Richard Wolff on the differences between Fascism and Socialism

"The nationalist hysteria is a mechanism fascism has always used to support its prime function which is to rescue, reinforce and stabilize the instability and the social problems of a capitalist
system."
Watch entire episode: • Economic Update: Fasci...
We make it a point to provide the show free of ads. Please consider supporting our work. Become an EU patron on Patreon: / economicupdate
Want to help us translate and transcribe our videos?
Learn about joining our translation team: bit.ly/2J2uIHH
Jump right in: bit.ly/2J3bEZR
Follow us ONLINE:
Patreon: / economicupdate
Websites: www.democracyatwork.info/econo...
www.rdwolff.com
Facebook: / economicupdate
/ richarddwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Twitter: / profwolff
/ democracyatwrk
Instagram: / democracyatwrk
Subscribe to our podcast: economicupdate.libsyn.com
Shop our Store: bit.ly/2JkxIfy
Prof. Wolff's latest book "Understanding Marxism"
Paperback: bit.ly/2BH0lkL
Ebook: bit.ly/2K6iI8v

[@menefrego5347]

Capitalists: Everything is economics Communists: Everything is economics The original horseshoe

[@yungsouichi2317]

Everything is economics, when it's not politics. Fascists such as yourself understand this, if only hazily or subconsciously.

[@menefrego5347]

@@yungsouichi2317 Politics is power, the history of the world is a battle of ideas, simple. The fact remains that the first 2 revolutionary positions view themselves through the lense of economic materialism, the first achieves the lower needs of man in Maslows hierarchy, the second barely meets that, neither make attempts for higher areas of the human experience, the second doesn't even try.

[@menefrego5347]

@@yungsouichi2317 I received a notification of your response, the beginning of an Engels prediction of a return to patriarchy. Either something went wrong or it was retracted, but I can't see what you said & so can't respond.

[@yungsouichi2317]

@@menefrego5347 maybe but I'm just gonna say C O P E and laugh regardless

[@menefrego5347]

@@yungsouichi2317 Poland kzbin.info/www/bejne/q2WlpXmJia9pjqc Spain kzbin.info/www/bejne/n4TLpXaKlrBohK8 Italy kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZpTJmWSderFoi9E Bulgaria kzbin.info/www/bejne/kIXKaXuld9Bqn80 Ukraine kzbin.info/www/bejne/Zpyzc3uFqNxprqc Right back at ya :)

[@Ancel7]

Capitalism benefits the few at its best. Socialism benefits all at its best.

[@Akumasama]

Fascism kills all but the few at its best.

[@distane8376]

@Frederic Bastiat "All things that are bad are leftist." You're a very big brain.

[@sublimesense7761]

Fascism is socialism

[@andrewkullar5679]

@Frederic Bastiat The Nazis literally rounded up disabled people and killed them.

[@g4macdad]

@Frederic Bastiat You forgot about the concentration camps, gas chambers and mass graves filled with thousands of murdered people. Germany had no choice but to implement those government services, as there was massive poverty under their previous system, before they took power.

[@Jammy2Sugars]

Once again, fantastically insightful. Bravo.

[@distane8376]

@Frederic Bastiat Hey try not to shoot up any public spaces later today ok?

[@damianbylightning6823]

Fantastically insightful if you continue to ignore the evidence which suggests he's wrong - and suggests fascism may well be a species of socialism. I'd go further, fascism is the superior moral sickness. It revels in its moral wretchedness. Socialsim sees all who do not agree with it as immoral and demands to dictate moral terms to all mankind. Both ugly sisters are cancers - both morally disgusting, selfish and pseudo-religious in nature.

[@SteveSmith-wv8sg]

@@distane8376 try not to round up any successful people for systematic murder today ok?

[@legalfictionnaturalfact3969]

@@damianbylightning6823 try brothers. lol.

[@madworld4489]

@@ccchhris but socialism never excluded anyone! 😆🤦‍♂️

[@rallymonkeys3326]

brilliant mind as usual... Maraming Salamat.... from Philippines!

[@gabms6320]

Professor sounds like you are talking every single point about whats happening in brazil today...😒😔

[@zhe8586]

gab ms. I am sure he was referring to the States 😂. Hint: ‘Make America great again’.

[@gabms6320]

@@zhe8586 trump its gandhi compared to bolsonaro. Brazil already its a state of exception

[@youtuber6185]

Brazil has some issues

[@gabms6320]

@Troll Trollsen nice try "troll trollsen". Try saying something next time because this bunch of words you putted together werent shit

[@grabbingkitties7824]

You never explain the difference you just talked about fascism and tried your best to equate it with trump. That's all I got from this.

[@thebarnhartboys7535]

Same

[@LongPolipop]

He did in the very beginning. Listen with your ears not ego

[@kiddkuru]

Fascists support private businesses. Socialists force businesses to be controlled by the state. Therefore, nazi Germany was socialist because during the Holocaust the state controlled all German businesses, prices, distribution of wealth, means of production, etc

[@BrotherCaptain36]

@@LongPolipop Not really, before 1:11 he just says that they have different goals. It's still the same ideology.

[@kristoffer3000]

@@BrotherCaptain36 They're the same ideology yet they're polar opposites with very very little in common, you must be EXTREMELY intelligent, top of your homeschooling class

[@TheDarkIllumination]

0:18 Oh so THATS why the Soviets signed The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in 1939 with Fascist Germany.

[@commonmancrypto1648]

Regarding the refrigerator analogy. The reality is that we have two choices, we either fix the broken refrigerator are we place all of our faith in some Refrigeration technology that has never been proven effective and has resulted in millions of tons of spoiled beef and poultry.

[@510tuber]

That's what Marx warned against. The people who constantly say, "Now's not the time." And look now, EVERY election cycle there're people who say, "Now's not the time to vote third party. Better to have a lifeboat with holes than build a new ship. We're in dire times, now's not the time!" Every.single.time. And it keeps going as they completely take over and destroy the planet. And the USSR actually ended famines that had gone on for thousands of years. There were famines so capitalists point and say "see? It doesn't work. It's not effective." When it actually was. But what's going on now under Capitalism? People are starving all over the globe because of capitalist imperialism and even in the capitalist home countries. Talk about spoiled beef and poultry. Capitalism will stifle socialist countries and even threaten others if they try and work with those countries, cause starvation, enact countless sanctions, then point and say, "See it doesn't work....and we have to keep it from taking over...but it doesn't work."

[@kristoffer3000]

Or we could just read a book and find out that the "refrigeration technology" you're talking about here has never been a failure and has always succeeded at what it set out to do. Look at China for example, 0% poverty rate and the fastest growing economy on the planet for over 30 years in a row with no signs of slowing down. The USSR had the fastest growing economy in the 20th century and if it was left to grow instead of being illegally dissolved against the will of the people it would now have overtaken the US economy.

[@308_Negra_Arroyo_Lane]

Way to totally describe Donald Trump without once mentioning his name.

[@bo_bo_deluxe]

No, he described 'murica's one party system (with corporate capture) that led to the Don.

[@alexanderson4497]

@@bo_bo_deluxe Yep. Trump is merely the symprtom is the big rot that American allowed to fester. A complete greedy, selfish sociopath to mirror the selfish country and it's people.

[@smrtfasizmu6161]

Actually, it describes fascism in any given country, I am not from America, and he describe my country without saying it, the same way he "describe Trump".

[@smrtfasizmu6161]

@Frederic Bastiat That's factually incorrect. Fascism is an ideology.

