DEBATING LIBS/GROYPERS/SEETHING OPS

Spend enough hours

About night

Making for a side

I've got

Quite enough

Just for a time

So don't break my

Heart in the twos

Please don't go ahead

And I was right

Love's a lot You don't think I hold your tongues Don't be the reason why I cry I cry. I cry. I'm I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm I've been home my life before

Guess my life was caught far too short

Now I'm scared

to love every night

in a

gosh if you've been

on my life before

don't break my heart in two.

Just don't go ahead and prove.

That I was right, love to survive, and through I do things a hundred times, don't be the reason why.

I cry, cry, cry, I cry, I cry, I cry I cry

I cry

I

I

I'm

I

I'm not uh... uh...

uh...

I'm

I'm uh... uh...

I'm

No 74 75

75

75 74 75

I was the one to let you know I was a sorry ever after 74 75

I was the one to let you know

I was a sorry ever after 74 75

I was the one to let you know

I was the story ever after 74 75

I wasn't want to let you know

I was a story ever after 74 75 got no reason for come to me on the rain running down there's no reason and the same voice come to me like it's all slowing down

and believe me

I was the one glad to know I was a sorry ever actor 74 75

Maybe me more now divine because you're really only under 74, 75.

It's not easy.

Nothing to say good is now when you say is never easy.

When I've found your eyes

Then I find that I'll find

When to count your eyes

Then I'll just say

I was the one

As you know

I was the song to let you know I was the sorry ever after

74

75

I was the one to let you know

I was this only ever after

74 75

74 Everaptor, 74, 75 74

More, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, Now is the time. Now is the time. The The I'm I was a one

I was a one legend

I was a sorry

after I turned 74, 75 after after 74 75

giving me more

and I'll define

because really

only after

74, 75

5

5 I'm 714 74 75

I was the one to let you know I was the sorry ever after

74 75

I was the one to let you know

I was a sorry ever after

74 75 Yo, everyone in here, boost.

That shit that I linked.

Stop.

Morgan being lazy, boost!

A rocker, 74, 75.

Got no 74 75 There's no reason for come to me and the rain running down

There's no reason

And the same voice come to me like it's all slowing down and believe me

I was the one who let you know I was a sorry ever after 74, 75

Maybe me more

and I'll define

Because it really only after

74, 75

It's not easy

Nothing to say, and I'm very safe

It's never easy

When I've found your eyes

Then I find out to find

When to count your eyes

To now to face

I was the one who let you know

I was the song we ever after

74, 75

I was the one who let you know

I was a story ever actor

74 75

74

44 4 4 4 4 4 4 I don't know. I'm going Oh

Go

Go Go

Yves Now is the time. I'm I'm going to I was the one to let you know I was a sorry rapper actor

74

75

Maybe me more and I'll be fine

because you're really only out of day

74, 75 Thank you. 74 75 I was the

74 75

I was the one to let you know, I was a sorry ever after 74, 75.

I was the one to let you know, I was a sorry ever after 74 75 I was the one who let you know I was a sorry ever after 74 75 I was the one

I let you know

I was a story

ever actor

74

75

Got no reason

for come to me and the rain running down.

There's no reason.

And the same voice come to me like it's all slowing down.

And believe me

I was the one who let you know

I was a sorry ever actor

74 75

giving me more

I'll divide

Because you really only are

74

75

It's not easy

Nothing's sake

And I'm saying It's not easy nothing to say and it's all

and I'm going to say

it's never

easy

when I

found your eyes

then I find

how to find

when

look out your eyes

and now get

I was the one I was the one you let you when you look out on your eyes and out of face

I wasn't the one who let you know

I was a sorry ever after

74, 75

I was the one who let you know I was a story ever after 74 75

74 more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more more Now is the time.

Now is the time. Thank you. I was the one who led to know I was the one to let you know

I was a sorry ever after 74

75

giving me more and I'll define

because really only after

74 75 Because really only I'm day Seven to four

seventy-five Thank you. I'm seventy four seventy five seventy five 74 75

I was the one who let you know I was a sorry ever after 74 75

I was the one to let you know

I was a sorry ever after 74 75

I was the

one who let you know

I was a sorry ever after

74 75

I was the one who let you know

I was a story ever after 74 75

There's no reason for come to me and the rain running down there's no reason

and the same voice come to me like it's all flowing down

and believe me

I was the one who led you know

I was a sorry ever after

74, 75

Maybe me more enough to find

Because you really only I turned

74, 75

It's not easy

No think you're saking

It's already

It's never easy

When I've count your eyes

Then I find that I'll find

When you count your eyes

And I'll just say

I was the one that you know

I was this all who let you know I was the sorry ever after 74 75

I was the one who let you know I was a story raptor 74 75

74

more

more more more

more more more more

more more

more more

more more more more my my Now is the time.

Now is the time.

The time. I'm not you're

I'm I was a one legend know I was a sorry

a director 74 75 I was a sorry ever after I turned 74, 75.

Giving me more and I'll just find, because really only I'm day, 74, 75. side. quite enough tears for life time

life time

Spend enough hours about night.

Making for us,

asking for a sign,

asking what I've

quite enough

tears for last

time

so don't

break my heart

in the truth

please don't go

ahead and home

That I was right, love to survive

They've done this a hundred times

Don't fear the reason why I cry

I cry

I cry

I cry

cry

cry

I cry

I'm

I laugh I'm I'm I love me I've been home my eyes before

guess the life was cut far too short

Now I'm scared to love

Am I enough

Because

They didn't feel love me all my life

before

don't

break my

heart

in two

just

go

ahead

and

that I was

like the side

light but no

there's a hundred times

don't be the reason

I cried

I cried I I cry, I cry, I cry, I cry, I cry, I'm I'm

I'm I'm I'm 74 75

75 74 75 I was the

74

75 I was the one who let you know I was a sorry ever after 74 75.

I was the one who let you know I was a sorry ever after 74 75

I was the one who let you know

I was a sorry ever after 74 75

I was the one who led to know i was a story ever after seventy four seventy five

there's no reason for come to me and the rain running down there's no reason for come to me and the rain running down.

There's no reason.

And the same voice come to me like it's all slowing down.

And believe me

I was the one who let you know

I was a sorry ever after

74 75

leaving me more enough to find because you really more and I'm too fine

Because you're really only after

74, 75

It's not easy

Nothing to say that is now ready to save

with memories with me

When I've found your eyes

that I find that I'll find

Where to count your eyes

And I'll say

I was going I wasn't the one who let you know

I was a sorry ever after

74 75

I was the one to let you know

I was a sorry ever actor, 74, 75, 74, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, more, Now is the time!

Now is the time. The I was a one to let you know.

I was just a sorry ever after 74 75

Give you me more and I'll define

Because really I'm only after 74 75 75 Music I'm coming back.

I'm coming up only to hold you under.

Coming up only to show you roll and to know you is hard we wonder to know you are all the one

oh coming on I'm coming home I'm coming only to hold you wonder

and coming up only to go to roll

and you know you get hard, we want to do.

You know you are all wronged boy. coming. Come in coming up only to show we're all you know you

is hard

we want to know you

are wrong

oh We know of you all wrong people. Thank you. I'm gonna love

A beautiful baby

You're the best

I just do what I'm glad

What I do I just know what I'm blessed What I do

Right again

You know I'm looking like you

Never come up

My dream

I'm going to love

I'm going

I'm going

Let's get down

and go I'm going to get home. I'm going to my head

I'm going to

I'm going to

my I'm gonna close my face

I'm gonna

I'm gonna

my soul

I'm

a

I'm

a

I'm I'm getting to make me

I just know

I'm getting to mess

One there's a baby

I'm cute and mad

I just know what I'm glad

What I can do is

I just forget I'm going glad What I can do What I can do I'm looking

No, I put

on my knees

and I'm going to

my head

I'm going to

My dream

I'm going to

sit up

My soul

and

I'm going to

get your end

I'm

a day

and

I'm

a bitla

love

I

don't a Don't get down to go home Don't know I'm going to

go ahead

and

I'm going to get down and

this

so I'm

so I'm

on my knees

and I'm going to

go and my eyes and I'm gonna go I'm gonna go my head

I'm gonna be

I'm gonna

go The I'm I don't know how much the time

I'm going to go ahead and go back.

I'm going to go and say, and I'm going to be a lot.

I'm going to say.

What I'm a bet?

Yeah.

So I'm not going to the Yeah I'm going to

My name

I'm going to

Go

I'm going to

I'm going to I'm a soul

I'm in

a bit

I'm in the

I'm in the I'm in the I'm in The I'm I'm

I'm going to

I can't

I'm going to

I'm a love

a bit of

a beautiful day

to give them to

get them

I'm going to

what I can do what I do I just get I'm going to spend I'm going to what I can do

I just go ahead

I'm going to

know I'm going to

my name

and I'm going to go

my mind

I'm going to

get up

I'm going to

see my soul

and

I'm going to be

a friend

but to get now

and I don't know. We're going to be in a new me and now. I'm a wonderful and the I don't know

I'm

I'm and

I'm not

I'm

I'm

I'm not

I'm

I'm

I'm not

I'm

I'm not I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm The and the I know

and

I know

I'm and I know I know

I'm

I'm I'm and The The I'm a lot of I'm I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm going to

I'm

and The Yo, what is up, everybody?

What is up, gorillas?

And Cardi, what's going on, bro?

Hey, yo!

What's going on, everybody?

It's bright in here.

It's a little bright in here.

Oh, that's right. I'm bright.

I'm bright.

It's shining like the sun.

Because y'all were saying you like it when it's more muted and it's dimmer and darker.

Well, we're turning up the...

As a matter of fact, it's so bright.

It's so bright.

I'm going gonna need to

Have some protection

Okay, that's how bright it is

Now I'm kidding

This ain't protection

I understand

I'm wearing sunglasses

Because my eyes are not looking at no bitch-ass people that I'm talking to today.

My eyes are on the prize.

I'm not looking at these bitch-ass people.

They're getting my VC, get in my Twitter space and talk that shit.

My eyes on the prize.

You understand these frogs? That's what they call. They call themselves the frogs. Is that it? Fat frogs? Fat, obese frogs that don't go to the gym, that don't train militantly, that don't shoot guns, they don't do don't do anything a bunch of fat frog

fucks that we rip apart like guerrillas on accident

gorilla logo let me tell you about guerrillas gorillas there was a gorilla named

cocoa cocoa cocoa the Coco, Coco the gorilla,

Coco the gorilla.

This gorilla kept asking

for a pet kitten, a pet

cat. Met no harm.

Kept killing the cat on accident.

Just by petting

it and it was killing the cat.

I'm against that.

I love cats, by the way.

But God forbid, we come into proximity with some fucking frogs.

God forbid some accidents happen.

You understand?

Anyway,

we're too

strong, we're too powerful, we come into

proximity with them and they

fold.

I see these people in my replies.

I have actually been kind of not

taught. I didn't understand

I'm getting a better idea

of these retarded

subcultures.

For one year

or for two years

these people are always

in my replies.

Every time I post

some extremely based

aura,

they were in my replies.

M.

Ribbit. Ribbit. And it's just like,

you can smell the gynecomastia. You can smell the low-tee,

estrogenic funcopop, smelly energy from these

disgusting degenerates that talk on my name and every single time

I've spoken to a groiper in real life which has happened back in the day I'd be streaming and

sometimes I think you caught them on stream. Every single one had a lisp.

They'd go,

Hi, hath, what do you think of the Catholic monarchy?

What if we have the Capulic monarchy and we have a red-brown alliance?

And they've always has, they always have a wet brown alliance and they've always

has they always have

a lisp and I know why these people don't

like me because I am

scary to autistic retards

I'm a hairy Arab yelling

man that dominures

these people.

Frankly, I mean, they talk shit on X, but in person I domineer them.

Why?

Because I am a massive person.

I am not the...

I am not the tallest.

I will concede on that. But I am quite massive compared to these limp-risted weak twigs. Unless they're fat, in which case they are

a bundle of weak mass

and I am strong mass

and they can see the full force

coming at.

Not literally, by the way.

Just metaphorically.

Anyway,

let's talk about

let's talk about

what do we have to talk about?

You know what? Before we talk about anything, let's start the space.

Let's start the space before we talk about anything, let's start the space. Let's start

the space before we talk about anything

because

these, and also there's the Trotskyites.

There's the Trotskyites.

You see, the Trotskyites

and the Groopers have allied

apparently, and also left comms and all these disgusting fascist vermin.

I mean, we Stalinists don't see a difference.

We've never seen a difference.

Trotsky was working with the Nazis.

He was a Nazi.

They're all the same thing in our eyes. Just a bunch of Nazi vermin

that we crush.

We march over them.

We are guerrillas and we don't, we sometimes we're walking

and we mow these people down. Osos, let's go.

By the way, guys,

we are 200 away from

1,000.

Full power level.

You will see a different version.

I'm just kidding.

Anyway, let's start the...

Let's start the...

Let's start the...

Let's start the space, shall we?

What the hell?

Let's start the space.

Yo, that's what I like to see. Blazer, what's going on with the 10?

That's what I like to see for the war chest. all right

all right

I have an incredible space title

okay

so we have an incredible space title

remember the professionalism thing

anyway join the space or or spread that i don't know spread spread spread spread the word spread the

space i don't know we're here the space is here okay now let me talk about why these people

will never join us and why we never want to recruit from the Groypers.

I don't know why Groypers are in my replies all the time.

You're not the subject. You're not the subject.

You're not the revolutionary subject.

You are the lump in.

You are Neats.

You have no job.

You have no employment.

You love chicken nuggets and chalky milk.

You are not my sub.

My intended subject are people that wake up and lift and they have discipline and they go to the gym and they're tough and they sacrifice. They don't just consume. They produce.

These are not producers. They are moochers. They're consumers. They're parasites, if you will.

Sorry, but you are not the subject. You are not my audience.

My audience are the people that are willing to inflict a little bit of pain upon themselves.

Sacrifice, if you will, to produce something new and make something of their life.

For example, when you go to the gym and you lift, is that consumption?

It's not.

It's production.

You are creating muscle.

It is pain.

You are inflicting pain on yourself.

You're not consuming funcops or luboos or macho lattes.

You are doing something same. That

is, they don't get

that. Those people do

not understand that. They are weaklings.

And that's why one of us is worth

thousands of them.

They don't go to the gym. They don't them. They don't go to the gym.

They don't train.

They don't fight.

They don't do anything.

Circuit, what's up?

They don't shoot guns.

They don't do anything.

They're a bunch of weaklings.

And what they are, they're cattle.

They're cattle chewing grass.

They are obese,

fat, and useless.

They chew grass

and they consume anime

and video games and chalky milk

and chicken nuggets.

But they call them chicken nuggies because they're so disgusting.

And I know that I scare autistic people. I'm not trying to deny that. I know that they are

afraid and they are uncomfortable. They're like, I don't like this guy.

He's not like my anime wafu.

I am not here to bring you smiles and joy.

I'm here to bring you pain and suffering.

Only when you pass through the fires of my pain and suffering,

will you come out a better person.

Tank, what's going on?

Only when you are willing to be yelled at by your own voice in your head to light a fire under your ass.

Stop blackpilling. go to the gym start lifting

start training start running start doing things that cause you pain and discomfort and fear

and then you will be eligible to be one of my soldiers until then you are not my

target audience you are a bitch with bitch tits and everyone can detect that from how you type they are black pillars that's what they call them black pillars

i absolutely dominate these people in every regard physically spiritually mentally and every kind of way they are dominated and destroyed by my mere presence they feel as though they are a conquered people in my midst and it makes them deeply uncomfortable and deeply... They start doing the autistic screeching.

So typical of their pathetic tribe, if you can even call it that.

I don't call it a tribe, I call it more like a herd of cattle chewing grass awaiting the real wolves

to have some fucking dinner

and you know what

I'm pretty fucking hungry

so why don't we bring these people up?

This person who has Arabic in their name.

Go ahead.

Hello, Haas.

One second.

Haas, can you say something? I can't hear you.

We can hear you. We're just waiting for you to say something.

Oh, okay, okay, very good, very good. So, Haas, you believe in reindustrialization of the United States?

That is correct?

Yes, I also believe in topics that aren't fucking boring.

Well, yes, but, you know, let's say the 20 years happen.

I'm a 20-year year old, you know,

like ACP dictatorship starts, and then I look like the elephant man. Like,

what's going to happen? What do you mean

if you're like really fat?

No, you get fat from all the coal

fumes burning and you look like the elephant man,

you know?

Yeah. all the coal fumes burning and you look like the elephant man, you know. Then you fucked up. He didn't do your job right.

Okay.

Follow the safety manuals.

OSHA will take care of it.

Our new and updated version.

Okay. I'm sure

that OSHA's,

what if it's from

the inhalation

and you just live near there?

You die from like

inhaling all of it.

We'll fix it through

environmental engineering.

Don't worry.

Oh yeah, okay, okay.

But you know,

I'm in the first generation.

You didn't get all the kings covered.

So, like, what else?

I have no video games.

I have no hentai.

I have no porn.

What am I going to do?

You know?

You're going to fucking work.

And you're going to go to the gym and you're going to lift.

And then if you do and then 5% of your

time will be spent on recreation

and that 5% of your time you can have cigars

you know you can

you can have good food

you can perhaps go on boats you can go on boats you can go hiking you can have good food you can perhaps go on boats

you can go on boats you can go hiking

you can go in the woods you can see nature

you can do you can hunt

you can go to the range and shoot

you can do boxing there's all sorts of

things that are healthy habits for men that don't

involve fucking

anime and pornography.

Yeah, what if any time I take a step

I fucking literally collapsed because my

legs don't support them with my own

body weight. What am I going to do?

Because you're fat?

No, not because I'm, well, I'm fat, but I have like 50 tumors from inhaling all the radioactive coal.

I just told you we're going to do environmental engineering and cure all that.

Yeah, yeah, like the first generation doesn't work, you know, you know, it's always a process.

No, you're wrong.

You're wrong.

Well, you know, it's going to be really tough for the first.

I think it's more of a mentality issue.

I think you have the wrong mentality.

And, you know, it's just, you know, we've got to think of solutions for the elephant man's, okay?

Goodbye.

I already gave you the solution.

You're just not willing to listen to it.

Well, that was absolutely pathetic.

If that's really all we're dealing with. That's absolutely pathetic.

And they're always in my replies, but they never reveal their voices because they have Lisp's.

I'm a Gwiper. And you know what? I'm a Gwiper.

Ha's. I'm a griper.

What about the Catholic monarchy?

Can we have a Catholic monarchy like Water the Wings?

I watch Water the Wings. It's my favorite movie, Hoss.

Water the Wing doesn't have the brown people in it.

Hoss, I want to watch Water of the Wings.

We put America first.

Where are they?

Where are the Lispy frogs?

They are very, they're very

distinguished and powerful

when they type on the keyboard, but when they

speak with their voice, things start to change, don't they?

Someone said, I'll debate you. Go ahead and get in the...

Either get in the Discord or get in the X-Base.

Whatever. Pick your poison.

Actually, there's a lot of people

that committed to debating.

Including the,

isn't there like a Trotskyite cuckold,

who's like passing his girl around

to Groyper's and Nazis,

and he's really upset that we called him out for it.

Where's that guy?

Where's the Trotskyite who's a cuckold?

Where's the cuckold Trotskyite?

Who's introducing his fine beloved to all of his fine Groyper allies.

Where is that gentleman?

He seems to be very upset with me on a personal level.

He says he wants to fight me and all these things.

I'd like to hear a fight challenge with his voice.

I wonder. Oh, is this Chris Crypto? The Taco Truck guy? Here's the Taco truck guy. Here we, here's the taco truck guy.

Hello.

What's my thoughts?

How are you?

Good.

Do you have good connection from your taco truck?

Yeah. I just wanted to let you know your glasses are too small, and you look like a retard in him.

And he left. He just disconnected. Wow. He just disconnected.

I can't believe he just disconnected.

That's incredible.

Well, look, my glasses may be too small, but I am such a massive and gargantuan man in terms of muscle mass and bone mass that I can't help it. I can't help having high tea in my blood.

These small glasses, they don't, they're not meant for men like me. They're just, I just wear them

to be somewhat relatable to people like you to try my best.

But as you can see, the glass, it doesn't even work.

It's like my, my massive skull is just too powerful.

And it's impossible that a man of my width and power level could even relate to someone as small and pathetic as you snapped like a twig by the mere wind.

Anyway, where are these people? by the mere wind.

Anyway, where are these people?

He literally said that and ran away, by the way.

He said that and, and by the way, Chris Crypto,

a guy who we know, we know what he looks like.

That's the thing. The funny thing about him is we know what he looks like. He's talking

about people looking like a retard.

You don't look like

a retard, sir. You are a retard.

You are physically a retard.

In any case.

I just want to let you

know that your

glasses is to

feed you. I hate you

like a retard. You've got my life. I hate you.

Anyway, I'm going to

my life.

I hate you.

Anyway,

where are our challengers?

Let's get the challengers. Let's get the challengers.

You ruined my wife!

You made me go to the grippers!

You ruined it! I wanted to be a

communist! And you made me go

with you! It's like you are mentally

violated.

I don't know what to tell you.

You are shattered.

Your soul is shattered.

Your spirit is shattered.

You're a nothing.

You're a piss ant.

You literally are nothing.

You're literally a nothing.

Like you crashed out. That's the

pipeline from people that

claim to be from our camp that go to

the Groypers who are Trotskyites

and they're all sorts of seething,

bitter people. Because, like,

you're an Arab! you don't belong here.

