Podcasts about marx

Actor Frank Ferrante joins Rick Kogan to talk about his 40th year playing Groucho Marx on stage and to discuss the Marx brothers’ Chicago history. Groucho’s grandson Andy Marx also chats with Frank and Rick about his grandfather and Frank’s impersonation of Groucho. Frank will appear as Groucho Marx on June 11th at Teatro ZinZanni […]

ORIGINALLY RELEASED Dec 10, 2024 Alyson and Breht finally dive into the German Revolution of 1918! This pivotal yet often overlooked revolutionary moment saw the collapse of the German Empire at the end of World War I, the rise of workers' and soldiers' councils, and intense ideological and political struggles shaping the future of socialism, liberalism, and fascism in Europe. Together they discuss this rather ambigious revolution, give a detailed overview of events, and reflect on what lessons we can learn from it. From the toppling of the Kaiser, to the brutal fight between social democrats and communists (including the horrible murders of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht), to the rise of the Freikorp and the Weimar Republic (and beyond), they help listeners understand the importance, the successes, the failures, and the tragedies, of this often neglected revolution. Check out the 3-part series on YT mentioned in the episode: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL7y0zyKXzhwzrZ0raG4HpT8ZdXx9USoW3 ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio: https://revleftradio.com/      

GUSTAVO MACHADO é filósofo e marxista. Ele vai bater um papo sobre Karl Marx, sua história e seu legado. O Vilela lembra bem de Marx, que já organizava sindicatos no jardim de infância.

Spencer Leonard discusses the meaning of the term "Historical Materialism," and how it emerged through the historical struggle for socialism. Support Sublation Mediahttps://patreon.com/dietsoap

******Support the channel******Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenterPayPal: paypal.me/thedissenterPayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuyPayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9lPayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpzPayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9mPayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on******Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoBFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Vanessa Christina Wills is Associate Professor of Philosophy at The George Washington University. Her areas of specialization are moral, social, and political philosophy, nineteenth century German philosophy (especially Karl Marx), and the philosophy of race. Her research is importantly informed by her study of Marx's work, and focuses on how socioeconomic arrangements can inhibit or promote the realization of values such as freedom, equality, and human development. She is the author of Marx's Ethical Vision. In this episode, we focus on Marx's Ethical Vision. We start by discussing Marxism and morality, and whether morality is a form of ideology. We talk about human nature, normativity, and the “rich individual”. We discuss “bourgeois” ethics, individuality, and human rights. We talk about the idea of abolishing morality, and how life would be like in a fully developed communist society. We also talk about the failures of neoliberal capitalism, the role of intellectuals, and intersectionality.--A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, MAURO JÚNIOR, 航 豊川, TONY BARRETT, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, STEVEN GANGESTAD, TED FARRIS, AND ROBINROSWELL!A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, NICK GOLDEN, CHRISTINE GLASS, IGOR NIKIFOROVSKI, PER KRAULIS, AND BENJAMIN GELBART!AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

This week, Ted welcomes co-host John Marx to the podcast to read and discuss the latest edition of the American Israelite.

Karl Marx legte mit seinem drei Teile umfassenden "Das Kapital" einen wichtigen Grundstein für die Entwicklung der kommunistischen Ideologie, sowie sozialistischer und kommunistischer Staatsformen im frühen 20. Jahrhundert. Doch kam die von Marx vorhergesagte "Revolution" viel später als angenommen und konnte auch die hohen in sie gesetzten Erwartungen nicht erfüllen. Andreas Peglau hat sich intensiv mit dem Marxismus - der Lehre, die "den Menschen" befreien soll, deren Vertreter aber zumeist gar nicht wissen wollen, was Menschen sind - auseinander gesetzt und ist live zu Gast, um darüber zu reflektieren, wie "Marx und Engels die reale Psyche in ihrer Lehre verdrängten".

In today's special episode, Victor shares a heartfelt letter from his bride, Eileen, to the All Things Possible Ministries team — as they confront the spiritual war surrounding their fight against child exploitation and abuse. Eileen calls the team to walk in truth and light, constantly seeking God's guidance to protect their hearts and minds from the enemy's schemes. She also shares a personal moment of reflection and repentance, reminding the team that it's not just about battling against external evil — it's also about staying clean before God to fulfill the mission He has given. We invite you to join her in prayer at the end!Learn more about ATP's efforts to combat child exploitation at victormarx.com/pci Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Phil Magness, occupant of the David Theroux Chair at the Independent Institute, drops by Casa de Remnant to discuss the corrupting effect of tariffs, why Karl Marx is overrated, the evolving definitions of intellectual movements, and Jonah Goldberg's gripes about romanticism. Show Notes:—The 1619 Project Myth—Phil for the Cato Institute: ”The Problem of the Tariff in American Economic History, 1787–1934” The Remnant is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including Jonah's G-File newsletter, regular livestreams, and other members-only content—click here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Alyson and Breht explore Friedrich Engels' Dialectics of Nature, a bold and underappreciated attempt to apply dialectical materialism to the natural sciences. Often dismissed or misunderstood, this unfinished work offers a sweeping view of reality - from physics and chemistry to evolution, human consciousness, and ecological breakdown - through the lens of Marxist philosophy. Together, they unpack Engels' central claim that nature itself unfolds dialectically: through contradiction, motion, transformation, and interconnection. They cover the three laws of dialectics, Engels' materialist account of human evolution, his critique of mechanistic science, vulgar materialism, and metaphysical thinking, and his early warnings about capitalism's ecological consequences. Along the way, they connect these insights to Marx's concept of species-being, and reflect on what this revolutionary worldview offers in the age of climate crisis, hyper-alienation, and late capitalist decay. Finally, Alyson and Breht have a fascinating open-ended discussion about the existential and spiritual implications of dialectical materialism as a worldview. Whether you're new to dialectical materialism or looking to deepen your understanding, this conversation reframes Engels' work as a profound contribution not just to Marxism, but to the philosophy of science itself. ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio or here: https://www.patreon.com/TheRedMenace Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio & Red Menace HERE

Zwischen Deutschland und Argentinien liegen 12.000 Kilometer und doch sind beide Länder aufs Engste miteinander verbunden. Zum Beispiel die Leben von Ellen Marx und Elisabeth Käsemann. Marx, verfolgte Jüdin, flieht 1938 aus Berlin nach Buenos Aires. Käsemann folgt ihr 30 Jahre später als links und revolutionär gesinntes Nachkriegskind. Beide werden Opfer der argentinischen Militärdiktatur. Diese deutsch-argentinische Geschichte zwischen persönlichem Schicksal und politischer Gewalt erzählt die neue Graphic Novel „Schweigen“ der preisgekrönten Autorin Birgit Weyhe.

Capitalism and government go hand in hand – one feeding the other Some people think of economic history as a trifle dry, but how can you resist a book that includes quotes like these: “The love of money (as a possession) is… a somewhat disgusting morbidity.” (Keynes). “Capitalism is an economic system, but it's also so much more than that. It's become a sort of ideology, this all-encompassing force that rules over our lives and our minds.”  (Rund Abdelfatah) How many critics of Capitalism can you name? I bet you can only think of a very few. Marx and Engels, I suppose. Keynes. Maybe Thomas Picketty in recent years. But … Continue reading →

ORIGINALLY RELEASED Oct 23, 2023 UPSTREAM INTERVIEW W/ BREHT AND ALYSON:  What Is To Be Done? This is the question so profoundly posed by the Russian Revolutionary and Bolshevik leader, Vladimir Lenin, in his landmark text of the same name. Although it was written well over a century ago, this text, the questions it asked, and the paths forward that it provided, are just as relevant today as they were a hundred years ago. And just as urgent. What roles do spontaneity and disciplined organization have in leftist movements? Can we focus simply on economic reform, or do our actions need a larger political framework to structure, guide, and propel them?  Why does it feel like even though so many of us are motivated to work towards structural change, that things continue to get worse? Why does it seem like potential revolutionary struggles in the West always seem to stall and fail to move from a singular moment to a protracted movement?  These are old and familiar questions — a lot of ink has been spilled and speeches made exploring them — and in this Conversation, we've brought on two guests who've not only thought about these questions in depth, but who have some pretty compelling answers that draw from revolutionary theory and practice in both their personal lives and from the deep well of wisdom bequeathed by theorists Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Mao.  Breht O'Shea is the host of the podcast Revolutionary Left Radio and a co-host of Guerrilla History. He's been on the show multiple times so you may already be familiar with his voice. Alyson Escalate, who has also been on the show, is the co-host, along with Breht, of Red Menace, a podcast that explains and analyzes revolutionary theory and then applies its lessons to our contemporary conditions.  Further Resources: Red Menace – What Is To Be Done? - V.I. Lenin  Revolutionary Left Radio – Politics in Command: Analyzing the Error of Economism  Red Menace – The Wretched of the Earth - Frantz Fanon: On Violence and Spontaneity Red Menace – Understanding Settler Colonialism in Israel and the United States Revolutionary Left Radio on Instagram Upstream – Buddhism and Marxism with Breht O'Shea (In Conversation) Upstream – Trans Liberation and Solidarity with Alyson Escalante (In Conversation) Upstream – Revolutionary Leftism with Breht O'Shea (In Conversation)  

America's hidden Marxist history reveals a country where radical ideas took root in ways we've deliberately forgotten. Dr. Andrew Hartman takes us on a journey through this erased past, uncovering how deeply Marx's ideas penetrated American society from the Civil War through today.Marx himself was surprisingly connected to America, writing hundreds of articles for the New York Tribune—the world's most-read newspaper in the 1850s—and developing key theories about labor and freedom through his analysis of American slavery. These writings would profoundly shape his masterwork, Capital, yet few Americans know this historical connection exists.The real revelation comes when we discover how widely Marx's ideas spread across America's heartland. Oklahoma socialists outnumbered Republicans for a decade. Mining towns in Montana and Colorado witnessed class warfare that rivals any European struggle. Jack London wasn't just writing adventure tales but promoting Marxism through passionate speeches and novels like The Iron Heel. These weren't fringe movements but significant political forces shaping American life.What makes American Marxism distinct is its remarkable hybridization—merging with evangelical Christianity in the South, populism in the Midwest, and civil rights activism in Black communities. Far from a rigid foreign ideology, Marxist thought provided analytical tools that diverse Americans adapted to understand their specific struggles against exploitation.Through economic crashes, war, and cultural upheaval, Marxist ideas have resurged repeatedly in American life—most recently since the 2008 financial crisis. By recovering this deliberately obscured history, we gain insight not just into our past but into the persistent appeal of radical critiques when capitalism fails to deliver on its promises of freedom and prosperity for all.Send us a text Musis by Bitterlake, Used with Permission, all rights to BitterlakeLeadership Lessons From The Great BooksReading great literature is better than trying to read and understand...Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the showCrew:Host: C. Derick VarnIntro and Outro Music by Bitter Lake.Intro Video Design: Jason MylesArt Design: Corn and C. Derick VarnLinks and Social Media:twitter: @varnvlogblue sky: @varnvlog.bsky.socialYou can find the additional streams on YoutubeCurrent Patreon at the Sponsor Tier: Jordan Sheldon, Mark J. Matthews, Lindsay Kimbrough, RedWolf, DRV, Kenneth McKee, JY Chan, Matthew Monahan, Parzival, Adriel Mixon

Book a consultation with Dr. Masha to review your HBOT protocol https://calendly.com/drmakeeva/hyperbaric-consultation-1Register for the HBOT Certification course :https://drmasha.com/hbotcourse/In this episode I break down the Marx Protocol — a structured HBOT approach used before and after surgery to help reduce complications, speed up healing, and support better outcomes. Whether you're preparing for surgery or supporting clients through recovery, this is a protocol worth knowing.DISCLAIMER: This “How to HYPERBARIC” Podcast is for informational purposes only. Statements and views expressed on this podcast are not medical advice. This podcast disclaims responsibility from any possible adverse effects from the use of information contained herein. Opinions of guests are their own, and this podcast does not accept responsibility for statements made by guests. This podcast does not make any representations or warranties about guests' qualifications or credibility. Individuals on this podcast may have a direct or non-direct interest in products or services referred to herein. If you think you have a medical problem, consult a licensed physician.