[@smrtfasizmu6161]

@Shane Lackey I am not putting it on Trump. And I don't think there is much difference between him and previous American presidents. Richard Wolf did imply Trump with "make a country great again". But the main idea that he could have expressed in other words is true. Fascists do find a golden age to which they want to return their nation. Often times that golden age is just a mythology or it wasn't really their country at all as in case of Mussolini trying to make new SPQR.

[@freegeorgia4808]

Mussolini was an Italian military man, journalist, and politician who was a member of the Italian Socialist Party for 14 years. In 1910, he was appointed editor of the weekly La Lotta di Classe (The Class Struggle), and the following year he published an essay entitled “The Trentino as seen by a Socialist.” His journalism and political activism led him to prison, but soon after he was released, the Italian Socialist Party-increasingly strong and having achieved an important victory at the Congress of Reggio Emilia-put him in charge of the Milanese newspaper Avanti!

[@odisseu9945]

And?

[@Buklen]

Was this made with Adobe eu?

[@PoliticalEconomy101]

Private Capitalist Cooperatives vs. Public Socialist Cooperatives: A capitalist cooperative is just a business with a more inclusive form of ownership. A capitalist cooperative functions the same as any other organization in a liberal society: it is founded to promote the self-interests of the members of the group. In cooperative terms it is founded to make a profit exclusively for its workers/owners. A worker owned cooperative would just make profits for the workers to appropriate for themselves. A worker owned cooperative or community owned cooperative would function as a de-facto private property business. A resource owned by the workers or a community has the right to exclude others in the country from its use. It also has the right to decide who can become owners of the resource. Society at large is at the mercy of the workers/owners who, like capitalists, may decide they don’t want to contribute to the common good and may want to keep all of the profits for themselves. They might use their profits to fund lobbying efforts to reduce taxes, reduce regulation, and procure subsidies from tax payers. Worker ownership would have little to no impact on the high level of income inequality already present in our capitalist economy. Socialists believe that all vital resources should be owned by the nation as a whole when possible. Resources should be freely available for all citizens. That’s why we statists want nationalization. A publicly owned cooperative is a group that works for the public-interest. Resources are available to anyone without restriction, and the workers do not expect exclusive profits from its business activities. A socialist cooperative has to turn a portion of its profits into the state and be collectivized, and the workers get paid a salary based on a democratically decided central income plan according to financial incentives in each industry. An alternative to nationalization would be a type of centralized stakeholder ownership (good for medium sized businesses). Stakeholder ownership distributes the profits more widely than does a strictly worker owned business. Stakeholder ownership also makes sure that all interests have equitable bargaining power. If the community is part owner then it can make sure that the profits get redistributed and used for social purposes.

[@kiddkuru]

Ok, Adolf

[@ATier87]

The Thumbnail is misleading. I thought Professor Wolff was gonna drop some sick rhymes and raps. Well, i'll still be waiting for it though.

[@ATier87]

@didrik mortensen ROW ROW FIGHT DA POWAH!! Seriously though, that is dedication. More power to you, bro.

[@ahmedanya1]

This is the only video that really helped me understand the difference, others really mumbling without even convincing me that they themselves understand what they are saying

[@philipberthiaume2314]

Thank you Richard

[@KeithGadget]

I agree they are very different. However, from the three major fascist movements I can think of, they all stated in socialism, and then once gaining power moved to fascism (took it to the extreme).

[@abesto4576]

I agree, but i would have to say that communism is not much less extreme

[@lcotler]

From a teaching or pedagogical perspective, this is by far the best discourse on the difference between fascism and socialism that I have ever seen! Watch it twice!

[@snipview8363]

Except that is a lie. Never mind that the Fascist Manifesto was written by the very well know Socialist and national syndicalist Alceste De Ambris, and reads exactly like the Socialist Manifesto, that Nazi party stands for National Socialist German Workers' Party ... .....that Nazi Germany and Russia started by being buddies and divvying up parts of Europe between them, that being at war is NOT proof they were not the same - a really stupid argument very typical of Wolff - exactly like capitalist countries being at war doesn't prove one of them is not capitalist... .....and last but not least that there is NO major difference between what Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, and Hitler and Stalin did to their people, to their political enemies and to the world. Wolff is nothing but a history denialist scrambling to dry clean and recycle the most criminal political philosophy in history. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_Manifesto#Contents_of_the_Fascist_Manifesto

[@DrSanity7777777]

@@snipview8363 "The first point we shall have to settle, therefore, is that fascism is a defense of capitalist society, an attempt to make it function."👇 mises.org/library/what-fascism Nazism was an ideology upon which its followers projected their fantasies and desires. Joachim Fest, reflecting upon the Strasserite dialogue, argued: "Hitler's party was socialist only to take advantage of the emotional value of the word... As with Hitler's protestations of belief in tradition, in conservative values, or in Christianity, the socialist slogans were merely movable ideological props." At the centre of Nazism was a personality cult; its glue was hatred of the Jews; and its leaders were ruthlessly pragmatic if pragmatism served the acquisition of power. It is not easy to define this historical phenomenon, and both Marxist and libertarian attempts have proven flawed. How, for instance, does one explain the fact that Hitler combined building a welfare system with euthanising the vulnerable? Socialists use welfare to protect the weak. Hitler used it to iron out the iniquities of capitalism (mostly unemployment) in order to let the "strong" flourish. The strong were, in his opinion, always the Aryan race. He was beaten, in the end, by an alliance of decadent Western democrats and Slavic communists. Long before that happy liberation, the destruction of the Strasserite element of the Nazi Party in the Night of the Long Knives (1934) was ordered to satisfy two traditional enemies of socialism: the aristocratic army and the nervous bourgeoisie. That Hitler did this to appease these powerful reactionaries provides us with a blueprint of what fascist of today have planned. "The really dangerous American fascist... is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way. The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist, the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power... They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution. They demand free enterprise, but are the spokesmen for monopoly and vested interest. Their final objective, toward which all their deceit is directed, is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection." - Henry Wallace Fascism relies heavily on nationalism(blood and soil). The idea of nation, race, and superiority are absent from the socialist thinking. Fascism, instead, does not call for social equality nor cares about the equal redistribution of wealth and income. A fascist economy aims at the strengthening of the nation, at the propagation of nationalistic principles, and at the enhancement of national superiority. Even if fascist economic policies often lead to economic growth - from which all segments of society can benefit - social equality is not among the goals of the fascist paradigm. Socialism and fascism are based on opposite principles and values. The idea of equality is alien to the fascism paradigm, while the concept of superiority is pivotal.

