Do We Need Fascism to Solve the Wealth Gap?

Do We Need Fascism to Solve the Wealth Gap?

Let’s go to our caller from the eight oh three
area code. Who’s calling today from eight Oh three? Yes. Hello? Yeah. Who’s this? Hi, I’m, I’ve been on, um, yes, I’m from NATO,
Pretty Columbia, South Carolina and I’m a student at University of South Carolina, I
believe is about three on m. And. M. I’ve been wondering what were your thoughts
on yeah, the current wealth gap in our society and
lately in my classes, and we’ve been talking a lot about, uh, a lot about pretty much a
fascism or a war because of the wealth gap is so wide now. And I wanted to get your opinion on that. Do you think those are really two options,
but do you think you’re, we’re heading down one or the other? No, no. I mean, listen, successful social democracies
that, that properly and aggressively regulate capitalism, uh, have reduced wealth gaps significantly. They’ve brought up the bottom, they’ve put
some limits at the top and we know that there are all sorts of intangible benefits to reducing
the wealth gap. Not only do you bring more people into the
sort of, uh, participate in class, as I like to call it, people who are enabled to participate
in society and in the things that the, the institutions of society, um, reducing inequality
reduces crime, reducing inequality has all sorts of intangible positive affects societies
work better when you have lower levels of inequality. The economy is more stable when you have lower
levels of inequality because the sort of purchasing power is not so concentrated one end, uh,
among Sophia people. So I don’t think that war or fascism are the
only path forward in an unequal society. I think that the Scandinavian economies are
proof of that. Uh, I think that there are other, uh, economies
that are proof of that. And I think that the, that that’s not the
only path forward. Oh yes. I, I told, I agree with you about, you know,
be social democracy such as in Hawaii, inland and you know, the Swedes, but also I just
wouldn’t know, I guess maybe pertaining to America, you know, unlike goes countries,
we don’t invest heavily in a social programs such as like education or teacher pay is to
keep a clear dialogue. So as far as, I guess with the, the current,
uh, you stagnate the status quo and the United
States, what are the paths forward here? Yes, yes. For the United States because even in the
past, like, you know, I guess even outside of the United States, but with Germany or
even when we were at this point and for in the beginning of World War Two, we would have,
you know, the wealth gap was huge and everyone was desperate and we decided to go war. Right. And here’s the thing, here’s the thing in
the United States. So we’ll think about the United States more
specifically. The desire among the voters is already there. Basically for economies that look much more
like the Scandinavian economies, you ask people, should the government provide a basic level
of healthcare to everybody, even if they can’t pay two thirds to three quarters of Americans
say yes, should the United States tax the very rich in order to reduce income inequality? Majority of the country says, yes, I could
go on. Okay, so the voters already want that stuff. The problem we have in the United States is
that the desires of the rich and of big corporations are overwhelmingly likely to be made into
law by our elected officials compared to if you’re just a random middleclass guy who goes,
so yeah, we need to fix the political system. Fascism I don’t think is going to get us better
teacher pay and the other things that you’re talking about and wars? No, definitely not advocating for it. No, no you’re not. Okay. All right. Thank you for the call. Very important stuff and I think that there,
the desire is there. We just need to make it a reality by fixing
the system. We have campaign finance as part of it, media
consolidation as part of it. We’ve talked about all of the things that
need to happen and they’re, they’re big things, but a fascism and war or certainly not the
paths forward. Thank you David. And I keep up the good work too. I love your show and I’m going to tell you,
listen, thank you. Really appreciate the call. Thank you so much.

88 thoughts on “Do We Need Fascism to Solve the Wealth Gap?

  1. Fascism never stopped wealth inequality since the ideology encourages even more unregulated laissez faire capitalism

  2. Fascism has never been, nor will ever be anti-capitalist. It has always existed in order to defend capitalism and the income inequalities inherent therein. The only reason why fascist nation seem to be better off at a surface level is because all the political opposition has be eradicated and all the discontent with the way things are has been forced underground under the threat of imprisonment, torture and/or death.

