000001_debate_with_jacobin_magazine

A debate with the Jacobin Magazine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2wgkp2CYYc&t=3766s

00:00 
the socialist argument is that in a 
00:01 
different sort of system workers can in 
00:03 
fact elect management run their own 
00:05 
forms bring new products and services to 
00:08 
market without the need for capitalist 
00:10 
wood Bhaskar really want to live in a 
00:13 
society in which birth control is 
00:16 
available if and only if a majority of 
00:20 
workers votes for it business owners get 
00:23 
to impose working conditions that have 
00:25 
given a good alternative 
00:26 
most people would reject we don't have 
00:28 
freedom lovers under socialism so please 
00:31 
give us a little bit more assurances 
00:32 
rather than fake responses if it's 
00:34 
necessary would you throw people in 
00:36 
prison for violating your values okay 
00:42 
while people are getting situated here 
00:45 
welcome everyone welcome to the Soho 
00:47 
forum it's wonderful to see so many 
00:48 
people here this is a monthly debate 
00:51 
series that we actually hope hold 
00:53 
further downtown most of the time but 
00:55 
this was a very popular event so we have 
00:57 
changed locations my name is Naomi 
01:00 
Brockwell and as a co-founder of the 
01:02 
series I'm absolutely delighted to be 
01:04 
here as a guest moderator tonight for 
01:06 
this very exciting debate the resolution 
01:09 
is socialism is more effective than 
01:12 
capitalism in bringing freedom to the 
01:14 
masses in favor of this resolution we 
01:16 
have bhaskar Sankara who's the founding 
01:18 
editor and publisher of the Jacobin 
01:20 
magazine and arguing against this 
01:22 
resolution we have Jean Epstein who's 
01:24 
the director of the surco forum format 
01:26 
format economics editor and book review 
01:29 
editor of Barron's so really really 
01:31 
wonderful having you both here is gonna 
01:33 
be very exciting tonight so up now while 
01:38 
everyone is going through their voting 
01:39 
procedure I want to introduce to you a 
01:42 
person that I'm a big big fan of he is 
01:45 
of course part of the part of the 
01:47 
problem podcast he is a very well known 
01:50 
and very funny comedian Dave Smith and 
01:53 
he'll be providing a warm-up act this 
01:54 
evening can you please give him a very 
01:56 
warm welcome to the stage 
01:57 
[Applause] 
02:01 
is this on oh okay hey what's going on 
02:04 
everybody 
02:05 
come on give yourselves a round of 
02:06 
applause for coming out tonight huh this 
02:09 
is gonna be fun 
02:11 
socialism vers capitalism the great 
02:14 
debate of our time and I I am a free 
02:19 
market libertarian I just happened to be 
02:20 
a shitty dresser that's a coincidence so 
02:22 
don't let that don't let that throw you 
02:24 
off or anything 
02:26 
all right good they can take a job how I 
02:28 
don't usually you know when we do these 
02:30 
things it's usually very libertarian 
02:32 
leaning but now we got some free-market 
02:35 
people here some socialists but I think 
02:37 
we can all agree that Trump is doing a 
02:40 
great job so there's a lot there's a lot 
02:43 
that we come together uh-huh there's 
02:45 
like four people who took that literally 
02:46 
and then the rest of the forum a couple 
02:49 
were right there but you know hey look 
02:50 
we may have some differences but at 
02:52 
least we're here we're gonna settle them 
02:54 
peacefully I think an Tifa might come 
02:57 
any minute but I just I hoped for now we 
02:59 
can have some fun I don't know I heard a 
03:02 
socialist told me once that that 
03:05 
libertarians American libertarians stole 
03:08 
the word libertarian from you guys is 
03:11 
that is that true 
03:12 
because I there is right like in Europe 
03:14 
the word libertarian was more associated 
03:16 
with like left-wing economics and then 
03:19 
Americans took that but really liberals 
03:22 
took our word and then we took your 
03:25 
because we just didn't have anything but 
03:28 
if it make if it makes you feel better 
03:29 
don't think of it as a stealing your 
03:31 
word just think of it as us 
03:33 
redistributing it to a different class 
03:35 
of people who needed it more than you 
03:38 
did I don't does that make it go down 
03:41 
any better no probably not what I don't 
03:45 
know what else can we come together on 
03:47 
besides obviously our love for Donald 
03:50 
Trump 
03:51 
we all were all anti-war probably right 
03:54 
yeah there we go someone's excited about 
03:58 
that that's what I like about like the 
04:00 
Socialists at least you guys are usually 
04:01 
pretty consistent on that one unless you 
04:04 
know Obama's doing it but other than 
04:05 
that you guys you guys are great 
04:08 
whenever a Republican is going to war 
04:09 
you're usually against that so let's say 
04:11 
at least 50% of the time 
04:13 
preciate it Tahoe Donald Trump do you 
04:16 
guys like to the Socialists at least 
04:18 
enjoy the kind of burn it down aspect of 
04:21 
Donald Trump yeah I thought I thought 
04:24 
some of you guys might at least like 
04:26 
that right now oh when did you guys 
04:28 
become such pussies I thought you were 
04:30 
revolutionaries don't burn it down we 
04:32 
like our iPhones now all right it's fun 
04:38 
huh the thing that Donald Trump's grab 
04:41 
people by I'm sorry did I not I should 
04:45 
watch my mouth on these things I 
04:46 
apologize 
04:47 
I knew the left wing was gonna be a 
04:48 
problem for me on this was that was that 
04:50 
a microaggression I don't know I don't 
04:52 
understand your language I'm - I don't 
04:55 
know maybe if I was younger I would 
04:56 
understand when to draw the line I'm out 
04:59 
of the game okay I'm married my wife is 
05:00 
here so you can't me to make all right 
05:02 
I'm out of this my wife is here she's 
05:05 
beautiful and she's and we're expecting 
05:08 
our first baby in in seven weeks 
05:10 
yeah that's how you get the left wing 
05:12 
off your back 
05:14 
what come on I would be a father I love 
05:17 
my wife she's incredible also I could 
05:20 
not be single in the me to moment 
05:21 
anymore I don't know how I don't know 
05:24 
how these young men navigate those 
05:25 
waters but I was like I got to get out I 
05:27 
don't you know like how do you even do 
05:29 
it if you're like a 20 year old single 
05:31 
guy you just like you go up to a girl 
05:33 
and you're like can I buy you a drink 
05:35 
and she's like actually I'm gonna call 
05:37 
the cops so that did and you're like I 
05:39 
don't think she likes me 
05:40 
I okay sensitive subject all right I 
05:46 
thought the shitty clothes thing I 
05:47 
should have gone back to that okay no 
05:49 
problem - some of you someone said they 
05:52 
did when I said the Donald Trump burn it 
05:54 
down think you kind of liked it nobody's 
05:56 
ever respected the presidency less than 
05:59 
now right at least that's that's 
06:02 
something and no one can deal with that 
06:05 
guy now you say I think Bernie Sanders 
06:07 
might have done a decent job debating 
06:10 
him did you guys Bernie fans know 
06:14 
all right they're not very enthusiastic 
06:15 
but they're there I don't you know I 
06:19 
disagree with most of his policies but 
06:21 
when it comes down to it I'm a New York 
06:23 
Jew I kind of love that guy like there's 
06:25 
just something there's something about 
06:27 
it 
06:28 
I mean I know he's in Vermont now but 
06:29 
that guy is a New York Jew to the core 
06:31 
there is you can't you can't take that 
06:34 
out of him I liked his style like I like 
06:37 
how Bernie Sanders debated Hillary 
06:40 
Clinton like like he just he debated 
06:42 
like he was just going somewhere else 
06:44 
and then they were like hey before we go 
06:47 
to dinner you got to stop off and debate 
06:49 
Hillary Clinton for a little bit and he 
06:51 
was like okay let's do it you know like 
06:53 
yours and they were like you want to 
06:55 
maybe run a comb through your hair he's 
06:56 
like what was the time I mean I like 
06:57 
just to go didn't even care I liked that 
07:01 
part Bernie sander 
07:02 
this may not make any sense but like I 
07:06 
feel like Bernie Sanders like when he's 
07:08 
giving a speech like he's just like the 
07:10 
1% and health care and all this I feel 
07:13 
like if you went on stage and just took 
07:14 
him and like moved him this way he would 
07:17 
just keep giving the speech this way 
07:19 
does that does that make sense at all 
07:24 
I'm not I don't mean to like I'm not 
07:27 
making fun of him for that it's just 
07:28 
like an observation but I'm a 
07:30 
libertarian I'd say about 90% of us are 
07:33 
somewhere on the autism spectrum so I'm 
07:34 
not like trying to if we cured or autism 
07:38 
tomorrow libertarian vanishes like 
07:40 
there's no more of us that's that we 
07:42 
just throw in the towel at that point I 
07:45 
don't know I'm very excited I am very 
07:48 
excited to see how this uh 
07:49 
this debate unfolds it is a super 
07:52 
interesting topic I mean no matter who 
07:54 
wins I hope you all that we will still 
07:57 
live in a neoliberal warfare state like 
08:00 
that's not going away it doesn't matter 
08:01 
how many good points are made up here 
08:03 
tonight we're all still going to be 
08:05 
angry that's another thing libertarians 
08:08 
and socialists have in common 
08:10 
we never win nothing ever goes our way 
08:14 
like Democrats and Republicans they get 
08:17 
to feel good sometimes we just always 
08:19 
have to explain why the person you think 
08:22 
we like still sucks and that's it's 
08:25 
exhausting 
08:27 
I do look maybe it's my bias but I do 
08:31 
feel like the socialism is a very I feel 
08:37 
like the hatred of capitalism I should 
08:39 
say is a little bit of a privileged 
08:43 
opinion I know I know 
08:46 
listen I I know you guys clap your ears 
08:48 
or whatever it's fine you agree they 
08:50 
don't agree but I just feel like look 
08:52 
I'm just giving my thought I think that 
08:55 
you wouldn't like I know abuse a lot of 
08:57 
you socialist you you hate capitalism 
09:00 
and it's excesses and you go to like 
09:03 
Times Square and it's just like this is 
09:05 
disgusting and I get it it is it's like 
09:07 
coca-cola and McDonald's as billboards 
09:10 
everyone's just like consumerism and but 
09:13 
I just think only like a privileged 
09:17 
person from a rich country would see 
09:21 
that like my point is no one comes over 
09:23 
from a third-world country 
09:25 
to Times Square and they're like oh the 
09:27 
consumerism like no one comes from 
09:32 
Africa and they're just like oh my god 
09:33 
the marketing is just separate they come 
09:35 
over and they're like holy food 
09:37 
look at this food everywhere this is 
09:41 
amazing I don't even have to hunt it I 
09:43 
just have to give you some of this paper 
09:45 
Fiat paper by the way it's not backed by 
09:49 
anything 
09:54 
I'm micro aggressed again I can't help 
09:57 
myself sir hi sir I really would like 
10:02 
you Wow 
10:08 
he just said great spiel let's have the 
10:11 
debate ensuring that I can't possibly 
10:14 
leave now I have to stay for a long time 
10:16 
I can't possibly leave on that I can't 
10:19 
let you pulling me off stage sir sir you 
10:23 
would lose a fight to my grandpa 
10:25 
you're not gonna bully me off of stage 
10:27 
okay you disagree with me I'm sorry if I 
10:30 
stereotyped Africa how about this for my 
10:33 
next comedy set you can make me a list 
10:35 
of all of the offensive subjects I'm not 
10:37 
allowed to talk about 
10:40 
then you can shove it up your ass okay 
10:41 
thank you guys very much you'd rather 
10:42 
debate I appreciate it 
10:44 
[Applause] 
10:51 
and on that note let's invite the 
10:54 
speakers onto the stage I trust that 
10:56 
everyone has already put in their votes 
10:58 
into the Soho vote.com website I'm 
11:02 
looking at it right now there are a lot 
11:03 
of responses here so thank you all for 
11:05 
that I'll be closing in just a moment 
11:07 
but let me go ahead and introduce our 
11:09 
speakers so arguing for the resolution 
11:11 
is Bhaskar Sankar who's the founding 
11:14 
editor and publisher of the Jacobin 
11:16 
magazine a leading voice of the American 
11:18 
left he's also the author of the 
11:20 
forthcoming socialist manifesto the case 
11:22 
for radical politics in an era of 
11:25 
extreme inequality which will be out in 
11:27 
April from basic books arguing against 
11:30 
the resolution as Jean Epstein the 
11:31 
director of the Soho forum is the former 
11:33 
economics editor and book reviewer 
11:35 
editor of Barron's and once more the 
11:37 
resolution tonight is socialism is more 
11:41 
effective than capitalism in bringing 
11:43 
freedom to the masses can you please 
11:45 
give our debaters a very warm welcome to 
11:46 
the stage so I am closing the voting now 
12:04 
for anyone who didn't get your voice and 
12:06 
just realize that in order for your vote 
12:08 
to be counted you have to be voting 
12:10 
twice so and Jean will be back in one 
12:13 
second this is the perfect moment for 
12:15 
him to be leaving fortunately 
12:19 
fortunately he has done this many many 
12:22 
times and understands the format so I 
12:23 
will go ahead and explain the format to 
12:25 
all of you so I'll give you a couple 
12:28 
more seconds to vote on there if anyone 
12:31 
hasn't already and so we start off with 
12:33 
a 15-minute opening remarks from each 
12:35 
person starting with the affirmative and 
12:38 
Bhaskar and then Jean will give his case 
12:40 
for the negative after that we have five 
12:42 
