Episode

Philosophize This! Clips: / @philosophizethisclips
Get more:
Website: www.philosophizethis.org/
Patreon: / philosophizethis
Find the podcast:
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2Shpxw7...
RSS: www.philosophizethis.libsyn.org/
Be social:
Twitter: / iamstephenwest
Instagram: / philosophizethispodcast
TikTok: / philosophizethispodcast
Facebook: / philosophizethisshow
Thank you for making the show possible. 🙂 Today we talk about Karl Marx and his famous critiques of Capitalism.
www.patreon.com/philosophizethis
www.philosophizethis.org
Thank you for wanting to know more today than you did yesterday. :)

[@ganome9655]

It's refreshing to see someone give an honest breakdown of Karl Marx's work. Far too often people speak emotionally, almost like you're criticizing their religion using the title socialist like a pejorative, when discussing socialism and capitalism.

[@eyeballjellyforbreakfast]

Venezuela is a perfect example of why "socialism" is a dirty word.

[@curioussoul6059]

Lukas High I don't understand what you mean.. you do know that Venezuala is 70% private industry (capitalist) 30% public industry (socialist)?

[@joshjohnson4995]

Lukas High what does that even mean????

[@nt6351]

@@curioussoul6059 Can you provide some legitimate proof to that claim? Supposing that you can, what are you driving at? It's widespread knowledge that Venezuala is an all-but-failed state. Do you think that if it was 100% socialist that this would improve economic matters? Would changing to 100% capitalism worsen the situation? I'm curious to know what you think.

[@curioussoul6059]

@@nt6351 I think a nation's successes or failures are much more complicated than "socialism did it" or "capitalism did it". Loads of people cooperate/work together to make things work, or they compete/sabatoge eachother. One of those actions (cooperation) builds countries and the other (competition) destroys them. X.x

[@Lizardbrainzzz]

I’m at work making Siracha Mayo holding that siracha and you choose to use it as a metaphor .😂

[@impakrsa8146]

Im a chef too and had a similar experience the first time around I always knew chefs are philosophers ...

[@jackgalloway2124]

assigned for my college class. Fantastic episode

[@natalieallen1890]

lets go 50AC, and yes this was super enjoyable to listen to

[@ToaNyroc]

I'm pretty sure this is the video that started my journey towards leftist politics. Always just went along with the capitalist propaganda I was fed growing up until I started listening to this podcast, and after this episode, I went and sought out more videos explaining Marx's ideas, which it turns out, are pretty reasonable, which is why they influenced so many people over the past century who were influential in their own right (including Albert Einstein, George Orwell, Pablo Picasso, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Helen Keller to name a few). So yeah, thanks for opening my eyes to the absolute horrors of the current economic system we're trapped in, and helping me create a better framework with which to understand the world.

[@TeaParty1776]

How many millions will you murder to stop the increasing capitalist global prosperity and respect for personal happiness?

[@sandersnoeren9683]

Try the Philosphise this episodes on the Frankfurt school. Gives more pros & cons on capitalism-communism and the societal flaws these produce

[@TeaParty1776]

> started my journey towards leftist politics. Your journey started with an unfocused mind.

[@brandonwilliams3788]

@@TeaParty1776 no they didn't

[@TeaParty1776]

@@brandonwilliams3788 ?

[@wildbear2472]

I watched episode 48 (Adam Smith - Specialization) and came away with a sinking feeling that the video was not an objective philosophical analysis. Thankfully I found this episode as the counterpoint to episode 48, which has redeemed my faith in this channel.

[@wsxcde21]

doesn't matter what economic label we use it. any collective organization always runs by hierarchical system. and its always kept together by dominion of force and some kind of bigger picture for life. a good master controls the slave imagination. and thats our world today.

[@NathanDudani]

Sadly, out masters are no longer merely people but their ideology manifested in material life (in reality).

[@heartofmilk]

Thank you for sharing this!

