Londoniyyah - Part 17 - Marxism/2 | Mohammed Hijab (2022-02-22) ​

0:00:14 another session of the london ear this
0:00:15 is the second of two sessions on marxism
0:00:18 it's a very important world ideology so
0:00:20 we actually dedicated two sessions to it
0:00:22 the first one was more explanatory in
0:00:25 scope
0:00:26 and this one is going to be more
0:00:28 discussion based and we have uh with us
0:00:31 in fact to start this discussion
0:00:33 uh
0:00:34 no other than the chair of the communist
0:00:36 party of great britain jack conrad how
0:00:38 are you uh jack conrad
0:00:40 i'm very well thank you surviving kovitz
0:00:43 so far excellent maybe you can uh tell
0:00:46 us a little bit more how to survive more
0:00:47 than just uh coving um but we're going
0:00:50 to ask some questions and and jack
0:00:53 we wanted to get it we wanted to get it
0:00:55 from you obviously firsthand you've
0:00:56 written about communism yourself you're
0:00:58 the author of a book called fantastic
0:01:00 reality which i'm sure is freely
0:01:02 available online
0:01:04 and you're also
0:01:05 as we mentioned you're the leader of the
0:01:07 comments by great britain so you have
0:01:09 expertise expertise both on the ground
0:01:11 and in written works first question a
0:01:13 very sim simple question which is how
0:01:16 would you define
0:01:18 marxism
0:01:20 and
0:01:21 how would you explain its implications
0:01:23 if it were to be implemented on a
0:01:25 political social and economic level
0:01:28 okay
0:01:29 well i would define marxism
0:01:33 as a theory and practice of human
0:01:36 liberation
0:01:38 um marxism is rooted deep in philosophy
0:01:43 not least german philosophy
0:01:45 but also in classic philosophy so
0:01:48 dialectics
0:01:50 but also you know historical materialism
0:01:53 so the study of history the attempt to
0:01:55 grasp historic laws
0:01:58 you could say marxism is also about
0:02:01 economics but marx i think would have
0:02:03 objected
0:02:04 to that he would call himself a critic
0:02:08 of economics
0:02:10 but also it's about politics and in
0:02:12 terms of um
0:02:14 you know what would be the result
0:02:17 the result would be
0:02:19 first of all the overthrow of capitalism
0:02:23 the constitution of the working class as
0:02:26 the ruling class but
0:02:28 crucially
0:02:30 using a semi-state
0:02:32 that withers away
0:02:34 so
0:02:35 marxism
0:02:36 is actually about
0:02:38 ending class of all sorts
0:02:41 ending exploitation
0:02:43 ending the antagonism between human
0:02:46 beings and nature
0:02:48 and it's actually about um a project
0:02:52 of
0:02:54 rounded individual development
0:02:56 so we're not um
0:02:58 anti-individual
0:03:01 we're
0:03:02 in favor of the fullest possible
0:03:05 individual development
0:03:07 but that's reliant
0:03:08 um on
0:03:10 collectivity in other words we don't see
0:03:11 the individual outside society so that's
0:03:15 my couple of minutes uh definition of
0:03:18 marxism
0:03:19 okay and um the second question i want
0:03:22 to ask you
0:03:23 is
0:03:24 the overlaps you see since you've
0:03:25 written about religion and politics so
0:03:28 you're
0:03:29 you kind of delved into both
0:03:30 series
0:03:32 what are the overlaps you see between
0:03:34 marxism and islam particularly obviously
0:03:37 uh we we should caveat this by saying
0:03:39 that marxism can be interpreted in a
0:03:41 variety of different ways as islam can
0:03:44 be as well but generally speaking how
0:03:46 would you um
0:03:47 rate or analyze or assess
0:03:50 the overlaps between marxism and islam
0:03:54 well first of all i'd say with islam but
0:03:56 all the abrahamic religions there's this
0:03:59 idea of achieving a better world
0:04:02 sometimes
0:04:04 certainly when it comes to christianity
0:04:05 i have to excuse myself i was brought up
0:04:07 a christian so i know a little bit more
0:04:09 about that
0:04:10 there is the idea oh well the better
0:04:13 world is there for heaven when when
0:04:14 we're dead but i think in all three
0:04:17 um you know major
0:04:19 uh religions there is this idea of a
0:04:21 better world here and now
0:04:24 i'd also say that uh as chair of the
0:04:27 communist party
0:04:30 while we are guided by marxism we have
0:04:33 no bar on people being religious
0:04:37 and indeed in our own organization we
0:04:39 not only got people from a religious
0:04:42 background i mean we've had in our ranks
0:04:45 for example
0:04:46 a church of england vicar
0:04:50 so we we
0:04:51 we're guided by marxism but as a party
0:04:54 we would seek to recruit all people no
0:04:57 matter what their background because an
0:04:59 awful lot of people whether they are
0:05:02 religious or non-religious want a better
0:05:05 world so that's the overlap it's about
0:05:08 the world that we're living in and the
0:05:10 world that we all want
0:05:14 before i continue asking questions um i
0:05:16 just wanted to ask the participants here
0:05:17 if they have any
0:05:19 probing or follow-up questions or any
0:05:21 comments they want to make
0:05:22 so far just just to involve everyone in
0:05:25 the room is there any comments or
0:05:26 questions that anyone has
0:05:28 for jack
0:05:29 conrad
0:05:32 i mean i i was just thinking that in
0:05:34 terms of
0:05:36 the muslim world
0:05:37 in the 20th century we've had sort of
0:05:40 leftist parties so the battle party in
0:05:42 iraq and syria would claim themselves to
0:05:45 be parties of
0:05:46 maybe not communism as such and marxism
0:05:48 as such but at least the left-leaning
0:05:50 parties and the experience that muslims
0:05:52 have had with that are very strong
0:05:53 secular states this sort of demonization
0:05:56 of the practice of faith so how can you
0:05:58 then say that there is this sort of
0:06:00 overlap between islam specifically i'm
0:06:02 not talking general abrahamic religion
0:06:04 but islam
0:06:05 and marxism or communism or socialism
0:06:07 and i'm not even talking about communist
0:06:09 states i'm talking about leftist states
0:06:10 we let's not even go to places like
0:06:12 albania russia and what happened to
0:06:14 muslims there i'm not sure if you heard
0:06:16 that jack i did i did excellent perfect
0:06:19 i don't have to repeat i might have
0:06:20 missed a couple of words but i've got
0:06:22 the gist of it yeah perfect uh yes
0:06:24 you're absolutely right uh my friend
0:06:27 that in terms of the record
0:06:30 of those that call themselves
0:06:31 secularists and certainly i'm well aware
0:06:35 in terms of the record of those that
0:06:36 call themselves
0:06:38 communists
0:06:39 it's often been more than disgraceful
0:06:42 so
0:06:43 you mentioned albania an atheist state
0:06:47 jesus sorry about my
0:06:50 background coming out
0:06:52 um soviet union i mean to me
0:06:55 uh when they began a war on religion
0:06:59 that was a deviation from marxism and
0:07:01 okay you could trace that back
0:07:05 to something like the mid-20s maybe even
0:07:07 earlier but it became its most extreme
0:07:11 in the east
0:07:12 against muslims
0:07:14 so they forced unveiling
0:07:17 of women
0:07:19 for example was hotly contested in the
0:07:21 leadership of the communist party the
0:07:23 soviet union we know who won
0:07:25 and precisely this gets back to you know
0:07:27 your original
0:07:29 observation muhammad you know that there
0:07:31 are many different sorts
0:07:33 um you know people that describe
0:07:35 themselves as muslims and there are many
0:07:37 sorts of people who describe themselves
0:07:38 as communists all i would say
0:07:41 is that in terms of orthodox marxism the
0:07:44 idea of war the persecution of religious
0:07:48 people because of their religion is
0:07:51 absolutely abhorrent what we stand for
0:07:54 is the right to practice one's religion
0:07:58 full stop
0:07:59 and as long as that doesn't harm other
0:08:00 people
0:08:01 um
0:08:02 we find that perfectly acceptable so any
0:08:05 state
0:08:06 that starts to persecute people because
0:08:09 of their religion in my view
0:08:11 is anti-secular and certainly
0:08:14 anti-communist so in my analysis
0:08:17 uh style in soviet union
0:08:20 um is what i call a counter-revolution
0:08:24 within the revolution it turns against
0:08:26 the people it turns against the working
0:08:28 class the working class
0:08:30 in the soviet union was exploited
0:08:34 so
0:08:35 yeah um i'm not going to apologize
