🔴 RED NEWS | HEZBOLLAH ATTACK | UKRAINE | AMERICAN COMMUNIST PARTY UPDATES

Zamba.

Is in love with

Yeah, it's

Can you have a feeling?

Proud as you just got the money on your scars out with the pun.

Se lone estágu da buyua.

Yeah, that's good, like.

Praise you, divertamoino nescaza di possé de undi villa siusla.

Yeah.

The ball, not gonna drop it.

No one can take this away from us.

That's a promise.

Can't let the

I can't have that on my conscience.

No regrets, I'm alive.

No more tears, let's get high.

Remember this moment.

Memories will never die.

This is all I've ever known.

This stage is my throne.

This is where I belong.

Don't ever feel alone.

Just remember this day and everything that I said.

The sun will still shine long after I'm dead.

Take ye with

Cross winds fall.

Yeah.

Oh.

Amen.

Shall see your boss now.

Must be common.

More near thou my poor

Roll you.

Oh no, no.

Come on.

Shaisma Medala ga

Chitsa corn, it's a swish and stook a pleat Snamya short sacrifice.

Sure.

What the fuck, Smudly?

Everyone thanks Smudly, because the intro is now over and the stream's gonna start.

Smudly!

Wow!

I'm gonna sing for Smugly 2.

I'm gonna sing for this guy, alright?

Holy shit, 100 subs.

Alright, ready?

And there it goes: 100 subs.

The Smuggling's killing him dream.

And we got it good.

And the in-person event.

And everybody thank him.

He is a hero.

I can't believe he got it all for everybody.

Smartly a hero.

Always trying to say that infrared is funded by foreign countries and all this stuff.

Cause they just don't watch the streams and they can't plainly see it's really smugly behind it.

Oh, I can believe what's going on.

Good.

And every time we always sponsor why.

It's all good.

And in the band coming in September, everybody got a band.

I'm a push is breaking like that.

Y'all get it though, right?

Yo, for real, what's going on, Smartly?

I appreciate that, brother.

Thank you so much.

What's up, everybody?

I just got done recording a podcast.

I thought it would be live.

It's not live.

But here we are anyway.

And we have a lot of content.

We have a lot of things to talk about.

And I think there's some guy I'm being told he wants to debate or something.

Let's see if he shows up.

Maybe, maybe not.

I'm not sure.

But, you know, and we have a lot to talk about.

So I'm going to tell you the Hezbollah has just launched rockets into Israel and it made the Iron Fall.

The iron phone.

The Iron Dome, uh, dysfunctional.

Didn't work, wasn't able to stop it.

So the Iron Dome is a big fucking bullshit, nonsense, nothing burger.

Everyone's known that for a long time.

It's a psychological dome, it's not actually real.

I mean, it's real, but it's like it barely works.

It's very easy to bypass it.

Alright, it's a nothing burger.

Psychological mainly.

So that's the news on there.

And then let me talk about Ukraine.

I want to talk about this because

Like, NAFO won't shut the fuck up about it.

Every time there's one of these ridiculous, brazen, desperate acts by the Azov Ukraine shithole, you know, NATO terrorist scumbags, it goes viral on Twitter and everyone like uses it as hopium.

Oh my god, Ukraine's gonna win the and then and then as soon as it's crushed.

And as soon as it obviously fails, which it will, and it's unable to reverse the overall tide of Holy shit Uh, Andre Andrew Socialism!

What an interesting name, but wow!

The gifted subscriptions speak for themselves.

25, holy shit!

Emirio is that guy banned?

That's the type of person that Emirio would ban right away, right?

Well, if he is on ban him, all right, he's earned his all right, he's not, okay, 'cause he earned his freedom, whoever that is.

Twenty-five.

Wow.

Wow.

Wow.

Thank you so much.

Really?

Wow.

Um I was anyway, guys, um, as I was saying.

As soon as this shit gets crushed.

We're not gonna hear anything of it.

That's what I've the past two years of the SMO.

Every time Ukraine, I mean, every time Ukraine, it's like it's like a Scooby-Doo villain or something.

It's like they're always coming up with these new.

It's like Ed Ed and Eddie.

They're always coming up with some new plan to save Ukraine.

It's a new contraption.

It's a new thing.

And NAFO makes it go viral on Twitter.

Oh my God, this is the end of Putler.

This is the end of Putler.

And then when it gets crushed.

We don't hear anything of it ever again.

What happened to the German leopard tanks?

Alright, what happened to the javelins?

What happened to the German leopard tanks?

You guys remember they kept making memes of those fucking German tanks?

Oh, this is the game changer.

Those tanks from the leopard tanks, the leopard tanks, and then nothing happened.

Alright?

So, this is gonna be the same thing.

It's gonna go viral now.

Nothing will happen.

Oh, yeah, hi, Mars.

Hi, Mars.

And nothing happened.

Alright, now this is a new nothing burger.

Where a Kursk is they're taking over Russia with Kur and then nothing is gonna happen.

It's gonna get crushed and then we're not gonna they're not gonna say anything.

We're not gonna you know what it is?

It's like fucking like crypto scam or something.

It's like you hear it when they keep pumping it, they're pumping it to the moon, but then when it fails and it crashes,

They take the money and they run.

There's no accountability.

Yeah, it's a fucking pump and dump.

That's what, you know, Ukraine is a pump and dump army.

That's what it is.

They pump and dump.

They hype bullshit nonsense.

And it's like, it's literally like that.

And it's like they're fooling the investors to keep pushing money into it.

The investors being Western audiences signing on board to send so much military aid to Ukraine.

They keep doing these things to convince the West that it's still viable to fund Ukraine.

That's why they do this shit.

And it's literally just some nonsense pump and dump scheme that will always fail, but they'll never cease to find creative ways to deceive Western retards from continuing to fund them.

Oh, it's still viable.

Look, Russia may not be taking Ukraine in one day.

Whatever.

Their strategy is their strategy.

But, like, come on, guys.

Ukraine doesn't have a Ukraine never had a fucking chance in this war.

And you want to ask me r what Russia's been doing?

They've been basically having all the NATO sp stockpiles get wasted.

They're like wasting all of these NATO stockpiles.

And bleeding them out.

And then, when Russia feels like it, they'll, you know, they'll do whatever they want.

But that's what's been going on.

And you know, you what, you really think Ukraine ever had a chance?

Don't be stupid, all right?

Don't be stupid.

They've never had a chance in this war.

Don't be stupid.

You know, a lot of stupid people think, oh, hopium, it's finally happening.

No, it's not.

The thing that's actually happening.

Look, steadily but slowly, all we've seen is the incorporation of new territory.

All we've seen is Russia taking new territory.

That's all we've actually seen.

A lot of people think this war is a stalemate.

It's not a stalemate.

It's just that Russia is just taking its time for whatever reason.

But the only changes that have happened.

You know, these NAFO retards still talk about the first two days of the SMO.

Russia failed to take Kiev.

You really think

You really think that Russia wants to take Kiev right away?

No, they don't.

They were doing some nonsense.

Clearly it was like some attacking arms depots and whatever, but like they're not actually just trying to take Kiev right away, okay?

What they're doing is taking their time.

But like the arrow of time in this war is very clear.

It's clear to everyone.

The arrow of time is in the direction of Russia taking new territory and incorporating it in Russia officially with referendums and whatever.

That's where the arrow of time, that's the direction of time.

Is it taking a long time?

Sure.

It's not clear to where Russia wants to stop either.

I think Odessa is a given.

I think it's a given they're going to take Odessa.

But I also think Russia is being very calculating right now and waiting to see what's going to happen of the elections in 2024 in the US.

I think they're waiting.

I you know, look, Russia, Iran, and China.

You think they're stupid?

You think they're stupid?

You think they're stupid like NAFO retards are stupid?

They're not stupid.

They understand this is the global war.

Everything is a moving chess piece in a global war.

It's like Russia can do nothing in isolation.

Iran can do nothing in isolation.

China can do nothing in isolation.

They're all working together and they're taking a strategic position in coordination with each other because they understand it's a global war.

It's not a Ukraine war.

It's not an Israel war.

It's not a Taiwan war.

It's a global war.

And they're all coordinating and they're being strategic about it and they're being smart about it.

You know, Russia knows, for example, if they finish off the Kiev government right now, let's say they do it tomorrow.

There's going to be consequences, all right?

And there's going to be consequences.

