The Future of Capitalism: Neo Feudalism? Panel 4: Radhika Desai and Michael Hudson

An interdisciplinary conference at the University of Chicago
4. Political Economy Panel (3:30-4:50 PM)
Radhika Desai (Manitoba): “What’s in a Name? The Misuses of ‘Feudalism’ and ‘Capitalism’”
Michael Hudson (UMKC): “Is the West Regressing into Neofeudalism?”
neofeudalismconference.wordpr...

[@martduenas]

My favorite geopolitical economic nerds!

[@mns8732]

Why couldn't high-school be this interesting?

[@piccalillipit9211]

*BOTH PEOPLE WERE FASCINATING* utterly brilliant.

[@thecirculareconomy4412]

Sadly so many progressive events are marred by technical issues. Often wondered why this is. Great content however

[@Crytoma]

Insightful

[@jason8434]

Prof. Desai makes an important point that Marx saw capitalism as progressive because, however crudely, it was socializing labor i.e. building a world of collective production and labor empowerment as opposed to feudal production for individual subsistence and aristocratic aggrandizement. This is the sense in which to understand "socialism" at its historical origins. Socialism is a project based on the socialization of labor and collective ownership based on political recognition of this ideology of industrial labor. I would argue from this premise that socialism's historical failure was a failure of industrial ideology, but that doesn't mean the socialization of labor cannot take new non-industrial forms, even semi-market forms based on reforms in how property rights function, opening up private property to public claims without having to abolish private property rights altogether.

[@ChrisCleg]

I agree!! Great comment.

[@piccalillipit9211]

"socialism's historical failure was a failure of..." socialisms historical failure was due almost entirely to its pathological destruction by capitalism

[@NotAPacifist825]

"Socialism's historical failure". I guess I missed that bit.

[@jason8434]

@@NotAPacifist825 1989, look it up.

[@NotAPacifist825]

@@jason8434 yea no. No such thing.

[@jacksonstone246]

“Today is already the tomorrow which the bad economist yesterday urged us to ignore” -Henry Hazlitt. This lady is out of her mind and emotional. What is her interest? the greater universe? No. Is it for the community? Doubt it. Is it for herself? Maybe. Is it from envy, hatred, and irrationality? Yes.

[@presterjohn1697]

Does Radhika Desai offer any analysis of China's growing billionaire class? Growing class divide? If not why?

[@ggc7318]

She would be canceled by CCP. Does she work for free ?

[@tylermcconnell]

China does not worry about how many billionaires it has, as long as they do not challenge the communist party for State power. See Jack Ma.

[@proadlekopy]

The amount of books she must have read

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

Very interesting

[@DannyDanny-rn7ck]

26:00 Wierguild

[@findbridge1790]

undying love for the sound of her own voice

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

Misogynist

[@NotAPacifist825]

She said only what was required to explain her point of view. So the opposite of what you said.

[@jacksonstone246]

@@NotAPacifist825her point is non-point or a better word, non-sense. This economy isn’t capitalist in the first place. Capitalism is NO GOVERMENT FAVORTISM OR ACTIVISM. She is about to break down and either start crying or yelling or both. She is literally out of her mind. Her point it’s, philosophical, ethical, epistemological, it’s not even political. It’s sheer hatred and ignorance.