Great work again - real appreciate your pedagogy. Which of his books are the quotes taken from and what do you recommend to read first from his writings?
Check out the document in the description for the sources of each of the quotes. See his works here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakunin#Works "Statism and Anarchy" is probably the most popular. 👍
Great conversation Never worry about “pissing-off” people who have convinced themselves there has ever been a socialist/communist society There have only been disastrous monarcho-dictatorships that have completely failed to provide citizens with their deserved place in the international community or indeed even a comfortable existence within their borders,, including some measure of luxury and travel
Bakunin is not an "anti-socialist." In his own words: "Liberty without socialism is privilege and injustice, and socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality."
"The individual is the true reality of life. A cosmos in himself, he does not exist for the State, nor for that abstraction called "society," or the "nation," which is only a collection of individuals." ~ Emma Goldman
One area where Bakunin's Anarchism ran into a bit of a hurdle seems to be with money/income. I don't recall the exact way he formulated his ideas on providing an equitable access to a medium of exchange, and thus to resources, to the populace, but as I remember it still ended up a relatively centralized contrived idea. This is not meant to be as a criticism of his philosophy, but rather an inquiry of whether or not this area has had any practical development. Obviously your right-wing Anrachists or Anarcho-Capitalists have their view on this pretty figured out, but they don't put much stock in equity of opportunity.
Excellent teaching. I see the Magna Carta as a (forced) social contract to demand expansion of rights from 1 to more than 1 - the beginning of the evolution away from state domination. Exceptions matter.
With regard to Bakunin's quote about nature. What he is saying is that man cannot do anything that is not nature or natural. This means that, since man is a part of nature and nature part of man, there is nothing man can do that is not natural. This means everything from iPhones to the millions of tons of plastic pollution in the ocean are just as natural as the trees and rocks. This is not to say they are not altering the environment in a way that is deleterious to the current state of it, but that is the essence of his statement. All man does is as natural as anything any creature does.
I think “dictatorship of the proletariat” is a terrible phrase, rhetorically speaking. I don’t like vanguardism, at least top-down vanguardism. Can we have a bottom-up dictatorship of the proletariat?
That what if they were on CZcams bit 😆 kind of makes me want to do some parody type vids of them and other philosophers arguing. Or an epic rap battle 😂
Nevertheless, Collective/Social Anarchism can only thrive within a smaller community, and together with like-minded individuals. Paradoxically, it requires conformity. Anything else is a silly notion.
I would tend to argue that the capitalist employment relationship requires a high degree of conformity. If capitalism is a giant machine, the workers are just parts. Workers need to be as basic and interchangeable as possible. Heck, we use words like worker bee, and corporate drone to describe this relationship.
If you do not understand historical materialism, then you might as well, just end your interest in progressing the world by bingewatching the Sons of Anarchy on Netflix.
Great Channel, great discussion....but really...at around 25 you have to get into that "we're destroying the planet as we speak...blahblahblah.....routine? Tolkien and Blake had already sensed the ravishes of industrialism, but many cultures overloaded their environments- it happened all the time- what now, something along: "the ways of the ____ [gangadanga]..... we should learn from them (just not how to properly cook other bi-pieds maybe)...we're "unsustainable"....want to bet that science will solve these supposedly "unsustainable" problems within the next two or three decades? And you don't really believe it yourselves- if you did you wouldn't be spending your time on philosophy...just sayn'....but I'm glad you are. Great channel.
Thanks! I'd take that bet on science though. For all the improvements technological or industrial advance has made to our lives, it's also predominantly responsible for accelerated environmental degradation. It's not an either/or paradigm. To be blunt, there's no "teching" our way out of the current trajectory w/o a major ideological shift. As for other cultures overloading their environments--that's true. And what did they do? They either changed the way they lived to get back to sustainable (ex: Iroquois League, survivors of Cahokia) or they ended (Rapanui). We can, indeed, learn from these cultures that proved more adaptable and in many respects philosophically, consciously, and socially much more advanced than we are now.
@@RevolutionandIdeology More advanced? Do you have a discussion on that? I'd be curious to see who might be "more advanced" considering the results don't seem to be any better. The Anasazi solved their problem with migration, but the great herding societies simply altered their/our environment, just as the great agricultural societies did- we're all still here and thriving. If i come up with a shorter term wager I'll let you know...
@@jollyscholar888 Really anything by David Graeber is better than what we've produced in terms of answering your question. That said, our earlier content on this channel provides discussion (Human Nature 1 and 2, State and Society, Natural Democracy, Matrilineal Society, et al.). I'm not so sure about the term "thriving" either...at least not most of us.
An introduction to the thinking of Bakunin through his own words. Let us know what you think!
His biography was my introduction in Anarchism.
Your guy's channel is criminally underrated, I look forward to pursuing your catalog
Thanks!
Can you make a video on Kropotkin please?
We have one planned for the future!
Great work again - real appreciate your pedagogy. Which of his books are the quotes taken from and what do you recommend to read first from his writings?
Check out the document in the description for the sources of each of the quotes. See his works here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Bakunin#Works "Statism and Anarchy" is probably the most popular. 👍
The best anarchist!
Ha! We should make a video debating who the best Anarchist is/was!
@@RevolutionandIdeology Hopefully, the best anarchist have yet to make their mark.
@@NathanDudani 👍
@@RevolutionandIdeology Do Kropotkin. You mentioned it in the video. My personal favorite.
Ah, see. If you start creating hierarchical lists there's going to be MUCH debate!