0:08:38 for that i'm gonna fight that
0:08:40 uh because to me um you know the these
0:08:43 people who call themselves communists uh
0:08:46 are actually
0:08:47 anti-communist and are discredited the
0:08:49 name of communism and marxism because of
0:08:53 their criminal uh actions
0:08:56 right is there any other questions for
0:08:58 jack on this on this point here yeah
0:09:00 yeah
0:09:01 um
0:09:02 just just to come back on that point so
0:09:04 in logic you have this idea what's
0:09:05 called the no true scotsman fallacy that
0:09:07 when someone points out i would you know
0:09:09 that there's a problem for example the
0:09:11 marxist state you say oh well those are
0:09:12 not true examples of marxism there is no
0:09:15 real scotsman so can you then give us an
0:09:17 example of marxism on a state level in
0:09:20 practice
0:09:21 not just what marxism itself but also
0:09:24 this what you what you've said are is
0:09:26 the freedom for people to practice their
0:09:28 religion um according to their own
0:09:30 beliefs within a marxist state can you
0:09:32 give us an example of that specifically
0:09:36 well no
0:09:38 full stop
0:09:39 why because the marxist project was
0:09:42 envisaged you could say rightly or
0:09:44 wrongly but the marxist project was
0:09:46 envisaged on the working class
0:09:49 taking over in countries where the
0:09:51 working class was the majority
0:09:54 and
0:09:54 winning what marx called the battle for
0:09:57 democracy and therefore when we look at
0:10:00 so-called marxist states i mean the only
0:10:02 one i can point to uh that had a glimmer
0:10:06 of the beginning but it couldn't go
0:10:08 anywhere
0:10:09 is the russian revolution of 1917
0:10:13 but from a marxist point of view
0:10:16 we shouldn't have expected it to survive
0:10:18 in isolation it survives in isolation
0:10:22 but turns into its opposite so the
0:10:24 marxist programme
0:10:25 is actually about the working class
0:10:27 coming to power
0:10:29 in the advanced capitalist countries
0:10:31 nowadays
0:10:32 europe western europe
0:10:34 north america
0:10:36 japan they're they're crucial to our
0:10:39 project
0:10:40 and without them
0:10:42 we shouldn't we don't expect anything
0:10:44 other than
0:10:46 what i would call freak societies
0:10:49 um you know um
0:10:52 pretense
0:10:53 um horrors uh and that's what's produced
0:10:56 so
0:10:57 no i can't that's that's the honest
0:10:59 answer but we shouldn't in terms of
0:11:01 marxist point of view
0:11:03 um expect anything else how on earth can
0:11:06 you put you know into practice the rule
0:11:08 of the working class and move towards a
0:11:11 situation
0:11:12 of abundance
0:11:14 uh in a country like russia
0:11:17 which had uh you know the same sort of
0:11:19 level of economic development
0:11:21 in 1917 as cromwellian
0:11:25 england
0:11:27 um i i think that you know um when we're
0:11:30 talking about the overlaps or lack
0:11:32 thereof um between islam and marxism
0:11:35 the thing that springs to my mind is
0:11:38 less so like the practical or
0:11:41 implementation type
0:11:43 situations
0:11:44 are more so theoretical aspects so
0:11:47 i'm not sure if you're aware but
0:11:49 islam has a system of redistribution
0:11:51 referred to as zakat
0:11:53 one of the pillars of islam in fact
0:11:56 distributable
0:11:58 to eight different categories of people
0:12:00 and
0:12:01 there are some very
0:12:02 specific laws when it relates to zakat
0:12:05 of redistribution
0:12:07 and classically like you know they'll
0:12:08 divide their on livestock and minerals
0:12:12 and uh
0:12:13 and obviously
0:12:14 uh
0:12:15 gold and silver as well
0:12:17 and so
0:12:18 what what scholars have done today and
0:12:20 most people in the world do is they say
0:12:23 well since the people don't use gold and
0:12:25 silver to
0:12:26 buy and sell they use money
0:12:29 fiat currency and so on
0:12:30 so they
0:12:32 effectively
0:12:34 they effectively redistribute using
0:12:36 people's wealth
0:12:37 but that's not to say that 2.5 which is
0:12:39 the figure
0:12:42 of the catabol income
0:12:44 per year is the only thing that's
0:12:47 subtracted because obviously
0:12:49 if you have livestock
0:12:51 as well with farmer
0:12:53 or if you have minerals of some sort so
0:12:55 i think the hanafi position you guys are
0:12:57 here anything that comes from oh you've
0:12:58 got a chef anything that comes from the
0:13:00 ground is a catabol right
0:13:02 yeah
0:13:03 anything that comes from that so yeah so
0:13:05 this is a catapult and so on of anything
0:13:07 that comes from the guy so things like
0:13:09 that
0:13:10 um
0:13:12 are redistribution aspects of islam and
0:13:14 in fact there are there is one thing
0:13:16 which in the quran says
0:13:17 you know hatha
0:13:20 you know it's talking about war beauty
0:13:22 but then
0:13:24 it states such that in this chapter 59
0:13:27 of the quran
0:13:28 such that it does not become
0:13:30 redistributed i.e the wealth
0:13:33 among the elites among you
0:13:35 this is the verse
0:13:44 so uh so that it doesn't become a
0:13:46 redistribution among the elite of you
0:13:49 and um
0:13:52 interestingly there's a discussion i
0:13:53 mean someone will say well this is
0:13:54 specific to war beauty
0:13:56 but then there's another scholarly
0:13:58 discussion is
0:13:59 to be
0:14:03 or the idea that if if phrases come
0:14:06 and they're generic in application then
0:14:09 even if the circumstances of revelation
0:14:11 are
0:14:12 uh specific that
0:14:14 this is a if you like objective of the
0:14:16 sharia which um
0:14:20 which islam has come so in other words
0:14:22 we can take from this ayah and we can
0:14:23 take from the idea of redistribution in
0:14:25 islam we can take from all that
0:14:27 that one of
0:14:28 islam's makha said if you like our
0:14:30 objectives is that
0:14:32 wealth is not distributed among elites
0:14:36 definitely this is i mean you can take
0:14:37 this is the islamic stance so we are
0:14:40 definitely anti-capitalist there's no
0:14:42 doubt about that
0:14:43 we do believe in redistribution we don't
0:14:44 believe in a society where poor people
0:14:46 should put them
0:14:48 in redistribution
0:14:50 yeah
0:14:50 but
0:14:52 and maybe in ways that i mean a pure
0:14:54 you know libertarian maybe wouldn't
0:14:56 wouldn't would not accept that yeah yeah
0:14:58 so on that level you can you can make it
0:15:00 compatible with the capital but
0:15:02 certainly not the usury and this is
0:15:03 another thing as well
0:15:05 like and um
0:15:06 i'm i'm just offering additional maybe
0:15:08 similarities and differences here jack
0:15:10 i'm i'm not sure if you're are you still
0:15:12 with us
0:15:16 hello your signal is um
0:15:18 pretty poor okay can you can you hear me
0:15:21 now can you hear me
0:15:22 yeah so i always tell you
0:15:25 i was just saying that in islam there
0:15:28 are aspects of redistribution and this
0:15:30 is a point of
0:15:31 intersection between islam
0:15:33 and if you like left-wing ideology not
0:15:35 just
0:15:36 left-wing economic ideology like a
0:15:39 fiscal
0:15:40 left-wing policies
0:15:42 um
0:15:43 so there's that and there's also which
0:15:45 is a big thing and
0:15:46 i think rightly one of the participants
0:15:50 wants me to ask you a question on this
0:15:53 uh islam bans usually interest
0:15:56 so it's obviously nowadays in in in
0:15:59 banking and so on we
0:16:01 i mean the entire economy is practically
0:16:04 predicated on interest rates
0:16:07 and banking the banking system
0:16:10 in fact there is one prophecy of the
0:16:12 prophet muhammad
0:16:14 where by
0:16:15 he stated
0:16:17 that there will come a time
0:16:19 where usury will become so widespread
0:16:23 in lemtak if you don't consume it
0:16:30 whoever does not consume it
0:16:32 it will not
0:16:34 they will not be able to wipe off the
0:16:36 dust
0:16:37 of interest from them
0:16:39 so in other words interest will be so
0:16:41 widespread that it's almost impo it's
0:16:43 inescapable from the human condition
0:16:45 this is a prophetic uh saying there will
0:16:48 be there will be a time
0:16:49 where interest will be so widespread
0:16:52 where you will not be able to remove it
0:16:53 from the human condition
0:16:55 so islam has very very very staunch
0:16:59 stance against interest
0:17:02 interest is one of the seven major
0:17:04 mubichads
0:17:06 major sins in islam i mean there are