Antonio Tarallo: En la casa de San Felipe Neri, en el corazón de la Roma católica. Homilía de León XIV en la Basílica de San Juan Letrán. Stefano Fontana: Diario de los Obispos italianos sale al campo para defender la decisión del Tribunal Constitucional sobre las dos madres. Nico Spuntoni: Cardenal Duka conversa sobre temas candentes que esperan a León XIV. Marco Lepore: El reclamo de educación sexual para los jóvenes es el resultado del bombardeo del mundo adulto hedonista. Sante Maletta: MacIntyre, de Marx a la fe pasando por Aristóteles y Santo Tomás.

Jasper Bernes discusses worker self-organization, labor time accounting and the revolutionary potential of workers' councils.   Shownotes Jasper's personal website: https://jasperbernes.net/ Jasper at UC Berkeley: https://english.berkeley.edu/people/jasper-bernes Commune Magazine: https://communemag.com/ Bernes, J. (2025). The Future of Revolution: Communist Prospects from the Paris Commune to the George Floyd Uprising. Verso Books. https://www.versobooks.com/products/977-the-future-of-revolution Bernes, J. (2020). Planning and Anarchy. South Atlantic Quarterly, 119(1), 53–73. https://jasperbernes.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/1190053.pdf on Worker's councils: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_council on Council communism: https://libcom.org/article/council-communism-introduction on the Paris Commune: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Commune on Rosa Luxemburg and the Mass Strike: https://www.rosalux.de/en/news/id/43964/rosa-luxemburg-and-the-political-mass-strike Nunes, R. (2021). Neither Vertical nor Horizontal: A Theory of Political Organization. Verso Books. https://www.versobooks.com/products/772-neither-vertical-nor-horizontal Find the quote “the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all” at the end of Chapter 2 of the Communist Manifesto: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm Group of International Communists (1990) [German original 1930] Fundamental Principles of Communist Production and Distribution. https://www.marxists.org/subject/left-wing/gik/1930/index.htm second, revised edition from 1935, published in English in 2020: https://arbeitszeit.noblogs.org/files/2023/04/GIC-Fundamental-Principles-2.-Ed.1935-1.pdf on Jan Appel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Appel on Labor Time Calculation/Accounting: https://arbeitszeit.noblogs.org/en-GB/basics/ Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ on Communization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communization Noys, B. (Ed.). (2012). Communization and its Discontents: Contestation, Critique, and Contemporary Struggles. Minor Compositions. https://files.libcom.org/files/Communization-and-its-Discontents-Contestation-Critique-and-Contemporary-Struggles.pdf on Gilles Dauvé: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Dauv%C3%A9 on the law of Value in Marx: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_value on Paul Mattick: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Mattick Roth, G. (2014). Marxism in a Lost Century: A Biography of Paul Mattick. BRILL. https://files.libcom.org/files/Gary%20Roth%20-%20Marxism%20in%20a%20Lost%20Century%20-%20A%20Biography%20of%20Paul%20Mattick.pdf Mattick's introduction to the 1970 reprint of the German first edition of “Fundamental Principles of Communist Production and Distribution”: https://www.leftcommunism.org/spip.php?article359 on the Communist Party of Germany, founded in 1919: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Germany on Amadeo Bordiga: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amadeo_Bordiga Bordiga on the distinction between the city and the countryside: https://peopleandnature.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/bordiga-humansearth.pdf Raekstad, P. R., & Gradin, S. S. (2019). Prefigurative Politics: Building Tomorrow Today. Polity. https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=prefigurative-politics-building-tomorrow-today--9781509535903 the Endnotes Journal: https://endnotes.org.uk/ on the German strand of the “Commons” debate and movement: https://commons-institut.org/theorie/was-sind-commons/ https://keimform.de/ Gibson-Graham, J. K. (1993). Waiting for the Revolution, or How to Smash Capitalism while Working at Home in Your Spare Time. Rethinking Marxism, 6(2), 10–24. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08935699308658052 Purnell, D. (2021).  Becoming Abolitionists: Police, Protest, and the Pursuit of Freedom. Verso. https://www.versobooks.com/products/2894-becoming-abolitionists   Future Histories Episodes on Related Topics S3E04 | Tim Platenkamp on Republican Socialism, General Planning and Parametric Control https://futurehistories-international.com/episodes/s03/e04-tim-platenkamp-on-republican-socialism-general-planning-and-parametric-control/ S02E58 | Søren Mau on Planning and Freedom https://futurehistories-international.com/episodes/s02/e58-soren-mau-on-planning-and-freedom/ S02E19 | David Laibman on Multilevel Democratic Iterative Coordination https://futurehistories-international.com/episodes/s02/e19-david-laibman-on-multilevel-democratic-iterative-coordination/ S02E10 | Aaron Benanav on Associational Socialism and Democratic Planning https://futurehistories-international.com/episodes/s02/e10-aaron-benanav-on-associational-socialism-and-democratic-planning/ S01E58 | Jasper Bernes on Planning and Anarchy https://futurehistories-international.com/episodes/s01/e58-jasper-bernes-on-planning-and-anarchy/   --- If you are interested in democratic economic planning, these resources might be of help: Democratic planning – an information website https://www.democratic-planning.com/ Sorg, C. & Groos, J. (eds.)(2025). Rethinking Economic Planning. Competition & Change Special Issue Volume 29 Issue 1. https://journals.sagepub.com/toc/ccha/29/1 Groos, J. & Sorg, C. (2025). Creative Construction - Democratic Planning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Bristol University Press. [for a review copy, please contact: amber.lanfranchi[at]bristol.ac.uk] https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/creative-construction International Network for Democratic Economic Planning https://www.indep.network/ Democratic Planning Research Platform: https://www.planningresearch.net/ --- Future Histories Contact & Support If you like Future Histories, please consider supporting us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/join/FutureHistories Contact: office@futurehistories.today Twitter: https://twitter.com/FutureHpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/futurehpodcast/ Mastodon: https://mstdn.social/@FutureHistories English webpage: https://futurehistories-international.com   Episode Keywords #JasperBernes, #JanGroos, #Interview, #FutureHistories, #FutureHistoriesInternational, #futurehistoriesinternational, #DemocraticPlanning, #DemocraticEconomicPlanning, #PoliticalEconomy, #History, #Revolution, #Revolutions, #RosaLuxemburg, #CouncilCommunism, #LaborTimeAccounting, #LaborTimeCalculation, #Capitalism, #Economics, #CouncilCommunism, #WorkersCouncils, #WorkerSelfOrganisation, #PoliceAbolition, #Communisation, #ParisCommune, #GroupOfInternationalCommunists

Most professionally trained neoclassical economists have never bothered to read Capital Volume 1—let alone know about the existence of its two companion theoretical volumes (2 and 3) and three historical volumes. While it's generally advisable to refrain from speaking on topics one hasn't deeply studied, bourgeois economics remains full of lively debates peppered with claims that begin: “But Marx didn't account for [fill in the blank].”   This week on The Dialectic At Work, we examine these alleged “absences” in Marx's Capital with Professor Richard Wolff. Since most such omissions stem from ignorance of Volumes 2 and 3, we'll dedicate the next two to three episodes to these critical texts.   Recap: In our last discussion with Prof Wolff, we went over the structure of Capital Volume 1: the question of use-value, exchange-value, and Marx's theory of surplus-value. We then zoomed into the site of the workplace and the working day, via an exploration of chapters 9 and 10 of the first volume. I also want to remind our audiences that in Season 1, we have already covered how Marx's work in these chapters was extended and developed into a theory of class analysis by Richard Wolff and Stephen Resnick in their book Knowledge and Class.   About The Dialectic at Work is a podcast hosted by Professor Shahram Azhar & Professor Richard Wolff. The show is dedicated to exploring Marxian theory. It utilizes the dialectical mode of reasoning, that is the method developed over the millennia by Plato and Aristotle, and continues to explore new dimensions of theory and praxis via a dialogue. The Marxist dialectic is a revolutionary dialectic that not only seeks to understand the world but rather to change it. In our discussions, the dialectic goes to work intending to solve the urgent life crises that we face as a global community. Follow us on social media: X: @DialecticAtWork Instagram: @DialecticAtWork Tiktok: @DialecticAtWork2:25 Website: www.DemocracyAtWork.info Patreon: www.patreon.com/democracyatwork

Programa de análise da conjuntura brasileira e latino-americana, produzido pelo Instituto de Estudos Latino-Americanos, com a participação de Elaine Tavares, Nildo Ouriques e Gustavo Machado. Nesta edição discutindo o nacionalismo. Edição: Júlia Dalri Eller

