Communism 3.0: The Succession of Capitalism and the China Model

[Music] hey everyone this is James Lindsay you're listening to the new discourses podcast and it's time to talk about Marxism we're actually going to read quite a bit of Marx today we're going to talk about a concept from Marx called the negation of the negation we're also going to talk about the concept of sucession which I'm not a th% clear on if succession refers to the negation or to the negation of the negation but at any rate there's this weird terminology that we're going to try to make some sense of and we're going to try

to make sense of the world that we live in through this terminology unfortunately as we're going to hear I think that it we're going to uncover or I'm about to tell you that I've seen uh pretty clearly in capital which is of course Marx's Infamous do Capital uh that um what is being attempted in China with their model which is the dung shellping theory model that we'll talk a little bit more about and what is being attempted in the west using ESG to create effectively the same model but with some slight uh we'll call them

Regional variations uh for for the purposes of this um is actually there in capital as the kind of correct direction to go if you wanted to establish a global communism now I don't think Marx is right about this going being something that will work but I do think that um when the critics out there say you know that what we're looking at in the world today is definitely not communism I think that they're not right I think that what we are looking at is most definitely communism and my usual argument of course and this Bears

on the title of this episode of the podcast is that communism evolved right uh communism 3.0 right or maybe we could call it uh 21st century communism there's a lot of things we could call it uh but what I think we're seeing is the succession of various forms of 20th century uh societal and economic Arrangement um into this new 21st century communism based off of what I'm going to refer to as the China model what's the China model looks like China to understand this we're going to have to break down Marx's idea of the negation

of the negation which is not exactly Marx's idea it was actually from Hegel Hegel talked about the negation of the negation and then Marx criticized it vigorously and then imported it anyway but um for reasons that I think will become clear though it's kind of murky because it depends on what we're actually referring to with this kind of dialectical construction the negation of the negation uh I'm actually thinking of this as the negation of the negation of the negation in other words what I'm saying is that the China model or the ESG model that we're

dealing with here in the west that mirrors it is the negation of the negation of the negation of our old models that's going to require me to talk a little bit about heel a lot about Marx and try to break all this down for you just to get the quick dirty introduction out of the way about the Hegel part hegel's dialectic was very frequently I I explained this at length before very frequently organized in terms not of thesis antithesis synthesis as we get from his predecessor Emmanuel Kant but rather as abstract negation concrete and this

introduces a lot of interesting and important ideas so what Hegel was saying is that we have an abstract conception of something at first and then our abstract conception runs into its negations that which shows us that our abstract conception of the thing is not complete and that allows us to uh come to more concrete understanding of the thing another way that he kind of puts this and on a much bigger scale but that what exists in macrocosm in these esoteric religions exists also in microcosm so on every scale in macrocosm you have this thing he

calls the theoretical idea that's the abstract conception of the world as it is it's what we how we think the world works the theoretical idea and it's meant to be our best approximation of what he calls the uh absolute idea the absolute idea is God to Hegel right it is the absolute it is that Beyond there Beyond which there is nothing you know it is all and everything an undifferentiated all you might even call it and it's the only actually true thing in hegel's very hermetic theosophical belief system why do I say that because hermeticism

seeks to see through the distinctions to see a more un ified whole as a form of higher understanding so you have the theoretical idea as our approximation of the absolute idea our best guess as to how everything works and then that gets put into practice giving you what's called the Practical idea and then there are contradictions between the Practical idea and the absolute and which is the that is between the objective and the perfect uh and therefore those contradictions start to manifest and show that there must be contradictions within the theoretical idea our guess about

the absolute and the absolute idea itself and so the negation arises through the application of the Practical idea which is supposed to be the Practical form or the objective applied form of the theoretical idea and those contradictions force a revolution in thought and a turn of the dialectic and so you have the theoretical idea is negated at the End by the Practical idea and then you arrive at a higher synthesis that is the negation of of that in other words the negation of the negation and that's hegel's idea so the idea of the negation of

the negation is one turn around the spiral of the dialectic you return from where you started but at a higher level of understanding you've been uplifted alaben or alfah hobin in German was the magic word for this and so I'm going to suggest that what we're looking at with a Chinese model or the China model is that if we start with Marxism and it's application to the existing societ IES to which it got applied the China model is the negation of the negation of the negation so it's another step around this uh subleading or or

dialectical spiral but to complete that there would have to be yet another negation that would take us to the completed World system which is what I'm suggesting they're building using the China model as the beta test that's a lot and that's what we're going to try to unpack a little bit here it's very complicated but those ideas that I've just laid on to you the abstract gets negated by its collision with the real with reality and its failure frankly and therefore becomes more concrete is not a difficult thing to get your head around we think

we know how the world works we try it out it doesn't work and therefore we have a more concrete understanding of the situation and that would be fine if they were actually doing it in a scientific sense instead of in a sense that's supposed to reflect back on the absolute they believe they already know the absolute is reflected in their perfect system of philosophy or in that's for Hegel uh what he called his system of science or in Marx what he called his uh his Scientific Socialism um The Immortal science of Marxism which can never

be wrong so what you have where this deviates from science isn't in its methodology where it deviates from science is in its assumption about whether Theory or experiment is the thing that's true and at the end of the day their theory is the thing that has to be confirmed whereas in science the theory is supposed to be built around actual observations and your best most imaginative con concept of the world if it doesn't agree with experiment is simply wrong it's uh the difference could be put this way is that they believe the immortal science of

Marxism is never wrong that it's only implemented incorrectly so that has to be adjusted uh the theory itself communism as a religion is still perfectly right and intact it just didn't get implemented correctly science sees everything the other way around the implementation is not an error there are errors and so on but the world is the thing that we're misunderstanding rather than other way around so let's not get bogged down in the philosophy of science let's talk about China and its circumstances today and its relevance and then we're going to compare ESG and then we're

going to get into marks okay so China is a communist country let's just be blunt about that Communists of strict obedience as they're sometimes called do not believe this they think that communism is not what you have in China that it has sold communism out I think that Marx is going to contradict these people and we're going to hear exactly why before too long but that's because China is no longer running a Marxist leninist program the way that Mao did um they can argue about whether ma perverted communism or not but certainly what's running in

China today is a derivative what's running in China today because of the way that they do is something called Xi Jinping thought or Xi Jinping theory he uh xiin ping he is obviously the guy in charge of China now he's the president of China uh I guess chairman and so his theory guides how China operates but xiin ping theory is Downstream from something called dung sha ping Theory dung sha ping or sometimes this is called dengism or dongis however you want to pronounce this d n g i s m dongis or dung shaing Theory dung

shaing was one of ma Dong's longtime lieutenants uh in the CCP in China and in fact after ma died in 1976 there were some um jockeying for position and power and dung sha Pang came out as the head of China in 1978 couple of years later and so he came out with his dung sha ping Theory um based on what he inherited from Ma so remember he was one of mau's longest lieutenants going back well before for the Chinese Civil War in the 1940s right after World War II he was one of of of Ma's

oldest and most loyal lieutenants that's how he was in the position to assume mau's chairmanship after mau's death uh and he inherited Ma's China which was not doing well in 1978 in fact Mao destroyed China Mao destroyed China in virtually every way you could possibly imagine I mean you want to remember that communism isn't just a death cult in the 20th century it was a death cult that was headed whether by lennin by Stalin by Mao by Paul pot by Castro we could go down the list we could name whoever we wanted to name it

was headed by Cults of personality and Mao ran a huge Cult of Personality where basically the entire country had to be consumed to his glory and it was we can talk about the devast of the Civil War that installed his power we could talk about the devastation of the Socialist high tide program or his M multiple purges before that in the 1950s we could talk about the devastation of the Great Leap Forward which was the single largest human-caused Calamity in human history which devastated the Chinese people and economy killed at least 40 if not closer

to to to 50 or 60 million people and then we can talk about the devastation that followed of the Chinese Cultural Revolution which in its red phase at the beginning 66 to 68 killed a couple million maybe much less viciously brutal and a lot less starvation than you had during Great Leap Forward and but then by the end of the cultural revolution which didn't technically end until Mao died because revolution has to be Perpetual or continuous uh in 19 76 probably claim the lives of about 20 million Chinese uh beyond the 40 million of the

greatly 40 or 50 million really of the Great Leap Forward and Beyond the tens of million roughly 10 million maybe before that in China not counting the Civil War itself so the economy was destroyed the people were destroyed the organization of the country was destroyed plus it was distraught and dismayed because it didn't know what to do because its God ma had just died died and thrown everything into confusion the people did not know how to deal with the fact that their dear leader had just died and so this is the the place that dun

sha ping steps into the power structure of China the CCP that runs a democratic centralist program the CCP controls the People's Republic of China it's not to be questions and it does everything that it does for the glory of socialism and the development of eventually eventual Chinese and maybe world communism and this is where dun sha ping steps in sees this Devastation and is in desperation and dun sha ping contrary to Mao who was running a very pral program dun sha ping was a much a very committed communist in the broad sense but in the

narrow sense he was much more pragmatic and anything that would solve the question of how to advance Chinese Communist interests was on the table for Duna ping where many things for Mao were not that way because Mao had to to stick very closely to Marxist leninist theory um so as not to have to backtrack all of his previous views and this was a big thing so dung sha ping comes out he does not do a full Cru Jeff style denunciation of ma the way that Nikita Cru Jeff uh crucified Stalin in 1956 but he comes

out and says that Ma was correct ma had a saying that he would say that the you know everything every time something really bad happened in in his his his uh regime he would come out and say that was we all have 10 fingers and it was correct on nine fingers and mistakes were made on one finger so it was 9/10th correct and 1/10th incorrect well dunsha ping came out and said that Ma was correct on seven fingers and incorrect on three fingers and therefore put some distance between himself and Mao not having to repeat

everything Mao did and he came up with this program he called open up and uh in fact the the actual doctrine of dung sha ping Theory aside from from having to adhere to upholding communism maintaining the Chinese uh Democratic centralism in the CCP giving uh all control of the of the People's Republic of China to the Chinese Communist party and also allegedly but less in practice and More in as an honorific upholding maong thought and Marxism leninism those are the the the some of the characteristics of dun shaing Theory uh to prove that it's communist

but in addition he said we're going to have one country two systems and we're going to open up and what he meant was they were going to open up their economy they were going to in line with a very radical Splinter take on Lenin's theory of productive forces that you have to develop the productive forces in order to have enough production to get socialism to prove itself in order for it to develop to the next stage which would be communism that they were going to open a fascist pkin market economy inside of their communist system

so the deal with one country two systems is there's one country China and it has two systems a communist system and a fascist system operating at the same time now notice I didn't say it's a capitalist system because it isn't it is a fascist system in fact it was imported and developed largely around the economic programs specifically of the national socialists in Germany from the 1930s not to say that they imported everything from national socialism and say oh my God they're Nazis no well maybe but no they were importing specifically the economic system of Nazi