Great conversation
Never worry about “pissing-off” people who have convinced themselves there has ever been a socialist/communist society
There have only been disastrous monarcho-dictatorships that have completely failed to provide citizens with their deserved place in the international community or indeed even a comfortable existence within their borders,, including some measure of luxury and travel
If Bakunin and Marx had CZcams channels! That's fun to think abt... nice work.
Bakunin is not an "anti-socialist." In his own words: "Liberty without socialism is privilege and injustice, and socialism without liberty is slavery and brutality."
"The individual is the true reality of life. A cosmos in himself, he does not exist for the State, nor for that abstraction called "society," or the "nation," which is only a collection of individuals." ~ Emma Goldman
How am I seing this videos from this chanel for the first time???
You guys ROCK keep doing what you doing thank you so much for this.
Thanks!
One area where Bakunin's Anarchism ran into a bit of a hurdle seems to be with money/income. I don't recall the exact way he formulated his ideas on providing an equitable access to a medium of exchange, and thus to resources, to the populace, but as I remember it still ended up a relatively centralized contrived idea. This is not meant to be as a criticism of his philosophy, but rather an inquiry of whether or not this area has had any practical development. Obviously your right-wing Anrachists or Anarcho-Capitalists have their view on this pretty figured out, but they don't put much stock in equity of opportunity.
Excellent teaching.
I see the Magna Carta as a (forced) social contract to demand expansion of rights from 1 to more than 1 - the beginning of the evolution away from state domination.
Exceptions matter.
great video guys
Thanks for doing this. It helps develop my ideas.
Thanks for watching!
Underrated
With regard to Bakunin's quote about nature. What he is saying is that man cannot do anything that is not nature or natural. This means that, since man is a part of nature and nature part of man, there is nothing man can do that is not natural. This means everything from iPhones to the millions of tons of plastic pollution in the ocean are just as natural as the trees and rocks. This is not to say they are not altering the environment in a way that is deleterious to the current state of it, but that is the essence of his statement. All man does is as natural as anything any creature does.
The quote about social contract theory likely is referring to Locke and not Rousseau, as Rousseau was not a liberal based on the classical definition.
Lovely
Where can I find sources from these quotes?
See the document in the description.
I think “dictatorship of the proletariat” is a terrible phrase, rhetorically speaking. I don’t like vanguardism, at least top-down vanguardism. Can we have a bottom-up dictatorship of the proletariat?
That what if they were on CZcams bit 😆 kind of makes me want to do some parody type vids of them and other philosophers arguing. Or an epic rap battle 😂
We'll totally watch a rap battle/parody. Get it!
Like this: czcams.com/video/QwqnRYPcrl0/video.html
lol We debate on twitter instead
lol
Nevertheless, Collective/Social Anarchism can only thrive within a smaller community, and together with like-minded individuals. Paradoxically, it requires conformity. Anything else is a silly notion.
I would tend to argue that the capitalist employment relationship requires a high degree of conformity.
If capitalism is a giant machine, the workers are just parts. Workers need to be as basic and interchangeable as possible.
Heck, we use words like worker bee, and corporate drone to describe this relationship.
Homogeneous society
Agreed
@@fortunatomartino8549 What is the difference between homogeneity and conformity?
@@fortunatomartino8549 What is the difference between homogeneity and conformity?
@@fortunatomartino8549 what is the difference between homogeneity....
So I agree with the violence of the state and library of the individual. But let's let pretend all people all equal. Not a race or eugenics thing
race is not real
If you do not understand historical materialism, then you might as well, just end your interest in progressing the world by bingewatching the Sons of Anarchy on Netflix.
ok....
Great Channel, great discussion....but really...at around 25 you have to get into that "we're destroying the planet as we speak...blahblahblah.....routine? Tolkien and Blake had already sensed the ravishes of industrialism, but many cultures overloaded their environments- it happened all the time- what now, something along: "the ways of the ____ [gangadanga]..... we should learn from them (just not how to properly cook other bi-pieds maybe)...we're "unsustainable"....want to bet that science will solve these supposedly "unsustainable" problems within the next two or three decades? And you don't really believe it yourselves- if you did you wouldn't be spending your time on philosophy...just sayn'....but I'm glad you are. Great channel.
Thanks! I'd take that bet on science though. For all the improvements technological or industrial advance has made to our lives, it's also predominantly responsible for accelerated environmental degradation. It's not an either/or paradigm. To be blunt, there's no "teching" our way out of the current trajectory w/o a major ideological shift. As for other cultures overloading their environments--that's true. And what did they do? They either changed the way they lived to get back to sustainable (ex: Iroquois League, survivors of Cahokia) or they ended (Rapanui). We can, indeed, learn from these cultures that proved more adaptable and in many respects philosophically, consciously, and socially much more advanced than we are now.
@@RevolutionandIdeology More advanced? Do you have a discussion on that? I'd be curious to see who might be "more advanced" considering the results don't seem to be any better.
The Anasazi solved their problem with migration, but the great herding societies simply altered their/our environment, just as the great agricultural societies did- we're all still here and thriving. If i come up with a shorter term wager I'll let you know...
@@jollyscholar888 Really anything by David Graeber is better than what we've produced in terms of answering your question. That said, our earlier content on this channel provides discussion (Human Nature 1 and 2, State and Society, Natural Democracy, Matrilineal Society, et al.). I'm not so sure about the term "thriving" either...at least not most of us.
great video guys
Thanks for watching!