You're brown.

But I am here.

But I am here.

And you, you avow yourself

a conquered people in my midst.

I am here.

What are you going to do about it?

I'm waiting to see you

do anything about it, bitch.

You step on my shit, you're going to get

slapped into the ground like anybody

else. Welcome to the

Wild West, bitch!

Anyway, who wants to come on and speak?

You're brown and you're brown and ginn and I'm here.

And I'm here.

And it's literally, you're literally impotent.

You can't do anything about it.

Does anyone want to whine about how I'm brown

and I'm apparently unwelcome

and apparently their land,

even though they don't work and they drink chalky milk and eat chicken nuggies,

and they have a lisp.

Really, no one is here.

Not a single person is requesting.

That's profound.

I can smell the fear.

I can smell the fear of the ops, who I know are listening to this,

but they won't join because of the fear.

Because of the fear. How pathetic.

How pathetic.

How pathetic.

How pathetic.

How pathetic.

Let's see. I need a co-host. Maybe I need a co-host. How pathetic.

Let's see.

I need a co-host.

Maybe I need a co-host.

Maybe I just can't see these people requesting.

Maybe, maybe, maybe they are requesting, and I just can't see.

Hmm.

Who can help co-host and pull people up that I can't see?

Um

I invited someone.

If you can, it'd be appreciated.

But I don't think anyone's requesting.

That's the thing.

It's quite sad. It's quite sad.

Larp. A larp? Larp. We're larping, guys. LARP!

We're lopping, guys.

We're not engaging in serious politics.

Serious politics is whining about J.D. Vance and the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, for that matter, 24-7 in the hopes that someone's going to hear your impotent whimpering and cries.

It's like, it's so funny because even their own leader is now saying, we need to get organized.

And it's like, we've been doing that for years.

Keep whining and bitching at the Republican Party.

Where's that going to get you?

The game is over.

You have to be a fucking retard to be stuck in that stage.

It's like, yeah, that's like me, like, fucking... All of us 10 years ago knew that there's no reforming the political system.

That's like 101 of being a basic dissident, of any kind who doesn't

have their head in their ass

right they're like

I put you disappointed me Trump what

what

how are you surprised

oh guys I'm gonna be so I'm gonna say something

heroic

Jamie Bans she is not a true dissident Oh, guys, I'm going to be sorry. I'm going to say something heroic.

J.D. Vance is not a true dissident.

What?

No way.

Really?

J.D. Vance isn't a revolutionary who's going to topple the system, and I had no idea that's such a profound cutting edge political observation.

Guys, oh my God, guys, the GOP isn't like, they're not actually based?

No way.

Oh my God.

If only we, if only we weren't LARPing and like consulting

Dead

Dead ideologies

Like Marxism that literally

fucking teach you this

If you learn it when you're

fucking 11 years old

Like

Chinese kids when they're

11 years old

learn about how the fucking

US political system works

and these retarded

fucking groipers

are still acting shocked

and surprised

that the Republican Party is compromised.

Like you're a fucking retard.

There's nothing else to be said.

Social audio, go ahead.

I'm just wondering what your

commie ass is rambling about in here, man.

Sounds pretty interesting.

I'm rambling about how there's a lot of retarded people that...

Yeah, I'd agree. I'd agree. I think I found one.

Where'd you find them? Is it me?

I'm still trying to figure it out, man.

Well... Where are you? I'm still trying to figure it out, man. Well, where are you coming from?

You don't sound like a groper because you sound like an actual American.

No, no, them fucking, them guys are pussies, man.

I don't listen to groopers.

And you know how I could tell you weren't a groiper?

I could tell you weren't a groroyper? I could tell you weren't a Groyper

because you sound like an American.

You know, I get that a lot. There's not a lot of those

showgunner.

Especially in spaces like this, dude.

Yeah. Where are you from, dude?

Well, I'm a first-gen.

I was born here, but my parents were immigrants, basically.

Yeah, no, no, I could assume that, but where are you from?

Michigan.

No, no, no.

Where are your people from, dude?

Oh, Lebanon.

All right.

So why you come over here, you know, preaching this comedy bullshit?

I didn't come here.

I was born here.

No, your people came here and you're preaching commie bullshit.

You're not on land or anything?

Got no businesses or something?

What's going on?

Hey, I was born here.

No, no, I'm asking you.

I didn't come here to preach communism.

I was born here.

But you're preaching communism.

Are you not benefiting from capitalism at all?

You're not capitalizing on that?

I actually am benefiting on a personal level. You're right.

Okay, so what you're concerned? Why push a bunch of bullshit

Marxism? Well, I actually care about my country, sir. I care about my people. I care about...

No, you don't care about it.

Okay, what are you, God? How do you know? Are you Jesus? I care about... No. You don't care about it. Okay.

What are you, God?

How do you know?

Are you Jesus?

So how do you feel about the U.S. Constitution?

We're trying to save whatever we can of it.

It's being over-throthed. You think that's compatible with your worldview?

Absolutely.

Just dive into that for me real quick.

The ones that are overthrowing the Constitution

aren't communists. They're the people that

claim to be fighting communism.

They did it after the Cold War. They created the CIA. They created the FBI. They created all these unconstitutional federal agencies. They started experimenting on American citizens. They started all these foreign wars and entanglements in the name of containing communism and fighting the communist threat.

They created the military industrial complex, which even Eisenhower talked about.

And as a consequence, our constitution has been thrown out the window.

NGOs created by the CIA to fight communism worldwide,

academic institutions, media, you name it, they've all

usurped our constitution, and now we are ruled by a shadow government that is unaccountable

at any level, and this was all created in the name of fighting communism. So it's the anti-communists who destroyed our Constitution, good sir. It's not foreign brown communists like myself.

And I agree with that to an extent, but I just don't see how communism is the

fix, right? Well, let me

ask you a question. Who does this

land belong to in your mind?

This land, America. Who does it belong to?

I know the few hundred

acres I'm sitting on belongs to me.

The rest of it. What do you do? Are you a farmer? Uh, I know the few hundred acres I'm sitting on belongs to me. All right.

What do you do?

Are you a farmer?

I do a little bit of ag, but I'm a developer and I'm in utilities.

What do you mean you're a developer?

You rent out properties to people live in?

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

I clear and prep land for development.

Okay.

What kind of development, if you don't mind me asking?

Anything from single family, multifamily, individual private estates.

So you clear the land, like in terms of the trees or garbage or whatever?

Yeah, most of the time it's, you know, it's wooded land or it could be bare.

It could be clear agricultural.

So you're not, you're not renting, are you renting it out, or you're just

clearing? I don't do any renting. Okay. I got you. I don't own, I'm not, I'm not in,

like, property management, none of that. Okay. So, look, I'll tell you what the communist

view is. A communist view is, you work the land, you take care of the land, people like you.

So the land belongs to people like you

who actually take care of the land and work the land.

It doesn't belong to the people sitting on their ass,

speculating and gambling in Wall Street with everyone's livelihoods.

Do I got a deed?

What does that mean?

A deed.

This is the land.

Hey, if you're taking care of the land, if you're taking care of the land, it's yours, okay?

The reason we are against private property, quote, unquote, is because we don't believe you should be allowed to do anything you want with the land. Okay, you shouldn't be allowed in our view, for example, to start poisoning the environment, to start doing things like, for example, alienating it, to give it to Wall Street and have them, you know, pawn it off to foreigners, right? And pawned off to people that want to use it for destructive purposes.

That's fairly regulated under our system now. You can't just legally poison land, right?

But isn't that what Monsanto's doing to our food? I want to go back to the Constitution, so you're against private property. But isn't that a, that's a pretty intricate part of our, like it's pretty heavily tied to our Constitution, isn't it? it it is but how it's defined is how it's

defined can be open to interpretation a and also the constitution can be amended and then let me ask

you another question though because i think this is important what do you think about

montanto are you a fan?

No, no, I'm completely against it. But that's a...

Okay, well, let me point something out to you.

It's in the name of the right to private property

that Monsanto is given the free the freedom to destroy the livelihoods of so many

American farmers with the patent system and the intellectual property system that they have,

they can defer back to the institution of private property, and that's what gives them the right

for their destructive behavior to prevail over what we would otherwise say is the common

sense to benefit the American farmer and the American working man. But they say, no, we're invoking

the right of private property, And it gives them the ability to tear up people's livelihoods and destroy people's lives. That's not common sense.

So it's in that sense that we're against-

Companies like Monsanto and like large huge agricultural, you know, business, they're not necessarily the issue.

The underlying issue is the fact that what percentage of Americans do you think are active in agriculture if you had to guess?

I would say not a lot but why is that it's less than one right but why is that because the ones that are are in debt mostly and they're being driven out

by monsanto and by a big

agribusiness. It's a tough,

tough life to live.

I think it's more of a cultural issue, and I see it around me.

Families sell their land.

And what usually happens is the

older generations did perfectly

fine run a small family farms. The kids

didn't want to do it.

And they sell the land for a quick buck.

And you could say that's an issue

with capitalism, right? There's that.

You could argue that. But that's the biggest issue is

is instant gratification.

But what about the farmers that want to... What about the farmers that are staying on

their land and they're getting into debt because they can't even afford

to maintain it.

So, I think

you're overstating that issue because there's

a, I'd say, what's

the average farm now in America? A thousand acres?

I think

I've seen some

studies that show most of the farms in

America are in debt and they're not making

a lot of profit and they're not really getting in my world.

Of course they're dead. I mean, as a business operator

I'm in debt. Yeah.

And it's not very profitable. It's not very

lucrative and it's very tough work and it's hard to very profitable. It's not very lucrative, and it's very tough work, and it's hard to get by.

It's extremely tough.

It's not very...

It used to me.

Most of it's heavily automated and mechanized now.

Like, even with my hay operation, like, I don't touch a fucking square bell or a round bell by hand anymore.

Do you have employees?

Not really that works to farm, no.

Yeah, I mean, so that's even better, honestly.

That's all family.

You're basically our target audience, to be completely honest.

You ain't going to get me into the comedy shit, dude.

Yeah, well, maybe not in 10 minutes, but I'm just telling you, what we're selling, you're the customer.

It's people like you. It's people like you.

It's people like you.

We want to have more of a voice in politics.

It's an impossible sale.

It's a futile, futile attempt.

Because my people go back to you know it they fall in the revolution the civil war you

don't think you don't think that's where the american the american communists came from that's where

they came from there's always been a Marxist element, of course.

You don't think that the American...

Listen, my best friend, who's Jackson Hinkle, his ancestors fought in the revolution, and they came from the Mayflower.

Yeah, I don't much care for that guy.

Well, I'm just telling

you that...

There was only 120 people

on the Mayflower.

Hey, there's a term.

Could you name

which ancestor he had

that was on it?

Because they got the manifest.

He could, yeah,

he probably could.

He probably could.

I couldn't name them for him,

but he probably could.

Because there were thousands of ships that came through that period.

You know, I had them on the Guidance Star.

There was a lot of different ships.

I didn't have a single fucking family member on the Mayflower there.

But most of them came through Jamestown, stuff in Virginia.

Where did you get this idea that communists

are against America?

Well, I like

private property. I like free market capitalism.

I don't like this bullshit we got

going on now, obviously, but

communism isn't the fucking answer.

To me.

What if I told you markets are freer under communism than they are under our current system?

I'll tell you're full of shit.

Let me ask you a question. Is it easier to be a farmer or fruit stand seller in China or America?

I have a new issue doing it.

You have no issues right now? I do local farmers markets and I run a little stand here at the farm.

And you don't have any issues doing what you do?

No, I got my kids around the shit

so

so your kids and you don't have any issues doing what you do as a farmer

no we love it what do you mean what what issue

we have that you wouldn't have under a communist fund?

Well, you just said you're in debt.

So are you going to get out of the debt?

What's going on with that?

Well, the debt is tied to the business.

I have no personal debt.

My land's paid off, got no mortgage, none of that, but my business operates with debt continuously.

And how is that going to be paid off?

I don't know. Keep on working. Like, I mean, I pay off equipment all the time. I'd say annually there's one or two pieces of equipment, a few trucks that get paid off.

It's a revolving door.

So it's permanent, just like the U.S. national debt, which is about over $40 trillion.

Yeah, it wouldn't make no sense not to stay in debt because I can utilize the depreciation on

new equipment so if I buy a truck

so you don't buy a new drill or buy an excavator

I get appreciated it. I get appreciated it.

Surfdom where you're constantly

paying rents.

Well I don't have to do it. I do this voluntarily.

I could choose not to go into further debt

and I'm going to do that

at some point

probably in the next five years

at some point

that's what they all say though

I mean I'm not quite 40 yet

I'm coming up on it

I figure by the time I'm 45

I'll slow it down.

So the system's not failing you. You're fine. The health care is fine. The insurance, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the agribusiness, no issues with debt at all.

You're basically living the American dream.

Yep.

Well, I'd say, sir, God bless you, but you're in the minority.

You know that, right?

Most people like you who are farmers are not living like you.

Man, I'm surrounded by farmers killing it. Big tobaccos kick

back off. All my neighbors, man, are

running huge tobacco operations.

And most of them are probably used in illegal

immigrants, but, you know,

they're doing pretty good. Yeah, if they're using immigrants, but you know, you're doing pretty good.

Yeah, if they're using immigrants,

then they're also in the small minority

of American farmers, the small

minority. So you and your

neighbors are in a small minority.

Wait, wait, you think that's a small minority?

Yeah, at, farmers that use illegal immigrants, yes, most farmers don't even have hired hands.

Most farmers are family farms that, uh, do it themselves.

Family farms have died.

I hate to tell you.

I'll, I'm doing, I hate to be a reddeter i hate to be a redd i live in

north carolina hoss and up until about five years ago we had the highest rate of agricultural

land loss in a decade hoss we lost a million acres of agricultural land, right?

To what? To development.

Like I was telling you, these are

kids inheriting

the land, choosing not to

farm, and selling the fucking land.

And usually, you're not

selling it. You're either selling

it to a larger farm

or to be a editor. I hate to be a reditor.

But I would say consult the data

on farm

ownership in this country.

And you will find that the majority

still, although they are going in that direction

because they're in debt and they're struggling,

so they're increasingly selling off their land

in an extremely rapid rate like you're talking about,

that's what's going on, okay?

And most of them are being driven out

because it's not sustainable.

It's just not competitive.

How are you going to compete with the big agribusiness?

Yeah, but these are issues that like Soviet Russia, the current Russia deals with.

China deals with the same shit.

China don't deal with this issue.

Yeah, you don't own

agricultural land in China.

They own it more than they do here.

No, no, it's the people's land. You don't

own it. And even

So every 99 years, every 99 years,

You don't own shit. Okay, every 99 years

you get a lease.

What's the difference?

It's just a semantic issue.

Okay, it's like the

deed that you have to renew

in the registry or whatever.

It's the same.

Well, they can come take it, which

they've got a pretty high

propensity to do so. They'll take the shit.

That's not true. That's not true.

Have you seen...

It's not much different than if you don't pay... Have you seen the...

Sir, have you seen the photos of homes that are

in the middle of Chinese cities where they had to build around the homes because the government won't come and just take the property because they allow people to have the right to not sell it to development versus this country, mind you, where we do actually force people to sell for purposes of development.

We have a term.

I've got a 50-acre plot I'm trying to sell right now, and the county's actually keeping me from selling it to a developer

I bought this particular

We have a term in this country

I can't believe I'm forgetting what the term is called

Where the government can come

And take your land

Eminent domain

Yeah exactly eminent domain

They don't have that in China.

I've had it used against me, but I mean...

But they don't have that in China.

If they need to add a turn lane, expand highway infrastructure, that's going to fucking happen to.

And they do do that in China.

They just, they might not call it eminent domain.

But I guarantee you, when they want to put in a fucking new high speed

rail or a dam, how many dams have they come through

and put in the past few decades? They don't build dams over a people's

house and the... That's or shit.

Man, they flooded whole villages out.

Where'd you hear that?

Dude, they've built some of the largest damn systems in the world in the past two decades.

You're not telling me villages didn't go with it.

That's impossible.

So all I'm getting from you is that you're a defender of the system we have

right now. Am I correct? You just love the system. I'm a defender of what the system's supposed to be. No, no, no. Let's not talk about... I agree that it's corrupt. It doesn't operate as it should. Why not?

Well, we've got a bunch of piece of shit politicians

that hadn't got checked in a long enough time.

And what are they doing wrong? You're claiming

everything's fine. Everything's working fine.

So what's the issue?

Personally, for me, but I think the overall picture,

I'd agree with it.

I mean, our government is out of fucking control.

It doesn't operate.

You know, it's not the federalist system that we should have.

The federal government is far too powerful.

But you're wanting to centralize authority even more so,

which is the opposite of what I'd like to see.

I want to see a decentralization in states' rights like we're supposed to have in a very limited functioning federal government.

What if I told you... You're proposing the opposite of that.

I am definitely proposing that we are a more unified country, and I'm proposing more accountability.

That's the word accountability, because the government in the 21st century is not going to be any less centralized.

That doesn't mean centralization and decentralization can't work together.

You can have more decentralization on the local level for self-governance while having a strong central government that is accountable.

We have a strong central government right now that is unaccountable because it's a shadow

government and it's not even enumerated in our constitution.

That's inevitable for a large our Constitution. That's inevitable

for a large central authority.

It is inevitable. That's the problem.

It sounds great what you're proposing,

but the inevitable nature of all

of those systems, all of them,

is to pretty much

devolve into

tyranny. Let me ask you a question. And you

can't show me a time in history

where it didn't. And even

for China, let's say it's all glorious now. Let's

entertain that they're

on the right track. What did they have

to do to even get the motion?

Where were they started?

You can't just erase what Mao did in the Maoist movement.

Let me ask you, what was their starting point?

Their starting point was zero, nothing.

They had nothing, They were nothing.

That's what they were walking with. It was out with the old

and with the new, and they killed off

millions of motherfucking people to

push their ideology. That's what the

federal government history books teach you

which you trust so much for some reason.

No, that's just the fact fact where'd you get the fact

though and you know what to push what you want to do like it to to really see the end result that you

want to see the same thing it would be the largest civil war known in world history you don't think that's happening You don't think that's happening,

you don't think that's happening regardless?

You don't think that's happening regardless?

I think there's a potential for that to happen.

It's not a potential, sir.

It's an absolute guarantee.

You seem like an, are you an accelerationist?

Because it seems that...

I don't have to accelerate anything.

I'm waking up to reality.

We are headed for a civil war and a destruction.

We're becoming more and more balconized.

But I think it's because of people like you.

I think it's...

What did I do?

Foreigners...

You come here. You don't understand what we should it's... What did I do? Foreigners... You come here,

you don't understand what we should have been.

And you try to change it into something new.

Sir, sir, I've never voted.

That's the problem. I have never...

Let me fill you on it.

If we had never passed a heartseller act

and let all you motherfucking foreigners in here, I don't

think we'd be where we're at right now.

I think this, the last 60 fucking

years having

non-Americans, obviously

not assimilating. Like,

your family's not assimilated. There's no

way you have been if this is the fucking ideology. Like, that's just what I believe, dude. And I'm not... Let me ask you a question. I'm not xenophobic at all. You think communism comes from Lebanon? No, no, I don't. All right. so what am I bringing from Lebanon here that doesn't belong here?

That's a European ideology.

So what am I bringing here from Lebanon that don't belong here?

The problem is you didn't bring anything.

And instead of absorbing

like the American way

of life you got it from somewhere to fuck

else. Where did I get it from

sir? It wasn't here.

Are you sure about that?

Are you sure about that sir?

You might have went to some

communist institution. Where'd you go? What university you go to? I went to

Michigan State. That's probably where you got it. No, I did

not, sir. I became a communist at a very, very young age. And let me tell you what, I've never,

I don't even know any language except English.

Where did you learn it?

I learned it online.

Yeah, it makes sense.

And it wasn't from here.

Yes, it was.

It was.

It was from other Americans.

That's where I learned it

so let me let me so sir let me

let me uh save us the trouble

okay

you seem to be under the impression

that people like me are the reason

this country's going to shit

I've never voted in my life.

I've never campaigned for a single fucking

politician in my life.

All I've done as chairman of the

American Communist Party is

do community service, do charity

and try to organize truck drivers.

So what the hell is so wrong with that that I'm contributing to the problem? Go ahead.

We can do all that without being a damn commie.

What's the issue of me being a communist?

In terms of meat and potatoes.

What have I done that's so wrong?

It's diametrically opposed to our system, dude.

That's the problem.

You don't play dumb with me.

But didn't you just tell me

that the system is shit?

Yeah, it's being operated

like shit, but that doesn't mean like if it

was functioning as it should.

It's better to... How do we make

it function as it should? Tell me how

that realistically is going to happen.

I'd like to see everybody, you know, do the exact same fucking thing I was able to do.

I didn't come from wealth.

I come right out of the fucking trailer part, right?

And I build a fucking company out of thin fucking air.

You told me a commie country I can go to and do that.

China.

I can go from not having a pop to piss.

I can buy ag land in China.

Yes, you can.

You tell me I can get a deed that I can pass on my fucking kids.

Not only.

Yes, yes, yes

you can. And it's not taxed. There ain't no damn

deeds for fucking ag land in China.

And it's not taxed. I might sound like a dumb redneck,

but I ain't. And it's not

taxed. That you cannot own

agricultural land in China.

It's the same thing as ownership.

