Heated political debate

Sompasilatrouve.

Je pe re sentien le males de jeanqui dance.

Et c'est doubriet que tu e son.

Vaisuvnier comes la décel.

Et si tulmonta de l'essul.

Sa c'est passse apre les son.

I'm not sure if I can do it.

Simple now, so you'll never turn away.

Oh, yeah.

No, it's what I do.

Maybe I should pull forward.

I'm not sure if I can do it.

You told me.

For my to re-examine

Let's bring them to Zama, tobacco, fake, let's go.

Let's bring them to Zambo.

Tobacco and figure.

Let's bring them to Zama.

Tobacco and Picker.

That's good.

American Step with the 20.

Thank you so much, brother.

I appreciate it.

Ed Gentry with the 5.

What's going on, Ed?

KFS4, what's going on?

So, guys, we just want to let you know.

What's up, guys?

How are you doing?

I just want to let you know that we are going to.

Give me one sec.

One sec.

I gotta fix this camera shit.

Thomas with the five.

What's going on, brother?

I appreciate you, Thomas.

I see you, bro.

What's going on?

What's going on, Thomas?

Second.

this stack shit right here.

Alright, I fixed it.

Alright, we're good, we're good.

Um

I think it's uh the f it looks the same as usual, right, the camera?

Alright, anyway guys, um

Yeah guys, listen, I want to let you know something, a few things about the space tonight.

The reason we're doing such a late stream uh you know this is one of the latest ones we've done in a while, but the reason it's so late is 'cause I wanted to give you guys time to actually get questions or things people wanted to confront me with.

You basically have fucking nothing, okay?

I looked in that channel, the Spaces content channel, and there is fucking one question, which is a guy asking about Maga.

And then everything else are just trolls.

And I'm just kind of like, is that all you could really get?

Is that it?

You know?

So we'll see how it goes.

But.

We'll try it.

You know, I'm gonna try to do the space and run the space.

I don't have any and but I'm not I'm only I'm gonna I'm not gonna have a lot of patience, to be honest.

Um we're probably gonna have to figure out how to change these up.

Um

Because let me start the space right now.

And by the way, the space is definitely.

I don't know if it's recorded or not, but I will delete it off my timeline because it hurts the algorithm.

So keep that in mind.

Everyone, make sure you turn your notifications on on Discord.

I don't care if you're getting pinged too much recently.

You better fucking turn those notifications on for real.

Versage with the 10.

Appreciate you, brother.

So this is the space.

And yeah, these spaces, I wanted to change it up and have a thing because I know people are scared to use their voice where they can write down their questions and ask them that way.

But you guys, you know, I gave you guys a day to do that.

There's really nothing.

So maybe you couldn't find anything.

I don't know.

But there's no for all the talk about our party, nobody, they know they can't trick you.

They don't want me to address whatever they have to confront me with because they know they're lying and you know they're lying.

Their goal has always been to deceive people outside of this community into, you know, having false perceptions about who we are and what we're about.

Okay, so I'm gonna start just scrolling through the spaces content thing.

There's a lot of stupid shit you guys screenshotted.

Um, really, honestly, do better for real.

Comrade, what's going on?

For real, do better, you know?

Like, it's kind of fucking ridiculous.

Um, but we'll go through it.

So someone screenshotted the pedo Fido Fido Pedo.

Um yeah, like I said, do better.

I don't know why you're Anyway, let's read out what they ask.

Why does ACP not follow basic rules of a ML Demcent party?

based on what?

There's no Congress that has been celebrated

You mean convened.

Well, we ratified the Constitution, which contains protocols for the first national congress, but the idea that you can launch a party with a national congress within the first day is fucking retarded.

Okay, you actually have to build the party's foundations up before you can have a completed democratic uh system within it.

No CC has been elected, okay?

Just come back in two months, literally, less than two months, actually.

Okay, like a month and a half.

Um I think the entire premise that

According to the political philosophy of Marxism-Leninism, you start out with democracy, that's not true.

You don't start out with fully fleshed out democratic formal procedures.

For example, the Soviet Union did not have a truly democratic constitution until 1936.

The first thing you begin with is some kind of collective principle.

And then once you have that collective principle, as you build the foundations up, you can begin to actually implement more broader formal democratic processes.

And the democratic procedures and forms of a party will never be fully completed until the party seizes power.

Even then, it's not fully completed.

Party democracy.

Really only becomes finished after the seizure and consolidation of power of the state.

Until then, it's always going to be unfinished.

Why?

Because the party is building itself up, it's growing, and as it expands, as it has more and more people, that is where the democratic procedures really start to get tested.

When you're launching with only a few hundred people, yeah, we try to make it as democratic as we can in the beginning.

You know, we have votes to ratify the Constitution, for example.

We maintain an internal culture of free criticism.

But as far as the democratically elected leadership body like the CC, you need eligible cadre who have experience.

To be eligible for that, you need to train up cadre to at least an extent who have proven that they are willing to.

Uh willing to, how should I put it, uh elevate to the supreme principle the collective principle.

Because party democracy, according to democratic centralism, is not the same thing as liberal or bourgeois democracy.

It is democracy under the assumption and the premise of a collective principle, meaning we are voting on the direction of a collective body that is binding on everyone regardless of their opinion.

That's what we're voting on, what is at stake within the procedures of party democracy.

is not the consent of so many different individuals.

What is at stake is the direction of how the collective is going to move forward.

And the collective moves forward regardless of individual opinion with respect to the outcome of the democratic procedure.

And the political culture of Marxism-Leninism is such that you acquiesce to a collective principle.

The burden is on the individual, not to say this is my opinion because it's what I want or it's how I feel.

The burden is upon the individual to prove, for example, why a given proposal or why a given argument or why a given rejection of someone's proposal is grounded in an overall consideration for what is best for the collective party, what is best for the direction the collective should take, what is best for the collective to reach its goals.

You don't tally people up with so many different feelings and opinions, and then you just kind of amalgamate that into a collective.

No, you begin with the collective, and from there, you have democratic procedures.

So there are fundamental differences between the bourgeois principle of democracy, which is rooted in individualism, and the notion of democracy that is proper to democratic centralism.

That is a notion of democracy which is in place not because democracy is seen as the supreme sacred principle, but because it is an effective mechanism for getting a pulse and accurately reflecting the will of the party, you know, making sure that parties are receptive to their membership, that they're receptive to their cadre.

There is no evidence that at this stage leadership is not being receptive to the cadre of the party.

Um there were a few wreckers who in no way reflected anything close to the majority, not even a significant minority.

In total, they they they cannot amount to more than maybe seven people in total, okay?

Mm, seven to nine, I think.

I don't know.

Something like that.

Nothing at all significant.

Um I think even that's a lot, you know.

We have

Free Danny Shop.

Yeah, roughly seven, I think I can count.

Um pff that is uh not any

And all they would have had to do is formulate their dissenting positions in some kind of way that is not individualistic, that is saying, no, no, this is the, you know, Haas is the worst for the party, for the direction of the party, not Haas is the worst because of some metaphysical principles or because he hurt my feelings or I don't know, because Jackson's tweets or something.

So, frankly, the notion we don't have democratic centralism, it's a little ridiculous.

Jimmy, what's going on, brother?

Appreciate you.

So you screenshotted this troll who is probably a minor asking about McDonalds, which I'm not going to respond to because I I they're probably a minor, to be honest.

Someone is asking why our MAGA

Uh the revolutionary subject.

I I would not put that put it that way.

MAGA is not a subject.

It is a reactionary anti-communist movement.

It is reactionary with respect to what?

Okay.

America is a reactionary state with respect to global geopolitics, I agree.

Within American politics, how is MAGA reactionary compared to what?

See, you need to be careful with your words, because the notion of progressive and reactionary i is objective within Marxism.

So how is MAGA objectively reactionary with respect to US politics?

In what way is MAGA, for example, reactionary with respect to the Democratic Party?

Jimmy, what's going on?

MAGA is far from reactionary within American politics.

Rather, MAGA is the center within American politics.

MAGA quite poignantly reflects the current trajectory and direction of the USA.

The reactionaries are actually the Hassan Pike reviewers and the DSA and the liberals who are organizing federal workers.

Those are reactionaries trying to resist an inevitable outcome of history.

So you don't know what reactionary means.

And you're saying that we have to go to lengths in using slurs and well, that's not we don't have to go to lengths to defend ourselves from leftists.

It just is something that comes pretty natural to anyone who has a spine.

Regarding people who were caught using slurs in private settings, I don't think they were going out of their way to do that.

I think that they were doing it privately because they actually go out of their way to not use bad words.

And most people go out of their way to not use bad words out of professionalism, politeness, and so on and so on.

But

The idea that the default is that you're politically correct and you have to go out of your way to be bad, I don't think it's very relatable.

It's very college-coded, what you're saying.

It's like you live on a college campus for your whole life and you think that's the norm.

It's not.

I'm sorry.

Political correctness is an exception, it's not a norm anywhere for any normal person.

Another troll, uh, who's probably a miner.

Okay.

Another troll?

Another troll?

Sophie, who is uh fed, um

Pretty sure we have evidence they're a Fed.

I could be wrong about that, but

This person in particular I remember being shown is a Fed.

Maybe it was someone else.

Uh Haas has me blocked, but maybe someone can ask him why Alex Dillard was spotted

In the uh and and he's they're talking about Zoltan's PSF telegram coordinating at Rage Against the Machine with so two things one

Uh whatever that is, predated the party by years.

Three things actually.

Two.

Um we have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to any kind of active collaboration, any kind of active working with, any kind of active um connection with any kind of uh fascist, neo-Nazi, far-right, whatever.

But to be absolutely clear about this, um

I was informed about what that because guess what?

Even I didn't know, right?

I didn't even fucking know the lore until these people.

made a big fuss about it, so I looked into it and I've been properly informed.

Uh when it comes to um Alex, uh, he had years ago a very incorrect view, which in no way is reflects anything to do with our party.

He had this view that he can somehow

Convert these far-right people to communism and to an anti-imperialist communist cause because you know the logic was well left liberals it's not working out so let's convert these far-right guys by you know having dialogue with them and going on their shows and yada yada yada and you know if if these are huge podcasters reaching tens of thousands of people, I guess it would be a little more understandable.

Of course, you want to reach people who are misguided.

But it was a huge mistake to try to, you know, convert Zoltan and these weird, very fringe, marginal people who in no way represent the

The masses, you know, of misguided people.

So that was just a very incorrect and naive strategy, which I totally never agreed with.

I totally oppose and reject and disagree with.

And he himself does not agree with it anymore.

And so, well, given the fact that he made this mistake in the past, shouldn't we blacklist him?

And that's the third thing I want to get to.

The third thing I would like to get to is that I want to remind everyone about the German Communist Party in the 1930s, which was full, Grant, appreciate you, which was full of people who were converted away from the Nazi Party and the SA.

They would take these lumpen from the SA and they would convert them away from Nazism and to Communism.

So that was what the KPD was doing.

They had ex-Nazis in the KPD who saw the light of communism.

And you mean to tell me that our party cannot have a guy who was never themselves a Nazi, but just had an incorrect, naive strategy where he thought he was going to somehow convert them to the correct view, even though they are bad faith, very bad people.

In particular, these guys he was talking to were very bad.

So this guy wasn't even a former Nazi that's in our party.

He was just a guy who had a very, very naive, bad strategy with respect to anti-fascism.

Um

So, to make it appear as though that somehow our party is affiliated with Nazism, because we have a member who two or three years ago was very naive and took it, probably took.

See, for example, look at this party, the Patriotic Socialist Front.

Look at the opportunism.

We were called Pat Sox for many years.

