Richard Wolff: Difference between socialism & communism and what they both missed

[@piley9439]

Thanks for breaking it down like this.

[@reasonablespeculation3893]

Socialism/Communism/Social democrats/Social Communism/Communistic Socialism; All not relevant... Owners NEED workers to do whatever task makes the business profitable... Workers NEED owners to give them money for their effort... In a Free Market Economy, these positions can change.

[@jared.video.youtube]

@@reasonablespeculation3893 worker coops

[@reasonablespeculation3893]

Jared Keklak …. OK for Family Owned Business, or simple operations. When Cooperatives rival the Dow Jones Components, I'll take them seriously.. As it is now, they can't compete.

[@AbdullahMikalRodriguez]

Please dont listen to this propaganda spewing soothsayer...literally pause the video after ever sentence he spits and look up WORD FOR WORD what he said and you will see hes not only consciously lying to you, but things are nearly opposite to his claims.

[@antediluvianatheist5262]

@@reasonablespeculation3893 kzbin.info/www/bejne/nIDUooV6Ztlnbbs Nope.

[@michaelvillarama7584]

I would love to see this man have a debate against Ben Shapiro.

[@Blueblackngold]

He would lose. He’d lose to your average wielder of common sense

[@tiersexualcommunistpropaga2766]

Bench Appearo would run away like he did with the BBC interview

[@Blueblackngold]

Gay Communist Propaganda lol na Richard Wolff is possibly the dumbest financial commentator

[@Blueblackngold]

Dimann10 no way. In fact a college kid could take Richard wolf who’s done nothing for his entire career.

[@mcdallywacker8977]

Ben Shapiro would be intellectually humiliated and dismantled by Dr. Wolff, it would be almost unfair. Little Ben’s cheap “gotcha” tricks and Gish Galloping wouldn’t work on somebody who’s not a college student who’s main focus is surviving through college.

[@Pyriold]

In germany we have a law forcing all big companies to have part of their management be recruited by vote from workers, the so called "Betriebsrat". This is not optional, as soon as any worker in a bigger company wants it, it gets established. I understand that this is not exactly what the professor is talking about, but it's maybe the closest existing thing on a big scale to it. We have a lot of experience with this system in germany and it's working pretty nicely, reducing social unrest.

[@obinnachris5178]

Fascinating

[@blackiron60]

What Wolff fails to address is that all socialist states, from Cuba to the Soviet Union, emerged into a hostile world dominated by hostile capitalist states bent on the destruction of any competing system of politics or economy. All of them faced war, sabotage, and various other attempts by capitalist states to destroy them. The USSR lost 28 million people to the Nazi invasion in WW2. Under such conditions, survival is the main concern. What he describes as lack of democracy, was actually the product of the siege conditions socialist states found and continue to find themselves under in a world dominated by a reactionary and brutally aggressive American Empire that is willing to use any and all means to crush progressive movements and countries.

[@krisspkriss]

He didn't fail to address it. He was addressing internal problems, not external ones. As socialist, we need to quit bitching about the sabotage from external influences, and fix the inherent flaws that doomed them from go. You want to live in the former USSR? Don't worry, we are almost to their level of late stage capitalism where the same people own everything, manage everything, and rung the government. There was no dictatorship of the proletariat because the aristocracy was just replaced with new people. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. Keeping the Russian people underfed, undereducated, and under the heel of the elite for over 1000 years running. Nothing changed in Russia but the names of people and positions. 1000 years of serfdom and counting. Don't worry, America is 80% there. No unions. No proletariat political power. Papers please. Cracking down on controlling the media and freedom of speech. Mass surveillance. Damn, we might be 90% there and I just don't want to accept it.

[@blackiron60]

If you've been following the recent situation in Venezuela even badly, you'll know that internal and external problems are not mutually exclusive. I'm not even going to respond to the Russophobic bullshit that the rest of your post got into except to say that I found it pretty disgusting.

[@Nahuatl22]

@@krisspkriss You know, he has ap point. The USSR didn't have "uneducated" people like they're portrayed in the mainstream media. It was the exact opposite. They sent the first human to space. They became a second world power in less then half a century. Westerners can't seem to grasp that aspect of the Soviet Society. Especially when they were one of the poorest countries in Eurasia during the Tzars era. I'm not a massive supporter of the former USSR and their political/economical system, but I do think they deserve credibility for the accomplishments they achived in such a short period of time.

[@henryberrylowry9512]

@@blackiron60 Although I certainly agree that the external and internal are not removed from one another, I fail to see where Christina is wrong in her critique of the soviet system. the short end of it is that Lenin deified himself, rashly appropriated his theory on imperialism from Bukharin (which he got backwards anyway) and then guided Trotsky to mass murder anarchists and workers who defected from the ranks. Maria Nikiforova is an example of a defecting Red Army soldier who ended up joining the ranks of the anarchists after the red army invaded southern Ukraine. Trotsky led the military to Kronstadt to massacre anarchists and workers for defecting to an island that the state could have easily let be. Lenin himself was not at all secretive about his envy for the order of capitalism. Herbert Marcuse documented this quite well in his text Soviet Marxism, in which he quotes Lenin at length more or less making the same arguments capitalists make in order to justify exploiting people for surplus value. A sort of natural right logic that heads back several thousand years to presuppose a natural place for people. Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin were all megalomaniacs. This isn't to say that I endorse state capitalism. Nor is it even to say that I would argue for some alternative to what happened. But I would certainly reject this black and white reasoning which posits only two alternatives, the US and Russia.

[@billypilgrim7838]

so unusual to enjoy intelligent comments

[@mikeburns2102]

Empower labor unions. We need a worker's bill of rights. Before any business is sold, the employees must get first opportunity to form a cooperative. End vulture capitalism. End leveraged buy-outs and stock buy backs. Stocks should be based on real productivity, not manipulation. End the unemployment statistic, as it is just propaganda. Use only adult labor participation.

[@bennetjanssen4037]

What do Stock buy-backs have to do with any of this? And how else are you going to price stocks than with a market? If the owner of a company wants to sell her business and the workers are against it, what would happen in your world?

[@mikeburns2102]

​@@bennetjanssen4037 That is the point. Buying back stocks inflates the true price, not the market. It is just a way for CEOs to give themselves a raise, at the expense of their works, stockholders, and everyone else. I am not against an owner selling a company. I just think employees should have first bid option. It would make a far better world, even if it is still Capitalist, if everyone has opportunity to enter the profit system.

