Ed Page 🎗️

Hello Julia, sans aucune ironie, c'est top que tu prennes le temps de te renseigner. Mais le problème quand on lit Marx aujourd'hui, c'est qu'on prend pour acquis sa prémisse de départ, alors qu'elle a été démontée scientifiquement il y a plus de 150 ans. Toute la pensée de Marx repose sur la théorie de la valeur-travail. L'idée que la valeur d'un bien vient de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour le produire. Si tu acceptes cette prémisse, alors oui, tout son raisonnement tient. Le capitaliste "vole" la plus-value du travailleur, l'exploitation est mathématique, la révolution est inévitable. Sauf qu'en 1871, trois économistes (Menger en Autriche, Jevons en Angleterre, Walras en Suisse) découvrent indépendamment la même chose : la valeur n'est pas objective, elle est subjective et marginale. Un verre d'eau dans le désert vaut une fortune. Le même verre à côté d'une rivière ne vaut rien. Le travail incorporé est identique. Donc le travail ne détermine pas la valeur. C'est le consommateur qui valorise un bien selon son utilité marginale dans un contexte donné. Exemple concret : tu peux passer 1000 heures à tricoter un pull moche que personne ne veut. Selon Marx, ce pull a énormément de valeur (beaucoup de travail incorporé). Selon la réalité, il ne vaut rien. Parce que personne n'en veut. À l'inverse, Bernard Arnault crée des milliards de valeur non pas parce qu'il "exploite" mais parce qu'il a su anticiper et organiser des désirs humains à grande échelle. La valeur est créée par la coordination, pas extraite par le vol. Cette découverte (la révolution marginaliste) a invalidé tout l'édifice marxiste. Pas pour des raisons idéologiques, pour des raisons scientifiques. C'est pour ça que plus aucun département d'économie sérieux au monde n'enseigne Marx comme un cadre d'analyse valide. On l'enseigne en histoire de la pensée. Maintenant, le truc important. Si ton intention en lisant Marx c'est d'aider les pauvres (c'est une intention noble), alors tu vas être surprise par ce qui suit. Regarde les chiffres de la Banque mondiale. En 1820, 90% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Cette chute historique ne s'est PAS produite dans les pays qui ont appliqué Marx. Elle s'est produite dans les pays qui ont libéralisé leur économie. Chine post-1978, Vietnam post-1986, Inde post-1991, Pologne post-1989. À chaque fois qu'un pays libéralise, des centaines de millions de gens sortent de la pauvreté en une génération. À chaque fois qu'un pays applique Marx (URSS, Cambodge, Corée du Nord, Venezuela), c'est la famine et les goulags. Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est l'expérience la plus massive jamais menée en sciences sociales. Plusieurs milliards de cobayes humains, sur un siècle. Donc paradoxalement, si tu aimes vraiment les pauvres, la position la plus cohérente n'est pas d'être marxiste. C'est d'être pour la liberté économique. Parce que c'est empiriquement la seule chose qui a jamais sorti massivement les gens de la misère. Pour creuser, je te recommande trois lectures qui vont changer ta vision : "La Loi" de Frédéric Bastiat (court, lumineux, gratuit en ligne) "La Route de la Servitude" de Hayek "Économie en une leçon" de Henry Hazlitt Bonne lecture, et vraiment chapeau de chercher à comprendre plutôt que de rester dans tes certitudes. C'est rare.

Моя любимая краткая история СССР. Как только умер Ленин, оказалось, что второй человек в партии, товарищ Троцкий - предатель. Каменев, Зиновьев, Бухарин и Сталин свергли Троцкого и изгнали из СССР. Но через пару лет оказалось, что Каменев, Зиновьев и Бухарин тоже враги и вредители. Тогда доблестный товарищ Генрих Ягода их расстрелял. Чуть позже Ягоду, как вражеского агента, расстрелял Ежов. Но через пару лет оказалось, что и Ежов не товарищ, а обычный предатель и вражеский агент. И Ежова расстрелял Берия. После смерти Сталина, все поняли, что и Берия тоже предатель. Тогда Жуков сверг и расстрелял Берию. Но вскоре Хрущев узнал, что Жуков враг и заговорщик. И сослал Жукова на Урал. А чуть позже вскрылось, что и Сталин-то был врагом, вредителем и предателем. А вместе с ним и большая часть политбюро. Тогда Сталина вынесли из мавзолея, а политбюро и примкнувшего к ним Шепилова разогнали честные партийцы, во главе с Хрущевым. Прошло несколько лет и выяснилось, что Хрущев был волюнтаристом, проходимцем, авантюристом и врагом. Тогда Брежнев отправил Хрущева на пенсию. Вскоре Брежнев умер, и выяснилось, что он был маразматиком, вредителем и причиной застоя. Потом было еще два маразматика, который никто и запомнить не успел, потому что дохли, как мухи. Но тут пришел к власти молодой, энергичный Горбачев. И оказалось, что вся партия была партией вредителей и врагов, но он-то сейчас все исправит... Тут-то СССР и развалился. А Горбачев оказался врагом и предателем.

BBC showing snooker and slips in a wokey section on sustainability. Why do they keep doing this? Do they think the average snooker fan wants to have this junk ideological crap shoved down their throats? Absolute tosh #snooker

@paulmasonnews @n1ckism @eva_illouz Good luck with that project. All attempts to “humanise” socialism thus far has descended into authoritarian despotism… because socialists don’t like people who like freedom. I’d give up if I were you

Just spoke at #tazlab with @n1ckism and @eva_illouz on how to resist the authoritarian left and defend the progressive, universalist and humanist core of socialism

@middletemple Brilliant Leonie. Bravo

Being Called to the Bar is a moving experience for many newly launched barristers. Leonie Hughes describes what it feels like to achieve her goal.

