Richard Wolff responds to Jordan B. Peterson

Through the magic of the internet it is possible for me to respond to some things that were said by a Canadian psychologist by
the name of Jordan Peterson who teaches at the University of Toronto. I’m not going to be talking about
the psychology he teaches or that he preaches because that’s not my area of expertise, just as it’s clear that Marxism is not his. However, he has made
statements about Marxism despite not knowing
very much about it, as is evident from what he says, and these have included daring
Marxists to debate with him. (Just for the record,
anytime anywhere, as long as we can work out the details. That’s no problem at this end.) So what is it that’s wrong with what Mr. Peterson has
to say about Marxism? Well, it’s partly that he’s
recycling old Cold War stuff. The Cold War was over in 1989. Most of us have moved on
around the world. Mr. Peterson seems to be stuck, and he’s stuck with
one of the oldest kinds of arguments imaginable, telling us that we should
not be interested in Marxism. In fact, it’s kind of immoral,
in his words, to be interested in Marxism in view of what Stalin
did in Soviet Russia. Well, OK, Stalin did terrible
things in Soviet Russia. However, Marxism exists in every country on the face of the earth. It’s been going on for 150 years, and a lot more than
what happened in Russia under Stalin over a
period of 15 or 20 years has to be taken into account if you’re going to make
an assessment of Marxism. To use the one example
that is really horrible over there as the
judgment on Marxism would be about the
same sense as saying Christianity should be dismissed
because of the Catholic Inquisition or the destruction of the
Native American population by Christians, or the Holocaust against Jews, gays and so forth by Christians in Germany, and on and on and on. Two world wars by
capitalist Christian countries fighting each other may all qualify for the kinds of arguments
Mr. Peterson makes. We don’t make those kinds of arguments because they make no sense, and Mr. Peterson ought to
not do that with Marxism. The only other thing to say is he seems to reduce Marxism, when he actually talks about it, to the problem of inequality: that some people are
rich and others are poor. And he deals with that by
the very sophisticated notion that poor people’s anger at the rich is their envy of their success. This is an insult to those folks who are critical of inequality, but apparently Mr. Peterson
doesn’t worry about that. So let’s respond. Inequality is indeed a social problem, but it has nothing particularly
to do with Marxism. People have been talking about
the problem of inequality for thousands of years before
there ever was a Karl Marx, or a Marxism. The whole point of Marxism was to explain why inequality under
capitalism didn’t go away. And let’s remind everybody: capitalism comes into the world in the French and American Revolutions, –talking about being better than feudalism because under capitalism, you see, we are free. We are equal.
We are democratic and all the rest of it. Capitalism was to bring, in the words of the
French Revolution, liberty, equality
and fraternity. Well, as you know and I know, and even Mr. Peterson must know, we have capitalism. We sure do, but we don’t have freedom,
equality and fraternity –not even close. Mr. Peterson’s own speech is
an indication of that, so the Marxists have always said, “Why is it that? Why do we not have the equality
that capitalism promised?” And the answer
is in the analysis of capitalism, the way in which
capitalism organizes society with employers and employees. The kind of parallel to lords and serfs, and masters and slaves, such that the employees
produce the wealth that the capitalists get into their hands, thereby becoming wealthier while the mass of the
working people are excluded from the very surplus their
creativity puts on this earth. In other words, there’s an explanation. If Mr. Peterson understood that, his critique of capitalism might address that explanation. Instead, he acts as though
there is no explanation, that Marxism is about the envy of the poor against the rich. With this caricature,
with this straw man which he knocks down with gusto, he thinks he’s actually
done something. For those who know
something about Marxism listening to him is embarrassing.

  1. Jordan is actually a very shallow man. He is just another of the old-school Christian Idiots who thinks that all people are evil in nature, and require an oppressive ancient religion to stand over them. What guys like him fail to understand, is the fact that all religions, with all their teachings of morality, and fairness, and justice, are a product of the human mind. We humans already have an innate inborn sense of morality, and proper behavior. We are not just "vile creatures of apatite". We are creatures of intellect, of science, and of life saving technology.

