Heated political debate

Vortex with the 10.

What's going on, Vortex?

Comrade Kid with the 5.

What up, bro?

Wow, Midwestern Singh with the 10.

See you, brother.

Ed Gentry with the 5.

What's going on, guys?

What's goin' on?

What's goin' on?

What's going on, everybody?

We have a

Confront the Chairman space that we're going to be doing tonight.

Um I have not gotten a lot of sleep, but that's okay 'cause I'm running on caffeine.

My heart is racing, my heart is pumping.

We're ready to have a confront the chairman space where we're just going to

Talk to um

lot of retarded people, to be honest.

But we do it every week, we commit to it, and actually, hopefully, we actually get some worthwhile, worthwhile enemies.

Okay?

So.

We will begin.

Uh I have BlueStacks open already and Eddie's going to be hosting it actually.

But I think I have some things to talk about.

I've been cooking, not hyping anything up.

I'm just letting you know something's been cooking and I cannot wait to share that with you guys.

And also, I I I actually have

Alright, so I have to make this announcement really quick.

This is not related to the cooking thing.

If you are a Redditor

And you're in the party and you have exper

You have experience managing Reddits and you know the lay of Reddit and you understand things like that, please message Kyle or me or anyone in the EB immediately, or Eddie.

Um or the PB for that matter.

Just message one of us and I don't I don't want to

Don't do it if you're just like someone who has big ideas.

If you actually understand.

How it works.

If you know how to.

If you have already a large presence, that's even better of any kind.

But let us know, please.

Just tell us, okay?

Um.

So, yes, that's making that announcement.

Step forward, Redditors.

I don't know if there's uh redditors in the party, but evidently, um

Reddit is definitely a very big thing.

Almost unavoidable kind of thing, you know.

So let's get right into the confront the chairman space.

Let's just get right into it.

I'm sure Eddie has already started it.

He is not.

Let me ask him to start it.

Oh boy.

We have some birthday announcements, but I don't know if I should announce them.

I don't know if I can.

So, yeah, I'll keep you updated on that.

And we can.

We're live, good.

Uh Eddie, uh y Eddie recently had a b birthday.

Is that I can say that right.

Recent is uh very vague.

Very vague.

Oh, so you guys know it's Kyle's birthday.

You guys know.

Okay, who told you?

Alright.

Uh I'm in the space.

How are you doing, Yankee?

What's up, Yankee?

Now, I don't know if you guys know this, but uh.

Joey, he has been outstanding, from what I'm hearing.

He's been outstanding.

And um I'm so proud of Joey.

I'm so proud of the progress he's made.

And um I've heard very good things about what he's been doing.

Alright, we're here in the space and we are hopefully going to have a good confront the chairman space, a productive one.

A lot of the time people who join the space tend to be a little lost, where they just kind of join and they go, Oh I don't know why I'm here, but what do you think about uh what do you think about Alpha Century and the possibility of life on Alpha Century?

So basically there's a lot of stupid gibberers we get.

Just people who like to talk.

I am not one of the people that like to talk.

I actually despise speech.

I hate speaking.

As a matter of fact, if I could be silent for the rest of my life, that would be wonderful.

Um I don't I don't enjoy speaking at all.

But I do it anyway as a total sac selfless sacrifice.

I do it selflessly.

And I kind of envy RFK because the way he talks, it's very doesn't take a lot of effort.

I could talk like RFK for a long time actually, you know, because it's literally not draining at all.

There's no energy that goes into it.

And basically, you know, it's just really.

Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot I was supposed to be professional.

My bad, guys.

Let's bring on the the haters, let's bring on the confrontations, let's bring on the people that h hate me and I don't know them, but bring them anyway 'cause of how generous I am.

Um Eddie, is there anyone requesting so far?

We just started the space.

Not yet.

That's okay, because apparently I have um peop okay, so I'm looking in the spaces content star side, I'm deleting this shit.

Again, nothing for the actual space, it's just some shit you want me to see.

And you want me to comment on it, but it has it's not actually someone sending something to the confront the chairman space.

It's some stupid fucking Twitter discourse nonsense that has nothing to do with this space.

So again, it's profound incompetence.

Profound incompetence.

Although Starside makes very good content, makes very, very excellent good content.

I literally went on a rant complaining about this last week.

I don't know why this is still happening.

But we spread the word, guys.

Make sure all the haters and all the detractors get in here.

If you have time to commit hating and attacking our party, you should have some time to commit to directly confront me.

And by extension, you're not just confronting me, you're confronting this entire party.

You're confronting this entire movement.

Well, not the entire party, because not everyone tunes into these, but you're at least confronting all of Infrared and a lot of Midwestern marks.

You're confronting us.

And a lot of people seem like they have a lot to say.

This is your chance.

You have the stage to and everyone will hear you, and everyone will be forced and be held captive to whatever you have to say.

Minister, what's going on?

I don't see anyone requesting yet.

Um yeah, not not yet, because uh a lot of people fear me.

It's just the truth.

And

I don't blame them, I am kind of a very scary person.

Um, from my debate yesterday, or not yesterday, Tuesday.

You know, I I have this magical ability to just pull things out of my sleeve that totally stun like Exodia card, you know.

Completely

Befuddle the enemy

with rhetorical savvy, with a degree of

Intricate and elegant.

um wordsmithing, if you will, you know.

I I I launched the nuke that they're eating shit in the street in LA.

They were baffled.

They had nothing to say.

You know, uh it's it's it's like a form of jousting, but with words.

And people fear this.

They fear it big time.

And I don't blame why so many people fear me.

I just think if you fear me, why speak why type?

Why type and talk shit?

What's the point?

When the civil war comes and they're I'm just kidding, never mind.

Anyway, um

Too many jokes tonight.

But, you know, um I want to talk about

Something that came to my attention recently.

Which was really disgusting, actually, because I noticed that a lot of people like to say that the ACP.

I understand why they fedjacked us now, too, by the way.

I'm going to explain it.

The reason they fedjacked us is because we carry ourselves with authority.

It's like imagine seeing the Black Panthers march on the street and they have sunglasses on and they're extremely authoritative and they're not emotional.

They keep it cool in the sense of like, this is not morality.

This is not feelings.

We're not bleeding heart liberals.

This is.

Authority, right?

People tend to associate those qualities only with our government because our government happens to be the authority that rules us, right?

But

We also carry ourselves with authority, so these liptards associate us with the feds because they think every form of political independence and authority has to be the feds.

Now, why do they think that?

The reason they think that is because they are the slaves, they are the prostitutes, and they are the dogs of the feds through the Democratic Party.

These people do not believe in any independent principle of political authority.

They don't believe in any independent party.

They don't believe in any independent principle of organization.

They don't believe in the discipline that's necessary to create independent forms of authority.

They consign the quality of having authority only to the powers that be.

So when they see us clearly have the quality of discipline and authority, they say, oh, you're feds.

And they're telling on themselves.

They're telling on themselves and they're basically saying anyone who tries to create independent authority is the same as the one that already prevails.

Which happens to be the one that they are the slaves of.

They don't have authority themselves, they're just the slaves of the existing authority, as all so called anarchists and bleeding heart liberals and so called radical leftists are.

They are slaves of the Democratic Party in practice.

In practice they are.

Um they can say whatever they want, but when push comes to shove, they will never ever deign, they will never dare create any kind of independent authority of their own and have the discipline to actually follow through on respecting that and treating it with the r with the um the the weight that it actually deserves.

So, that is unfortunate, actually.

It's very unfortunate that.

People take this what I'm saying, they take it for granted.

Me speaking it out loud is an embarrassment to them.