Why should they, you know, why should they be not con you think they're not considerate of those consequences?

Um, it's going to activate NATO.

Well, why do that when NATO can have its hands tied in the Middle East?

Why do that when they can have their hands tied with China?

It's smarter to coordinate.

Smarter instead of allow giving them the opportunity to marshal all of their forces into one place.

So that everyone can pretend Russia's the big bad guy and that's no, this is a multipolar war, it's a global multipolar war.

It's very clear, all right.

So I'm sick of these idiot loser stupid fucks who uh are clogging up my timeline with nonsense.

Kursk!

I'm a NAFL Kursk!

It's a Kursk is gonna Kursk!

It's gonna be it's it has to Kursk!

Yeah, and you know, we all know why.

We all know why you suffer obesity and all these other problems.

We all know why you're like a fucking miserable, depressed piece of shit.

It's 'cause you're a fucking moron idiot.

Dumb fuck.

J curse on Reddit, it got updated to nineteen thousand.

That means it's reality.

Like these Redditors still think that uh Kiev controls like as of stall or something.

They still think that Mariupol is still going on.

They still think that Ukraine is still fighting in Mariupol.

Any minute now they're gonna come out of a Zovstal and Pullard's gonna tremble.

You know, and then curse curs.

It's such an astroturfed pentagon nonsense, fake news, bullshit thing.

It's such bullshit.

Like, does anyone believe that stuff?

Does anyone believe this nonsense?

It's totally manufactured and fake.

Everyone can see that.

Like I used to be just like you guys.

By you guys I mean general audiences.

Like ultimately we don't know what's going on in the world, right?

But I literally asked Jackson in private, I'm like, all right, what do you actually think?

Like, 'cause I'm like, clearly, you know, there's propaganda, we are clearly biased, we know that.

And I'm like, what do you actually think though?

And he'll straight up tell me, he'll straight up give me the receipts.

He'll be like, no, like, we're literally actually right about all this.

It's not just propaganda, we're not just hyping them up.

I was like, so what's going on in Venezuela, Jackson?

I was like, what do you think?

I mean, you were there.

Like, what's your real unfiltered thoughts?

And he's like, straight up, everything I've been saying, like, is actually true.

Like, they straight up made it seem like Maduro rigged it in the West.

And they made it seem like they're on the verge of a revolution.

And it was all fake.

He was like, They're sharing all these clips from twenty nineteen.

He's like, I was here, I saw the demonstrations in Caracas and he's like, They weren't they weren't that big.

They weren't like as big as people were trying to make them out to be on Twitter.

And he was like

You know, the fucking.

He was talking about the judge, the whatever, the head, I don't know what it was called.

He's like, all the votes were counted and validated by all the parties.

He's like, they straight up actually have like a cringe liberal democracy in Venezuela where they do all this like rule of law bullshit, democratic style.

He's like, if anything, the problem in Venezuela is they're too democratic.

They're still too like liberal democratic.

They should be more iron-fisted authoritarians.

Strelostani, what's going on?

Which I agree with.

Like, you know, for example, I want to see a timeline where the PSU V eliminates all opposition parties.

Why sh uh a state cannot be sovereign if it tolerates opposition parties?

That are against the sovereignty of the state.

Like, for example, in Russia or Iran, you can have opposition parties, but they all have to agree on sovereignty.

Like, they it's non-negotiable.

I personally don't agree with multi-party states.

I don't think that opposition should be tolerated at all.

But if you are going to have a tolerated opposition, everyone needs to be on the same page as far as sovereignty is concerned.

In Venezuela, they have an actual U S aligned opposition.

I think the state should totally crack down on it and totally go more hardcore.

You know, that's what I think, uh, if anything.

But whatever, it's their country, it's their business.

But it's just like crazy, like being on the other side of the fence where you actually know what's going on.

Like, guys, we are straight up right about all of this.

It's like a shot in the dark.

Where you're like, all right, the communism stuff, is it just a meme?

Is it real?

Is it just a joke?

And then it turns out like, no, it's actually real.

Like, we actually are correct.

The Western media is just lies about fucking everything.

And it's like totally nonchalant.

It's like, yeah.

Welcome.

Like, you like, I'm going to go to the DPRK.

I don't know if it'll be this year, definitely 2025.

It could be this year, though.

So, fingers crossed.

But I'm going there.

Like it will happen.

It's already talks already being had.

Like it's gonna happen.

Um like we're already like setting it up basically.

I'm gonna go there and I guarantee you I'm just gonna be like chill.

And I'm like, oh yeah, yeah.

The Western media has just been like straight up lying about everything about this country.

And everyone like is nonchalant about it.

It's like, whatever, we're used to it.

That's how it was when I went to Russia.

That's how it was in Venezuela, according to Jackson.

That's how it is in China, according to Grayson and Jackson.

It's like, yeah, the Western media is just fucking lying and they're being hysterical, lying, screaming retards.

Meanwhile, people are getting on with their day-to-day lives in these authoritarian countries just fine.

And it's like, it's nothing like they say it is, how they tell it to us.

Just don't just visit Pyongyang.

I've never seen coverage of rural places in the DPRK.

Could probably go there too.

I don't see why I couldn't.

I you know you don't you don't understand?

It's like I know people who have been outside Pyongyang too.

I've known people who've been outside Pyongyang and it's the same thing.

I mean, it's not the same in terms of development, obviously, but it's the same in the sense that it's nothing like uh it's nothing uh scandalous like, oh my god, the it's a nineteen eighty four hellhole.

Like, no, I mean, yeah, it's poorer than Pyongyang, obviously.

But people still get by fine, you know, just day to day lives.

It's normal.

Could Xiang I think he's been there.

think he's already been there.

He has already been there as a matter of fact.

Yeah, but

I will be going there.

Patreon tonight.

That's very possible.

That's very, very possible.

We may just be doing that.

But guys, who's this guy that wants to debate me?

I've been hearing about what's going on with that.

Everyone tells me, well, not everyone.

A few people have told me, oh, there's some guy who's calling you out.

He wants to debate you.

Well, here I am.

So where is that guy going to show up or no?

Or are they just venting?

Are are they just venting?

Are they just venting and they're not actually gonna show up and stand on business?

They're just venting.

They're just trying to get it all out, all the emotions out, and it's not actually like a challenge.

'Cause if someone is challenging me, you know, they'll they're free to come and V C

Right now.

They're in okay.

But he won't debate on VC.

Okay, will they will they debate where they can type and I can respond?

Like, like, I could respond with my voice and they could just type out their feelings and vent, and I can just respond to it.

'Cause I'm fine doing that too.

Like, I'll I guess we have to be accommodating to the disabled or whatever to not be ableist.

'Cause some people are just they have like anxiety disorder.

They can't use your their voice.

That's fine.

I'll literally just respond to whatever they type on the keyboard.

Um but yeah, I'll do that too.

So is that happening or no?

Or is it just jibber?

They block everyone.

Okay, so they just all right, so so they're just venting basically.

They're just venting.

It's not actually like a challenge.

Nobody's actually challenging me.

They're just venting.

That's what I suspect.

So, a lot of people they just like to vent.

They like to get things off their chest.

And then when they get any pushback, they block you.

Because they're not actually challenging anyone's ideas.

They're not actually saying anything.

They're venting for psychological and emotional reasons.

They need to get it off their chest because, on a psychological level, on a pathological level, they need this.

They need to just voice this out.

They're not actually looking to actually have anyone respond to it.

No, no, no, don't you dare respond.

That will ruin everything for them skeeby D.

Yo, Chen, what's going on?

That would ruin everything for them.

You know, they're just gonna they're just gonna vent

Hoping that no one will ever or pretending like no one's responding.

That's you know, some people, it's like a, it's, I think they teach you this in yoga or something.

It's just like, oh, Haas is a fascist, he doesn't know anything about Marxism.

And like, you have to pretend like Haas can't respond.

Devil chunk chocolate cookie or baked chicken.

Not even respond to that.

You have to pretend like, um, oh, Haas is, Haas doesn't know anything about Marxism.

And then like you say that, and you're speaking it into existence.

And you have to pretend like Haas can't hear you and can't respond to it.

Because if if Haas actually looks at you and starts like responding to it, the cope gets ruined.

The way you're coping with your cognitive the whole thing gets shattered, right?

So it's basically like a nonsense yoga self-help like venting psychological ritual.

Like it's not actually like a challenge, right?

