Fundamentals of Marx: Historical Materialism 

It's definitely the most accurate way to understand history in the context of the economy, labor, and class struggle, but it shouldn't be used to explain history as a whole, as it lacks intersectionality and can't explain history outside of class struggle. Marx and Engels themselves were very irritated by people trying their work to explain history outside of the economy (i.e. economic determinism). Historical Materialism only truly pertains to the transformation of labor, commerce, and the social structures surrounding them (as in, the relationship between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat). Historical Materialism should be taught in schools, but it's important to not base one's understanding of history on it alone.

@@djrocksgaming6255 What is human history outside of class struggle when everything is a product of it? Its not like hunter gatherer society anymore.

@@djrocksgaming6255 while I agree that economic determinism is bad, materialism is the way to go. How does intersectionalith contradict with materialism.

@@djrocksgaming6255 are you saying that their analysis was class reductionist?

@@Nobody-fb7ni lol

With but a straw

Damn! Foiled again by impeccable logic and facts!

Democratic People’s Republic Of Denmark. The straw ran from Kabul to Moscow

@@Tribute7373 It was a silly straw

yet not the last straw

@Jesus él McNuggetCunt "right-wing intellectuals" such as?

Government has never been at the top of the locus of power. *“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations* that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -Thomas Jefferson “I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity under the name of funding is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” -Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:23 “I own it to be my opinion, *that good will arise from the destruction of our credit. I see nothing else which can restrain our disposition to luxury, and to the change of those manners which alone can preserve republican government* . As it is impossible to prevent credit, the best way would be to cure its ill effects by giving an instantaneous recovery to the creditor. This would be reducing purchases on credit to purchases for ready money. A man would then see a prison painted on everything he wished, but had not ready money to pay for.” -Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1786. ME 5:259 *“If the debt which the banking companies owe be a blessing to anybody, it is to themselves alone, who are realizing a solid interest of eight or ten per cent on it. As to the public, these companies have banished all our gold and silver medium, which, before their institution, we had without interest, which never could have perished in our hands,* and would have been our salvation now in the hour of war; instead of which they have given us two hundred million of froth and bubble, on which we are to pay them heavy interest, until it shall vanish into air… We are warranted, then, in affirming that this parody on the principle of ‘a public debt being a public blessing,’ and its mutation into the blessing of private instead of public debts, is as ridiculous as the original principle itself. In both cases, the truth is, that capital may be produced by industry, and accumulated by economy; but jugglers only will propose to create it by legerdemain tricks with paper.” -Thomas Jefferson to John W. Eppes, 1813. ME 13:423 Source: www.whitlockco.com/thomas-jeffersons-top-10-quotes-on-money-and-banking/ "The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation". -Vladimir Lenin "under the gold standard, a free banking system stands as the protector of an economy's stability and balanced growth... The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists to use the banking system as a means to an unlimited expansion of credit... In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation” - Alan Greenspan "The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is *slave* to the lender. -Book of Proverbs 22:7 We have all been pledged as collateral chattel by _"our_ government to the banks and bond holders as every measure of what we own; our labor, our property, our income, our resources are taxed to pay interest on government debts to the sum of $84,000 per every man, woman, and our *children too* ! Source: www.usdebtclock.org/ “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.” -Frederick Douglass *Stefan Molyneux The Story of Your Enslavement* 51,112 views•Feb 25, 2012 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-eq3jjzI8Gdo.html *The Cultural Consequences of Fiat Money Jörg Guido Hülsmann* 17,735 views•Aug 4, 2014 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-SAN5CKbZnD0.html *Money vs Currency Hidden Secrets Of Money Episode 1 Mike Maloney* 4,785,705 views•Feb 26, 2013 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-DyV0OfU3-FU.html *The Money Masters notes history of of fractional-reserve banking, monetary policy, and taxes Bill Still* 23,587 views•May 4, 2013 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-jkKwcXSbDK4.html *'The Welfare-Warfare State is Anti-American': LP Presidential Hopeful Jacob Hornberger * 11,445 views•May 21, 2020 **ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ytw5nDZchwQ.html** *How A Secret Society Created The Federal Reserve At Jekyll Island Valuetainment Patrick Bet David* 194,162 views•Oct 7, 2020 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4RCJGr2XQh8.html *BookTV: G. Edward Griffin, "The Creature from Jekyll Island"* 14,141 views•Aug 27, 2012 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pqhxzN0PMeg.html *Currency's connection to income tax NBC interview with Merrill Jenkins 1978* 947 views•Sep 19, 2017 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nwKLulXs2Bk.html *WATCH How you're being ripped off* ! 9,133 views•Dec 13, 2013 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-sGsFK52L0lk.html *August 15, 1971 Richard Nixon Closes the Gold Window* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7_Xw5tWsOQo.html *The Collapse of The American Dream Explained in Animation* 9,308,363 views•Jan 11, 2011 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-mII9NZ8MMVM.html