  3. The Ethno Fascists don't call it Fascism…they call it "Communitarianism". Basically "Racial Collectivism" The collectivism the Left wants with the Racism the right struggles to make sound palatable. Racism is completley allowed in a Role model Ethnostate like Israel but in America they will call it "Communitarianism". The alt right completley admires Israel but their fascist policies will be diguised by different terminology when implemented here. The right wing economic ideology isn't "fascist" it is actually Fabian Socialism.

  4. democracy, authoritarianism, etc. doesnt matter as long as you have competent, experienced leaders with the political will to solve these problems – it's not the system you use it's the leaders

  5. The Prime Minister of Denmark Lars Rasmussen, says a smaller Welfare State is far more beneficial for everyone, so it would seem David isn't being entirely honest.

  6. I’m think he means authoritarianism because fascism keeps a us vs them mentality with a strict hierarchy in maintaining the status quo of capitalism, usually also involving race to while authoritarianism can be practiced into any type of economic theory

  7. the only thing that will solve historic wealth gaps worldwide… a global war….then we will all be poor….just like in many socialist countries.

  8. Why would you want to solve it? Income inequality is the greatest thing in the world. Or should we all be npcs and be exactly equal and make the same amount of money. “Orange man bad. I think we should protest”
    TRUMP 2020 🇺🇸

  9. Do you really need to post video titles that are basically turn into deep state questionnaires in the comments section ?

  10. Wtf….we have fascism now everything is being privatized….research trumps private army that's being created in Africa by Erick prince (betsy's DeVos brother) wake up

  11. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but didn't the caller get it backwards? I.e. that high inequality can lead to war or fascism, instead of war or fascism being the solution to income inequality?

  12. How is it that the social democrats advocating the welfare state are the same people who refuse to do anything to control immigration, and in fact often encourage illegal immigration?? How exactly do you expect to have a successful social democracy when millions from around the world either enter or overstay visas illegally?? It is not susutainable in any way.

  13. Speaking of Fascism …….this video came with a Prager U ad with freaking Candace Owens sounding off about African Americans who play "the black card". Content providers really should have some veto power over the ads used with their videos. I really don't think this is what David would have chosen.

  14. I'd bet we'd see a whole less of a wealth gap if we started boiling the super rich in large kettles live on tv and the internet.

  15. Fascism is conservatism (conservatives as religious fundies are adverse to secularism and anything meaning a secular state, which would have greater power than any church) on steroids – that is employing the state as a means to achieve reactionary ends.

    Fascists have always emphasized class collaboration, not class war, class war being an issue only when the working class rose up, with abject feudalism, theocracy, slavery, racism and colonialism never being part of any class war whatsoever.

  16. Any study of fascism shows that upon winning power fascists/RW populists always make deals with the 1%,as when push comes to shove the 1% would always side with fascism against the far left. Hitler purged his radical wing and quickly made deals with the 1%. Mussolini, Franco and Pinochet all took different but similar paths in repressing any threat to the 1% and keeping the elite happy.Basically they agreed to leave each other alone, the 1% were left to exploit the workers and further enrich themselves whilst the fascists were left alone to get on with war, repression and genocide-a sweet arrangement for all concerned, except of course the people who suffered from the crimes of both

  17. Wrong word choice you mean authoritarian… and we don't need any of that fuck all forms of authoritarianism in any form on the left or the right.

  18. I love it. I saw the title and I thought to myself, "this is it. The Koch brothers finally got to David and he's making a pivot that would make even Rubin blush" 😀

  19. Isn't changes in Algerythims to create keep liberal eco Chambers.
    .why do you think White identify or men's groups ingeneral are growing.
    And if you have links to both points of view.
    But Change it to only one it's wasn't an Ecochamber. You made it to an Ecochamber

  20. Duh yes! Fascism will lead to fewer noisemaker poor. Why? Cuz they will kill them stupid🤗
    That's how fascists roll bitches!

  21. This topic was a waste of time. Don’t debate fascism. Should’ve just cut the caller off.

    He may not be advocating for fascism but he is bringing it into discussion. The fascists are hateful people who want to kill marginalised groups.