Join me for conversation with Dr. Jaleh Mansoor (Associate Professor of Art History in the Department of Art History, Visual Art, and Theory, University of British Columbia) about her book Universal Prostitution and Modernist Abstraction: A Counterhistory (Duke University Press, 2025). Our discussion brought us to topics like the artists' muse, the modern laborer, and other figures precariously suspended between the object/subject dialectic. In Universal Prostitution and Modernist Abstraction, Dr. Mansoor provides a counternarrative of modernism and abstraction and a reexamination of Marxist aesthetics. Mansoor draws on Marx's concept of prostitution—a conceptual device through which Marx allegorized modern labor—to think about the confluences of generalized and gendered labor in modern art. Analyzing works ranging from Édouard Manet's Olympia and Georges Seurat's The Models to contemporary work by Hito Steyerl and Hannah Black, she shows how avant-garde artists can detect changing modes of production and capitalist and biopolitical processes of abstraction that assign identities to subjects in the interest of value's impersonal circulation. She demonstrates that art and abstraction resist modes of production and subjugation at the level of process and form rather than through referential representation. By studying gendered and generalized labor, abstraction, automation, and the worker, Mansoor shifts focus away from ideology, superstructure, and culture toward the ways art indexes crisis and transformation in the political economic base. Ultimately, she traces the outlines of a counterpraxis to capital while demonstrating how artworks give us a way to see through the abstractions of everyday life. This episode was hosted by Asia Adomanis, a PhD student in the Department of History of Art at Ohio State. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Yesterday, the self-styled San Francisco “progressive” Joan Williams was on the show arguing that Democrats need to relearn the language of the American working class. But, as some of you have noted, Williams seems oblivious to the fact that politics is about more than simply aping other people's language. What you say matters, and the language of American working class, like all industrial working classes, is rooted in a critique of capitalism. She should probably read the New Yorker staff writer John Cassidy's excellent new book, Capitalism and its Critics, which traces capitalism's evolution and criticism from the East India Company through modern times. He defines capitalism as production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets, encompassing various forms from Chinese state capitalism to hyper-globalization. The book examines capitalism's most articulate critics including the Luddites, Marx, Engels, Thomas Carlisle, Adam Smith, Rosa Luxemburg, Keynes & Hayek, and contemporary figures like Sylvia Federici and Thomas Piketty. Cassidy explores how major economists were often critics of their era's dominant capitalist model, and untangles capitalism's complicated relationship with colonialism, slavery and AI which he regards as a potentially unprecedented economic disruption. This should be essential listening for all Democrats seeking to reinvent a post Biden-Harris party and message. 5 key takeaways* Capitalism has many forms - From Chinese state capitalism to Keynesian managed capitalism to hyper-globalization, all fitting the basic definition of production for profit by privately-owned companies in markets.* Great economists are typically critics - Smith criticized mercantile capitalism, Keynes critiqued laissez-faire capitalism, and Hayek/Friedman opposed managed capitalism. Each generation's leading economists challenge their era's dominant model.* Modern corporate structure has deep roots - The East India Company was essentially a modern multinational corporation with headquarters, board of directors, stockholders, and even a private army - showing capitalism's organizational continuity across centuries.* Capitalism is intertwined with colonialism and slavery - Industrial capitalism was built on pre-existing colonial and slave systems, particularly through the cotton industry and plantation economies.* AI represents a potentially unprecedented disruption - Unlike previous technological waves, AI may substitute rather than complement human labor on a massive scale, potentially creating political backlash exceeding even the "China shock" that contributed to Trump's rise.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Full TranscriptAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. A couple of days ago, we did a show with Joan Williams. She has a new book out, "Outclassed: How the Left Lost the Working Class and How to Win Them Back." A book about language, about how to talk to the American working class. She also had a piece in Jacobin Magazine, an anti-capitalist magazine, about how the left needs to speak to what she calls average American values. We talked, of course, about Bernie Sanders and AOC and their language of fighting oligarchy, and the New York Times followed that up with "The Enduring Power of Anti-Capitalism in American Politics."But of course, that brings the question: what exactly is capitalism? I did a little bit of research. We can find definitions of capitalism from AI, from Wikipedia, even from online dictionaries, but I thought we might do a little better than relying on Wikipedia and come to a man who's given capitalism and its critics a great deal of thought. John Cassidy is well known as a staff writer at The New Yorker. He's the author of a wonderful book, the best book, actually, on the dot-com insanity. And his new book, "Capitalism and its Critics," is out this week. John, congratulations on the book.So I've got to be a bit of a schoolmaster with you, John, and get some definitions first. What exactly is capitalism before we get to criticism of it?John Cassidy: Yeah, I mean, it's a very good question, Andrew. Obviously, through the decades, even the centuries, there have been many different definitions of the term capitalism and there are different types of capitalism. To not be sort of too ideological about it, the working definition I use is basically production for profit—that could be production of goods or mostly in the new and, you know, in today's economy, production of services—for profit by companies which are privately owned in markets. That's a very sort of all-encompassing definition.Within that, you can have all sorts of different types of capitalism. You can have Chinese state capitalism, you can have the old mercantilism, which industrial capitalism came after, which Trump seems to be trying to resurrect. You can have Keynesian managed capitalism that we had for 30 or 40 years after the Second World War, which I grew up in in the UK. Or you can have sort of hyper-globalization, hyper-capitalism that we've tried for the last 30 years. There are all those different varieties of capitalism consistent with a basic definition, I think.Andrew Keen: That keeps you busy, John. I know you started this project, which is a big book and it's a wonderful book. I read it. I don't always read all the books I have on the show, but I read from cover to cover full of remarkable stories of the critics of capitalism. You note in the beginning that you began this in 2016 with the beginnings of Trump. What was it about the 2016 election that triggered a book about capitalism and its critics?John Cassidy: Well, I was reporting on it at the time for The New Yorker and it struck me—I covered, I basically covered the economy in various forms for various publications since the late 80s, early 90s. In fact, one of my first big stories was the stock market crash of '87. So yes, I am that old. But it seemed to me in 2016 when you had Bernie Sanders running from the left and Trump running from the right, but both in some way offering very sort of similar critiques of capitalism. People forget that Trump in 2016 actually was running from the left of the Republican Party. He was attacking big business. He was attacking Wall Street. He doesn't do that these days very much, but at the time he was very much posing as the sort of outsider here to protect the interests of the average working man.And it seemed to me that when you had this sort of pincer movement against the then ruling model, this wasn't just a one-off. It seemed to me it was a sort of an emerging crisis of legitimacy for the system. And I thought there could be a good book written about how we got to here. And originally I thought it would be a relatively short book just based on the last sort of 20 or 30 years since the collapse of the Cold War and the sort of triumphalism of the early 90s.But as I got into it more and more, I realized that so many of the issues which had been raised, things like globalization, rising inequality, monopoly power, exploitation, even pollution and climate change, these issues go back to the very start of the capitalist system or the industrial capitalist system back in sort of late 18th century, early 19th century Britain. So I thought, in the end, I thought, you know what, let's just do the whole thing soup to nuts through the eyes of the critics.There have obviously been many, many histories of capitalism written. I thought that an original way to do it, or hopefully original, would be to do a sort of a narrative through the lives and the critiques of the critics of various stages. So that's, I hope, what sets it apart from other books on the subject, and also provides a sort of narrative frame because, you know, I am a New Yorker writer, I realize if you want people to read things, you've got to make it readable. Easiest way to make things readable is to center them around people. People love reading about other people. So that's sort of the narrative frame. I start off with a whistleblower from the East India Company back in the—Andrew Keen: Yeah, I want to come to that. But before, John, my sense is that to simplify what you're saying, this is a labor of love. You're originally from Leeds, the heart of Yorkshire, the center of the very industrial revolution, the first industrial revolution where, in your historical analysis, capitalism was born. Is it a labor of love? What's your family relationship with capitalism? How long was the family in Leeds?John Cassidy: Right, I mean that's a very good question. It is a labor of love in a way, but it's not—our family doesn't go—I'm from an Irish family, family of Irish immigrants who moved to England in the 1940s and 1950s. So my father actually did start working in a big mill, the Kirkstall Forge in Leeds, which is a big steel mill, and he left after seeing one of his co-workers have his arms chopped off in one of the machinery, so he decided it wasn't for him and he spent his life working in the construction industry, which was dominated by immigrants as it is here now.So I don't have a—it's not like I go back to sort of the start of the industrial revolution, but I did grow up in the middle of Leeds, very working class, very industrial neighborhood. And what a sort of irony is, I'll point out, I used to, when I was a kid, I used to play golf on a municipal golf course called Gotts Park in Leeds, which—you know, most golf courses in America are sort of in the affluent suburbs, country clubs. This was right in the middle of Armley in Leeds, which is where the Victorian jail is and a very rough neighborhood. There's a small bit of land which they built a golf course on. It turns out it was named after one of the very first industrialists, Benjamin Gott, who was a wool and textile industrialist, and who played a part in the Luddite movement, which I mention.So it turns out, I was there when I was 11 or 12, just learning how to play golf on this scrappy golf course. And here I am, 50 years later, writing about Benjamin Gott at the start of the Industrial Revolution. So yeah, no, sure. I think it speaks to me in a way that perhaps it wouldn't to somebody else from a different background.Andrew Keen: We did a show with William Dalrymple, actually, a couple of years ago. He's been on actually since, the Anglo or Scottish Indian historian. His book on the East India Company, "The Anarchy," is a classic. You begin in some ways your history of capitalism with the East India Company. What was it about the East India Company, John, that makes it different from other for-profit organizations in economic, Western economic history?John Cassidy: I mean, I read that. It's a great book, by the way. That was actually quoted in my chapter on these. Yeah, I remember. I mean, the reason I focused on it was for two reasons. Number one, I was looking for a start, a narrative start to the book. And it seemed to me, you know, the obvious place to start is with the start of the industrial revolution. If you look at economics history textbooks, that's where they always start with Arkwright and all the inventors, you know, who were the sort of techno-entrepreneurs of their time, the sort of British Silicon Valley, if you could think of it as, in Lancashire and Derbyshire in the late 18th century.So I knew I had to sort of start there in some way, but I thought that's a bit pat. Is there another way into it? And it turns out that in 1772 in England, there was a huge bailout of the East India Company, very much like the sort of 2008, 2009 bailout of Wall Street. The company got into trouble. So I thought, you know, maybe there's something there. And I eventually found this guy, William Bolts, who worked for the East India Company, turned into a whistleblower after he was fired for finagling in India like lots of the people who worked for the company did.So that gave me two things. Number one, it gave me—you know, I'm a writer, so it gave me something to focus on a narrative. His personal history is very interesting. But number two, it gave me a sort of foundation because industrial capitalism didn't come from nowhere. You know, it was built on top of a pre-existing form of capitalism, which we now call mercantile capitalism, which was very protectionist, which speaks to us now. But also it had these big monopolistic multinational companies.The East India Company, in some ways, was a very modern corporation. It had a headquarters in Leadenhall Street in the city of London. It had a board of directors, it had stockholders, the company sent out very detailed instructions to the people in the field in India and Indonesia and Malaysia who were traders who bought things from the locals there, brought them back to England on their company ships. They had a company army even to enforce—to protect their operations there. It was an incredible multinational corporation.So that was also, I think, fascinating because it showed that even in the pre-existing system, you know, big corporations existed, there were monopolies, they had royal monopolies given—first the East India Company got one from Queen Elizabeth. But in some ways, they were very similar to modern monopolistic corporations. And they had some of the problems we've seen with modern monopolistic corporations, the way they acted. And Bolts was the sort of first corporate whistleblower, I thought. Yeah, that was a way of sort of getting into the story, I think. Hopefully, you know, it's just a good read, I think.William Bolts's story because he was—he came from nowhere, he was Dutch, he wasn't even English and he joined the company as a sort of impoverished young man, went to India like a lot of English minor aristocrats did to sort of make your fortune. The way the company worked, you had to sort of work on company time and make as much money as you could for the company, but then in your spare time you're allowed to trade for yourself. So a lot of the—without getting into too much detail, but you know, English aristocracy was based on—you know, the eldest child inherits everything, so if you were the younger brother of the Duke of Norfolk, you actually didn't inherit anything. So all of these minor aristocrats, so major aristocrats, but who weren't first born, joined the East India Company, went out to India and made a fortune, and then came back and built huge houses. Lots of the great manor houses in southern England were built by people from the East India Company and they were known as Nabobs, which is an Indian term. So they were the sort of, you know, billionaires of their time, and it was based on—as I say, it wasn't based on industrial capitalism, it was based on mercantile capitalism.