Germany of the fascist programs fascist programs according to Bonito musolini were the fusion of state and corporate power such that the corporations do the will of the state okay and so they're going to put a fascist economy inside of a broadly communist system and as Duna ping himself said it would be done to the glory of socialism and what this does is it allows this country to solve the problem of production or in other words create as I've called it in the past well sounds like an oxymoron a productive socialism and of course if we

look at our our Herbert marusa over here in the West in the 1960s and70s Herbert maruza is explaining that the weakness of socialism isn't in its ideology at all it has that correct its weakness is in the fact that it cannot produce whereas on the other hand capitalism can produce but it fails to be sustainable and inclusive it's not Equitable so it's not inclusive and it's not sustainable maruza said capitalism proliferates false needs and causes people to believe in the culture of capitalism that those false needs are true needs and these needs proliferate so capitalism

produces more and more and more and more with no guardrail with no stopping at all and most of what it produces is junk even without the profit motive that leads to things like planned obsolescence which he complained about a lot capitalism itself is intrinsically designed to not be sustainable it is an exponential curve that continues to grow forever until there's a collapse which is why in one-dimensional man he said that in fact that the the free society that he imagines would certainly require a reduction in the future world population but he also talks repeatedly about

less plastic less stuff less gadgets fewer things and a living honestly he says this with a lower standard of living and so what we have operating in China is a pkin market that is actually a fascist program operating at the behest of the Communist party and it has to do everything in a way that uplifts and glorifies the Communist party and recognizes and maintains its centrality it so-called Democratic centralism so Business Leaders now are no longer the Demons of the economy or the Demons of the Society Business Leaders are now stakeholders if you will in

their system and are actually major decision makers but if they Veer from the Communist party line or if they bring shame upon Socialism or fail to build socialism then they can be turned into enemies of the state and re-educated or disappeared virtually instantly so we have this productive socialism that builds up in China that's what I'm going to call the China model I'm not going to get into how the US state department helped to architect that that's a different podcast I think I've covered it before I'm going to talk now that in the west we've

decided that we needed to put a bridal on capitalism following Marcus's orders and probably the same US state department and to pull from dung our economy needs to be opened up it doesn't need to just be more sustainable it also needs to be more inclusive in other words it needs to be made Equitable in other words it needs to have socialism infused into it and that's what the ESG model does in the west and I'm going to tell you yet again the ESG model in the west is a direct mirror image of the China model

in the East and I know we have a lot of people realizing kind of in a panic at this moment that one of the most important priorities we have is to figure out how to unleash American manufacturing and American productivity again and that what they're running up against is the discovery that ESG is designed to make sure they cannot do that in fact what ESG produces is a patkin market that's mostly led by The Business Leaders but who all have to be ideologically coralled and it turns out they are working kind of in inverse they

don't have a CCP to whom they're answering they answer to their own internal cartel and the state is dragged along with so rather than having a fascism inside of a communism under ESG we have a communism inside of a fascism remember we're injecting inclusivity and Equity those are socialist ideals or communist ideals into the program of capitalism we're putting a bridal on capitalism so that it's not overproductive and doesn't produce wasteful things and all that's to be determined by the stakeholder class which are these major Business Leaders who know what the right interests of the

global superstate would be and therefore can guide these multinational corporations incidentally in collaboration with their friends in China whom they're trying to profit with um and so we have the same model being built in a different way more palatable to our situation whereas dun sha ping had the ability as the chairman of the CCP to just Implement what whatever he wanted and of course the people supported it because the profit motive that he Unleashed allows them to uh pursue their own interests and make money and become rich and not be in Desperate poverty or at

the complete dependency of the State anymore you just have the state lurking in the background like in fascism ready to destroy you and its value system is communist so we have this exact same model and it has a bunch of names sustainable capitalism you hear sometimes sometimes sustainable and inclusive capitalism sometimes as from the council for inclusive capitalism you'll just hear it called inclusive capitalism the Vatican is a major partner in that as are about 600 CEOs of the largest corporations in the west um stakeholder capitalism is also a brand name that's given to this

management system in the in the west uh where the stakeholders are the managers it's these enlightened experts who know what the world really needs better than other people who are going to you know you know represent our stakes in how corporations and governments do business um so what you have then here in the west under ESG is a fascistic economic control model that's run through Asset Management firms because that's where the overwhelming reservoir of capital lies but it's coordinated not just through those firms themselves but through nonprofits such as the world economic forum and the

council for inclusive capitalism but also with governments in collaboration they call this a public private partnership so you might just think it's the three kind of biggest entities in this are the United Nations the world economic forum and the black Ro Black Rock and asset manager but SL Vanguard State Street SLG Goldman Sachs these largest Asset Management firms and they obtain this concept of a stakeholder group who understands the challenges to the environment the social environment and corporate governance better than anybody else so they create this thing called stakeholder capitalism that is because they are

a governing Council and governing Council in Russian is Soviet they are actually a stakeholder Soviet and so what we're dealing with in the west under ESG you can call it a cartel fine you can call it organized crime you can call it racketeering it is all of those things but its actual function is as such is as a Soviet it is stakeholder sovietism okay so this is a mirror image model taking taking place in the west to the one that you have uh in dung sha ping taking place in the East and uh here's how

it works it is a fascistic economic control model in other words kind of a economic cartel working in public private partnership with States and coordinated through nonprofits um and there is a multi-level communist ethos buried within it so the fascism's on the outside and the communism's on the inside well what does that look like well under the letter e for ESG uh environmental what you have is a program designed to hand over global power in hemony to communist China we're going to allow communist China to grow to build as much energy as they want to

build as many nuclear and coal power plants as they want they are exempt from environmental standards as a developing Nation as it's called even though they are in many ways either the richest or closest to richest country in in the world so they are a developing Nation so they're excused used and allowed to have energy growth whereas the West has to experience energy degrowth our entire way of life has to contract while there's expands that's called handing over global power and hegemony to communist China that's much of the purpose of the E andg is to

hand over global power and hegemony to communist China by building up their energy abundance and diminishing ours entrapping Us in energy scarcity there's also elements especially throughout the West West in the degrowth process because prog uh program because remember we don't have ESG programs in China they can choose to do them when they want and they get Applause on the world stage and they don't have to do them when they don't want uh and everything's fine so here what we have is a program that in the Soviet Union was called the kulak isation so the

kulaks were the rugged independent farmers who could basically organize their own lives their families and sometimes their Villages make sure everything was getting getting taken care of for us they are the independent successful small business owners and the environmental regulations among other regulations that are being imposed upon successful kulok run businesses are deising our uh country in the same way that Soviet Union deul ised except that the Soviet Union did it literally through starvation and murder and expropriation whereas we're just doing it through regulatory capture and management or mismanagement but that's the point so you

have the Communist ethos coming in through the en enironmental programming in ESG it's very nakedly in fact Central to the social or S component of ESG what is s in ESG doing it is implementing social justice this is a leninist program actual equality diversity diversity in Russian uh Ras NE braia is literally what we call diversity it turns out as a same program they had one that's very similar to what we call um incl inclusion under the name indigenization which is like corinia or something like that you'll have to look that one up but you

can read about it and then they of course have actual equality which is what we call Equity and it's like a onetoone match so the social justice and Dei program of the S part of ESG although we have different identity politics involved that Matrix of identity politics that we call intersectionality being a direct import from Ma's Matrix of of uh class ID identities that he used to to move the cultural revolution uh but then this all stems back to Lenin and Stalin and under the brand name of social justice and that's what the S is

for S is for social justice this is explicitly communism it's it's OB obviously operating partly through cultural communist means but when how they were talking about price fixing to control the economy coming from kamla Harris and so on um the the the naked communist sides are showing in the economic sense as well and uh what this is primarily being implemented through this public private partnership monstrosity which is the Soviet the stakeholder Soviet um the corporatist AKA musolin fascism power Nexus that is uh is the big corruption at the center of western western governance right now

and then the gcore is governance and the point of the governance score is to make sure that the corporations reward W themselves for implementing this program and punish themselves for not implementing this program um it's a social credit system for corporations and the point of the gcore is to Bridle capitalism into the stakeholder Soviet model like I just described in other words to turn it into a communist simulation of a business uh and it's to actually also establish and install commissars throughout whether they're called ESG officers Dei officers sustainability offic officers or whatever who are

there political officers who are there to enforce and report to the central authorities in this case that being the asset management program uh headed up by these huge firms in order to control businesses so you have the Soviet model being imported through ESG to to bring about a power transfer to the largest communist country still in the world and to implement direct Advanced primarily cultural communist policy through the so-called s or social score and so this is the the world that we are living in the Chinese have it on one side and we have it

on the other I want everybody to remember dun sha Pang himself made it very clear and Xi Jinping has made it very clear since uh in recent years that China never abandoned communism they are doing this as a tool to achieve communism by figuring out a new approach to unleashing the productive forces as lennin said that they must in order to succeed both of these models require a social credit system in order to actually work that social credit system in the form of ESG is being already applied to our businesses and we already see people

talking about articles being written about personal ESG scores China in 2014 officially implemented its digital social credit system uh we're all aware of it there are people who downplay its existence that exist as far as I can tell only on the woke left and their counterparts on the woke right who don't want us to believe such a thing is actually there I could get into their arguments but I'm not going to bother uh the long and short is that it is a less centrally coordinated program than we often fear many of the more egregious things

that we see are local things local Ms or programs or implementation some of which are actually struck down from the Chinese government and that the Chinese government overall has indicated that it does not necessarily have any uh interest in creating a national social credit program I don't know if that's true or not but what I do know is that I have a copy of the Chinese Communist Party document from 2014 wherein they explained the rationale for implementing a social credit system and this was from not some Fringe area but rather a central CCP Authority and

it is not like I had to go hunt down or spy or whatever to get this document it is available on the Stanford University website on their Digi China platform where they take important Chinese documents to politics and translate them the translations not great but I have a I'm going to read to you the two opening paragraphs to that Chinese Communist Party document explaining the purpose of the social credit system which I'm going to try to just just what's the relevance of it this is how you have the necessary control mechanism and the necessary brainwashing

tool ideological remolding tool at the same time social credit does that in order to create the dest economy and make it work or the ESG economy make it work and I argue that those are actually the same thing in two different contexts productive socialism and sustainable capitalism are two sides of the same coin you might even argue that they are dialectical pairs that will meet in negation of one another to complete the Communist global system but anyway here's the social credit system description from the Chinese Communist Party itself a social credit system is an important

component part of the Socialist market economy system that's the first sentence lest anybody have lost the plot and think because 21st century communism doesn't look like 20th century communism that it's not communism the Communist Party of China says a social credit system is an important component part of the Socialist market economy system let's put a pause on that though because you've just heard a specialist term you probably didn't know was a specialist term dunsha ping when he talks about his one country two systems actually the the model that they've implemented which is one country two

systems is called a socialist market economy it's not a market economy of course it's a patkin market that's op that operates at the behest of the CCP here's how it actually works is that the CCP this is dunell Ping Theory the the government owns the land the government owns the raw materials and the government owns some of the heaviest of heavy capital and then private interests are allowed to try to make money as they will uh in that system but because the government owns the land the government owns the raw materials and the government owns

some of the heaviest of the capital to to to be able to run these operations the government can cut you off in a second if you are no longer serving the Socialist market economy system AKA dung sha ping theory-based Chinese communism what he called socialism with Chinese characteristics a more accurate name when I'm not saying this is what Chinese means Chinese doesn't mean fascist but socialism with Chinese characteristics as dun sha ping referred to it would more accurately be described as communism with fascist characteristics that would be the correct expression not the euphemism expression okay

so now you know a little bit more about dun Duna ping Theory and how it works and I wish I would have said that earlier but I kept remembering I had to say something and I couldn't remember what it was cuz I didn't put in my notes uh and now I just remembered but they call it a socialist market economy system so when you hear socialist market economy what that means is dung sha ping Theory communism so do you understand this is 21st century communism it is not an abandoning of Communism and in fact when

we get to Marks in a minute you're going to hear it is the correct interpretation and completion of Communism as Marx wrote in capital so a socialist credit system is an important component part of the Socialist market economy system which is your dung ISM your corpor gcore and the social governance system which will be eventually your personal sng scores it is founded on laws regulations standards and Charters it is based on a complete Network covering the credit records of members of society and credit infrastructure it is supported by the lawful application of credit information and

a Credit Services System its inherent requirements are establishing the idea of a sincerity culture in other words that people actually believe the socialism that's why it's a brainwashing tool and carrying forward uh carrying forward sincerity and traditional Virtues Of course what it means is socialist virtues it uses encouragement to keep trust and constrains against breaking trust as incentive mechanisms in other words it uses carrots and sticks to make people not just conform but brainwash themselves to believe that's how they should behave and its objective is raising the honest mentality and credit levels of the entire

