Politics DEBATE - ELON MUSK CRASHING OUT on TRUMP!

Everybody, uh Pardoner Pigeon, thank you, Diogenes.

What's going on guys?

I appreciate you.

I uh

What's going on, everybody?

I am not in a good mood today.

I'm not gonna, I'm gonna be an asshole today.

I'm not gonna be nice today in my confront the chairman's space.

I'm not in a good mood, but I have high energy.

You know how it goes.

I'm not in a good mood, but I have high energy.

And I don't have any patience for bullshit today.

I don't got any patience for yip-yappers and time wasters and bullshitters and dumb motherfuckers.

What the fuck is up, Saliber?

What's going on?

Anyway y'all.

We're gonna get into it.

I'm gonna start the space actually like now.

I'm gonna start it now.

By the way, everyone should congratulate me for having such an early stream.

What a miraculous thing!

Oh my god.

Fuck X.

It's such a piece of shit.

It's such a piece of shit.

Or BlueStacks is a piece of shit.

I didn't mean to click the live button on X.

Spaces, there we go.

American Communist Party Discussion QA

No, debate, debate, discussion, and Q and A.

Alright.

So we're starting the space.

Starting the space.

Uh the space has started, and we are actually going to be on the Twitter app.

And we're gonna be boosting it.

So let's boost the tweet, everybody.

Let's boost the tweet.

Okay, I'm gonna show you the tweet and we're gonna boost it.

I'm gonna have it up right here.

And it's gonna be right here.

And we're gonna boost it.

We're gonna boost this tweet so that and I'm gonna put it right here.

So people see it.

And I'm going to delete the tweet, by the way, when the space is over.

But we're going to keep the tweet on as long as the space is running.

Okay, so the space is here.

We have people pouring in.

So many people, by the way, so many people.

All 20 of these people.

Pouring in.

By the way, you guys don't have to join.

You can just stay in the stream and chill in the stream and watch eating your popcorn.

But let's boost this space to make sure a lot of people get in.

By the way, I do need someone to help co-host this space.

I am going to need a co-host because for some odd reason I cannot see on BlueStacks or whatever it is.

I can't see a lot of these bots who request to debate me.

I can't see a lot of them.

So I need someone to co-host, whoever can co-host.

Let me know.

Let me know.

Frotaz, what's going on?

So I want to first open this up by talking about something that I mentioned in the last stream, which is the Dark Elf, Curtis Yarvin, the Dark Elf.

I was talking about how I was aware of a conspiracy by the Dark Elf, Curtis Yarvin, and how he's been working with Peter Thiel and this entire strange network of dark, the intellectual dark web, quote unquote, of dark elves, and the.

It's like a Lord of the Rings fan club.

They want to destroy democracy, they say.

And Peter Thiel's involved, and all these Silicon Valley people are involved.

Now, I didn't know.

I still don't know, really.

I'm not going to make the assumption that Elon Musk is part of their faction.

I don't know.

I mean, I think he is.

Maybe I'm getting it wrong.

But I did say that there is this big conspiracy they're trying to do.

They think they're so slick, too.

He thinks he's like, oh, we're playing 16 chess and we're going to have the neo-reactionary, what is it, corporate oligarchy, and we're just going to have a CEO and everything will be privatized.

Anyway, they believe this, and they kind of LARP as these dark elves or these Lord of the Rings characters.

I don't know.

Anyway, these gentlemen, I said that the reason I don't ever panic about it or freak out about it or whatever.

And the reason is because I know they're going to fail.

They're not going to succeed in overthrowing the cathedral, actually.

It's not going to work.

They're not going to succeed.

This is basically a ruling class utopianism.

You know, there used to be something called utopian socialism, which almost always came from the bourgeoisie, by the way.

A lot of people know that.

It's in the 19th century.

You saw bourgeois utopian socialism.

All these rich guys who thought they had all the answers to all the problems of society.

Whatever.

So Curtis Yarvin doesn't think he's a utopian.

He thinks he's this realist.

He thinks he's this extremely realistic guy who has no illusions and he's not one of these hippie socialists or whatever.

So he's like, oh, I'm totally realistic.

I'm totally whatever.

So he thinks that just by being this quote-unquote realist.

That his utopianism is just going to work.

But it's not how it works, right?

So he's still a utopian.

He's still a utopian.

And Elon Musk is a utopia.

They're all utopia.

They're right-wing utopians, you know, so to speak.

And it was a colossal failure.

Elon Musk was trying to do something with the deficit.

And look, it's those old guys in the Senate and in Congress.

That's the cathedral.

It's the lobbies.

It's the corporate lobbies.

I don't care if you're Curtis Yarvin, and I don't care if you're a goddamn hippie who believes we should all be on organic farms with tie-dye shirts.

It doesn't really matter.

If what you want does not align with the monopoly capitalists that are actually in power, it doesn't matter.

You're just a utopian.

So all these interesting Silicon Valley creepy crawly people who have all these interesting ideas about eugenics and all this stuff that they say, that they present themselves is so interesting.

None of that.

It's the same thing as a guy with the tie-dye shirt saying that we all need a, you know.

Young Soviet, what's up?

It's the same thing, right?

Because at the end of the day, it's the crooked, sleazy, you know, evangelical, creepy, deeply entrenched dynasties of the monopoly capitalist class who are these just slimy Republicans and Democrats and Nancy Pelosi's and Chuck Schumer's and Lindsey Graham's.

Those are the people running the goddamn show.

And, you know, it's even Trump bows before them.

Trump gets on his knees and he bows before these people.

And he tries to have some wiggle room to be different as much as he can, but there's only so much he can do, you know.

And at the end of the day, you know, these are the people that are in charge.

And I think this confirms that the Silicon Valley, you know, dark elves are definitely not in charge, so to speak.

They're not in charge.

They're not the ones that ever held power.

And Yarvin and all these, and Musk, I mean, Musk himself, he's like, look, I've accepted capitalism.

I've accepted the system.

This is irrationalized.

And that's how it is.

That's how every revolution starts, by the way.

You just start to realize the system is fucking irrational, even if you're a total sellout.

Who accepts all the premises of our current system.

You're a total fucking sellout who accepts all that, right?

It doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter because even then it's not rational.

See, the you know what the number one dissidents in the Soviet system were?

The number one dissidents were not the retards running around going, We want freedom, we want liberalism.

No, no, the number one dissidents were the people who were like, Hey, look,

Like I'm a communist, I totally long live Brezhnev, this is great, but you know, this is it's kinda fucking stupid how we're doing this, we we kinda need to reform it a little bit, maybe with the planning, maybe add some computers to the mix.

These people were very dangerous, this the they were regarded as very dangerous by the revisionist clique that eventually took over the Soviet Union because

You know, it just exposes and reveals the contradictions of a system so blatantly and so openly, right?

That's what's going on in the USA.

Elon Musk is not proposing socialism, he's not proposing a communist order of things, he's not saying we need to, you know, we need to have a radical reform of the system.

He's just saying, hey, let's try to cut the deficit because this is untenable.

It's just going to spiral out of control until we default.

This is irrational.

And he's out of there.

You know, it's really that simple.

You know, it could be a total sellout and shill of the system.

But as long as you are not because the whole thing, this is also a lot of leftists get this wrong.

They get it very, very wrong.

Okay.

Alignment with the system has absolutely nothing to do with ideology.

You can have the ideology of the system one for one.

But that's not what matters.

What matters is who what the pecking, it's all authority.

Whose ass are you kissing?

Right?

It's a pecking order.

It's authority.

You sit down, you shut the fuck up, you do what Lindsey Graham tells you to do.

That's it.

It doesn't matter your values.

Nobody gives a shit about that.

They just care about are you going to get in line and do what you're told?

Right?

Elon Musk can call himself a capitalist.

a crapalist.

He can call himself a libertarian, whatever.

He can call himself anything he fucking wants.

But if you don't fall in line and just take orders directly, you may as well be a goddamn Osama bin Laden.

You may as well be the goddamn epitome of an enemy of the system for a lot of people, right?

So this is kind of how it works.

It has nothing to do with ideology.

The system definitely promotes certain ideologies in the universities and in media.

That's absolutely true.

But it's all about, it's a very brutal hierarchy of authority.

You just follow what you do what you're told.

You're not supposed to question it.

You know, ideologists are very dangerous, whatever they are, because ideologists do question things.

They want their ideology to be internally consistent in some kind of way.

So that's going to give them the audacity to sometimes challenge things and ask questions, right?

And that is the problem with any kind of real order that involves authority, right?

If you're a pure ideologist, you are at odds with authority, right?

Because authority is not premised upon ideology, and that's just the truth.

Amila with the 10, what's up?

Authority is not premised upon ideology.

Authority has its own logic and its own structure.

Absolutely, it does.

It's a beast of its own.

It's not about your fucking opinion.

Oh, I have.

Congratulate.

You know, you could be Drew Pavloo.

And go to the White House and literally carry a sign of the CIA and say, I worship the CIA, I love the CIA, all this kind of stuff that these people say.

That but that that that's not okay.

I mean, so what?

Like, you're not really let in until you actually start.

Knowing that you know, following orders.

That's really what it is.

You just have to do what you're told.

They don't really care how you justify it in your stupid fucking head.

You know?

Anyway, I'm going to start bringing people up, but I just wanted to say this is a vindication, I think, unless Peter Thiel and Yarvin are on the opposite side of the fence as far as Musk is concerned.

Total vindication of what I said: that Yarvin can be a dark elf and whatever, but at the end of the day, they're not going to succeed.

That's how sad, by the way, I used to think that there's this big conspiracy.

Look, it's so sad, our current historical predicament.

The sad thing is that, no, it's just really boring Wall Street capitalists who are in charge.

The Silicon Valley guys are not in charge, right?

They have all these wacky, warped ideas, and they're pretty ugly ideas, frankly.

