Marxism 101
tags:
Stumble ThisInteresting Video you can actually learn something from.
X Greetings! You are not currently logged in, but please don't let that stop you from voting up any videos you like. :)
|
| |||||||||||||||
Marxism,capitalism,economics Marxism 101
Comments  playlists with this video Law by rottenseed
who voted for this video guitarwolf
- siftbot
x17Marxism 101 Related Videos
| Watch this Video NextFriends O' the Sift Top New Videos by Vote                 Subscribe Top 15 Sifters of All Time Top 15 Sifters of the Past Week 12. dan00108
(171 votes) Newest Appreciated Comments          | ||||||||||||||
What? How you would implement socialism has everything to do with whether or not you could pull it off. The specifics are very important.
FAIL
Then the investors come in, build more factories. To make things simple, let's say that one of the new factories is the same size as the existing one, and one is half the size. This means that there are two more capitalists, two more maintenance workers, and three more laborers.
If you're paying attention, you will notice that the competition has created 1 more labor position than was available before the rise in efficiency, two more technical positions, and two more capitalist positions.
Now, I'm not saying that this example is VALID. I'm saying that the example that he used ends up helping society, rather than harming it, as he suggests.
Our brilliant teacher here also forgets that someone out there has to create the new technologies that are used. Advancements in technologies don't appear out of mid-air.
I also like how he mistakes the voice of Corporations for the voice of Capitalism. Capitalism is about more than just corporations, it's about the entire society. It's called vote with your dollars. If you want to see capitalism at work, look towards your nearest union, or search sift for 'carrot mob'.
Now, don't get me wrong, I think that there will be a time where Capitalism no longer provides any benefit to society, but IMHO, that's 2-300 years from now. Maybe the world will switch over then, but if we do, it'll be because of all of the advancements that only Capitalism could have provided.
@6:42 There are A bunch of different ways you could hypothesize about how to do this. The specifics are not important."
What? How you would implement socialism has everything to do with whether or not you could pull it off. The specifics are very important.
If you want specifics, a good starting point is either Michael Albert's and Professor Robin Hahnel's writings on Parecon, or David Schweickart's writings on Economic Democracy.
I agree that the specifics are important. You can't criticise a flawed economic model effectively without proposing an alternative system embodying more beneficial and balanced ideology.
Luxury for the top 5% of the population?
A historical HIGH in poverty and starvation, worse than anything seen before. I mean, the crusades, the jihads and all the historical calamities are horse-shit compared to the ugly mess thats going on today.
Capitalism doesn't even allow men to be slaves (which they de facto are) A slave had value in himself, but a worker has none, its only his labor that has value, and this, unlike a slaves, can be bought and then discarded, creating a vicious cycle. A slave WAS property, but a worker is even less - only his disembodied TIME has any worth.
And even in developed countries - what has capitalism provided for the average man?
Clinical depression, loss of meaning, a sedentary lifestyle filled with neurosis, stress and fear.
>> ^bluecliff:
And what exactly are the so called benefits of capitalism?
Luxury for the top 5% of the population?
A historical HIGH in poverty and starvation, worse than anything seen before. I mean, the crusades, the jihads and all the historical calamities are horse-shit compared to the ugly mess thats going on today.
Capitalism doesn't even allow men to be slaves (which they de facto are) A slave had value in himself, but a worker has none, its only his labor that has value, and this, unlike a slaves, can be bought and then discarded, creating a vicious cycle. A slave WAS property, but a worker is even less - only his disembodied TIME has any worth.
And even in developed countries - what has capitalism provided for the average man?
Clinical depression, loss of meaning, a sedentary lifestyle filled with neurosis, stress and fear.
This seems like an overreaction, especially when suggesting that a return to slavery would somehow be better than our current iteration of nihilistic wage-slavery.
As for the average man in developed countries, capitalism has provided: cellphones, television, cheap computers, the internet, cheap fast food, cheap sweets, and investment banking to let you buy a home or start a business.
>> ^hatsix:
Now, don't get me wrong, I think that there will be a time where Capitalism no longer provides any benefit to society, but IMHO, that's 2-300 years from now. Maybe the world will switch over then, but if we do, it'll be because of all of the advancements that only Capitalism could have provided.
Yes, advancements only capitalism could've provided, like bottled water, service contracts, marketing, cigarettes with extra nicotine, energy monopolies, operating system monopolies, and healthcare and education costs that increase every year.
So, capitalism does good, and bad...at the same time.
My read is that capitalism can do wonderous things, but it can also do hideous self-destructive things. The trick is to try to channel the good, competitive, profit-driven innovation into things that actually do good for the society, while limiting it's ability to be parasitic to the society, selling harmful or worthless products to people who find them attractive for one reason or another (think cigarettes and bottled water).
I think too many people in the U.S. worship capitalism like a religion; they feel it must be adhered to absolutely, or "bad things" will happen. It's like saying selective breeding is obviously ineffective and morally wrong, because Evolution Must Decide which cows reproduce, and which ones do not.
I get that there's a "voting with your dollars" effect in play with capitalism, but consider this: when you buy clothes at Wal-Mart, do you care about the condition of the workers in the factory who made it, or do you just care about that low-low price?
Each person owns their own life; through use of that life they may generate property; property may be freely exchanged or given away.
N.B.: I upvote thy comment Davido cause I thought thou were talking about gorillaman but thou still right about the vid.