@@joseastiz1775The ruling class gave concessions to the working class in the Nordic countries specifically because of their proximity to the USSR, which had great rights for the workers. Now that the USSR has been temporarily dissolved, the nordic countries are slowly but steadily rolling back their concessions.
@@CommunistBot you do realize that one of the prime minister of those countries had to come to the u.s in order to let clear the fact that they are not a socialist model and neither a modern progressive. Just because a country has a big public spending doesn't make it socialist. Those countries are usually on the first places of the index of economic freedom and property rights as well as their corporate tax rate is relatively low(sometimes lower than the us) and they got a vat tax of 20% which is naturally more regressive meaning that the ones that pay the most are the middle and lower class
@@joseastiz1775 the concessions of the rulling class are always held hostage by the rulling class, they can remove them at any time they want. Moreover, society's like the Nordic countries can only work if you have suffering somewhere else on the planet, for example, some overexploited worker abroad (say bangladesh) doing cheap clothing to sell to them
The "Monopoly for millennials" that you talk about already exists... made by Hasbro themselves. It's literally called "Monopoly for Millennials" and works pretty much how you described. I gifted it to my sister, about 10 months ago. We played it and it's actually pretty fun.
This channel has been a lifesaver. I’ve always been interested in economics but haven’t had the time to read these giant books. Please keep doing more.
I really can't imagine why you'd have to read 1500 pages to figure out "things would be better if these guys stopped stealing the product of our labor." Like thanks to Marx for writing this and getting the ball rolling...but I've already read an entirely way too long book (Moby Dick) that really boils down neatly to a couple pages.
It's endlessly funny when businesses complain "we can't find skilled labor." I have worked for two companies that complain about this. The first company lost me to the second company because they didn't pay enough, and the second company lost me to my current employer because they refused to pay more. Oddly I have not heard my current employer complaining about this, because many people have been applying to work here. I recently heard the second companies' customers were complaining at a trade show about the poor quality of service recently, and boom, a friend of mine got a huge raise to make more than I've ever heard of the week before he was set to leave and join my employer. But I thought they couldn't "find" skilled labor? Gee the second they paid more it turned out they already had it.
If its "exploitation" to offer employment to workers, then what alternative does socialism provide? Can i do nothing but skateboard, and be provided free food, home, medical, etc? Or will i be deprived of these things unless i do some sort of labor for the government?
@@tomp.214 its a question about the ideas in the book. Marx says offering employment is a form of exploitation. Im asking for someone to explain how socialism solves the exploitation issue.
@@terminsane I don't think OP is a socialist lol. But to answer, the reason that employment is exploitation is because the worker is adding a certain amount of value to the commodities they produce, and being paid less than that total added value, and the capitalist is collecting the difference (surplus value). Under capitalism, because companies must compete to survive, there is a perpetual incentive to increase the rate of surplus value extracted from labour which is why bosses will constantly attack working conditions / pay. Under socialism, the means of production (factories, tools, etc) would be controlled democratically by the workers themselves and production would be managed and planned in the interests of all of society, meaning that any surpluss value would be controlled by the people who produced it rather than a boss. Thus the workers would not be exploited by and in the interests of the profits of a capitalist, but instead labour would be conducted freely in the interest of the collective.
The rate of surplus value is the most important concept for the masses to take control of the system. People are waking up increasingly during the modern Information Age, where we see how blatantly so many capitalists are willing to destroy their workers’ unionization efforts, and how so many capitalists refuse to help the common laborer.
At 3:18 is the key to marx’s biggest flaw: “Labor is the only thing that can create value.” That may be true, but marx’s failure was to define labor as only MANUAL labor. The problem is that labor comes in many forms, and, out of his blind, infantile hatred of the owning and managerial class, marx totally dismissed the MANAGERIAL labor that goes into production. Managing and organizing production is most certainly labor. It is the expenditure of energy that, in marx’s own terms, ends up embodied in whatever product is being manufactured. To deny this is the most ludicrous and infantile folly. Anyone watching this and considering the labor theory of value should also go take a look at Alfred Marshall and his Marginal Theory, which blew marx and the labor theory out of existence, and how it holds SCARCITY as a major contributor to a given thing’s value.