[@_PanchoVilla]

Should we listen to Marx's work theory if he never worked a day in his life?

[@nthperson]

None of the conventional "isms" address the fundamental imbalance between human and property rights associated with access to and control over nature. In terms of labor and capital goods, nature as a zero cost of production. Nature is provided to humans for our use and survival. Almost alone among the great political and economic thinkers, the American Henry George presented a cogent argument for a labor and capital goods basis for property. Nature is, George argued, the commons from which all wealth is produced. Nature is the source of private wealth but is not legitimate private wealth. The ideal structure for accessing any part of nature is under a competitive bidding system for a leasehold interest issued by the community or society. Note that government is, then, the agent of the community and society for administrating such as system. As deeds to nature had already become a widespread norm, George argued that a second-best approach was for government to collect from every "owner" of land (broadly defined to include such natural assets with an inelastic supply as frequencies on the broadcast spectrum) the full potential annual rental value. This would serve as the fund with which to pay for democratically agreed upon public goods and services, which the potential for an annual citizen's dividend to be distributed. The term that best described the principles embraced by Henry George is "cooperative individualism". Edward J. Dodson, Director School of Cooperative Individualism www.cooperative-individualism.org

[@TeaParty1776]

Reason is the basic cause of production-Ayn Rand

[@nthperson]

@@TeaParty1776 I do not understand what she was getting at. We certainly utilize our ability to reason to decide what goods we most need or most want to produce. That said, early humans had few options in what and how they produced. I suspect they learned by trial and error which plants or fruits were edible and which caused illness or death. When did they first learn that it was generally better to cook the meat of killed game than to eat it raw and cold? Perhaps we often learn by accident, then use reason (or memory) to repeat the steps that yielded a desired outcome.

[@christinemartin63]

No matter how much capitalism is trashed, it's an economic system worth keeping (and improving). Communism -- as it was practiced in Romania (my birthplace) and other Eastern European countries -- was a dismal failure. In such a surreal country (after all, Dada was born here), financial hardship was the least of your worries. If you didn't lose your mind, you slowly became a conditioned, soulless entity. Oh, yeah, and you could never leave. And if you were lucky enough to leave, you'd have to be deprogrammed to become human again. America is a gift.

[@Everyone321]

Communism has never existed. Its a post capitalist society it can never exist along side capitalism as it is not a utopian system

[@luisannymarinez2240]

100 %

[@elijaguy]

You passed the test beautifully!

[@lebroncode]

Karl Marx didn’t know about fiat and central banks because they weren’t around then. That’s a major problem with our capitalist system today. And is actually why people started going into debt in the 1970s. Central banks encourage taking loans because that’s when money is created in a fiat system.

[@jeffreywhite7867]

Started with the Dewey-Lippmann Debate episode...still enjoying the playlist

[@christinemartin63]

Marx -- another original, influential thinker ... but a failure as a provider for his family and an exploiter of his aristocratic, obedient wife. Walked the talk? Nah.

[@Sui_Generis0]

Marx never said profit was theft

[@dominicberry5577]

Good talk.

[@22Janhavi]

Global trade started in 1968-70? And jobs went to India for cheaper labor? India was a colony until 1947 - with many other nations providing (almost) free (exploitative) labor and resources!

[@TeaParty1776]

Billions of people rose from ,ancient daily near-starvation to the middle class w/hope for the future. You want an anti-capitalist jackboot to stomp them back into the anti-mind, collectivist mud. In Defense Of Global Capitalism-Johan Norberg Rational Optimism-Matt Ridley Capitalism-Ayn Rand Liberalism-Diedre McCloskey

[@adrrienfonseca4763]

Intriguing insights. But I'd agree with other profound scholar's that we live in a state capitalist system, not capitalism... shit collapses immidiately.

[@adrrienfonseca4763]

A state playing a significant role in maintaining the private sector viable by all means is ground to argue that we platform on a state capitalist system & the crisis of 2008 bailouts or the mass worth$ of corporate lobbying are good examples. How the cards are layed varies. Mountain gridlock of a subject. Nice little flash of erudition.

