Marxism, Intelligence, And The Thing with Freddie DeBoer

[@ColemanHughesOfficial]

Glad you caught the show. Let me know what you think in the comments and I’ll reply as soon as I can. If you’re a regular listener and would like to show your support and gain access to exclusive talks with some incredible minds, check out the Coleman Unfiltered membership here: bit.ly/3B1GAlS

[@jshays007]

Thank you for all of the brilliant conversations you host. I sincerely appreciate your presence online.

[@avideorecord3585]

First and foremost, thank you. We must separate Marxism from Marxist Strategy. Marx and Engels discovered the atrocious abuse that unregulated (by a govt) capitalism had at that point resulted in. The antidote, Marx put forth, was to bind the abused victims by their class and status and in his Manifesto he proposed his solutions. The Strategy is identity based and can be placed upon and used on any class of people of whom you can bind by a common identify. Identity politics is unconstitutional and it suggest such in the terms that make it up. Human rights are inherent in every individual human animal; the right to speak, not to speak, move around freely and unencumbered, bear arms to protect one’s self and family, have one’s own beleifs, choose not to purchased the governments or some other corporations products or be fined, not to put experimental drugs into one’s own body and the bodies of their children and not to have the services benefits and privileges that their families have fought and died for, taken away as a result of exercising those rights not to vaccine or purchase healthcare. How many have died for our constitution and rights to private property, free speech, basic human autonomy? Who here is willing to say on here that it is a benefit (what govt is instituted for) to have the political party that happens to be in office to a. Disarm you b. Force you to purchase something you don’t want or pay a fine. C. Put an experimental vaccine into your child’s body against your will

[@LeviNotik]

Coleman, good work as always. Would be much appreciated if you added chapters to your videos so we could find the parts we're particularly interested in.

[@LeviNotik]

@@igstan hahaha hey lonut, fancy meeting you here!

[@scottwillis1355]

Seriously! Freddie DeBoer has no concept of the economy of language. Please add chapter markers at the points where he makes points (It makes it so much easier for the listener).

[@bd7913]

Great conversation. For an avowed Marxist, Freddie offers a very clear-eyed assessment of a number of issues.

[@swarming1092]

There’s ‘marxists’ (SJWs and race freaks) and then there’s Marxists. The latter are a tiny, tiny minority. But even if you’re not a Marxist, you will find an enormous amount of truly tremendous insight, analysis, and wisdom in them if/when you find them. You don’t have to agree about a final resolution to class warfare, for example, but you could follow them up to that point and acknowledge the tensions and then find non-Marxist ways to redress them.

[@builditwell]

This must be one of the most intelligent conversations I have listened to this year.

[@calangst]

Great discussion. I taught at Purdue in the 1990s and also observed that very few of my (non engineering) students really wanted to be there. Rather than really adding skills to people (or making them better people) what college often really does is filter out people who can't manage the patience and self-regulation needed to go through 4 years of doing what they are told. But as you observe, jobs - like working in the car industry before the 1980s that give an unskilled ish person - a very comfortable lifestyle - aren't around anymore. Trade schools, apprenticeship programs, fewer people going to college, and more honesty about the connection between college curriculum and jobs and life. THere are way to many PHDs in English and History than we can employ in serious research in those fields.

[@calangst]

Love the point about status anxiety. The best example I know is in nursing. The traditional route to an RN is an associate degree or just a tradeschool program. But many nurses lobby for a BS be required to become and RN. There are even many proposals to apply this retroactively - giving 10 years for non-BS/BA RNs to get their college degrees. And the classes that are different are the non nursing classes that are part of a liberal arts curriculum. So as you can imagine, there is no evidence that getting a BS/BA makes anyone a better nurse.

[@randygault4564]

Thanks for this. It's good to hear directly from kinds of voices we tend not to hear from.

[@MichaelPlatson]

Love it, this was a great conversation. Had an argument with someone who a while back about my use of the world "conservative" to describe someone's social/political leaning, for which I was criticized that "conservative" was a dog-whistle for "racist". So I asked what other word I should use to replace to meaning of "conservative" and was told to just say "racist" because that's what it meant. This was a non-starter for me, if there's no replacement word and "racist" surely didn't cover it then I will revert the definition of "conservative" to its original meaning and they could just deal with it. That seemed to end the argument.