But

I saw uh anyway, the reason I'm bringing this up is because a lot of the times people ask, Well, what's the purpose?

Wha w why are you fetjacking them?

What's what's their purpose?

and they'll go well their purpose is to uh to to shitcoat the image of communism and make communism look bad and make it look um you know uh

Make it look unappealing.

And the government is scared of it looking unappealing, apparently, right?

And who who could who could possibly threaten the government except military age males, by the way?

That's another question I have.

Is the government threatened by um gender curious, obese people on a wheelchair?

I don't think they are.

I think they're threatened by military age males.

Okay.

Um so the question is who is making communism unappealing for military age males, which are the only demographic the government is actually scared of and who can actually mount significant

They could actually threaten the government, right?

I mean, that that's the people in the military right now.

That's prospective people who could be in the military.

They've always been decisive for any dispute when it comes to power.

So, I saw a tweet recently.

It got about 15,000 likes.

The author of the tweet was named Trans Judeo-Bolshevik.

Trans Judeo-Bolshevik, right off the bat, we're coming out with a great image for communism in America, right?

This is just like we're the ones shit coding it, and that's what a good optics looks like, right?

Trans Judeo-Bolshevik, who is very ironically, and this is just a testament to their intelligence, really, because they're so smart.

That they're ironically using uh the Judeo-Bolshevik Nazi propaganda thing.

But in a way that's kind of like sarcastic.

And the reason that's so intelligent and smart is because young people in mass numbers are being fed these lies about Judeo-Bolshevism and being converted to Nazi ideology.

And no one's actually doing the necessary education to actually do the propaganda, do the agitation to show them the truth.

So this person is just taking for granted the fact that it's an absurdity as if...

As if that is taken for granted by the actual majority of young people being radicalized right now.

So it's so very responsible of them.

It's so very considerate of the optics of communism of them to call themselves trans-Judeo-Bolshevik, right?

Anyway, trans-Judeo-Bolshevik made a tweet saying, you know, guys, when the revolution comes, it's probably going to be led by reactionaries, and it won't be led by leftists.

It's going to be a reactionary revolution led by it's not going to be you know, we should fear this, guys.

It's not going to be led by leftists.

It's going to be bad because reactionaries are going to lead it.

And it just goes to show how language and the meaning of words has completely

has completely um been degraded to such a point where we are now calling we are now defining left and right, not in terms of revolutionary politics versus reactionary politics relative to the actual status quo,

We're defining it in terms of how nice you are and how how how how many slurs you use, how how constrained, how much of a a leash you're on when it comes to the manner by which you express yourself, how much you're willing to actually just drop the bullshit and just

Say it how you actually feel it or mean it, versus how much you're going to be a fake fuck for corporate HR departments.

If you're a fake bitch, apparently you're leftist now because you're compassionate and moral and you'll never hurt anyone's feelings in the world and you're gonna see a disgusting, ugly monster and say that you are so beautiful.

So anyway, I don't mean to sing, I have a great voice, but that's apparently that's being a leftist.

It just means being compassionate and a bleeding heart liberal and you're just such a great person all the time and you have no backbone and there's nothing about you whatsoever that is real that actually reflects

The contradictory nature of reality, right?

In any case, look.

Apparently, that's left, and right wing just means like you're this toxic person who is, you know.

Off the leash, I guess.

You just

You are willing to tell the truth about the human conventions and norms that make sense to the majority of people in our country and just be fucking honest about what reality is.

Really, apparently that's right wing.

And that's who they're referring to, by the way.

In any case

Isn't it interesting how they're trying to define left and right now just on the basis of this nebulous cultural thing, this nebulous kind of like divide in this country between out of touch people on college campuses who live in a bubble and people who work in coal mines?

That's the r left-right axis now.

Okay, now let me tell you the the the crazy part, right?

The crazy part is that in the entire modern history of mankind, the entire modern history of mankind, the left right axis was defined by one thing and one thing only.

Revolutionary politics versus politics in defense of the status quo or the ancient regime.

So from the beginning, the left-wing position, that just means that's the revolutionary position, where you are bringing society back down to its premises.

You are re-litigating power at the most fundamental level, which is political power and state power.

That is left, the party of movement.

And right was what?

Preserve the king, defend the king and defend the ruling order.

That's the only meaningful distinction of left and right.

There's no other meaningful distinction.

So, understand and comprehend the profound irony, the profound absurdity, how ridiculous it is that someone is saying the revolution is going to come from the reactionaries, guys.

You have lost touch with the meaning of these words.

You have lost touch with the very meaning of what these words actually are supposed to refer to.

A reactionary is not someone.

Who has toxic views about trigender bathrooms, okay?

That is not what reactionary has ever meant.

All reactionary means is counter revolutionary.

That's what reactionary actually refers to.

Counter revolutionary in defense of the status quo.

Trying to stand in the way of the revolutionary movement of history and yes, revolutionary movement of history.

A revolutionary force definitionally cannot be right wing and it cannot be reactionary.

So you are telling on yourself in the midst of a profound political realignment, and ironically, they call themselves trans-Judeo-Bolshevik.

They're already adopting the right-wing ideology in a sarcastic, ironic way.

But let's just be honest about what this is.

These people are awakening to the fact amidst all of the chaos and political realignment going on right now that they have become the right-wingers.

They are now the right.

You are now the right-wing.

You are the future black shirts of the CIA, Deep State, and the status quo.

You are the right.

You are going to be out on the street defending the status quo in violent, thuggish ways, which is what the black shirts did in Italy, and it's what the brown shirts did in Germany.

On behalf of the oligarchical elites.

These criminal thugs were sent down because they had a so much anxiety and fear that things were changing too rapidly and too violently, and they had so much anxiety about that that they sent these criminals to go engage in violence to suppress the revolutionary sentiment of society.

Now you tell me what's going on right now with people marching on the street saying hands off USAID, hands off NATO, hands off the CIA, hands off

You know, Zelensky hands off to the Nazis in Ukraine.

Tell me what that is.

Are those the l is that the leftists?

Is that what leftism is?

Is that the left wing?

I mean, w there is a political realignment that has already happened.

And there's so many people that have this nebulous label of calling themselves leftists, who have no fucking idea that because of their lack of awareness about history and their lack of self-awareness about what is going on right now, they feel safe and they feel comfortable because they're calling themselves leftists.

But they have actually ended up in a far extreme right-wing position.

And it happens seamlessly.

And they have no fucking idea, right?

And and to say that out loud would be a profound shock for them and it would be profoundly disturbing to them.

But it's the truth.

They have become the right.

Not only the right, but the far right.

So, what does leftism mean anymore?

What does that even mean?

What does it refer to?

What could it possibly refer to?

What could the left possibly refer to except the force of revolution, the forces of revolution?

Mind you, the March on Rome.

And Hitler's uh uh rise to power was not these were not revolutions, these were not revolutions, these did not act these were not uprisings against the system.

That's not what happened.

What happened is that the system appointed violent thugs to take charge to suppress the revolution because they were scared of a revolution, so they they got these criminals

to do things that were outside of the constitutional law to ensure with emergency powers that a revolution couldn't take place.

And it kind of sounds like these leftists that that's what they want.

That that's what really they're gunning for now.

They want

They want to assume emergency powers.

I mean, you know what?

Let me just be fucking honest.

Trump got elected.

He actually got elected.

On what grounds?

Where is this notion coming from that right now, you know, Trump something drastic needs to happen?

He should be impeached.

This or that.

I mean, you know, we have no dog in this race.

We know that our country has been occupied for decades and decades, and Trump hasn't reversed that.

But he got elected.

What is the real legitimate pretext for leftists now posturing as revolutionaries?