Society in other words making it more socialist but in this new 21st century dung shell ping model it goes on to say accelerating the construction of a social credit system is an important basis for comprehensively implementing the scientific development view that's a code for Marxism and building a harmonious socialist society very explicit what its goals are building a harmonious soci socialist society it is an important method to perfect the Socialist market economy systems that means dung ISM and the corporate gcore for accelerating and improving social governance that's your personal social and governance scores ESG scores

and it has an important significance for strengthening the sincerity Consciousness in other words thought reform or ideological remolding has a important significance for strengthening the sincerity consciousness of the members of society foregoing a desirable credit environment raising uh sorry not forgoing forging a desirable credit environment raising the overall competitiveness of the country which I would say is to the glory of socialism as dun shoing said and stimulating the development of society and the progress of civilization progress of civilization Lenin was extraordinarily clear means progress toward communism so how do we understand all of this in

hegelian and dialectical terms let's go back to that theoretical idea practical idea thing and for those of you that follow my Twitter this is The Epiphany I had in my sleep the other day and woke up still remembering it it was very excited that I I literally thought this up in my sleep woke up middle of the night thinking it very excited went back to sleep woke up in the morning wrote it down it was still there that usually doesn't happen Okay so what we did in the 20th century worldwide was a number of totalitarian

experiments communism and fascism in particular and we if we were to combine those experiments and the results let's look at those experiments and the results and combine them with the absolute unwavering religious commitment of Communists to their religion of Communism this is what we get first of all in say Soviet Union and in the in China well I should say in Russia and in China that became Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China among other places a feudal society was subjected to Marxism and what it did was in the long run even though there

was a reign of what they called actually existing socialism at the time in the long run it collapses and what's left uh at least in Russia was a oligarchical kleptocracy where the government is basically you have oligarchs that are Untouchable who rule with a basically Iron Fist and rob their population and you have uh in China they took a different Road um in China what happened was when the the society collapsed um and Ma died Duna ping came in with his openup program in other words I would say that uh the negation of the negation

so to speak of a feudal society is a collapsed Society but dung shell ping rescued it by taking it in the next Direction now what happened in the places where they attempted to force capital or Force socialism onto capitalism so this happened in a lot of European countries that wouldn't go undergo Revolt for themselves the Socialist Revolution did not arrive as Mark's intent uh but they were forced from without and they were subjected to Marxism and what you see in virtually every case whether it's Germany whether it's Italy in the 1910s 20s and 30s is

that you get fascism as a reaction and we see this Rising bid toward fascism Spain of course famously with Franco goes fascist in order to avoid communism a lot of people argue that Franco saved Spain I don't think he did but what we see is in fact that the negation of the negation of capitalism by socialism turns out to be fascism you do not get to Communism you get fascists and so this has created quite the conundrum for would be 21st century Communists but marxists never doubt Marxism they only doubt it's attempted implementation and the

people who tried to do it so therefore it's not that Marxist faith is wrong The Immortal science of Marxism cannot be wrong it is that the people like lenon and Stalin and Ma and so who attempted to implement it did so poorly causing this reaction and backlash that led to Fascism causing these collapses like after the Great Leap Forward and the cultural revolution where dung sha ping picked up so what is this in hegelian dialectical terms as I promised so communism after these experiments and given the faith of marxist communism is still regarded by Communists

as the correct theoretical idea it's how the World should work they think it's the best reflection of the absolute idea of how the perfectly ordered Society the platonic Republic should actually look so communism is not questioned in any way it remains held as the correct theoretical idea but what they discovered was that the attempt to force Implement socialism did not work in either feudal or capitalist contexts and in fact what you find out then is that at the econom IC level but not necessarily otherwise except incorporating some of the nationalism that's a point to to

make is that fascism comes to be seen as the correct practical idea fascism can produce without having to sacrifice totalitarian control fascism in fact can produce better than Freedom can produce so they think because you can Marshall with a command economy you can Marshall the productive forces exactly as needed and desired by the government in an instance without all of this fussing around of freedom without this producing things that are unsustainable to the economy itself which is of course a laughing stock because these these entities always produce in a in a way that destroys themselves

trying to show off that their system is the best but what you end up with then is that the belief system coming into communism 3.0 or 21st century communism or corporate communism you can call it what what you want those are some names that I use for it uh what in in in Galan terms which is where Mark got a lot of his ideas what you see is that communism is still held as the correct theoretical idea and fascism is regarded as a correct practical idea and the goal of the hegelian dialectic is always to

achieve the absolute by synthesizing the theoretical idea with the Practical idea and that will provide the absolute idea or in this case the fusion of Communism and fascism is the absolute system it's the one that will work it is the one that lend Len said will form although overwhelmingly powerful a semi-state that can wither away to form the stateless classless society of socialism which of course is ridiculous the reason some nationalism Creeps in just since I brought it up is because it is actually following less the internationalist model and more the Chinese model uh which

borrowed heavily off of Stalin because of its plight uh and Stalin believed in a model that he called socialism in one country which was to build up the Socialist power base in Soviet Union um alone and not worry about trying to convert the rest of the world this was in in indifference to um Lenin's idea of a global Revolution and trotsky's idea of what he called Perpetual Revolution where one country after another after another after another after another would be subjected making them all fall like dominoes uh leveraging the power of Soviet Union to do

it uh this is a more istic approach believe it or not but with a uh huge internationalist or Global Bent by getting all of the different players on the same page and then letting that synthesize into one model in the end but this synthesis is going to believe that in theory it's communist and in practice it's fascist and the goal is to harmonize theory and practice through the reflection against what against Theory against their beliefs about what the ideal society looks like which is a communism that can produce and the fascist model is their production

model and the Communist ethos is their vision for society this is communism 3.0 it is the fusion of Communism and fascism in this way uh China has built this program and he did they they did so in the wake of Ma's death with dunga Ping's one country two systems model and they did so more or less explicitly and without apology even to the point where they have remarked in the past that the method of economic growth that they've espoused is more or less imported from national socialism from the Nazis and also uh Stalin's ideas about

what were called National Socialist ideas but not that they weren't Nazi ideas about one uh communism in one country the goal was to figure out a way to maintain the ideology the theoretical idea while um unleashing the productive forces in line with Lenin's theory of productive forces uh to elevate the to a global power uh position where they could start to leverage the world toward their system so the idea in China then is that the Practical idea fascism has entered into the theoretical idea in order to negate it and complete it that's the fancy heelan

dialectical language practical idea fascism enters into the theoretical idea of Communism in order to negate it in other words to cancel out its failures and lift it up to a higher level and complete it and ESG copies this program exactly in the west the theoretical idea of Communism is now entering into the Practical idea which is a corrupted capitalist market economy that has adopted a corporate cartel through the finance asset management system so they have a fascist program running coordinated again through things like World economic forum and falty to the United Nations as a governing

body no specific country is in charge of this and the theoretical idea of communism enters into this control mechanism this fascist control mechanism to negate it and complete it so communism comes in through a fascist takeover of our corporate environment through giant multinational corporations deciding to collude not just with each other but also with um governments facilitated by n gigantic nonprofit organizations like the world economic forum and uh the United Nations and the goal is that the this will actually allow us to negate naked raw capitalism finally and complete it not just take it into

the Socialist to communist um channel that Marx talked about in a kind of very simplistic way but actually to complete the capitalist program uh as it was intended by Marx to to take hold of those productive forces and the products of capitalism and the everything that it's able to produce the productivity of capitalism and push it toward socialist uh redistribution so that we can achieve the perfect communist society and so in other words what we're dealing with then is in China and then in the west under ESG is that we have two Global Systems that

actually share the same model although in details inverted somewhat from one another that will eventually be able to synthesize together to get to the global communism in other words the negation of the negation of the negation and so this process of negation and completion is the subject of today's podcast which is what I'm calling dialectical succession now we can finally dig in I originally intended to start here by the way and then I figured I better set the table so we know what we're talking about and markx kind of called it and I hate to

say that um but what we're looking at with this Fusion despite what the Communists of strict obedience want to have believ their religion left them behind these morons think that they want to debate me about this so they can go rant they don't even know the religion left them behind it's like what is there to debate you don't they don't even know what they're talking about uh they they don't know that history used them then discarded them and has moved on without them the religion left them behind well and I think when we read this

from from marks in capital you're going to hear that oh James knows what he's talking about he didn't make it up this is real Marxism that we're dealing with here in 21st century communism unfortunately uh although Mark said so much stuff and he's so messy that you can find the real Marxism in basically any direction you want you can find uh the real Marxism in um endless growth uh you can also find uh Marxism allegedly the real Marxism as koho did in his book Marx and the anthropos scine in degrowth so the real Marx is

everywhere you need him to be in order to advance your power but that's consistent in with Marxism and not what we're talking about uh I don't want to digress so the key concept that we're going to deal with is very abstract as I said it's in fact abstruse I when I first heard it I had no idea what in the hell I was talking about I'm not 100% sure here a couple years later that I have a full grasp of it but I can actually talk articulately about it and then the thing is that because

of the macrocosm it applies on this big scale and microcosm it applies in small scales that don't totally match up uh as as Hegel called it a circle made of circles um I find the the concept of the negation of the negation to be a bit complicated and of course Marx imported it from Hegel while also saying he wasn't going to import it from Hegel so it's a very uh bizarre concept but this is ultimately this negation of the negation is in fact the dialectical Machinery by which Mark's believed history moves toward its intended endpoint

we're going to use the term succession and I don't know if one negation equals a succession or if you have to have that negation in completion I think that's the correct expression you negate and then complete in other words you you do a full sublation to get to a success ession so that say socialism succeeds capitalism according to Marxist theory communism succeeds socialism according to communist Theory capitalism succeeds uh feudalism in communist Theory but this is this is how Marx believed history moves right toward its intended endpoint which is communism remember we're going back to

we're going back home according to Marxism we're all going back to communist Eden where it's like tribal communism but for everybody all at the same time but Mark criticized heel for this idea a lot so Hegel is very much more invested in the idea of the negation of the negation so what does that mean so the negation of the negation is where say um I I'll give you a couple of examples and then we'll get into some more abstruse examples but this is be like uh so I said that capitalism is supposed to be the

negation or succession really of feudalism well then when you do that again you get to socialism right so it's a negation followed by a second negation um I don't know if that's the best way to look at it because sometimes what I think of with negation of the negation would be let's say that the contradictions of capitalism arise right so that's the negation of capitalism and then the negation of that negation of capitalism is a re a revolutionary reconstitution of society and resulting in socialism so socialism as a succession of capitalism is the negation of

the negation of capitalism but that's that's one example another example and and I think I have this further down on my notes so I'll get awkward when I get to that point because I'm doing it early uh is actually what I just said that we're going home right so markx believed that the uh original state of human beings or state of nature was in these Tri primitive tribal communist situations and that what we're going to do is we're going to negate that through different forms of productive forces which could be slavery which could be feudalism

which could be capitalism or which could be an a command economy under socialism though that one counts as different and what we're ultimately going to do so productive forces negate our original tribal communism but we're going to do is eventually seize the productive forces and negate the productive forces uh sequence and return back to Communism but not communism down on the low level of primitive communism but having walked the spiral upward one level to a global or maybe National first then Global communism so do you see see what I'm talking about um how it takes

place on multiple levels at once and this is true for for heger Hegel as well um anyway markx criticized and imported this kind of an inverted way it's going to take a lot of unpacking and uh we'll come back to Hegel so let's talk about Marx and how he uses this concept in capital although it's certainly not the first time he used it so this appears in chapter 32 of capital volume 1 which is very near the end uh in this document that I have it is Page 539 out of 547 it's only two pages

long and the title of the chapter is historical tendency of capitalist accumulation remember this is one of the things that I do where I'm going to read to you from Capital where the marxists will say has James ever even read marks and so let's read marks he says what does the Primitive accumulation of capital that is its historical Genesis resolve itself into in so far as it is not immediate transformation of slaves and surfs into wage labor laborers so this is Mark's idea right slaves are the slave economy surfs are the feudal economy wage laborers