[@adrrienfonseca4763]

@Fungy BungyI see what you are saying. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iIbdoqh7rsZpgtk Found this very insightful.

[@adrrienfonseca4763]

@Fungy Bungy I'll continue lookin into this shit. I'm getting a new(your) perspective on this.. On instances, state intervention is critical in sustaining a non sustainable economic system, hence, " a sort of."

[@TeaParty1776]

> state capitalist No contradictions in reality. Either capitalism or statism. We have a mixed economy.

[@NathanDudani]

It is not much of a battle if the former does not have a kicking and screaming (alive) counter-hegemony at both the economic and cultural levels; alas, any attempts at such outside of massive inter and well-connected groups solely focused on organically developing such parallel structures would end in a level of tyranny the world has yet to witness.

[@bihone4750]

It is so odd to see capitalists shrill for their system by saying things like "marxism has never been tried successfully", when 1/3 of the living human population live under governments that self identify as "marxist". What should we say to them? What does it mean to be "marxist"? Can we move beyond our own stupid perspectives, cultivated by our western culture that insists capitalism has won? What does it mean to be a "marxist" government, considering Marxism is inherently a system of socioeconomic observation, rather than a direct economic system? Why are you so eager to disregard an obviously complex & nuanced argument? Do you self identify as capitalist? Do you feel like your identity is attacked when you hear people talk about Marx? What political thinker has influenced the world, more than Marx? What philosopher has influenced the world, more than Marx?

[@josiahjoel7580]

Very good episode

[@anirudhsinghrawat5659]

You must make use oh KZbin shorts and tiktok

[@springroll6758]

gud episode

[@nopasaran191]

Based

[@slartibartfast2977]

Marx's critique henges more on a distinction, that Steve does not go into, between private and personal property. I read das kapital, and listened to many people talk about marxism. Marx didn't talk about profit being theft. He talked about surplus value, and it is debatable what percentage of that was exploitative and what percentage the bosd could take as a wage. I understand the need for simplification though. Good steelman. Peace.

[@BlakeZeb]

What..? Is this satire? I mean, the distinction between private property and personal property is certainly talked about, but I don’t see how Marx’s critique of capitalism has more to do with this than the idea that profit is exploitation. There’s not a debatable percentage that goes to a boss, the workers own the means of production, or they don’t and exploitation is occurring if someone is profiting in this manner.

[@gregoryhigley2965]

I generally like your stuff, but this was totally unbalanced. Your worst by far. This wasn't "Communism vs Capitalism", but really just a discussion of Communism. Capitalism and its intellectual defenders aren't really discussed. A definition of capitalism isn't given. (There should be several, since pro-capitalists reject the Communist definition.) No mention of the Austrian School, Milton Friedman, or the enormous empirical evidence for capitalism and against attempts at communism. Even if communism is superior in some way, and even if it could work, we can say empirically that attempting it is extremely dangerous.

[@tookie36]

Capital owners are leading the world off a cliff… so there is that

[@_PanchoVilla]

You have to watch the rest of his work. This is episode #81 and every prior episode builds into this one.

[@papafrankupotatoman7306]

Damn, Marx was so based.

[@TeaParty1776]

Based in the unfocused mind and waiting for a revelation from the Dialectic.

[@joshuabyram7485]

Who decides who doesn’t have to work and who does?