[@bennetjanssen4037]

Mike Burns That’s first bid idea sounds interesting. To the buy-backs: They also decrease the number of stocks, hence the price increase. The buy-backs are bad because of something else: Companies burden themselves with debt and they spend money that they could have otherwise spend on innovation. Also, information on whether/how much buy-backs a company did is not very easily accessible I feel. So it should be obligatory to transparently disclose that in the quarterly results.

[@mikeburns2102]

@@bennetjanssen4037 Buy-backs has not always been legal, for a variety of reasons. Not all deregulation has been good.

[@jamesmartin2740]

You’re an idiot.

[@MrSammo1]

People must first be taught that money isn't real.

[@GregoryWonderwheel]

Money is debt. That is, money is a symbolic or metaphoric statement for calculating the relationship of debt between people.

[@MrSammo1]

@@GregoryWonderwheel With modern technology that need is quickly going away.

[@sebas8225]

@@GregoryWonderwheel Money is the value we trick ourselves into playing with.

[@AceRimmer_]

Bitcoins

[@Synerco]

just because something's socially constructed doesn't mean it isn't real

[@moneymanfernando1594]

Maybe we workers need to unionize in order to have a voice in our jobs. We are the ones doing all the work. The money trickles up not down.

[@sarabjeet67]

@ThePHiLsTeR also what's to say the union leader won't be bought by the employer ?

[@majinbull17]

Shout out to Prof. Wolff

[@dwonderwoman7143]

Listen and Learn you who are Closed Minded.. Knowledge is Power

[@bicyclist2]

Agreed!

[@DrPeterMarsh]

This fills a gap in my understanding or lack there of

[@itsarendezvous]

If this helped you understand the difference between socialism and communism then you still don't understand

[@dougcasey6117]

He stops right where I feel the details needed to be laid out on how to democratize the workplace. By labor-unionization or co-ops perhaps and if so explain the mechanisms to get to these, I guess we have to be creative and figure that out

[@johannesbekker1970]

Interesting you should ask this question because albeit that the laws governing the workplace will be democratic = decided by the workers, the retailers and the consumers, the actual work done cannot be democratized. Why ? Well let's assume an industrial workshop is meant with complicated machines and apparatus, those working on these expensive tools cannot be ordinary workers but highly skilled and trained for years, so democracy = everyone is equal, cannot be employed in this instance for obvious reasons, ONLY merit & experience will dictate who does what.... So you're perfectly justified in asking this question. It'll also be dumb to pay these highly skilled people a wage similar to an unskilled laborer no ? There's more ...

[@elv3a424]

@@johannesbekker1970 I think you are misunderstanding how a cooperative works. In a cooperative, everyone doesn't do the same work. Just like in a capitalist enterprise, if a technician is neede, one is appointed. The central difference is how the technician is appointed. In a cooperative, this person is democratically chosen to do the job (hired). About everyone making the same: cooperatives don't have same wage for everyone. People in different positions earn different amounts. Just read the wikipedia article before you comment.

[@whatshisname2497]

This is very simplified, but I guess it's meant to be.

[@suzanadee8252]

I think hes trying to break it down for people who never read a book on the subject and understand nothing about it.

[@HypermarketCommodity]

@@suzanadee8252 yeah thats why im holding back my triggered Marxist-leninist side...

[@patrickvanmeter2922]

@@suzanadee8252 Makes sense. I have read many of the books and Wolff does a good job explaining some of the things I didn't understand.

[@GregoryWonderwheel]

With over 150 years of steady propaganda in the USA against socialism and creating a false narrative of capitalism, the economic education of the American people must be done in manageable bites so they don't choke on the meal.

[@patrickvanmeter2922]

@@GregoryWonderwheel Most American people aren't interested. After 150 years of having lies crammed down their throats, they are tired of cf choking.

[@NeoRipshaft]

This is interesting and quite a bit different than what I've been hearing from so many others who identify as Socialist or Communist. My current model of capitalism vs socialism vs communism (not exhaustive) is all about where capital lies. Individual citizens in capitalism, the state in socialism, and the workers in communism. This is a somewhat superficial view as the state is necessarily the ultimate holder of capital (though I don't often hear people acknowledge this), but it basically comes down to the behavior of the state with respect to capital.

[@stevencats7137]

Aren’t those definitions of socialism and communism supposed to be flipped? As in under communism and state has capital and socialism the people do?

[@domingodeanda233]

Thanks Mr Wolff, for making it so easy to understand.

[@internetwonderbuilder4741]

You've got to distinguish between large employers and small employers. Whenever a small employer hears this stuff, their first thought is oh God I can't compete if I have new regulations placed on me. Please explain very plainly how the idea is to replace some of the monopolies with regulated utilities, and others with real market place competition. The idea is to encourage a vast diversity of small businesses and rein in the giants, while having certain industries, which have never been the domain of small business, such as energy, internet and medical care for example become well regulated utilities forced to serve the public rather than gouge them. It needs to be emphasized very clearly that democratic socialism is the friend of small business, and that unfettered capitalism has been the ruin of every mom n pop operation in the USA, not democratic socialism. Instead of Walmart we could have a grocer, a Baker, and butcher again. We could be lifelong acquaintances with our barber again. We could aspire to have our own little businesses and work for ourselves, not enslaved to a deadend job for health insurance, because we wouldn't need health insurance.

[@antediluvianatheist5262]

With GOOD regulation NOT aimed at helping corporations, you get small businesses. Regulation is a tool, not an end in and of itself.

[@海狸-m8v]

Fun fact:China, during the later period of culture revolution, had a semi-democratic worker-leader relationship established in some region. It is called Angang Constitution, which party officials and workers making decisions together, and it becomes a movement, had it's peak around 1972. Unfortunately, the leadership of Culture revolution was entirely burdened on Mao himself, and he is nearly 80, unable to make any revolutionary decisions. After his death, his opponents execute a coup d'état, took out his followers, and killed the culture revolution, as part of the movement, Angang Constitution did not reach its maturity.