[@DrSanity7777777]

@@snipview8363 In May 1930, Hitler met with the Strassers in Berlin to try to persuade them to shut up about a socialist revolution. Hitler began with a lecture on art, arguing that true art conformed to eternal ideas. There were no “breaks” in true art but continuity through inheritance. By implication there could be no “revolution” but simply an assertion of the one truth that mattered to Hitler: racial superiority reflected in authority. Dan Hannan quotes Hitler then telling the Strassers "I am a socialist!", which sure reads like a smoking gun. But consider what Hitler goes on to say about the working-class: “The great masses of workmen want nothing else than bread and amusement; they have no understanding of idealism; and we can never count on being able to gain any considerable support among them. What we want is a picked number from the new ruling class, who - unlike you - are not troubled with humanitarian feelings, but who are convinced that they have the right to rule as being a superior race, and who will secure and maintain their rule ruthlessly over the broad masses.” As for class relations, Hitler asserted that workers had no right to have a say in their own management as it was a perversion of that eternal natural order of the survival of the fittest. The industrialists: “have worked their way to the top by their own abilities, and this proof of their capacity - a capacity only displayed by a higher race - gives them the right to lead.” And on the subject of reforming the economic system, Hitler offered this not very Left-wing observation: “Socialism is in itself a bad word [if it is used literally]. But it is certainly not to be taken as meaning that industry must be socialised.” So long as industrialists acted in the national interest, they can keep their property. Indeed, “it would be little short of a crime to destroy the existing economic system.” "The main plank in the National Socialist program is to abolish the liberalistic concept of the individual and the Marxist concept of humanity and to substitute therefore the folk community, rooted in the soil and bound together by the bond of its common blood." - Adolf Hitler in the German Reichstag, (January 30, 1937)

[@snipview8363]

@@DrSanity7777777 WOW, you discovered that Fascists and Hitler had some different ideas about Socialism than Marx? Think Marx invented Socialism? Or think Socialism in practice, in Soviet Russia and all those who followed, didn't stray away from the idealistic and naive Marx, who could never hold a job and lived on the back of Engels? :-) "We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." "I have learned a great deal from Marxism, as I do not hesitate to admit. The difference between them and myself is that I have really put into practice what these peddlers and pen-pushers have timidly begun.... I had only to develop logically what Social Democracy repeatedly failed in because of its attempt to realize its evolution within the framework of democracy. National Socialism is what Marxism might have been if it could have broken its absurd and artificial ties with a democratic order. " "Our socialism reaches much deeper. It does not change the external order of things, it orders solely the relationship of man to the state. ... Then what does property and income count for? Why should we need to socialize the banks and the factories? We are socializing the people." Adolf Hitler in his May Day Speech, Berlin, 1 May 1927 (quoted by John Toland in his book Adolf Hitler, 1976, p. 306.)

[@DrSanity7777777]

@@snipview8363 In 1920 the short lived German workers party adopted certain socialist policies to appeal to the working class in Germany and reformed And Became the National Socialist German Workers' Party or NSDAP for short. The NSDAP still maintain a pro capitalist class structure (something that goes against the basic principles of socialism in the removal of classes and distribution of capital) they used these socialist policy’s they adopted before returning to a corporate cartel Base and in the process many people from within the NSDAP made massive profit through there pro capitalist ideology. Another part of socialism is “no class’s, no race, No nations only socialism” do we really need to go into the Nazis views on Jews and Homosexuals? there views on Aryan and German supremacy? There views on communism? In 1933 the NSDAP banned trade Unions and strikes, Nazis troops occupied Trade union buildings arrested leaders and seized Union funds, nothing says “leftist” like anti Union They were fascists (a far right wing Ultra Nationalist ideology) who had more in common with the Likes of Franco and Mussolinis fascist dictatorship than they ever did with the writings of Karl Marx, Another thing During the Night of long knives the Nazis murdered members of the “Strasserism” the more Traditional socialist leaning subgroup Within the NSDAP, the Strasserism where viewed as enemies of Hitlers ideology and goals for “greater Germany” So no the Nazis weren’t socialist or left they where the complete opposite. kzbin.info/www/bejne/noapp3pqh9WqgKs

[@TheChowitzer]

Hey Prof. Wolff, I love your content... I'd just like to say although I know you're a Marxist and like to focus on that perspective, I'd really love to see you do a video on anarchism and your full thoughts on it - I think it could be very enlightening. Thanks for creating your content!

[@carlostaffanelly418]

Would love to see this as well, the economic theory of anarchism seems like untrodden territory right now

[@atrijitdas1704]

@The Colonel "anything that has rules cannot be anarchism" is wrong and maybe that's why there should be more talk about anarchism. Anarchism opposes UNJUST (not all) hierarchies in society. Anarchism isn't just advocating for chaos. It is advocating for society to be as lateral as possible in how power is distributed. I would suggest checking out the youtube channels "Thought Slime" and "Anarchopac" to get a better understanding of anarchism

[@atrijitdas1704]

@The Colonel guess i agree with you on the first bit. everyone is against "unjust" heirarchies. What matters is which heirarchies you call unjust. Just like how every ideology is biased or violent. Just towarda different things. But you're still wrong to suggest anarchists want no rules and complete chaos. Which dictionary are you looking to? I'd say a better way to understand anarchism would be to read self-proclaimed anarchists. Try Proudhon, Bukunin, Chomsky, Arundhati Roy, whoever. You don't have to agree with any of them. It's just none of them would describe their varied ideas of anarchism as what you're saying. You say anarchists' economic ideas are theft, anarchists say private ownership of means of production is theft. You say anarchists believe in no rules, anarchists say they believe in striving for "order without power". Here's someone working on a phd in anarchism and its history doing a basic explanation. Maybe spare 15mins and check it out? (they cite lots of old dudes with big beards who are called anarchists): kzbin.info/www/bejne/eXWweJmpis-Glas

[@MRWDL800]

@The Colonel "... as opposed to all those other political ideologies FAVOURING unjust hierarchies... " like fascism? like capitalism? like medieval feudalism? like fucking everything? "I love the irony of being told the rules of how to be an anarchist." You expect to be able to make up your own definition of words?

[@deusmorthem441]

MRWDL800 he is literally opposed to the example you project onto him. You make the argument supporting his comment. Did you not realise this when you typed your comment?

[@waltermorales3084]

That was fabulous Dr. Wolff. 👌💯👍

[@madworld4489]

They can talk about their dreams for the future all they want, in practice, socialism and fascism are indistinguishable.

[@Arthurian.]

This is the only truth I see. No wonder why people have such difficulty describing how they're so completely different.

[@kristoffer3000]

@@Arthurian. Must be hard to go around talking politics with people when you're incapable of grasping very simple concepts 💀

[@kristoffer3000]

In practice socialism and fascism couldn't be further apart if you tried, but go on, brainlet.

[@Arthurian.]

@@kristoffer3000 Nazis are socialists

[@joggy93]

For once I am not convinced entirely. Historically, European fascist movements stemmed from socialism: Mussolini was a prominent socialist party member and Nazi stands for national socialists.

[@josefreitas6824]

If he comes from a socialist or social-democrat prespective, that would explain the effort to distinguish fascism from socialism. This effort has been going on for decades. Fascism comes from fascio, which were the italian workers and soldiers councils, not much diferrent from soviets. And he is leaving corporatism out of the equation because that would conflict with his notion that fascim is for capitalists. He means big industry leaders, investors, bankers... this notion of capitalist leaves out the small business owner, the family farm, the family restaurant. These examples are capitalist per excelence, because they do own capital and operate for profit. He actually means corporatism\ corporativists. This system is the economic system of fascism and it does help the big corporations IF, and only if, they play along with whatever the government tells them to. If they don't...welp, either the state takes over or some other less legal way of changing the board will take place. Corporativism is a way for the state to control whatever a company does without owning like the socialist take of the means of production demands. But wait... if the national-socialists and the fascists, whom as he pointed out "Want the state to step in", why would they let go of the control of the economy to private enterprises and ownership? Why would they loose this control? Well, they haven't lost such control because these "private" enterprises only exist and operate for as long as they play along. Not capitalist, corporatist. And he says Mussolini was anti-semitic and associates the fascist ideology with racism... only after 1938 did Mussolini enact racial laws in Italy and it only got serious after Germany took over the nothern part of italy after 1943. Fascism doesn't spread racism in any comparable way to nacional-socialism as the latter is based off a racial notion of superiority thus justifying the segregation of inferior peoples.The national part refers to the aryans, not even the germans, and these aryans were considered to BE THE NATION, and wherever they lived, or had lived in the past, was their rightfull place. Ask Himmler and his mystic shithead followers.