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the beginning of the book, which focuses on Bolts and the East India Company, brings to mind for me two things. Firstly, the intimacy of modern capitalism, modern industrial capitalism with colonialism and of course slavery—lots of books have been written on that. Touch on this and also the relationship between the birth of capitalism and the birth of liberalism or democracy. John Stuart Mill, of course, the father in many ways of Western democracy. His day job, ironically enough, or perhaps not ironically, was at the East India Company. So how do those two things connect, or is it just coincidental?John Cassidy: Well, I don't think it is entirely coincidental, I mean, J.S. Mill—his father, James Mill, was also a well-known philosopher in the sort of, obviously, in the earlier generation, earlier than him. And he actually wrote the official history of the East India Company. And I think they gave his son, the sort of brilliant protégé, J.S. Mill, a job as largely as a sort of sinecure, I think. But he did go in and work there in the offices three or four days a week.But I think it does show how sort of integral—the sort of—as you say, the inheritor and the servant in Britain, particularly, of colonial capitalism was. So the East India Company was, you know, it was in decline by that stage in the middle of the 19th century, but it didn't actually give up its monopoly. It wasn't forced to give up its monopoly on the Indian trade until 1857, after, you know, some notorious massacres and there was a sort of public outcry.So yeah, no, that's—it's very interesting that the British—it's sort of unique to Britain in a way, but it's interesting that industrial capitalism arose alongside this pre-existing capitalist structure and somebody like Mill is a sort of paradoxical figure because actually he was quite critical of aspects of industrial capitalism and supported sort of taxes on the rich, even though he's known as the great, you know, one of the great apostles of the free market and free market liberalism. And his day job, as you say, he was working for the East India Company.Andrew Keen: What about the relationship between the birth of industrial capitalism, colonialism and slavery? Those are big questions and I know you deal with them in some—John Cassidy: I think you can't just write an economic history of capitalism now just starting with the cotton industry and say, you know, it was all about—it was all about just technical progress and gadgets, etc. It was built on a sort of pre-existing system which was colonial and, you know, the slave trade was a central element of that. Now, as you say, there have been lots and lots of books written about it, the whole 1619 project got an incredible amount of attention a few years ago. So I didn't really want to rehash all that, but I did want to acknowledge the sort of role of slavery, especially in the rise of the cotton industry because of course, a lot of the raw cotton was grown in the plantations in the American South.So the way I actually ended up doing that was by writing a chapter about Eric Williams, a Trinidadian writer who ended up as the Prime Minister of Trinidad when it became independent in the 1960s. But when he was younger, he wrote a book which is now regarded as a classic. He went to Oxford to do a PhD, won a scholarship. He was very smart. I won a sort of Oxford scholarship myself but 50 years before that, he came across the Atlantic and did an undergraduate degree in history and then did a PhD there and his PhD thesis was on slavery and capitalism.And at the time, in the 1930s, the link really wasn't acknowledged. You could read any sort of standard economic history written by British historians, and they completely ignored that. He made the argument that, you know, slavery was integral to the rise of capitalism and he basically started an argument which has been raging ever since the 1930s and, you know, if you want to study economic history now you have to sort of—you know, have to have to address that. And the way I thought, even though the—it's called the Williams thesis is very famous. I don't think many people knew much about where it came from. So I thought I'd do a chapter on—Andrew Keen: Yeah, that chapter is excellent. You mentioned earlier the Luddites, you're from Yorkshire where Luddism in some ways was born. One of the early chapters is on the Luddites. We did a show with Brian Merchant, his book, "Blood in the Machine," has done very well, I'm sure you're familiar with it. I always understood the Luddites as being against industrialization, against the machine, as opposed to being against capitalism. But did those two things get muddled together in the history of the Luddites?John Cassidy: I think they did. I mean, you know, Luddites, when we grew up, I mean you're English too, you know to be called a Luddite was a term of abuse, right? You know, you were sort of antediluvian, anti-technology, you're stupid. It was only, I think, with the sort of computer revolution, the tech revolution of the last 30, 40 years and the sort of disruptions it's caused, that people have started to look back at the Luddites and say, perhaps they had a point.For them, they were basically pre-industrial capitalism artisans. They worked for profit-making concerns, small workshops. Some of them worked for themselves, so they were sort of sole proprietor capitalists. Or they worked in small venues, but the rise of industrial capitalism, factory capitalism or whatever, basically took away their livelihoods progressively. So they associated capitalism with new technology. In their minds it was the same. But their argument wasn't really a technological one or even an economic one, it was more a moral one. They basically made the moral argument that capitalists shouldn't have the right to just take away their livelihoods with no sort of recompense for them.At the time they didn't have any parliamentary representation. You know, they weren't revolutionaries. The first thing they did was create petitions to try and get parliament to step in, sort of introduce some regulation here. They got turned down repeatedly by the sort of—even though it was a very aristocratic parliament, places like Manchester and Leeds didn't have any representation at all. So it was only after that that they sort of turned violent and started, you know, smashing machines and machines, I think, were sort of symbols of the system, which they saw as morally unjust.And I think that's sort of what—obviously, there's, you know, a lot of technological disruption now, so we can, especially as it starts to come for the educated cognitive class, we can sort of sympathize with them more. But I think the sort of moral critique that there's this, you know, underneath the sort of great creativity and economic growth that capitalism produces, there is also a lot of destruction and a lot of victims. And I think that message, you know, is becoming a lot more—that's why I think why they've been rediscovered in the last five or ten years and I'm one of the people I guess contributing to that rediscovery.Andrew Keen: There's obviously many critiques of capitalism politically. I want to come to Marx in a second, but your chapter, I thought, on Thomas Carlyle and this nostalgic conservatism was very important and there are other conservatives as well. John, do you think that—and you mentioned Trump earlier, who is essentially a nostalgist for a—I don't know, some sort of bizarre pre-capitalist age in America. Is there something particularly powerful about the anti-capitalism of romantics like Carlyle, 19th century Englishman, there were many others of course.John Cassidy: Well, I think so. I mean, I think what is—conservatism, when we were young anyway, was associated with Thatcherism and Reaganism, which, you know, lionized the free market and free market capitalism and was a reaction against the pre-existing form of capitalism, Keynesian capitalism of the sort of 40s to the 80s. But I think what got lost in that era was the fact that there have always been—you've got Hayek up there, obviously—Andrew Keen: And then Keynes and Hayek, the two—John Cassidy: Right, it goes to the end of that. They had a great debate in the 1930s about these issues. But Hayek really wasn't a conservative person, and neither was Milton Friedman. They were sort of free market revolutionaries, really, that you'd let the market rip and it does good things. And I think that that sort of a view, you know, it just became very powerful. But we sort of lost sight of the fact that there was also a much older tradition of sort of suspicion of radical changes of any type. And that was what conservatism was about to some extent. If you think about Baldwin in Britain, for example.And there was a sort of—during the Industrial Revolution, some of the strongest supporters of factory acts to reduce hours and hourly wages for women and kids were actually conservatives, Tories, as they were called at the time, like Ashley. That tradition, Carlyle was a sort of extreme representative of that. I mean, Carlyle was a sort of proto-fascist, let's not romanticize him, he lionized strongmen, Frederick the Great, and he didn't really believe in democracy. But he also had—he was appalled by the sort of, you know, the—like, what's the phrase I'm looking for? The sort of destructive aspects of industrial capitalism, both on the workers, you know, he said it was a dehumanizing system, sounded like Marx in some ways. That it dehumanized the workers, but also it destroyed the environment.He was an early environmentalist. He venerated the environment, was actually very strongly linked to the transcendentalists in America, people like Thoreau, who went to visit him when he visited Britain and he saw the sort of destructive impact that capitalism was having locally in places like Manchester, which were filthy with filthy rivers, etc. So he just saw the whole system as sort of morally bankrupt and he was a great writer, Carlyle, whatever you think of him. Great user of language, so he has these great ringing phrases like, you know, the cash nexus or calling it the Gospel of Mammonism, the shabbiest gospel ever preached under the sun was industrial capitalism.So, again, you know, that's a sort of paradoxical thing, because I think for so long conservatism was associated with, you know, with support for the free market and still is in most of the Republican Party, but then along comes Trump and sort of conquers the party with a, you know, more skeptical, as you say, romantic, not really based on any reality, but a sort of romantic view that America can stand by itself in the world. I mean, I see Trump actually as a sort of an effort to sort of throw back to mercantile capitalism in a way. You know, which was not just pre-industrial, but was also pre-democracy, run by monarchs, which I'm sure appeals to him, and it was based on, you know, large—there were large tariffs. You couldn't import things in the UK. If you want to import anything to the UK, you have to send it on a British ship because of the navigation laws. It was a very protectionist system and it's actually, you know, as I said, had a lot of parallels with what Trump's trying to do or tries to do until he backs off.Andrew Keen: You cheat a little bit in the book in the sense that you—everyone has their own chapter. We'll talk a little bit about Hayek and Smith and Lenin and Friedman. You do have one chapter on Marx, but you also have a chapter on Engels. So you kind of cheat. You combine the two. Is it possible, though, to do—and you've just written this book, so you know this as well as anyone. How do you write a book about capitalism and its critics and only really give one chapter to Marx, who is so dominant? I mean, you've got lots of Marxists in the book, including Lenin and Luxemburg. How fundamental is Marx to a criticism of capitalism? Is most criticism, especially from the left, from progressives, is it really just all a footnote to Marx?John Cassidy: I wouldn't go that far, but I think obviously on the left he is the central figure. But there's an element of sort of trying to rebuild Engels a bit in this. I mean, I think of Engels and Marx—I mean obviously Marx wrote the great classic "Capital," etc. But in the 1840s, when they both started writing about capitalism, Engels was sort of ahead of Marx in some ways. I mean, the sort of materialist concept, the idea that economics rules everything, Engels actually was the first one to come up with that in an essay in the 1840s which Marx then published in one of his—in the German newspaper he worked for at the time, radical newspaper, and he acknowledged openly that that was really what got him thinking seriously about economics, and even in the late—in 20, 25 years later when he wrote "Capital," all three volumes of it and the Grundrisse, just these enormous outpourings of analysis on capitalism.He acknowledged Engels's role in that and obviously Engels wrote the first draft of the Communist Manifesto in 1848 too, which Marx then topped and tailed and—he was a better writer obviously, Marx, and he gave it the dramatic language that we all know it for. So I think Engels and Marx together obviously are the central sort of figures in the sort of left-wing critique. But they didn't start out like that. I mean, they were very obscure, you've got to remember.You know, they were—when they were writing, Marx was writing "Capital" in London, it never even got published in English for another 20 years. It was just published in German. He was basically an expat. He had been thrown out of Germany, he had been thrown out of France, so England was last resort and the British didn't consider him a threat so they were happy to let him and the rest of the German sort of left in there. I think it became—it became the sort of epochal figure after his death really, I think, when he was picked up by the left-wing parties, which are especially the SPD in Germany, which was the first sort of socialist mass party and was officially Marxist until the First World War and there were great internal debates.And then of course, because Lenin and the Russians came out of that tradition too, Marxism then became the official doctrine of the Soviet Union when they adopted a version of it. And again there were massive internal arguments about what Marx really meant, and in fact, you know, one interpretation of the last 150 years of left-wing sort of intellectual development is as a sort of argument about what did Marx really mean and what are the important bits of it, what are the less essential bits of it. It's a bit like the "what did Keynes really mean" that you get in liberal circles.So yeah, Marx, obviously, this is basically an intellectual history of critiques of capitalism. In that frame, he is absolutely a central figure. Why didn't I give him more space than a chapter and a chapter and a half with Engels? There have been a million books written about Marx. I mean, it's not that—it's not that he's an unknown figure. You know, there's a best-selling book written in Britain about 20 years ago about him and then I was quoting, in my biographical research, I relied on some more recent, more scholarly biographies. So he's an endlessly fascinating figure but I didn't want him to dominate the book so I gave him basically the same space as everybody else.Andrew Keen: You've got, as I said, you've got a chapter on Adam Smith who's often considered the father of economics. You've got a chapter on Keynes. You've got a chapter on Friedman. And you've got a chapter on Hayek, all the great modern economists. Is it possible, John, to be a distinguished economist one way or the other and not be a critic of capitalism?John Cassidy: Well, I don't—I mean, I think history would suggest that the greatest economists have been critics of capitalism in their own time. People would say to me, what the hell have you got Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek in a book about critics of capitalism? They were great exponents, defenders of capitalism. They loved the system. That is perfectly true. But in the 1930s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s, middle of the 20th century, they were actually arch-critics of the ruling form of capitalism at the time, which was what I call managed capitalism. What some people call Keynesianism, what other people call European social democracy, whatever you call it, it was a model of a mixed economy in which the government played a large role both in propping up demand and in providing an extensive social safety net in the UK and providing public healthcare and public education. It was a sort of hybrid model.Most of the economy in terms of the businesses remained in private hands. So most production was capitalistic. It was a capitalist system. They didn't go to the Soviet model of nationalizing everything and Britain did nationalize some businesses, but most places didn't. The US of course didn't but it was a form of managed capitalism. And Hayek and Friedman were both great critics of that and wanted to sort of move back to 19th century laissez-faire model.Keynes was a—was actually a great, I view him anyway, as really a sort of late Victorian liberal and was trying to protect as much of the sort of J.S. Mill view of the world as he could, but he thought capitalism had one fatal flaw: that it tended to fall into recessions and then they can snowball and the whole system can collapse which is what had basically happened in the early 1930s until Keynesian policies were adopted. Keynes sort of differed from a lot of his followers—I have a chapter on Joan Robinson in there, who were pretty left-wing and wanted to sort of use Keynesianism as a way to shift the economy quite far to the left. Keynes didn't really believe in that. He has a famous quote that, you know, once you get to full employment, you can then rely on the free market to sort of take care of things. He was still a liberal at heart.Going back to Adam Smith, why is he in a book on criticism of capitalism? And again, it goes back to what I said at the beginning. He actually wrote "The Wealth of Nations"—he explains in the introduction—as a critique of mercantile capitalism. His argument was that he was a pro-free trader, pro-small business, free enterprise. His argument was if you get the government out of the way, we don't need these government-sponsored monopolies like the East India Company. If you just rely on the market, the sort of market forces and competition will produce a good outcome. So then he was seen as a great—you know, he is then seen as the apostle of free market capitalism. I mean when I started as a young reporter, when I used to report in Washington, all the conservatives used to wear Adam Smith badges. You don't see Donald Trump wearing an Adam Smith badge, but that was the case.He was also—the other aspect of Smith, which I highlight, which is not often remarked on—he's also a critic of big business. He has a famous section where he discusses the sort of tendency of any group of more than three businessmen when they get together to try and raise prices and conspire against consumers. And he was very suspicious of, as I say, large companies, monopolies. I think if Adam Smith existed today, I mean, I think he would be a big supporter of Lina Khan and the sort of antitrust movement, he would say capitalism is great as long as you have competition, but if you don't have competition it becomes, you know, exploitative.Andrew Keen: Yeah, if Smith came back to live today, you have a chapter on Thomas Piketty, maybe he may not be French, but he may be taking that position about how the rich benefit from the structure of investment. Piketty's core—I've never had Piketty on the show, but I've had some of his followers like Emmanuel Saez from Berkeley. Yeah. How powerful is Piketty's critique of capitalism within the context of the classical economic analysis from Hayek and Friedman? Yeah, it's a very good question.John Cassidy: It's a very good question. I mean, he's a very paradoxical figure, Piketty, in that he obviously shot to world fame and stardom with his book on capital in the 21st century, which in some ways he obviously used the capital as a way of linking himself to Marx, even though he said he never read Marx. But he was basically making the same argument that if you leave capitalism unrestrained and don't do anything about monopolies etc. or wealth, you're going to get massive inequality and he—I think his