They just call it something different.

You get a 99-year lease, and you can also have it be inherited.

So, yeah.

And it's not taxed, by the way, the inheritance.

So anyway, let me fill

you in on something, sir. Okay?

You're getting, you're belligerent, you're hostile

at me, because I'm an Arab

and I'm a communist.

But little do you know.

No, no, no, no, it's okay. Nobody's...

I'm not really hostile, my feelings aren't hurt,, it's okay. Nobody's... I'm not really hostile,

my feelings aren't hurt, so it's okay.

I'm trying to just be realistic.

But little do you know that the reason our system went to shit is because of the people that were running it before anyone who was ever even related

to me by blood ever stepped foot

in this land. You talk about the federal

government getting more powerful, but

you don't want to ask the question of how it did

and at what point did that happen.

It happened during the... Well, I don't need to ask.

I know how.

It's because it went unchecked.

And they've slowly peeled more...

Was it not during the Cold War?

That all this happened?

Say that again?

Was it not during the Cold War that this

shadow government solidified itself when they killed JFK?

I had started before them.

I agree.

I'd say closer to the turn in a century, really, is when it started.

I actually agree with that.

I agree.

It was around the time of the spanish american war and it was around the time of the creation of the federal reserve banking system

which was also one constitutional and none of these things is that an american based, or was that derived from somewhere else?

It was derived from Europe. It wasn't American. The American-based system was to have a national bank, not a private one. In any case, none of this had anything to do with communism or anyone I was related to. Okay, sir. So put the gun down, please.

Yeah, I'm not saying communism got us to I mean really the system as it stands I'm not gonna say it's the problem but the people that we voted in you know to operate the system has been the problem.

Well, how do you think that happened?

Complacency.

Well, let's be more specific, okay?

Because I'll tell you what I think.

What I think would happen is that a bunch of monopolies formed around the turn of the century,

exactly around that time, and they bought and paid for our entire political system, and they

bought our state and hijacked it with money, not with complacency, not with people that were too power hungry, but people who controlled our railways, our oil, our land, our industries, our factories, our steel production production all of these were monopolies

and these people who owned all of our wealth privately by the way

were able to restructure our entire system or your entire system if you don't

think i belong here i'll just do it for the sake

of argument. Your system,

they did it willy-nilly

according to what they've envisioned

what they wanted. The people had no say in it.

So all the people who had ancestors that fought in the

American Revolution who shed blood to build a specific type of republic, all that was thrown out the window without a single gunshot fired, without a single shot fired, all because they had money.

Now, you tell me how communism isn't the solution to something like that.

Communism, which says we're going to take our wealth back at that level of scale

so that the people can have this say, so there can be popular sovereignty

and so people who

happen to control our resources

can't refashion the

entire system and government as they see

fit. What's so wrong

with that? I mean,

if you have a damn monopoly anyway...

Because it destroys individualism.

It's the exact same problem.

Like, you're fixing a fucking issue with an issue.

But, sir, let me ask you a question.

We already have corporations like Ford, GM, and our big auto business, for example, where's the individualism there?

There is none.

There are big monopolies and corporations that are faceless.

And we subsidize them, by the way.

We pay our, I pay taxes.

I know that doesn't matter because all the money's fake anyway,

but I pay taxes, you pay taxes.

And it gets our money that we send to the government

is sent to them for free and we get nothing in return.

You tell me how we are, we the people are not entitled to taking over those kind of industries

and entrusting them for the common interest and the common good.

Why are these industries allowed to gamble with the livelihood

of so many American jobs and livelihoods

and throw all the money on the casino of Wall Street

to be pissed away

when we are literally paying for them

and subsidizing them?

Tell me how that's fair.

Where's the individualism in that?

Tell me how the state having control over all these industries is going to fix that issue.

Because now you damn sure got a monopoly.

At least it's an oligopoly that we're dealing with now.

It's not technically a monopoly because there's not just one company controlling industry.

It's just a select few.

So I'll agree it's a bastardization of it.

It depends on the type of state.

Do I think, do I trust the state that we have now? No, because I think it's corrupted, bought, and paid for. It's not even our state. We have to refound and reconstitute our republic. I see no way around it. And the way we do that is we start. Why don't we go back to what it was supposed to be instead of starting all the fuck back over, right? Wouldn't it be more efficient just to dissolve the federal government or at least diminish it? Diminish it capacity? If we want to go back to what your forefathers dreamed of this country being, we have to start it from scratch. There's no way we can salvage it. It's beyond the pale of redemption. That's how corrupt it's become. And you got to start below so i'll tell you what we believe we believe at the local level of small towns people learning how to govern themselves at the

most local levels and at the most local levels, representatives from the local should themselves form a governing body, and then it should scale up and up and up, and that should be the foundation of our republic. It should have roots and soil all the way below.

And that's what we believe.

What's so wrong with that?

What's so wrong with a government like that controlling the resources stolen by the monopolies

and entrusting them for the common good.

What's the issue? Because I don't trust them to do that. And you can't give me one example of

where I should. Well, you don't trust them. You don't trust yourself. You don't trust yourself you don't trust

social

no no i only trust myself

you don't trust yourself you're part of a country

you're part of a nation if you don't trust your people

in your nation if you don't

capitalized on it.

And I'm sure you have to.

You're doing it now.

You're probably getting paid to do what you do now.

Barely.

And operating in the capitalist system.

Honestly, I could be making a whole lot more money if I wasn't doing what I was doing.

Easily. Easily, I could be probably 10 times. wasn't doing what I was doing. Easily.

Easily, I could be probably ten times.

I have a feeling you're doing pretty good.

I could be ten times more, not really, I could be ten times more wealthy than I am right now if I wasn't doing what I was doing.

Well, why don't you just do that?

Because it's called belief and conviction. Well, why don't you just do that? Because it's called belief

and conviction.

That's why.

Bullshit.

You could be making babies

having a wife,

buying land in America.

Why didn't your forefathers

just be loyal to the British?

Why risk their life in a war?

What's the point?

That was a central authority, right?

So what?

The crown.

Could have gotten more wealthy and it could have been easier to just uh do nothing

no i don't think they could have got more wealthy because the crown the central authority was

stealing you know when it was minimal tax You're talking about people risking their lives

They could die.

How are you going to make money if you're dead?

They'd already risked your lives to even get here.

Not all of them.

Some of them were already here.

And to travel the frontier and fucking break ground on ground that's never been broken so you're saying the only purpose of life is to make money

no no it's to make babies dude what you're talking about that's the only real purpose okay and look at the birth rate right now.

I don't give a damn by that.

I got three of them.

I'll make another one if I got to.

So you, so this is my, this is an issue, sir.

Are you a patriot or are you just an individual?

You just care about yourself?

I'm not a patriot in the same.

I'm not the modern type of patriot.

You can see me as like the old school.

Like I don't trust the federal government.

Never will.

None of my people ever did.

We were in states rights.

But at the end of the day,

North Carolina were part of writing

the Mecklenburg Declaration,

which was a precursor to the Declaration

of Independence. We've never trusted

central authority, right?

At the end of the day, you only care about yourself.

Do I have that right?

Well, that's the whole idea. That's, that's the enlightenment. It's the individualism, right?

I don't believe in a collective. I don't trust you, dude. Why would I want to be part of a collective?

Because you already are. I'm, yeah. Really? You're an individual.

You pay taxes.

You pay taxes and the government...

Yeah, I know how to minimize that, though.

It doesn't matter.

You are paying taxes to your lord, the government, and they have you but the barrel of a gun,

and there's nothing you can do

and at any moment

they can come and take away

everything you have

and everything that you are

and they have that power

and they surveil you

they surveil you

they surveil you

and they watch you

and even when you're taking a shit

they're watching you

so don't tell me you're an individual when you're taking a shit they're watching you. So don't tell me

you're an individual

when you're part of this system just like everyone else's.

I voluntarily

give them all that access.

No, that's it. It's mighty convenient.

It's mighty convenient when you don't even come into my house

let me tell you you hear my wind trimes

I'm in the middle of nowhere I could fire a fucking firearm off my front

and they could still get you right now they can listen in they don't need a phone

to listen in on you they can listen in any way they need.

And they can see you.

If they want a damn stare at the crack of my ass with a satellite, I don't give shit.

That's mighty convenient because you don't have a choice.

You don't even have a choice.

Even if you want it to do the opposite, you couldn't.

So it's mighty convenient that you tell yourself it's all voluntary to preserve your dignity and your pride.

But the truth is, you don't have a damn choice anyway.

You're trying to put me in a situation where I even less choices.

How? How's that?

How's that?

You telling me, so China's not surveilling the fuck out of their people?

They are, but I'm not saying we have to become like China in every kind of way.

I'm saying we should have the ability to have the sovereignty as a people to decide these things ourselves. And you're

saying you don't trust your fellow man. That sounds like individualism, though. I thought you were

collective. No, it's not, because we all have to come together as a collective to do that.

Consensually and voluntarily, right?

Well, there's got to be a way to acknowledge that we are one people.

If we can't do that, this country's...

We are one people, though.

If we're one... I mean, I'd have a beer with you eyes in real life.

I'll tell you that.

If we're one people, if we're one people, then we have one existence and one will.

But we don't.

I don't agree with my neighbor on half this shit.

What makes me think?

It doesn't make it.

It's not realistic.

On a practical and functional level, it's got to be because you can disagree with your neighbor all you want, but you follow the same laws.

You pay the same, not the same monetary amount,

but the same procedure.

How do you create this hive mind that you're...

You don't need a hive mind.

It's as simple as this, man.

When your neighbor needs help,

the village should come together to help them.

What's so wrong with that?

When there's a state of exception where there's a flood or there's a hurricane, there should

be an ability for us to mobilize our resources to make sure people are taking care of and

protected.

In contrast to what's going on right now, where people are being left to rot and left in the

blood.

Where in Texas?

For example, I don't mean to interrupt you, but this is on topic.

I'm about an hour outside of Hurricane Helene's impact area, you know, where most of the devastation was. You wouldn't believe the amount of people to mobilize. I took two skid steers, too many excavators, and three crews up there, all private, not funded by anybody, just all private damn business, dude, up there helping each other by the thousands.

And that's, and that's, and that's, and that's, and that's, and that's, and that's, and that's great.

And that's great. We were up there for six days before the state was with FEMA and before the Fed

was. It wasn't until Tuesday. The shit hit on a Thursday. It went until the next Tuesday I've seen

the first FEMA inspector. That's your central authority. And you think that's a good thing

that our government doesn't give a shit about our people, that it just leaves them, even though we pay them taxes and they have all this wealth and resources that they used to spend?

That's the nature of it.

I don't see how communism is going to be any different.

It's just going to be benevolent.

It's going to be this new benevolence communist, under a communist, every single volunteer is going to be equipped with the resources with the cutting edge with the vehicles that they need to help people instead of the resources being used to fund foreign wars and entanglements.

That's what we believe.

What's so wrong with that?

I mean, I don't think anything's wrong with it, but I just don't see why you need communism to do any of them fucking things.

And why you have to give the state the central authority so much power because the problem is they have too much power now and you're like you know what the answer is we're going to give them more power we don't want we're going to be different this time we don't want to give them more power we don't want the state that we have right now to have more power. We want to build a new state that comes from the people to have power. How many people do we got to remove? What do you mean? What are you asking? Ask yourself. How many people? I know the ask yourself how many people i know the answer how many people

were in the federal government not not i'm talking elected positions

between the judicial executive and legislative branch was a little over 500 people listen

let's just say...

Wouldn't it be easier

just to get rid

than motherfuckers

than it would be

to implement this

utopian communist society?

You get rid

of the government

we have now.

We're going to need

a new government.

So how do we... And there will be a government regardless, by the way.

There is going to be one, no matter what.

You put a bunch of damn rednecks like me in it, man.

I bet we'll be fine.

Hey, and that's what we're fighting for.

So what's the issue, sir?

We ain't doing it under communism. Yes, that's

exactly what Mao did. He put all the

rednecks in power.

No, fuck, Mao. He put the kids

in power. No, he didn't.

He was the youth. Stalin and Mao.

Stalin and Mao.

You ain't tricking my redneck ass.

Don't let the accent fool you.

I want to send you books, sir.

I'm not trying to trick you.

I'm telling you the truth.

I know about the cultural revolution,

and it was the fucking young generation to push that.

It wasn't the old hillbilly fucking redneck farmers.

Would I be able to send you a book

that you can read

about how it was the hillbillies?

Shoot me a link. You can send it.

Are you able to message me?

Oh yeah.

Pen and paper?

No, man, it's 2025.

Let me pull my notes out.

It's called the unknown... It's called the unknown cultural revolution.

So what this book says is that in the beginning,

that's right, it was students in the cities and yada, yada, yada. But then as time

passed, it started spreading to the rednecks in the countryside, and they were the ones

that started to get put in charge, and they were challenging the party authorities

and that's what the whole cultural

revolution was about. It was an uprising of the

rednecks and that's who

Mao tapped into.

You ain't getting American rednecks

to do it though. That's a completely different

type of people. That's what we're trying to do. though that's a completely different type of people that's what we're

trying to do it ain't going to happen hey what are you god how do you know you might get some

suburbanites but you ain't getting us fucking hillbillies too it ain't what if i told you we already

got some of y'all what if i told you that what if would you. What if I told you, we already got some of y'all?

What if I told you that?

Would you believe me

if I told you we already got some of you?

No, no, I wouldn't.

I mean,

you might have got a one or two.

No,

we've got more than one or two.

We've got plenty of rednecks.

And plenty more coming.

They probably some damn Yankee carpet baggers that down there country?

No, they're not.

They're fucking rednecks.

And they sound just like you.

And you're telling me they own land,

got property

came up from nothing

some of them do yeah

then what a hell

they won't be a commie for

because they understand

it's the only way

we unify our nation

and take it back

for the people

I just I don't know what makes them think that you can't take our you can't for the people.

I just, I don't know what makes them think that. You can't take our, you can't take America back unless you address the question of who owns the mines, the, the resources, the factories, the farm.

You can't take the country back if you're just leaving it

willy-nilly to Wall Street, because you can have it on paper to have a constitution and a government,

but who owns and who's in charge are the people that materially own the wealth. And I can't believe you who are a redneck who

understands common sense disagrees with me on that. It's simple common sense. If I own all

the things that make people be able to survive and live.

We agree on the problem, but not to fix, not the solution.

The solution's an open door, sir.

The step one we're trying to take is to organize, have one voice.

You're listening an option for me, though.

Organizing is not an option? Why not?

How about you have a seat?

Fine. What if we tell you? What if we tell you?

What if we tell you?

I mean, we can dissolve the federal government together, but you ain't putting in a communist fucking.

All right.

How about this?

How about this?

We come to you.

We pull up a chair for you.

We have you sit down and we ask you what do you want to see?

Give us your input. What do you want to see give us your input what do you think

makes sense yeah i want to see some deregulation i want to dissolve the federal government

just let's go and get rid of the federal reserve while we're at it okay and uh and then you leave

my damn private property alone. And what about who's

going to take care of the sick, the elderly, the people that can't, the orphans, the people that

can't fend for themselves? Well, before they destroyed the nuclear family and the whole family

culture in America?

How do we bring the family back? How are we going to do that?

Oh, you're going to do that with communism too?

Absolutely. It's the only thing I can do it.

Well, I never really lost mine.

I see it

It's pretty widespread, but I don't have

that same issue here. Be realistic

I can tell you have a lot

of pride, and I'm not saying you shouldn't,

but I want you to be realistic

with me. You seriously think

that most Americans

can do what you did? Is that really what you're trying to say?

Dude, I'm an uneducated redneck. If I can do it, most Americans can do it.

I don't have an education. I didn't go to Michigan State University. I didn't go to shit after high school.

That's the one delusion.

I went straight to work.

That's the one delusion.

And then I started my own business with a pickup truck and a fucking wheelbarrow.

And I don't think I'm children in you.

How old are you, house?

29.

So I'm nine years older than you.

I'm 38.

You can't do it?

I probably could, but I'm doing this because I believe in this.

I can do plenty of...

If you can do it, then there's no point in what you're doing because you're not even given the other option a chance, dude. You're like, I'm not going to do it. I'm going to jump. Well, you said something very interesting. You said that I've given nothing to this land that I don't belong here and all these kind of things. What if I'm trying to give back? What if I'm trying to give back to the country that fed me and raised me and, you know, that I'm not that I'm not able, but your direction is wrong. Well, I disagree. I think that I could easily do what most immigrants do, actually, which is pursue a professional career that has nothing to do with productive labor and get rich and get wealthy.

I don't want to do that.

I want to give back to the country that I was born in and that fed me and raised me.

You can get back.

Do you know how many people my redneck ass employees cost and give a good light to you?

I mean, I don't pay less than.

I'm talking to the guy.

I thought you don't have employees.

I told you on my farm I don't use any employees.

My business has employees.

What's your business? The clearing?

No, no. The bulk of my business and most of my revenue comes from directional drilling.

I install fiber optic utilities, large scale.

All right, sir, with all due respect, I think that's...

And my lowest, my lowest...

And that's the discipline.

There we have it.

$250 a day.

I'm talking just a bare bono's labor with a trouble in his hanging. With all due respect, that's the issue. See, I thought you didn't employ anyone. That's why I was saying you are the subject. You are a target audience. If you employ people, we would say you are bourgeois

and

you're not an enemy

you're not saying it's a problem

I got employees

I got one employee

I think he

I think he brings home more annually

than I do

That's fine

I'm not

Listen nobody

Nobody's saying

you're a bad person.

Right.

But my highest paid, we're not saying,

we're not saying you're the bad.

$500 a day.

We're not saying you're a bad person.

We're not saying you're a bad person.

We're not trying to say you're the enemy.

But it makes sense.

Have you created a job for anybody to feed their families? But it makes sense you're not receptive to our message.

You understand?

It makes a lot of sense.

I mean, I've been on the other end of it.

I've been an employee.

No, I get it.

I get it.

But when we talk to rednecks who don't employ

people, they're very receptive to our message. They're probably dumb and dirt. Well, that's

kind of how the bourgeois see the working class, and we disagree.

No, you're just fucking fooling them, man.

You're not being honest.

How am I?

What have I said so far that's dishonest?

It doesn't mean they operate in logic.

Sir, the fact that you think that most Americans... And most of them don't need to be leaders.

The fact that you think...

They are proletarians.

And that's who we're trying to have run everything, not the bourgeois.

We're just tricking them, idiots.

You see it...

I think you're

tricking them

no I'm

giving them jobs

bro

okay you're

giving them

jobs and

have you gave them

any money

I don't have

money to give

them

I gave Jerry

$1,500

at the end

of this week.

Weekly pay, after taxes.

Hey, look, you could be very generous as an employer.

Why the hell would Jerry want to go to communism?

You could be a generous employer, sir, but you don't have the perspective to understand what I'm talking about, if that's what you are.

Y'all probably kill me when the revolution.

No, no. Why are you getting dramatic here? Okay. There's people in China that employ others. Okay, it's okay. But it makes sense you're not, you know, you're not receptive to the message. It just makes sense you're not you know you're not receptive to the message

it just makes sense

because you're doing fine

if you're doing fine enough to employ other people right now

then what I'm saying doesn't resonate

I could go bankrupt every three months Haas if one of these asshole utility saying doesn't resonate I can go bankrupt every three months

Haas. If one of these asshole utility companies

doesn't pay me, I can go

bankrupt. Okay.

I mean, it might be fine, but I'm taking a hell

of a damn risk. I'm carrying

all that debt.

I'm the one playing the bank for these

motherfucking large utility companies.

And everything's going fine for you,

so I don't understand,

you know, if everything's...

Having an accounts receivable of $500,000

every month.

If everything's going... if everything's going...

Then motherfuckers don't pay me, I'm fucked.

And then I might have a bunch of Amigos.

But you know what?

Let me tell you something.

Because I can't pay them.

Okay, but let me tell you something.

This is the issue.

You see, Mao,

when he was fighting in the Revolutionary Wars, he allied with a lot of people

like you, and he said, let's fight the equivalent of what was then the utility company. It was the

landlord. He said, we want to liberate you from them.

And he called him the patriotic bourgeoisie.

Now, not all of them are going to be receptive to that message because it's a risk.

You want to be sympathetic with the communists.

You're taking a risk.

You don't trust us. You don't,

you know, you think we're full of shit and everything. And on the other hand, you have these

utility companies and all these people you don't like who we don't like either and who we're

struggling against. So it's like, pick your poison. What risk you want to take. You know, you want to

ally with the communists. We have a common struggle. We have a common cause. We think that

these companies are screwing over all Americans. We think they're screwing over people like you

and everyone else.

But...

You know who's helping them?

Who's that?

The central authority.

That's true, but...

All you want to do is get rid of the

corporation. We're still going to be getting screwed

by central authority.

Because what fucked, what fucked my industry,

it was amazing.

If you,

about 2020,

the industry was amazing.

And then you know what happened?

It was government subsidized.

He passed the fucking,

what was it?

Build Back Better or whatever the fucking... If you're in a position...

Dumped a bunch of money in fiber optics.

Destroyed the industry.

And we don't have anything to do with that bullshit.

But if you trust our government more than you trust us, which is what I'm hearing,

right, then

I don't trust either one of you.

Well, look, sir,

I don't know what to tell you.

You have a problem with communism because you think we're a bunch of devils.

I don't blame you.

I don't think you devil, and I think you mean well.

But I think what you believe is diametrically opposed to what I believe.