If you're consistently revolutionary, there's no problem with that.

Meaning, if you are a revolutionary under Biden, and if you were going to be one under Kamala, or if you're one under whatever, that's fine.

But what makes Trump and Doge and Elon Musk so exceptional and so extraordinary that it warrants drastic emergency extra constitutional power to remove this threat?

What justifies that?

You tell me.

If you're consistently a revolutionary, then fine.

Nothing changed.

That's fine.

But why are so many people becoming quote unquote radicalized by Trump if not for the fact that he is disturbing in their mind forget the truth in their own mind

The system, and they're coming out in defense of the system.

And that's the new tendency that's going on.

They're defending the system, calling themselves leftists, defending the system against Trump.

Now fear-mongering that there's gonna be a a revolution.

And th but it's gonna be led by reactionaries so it's bad, you know?

It's absolutely fucking ridiculous.

Anyway, uh youth and those, go ahead.

Yes, how's it going?

So I have a couple of questions.

I guess I'll start with this one since it's kind of on topic.

But I wanted to ask you, and this is something I believe, is if we do get a radicalization of the population, there's perhaps, I don't know, there's going to be some sort of re-proletarianization of America or whatever.

I tend to be of the opinion that it's most likely going to be the urbanite classes to be more educated that are going to gravitate towards communism.

It seems to me that the ACP has this intention of being about MAGA, being about the rural people of America, but I find it hard to believe that they even have any real kind of revolutionary potential.

To me, it seems like they're easily fooled, like they don't really have an interest in communism.

How do you approach that if you see, hypothetically speaking, if you were to see that it was the urbanite classes, maybe not the educated ones, but urbanite people?

I will explain the dynamic of urban and rural very precisely.

And it's a dialectic, and I will explain it very precisely.

Now, at the outset, square one, the more educated urban classes will be more interested and sympathetic to Marxist ideas, and that is absolutely true.

By default they are.

In fact, at the outset and on a spontaneous level, they're the only ones in the beginning who are.

That's true.

That is indisputable.

But for as long as they remain within the confines of their class and social existence that they came from.

This nebulous sympathy that they have for Marxism and for Communism.

will never ever be transformed into a principle of independent political authority.

In the gardens of Versailles, Marie Antoinette and all of the royal aristocrats and whatever, they were all reading Rousseau.

They were reading these profoundly revolution they were the ones who had interest in it, the elites, but it was a nebulous type of sympathy, it was a nebulous affinity they had for it, which they fundamentally did not actually take seriously.

It's a form of posturing to outclass their peers, actually.

The adoption of radical and quote-unquote revolutionary ideas among urban elites tends to be a form of posturing that allows them to appear more interesting and more distinguished and more unique than their peers to career climb.

And that's the only reason they do it.

But they will never ever actually take it seriously to the point where they act radically upon that basis and discover from it an independent principle of political authority.

How is that transition made?

How does it actually happen?

For as long as they remain confined to the citadels of the bourgeoisie, it will not happen.

It cannot happen.

Even if they wanted it to, they will be blocked and obstructed, because nowhere is the system stronger than it is in the urban core.

So what is the dialectic?

How does it happen?

It's very simple.

The first step is for the educated intelligentsia who are actually principled, who are actually sincere, and who actually do believe in this principle to radi that will radically transform society.

is to go down to the people, to go down.

to go outside of the urban periphery and to go outside of their class, carrying with them the power that they have and the education and privilege that they have, to go down to the rural periphery.

And from there, and on that basis, create a new basis of power and counter hegemony.

And that is the dialectic.

And the people in the rule, uh fly over, peripheral

Spaces

They're easily duped because there are people that already are preying on them.

But if principled and educated people initiate a dialogue and a dialectic with these people, a new basis for building power becomes possible.

And only on that basis will the material foundation be laid and created to create an a truly independent form of political authority, which will never happen in the urban core and cannot happen.

And so I would even take it a step farther.

The the internet age has also made this geographical distinction superfluous.

You don't even need these urban people anymore because everyone has universal access to the internet.

That's why I've discovered for our party and for our movement, so many people are just people in small towns.

That are isolated, who saw this movement speak to them through the access they had to the internet.

Because uh th all the alternatives were fundamentally out of touch.

Well, I have a kind of a follow-up question.

I think what you said is there's a lot of truth to what you said.

But this speaks to what you've been talking about for a couple of months, that in the case that the American state, so there is not going to be a revolution, but there is going to be kind of a collapse of the system.

And then there will be an opportunity.

Some avenues will open up.

I agree with that.

And I believe that throughout history, this is really the cause of why states balkanize, right?

It is kind of elite infighting.

And when some elites, as you described, are discontent with the establishment, they look down and they kind of build power and then have some sort of revolt or something.

But I think that something that's important is I think a lot of the power will ultimately come from within, if not the institutions, within these upper stratas of society.

And what I mean by that is you need people that are in control of corporations, people that are in control, if not massive corporations, and at least local businesses.

You need a lot of people that have the infrastructure to sustain such a movement, that have the infrastructure to contest power, right?

So I don't think that just organizing, sorry for the expression, but rural peasantry or, as you said, the periphery.

I don't think that by mobilizing them alone, you'll have enough for a movement.

I think that you really need kind of people working within the elite, people working within the institution for that to happen.

You know what I mean?

I disagree because the decisive thing at the level of hegemony is that there are contradictions within it that weaken it.

So that the bourgeoisie becomes divided, for example.

That division must be exploited by a revolutionary movement.

But you don't need them to assist you directly.

You can build counter hegemonic alternative forms of power.

That is actually something very possible.

Um and the way you do that is by getting out of the institutions.

The presence you have within the institution should only go insofar as you're weakening them from within.

Um, but never, never, uh, this this notion that you can maintain a foothold in the hegemony, which a lot of people attributed to Gromsky or Saul Linsky or whatever.

It's a total disastrous mistake because the truth is that human beings are shaped by their material surroundings fundamentally.

You can be as principled as you want and disciplined as you want, but at the end of the day,

Our social environment and social conditions and material conditions, that's what shapes us at the end of the day.

So you could be someone who's Machiavellian and say, I'm going to go to the system and the environment you're in will absorb you.

It will totally dominate and preponderate over defining your range of action, defining your worldview, defining who you are.

And the only thing that could possibly keep that in check is the construction of new forms of power, dual power, that are outside of these institutions.

Without a principle of new forms of authority and power.

There is no central organization, there is no central principle of activity and political direction that could keep people in check and make sure that they are not going to be corrupted by the system of the ruling class.

Yeah, I mean, I think that you're right about that.

The main thing for me, I guess, and I'll say I'm not a communist, right?

Is I think that there is an extent to which the hegemony will be preserved.

I don't think maybe you would argue that it would fundamentally change.

Maybe that's true.

But I think that there are a lot of elements.

And this isn't the case just for communist revolutions, but it's the case throughout history that when an empire supplants another empire, say when the Ottoman Empire supplants the Byzantine Empire, for example, a lot of elements of the bureaucracy, a lot of elements of the way that society is organized are actually preserved.

I don't know if that's the right word.

Maybe you'd use maybe something sublated.

Maybe that would be a better argument for it.

But I think that...

Yeah, sorry, you were saying

I think that what happens is that institutions become reduced to mechanisms and they become superfluous in the sense that they get they no longer become the center of power.

They still have a role, but they're no longer

the same hegemony because there's a new principle of power and authority that emerges as a layer on top.

So for example, if you look at the Ottoman Empire or or for example, and compare that to the Byzantine Empire,

The dynastic principle that the Turks introduced.

Was something that was revolutionary relative to the uh institutions of the Byzantine state.