[@Kumaryoku]

It's about reduction of work hours a week for all workers, not about having a few people freeloading off the rest

[@johnercek]

in our current system? our parents

[@tomio8072]

Under capitalism, i guess our bank accounts, under communism (as it is thought out to be) people would voluntarily carry out actions which both fulfil their personal capabilities as humans, and are provided for those who are in need of it. People would work rather to help one another, for they know both that others will do the same for them, and perhaps also because they don’t want others thinking they are just freeloading. But then concerning those who free load, the only problem would be if some people sat around and did nothing, and then others went around doing everything, and both ended up getting the same things from life, it’s a worry that it will all turn to chaos as those who work either decide they won’t work as well, or those who don’t work decide to withhold to resources from people if they don’t work. If people are pursuing activities which fulfil them as people however, and not just having to work shitty jobs like we have to now, it might be said that those who work might even putty those who don’t work, for, at least I would say, most people I feel can’t stand doing nothing with their life, they have to do something, and so providing for others in the community might give their life purpose. In contrast those without this drive may even be pitied for seemingly not having a purpose.I guess then to have to ask 1) if when people are provided all the things they need to live a life fulfilling life external to them, will they then make their own purpose in life by helping one another and creating art and excelling in sports or whatever? and 2) will there be enough of these people who will do this to keep the system working? And then concerning jobs which actually are pretty shitty, there might be some answers to this: 1. by chance there are going to be some people who actually find these fulfilling 2. The fact that no one else wants to do some jobs, and yet others will do it might make those who actually do those jobs seem admirable, and so bring social status with it, or 3, perhaps it could even be put on a local router, where it is done by people in an area where people would face direct pressure and conflict if they didn’t actually stick to their share of the router. Or 4. Some shitty jobs could be done by robots I guess. This would be as well to have the whole system as voluntary as possible of course, but if you wanted to not make it as voluntary, then I suppose there could be rules like “those who do not work do not eat” implemented by the community and enforced by the community, with adjustments for people who are disabled in one way or another, but then again maybe something like this isn’t needed, hopefully anyhow. And then the final thing is if this whole communism thing in theory sounds good, how can we move towards organising society this way, without it moving towards an authoritarian state.

[@NathanDudani]

It is determined first by owns production and in what ownership structure and second under what relations as created by the former

[@NathanDudani]

All the rest of the commenters have no cohesive criticism

[@jamaldarwand1935]

Very balance analysis and commentary of these great thinkers. The thing is capitalism is still young in un-developed countries and some developed countries it is almost peaked. I wonder what would happens when the capitalism reaches it maturity in every countries and natural recourse becomes scars?

[@brandonbrown1568]

Good question. But really those countries where capitalism is underdeveloped, are never gonna get matured capitalism. Because developed capitalist countriws depend on that and repress growth there.

[@brandonbrown1568]

And resources like food are not scarce at all. We have the food to feed the world 1.5 times, but because of our economic system it doesnt get distributed to all the people that need it and they still die. Look at how to covid vaccine is distributed. Countries that have been hit the hardest hardly get any, just because they cant pay enough.

[@ridleyscott5234]

who knows? historicism of any kind is stupid and short sighted. Capitalism might be replaced by feudalism, or might be replaced by communism. State intervention might make capitalism functionally immortal.

[@TeaParty1776]

> and natural recourse becomes scars? The more capitalism, the more nature is a resource. You evade mans productive mind that produces more from less.

[@whatdupdoh]

Thanks for the video, comrade.

[@seanpatrickrichards5593]

22:49 yeah, those seem like good reasons why communism wouldnt work.. "the world needs ditchdiggers" but who wants to be a ditchdigger?

[@seanpatrickrichards5593]

Needlessly producing and consuming does seem kinda crazy though.. Sometimes it seems like alot of what people are doing is slaving away to produce stuff people dont really need, then hoodwinking people into buying it so that they then in turn have to slave away to make stuff people dont really need, etc.. :P but then life seems better for those people in the capitalist countries than the communist countries (i dunno whatever, someone else can figure it out, i'm gonna laze around and watch Oprah and collect welfare.. I have always depended on the kindness of strangers!)

[@shantanusingh5320]

How about we automate ditchdiging?

[@larrysmith2636]

the rich rule the poor regardless.

[@TeaParty1776]

In capitalism, individuals rule themselves. Thats what commies hate. Unless you mean that people buy gasoline from multi-billion dollar corporations, not from dishwashers.