They have these eugenic, whatever.

But, you know, at the end of the day, the people in charge, that's Wall Street.

That's the.

Old, boring, traditional global capitalist class, you know, the oil barons, all these kind of people, they're still firmly in the driver's seat.

This is the Nancien regime, okay?

This is like, you know, the Silicon Valley guys, they're a lot like the nobility right before the French Revolution who were pushing for reforms.

They're like, we're an up-and-coming new nobility.

We're, and, and we think there's this, and like, they're not, they're not going to be the subject of the revolution, right?

The subject of the revolution is going to be the sans-coulot, if I'm saying that correctly, uh, or the, you know, the small merchant in the um the town or the peasant in the countryside, really.

That's the subject of the revolution.

These guys who are these nobles that are these dark elf, disgruntled nobles, they're not going to ever be able to affect any kind of change in the system for better or for worse.

They won't affect change in the system.

The people that will affect change of any kind.

will always be the revolutionary masses.

That is a law of history.

It's always been the truth.

It can start at the top.

Often it does start at the top.

I'll concede that.

But it's never carried through

Without the revolutionary masses.

Every revolution in history, it's all the same.

So, this whole so Yarvin, he's not a scary guy.

The New Yorker and New York Times, they try to make him out to be this really scary, terrifying guy.

He's not scary at all.

He's a LARPer.

He's not going to be able to do anything.

All his plans will amount to nothing.

Because he has this retarded worldview, frankly, where he says that he's a dark elf and the MAGA and other workers, they're all hobbits.

And they're just these passive potato-eating hobbits.

And he has no comprehension of how revolutions, or at least systemic changes of any kind, work.

At the end of the day, Yarvin is going to be dancing with Kamala Harris and Nancy Pelosi.

He will have to bow to the system.

They all have to bow to the system.

Lindsey Graham, they're all getting on their knees.

They're bowing to these really boring elites that have ruled us for decades and decades.

And, of course, the Zionist state of so-called Israel, right?

So, look, that's really what's going on.

Big pharma and all these sleazy dirtbag, whatever companies.

There's a fly in my vicinity.

Anyway, I'm going to bring on.

People

There's a French gentleman who's from the PCF.

I'll bring on this French gentleman.

What's going on, Jan?

What's going on?

I'll bring on Sewell for a co-host.

He's a good co-host.

Jan, go ahead and speak.

Go ahead, Jan.

Go ahead and speak.

Alright, I think Yan is eating a baguette and he can't speak.

So Yan, thanks for wasting our fucking time.

Thanks for truly being useless.

Casey, please come on and speak.

Go ahead, Casey, go ahead and speak.

Oh.

Hello.

Hey.

Um so I'm coming from

Yeah, I don't do much else, thanks.

Um

So I'm I'm just coming from Australia.

I just thought I wanted to get a chance to stop in here and just ask some questions.

Because I do I do have I do believe that the ACP

um seems best place uh to try and capitalize on like marga disenchantment in the future as it's increasing.

Um

So I I just want to ask a couple of questions 'cause I'm on the I'm on the ACP website right now.

Um so the uh the the program here it's um

It's not too bad, but I'm I'm wondering um

Is there like

Like an actual sort of

Programme for Revolution itself.

Um

That's impossible.

I mean, you can't have a program for objective laws of history.

We anticipate revolution and we want to be at the leadership of such a thing, but you don't have a program that says we want revolution.

Also, look, the whole point of spreading revolutionary consciousness is giving people a reason.

to comprehend the necessity of revolution.

It's not to tell them revolution is good for its own sake, because it's not good for its own sake.

There is a reason it's historically necessary.

So revolutionary consciousness derives from the concrete necessity of revolution.

But that's not revolution for its own sake.

This is also why we don't put in our program class struggle, because that's a given.

A class struggle is not it's not being waged for this is the content of class struggle.

These are the things that that that the working class will rally around in contradistinction to the capitalist class.

So

It's a form and content confusion a lot of people have, where we're we're not just directly advertising um, you know, the the the the form, I guess, directly, when such a form is determined objectively and we are just giving it content in our own way.

Yeah, I've only recently heard about this form and content stuff.

I haven't read Heidegger that I've been reading.

I mean, look, you don't need to read anything.

It's just what I'm trying to say is that you don't need to push for revolution.

You just need to stand your ground and revolutionary principles will make themselves evident through the course of struggle itself.

But there has to be a reason.

There has to be a material necessity that endens that.

And that has to have political content.

It can't just be LARPing and saying, I want revolution because it's cool or I like the form of revolutions.

Because then that is no longer revolutionary, right?

The form of a revolution, you're aestheticizing it.

Where's the content?

What is it for?

What's the context?

What's the concrete circumstances?

So, you know, this is really where we're coming from with that.

I I have I have heard the uh I've I've heard the critique from even people on the ultra left who say that like uh uh there are a lot of modern modern um sort of communist leftists who try and um deify the Russian Revolution.

They sort of just wanna they they want a repeat of that you know violent struggle.

Um well I mean it definitely definitely uphold that revolution as the most consequential and important one of the last century at least.

Yeah.

Um a another question.

So it says like

Ending mass immigration and modern so we have one question at a time, you know, and and and and that first question was.

You know, um I I don't know.

Suo, besides this person who already agrees with us, 'cause their name is Islam Stalinism, and let's give the French guy a chance to finish their baguette and speak.

Go ahead, Jan, go ahead and unmute yourself.

Uh I think there's a wignat right after this guy that you might want to talk with.

Okay, well well bring them on and and Jan can finish uh chomping on their croissant and learn how to unmute themselves.

Go ahead and bring that gentleman up.

Hello?

Oh, it's an Australian.

Great.

Doomernas, what's going on?

We spoke before.

I thought we've gone over this.

I'm not an Australian.

Okay, if we spoke before, then you're out.

Okay.

And second of all, you always open in an Australian-sounding way.

So, you know, we're not going to have this thing where we just have regulars, you know, who just for its own sake.

Anyway, Sewell, who else is requesting who has not done so?

There's this guy with like a fat white guy as a profile picture with three followers, probably alt.

Go ahead, bring him on.

Go ahead and bring him on.

Mr.

National, go ahead, Mr.

National.

Hello.

Hey, I just became aware of your channel or your Twitter, and I found some things very interesting.

You're talking about Elon Musk, and correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but basically he's finding out there isn't a will to get rid of the deficit.

So it seems like what you were saying, and it was this really interesting point I've never thought of, that there isn't any, there's no will, even amongst the right, to get rid of the deficit because that debt extends power for the banking system.

So like the debt is at the point is to be in debt because it keeps these people in power.

And he's kind of finding that out the hardware.

So what's your question?

Yeah, the question is this.

What do you think of the Federal Reserve banking system?

We want to get rid of it and replace it with a national bank.

So how do you keep the national bank from not doing the same thing that the Federal Reserve is?

Because it's directly state-owned and it has no central bank independence and only the state can create credit directly.

Just like China's.

Cool, thanks.

For sure.

For sure.

Uh Sewell, who else do we have?

And we're just having just jo just the the the the Turkish Stalinist, that's it.

Could they they said their name is in Mumbai.

Are they Turkish really?

Let's bring them up.

Let's see.

I don't know.

I'll give you a chance to speak, but if you if if what you say is Haas, I really like you and agree with you, then you're getting banned forever.

So please speak carefully.

My question is is is there any part of this?

So that's it.

That's exactly it.

Your m your mic is not working, dude.

Oh.

It's still not working.

So, this guy's just farting.

He's just farting, you know.

I just removed him.

Do we have anyone else requesting?

We literally have no one else requesting right now.

Wow, that's fascinating.

That's fascinating.

A lot of people

A lot of people, they don't want to request.

They have a lot of opinions about ACP.

I'm the chairman of ACP, but they won't request because ACP did this and that, and ACP is this and that.

And hello, the chairman is here.

I guess the chairman's views don't matter.

Only some random person who's on the periphery, that's what matters, right?

And by the way, let's hold down to the same standard.

Every single person who's affiliated with so-called leftist Twitter is responsible for a collective organization called Shitlib Incorporated.

And everyone has to be responsible for what everyone who's even one degree of separation away says.

And they're not organized, so they don't have that burden because they don't have an organization.

So, of course, they're not responsible for anything.

And if you are responsible for things, you have to be absolutely pure, absolutely pure, and there has to be absolute uniformity across the board.

And I can't understand how people are so retarded that they buy into this and they actually find that compelling and convincing.

I don't know.

Psyop, go ahead.

You have a frog in your profile picture.

Hello?

Yeah!

Hey, what's up?

My question for you is why why don't you support capitalism if capitalism is actually revolutionary?

When did I say it's revolutionary?

Well, I don't know if you did necessarily, but if you're a Marxist, don't you believe that capitalism is revolutionary?

Yeah, like three hundred years ago.

What you don't believe that anymore?

It's n it's it it is no longer it has not been true for a very long time.

It has not been true since Lenin wrote Imperialism.

If not before then.

So so you're saying capitalism is no longer revolutionary?

It has not been for centuries.

Well then then how did George Soros do all those color revolutions?

Those the an overthrow of state is not historically revolutionary, you know, in the Marxist sense.

Actually, the opposite can often be true.

You know, sometimes the destruction of state infrastructure retards and rolls back advances in the forces of production.

And all it does is it devastates the means of production and the forces of production and serves to plunder and destroy nations and just completely destroy them.

So, you know, yeah, look at Libya, for example.

So that's not revolutionary in the Marxist sense.

Revolutionary in the Marxist sense takes more than just obliterating the order, you know, the normal order of life.

Okay, a revolution has to actually qualitatively advance history into a next stage.

George Soros did not do that.

Any of these color revolutions he's ever bankrolled did not advance history to a higher stage or more developed qualitatively stage.

It retarded nations and countries compared to where they were before, actually.

Well, I disagree.