Im a sculptor, not a distributor or door-to-door salesman. When someone buys my sculptures and resells them, they are providing a valuable service, and it is indeed a type of labor. I sell far more sculptures, and more people can access my product, because of it. How can you consider that "exploitation"?
Overproduction of capital led to the stock exchange crash, the housing market bubble popping and the post WW1 economic crisis of Germany; especially when backed by imaginary currency used for CMC production
Commodity fetish is "reification"--a key term in Marx and Phenomenology. Also, worker control-of the point of production, meaning as Richard Wolf puts it, democratic control of companies by workers. The state of constant economic crisis is bearing out amongst workers in America. Finally, the illusion that capitalism is somehow inevitable and seems to be the sole method or organizing and manifesting an economy is key. This, along with constant crisis allows capitalism to sustain itself while consuming itself to exhaustion, which I believe is happening.
Yeah the division of labor is absolutely debunked. In fact its the opposite. More specialized labor means more training required, which means less supply of that labor and thus less replaceability.
Capitalism lets me refuse to buy Bud Light, and i can avoid watching the new Little Mermaid movie too. Socialism seeks to take my labor and give it to whoever the governing body decides should have it. Socialism bans me from choosing who i give my labor to. Its my labor and i should be free to trade it however i wish. Regardless of what you think of the trade
@@bigbillhaywood1415 or more because they will pass you through school regardless of your skill/ability. EG: the new "experts" cant even explain what a woman is anymore. Just 10 years ago everyone knew. New generations have been taught that 2+2=5
What is a "worker"? Can someone do an activity that you look down your nose at, and still be considered a "worker"? Isnt a worker just anyonr who provides some value to another? Who dictates for us all, what value a particular type of labor is worth? Why cant the involved individuals decide what their labor is worth on their own?
“Human labour” is a flawed idea. Really it’s about “Experience”. The reason why capitalism is a flawed economic system and will be usurped is because $20 does not equal $20 for everyone, meaning, human lives, which are all worth the same, unalienably, under God, as it is self evident, are valued differently. Each individual human Experience is worth the same, and should be valued as such Edit: not ‘usurped’ just altered as we evolve to one/two/much fewer credit systems
@@blacksabbath6227 the Overall World Experience the neurosurgeon produces with their Experience is greater than the cook so they are compensated more $ and the market values them more because they produce more area under the curve for ‘Good Experience’. I didnt say $20 for a fry cook should be worth $400 for a neurosurgeon? I’m saying $20 for a fry cook will eventually be $20 for a fry cook everywhere when we have one world credit system. RN nation states are still fighting over influence to whose Constitution produces/makes a better society, and subsequently, whose credit is worth more. That’s why an Ethiopian fry cook might earn $2 doing the EXACT same job as an American fry cook at $120. It’s just an unfortunate byproduct of the multi factional Empire credit war system we’re in currently that people get valued more or less for doing THE EXACT SAME THING based on the credit system theyre using. That’s my point: if theyre doing THE SAME thing it just is Fair they are paid the same. But of course, this isn’t for 21st century thinking to worry about: we still gotta fix the 1. Geneva Convention; 2. Cartels; 3. Corruption; 4. Unoptimal use of research and resource. Thanks for your response though, I know you’re fighting the good fight trying to educate nanu Marxists. I’m not one of them for the Blue White Red Empire no way- this Empire is run too smoothly (historically speaking) to want to credit reset. Intelligence has the resource, and those with intelligence can easily come by it. Perfect system. Only problem is it’s too easy for people to gain credit from causing suffering: eg. Cartels & scamming & bad crim shit THIS is what we need to focus our efforts on tbh.. NASH EQUILIBRIUM has solved wars between Empires with nukes (M.A.D). We are post war if you have nukes. So we should convert all resources from national security (defence) and divert it into (attack)-> police; investigators; judges.
Humans might have the same value morally, but practically speaking, a blind person cant drive a car and thus is 100% less capable as a taxi driver. You wont want to travel across a bridge or live in a building constructed by an artist who flunked out of grade 3 math class. No matter how cool it looks.