[@TeaParty1776]

Its outrageous that poor people must buy gasoline from multi-billion dollar corporations. In an ideal world, they would buy it from each other.

[@Everyone321]

in communism there would be no such thing and intense rich nor poor. There would be no class distinctions as wealth would no be accumulated under a tiny minority

[@Booer]

Just started watchin...lets hope this video isn't trying to make nutty claims Edit: finished watching. This was overly simple to a fault. What a nothing burger. Nonetheless I hope someone out there is less cynical than me and does find the theory behind this simple explanation. Thank you for the content.

[@coleride]

The poor will always be with us. If you give them free money it devalues the local currency, keeping them poor,, and destroys their spirit, the only thing they have. There will always be the unlucky, the lazy, and the foolish.

[@ignatiushazzard]

Communism advocates the abolition of money

[@craigwillms61]

amen, so true

[@Ladyroundrock]

These criticisms are interesting but seem to only apply to an overly simplified version of capitalism. Take the clock example: in a capitalistic society you have the option to buy a massed-produced clock, but there is also demand for more artistic or handmade varieties, so there is still a place in the market for that. Also, as another example, I work in an industry where there are fewer people then there are jobs, so the market actually works in my favor when we are talking about job security. The idea that capitalism only promotes mass-production and cut-throat work environments is not the reality in practice.

[@dominicberry5577]

How many job markets would you say have fewer candidates than jobs? And how much of the total job market do you imagine these represent? I think you’re doing a little too much oversimplification yourself.

[@curioussoul6059]

Dominic Berry I think I can answer both of your questions with the following sentence: Very very few jobs have fewer candidates than positions.

[@dominicberry5577]

@@curioussoul6059 That's only true if you ignore the salary and the qualifications. There are plenty of jobs which very few people would not be willing to do if they weren't paid for it. The higher the salary, the stronger the indication that demand to get the work done strongly outweighs the willingness to do it. There are likewise, plenty of jobs employers would like to create, but can't because ... not many people know how to do that. That's often the case with the computer programming industry or other technology related industries. What prevents movie makers making more movies is, they need big names to attract public attention and there are only so many big names to go around. They could easily create more movies and more jobs by using unknown actors. They just don't make enough money.

[@curioussoul6059]

@@dominicberry5577 My point was mainly that the video's critiques of capitalism are valid in most real-world cases. The original comment was invalid because the anecdote shows survivor bias. I find it baffling that "big names" are attractive to peoples' attention x.x

[@frankguan5044]

And he only presented an oversimplified version of Marxism, so...

[@nunomadeirapereira5371]

china

[@oddfutureisdopeasfk]

Fuck this system. Im absolutely tired of it and im only 22

[@TeaParty1776]

Move to Russia. Putin has a job for you.

[@dothex4919]

Great critic of both. But in a free society, capitalism always wins.

[@David22092001]

boy I sure feel free with my crippling student debt, my crippling medical dept, my land of the free unless youre trans or black etc, my poor ass paying for my landlords new mercedes sure sounds like winning huh

[@Everyone321]

working for products i never see and my life activity used to build the wealth of others and expand the body used to exploit my labour power sure feelings like winning

[@AnUtterMesh]

What an oversimplified pile of gibberish. I don't think either system works but communism and socialism deals in hypothesis and theory and wherever it has been practiced in the past, it's supporters adamantly deny its involvement. I'm fully willing and able to accept that unchecked capitalism has major flaws and in some cases has led to deaths but can the communist do the same? Marx fundamentally attempts to structure a broad framework of economical, social and spiritual needs into a one size fits all type system. Which is why it fails. It is eutopia personified which is why it is so attractive to people who can't think past their emotions and unfulfilled needs. To end isn't it strange how people who flee communist countries living under relative poverty among other things become staunch anti-communists? And how strange that people living under relative prosperity in capitalist countries with no experience of other systems of government advocate for communism? Just food for thought.

[@throg3275]

Chile.

