Richard Wolff: Difference between socialism & communism and what they both missed

Help us reach 100,000 subscribers and gain access to more studio time! Please hit the red SUBSCRIBE button above. ^^^

"If you give socialist governments the kind of power that you gave in Russia and China, and if you give them the kind of power in Scandinavia and elsewhere to regulate, you create tensions. In the communist world the tension was the government had so much power the danger was it would use it for political ends that were not socialist. And that indeed often happened. In Scandinavian type social democracies the government's attempt to regulate was undone by the pushback of the private capitalists who didn't want their profits limited. And so over time there was a reaction in the communist countries against the political problems of a powerful state, and there was the undoing of social democracy by the resistance of capitalists."

To watch the full episode:

Follow us ONLINE:

[rickobrien]

Most people spend their, not working lives but most of their awake lives at work with people they are not seriously connected to. I always though that was strange.

[michaelvillarama]

I would love to see this man have a debate against Ben Shapiro.

[piley]

Thanks for breaking it down like this.

[blackiron]

What Wolff fails to address is that all socialist states, from Cuba to the Soviet Union, emerged into a hostile world dominated by hostile capitalist states bent on the destruction of any competing system of politics or economy. All of them faced war, sabotage, and various other attempts by capitalist states to destroy them. The USSR lost 28 million people to the Nazi invasion in WW2. Under such conditions, survival is the main concern. What he describes as lack of democracy, was actually the product of the siege conditions socialist states found and continue to find themselves under in a world dominated by a reactionary and brutally aggressive American Empire that is willing to use any and all means to crush progressive movements and countries.

[Pyriold]

In germany we have a law forcing all big companies to have part of their management be recruited by vote from workers, the so called "Betriebsrat". This is not optional, as soon as any worker in a bigger company wants it, it gets established. I understand that this is not exactly what the professor is talking about, but it's maybe the closest existing thing on a big scale to it. We have a lot of experience with this system in germany and it's working pretty nicely, reducing social unrest.

[mikeburns]

Empower labor unions. We need a worker's bill of rights. Before any business is sold, the employees must get first opportunity to form a cooperative. End vulture capitalism. End leveraged buy-outs and stock buy backs. Stocks should be based on real productivity, not manipulation. End the unemployment statistic, as it is just propaganda. Use only adult labor participation.

[MrSammo]

People must first be taught that money isn't real.

[moneymanfernando]

Maybe we workers need to unionize in order to have a voice in our jobs. We are the ones doing all the work. The money trickles up not down.

[dougcasey]

He stops right where I feel the details needed to be laid out on how to democratize the workplace. By labor-unionization or co-ops perhaps and if so explain the mechanisms to get to these, I guess we have to be creative and figure that out

[dwonderwoman]

Listen and Learn you who are Closed Minded.. Knowledge is Power

[DrPeterMarsh]

This fills a gap in my understanding or lack there of

[domingodeanda]

Thanks Mr Wolff, for making it so easy to understand.

[internetwonderbuilder]

You've got to distinguish between large employers and small employers. Whenever a small employer hears this stuff, their first thought is oh God I can't compete if I have new regulations placed on me. Please explain very plainly how the idea is to replace some of the monopolies with regulated utilities, and others with real market place competition. The idea is to encourage a vast diversity of small businesses and rein in the giants, while having certain industries, which have never been the domain of small business, such as energy, internet and medical care for example become well regulated utilities forced to serve the public rather than gouge them. It needs to be emphasized very clearly that democratic socialism is the friend of small business, and that unfettered capitalism has been the ruin of every mom n pop operation in the USA, not democratic socialism. Instead of Walmart we could have a grocer, a Baker, and butcher again. We could be lifelong acquaintances with our barber again. We could aspire to have our own little businesses and work for ourselves, not enslaved to a deadend job for health insurance, because we wouldn't need health insurance.

[whatshisname]

This is very simplified, but I guess it's meant to be.

[DammitBobby]

Beautifully put. Couldn't have explained it any better/more simple

[NeoRipshaft]

This is interesting and quite a bit different than what I've been hearing from so many others who identify as Socialist or Communist.

My current model of capitalism vs socialism vs communism (not exhaustive) is all about where capital lies. Individual citizens in capitalism, the state in socialism, and the workers in communism.

This is a somewhat superficial view as the state is necessarily the ultimate holder of capital (though I don't often hear people acknowledge this), but it basically comes down to the behavior of the state with respect to capital.

[qhbkgvo]

Fun fact:China, during the later period of culture revolution, had a semi-democratic worker-leader relationship established in some region. It is called Angang Constitution, which party officials and workers making decisions together, and it becomes a movement, had it's peak around 1972. Unfortunately, the leadership of Culture revolution was entirely burdened on Mao himself, and he is nearly 80, unable to make any revolutionary decisions. After his death, his opponents execute a coup d'état, took out his followers, and killed the culture revolution, as part of the movement, Angang Constitution did not reach its maturity.

[DavidRodriguez-kysi]

Great video! this can't be stressed enough.

[scruples]

There is no democracy in the work place because the one person that owns the business is in charge and makes all the final decisions. Right or wrong everybody is depedant on that one person decision.

[Harthorn]

I disagree with last statement, the basis of democratizing the workplace.

It should go deeper than that, as how the Chinese CCP have found. Get into the private family unit and change that, and also including basic educating starting from the first day into school, that will fundamentally change subsequent interactions of these cogs in it's interaction with the greater machine.