Vulgar economism is but an attempt of quantifying and rationally deciphering a fundamentally irrational system. The Mont-Pelerin society is a group of bourgeois apologists who emerged to as a result of late-stage capitalism as the Keynesian consensus inevitable fell apart due to the contradictions of capitalism. Not to mention the criminal ways these free market theories were applied with electric shock therapy with various fascist regimes such as Pinochet’s Chile. The Chicago school of Economic imperialism should burn for crimes against humanity.

@Jesus él McNuggetCunt Party Comrade 1992's comment is ofcourse nonsense; ofcourse the right wing is more than just the MAGA fanatics. Also Dutch Kosmonaut acting as if there can't be a right winged intellectual is childish. But calling Ricardo, Kant and Locke right-winged is really ridiculous. There is a weird tradition on the right of calling classical economists like Ricardo and Locke right winged, even though they believed in labour value. At least I'm happy to see you didn't name Smith, because that would be embarrasing. The others of your list as far as I know them I barely consider intellectuals (yes, not even Hobbes). I also don't think we can consider neoliberal economists intellectuals in 2021.

Lol what an imbecile comment, a classic appeal to my side SMART and FACTS and LOGIC, other side FEELING Literally i could say the right is idealism, hiearchy as grounded in human nature, socio-economic science (???????, what is this clownery lol, modern economic science is no where near communism lol) The left: blue haired SJW feelings boohooo Do you see how intellectually dishonest this is

any book of his in particular?

@@jamiehg6211 How Europe Underdeveloped Africa is essential.

I'm gonna check this out. Thank you

Thanks, I'm glad you liked it! I see this reduction a lot. Sometimes I see it made by unknowing opponents of Marxism. Sometimes I see it made as a deliberate attack on Marx. Worse yet, I see a number of Marxists reduce historical materialism to some kind of two-dimensional ladder. At that point Marxism is turned into some kind of odd mysticism and abandons its scientific nature. It also becomes a dangerous form of determinism, misleadingly suggesting that capitalism will simply end itself because that is the "law" of history, and that the system that follows will necessarily be socialism. Naturally, that creates a pretty problematic praxis, or more precisely, the complete absence of one. I'll need to put that Cockshott book on my list, sounds interesting!!

Nice to see you hear...a much needed break from that...other guy

Marx was explicitly BUT.NOT exclusively West Euro FOCUSED, but he analyzed, to some extent, E Europe, S + E Asia, Mid E + N Africa, rest of Africa, Pacific Native Americans of N + S?.Americas etc. in lesser known writings--- articles letters, NOT whole books, some.more recently translated? Monthly Review Press in its articles + books on Marx + ecology discuss many of his writings on societies outside of W Europe.

Keep dissing other isms, see what happens with yours. All isms are stupid, read all books, not just the ones in front of you. Feelings have merrit too, and I don't think marxists care about ALL the facts, just the ones they care about (because fit the narrative).

@@andredeketeleastutecomplex i would agree feelings have merit too. like the alienation, depression, isolation we see from capitalism is significant. the strife of minorities is significant. to leave them out of the discussion is arguably even vulgar materialism. you’re making everything about matter when the human experience matters too. even if you want to go there - science has in many ways expanded since marx, like for example psychological science can definitely play a role in marxist analysis today.

love the dave rubin quote

@@andredeketeleastutecomplex well said. Although imo a proper communist understands human beings' essence is first and foremost material. With basic needs that need to be fulfilled. A socialist project starts from acknowledging the poverty under capitalism in this matter. Socialism, based on its understanding, creates that priority. Feelings are important, true, but materialist has scientific validity. You need food, water, sleep, shelter, hygiëne. In a socialist economy those are more important than profit, in capitalism profit is seen as no. 1 and the is magically believed to follow (so that you don't have to pay for it lol). Taking practical, historical materialism which recognises freedom and the need for action is where science and philosophy meet. It is the proper communist spirit.

facts over feelings? Why are feelings worse than facts?