[@freegeorgia4808]

​@@josefreitas6824fascism only has a capitalist veneer. Giovanni Gentile, a neo-Hegelian philosopher, was the intellectual author of the “doctrine of fascism,” which he wrote in conjunction with Benito Mussolini. Gentile’s sources of inspiration were thinkers such as Hegel, Nietzsche, and also Karl Marx. Gentile went so far as to declare “Fascism is a form of socialism, in fact, it is its most viable form.” One of the most common reflections on this is that fascism is itself socialism based on national identity. Gentile believed that all private action should be oriented to serve society. He was against individualism, for him there was no distinction between private and public interest. In his economic postulates, he defended compulsory state corporatism, wanting to impose an autarkic state (basically the same recipe that Hitler would use years later).

[@freegeorgia4808]

Your right. Everyone kneq fascism was on the left. Especially the creator of it. History has been um modified to project it onto the right. Its not. Giovanni Gentile, a neo-Hegelian philosopher, was the intellectual author of the “doctrine of fascism,” which he wrote in conjunction with Benito Mussolini. Gentile’s sources of inspiration were thinkers such as Hegel, Nietzsche, and also Karl Marx. Gentile went so far as to declare “Fascism is a form of socialism, in fact, it is its most viable form.” One of the most common reflections on this is that fascism is itself socialism based on national identity. Gentile believed that all private action should be oriented to serve society. He was against individualism, for him there was no distinction between private and public interest. In his economic postulates, he defended compulsory state corporatism, wanting to impose an autarkic state (basically the same recipe that Hitler would use years later).

[@josefreitas6824]

@@freegeorgia4808 I'm a PhD student in internacional relations and I can tell you that at this level, people still call fascism far right

[@odisseu9945]

​@@josefreitas6824maybe because it is

[@josehawkins4276]

Marx was and remains a giant of economic thought, who understood the value for workers when they maintain mutual control over the surplus-value of their labor, separate from their individual thoughts and expressions. Bolshevism was the furnace that forged the Soviet State. A state having a corporate structure, it's foundation cast in ideological purity. An insidious ideology that controlled the thoughts and expressions of the population through propaganda, force and other means. When any elite, corporate, bureaucratic, religious, academic and so forth, thinks for us, compels our speech, we will have begun a perilous journey, inevitably descending into a neo-postmodern and/or neo-fascist inferno.

[@wingoreviewsboxingandmma3667]

this ignores the fact that Hitler despised capitalism. just because communism isn't only for of socialism, it's just one of the extremes of it. Fascism was created by an Italian socialist. Hitler the fascist you tall about was a socialist. it's in his political parties name

[@crystalross7943]

Thank you for explaining it. I never really understood the difference in history class.

[@gordonstewart6757]

MAGA for the chosen few

[@PoliticalEconomy101]

The income distribution must be socialized folks!

[@juliahenriques210]

Professor, the class analysis of fascism works for Italy, as well as for Iberian authoritarianism, and for US backed Latin American authoritarianisms decades later. It does work a little less for Germany and Austria, though, and less still for the Eastern fascists. Maybe the point that's missing in most marxist takes on fascism is that other factors not directly tied to class struggles enabled it to succeed. Authoritarianism, the belief that hierarchy is a necessity, that someone needs to have authority to issue direct orders to others, is a monster in itself. It does align more easily with the right, sure, but it is its own thing nonetheless. Of all the leftist movements in the beginning of the 20th century, the ones that withstood were the ones that faced fascist and right-wing authoritarianism, which are quick to embrace social hierarchies and whose ultimate form is militarism, with a strong military force of their own. The price paid was their own drift towards authoritarianism, of course, but that's another topic. The same can be said of tribalism in the form of nationalism, that was at the core of all fascisms, but was also used to great extent by Stalin and Mao. And the same can be said of religion, another staple of fascisms, but also the path that led MLK to socialism. It would be great if you tackled, for example, how the fascist rethoric was actually one of transcending the class struggle through an organic nationalism, and also how fascists were obsessed with order and absolutely terrorized by complexities, both economic and social (as they continue to be).

[@Gigika313]

More people need to see this, everyone share if you can!

[@kunga1044]

Your the Greatest. Waking people up to the truth.

[@Todavaina1]

Fascism is the effort by the richest to save a broken capitalist system. That's a remarkable thought considering that fascism and communism became popular during the great depression as alternatives to what was called then the failures of capitalism.

[@AdelSaeedPersian]

And how you realize that is who backs the fascists when capitalism goes to shit. And you realize that fascism has zero chance of taking over without getting financed and propagandized by the richest people.

[@Baffi_]

Well said

[@bensondavido4525]

Please explain to me why Venezuela crashed? Or the USSR? Or Ghana or the Czech republic? I read so many people tell me how bad socialism is when implemented and I hear others say how great it is... I see evidence of the former but not much of the later. Help me understand

[@bensondavido4525]

@Frederick Röders I don't mean to simplify the reasons. I actually believe you can attribute some of the success the Soviet, the Czech and Cuban systems to socialist ideas. I just don't understand what you and other people mean when you say "Capitalist undermining" If the socialist or communist systems were superior they would have survived would they not? I only know what I have read in the last 5 months but I'm still not seeing how these systems are inevitable. It seems that fascism is an inevitable consequence of "true" socialism because the power in a socialist economy always accumulates in the hands of a party which is inevitably controlled by a charismatic strongman who remakes the society into a dictatorship. Weren't these fascist societies socialist as well? I would agree that capitalism has a few flaws... mainly it doesn't address justice system (although it probably shouldn't) and it doesn't provide comfort to the sick or mentally ill. But I don't see why the system gets such a bad rap given how many people have benefited from it.

[@theTeflonDon1]

This guy is nuts

[@DougGrinbergs]

1:01 profits for a few, laughable trickle-down vs. real social benefits for the many

[@TheWizardGamez]

Your saying Mussolini was a capitalist? Or at least a crony capitalist? By that same token Lenin was…

[@mrsentencename7334]

Mussolini was a former Marxist. He just took the movement in a nationalist direction for Italy, opposing the international Marxist party. “What a shame we lost Mussolini, he was the only one who could have usher in the revolution for us in Italy” - Lenin Mussolini wanted a few select corporations (another word for syndicates and/or trade unions) to run the economy instead of lots of small businesses. “Everything in the state nothing outside the state nothing against the state” This is not capitalism in any way. This guy chats waffle and I suspect he’s a socialist

[@BowToWard86]

​@@mrsentencename7334 Wolff is definitely a Marxist, and has a vested interest in making all bad things seem to be as a result of capitalism. Thank you for using the actual definition for fascism that Mussolini gave, instead of that merger of state and corporate power nonsense.

[@johnmeyer2072]

After reading more about fascism and socialism it occurred to me that the system we have now is more like fascism (socialism for the rich/corporations with a strong nationalist component). It was a strange thing to realize because it was so disturbing, and now this very credible expert is saying the same thing.

[@hughbenson1987]

Can you recommend any of the books that you have read which would explain the comic schemes of Fascism?

