Economic Update: Capitalism vs. Socialism 

The Servermonitor I was just going to make a similar comment when I saw your text. Dr. Wolff would take the piss out of Jordan Peterson for sure.

peterson will never do it. wolff is a serious scientist and peterson is a neohobbesian clown peddling facile justifications for the status quo.

Zizek made Peterson look like the chump that he is.

We need David Harvey to take on JP. Wolff may be unreliable in pursuing the excoriation of the uninformed, knee-jerk capitalism booster. Certainly, Harvey wouldn't be.

"Where are the Marxists!!!"

That, AND why do I NEVER see ads on his posts....? ...RU-vid, we’re looking at you... 👀👁👁👁👁👁👁👁👁👀

If you have not taken a “Social Theory “ class while you were attending a University you might never have been introduced to Marx and his social theory. Like Dr wolf explained, it is very difficult to find a course on Marx at any University. This is way he does not 500 k subscribers. Wolf is actually giving the course on Marx that is hard to acquire at most Universities.

Sandy They will soon have many more subscribers, the message is spreading Solidarity ✊🏼

no he is a communist exhort

@@johngergen4871 yea right. I was inroduced to marx in a psychology 101 class in community college. They are promoting this garbage widely.

Yes, of course it is. We were all born into this system and it will take lots of soul searching and study to keep our awareness at a high level. Thank you for listening and being willing to do research!

There is no deeper level.....but then can YOU actually explain WHAT you believe you were "informed" about? And if you truly understand THAT, you will see that what has been imparted is not unique, nor specific to this subject, but is quite general and applicable to every subject....." he who controls the present controls the past; he who controls the past, controls the future."

@@jgalt308 Thanks for your feedback. Sounds like an attempt at a Meta-narrative of control. We are all separate realities, so in that sense we are all unique.

@@stevesayewich8594 You seem to have found the problem, while missing both the specific and general lesson here so the feedback wasn't much help....but the question remains, so all is not lost.

There is nothing to understand at a deeper level. Wolff has never demonstrated, in reality, a single thing he preaches.

False. Trump will crush Bernie IF bernie wins the nomination.

Bums better off not middle class

@Adam George the land theory of value has no proof behind it, the subjective value theory has no empirical proof behind it, only the labour theory of value promoted by Marx (not of the Vol 2 and 3, only the 1st Volume of Capital) and by extension some statements by Ricardo, Smith, Luxemburg and Kalecki have been proven to be consistent with empirical observation

If you are serious about learning this stuff see the resources on my channel

@Adam George we did that in Australia 80s m there was more business bankruptcy

socialism is theft. Taking from one, and giving to another. End of story.

Literally proved his point mate. You might want to add a /s next time.

@@MrHigherplane Capitalism is theft. It takes from many and gives to the few. End of story.

@@frankscott1708 it doesnt take anything. You voluntarily choose to sell your labor for less than you think its worth. If i sell my car for 40% less than i know its worth, thats not theft. that means im a idiot. You are an idiot.

@Jamie if you are in a position of "work for us or starve" then it is your own fault. You should have a means of survival outside of a "job". If you dont, then it is no one elses fault that you were too stupid to invest in a means of survival. That is really the fault of your socialsit government which taught you to be dependant on them like a good little slave. Now you want what others have produced on their own. Shame on you!!

Only if you have money will you get everything and the have-nots suffer.

rational people see this. brainwashed propagandized fools on the other hand do not i.e. most of the american population. those of us that take the bible as a science book also swallow the myths of capitalism hook line and sinker.

Effort is not equal, why should the rewards be? If you choose to drop out of school with a 6th grade education, and have a couple three kids before you get married that should be on you, not on society.

If Peterson was capable of learning anything, there would be some evidence available of it and there is none. But he already understands what has been "taught" here......which is why we find ourselves where we are, and why Peterson has managed to sell his bullshit to those predisposed to believe it. Of course the actual lesson will be beyond most, it may even be beyond Wolff, with the exception of this specific instance, since it has a general application and is not limited to this subset of A vs B. Now exploited and exploiter works well, but the subject is the history of civilization in its entirety....whose final enlightenment may dawn, just before the lights go out, but probably won't.

Marsha Benson That's true, but unlike the slaves, the prisoners don't produce anything. The taxpayers have to support them.

Clare Stucki That’s not true. The surplus of labor that prisoners have always represented has been exploited shamelessly in recent decades in America. They sew uniforms for the US military, fight fires in California, and make license plates for automobiles. That’s just what they make for the state; private companies like McDonald’s and JC Penny exploit prison labor to make commodities. Usually they’re paid pennies on the hours, and in some cases, for nothing at all - the literal definition of slavery, permitted as a punishment for criminals under the thirteenth amendment of the US constitution.

@@clarestucki5151 apparently you have NO idea of what your talking about! EVERY prisoner is required to work. Some up to 12hrs a day. Manufacturing didn't move over seas! Not only do companies get slave labor, they charge those prisoners 3× the price. For basic needs!