And I think we both agree on the problem, right? And not necessarily the problem, but we agree that there is a problem, right? We don't agree on the solution.

The problem is your solution is going to take a lot of death like it does

everywhere it's implemented

everywhere

sir i think that

a lot of death

because you're going to have to kill a lot

of me and i'm not the only millions

and millions of me

that ain't going to go for it bro i'm glad

i'm glad you can encounter people like me and fantasize about us and say, we're going to be the ones killing this and that. But the truth is... No, you're not the only ones that probably won't do it. No, the truth is we are fighting an uphill battle against literally every political faction that exists, and we are the ones fighting the system right now, and it's coming at us with everything it's got, okay?

And the truth is, the death and craziness that you're talking about, that's coming and we're having

nothing to do with it. We're trying to protect- You're accelerating it. No, we're not. Absolutely

not. You are doing- You are furthering the Balkanization of America. You are doing the exact-

You are introducing a foreign ideology, and it's already been here, you're not introducing it, but you are promoting it further, right? And that's just true. And the more, the more these ideologies that are un-American are introduced, the more that balkanizing will spread.

And the more factions we will have.

And that's, I think that's the goal, right?

Our so-called ideology.

Because it's going to take something like that for you to implement the type of system you want to implement.

That's just the truth. You need to see this state fail to build it back up from nothing.

I'm saying there's an option that we don't have to fucking do that.

So get to work then. Don't just talk about it. option. We don't have to fucking do that. So,

so get to

work then.

Don't just talk

about it,

then do it.

Because I'm seeing an

example.

I'm watching a,

I'm watching

a,

I'm watching an entire,

American from nothing.

And I'm watching

an entire state

collapse and nobody doing a fucking thing about it.

That's what I'm seeing.

I'm seeing a whole society and system collapse.

Nobody's doing a fucking thing about it and nobody's organizing communities to defend themselves.

What region do you live in?

You ain't got to give me specific, but maybe a state.

Around Michigan, around Detroit, okay?

So nobody's stepping up to organize communities to eventually for them to be able to defend themselves and have, you know, like, we're, we're, all hell's going to break

loose in this country, okay?

And it's people like you who are going to say, all I care about is myself, and all these

communities are going to burn and nobody's stepping up to defend them, okay, because you

don't believe in collectivism.

No, no, no, I'm active in my community.

Okay.

But you want to increase the size of my community and the burden, right?

That's not true.

I don't have time to think about Detroit, bro.

That's your problem.

That's what community means.

Which state are you in?

I'm in North Carolina.

Okay, we have a chapter in North Carolina.

I don't have to be there.

You told me I can cuss y'all out in person?

Yes, you can.

Nah, I mean, we'd have this same type of banner.

Maybe, but all I'm trying to say is what we're trying to do is organize communities, okay, to be more self-reliant.

That's it.

Yeah, but that doesn't equate the communism.

Yes, it does.

My community's pretty damn self for right now.

I want to send you more books because you weren't taught this in school.

It's not because you're a stupid redneck. Nobody was taught this.

I wasn't taught this and no one was taught this.

They don't teach it in college either.

But the truth is, the first people that came to this country

across the sea from Europe were communists.

They lived in communist communities, and they lived a communist way of life. communists. They lived in

communist communities

and they lived a

communist way of

life.

Communism was on

this land and on

this soil

before it became

a term in Europe.

You're stretching it.

There wasn't even...

No, I'm not.

There wasn't

even a term of

communism.

They didn't have the term.

They didn't have the term, but that's how they lived.

You never heard of this?

Marxism didn't become a thing until, what, the mid-1800s?

Right.

But communism comes before Marxism.

You ever heard of the Shakers?

You ever heard of all the Anabaptists, all the communities that came here?

The Moravians, the Quakers, I've got Moravians and my lineage, but they weren't, they weren't communists.

Yeah, they were.

They were communal people.

Same thing, sir.

People coming, people coming together.

That has nothing to do with central authority. Communism is a political system.

We want a strong... Those people were communal. The only reason we want a strong central authority is for a few reasons. One, we want infrastructure. You need a central authority to build nationwide infrastructure, such as high-speed rail. The second thing is we want it for a government credit to be able to give people loans that can use it. And unlike the Federal Reserve, how it was intended actually in the beginning was a national bank.

And then third, we want it for defending the country against foreign adversaries.

Not the foreign adversaries we have now, but like, for example, if NATO or Canada or something wanted to come

fuck with us, we want a militia.

So you want to change our allies completely

too, huh? Who would be our new

allies? Russia and China?

Russia, China, North Korea

and Iran.

Yeah, I don't mind doing business with Russia.

Honestly, I think we need to mend those relationships, but that's not.

And that might be almost impossible with European nations and the way they're acting right now.

It's absolutely impossible. They're war mongers.

But I don't agree with either side of that.

I don't really give a fuck, to be honest.

Well, Russia is not our enemy

and Europe is trying to drag us into wars

and Russia isn't.

So that's the difference.

I don't think we really have an enemy, number one.

Or really a threat.

Yeah, well, I'll tell you what.

Russia's not a threat.

They're not a threat, but if we took our country back,

even as you wanted it and envisioned it,

if you overthrew the federal government,

which is what you want,

I'll tell you what's going to have.

No, no, watch how you say that now.

No, I don't mean it.

We're going to vote them all out.

That's what I meant. That's what I meant.

If you were able to pursue the path you wanted to pursue that you described, even if you did it, and I had nothing, we had nothing to do with it, we communists, I'll tell you what will happen.

What will happen is that NATO will come. And they're going to say, we have our reserve dollars. We have our treasuries and we're not being paid, our treasury notes. And you owe us all this debt and we're going to come and secure the country so we get paid back tell them good fucking luck well that's what they're going to do they're going to become enemies of the american people well that's true well that's where the that's where mousie dung is going to come in it's going. Well, that's where Mao Zedong has to come in.

It's going to be...

Miles is dead.

I know, but you're going to have to start reading him, because it's going to be farmers in the countryside.

They're going to have to have guerrilla warfare against foreign occupying.

We're still going to have a U.S. military.

Maybe the military.

Just because we vote out all these cock suckers doesn't mean we don't have a U.S.

What if the military divides and what if half of it goes to NATO?

What then?

I don't see.

I think that would be an exaggeration, even if a percentage...

I think a whole lot of the people that run the...

I got two younger brothers.

One of them's been in for four years now.

And they may be good...

I don't think that's going to happen. Hey, look, we have soldiers in our four years now. And they may be good. I don't think that's going to happen.

Hey, look, we have soldiers in our party, too, but that doesn't matter because the people

who run the military are, let's say, they're bought and paid for.

My stepmom's a lieutenant colonel.

Matter of fact, I go to her ceremony ceremony next weekend but she's not on top of

the pyramid uh lieutenant colonel's pretty damn high rank it's not on the tippy top

i mean i guess so i died but they're still based I mean, I guess.

But they're still basic, they're still basic-ass Americans at pretty high levels of military there.

I don't think there's many, I don't think there's any like you.

I would imagine there's not a single military leader that has your ideology.

Well, in order to get that high up, you can't.

You got to sell out at some point.

Everybody I notice in the military is American as fuck, bro.

Yeah, but you don't know the people that actually run it behind the scenes in the shadow government.

You know people that run palinthier

you know Eric Prince

there's a lot of bigger companies like that

Eric Prince and all them spooky

fucking people

they've got nothing to do with people like you

there ain't no spooky people in They've got nothing to do with people like you.

There ain't no spooky people in the communist country.

You just said you only care about America, right?

So why don't we just talk about America?

Okay, China, maybe China's got its own problems.

Oh,

I need to see a shining example. China.

China is doing much better

than we are.

Just be honest.

China's doing much better.

Much better.

They're doing much better.

In the urban areas,

I've been to China. And the countryside, they're doing better. I're doing much better. In the urban areas, I've been to China.

And the countryside, they're doing better.

I went across the countryside.

I think it was five, six years ago with my brother-in-law.

He's in supply chain management, right?

And we went out, and we've seen a bunch of fish farms.

And that's about the poorest, dirtiest shit

I ever seen. And I've been in some

podunk areas of West Virginia

all through Appalachia. I ain't never

seen nothing that damn poor, bro. Ever.

You said this

was six years ago? Yes, five was six years ago

Yes five six years ago

Well that was probably before the bulk of the poverty alleviation campaigns

That's convenient

They do that over there unlike here

Where we just let people wallow in poverty.

There's more starving people in China right now.

All I can tell you is this, all right?

I understand communism has been brutal in history, but it's brutal times that create brutal communism.

And the only thing that can unify a nation in brutal, brutal times are the communists.

When the Russian Empire collapsed, it was the only the communists that came to the rescue.

When the Chinese were having chaos and warlords and all hell was broken loose, it was only

the communists that could come to the rescue. Why? Because communists unify people as one nation

and one people.

Is it brutal?

Yes,

is brutal.

But brutal times call for brutal.

My question is,

why I've been in here,

right,

for this amount of time.

And I've got about 30 new friends requests.

They all look Chinese.

Chinese names.

What the hell's going on, man?

Look, I don't know.

Maybe they want to educate you about China.

Maybe you should talk to them.

You've got a lot of damn followers.

They, they bots.

No.

You said followers?

There's about 114 people

in here you shouldn't you have a few more people

and that

man I got most people in my

kick stream I'm you get me hacked

there bud I'm not hacking

you sir

I don't know what you're talking about I think the CCP I'm not hacking you, sir.

I don't know what you're talking about.

I think the CCP's coming after me, diddy?

No, the CCP doesn't have an issue with you, sir.

They need to quit buying damn land here in America.

It's starting to piss me off.

Hey, hey, but you know what? They got in about 40,000 acres here. Don't you believe

in private property? What's the issue? I thought

you believe in private property. And that's pushing

the damn limits. Oh, so

now there's limits. So now

there's limits? So now there's limits?

Hey, look, China's not going to give a damn shit unless we have our own house in order. You know who the largest port producer is in the United States?

Port.

Pork.

Pork.

The largest pork producer

we had Smithfield who bought them

China

well it was a Hong Kong base company but yeah

well hey if our system

allows to do it why shouldn't they

I think we should

disallow it. Yeah, so we should

become communists, I agree, just like them.

We should become communists like they are and

control our shit. I think they'd respect us

more if we were. They don't respect

us when we're a bunch of free

market retards.

It's done me well, ma'am.

It hadn't done the

pork company and the farmland well.

No, it done them assholes well. They sold

it out, sons of bitches.

So what's the damn issue?

I don't know what the issue is.

That's that crony capitalism bullshit.

Yeah, and the communism is the solution.

Man, they motherfuckers are capitalist over there, too.

So are they communists or are they capitalists?

It's a little

bit of both.

Well, we're trying to

become more like them

and we're fine with you

calling it whatever you want.

But we're going to

I don't want to share shit

though.

This is my land,

dude.

I ain't shot on share.

We don't want to

I give it to my family.

We don't want to take it to my family. We don't want to take it.

We don't want to go near your land, sir.

We don't want to touch, unless you invite us for a barbecue, but we don't want to come near your land.

I do like barbecue.

Yeah, but otherwise, we don't want to come near your land, all right?

We want to leave you in peace.

But we do think that this country has a lot of problems, and there's a lot of people that need to be taken care of that aren't.

And there's a lot of problems that need to be fixed that aren't.

And that's what we believe.

Well, I appreciate your, you know, what you're trying to do here.

You know, I think you might have a good heart or you might be a damn CCP plant.

Who the fuck knows?

But I appreciate you entertaining me tonight, Haas.

All right. Well, it was a pleasure talking.

And it was a good conversation.

Okay.

Well, I'm sure you normally deal with Groyper's and fucking Wignats and a bunch of damn weirdos.

No, we've got nothing to do with them.

No, no, I know you don't have anything to do with them, but you probably deal with them.

Yeah, we do. Sure. Why not? Of course,

those people don't work at all. You know,

so it's a major distinction. Anyway, good night.

Yep, you have a good one. You too. And man, these bots better not hack my damn account now.

I don't know what's going on with any bots, but...

I'm going back in one of your spaces and cuss you out.

Okay.

Noted.

All right.

You have a good one.

You too.

So, wow. all right you have a good one you too so wow okay there's actually a leftist in here finally the schizomarchist this person won in debate class and they they're a master

debater on a professional

level and they're going to destroy

me in a debate because they in band

class they got an award

for rhetoric. Go ahead

Annie.

Hello Hess. Can you hear me?

Yeah, I can hear you.

Okay. I have a few questions for you.

Do you have questions or you have a debate topic?

I just wanted to ask you if you think modern China is socialist or communist.

What do you mean?

Well, I mean, if you think you're a socialist, then you could tell me what you mean by socialists.

What country are you from?

I'm French. That explains the accent, maybe. Okay. So, colloquially, for us, a communist

country is a country run by a communist party, the capital C.

In reference to the hypothetical communist mode of production, that is a qualitatively new mode of production that has been fundamentally transformed by the historical movement of communism so much so that many of the qualities and characteristics of our current motive production, such as, for example, exchange value and commodities and so on and so on, these cease to exist. So China obviously has not entered this so-called higher stage of communism, as Marx described it. We call it communist in the colloquial sense because a communist country is one that is ruled by a communist party, a proletarian dictatorship, and is being ruled and governed in a way that facilitates the development of communism.

Now, the question is, do we regard China as a socialist country?

And the affirmative, yes, we regard China as a socialist country in terms of the mode of production.

Yeah, that it is like transitioning from its current mode of production towards communism.

That's what you mean, right?

Yes.

Okay, that's, okay, that's fair enough.

Answer.

What other questions do they want to ask? fair enough answer. What does your question today?

I want to ask first.

Yeah, which mode of production

is defined by wage labor primarily?

The capital is mode of production.

Okay, can you tell me if China has wage labor?

Yep, wages exist in China.

Okay, so then conclusion China is?

Nope, because for a mode of production to...

You asked the question primarily defined by wage labor, did you not?

Yes, because there are other defining factors to capitalism.

But wage labor is a primary factor that defines capitalism.

Yes, and there are qualities of capitalism that survive into socialism, according to Marx.

So just because there are things, just because...

It's a main one, yes.

Just because there are certain qualities that are shared with the capitalist mode of production, such as, for example, wage labor, doesn't mean that the mode of production is capitalist. It could very well be a mode of production transitioning out of capitalism, or one that has even sublated capitalism and incorporated some of its characteristics,

but in a way that assimilates them toward a higher logic of production,

which is what we would argue in the case of China.

Okay, okay.

Well, what about like commodity production then?

That's like a nods you're saying that China has.

Would you also say that they're not capitalist?

Have you read Stalin's economic problems in the USSR?

I've read Bordiga.

Okay, have you read Stalin's in his own words?

Yeah, and it's fucking bullshit.

Okay, hold on.

What is Stalin's argument about what makes a commodity a socialist commodity?

Don't talk to me about how you feel about it or whether you think it's bullshit or not.

What is his argument?

There's no such thing as a socialist commodity.

So I'm going to try to be patient

I'll reiterate

I'm not asking you how you feel about the concept

I'm asking you what knowledge do you have of what

the argument Stalin made in favor

of the concept of a socialist commodity

what did Stalin say

to defend this concept?

That's not my question.

You're completely deflecting.

I'm not deflecting.

I'm asking a rudimentary question

to gauge your level of knowledge

of Stalin's writing

and economic problems in the USSR.

What arguments did Stalin use to justify and defend the concept of a socialist commodity?

So you don't have the rudiments.

You claim to have red Bordiga and to have this comprehensive knowledge of how Stalin is wrong, but you don't even know the rudiments of what Stalin's arguments were. So how do you square that? Can we get back into topic instead of you

deflecting how is this a deflection

I was asking you questions about

how it is that China is how it is that China is

how it is that China is socialist is conceptually and found and theoretically from the Marxist perspective

already established by Stalin now if you're not familiar with Stalin's argument you can't

hold on how can you know whether Stalin is a Marxist or not if you don't even know what he said?

You've never even read his arguments, so how would you know if he's a Marxist or not?

That's like a retarded question.

No, it's not a retarded question.

If Bordiga says Stalin is not a Marxist,

but you don't even know what Stalin's position

is, how can you qualify

it as Marxist or non-Marxist?

Dude, I'm a history

student. I know what Stalin did and did

not. I don't care about what he said. I know what

did. What did Stalin do about what he said. I know what he did.

What did Stalin do then? Tell me.

What made the USSR?

What, what?

Bureaucrat capitalist.

What's that?

Bureaucrat capitalist. That is the correct room. But Stalin did make an argument, an economic problem. bureaucrat capitalists. Okay.

But Stalin did make an argument in economic problems in the USSR, where he did point out specific qualities and characteristics of the Soviet economy and motive production.

Now, you're not familiar with that at all.

So how can you qualify whether Stalin was a Marxist or not?

Because he did bureaucratic capitalism.

Let me ask you a funny question.

What would it look like for Stalin to quote unquote?

Because you don't care about the theory, apparently theory is immaterial as far as whether you can qualify someone as a Marxist or not. So all that matters is what someone does, right? All that matters is what someone does. What the fuck did Bordiga do except sit in a chair?

Okay, no, no, no, no, no, no.

You're saying, you're saying Stalin as a theoretician is immaterial to the question of whether he was a Marxist or not.

And all that matters is what he did.

So by that same fucking logic, let's not judge Bordoga

by his theory, but by what he fucking

did, which was nothing. So he's even

less than not a Marxist. He's a

fucking nothing who did nothing. Am I wrong?

Bro, you're crashing

out over nothing.

Seriously, I'm not even a Bordecaist.

Well, I don't know why you're deferring to Bordeca then, who's clearly not a Marxist, because he did nothing.

Yeah, he clearly did nothing, yes. Okay, but anyways anyways let's move on since we both seem to not be able to agree

no i'm willing to explore this even further if you want because yes let's talk about how the ussr was a

bureaucratic capitalization let's talk about the the USSR was a bureaucratic capitalist nation.

Let's talk about the rudiments, which was Stalin's economic problems in the USSR and the concept of the socialist commodity.

Okay, explain to me since you know it so well.

Okay, so are you willing to now admit that you're not familiar with it and you would like me to explain it to you?

No, I just want to know what you are you saying.

Are you familiar with it or not?

That's what I, all I've been trying to ask this whole time, are you familiar with it or not?

Hey, look, this thing is...

I would like you to be honest about your level of knowledge of this.

I read Marx.

Okay.

Have you read Stalin?

Yes or no?

I've read a few texts of him.

Have you read economic problems?

Have you read economic problems?

Have you read economic problems in the USSR?

I read extract.

I haven't read it in full.

So you are not familiar with his arguments about a socialist commodity and what he says about socialist commodities.

There is no such thing as a social commodity. Are you familiar

with what he

wrote about

what a socialist

commodity is?

Yes or no?

You're not, are you?

Just to say

you're not.

Just admit you're not.

Yeah, you're not. Just admit you're not. Yeah, you're right.

Stalin is actually better than nice.

No, no, no.

Just admit that you're not familiar with what he wrote.

That's all I'm trying to gauge here.

Or say that you are familiar with it and explain it to me.

Okay, I'll bite a hook then.

I'm not very familiar with...

Okay, so after so long...

By the way, you're doing great, by the way.

The debate team would be proud.

But anyway, I'll explain...

Thank you also.

I'll have another question for you later. I'll explain... Thank you also. I'll have another question for you later.

I'll...

I can describe for you what Stalin's argument was.

So,

Stalin's argument's actually quite brilliant

from a dialectical perspective, in my opinion, and I'll explain why.

So for Marx, commodity production, capitalism isn't just defined by commodity production, but something called general commodity production.

Now, what is the general quality for commodity production for marks?

It's the fact that commodities are measured by the same abstract, unyieldingly formalistic standard of exchange value, right?

So, you know, he uses the arguments in capital of the, you know, the 20 yards of linen and the code and yada yada, but like everything falls under a common standard and it's just a question of quantity for everything to be an equivalent, right?

So this for Marx is why you have general commodity production rather than just commodity production.

And in a typical case of pre-modern commodity production,

you have norms, for example, of how commodities are exchanged for other commodities,

conventions, established.

And in capitalism, all that is solid melts into air. So you have general

commodity production. Generalized commodity production is indiscriminate with respect to the

substance and qualitative determination of commodities. They are all subjected to a common universal

standard okay now the question is how do you go from general commodity production to a socialist

mode of production.

What does that transition look like?

Or how does one lead to the other?

How does one develop into the other?

Now, I think left communists are basically

anarchists who have the idea that

we're just going to abolish commodity

production and

basically...

Okay, let me finish. We're just going to abolish it, and it's no

different from anarchism. It means nothing. It's devoid of any substance, and it's

just a kind of, we're going to abolish the concept of commodities in our head, and if

we're faithful enough to that conceptual abolition in our own mind,

then we're going to be living in the society, socialist society, and we're

going to be emancipated. They use many vague words like emancipation and whatever, but it ultimately

means nothing concretely. And there's never been an example of anything like that in history,

right, or anything close to it. in any case in the USSR Stalin justifies

the notion of the socialist commodity in the following way because of the fact that in the

USSR there was, in fact,

distinctions as far as what common property was.