minutes of rebuttal from each side and 
12:45 
then I'm going to be inviting the 
12:47 
audience to ask questions so you will 
12:49 
notice that we in this very dark room 
12:51 
that you can't see them at the moment we 
12:52 
do have two microphones at the front of 
12:54 
the stage so if you are up the top in 
12:56 
the gallery I saw that a lot of people 
12:58 
have has since arrived and that's filled 
12:59 
up so I will be letting you guys know if 
13:02 
you wanted to ask questions to either of 
13:03 
the debaters I'll be letting you know 
13:05 
when you 
13:05 
and make your way down and start lining 
13:07 
up there and the same goes for everyone 
13:08 
in the audience if you do want to ask 
13:10 
questions to either of the debaters then 
13:12 
I will be letting you know that the 
13:14 
microphones are gainer at the side 
13:16 
please don't line up before I announce 
13:18 
it because we'll just have a long line 
13:20 
of people there so after that we'll have 
13:23 
30 minutes of Q&A I will also at that 
13:26 
time invite the debaters to be asking 
13:27 
questions to each other he's back guys 
13:31 
yeah this is what a bit of very 
13:33 
one-sided debate without your team so 
13:35 
after that we will have five minutes 
13:37 
closing remarks from the affirmative 
13:39 
five minutes summary from the negative 
13:41 
and then we'll open up the final vote so 
13:43 
now that that is all clear we are ready 
13:47 
to begin I would like to invite Bhaskar 
13:49 
to give your opening establishing case 
13:51 
15-minute remarks 
14:00 
thank you all for for coming I should 
14:03 
say I'm a bit wary of the framing 
14:06 
actually I was a bit worried about even 
14:09 
about even coming but I took inspiration 
14:11 
from I don't know if any of you are a 
14:13 
basketball fans I'm very excited that 
14:14 
the season is starting start inspiration 
14:17 
from Jimmy Butler 
14:18 
you know you might make a scene but you 
14:20 
got to show up to get paid so I'm here 
14:23 
so I am worried about the framing 
14:26 
statement because it's an assertion that 
14:28 
could very well devolve into just 
14:30 
terminological debates 
14:32 
you know I say socialism means one thing 
14:35 
gene says capitalism means another I lay 
14:38 
at a socialist vision of a just world 
14:40 
gene says I'm comparing the messiness of 
14:43 
an actually functioning system with a 
14:45 
theoretical one so instead what I would 
14:47 
like to do is both lay out the 
14:50 
democratic socialist vision and explain 
14:51 
how reforms inspired by it and enacted 
14:54 
by Democratic socialists have furthered 
14:57 
the cause of human freedom so to begin 
15:00 
with I should say that democratic 
15:01 
socialism is not an anti liberalism we 
15:05 
stand in the radical spirit of the 
15:07 
Enlightenment the spirit of those 
15:08 
movements that called for liberty 
15:10 
equality and solidarity the problem that 
15:13 
socialists have with capitalism is that 
15:15 
it's both created the material wealth 
15:18 
necessary for us to bring about that 
15:21 
world but frustrated its actual 
15:23 
realization so India has a free press 
15:26 
that's a triumph of its social order but 
15:28 
30% of Indians are illiterate to fulfill 
15:31 
the promise of freedom of press in 
15:34 
actuality we need to have the right to a 
15:37 
universal high quality state-run 
15:39 
education so that's a logic of 
15:41 
democratic socialism pushing beyond the 
15:44 
logic of liberalism so similarly we do 
15:47 
have freedom today we're not living in 
15:50 
the worst of all possible worlds but 
15:52 
it's an unnecessarily limited freedom 
15:54 
it's a freedom mostly enjoyed by those 
15:57 
who own capitalist private property the 
16:00 
rest of us are at the mercy of those 
16:02 
people by private property socialists 
16:05 
don't mean personal items but those 
16:08 
things that give people who own them 
16:09 
power over those who don't take it 
16:12 
privately 
16:13 
workplace business owners get to impose 
16:16 
working conditions that have given a 
16:18 
good alternative 
16:18 
most people would reject and while 
16:21 
workers do most of the work at a job 
16:23 
owners have unilateral say over how 
16:25 
profits are divided so Jean would say 
16:28 
that this is merely an employment 
16:30 
contract while socialists say that 
16:32 
worker starve is not a fair choice 
16:35 
economic relations aren't free and 
16:37 
private these are contrasts that are 
16:39 
laid under duress their contracts that 
16:42 
undemocratically give some people 
16:45 
tremendous power over others now 
16:48 
capitalists and workers of course need 
16:49 
each other but it's an asymmetrical 
16:52 
dependency any employer needs an 
16:54 
individual employee less and that 
16:56 
employee needs an employer the this 
16:59 
realization is at the core of 
17:01 
working-class politics the the reason 
17:04 
why generations of working people have 
17:06 
organized collectively to bargain on the 
17:08 
shop floor and I've also tried to 
17:10 
influence politics at a national level 
17:12 
through political parties now let's look 
17:16 
at concrete examples of democratic 
17:18 
socialist politics in practice examples 
17:21 
that I would argue show the enhancement 
17:23 
of human freedom in action so we could 
17:27 
see existing societies take Europe's 
17:29 
welfare states in most cases built by 
17:32 
social democratic movements where 
17:35 
private property has been undermined 
17:37 
through the regulation of capital in 
17:40 
those societies the majority enjoy a 
17:43 
greater reign of range of choice and 
17:45 
they have a greater chance to reach 
17:47 
their god-given potential than I do in 
17:50 
the United States before I'm an atheist 
17:52 
I'm not sure why I said God but roll 
17:55 
with it those societies limit freedom 
17:57 
for people that own private property if 
18:00 
I owned a factory and I employ gene 
18:02 
there's a restriction on my freedom to 
18:06 
use a machinery that I purchased with 
18:08 
any given set of workers including gene 
18:10 
for more than 40 hours a week that 
18:14 
there's a restriction on my ability to 
18:16 
unilaterally dismiss gene if gene isn't 
18:19 
doing a good job and within the first 
18:21 
hour of screw up I want to dismiss him 
18:23 
and so forth but for the majority of 
18:26 
people who don't own 
18:27 
private property for people like Jean 
18:29 
they enjoy a greater range of choice and 
18:32 
decided their life outcomes deciding the 
18:36 
conditions of which they live every day 
18:37 
and a greater chance to reach their full 
18:39 
potential 
18:39 
they had this greater freedom not 
18:42 
because private property is upheld but 
18:45 
because the freedom for the minority who 
18:46 
owns private property is limited 
18:49 
fundamentally socialists believe in the 
18:51 
rights of people to the fruits of their 
18:53 
own labor of course we believe in 
18:56 
individual rights and individual freedom 
18:58 
but our individuality can only be 
19:00 
developed fully in a society embodying 
19:02 
the values of liberty equality and 
19:04 
solidarity 
19:05 
we don't want an all-powerful government 
19:09 
bureaucracy we don't want big corporate 
19:11 
bureaucracy to control our society 
19:13 
either social and economic decisions we 
19:16 
argue should be made by those with whom 
19:18 
they most affect so libertarians can't 
19:22 
go far enough to embrace a more 
19:25 
expansive vision of freedom that's 
19:27 
because a deeper freedom isn't 
19:28 
compatible with a world in which a few 
19:31 
own private property and the rest of us 
19:33 
are at their mercy is to survive it's 
19:35 
not primarily a question of the market 
19:37 
but that a private ownership and the 
19:39 
disparities of that entails 
19:41 
now what Jean may say if he was as sharp 
19:46 
and witty as me is that what you're 
19:48 
describing is a social system social 
19:50 
democracy a system where much of social 
19:53 
life is taken outside the sphere of the 
19:55 
market where extensive rights are 
19:57 
afforded to working people and so on 
19:59 
that might have been enacted even by 
20:02 
nominally socialist parties but that is 
20:04 
fundamentally fueled by wealth created 
20:07 
through private enterprise a Democratic 
20:10 
Socialist would have two replies the 
20:12 
first is of the rights I've described 
20:13 
above where rights were foisted upon 
20:17 
capitalists and enacted in most cases by 
20:20 
labor based parties communist regimes 
20:23 
rolled on authoritarian coercion but 
20:26 
also but out of the great workers 
20:27 
movements of the 19th and early 20th 
20:29 
century also came profound attempts to 
20:32 
humanize capitalism to make it more 
20:34 
democratic this progress these efforts 
20:37 
all dependent on wealth generated by 
20:40 
capitalism but capital everywhere and 
20:43 
always has fought against the 
20:45 
implementation of democracy and the 
20:47 
expansion of suffrage and once we got 
20:50 
democracy capitalism has always worked 
20:52 
to undermine it to make sure that the 
20:54 
power was never helmed in by democratic 
20:57 
processes by engaged and empowered 
21:00 
workers while were capital is so worried 
21:04 
about working in democratic societies 
21:07 
it's simple they thought that if working 
21:10 
people had the vote they wouldn't just 
21:12 
stop there they would extend democracy 
21:14 
for merely the political sphere into 
21:16 
democratic and social realms as well 
21:18 
that's why all parts of the social 
21:20 
movement call themselves social 
21:22 
democrats for much of its history 
21:24 
capitalists actually underestimated how 
21:27 
resilient their system is we do live in 
21:29 
a democratic capitalist society a 
21:31 
society that's been made more civilized 
21:33 
by the efforts of working-class 
21:34 
movements but simply every one of those 
21:38 
struggles every one of those efforts to 
21:39 
humanize a system to bring it closer to 
21:42 
our ideals has been despite the 
21:44 
resistance of capitalist to say that 
21:47 
you're a supporter of capitalism today 
21:49 
is not to say that if you're in favor of 
21:51 
markets I'm in favor of a system of 
21:53 
worker controlled forms operating in a 
21:55 
regular regulated market to say that our 
21:58 
capitalist is to say that you're in 
21:59 
favor of private property the rights of 
22:02 
individuals to own firms and employ 
22:05 
people and wage labor Democratic 
22:08 
socialists don't think of all capitals 
22:11 
of courses as parasites it might be in 
22:14 
our rhetoric but in fact it's not in our 
22:15 
analytical vision many capitalists do 
22:19 
contribute not only their individual 
22:21 
talents but managerial expertise to 
22:24 
enterprises and they often take on 
22:27 
tremendous amounts of entrepreneurial 
22:29 
risk in starting new ventures the 
22:32 
socialist argument is that in a 
22:33 
different sort of system workers can in 
22:35 
fact elect management run their own 
22:37 
forms bring new products and services to 
22:40 
market without the need for capitalist 
22:43 
we can do so of course in a society 
22:46 
where the necessities that one needs to 
22:48 
have a good life access a childcare 
22:50 
healthcare housing education all these 
22:52 
things are guaranteed as social 
22:54 
right and not something prone to 
22:56 
accidents of birth or the ability to pay 
22:58 
a market price for but if you're 
23:01 
depending defending capitalism once 
23:03 
again you're not defending markets 
23:04 
they've existed before capitalism and 
23:07 
they will exist after capitalism you 
23:09 
were defending a form of social 
23:11 
organization based on hierarchy and 
23:13 
exploitation most of our lives are spent 
23:18 
in unfree workplaces a few corporate 
23:21 
ceos make decisions that affect millions 
23:23 
of people and this tyranny bleeds over 
23:26 
into other spheres of life it undermines 
23:28 
even political democracy the noble dream 
23:32 
of liberty and justice for all has been 
23:34 
frustrated by how wealth and power are 
23:36 
distributed by how undemocratic 
23:38 
capitalism is and if we were to achieve 
23:41 
a deeper democracy an economic democracy 
23:44 
the Conor democracy that allows the 
23:46 
majority to live freer happier lives 
23:48 
then we would see that capitalism is a 
23:50 
barrier to that advance at its core you 
23:55 
know I'm a Backstreet Boy socialist you 
23:57 
know III I realized I wrote what I wrote 
23:59 
is very close to Backstreet Boys lyric 
24:01 
as I'm reading it but to assert these 
24:05 
social sort the moral worth of every 
24:08 
person matter you know who they are 
24:09 
where they came from or what they did I 
24:12 
added the last part with any luck future 
24:16 
generations will look back at a time 
24:18 
when when life outcomes were accidents 
24:19 
at Birth with shock and disgust the same 
24:22 
way we look back on more extreme form of 
24:24 
exploitation and oppression slavery 
24:26 
feudalism and so on that have already 
24:28 
been done away with if human beings have 
24:31 
the same inherent Worth and it's up to 
24:35 
you whether or not that's that's a case 
24:36 
then they must be free to fulfill their 
24:39 
potential to flourish in all their 
24:41 
individuality in order to realize this 
24:44 
expanse of freedom we need to guarantee 
24:47 
at least the basics of a good life to 
24:49 
all and given the opportunity to thrive 
24:52 
these people can then contribute to 
24:55 
society and create the conditions in 
24:57 
which others can do the same freedom for 
25:01 
working people today however means 
25:02 
limiting the freedom of those who 
