Video

Errors in putting Leninist ideas in Marx’s mouth. Marx wasn’t a statist, didn’t call for a socialist state. Nor did Marx really differentiate socialism and communism - those are largely Leninist ideas.

Social and mutualist anarchism would work in city environments with unions and stuff but individualist anarchism would work best in rural areas with less people and more self sufficiency.

The President of the United States is not directly elected. Each state allocates people called electors, of a number equal to that state's number of representatives and senators in Congress. The electors are /usually / selected by whichever party's presidential candidate won the popular vote in that state. For example, Wyoming gets 3 electors. The number of representatives in the lower chamber, the House of Representatives, is determined by population, as stated by the Census. Which is taken evry ten years. So the 2008 election was determined by electors enumerated by the 2000 census. Thus why, partly depending on population shifts, elections can swing opposite the popular vote.

For the differences in worldview based on differing views of human nature I'd highly recommend Thomas Sowell's book "The Conflict of Visions".

I can't understand why such good videos on this topic have such a low number of views.

Great video. Hard to find well-made and balanced videos on voting systems. I think this one did well to point out both sides of the argument here. Bookmarked.

This gentleman does not understand anarchy. Anarchy simply is achieved and exists there is no “once we get beyond it”. Once anyone or any group of people start to decide what anyone else should do via coercion it is no longer anarchy. This need to have subtypes of anarchism is just due to a lack of courage and fear of taking full responsibility for themselves. They need an authority in charge because they are deeply psychologically troubled from their own childhood.

this was so amazing! so helpful for me in my political science course in uni (first year), thank you!!

Mutual aid is an interesting book but suffers from the flawed science of its time. btw I say PRU-don not PROUD-on

What are some texts to check out by oakeshott?

anarcho individualism sounds great to me until it starts sounding like its cool with violating other ppl’s individualism. so, its a non-reciprocal ideology. its not a contract, its simply a doctrine. i mean, thats every dictator and politician out there.

In "For a New Liberty" Rothbard asks What would you do about crime with out a sate? Then he goes through all the common sense ideas that a family or group of people would try... working together with their neighbors, locks on the doors, maybe bars on the windows, maybe getting weapons, practicing security precautions. I listened to half this video, tired of the distortions.

Currency is emergent; read "Debt; the first 5000 years"

define "society?" Didn't Josiah Warren create a community and a "Time store?" how is that leaving society.... Thoreau has a chapter on society.

2:45 and already he is building a strawman by saying things that aren't necessarily so, like Individualist anarchists' are against "society" and "religion" some may be and some may not... There was a good book "Native American Anarchism" Paperback - January 1, 1983 by Eunice Minette Schuster (Author) who goes through the religious and pacifist roots of American Anarchism.

Rawls has nothing to do with Woke ideology. It is all based on the enabling the individual and not the group the individual belongs to. Once you move into Woke say positive discrimination based on race or gender you have left Rawls. The veil of ignorance is incompatible with these kind of preferences. In fact I would say that Rawls is one of the best arguments against DEI and Post modern Identitarianism.

So Brexit referendum didn't pass the 40% of the population saying yes test that the 70s devolution /Scottish referendum had to pass?

“Anarcho”-capitalism isn’t anarchism. Capitalism is inherently hierarchical.

I’m questioning if anarchism will work, since the human race isn’t a hive mind. Only when every human believes in anarchism wil anarchism work?

you are a true motivation, I love your classes, lots of love xx

amazing

2 weeks away from my politics A level mock and this really helped, thank you for posting this

_Many_ individualst anarchists are and were anti-capitalist, such as Benjamin Tucker, Voltaririne de Cleyre. "Anarcho-"Catpitalism is a bit of a 20th century distortion. Rothbard admits as such, thinking the old pro-labor, anti-capitalist, anti-state movement was effectively dead post-1940s and so he could appropriate the term "anarchist". Ofcourse, we've seen a rise of anarchist with the 60's New Left and anti-globalization protests since 90's.