I think that uh what he did was he changes the regime.

He puts in the people who he wants to do and I think you want to do the same thing.

And I don't know how you define it.

What the hell are you talking about, sir?

I want to do what George Soros does.

Well, why don't you give me the fucking money first?

Well, I thought you were against capitalism, but capitalism is the most revolutionary thing that there is, so I don't understand what you're saying.

The whole spiel that I went on for 45 seconds, was that a waste of my breath and a waste of my time?

You just didn't.

Well, I don't even know how you define revolutionary.

I don't know either, sir.

I don't know either.

I just defined it for you.

I defined it as taking history into a qualitatively more advanced stage.

Okay.

Which means...

Taking history to a more which means endangering political and economic relationships and systems that qualitatively outmode and surpass previous ones by virtue of their logic and their development versus regressing into shit that already existed into the past, sir.

Do you understand the distinction?

I think that like I don't s see how you can like if you said give me the money so I can do my revolution then doesn't that make you a capitalist?

Like, if you say that, then you should go out and be a capitalist and go make a bunch of money.

I'd love to.

Give me the capital to do it.

I'd love to make a lot of money.

I'd absolutely love to make a lot of money and bankroll this party and grow its but that's not how it works.

That's not how it works.

'Cause the only way you can actually grow a party is by organizing among the working masses, and that's how it actually works.

Or what if you find a person who is powerful, or maybe they're a banker, and they have like millions and millions of dollars?

What's in it for them?

Well,

I mean that's why it doesn't happen, 'cause there's nothing in it for them.

That's why we don't get it.

This is how capitalism works.

If you start a business, you go out, get funding, you gotta like give your elevator pitch or whatever, and go on the shark tank.

Except money's fake.

Except we don't even have real money.

So what are you talking about?

You know?

Okay, we have actors who we have two groipers who are requesting.

I think this this conversation is is pretty much done.

I think it's done too.

I think this guy is really confused.

Go ahead, we're gonna bring on Hoplite, who's a groiper, who has the frog.

One at a time.

Bring on the frog one.

Go ahead.

Hey, what's going on, Haz?

Thanks for having me.

Yeah.

Great space.

I just wanted to say this goofy guy here, Kyle Langford, is not a groiper.

He doesn't represent us.

He's a gay faggot trying to dox people, do all kinds of crazy shit.

Just wanted to put that out.

We're just airing out drama that I don't give a fuck about.

Thank you for nothing.

A V, let's go ahead.

Or AV.

Looks like he already agrees with me.

Who's the Kyle?

He left, the governor of California.

I don't know what's going on.

I don't know what's going on.

Two people just left.

Go ahead, A.V.

Hello, Comrade Haas.

I would like to quickly extend my greetings.

So before I can you hear me?

Okay.

Yeah, I can hear you.

Right.

I'm joining the space for the first time, so lest I waste our time.

I was wondering if you'd be willing to entertain discussions, or is this just a space for confrontations?

This is just a space for confrontations or questions.

Right, right.

But if you want to propose something quickly, if you have an interesting thing you want me to talk about at length and lecture, I can do it.

But you have to be quick about presenting it.

So please, very quickly.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

So, Comrade, I'm from India, and I was just wondering where do you place the country that I come from in your scheme of things and the recent developments in Asia and BRICS and multipolarity?

Because the way I look at BRICS right now is basically that it's like a sabotaging party, right?

Like there's China, there's Russia, and all these countries.

They seem to be in a kind of unaison when it comes to a lot of their positions.

But there's India, which is an adoration.

So, is your question just my views on India?

Not really.

The question is: how do you view India in the grand scheme of things going through?

Okay, sure, I can answer that.

I think that I have not properly studied India at all.

So, I'm very ignorant about India.

I don't know a lot about it, actually.

But I do know a little bit that it's ripe for revolutionary conditions, it seems like, with the farmers' protests that happened a few years back.

So, I think that there's a lot of interesting things India.

It's probably um

Historically bound for in terms of changes, major, major changes politically.

But there lacks the proper leadership, of course, right now.

But I I think that India and its current state and its and the current post colonial system that it has is definitely um

Incapable of um

India is not, in my estimation, in my limited view, it's not a real state.

Okay, it's the same thing as the British Raj, but there were some comprador classes that were brought in to take some of the cake, in addition to the forces of global colonial, you know, financial extraction.

So, in my estimation, this is India.

India is not properly unified state, and i i insofar as it is within BRICS.

I think it definitely has sabotaged the the goals of Russia and China and so on, and I think it will never be loyal to the cause of multi-polarity.

India has always been friendly with Russia, that's true, but is India will India sacrifice its relationships with the West for Russia?

I doubt it.

And I think that's where it's decided, because I think when you look at it, Russia is a very important country because for a lot of reasons, obviously.

The Indo-Pacific region is half of the entire world, okay?

And the U.S.

cares way more about encircling China than it does destroying Russia.

It cares about destroying Russia a lot, don't get me wrong.

But China is definitely more on the top of its list of priorities.

And India is a decisive piece of the strategy of the U.S.

to encircle and destroy China.

Now, India, you know, Indians are not maybe they're not going to get on board with it, maybe they will, but but that's how the US and Britain sees it at least.

And the economic relationships are definitely there.

To make that plausible, to make that possible, right?

India's incorporation within the Anglo-Saxon world of international finance and capitalism, you know, probably will outweigh India's history of fraternal relations with Russia, I think.

But, you know, that's my limited appraisal and my my understanding.

But thanks for coming on and thanks for the question.

But uh in general I need to study India more.

Uh I don't know a lot about it.

So, um

We have uh five requests, Sewell, I can only see one.

Who are these other four people?

All right.

Again, we've got the Australian Wid Wignat.

Then we've got a Groiper.

Do you want that guy up?

Which Groiper?

Char as enabled.

Sure, bring bring we're we'll bring up for debates.

Bring him up.

Go ahead and bring them up.

Go ahead.

Oh, hi, how's it going?

Um, I'm kind of uh oh, I'm a little lost of words.

Hi, Haas.

Um, how's it going?

I, I, it's just like, it's like, I don't, I don't even understand what that's like some NPC like what that was like some some that was like some Disney Pixar introduction.

Like, oh, I'm a little at a loss of words.

Hi, I mean, what is going on?

What are they putting in the food?

I don't know what this is.

It's a crisis.

Anyway, bring on the next person.

Alright, we have some Australian author guy, but he looks like uh I think that's the guy I already brought on, yeah.

Oh.

Does it?

Yeah, it is.

It definitely is.

Casey?

I think so, yeah.

It it doesn't show anyone else's speaker right now.

Okay, well, I mean, uh, we'll we'll well I I'll I'll have to speak, you know, and um until people muster the courage to join.

But, you know, the thing is, is that, uh, you know, l look, um

This Elon Musk and Trump thing, there's another possibility I didn't talk about yet, also, which is what if it's staged?

What if there's so much heat on Elon Musk right now and on Trump as well that they're doing this and it's all fake and it's staged to take the heat off?

Because you know what I want to see is I want to.

I asked ChatGBT and I asked Grok, they don't have answers.

What is Peter Thiel saying about this?

How is he chiming in?

Because.

The Musk-Trump relationship, I always thought that was a proxy for the Thiel-Trump relationship.

But so I found out a day or two ago, it was revealed that Elon Musk called Peter Thiel a sociopath.

Is there tension going on between Elon Musk and the Peter Thiel Dark Elf Alliance?

The Dark Elf people.

Um is something going on in uh

In Middle Earth, so to speak.

Is Elon Musk a dark elf or is he something else?

Is he some kind of.

Um, some kind of orc, you know, what's going on?

We don't know.

I would like to know that.

It would give me a way better idea of what's going on.

And also, look, if Teal, if this does not, you know, Trump just had a huge agreement with Palantir in Silicon Valley, so.

If this if i something tells me this could be fake and it could be staged.

I don't know actually.

I don't know, but we should always entertain that possibility.

But at the same time, what Musk said is pretty remarkable, it's pretty incredible.

He said that the Epstein books that Trump was in the Epstein black books or whatever, and that's why they weren't released, the notebooks, the the files.

I I you know, look, I I don't know why they would fake that because you know, Musk is helping delegitimize the regime.

He's like, he's going, he's fully crashing out, firing everything.

He's launching every everything that he could possibly do to sow distrust in the current administration.

He's doing it, you know.

And I don't know how staged that could possibly be.

And it's a really interesting.

I think a lot of people are underestimating how fucking big this is.

Because, you know, for the longest time, the whole right was united.

The ones that are in power.

So, X was an apparatus of the Trump campaign in a lot of ways.

I mean, the content we were seeing on X, the nature of the discourse here reflected that.

Elon Musk has gone rogue.

X is still just as important as it's ever been.

Nobody uses Truth Social.

So, what's going to happen?

How is this?

Okay, there's a guy named the Knicker.

We're going to bring them on.

This is another Groiper, I believe.

Go ahead.

Go ahead.

Yo, yeah, so you deny the two fundamental aspects of geopolitics, and that's race and Jewish power.

And that's where you make your biggest mistake.

And I see why you do it, because you're like a five-foot-three manlet, brown man, let.

So it makes sense that we appreciate that.

I just wanted to tell you that the most fundamental prerequisites of geopolitics is race and Jewish power.

And I know so much about geopolitics and history, and just from you can tell from the tone of my voice.

So please, the Nicker, explain to us why race is fundamental to geopolitics.

When, for example, Arabic peoples who are extremely close to each other racially are always backstabbing each other and selling each other out at every turn.

Or why, you know, in East Asia, you have a huge conflict between China and Japan and South Korea, and how that's somehow immaterial.

And then the whole rift between the Republic of China and the People's Republic, even though they're literally identical and the same people.

But apparently, the only explanatory paradigm for understanding geopolitics is race, and it's the most important one.

Can you please explain that, the Nicker?