great contribution, Piketty and the school of people, one of them you mentioned, around him was we sort of had a vague idea that inequality was going up and that, you know, wages were stagnating, etc.What he and his colleagues did is they produced these sort of scientific empirical studies showing in very simple to understand terms how the sort of share of income and wealth of the top 10 percent, the top 5 percent, the top 1 percent and the top 0.1 percent basically skyrocketed from the 1970s to about 2010. And it was, you know, he was an MIT PhD. Saez, who you mentioned, is a Berkeley professor. They were schooled in neoclassical economics at Harvard and MIT and places like that. So the right couldn't dismiss them as sort of, you know, lefties or Trots or whatever who're just sort of making this stuff up. They had to acknowledge that this was actually an empirical reality.I think it did change the whole basis of the debate and it was sort of part of this reaction against capitalism in the 2010s. You know it was obviously linked to the sort of Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement at the time. It came out of the—you know, the financial crisis as well when Wall Street disgraced itself. I mean, I wrote a previous book on all that, but people have sort of, I think, forgotten the great reaction against that a decade ago, which I think even Trump sort of exploited, as I say, by using anti-banker rhetoric at the time.So, Piketty was a great figure, I think, from, you know, I was thinking, who are the most influential critics of capitalism in the 21st century? And I think you'd have to put him up there on the list. I'm not saying he's the only one or the most eminent one. But I think he is a central figure. Now, of course, you'd think, well, this is a really powerful critic of capitalism, and nobody's going to pick up, and Bernie's going to take off and everything. But here we are a decade later now. It seems to be what the backlash has produced is a swing to the right, not a swing to the left. So that's, again, a sort of paradox.Andrew Keen: One person I didn't expect to come up in the book, John, and I was fascinated with this chapter, is Silvia Federici. I've tried to get her on the show. We've had some books about her writing and her kind of—I don't know, you treat her critique as a feminist one. The role of women. Why did you choose to write a chapter about Federici and that feminist critique of capitalism?John Cassidy: Right, right. Well, I don't think it was just feminist. I'll explain what I think it was. Two reasons. Number one, I wanted to get more women into the book. I mean, it's in some sense, it is a history of economics and economic critiques. And they are overwhelmingly written by men and women were sort of written out of the narrative of capitalism for a very long time. So I tried to include as many sort of women as actual thinkers as I could and I have a couple of early socialist feminist thinkers, Anna Wheeler and Flora Tristan and then I cover some of the—I cover Rosa Luxemburg as the great sort of tribune of the left revolutionary socialist, communist whatever you want to call it. Anti-capitalist I think is probably also important to note about. Yeah, and then I also have Joan Robinson, but I wanted somebody to do something in the modern era, and I thought Federici, in the world of the Wages for Housework movement, is very interesting from two perspectives.Number one, Federici herself is a Marxist, and I think she probably would still consider herself a revolutionary. She's based in New York, as you know now. She lived in New York for 50 years, but she came from—she's originally Italian and came out of the Italian left in the 1960s, which was very radical. Do you know her? Did you talk to her? I didn't talk to her on this. No, she—I basically relied on, there has been a lot of, as you say, there's been a lot of stuff written about her over the years. She's written, you know, she's given various long interviews and she's written a book herself, a version, a history of housework, so I figured it was all there and it was just a matter of pulling it together.But I think the critique, why the critique is interesting, most of the book is a sort of critique of how capitalism works, you know, in the production or you know, in factories or in offices or you know, wherever capitalist operations are working, but her critique is sort of domestic reproduction, as she calls it, the role of unpaid labor in supporting capitalism. I mean it goes back a long way actually. There was this moment, I sort of trace it back to the 1940s and 1950s when there were feminists in America who were demonstrating outside factories and making the point that you know, the factory workers and the operations of the factory, it couldn't—there's one of the famous sort of tire factory in California demonstrations where the women made the argument, look this factory can't continue to operate unless we feed and clothe the workers and provide the next generation of workers. You know, that's domestic reproduction. So their argument was that housework should be paid and Federici took that idea and a couple of her colleagues, she founded the—it's a global movement, but she founded the most famous branch in New York City in the 1970s. In Park Slope near where I live actually.And they were—you call it feminists, they were feminists in a way, but they were rejected by the sort of mainstream feminist movement, the sort of Gloria Steinems of the world, who Federici was very critical of because she said they ignored, they really just wanted to get women ahead in the sort of capitalist economy and they ignored the sort of underlying from her perspective, the underlying sort of illegitimacy and exploitation of that system. So they were never accepted as part of the feminist movement. They're to the left of the Feminist Movement.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Keynes, of course, so central in all this, particularly his analysis of the role of automation in capitalism. We did a show recently with Robert Skidelsky and I'm sure you're familiar—John Cassidy: Yeah, yeah, great, great biography of Keynes.Andrew Keen: Yeah, the great biographer of Keynes, whose latest book is "Mindless: The Human Condition in the Age of AI." You yourself wrote a brilliant book on the last tech mania and dot-com capitalism. I used it in a lot of my writing and books. What's your analysis of AI in this latest mania and the role generally of manias in the history of capitalism and indeed in critiquing capitalism? Is AI just the next chapter of the dot-com boom?John Cassidy: I think it's a very deep question. I think I'd give two answers to it. In one sense it is just the latest mania the way—I mean, the way capitalism works is we have these, I go back to Kondratiev, one of my Russian economists who ended up being killed by Stalin. He was the sort of inventor of the long wave theory of capitalism. We have these short waves where you have sort of booms and busts driven by finance and debt etc. But we also have long waves driven by technology.And obviously, in the last 40, 50 years, the two big ones are the original deployment of the internet and microchip technology in the sort of 80s and 90s culminating in the dot-com boom of the late 90s, which as you say, I wrote about. Thanks very much for your kind comments on the book. If you just sort of compare it from a financial basis I think they are very similar just in terms of the sort of role of hype from Wall Street in hyping up these companies. The sort of FOMO aspect of it among investors that they you know, you can't miss out. So just buy the companies blindly. And the sort of lionization in the press and the media of, you know, of AI as the sort of great wave of the future.So if you take a sort of skeptical market based approach, I would say, yeah, this is just another sort of another mania which will eventually burst and it looked like it had burst for a few weeks when Trump put the tariffs up, now the market seemed to be recovering. But I think there is, there may be something new about it. I am not, I don't pretend to be a technical expert. I try to rely on the evidence of or the testimony of people who know the systems well and also economists who have studied it. It seems to me the closer you get to it the more alarming it is in terms of the potential shock value that there is there.I mean Trump and the sort of reaction to a larger extent can be traced back to the China shock where we had this global shock to American manufacturing and sort of hollowed out a lot of the industrial areas much of it, like industrial Britain was hollowed out in the 80s. If you, you know, even people like Altman and Elon Musk, they seem to think that this is going to be on a much larger scale than that and will basically, you know, get rid of the professions as they exist. Which would be a huge, huge shock. And I think a lot of the economists who studied this, who four or five years ago were relatively optimistic, people like Daron Acemoglu, David Autor—Andrew Keen: Simon Johnson, of course, who just won the Nobel Prize, and he's from England.John Cassidy: Simon, I did an event with Simon earlier this week. You know they've studied this a lot more closely than I have but I do interview them and I think five, six years ago they were sort of optimistic that you know this could just be a new steam engine or could be a microchip which would lead to sort of a lot more growth, rising productivity, rising productivity is usually associated with rising wages so sure there'd be short-term costs but ultimately it would be a good thing. Now, I think if you speak to them, they see since the, you know, obviously, the OpenAI—the original launch and now there's just this huge arms race with no government involvement at all I think they're coming to the conclusion that rather than being developed to sort of complement human labor, all these systems are just being rushed out to substitute for human labor. And it's just going, if current trends persist, it's going to be a China shock on an even bigger scale.You know what is going to, if that, if they're right, that is going to produce some huge political backlash at some point, that's inevitable. So I know—the thing when the dot-com bubble burst, it didn't really have that much long-term impact on the economy. People lost the sort of fake money they thought they'd made. And then the companies, obviously some of the companies like Amazon and you know Google were real genuine profit-making companies and if you bought them early you made a fortune. But AI does seem a sort of bigger, scarier phenomenon to me. I don't know. I mean, you're close to it. What do you think?Andrew Keen: Well, I'm waiting for a book, John, from you. I think you can combine dot-com and capitalism and its critics. We need you probably to cover it—you know more about it than me. Final question, I mean, it's a wonderful book and we haven't even scratched the surface everyone needs to get it. I enjoyed the chapter, for example, on Karl Polanyi and so much more. I mean, it's a big book. But my final question, John, is do you have any regrets about anyone you left out? The one person I would have liked to have been included was Rawls because of his sort of treatment of capitalism and luck as a kind of casino. I'm not sure whether you gave any thought to Rawls, but is there someone in retrospect you should have had a chapter on that you left out?John Cassidy: There are lots of people I left out. I mean, that's the problem. I mean there have been hundreds and hundreds of critics of capitalism. Rawls, of course, incredibly influential and his idea of the sort of, you know, the veil of ignorance that you should judge things not knowing where you are in the income distribution and then—Andrew Keen: And it's luck. I mean the idea of some people get lucky and some people don't.John Cassidy: It is the luck of the draw, obviously, what card you pull. I think that is a very powerful critique, but I just—because I am more of an expert on economics, I tended to leave out philosophers and sociologists. I mean, you know, you could say, where's Max Weber? Where are the anarchists? You know, where's Emma Goldman? Where's John Kenneth Galbraith, the sort of great mid-century critic of American industrial capitalism? There's so many people that you could include. I mean, I could have written 10 volumes. In fact, I refer in the book to, you know, there's always been a problem. G.D.H. Cole, a famous English historian, wrote a history of socialism back in the 1960s and 70s. You know, just getting to 1850 took him six volumes. So, you've got to pick and choose, and I don't claim this is the history of capitalism and its critics. That would be a ridiculous claim to make. I just claim it's a history written by me, and hopefully the people are interested in it, and they're sufficiently diverse that you can address all the big questions.Andrew Keen: Well it's certainly incredibly timely. Capitalism and its critics—more and more of them. Sometimes they don't even describe themselves as critics of capitalism when they're talking about oligarchs or billionaires, they're really criticizing capitalism. A must read from one of America's leading journalists. And would you call yourself a critic of capitalism, John?John Cassidy: Yeah, I guess I am, to some extent, sure. I mean, I'm not a—you know, I'm not on the far left, but I'd say I'm a center-left critic of capitalism. Yes, definitely, that would be fair.Andrew Keen: And does the left need to learn? Does everyone on the left need to read the book and learn the language of anti-capitalism in a more coherent and honest way?John Cassidy: I hope so. I mean, obviously, I'd be talking my own book there, as they say, but I hope that people on the left, but not just people on the left. I really did try to sort of be fair to the sort of right-wing critiques as well. I included the Carlyle chapter particularly, obviously, but in the later chapters, I also sort of refer to this emerging critique on the right, the sort of economic nationalist critique. So hopefully, I think people on the right could read it to understand the critiques from the left, and people on the left could read it to understand some of the critiques on the right as well.Andrew Keen: Well, it's a lovely book. It's enormously erudite and simultaneously readable. Anyone who likes John Cassidy's work from The New Yorker will love it. Congratulations, John, on the new book, and I'd love to get you back on the show as anti-capitalism in America picks up steam and perhaps manifests itself in the 2028 election. Thank you so much.John Cassidy: Thanks very much for inviting me on, it was fun.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Join me for conversation with Dr. Jaleh Mansoor (Associate Professor of Art History in the Department of Art History, Visual Art, and Theory, University of British Columbia) about her book Universal Prostitution and Modernist Abstraction: A Counterhistory (Duke University Press, 2025). Our discussion brought us to topics like the artists' muse, the modern laborer, and other figures precariously suspended between the object/subject dialectic. In Universal Prostitution and Modernist Abstraction, Dr. Mansoor provides a counternarrative of modernism and abstraction and a reexamination of Marxist aesthetics. Mansoor draws on Marx's concept of prostitution—a conceptual device through which Marx allegorized modern labor—to think about the confluences of generalized and gendered labor in modern art. Analyzing works ranging from Édouard Manet's Olympia and Georges Seurat's The Models to contemporary work by Hito Steyerl and Hannah Black, she shows how avant-garde artists can detect changing modes of production and capitalist and biopolitical processes of abstraction that assign identities to subjects in the interest of value's impersonal circulation. She demonstrates that art and abstraction resist modes of production and subjugation at the level of process and form rather than through referential representation. By studying gendered and generalized labor, abstraction, automation, and the worker, Mansoor shifts focus away from ideology, superstructure, and culture toward the ways art indexes crisis and transformation in the political economic base. Ultimately, she traces the outlines of a counterpraxis to capital while demonstrating how artworks give us a way to see through the abstractions of everyday life. This episode was hosted by Asia Adomanis, a PhD student in the Department of History of Art at Ohio State. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Join me for conversation with Dr. Jaleh Mansoor (Associate Professor of Art History in the Department of Art History, Visual Art, and Theory, University of British Columbia) about her book Universal Prostitution and Modernist Abstraction: A Counterhistory (Duke University Press, 2025). Our discussion brought us to topics like the artists' muse, the modern laborer, and other figures precariously suspended between the object/subject dialectic. In Universal Prostitution and Modernist Abstraction, Dr. Mansoor provides a counternarrative of modernism and abstraction and a reexamination of Marxist aesthetics. Mansoor draws on Marx's concept of prostitution—a conceptual device through which Marx allegorized modern labor—to think about the confluences of generalized and gendered labor in modern art. Analyzing works ranging from Édouard Manet's Olympia and Georges Seurat's The Models to contemporary work by Hito Steyerl and Hannah Black, she shows how avant-garde artists can detect changing modes of production and capitalist and biopolitical processes of abstraction that assign identities to subjects in the interest of value's impersonal circulation. She demonstrates that art and abstraction resist modes of production and subjugation at the level of process and form rather than through referential representation. By studying gendered and generalized labor, abstraction, automation, and the worker, Mansoor shifts focus away from ideology, superstructure, and culture toward the ways art indexes crisis and transformation in the political economic base. Ultimately, she traces the outlines of a counterpraxis to capital while demonstrating how artworks give us a way to see through the abstractions of everyday life. This episode was hosted by Asia Adomanis, a PhD student in the Department of History of Art at Ohio State. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/art