25:05 
benefit from the inequalities and hair 
25:08 
in class society socialism is not so 
25:11 
much about trading freedom for equality 
25:13 
but rather posing the question of 
25:16 
freedom for whom and I would argue that 
25:19 
socialism is even an extension in a 
25:21 
sense of freedom for capitalist every 
25:24 
little fiber of a capitalist being is is 
25:27 
lost and the effort to remain 
25:29 
competitive in the marketplace 
25:31 
imagine if what Steve Jobs personality 
25:35 
would have been like if you would have 
25:36 
been able to flourish in other ways 
25:39 
instead of just being you know an 
25:40 
asshole call his dying day but it's not 
25:43 
Steve Jobs heart it's marking 
25:45 
competition so now imagine what a change 
25:48 
would be like for a young black American 
25:51 
to grow up in a society where they don't 
25:53 
have to settle for the worst schools the 
25:55 
worst healthcare the worst job or likely 
25:57 
to be subjugated the worst carceral 
25:59 
system on earth last point is something 
26:01 
I know we agree on I'll imagine what it 
26:04 
would be like for women if they were 
26:06 
more easily able to leave abusive 
26:09 
relationships or escape workplace 
26:11 
harassment with the help of strong 
26:13 
welfare state guarantees imagine our 
26:16 
future Einsteins and the vinci's 
26:18 
liberated from grinding poverty and 
26:21 
misery to pursue their great 
26:22 
intellectual and artistic work or forget 
26:25 
Einstein or DaVinci better yet imagine 
26:28 
ordinary people with ordinary abilities 
26:31 
having time after their twenty eight 
26:33 
hour work week to explore whatever 
26:35 
interests or hobbies director fancies or 
26:37 
simply enjoy the right to be bored the 
26:40 
deluge of bad poetry strange 
26:42 
philosophical blog posts that comedy 
26:45 
routines will sure be a sign of progress 
26:51 
every form of exploitation every form of 
26:54 
hierarchy from feudalism to slavery 
26:56 
onward have one seemed natural and 
26:59 
impossible to overcome one day I hope 
27:03 
people will look back at the needless 
27:05 
suffering in this abundant beautiful 
27:07 
planet of ours and recoil in horror 
27:10 
there is a different way there is a path 
27:12 
to freedom and I think that path 
27:14 
involves putting the market harnessing 
27:18 
the market by putting it behind 
27:21 
in the interest of human needs and 
27:23 
creating society in which ordinary 
27:25 
people have the freedom to control their 
27:28 
workplaces to own it to engage with 
27:33 
others in such a way that is not 
27:35 
possible 
27:36 
under capitalism when libertarians say 
27:39 
that they're defending a free system 
27:42 
they're locking in a form of freedom in 
27:46 
which we could escape as individuals an 
27:48 
individual worker can become a 
27:50 
capitalist but they're accepting that we 
27:53 
cannot collectively all reach this level 
27:56 
of creativity and freedom that being a 
28:00 
capitalist means in the society what I'm 
28:02 
posing is not the restriction of freedom 
28:04 
what I'm posing as a society in which we 
28:07 
could all flourish or reach our 
28:08 
potentials thank you 
28:11 
[Applause] 
28:19 
now Jane will present his 15 minute case 
28:22 
for the negative well thanks it's a 
28:30 
pleasure to debate this issue with 
28:33 
Bhaskar Sankara 
28:35 
Bhaskar became a socialist at age 
28:37 
fourteen and for me it happened at age 
28:40 
four I was a red diaper baby since my 
28:44 
mother was a card-carrying member of the 
28:47 
Communist Party and I have her FBI file 
28:50 
FBI file to prove it you could tell who 
28:53 
the FBI agents were in the party because 
28:56 
they were the only ones who paid their 
28:58 
dues on time and now at age fourteen I 
29:02 
distanced myself for my mother's Soviet 
29:05 
loyalties and adopted the vision of the 
29:08 
Democratic Socialist with whom Bhaskar 
29:10 
also associates socialist values are 
29:13 
still a part of me even though I've 
29:15 
abandoned conventional socialism because 
29:18 
I've struggled with the issue of freedom 
29:21 
I've recognized not just that capitalism 
29:25 
is more effective than socialism in 
29:28 
making freedom possible under Bhaskar 
29:31 
socialism the exercise of freedom would 
29:34 
be impossible but here's the good news 
29:37 
capitalism makes it possible for Bhaskar 
29:41 
to achieve socialism without tears 
29:44 
unconventional capitalist socialism that 
29:47 
will be far truer to the value of 
29:49 
freedom and to the other values that 
29:52 
Baskar espouses of equality and 
29:54 
democracy and my proposed route to 
29:58 
unconventional capitalist style 
30:00 
socialism will be a lot easier to 
30:02 
achieve than bass cars chosen route bass 
30:06 
goes to Tesco defines conventional 
30:08 
socialism in his essay will socialists 
30:11 
take my Kenny Loggins records his quote 
30:14 
socialist vision requires quote 
30:17 
abolishing private ownership of the 
30:20 
things we all need and use factories 
30:24 
banks offices natural resources 
30:27 
utilities communication and 
30:29 
transportation Orford infrastructure and 
30:31 
replacing it with 
30:32 
social ownership unquote Bhaskar would 
30:37 
therefore abolish private ownership of 
30:39 
the means of production which we do all 
30:42 
need and use although you can keep 
30:44 
personal property like Kenny Loggins 
30:46 
records now now let's define capitalism 
30:52 
capitalism is a system in which private 
30:55 
property rights in the means of 
30:56 
production are both permitted and 
30:59 
protected by law under bhaskar socialism 
31:02 
it would be unlawful for someone to 
31:05 
forcibly take you Kenny Loggins records 
31:07 
but it would also be unlawful to own 
31:10 
factories stores and offices under 
31:13 
capitalism would it would be unlawful 
31:16 
for someone to take your factory office 
31:19 
or store but otherwise the exercise of 
31:23 
property rights under capitalism 
31:25 
consists of a series of wide-open 
31:28 
choices about the way people organize 
31:31 
their enterprise how they pay themselves 
31:33 
and the goals they pursue Baska seems to 
31:38 
think that the only conceivable goal 
31:40 
under capitalism is the pursuit of 
31:43 
profit but that isn't even true today 
31:46 
just for starters of the nearly 30 
31:49 
million small business owners in the 
31:51 
u.s. probably about 10 million can 
31:53 
hardly be said to be pursuing profit 
31:56 
after they pay themselves as wage 
31:58 
earners servicing their own enterprise 
32:00 
there is no profit left over their 
32:03 
motivation is not profit but the 
32:05 
exercise of their freedom to run a 
32:08 
restaurant book store food truck grocery 
32:10 
store podcast blog or what have you war 
32:15 
the motive can be the practice of 
32:16 
religious freedom as with the Amish 
32:18 
Mennonites and acetic Jews or the motive 
32:21 
can be to live in a productive community 
32:23 
as with a kibbutzim in Israel or the 
32:25 
communal movement of the 1970s spawned 
32:29 
by the new left of which I was a part 
32:32 
the huge nonprofit sector includes 
32:36 
Jacobin magazine and the solo forum 
32:39 
basco and i commit funds to rent offices 
32:42 
and equipment from owners of that 
32:44 
property and we raise revenue 
32:46 
from a combination of product sales and 
32:49 
voluntary donations from people who gain 
32:51 
satisfaction by paying us to provide our 
32:55 
products as I believe Bhaskar recently 
32:58 
acknowledged publicly he is a capitalist 
33:01 
we are both capitalist and neither of us 
33:04 
is motivated by profit the point then is 
33:08 
that under capitalism you can run your 
33:11 
enterprise according to any of a whole 
33:13 
range of objectives each worker can draw 
33:16 
the same wage if everybody chooses all 
33:20 
that's required is that you cover your 
33:22 
costs which can be done through many 
33:24 
channels I'll talk about how Bhaskar can 
33:27 
capitalize on that in a minute in a 
33:30 
capitalist way but first let me explain 
33:33 
why freedom would have no chance under 
33:36 
his form of socialism for starters while 
33:40 
Bhaskar won't take on kenny loggins 
33:42 
records he will need to shut down the 
33:45 
nearly 50 billion in financing raised 
33:48 
every year through crowdfunding which 
33:51 
helps launch credit kenny loggins 
33:53 
wannabes he'll also need to outlaw the 
33:56 
many other private ways people raise 
33:58 
billions in funding to finance their 
34:00 
ventures and be prepared to imprison 
34:03 
those who defy the socialist law instead 
34:07 
economic decision-making would come 
34:10 
under democratic control so let's ask 
34:14 
how many muslim prayer rugs with the 
34:17 
Democratic majority of workers vote to 
34:19 
produce what share of construction 
34:22 
materials would a majority of workers 
34:24 
apportion to new mosques right now under 
34:28 
capitalism vegetarians and vegans 
34:30 
who together make up less than 10% of 
34:33 
the population have more options every 
34:36 
year what the majority of workers find a 
34:38 
need to produce vegan meat or milk 
34:41 
substitutes how important would worker 
34:43 
majorities consider hair products for 
34:46 
African Americans 
34:48 
Baskar has written that he wants 
34:51 
socialism to quote involve a commitment 
34:54 
to a free civil society especially for 
34:58 
oppositional voices unquote 
35:01 
admirable statement they Avast Bhaskar 
35:03 
but now imagine an oppositional voice 
35:06 
like mine that once the 
35:08 
democratically-elected planners to 
35:10 
commit resources to put on public 
35:12 
debates catering to libertarians who 
35:14 
support capitalism or an oppositional 
35:17 
voice that needs resources to publish 
35:20 
publicize the idea that the planners 
35:22 
themselves are corrupt will they really 
35:25 
back those who seek to criticize them 
35:28 
would Bhaskar really want to live in a 
35:32 
society in which birth control is 
35:35 
available if and only if a majority of 
35:38 
workers votes for it or would you prefer 
35:41 
a society in which private business can 
35:44 
produce contraceptives the Preferences 
35:47 
of a Democratic majority be damned if 
35:50 
contraception at every CVS and Walgreens 
35:53 
sounds better to bhaskar than popular 
35:56 
controlled he may actually be a less a 
35:59 
fair capitalist at heart or at least 
36:02 
he'll see why democratic socialism poses 
36:05 
a threat to the freedom he himself 
36:08 
treasures under capitalism the mere 
36:11 
existence of buyers like Muslims vegans 
36:14 
Orthodox Jews and libertarians like me 
36:17 
gives rise to suppliers of their needs 
36:20 
the litmus test of people who believe in 
36:24 
freedom is that they are willing to 
36:26 
tolerate the propagation propagation of 
36:28 
ideas and practices they dislike the 
36:32 
intolerance have no problem 
36:33 
welcoming ideas and practices they do 
36:36 
like as a believer in freedom Bhaskar 
36:40 
might have noticed the intolerant strain 
36:43 
in all societies including this one and 
36:46 
yet he wants us all to take our chances 
36:49 
with the potentially intolerant tyranny 
36:52 
of the majority to which we must all 
36:54 
respond no in Thunder the right to 
36:58 
private ownership of the means of 
36:59 
reduction is essential to freedom but 
37:03 
the freedom of course can be curbed by 
37:05 
repressive institutions and to a great 
37:07 
extent we're seeing that today but 
37:10 
without the right to private ownership 
37:12 
freedom doesn't stand 
37:14 
chance to begin with the throttling 
37:17 
under freedom of freedom under bhaskar 
37:19 
socialism would probably be worse than 
37:22 
I've described realistically that's 
37:26 
because most of us will not have enough 
37:28 
hours in the day or even any great 
37:31 
desire to closely monitor the detailed 
37:34 
decisions of the the democratically 
37:36 
elected planning boards the planners 
37:38 
will have to deal with complex supply 
37:40 
chains and must have the power to 
37:43 
reallocate workers from coops that need 
37:45 
to contract to others that need to 
37:48 
expand and here's why the planners will 
37:50 
have a perfect excuse for rejecting 
37:52 
projects they don't like the economic 
37:56 
reality of scarcity by scarcity I mean 
37:59 
the fact that what everybody wants 
38:01 
always adds up to more than there is 
38:05 
they can therefore reject projects they 
38:07 
don't like on the factual grounds that 
38:10 
the resources are simply not available 
38:14 
here's one happy outcome for Bhaskar 
38:17 
socialism those oppositional voices will 
38:20 
start asking for permission to solicit 
38:23 
funds from independent sources and with 
38:25 
those funds they'll launch their 
38:27 
products choosing to sink or swim in the 
38:30 
competitive marketplace on their own as 
38:32 
a lover of freedom 
38:34 
Basco will help lead the capitalist 
38:37 
counter-revolution to restore their 
38:39 
rights as he starts realizing that 
38:42 
freedom and private property rights are 
38:44 
inseparable 
38:46 
so crowdfunding will make a huge 
38:48 
comeback and a thousand other capitalist 
38:51 
flowers will be allowed to bloom I can 
38:54 
save Bhaskar the agony of going down 
38:57 
this route he is written quote workers 
39:01 
at all levels know how to make things 
39:03 
society needs that can run their 
39:06 
workplaces collectively cutting out the 
39:08 
middlemen who own private property 
39:11 
unquote so Bhaskar let's talk about how 
39:15 
workers under your leadership can cut 
39:18 
out those middlemen and build socialism 
39:21 
in the here and now by owning that 
39:23 