or wage slaves are the capitalist economy but those three things are actually three manifestations of the same thing and that's why you have primitive communism and you have Global communism and in between you just have manifestations of the same problem which is uh in so far as it is not the immediate transformation of slaves and surfs into wage laborers and therefore a mere change of form it only means the expropriation of the immediate producers that is the dissolution of private property based on the labor of its owner private property as the antithesis to social Collective

property exists only where the means of Labor and the external conditions of Labor belong to private individuals so in the original tribe there were no private individuals you were all part of the tribe there was no private property and then private property is the antithesis of that social Collective property and it exists only where the means of labor labor and the external conditions of Labor belong to private individuals that is the negation of the original circumstance it needs to be reated or negated a second time to succeed to Global communism he says but according as

these private individuals are lab laborers or not laborers private property has a different character the numberless shades that it at first sight presents correspond to the intermediate stages lying between these two extremes the private property of the laborer is his means of production sorry in his means of production is the foundation of petty industry whether agricultural manufacturing or both so the means of production controlled by your average laborer is your ability to run a small business business Petty industry again is an essential condition for the development of social production and of the free individuality of

the laborer himself of course this Petty mode of production exists also under slavery serfdom and other states of dependence but it flourishes it lets loose its whole energy it attains its adequate classical form only where the laborer is the small sorry is the private owner of his means his own means of Labor set in action by himself The Peasant of the land which he cultivates The Artisan of the tool which he handles as a virtuoso virtuoso virtuoso there we go so the maybe it's a virtuoso and I would have just done better not to sound

so damn smart pronouncing it um so what he's saying here is that these small private laborers are actually kind of legitimately working with their stuff and they are unleashing their productive potential in other words they're engaging in productive forces correctly but of course what he's going to say is that capitalism comes along and expropriates them from the ability to work for themselves so in this regard people could read this and say Marx was extremely Pro small business he was anti-big Corporation right well um kind of I mean look at what Lenin and Stalin especially did

to the koks or what what mounted to people who didn't collectivize right so maybe not so much uh but let's just stick with that um where we leave off the this mode of production presupposes parceling of the soil and scattering of the other means of production as it excludes the concentration of these means of production it also excludes cooperation division of labor within each separate process of production the control over and the productive application of the forces of nature by society and the free development of the social productive Powers it is compatible only with a

system of production and a society moving within narrow and more or less primitive bounds to perpetuate it would be as uh peur rightly says uh to decree Universal mediocrity so he understands somehow that big corporations allow you to do things that small businesses can't he says at a certain stage of development it brings forth the material agencies for its own dissolution from that moment new forces and new passions spring up in the bosom of society but the old social organization Fetters them and keeps them down it must be annihilated it is annihilated it's Annihilation the

transformation of the individualized and Scattered means of production into socially concentrated ones of the pygmy property of the many into the huge property of the few the expropriation of the great mass of the people from from the soil from the means of subsistence and from the means of Labor this fearful and painful expropriation of the mass of the people forms the Prelude to the history of capital all right so what he just said there actually was him describing the formation of capitalism and he's describing it as expropriation of these Artisans these Farmers so you have

this farmer you have that farmer Farmer fer Joe Farmer Bob and they're growing their stuff and you have you know Mr Smith over here doing his Smithy work you have your various Artisans making tools making things building houses one by one each unique and individual and then corporations come along people come along and say you know what I have a good technique for say farming or I have a good technique for smithing so I'm going to run my farm buy more land get things more more Capital make it all bigger and rather first of all

I'll be just be able to use economies of scale able to drive these small uh mediocre people out of business and I'll be able to actually acrew their talent so I'll get you know N9 out of 10 of the best blacksmiths will come work for me and together those N9 out of 10 will be able to come up with things that are superior to what number 10 could do even if he was the best blacksmith in the world and so what's going to happen is all the blacksmiths are going to be expropriated into a factory

that can produce Iron Works faster better and cheaper and more consistently so now the Artisan work of iron or Artisan work of farming because of big farms big uh corporate Farms is going to drive all of the the small business people out of out of business and what you're going to have is um this new capitalist form in other words the expropriation of the mass of the people forms uh sorry the the ex expropriation of the great mass of people from the soil from the means of subsistance and from the means of Labor this fearful

expropriation of the mass of the people forms a Prelude to the history of capital because where does he say I was looking for oh from the pygmy property of the many to the huge property of the few so you have your little pygm property and you run your business on it but somebody like Walmart comes along with its huge property and annihilates you and expropriates you from your small business this is what he's talking about and he has a point in fact we have tried to figure out how to deal with that with antitrust legislation

and with anti-monopoly legislation and some of that is has been applied very successfully and freed up the middle class to its productivity and some of it has not been applied very successfully like black rock is still in business where antitrust needs to be applied to take it down but you get the um general idea of what he's talking about he says it comprises a series of forcible methods of which we have passed in review only those that have been epic making as methods of the Primitive accumulation of capital the expropriation of the immediate producers was

accomplished with merciless vandalism and under the stimulus of passion uh of passions the most infamous the most sorted the pettiest and the most meanly OD self earned private property that is based so to say on the fusing together of the isolated independent laboring individual with the conditions of his labor is supplanted by capitalistic private property which rests on exploitation of the nominally Free Labor of others that is on wage labor so this is capital this is how Marx explains it as soon as this process of transformation by the way if you didn't realize that Marx

Marx's critiques of capitalism are actually critiques of Monopoly and once you understand that it's critiques of Monopoly and uh oligarchy then um you can come to understand that uh his critiques of capitalism as what we think of as a market economy both hit and miss at the same same time uh he's completely correct about how Walmart takes over but he's completely incorrect to say that that's what we want um but on the other hand we do want to allow corporations to grow just not to where they get to the exploitative stage but I digress I

don't want to digress because we got a lot to cover he says as soon as this process of transformation has sufficiently decompos the old Society from top to bottom as soon as the laborers are turned into proletarians their means of Labor into Capital as soon as the capitalist mode of production stands on its own feet then the further socialization of Labor and further transformation of the land and other means of production into socially exploited and therefore common means of production as well as the further expropriation of private Proprietors takes a new form that was a

very long sentence but there was some very important stuff in there that I want to make it all clear uh what he's talking about notice how he is the further socialization of Labor and the further transformation of land and so on Marx actually believes that capitalism is a quasi socialist program it's just that you have lots of little uh corporate owners who are basically little socialists they have socialize the means of production by getting lots of other people to do the work for them which they then pay them a wage for but it's essentially already

tipping toward it's not you with your stuff building a business it's you with your stuff building an Empire and you have basically like a feudal Lord you have lots of people working under you you already have socialized production um you would not be able to produ Apple I know um what's his name Tim Cook is that who's in charge of Apple would not be able to produce what Apple produces by himself he has to have an entire social apparatus in order to do it but anyway after that transformation of the large corporation stage takes place

he says the further explo expropriation of private Proprietors and the uh um common means of production all take a new form that which is now to be expropriated he says is no longer the laborer working for himself so the many by the few but the capitalist exploiting many laborers so now he says there's supposed to be a turn and this is how you go from capitalism to socialism so when capitalism Maxes itself out and expropriates as many possible people from their own livelihoods as possible and makes them work for a socialized production method then it's

just time for the workers to say you know what we don't actually need the bosses so now the capitalists are going to get expropriated by the workers that's what he's saying that's the next step that which is now to be expropriated is no longer the laborer working for himself but the capitalist exploiting many laborers this expropriation is accomplished by the action of the imminent laws of capitalistic production itself by the centralization of capital like I said they become their own little kind of Lords right he says one capitalist always kills many hand inand with this

centralization or this expropriation of many capitalist by few develop on an Ever extending scale The Cooperative form of the labor process the conscious technical application of science the methodological cultivation of the soil the transformation of the instruments of Labor into instruments of Labor only using usable in common the economizing of all means of production by their use as means of production of combined socialized labor the entanglement of all peoples in the net of the World Market and with this the international character of the capitalistic regime now this is actually a very long sentence it's very

indicative of the world that we have now with our large multinational corporations and so what he's saying like I said is what's going to happen is you have the corporation get bigger and bigger and bigger and they're already doing a socialized production program but what's happening is that the boss is is mainly profiting off of this while nobody else is the workers are not so the workers are being exploited so the workers are now going to team up together and say we can run this without the bosses we don't actually need the managers in order

to make it work and we don't need the capital owners we can just declare that we all own this together as it turns out that doesn't actually work when you try to do that when you try to collectivize the people know when everybody owns it nobody owns it so nobody takes care of it uh the way that they should when somebody owns it somebody's ass is on the line for it and somebody pays a big cost when it falls apart the cost is the cost of the factory breaking down is concentrated on the owner who

has a huge vested interest to get that fixed it is not diffused and spread out across the say 2,000 workers uh who who don't have the capacity without becoming managers themselves to figure out how to fix it and then who actually decides to care so it doesn't actually work but this is what he's saying the thing's already operating is social production so why don't we just get rid of the people who are profiting off of the fact that they've built a method of social production that's his argument that's that's the case of Marxism and another

interminably long sentence says along with the constantly diminishing number of the magnets of capital so there's a smaller and smaller number of corporate oligarchs who run everything who use super monopolize all advantages of this process of transformation grows the mass of misery oppression slavery degradation exploitation but with this too grows the Revolt of the working class so he says basically the conditions that we're finding ourselves under right now with the increasing super corporatization of all parts of production in the world eventually pisses people off right it makes all these things miserable but this grows ready

for that Revolt where we don't need the bosses anymore right and he says a class always that that the Revolt of the working class comes from a class always increasing in numbers and disciplined United organized by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself turns out that wasn't quite right but that's what he said the Monopoly of capital becomes a Fetter upon the mode of production which has sprung up and flourished along with and under it centralization of the means of production and socialization of labor at last reach a point where they become

incompatible with their capitalist integument the integument sorry this integument is burst aunder the nail of capitalist private property sounds the expropriators are expropriated so he's describing what happens in the seizing of the means of production in a socialist Revolution and we're getting close to the point where he uses the phrase in the end of the chapter the capitalist mode of appropriation he says the result of the capitalist mode of production produces capitalist private property this is the first negation of individual private property as founded on the labor of the proprietor so if you're a sole

proprietor and you have your little shop you have your individual private property but capitalism comes along and negates your private property it turns it into corporate property it buys up your little business and and puts it in part of the giant mega Corporation this is the first negation of indiv idual private property as founded on the labor of the proprietor but capitalist production begins with the inexorability of a law of nature its own negation it is the negation of the negation well there's that phrase right there this does not reestablish private property for the producer

remember the negation of the negation doesn't bring you around the circle to the same spot it brings you around the circle to a new higher level right so capitalism abolished individual private property by collect iing it by scooping up all the capital and letting you work with it although it's no longer yours so you're not working with your stuff you're working with the company's stuff but the company will beat your ass if and fire you or whatever if you break their stuff and this he says it's going to rupture as we just described and this

he says does not reestablish private property for the producer but gives him individual property based on the acquisition of the capitalist ERA this is extremely important it gives him individual property based on the notice that there is no individual private property private property is gone it's property that you're allowed to use individually but there is no private to it you can't withhold it from others any longer because it's yours but it gives him individual property based on the acquisition of the capitalist era that is on cooperation and the possession in common of the land and

the means of production now I hate to blow the punchline but I always do when I get to it that's what dung shell ping is doing cooperation and the possession in common of the land and the means of production the dunga ping model dung ISM says that yeah private interests can pursue their own individual earnings your own individual property but they own the land they own the heavy Capital they own the raw materials those are held by the Party by the state in the name of the masses and the work is done in a socialized