And this guy who's actually really a Hitler Nazi, remember these people rarely ever fronted this way.

At least as far as I could see.

They always concealed their real view and they said, Oh, I'm just a kind of syndicalist or whatever.

Deep down, they're just full Hitler, extremely hateful Nazis, you know.

Anyway, they created a group called Patriotic Socialism Party or something.

Um, because they themselves agreed with the left liberals that this label is Nazism, and they were like, Yeah, unironically, yes.

Um.

And they made all these, you know, claims about how they're committed to anti-imperialism and o opposing interventionism.

So, you know, um

Of course, maybe some guy got confused and uh made a very wrong uh decision to take them at face value and try to have dialogue.

This was years before our party, and it had nothing to do with us.

It had nothing to do with me.

I found out about it because of these people.

And of course when I found out, I said, Is there a guy who's in our party who's affiliated with Zoltanus and all this shit?

So I was properly informed about what actually the context is, and it's clear that the gentleman who's in our party has no affiliation with these people.

He completely repudiates and rejects

That very false and poor strategy.

Now, let's now let's actually start asking the real questions, though.

So, Sophie and her friends, um, her whole gang are openly affiliating with actual Nazis like Bree, um, you know, and they have no problem working with all sorts of disgusting neo-nazi scum against us.

Uh, the claims that they make about us are almost only ever truly amplified by neo-Nazis.

For example, they made the claim that we're being funded by Russia.

Neo-Nazis are the ones who picked that up and amplified it.

So they are acti not only are they actively affiliating with and working with neo Nazis, but that is a key part of their strategy to take us down and and oppose us.

So these are actual fascist collaborators.

The American Communist Party does not tolerate any kind of

Fascist collaborations.

We're very patient with individuals who are misguided.

We're very normal and patient and human.

Zoltan and that whole crew, these are these guys are been in it for decades or something and they are very, very much conniving and Machiavellian and very much lost in the sauce past any point of return.

And just like Bree, for example, Brie is likewise lost in the sauce, but they work with Bree freely without any issues.

Um and okay, they're mentioning Caleb Maupin.

Um Caleb.

Has nothing to do with our party.

Uh I can't verify whatever you're m claiming about him.

Um I can't ver you're prob you probably lie about him too.

I don't know.

You lie about us.

You probably lie about him.

Um

I think many of I don't agree with obviously I don't agree with many of his uh

Positions and decisions, so what can I say?

What can I say?

That's really uh that.

Um okay, so that's all.

That's all the written questions that I can see.

Uh so let's bring on uh Ray

Ray.

What's going on?

All right, they disconnected, I think.

Uh R E, let's bring on R E.

What's going on, R.

E.?

Thank you.

I'm doing good.

Thank you.

First of all, thank you for having me.

I've been keeping track of what the American Communist Party has been up to.

I actually have a question.

Sure.

And that is, and that is, since with fascism on the rise, and many people are, well, basically, fascism already here accelerating really quickly than we expected.

Many people, many Americans are well, American leftists are divided between fighting, between actually fighting fascism or basically fleeing out of fear for potential persecution.

And my question is, what role do you think the American Communist Party should have at this giving moment?

Given that we're seeing a divided left with who are either trying to flee or basically fighting each other over how we defeat fascism?

Well, I think in truth, we don't really have a left right now.

I think we have a lot of confused ex-Democrats or Democrats.

They're still Democrats, actually.

But the question of actually building left-wing politics is an open door right now.

And with respect to the question of fascism, we have to be very careful about.

What that actually means.

Do I think we're on a fascist trajectory?

Yes, I do.

But that is not exclusively or even uniquely coming from Trump or MAGA or the Republicans.

That is something that was built up by the Uniparty for many decades.

You know, the power of the DHS, who built that?

It was really Obama, the NSA, and before that, George W.

Bush, people that are ostensibly anti-MAGA, right?

Anti-Trump.

That's not to say that Trump is immune from the fascist trajectory.

Far from it.

I'm just saying, you know, it's not Cheeto Mussolini, quote unquote.

It's a system.

It's a fascist system that has been in the making.

And I think accelerated the most under Biden, frankly.

And, you know, with respect to the question of how fascism will take shape, well, I think many of these so-called leftists will be commissioned as some of the black shirts themselves.

I think the DSA types and the Hassan Piker, some of Hassan Piker's viewers, I think they are prime candidates for a reactionary kind of black shirt fascist movement.

And what's going to really provoke a fascist movement in this country is a successful communist movement or a successful progressive left-wing movement.

And until we have that, there isn't going to be fascism.

So to be clear, fascism really only takes shape as a form of anti-communism.

It's a response to the threat of communism.

Without that threat, it doesn't really take shape.

You have a lot of similarities, and there's a trajectory towards some kind of dictatorship that suspends constitutional liberties and so on and so on and norms.

But fascism is uniquely a type of anti-communism.

And I'll give you an example of blackshirt activity that I've witnessed in my experience in 2025.

We went to the port of Newark to organize Drej truckers to unionize them because these truckers had previously been in unions.

The labor movement made huge gains to organize them and unionize them.

And then Reagan came along and neoliberalism came along and they were all broken up from their unions and they were misclassified as independent contractors and all their benefits were taken away and it was just a complete rollback for not only the labor movement as a whole, but them in particular, right?

So we went to just first, first stage, by no means the end, but just the first stage, a concentrated effort to inform them that legally they're being misclassified according to new NLRB regulations and new local laws in New Jersey.

They're being misclassified.

That they are basically being scammed.

They're working hours and hours for free.

And that, you know, if they come together, you know, the Facebook groups and so on and so on, you can begin a discussion about how do we actually move forward having a collective voice to organize and challenge this.

And they were very interested in that discussion, you know?

And that was square one.

So that is what we did.

That is what we did.

By the way, we're not proposing a union ourselves.

Like, we're not making one ourselves.

There are existing unions that are very interested.

One very, very large one, not the UDDA, that's not uh union.

Um

That's a movement to build one.

A very big union, right?

And this is what this all is all about: is just empowering and giving our assistance to the growth of the labor movement.

And we truly provoked a pretty violent, I think a violent reaction.

I don't want to exaggerate, but we had a lot of people very enthusiastically engaged to wreck this, to dox and intimidate the truckers, to call them up and threaten them, all this kind of crazy shit.

Um to collude with police and and God knows, mi perhaps they called the Port Authority because uh police removed some of our guys recently.

which is illegal, by the way.

We're going to be contesting that.

And there was this sudden fanatical enthusiasm to block this and to help the companies, who are, by the way, aligned with the Democrats in this specific instance.

So that isn't imagine if we actually started to become more successful.

Imagine if we just didn't hand out pamphlets, but it started to take off from there and become something much bigger.

Imagine the reaction it would provoke among these DSA, these jealous DSA types.

And everyone, you need to know that black shirts always come from the ranks of disgruntled, embittered, and jealous ex-socialists.

Almost always.

They usually come from the socialist movement, and for whatever reason, they get embittered and disillusioned with it, and they become fascists.

And you know who told us was, I believe it was comrades from Nicaragua.

They said,

You know, in the eighties

The death squads that were funded by the CI, these guys.

Because they saw what was happening to our party, where we had some wreckers.

They said, This reminds us of when we started our shit.

All the people who did what Bree and Danny did to you, they went on to become the chiefs of the Death Squads.

This is what our comrades in Nicaragua told us.

So, you know.

Don't fearmonger about fascism when there's not even a communist movement.

That's all I'd say.

They're not going to have fascism until there's something to respond to.

There's not going to be fascism because DSA is considered a threat.

It's not.

There's not going to be fascism because they think Hassan Piker is a threat, because they don't.

Because they publish him on the front page of Twitch and because every corporate media outlet gives him puff pieces and glorifies him.

He's never deplatformed from anywhere.

All the corporations love him and he's never given a hard time whatsoever.

He's never sabotaged or wrecked in any kind of fucking way.

Okay.

So he's not a threat.

So fascism has to be a response to some kind of revolutionary communist or socialist movement.

And that does not exist in this country right now.

It just doesn't.

And the whole thing about Trump being a fascist, it's just a scam the Democrats use to perpetually make people fall behind them.

Because we're taught this myth, this form of historical revisionism, that Hitler just came out of nowhere because democracy failed us.

When in reality, Hitler was a response to the Bolshevik Revolution and he was an anti-communist who wanted to stop the German communists and he wanted to plunder Russia and he wanted to destroy the Soviet Union and he wanted to protect the German capitalist class from a rising militant workers' movement in Germany.

We don't have that movement.

Okay?

We need to be all in on building that movement here in this country.

And every time liberals say we're under a threat, Elon Musk is going to bring us fascism, you should respond to them and ask, Okay, but where's the Bolsheviks?

Where's the German Communists?

Where's the actual revolutionary movement that the fascism is in response to?

That movement doesn't exist here, and it will never exist for as long as people are being like Hassan Piker and trailing behind the Democratic Party in the name of anti-fascism, or Joe Sims for that matter, who does the same thing.

So that's that's my long response, basically.

And that leads me to a second that leads me to a second question, and that is, if there is a, if there will be a revolution, what role will the American Communist Party Party Communist Party would play in establishing basically a socialist communist America?

What role do you have?

Yeah, this will be the last question, and then I'll bring Ray up.

But basically, we are pursuing the path of building dual power.

Dual power is basically building alternative institutions of power that occupy.

The source of power is organization, by the way.

Organization is everything.

If you can have organization, if you can have legitimate authority, people regard as legitimate.

And what is legitimate authority, by the way?

Legitimate authority is not only an authority you're going to take orders from, but it's also an authority that you're going to regard as representing the best interests of the common, the commons, not just individual interests.

So in this way, people are willing to make sacrifices as far as their individual, immediate self-interests in the name of a bigger principle or in the name of the community or the collective or something, right?

So for example, maybe you won't run red lights or maybe you'll follow laws because you were at, you know, could every single cop take on the whole population?

No, of course not.

Power, it's kind of like an illusion.

Of course, it's rooted in fear to some extent, but at the end of the day, people regard the U.S.

state as a legitimate authority for which they are willing to sacrifice immediate individual interests for the sake of something bigger, you know?

Something that can occupy a scale of organizing millions and millions of people.

Um so that there's order, law and order, basically, right?

And so this is what Mao's PLA did, this is what the Bolsheviks did, or not even just the Bolsheviks, but the phenomena of the rise of the Soviets in Russia.

So, we are trying to lay the groundwork for a form of organization that can endure what we anticipate will be the collapse of the United States.

Nothing like from a movie, by the way.

All it takes for a collapse is a constitutional crisis.

If you think I'm being far-fetched, even Chuck Schumer now, he just said, Well, we're not going to have a crisis until Trump defies the Supreme Court.

And I believe Trump has already defied a federal judge.

So, we're not far from defiance of the Supreme Court.

Um.

And that will provoke a kind of crisis which we're already in the American Civil War, by the way, it's just it hasn't gotten ugly yet.

And if you think it won't

I think you're in for a surprise.

Ray, I'll bring you up.

What's going on?

I think you disconnected.

Um

P D

What's going on?

Um, well, you brought me up, I guess.

Um

if you don't mind, I I have a few questions.

Sure.

Sure.

Um, so first of all, uh one of them is kind of like a maybe a theoretical question and and maybe uh

Uh, speaks more to like, you know, I'm not very well versed in Marxist-Leninist literature and stuff.

So, I wanted to ask you, first of all, um.

What distinguishes like financial imperialism versus fascism?

And you kind of like touched upon like, oh, it needs like you need to have a Bolshevik movement, something like that.