0:17:07 more than
0:17:08 seven according to majority scholars but
0:17:10 one of the seven most emphasized major
0:17:12 sins
0:17:13 interest is there are
0:17:15 the one on the right then but there are
0:17:16 hadith
0:17:17 which are pretty severe about
0:17:19 i'm not sure maybe for jack
0:17:21 maybe maybe they are actually
0:17:23 it might not be but you know there are
0:17:25 some you know prophetic sayings in islam
0:17:28 which are very anti
0:17:30 uh
0:17:31 interest in the quran in fact there will
0:17:33 be
0:17:35 that whoever consumes interest then
0:17:38 prepare for a war between allah and his
0:17:39 messenger
0:17:41 yet
0:17:48 that those who consume
0:17:49 interest will not raise on the day of
0:17:52 judgement except for the one
0:17:53 who's basically been played around with
0:17:56 by the devil or touched by the devil and
0:17:59 uh and so on so the point is is
0:18:03 we have a very strong science
0:18:05 anti-capitalist from that perspective
0:18:06 because modern-day capitalism a lot of
0:18:08 it is characterized by the interest
0:18:10 systems and from that perspective islam
0:18:12 is anti-capitalist or anti-modern day
0:18:14 capitalist systems
0:18:16 um and obviously with the redistribution
0:18:18 aspect as well
0:18:20 so these are intersections but the major
0:18:22 i think point of uh dissimilarity is a
0:18:25 hadith which can be found which is uh
0:18:28 authentic
0:18:29 where the prophet said that
0:18:31 where they were actually asking him to
0:18:32 stabilize
0:18:34 the market the the the the
0:18:36 the prices for goods
0:18:39 and the prophet
0:18:40 salallahu he stated
0:18:43 that allah or god is the muslim he is
0:18:46 the one who sets the price meaning
0:18:49 i feel like you're not the invisible
0:18:50 hand of the you know the economy i'm not
0:18:52 we're not saying using that language but
0:18:53 the idea is really that
0:18:56 the most god was going to take care of
0:18:58 that and the answer on the face of it of
0:19:01 verses of the quran which seemed to
0:19:02 indicate
0:19:04 that inequality
0:19:06 is not something inequality of outcome
0:19:09 is not something we're opting for
0:19:11 but is allowed to exist
0:19:14 let me explain where in the quran it
0:19:16 says
0:19:28 that we have allowed
0:19:30 some of you to be above others so that
0:19:32 some of you can
0:19:34 basically use others or not use others
0:19:36 but how would you do how would someone
0:19:42 would you say is uh
0:19:44 no no no no not in this context in this
0:19:46 context it would be not mockery now it
0:19:48 would be like a utility
0:19:50 no
0:19:52 it would be utility it would be utility
0:19:53 so in other words
0:19:56 islamically the idea of an employment
0:19:58 employer contract
0:20:00 is not necessarily seen as exploitative
0:20:02 by nature in the same way that like you
0:20:04 know marx would say surplus value and
0:20:06 all that we covered before
0:20:08 so i i think these are the aspects of
0:20:10 dissimilarity um but there are aspects
0:20:12 of similarity as you've mentioned these
0:20:14 are just some technical details is there
0:20:16 anything that you want to add or
0:20:18 jack um
0:20:28 historically have involved some degree
0:20:31 of redistribution downwards
0:20:34 simply because um you know
0:20:38 extremes of super extremes of wealth
0:20:41 lead to mass starvation for example uh
0:20:44 in periods of
0:20:46 crop failure so there has to be some
0:20:48 provision for emergencies or or a
0:20:52 drought or whatever it happens to be
0:20:54 okay
0:20:55 so in terms of marxism
0:20:58 in terms of marxism what we would be
0:21:01 emphasizing is not so much circulation
0:21:04 redistribution
0:21:06 but production itself yes so in terms of
0:21:09 marxism the stress is it's not ignoring
0:21:12 distribution but the stress is on
0:21:14 production itself and from our point of
0:21:16 view
0:21:17 of course although wages and prices
0:21:20 you know
0:21:21 are set and anarchically
0:21:24 nonetheless in our view they
0:21:26 revolve around value and
0:21:29 um our search is not for a just price or
0:21:33 a just wage because we think that
0:21:36 with with prices with wages
0:21:39 that still involves exploitation
0:21:42 yes and therefore what we were what
0:21:45 we're emphasizing
0:21:47 uh is that the working class the
0:21:49 productive class of society takes over
0:21:52 the means of production
0:21:54 and goes towards a system that's based
0:21:57 on need
0:21:59 not on
0:22:00 um
0:22:02 you know greed
0:22:04 but on the basis that people are
0:22:06 different and people have different
0:22:08 needs
0:22:09 and it's also based on an assumption
0:22:13 um and that might be a leap of faith but
0:22:16 i think i could argue why
0:22:18 but it's also based on people
0:22:20 contributing according to their ability
0:22:23 hence the you know the famous
0:22:25 slogan of each according to them each
0:22:27 according to their ability
0:22:30 so yes there is there is there are
0:22:32 crossovers as you were saying
0:22:35 um nonetheless um there's clearly also
0:22:38 um distinct differences because
0:22:42 we don't think that there can be such a
0:22:44 thing
0:22:45 as a
0:22:46 fair day's work for a fair day's pay
0:22:49 of course we're not saying
0:22:51 uh the the capitalist um cheats the
0:22:54 worker they do give them on average
0:22:57 uh a fair wage but within that
0:23:00 relationship
0:23:01 there's exploitation it's hidden
0:23:04 uh in a way that it isn't with slavery
0:23:06 or it isn't with feudalism
0:23:08 but there is exploitation and ultimately
0:23:10 that comes back to labor and nature
0:23:14 capitalism exploits labor power and it
0:23:17 exploits
0:23:18 nature
0:23:20 yeah i think you know i was thinking
0:23:22 about this myself jack and
0:23:24 i think a lot of the reason why marx
0:23:26 came to his conclusion i don't think
0:23:27 he's necessarily within his own paradigm
0:23:30 inconsistent actually to be fair uh
0:23:32 having read him myself
0:23:34 i think within his own paradigm he's
0:23:36 not inconsistent and when
0:23:38 i say he's on paradigm i'm talking
0:23:40 specifically about the materialist
0:23:42 paradigm
0:23:43 because i think the major difference in
0:23:45 them the islamic understanding for
0:23:46 example
0:23:48 or any other understanding which has
0:23:50 um
0:23:51 i would say
0:23:53 latent or over you know metaphysical
0:23:56 traits you know metaphysical traits
0:23:58 any any such paradigm with over
0:24:01 metaphysical traits
0:24:03 uh there's gonna
0:24:05 be differences and the differences here
0:24:07 is relating to the eschatological
0:24:09 paradigm so from the islamic position
0:24:13 this world that we're living in here
0:24:15 okay the dunya if you like
0:24:19 there is no prerequisite
0:24:21 for everyone in this world
0:24:23 to be equal
0:24:25 in society
0:24:26 and when we say equality here we mean in
0:24:29 wealth
0:24:30 we mean in uh being some people are
0:24:32 going to be more clever than others
0:24:34 geographically located in places which
0:24:36 are more advantageous than others uh
0:24:38 some people are going to have better
0:24:40 education than others some people are
0:24:42 going to be born with disability and
0:24:43 others are not some people and that we
0:24:46 don't think is inherently an injustice
0:24:48 likewise we don't think that some people
0:24:50 employing others
0:24:51 is inherently an injustice because of
0:24:54 the surplus value that their work
0:24:57 has put on to whatever object that
0:24:58 they're creating whatever product that
0:25:00 they're making we think that that's just
0:25:02 a state of affairs which has been
0:25:04 allowed to happen
0:25:06 but what we
0:25:07 we do say is
0:25:08 for those who act proper in this world
0:25:11 in a certain within religious con
0:25:13 paradigms
0:25:15 that they will be rewarded in the next
0:25:17 life
0:25:19 i mean we have a narration i'm not sure
0:25:21 if you guys have come across it which
0:25:23 says that even animals in this case i
0:25:25 think it was a goat
0:25:27 a goat
0:25:28 with a horn i think was it was it a goat
0:25:30 i think was it a gut with a horn on the
0:25:32 day of judgment another goat without a
0:25:34 horn the goat with the horn
0:25:36 it hurts to go with the horn and the one
0:25:38 without the horn will grow a horn and
0:25:41 will hurt back
0:25:43 perfect just the day of judgment the