[@NikolajLRasmussen]

TIL. Thanks. It doesn't even have a Wikipedia entry :/

[@海狸-m8v]

@@NikolajLRasmussen It is only a minor movement in the Culture Revolution, it only has a Chinese wiki, and not very informative, if you can read Chinese, here is the link zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9E%8D%E9%92%A2%E5%AE%AA%E6%B3%95

[@ginkgo467]

This is an incredibly important, helpful, and accurate introduction to a very long and complicated history, and I applaud Dr. Wolff for telling it so concisely! I urge everyone to spread this video to all the misinformed people in the US who don’t know anything about the history or socialism and would just as quickly fear that mildly social-democratic politicians like AOC and Bernie Sanders are going to “turn the US into Venezuela” and/or do not understand the difference between the attempts at “socialism” being carried out Venezuela, or in the Scandinavian model, and the attempts at “socialism” historically carried out in the USSR. However, while I fully agree that the bureaucracy of the Soviet model was a failure as are the attempts of “social democratic” parties to simply regulate market capitalism, I think we must take seriously the written theory of socialist revolutionaries in the 20th century. I would seriously recommend Rosa Luxembourg’s “Reform or Revolution”, and V.I. Lenin’s “State and Revolution”, and the writings of Ana Louise Strong and Angela Davis as well have been a great inspiration to me. Furthermore I am still actively seeking literature from the many other Marxists outside of Europe who have contributed much but all too often go completely unrecognized by Marxists in the West. Even as their model for socialism was rife with internal contradictions and besieged by outside threats, the most difficult struggle of socialists has always been to actually take power, or simply to defend it from the capitalist class if you believe we can achieve socialism without seizing control over the state, and it is here I believe that all of us, including Dr. Richard Wolff and the wonderful contributions “Democracy at Work” have made to the development of this new hopeful socialist movement in the US today, still have a lot more to learn. I am incredibly skeptical based on what I know of the history of socialism in the US, that the US economy of private capitalist ownership can be massively transformed into a system based on cooperation and worker-ownership without facing both repression and co-optation by the capitalist class and the capitalist state in order to preserve the status quo. I don’t think anyone has the answers as to how we prepare to respond and defend our vision but I am confident it will take tens of millions of leading activists who are capable of thinking for themselves and utilizing lessons from the robust history of socialism and Marxism to aid in our project.

[@bicyclist2]

I agree.

[@antediluvianatheist5262]

Venezueala would be fine if the US would leave them alone.

[@ericmacrae6871]

@@antediluvianatheist5262 every socialist country will be fine if the US will leave them alone. Imagine if the US decide to have a trade deal with a socialist country.

[@ericmacrae6871]

Honestly the one way that I can see the US changing it's way it need to breakdown to the point that people needs to realize change is needed. This is the sad truth of human history. People do not like to change unless something dramatic happens. This story will always going to be a reminder of how people do not act until it is to late. There was a kid who played hockey in Canada. He had this heart condition that he can go to cardiac arrest at anytime. Knowing the risk of it he played hockey while petitions to have an AED in his Arena. No one listen until after he die. Then across Canada the story went viral and every Arena across the Country got AED in their arenas. Yet this story demonstrates that it required the kid death for people to finally bring the AED a tool that could have save the person life. Try convincing someone who as been indoctrinated with liberalism ideology for 400 years it is not going to happen overnight. If you really think about it the reason that the American revolution happen was because the US got so fed up with Great Britain that they revolted agaisnt them. The living condition got so bad that the American people wanted change and the system broke down. Soviet Union came into being because of the living condition that was happening in Russia and people got way to fed up and wanted to have a social change a revolution needed to happen. The US needs to hit rock bottom before people are willing to take the revolution. The US is falling and it's demise is around the corner. Until that time arrive people are not ready to leave Capitalism behind

[@kchennessey8781]

Stalin had much more to do with shaping what we now know as Soviet communism than Lenin did. Lenin was a social Democrat and he held together a wide coalition of workers and present groups. Lenin was a staunch believer in democracy. If the majority disagreed with him, he would do what the majority wanted. It all went wrong when Lenin died. Stalin seized power claiming to be Lenin's successor and exiled his real successor, Leon Trotsky. Stalin had all the revolution leaders who agreed with Lenin killed. He then proceeded to bastardize Lenin's Marxist rhetoric to serve his own fascist- socialist combo we know as communism. The majority of the people that Stalin murdered were Democratic socialists and social democrats who were loyal to Lenin and opposed him including his own wife and son. The boshlevik revolution is really a sad story of a well intended revolution hijacked by a brilliant and evil man.

[@kyleoliva2411]

He said "Russia is where the socialists won". So don't we have the same danger of socialist winning here and turning to the dark side of despotism/communism. I don't like that the socialists dont talk about this. There is a chance that if the socialists win in America that it can take the same turn.

[@Harthorn]

I disagree with last statement, the basis of democratizing the workplace. It should go deeper than that, as how the Chinese CCP have found. Get into the private family unit and change that, and also including basic educating starting from the first day into school, that will fundamentally change subsequent interactions of these cogs in it's interaction with the greater machine.

[@etiennebowie]

Prof. Wolff, thank you again for educating the left. Many of us don't know this history. Going forward us socialist--all of us--need to be working together to create what I call the New New Left. We are the children of the American and French revolutionaries, the labor and human rights activist of the 20th century, and the children of the peace and love hippies. Now is the time we take all of that history as one to create a new vision of the left. One of human advancement, technology, peace, and sustainability. We will be that generation to meet that commitment, and you will go down as one of the fathers of that new movement. Thank you!

[@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723]

As Romanian with a mix of Hungarian, Austrian German & Polish there is no difference between democracy, the rule of the oligarchs, capitalism, the rule of financiers, fascism, the rule of oligarchs, communism, the rule of robber barons,

[@scruples671]

There is no democracy in the work place because the one person that owns the business is in charge and makes all the final decisions. Right or wrong everybody is depedant on that one person decision.

[@dgmzg9106]

Scruples if that one person didn't take the risks to start said business there would be no business to go to work for. How many people will create a business just so someone else will control it? That is the real problem with your ideology. You kill the entrepreneur there is no business. There is no work. Government can never create prosperity they create a environment for it to prosper and control it. This is the problem China solved Communist Government with a Capitalist workforce.

[@scruples671]

@@dgmzg9106 I was just pointing how business is currently done. It points out the goals are just for his success and that might not be a successful model. But if the whole company had equal stake and equal say there is a better potential for larger success.

[@DiThi]

@@dgmzg9106 We don't want to kill the bosses. We want all workers to be the bosses. Or to have a boss chosen by the workers, like any other employee, that could be fired by the owners (the workers) if he does badly.

[@rickobrien1583]

Most people spend their, not working lives but most of their awake lives at work with people they are not seriously connected to. I always though that was strange.

[@HypermarketCommodity]

Follow the White Rabbit and takee the Red Pill.