Inequality is moral. The person who does 2x more work is absolutely entitled to 2x more than the other guy. If you were to take from the harder worker and give it to the slacker who does no work, that would be immoral.
Its interesting, a major marx argument against capitalism is that workers are being exploited, and non-workers are benefitting off their labor... And then marx solution is to take the labor of the workers and "redistribute it fairly and equally" Marx correctly identifies labor as the source of all value. Then he seeks to centralize it under a small governing body (which will be tots honest pinkypromise) and redistribute it to those who do nothing The difference is under capitalism, it is our ignorance that can lead to bad choices. While socialism makes someone else's bad choices mandatory.
The labor thoery of value is deeply flawed. Labor is valueless unless directed. If a worker can lift 100 pounds that skill is useless unless directed to a purpose. Business provides and find tunes this purpose.
Did you forget that the labor theory of value says that value is created by *socially necessary* labor? Making mud pies if they are not needed by society will take a whole lot of labor, but will lack value since nobody needs those mud pies.
Profit is what i get for doing labor. I buy a 5$ log, i perform labor to widdle it into a statue, and sell it for 10$. I have 5$ profit. This is not exploitation
You clearly didn’t pay attention lol. The company/capitalist buys the log for $5. You are paid $7.50 to widdle it into a statue and the company sells the statue for $10. Thus, you were not given the full value of your labor.
If its 'exploitation" to offer employment contracts, what do you call it when socialism forces you to work for the state? Or are you going to tell me i can skateboard, and youll provide me with free food and housing for my whole life?
10) Fetishization used to refer to an unhealthy obsession with material objects- how Marx compares religious beliefs with this word is ignorant at best (I try not to be religious or dogmatic- but I still am in certain ways. Definitely not theistic.) nowadays most self-proclaimed Marxists are the opposite. Yawn- this video was probably genuine in nature, but I think people (I’m a person) miss their forest (🧠) for the trees (our own cognitive structures) because the largest hurdle is time x the expansion of knowledge…. but I’m too tired to get into all the things right now.
#8 "a worker must sell his labor" Socialisms alternative is to forcibly extract that labor from the worker, and "reimburse" him however the centralized governing body dictates is "fair". Everything of value requires human labor to produce. Nothing has value without human labor.
Video to explain the currency collapse due to money printing backed by guns rather than gold and why Bitcoin network as a currency and a means of exchange of value without any intermediary or system (SWIFT, Central Banks, Banks) may be a valid alternative for future global financial system. A world without IMF or Central Banks and individual labour exchanging value directly with any other labour. Or is that a start of an abstrat for an MSc research proposal!? :) ... Thank you for your videos; Merci, Shukran ... And I was shocked to read how vulgar the anti-semitic comment from Marx; do you have any more references for such comments?
How'd you manage to leave our the central concept the emancipation of society from Judaism. His antisemitic stances toward Judaism as an ideology and religion is central to Das Kapital. Marx even goes so far as to say that Kapital (or money) is the worldly god of the Jew and therefore their religion can be called Capitalism. To summarize, the Dad Kapital can be translated basically as "The Jew"....
Because there is nothing wrong with Marxism. Marxism is a critique of capitalism and economic theory that intentionally avoids describing what a future after capitalism would look like beyond a few basics. Marx did not invent the theory that the USSR or China followed. The USSR followed Marxism-Leninism, a Leninist addition to Marxism which created a vanguard party and was authoritarian. China followed Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, which was Marxism-Leninism, but with certain aspects adapted to China.
People following the ideology of communism, esp. those living in democratic countries, does not like to live in North Korea nor in today's Venezuela. They are just fooling themselves.
@@angreys I agree with you. Additionally, these people will probably say that the countries you listed never practiced “true” communism. I highly doubt any version will be any better which is why I don’t want to be a part of their “utopian” experiment and would much rather them live out their fantasies amongst themselves, away from me and others who don’t subscribe to their ideology
If you think like Marx, you will either hate your job (and your life) or not have a job at all and get on the government dole. Also, Marx never worked a single day in his life, so why do people think it's a good idea to listen to him? He's partial and opinionated, and that causes division in society, which is far worse than say division of labor.