They're saying prostitution is productive labor.

Again, they're not saying that as in like they're either making a statement, they are venting that for whatever psychological reason.

They're just venting.

It's not actually.

Let me tell you guys something.

To make an actual theoretical statement, whether it's critical, whether it's affirmative, whatever, you actually have to commit to what claim you're making.

You have to commit to that claim.

You have to be open to the possibility that someone out there may hold it to scrutiny and disagree with it.

If you're unable to make that commitment, you're not making a theoretical statement.

You're not making any kind of statement.

All you're doing is venting for your own psychological needs and for the needs of other people who are coping alongside you.

It's that simple.

Double chunk chocolate cookie or chicken bake?

Yo, the.

Chicken bake has pork in it.

I can't fucking as much as I want to try it.

It has pork.

I can't.

You know what the hell is wrong with Costco?

They're like, yeah, we're just going to make this chicken bake probably the best sounding thing on the menu, but there needs to be bacon in it.

There needs to be fucking like pork in it.

And it's called a fucking chicken.

Excuse my French.

It's called a chicken bake.

It's not called a pig bake.

Okay.

It's called a...

It's not called a hog bake.

Jaysco, what's going on?

It's not called a swine bake.

It's called a chicken bake.

They want to call it a chicken swine bake.

Be my guest.

But I I asked them once, I was like, yo, do you have like a just chicken?

They're like, no, it comes prepackaged.

Yeah, but their hot dog is beef.

But the chicken bake has to have pork.

You said that surplus value is impossible to be produced at the individual level and is only at the aggregate level.

Can you explain that more?

If only someone wrote a book about this, and spoiler, Marx is the one who wrote a book about it.

He wrote a book about it in Capital Volume 3 when he was trying to explain the transformation of values into prices, and I guess vice versa.

It's called Critics of Marxism, they call this the transformation problem because they don't understand it.

But he was trying to explain that and the uh why trying to explain why there's an average rate of profit across sectors and industries.

And he came to the conclusion that you know the reason for that is because

Only in the aggregate is value actually being produced.

But that guy who's claiming that, like, everyone who's paid a wage in the context of profit being produced is a productive laborer.

I bet you if I asked them to come in my VC and just explain to me why there even needs to be a distinction between the form and content of value, like for example, why aren't you just a marginalist then who's like a Chomsky, Richard Wolfe, I want workers' democracy type?

Like, why are you even talking about value as something separate from price?

Uh, which is the form of value, right?

Why are you even treating it as two different things?

Like Marx was clear: value and price are not the same thing, they're related, they're interconnected, but they're not exactly the same.

All right, I'm

Kinda sick of this, but thanks for the five.

He's clear that they're the same in like in the sense that price is the form value takes, but the significance of value does not end with price.

The law of value asserts itself in many ways at the expense of profit and price and so on and so on.

So, like, why is that guy even drawing a distinction between the two?

If he thinks that all surplus value is, is unpaid wages, why even use the word value?

Why don't you just say that?

You know what I mean?

What's the point of the concept of value in that case?

Hezbollah's fucking up Israel right now.

Cool.

It's like, I know, I covered it.

Um when will the ACP take Greenland?

I think Jackson I think there was like something about that, like Greenland or Iceland or something.

Um something like that.

But I was like, nah, we're not gonna go near that.

That's a little tough.

Double chunk chocolate cookie or chicken bake?

Who is it now?

Oh my god.

That's the Twitch days coming back.

Off

Okay.

Interesting.

Yeah, so Juzan, what's going on, brother?

I appreciate you.

What's going on, Juzan?

Yeah, anyway guys, we have some things to talk about.

Um, can I just say this?

I finally started gaining a little weight.

I was testing my limits.

Like, how much can I actually start eating straight-up trash junk food before I start gaining some pounds?

And I've gone from 170 to 175, I think, or 171 to 174-ish.

And I'm like, all right, now I'm gonna start eating good again.

I just want, I was trying to tell.

He's like, for three weeks, I've been eating nothing but like burgers and fries every day.

I didn't gain a single pound.

So I was like, is this thing on?

Let me just keep doing this.

And then finally, like a few days ago, I saw an increase in the weight.

And I was like, okay, now I understand the cause and effect.

And I'll go back to clean eating good.

Um

Yeah.

I'm gonna expose who's donating this stuff right now, 'cause I know who it is.

This person better text me if they don't want me to expose who they are, 'cause I know who you are.

Alright, I know who this person is, and they know who they are too.

And

Huh.

I do know who this is.

Anyway, uh

Anyway, um

Yeah, yeah, did I ever show you guys the message Charmhole sent me?

Cause Charmhole's now running around.

Oh my god, speak of the devil.

Yo, I'm live.

Yeah, you're on speaker.

It's a double chunk chocolate.

See, oh, that was Jackson.

I knew it was Jackson.

There you go.

Double chunk chocolate.

Have you you just discovered that?

You just discovered that?

This guy didn't even have a Costco membership.

That's the crazy thing.

I love the Rizzler.

Who's that?

You don't know the Rizzler, bro?

That's from the Riz party.

No.

The TikTok Riz party.

No, bro.

It's the Rizzler.

You don't know the Rizzler?

Who the fuck?

That's the TikTok Rizzler.

You don't even know what you're talking about.

The Rizzler is the kid?

All right, they're changing it up.

No, no, no, no, no, bro.

Look up on Twitter.

Look up Rizzler.

Just look up Rizzler.

All right, on Twitter?

Yeah.

And react to those double chunk chocolate videos.

Bro, I've seen, I've seen, they're like a year old.

I've seen those.

Bro, don't you think it's kind of related to Marxism, though?

Definitely.

What the hell is that?

It's like a small kid.

They've started using him as a weapon.

What?

The Rizzler.

It's literally like a five-year-old kid.

This kid needs to go on a diet.

This is like a obesity diabetes.

This is a future diabetic.

This is bad parenting.

This is a future diabetic.

Kids don't need to diet, but they just need to not stuff their faces with fucking garbage because they'll literally get diabetes early.

No, I mean it's a health problem.

Like it's a health problem, straight up.

Diabetes, health problem.

Shit is serious.

And also, uh, here's the thing.

Uh, morbid, what do they call it?

Terminal what do they call obesity when it's dangerous?

It's like um what do they call that?

The o the dangerous type of morbid, yeah, the morbid obesity, not even as a joke.

That's straight up, like, really bad.

It's not because of how people look.

It looks have nothing to do with it.

It's literally like a health problem.

Uh but here's the thing.

Uh

A lot of people hate the Costco guys, and I don't know why they are hated.

They're with the mob, chill.

Whatever.

Yeah, he's just balking.

I guess he's just bulking.

Take back everything.

I take back everything.

Hey, but I'm with the mob too, the ACP mob.

You know, we're a mob as well, a legal mob.

Before they come near me they gotta get past Yankee Tanky.

They gotta get past the hired muscle of the ACP.

Anyway, I was talking about Charmhole.

Charmhole is deeply disturbed.

Did I ever tell you guys the wonderful DM Charmhole sent me?

Did I ever tell you the wonderful DM he sent my way when I did not react to Trump's shooting with as much as, you know, excitement?

You I didn't share that with you guys?

Are you sure I didn't?

Are you sure I didn't?

I'm pretty sure I did.

Pretty sure I did.

It was like um

Let me find it.

Um

Uh I'm pretty sure I did.

Anyway, uh okay.

Guys, I had an interview.

The guy was named Douglas Lane.

I had an interview with him today.

And we don't really agree on much, I don't think.

I mean, he's not an ML, but he gave me the opportunity to.

Talk about some really interesting stuff.

So, I hope you guys look forward to that.

Super interesting.

Super interesting.

conversation

Uh and I wonder if I should talk about that stuff now or I should no I'll wait, I don't wanna spoil it.

But he gave me the opportunity to basically talk about, you know, Hegel and Stalin, things like that.

I like anyone who just lets, you know, who is smart and like is open to new ideas.

I don't have to agree with them on everything, but it's like, it's just there again, like that, like that guy who's just using Twitter to vent about us.

It's like, look, like, you can draw different conclusions as me, but like, you're calling yourself like an academic or some professor and your reaction to like different thinkers is to like fucking aren't you like aren't these people like the Lukox guys who are like the dialectic of enlightenment, you know, the Enlightenment project of rationalism and holding everything to be discursively accountable and the possibility that everything can be given rational explication and mediation.

