top of page
Search
  • Writer's pictureSammas

Interview with REVOLUTION and IDEOLOGY


When learning about topics such as revolutions, social change and ideologies, in most cases it is better to leave it to actual university teachers to be the source of information. When it comes to for example content in Youtube and podcasts, in the sea of poorly researched and often plain false knowledge, channels such as Revolution and Ideology are goldmines of professional lectures on various topics interesting to especially those who lean left. Created by Nick Lee and Jared Benson, university instructors of sociology and history, the podcast is almost three years old and has over a hundred episodes of essential information. I had an extreme pleasure to ask a few questions from Nick (from Valencia Spain) and Jared (from Colorado, U.S.)


You have discussed a huge number of topics, such as history, ideology, spirituality and even psychedelics. What are your most viewed topics? Are these the ones you will be focusing on in the future, or do you want to widen the horizons of the topics even more?


Jared: Nick follows the analytics more closely than I do, but unfortunately, the number views on YouTube specifically tend to be higher based on the length of the video/pod rather than the topic. There are of course outliers, but generally, viewers want to consume their content “efficiently” which isn’t always our strong suit. We briefly talked about trying to cater to the "7-to-15-minute crowd" and ultimately concluded we’re going to just keep producing mostly longform pods more than anything else because it’s what we enjoy.


Nick: As Jared mentions, the most viewed videos are typically our shorter ones. The most viewed overall is a 7-minute video I made about Antonio Gramsci. It’s not even that well-done but it checks all of the boxes for the YouTube algorithm. We made the decision pretty early on that we weren’t going to cater to the algorithm and were instead going to focus on whatever we wanted to learn more about, or conversations that we felt needed to be had. This has surely hampered our ability to gain subscribers because we haven’t pigeon-holed ourselves into a narrow niche which would make it easier to align with and compete with other channels. We’re all over the place because that’s how we like to think and research. We sort of let the program go in whichever direction we feel like. We’re also very small. So if a video gets 10,000 views that a pretty large number for us while it’s only a blip for larger channels. We don’t really focus on the numbers too much because we didn’t set out to create a 1mil sub YouTube channel or podcast. We just wanted to have the conversations we were having in private be available to others. Creating a podcast and YouTube channel was the easiest and cheapest way to make that happen.



You are both a teachers by professions, university instructors to be exact, and have co-taught two humanities courses titled “Resistance and Revolution” and “Ideology and Isms". When you present for example so-called anarchist ideas to the students, how are they divided between shrugging them off as rosy utopia and getting actually interested in some of the ideas?


Jared: The first thing we usually have to do is dispel the socialized clichés attached to Anarchism, from the oft-mocked punk scene, to crappy T.V. shows about motorcycle gangs, to literal “chaos.” We then dig into discussions about human nature, natural social organization (why organisms actually live together), mutual aid, reciprocity, etc. to at least get them to critically reconsider hierarchal, prescriptive social mechanisms. From there we present varied historical/current examples of “stateless” organization. This process seems effective in ensuring that very few shrug the ideas off as rosy or utopic within academic discourse. It’s rare that we field discussions, receive assignments, or comments that echo the tired "it looks good on paper, but…" That said, how or if many of the learners will ever apply our content outside a classroom is difficult to assess—especially given control dominant belief and economic systems have over their lives right now.


Nick: Jared pretty well sums up our approach. The first step is to ‘dispel the myths’ about Anarchism. We then dive into actual theory, Marx, Kropotkin, Bakunin, and so on so the students can actually read the work of these men (and women, Goldman, etc.) whom they’ve typically only known previously as boogeymen. It’s really easy to confront the mythology of Marx, for example, but that’s impossible when you actually engage with his works. Now, our students may discover that they disagree with everything he says, that’s fine, but at least they’re forced to arrive at that position in an enlightened way. That’s really our goal, which we tell the students on day one. We’re not in the classroom to convince anyone of anything, only to make them engage with ideas which they probably wouldn’t have otherwise engaged—and, as a result, to view the world in a different way. Not that this approach is the best approach for all ideas but we generally begin by dispelling myths, then go into theory (a lot of the dispelling of myths is done by the theory itself), then we do historical examples.


