Debunking Jordan Peterson’s “Cultural Marxism” with Richard Wolff

Keep Empire Files independent and ad-free: / empirefiles
Jordan Peterson, a staunch defender of the status quo, is known for propagating the fear of "Cultural Marxism." After a disappointing debate on Marxism with Slavoj Žižek, Abby Martin talks to Marxist economist and professor Richard Wolff about Peterson's theories.
FOLLOW // EmpireFiles // Twitter.com/AbbyMartin
LIKE // / theempirefiles
MERCH STORE // empire-files.myshopify.com

[@caffeinator1849]

People really criticizing Wolff for "strawmanning" when Jordan Peterson tried to debunk communism by reading Communist Manifesto before bed

[@squirrel8161]

@@panaccoman Nazis weren't socialists in the contemporary sense of the word.

[@squirrel8161]

The Peterson crowd seem to follow their leader like lemmings.

[@squirrel8161]

@@panaccoman butthurt

[@squirrel8161]

@@panaccoman perhaps try reading a book before bed tonight. Go on and break the habit of a lifetime!

[@AAAAAA-zw7oh]

@@panaccoman becasude Mein Kampf to Nazism is the same than the Communist Manifesto to Marxism... sure bud

[@theicyridge]

When Peterson said bosses would never exploit their workers, I choked on my Nestle chocolate bar.

[@user-hy7bj5rd9d]

African children didn't give their forced labor to Nestle supply sweatshops for you to choke on their freakin chocolate bar.

[@theicyridge]

@@user-hy7bj5rd9d I was being facetious. I was pointing out the absurdity of Peterson's statement.

[@EWKification]

It's not a real quote. Notice you never hear him say it. It's a paraphrase of a quote, taken out of context.

[@RatatRatR]

Seems to me like a fair take on what Peterson said.

[@sw.7519]

So finish your job and start it on your own. Who is preventing it?

[@Retalak]

It's hilarious looking back how Peterson was always saying "I'll debate any Marxist who dares" and then didn't when the man, the Wolff himself challenged him.

[@kirstinstrand6292]

Peterson uses too much palaver, constantly. I seldom listen to him, although I respect him for being helpful to our disengaged young men. Peterson avoids challengers when it comes to serious debates, however.

[@keanuxu5435]

Jordy Pete is a grifter, saying he will debate any Marxist or actual Leftist, which doesn’t include Liberals, just for his audience, but he knows that if he actually debated a Leftist, he would lose the debate, thus losing followers and money.

[@LlibertarianGalt]

This whole argument is a strawman fallacy. "It's Cultural Bolshevism" is a farce. It's neo-Marxism and no one's claiming it's cultural bolshevism other than remedial communists like Wolff. Cultural Marxism is a real discipline self described by its adherents. And it's founded in NEO-MARXISM. Wolff is a total clown lmao. Wolff demanded a debate then ran away from it. Dude's a loser.

[@robertprice9052]

@@kirstinstrand6292Wolff will not debate anyone who knows what they are talking about.

[@Elkington7]

@@robertprice9052 Such as?

[@annier7790]

...this comment section is weird...

[@andreikovaci1202]

Hmm.. just look at the US...

[@andreikovaci1202]

@@asdfhjgasfd12 Well...read the above comment....

[@mediatool9596]

Bc people dont buy the bullshit behind the Socialism shills

[@armandovaiandando6472]

@@mediatool9596 Maybe because you have been brainwashed.

[@mediatool9596]

@@armandovaiandando6472 nope. Way off. Try again next time

[@PaulHosse]

Yes, bosses would be stupid to exploit their employees, but that doesn't stop them from doing it anyway.

[@TeaParty1776]

Since the bosses are stupid, there are no profits, no capitalism and no oppression. All Marxists can return home. Its all good/.

[@brigadierharsh1948]

Of course it doesn't but simultaneously it certainly does mean that the fundamental nature of power can't just be based on exploitation.

[@brigadierharsh1948]

@Militant Anarchist Judging by your name I assume you must be one hell of a reasonable person

[@lizicadumitru9683]

@American Fuel TV Apparently given the definition in this video, yes they all do. Which I would suggest that bosses of course cannot pay employees the exact amount that they would make from the product that the employee generates or else why would anybody go to business to begin with? There has to be profit at the fundamental level.

[@lizicadumitru9683]

@American Fuel TV I would think it would be just what an individual employee made for that company, assuming that can be quantified. Definitely not overall profit.

[@spencerjames9417]

Donate a dollar to mike gravel to get him on the debate stage

[@spencerjames9417]

C J Titan he's running to shit on biden

[@michaelamirault5430]

Let's get him on that damn stage!

[@aibrainlet8041]

@Long duk dong you can have a minimum amount of donors as well, though the odds of this threshold being met is near zero as no candidates have yet achieved this so far

[@aibrainlet8041]

Honestly, Gravel has less than a 0% chance of winning. And he is faaaar from the best left wing candidate. If your a leftist who is willing to give the democrats a chance in this upcoming election, it honestly does not make sense to vote for anyone except Bernie Sanders, Tulsi Gabard, and Andrew Yang. Every other dem candidate is either a straight up corporate shill, or filler and has no chance of winning (most are both). It would make more sense to not vote than to vote democratic for anyone who is not one of those 3 (from a leftist perspective)

[@Jraymiami]

Steve Fortuna ... to disrespect Gravel, who is highly intelligent, articulate, a former member of Congress, a genuine servant of the people & the planet, a peace activist, because of his age, is only serving the corporate media’s narrative! It’s too bad more politicians aren’t looking out for the American people. You should at least listen to what he has to say, you might be pleasantly surprised. If he gets on the debate stage, he will force the others to address important questions and not just platitudes.Tulsi 2020!!!

[@buteobuteo1049]

Average comment in this section: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[@cauliflowerhead2735]

The debate between Peterson and Zizek was a real eye opener for me. I stopped blindly following Peterson. While I haven't invested too much in understanding Marx, I felt humbled watching that debate as I was too a bit arrogant towards Marxist positions without knowing much of it.

[@stevenyourke7901]

You should start by reading Marx carefully. First, the Communist Manifesto, part 1. Then read Capital. It’s a huge work but if you want to really understand Marx, you have to study it. Listen to Professor Wolfe. He really knows Marx. Peterson is just a shill for the right wing. He’s completely ignorant about Marx. He’s a psychologist. Not an economist. Marx was primarily an economic theorist, a critic of capitalism.

[@jonsegerros]

@@stevenyourke7901 lol marx was a trash economist and wrong. We've seen this the last +100 years. It's shit in theory and shit in practice. The fact u blind idealistic delusional idealogues keep this ridiculous theory alive and still being a marxist in 2000s is equivalent to being a flat earther

[@benparsons2878]

I was in the same boat. I wasn't that well versed in Marxism and wasn't impressed at all by some of Peterson's comments about it and realised that he wasn't well versed in its philosophy. Then I realised that Peterson's perspective comes from psychology. He's trying to understand why any human being would ever think that a gulag or a concentration camp is a good idea when it's so clearly a terrible thing. Communism in theory does not play out the sane way in practice, and while he may not completely understand the theory he seems to be good at explaining the practice.

[@williemherbert1456]

@@jonsegerros I disagree with you, Marxism in understanding the economic actually has lots of merits, especially in fulfillment of actual nuance and function of economy as economy from its original etymology, as art or discipline of living, and Marxism want to achieve an political and economical environment that sustainable to solve daily, whether big or small social obstacle and problem we faced as living beings, trying to combat the increasing consumerism and excessive production that conducted by capitalist via market fraudulence in evading both community and government present counter-measure that function to shield them from endangering trickery, the common case that are happening in USA, predatory credit and banking as well unassured private insurance service.

[@jonsegerros]

@@williemherbert1456 so, solution to modern capitalism that could be easily solved by deregulation and stopping corporatistic legistlagion = full on marxist. Kek ok. o, you know, we just keep the market economy and stop ruibning it by government inverventions and big business corporations controlling the market rather than having a free market. as the pseudo-capitalism we have today

[@happyslave9162]

It would be stupid for a boss to exploit the workers? Dude, have you ever had a job? lol

[@happyslave9162]

I can get see that in an egalitarian world, but under capitalism, I beg to differ. I only have this anecdotal evidence, but it's pretty persuasive: It is not only fact that your boss will generally be terrible toward the workers, but it is unashamedly cultural. It is vastly the norm, not an exception. It is mythological via our popular media, Hollywood movies being maybe the most powerful. If it's academically "stupid", then why is it a near-universal? And this, from a man [Peterson] who stresses legitimate hierarchy as a basic human yearning. You get more results under tyranny by harshness, not reward or a welcoming environment. I do believe humans can achieve and enjoy such ways, but for the moment being shitty to peeps would be the norm, since it blends in with the shitty paradigm.

[@TeaParty1776]

Define exploit. Define fair. Do you want a job or not?

[@TeaParty1776]

@Joshua E. > most people hate their bosses and jobs generally Your faith in the supernatural is noted.

[@TeaParty1776]

@Joshua E. On my planet , ancient global poverty has been reduced to 8% by capitalism. Marxism has been reduced to the workers paradises of Cuba, Venezuala, North Korea , Hollywood and American schools. How is it going on your planet?

[@happyslave9162]

Right, yes, I comprehend; but what I found odd is Peterson's argument. It not only contradicts the empirical, cultural norms that are pervasive (not right, not wise, just clear and present), but furthermore argues against his own assertions that hierarchical structures and forceful guidance, reliant on strength / projected strength, are the natively compatible, pre-existing, organic framework that we humans are defaulted to obligingly utilize. I don't agree with him at all, but wished to point out the contradiction. It's just odd, no more, no less. -The Revolution Will Not Be Televised...hm, or will it? -A-

[@fjcf123]

Michael Parenti should have been the one that debated Peterson.

[@deensama7718]

there's no way that would be suitable for the public. there would be way too much gore, Parenti would slaughter him

[@GormTheElder]

@TheSingularity And last time Peterson humiliated himself in public

[@deensama7718]

@Michael Maya he has a lot more following, sure, but Peterson has very very little credibility among actual academics. he barely contributed anything to his own field, and he's widely seen as a charlatan by anybody besides his horde of teenage-to-twenties boys who follow his views. parenti has been around a long time, and wouldn't play nice like Zizek did, he would go for the throat and eviscerate Peterson for knowing absolutely nothing about Marx or history period

[@raphaelreineke6282]

Lol he’d never dare😅🤓

[@scottdem]

Bob Black referred to Parenti as a Stalinist simpleton, so it seems uncertain as to weather that would be anymore interesting.