Go ahead, explain.

Crash out more, bro.

Go ahead, explain yourself.

You just said that the two fundamental principles of geopolitics are race and Jewish power.

Go ahead and elaborate.

Stalin's Pimple, what's up?

Go ahead and elaborate.

Are you are you speak English?

That's pretty self-explanatory.

Right, but why should anyone buy into that or accept that as true?

How can you be able to do it?

Because it's just an obvious reality of the world we live in.

How is it obvious?

You have eyes?

I do.

I absolutely have eyes.

How do you explain the geopolitical conflict in the former Soviet space according to race and Jewish power?

Just go ahead and break that down.

Well, because it's fundamentally about groups.

And groups are different.

Don't walk back and talk about fucking groups.

Talk about race and Jewish power, which is what you just said, and apply that to the conflict of Russia in the former Soviet space for Russia to basically reassert its sovereignty.

Go ahead and explain your geopolitical paradigm of how Russia is fucking in conflict with all of these other Slavs who are part of the same race, according to you, who are ass kissers of the European Union and the West.

And nobody hates, there's so much hatred, for example, between Czechs and Russians.

You look at Yugoslavia with the Croats and the Serbians.

They are racially identical.

They're the same people.

The Bosnians, they're all at each other's throats and they want to kill each other.

You just said the number one most important principle of geopolitics is Jewish power and race.

Apply that to the geopolitical conflict of the Yugoslav wars in the 1990s.

Go ahead, Nicker.

Go ahead and do that.

I I I I I can't really do it though, 'cause like I'm just like a pothead who just says shit and talks out of their ass and I just go ahead and do it.

What's what's wrong?

You can't 'cause you're a fucking moron.

You know, there you go.

He said nothing.

Uh Nathan, let's bring on Nathan.

Huzz, can you hear me?

Yeah.

Yeah, how you doing?

Um so I just wanted to ask you, like just quickly, I just have a question.

Apologies if you touched on this before, uh but what is the ACP stance or just um like your personal stance on Zora and Mandani or just like what is the relationship of just these like leftist figures?

Yeah, yeah.

So what is your the relationship particular of leftist but in a particularly municipal context surrounding like freezing rent and stuff like that?

I mean, I don't really care about his policies.

I think the guy is not I'm not very he he's not I don't think he's very interesting.

I think he's uh politically not very independent, not very strong.

Um I don't trust him at all.

I don't know much about him though, to be honest.

But he doesn't seem particularly authoritative or strong willed politically to me.

He kind of seems especially after the you know, I kinda he he kinda seems like a Zionist sellout, to be honest.

Yeah, that's fair.

I think that's a lot of the criticism that he has received.

But like around the policies of law, anyone can have great policies.

But remember this, you know, politics is about authority and it's about there's a pecking order and there's a, you know, it's really like brutal relations of power you're dealing with, right?

And it's like you can have all the policies in the world, but who are you flipping the middle finger to?

Who are you giving the middle finger to?

And who are you actually, you know, who are you actually taking orders from, right?

That's all that matters.

Who are you pissing off and flipping off and breaking ranks with?

And who are you giving, you know, acquiescence to?

You know, who are you giving obedience to?

So, you know, policy is of secondary consideration when it comes to the laws of political.

dynamics, so to speak.

Yeah, yeah, I I think I think that's fair.

So I guess my like like just a broader question of like what is the role of like the Marxist Leninists on a municipal level, would you say?

A municipal level.

Um

I don't know.

I mean, um

Uh it depends on uh the the municip municipality.

It's all going to be different.

It depends on the contradictions.

I don't think there's a general Marxist view on that.

I think that it it depends on the the contradictions within that municipality.

Right.

So do you feel like like obviously like Chris Halali is like the high belief of in in Vermont, for example, like do have you found that to be useful for the ACP?

Um Chris Solali on

Uh the the the the uh the high bailiff.

Yeah, I mean, yeah, he's in a position of authority.

That's great.

He's he's he oversees the police.

He um he he polices the police, so to speak.

That's wonderful.

That's great.

The High Bailiff.

Okay, yeah, that's fair.

That's all I wanted to touch on, but thanks.

For sure.

See you later.

Alright, we we got three of the same guys.

We got Char, who was the Disney guy, then we got A.

V, who's the Indian guy, and then we have Slime, who's a private with zero followers, I don't know.

Bring the creepy zero follower person.

All right.

Uh

Hello?

Yep.

Yep.

Uh Haas, I have a question uh regarding China.

Okay.

Uh so my question is uh you regard it as a Marxist Leninist nation and the problem that occurred in the Soviet Union w uh which was uh a l a lot of like uh the internal organs, uh the institutions, they uh became like anti-communists and and they didn't really uphold the same revolution that was started by Lenin.

Uh how would a China avoid the same issue?

Well, they're they're aware of the causes of the decline of the Soviet Union.

Yeah, but like what steps are they taking?

Like I've tried reading about it, but I didn't like I couldn't find anything regarding that.

Well, Xi Jinping is trying to promote the study of Marxism sincerely.

And they are actually doing that.

They're spending a lot of money and putting a lot of effort into actually making sure that the newer generations actually learn and study Marxism.

And, you know, it's also important to keep in mind that Xi Jinping is kind of a populist.

He has actually cracked down on corruption and he's opened opportunity for the rural masses.

And that's really what didn't happen in the Soviet Union.

There was just this stagnant corrupt bureaucracy that never gave way.

You know, it never gave in.

Yeah, I I I've uh like I've seen that like where he's uh uh uh like in the uh municipalities of China like a lot of the villagers they have like autonomy over their own like land and their own area and they make their own decisions but I don't think that's gonna successfully like defend like the dictatorship of the proletariat 'cause we actually have to be like ideologically well read.

Um they are.

I mean they study Marx.

They have entire university courses and they I mean they have everything for that.

Um institutionally they cultivate it.

It's just they're not so fanatical about it because they live and breathe it pretty seamlessly.

It's part of their society, you know?

It's a given to them, you know.

The rejection of Marxism is actually quite odd within China.

It's considered very strange to reject something that is just as a truism so indispensable to the very functioning of the machinery of state and even civil society.

Oh, I wasn't aware of that.

But also, a lot of the leaders that hold some of the highest positions in the Politburo, a lot of those guys, they're technocrats.

They're not really world-read Marxists.

If you were to question them on theory, all I could say is this: Xi Jinping is carrying China.

He really has saved China.

Yeah, I agree.

I agree with that.

So that's really what you have to keep in mind.

Xi Jinping is the key factor in China's political longevity right now.

Nothing is guaranteed and nothing is absolutely certain.

But right now, Xi Jinping is helping hold things up.

Uh yeah, I I have uh another question like uh regarding like suspension.

So Sewell, who else is uh requesting?

It's the same two people.

You have the Disney griper and the guy from India.

Disney Groper, what is that?

The guy who came up with like a Pixar and P C voice.

Okay, bring them up for a second chance.

Okay.

'Cause maybe they're gonna answer the question about the Yugoslav wars.

Hey, Deus Vault, you fucking Muslim calmie bitch.

Yeah.

You got something to say?

Come on.

Yeah, I do.

I wanna.

Hey, hey, hey, hey, by the way, by the way, I just wanted to say, I just wanted to say, we're gonna reclaim the Holy Land.

We're gonna reclaim the Holy Land, you fucking Muslim.

Come and I just gotta call your special needs teacher, and I shut the whole thing down.

That's how you said Deus Vault.

I just call your special needs teacher, and the crusades are called off.

That's all I have to do.

Okay?

So let's be humble here.

Let's be aware of what we're dealing with here, you know?

Anyway, who else, Sewell?

The guy from India and like one guy named Comrade Private, one follower.

Okay, bring the Comrade, I guess.

Hello.

Yeah.

Yep.

So yeah, so I just have a question regarding um like the potential war that's uh that's been brewing up with uh Russia and all the uh Europe for example like as well as uh fuck what's the other country.

Oh yeah, and uh UK.

Um so like do you guys actually believe like uh World War 3 is gonna happen?

And if it does how do you like think it would actually like come about, you know, like what do you think?

Um, I gotta check my crystal ball real quick.

Is that all right?

Yeah, sure, dude.

All right.

I gotta kind of do a seance.

Can I do my seance?

Yeah, sure.

Um

Um

I'm I'm getting the spirits.

Hold on.

Hold on.

Hold on.

I'm getting something.

Oh, shit.

Okay.

So, I consulted the spirit realm and, you know, I was talking to a lot of people and stuff.

And I had a lot of visions and I saw a lot of things.

And, you know, what I can tell you pretty confidently is that I don't fucking know, and no one else does.

So.

Um if the war were to break out, like with World War III or whatever, who would you like which side would you think was gonna come out winning?

Like

The revolutionary side.

Oh that's why that's asked.

Are you smoking pot?

No, why?

I'm just wondering.

No, I don't do any drugs having some tr uh tranquil spot alcohol or smoke weed or all right.

Well don't make sure you don't do pot.

Anyway, who else are we bringing on?

Um everyone's old person except for one.

I'm just gonna bring that one up.

Okay.

Aquatic Doge, Christian and Bio.

Huh.

Go ahead, Aquatic.

Aquatic dog, aquatic doge, you are a speaker, you can go ahead.

Okay, well they're no longer speaker.

There's three requesting, all three are old people.

Slime, comrade and Avie.

As long as they're new no, no, no, don't bring any old people.

Just anyone who's new.

Anyone who's new at this point.

I'll bring up the next new person that requests.

Okay, aquatic requests again.

Go ahead, Aquatic, your mic is off.

If you don't speak, I'm not going to give you a third chance, so just go ahead.

Okay.

Well, um, there seems to be no one who wants to confront the chairman.

That is, um that is uh beyond uh

That is beyond plausibility, frankly.

There's plenty of people who want to confront the chairman.