What day?

@@DC-wg1cr 7th of November

Perhaps some day! Some of the channel's videos already cover part of Capital (commodities, commodity fetishism, surplus value).

@@themarxistproject yes make one

All 4 volumes?!

marx had wrongly analysed that the indian society does not have motion and thus is stagnative. a mistake he revised in the last couple of years of his life

Atharv Shinde what text are you referring to?

Marx' s writings on areas outside of W Europe are in articles, rather than books. Some are perhaps more recently translated. Monthly Review Press has many articles + books, especially on ecology, that discuss areas outside of W Europe.

Good catch comrade!

But we need to.remember that in many organized religions that churches, temples, etc..often had farms, workshops, etc. economic production. In W Europe, Catholic Church faction of Christians was largest landowner, so some societies had religious sectors within their economies..Even now, some Catholic monasteries + nunneries produce farm.products like bread. cheese, wine. etc. What about other Christian factions?.Other religions?

Economic Determinism: The Economic structure is the sole factor of changing of society Historical Materialism: The Economic structure is the necessity of the change of society, but it is not the cause of it. The change of society is always determined by the superstructure (Ideology, Politics, Arts, Education, etc.) and the change of economic structure (High level of productivity) I'm surprised that it's been 3 months and no one replied to you

Michel Jackowell definitely not. Think it’s more reflective of the notion that communism won’t be achieved without class struggle. Perhaps too, Marx being a revolutionary, he was painting a vision for the future which is part of winning people to your perspective. The theory of socialist revolution just as relevant today as it was in Marx’s time and does not seem to be going away.

I say yes, Marx understood that our society is always changing and socialism is one of the routes it may go, socialism and communism is ideal so I guess that's why he focuses on that, but fascism, anarchy and God knows what else are still very much options

I don’t think the nature of the contradictions change, each one becomes bad eventually because material conditions worsen it, so yes, something contradictory can replace capitalism, or perhaps not if there is something that allows socialism to take over. Also worth noting is that not every society will go forth like this, some might have completely different contradictory situations unlike Europe had Europe not taken them over.

Didn't stone tools come about as a necessity to hunt animals for food and pelts?

Instead of a state, it was communities.

Short answer: productity determines relation of production. The long answer: the increase in productity allows human society to produce more agricultural surplus, like rice and wheat thanks to the adoption of agriculture. This increase in food surplus allow more people to not perform the role of farmer to feed themselves, which create a group of people that has nothing to do all day long. Now, the society can feed some idle population, what can those people do? Art, government, entertainment, you name it. Diversification of vocations starts to happen. Human society first saw the rise of city in indus valley. But, I still didn't answer your question on how we transfer from tribal to feudal society. Because I myself is still a student of materilism, hope you get inspired by my post and see the history from the angle of historical materialism.

I'm not an American, so i'm not fully knowledgeable on the history of slavery, but to my knowledge it preceded capitalism, by the time of the U.S civil war it was essentially an an outdated mode of production with outdated class relations in contradiction to the Northern industrial mop and class relations, hence the civil war was the transformation which caused the end of said contradiction. Different class societies can overlap, in the sense that a previous class attempting to hold on to its outdated status is in conflict with a new class, and yes, capitalist societies do still have the vestiges of previous societies, just as a socialist country would have vestiges of capitalist societies.

@@skepticmonkey6923 thank you 👌🏾

In previous periods existed a thing called day-laborer (altrough other names are used), it refers to people that sell their workforce to any one that could pay them, they will work, receive a payment, and leave. They are exacly like the Proletariat of the present world, but they lived in the slavery and the feudal systems. This shows that even trough there is a MAIN economic system, there could be other kinds of people. Even trough lords and serfs where the majority during feudalism, there was still the day-laborers, artisans and other types of people. In capitalism, the MAIN classes are the bourgeoise and proletariat, but still exist slaves, and the petty-bourgoise (people that dont have a industry, but have their own business), etc. So in capitalism slavery can still exist (and exist), but slavery will never be the main force to the capitalist system, because this role is assumed by the proletariat.