  2. Marxists never seem to be very impressed with the concepts of freedom and that human beings simply differ from one another in ability. They also always seem enthralled with the idea of making everyone equally miserable…I wonder why that is? 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

  3. Richard Wolff and his big ego,set up a face to face discussion with Jordan Peterson rather than do his inventory.Richard Wolff has for several decades been harping about the same subjects over and over.At some point,the unexpected becomes reality and Wolff says,"I told you so".To me he's become boring !!

  4. Comments by Jordan Peterson's viewers channel reminds me of the types of comments that I've learned about with cult members.

  5. I don't like Jordan Peterson, he's a know it all and he's pompous !!
    Much of what he preaches is BS too.

  6. 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👍

    My college professor berated me for agreeing with Marxism.

    Corporate greed and now in America corporation's are people too.
    Correct me if I'm wrong. Mitt Romney played a huge part in that happening.



    “Anti-Communism is anti-Semitism.”

    Jewish Voice (New York: National Council of Jewish Communists), July-August 1941, p. 23

    “The revolution in Russia is a Jewish revolution”

    The Maccabean (New York), Nov. 1905, p, 250

    “Jewry is the mother of Marxism.”

    Le Droit de Vivre, May 12, 1936

    “Judaism is Marxism, communism”

    Harry Waton, A Program for the Jews and an Answer to All Anti-Semites  (New
    York: Committee for the Preservation of the Jews, 1939), p. 64

    “The communist soul is the soul of Judaism.”

    Harry Waton, A Program for the Jews and an Answer to All Anti-Semites  (New York: Committee for the Preservation of the Jews, 1939), p. 143

    THE 66,000,000 HOLOCAUST

    “We cannot state that all Jews are Bolsheviks. But – Without Jews there would never have
    been Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the Truth. The Blood
    Maddened Jewish terrorists had murdered 66,000,000 in Russia from 1918 – 1957.”

    “Between the years 1917 and 1991 preceding the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is estimated
    that Communist Jews murdered somewhere between 60 and 135 million innocent

    Alexander Solzhenitsyn

  8. Marxism doesn't account for the fact that some work harder than others and so should be rewarded for there efforts in a greater proportion.

  9. Professor Worlff, thank you for your valuable lessons.

    What are your thoughts on Foucault's work and his criticism of Marxism?

  10. Healthy debate… I love this guy..
    But I disagree highly with Richard…
    I suffer too much understand socialist leaders who wanted good things but our economy suffer alot . High unemployment n poverty till now..

  11. America would rejuvenate with a good dose of Socialism. However, to get there — and, to understand this very simple: Economics 1+1 — it would require to think outside of the box of the current concept. That would be the starting point.

    Then, if allowed to think outside of the box . . . they (the corporate slaves) will suddenly fall, as in trip over proof and examples that the most successful countries in the world, also . .. countries with the BEST healthcare in the world . . . Paid for by redistributing wealth directly into the homes of people. That also works for education and social programmers wherever needed . . . etc . . . etc . . .

    To free America from the rut of corporate NEO-enslaved, America needs to consider — to think outside of their consumer / employee status roles. Their is a whole new happier world waiting for you all . . . if you would just do it.

  12. This Wolff guy is absolutely adorable… The only forum on earth he can hope to create the illusion of being able to debate Peterson is one where he sits in his own echo chamber, speaking emphatically to a camera. What a hack. At least the video is good for a laugh.

  13. I don't know what to give this a thumbs up for being simply factual about the original definitions of Marxisim and Capitalism or a thumbs down for the intellectual ignorance for the fact that for every "ism" there are so many flavors, shades and variations nobody can follow any of it.

    Every politically ambitious person is to some extent narcissistic and in their pursuit of political power uses an ideological label that fits (at least in part) what they can use to convince others to their cause. The problem with this is that strict definitions are lost. Prof Wolff can argue all he likes about strict definitions of Marxisim and Capitalism but in the real world those definitions don't mean anything anymore. Look at the word socialism and how it gets used in American politics. It has so many definitions that nobody knows what anybody is trying to say once that word is used.

  14. First of all, slapping a title behind your name does not make you an expert in any field.

    Anyone with a logical thinking brain will read the communist manifesto and immediately close the book and throw it into the nearest dumpster. There are a lot of other examples of Marxism that has failed.

    Not only that but Marxism is completely based psychologically so a psychologist can have a lot to say about Marxism and it’s major flaws.