It's just that they're all too afraid to do it.

They want to do it, they just don't they don't have the courage.

And that's such a shame.

It's such a shame that so many lack the courage to confront the chairman, because the they definitely would like to confront me, because I always see people bitching and crying and whining about the party that I lead.

I help lead and they don't you know, they they they don't got smoke for the chairman.

Well, they do, but they're just not willing to confront him about it.

And the reason they're not willing to do that is because they rehearse it and they listen to themselves speak.

In the mirror, and they sound fucking stupid.

One new person requesting named Sario, I'm bringing them up.

All right.

Go ahead.

Uh ice.

Hi, can you guys hear me?

Yeah, we can hear you.

Okay, sorry.

I will teach the the headphones.

Sure.

So I'm not American, but I was wondering because in America in I'm from Colombia.

And here we used to have a very strong two-party system, akin to what happens in America.

And that only failed, and now we have several different political parties.

That only failed because the institutionality behind the

The two political parties still behind people didn't really believe in tent anymore.

And that was because they weren't able to really have the votes for it, right?

Do you believe that in the future it's possible for the institutionality of the Democratic and Republican Party to fail?

Because it seems very unlikely.

It seems that the rich people really have a lot of power.

Thanks for, you know, you answered it yourself.

So thank you for.

For that question.

Mr.

Resco go ahead.

Hello!

Mr.

Resco, your mic is off.

Oh, there we go.

Okay.

Um, greetings, house.

Hope you're doing well, my brother.

Um question um heads up it's not confrontational whatsoever really um this is just an an effort on my part to um

to seek some clarification.

Um since a two-part question.

Now there is this this this narrative um

that is prevalent from some factions, equating China's current political system with Germany's national socialist model.

And now my question was, could you

Analyzable individuals comparison.

Um, maybe look at the um, yeah, it's functional differences.

Right, okay, cool.

My reasoning exactly, but I just for the benefit of um the audience, and of course, you probably know this subject much more in depth than I do.

Um, but I just wanted you to maybe maybe highlight some of the um um differences, um, so to speak.

And the second, second, second part of the question, sorry, has is.

Yeah, well

We can talk politically or we can talk economically, okay?

Politically speaking okay, economically, I can talk economically.

I can do both, but we can just do economically only.

Okay, well Nazi Germany

Did not have a state bank.

They still had a central bank.

They still had central bank independence.

All right.

They didn't have.

universal state or public ownership of land.

The Nazis not only didn't privati they didn't nationalize anything except the uh airplane industry, they privatized a whole lot, right?

You look at the dominance of the state-owned enterprises within China, there's nothing like that you see in Nazi Germany.

Okay, so China, the state runs the economy in a way that was not the case in Nazi Germany.

In Nazi Germany, you had a cartel of pre-existing oligarchs, capitalist oligarchs, that coordinated together through the Nazi Party to dictate policy.

In China, there's no such thing.

The one who dictates policy in China is the Communist Party, nothing and no one else.

And it's that simple.

They don't acquiesce to the will of any forces within civil society.

However rich they are, however much money they have, it doesn't even matter because they don't really own it at the end of the day.

They have a way in China of making it seem like something is private, and it's actually not private.

And that's good, that's great.

So I can I mean I can go on.

The Chinese um economic system is based on developmentalism, peaceful developmentalism, right?

The German economic system was driven by war, uh arms manufacturing, okay, militarization.

That was the whole thing holding together the German economy with their um

With their uh the way they build out their economy is through propping up the military-industrial complex, right?

That's not how that's not what drives China's economy, right?

Okay, so politically it's very different.

Politically speaking, um China actually does still have a whole process democracy.

They didn't have that in Germany, okay?

China absolutely still has institutions which at the most local of levels make sure that the will of the people reaches the highest levels.

You didn't have this bizarre Frankenstein monster system where you had the Weimar parliament just dissolved with emergency acts, and then this weird, awkward system where you just had the Nazi Party.

China is a much more sophisticated system.

You have the Communist Party dictatorship that works hand in hand with the people's democracy.

It's what they call it.

And these are two institutions of state power that work together.

And Nazi Germany didn't have that, right?

You can go to the nationalities policy.

China has 55, I believe so, 55 recognized ethnic groups.

And they all have equal rights under the law.

They don't have racial laws.

They have no such thing, right?

So I can go on and on and on, but there's a fundamental difference.

There's no comparing the two.

The reason people compare the two is they lazily look at the fact that both were had relative, you know, both had markets and both were, you know, the Nazis claim to be very nationally oriented.

That's debatable.

because they were mainly oriented on uh conquering Eastern Europe on behalf of the global capitalist profiteers.

It's not very nationally oriented.

But there's a superficial thing people do is they look at it and they go, Huh, they're they're both not the same type of socialism as the Soviet Union, therefore they're the same and that's not true.

So that's my answer.

Thank you, Brother.

I appreciate that.

That's very insightful.

Now, the second part of the question, if you would allow me, is that okay?

Sure.

Right.

Um this is more pertaining to how you would um

um characterize um China's um um political economic model.

So specifically, uh to what extent can it be described as communist?

Um and and what defining characteristics support contradict this um classification?

Because obviously you hear again this nonsense about how China Communist state is just a state ruled ruled by a communist party, that's all it means.

Specifically, how does it um how does this implementation compare with theoretical communism?

I suppose is what I was writing.

Theoretical communism, there's two ways of looking at it.

One is the the process of historical development itself as scientifically expounded uh into consciousness and into um

Into a scientific consciousness.

So that is where you can see communism in motion, okay?

Which is the application of laws of history consciously to reality, right?

And responsivity to those laws of history consciously and scientifically.

So that's one way you can look at it.

It's a process of history that is comprehended and steered scientifically, so to speak.

Now, the second notion of communism with a lowercase C.

is uh a a stage of historical development, uh specifically the development of a mode of production.

So this is a stage of hi the historical development of a mode of production in which uh the the principle of that um to each according to their um

From each according to their ability and to each according to their need, right?

so to speak.

This is how it's been described historically, for example, in China.

And basically such a society would be based on a free association of producers,

There would be no um

No medium of exchange value.

And nothing really positively can be said about it, except.

uh uh how it would lack many of the characteristics of hi hitherto historical modes of production, like, for example, uh it would not have classes, there would be no state, so to speak.

But what it what that means is not very clear, by the way, because there's a distinction between central authority and state.

There's always a distinction between that, right?

But anyway, um

Such a communist uh society.

Um

would be far into the future as a consequence of transformations in the mode of production that outmode a lot of the things or characteristics of capitalist society.

So

Um, tho those are not the same though.

You know, if you say a country is communist, you don't necessarily mean communist in the sense of their mode of production is communist.

You mean it in the sense that they're they're led by communists and they're guided by communist principles.

Excellent.

Thank you for answering my questions.

It was very insightful.

Thank you for your time, Brother.

Uh one of the guys is an anti-communist, should I bring him up?

His name is Nick.

Go ahead, Nick, your speaker.

Yeah, so I just uh I had a question, uh if you don't mind.

So you were talking about how China is communist, correct?

Yeah.

Yes, that's correct.

So by what definition?

I'm just curious, because you said it was run by a Communist Party, but it doesn't really follow the traditional definitions uh given by Marx.

Some people argue, however, that Marx didn't use definitions, so I'm just curious what you're basing it off of.

Well, you I just I just said it, though.

I just literally went on a tangent describing it.

That there's a distinction between calling a country communist in the ordinary sense of the word, the colloquial sense, which is that it's just ruled by a communist party and guided by communist principles.

And then there's a notion of communism with a lowercase C, which was described historically by Marxists as a phase in the development of the mode of production in the future.

So wouldn't communism with a small C more be socialism since that would be the...

No, no.

Well, they were sometimes used interchangeably, but within Marxism-Leninism, they made the distinction between socialism and communism within that tradition.

To simplify it.

Okay, 'cause I guess I just

What is the difference between communism lowercase C and socialism in this situation?

Because

Would still have exchange value, right?

A socialist society would not be based on a principle of purely free association.

It would still be characterized by class antagonisms and a dictatorship of the proletariat, and therefore a state in the Marxist sense of the word as an organ of class rule and dictatorship.

So I'm assuming that you are not a Stalinist based on how you're arguing that Soviet society was a socialist society.

He never said they had achieved communism, the lowercase C.

Um he never had that pretension.

You know, he said very clearly that they are building a socialist society and uh eventually heading toward communism.

If that's the case, so communism is without a state.

And there's a difference between the communist principle and the long-term consequences of being guided by such a principle.

There's a difference between those, you know?

And that's important to understand that the communism of the lowercase C is not what people should be desiring and fantasizing about and fixating on.

That is just an inadvertent, indirect consequence of the evolution of history.

The capital C communism, the principle of commune, that is what matters.

That's what's important.

So we should st I'm just we're going off of an idea of the fact that we don't worry about the future 100 years from now.

Worry about the struggle here and now, the class war here and now, and our duty to respond to the laws of history now.

That's what's important now.

Fantasizing about a much better society and a more advanced society, which, you know, we don't know when that w what that would look like or when it that's not that's not important.

That will come objectively as a consequence of wisely responding.

But that's that's not the primary antagonism.

The primary antagonism right now is not the development of a post socialist or a communist mode of production and the previous one.

The primary antagonism right now is much more concrete and it's based in a class struggle.

So

This fixation a lot of people have on this fetish of communism is a moneyless, classless, whatever they're confusing that for communist principles.

Well, no, that's not true.

Communist principles are what you find in, for example, the Soviet textbook, the moral code for the communist builders, for example, or what the Communist Party of China teaches its members to be selfless, to be duty-bound, to fight and serve the people, and so on and so on.

That's what communist principles are: collectivism versus individualism, sacrificing petty individual ego for the sake of.

The objectivity of collective principles and so on and so on.

So this is what communist principle is.