"Never worked a single day in his life".He worked for Rhineland news as a journalist in Cologne shortly after receiving his Phd. (Citing his biography as a source by Jonathan Sperber).Get your facts right. Although I'm a huge propagandist of the Laissez-faire economy and have ideological differences with Marx's communist Manifesto.
@@akshaymanta55 Propagandizing is not real work. It gives you absolutely NO IDEA what the rest of the work force is like. But that's just the problem these days, isn't it? Everyone wants to write articles with such conviction that make everyone think they are right, when they are totally wrong and have zero insight as to what real work looks like. Marx was a pure propagandist, and calling what he did "work" is intellectually dishonest, and is absolutely SHAMEFUL. I would say it is the root of the problem with today's youth. They by-and-large think that because some university gives you a piece of paper, and they go to work writing propaganda (Hello liberal "news" media), that you've done something real, when all you have really done is confuse and mislead people. So no, Marx never worked a day in his life, and that has absolutely led to a misled generation, or several misled generations if you want to get technical. So no, I have my facts right, and you misconstrued what it means to actually do meaningful work in the world.
@@trentp151 Well if only you'd read his articles prior to his writing the communist manifesto. Till 1842 Marx wrote articles which which vehemently supported freedom of the press citing them as basic universal human rights as well as free trade and advocating Democracy claiming "Democracy is the solved riddle of all Constitutions". Now brace for the impact. Marx at the time was acutely opposed to communist ideas and hinted at suppressing their uprising. He was ultimately fired by the Prussian authorities as he dared to take an anti establishment position and rightly so. Hence passing judgements and saying he never worked a single day in his life is pretty easy isn't it without having read his body of work(read Das Kapital). I'm sure your work entails solving global problems on a daily basis as his work(journalistic and Das Kapital not communist Manifesto)is beneath your dignity to be considered "meaningful". Instead of a monolithic interpretation of things try developing the dialectical method as every person has multiple layers to his personality. Marx had identified a genuine problem but got it totally wrong in terms of his solution. Adam Smith's wealth of Nations and Ricardo's principles of political economy and taxation had huge similarities with Marx's Das Kapital as all of them got it the "labor theory of value wrong". But still Adam Smith was brilliant as the world we live in still works on the principles he cited in the " Wealth of nations".
@@akshaymanta55 I hear you, but I am failing to see why any of Marx's works should be propagated at all. After all, the USA is NOT a democracy according to the US Constitution - - it is a Constitutional Republic, and even Adam Smith recognized this. Another problem that Marx brings to the table is that he was not an American, and wasn't criticizing the American system in the first place, so by trying to draw correlations to Marx's work to common day America is essentially creating problems where there shouldn't be any; by using "Democracy" to erode the common citizen's natural rights outlined by the constitution. I don't disagree that I am short-changing Marx, but due to the fact that his ideas are so utterly problematic in that they erode the natural God-given rights of people and to usurp the power that was granted to the Citizens of the USA... His ideas have just been used to flip the script on EVERYONE and as it turns out, his ideas create tyranny, so I can see absolutely zero reasons why he shouldn't be relegated to the trash bin of history.
![The death of ideology | John Mearsheimer [Full Interview]](/img/n.gif)
Best example of rise & fall of Capitalism can be seen via history of The "East India company" it's lifecycle was almost the same as marx predicted.
How do explain the Nordics then
@@joseastiz1775The ruling class gave concessions to the working class in the Nordic countries specifically because of their proximity to the USSR, which had great rights for the workers. Now that the USSR has been temporarily dissolved, the nordic countries are slowly but steadily rolling back their concessions.
@@CommunistBot you do realize that one of the prime minister of those countries had to come to the u.s in order to let clear the fact that they are not a socialist model and neither a modern progressive. Just because a country has a big public spending doesn't make it socialist. Those countries are usually on the first places of the index of economic freedom and property rights as well as their corporate tax rate is relatively low(sometimes lower than the us) and they got a vat tax of 20% which is naturally more regressive meaning that the ones that pay the most are the middle and lower class
@@joseastiz1775 I didn't watch the video, so I feel like I might have misunderstood your comment
@@joseastiz1775 the concessions of the rulling class are always held hostage by the rulling class, they can remove them at any time they want. Moreover, society's like the Nordic countries can only work if you have suffering somewhere else on the planet, for example, some overexploited worker abroad (say bangladesh) doing cheap clothing to sell to them
The "Monopoly for millennials" that you talk about already exists... made by Hasbro themselves. It's literally called "Monopoly for Millennials" and works pretty much how you described. I gifted it to my sister, about 10 months ago. We played it and it's actually pretty fun.