  15. I say, you are rather embarrassing. Lets forget about Stalin and Mao etc for Now. What happened when the socialists took over in Britain after the Second World War? Because socialism does not work they run Britain down. It took the lady on the white horse to redeem Britain from the abyss. Look at the record of the practice of socialism from all corners of the world. Don't be selective. Look at what socialism has done to Africa, South America, the Middle East etc and have the guts to tell me that that evil infantile ideology is good.Unless you worship it; I wouldn't be surprised.

  16. Marx made me question my capitalist culture like Pink Floyd made me question the institutions of my domestication. Neither provided much in the way of answers, but they opened my eyes to the problems.

  17. Jordan Peterson is a lunatic psychopath period. He a very stupid and dumb person. He needs to get another job.

  18. Richard Wolff is a genius he knows what he talking about, Jordan Peterson is a total idiot, simple as that. He talks in circles, he doesn't know where his going period.

  19. So getting paid for your labor in a way that is voluntary is akin to slavery? Yea, Mr. Peterson clearly got his analysis wrong. Lmao

  20. Even you are wrong about Stalin and are regurgitating Cold War propaganda,you literally have no reason for your bad opinion on him.

  21. meanwhile, since karl marx, Capitalism has consistently lifted living standards of the whole world. yes, we have reached a plateau with minimal growth, but that has a lot to do with too much regulation, bad tax codes, and DUM trade deals, which by the way, ARE HELPING many developing contries.

  22. It’s freedom of opportunity not outcome. I don’t want to live in a world where the lazy, useless, in the way people make the same as everyone else. I’ll start to buy this shit when I see people actually making sacrifices to try and survive. Not paying for a brand new car equivalent to their yearly pay with a two hundred dollar phone plan, while eating out every fucking day. Then these people turn around and blame everyone else for their situation. Capitalism isn’t fair. Forcing everyone to be equal is also not fair and counter productive. Anyone in this capitalistic society can become successful, how?! By creating value for society.

  23. Yaron Brook from Ayn Rand Institute should debate Richard Wolff instead of Jordon Peterson. Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman would've been much better candidates who were very active during Wolff's student days. However Wolff must keep off Thomas Piketty's selective data (Texan sharpshooter data selection fallacy) while advancing facts or peddling ignorance.

  24. It seems hard to truly disprove Peterson's views without analysing the psychology which supports his views. To me Peterson very frequently talks about extreme inequality that is very much present under this system and is critical of it. I don't think wolf has heard many of Peterson's talks really. They both actually understand that the system of inequality is much older than capitalism. Peterson and others believe it has evolutionary or biological roots and can't be just dismissed and eliminated through legislation or policy and a medium needs to be created with equal opportunity for success and good strong social safety net programs for those that fall through the cracks.

  25. When I was about 15 years old living on a farm in Namibia, which was governed by South Africa, I knew nothing about Marx but noticed that the black slaves working on the farms were paid £3 a month to enrich their owners who could go on trips to Europe. I admire Richard Wolf for brinigng Marx's critque into a focus outside the tyrannies that were established in the name of Marx. The evils of the Soviet system did not begin with Stalin. Rosa Luxemburg told her comrades, Lenin and Trotsky that their policies would lead to a terror worse than that of the Tsar. I often quote John Ruskin, but will do so again. He was a Conservative and accepted capitalism but wrote that its only function should be to produce human riches and that if it multiplied itself for itts own sake we were in the shit – my word – and that is where we are. Ruskin said our servants shoud well off enough to lead their own lives and should be our brothers and sisters. .- I have noticed that all men who had a great social impact: Jesus, Marx, Nietzsche, Freud have been perverted into something evil lby their false followers. Ghandi is of course an exception to this rule but he taught us enough about resisting authority