0:25:44 idea of the day of judgment
0:25:46 means that perfect judgment will be
0:25:49 administered
0:25:50 meted out
0:25:52 or on that forum which is uh the forum
0:25:54 of the deliverance so anything that
0:25:55 happens here which is not which may be
0:25:57 exploitative
0:25:59 in this case we don't believe that the
0:26:00 work worker
0:26:02 you know employer employee relationship
0:26:04 is exploitative anyway but we
0:26:07 even things which whereby
0:26:09 where you know people have been wronged
0:26:12 within our own paradigm it will be kind
0:26:14 of rectified on the day of judgment so
0:26:16 that's i think
0:26:18 really unless we believe in that
0:26:21 it's
0:26:23 if one believes in that
0:26:25 then it follows it follows that you know
0:26:26 it can't be that the rules of god the
0:26:28 prescribed rules of god are unjust
0:26:31 but if one doesn't believe in that and
0:26:33 they believe in
0:26:34 you know
0:26:35 historical materialism
0:26:37 as a basis
0:26:39 or has a secular understanding that i
0:26:41 don't see
0:26:42 i can see fully why someone would not
0:26:44 believe in any of this
0:26:45 i i fully understand the communist
0:26:47 position
0:26:48 in fact i'm sympathetic towards it from
0:26:50 within its own paradigm i understand it
0:26:52 i i'm not
0:26:54 i'm not saying it's even inconsistent
0:26:55 with its own paradigm but
0:26:57 like you said i think there are some
0:26:58 assumptions which are
0:27:01 a leap of faith
0:27:02 and i think that's where the major
0:27:04 differences will have to continue being
0:27:07 uh what i was going to say next uh
0:27:09 though just changing the subject
0:27:11 actually a little bit because
0:27:12 i think we've done a good job here in
0:27:13 fleshing out the main some national
0:27:14 differences between
0:27:16 communism and islam unless someone wants
0:27:17 to add something here
0:27:19 yep someone wants to add something yep
0:27:24 you can ask about the free markets
0:27:26 you know the things that we're talking
0:27:28 about about communism um but
0:27:31 i mean
0:27:32 the idea of
0:27:33 the the kind of the possibility of
0:27:36 shaking your duties yes knowing that
0:27:38 essentially the state is going to take
0:27:39 care of you yes um is also problematic
0:27:41 because we have like you know
0:27:45 you know the prophet sallam really
0:27:47 encouraged people to go out and get a
0:27:48 job to work and i'm not saying that the
0:27:49 communists are not saying that but i'm
0:27:51 just saying that the kind of the kind of
0:27:52 idea that well it's okay if some people
0:27:55 are not doing well
0:27:56 because
0:27:58 there's an element of
0:27:59 that redistribution is almost too
0:28:01 central and i think you know from as a
0:28:03 muslim you know we're encouraged to
0:28:05 basically get up and to do something so
0:28:08 for us
0:28:08 or practice is really important and i
0:28:10 think that as a psychology is very
0:28:12 important because it reflects us within
0:28:15 the animal kingdom the idea that we have
0:28:17 to make our own space that i did that we
0:28:18 have to so i think if we're looking at
0:28:20 it biologically if we're looking at it
0:28:21 psychologically
0:28:25 the worst of
0:28:26 the worst way to acquire money is to
0:28:28 seek it from others
0:28:32 the upper hand is better yeah exactly so
0:28:34 i think you know from our paradigm it's
0:28:35 quite clear that we we do have
0:28:38 we do have an
0:28:39 aspect of free market we encourage
0:28:41 definitely trade you know you know
0:28:44 uthman for example the prophet's
0:28:46 son-in-law was very wealthy etc but
0:28:48 but even if we didn't look at it from
0:28:49 our paradigm even if you were just
0:28:50 looking at it without this paradigm i
0:28:53 still think that it would cause it it
0:28:54 doesn't reflect you as a human being i
0:28:56 think biologically and psychologically
0:28:58 it doesn't it doesn't reflect that you
0:29:00 know and that's just my i'm not sure if
0:29:01 you heard all that jackard do you want
0:29:03 to come back and say anything in
0:29:04 response anything
0:29:06 i i followed enough but uh the
0:29:08 connection here is poor but yeah i
0:29:10 followed enough okay just a couple of
0:29:13 remarks first of all
0:29:15 from my point of view not just a sort of
0:29:17 point of view
0:29:19 but historically um
0:29:22 the fact that human beings have to sell
0:29:24 themselves have to sell their ability to
0:29:26 labor is a product of history
0:29:29 it's not something that
0:29:32 is imposed on us by nature
0:29:35 it comes into being
0:29:37 at a definite point in history
0:29:40 marx defined capitalism as commodity
0:29:42 production
0:29:44 taken to the point of where labour
0:29:46 itself
0:29:47 generally appears as a commodity so in
0:29:50 ancient greece labor didn't generally
0:29:53 appear as a commodity you know in
0:29:55 ancient arabia labor didn't generally
0:29:58 appear
0:30:00 as a commodity
0:30:02 and so marx in capital
0:30:04 actually tries to go back to the origins
0:30:06 of this and he talks about separation
0:30:10 of the producer from the means of
0:30:13 production
0:30:14 and in england that happens at a
0:30:16 definite moment the enclosures
0:30:18 forcible removal
0:30:21 of the labourers from the land and
0:30:23 therefore they are left with nothing
0:30:25 else available to them to make a living
0:30:27 to survive
0:30:29 other than selling themselves
0:30:32 so
0:30:32 this isn't about human nature and the
0:30:35 second point the final point i'll make
0:30:38 is that we've got very good
0:30:40 anthropological
0:30:42 studies
0:30:44 uh that go back to
0:30:46 what we think are the origins of our
0:30:48 species
0:30:50 roughly speaking 200 000 years ago
0:30:54 of where
0:30:56 no classes
0:30:57 existed
0:30:59 of where if you talk about this
0:31:01 freeloader question we can look at
0:31:03 contemporary what we would call original
0:31:06 communist or primitive communist
0:31:07 societies
0:31:09 of where believe it or not a freeloader
0:31:11 and they do exist
0:31:13 um is regarded more as a joke
0:31:16 than a threat now obviously if you
0:31:18 generalized it you die out
0:31:20 nonetheless what i would argue is in
0:31:22 terms of human nature
0:31:24 um you know we survived and thrived
0:31:27 for 200 000 years
0:31:30 without exploitation without classes
0:31:32 without the state and the marxist
0:31:35 project is to go back
0:31:38 to what
0:31:39 we would call our true nature
0:31:41 but on a higher material level hence our
0:31:44 view of capitalism in that sense
0:31:46 providing the material foundations for
0:31:49 what we would call advanced or modern
0:31:52 communism i i guess i've got one thing
0:31:54 to say and then one of the participants
0:31:56 wants to ask a question before he does i
0:31:57 just want to just make one comment
0:31:59 and i think you've kind of alluded to it
0:32:01 already with this idea of like surplus
0:32:03 value you didn't mention it but i mean
0:32:05 you mentioned it in another way let's
0:32:08 i'll give one example like of this brush
0:32:10 here which is uh i use it to comb my
0:32:12 beard so i can look more like marks but
0:32:14 a good looking but a good looking
0:32:16 version
0:32:18 you know um but what i was going to say
0:32:20 was um
0:32:22 say for instance this is
0:32:24 the materials that are required for this
0:32:26 kind of brush is like one pound okay so
0:32:28 the material now
0:32:30 i assemble it together and i
0:32:32 my job is to put this these bristles in
0:32:34 here and
0:32:36 and then this is sold then they're
0:32:37 they're after that for one pound
0:32:39 550 let's say two pounds for the second
0:32:41 one or whatever you want yeah send it
0:32:43 for 1.99 two pounds yeah
0:32:46 now so
0:32:47 correct me if i'm wrong i'm just gonna
0:32:50 tell you my understanding of surplus
0:32:51 value and you you tell me if i so
0:32:53 basically obviously after all the kind
0:32:55 of costs have been paid
0:32:57 um that surplus
0:33:00 whereby i now
0:33:02 after the profits have been made even
0:33:03 yeah the surplus is my work my i have
0:33:07 put it's like you said you mentioned it
0:33:09 it's almost has become a commodity in
0:33:10 itself so my constructing these bristles
0:33:13 onto this brush is the commodity here
0:33:16 which is now being given
0:33:18 or transferred and on the marxist
0:33:20 paradigm
0:33:22 exploited
0:33:23 exploitatively taken all right
