Richard Wolff: Difference between socialism & communism and what they both missed 

Most people spend their, not working lives but most of their awake lives at work with people they are not seriously connected to. I always though that was strange.

I would love to see this man have a debate against Ben Shapiro.

Thanks for breaking it down like this.

In germany we have a law forcing all big companies to have part of their management be recruited by vote from workers, the so called "Betriebsrat". This is not optional, as soon as any worker in a bigger company wants it, it gets established. I understand that this is not exactly what the professor is talking about, but it's maybe the closest existing thing on a big scale to it. We have a lot of experience with this system in germany and it's working pretty nicely, reducing social unrest.

People must first be taught that money isn't real.

Empower labor unions. We need a worker's bill of rights. Before any business is sold, the employees must get first opportunity to form a cooperative. End vulture capitalism. End leveraged buy-outs and stock buy backs. Stocks should be based on real productivity, not manipulation. End the unemployment statistic, as it is just propaganda. Use only adult labor participation.

Shout out to Prof. Wolff

Maybe we workers need to unionize in order to have a voice in our jobs. We are the ones doing all the work. The money trickles up not down.

Thanks Mr Wolff, for making it so easy to understand.

What Wolff fails to address is that all socialist states, from Cuba to the Soviet Union, emerged into a hostile world dominated by hostile capitalist states bent on the destruction of any competing system of politics or economy. All of them faced war, sabotage, and various other attempts by capitalist states to destroy them. The USSR lost 28 million people to the Nazi invasion in WW2. Under such conditions, survival is the main concern. What he describes as lack of democracy, was actually the product of the siege conditions socialist states found and continue to find themselves under in a world dominated by a reactionary and brutally aggressive American Empire that is willing to use any and all means to crush progressive movements and countries.

Listen and Learn you who are Closed Minded.. Knowledge is Power

This fills a gap in my understanding or lack there of

He stops right where I feel the details needed to be laid out on how to democratize the workplace. By labor-unionization or co-ops perhaps and if so explain the mechanisms to get to these, I guess we have to be creative and figure that out

This is very simplified, but I guess it's meant to be.

Great video! this can't be stressed enough.

You've got to distinguish between large employers and small employers. Whenever a small employer hears this stuff, their first thought is oh God I can't compete if I have new regulations placed on me. Please explain very plainly how the idea is to replace some of the monopolies with regulated utilities, and others with real market place competition. The idea is to encourage a vast diversity of small businesses and rein in the giants, while having certain industries, which have never been the domain of small business, such as energy, internet and medical care for example become well regulated utilities forced to serve the public rather than gouge them. It needs to be emphasized very clearly that democratic socialism is the friend of small business, and that unfettered capitalism has been the ruin of every mom n pop operation in the USA, not democratic socialism. Instead of Walmart we could have a grocer, a Baker, and butcher again. We could be lifelong acquaintances with our barber again. We could aspire to have our own little businesses and work for ourselves, not enslaved to a deadend job for health insurance, because we wouldn't need health insurance.

You are appreciated.

There is no democracy in the work place because the one person that owns the business is in charge and makes all the final decisions. Right or wrong everybody is depedant on that one person decision.

Stalin had much more to do with shaping what we now know as Soviet communism than Lenin did. Lenin was a social Democrat and he held together a wide coalition of workers and present groups. Lenin was a staunch believer in democracy. If the majority disagreed with him, he would do what the majority wanted. It all went wrong when Lenin died. Stalin seized power claiming to be Lenin's successor and exiled his real successor, Leon Trotsky. Stalin had all the revolution leaders who agreed with Lenin killed. He then proceeded to bastardize Lenin's Marxist rhetoric to serve his own fascist- socialist combo we know as communism. The majority of the people that Stalin murdered were Democratic socialists and social democrats who were loyal to Lenin and opposed him including his own wife and son. The boshlevik revolution is really a sad story of a well intended revolution hijacked by a brilliant and evil man.

Great Job!

Beautifully put. Couldn't have explained it any better/more simple

In Scandinavia all was all right as long as the fight was for pay and conditions. When a certain affluence was attained, it went awry. You got People With the strangest motives and pet Projects, turning away People of the old School.