[@guillermodelatorre8592]

Not only he sounds not very accurate about marxism, he's also ignoring his own profession, his own identity as a psychologist, because as a human behavioral expert you should know human's tendencies. Exactly he's ignoring human nature. Thank you Mr Richard wolff!!

[@Hoi4o]

Marx himself either fundamentally ignored or misunderstood human nature in all his works (to be more percise - human psychology and social behaviour)

[@guillermodelatorre8592]

Lyubomir Ivanchev I don’t think there is anyone yet that can fully understand the human mind.

[@Ryan_hey]

@@Hoi4o Care to explain?

[@LlibertarianGalt]

This whole argument is a strawman fallacy. "It's Cultural Bolshevism" is a farce. It's neo-Marxism and no one's claiming it's cultural bolshevism other than remedial communists like Wolff. Cultural Marxism is a real discipline self described by its adherents. And it's founded in NEO-MARXISM. Wolff is a total clown lmao.

[@zrphel02]

@@LlibertarianGalt Tell me what Marxism is

[@wordsofdv]

Recently discovered his work. This man is aweseome.

[@poesie6279]

I take it you mean the work of Prof Wolff 🙃

[@taniwhaokoata]

I'd rather see Wolff in a discussion with Zizek than a debate with Peterson.

[@MrDeathyness]

ELlo-Gee Philosopraptoa Zizek would eat Wolff alive

[@steven5054]

@@MrDeathyness Zizek would eat Zizek alive.

[@ithemba]

I actually think they could probably reach some interesting points but nethertheless there would be some loss due to friction, since Wolff, for all his nominal Marxism, is such a insufferable Anglo-Saxon positivist. That's alright as long as you talk economics but with criticizing the whole of society, more like Zizek does in the footsteps of freudo-marxism, Frankfurt school and so on and so on, it gets kinda annoying. Take the difference between Postone and Wolff to get what I mean. Postone is a brilliant Marxist who as kinda synthesized 60s Frankfurt philosophical Marxism with old school by the book reading of Das Kapital.

[@dnickaroo3574]

Zizek has difficulty connecting two thoughts in a logical way.

[@FerociousPaul]

Why not both?

[@sam33naR]

This is amazing! Would love to see more of you and Dr. Wolff together!

[@TheReactor8]

You are a troll

[@redwater4778]

You amaze to easily.

[@sam33naR]

@@TheReactor8 Why a troll?

[@sam33naR]

@@redwater4778 And you comment unnecessarily.

[@meganh9460]

@@sam33naR Its horrible propaganda. Honestly, the way this misrepresent just about everything Jordan says so they can mock him as stupid on a entire subject based on what... 5-6 words out of context. Come on, this is just sad. Even if Jordan is full of horse shit, this is much worse.

[@alexsanguily2768]

She left out what Jordan Peterson says about how hierarchies have a tendency to become tyrannical, important point

[@davidcorner4507]

If you listen to Peterson and what others have said about the topic you should realize that Peterson has hardly anything of interest to say. Congrats on not realizing that

[@phush3495]

What Peterson does is add side disclaimer everywhere but ultimately his main point is hierarchy is good and natural. It's like 'Im not sexist, but!' , I'm not racist, but! IQ is problematic, but!.

[@bestdjaf7499]

@@davidcorner4507 Maybe you will be so kind to give an example? Who are the others and what did they say about the topic?

[@edbrotherton36]

@@davidcorner4507 "Anything of interest" is subjective on an individual level so just because may not be "anything of interest" to you, don't mean that others feel the same and on the contrary might just find what he says quite interesting.

[@kinesissado9636]

Edward Brotherton because what he says fits with their narrative not because what he says is either substantiated or profound. Jordan Peterson from what I’ve observed often does not have anything interesting to say about topics outside of his field of expertise. In fact he’s a good example of what it means to know enough to think you’re right but not enough to know you’re wrong. I’m not saying he “never” (absolutist term) has anything good to say but for the things that he gets coverage for he never has anything interesting to say. Don’t be purposely obtuse by “never” he means for the things he gets coverage for and for “interesting” he means things that are either well substantiated or profound

[@StroumTV]

This is guy is like bernie sanders' uncle

[@paulrevere47]

Abraham Lincoln observed: Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Seems WETHEPEOPLE need to reorient the Mister Monocle's of this rabbit hole.

[@EvitoCruor]

Joe Doaks That's what we get for being idiots on a societal level. Being an honest free market advocate I despise the institution of the the modern corporation and the absolute corruption of contract law.

[@ScienceTalkwithJimMassa]

Lincoln went on to say that to tax a man's labor is just wrong, capital should be taxed, the exact opposite of what is in place today where labor is taxed and capital taxed very little if at all.

[@paulrevere47]

@@ScienceTalkwithJimMassa I've run across a few p'sov which gave occasion to that comment, do you happen to have a link or search criteria for finding where and to whom he made these comments? When raygun doubled withholding and introduced the handcuffs of the 1099, I about gave up on any 'capitalist' favoritism. I have been self=-employed most of my life and have written, proudly, for too many tax cycles, too many 5 figure checks being dazzled by some very lucrative earning years. Truth is that trying to go thru the hoops of loans and grants most always depended upon ref's from someone of consequence which was not easily manifest via my blue collar life circumstance. That made building a business momentum, which always burns an entrepreneur's credit card stash, a very gut wrenching ordeal due to what we now know is a controlled and essentially closed money river and investment game. I've never found even a hint for how society can have free market exchange and not have market regulation of the pronounced greedhead syndrome in American and whirled society...avarice is the rule deception the main lever.

[@ScienceTalkwithJimMassa]

@@paulrevere47 This quote says as such in 19th century fashion. "And, inasmuch [as] most good things are produced by labour, it follows that [all] such things of right belong to those whose labour has produced them. But it has so happened in all ages of the world, that some have laboured, and others have, without labour, enjoyed a large proportion of the fruits. This is wrong, and should not continue. To [secure] to each labourer the whole product of his labour, or as nearly as possible, is a most worthy object of any good government." The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume I, "Fragments of a Tariff Discussion" (December 1, 1847), p. 412. He is in essence saying that it is not right to take away what a man has labored for which would include wages. You can go to this website for more quotes: rogerjnorton.com/Lincoln97.html

[@paulrevere47]

@@ScienceTalkwithJimMassa Great, thanks!

[@ironmonkey6047]

Wolff and Peterson..debate !

[@steven5054]

Wolff has to pony up the cash. No Marxists want to debate Peterson though.

[@miguelthealpaca8971]

@@steven5054 what are you talking about? Wolff was going to fly across the country to debate him but Peterson withdrew.

[@johnwalsh717]

@@miguelthealpaca8971 It's easy for him to say that without Peterson being there to clarify what happened. It's likely that there was a perfectly good explanation. Peterson debates people regularly, I see no reason why he would withdraw from this particular debate, especially given that he had previously agreed to it.

[@argophontes]

@@johnwalsh717 Peterson significantly raised his price after being told that Wolff was going to show. That's according to Boise State.

[@krey89]

JP don't want that smoke

[@gabrielalmanza9433]

the jp fanboys relly showed up to the comment section. maybe they cleaned their bedroom earlier lol.

[@shivangbhardwaj826]

Unlike you guys who are high on weed all the time wanting the government to feed you

[@nishant8507]

What an insightful comment.

[@kennyfernandez2866]

This is an amazing comment.

[@leftoids.are.cringe]

"NOOOOO PEOPLE CAN'T HAVE AN OPINION DIFFERENT FROM MINE IN THE HECKIN COMMENT SECTION." lol piss harder, piss baby

[@shivangbhardwaj826]

@Exploited unlivable wage voluntarist libertarian Become the business class, simple. While currently I am not very well of with both my parents being teachers with little salary, I will attain great riches and become wealthy.

[@bsykesbeats4013]

By virtue of the fact that you accepted the job, that means that you ALSO are getting more value in return for what you are giving, because if your time is worth more to you than that $20, you will not accept the job. (Key words: "worth more TO YOU"). And yes, this of course also applies if you are in a desperate situation and accept a job for lets say $5/hr. In that moment, the $5/hr is worth more than your hour to you, until its not worth it to you anymore. Whatever situation you are in, either a desperate one where you accept a job for "low" pay or an empowered one where you only accept a job for "higher" pay; if you accept the job, then YOU found it worthwhile to exchange that hour for that dollar amount. The value of something is what somebody is willing to pay AS WELL AS what somebody is willing to accept for it in return. When those 2 things meet, that is the value in that moment in time.

[@jamesfrancese6091]

Price, wage, and purchasing theorists lay down your pens! The final words have been spoken.

[@m0thdm]

"So ignorant... that it takes your breath away." - RW on our favorite frog

[@alexsmith2910]

It's true.

[@m0thdm]

@@alexsmith2910 Every time someone sees the truth about JP, and expresses it, I sigh in relief. If not for yall, I would be living in a very dark twilight zone episode

[@youtuber6185]

8:40 she says JP justifies hierarchies. JP said pointing out that they exist is not the same as saying they are good. This entire interview makes errors such as this.

[@m0thdm]

@@youtuber6185 JP is in favor of hierarchies. This is the equivalent of saying they are good. More often than not, they are right about JP, and critique of him, though not perfect, is absolutely necessary

[@youtuber6185]

Adam Ortiz Your comment is misleading. He says they can be a problem but are inevitable and necessary. Some things that are necessary are not always good but without them you have chaos. See the following video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/jJqqlZ2ZZZ2JqpY The intentional misleading of Jordan Peterson’s points and the incorrect deductive reason Wolff uses quickly show his nonsensical ramblings on capitalism. Disparity exists so it’s capitalism’s fault is such an oversimplification of inequality of outcome it’s border line laughable. There is inequality in height , should we force a limit at 5’5 in basketball? It’s the same thing in society. There will always be inequality in a free society and to enslave us all to the lowest common denominator leaves us all in poverty. It’s a fools argument. Wolff is a fool.

[@arthurjohnson9135]

Jordan Peterson uses the term "exploitation" in the common sense way of "wilfully treating people in a mean and nasty manner". Marx did not use the term "exploitation" in that sense.

[@BspVfxzVraPQ]

Also, paying people less than they produce is common sense. As en employer you have to cover other expenses and make sure you have some buffers to survive bad times. If you really underpay your employees they will move to the competitor. Marx ignored price discovery (or wage discovery in this case). In a capitalist society you can switch employers but in a perfect marxist society you can not.