Haha that’s awesome😂
This channel has been a lifesaver. I’ve always been interested in economics but haven’t had the time to read these giant books. Please keep doing more.
You can also listen to audio books if your having trouble.
I really can't imagine why you'd have to read 1500 pages to figure out "things would be better if these guys stopped stealing the product of our labor."
Like thanks to Marx for writing this and getting the ball rolling...but I've already read an entirely way too long book (Moby Dick) that really boils down neatly to a couple pages.
It's endlessly funny when businesses complain "we can't find skilled labor." I have worked for two companies that complain about this. The first company lost me to the second company because they didn't pay enough, and the second company lost me to my current employer because they refused to pay more. Oddly I have not heard my current employer complaining about this, because many people have been applying to work here.
I recently heard the second companies' customers were complaining at a trade show about the poor quality of service recently, and boom, a friend of mine got a huge raise to make more than I've ever heard of the week before he was set to leave and join my employer. But I thought they couldn't "find" skilled labor? Gee the second they paid more it turned out they already had it.
Nice format. Made me curious of this book, especially after finishing Adam Smith
I've been reading capital and this has been really helpful with understanding the ideas
If its "exploitation" to offer employment to workers, then what alternative does socialism provide?
Can i do nothing but skateboard, and be provided free food, home, medical, etc? Or will i be deprived of these things unless i do some sort of labor for the government?
@@terminsane bro what i was saying the video was useful to help undertsand the ideas in the book wtf u one about?
@@tomp.214 its a question about the ideas in the book.
Marx says offering employment is a form of exploitation.
Im asking for someone to explain how socialism solves the exploitation issue.
@@terminsane ah i see, you should ask google
@@terminsane I don't think OP is a socialist lol. But to answer, the reason that employment is exploitation is because the worker is adding a certain amount of value to the commodities they produce, and being paid less than that total added value, and the capitalist is collecting the difference (surplus value). Under capitalism, because companies must compete to survive, there is a perpetual incentive to increase the rate of surplus value extracted from labour which is why bosses will constantly attack working conditions / pay. Under socialism, the means of production (factories, tools, etc) would be controlled democratically by the workers themselves and production would be managed and planned in the interests of all of society, meaning that any surpluss value would be controlled by the people who produced it rather than a boss. Thus the workers would not be exploited by and in the interests of the profits of a capitalist, but instead labour would be conducted freely in the interest of the collective.
Good summary. Very helpful. And your sense of humour is always appreciated.
The rate of surplus value is the most important concept for the masses to take control of the system. People are waking up increasingly during the modern Information Age, where we see how blatantly so many capitalists are willing to destroy their workers’ unionization efforts, and how so many capitalists refuse to help the common laborer.
Are you from Vienna? Cool videos - using it for my macro eco studies currently
At 3:18 is the key to marx’s biggest flaw: “Labor is the only thing that can create value.”
That may be true, but marx’s failure was to define labor as only MANUAL labor. The problem is that labor comes in many forms, and, out of his blind, infantile hatred of the owning and managerial class, marx totally dismissed the MANAGERIAL labor that goes into production.
Managing and organizing production is most certainly labor. It is the expenditure of energy that, in marx’s own terms, ends up embodied in whatever product is being manufactured. To deny this is the most ludicrous and infantile folly.
Anyone watching this and considering the labor theory of value should also go take a look at Alfred Marshall and his Marginal Theory, which blew marx and the labor theory out of existence, and how it holds SCARCITY as a major contributor to a given thing’s value.
Im a sculptor, not a distributor or door-to-door salesman. When someone buys my sculptures and resells them, they are providing a valuable service, and it is indeed a type of labor.
I sell far more sculptures, and more people can access my product, because of it.
How can you consider that "exploitation"?
