The Cadre Journal is partnering with the Arghiri Emmanuel Association, a foundation dedicated to the legacy of theorist and activist Arghiri Emmanuel, to create the Unequal Exchange podcast, a platform dedicated to anti-imperialist theory and activism. We will preserve our archive of interviews with actors across the Global South with a new database of discussions on Unequal Exchange, Dependency theory, and more economic analysis of imperialism. We will continue to publish similar interviews while expanding to encompass more tutorials on Marxian value theory and analysis, historical analysis using the UE approach. Content will be more collaborative and feature a range of new voices providing expertise on specific subjects, such as the history of the Congo, mining corporations, trade imperialism, and economic thought.
To follow us on Twitter: @ArghiriEmmanuel, @thecadrejournal, or @antiimpnet Website: www.unequalexchange.org Patreon: patreon.com/ArghiriEmmanuelAssociation
I’m really loving learning about socialism and its principles! If these principles were implemented in our political system it would cure all the ills that plague our society and especially in AFRIKA!💯👍🏿💪🏿
I’m so glad that I found this outlet, I’m new to this political sphere and I’m very eager to learn more about the struggles of those people who oppose capitalism!!💯💪🏿
I’m new to this political ideology but it’s clear to me that socialism is fair and that it’s what AFRIKA needs to liberate themselves from capitalism and all its evils!
Nasser is rarely mentioned in western media. A pivotal figure. No fascist chieftain but sometimes he acted like one. Failures: union with Syria, war in Yemen, mischief in Lebanon, the deluge of 1967, domestic repression, and a taste for assassinations. To say his legacy is complex is an understatement. He will always be remembered for 1952 and 1956 but his legacy is one that is a mix of the sweet and the bitter.
Informative story shared from one true young Libyan from his perspective on what they all had gone thru during the time of war and then. Respect!! May Allah bless all Libyans with peace & unity like before. Insha Allah...
I don't know if I will get a response, but I hope I do. I will soon buy Unequal Exchange and Profit and Crises. However, I want to know just how the notion of "finance capital" is dealt within the UE literature. The term still seems vague to me. Does "finance" actually hold any real value in terms of M -> M? Does it allow for the expansion of productive forces considering it just seems to be parasitic rentierism? Or is there a way to formulate it in a way that removes the parasitic aspect within it?
If treating separately "the person" and "their work" is idealist and bourgeois, then we have to take seriously the anticommunist pseudocritiques that Marx himself shouldn't be taken seriously because he was 'financed by bourgeois money' provided by Engels (or that Engels himself was a hypocrite as he himself was a son of a capitalist), that he was antisemitic, sexist and whatnot else provide conservatives and liberals in their saga do 'discredit marxism once and for all'. This view is too superficial and problematic imo.
Eso es pura mentira acabaron con las universidades ella es fruto de la revolución buscar a un culpable, y defender el gobierno para que le den una dulce vita, mientras el pueblo que se joda que resuelva como pueda.
Eso es una narrativa que ya no se la come el pueblo destrozaron la economía, y se robaron todo y el principal de está desgracia fue el difunto presidente Hugo Chávez. Maduro es un hombre muy astuto pero para atornillarse al poder. Tienen 25 años mandando se robaron todo entre ellos, convirtieron a Venezuela en un país de mafiosos, esa es la realidad pero según ellos la culpa es de los gringos.
We in the west are not able to change. Unless the rest of the world start alternative to everything . Like the BRICS but even the UN. and leave the current UN. So the west is forced to attend eye to eye. Or isolate it self. And get forced to leave the rest of the world alone.