@@lovetoall1429 I don't know who she is, but every week she/he/it has some kind of reactionary and idiotic comment to make. Apparently she's never heard of prison labor and the plethora of companies who contract out their production to workers inside the prisons, who they can pay $0.08 an hour to. Capital is taking potential well-paying jobs from American workers, and exploiting prisoners instead. Prisoners are their ideal workforce.

socialism is slavery. Capitalism is freedom

I doubt most fail to take any of that into account. You might have that impression due to the emotional charge some words carry, especially in politics, where words carry the ethics and morals of it's ideological spokesman. Whoever claims the USSR willfully sabotaged it's own course is a sheep. Lenin wasn't at odds only with the western capitalist establishment, it was at odds with the science of communism itself. Marx said, and rightfully so, that the (successful, or genuine) proletariat revolution will begin in the most developed country, which at the time was the US, not agrarian Russia. The revisions made, mainly by Stalin's rule to the theory is too, justifiable, but unfortunately, it created another type of propaganda, which now burdens our time.

The USSR did need a strong central government considering its backwards nature at the time and its vast geographical size. And the West DID attack it because of the threat it posed to the ruling class's in other various countries. However, it must be said, that a degeneration took place after Lenin's death, in particular the policy of "Socialism in one country" policy of 1927. That , and the backing away from international socialism coupled with the purges of the original Bolsheviks through the Moscow Trials. This has to be aid at the feet of Stalin...

Even without the full hostilities that threatened it in the USSR, communism always fails, no matter what, and the reason for that is quite simple: communism always think that everybody will work and cooperate to achieve it's goal and since people don't always do those things, you have to use force and in the end, you're always left with dead bodies all over the place! If you think about it, this is not rocket science!

Yeah, God junior, so how capitalism or slavery makes people cooperate? I certainly don't go to work with goal to make business owner rich, but I cooperate to make it happen. Maybe be we need to rethink incentive.

I'll give you an insider view of why Soviet Union collapsed. I don't hear anyone mentioning one fact that Russia annexed many countries around it and made them lose independence. Anti-Soviet movement did not start as anti- communist movement- it was movement for independence in Poland, Czech Republic, Baltics and Caucasian nations. Then movement for independence was hijacked by business right who saw a lot of opportunities with privatization of whole countries. Now majority of population in these countries is left holding bag while ex- communist leaders turned into new oligarchs are promoting libertarian paradise.

Yep and now that they don't we've seen what has happened to the American worker since the 80s. It's no coincidence people!

If the GJ get their way capitalism may very well have to deal with competition from a Commune of France

If you belong to the democratic minority you are fucked just as much as living under tyranny or even worse

Well, my first boss only cared about using my body for extracting profits from my labors, he didn't give a shit about anything else to do with me. But my new boss... is the same :O is that what Pete was getting at?

That concentration is kinda the main motivating factor which drives everything forward. Take it away and everything will fail.

Good point.

God forbid they learn anything. Then they might learn they were wrong.

Equally poor in Australia , that's Democratic socialism

I also lived under purported socialism in Bulgaria for 15 years. However , what they claimed to be socialism was brutal state imposed authoritarian economy. The state owned all the companies. Minimal private property was allowed. That reality had nothing to do with social democracy and socialism. What people don’t apprehended is,that democratic socialism can only thrive in pluralistic, open and humane society. I.e. , society that emphasizes collective good before extreme accumulation of wealth. Democratic Socialism doesn’t negate private enterprise but looks to channel private gain for the common good before all else. All the Eastern Europe countries nowadays are more miserable than ever.

He certainly keeps it nice and simple and easy to digest, if you'd like to look for the opposite viewpoint look to thomas sowell!

No, socialism can work alone just fine take soviet union and China as an example they displayed levels of growth that are unimaginable for any capitalist state.

Yeah but unfortunately the term is now hijacked by social democrats

It would be easier for everyone if you moved to North Korea instead. They have everything you are looking for.

No employers has an obligation to provide a job for a worker. If you are low skilled and your job is slated to be automated, you had better step up your game. No one owes you anything.

@@psychicspy I'm suggesting an incentive not a mandate. I own a company who codes said automation every day, (which I couldn't do without my employees). Software and AI are replacing white collar jobs not blue collar ones as mechanical robots are expensive and "skilled" labor costs more. I would say "learn to code" but Google's GPT-3 AI is almost doing that now. When 60+% of "skilled labor", like coders and managers, is automated in a decade what do you plan to do with the surplus people?

= My company gets paid to code people out of the jobs they "stepped up their game" to get. And we'll soon be replaced by the automation\AI we're coding.

@@_AutoCoder Moral of your story? Don't step up your game without first exercising a little forethought. There are plenty of articles, plenty of websites that track and report on job trends and automation. Have a plan if you plan to have.