While we're told by politicians that the ideas of Karl Marx are foreign and have no place in this country, history proves otherwise. Andrew Hartman shows that Marx and Marxism have had an a significant influence on the United States, from Marx's journalistic writings for the New York Daily Tribune, to the mass politics the Socialist and Communist Parties and the Wobblies, on the most radical edge of the New Deal, and the New Left, and finally with the return to Marx's ideas since the Global Financial Crisis. The post Fund Drive Special: Marx's Influence on America appeared first on KPFA.

Acesse o Guia de bolso de IOT do TdC no link: http://bit.ly/4dyi6n8Pedro Magno e Lucca Cirillo conversam sobre os alvos de LDL em 4 populações:- Evento cardiovascular prévio- Presença de diabetes- LDL > 190 mg/dL- Outras situações Veja mais em https://www.tadeclinicagem.com.br/guia/259/hipercolesterolemia-familiar/Veja o vale a pena ouvir de novo em https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k42rmssU1xE&ab_channel=TadeClinicagemReferências:1. Mach, François et al. “2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: lipid modification to reduce cardiovascular risk.” European heart journal vol. 41,1 (2020): 111-188. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz4552. Faludi, André Arpad et al. “Atualização da Diretriz Brasileira de Dislipidemias e Prevenção da Aterosclerose – 2017.” Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia vol. 109,2 Supl 1 (2017): 1-76. doi:10.5935/abc.201701213. Grundy, Scott M et al. “2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.” Journal of the American College of Cardiology vol. 73,24 (2019): 3168-3209. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.0024. Pearson, Glen J et al. “2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidemia for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults.” The Canadian journal of cardiology vol. 37,8 (2021): 1129-1150. doi:10.1016/j.cjca.2021.03.0165. Marx, Nikolaus et al. “2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes.” European heart journal vol. 44,39 (2023): 4043-4140. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehad1926. Vrints, Christiaan et al. “2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes.” European heart journal vol. 45,36 (2024): 3415-3537. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehae1777. Hong, Sung-Jin et al. “Treat-to-Target or High-Intensity Statin in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.” JAMA vol. 329,13 (2023): 1078-1087. doi:10.1001/jama.2023.24878. Cannon, Christopher P et al. “Ezetimibe Added to Statin Therapy after Acute Coronary Syndromes.” The New England journal of medicine vol. 372,25 (2015): 2387-97. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa14104899. Sabatine, Marc S et al. “Evolocumab and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease.” The New England journal of medicine vol. 376,18 (2017): 1713-1722. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa161566410. http://departamentos.cardiol.br/sbc-da/2015/calculadoraer2017/etapa1.html11. Lipidology update: targets and timing of well-established therapies, Luigina Guasti 1, MD, PhD, FAHA, FESC; Alessandro Lupi 2, MD at https://www.escardio.org/Councils/Council-for-Cardiology-Practice-(CCP)/Cardiopractice/lipidology-update-targets-and-timing-of-well-established-therapies12. Ray, Kausik K et al. “EU-Wide Cross-Sectional Observational Study of Lipid-Modifying Therapy Use in Secondary and Primary Care: the DA VINCI study.” European journal of preventive cardiology vol. 28,11 (2021): 1279-1289. doi:10.1093/eurjpc/zwaa04713. Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration et al. “Efficacy and safety of more intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol: a meta-analysis of data from 170,000 participants in 26 randomised trials.” Lancet (London, England) vol. 376,9753 (2010): 1670-81. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61350-5