But I mean, I kind of feel like there's not a whole lot of distinction between like, and I feel like, you know, obviously we're in kind of a situation of financial capitalist imperialism, and that's kind of like what we're seeing played out, especially, you know, obviously not only the Trump administration, but other administrations prior.

And then the other question I had was, you were just touching upon, you know, we need this militant left-wing revolution.

uh and that the police state can't stand upon, you know, can't stand against the populace as a whole.

Um but obviously like you know, individuals Sorry, I think your your question is a little m um

uh misconstrued because it's not what I meant.

I'm I was just talking about the what is legitimate authority and using police as an example for I mean, like in the the eyes of an average person.

Uh not that I believe that they're, you know, necessarily legitimate, but

In any case, um

The it's not that I think we need a left wing revolution right now.

It's that I think we need the bare minimum of left wing politics that has the guts to break to do two things.

One, break from the Democratic Party, and two, maintain some kind of principle of collective discipline

So that it doesn't divulge into a bunch of splits and micro, you know, sectarianism and pettiness.

Because this is the problem: when it comes to the Democratic Party, everyone falls in line at the end.

You can have all these opinions you want, but there is this superstitious reverence of the Democrats as an objective power, where Hassan Piker can have an opinion, Sam Seder can have an opinion, everyone can have an opinion.

But at the end of the day, the Democrats are the objective thing and you fall in line.

And the corruption is very clear because what gives them that objectivity is money.

Not only money, but institutional power through the media, through the academic institutions, through the NGOs, through big tech, you know.

And so they have this corrupt acknowledgement that when it comes to the Democrats, we all fall in line.

We don't be wreckers.

We don't shit everything up.

We don't ruin it.

We fall in line.

But nobody thus far has had the guts to step out and say, let's commit to a new principle of politics and political authority.

Let's build a new party.

Let's build a new form of collective political organization that we are loyal to and that we respect just as much as we before had respected the Democrats, at least, you know, that we regard it as objective, we regard it as an authority, and it's a principle worth fighting for and sacrificing our pettiness and our ego and all that kind of stuff for.

No one takes it seriously.

They laugh.

I mean, our party, they laugh at us.

A lot of them, they laugh at us.

They don't take us seriously.

And they wouldn't take themselves seriously if they tried anything similar.

Because they don't believe in the power of principles.

They just believe in the power of money.

And they believe in the power of institutional power.

But they don't have faith in the masses.

They don't have faith in what the people can actually do if you actually deign to have the courage to believe in them and organize them.

So all we want is for there to be actual left-wing politics that stands on business, that commits to some kind of political principle, and does not, in a corrupted, disgusting way, mouth off like Hassan Piker in one breath, and then behind closed doors, you know, acquiesce to the Democrats.

Because let's be realistic, the Democrats are the real thing.

Why are they the real thing?

We live in an era of alternative media.

We live in an era of alternative forms of communication and information.

We live in an era where academic institutions and the media have lost the credibility they once had.

Finally, we live in an era where, financially speaking, it's possible to raise money.

And I mean, look, these organizations already get money.

Like the PSL, they got 12 million from Goldman Sachs.

Hassan Piker is a millionaire living in West Hollywood.

You're saying we don't have the financial resources to build something separate?

We absolutely do.

It's just that nobody has the courage.

It's a courage thing.

It's not a money thing.

It's a power thing.

They're too scared to be disinvited to the Hollywood galas.

They're too scared to not have the opportunity to sit down with AOC and sit down with Bernie Sanders.

They're too scared to be smeared by the corporate media and smeared by and attacked and gangstalked by the CIA and have bots on social media run sustained campaigns to destroy your reputation.

They're afraid and terrified of all those things.

They're afraid of being banned and deplatformed from Twitch and other places.

They're afraid of facing the scrutiny and the wrath of the state.

So they're playing it easy because they're corrupt and they're sticking with the powers that be just because they're powerful.

And if we're Marxist, where does the power come from?

It comes from the bourgeoisie.

It comes from the billionaire bourgeoisie oligarchical class that funds the media, that funds the universities, that funds big tech, that funds the Democratic Party itself.

And these sugar daddies, with their arbitrary opinions, with their own arbitrary views, with their own arbitrary power, shape and control the content of the brains and the minds of 99.99999% of Americans in this country who call themselves leftists.

And that's just the truth.

Yeah.

Yeah, I mean, uh yeah, I

Yeah, I kind of agree with you.

I disagreed a little bit with your assessment of the Democratic Party.

I mean, I see what you're saying about people falling in line with the Democratic Party, like kind of thinking that they're the only alternative to the Republican Party and they're the supposed leftist organization in this country.

But what I kind of criticize the Democratic Party for is their inability to rally.

Like, every time that they have a chance to, you know, stand up against, you know, right-wingism or whatever, or every time that they have a chance to, you know, stand on principle and like demonstrate that they are leftists, that they always fall apart over sectarianism and this and that.

And this kind of like the revolving victim sort of theory, I guess.

You know, the revolving villain.

The issue has always been the same.

Politics is power and it's ugly and it's fucking brutal and it's really violent.

Even if it's not physically violent, it's very violent.

And what I mean by that is if you're gonna do something like actually have the balls to step out of the Democratic Party and really build a political authority that's separate from that from scratch, brand new, that is a declaration of war.

That is something toxic.

That is something brutal.

And

And you know, they ask why, Haas, did you for so long indulge in culture war stuff?

Do I think culture war stuff is productive?

I don't.

But I can't help but notice how, for some strange reason, for two decades, leftists were being taught that.

It's toxic to be aggressive, and it's toxic to be militant, and it's toxic to stand on business, and that you should be soft, and you should be like a flower, and you should be crying tears of compassion all the time, and basically be submissive.

And I don't understand.

How do people not put two and two together?

The qualities you need, and the character that you need to build alternative sources of political authority are character qualities that are absolutely incompatible with the politically correct environments of university campuses and these safe space bubbles where no one's feelings are ever getting hurt or anything.

It requires a degree of aggressive, you know, toxicity in the sense that it's a declaration of war.

And yes, in the process of building new political authorities, people's feelings are going to get hurt because they're going to be told the cold, hard fucking truth, which is that.

No, you are not a special snowflake.

No, you are not this perfect virtuous person.

No, you actually have to do the work to get it done.

No, it's not just going to be handed to you.

No, not everyone's going to be perfect right out the outset.

You can't have a purity fetish.

These are the things you need to build political authority of any kind.

To build, not follow existing ones, but to build new ones, you know?

And it just so happens to be the fact that these are all the character qualities that liberal leftists have been brainwashed for decades into regarding as right-wing.

For all of these, the whole reason they try to associate us with the right and right wing, all this nonsense, is because we're calling out the bullshit.

We're calling out the bullshit of how they have made the left wing into a bunch of pussies.

And somehow they've made being a pussy, somehow that's left-wing now, to be a pussy.

Why is being a pussy left-wing since when?

Was Joe Hill a pussy?

Was John Brown a pussy?

Was Robespierre a pussy?

I don't understand this.

Were the fucking miners in Kansas who were throwing dynamite at police, pussies?

I don't think so.

Not that I endorse that.

Yeah, well, I mean, like the average person, you know, like they have a family and a career and stuff like that.

I don't advocate adventurism and violence and being crazy.

I say follow the law.

I say don't be stupid.

That's what I say.

But at least have the principles, at least have the dignity to just have the courage.

I mean, look, it's a fucking illusion, all right?

We, our party, the American Communist Party, the heat and the pressure is on us.

Everyone we go near gets doxxed and harassed and stalked and canceled and they it gets tortured psychologically, okay, and gets swarmed.

But what people don't realize is that if enough people just you don't even have to join our party, just if enough people come together about building new left-wing politics and call their bluff, they can't fucking do that to us all.

All they can do is corner and isolate a small minority of us, which they're doing to us right now, primarily, to deter others and scare others.

But everyone together, if everyone does it, they can't fucking do that to everyone.

You think if, I mean, they fear that so much.

People don't understand how much they fear that.

They fear people having the courage to be canceled.

And they people look at us and they go, I don't want nothing to do with that.

I don't want that to happen to me.

But what they don't understand is that all it takes is a minimal threshold of people doing it like we're doing it.

And the whole fucking bluff is called.

And they can't torture you, and they can't do all this shit that they're doing.

And they can't shut it down.

And um

And I look at Hassan Piker with his live concurrent views and all of his riches and wealth and money and I look at all this millions of dollars in billionaires, uh Goldman Sachs, you know, uh the PSL and all this kind of stuff.

And I don't buy it.

I don't buy that there's no resources for this to just do it independently.

I don't buy that.

And look how much we're able to accomplish, as poor as we are, and with as few numbers as we have, look at how much we are able to accomplish.

Imagine if Hassan Piker woke up one day and had the balls to rebel against his Democrat masters.

Maybe he'd lose half of his audience.

Let's say he'd lose half.

But he would have the power to fundamentally start a fucking

Start a flame in this country that couldn't be put out.

To be honest, he would absolutely get close to having that power.

And look how small our numbers are, and we are able to cause such a ruckus.

Imagine if other people started having the balls to do it, and everyone started doing it.

Yeah, I mean, that that's kind of my frustration with like, you know, like the Bernie Sanders of the of the of the Democrat party and stuff like that.

It's like if Bernie had l been like

You know, had the balls to fucking be independent and not go along with the democratic establishment, like you know, we may we may be in a very different situation right now.

But I mean, so, okay, I have one more question for you, and that is like, what is the difference between, you know, Lenin's revolution and that and the Communist Party in Germany?

You know, like, why was Lenin successful versus the Communist Party in Germany who failed?

And what is the sign, you know, that we should be looking for to say that, like, you know, the critical point has been reached and you know, the the the time for you know.

Uh, you know, um, theorizing and talking as like past and it's time to then seize power or whatever, you know, what it what it what would be the point at which it never it doesn't ever work like that.

It always works as you build successful forms of dual power that become more legitimate than the existing self-proclaimed legitimate authority of the state.

As far as the failure of the German Communists.

You can blame a lot of it on the Social Democrats in Germany.

You know, in Russia, the Social Democrats were nowhere near as strong as they were in Germany.

So Lenin was able to outmaneuver them easily because they were never that powerful to begin with.

But in Germany, they had such a footing, they were such gatekeepers.

They murdered and killed and persecuted.

They killed Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebrecht, you know?

And they murdered these are those were the Hassan Pikers of the day, if I'm being ridiculous a little.

Those were the Bernie Sanderses of the day, though.

They were the gatekeepers.

Anybody, anybody who deigned.

To have the courage to tell the truth about what was going on.

They killed 'em, they massacred 'em.

They collaborated with the free cops.

They collaborated with fascists even.

And they suppressed the shit out of them.

And then once they were done, Hitler started gaining traction.

And then the German communists had to realize to bypass these gatekeepers.

We are going to have to tap into non-traditional industrial worker elements, but it was too late by then.

It was too late.

They, you know, it was too late.

They had to have reached the farmers.

They were already reaching a lot of the unemployed.

That was really their main base in the cities.

But the farmers as well, they had to have reached the peasants, which, you know, there was the social democratic orthodoxy is that they are unimportant or they're less advanced or whatever.

So they are to blame.

100% the social democrats were to blame.

It was only when the German communists really wised up.

To their strategic predicament because it was so confusing because they're like our number one.

For a long time, even they maintained the view that maybe the Social Democrats will be a bulwark against fascism.

They didn't realize it until it was too late, what the situation was, you know?

And that's a shame.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, thanks for thanks for checking myself.

I don't have anything else for you right now, but I'm sure I'll be tuning into other streams in the future.

So anyway.

So Kayla, I'm going to invite you to co-host because there's a lot of users I can't see.

I think there's it says six people are requesting, but I can only see one.