0:33:26 from me to the owner of production
0:33:30 is that so far so good right
0:33:33 or is there any any point
0:33:35 okay good
0:33:36 fine so at this point um there's there's
0:33:39 a few issues here
0:33:41 uh issue number one
0:33:42 say for example
0:33:44 i have this young man the strapping
0:33:45 young man in the front you can't see him
0:33:47 but they say he is the owner of the
0:33:50 company
0:33:52 and because he's such a strapping man
0:33:54 and he's got his charisma and he's very
0:33:56 confident and he's been attending these
0:33:59 sessions so it's very intelligent as
0:34:00 well
0:34:01 and
0:34:02 so he's he's produced a brand name which
0:34:06 just like ralph
0:34:07 lauren or rolex
0:34:10 or any of these kind of names it means
0:34:13 that he
0:34:14 that the end user the consumer
0:34:17 can will be willing to pay more
0:34:20 for
0:34:21 this for the same material cost so for
0:34:24 example if i had someone else another
0:34:26 factory where someone else was producing
0:34:28 exactly the same
0:34:30 brush
0:34:31 okay with the same exact
0:34:33 com
0:34:34 composite parts
0:34:35 but for a much more expensive price 9.99
0:34:38 not 1.99
0:34:40 then who gets the credit
0:34:42 this is the question who who should get
0:34:44 the credit
0:34:45 for the fact that profits or larger
0:34:47 profits have been made should it be this
0:34:49 entrepreneur this young strapping and
0:34:51 charismatic and confident entrepreneur
0:34:53 on the front
0:34:54 you know or should it be me because i've
0:34:56 assembled it together because if it was
0:34:58 a matter of
0:34:59 well me because i've assembled it and
0:35:00 put it together it's a hidden commodity
0:35:03 then cetera is paribus every par every
0:35:06 where where the same materials are found
0:35:08 and the same composite things are there
0:35:10 then it should be the same cost the
0:35:11 assumption therefore
0:35:13 that
0:35:14 it's the same cost for every that label
0:35:17 costs the same everywhere
0:35:19 especially in modern societies where
0:35:21 it's driven by the mine supply is
0:35:22 seemingly a false assumption what would
0:35:25 you say to that
0:35:27 well first of all yes that would be a a
0:35:30 false assumption indeed it would be
0:35:32 you know the risk it would be stupid and
0:35:35 uh marx wasn't that stupid so what he
0:35:38 what his assumption is
0:35:40 is that price and value will diverge
0:35:45 and uh some products some commodities
0:35:48 will sell above their value
0:35:50 some will sell below but on average
0:35:54 that will work itself out over billions
0:35:57 and billions of commodity exchanges so
0:36:00 hence the assumption of life
0:36:04 it's i should put it a working
0:36:06 hypothesis
0:36:07 which i think can be supported because
0:36:10 uh you know if you take um your standard
0:36:12 um capitalist economics
0:36:15 they have a big problem in describing
0:36:17 where profit comes from
0:36:19 um but let me can i just come back on
0:36:22 one point so sorry
0:36:24 sorry i don't know if
0:36:27 you've seen the date just to watch the
0:36:29 rolex or they date watch they're very
0:36:32 good-looking watches
0:36:34 um
0:36:35 now if you try and buy them the sliding
0:36:37 price is about 4 700 pounds don't ask me
0:36:40 why i know
0:36:43 not that i've you know trying to invest
0:36:45 in anything like that myself
0:36:46 but you know i know this i actually had
0:36:48 a conversation with somebody uh recently
0:36:51 that he has a day-date watch classic
0:36:54 20 000 pounds is worth well this is the
0:36:57 point how do we know what it's worth and
0:36:59 this question obviously the modern
0:37:00 assumption of market free market
0:37:03 economics is that value is determined by
0:37:05 demand and supply now the problem here
0:37:07 of course is if we say that it's because
0:37:09 you mentioned above their value and
0:37:10 below their value
0:37:11 but their value is itself
0:37:14 determined by demand and supply so how
0:37:16 can it be above a value which is yet to
0:37:18 be determined by the demand and supply
0:37:20 can you see what can you see the
0:37:21 cyclical nature of saying above and
0:37:22 beyond yeah can you see the issue how
0:37:24 would you resolve that
0:37:26 well first of all i would reject the
0:37:28 idea that value is determined by demand
0:37:31 and supply that's the first thing okay
0:37:33 what i would
0:37:34 do is go back to your original
0:37:36 assumption
0:37:37 and that is to say that value is
0:37:40 determined by inputs
0:37:42 yeah and therefore the inputs are the
0:37:44 the hairs on the brush the wooden bit
0:37:47 but also the labor power that you
0:37:51 have put in
0:37:52 to transforming those products and again
0:37:54 the marxist assumption on average
0:37:58 is that you will be paid the value of
0:38:01 your labor power i.e what is
0:38:04 necessary for you to reproduce yourself
0:38:07 and reproduce labor power in terms of
0:38:10 the future generation so that's the
0:38:12 marxist
0:38:13 argument not supply and demand of course
0:38:15 we don't quite input can you can you
0:38:17 explain that a little bit more then so
0:38:18 when you say value is determined by
0:38:20 input
0:38:21 um there's okay so let's let's flesh
0:38:24 this out just a little bit more can you
0:38:25 just explain that just as a standalone
0:38:27 first of all what do you mean by that
0:38:29 exactly
0:38:30 so i can write it down well what we're
0:38:32 talking about is marks begins in capital
0:38:35 with defining a commodity yeah it says
0:38:38 on the one side it's got use value and
0:38:40 on the other side it's got exchange
0:38:42 value so when marx talks about value
0:38:46 in the main he's talking about exchange
0:38:48 value and that's determined by the
0:38:50 market you know
0:38:52 um are you prepared to buy
0:38:54 so we're talking about the monster
0:38:55 player with that
0:38:57 well okay
0:38:59 nonetheless nonetheless
0:39:01 uh we're still not talking about uh
0:39:04 what determines its value because a
0:39:06 commodity right might have a high value
0:39:10 but be forced
0:39:12 by competition to sell below its value
0:39:15 but then would that would that mean that
0:39:17 the value intrinsically changes or does
0:39:18 it stay the same or what what happens to
0:39:21 the value
0:39:21 the value will change according to the
0:39:24 inputs but
0:39:25 what we're talking about here is the
0:39:27 question of realization
0:39:29 and so some capitalists because of
0:39:31 clever marketing or because they're
0:39:33 exploiting their workers with high
0:39:35 technology
0:39:37 or whatever the reason happens to be
0:39:39 will realize
0:39:42 the value of that commodity and they can
0:39:45 realize extra
0:39:47 value and therefore some capitalists
0:39:49 will not realize that value
0:39:51 and either operate at a very low level
0:39:54 of profit or be forced out of business
0:39:57 so we have a difference between
0:39:59 value
0:40:01 and realization but do you know when you
0:40:03 said that a value it changes according
0:40:04 to its inputs right
0:40:07 yeah so say for example you have a
0:40:09 commodity right
0:40:10 and it has a certain value yeah
0:40:13 um
0:40:16 now as a standalone without any input
0:40:20 first and foremost let's just start with
0:40:21 that no one's touched it
0:40:23 a chunk of gold a bar
0:40:25 a gold bar
0:40:27 just to you is on the floor there
0:40:29 somewhere a rolex watch maybe
0:40:32 they they just watched what they were
0:40:35 just what
0:40:36 a chunk of gold
0:40:39 it's on the floor
0:40:40 um
0:40:43 what is the value of that chunk of that
0:40:45 bar of gold
0:40:46 no no one's touched it
0:40:49 okay first of all clearly
0:41:21 has got no value it's being supplied
0:41:24 free by nature
0:41:26 it has no value no value okay it's a
0:41:29 product of nature with beautiful value
0:41:32 so what's its use value
0:41:34 it's got precisely an apple it's got
0:41:37 loads of use value you can eat it so
0:41:39 that's why we're defining a commodity
0:41:41 so when you say it has no value you're
0:41:43 talking about exchange value or because
0:41:45 you said remember we said that value is
0:41:47 exchanging use
0:41:49 you can pick it up and you can eat it
0:41:51 unless you want so is it valid is it
0:41:53 valuable is it
0:41:55 when you say no value it's got value
0:41:57 it's got use value okay has used that
0:41:59 unless you take it to the market it's