  26. In our system you do have freedom though. Everyone can be the employer. We all have that choice. Most people dont want to put in the work to get to that position though. If you sat in front of your computer and or smartphone long enough and actually used it for learning, you could obtain enough knowledge to be the best at what ever position your heart desires. Because of the internet we have the ability, nah, the blessing of being able to access the most information then ever befor in history. Hence allowing for people to become what ever their heart desires. But most people misuse the devices we have created (created from capitalism may I add) for entertainment purposes and now wonder why they are stuck at the bottom. The statement "knowledge is power" could never be so try, more then it is right now. Parenting is where this displacement is started, showing children the importance of knowledge is key, otherwise kids grow up not wanting to learn a damn thing. Getting them to thirst for knowledge is the way you can keep them from the bottom.
    The pareto distribution is the beat way to explain the inequality of the system. Or should I say systems. Because while Marx was write about inequality in capitalism, he was wrong about it only being in capitalism. Its apart of every system that ever existed. I'm not sure what lecture of debate or article you read on j.p.'s view on Marxism but I think you need to dig though some more internet and get a better perspective on his outlook on it. What you were saying in this vid didn't line up with the things I heard him say. But I'm not sure to many people go look for perspective anymore. I clicked this video because I wanted to see what yours was, but I'm not sure you ever played enough attention to his to make an argument against him. Js

  27. But in western society, dosent everyone have the opportunity to be the employer. And to be the employee is just merely the path one chose as well. We have never had this much knowledge at our finger tips ever (because of the internet) so don't you think if we actually used these devices for knowledge, you could be at the top of any hirarchy/business in this system? Just for the record you could go live in the forest in this society as well and never have to lift a finger for the man ever. But the innovation of technology that has been created by capitalism, makes our lives alot easier so most won't go to the woods and live primitive and free. But it's still nice to have that choice is all I'm saying.

  28. Peterson is not an economist. Debate Sowell.
    One example? Russia, China, Cambodia, North Korea, to some extent Venezuela. Every place you've tried your crazy ideas has resulted in deaths of millions.

  29. The rich might get richer but the poor also get a better Quality of life, I’m sorry but the notion that it is your right to something just for existing is nonsense. but you should be able to achieve what ever you work towards capitalism dose provide this

  30. Well that depends on your definition of “criticism.” You clearly just do not understand the logic that Saint Jordan Of Toronto used to TOTALLY DESTROY Marx (whose story incidentally fits the Jungian Archetype of the Babylonian god Marduk, and that’s why Stalin was afraid was of snakes). If you watched his YouTube series on how the Crusade in the New World meant eradicate the native Americans was actually a reflex action against radical feminism, you’d understand. Now go clean your room.

  31. the only way Marx has any relevence is by constantly moving the goalposts. all his predictions were wrong. all of them. and many of them were disproved within Marx's lifetime. See Leszek Kolakowski's "What is Left of Socialism?" beyond that, Marxism has had virtually zero effect on economics because um it's all wrong from the start

    1. Marx was an

    important and influential thinker, and Marxism has been a doctrine with
    intellectual and practical influence. The fact is, however, that most
    serious English-speaking economists regard Marxist economics as an
    irrelevant dead end. ~~ Robert Solow, Nobel Prize winning economist

    2. there is no major premise, doctrine, or tool of analysis
    in economics today that derived from the writings of Karl Marx. There is
    no need to deny that Marx was in many ways a major historic figure of
    the nineteenth century, whose long shadow still falls across the world
    of the twenty-first century. Yet, jarring as the phrase may be, from the
    standpoint of the economics profession Marx was, as Professor Paul Samuelson called him, "a minor post-Ricardian."
    Thomas Sowell (2006). On Classical Economics, Yale University Press, p. 186

  32. You haven’t listened to a thing Jordan has said. So how do you organize a society with no hierarchical structure. Show me how and when it has ever been done.

  33. Peterson refers to the social justice warriors on campus as social Marxists. Equality of opportunity, yes. Equality of outcome demanded by the SJW's , no.

  34. Richard Wolff says and i quote " To use the one example that is really horrible over there ( referring to Marxist Russia under Stalin) as the judgment on Marxism". There is a huge flaw in that statement and that is that it is no the only example in fact almost all historical examples of Marxism were at the vary least failures and in many cases thy were horrendous abuses to humankind. I am trying to give Neo-Marxism and Neo-Communism a chance to change my mind, but if this is the level of thought in modern Marxism….. well i am not impressed. Capitalism is by no means perfect
    but it has produced, (along with other forms of government to give aid) a living level that is higher then ever before. That can not be said for Marxism.

  35. With all do respect. Most of the anti soviet lies have been exposed as such. It was the first and most successful attempt at building socialism along Marxist lines. One can still be critical of Soviet mistakes but only within the context of the local, regional and global realities and limitation of those times. It is not incidental that people like Peterson use it as a way of discrediting Marxism. It’s part and parcel of the capitalists and the bourgeoisie imperative in trying to protect and manipulate the worker to protect their ‘class’ interest. Otherwise this video is on point.

