has the moral force it does. Not paying a debt means living off the labor others without their consent.

[@gargemel123]

That’s not true. Medical debt is incurred not because of the price of medical care is tied to a market force but instead because some account can just charge an arbitrary price.

[@MartinHNelson]

If you listen to his talk at Google, it is clear he both understands and agrees with your point. However, Graeber suggests that debt isn't quite so simple and straightforward in all cases. That it is has never been that simple. Indeed he speaks approvingly of punishment of the person who is essentially living off another's labor by shirking his debts. Obviously if a person fails to repay then that person doesn't get more loans... if the rule was it is totally OK to never repay then it follows no one lends $$...

[@jonnymahony9402]

That's a made up narrativ to get people in believing in the concept of debt. To be a quiet servant of your master, not think about a different way of how to organize society.

[@danieldonaldson8634]

"Graeber is lying" really marks this comment out as from a thoughtful, balanced and judicious interlocutor with deep respect for his counterpart. I might contract a debt that I agree to pay back by marrying the lender's daughter. If the contract clause says, "agrees to marry the bearer's daughter", then if that lender sells the debt, as he is entitled to do, I find myself bound to marry someone I know nothing of. The resulting morality of demand to pay by the debt-purchaser bears no resemblance to the morality of the original debt I incurred. The premise under capitalism of a transferrable promise is that the ethical dimension, such as in the IMF example of debt forgiveness, is legalistically isolated from the general morality of human existence. If you prioritize that kind of brutality, then you not only lose your humanity, but deny others theirs. A debt for the lender is a risk calculation: it should be expected to be sometimes go sour, particularly under the influence of time. Capitalism is, by definition, living off the labour of others without their giving meaningful consent. Bad debts are something different altogether: they are costed into the background profits of exploitation. The morality of repayment, which is generally controlled by the indebted, who can demand repayment and bring legal suit (where the debtor cannot) is not constant, but contingent.

[@mariemills-ff8qy]

Living off the labor of others seems to describe the owner class.