@@_AutoCoder If you were a rancher and you had a surplus of cattle, the market price for those cattle might start to fall below the cost of housing and feeding them. You could "liquidate " some of your inventory, but you aren't a monster, so then the best option would be to keep the bulls away from the cows until such time that you needed more cattle. You might even decide that raising plain old cattle just wasn't productive anymore so you'd switch to raising fewer but higher quality heads of cattle. Maybe breed only the really healthy, really intelligent ones. Remember, "You are what you eat". The worse thing that could happen is for the government to subsidize a bunch of cattle that will just stand around all day consuming valuable resources. Worse yet, the government might neglect the fencing on its property and allow stray cattle to wander onto your land. Imagine the burden on resources that would impose. Who would be responsible for the vet bills? Oh, and don't even try to separate the bulls from the cows. Oh no. Someone is sure to find that immoral. Gotta let nature take its course. No, you would just have to keep on feeding that cattle as you watched that herd grow in numbers year by year while at the same time the market value of plain old cattle dropped lower and lower. Whew! Glad I'm not a cattle rancher.

Base on the comments most people don't even get what real socialism is = end of Employer/Employee relationship (*cough economic slavery*).

I like to call Bernie Sanders a regulated-capitalist. Calling him a democratic socialist distort the real meaning of socialism (end of the employer).

"bought" seems like you love capitalism as does wolfe. And for good reason

@@MrHigherplane Do you think bying stuff is exclusive to capitalism?

Small and medium business owners aren't corrupt left wanker

Ben Chesterman Small and medium business owners are not the problem

Do you want real socialism or just State-Capitalism (China) or Regulated Capitalism (Sweden)?

​@@walden6272 I'm a sort of Leftist Libertarian Utilitarian Bernie Bro. or close to a rule Utilitarian. I am open to changing my mind on politics. I was arguing on behalf of Regulated capitalism (Sweden, Spain, Canada) and the argument I hear from people arguing in favor of "real socialism" is that if we somehow reach that point it will be the end of capitalism for good, and the implicit argument is that this will be a good thing for human freedom and wellbeing. This is all projecting so far out into the future that you and I won't likely be alive. I just wanted some feedback, some ideas as to why they think this would be the case. If you are a Socialist, or just have ideas or links about this subject please share them. Thanks.

Yes, exactly as you say, most megacorporations started as coops as well like for example Apple was a cooperative of 2 people in the beginning. Many other corporations even started as an individual business. with only one person

Unfortunately, he is wrong.

@@deltaxcd How is that?

@@anabelcamacho6584 The cause of conflict is not who is boss, but property rights, because under this kind of system( considering the fact that earth is the finite size) someone will end eventually end owning everything while the rest will be left with nothing. and one who owns nothing becomes a slave of the one who owns evrything

@@deltaxcd So it is about usury of humans? Capitalism is just fun beginning of monopoly game , during which, wealth will be redistributed from poor to wealthy. In order to be rich one need a lots of poor people , where else one can get all wealth from? www.bitchute.com/video/XGSwnCqd6sgC/ www.bitchute.com/video/Rsy2MlHXVE3y/

He is wrong on his definitions he is confusing socialism with communism

@@deltaxcd your a troll that likes to spread misinformation

socialism is theft

Big government the biggest crooks

100 million dead because of Communism? LOL Then if you use the same logic, then over 2 Billions have died under Capitalist Countries.

Don't be a jackass,.. before you post stupid comments pls read.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes You will find all sort of information. Don't try to bring communism to the United States,.. move to North Korea

Sorry, wrong address, it is:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes

I get what you're saying but I don't think it gets at the heart of the kind of socialism Wolff (and arguably Marx) is talking about. After all, the surplus value of the laborer is returned in the way of social programs in all social democratic states. The point - if I understand Wolff correctly - is not that it gets returned, but that the laborers have control over it from the beginning.

@@GodlessPhilosopher The labour value cannot be returned to the labourer unless they own the means of production, and this is the case in a worker ran state, ie. The USSR, as much as direct worker control. You may argue that all democratic states return the surplus value to the worker, but that is not necessarily so in a capitalist democracy. Sometimes governments in capitalist democracies try to return some of the surplus value to the worker, in an effort to resolve a contradiction within that society and "save capitalism" but this is NOT something that lasts long and, as can be seen around the world today, gets eroded over time. Also, this paltry return of the surplus value to workers in capitalist democracies can only result from super exploitation of the third world via imperialism. All because in capitalist democracies workers, by and large, don't own the means of production. In the USSR the means of production was primarily owned by the workers either through the worker ran state and, yes, even cooperatives. So yes, I think I addressed the heart of Dr. Wolff's statement.

I'm with you and, like you, I tend to be more sympathetic to the USSR than Wolff. I just wanted to point out that return of surplus value to the workers *per se* isn't sufficient (or necessary) for socialism for Wolff. What matters for him is that the workers get to decide where the surplus value goes.

His argument is that government is just a different source of capital and management for business, and isn't really Socialism. The argument is that real socialism doesn't exist. A mixed economy is simply a functional form of Capitalism that doesn't collapse like both fully government owned or fully privet owned economies do. This is a talk about developing a system that doesn't exist.