Cooperative Fashion on Capital that is ultimately The Possession in common of the land and of the means of production this is why I say that what they're doing in China is in fact in line with capital with marks and that what we're dealing with is a global Communist Revolution to bring us all into this program the transformation of scattered private property just to finish the paragraph even though we already read the negation of the negation part the transformation of scattered private property arising from from Individual labor into capitalist private property is naturally a process incomparably

more protracted violent and difficult than the transformation of capitalistic private property already practically resting on socialized production in dis socialized property in other words once you get to a major monopolistic or oligarchical situation like we have under Black Rock it's just a matter of kind of transforming the form to enter into to a socialist system you already have a socialist system in practice that's AKA literally fascism is already a socialist system in practice it just has to get the ideology right now so that it will begin to wither the state away like Lenin said Marx

finishes by saying in the former case we had the expropriation of the mass of the People by a few usurpers that's the development of big Capital taking up all the small Proprietors and in the latter we have the expropriation of a few usurpers by the mass of the people and it turns out that that never actually works in practice but now you know where Marx is coming from and now we can go back to Hegel and talk about this negation of the negation thing because we just heard it and we heard that capitalism negates the

small private owner by collectivizing his productive capacities and then that in its second negation becomes socialist by negating the usurpers at the top of the program so the negation of the negation of small time capitalism becomes socialism and so like I said before hegel's formulation of the dialectic was that you understand things in the abstract which is in line with your best guess of the theoretical idea and then that that Encounters in practice or through the Practical idea it's negative or it's negation which leads you to a greater or more concrete understanding now other words

the abstract leads to the negation leads to the negation of the negation which is not the original abstract idea but it is now better understood on a higher level that's your negation of the negation and this is actually written about in phenomenology of Spirit by Hegel and I don't know if I've read much Hegel to you before because well I'm going to read you some Hegel and you'll see why I haven't read you a lot of Hegel this is Hegel phenomenology of spirit in thus pointing out the capital N now I'm not going to do

the capital EMP part every time but he capitalizes now right in thus pointing out the now we see then merely a process which takes the following course first I point out the now and it is asserted to be the truth I point it out however as something that has been or is something canel and done away with I thus anull and pass beyond that first truth and in the second place I now assert as the second truth that it has been that it is superseded so there's your super session or succession now pause what the

hell why is this now this discussion is a little bit weird he's actually discussing the concept of now and he's like it it reminds me of that scene in Space Balls where they're watching the video of themselves Rick Moranis and whoever it was that played uh uh Colonel Sanders and uh they're watching the video of themselves and they're like when is this and he's like this is now we'll go back to then well we can't go back to then why because this is now and anyway it reminds me of space balls but what he's looking

at is here's this idea of now but by the time we're talking about now maybe or at some other time now is no longer now but it was now when it was now but it's not now anymore so there's this idea of now which is ever present which is right now and then there's the idea of now which is already past which was now when it was now but it's not now anymore see why it reminds me of space balls and so anyway that's literally first I point out the now and it is asserted to

be the truth I point it out however as something that has been so it's no longer the now or is something canceled and done away with so we have this abstract idea of now right of nness right now but as soon as we can think of now it's already not now it's already a different now so there are lots of Nows so then the now is negated by then so now there is no now now is gone now was where where are we we at now we'll go back to then we can't go back to

then I'm telling you it's Space Balls this is straight up Mel Brook's comedy okay so what we have to understand is that there are these kind of universal now which is an abstract but then there's the particular now which is the now that I meant this now not some other now this now a certain now and that's a concrete understanding of now so you have now but then you realize because of then that now is negated by the passage of time and therefore when I say now I mean a specific time that we can all

understand this particular that now not that particular now and this now we can understand is now and then we have a concrete understanding of what somebody means let me read it again first I point out the now and it is asserted to be the truth I point it out however as something that has been or something canceled and done away with I thus anull and pass beyond that first truth and in the second place I now assert as the second truth that it has been that it is superseded but thirdly what has been is not

cuz it it's before right it's not anymore I then supersede cancel its having been I'm assuming that somewhere in superseded and cancel there we have alaben but I'm not sure I then supersede cancel its having been the fact of its being annuled the second truth negate thereby the negation of the now and return and so doing to the first position that now is you see why I don't read Hegel out loud but what he he's saying what I just said with the whole Space Balls thing the now and pointing out the now are thus so

constituted that neither one nor the other is an immediate simple fact but a process with diverse moments in it so now is now is but now is actually a process of lots of Nows this is set up it is it says it says this is set up it is however rather another that is set up the this oh sorry I read that wrong I thought it was like literally a he's so so bad I thought it was literally a uh like paragraph marker a this is set up it is however rather an other that is

set up the this is superseded and this otherness this cancelling of the former is again it is itself again an olded so and so turned back to the first but this first reflected thus onto itself is not exactly the same as it was to begin with see that's what I was telling you namely something immediate rather it is a something reflected into self a simple entity which remains in its otherness what it is a now which is any number of Nows and that is the genuinely true now the now is simple daytime which has many

Nows within it hours a now of that sort again an hour is similarly many minutes and this now a minute in the same way uh many Nows and so on showing indicating pointing out the now is thus itself the very process which expresses what the now in truth really is namely a result or a plurality of Nows all taken together and the pointing out is the way of getting to know of experiencing that now is a universal was that clear or what so that's why we don't read heel but there you have the idea of

the negation of the negation which is where you take the ab ract concept of now and you negate it because now moves around we're at a different now and thus you can understand the universality of the concept of now being any given time which he never actually says very clearly any given specific time this particular now which could be any of this particular now uh and you have a concrete understanding of now meaning at the present time and then he has this really weird and conf confusing discussion that somehow a day is is a now

and then also so uh an hour is a now inside of that now and then a minute is a now inside of that now and then a second is a minute is a now inside of that and we could cut further and he really did say that and I'm not getting into it so he actually Hegel describes that there are in fact three modes of of the dialectic and negation of the negation is one of the three the three are quantity transforming itself into quality or quality into quantity so when Herbert marcuz is talking about

the requirement for a qualitative change he's actually always saying this he's always talking about how quantity under the capitalist system we have lots of stuff but it has to be transformed into quality it has to be turned into stuff that's worth having and that we appreciate this is a transition from a GDP productive consumptive economy to a well-being economy quantity has to transform into quality but the thing is is on the other hand you also have to have quality that transforms into quantity if you have a socialist system like you do in China that has

quality because it's communist and it's theoretical idea that has to be able to transform itself into quantity in other words it needs to be able to produce as well and so this is one of the forms of the dialectic according to uh Hegel quantity has to transform into quality and quality into quantity and that is literally your production of bridled capitalism or sustainable capitalism alongside your produ your your your creation of productive socialism a second is the unification of opposites these things that appear opposite are only really comprehensible as part of the same hole which

is the better and higher understanding of the thing and then third is negation of the negation or succession so or sup supersession I guess we could use that word instead so what do we mean by unification of opposites well you know let's look at black and white those are opposites right they're opposite tints they're the maximally opposite tins gray is a tint set of tints many tints in between and we could do the whole now thing with gray instead but we're not going to because we're not heel and we're not that confused but what Hegel

would indicate is that is a pair of opposites black and white that black when we encounter in the natural world is usually the absence of of light light when it hits things turns them white if you increase the intensity of the light it becomes whatever you shine the light on appears white and then black is what you end up with in the shadow so black is only comprehensible as the absence of white but on the other hand in the realm of tints white is what you have if think about a piece of paper when there

is an absence of of tint added so white and black are actually only comprehensible as part of a process that contains both of them that's the unification of opposites and if that sounds like it just confuses things when you could just say it's black and white what the hell that's the point the idea is to remove all distinctions to see all things in a very literally confused way as parts of single Dynamic processes so that you can become a guru and confuse other people and lead them around but like I said quantity into quality and

quality into quantity that's one dialectic the unification of opposites seeing them as two parts of a single ho removing distinctions that's a second dialectic and this third dialectic is the negation of the negation which he just did with that now thing okay he has another more famous version that I'm going to summarize not from him but from Marx in a minute about being in essence appearance and concept or form the notion which is the theoretical idea activity the Practical idea and how this all leads into the absolute um Marx about it in fact Marx criticizes

not just Hegel for his construction of the negation of the negation because he says that it's in fact theology returning to theology but he also criticizes Foy Box's materialist critique of Hegel so Hegel Marx thinks that Hegel created a theology that returns to a theology because you start with the abstract so that's a theological concept and you return turn to a different abstract on a higher level of understanding he calls it concrete but it's in fact not concrete Mark says it's still abstract and therefore its theology returning to theology so foyer Bach follows Hegel and

foyer Bach makes the point that uh he's a materialist is that so he has makes the point that Hegel is actually kind of doing this and so um Marx actually goes further and takes Firebox materialist reconfiguration of Hegel and criticizes the negation of the negation idea there too but then in the end somehow Mark still adopts literally the same program which is why we just talked about all of this with um primitive communism and then the productive modes uh of individual property leading back into Global communism so here's Marx something from another piece of Marx

that uh I've never read to you before it's from Marx's General critique of Hegel which he wrote in 1844 he wrote a lot of things in 1844 by the way he also wrote the his critique of hegel's philosophy of right which is where the Opium of the masses line comes from he also wrote um although he probably wrote that in 1843 and published in 1844 he also wrote his economic philosophic manuscripts which I think are some of his most important work in 1844 so anyway he says forbach this is markx again forbach is the only

one who has a serious critical attitude toward the hegelian dialectic and who has made genuine discoveries in this field he is in fact the true conqueror of the old philosophy the extent of his achievement and the unpretentious Simplicity with which he F forbach gives it to the world stands in Striking contrast to the opposite attitude of the others fo Bach's great achievement is one the proof that philosophy is nothing else but religion rendered into thought and expounded by thought that is another form and manner of existence of the estrangement of the essence of man hence

equally to be condemned so philosophy according to Marx following forbach here is just another way for man to do religion and thus to estrange man from his own Essence which is material and thus is to be condemned alongside religion secondly the establishment of true materialism and of real science by making the social relationship of manto man the basic principle of the theory and three is opposing to the negation of of the negation which claims to be the absolute positive the self-supporting positive positively based on itself so here he says that Fox's great contribution is in

fact in saying that Hegel was wrong with this negation of the negation nonsense which by the way is in a sense like do a criticism do a criticism of the criticism and somehow you get back to the original thing but better right two negatives give you a positive but in an additive not a multip implicative sense apparently forbach Mark says explains the hegelian dialectic and thereby justifies starting out from the positive facts which we know by the senses as follows Hegel sets out from the estrangement of substance in logic from the infinite abstractly Universal from

the absolute and fixed abstraction which means put popularly that he sets out from religion and theology Marx is dead on the nose with this in fact the absolute is um which is the ultimate abstract uh for Hegel and hegel's goal is to start with the ultimate abstract negate it in practice in the world and return back to a fully comprehended uh absolute so the absolute abstract the abstract absolute is going to turn into the concrete absolute which is the real absolute or the manifested absolute or the imonti absolute and so he does start out from

theology because the absolute for Hegel is equivalent to God secondly markx tells us he anuls the infinite and posits the actual sensuous real finite particular philosophy analment of religion and theology thirdly he again anuls the positive and restores the abstraction the infinite restoration of religion and theology so what forbach what Marx is saying forbach did with Hegel is said aha you're starting out with religion then you're giving us a material world as a reflection and then you're just using that to get back to religion so therefore you're just a theologian and forbach was inverting all

of this because he was a materialist in fact Mark said he wasn't even materialist enough but he was a materialist forbach marks tells us thus conceives the negation of the negation only as a contradiction of philosophy with itself as the philosophy which affirms theology meaning the Transcendent and so on after having denied it so you have the Transcendent realm where the absolute form lives and then it's denied in the material world which is posited to be an illusion and thus gets transcended only to come back to the Transcendent realm in the first place and so