[@TeaParty1776]

@@BspVfxzVraPQ > paying people less than they produce is common sense. Employers pay employees what they ,the employees, produce. He doesnt pay them what he produces. Marxism is the economics of zombies who use an intuited social consciousness to produce whatever they feel like producing with no conscious, rational concern for a market of supply and demand. They throw their production into a common pot. The other zombies take from the pot whatever they feel like taking, all without money. The intuited social consciousness, replacing price coordination, assures the faithfull zombie that he produces what the other zombies want and that the other zombies produce what he wants, all without any conscious concern for supply and demand. This is the real zombie economics. Marxists regard it as scientific. Of course, Kant’s subjectivism decapitated science before Marx wrote. The theoretical result is economics without mind and the individual. The practical result is Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela and the conceptual disintegration of virtually all economics teaching.

[@sovereignpsyche7968]

Erwin, that's quite an accurate explanation of a particular authoritarian type of Marxism, but doesn't represent all Marxist schools of thought. The problem with capitalism herein lies the problem of self defining its necessity to exist within the system.. Of course itll seem as if you always need capitalism for capitalist markets to work in a capitalist system lol.. But refusing to contemplate alternatives outside this norm reveals an inability to imagine scenarios outside of certain paradigms.

[@TeaParty1776]

@@sovereignpsyche7968 > particular authoritarian type of Marxism The transcendental Marxist ideal of decentralized authority quickly changes to centralized authority as concrete reality makes its appearance.

[@ALPHAHXCORE]

@@sovereignpsyche7968 well then link me to a piece outlining your preferred kind of marxist economic system.

[@Sahilkumar-dr4en]

Thank you so much. From a long time Peterson was annoying many of us , by his ignorance of Marxism

[@normankeena]

I've watched some of his videos, his tone of voice, his cadance, sounds all the time like somebody 'pissed in his porridge' as we say around here. Somebody told him he is an idiot, perhaps in an 4:32 'ersounce way' but he still holds a grudge. I just wanted to use that word, 'ersounce' nonchalantly, for once

[@daniellion7116]

Boy are you the ignorant one.Have you tried to live in a communist state?Ask people who did,they hate it with a passion.

[@daniellion7116]

@Jaskaran Singh I more talking old style soviet communism ,before it morphed to a type of capitalism,but that is your experience.

[@daniellion7116]

@Jaskaran Singh the russians because they are young and cant remember the lines for food and nececities and the gulags.

[@troubledtimes3941]

" The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the *forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions* " Directly from the Marxist manifesto. Of course, there's a cultural movement. And its intention is to undermine the current status quo. This one snippet tells us that. When the likes of Peterson say "Cultural Marxism", they are referencing the cultural side of Marxism specifically, not the economic side. Jordan Peterson isn't ignorant of Marxism. Richard Wolff hilariously is. And apparently hasn't made it beyond section 2 of the Marxist manifesto. And neither have you. And nor has any Marxist who claims that Peterson is lying or doesn't understand Marxism.

[@thomasjamison2050]

"Jordan Peterson or Steve Bannon". Enough said right there.

[@casualkave537]

To see “Marxist Economist” was enough for me kek

[@justingoretoy1628]

Wow I can't believe I haven't seen this interview!

[@oliverbanter1865]

I think it's easy to take a quote out of context and make assumptions about what someone may believe. This will only become more clarified if there is a debate between Peterson and this guy.

[@gorillaguerillaDK]

Then get Lobster-Daddy to debate Wolff...

[@Solidude4]

Well he was willing to debate JP. Peterson is the one who backed out of it.

[@nilesbutler8638]

Wouldnt that have been great? But Peterson rann away from that debate - so he probably knows he cannot win it. No other reason to back out, really.

[@davidcopperfield2278]

go get the 50K that Peterson wants for the debate and let there be a debate

[@integral3452]

@@davidcopperfield2278 as soon as someone got 50 k he would ask for 100 k and u would still defend him.

[@soldierofsolution]

Abby Martin. My celebrity crush. DAMN, WHAT A WOMAN!

[@zarategabe]

She is a babe.

[@nwchrista]

I'd REALLY like her if she was herself not such a Marxist. The Marxist guest did perhaps have a good point about cultural Marxism being ACTUALLY cultural bolshevism. Bolshevism was born of Marxism, however.. the two being indistinguishable. I'd like to hear him expound on that point.

[@keatsiannightingale2025]

@@nwchrista The point was that "cultural Marxism" does not even exist in any meaningful form but as a fear tactic of the Reactionary Right.

[@individualistjoe3688]

@@keatsiannightingale2025 really so I can criticize gays and transgender people then?

[@davidmorris9596]

@@individualistjoe3688 with all being equal...why not😂😂

[@ricardocorrea9376]

Jordan Petterson has not ustified hierarchies, he only observed them. They got that wrong.

[@barontexmex6613]

He has justified hierarchies and made a case for why we need them. This guy mischaracterizes alot of Jordan Petersons arguments though.

[@edwardlynch6550]

We do need hierarchies. Tbeg are important. And even if we didnt want to. We naturally do it.

[@SpoopySquid]

As a Marxist, I wish we were half as influential as reactionaries say we are

[@lundqvjrl9359]

This is a honest appeal out of curiosity. To a non-marxist as I am, can you please state the core values about marxism that makes it so good acc. to you?

[@Justin-rm6su]

@@lundqvjrl9359 So as a Marxist myself, it's not necessarily a system of values or anything of the sort. It's very different than the modern, Western idea of what in ideology is. It's first and foremost a method of analysis, specifically a historical-materialist and dialectical-materialist analysis of society. It isn't static, there aren't certain 19th century truths it clings to even in the 21st century. It's an adaptable system of materialistic (in the philosophical sense) and dialectical thinking, it's very dynamic and seeks to understand the world from a materialist and dialectical standpoint more than anything. It views society through the struggle of very real, materically and socially defined classes and how they interact with their economic environment. Fundamentally and most simply, this comes down to those who do socially productive labor for a wage (working class) and those who profit from said wage-workers (ruling class). Of course there is much more nuance but that's very generally what Marxism entails. Everything else that Marxism entails, be it Marxism-Leninism or Maoism is merely a product of the socio-economic conditions, place, and time and developed for a certain material purpose.

[@lundqvjrl9359]

@@Justin-rm6su Ok, thank you for the aswer . So basicly a tool to understand sociaty?

[@Justin-rm6su]

@@lundqvjrl9359 Exactly, it's a tool to understand society with a historical-materialist and dialectical-materialist focus. It's not an ideology like liberalism with certain values that cannot be changed or adapted to current times or material conditions. Hence you are a country like post-Deng China and the Leninist Soviet Union which both fall under the umbrella of Marxist derived ideologies despite incredible differences. That being said, Marxism-Leninism which both countries generally follow(ed) is Marxism adapted to each of their particular socio-economic conditions of each country. It's a specific, practical form of Marxism under the wide umbrella of Marxist schools of thought and praxis.

[@lundqvjrl9359]

@@Justin-rm6su Aa I see. Thank you for that. So it's a bit like or the same as what they call critical theory or is this something else? What knowledge do you feel you have gained regarding western sociaty so far, by delving down in to the marxist theory's?

[@yeezynapkins2970]

Benevolent bosses was debunked a long time ago, it's called power corrupts.

[@CalebDiT]

If I was your boss and heard you talk like that, I'd demonstrate my respect for your view by letting you go find another job. And listen to your own criticism of yourself: If you ever start your own business and hire workers, you will behave corruptly. So by your own admission, you are an immoral person.

[@elliotyourarobot]

@@CalebDiT No its because the system drives and encourages such behaviour bosses who behave differently do so in spite of the system not because of it.

[@CalebDiT]

@@elliotyourarobot I disagree. Greed is driven, encouraged, and protected by the culture. Laws aren't created by a system. They're created by people. And if you believe in some form of democracy, then you believe the legislators who have long careers voting as our enemies aren't voted into office by the system. They're selected by us. So the reason we don't fix these problems is because it would be hypocritical. If the people were to change, businesses and the laws would change.

[@elliotyourarobot]

@@CalebDiT Culture creates the system and just because we the people want change doesn't mean we will get it because of the bourgeoisie we are forced to elect.

[@CalebDiT]

@@elliotyourarobot Oh, you were forced to vote? I'm sorry you live with a government that makes you do that. In America, despite all its faults, we're not required to do so. For us, the problem is that people keep trying to change the system _with_ the system, whereas elections should generally be boycotted until people don't have to select from merely the lesser of two evils. Furthermore, in addition to our voting for our legislators, every law in America is judged by the people in the courts; in the juries. No matter what the national and state Congresses enact, the people can overrule almost any law. Alas, we don't. The jurors -- the people -- have become the corrupt judges and perpetrators of injustice. It remains, however, you're contradicting yourself. You agree that the culture creates the system but you then say the culture wants to change the system. The culture wants to contradict itself? Still, since you say the culture creates the system, it seems your criticism should be against your culture for its immoral choice in creating that system.

[@marcadams440]

"Right wing figures like Jordan Peterson" wrong, right from the first sentence.

[@marinarichardson821]

thought the same thing, marc! they don't even know him at all

[@TheJimjamAkiFan]

Are we here cus of Mikhaila?

[@roisin9401]

all of his values are deeply rooted in conservatism, whether he claims he is one or not is irrelevant when you look at his entire philosophy

[@pieterrossouw8596]

Both Hillary Clinton and Obama would be measured as "right wing" by the current standards of the representative left. I'm pretty conservative myself but we need the moderate left to be represented so the democratic socialist, marxist and/or outright communist fringes of the left can be presented as the fringes they are. I cannot believe that average left-leaning person would agree with this stuff... The extremists get all the air-time.

[@dylan9298]

Pieter Rossouw the fact you lump together democratic socialism, marxism and communism as all being the same and “extremist” shows you lack an even basic understanding of the issue you’re trying to speak to.

[@theonenonly122]

Let’s get them in a debate so JBP can have another notch on his belt

[@__D10S__]

they tried but perterson cancelled lmao. he got cold feet. keep coping.

[@theonenonly122]

Ryan B well I’m assuming if he did it was probably due to his current medical situation. Where did you hear it from? I’d be really surprised if he refused without good reason because I’m pretty sure he’s undefeated

[@wolfgangk2824]

This is all wrong. Here is the truth www.marxists.org/subject/frankfurt-school/index.htm

[@__D10S__]

theonenonly122 no, this was before all that. He didn’t technically cancel, but he asked the college who was supposed to be hosting it for far too much money to attend, and allowing him to backout under the guise of not being paid enough.

[@theonenonly122]

Ryan B damn, crazy. Can you show me a link by chance

[@DonCDXX]

There's only one thing I didn't like about this video. It was too short. I could've listened to this for an hour or more.

[@jordanallen3078]

Agreed. I really hope the full interview drops soon.