The podcast came into existence as a byproduct when you began research for a third course titled “Stateless Societies”, has that course come into your curriculum already, and if so, how has the response been?


Jared: Yes. We’ve been teaching that class on a consistent rotation for the past two years. Students seem to really enjoy it and as mentioned earlier, are quite open to entertaining the ideas for a “new” type of social organization. Naturally, there aren’t a lot of courses at any level of education that directly challenge the ideals, systems, etc. they live in—education within the state seeks to condition. They seem to appreciate the novelty.


Nick: We’ve been teaching that course for a couple of years now. Students respond really well. Either they’re already anarchist-leaning and love that a course is being taught that relates to them or, they have no idea what the topic of the course is when they sign up and usually end up having a good time just because the subject is so different than what’s typically taught in the university setting.



When looking at the unjust paid education system of the US, where young people indebt themselves for life over useless college degrees, it certainly seems crazy from my Scandinavian social democratic perspective. What do you think of the state of education in US in general in this Biden era, are there any improvements in sight?


Jared: It's an embarrassment. We use this descriptor a lot on the pod, simply because there’s not much else to describe the situation. As you mention, starting the "next" generation off in debilitating debt (and each subsequent in more and more) not only reveals the true "values" of the U.S.—particularly of a certain generation, but their (as well as systems/beliefs) hypocrisy. There’s no "freedom" or "equal opportunity" when entering adult life paying the already established wealthy for the right to play their game. I’ve seen no improvement, regardless of administration.


Nick: It really is an embarrassment. I tell my students all of the time that, if they are able, and it’s not ‘easy’ but it certainly isn’t impossible, they should be going to school in Germany (or a number of other countries which provide essentially free college in English). The United States celebrates its status as the country with the "best education system" but it’s not even close to the top of the list for percentage of the population who has a university degree. And, I think this is only going to get worse over time. Nothing has improved with Biden—those who expected it to were misguided I think. Things will certainly get worse before they get better. The education system is interlinked with the economy in many ways and there’s going to be turmoil there in the future for sure.


You have both been very interested in Marxist thought, but show clearly sympathy towards more anarchist philosophies. Has Bakunin won over Marx in your personal lives already?


Jared: I don’t think it’s an either/or. I think there’s important things to learn from both thinkers, but I find myself drawn to non-Western philosophers as much, if not more so.


Nick: Not that I consider myself a full blown egoist (shout out to r/fullegosim lol) but I appreciate Max Stirner’s philosophy regarding ideologies—meaning that we should be free to adopt them when they serve our interests. Otherwise, we’re forced to subjugate ourselves to them which only results in a form of ideological self-oppression, certainly not freedom (of course the Marxists would critique this as being reactionary, that’s fine). There are aspects of Bakunin’s philosophy that are incredibly helpful. The same is true for Marx. Rather than forcing ourselves to “be” an Anarchist or “be” a Marxist, we should allow ourselves the freedom to adopt the helpful portions of each (and others). Both Anarchism and Marxism are so deep and complex that neither term as a category really has any meaning. There’s not a single self-proclaimed Anarchist who doesn’t think and behave in ways which align with certain aspects of Marxism and vice-versa. The same is true for almost any ‘buckets’ we create for ourselves.


Revolutionary Catalonia has been viewed as the great example of anarchism in action, but during the last years people have also been turning their eyes to the autonomous region of northeastern Syria also known as Rojava. How do you see the state of that region, and how well do you keep yourselves updated on the situation over there?


Jared: We use Rojava (alongside the Zapatistas) as a few of our favorite examples of successful/attempted Statelessness in our courses. We find them inspirational on so many levels. I’ve admittedly not kept up w/Rojava as much as I would have liked to in the past two years.


Nick: I follow the general developments in the news and, more so, on social media. Despite the continuous fighting on the street-level, from a geo-political perspective it seems to be at somewhat of an unfortunate stalemate.


Considering even more the anti-government yet capitalist philosophies of the US compared to the more socialist mindset of people growing up in for example Europe, would you say left wing ideas are much harder to get through in America even today?