    Lies Concerning the History of the Soviet Union

    On the Ukrainian famine
    Talking about the famine of the thirties, the propagandists of the theory of the Holodomor hide that in the XIX century the famine visited the Russian empire every 2-3 years. At the same time, even in the most terrible crop failure, up to 15% of the bread produced was sold abroad. Ivan Vyshnegradsky, the former Minister of Finance in 1891 (this year was deposited in people's memory as the King-famine), justified it with the need to balance the state budget at any price: "We must export, even if we die." Moreover, contrary to popular belief, the “breadbasket of Europe” was Trans-Urals and South Siberia, and not at all Ukraine.

    The reasons for the frequent famine in Ukraine lie not only in the export of bread, but also in the landlessness of the peasants, in the low farming culture, poor equipment and almost no fertilizer.
    The situation has further deteriorated as a result of the devastation caused by the Civil War. The worst was the famine of 1932-33, affecting not only Ukraine, but also the North Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Trans-Ural, Volga region.

    However, this is not all. Pages of the émigré newspaper Ukrainian Citizens' News published in New York of those days are full of headlines:
    “15.000 children in Transcarpathian Ukraine face starvation” (05/04/32)
    “Hungry death prevails in the villages of the Hutsul region” (04/16/32)
    "Hunger in Western Ukraine is increasing" (May 1932),
    "The Czech imperialists starve the oppressed population of Transcarpathian Ukraine" (04.19.32)
    Poland is going hungry (“The Land of Gallows, Hunger and Suicide”, USCHV, 11/20/32), and in April 1933, Romanian, Austrian, Hungarian news agencies reported the death of 120,000 children from starvation in Romania. In May 1932, the Czech gendarmerie shot a march on the capital of starving workers. In November of the same year, 6,000 hungry peasants of Catalonia smash landowner estates in Spain. In the 960-thousandth Budapest, Hungarian newspapers have 150,000 hungry people. 4 million starving in 1932 in Germany, especially desperate, smash up warehouses and grocery stores (UShV,). In the USA from the famine of 1932 caused by the Great Depression are estimated at 6-8 million people, and the data about them is still classified. At the same time, the government, according to the reports of the American, Canadian and Brazilian telegraph agencies, used steamboats to drown in the ocean and burned grain in the furnaces in order to prevent a decline in prices for it. Julius Fucik (Tvorba magazine, August 25, 32) writes about such measures of "price protection" in Czechoslovakia in the midst of famine….
    Article is long and can’t post on you tube but I can provide full text if needed

    This is the sources on this selected pieces from the article.

    Sources: 1. Mark Tauger, “Hunger, Famine, Genocide?”, Kiev, Dovira Publishing House, 2008. ISBN 971-966-507-245-4
    2. N. Lativok, E. Mazur, “1932-1933: the Holodomor in Europe and America. 1992-2009: the genocide in Ukraine ", Moscow, the White Alvas, 2009. ISBN 979-5-914640-21-4

  36. Mr Peterson is just a marketing man. He's good at his profession.

    It takes compassion, integrity, independence and true wisdom to really understand about Marxism.

  37. The flaw in the argument is that it isn’t “One horrible example”. Literally every instance where Marxism has successfully achieved a mono-party rule has been as bad as or worse than Stalin. Those instances where it hasn’t been terrible is because Marxism has been tempered against existing Democrating systems while retaining private ownership which makes it “not real socialism”.

  38. Wollf is an ASS, as is outlined, in part, by his ad hominem attacks on those who disagree with him. Plus, he is completely blinded by his own ideology and, he knowingly misleads his audience to support his outdated views.
    He is a danger, to the gullible young minds he corrupts.

  39. Wolf ia too much for Jordan Peterson.
    Do not debate Peterson, Dr Wolf.
    Peterson is just a mediocre psychologist who knows nothing about economics and history.

  40. actually, Nazis werent christian… just had to point that out, not that im a christian or nazi or anything

  41. I have commented also on how Peterson's knowledge of Marxism leaves much to be desired. Awesome that Dr. Wolf has schooled him on the subject!

  42. 3:36 "We have capitalism! We sure do. But we don't have freedom, equality and fraternity. Not even close."