[@Everyone321]

>>> "I don't think either system works but communism and socialism deals in hypothesis and theory and wherever it has been practiced in the past, it's supporters adamantly deny its involvement. I'm fully willing and able to accept that unchecked capitalism has major flaws and in some cases has led to deaths but can the communist do the same?" First of all communism has never existed its not a utopian system thats implemented it comes abour proceeding the collapse of capitalism after capitalism internal contradictions have met a critical breaking point. The atrocities of the 20th century "communist attempts" (if you can even call them that) failed mainly due to the fact that it wasnt actually based on anything marx wrote or intended, mainly being based on vulgar "Worldview Marxism" (something marx was against in his own time). >>> "Marx fundamentally attempts to structure a broad framework of economical, social and spiritual needs into a one size fits all type system. Which is why it fails. It is eutopia personified which is why it is so attractive to people who can't think past their emotions and unfulfilled needs." Marx actually never gave a clear formula to bring communism about and was pretty clear that he was against forming reality around certain sectarian principles. He even said it himself "“Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things."

[@gleidson105]

Because capitalism we are too far from each other we can listen to each other tho

[@venuss2000]

Ah yes, Bernie Sanders, the socialist/communist who owns 3 homes. Sounds about right😂

[@David22092001]

sanders is still a capitalist, he never was socialist at all, he is a socdem meaning he is for a more socialised version of capitalism, but still a capitalist

[@skyteus]

@@David22092001 Are you trying to describe the difference of social democracy and democratic socialism to a guy who thinks "socialism is when houses not"? A valiant attempt though.

[@giggitygoo675]

while i agree with you in that capitalism isn't perfect, you did leave out how communism (both in nazi germany and soviet russia) looked to eliminate weak (in their eyes) humans. Those being gay, handicapped, homosexual etc. in hopes to bring upon a new form of man. There was no room for the lazy or unwilling in either society (housing them in gulags does not count as 'housing'). The inherent flaw in capitalism is that there must be a lower class in order for capitalism to survive (which is why we export manufacturing). Having lived in Cuba for many years; i hear arguments about the embargo. However, this is flawed, the government would not use the resources to better society, they would simply better themselves. Lastly, the bottom line is what is all about. If you believe that the government of Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany (and Cuba) were living by the same standards as their citizens you are deeply mistaken. If Soviet Russia, and Nazi Germany (and Cuba) were not making profit they would not be able to sustain a country; and if they were "sharing" profits it would not be sustained for long.

[@baaaldur]

Thanks for asserting early that Nazi Germany was a manifestation of communism, clues any reader in immediately that you have nothing of substance to say and that they should stop reading

[@TeaParty1776]

> The inherent flaw in capitalism is that there must be a lower class Capitalism is freedom to try, not automatic success. Thats what you hate.

[@David22092001]

'communism in nazi germany' ?

[@craigwillms61]

" Those being gay, handicapped, homosexual etc. " so... etc meaning those 6 million jews?

[@mooxq3083]

Wow you totally missed the entirety of capitalism in this video and don’t even go into socialism or communism etc.

[@joshg.4553]

I came to Marx's first criticism of capitalism, on my own, back in high school but even back then I realized that the solutions were typically submerged in an emotional quagmire. In addition most of these solutions are surrounded by a hypothetical moral tension created by the realization that not everyone should succeed. Much like participation trophies if everyone is rewarded equally regardless of their input the outcome becomes meaningless and devoid of fulfillment. Not to mention Marxism has never in practice returned power to the people but rather has demonized the more successful in exchange political power.

[@JohnBrown-qw8dr]

Communism doesnt mean everyone gets rewarded equally. Lol it's just a system based on needs instead of profit. This doesnt mean everybody would get the same amount. Nobody critical of capitalism is saying (at least that I've heard) that a doctor should be paid the same as someone who cleans bathrooms, just that the person who cleans bathrooms should get paid a living wage.