ORIGINALLY RELEASED Mar 19, 2024 Alyson and Breht explain and explore Karl Marx's classic work "The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte." Together, they discuss Marx's incisive analysis of Louis Bonaparte's rise to power, the complex interplay between historical events and class struggle, and the profound insights into how revolutions unfold and regress. In the process, they delve into French history, the peasantry and lumpenproletariat, Bonapartism's relationship to modern Fascism, the role of the State under capitalism, and how all of this helps us to make sense of our contemporary moment of crisis in the US and around the world.  ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio HERE  

Die US-amerikanische Philosophin Susan Neiman über Weltpolitik und Philosophie, von Voltaire bis Donald Trump, und warum sich die Linke statt auf Wokeness auf ihre traditionellen Werte besinnen muss. Die amerikanische Philosophin Susan Neiman springt für die Aufklärung in die Bresche. Die europäische Ideenwelt des 18. Und dann 19.Jahrhunderts von Rousseau, Voltaire, Hegel bis Marx muss das Fundament des Engagements der Linken bleiben, argumentiert sie. Susan Neiman ist von Donald Trump empört, bei dem sie Faschismus ortet. Und sie wendet sich bei der Verteidigung der Aufklärung gegen das postkoloniale Denken und ganz allgemein Wokeness in der akademischen Welt. “Links ist nicht Woke” ist der Titel ihrer jüngsten Streitschrift.Was Susan Neiman darunter versteht und wo Wokeness reaktionär wird, bespricht sie in einer Wiener Vorlesung. Im Gespräch mit dem Journalisten Günter Kaindlstorfer bietet sie einen Parforceritt durch Weltpolitik und Philosophie. Es geht um den französischen Philosophen Foucault und Donald Trump, um die Instrumentalisierung von Antisemitismus und die umstrittene Autorin Judith Butler. Hören Sie das Lob der Aufklärung und warum sich die Linke ihrer traditionellen Werte besinnen muss von der Philosophin Susan Neiman. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Get Andrew's book here: https://press.uchicago.edu/.../chicago/K/bo245100866.html   In Karl Marx in America, historian Andrew Hartman argues that even though Karl Marx never visited America, the country has been infused, shaped, and transformed by him. Since the beginning of the Civil War, Marx has been a specter in the American machine. During the Gilded Age, socialists read Marx as an antidote to the unchecked power of corporations. In the Great Depression, communists turned to Marx in hopes of transcending the destructive capitalist economy. The young activists of the 1960s were inspired by Marx as they gathered to protest an overseas war. Marx's influence today is evident, too, as Americans have become increasingly attuned to issues of inequality, labor, and power.   After decades of being pushed to the far-left corner of intellectual thought, Marx's ideologies have crossed over into the mainstream and are more alive than ever. Working-class consciousness is on the rise, and, as Marx argued, the future of a capitalist society rests in the hands of the people who work at the point of production. A valuable resource for anyone interested in Marx's influence on American political discourse, Karl Marx in America is a thought-provoking account of the past, present, and future of his philosophies in American society.   Check out our new bi-weekly series, "The Crisis Papers" here: https://www.patreon.com/bitterlakepresents/shop   Thank you guys again for taking the time to check this out. We appreciate each and everyone of you. If you have the means, and you feel so inclined, BECOME A PATRON! We're creating patron only programing, you'll get bonus content from many of the episodes, and you get MERCH!   Become a patron now https://www.patreon.com/join/BitterLakePresents?   Please also like, subscribe, and follow us on these platforms as well, (specially YouTube!)   THANKS Y'ALL   YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG9WtLyoP9QU8sxuIfxk3eg Twitch: www.twitch.tv/thisisrevolutionpodcast www.twitch.tv/leftflankvets​ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Thisisrevolutionpodcast/ Twitter: @TIRShowOakland Instagram: @thisisrevolutionoakland   Read Jason Myles in Sublation Magazine https://www.sublationmag.com/writers/jason-myles   Read Jason Myles in Damage Magazine https://damagemag.com/2023/11/07/the-man-who-sold-the-world/

Andrew Hartman joins Ben Burgis to talk about his fascinating book "Karl Marx in America," where he traces interest in Marx's ideas by American commentators from the Gilded Age to the Great Depression to the Vietnam-era New Left to the present. Before that, Ben does an Opening Argument responding to Ro Khanna on socialism. In the postgame for patrons, Ben and the crew watch a slightly less serious discussion about Marx by Tim Pool and Sargon of Akkad and some other person who's name none of us can be bothered to remember (+ Donald Trump telling a story about how his fat billionaire friend in London).Sign up for the Capital Vol. 2 class:patreon.com/benburgisBuy Andrew's book:https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/K/bo245100866.htmlFollow Andrew on Twitter: @HartmanAndrewFollow Ben on Twitter: @BenBurgisFollow GTAA on Twitter: @Gtaa_ShowBecome a GTAA Patron and receive numerous benefits ranging from patron-exclusive postgames every Monday night to our undying love and gratitude for helping us keep this thing going:patreon.com/benburgisRead the weekly philosophy Substack:benburgis.substack.com

ORIGINALLY RELEASED Mar 6, 2023 In this insightful episode, bestselling author and acclaimed literary critic China Miéville joins Breht to explore his newest book, "A Spectre, Haunting: On The Communist Manifesto." Together, they examine the enduring literary power and historical significance of Marx and Engels' groundbreaking text, unpacking its vibrant prose and revolutionary fervor. They also delve into the historical circumstances surrounding its creation and discuss its growing contemporary relevance amid today's global challenges. A must-listen for those interested in literature, history, and the ongoing relevance of radical political thought. ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio HERE

Nous sommes en 1908. C'est cette année-là que paraît, dans une première édition en volume, « Réflexions sur la violence », un ouvrage signé Georges Sorel. Celui qui, pendant la majeure partie de sa vie, fut un polytechnicien tranquille, décoré de la Légion d'honneur, écrit : « Le danger qui menace l'avenir du monde peut être écarté si le prolétariat s'attache, avec obstination, aux idées révolutionnaires, de manière à réaliser, autant que possible, la conception de Marx. Tout peut être sauvé si, par la violence, il parvient à reconsolider la division en classes et à rendre à la bourgeoisie quelque chose de son énergie. C'est là le grand but vers lequel doit être dirigée toute la pensée des hommes qui ne sont pas hypnotisés par les événements du jour, mais qui songent aux conditions du lendemain. La violence prolétarienne, exercée comme une manifestation pure et simple du sentiment de lutte de classe, apparaît ainsi comme une chose très belle et très héroïque ; elle est au service des intérêts primordiaux de la civilisation ; elle n'est peut-être pas la méthode la plus appropriée pour obtenir des avantages matériels immédiats, mais elle peut sauver le monde de la barbarie. » Théoricien de la violence révolutionnaire ? Partisan d'un syndicalisme radical ? Fidèle de Marx mais associé aux royalistes ? Communiste fervent ou précurseur du fascisme ? Récupéré ou irrécupérable ? Qui était Georges Sorel ? Invité : Arthur Pouliquen , docteur en science politique « Georges Sorel – Le mythe de la révolte » éditions du Cerf Sujets traités : Georges Sorel, théoricien, violence, polytechnicien , révolutionnaire, Karl Marx, Communiste, fascisme, mythe Merci pour votre écoute Un Jour dans l'Histoire, c'est également en direct tous les jours de la semaine de 13h15 à 14h30 sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes d'Un Jour dans l'Histoire sur notre plateforme Auvio.be :https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/5936 Intéressés par l'histoire ? Vous pourriez également aimer nos autres podcasts : L'Histoire Continue: https://audmns.com/kSbpELwL'heure H : https://audmns.com/YagLLiKEt sa version à écouter en famille : La Mini Heure H https://audmns.com/YagLLiKAinsi que nos séries historiques :Chili, le Pays de mes Histoires : https://audmns.com/XHbnevhD-Day : https://audmns.com/JWRdPYIJoséphine Baker : https://audmns.com/wCfhoEwLa folle histoire de l'aviation : https://audmns.com/xAWjyWCLes Jeux Olympiques, l'étonnant miroir de notre Histoire : https://audmns.com/ZEIihzZMarguerite, la Voix d'une Résistante : https://audmns.com/zFDehnENapoléon, le crépuscule de l'Aigle : https://audmns.com/DcdnIUnUn Jour dans le Sport : https://audmns.com/xXlkHMHSous le sable des Pyramides : https://audmns.com/rXfVppvN'oubliez pas de vous y abonner pour ne rien manquer.Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement. Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Hey folks! two great interviews for you tonight, first Andrew Hartman (@HartmanAndrew) on his excellent new book, Karl Marx in AmericaBuy Andrew's Karl Marx in America here: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/K/bo245100866.htmlThen, Michael O'Neill Burns (@michaeloburns) joins Matt to talk about philosophy over the past few decades and if things are looking worse for contemplation.Subscribe to Michael's channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@MichaelOBurns