Um long term consequences, a society guided

By those principles, and uh it would be is that it would allow the fetters on the development of the mode of production to be uh removed.

And and and history can just develop objectively and organically without

You see, it's really complicated to explain.

It's like, you know, the problem with.

The reason you need Communist consciousness.

Is because all other kinds of consciousness partake in this endless cycle of failing to respond to the objective laws of history and thereby being condemned to all manner of absurdities, contradictions, confusions, and being condemned basically to this never-ending cycle, this like samsara, so to speak.

Racial antagonisms, religious antagonisms, all sorts of obfuscations and obscurantism.

And all it does is lead to the degeneration of civilization itself, thus far achieved.

And it destroys the development of the productive forces.

It destroys, it has a destructive factor.

So, you know, communist consciousness is necessary because communist consciousness is consciousness of history and historical development itself.

You don't have clarity on that.

And you're bogged down by metaphysical presumptions and superstitions, so to speak.

You're talking about history.

Which country do you think did communism best?

Because you obviously said, well, you said that there is no nation that did communism correctly or fully got it.

I don't like that idea that no quote-unquote no nation did communism.

I don't like that notion.

I don't like this meme that communism was never tried.

It's wrong.

It's disgraceful.

It's disrespectful.

Not that it was never tried.

It's that it was never succeeded.

No, I mean, that's also wrong.

It's completely wrong.

Because communism is not the word communism should not be defined by the technical term of a future hypothetical mode of production that is a consequence of the development of history.

The term communism should describe.

political unifying principle of state, a principle of revolutionary politics and so and and and revolutionary movement of society, for example, and and that is not that was succeeded, that absolutely succeeded.

Communist states were very successful in what the the plans they actually set about to achieve.

Um this notion of of the true communism or the real communism

Does not have an immediate or pressing significance.

You don't have to worry about that.

That is not the essential thing.

That's not something you can control.

That's not something you can enact willfully or voluntarily.

If you argue that its ideas were implement- So if you're arguing that the ideas were utopian, where did the utopian implications?

Oh, yeah, no, I know.

There was a difference between utopians.

Well, there are obviously utopian communists because there are people in every belief system that take it to the extreme of everything will be utopians, but they're not taken seriously.

Let's be realistic.

The principle of action and the principle of political existence with the fantasy of some future society.

Those are not the same.

Absolutely not the same.

It would be like if just like, oh, 100 years in the future, theoretically something could happen.

Or it's like saying, or it's like saying, I want to live in this perfect society, so I'm going to take up arms to make this society happen.

Yeah, that's not Marxism.

That's utopianism.

That's that too is utopianism.

If you don't take up arms, how will it happen?

I'm just curious because Marx did talk about the rising of the proletariat, and then obviously in the Soviet Union, it did happen that way.

Because the purpose is not creating a society according to the whims and fancies of your consciousness.

The purpose is being responsive to the concrete class antagonisms that already exist.

So nobody took up arms in Russia because they wanted to create a utopian society.

They took up arms because they wanted peace, land, and bread.

They wanted out of the war.

They wanted land reform.

They wanted very concrete things that gave body and gave form to the actual concrete class struggle within Russia.

Yeah, which then less than 20 years ago.

That's the same shade as fighting for a communist mode of production.

You can't fight for a communist mode of production because a communist mode of production is not determined politically.

It's not determined politically.

How so?

I mean, no, if you get rid of it, it's a communist society, as Marx describes it, is not determined politically.

It's determined according to the objective laws of economic development of the mode of production.

It's totally different.

And the way he described it was very precise, not in the sense that he gave detail, but the way it happens was that eventually the things that are part of capitalism become superfluous.

Okay, so it gets sublated.

The very logic of capitalism itself or the logic of the current mode of production gives rise to a qualitatively new development.

It's not this radical rupture where overnight everything about economics suddenly changes because you're experimenting with this new society.

That's not how Marx described it.

Now, the rupture and the violence or whatever happens, yes, at the political level as a consequence of the development of class struggle.

But the class struggle is not waged over a utopian society.

The class struggle is waged over the very immediate logic of a social conflict where the determination of how we go forward as a society policy-wise starts to be under contestion.

So it starts with trade union consciousness.

And then it goes further to the question of monopolies and monopoly capital and whether these monopolies should be allowed to exist and control our politics.

It gets to the heart of questions like sovereignty.

How can we maintain our sovereignty if we have these monopolies hijacking our government?

So class struggle always takes a concrete form based on the historical logic of a given society and what's meaningful and sensible to it.

The proletarian class struggle does not radically introduce, ex nihilo, a completely new logic just based on the whims and fancies and fantasies of consciousness that says, I want to live in this new society that's different.

That is not an engine of class struggle.

The engine of class struggle is the here and now contradictions of our society.

To me, correct me if I'm wrong.

It sounds like you aren't inherently anti-capitalist.

It's more that you believe that there is something better out there.

Correct me.

No, it's more like.

It's more like of capitalism itself, naturally develop it and drive it towards the direction of socialism.

It's just that politics acts as a fetter to that.

Therefore, the proletariat must wrest political control from the bourgeoisie, from the monopoly capitalist class or the imperialist class to allow the mode of production to develop more or less naturally.

That's the idea.

What's interesting is that you are saying that, but also saying that you should not take up arms.

You should not fight for it.

So are we supposed to...

I didn't say that.

You actually said that you should not be taking up arms.

That is not what you're saying.

Okay, look, look, you're being extremely imprecise in terms of exactly what you said, actually.

It's what I said in reference to what?

Taking up arms for what?

Okay, for peace, land, and bread.

No, I didn't say that they were wrong for doing that for peace, land, and bread.

Marxism is not about taking up arms because of the whims and fancies of wanting a new society.

That's not what it's about.

Absolutely.

Yeah, it's about taking up the arms to replace...

To not for a fantasy, to get rid of a government.

Taking up arms, for example, I'm not advocating this, but hypothetically, in a revolutionary situation in the U.S., it would be to regain national sovereignty, to have land reform, to cancel the debt, you know, things that are concrete that actually compel people to want to make change that they know is possible and immediate.

No one is going to be compelled to take up arms to fight for a hypothetical society in someone's head that sounds better.

I mean, no, people, there's an immediate pressing antagonism and they respond to it.

So I never said, I never advocated pacifism.

You focused on me saying take up arms and you didn't actually, you overlooked what I said was the qualifying premise, which was for the sake of utopian society.

That's not Marxism.

Marxism does not advocate taking up arms to create a utopian society or even a society that you think is better.

The question of violence within politics, within Marxism, has always been a pragmatic, real politic question of the inevitable logic of class struggle and the nature of revolutionary change.

But it has never been, and that's politics.

And that's why Marxism was always a Klaus Witsian tradition, right?

War is an extension of politics and vice versa.

It's a no-brainer.

The reason Marxism was always Klaus Witsian, because they always rejected this stupid idea that politics is somehow this neutral marketplace of ideas.

Well, Marxist said, no, it's warfare.

Politics is war.

It's the same thing.

So this is where revolutionary um

By the way, I don't advocate violence.

You know, it's illegal.

I don't advocate for it.

Also, we're not at a stage in which such a thing is meaningful because we still have rights.

We still have a constitution.

So you believe that at the stage we're currently at, from what you just said, it it's not that it isn't s as bad, it's just that there isn't a need to take up arms.

We're at that state where it's kind of like this needs to be changed by that would be reckless adventurism because the ma the masses are not in a state of consciousness for such a thing.

And moreover, the contradictions within the state have not been developed to such a point that such a thing would be meaningful outside of lawless adventurism.

So that's why.

Anyway, thank you for coming up, Nick.

There's a couple of people requesting um yeah I was just gonna bring him up.

Okay, good.

Hey Haz, Ed Mubarak.

I just wanted to ask uh what's the difference between existence and being?

You mentioned it on in one of your podcasts, but whatever.

Uh thank you so much, uh Ed Mubarak, by the way.

I always saw existence as a um particular way of being, right?

Whereas being itself, being as such, while not incompatible with existence, while not unrelated to existence,

Um

does not necessarily already imply determination.

All right.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

There's two people requesting, both seem pretty sympathetic with ACP politics.

Alright, we'll wait then.

It's alright, we'll wait.

Is this working?

Yeah, hello, yeah, I can hear you.

Yeah, hello, Huz.

I've joined this space to defend the honor of Australia.

You have been slandering and defaming us.

I don't give a fuck.

I'm not even.

It sounds so boring.

Like, I literally don't give a fuck.

Sorry, I just don't care.

I'm about to go to s I'm about to like fall asleep from that proposal of I don't I don't care.

That's the thing.

I don't fucking care.

My number one problem with Australia is I keep having to hear about it.

There's no honor to defend.

I don't have anything to do with Australia.

It's a country with 30 million people.

Leave me alone.

Literally just leave me alone, I don't fucking care.

California never bothers me like this, and California is not its own country, and it's more relevant to me, you know?

And it's like.

It's crazy.

The the the the the narcissism is crazy.

Infrared or ACP people, please stop requesting, 'cause I'm not going to bring you up if I could see in your profile.

We're going to wrap this up in about two minutes.

We're going to wrap the space up in about two minutes, by the way.

Okay, fort.

Oh, he's like, here we go, a Canadian nationalist.

That's great.

We got all the tethers here.

All right.

Go ahead.

Uh

How are you today?

Thank you for handing me the mic.

I just wanted to get your take on something because I was listening to your previous speaker as yourself, and I can see obviously that you have a good understanding of Marxist-Leninism properly.

It was not meant to be this sort of reckless utopian project.

But I wanted to get your take on James Burnham and Samuel Francis.

Because I believe that James Burnham and Samuel Francis, that is Samuel T.

Francis, the author of Leviathan and its enemies.

James Burnham famously wrote The Managerial Revolution.

And in the 1940s, James Burnham saw.