So I need someone to co-host.

I'll bring Ross on.

I need someone to co host just to bring these people on that I cannot see.

Uh Rambly is a um is a troll.

I think it's mentally ill troll, but I I'll just bring them on s as a so you guys can see.

Um hello.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I'll bring Rambly on just so you guys can see like the model.

Um these are the how should I put it?

These are the mentally ill, mentally depraved future black shirts, and I'll bring them on.

Just so you guys can see what I'm talking about.

So, we're talking about the need to build left-wing politics seriously, and this is what Rambly has to say.

Go ahead, Rambly, say what you have to say.

I I would here's what I would like to say.

The ACP co collaborates with cops and has failed biology because he thinks women have two holes, not three.

So you said we collaborate with cops.

What do you mean by that?

You have cops in your party.

There's evidence for this.

And you guys also and the ACP also has a bunch of pedophiles and we have evidence of this too with Scott Ritter, Tim Russo,

Scott River.

First of all, you're making a lot of different claims.

So, first of all, you said we have cops in our party.

Do you mean cops in plural?

Do you mean that in plural?

Yes, I mean that in plural.

Okay, so besides the one gentleman who's in a town, a rural town of less than 7,000 people, who I did not even know was in the party, but actually proved to be an upstanding guy who's well respected in his community.

And by the way, he lives in a remote rural place where he's a community leader, where there's still an ongoing discussion and debate.

Besides that one guy, can you name a single other cop in our party?

Jackson Hinkle, he is a fed.

Not only that.

No, no, no, hold on, hold on.

Let's go one by one.

So you said Jackson is a fed.

Based on what do you say he's a fed?

I mean, he complained when Trump cut the CIA shit.

When?

When did he complain about that?

Remember, I can't die, so can you help us all remember?

Well, okay, okay.

Another thing is that no, not another thing.

Why are you saying Jackson's a Fed?

Well, because he he's part of the CIA.

There's proof of this, too.

Where is the proof that he's part of the CIA?

Look at his fucking tweets.

Where's the proof that he's part of the CIA?

The tweets!

The proof is in the footing!

So you you have no proof.

Okay.

So you have no proof.

You also said you named a few people that have nothing to do with the ACP, like Scott Ritter.

Why are you saying Scott Ritter's in the ACP?

Well, you all collaborated with him.

I am the chairman of the American Communist Party.

When have I ever interacted with Scott Ritter?

In but you also have a pedophile in your you also had a pedophile running in around in your Discord server.

Who?

Name them.

But there's this Name them.

Hold on.

Let me let me see if I can find it.

Geoff, please find it.

I'm so glad you're willing to be forthcoming on the board.

Yeah.

You actually believe these things.

It's incredible.

But please show me who in my Discord uh fits that description.

Let me see.

Which, by the way, is I GG.

But it wouldn't matter anyway 'cause it would be just as bad.

Who in my Discord?

Please produce the evidence.

Where's it at?

Okay.

All waiting, Rambly.

What?

We're all waiting for you to produce the evidence.

Oh, I did.

Where?

Check.

Check.

Check the replies.

Okay, we'll check the replies.

So

Clicking the space flies are loading.

I think I'll just look your profile to see if it's

Go to your profile, go to your replies.

Okay.

This this is a guy named Voivo Dean.

Who indeed said some creepy nonsense and was called out for it.

I see no evidence this happened in my server at all, by the way.

Um Voi Voi, let's look them up.

There is no user in my server

Which is the IGG server.

There is no user that has this name.

In this server.

The only thing

The only thing is that their name is yellow, where and our names are yellow in our server.

How do we know this isn't some bullshit you fabricated?

Where's the proof this even happened in my server?

By the way, he was clearly banned for this because everyone was calling him out.

He was taught, he was saying a minor was cute, and he was saying, Oh, I wasn't saying I was attracted.

It was still creepy and it's not acceptable.

We don't talk, unlike Fido, by the way, who openly sells child pornography to minors who you collaborate with, but we don't accept this.

And where is the evidence this is in IgG?

And two, this person is not in our server.

This person is clearly, they first of all, clearly they got banned quick enough.

Because they're not e okay, he left.

Rambly left.

Incredible.

Yeah, he he sounded off.

Okay, let me Emirio.

Okay, so that was Code Along.

There we go.

So that was Code Along.

Okay, now I understand.

Code along is a creepy guy from Australia who makes thousands of alts all the time and it's, you know, joins our server.

And we always have to catch him and ban him.

That's not my fault that there's a crazy guy.

Who bothers us?

The notion that this person is somehow a member of our community, an IGG, is fucking ridiculous.

But it's also especially retarded to somehow associate the Communist Party with this, given that the gentleman lives in Australia.

Kodalong lives in Australia.

And he's literally like he is like a fucking there's a wanted poster up of him proverbially.

Like we literally ban innocent people 'cause we think it's his alt all the time.

'Cause he's always making alts joining the fucking server bothering us, being a fucking weirdo.

How is that even related to the party?

By the party has no Discords at all anyw anyway.

This clearly isn't tolerated in our server, and this person is not a member of our community.

It's that simple.

We have the screenshots of Fido, who you still work with.

Rambly.

Where did Rambly go?

What a coward.

They left?

Notice I want everyone to understand something.

Notice how they could not sustain or follow up on a single claim they made about us.

Not one.

And I gave them the opportunity to follow up on every single claim they were making about us.

They said there are cops in our party.

The Washington Chapter

Handed out free turkeys to families in need with a local P D.

And that was something they immediately deleted and issued a self-criticism on, because it doesn't reflect the message of our party, so therefore it was a mistake.

It was a mistake that they admitted was a mistake and corrected for.

Meanwhile, there is one one guy with good standing in his community in a small, small rural town.

Who's some kind of deputy something, I don't know.

And

I did not even know about it until I was told.

And

It's an ongoing discussion and debate, but we have a clear now we have a very clear and unambiguous policy that no law enforcement are allowed in the party.

Look at how much I'm engaging with the accusations he made though.

Look at how much I'm I'm almost desperate for these people to accuse us of something to my face, to me directly.

So they can be shown how much every false claim they make about every negative claim they make about us is rooted in actual lies.

Lies that we and it's so people don't believe how much we're lied about.

They can't even believe it.

That's why we have to take it to court, by the way.

Because unless we defend ourselves legally,

People do not understand the astronomical lengths the feds go to to fabricate a false reality.

And no, not one that has grains of truth, just a completely false reality.

He said Scott Ritter is in our party.

What are you even talking about?

He said Jackson is CIA.

What uh on what planet is Jackson CIA when he can't even come back to the US?

When he's living in Moscow for nearly a year now.

And by the way, the Russian security services

Chinese security services Hezbollah

Hamas

And others

I won't mention right now.

and the Venezuelan state security services somehow

They could not come to the correct determination.

But you on Twitter have.

You have a thread on Twitter that proves it.

But that is out of their reach.

They can't access Twitter to see the truth.

Right?

They have no way of vetting him.

You know better than them.

Uh Kayla guys, do you guys see anyone else requesting?

'Cause I don't.

Yeah, I'll um bring someone up.

Sure, thanks.

A doodle did

Go ahead.

I'm I I ain't got really a question about the party.

I got more a question about what your thoughts are for the future.

I've been doing a lot of reading about lethal autonomous weapons and it got me thinking if these advanced so good in the next 30 years that Look this isn't just like a pothead stoner space.

This is confront the chairman, all right?

I w I I was hoping it was at least tangentially related to the party somehow.

We're not gonna just talk about robots for no reason.

Uh please bring someone else up.

Okay.

Hello?

Yeah.

uh hey thanks for having your question uh i've spoken to you before i don't know if you remember i'm a long time supporter on patreon and youtube uh so thank you yeah um yeah of course um so even though i have a disagreement or something it's not in bad faith here's my um disagreement or question um there seems to be a cope pervading in the entire party and I think it stems essentially from your influence because there's no question you are the you know short of a cult of personality you are the biggest influence on the party by far that's not to draw away from the collective power of the party but here's the cope

You have continuously cloaked a serious epistemic uncertainty about the nature of communism for a very long time.

And it seems to a lot of people to be a sophisticated kind of approach to the question of what will communism looks like.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but the your response is consistently along the lines of it is impossible to know or we are not in the business of prognostication.

We are not in the business of looking into a crystal ball.

That's what Mark said.

Right.

And I think that Marx is not a god, right?

I mean, I respect Marx more than anyone.

But the fact that he did not prognosticate is not a feature.

It's a flaw.

And I think it's a flaw that the Marxist tradition and all tendencies have borne.

I'll just tell you this.

We can go ahead and create the Big Rock Candy Mountain for all I care, right?

So tell me how to be hyperbolic here.

Don't tell me how to effectively build power and maybe I'll entertain the big rock candy mountain.

But for me, how to build power.

How you're building power.

Hold on.

How you're building power is perfectly fine.

I have no criticism of that.

Thank you so much, brother.

I appreciate it then.

Because really, that's all that matters.

If you want to talk about.

Me planning a society right now in a party with nearly less than a thousand people right now.

I don't know what to tell you, okay?

Society of three hundred million people, I'm gonna plan that.

Okay.

I know that I'm known for for being a big personality or whatever, but to be honest, I'm a little more humble than that, okay?

Uh we have a program.

You can read it.

I don't know what else we could offer.

At this stage.

Um

Uh Rambly came back if you'd liked them to be able to.

Sure and let him come back.

'Cause they were making specific accusations.

Go ahead, Rambly, do you want to follow up on the various lies you were telling?

Uh

It column lies, but I posted an entire thread.

Oh, really?

Where?

I'll link it again.

Okay.

Where's the thread?

In the reply sentence.

So you linked a you linked a user named Code along who is perma-banned, not just for this, but for many other things, who is not a welcomed member of our community, and who links hundreds of alts.

What?

Pictures of Eddie and a there's also rumors of you guys having a grooving ring.

Want to talk about that?

What are you talking about?

In the Discord, it's the head going in e-grooming ring.

Question mark: What are you taught?

Where is this?

Where can I look at this?

It's by a thread.

I'm looking at your latest replies right now.

Yeah.

I can't find anything.

You retweeted Trump Tower, and then there's a link that goes to this post is from oh, this is because I blocked the account.

Okay.

Okay, so that's why.

So let's say.

Let's see what this is.

This is just code along.

Why are you showing me code along?

That's more.

Just scroll down.

Where?

What do you mean where?

You linked a guy named Liam, yes, and all he is doing is showing the code along guy who's banned.

What else have you shown?

That's it.

Liam just shared the same thing.

Here's another one.

Yeah, this is it.

It's not just that.

I'm looking through your replies.

That's the only thing you posted.

I also posted about 10.

Why don't you read it out to me?

Because I cannot see it.

So read out whatever you're talking about.

All right.

You didn't hear about the grooming rig?

The He Hegelian E-grooming rig?

Question mark?

Pepper emoji.

Exactly that.

Are you talking about the Hegelian e-girl shit?

Yes.

What does that have to do with our party?

And who is what are you fucking talking about?

What are you even talking about?

Because there's photos of Eddie and Kyle with her.

With Nikki, yeah, I know who Nikki is.

But you're talking about the group, the Hegelian e-girl group, that I was never in, that I had no oversight in, that I had nothing to do with.

To say nothing of the party, by the way.

Infrared had nothing to do with that.

But what are you accusing them of?

Because this is news to me.

So what are you accusing them of, first of all?

But again, it it's it's whether or not this is like fucked up.

What is but but what what is fucked up?

I'm not seeing I don't you what are you linking?

I don't even know what you're accusing them of.

It's like you you already fucked up by saying this is somehow related to the party, but oh you want I don't I don't even know what you're accusing them of because I can't see it.