#4 & #1 hits hard
They are delusional pseudo intellectualism.
wonderful
Nice explanation.
Amazing video .Very informative...
Everyone reading Marx needs to accept the fact that he basically wrote the playbook for capitalism.
Value is not tied to the amount of labor necessary. Increased capital almost always leads to increased profit, due to economies of scale.
Overproduction of capital led to the stock exchange crash, the housing market bubble popping and the post WW1 economic crisis of Germany; especially when backed by imaginary currency used for CMC production
Commodity fetish is "reification"--a key term in Marx and Phenomenology. Also, worker control-of the point of production, meaning as Richard Wolf puts it, democratic control of companies by workers. The state of constant economic crisis is bearing out amongst workers in America. Finally, the illusion that capitalism is somehow inevitable and seems to be the sole method or organizing and manifesting an economy is key. This, along with constant crisis allows capitalism to sustain itself while consuming itself to exhaustion, which I believe is happening.
Yeah the division of labor is absolutely debunked. In fact its the opposite. More specialized labor means more training required, which means less supply of that labor and thus less replaceability.
Except the workforce has become rapidly deskilled as a general trend because of technological advances.
Capitalism lets me refuse to buy Bud Light, and i can avoid watching the new Little Mermaid movie too.
Socialism seeks to take my labor and give it to whoever the governing body decides should have it.
Socialism bans me from choosing who i give my labor to.
Its my labor and i should be free to trade it however i wish. Regardless of what you think of the trade
@@bigbillhaywood1415 or more because they will pass you through school regardless of your skill/ability. EG: the new "experts" cant even explain what a woman is anymore.
Just 10 years ago everyone knew. New generations have been taught that 2+2=5
What is a "worker"? Can someone do an activity that you look down your nose at, and still be considered a "worker"?
Isnt a worker just anyonr who provides some value to another? Who dictates for us all, what value a particular type of labor is worth? Why cant the involved individuals decide what their labor is worth on their own?
A viewer tried to tip this video. More Info in our Account Bio.
8:41 typo alert.
“Human labour” is a flawed idea. Really it’s about “Experience”.
The reason why capitalism is a flawed economic system and will be usurped is because $20 does not equal $20 for everyone, meaning, human lives, which are all worth the same, unalienably, under God, as it is self evident, are valued differently. Each individual human Experience is worth the same, and should be valued as such
Edit: not ‘usurped’ just altered as we evolve to one/two/much fewer credit systems
The experience of a Mcdonalds fry cook is not worth the same as the experience of a neurosurgeon
@@blacksabbath6227 the Overall World Experience the neurosurgeon produces with their Experience is greater than the cook so they are compensated more $ and the market values them more because they produce more area under the curve for ‘Good Experience’. I didnt say $20 for a fry cook should be worth $400 for a neurosurgeon?
I’m saying $20 for a fry cook will eventually be $20 for a fry cook everywhere when we have one world credit system. RN nation states are still fighting over influence to whose Constitution produces/makes a better society, and subsequently, whose credit is worth more. That’s why an Ethiopian fry cook might earn $2 doing the EXACT same job as an American fry cook at $120.
It’s just an unfortunate byproduct of the multi factional Empire credit war system we’re in currently that people get valued more or less for doing THE EXACT SAME THING based on the credit system theyre using. That’s my point: if theyre doing THE SAME thing it just is Fair they are paid the same. But of course, this isn’t for 21st century thinking to worry about: we still gotta fix the 1. Geneva Convention; 2. Cartels; 3. Corruption; 4. Unoptimal use of research and resource.
Thanks for your response though, I know you’re fighting the good fight trying to educate nanu Marxists. I’m not one of them for the Blue White Red Empire no way- this Empire is run too smoothly (historically speaking) to want to credit reset. Intelligence has the resource, and those with intelligence can easily come by it. Perfect system. Only problem is it’s too easy for people to gain credit from causing suffering: eg. Cartels & scamming & bad crim shit
THIS is what we need to focus our efforts on tbh..
NASH EQUILIBRIUM has solved wars between Empires with nukes (M.A.D). We are post war if you have nukes. So we should convert all resources from national security (defence) and divert it into (attack)-> police; investigators; judges.