[@delvana111]

You are appreciated.

[@nthperson]

The bottom line is that under our current systems of law and taxation the corporate form of ownership has come to dominate almost all sectors of the economy. Disinterested shareholders have even stopped caring whether they received dividends. The stock market is nothing more than a giant gambling casino. Getting our elected legislators to even consider amending the law affecting corporate interests is not likely to happen given the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that corporations are persons. The best we could hope for is to push for tax reform that favors cooperatives, partnerships and sole proprietorships. One way to move in this direction is to push for the exemption of business revenue from taxation up to some limit (e.g., the median revenue. Say this came to $5 million. All revenue up to $5 million for any company would be exempt from inclusion in taxable income. All deductions for business expenses would be eliminated. Revenue above $5 million would be subject to an increasing rate of taxation on higher ranges of income.

[@adamsd6638]

Thank you Prof.

[@christopheryou]

Get the word out!

[@allypoum]

Great summary as ever from the redoubtable professor Wolff. A convincing argument could be made that the very criticisms of the Soviet model he correctly points out to be largely the consensus among present-day socialists are not new and have been strenuously & consistently set forth by the worker's opposition, left communists, council communists, anarcho-syndicalists and others on the 'libertarian' and 'class struggle anarchist' left since the February & October days and beyond... A great primer, though. It's what he does best.

[@anfffff]

THIS IS AWESOME! he knows the difference between socialism & communism and what they both missed!

[@floro7687]

In Scandinavia all was all right as long as the fight was for pay and conditions. When a certain affluence was attained, it went awry. You got People With the strangest motives and pet Projects, turning away People of the old School.

[@philiproberts94]

Ignores why people would start a business in the first place... for a profit. It requires risk. Risk / reward are inseparable. Don’t want to take risk? Then you can be an employee for someone who does. It’s a beautiful thing!

[@caneandatophat5515]

Not everyone starts a business for profit. Some do it because they have the desire to fill a need. And you can ask almost everyone in the food industry what kind of profit they make, it’s not much. It’s not always profit.

[@DammitBobby]

Beautifully put. Couldn't have explained it any better/more simple

[@davinmaki7533]

Dumbed down Bed time stories for diluted revolutionaries.

[@dabest9843]

So the problem with Socialism and Communism in the 20th century is.... there weren't enough co-ops?

[@johnchristopherdelegero1728]

Ownership is the problem. Because gangs form as large as Countries to try to get more the other gangs. So one country get rich while the others are in debt. The worst is when few persons inside a gang gets far richer or has more power over others, you got oligarchs and dictators ruling gang labeled "countries" waging wars on other gangs, all for ownership of resources.

[@johnchristopherdelegero1728]

Moving towards resources based rather ownership based living can help solve your problem.

[@WhirlOmar]

I have heard Richard Wolf describe democratizing the workplace in videos before. The only thing I don’t agree to much with Is that the majority of workers really cannot have too much of a say in the direction. It’s like too many cooks spoil the broth. A movie doesn’t get made with everyone directing it. Now, of course my perception of what he means can be wrong. In which case my opinion goes out the window.

[@CyanTeamProductions]

Can you talk about how the USSR didn’t start becoming revisionist until after Stalin and Khrushchev started lying during his secret speech?

[@pimpinspartan]

hahahahah lying

[@CyanTeamProductions]

Monsignor kzbin.info/www/bejne/eZTQm2WCn5qdeJI

[@michaelotero3909]

thewalrus cat you are dumb as fuck dude. Stalinist crimes are well documented within and outside of Russia. You know nothing about the history of the USSR so don’t speak about it

[@CyanTeamProductions]

Please read Furr, more evidence is emerging of fraudulent documents being used. Anti Stalin propaganda is to make us scared of the ideology as an attempt to steer the working peoples away from a power than holds a threat to the ruling class. More Russians are waking up to this.

[@CyanTeamProductions]

I know Michael wont read any of it because typically when someone disowns Stalin they typically dont support socialist revolution. Good thing Wolff does :D

[@deidara_8598]

Not to nit-pick, but Scandinavia isn't a country (at least not in this century, back in the 1400s you would be right), Scandinavia is a trio of the countries Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. But the social democracy they have in those countries is part of a bigger economic philosophy known as the Nordic model, which also entails the economic policies of Iceland and Finland. Also, these countries aren't purely driven by social democracy and socialism, they very much have a mixed economy and allow private industry to flourish while providing their citizens with a wide range of free government services like free access to healthcare and education. The Nordic model can be for the most part viewed as a set capitalist societies with strong social safety nets to counter the negative side-effects of a capitalist society like increased economic differences and the disenfranchisement of the physically, socially, economically, or otherwise disadvantaged. It's capitalism on training wheels, if you will.

[@Ynimixer]

4:51 thank you professor Wolff, that's the key point. We should never forget that "[e]conomic relations are relations between people: who tells whom what to do and how to do it. Property relations are relations between people and things: who owns what; land, factories, mines, ships, etc.". Thus we should always fight "the false thesis that state ownership of property equals workers' state" (both quotes from Facing reality, by C.L.R. James and Grace Lee Boggs) Socialism is supposed to be about autonomy, empowerment, direct democracy, self-management and self-organization, from the work place, to your neighborhood and beyond. Anything different will probably degenerate into a bureaucratic nightmare

[@夏歌-f3e]

Mao developed socialism at chinese factory during the Culture revolution, by democratizing workplace by "两参一改三结合", "四大自由"

[@sweetshoez]

This n*gga spittin. Love you professor always filling in my theoretical knowledge gaps

[@gregorbegger9291]

“The goal of Socialism is Communism.” - Vladimir Lenin

[@PirateAlgeria]

Thank you teacher

[@darrenfleming7901]

So essentially communism is just a particular flavor of socialism, which is what I've been thinking for a while. One problem I see is that people associate communism immediately with Stalin and Mao, because they called themselves communists, but I don't think that its fair to classify all communism as being like them. Especially in recent years, more and more people are using the term socialist over communist, and I feel like communism is becoming a label used mainly by opponents to smear socialism by associating it with Stalin/Mao. And importantly I don't see anything in the core values of communism that would stop it from being democratic, but the assumption most people make is that communism means abolishing democracy.

[@HypermarketCommodity]

I am calling Revisionism on Prof. wolff, capitalism aint socialism.