Mark says uh and which it therefore affirms in opposition to itself saying basically the hegel's negation of the negation is in fact a contradiction it starts with the infinite and it goes into the finite and comes back to the infinite or if you want to say Transcendent to material to Transcendent so it's wrong but remember Marx famously said that he was going to turn turn Hegel on his head so what if it were to start with material and or you know finite or whatever and then went to infinite and then came back down that might

work ooh and that's why he ends up keeping the negation of the negation so the positive position or self-affirmation and self-confirmation contained in the negation of the negation is taken to be a position which is not yet sure of itself this is Mark's bitching still which is therefore burdened with its opposite which is doubtful of itself and therefore in need of proof and which therefore is not a position de demonstrating Itself by its existence not an acknowledged position hence it is directly and immediately confronted by the position of sense certainty based on itself forbach also

defines the negation of the negation the definite concept as thinking surpassing itself in thinking and as thinking wanting to be direct awareness of Nature and reality but because Hegel has conceived the negation of the negation from the point of view of the positive relation inherent in it as the true and only positive and from the point of view of the negative relation inherent in it as the only true act and spontaneous activity of all being he has only found the abstract logic logical speculative expression for the moment for the movement of History which is not

yet the real history of man as a given subject but only the Act of Creation the history of the orig or of man so then Marx isn't happy about this he's just saying that all Hegel has done is Swindle himself into starting with religion to end at religion and then says religion is true and he calls hegels a double error and in fact a lie of his principle and then this is what Marx has to say going on more about this negation of the negation stuff he says in this discussion all the illusions of speculation

are brought together first of all Consciousness self-consciousness is at home and its other being as such it is therefore or if we hear abstract from the hegelian abstraction and put the self-consciousness of man instead of self-consciousness it is at home in its other being as such this implies for one thing that Consciousness knowing is knowing and thinking is thinking Consciousness pretends to be directly the other of itself to be the world of sense the real world life thought surpassing itself in thought as foyer box said this aspect is contained herein in as much as Consciousness

as mere Consciousness takes offense not at estranged objectivity but as but at objectivity as such secondly and I think this is the part I really need you hear this implies that self-conscious man in so far as he has recognized and superseded the spiritual world or his world's spiritual General mode of being as self-alienation nevertheless again confirms it in this alienated shape and passes it off as his true motive being reestablishes it and pretends to be at home in his other being as such thus for instance after superseding religion after recognizing religion to be a product

of self-alienation he yet finds confirmation of himself in religion as religion here is the root of hegel's false positivism or of his merely apparent criticism this is what forbach designated as the positing negating and reestablishing of religion or theology but it has to be expressed in more general terms so hegel's construction was we have this abstract idea of the Divine we look for uh you know resolving the various contradictions and so on in ourselves and in our own thought and we return to a comprehension of the Divine and it's worse than that Hegel thought we

were actually monetizing the Divine by discovering the Divine in ourselves and so for box saying no you're just doing religion again what you're doing is no makes no sense Marx now says this has to the fo Box's right but it has to be expressed in even more general terms he says the reason is at home in unreason as unreason sorry thus reason is at home in unreason as unreason so there's your whole dialectic of Enlightenment by horkheimer and adorno um they just all these people do is rip people off the man who has wed recognize

that he is leading an alienated life and law politics Etc is leading his true human life in this alienated life as such so when you realize that your political and legal existence is actually alienating you you are living your true you are Awakening to who you really are which is being alienated from who you really are right so he's leading his true human life in this alienated life as such self-affirmation self-confirmation and contradiction with itself and contradiction with both the knowledge of and the essential being of the object is thus true knowledge and life so

there's your Gnostic Awakening through realizing your alienation both with the knowledge of and with the essential being of whoops sorry they they there here we go let's try again there can therefore no longer be any question about an act of accommodation on hekle part Visa V religion the state Etc since this lie is the LIE of his principle if I know religion as alienated human self-consciousness then what I know in it as religion is not my self-consciousness but my alienated self-consciousness confirmed in it I therefore know my self-consciousness that belongs to itself to its very

nature confirmed not in religion but rather Anni in annihilated and superseded religion and Hegel therefore the negation of the negation is not the continuation of the true Essence affected precisely through negation of the pseudo Essence with him the negation of the negation is the confirmation of the pseudo essence or of the self- arranged Essence in its denial or it is the denial of the pseudo Essence as an objective being dwelling outside man and independent of him and its transformation into the subject A peculiar role therefore is played by the act of superseding in which denial

and preservation that there's Alf haben right that is affirmation are bound together and so what Marx is actually saying is that this idea of the negation of the negation starting with the abstract and coming back to the abstract ultimately which Hegel calls concrete actually gets it wrong it should start with a material and it should proceed through material conditions in all forms just like Foy boach is recommending thus Mark says for example in hegel's Philosophy of Law civil law is superseded sorry sorry super civil law superseded equals morality morality superseded equals the family the family

superseded equals Civil Society Civil Society superseded equals the state the state superseded equals world history in the actual World civil law morality the family Civil Society the state Etc remain in existence only they have become moments which means IR reducible Parts states of the existence and being of man which have no validity in isolation but dissolve and engender one another Etc they have become moments of motion moments of the motion of History technically in just the same way quality superseded equals quantity quantity superseded equals measure measure superseded equals essence essence superseded equals appearance appearance super

eded equals actuality actuality superseded equals the concept the concept superseded equals objectivity objectivity so there's your objective idea right objectivity superseded equals the absolute idea the absolute idea superseded equals nature nature superseded equals subjective mind subjective mind superseded equals ethical objective Mind by the way that's the stage in which the United Nations and the others are pushing it's going to be global ethics so subjective mind superseded equals a ethical objective mind so they're going to tell us what our ethics are by superseding ethics themselves or our subjective individual Minds themselves ethical mind superseded equals art

art superseded equals religion religion superseded equals absolute knowledge and then Marx concludes his criticism by saying the religious Etc man can find in heel his final confirmation so Marx's problem with Hegel is not the concept of the negation of the negation but the concept that the negation of the negation is still doing spiritual work it's still setting up a religion he wants it to do he wants it to describe material transformation dialectical materialism not hegel's weird religion but that was mostly included for completion so Marx doesn't only criticize Hegel on this concept he also explains

the positive aspects of hegel's formulation so he doesn't want to throw the baby out with the bathat of this NE ation or the negation thing and he then will save that and apply it to his own firm convictions as we might say uh and we call that Marxism today so supercession marks tells us as an objective movement of retracing the alienation into self this is the Insight expressed within the estrangement concerning the appropriation of the objective Essence through the supersession of its estrangement remember positive Transcendence of private property is human self- estr ment that's what

communism is it is the estranged insight into the real objectification of man into the real appropriation of his objective Essence through the annihilation of the estranged character of The Objective world through the supersession of the objective World in which its EST stranged mode of Being Sorry in its aranged mode of being in the same way atheism being the supersession of God is the Advent of the theoretic humanism and communism as the supersession of private property is the Vindication of real human life as man's possession and thus the Advent of political or sorry practical humanism or

atheism is humanism mediated with itself through the supersession of religion whilst communism is human humanism mediated with itself through the supersession of private property only through the supersession of this mediation which is itself however a necessary premise does positively self deriving humanism positive humanism come into being notice Ro he's saying here by the way is that atheism is not the goal of Communism the Soviet Union's tried to force people to be atheists that's 100% true but and didn't succeed at it but that's not the point the point is merely to create the opportunity to adopt

what Marx called theoretic humanism and then communism as the succession uh or supersession so in in the same way atheism being the supersession supersession of God is the Advent of theoretic humanism and communism as the supersession of private property is a Vindication of real human life as man's possession and thus the Advent of practical humanism or atheism is humanism mediated with itself through the supersession of religion while communism is humanism mediated within itself through the supersession of private property so he's not trying to the goal of Communism is not to make atheists the goal is

to transcend religion and transcend private property so that you can be Communists he says but communism and Atheism are no flight no abstraction no loss of the objective World created by man of man's essential Powers born to the realm of objectivity they are not a returning in poverty to unnatural primitive Simplicity on the contrary there but the first real emergence the actual realization of man sorry first realization for man of man's Essence and of his Essence as something real so we're not Spiritual Beings we're just people and we have a world that we live in

that we can transform he says thus by grasping the positive meaning of self-referred negation although again in a stranged fashion Hegel grasps man's self-estrangement the alienation of man's Essence man's loss of objectivity and his loss of realness as self-discovery manifestation of his nature objectification and realization in short within the sphere of abstraction Hegel conceives labor as man's Act of self Genesis conceives man's relation to himself as an alien being and the manifestation of himself as an alien being to the emergence of the species Consciousness and species life so he doesn't throw out all of Hegel

on this negation of the negation thing I'm just again I'm reading this just kind of for for completeness I know it's long but it's good to actually to hear where these ideas come from and understand cuz he has to get to his point through another criticism of Hegel because so now he starts with however so he just gave Hegel all this doe Hegel really kind of had it however apart from or rather in consequence of the referral already described this act appears in Hegel first as a merely formal because abstract act because uh the human

being itself is taken to be only an abstract thinking being conceived merely as self-conscious ious so there's your cesan I think therefore I am right and secondly because the ex Exposition is formal and Abstract the supersession of the alienation becomes a confirmation of the alienation in other words you supersede your your spiritual beliefs only to come back to spiritual beliefs that's his problem or for Hegel this movement of self- Genesis and self-objectification and the form of self-alienation and self-estrangement is the absolute hence final expression of human life of life with itself as its a of

Life at peace with itself and in unity with its Essence this movement in its abstract form as dialectic is therefore regarded as truly human life and because it is nevertheless an abstraction in estrangement of human life it is regarded as a Divine process but as the Divine process of man a process traversed by man's abstract pure absolute Essence that is distinct from himself Marx is not happy about that Marx wants man to be the generator of man thirdly this process must have a bearer a subject but the subject only comes into being as a result

so Marx puts the subject first because your suffering is what gives you the uh your your awareness like we said earlier of your alienation is what gives you the insight to know that you are what you are and that you need to transform the world this result he says the subject knowing itself as absolute self Consciousness is therefore God that is what Hegel argues absolute Spirit the self knowing and self- manifesting idea real man and real nature mere predicates become mere predicates symbols of this hidden unreal man of this unreal nature subject and predicate are

therefore related to each other in absolute reversal a Mystic subject object or a uh subjectivity reaching beyond the object the absolute subject as a process the subject alienating itself and returning from alienation into itself but at the same time retracting this alienation into itself and the subject as this process a pure incessant revolving within itself so that's really a confusing statement but what we have is that again Marx is complaining that we're not putting man in his real form first we're putting it backwards we're we're making this uh man is man isn't the thing that

begins then exerts his subjectivity on the world and thus sees himself in the object that he manipulates or creates um it's the other way around for Hegel it starts with the with with with the with this mystical as he calls it conception of man and gets it all backwards so first Marx tells us formal and Abstract conception of man's Act of self-creation or self objectification Hegel having positive posited man as equivalent to self-consciousness the estranged object the estranged essential reality of man is nothing but Consciousness so there's his problem with it the thought of estrangement

merely estrangements abstract and therefore empty and unreal expression negation this is impossible sentence the supercession of the alienation is therefore likewise nothing but an abstract empty super recession of that empty abstraction the negation of the negation the rich living sensuous concrete activity of self objectification is therefore reduced to its mere abstraction absolute negativity see Marx wants you wallowing in your m misery Hegel wants you focused on the ideal forms and so Marx is like he's got it all wrong because this so-called negativity is nothing but the abstract empty form of that real living act its

content can in consequence be merely a formal content produced by abstraction from all content we can go back to that now thing I think a result therefore one gets General abstract forms of abstraction pertaining to every content and on that account indifferent to and consequently valid for all content the thought forms or logical categories torn from real mind and from real nature so isn't this all fun and simple so what in the world so that's Marx in 1844 complaining about the way that Hegel set up the negation of the negation so you'd be under the

impression that he's just like get rid of it but no he wanted to appropriate it and turn it inside out and so I just wanted to give you the critique so you can actually hear it here is stupid discussion so you can hear it for yourself that's sort of all tangential to where we're going with this or what this is about because later in 1844 marks outlined what he is really interested in with regard so if all of that didn't make any sense we're doing okay it doesn't matter Marx outlined what he really means by

the negation of the negation in his famous economic philosophic manuscripts which are sometimes called the Paris manuscripts or the 1844 manuscripts and he does so at the tail end of a rather funny passage in fact it's a funny passage that Eric Faline uh LED uh took it's the passage that led Eric fogline I guess is how I should phrase this to identify Marx as an intellectual swindler who must have known that he was full of crap but sold his ideas anyway so I'm going to read the longer expression of this I know you are just