I think it’s important to note that as mentioned in the video, historical materialism isn’t linear, it doesn’t treat each specific system as its own thing, that’s why you can find slavery in a capitalist system despite them being 2 separate systems in history, material conditions are what lead to the end of slavery in the US because it wasn’t favorable to either the slaves or the US as a whole.

@@skepticmonkey6923 socialism is putting almost everyone into a single level of wealth with no rewards and promotes laziness. Then it leads to depression and negative population growth and many other things. Marxism is pretty much a pyramid with the 100 people with high power on top and then the rest underneath are slaves. You can get punished for not doing what you’re told. Which promotes and leads to anarchism.

At least serfs got to spend their days achieving goals with their families. I'm so exhausted from hitting the goals my employer set that I have little left for my family.

You speak of late-feudalist serfs, with the advent of worker's guilds. You must look to earlier times, when, for example, the landlord had the right to the first copulation of a married serf couple.

@Random User "In other cases, an official personage, the head of the tribe or the gens, cacique, shaman, priest, prince or whatever he may be called, represents the community and exercises the right of the first night with the bride. Despite all necromantic whitewashing, this jus prime noctis [Right of first night. - Ed.] still persists today as a relic of group marriage among most of the natives of the Alaska region (Bancroft, Native Races, I, p. 8i), the Tahus of North Mexico (Ibid., P. 584) and other peoples; and at any rate in the countries originally Celtic, where it was handed down directly from group marriage, it existed throughout the whole of the middle ages, for example, in Aragon. While in Castile the peasants were never serfs, in Aragon there was serfdom of the most shameful kind right up till the decree of Ferdinand the Catholic in 1486. This document states: 'We judge and declare that the aforementioned lords (senors, barons) ... when the peasant takes himself a wife, shall neither sleep with her on the first night; nor shall they during the wedding-night, when the wife has laid herself in her bed, step over it and the aforementioned wife as a sign of lordship; nor shall the aforementioned lords use the daughter or the son of the peasant, with payment or without payment, against their will.' (Quoted in the original Catalan by Sugenheim, Serfdom, Petersburg, 1861, p. 35)" F. Engels in 'the origin of family, private property and the state' p. 28

@@mariussielcken 1) artisan guilds were mostly in ciries. mostly.men, but some.women. Did.serfs have.organizations? Artisans lived in towns, usually not in buildings that employers owned, +. at least in W Europe. some cities.had. legalized political.autonomymfro local feudal.landowner. thus artisan guilds were organizable in autonomous. merchant-- ruled towns. So called.formal.right, of.1st night has recently.newm.disproved by some video.channel---formal right was a later myth--- informal "right". or.power. was the norm. y

@@TheMightyShell Marx.said that all political.economy different.versions are based on how different..lengths.of labor.times.are divided for which different.purposes.

I think it's important to understand the context of the term "science" as used by people in the 19th Century. They don't mean science in the sense of the scientific method, but rather "science" as a catch-all term referring to the application of logic and study of observations (E.g. events on history). That's my understanding anyway.

@@AccordionThis You are probably right and your point deserves due consideration. Yet, as this term is still used today, I believe it may mislead poeple who are new to the marxist analysis. It may easily be used, and I think it has been so, by proponents of socialism to drap themselves in an aura of respectability above that of other ways of thinking politics.

absolutely

@serge girard the social sciences are almost completely based on science. Science prioritizes observation and experimentation over reason. Social sciences utilize observation and not reason. Expirementation, though not as common, is present in psychology and sociology.

@@maryallen1002 I agree. As a Political Science graduate myself, I have no argument against what you say here. However, I was witness to incalculable situations where students (or even Professors) of social sciences, arguing that total objectivity was impossible, would throw themselves with abandon in totally biased rants. In social sciences, remaining scientific is always a struggle. And, to go back to my initial point, when you leave the realm of observation-explanation to rather go into that of political project, calling this scientific is certainly misleading.

Change is the one constant, though the change that occurs is always shifting ;)

Haha sure, I suppose. Can't really wrap my mind around what that implies.

My feet are on the ground. I think one of the major points of dialectical materialism is to appreciate how ideas speak to material conditions and vice versa. If we talk of change being in a constant state of change, I sense this falling in purely abstract realms and out of touch with material.

Ivan Rančić we don't know what the universe is expanding in to

To put it very bluntly: History doesn’t move forward because of ideas people have that change society, it moves forward and progresses because of the material conditions of said society. Does that make any sense?

Marx wrote.mjch about how.dominant class.dominates.economic.production ideological.false.consciousness.ideas to impose.both.on.all.classes in.a.society--- see German Ideogy. +.etc. later works. Or her later.thinkers.expanded.on.this, like.Antonio.Gramsci,in.Prison.Notebook Noam.Chomsky +.Edward.Herman.Manu facturing.Comsent.. .etc

No, it does not

Most of the time yes

Engels predicted both world wars decades before they occurred.

Capitalism can only sustain itself through infinite growth which is an impossibilty with finite resources. We will either succumb to its destruction or advance to socialism. With the way things are going now, it looks like that this change will begin in this century.

Well, since I *need* to read them, they are now on my book list. Though, I should say that you are not making a great case for your argument by implying you've read X book that I haven't. What's the point in doing that when you could just tell me the central premises of the argument? That would at least give me the opportunity to consider your point.

@@themarxistproject Because im just a youtuber, and nobody gets respect on youtube. The books are by experts and are empirically researched.

@@PoliticalEconomy101 that's understandable, and rest assured I will get to them eventually. In fact the Williams book was already on my list, as it turns out. Still, it can't hurt to lay out your thoughts for me. I'm willing to respect and consider most perspectives if it they are adequately defended, regardless of the authority the person has on the subject.

@@themarxistproject Actually, if you want some better books to at least get you in the game i have 2 i could recommend.

Go for it. My list is ever-growing anyway

They make really good content and they do not seem like Trotskyists to me. What makes you say that? Even if they are, I don't agree with invalidating anyone's arguments/work on the grounds of an ideological label.

@@themarxistproject I am making that claim on the basis of their new movement that had been initianed on 7th of november that managed to unify with anarchists and more questionable characters such as Station Marx. In addition whilst I do think their videos are really good they do throw further Trotskyist rhetoric when discussing Stalin and old bolsheviks, that had been trialed for treason.

@@alexalfinson901 I had not heard of such an initiative. I think sometimes it's okay to have alliances with other leftist groups if it is strategically useful. I don't think Выход Есть or Вестник Бури are themselves anarchists. Yeah they are critical of Stalin and somewhat critical of the Soviet Union. I dont agree with all of their positions but I think they are overall good comrades, doing good work.

@@themarxistproject I didnt say that they are anarchists, im saying their movement alligns a range of left movments such as anarchists. I was mostly talking about these two channels, because Russia is likely to have the pivotal moment in history that it had in 1917, since the class contradictions are soon bound to reach their peak and will likely spill out in the next great recession.

@@alexalfinson901 I understand. But I think even the Bolsheviks had to make strategic alliance with groups they didn't go hand in hand with (for example, the Mensheviks and SRs, and even some anarchists).

A smooth progression was never the expectation, but the general trend is one of class struggle progressing

@@chrisgaming9567 I understand. My point is 'progress' was a rhetorical flourish of Darwin to pitch evolution by natural selection to his Victorian audience. The concept of progress is trashed in biology: that humans are the 'peak' of it for instance. Similarly concepts of 'stages' in civilization also fell, when the historical arc of the Middle East of cultural and tech innovation was not recapitulated in South America. Disabuse yourself that some utopia is an end point. The conditions we live in are our own to make,

Check out the latest video on geopolitical economy, it covers this issue in greater depth!

Poo poo 💩

it creates the conditions for a socialist revolution, but the working class may or may not revolt. They may not revolt, (or all the revolutions could fail) and capitalism would drive the world to ecodisaster and collapse.

True, I guess

No. Lol.

@@VeryHandsomeAndTall have you readed it?

did you pass?

So how did you do?

fed

Why are you an anarchist?

@@pressftopayrespects6325 not op, but for me is several reasons. Do you have something specific in mind that you think means i shouldn't be one?

@@br2485 I was asking it as opposed to “why aren’t you a marxist?” I believe that anarchism isn’t dialectical or materialist.

Marx.evenrually.dealt +.most.criiticisms. but.often I later.relaticely k secure articles. not in.whole. books. Some articles.were.rather. recently translated.