Your question's really boring.

Holistic, go ahead.

Yeah, I had a question about socialism, Marxism in relation to modern science.

Is that all right?

Okay, make it quick, please.

Yeah, so I have uh I seek out authors that are anti-science, anti-reason, and anti-mathematics.

And in particular, I do seem to be seeing a lot of Marxist thinkers that do seem to be in agreement with the way that I think.

In particular, I guess this guy, Joseph Dyetzkin, he has a book like Socialistic Science Against Reason and all that other fake ng shit.

And I'm curious, what is the overarching position on Marxism in relation to science writ large and mathematics, if you could comment on that too?

Well, Marxism rejects, first of all, the rigid division of labor within thought.

It rejects these artificial barriers they create that say you're not allowed to comprehend these things in a way that's fundamentally interrelated.

So that's the first thing.

The second thing is that Marxism rejects formalism.

It rejects metaphysical formalism and it rejects empiricism as well.

It rejects this notion of

Science somehow being unrelated or not fundamentally interconnected with almost all other aspects of human existence.

So, Marxism differs from modern science in many considerable ways.

It rejects the notion of modern science's subject-object distinction, for example.

Marxism regards history as a so-called object of science, but simultaneously, not just an object.

Also,

Also, qualities that would otherwise be called subjective, right?

Active, prescriptive, normative, even, right?

And Marxism regards the science of history to be a science of praxis as well, a science of responding to it.

So, you know, Marxist science is very different.

Marxism doesn't say that human beings are like animals and we have to study them in a lab coat.

For Marxism, science is about knowledge.

You know, that's the key thing.

It's about having a clear, systematized record of knowledge of the development of history, of class struggle, of developments within history, right?

And it's knowledge of a logic of struggle, it's knowledge of a logic of succession, it is logic is knowledge of relationships and so on and so on.

And this type of knowledge is not something you can just confine in a laboratory and be considered scientific according to modern scientific standards.

You just can't.

Yeah, so I'm gonna, I see some of my friends in here.

I'm gonna get a lot of hate for this, which is fine.

I can take it.

But I'm actually find a lot of, I'm in agreement with a lot of that.

I see the main problem in modern science is the reduction of everything to analysis.

And the problem is it does appear to be useful and true because the model fitting that's based in the dualism, the artificial dualism, is true, but only inside of your mind and analytically.

And every time something is not true, the model is simply altered.

to fit the facts the way they turned up and then it just goes on as before.

So I don't know.

Haz, am I starting to become more open to this socialistic sort of thinking?

I'm not sure, but I did sort of enjoy that answer.

I'm very honest.

For sure.

Can I say one more thing or ask you one more thing?

No, but I'll let you go ahead.

Amazing.

Thank you, Haz.

What a nice guy.

So it's related, but what are your thoughts on statistics?

Do you believe they are real or do you believe they are simply black magic as I do?

I think that some of them could be useful, but it's an extremely manipulated, manipulated practice of statistics.

Extremely manipulated, is what I'll say.

It's extremely, extremely twisted and manipulated and.

And unless you you are a trained statistician or you're like a mathematician and you know what's going on, uh you cannot really have information.

Well, sure, but but you know, you don't a lot of people can't even comprehend, you know, what's what's even being communicated or said with, you know, statistical um uh you know, um I don't know, presentations, you know.

So

Well, yeah, thank you.

I appreciate the answer.

Thank you for not hitting on me this time.

Great chat.

Thanks.

For what?

For what?

Hitting?

What is he talking about?

I don't I don't even know.

Um

People people just say ev anything.

They just say everything and anything, you know.

Anyway, um

I think he meant hating.

I think he he meant to say hating.

Uh yeah, hating.

Alright, for sure.

Well, um

Anyway, uh

Ah.

Alright.

Um

Uh this space.

Did I hit record for the space itself?

I hope I did.

But if not, it'll be on my channel.

Marks, what's going on, Carti Marks?

Carti Marks, what's up?

So, I think we're done.

I think we're done with the space.

We do two-hour confront the chairman's spaces, and we're done with this one.

So, we're going to end the space.

We're not ending the stream, though, so you can come to kick.com/slash infrared if you would like to continue to listen to me speak.

But Sewell, thanks for co-hosting.

We're going to end the space and wrap it up.

Alright, well that was a very boring space and I just don't have the patience.

That's really the issue.

I don't have patience.

One sec, guys.

Australia Stani, thank you so much.

Appreciate you, bro.

We have an we have an interesting stream going.

Guys, I started my stream so early that we're we're not we're we're gonna start uh doing reacting to YouTube soon.

But we we have a very interesting stream because we've been um we've been uh you know, we've been we've been streaming and and it's been been very interesting, you know.

There was a Drew Pavloo Alex Jones today.

I want to react to that for sure.

Harold, what's going on?

So, give me one second, guys.

Give me one second.

That that's on X or it's in show requests?

Okay, for sure.

Alright, uh so let's get into it.

Let's get into it right now.

Show requests, okay, it's on X.

All right, and then there's something else.

So there's what?

The DSA has factions.

Let's see the.

Let's look at the factions within.

Bruh, Donald Parkinson, it's so sad.

This guy is just like, Donald Parkinson.

ES, what's up?

Yo, Donald, why don't, Donald, why don't you just form a party?

Are you really content having two seats within the DSA?

And that's like praxis to you?

You're just...

How fucking like...

Just be principled and actually like form an organization that reflects your values, you know?

Oh, Sos, what's up?

It's so lame.

It's like, just dude, just actually build a principle that reflects your values.

Sorry, actually, build an organization that reflects your principles.

Don't just like join an organization that you don't, doesn't reflect your principles and then form a caucus within it that gets two seats.

You've been in it for like a decade.

There's no, you know, the Bolsheviks, a few decades, they took state power.

It's been a decade.

You still have two seats.

It's fucking ridiculous.

You know, I don't know what the time scale for this is, but it's pretty silly.

You know, just form your own organization.

You can't because it turns into a sect.

That's why.

It's so sad.

There's no possibility of principled organization for this generation.

It's really sad.

And by this generation I mean millennials who are always at each other's throats with the most stupid petty bullshit.

Vision.

Donald could himself be even be well meaning and it wouldn't matter because there'd be some fucking millennials, co-millennials that fuck it all up 'cause they they got their feelings yurt or some shit.

This is logical.

Okay.

Germany's preparing subscription.

Five countries have launched it, including women.

They say it's a 30-year war.

They will break up Russia.

Uh and is literally a connection.

So, did you know?

Guys, this is really boring.

I'm not watching that at all, it's just like a it's really boring.

Um

I have better things to do than watch something like that.

Freaking iPhone is stuck in my pocket.

There we go.

Sorry, guys.

Sorry for having an iPhone.

Really lange.

It's really uh cringe.

Alright.

Alright.

I'm a huge asshole.

I am just a jerk and a mean person.

I'm a bad person and a mean person.

I'm not nice.

And the reason is because um the reason is because um I'm literally the fucking french fries from the adult swim show.

What is it called?

Frywalk

Aqua Teen Hunger Force.

I'm literally just like Frylock.

My whole personality.

Don't belong here, has you're an Arab, you're a Muslim, you're Lebanese, you're a brown, you're this, you're that.

All while my nuts are hanging.

Imagine that.

All while my nuts are hanging and I'm walking out in the open.

as a conqueror, walking as a conqueror.

Can you imagine that, as a conqueror,

As a conqueror.

As a conqueror.

I'm not here to be Nelson Mandela.

I'm here to be Genghis Khan.

I'm a conqueror.

I'm an Arab Muslim who is here to conquer.

Land

Understand that.

One hundred thousand percent Islamic.

Foreigner.

Strangeness.

Foreignness.

How strange.

How foreign.

How t how scary?

Honestly.

How scary.

How scary.

Uh

Hmm.

I just don't even have things to talk about.

I just I'm not used to ending the stream this early in the night, but I guess I should, right?

I guess I should.

Ah YouTube videos, let's react to some YouTube videos.

I've been going so hard with cardio.

I've been running.

I don't ever run.

I started running.

Can you believe that?

I'm sweating.

I'm running.

I'm running on the treadmill.

Can you imagine how stupid that is?

A man like me running?

But it happens.

But it's kinda silly, you know.

I I'm a marcher, I march, I don't run.

Who do I run for?

Nothing.

If I can't walk there, if I can't march there, I'll take a horse.

I run for nothing, it's stupid.

Ozempic, Hazempic.

You know, if you just, I just, you know, what I've gotten the delusion of?

I'm, I've been pretty steady 175.

And I've just been eating like total garbage.

I've been eating burgers and fries and Taco Bell and just complete, absolute fucking like garbage.

And my thought is that, you know, if I just do cardio and lift, I can kind of just eat whatever I want.

I mean, I work hard.

Why not?

I work out every day.

I I do cardio on the treadmill for 45 minutes per day, minimum.

I break it up though, but I do minimum 45 minutes.

I lift pretty intensely in in succession.

That alone is cardio.

And it's not good for weight.

I disagree.

I think it speeds up the metabolism, the metabolism.

The metabolism, so to speak.

It does beat up the metabolism.

It speeds it up, so to speak.

It absolutely does.

Uh, kills your energy alarm long term.

You know, I think that food is not that deep.

That's an and and and I know this is wrong, and the Peters will disagree with this.

And the Peters are right, I'm wrong.

I just have a delusion.

My delusion is that it's not that deep.

You just have fuel, whatever, whatever it doesn't kill you, it's okay.

Just fuel.

You just have it's more about what your lifestyle.

If you're running a lot and lifting, it doesn't really matter so much.

Wait, you can have McDonald's, you can have whatever, it doesn't matter, just enough fuel for the tank.

You know, some people say the 87 is better than the 89 grade fuel, and it doesn't really matter.

It n you know, I've never seen proof it matters.