dying to have more Marks here and I'm excited to continue reading to you all this long- winded crap 2 hours into this but it's kind of a funny funny piece so as far as Marx can be inadvertently funny so Marx is explaining what it means to be human in the economic philosophic manuscript and it's obviously not what heel what he was just ripping heel for which is that we're not somehow this Divine thing that um came down to earth and is going to realize that we're fine that's not what it is although technically it is

he's going to flip that over right and so man creates man is what he's going to explain and he starts off by laying out the conditions for Independence and this is his one of his anti-religious sceds a man he says a being only considers himself independent when he stands on his own feet and he only stands on his own feet when he owes his existence to himself a man who lives by the grace of another say God right regards himself as a dependent being but I live completely by the grace of another if I owe

him not only the maintenance of my life but if he has moreover created my life so this is definitely a shot at God but not just that because he hates that the factory owners are owed the maintenance of his life right if he is the so let me read that whole part but I live completely by the grace of another if I owe him not only the maintenance of my life but if he has moreover created my life if he is the source of my life when it is not of my own creation my life

has necessarily a source of this kind outside it the creation is that's Capital C creation meaning the religious Creation The Genesis creation the creation is therefore an idea very difficult to dislodge from po popular Consciousness the fact that nature and Man exist on their own account is incomprehensible to it because it contradicts everything tangible in Practical life so he's really wanting to get past the creation and that's a stumbling block for his you know man- centered religion but he's saying that the only way for you to actually be independent to be liberated is to cast

down all dependence on all other beings to whom you might owe your life doesn't that sound like a healthy way to be he says the creation of the Earth has received a mighty Blow from Geon noi that is from the science which presents the formation of the Earth the development of the Earth as a process as a self-generation maybe we should go read some tar de shardan again soon and also observe his Reliance on the the the suffix noi Geon noi nosi like Gnostic g n o y goosi gnosticism about the Earth Marx then goes

on to say generao equivoca that is spontaneous generation is the only practical reputation of the theory of creation cretion now it's certainly easy to say we don't believe in spontaneous generation by the way Christians who are creationists do not believe in spontaneous generation uh they believe things were created and people who uh are bent on the materialist uh or naturalist I should say biological evolution do not believe in spontaneous generation either they think that the forms of life evolved although they don't necessarily claim to say how that started and when not getting into that debate

cuz that's a diversion so don't start it we're doing Marks here he says now it is certainly easy to say that the single individ to the single individual Aristotle has already said you have been begotten by your father and your mother notice what he's doing is tearing down common sense in Aristotle here Aristotle already said that you have been begotten by your father and your mother therefore in you the mating of two human beings a Species Act of human beings has produced the human being this is why Marx is going to try to claim that

we're a species being because we're produced by species acts in other words human reproduction you see therefore that even physically man owes his existence to man therefore you must not only keep sight of the one aspect the infinite progression which leads you to further inquire well who begat my father who his grandfather Etc you must also hold on to the circular movement sensuously perceptible in that progress by which man repeats himself in procreation man thus always remaining the subject you will reply however I grant you this circular movement now grant me the progress which drives

me ever further until I asked who begot the first man in nature as a whole so let's pause and take that was a funny way of phrasing all this let's take stock of where we are Marx is saying yeah okay so I get it there's an infinite regress here I came from my father my father came from his father he came from his father and then you might reply to all this stuff this he's doing a hypothetical conversation with himself here you might reply to all this stuff by saying who begot the first man and

who begot nature as a whole Mark says I can only answer you your question is itself a product of abstraction this is exactly where um Eric fogland decides that markx is a swindler he then says your question itself is a product of abstraction so that would have to be negated and then negated again or succeeded so succession is the negation of the negation right so that would have to be negated and then negated again or succeeded ask yourself how you arrived at that question ask yourself whether your question is not posed from a standpoint to

which I cannot reply because it is wrongly put ask yourself whether that progress as such exists for a reasonable mind when you ask about the creation of the na of nature in man you are abstracting in so doing uh in so doing from man and nature when you postul so right it's like the Nows right this now that now all the Nows every now but now you understand now here what markx is basically doing is the same little freaking stunt but he's like you can't ask who the first man was without having an abstract concept

of man you can't ask where nature came from without having an abstract of nature so you're just going into the abstractions just like Hegel did that's literally what he's saying so this is baloney he says ask yourself whether that progress as such exists for a reasonable mind when you ask about the creation of Nature and man you are abstracting in so doing from man and nature so that's what I'm saying you postulate them as non-existent because they're abstract right but that's actually not what anybody's doing and yet you want me to prove them to you

as existing now I say to you give up your abstraction and you will also give up your question or if you want to hold on to your abstraction then be consistent and if you think of man and nature as non-existent then think of yourself as non existent for you two are surely nature and man don't think don't ask me for as soon as you think and ask your abstraction from the existence of Nature and man has no meaning or are you such an egotist that you conceive everything is nothing and yet want yourself to exist

so that's where Eric Faline concludes that Marx is an intellectual swindler and that's the funny part because he can't answer the infinite regression question and flips out and says don't ask the question and then calls the hypothetical questioner a name you're an egotist you you exist therefore obviously you exist don't ask me questions about where everything came from even though literally it's in the midst of a discussion of where everything came from which is that man begot man and became man through the historical processes that made man into man Marx continues you can reply I

do not want to postulate the nothingness of nature Etc I want to ask you about its Genesis just as I ask uh the anatomist about the formation of Bones Etc Marx is about to flip out again Mark says but for the Socialist man the entire so-called history of the world is nothing but the creation of man through human labor nothing but the emergence of nature for man so he has the visible irrefutable proof of his birth through himself of his Genesis since the real existence of man and nature has become evident in practice through sense

experience because man has thus become evident for man as the being of Nature and nature for man as the being of man the question about an alien being that's God by the way about a being above nature in man a qu which that's the Gnostic conception of God by the way as it is an alien being a question which implies the admission of the universality of nature in man has become impossible in practice atheism as the denial and this is the this is the punchline all that was the fun part and this is the punchline

atheism as the denial of this unreality has no longer any meaning for atheism is a negation of God and postulates the existence of man through this negation but socialism as socialism no longer stands in any need of such a mediation it proceeds from the theoretically and pra practically C ous consciousness of man that means real world consciousness of man through the senses and of nature as the essence socialism is man's positive self-consciousness no longer mediated through the abolition of religion just as real life as man's positive reality no longer mediated through the abolition of private

property through communism communism is the position as the negation of the negation pause of what communism is the position of the negation of the negation of two things God and private property communism is the position as the negation of the negation of God atheism is the negation of God and socialism theoretically and practically sensuous consciousness of man that social ISM or communism is the negation of the negation of belief in God so when how does that work why is that it because when you believe in God you are unable this is z opium of the

masses argument you are unable to perceive the sources of your suffering because you've been numbed to them through your faith so you are no longer you're not able you're imposed by this alien being imposed upon so that you can't understand the nature the true nature of your suffering because you don't understand the true nature of your suffering you'll never do anything to change it or end it and when you decide that you're experiencing your real misery in life then you will decide no I don't need to pray about it I need to do something about

it and when you decide to go do something about it what you'll realize is that it was never God it was us together socially working one for another that makes it all work and then you arrive at socialism so the negation of the negation of belief in God is socialism and he says it right there and the abolition of religion and the abolition of private property together form communism and communism is the position as the negation of the negation and it's hence the actual phase necessary for the next stage of historical development in the process

of human emancipation and Rehabilitation it's not that we're just going to free ourselves from our um Fallen state or our estranged state or our alienation or our exploit ation or our expropriation we're not just going to free ourselves human emancipation from that we're going to have human Rehabilitation we're going to remember who we really are which is that we're socialists we're Communists at heart and Marx finishes this passage by saying communism is the necessary form and the dynamic principle of the immediate future but communism as such is not the goal of human development the form

of human society so communism itself is also just a stepping stone to a complete Liberation but here's what we get to take away communism is the real negation of the negation in Marxism it's absolute it's it's primitive communism as a model of the ideal Society gets negated by productive forms that involve property that gets individual property I guess that gets negated again into communism communism is the negation of the negation so it is uh the succession uh of of human history is communism so communism is literally a successor religion I used to give Wes Yang

uh for calling woke successor ideology but it turns out here it is rooted for real in Marxist lingo um atheism Marx gave us is the negation of religion and communism is the successor of the negation of religion so it is the negation of that negation and Socialism or socialist Consciousness as as a faith is therefore the successor of religion through dialectical negation that's why Antonio gry famously said that socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity and this is marks at his religious but um it's also marks in his more practical uh Global communist

Vision right and so in that practical Vision we just heard in capital earlier in the podcast that uh communism is the negation of the negation of primitive communism so tribal communism goes through productive phases uh and then returns to Global communism and um what we heard in capital really puts it together and leads us back to where we started the China model and the ESG mirror of the China model we could basically call them both the China model because they both benefit China uh how about that ESG is designed to benefit China and the China

model the dung shaing theory is designed to benefit China and in fact they work exactly play the same way to benefit China how about that um just to to drag it back to Capital though markx narrowed it right down for us the microcosm within the microcos or macrocosm I mean um capitalism expropriated those huge land owners and the huge and all the small Proprietors sorry ex I did that backwards capitalism expropriated all of the uh small Proprietors and then socialism will expropriate the huge owners uh as the negation of the negation to lead us on

the primose path to Communism and that's exactly what Mark said is that socialism is going to expropriate the expropriators so back to that passage from capitalism let's look at it again along with the constantly diminishing numbers of the magnets of capital who usurp and monopolize all advantages of this process of transformation grows the mass of misery op oppression slavery degradation exploitation imagine if you got your religion out of the way have no way to cope with that so you'd become revolutionary radicalized but with this too grows the Revolt of the working class A Class always

increasing in numbers and disciplined United organized by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself the Monopoly of capital becomes a Fetter upon the mode of production which has sprung up and flourished along with and under it centralization of the means of production and socialization of labor at last reach a point where they become incompatible with their capital integument this integument is burst asunder the nail of capitalist private property sounds the expropriators are expropriated so that's how you're going to get there that's a revolution the key observation to make here is that the

form of Monopoly Capital will come into being and then will be co-opted by the workers that's marks his vision he could have written this down in a lot fewer than 500 Pages Marx says that this will be necessarily a violent process but it will be less violent and less protracted than the emergence of capitalism beating down all the small Artis and feudal producers um and that Monopoly Capital thing is very important for our time because as we continue to move more and more toward Monopoly Capital that's what they're seizing you'll notice that Communists tend to

seize Monopoly power and they tend to seize choke points and that's exactly what we're seeing happen so turning back to Capital remember Marx says that socialism is the negation of a negation which is the rise of capitalism from the earlier form of productive forces then being negated and that socialism in fact as the negation of the negation rests a top the productivity of those early phases without negating their essential form in other words we've got to have the corporate organization as a basis of the product the the rise of productive forces in order to have

something for socialists to work with so that it doesn't turn into a primitive mud hut which is what it does in practice which is what Mark says is crude communism and what it leads to okay so we're supposed to have an uplifted or succeeded or superseded communism that will be National and Global and will have a high level of production even though nobody uh has to work or something and the money phrasing again we'll return to that and then we'll close up here the capitalist mode of appropriation the result of the capitalist mode of production

produces capitalist private property this is the first negation of of individual private property is founded on the labor of the proprietor but capitalist production begets with the inexorability of a law of nature its own negation it is the negation of the negation this does not reestablish private property for the producer but gives him individual property based on the acquisition of the capitalist era based on the acquisition of the capitalist era that is on cooperation and the possession in common of the land and the means of production so what I just said is born out this