0:42:02 got no exchange value and therefore no
0:42:04 value but yeah we all like apples
0:42:06 okay
0:42:09 i seem to be
0:42:10 i might be you know maybe misreading
0:42:12 what you're saying and please correct me
0:42:14 if i'm wrong
0:42:16 but it seems to be a cyclical argument
0:42:18 and i'll tell you why because if we say
0:42:19 that the value the value of something
0:42:23 is determined
0:42:25 by
0:42:26 uh
0:42:27 the value of something is determined by
0:42:29 the input which is what you said a value
0:42:31 is according to its input yeah
0:42:34 and if i ask you how do you prove that a
0:42:36 value of something is how do you prove
0:42:38 that a value of something is according
0:42:39 to its input
0:42:42 then you go back to saying that well
0:42:44 actually because it doesn't have any
0:42:46 value until the input has been put into
0:42:48 it then it becomes if you put it in that
0:42:50 articulation in that formulation that
0:42:52 the value of something is according to
0:42:53 its inputs and then we say okay fine
0:42:56 how do you prove that the value of
0:42:58 something is according to its inputs and
0:42:59 it's not just the minor supply which is
0:43:01 the normative understanding
0:43:03 then
0:43:04 you say well i'm not saying you said
0:43:06 this but obviously you're at danger of
0:43:08 making this argument
0:43:10 is that well the value of something
0:43:11 because something has no value until an
0:43:13 input has been touched so if the if the
0:43:16 evidence for that the value of something
0:43:18 is according to its input the fact that
0:43:20 has no value
0:43:22 before it's been touched then it's a
0:43:24 cyclical argument because you're you're
0:43:26 using
0:43:27 you're using the input to prove the
0:43:30 input
0:43:31 do you see what i'm saying here okay
0:43:33 yeah but i don't agree with you okay
0:43:35 tell me why yeah
0:43:37 first of all i'd make the point that
0:43:39 marx
0:43:41 didn't
0:43:42 have to put it develop he didn't invent
0:43:44 the labor theory of value
0:43:46 i mean you can read aristotle he's you
0:43:49 know vaguely making remarks along those
0:43:52 lines but in terms of its um height
0:43:56 which i think marks goes one better it's
0:43:58 people like david ricardo and adam smith
0:44:02 and so what we're arguing about
0:44:04 isn't going along the road and finding a
0:44:07 nugget of gold what we're talking about
0:44:09 is a society
0:44:11 that is characterized by human beings
0:44:15 interacting with nature on a generalized
0:44:18 level
0:44:19 so of course we get things for free from
0:44:22 nature so sunshine
0:44:24 i find that very useful we couldn't
0:44:25 survive without sunshine the air that i
0:44:28 breathe
0:44:30 well at the moment they haven't managed
0:44:31 to turn that into a commodity it's got
0:44:34 use value without it i cannot live right
0:44:37 so of course
0:44:39 uh you know that could well be given
0:44:41 pollution and all that an attempt to uh
0:44:45 ration us or something like that but
0:44:47 yeah marxism is dealing with the
0:44:49 commodity which isn't the same as a
0:44:51 product
0:44:52 and it isn't the same simply
0:44:55 as something that comes free from nature
0:44:58 it's something that comes from
0:45:00 relationships between human beings that
0:45:03 has a history
0:45:04 that has a pre-history and has a more
0:45:07 recent history so i don't think it's a
0:45:09 circular um argument so if i just finish
0:45:12 with this yeah
0:45:14 of course it's just taking your gold
0:45:17 as an example that's true
0:45:19 that in namibia as i understand it or
0:45:21 parts of south africa you can walk along
0:45:24 you know the desert and find a piece of
0:45:25 gold that's absolutely right
0:45:27 but we also know that in south africa
0:45:30 tens of thousands of people are put to
0:45:32 work to extract gold
0:45:35 and that determines
0:45:37 uh the price
0:45:39 and the value of gold i'm not saying the
0:45:41 two are exactly the same
0:45:43 but precisely because they have to dig
0:45:44 deep and they have to employ so many
0:45:47 thousands of workers
0:45:48 that's what gives it value gold can be a
0:45:52 useful metal
0:45:54 but what gives it its price its value
0:45:56 in terms of being a tiny little nugget
0:45:59 um yeah is the amount of
0:46:02 labor ultimately yeah machinery but i'd
0:46:04 say that that is um crystallized labor
0:46:08 uh from the past
0:46:10 so it's labor labor labor plus
0:46:15 okay so i guess if it's not circular let
0:46:17 me ask you this question then
0:46:19 um if
0:46:20 if a value changes according to its
0:46:22 inputs which is what you said
0:46:24 how do how do you prove that a value
0:46:26 changes according to its inputs in a
0:46:28 sense without saying that with without
0:46:31 set without stating
0:46:33 that because had it not been had it not
0:46:36 had an input
0:46:37 that the value which would change which
0:46:39 would be the circular argument so how do
0:46:40 you prove this premise which is a value
0:46:42 changes according to its inputs without
0:46:44 employing the circular argument of
0:46:45 saying that without the input the value
0:46:48 wouldn't change
0:46:49 well from my knowledge of standard
0:46:52 economics and
0:46:54 you know
0:46:55 i didn't study it at university but what
0:46:57 you've got is the idea of various inputs
0:47:01 uh going into what i would call a
0:47:03 commodity so classically it's land where
0:47:06 you have your factory or you have your
0:47:08 agriculture
0:47:10 it's raw materials and it's labor
0:47:13 and but i think the interesting thing
0:47:16 for um you know people new to marxism
0:47:19 and i have to include myself at some
0:47:21 point you know
0:47:23 it's very humble of you being
0:47:24 being being a leader
0:47:26 of the party people can't see me but
0:47:28 i've got grey hair now well that means
0:47:30 two of us
0:47:31 the point i would make is it seems
0:47:33 paradoxical uh that um some of you know
0:47:38 some of the things we're surrounded by
0:47:41 um have actually got very low value
0:47:45 right
0:47:46 and if we look at uh previous versions
0:47:49 of it or versions that are maybe made in
0:47:52 less advanced societies actually they've
0:47:54 got a higher value
0:47:56 and yet precisely this is the
0:47:59 point about marx
0:48:01 is he says okay so you've got high value
0:48:03 low value
0:48:04 who realizes the profit who realizes
0:48:07 that surplus value
0:48:09 and it isn't
0:48:10 i produce a commodity with a high value
0:48:13 and therefore i make a fat profit
0:48:15 because i might have to sell it at a
0:48:17 high price and if i have to sell it at a
0:48:19 high price some other capitalist is
0:48:21 going to realize that surplus value so
0:48:24 the job of a capitalist is to drive down
0:48:27 the value
0:48:28 of that commodity that doesn't mean that
0:48:31 his profits or her profits go down
0:48:33 necessarily
0:48:35 but in terms of for each unit
0:48:37 it's got less inputs
0:48:40 into it crucially labor i mean we all
0:48:42 know about automation we all know about
0:48:44 machinery you know what used to take a
0:48:46 day can be done in minutes seconds uh
0:48:49 often nowadays
0:48:52 okay well that's very informative i
0:48:54 don't want to take too much more of your
0:48:55 time i want to ask you just two more
0:48:57 questions and see um and then round out
0:48:59 um
0:49:02 people are aware of what marxism is i
0:49:03 think now based on the aforementioned
0:49:05 conversation
0:49:07 but what would you say are the
0:49:08 differences between marxism communism uh
0:49:11 socialism and social democracy what
0:49:14 generally speaking are the main uh areas
0:49:16 of demarcation
0:49:19 well first of all uh it's a bit of a
0:49:21 funny one because
0:49:23 i think i'm not quite sure but certainly
0:49:26 in terms of classic marxism people like
0:49:29 lenin
0:49:30 the contemporaries of marx marx's
0:49:32 conway's in germany they called
0:49:34 themselves social democrats okay so the
0:49:36 the first name of russia uh you know
0:49:39 lenin's party was the russian social
0:49:41 democratic labour party
0:49:44 in 1914 that changed uh because
0:49:48 world war one and most leaders of social
0:49:50 democracy supported the war
0:49:53 and lenin said well we can't call
0:49:54 ourselves social democrats anymore hence
0:49:57 the going back
0:49:59 uh to the word that marx had originally
0:50:02 used to describe himself back in the