[@ShoesMagoo]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/aKqomqlnm66br6c

[@ObjectiveMedia]

Check out “Zeitgeist Addendum” and “Zeitgeist Moving Forward” ✌️

[@claudiar7186]

If you are interested in the topic and not just agreeing, I suggest you look into it further. Somewhat disingenuous to debunk cultural Marxism without mentioning the Frankfurt School, isn't it? Sure Marx never mentioned cultural Marxism, because it was a build out of Marx's earlier work. Doesn't mean it wasn't constructed, which Wolff is implying.

[@tennis5126]

It's short for a reason- it's short of true information. Richard Wolff is a liar; I doubt that Peterson would decline an opportunity to debate with a Marxists. If anything it would be the other way around. It's the first time I've listened to Wolff and already I can see the lies he vomits out. Type in 'Cultural Marxism' in youtube and you'll have your info. TBH, this is the only video that I've watched talking about Culture Marxisms as phrase used by the right to be hateful to those who they disagree with. Wolff is a damn liar and Culture Marxisms manifested from Marxisms and the proletariat class/minority.

[@ausPPC]

It's so easy to criticise and make ridiculous analogies when the person being attacked isn't present.

[@gorillaguerillaDK]

ausPPC You don't need a person to be present, to critizise the use of certain phrases, such as "Cultural Marxism".... But certain people, who tend to use such phrases, or who has used it or similar phrases in the past, should either educate themselves on what the phrase actually means, come clean and admit that they didn't know that, and of course abstain from using that language again - or accept that people who DO know, will regard them as either dishonest or seriously uninformed, or the third option, percieve them as actual fascists.... Now, of course there's the possibility that some is a little bit of all three, uninformed, dishonest, and a tendency to be at least a proto-fascist.....

[@sukisuzuki10]

IKR, like Dr Peterson does ALL THE TIME

[@alexf1436]

Maybe Peterson shouldn’t have run away from his debate with Wolff??

[@AdrianCelsiusTepes]

Yeah, if only Peterson had debated Wolff, like he said he would.

[@generalblankenship]

@Adrian Celsius Tepes Peterson’s been through a lot in the passed year, I highly doubt he’s against debating Wolff because Peterson has such an open mind. Debates aren’t about winning or losing to him.

[@NuttyNeil76]

Loved this, thanks!

[@artpeasant3517]

As person who is not some big fan of marxism, I totally agree with mister Wolff. People embrace Peterson's views because they never read anything about marxist ideology. Many people tend to label opposite opinions very easily without objectivity. Conservative extremists think that everything different from their perspective is "Marxism" and progressive extremists think that every different opinion is Fascism.

[@LlibertarianGalt]

You don't know what you're talking about and neither does Wolff

[@srtghfnbfg]

​@@LlibertarianGaltNo one does except you clearly! Says a lot about you just from that comment

[@LlibertarianGalt]

@@srtghfnbfg Nope. Plenty of people know. Wolff and this commenter are being dishonest grifters.

[@Citruss_XIII]

Lol huge claims and you didn't even bother to add one supporting point or argument. @@LlibertarianGalt

[@LlibertarianGalt]

@@Citruss_XIII Case and point: the conflation between cultural bolshevism and cultural marxism is applied by Wolff and critics of Peterson. This is a dishonest attempt to make people think the terms are interchangible when Cultural Marxists labelled themselves and their theory which is documented pretty well anywhere outside of Wikipedia's nonsense article on the topic.

[@marlonsampson4774]

The capitalist owner says "Jump". The wage labourer says " Where's my gun".

[@sovietcupcakes328]

That's how it should be lmao.

[@Friendznco]

Then say it pussy, instead of roleplaying on a KZbin video on your half day off.

[@sovietcupcakes328]

@@Friendznco IT PUSSY! Medal please.

[@peterhooper2643]

Chairman meow… best reply ever

[@RefurbishedPrototype]

Wolfe and Martin. 💕👍🔴⚫ Yes please!

[@williamarnold9744]

Hear! Hear!

[@naturallaw1733]

@BLAIR M Schirmer "It saves them having to think, I suppose." yes Ideologues sure hate it when they have to think for themselves so they would rather just repeat these goofy slogans. 🙃

[@StephenKuehn]

Hope she can interview Michael Parenti at some point too.

[@RefurbishedPrototype]

@John D Sure. The entirety of Scandinavia.

[@naturallaw1733]

@John D I don't think anyone truly wants more Govt Power or any kind of Power in their lives. I think it just comes down to an Economic System that is Sensible and Fair and allows Everyone to create their own existence. all that Gov., Corporation, Bureaucracy, Institutions etc. are is just noise and distractions from the only true thing that matters(Economy). everything else is just made-up to create a sense of meaning and structure in people's lives but they only work to Control and Divide the masses even more because they are only there to seek the support of the people and not to actually directly improve their Lives. you can only do that when all the focus is on the Economic System and not this other shit we have everyday about Partisan Politics, Religious views, various Ideologies, Social, Cultural beliefs and so on... so all this nonsense we see talked about today is a Huge waste of time because while it goes on and the people join their side of the argument, the Economy will just continue to be a struggle for most people while the Lucky few Elites(Gov./Corp.) who thrive with all these made-up Social conventions/institutions everyone is Conditioned to prioritize their lives by, just stay in Power and don't really care too much about the Struggles in the Economy for the everyday person. they would rather just keep things pretty much similar to way things are now so their time, energy and focus will continue to go to this Made-Up story they keep telling you, me and themselves we should care about and center on rather than paying attention to and concentrating more on that which truly matters the most in Everyone's Life. and that's of an Efficient, functioning Economy with the sole purpose to be able to provide Everyone a Healthy, Decent Living standard. no Gov., Corp., Politics, Authority, Organization etc. needed.

[@adamkhan4451]

Him and jordan should have a debate

[@odinnleemoriarty3333]

Of course the employer MUST pay the employee less than whatever they produce or the employer would not be able pay for the cost of running the business or themselves, its only when those margins are skewed way out of proportion that it becomes exploitation.

[@jamesclarke5397]

Exactly! I run a business and it would be insane to pay someone everything they bring in. The business wouldn't grow and if they had one bad day I'd have to fire them. Where as because I have profit, we can buy better tools, produce more material, and everyone makes more and more while having an easier time working.

[@georgecoventry8441]

True. And that is clearly understood by everyone who takes on a job working for some employer, whether or not they are on "the Right" or "the Left" or somewhere in between (which is where most people really are...they're somewhere in between the farthest extremes of Right and Left). I don't have any problem with the fact that an employer must pay me less than the value I produce for him in order to have a viable business that makes money for him....but I do have a problem with people being paid outrageously less than the value of what they are producing and being paid so little for a full time job that they can't meet basic living expenses and live above the level of abject poverty. At that point it does become exploitation. In other words, there needs to be a reasonable compromise made between the needs of the employer and the needs of the workers...a fair bargain needs to be struck between them...and that's what brought the union movement (and socialism itself) into being in the first place. You can't give over total dictatorial power to the employers and expect a fair system. Neither can you give it over to the workers and expect a fair system. A compromise that both sides can willingly accept is what needs to be found, and that's why we have always had "collective bargaining" between unions and companies, since unions were allowed to exist. At first they were not legally allowed, and any attempt by workers to unionize was met with extreme violence on the part of large businesses and governments against workers...........and that wasn't very long ago, historically speaking.

[@37Dionysos]

Two of the world's best bits of hope in the face of savage madness---"Marx was first published in 1867 so Peterson had time to take a look at it." (whack!!)

[@philisamazing08]

...and the Koran was written well before that. Have you read it? Gurantee peterson knows more about Marx than the average person. This is a semantic point used to try and discredit a whole body of knowledge that a person may or may not have. Smh

[@37Dionysos]

@@philisamazing08 And The Bible was written well before The Koran but that doesn't save either from being clownishly wrong. Nothing "semantic" about Wolf's showing Peterson's pretentious ignorance.

[@robertmartin6655]

And YOU had time to check how well Marxism went in the Eastern Block, haha. Just move over here and give us a lesson, please! Open invitation. But wait! You guys just READ it! 0 firsthand experience with it! :D

[@37Dionysos]

@@robertmartin6655 It would be foolish to think Wolff/Martin are unaware of failed communist states. What they show is that Marxist analysis still has a lot of value---especially in a blind-ignorant America eating its own people and ecology and fomenting global war for the Profit of a very few. For ex., in America I paid $200/month for web/phone/cable and couldn't afford health care. Here in "socialist hell" I get the same for under $50/month and health care is FREE after my taxes. Keep your fake "free market," you tool.

[@mirror452]

@ Capitalism works worse than even the flawed real existing socialism we had. Check this out: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1646771/pdf/amjph00269-0055.pdf

[@waflwiro]

Please debate Peterson. We need it

[@lucius02]

Wolff has only read Marx and marxism and will get blasted out of the room.

[@jesperburns]

@@lucius02 Yes, because everyone is asking Wolff to debate him on anything other than Marxism. Oh no wait, they literally want him to debate JBP on Marx...... I mean wtf dude?

[@michaelwu7678]

Wolfe already extended an invitation but Peterson declined

[@lucius02]

@@jesperburns and this is why your marxist ass will never pay back his student loan.

[@jesperburns]

@@lucius02 ... I have no student loan because I do not live in a shithole country. Also, I'm a programmer, any loan I would've had would've been paid back a decade ago. And lastly, I am hard right. Peterson is to my left. Your comment was just obviously retarded so I couldn't help myself.

[@yougood809]

I don't think he has thought about Jordan Peterson's arguments efficiently. Not at all

[@staceyboomboom8031]

Because you're brainwashed by a quack.

[@MassDefibrillator]

I don't think peterson has thought efficiently about his own arguments. He's fine in his own professional realm, but when he starts going outside of it, his clear ignorance of the subject matter, and his over reliance on his own prejudicial ideas, really shows. These two put in just as much thought to dismantle those ideas as peterson put into them to create them.

[@thechangingtimes]

What arguments? Peterson’s Methods of Meaning was literally unintelligible hogwash.... complete with comically drawn diagrams of the “dragon of chaos?” No shit... I actually tried to make it all the way through the 600 pages of rambling schizophrenia .... finally gave up after 300 pages in...my diagnosis JORDAN PETERSON IS A QUACK. He is a modern day L. Ron Hubbard.

[@domingodeanda233]

Thanks for the interview, it was awesome.

[@fahadtube1406]

Abby, are you going to release the full interview??

[@AbeldeBetancourt]

@@redwater4778 what a dumb (wannabe) comeback...

[@Mike-yb8he]

Yes!

[@redwater4778]

@@AbeldeBetancourt Your right . The fat guy is right too. This "Cultural Marxism" is only in the educational systems in capitalist counties.