[@rybostrengthtraining6425]

You get rewarded in the work place for how hard you work, but most importantly, the value you bring to the work place. Probably the most unfair thing you could do is redistribute wealth in the working environment so that everyone is making the same amount of money- one person may have more knowledge and overall value- so they help make the company more money than other employees. In return, that person should absolutely be paid more than his/her colleagues. What about for those damn employers? They take on the most responsibility in the work place, and help make sure that the place keeps on running in the first place, so they too should be paid more than their employees. Start making yourself more valuable.

[@GregoryWonderwheel]

It was called the USSR and one of those "S's" meant "soviet." The theory of the soviet was workplace democracy, But as soon as the USSR was created, the Communist Party took over and prevented the soviets from having any actual democratic power, and the Communist Party then sent in people to tell the soviets what to do and control them instead of the soviets using workplace democracy to tell the government what to do. So the word "Soviet" in the title of the USSR became meaningless and unrealized. That is, the theory of the soviet was supposed to be a revolution in the organization of the enterprise, but THE PARTY prevented that revolution from happening and instead used THE PARTY to control the organization of the enterprise as a new state capitalism model instead of a private capitalism model.

[@noelchambers6115]

what a great point gregory. i did not know soviet literally translates to council or democratization of the workplace....hilarious that wolff.....states its 'the lack of democracy in the workplace that caused the failure of socialism'.....it was in the name!! great work greg!

[@artemesaulkov2010]

Nonsense. U just disregard everything even there was a civil war after the revolution

[@ErikLandvall]

This is historically incorrect. Please read about Marx and Engels to understand where the origin of communism is from, and what part Marx, Engels or Russia played in keying the term. Marx and Engels simply wrote the manifest to build a consensus regarding the term, the term is however older then these two individuals, and defiantly older then what was going on during the 1920...

[@badomaji]

Seems to me that the current 'conservative' groups could better be referred to as 'reactionary' political parties. What do you think Professor Wolff?

[@brunoqueiroz2759]

im not the professor, but may i give my opinion on this? i also get the same idea. they are a recurring political figure, of right wing movement in times of crisis. they are the ones that in a populist way create an enemy who is to blame for everything, most of the times this enemy are foreigners or other capitalist/socialist countries. they reject the current system, but are also against the progressives. an old way of thinking, one of hate, idealism and ignorance.

[@petrolheadJJ]

Unequal is not the same as unfair.

[@obinnachris5178]

By the way, Social democracy ≠ Socialism Social democracy= Regulated capitalism Socialism= dismattled capitalism and in its place the dictatorship of the working class

[@DavidRodriguez-ky5si]

Great video! this can't be stressed enough.

[@TheDarkIllumination]

“All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible.”-Frank Herbert Even if by some miracle we could do it, democratizing the workplace will accomplish nothing. The power hungry sociopaths will still rise to the top and take over the movement. Like Orwell always said people seek out power because they like power and merely use popular movements to take it.

[@KingMJAH]

Normally I’d tell you that if this is true than democracy would also be horrible, but since your probably in America I can give you it this time, after this last year and three before it.

[@wallycheladyn1190]

How does a business, that is run by the democratic vote of its workers, manage a down sizing of the operation? In other words, people need to be layed off, factories closed, wages cut; otherwise the business will fail.

[@anthonytom-duyquang3558]

I'm sure that everyone would agree to take a pay cut in that case. www.retail-week.com/grocery/co-op-boss-murrells-takes-pay-cut-to-launch-members-coronavirus-fund/7034606.article?authent=1

[@kwennemar]

Great Job!

[@paolomartini150]

Democratizing the base of society.....

[@laflines8711]

It seems that every country does it a little bit differently. Scandinavian vs Germany vs China vs Russia. Although China and Russia's version of socialism (communism) appears to be the most successful, I'm not fond of it at all. Actually modern Russia is more of a fascist nation than anything else. We're in a fight right now to retain our democracy. Why would we give it up for a Communist dictatorship that would strip us of our rights? I do agree that the whole system has to be reworked from the bottom upward. But only as long as the people retain the power.

[@kso35]

Why do so many people seem to have no idea about the difference between the two?

[@lucasbowering]

You must be simplifying on purpose. Lenin considered himself a social-democrat prior to the outbreak of WWI, he belonged to the majorityist (bolshevic) wing of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, they didn't change to Communist Party until 1917, (April Theses, I believe).

[@thosethatcan]

No lables no lies. No bs to hide behind.

[@benjaminbrown7820]

The relations between master-slave, lord/lady-serf and employer-employee, but in a accelerationist post-capitalist economy, white-market white-collar job's/careers/professions/occupations/ranks/positions/fields/role (s)-and-responsibilities would have to become worker co-operatives to avoid-and-avert, or at least, deter-and-defer automation

[@ArChi285]

That means the ideals of Karl Marx is not yet implemented. In fact, I think I have read or watched somewhere that Marx's ideals is a moneyless system/society, or resource-based economy, which I subscribe.

[@markgigiel2722]

Capitalism has destroyed the ecosystem so badly that none of this will matter shortly. We had dreams. I'm a John Lennon "Imagine" kind of guy. We missed our chance. The inherent greed and tribalism and lust for power of humanity won out. We will ALL soon become extinct. I don't say this lightly. I have children who will also suffer and die. Richard is correct and awesome at what he does, but it's for naught. I'm not sure why he doesn't see it. Maybe he doesn't have a garden or go camping or read the IPCC news. We are screwed, amigos, and there is no longer a chance to fix it.

[@davinmaki7533]

look up the beetles apple project

[@markgigiel2722]

@@davinmaki7533 It's Beatles.

[@hk2212]

Mark Gigiel What you say is absolutely true - and for the most ironic reason imaginable. Namely, capitalism is everything its defenders and promoters say it is - and thereby hangs a tale. Capitalism is wildly successful because greed is one of humanity's greatest incentives. And it's precisely because capitalism has been so successful that it is destroying the biosphere. Destruction to capitalism is like mountain climbing to a mountain climber: you do it because it's there and you can do it. The more unworkable an economic system is, the better for the biosphere. Do you want life or do you want progress? As they say: "You pays your money and you takes your choice."

[@davinmaki7533]

+h k Space economy commie. You are in a trap where you desire to be controlled.

[@davinmaki7533]

+Mark Gigiel don't care you know what I meant, im arguing with a dozen of you commies at a time. Trying to figure out why you want to submit to controllers and take money from productive people and spend it on failure. Stellar feudalism!