[@konferansjer]

Talking about the difference between socialism and fascism is like talking about the difference between caviar and dog shit

[@armanraha651]

Richard Wolff 💓

[@HiddenOcelot]

Just because they're "opposed" doesn't mean they're opposites. The reason most people oppose both, or equate them both is because they're both collectivist movements (or homogeneity focused movements). they might go about it in slightly different ways, but tbh, it's not too far off. The propaganda starts in the classroom (such as teaching specific things, nationalism for fascism, and social economics in socialist education). They attempt to make the people under governance accept the political leanings (and economic leanings) of the majority, or the state using this education. About the capitalist profits bs you just spewed too, they DON'T like capitalism, their own manifesto even states as much. What they DO do however, is protect personal ownership of business as long as it aligns with the states goals (can cite this if needed, also historic examples shows this to be true), and take the business into the fold of the party if they do not align (and remove the personal ownership of that business therefore getting rid of the "capitalist" profits). I find your understanding of the economics of actual fascist regimes to be lacking here (and highly skewed towards one political leaning, and against one political leaning). the most common fascist regimes actually did provide healthcare for citizens, it also provided education for the population for free too. They did "redistribute" wealth, just towards the uses of the "state" (or the collective nation). That's really the only difference here, nothing else is different, the "goals" are the same (betterment of society as a whole), but how they go about it is slightly different, never forget that. I do see a LOT of political leanings in how you speak about socialism and about how little you actually know about fascism, I myself despise both of these ideologies, but at least I can say that I'm as neutral as I can possibly by towards both. Yes socialists have good intentions, but so did the fascists, they certainly "tried" to better society, but the way they went about it, of course wasn't good (and the same with socialists too). I also find it ironic that he thinks that big business is somehow trying to fix a system that is broken? When I know at least 10 or so of the largest companies in America pushing the "left leaning" ideology to this very day, it's not about that, they aren't trying to do that, they're trying to use the ideology to push their own profits regardless of what they do, it matters not if they "destroy" the capitalist economy, they profit regardless, and mostly because they know that it's going to turn not into socialism, but fascism because of this push, and they're going to be protected because they're helping the government do it's thing (again, as long as it fits party lines, and aligns with the "state" they get to keep making money).

[@willwalker6894]

Exactly. His trying to claim because they oppose each other is proof they are not the same. That’s like saying because Sunni and Shiite are at constant opposition to each other, that means they are not Muslim. Fascism was birthed out of Socialist doctrine. Mussolini’s core convictions as a Marxist didn’t change, other than the fact he felt the conception of socialism needed to if it wanted to operate in the real world.

[@Bofadeeznutz69]

@@willwalker6894 why did the capitalists fund the fascists then?

[@nancode]

Your explanation is way better than this video. And, btw, socialists and Nazis were allied in the beginning of WWII, and only after Hitler betrayed Stalin in operation Barbarossa, they started fighting each other.

[@HiddenOcelot]

@@nancode They both knew they would fight each other, and I can tell you why they knew, because they were competing for the same ideological territory, they knew the collectivist bent of the other could undermine their attempts to push their own ideas. There is a reason the fascists left the conservatives alone, and took out the socialists first, because they were competition, and the conservatives simply weren't.

[@kristoffer3000]

@@nancode A non-aggression pact is not an alliance. That is not a hard concept to grasp.

[@sprengtportianpatriot6068]

I don't think fascism is that simple. Fascism has always had both a "right" and a "left" wing. I'm a little bit sick right now, so I won't get into details, but think of the fascists' 1919 manifesto or the Italian Social Republic. Mussolini also wanted the post-fascist government of Italy to be socialist. And this is basically just the tip of the iceberg. I'd be glad to answer any questions anyone might have, but keep it polite please.

[@user-ik2no7jw5g]

How do we stop it from happening?

[@bloanta]

You are the dude

[@teddyboef2821]

Th♥️nk you!

[@florianruhstaller1730]

Who cares about inequality? As long as everyone is getting richer whats the problem

[@shreypurohit2877]

Bruh this fire 🔥

[@HughMorristheJoker]

Wolff should be syndicated to all schools in US

[@Texasjim2007]

Mussolini was let us note the founder of Fascism began as a Socialist newspaper editor. The very word "Fascism" came from the Italian word for trade union "fascia" and it was in the very Bible of Marxism the Communist Manifesto that the idea of a "dictatorship of the proletariat" originates. In what sort of Orwellian double-speak is Fascism not merely a form of Socialism in the same sense that Catholicism is a form of Christianity? Socialism is like any religion. It is an intellectual theory that has many different sects in a democracy where people are not restricted by overpaid wealthy social elites like yourself from having dissenting opinions from yours as to what words actually mean to them. When you or any other group of elitists gain the political power to do that you become an entrenched theocracy like Dark Age Roman Catholicism arbitrarily defining everything and denying anyone who disagrees with you any right to question your opinions. Political power is inherently corrupting for any religion or philosophy. "Equality" lets make note is in fact a legalistic myth in objective reality. There are actually very few things in which any two human beings are measurably equal. We each have one head to store a finite amount of information in for example but each individual has their own individual life history in different places and situations that only by massive over-simplification can be described as identically equal. My wife whose first memories are North Korean thugs holding machine guns on her mother to steal all her family's food for themselves when they occupied Seoul obviously has a very different idea of that wonderful socialist "equality' means in real life than you do. Your Bernie Sanders sect of the Socialist religion doesn't seem to have any problem with billionaires like Jeff Bezos or George Soros as long as they give some of their money to keep you and all your rich Socialist friends living far above the global standard of living by peddling hate speeches against their fellow capitalist competitors trying to drive them out of business allowing all your billionaire buddies to gain corporate monopolies by eliminating their competitors. Karl Marx was likewise employed by a German capitalist named Engels let's note. If the difference between Fascism and Socialism is that Fascists supported the financial self-interests of capitalists who gave them money against rival capitalists who didn't then aren't you by your own definition doing essentially the same thing as any Fascist intellectual in Nazi Germany did? The fact that Hitler's German Socialists fought a war with Stalin's Russian Socialists who invaded non Socialist Poland at the same time for the exact same purpose of redistributing Polish property to themselves and their friends like the New York Times reporter who took bribes of money and sexual favors from Russian agents to cover up Stalin's mass murder of 20 million Ukrainians to steal their wheat is not proof Fascists aren't Socialists but rather that organized crime families who call themselves Socialists when they get enough power to take away everybody else's property in their own country are capable of coming up with rationalizations for starting gang wars with other Socialist countries trying to steal their property. Cambodian Socialists and Vietnamese Socialists lets note killed more people in the 12 years after Americans left South East Asia than everybody killed on both sides in the 12 years we were fighting a war there, A Sociologist named RJ Rummel has facts and figures to objectively prove that. Historically there is no evidence that turning a country into one big state corporate monopoly is more efficient at creating wealth than letting rival capitalists compete with each other to supply what the public demands which is why technological progress occurs...the only factor known to pragmatically improve the standard of living for everybody in a country. No matter what political system the smart people are always going produce more wealth than stupid people when given the incentive to do so. Any idiot can steal somebody else's car but not everybody is smart enough to build one for themselves. Capitalist America has never had a mass famine like Russia or China had with state run economies that caused over 80 million people to starve to death. If all you want is equality join the People's Temple mass suicide cult and you can achieve it very easily by making everybody equally dead following orders from an insane psychopath who doesn't have anyone with the power to criticize his thinking no matter how out of touch with reality crazy.

[@christophergould8715]

Mussolini was preceded by what I would call Conservative Liberals-often Free Masons so anti Catholic Church,wanting more Secular changes in society along the lines of Napoleon and the French Revolution,wanting education and marriage out of the hands of the Church.At the same time being unfriendly to Trade Unions and Universal Sufferage.Wanting to industrialised but not liking the organised working class and likely to be panicked by strikes and militancy.Supportive of colonies for Italian industry.After the Russian revolutions there was a strike wave in Northern Italy which turned these classical Liberals into fascists willing to make compromises to avoid the Red Peril.Mussolini gave them a lot of what they wanted-Ethiopia,the destruction of Socialist movement and Unions but did not continue vendetta with the Catholic Church.Mussolinis Socialism?Yes but that is an old story,intellectuals going from left to right You have it in America-Whitaker Chambers-even Ronald Reagan started as a New Dealer and I have heard even at one point tried to join the US Communist Party

[@Texasjim2007]

​@@christophergould8715 Actually Reagan never tried to join the Communist Party but a lot of the organizations he was involved with as a Democrat turned out to be heavily infested with closet Communists including it should be noted the Screen Actors Guild he was the trade union President of at one point and had Stalin actually put out an order to assassinate him for political incorrectness that fortunately was foiled by Stalin's death and Beria's subsequent arrest by Khrushchev. The French Revolution is where the distinction between Right and Left began let's remember with the left being anti-Catholic Jacobin psychopaths who wanted to end all distinctions between Church and State by making Atheism France's new and improved State Religion mass murdering anybody who disagreed with it similar to Cromwell's anti-Catholic Puritans who cut off their king's head like the Jacobins did. The hidden agenda of all advocates of Orwellian despotism is in fact to give their own ruling elites absolute power unrestrained by any legal or ethical tradition forbidding their cult from raping, robbing, enslaving or murdering everybody else no matter if you want to call the cult Socialists, Fascists, Muslims, or Maoists. As Sigmund Freud observed there are no two mindsets as similar as the Far Right and the Far Left.

[@KenSexe67]

A Polish friend of mine who lived through both the communist and capitalist Polish governments gave me an interesting analysis. She said that "under communism everyone has money but there is nothing to buy whereas with capitalism nobody has nay money but there is a lot to buy." I always wondered how this fits within the socialist model...

[@AyeAyeAye19]

In Communism you wouldn't "buy" anything. That's mistaking Socialism with Communism, which seems to be the go-to for those that don't understand it.

[@zackandrew5066]

Interesting

[@waindayoungthain2147]

My idea , the Powerful saves the business for more powerful. But it’s not responsibility to us. But we live together in the society, we need help to support the business to ourselves as we are People 🙏🏼😀.

[@oddjam]

As a person sympathetic to libertarian Socialism, please don't equate Socialism with "the government stepping in". Big fan of coops tho

[@GForce162]

Pay your education debt first before making useless comments

[@deussivenatura5805]

muhua Guo That's a really dumb comment.

[@youtuber6185]

In a capitalist country you are free to create a coop. I own a company and I share part of the profits. And in our meetings I get the feeling of the group and make the final decisions. I’ve tried holding votes but it becomes hostile very very quick and makes people uncomfortable with all types of pressure. I’ve found that the most experienced and wize is best to make the final decision. That’s why private ownership works, that’s why capitalism works... a final decision maker

[@TheSimonScowl]

@@youtuber6185 How is capitalism working today?! You know another huge crash is coming, don't you?

[@youtuber6185]

The Hermit Yes , and it may be a depression around 2030. It’s caused by servicing the national deficit among other things. The global elite will use it to roll up the US , Canada and Mexico into a central currency much like the Euro. It’s all part of moving the world into a new world order. They can’t accomplish this with free citizens and a thriving capitalist economy but they can do it by crashing the economies and promising socialism. That’s the irony

[@paradisecaregiving7126]

Nice work, Professor. Thank you.

[@cameronbrown9424]

In the former Soviet Union, socialism was the national identity. Same with North Korea, China, etc. Facism is about authoritarianism, regardless of the ideology.

[@JuanVasquezq]

Capitalism together with democracy lead us to this where the majority prevails and lives better, but always leaves behind the small groups; this generates socialism, modern socialism is progressive and needs to segregate the majority to win, then some of the segments formed from segregation will generate fascism since they will not benefit from social policies. thats my equation.

[@nthperson]

Is there a way for individuals to do well for themselves by doing good for their communities and societies? The path to this outcome was put forward by Henry George in his writings. The solution is for the laws of a society and its system of raising public revenue to prohibit and prevent monopoly privilege. This can be accomplished, George observed, by the public collection of "rents" from all sources. Rents are unearned to individuals and entities. Rents are societally-produced. Let individuals keep the values individuals actually produce. I use the term "cooperative-individualism" to describe the outcome. The structure is not "socialism" as generally perceived, but the outcome is a just distribution of income and wealth to those who actually produce income and wealth, ending the centuries-long redistribution of income and wealth that now exists to non-producing "rentier" interests.

[@andrewkullar5679]

So a land/property tax?

[@nthperson]

@@andrewkullar5679 Yep. Exempt all property improvements. Impose an annual tax on land equal to the potential annual rental value of whatever land is held. Henry George was far from the first to propose this change in public policy. The idea comes most prominently in the writings of the French political economists known as Physiocrats, writing in the mid-18th century.

[@Hardcoreforliife]

DEBATE STEVEN CROWDER OR BEN SHAPIRO

[@charleswashington3973]

Neither of those jokers are worth the time of day. Destroying them might help populate the message more though. For a genuinely academic discussion, a debate with another professor of economics would be much more useful

[@mikejoseph3111]

make the country great again you know who said that Hitler same thing we hear now

[@sharadowasdr]

TIK should watch this.

[@badman3799]

I listen to this man, but the only ‘ism’ that will provide solutions is education ’ism’. Know more. It starts and continues from there.

[@atrijitdas1704]

you are mistaken if you think fascists of the past and the present weren't/aren't "educated". you are also mistaken if you think those who help fascists gain or come into power aren't/weren't "educated". Since education is usually accessible to certain privileged sections of society, these are also the people who benefit from the status quo and ensuring it remains intact. If that meant siding with fascists, they went there. E.g. i live in India and the current ruling party is the BJP, which is hardcore rightwing. The bjp also has ties with the RSS, which has an explicit aim for making India an ethnostate and took guidance from hitler and mussolini. BJP got voted in as the majority for their second 5-year term by a large margin. And the voterbase wasn't just people who weren't "educated". It was middleclass/educated/upper-caste people

[@badman3799]

Atrijit Das “you are mistaken” if you assume you know just what i mean when i use the word ‘education’

[@atrijitdas1704]

@@badman3799 ahh sorry. I assumed formal education i guess.

[@badman3799]

Atrijit Das capitalism is bad when its all about greed and exploitation. It was better when business owners Did Not aim to overcharge, underproduce, underpay the worker, etc. Remember there was a time when things were “built to last” ? That was capitalism. A fair deal. A win-win situation. A company “taking care of its employees” All that has left capitalism. . So people shouldn’t ask to be ruled and controlled more by others (government; socialism) just because capitalism has gone bad. Bitcoin and Ethereum are good examples of systems that can help to fix all this. These systems are extremely corruption and cheat resistant. BTC and ETH are examples of systems that have “rules without rulers”

[@mattkerslake2881]

@@badman3799 please tell me more about these good days of capitalism my reactionary friend

[@erikvan9582]

Even if it was why would it matter again?When we talk about facsism we generally look at it in horror because of all the genocidal acts of it,There economic systems might be a failure or a success,but when we look at nazis we remember the holocaust,the war and destruction of freedom.

[@rant9881]

If I didn't know any better, the usa has been rather fascist even before trump.

[@rant9881]

@Robert Johnson Wut?

[@jonathanrogers897]

@@rant9881 Robert Johnson IS a fascist so he's going "lalalallalalala" with lots of words that literally describe what Dr. Wolf already described "bUt dAfFraNt" Get fucked robert, and I mean by a cactus or a pike.

[@rant9881]

​@Fascism is The future don't ever take off that white hood man. I hope you carry it to your grave.

[@rant9881]

@Fascism is The future go back to the hole you crawled out of

[@TheSimonScowl]

@Robert Johnson According to Mussolini himself: "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power" You're welcome!

[@Dontwannaknow44]

Phenomenal job Richard!!!

[@eliasE989]

Well said. Thanks for the insights.

[@TheMrPeteChannel]

Mussolini renamed Italy the "Italian Social Republic".

[@scasey1960]

Reagan also used “Make America Great Again” as their election slogan .

[@poptraxx418]

America did become great again

[@kristoffer3000]

@@poptraxx418 By plummeting millions into poverty and setting the framework for people like Trump?

[@GondolaVoyager]

Half way in I thought "wow, this actually doesn't seem too biased and is accurate to what I know"... But then he goes "--fascism is the effort by the richest people in this society sitting on top of the biggest corporations to save the system that made them rich." How is this so? Could anyone explain? I can find no wealth estimates for Mussolini, Oswald Mosley, Corneliu Codreanu, Giovanni Gentile, or Plínio Salgado so I wonder where this idea comes from. Look at modern self-professed fascists like Cultured Thug or vaguely "far-right" individuals, most of them are middle class *who fight against the 1%!* Are Fascists the ones who pander and change their views to what will garner the most support, or is that the modern parties? Nationalist policies are the opposite of what the super rich corporate big wigs want. They want more immigration for cheap labor. Who is truly concerned with protecting their wealth, the ideology that *only* concerns itself with the accumulation of capital and consumerism regardless of how it's required, or the ideology based on the rejection of materialism and the embrace of spiritualist idealism (which are the same grounds it rejects Communism)? "Fascists are only concerned with lining their pockets" is literally backward to their doctrine. Mosley talked much about ending the income tax (would never happen under capitalism) and instead taxing large corporations for government spending, and the philosophy largely involves cutting out materialism & radical individualism for the sake of the collective peoples. This video, like nearly every other "explanation" or break down of the topic is lying propaganda.

[@GondolaVoyager]

Of course the guy is a Marxist Jew. What else would he be.

[@AlexeiRamotar]

It shows either intellectual gymnastics (for those who actually understand some economics) or intellectual laziness when people make that comparison. I saw this by a KZbin contributor, TIK, fascism = socialism + nationalism; nazism = socialism + nationalism + racial supremacy.

[@Overitall805]

Spoken like a true comrade

[@sgtcrtrdnl]

Fascism and communism are both forms of collectivism/socialism.

[@mrsentencename7334]

Correct, fascism was just Italian socialism, it only cared about you if you were Italian.

[@perrymason866]

Didn’t the Nazis take control of all production? Isn’t that the suggestion of socialism, too? I’m not saying that all socialists = Nazis... But I’m definitely seeing some links in the whole governmental monopolisation thing. Am I completely wrong to see those links? Or are people just flat denying that centralisation of production hasn’t actually ever gone well? I’m perfectly open to the possibility that I am wrong so please re-read this post before you argue about things that I have not said.

[@perrymason866]

Janindu Maleesha yeah, cheers. I have actually done a bit of reading around this since posting this comment. It seems that the main issue that socialism has to get past is the problem of how to put the wealth into the hands of the people... Taking it the way the communists did, clearly didn’t work. I’m not suggesting socialism would work, either. Just saying that to even achieve it would be rather difficult. Workers’ co-ops seem to be one of the better ideas, to me. Whether or not they will compete as well across all industries and in all markets, is another question entirely.

[@subsonic9854]

Aye, dont blame foreigners when you can blame rich people.

[@missyv8900]

All the isms have some common negative outcomes. Imagine what an evolved system that eliminates those outcomes could do.

[@kristoffer3000]

You mean socialism? Because that's what you're talking about.

[@Smoothie782]

Do they both give power to the government?

[@AdelSaeedPersian]

Now this is an epic speech by comrade Wolff.

[@peterclark4685]

Unwittingly you have pointed to the solution. Corporate Capitalism IS the problem. Capitalism when it gets no bigger than the boss, his factory, his business model and product, his workers, function because it suits human nature (the only person who looks after something is the bloke who owns it, the workers and managers know each other, socialise, care about their problems, a two way street, etc). Note: With Just-In-Time production even the biggest manufacturer can be re-engineered with the above framework. Asking governments for solutions cannot work for the precisely same reasons. They emulate the 'head office' model of Corporatism¹. Asking ideology for solutions cannot work because it, like religion, requires a 'leap of faith', generates purists (nasty little shits those) and acts as a bottleneck for ideas and revisions. Life is messy. The messy bits are usually the most interesting. Complexity can only be divined by simplicity. Apply the KISS solution to everything. Link: The only government we need and perhaps the only government that is unattainable to H. sapiens. It is a blend of Liquid Democracy and Direct Democracy. If we can build up to the following we will have created an irreproachable democracy. The pinned post and its primary comments (II - VII) for the gist of the idea. (10 minutes reading) facebook.com/Vision-Representation-A-Humanist-Government-262619170609120 ¹ I suspect they both fail because in both environments pathological personalities can hide behind graphs and bottom lines

[@buddhangle]

Thanks for the lesson, Prof!!

[@jamespurcer3730]

I think that a Fascist agent has just moved into my neighborhood. He's a cop. He displays a U.S. flag in front of his house beside another flag that looks like a U.S. flag which has stripes that are black and blue (a cop flag) instead of red and white. When I see both flags displayed this way, I see a RED FLAG - DANGER! I imagine that this man's house contains More than one assault rifle, plenty of ammunition, and maybe even Fascist symbols that are hidden from his guests, but are easily accessible to him so that he can pet and admire them.

[@JoseGarcia-dr7cp]

One of the best explanations I heard, thank you Professor Wolff!

[@BenGrem917]

Did you, Dr. Wolf, just speak for we socialists under the banner of Anarchism with the notion we want government intervention?

[@dandombrowski9991]

Cani Terrae how are you going to transition to socialism without some form of govt/organization/military ? you gotta have your veggies before desert. Rojava is probably the closest example of large scale libertarian socialism and they have all of the aforementioned. not trying to be confrontational or sectarian , i am just curious.

[@wingoreviewsboxingandmma3667]

if the people want to own the means of production than they need to create the means of production. because socialist and communist expect to do that and take all of the risk for them while giving them taking the risk the same reward as those who did not take that risk will make sure that no one ever invests in creating that is a means of production. so all the people working the place that is means of production of they all equally invest their own resources into it. because let's face it, would you take on the loans and or put up your assets to start a company that you won't profit from creating by being paid the same as the employees but you also will not be able to pay the overhead expenses. now you have killed the economy because no so create a business under those circumstances. if there are no businesses there are jobs.

[@tomarmstrong1550]

When did Hitler destroy the Soviet Union?

[@trez735]

You totally had me until you said "protecting the nation against foreign endangerement of whatever kind you can CONJURE UP" There are real life dangers and threats from the outside...not dreamed up.

[@dahlizz99]

Yes. No country on earth is beloved by all other countries and peoples. But these globalist academic types live inside their heads. A place where everyone can live anywhere without conflict. Just ask Israel and Palestine if that is true or not.

[@dinnerwithfranklin2451]

Thank you Professor Wolff for this really important information.