It's a fundamental commitment of the Enlightenment.

But then like, what do they do when they encounter us?

They just call us names.

It's like, look, Lukox, from his perspective, he was dealing with this problem of how like fascist thinkers were themselves closing off the possibility of like rational.

I mean, this is more Habermas, but like rational communication, right?

Like, and that was the problem.

But it's like and that's the problem with like groipers.

You could try to rationally engage with a groiper, but they're just gonna respond like calling you the n-word or something, right?

But here I am, like fully capable of like laying everything on the table as far as where I'm coming from rationally.

Like the possibility of rational dialogue hasn't been closed.

And yet there's people who will try to dismiss thinkers through guilt by association by just calling them names.

It's like, okay, even if that's correct, you need to rationally subject that to rational scrutiny.

You need to actually explain in a way that can be communicated to anyone why your position is ultimately correct and what they got wrong.

That is why actual left-wing thinkers in the 20th century.

engaged with Heidegger and engaged with Schmidt.

It would be one thing to just be like, Oh, Heidegger's a Nazi, so he has nothing of importance to say.

But then it's another thing to say, okay, here's what Heidegger was trying to say, and here's where things went wrong.

And maybe here's where we could correct that and draw a different conclusion.

But, you know, there's a minimum of acceptance that there's a raise.

This is what Midwestern Marx guy said: there's always a rational kernel behind a thinker.

And then some idiot responded, like, so what's the rational kernel behind Hitler?

And it's like, but Hitler wasn't the thinker.

Mein Kampf was not an innovative text that contributed anything to the history of philosophy or theory or the intellect.

Mein Kampf was just Hitler like.

you know, um, uh venting.

It's literally Hitler venting, like that professor is on Twitter.

He's just venting.

There's no rational kernel of Hitler because Hitler isn't an actual thinker.

The contrary, Hitler was just a hired thug, okay, of the capitalist class.

So that's why you're saying there's a rational colonel of Mussolini?

No, because Mussolini is not a thinker.

But as far as a thinker is concerned, if that thinker has made some kind of contribution to the history of thought, regardless of their political views, regardless of however wrong they were, there's always a rational kernel.

Because look at the key word, they made a contribution.

For example, someone at once would ask me, Okay, Haas,

So fully, fully be committed.

What's the rational kernel of Schopenhauer and Nietzsche?

You know what I would say?

I would say Freud is.

All of that was culminating in Freudian, the breakthrough of Freudian psychoanalysis.

That's what Schopenhauer and Nietzsche were ultimately building up towards, in my view, right?

Like they were coming from somewhere.

There were inadequacies of Enlightenment philosophy, rationalistic Enlightenment philosophy, which could not account for the unconscious, right?

Schopenhauer tried to give expression to this in a wrong way.

Nietzsche did this later as well.

And then Freud finally reveals the symptom behind everything, right?

So every thinker who has made a contribution to the history of thought, there's a rational kernel behind where they're coming from.

And it's incumbent upon Marxists to distill that rational kernel, to bring out that rational kernel.

it doesn't apply to like us all political leaders or all, you know, statesmen and and and propagandists or whatever.

So yeah, there you go.

There's always a rational kernel kernel in thinkers.

Um, Gent you know, Gentile is someone I don't read.

I really ha I'm familiar with who they are and I totally reject them.

And is there a rational kernel in Gentile?

I don't really

Not one, there's none that actually I don't really see him contributing to the history of thought.

That's the problem.

Whatever Gentila was doing ends with him.

Um as far as I know, it ends with him.

Uh so that's the problem.

Um

He was he failed totally, even on the well, not on the terms of his own projects.

Jin Tile, um

is totally, totally superfluous when you have Kojev, for example.

The project of rendering Hegel something phenomenological, something that is relatable at the level of like the subject, for example.

Kojev is the one who did that.

And Gentila contributed.

I don't really think he contributed anything, honestly.

Uh now Evola, uh again, again, I don't I think Guenon definitely.

Rene Guenon, yes, absolutely.

But Evola, uh again, I I'm much more skeptical of Evola in terms of their historical.

uh significance.

I'm I'm skeptical of all of them, but I'm talking about like who has actually contributed something to the history of thought.

A lot of people don't know this because they just believe in whatever like nonsense feds say about me.

I genuinely don't believe there is any rational kernel to fascism.

And a lot of people think I'm being so uncharitable when I say that.

I literally see fascism as the reign of killer clown degenerates, and there is no rational kernel to it at all.

There is nothing redeemable about it at all.

There is nothing that could be salvaged from that.

And people point to all these other things that are not even themselves inherently fascist.

And for some reason, give fascism all the credit for them.

For example, they want to talk about what was it, Diannunzio, who I'm not even a fan of to begin with.

But even that, the whole Republic of Fume or whatever, like that wasn't yet fascism.

So if you find something interesting about that, there's no reason to give Mussolini credit for it.

And then people like to talk about the German conservative revolution, which produced a lot of interesting thinkers like Carl Schmidt and Junger and whatever.

But why are you giving the Nazis credit for that?

Those thinkers at best sold out to Nazism, but you can't reduce that to Nazism.

You can't, for example, someone wrote a blog.

They're like the Nazi philosopher Heidegger.

They're like, that's super misleading.

Heidegger is.

Heidegger's thinking was never officiated by the Nazi Party.

Giving the Nazi Party credit for Heidegger's thinking is giving the Nazi Party way too much credit.

Um

So, I don't see what the Nazis could take credit for that there's a rational kernel within.

That's the problem.

They were literally the epitome of degeneracy and evil and madness, and I mean that.

It's like I don't know how other people can't see that the same way that I can.

I don't even think leftists see it the same way that I can.

There was really something fucking demonic and like the epitome of fucking evil degeneracy that's in fascism.

It is there's a reason the communists at the time called it barbarism, okay?

Because like that's it straight up was a total circus madness killer clown type of thing.

Um

And you know, I see nothing redeemable about it.

It's like it's like think about it.

Like, would you say there's something redeemable about Azov?

No, there isn't.

So I see it the same way for I see fascism the same way.

There's nothing about it that's redeemable, nothing.

Um

Nothing at all.

Even, I don't even like how Western intellectuals flirt with it in the sense of like they associate a lot of things with fascism that are by no means inherently fascistic.

Like, they associate authoritarianism and like uh you know uh I don't know, discipline and like um you know a kind of a politics of struggle and honor and they they just jump the gun and are like, Yeah, this is like fascist.

And no, it's not.

You know, who did this was um what were they called?

The anthropological society that Bataille was a part of.

They associated this newfound kind of temptation of grand historical opening of meaning and like you know, uh, whatever they something inherently libidinal and tempting.

No, no, that's not inherently fascist.

As a matter of fact, all of those things that are associated with fascism that people find uh libidinally tempting, as weird as that sounds, were stolen from communism.

Okay, the whole uniform stuff and the discipline and the solidarity, whatever, red before black, all of the aesthetics of fascism that people find appealing were stolen from communism.

And if not communism directly in the Soviet Union, then the social democracy workers' movements.

Stolen, one for one.

Like a lot of people, they'll be like, oh, you know.

Uh, you know, the the Hitler youth camps where everyone is like a Boy Scout and like, you know, that stuff is not the worst.

And I'm like, well, that was just stolen from the Social Democrats.

One it was literally stolen and repurposed.

So there's nothing inherently Nazi uh about, you know, um

Uh Boy Scouts or something.

That was something perverted for something very evil.

And they're like, well, what about the kind of the militant, you know, solidarity and the kind of that again is all stolen from Bolshevism.

It was all stolen from communism.

All of it.

Even some people will go farther.

What about the cool black leather jackets?

It's like, even that was stolen from the Bolsheviks.

Even that, literally, even shit like that was just stolen.

Straight up plagiarism.

Aesthetic plagiarism.

Lawn guy.

And why did they have this aesthetic plagiarism?

They had this aesthetic plagiarism because they wanted to dupe and fool the workers.

Because all those aesthetics were from the working class and they tried to dupe them and fool them.

So people are like, guys, imagine this, all right?

Because you need to visualize it.

Imagine ACP and we have all these cool aesthetics and we got all this like cool stuff, whatever.

And then, like, Nick Fuentes or these whatever killer clown, I don't know, bap, whatever fuck these right-wingers, they come along and they steal our shit.

