"Karl Marx Was Right"

Want to join the debate? Check out the Intelligence Squared website to hear about future live events and podcasts: www.intelligenc...
__________________________
www.intelligenc...
Filmed at the Royal Geographical society on 9th April 2013.
We can't say Karl Marx didn't warn us: capitalism contains the seeds of its own destruction. In their chase for ever higher profits, the capitalists shed workers for machines. The higher return on capital means that the share of profits rises and the share of wages falls, and soon the mass of the population isn't earning enough to buy the goods capitalism produces. And that's exactly what's been happening over the past four years of the Great Recession: ever increasing income inequality, leading to ever weaker aggregate demand -- temporarily disguised by an unsustainable credit binge -- leading to collapse. You don't have to be a communist to see that this is so. We should all be Marxists now.
Or should we? Every time capitalism hits an inevitable bad patch, Marx's name is invoked with wearisome regularity. But no serious economist or political thinker -- with the possible exception of Gordon Brown -- has ever suggested capitalism can break free of booms and busts. Once bust, as we've seen time and again, the capitalist economy has a robust in-built ability to restore itself. As for all the talk of growing inequality, hasn't anyone noticed that ordinary people in the capitalist West have enjoyed an astonishing long-term rise in their standard of living? We are not suffering an existential economic crisis. We do not need extraordinary remedies. We do not need Marx.
So which is it? Is Marx the voice we should be heeding? Or are his modern day apostles resuscitating a late Victorian corpse whose main contribution to human affairs has been the Soviet gulag?

[@01Tanthallas]

Why are these supposed “anti-Marxist” speakers talking of how capitalism has lifted people out of poverty and created a middle class as if it contradicts Marx? Marx would wholeheartedly agree that capitalism would do this...and also that it would lead to increasing levels of inequality, to the point that (real) returns to labor would not keep up with increasing levels of productivity that would be allocated to profit. Marx called the mechanism that would do this “fictitious capital; or parasitic capital”. This is precisely what occurred.

[@lindamohamed5296]

correct

[@johnlove2954]

Yes, Marx would agree with that. But Marxists disagree because Marxists lie.

[@tedvothjr.2426]

Gotcha, Steve, thanks,. Youre a better Marxist than !

[@ugaddasediss9540]

Steve Marangos . Start a business Steve. Secure capital and hire good help. Compete in the open market. Try hard to succeed and succeed or perish. Become a big business Steve. Not just a big mouth.

[@01Tanthallas]

Ugadda Sediss Wouldn’t this be ironic if I owned a business and pay more in taxes than you make in a year? It would...

[@MrUndersolo]

Someone once said, “We have socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor”. Seems about right...

[@kalanaherath3076]

Bernie reiterated it and Martin Luther King said it originally

[@sirtheodorefranciswindsor]

@Marie so much irrelevant points and pivots. You're argument is terrible. Try staying relative to the topic lmao. Just spouting a bunch of points doesn't mean you're correct.

[@xxxfaze_cumshotxxx7946]

@@sirtheodorefranciswindsor Okay but capitalism has caused enough suffering to the point where you can't really defend it anymore, try watching a pro-communist video, the same reason communism failed was because of Mikhail Gorbachev and his awful policies, ironically the same person who SAVED THE WORLD FROM COMMUNISM. Just watch this, the entirety of it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g5vafWSjiNeDgqM I'll know if you watched the video or not, I can tell by the amount of bullshit you'll spew. I don't even know why I"m trying, you're just gonna open up the video and then go to the comments and type "STALIN HOLDOMORE VENEZUALA 20 QUADRILLION PEOPLE PIZZA HUT"

[@themissinglink2163]

I would suggest the opposite is true. Why large corrupt companies push socialist agendas it to get bloated tax payer funded projects because they are far more profitable than anything in the competitive private sector. The Clintons were playing this game. Hillary would ensure a company got a bloated tax payer funded contract and a month later the company would pay Bill millions to give a speech. Both parties have been playing this game for years. Unfortunately this is totally legal uless you can prove intent.

[@sirtheodorefranciswindsor]

@@xxxfaze_cumshotxxx7946 you absolute moron. The person I attacked was for capitalism. You dumb turd. You're reading comprehension skills suck. You don't even know what side I'm on. Wow you're trash.

[@thomasjamison2050]

I would like to see this debate revisited with the same participants today, or maybe we should wait until the next major financial disaster. Won't be long now.

[@marzbigman]

Hi I'm from the future. The financial disaster is here and we are fucked. Figure I let you know.

[@damianbylightning6823]

Why don't we wait until all Marxists grow out of their short trousers? Would be good to hear the confessions of pseudo-religious fanatics.

[@TheButterMinecart1]

@@damianbylightning6823 The number of disagreements within the left, and even between Marxists should be enough to tell you that Marxists are not pseudo-religious fanatics who unquestionably obey the words of Marx.

[@damianbylightning6823]

@@TheButterMinecart1 Clearly, you know nothing about the history or religion. I would, if I were you, pick up a book on the Protestant religion. I would pay particular attention to the paragraphs dealing with puritanism. Your naivete, willful ignorance and lack of insight made me smile. Are you an academic, by any chance?

[@damianbylightning6823]

@Whizper2me Dear touchy ad hom man, Marxism, my dear impressionable little boy, is not philosophy. It is a weirdo cult which worships history and 'morality' and uses mumbo-jumbo to deny doing this. It is and remains a reactionary revolt against the Judaeo-Christian tradition, from which it came. You can attach philosophy to any number of things - it doesn't make them philosophical or philosophy itself. It is as philosophical as Mormonism, Wiccanism or Scientology. It is a moral duty to point these things out. Also, offending Marxists is fun - not as much fun as annoying modern feminists, but modern feminists are not quite as dangerous or deluded. Like anarchism, it prefigured much of the political psychopathy which distorians label as 'fascist' and 'Nazi'. The ideas of modern political antisemitism, the Holocaust and other morally wretched and lunatic ramblings, can be traced to cults like Marxism and abarchism. Distorians don't talk about this - and use devices such as the 'left-right spectrum' and acts of omission to prove it. Grown-up morons and those whose balls haven't dropped, tend to be very convinced by such reasoning. Basic Marxist tenets such as its view of history have been falsified in recent decades and its absurd take on the labour theory of value is only believed by hard core people who show how clever they are by making a good case for manifest nonsense. Proving day is night is not something the intellectually normal do. Defending a tradition that helped mould modern political antisemitism, the Holocaust and 100 million deaths, is not something the morally normal do. Clearly, you have not engaged in any ad hom arguments and stuck doggedly to arguing for absurd propositions such as two named idiocies or the equally stupid notion that human nature doesn't exist, 'species being' exists - which is human nature, but only in a magical sense. No religion has asked its followers to believe anything quite that absurd. Ad hom and very touchy. Are you an academic and a very short male?

[@davidleahy6141]

I am watching this debate 6 years after it was held and nothing has been done. The influence of transnational corporations on the political system is choking off any reforms necessary to overcome the ongoing problems.

[@kiwitrainguy]

And yet the people in the audience were convinced by that debate that Marx was not right, in other words that the system of Capitalism is not in need of reform. That was the most disappointing part of the whole hour and three-quarters for me.

[@l.w.paradis2108]

@@kiwitrainguy They vote rationally: for whatever they suppose will bring _them_ more money. When that is all that matters, you have ultimate alienation -- and ultimate instability. Be ready for a wild ride.

[@mornnb]

I don't buy Marx's solution though. The problem is not capitalism, the problem is corruption. Which is a problem under any economic system, socialism or capitalism. If we actually had capitalism the situation would have been solved by insolvancy of these transnational corporations, with the ones taking their place learning lessons, at least for a time. The question should be, how do we overcome the actual problem, which is Corporatocracy. How do we move from corporatocracy to an actual liberal democracy.

[@zacharyjohnson3771]

@@mornnb boooo wrong

[@MrPro897]

@@kiwitrainguy failures of capitalism don't prove Marx was right

[@armadatint]

We’re taught growing up that ‘We the People’ have the power to affect radical change in the voting booth. But this is another fairy tale. Voting only changes the players. It doesn’t change the game.

[@joeldwest]

Only vote for candidate s that don't take corporate money, or billionaire money

[@bell4645]

victoria ann zabaras *that do

[@VocalBear213]

@@joeldwest and after being elected, they will

[@joeldwest]

Every so often the elites (the biggest psychopaths usually) of a culture being slaughtered en masse seems to be one of the few things that stave off an even bigger die-off of the population.

[@joeldwest]

@@VocalBear213 Then we tell each other and vote them out. I read the Chinese apply the death penalty for official corruption.I think it's a great idea. Maybe being forced to live a modest life must be part of the bargain when people elect to serve the public.

[@boeingdriver29]

Wish Richard Wolff was on the panel. He would have obliterated the opposition.

[@mjohnson1741]

That's exactly why they didn't have him on...it's part of the agenda.

[@Johnconno]

These public-school swine!

[@GuyShōtō]

@@mjohnson1741 Or they didn't select him like the plethora of Marxist scholars they could have chosen, you are aware they're a lot of Marxist scholars they could have chosen but decided not, right? You are aware that there isn't grand conspiracy they just wanted the two scholars they decided because they were clearly qualified for the debate. There isn't a secret agenda against your heroes hiding under every rock.

[@marhobane3040]

Or maybe he wouldn't. kzbin.info/www/bejne/foXNYmqZabNsrKs

[@GuyShōtō]

@@marhobane3040 No Jordan Peterson and his little fan boy didn't come close to refuting let alone addressing Marxism's fundamental principles, nice try though buddy.

[@hlund73]

32:00 there is no conflict between Darwinism & Marx. Marx's description of the inevitable self destruction of capitalism is as Darwinistic as the demise of the dinosaurs - that must result in a revolution of social structure, or we must suffer social extinction. The lesson is that capitalism is flawed because we attribute capital, an abstract idea, with the impossible quality of not being subject to entropy.