This is interesting and quite a bit different than what I've been hearing from so many others who identify as Socialist or Communist. My current model of capitalism vs socialism vs communism (not exhaustive) is all about where capital lies. Individual citizens in capitalism, the state in socialism, and the workers in communism. This is a somewhat superficial view as the state is necessarily the ultimate holder of capital (though I don't often hear people acknowledge this), but it basically comes down to the behavior of the state with respect to capital.

I disagree with last statement, the basis of democratizing the workplace. It should go deeper than that, as how the Chinese CCP have found. Get into the private family unit and change that, and also including basic educating starting from the first day into school, that will fundamentally change subsequent interactions of these cogs in it's interaction with the greater machine.

Great summary as ever from the redoubtable professor Wolff. A convincing argument could be made that the very criticisms of the Soviet model he correctly points out to be largely the consensus among present-day socialists are not new and have been strenuously & consistently set forth by the worker's opposition, left communists, council communists, anarcho-syndicalists and others on the 'libertarian' and 'class struggle anarchist' left since the February & October days and beyond... A great primer, though. It's what he does best.

Fun fact:China, during the later period of culture revolution, had a semi-democratic worker-leader relationship established in some region. It is called Angang Constitution, which party officials and workers making decisions together, and it becomes a movement, had it's peak around 1972. Unfortunately, the leadership of Culture revolution was entirely burdened on Mao himself, and he is nearly 80, unable to make any revolutionary decisions. After his death, his opponents execute a coup d'état, took out his followers, and killed the culture revolution, as part of the movement, Angang Constitution did not reach its maturity.

Thank you teacher

This is an incredibly important, helpful, and accurate introduction to a very long and complicated history, and I applaud Dr. Wolff for telling it so concisely! I urge everyone to spread this video to all the misinformed people in the US who don’t know anything about the history or socialism and would just as quickly fear that mildly social-democratic politicians like AOC and Bernie Sanders are going to “turn the US into Venezuela” and/or do not understand the difference between the attempts at “socialism” being carried out Venezuela, or in the Scandinavian model, and the attempts at “socialism” historically carried out in the USSR. However, while I fully agree that the bureaucracy of the Soviet model was a failure as are the attempts of “social democratic” parties to simply regulate market capitalism, I think we must take seriously the written theory of socialist revolutionaries in the 20th century. I would seriously recommend Rosa Luxembourg’s “Reform or Revolution”, and V.I. Lenin’s “State and Revolution”, and the writings of Ana Louise Strong and Angela Davis as well have been a great inspiration to me. Furthermore I am still actively seeking literature from the many other Marxists outside of Europe who have contributed much but all too often go completely unrecognized by Marxists in the West. Even as their model for socialism was rife with internal contradictions and besieged by outside threats, the most difficult struggle of socialists has always been to actually take power, or simply to defend it from the capitalist class if you believe we can achieve socialism without seizing control over the state, and it is here I believe that all of us, including Dr. Richard Wolff and the wonderful contributions “Democracy at Work” have made to the development of this new hopeful socialist movement in the US today, still have a lot more to learn. I am incredibly skeptical based on what I know of the history of socialism in the US, that the US economy of private capitalist ownership can be massively transformed into a system based on cooperation and worker-ownership without facing both repression and co-optation by the capitalist class and the capitalist state in order to preserve the status quo. I don’t think anyone has the answers as to how we prepare to respond and defend our vision but I am confident it will take tens of millions of leading activists who are capable of thinking for themselves and utilizing lessons from the robust history of socialism and Marxism to aid in our project.

He said "Russia is where the socialists won". So don't we have the same danger of socialist winning here and turning to the dark side of despotism/communism. I don't like that the socialists dont talk about this. There is a chance that if the socialists win in America that it can take the same turn.

Ownership is the problem. Because gangs form as large as Countries to try to get more the other gangs. So one country get rich while the others are in debt. The worst is when few persons inside a gang gets far richer or has more power over others, you got oligarchs and dictators ruling gang labeled "countries" waging wars on other gangs, all for ownership of resources.

The bottom line is that under our current systems of law and taxation the corporate form of ownership has come to dominate almost all sectors of the economy. Disinterested shareholders have even stopped caring whether they received dividends. The stock market is nothing more than a giant gambling casino. Getting our elected legislators to even consider amending the law affecting corporate interests is not likely to happen given the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that corporations are persons. The best we could hope for is to push for tax reform that favors cooperatives, partnerships and sole proprietorships. One way to move in this direction is to push for the exemption of business revenue from taxation up to some limit (e.g., the median revenue. Say this came to $5 million. All revenue up to $5 million for any company would be exempt from inclusion in taxable income. All deductions for business expenses would be eliminated. Revenue above $5 million would be subject to an increasing rate of taxation on higher ranges of income.