What are you accusing them of?

Oh, what?

The e-grooming me?

Yeah, what what grooming ring?

What are you talking about?

Oh.

Excellent.

There we go.

Yeah.

Why don't you add, like, you said something pretty crazy there.

Why you said you should talk more about it and elaborate what you mean.

Oh, I am aware.

This is the confront the chairman's face now.

So, what is this grooming ring you're talking about?

Are you talking about Fido's server where he grooms minors into the anti-ACP cult?

Because we have proof of that.

Okay, first of all, dude's not a fucking pedophile.

He's over 40 years old and he runs a server filled with a bunch of minors.

Okay, where's your evidence for this?

It's in Kyle's thread about Fido.

Look up Kyle Pettis.

Look up his name and look at his thread about Fido.

And you will find the evidence that there's minors in that server.

And that Fido sold what he called himself child pornography to minors.

And that Fido also talked about how minors need to explore their sexuality and a bunch of other weird, creepy fucking things.

And he was promoted to vet a server full of minors for the anti-ACP call.

Now that is proof of grooming.

You're accusing the Hegelian egros of that.

I want you to show me proof of what you're talking about.

Because, first of all, that has nothing to do with the party, not even infrared.

But now you're making this claim about them, which I have every reason to think is a lie.

Because look at your track record of lying about us.

So, based on one proof.

Oh, it's so funny.

Yeah, didn't you guys support Trump?

We have the proof of that, too.

Why are you just went from like calling us Jeffrey Epstein to now saying that we supported Trump?

Don't you realize you made an extremely serious accusation that you're just not committed to following up on?

Don't you think it's all reckless to make such extremely serious accusations and not feel the need to like, I don't know, follow up on it a little?

Just a little bit?

I have followed up on it.

How?

I've three.

Am I cutting you off, by the way?

The floor is yours.

Please explain.

Uh.

I'm looking at the thread you're talking about.

I'm not what thread?

Oh, Kyle's thread.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Right.

Mm-hmm.

So that's what receipts look like, okay?

That's what receipts look like, by the way.

Hold on, let me.

Okay, no.

But Fido's arguing for a sex ad, which is objectively a good thing.

Let's go through the thread and let's see.

I'm going to read Fido's comments and we'll let everyone decide how innocent these comments are, okay?

We'll go right there.

And I'll actually ask you if you think these are okay things to say.

What do you think about that?

Go for it.

Let's do it.

So going through, here he is.

Mm-hmm.

Hold on.

I gotta get

It's thread.

Mm.

Yeah.

I'm using the blue stacks to navigate, which is the issue right now.

Taking long to scroll through.

Okay, you know what, I'll just do it on my browser.

It'll be way quicker.

All right, here's his thread.

All right, let's look through these, okay?

So, here's what Fido says.

Teenage girls will be exposed to sexuality.

Life finds a way.

Now, this is in reference to him selling pornographic materials to minors.

Do you approve of that?

And he said in his defense, he goes, You're going full moralist and you want to ban sex.

What do you think of that?

Do you think it's wrong to be full moralist in that context?

Alright, let me see what you're talking about.

He was being called out for selling porn to teenagers, and he says, I have nothing to defend against a bunch of prudes.

Uh yeah, but what was the port?

Was it a Playboy magazine?

No, it was a bookshop he stocked and owned, which he sold what he called child pornography to minors.

Oh, I didn't know he owned Barnes in the No, he owned his own small business bookshop.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah, but can you please elaborate what the what was the pornography?

Ask Fido.

Ask him.

He's the one who sold it and identified it as that.

We also have evidence in that threat of minors making sexual comments and engaging in sexual discussions.

Look at this.

Fido goes, Young girls should be allowed to explore their sexuality, you Islamic mullah.

Do you agree with that comment?

Yeah, 100%!

Do you think it's a appropriate for a man who's over forty and a server full of minors to make such comments, talking about minors exploring their sexuality?

Is that okay to you?

A matter.

It's correct.

You should be able to do that.

Why is that your business whatsoever?

Like, why would you say that?

Why would it be on you to say that or make that comment?

Okay, why is it your business to police miners?

To police a man who's over 40 years old making creepy fucking comments about little girls in a fucking server full of miners that he grooms into his cult.

Yeah, I'm going to police that over 40-year-old man making that disgusting, creepy, weird comments.

Of course I will.

Okay, w what what are the creepy comments?

I just named some to you, but I'll name you even more, okay?

Someone told Fido, stop selling pornography to kids, you weirdo.

And he replied by saying, No, I don't think I will.

What do you think?

Is that the response of an innocent or a guilty person?

Just show me where he says that.

It's in the thread.

It's in Kyle's thread, which you can find in his profile.

It's pinned on his profile.

That specific one I just told you about is pinned on his profile.

Yeah, okay, so you see it now.

And and what's your excuse for this?

Do you accept this?

Do you find this okay?

I'm not finding it.

Okay, well it's pinned on his profile.

So you must be pretending.

No, I'm not sure among the first four images in the first post.

And it's the photo of that guy with a beard!

That painting of a guy with a beard.

It's right there.

Oh, come on.

He was clearly fucking joking, man.

Okay, this is a man who's over 40 years old who admitted to owning and stocking pornography in a comic book shop that was sold to children and also stocking manga that depicted child pornography that he owned and stocked and also sold to children.

He's over 40 years old and he helps run a Discord server full of minors that is dedicated to extremism.

It's an anti-ACP cult.

What is funny about this joke he made, given that context?

Can you tell me?

I think what he's saying is that you guys are being insanely stupid and irrational.

We're being irrational, really?

Yes.

You just accused us of running a grooming ring and provided no evidence.

You said there were pedophiles in the party because of Scott Ritter, but Scott Ritter is not in the party.

You said Jackson was CIA because look at his tweets, the proof is in the pudding.

Every single claim you've made doesn't even have a smidgen of evidence to back it up that's grounded in reality.

I just gave you smoking gun evidence that this guy's at minimum a fucking criminal.

I'm not interrupting you.

I'm allowing everyone to see who you people are.

Go ahead, the floor is yours.

Show us show us the opposition.

Show us what our haters look like and our our ta detractors are, please.

You're a perfect representative.

I believe.

That baristas are proletarian.

But you just made a lot of crazy claims about us, and now you want to talk about baristas.

Why don't you actually follow up on the things you accused us of?

Unless you want to walk them back and admit you were lying, or at least you were fooled by others who lied to you.

Yeah, but I no, I think I might be familiar with that.

That server?

What server?

The one in Fidozo.

That's where we have meets.

Okay, produce them.

Okay, now I can finally see the the Hegelian thing in your first replies, which was eleven minutes ago, so now I can see it.

So this was in our server.

And Nikki did not get along with a lot of people in our community, which goes to show she wasn't even in the party, by the way.

So there was a lot of back and forth.

So here's a Hegelian e-girl council.

A group chat I was never in and had nothing to do with.

So let's see.

They're talking about OF, but also theory.

I don't fucking know what that is.

Now, there's someone who, yes, there's someone here who says, when I turn 18, they'd get on that.

Of course, that's disgusting.

Of course, that was so disgusting that when someone, people in our community found out about it, is what you're showing here.

They fucking made a fucking big outrage over it, and rightly so.

But what do we have to do with that?

This is clearly an unmoderated, reckless group chat.

Where is the complicity that somehow this has something to do with us?

And where is Nikki here?

Where is Nikki?

Where is Nikki in this screenshot?

Nikki's not even here.

So Nikki's in some random Twitter group chat, apparently.

And it's reckless and unmoderated, very clearly.

And so she's getting blamed.

Where's the proof she's responsible?

I don't know.

But she's also not even a member of the party and never was.

And Infrared had no affiliation with Hegelian e-girl council or whatever.

And now you're showing a photo with me standing next to Nikki.

Absolutely.

Yes, I met Nikki.

I know who Nikki is.

And I met her.

But what is this proof?

What is this?

You made a crazy fucking claim about the American Communist Party.

And all you have to show for is our own community in Discord condemning a Twitter group chat that not only has nothing to do with the party, but has nothing to do with infrared.

So much so that the actual infrared community, they're the ones calling it out and condemning what's going on there.

You're also fucking with Jackson Hinkles associating with Andrew and Tristan.

No, no, no, don't, don't run away from this.

Don't run away from this.

All known pedophiles, by the way?

Andrew Tate Andrew and Tristan being sex traffickers?

Jackson is affiliated with who?

The Tate brothers and Sneeko.

But you're affiliated with Fido.

He's innocent.

Just because Fido is less famous.

Doesn't make him less innocent.

No, he's innocent.

Fido is absolutely not innocent because he was trafficking porn to minors.

That's not innocent.

Second of all, do you think Hassan Piker should be canceled in the same way as the Tates?

Yes or no?

Is affiliation with Hassan Piker just as much as damning as with the Tates?

What did Hassan do?

Yes or no?

No, Hassan Piker visited a brothel in Germany called Artemis that was raided for human trafficking.

So Hassan may have well have been a John who actually victimized victims of human trafficking themselves.

So if you're accusing Andrew Tate and Tristan Tate, what they stand accused of is their participation in the sex trade is through pornography, right?

Fido sold pornography to minors, and Hassan Piker visited a brothel in Germany raided for human trafficking.

I would do that.

We will absolutely raise hell about Jackson the minute you apply the same standard, not only the same standard, 1% of the standard you expect to apply to Jackson to yourself.

Then we can talk.

We're not going to talk to a hypocrite about Jackson making a positive tweet praising the Tates' foreign policy views when you guys have no problem being led by a guy who visited Artemis and affiliating with Fido, who is actually not only participates in the sex trade, but is a pedo.

No, he's not.

He's not a fucking pedophile.

You oh, is he an Abibophile or whatever you guys say?

He's talking about fucking minors, okay?

He's talking about minors, minors.

That's what he's and he's grooming them.

He's a creep.

He's over 40 years old, and he claimed himself he's selling child pornography.

Okay.

That was his own words.

Where did he admit this?

Twice.

The pinned thing.

Yeah?

And where he says he that, yeah, he's talking about CP, these mangas he's selling, where they're depicting children explicitly.

Okay.

Well, I agree, a lot of anime is bad for doing that.

But

To be honest.

There's more than just that stealth in anime, especially in the manga.

Chainsaw man.

Nobody gives a fuck about anime.

Fido is admitting to selling very specific types of manga to miners.

Hey, what kind of manga?

Children explicitly, it's called hentai.

It's porn.

Oh, oh, oh.

Yeah, he stopped that and sold that to minors at his bookstore that he owned.

Provide proof, please.

The proof is in his thread.

It's in Kyle's thread.

He left.

He left.

He actually just left.

Alright, we're gonna bring up this guy, Applejack.

Go ahead.

Hello, first and foremost, I want to uh bring up that I think we have some mutual friends.

Um, Haas, uh, one that's with uh Jackson Hinkle and one that I do consider a friend that I've met here, um

Uh, but I do have some questions that I wanted to ask about the American Communist Party.

Um, but

I'm not 100% full on with like a third party movement.

I think the system's too corrupt.

But I do want to ask one thing.

When it comes to the Communist Party, are there motivations to try to push things like the members to learn self-sufficiency, like learning how to grow, how to provide food, how to farm, how to actually be one where we can step away from things like fiat currency?

Ah, look, if you read our program, we have a whole thing about ACP.us slash program about um transforming the financial system as we know it.

Um

Regarding beyond fiat currency, you know, there are many, many interesting things.

Um

But we're not going to prescribe a specific replacement, but we do think that.

You know, for example, BRICS countries have this idea of um currency that is backed by resources, wealth and mineral resources, and for example, uh and it's a blockchain currency.