[@JDG-hq8gy]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/qJe8p3-il72dlZo

[@freyfaust6218]

Agree... capitalism is an idea, not a reality. As an idea, it is quite a persistent one... but just as persistent as socialism I might add..

[@equinox2584]

@Ronald Reagan Capitalism keeps you poor because big companies are incentives to pay their employees less to maximize profits. In a lot of ways, Marx has predicted the future stating that capitalism is a self-defeating model and we are seeing that in the form of economic crashes every 10 years or so.

[@royhuang9715]

@@equinox2584 there is no point arguing with a neoliberal.

[@angry-white-men]

Capitalism was very good in theory, just not in reality.

[@yellowdogdemocrat1402]

Who else is here in 2020? Lmao

[@commander_expendable]

everyone who are in either intellectual sectors of the u.s or europeans

[@manudibash]

mee

[@kaushal09able]

Long live revolution....

[@Union-ep3cc]

Long live communism.

[@stevenmiller4329]

Who else is here in 2021?

[@eskoelmwood5936]

The system is being propped up by artificial consumption via credit expansion, and artificial scarcity via planned obsolescence. The ultimate problem is that capitalism is absolutely dependent on consumption and scarcity, and since we are now being forced to drum up analogs for the two says a tipping point has likely been reached. The only answer to the current problem is to generate more credit, and scarcity. that is unless capitalism can somehow be separated from its dependencies without completely morphing it into something quite different. Marx was right. feudalism was the precursor to capitalism, and while it fixed many of the problems with the previous system, in other ways it just carried over other inherent problems. Indentured service was a major carryover, and it took world reformation to attempt to change the archaic act of owning people. Credit is the new manifestation of indenture. In many ways it is nearly impossible to forgo the acquisition debt through credit if you want to participate in the first world. Debt forces you to work in order to pay back your debts. Students in America can spend decades paying off loans. How do we change anything when the elite 1% own half of the worlds wealth? How do you get the 99% to band together to solve this problem?

[@mildredmartinez8843]

Great question. The propertied class had a great "coping" mechanism in 2008. Let the government bail them out. I'm sure they will come up with other coping mechanisms in the future when capitalism hits the fan again.

[@michaelbunner7387]

I guess the first thing besides replacing propaganda with the truth would help. A second thought would be to educate the masses starting with teaching the humanities,and civics would help The removal of the private central banks cartel of crooks conmen and theives and reeztablishment of economic soverinity

[@kiwitrainguy]

I see part of the solution as being carried over from the Environmental movement: "Think Globally, Act Locally". Avoid as much as possible buying things on credit, only update appliances (and that includes electronic devices) when necessary (I replaced my fridge-freezer in 2020 when it expired after its life of 36 years).

[@SolarFlareAmerica]

@@kiwitrainguy as good as that advice is for reducing personal excess, the "think globally, act locally" and other associated catchphrases are regarded by people I've heard as oil company propaganda, more failed "personal responsibility" talking points. It's also a clever way to offload their need to change to accompany climate change onto consumers, as well as being an even more clever way of pretending they are changing because they can put their money into eco-friendly ads and it counts as a contribution, lessening their carbon taxes and such. The fact remains that no matter how much we attempt to change our consumption habits, if oil companies can just keep shoving their product into stores and out-lobbying or out-competing ethical products and companies, little will change fast enough. Idk, it's still a good thing to think globally, but honestly thinking locally in the sense of getting together with your community and acting together as best as you are able is a much more achievable thing for the average person, and change is more evident. You can theoretically get together with your town and source local and import ethical products into your community, and can, if you live in an involved enough community, move to ban more harmful imported products from being sold there.

[@olympiahendrix4392]

Deep thinking going here! 5 years later, where do you stand with Wokism? Dying to know.

[@jasonwang1162]

apr 2020, i fear the answer is more than clear now

[@Bigwave2003]

"How much free taxpayer money does capitalism need today to keep functioning?" Brilliant point on bankers who have their hands out for quantitative easing (free money thrown their way by the government).

[@roguespearsf]

@JaneFonda1942 that's why all these bankers should be hung

[@destruction1928]

@JaneFonda1942 an inteligent person, finally

[@Hamsterbtconly]

That’s what annoyed me the most there needs to be a delimitation between capitalism as a free market system and the fractionalised reserve bank system that has polluted western civilisations bring back a hard money and watch capitalism flourish

[@tankyjones888]

@@Hamsterbtconly capitalism regularly crashed and saw crisis under gold standards, in fact the procurement of gold itself was rather bloody.

[@shoobidyboop8634]

That's not capitalism. It's wholesale theft.

[@justinwubble1419]

Watching from 2020, in the next major recession.

[@ryanhendricks426]

Just wait, 2020 still ain’t over.

[@cabapmc]

@@ryanhendricks426 lmao

[@megasalexander927]

2021, inequality is even more.

[@martinko4086]

@@megasalexander927 yes, YOU are NOT equal to ME . Do you have any problem with it ??

[@djctai9288]

you were wrong, my portfolio up 500% lmao.

[@furchtegottgellert4865]

True, in a free market one would expect to see american troops with foreign weapon systems.

[@googleisillukinati8071]

Mwo is epic

[@ilovetech8341]

Weapons are a funny thing. Things are most peaceful when everyone has the same weapon.

[@kie-skatemods4141]

American troops do have and use foreign weapon. They use the 9mm Beretta M9. It’s made in Italy. How about that for free market

[@bcshu2]

So let’s think about this for a second. A country decides to utilize weapon systems from outside their country. In turn a conflict emerges for which a war occurs. That countries supply line is shut off. Doesn’t seem to be so wise. There are very reasonable justifications why, for the interest of national defence, nations prefer to not be reliant upon outside nations for the very supplies necessary in times of war.

[@kie-skatemods4141]

bcshu2 you clearly don’t understand why and how the US got and bought the 9mm Beretta from Italy

[@quagmire444]

For anyone who wants a short summary of what the so called contradiction is, then here you go. 1. In capitalism, there are the business owners and the people they employ. You have an owning class and a working class. 2. The goal of the business owners is to make as much profit as possible. Much of this is done via minimizing productivity via cheaper labor whether that be paying workers less or just plain outsourcing jobs, automation, etc. 3. The business owners profit, but the working class suffers because they either have no jobs or wages that are far too low to keep them alive. The working class is the primary consumer of the products that the business owners are selling, so where do they get the money? Thats mainly the contradiction. This is one of the speculated reasons for the 2008 crash, which is that people kept borrowing and borrowing money to buy until their luck ran out.

[@prikipriki30]

@Ronald Reagan You are seriously deinformed.

[@smujismuj]

What this debate illustrates is the oversimplification of the motion.

[@haloljt]

the second speaker against the motion states that marx was wrong about value - but he wasn't. Marx explicitly states in Das Kapital that important distinctions have to be made between use value and value - value being what this economist refers to - the purely social value of a commodity. Marx writes about how the labour time and the value derived from it isn't equal to the social value the commodity in question gets assigned. He wrote about how gold, while of high value, never got the same value as the labour time could have shown.

[@hubertblastinoff9001]

So with two global economic crises in the span of not even a decade and a half, how do people feel about this now?

[@guyvert49]

it is socialist interventions which caused them in the fist place with their bankrupt Keynesian concepts & interference in the market

[@hubertblastinoff9001]

@@guyvert49 What about the crisis of 1929 which caused the emergence of Keynesian thought in the firs place?

[@CHBMovies]

@@guyvert49 how did Keynesian economics cause the Great Recession or the coronavirus recession?

[@stephenshoemaker6035]

@@CHBMovies These idiots are usually referring to the government bailouts of the "too big to fail" banks. They see the federal interference as a distortion of the free market. If the enterprises were going to fail, and we bail them out, the only thing we've done is helped a failing enterprise continue to fail. Same story for government lockdown of private businesses. What they can't (or, as I suspect, won't) see is that these measures were taken in order to prevent an even larger economic meltdown. And the only reason they think any of this is because they believe that capitalism works in a vacuum and therefor it compels businesses to act in the best interest of society. Also that the government is greedy and oppressive, and that the only reason we don't live in a capitalist utopia is because the government regulates and taxes private businesses and citizens. The real reason they think these things is because private interests control the media they consume under capitalism, and said private interests benefit from having an army of lemmings voting for deregulation and less taxes. Because Daddy Elon Musk is going to send them all to paradise on mars. They are, metaphorically speaking, bleeding out in the back of an ambulance and whining about the driver going too fast because it makes them feel sickly.

[@Olay16]

I feel pretty good.

[@zergnub7426]

marx also dealt with the idea that an object is worthless if there is no demand for it. it's called use value, and its in the first chapter of Capital. This bloke could have known it if he had bothered to read it.

[@miwi9883]

Labour and use value are not able to determine the price of a good because they don't explain the demand for a good.

[@zergnub7426]

@@miwi9883 indeed. Demand dictates the very conditions of one's labouring existence.

[@miwi9883]

@@zergnub7426 Only in capitalism, in East Germany for example much useless work was carried out because nobody was allowed to be unemployed or because of misplanning of the central committee.

[@zergnub7426]

@@miwi9883 That's true. When I lived in Moscow, they were still employing four people to stand in an empty shop with no customers :)

[@urbanundergroundmusic5322]

2nd dude is like: "We have some inconsistencies in the way the slave auction is conducted which can and should be addressed through regulation etc." The problem, however, is the existence of a slave auction itself and not how it's being run.

[@olympiahendrix4392]

Every time you buy something because it is cheap, you lower the value of the poor sod who made it! He might as well be a slave. the solution is to value each other and each other's labor! That is more expensive. Yet, none of the "activists" speak of this. Too busy exploiting through propaganda I think!

[@davesmithy8317]

I got pretty angry @50:16 when she said that people who "aren't being exploited" are bearing most of the burden while simultaneously"not being apart of the system". I listened to that 3 times and can't imagine the amount of mental hoops she had to jump through to actually convince herself of that.