[@AbeldeBetancourt]

@@redwater4778 The "fat guy" is an elite Harvard and Yale professor. The correct expression is "Cultural Bolchevism" and it was imposed by dum-dums from the Nazi Party in order to reject any cultural vanguard or popular movement. You keep making this silly mistakes which make us doubt your IQ in the better case and your will to grab scholarly sound books in the worst. By the way, this is a _global economy,_ there are *no* "non-capitalist" countries, you silly.

[@PoliticalEconomy101]

WOW. Im completely surprised at Dr Wolff's ignorance. I thought for sure he would admit that cultural marxism is a real thing since he is an academic and i also love his work but sorry Dr Wolff is WRONG. Cultural Marxism is real and its nothing to be ashamed of If Cultural Marxism doesnt exist then why does the University of California at Los Angeles have a course on the subject by Douglas Kellner with a downloadable PDF document called "Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies?" That is really weird dont you think? Maybe you can email the professor and tell him he doesnt know what he is talking about. Even though the professor himself is a Marxist. Also why did Richard Weiner Professor of Political Science write a book on cultural Marxism called "Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology?" Also why does Marc Tuters from the University of Amsterdam have a academic journal article on the subject. Also why does Jerome Jamin from the University of Liege have an academic journal article called "Cultural Marxism: A Survey?" All sources are available upon request.

[@rec9264]

Hahahaha, i've never expected Empire Files doing Jordan Peterson! good work guys.

[@contactyourcongressmen5638]

Both are controlled opposition of the establishment, if you ask me. It's a complex world.

[@TheAncientOneOfDays]

That's why empire had people that watched it, now it's in the trash can...group trash can

[@ObjectiveMedia]

Contact your congressmen that just shows that you don’t understand who your enemy is. Peterson is not in opposition to the capitalist/fascist/imperialist establishment, quite the opposite actually.

[@brigadierharsh1948]

@@ObjectiveMedia You really think there is only one type of establishment in charge? Imperialist establishment? Really? You're about 200 years too late on that one buddy, that ship has quite literally sailed. Sure, rich corporations certainly hold a degree of power but they are by far not the only one's in control. Academia and entertainment alone breed their own sorts of power with their own agendas, there's no one type of person with one sort of objective running this shit show.

[@andreikovaci1202]

@@brigadierharsh1948 Ah, that was a really good one.....

[@missyv8900]

Please say there's more. Full interview link? It was just about to get even more interesting at the end!

[@vladm.6859]

if that's how you define exploitation you do not know what it means. Either that or you can just as easily argue that the employee is exploiting the employer/owner because he is getting all the fruits of his labour while being provided tools, machinery, capital completely for free AND while not being at risk of losing any money given the business goes under

[@JM1675]

I agree. A bit of a silly analogy, but what springs to mind is pawn shops. Say you have an antique piece valued at $1000. The pawn shop will never pay you anything in the vicinity of that amount because they bear the risk of not selling it, and ultimately they profit off the margins.

[@ratguy101]

Richard Wolff explaining exploitation is ear-candy. He's so clear and persuasive and right.

[@andreikovaci1202]

ratguy101 Also full of shit.

[@finnradoy1742]

ear-candy? The fact that employers pay you less than you are worth is not something mind expanding, its the most obvious feature of the employer-employee relationship. Like does he not realize how hard it is for an employer to find a gap in the market, establish himself, produce a good people buy and then manage all of that with employees? So the employer is expected to give what the worker is worth? Since the employer wouldn't be of any value in that equation, why does the employee not go about and work without being employed by someone else? He would be paid 100% of his worth. Damn right, because to establish yourself in the market is extremely fucking hard and tedious and probably way harder than being employed for only 90% of your works value.

[@sutherlacd27]

Everyone already knew you get paid less than the value you create. That's because as a worker you have less risk than the owner.

[@VeganTrove]

So glad you did an episode on this. ♥️

[@Joao-pe8ur]

All the Petersonians disliking the video because their surrogate daddy is being exposed for being out of his element.

[@BarbaPamino]

I'm not a Petersonian but to equate him to Steve Bannon or even call him right wing is a joke. And shame on Abby for lazy journalism. I'm right wing. Jordan Peterson is way left of me.

[@BarbaPamino]

@athesit humanist and you keep falling for war criminals like Bernie

[@mgdarenz]

Surrogate daddy? I think millions of people like what Peterson has to say, because most of it is right, and they can see he has genuine compassion an empathy for people, and has a hefty measure of humility. Human virtues that these two wanna be intellectuals do not possess. So your stupid comment reveals much about you, and nothing about anyone else.

[@lowkeyliberty7105]

In the words of Jesse Lee Peteron "Amazin"

[@Garblegox]

'mazun

[@aaronhazlett]

HassAmayzin

[@craigjervis5652]

Beta Male!!

[@mediatool9596]

Jesse Lee is Da Man:-)

[@esotericist6667]

Great interview with Dr. Wolff. The sound mixer did a poor job, however, as his microphone level was much too low compared to Abby's.

[@shadforthw3535]

Should’ve hired a capitalist to do it.

[@thegoodcaptain]

They don't understand basic economics -- Why would they understand audio engineering?

[@Yoshsterpalooza]

Capn Sweet yea socialists really don’t understand economics at all

[@Jazzmarcel]

Wtf!......only 10mins! More Abby Martin and Richard Wolff, come on!😡👊🏾

[@bigdaz7272]

Here here. I made myself a brew and sat down anticipating at least an hour or so. 10 min ffs? C'mon guys don't do this to us.

[@TomaszAgencki]

The part with exploitation sounds like half the truth. If a person values 20 $ so much that Its ready to work for one hour to earn that (has time, needs money) than there is no exploitation,even if the employer values the work higher than 20$. If Its voluntary, if both sides agreed, then Its pointless to acuse anyone of exploiting the other.

[@ComradeKoopa]

Work under capitalism is not voluntary.

[@georgecoventry8441]

True. And that is clearly understood by everyone who takes on a job working for some employer, whether or not they are on "the Right" or "the Left" or somewhere in between (which is where most people really are...they're somewhere in between the farthest extremes of Right and Left). I don't have any problem with the fact that an employer must pay me less than the value I produce for him in order to have a viable business that makes money for him....but I do have a problem with people being paid outrageously less than the value of what they are producing and being paid so little for a full time job that they can't meet basic living expenses and live above the level of abject poverty. At that point it does become exploitation. In other words, there needs to be a reasonable compromise made between the needs of the employer and the needs of the workers...a fair bargain needs to be struck between them...and that's what brought the union movement (and socialism itself) into being in the first place. You can't give over total dictatorial power to the employers and expect a fair system. Neither can you give it over to the workers and expect a fair system. A compromise that both sides can willingly accept is what needs to be found, and that's why we have always had "collective bargaining" between unions and companies, since unions were allowed to exist. At first they were not legally allowed, and any attempt by workers to unionize was met with extreme violence on the part of large businesses and governments against workers...........and that wasn't very long ago, historically speaking.

[@JFLOProductions]

It’s a simple equation. 1+ec= (L+L*)/L Worker produces more value for the boss that the boss pays him. That is exploitation under capitalism. It doesn’t matter whether it’s voluntary or not-it isn’t btw…We live in an environment where if a worker doesn’t enter into an unfair contract with a capitalist, that worker will starve. That is a coercive negotiation. The worker might as well have a gun pointed at their head when deciding whether or not to enter into a contract as an employee. That being the case, it has nothing to do with the factor of exploitation in Marxist theory

[@doctorbraino4689]

Moscow. Two friends meet: How are you, Sasha? Serghei, my friend, life is great! Really? Have you read the newspapers? Of course, how else would I know?

[@jptugagmr]

USSR world super power. Russia capitalist failed state.

[@Bombdizzle]

I think it's unfair to Peterson to lump him in with Steve Bannon. He's not inherently evil like Bannon is

[@ThomasDoubting5]

Evil is a complex thing.

[@agenda5032]

I hope Bannon runs for president

[@DurealRa]

Are you sure he's not?

[@p.brooksmcginnis1749]

No More War

[@Kolokommouna]

No more capitalism!

[@SuperBrendan3]

Jordan Peterson isn’t a “right wing figure”...

[@evanhadkins5532]

You don't think so. I'd say he is, even if he doesn't regard himself as being of the 'right wing'.

[@mitsuki2272]

Alessandro Belli Bro he believes porn should be banned like??? He’s a blatant republican that occasionally tells you to wash your balls and clean your room lmao

[@MrJakecornford]

@@mitsuki2272 when did he say porn should be banned? I have heard his say that it's not particularly healthy but not banned.

[@MrJakecornford]

@@evanhadkins5532 he has argued many times that we need both the left and the right. I have also heard him debate for both left and rightwing ideas. I would say from what I heave heard of him it would be right of centre. But then this could also be down to him not agreeing with some arguments made bt students/faculty who are overwhelmingly left. This may create some bias in the content that is available.

[@evanhadkins5532]

@@MrJakecornford Yes he debates both sides. He ends up with a position something like 'the right wing is the more reasonable position' fairly consistently.

[@MThomasson88]

The thing is Jordan Peterson never says a thing is either one thing or another, his opinion is far more nuanced than that. It is stupid to exploit your employees because they don’t do as much for you; he never says is doesn’t happen. In fact he has always said hierarchies lean towards corruption and it’s your job to notice and do something about it. This exposes nothing more than the level of their ignorance. There is a natural difference between people else we would all be the same like a programmed robots. There’s a reason why for example at 5.8ft I will never be the best basketball player in the world. This is probably the dumbest thing they said.

[@l.w.paradis2108]

But why would these attested differences in specific abilities lead to a global hierarchy of individuals that is either natural or justified by some ethical measure? Clearly they do not. Read the Gorgias, for instance.

[@michaelconvery8871]

Yep. The majority of those that follow Marx, are little children in adult clothing. This whole interview is exactly how Marxists speak, with very little understanding of human nature.

[@rev0lve638]

he never says a thing is one thing or the other, because it's hard to be proven wrong when you never take a position.

[@M1ST9094]

Did JP actually say that about workers being exploited could someone link me that?

[@NiaziMujahidKhan]

Yes, he did, in the debate against Slavoj Žižek. And it was quite apparent that he has never actually read Marxism. Having said that, these guys are still making strawman arguments against him.

[@resonanteamarilla7]

When JP talks about hierarchies his argument is sound. He never justifies social inequality and he actually criticizes capitalism often. So this missed his argument about the roots of inequality in hierarchies. About cultural marxism, he is asked the same question by Zizek and the response was given which you do not discussed here. Instead they go on about the concept of exploitation and use and out of context quote to call JP ignorant. JP knows and acknowledges that there are exploitative people "tyrants" in hierarchies be it political hierarchies or economic hierarchies. His take on that is closer to home in that it provides psychological tools to help avoiding on becoming one. I was born and raised in a leftist family. In my view they didnt debunk anything, just took an "easy" shot at JP. I take JP wisdom about life to be much more enriching and actually more revolutionary than the Marxist academic pissing contest.

