We are a revolutionary political organisation that fights to create in Britain a genuine mass Communist Party cohered around a genuine communist programme, and for communist leadership of the workers movement in Britain, Europe and internationally. Our goal is to overthrow capitalism and build a communist society free from the exploitation and oppression that characterise all class societies.
If I were you, in a lecture titled "How Broad Frontism requires top down bureaucratic controls" with ten minutes of discussion of various inter-left struggles without at any point defining the terms "Broad Frontism" or what you mean by "top down bureaucratic controls."
I really appreciate these videos. It's just too bad that the comments are turned off for most of them. I think discussion is extremely important when it comes to these topics.
Very interesting debate, must say that I completely disagree with Lazare on a number of issues. First is the idea that supporting a generalised, and by its nature not strongly coordinated, campaign of boycotts, divestment and sanctions, that this automatically means wholesale agreement with the BDS organisation (and therefore subordination to the perspectives of Hamas). This is clearly not the case, and is ironically contradicted by the insistence (correctly, if we are talking about a Palestinian communist party) about engaging with Histadrut. I also think there is generally an overly sunny view of the consciousness of the Israeli working class which just seems totally out of connection with reality
(Beginning - 26:02) The political prospects of ending the occupation vs. ending Israel (26:03 - 32:07) 1967 was not a war of self-defense, getting the US on board (32:08 - 34:28) 1982 Invasion of Lebanon - Israel killed between 15-20k Lebanese and Palestinian civilians (34:29 - 39:39)The myth of defense and deterrence factors - "Peace offensives" and ceasefires broken (39:40 - 50:22) First Intifada 1987 - Loss of the support of organized left from '82 invasion - Left liberal opinion lost in '87 - Emergence of human rights organizations (50:23 - 57:54) Oslo I and the birth of the Palestinian Authority (57:55 - 1:18:13) Gaza, fact and fiction - (1:05:26 KHamas!😅) - ceasefires broken by Israel - deterrence capacity "rockets" (1:18:14 - 1:20:20) "Terror tunnels" - Hamas realizes Israel doesn't give a damn about its own civilians being killed, only its combatants - (1:20:21 - 1:31:39) Abandonment by int'l community and human rights orgs - IDF soldier testimonies in Breaking the Silence - Four kids killed on the shore - end of main talk (1:31:40 - 1:50:39) Political correctness and the fear of being called antisemitic for acknowledging the existence of the American Jewish lobby - @ 1:50:15 - Man shouts "LET THE COMRADE FINISH HIS CLOSING REMARKS!" 😂 Finkelstein says "Let's not end on a conflictual note", man says "That was me being nice" 🤣- (1:50:40 - end) Civil Rights Movement - Gandhi - possibilities for non-violent resistance in Gaza (pre-Great March of Return) - Int'l community must be shamed into upholding int'l law
Has Michael Robert ever read Roemer's proof of Okishio theorem? :) When all capitalist introduce the new technology the high profit rates of the initial adopters will fall but still it would be a higher value than the old technology. That's what Okishio theorem says.
But wouldn't the higher profit rates from new technology again only apply to the initial adpoters? As soon as other capitals advance it will equalise the general profit, meaning general profitability for all capitals in that sector. It can only be "higher value than the old technology" to a certain point and for a certain number of advancing capitals, right?
No. It is higher than the original value even after the final equilibrium (to say everyone in the sector has adopted the new method). If you calculate it, you can clearly see that. Refer the book "Marx after Sraffa" for a simple version of the calculates. (At first profit rates rise for initial adopters, then it will fall again, but it never falls below the orginal value.. Last equillibrium value for all the capitalists in the sector is higher that the original rate of profit.)
@@thamalupiyadigama1216 That's not even a strawman that's plain nonsense. The rate of fall surely can fall below below the original value, depending on capital accumulation - smh
@@fredgrasser1282 It "can" fall below due to other factors, but it does not "ought to fall" as we can clealy see from the calculations the final rate of profit is still higher than the inital value, when the real wages are constant.
When Marx calculated the rate of profit in the stage after the wide adoption od the new technology he did a mistake (Marx himself mentioned it. He unfortunately thought it is a negligible approximation). When the rate of profit gets equalized among industries prices deviate from the values. One should use prices to calculate the costs.
I live in a communist country. Let me know how this ends because the kommissar says he’ll shoot me in head if I don’t get back to work assembling VCRs.
Since the Online Safety Bill is about to become law in the united kingdom, there is no doubt communist Great Britain will soon become reality. Interesting times.
Great video, a very interesting presentation. Just as he says, there is great value in these works of history which are both exhaustive and do not come about as either anti-communist or stalinist propaganda. Rosmer is such a remarkable figure, whose life overlapped with so much of the history of socialism in the 20th century, from pre-ww1 pacifism and syndicalism to bolshevism/trotskyism.
Machines is made only by human labor. Surplus value mainly through constant capital is the end of capitalism. Marx main work, do not forget, was the critique of capitalism. In a communist society it is conceivable to think humans will not have to exert labor outside leisure. Not under capitalism.
I think that you'll realize how off your understanding of Marx is as soon as you try to deal with that law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall.
You've got it backwards. Uber gets MORE profits in the short term (because otherwise it wouldn't have introduced robot taxi drivers. Then Lyft is forced by competition to also introduce them. Then profits of both companies are lower. Don't you remember the passage about the hand loom weavers? It's very early in volume 1. Good people to read on the stuff are Anwar Shaikh and Moishe Postone.
By treating variable capital as just something that the sale price has to include (like constant capital) you skip WHY socially necessary abstract labor time is the substance of value in the first place and gloss over the 'socially necessary abstract' part, IMHO is key.
Did you even read Sraffa? Sraffa uses reductions to dated labour as an aggregation method. His book's whole purpose was to show that you can't aggregate "capital" in prices.
درود بر شما خیلی عالی بود مرور تاریخ ایران و خیانتها و سختیها و رنجها که بر ایران و مردان و زنان سرزمین مان وارد آمده ، باشد که از تاریخ برای امروز درسی بگیریم ، به امید روزی که در ایران و دنیا شاهد آزادی کارگران و توده ها از ظلم و زنجیر سرمایه داران باشیم
This guy is an utter clown. He has no understanding of universal grammar. He thinks it's "something to do with a common language" that the Pentagon might be interested in 😂😂. Astonishing hubris to build such lofty conclusions on such an impoverished, groping effort at understanding. And I'm no great admirer of Chomsky's technical work. I think Quine, Putnam and Kripke all offer substantial objections which he doesn't deal with well. But the difference between him and his critics is almost invisible compared with the difference between all of them and this utter clown, Chris Knight.
Pierre Clastres said pretty much the same thing in the 70-ties, even Chris Knight's concluding statement is so Deleuzo-Guattarian... If you speak French, you can see for yourself: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-IDlleC1qKNw.html 😶
Hi comrade, this debate is part of a wider polemic going on in our paper (weeklyworker.co.uk/), originally around congressman Jamaal Bowman and the DSA and has evolved into a general debate about BDS. The polemic began in WW1375 and continues in the paper. Comrade Macnair's contribution to the debate can be found here: weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1379/no-change-of-line/
Thanks for shedding light on the events leading up to Bloody Sunday! It's not often mentioned in Russian sources so I'm thankful for the opportunity to learn more about it on your channel 🚩