They steal our aesthetics, they steal our vibe, bar for bar, word for word, and they just repurpose it in order to support the war machine and like totally perverse ends.

That would be the equivalent.

Like, they straight up stole the aesthetics of communism.

Um, to fulfill very demonic, evil, and perverse ends.

So, anytime someone is like tempted by fascism and, like, oh, this doesn't seem all bad, it's like what you're looking at aesthetically is something that was stolen.

So, the real essence of fascism is actually evil.

Like, people are like, Oh, it's not nuanced.

I don't know what to tell you.

There's some pagan, dark, serpentine, evil shit at play in fascism.

Nihilism, I don't know, whatever you want to call it, it's something really fucking demonic though.

Like authoritarianism is not fascism, all right?

Um having a sense of national solidarity, that that's not what that that's not fascism.

Fascism is something very nihilistic, barbaric, satanic, and demonic.

which is totally suspending all of the values of s of humanity, of civilization, of culture, you know, literature, everything.

It's this it you know, I don't I don't

And you look at how the Japanese were in World War Two as well and uh the thirties and it's like something is really deep and dark and demonic here at play.

Something pagan and serpentine.

It's like it's it's the serpent, you know.

It's like anarchism.

All of the degeneracy and wickedness and evil we associate with capitalism and decay, like chaz and anarch imagine that, but elevated to the status of state dictatorship.

Matter of fact, I want to talk about something.

Um

The other day I watched HBO's Watchmen.

I watched one episode, like before I went to bed.

And I'm like, fuck, this is so fucked up.

Because

The police department, I think it was like in Oklahoma.

It's like a literal fascist, like literally, that's what they wear masks.

Nobody has any civil liberties.

They're just terrorizing the local population.

But everything gets twisted because the local population is being coded as like deplorable racists, and the police department are like, you know, the liberals.

But the liberals are actual fascists, like one-for-one, actual, like, nihilistic.

barbaric fascists wearing masks like terrorizing people.

And I find that like contrast so interesting.

Like, oh, the actual progressive liberals are the real fascists.

Like something Dinish De D'Souza would say, but HBO actually made a show about it.

And um

I found it disturbing because I was like, oh, is this where leftists are getting the idea that Marxism-Leninism is just like turbo Kamala Harris, liberal authoritarianism?

Because there's a character who's part of the police department that's called Red Scare, and it's like some Eastern European guy who literally says he's a communist, like as a joke or something.

So I think they saw that.

They must have seen that and they're like, oh, yeah, I'm a hardcore liberal.

Basically, like a bunch of liberals saw Watchmen and they saw the communist being on the side of the fascist police department.

Like rounding up all the Trump deplorables, and they're like, I want to be that.

That must be what communism is.

So they started identifying with communism because they think it's literally like Kamala Harris, Adolf Hitlerism.

They think it's like uh Democrat Party Hitlerism.

It's like the Democrats but but taking away all of our civil liberties.

And you know, implementing a fascist dictatorship.

that's anti popular, that's anti masses, that's anti people to terrorize the deplorable blue collar working class, you know, trailer park trash or whatever.

Uh so that's actual fascism.

Um

The the terms and the labels might be getting mixed up but for that's actually what fascism is, notwith labels and all notwithstanding.

And I think a lot of people got confused because of HBO's watchman maybe.

Um

I mean, I believe TV shows have the power to like change and affect perception in such a way.

Honestly, I do.

Especially in a country where it's like so confusing and unclear about what communism actually is.

It's very easy to create the necessary set of associations just from a high-funded TV show.

So I don't know.

Um anyway I was gonna say uh pfft.

What was I saying?

Yeah, there's nothing about even Žižek, apparently.

I learned this.

He's writing a new book on soft fascism, saying that's the future.

And I'm like, can you just shut the fuck up and stop calling it fascism?

No, you're not talking about fascism.

You're talking about what liberals will knee-jerk refer to as fascism, like authoritarianism.

And like, that's not inherently fascist, right?

That's just the kind of liberal prejudice about ontologizing fascism into like a trans-historical pattern or like a fucking temptation like the dark side in Star Wars or something.

And that really does a disservice to the victims of fascism.

You know how disgusting it is to ontologize fascism?

Oh, it's a dark side, we have to keep it bay.

You know what?

No.

What made fascism so bad was that it wasn't transhistorical.

It was a unique barbaric evil of the existing historical era we live in, which was unprecedented.

It was an unprecedented debasement and loss of humanity.

Which has no precedent.

And the only precedent I can think of are like the villains in the Bible and the Quran, right?

These arrogant, evil, demonic people.

Like, like, you know, when that story, uh, uh, when Abraham is going into that city and everyone's trying to, like, rape him and angels?

Maybe that is what fascism is.

Something very viscerally evil that's described in the holy books.

Yeah, the Hungarian counter-revolution was 70% lumpin' and ex-convicts released from prison.

Yeah guys, let's not flirt with it.

I mean I'm not saying you guys do this.

I'm just saying like in general.

I hate how like liberals and even some edgy leftists will try to flirt with it and be like, oh, there's something tempting and interesting about fascism.

No, there isn't.

There's nothing interesting about it.

All the things you're associating with fascism that you find interesting are not even inherently fascist.

They were likely hijacked and repurposed and perverted by fascism.

You know?

Straight up.

Straight up.

And, you know, like, oh, well, well, okay, then why did Heidegger see the Nazis as the zeitgeist of like a new Dasein?

Because Heidegger was an old oaf out of stupidity.

Like, straight up, he was fucking stupid.

All right.

I mean, he was stupid in the sense of the conclusions he drew from his own.

From the correct question that he did pose, he drew stupid conclusions from it.

That's very clear.

Um

But, you know, uh the idea that Heidegger created some Nazi ideology that was officiated by the party, no, he didn't.

You think fucking Hitler read Heidegger, you fucking moron?

You think the actual Nazi party, like you think they were, like, reading Heidegger and like canonizing no, they weren't, okay?

Red what's up?

Uh, no, they they were the the ideology they were popularizing was like uh cannibalism, okay?

It wasn't some sophisticated phenomenology or ontology or something.

Like, no, I'm sorry.

Yeah, Nazism was tempting for retards, I totally agree.

It's like it's like well well I mean I mean the authoritarian countries in the Third World, those were kind of like fascist and it's like that's Cold War propaganda.

They tried calling like Nasser and like, you know, uh Assad and Gaddafi and you know now Chavez.

They tri yeah, they called him.

They compared those people to Hitler as like Cold War propaganda.

It was nonsense.

There's there's no truth in that at all.

There's not even a grain of truth in it.

Not even a single grain of truth.

I love how these idiots, though, like trying to cancel me about Heidegger.

They're like, well, I can draw a clear connection between Heidegger's outlook and how he could have related that to Nazism.

And it's like, okay, but you can't reduce it to that because it wasn't the official ideology.

It wasn't entertained in any serious way by the Nazi party.

And it's clear that Heidegger drew a false conclusion.

Um.

It's a ridiculous assertion to make.

I mean, you can say in the same breath that Heidegger has a seminal historical significance for the history of thinking in the West at least, while also saying that Heidegger was very wrong in terms of the conclusions he drew from that thinking as applied to politics and the real world.

Um

The Nazis made all for example, why take Nazism at face value?

Anyone who takes Nazism at face value is a Nazi.

If you agree with the Nazis that Nazism was some revival of the nation and revival of the Volk, and it was this true, authentic, you know, rooted in the soil community of blood and soil.

No, it wasn't.

That was propaganda.

Nazism, as Dmitrov pointed out, was a top-down phenomena coming from the higher echelons of the financial capitalist bourgeoisie, the imperialist bourgeoisie, and it was a complete fucking pageant show trying to LARP and sell itself to the masses with these fake appeals to populism.

Again, what did Stalin say?

And he literally said this adverbatum.

He said they call themselves national socialists.

What is so nationalist about it?

It's based on trying to conquer and plunder foreign countries instead of focusing on your own nation.

So it's not nationalist.

He said they call themselves socialist.

What is social about it?

You know?

He said they call themselves German He said what is even German about this?

It's not rooted in any in Germany's real authentic historical traditions.

Stalin said this advertim he repeated it in a different way uh in his first speech after Barbarossa.

He said the Hitlers will come and go, but the German people and the German state will remain.

He said Hitler doesn't represent everything that Germany is.

So why give them why give the Nazis credit for the claims that they're making?

This is the big sin of pseudo-intellectual, bourgeois pseudo-intellectuals of the 20th century.