[@Amadeus8484]

@@NiaziMujahidKhan Calling out the Right on their bullshit isn't strawmanning.

[@regularsherlock6237]

@@NiaziMujahidKhan not really. Its hard to critique a position like ‘being against Postmodern NeoMarxism’ without looking like you are strawmanning your opponent because your opponents position is completely incoherent. Your opponent is conflating two things that aren’t the same (and are in fact opposed in significant regards) and isn’t clear about which one in particular they believe to be problematic. Peterson has argued against Gay Marriage on the grounds that it constitutes an ‘assault on traditional modes of being organised by cultural marxism’. To simply describe this as a fairly incoherent belief riddled with contradictions is not strawmanning anyone because the argument isn’t coherent enough to misrepresent.

[@thisis5123]

I’d like to see the debate, i think there is some misunderstanding going on both sides.

[@ColorMatching]

Peterson isn't equipped to debate Woff. Zizek made Peterson look like a fool

[@Crunchy166]

9:17 But that doesn’t change the fact that hierarchies are natural.

[@cookergronkberg]

Which hierarchies? and to what extent are you claiming these hierarchies are the result of natural phenomena vs a social construct. Do you really think that the org chart and wage distribution at McDonald's or Amazon is predominantly the result of natural development?

[@jacksonneptune4083]

Get off twitter and go read a book, and I don't mean Jordan Peterson.

[@mwat56]

@@cookergronkberg : What's the difference between "natural phenomena" and "social constructs"? When you go right to the beginning of life as we know it all the organisms built hierarchies (often deadly ones). So one can argue that those organisms were behaving according to a social contract - at least from an outside perspective. A contract that defined who got eaten and who survived a bit longer. The building of swarms/flocks/schools further cemented and modified both the hierarchies within a given species as well as in harmony or conflict with others. And that goes on basically unchanged until today. Even the upcoming of "intelligence" and "consciousness" didn't change that but only gave us the ability to become aware of these socially (not necessarily consciously) constructed hierarchies. However - and that's a mistake far too many people make - stating the fact that there are (and always were) hierarchies is not a judgement. Such a statement does not necessarily imply that hierarchies are _good_ (or _bad_ for that matter). Being aware of a fact (and making others aware) is not the same as welcoming said fact. And Peterson himself has a lot to say about the inherent stupidities of certain hierarchies.

[@cookergronkberg]

@@mwat56 The distinction could take place at various levels in which it is no longer very useful to simply reduce human life and society to the interaction of matter and energy in the universe. We have fields like sociology and economics precisely because we need higher level concepts and explanations, even if we still ultimately can consider everything we do as an emergent property of physical processes. I am personally against a particular idea that I have seen some Peterson fans make that makes very strong claims about natural hierarchies necessarily leading to particular high level economic or political systems. This seems extremely tenuous.

[@sheedy9]

Cancer is natural.

[@NathanPK]

Came for a proper debunking, found them debunking a straw man. Disappointing.

[@Ciaranmch]

Agreed. See here for proper debunking: kzbin.info/www/bejne/mYaUfZuZes1rg9U

[@wgebbia]

"cultural Marxism" itself is a straw man.

[@joelyazell7380]

He said he sells fakery. Then tells you his definition.

[@viktorkc1154]

What?

[@nathanieljacobs3151]

Yeah, all conjecture and guess work at ulterior motivation, and no actual definition or goodfatih analysis of intention. It's not like there are dozens of instances where JP - not sure about Bannon- has explained what he means by Cultural Marxism......oh wait, there are. Of course the problem is that he (and Bannon supposedly) are the only ones who use the term Cultural Marxism.....oh wait, thats not true either. So then it must be they use a markedly different definition......nope, that also isnt the case. I've seen several clips of this "marxist expert," tired of the mischaracterization of marxism- clearly he is very much an ideologue- whenever he talks about marxism, and especially in the couple clips I've seen of him "destroying" JP, they contain a lot of bullshit and outright lies. Thre is something clearly not right about this man. And I dont have to guess and elaborate at his ulterior motives, and link them to some historic manifestation of evil; whatever the specifics, they're clearly not aimed at honesty, sincerity, understanding, and truth.

[@aquilarossa5191]

There has been a trend among the mainstream left of talking about civil rights issues and equality, but not talking about economic issues and income inequality. The neoliberals would only advance causes that did not impede the free market or profits of the corporations. This allowed them to appear left wing, but not actually be left wing on pocket book issues like wage stagnation etc. Equality, liberty and fraternity was the mantra of Liberalism. Early socialists and then Marx said that liberalism and capitalism were not delivering that for the working masses, but rather were creating income equality and a new class of elites to replace the old elites of feudalism. Capitalism was just the latest in a long history of systems of exploitation and it had its own exploited classes just like slaves and peasants before it. Liberalism's failure to address this and asking what to do about it was called The Social Question and is the root of socialism. Cultural Marxism is an oxymoron, because Marxism without the economic and class conflict components is just liberalism

[@skynet4496]

Yep! Peterson and other right talkers like to use a strawman "marxism" which ignores economics and even the DNC is pro bank!

[@TruthDissident]

Very well said. Liberalism and Marxism are blood brothers. You cannot discuss & critique one without discussing the other. Peterson's idea of being a "classical liberal" is dumb.

[@misterhill5598]

Thanks for this one.

[@jackfahy2283]

Jordan Peterson is not right wing, I like you Abby but you’re wrong saying he’s right wing.

[@willpritchard8121]

Lol just like Dave Rubin pretended to not be right wing for a while there 🙄

[@marknussbaum8394]

Yeah, if you had to attach a label, "Libertarian" might be the closest fit. Right wingers despise Libertarians. Too much independent thought.

[@TeceraOfficial]

If you think libertarianism (as it's understood in America) isn't right-wing, I have a bridge to sell you.

[@Fallonbuddy24]

Maveric I don’t see how it has to be black and white, left or right. Libertarianism is a completely different take on politics. Just maybe there is a SPECTRUM with a CENTER. Because they literally advocate no coercion by the state where as both left and right have their own interests and support coercion to get it.

[@willpritchard8121]

@@Fallonbuddy24 American libertarianism doesn't want government coercion but ignores economic coercion. Rather than acknowledging any of the existing coercion or exploitation of the capitalist system, such as the exploitation of the workforce on pain of starvation or homelessness, or exploiting whole countries, it would enable more of it by holding the basic economic relations of capitalism sacrosanct. The best historical image of "free" market capitalism we have is thus Victorian Britain, where people (including children) are forced to work for slave wages. American libertarianism also depends on people abiding by the NAP without enforcement, which is a strangely positive view of human nature, much like the view of Rousseau which JP is so critical of. Actual non-coercion is sought by left wing anarcho-communists and anarcho-syndicalists, who seek to actually create an economic system where horizontal and non-coercive relations are actually possible, rather than just keeping existing capitalist relations like libertarians want to.

[@captain0sam]

I’m working on a top secret cloning machine. It takes awesome journalists like Abby and clones them x1000.

[@tikemyson8839]

😍

[@KittredgeRitter]

Suck up

[@joywilder9092]

Sorry, but only one Abby Martin per reality paradigm. (the pair-o'-ducks conundrum)

[@matthewmcclain1316]

Get it done, NOW!!

[@captain0sam]

Joy Wilder dammit 😂

[@realgaming8527]

I'm not usually one to defend JP but I have never heard him use the term "Cultural Marxism" once. I've heard him use the term "Neo-Marxism" or "Post-Modern Neo-Marxism", which he defines as a shift from the ideology of class struggle to a kind of identity struggle, what some people would call "intersectionalism".

[@MoDonJon]

facebook.com/drjordanpeterson/posts/cultural-marxism-is-destroying-america-httpstcorfnk9xa6du-via-dailycaller/1199364426794357/

[@cakep4271]

Those reply links: 1. A JP video that never uses the term cultural Marxism. 2. In 2016 Jordan Peterson put a link on Facebook to an article that had the term cultural Marxism in the title... Wow.

[@Cajaquarius]

Post Modern Neo-Marxism = Cultural Marxism: different name, same shit. You lobster cultists really need to get better at logic. These semantic goal post shift defenses don't work.

[@BeylikMevzular]

@@Cajaquarius Well, don't really want to join the debate but, you see, different names changes everything. Mr. Richard Wolff is counterarguing Mr. Peterson's words based on the phrase Cultural Marxism. He says that no Marxist ever talked about such a thing. So it matters. To be clear I am neither rooting for Mr. Peterson nor against for Mr. Wolff. It's really easy to hate one side or another these days, let's not fall for this trap.

[@the_REAL_Pearl_]

Pretty sure he said it in his debate with Zizek.

[@braydiculous]

You could only believe this if you've never actually listened to Peterson talk for yourself.

[@zootsoot2006]

Exploitation is built into life itself. Unless somebody is your kin, you can but view that person in an exploitative way. The difference between capitalism and every other kind of system is that that exploitation has been successfully distanced by introducing money in between. The most pessimistic, though not because of that untrue, interpretation of capitalism, is, 'take a proportion of the money I made you so you don't otherwise take my freedom or even my life'. In every other system, the latter two are what can only be the case.

[@Sinleqeunnini]

@@zootsoot2006 The more relevant question is 'how much' capitalism or whatnot a society should have, and on that note both history, Christianity, and many other fields come together to argue that America needs a serious critique of its own capitalistic system. Marxism should be one of the voices in that critique.

[@zootsoot2006]

@@Sinleqeunnini And every conservative would agree with you. The British Queen Mother put it perfectly, 'the best system is a Conservative government with a strong Labour opposition'. Don't think anyone's put it better than that. Marxism is merely the Capitalism's Unconscious, all those human motivations which are not fully expressed in a capitalistic system. It is not a system of its own, and if treated as such can only destroy a society, much like the unconscious taking over the mind can only lead to mental illness.

[@Sinleqeunnini]

@@zootsoot2006 A faulty analogy, given that it attributes consciousness to what are presented as ahistorical theories. Marxism an articulated theory in many variations. Just because it emerged as a reaction to emerging capitalism doesn't mean it can't function on its own, or that it can't be changed and adapted for more fundamentally pragmatic reasons. Nor is there any reason why a conservative government should necessarily be in power through such developments. As Heidegger noted, deep historical tendencies in the 'West' (should one choose to defend that notion) involve the notion of revolution and freedom, with its best aspects represented by the polis and the cross. That has been on full display for the last few hundred years. There is no reason not to think that won't continue in the present, much to the conservatives' chagrin.