Life is a choice: you either become the victim of your circumstances or the hero of them 👇🏻

Confused as to why politicians say, on another attempted arson attack on a Jewish building, “these terrorists are trying to divide us - and will not succeed etc etc.” Are they? I’d say that diviseness is not the object. I’d say it’s trying to kill Jews.

@PJTheEconomist @matthewsyed I don’t think it’s brilliant at all. Is weak and desperate and seeks to elevate the author above the ordinary electorate who live ordinary lives. Usual elitist guff that’ll have the “educated” elites nodding heads and patting each other on the back. 3/10 sir

Brilliant from ⁦@matthewsyed⁩ A plea to get serious about what really matters. Surveying the lack of seriousness and the consequences for us all he concludes “it breaks my heart to see it”. Mine too. thetimes.com/article/d42114…

"Fauda” is coming back : For the first time since October 7, the hit series "Fauda" is returning in a new season - ( season 5 ) . The premiere event is set for May 10, but is subject to security developments. The series is expected to air as early as the middle of next month. According to sources familiar with the details, the season edits are nearing completion. @mako_feed

The Southport inquiry has revealed a system “exquisitely sensitive to causing offence…but strangely numb to the potential and actuality of mass murder” Powerful words from @NotThatBigIan (Link below)

Today the Southport Inquiry published its findings. I’m not talking about the agencies right now. I’m talking about his parents. Because somebody fucking has to. I’m a former detective. 21 yrs in the force, I know what I’m looking at🧵👇

The Arab Word is Watching a Different War: Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position: The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks. What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought. Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies. The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran. The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic. When Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world. The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does. This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice. The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with. The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence. open.substack.com/pub/zinebribou…

Your Holiness, let me put this as politely as I can: you don’t know what you are talking about. If you want to write on a subject—horse racing, say, or musical composition—it’s a good idea to know something about it before putting pen to paper or, these days, hitting the computer keyboard. The same goes for economics. You don’t have to know anything about economics, but if you don’t, you shouldn’t pontificate on the subject. What you have written gives evidence of a soft heart, which is a good thing, but soft hearts, if they are not to be destructive, should be closely associated with hard heads. Your post is an embarrassment to those of us who are Catholic and who respect and venerate the office you hold. You wrote: "Hundreds of millions of people throughout the world are immersed in extreme poverty." Yes, and that’s not good. However, almost all of the human race was immersed in extreme poverty for most of human history. The last two hundred years have seen the mass of people lifted out of poverty in a way that has never been achievable or achieved before. [see Hans Rosling’s Factfulness for some real information: [amazon.co.uk/Factfulness-It…] You wrote: "Yet, disproportionate wealth remains in the hands of a few." If wealthy people have obtained their wealth by honest means, issues of proportionality are irrelevant. They have provided goods or services that people are willing to pay for and they have been rewarded accordingly. What they do with that wealth is a moral issue for them and not a legal or political matter for anyone else. You wrote: “...the need to address solvable problems related to a more equitable distribution of wealth, to be achieved with moral sense and honesty.” [italics added] This is a classic example of the zero-sum fallacy. The solution to poverty is to make poor people un-poor, not to make wealthy people un-wealthy. [see stephankinsella.com/2023/06/casey-…] What you call 'equitable distribution' presumes that wealth is something that just sits there, waiting to be distributed. But wealth is something that is produced, and its production already determines its ‘distribution’. Your Holiness, there is much work to be done to sort out the problems in the Church. May I respectfully suggest that you direct your attention to the resolution of these problems.

@MarcIles Would agree if performances provided hope but sadly we’ve been underperforming for too long. Does anyone really believe we can defeat Bradford or Stockport in playoffs? I hope I’m horribly wrong

@EdPage_ Definitely not impinging on that view but considering the financial landscape - Luton, Cardiff, Huddersfield holding a bigger wage budget at the very least - is there no room to hold judgement to the play offs?

Last Word pod rather a cathartic exercise today. I do subscribe to the theory that this side doesn't make a habit of playing poorly in successive games but Stevenage going well. Will find out on Tuesday what Wanderers are all about, methinks. #bwfc

@MarcIles Accept that but my Wycombe STH mate adores Morley. Can’t u/s why he wasn’t our ✰ player. Confidence, clarity & belief all below par in squad imho

@EdPage_ Other clubs "getting more" from former players is a subjective view. And not, I'll be honest, shared by the pros I know.

Don’t bomb Israel if you don’t want to be bombed by Israel. It’s not that complicated.

@MarcIles Very few games dominated for full 90 mins. Late rescue acts show we have potential but we start poorly too many times & concede momentum. Inconsistency of performance & selection. All point to lack of confidence, clarity & belief. That’s not on players that’s leadership

@MarcIles One of the most expensive squads in L1 yet performances don’t mirror investment. Wycombe & Stockport getting more from Morley & JDC. Rodriguez, Sheehan, ACD, Gayle, Apter, JOT & Burstow all below par relative to potential. Forino underutilised. Collective underperformance.

@MarcIles Test of a leader is ability 2 extract best from available resources. By any objective measure SS has failed as 2 many are playing below par. We learned from Evatt’s demise there’s no way back from that. Sorry to say SS has to go now. SB won’t sack him tho & there lies the problem