This is the first interviewee on Conversations with History who gives answers similar to the way I would; for example, if I were asked about the influence my parents had on me, I wouldn't know. Many intellectuals seem good with autobiography, though. This is unique.
Mr. Kreisler, Great inteviews overall. May I suggest that you use fewer leading questions that sound almost like multiple choice. At least start out that way; then if you find response lacking , lead on. I would like to hear more from philosophers. Thanks for the series. Bill
The comment about his education - I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it meant. Just like George Bush's parents, Hardt's parents "most likely paid his way through college." I can't believe I have to explain this.
@automaticflow In America, at least, both parties are technically "liberal". Democrats represent Social Liberalism while Republicans represent Neoliberalism.
@smileyfacemug Ummm...argument please? In what way does either party substantially differ from the tennants of John Lock? Aka, the founder of liberalism.
People can hate on me because of this, but did anyone else get it really hard to engage with things he was saying? He was very short in the beginning with his answers. Its almost like its very hard for him to express himself, which of course is weird to me being that he is a prof of literature. I got to this video because I was on the Robert Fisk video
@nacho862 - I don't think American's are stupid, I never really inferred that. What I would say is that British people have a stronger, culturally ingrained sense of irony, which might be down to bad weather and historic class divisions, but is nevertheless apparent.
Don't forget that in an interview you are answering someone. A bright interviewer is the one who has the skills to get the best of people and Harry Kreisler asked numerous silly questions and was incapable of conducting the interview. I agree that the video is not a good one.
Yeah, but I don't really think he is. To be honest, and I've seen another interview with him where he comes across in the same way, he seems to be more interested in talking about his own political activity and the way he relates to it rather than talking about world socio-economic systems. Seems to me to be a bit of a self-obsessed charlatan really...
A perfect example of useless, stuttering, word creation, bereft of fundamental meaning, insight or any genuine intention to communicate ideas. This reminds me of the output of the "random postmodernist generator".
For me it is just an example of "How not to conduct an interview". "-Why do you think the book had such an impact?" Asks Harry. Jesus! Gimme a break. I'll stop watching it and watch a serious interview.
Whoever wrote the music deserves a grammy
This is the first interviewee on Conversations with History who gives answers similar to the way I would; for example, if I were asked about the influence my parents had on me, I wouldn't know. Many intellectuals seem good with autobiography, though. This is unique.
great interview, the second book Multitude is also a must read, hopeful, realistic, great stuff.
Michael Hardt is my uncle, this is fucking hilarious...
Skip the beginning, avoiding unnecessary data about Michael's life, and start
here: 12:58
Thank u
Thx
Mr. Kreisler,
Great inteviews overall.
May I suggest that you use fewer leading questions that sound almost like multiple choice.
At least start out that way; then if you find response lacking , lead on.
I would like to hear more from philosophers.
Thanks for the series.
Bill
@matchbox555
notice it's a conversation...merely a conversation.
lol the first 3 minutes are super awkward
Tricia Lynch i see lol so fucking ankward
Glad you could dress up for the interview, Mike. The old "MOT" thing continues.
@ozzylaza agree. maybe he was constipated or something. Robert Fisk is one of the greatest. Hope you went back to the Fisk video.
sorry but can we drop the intro music, PLZ!!!!
@smileyfacemug Yeah, you definitely have a good point.
Got it. I didn't get to read the whole original post, just the excerpt, due to the low ratings it received.
The comment about his education - I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it meant. Just like George Bush's parents, Hardt's parents "most likely paid his way through college." I can't believe I have to explain this.
Who said that?
and a metronome
@automaticflow In America, at least, both parties are technically "liberal". Democrats represent Social Liberalism while Republicans represent Neoliberalism.
Huh? Which comment? Who? When? Where?
@smileyfacemug Ummm...argument please? In what way does either party substantially differ from the tennants of John Lock? Aka, the founder of liberalism.
People can hate on me because of this, but did anyone else get it really hard to engage with things he was saying? He was very short in the beginning with his answers. Its almost like its very hard for him to express himself, which of course is weird to me being that he is a prof of literature. I got to this video because I was on the Robert Fisk video
I'm pretty sure that's exactly what the comment meant.
@matchbox555
He's got some intriguing things to say, but mostly in other videos; this is a good example of pretentiousness among intellectuals.
why do you say this?
Confussed? What's "confussed?"
@nacho862 - I don't think American's are stupid, I never really inferred that. What I would say is that British people have a stronger, culturally ingrained sense of irony, which might be down to bad weather and historic class divisions, but is nevertheless apparent.
So irony isn't lost on every American
mmmhh , I suspect "Iperium" has been written by Antonio Negri more than by him
Don't forget that in an interview you are answering someone.
A bright interviewer is the one who has the skills to get the best of people and Harry Kreisler asked numerous silly questions and was incapable of conducting
the interview.
I agree that the video is not a good one.
I wish the interviewer was another person since Harry Kreisler makes a lot of questions about details that are not relevant.
@Distortion0 That's not true
@matchbox555 CZcams is a bad place to get philosophy. It's a lot more efficient just to read the books.
"Time to stop listening to intellectuals who fool us. Time to put our faith into a powerful leader who we can depend on." Yeah. Like Hitler.
the host never creates new questions....hahaha
Gaaaaaaaaa! Yes, boots!
oh man if his lectures are like his interviews I think I'd just skip his course
بخت النصر خراسانی 555555555
Yeah, but I don't really think he is. To be honest, and I've seen another interview with him where he comes across in the same way, he seems to be more interested in talking about his own political activity and the way he relates to it rather than talking about world socio-economic systems. Seems to me to be a bit of a self-obsessed charlatan really...
oh man, Hardt looks super uncomfortable
yeah, i didn't make it past 5 minutes...how does that fart smell Hardt?
A perfect example of useless, stuttering, word creation, bereft of fundamental meaning, insight or any genuine intention to communicate ideas. This reminds me of the output of the "random postmodernist generator".
You're being sarcastic, I'm guessing.
It is dreadful (the music).
yeah, freaking awful.....but thanks for the tip on 12:58
Why can't this man succesfully finish a point or keep to a question topic?
For me it is just an example of
"How not to conduct an interview".
"-Why do you think the book had such an impact?" Asks Harry.
Jesus! Gimme a break.
I'll stop watching it and watch a serious interview.
very uneasy response
this guy is saying absolutely nothing
he never actually makes a point about anything
hes pretentious and trying hard to be esoteric
hardt is spineless. the self evidence of this statement excuses me from any explanation as to why.