  22. Singapore 🇸🇬 has authoritarian like political system and the right leadership is there, drastic changes can happen very quickly

    But if you are betting that a leader is always working for the interest of your society …. what about the next leader?

    It’s not a sustainable philosophy in the long run.

  23. Fasicm is why we are here. All right wing policy that moved the Overton window to the right caused all this.

  24. Fascism would just see all the poor people rallied up in concentration camps and punished in many ways. This already happens in North Korea btw!

  25. Instead of fascism the caller probably meant some great external force that would present a challenge of a generation.
    Fascism specifically did not create the conditions for social reforms in the US.

  26. This caller should realize that what we have now is fascism. That eventually leads to war since it creates income inequality via authoritarianism. Did Pakman even tangentially bring that up?

  27. Wasn't fascism described in 1936 as privatizing profits and socializing losses?

    I've read many definitions of fascist economy, but reality strays from theory. Core thing that does happen is that the State takes control of the economy through State intimidation of the "owning class" and destroying labor unions. The control is mainly to implement any hypernationalist policies the ruling party is establishing, especially protectionism and militarism.

  28. If by that you mean raising taxes on the rich and stop giving welfare to corporarions then yes. But we dont need a dictator to do it

  29. Change of the greed paradigm through an expectation that the masses can influence the wealth and power hoarders through the corrupted systems that enabled them? Look at the truth of humanities history then wake up to the fact that the crucible of anarchy always precedes social equalization because in their unearned generational entitlement, the rest of us can not be viewed as human.

  30. As a working historian for more than 40 years I have to assume that the caller has absolutely no idea what fascism is or how it works.

  31. History has proven that nationalism and in its extrem facism, didn't make anything better but worser. Very most of dictatorchips regardless of left or right, has shown an increase of livestyle in the beginning. But after some years those totalitary regims tend to make wars, corruption and will at max taking care for their own clan only. Don't be that dump to wish any kind of dictator!

  32. FYI: Taxing the rich won't address income inequality. The incomes of the rich will still be just as much larger than the others assuming that they don't move their income to other jurisdictions which the Panama Papers showed is very easy to do. That's just income redistribution.

  33. If you want to reduce the wealth gap between the rich and the poor, try communism. The number of rich people in a country under communism is reduced to members of the upper party…

    Because everyone else is made poorer.

  34. No what we need is for the rich or super rich to do what the republicans always say they do and create jobs here in America. If they don't start doing that we the consumers will no longer be able to buy their products, and they will no longer make so much money. So they need to use their extra wealth to make jobs for us. And bring the wealth back down into circulation, where it can even out some. I don't think anyone expects or wants there to be NO rich people. But maybe no billionaires, that's pretty extreme

  35. What is with the title? That is some kind of sick thinking! How the hell is fascism which is Corporate control government supposed to help with a wealth problem?
    Your title is absolutely ludicrous! But I will listen to find out if the rest of your stuff is as ludicrous as your title.

  36. Who thinks fascism would be a positive thing? Sure, you MIGHT be able to narrow or remove the wealth gap, but the gigantic host of other problems it brings would make solving the wealth gap completely moot.

  37. The psudoe idealisms expressed here make valid conversation difficult. My semi biased outside view can only express the U.S.A as a Corporate Kleptocracy. There is very small evidence of anything else guiding the actions of your country in the last 60 years.

  38. I think David misunderstood the question here. I believe the caller was asking: If the wealth gap and income inequality continues grow un-addressed and unabated, does he (David Pakman) see any other possible outcome for the USA other than Fascism or war? The key part being that income inequality remains unaddressed. Sort of an if than statement. He wasn’t asking if David thinks either of those two options was desirable.

  39. Scandinavian did not heavily regulated capitalism. Scandinavian countries has been in the top of free economic ranks. You can find the World bank list since the 90's and they were always there. Actually they had more free market if compared to US. The reason they are rich are actually the contrary. They were more economic free. You CAN'T find any economic study that shows they had heavily regulated country so your argument has no foundation rather than a wrong and false idea without any evidence

Leave a Reply

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