I also think there is a difference with m uh modernity compared to these more organic historical empires, which do operate on the basis of a of a of a profound degree.

I mean, Marx said that only the dynasties change, but everything remains the same in the case of China, where these new dynastic principles arise, but they pre preserve the bureaucracy and machinery of the state in a fundamental way.

But with political modernity, you are dealing with a circumstance where the principle and institution of state power oftentimes is suspended in a permanent state of war with the rest of the population, and which actually itself suppresses that more organic historical principle of civilization and collective existence.

that you see in the Asiatic empires.

So for example, in America, we don't have a real principle of state power, I don't think.

I think we have, with the Civil War, a a vague precedent

Um, of a united principle of statehood that is, um,

Still nascent and extremely immature and even today extremely tenuous.

Um a lot of what we call the institutions of power, they've already become outmoded because of technology.

For example

What purpose does the university system serve now?

Like, literally what purpose?

It's totally outmoded.

Technology alone has

Has destroyed most of these institutions already in terms of their actual um.

Anything that would survive a revolution, as you would say, you know, that that's no longer the case because of just technology alone.

If we had a revolution tomorrow

You know, the whole machinery of the state would all just be toppled and it would be utterly uprooted and destroyed just because of that.

What would probably be preserved are certain unwritten conventions of state power that are much more deeply psychological and so on and so on.

Like, for example,

The extent to which Stalin uh assumed the the role of a czar, for example.

Is an example of that kind of he didn't actually assume the office of Tsardom as an institution in an institutional way.

But because of this profoundly psychological factor of the unwritten conventions of power that existed, that's how that took form.

So that's that's my answer to the best of my ability.

Alright, well thanks for uh e oh I got a post invite.

Nice.

Anyway, thanks for coming on and uh we're gonna

So we have the autistic guy Rambly who's requesting Eddie, is there anyone else requesting?

'Cause I only have one.

Yeah, I've got a couple more.

Yeah.

Let someone else know.

Uh, hold on.

Yeah.

Is it the Michael Flynn guy?

No.

Uh who do you have in mind?

Uh Cameron.

Yeah, bring him on.

Yeah.

Go ahead, Cameron.

Hey, hey, how you going?

Um, I just have a question about, like, I feel like um there's a lot of like I don't know like I reckon you will probably succeed in America or whatever, but like my issue is that like I feel like your movement is like fundamentally like anti-Catholic and I I suppose my question would be is like do you think that if you use one political power that like you would have like more of the reason I disconnected them is 'cause they're from Australia.

Why do you have a problem with us if you live in Australia?

What what possible significance could that have, regardless of the outcome or whatever conversation we're going to have, right?

Um let's um

Let's bring on final boss of gym cells.

I don't know what that means.

But we're about to find out.

Go ahead.

Go ahead.

Yeah.

Hey, what's going on?

Uh hey w you guys seem like you're uh you're you're you're supportive of Doge?

mean we don't care about Doge.

I don't know either.

We don't really care.

What do you think about our federal employees in general?

you know.

I think the federal workforce should be fired as much as possible.

Okay, uh like millions of people unemployed at the same time or

I'm all for it.

Okay.

That's weird, man, 'cause uh

You know, it seems like we're going i it's going in the opposite direction, you know, more like privatization instead of the other way, you know.

Lord.

Well, I d I don't know what to tell you.

I mean, there there's no real private sector.

It's still controlled by some kind of government.

Um

But in any case, I don't.

I mean, I don't.

I'm not here.

I'm not going to defend the imperialist state machine.

It's just that simple.

Yeah, I hear you, but what about like the rank and file?

You know, like you're just a you know, you're a public sector guy, you know, but uh.

You know, you're not part of it.

You're just uh you know

I think I'm not going to defend the institutions.

I'll give you a good analogy.

I'm not going to defend the CIA just because there's a janitor who works at Langley who's going to get fired if the CIA is destroyed.

That's really the reasoning here.

Like, okay, well, it's a tough world.

All right.

Do you think Doge is really about efficiency or is it really about?

I don't care what it's about.

I really like how they shut down USAID and, you know, and then replace it with a private company, you know?

Replace it with the power.

Private companies don aren't empowered with the force of the repressive apparatus of the state.

So

You know, pri privatization

The ship has sailed so fundamentally when it comes to that.

Like, for example, the Federal Reserve is private banks who literally run the economy.

Under Obama, we bailed out banks.

Like private banks, i we just gave them public money.

You know, I mean, like that that trend, there's nothing more that can be done.

What do we have that can be privatized?

The government took control of a bunch of them after 2008 as well.

This happened.

Or the reverse.

When you think about it, it's the reverse.

The government didn't nationalize them, the government itself.

It started becoming of like part of the state machine is that the private sector started having authority in ways they didn't even have before, you know?

What do we even what public

What do we have that can be privatized, even though you know?

That's the issue.

Like, what do we have?

What's left?

I guess the the the the the parks?

Federal land?

That was stolen from the the Indians?

What are we talking about here?

Post office.

Yeah, they're talking they talk about privatizing the post office and uh

You know, we got millions of federal employees, you know, just like you know, dudes that don't have too much power.

You know, you're just approving patents or freaking working for the DOD, you know, engineering, you know, federal firefighters.

Class struggle is a ruthless thing that is fundamentally impersonal.

And

There there is no such thing as personal compassion in politics.

There's no such thing.

I don't like appeals to, you know

the janitor working at Langley is going to be laid off.

It's like, well we're we're looking at systems and institutions of power, right?

And that's the only analysis I will accept that has any meaningful relevance.

Um

The question of what should be done with the livelihoods of millions of Americans out of a job.

I mean, if I was ever given a position of power to address that question, you know we would have a socialist country.

You know that we would have a uh an ability for everyone to have a decent paying and so on and so on.

But what are we talking about here, you know?

I don't like thi I'm so sick of this personal blackmail that oh well if we don't vote for Kamala there's all these people that are gonna get hurt.

Well guess what?

People are getting hurt every single day.

In large volumes, in magnitudes that are not even fathomable at an individual level.

And that's not where politics has relevance.

Politics has relevance at the level of fundamentally impersonal collective principles and structures and systems.

And I don't any argument against Doge on the basis of federal employees losing their livelihoods.

Well, a lot of the Iraqi civilians lost their livelihoods and federal employees, and we were all culpable in that because we paid taxes.

You know, I don't know what to say.

Like, like.

At what level are we actually morally responsible for this because of our inaction?

At what level?

Because it feels like we're picking and choosing right now.

Feels like we're really, really picking and choosing.

Is it unfortunate that a lot of people depend on the imperialist state machine to make a living?

Of course, it's unfortunate.

But is that a sufficient is that sufficient for us to start saying, no, let's preserve the imperialist state machine and start defending it?

No, it's not.

It's also hypocritical in my view.

Because it's picking and choosing morality.

It's picking and choosing what where human life and livelihood matters and where it doesn't.

Okay.

Think of the amount of jobs and happiness of the American people that's being suppressed and

made impossible because of the imperialist state machine's ability to suppress the population.

Think of how much lost opportunities, lost happiness, lost prosperity that came that comes from that fact that we we're an occupied regime and government.

Chaos and turmoil in the imperialist state apparatus is not my fucking problem.

I'm not gonna sit here and and say we need to rescue and defend this rotten order from the collapse that it deserves according to historical laws because harm is going to come.

Won't this rotten order become more rotten?

You know, like isn't the goal of Doge to just privatize a lot of the same shit that's going on now?

It's like, hey, we'll fire all these g let's say I let's say I'm a guy, I'm a public sector guy in the Defense Department, and then I end up working for a contractor doing the same thing, charging departments.

What difference does that make?

It costs the taxpayers more money, you know, it's like it's the same thing, but.

charging more, you know.

It's like what's the point?

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

I mean, look, the the rotten order becoming more rotten as a consequence of a fundamentally rotten premise is not my problem.

Like, it's not incumbent upon me to defend a rotten order, to stop it from becoming more rotten than it is.

It's incumbent upon me to remain faithful to an entirely contrary principle of politics, which I am.

Yeah.

I don't know, man.

I'm kinda retarded, but it it it sounds like

It just sounds like privatization, you know?

I don't know.

But why why are you what do I have to do with that?

Just because I'm not willing to defend the federal government, I I I have nothing to do with it.

I know I will not defend the federal government.

What becomes of the federal government amidst its uh the the devastation and ruin and chaos and turmoil and collapse?

Blame nothing else but the contradictions of the system.

Don't blame me for not volunteering myself to defend Nancy Pelosi and her husband.

No, I mean, I hear what you're saying, but like, you know, like the other day I was hearing you kind of uh fuck what was that debate you had with that uh that guy and you were kind of uh you were talking about you know a lot of the technological innovation we have comes from you know the government and becomes private that's true yeah exactly like you know we have like these it sounds like to me that the system is just becoming more dysfunctional

Mm-hmm.

It's not our responsibility to defend a dysfunctional system.

It's our responsibility, again, to remain faithful to a completely different principle of political authority.

and politics.

So so how can like a a person let in theory they're in the public sector, how can they make the positive change for

What can they do?

Join our party.

Join our party and fight for our program.

No, right.

All right, I think I'm taking up too much time here.

Sorry.

Thanks for having me on.

All right.

Orange, let's bring orange on.

Orange is an ally, by the way.

Is there anyone besides Rambly?

Um, yeah, there's a couple.

There's LeBanish.

LeBonishe.

I think they were on before, so let's prioritize someone else.

Uh, and then the Michael Fiend guy.

All right, uh, Orange, sorry, but this is really only gonna be for ops.

Bring on the Michael guy.

Mm-hmm.

Go ahead, Michael.

Huh.

So

I just had a I uh just joined the party recently.

Um I've been a

kind of listening to uh several of the executives kind of like uh debating in different places, but I'm wondering like uh this uh kind of uh the industrial policy that you guys have kind of uh put forward or whatever

Do you

Um

Is there

idea of um

sort of I mean the idea of the state or something under communism, I mean, would that be do you envision like a kind of

Institutions that would be in charge of kind of lining people up with work.

Yeah, well if you read the program, we believe in

Converting the major companies into state-owned enterprises.

So that would be the beginning, is the principle of state-owned enterprises.

Okay.

So in the I mean, would you go about kind of a I mean, to get people like in terms of their expertise maybe

That aren't um necessarily uh communist uh

To, you know, like the last speaker kind of mentioned a lot of technological advancements coming from the government.

Would you try to recruit people from existing institutions and re-educate them?

I'm sorry, we only do like one question and I answered one, but I'll answer the second one and just say that I think we're getting ahead of ourselves a lot.

That's a question for when that becomes of more press.

I don't know what the significance of that question is, and I have trouble answering it because it's like we are so far from the reins of power right now to make that kind of decision.

I know the Bolsheviks had to make decisions when they immediately seized power to re-educate existing experts and stuff, but the the general goal is that you want

You want new institutions that operate under new principles of state power and which bring immensely more people gatekept from uh power.

You want to bring them in um much more than before.

Um so yeah, that's that's really all I could say.

toward that end.

Um apologies for uh

Running you off a little bit, but I

We um

Yeah.

Anyway, uh Eddie, is there anyone else requesting right now or?

Only Rambly and Lebanese.

Oh, Joseph just requested.

Gotta let's bring bring Joseph on.

Go ahead, Joseph.

You won't hello.

Yeah, what's up?

The Nahaz, the Gulags, they were real.

Like, hundreds of millions died.

It was a good thing.

Stalin did nothing wrong.

Do you know that?

Hundreds of millions died in the Gulag.

Yeah, dude.

Maybe even more.

Like billions died in China under Mao.

And they all deserved it.

Now did nothing wrong.

Stahl did nothing wrong.

You know this right.

How do you know it wasn't trillions?

It may have been.

I mean the the real numbers were kept secret, it's a good thing.

So what's your point?

I don't really have one.

I'm just way more communist than you.

I'm I'm the mega tanky.

I'm the giga tanky.

Yeah, I don't really have a point.

Are you the type of person that, um, was like throwing popcorn in the Minecraft movie theater when you saw Chicken Jockey?

That was throwing popcorn to people.

I'll sell them.

When someone's taking a shit in his ball, I like to piss all over the floor

In the runaway we got on man.

Yo, what the fuck?

Sounds really exciting.

It sounds like you live a really exciting life.

I do, I do.

Anyway

Uh, that was the Joker everyone.

That was like uh the guy they were before they chose Joaquin Phoenix they were gonna have him be in the movie with

Lady Gaga is

Anyway, uh w anyone else uh besides Rambly, Eddie, or we're gonna have to bring Rambly on.

Um we've got Indy Idili.

He's an ally too.

Oh, and then Plastic Patty, that might be a hit.

Yeah, bring bring them on, sure.

Several, uh, like two or three years ago on stream, you said in a hypothetical matchup between uh fucking Godzilla and King Kong that not only would King Kong win, but it would be like okay to root for him.

Do you still hold this position or have you self-critiqued?

I I like um

King Ghidorah, the the the alien one.

Yeah, but the thing is, is the dinosaur that breeze fire is a lot cooler.

I disagree.

I think King Adora was the correct one.

Well, like an alien.

That's an outsider.

Exactly.

It's gone by.

But I understand the King Kong thing because he's a primate.

He's like, what's it called?

Um.

Human-like, you know what I mean?

But like, Godzilla.

Like, struggled.

Like, like, he rose up from the he like he's from Oblock, right?

That shitty island where he, like, got nuked or whatever, and that then he got big.

He was, like, grinding.

Like, he leveled up.

Where, like, King Kong, he was just like, it's like a Nepo baby.

He was, like, born into that.

You know what I mean?

Like, there's nothing really special about King Kong, regardless of his, like, um.

Y you know, the happen chance of his birth.

Isn't that true for anything?

No.

'Cause Godzilla grinded.

Like like, yeah, he was like getting bigger slowly.

If it wasn't for his parents uh looking like that, he wouldn't be that big like that, you know?

It's 'cause his species he got the inheritance of his species.

Listen, agree to disagree.

That's all I have to say.

We'll just end it there then.

All right.

Is there anyone else besides Rambly, Eddie?

Um, no, Lebanese, Indy Dil.

I don't know how to pronounce it.

I think they're both allies, and then Rambly.

All right, we're all right.

Time for Rambly, everybody.

I mean, here we go.

This is the author and he comes on every week.

Okay, um, I do want to ask two questions.

One, um, why do you think that T-Rexes aren't real?

Because

Oh there 'cause of, you know

Okay.

So why do you think T-Rex's aren't real?

Have you seen one?

They're extinct, dumbass.

You didn't answer my question.

Have you seen one?

Their fossils are in the museum, but that doesn't mean they're not real.

Have you seen germs?

They're very much real.

I have, I have seen them.

Anyways.

My second question.

How many holes do Remen have below the belt?

Woo!

So I was researching autism after you came on and I was learning that autistic people they have these like compulsive things they have to do or else they kind of start rocking out you know like they start they start having these like aggressive exertions of physical activity that because they're kind of like it's a lot of rage that builds up so they have to have this you have this like compulsive behavior they have to do or else they become like you know dangerous so i think that that is that for you dude just answer the question just answer the question

Yeah, there you go.

Just answer the question, Haz.

See?

You live with your parents?

No, I don't.

I'm currently in a dorm.

But again, just answer.

What does this have to do with the Great Holes question?

Answer the question, Haz.

How many holes?

So you're in college right now?

Yeah.

And this is what you do with your spare time?

I study.

But this is like...

Don't you have friends?

Uh, yeah.

Why don't you say that?

But the thing is, dude, answer the question, dude.

You're dodging the question so hard.

I know.

How many holes do women have below the belt?

I want to know more about this big fan of.

No.

No, no.

Stop.

How many holes?

How many holes?

We're doing holes.

We're doing holes.

Talk about holes.

How many holes?

Rambly, you said you're in college in the dorm by yourself and that you have no friends.

No, I'm asking how many holes do women have below the belt?

Uh, Rambly, do you have like a girlfriend or no?

There's nothing wrong with not having one, but just asking.

Did how many holes?

How many holes?

Just answer the question.

Stop asking me.

I'm just gonna ask you other ones.

And no, I don't have a girlfriend.

Right, doesn't surprise me.

But let's say I called your mom and I told her that you do this every week.

What would she think?

What would she think of?

Be honest.

Like, how would she next time you like go home for Thanksgiving dinner or whatever you do when you go home?

You're sitting at dinner and she's like, oh, you know, Rambly, or whatever your name is, this guy named Haas called me and he said that every week this is what you get up to.

And you asked this weird question about women's genitals.

What would, how would like she, what would she see you like?

Like, how would she react to that?

What would be like the expression on her face?

Would she be disappointed?

Oh my god.

Oh my god.

Dude, Rambly.

Why do you want to call my parents about this shit?

Just answer the question.

Because I think I know what their reaction would be.

I don't want to call them.

I'm not going to call them.

I'm just saying, like, I know what the reaction would be.

They would be, let's call the doctor because it's an autism thing.

Always trying to.

No, no, no, no.

My parents are insanely supportive of me being autistic.

That they're gonna need to provide you more support if they ever knew as my parents love me for who I am.

I think that's true.

This is who I am.

I know that, but they also need to help you medically because you do crazy things like this and they need therapy.

Yeah, I know you are.

And you need to have more therapy.

And I should talk to your therapist.

Uh no, you're not gonna talk to my fucking therapist.

Why not?

You're gonna answer the question about how many holes women have below the belt, dude Have you talked to your therapist about this weekly activity you do?

Are you good you get on, um

This this space.

Oh, I why would I?

Why would I?

I think they would be interested.

I think they would be interested.

Dude, how many holes?

Just ask just answer the question.

Is your is your therapist, um, trained in psychoanalysis?

Yeah, she doesn't give a shit about the fact that I'm autistic.

Just answer the question.

How many holes?

Because I think your fixation on this topic would reveal things about your psych that you probably didn't even know.

I think your therapist would be interested in it.

And there may be a cure for autism at the end of the tunnel of this.

Research has shown that it's not curable.

Oh my God.

But if your therapist knew about what you do every week and put the dots together, they may be able to discover something.

I'm not saying it's we found a cure yet.

I'm just saying I want to contribute to that cure by documenting more data about autistic behaviors.

There is no cure, period.

No, in order to get a cure, we need data.

You are so ignorant.

You are so ignorant when it comes to autism.

I know, but there are.

It literally is just neurodivergence.

I know, but there are autistic research centers that need more data on autistic behavior, and this could be useful to them.

They could actually use this data.

I don't think it's funny.

It's not funny for you to laugh at this crisis.

And these research centers, they could use the data of, you know, it's things that they never knew.

Autistic people have been documented being fixated on Sonic the Hedgehog and Super Mario and all this other kind of stuff.

But this is something new that could contribute to progress and science, you know?

Dude, dude, just answer the question.

Just answer the Great Holes question.

How much data about autistic behavior will it take to answer the question how many holes do women have below the belt?

I think a question like that, the answer is already contained in the question.

And the answer is very simple, Rambly, is that you have a severe case of autism.

Very severe case of autism.

I'm not nonverbal, dude.

How many holes?

So, is it are you on Eastern time right now or is it Pacific time?

I'm not telling you that how many holes I'm just saying, 'cause I'm imagining somebody in their dorm at 11:47 p.m.

And do you do is the dorm only yours, or you have a roommate?

All to myself.

Oh, yeah, that's not surprising.

But are the walls thin or are they thick?

Like, do do people hear you screaming this?

Dude.

At and late, I'm sure some people are.

I'm sure some people are trying to sleep, Rambly.

Dude, how many holes?

Just answer the question, dude.

Did you watch that movie with Shia LaBeouf?

It's called Holes.

I think you would like it a lot.

I did when I was in sixth grade, but come on, man.

Just answer the great holes.

Answer the great holes question.

How many holes do women have below the belt?

If you watch the Shia LaBeouf movie again, you will actually cure your autistic fixation on this question by transferring it to something else.

Dude, just answer the question, how many holes do women have below the belt?

Cool.

Ask your therapist first.

Well sh she already knows 'cause she's a woman.

I'm asking you, how many h holes do women have below the belt?

Maybe she maybe she doesn't.

Ask her.

See?

They teach this shit in school.

How many holes, dude?

Why are you s why are you dodging the question so much?

If they teach it in school, why do you why do you why why do you why are you so curious?

It sounds like you're very curious, like you don't know.

I actually, yeah, I am a little curious.

'Cause I want to know the answer.

How many holes?

So you don't know is what you're saying.

Yeah.

Well, you should probably find a girlfriend and she'll teach you.

There we solved it.

There we go.

Rambly, he's by himself in a dorm in college.

He has no friends.

He has no girlfriend.

And he comes to my space every week asking about women's genitals.

I don't know, dude.

Download Tinder.

Go go go um.

Go to Autistic Um Autistic Meetup.

Find some apps for Autistic People.

They can find each other and, you know, I don't know.

Find yourself an Autistic Woman who will share your

your behavior and approve of it.

'Cause I don't know if there's a lot of um neurotypical people who will, to be honest.

Anyway I just solved that whole thing, you know?

I just solved it all.

So

Um let's is there anyone else, Eddie, besides Joseph?

'Cause

Um Garden Mutual.

Yeah, go ahead, bring them on.

Go ahead, man.

Am I out?

Yep.

What's up, man?

Question for you.

I recall in a

most likely paraphrase poorly.

American taxpayers are culpable

For what happened with the Iraqi citizens that you were referring to, I was lost.

If I you could help me get better up to speed with uh was it a Difa, was it something else?

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

Not too long ago earlier in the space, you made it.

Yeah, I'm saying everyone is culpable in the system and is culpable in human suffering in some kind of way.

So I don't like this argument that I have to come out and protest hands off NATO because there's a janitor who works at Langley that might get fired.

You know, and and and his life is going to be made worse as if it's my fault, you know.

I just think you you pick and choose what human suffering that you're responsible for that you're going to act to to reduce or whatever.

And I just I don't like that argument.

Well, I'm I'm not uh

saying that there's uh I mean forget forget taxes by waking up and and and and uh eating food, you know, somehow that's all interconnected with with some horrible war crime happening in the world, you know?

It just it would seem that if uh if American taxpayers are culpable for something happening to an American or an Iraqi citizen, um it seems like uh somehow our uh taxable earnings, the money deducted from our earnings to the government, the US government, are somehow responsible uh for harm against an Iraqi citizen.