THIS IS AWESOME! he knows the difference between socialism & communism and what they both missed!

This n*gga spittin. Love you professor always filling in my theoretical knowledge gaps

Hi Mr Wolff

Love it!

Why do so many people seem to have no idea about the difference between the two?

Unequal is not the same as unfair.

But didnt the Russian government and Chinese government have a lot of worker debate and choice for local leaders

Has any country implemented a working system whereby private ownership has been replaced by some or complete worker-ownership in a smooth transition (i.e. no bloodshed/rebellion etc.) Did that happen in England with the National Coal Board (E.F. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful)?

Seems to me that the current 'conservative' groups could better be referred to as 'reactionary' political parties. What do you think Professor Wolff?

I have heard Richard Wolf describe democratizing the workplace in videos before. The only thing I don’t agree to much with Is that the majority of workers really cannot have too much of a say in the direction. It’s like too many cooks spoil the broth. A movie doesn’t get made with everyone directing it. Now, of course my perception of what he means can be wrong. In which case my opinion goes out the window.

Thank you Prof.

Not to nit-pick, but Scandinavia isn't a country (at least not in this century, back in the 1400s you would be right), Scandinavia is a trio of the countries Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. But the social democracy they have in those countries is part of a bigger economic philosophy known as the Nordic model, which also entails the economic policies of Iceland and Finland. Also, these countries aren't purely driven by social democracy and socialism, they very much have a mixed economy and allow private industry to flourish while providing their citizens with a wide range of free government services like free access to healthcare and education. The Nordic model can be for the most part viewed as a set capitalist societies with strong social safety nets to counter the negative side-effects of a capitalist society like increased economic differences and the disenfranchisement of the physically, socially, economically, or otherwise disadvantaged. It's capitalism on training wheels, if you will.

Prof. Wolff, can you please talk about the social welfare state and its shortcomings or advantages

So the problem with Socialism and Communism in the 20th century is.... there weren't enough co-ops?

The relations between master-slave, lord/lady-serf and employer-employee, but in a accelerationist post-capitalist economy, white-market white-collar job's/careers/professions/occupations/ranks/positions/fields/role (s)-and-responsibilities would have to become worker co-operatives to avoid-and-avert, or at least, deter-and-defer automation

This is historically incorrect. Please read about Marx and Engels to understand where the origin of communism is from, and what part Marx, Engels or Russia played in keying the term. Marx and Engels simply wrote the manifest to build a consensus regarding the term, the term is however older then these two individuals, and defiantly older then what was going on during the 1920...

does he explain it for childs?

How does a business, that is run by the democratic vote of its workers, manage a down sizing of the operation? In other words, people need to be layed off, factories closed, wages cut; otherwise the business will fail.

Democratizing the base of society.....

Mao developed socialism at chinese factory during the Culture revolution, by democratizing workplace by "两参一改三结合", "四大自由"

This is super late and probably won't get seen, but does anyone have other sources on communist being coined in the 20s? How does the communist manifesto, and other uses of the word communism, made before the Russians revolution relate to this?

Prof. Wolff, thank you again for educating the left. Many of us don't know this history. Going forward us socialist--all of us--need to be working together to create what I call the New New Left. We are the children of the American and French revolutionaries, the labor and human rights activist of the 20th century, and the children of the peace and love hippies. Now is the time we take all of that history as one to create a new vision of the left. One of human advancement, technology, peace, and sustainability. We will be that generation to meet that commitment, and you will go down as one of the fathers of that new movement. Thank you!

Get the word out!

No lables no lies. No bs to hide behind.

That means the ideals of Karl Marx is not yet implemented. In fact, I think I have read or watched somewhere that Marx's ideals is a moneyless system/society, or resource-based economy, which I subscribe.

Then they leave for less regulations and less taxes. Then what. Money's run out

If Lenin and the rest of the socialist revolutionaries called themselves communists and that's where "it hapenned" then what is up with Marx/Engles book the communist manifesto? I am legitimately confused, what did the term mean to Marx?