[@MontanatheMaverick]

It’s hard to imagine someone with as much life lived and ignorance gained as Professor Wolff

[@davidmcardle9890]

Both of these economic systems failed miserably and produced similar results, misery. One wears a mask while the other doesn't

[@freegeorgia4808]

Hahahaha. Even Stalin and Lenin claimed they were democratic. The only difference between socialism and fascism is fascism has a capitalist veneer. The government conteols all the business and use that to conteol the people. The creator of fasciam said fascism was perfected socialism

[@kamala7101]

This is utter nonsense. I hope this is a satirical definition

[@nympholepticmonkey352]

Sensational content sir :).

[@gninja92]

3:45 Trump

[@vivelafrance6357]

Why does Rickard Wolff always look angry?

[@tobykelsey4459]

Cognitive dissonance can be as painful as chronic toothache.

[@Gigika313]

Only Bernie

[@polpogger9553]

Wow, a communist attempting to explain what fascism is, at this point, we should have the keynesians explain what communism is.

[@klavdjojuvinsky7081]

Richard your videos are extremely important. More and more people are starting to think outside the capitalistic/neo-liberal box. I forward you videos to all my contacts in Brazil and Portugal. Your English is clear, you speak slow and explains in easy terms, enough to be well understood by persons who have knowlege in english but speak portuguese as the native idiom. Congratulations for your contribuition to spreading of socialism ideas and culture.

[@dahlizz99]

Good luck in the Gulag my friend.

[@PKPALLY]

Socialism will always lead to communism. Was Stalin fascist? Was Mao fascist? Was Pol Pot fascist?

[@LevisH21]

you think discrimination and oppression of minorities didn't happen under Communist regimes? Communists are not saviours of the planet. in fact, the Soviets always crushed rebellions in former Communist countries of Czech Republic or Hungary. and most Communists didn't even like eachother. Soviet Union vs Yugoslavia or Communist China for example. and we still have China today pretending to a Communist country but in reality the CCP is very imperialistic and fascist with concentration camps and oppression of all ethnic minorities that live inside China. in the Middle East, there was a very popular movement of Arab nationalism combined with socialism that started in Egypt with president Nasser. he wanted to create a pan-Arabic nation with socialist elements. but the truth is, he had the back of the rich elitest and military leaders.

[@bigkingsean1330]

Socialism and Fascism are similar as they are both authoritarian on the freedom vs authoritarian scale. People, generally, have their own best interests in mind when the make decisions, OR, if they don’t, at least it was their choice. Socialism removes personal choice to be in control of your own livelihood and self-determines they can manage your interests better than you can; they don’t. Taking someone’s earnings and redistributing them to others in the name of equity is not compassionate or generous, it’s dangerous and disastrous. Those who earned it are disenfranchised and those that receive didn’t earn it, and are still incapable.

[@510tuber]

Yeah, you didn't just describe American conservatives... that's totally socialists lol. Conservatives totally aren't the ones who are undemocratically trying to enforce their views and "values". It's not conservatives who are in the Supreme Court acting authoritarian...no, it's socialists.

[@510tuber]

The entire basis of socialism is the worker gets what he earned. Capitalism is giving it to those at the top who don't. Some people are so addicted to talking points they can't see that they're describing fears that are actually right in front of their face. Try to learn something real. When was the last time you actually took notes from academic material and studied?

[@bigkingsean1330]

@@510tuber I’m not sure what I said relates to American conservatives … I didn’t mention them at all, I’m not even American. This is your talking point. I’ll speculate what I think you’re referring to; removing the AUTHORITY of the federal government and letting states decide laws specifically for their state provides more autonomy and freedom for the people of each region. Democrats want other people to pay for a few peoples student loans, loans that they agreed to take out for their own personal benefit … this doesn’t seem earned. Socialists take, “from those with ability and give to those as they need”. It’s detrimental to be capable and advantageous to be useless. It’s anti merit. There’s a complete miscalculation on what socialists think they earned vs reality. To think an Owner put in no labor to create a company is just ignorant. Without the provisions and risks incurred by the owner / capitalist (their labor) the employee is not valuable. For example, how does one sell goods if there are no resources, no goods, place to store goods, way to transport goods, advertising and so on. Also, the belief that employment and trade is a zero sum game and cannot be mutually beneficial is a socialist flaw. I’m here, at a left wing source, to hear what they have to say from their perspective. What have you done to get a more complete view? Have you listened to Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, have you read Atlas Shrugged? You sound like an uninformed copy / paste of any high school student on Reddit.

[@bigkingsean1330]

@@510tuber this is generally what I agree with (classical liberalism) kzbin.info/www/bejne/n4aQaYiwlNOAl7M

[@nf-racing71]

I have never seen a worse explaination, wich plays with peoples ignorance, its horribly biased and worse... that man knows he's lying

[@faith4today]

No, he believes what he's saying, unfortunately, not realizing free-market capitalism has created the greatest wealth and opportunities the world has ever known for many people, not just the super rich. What he's really misunderstanding is that free-market capitalism is not the same thing as monopoly capitalism.

[@kristoffer3000]

@@faith4today That must be why so many are so desperately poor. Also there's some bootshine all over your lips.

[@HiddenOcelot]

Also, Italy didn't demonize the Jews, racially that is, ideologically, Jewishness was replaceable with capitalism, and was used interchangeably (see "das kapital" for examples of this happening), and was still used in this time period for this usage (historical context is important). That's why Marxism, Fascism, Nazism disliked capitalism, and ironically why both Marxism and Nazism disliked the Jews (the "cause" of capitalism) and Judaism (the ideology and religion of "capitalism") I'd recommend reading up on this phenomenon and usage of the two terms interchangeably before doing another of these, it's useful in understanding both ideologies and their links to Anti Semitism, and Is why the Left in America has been increasingly more Anti Semitic. It isn't linked usually to pure socialism (as this use wasn't common back in the original development of the ideology), but is now increasingly common in left leaning circles in the US as opposition to capitalism increases.

[@Luzurus]

"The fascists want the government to come in and reinforce, stabilize private capitalist profits." This claim is 100% inaccurate as fascism has a clear opposition to the doctrines of liberalism, both in the political and the economic sphere. Not to mention how the ideology rejects individualism as a whole. I would hope someone would be educated enough to realize that fascist have been critiques of capitalism from the beginning.

[@benjaminrao34]

Yes but Hitler, even as an anti capitalist, found useful allies in the conservative capitalist class.

[@guillermogutierrez-santana4446]

This guy is an idiot for thinking he could pass of socialist activism as an objective comparison. I would rather watch Rush Limbaugh defend Crony Capitalism than this Wolff goober defend socialism. Wolff and Limbaugh are equally as objective and logical.

[@newtide8209]

They were against free market. They weren't against private property. They however controlled ownership of private property. So fascism can be considered right wing of Hagelian philosophy while Marxism is left wing of Hegelian philosophy. Modern woke ideology itself is a form of fascism as it benefits the ruling class just like what fascism was meant to do. It's also enforced by totalitarian state just like fascism. Socialism is only alive as fringe movement in Europe and mainly alive in Asian countries. The future of socialism is in the East.

[@txc_denair]

@@newtide8209 lmao. "Modern woke ideology"

[@degustablegerbil]

@@newtide8209 how can it be private property if the state controls it?

[@edwardyang8254]

Great insight, thank you.

[@joko09010]

🤔💯👍🏻

[@humanrightsadvocate]

Imagine you're a junkie and your drug dealer kicks you in the balls, spits in your face and takes all your money before giving you the fix. That's capitalism. Socialism is when you go to a rehab/detox clinic. You see, socialism doesn't mean changing your dealer with a nicer dealer. Socialism is when you abandon capitalism and change your life. What's your alternative to the "broken refrigerator" analogy?