What they did is that they conceded to the Nazis all of the overt ideological pretensions and then just said those things were bad.

So if the Nazis talked about, for example, social solidarity, they said, hmm, there's something inherently fascist about social solidarity.

Instead of drawing the opposite conclusion, which is that the Nazis were lying to the masses, trying to say things that sounded good to them, but which served perverted and dishonest ends.

That element of dishonesty got lost on these liberal pseudo-intellectuals and they started taking the fascists at face value.

Like, oh, you're talking about national revival?

Mmm, that's inherently fascist.

Well, what if the inherently fascist thing is actually dishonest, dishonestly presenting itself?

What if the inherent fascism is actually the terroristic dictatorship of monopoly capital and that it's selling itself on false pretenses to the masses as a national revival?

What about that?

Why all of this pathologization and ontologization of fascism, which is based on taking it all at face value at its word?

Like, imagine Hitler gives a speech.

We are going to make Germany great and prosperous and happy.

And then a fucking liberal pseudo-intellectual is like, you know, is there something inherently fascist about happiness?

It's like, how can you not see the actual point here?

Like, Hitler is lying.

He's not going to make Germany happier.

Don't concede happiness to the bad guy.

Why are you doing that?

Like, imagine.

Yeah, imagine like an evil person is like, I'm going to feed everyone and make sure no one will ever be hungry again.

Is solving hunger inherently fascist?

No, why are you conceding these good things to them?

Why are you taking them at face value?

They're lying.

They're clearly lying.

They're clearly not delivering on these things.

They clearly don't have an intention to deliver on them because we know they didn't.

Because we know what actually fucking happened.

W Hitler plunged Germany in a suicidal war, which led it to national ruin and humiliation.

Ditto with Mussolini.

Syngman Rhee and Park Chung Hee were fascists.

Uh

Park.

Yeah, I mean, th they there's a case to be made that it would be a fair characterization.

I guess, because that's what they were called by the D P R K.

But that's not why Park was later deposed by the U.S.

If I'm getting the order the chronology correct

Park Chung-hee came after, right?

Yeah, he did.

And he was deposed by the US.

Uh yeah.

In any case.

Perronism.

That's where I draw the line.

When people say Perrone was a fascist, I'm like, you're a fucking retard.

All right.

Perrone wasn't a fascist.

Um I think that's stupid.

I think that's where it gets started Nasser and Perrone are not fascists for that matter.

Um because the key thing about fascism is the you know that whole thing that Dmitrov was saying, like the terroristic dictatorship of monopoly capital?

It's kind of like not just like a footnote.

It's kind of like the main thing that defines what it is.

It's not like just like something on the side.

Uh it's actually the main thing.

Like, read Dmitrov.

You know what he said?

He said, don't concede the nation to the fascists.

Don't concede all these things to the fascists.

Fight for your nation.

Fight for your history.

Don't concede them to the fascists.

And then here you have, like, these really smart professors, like, historical.

Um, we have to be historical national nihilists because, like, nations are inherently fascist because Hitler talked about them a lot.

And it's like, who are you going to listen to?

This retarded professor?

By the way, anyone can be a professor.

I could have become a professor if I wanted, but I chose to do something that will actually make an impact on history instead of something that will give me free money forever.

But by the way, it's like, who are you going to listen to?

Dimitrov or these retards who have no actual connection to the historical communist movement?

I'm not saying I have a connection to that movement.

That's why I read Dmitrov.

I trust what Dmitrov says.

I think that guy knows what he was talking about.

I don't think these Western academics know what they're talking about, though, because they're completely detached from any actual communist movement, historically or in the present.

We are trying to build that here.

We're being very humble about it.

That's why we're Marxist-Leninists.

That's why we're not, you know.

She's claiming that we're creating something from scratch.

Minister, what's going on?

Uh yeah.

So the I don't think any debate's gonna happen, right?

Uh so what should I I think I'm gonna do the Patreon Q and A.

Um

Let me uh let me do that now.

Let me do that now.

Let me do that now.

Patreon Q and A.

That's what we're gonna do.

All right, let me start the recording.

Wow.

Um, can you guys?

I know you're patrons, and you can ask me whatever you want.

Can you just stop asking me stupid questions?

Can you just start asking me interesting questions?

like like interesting topics instead of like retarded shit.

So I'm not gonna call this person out, my own patron.

For example, what are your thoughts on brutalism?

What do you want me to say?

It's just not a good question.

It's the first question and it's just not good.

Like, what do you mean?

What do you mean?

What are my thoughts?

I'll tell you my thoughts.

I think it's fucking stupid and overrated.

I'm sick of brutalism, anything.

I'm a Zaha Hadid type of communista.

Alright?

Zaha Hadid, Beijing airport, curves.

I am a postmodernist, post-modern Marxist.

Whatever Jordan Peterson was saying, I like the PS5 architecture.

I don't like this ugly, blocky, nonsense shit.

Okay?

I have an Islamic metaphysics of architecture.

I like Zaha Hadid, and that's my view.

Haydar Aliyev, cultural center, communist.

Exactly.

That's what I believe in.

I like the curves.

I like the water.

I don't like this.

This just feels like torture and torment, and you know, I'm a postmodern neo-Marxist, I'm not one of these.

Constructivista Soviet avant-garde Marxists.

I think I'm see.

This is the progress.

The progress.

I'll do MS Paint.

No, I won't.

I don't have time.

Listen, it's like it starts with the Soviet avant-garde where they just like worship squares or whatever, right?

And then Stalin comes in and you know, beautiful socialist realist artist.

He's starting to like implement.

He's taking stuff from all the art and history.

Sorry, the history of architecture and art.

He's classical, neoclassical, whatever, Byzantine stuff.

He's just putting it all in one.

It's so nice and beautiful.

And I'm taking that further.

Okay.

I'm accelerating in that direction.

I'm not going backwards.

I'm going forwards into Zaha Hadid.

Um

And that's who what I like, alright?

And all these square worshipers need a chill and, you know.

Convert to Islam.

Anyway, uh, the black pack.

What's going on?

After the launch of the Institute, Infrared will get a lot more media attention.

This is so old.

Oh my God.

Um.

What do you think about putting a policy to deal with media outlets in the wiki?

None of you are in the Institute, first of all, so an question answered, you're not even in the Institute.

The Institute has two members, Jackson and uh and uh Haas Aldine.

Those are the two members of the Institute, and no one else is allowed in.

Uh anyway.

Don't even think about that institute.

I don't even want you to think about it.

I want you to forget that it even exists.

All right.

We need it, but you don't have to worry about it.

All right.

Anyway, we uh the reason is uh it's explained it.

We need a bricks, like an American bricks um thing to like when we write for things or when we are going to certain events and we and it's not

It's not um

If if we can't represent the Communist Party, we'll do it on behalf of the Institute to be less inflammatory in some contexts.

But don't even worry about that.

It's not even.

Don't even worry about it, all right.

It's a it's a front.

It's a communist front.

Literally, it's a communist front.

Blackpack, what's going on, brother?

Ah, that's you, Blackpack.

But what's going on?

Why did you tag me?

It's a communist front, all right?

What's up, bro?

How you doing, Blackpack?

Ah, Paul!

Thanks for being a patron.

By the way, everyone thanks for being a patron who's a patron.

All right, I can't say it a million times.

Same question for the party.

If you're a party member, then we have media guidelines, which is don't talk to anyone.

uh by yourself.

You refer them to us leadership and we'll decide.

For now, that's the position.

By the way, uh you know, I want to say this before we get into the Patreon more.

Like, people like, you know, Haz, what's going on?

What if someone leaves the party and starts.

venting and w it's like, okay, it's literally like Mountain Blade with an NPC like leaving and getting pissed off at you.

Like we we know it will happen, all right?

We optimize the technology

To account for that.

But it's if you want to know how I see it, I literally see it like a Mountain Blade NPC, like getting pissed randomly and like, I don't know, like going and whatever.

It's like, yeah, it's just a fucking petty bourgeois individualism where you don't get your way individually.

You don't get your way individually.

You're unable to convince anyone in your chapter of your worldview.

They're not persecuting you of it, but like you're not able to get your way.

So you go on Twitter and you start bitching and whining.

It's like, you know what?

We know it will happen because this is not everyone's cut out to be a communist.

To be a communist, you gotta.

It's a different culture, it's a different mindset.