Sweden is top 10 in economic freedom, not so many regulations

So essentially communism is just a particular flavor of socialism, which is what I've been thinking for a while. One problem I see is that people associate communism immediately with Stalin and Mao, because they called themselves communists, but I don't think that its fair to classify all communism as being like them. Especially in recent years, more and more people are using the term socialist over communist, and I feel like communism is becoming a label used mainly by opponents to smear socialism by associating it with Stalin/Mao. And importantly I don't see anything in the core values of communism that would stop it from being democratic, but the assumption most people make is that communism means abolishing democracy.

It seems that every country does it a little bit differently. Scandinavian vs Germany vs China vs Russia. Although China and Russia's version of socialism (communism) appears to be the most successful, I'm not fond of it at all. Actually modern Russia is more of a fascist nation than anything else. We're in a fight right now to retain our democracy. Why would we give it up for a Communist dictatorship that would strip us of our rights? I do agree that the whole system has to be reworked from the bottom upward. But only as long as the people retain the power.

You must be simplifying on purpose. Lenin considered himself a social-democrat prior to the outbreak of WWI, he belonged to the majorityist (bolshevic) wing of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party, they didn't change to Communist Party until 1917, (April Theses, I believe).

There is an emerging problem looming that will render this question and answer moot, A.I.s and robotics is and will continue to completely displace the current work force leaving humans with no job.

The socialism of Germany during Hitler's era what's a monopolistic economy where the political system granted power to the corporate office to have a monopoly over the economy. Hands Volkswagen who made a custom made Cabriolet convertible for Hitler as well as being give another resources in exchange for preferential treatment in the markets, Audi BMW we're also giving preferential treatment but they were given permission by government to use human slaves without pay I'm barely any food. Nestle very famous company also lobbied government for the ability to use slaves oh, I'm just was considered a modern civilization in that era. Please consult with the misery index and how that is achieved you may also want to peruse the slavery index as well as your portion of the national debt taken out on to your name without your permission at an interest rate by which you will never be able to pay but will be forced to pay with your labor, history repeating? PS most of that that taken out on the your name came about as a form of bailouts for the big corporations courtesy of the bureaucrats. We see this collusion going back to Thousand Years, every boom-bust cycle was created for the benefit of the power Elites at the expense of the majority and all initiated by government policy which intervened in the markets to create every boom-bust cycle since 200 BC and ended with the impoverishment starvation and death of Millions upon Millions. Pretty sad human history

Ignores why people would start a business in the first place... for a profit. It requires risk. Risk / reward are inseparable. Don’t want to take risk? Then you can be an employee for someone who does. It’s a beautiful thing!

“All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible.”-Frank Herbert Even if by some miracle we could do it, democratizing the workplace will accomplish nothing. The power hungry sociopaths will still rise to the top and take over the movement. Like Orwell always said people seek out power because they like power and merely use popular movements to take it.

Thanks for this simple and clear explanation.

Imagine going to work and you are 55 years old with 30 years of experience, and you work with some kid who is 24 years with no experience,and because you are socialists and equall acording to mr Marx and Wolff,you must listen to his ideas and conclusions about how that job should be done..great,i dont see any problems,i think that we should let stuwardess to drive plane where mr Wolff is flying since pilot and sturades are equall in the workplace and have the same responsabilities..or i would like to see him on operating table yelling"hey nurse come here and cut me,you are equall to the surgeon you dont have to listen to this hierarchy,we are all equall,my commrade"...oh and by the way, communism is supposed to be absence of state,not the other way around where all there is is a state..but mr Wolff think that only wrong thing that socialists and communists have done is that they didnt take more control of a workplace and made it more equall..ahh,that magic word,equall..how can you be against that..

I wish people give up their prejudice about socialist countries and consider them friends instead of enemies, which will be more conducive for world peace, like President Trumps peace initiative with N. Korea, last year dissolving 70 years old hatred without further bloodshed. Now borders between North and South Korea are opened and they have started visiting each other and hopefully there will reunification, like east and west Germany some years down the line benefitting both countries. Wise leaders of of China have adopted/altered their economic and social policies best suited for welfare of their population from the efficient utilisation of the available resources helped more by shedding their earlier prejudice about capitalism and west. In 30 years since shedding the cobwebs of '' isms '' China has surpassed economic growth of many countries and has become one of the most advanced nation with more engineers, doctors, scientists doing astronomical research and advances in science and technology, because China invested its vast resources for development of human capital instead of war machines. It is now helping other poor countries of Asia and Africa for infrastructure and humane development with the surplus resources at its command ! These efforts should be appreciated instead of seen with suspicion. If recipients don't like their help, they can always terminate agreements entered peacefully as provided by exit clauses, as some countries have already done so, due to change of their economic plans or priorities. The honourable solution would be to withdraw the unjustified sanctions, which are the root cause of misery in Venezuela and and elsewhere. Sanctions, like used condoms should be flushed away after expatiation, by kiss and makeup peace efforts, rather rubbing salt in the wounds of a violated body. For as you rightly said we can't bestow ( i say thrust down the throats) democracy by sadist interventions. And if Russia does not learn from Afghan debacle, its their loss ! Americans should not fear their assistance to socialist governments worldwide, rather welcome it and give their undivided attention to make America great again rather Venezuela. Let other socialist governments look after their own. And if recipient countries find their help obnoxious/nefarious/exploitative they will get booted out, as in Afghanistan/Balkans, for no nation can be subjugated against its will. Tyranny fails of its own inconsistencies. For all American nations were once colonies of European nations (including USA), and when locals/immigrants from same race as colonialists found their rule tyrannical, they were overthrown. My late learned father gave me a valuable piece of wisdom, ''help a friend in need, if you have sufficient resources after meeting needs of your family, because family comes first, but never borrow to help anybody, because you will be pledging a part of your income over which your family has first priority ! '' Is Venezuela a friend of America ? No. Does America have sufficient resources after meeting needs of its citizens ? No. Does it need to borrow to help anybody ? Yes. Decide yourself ! Is it a crime to choose a socialistic pattern of development ? Does American model of capitalistic development of economy ensure fair/just/equitable distribution of resources to the needy ? Are American people satisfied by subsistence wages/welfare cheques ? Can they afford decent houses/spouses ? Higher education ? Healthcare ? MV insurance and service overheads ? Why do so many working Americans live in cars/vans/campers barely surviving day to day while rich folks spend millions of dollars for relaxation on the golf courses ? Does American industry discharge its obligations to the nation in return of good infrastructure, law & order frameworks, lower taxation, easy banking finance and 'laissez faire' policies of government ? No way sir, in the everlasting greed to maximise profits and cannibalistic growth ambitions they employ robots, spend billions on automation to cut down wage bills, and move jobs that can't avoid human labour oversees to the low wage countries abroad, while salting away astronomical profits in tax heavens abroad, all the times. Mahatma Gandhi said that industry should hold in trust the supernormal profits on behalf of nation, for the welfare of society ! Sadly, we see billions of dollars in Annual bonuses to the industry executives/promoters, bountiful stock options, buybacks to share holders, luxurious private jets and vacations for top brass, eating away the capital reserves. American Government spends trillions of dollars to maintain '' white elephants '' large ACC, nuclear submarines, stealth aircrafts, missile systems on defence, while a pack of ''dobermans'' would have been sufficient, squandering scarce borrowed resources raised through fed/taxes/import credits. In my view Venezuela, Iran , Syria and Turkey should file class action suits in US courts as well as with ICJ at Hague on behalf of their citizens in a trillion dollar law suit for imposing unjustified sanctions against them causing wipeouts of their savings through hyperinflation and shortages of food and medicines, otherwise this madness won't stop. Politicians should be held accountable for effects of their mindless fiats sometime very soon. Extremely unwise policies from a nation that claims to be a role model for the free world !!

Well then how do we start democratizing the work place? Will the rich guys start lending money to their employees to buy shares of their own companies for a start? Easier said than done for all the criticizing of state capitalism done by the revolutionist. Will you also criticize the French for chopping off the heads of their royalties and nobles? Btw Norway also have state capitalism. Scandinavians have already enjoyed few hundred years of capitalism fruits and has plenty of resources per capita, thus the high living standards. It cannot be compared to war torn China and Russia, especially China who was pillaged by the 8 nation alliance, endured the worst of WW2, civil war, Korean War, Vietnam war and built up from zero.

New thumb nails, have him write down all his theories/stories. (Him being Richard Wolff). This channel seems like a liberal Radio Head talk show with visuals. This structure is similar to a Fox News/Rush Limbaugh/Alex Jones kind of production style. All u need is the logos, podcast mic, & a sponsor. But I believe in the conversation of all views, just need it to be more accessible & deeper content in the form of events with talks & lectures or history animations which runs with current news & other. it's a lot of work but it might be the right way to go at this point...I'm so tired of hearing Richards Wolffs voice drowning away with opinion points - with slippery language that seems abigious and presupposes the audience knows a certain amount of things

so the answer is libertarian socialism?

You get rewarded in the work place for how hard you work, but most importantly, the value you bring to the work place. Probably the most unfair thing you could do is redistribute wealth in the working environment so that everyone is making the same amount of money- one person may have more knowledge and overall value- so they help make the company more money than other employees. In return, that person should absolutely be paid more than his/her colleagues. What about for those damn employers? They take on the most responsibility in the work place, and help make sure that the place keeps on running in the first place, so they too should be paid more than their employees. Start making yourself more valuable.

“The goal of Socialism is Communism.” - Vladimir Lenin

Within China, with its partial state owned companies, people see the NATION, which defines the common interest, as their employer. They realize that low wages are in the interest of the community and accept harsh conditions of work and live. The Chinese worker has no need for a democratic workplace, has trust in the rationality of the economic reality. This is why the Chinese system must be defined as NATIONAL COMMUNIST...…… Within socialist nations in the West wealth has spread and the workers accept their social acceptable wages. They also do not want a democratic workplace………

Town and small city is going ghost Migrating to big cities. Communism provide them jobs in home town. Central Asia. Kazakhstan. Kyrgyzstan. Tajikistan. Turkmenistan. Uzbekistan Before have jobs in home town home cities now going for jobs to Moscow. Eastern European countries before have jobs in home town home cities now migrating to London for jobs.

Ok. But what does a socialist workplace look like?

The Danish Social Democrats, formed in 1871 after the 1st International, already were named so in 1878, and got voted into the Danish parliament in 1884. Your history lesson is dumbing people down -_-

4:51 thank you professor Wolff, that's the key point. We should never forget that "[e]conomic relations are relations between people: who tells whom what to do and how to do it. Property relations are relations between people and things: who owns what; land, factories, mines, ships, etc.". Thus we should always fight "the false thesis that state ownership of property equals workers' state" (both quotes from Facing reality, by C.L.R. James and Grace Lee Boggs) Socialism is supposed to be about autonomy, empowerment, direct democracy, self-management and self-organization, from the work place, to your neighborhood and beyond. Anything different will probably degenerate into a bureaucratic nightmare

Can you talk about how the USSR didn’t start becoming revisionist until after Stalin and Khrushchev started lying during his secret speech?

stay resilient but energetic [of search]° at the same time ref earlier comm Forbes °data -- catalyst of everything ----

By the way, Social democracy ≠ Socialism Social democracy= Regulated capitalism Socialism= dismattled capitalism and in its place the dictatorship of the working class

People have to unite and respect each other! You can take an example from the success of the ORGANIZED crime ;)

I love Richard Wolff! We should clone him and put his clones in political office.

USSR became State Capitalism

I am calling Revisionism on Prof. wolff, capitalism aint socialism.

It was called the USSR and one of those "S's" meant "soviet." The theory of the soviet was workplace democracy, But as soon as the USSR was created, the Communist Party took over and prevented the soviets from having any actual democratic power, and the Communist Party then sent in people to tell the soviets what to do and control them instead of the soviets using workplace democracy to tell the government what to do. So the word "Soviet" in the title of the USSR became meaningless and unrealized. That is, the theory of the soviet was supposed to be a revolution in the organization of the enterprise, but THE PARTY prevented that revolution from happening and instead used THE PARTY to control the organization of the enterprise as a new state capitalism model instead of a private capitalism model.