0:50:04 communist manifesto i'm a columnist
0:50:06 right
0:50:07 so
0:50:08 if we now take at least my use of the
0:50:11 word socialism it simply means the
0:50:14 transition period
0:50:16 between capitalism and communism it's a
0:50:19 state semi-state but it's the transition
0:50:22 from
0:50:23 capitalist
0:50:24 society bearing all its imperfections
0:50:28 to communism which is about um
0:50:31 production for need
0:50:34 people working according to their
0:50:35 ability so that's a very short answer
0:50:39 with all sorts of um stuff left out but
0:50:42 it's one of these paradoxes yes okay uh
0:50:44 it shows you how words
0:50:46 change
0:50:48 finally i want to talk about um i'll
0:50:49 just ask you one last question i know
0:50:51 taking up lots of your time and i do
0:50:52 thank you i think everyone here is very
0:50:54 grateful for your time
0:50:56 we have as well very stimulating yeah uh
0:50:58 we'll give we'll give questions at the
0:51:00 end um but one more question from from
0:51:02 me it's just about the the uyghur
0:51:04 situation um as you know because um you
0:51:07 know uh you know there's a small muslim
0:51:10 minority
0:51:11 in east pakistan uh of uh persecuted uh
0:51:15 individuals
0:51:16 and uh obviously china refers to itself
0:51:19 as a chinese communist party or the
0:51:22 governed governing party in china refers
0:51:24 to itself in those times
0:51:26 what do you think the position is or
0:51:28 what would marx's position be
0:51:31 uh himself or your your position even on
0:51:34 the um on the kind of things that are
0:51:35 happening in that area
0:51:39 it's very difficult because we're in a
0:51:41 situation of a new cold war
0:51:44 and therefore when i read american
0:51:46 sources british sources my own instant
0:51:49 response is is that true
0:51:52 so i do not i'm not convinced about the
0:51:55 idea of genocide i'm certainly convinced
0:51:58 about the idea of oppression
0:52:01 and exploitation
0:52:02 um you know
0:52:04 to me when i look at
0:52:07 the chinese communist party
0:52:09 what you've got is something that's
0:52:12 turned into its opposite um you know
0:52:14 when it was founded in 1921
0:52:18 um
0:52:19 they clearly had different goals that
0:52:21 they then compared with what they've now
0:52:23 got either way
0:52:25 you asked me about you know what marx
0:52:27 would have thought
0:52:28 and i i think he would have been
0:52:30 appalled that people are carrying out
0:52:34 national oppression
0:52:35 in the name of marxism and communism
0:52:39 the problem that people like myself has
0:52:41 got
0:52:42 is do i carry on calling myself a
0:52:44 communist or do i want to call myself
0:52:47 something else i've already illustrated
0:52:49 lenin in 1914 saying i don't want to
0:52:51 call myself a social democrat anymore
0:52:54 it's a decision that i've made
0:52:56 personally that i want to continue
0:52:58 calling myself a communist and yet point
0:53:01 the finger at the communist party of the
0:53:03 soviet union under stalin and his
0:53:04 successors and z
0:53:06 and now
0:53:08 my argument is well they're not they're
0:53:10 not communists
0:53:12 they call themselves communists well
0:53:14 that's a problem for me
0:53:16 but i think you know again one thing
0:53:18 that comes to my mind
0:53:20 uh and i think it was from lenin and he
0:53:22 said well the problem that we've got
0:53:24 calling social democrats columnists
0:53:26 socialists
0:53:27 is that we called ourselves the party of
0:53:31 pink angels
0:53:32 our enemies would turn
0:53:35 pink angels uh into the devil
0:53:38 so we can call ourselves whatever we
0:53:40 want i would say that um
0:53:42 my approach to the world has got a lot
0:53:45 more in common with karl marx lenin
0:53:48 and all the rest of it than z
0:53:51 uh mao
0:53:52 style and let alone you know enver hoja
0:53:56 or pol pot
0:53:57 to me these are
0:53:59 freaks abominations
0:54:01 um
0:54:03 they have something to do with marxism
0:54:04 in terms of what names and what words
0:54:06 they use
0:54:08 but nothing in reality
0:54:10 to do with marxism
0:54:12 any other questions from the floor
0:54:14 before we uh conclude with uh
0:54:16 jack and thank you once again jack for
0:54:18 your time
0:54:19 any questions on the floor um i just
0:54:21 wanted to make a few points in response
0:54:24 number one was this idea you mentioned
0:54:26 of the enclosures so this is a very
0:54:27 famous moment where people some people
0:54:29 would claim that british capitalism
0:54:31 began with the enclosures
0:54:34 with the peasants and their lands being
0:54:35 enclosed and used in order to farm for
0:54:37 profit
0:54:38 and he's and then obviously you have
0:54:40 this idea of the industrial revolution
0:54:41 and things but when if marx's theory is
0:54:43 predicated on those two things that's a
0:54:45 very eurocentric response that's marx's
0:54:47 ideas then are built in response to
0:54:49 something that happened very specific in
0:54:51 europe so marxism then
0:54:53 would be a very specifically european
0:54:55 phenomenon and would work
0:54:57 and and and even his predictions in
0:54:59 terms of a european context i mean you
0:55:01 you mentioned advanced capitalist
0:55:03 societies is what marx thought were
0:55:04 that's what he thought where the
0:55:05 revolution would begin he was very wrong
0:55:07 because in germany and britain where he
0:55:09 thought the revolution would begin it
0:55:10 didn't it began in russia which was like
0:55:12 you mentioned yourself and you said it
0:55:14 was a um it's uh in terms of economic
0:55:17 development it was akin to cromwell's
0:55:18 england which is again marks his
0:55:21 predictions as somebody who claimed to
0:55:22 be
0:55:23 a scientist making predictions
0:55:24 historical materialism he came out to be
0:55:27 very incorrect in the predictions that
0:55:28 he made and obviously the fact that it's
0:55:30 so eurocentric makes his universability
0:55:33 not practical
0:55:34 and i think in terms of the islamic
0:55:36 system i think one of the big problems i
0:55:37 think muslims would have is this idea
0:55:39 one of the core things about marxism is
0:55:41 this idea of alienation and this is
0:55:43 taken from hegel can you define it
0:55:45 please before you continue alienation is
0:55:46 this is this idea that you have been um
0:55:50 i i how you know like uh how would you
0:55:52 put it i think in islam we'd call it
0:55:54 to be spiritually lost to to be um in
0:55:57 the wrong place to be sort of this is
0:56:00 like a very sort of moral psychological
0:56:01 spiritual state where somebody's not in
0:56:03 the place that they're meant to be
0:56:05 where and marx would say that's because
0:56:07 the the worker has been alienated from
0:56:09 the means of production
0:56:10 um and the muslim would have a lot of
0:56:12 problems with that because that's a
0:56:13 religious concept put in materialistic
0:56:15 terms and that's a very secular idea um
0:56:18 and i think in the islamic system we
0:56:20 have this idea of um and and then
0:56:23 obviously this idea that you're trying
0:56:25 to rebuild
0:56:27 for example if we talk about the islamic
0:56:28 system we have markets but there's an
0:56:30 ethical religious framework in which
0:56:32 these markets are embedded if you
0:56:33 remember if you i don't know if you've
0:56:34 read carl palani or what polany talks
0:56:36 about embeddedness that you have markets
0:56:38 embedded in religious societies or
0:56:40 non-religious societies but this idea of
0:56:42 moral markets and this is where you
0:56:45 would have that even though people are
0:56:46 rich because if you have this idea
0:56:48 people
0:56:49 produce for need then you have the great
0:56:51 conundrum that the loads of communist
0:56:52 societies in the 20th century did in
0:56:54 that people stop producing production
0:56:56 doesn't happen or production happens for
0:56:58 example with the chinese in mao is this
0:57:00 idea that let's pretend to the state
0:57:02 that production is happening and when
0:57:03 finally they allowed people to actually
0:57:04 build on their own little plantations
0:57:06 that's when growth actually started to
0:57:08 happen because people are incentivized
0:57:10 to produce when it's for at least some
0:57:12 sort of selfish idea and before adam
0:57:14 smith mentioned this because you
0:57:16 mentioned this idea of this the arab