[@feitur]

@@JohnBrown-qw8dr But if the doctor gets paid more he also has more possibility to invest his money in things that create even more money. In many countries of the world, especially countries with a free market (as close to it as possible at least, there is no true free market anywhere) people who clean toilets do get pretty good wages. Nobody should look at cleaning toilets as a permanent job anyway, more as a starting point, if you earn just enough to save just a little bit, that little bit will grow over time and the work experience will allow you to apply for a slightly better paying job. Only thing truly stopping a person from developing and advancing is their own ingenuity and creativity. Accumulation is inevitable, we see it in everything, not every musician is famous, we know the Beatles, Rolling Stones and others because their popularity accumulated. Some people are simply better at making money than others. In a capitalist system people pretty much only make money by creating goods or services. I'm not going to go into inheritance, that's a whole different discussion. Bill Gates got rich because he provided a service, people wanted computers more than they wanted their money. Sure, he got filthy rich but we now have computers which enable us to live a better life, i have the knowledge of the world at my finger tips, i can chat with my family in a foreign country, i can even listen to podcasts explaining that the system that I and many others are hugely benefiting from is somehow bad. Not so long ago 1 out of every 4 people on this earth lived in extreme poverty, that number is down to 1 in every 20 now. You try telling all the people saved by agricultural, medical and energy technology that they should want a life similar to Venezuela, Soviet Union or Cuba. We should strive for equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

[@TeaParty1776]

Marxism is destructive power to the people.

[@radking9854]

Capitilism is not perfect but atleast we don't need Walls to keep people in-JFK

[@OjoRojo40]

Ehhhh well some people in Guantanamo have a word or 2 to say about that.

[@seanlynch3407]

Tell that to the biggest prison population in history

[@johanlurman8398]

Hahaha omfg the ultra capitalist USA got the most prisoners per capita at least compared to the western countries.

[@erickfernandez1671]

Mr. West, I can tell you've never lived in a communist country

[@chrisloukas9632]

Is this because many in the west say communism is bad but in reality it isn't, or are you saying is worse than we think?

[@shaneburke4826]

Mr. Fernandez, I can tell that you don't know what communism is, because if you did, you'd see that nobody has ever lived in a communist country

[@abhiroopdas3232]

@@shaneburke4826 well said lol

[@baaaldur]

No one has lived in a communist country. At most, some have lived in states with ruling communist parties that purport to be working towards communism. But we all live within global capitalism. It's funny because most of the time when you dig into people who say "You never lived through communism like I did!" you find out they were born in, like, post-Soviet Russia and have no idea what they're talking about

[@craigwillms61]

@@shaneburke4826 whatever, we all know what he means - Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba, Soviet Russia and on and on.

[@GhostSinatra]

Marx should rename his book to "The fairytales of Karl Marx". It's all about "how you feel BRUH".

[@Homunculas]

CRINGE OVERLOAD. ALERT!

[@tomio8072]

Nah his best work is one of economics

[@kendrakrust1244]

The Bible is a much better representation of the material conditions of the modern world and just REALITY in general, I agree.

[@TeaParty1776]

His early attack on capitalism is virtually identical to the attacks by religious conservatives of his time. Hatred of man in the universe, hatred of mans independent mind and hatred of desire for personal happiness.

[@Everyone321]

have you even read the book

[@malus1469]

I started reading Marx, he lost me when he started defining the value of labor and products. Marx has many assumptions which you should immediately notice and which, I think have been clearly shown to be false. And I feel that his book starts exactly in the way meant to befuddle readers into not properly thinking about what kind of underlying assumptions he makes... maybe the only really justifiable argument is that against the collusion between government and "capitalists" and it seems to be solved much better through democratic means than any communist models... I am sorry, but it does not seem to address many of the core problems of Marxism and seems to add aspects which I at least am not certain are actually based on Marx itself... All of this seems way, way too informal and shallow. I am sorry, but I just do not feel like I can trust your take on Philosophy based on this. If I want to deepen my understanding of Philosophy, I shall rather do the work to actually listen to the original, thank you.