We chat with linguist and cognitive scientist Hagen Blix about his new book Why We Fear AI (co-authored with computer scientist Ingeborg Glimmer) about how the technical qualities of AI – especially LLM chatbots – take the alienation (and seemingly alien power) of capital to the next level. What happens when the social logic of capital — which appears to be a motive force with no motivator — is channeled through generative technologies that appear to be texts with no author? People see an entity that must be feared and worshipped. ••• Why We Fear AI | Hagen Blix & Ingeborg Glimmer https://www.commonnotions.org/why-we-fear-ai ••• https://www.If A.I. Systems Become Conscious, Should They Have Rights? nytimes.com/2025/04/24/technology/ai-welfare-anthropic-claude.html ••• Marx's Comments on James Mill http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/james-mill/ Standing Plugs: ••• Order Jathan's new book: https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520398078/the-mechanic-and-the-luddite ••• Subscribe to Ed's substack: https://substack.com/@thetechbubble ••• Subscribe to TMK on patreon for premium episodes: https://www.patreon.com/thismachinekills Hosted by Jathan Sadowski (bsky.app/profile/jathansadowski.com) and Edward Ongweso Jr. (www.x.com/bigblackjacobin). Production / Music by Jereme Brown (bsky.app/profile/jebr.bsky.social)

ORIGINALLY RELEASED Oct 11, 2018 In this episode, Alyson joins Breht to do a dive deep into Vladimir Lenin's State and Revolution, one of the most important texts in Marxist political theory. We break down Lenin's core arguments about the state as an instrument of class rule, the necessity of smashing the bourgeois state rather than reforming it, and the vision of a transitional workers' state on the path to communism. We also discuss the historical context of 1917, how Lenin draws from Marx and Engels, and why this work remains essential for understanding the nature of power, revolution, and socialist strategy today. This episode offers an accessible yet rigorous guide to one of Lenin's most influential works. ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio https://revleftradio.com/  

John Cassidy, staff writer at The New Yorker and the author of Capitalism and Its Critics: A History: From the Industrial Revolution to AI (Macmillan, 2025), traces the last three hundred years of global capitalism from its beginnings. 

Amid rising concerns about AI, inequality, trade wars, and globalization, New Yorker staff writer and Pulitzer Prize finalist John Cassidy takes a bold approach: he tells the story of capitalism through its most influential critics. From the Luddites and early communists to the Wages for Housework movement and modern degrowth advocates, Cassidy's global narrative features both iconic thinkers—Smith, Marx, Keynes—and lesser-known voices like Flora Tristan, J.C. Kumarappa, and Samir Amin. John Cassidy has been a staff writer at The New Yorker since 1995. He writes a regular column, The Financial Page. He holds degrees from Oxford, Columbia, and New York Universities. His new book is Capitalism and Its Critics: A History from the Industrial Revolution to AI.

This week we return to an always prescient question: What happened to the future? What Lies Ahead?https://jacobin.com/2023/01/slavoj-zizek-time-future-history-catastrophe-emancipation  Mark Fisher's Specters of Scarcityhttps://jacobin.com/2025/01/mark-fisher-neoliberalism-acid-communism ‘Culture has lost the ability to grasp the present'https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/mark-fisher-ghosts-retromania/How the pandemic messed with our perception of timehttps://www.vox.com/science/23823507/pandemic-memory-time-perception-lockdown Send us a message (sorry we can't respond on here). Support the show

Gary Marx joins Paul through a connection with recent guest and friend Bret McCreight. Even though he has family ties to Germany from the 1800s, he told Paul he was no relation to Karl! Gary grew up in a military family and married his wife whom he met while they were in high school in Germany. After high school, his family moved back to the states and Gary went to James Madison and majored in Political Science. His work is in Public Policy/Public Affairs and he told Paul how he has worked on six presidential campaigns and has been to several conventions. They had a lengthy conversation about the Ukraine-Russia war and touched on Israel, NATO and current politics.  Gary has his own podcast which we encourage you to check out … Peace and Power Ukraine.

ORIGINALLY RELEASED Nov 13, 2017 Dr. Thoreau Redcrow is an American academic with a Ph.D. in Conflict Analysis with a concentration in Global Conflict. Thoreau is a researcher who specializes in studying armed guerrilla movements, and who has over a decade of experience studying the life and legacy of Che Guevara. His prior investigations into Che's biography have taken him to Cuba to speak to those who knew and fought alongside Che, as well as to other arenas around the world which have been influenced by Che Guevara's armed struggle. Brett sits down with Dr. Redcrow to discuss the Argentine Marxist revolutionary; including an entire segment of the podcast dedicated to debunking many of the right-wing and anti-communist lies about him. Topics Include: Che's childhood, the political context out of which Che emerged, the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro, debunking lies and slander about Che, The Bay of Pigs, Anti-Imperialism, "Guevarism", Marx, Lenin, and much, MUCH more! ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio HERE Outro Beat Prod. by flip da hood

Original Air Date 5/24/2019 As the neoliberal order collapses from the pressure of its failures to provide for working people, we take a look at the much-maligned, rarely-understood field of economic and social study known as Marxism. Be part of the show! Leave us a message or text at 202-999-3991 or email Jay@BestOfTheLeft.com BestOfTheLeft.com/Support (Members Get Bonus Shows + No Ads!) Use our links to shop Bookshop.org and Libro.fm for a non-evil book and audiobook purchasing experience! Join our Discord community! SHOW NOTES Ch. 1: The Contributions of Karl Marx Part 1 - Economic Update - Air Date 5-25-18 Professor Wolff takes a deeper look at the life and work of Karl Marx in celebration of the 200th anniversary of his birth. Ch. 2: Marxism Today - Analysis - Air Date 6-19-16 Robin who was a BBC reporter for 25 years thinks Marx was always in the background discourse of politics, an influence he partly feared and didn't fully understand. He takes a walk through central London in the footsteps of the great revolutionary. Ch. 3: David Harvey on Marx, Capital, and the Madness of Economic Reason - Left Out - Air Date 11-5-17 David Harvey is arguably the most influential living geographer, as well as one of the world's leading Marxist scholars. He is among the most cited intellectuals of all time across the humanities and social sciences. Ch. 4: This Ruthless Criticism of All That Exists Marxism as Science - Revolutionary Left Radio - Air Date 2-2-19 J. Moufawad-Paul, a Marxist philosopher and author of "Continuity and Rupture", "The Communist Necessity", and "Austerity Apparatus", joins Breht to discuss his most recent essay "This Ruthless Criticism of All That Exists: Marxism as Science". Ch. 5: Erosion of Consumer Choices - David Harvey's Anti-Capitalist Chronicles - Air Date 4-24-19 Prof. Harvey discusses Marx's theory of Capital and its relevance today. Consumers have less and less autonomy. Their choices, even how they will spend their leisure time, are increasingly influenced by capitalists. Ch. 6: The Contributions of Karl Marx Part 2 - Economic Update - Air Date 5-25-18 Professor Wolff takes a deeper look at the life and work of Karl Marx in celebration of the 200th anniversary of his birth. Produced by Jay! Visit us at BestOfTheLeft.com ​ ​ ​

In Deze Podcast hebben we het over ↓ ・ De teloorgang van het Marxisme en de arbeidersbeweging ・De rol van cultureel marxisme en de vervaging van links en rechts ・Neoliberalisme, consumentisme en identiteit als machtsinstrumenten ・Massamigratie, open grenzen en de ondermijning van nationale soevereiniteit ・De woke cultuur, labeling en het verlies van vrij debat ・ Jongeren op zoek naar nieuwe maatschappijkritiek

Como todos los jueves, Susanne Nicole y Racher Smith toman el timón de Temprano para conversar sobre las ideas que forman la llamada realidad política del país. En esta ocasión hablan sobre la realidad boricua desde una perspectiva marxista con el profesor de sociología Ángel Rodríguez Rivera. Y en la segunda mitad del programa la conversación se alivian, si dejar de ser profunda, cuando las compañeras conversan con Nitzie Judith Sanchez, bombera -entiéndase interprete de musical de bomba- La corilla de Nitzie se presentan este fin de semana en el Afrojammin de Ponce

Is the radical right becoming the very thing it hates? Dr. Jordan B. Peterson sits down with Dr. James Lindsay to unpack the rise of the "Woke Right"—a faction of online reactionaries using the same tactics of victimhood, outrage mobs, and cult-like behavior once exclusive to the radical left. Together, they explore how parasitic ideologies hijack belief systems, mimic virtue, and weaponize social media to manipulate the masses. From cluster B psychopathology to Nazi apologetics, from Marx to modern meme culture, this is a deep dive into the psychological and ideological rot infecting both ends of the spectrum.If you've sensed that something is deeply wrong in today's culture wars—on both sides—this episode puts it into words. Dr. James Lindsay has written eight books spanning a range of subjects including education, postmodern theory, and critical race theory. Dr. Lindsay is the Founder of New Discourses, an organization dedicated to shining the light of objective truth in subjective darkness.  Dr. Lindsay is the co-author of “Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity―and Why This Harms Everybody” and is the author of “Race Marxism,” as well as his newest book, “The Marxification of Education.” Dr. Lindsay has been a featured guest on Fox News, Glenn Beck, Joe Rogan, and NPR, and he has spoken at the Oxford Union and the EU Parliament. This episode was filmed on April, 29th, 2025.  | Links | For Dr. James Lindsay: On X https://x.com/ConceptualJames?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor On YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@newdiscourses/videos Read his latest book, “The Queering of the American Child: How a New School Religious Cult Poisons the Minds and Bodies of Normal Kids” https://a.co/d/9lpXvGc 

ORIGINALLY RELEASED Apr 4, 2020 In this solo episode, Breht breaks down Karl Marx's powerful concept of alienation from his Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. He walks listeners through the four types of alienation Marx identified—alienation from the product, the labor process, our human essence, and from each other—and bring them crashing into the present with real, relatable examples from contemporary working-class life. From soul-crushing jobs to the feeling of life slipping through your fingers, we connect Marx's 19th-century analysis to the 21st-century reality of exploitation and isolation under capitalism. In the process, Breht demonstrates how alienation is rooted in private property and capitalist social relations and explicates Marx's concept of species-being: our natural human capacity for conscious, creative, purposeful activity—which is reduced to a mere means of survival under capitalism, rather than a free expression of our humanity. This is Marxism made urgent, raw, relatable, and personal. Also: Happy International Worker's Day! Listen to the full Red Menace episode (from which this segment was extracted) here:  https://redmenace.libsyn.com/economic-and-philosophic-manuscripts-of-1844-karl-marx ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio HERE Outro Beat Prod. by flip da hood

Historian Andrew Hartman returns to This Is Hell! to discuss his new book from University of Chicago Press, "Karl Marx in America." "The Moment of Truth" with Jeff Dorchen follows the interview. Check out Andrew's book here: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/K/bo245100866.html Help keep This Is Hell! completely listener supported and access bonus episodes by subscribing to our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thisishell

Part XX - Karl Marx - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Check out the book here: ⁠⁠https://a.co/d/1qRii01⁠⁠ Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow For full shownotes visit: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices