Debt by David Graeber: Our Historic Moment of Economic Transition
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- This video introduces a series on David Graeber’s book, Debt: The First 5,000 Years. I set up the frame for the book and the way I will interact with the series, including questions we will explore going through it.
Video 2 in the series: • What Defeated the Mili... (What Defeated the Military-Coinage-Slavery Complex? Axial Age Economic Transition | Debt by Graeber)
Video 3 in the series: • The Original Free Mark... (The Original Free Marketeers: Islamic Traders of the Middle Ages (David Graber, Debt, Part 3)
I'll post the rest of the series links here when I finish them.
If you plan to buy the book from Amazon and want to support the channel, here is an affiliate link: amzn.to/3UZrSWA
Some of the images in this video were generated by AI. - Věda a technologie
4 part series!? LETS GOOOOOO!!!!
"The Creature from Jeckyll Island" is a good buk to read
with regards to how banking criminals usurped control
of the nation's monetary system.
Effectively establishing a monopoly and using the force
of govt to enforce that monopoly to the detriment
of the working class.
I love David Graeber, like you I don't agree with all he says but I have plenty of time for his views and knowledge. I can't wait to read his book, and I look forward to your coming series about it 🙏
I love your channel. It’s an amazing time to be alive.
It never ceases to amaze me that concepts like democracy and communism, founded upon the assumption of small communities (150 people), are still being applied to metropolises of millions of people.
There are no more barriers to radical (actual) democracy anymore. We literally have the technology and the literate populace that formed the basis of the excuse of representative "democracy" around the time of the American revolution. We can effortlessly poll millions of people in a few days. Govts and bootlickers just choose to not believe this because the core problem of democracy will rise again and again, the people will vote in their own interests and not in the interest of power.
I never ceases to amaze me how illiterate people speak so loudly from their ignorance.
Communism was made up by the Aristocrats to bring back fuedalism, when you look at the creation of it and who was involved in installing it, it is a well funded well supported movement spoken for by the world's elite, circa 1850 is when some very rich powerful people started talking about socialism and communism. They didn't like what the industrial revolution did for their power, as many former surfs were earning a living, becoming independent and some were becoming rich enough to rival the Aristocrats
but every metropolis can be broken down in smaller centers of power ie; counties, boroughs, towns, neighborhoods, street, to even an apartment building. all of these are best administered when the communal needs are met, which can best be gauged through a democratic system.
@@hermitant9 Democracy + System Dynamics = Better
I watched a very long video about what capitalism actually is, what economics is, communism and socialism, and how the language has changed thats used to describe these systems, so much so that when people blame capitalism for certain problems they don't realise theyre describing socialism or communism, people dont realise Western society is a mixture of systems, an Oligarchy, communism, socialism and some small amounts of ever dwindling capitalism. It makes everything so much clearer when you understand how they work, and their historic beginings and inplementations, I also agree that were indoctrinated to believe we can't change, I personally think we can and that we are far more cooperative and independent than the state would like us to believe which is why most films always show societal collapse, violence and apocalyptic events when the government breaks down, in reality, people would very quickly self organise. They would have to. There's actually proof that the government interferes if it sees people helping each other, watch "who we really are when it all goes wrong" to see how great people are and how utterly tyranical the state is.
About "mature economists think..." David has a short piece from 2019 where he goes into detail with names and sources - called "Against economics"
YES THANK YOU
Thanks, Ashley! I read Graeber's book a few years ago and really think that I need to read it again. Graeber left us way too early~how I miss listening to his talks and reading his writings.
I'd quibble about your second point of disagreement insofar as his saying that no one will be able to say what this transition is for a generation, doesn't preclude the change happening quickly. It's just that without the context of how things cascade and settle, we won't be able to know what we are really going through.
I'm excited for this series!!
I would argue that both hypothesis are possible. So Ashley is correct in asserting that Graeber could be wrong about the time scale. Even insofar as our ability to parse and comprehend it after a change. This does really all hang on how much catastrophe it entails. If everything plunges into abject misery for decades or more, then yeah, it's gonna take a while before we can make sense of it all.
The neoclassical/neoliberal faux scientism of political economy that drives the austere and oppressive decision-making has me pretty much convinced that any such changes without a massive social and cultural shift will be majorly catastrophic.
Is this simply a prescience Graeber is alluding to? Considering his observant nature to the modern reality?
I would have to pull my copy of the book and try to discern such intent, but such a conclusion is not unwarranted considering the current landscape of political economy.
I greatly look forward to this and haven't read the book, but a couple of points. 1). Graeber was an anarchist and therefore his idea of communism - and even Marx's idea of communism - has nothing to do with "totalitarian systems", or whatever the quote was. All anti-capitalists (hard leftists) see communism as a classless society, in relation to ownership of production regardless of the tactical and style differences. "From each according to need etc." assumes abundance of resources but, post-capitalism, doesn't assist how to go from one to the other outside of the vague goal of creating a classless society. Further, the USSR, China et al see/saw themselves as socialist thriving for communism but none has ever claimed to be communist. It's also debatable if any self-identified socialist country is actually socialist; socialistic maybe. 2). Again, I didn't read the book yet, however, I suspect Graeber (and hard-leftists generally) don't criticise economists for how they think, as such, but usually from the liberal-capitalist ideologies underpinning 'how they think' which they are often unable to see themselves. It's partly why Marx in Das Kapital says: "...the capitalist is just as enslaved by the relationships of capitalism as is his opposite pole, the worker, albeit in a quite different manner". But, of course, it's ideologies all the way down!!
11:00 identifying straw man mythos is an incredibly prescient consideration in providing a worthwhile new direction…I’m excited for this series, keep going!
Hi from Australia, Ashley. I'm looking forward to the series. It's great to see you again. There is so much to engage with in our current circumstances, and the enforced hopelessness of political, economic, and social structure change is not an indulgence any of us can afford anymore, let alone coming generations.
I really appreciate your deep dives in an age of 30 sec sound bites. Your channel is a MUST-READ for those who wish to understand likely changes.
I have found Small is Beautiful (E.F. Schumacher) and Schumpeter as good partners to this book. While there are many strawman arguments - I do generally agree emerging economic models being more of a 'reversion to the mean' of how economic participants exchange value - change is likely coming and its good to educate people to allow them to make the best decisions/plans for themselves, family and community.
Thank you, Ashley. This was a very interesting. Looking forward to enjoying the rest of the series.
I think this is one of the most important books on economics, precisely because it wasn't written by an economist. Economists seem to pull the history out of their asses, and getting some actual anthropology on the subject makes a huge difference.
Can't wait for the full series!
Fantastic! I’m very excited by this new series of yours. Thanks so much! ❤
The whole point (historically) with “incorporation”, was to legally institute a “body” outside of its owner(s). So today, going bankrupt is a lifelong predicament for a meat-and-blood person - not so for a legal construct, the corporation or firm.
The incorporated entity “dies” and is forgiven its debt and taxes, the owners go on in life. The working person - serf, slave or waged - does _not._
This difference has increased twice in modern times, before WW1 and today. Communism or socialism have not had power across the OECD (the west, global north) in these periods. Liberal economic individualism has, though…
Thanks for the book recommendation, I'll check it out. Love the Rod Sterling voice, btw!
Yes! Get into it. I don't think it's possible to overstate the influence of the University of Chicago in embedding superstructures in the world. It's so much a part of public consciousness that the Argentine people with all of their trauma are trying once more like a battered spouse to do it "right".
"I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism." - Smedley Butler
I could listen to you all day long 😀
Really looking forward to the series. I thing you like this, you’ll love digging into the MMT view of money/debt
money can make trading convenient but beyond that it's simply toxic waste
Great video. Really enjoying these book reviews. Very excited for the rest of this series on Greaber's Debt, and more book reviews. Hope Prof. Hodgson will one day write a book synthesising her insights and thoughts on the new enlightenment.
Thanks for the analysis, I see Graeber's use of the needs-ability imperative to refer to communism as a way of categorizing it as an economic theory. The operationalization of the theory are where intersecting systems of knowledge and governance come into play. I'd defend the idea that the changes needed to make way for less totalitarian versions of actually existing socialism in the past are mostly minor and at times would have been changes that the US and its allies could have made regarding the environment of geopolitical economy that they set out to construct. Although i also believe it does no good to revert back to the agent-structure pendulum, there's a way of resolving the tension between those concepts
Thank you for your interpretation of David Graeber. Especially his interpretation of the freedom from debt encampment at Wall Street which the mainstream media totally avoided lol ❤️ 🦣 🐻 🐻❄️ 🐺 🐔 💋 💋 💋 💋 💋
Ashley Hodgson is brilliant!
I really liked this book, I read it a few years ago. It may be think about debt in a new way that I hadn't thought about before.
Ironic that right at the point where morality is discussed in its being brought to bear on economy, my viewing is interrupted with an advert' from a bank urging 'net zero' as 'the path we are on'. Truly we are being herded.
Nice! Now I can finally not read the book! THanks for your videos! Game theory is so important!
16:26 the apparatus of hopelessness, 16:48. 17:18
i think we have a good idea already which economic ideas can and should be thrown out. Neo liberalism is a good start. Trickle down economics. Privatisation is always more efficient. That people are fundamentally and primarily driven by a selfish motive to make a profit
This looks like a great series. I would, however, like to partially disagree with your thought that we don't know which "categories of thought" or ideas will get jettisoned. I think that many of us have some pet stupid ideas/concepts/beliefs that were probably useful in the past, but which have ALREADY become hopelessly outdated, much less are they likely to be useful in any major configuration.
☮
👀👍
Powerlessness is real, not imagined, imo. Those with power haven't voluntarily given it up normally. So unless something drastically changes, we will remain under their thumb(as long as they control the education the finances and the food not to mention the culture) don't give us false hope I know you're breaking it down but the world isn't as it should be the world is as it is unfortunately.
There are economists and economists - try Austrian economics for a change (instead of the keynesism that has been forced upon us for decades (with an extremely detrimental effect).
The future is now. The future is Bitcoin. How long from million adopters now to billions? And yes, it’s a very bumpy road.
a buk --->📙
Why does this seem so Marxist or Marxian? Still very interesting
Useful book, IF you engage critically with Graeber's dismissal of existing and historical small societies which practiced and still practice communism and live debt free. He provides no rationale for his clearly aesthetic and implicitly either classist or racist (take your pick) distaste for indigenous people. His work is still meaningful to me, but wowsers he has some bad blind spots.