GK Chesterton on Capitalist Despair
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 02. 2021
- In Chapters 2 and 3 of GK Chesterton's The Outline of Sanity (1926) we get perhaps one of the first identifications of and arguments against capitalist realism, the idea that we can do no better. He also anticipates some aspects of neoliberal capitalism which we are all too familiar with today, particularly the idea that workers must simply sacrifice for the greater good rather than hope to really get ahead and be happy themselves. Chesterton lays the groundwork for his proposal of a third way economy of Distributism.
For more from me:
lauriemjohnson.com/
politicalphilosophy.video.blog/
iTunes podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Please fill out this form to be put on the email list for summer seminars::
forms.gle/WxikMpNx1M64GeTEA
Thank you for doing this. Chesterton is one of my favorite people in the whole wide world. He was one of the most original and brilliant thinkers I have ever had the pleasure to come across. I hope more people discover this remarkable human being.
Excellent primer. Thank you! I will have to start reading the Chesterton collection that’s been sitting idly in my library.
There's a right-wing/reactionary Caltholic guy on CZcams called "The Distributist" (Dave), he actually took that name from Chesterton. He's been promising a video on distributism for a while, but according to him, it's severely underdeveloped and will need to be adapted to the contemporary situation of capitalism (especially the dominance of international capital markets and multinationals, less emphasis on land as a means of production). Anyway, he's scary smart and has very incisive analysis, just know that he's really right-wing. :) he's had a lot of conversations with the alt-right but isn't alt-right himself.
I'm curious about "The Distributist" but YT has a lot of talky right-winger who don't check their facts. Plus Dr Laurie Johnson has just filled all my vid watching time.
@@yimhappy definitely not that kind of guy. I can't stand those.
Before I proceed, I want to first say that 1) I enjoyed this video, 2) I first encountered Chesterton some 11 years ago (not by economics), and I've read almost all of his works - fiction and non-fiction; and 3) that Basic Economics by Dr. Thomas Sowell was one of the most influential books I've ever read.
With that said I would start by asking: How do you define Capitalism and how does that compare to how GK Chesterton defined Capitalism? What alternatives existed during his writing of this?
More importantly, there are no supply-side economists or proponents of free markets (attention to your picture of Milton Friedman) who would EVER - never, never, never - support "making their own indepent nation an eternal debtor to a few rich men, etc..." That very notion flies in the face of free market capitalism. Tech monopolies, insider trading, and politicians who sell the security and prosperity of their nation to the highest bidder is NOT capitalism.
Is what you presented true for the most part? Yes, you will find little disagreement from me. But to conclude it is caused by a "capitalist economy" is objectly false. Adam Smith himself, as would GK Chesterton, would be appalled at the very grievances you extol here.
I sympathize, but the thing is, it just doesn't really help to say "this definition is capitalism and we are not in that ideal capitalism now." That just means that the system doesn't and maybe never completely did resemble the ideal capitalism. I agree with you that this isn't that ideal capitalism. We can call it corporatism or neoliberal capitalism, or oligarchical capitalism, etc. Many people argue about what we should call it. But, it does look like what we have now evolved from capitalism and that most people still call it capitalism, which does constantly change and shift and evolve. You're right. that one way to look at Chesterton's argument is that he wants to return to a more ideal capitalism where more own property and where there are some rules by which all play that are designed to prevent monopolization.
@@maurinacademy Well, I began with asking how you would define Capitalism as you speak of it here, not by appealing to the definition of Capitalism - much less the ideal Capitalist economic environment. I am appealing to the first principles of which supply-side economics are based - which is also why I asked what other alternatives were available at the time of his writing this - and how I can agree with your criticism of the conditions but disagree with your argument about the cause.
I love how there is zero dislikes.
2 so far. BaSEd ANti-capitalist gang
I'm still looking for someone to encapsulate and give a good summary of Chesterton's views. It seems every video jumps in at midstream without starting from the beginning.
Hi, I really enjoy your videos. But I have to kinda disagree on Marx.
Marx never had really thought out a socialist system. He has a know phrase :" I cant give recipes to the cooks of the future." He kinda liked the Paris Commune, and wrote "Critique of the Gotha program" where one can extrapolate some real political stuff. But most of his work is abstract.
So I don't think he would be explicitly against communitarianism. His only point was "give workers means of production". A statement which is very abstract, and includes communitarianism.
Thank you again for your videos.
Ah, I mean to say that Marx has a much more detailed critique of capitalism, not that he has a much more detailed vision of what socialism would eventually look like.
The issue with postmodern talk about capitalism, from Nick Land to Mark Fischer, is that they assume their axiom is pessimism. That their voices and actions cannot change the system, or see that capitalism will not last forever. Fredric Jameson was an outspoken critic of this anticapitalist pessimist talk, as Jameson saw these critics as a reflection of postmodernism, not sincere anticapitalist thought. In other words, capitalism will eventually fall, and thus debunking Fischer and Land, mere distractions of certain subcultural attitudes. I believe this pessimistic talk gives power to the neoliberal capitalist establishment. ...The abandonment of the Marxist or anticapitalist canon in favor of Foucault power trips, and ignoring the fact countries like North Korea and China are examples that contradict the modern world. If anything, Fischer isn't new, and Chesterton was a light of rationality many years ago, before a hip and consuming trend with postmodern creative writing.
You should read 'Foucalt and Neoliberalism' by Damiel Zamora if you haven't already.
Whats not germaine of his critique? In a fews years time system plunges the world in a great depression, then murder of whole peoples., countries.
No, hes pertinent to now and expect the same in a few short years.
14:29 "Not the Marxist solution, but rather to redistribute the poverty, ehh, the property." Yeah that would be the Marxist solution ;)
Redistributing the poverty: Marxism. Redistributing the property: Distributism.