[@LindaMitchell-q1t]

Such a joy to listen to such fresh and insightful dialog. Freddie sets the record straight about Marxism in important ways. I especially liked the ending discussion about how the medium has shaped the message. As usual, I want to tell everyone I know LISTEN TO THIS!

[@TheArtemis07]

High school dropout rates have decreased because high schools have lowered their graduation standards, says Deboer. Presumably he means that graduation tests are easier and that there is grade inflation. I concede that this may answer part of the trend, but couldn’t it as plausibly be that students now understand that college is the new high school, and they don’t want to have quit the level below that. They know they will never be able to get a good job if they don’t at least complete high school. There are now graduation coaches who keep at-risk students on track. In addition, more parents now have gone through higher education, no doubt resulting in their encouraging their kids to complete high school at the very lest. Too bad Deboer doesn’t bother to consider other possibilities. I’m in my 23rd year as an educator, and I can say confidently that Deboer needs to do more homework. Pun intended.

[@steph744]

really enjoyed that episode. not often we hear the fact that not that many college graduates are needed for our society but a lot of people in other jobs contribute to society and deserve to be recognised and get a living wage. I am french and we do have such schools too where you can go to learn how to be a farmer/ hairdresser/ cook/ baker/ plumber etc.. starts around 15 years old. works great for some kids. you can spend half your time working as an apprentice and the other half in school.

[@Warstub]

"Marxism does not promise equality, and in fact, both Marx and Engels state (independently) that true equality is impossible; ... any difference between two people can be expressed as inequality. So long as there's human difference there is going to bee inequality."

[@Chris_Patton]

I am prejudiced against college grads at this point. It seems to me that there are sociological "filters" in place that have made it easier to advance your career through organizations and institutions that wield power in our society if you are a willing to subsume your critical thinking capacity into the group think of the blob. And over the years those institutions have evolved into organizations that resist any kind of self awareness or reflection. I think that starts in college, where the student's success is largely defined by their avility to communicate back to the professor a regurgitated version of the professors own ideas. I graduated in 1994 at the top of my class, from a school ranked in the top twenty public highschools in the country. Took mostly AP from junior year on. Scored 1440 on my sat without any preparation or even much effort. Went to bard college on an almost complete academic scholarship. Was shocked by how easy it was. Dropped out, traveled around, eventually started working as a carpenter and fell in love with the trade. I dont know what it is about college because i didnt stay very long, but somehow it seems to educate people just enough to make them overestimate their intelligence and competency, which is a great recipe for stupidity apparently. During the pandemic, the contrast was dramatic. Every tradesman i knew could see that there were clearly agendas that were steering policy away from common sense and the common good, and towards obvious economic and political interests. College grads on the other hand... were simultaneously full of certainty and hubris, and also terrified of applying any critical analysis to the situation at hand. They were certain that their fellow technocrats were correct and therefore thinking about it could only complicate and screw things up. I have worked within a trade, and also within a daily work environment, where i either put up, or shut up- there's no bullshitting my way through it. I either did what i said i would, or i didn't. I think that there are a lot of work environments, populated mostly by college grads, where your ability to communicate competency to your peers and superiors matters more than your ability to demonstrate actual competency... environments where bullshitting effectively can be more advantageous to your career than actual competency.

[@dmr6390]

I was surprised about how great this episode was. I don’t usually enjoy listening to a Marxist

[@ditkovichpaysmyrent]

Yes, it’s almost like Marxism is just another economic theory and not some abstract boogie man🧐

[@Jonwisniewski04]

I would generally agree. However, this guy isn't a talking head on a cable news network. He's an actual academic who's read the theory and papers thankfully. So he makes actual sense. What a concept!

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

"I don’t usually enjoy listening to a Marxist" -- Oh yeah? Who have you tried?

[@fiddlersontheramp5417]

love this guy! amazing. so much humanity and compassion.

[@Sergiuss555]

which one of them? 'Compassion' got bastardized recently in the hands of the woke totalitarian mob it makes me sick. Why would you even comment here on anything other than intelligence and honesty? Go watch your mother Tereza give a speech or something.

[@fiddlersontheramp5417]

@@Sergiuss555Well obviously I love coleman, I'm referring to the other guy. Well I can comment on a person seeming to have virtues if I like! Everything he says seems to be steeped in pathos, rather than point scoring. He seems very down to earth.

[@swarming1092]

His substack is a banger. Look up his post titled “Please Just Fucking Tell Me What Term I Am Allowed to Use for the Sweeping Social and Political Changes You Demand”. You can be even *radically* left-wing economically and still thing that the last like 10 years of SJW batshittery has been insane nonsense that has not in any sense measurably improved the lot of the working class in many Western countries

[@RKPT9]

Removing the word equality from your example of ending the process that produces exactly that condition as its primary goal doesn't mean marxism isn't first and foremost an ideology of equity. In your attempt and failure of trying to perform some kind of singular solution for successful outcomes in educational choices defines why this ideology fails so miserably time and time again.

[@maureensansburn6413]

Interesting conversation. Coleman, I'd like to see you have Richard Wolfe and Chris Hedges on as guests

[@killa3x]

My man Coleman. Wonder if we will ever come to terms with the fact that people vary in intelligence.

[@lochnessmunster1189]

This is exactly it; despite the Equality Doctrine, people do have wildly varying levels of intelligence, and they are not just grouped up on one side of the political spectrum.

[@lochnessmunster1189]

@@kenhiett5266 Thanks- I'll have a look.

[@alanmeeker2179]

Regarding the discussion of admissions, specifically weighting of quantitative metrics versus non (aka, "holistic" methods). First off, regarding standardized test scores, at least for the GREs, studies have indicated that they are not valid predictors of performance/success in graduate schools, thus many programs are dropping them from consideration. I'm on a biomed PhD program's admissions committee at a major university and we dropped the GREs as a strong factor for this reason. However, we can still look at the scores and factor them in, we are just aware that they are not great indicators and we therefore weigh them less than in the past. So one should, I think, take into consideration what is known about the degree of validity of any standardized test with respect to its specific application. Regarding the comments the guest made on holistic approaches to admissions, it is an interesting observation that such an approach was apparently used earlier in order to aid in denying admission to a group (Jewish applicants) perceived as being undesirable. However, his puzzlement as to why present day admins would be using holistic admissions as a tool to try to increase admissions of individuals from historically under-represented groups, and his assertion that it will tend to be used in the same way as in the past - to deny admission to such under-represented students, seems to be missing the change in motivation of the admissions directors, deans, etc. that, in many, perhaps most cases, are actively seeking to admit /more/ under-represented individuals; thus, rather than using it as a tool to exclude, their goal is to use it as a tool for inclusion. Many admissions committees are now being pressured to more heavily factor in non-quantitative aspects of an applicants application package; more specifically, to consider things in the applicant's past experience that may help to explain why some of the more traditional quantitative metrics may be on the lower side of the distribution than would normally be considered acceptable; things like family dynamics, poverty, disabilities, first in family to apply to college, as well as more "hot button" social issues such as exposure to violence, gender, race, etc.

[@afterthesmash]

Superb guest, superb discourse.

[@virtualalias]

Call it the Matriarchy, bro. It's the spirit of the mother spreading out of the home and into the workplace, educational establishments, politics, and so on as women take up supporting and leadership roles in these institutions. It focuses on personal safety over exploration, character assassination (cancelling), fairness, vanity, fluidity, acceptance, and the preeminence of feelings. We're witnessing the ascension of the Goddess and her disciples are woke.

[@karinelaxa959]

Sounds like you have a mommy issue. Love Thy mom

[@alisterrebelo9013]

@@karinelaxa959 Any particular point of his comment you want to specifically rebut or lazy slurs the best you can do?

[@MrCmon113]

That's why my boss offered me milk.

[@Zidana123]

The Thing's True name is Intersectionality, which is in abstract the intersection of different identity sub-types In practical, the more identity sub-types you can have, the more Intersectional you are and therefore 'better' and higher on the totem pole That's why say, a disabled queer latinx is better in this philosophy than just a disabled latinx or a queer latinx The desire to climb higher on the Intersectional totem pole is what drives the proliferation of all these additional and ever weirder identity sub-types Call them that. It's the name they themselves use and the core of their philosophy, they can't squirm away from it I wonder sometimes if the Liberalists and the Trad Marxists (jeez, I almost can't believe I'm using those two words together) have like a psychological aversion to using the word 'Intersectionality' because it's basically anathema to their Individuality or Class-Consciousness worldviews. So they can't call it what it is but must latch onto these ancillary terms like 'sjw' or 'woke' or 'CRT' or 'political correctness' or 'successor ideology' or 'praxis'

[@MrCmon113]

It's because "intersectionality" is completely orthogonal to what this is about. Also it's not just about the number of your positive group memberships, but their quality. For example a disabled lesbian woman is lower on the totem pole than a Muslim dude.

[@Zidana123]

@@MrCmon113 In your view what is it about?

[@BMoore335]

Sorting systems by their nature require a mix of factors to maintain function and credibility. The fact that universities reflect this isn’t an institutional criticism, but a fact of their desire to survive. If you want a more perfect meritocracy then honesty dictates transparency, and the more transparent the less social buy in. The more walls, the more ways to overcome them.

[@BenTevikMusic]

Nice to see he dressed up for the interview!

[@Sergiuss555]

he doesn't look even half bad for a marxist

[@joshuaprice8501]

It's pretty cool seeing one of the most famous members of our Reddit community on your pod.

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

Ya, it's also worrisome.

[@TIm_Bugge]

Seems like Labour Theory of Value (LTV) and Subjective Value Theory (SVT) are often compared as if they were two theories of the same thing. As I see it, SVT is trying to describe how prices emerge from the moment-to-moment behaviors of individual actors, while LTV proposes an analytical framework for policy-makers to focus state-level influence and intervene in that price discovery in a way that is ethicly good. The former asks, 'what do prices tell us about what we do?' and the former asks 'What should we do about what the prices are telling us we are most likely to do? Viewed like this it looks like it would be best if we could protect and improve our ability to price things so that we don't wind up smothering the very thing that attaches at least some measurable telemetry to the material reality of the world beyond any one person's capacity to physically apprehend it.

[@timothychang34]

Hi Coleman, I know the cover art for your episodes the past year is probably a lot of work, but i think this is a case of "less is more". A simple picture of you and the interviewee and the title is really all that is needed imo. If you look at your earlier videos that have a couple 100k views, the art back then was more simple and made it easier to understand the premise of the video. Right now there is way too much clutter. I think the video clips are also unnecessarily cluttering your videos page. They could likely be moved to a second channel. I love listening to your podcast on spotify, and I would hate for people to be unable to find you on KZbin because of how hard it is to find specific episodes.

[@SeraphsWitness]

How can anyone possibly say Marxism is dead? 1 in 5 social science professors in America is OPENLY Marxist. That's to say nothing of all those who espouse Marxist ideas without explicitly using the label. I'm just astonished at the opening premise of the video.

[@FreakyBr0]

where did you hear that statistic? lol

[@StrategicWealthLLC]

Almost no college economics professors are Marxist. The Marxism shows up in softer courses (Sociology, African American Studies, Gender Studies).

[@SeraphsWitness]

@@StrategicWealthLLC Exactly. Hardly a shock. Thought I can't say the hard sciences are safe from social pressures either.

[@nowonder6086]

1. People can call themselves whatever they want even without a rudimentary understanding of what the label stands for, something he talks about in the same opening segment. 2. Think of how small a number of the population that is. These social scientists don't represent an alive Marxist movement. They aren't organizing labor, they don't have political power, and they don't convert the masses.

[@KiernanAlex]

There is beef between old school Marxist, who treat the evolution of their idealogy as a heresy and "not real Marxism." And the Woke crowd, who would refer to old school Marxists as "Class reductionist." View it as a kind of Catholics vs Protestants, each claiming true legitmacy, one spawning from critiques of the other.

[@gregmeier]

Coleman, you made the exact point that I was screaming inside of my head about the problem with the logic behind the Labor Theory of Value. By asking Freddie about it you conveyed very clearly exactly why Marxism doesn't work. I was so excited to hear what Freddie's answer to that criticism would be, thinking it would be intricate and well thought out - but it was nothing! He completely sidestepped the question. I was hoping to learn something about Marxism that opened my eyes to a different perspective, but I was disappointed. Great job as always by you, though.

[@mattsch21]

That side step tells you everything you need to know about Marxism

[@gaoblai]

Coleman's criticism is flawed, because he attributes the "decision making" process of product creation to something other than labour, but it is labour! intellectual labour is still labour in a Marxist analysis. Coleman also sidesteps the ownership question. Marxism shows how labour is exploited under capitalist relations because workers don't get paid their full share for their work. Coleman doesn't really go into this.

[@gregmeier]

@@gaoblai Good point. Can you tell me, though, in Marxist theory, is there an acceptable return on investment for a business owner, or does the labor deserve ALL the profits?

[@gaoblai]

@@gregmeier Ok, to be clear, Marxist theory is more descriptive of capitalism than it is prescriptive of socialism, i.e. Marx doesn't really ever lay out his perfect society, it's more of a way of looking at capitalism. However, interpreting your question, under some forms communism, the business wouldn't really have an owner, it would be collectively owned as a co-op. The functions that an owner may do, like admin, searching out markets etc, would be compensated though

[@gregmeier]

@@gaoblai Thank you for explaining. I really appreciate it. I think I just have one more question. Who would put up the initial investment to start the enterprise?

[@LoisSharbel]

What an eye-opening conversation! Reading a bit of your bio, I find it shocking that I agree with most of what I'm seeing and yet you call yourself a Marxist. Do you think that the Marxist methods I've always read about which advocate subterranean methods of undermining capitalist society and destroying institutions is desirable? Obviously, fear has paralyzed common sense and damaging ideas have caused those who speak out to lose jobs and efficacy, but the ideas you propose make sense and don't sound like the typical communist solutions. I'll be interested to see what effect voices like yours have in curing our national problems. Coleman, of course, is already an invaluable voice, giving hope to those of us looking for sanity.

[@monkeymox2544]

You're confusing specific attempts to speed up the decline of capitalism with Marxism generally. Marxism is a method for analysing capitalism. Classical Marxism holds that capitalism sows the seeds of its own destruction through its own internal tensions (or 'contradictions', to use the Marxist terminology). It doesn't need to be 'undermined', in principle, since it undermines itself, although the pain of those tensions can be lessened. Marx wrote in the preface to the first edition of Capital that "even when a society has begun to track down the natural laws of its movement - and it is the ultimate aim of this work to reveal the economic law of motion of modern society - it can neither leap over the natural phases of its development nor remove them by decree. But it can shorten and lessen the birth-pangs." Some Marxists are what we call 'accelerationists' - they don't want to undermine capitalism at all, they want to speed it up so that it dies sooner. Other Marxists want to temper and tame the institutions of capitalism to alleviate its harmful tendencies, and prepare for the time when it collapses. Others advocate for the (possibly violent) revolutionary overthrow of capitalism (although not so much these days, for obvious reasons). What I'm getting at is that the things you've been told about 'Marxism' are probably either untrue, exaggerated, or only represent a subsection of actual Marxist thought.

[@heatherchapman1984]

I did not hear in Freddie's description of the Labor Theory of Value any acknowledgement of "innovation" (perhaps a passing nod to "efficiency," which Marx characterizes as quickly exhausted) or "risk," which are real phenomena . . . and contribute to creation of value as well. Try listening to Tupy and Pooley's interview on the Michael Shermer show for an explanation of this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rp68q4aEe91kh8k

[@bruceleeharrison9284]

I love listening to Freddie, but for God's sake someone get him a glass of water!

[@LeviNotik]

😂

[@MichaelWilson-ee8zx]

@@LeviNotik Won't help. The pharmaceutical cocktail he's on would steamroll any mere glass of water.

[@tomspaghetti]

Great discussion!

[@cam1696]

Is preparing you for a job the only goal of college? EDIT: I should have waited to finish the video before posting...

[@fiddlersontheramp5417]

Where are all the views?

[@11East]

People don’t click unless its something that they think confirms what they already believe.

[@Thindorama]

@@11East Isn't it kind of early to be fair?

[@fiddlersontheramp5417]

@@Thindorama yeah true.

[@fiddlersontheramp5417]

@@11East :(

[@concilium1]

How’s the track record? Batting a thousand for tyranny and destitution.

[@ghfudrs93uuu]

I call it The Vampire Castle

[@niceprofile-k6i]

at this point i feel the term is social justice

[@filmjazz]

Tying Marxism to social justice really does a huge disservice to Marxism IMHO. I like a lot of James Lindsay’s ideas but lately I’ve started to cringe whenever he mentions Marxism, because capitalism in its current form needs to continue to be critiqued, and Lindsay is harming that effort by conflating the two ideas.

[@davidturner9827]

Equality before the law = inequality of outcomes. You can accept it or not, but one day you have to square with it.

[@ilovepotatoesforever9818]

This guy likes to listen to his own voice.

[@livengoodjames7406]

Ahh, uhmm, ahh, hmm.....

[@synthesizerneil]

Marxism and intelligence? Sure 🥴👍

[@eemoogee160]

Yeah, Coleman's mother was clearly an idiot 😆 🤣

[@truthseeker3397]

I never thought I would be able to listen to a Marxist without cringing... but this guy did it... he seems reasonable... potentially

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

Give David Harvey a try.

[@gaoblai]

De Boer doesn't make sense here. He correctly states that Marxism is a philosophy for understanding the world and then says Marxism is dead. A philosophy cannot be dead

[@adreaminmybrain]

Yeah, I found that odd too. I guess he means Marxism as a political movement is dead. ("Being a Marxist is to align yourself with a dead movement. There was a time in my life when I would've called myself a communist, but a communist... there needs to be a movement for there to be such a thing as a communist.")

[@nowonder6086]

Not literally dead, just irrelevant and marginalized. Even worse, Marxism is associated with all the wrong things when it's actually brought up.

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

A philosophy dies when nobody engages with it any more in any serious capacity.

[@shellyshelly9218]

Freddie's understanding of Marxism is way off. Terror groups like Shining Path or "Twitter users with a hammer and sickle profile" do not represent Marxism. Leninism, Trotskyism and Maoism are not Marxist, either. Coleman alao misunderstands Marxism. China has never been Marxist, socialism has never been "tried" and his objection to the LTV is laughably wrongheaded. So this is a conversation dismissing Marxism between two men, neither of whom has even a basic understanding of Marx's ideas. Seriously, go and read Marx's works and you'll see how mistaken these understandings are.

[@shellyshelly9218]

Ok, listened a little further and at least Freddie does make some valid points, e.g. that Marx did not support "equality", as idiots like Jordan Peterson charge.

[@tenholindberg9862]

Human value is not same as our market value. Thryre not equal bro n Come on Cole. Marx wrote about natural hierarchies vs class hierarchy. This is not good information. Marx didnt advocate hyper hierarchical elite government like soviet union, with extreme lack of democracy ,and freedom. Marx was More of anarchist, but he didnt write nothing about bolshewist stradegy. Also marxs accievements In other field are monunental. Scientific analysis, of the society and world. Not the least

[@DFWNites]

Marx mostly made up a lie to make people think all wealth is unjust.

[@avideorecord3585]

We must separate Marxism from Marxist Strategy. Marx and Engels discovered the atrocious abuse that unregulated (by a govt) capitalism had at that point resulted in. The antidote, Marx put forth, was to bind the abused victims by their class and status and in his Manifesto he proposed his solutions. The Strategy is identity based and can be placed upon and used on any class of people of whom you can bind by a common identify. Identity politics is unconstitutional and it suggest such in the terms that make it up. Human rights are inherent in every individual human animal; the right to speak, not to speak, move around freely and unencumbered, bear arms to protect one’s self and family, have one’s own beleifs, choose not to purchased the governments or some other corporations products or be fined, not to put experimental drugs into one’s own body and the bodies of their children and not to have the services benefits and privileges that their families have fought and died for, taken away as a result of exercising those rights not to vaccine or purchase healthcare. How many have died for our constitution and rights to private property, free speech, basic human autonomy? Who here is willing to say on here that it is a benefit (what govt is instituted for) to have the political party that happens to be in office to a. Disarm you b. Force you to purchase something you don’t want or pay a fine. C. Put an experimental vaccine into your child’s body against your will

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

Me. I regard it as massive benefits for society overall that there is e.g. a police force and public hospitals and public schools. If you're an antivaxxer, then all reason is lost on you anyway though. Better if you in particular don't have kids anyway, that would be the best way to protect your kids. And god save the fool who hands you in particular a gun.