"Once thriving capitalist metropolis is now struggling to control wild dogs after a period of 40 years."
Posted Jul 26, 2015, 5:55 AM UTC
3846
I know Wolff is not always popular around here, but he explains the collapse well (from his perspective) and always glad to hear about it from other perspectives.
5
Thanks.
I always enjoy his talks. What are some criticisms of him around here? Search turned up nothin'.
7
Well, I've never heard of this guy or posted in this sub before, but I made a post saying I liked the video and within 10 minutes was downvoted into the negatives, so there's that.
Then there's another post calling it "shit" and comparing him to David Icke (who believes in Satanic, shapeshifting, lizard-people from space (not an exaggeration btw)), so I guess there is some opposition.
Must be pretty active to be able to downvote things they don't like within 10 minutes of responding to a relatively mild, factual post in a small subreddit.
Jimmies have been rustled, apparently. Lol.
11
He's a socialist. It wouldn't matter if he came out and said "hey, the sky is blue", someone would trash the poor guy just because he's a socialist. There are people in life who are married to their ideology. Even if that ideology is wrong, they will not let go. I haven't really made a choice between the two (capitalism/socialism). I think we are likely to see something new arise.
Either way, Marx gets a lot of shit from some people. The thing is, it's pretty obvious some of these people have never read it. I'm quite sure they haven't even read Smith or Ricardo either.
15
There is nothing to choose when it comes to economics. You either have a system that is sustainable or you don't. If you don't then your choice is going to be changed against your desires. People don't think to check their system against the energy the sun provides, the renewability of resources, or the integrity of ecoservices.
Without these considerations, it's completely irrelevant in the long run what a person believes, except for the fact their beliefs have likely compromised the future of their progeny
8
I'm not a fan of socialists, just because it can be taken too far, but this guy I like. He explained things in a clear manner and even had a prescription to end out predicament. The only problem I see with it all is the end of oil, would that be mitigated?
2
I think we are likely to see something new arise.
Literally nothing but these two (or a regression to an older political-economic system) is possible. This is true on a very basic, even mathematical sense:
Capitalism is the private ownership and control of the means of production. That is, capitalism is where some subset of the population--that is, some group that does not include everyone--controls the means of production.
Socialism is the public ownership and control of the means of production. That is, socialism is where no subset of the population is allowed to control the means of production--it is literally everyone who controls it.
If it is not-everyone, it is capitalism. If it is everyone, it is socialism. There is no third way that is even logically possible.
1
[deleted]
-7
[deleted]
10
[deleted]
-9
Don't ever speak to me again.
3†
[deleted]
5
Of course. I kinda forgot I wasn't in a more socialist-friendly subreddit.
3
It's better than it was a few years ago, when the bulk of this sub was "survivalist" types (you know, right-wing goldbug ideas were pretty popular).
1
my only criticism is the endless plugging at the beginning of this video
4
Maybe you put the name of the person doing the talk in the title...
5
[deleted]
-18
What is your solution then?
3
[deleted]
-3†
What is your solution to the eventual end of this economic system due to much more expensive resource extraction, decreased industrial output, decreased agricultural output, increased pollution etc. ?
6
[deleted]
2†
Marx's societies didn't militarily win any cold wars, which is not a terrible thing.
Marx's ideas haven't been given nearly enough of a chance in this century. Technology - the means of production - has changed drastically since the times of his writing, but his ethics bear out. He deserves a modern interpretation of his work.
I haven't read the article yet; just comments. Yours stuck out. I think the greatest ecological catastrophe is happening right fucking now, if you hadn't noticed; and it's not the marxists at the wheel. Just saying.
0†
[deleted]
-1†
However Marx is enjoying a bit of revival as an economist and observer given how things are in the world today.
-1
Thanks for posting this. Never heard of this guy before but this was informative, easy to understand & entertaining to watch. Learned more about the Greek/Europe situation without being kind of overwhelmed or having things oversimplified or overcomplicated.
Don't know why this guy would be unpopular, he presented the information well. This was a video I could recommend to people who follow the "deadbeat Greece" narrative that can explain to them in an hour why the truth is different and more complex.
Edit: This part in particular
https://youtu.be/En4rRo07axE?t=4519
where he talks about the narrative that is being sold and was sold by Mitt Romney in 2012, that the working poor should be angry at the unemployed poor and hold them responsible for conditions at large, is particularly relevant. I think and talk a lot about framing as it is probably the most powerful political/economic tool available. In this case you limit the scope of consideration or argument for who is responsible by eliminating the possibility that the system itself, or those with the most power and wealth, could possible have any responsibility for or effect on the economy at large. Classic misdirection, chicanery at its finest.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, indeed.
[deleted]