Humans might have the same value morally, but practically speaking, a blind person cant drive a car and thus is 100% less capable as a taxi driver.
You wont want to travel across a bridge or live in a building constructed by an artist who flunked out of grade 3 math class. No matter how cool it looks.
Inequality is moral. The person who does 2x more work is absolutely entitled to 2x more than the other guy.
If you were to take from the harder worker and give it to the slacker who does no work, that would be immoral.
Its interesting, a major marx argument against capitalism is that workers are being exploited, and non-workers are benefitting off their labor...
And then marx solution is to take the labor of the workers and "redistribute it fairly and equally"
Marx correctly identifies labor as the source of all value. Then he seeks to centralize it under a small governing body (which will be tots honest pinkypromise) and redistribute it to those who do nothing
The difference is under capitalism, it is our ignorance that can lead to bad choices. While socialism makes someone else's bad choices mandatory.
The labor thoery of value is deeply flawed. Labor is valueless unless directed. If a worker can lift 100 pounds that skill is useless unless directed to a purpose. Business provides and find tunes this purpose.
Labor has shown it can direct itself though. If there were never a worker owned enterprise, you'd be correct. But that's not reality
Did you forget that the labor theory of value says that value is created by *socially necessary* labor? Making mud pies if they are not needed by society will take a whole lot of labor, but will lack value since nobody needs those mud pies.
Profit is what i get for doing labor. I buy a 5$ log, i perform labor to widdle it into a statue, and sell it for 10$. I have 5$ profit. This is not exploitation
You clearly didn’t pay attention lol. The company/capitalist buys the log for $5. You are paid $7.50 to widdle it into a statue and the company sells the statue for $10. Thus, you were not given the full value of your labor.
If its 'exploitation" to offer employment contracts, what do you call it when socialism forces you to work for the state?
Or are you going to tell me i can skateboard, and youll provide me with free food and housing for my whole life?
10) Fetishization used to refer to an unhealthy obsession with material objects- how Marx compares religious beliefs with this word is ignorant at best (I try not to be religious or dogmatic- but I still am in certain ways. Definitely not theistic.) nowadays most self-proclaimed Marxists are the opposite.
Yawn- this video was probably genuine in nature, but I think people (I’m a person) miss their forest (🧠) for the trees (our own cognitive structures) because the largest hurdle is time x the expansion of knowledge…. but I’m too tired to get into all the things right now.
Translation of bengali
A rebuttal to all of this can be found here: czcams.com/video/hkTO4-lKkog/video.html
Karl Marx says after all these, communism is the answer. Nope. Miata is always the answer :D
No communism is the answer
#8 "a worker must sell his labor"
Socialisms alternative is to forcibly extract that labor from the worker, and "reimburse" him however the centralized governing body dictates is "fair".
Everything of value requires human labor to produce. Nothing has value without human labor.
Video to explain the currency collapse due to money printing backed by guns rather than gold and why Bitcoin network as a currency and a means of exchange of value without any intermediary or system (SWIFT, Central Banks, Banks) may be a valid alternative for future global financial system. A world without IMF or Central Banks and individual labour exchanging value directly with any other labour. Or is that a start of an abstrat for an MSc research proposal!? :) ... Thank you for your videos; Merci, Shukran ...
And I was shocked to read how vulgar the anti-semitic comment from Marx; do you have any more references for such comments?
How'd you manage to leave our the central concept the emancipation of society from Judaism. His antisemitic stances toward Judaism as an ideology and religion is central to Das Kapital. Marx even goes so far as to say that Kapital (or money) is the worldly god of the Jew and therefore their religion can be called Capitalism. To summarize, the Dad Kapital can be translated basically as "The Jew"....
"good ideas" .. no.no.no.no.
Why is everything positive on youtube when you search this? Nothing negative at all, this is very disturbing
Because there is nothing wrong with Marxism. Marxism is a critique of capitalism and economic theory that intentionally avoids describing what a future after capitalism would look like beyond a few basics. Marx did not invent the theory that the USSR or China followed. The USSR followed Marxism-Leninism, a Leninist addition to Marxism which created a vanguard party and was authoritarian. China followed Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, which was Marxism-Leninism, but with certain aspects adapted to China.