private property you could tap the power 
39:27 
of the average 
39:28 
the bottom half of income receivers in 
39:31 
the US account for one third of all 
39:35 
consumer spending and the bottom 
39:37 
four-fifths for nearly two thirds 
39:39 
imagine that Bhaskar could assemble a 
39:41 
minority accounting for just one-fifth 
39:43 
of consumer spending dedicated to 
39:46 
patronizing firms run according to 
39:48 
socialist values they would have a 
39:51 
consumer economy larger than all but a 
39:53 
relative handful of countries their 
39:56 
vision would be to create a huge sub 
39:58 
economy of interconnected firms 
40:00 
dedicated to socialist practices 
40:02 
Bhaskar has written that workers would 
40:05 
reject employment by capitalists quote 
40:07 
if given a fair alternative well 
40:11 
according to the Basque are then firms 
40:13 
owned and operated by workers would 
40:15 
provide that fair alternative so other 
40:18 
workers would join dedicated the 
40:20 
dedicating their savings and consumer 
40:23 
dollars to the worker owned firms firms 
40:25 
could be bootstrap through crowdfunding 
40:26 
money could be borrowed through the tax 
40:29 
advantage medium of employee stock 
40:31 
ownership plans there's also the 
40:33 
potential to tap the three point four 
40:36 
trillion in pension fund money currently 
40:39 
held by labor unions in the US and the 
40:42 
41 trillion held by unions worldwide 
40:45 
here's one's tractive a strategy the 
40:48 
profit margins of existing corporations 
40:50 
average 15% of revenue so the movement 
40:54 
commands so that if the movement 
40:56 
commands just 20 percent of the consumer 
40:58 
dollar it could target companies with 
41:00 
boycotts wipe out their profits and 
41:02 
acquire them on the cheap boycotting has 
41:05 
an honorable tradition going back to 
41:07 
Martin Luther King and Rehana Gandhi and 
41:09 
boycotts are free-market acts performed 
41:13 
by consenting adults by capitalist means 
41:16 
instead bhaskar wants to play the ugly 
41:20 
game of politics by trying to win voting 
41:23 
majorities to improve socialism top-down 
41:26 
through government edict my plan can 
41:28 
happen much sooner 
41:29 
since the minority will be all that is 
41:31 
needed to get the revolution going and 
41:33 
it would be a bottom up capitalist 
41:35 
revolution brought about people who walk 
41:38 
the walk rather than just talk the talk 
41:40 
we 
41:41 
capitalists could not object since it 
41:43 
would not infringe on anyone's exercise 
41:45 
of private property rights in capital 
41:48 
goods as a believer in freedom bhaskar 
41:52 
has no choice but to follow the route 
41:54 
I've outlined to build his socialist 
41:56 
vision in the here-and-now that was in 
41:59 
fact the goal of many of us in the new 
42:01 
left in the 1970s and we failed but that 
42:06 
doesn't necessarily mean that bhaskar 
42:09 
shouldn't try so VASCAR let's start 
42:12 
talking about building socialism through 
42:14 
capitalist means the only means worth 
42:17 
employing for freedom's sake now since 
42:22 
we know that VASCAR socialism the 
42:28 
abolition of private ownership of the 
42:30 
means of production is a non-starter 
42:32 
that it will suppress freedom since we 
42:35 
know that's the route the only route 
42:37 
that basco wants to go down this should 
42:40 
deal with most of his problems with 
42:42 
capitalism if he doesn't like the fact 
42:45 
that capitalists have too many rights 
42:47 
then boycott them organize you have the 
42:50 
power of the consumer behind you but if 
42:54 
he wants to talk about cherry-picking 
42:58 
socialist quasi socialist economies in 
43:00 
Europe that are fundamentally capitalist 
43:02 
then we can talk about that to the 
43:05 
Nordic countries of Bella's respect 
43:07 
property rights more than the u.s. so if 
43:10 
we replicate the Nordic countries we 
43:13 
will in certain respects be more 
43:15 
capitalist than we are now but bhaskar 
43:18 
again as a lover of freedom I asked you 
43:21 
to march in the direction of those of us 
43:25 
in the new left who tried to to to do 
43:30 
the capitalist experiment through 
43:32 
through capitalist means the the 
43:35 
opportunity is open to you so please 
43:37 
take it thank you 
43:49 
now we'll have five minutes of rebuttal 
43:52 
from Basco so from the outset of course 
43:57 
I appreciate jeans remarks for the 
43:59 
outsells I'm worried that libertarians 
44:00 
are losing sight of what they're 
44:02 
advocating for because profit is the aim 
44:05 
of all capitalists and capitalism would 
44:08 
not work a profit wasn't the aim of all 
44:10 
capitalist it's not their aim dividends 
44:14 
isn't the aim of all off capitalists 
44:16 
they don't want to necessarily all get 
44:18 
personally filthy rich but once you're 
44:20 
engaged market competition they need 
44:22 
money for expansion they need money to 
44:24 
guard against depreciation they need 
44:27 
money to develop new techniques in order 
44:30 
to be competitive in the market against 
44:32 
ur potential competitors all capitalists 
44:34 
need profits the search for profits is 
44:36 
what actually makes your system your 
44:38 
system works so I find it quite quite 
44:41 
dubious that that basic point is is now 
44:43 
lost upon upon libertarians now as it 
44:47 
relates to my vision of a just society 
44:49 
I'll break into both the economic sphere 
44:52 
and the political sphere and the 
44:53 
Piccolo's sphere I imagine that we of 
44:56 
course need to have a productive role 
44:57 
for finance in other words there needs 
44:59 
to be some sort of way to bring new 
45:01 
products and services to to market 
45:05 
because I do believe that there will be 
45:06 
a role for the market under under 
45:09 
socialism I basically believe that there 
45:13 
should be a bedrock welfare state 
45:16 
something similar to what you have in 
45:17 
Scandinavian social democracies so 
45:19 
that's the state that I mentioned before 
45:20 
we're huge spots of life Rd commodified 
45:23 
so basic social rights are granted to 
45:26 
people just by virtue of being born but 
45:29 
then those should there has to be a 
45:30 
sphere where there's market competition 
45:33 
underway where worker control firms are 
45:36 
competing with each other 
45:37 
and producing consumer products if you 
45:41 
want to create a new firm you'd be able 
45:44 
to do stuff without recourse to private 
45:46 
capital because there could be 
45:48 
state-owned banks that are using 
45:50 
objective measures based on 
45:52 
profitability and other other factors 
45:54 
maybe also incorporating certain 
45:55 
ecological factors like a cost of 
45:57 
externalities I decide what to fund what 
46:00 
not to fund but I see this largely a 
46:02 
technic 
46:02 
can be politicized process and the idea 
46:06 
is not actually quite foreign to even 
46:08 
certain forms of of capitalism in which 
46:10 
there are state-run Development Bank's 
46:12 
that are not run so differently than 
46:15 
private banks only regulated quite quite 
46:18 
a bit differently but essentially what 
46:21 
that's emitting is so there has to be a 
46:22 
price for firm failure there has to be a 
46:24 
price for inefficiency I guess the 
46:26 
difference in this case is that the 
46:28 
price for failure isn't going to be 
46:29 
utter destitution for the workers who 
46:33 
are controlling their own own firms 
46:34 
rather they'll be able to fall onto the 
46:37 
safety net of a welfare state and the 
46:40 
state could then try to encourage people 
46:42 
into new sectors that are more dynamic 
46:44 
through some form of like active labor 
46:46 
market policies yeah it's not a radical 
46:49 
experiment it's social democracy plus 
46:52 
worker controlled spheres and the 
46:55 
decommodification and role for 
46:57 
democratic planning there would be there 
46:58 
would be only there at the I would 
47:00 
imagine at the commanding heights of the 
47:02 
economy so other socialists have 
47:04 
different views but this is this is my 
47:07 
view I'm not asking you to leap blindly 
47:09 
into society youyou can't imagine I'm 
47:12 
asking to imagine Scandinavia and 
47:14 
imagine then the addition of instead of 
47:18 
private ownership affirms worker 
47:20 
controlled firms now I keep mentioning 
47:23 
this again maybe because this is a new 
47:25 
tactic of libertarians to just say oh 
47:27 
well in fact this thing that we've been 
47:30 
complaining about for 20 30 or 40 years 
47:32 
is now all of a sudden extremely 
47:34 
extremely capitalist and I don't have 
47:36 
time to get into the into the debate but 
47:40 
fundamentally the trajectory of actually 
47:43 
building what I describe as democratic 
47:45 
socialism has happened through the 
47:47 
creation of political parties and trade 
47:49 
unions and the seizure of this state so 
47:52 
in Scandinavian almost 50 years of 
47:54 
uninterrupted role in Sweden the Swedish 
47:56 
Social Democratic Party deeper modified 
48:00 
huge swathes of the economy and created 
48:02 
a large welfare state they were still 
48:04 
dependent on private industry they did 
48:06 
so largely through sectoral bargaining 
48:07 
between workers and capitalists now at a 
48:11 
certain point this system hit its 
48:13 
contradictions there's many reasons why 
48:15 
this happened but 
48:16 
one of them is simply that workers were 
48:18 
given too much too many rights they 
48:20 
started demanding things that capital 
48:21 
couldn't seed there was different ways 
48:24 
to resolve the crisis one was the 
48:25 
rightward movement of social democracy 
48:27 
reconciling themselves to capitalism the 
48:30 
other way was pushing for a deeper 
48:32 
richer form of socialism which what was 
48:35 
actually ironically because he mentioned 
48:37 
pension funds it was through a plan to 
48:39 
socialized the investment power of 
48:41 
capital through pension funds so we have 
48:44 
been pursuing that route pension funds 
48:46 
and other things are our route from 
48:48 
social democracy to democratic socialism 
48:50 
we were doing so through the state and 
48:52 
through the creation of political 
48:54 
parties so we don't need new left 
48:57 
communal fantasies or crowdfunding or 
49:00 
whatever else we have a clearer complex 
49:03 
but but proven route from the 1930s 
49:06 
onward that we've been pursuing as 
49:08 
democratic socialists around to our 
49:10 
vision of socialism 
49:13 
[Applause] 
49:17 
five minutes of rebuttal from the 
49:19 
negative well back in the 1970s basco we 
49:23 
didn't understand economics that well 
49:25 
either 
49:26 
the bhaskar doesn't seem to think Vasco 
49:30 
doesn't seem to think that he and I are 
49:31 
capitalists and he does even though 
49:34 
Vasco recently was involved as a as a 
49:38 
capitalist with the finding of a firm 
49:40 
Bhaskar 
49:41 
depreciation is a cost it it's a you you 
49:46 
don't make a profit by paying for your 
49:47 
depreciation you should learn that when 
49:50 
you you and I are renting offices and 
49:52 
they depreciate and the rent that we pay 
49:55 
has to pay for depreciation no 
49:57 
capitalist gets profits out of 
49:58 
depreciation that's a cost so you may 
50:01 
now we at the Silla forum and Bhaskar at 
50:04 
a Jacobin is bringing in new technology 
50:07 
he he's actually planning a movie he's 
50:09 
planning a book we're planning to expand 
50:11 
and we don't make any profit but 
50:13 
obviously we raise revenue for that so 
50:15 
this idea of VAS cars that you need that 
50:19 
you need profit profit obviously the 
50:21 
profit and loss system I believe is 
50:23 
indeed highly productive but it's a 
50:25 
matter of choice under capitalism it's 
50:28 
not something that it has to be imposed 
50:31 
on people if you want to run a company 
50:33 
that's profit-making as most people do 
50:36 
that's fine 
50:37 
but many many people just run their 
50:39 
businesses and earn a salary from it and 
50:41 
Bhaskar if they need money to innovate 
50:44 
or expand they raise the money if they 
50:46 
need to pay the depreciation as every 
50:48 
capitalist must they have to pay for 
50:50 
that too but they don't make any profit 
50:52 
out of it they just raise funds for 
50:55 
those things so please get your economic 
50:58 
straight capitalism is just a series of 
51:00 
choices private ownership of the means 
51:01 
of production to do what you want with 
51:05 
that private ownership now Bhaskar has 
51:07 
now used that ugly word state-owned 
51:10 
banks Bhaskar has told us we don't need 
51:13 
crowdfunding ok you don't know you don't 
51:16 
only don't need it Bhaskar I assume it's 
51:19 
going to be unlawful I assume you're 
51:21 
gonna forcibly shut it down because it's 
51:24 
evil because it raises money for people 
51:26 
to own and operate private capital you 
51:30 
want stay 
51:31 
owned banks and you said hey look we 
51:33 
have that well you know what that is 
51:34 
baska that's the ugly thing with 
51:37 
libertarians called crony capitalism or 
51:40 
I prefer to call it capitalism after 
51:43 
what my uncle Abe the socialists used to 
51:46 
call it state-owned banks of deciding on 
51:50 
and evaluating your profit potential 
51:52 
these state-owned banks are going to do 
51:55 
that and we're gonna trust them we can't 
51:57 
use crowdfunding we can't use any 
51:59 
alternatives my solo forum is gonna go 
52:02 
before these state-owned banks and 
52:04 
they're gonna be then if they're going 
52:05 
to be people with vision and they're 
52:07 
gonna be evaluating my potential it's 
52:09 
going to be a totally fair process and 
52:11 