[@dangbiga2231]

Sweden is top 10 in economic freedom, not so many regulations

[@JuanMercado91]

If Lenin and the rest of the socialist revolutionaries called themselves communists and that's where "it hapenned" then what is up with Marx/Engles book the communist manifesto? I am legitimately confused, what did the term mean to Marx?

[@augurcybernaut4785]

Soooo basically Mao & Lenin got it wrong either because neither went far enough in their convictions or because they both misunderstood Marx?

[@augurcybernaut4785]

Marx was right 🤦‍♂️

[@lucioferox7549]

They theoretically understood most of him but had minor disagreements which lead to a completely different practice. Both Lenin and Mao knew that for socialism and communism to dialectically come in place, industrialisation had to be fully achieved, capitalism had to reach a peak of maturity to then be replaced. In other words, you had to become like the US or UK before even start discussing socialist practice. However they both believed that there was a way around that for poor countries like Russia or China, which was central planning and breaking imperialism. Look at Mao's "New democracy", third worldism theory or Lenin's NEP for example..

[@augurcybernaut4785]

Lucio Ferox88 🤦‍♀️----- if they got it "wrong" what trait do we possess that makes you think we would do better?

[@lucioferox7549]

@@augurcybernaut4785 Because 1. They were underdeveloped countries which had extremely scarce capital stock per capita and a barely even capitalism there to begin with. Because of this any worker autonomy would have probably been disastrous, it required strict central planning to allocate extremely scarce resources. Capitalist economic mechanisms still existed during socialist practice because those countries still had to develop and become capitalist in the first place. Marx would say that these experiments are premature. In my opinion he would agree with China's policy after 1978 but that's a little bias. 2. They were in an extremely expensive cold War and competition against the most developed countries in the world. You can't topple Rothschild by building a competing power lol. You must topple Rothschild in his base . Otherwise he will topple u before you even know it (Rothschild is just a funny example) They didn't get it wrong they just had a broken car to begin with. So they had to legitimize that broken car. And that's only the beginning of the list I'm lazy

[@augurcybernaut4785]

Lucio Ferox88 soooo in other words ignorance is strength.

[@clivefive4081]

Hi Mr Wolff

[@hazelsomaya3287]

I wish people give up their prejudice about socialist countries and consider them friends instead of enemies, which will be more conducive for world peace, like President Trumps peace initiative with N. Korea, last year dissolving 70 years old hatred without further bloodshed. Now borders between North and South Korea are opened and they have started visiting each other and hopefully there will reunification, like east and west Germany some years down the line benefitting both countries. Wise leaders of of China have adopted/altered their economic and social policies best suited for welfare of their population from the efficient utilisation of the available resources helped more by shedding their earlier prejudice about capitalism and west. In 30 years since shedding the cobwebs of '' isms '' China has surpassed economic growth of many countries and has become one of the most advanced nation with more engineers, doctors, scientists doing astronomical research and advances in science and technology, because China invested its vast resources for development of human capital instead of war machines. It is now helping other poor countries of Asia and Africa for infrastructure and humane development with the surplus resources at its command ! These efforts should be appreciated instead of seen with suspicion. If recipients don't like their help, they can always terminate agreements entered peacefully as provided by exit clauses, as some countries have already done so, due to change of their economic plans or priorities. The honourable solution would be to withdraw the unjustified sanctions, which are the root cause of misery in Venezuela and and elsewhere. Sanctions, like used condoms should be flushed away after expatiation, by kiss and makeup peace efforts, rather rubbing salt in the wounds of a violated body. For as you rightly said we can't bestow ( i say thrust down the throats) democracy by sadist interventions. And if Russia does not learn from Afghan debacle, its their loss ! Americans should not fear their assistance to socialist governments worldwide, rather welcome it and give their undivided attention to make America great again rather Venezuela. Let other socialist governments look after their own. And if recipient countries find their help obnoxious/nefarious/exploitative they will get booted out, as in Afghanistan/Balkans, for no nation can be subjugated against its will. Tyranny fails of its own inconsistencies. For all American nations were once colonies of European nations (including USA), and when locals/immigrants from same race as colonialists found their rule tyrannical, they were overthrown. My late learned father gave me a valuable piece of wisdom, ''help a friend in need, if you have sufficient resources after meeting needs of your family, because family comes first, but never borrow to help anybody, because you will be pledging a part of your income over which your family has first priority ! '' Is Venezuela a friend of America ? No. Does America have sufficient resources after meeting needs of its citizens ? No. Does it need to borrow to help anybody ? Yes. Decide yourself ! Is it a crime to choose a socialistic pattern of development ? Does American model of capitalistic development of economy ensure fair/just/equitable distribution of resources to the needy ? Are American people satisfied by subsistence wages/welfare cheques ? Can they afford decent houses/spouses ? Higher education ? Healthcare ? MV insurance and service overheads ? Why do so many working Americans live in cars/vans/campers barely surviving day to day while rich folks spend millions of dollars for relaxation on the golf courses ? Does American industry discharge its obligations to the nation in return of good infrastructure, law & order frameworks, lower taxation, easy banking finance and 'laissez faire' policies of government ? No way sir, in the everlasting greed to maximise profits and cannibalistic growth ambitions they employ robots, spend billions on automation to cut down wage bills, and move jobs that can't avoid human labour oversees to the low wage countries abroad, while salting away astronomical profits in tax heavens abroad, all the times. Mahatma Gandhi said that industry should hold in trust the supernormal profits on behalf of nation, for the welfare of society ! Sadly, we see billions of dollars in Annual bonuses to the industry executives/promoters, bountiful stock options, buybacks to share holders, luxurious private jets and vacations for top brass, eating away the capital reserves. American Government spends trillions of dollars to maintain '' white elephants '' large ACC, nuclear submarines, stealth aircrafts, missile systems on defence, while a pack of ''dobermans'' would have been sufficient, squandering scarce borrowed resources raised through fed/taxes/import credits. In my view Venezuela, Iran , Syria and Turkey should file class action suits in US courts as well as with ICJ at Hague on behalf of their citizens in a trillion dollar law suit for imposing unjustified sanctions against them causing wipeouts of their savings through hyperinflation and shortages of food and medicines, otherwise this madness won't stop. Politicians should be held accountable for effects of their mindless fiats sometime very soon. Extremely unwise policies from a nation that claims to be a role model for the free world !!