I've never and don't over you just don't have to eat a l yeah, you just shouldn't eat a lot.

Like, you know, for a ten piece at McDonald's, ten piece in a McChicken, I mean, it's fine, but then you start getting the large fry and the quarter pounder and you're eating too much and it's like, chill out.

I eat about 2,000 calories a day.

So it's like I'm in the clear.

I eat 2,000 calories a day.

It doesn't really matter how I get them.

You can have a burger, doesn't matter.

Uh I should be having about a lot more than two thousand.

Um, but I I'm I'm uh

I'm losing weight, so wh when I build I'll start doing three thousand.

I suppose when I bulk

I'm looking for YouTube videos to watch.

I'm literally looking through YouTube and there's like nothing to watch, unfortunately.

Let's watch this East Germany thing.

Ah

So many people that are in this chat that, like, by themselves, just sit and watch videos like this.

And I'm the one streaming it now.

Now you see what you look like.

We just watch these, you know, we just.

What's the best?

Yeah,

Young hell kinda how

How did all that just disappear, you know?

God, what is it What a horrible thing that happened, dismantling

This um hm.

Hm This will give me some good recommendations.

Uh

Mm.

You know what is an interesting song?

The Song of Pregozin's March.

Is this real?

Hold on.

Why can't I find it?

Is it?

Where is the song?

Wow, what the fuck?

Hold on.

I think this is it.

Is this AI or a real song?

Let me check.

Is this a real song?

Uh it came out eleven months ago.

I don't know.

Shoot his pumpkin as me.

Here we follow the

It's not a bad song.

It's not a bad song.

I mean, it's a good song.

I mean, it sounds good.

That's what I'm just trying to say.

I mean, I don't endorse anything.

It's just the song sounds pretty good.

Yeah, I am.

Imagine being like a rich

Uh, billionaire, like in Moscow, and this starts blasting on the speakers.

You just walk outside, you walk out from your balcony, and this is just blasting this song.

Okay.

I don't know who made this song, but it's pretty funny.

Who made this?

Who made this song?

Who made this?

I don't know who made this.

You know, Putin said he's gonna retaliate, by the way.

He said he's gonna retaliate uh soon.

But uh I hope this is not another Operation True Promise 3.

You know.

Yeah.

True Promise Three is coming.

Trust the plan.

Oh and yeah ch Yeah, it's coming any day now.

Any day now.

So there's a TikTok account that I found and um

It's like deep schizophrenia, right?

And it's like deep schizophrenia, right?

And it's this, like, I don't even know what it is.

It's like this AI.

And it is such a fascinating account.

It's like

It's like this character that like has it's speak I don't even know how to get the AI to sound like this.

But it's like um and he like looks like he's like a character from like like I don't know like of like a nineties

He looks like a mascot, like a mascot of something.

I don't know.

I can't describe it.

It's hard.

He's like, um, so did you know that under the pyramids there are mind receptors?

And according to Pentagon documents, these mind receptors, like, all of his, all of the videos are like that.

They're like,

Um so there's a theory that this is actually a prison and everything in the

I don't know.

I th it's I I I really enjoy th those videos though, you know.

I can't, I don't even know what their username is.

They usually just come up on my TikTok for you.

Um, there's also another TikTok format of there's a TikTok format that I love, and I just know the song, but it is so beautiful.

It's a Chinese, it's a pro-China thing.

I can't find

I can't find it.

Oh no.

Hold on.

I will find it.

Give me a second.

Okay, hold on.

Uh we're gonna watch this.

Ugh, what the hell?

Hold on.

Oh, okay.

Okay.

Spelled it wrong.

It's a Chinese song and it's a great format.

It's just beautiful.

I'm trying to find the one that says Music in America, 'cause that's the best one.

Oh, where is it?

I can't find it.

But they use this song as the meme template.

Yeah.

Yeah.

It's like first it just says running in America, then it'll show it'll show something really bad about like um like some clip of America that's really bad, and then it'll just show running in China and it's better.

And always it's when the beat drops.

It's so great.

This is what it

It's so good.

This song goes so hard.

I love that song.

Um.

But I can't show it to you because I can't find the video.

I just have the song.

Anyway, fuck.

Alrighty.

Vladiel, what's up?

Appreciate you.

Alright, we're gonna end the stream.

I have nothing else to present to you, nothing else to say.

And I'm hungry, so I'm gonna go eat.

I agree, bring Indonesia into bricks.

I agree with that.

Anyway, guys, I'm gonna go eat food.

Nope, there will not be a stream tomorrow.

We're going to be streaming Sunday, Sunday, Sunday, Sunday, Sunday.

Well, guys, I am.

Definitely human.

Uh anyway guys

I'm only human, after all, I fucking hate that song.

I'm only human after all

Fucking hate stup stupid songs.

What's the other song?

What?

Oh, oh, oh, oh, oh.

These are like, um.

What's the other song?

Anxiety.

What's the anxiety song?

Anxiety

All these fucking disgusting songs that come from uh Imagine Dragons, right?

They all sound I'm only human after all.

There's a specific genre of like

I don't even know like what the demographic is, but it's like people who are into like really cringe.

Like cool.

stuff like

You ever hear the one that's like, Yo ho no And it's like clearly this like Viking LARP.

It's like Viking LARP.

They're like this is so cool.

We're like pirates.

Yo, it's like always like fucking fifty year old, middle aged.

I don't know.

I thought yeah, but I hate the Yoho song.

I hate Viking LARP a lot.

Um

It's the ancestral Viking uh d it's my ancestral Viking genetics, right?

And it's like, dude, you're fucking Irish.

You don't have any fucking Viking ancestry, you're fucking Irish.

Shut the fuck up, you stupid LARPer!

I don't get the Viking thing.

The Viking thing is disgusting.

I don't understand the appeal.

Is the appeal that it's just like a pre-Christian thing and they're like, oh, we're not losers who are like Bible thumpers.

Yo-ho!

We are open-minded.

Vikings, not bigots.

We worship the trees.

It's like Liptards can just LARP as like being progressive and being barbaric, I guess.

It's Phoenician.

It's the white people's Phoenician LARP.

Yeah, that's true.

That's exactly what it is.

It's Phoenician LARP for white people.

You notice pagan LARP is like the cancer of nations.

Like, for example, Pharaohism in Egypt.

We're going back to our pharaonic shut the fuck up, you goddamn LARPing dumb fucks.

And then you got the Greeks, the He the Hellenism.

Hellenism and Pharaohism and Vikingism and all these stupid, disgusting LARP.

And then in and MBS inside they're even doing the pre-Islamic pagan LARP in uh in in in uh Saudi Arabia now, you know.

Can we stop this?

Can we stop this?

Uh

This nonsense, you know, fascination with these.

You know, they're it's just like.

Um, can we stop this like uh ethno?

I don't even know what the term for this is.

It's like ethno- yeah, and then the Iranian one, you know, diaspora who are Shah supporters that LARP Zoroastrianism without even knowing anything about it, by the way.

Um, pre yeah, pre is pre-Abrahamic LARP ideologies.

are unforgivable.

Ah.

They're all unforgivable, all of them.

If you live a c in a country that is predominantly of an Abrahamic faith and you are LARPing the pre-Abrahamic society, you're a stupid, disgusting LARPer.

And I disagree with you a lot.

And I think that you are um you are coping and you are engaging in nonsense, you know, basically.

Mm-hmm.

Uh, I'm a desert dweller saying this.

You know, Hamza, I don't even know why the fuck you say that.

You know, it's like, what the hell are you?

There's not a goddamn desert in Lebanon, and you know that, you know.

Stop the cope, stop the nonsense.

I was there, there were no deserts.

There were no deserts.

You know, Hamza, you know, you you are you are like you know what you are, you're like the Wendigo forest people.

You are this you're s you're like slender Slavs in the forest with really long arms and legs and you're just running around at night in the forest, making really scary noises, by the way.

And it's just very disturbing.

Okay?

That's all I could say.

Bosnians are anything but slender.

What are you talking about?

Dua Leap?

Oh, she's Albanian.

Never mind.

Anyway, guys, um.

Ah.

I fear the forest.

Yeah, I do fear the forest.

I'm not going to lie.

Like, I do fear that.

I have nightmares being in a dark forest in the middle of a dark forest.

That's fucking terrifying.

Like, it's literally dark all day and you're stuck there and you don't know how to get out.

Why would you be there?

Get out.

Why would you want to be there?

I mean, forests are nice to look at from without, without going in them.

I like forests.

I like what they look like.

I just don't like going inside of them.

I love the woods at night.

Well, me too.

Provided that I can leave provided I can leave them.

Uh you know, I I I I I I I I I like by the way, I like Michigan.

Because I like autumn.

I'm a big fan of autumn.

And Lebanon doesn't have that.

They don't have that.

They'll never have that.

So it's part of my personality that I like autumn.

And I like the.

I like how it smells.

You know, I like the pumpkin um stuff and like the

The um the the d the doughnuts, the cider doughnuts, apple cider.

It's all great.

I see y you know, it's like that's fundamental to me.

Like Lebanon doesn't have that.

And so you see you know, I'm racially Lebanese, quote unquote, but I k you know, it's a sad way of living to be in September or October and there's no cider and donuts and you don't have that smell in the air.

That's all that's my whole life.

That's everything.

You know?

So, you know, I like Lebanon too, but to be honest.

There's there's very it's very different.

Um

But uh it's a shame because I'm gonna be very old by the time Halloween starts.

Okay, let's see what's going on.

Well, uh

Well, I guess that's my cue to to to end the stream.

My cue to end the stream.

Well, guys, it's hard to end the stream.

But I have to.

'Cause I have to eat food.

Anyway, I'm s I f I feel like there's something I'm forgetting to say.

Like I'm forgetting something.

I feel like I'm forgetting something.

Nothing.

Nothing.

Alright, nothing.

Anyway.

Goodbye.