So you had common property in the form of state ownership,

but then you also had common property in the form of the Kolkosis, right? And for Stalin, the socialist commodity was born,

not of a universal exchange value

that can be potentially indiscriminately exchanged with anything,

and it has an unlimited and infinite range of

liquidity so to speak you had a very specific uh relationship and so let's call it a determination of exchange between the state and the Colcosis, where the state would buy or get grain, procure grain from the coal cozes in return for farm tractors

for the mechanization

of agriculture

and that had to

be measured,

that had to be

accounted for

and it was in fact

an economic

exchange that

was going on

between two

distinct forms

of ownership

and this is what defined the parameters of the commodity form not

something that's universal not something that's abstract not something that represents a limitless

liquidity of commodity exchange but a determinate social relationship that is born of a very specific plan, a plan to industrialize the country, to serve a specific purpose, right?

So Stalin justifies the notion of a socialist commodity on this basis he says yes do we have commodities in the USSR we do but the form of the commodity its parameters and its form are defined in a determinate social, socially meaningful way, right? One that fulfills our five-year plan, our plan, right, for the construction of our society.

So this is how you go from generalized commodity production to a socialist mode of production.

You narrow in and find the actual determinations, we call them supply chains, of how things are actually produced, how things are

interdependent upon each other, in order to actually pursue tangible outcomes in a planned way,

rather than leave it willy-nilly to the market

and just have this kind of

sanctity of the commodity form

which has no substantive determination

on a socially meaningful level, right?

So it's in this

specific sense

that you can say

socialism

can be born

out of a

capitalist mode of

production.

Or how do you

discover socialism

from capitalism?

How do you develop socialism out of capitalism?

Well, you do it, first of all, by scientifically comprehending the determinations of the exchange of commodities at the economic level, right?

On paper, formally within capitalism, for example,

you have a universal standard of the commodity form,

but in reality, we all know that there's supply chains.

We all know that there's different interdependencies between different sectors of the economy. We all know that

industrialization does in fact, whether it's in England, whether it's anywhere else, come at the expense,

and there's a trade-off economically with agriculture

in some kind of way. So to scientifically comprehend how that is and control for it and distill

that, that is how you develop socialism out of capitalism, especially when you're coming from an agrarian country.

So that's how Stalin justifies a socialist commodity.

Okay, okay.

I'm just going to need to be fast because I need to go to the gym soon.

I just want to pull up a quote from Engels,

which says that the transformation

either into joint-stoy companies and trusts

or into state ownership does not do away

with the capitalistic nature of the productive

forces. What do you think of that?

Yeah, he's saying that just because

we're witnessing the rise of monopolies and joint stock

companies, that doesn't mean we have transitioned out of

the capitalist mode of production.

But can you finish the quote?

Can you finish the quote? Can you finish the quote?

That's the whole quote.

No, it's not, so I'll read it to you.

The transformation into joint stock companies and trusts

do not do away with capital's

nature of productive forces.

This is obvious. The organization that

bourgeois society takes on in order to support

the external conditions against the

encroachments as well as against the

workers as of individual capitalists,

the modern state, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine.

The state of the capitalist, the ideal personification of the total national capital.

The more proceeds to take over the productive forces, the more becomes the national capitalist. The more citizens does it exploit. The workers remain wage workers, proletarians. The capitalist relation is not done away with. It is rather brought to a head. But brought to a head, it topples over. State ownership of the productive forces is not the solution of the

conflict, but concealed within it are the technical conditions that form the elements of the solution.

Now, even better, what does Engels say right before this? Because that's even more illuminating as far as how he comprehends the development of a socialist society.

He refers to the socialist mode of production as an invasion from the future in trust freedom of competition changes into its very opposite into monopoly and the production without any definite plan of capitalist society capitulates to the production upon a definite plan of the invading socialistic society.

Now, here's the thing. This is illuminating as far as how Marx and Engels understand the transition from capitalism into socialism.

Socialism, rather

than a black and white red

line that just kind of pops out of nowhere

and determines everything

of what the mode of production is, like an

Anglo box,ism is a tendency

that capitalism is already developing into. So the question of whether you are developing

a socialist mode of production is a question of what your active relationship to that tendency is, not whether

you have ticked a bunch of boxes that decide whether you conform to a certain ideal of what

society should be or what it shouldn't be for that matter. So this is the dialectical versus mechanistic comprehension of how modes of production change.

William Jennings, thank you so much, man. Appreciate you.

Okay.

Except in the context of the U.S.S. USSR, the state is a national capitalist.

No.

The concept, no, it's the USSR, the Tsarist state, you could say, had qualities of the so-called national capitalism that Englews was talking about. But in the USSR, what actually makes it a socialist society isn't even state ownership. It's the fact that there's also another form of cooperative or common ownership, which is the Kolkosis, which are not actually owned by the state.

Have you fucking read Marx?

Yes, I have.

Then you're a fucking retort.

Why?

How can you say that the USSR was not

a national capitalist? Do you even

know what you're talking about? Because the USSR

did not have total state ownership.

The Kolkosa's were not owned by the state.

Oh my God. Oh my God.

Then it's just a partial

national capitalist. It's just

partial. It's not a national capitalist

just because

the relationship the state has

to the Colcoses is

one that forms the parameters and the tendency of a socialist mode of production, a mode of production.

So how society is developing and what direction it's actually going in is in its determination socialistic.

The USSR is not just a giant company

that's owned by the state that is

constantly seeking profit.

No, no, that's not what the national capitalist is.

It owns some of the means of production.

Therefore, it's a national capitalist mode of production.

That's how it works.

Have you read the critique of the Gotha program?

I have.

That's literally where this comes from.

Okay.

So does Marx, does Marx identify state ownership with socialism and critique of the Gotha program to at least a certain extent?

Within the cooperative society, based on common ownership as a means of production, the producers do not exchange their products.

Just as little does the labor employed in the products appear here as the value of these products.

This is literally from

Critic of the Gostra program.

Okay. So there's state

ownership.

Oh my God. Are you slow?

There's state ownership, according to Marx.

And there's centralized ownership of the means of production, according to Marx and Engels, which they actually affirm, I think multiple times, actually.

The scale, the centralizing

scale that they identify

with capitalism, railroads, and owning

things at such a level of scale that it has to be central,

they identify that with progress itself.

What if not a state could own something like that?

How can a local cooperative

own a railroad

at the scale of a nation? Can you explain that to me?

Good.

What do you think Marx and Engels believed the proletarian dictatorship should do with the monopolies, the railroads, and the monopolies, and the joint stock companies that formed?

Do you know what councils are?

You think Marx and Engel advocated for

local councils

to run

trains?

Are you

retarded?

How would that

even fucking work?

A federation, dumbass.

A federation.

How do you run

shit at scale with a fucking federation?

You need centralized control because it's a centralized perspective.

You think a fucking, you think a federation of councils can scale

up and just run shit? No.

There first has to be

a central perspective

that can even address

the object at scale

that is a national rail system.

How do you go, how do you go from a local

rail a piece of railroad at the local level to a national rail system if you don't

already have a fucking plan that's central and scale to build the railroad.

Okay.

I know you're frustrated, and the frustration you're feeling is stupidity.

Your debate class didn't do anything to teach you about the rudiments of Marxism. And that's the issue.

The fucking

councils make the plan, dog.

How do they do it

in a way that's centralized?

How does that work?

By delegating, councils delegate.

That's how they work.

Are you fucking retorting?

Okay.

So you're basically saying that what is the unit of the railway?

What does that look like?

Like at the lowest level?

What is the smallest council for the federation

that controls the railways? Can you explain that?

How many

holes do women have?

So you concede.

Is that a tactic

from debate class to talk about

women's genitals when I'm asking you about how your councils would run a national railway system? You're talking about women's genitals? There is a fucking Congress of councils. Okay, listen, you're talking about a form of cooperative ownership of an industry in this case

the railways right but that has

to have a smallest unit

a low scale right so the

smallest council how big would that

be

that's not up to us to the sign

okay okay

do you think that a national rail system

can be like divided

into discrete parts

and it doesn't need to be

planned in a centralized way

where they have a fucking map

of the entire country

and say this is where it's going to go. They can just say

let's just have a bunch of

like small, let's have a bunch

of small like councils

that own small pieces of

the railroad

maybe come to an agreement about how they

should all fit together in a puzzle.

Do you know how fucking retarded that sounds?

The lowest council would be at the municipality state.

Like, the level of like a city.

Okay.

How do you build that from scratch?

Oh my fucking God. Are you seriously asking this?

Yeah. How do... What is the productive unit at the municipal level that's going to form the council?

Oh my God.

See, this is your issue.

Okay, Marx and Engels talked extensively about production at scale being centralized

and how that's progressive.

The centralizing tendencies of capital itself and their view are progressive.

I already talked to you about the Congress of Unions, and now I need to leave.

But where did Marx and Engels talk about a Congress of Unions versus an administration, centralized administration at scale

over society,

which they talked about at length.

Yes, true.

Just to get paid the filing.

What?

He left.

He said that and left.

Okay, so I'm surprised.

This guy said that in debate class, he said he could destroy me in a debate, and that his

proof was that he did really well in debate class.

That's how he ends it off, okay?

And, yeah, I have people in France by the way

infrared has people in France and

yeah

that was

the most pathetic

display I have never seen someone

fuck up in a debate

more in my life.

I actually thought this guy

would put up a good fight

because he was talking shit

saying he's a...

Oh, I was the top of my class

in debate class.

It's like, debate class

doesn't teach you

how to fucking read books,

retard. He says Stalin's not

a Marxist. He's never read Stalin in his life.

Fucking pathetic.

I need to bring someone up to co-host

because I can't see everyone.

In case they're the Trotskyite retards or whoever want to show up, let's bring up this guy, hold on.

I'd like to bring up a groper.

We'll bring up this guy

named Rare.

Go ahead, Rare.

Go ahead.

Go ahead, speak.

Unmute yourself. Hello? Yeah, go ahead. unmute you so

hello yeah go ahead

can you hear me

yeah

yeah I'm a goryper

oh you are

okay great

I love

I love Hitler

and I'm obsessed with Jews

okay how old are you um of Hitler and I'm obsessed with Jews.

Okay, how old are you?

I'm just joking, I'm not a, I'm not a, I'm not a, I'm not a griper. I'm actually a liberal from Iran.

I just want to know, I have a question though.

You live in Iran?

No, I don't live in Iran.

I was born in Iran.

Okay.

And I'm a liberal.

Okay, so what's your, like, what's your take about on, like like Iranian politics? Do you support us that want to like overthrow the Iranian government and install a like a democratic government?

No, I don't support that.

Why not?

How come?

Because liberal democracy is for retards and cattle.

Can you expand on that?

Why do you say this?

Let me expand on it, please.

What you're advocating for is the rape of Iran by the West.

And I'm against it.

I mean, I care about improving the average Iranian's lives.

It's not going to be improved. Iran had a lot of decades under Western colonial rule, and people's lives were not being improved. Far from it. There's no incentive by the Western America to give a shit about improving the life of the Iranian people. There's none.

They want to take Iran's resources, take its oil, take its industries, take the capital that they lost decades and decades ago, and get quick rich off of it, without having any regard for the long-term prosperity of the Iranian people.

If you're angry at the Iranian government, be angry at them for not pursuing

closer economic ties with China, because that could easily solve a lot of the economic problems

in Iran. The problem is that there's pro-Western people over there who have cold feet

when it comes to China because they're hoping that they're going to get their money from the European banks back.

Okay, but you think that if Iran, let's say they installed or like elect a pro-Western government, that's not going to...

They already did. That's what Pasechian is. They already did elect the pro-Western leader.

I mean,

is he,

like,

he's a moderate,

right? He's still loyal

to the regime.

You tell me,

I don't know.

Yeah,

I'm telling me.

I don't know about that.

I really don't know about that, sir.

He is loyal to the regime.

I'm talking about like overthrowing the whole regime, like even the hump the supreme

leader and just remove the whole theocracy system

and let's split the Iranian's...

What you're talking about

is Balkanization

and the destruction of the Iranian people.

You're talking about something

that would be a bigger catastrophe

than anything in the history of Persia.

Even worse than Alexander and worse than the Mongols.

You're talking about the Kurds, the Azis, the Ahuas, and everybody seceding, and Iran breaking and splintering into

a million pieces.

They're not going to do that because they do want to be part of Iran.

They absolutely will because when shit hits

the fan just like in Syria and Libya

and every other fucking country this happens

in, all bets are off,

all chaos breaks out, and everything

gets fucked, and that's what happens.

Iran, love

it or hate it, love or hate the

chaminai and love or hate the central

government, they're holding it together.

Okay?

It's one centralized

state infrastructure

that should be built off of,

not destroyed and wrecked

and devastated.

For what? They took over so many companies

they built up so much they mean what what they have accomplished in 79 should not be reversed

it should be expanded upon taken to even new heights.

But you're trying to take them back

to the Stone Ages. I'm against that.

Well, isn't that what you're

trying to do here, like,

by installing communism?

No, I'm not.

I would prefer, if I talk about my personal preferences, I'm not. I would prefer

If I talk about my personal preferences,

I prefer if it was possible

that, you know,

America could just,

I guess, I don't know,

have a moral obligation,

obviously, to

dismantle the entire system of

imperialism, but simultaneously

just kind of keep

relative, normal, prosperity

without any radical, revolutionary

overhaul.

And everyone can have KFC and McDonald's and okay but I'm telling you

it's not realistic I can tell you that objectively speaking the systemic contradictions are

coming to a head in this country and the revolutionary position is the only realistic one.

Okay, that's fine, but let's go back to Iran.

I was going to ask you a question. I kind of forgot.

So... question I kind of forgot um so you support the regime and you said that trying to like all right i'm already bored of this san ye I'm going to bring up

someone named

San Ye.

Go ahead.

Go ahead.

Somebody named

Red Armchair

I'll bring them on too

I need a co-host to be able to see

every single person who's requesting by the way

because I can't.

Hello, has...

Yo, what's up?

Yeah, I am from India. what's our thoughts on c p i am a member of c p m do you think it's a liberal party or social

democratic is that the party vj Prashad is part of?

No. He is not member of any Indian Communist Party.

Well, I have a very poor impression of V.J. Prashad.

That's all I can really say.

I don't have anything against CPIM as far as I know.

I am against Vijay Prashad.

That's all I can say with certainty.

Okay.

What's your opinion on Thai Continental Institute?

That's VJ Prashad's thing

right

yeah yeah

but he's speaking

anti-impleism

he can speak a lot

but he's a dishonorable

character and I don't like him

and I also think he's not

speaking anti-imperialism effectively

because he's not linking up anti-imperialism

with the cause of the

proletariat. He's linking it up with the

cause of academic gibberers.

And, sir,

academia is not the revolutionary subject.

It's all I can really say.

Jeff, go ahead.

Go ahead, Jeff. All right right i was just requesting see if you needed a co-host but i'm just listening

all right all right sure uh to the co-host if there's any like

trotskyites or leftists here, then please bring them up.

Bue is called the left gun.

Let's bring up this guy, Bue.

And then nobody and then Walter in that order.

Go ahead.

Okay,

Bue is gone, I guess.

So we'll bring up nobody.

Nobody, go ahead.

Our, Bue is here. Go ahead, Bue speak.

Go ahead and speak yo hello

can you hear me yeah

yeah yeah why why do you think uh groypers are more popular than you know the acp and whatnot

i think it's because groepers are basically just consumers um than the ACP and whatnot.

I think it's because Groypers are basically just consumers.

They don't actually do anything actively.

They don't produce anything

and they are unwilling to sacrifice anything.

And they just like to consume

in a way that has no discontinuities, and they associate that discontinuity with something

extremely, they like autistically screech, like you're taking away their anime and video games,

and they can't do that. It's like you're telling them, I'm a hairy yelling Arab guy and I represent

the most masculine, powerful

father figure and

they like hate it because they're screeching

and they just want to be left alone with their

chalky milk. And unfortunately

just like with drugs, there's more

drug users than ACP members. It's a lot easier to be a Groyper because you can just kick your feet up, be a fat, lazy slob, and fat lazy fuck, and it's much easier. And you're just consuming and consuming and consuming.

And you're, you're, you have, at no point you acquire self-awareness.

That's why they don't go to the gym.

They don't do anything like that.

I mean, what can I, how can I reach these people?

They don't even go to the gym.

Oh, but can't you say that like the ACP was in the same

spot? Maybe like a year ago?

No, we've never had that type of people in us.

Are people? Aren't you guys

from like the same community, right?

No. You're the same like streamer community.

This like, I don't know how to call it.

I don't follow you guys.

This is all politics where you're all online and whatnot.

Groypers, I'll tell you my experience.

Groypers are more like Destiny's people.

Same people.

They're the same demographic.

They're not my audience.

The same audience of destiny

as the Groypers.

Same people.

Can you say there are

there's some people in the ACP who are aligned or have some sort of sympathy with Groopers or with the far right or with people? There was people in infrared like that, like this drug addicted Italian degenerate and they were our weakest links and we purged them and cut them off. They're drug addicts, they're freaks, they're degenerates, and they proved to be very weak people, and they're totally gone. There was an Italian guy in Florida. He's like a drug addict and he's a degenerate. And he used to beg our community like a bum and beg for drug money all the time.

And he would be in everyone's DMs, please, can you, and he was like, he's this despicable

freak.

I think he's got some rap sheets and shit as well but those yeah

those people and trotskyites and the these are like degenerate like complete freaks we purge

them because they're not they just they're not fit to be part of us but why were they

attracted towards you in the first place how is that possible because a lot of leftists kept saying

that i'm a fascist and i'm a this and i'm of that so some of these people were like oh this is my

community and they like they they would come to me and they they have lisps and they would think that like oh hoss is what hoss agrees with my retortation and then they realized we're actually communists and they would crash out and get super disappointed because they just realized

all they did was unironically take like

retarded leftist slander seriously

and yeah they crashed

out because of it

I don't know

man I think that there's a lot of

like with the groepers I feel like the thing is the goyphers are able to mobilize so many people. It's because your guys' propaganda is not the most optional. No offense.

We don't have. Even though I'm not a Hitler right one thing Hitler was right on

was on propaganda

you guys are not

you're still

you complain about like

the academics and whatnot

and all the language

but actually if you look at all

like look at your own Twitter posts, for instance,

there's just academic mumbo-jumbo.

It's incomprehensible to the average person.

You're trying to...

Our party is not trying to recruit the average person. We're trying

to recruit the best of the best, the smartest

or the smartest.

Are you sure about that?

I'm sure.

The people we're trying to recruit are

good people, very exceptional

people. We don't want these

retards who are autistic with LISPs.

The thing is,

your party, there wasn't like that much

I don't know about now, but I actually was in the party

for a bit.

There wasn't that much of I don't know, vetting process, you said.

Of course there was. What chapter were you in?

I'm not going to leak myself, but I was in the west of the United States.

And there wasn't a very deep vetting process.

It was quite easy to get in.

To become a reserve member, yes.

There's a lot.

Before we had the reserve system, every single person had to go through a personal interview.

So I don't know what you're talking about.

Yes, yes.

And I went through that personal interview by Kyle Pettis once.

Right.

Okay.

So you know there is a vetting process.

Yeah.

But the thing is, like, even though I support you guys, like, I'm not like, I don't know, I'm not, I wouldn't like be in the party.

Listen, buddy, I'll tell you the truth, okay?

We've been around since 2021.

Okay, the party is one year old, but I've been around since 2021.

This guy,

Nick Fuentes,

he's been here

since when,

2017,

2016?

Think about it.

I don't know.

You got popular

around the same time.

No,

that's not true at all.

He was on Twitch.

He was there before,

right? He was on Twitch he was there before right he was on

Twitch he got big on Twitch

I was not even given a year to be

on Twitch I got banned in March

or April 22

okay I was growing on Twitch pretty rapidly

they banned me, okay?

The censorship wave, see, Fuentes was able to grow enough to the point when he totally got deep plan for him and censored, which is only after January 6, he had enough pull.

Okay?

Me, I got deplatformed and censored much earlier than meeting that threshold, right?

I'm not saying we're not going to eventually surpass them, but why right now are we not bigger?

Well, because we started a lot later, and plus, we were not allowed to thrive for as long as he was, and they were, and that community was.

We were, they snuffed us out much quicker, okay?

Talk about Jackson.

Jackson had the biggest pull in this country on YouTube,

and they totally wiped his YouTube channel out.

Okay? My YouTube, I haven't uploaded it

since January, because I could see the writing on the wall that

if it even ever gets big, they're just going to wipe it out.

So our community is not even allowed to grow out in the open in the same way.

So that's why, okay?

I mean, our here's like all on the same platforms now.

X.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah.

Yeah, so you're, like, on a level playing field.

You're able to...

No, it's not level at all, because...

It's not level at all.

Because I've been blacklisted, in addition to the persecution that made it from Twitch, okay?

Every major right-wing influencer is fucking terrified of me and blacklists me.

Okay?

I've been blacklisted by all the major influencers, both rightists and leftists.

Even Flentes, even after January 6th, there were still rightist influencers that would debate him.

And there were leftists who would still debate him.

Every single one of these people blacklisted me very early on. They said, we don't go near Haas. Even he won't debate me. You understand? But Hassan Piker won't even mention me. He's just fucking terrified of mentioning me. He refers to me. He doesn't mention me by's just fucking terrified of mentioning me he refers to me he doesn't mention me by name

um vash i debated once okay one time only he would never allow me to debate him again i debated socialism done. I went through a huge run

running through these people debating them.

Destiny, you name it.

And then they said, no,

it's too dangerous. We're not going to allow the

Nick Fuentes thing to repeat. We're not going to

allow a new community of tankies to form.