[@bicyclist2]

This is how completely delusional and brainwashed most baby boomers and capitalists are. I completely agree with you.

[@papaluskask999]

She'll a shill for establishment

[@Edge81]

Also dodged the question, wether or not what we are living under, can be called capitalism?

[@Edge81]

She looks stupid now, with the criticism of the Chinese model. "So something needs to be done" but she asked people to vote against the motion.

[@eemoogee160]

@Ronald Reagan and trickle down economics helps those at the bottom, right Ronald?

[@lefrise5]

So, in a nutshell, they seem to all agree that we need change, systemic or not...

[@freyfaust6218]

the difference perhaps, is whether you think revolution and the delivery of all aspects of social undertaking to state administration is the pathway or not. I do not. The cultural imperialism and the violent confiscation of property and life that socialists/communists espouse, the banning or outright extermination of people on the basis of their opinions and beliefs... this does not change the problems engendered by authoritarian rule, only the names of the oppressors.

[@liquid_lover]

@@freyfaust6218 this is exactly my problem with these shortsighted criticisms of socialism. You can't generalize every leftist as having the same bloodthirst as the people who have led past Soviet countries. You just can't. There are many denominations of socialism which want to get there in many different ways, which depart from the dominant Marxist-Leninist tendencies (single-party "democracies") of the Soviet Union and other socialist states. Some are reformists (democratic soc), but others are revolutionary (rev. soc). Some reformists emphasize party politics and acknowledge the heavy role of the government (state socialists/democratic soc), while some think that unions and syndicates are an adequate third-party to effect change (anti-statist socialists: anarcho-syndicalists or libertarian soc). Some want to dismantle the government entirely for more democratic institutions (libsoc/anarchists/ansynd), some want to preserve markets (market socialists/market anarchists/mutualist), and yet others want to do both (libmarksoc). And it's clear that some statists and MLs permit the state to own the means of production, but ansynds, market socialists, mutualists, etc (left-libertarians more generally) think that power is the problem (gathering from anarchist/left-Marxist theorists) and prefer decentralized/worker/community ownership of the means of production. Socialism isn't a monolith. A lot of us at this point recognize that the Soviet Union was a despotic failure. Other theorists and leftist activists have devised their own ideas of organizing society while still upholding main socialist principles of worker ownership. You can't even begin to criticize them without actually being specific on the type of leftist ideas that you criticize.

[@qamarkhan4531]

If Richard Wolff had been on the panel, the outcome would have been very different.

[@antipositivism3128]

Qamar Khan Jordan Peterson would wreck him.

[@mucura1]

@@antipositivism3128 No way. Petersen doesn't have the intellectual qualifications in the subject to even come to the table. His expertise is elsewhere.

[@andrewfarrell1816]

@@antipositivism3128 when Wolff and Peterson were both invited to talk at the same university, Peterson dropped out by massively upping his fee when he found out that he would be debating against Wolff.

[@antipositivism3128]

Andrew Farrell That’s utterly speculation. You can talk about what he did but assume intent is usually a losing battle.

[@frankstraw3077]

to be fair If R Wolff could go on the panel then I wouldn't have said lets get Thomas Sowell on the other side. Jordan P is great, but he addresses the issues from of a a social perspective. Wolff, correct me if I am wrong is an Economist and most of the argument being about capitalism etc, I think having another Economist would make for better opposition. Thomas Sowell or Milton Friedman... then lets see the outcome. : )

[@NS-pr8is]

“I was a Marxist but I don’t understand anything about Marx” ok cool 👌🏻

[@masada2828]

N S - at least ur honest.

[@bigwes617]

@CWW Like, Manifesto was pretty much written to be easily digestable and dumbed down as much as possible, but that's the book they know the name of so that's the book they pretend they've read.

[@bigwes617]

@CWW Historical Materialism? Uh... you can't mine history or build things with it... history isn't a material... dumbass communists... 🤤

[@meganaxeliar]

The left claim Marx and don’t ‘cancel’ him for his rampant racism, sexism and all since without him they’d be aimless, degenerates of nothingness; simply bitching about gender pronouns, polygamy, open borders/muh diversity and all. In leftist terms, here’s some takes from Marx to which if he existed today, he would be deemed a muh far-right fascist/nazi: marxists.architexturez.net/archive/marx/works/1862/letters/62_07_30a.htm + ‘On The Jewish Question’ - Karl Marx

[@NS-pr8is]

Megan Axelía Carrington-Ráðvarðardóttir doesn’t look like you read Marx and just chose to believe some quotes from rightist sources, and on the Jewish question is a criticism of studies which ignore the material conditions of certain groups of people. Even if Marx was a racist or antisemite, none of this is reflective in any of his important work or has anything to do with the ideology of Marxism.

[@Krappman]

Come to think of it... It kind of pisses me off that old fucking geezers that are so heavily invested and well of in the status quo, defending it. They haven't had a single unique thought in their lives, any of them, on either side. And some of them are telling us that the system that clearly works poorly, is all we got to chose from. That's fucking blaha.

[@AndrewStergiou]

You might have a good point if you checked your grammar better .. they (these wankers) you say "old fucking geezers that are so heavily invested and well of in the status quo, defending it. They haven't had a single unique thought in their lives" and add "any of them, on either side" (meaning they vacillate waffle on the issues?) where in their reformist bullshit as you say "[with] them are telling us that [when] the system that clearly works poorly, [as]is all we got to chose from [this and that to fix the whole mess as we did so many times before as if we should be so stupid to believe those well paid middle class apologist wankers for the establishment ..... Well friend comrade slash what ever if that is the case I agree with you for I too am sick and tired of my integrity infringed upon by the class biases of those held in esteem above me simply because they rest on the side of upper class prestige power money and privileges. So HEAR HEAR as in HERE HERE

[@Krappman]

Sorry about my grammar! I wasn't aware of any mistakes I did. Probably plenty though. English being my third language. My sentiment was. Isn't it high time now, that someone could come up with better and more modern economic ideas than the at least 150 year old ones we have today. It is as if those have become dogmas, no, even scientifically proven to be the only gigs in town, and that they all will be the only gig in town until the rapture or the heat death of the universe (whichever comes first). I kinda bet we could come up with systems that are better and way more fair.

[@AndrewStergiou]

Krappman please post on you tube for response

[@AndrewStergiou]

Krappman I understand you wish to replace our use of basic elements such as hydrogen and Oxygen simply because you wish to vary your privileged diets in what is afforded you with something other than the 15 basic food stuffs which invariably makes up your diet. Where if you listened it is capitalism which is at question not our terminology in examining it but you as many would wish us to stop our criticisms of capitalism for it as capitalism has been the problem not the solution for the last three hundred years.

[@Krappman]

If I understand you right, you didn't get me. I agree that capitalism isn't the cure. Nor is Marxist type capitalism the answer either. All those antiquated terms should have been put to rest by now. Why is there so hard to come up with a working common heritage model to superseed these ones?

[@waffles001]

No he was left

[@mishapurser7542]

"But then people will explain anything" is the epitomy of dishonest rhetoric, and not an argument.

[@kingofbadgers3019]

Or it's just a pretty clear outline of an assumption she's working from; the USSR was Marxist.

[@danielhutchinson6604]

@@kingofbadgers3019 Soviets were still a form of Capitalism, they continued to use money as Rubles.....Marx was not in favor of discontinuing the use of money, simply some control of the distribution......Communalism would be an action that abandoned that habit.....

[@stevelenores5637]

Like I said in an above post. Under the right circumstances anyone can stand up at some moment in time and shout, "See, I told you so!". Proves nothing except opportunism.

[@olympiahendrix4392]

word salads never make sense. Financial audits do.

[@sirherbert6953]

The 4th speaker has to reread Marx, because he is very much wrong. Marx did not believe that wages would fall under capitalism, he believed they would rise as he states in wage labor and capital. He misunderstands the labor theory of value, something Ricardo and Smith believed. It is not necessarily a theory of prices, even though there is a relation and Marx makes very clear that something like use value exists and only labor which contributes to the enhancement of use is truly productive. His points on dialectics and evolution also eems quite misplaced. As longevity and a certain graduality is not excluded by Marx.

[@AlbertSchram]

The motion is: "Karl Marx was right. Capitalism post 2008 is falling apart under the weight of its own contradictions". For the motion: Tristram Hunt [01:55] to [11:00] Robin Blackburn [20:48] to [30:02 ] Frank Furadi [37:36] to [47:04] Against the motion: George Magnus [11:05 to [20:40] Madison Perry [30:13] to [37:21] Judith Shapiro [47:16] to [56:08 ]

[@answerman86]

How is it falling apart? We are still back to being the strongest nation on earth once we got that America hating commie Muslim Obama out of office, What a stupid ass video. WTF "Karl Marx was right" the stupid ass lowlife philosophizing son of a bitch never worked a day in his life (was always supported by his friend, Engels) The application of Marxist ideology resulted in hundred and 20,000,000 people slaughtered in starved to death in the 20th century and these dumb son of a bitches say that Marx was right ?????????????????

[@rogerpope6057]

Ask people who were forced to live under communism what they think of communism.! These people are idiots.

[@nthperson]

Only in the third volume of Das Kapital does Marx come close to a more complete analysis of how socio-political arrangements and institutions secured entrenched, monopolistic privilege. Powerful, monopolistic interests have seen to it that they are the beneficiaries of systems of property law and taxation. The resulting concentration of income and wealth is, in fact, the result of laws that prevented the operation of competitive forces to the benefit of what the political economists identified as “rentier interests.” The “fair field with no favors” called for by Adam Smith as the essential basis for the operation of markets has been undermined by powerful elites. The system we call “capitalism” is really built on centuries-old “landlordism.” Landlordism arose when laws were changed to permit the purchase, sale and mortgaging of land. Agrarian landlordism expanded when peasants were removed from land in order to raise sheep and cattle, and the land was commercially exploited to meet the demand for minerals and other natural resources. Agrarian landlordism did not disappear; it merely evolved. Rich landlords acquired business interests. Rich owners of businesses acquired vast land holdings. Landed wealth, capital-owning wealth penetrated the financial and insurance sectors of economies.

[@answerman86]

@@nthperson I don't get it. Are you whining with all this gobbledygook that you didn't get and on the early early on and become a big rich capitalist? What your point? Are you having a problem with the fact that there are winners and losers in capitalism and the fact that you're a loser is making you a malcontent? The Commies have no right to take away God's gift to me of free will to make what I will out of my own life through my incentive, hard work and talent. It's best to not have a big bureaucracy taking their cut to run things with people that don't know what they're doing and would not have chosen what they do for their life's work. There is no system other than capitalism that has lifted so many people out of poverty and squalor. Marxism makes everyone equal all right, equally poor. (Unless you're a party member of the court) The only thing that is falling apart in capitalism is too much Marxism being injected into it. (And too much corporate conglomerates and their merging with government and that's a very definition of fascism) we don't want your God damn Fundamental Transformation to take us away from what the founding fathers envisioned and set into place by immersing us into Marxism. You know full well that the application of Marxist ideology has resulted in the slaughter and starvation 120,000,000 people during the 20th century. How lamebrain stupid you have to be to want to bring it here ??????????????????

[@Yor_gamma_ix_bae]

You need to head back to remedial summer school for English.

[@TheGodlessGuitarist]

I wish folks would take time to consider what kind of society evolves from a system that rewards greed, ruthlessness and selfishness whilst penalising the lack of such characteristics.

[@patrickortiz2898]

Foolishness you dont have to be any of those things and still provide for your family and yourself. Of course people are free to be like that but under communism you are not free at all so ill settle for the occaisonal ass hat that a group of supposedly smarter people telling me how and where to live thank you very much

[@olympiahendrix4392]

we are in it till our necks now! and it got to stop!

[@williamrockwell9705]

Human reality is not going to just go away because you have a government managing the means of production. You will just give those people even more power.

[@itsoktobehappy461]

I’ll take a bit of greed over losing all incentive to do anything all day

[@elioftheforest]

Needs redebating to account for last 7 years especially 2020

[@equinox2584]

@Ronald Reagan Trump supporters were the smart ones? Biden is insane? Biden is currently passing a plan that will give hundreds of thousands of jobs while also fixing the infrastructure in America that has long since needed fixing. Trump wanted to protect us from space isis, Trump wanted to well actually I am not sure what he wanted to do because he didn't really do anything during his 4 years other than kill over 200k people will corona.

[@equinox2584]

@Ronald Reagan What massive inflation? The inflation that was originally caused by Trump's stimulus bills? But now lets look at what Biden is doing, he is passing an infrastructure bill that will create thousands of jobs and fix the long broken infrastructure in America. He is doing more in his first few months than Trump in his entire presidency.

[@deusbeowulf6039]

"It's finding ways to keep itself going outside of the free market"... Tax payer funds for corporate bail out has joined the chat

[@Matt-jw2yo]

It's hilarious that Judith says that the tackling of inequality in Latin America by the likes of Lula Da Silva is "low hanging fruit". I feel sure she'd have a different opinion if it was a right wing government overseeing such incredible positive change.

[@eggizgud]

She teaches at LSE! But I guess her students get to sharpen their thoughts thanks to hers.

[@smujismuj]

Did any of them discuss the effects of economic growth and the corresponding increase in consumption of resources, which Capitalism requires, on the environment?

[@Ciph3rzer0]

God. Can't stand listening to unimaginative capitalist bootlickers.

[@paulaustinmurphy]

It's an easy and cheap game to say that "Marx was right". All its takes is some artfully-selected texts (the embarrassing ones about Jews, etc. are usually ignored), some convoluted reasoning, some vague analogies with contemporary events, etc. Of course, the same is true of many other theorists, philosophers and religious prophets. This perennial need to demonstrate that "Marx was right" is clearly theological in nature. It's like religious leaders and theologians attempting to proof every sentence in a religious text "right" and (as the cliche has it) "more relevant today than ever". Religion will never die. And the religion of Marxism will never die. He's still a brilliant weapon against capitalism - despite being right or wrong. ("The point isn't to interpret the world: it's to change it.") He's still a much-admired prophet. And he's still *wrong* on most counts... Of course, anti-Marxists must resist the desire to say that Marx was wrong about everything. Marx was right about *some* things - as were many other economists and writers of his generation. However, admitting that Marx was right on some things, doesn't make one a Marxist. That said, claiming flat out that "Marx was right" makes one a theological Marxist (as Professor Terry Eagleton, mentioned in the video, is).

[@richardmayger2716]

I’ve heard nothing about the distribution of surplus which is the key point of Marxism

[@ceoofantifa6245]

No l, it's historical materialism

[@The.Isadorable]

Am I the only one who is baffled by seeing Tristram Hut defend Marx merely 2 years before he started inciting resistance against Jeremy Corbyn who is not nearly as far left as Marx

[@DipakBose-bq1vv]

When I was a student I read the Harrod Model which proved mathematically that capitalism is basically unstable.

[@powrobe2]

@Hoang Long Nguyen Explain how it is better than anything.

[@powrobe2]

@Hoang Long Nguyen I feel like you are a liar. I never mentioned an ideology...just material fact. If you refer to Staliinism as socialism, you truly are a university idiot. Try reading. Try to challenge yourself or just be a malleable moron.

[@powrobe2]

@Hoang Long Nguyen I bet you used to pay your mother for her breast milk. You stay a capitalist puritan. Your education was worthless.

[@powrobe2]

@Sam Farza I suppose Trotsky is completely ignored by revisionists like you. Capitalism is the only answer even if it leads to planetary destruction and WW3.

[@powrobe2]

@Sam Farza I think it would be easier to "stabilize" an active volcano than capitalism. You are really sold on keeping the masses dumbed down. Good luck with your campaign.

[@dordiwesterlund2528]

This is not a debate. This is some mostly old guys and one stupid woman each giving a at best mediocre speech. If you want a debate, ask a specific question. For ex., Marx predicted a tendency of the rate of profit to fall - can we see this tendency at work today? Marx predicted much of the current ecological crisis on the basis of the theory of the metabolic rift. Or can someone deny it? Marx was the first to analyse what is now called unequal ecological exchange. Do we see such exchange at work at the modern world, yes or no? Marx said that capitalism functions on the basis of exploitation of labour, the creation of surplus value. Is globalization today based on labour cost, yes or no? Like that woman in there says that Marx had nothing really relevant to say about the financial sector, but Marx analysed financialization as a direct consequence of capital that can no longer be invested profitably in the productive economy. That second old guy mentions that Marx had nothing to say about automatization (as it used to be called). Read Grundrisse. It just proves you never read a text of Marx in your life. There are studies about all of this and often not by Marxists which confirm these theses. And finally, Marx said that in a socialist society the state would die off because it simply would not longer have a role to play. Does it make sense to blame Marx for Stalin and Honecker? We should do better than this all of us together and we can all start right now by starting to inform ourselves and think for ourselves. Doubt everything! Anyone knows who said that?

[@donnygv27]

The capitalist guys do not understand Marx. It appears as though they've either gotten their Intel from other peoples' summaries of his works, or they selectively read some of it and actually didn't understand the perspective, mindset and therefore positions, which is totally fair if you've only gone over his work a couple times. it's pretty dense once you get past the basic, surface level calls to action of works like the communist manifesto. There's nothing wrong with not understanding Marxism, unless you're going to try and speak at length on it. As a result, they actually end up, at a couple points, arguing in agreement with his actual written beliefs, and I find that very amusing

[@sirherbert6953]

The 4th speaker really made little sense. Marx did not belive that wages would fall. He believed they would rise only at a slower rate then the prodit on capital as he states in wage elabor and capital. He misrepresented the labor theory of value, which surprised me since he is part of the Adam Smith institute who himself was an adherent of the ltv. Marx very clearly states that use value exists and that it must be different in order for trade to accure as well as that only labor that contributes to use value is productive.

[@ericmacrae6871]

@@sirherbert6953 I have recently started to study Das Kapital and the one thing that I am noticing is that all the criticism against Marxism are all fallacious arguments. but hey what can we do right?

[@justicenow999]

What I find curious about this debate is that none of the speakers addressed what the inherent contradiction in capitalism is. There was not a mention of surplus value, or what I like to call excess value. The inherent contradiction of capitalism is the result of a sizable portion of the wealth being taken by stock market players who add no labor value to the product. They simply live off their proceeds. This is the case with stocks and also interest charges. They both create excess value which unbalances the economy. In order for capitalism to survive it must constantly expand, grow, in order to exploit new markets in order to cover the excess value. Capitalism has survived up until now by expanding and exploiting the far reaches of the planet, including "communist" China. But once these markets are saturated, this will be the death toll of capitalism as we know it. Hopefully, we will see a new market where loans and investments are made thru publicly owned banks and financial agencies which will charge a minimal interest rate. Worker owned cooperatives will thrive. Cooperate boards will be populated not by stock holders but by worker/owners. Excess value therefore will be eliminated and this new economy, which I named "free enterprise socialism", will thrive. One more thing. Capitalism has survived in some measure due to the flexibility and cooperative spirit inherent in a functioning democracy. The democracy in the USA has been slowly eroded by the influence and domination of big money. This is nowhere more apparent as in the Supreme Courts decision on Citizens United. Defining corporations as "people" as referred in to the Constitution is hastening the implosion of capitalism by removing democratic safeguards.

[@kickasskdf]

Giving power to those who have not earned it will be the wasted potential in your vision. The co-op boards you are talking about are already in place with any company with stock options. Money and power are correlated to adding value in capitalism. Also dividends and interest are not wasted or excess in capitalism because with interest you are loaning money to somebody to fund them adding value and with dividends from stocks you are partial owner in a business so adding a partial amount of value that the business is producing.

[@andrewx7806]

@@kickasskdf what you wrote is true but what I wrote is also true. Excess value causes inflation. Inflation leads to debt. Debt leads to capital accumulation and inequality. Excess debt can crush capitalism. Stock holders are not co-op boards. They have essentially no say on how a company is run.

[@kickasskdf]

@@andrewx7806 too much debt can definitely cause recessions and depressions in capitalism and is a problem but also is a needed balance to the growth capitalism drives. Kind of like a reset button. The wealth inequality is less of an issue for me because not all people add the same value. Imbalances definitely occur though. Good points overall, just a tough discussion to have on chat rather than over some beers haha.

[@charleswilliams624]

I will not lower myself to watching this. In 72 years on the planet none of the rivals to capitalism has given any power to people in general. My conclusion is all the other "ism"s have caused more deaths that are in effect wholesale in large numbers. Most particularly they crush emotionally and physically any resistance to their inefficiency. Truth be told no one on this debate can solve how to fairly have a system of work that benefits benefits people equally. It is beyond the ability of with man. History is replete

[@olympiahendrix4392]

Brilliant! Justicenow999. Merry Xmas to you and yours.

[@AbandonEarth911]

Let us all help to speed the day when this wonderful earth and its rich resources are held in common for the benefit of all humanity.

[@stevemora7845]

Very well put!

[@papichulo4171]

Not profits, people.

[@ceoofantifa6245]

We can only hope

[@bicyclist2]

Capitalists will call this Communism. And use all there money and power to prevent this from happening.

[@freyfaust6218]

the problem is... who will hold them for us? Administrators? Centralized power always resolves as unaccountable.

[@Luke-tt3dt]

There are two aspects of capitalism that I believe this debate completely neglected to address. 1) The tendency, within capitalist systems, for wealth (and therefore political power, in the form of media control, lobbying and cronyism), to become increasingly consolidated over time, and the tendency for larger monopolies to swallow up their competition - competition being a necessary condition for markets to create wealth and prosperity that benefit humanity as a whole, and therefore for capitalism to be sustainable in the long-term. 2) Capitalism's need for endless, exponential growth, in order to make it worthwhile to hold and invest capital in the first place. This is a mathematical and logical impossibility - infinite growth cannot be sustained with finite resources. For those two reasons, I believe capitalism will eventually fall and be replaced by a better system. It probably won't fall in our lifetimes, or our children's lifetimes. And Marx was perhaps ultimately wrong about exactly *how* capitalism will collapse under its own contradictions. But ultimately, I believe the core principle of Marxist dialectical materialism will prove itself right, given enough time.

[@bobover6474]

Your never going to get a good debate on capitalism from millionaires.

[@Rhiorrha]

What's causing capitalism to fail are the socialist/marxist policies that have been introduced into it.

[@andreasandersen8858]

social policies is what's keeping capitalism alive. It would destroy itself in a decade without such corrections.

[@SuperHumex]

Tell that to norway, curently the best place to live in the world.

[@maryfountain4202]

Andreas Andersen Absolute rubbish, you're confusing the antics of the banks with collusion by politicians (who've let them do whatever they want with their depositers money) and an economic system

[@maryfountain4202]

gespilk Piketty is wrong - all over the newspapers in the UK. The independent ONS, office of national statistics is right.

[@normalizedinsanity4873]

Dont be fucking stupid there is no socialism in the US or anywhere else, there is no such thing as a socialist policy the problem is most men are babies and can't stand being wrong and the whole world will go down the toilet because childish stupidity, explain which policies are socialist. 76 posts two days ago about Marx, ,when asked to prove what they were saying, not one could do it, no one

[@JustMe-uc1lt]

What a brilliant debate: erudite and thought-provoking. I enjoyed each and every speaker immensely immensely. Thank you.

[@leonardmoriarity3612]

Capialism is. By by.

[@Rotebuehl1]

@@leonardmoriarity3612 Simply let's see...

[@williamparker1085]

more useless blather

[@lindalarsson1436]

@@leonardmoriarity3612 Whatever WEF is in charge

[@lindalarsson1436]

Iits a very old video 1O years ago. Dec. 2022

[@incaseinever]

There is ideology...then there is the outcome. People fall for ideology and promises....everytime!, but sometimes you have food to eat.

[@tusharsingh4543]

"Value is based on demand" only exists in a theoretical world where price fixing and inelastic demand doesn't exist. I doubt many people want drug companies to needlessly price gouge life-saving drugs or other healthcare services. This completely ignores the supplier's wants when it comes to assessing what they want their goods and services to cost and taking advantage of how desperate a consumer is obtain their needs, aka save their life.

[@psychonaut689]

I wanted to challenge this point too. I think value is based on many things. Their is a difference between value and price and cost. Economists often see value in monetary terms.

[@kiwitrainguy]

OPEC play this game as well. They reduce production of oil so as to increase the price of it.

[@mornnb]

Well, your example is one in which we have given a company a legal monopoly over a drug, see for a market to function there needs to be competition. If you outlaw competition a market doesn't work. I'd argue it is not so much a criticism of the idea of demand as value as it is a criticism of the idea of intellectual property.

[@mornnb]

​@@kiwitrainguy I very much agree with the comment in the debate that capitalism is a system of cooperation. OPEC knows that if they push the price too high they will destroy demand. OPEC's survival hence depends on their customers survival, so they have to carefully select a price that is a balance of their concerns that also doesn't financially destroy their customers.

[@cameroncameron2826]

True - including here being no evidence of that type of specialist drug ever reaching anyone in a marxist regime. Nobody knows the answer to all this when the predicament is ruled by corruption in every type of economy.

[@z3020979]

To be honest, I don’t mind bailing out the banks, but the bank should pay back. Tax money is tax payers money.

[@PrimusPete]

yes definitely, I don't quite understand why they haven't yet paid back the trillions we have given them. If you or I ever went bust, would the gov't just give us money? nope. It's a real scandal and it's causing so much trouble in the world. Outrageous.

[@sandracalderin6115]

@@PrimusPete agree it should be paid back!!

[@sandracalderin6115]

@Vexalord you souds like Spanish vocabulary in regards of Marxism .the day this country becomes Socialist Marxism I'M GOING TO STOP WORK SO YOU COULD TAKE CARE OF ME AND MY HOLE FAMILY, and going to call all my relatives that still lives in my original country to vome over the border so you could take csre of them too

[@sandracalderin6115]

@Vexalord that is right we should all be free to work for whom ever we want the state country should not dictate my life that should be my decision.and if you want to slave your self for the community other people that should be your decision but it should not be imposed up on any one freedom over anything

[@sandracalderin6115]

@Vexalordanthropology is the study of human behavior has nothing to do with decision of human, some people are responsible other irresponsibly some are industrious ,others their priority is trying to blame other for their lazy behavior and try to get others to take care of them, that is the reason their is no equally of out come. think everyone is responsible for the life they want for them self and their family( of course as human we have the responsibility to care for the sick ,handicap, ..) but all of us work and should buy our health insurance through work place not the government , because then we loose freedom .the government took over to much power in one place no balance , it life have to balance and the direction of our lives should be our

[@smujismuj]

One thing these discussions rarely touch on is that there are billions of people whose lives are effected by decisions made in board rooms. I'm trying to think of when I have ever heard people at this level discuss whether or not these board members have any moral right to that power.

[@incaseinever]

In communism (from history) there are no boardrooms, only one person decides.

[@zacharyb2723]

we mostly agree that they don't

[@Luke-tt3dt]

The Divine Right of Shareholders

[@billyb4790]

Just because capitalism isn’t perfect does not make Marx right.

I mean. I can't even buy or rent a house anymore with the wage I'd make at my age, yet everyone expects you to move out at 18. I'm 21 and I still don't earn enough as I'm forced to study to get a good job and part-time isn't generating a good income. If I go for a loan, I'd have to have a partner to get close to enough for a house. Netherlands also has loads of taxes. Most products 21%. Essential products 9% (used to be 6). But we already pay up in taxes on our income. To the congregration we pay taxes, for power, water, etc we all pay taxes. On money we inherit we pay taxes. If my parents win the lottery, if they pay me some money there will be a lot of tax on that. The Netherlands is basically a tax-ridden disease. All the while we don't get fixed contracts as easily anymore, so when your salary is about to increase or you get close to a fixed contract you end up getting fired. Also got employment forms that end up being more expensive due to becoming your own individual legal entity, where you will have to pay insurance, pay towards your pension, etc. It's stupid what's going on down here.

[@johnkovic3357]

I admire your frustration with the current situation in your country, but I can tell you the polar opposite is happening in the US. Americans, including myself, do not have enough to pay for medical bills, let alone housing and education. We live in a society that wants to slash taxes at whatever cost, while allowing corporate powers to raise the prices of basic goods and services to unthinkable prices. I went to the emergency room two years ago for an allergic reaction, and had to pay $150 for a tablet of Tylenol - that is a metaphor of the system I am describing.

[@DanLetts97]

For the record, having a partner is exactly what people used to do. You got married and bought a house together and then raised a family. That hasn’t changed

@@DanLetts97 Indeed. However, it has become almost completely impossible to find affordable housing. The social rental properties (lower prices - around 700 a month - that you need to be below a certain threshold in yearly income for) have a 10 year waiting list in most municipalities. In Amsterdam, the average rental price is far higher than minimum wage. The free rental market, properties throughout the country start at 1400€ per month, which is 200€ shy of the minimum wage of 1600€ at 40hrs per week.

[@ivanandreevich8568]

This is a very poor debate by the usual IQ2 standards. The cronies arguing against the motion are not capitalists. Bring in some libertarians & classical liberals please.

[@samuellaver1108]

You're implying that Libertarians can argue a whole deal better on the case? Capitalism-especially when left unchecked-will boil down to a monopoly. It is the nature of capitalism, and the result of competition.

[@DivingDonut]

Sam Hall Please then, name 1 Monopoly that was created without government intervention or coercion.

[@samuellaver1108]

It depends. Capitalist governments are just as corrupt as capitalism itself-I support neither, in case you can't tell. Through governments fixing the interest rates, often businesses will decide investment depending on the MEC of the return. So, inherently, oligopolies have been created with governmental help. If you also look right back to the first transcontinental railway in America (when it was beginning to develop), a monopoly on the trains formed, and that was, as far as I'm aware, without governmental help. Let me guess, I need to "learn basic economics," right?

[@DivingDonut]

Sam Hall Dont know. Do you know basic economics? The Railroads were subsidized at the time (when I read the wikipedia article about this correctly). Thus no Monopoly until now.

[@samuellaver1108]

...do I know basic economics? Yes, I do. Quite well. If I didn't, I wouldn't be a Marxist.

[@lokeshkumarray7560]

Indian philosophy is the way forward.

[@petonovy]

Unbelievable. So many characteristics of "capitalism" (from the speech of Marxist) and no mentioning of process of private property, competition, insentives and free trade (not regulated and influenced by state by central bank, all which are not part of capitalism). Foggy picture of trembling "capitalism" described by Marx and marxist in this debate is obvious by looking around, and even at history of east block of Europe. Look at North Korea - do you like this kind of society??

[@Celrador]

+Peter Nový Sorry, but your comment is essentially ignoring everything that socialists stand for. North Korea officially turned away from Leninism years ago. The Eastern Bloc also was/their remnants are state capitalist. The state is the owner of the means of production and manages them through a Command Economy. The whole point of a command economy is to manage the economy in a top-down manner as if it were a capitalist enterprise. The idea of Leninists was: Start a revolution and seize control over the state >> establish a one-party dictatorship >> use this to seize control over the means of production and create a command economy to bring the economy on the adequate level of industrialization that is deemed necessary for the transition to socialism >> decentralize the means of production and establish worker control over them This is an Authoritarian route, that got heavily criticized by anarchists, socialists and communists even before it got first implemented. The political stream of socialism isn't uniform. There are a lot of different substreams with Leninism and the Leninist-inspired substreams (i.e. Maoism or Stalinism) only being a small fraction of them. A typical criticism of this approach is, that you just bundle the political struggles that are usually spread out over multiple parties into one party, where the politicians backstab each other to be at the top. As all the means of production are then in the hands of a small interest group, you essentially create the incentive to not give the power away anymore and create something far worse than capitalism. There are also other approaches though, like democratic socialism, where you try to create the "dictatorship of the proletariat" by establishing a (half)-direct democracy in the country and then incentivise the restructuring of business to socialist enterprises. (A socialist enterprise would for example be the Mondragon Corporation, WinCo in the US, or the 7.600 cooperatives of Germany with their 20.000.000 members.) Socialists seek to abolish the employer-employee duality, that is seen as an oppressive and illegitimate hierarchy, by making the employees the shareholders of the business and therefore themselves their own employers, who run the business democratically. (Investments can still happen via contracts rather than shares of ownership over a business.) And the definition of capitalism used by Marx is also important in this context here: Capitalism describes the private ownership over the means of production, the existence of wage slavery and private accumulation of capital. (Important note: Your car, house or computer are personal property, not private property. Socialists don't want to take that away from you. They advocate for transforming businesses into employee-owned cooperatives.) - A traditional German socialist

[@petonovy]

+Celrador terminology you use is not related to any type of economy. If central planning is in your therm command economy I still not get any logic in your therm state capitalism. Central planning (characteristic of socialistic economy, if without private ownership of means of production is based on communistic theory). This was a case of all counties of Eastern block and also is in North Korea. On other hand stare capitalism does not exists for simple reason: state is not privately own business.

[@Celrador]

Peter Nový _"terminology you use is not related to any type of economy"_ What exactly do you mean by that? The socialism/capitalism question is a question about the ownership over the means of production, while the central-planning/market-economy question is about the allocation of resources. An entire economy is a complex construct that can be defined by a lot of different approaches on how to solve various problems. _"If central planning is in your therm command economy"_ A command economy is specified by a strict hierarchical, undemocratic system that is enforcing a centrally planned economy. (Which is in opposition to a centrally planned economy in a state with direct democracy.) _"I still not get any logic in your therm state capitalism."_ It is state capitalism, due to the fact, that the state itself is enforcing wage slavery and tries to accumulate capital. The state is externally (i.e. towards other countries) acting like an individual capitalist, but is a command economy internally, that is managing its entire economy as if it was a capitalist enterprise. _"Central planning (characteristic of socialistic economy, if without private ownership of means of production is based on communistic theory)"_ Socialist economies don't need to be centrally planned. That is a common misconception, only because the Eastern Bloc prefered this model. There is also market economy socialism, or decentralized and democratic economic planning. We socialists only really agree on the fact, that the labourers themselves should own and control their own workplace. In how we can achieve this and which other things we need to change is where the socialist movement splits up into its many substreams. There are far more concepts out there than just "free market" or "centrally planned". _"This was a case of all counties of Eastern block and also is in North Korea."_ I agree and I am not a big fan of this approach. (I personally would prefer market economy socialism as the next step. Trying to incentivise the transformation of capitalist into socialist enterprises by state interventions [i.e. subsidies], that got democratically decided upon.) _"On other hand stare capitalism does not exists for simple reason: state is not privately own business."_ I will just give you the definition of Wikipedia, which is pretty much spot on. _"State capitalism is usually described as an economic system in which commercial (i.e. for-profit) economic activity is undertaken by the state, where the means of production are organized and managed as state-owned business enterprises (including the processes of capital accumulation, wage labor, and centralized management), or where there is otherwise a dominance of publicly listed corporations of which the state has controlling shares."_ Source: Williams, Raymond (1983). "Capitalism". Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society Another example for state capitalism rather than the Eastern Bloc economies would be our privatized "Deutsche Bahn AG". (Our German, formerly public service, railway company, which got privatized with the German state holding the majority of the shares.)

[@petonovy]

+Celrador OK, I see that you do not talk about anything which is connected to experience based on economical, social or psychological experience. Nor on universal use of private property and freedom of choice. Please realize that you are in favour of the model which ignores individual and takes model as most important. It is easy to create model for others, give poor taken from rich and feel like charity. If anything is forced on even one person it is invasion to private property and personal freedom of decision. I agree that there are many theories, many models and many "economists", but problem is that most of them play chess with people as people need their assistance with move thru life - from education to job. Take hands of me mr.Marx. I know that if you do not own production means you can not fail and that's good only for bad business which is bad for me.

[@Celrador]

Peter Nový _"OK, I see that you do not talk about anything which is connected to experience based on economical, social or psychological experience."_ There are more than enough examples of real life applications of these concepts I mentioned. _"Please realize that you are in favour of the model which ignores individual and takes model as most important. It is easy to create model for others, give poor taken from rich and feel like charity. If anything is forced on even one person it is invasion to private property and personal freedom of decision."_ And the Land Enclosure Acts, that took public land and gave it to private landlords wasn't an infringement on the public freedom and the personal freedom of each individual of the public?! This decision made by monarchs and a few of their private friends wasn't forced upon the public, which is made up of individuals, according to you?! To quote Jean-Jacques Rousseau here: _"The first man who, having fenced in a piece of land, said "This is mine," and found people naïve enough to believe him, that man was the true founder of civil society. From how many crimes, wars, and murders, from how many horrors and misfortunes might not any one have saved mankind, by pulling up the stakes, or filling up the ditch, and crying to his fellows: Beware of listening to this impostor; you are undone if you once forget that the fruits of the earth belong to us all, and the earth itself to nobody."_ _"I know that if you do not own production means you can not fail and that's good only for bad business which is bad for me."_ What exactly are you trying to say here? Also note, that you are entitled to your own opinion and I am merely trying to explain you the view of a socialist, as you heavily misrepresented socialist and marxist theory in your comments.

[@3Zeddy2]

"That is what we are arguing about" oh no, you don't get to claim you are debating when you declare man's self interest is immoral, and that in order to be moral you want a gun pointed in his face.

[@jayvis123111]

Both of these positions are SUPER fact left in the united states and I'm a big fan of that.

[@loganmartin4435]

It honestly just goes to show how far right america has become when even the position of reforming capitalism in the face of its collapse is a an extreme position.

[@whatwhat678]

@@loganmartin4435 Are you serious? What the hell do you mean “reforming capitalism”? A socialist president dishing money out to special interests is nothing to do with capitalism. Big banks too big to fail, decreed by government, is not capitalism at play. The federal reserve bank arbitrarily deciding how much money costs is not capitalism. You do know that socialism and communism is defined by government controlling the means of production, right? Just so you know, 2 + 2 still equals 4, but Jack Dorsey and Zuckerface, bezos and Pichai are doing everything they can to change that fact.

[@equinox2584]

@@whatwhat678 America is very far right economically we take in lots of taxes and yet we do not have universal healthcare like the rest of the developed world, we may have lots of wealth but all our wealth lies at the top while the working class suffers for the gain of the one. And your definition of socialism and communism is wrong, socialism the definition is the workers owning the means of production and communism is an extension of that philosophy that also adds a stateless and classes society, communism is a perfect utopia it will never happen like that we will always require a state.

[@dashboardkid21]

Bring this back next April. 10 years, a pandemic, the largest transfer of wealth ever! How would people opinions change?

[@dashboardkid21]

Also this place with people in the middle class, of course their opinions would be skewed "Against" Had this place been filled with paupers or at least an equal amount of both classes, the results then may have been different.

[@kurono1822]

capitalists: "capitalism is great, because capitalism is good" critics of capitalism: "we see that during the past decades, inequality has increased disproportionately and capitalists tend to abuse power to get governments do as they say, this is clearly....etc, etc"

[@lesegosibiya6829]

kurono1822

[@CynicalBastard]

@minecraft creeper Enjoy all those right-wing problematics increasing.

[@nicoruppert4207]

@minecraft creeper Libertarian socialism has entered the chat

[@grosstoastie1216]

Communist advocates: "The bourgeoisie are all dicks and we want the communists to give us freedom! Actual communists: Alright everyone! No freedom of religion! No free speech! No rights outside the right to follow your totalitarian overlords or that'll be another mass genocidal, frenzied display of power and mass starvation to keep you all in line! Eh, fuck it. If you're a physically healthy political dissident we'll forcibly harvest your organs from you while you're still alive because honest, hard working slaves need your heart and liver more than you do!

[@AndersonRandom]

The Wildest part was watching the 300 people vote "Against". The ones for the motion gave very detailed explanations with examples while the ones against the motion could never grab on to anything concrete. But I guess that's what you should expect from a room full of wealth and privilege.

[@EpicAlcatraz99]

Let's compare 2008 to umm idk..the entire 20th century.

[@questworldmatrix]

Until Reagan and so on dismantling of a lot of checks and balances, there was the New Deal and things like Glass Steagall.

[@haniqassim]

What gives the perception that capitalism works is its use of foreign colonialism and war.

[@ilovetech8341]

And communist based societies don't have war? Even the native Americans fought against each other.

[@xxxfaze_cumshotxxx7946]

@@ilovetech8341 they don't? a communist society wouldn't even need an army, what you saw in the USSR was a struggle to stay alive after what America tried to do. War goes on to this day and had communism taken the world by storm we would actually fucking CARE instead of just saying that this is rEaLiTy and hUmAn nAtUrE.

[@haniqassim]

@Ronald Reagan We as humans haven't reached a successful social system yet. All what we know have it's pros and cons. Recently though, communist China is winning against capitalist US.

[@sabineliebherr5765]

Would you please name the name of this malevolent lady who made the last contribution?

[@SovereignStatesman]

They will never get the point, that consumer-choices is meaningless without choice of GOVERNMENT.

[@alfabravo80]

Well worth a listen.

[@ncrtrooper1782]

The fact that he's right is sad. I wish it wasn't the case that capitalism is horrible, but it is. More people need to accept that and join the new Internationale.

[@annahelenwerner668]

Wake up

[@goldiz1978]

The same people sabotaged capitalism. I wouldn't trust them either way.

[@aswidener]

What is sorely lacking in debates of this sort, is a true definition of capitalism. Bailing out massive financial entities is not capitalism. That's closer to fasicsm - government control of private entities. Socialism and communism are state control of private resources. Another way to put that is force. Force of some collective against the free will of individuals. Capitalism in its simplest guise is absence of collective force. I am free to engage my resources in any non-forceful manner that I see fit provided I do not aggress against another. I am free to engage in any exchange that I wish, provided that my counterpart is also not forced to participate, but in turn engages out of his free will. All you who agree with "Marx is right" would unwittingly usher in a new totalitarian regime and squash human freedom, innovation and joy.

[@englishgoddess8238]

Happy you been to China ? Korea ? Russia ? Socialism is being a slave there’s a reason they want the system to change we will be total slaves and have no freedom.

[@guts1258]

@@aswidener You unironically did the “Socialism is when the government does stuff." meme.

[@rubentala4762]

Yanis Varoufakis says we are seeing a new system being born inside capitalism: techno-feudalism.

[@hamptonkearney3888]

so these guys think if you're poor, you should not have the ability to climb out of that, and that you should have to bow to the big central government with at least half your earnings. freedom is more important than profit.

[@nelsongonzalez4533]

It sounds familiar 😌 history repeats itself. Things like machines replacing humans in factories and other industries is happening now as it happened during the industrial revolution.

[@freyfaust6218]

every technological advance has opened new markets, refuting the idea that technology will put millions on death row. The expanding population, decreasing prices, increasing food security and access to basics and luxuries for the global population throughout this century is a clear refutation of luddite intransigence.

[@equinox2584]

@@freyfaust6218 Yeah the machine argument is pretty dumb the only one thing I can think that will really have an impact is self-driving trucks, they can drive all night perfectly without any stops this will remove truck stops business the truckers business, and many others which will probably result in a net negative but you never know with this stuff sometimes you think that will happen and then the opposite occurs. Though if we have all these recourses in such an abundant quantity why can we not share the love with everyone rather than locking in a pay wall?

[@freedomordeath89]

@@equinox2584 Not necessary. Cars destroyed the horse-drawn industry. All the "stops and rests" for horses employed thousands of people to mantain the horses, feed them etc (not just drive the cart/horse). Those jobs disappeared with the car. New jobs appeared. Jobs are not limited as socialists think, jobs are the natural result of people having free time and needs to satisfy, you will always find a job as long as there's a good environment for it, the role of the state is to create the environment for jobs, jobs will come along. Socialists instead want to create artificial jobs that are not needed.

[@equinox2584]

@@freedomordeath89 I never said I thought there wouldn't be jobs because of new tech I was just saying that I think the trucking industry as a whole is the thing most likely to cause problems in the future. We should not be manufacturing jobs and I am a socialist lol.

[@freedomordeath89]

@@equinox2584 YOu are probably not a socialist. Most people use the word without knowing the meaning. You are probably a social democrat which is really different.

[@kirklazenby1]

This aged well

[@mattgeer4778]

workers unite!

[@smujismuj]

I continue to suspect a pro-right leaning for IQ2. I almost always take exception to how the motions are worded. It's almost as if they metaphorically gerrymandered.

[@kdwyermedia]

It's a philosophical debate

[@karlmarx3431]

Told you so.

[@seasalt489]

Should have listened to you marx.

[@user-sm7og6fi3j]

Karl Marx Burn in hell. I hope Marx suffered greatly, his filthy, infected skin was a sign of the evil that dwelt within him. You're no better.

[@stevehain9572]

Karl Marx, you killed 120,000,000 people in the 20th century alone. You have poisoned our youth, infiltrated our education and damaged our great accomplishments. You are a very bad man.

[@Katerirades]

Best comment ever 😄

[@allenkuruvilla8905]

Ahm

[@KrutoiPersonazh]

The further kid exists from Soviet State in space and time the harder he suffered from it's tyranny)

[@RegnumHierosolymitanum1099]

Based Karl Marx

[@unclefester9113]

In this context - I suspect that Intelligence is being misused.

[@RonzigtheWizard]

Not misused, MISSING.

[@rumco]

I lost intelligence watching the mad ramblings by some on this panel.

[@smujismuj]

What doesn't get mentioned much is how the essential pull of the profit-motive-mindset makes every entity you do business with an opponent. That kind of potential-antagonism runs under everything we do.

[@freyfaust6218]

That is simply untrue. Most business is pacific. Someone does a service for you that they themselves price... construction, repair, maintenance, transport. You agree to pay them what they ask or you look for someone who offers the service at a price you can afford or think is fair. Its called VOLUNTARISM, and it is the only modern barometer for morality.

[@InArgCroitheGoDeo]

32:47 Marx & Engels never ignored Darwin’s theory of change. They acknowledged the fact that humanity is subject to the same natural laws as any other species but also that humanity is unlike any other species in that we have the capacity to transform and create our world through our labour in a way that goes beyond survival and reproduction. Marx said that humanity, like all beings, is in a constant battle against natural forces for survival. Technology or our ability to ‘outwit’ nature determines how we interact with each other and with nature. The Marxian dialectic is both evolutionary (via the forces of production) AND revolutionary (via the relations of production). I’ve never been sold on Marx’s stagism, but to believe that capitalism is the final stage of human history is just naive and ridiculous

[@kleinefuchsdrachen3621]

Midway through this video, I now think of Capitalism as slowly crumbling away as the result of its coping mechanisms to fight back the crises carried out and executed by the growing technological advancements. Though Capitalism itself will not collapse entirely yet, it will eventually become unrecognizable as technology continues to advance and create new problems.

[@Knubbelbubbelbubbel]

The points on the 3 pro-capitalists were laughable. Human nature, it will sort itself out, just let it roll. Pure status quo ideology!

[@MM-du7je]

The first guy really destroyed any semblance of debate, everyone else seemed like they were backpedaling from there.

[@trstenik100]

the first guy is total moron

[@bilanmali7081]

Not really. The first guy had to luxury to puke whatever he wanted because he never foresaw what could be coming next

[@MM-du7je]

@Ronald Reagan Oh geez do you post on /his/? Stop misusing hyphens.

[@TimothyCihal-pn7fm]

The history of all previous societies has been the history of class struggles. KM

[@damianbylightning6823]

And also struggles between generations, the sexes, regions, faiths, languages, identities, customs, mores, looks, fashions... What he noticed was said better by Acton - and Acton said it in a manner which was opposed to power and to the fascism which was aided by Marx's thought. Whereas, Marx was a man who gave ammo to loonies. Marxism - that great liberatory doctrine - was and remains fascism in drag! Apart from not being as crude and stupid as Engels, what exactly did this total fuckwit ever get right? It doesn't really amount to much, does it? Oh yeah, KM was such an insightful thinker. LOL!

[@cocotaveras8975]

Timothy Cihal As much as I oppose many of the aspects of socialism, he was right. He was one-hundred-percent right on the money!

[@damianbylightning6823]

@@cocotaveras8975 Uhh, big capital was what he got right. My clock in my dining room has stopped - it will be correct at 19:35. Do I call my clock Charlie Marx? Even this coincidental thing is connected to confusion, wishful thinking and applying best case and worst case scenario - depending on which outcome the great seer wanted. Big capital is related to the egregious idea that capital is all-powerful, all-conquering and can't be stopped - but is also too stupid to see its end coming or work out how to stop its allegedly inevitable collapse. This will happen despite the fact that Charlie Marx had already predicted how it will happen! He was a parody prophet and gave us a comic version of Judaeo-Christianity. His view of history is so stupid that it takes immense effort and imagination to explain away all the absurdities. The only difference between modern crackpots like anti-vaxxers, flat earthers and creationists OOH and and Marxists OTO is that Marxists have a better quality of denier of reality and excuser of idiocy - mostly funded at great public expense.