We pay taxes and part of what we pay goes to the military, which goes to commit atrocities against innocent people.

Aren't these taxes forced?

Sure, but we still pay them.

So if we didn't pay, we wouldn't be culpable.

Yeah, if we o if we overthrew our state, we would not be culpable for what it does anymore.

I don't know what to tell you.

We are culpable.

I'm not saying Americans should beat themselves up

But I'm saying I was using that as an argument against the idea that we need to defend uh the government from Doge.

Because, oh, well, Doge is bringing some suffering.

Well, suffering is uh

We're bringing suffering either way, no matter what we do.

You know, it just, it's a question of.

What we are willing to act on behalf of from the perspective of principles, from the perspective of structures, from the perspective of systems, but the idea that you can just blackmail everybody with personal stuff, you know, again, the janitor working at Lanely, that's not a principle of politics.

It's not a principle that gives rise to a political position.

You have to have a bigger picture.

You have to have a bigger picture, and bigger pictures are cold.

Bigger pictures are cold because they're not personal.

When you have a bigger picture,

You look at things from the bigger picture of how it's all interconnected and yada yada yada yada, you know, that is very cold because it's no longer personal, because you're no longer just referring to a given person's personal life, but you are referring to the impersonal collective reality and collective principle that does actually affect people's life at scale.

You know, uh uh a political principle according to which the government should work for the people.

will lead to considerable considerably less needless suffering than a principle according to which the government should work for Wall Street.

That's a principle.

It's not personal though.

It's a principle.

Principles are not personal.

And politics is about that, it's not about the personal.

It's about impersonal commitments that are collective at scale, that are systemic and are institutional.

So, I am in favor of Doge cutting USAID and cutting as much apparatuses of the Imperial State Machine as possible.

And that puts a smile on my face, and I can definitely say I have no problem with it.

That's it.

Principles aren't personal, political principles are not personal?

No, they don't address personalities.

They don't address individual people.

They address the common reality that we share, which, of course, affects people individually.

Of course, it does.

Should we accept that as a universal fact?

Yeah.

I recall um probably incorrectly.

And I'm I'm very uh short and sasqui pidelian.

Um

Uneducated people are not drawn to Marxism because the educated people naturally are.

Learning about Marxism is a form of education, so it's natural that people who are more educated will probably have an easier time learning about it than people who are uneducated.

Would that be lack of access to the resources to learn about Marxism?

Yes, it's a lack of it's a lack of access.

And it's a lack of being put in an institutional framing in which you are thinking about things.

at a scientific level.

Rather than just rather than just, you know, whatever makes sense whatever happens to immediately make sense to you personally.

Well, that would be unrelated to principle.

The uh would you disagree that public school systems fail to accurately educate us?

Why is that unrelated?

What do you mean it's unrelated?

Well, if it's uh if it's uh internalized personally, it wouldn't be based on principle.

Uh, would it most people, yeah, most people do not their their consciousness does not directly uh stem from principles, it stems from what makes sense to them personally.

Yeah, would you disagree the public education system state by state, nationwide maybe, fails to accurately educate on Marxism?

I mean it doesn't at all.

It doesn't it's not accurately or uh inaccurately, it doesn't at all.

It doesn't teach anyone Marxism at all.

Why would it?

That would make the uh public si uh school system a failure at uh providing uh people the ability to be educated.

Which it is, yeah.

According to what standard?

The one you just laid out.

Based on uh being uh unaware fully factually of Marxism?

Or what's the end of the Are we uh basing someone being educated or not based on whether they know the facts about Marxism that

According to the argument you just made, yes.

In every possible circumstance or argument, no.

But that's what you just said.

Well, I'm I'm just asking questions.

I'm not arguing.

I think that public education

lends itself much less to people discovering and learning about Marxism than universities do.

Because universities tend to, um

force people to think more deeply and critically.

Uh supposedly, you know.

They also um

They also there's also the fact that that that marxism has been sanitized in universities.

You know, it's it's been made something toothless and removed of its revolutionary edge, so people have a much easier time.

you know, learning about it and and because uh there are a lot of so called Marxists whose views are not incompatible with the ruling institutions of society.

So there's all sorts of reasons, you know?

No, I I hear what you're saying.

The uh the oligarchical institutions, basically, right?

Yeah.

Anyway, Garden, thanks for coming on.

That's a lot of questions.

Abe, go ahead.

Go ahead, Abe.

Hello.

Um

I don't want to uh go back to what you guys were just talking about and I don't want to be argumentative or confrontational really.

I just want to present some facts and um get your perspective on uh general economics because I come from the understanding that communism has a lot of planned economies.

So with um I guess the stock market dropping that one couple days by ten percent and China, the CCP um being tariffed over a hundred percent, um I just use like uh the Gaussian uh solving linear equations to understand economics and uh GDP.

So arranging the variable coefficients for like consumption, investment, government spending, savings and net exports.

I think with what the like that's that's just like the facts I want to present, but my analysis leads me to believe that if done right with everything on the books with like uh Inflation Reduction Act, which is a really far left policy but came with a lot of regulation that wasn't released or affecting the American economy and uh the tariffs that uh have been put in place.

Eddie, I'm sorry, but they're

I know I'm you know, this is a forum for the masses.

Let the people speak their mind, but

Even I have limits as far as my patience.

Even I have I mean the the Gaussian linear coefficient I mean what the hell are we talking about here?

All right this guy is like building a fucking uh like a nail bomb in front of me.

He's talking about the Gaussian you know he's like engineering some kind of device and I it's dangerous.

I don't we have to shut it down.

Mm-hmm.

Looks like we don't have anyone else.

He was like Walter White cooking, but instead of blue meth, it was like poison gas and it was dangerous, so we had to stop it.

It's like Dexter's Labs type of shit.

The Gaussian curved symmetry of the G and I coefficient, which we put man, what the hell is going on, man?

You know

What what are we doing here?

We w w we w we landing someone on the moon?

Are we building rocket ships?

You want to bring on this Abe guy?

We already did.

That was it.

Oh.

He had a whole presentation ready.

I just

I just no, it's not gonna happen.

It's just not happening.

Alright, I'll Abe, you can come on.

You have to be super simple, like, and just get to the point right away.

Get to the point.

Like, right away.

Hello.

Um excuse me, I guess uh I guess I tested your patience.

Uh I'll try to keep things in lay terms.

No, just get right to the point.

Skip past all the reasoning and just get right to the point.

I mean, how since the global market has been probably hit just as hard as the American market and China's currency dropping, how can we defend or how do you defend or look at communism as an international or ability to sustain global power because America is a global power.

Would you think that step to communism is just to say that it could be another stage in the American decline?

I'll just start with that simple question.

I don't know what you mean.

Do you mean...

Would communism correspond to America declining from its status as a global power?

Is that what you mean?

Yes, because we have this global empire with our dollar as the reserve currency and we have these military bases across the whole world.

And to me, communism is the solution to how we preserve our nation as a unified nation, even though we're losing our empire.

Because when the collapse happens, the decline you're talking about, it's going to go in the direction of Balkanization.

Our nation will be destroyed.

And foreigners will come, probably, like NATO, and carve it up and create spheres of influence for themselves.

So we have to address the question of how fundamentally we can build the premises of civilization one and also a sovereign economic foundation from scratch to actually have real national independence and national existence.

So to me that's communism.

That's the way.

We have to go inward and and and uh

Build on uh on that foundation.

I agree on sovereignty.

I'm a little wary of like communism's authoritarian tones and social type things.

Because when you were like kind of being displeased with my presentation, it just reminded me black intellect is not the most valued thing in this world.

I didn't even know you were black.

So what are you talking about?