They said, we would prefer the Nazis over these guys.

The Nazis, they're more, you know, they're preferable.

We're, we're Stalinists.

The Stalinists are much more dangerous and much more hardcore.

And they don't want to even give us the opportunity.

But we're marching on, we're going through, and it'll be fine in the end. It'll be fine in the end,

because we are real life, and they're not. At the end of the day, you see, the Groypers don't have an independent organization.

And the minute they have to commit to one,

the minute they have to commit to organization,

they will scatter the wind,

and they're going to collapse an infight into a million different tribes

and I guarantee

that will happen.

I guarantee personality cult forming

around Nick Fuentes so I don't know

about that. Sure, there's a personality

cult and that goes far as far as being a successful influencer and commentator.

But let me actually talk about this.

Nick Fuentes' generational run right now hinges upon distinguishing himself from boomers

you know like Candice Owens

and these other people and the network that surrounds

JD Vance and Peter Thiel

and the agenda that prevails within the Republican Party

but what happens when people

finally decide to get it and say,

fine, we're done with the Republican Party,

and we're done with the Democratic Party, for that matter, let's say,

just as the most charitable interpretation

that they're also against the Democrats,

which I don't fully believe.

What happens after that?

They say, okay, maybe we have to make our own party?

At that moment, when they decide to make that fateful step,

the online cult of personality is not going to matter.

You're going to have to have something in real life, with real discipline, with real formal organization.

And I don't think they're going to be able to pull it off.

So that's what I'm betting. I don't think they're going to be able to pull it off. So that's what I'm betting.

I don't think they're going to be able to pull off forming their own authority and sovereignty.

Okay.

So what separates you from like every other Marxist Leninists in the United States over the past 100 years

who's failed miserably

at creating any sort of

alternative political

I don't know

dialogue you could say

because everyone in the US

has failed miserably

they've not succeeded at anything.

I think my communism,

my communism is hyper-American and hyper-adapted to this land in ways that they were not.

Are you saying like the Communist Party USA in like the 50s or 40s or whatnot?

You're saying they weren't hyper-American that they were...

They tried.

Foster was trying, but he had gatekeepers that were preventing that.

And yes, they were not adapted enough to america the thing is like i don't

understand why do guys don't just like i don't know you can say modernize in a sense we like

think think about what you're saying how have we not modernized uh yeah like let me let me let me let me let me speak uh like the

other socialists in i don't know latin america or africa or the little south where they've

basically there's like a sort of popular front socialism a socialism 21st century. I'm pretty sure

Eddie calls Venezuela socialists

or whatnot. I mean, you

people call it socialist, so why don't

you guys just go that route instead of

like using the communist label?

Because you're

going to be

you're going to be

put in the same

camp with all the

leftists and whatnot

who are

you know

putting a bad name

to communism.

Well,

the same thing

is going on

with socialism.

Okay. So, but furthermore, I'd say communist Well, the same thing is going on with socialism, okay?

So, but furthermore, I'd say communism with a capital C because we're Americans.

We're not going to pussyfoot around it and be like, you know, Europeans or something.

No offense to Europeans, but like, let's be honest.

We are loud and proud Americans who like to shoot guns into the sky and ride horses,

and we are not going to fucking conceal that we're communists.

We're going to say that we're communists with the capital C. And we're not going to be like, oh, we're communists. We're going to say that we're communists with a capital C.

And we're not going to be like,

oh,

we're so, no,

we're in the fucking Wild West,

okay?

There's no bullshit here.

We're not here to be bullshitters.

But,

like,

Maduro calls himself a Marxist,

and he has, like, very deep Marxist and he has like

very deep Marxist influence

because

in Venezuela they have a tradition

called the Bolivarian tradition

so they are creating continuity

with Bolivarian revolution

and Bolivarianism.

They don't have to create a revolutionary tradition from scratch like we do.

But America does have a revolutionary tradition, right?

We don't have a boulevard.

Are you sure?. Are George Washington?

No, George Washington was not a centralizing, modernizing figure in the way Boulevard.

You could maybe say Lincoln, but Lincoln's revolution was totally reversed.

That was Reconstruction. Now, if Reconstruction succeeded and was prolonged maybe we could just kind of do what

Venezuela does and and whatever but no we did we couldn't so America has a power vacuum in terms of its state tradition that only communism can fulfill in our view.

But you don't necessarily need some historical myth to fulfill these political goals. You could do this

without it. Can you

know it? Look, brother,

for the same reason

that communism

it's like you have a

problem with it, it's the same reason why we roll

with it. Because it's like, we're here with it. It's the same reason why we roll with it.

Because it's like we're here for an alternate timeline.

We are here for a bizarre old topsy-turvy world.

The whole world turned upside down.

We believe in something so comprehensively revolutionary that it shakes the fucking fundamentals

of reality itself.

Of what people think and experience

is reality. We think is a

false illusion.

We think that the American Empire is an

empire of illusions and lies.

And that communism is this

ultimate red pill.

Which situates us in a completely alternate timeline

and an alternate reality.

That is the real reality.

That we've been living in the entire time.

You can take the red time. You can take the red pill.

You can take the blue pill.

You take the blue pill.

You vote for Zoran Mamdani.

You become a Groyper DSA member.

And you continue whining about Jews and J.D. Vance and hope that it's eventually going to lead to something meaningful and you can do drugs and you can have Lububu's and Macha. Take the blue pill. You consume more anime and video games. Or you could take the red pill.

Communism with a capital C.

You can completely change your perspective on everything you have ever been taught about the nature and history of the modern world itself, dating from the very first days of the French Revolution

itself all the way up to now, even going back all the way to the times of Jesus Christ,

where the Lord's Prayer originally said, forgive us of our debts, not our sins, our debts,

and the whole point was wiping out debt at the expense of the Roman landowner class.

Even the times of ancient Babylonia were the kings of Babylon, the kings of Mesopotamia and Persia, they would rise to power on the basis of wiping out the debt, and the entire civilized tradition of centralized state authorities was born of communism, wiping the debt and liberating people from the land, from slavery.

Stalin and Mao,

Lenin, Marx, they're all part of this

one universal historical tradition.

Struggle of communism, the riddle of history

solved. You put down the Lubbubus,

you put down the macha for one fucking second.

And you embrace.

I've forgotten and erased.

Lost history and also a lost future.

You get to work.

You start improving yourself. You go to the gym. You start running. You start improving yourself.

You go to the gym.

You start running.

You start training.

You push yourselves to your human limits.

Because they told you you couldn't do it.

Yes, you fucking can do.

The horizon is open.

You don't have to just consume.

You can make yourself into something

that no one has ever thought

possible.

Become a soldier for our red

communist cause.

Break through the fabric of a false

history itself

and in doing so open the horizon of a new future.

That is the red pill, sir.

That red pill is a red pill with a capital C.

I leave you to your thoughts.

Nobody, go ahead.

Hey, what's up?

I'm a unaffiliated leftist, I suppose you can say.

I've been disappointed by all organizations.

I'm...

All right, you're cutting out a lot of

okay is that a little bit better yeah okay well i would just say overall i agree with your strategy

and uh think that your tactics are modern

and well adapted to the U.S.

etc. I wanted

to ask a little bit about coalition

building. Basically

people like me, other

lists, etc.

I mean, do you believe that you can browbeat, say,

or debate people into your side?

And to be clear, I understand the vanguard

you want to raise has to be ideologically disciplined

and consistent.

But in terms of the coalitions that you're reaching out to,

I just wanted to ask about your thoughts on your tactics there.

Look, on a personal level, when you talk to people personally, it's different,

but online it's a jungle.

It's a doggye-dog world.

Just look at my replies in any of my posts.

These people, they only speak the language of force.

You know, you can't just be friendly to these people.

Sure.

You know, they, they, they, they, they, they, it's they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they, they only friend, enemy distinction. There's no one between.

And you absolutely need to dominate these people, put them in line, um, so to speak. And, uh, sorry to say, but they only respect ruthlessness.

Because the lion has to charge in and eat or it dies.

Can't think about it, you can't hesitate.

Can't be like cattle, like the gro the groipers they're frogs they're prey

animals okay they're not even our preferred prey they're more like a snack frankly

and they don't show themselves.

But I'd agree. And I agree.

I agree with that.

However,

there are people who,

you know,

for example,

yes,

respect.

I hope you meet ACP members

and talk to them

and have personal conversations with them in private, but I am a warlord, sir. And I'm on the internet.

I'm not in person talking to you.

If I can be in person and meet people and know that there's a minimum of respect established,

then I don't have to browbeat

anyone into

anything

and usually

in person

nobody ever

acts in the way

they do

online when it

comes to this

disrespect

shit

it's never

happened

because I'm too wide when they see me they say this guy's like wide It's never happened.

Because I'm too wide.

When they see me, they say,

this guy's like wide Putin, and they get scared.

Too much muscle mass.

Let's bring on San Y. Go ahead, San Y.

Hello?

Yeah.

Oh, my God. I'm speaking to the chairman himself

um

greetings from

Serbia

okay

I'm a Serbian

left communist

if you could imagine

oh god

fuck

yes yes and uh imagine.

Yes.

Yes.

And you had a beautiful so I just have to say

a beautiful debate with

the French person.

So I have to congratulate you on the win, which I think was very bad.

I think the whole debate was bad.

It was kind of disingenuous, but whatever, you know.

On the whole, I think your party is kind of a larp

honestly

you're kind of a larper

I just I just think that

I think you're a big old larper

but you know I respect

to not larp

to be real so so to speak?

What does that look like?

No, you know, I don't actually mind the LARP.

I think it makes the ECTCD kind of unique.

I'm not saying you mind it.

I'm not saying you mind it.

I'm saying what does it mean to be real, to do real politics?

Because you're a left com. So what does it look like for there to do real politics because you're a left com so what does it look like for there to be real politics rather than LARP

well I would say that

well you know

I will not even try to

to make myself

look smarter than you because you are more well red than me.

You're quite a smart man.

But I am, you know, kind of interested why, for example, you associate with our dear comrade

Dugin, Alexander Dugin

and his

other retard. Well, I'm glad

you called me smart, but you said you think

all we're doing is LARPing, so I'm just asking.

Yes, yes, it's kind of a larp of course.

Right, right, right.

But I want to know

what,

what does it

look like

for a party

to not LARP

in 2020?

I would say

that,

you know,

you don't

try to make

kind of a

historical epic

out of your

What do you do though what do

do positively

I don't do anything I don't even try to hide

it I'm not actually doing anything

and that's that's the

ding ding ding

well yeah but you know

you have that you know liberal

aspect you're kind of you're that, you know, liberal aspect.

You're kind of, you're kind of a closeted liberal, if I am honest.

All right, can I ask you something?

Yes, of course.

Forget about you.

Yes, yes.

What has a left communist ever done in the history of mankind?

Please, go ahead. Well, I would actually

really like this

question because, for

example, you said that

our comrade Bordiga

didn't do anything but sit on his armchair.

I beg to disagree

because he was

one of the founding fathers of the Italian

Communist Party and was active

in the most radical times of the

party. So I think that, you know,

for the sake of history and everything.

What? How long was that period? What?

How long was the period of his engagement with that?

It's the post-commenttern Italian Communist Party that he was one of the founders of.

How long was he actually there doing anything?

Well, with the

communist party, Italy, not too long

because of course it was

a Stalinist shit hole.

So he did basically nothing

and then for the rest of his life did nothing.

Well, you could say that. However, you know, that is what my biggest problem with ACP, that you are basically,

not, you know, a lot of people call you fascists. I don't agree. I think you are just red liberals.

You know, you hate Hassan and everything, but deep down, you kind of share the same ideological roots with all of these social democrats. You're liberals. You know, being liberal means living and being outside and doing things rather than

doing nothing

and abolition of the world. Well, no, I don't say that,

I don't say that, that you don't have to do

anything, but you know, you have that

fetish of doing everything.

Then you do nothing. You don't do actually anything. Then you do nothing.

You don't do actually anything.

Then you... I mean, I think the whole internet presence of this infrared and ACP is kind of

now.

Was Lenin a LARPA?

No, of course not.

Of course he did a lot. He made a lot of mistakes. Let's be clear on that. But he was no warper. Okay, sir, was Lenin a LARPur in 1900? No, no, no. He was, I would say that I would, I would consider him an authentic revolutionary.

Okay.

So, have you, are you familiar with something Lenin wrote called First Steps?

No, no, no, no, please, please unite to me.

Are you familiar with what is to be done? Yes, of course.

Okay.

Are you aware of what Lenin considered the first step to be for organization?

Which one? What is the first step?

The first one, the square one for Lenin.

What his argument was?

Yes.

Which one?

Please.

He believed in a centralized newspaper.

Ah, yes, of course. However, at the same time, in a centralized newspaper.

Ah, yes, of course.

However, at the same time, I would say that, of course,

Lenin was a very good revolutionary.

However, he was a revolution.

I don't consider your party revolutionary. Let's talk about before Lenin

was a revolutionary, before

1905, before anything,

the square one

of creating a collective

framework of organization.

How did Lenin

conceive that? How did

he argue that would be possible?

Because they didn't actually have that

always. The Russian

Social Democratic Labor Party

was born out of something, and after

it was born, it wasn't really all that much.

So how do you go from that to something?

Because you call us LARPERS, and you're not applying this criterion to Lenin in the crucial years that they were doing nothing effectively at any significant scale now is ACP at scale doing quote unquote something like compared to, no, we're very insignificant,

okay? But we consider

ourselves to be in those crucial steps

and we're following Lenin's footsteps.

How are we not?

Well,

I would say that

you are not following Lenin's footsteps. In fact, I would say that you are not following Lenin's footsteps.

In fact, I would call you closer to LaSalle, Ferdinand Lassal.

I would say that you are following the traditional social democratic steps,

and I think you're doing it very well. I think that you have a very great

future ahead of you, but you know, not a revolutionary future, of course. LaSalle helped lay certain

norms and conventions for the second international and social democracy,

no doubt about that.

But Lenin was a social democrat.

Yes, because of course

social democracy meant something different

than what we use it today.

No, no, hold on. Hold on.

I'm aware.

But the social democratic tradition that came from Lassell was the same one Lennon was part of.

Yes, of course.

I would not say that.

However, I would say that he did a lot of...

I mean, when I...

Let me ask you a better question.

How is it that I am returning to LaSalle in a way that comes at the expense of Lenin's legacy?

Well, it's very simple.

I would say that because you are not a revolutionary organization,

and you have no roots to Lenin in an actual,

because of course it's...

Be more specific, why not?

Well, of course, you don't want to change the world I would say that you don't want

to really abolish

the current state of things

I would say that you are very much

happy with

you know

working with

capitalist countries

that's of course

of course

China but I would say also

Iran

would you say that the world

would you say the world

is not changing right now

as we speak

I mean I would say that it is changing but not in a way to, but not changing towards a

community society.

But Lenin disagreed with you on numerous accounts.

First of all, Lenin perceived Russia to be entering a revolutionary

situation, first of all.

And he perceived that as inevitable.

The second thing is that Lenin

perceived the rise of imperialism

to herald a new mode

of production, socialism.

He perceived World War I to have a revolutionary significance to open up the opportunity for a revolutionary circumstance.

Because he thought World War I was basically the whole capitalist mode of production coming to a head at a crucial moment.

So for Lenin, he didn't need to talk about changing the world because for him the world was already changing.

He just believed in responding to those changes in a

principled manner. So how is that

I'm trying to say that you do not have a

princiined manner of

a revolutionary manner. You have a principled

manner, of course, but you're not revolutioning. A principled

manner of responding

to revolutionary change is the

entire content of what it means to be a revolutionary

and nothing else. Yes,

of course, I agree, but you are now using

word games. Of course, you agree with

what you're saying, because of course you say

that China has

socialist community production and not

the moment of its own. I'm saying. I'm saying that the world...

Of course, but you know it is, you cannot say

that socialist commodity production

exists for example. I cannot agree with that.

And I would say that...

Before I convince you about socialist commodity production,

or we talk about that,

I first of all would argue and make the argument

that the emergence of multipolarity is objectively

revolutionary in the strict sense

that there is

a mode of production that is concrete

not just abstract, doesn't have an abstract

checklist and criteria

and that's not dialectical, it's a concrete

system based in U.S. hegemony and dollar hegemony, and what Michael Hudson described as super-imperialism, or what Varifakis calls the global Minotaur, the global system of recycling profits back into the U.S., that hegemony is entering into contradiction with

different polls, with Russia, with China, with Iran.

And that is, that does signify a revolutionary change going on.

I would beg to disagree with you, because I would say that yes, in some way you are, you are correct in saying that

this is happening. However, I would say that this is more

preparation for a new imperialist war between

the East, America and I mean East China

and West America in splitting up the world even more.

I would say that you would have to...

The imperialist...

There is a very big...

The imperialist stage of capitalism.

No, there's not. No, there is it.

I would say yes, because if you're saying multipolarity, however, at the same time, you are not exactly going to defend the African workers on strike against the Chinese factories, which they are working now.

Maybe I would. Maybe I would.

Why wouldn't I?

Well, because then you would have to, I mean,

you would have to agree that there is an export of capital on the side of China into Africa.

China, you're mistaking how capital on the side of China into Africa.

China, you're mistakening how these different systems are interacting.

China is a sovereign country.

China has its own laws and they do business in their own way.

Now, if another country, if China In a capital space, of course.

No. I agree. No. No.

Yes, I agree.

You're cutting me off. You're

cutting me off because you're afraid of what I'm going to say

because I'm going to educate you. Okay, please. I'm sorry,

please. Yeah.

So let's say China is economically disadvantaging an entire country and they're getting the majority of the benefits and this country's not.

That's not China's problem because China's socialism is confined to the extent of China's sovereignty.

China's not responsible for the sovereignty of another country.

Ah, yes.

Okay.

So if another country, for example...

It is not internationalist.

It is, let's say, national.

No, it has nothing, the internationalism, even in the time of Marx and Englos, was a relationship between nations, not people within nations, but between nations.

So the individualist comprehension of internationalism says that internationalism means that

individuals in different countries transcend borders, and this comes at the expense of their

own nations.

But internationalism for Marx and Engels meant

a relationship of solidarity between nations

at the scale of the nation, at the collective,

not the individual.

Yes, of course.

However, you're still thinking...

So in order to be internationalist, you have to have your own sovereignty and your own national form consolidated.

You have to have the victory of the proletariat consolidated in a national context, whether that's in the form of a party, whether that's in the form of a dictatorship, whether that's in the form of an entire country that you've taken over. The only way you can be internationalist is if you represent your nation and your nation's sovereignty.

First of all, and you get your own house.

That is an interesting thing, because, of course, there is some backing to your claim.

However, I really liked the explanation of, I mean, for example, Lenin and let's, I mean, God forbid Bordiga, where they say that there is a moment in time, in every moment, in revolutionary moments where the nation has to go against

itself for the revolutionary cause

and I think that

revolutionary defeatism

is not a case of a nation going against

itself. No I would say even

it's a case of it's a case

of a nation going against

its hegemic. No, I would... Okay, I would then use my own

country, the Serbian social democrats, for example,

during the First World War, They understood that on its own,

I mean, in a vacuum,

defending Serbia against Austrian imperialism is a good thing.

However, in a greater aspect,

looking at the

broad picture, they also

saw the need for

revolutionary defeatism

so that the world revolution

could get a foothold.

And that is what I mean

at the fans of your

nation. Practice, yeah, but that

was completely mistaken because practice has shown

No, it was not mistaken.

Because the social democrats

in Serbia were right to

go for a national

defeat as a revolutionary

divism. Yeah, but the

only case where communists

rose to power in Serbia

was when they were defending their homeland.

Yes, but

I mean, please,

that is a different context.

Concretely, concretely, I would say that in the revolutionary scale, the nation has not the, is not the most important thing.

It is, of course, the nation is nothing.

It's not about importance.

It's about the form of class struggle.

So why is revolutionary defeatism revolutionary in Russia, for example?

Why was that effective?

And why did it succeed?

It succeeded

because the national

aspirations of the Russian people

concretely did not

consist in propping up

the Germanized, largely

Germanized aristocracy and land

owning class, but empowering the national majority, which was not a subject of politics at all, but totally excluded, which was the Russian peasantry. The Russian peasantry, who were devoid of land, who were indebted, who were impoverished, they were the subject of Lenin's politics.

And Lenin's revolutionary defeatism was targeted against a state machine that was at war with its own nation, with the national majority.

And Lenin's revolutionary defeatism actually fulfilled the national aspirations of the Russian.

Yes, of course, but you're speaking about national subterimination

which cannot in this current

context be progressive.

In this current 24th century, we are

talking about... It can neither be progressive

nor reactionary. It's a question

objectively.

No, I am talking objectively. It cannot serve revolutionary purposes. How revolution... a question objectively of how

class struggle

the revolutionary purposes

how revolutions and class struggle

acquired determination is through the national

form and they always have

it's unavoidable fact of what

they are a revolution

is not abstract doesn't happen in a vacuum.

It is a thing that happens

to nations by nations. Nations

make revolutions. Yes, but then

of course, you're not talking

this is a

simultaneous, the notion of a disgusting disfigurement of not talking this is a simultaneous the science

this is a

disgusting disfigurement

of the of Marxism

I would say

but this is my opinion

however I would say

that

Marx

Marks and angles

originally wrongly predicted

that there would be a more or less simultaneous revolution that first breaks out in the Imperial Corps in England of the most advanced to developed capitalist countries.