Like, you can't just

You know, you have to accept the logic of collectives, even if you disagree with it personally.

You have to understand this only works if it's a team effort.

Anyway, I just see that as like some NP.

I don't see that as a threat to the party.

I see it as an NPC inevitability of NPCs from Mountain Blight.

All right.

Uh anyway, uh okay, let me continue.

Word, what's up?

In your investigation of premodern and ancient societies, did you observe any development and role of alienation in the Marxist sense?

Uh good question.

I would say ancient Greece and antiquity, definitely.

And Rome, for that matter, but that's still in the classical era.

So here you have Greece, which I tried to study this, and I even asked Paul Cockshot for some help.

I was like, what was Greece?

Like, what did that contribute to world history?

And he gave me a book that shows that they did contribute some technological innovations, which were very important.

The Greeks introduced a concept of technology, or a principle of technology, we should rather say, which didn't exist before.

Although there was technology before them, and all their methods were stolen, it's technology as a movable abstraction that the Greeks kind of are introducing.

And then, moreover, the Greeks laid a foundation of the uh Roman Republic and the the this new significance of the alienation of law, right?

The indiscriminate application of laws to all conquered territories and peoples, standardization of law.

That is another contribution.

That's so th so alienation uh begins, I think, in ancient Greece.

But here's the thing alienation

The subst, sorry, the underlying structure of alienation did not originate in ancient Greece.

It's much older.

But it's not alien.

That's the thing.

This is what Marx and Engels overlooked.

Ancient Egypt had a state, but it wasn't an alienation.

It's the same level of distance from the immediacy of communal relations.

So the distance is definitely there.

The lack of immediacy is definitely clear.

But it's not alien.

It's something that is.

somehow harmonious with the pattern of life and humanity and whatever, and I think the same is true for all Asiatic societies, uh mostly.

And then Greece is a kind of uh the emergence of the principle of logos, that's the beginning of the end.

Anyway, AJ, can you please go into what Boris Groys means when he says paradox in communist postscript?

What kind of reading of Plato is Groys engaging in here?

Uh i I think he was actually talking about dialectics and contradictions and how language kind of serves this role of

resolving those, but uh the reading of Plato I mean the the significance of Plato in this regard is clear in the sense of this notion of a a republic or a community founded upon the abstraction of language as it is uh at a distance with like like actual material

you know, uh reality, let's say, right?

The world.

Um and and I think the paradox, this is my interpretation, is the kind of the sites of

Um

of encounter between this kind of realm of and community of language and the limits it finds itself stumbling upon, you know, at the level of nature or the real world or society or history.

So, could be wrong about that, but that's my understanding of Groys' linguistification.

The grounding in Plato is not, I will admit, I couldn't off the top of my head cite Plato directly, as far as that's concerned.

Paul, one of my anxieties is the team sports effect.

I wonder what China Russia would have to do for us to say Yeah, that's bad.

Nothing.

Is it ever appropriate for us to critique China or Russia?

No.

They can do no wrong.

They can do no wrong as far as outside.

The only wrong they could do.

No, no, I'll tell you what they could do that's wrong.

Snake each other for the hegemony.

So there is nothing, to be clear, all forces that are in the direction of undermining the global hegemony can do no wrong as long as it's in that direction.

But for example, if Russia or China

Are selling out, let's say, and giving up that aspiration of sovereignty and selling out their sovereignty and like selling out each other, then, yeah, obviously, I will be critical.

If Russia throws China under the bus, I'll criticize them and vice versa.

I am a globalist multipolar I'm a I'm not a multipolarista.

I'm a multipolar

What do you call it if it's masculine?

I guess it's the same multipolarista, like Chavista.

I'm a mol I'm a globalist multipolar guy.

I hold everyone to account by the standard of a multipolar revolution against a global hegemony.

So anyone who's falling short of that, I'll criticize them on those terms.

But as a rule, you should keep your criticisms private until they can no longer be private.

Don't be quick to publicly run your mouth criticizing these governments, even if they're fucking up and making mist Hypothetically, if Russia was fucking up in uh Ukraine and Pergozhin was totally right, don't even go in public and yap about it, because all you're doing is harming their efforts at the level of morale and propaganda.

Keep it private.

Okay, there's a guy named Return to Yeeve Ropa who wrote a ten-page essay.

Which I am obligated to um respond to because he is a patron.

But I am not obligated to read it aloud.

So let me look at it.

I take issue that.

Ready?

I take issue with the idea that the political right is gayer and has more gay men.

Uh what?

That's a good twist for the unpredictable.

A lot of the people on the right are straight homophobes who

Uh I don't know why the topic of gay right-wingers is so um long-winded.

It's like a 10-page.

It's the longest question by far.

Um.

Yeah, I think this is a topic that it's better left to

for me to not theorize

Although I think I probably could theorize.

Yo, June.

I have become skeptical of concrete.

When you look closely at it, you can see microorganisms in the cracks.

It might be due to radio wave manipulation.

What is the ACP position?

Thank you, Resident Schizophrenic.

I appreciate the money.

But.

I don't know what to tell you about that.

Now, as to this question about

The right winger is

Do you believe it's true the idea that the alt-right is closeted?

Here's what I'll say.

I'm not going to answer that directly, but I'll say this.

I think that.

Undialectical extremism, which is what extremism is, uh and especially right wing extremism in particular, is very much correlated with and associated with sexual perversion in general.

Like

Like across the board, all right, and oftentimes that's not to say all gay people are, you know, um.

are like evil, malign, you know, depraved people.

I'm not saying that.

But for example, within their right-wing framework, they may consider gay people that way.

And that's precisely why they indulge in their perversion.

It's precisely because they become libidinally invested in the very perversions that they

are building this entire ideology around rejecting, right?

And I and it's not just for right-wing extremists.

Like for example, religious fundamentalists tend to be huge perverts.

There's a reason for that.

There's a clear reason for that pathology.

Um they tend to be perverts, yes, because

You know, because what you know what they actually lack is they lack the kind of really really it's Christian or Muslim, however you want to look at it.

They lack the Christian forgiveness, or they lack the Muslim mercy.

They

Find it impossible that people have fallen into sin in a certain way.

And so they just want to crucify them on that cross sadistically.

Which, of course, eventually they adopt some kind of sexual fixation and fascination with it, and then then they become hypocrites and themselves culpable in it.

But a real position should be one of forgiveness or mercy, where

You don't sit in judgment.

You don't sit in judgment and pretend you're better.

You understand that if I think this phenomena is evil, then we're all culpable in it, socially, you know.

Um you can't sit in judgment and pretend like you are somehow pure and everyone else is evil.

For example, um

You know, capitalism itself is a kingdom of depravity.

Yeah.

Look, you can spend time crucifying an OnlyFans girl.

You can spend time crucifying her and berating her and

you know.

But what did Christ say?

Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.

And that doesn't mean everyone's the equivalent of an OnlyFans girl.

It means that we're all culpable in this society.

We're all culpable in the same capitalist society which gives rise to this evil and degeneracy.

And until we take responsibility,

for the root cause.

You know, we can't even speak on the matter.

We of course reject it, we reject it at the social level, we reject it politically, we won we think it should be banned, but we're not here to punish and sadistically crucify people and sit in judgment.

We're here to heal society, you know, not to, um.

Not to put salt on the wounds, so to speak.

Um

So that's my view.

It's like, you know

Um

You need to have forgiveness and mercy.

I like mercy, but if you're Christian, you'll understand it as forgiveness, right?

They're referring, I think, to the same thing.

Where, you know, that's not to say all individual faults can be blamed on society.

No one's saying that.

But.

At the same time, you know um

the the pedagogy of being a dignified human being.

Is sorely lacking, you know, in a in a in a society where the norm is to sell each other, you know, sell each other out, sell your fellow man for a few pieces of silver, you know, and it's literally, you could even be a good person, and this is literally what it is, you know.

Like, people tend to personalize it, and it's it's not personal.

Like, maybe there is a landlord who's just a good guy who's just trying to feed his own family, but it's like.

You know?

The rent is still being raised, whatever the excuse even if they had a good justification and excuse for it, it's still fucking happening, you know, and who's taking responsibility?

It's the job of communists to do that, you know?

It's the job of communists to take responsibility for where we are at as a people and as a society.

And a lot of us are hurting, and a lot of us have fallen.

You know, you know, I I I don't sit in judgment of all these drug de drug addict, homeless people.

I think they've fallen.

And I think uh our job as communists, as a society, is to build up the confidence we have as a people and lift up our brothers and sisters who have fallen into darkness and decay.

Lift them up, not spit on them and keep them down, 'cause capitalism does a way better job of that than we possibly could ever dream of doing.

All right.

Anyway, um winged uh thank you for being a patron.

What do you think about land theft happening in Puerto Rico?

Is that the land back we should support?

Yeah, yeah, I don't know if I said this yet, but we don't accept

Um

any colonialism at all.

We don't recognize it in the sense of like we believe in Puerto Rican independence.

Even if the Puerto Ricans themselves vote in favor of in a referendum to stay a colony, too bad, because we're not gonna recognize it.

Even if only a minority of Puerto Ricans want independence, we support the minority.

Because colonialism is not just a crime against Puerto Rico, it's a crime against our own popular sovereignty.

To even have one colony or one territory as a country is a threat to our popular sovereignty as a people, and I reject it unconditionally.

I reject it unconditionally.

So I support Puerto Rican independence, and that's an official party position that we agreed to as leadership, by the way.

We agreed to that officially.

Uh that's why Puerto Rico will not be incorporated.

Um, if there's a pro-independence Puerto Rican, I mean, I don't, yeah, I don't think there's a way to spin it.

I mean,.

So it's not that we're excluding, it's just we reject that.

Again, a lot of people ask why isn't Mexico part of this?

And I always say, because Mexico is already sovereign.

If we added Mexico to the map, we would be telling Mexico, You don't have a sovereign country, you're going to be part of ours.

We can't do that.

We'll join up in a North American Union with Mexico

In a way that the Mexicans themselves agree with it.

It's just that we don't have that attitude with Canada.

Canada will be forcibly annexed, not Mexico.

Because Canada is a country of thirty million people that all live in cities, mainly.

So sorry, but we're not gonna tolerate that on our border.

Uh Paul.

Did Marx put too much emphasis on the economy?

Not at all.

Anon Yemus.

Thoughts on Andrew Jackson?

June.

I'm giving you money and you're calling me a schizophrenic.

You are an extreme all right.

You may or may not be one.

Thank you.

I appreciate the money, all right.

I'm not trying to be an asshole.

But you're just kind of saying some crazy stuff, which I d I you cannot pay me enough money to entertain it.

All right.

You could not pay me enough money to entertain what you're saying.

I'm sorry.

I myself cannot.

All right?

You're free to do whatever you want, though.

Thank you for the.

the money.

Anyway, thoughts on Andrew Jackson?

I don't have many thoughts on him.

What are your thoughts on the messianic nature of historical materialism?

Was Walter Bennyman right that this idea was ultimately fascist/slash?

I don't know if he said that.

What are your thoughts on Walter Benjamin overall?

I kind of like him.

I think he's a very, very interesting thinker who who should be engaged with.

I like him more than Adorno and all the rest of the Frankfort people.

Uh Azad.

Apologies if this is a silly question.

Okay.

Are specialized trades part of the working class?

Yeah.

Yes, they are.

Because here's why.

Read my thing on the Pat Sock split because I talk about this.

Uh you can't call blue collar workers uh

subordinated by craft unionism because after the New Deal, part of the social contract in the United States was between um blue collar work as general labor, as a form of general labor that's political,

which um re which which cut across all of the kind of specialized crafts.

That's why we have this generality of blue collar work.

That's the work that was recognized by the state as an achievement of the whole labor un movement.

So for example, that's why I reject craft unionism.

Lenin rejected craft unionism.

All the great Marxists, they rejected craft unionism because it was based on a specific type of labor to the exclusion of the general working class.

But the category of general labor finally gets political recognition around the time of the New Deal and afterwards with labor legislation and a wider, broader union movement, especially the main unions.

For example, even the AFL and the Teamsters, they have specialized departments for different types of labor, but they're labor unions, right?

So.

But blue collar, why do we ha have such emphasis on blue collar labor in general?

Um, well, read the Patslock split because I explained it there.

But to explain, it has a lot to do with, um,.

Well, this is a more speculative this is a more speculative uh idea.

The more speculative idea is that these are the forms of labor that reproduce the um collaterals that are used

to um

To fund the rest of the economy with through speculation and investment.

So that's the first thing.

Uh the second thing though is that um

Th these are the forms of labor which um

Remain of the sociological historical proletariat before the era of neoliberalism, where a new kind of society seems to be taking place, where the class categories of the past no longer can be applied so easily, right?

So, the historical sociological proletariat has a lineage and it has a specific line of development, which is political, which is through the labor movement, and that lives on only in the blue-collar working class.

Now does that mean that it can't

Be built on.

Of course not.

We want to build on it.

We just have to know where we left off.

It's like Marxism-Leninism.

We don't want to end everything with Mao, but we just know where we left off so we can build off of it.

So it's the same thing with the blue collar working class.

There of course needs to be a way to incorporate the service sector and the rest of American society in a broad working class movement.

All I've done that got me in trouble was express scepticism that the way in which this will be done wi will be applying the old paradigms.

of just unionizing the shop floor.

in order to do that.

I'm very skeptical of that.

I'm not saying I'm against it and I want people to stop and I'm gonna go stop them.

I'm just saying I'm not I don't have faith in that.

I think there needs to be a way to understand how labor has been socialized since then.

Which goes beyond just trying to incorporate the service sector into the, you know, the paradigm of the historical proletariat.

That's all.

At least directly speaking.

At least one for one, you know?

Uh what should happen to class enemies slash para they should be given an opportunity to join the rest of productive society.

Winged.

Could you clarify the difference between class collaboration and political lines of the parties?

Uh class collaboration is

is uh is when you basically um subordinate the political supremacy of the proletariat.

But as long as the proletariat is at the helm, of course l as in the case of China, of course there could be uh an alliance with other classes, as long as the proletariat's at the helm.

Word Saladin, given that Kant's been studied.

Do you see Western geopolitics as particularly Kantian?

NATO liberal democ I don't know.

Maybe neo-Kantianism has influence because of Karl Popper and because of social democracy and yada yada, but I just don't find that to be a useful paradigm.

Like, what do you mean?

It's kind of idealist.

Like, what, you think Kant is the basis of everything instead of actual material premises?

John Locke, worth a read.

Why not?

What are your thoughts on ACP members practicing entriism and getting involved in local politics?

Um, I'm against it.

The communists disdain to conceal their views.

We're we're we're not illegal.

We can just be open.

Will there be a role to play in the new organization for guerrillas outside America?

If you're an American citizen, if you're talking about ACP then yes.

What vision do you have for the Institute that you would like to share now that ACB has launched?

I kinda already answered that.

State capitalism versus socialism to a good faith Trotskyite.

Um, state capitalism is when there is close collaboration between hitherto constituted monopoly capitalist cartels and the state, which it

Um, uses as a tool, whereas socialism, it's the state that's actually at the helm and which, um,

Owns these monopolies itself rather than the reverse, basically.

Asian Americans in American history and society.

Good question.

I don't know.

I I like to think that um

something to do with geopolitics, like the more west you go, the you find the east.

I dunno.

Favorite stand up comic?

I don't have one because I'm not a fucking loser.

Just kidding.

I don't know why that was so aggressive, but I'm not a fan of stand-up comedy.

Benign, favorite Terminator movie in why?

Terminator 2?

Because it's brilliant, because it's the best one.

But maybe Terminator Salvation, because it's communist.

And you're asking why.

I like Terminator 2 because it's like one day everything's normal, and then all of a sudden, all this fucking happens.

Because some conflict in the future is taking place, and there's not even time to explain it to you.

It's just fucking taking everything.

I think there's very communistic.

That's really what it is.

That's really the truth, you know?

It's like modernity.

It just shocks you.

Takes you out of your.

Your familiar place, and it transplants you into this.

this this immediate conflict that's happening in at the future.

Anyway guys, that's all for the Patreon.

Now let me upload this.

Today's the 11th.

Alright.

All right.

Anyway guys, new questions if you refresh.

Save him for later.

I just uploaded it.

Save him for next week.

Next week.

Imagine, imagine that we did these every week.

Save that for the next one we do, whenever that is.

Anyway, guys, I'll see you.

I'll see you.

See you all later.

Wait, wait, wait, wait.

Any news?

See y'all later.

Bye-bye.

Great stream.

Bye-bye.