0:57:17 world didn't have this idea i mean dave
0:57:19 graber who was a brilliant
0:57:20 anthropologist at the lsc who died last
0:57:22 year actually my dream was to meet him i
0:57:24 never got to in his book five thousand
0:57:26 uh fire debt the first five thousand
0:57:28 years he mentions that before adam smith
0:57:33 has this idea of you know this division
0:57:36 of labor and the idea that um for
0:57:39 example what adam smith would call the
0:57:40 invisible hand was something envisaged
0:57:42 by muslim scholars long before him based
0:57:44 on a virtue ethicist sort of islamic
0:57:47 idea like mishka and ibn abdullah and
0:57:48 there's many many other scholars who've
0:57:50 written on this so um i just i just
0:57:52 think that what we have as an islamic
0:57:54 platform is a much better and more
0:57:57 practical realistic way of um organizing
0:58:01 society understanding because what
0:58:02 marxism does is removes religion and
0:58:04 religion is that which allows the
0:58:06 altruism within people to manifest it so
0:58:09 i i could go on and on and on but i'm
0:58:10 just thinking like you think about the
0:58:11 ottoman empire the work that you have on
0:58:13 every single the hospitals that the rich
0:58:15 people would set up
0:58:16 the workf the idea of the endowment that
0:58:18 rich people in islamic societies they
0:58:20 would not be there to exploit they would
0:58:22 have this idea that is my religious
0:58:23 obligation to take care of the poor
0:58:25 hence i will now fund whether that's the
0:58:27 sultan or his female family members or
0:58:30 the wazir or whatever would set up the
0:58:32 hospitals they would set up schools they
0:58:34 would set up the mosques and the mosques
0:58:36 would be built with the market
0:58:38 directly next to it to fund the mosque
0:58:41 because they understood i know i i just
0:58:43 feel like i don't know i mean i don't
0:58:45 know if i'm making any coherent points
0:58:46 here but i think for me marxism becomes
0:58:48 very antithetical to the historical
0:58:50 reality that islam has ever seen
0:58:52 because we've always had this idea that
0:58:54 religion is the core and for islam and i
0:58:56 think
0:58:57 i'll finish with this is this idea that
0:58:58 for muslims specifically to to
0:59:01 especially with the history we've had
0:59:02 with colonialism to remove the yoke of
0:59:05 european um exploitation from our next
0:59:08 and then to take another european idea
0:59:09 that has no sort of organic
0:59:12 production with our own community is
0:59:14 just a fast i think we're very happy
0:59:16 that we have a tradition that we can go
0:59:18 back to ideas that mark spoke about
0:59:20 better clever people i would say without
0:59:22 a shadow of it i'm more moral people
0:59:23 because marx cheated on his wife and he
0:59:25 wasn't a good person he wasn't he was an
0:59:27 immoral person engel's father ran a
0:59:29 sweatshop and marx was funded from
0:59:31 engels so while he was complaining about
0:59:33 capitalism it was a sweatshop that or
0:59:35 whatever the factory that engel's father
0:59:36 used to run would fund marx's works um
0:59:38 and i think that muslims would have be
0:59:40 very very uncomfortable with marxist
0:59:41 idea i'm not capitalist but i'm just
0:59:43 saying that i think we have our own
0:59:44 frameworks our own ideas and our own
0:59:46 tradition that we can go back to rather
0:59:48 than moving to marxism
0:59:50 well i think that that deserved the
0:59:52 camera being
0:59:53 in your direction but jack any any last
0:59:55 comments on that um or do you want to
0:59:58 end it
0:59:58 there well i'd like to come back but
1:00:01 you're gonna have to shut me up very
1:00:02 quickly because there's so much there
1:00:04 that was a really not a great question
1:00:07 but a great series of questions yeah so
1:00:10 i'm going to try okay just to
1:00:13 say a few things first of all mark's
1:00:16 the accusation that marx was eurocentric
1:00:19 i think that's profoundly wrong of
1:00:21 course he began
1:00:23 studying
1:00:24 capitalism
1:00:25 where it first made its major
1:00:27 breakthrough and made that point
1:00:29 countless times and also made the point
1:00:31 that the rest of the world doesn't need
1:00:33 to follow england and indeed you know
1:00:35 what's interesting about marx
1:00:38 is not only his writings on china and
1:00:41 india but in the last years of his life
1:00:44 he stopped writing capital in order to
1:00:46 teach himself russian
1:00:49 in order to study
1:00:51 the mur the commune
1:00:53 of the peasants in russia and you know
1:00:56 wrote whether rightly or wrongly about
1:00:58 the possibility of russia actually
1:01:01 avoiding capitalist development so
1:01:04 eurocentric
1:01:05 no
1:01:06 um and also in terms of this whole thing
1:01:10 well what we've got in terms of engels
1:01:13 um is a book called the origin of the
1:01:16 family private property and the state
1:01:18 and what that bases itself on is the
1:01:21 neolithic
1:01:23 revolution what i would call a
1:01:24 counter-revolution
1:01:26 it's hardly happened in europe we know
1:01:28 that now definitely
1:01:31 so again i would say no not eurocentric
1:01:35 lastly and you know i think i've you
1:01:37 know said enough
1:01:39 lastly on marx's prediction well
1:01:41 precisely um in the last preface
1:01:46 to the communist manifesto that marx and
1:01:48 engels jointly roach i think was 1882 a
1:01:51 year before his death
1:01:54 they're actually predicting that the
1:01:56 revolution will first happen in russia
1:02:01 and they say that unless the revolution
1:02:03 happens in the rest of europe
1:02:05 there will be a disaster there'll be
1:02:06 barbarism there'll be war
1:02:08 so i'm not claiming that if if you look
1:02:11 at marx uh you can find there he did he
1:02:14 predicted
1:02:16 uh you know what's happening with us now
1:02:18 in the 21st century uh but he had a
1:02:21 pretty you know a pretty powerful
1:02:24 tool
1:02:25 uh available to him to analyze the
1:02:28 contemporary politics of his day
1:02:31 yeah and to project
1:02:32 uh what is human you know the the future
1:02:37 for humanity
1:02:38 lastly
1:02:39 altruism
1:02:42 this is me speaking as a
1:02:45 absolute um
1:02:47 atheist
1:02:49 now
1:02:50 i respect muslims i respect people who
1:02:54 are religious
1:02:55 and what i would tell you is that some
1:02:57 of the most altruistic
1:02:59 most humane people i've ever met
1:03:02 in my life
1:03:04 are atheists
1:03:05 so i just think that as well as me
1:03:07 respecting religious people who can be
1:03:09 altruistic you know i've given my life
1:03:13 for the struggle i know lots of other
1:03:14 people you know around the world
1:03:17 you know communists who fought maybe
1:03:19 wrongly you might disagree with them but
1:03:21 they've certainly not
1:03:23 uh done what they've done
1:03:25 for selfish purposes well i mean we've
1:03:28 got we've got a um an entire session in
1:03:31 fact on egoism and altruism
1:03:35 which we've completed it should be
1:03:36 coming up after this one but uh jack i
1:03:38 think it's been a pleasure having you
1:03:40 here
1:03:40 honestly the contributions of the group
1:03:42 has been very good as well um you're
1:03:45 always welcome to come
1:03:47 as an atheist to visit us here in the
1:03:49 office
1:03:50 you know how to get through to us and uh
1:03:53 or and or you can get something to eat
1:03:55 as well maybe somewhere in north london
1:03:58 near marx's grave so you can do your
1:04:00 [Laughter]
1:04:02 but
1:04:03 where is he buried again jack
1:04:06 hi gay high gate cemetery i live in
1:04:08 hampstead so
1:04:09 next door fair enough well jack it's
1:04:11 been a pleasure
1:04:15 yeah thank you very much i enjoyed it
1:04:16 very much thank you so much for your
1:04:18 time
1:04:19 i'll see you later
1:04:22 bye
1:04:24 and that concludes our session today
1:04:27 some very fantastic contributions from
1:04:30 our very special participants
1:04:32 i feel
1:04:33 like i should have been on this side of
1:04:35 the camera
1:04:36 on many occasions at this time
1:04:39 and hopefully i will be on this side of
1:04:42 the camera
1:04:43 and those on the other side will take a
1:04:45 leading role this is the whole point of
1:04:48 the sapiens institute
1:04:50 uh series the london era
1:04:53 and with that we conclude
1:04:55 wassalamualaikum warahmatullahi