[@limoreperetz4577]

Prof. Wolff, can you please talk about the social welfare state and its shortcomings or advantages

[@tylerwright7645]

Awful lot of people benefiting from capitalism in this chat that still support the failed ideas of socialism

[@lukaradojevic7195]

Imagine going to work and you are 55 years old with 30 years of experience, and you work with some kid who is 24 years with no experience,and because you are socialists and equall acording to mr Marx and Wolff,you must listen to his ideas and conclusions about how that job should be done..great,i dont see any problems,i think that we should let stuwardess to drive plane where mr Wolff is flying since pilot and sturades are equall in the workplace and have the same responsabilities..or i would like to see him on operating table yelling"hey nurse come here and cut me,you are equall to the surgeon you dont have to listen to this hierarchy,we are all equall,my commrade"...oh and by the way, communism is supposed to be absence of state,not the other way around where all there is is a state..but mr Wolff think that only wrong thing that socialists and communists have done is that they didnt take more control of a workplace and made it more equall..ahh,that magic word,equall..how can you be against that..

[@baibando7427]

Ok. But what does a socialist workplace look like?

[@rwatertree]

Worker cooperatives. The workers own the firm for which they work and make executive decisions using either direct or indirect democracy.

[@ernststravoblofeld]

Specifically, there wouldn't be people pretending to be busy. There would be no need for a good chunk of regulation, because the workers would be in a position to protect themselves. When automation improves productivity, the workers benefit, through higher income and/or shorter hours. Basically, it looks a lot like it does now, except all the benefits that go to people who don't work (or don't work enough to justify their cut) would go to workers instead.

[@bicyclist2]

Watch the Michael Moore documentaries: "Where to invade next" and "Capitalism: a love story".

[@GeistInTheMachine]

Love it!

[@daddybutterunboxings2180]

But didnt the Russian government and Chinese government have a lot of worker debate and choice for local leaders

[@paulgibby6932]

Has any country implemented a working system whereby private ownership has been replaced by some or complete worker-ownership in a smooth transition (i.e. no bloodshed/rebellion etc.) Did that happen in England with the National Coal Board (E.F. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful)?

[@JuanMercado91]

it seems to me, no, not on a massive state scale but yes on a small community or even town scale. Worker co-ops exist and have existed for a long time.

[@mottscottison6943]

Well then how do we start democratizing the work place? Will the rich guys start lending money to their employees to buy shares of their own companies for a start? Easier said than done for all the criticizing of state capitalism done by the revolutionist. Will you also criticize the French for chopping off the heads of their royalties and nobles? Btw Norway also have state capitalism. Scandinavians have already enjoyed few hundred years of capitalism fruits and has plenty of resources per capita, thus the high living standards. It cannot be compared to war torn China and Russia, especially China who was pillaged by the 8 nation alliance, endured the worst of WW2, civil war, Korean War, Vietnam war and built up from zero.

[@marcionphilologos5367]

Within China, with its partial state owned companies, people see the NATION, which defines the common interest, as their employer. They realize that low wages are in the interest of the community and accept harsh conditions of work and live. The Chinese worker has no need for a democratic workplace, has trust in the rationality of the economic reality. This is why the Chinese system must be defined as NATIONAL COMMUNIST...…… Within socialist nations in the West wealth has spread and the workers accept their social acceptable wages. They also do not want a democratic workplace………

[@bicyclist2]

European socialism works for the people, and Chinese Communism works for the benefit of the state. Watch the documentaries "Capitalism: A love story" and "Where to invade Next"

[@michaelcisneros8737]

Then they leave for less regulations and less taxes. Then what. Money's run out

[@dinnerwithfranklin2451]

Thanks for this simple and clear explanation.

[@crimsonkatanaz]

This is super late and probably won't get seen, but does anyone have other sources on communist being coined in the 20s? How does the communist manifesto, and other uses of the word communism, made before the Russians revolution relate to this?

[@titovalasques]

There is an emerging problem looming that will render this question and answer moot, A.I.s and robotics is and will continue to completely displace the current work force leaving humans with no job.

[@JuanMercado91]

not so if the workers control the A.I.

[@NikolajLRasmussen]

The Danish Social Democrats, formed in 1871 after the 1st International, already were named so in 1878, and got voted into the Danish parliament in 1884. Your history lesson is dumbing people down -_-

[@PetBunnyDebbie]

I love Richard Wolff! We should clone him and put his clones in political office.

[@HamzaKhan-sq3ms]

Town and small city is going ghost Migrating to big cities. Communism provide them jobs in home town. Central Asia. Kazakhstan. Kyrgyzstan. Tajikistan. Turkmenistan. Uzbekistan Before have jobs in home town home cities now going for jobs to Moscow. Eastern European countries before have jobs in home town home cities now migrating to London for jobs.

[@gigsrouiy8080]

The socialism of Germany during Hitler's era what's a monopolistic economy where the political system granted power to the corporate office to have a monopoly over the economy. Hands Volkswagen who made a custom made Cabriolet convertible for Hitler as well as being give another resources in exchange for preferential treatment in the markets, Audi BMW we're also giving preferential treatment but they were given permission by government to use human slaves without pay I'm barely any food. Nestle very famous company also lobbied government for the ability to use slaves oh, I'm just was considered a modern civilization in that era. Please consult with the misery index and how that is achieved you may also want to peruse the slavery index as well as your portion of the national debt taken out on to your name without your permission at an interest rate by which you will never be able to pay but will be forced to pay with your labor, history repeating? PS most of that that taken out on the your name came about as a form of bailouts for the big corporations courtesy of the bureaucrats. We see this collusion going back to Thousand Years, every boom-bust cycle was created for the benefit of the power Elites at the expense of the majority and all initiated by government policy which intervened in the markets to create every boom-bust cycle since 200 BC and ended with the impoverishment starvation and death of Millions upon Millions. Pretty sad human history

[@bicyclist2]

Agreed!

[@rashedahadi3585]

so the answer is libertarian socialism?

[@pauldavidking9083]

It's interesting but he's painting it with a light touch and suggesting that a lot of these players intended well. What happened in the USSR was power being built up by self-interested elite for illegitimate reasons, not just another attempt at egalitarian growth - no matter what lies they told themselves. Plenty of authentic socialists called them on it at the time. I think Wolff is pretty optimistic and sees the value in talking about it in those terms. I just think we should be honest about the darkness. Killing millions in a totalitarian state isn't just another attempt at socialism. It's important to tell if politicians are really what they call themselves - what's behind the rhetoric, what their actual motives are, who they serve. It's not a purity test, it's clarifying where we stand and what we face.