if they turn me down I'll know that well 
52:14 
my my freedom has been conserved 
52:16 
well that is craft ilysm that's the rule 
52:19 
by elites now you mentioned the pension 
52:21 
fund deal in Sweden I'm talking about 
52:24 
the voluntary movement of people's into 
52:28 
socialism I am in a friendly way trying 
52:31 
to call your bluff what I'm trying to 
52:34 
ask you to do is to get consumers they 
52:38 
have enormous power well as I said the 
52:40 
bottom half control one-third of all 
52:43 
consumer spending I'm asking you to get 
52:46 
them to voluntarily do it and not take 
52:49 
away the freedom of people of Kenny 
52:52 
Loggins and Kenny Loggins wannabes who 
52:55 
do want to raise money through 
52:56 
crowdfunding 
52:57 
a venture capital firms who do want to 
52:59 
raise money of all the dispersed 
53:01 
information we have out there that 
53:03 
capitalism assembles no in Thunder to 
53:07 
your state-owned banks bhaskar now apart 
53:11 
from that you mentioned Sweden as though 
53:13 
oh we libertarians just lately learned 
53:16 
that their cattles well the Nordic 
53:18 
countries have been brought up and 
53:19 
indeed the fundamentally kappa whatt 
53:21 
capitalist when the prime minister of 
53:23 
Denmark said no we are not socialists he 
53:25 
knew what he was talking about but 
53:27 
Bhaskar what you are doing is 
53:29 
cherry-picking these countries you you 
53:33 
are ignoring Spain Greece Italy Portugal 
53:35 
you're ignoring Venezuela you're 
53:38 
ignoring all the all range of countries 
53:41 
that have chosen this route 
53:44 
you've decided ah the u.s. is going to 
53:46 
be like like like the Nordic countries 
53:49 
like the Swedes well Swedish Americans 
53:51 
live better than Swedes in Sweden and I 
53:55 
think that for example when it comes to 
53:57 
medical care will we really have 
53:59 
Medicare for all or we will we have the 
54:02 
Veterans Administration for all that 
54:05 
wonderful government-run medical care 
54:08 
system that's been that's turned into a 
54:11 
charnel-house a bureaucratic killing 
54:13 
that that's what can also happen under 
54:17 
such regimes but again bhaskar learn 
54:19 
capitalism is all about choices it's not 
54:22 
necessarily about profits learn your 
54:24 
economics and March in the right 
54:26 
direction toward volunteerism as a lover 
54:29 
of freedom thank you 
54:31 
[Applause] 
54:40 
so in a moment I am gonna open up the 
54:43 
floor to audience questions so if people 
54:45 
from the top honest up make their way 
54:47 
down you can line up in front of the two 
54:49 
microphones there but before we go into 
54:51 
the audience questions and while they're 
54:53 
making their way down I do want to give 
54:55 
our debaters the opportunity to ask each 
54:57 
other a question if you have any so 
55:00 
design yeah yeah so Jane if you wanted 
55:02 
to go ahead 
55:06 
Vasko in a recent tweet you wrote 
55:09 
capitalism is bad I told those workers 
55:12 
that I just fired 
55:14 
how's that for freedom now you have also 
55:17 
written that in your system of socialism 
55:19 
there will be worker owned cooperative 
55:21 
still competing in a regulated market my 
55:25 
question is this let's say that there 
55:27 
are worker on cooperatives having 
55:29 
trouble competing in the regulated 
55:31 
market and that these coops decide to 
55:33 
fire workers who are not pulling their 
55:35 
weight and to recruit other workers who 
55:37 
are more qualified their aim would be to 
55:40 
make their coops better able to compete 
55:42 
in the regulated market would you allow 
55:44 
the firings to happen well first of all 
55:47 
I never said that we actually haven't 
55:49 
ever fired a worker I mean we haven't 
55:53 
had to but we do have procedures to do 
55:55 
so through progressive discipline I 
55:57 
imagine be the same saying in a worker 
55:58 
controlled firm where workers are 
56:00 
shareholders rather than wage laborers 
56:05 
so in other graves there's a verbal 
56:07 
warning that there's written warnings 
56:09 
with points of action then there's so on 
56:12 
you know force that progressive 
56:13 
discipline it's very common 
56:15 
i I think that it's it is a necessary 
56:17 
part in other words there is both the 
56:20 
calculation debate issue that socialism 
56:23 
has faced but there's also incentive 
56:25 
issues and they both need to be 
56:27 
addressed and I think having firm 
56:29 
failure and also having some mechanism 
56:34 
for internal governments governance 
56:36 
doesn't involve you know progressive 
56:39 
disciplinary firing for for 
56:41 
inefficiencies would be necessary in any 
56:44 
market socialist system while we're 
56:46 
still living in conditions of relative 
56:48 
scarcity which we are today would you 
56:50 
allow a firm to downsize severely I cut 
56:53 
one 
56:53 
it's death if it's having trouble 
56:55 
competing yes of course I mean these of 
56:58 
course I mean the firms will need to be 
57:01 
competitive in the market the question 
57:02 
is what happens when you fail will it be 
57:04 
utter destitution or will you land into 
57:07 
the arms of a welfare state that will be 
57:11 
able to take care of your necessities 
57:13 
and then get you if you're willing to go 
57:15 
back into the competitive marketplace so 
57:17 
in other words we want both voice and 
57:19 
exit for workers we want them to be able 
57:20 
to escape the workplace as much as 
57:23 
possible - do you think that Spain 
57:33 
do you think Spain Portugal Italy Sweden 
57:36 
Denmark Norway and and in Iceland are 
57:40 
fundamentally capitalist countries well 
57:42 
yes of course they're ok they're all 
57:44 
capitalist countries I would say that 
57:45 
this we there there's three different 
57:49 
you consider in this in this simple way 
57:52 
there were social democratic movements 
57:55 
in in Sweden for a time and and in 
57:58 
across Scandinavia they aspired to world 
58:00 
after capitalism in fact what they 
58:03 
managed to do is deliver doses of 
58:04 
socialism within capitalism but while 
58:07 
delivering these doses of socialism 
58:09 
within capitalism they built towards a 
58:12 
sort of crisis and at this crisis point 
58:14 
the left-wing of these these movements 
58:17 
in these parties push for a way to 
58:19 
actually resolve these crises by going 
58:22 
beyond capitalism well a right-wing saw 
58:25 
the easier route and the more viable 
58:28 
route as taking a step or two backwards 
58:32 
and trying to restore firm profitability 
58:36 
and and and so on so I think the road to 
58:40 
more radical socialism lies through 
58:42 
social democracy and isn't counterpose 
58:44 
to it but what I'm interested in is what 
58:47 
these parties were who is their class 
58:50 
base and what they aspired to do what 
58:52 
they managed to accomplish and there's 
58:53 
good and bad lessons I think some of 
58:55 
those countries you mentioned were not 
58:56 
in fact led by social democratic 
58:59 
movements in some countries like in 
59:01 
Germany the welfare state was brought 
59:02 
about by christian democracy looked 
59:04 
quite a bit different in the u.s. our 
59:06 
welfare state was brought up 
59:07 
through a variety of ways but largely by 
59:10 
a social Liberal Party so it's 
59:11 
constituted on a different basis and the 
59:13 
universal welfare states of Scandinavia 
59:15 
so and do you have any question the 
59:18 
South Stream well I have a series of 
59:20 
assertions but I cannot phrase the 
59:24 
question no I will I will concede pass 
59:35 
go you can make an assertion and say 
59:39 
I'll add that to the end I would have 
59:44 
one very quick clarification if you just 
59:46 
give me one clarification and that's 
59:49 
simply that I think when we think about 
59:51 
a political sphere under socialism we 
59:53 
again don't have to make this leap into 
59:55 
this this crazy feature no one can 
59:56 
imagine I think it'll consists of a 
59:59 
bedrock of individual rights that are 
60:02 
that are that are guaranteed to all all 
60:04 
people freedom of speech and so on the 
60:06 
one right that is very prevalent it's a 
60:10 
major feature of this society that I 
60:12 
don't think would be given is the right 
60:13 
to employ other people in wage labour so 
60:16 
if you want a criticism it's it's it's 
60:17 
on that I think that in the end the 
60:21 
political so that's a moral and ethical 
60:24 
belief that's the ideological part of 
60:27 
being of being a socialist I will 
60:29 
concede is is is entirely ideological in 
60:32 
that I think that in a normative sense 
60:37 
hierarchy and exploitation are bad and 
60:39 
to whatever extent it can be mitigated 
60:41 
we should mitigate it 
60:44 
so some forms of hierarchy will always 
60:46 
need so if you have a small child if 
60:49 
you're a parent you wield authority over 
60:51 
that child that's acceptable 
60:54 
unacceptable form of hierarchy in my 
60:55 
mind but it's a hierarchy that's 
60:57 
mediated that's control okay so in 
61:08 
addition to that there'll be a political 
61:10 
they'll be representative democracy plus 
61:12 
certain directive erotic inputs but that 
61:14 
will be similar to what you have in 
61:15 
Sweden or referendums in California or 
61:17 
so on so you'll be free to have the soho 
61:19 
forum you'll be 
61:20 
to fundraise for other things as long 
61:23 
for the state-owned banks boom you 
61:26 
shouldn't get crowdfunding state-owned 
61:30 
bankers the crap Atlas Bhaskar what do 
61:32 
you want well if you engage in 
61:34 
crowdfunding today you don't have to do 
61:35 
it through a JPMorgan Chase you could do 
61:37 
quite you would have fun yes sure it's 
61:47 
not used to create an enterprise that 
61:49 
employs wage labor wage labor I see so 
61:52 
in other words if somebody voluntarily 
61:55 
wants to work for me at the Seoul forum 
61:57 
what happens and insists on doing does 
61:59 
that person go to prison so he continues 
62:01 
to do that to violate your rule 
62:03 
what happens then Bhaskar I if I decide 
62:07 
to go to you one day and I said I want 
62:10 
to work for the Soho forum for the rest 
62:12 
of my life and and I don't want to get 
62:15 
paid well I want you to provide food and 
62:18 
housing 
62:19 
what would you be allowed to again sir 
62:21 
an employment relationship like that 
62:22 
under this capital society 
62:24 
no what do now you just answer your own 
62:27 
question look capless at 15 consent to 
62:30 
voluntary actions between people you 
62:32 
don't allow that will allow those you 
62:34 
are a lover of freedom you're doing 
62:36 
double thing you hate freedom people 
62:38 
should not do voluntary acts people want 
62:40 
to work for me that want to work for you 
62:41 
don't you have employees but aren't you 
62:43 
accomplice with employees no I'm 
62:45 
actually not even I'm a technically an 
62:47 
employee of a Board of Directors but you 
62:49 
know I work so in other words what I'm 
62:54 
saying is that the employment 
62:55 
relationship under capitalism is already 
62:57 
regulated I'm posing a symbol I a 
63:00 
relationship in which this this thing 
63:02 
wage labour is no longer allowed don't 
63:06 
you realize that you've backed away from 
63:07 
my question if somebody voluntarily 
63:09 
wants to work for me for what I pay and 
63:12 
under my and says I want to do it you're 
63:15 
gonna throw that person in prison if 
63:16 
that person does it against your wishes 
63:19 
and values is that what you're gonna do 
63:21 
how are you going to enforce your rules 
63:23 
Bhaskar how is that gonna happen well I 
63:26 
think that in a society in which most 
63:28 
people can do similar labor to what 
63:30 
you're describing but actually be 
63:31 
shareholders actually own 
63:34 
shares and receive dividends from a firm 
63:35 
I'm not sure they would choose to to do 
63:38 
that well I I think I directly answer 
63:40 
your question well that's why I'm 
63:42 
calling your bluff Bhaskar I'm trying to 
63:44 
suggest to you that you can work on that 
63:47 
and you can achieve it you could have 
63:48 
worker owned firms in under capitalism 
63:52 
any time you want just get people to be 
63:54 
impressed by your values there wasn't 
63:58 
just walk the walk and quit talking 
64:00 
there was mass there was mass support 
64:02 
for the for the minor pension funds 
64:05 
Creed there were mass support for the 
64:07 
minor plan in Sweden it would have so 
64:09 
slowly socialized production again 
64:12 
Bhaskar you are a political a Politico 
64:15 
you can't talk the talk of individuals 
64:17 
of individual movements you want 
64:19 
top-down either 
64:21 
I'm trying to tell you quit playing the 
64:24 
ugly game of politics but because that 
64:26 
can give you Donald Trump I'm trying to 
64:28 
suggest to you try to impress the 
64:30 
grassroots with your values and then 
64:32 
organize them the way King did the way 
64:34 
Mahatma Gandhi did and and then owned 
64:36 
firms and boycott them and take them 
64:38 
over work it from the bottom up Bhaskar 
64:41 
because your lover of freedom so you you 
64:45 
said this is what happens when you don't 
64:46 
let him I don't know but you said you 
64:50 
said that the pathway is through 
64:52 
consumer power and boycotts right and 
64:55 
where does your consumer power come from 
64:58 
okay if not the amount of money you have 
65:00 
which is a result of battles about 
65:02 
winners of our launch of economics one 
65:05 
third of the consumer dollar comes from 
65:07 
the bottom half nearly two thirds comes 
65:10 
in the bottom four fish repeat that 
65:12 
after me Bhaskar because apparently it's 