does not reestablish private property for the producer but gives them individual property based on the acquisition of the capital Ser you're not going back to private property ownership as we go through this transition we're going to have individual property which means stuff that you can have access to but that's common communally owned and it's going to be based on the acquisition I think that's a fancy word for theft of that which was produced in the capitalist era um and markx of course believed as we can see that the full expression of the capitalist era is

in fact Monopoly Capital that then through its own internal contradiction and its own form having become socialized production can easily be transformed into state capital through the expropriation of the expropriators as it turns out forcing communism in the 20th century didn't work because it was going up against Capital rather than recognizing that Capital has to be usurped it has to be the transformation has to be done on the acquisition of capitalism that's what he said right the the acquisition of the capitalist era is what it has to be built upon which means for socialism to

work it has to acquire Monopoly Capital power they tried to force that in these situations like in Soviet Union and People's Republic of China into a feudal society that didn't have forces of production in a industrial sense and so they tried to build those forces of production on communist or socialist Theory and it didn't work out they think they're in a different position now now they have this 20th century made the world Rich you have a fascist production model running in China you have an increasingly fascist production model still operating the west but bringing it

down so that China can rise and [Music] um the future program is going to be built on the Acquisitions of the capitalist ERA this time not on feudal backwards things very different and that's why it's going to require like we started at the beginning with a social credit system in order to manage social governance and the Socialist market economy AKA denist system now nearly all of the commentary I've ever heard on this key passage of marks in capital that we've talked about here um usually it references his thoughts about the negation of the negation and

focuses on the emergence of individual property and whatever individual property might refer to uh for example if you go back and listen to my podcast I did about kohito and de growth um from Marx and the anthropos scine the that entire discussion is really about what individual property looks like in a commonwealth where Commonwealth doesn't mean like Virginia it means like literally everything is held in common all the wealth is owned in common um so I've seen very little commentary my point being my very I've seen very little commentary talking specifically about that last Clause

that key clarifying Clause that this is all going to be based on cooperation and the possession in common of the land and the means of production and again I remind you the dest system dung sha ping theory is one country two systems the systems are communist and fascist and the um rather explicitly so and that the way that it works is that people are free to pursue private interests and become wealthy AKA individual property but all of the land all of the raw materials and the heavy Capital are owned in common by the CCP so

the means of production in the land are owned in common by the CCP but people are allowed to pursue their own private interests through that so now we can talk about some real negations of the negation so that we can get to the negation of the negation of the negation I guess or the successor of the successor uh or that which supersedes 20th century communism and leads us into 21st Century communism just to throw around all of our buzzwords so for a century or so we've forced the Socialist experiment in various places and we can

say with some clarity how things work out uh there are feudal attempts and there are capitalist attempts both being put under attack by Communists so in backwards feudal societies like Russia and China backwards being the Soviet word for it by the way um when they negated by communism by a violent beard Revolution which seems to be the only thing that works enforced into what they called actually existing socialism that bureaucratized very quickly it actually had strong fascistic totalitarian elements and then eventually it all collapses um the negation of the negation of feudal societies through communist

practice is societal collapse of the productive forces which then has to build back better I suppose is the phrase um so what is the negation of the negation of a feudal state by Marxist practice it's a failed state in economic desperation controlled by a cartel like oligarchy uh it's actually usually a kleptocracy of either state or business interests that managed to cleave onto power in that collapsing transition capitalist societies usually don't succeed in being negated by socialist practice or by socialism at all because the business World basically rejects it and it never gets off the

ground it's also very unpopular with free people to try to steal their freedom for a pipe dream especially when they can see around the world that it's causing the deaths of hundreds of millions of people I should say deaths and suffering and and uh destruction of hundreds of millions of lives so if the Socialist attack in a capitalist country is is sufficiently threatening what has happened is that there generates a giant reaction and it's commonly come to believe when it's sufficiently organized communist takeover that there's only one way to stop it which is by turning

to fascism which can organize people like a bundle of sticks to fight back against the lockstep vision of the completely zealous and and insane Communists um and of course modern Western Nations right now are getting their test on this so the negation of the negation of a capitalist state by Marxist practice ends up not to be communism as markx predicted but rather fascism fascism is what you get unless of course we're just able to successfully repel the Marxist practice in the first place if we when we can keep our society a republic can be capped

don't lose hope but Marx therefore didn't quite have it although we heard in capital where this is going to go the negation of the negation of capitalism is not socialism that leads to Communism it is socialistic parasitism that triggers fascism fascism is the negation of the negation of a capitalist Society let me say that again in case the people in the back missed it fascism is the negation of the neg ation of a capitalist Society so Communists always go and rescue Marx from himself by bringing him back in in some new light and focusing on

some other one line or another line kind of like how um Lenin believed he cracked the code of what Marx and Engles truly meant by developing his Vanguard model and coito believes that he figured out what marks really meant by developing degrowth well Lenin's Vanguard model I guess um worked in the context that it worked but required figuring out a theory of productive forces that he could never figure out how to unleash and that's where we get the collapse of China and the rise of the the China model um ma China collapses through the cultural

revolution in the end really at the Great Leap Forward and then through the cultural revolution again uh very badly dung shellping enters into this chaos as we discussed at the beginning and you end up with a fascistic integrated pin Market that they call socialist market economy total oxymoron and that is the China model and that is the negation of the negation of the negation absolute Calamity was the negation of maist socialism feudalism was negated by socialism socialism was negated in destruction and collapse and dunga ping does a negation of the negation of the negation with

the help of the United States state department Henry Kissinger uh brazinski Rockefeller they David Rockefeller and uh some other Chinese fellows like th Chan and that model the China model is the negation of the negation of the negation right desperation is what allowed it to happen dun sha Pang was desperate to rebuild his country to build back better and he rebuilt he rebuilt with a fascist model without ever abandoning the theoretical idea of Communism one country two systems open up let there be a market but the market will the CCP sorry the market will be

controlled by the CCP because the CCP will own and control all land all raw materials all Heavy Capital private interests can run whatever fascist corporatist model they want on this state-owned Capital to the glory of socialism as dun shaing had it and they can get as rich as they want so that they might have what it takes to unleash the productive forces and build China back better and so what you end up with in this successor model or superseded model is a fascist economy that maintains the basic Spirit of Communism or in other words you

have the Practical idea being the fascist economy and the theoretical idea being the basic Spirit of Communism that's the way dun xaing phrased it with all centralized power located in the PRC uh and the the CCP being its uh it's its head running a democratic centralism again dung called this socialism with Chinese characteristics but it is in fact communism with fascistic characteristics and the negation of the negation of the negation of feudalism therefore was the China model under dung sha ping Theory which has been Advanced since through Xi Jinping Theory which is similar but it

with even more social control and a tighter grip on the corporate environment combined with the exploited positioning in the global manufacturing trade and a social credit system to make sure that this power can't be challenged and that is population is compliant we'll just remind you the money phrase from Marx said the capitalist mode of appropriation the results of the capitalist mode of production produces capitalist private property this is the first negation of individual private property is founded on the labor of the proprietor but capitalist production begets with the inex inexorability of an of a law

of nature its own negation it is the negation of the negation it does not reestablish private property for the producer but it gives him individual property based on the acquisition of the capitalist era that is on cooperation and the possession in common of the land and of the means of production AKA dung sha ping Theory this is dung shell ping theory in practice it does not say possession in common of the products of production merely the means of production this allows productive forces to be Unleashed through fascist production models and dun shing's hybrid model is

the successor model to maist Communism socialism with Chinese characteristics succeeds maist communism by incorporating fascism as its economic engine and ESG does exactly the same thing in reverse because it's attacking a successful productive prolific capitalist economy it puts a bridal on capitalism in the name of sustainability and inclusion that's where maru's arguments from onedimensional man and the ESS and Liberation came in that we talked about before so um an important point though when we talk about maruza is that maruza realized that in the West in capitalist societies one of the forces that we have to

deal with in capitalist culture so to speak is that the working class is stabilized and conservative and counterrevolutionary they don't want a revolution so now you have in the west the ability to say you know what we can have a communism that no longer tokenizes the worker and therefore has to pretend that it hates corporations China was in desperate Straits and it could claim a gigantic humanitarian win by building out a market and in fact it raised a billion people out of poverty while imperiling the entire world but nevertheless they could claim a gigantic win

here in the West we had the problem Communists had the problem I should say actually we didn't Communists had the problem that they can't abandon the working class to whom they built around whom they built everything that Marx has written everything and maruza is like no they're stabilized we can move on we need a new working class he said a new proletariat so he Imports maest identity politics in American identity categories cultural identity categories to form a new proletariat and there you get the basis of your score for ESG the gcore is ultimately the most

important score because it allows a Soviet uh stakeholder Soviet model to design how corporations are going to be run and in particular that they're going to implement the social justice program that is American maoism the whole program of ESG operates like an organized cartel environment for doing business with State support that is coordinated and facilitated under What's called the public private partnership model or stakehold older capitalism which I told you already is stakeholder sovietism which is daada economic fascism that's operating now not beneath the state but above the state and controlling the state pulling the

strings of the soall deep State and it forces the implementation of the environmental and social requirements to achieve degrowth which is the inverse or negation of capitalism so that we can end up with a fascism with communist character istics so the negation of the negation of the negation of our capitalist Society is sustainable and inclusive capitalism which is a capitalism sort of it's a fascism really bridled by a stakeholder Soviet comprised of So-Cal of managers and so-called experts just as Lenin intended the Vanguard to be who owe nothing to the stabilized and now conservative working

class but this is the same model that you have run by the CCP in China with the single inversion that the state is not yet on top but the UN really as a um will be would be wants to be Global government is actually on top because ESG is all designed to service the United Nations and its sustainable development agenda this is the successor or sucessor if you want of capitalism a bridled fascist corporate environment run by a financial cartel that's implementing communism for the masses but definitely not for the oligarchs and handing the torch

to the largest communist country in history so in summary Marx called communism the riddle of History solved and it knows itself to be the solution he also called it the negation of the negation that solution is the negation of the negation of the negation I should say of the 20th century modes the negation of both actually existing socialism and fascism into a single totalitarian system that anuls yet keeps the essential characteristics of both failed systems so in other words the suers session of Communism and capitalism both the supersession of industrialization to use that language is

communism 3.0 a corporatist communism 21st century communism and it is the successor of the model of 20th century industrial and State communism and his Capital uh capitalist rivals in the west that's the world that we live in today that is what is being built and yes indeed it is communist communism 3.0 21st century communism which is Marxist succession through the China model which Accords exactly with what Marx said the negation of the negation would be in capital near the very end as we read so in China they've built the new model of Communism in the

west with ESG we copy the new model of Communism and so the last stage before its final negation will be that these two systems are separate and different and competing in the end they will merge and we will have one Global communist system but the problem is besides all the Tyranny all the Death all the control the social credit system the complete lack of Freedom the eventual grinding down is that communism only works when it can steal from other places it cannot actually produce productive socialism in China does not exist not really China thrives not

because of its ability to Marshall productive forces but because of its ability to generate huge savings in production costs and a huge consumer market and basically the Henry Ford Model is what's being played out there um for Western corporations and is bleeding Western Nations Rich Western Nations dry to do it meanwhile figuring out ways which it could be sustained for a while on this to exploit the world to steal all of its material resources the question is is what happens when it's one global system can they still do that well they believe that they can

and that they will and I believe that they can't and that billions will die but of course that's likely to be part of the problem or program because think back to what maruza said as I as I told you in one-dimensional man in chapter 9 near the end where he says of course this free society that he envisions will require a reduction in the future population of the world and he wrote that when the population of the world was about 3.4 billion people less than half of what it is today so they need fewer of

us to make their sustainable economy work in the long run and it's very concerning that's not the point we're not going to digress we'll finish what's happening in the world today is communism it's unabashedly communism it's obviously communism it's communism if you look at what's happening with eyes that can see and ears that can hear it's communism if you read the key phrases from Carl marks about what communism is meant to be that's the world that we live in that's the thing that's happening we are in the midst of a global Communist Revolution and we'd

better wake up and we'd better stop it [Music] [Applause] [Music]