[@matejebach5487]

Nice but many things not accurate. First the last, there was form of socialism in Yugoslavia where workers were owners of their companies and factories. It worked with problems but worked, better than usual capitalism. That country was destroyed by churches and huge investments from the west in creating troubles for that economy. Second, in Russia word communism was connected directly with Stalin who proclaimed communism as existing state, while communism in fact was ideal for which socialism tends. And Stalin didn't create socialism or communism but existing beginning of development of socialism turned back in Russian feudalism where he was Czar, communist party his church and CCCP country - heaven on earth - communism. With sinners, orthodox-christian mass persecutions and so on. He was orthodox christian priest, he knows how to organize country in already known way. He destroyed most of previous communists efforts and turn it back into new version of imperial Russia. Some improvements he didn't revert and it was great breakthrough in the world, planned economy, gender equality, equality before the law, healthcare...

[@snowblow1984]

In theoretical sense, Stalin was a Marxist. I don't think he ever declared communism as it is in itself a finalization of the proletariat power and classless society. He didn't revert communist ideas like planned economy or equality. He continued implementing marxism. So, this "He destroyed most of previous communists efforts and turn it back into new version of imperial Russia. " is completely incorrect. Also, not Russia but RSFSR and USSR later on.

[@suzanadee8252]

Agreed on Yugoslavia but that happened after USSR took over with Warsaw Pact. Yugo slav communism/socialism was less insidiously anti democratic than that of the USSR. USSR didnt practice democratic socialism as practiced by many western European and Scandinavian countries today but practiced totalitarian communism with government control over all enterprises and no political opposition to the communist party. There were different leaders with different takes on totalitarian communism in the USSR, Lenin, Stalin, Khushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov and lastly Gorbachev, whom people accuse of destroying the USSR and communism in Russia. Under Gorbachev the USSR started perestroika and losening up of government control by allowing more private enterprises called "cooperatives" that could sell in a somewhat free market. So this was communism imposed by a small minority called the Bolsheviks who made the revolution in Russia and created the USSR. There was no worship of God or religion in the USSR. Gender and ethic equality was the goal, but fell short many times. As you may know there was horrible anti semitism in the USSR especially under Stalin. He even planned a community in the far east to supposedly deport all Soviet Jews, Barobijan. All of the Soviet Republics gad their own ethnicities with their own cultures and languages but were Russified, i.e. made to study and speak Russian and follow Moscow. Therefore, there has never been "democratic communism" anywhere. But there is democratic socialism in western europe.

[@HypermarketCommodity]

@@snowblow1984 Soviets called them self socialist, USSR, Union of socialist soviet Republics... Stalin was a Marxist-leninist. Only if you don't know any marx and lenin you would claim the Soviet Union was Communist, while there ideology was communism they knew they had not achieved communism.

[@snowblow1984]

@@suzanadee8252 Socialism means public ownership of means of production. Social democracy is capitalist state with strong protections for the majority of the population. You are mixing the two together. Brabejan wasn't created too move jews away from everyone. While antisemitism was present in ussr, Jews were freely living in every major city just like everyone else. Russian was learned as a second language and a unifying one in the republics.

[@snowblow1984]

@@HypermarketCommodity that's kinda what I said. I didn't claim it was communist. Communism have not been achived anywhere. I said, Stalin did not claim the end all comunism either. And he couldn't. As we both know he was a marxist .

[@karapana8398]

does he explain it for childs?

[@Booer]

New thumb nails, have him write down all his theories/stories. (Him being Richard Wolff). This channel seems like a liberal Radio Head talk show with visuals. This structure is similar to a Fox News/Rush Limbaugh/Alex Jones kind of production style. All u need is the logos, podcast mic, & a sponsor. But I believe in the conversation of all views, just need it to be more accessible & deeper content in the form of events with talks & lectures or history animations which runs with current news & other. it's a lot of work but it might be the right way to go at this point...I'm so tired of hearing Richards Wolffs voice drowning away with opinion points - with slippery language that seems abigious and presupposes the audience knows a certain amount of things

[@thrisbt1]

i hope it becomes reality so we can really see how much better things will get.

[@MOBFAX]

You’re a idiot. You want to give the government unlimited power and live on welfare. Trash commie

[@vitre69]

I like how socialism is basically a formless bunch of principals that everybody should strive for regardless of economic structure. It's like reading the zodiac, seeing a vague characteristic that everybody has at some level, and saying "that's so me". Imma create my own ideology where we are all about eating food, but against planting it.

[@andreykirchev32]

People have to unite and respect each other! You can take an example from the success of the ORGANIZED crime ;)

[@noelchambers6115]

why is there debates about a non-issue? market-based economies are the ONLY solution. whether its state controlled market economies like china or viet nam or social democracies or pure libertarianism. they have to have market economies. that wolff chose to educate himself on a failed system from 1840's is his problem. democratization of the workplace? c'mon richard...the game is over. go golfing in boca..your entire educational pursuit has been meaningless---you should have studied astrology.

[@MDNT3M]

there's so many layers of the system in terms of people, the ones who are doing well and the ones who think they are doing well will always defend the current system, even if they know it's at the detriment of many others. I'm quite anti capitalist in ways, but in other ways quite pro capitalism, i just think it needs more government regulation. also, let's have Plato's Philosopher King as president or prime minister and it may become more egalitarian, moral, ethical, just generally more humanitarian instead of primal drives, tribalism and economics over ethics. I think we need to become a multi-planetary species and this could potentially solve a lot of issues.

[@redrascal2424]

So it seems our dear Prof. has actually turned into a revisionist?

[@sinOsiris]

stay resilient but energetic [of search]° at the same time ref earlier comm Forbes °data -- catalyst of everything ----

[@rabbitssong179]

but muh vanguard party needs to tell ppl what do, I know marx better than these unedutaced ppl bcuz I'm upper middle class that have time to spend reading theory without doing praxis and dreams about leading the revolutionary vanguard party by myself, the masses needs me ;-;

[@hughmungous3357]

But "socialists" put almost all effort into democratizing race and gender relations.

[@rickobrien1583]

Most people spend their, not working lives but most of their awake lives at work with people they are not seriously connected to. I always though that was strange.

[@traceuse13]

Alienation. It really sucks

[@michaelgray1803]

Stupid if you look at it

[@FranciscoSilva-mk9tu]

That idea is developed by Marx in his Manuscripts of 1844

[@archivehans]

The more cruel thought is about how normalized it is.