Awful lot of people benefiting from capitalism in this chat that still support the failed ideas of socialism

Soooo basically Mao & Lenin got it wrong either because neither went far enough in their convictions or because they both misunderstood Marx?

there's so many layers of the system in terms of people, the ones who are doing well and the ones who think they are doing well will always defend the current system, even if they know it's at the detriment of many others. I'm quite anti capitalist in ways, but in other ways quite pro capitalism, i just think it needs more government regulation. also, let's have Plato's Philosopher King as president or prime minister and it may become more egalitarian, moral, ethical, just generally more humanitarian instead of primal drives, tribalism and economics over ethics. I think we need to become a multi-planetary species and this could potentially solve a lot of issues.

i hope it becomes reality so we can really see how much better things will get.

but muh vanguard party needs to tell ppl what do, I know marx better than these unedutaced ppl bcuz I'm upper middle class that have time to spend reading theory without doing praxis and dreams about leading the revolutionary vanguard party by myself, the masses needs me ;-;

why is there debates about a non-issue? market-based economies are the ONLY solution. whether its state controlled market economies like china or viet nam or social democracies or pure libertarianism. they have to have market economies. that wolff chose to educate himself on a failed system from 1840's is his problem. democratization of the workplace? c'mon richard...the game is over. go golfing in boca..your entire educational pursuit has been meaningless---you should have studied astrology.

I like how socialism is basically a formless bunch of principals that everybody should strive for regardless of economic structure. It's like reading the zodiac, seeing a vague characteristic that everybody has at some level, and saying "that's so me". Imma create my own ideology where we are all about eating food, but against planting it.

So it seems our dear Prof. has actually turned into a revisionist?

It's interesting but he's painting it with a light touch and suggesting that a lot of these players intended well. What happened in the USSR was power being built up by self-interested elite for illegitimate reasons, not just another attempt at egalitarian growth - no matter what lies they told themselves. Plenty of authentic socialists called them on it at the time. I think Wolff is pretty optimistic and sees the value in talking about it in those terms. I just think we should be honest about the darkness. Killing millions in a totalitarian state isn't just another attempt at socialism. It's important to tell if politicians are really what they call themselves - what's behind the rhetoric, what their actual motives are, who they serve. It's not a purity test, it's clarifying where we stand and what we face.

Demon

Anu mali ko sq ginawa ko sa lqro naya.n sa color ng treade kc red ginamit ko white anu maku ko sq pag lalaro ko ginaw ako lang ang alam ko sa laro nayan sa treade lahat ng alam ko sinabi ko anu mali ko kayo may gawa ng karo ng treade hd ako ng laro lang ako nasira ba ng husto ang treade nayan oara husgahan ninyo ako ha anu walang kasagotan sa oag sira sa utak mo kaya sinira ka husgahan buhay kk ng maki nayan inalam na ninyo lahat ng ginawako sa laro nayan matagal ba ako ng laro hd September lang yan ung totoong ginawa ko gnoera un lang September 2022 ng simula tradeadia ng buhay ko dahil sa treade nv currency nayan sira ka husgahan hangang nayon pag usapan ninyk buhay kk kala lo pumatay ako ng tao sa sa pag uusig ninyo sa buhay ko nayan ha anu ginwa kong mali sa inyo lahat ng laro lang ako ng yreade kayo sumira sa buhay ko sa oamilya ko ako pinahiya ninyo kc hd ninyk naramdaman ung oag sira ninyo sa utak ko kahit anung paliwang ko sa kanila wala sinira ninyo buhay ko dahil sa treade nayan

Capitalism has destroyed the ecosystem so badly that none of this will matter shortly. We had dreams. I'm a John Lennon "Imagine" kind of guy. We missed our chance. The inherent greed and tribalism and lust for power of humanity won out. We will ALL soon become extinct. I don't say this lightly. I have children who will also suffer and die. Richard is correct and awesome at what he does, but it's for naught. I'm not sure why he doesn't see it. Maybe he doesn't have a garden or go camping or read the IPCC news. We are screwed, amigos, and there is no longer a chance to fix it.

Nice but many things not accurate. First the last, there was form of socialism in Yugoslavia where workers were owners of their companies and factories. It worked with problems but worked, better than usual capitalism. That country was destroyed by churches and huge investments from the west in creating troubles for that economy. Second, in Russia word communism was connected directly with Stalin who proclaimed communism as existing state, while communism in fact was ideal for which socialism tends. And Stalin didn't create socialism or communism but existing beginning of development of socialism turned back in Russian feudalism where he was Czar, communist party his church and CCCP country - heaven on earth - communism. With sinners, orthodox-christian mass persecutions and so on. He was orthodox christian priest, he knows how to organize country in already known way. He destroyed most of previous communists efforts and turn it back into new version of imperial Russia. Some improvements he didn't revert and it was great breakthrough in the world, planned economy, gender equality, equality before the law, healthcare...