[@TimothyCihal-pn7fm]

@Doc Vega Yes, and like Rome the end will come when more have less. Uneducated hillbillies!

[@TimothyCihal-pn7fm]

@Doc Vega I have two battle stars and a purple heart, flleet Marinecorpman 1st Marine Division. Funny how I didn't see you there. You corporate bought and paid for Republican coward!

[@plasticvision]

lmao getting tristram hunt to defend marxism...

[@anactualcloud]

Why’s that funny?

[@plasticvision]

@@anactualcloud arch blairite tristram hunt defending marx? pull the other one!

[@shamarwright1133]

Marx is right and have been right since.

[@aza091234]

Real Democracy in Economy man, that's how the world will get better.

[@grb1969]

While a direct-democratic economic and political reform is necessary for social stability, it remains systematically insufficient to alter the in in sustainability of a commoditized, monetized, and financialized free-market economy. At minimum, a direct-democratic monetary system would be necessary for economic stability; but also may be insufficient as a methodology of managing the social order towards the goal of sovereign self-governance.

[@heidimelcarek3677]

As this first statement of the proponent of capitalism is speaking, saying that the problems are fixable - all I can think of is 'well, we tried that...it didn't work...obviously'.

[@zagyex]

Marx provided a valid critique of capitalism. But building an economy and social system on a critique is a fatal mistake. So the motion makes little sense.

[@arrystophanes7909]

I always found Karl much more hilarious than Groucho

[@1972hermanoben]

And yet, for all the hilarity, his legacy seems far harder to shift than Skid’s

[@olympiahendrix4392]

@@1972hermanoben you can say that again!😉

[@jeffmoore9487]

As we watch capitalism flounder, unable to move decisively to non-fossil fuel economics, and as its militarism gives way to WW2 scale genocide in Yemen, Marx again seems to provide the only way out to peace and prosperity.

[@seamonster936]

Is that humour? Not very well executed if it is. Marx never saw a way to peace and prosperity. Marx could not conceive that market economies could engender compromises between the owners of capital and the labouring classes. Because their (him and Engels') historical context is that immutable forces drive history, now this is true to an extent, the Industrial Revolution did occur in Britain because as an island trade and empire came easier, etc., but they could not fathom of individuals driving history. All this lead to his spectacular failure to recognise Capitalism's dynamism, if it weren't for enterprising Germans, Capitalism, which floundered wouldn't have moved us to cars and we would be living in cities full of dead horses. Imposition of energy regulations will solve nothing. Marxist genocide actually exceeds the scale of the Second World War and speaking of militarism, the Soviet Union invaded Finland, the Baltic States, Poland and Afghanistan, built a wall in Berlin, tried to place nuclear weapons in Cuba and crushed dissent in Hungary.

[@gopr3117]

Communism is fundamentally impossible. We are mammals with intrinsic individual agency. We are not a hive species. Marx’s communism is a utopian impossibility. After capitalism comes destruction... not the “utopian” prophecy of Communism.

[@RonzigtheWizard]

​@@gopr3117 Capitalism is racing towards destruction on numerous levels. We're on the verge of a nuclear WWIII and extinction by climate catastrophe is racing at us at break neck speed.1% of the world owns almost all the wealth while ever greater numbers or the 99% are unable to even feed themselves adequately. The divide between politics and economics has been destroyed so politicians sell themselves to the highest bidders. What is needed is a socialist political system with a firm wall between it and a capitalist economic system. When capitalism bought the government there was nothing left to protect the people from unrestrained greed which is the predominant force driving capitalism.

[@answerman86]

The only problem with our capitalism is the all pervasive Marxism that is causing the fascist phenomenon of merging of corporate and government. Marxism destroys everything it touches. Just look at what Marxist propaganda has done to your pathetic excuse for a mind. You know full well that the application of Marxist ideology has resulted in 120,000,000 people slaughtered in starved to death in the 20th century, yet you think it a good idea to bring it here.

[@fredgillespie5855]

@@gopr3117 - Amish or and Hutterite type communities are a better answer. All a question of scale and living within our environmental limits.

[@84KCEE]

At 1.06.00 finally the most important point

[@kpw84u2]

Yes!

[@MikA-db2]

Cuba seems to be very good at looking after not only its own people, but those of other nation, with its medical and other skills expertise. And this while sanctions are in place against this country for no other reason than its political leanings, such is liberty and freedom of will!

[@josephruiz7233]

Cuba's regime only exists because of foreign aide. It's a Capital Offense punishable by death for a Cuban Subject to emigrate from the Country, and their population is dying off, having been in a slow but steady decline since the 1970's.

[@iam8401]

@@josephruiz7233 Why you guys constantly lying? Why would Cuban leaders keep those who wanted to see world if they don't like Cuban regime, that is the profit here, if the regime can't even feed them? Who sold you your math grades? _For decades, Cubans trying to flee repression, food insecurity and economic devastation boarded rickety boats, risking their lives to get to American shores. Now they are coming in record numbers, but this time on foot, their flight aided by Nicaragua, which dropped visa requirements late last year for Cubans, giving them a toehold in Central America to journey overland through Mexico to the United States. American officials have accused Nicaragua’s authoritarian president, Daniel Ortega, of enacting the policy to pressure the United States to drop sanctions on his country. The surge in Cubans trying to cross the southern border represents just a portion of migrants who have at times overwhelmed border officials as undocumented crossings continue to rise under the Biden administration. March set a record for the number of people caught crossing illegally in a single month in two decades: 221,303._

[@donaldwhittaker7987]

Business precedes politics and thus controls it. It is the way of nature. There is always a ruling class and politicians do their bidding. Don't despair. Just do good work, teach your children to be curious and to think clearly, and join your ancestors.

[@OMGAnotherday]

Whose here in lockdown May 2020!

[@OMGAnotherday]

2019 the situation is worse😩

[@magalygomez8114]

Welcome to 2020

[@BenMiner0110]

Magaly Gomez you haven’t seen shit yet. Lmfao

[@OMGAnotherday]

Datrén Higgins I definitely didn’t see 2020 coming ☹️

[@iart2838]

Capitalism: creates wealth for whom? That's the key question. Marx never disputed this, his aim was that the wealth needs to be distributed. Those who produce wealth are not rewarded, but exploited.

[@smujismuj]

One of the assumptions being made here is that a life of laboring for the unfair profits of the investment classes is acceptable.

[@edwardheaney3641]

If you consider it unacceptable, you are not being forced to participate.

[@yareyaredaz3522]

@@edwardheaney3641 but you are forced since we all live in the same sociaty. Refusing to go with the flow will mean you cant have a family or a regular life. Or worse to go starve to death. Your comment is stupid

[@edwardheaney3641]

@@yareyaredaz3522 You absolutely can, live off canned foods for 90% of your meals like they did. Don't use electronics, don't use modern cars which are safer and more reliable. Don't buy health insurance because you don't use modern medicine. You can live like them, but you won't because the modern standard of living is better.

[@yareyaredaz3522]

@@edwardheaney3641 so the only way to avoid the system is to live like an animal.You just made my point for me sir

[@edwardheaney3641]

@@yareyaredaz3522 And you've made my point for me, the system is what stops us from living like animals. Don't blame the system for all the good its done.

[@Akshayattr1]

it pains to witness that by now tha is 2020, marxism is seen as tragedy and capitalism is seen as ever great. right wing populaism and propoganda has run too deep on social media mostly among teens who do not understand economics.

[@caydcrow5161]

Bro just take a fucking look at the 20th century Moa and Stalin? Fascism and Socialism are terrible bro. Capitalism has made more people wealthy. People that are poor in America live better than moist people in all of history

[@Akshayattr1]

@@caydcrow5161 brazil, congo, ghana, indonesia, india, south Africa, egypt, pakistan and majority of whole world is a proof that capitalism doesn't work. These countries are capitalist and their gdp/capita and human development index is such lower than almost all socialist countries like USSR, china, cuba. This is evidence. Capitalism created wealth only in the first world because of colonialism which looted and profited all money from whole world. Colonialism and imperialism were two wheels of capitalism used to generate wealth for the minority.

[@Akshayattr1]

@@caydcrow5161 majority of capitalist countries are poorer and underdeveloped than socialist countries. Socialism made two super powers and economic giants like USSR and china.

[@caydcrow5161]

Akshay attri it’s funny all th countries you named at the top have something in common besides what you call “capitalism”. If you can figure it out I’ll give you a cookie

[@Akshayattr1]

@@caydcrow5161 sure. When something doesn't work label it socialism and when capitalism fails just that isn't capitalism. Hahaha you're great man

[@purplesnails22]

I always find the argument that Karl Marx was wrong about the labour theory of value because value is determined by demand quite funny. Sure, but how many people are demanding something that has had no labour input? I don't think there is a big market for turnips that are still in the ground.

[@paddywhack9261]

One of the most civilized panel debate that I've seen in too many years. But no apparent solid solution/s were put forth, unless I missed something, it was more like: "We'll see." Well, yes, we *will* see. But this rapacious form of capitalism is eating its own young.

[@thegreatonecometh200]

Automation will kill capitalism cause it will put millions out of work

[@royhuang9715]

There never will be solid solutions produced by human ever. Capitalism was a solution to feudalism, does it looked solid? Human can only replace one shitty system with another hopefully less shitty system.

[@paperfart3988]

The problems under capitalism would be way worse under any system based on Marxism

[@DFMoray]

There will be slavery until we are all masters of Love.

[@yourdedcat-qr7ln]

@@paperfart3988 I disagree

[@Luke-tt3dt]

It's rare that I agree with 100% of what a person says but I can't find fault with a single point made by Robin Blackburn here, he's a brilliant man who gets nowhere near the level of publicity that he deserves

[@KrunoslavStifter]

“Karl Marx was right, socialism works, it is just that he had the wrong species” ― Edward O. Wilson, The Ants