> "On the basis of the fundamental postulate of historical materialism set out in the introduction and according to which it is not the degree of exploitation that renders a situation revolutionary, but the objective incapacity of the system to develop the productive forces, and bearing in mind the scope of present development in relation to the general level of mankind’s technical knowledge today" So exploitation is a secondary factor for revolution in the global South? And does this mean that the primary reason labor aristocrats in rich countries aren't interested in communism is because the productive forces are still developing for them? And not because they're not exploited workers? Deindustrialization partly contradicts this, but it can also be negated because they can still get the products from industrial production via outsourcing from poor countries. So the primary reason they're still interested in capitalism is because it offers them the latest technology? And not being exploited workers is a secondary reason? This also could be part of the reason communism fell in Europe and China. The industrial productive forces were built, but the technology productive forces were maybe still lagging the imperialist countries and the people wanted access to newer technology and they didn't trust communism to be able to do it. Being cut off from the world might be enough to convince most people to give up communism. Edit - The below is not quite accurate. Emmanuel criticizes Lenin, but not everyone is right about everything all the time. This includes Emmnauel. Lenin's work is still valuable so it shouldn't be dismissed as unscientific like Emmanuel did. Emmanuel also described Lenin's imperialism book as "marginal work" in this article "White-Settler Colonialism and the Myth of Investment Imperialism," free download on www.annas-archive.org,: "Unfortunately a certain piety towards Lenin's writings still prevents Marxists from disengaging themselves intellectually from the influence of a marginal work which never had any scientific pretensions, and which was written rapidly, in the difficult conditions of exile, with no other documentation to hand but the Bern library. The author himself described it as a simple 'attempt at popularization'; and far from being a general theory of imperialism, it was only an empirical analysis conditioned by a particular historical situation." I think communist party central committee members need to be actual economists. If we had this requirement we wouldn't have parties failing to develop the productive forces or denying the labor aristocracy exists. And it would weed out and prevent career politicians and intellectuals from coming into positions of power and pumping more bad theory. Economic reality is not up for debate. Capitalist university education doesn't teach unequal exchange so it must be self-taught, meaning there's no excuse for communists not to learn it. Those who refuse to be economists won't take it seriously and will end up ignoring their economic advisors and continue to run communism into the ground.
A criticism for this book that nobody talks about is that Cope is inconsistent on the mass immigration issue. In the long term he's anti-mass immigration because it's obviously caused by imperialism. When imperialism ends, mass immigration will also end. But in the short term he's pro-mass immigration because it helps lower the labor aristocracy's wages. However, and I don't have any economic data to back this up, I don't think immigration alone can end the labor aristocracy cause the borders will never truly open up completely. All it'll probably do is turn the immigrants into labor aristocrats themselves. Even Immanuel Ness admitted that immigrants stop sending remittance money back home eventually. Whatever the case, Cope follows Lenin's example on the issue and takes a strictly materialist position on it despite the fact that it can be considered non-class oppression on the host nation, because they're taking in immigrants who can't readily assimilate. Which is inconsistent because Cope is against non-class oppression. He's stated he's against requiring women and non-white people taking a materialist/pure class struggle position since they're subject to non-class oppression. National demographic decline/replacement is a real phenomenon that should be opposed though, it's non-class oppression. The Native Americans were largely replaced in the name of materialism to build capitalism in North America at the expense of the natives. Now replacement is happening to the white European nations in the name of materialism to essentially build communism at the expense of the Europeans. You could argue they have it coming since it's their own doing through their imperialist actions. But we shouldn't let entire nations be replaced for the sake of materialism. Communists need to be speak out about this issue before it's too late. It's mass non-violent settler-immigration. And people who deny that white people are a nation should also remember that Lenin said black people in the U.S. were a nation. Cope said the same thing. If they're a nation then so are white people. And nations don't change based on oppression status. Communists also need to promote single nation countries and be against multi nation countries and/or unions. Nations need to govern themselves. It's the most logical position. Lenin and Stalin were both concerned about Russian chauvinism in the USSR. And it could've easily been solved by requiring single nation countries. A nation being current historical constitution resemblance and language. Or current race and language. But this is a great book that every communist should read. Even after Cope's defection to capitalism.