So this kind of stuff is the future and it's what we would um be looking at as far as beyond fiat.

I'm not going to lie, I kind of do like that response.

I'm a journalist.

I don't follow in with parties.

I have a huge respect for Jackson Hinkle.

And we've had some conversation because I feel like he was an invaluable source with the whole situation with Ukraine and Russia.

But I just have some ways that I want to look at things.

And I do have a large community of people, especially people that are from my black background, from my black community, that look at all these types of situations and they're disillusioned by everything that's going on.

The way I look at things is I think that electoral politics cannot work currently because I believe that the system's too destroyed.

It's too much of a virus.

It's like if you're walking with a person who's sick and you continue to stay around that person, you're going to get sick.

Any politician that comes into this system is eventually going to become corrupted, even if they're not corrupt when they enter.

So what type of fail safes do you think that the ACP can actually have that would stop itself?

Yeah, our political strategy as far as electoralism is, first of all, we need to build a strong foundation of political authority for our party, where the loyalty is to the party.

And there's a foundation to keep that in check, right?

Then the next step is very local politics, extremely local politics.

And if we ever were to get a point get to a point of get someone getting someone in Congress or the Senate, you know.

Very unlikely, by the way.

Uh there would have already been built up a very strong foundation of political authority.

Um

That is rooted in the party.

I mean, you are the our party is such that you are loyal to the party as the principal political authority.

You, it's not like AOC who was in DSA and she was in this and that and everything.

And no, no, no.

You're in the communist party, and that's who you're accountable to.

That's everything hinges on that.

You know, would you say it's more like a Tea Party type thing where everybody's in lockstep?

Tea Party was kind of like a.

A movement within the Republican Party.

We're trying to build a party, you know?

No, I totally understand that.

When I ask about like Tea Party, I mean more like, okay, so with like, we'll say the squad or the progressives or whatever they wanted to call themselves, they had a chance to lead to withhold the vote for Nancy Pelosi.

Let's think about the look.

Anyone who's running, let's say we got someone in Congress, right?

Their whole career, their whole...

reputation, everything would be built up by the party.

Everything hinges.

They are absolutely dependent on the party.

They're funding their campaign, everything.

It's all dependent on the party.

The whole thing, the whole thing that makes them popular in their district or whatever, it's all led by the party.

So if they betray us once they get into power, the whole fucking thing comes crashing down.

The same way we get them in, we'll get them out.

If we had AOC who was in the ACP and we got her in power and she fucking pulled the shit she did.

We would have been the deciding factor of her getting elected in her own district in the first place from the beginning, because that's how it works.

Party is the decisive factor.

We want to create an organization effective enough to get people to win one day, right?

Of course.

So if you betray the party in favor of the lobbyists or the system, whatever, this is all hypothetical, by the way, because we're nowhere near there.

The same way we put you in, you get put out.

You know, you get taken out.

Not like taken out like, you know, like mafia.

I mean, like, you get removed.

You don't get the backing of the party.

You don't get helped in the next election.

You're on your own.

And you know, the same way we organized to bring you up, we organized to bring you down.

We reveal the truth about who you are.

Have someone replace you, you know?

Okay, the last question that I want to ask has to do with DSA funding.

I'm sorry, not DSA, ACP funding.

Yeah.

Is this the idea of something like the complete grassroots movement?

I act this because I have a crew and we do a lot of mutual aid.

And I want to know whether or not if, let's say, I get this group that wants to actually start trying to put in for funding for the ACP, is that same funding would also be used to try to help mutual aid, like, say, what communism, in my idea of what communism is, which is helping your neighbor.

You know, yeah, we do community service and it's a big part of our party activity.

So we don't call it mutual aid primarily because we don't get anything in return, right?

We're not getting aided ourselves.

So we call it a community service.

It's pretty much, you know, we just call it something different.

But that's something I should think about.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Keep going.

Right now, the party has a strategy to finance itself through like social entrepreneurship, you know, more or less.

Creation of cooperative business enterprises that serve as a headquarters and an ability to fund party operations full-time.

And these will be owned by chapters.

Now, we have not, there's going to be a lot of work to get these off the ground.

You know, there's a lot of promise.

A lot is in the works, but it's not going to be like an overnight thing.

Beyond that, we're funded now out of pocket.

So if you, you know, have a strategy to help as far as donations or some kind of collaboration, please DM me and we can get more, we can have more of a discussion about, you know, maybe what that looks like.

Maybe if you're talking about a collaboration for a community works project we could collaborate on, maybe you could help with the funding.

You know, that would be great, you know.

Hey, listen, I just want to appreciate you and thank you for your time.

I'm an anti-war journalist.

I work with some friends and we don't ask for donations.

We're just doing pretty well in our lives right now.

We settle into a kitty and we try to help people around our community.

Like you said, we don't ask for anything in return.

I'm seeing you from the sidelines.

I learned about you from Jackson.

Jackson and I had a couple of conversations.

I consider him a friend.

And I really like what you're doing over here.

I appreciate you for having me on.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate you.

Really great.

Um

Sealer man, good night.

All right, let's bring on maybe two more people.

So Kayla or Ross, if you guys want to choose someone.

Okay, Jeremy, what's going on?

All right, Haas, thank you.

Uh I I have listened to some of your longer extended um debates and discussions about uh philosophy and history, and I find you I do find you a a serious um

thinker and philosopher.

However, I think that the the the geopolitics and the deep politics behind your party and your movement here are built on for like some some kind of sand or some kind of destabilized fraud of some sort.

Because it's clear Hinkle is a fed, but he's a he's a some kind of fed of the SVR or of whatever whatever sort of strategic Moskirovka officer Dugan is, right?

And I mean, and it's in this area that that the found your geopolitical foundation is so problematic that I think you need to rethink the whole thing.

Because you might before Jackson and I ever met a single Russian.

Single Russian, to say nothing of going to Russia or anything.

We were in 2021.

We were

at a cigar lounge he had a notebook, taking notes,

And we were talking about Russia, multipolarity, Alexander Dugin, Putin's role before the SMO.

Before I even met Jackson.

I was stri talking about Putin, I was talking about Russia, I was talking about Dugan.

When the SMO happened, I did not even blink to show my solidarity and support to Russia.

I didn't even blink.

Before SMO, and even in the weeks leading up.

Our pro-Russian orientation and our geopolitical outlook has nothing to do with any powers in Russia.

That we I mean, Russia is a power in the sense of the power of Eurasia and so on, but no institutions in Russia, no SVR, no FSB, no nothing had anything to do with corruption.

I wasn't saying that, Haas.

I'm just telling you, our position from day one has been absolutely sovereign, absolutely made on the basis of a specific and unique philosophical outlook and world view.

And we

We came to Russia.

Russia did not come to us.

Second of all, you may not believe me, and that's okay, because I know how it looks.

He lives in Moscow, and he's so pro-Russian.

You're arguing against the straw man, though.

If you want to argue against the straw man, that's fine.

In Jackson's case, I can personally vouch and attest to you: nobody, nobody is fucking giving him orders or showing him how to fucking do a thing.

There's no SVR, there's no FSB, he is himself.

He is himself.

Sharing his view.

Maybe he's being watched.

Absolutely.

I wouldn't doubt it.

Of course, he's being watched.

Of course, and they watch everyone.

He's an American.

But he is just he's being left alone.

That much I can tell you.

There's no uh there's no Russian security handler instructing him, telling him what to do, nothing.

By the way, they wouldn't because Jackson he goes to Lebanon to Nasrullah's funeral, he interviews Hamas, he has an extremely aggressive anti-Zionist position.

And although Russia, the Russian state, is very sympathetic with Palestinians and they're friendly with the resistance, they do not go that far, my friend.

So this is proof Jackson has a very independent position.

Not I was not denying any of that.

My original point is that the nature of your geopolitical allegiances and commitments are shaky at best and are based on deceptive geopolitics at worst.

So I y you misunderstood me.

I wasn't saying that that you and or Jackson had been bought off or influenced in order to become creating your alliance with this Duganist Russian perspective.

No, my point is that you can be an asset via narrative warfare in many ways, right?

And so the the part of the problem here is that it's very, very obvious that

Putin and Netanyahu have a very deep geopolitical alliance.

And then this goes then to the actual commitments of both you and Jackson in terms of Hamas and the access of resistance, as if this is not some kind of Netanyahu operation of some sort.

It's not a coincidence that Netanyahu made sure that Hamas was backed for years.

Listen, what you're saying is speculation, and I disagree.

But it's still speculation.

My view is that um

Maybe Russia prefers Netanyahu to the alternative who are more close with the EU.

Maybe.

But hm.

Look, um

Bootin the net and Yahoo

are not geopolitical allies.

Everyone knows Israel serves the United States.

Russia, of course, will exploit any opportunity it can, any rifts in the enemy, anything, you know.

This you also observe this with some of the um European uh right populace who are very much, you know, they're still NATO and they're still this and that, but

Um no, I don't think I think you're exaggerating the the connection, basically.

Um

I also think you're underestimating the extent to which Russia has indeed infiltrated uh the Zionist entity itself uh since Soviet times.

Um

The reverse is the reverse true maybe.

But at the very least, um that infiltration is there.

But let's just say you were right about Putin.

I don't agree you are.

Let's pretend you were.

Our geopolitical analysis is such that the very nature of Russian polarity and the Russian state itself and the sovereignty of the Russian state is inversely proportional to the ties the Russian Federation may currently still maintain with Israel.

A cursory glance at how the pendulum swings.

The more pro-West Russia is, the more oriented and aligned with the West, the more it's pro-Israel.

Also, the reverse is true, right?

So that is how that is the tug of war at hand.

The more the forces of Russian polarity and sovereignty and Eurasianism prevail, the less Russia has any kind of connection with Israel.

The more pro-Western elements prevail, the more there will be a connection with Israel.

And that is the nature of Russian geopolitics in the Middle East and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

I think that this is part of the problem here, is in terms of the actual nature of the depth of your geopolitical understanding.

And this is we bumped heads a little bit maybe a year ago around deep politics in relationship to Zionism and the relationship of Zionism to the United States and this whole question of is Israel a tool of the American Empire or is it the tail wagging the dog or all of that?

But the main problem here, I think, is I think you really don't understand the deep geopolitics of the Soviet Union in relationship to Israel and how the Soviet Union has always used Israel as a tool in many ways in relationship to its war against the United States.

And you may celebrate that because I don't agree because if you're talking about the extent to which the KGB had infiltrated Israel, they had infiltrated European countries as well.

They had infiltrated other U.S.

allies.

And the reverse is true as well, by the way.

And even the JFK files revealed that, that the CIA had guys infiltrating Russia through Israel.

So.

The closest Israel ever got to f to getting threatened was in the Seventy three war, thanks to the USSR and its um preparations and how much it supplied Syria.

And that war was primarily a done deal because of Egypt betraying

The forces of uh

The USSR and Syria and the you know the Arab cause.

That was what saved Israel basically.

Sadat's betrayal.

That wasn't uh r the Russians wanted to kill Sadat for that.

By the way, they saw him as a huge traitor, like a waste they he wasted everyone's money, everything.

Um I wasted all the resources and help and assistance.

Russian geopolitics in the Middle East, Soviet geopolitics, was squarely based in support for the Arab cause.

I mean, that is just completely self-evident.

That's not true.

I mean, it's very clear that from the before Israel was created, the Soviet intelligence had decided to use their assets, their agents, like including Kim Philby, on behalf of the most militant of the Zionist terrorists, the ones who blew up the King David Hotel bomb.

No, no, no.

The exact opposite is true.

The exact opposite is true.