65:14 
something you don't know learn some 
65:16 
economics 
65:17 
[Applause] 
65:20 
okay well Jim you're just encouraging 
65:27 
men let's let's get to the audience in a 
65:29 
second I do in a more monetary stage 
65:31 
right I'm talking about the United 
65:33 
States 
65:34 
the revolution now I going to go to 
65:36 
audience question sorry what all right 
65:42 
so over here are this gentleman in the 
65:45 
front you want it I'll go ahead and ask 
65:46 
your first question you can address 
65:47 
either of the debaters can we turn that 
65:52 
microphone on if it's not already by the 
65:58 
way I really appreciate the be passion 
66:01 
up here is this not entertaining the Q&A 
66:10 
I'm very excited to see what what 
66:11 
happens all right go ahead not mark mark 
66:13 
Skousen I'd like to get your take on 
66:15 
both of you on John Mackey's book 
66:19 
conscious capitalism where he develops 
66:22 
the stakeholder philosophy of working 
66:25 
together and this is wholefoods the CEO 
66:28 
of Whole Foods where they have teams 
66:31 
that make decisions on salaries of these 
66:34 
employees so you have a form of social 
66:38 
democracy or democratic capitalism 
66:40 
already in the conscious capitalism 
66:43 
model stakeholder philosophy I'd like to 
66:46 
get your take on that new approach to 
66:51 
capitalism this is a question for both 
66:53 
the debaters socialists way back one 
67:01 
push at a time so I would say there's 
67:05 
different ways to organize capitols 
67:07 
workplaces some could be extremely 
67:09 
hierarchical some could be more 
67:11 
horizontal my objection to the Capitals 
67:14 
a workplace is the fact that it's it's 
67:17 
privately owned by by individuals and it 
67:20 
inherently relies on a form of 
67:23 
exploitation I don't mean to describe a 
67:26 
literal labor theory of value my quick 
67:29 
thing that I'm saying but rather that 
67:30 
it's a good framework to understand how 
67:31 
this works simply if if gene is employed 
67:34 
by me I'm not sure I would based on his 
67:37 
temperament but he might be might be a 
67:40 
true great union organizer he might be a 
67:42 
rabble rouser 
67:43 
but and and he's stable employed for for 
67:47 
ten years by me and I'm paying in 
67:50 
fifteen dollars an hour over the course 
67:51 
of this ten years then you could 
67:53 
probably assume one thing based on that 
67:54 
relationship that jeans probably worth 
67:56 
more to me than you know than the $15 an 
68:00 
hour I'm I'm paying him and we're gonna 
68:04 
have certain battles over how much money 
68:06 
is gonna be be paid and and this is this 
68:10 
is the the root of a lot of the 
68:12 
pressures that existed every workplace 
68:14 
you know people want to get paid more 
68:16 
they know there's certain limits and 
68:18 
what they could get paid in other words 
68:19 
gene can't them at a hundred dollars an 
68:20 
hour because if my firm is no longer 
68:22 
profitable then none of us are employed 
68:24 
but but there's you know there's this 
68:27 
tension that exists in all workplaces 
68:28 
they certainly exists at Whole Foods 
68:30 
where there has been worker actions 
68:33 
where people are demanding kind of 
68:35 
different things but the main thing 
68:36 
they're demanding is higher wages and 
68:39 
more autonomy and no capitalists no 
68:42 
matter how conscious they are gonna is 
68:44 
gonna give that to them it's gonna be 
68:45 
the result of a political battle on the 
68:47 
shop floor it's not gonna be you know 
68:49 
decided by a theory or ideology of this 
68:52 
first and a capitalism of that version 
68:53 
of capitalism well in answer the 
68:56 
question certainly John Mackey's idea of 
68:59 
conscious capitalism is is better than a 
69:03 
lot of other ideas it seems to work well 
69:05 
at Whole Foods and I support it I don't 
69:09 
know if it's valid for all firms I can 
69:12 
want to observe that VASCAR lives at 
69:16 
least granted that if he was a 
69:18 
capitalist and I was a worker he'd be 
69:20 
afraid of me even though I would just be 
69:22 
a worker so clearly there might be other 
69:24 
kinds of relationships that workers and 
69:27 
employees can have and again VASCAR 
69:30 
keeps ducking the two questions which is 
69:33 
why doesn't he create worker owned firms 
69:37 
if he doesn't like the firms owned by 
69:40 
handful of people that's quite possible 
69:43 
under this capitalism and would he 
69:45 
actually throw in prison people who 
69:49 
violate his values who choose to work 
69:52 
for fell through for capitalist firms 
69:54 
voluntarily Eve 
69:56 
though as I've said his quasi socialist 
69:59 
alternative would be available he ducks 
70:01 
that question as well someday hopefully 
70:05 
tomorrow he'll face those two questions 
70:07 
and see the light thank God okay next 
70:10 
question over here and just a reminder 
70:12 
if you're asking a question from the 
70:13 
floor don't give us statements make sure 
70:15 
that you're asking questions and keep it 
70:17 
short so my name is Jenny Brown um so I 
70:22 
wonder if both the speakers could 
70:24 
address the situations that we see on 
70:27 
the shop floor in for example production 
70:31 
companies in the US where it's no 
70:34 
degrees of freedom you have you're given 
70:38 
three minutes to urinate once a day 
70:41 
sometimes you have to wear diapers on 
70:43 
the line because you will be fired if 
70:45 
you go there are no choices about 
70:50 
whether you can have work overtime you 
70:54 
have to or you will lose your job so 
70:58 
just the the situation that is existing 
71:01 
right now under capitalism with private 
71:04 
ownership if you could just address the 
71:07 
working conditions that that is kicking 
71:10 
up and what percentage of workers do you 
71:13 
think work under those circumstances 
71:14 
about 20 percent 20 percent and yeah you 
71:18 
said in that's who are not allowed to 
71:21 
renew yes do not you know do you know we 
71:23 
don't even have 20 percent of the 
71:24 
workers in factories to begin with but 
71:26 
20 percent no not just factories some 
71:28 
schoolteachers have to bring their whole 
71:30 
class into the bathroom so that they can 
71:33 
pee oh right okay then all right okay 
71:37 
that's good 
71:39 
good to know I had to run out to pee 
71:42 
myself recently as you know so I have 
71:45 
two ties with that I'm sorry for this 
71:47 
stupid joke so best though do you want 
71:49 
to answer that or should I that's a 
71:52 
great job so far I mean they let you 
71:53 
keep gone well we have we have an 
72:00 
educational system that pays that that 
72:03 
pays nationwide ten thousand dollars a 
72:06 
student in New York it's twenty thousand 
72:09 
dollars a student so and that means that 
72:13 
for every 30 kids in a class in New York 
72:15 
there's 600 thousand dollars that could 
72:17 
be realized how much of it ends up in 
72:20 
the classroom nationwide there's 300 
72:23 
thousand dollars that could be realized 
72:24 
the schools are run by government 
72:27 
bureaucracies so that may explain why 
72:30 
despite the fact that there is that 
72:33 
that's spending on schooling in this 
72:35 
country is that a record high in 
72:36 
inflation-adjusted terms that may 
72:39 
explain why the problem that you've 
72:41 
suggested that you've talked about 
72:43 
exists that we may want to free it up 
72:46 
from government control and that's the 
72:48 
reason why poor people poor people are 
72:51 
over subscribing the charter schools and 
72:54 
the end of out your schools because they 
72:56 
spend their money so that kids do not 
72:58 
have to pee in the hole that's that's 
73:00 
the capitalist alternative which by the 
73:01 
way 15 percent of Swedish parents send 
73:05 
their kids to voucher schools and now 
73:08 
the other part of it is that oh you 
73:10 
should join with me as should Bhaskar in 
73:13 
trying to combat that the capitalism in 
73:16 
the labor markets to free the labor 
73:18 
market so that laborers have 
73:20 
alternatives government control on 
73:23 
behalf of special interests of some of 
73:25 
so many professions is locked up to be a 
73:28 
beautician to be a florist to be a 
73:31 
plumber do you know how difficult it is 
73:33 
to become a plumber in New York because 
73:36 
of the states afforded plumbers Union 
73:37 
all of those alternatives should work 
73:40 
should open up for laborers but they are 
73:42 
closed because unfortunately people like 
73:45 
Vasco thinks that government control 
73:46 
cadet all this credentialism and all 
73:49 
these barriers that make it difficult 
73:50 
for laborers to shop around 
73:52 
to get better jobs to work under better 
73:55 
working conditions are closed off to 
73:57 
them 
73:57 
that's the evils of capitalism that we 
74:00 
live in chairs are trying to fight and 
74:02 
that you should fight also so with 
74:04 
respect to the schools what you should 
74:05 
really fight really do is liberate all 
74:08 
of that money so that the $300,000 
74:12 
average can get into that classroom and 
74:15 
the kids the big peeing on gold-plated 
74:17 
urinals so the actual question was about 
74:22 
the conditions of huge segments of 
74:25 
American of American workers and it I 
74:27 
don't know the exact figure but it is it 
74:29 
is a large segment of American workers 
74:31 
and increasingly precarious jobs working 
74:34 
in factories with very limited rights 
74:36 
and the simple reason why it's like that 
74:39 
is because American unions are weaker 
74:41 
than its counterparts anywhere else in 
74:43 
the advanced capitalist world therefore 
74:45 
may American workers have the same 
74:47 
rights and are afforded the same dignity 
74:49 
as workers a very weak bargaining power 
74:52 
in the third world often and that's 
74:54 
that's that's a real reason and and if 
74:57 
you want to give people more rights if 
74:59 
you want to build union rights to say 
75:02 
that ok everybody deserves a five-minute 
75:05 
break every hour you know or whatever 
75:07 
whatever else is a very bare-bones 
75:09 
basics you have the very least fight for 
75:12 
the right to collectively bargain you 
75:14 
have to fight for the sort of 
75:15 
legislation that libertarians that big 
75:18 
capitalists that small capitalists 
75:20 
all have historically opposed and and my 
75:24 
only aside is on jeans two questions on 
75:26 
answer very quickly at a yes or no way 
75:30 
one is worker owned firms under 
75:33 
Capitol's and we're fine but they're 
75:34 
subjected to a lot of the same pressures 
75:37 
competitive pressures as as other as 
75:40 
other firms so we want to build a 
75:42 
society in which you have the bedrock 
75:45 
dica modifications that I talked about 
75:46 
where we have Medicare for all where we 
75:48 
have a certain basic education rights 
75:51 
and and so on so that's most of our 
75:54 
reform efforts are focused there seems 
75:56 
to you bhaskar then let me try to make 
75:59 
the same point the bottom half has asked 
76:02 
control of one third of the total 
76:04 
consumer dollar can 
76:06 
Zoomers spending could be dedicated to 
76:08 
those socialist firms and support them 
76:11 
in whatever way you want nearly 2/3 is 
76:14 
controlled by the bottom four-fifths 
76:16 
please learn some economics about the 
76:18 
power of the consumer that you can 
76:21 
marshal that could be a sub economy of 
76:23 
socialist firms and you could subject 
76:25 
them to whatever a economy of of 
76:33 
cooperatives that are thriving in places 
76:36 
like Spain Mondragon is a large 
76:38 
cooperative at one time was the sixth 
76:40 
largest business in in in Spain but 
76:46 
these these are subject to a lot of the 
76:49 
same a lot of the same competitive 
76:51 
pressures so I think in other words is 
76:52 
the difference between a cooperative 
76:54 
under capitalism and a worker controlled 
76:56 
firm under a post capital society where 
76:59 
capital no longer holds a power to 
77:01 
withhold investment where there's not a 
77:02 
separate class of people continually 
77:04 
trying to undermine refer reforms again 
77:09 
you're beating a hasty retreat you're 
77:11 
beating a hasty retreat just some 
77:13 
example about me what I'm trying to do 
77:19 
is trying to suggest to you the 
77:21 
potential in the American economy what 
77:24 
you can do we and the new left in thank 
77:26 
you so we didn't look at what others had 
77:28 
done badly we try to look at the 
77:30 
potential of what we can do look it in 
77:33 
the face and you'll see that let me 
77:36 
finish my answer your second question 
77:38 
please Jeanne you're from the new left 
77:40 
do you smoke weed in the 60s are you 
77:43 
wondering whether that explains well I'm 
77:45 
just saying that maybe maybe it's time 
77:47 
to get get back on it you know 
77:50 
so but on the second question no I don't 
77:56 
think I don't think I don't think 
77:58 
coercion would be would be necessary 
78:01 
well but but it's a process like that I 
78:06 
like that is necessary rasca would you 
78:11 
apply it what if people voluntarily 
78:13 
decide to work in conditions that you 
78:15 
don't like and they say no I want to do 
78:17 
it and then you said well you have to 
78:19 
stop doing no I can't stop doing it what 
78:21 
would you though then Bastar the it 
78:24 
would look the problem you are facing is 
78:26 
that we have the awful experience of 
78:28 
socialist societies most recently the 
78:31 
experiment of socialism in Venezuela 
78:32 
most recently what happened in China 
78:35 
that we don't have freedom lovers under 
78:38 
socialism so please give us a little bit 
78:40 