[@ellinmara5997]

@@zootsoot2006 money existed before capitalism, though... if what you say were true, the world before capitalism would have been pure slavery, which is simply not the case.

[@rontomkins6727]

The woman looks like Maxine from Being John Malkovich

[@cashewpistachio1826]

Thanks Ron ☺ Now FUCK OFF...

[@BlacKWidoW70s]

Omg, yes, thank you! I've been trying to figure out the resemblance since I 1st came across the chanel.

[@QT5656]

As played by Catherine Keener.

[@Radicalfoodie]

Once again thank you so much for exposing this Empire and it's inner workings

[@dfghj241]

you say "exposing" as if this is uncovering some hidden truth or something like that, but it really isn't. all of this is very well understood in the academic arena (at least), its quite incredible, there are so many authors over the past 90 years that wrote extensively about the inner details of the american empire, its systems of exploitations, its lack of true diplomacy (these 2 date back to 200 years of authors discussing, including some by the fouding fathers themselves), its foreign "adventurisms" that are actually very well calculated and have as much to do with adventure as the nazi takeover of paris, hell there is even works about the empire's transnational capitalist class dating back to just before WWII. And the funny thing is that alot of these authors are actually defending this using a moralist, jordar peterson esque philosophy that "this is all justified". it is trully astounding.

[@meganh9460]

@@dfghj241 If you think hes saying 'this is all justified' then you need to pick up his book and read it. Did you notice how they didn't use any of his own words, why not. According to sam the quality is top notch. They showed a video but couldn't stop talking to let you hear his own words. You know on my right wing sites they bend the truth as well, but they always let you see them speak for themselves. They just never do that here on any leftist channel.

[@meganh9460]

@@dfghj241 Oh ya and thats just the battle. The real war is collectivist vs individualists. Its funny hearing Marxists talk about being exploited by a company when they want to be exploited by something much much bigger. I wonder where I fit in this scheme as I own my own business that only employees myself. Am i evil or no lol

[@Thelastkroom]

Alonzo Kennedy lol u are so fucking stupid

[@dfghj241]

@NolanEP i'm not talking about the details being justified, on the other hand, the system and said historical institutions in which such gruesome details are allowed to happen (and even encouraged) are justified and even naturalized by jordan peterson. so in the end he is justifying these atrocities quite openly. although of course, like every gruesome attrocity, no sane human being could defend it. The least you could do is either pretend it is an isolated case, the result of mad men running things, OR you could ignore it, hide it from thought or pretend it didn't happen... but of course none of these ways of dealing with such problems call for deep analysis, and that is indeed part of the problem.

[@123emser]

Who puts Steve Bannon and Peterson under the same umbrella???

[@tonyjofenig6833]

Did you listen to what they were talking about? The term "cultural Marxism", which both Peterson and Bannon use, but neither can define, or defend.

[@jesperburns]

@L Cincinnatus Are you trolling? I googled "jordan peterson on cultural marxists" and came up with hundreds of videos, clicked on three and bingo, he used that term in all three. Also, note: I am much more right wing than Peterson.

[@RihannaIsIluminati]

L Cincinnatus You sound like an ignorant dumbass.

[@Red-rj7sr]

Peterson and Bannon both use the term very frequently, which is why Proffesor. Wolff mentioned them both in the same breath.

[@lostinspace4417]

@@tonyjofenig6833 kzbin.info/www/bejne/r2TUnJlpl8admpY

[@Pelmeni3000]

How much is he making in this current system

[@marekmican99]

Without the employer, employees get 0, no?

[@MrSammo1]

Capitalism should more correctly be called parasitism.

[@kelleher108]

Great Job Abby...hang in there, it may get better. Peace and Love From Canada

[@Johnconno]

What else can I expect from Canada?

[@wilfred5656]

Exploiting employees is the modus operandi of bosses. Infact that's why they're bosses. That's total BS.

[@joshuanorris9785]

source to where Jordan Peterson said this please? thanks!

[@lachlanbell8390]

Hahahaha! Unlikely. That would mean these people actually listened to Jordan Peterson's words. Don't hold your breath waiting.

[@kx7500]

Lmao imagine asking a video with hundreds of thousands of views to personally send you a source for claims and claiming victory when you don’t get it. Both of you are morons.

[@NoahNobody]

I like this guy and what he was saying. About the topic of exploitation; If you were getting the full value of your work, you would be getting the same money as if you were self employed. Your boss needs to add his cut for whatever he does and more for growth investment, so of course some of the value is lost. A lot of the time, the cost to the consumer is based on the production costs, so keeping wages down is preferred. I think the real exploitation comes from certain parts of the economy which is artificially raising its value in order to make people poorer than they need to be. Like the housing economy, the petroleum and power economy. These are the things people can't do without, but people have to now pay more than what they should be able to easily afford from their labour effort.

[@jamesoquinn9168]

Notice he refers to 'unfettered capitalism'. Its running the capitalist machine without any safeguards. In our society, where corporations and the rich have captured democratic power, they've removed the safeties, so the machine produces more for them, and less for everyone else. Capitalism can work. For a time. Before the monster is out of its cage, wrecking havok on the population.

[@cheeck6230]

Runaway inflation.

[@lucaspdersolii]

You guys should check out Carl Menger's theory of value.

[@TeaParty1776]

> Your boss needs to add his cut for whatever he does and more for growth investment, so of course some of the value is lost For whatever he does?! Provide capital, land, factory, wages prior to profit, customers, suppliers and, most important, the idea that created a business. Of course, you could stand naked in a forest and wait for the Dialectic.

[@luijoc]

Richard Wolf makes me want to read Marx.

[@TheGroovyJones]

He wrote a short book introducing Marx, 25% off in May '19 at Lulu dot com.

[@soulbeats135]

username checks out

[@Kolokommouna]

@@dumbdumber7203 **triggered*

[@dumbdumber7203]

@@Kolokommouna Anybody that has survived the evils of Marxism would be. Thank your parents for financing your lifestyle.

[@Kolokommouna]

@@dumbdumber7203 the evils caused by capitalist encirclements, sieges, sabotages or/and the random nature of the weather? Perhaps the attempt of the construction of the dictatorship of the proletariat in countries with the overwhelming majority of the working class being peasants? Or perhaps the evils of massive increase of living standards, eliminated unemployment, homelessness, illiteracy and health insecurity? Or perhaps the evils of peace bread and land? Or perhaps the evils of worker's self management through workers councils and rural communes? Any one who calls marxism evil has no idea what marxism is about. At worst, people who know and disagree wouldn't called less that outdated,a belief that is removed from reality. As for the last part, I don't know how Americans are, but I can assure my lifestyle is not as "luxurious" as you seem to think.

[@mikhaila]

Lol this aged well...

[@gonzalomendoza1198]

Just came from your insta story to see this funny video

[@joshuaalon496]

Thanks for sharing this! Gave me a great laugh.

[@joshuaalon496]

@turtles_O Shut up and go loot some more stores and keep shouting BLM to deaf ears.

[@SHITHAPPENSLIKABOSS]

Mikhalia hope your'e well. Stay gold

[@poopbuster69]

Tricky disinformation

[@user-dd2gj8bg5b]

You are paid less an hour than what you are producing because you're employer has to be paid as well and he has to be paid more than you because he is doing more work, the facility's that you work within have to be maintained and that too has to come out of your salary. I think what prof. Jordan peterson means is that if you are an employer you would find fairly logical to pay your workers less than what they produce only to use the extra money to further enhance their productivity

[@glueplay]

"he's doing more work" lmao

[@yak55x]

Weird how I never get any notices about Empire Files.....

[@NyetTube]

Me neither. Google is our mortal enemy.

[@tegridyfarms9972]

Me neither

[@cristianbejan1970]

same, but also for many other channels

[@alveolate]

@Black Jesus when you leave the power of media curation to bots, you surrender a part of your autonomy and independence. i'm sure we media-savvy people have our own techniques of proactively searching for good content and weeding out bad ones; what we need now is a system of sharing our curation and transparently labeling it.

[@xcyoteex]

Weird how I never subscribed or watched one is these, but I'm having it pushed on me.

[@followufollowme]

Stefan Molyneux read Marx but obviously, didn't understand it. Now Peterson is even worse, worse than that is Shapiro, both are loved by Rogan fans.

[@SuperMokez]

rogan isnt nearly as bad as any of these guys.. hes just nieve

[@fellowcitizen]

Shapiro and Molyneux have completely different beliefs and objectives to Peterson. Peterson is radically Leftwing it's just that there is a trend for dogmatism among (hate-based?) elements of the Left, so they can't seem to see that he is profoundly open; interested in; and appreciative of everyone and everything with sincerity - thus he is willing to explore the perspectives of the Right, and to acknowledge the elements of society which have partially worked enough to be able to produce Abby, Wolff, himself, Julian Assange and so on.

[@SclountDraxxer]

@@fellowcitizen radically left? LOL! Name *one* thing Peterson is left on. I don't think I've ever seen him on *any* left shows/podcast/blogs....plus he's often debating other lefties. Where'd you get this belief from??😂

[@matthewronchetti2915]

Let's have a good faith discussion about Jordan Peterson. Dick Wolff "Jordan Peterson is a Nazi." Lmao

[@matthewronchetti2915]

@jamesk479 wolff* haha

[@LunaticThinker]

Not what he said but okay

[@matthewronchetti2915]

@@LunaticThinker I am only slightly exaggerating what he said to point out the absurdity of his opening statements. Comparing Dr. Peterson's terminology to Nazi terminology, and then saying do with that information what you like, is telling the radical left that Jordan Peterson is a Nazi. If I am wrong, what message was he trying to communicate?

[@LunaticThinker]

@@matthewronchetti2915 I am the radical left buddy and no that's not what I took from it. It's very clearly saying that the rethoric he used is similar to that of nazis... which it is.

[@Earthad23]

LunaticThinker you’re the radical left ? Hey from all of us please just get a job and grow the fuck up and stop giving the radical right such easy fodder to get clowns like trump elected ,you’re fucking things up for everyone because you’re self obsessed spoiled children and nobody cares about you and life isn’t fair so suck it up pussies.

[@tarhunta2111]

Perfectly articulated.

[@GRRAB]

Yes. This is what I've been looking for. Thanks Prof!

[@derekdufon5069]

Why do they keep grouping Jordan Peterson and Steve Bannon together? They have nothing in common.

[@oliveM2009]

JP is not a right winger

[@pookz3067]

They are both spreaders of the anti Semitic cultural Marxism conspiracy theory

[@derekdufon5069]

Pookz , are you being serious?