If only communists could form their own country and live amongst their own
People following the ideology of communism, esp. those living in democratic countries, does not like to live in North Korea nor in today's Venezuela. They are just fooling themselves.
@@angreys I agree with you. Additionally, these people will probably say that the countries you listed never practiced “true” communism. I highly doubt any version will be any better which is why I don’t want to be a part of their “utopian” experiment and would much rather them live out their fantasies amongst themselves, away from me and others who don’t subscribe to their ideology
I agree. What a wonderful world that could be.
Pretty much every economy in the developed world is a mixture of capitalism and socialism to varying degrees.
If you think like Marx, you will either hate your job (and your life) or not have a job at all and get on the government dole. Also, Marx never worked a single day in his life, so why do people think it's a good idea to listen to him? He's partial and opinionated, and that causes division in society, which is far worse than say division of labor.
"Never worked a single day in his life".He worked for Rhineland news as a journalist in Cologne shortly after receiving his Phd. (Citing his biography as a source by Jonathan Sperber).Get your facts right.
Although I'm a huge propagandist of the Laissez-faire economy and have ideological differences with Marx's communist Manifesto.
@@akshaymanta55 Propagandizing is not real work. It gives you absolutely NO IDEA what the rest of the work force is like. But that's just the problem these days, isn't it? Everyone wants to write articles with such conviction that make everyone think they are right, when they are totally wrong and have zero insight as to what real work looks like. Marx was a pure propagandist, and calling what he did "work" is intellectually dishonest, and is absolutely SHAMEFUL. I would say it is the root of the problem with today's youth. They by-and-large think that because some university gives you a piece of paper, and they go to work writing propaganda (Hello liberal "news" media), that you've done something real, when all you have really done is confuse and mislead people. So no, Marx never worked a day in his life, and that has absolutely led to a misled generation, or several misled generations if you want to get technical. So no, I have my facts right, and you misconstrued what it means to actually do meaningful work in the world.
@@trentp151 Well if only you'd read his articles prior to his writing the communist manifesto. Till 1842 Marx wrote articles which which vehemently supported freedom of the press citing them as basic universal human rights as well as free trade and advocating Democracy claiming "Democracy is the solved riddle of all Constitutions".
Now brace for the impact. Marx at the time was acutely opposed to communist ideas and hinted at suppressing their uprising.
He was ultimately fired by the Prussian authorities as he dared to take an anti establishment position and rightly so.
Hence passing judgements and saying he never worked a single day in his life is pretty easy isn't it without having read his body of work(read Das Kapital). I'm sure your work entails solving global problems on a daily basis as his work(journalistic and Das Kapital not communist Manifesto)is beneath your dignity to be considered "meaningful".
Instead of a monolithic interpretation of things try developing the dialectical method as every person has multiple layers to his personality.
Marx had identified a genuine problem but got it totally wrong in terms of his solution. Adam Smith's wealth of Nations and Ricardo's principles of political economy and taxation had huge similarities with Marx's Das Kapital as all of them got it the "labor theory of value wrong". But still Adam Smith was brilliant as the world we live in still works on the principles he cited in the " Wealth of nations".
@@akshaymanta55 I hear you, but I am failing to see why any of Marx's works should be propagated at all. After all, the USA is NOT a democracy according to the US Constitution - - it is a Constitutional Republic, and even Adam Smith recognized this. Another problem that Marx brings to the table is that he was not an American, and wasn't criticizing the American system in the first place, so by trying to draw correlations to Marx's work to common day America is essentially creating problems where there shouldn't be any; by using "Democracy" to erode the common citizen's natural rights outlined by the constitution. I don't disagree that I am short-changing Marx, but due to the fact that his ideas are so utterly problematic in that they erode the natural God-given rights of people and to usurp the power that was granted to the Citizens of the USA... His ideas have just been used to flip the script on EVERYONE and as it turns out, his ideas create tyranny, so I can see absolutely zero reasons why he shouldn't be relegated to the trash bin of history.
@@akshaymanta55 marx lived on engels money, and never worked at a mine. he was just a journo talking dumb shit.
M->C->M' was what got me into all of this.