more assurances rather than vague 
78:42 
responses if it's necessary which you 
78:44 
throw people in prison for violating 
78:46 
your values the values which it's not 
78:49 
we're not writing a blueprint for there 
78:51 
for the future it's fine if I'm in 
78:53 
charge of a social society then of 
78:55 
course not 
78:56 
you know what exactly exactly that's why 
78:59 
I said it there'll be a social there'll 
79:03 
be a judicial system that'll have 
79:05 
certain criteria for when it throws 
79:07 
people in prison and all certain 
79:09 
criteria for what speech is allowed and 
79:11 
what's not and it will probably draw on 
79:13 
existing types of jurisprudence so for 
79:15 
example clear and present danger you 
79:17 
know it's not it's not a leap into the 
79:21 
unknown own future it's not as your zero 
79:23 
break with with the past we're saying 
79:27 
that there are certain spheres of life 
79:29 
that are right now only available that 
79:31 
people could pay but should be available 
79:33 
to everyone as part of their basic needs 
79:35 
we're saying that there are certain 
79:36 
forms of exploitation and oppression 
79:38 
that exists the world today that we 
79:40 
think we construct a society where it 
79:41 
doesn't exist 
79:42 
full-stop I think you said you would not 
79:44 
shut down a crowdfunding and that's good 
79:47 
to hear and and I think actually if you 
79:49 
ran the society bhaskar you'd very 
79:51 
quickly lead the capitalist 
79:53 
counter-revolution because you would get 
79:55 
sick and tired of those state-owned 
79:57 
banks that that are not granting people 
80:00 
opportunities yet that's what you would 
80:02 
do my 
80:03 
however Bhaskar is that maybe somebody 
80:06 
like you will not be in charge maybe the 
80:09 
best maybe the worst will get on top 
80:11 
maybe power-hungry people will but if 
80:14 
you were in charge 
80:15 
socialism won't last a month because you 
80:18 
would find how hateful it is because 
80:20 
you're a lover of freedom and we'll go 
80:22 
to the next audience question over here 
80:25 
this one's for Bhaskar although maybe 
80:28 
both chime in if there's time it would 
80:32 
be hard to stop him and to that point in 
80:35 
solidarity with Bhaskar I would support 
80:36 
state subsidized acupuncture session for 
80:39 
Eugene immediately following this event 
80:41 
sorry I'm sorry in 2017 the average 
80:50 
top-20 CEO comp was 66 million versus 
80:55 
the comparable average comp four for the 
80:58 
top 20 athletes of 62 million it's a 
81:01 
difference of about 6% those numbers 
81:04 
include options and bonus for CEOs and 
81:06 
include sponsorship pay for athletes 
81:09 
which group do you think creates more 
81:11 
positive value and prosperity for 
81:13 
society and do you think athlete 
81:16 
compensation and by extension celebrity 
81:18 
compensation which is very similar to 
81:20 
those levels deserve as much public 
81:23 
scrutiny as CEO pay I would say no I 
81:26 
don't even support a salary cap in 
81:28 
sports these are athletes that are 
81:31 
creating value and they should be renew 
81:33 
marae today they're creating they're 
81:34 
creating the value through their own 
81:36 
efforts and their own individual talents 
81:38 
and they're not creating value through 
81:40 
the labor of others so I think LeBron 
81:44 
James should be making many times more 
81:45 
than he was what he's earning now and at 
81:50 
the very least but obviously you know 
81:53 
he's collectively working on a team and 
81:55 
the point of any good collective 
81:57 
bargaining agreement is sometimes to 
82:00 
boost the conditions of the worst paid 
82:03 
or worst condition 
82:05 
players so in this case NBA players and 
82:07 
the G League and sometimes that means 
82:10 
kind of caps on on the the best-paid but 
82:14 
that's a collective democratic decision 
82:16 
that actually LeBron James was the you 
82:18 
know major figure in the players you 
82:20 
should point out the NBA players agreed 
82:23 
to the salary cap that they exact 
82:25 
underwriters collectively collectively 
82:27 
bargained yes not random I mean the 
82:30 
premise of your response is sort of that 
82:31 
it's random it's not random yeah yeah 
82:33 
yeah so the cap it said we don't need to 
82:35 
get sucked in I'm not worried about the 
82:39 
amount of money or the amount of wealth 
82:41 
that anyone wants that anyone got gets 
82:45 
it as a result of their exceptional 
82:47 
talent or ability obviously this is a 
82:48 
small percentage of society and also 
82:51 
that I think my conception of class is 
82:54 
not it's more relational than gradation 
82:59 
'el so in other words you could be a 
83:03 
capitalist and run a small firm of four 
83:05 
or five people and be struggling and 
83:08 
earn $30,000 a year or you could be a 
83:10 
worker in at a privileged sector or a 
83:13 
very capital-intensive sector like a 
83:15 
longshoreman and earn $90,000 a year and 
83:19 
I would consider one a worker and one 
83:20 
you know as some sort of small 
83:22 
capitalist yeah those are just two quick 
83:27 
observations those $30,000 capitalists 
83:29 
who were indeed legion with the people I 
83:31 
spoke about they are not they are not in 
83:34 
it for profit that's just simply drawing 
83:36 
a wage out of their business that pays 
83:39 
them for the services to their business 
83:41 
that's why that's another good example 
83:46 
of why not even today as private 
83:49 
ownership of the means of production 
83:50 
always pursued for profit again vascular 
83:54 
anionic capitalist the only thing I 
83:55 
would say to your question about 
83:57 
athletes are that again the crapola 
84:00 
system the the ways in which labor 
84:03 
mobility is limited which indeed it's 
84:05 
also limited by unions and the crapola 
84:09 
system whereby profits are privatized 
84:12 
and losses are socialized the best 
84:14 
example of that was Obama's bailout of 
84:17 
General Motors and Chrysler 
84:20 
again socializing losses which shafted 
84:23 
our workers in the south and favored 
84:26 
unions in Michigan because he was 
84:28 
courting the Michigan vote that's 
84:30 
capitalism and in the sports case the 
84:33 
the capitalism of government subsidizing 
84:37 
sports stadiums for these very rich 
84:39 
firms is this is an obviously an outrage 
84:42 
that VASCAR should also oppose up until 
84:45 
the 1950s the team's paid for their own 
84:48 
stadiums I'm a big James Dolan fan so I 
84:51 
won't oppose a great leader even people 
84:59 
it's okay with you all right next 
85:02 
question from the audience thank you my 
85:04 
name is Ray Harry yes I want to first 
85:08 
make an assertion and that assertion is 
85:10 
that your praise your assertion in the 
85:13 
form of a question well yes it's good 
85:15 
it's gonna be in a question yes it is 
85:20 
have to start over now I was interrupted 
85:26 
okay so the assertion is that it is 
85:29 
competitive capitalism that is creating 
85:32 
something an externality called global 
85:35 
warming and global warming is 
85:37 
threatening our very survival on this 
85:39 
planet 
85:40 
capitalism is responsible for this 
85:42 
capital it is competition competition 
85:46 
where all of us are competition creates 
85:49 
winners and losers and in this case this 
85:52 
externality is going to be such a losing 
85:55 
proposition for all of us that the human 
85:57 
race is going to be out of here and my 
86:03 
question is how do you address the issue 
86:06 
of competition creating such negative 
86:11 
situations for it automatically 
86:13 
structurally creates winners and losers 
86:16 
competition does it creates winners and 
86:22 
how does it create it creates bad 
86:25 
externalities what is your response to 
86:27 
this the one particular bad externality 
86:30 
is that competition creates 
86:32 
Vaska you had structurally looser so to 
86:39 
play to play devil's advocate in the 
86:41 
scenario just coming over to my side 
86:43 
that's good yeah to to turn the scenario 
86:46 
you played out you could find ways to 
86:47 
price in you know some of these these 
86:51 
effects through carbon taxing or whatnot 
86:54 
but I think as a whole the reason the 
86:57 
reason why capitalism creates these sort 
87:01 
of problems is less the market 
87:02 
competition end of it but the fact that 
87:04 
that grower died imperative of 
87:06 
capitalist firms isn't isn't restrained 
87:08 
I also would argue that under socialism 
87:11 
as I envisioned it where the consumer 
87:13 
sector for consumer goods is by worker 
87:15 
owned firms the same imperative doesn't 
87:19 
actually apply right because you're not 
87:21 
trying to maximize total revenue you say 
87:28 
you're not building these mega firms 
87:29 
what you're trying to do is maximize a 
87:31 
revenue per shareholder revenue per per 
87:34 
worker so you you might you know want a 
87:36 
firm of 4050 people which which would 
87:38 
solve part of that but I think in 
87:40 
general a society in which there is a 
87:43 
more robust responsive state where there 
87:46 
is a greater role for for elements of 
87:49 
planning and organizing certain aspects 
87:52 
of the economic plan of society which by 
87:57 
the way sounds very pernicious and scary 
87:59 
for those of you in the room that are 
88:00 
libertarians but most societies have 
88:03 
actually had industrial industrial plans 
88:07 
at one point another developing states 
88:09 
have all done at all within a capitalist 
88:10 
framework I think that kind of society 
88:13 
with more room for democracy and and 
88:15 
empowerment of ordinary people is 
88:17 
obviously going to be able to think 
88:19 
about the medium and long term effects 
88:21 
of of growth and development well I 
88:27 
think I think Bhaskar atleast did say 
88:29 
that that obviously you can have carbon 
88:32 
taxes you can rein it in clearly it's 
88:35 
not it's not capitalism that causes 
88:37 
global warming 
88:38 
it's industrialism and the the the the 
88:42 
Soviet Union was not capitalist it was 
88:44 
massively polluting 
88:46 
China competing with the United States 
88:51 
okay so that's why they did it okay all 
88:54 
right well quit well III think as Baskar 
88:57 
would agree and I don't have to disagree 
88:59 
with you I'd have to say that that 
89:01 
industrialism which involves the use of 
89:03 
fossil fuels it involves the it involves 
89:08 
the the heavy machinery involves all 
89:12 
kinds of things that that produce output 
89:14 
and under basco socialism they might not 
89:17 
want to wrap basket maximize revenue as 
89:19 
I just said under capitalism you don't 
89:21 
have to maximize for profit but if 
89:23 
you're going to put out stuff that 
89:25 
that's that's based on a fossil fuel 
89:27 
economy you're going to pollute and of 
89:29 
course they're ways of dealing with it 
89:30 
do you want to you are you saying that 
89:32 
the use of fossil fuels only happens 
89:34 
under capitalism sir no okay okay then 
89:37 
no that's good thank you answer my 
89:39 
question then the use of phosphorus is 
89:41 
what's polluting what's causing a woman 
90:00 
well no I I think it is true that that 
90:03 
under system like like capitalism 
90:05 
economic power does translate into into 
90:08 
political power and there are certain 
90:09 
lobbies preventing the emergence of new 
90:13 
technology but more important is the 
90:15 
fact that green renewable technology 
90:16 
there is a cross there is a cross cost 
90:19 
curve involved and I think that a more 
90:22 
proactive government pushed industrial 
90:27 
policy could could bring about an energy 
90:29 
transition and quicker I mean this is 
90:31 
not a rest well we needed Obama to 
90:32 
subsidize Solyndra because because but 
90:35 
but because we needed more capitalism 
90:37 
and again again basco talks about those 
90:40 
wonderful state-owned banks that really 
90:42 
scares me when he uses the word state 
90:43 
usually I didn't want to use that word 
90:45 
for Bhaskar because because usually they 
90:47 
like to say no no no that's the state 
90:48 
it's gonna be democratic councils 
90:50 
state-owned banks or capitalists and it 
90:52 
really depresses me that Bhaskar to lose 
90:55 
himself into thinking that those 
90:57 
state-owned banks will be the only place 
90:59 
we can go 
90:59 
- to raise money for the Soul form well 
91:12 
I think I think it is funny that gene 
91:15 
can summon the depths of the Gulag be 
91:19 
tougher wounds killing fields but 
91:22 
instead he's focusing on the North 
91:23 
Dakota 
91:24 
you know State Development Bank the 
91:26 
gentleman is yeah but you're saying 
91:29 
state-owned banks of this great 
91:30 
pernicious evil but you're not even if 
91:35 
you want if you want to abolish 
91:37 
everything other than state-owned banks 
91:40 
then you are going to suppress freedom 
91:42 
and the state-owned banks are not are 
91:44 
not the gulag they're not the pernicious 
91:46 
freedom but they're just a bunch of 
91:48 
people who are giving other people's 
91:50 
money away they're not putting money at 
91:52 
risk they are crapulous 
91:54 
they are not capitalist they are 
91:56 
obviously not what we want we want 
91:58 
crowdfunding you're not gonna bones 
92:00 
crowdfunding I thought you said 50 
92:02 
billion dollars a year of it you're not 
92:04 
going to abolish it I think if you were 
92:07 
going to make if I was gene I was gonna 
92:09 
make a case against democratic socialism 
92:10 
to young young Americans that are prone 
92:12 
to democratic socialism I would say this 
92:14 
if you pursue my route as a hyper 
92:18 