I know, but I'm just saying from my perspective, it's just like one of those things where I open my voice, like open my mouth, and like I'm never received with like respect or like attention or like.

It doesn't have to do with you being black because you have a America, UK, France.

I thought you were.

I thought for you're from Europe or something.

I don't know what w race you are.

I'm I'm just saying from like the perspective of like would communism s still allow a safe America?

Um because it may lend itself to that cold policy that you were trying to describe earlier.

W what you said safe?

Yeah, 'cause if we're prescribing cold policy and trillions of dollars are moving and uh it's still America, would that polarity from communism like how would you view the safety, national security aspect in America?

S say uh what's the safety from what?

Like, um, so I was saying from my perspective, like, I'm black, I felt, like, unheard or unappreciated, or just, like, generally apathetic to my point of view.

But if that's if that sentiment is amplified on the national level in a cold realpolitik that you previously described, how would you ensure safety and public order when there are

histories of social issues in America.

Um

Did so you did I make you feel unsafe?

I don't understand.

Like what what do you mean?

No, I'm not saying you made me feel unsafe.

I just I just felt like the f like if the floor is open and there's freedom of speech and I sound different than another person and I'm vulnerable and that sentiment is projected to the national stage with an immense more amount of power than

Like my my whole thing is how would you or how does the communist movement go from like a niche kind of elite educated field to saying having like communism or or like social collective ideas like free college or like um supporting youth entrepreneurship or something like that?

Like how can those ideas from this sort of space relate to like I guess from that perspective, like um a more common acceptance or understanding of uh socialist, communist, Marxist uh ideals?

I'm gonna try to answer your question the best way I can because you have me lost a little bit, but what I will say is that the important thing.

Is results.

The important thing is substance.

And the meat and potatoes.

Okay, always.

So.

Communication should be as clear as possible, and what is done with policy.

needs to reflect

What is necessary for results?

And that is really I don't I don't know what else I could say because I don't know what you're asking really.

I don't know exactly what you're asking.

But if you're saying, for example,

How would you account for being dismissive of people who sound different or whatever?

I would say that in any functional institution, there needs to be clarity when it comes to matters of communication.

And what you were saying earlier, which I was dismissive of,

Was

Not at all clear to me because you were talking about a lot of uh

Complex technical mathematical terms.

And it just didn't seem like it was directly relevant to anything.

For me.

Oh, yeah, that's that's my um excuse me.

I'm taking a public speaking class right now and I feel like I got a D or something.

Um, but my whole thing was trying to relate that because um I studied economics and I'm taking this mathematics course at a community college and I just and I like go to Fed meetings in Philadelphia sometimes.

Like I'm going to one next week to meet the Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner and hear her speak.

So I'm just using those terms to real-world current events, like relating like GDP, linear system equation models, et cetera.

It doesn't matter, blah, blah, blah, to like those like tariffs or like, cause that's a current event or like boosting employment because that's like a common good goal that most political parties have.

You see where I'm coming from now?

Um

I I don't I don't know why it can't be more simple though, you know?

Like, why do we need to talk about the math the technical mathematical stuff?

No, we don't have to talk about that.

I would just bring that up as an example to like bolster my credibility.

Well, I mean I I d I don't think that there's any everyone who comes on the space is is given a benefit of the doubt when it comes to credibility.

And you don't need to use complex mathematical jargon to

to have a right to to to share your perspective.

Everyone's entitled to their own and they're entitled to no nobody is more authorized or less authorized to have an argument than someone else.

An argument should be judged on its merits and nothing else.

Yeah, now we're just trying to build those merits.

No, that but that's not merit.

That's kind of like overwhelming with technical jargon.

That's just it kind of seems like it's meant to obscure the possibility for us to to actually judge what you're saying on its merits.

Okay, I under I I understand where you're coming from.

It's no offense, Abe, but it's a very like liberal sort of PMC type thing to be like, you know, I am able to use all these technical jargony words and therefore I am credible.

You know, really, um, if if you can understand something well, usually you're able to simplify it when you articulate it.

Or that's my view on it at least.

That's why I was laughing at you earlier.

Okay.

Oh, okay.

But basically, just to make it simple, I think, like, as someone who's all over the political spectrum and someone who voted for like Jill Stein eight years ago, but also Trump last year, to make it simple, the policies that Biden put in place and the policies that Trump has put in place are kind of putting us in the best of possible realms of like situations to actually have a decent sovereign economy.

So yeah, I just wanted your perspective on like that communism aspect, but that was just my main point to make it simple.

So thank you.

If you want, yeah, I could give you our view on the tariffs and simplify that.

Our view is that the problem with tariffs is that they will increase the price of goods and it'll be inflationary.

And you do the math and they've done the math.

And supposedly, I just trust the people.

This was Hudson, who claims the math was done.

Maybe I'm wrong.

But uh uh basically

It doesn't matter how much we tariff the goods of foreign countries, because of the cost of living is so high, we will never ever ever be able to make our goods as competitive as they are, just because of the discrepancy of the costs of production being much, much higher here, because of how much more wealthy and developed we are, how much more we consume, and how much the costs of living are, and so on.

And Hudson basically says the root cause of the cost of living being so high, the need for wages to be as high as they are.

is because things

uh are are treated as commodities in the private sector, which really the government should be uh uh uh intervening in and treating as a public good and a public utility.

So for example, education and health care and um

Rents for for

for paying your bills for your house.

All these things are monopolies that should be treated as public utilities, but are just given completely to the private sector as monopolies.

And they follow a rentier logic where they're the you know, the only way to make profit if you're a rentier form of capital, you just keep increasing the costs.

You know, otherwise, you're either going up or down in capitalism.

Only way to go up is just keep increasing the costs, right?

Keep the rent, the rent surging up.

It's a spiral because also when the interest rates and when the debt goes up, the rent has to go up, right, correspondingly.

So this rentier principle upon which US economics is based um makes the cost of living much, much higher than it needs to be.

If we could radically reduce the cost of living and therefore the cost of labor, we could be competitive.

We have the wealth, we have the technology to do it.

Uh, but we don't have the political willpower uh to clamp down on the uh

the the private sector basically, the private pri private rentier capitalists.

So that's that's our view basically.

Tariffs can be a good step.

Even if it's a disastrous policy.

I like the step because it's taking us out of the neoliberal framing of expert conventional economics.

And it's opening the door to uh alternative paradigms.

Which is worth more than anything.

If we can break the grip and monopoly of the neoliberal expert class when it comes to economic policy, we're opening the space for.

For there to be a path forward for for more popular economic policies, you know, to to to have a chance.

The problem is this class of experts, so I see it as class warfare in a way against the segments of the hegemony which I support.

But no illusions, the tariff policy will not be good as it stands.

But that doesn't mean we should go back to what was before.

We should take this farther.

It's a it's a revolution and we need to take the revolution farther and Trump won't take it as far as it needs to go.

That's really my view.

Alright, I'm gonna bring Lebanese on, and that will probably be the last person, 'cause no one else is requesting.

They've been on before.

This is the second time, I believe.

Alright, I think they're Vaughan.

Eddie, is anyone else requesting?

Um, we got oops.

Uh, just Michael and Indy Idili.

Well, I think we're gonna wrap up.

Space.

Um

Gonna wrap it up.

Alright guys, see you next Thursday.

Alright.

So that's the space is over.

Um, it was uh very um

I don't know what to say.

I'm gonna think of something new for Chairman.

Because clearly these spaces, they're just

They're just not just not it.

Nobody wants to confront the chairman.

This is the truth.

Anyway guys, I'm gonna go t sleep because I'm fucking exhausted.

So, good night.