[@Elmirgtr]

Malus none of what you wrote actually was an argument against marx

[@animore8626]

Maybe the dozens of strawmen that you just made in this comment wouldn't actually be there if you actually read Marx instead of dismissing for his ideas on values which you're too biased to care to understand.

[@scuevas1]

there’s great introductions to marx and if you actually read any of his earlier work, mainly German Ideology, you’d notice that Marx mentions other philosophers like Hegel. he mentions hegel because his work is heavily influenced by hegelian dialectics. and understanding dialectics is super recommended before delving into his larger works like Das Kapital. the point i’m trying to make is that you will not understand the crux of marxism by simply perusing through the communist manifesto. you must understand the historical context, the predicated works behind his ideas, and the goals envisioned by marx and engels. to put it bluntly, you seem like you haven’t put in the work necessary to understand the material you’re adamant about disparaging. it’s not difficult to understand, either, it’s just work... kinda the whole point of marxism, right?

[@OjoRojo40]

Well that's not exactly how capital volume 1 starts.. did you rally read it?????

[@ridleyscott5234]

@@animore8626 the labor value of theory that Malus is talking about is clear in Marx's work. this was clearly something marx believed in, something you can criticize.

[@cjones4518]

I came here from a recommendation from Ben Shapiro. I expected philosophical discourse and critical thought. What I got was high-mindedness, patronized, and it rubbed me the wrong way. I think you may be making a mistake and assuming that your audience is the general American to which this video seems to be intended for. Again, not from intellectual high-mindedness, but from the fact that you seem to be assuming your audience, I did not enjoy this video at all, and I certainly didn't feel like I learned anything. This mainly stems from the fact that you assume no one born under a particular system has questioned its flaws or merits. This is too much of a an assumption in my view. Anyway, just my two cents.

[@GarrettSaxon]

You didn't listen to much of this. He says about 4 minutes in that most people can see that capitalism isn't perfect.

[@joseguerreroneri18]

TheMuffinMa n This episode was made with an intention towards it's listeners because a sizeable amount of us don't have adequate training in philosophy or political theory. Obviously, some of us do, others don't, but it's made to appeal to the general listener, by making it relatable, understanable, and accessible. You've mentioned in the post that Stephen West assumes that the listener is a general American, that's because a large number of us represent that demographic. Some listeners reside outside America. Anyway, reasonably intelligent people (like yourself) has to acknowledge that our economic system is flawed. And if it "shrugged" you the wrong way, give it another listen or read some Adam Smith and Karl Marx. They were both brilliant in their own right.

[@animore8626]

r/iamverysmart

[@zat1342]

Cannot imagine a worse fare than being ordered around by the likes of moron extraordinaire Ben Shapiro. I feel sorry about you, man.

[@TeaParty1776]

@@GarrettSaxon > capitalism isn't perfect. There is no Garden Of Eden. Capitalism is perfect for mans independent mind,

[@Fast85FoxGT]

The rich get richer and the poorer get poorer is the equivalent of my car is slow because other cars are faster. You can make your car fast. No one is stopping you and it is even applauded.

[@wechildrenof1990]

This anology doesn't work. Car speed levels aren't dependent on one another in the same way wages and economies are. If a manager in charge of 6 staff members earns more than each employee it's because his position is more scarce and the staff more abundant. How much management make and how much workers make has a direct impact on each other in a way that different cars speed capabilities don't. There's only a limited amount of management positions available so the majority will not make those positions. It's disingenuous to claim no one is stopping you. The scarcity of the position and the access to it is stopping you.

[@taliaspencer9093]

Incorrect analogy.

[@whatdupdoh]

You are forgetting that someone is taking your car parts to make their car faster.

[@OjoRojo40]

Bad example.

[@TeaParty1776]

@@wechildrenof1990 > There's only a limited amount of management positions How many more mgt positions now than in 1800? More capitalism->more freedom to create.