[@muslimmetalman]

Nick Smith they have loads in common. Speak to the same insecurities

[@skepticsr_us]

@@derekdufon5069 : He is not serious. He is biased.

[@francisjtuk]

On the Peterson v Wolff issue, I think there's things to like about both of these intellectuals philosophies. Not sure that we have to accept all of one or all of the other in such a polarised fashion.

[@stevenf.laforge5357]

Can't actually refute Jordan and co. Only the usual name calling ''hateful'' or ''afraid of blacks or women'' i.e. ''racist'' . He's confusing 'classical ' Marxism' with later Frankfurt school writers that he ignores....

[@sebastianlenzlinger9291]

You missed 90% of the video

[@mitsuki2272]

Dude you clearly just covered your ears and yelled “lalalalalala” and proceded to make this stupid ass comment.

[@thomasthompson162]

I feel like I could actually get my Dad would listen to Wolff talk about Marxist perspectives, but mostly because he sounds a little like Archie Bunker.

[@Kehwanna]

Wow. He does sound like Archie Bunker.

[@TeaParty1776]

Archie Bunker was not exactly the coldest beer in the six-pack.

[@anddudewaslike]

waiting for conservatives to clutch their pearls at the "reach for your gun" comment at the end

[@anddudewaslike]

@Natasel never said they were or weren't.

[@brigadierharsh1948]

It would be funny if it weren't so hypocritical

[@Amadeus8484]

Wolff really touched a nerve with all the rightards in the comment section haha

[@justinkerrigan5863]

No, he’s just another disguised commie apologist. I find it hilarious that people like you criticize others interpretation of political beliefs but then preach someone like Karl Marx who is complete fraud himself, man tried to run his own business and completely failed, and also lived like a bum with his buddy, nothing but a false prophet. Keep dreaming of your world that you find ideal, it will never exist. Sorry

[@Amadeus8484]

@@justinkerrigan5863 bellowed the temporarily embarrassed millionaire...

[@Ps3luvr260]

@@Amadeus8484 how does that much delusion taste?

[@Amadeus8484]

@@Ps3luvr260 And the projection is stellar too lol

[@Lerxst]

He literally has no point aside from "Peterson uses the definition of power different than Marx/misrepresents his definitions" which isn't even a rebuttal. Wolff is a typical communist apologist, writing off crimes against humanity like Dekulakization and the Holodomor as "not real communism" and "the result of poor resource management" when we know they were targeted attacks on specific ethnic groups. Anyone stupid enough to spout moronic bullshit like "The USSR was only a critique of capitalism" clearly skipped history and isn't worth more than a moment of brain power.

[@redlightmax]

8:37 Abby Martin: "Another thing that [Jordan Peterson] says is... that hierarchies are biologically natural and that we should just accept them." Curtis Everett (Chris Evans) in Snowpiercer (2013): "That's what people in the best place say to the people in the worst place."

[@qianglao]

My 40 years life in a communist country proof that no matter how beauty the words they used to describe communism all communist countries will end up as a highly hierarchy system, much worse then capitalism countries. I think there are something fundamentally wrong in Marxism. By the way, I came from China.

[@mshin291]

​@@qianglao I'm from S. Korea, a capitalist country. While I'm better off than an average Korean, I still saw a good number of my friends suffer undeserved hardships just because of the social order. All system has this kind of horrid hierarchy - not just in communist and/or capitalist societies, but as they say, the grass always look greener on the other side. That's why people from capitalist countries often cry for socialism, and vice versa. Realistically speaking we just have to make the best out of our environment, even if it is flawed.

[@bestdjaf7499]

@@qianglao I came from USSR. The same shit. Hierarchy is inevitable. So there are 2 options: 1. Centralized the Power in the hands of Bureaucrats/Technocrats & * their Families & Friends. 2. Decentralize the Power across the Local Governments & Corporations. Decentralization is the Best Practice across all subjects. In System Development, it's the Decentralized Component/Plugin based systems like Linux. In Business it's Decentralization & Flat Organizational Structures. In Finance it's the Decentralized Currencies like Bitcoin. In Politics it's The Founding Fathers idea of Decentralization and local governance.

[@bestdjaf7499]

@@mshin291 You are describing the rigid/corrupt hierarchies. It's one big Federal Government planning for a Better Social Good. The problem, it's doesn't work. You cant fix people & society. We will always have the sociopaths & nepotism & corruption & crime & hierarchies .... All you can do is to minimise the harm & damage; To Prevent the idiots & criminals to break your system. A common solution is a Decentralized System. Look at Linux. Probably there are a Nazi & Communist version of Linux. Linux is small and runs everywhere. And there are free & licensed versions of Linux. * "The main functions of the Kernel are the following: Manage RAM memory, so that all programs and running processes can work. Manage the processor time, which is used by running processes. Manage access and use of the different peripherals connected to the computer".

[@MassDefibrillator]

@@qianglao Of course hierarchies of some kind are inevitable, the point is that Peterson tries to use this dull sentiment to justify the current hierarchy that he's well off in. Not all hierarchies are tyrannical power structures, some hierarchies are fare worse than others. Stop playing this silly false dichotomy game of "it's either USSR or US capitalism", it's lazy and nonsense.

[@Anonymous_Prole]

No mention of Gramsci or The Frankfurt School of course.

[@sandraheaton1084]

Well, he does nod to the F.S when he talks about Marxist's interest in the way capitalism & economics influences culture. Adorno, for example studied the way that the spread and ubiquity of popular music (via the then-novel technology of radio) was having a nefarious affect on the listener's ability to appreciate and comprehend complex orchestral music.

[@Ronni3no2]

What did you think he meant at 1:50 then?

[@alexb8560]

It's a 10 minute video about Jordan Peterson, wtf do you want?

[@marinak1586]

It is kind of funny to ask a Jew about Cultural Marxism or F S in this regard. So, this lady has no a clue or works as she is paid.

[@AdrianCelsiusTepes]

Marina K why is it funny? Does this have something to do with Jewish humor?

[@NeutronView]

Heard about Abby through the joe Rogan podcast and wow she is incredible. I love how she pointed out that Bernie is the biggest threat to the dem establishment

[@jeremyyates64]

Jorge Lozano she said her channel was hard to search and would take time to find. This channel was the second on the search. That’s lie #1. I’m sure there will be more.

[@KlausBahnhof]

@@jeremyyates64 She meant that the content of her channel is hard to search through, not that it's hard to find the channel itself... dumbass.

[@BarbaPamino]

Really? Go read up on his voting record when it comes to airstikes in the middle east when a Democrat is in the office. Bernie is a tool use beautiful to temper the revolutionary mindset of the leftists that believe. And he's significantly more dangerous for the world than Peterson and Bannon combined.

[@BarbaPamino]

@@jalemairliha and how many air strikes has Bannon ordered. Get over yourself. Joe Biden is a career long international doom and groomer who's been voting to blow up innocent people for 5 decades. My point is not that Steve Bannon is worth defending. It's that he has no tangible power and never did. He's a media guy. Biden is a bomb dropper.

[@peterdelong7514]

The Marxist definition of exploitation is flat-out wrong. The employee values the wages paid by the employer MORE than he values his labor, or he would not voluntarily accept the terms of the employment contract. Likewise, the employer values the employee's labor MORE than they value the capital they pay him, or they would not voluntarily accept the terms of the employment contract. This is a mutually beneficial arrangement to both parties. You could just as easily make the argument that the employee trades his labor to EXPLOIT the employer's vast amounts of capital, and lack of labor.

[@marcadams440]

It makes sense if you change the meaning of the word. Like so many other far left ideas.

[@ngpdreamteam2k4]

Peter DeLong to be fair what he says is true, but he stops short at the exploitation. And only looks at the worker and treats them like a victim. Your comment takes it to completion. Both parties are exploiting and profiting from each other. Both are doing a cost benefit analysis, where the benefits outweigh the cost. He turns it into a zero sum game where the employer wins and the employee loses, which is a childish way of looking at it.

[@ngpdreamteam2k4]

Peter DeLong also I think he’s saying that a lot of employees are undervaluing their labor and selling themselves short. Which is also true, but that’s a part of life and it’s up to the employee to properly negotiate his value. He also fails to mention that the employers can overpay for labor allowing the employee to gain the edge, but no matter what it’s rarely if ever a zero sum game.

[@peterdelong7514]

The other core principle of Marxism is the "labor theory of value" - where the value of a good or service is directly proportional to the amount of societal labor which goes into it. This is easily debunked by the subjective theory of value - where the value of a good or service is determined by the individuals engaged in the transaction. In other words, the more intense the desire within an individual, the more valuable the good is to that person. Example: I would pay $15 for a shirt with a Milton Friedman quote on it, but I would pay $0 for a shirt with a Richard Wolff quote, even though the shirts are materially the same with equal amounts of labor invested in them. Conversely, a fan of Richard Wolff may pay $50 for a shirt with one of his quotes, and have zero interest in a shirt related to Friedman.

[@ladyblues994]

If we had a system that didn’t funnel most of the profit to the shareholder class, you might have an argument. But as it stands, most people have no choice but to accept whatever employment they can find, so is it really a choice or a reluctant acquiescence? And even you if reject everything Wolff is saying, we can’t ignore the fact that paying people the current minimum wage or even a little bit more, is in and of itself exploitative. And this is the point where people often say, “well, then work 2 jobs, work 3, work 4, hustle.” Which further proves the point that the working class, be they poor or middle class, are underpaid relative to the cost of living. Not to mention the quality of the jobs themselves: more part time and temp jobs, means employers aren’t fully investing in their workforce, resulting in high turn over rates, workers feeling a sense of alienation and indignity in what little work they can scrape together.

[@emiliodauvin5059]

JP is very clear that hierarchies can be corrupt and dysfunctional. I note that none of the two talking try to defend the position that a society without hierarchies is possible.

[@SH-kz4fl]

It is odd that those who argue for Marxism don’t understand this. In current society there is hierarchies but at least there is a possibility that you may rise within it. In Marxism there is still hierarchy except you are permanently stuck at which ever level those at the top decide for you to be stuck at. It’s just absurd to me.

[@MarcoBonechi]

S H what? The ideal political system for capitalism is dictatorship with slavery, and no labor unions. Because people are only meant to produce capital. People are not important at all in capitalism. In socialism it’s all about people. That then you have dictatorships in Russia it’s more about their history and nothing to do with Marx.

[@Darren_S]

@@MarcoBonechi The dictatorships resulting from trying to apply socialism is never because of some failure of maxism lol

[@pcproffy]

@@Darren_S Just like with capitalism. Double lol.

[@lincolnduke]

@@MarcoBonechi "capitalism is dictatorship with slavery" Do you understand what capitalism is? Genuinely.