    Said the man, as he is exercising his freedom to respond to a fellow professor, while he's met with a group of supporters of his on Youtube…

    And that "magic" of internet called Youtube. Yeah. That "magic" was created out of capitalism. Y'know, Youtube is a company. Just sayin'.

  43. While I certainly disagree with your argument on when capitalism developed and what it promised to bring us, I can admit that Peterson doesn’t do ideas which I strongly disagree with, I.E Marxism, justice. There can be an element of greed to any decision we make, but to write off a school of thought as just being built on greed and then claiming that you have defeated their ideas (big distinction between ideas and motivations) is silly.

  44. You forget to mention that capitalism also creates the OPPORTUNITY for upward social mobility, something not available in the time of slaves, serfs, lords, communism ect. It’s also convenient that you attribute 60 million dead Ukrainians and Russians to Stalin and not marxism aka communism aka socialism. Stalin is just one man. I don’t think humans have figured out a perfect system yet but I lean towards the system that caters to the individual instead of to the state. If doctors make the same as cashiers what is the point of doing all the work to become a doctor?

  45. Name one Marxist country that didn’t go all totalitarian and kill its own people on a major scale to uphold the power

  46. Jordan Peterson just doesn’t cite Stalin and Soviet Russia as a failure of Marxism. While it most certainly was the pinnacle of failure for that ideology, he also points out North Korea, China, Cambodia (Pol Pot), Vietnam, Venezuela, and others to highlight Marxism, or it’s variations, as a failure. Additionally, if you actually listen to him he readily criticizes capitalism. In fact, he was once a part of the socialist party in Canada. However, he learned their party leaders were actually more greedy, corrupt and power hungry than those they criticized, capitalists and conservatives.

    I think you need to listen to JP more before you claim he knows nothing of Marxism… He’s quite well versed in the subject. But of course, marxists and socialist simply want to blame everyone but themselves for their lot in life. Additionally, taking out any form of personal responsibility, Marxists and socialists expect equality of outcome and not equality of opportunity. The fails to address one critical aspect, that is individuals are highly individualistic with different motives, desires, interests, passions , etc.

  47. Professor Wolf is an economist. That's his forte, and he displays it with conviction. His explanation of Marxism is academic, the product of long years of studies in that field. His attack on clinical psychologist Jordan B. Peterson is not without merit. The psychologist has been known to arrogantly parade his pseudo understanding of other subjects and he seems to have fooled an awful lot of people. The following is a description of Mr. Peterson taken from the Guardian: “Peterson’s secret sauce is to provide an academic veneer to a lot of old-school rightwing cant, including the notion that most academia is corrupt and evil, and banal self-help patter,” says Southey. “He’s very much a cult thing, in every regard. I think he’s a goof, which does not mean he’s not dangerous.”

  48. My hero Chridtopher Hitchens was a Marxist, it cant be so bad as this genius choose it. In contrary to what Richard Wolf here sais, Hitch did attack christians for the same reasons (and more) that i just heard here, which i admire him for, but Americans dont even understand socialime let alone Marxisme

  49. Wolff is just talking about the Marixst critique of capitalism, which is only half of the story. What about the other half of the story? That's the Marxist solution to inequality. It has never worked, but rather, has lead to misery and death.

  50. Capitalism is a joke now we've become a monopoly. I have never recieved a bailout for my businesses. I have never recieved any incentives for my businesses a complete F…… joke!

  51. Peterson only sound intelligent to those who don't read much, especially when start talking about subjects you have a bit of understanding, you'll know that he has no idea what he's talking about, or he just know a bit about that topic, perhaps he have read one or few articles about that topic just for sack of arguments… But know any deep understanding of such subjects… Don't get me wrong he is a brilliant psychologist, and have a lot to said about many topics