And that once this happens in the center, it's just going to like lightning spread to everywhere else, including the colonized world.

And in this way, from the top down, communism would triumph on a planetary scale.

Now, empirically speaking, this

notion

was disproved

within Marx and Engels' lifetime.

Within their lifetime, they abandoned

this notion. When they

wrote the Communist Manifesto, they had

this wrong notion.

And within their own lifetime, they realized it was not correct.

And that, for example, Lenin was, sorry, Marx recognized that the Russian peasantry had more revolutionary potential in the late 19th century than the English proletariat did.

Yes, of course.

And on the question of Polish polish on the Polish national question

they were very clear

and explicit

that the polls need

to

constitute themselves as a nation

and become nationalists

the words that they used.

And they were,

I mean, I would say

that Paul's during the First World War student,

I disagree with Lenin on

a Polish question.

But this is a very interesting point

you just made about...

But you disagree with Lenin.

But you're trying to say that I agree with LaSalle

rather than Lenin. I'm just trying to say

what I'm in... My position

is fully Leninist. it's fully in line with

yes of course because of course it is a dogmatic point but I would say that this is not

such an interesting question as I would would like you to ask I would like to ask now which is

of course you said a lot about

revolutions happening

in the imperial core and everything

but of course as we know

that that didn't happen and as we know

as Engels Max

and Lenin anticipated

Russia couldn't

develop a socialist mode of production

that's not true in Lenin's case

no no no no Lenin was clear

I would say that the Russian

experience wasn't

Lenin was pretty clear

toward the end of his life

create a socialist...

For the end of his life,

Lenin was clear

that it could be possible

to construct socialism in one country.

I think that's bullshit on your part,

but okay.

No, it's not.

What did Lenin say

about building?

Then I don't agree with Lenin.

I don't have to agree with Lenin.

I don't have to agree with Lenin on that point.

Okay.

Well, I'm just trying to tell you,

you claim that I'm more like LaSelle,

and I'm saying, no no I'm a Lenin

Yes of course

Yes he had some

I mean I'm not I'm not using

I'm not seeing

Lenin as a god

But okay

Let's disregard it

Yes I mean this is a very simple

Yes or no question.

Is exchange on the market necessarily meditated by value?

By this I mean the social necessary labor time contained in commodities.

Is all exchange on markets necessarily mediated by value?

Yes.

By this, I mean, socially necessary labor time contained in commodities.

Yes, but not abstract labor value okay so if value exists does that not mean money prices and wage

labor are presupposed in some form no because value predates the capitalist motor production.

Yes. However, in Marx says, where labor, in the critique of the Gota program, it says,

where labor has been directly social, it does not take the form of the value of things.

The fact that it takes

this form proves that it is not social

but private labor.

Your question

was whether or not the existence of value means there's capitalism. It doesn't because it predates the capitalist mode of production. Now, the question of, at what point can it be said that private property has been fully and comprehensively overcome within civilization?

That's a separate question of whether or not a society can legitimately be called a socialist mode of production that is developing in that direction.

Yes, of course. However, I mean, that this capitalist model production necessarily means that wages and value exist and of course if those exist then classes must exist also your perspective is undilectical and i'll make that concrete how so i would like to know wages and value and prices and all these other concepts, I would say you're treating them as idols, they only exist to the extent that they are suspended in a process by which they are overcome by their own, by the very contradictions that underlie them.

They don't exist in a way that's institutionally established, like some kind of Greek pillars holding up heaven.

They don't exist outside the context of overcoming themselves, of being overcome by their own contradictions.

There's no steady state existence where these things are like enshrined and cemented as definite and

um self-sustaining you see for marks capitalism cannot actually reproduce itself. To the extent that capitalism has any feedback loops, those feedback loops, develop it in the direction of a new mode of production.

So in this sense, Marx was kind of like

an accelerationist in a way,

if you want to put it this way.

For Marx,

to the extent that capitalism

has feedback,

systemic feedback loops,

systemic is the word I'm using.

To the extent that capitalism

can consolidate itself as a system, and that system can reinforce its existence in any kind of way, it is actually suspended in a process of transitioning into a different mode of production.

Yes, okay, but Chairman has has I feel this is

devolving into sophistry

no it's not

no it's not yes of course it is

because I because the question

the question is not

the question is not

whether a given society

has these different kinds of qualities

and categories or whatever because those cannot be voluntarily

overcome all you can have is a state whose policies scientifically respond in principle to the

tendencies that are already in

motion. So

revolution is not

about changing the mode of production.

Revolution

is about overthrowing the

stick. Yes, I am

because you have to listen.

I don't know, you know, this is the interesting thing about you.

Because you need to stop interrupting me.

You need to stop interrupting me.

You need to stop interrupting me.

For fuck's sake, are you so dogmatic and religiously devoted to your specific interpretation that you're terrified to fucking hear what I have to say.

You are right. I'm sorry. I should just listen to say. Modes of production are not determined by politics. They're determined by their own logic

of economic development and economic production.

What Marx and Engels believed

is that the superstructure

imposes a fetter on the development of the mode of production.

And this fetter doesn't necessarily prevent the contradictions from coming to a head,

but it prevents the ability for society to respond to them scientifically and rationally.

So that's why they would say later, Luxembourg would say socialism or barbarism,

because the contradictions will come to a head,

but if they're not able to be responded to rationally and scientifically, then it's going to cause confusion, decay, degeneracy, and barbarism, basically. It's going to be chaos. So, for Marx and Engels, for the Marxist tradition, the content of being revolutionary, it's a political category.

It's about overthrowing the state or toppling the state or comprehensively asserting the dominance of a completely new principle of governance.

But

when it comes to the mode of production,

all effective revolutionary

governments and dictatorship

revolutionary dictatorship can do

is unleash

the fetters on production that are already

revolutionary, that are already developing

in the direction of socialism.

So, you cannot change the mode of production

voluntarily.

The revolutionary...

The revolution in production that happens from socialism to capitalism is not subjective.

It's objective.

The subjective element, so to speak, is a question of politics and

affecting the proletarian dictatorship at the expense of, for example, political reformism. So a political

reformist will say, I want to just elect Zoran

or whatever, and then if I defer

to the...

Or has...

Even me, if I was running for election,

sure. And you just want to elect me.

You will. But okay,

I would...

A revolutionary...

A revolutionary... I would, this is getting a little bit far away from my original.

A revolutionary.

I would like to ask you how reproducing this mode of production is going to somehow magically like

that capitalism

cannot reproduce itself

to whatever extent

but how are you going

to continue

using the same

mode of production

as capitalism

does in

let's say

socialist

communist

communist country like China how is it going to magic does in a, let's say, socialist, communist,

communist country like China,

how is it going to magically, let's say,

one day just

become destroyed commodity

production?

It's already happening.

The premises of a new mode of production

are already here yes but then less than the question is

why it's been it's been happening for a long time it happened 29. It was deepened in 71.

It's constantly

we are entering a new mode of

production whether we want to or not.

The question of whether that's going to be compatible

with civilization is a question of whether

we can effectively respond

via the superstructure

to these changes.

Yes, but this is moralization, civilization,

this words don't mean anything.

Socialism and barbarism.

Socialism is barbaric.

Okay.

Look, you're not, you're not

impressing me, okay?

I'm the king of barbarians.

I'm the barbaric one.

Yes, of course, I'm offering

your new lard.

This is new larp to you.

You should be writing

yourself.

No, I already was ahead of the game.

But the thing is,

barbarism is the foundation of civilization

okay and of course

you're saying that

that community that

that uh

capitalism if I is

so please tell me if I'm

understanding correctly already has

the is heading

towards a new mode of production

as of now, yes? Sir, sir.

Is this true? I'm sorry.

No, no, let me actually, let me nuke you.

I'm not saying that.

That's what Lenin said in imperialism.

Not me. Yes, but this is said in imperialism. Not me.

Yes, but this is just pure reformism.

This is pure reformism. No, it's not.

It's not reform. Yes, of course it is.

Listen, I don't know why you guys always fuck this up.

Every one of you ultras fuck this up.

I see it all the time on Twitter.

Reformism is not

about gradualism

when it comes to economics or the mode of production.

Reformism is about

politics. Do you believe

in revolution? Yes, but you're just

politicking. This is not your

No, dude.

You're seeing communism as politics.

Oh my God.

Holy fuck.

Reformism is about whether you believe in voting for Zoran Mamdani or...

Who the fuck says Zomra, Mamdani?

With all due respect, I don't give a shit about him.

Do I have to mute you?

Do I have to mute you?

You're like an animal.

Okay.

Well, okay, sorry.

Reformism.

The barbaric part of me, you know, the American warrior of the, I'm a farm.

I'm not a peasant.

Reformism has absolutely nothing to do with how quickly you think capitalism can transition into a different mode of production.

Reformism is about your attitude and stance and relationship to the to the state to the political state so if you

believe you can shill and you can you can push the system left enough to get to be create

socialism from democracy or something you're reformist ifist. If you're a Leninist, you believe in creating a new principle and foundation of state power that is incompatible with the one that rules us. Okay. So Lenin was decisively revolutionary, not because he overthrew the capitalist mode of production

he didn't by the way and he admitted as much

he said the habits of capitalism haven't been eliminated

he presided over the NEP so he didn't abolish capitalism

but he was revolutionary because he toppled, he not only toppled the state machine, which to be honest was already toppling by itself, he asserted a completely new principle of state power and constructed a completely new principle of state

state power and dictatorship and that is what made him revolution okay i understand that however

in the even in the in the real socialist movement like in russia how mean, I do not see how you can, like, make sense of the theory of socialism in one country.

If, of course, dictatorship of proletarian means the rule of the working class as a class.

Not in one country.

Here's why.

Because although every country is interconnected,

every country is also,

according to the theory of Lenin at the time ripe for the

for the emergence of a new mode of production

objectively speaking

this was an international thing Lenin said

that the conditions for socialism have been established

with imperialism.

Imperialism is the final stage, according to Lenin.

That's what he believed.

Okay.

And I don't see how this is contradicting anything I said.

I agree with that.

So now the question of decisively being able to construct socialism or not is a question of the superstructure. It's a question of the political apparatus. Well, the state superstructure and political apparatus is delimited according to sovereignty, according to the form of a nation.

So you can build socialism within one country because you can lay hold of sovereignty.

You can rule over and preside over a country and respond effectively to the tendency of the invading socialist mode of production

and make that the principle of governance.

So that is absolutely possible.

Every single country has this tendency. It's just that the superstructure is not responding to it scientifically. And so as a consequence, you see absurd degrees of the socialization of capital and the centralizing

tendencies of capital, to the

point that render private property

almost superfluous completely.

I mean, money itself ends

after 71, according to Marx's

definition of money, which

was an exchange, a commodity that was imbued with abstract labor time, that was gold for Marx. Well, fiat money, the production cost of fiat money, it's a penny okay it doesn't justify its exchange value

which is one dollar what the production cost of one dollar is not one dollar of value okay

equivalence of value so wow okay okay so you left con you. Wow. Okay.

So what you left comms have ignored is the element of objectivity in the question of how socialism emerges.

And you misunderstand the relationship between the so-called subjective element, the political element, so to speak, and the economic one.

You collapse the distinction, just like Hitler tried.

Well, okay. That is an interesting thing you just said said but I will, okay, I know how

done, no hard feelings

I would say that

I mean, the goal

of the communist movement is to

abolish classes and I mean

with that the whole capital

system of production.

Your claim is devoid of concreteness.

What does that mean concretely? Nothing.

It's a concept.

You're talking about...

If you don't stand that...

Sanye, what you're talking about

is a conceptual abolition.

You're saying what the goal of a communist movement

should be is to

affect a

abolition of something inside

my head and that for as

long as reality doesn't conform to that

abstraction,

then you're just saying that Marx was an idealist.

No, he wasn't.

You're literally saying that Marx was an idealist when he was saying that the abolition of value

and the classes is something that can be achieved.

You are basically

saying that he was...

You're also not saying anything concrete.

You're saying... Yes, I am. Because Marks...

Marks was very clear.

Very clear that there was

no voluntary... Yeah, it was very clear what he was

meaning, and he

didn't mean that he never ever heard

critically support Russia in its

war against name not at

any point why are you babbling

Marx did not at any point you're also babbling

I think we can go babble you

because you're an animal.

You just can't help yourself.

At no point did Marx

refer to a voluntary abolition

of anything. He referred to

a process of sublation.

The process by which

money and classes and all these things come to no longer become the guiding principles of civilization and society is not because people come together and voluntarily decide to exterminate or eradicate them,

but because according to the very contradictions of class society,

as they have reached their cumulative point under capitalism, according to Marx,

the fertile conditions for their very overcoming have been established

and have been made inevitable, according to the laws of history.

Marx believed that communism was the riddle of history solved, that the abolition of private property that you're talking about

is not something affected by fiat,

according to the voluntary will of a collective or group or individual or something.

But that's actually a tendency of history itself that it's tending toward

in the very development of history.

And for Marx, that's an objective process.

And the question of will and the subjective factor is about effectively and scientifically

responding to that and acknowledging it.

It's not about enforcing it on reality to shape it according to some unyielding standard of this needs to be

abolished that needs to be abolished that is not Marxism that is some ridiculous form of

voluntaristic anarchism if you can even call it that. Now I'll unmute you.

Hello, can you hear me?

Yeah.

Okay. Sorry for my barbarity.

I mean, the spirit of the movement moved me.

But what I wanted to say is that Marxism will be mainly negative in the aspect of destroying current

capitalist relations. What does that look like?

That will mean

the complete destruction

of the current

concrete. Well, with all your

respect, you were not really concrete in your

you were also speaking as precisely, rather abstractory. No, I were not really concrete in your, you were also speaking

rather abstract. No, I'm not, because I'm defending the concrete experience

of communist history fully. Yes, and we have to agree that

the communist history was not able to destroy

capitalist relations. And this is a fact. That was not able to destroy capitalist relations.

And this is a fact. That was not

the extent of its ambitions was

not to comprehensively destroy

capitalist relationships. But

the goal was to respond

to history. And they did do that within their countries.

Respond to changes already happening in history.

And respond to those rationally and effectively.

And they did.

But as you said, but as you said, Lenin also agreed that the world is

ripe for a revolutionary change

and that means that the

world is ready for a

common revolutionary political

change. So the question

is why did Western Marxists

The question is why did Western Marxists... The question is why did

Western Marxists fail to respond

to the zeitgeist of the moment, effectively?

Because they have...

I mean, I would also blame a little bit of the

comment on that question

particularly. No, blame people

who have your mentality. Blame people who have your

mentality. Blame people who have

your mentality that we can just abolish

everything without caring about

how these things acquire concreteness

and determination.

Yes, but capitalism is a concrete thing

and the relations of a capitalist country are very concrete.

I don't think you have a concrete comprehension of capitalism. I think your understanding of capitalism is entirely according to an abstract formal standard. I don't think you left comms in general

have ever actually studied the

system concretely

of our mode of production.

It's supply chains, the credit system,

how it's funded. You don't care about

any of these things. All you care

about is either the presence or the absence of abstract categories, and you don't care whatsoever about how these so-called categories actually manifest or concretely exist. And that is not Marxist.

I understand that.

However, I would also say

that as you said, and every Marxist

agrees in this, that

in the 21st century, the world

is, I mean,

in

the question of being able to carry itself to a communist mode of existence.

I got to mute you because this has gone on for like an hour

and I have to narrow the

topic to just very basically

say I think you have a loaded

understanding of what revolutions are

I think you think revolutions are people going

out on the street naked and abolishing everything

I think revolutions are a concrete thing. I think they're a detail of military history. I think revolutions happen within nations, according to a national form. And I think that they are objective phenomena, and they have nothing to do with people running around

abolishing things just because they have become comfortable with the notion of

abolishing it within their own head so that's all I can really say.

You're saying that the world is right for revolution. You don't have to take long saying that. Okay? The problem is I think you have a wrong idea of what revolution even is.

Revolution has a concrete subject. The concrete subject of revolution is not the fulfillment of any abstract

criterion of change. The concrete subject

of revolution is the real

existing change

that is already occurring.

Then let's say that

this will be my statement for the whole debate i agree with you that the

concrete task of a revolution is change however if that change does not mean that from the start of the revolution, that's, I'm not even saying, I'm a communist, I believe in the dictatorship, the proletariat and everything between that.

And of course, I don't, I, as you said said that Lefcoms want to abolish commodity production immediately.

I'm not saying that.

However, I am saying that a revolutionary moment has to at the start of a revolution, to immediately start

the process of

changing the world

changing the modes

of existence of society

I hear you I hear you

I'm just going to continue to reiterate

your understanding is subjectivistic no I'm not saying I'm just going to continue to reiterate. Your understanding is subjectivistic.

No, I'm not saying. I'm saying that the objective force...

Marxism says the revolution...

The historical necessity of a revolution.

I hate saying this. I got to meet you again.

But it's like,

Nick Land has a better understanding

of Marxism than you people.

Because I don't fully agree with him.

But it's like a necessary overcorrection

that you should go read him.

To get this idea out of your head

that the revolution is like a subjective thing.

It's not. The revolution's already happening.

Okay? The question is, are we going to be revolutionary

in response to the one that's already happening objectively?

A revolutionary process is not going to affect immediately and at the outset a change in the mode of production.

Revolutions occur in response to changes in the mode of production. Revolutions occur in response

to changes in the mode of production.

They are not themselves the cause.

And to the extent that they are,

then the revolution isn't

political. It's economic.

And the political one is in response.

So this is a basic base superstructure distinction

that is important within Marxism.

The base and superstructure

do not transform simultaneously.

The base is primary, okay?

The superstructure responds to the base.

This is the rough relationship that Marxism outlines.

Okay.

Unfortunately, we're going to have to cut it short there, all right?

Maybe another time, but it's been just too long, like an hour.

Okay? Walter, go ahead. but it's been just too long, like an hour, okay?

Walter, go ahead.

Go ahead.

The last speaker of the night.

You know, I love waiting hours listening to all the leftists and fighting.

It's very impressed, but I had a point to make it. Is my mic working properly, by the lawyer?

Yeah, it is.

So you believe that you're an American, correct?

And that's this American-based movement, right?

Yeah.

Despite the fact that

I'm a brown Arab, I believe I'm an American.

Do you know

about the Naturalization Act of

Let me make sure I'm correct on this.

The first Congress, 1790.

Don't give a damn about ancient documents

that have no binding status on my life that's like the core basis of america that determines what an american is according to you according to the first congress okay the first Congress was 300 years ago.

So where are we living now?

So we just ignore all the pillars of America and just disregard the tradition of this country?

I don't see any pillars.

I'm living in reality, all right?

Well, the pillars are gone, right?

And that's why this country is, you know, kind of fuck, because we don't know what in America is.

Okay, so what is you're basically saying is, well, you consider to be the pillars of America have to totally be created from scratch.

And am I on board with this?

No, if we're already in a position of creating shit from scratch, then I think

that something that's more realistic would be something that is actually adapted to the reality

of what this nation is and has become, which is not a all-white nation, okay? That is the

content. I think That is the content.

I think nations are living things.

They're not dead principles.

They're living things. Whether you like it or not, America as a nation today is not a exclusively white nation.

And that is the fact living

before us right now of the people

of this nation and this land.

Well, the issue is with America

is that it has an identity crisis, right?

Like if you don't know what an American is,

right, then how are we going

to progress as a country? Every person

in their country, a nation, no, a nation

is a race of people with a common set

of cultures and traditions. If you

don't know what that is, and what is America, then?

If it's just an economic zone or like any

brown guy is like an American.

I have my own definition of that, if you want to hear it.

My definition of an American is anyone

who is willing to commit to this land and this land only

and struggle and fight for it

when shit hits the fan

so when shit hits the fan

whoever flees this land

regardless of their ancestry

has given up on this land

whoever stays in fights

and is part of the process of

the creation of what this nation

is, is part of this nation. So it's

a commitment issue for me. That's how I

see what the foundation. That's the same

argument that Drew Pavlov, I mean, like

all the liberals make that America isn't

like a place or a nation

or race of people that it's more so just

magic soil and that any person

can just identify with the nation and I

disagree with that I think if you want to

I didn't say identify I say give their

labor struggle in blood that's not an

identity that's an act.

What is the blood and soil of America,

if not an ethnic American? What is an

ethnic American at that point?

And ethnic, and ethnicities

are born of

revolutionary struggles.

So an ethnicity is born when people band together and fight for something and die for something.

And once they draw the line that defines what that community is based on warfare, right?

All the descendants of that community become part of that

ethnicity, okay?

I fundamentally reject the notion that, you know, any person in this country, because, you know,

the people that bled for this country

since its founding were white men of good moral

character. That's what the first Congress...

The founding of the revolutionary founding

of the country...

Even the arguments with like

the black being in the American true the problem is that the revolutionary

the revolutionary founding of the country

was never completed

that's the problem the war did happen yes that's correct

the revolutionary war people shed blood and that's correct. The Revolutionary War, people shed

blood. And that is, I would argue,

would actually cemented... Well, and you might

have to interrupt you because that's not an argument that's made a lot

about the blacks being freed. Yes, we intend

to free them and then we want to

reintegrate them back to Africa. Both Abraham,

Lincoln, and Thomas Jefferson

mentioned this, that once he did

free them from slavery, they'll be sent back to Africa.

I would say that a nation

is defined more

by its living reality

rather than the intentions

of ideologists who might have possessed a decisive importance in the

history of that nation, sure, but Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln did not create any nation.