What a high level of revisionism! What is this "non-class oppression" you speak of, and how is it delinked from the global capitalist system? The patriarchy, settler-colonialism, homophobia etc. are all linked to capitalism and it's historical conditions. Engels already elaborated on this over 100 years ago, what's your excuse for blaming some impotent version of "materialism" for their oppression? And more egregiously, equating communist demands with settler colonialism, and impoverished immigrants with settlers, pretending that the white Europeans who benefit of imperialism are equal to the native Americans. You call yourself a communist but in reality your viewpoints completely align with the fascist reactionaries. You are a chauvinist of the highest order and your appropiation of communist terms do not fool anyone.
@@madcube1581 There are two main categories of oppression, class (financial) and non-class (non-financial). By non-class oppression I mean the imperialist white European nations are being non-class oppressed by immigration, but not class oppressed since they're labor aristocrats (workers who are not exploited). And this non-class oppression is linked to imperialism, because mass immigration wouldn't exist if imperialism didn't exist. For the sake of clarity, forget about the settlers in the U.S. for a moment and consider that the white European nations in Europe, who are natives themselves and not settlers, are also being replaced. I'm sorry reality bothers you, but communists need to take replacement seriously. I am a communist. White separatists can also be communists, you learned something new today. And the fact that you're promoting identity politics by comparing ridiculous topics like "homophobia" alongside serious topics like the patriarchy and settler-colonialism shows you're less of a communist than me. And bringing Engels into this doesn't work because he stated in 1845 that he was against Irish immigration into England. This was before he learned of the labor aristocracy, but it's still relevant. I actually disagree with Engels here anyways though because European-Irish (white-Irish) people can readily assimilate into the European- English (white-English) nation. They just had to learn English to assimilate. So using them to lower English wages is fine in this instance. Although it's not a thing that the Irish population decreased because of it. It's also amusing you call me a chauvinist for this, but don't hold the same consistency towards Marx and Engels, who made plenty of chauvinist statements against non-white people lol.
@@user-ke1gu9bx1eYour gripe of seeming "replacement" is because of Imperialism. These immigrants from Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, multiple areas of Africa, Iraq, Syria etc are all arriving because of the actions taken by your State and ruling class, ultimately supported and enabled by the masses of Europe. None of this would be occuring without this and to compare the actual plight of ACTUAL Native Americans to your own self induced incel crisis is amazing. Astonishing feat. Marx and Engles chauvinistic statements are merely comments immersed in the material realities of their time, yours however aren't.
@@user-ke1gu9bx1eZak Cope has now degenerated into an open Zionist and defender of "free markets" following the beginning of the genocide in Gaza because of his own background as a Northern Irish loyalist. His brain broke, this just shows you how fake many European "Communists" are, at the drop of a hat they go straight back to being Imperialists when push comes ti shove because their continued life in luxury depends on the subjugation of those in the Global South. Europeans aren't being "replaced" there's no "genocide" occuring, they just don't have children anymore and most of the immigrants arriving are working age due to the structure of unequal exchange and imperialism.
I'm reading Gabriel Rockhill's essay on CIA and the Frankfurt. What level of influence did the Frankfurt School have with the OSS, specifically the denazification of Germany post WW2?
Rockhill ignores the proliferation of Chinese Special Economic Zones, a hyper-fascist creation which benefits the corporate class, privatizes public territory, abuses labor, avoids national regulations and tariffs, and is a threat to sovereignty.
Does Rockhill provide any critique of the rapidly growing billionaire class and overall class divide fully underway in China? Strangely this is never dealt with head on by the western online left.
Liberation is usually described in terms of gender or race, probably becausr socialism has been diminshed since Reagan. But, liberals want universal healthcare and a smaller military. Our friends are in democracies, not in Middle East, China, Russia or most of Africa.
The last two minutes snd 59 seconds of the sound of this video are cut off for me. If this not just for me, why is this and where are they please? Thank you very much indeed.
I have listened to a lecture by Torkil Lauesen some years ago when He visited my hometown. Weather or not one agrees with him, he has got a fascinating life story and interesting thoughts.
Very interesting video, thank you for the upload! May I suggest to perhaps lower the music a little bit as it’s hard to understand some part of it(i.e. the BTNews interview).