Jared: In short, yes. We often have difficulty discussing economic policies w/U.S.ers due to the fact that philosophically speaking, even the purportedly left-leaning Democratic Party would be considered at best, moderate-right (conservative) almost everywhere else in the world. Needless to say, one can infer what this means regarding the economic/fiscal beliefs of the other major U.S. party. I mean, as your prior question about education asserts—in plain terms, this country is literally forcing its children to pay their parents to be educated. And don’t get us started on the moral bankruptcy of the healthcare system.


Nick: I’m not sure I’d categorize the U.S. as anti-government. There’s only a very small sliver of the population who I would consider falling into that camp (only the truly revolutionary anarchists/insurrectionists). The rest really want a government that they control, even if it’s a small one. But, to answer your question, yes it’s obviously challenging. For most people in the United States leftist ideas are absolutely horrifying even if they have no idea what they really are.


If you asked random people on the street to define Anarchism and Marxism I’d guess 99% couldn’t provide an even remotely accurate answer despite the fact that many of them consider leftist ideas as the biggest threat the their way of life.

However, I will say that despite the content of our program, our overall goal isn’t to disseminate leftist ways of thinking but to help people think for themselves. I read countless posts on reddit and elsewhere framed something like "How do I convince my conservative roommate that socialism is good?" That’s approaching it from the entirely wrong direction. First, you should try to teach them to think critically and for themselves. I think there are plenty of people across the spectrum who lack that skill.


Now in the tender age of 41, I am personally increasingly interested in anarchist thought as I get older, but what works of literature do you usually recommend to someone just getting interested in the concepts of anarchism? What are your favorites from the ranks of the classics? And what do you think are the best sources of updated anarchist information online today?


Jared: The obvious: Proudhon, Kropotkin, Bakunin, Goldman, et al. The less obvious: Laotze, Omar Khayyam, Rumi.


Nick: If by "literature" you mean fiction, I’m not aware of a lot of anarchist-inspired fiction other than the works of Ursula Le Guin; The Dispossessed is her most well-known work. The Monkey Wrench Gang by Edward Abbey comes to mind as well. There was a discussion on Reddit a few years ago trying to list anarchist fiction and it was really a struggle. I’m sure there are a lot of obscure authors I’ve never heard of. There are actually a lot of nihilist and existentialist fiction which is interesting, that’s where I’ve been ‘living’ recently. Turgenev, Chernyshevsky, Camus, Sartre.

Regarding the best sources of updated anarchist information online, there are some sites that are the true ‘underground’ of Anarchism where communiques from groups are posted etc. but I have never really found those to be helpful. r/Anarchism is probably the best. There are also a ton of really good podcasts. It’s Going Down comes to mind. Their website is also pretty good. The Anarchist Library is indispensable.


As you live in the promised land of firearms for personal use, considering violent uprisings such as Kronstadt (situated not far from another naval fortress island of Suomenlinna where I am writing this), or for example the guerrilla warfare of the PKK, where do you personally draw the line when it comes to the use of arms and violence in the case of for example self defense or revolting against fascist regimes?


Jared: I’m personally not into the celebratory gun culture of the U.S. That said, this question regarding a social movement’s requirement of arms is purely contextual. What’s the time/place/regime/ideal et al. in question? Are they looking solely for self-defense? Are they looking to make change? Reformative? Transformative? There are too many factors at play for there to be any definitive answer—even for myself, my personal beliefs on the topic could/would change given any number of the above factors.


Nick: I currently live in Spain so I’m not in that culture either, Spain has restrictive and interesting gun laws. I will suggest this, and this will be controversial and alienate a lot of people on the left and the right, I think the entire discourse about personal gun ownership is misguided. I think it’s much ado about nothing. Throughout history, if any group of people has risen up against their government, arms seem to fall from the heavens. It’s never just the individual people’s cache’s that supply the revolution. So many groups and governments have an interest in the collapse of another group or government that they will be quick to supply any challenge to that regime. Shit, the United States itself does this all the time. It’s not as if the members of the PKK all had AK-47s in their closets and decided "now’s the time." That version of events people refer to anecdotally never happens (more below).


I also fully agree with Jared that this issue must be considered on an individual basis. Meaning, the person, in the moment, in the midst of a movement, must decide their position in that moment. It’s easy for me to pontificate that I definitely support the use of violence, or to pontificate that I unilaterally don’t support the use of violence, but to think that same sentiment will carry into the streets when it becomes necessary, is incredibly naïve. And, importantly, it goes both directions, which is something we should keep in mind.


It’s easier for us to imagine a pacifist who turns radical when put into a certain situation but we never consider the opposite even though that’s a real possibility.

In addition, the gun discourse, I think naively, rests on the version of events where individual citizens are fighting in the streets against their oppressors. I believe that’s an over-simplified-analysis. If a revolution truly topples global capitalism, it will be the likes of which we have never seen before. The versions which romanticize 1776, or Catalonia, or Russia, are missing the mark and/or are far too simplistic.


As we have seen here Finland in the case of the Extinction Rebellion, people who would otherwise support a certain cause get often turned off by the methods of the protest. What are your personal philosophies or tactics when it comes to the methods of useful demonstration?


Jared: As w/the question regarding arms, it’s purely contextual. There’s no one-size-fits-all ideology just as there’s no general template for social movement. In fact, that’s the error most activists, and even commentators make (perhaps even us). While we can and must certainly learn from others, past and present, each movement and thus, set of tactics must be its own if we’re ever to make what Subcomandante Marcos once called, "a world in which many worlds exist."


Nick: It really is too complex for there to be a one-size-fits all answer to this question. Even across the lifespan of a single movement it may make sense to use a multitude of tactics. In the case of Extinction Rebellion specifically, I’ve always enjoyed those who criticize its tactics but do nothing to otherwise help the movement. If you don’t like what ER is doing, fine, there are literally thousands of other organizations that are tackling the same issue using various means. Not to mention that ER isn’t even extremist in my opinion. Framing it that way is a result of governments and other organizations trying to manipulate the Overton Window.



Symbols like Milton's Lucifer or the myth of Prometheus from classical Greece have been used as symbols of revolt by the left in the past. You are both apparently staunch atheists, but what are your favorite symbols of rebellion from for example world mythologies and religions, or sci-fi and fantasy literature?


Jared: I’m not really a staunch anything—those that claim to have the end all, be all answers to life’s most important questions, to include religious zealots and atheists alike, are equally problematic. Why are we not fine just saying, "I don’t know?" Anyway, in terms of spiritual rebellion, I mentioned Omar Khayyam and Rumi above. I’m also a big fan of Siddhartha’s revolt. I also really enjoy the characters of mischief in First Nation mythos, most often personified by characters like the Coyote.


Nick: I too like Siddhartha (my daughter and I are actually reading that together now). I fear being ridiculed, but the Star Wars Rebels must surely be the most popular. The problem is that the story of rebellion is largely overshadowed by the spectacle of it all, and people in the United States identify with the rebels rather than realizing they’re the Empire which was Lucas’ point. This is actually something Jared and I discuss frequently: the fact that so many of the stories in our lives feature rebelling protagonists yet there is such a lack of the rebellious spirit in the United States. There’s a huge disconnect there that needs to be explored. My assumption is that the commodification of it all makes it lose its true impact but we’d have to do some real work there to come to a conclusion.


Joe Biden has been president for about a year now, and his ratings have gone down while Republicans have been winning for example important gubernatorial elections without sucking up to Trump. What do you think of the political climate over there right now, and how do you see the future unfolding when it comes to leftist politics and so-called Trumpism?


Jared: The political climate is somewhat divided—though not as much as both those within, as well as outside observers believe. There are clearly some important issues that both "sides" appear to be divided on, at least in rhetoric. However, in practice, its business as usual for Democrats and Republicans alike. That’s the power of hegemonic systems and their socialization. The illusion of difference and choice. So the real debate between the parties isn’t about any actual change in trajectory, but about harm reduction along the way.


Nick: The United States political system is a punchline for the rest of the world which would be tragic if it didn’t have such serious global consequences, not to mention the consequences for the people of the United States themselves. I’ll just say that until we realize that the democrats and republicans are the same, nothing will really change. This relates to my earlier discussion of "Anarchist" and "Marxist," the terms "Democrat" and "Republican" have lost all meaning. We can begin to make progress once we realize that.


What do you think of the leftist media over there, such as the many famous Youtube-channels? Are they useful or are they actually the same sort of corporate media they usually like to critisize, often adding fuel to the flames of the polarization and tribalism rampant in the west today?


Jared: I don’t personally find them useful—I’m one of those get my news from international sources snobs, but I recognize their historical necessity and appreciate their "efforts."


Nick: I’m the same as Jared largely. I don’t personally find them useful. To be honest, I can’t stand watching them. They’re just as dogmatic as anyone else. I’m sure people think the same thing about us and that’s fine. We’re not here to impress or convince anyone. If you can’t realize that Vaush is exactly the same as Ben Shapiro then you need to re-analyze things. Now, if you do fully realize that and are still entertained by Vaush, knock yourself out.


I understand that most content creators are probably fulfilling the function of being a gateway into leftist thinking, providing overviews of introductory theory and so on. But, first, how many people are really necessary to perform that ‘duty’? There needs to be a few really really good ones, everyone else is better off spending their time doing something else. Second, the vast majority of content creators from all over the spectrum are just self-congratulatory celebrations of their way of thinking. It’s nauseating. If someone’s a socialist, how many hours of content can they watch telling them how awesome socialism is? Doesn’t it get boring after a while? (The same is true for those on the right; aren’t they tired of listening to the same thing over and over and over?)


There are some exceptions: The first is Contrapoints. The amount of work and research they put unto their content is inspiring. I don’t agree with everything they say obviously but it’s really really good shit. I can’t stand Vaush for more than 5 seconds but I will listen to Natalie talk about pretty much anything, not because she’s “correct” but because I know she’ll present things in a way in which I never considered them. That’s invaluable.

The second is Revolutionary Left Radio (which isn’t really present on YouTube but is a great podcast). Breht is clearly a die-hard Marxist but has a unique ability to listen to other ideas. For example, his episode with Zoe/AnarchoPac was exceptional.* Another example is the episode debating scientific socialism. Of course, this is only limited to other ideas on the left but still, it’s something—something we need more of. Rev Left Radio really inspired us to start our own podcast, not that we have the same format or can hold a candle to Breht.


Means.tv is also doing some very interesting stuff. I feel as if the left really needs to make up its mind on whether or not it’s going to fight the culture war. Right now it’s so absolutely fragmented and disconnected that if it thinks it’s fighting the culture war, it’s not. It’s losing miserably. The interview with some of the Means TV founders on RevLeft Radio made me think a lot about this.


I saved the most important question for the last: What are your favorite Wu-Tang bars of all time?


Jared: There’s no way to answer that question firmly—too many, but so as not to cop out, here’s a couple from my favorite member, Inspectah Deck:



It's only natural, actual facts are thrown at you

The impact'll blow trees back and crack statues

Million dollar rap crews fold, check the sick shit

Explicit, I crystallize ya rhyme til you can sniff it

We live this, fitted hats low conceal the crooked eye

No surprise, verbal stick up, put em high

Rebel I, outlaw, split second on the draw

Blow the door off this shit like bricks of C-4


The Rumble


Aiyyo yo

I spit bars

Travellin tremendous speed measurin far

Been bustin satellites circlin Mars

Verbal onslaught, bring forth physical force

Of a hundred wild niggas piled in a Trojan Horse

Thought method, set it on generic mic ethic

Professional neck shit, left foes beheaded

This music, is mind control like computer chips

Been doin this for numerous years, refuse to lose it

Wit turbo tactics, maneuver like a trained soldier

Hall of Fame flame thrower, take game, it's game over

Ayatollah, high roller nine totter

Mind controller, 2009 time folder

My coalition, bring the demolition

Wu-blade decision, slate the competition, wit no intermission

Spittin hazardous darts, up front like Rosa Parks

Makin million men march


Nick: The super simple Method Man, "Cash rules everything around me…" I think this is the universal lyric which everyone knows. You wouldn’t believe how often my students bring this up in my classes in so many different contexts.




Jared and Nick are both working university staff members and rely on state income to support themselves and their families. As such, they cannot provide any answers or information which is illegal. This may result in them censoring themselves on certain questions.














58 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page