This has got to be the greatest explanation on Marx & the basics of Socialism and Communism If I’d have had Coxy’s vlogs growing up I’d have done really well in school, instead of the big dry text books they used to make us read Excellent teacher 👍

Typical English teacher on CZcams = clear and explained easy, straight to the point. If this was an American, it would be a 15 min introduction of waffle Thanks for the great content Coxy 👍

Coxy, can you continue with these lessons. They really help me understand. I see you haven’t posted any new ones, the way you teach is very good i.e simple and clear 👍

Great teacher 👍 Keep these coming

Please make sure you keep making these vlogs Coxy, you have really helped me understand a lot of things

Collectivism does not exist in reality, only in the mind. There is no forrest ; there are trees.

Excellent teacher! Cheers Coxy 👍

Murray Rothbard wasn't even a real anarchist as anarchism is stateless socialism not capitalism which is founded upon violence and Coercion.

Coxy is the man. The best teacher, explains it in a simple and easy way. Cheers for the vlogs 👍

This Coxy is a brilliant teacher. I wish he, and his style of explaining was at my old school growing up ! Keep up making these vlogs Coxy, because it saves me reading big dry books on these guys 👍👍👍

Keep these vlogs coming Coxy 😎👍

Thanks mate

Great video mate

All anarchist agree that so-called anarcho-capitalists are not anarchists

A lot of this is performative, and actually practical. In order to preserve the essential "order" and prevent a revolution, some concessions must be made. Being American (and a cynical one), we've seen this with FDR's New Deal, and LBJ's "Great Society's" social welfare programs. These changes occur during crisis, and huge technological advances. Monarchy is indeed, in large part, essential to British identity irrespective of class. State provided healthcare supports business. We're in late stage Capitalism here in the States, and neo- liberal politics are proving disastrous.

You are a brilliant teacher, I really enjoyed this. Thank you

The stuff on Stirner is so unbelievably stupid. "People are egotistical with no interest in the welfare of others" Nonsense! Stirner supports psychological egoism which states that everyone regardless of their actions or beliefs is fundamentally self-serving. Caring for other's wellbeing can very well be self-serving and often is. "We do not aspire to a communal life but a life apart" CITATION NEEDED "Individuals are entitled to everything" You've completely misconstrued Stirner. Individuals are entitled to NOTHING. The endless justifications that people use to justify why they are entitled to property of any kind are mere SPOOKS. The fact of the matter is that if you own something, it isn't because you are entitled to it but that you are able to occupy it. It's yours so long as you manage to hold on to it. THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ENTILTALMENT. "Working together is rational not natural" RATIONALITY IS A SPOOK. One works with others as they please for whatever reason they want. It has nothing to do with acting in rationally appropriate ways. "Violent insurrection to bring down the state" Once again you are basically stating the opposite of what Stirner states. Quote form pg. 280 of The Ego and Its Own "The revolution aimed at new arrangements; insurrection leads us no longer to let ourselves be arranged, but to arrange ourselves, and sets no glittering hopes on 'institutions'. It is not a fight against the established, since, if it prospers, the established collapses of itself; it is only a working forth of me out of the established. If I leave the established, it is dead and passes into decay. Now, as my object is not the overthrow of an established order but my elevation above it, my purpose and deed are not a political or social but (as directed toward myself and my ownness alone) an egoistic purpose and deed. The revolution commands one to make arrangements, the insurrection [Emporung] demands that he rise or exalt himself [sich auf oder emporzurichten]. What constitution was to be chosen, this question busied the revolutionary heads, and the whole political period foams with constitutional fights and constitutional questions, as the social talents too were uncommonly inventive in societary arrangements (phalansteries and the like). The insurgent strives to become constitutionless." "Stop property, morality, religion must go" You are implying that Stirner is arguing for the overthrow of these spooks through revolution. The revolution that Stirner supports though is personal not collective.

12:00 , me in every conversation ever lol

In fact, state should correct the negative externaties.

4:05 brilliant point!

6:30 this is an amazing point onwards!

Your videos are so interesting and insightful! I’m learning so much! You’re a great teacher. Thank you!

Thank you, very useful

this is so helpful. thank you so much!

Thank you so much) very helpful and straightforward

Thank you sir😊

Don't forget social liberalism, which is a completely free society with a social safety net, usually funded by some taxes on the wealthy.