capitalist you're gonna find 5% growth 
92:20 
rates over the next century and yeah 
92:22 
we'll figure out a way to innovate our 
92:23 
way out of climate change you saw my 
92:25 
question if you pursue his route you're 
92:27 
gonna get three point five percent 
92:28 
growth and that 1.5 percent difference 
92:31 
is a matter of life or death for 
92:32 
hundreds of millions of people all 
92:34 
around the world I mean but instead 
92:36 
we're getting this this this whole 
92:38 
inventing of language or what he's not 
92:40 
even defending what he's here to defend 
92:41 
that's lost capitalism you should go a 
92:44 
little musical in a capitalist society 
92:46 
I'm sorry your side has built a society 
92:49 
obviously we tried to humanize it and 
92:51 
change it over time but you're living in 
92:53 
a capital society this is this is your 
92:56 
look please this is a thing that 
92:58 
vegetarians certainly love you but 
93:00 
you're but why don't you just come on 
93:02 
stage and take 
93:03 
no no Gigi don't don't put that offer 
93:05 
out there alright we've unfortunately 
93:06 
run out of time we've run out of time 
93:09 
here for Q&A but they you so much for 
93:11 
the questions I just don't mind that 
93:14 
obviously we've got closing statements 
93:16 
now but this is a very heavy issue that 
93:19 
we're not gonna solve in an in a 
93:21 
two-hour debate so there is wine and 
93:23 
cheese and everything afterwards where 
93:25 
you can continue to ask questions both 
93:27 
of them will be around but we have not 
93:28 
finished we have no rapping we now have 
93:31 
our five minutes closing statements from 
93:33 
the affirmative Abbas Carson Cara if you 
93:35 
wanted to go ahead and close up your 
93:37 
site thank you all for sticking around 
93:43 
thank you for moderating this it's an 
93:45 
unenviable task and I really do 
93:48 
appreciate thank you to to Jean for the 
93:51 
for the invitation actually he was very 
93:54 
persistent in getting me here he did 
93:56 
everything organizing it you know he 
93:58 
even gave me the pen that I'm using in 
94:00 
the debate so he was very cordial 
94:01 
setting it up and whatever else I really 
94:03 
do appreciate it and I appreciate the 
94:05 
the audience yes 
94:07 
he literally ripped his notebook in half 
94:09 
to give me something that I press on it 
94:11 
right on so is it yeah ID appreciate it 
94:13 
now capitalism of course has proved 
94:16 
remarkably durable far beyond the 
94:18 
expectations of socialists you know 100 
94:22 
plus plus years ago but from a different 
94:25 
perspective the history of working-class 
94:27 
politics since the days of Marx and 
94:29 
Engels has in fact been a great success 
94:31 
you know god I'm once again mentioned 
94:34 
God rested on the seventh day the labor 
94:37 
movement gave us the sixth off we went 
94:40 
from an era when capital ruled 
94:42 
unchallenged to one with powerful limits 
94:45 
on its conduct the 40-hour week labor 
94:50 
and environmental regulations and more 
94:52 
these reforms and the broader progress 
94:55 
of women's liberation and towards racial 
94:58 
equality are constantly under siege but 
95:01 
they happen we don't as I said before 
95:04 
live in the worst of all possible worlds 
95:06 
the world we live in as brutal and 
95:09 
unequal as it is has been made more 
95:12 
humane by class-conscious movements by 
95:15 
the efforts of 
95:16 
Democratic socialists this consolation 
95:19 
seems like a small one given how lofty 
95:21 
our ambitions still are but many not 
95:25 
gene obviously would agree that you know 
95:28 
socialists have always understood that 
95:29 
capitalism works they even proved 
95:32 
capable reforming some of his ugly 
95:34 
features but why would we want to repeat 
95:38 
the disasters of 20th century the 20th 
95:40 
century but once again struggling to go 
95:42 
beyond it and create a social system 
95:44 
I've tried to offer in a series of 
95:48 
scattered and increasingly erratic 
95:50 
interventions a few answers to that 
95:52 
question now the first is that the 
95:55 
tremendous suffering in the world today 
95:57 
demands a response capitalist 
95:59 
development has created mass abundance 
96:02 
but it hasn't met the needs of the most 
96:04 
vulnerable millions still die every year 
96:06 
of preventable diseases many more spend 
96:09 
their lives mired in poverty the second 
96:12 
answer is as I mentioned ideological and 
96:15 
I'll admit that capitalism is based off 
96:18 
wage labor which rests on the 
96:20 
exploitation and domination of humans by 
96:23 
other humans democratic workplaces 
96:26 
embedded in an economy committed to the 
96:28 
moral Worth and flourishing of all could 
96:31 
make the subordination no longer 
96:33 
necessary a third answer even if we're 
96:37 
content to simply reform capitalism 
96:39 
these reforms will be continually 
96:42 
undermined by capital's structural power 
96:45 
addressing that dilemma will mean 
96:47 
pressing on to democratic socialism a 
96:50 
good social democracy can get us pretty 
96:53 
far along the road to justice and we 
96:56 
know that social democracy works and 
96:58 
presumably where it falls short it could 
97:01 
be improved without completely doing 
97:03 
away with private ownership but there's 
97:05 
more than an ideological motivation for 
97:09 
a radical socialism well I consider 
97:11 
myself a democratic social it's not a 
97:12 
social democrat more than the moral idea 
97:15 
that the exploitation of people by 
97:18 
people is a problem in desperate need of 
97:20 
a solution 
97:21 
capitalism both crates the precondition 
97:24 
for radical human flourishing and 
97:26 
prevents its ultimate fulfillment for 
97:29 
socialists 
97:30 
to the extent that some hierarchies 
97:32 
linger they have to be constantly 
97:34 
justified and held in check today I 
97:38 
think we would all agree that extreme 
97:40 
forms of slavery of exploitation like 
97:42 
slavery should be prohibited their 
97:45 
socialist argues that wage labor is an 
97:47 
acceptable form of exploitation and that 
97:49 
we actually have alternatives now to 
97:51 
empower ordinary people to control their 
97:53 
destinies inside and outside their 
97:55 
workplace but even I have a hard time 
97:58 
imagining that the abstractions of 
97:59 
ideology will be enough to encourage a 
98:01 
risky leap from a humane social the 
98:04 
Democratic world the world that we could 
98:07 
build into an unknown socialist one if 
98:09 
that happens I imagine it'll be driven 
98:12 
through practical necessity through the 
98:15 
day-to-day struggle to preserve and 
98:17 
expand reforms socialists have survived 
98:20 
a lot over the past century it survived 
98:23 
persecution from tyrants and the tyrants 
98:25 
that it itself gave birth to it survived 
98:27 
the radical reshaping of capitalism and 
98:29 
that of its great protagonists the 
98:31 
working-class but does socialism have a 
98:34 
future 
98:34 
well democratic socialism actually 
98:36 
prevail people to more free and 
98:38 
prosperous system I have the utmost 
98:41 
confidence that a world in which some 
98:43 
thrive by depriving others of freedom 
98:45 
billions needlessly suffer amid plenty 
98:48 
and we move closer to ecological 
98:49 
catastrophe is unacceptable I also 
98:52 
believe that as long as we live in a 
98:54 
society divided by class there will be a 
98:56 
national natural opposition to 
98:59 
inequality and exploitation there will 
99:01 
be technical and political barriers to 
99:03 
progress that we can't underestimate but 
99:06 
if we're to make something of our shared 
99:08 
homeland socialist politics broadly 
99:11 
conceived offers us the best tools for 
99:13 
getting there and to thinking about 
99:15 
what's wrong with capitalism today 
99:18 
[Applause] 
99:25 
now have five minutes summary from the 
99:27 
negative well when Bhaskar ducked some 
99:33 
of my questions this evening there was 
99:36 
at least one case in which I was 
99:39 
heartened that he did duck the question 
99:41 
because when I kept asking him in his 
99:44 
socialist society would he shut down 
99:49 
crowdfunding and make it unlawful and if 
99:53 
something's unlawful you get punished he 
99:56 
couldn't answer the question he felt 
99:59 
back on same solid jurisprudence but he 
100:01 
wants a social society in which private 
100:05 
ownership of the means of production is 
100:06 
not permitted so again if it's not 
100:09 
permitted it's unlawful if it's on it's 
100:12 
not unlawful you use the power of the 
100:15 
state to punish people who break that 
100:18 
law even let's slip well yeah maybe I 
100:20 
would allow cloud funding that was a 
100:23 
good sign then when I asked Bhaskar 
100:26 
would you make it unlawful for somebody 
100:29 
to work for me I work for him just on 
100:32 
whatever terms they choose and if you 
100:35 
don't want them to do the well it may 
100:37 
not be necessary he said to prevent them 
100:40 
well yes but if it were necessary what 
100:43 
would you do and and then to in answer 
100:49 
when I asked him what why would you want 
100:52 
the state-owned banks to be the only 
100:54 
forum well well maybe they're not such 
100:56 
ever well you know again we know I know 
101:00 
at least that Bhaskar Bhaskar once he 
101:04 
confronts the implications of what he's 
101:07 
really talking about is going to back 
101:10 
away from what he's really proposing the 
101:14 
outlawing of these practices because he 
101:18 
doesn't approve of them well the where 
101:20 
he ducked to my question continually and 
101:23 
where he kept insisting that somehow or 
101:26 
other this is not doable 
101:27 
he ducked my question by not realizing 
101:29 
that we in the 1970s realized that the 
101:33 
record of real socialism with a real 
101:37 
abolition of private owners 
101:38 
a means of production has been so 
101:41 
horrific that it's unimaginable the 
101:45 
millions do died on China the refreshin 
101:48 
in China the fact that the quasi 
101:50 
socialist Hugo Chavez most recently kept 
101:53 
being cited for human rights abuses I 
101:55 
didn't want to stick him with the 
101:57 
appalling record of socialism but what I 
102:00 
really want him to confront is this he 
102:03 
cannot keep talking about how well we're 
102:06 
going to evolve we're going to 
102:07 
experiment we're gonna see we don't know 
102:10 
we'll develop well unfortunately after a 
102:13 
century of Horrors from the record of 
102:16 
socialism we need better answers than 
102:18 
that and then most importantly we're 
102:21 
VASCAR backed away was when I kept 
102:24 
telling him that you can have the 
102:27 
socialist revolution to tomorrow you can 
102:30 
start it going 
102:31 
you don't need forcible government edict 
102:35 
top-down edict to bring about even at 
102:38 
best that will not be as socialism worth 
102:41 
having you should understand private 
102:44 
ownership of means of production offers 
102:46 
you all the opportunities you want to 
102:49 
create consumer economies that will only 
102:52 
buy from your worker owned companies so 
102:55 
they can run things the way they want 
102:57 
because the consumers of i from them 
102:59 
wanna buy from them you can take over 
103:02 
companies all of that potential bhaskar 
103:05 
kept backing away from and I only asked 
103:09 
him as a lover of freedom try to 
103:11 
confront that try to understand what 
103:14 
what what socialism through capitalist 
103:17 
means can offer him just as we in the 
103:20 
new left understood as well it's a very 
103:24 
difficult experiment 
103:26 
face it please call your own bluff bring 
103:31 
about the socialist economy quit 
103:33 
pretending that consumers that the 
103:36 
average person has no power when when 
103:39 
the bottom half had one-third of the 
103:41 
consumer dollar and the bottom 
103:42 
four-fifths have nearly two-thirds quit 
103:45 
pretending that there's no power when 
103:47 
three point two trillion dollars is is 
103:49 
controlled by pension funds that could 
103:52 
voluntarily not through force of elite 
103:54 
--ax quit pretending that they stayed on 
103:57 
banks that well it's been done and you 
103:59 
know it works fine and and the North 
104:01 
Dakotans love it quit pretending that 
104:04 
that should be the only stop in a free 
104:07 
society to to those who would tell us 
104:11 
that we have to abide by the decisions 
104:14 
of the majority over the state-owned 
104:15 
banks we freedom lovers including VASCAR 
104:20 
will have to say that no we understand 
104:24 
that you cannot have freedom without the 
104:27 
option of private ownership but the good 
104:29 
news the good news is that it not only 
104:31 
lifts the living standards of the broad 
104:33 
masses of people it offers the freedom 
104:36 
to practice socialism by capitalist 
104:40 
means bhaskar I invite you to learn that 
104:43 
and put your mind around it thank you 
104:47 
once again the resolution socialism 
104:51 
socialism is more effective than 
104:53 
capitalism in bringing freedom to the 
104:56 
masses so our results here the yes vote 
105:00 
beforehand it was 26 percent and 
105:03 
afterwards it was 30 percent we had a 
105:05 
change of three point seven percent that 
105:09 
is the score to beat here the no vote 
105:11 
started out at 52% and then it changed 
105:14 
to 63% so the change was 11 percent and 
105:17 
that means that the the winner here is 
105:21 
the no vote they picked up more points 
105:24 
there so the Tootsie Roll goes to Eugene 
105:27 
so well done the prestigious took the 
105:31 
role prize 
105:33 
[Applause]