They were trying to respond to their national realities in varying degrees of different ways.

I think that there's a lot that they didn't really know as far as what America as a nation would actually end up being.

I think it was a pretty unprecedented thing they were doing, seceding from the British Empire

and constructing a completely

new and unprecedented

principle of

community and state

and did they have

presumptions? Of course they did

but did they have certainty. I don't think they did.

How could they? I think the founding fathers had a concrete view of what America was,

which is what we had for several years pre their recent migration acts.

I don't think they had a clear... I don't think they had a clear...

I don't think they had...

But we predominantly had this country having primarily

in northern Western European migration for most of its history.

I don't think...

That might have been what they had.

That might have been what they had, That might have been what they had,

but they were not certain that's all it would ever be.

They couldn't be.

All they could do is just respond to the times they were living in,

but could they say this is all this completely unprecedented new principle of state

and this

new land that's completely

in their view uncharted

and unexplored could ever end up being

they had no fucking idea what would happen

were they

um

well they're not

did they have an idea that was did they have an idea of an America that reflected what America was at that time?

Yeah, they did.

But could they preempt the possibility that the nation would develop in the way that it has objectively since then?

No, they couldn't.

How could they? They didn't have magic powers.

Nobody can predict the future, right?

But the basis of their ideology

and one American historically

is, is a white man of good moral character,

predominantly European for most of our history.

They could have

they certainly could have had, they certainly

could have had that expectation

but that expectation was wrong.

On what grounds was it wrong?

It was wrong objectively because on this continent, the realities of what this nation objectively is and ended up being was far from an exclusively European or white nation.

It was a one people that at the level of civil society

interacted with. And you know what? This was even true, I would argue, even before

the revolution. The emergence of different mixed peoples and all sorts of different novel ethnic developments

those are the people behind the uh the boston massacre right they provoked it so to speak

uh when the british The Boston Massacre, right? They provoked it, so to speak.

When the British...

Was it the Boston Massacre?

Am I getting the history wrong?

Was it called something else? You might be getting it.

I believe so.

I think it was Bloody Monday.

I forgot the specific name.

Sorry, it's blanking on me too.

Yeah, yeah.

That specific one.

But concretely, right, would you not agree

that a nation on itself, like,

is a race to people with common

ancestry and a shared language, right?

Like a shared universal... The common ancestry thing, shared language, right? Like a shared universal.

The common ancestry thing, I would say...

If the founding fathers were here,

that they would approve of what it is. Like, they would look at a lot

of people that call themselves American and

be like, who the fuck are you? Where are you

in the contrary to the intent? They would

probably be baffled by a lot of things but it it has nothing to do with the question of what a nation objectively is um i don't think nations it's literally on atomology dot com like everyone knows the nation is a race of, a large group of people of common ancestry and language, right?

Yeah, but for example, by common ancestors...

They're a stock of American.

Yeah, I just, that's not true, okay?

Because, for example, the Europeans, for example, do not all share a common ancestry to the same degree.

You know, there might be a Hungarian out there, right, who shares more of a common ancestry.

I actually do genetic studies. Most northern Western Europeans have a common ancestry. I actually do genetic studies.

Most northern western

Europeans have a common

ancestry going back to

Scandinavia of the

Yemeniast.

But all people

that are more

common

with a European

all people

at a sufficient

scale in time share a common ancestry, okay, according to on with a European all people sufficient scale

in time

share a common

ancestry

according to the

YDNA analysis

the YDNA analysis

totally arbitrary

you just

pinpoint a mutation

at a specific time

you can

go back to the beginning

of time, okay?

So I have a question for you then.

If I put you or a Negro,

and I don't mean to say this sir on your stream,

right, I'll try to tone it down, right?

If I put them next to any European

and, you know, compared myself to them, would you

not say that a European would have more

in common with a Hungarian than you

would, for example?

It would

be fair to say that a European has more

uncommon with the Hungarian, but I was going to talk about

the Huns and like the various nomadic peoples that invaded Hungary.

And that's a...

Does a Hungarian have more common with them potentially than someone in Britain?

I don't know.

But look.

I mean, like, I can send a genetic chart, by the way.

I'm not sure.

Yeah, look, in any case, I would say that the thing about America is that race is a question a question of proximity geographic proximity so the process by which

people's acquire proximity and they intermingle and stuff obviously that's geographic for all of

most of history right so that's why you, the phenotypes of a given people, there is a geographic logic and continuity to it, right? People that are clustered in a specific region usually look alike to the extent that they are closer together in land and where they're living and that's

because people mainly live where they have for a prolonged period of time and to the extent that

they do migrate, that usually

used to take a long time, right?

Yeah, I'm just saying, I think that

America, where people

separated, continentally

separated for thousands of years

potentially, are suddenly coming into

contact and suddenly coming into contact and suddenly

coming into

proximity,

you are

seeing pronounced

phenotypical

differences

between people

that are

extreme,

that are

atypical

when it

comes to

how nations

typically form. Nations typically don't form from people that are separated for thousands of years

continentally. Nations typically form by people who are already in a degree of geographic proximity with each other, or they're brought into proximity, right? For example, the Greeks coming into proximity with the peoples of Mesopotamia. That's not a huge leap across the pond, so to speak. It's not comparable to, for example, the Greeks immediately entering into proximity with the Japanese.

So this is the logic of how races and ethnicities and nations form for all of history until, let's say, the discovery of the Americas and the rise of the global capitalist system.

And that presents unique circumstances, sure.

And that's why we have a category of race.

I mean, racial distinction, it's a category of continental distinctions, right? Because you mentioned European, you mention African, these are continents. And why that's important is geography is important for how people come to be. When people separated for thousands of years from different continents come together into one place, their physical characteristics are accentuated to a huge extent.

But now that they are here sharing this geographic proximity in one place, you say it's a question of magic dirt. It's not. It's just a question of people living amongst each other. That's all. And laboring amongst each other and producing amongst each other and creating. Because what a nation it's not a static thing i mean people feed themselves they build they they they support themselves this is not something that's given it has to be done through labor okay so a shared community of labor and production and geographic proximity

is a sufficient recipe for the genesis and unification of a nation, regardless of, you know,

the extreme physical differences that are a consequence of the separation by continents for thousands of years.

So that would be my argument.

I would say there may be an argument for ethnogenesis and right like a lot of schizophrenic like white

nationalists for example say oh mixed race people been like several decades after get killed but like

there is you know if you're not genetically of a nation right there's kind of a difficulty with

identifying with that nation that's why there are a lot of people with identifying with that nation.

That's why there are a lot of people in this country that don't know what they really are,

what really an American is.

But I think it all boils down to a question of labor and commitment.

So, for example, a lot of the people that are immigrants who are not

strongly loyal to America are people that are usually working jobs that are not connected

to productive labor, industries, or agriculture, anything that forces them to commit to the land. It's usually

stuff that like it's a quick, you know, I'll be a coder, I'll be some kind of professional or

something, and you can eventually just immigrate back if you make a raise enough capital or make enough money versus you know if you're tied to the land then you're going to have your family here you're going to have your descendants be here they're going to have to coexist with the communities that are already here and and merge with them and mingle with them. And that reflects a degree of commitment.

And that is not all immigrants are committed to that. It's true. But that's the capitalist system. We have a free-for-all, okay? So we don't have a

socialist system that binds everyone to a degree of commitment to the nation and to the

common welfare of the people. We have a free-for-all system where everything's, I mean,

you can buy citizenship right now for a few million

dollars. They have the gold card, right, that Trump created.

So.

Yeah, and that's why I think it's like a good idea to return to what the founding father's

intended and go back to their paperwork and what the first Congress team in the American is, so it's easier to identify what it is.

I'll speed run it and simplify it. I know it's very late, but I'll just tell you my take, okay? That's civil war. That's bloody conflict. That's, um, balkanization. It cannot unify this country it would lead to this country

being torn apart i will tell you with certainty not only will all the minorities object to it half of

the white people will object if if not more than half.

Most white people don't agree with it.

Most white people don't agree with excluding all the non-whites.

It's just the truth.

You can get maybe a maximum of 25%, I think, maybe, who would sign up for that?

The rest would say that's unreasonable.

I have black coworkers.

I have Mexican friends.

I have a Mexican girlfriend.

I have a this.

And they would say, I don't want to do this thing where we're just going to make it all white people.

I have native blood.

I have this.

I have that.

I know white people,

okay,

so I'm not talking out of my ass here.

I know you're evangelizing and you're trying to convince all of them,

but I don't even think you're going to succeed in convincing white people to agree with you.

I mean, there is a growing sentiment within a lot of politics, right?

But to name that sentiment, you have the Nick Fuentes thing, and most of them are not fully white most of them are Mexican or they're

Latino yeah but necessarily like I wouldn't say they're the only I think you're

confusing like Groypers aren't necessarily that the only faction within that sphere

right you also have um Americans. The Groypers

are the only ones... They're the only ones growing at a sufficient

rate to where

you can say this phenomenon is taken hold.

But serious

white nationalism, I don't think, is

winning at all.

A more kind of ironic one, which is like brown self-hatred, is taking root.

I agree with that.

Yeah, that is a thing, right?

But would you not deny, like, due to the extreme conditions, right, within the country,

and especially the H1D discourse, like a law of the right wing has sort of become more

racialized, at least even amongst some people.

I don't even see that as racial.

I see that as,. I see that as

that's a lot of people,

black Americans,

like black Americans,

people that are more working class

and committed to this country are upset

that foreign labor is coming and being imported at their class and committed to this country are upset that

foreign labor is coming and being

imported at their expense

and that's not necessarily

I mean like black Americans

like genetically

I did studies into this like they have

their dental records

go back to the founding fathers because

there was a lot of mixing that happened.

So, I mean, like, they sort of have a stake in the country,

at least genetically speaking, like 80% of them

on average.

There's natives.

There's Latinos even that are here.

Yeah, but Latinos have an entirely different culture compared to like the base of what America is.

That's why I beg the difference.

When I go to Texas and when I go to the southwest, I see a fusion

and a mixing

of cultures.

Again, it's the geographic

proximity thing. It's totally

normal.

I would say it's totally normal um i would say it's it's a hard argument to make and i don't want to come up here an insults or anything like that so i'll just put it no you can you can insult the way i'm an i'm an

arab son of of Lebanese immigrants

and what can I say?

I mean, I am what I am.

I have no

I don't rest on the laurels

of my ancestry.

I don't need to. I rest on the laurels

of what I am and what I do, and I'm nothing else but that.

I am nothing else but what I am and what I do.

That's it.

I don't have an aristocratic pedigree you know of sir willington

with a white powdered head

or something all i am is

what i do that's it

yeah i would just

say you know best of luck

to you i i just consider an american

to what the founding

fathers decreed within this country.

And I don't think I can really convince

you otherwise, so it's kind of a pointless debate

in the first place. I mean, I've thought

for example, at a point in my life, I thought about

me moving back, I don't know what that means. Moving back.

Going to live in Lebanon or something.

You want to, like, fight Israel.

Being with my co-eth-eth...

What's that one...

What's that one... I'll tell you the problem. I go to Lebanon,

which I have gone and

don't me

wrong I love

the people

there

they're great

it's a

great country

but

I don't have

the culture

I don't

it's just

the truth

I was born and raised here, and this is all I know. I go over there. I'm a foreigner. I'm a foreigner in Lebanon. I am functionally a foreigner. I don't even speak the language.

And all the people that I know are here and that I've met and that I've been socialized with are here.

So why would I go just because it's like the episode of SpongeBob where Squidward went and all the people

looked like him who looked like Squidward

Squidward didn't even get along with those people

he wanted to go back to the crusty crab with Patrick and SpongeBob

even though they're not squids

I just think like SpongeBob, even though they're not squids.

I just think, like, if you look at all the racial rights, like, in L.A. and, like, BLM,

like, those were representations of, like,

contradiction within, like, the American

mythos, right? Due to the

confliction of identity,

like the various groups are fighting themselves

within the country because we don't know what an American is.

I think it's more complicated

than, or not even more complicated.

I just think it's different from that.

I think that, first of all,

race riots have been a thing in history.

I don't know if BLM and the Mexican riots in L.A. were that?

They were literally Mexicans all over social media

claiming that they have a claim to the United States

and that it's greater Mexico.

Like, if that's not ethnic or even...

I don't...

I don't... I don't... Yeah, I don't, but I wouldn't say that's a, that's a racial

conflict, I would say, it is, come on.

It's more, it's more, it's more, it's more of a national, well, it's a few things.

It's more of a national sentiment., it's a few things. It's more of a national sentiment.

What is the nation, then?

What is a nation?

I agree it's a result of confusion over American identity, for sure.

I mean, it's parallel to that.

I can agree with that.

But what I would say basically is that defining what America is as a nation has to take into account the people already here objectively that form the nation.

And I don't think...

Look, I'm just going to say, I'm going to simplify it.

The solution is communism.

And the solution is communism for the very simple reason

that it's the only thing

that's going to establish as a principle committing to the land and committing to the people here. The absence of this commitment and the dominance of the capitalist principle leads to a situation where we don't effectively have a national consciousness at all within this country or a unified national consciousness.

Because take California, for example, in the conflicts there.

What is the crux of the conflict?

The crux of the conflict is the importation of cheap labor to do farm work.

Yeah, but it displaces the native ethnic Americans.

And like I said, how do you deal with this if the people who are here weren't intended to be here by the Founding Fathers?

Like, how do you handle that, right?

Regardless of what the founding fathers wanted, there needs to be instituted a commitment to the land and to the people.

Commitment is square one of national existence and a national principle.

Um... and a national principle. You know, for as long as

the flows of population

and the relationships between people

within this country are purely defined by money,

there is no principle of social harmony,

whether national or otherwise, that will be possible.

People will continue to be divided according to many different tribes and many different things

yeah if there's a piece of paper right and there's a document right for the basis of the country

that clearly quantifies one American is.

I mean, then that's that.

It's concrete.

Like, that is what the founding fathers want to be.

A piece of paper isn't concrete.

You don't believe that.

If you believe that, then you would believe that paper citizenship is what makes an American.

You don't believe that.

So a piece of paper... No... It's like the founding documents,

like the basis of what the country is,

like what they intended,

or which is for the country.

The country is a material reality.

It's not a document.

It's a fact of existence.

It's a fact of how people live how they eat how they reproduce themselves how they reproduce biologically how they form communities how they transmit values those are living tendencies and principles. They're not...

Yeah, the reality was that people came here, you know, the people living here beforehand didn't have a country. And then those settlers killed them, conquered them, and made a country that exists in this day, and that

was made for those people.

No, what happened

was that people were pursuing

land grabs to make a quick profit,

and there was no national

intentions at all.

It was an individual intention. And afterwards, it was said that this is a new nation. But the killing of the natives and all, this was all a consequence of individual pursuit of profit

and in fact we would have been better and all those people that went west doing that all got fucked over themselves.

So they went and killed the natives to get the quick profit.

And then bigger fish came and fucked them.

And that's the whole story of the Wild West, by the way.

That's the whole story of how Wild West, by the way. That's the whole story of how the West

ended. And all the Western movies are about it. But in any case,

it would have been better instead of genocide for us to have instituted a principle a civilizational principle of developing the land in common productively and um you know in ways that could be done with the natives you know we would

have been better off for it we wouldn't have gotten screwed in the way we ended up

getting but I digress. We're not we.

I don't want to say we so strongly.

Huh?

So how were the American screwed?

No, we killed. Like, I wouldn't even necessarily,

it was necessarily a genocide.

Of course they were screwed. Americans were screwed because

they had, all the land that they had

was taken from them.

And they became slaves

themselves.

They became wage slaves. So that's how

they got screwed.

I mean,

I wouldn't necessarily agree with agree with that sure there was a governance form

that you know would tax some property taxes it's a pain in the ass right it's not just property

taxes we're talking dispossession like when rockefeller found oil under the land

and how much people he evacuated and kicked out

and how much dirty business was going on with that

prospecting shit

and that's the tip of the iceberg obviously but

the winners

of the westward expansion

wasn't the American people.

But I mean,

there was suffering, but the country

that was built afterwards was beautiful.

It was beautiful for most of the

ethnic Americans. You know what America was beautiful

in the consciousness of 99% of people? It was beautiful

in the 50s when

we were more or less

had like

pressure from the Soviet Union to adopt social we more or less had like pressure

from the Soviet Union to adopt

socialistic policies

I would disagree

because I think that was

when the nuclear family came around

which kind of destroyed the multi-generational

family unit that was born of the GI Bill and it was born of the New Deal came around, which kind of destroyed the multi-generational family units.

That was born of the GI Bill, and it was born of the New Deal, and it was born of all these things that had to happen because of pressure from the USSR.

And as soon as that pressure was taken off, it all went to the wind.

I just disagree with that.

And also, I would just say, right, the 50s were a horrible time.

It was very chaotic.

And it was when the nuclear family became

proliferated in the West.

So when was America beautiful?

The multi-generational family structure, which

maintained the country. When was America

beautiful then?

I would say

its peak was around between the

1800s around that time.

It was really the peak around American time.

What?

The middle or the early or the late?

The middle to late.

So the Civil War?

To some

the post-Civil War as well.

So Reconstruction.

Yeah, and I would say the last chance we really had to really fix this country was during the Civil War.

Afterwards, we were kind of fucked.

Like, that was our moment in America where we made a decision as a nation and chose our path, which was pretty shit in general but we did

choose it. So at no point were we beautiful.

We were always fucked.

I mean like the Civil War was

our last chance to really save the country

but after that yeah from there kind of went

from shit.

So I just, we got to end it there because we've gone on too late, but I don't know.

I mean, yeah, yeah, and that's fine.

I hope I didn't take up too much of your time.

I was waiting very patiently, so.

All right, no problem.

So we'll just end it there, you know, I, i don't think you see it's a utopia i mean

america is what it is we can't go back to the past and i don't even know where we would go back

and we got to take responsibility you You know what's funny?

Not a single Groyper came on

this whole space.

Not a single one.

That's fascinating.

Anyway, guys,

for the purposes of the algorithm,

I'm going to be removing the post

from my

timeline. It's not even recorded on X, but kick.com slash infrared

is where you can um is where you can uh...

is where you can uh... watch the

video Thank you. All right.

So. all right we're wrapping it up

says one person's requesting to speak i can't see who it is who's requesting to speak

oh boy let me speak. I can't see who it is. Who's requesting this week?

Oh boy.

Let me invite someone to co-host.

Maybe they can see. Urban genius. I'll give you a really quick chance. Go ahead. Very quickly.

Very quickly, go ahead.

What? Unmute yourself.

Unmute yourself. Go ahead. go ahead how you doing my brother um

we've got a lot of time so we got to make you go fast

you got a brother.

Sālak, we'll be Muslim

2 and we're not Muslim

al-A al-Aid al-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-oha-a-a-a-oha-a-oh.

Well, I wanted to ask, first of all,

um, you know,

there's some aspects of communism that, you know, I can concede to. But my problem with the ACP movement and with communism in general is I don't know how it's still relevant today because most of the

benefits that, you know, like Carl Marx wrote and his book

and all that, we already see today. So people have, people have social nets that protect you

if you're unemployed, if you get injured at work

and then

oh no the space ended oh no

fuck

it ended it was a glitch

what can I say

uh ended. It was a glitch. What can I say? You know, You know, I'm have I been muted this entire fucking time?

I'm about to end

the stream so if you're gonna drop subs speak now forever hold your piece

I'm just saying you know not to crab it up in here.

Not to crab it up.

Anyway, guys, why is the mod doing that?

Why is it fucking doing that?

Everything I'm seeing on stream labs is like a mod removed mod deleted what is going on is that kick

oh it's mr. beast's kick mr. beast took over kick

removes the R word

Can I change my settings?

Band words

I don't have a lot of band words

So I don't know how to change the settings man settings, man.

No, no, I'm not the one who's banning these words.

It must be a sight-wide thing. No, no, no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no no they've banned the they've banned the word redneck

it's fucking crazy

no

no

no no No, no,

Neen, Neen

Neen

Yeah,

look at this.

46% of farmers

have profitability.

I knew it i knew i was right

i just want to let you know No! The hair is... Your glasses are still for you.

I mean you like...

Like a weird!

You've got my life!

I hate you!

Anyway...

Yo, I'm so funny.

Chris, thank you so much, bro.

Appreciate you.

Appreciate you.

Oh, AI moderation.

All right.

Okay, um...

All right. Free speech is back.

He speech is back.

Oh, but you still can't say slurs.

Like, crack.

Like Graham. like Graham like Graham so

me

knee

name Neen, na, Ninn, Ninn, Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Ninnin,

Nene,

Nene,

Neen,

All right, y'all.

All right, y'all.

All right, y'all, we're just going to have to build back better on Sunday. You know, dunan nan nan nan ninnan ninni n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n Dun-na-na-na-na-na-na-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n-n- POMPEO POMPEO POMPECED

POTKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK and so, you know, Jock, Jock, Jop. Uh, uh, Buh,

uh, Bhopi,

uh, and uh...

I'm

Bhopi

Bhopi Bhop I'm

No

I'm Number eight No Immediately

Immediately evacuate immediately.

The self-destruction system has been activated.

This island will self-destruct in 10 ten minutes all the personnel must evacuate immediately all the personnel congratulate immediately about how you're late, you know, and they're Monday, once Go September 28th

Daylight

The monsters have overtaiking the city I'm Yeah. I'm I'm a lot of the Thank you. I'm going to 208.