The agents of the Soviet Union, that was the MAPAM faction.

These were the kind of leftists who were very much against the Ergun and others.

And yes, the KGB infiltrated them.

And there was a lot of intrigue going on and, you know, conflict between great powers you would expect.

But there was also Zionist infiltration of the Eastern bloc, specifically in Czechoslovakia, which where they were shipping arms to Israel in 1948 without the knowledge of Stalin, without the knowledge of the authorities.

When Stalin found out the Slanksky or whatever trial began and the Zionists were executed.

We're conspiring to steal the arms and um

The rest is history, the Soviet Union.

agreed to the partition plan proposed at the UN because it was already the design of the British and the Americans, the other two great powers, and the Soviets wanted a seat at the table.

Um, that's how they saw it.

There, there was no clearly well-defined Arab nationalist cause at that point.

Um

Was it a mistake?

Of course, but it's not evidence that they were infiltrated or that they were pro-Zionist.

And well, I wouldn't call it pro-Zionist because this is just about r realist geopolitics in many ways.

And i what I was actually referring to.

You are looking at a lot of the ways in which

Soviet geopolitics.

Has never been based in one-sided commitment to the destruction of the enemy.

Even with respect to the United States and NATO, it was not the case.

So for it not to be the case for the Soviets' adversaries in the Middle East, which was Israel, um is obvious.

The Middle East was uh of much less importance to the Soviets.

Than you know, Europe and the United States, which is the very until recently, which is where you then really begin to see well no, recently the Russian involvement in the Middle East is because of the legacy of the Soviet.

They're just now rekindling the foothold they had in the region in Syria with the bases they had in Syria.

Which is why you see Israel d openly calling for Russia to be brought further back into Syria in order to weaken the Syrian state.

They're working hand in hand with the Israelis to try to weaken the Syrian state now that it's out of Russian hands.

What you're neglecting is that that's only because since Trump got elected, there are a lot of pro-Western orientations now in the Russian politics and in the Russian state.

And yes, that has had consequences for Israel-Russia relations as well.

It's literally directly proportional, though, to the United States.

And then, second of all, I think another thing you're missing.

Is that

When it comes to actual military ties and relationships.

Russia maintains a degree of plausible deniability, but who are they signing directly

you know, um, treaties and defense partnerships with.

It's Iran.

Who are they giving the S300s, S400s?

You know, but were they working?

But Haz, you know that the Iranians actually had accused the Russians of supplying the Israelis back door uh cyber codes to the Tor M1s 15 years ago.

And these are the ones that that then the were used to shoot down the Ukrainian airliner after Trump had General Soleimani assassinated.

There is a look like a cyber attack.

Iran is itself heavily infiltrated by the CIA, and these elements do everything.

No, this is Russian, Russian-Israeli conduit.

This is not to do with this.

This is cut me off.

Absolutely, it does, because the CIA and the MI6 are constantly at work within Iran to spread anti-Russian sentiment.

And this is probably one of the forms that had taken that accusation.

The reformist factions within Iran are anti-Russian.

And Iran has always been on the fence, Cold War-wise, since 1979, because they had the slogan, Neither East Nor West.

So it was a tug of war.

And the West always, always, always was trying to make sure that Iran would never, ever, ever go toward an E a more Eastern orientation, more toward the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact.

The Soviets themselves didn't even have the willpower and the initiative.

You know, it was Gorbachev at by that time.

But, um

In any case, Iran is a battleground itself between the great powers.

Iran itself is not yet a great power.

But and you notice though that we just had a repetition of Trump, Putin, Helsinki 2018.

That time, Trump emerges from a room where it keeps out American officials really from observing what happens.

And Trump emerges almost looking like a slave physically to Putin.

I mean, that's it's it's irrelevant.

Iran and Russia have just signed a mutual defense treaty.

You know, I mean that is not exactly is Russia willing to go to war with Israel?

No.

No, it's not.

But it's clearly.

The main question is, is Russia willing to supply Israel backdoor codes to the weapons that they supply the Iranians like they have.

The thing you are alleging that Russia did happened 15 years ago that you're alleging.

You just have to look at over time since the dissolution of the USSR.

Since the dissolution of the USSR, Russia rekindled its diplomatic relations with the Zionist entity.

Everything was cozy and fine.

There's 2 million Russian speakers today because of that.

But look at the orientation of the history of the Russian Federation.

Putin rises to power.

It's becoming markedly more against the West.

There's constant attempts, you know, joining NATO, becoming assimilated under the US-led war it's all failing.

Medvedev is the high point of this kind of ass kissing, you know.

Doesn't work out, you know.

Russia's still under siege.

So the nationalistic and the hard line and the forces of sovereignty within the Russian Federation exert a tremendous amount of pressure upon the center.

Especially in the aftermath of the Maidan coup in Ukraine.

So this whole trajectory is directly proportional of Russia becoming more sovereign, more independent of the West and more aggressive against the West directly coincides with the extent to which Russia aligns with the anti Zionist forces and the extent to which Zionist forces within Russia have their we position severely weakened.

So I'm not denying that it's a battle.

It has been a battle.

The Soviet Union collapsed ninety one.

That happened.

All sorts of pro Western garbage infiltrated Russia and still has.

But look at the o what is Russian polarity?

Russian polarity has an orientation and it has a direction.

That direction is markedly in the direction of anti-Zionism and solidarity with the forces of multipolarity everywhere, including the region.

That is a fraud that's mainly in relationship to the usual main enemy, which which you're right, of course.

After the Soviet Union went away, then the Harvard boys looted and pillaged, tried to neoliberalize, turn it into a gangster economy.

It became a gangster economy.

Then Putin and the KGB Siloviki re-emerged, stood the Russian deep state back on its feet.

And it's very obvious that there is some kind of Russian deep state continuity, at least in some kind of function, with the Soviet security state.

That's why Putin is surrounded by KGB officers.

That's why someone like Dugin is not just philosopher.

The KGB guys are not big fans of Israel.

Just letting me know.

I'm not saying they're big fans.

You keep on saying as if I'm saying they're pro-Zionist.

No.

That the entire Zionist project was a tool of Soviet deep geopolitics.

And I was going to point out that Kim Philby and the Balfour Declaration, which the Soviets themselves published and exposed that otherwise wouldn't have.

Sykes Pico, I mean, they exposed that.

I don't know if they exposed the Balfour Declaration.

But they look, the Sovietism was anti-Zionist from the start.

Zionism was already in full swing before the Soviet Union even took form.

Did the Soviet state have agents and infiltrators everywhere in the world?

Absolutely they did.

Why shouldn't they have?

Doesn't mean they were...

It doesn't mean they supported the things they were infiltrating.

It just means they were...

You're arguing against a straw man.

I didn't say they were supporting it ideologically, but they tasked Kim Philby, who was one of their most important top Western moles, to actually facilitate the King David Hotel bombing against the British.

It makes total sense, obviously.

This is the proof.

This is speculation.

No, no, this is in the Matrokin archives.

And it shows that Kim Philby was used as a counterintelligence ploy against the British and pointed the finger over to Lebanon right as they knew that the Irgun and the Stern gang were about to bomb the King David Hotel.

In the archives, you're talking about, I don't know what proof, what's the proof Soviets were behind this bombing, King David Hotel bombing.

I didn't say they were behind the bombing.

I'm saying that they tasked one of their most important high-level Western moles to facilitate the bombing.

I don't, yeah, that's very vague.

I don't know what that means.

It means that Philby, who was he was a Soviet mole, right?

He wasn't a sort of he wasn't working for the West after he became a Soviet spy, right?

Look, it's all so vague and ambiguous.

It's not ambiguous.

It's extremely ambiguous.

This is not enough to provide smoking gun evidence for the claim that they were somehow creating the Zionist project to further their I don't I don't it just it doesn't line up with the facts.

I'm telling you, these are the facts, and this is the deep geopolitical.

This is usually where Marxists tend to get into problems, is because of the materialistic view of politics.

We don't need to talk about philosophy.

Okay, all right, fine.

This claim on the merits of it is not actually coherent or credible or substantial enough to justify the claim, the overall more broader claim you're making about Soviet-Israel relations.

All right, I don't want to take up all the time, but can we talk a little bit about current politics and what multipolarism really is and the actual Russian-Israeli relationship and why Trump is being tasked to divide the United States from Europe, to soften up Europe, and to create and that multipolarism is not some kind of actual distributed.

It's too much speculation is the issue.

And we don't want to just talk about speculation.

So.

All right.

Have you met Dugan?

Just the last question.

Yes, I have on multiple occasions.

Yes.

Do you know if he ⁇ if he ⁇ because his father was GRU and there is a strategic Moskirovka cell that used to be called GUSM, then became a GTK and then FOSTEC.

And it's pretty clear that Dugan is not just...

If you want to know Dugin's thoughts, he's very open about them.

He doesn't hide anything.

I'm not interested.

I know his thoughts.

And part of his thoughts are about helping create chaos, both in the Middle East and in the United States on behalf of softening up the world towards this.

You know what?

Want to know what the chaos means?

Read Political Plotinism.

He has a chapter on it.

And it's about logos and chaos.

Chaos is not disorder and disarray for Dugan.

Right.

It's order out of chaos.

It's very Masonic, actually.

No, it's not.

Chaos has nothing to do with disorder.

It has nothing to do with frenzied, you know, wilderness.

You know that Dugan has worked with Avigdor Eskin.

Avigdor Eskin, who is a major third temple terrorist, basically.

I don't know that.

Listen, Dugan has had dialogue with a lot of different people over the course of his life.

Not dialogue.

They are partners.

They are intelligence partners of some sort.

This is what I'm saying.

Okay, am I intelligence partnership?

Am I intelligence partners with Dugan?

Avigdor Eskin.

Why am I intelligence partners with Dugan?

No, I don't think so.

So, what's the threshold that's necessary from going to dialogue to being an intelligence partner?

Well, when you actually come from a family of Soviet intelligence, that's a likely indicator.

For example, I would have met Dugan too if I'd taken up the invitation to go to the New Horizons conference.

So, we do know that this is, you know, that the cultivation of intelligence is too much speculation.

Dugan is a philosopher.

He's a philosopher.

He's also a strategic Moskirovka officer of some sort.

That's why he interfaced.

That's why you have interfaced with him.

That's why I would have interfaced with him.

That's why Jackson Hinkley.

So, you think he's manipulating us?

Yes, he's manipulating you.

He's manipulating the whole world into supporting multipolarism, which is not some kind of decolonialization.

I'm going to need to trust that my appraisal of Dugan's writings is very much on an independent basis and predates my meeting of Dugan on a personal level.

I think you are reading too much into things.

Dugan is not.

Your very misunderstanding of what he means by chaos is enough.

Read political platinism.

I really don't know.

In trying to weaken the Syrian nation.

You know what your problem is?

Your problem is that you see it primarily as like Israel is the center and that's it, when in reality it's a battleground between Russia and America.

Primarily.

So the Syria, it's not about Israel necessarily.

It's about Syria is an EU project right now.

EU and NATO, one in Syria.

And if Netanyahu's rivals were in power in Israel, they'd be fully on board.

It's just that Netanyahu represents this um not pro-Russian, but definitely more pro-American versus EU.

Um

And then Netanyahu himself is this kind of uh demagogue within Israel.

Not necessarily like Trump, but, you know, it's he is a fanatical Zionist extremist who thinks that the NATO consensus is holding him back.

So he's a kind of crazy guy.

And for that reason, um they are pursuing a strategy that is more kind of um

More hostile to the Syrian state right now, despite the fact that the EU just gave him a bunch of aid and assistance.

That was always the plan of Netanyahu.

That's why he pursued the Clean Break paper in 1996 when he first came in and he got all the extreme neocons to write it up for him.

And it called specifically for regime change in Iraq, but specifically for a rollback destabilization war of Syria, not a regime change, and with the main focus on getting rid of their weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons deterrent that they could use to push back against Israel if they ever got into it.

And basically, the United States and Russia actually helped Netanyahu fulfill that in Syria.

Well, look, Syria, I don't, that's just no.

Syria, Israel had always wanted to carve up and destroy and destabilize Syria.

They got what they wanted.

They're using, you know, they're not, it's not that they're trying to weaken Jolani, it's that they are trying to carve up Syria and break it apart and make sure it could never be a unified state again.

Because in 73, they really gave him a bloody nose.

It's just the truth.

True.

That's that we agree on that.

But I guess my last point would be that Netanyahu is not really pro-American.

He, I mean, it was even all of this.

I'll tell you what it is.

All right.

And then we got to move on.

This is a specific thing.

He architected 9-11.

I have speculation.

I'll tell you what.

Netanyahu facilitated.

Let me give you my speculation and then we'll wrap it up.

My speculation is that by pro-American, I mean the DOD.

There's a war between the DOD and the CIA.

And there's always been this conflict.

The DOD is aligned with now with Silicon Valley and Peter Thiel and these Silicon Valley contractors.

And the Department of Defense has been strengthened by the creation of agencies like the DHS.

And this is a tug of war.

It's like DOD versus CIA.

CIA is with the academia.

It's with the media.

It's with, you know.

What they're calling the fourth branch, but then the DOD doesn't have the soft power, it doesn't have the cultural soft power, it doesn't have a strong foothold in politics either.

So these are the the the two factions of the deep state fighting and that n the DOD are the neocons and N Netanyahu is aligned with them.

So that's what I mean by American.

Whereas the CIA, they're aligned with the EU, basically.

So that's my appraisal.

All right.

I guess my last point to you is that I do appreciate the conversation with you.

And I guess my sort of urging is for you to rethink what might be your most righteous and good faith ideas for how to best regenerate the United States of America and really rethink from first principles what might be really stale 1800s European oriented philosophy that has sort of gotten you stuck into, I think, a very deceptive form of geopolitics and allegiance.

Thank you.

But thank you.

Okay.

Yeah, okay.

Good discussion.

See you later.

All right, we'll bring on let's see, global.

Okay, I brought you on before.

Henry.

Uh Kayla, who else is uh requesting besides Henry and Global?

Um, there's a guy, AI, um, who's been on for a while, pronouns and bio found.

Yeah, bring him up.

Uh, leftist, yeah, bring him up.

Bring them up.

Hey, how's it going?

Uh good, how are you?

Good, good.

Um I've been a subscriber to Red America uh since the first issue.

Nice.

Um pretty interesting stuff in a lot of those articles that are written.

Um my question is uh

Does the ACP have any plans for a sort of newspaper?

Of course, Leddon called for that for a party newspaper.

Yeah, let me respond to that quickly.

Besides Red America, which is very dense theoretically, we're planning a kind of blog thing that's going to be much shorter articles that's going to be on our website.

Uh, it'll be shared to X as well, but like it the full form, like X will be a preview and then there'll be a link and you go to our website and that's how you basically read them.

Yeah, that's in the work.

Yeah, yeah.

Um I would I would ask I would add maybe uh

Is there any sort of consideration for the social media aspect of that?

Um the D program, uh, regardless of their politics, you know.

Um

They had a first thought channel, which I thought was a good format.

Yeah, you know, when it comes to expanding, we have a YouTube channel.

We really need to grow the party a lot before we start doing that, though, because we all run our own social media platforms kind of full-time already.

So we just don't have the resources for it right now.

And we don't have the ability to boost them and have them gain traction right now.

But once we grow larger, we're going to have all sorts of media stuff we do.

That's similar to that.

Yeah.

I had one more question.

This is more sort of a larger scale.

Just a question about the immigrant proletariat that exists in our country today.

What's the ACP line that reconciles with proletariats that are immigrants, undocumented, that have a lot of people?

We want to have a strong foothold in a more secure segment of the working class who won't face threat of immediate deportation if they organize.

And we want to build a base, a strong base of we won't we want to revive the labor movement and the workers' movement.

Now, once we get to doing that, it will be much easier.

We'll have the necessary leverage to think about undocumented or whatever other communities.

But we we we we we cannot f begin with them, you know, um or prioritize them because it's not a secure foundation.

Um

for the labor movement.

Yeah, yeah, I think the a lot of it has to do with their their uh

Their economic power, buying power, I guess.

In my yeah, I mean, it's also the threat of deportation is just instant.

Yeah, you know, it's just like makes people very reluctant to pop their heads out, you know.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Yeah, um, to change national politics, you need a strong national base, always, you know.

Yeah, yeah.

Um, the last thing I wanted to bring up was uh, about 10 months ago, um, Paul Cockshot actually made a video arguing that baristas were uh proletariat, or at least I can uh quickly quickly kind of not respond, but share my thoughts.

Um, yeah, he basically calculated the costs of you know, their costs and the profit margins on the sales, right, at sale.

Yeah, yeah, but the question I raise is.

Labor for it to be productive has to valorize capital.

But when you look at Starbucks, the capital that actually expands, that's responsible for the expansion of the franchise and the expansion of the company, is not actually primarily sales.

It's primarily coming from credit.

The sales are just a form of data for shareholders and other speculators that show that, you know, this is it's like a bubble.

Like it's like when Bitcoin's going up, everyone wants to buy in.

Well, the stock market in corporate America works the same.

The sales rarely actually finance.

The growth of capital.

They don't, it does, it's not really where the capital is coming from.

Whereas, what Marx was talking about when he talked about capital is that.

Capital derives from the sale of commodities.

That's what builds the capital, from the surplus value, right?

That goes into the capital, which itself is what's responsible for the expansion of capital accumulation.

And that form of accumulation and reproduction of capital does not happen in Starbucks or any other modern company for that matter.

And that is a that is a big big challenge for Marxists today to understand where the actual value is coming from if it's not produced at the level of sales.

It's not just something that applies to baristas, but everything, you know.

Yeah, I mean, Starbucks and any other sort of major food corporation are big commodity traders, and sort of that plays into the speculation market.

That they uh yeah, so one of the ideas we're interested in is from Michael Hudson to understand political economy today, you have to understand.

how monopoly capitalism has evolved.

Because Lenin writes imperialism, this is the era of monopoly capital.

The era of monopoly capital is not the same thing as what Marx was talking about.

So what is the labor that valorizes

monopoly capital, right?

It's not the same thing as just being anyone who's employed or is given a wage.

But more interestingly, is you have to think about what are the forms of

Revenue

that are secure enough to act as security, financial security, or collateral for speculative investments in services.

And then if you evaluate and look at it, you'll always find it's energy like oil,

And it's the blue-collar industries, which are primarily very, very solid, reliable sources of rent and revenue.

And it's atop the basis of this revenue that all sorts of different kinds of speculative entrepreneurship and enterprise is possible.

So in our view, I think the service sector and the service industry

owes itself not actually to self-valorizing capital in itself.

Rather, it belongs to the realm of speculation.

Anything that is purely driven by consumerism is uh rooted in speculation.

Because for it to be uh rooted in um

In capital, it has to be self-reproducing.

It has to be something that is.

rooted in labor that valorizes the reproduction of capital.

Not just

speculative investments based purely on the demand of of of consumers, right?

But based in the real production of value and the real production of profit.

Starbucks and all the other corporations are all in debt, you know?

Yeah.

And, um

So that is my view, basically.

You can't just look at it by comparing sales.

to wages, you have to also ask the question of where does the actual financing come from to build the stores and to invest in them and the and the you know the the operating costs.

Where does that original capital and investment actually come from?

So so is in with with all that you've said, is does that mean that the productive process of making a cup of coffee to sell, is that inseparable from from the financial sector and sort of th that s that s sector of the economy?

Uh investment.

Speculative um

Capital.

That's what pays for services like that.

Also, in Disney World, where they're wearing the costumes in the hot, sunny days.

That is not produced.

That is not a type of labor that valorizes capital.

I mean, more so in a mom and pop coffee shop.

Is that still separate?

Is that coffee shops tend to be forms of subsistence that cannot really expand?

Interesting.

They maybe can if they get out enough loans and they pay off the loans.

And then at that point, but then yeah, at that point, it becomes data.

Like investors are seeing this, there's a lot of demand for this.

So they'll get a bunch of credit and maybe it can become a chain and they can become a franchise.

Maybe it's like an American dream.

It's kind of one in a million.

But it's not necessarily something that doesn't happen anymore.

But it's not just coming from the sales is what I mean.

Like it has to really be coming from the sales for it for that to be really productive capital, according to Marx.

And it's not.

It's always coming from outside speculative capital.

Interesting.

Okay, yeah, yeah.

So yeah, so that so I'll I'll end my time, but that just kind of piques interest in sort of what a

what a socialist economy would look like in terms of maintaining strictly productive well yeah our idea is it's always been free time.

You know, if all that really exists in terms of

Um the real economy that is

that is, you know, um rooted in some kind of like um

Wage labor or labor vouchers, some kind of institutionalized economics that's where you have to have this job to survive.

It's just like productive blue-collar industries that everyone works for like 30 minutes a day or something, right?

And then all the things that are taken up by the service industry that people are doing to survive.

People can just do things uh with their free time.

If you have a passion for baking, if you have a passion for making coffee, you have a passion for running a bar, just like people have passions for art and all these other kind of things.

We can have an information economy that rewards demand and it rewards popularity.

And we can divert resources more on that basis so that people can fulfill their dreams and consumers can also fulfill their you know their their dreams in the form of consumption.

Kind of like the internet, how the internet works.

In the non-physical digital world,

People want to open up all kinds of shops.

They want to become artists.

They want to be content creators.

They have all these visions for producing content that people want and enjoy.

And it's rewarded algorithmically on the basis of demand.

And there's usually a patron patron system sometimes, like with Patreon, where audiences are deciding that they want to continue supporting it.

because of the demand, and none of it is forced.

It's all based in free time, people's free time.

Now translate that from the digital to the real world, and that's how we want to replace the service sector.

You can't have this model applied to the heavy industry materially necessary jobs or agriculture, but it can definitely apply to coffee shops.

There's a million different ways to run a coffee shop and make cups of coffee, millions of different ways to mix the ingredients and do whatever.

I mean, here in Dearborn, we have a sprawling, very hyper-competitive coffee shop environment, and they're a million times better than Starbucks, I'll tell you that.

But

There's so many different ways, variations, you know, when it comes to service type businesses.

These should not be businesses upon whom people's livelihood depends.

These should be things that people do in their free time out of passion, just like they're doing content creation on the internet.

So, this is my view, basically.

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense and sort of clarifies things.

Thanks.

Appreciate it.

And have a good night.

You too.

Good night.

Thanks.

So, um

I think we're gonna wrap it up there.

Is there any like leftists you see, Kayla?

Like ops?

Anything like that?

No.

Yeah.

Alright, we're gonna wrap it up.

So guys, great space.

I am gonna delete the space from my from my uh what do you call it?

From my timeline, just because uh for algorithm reasons.

But um

We you can access this space, kick dot com slash infrared.

It will be archived there.

Um if you want to, you know, go back and stuff.

So, uh, that's all.

We'll wrap it up for next week.

We'll do another Confront the Chairman.

We do 'em every Thursday.

Bye-bye.

Oh, I didn't end the stream yet.

Oh.

Well, this is a little awkward.

My bad.

Turn the camera back on.

Uh hi guys.

Mm-hmm.

Um

Well, bye-bye.