  52. "One example"!? Marxism has resulted in destruction in any nation that has let the ideology creep in like a cancer. To think that Soviet Russia is the only example of marxism-gone-wrong leads one to believe that Wolff doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. And calling petersons ideas "old" or unsophisticated is not an argument. Marxism is about equality… riiiiiiight. Actually, the Marxists use the ideology to foment civil unrest to destabilize society to their advantage. They stir up the poor against the rich, the employee against the employer under the guise of equality but really for the purpose of driving that society into accepting first socialism as an intermediary step to full-blown communism. The idea is that if society isn't equal then the Marxist will MAKE it equal. It's all about force. And, of course, what happens is the same thing that happens in every communist regime. On the other hand, Capitalism does not inherently lead to equality either. This is because a free and equal society is built on the bedrock of a moral foundation. Individual morality is THE ONLY WAY to equality. It is found not from the outside -in use of force, but from the inside-out use of personal freedom. The difference is that Free market capitalism does not seek to interfere with the necessary prerequisite of individual morality – the freedom to choose. marxs own writings reveal that the Marxist ideology seeks to stamp out the author of the moral code himself, to replace God with a new arbiter of morality, the almighty State – ultimately to remove from the individual the freedom to choose and the ability to be a moral agent unto himself. This has never and will never lead to a free, prosperous and equal society. Listen to Wolff very carefully and determine what his ultimate solutions are. Like Marx, Wolff seems to be quite able to identify a problem, but the solution he presents is…. laughable if it wasn't so sinister.

  53. Seriously? No one knows what Marxism is? Especially this guy!? The idea is dividing society into groups and then the oppressed overthrow the oppressors… so now we have cultural Marxist imagining that minority groups are the victims of the minority groups and need those with cultural power need to be shamed and denigrated… duh 🤷🏼‍♂️

  54. Peterson is talking from stomach not from head,he wasted his time to take the degree in psychology.or from some fack university.
    When I suffering I am not free.
    1) suffering with food
    2) suffering with housing
    3) suffering in jobs place
    4) suffering with health issues
    5)and Manny.
    Maybe Peterson taking good money from some one else alike H Clinton without knowledge to talking about Marxism.

  55. wolffie is bright.. smart..nuts.. .. ignorant of the threat of the gvt debt ! ! ! that little annoying deficit in the amount of $22 TRILLION ! ! !

    taxpayers rev is not enough to make a dent bin this disgusting .. criminal..led unnecessary bond debt..

    🤔 did you just tune out.. go to linked in or other soc med pablum..twaddle..farcebook..
    hoizontal neck … cross the street entitled… privileged..not looking

  56. Sure he is using Soviet as the one of the worst things that communism can cause to a country. But when you look at the other countries that tried full out communism it always came with a brutal authoritarian ruler elite. Just look at countries such as China, Mongolia, North Korea, Cuba, East Germany, Albania, North Vietnam, Kongo (to some externt), Camodia and more. These were countries that from their beginning were geniune in their attempt to establish a communistic system but all ended up poorer and with authoritarian leadership. This is a fact that show that communism to this day havent been more succesfull in replacing their previous capitalist systems and should be use as a cautionary tale of what have happened when communism have been tried to be implemented previously. This is not to say that the current capitalist consensu isnt deeply dysfunctional, but to be a warning to people who naively think that just replacing capitalism will solve all problems. The world isnt that white and black..

  57. Sir, all leftists and communists you have refusing the terrible things of the Soviet Union till the Berlin Wall fall.

  58. I believe dr wolff accepted a challenge to debate with Peterson at some university, to which mr. Peterson declined

  59. Well, there is no fool like an old fool. Having been brought up as red diaper baby, and having been a communist sympathizer thru my years at university, and after traveling thru many eastern bloc communist countries, and having lived in Cuba almost 4 yrs during the mid sixties, and having traveled to Cambodia and seen the piles of skulls, this old fool Wolff does the adage justice.

  60. Marxism can only be enforced by an altruistic society that does not now exist or by force which would require death.
    Capitalism has the same opportunities all around with those successful obtaining according to their merit and those who do not achieve success to run their own business being left to seek employment.
    The nature of employment being a thing is in fact in Marxism too, everything comes from somewhere. A free market encourages faster development to require less for the same.

  61. Well I do like Jordan Peterson. But on this you're absolutely correct. I think his heart Jordan Peterson is a conservative. Almost taking the tone of that's the way it is so that's the way it should be. And if you take what I call his self-help philosophy it's sort of centers around moving within your capability. That get your house in order shtick. I don't know why he comments on socialism at all he's obviously not knowledgeable. And he himself admits he's not sure why power concentrate so heavily in hierarchies. But if that's the way it is that's how it should be.

  62. I want to see a live debate. This video sounds more like a personal attack than a debate. Shame.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *