🔴 RED PILL NEWS | PALESTINE WAR 🇵🇸

Edition of the infrared show.

Not without good reason, however.

Hot take, what's going on?

Notice my mic was a little lower than usual.

Blackpack, thank you so much, brother.

I see you.

Thank you so much for that as well.

What's going on, hot take?

Guys, I want to say a few things.

This is going to be a test for clipping.

Okay, I want this to be a clip stream.

So I want you guys to really.

Really, clip this stream, especially because I'm gonna make it for clip-related reasons.

Psyop Shorty, what's going on, man?

How are you doing?

So, Suez!

Wow!

Wow.

Uh first things first, before we get into the uh

The funny business, not funny business, the r serious business.

We have a new setup.

I have uh

Portrait I got, I said I was gonna get a portrait of someone special, and you can see who it is.

If you can't recognize them, hit the books.

But it is William Z.

Foster.

And I also set up a bookshelf, which I spent all Friday putting together.

Not all Friday, just a good chunk of my Friday putting it together.

And, you know.

There's a lot of books, and I displayed them very intentionally.

Uh

And if you can understand why, that's great.

If you can't.

Don't worry about it.

I also am not done with my display or setup.

I still have a few still have a few things here or there to be displaying and hanging up and but it'll it'll be a great final result and you'll probably see that next stream.

It's just I didn't have time today to finish it because I was preoccupied with attending to various different matters and and things.

But overall I'm uh ha I I I what do you guys think?

And I shouldn't really be asking for your input.

It's a little bit unprofessional.

To be honest, it's a little bit un unprofessional.

But the black bookcase, I was so torn over it because that thing is wood, but you can't even see it, it kinda looks black, and c I was gonna get a dark brown wooden one, but I just thought black would be the way to go.

And I'm a little bit conflicted over it, but whatever, you know.

But at least my stream looks full now, right?

Right, right.

I'm asking that.

in in a way to to ask approval, right?

'Cause I'm not actually a hundred percent sure if it does.

Uh but in any case, you know, these are some of my some of my books, not all of them.

See, I have some some problematic uh leftist books that I for example, I have a book by Paul Mason, if you can believe it, that I got in uh

2015.

I'm gonna burn it.

Probably burn that book.

Alright, there's a few books I need to be burning.

Alright, the Paul Mason one.

I mean, Zizek, I uh

I'm not gonna burn his yet.

Even though he's kinda crossed the line already, he's got a there is a GJ book on the shelf if you can see it.

But he hasn't crossed the line quite yet.

Oh, he has crossed the line, sorry, but um it hasn't gotten to the point where uh

His whole legacy as a non-political philosopher can be repudiated completely.

But anyway, that's my new setup, and it's not exactly done, but

Yeah, that's it.

And um

Today we're going to be talking about socialism, but there's some breaking news before we get into it.

And the breaking news is that it turns out that the terrorists who committed the terrorist attack in Moscow

At the Craucas City Hall, have confessed that they were in fact under the employ of Ukraine.

Apparently Ukraine paid them nearly eleven thousand USD, or the equivalent of as such, each for their role.

They were gonna create a passage for their escape, and they were promised compensa compensation in Kiev.

I mean, this is a uh a shocking revelation.

I mean, it is absolutely.

We're going to look at Jackson's tweet because we support our.

Our brothers.

If you guys don't know this, um, Jackson works for um the CIA, the FSB, the CCP, uh, Hamas, the Houthis, Israel, and and um the boogeyman all at once because he interviewed Tulsi Gabbard one time when he was like seventeen or something.

Anyway, uh that's

Yeah, it's not really news though, 'cause we all know that, 'cause it's so obvious, right?

It's so obvious, like.

Guy, literally, his ex-girlfriend dated Jonah Hill.

Right?

Jonah Hill is obviously a fed.

Anyway, um, let's continue.

The activity of the USSR in demining near the border villages.

I don't think they mean the USSR.

I think this is a mistake in translation.

You know, physinogamy is real because, like, you can just tell this guy looks like a disgusting scumbag.

Like, look what a disgusting evil dirtbag this guy looks like.

He literally looks like such a he looks like a skeleton.

If it was a f he looks like skeletor or something, like just a disgusting, evil rat.

Disgusting monster, you know.

Just look at this sick fuck.

Literally he went and he just fired on a bunch of civilians.

And he's not breaking you know, he's he's not broken down and begging for forgiven nothing, no like there's not even any remorse in his eyes.

It's like these are aliens among us.

They're not even human.

They just disgusting monsters.

You know, 90% of our ops have this profile.

They're just a little smarter about how they express it.

The biggest manifestation of sociopathy is pathological lying, right?

If you're too much of a coward, or you're at least smart enough not to get caught massacring a bunch of innocent people, the outlet for your sociopathy is you're going to just be spreading lies all the time.

Just for the sake of it, just because, just for the rush of being able to.

spread falsehood, it's just like a source of power for them, they feel like it is, right?

But it always comes to and already is in the case of us, but it's always comes to hit them really hard in the end.

That's why, you know, some of 'em just do what this guy did.

You know what's you know what's horrible about Russia's legal system is that they abolished the death penalty.

And actually the Communist Party and Zayugunov keep saying bring back the death penalty.

These guys are going to be kept alive.

I mean, I

I don't understand I mean look I'm not here to lecture Russia it's a different country they have their own rules

They have their own thing going on.

But as an outsider, I fully agree with Zayuganov.

Bring back the death penalty and put a bullet in the head of these fucking animals.

Excuse my French.

Put a bullet in their head and put them down.

These people have lost the right I mean, forget a bullet, get a giant sword and behead them, but I know it's not the Russian way.

But you know, it's just it's atrocious.

I I just get sick to my stomach thinking about how these guys are gonna still be walking away breathing.

I mean what I mean, in any era of human hi I mean, Russia's such a humanitarian country.

compared to the US.

In the US the police would have killed this guy, right?

These guys.

But they people think Russia's some like brutal dictatorship.

They're not.

They don't even have a death penalty.

You know, people don't know that.

Russia does not have the death penalty.

But they should.

That's what I'm saying.

They really should have it, you know?

They really should have it.

This 'cause this is just disgusting.

Uh, they got if they get the information they got out of these guys, really dispose of them, you know?

Even if they are sent to prison, still kill them anyway, you know, just like have a guy shank them or something.

These guys should not be allowed to keep breathing, you know, after what they did.

But this is just my opinion.

I'm kind of babbling.

Like an idiot.

I don't really have any business telling Russians what to do with their uh

With the evil scumbag criminals they catch terrorists.

It's just hard for me to stomach because I think it's like, you know, imagine it's your family.

Imagine your family is there.

And these scumbags are the ones and you know, uh the the one who's ultimately responsible is the one who needs to pay, first of all.

Which is Ukraine, which is the terrorist Nazi state of Ukraine.

The terrorist state of Ukraine needs to pay for this terrorist attack.

And it's gone on too long.

They've been committing too many terrorist attacks.

They've been doing it for a decade in the Donbass.

They're still committing terrorist attacks in the Donbass, blowing up bus stations and killing civilians and flagrant acts of terrorism.

They kill civilians like Daria Dugina, and they simply somehow got away with that.

They killed that blogger in that cafe.

in Saint Petersburg.

And now that they've done this, enough is enough, you know?

I'm not telling R Russia what to do, but I'm strongly suggesting, I mean, just take Kiev and bomb the shit out of

Anyone who resists, you know, Zelensky, one bullet for Zelensky, straight up, bullet in his fucking head.

I'm getting emotional.

I'm going to calm down.

I want to be more professional, right?

But, uh,.

And all the Ukrainian leaders need to be tried for crimes against humanity.

And these rotten banderas, these rotten Azov scum.

Enough is enough.

These cockroaches need to be squashed.

Because

I'm not Russian, I'm not even Russian, but I'm I'm I'm looking from the outside and I'm just so s sickened.

I mean, you know, Americans would never tolerate this happening to them.

You know, it's so dis and our country's to blame, actually.

Our country is the one that bears responsibility because we're the ones arming these sick, sick, twisted demons, these sick, demonic Nazi scum in Ukraine.

And let me say what I couldn't say on Twitch.

I fully pray that Russia.

Bombs Kiev into the Stone Age and massacres the Ukrainian government.

Cateen style.

I'm not good optics for Russia.

I know I'm not their spokesperson.

This is me as an American.

Me as an American.

Russia isn't like this.

I'm like this, right?

Yeah.

These sickos, they're literally terrorists.

I mean, they're actually terrorists.

I mean, this is what they do.

And they do it in Moscow, and it's like they're rubbing in their face, like, yeah, we can get away with anything, you know?

And now they're doing this.

You know, excuse me for raising my voice, but

Enough is enough, man.

I mean, they're they're

They're rabid frothing at the mouth, rabid dogs, and they're losing the war, and this is the type of stuff they resort to now.

With our tax dollars.

Key word, strong emphasis with our tax.

I mean, they're taking our taxes and funding.

This is what our taxes are doing.

Every clip of me is me yelling, so let me calmly say this.

This is what our taxes are doing.

We are funding, in addition to the genocide in Gaza, terrorists to go and murder civilians and massacre them

in cold blood out in the open and we're paying for it.

If every single American I'm not hypothetically for legal reasons, if every single American just didn't pay taxes in 2024,

the whole thing the whole the whole criminal enterprise collapses instantly.

You know that?

I'm not telling you guys to do that 'cause you will get in trouble.

But it's just if it was somehow collectively organized for the whole nation,

That would be all it takes.

This is our tax dollars at work.

It is so shameful.

It is so shameful.

What a shameful country we become.

What a shameful sh I mean, this is disgusting.

I mean I even when I came back and I came to DC from Mal I was disgusted.

I mean what a disgusting, filthy country we've become.

What a filthy, disgusting country we've become.

supporting these Ukrainian scumbags in addition to the Zionists and Israel.

What a disgusting, filthy, filthy, disgusting, rotten to the core government we have.

And, you know, something needs to be done, man.

Just filth, filth, filth.

corruption, sickness, evil, Satanism,

And I'm thinking of Lindsey Graham, that disgusting androgynous Senator Lindsay Lesbian Graham.

Lesbian Graham.

And he's frothing at the mouth, happy and giddy about this.

And I'm thinking about these Democrat Nazi scum

You know, Russia needs to go gloves off, man.

We've been I I I haven't even been reporting the SMO because I don't know what's going on.

I don't know enough information, but I really wish they just went gloves off, finished the jaw.

I mean, they're smart.

They know what they're doing.

They have a plan.

But

But but but the thing is, there's Kiev is a demonically occupied capital.

It's literally like a capital of demonic, evil goblins.

snickering and laughing,

And it's just

The only solution to that

Is the same thing that happened to Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible.

You know, it's the only it's just like the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, where you know, he goes and he says, God, listen, don't destroy this city.

There's got to be some good people in it.

And he went, and there's just no way to save it because it's r literally a demonically possessed capital.

You know, I I I was in Moscow.

you know, weeks before this tragi this not a tragedy, this atrocity happened.

And

You know, just you can just sense

goodness

in the Russian people, I think.

You know, they're just

People out with their families, completely normal.

I mean, it's it's it's not an accomplishment to be normal, but

Just people getting on with their lives totally innocent.

And

Tobias.

Hello.

This is Tobias.

I'm glad you see things my way now.

Toby, it ain't the time for this, Tobias.

It's really not.

Absolutely not the time for this.

But uh

You know, you just see that Ukrainian flag, that blue and yellow flag, and you just wanna vomit.

It's like a it's such a demonic, evil, twisted.

sick entity, you know?

Just vomit.

Enough is enough.

This just shows how lenient the USSR was.

The USSR was an extremely lenient state and government.

They were not brutal.

They were not a brutal dictatorship.

They would have been if I was in charge.

They weren't.

And I know this because they didn't round up every single bandarist.

and shoot them in the head and pile them into a ditch.

Some of these guys manage to escape and worm their way back and look at the havoc that they're causing.

The Soviet Union was nowhere near as harsh as they had every right to be, cracking down on these banderous scum.

Russia's a very humanitarian country, so is the Soviet Union, to be honest.

No death penalty,

You know, they try to be humanitarian and

Yeah.

I just wish they knew they had a right.

They had a right.

They have a right to be brutal.

You have a right to be.

You have a right to have.

A brutal response to this kind of thing, you know?

So this was on their phones.

Picture from the phones of the detainees.

Look at this.

Tfu.

Tui alaikum.

Fuy alaikum.

Excuse my French.

Being so dramatic.

But uh

No, I'm trying to be more professional now, guys.

Terrorists will lose.

In the end, God wins, you know?

That's what we you know what you know what they say?

They say anger is the way the devil gets a hold of you.

You wanna know why?

Because when you're angry, you don't have faith that God is gonna punish evil.

In the end God will win.

Mm-hmm.

God will win in the end.

God will prevail in the end.

These sick demonic scumbags won't win.

It's the law i if you want to put it in Marxist terms, the laws of history will prevail.

You can't stop the laws of history.

You can't stop the tide of history.

It will prevail in the end.

and things will be as they're meant to be.

I sincerely believe that.

I mean, it's just crazy how there's still people that are trying to both sides of the conflict.

Oh, Ru both Russia and Ukraine are bad.

Yeah.

One side are actual neo-Nazi banderate anti-human subhumans, let's call them what they are, subhuman scum.

And the other side are just normal people trying to defend themselves.

And that that that terrorist attack in that city hall, Russia has never done neither Russia nor other n neither Russia nor any Russian backed group in Ukraine has ever, ever, ever done anything close to that.

So tell me who the good guys and the bad guys are.

One side are just people trying to defend themselves, defend their lives, defend their dignity, defend their existence.

And another side are these rabid, frothing at the mouth, demonic Satanists

All Russia did is help out their brothers in the Donbass.

That's what this all is about.

You know, they were doing this stuff in the Donbass.

And Russ f finally Russia stepped in and said, Enough.

We're gonna help out our brothers in the Donbass.

We're gonna help out our brothers, you know, behind enemy lines.

We're not gonna leave them stranded to get slaughtered and terrorized and flogged and

destroyed and ethnically cleansed.

You know, I I I can see who the good guys are in this conflict, and I could see that from the beginning.

But there's still somehow people who who somehow think that this is uh you know, they'll they'll try to use some Marxist verbiage and be like, Well, it's it's two capitalist countries that and I'm like

You are such an idiot.

It's literally the Anglo box.

You're just taking Russia, putting it in the capitalism box, and you're taking Ukraine, you're putting it in the same box.

So therefore, they're the same thing, really?

You're an idiot.

You're actually a moron and an idiot.

And you should be barred from speaking in public and sharing your opinion in public for all eternity because you're a goddamn idiot.

I mean you're genuinely an idiot.

And

Your tongue should be removed straight up, and your hands, your fingers,

Gone.

You could stay alive, but all those things are gone.

Good luck.

Imagine if it's your family.

You know, who does that?

Who does that?

Who does that?

Go to a city, and it's so organized, too.

They all pre-planned it.

It's so who does that?

I mean, you have to understand in Moscow, they don't even have contingencies to prepare for a thing like that because it's just not even thinkable.

Like, who would do that?

You know, why would anyone do that?

It's beyond the threshold of the human.

It's not human, you know?

Absolutely sickening.

Let's uh

Okay, we have some other breaking news I have to cover and then we're going to talk about Richard Wolfe and socialism.

Uh apparently

Something has happened.

Uh I'm not sure what to think about this.

So

Iran has told the United States

That

It will not strike Israel if a permanent ceasefire deal is reached in Gaza.

We've all been waiting the Iranian response.

And apparently Iran has said they won't respond to Israel's war crime and violation of international law and act of war when Israel bombed an Iranian embassy.

It's completely unprecedented.

They claim that they will not respond to that.

As long as a ceasefire is reached in Gaza.

And apparently

The United States is now trying really hard to pressure Israel to conclude a ceasefire deal.

To prevent Iran from responding.

You know, I have a big mouth and I want to open my mouth because I've had it shut for too long.

And I don't care if I sound like an idiot.

I have I have mixed feelings on it.

I'm not gonna get emotional.

I'm gonna respond to this calmly.

So I have some mixed feelings on this.

What Iran is doing is good in the sense that it's humanitarian.

And this just shows what a selfless country Iran is, to be honest.

Because you need to understand when a country strikes and bombs your embassy and you don't respond to that.

You are you are making such a sacrifice.

To the

to the standing of your country in terms of

whether you know how much respect you're you're commanding from others.

But Iran's reasoning is that we're not going to act just on behalf of Iran, but the whole resistance.

So Iran is saying, okay, we're going to use this as a bargaining chip to help Hamas in Gaza.

And help the Palestinian people, which is extremely noble.

It's an extremely noble thing to do.

And you know, because of that, I really, really think.

All of these pro-Palestine people

Get on your goddamn knees and kiss Iran's ass!

I'm sick of this.

They're literally sacrificing

Their own ability to save face and defend themselves as a country their embassy was bombed.

You know how crazy that is?

What country wouldn't respond to their embassy being bombed?

Iran is not responding if a ceasefire is reached.

That's how much they're sacrificing for the Palestinians and for their resistance.

Wait, are you supporting Hamas?

Am I am I supporting Hamas?

I

Unconditionally I unconditionally

Believe

That Hamas

must and should get an unconditional victory.

I can't say I support them 'cause they can they can twist that w and make it seem like, you know, make it illegal.

But like, yeah, Hamas is good.

Hamas is good.

And I'm sick of pretending they're not.

I mean, I've never been pretending they're not.

But Hamas is 1000% the good guys.

And there's like basically nothing wrong with them.

I mean, what's wrong with Hamas?

Name one thing wrong with him.

There's literally nothing.

Uh, you support America.

Yeah, me too.

I'm an American.

And you know what?

Hamas are literally.

Hamas are literally like

Defending the Alamo right now.

That's what they're doing.

Hamas are literally just like the Patriots fighting the Redcoats.

So to be clear, Hamas are the Patriots and Israel are the Redcoats.

So that's why I think Hamas are good.

Um

But let me be clear about this.

Um I mean, when when have I ever made a mistake about the uh uh when have I ever um made a secret of that?

I am sick of pro-Palestinian self-proclaimed pro-Palestinian people not giving the proper respect to Iran.

and how much Iran is sacrificing for Palestine, because they're sacrificing a lot.

And it just, it's, it's honestly at this point, you know, everyone can do their geopolitical pragmatism.

Iran is doing this.

For ideological reasons.

meaning they're doing it out of honour and principle.

Like, oh no, Iran is just doing it to project power geopolitically.

And it's like what does that look like?

What does that look like concretely?

Like, what is actually what does Iran actually gain economically from this?

It actually suffers a lot.

So yeah, Iran, just like when the Soviet Union was arming anti-colonial forces and it to no gain to itself, but just just to further communism, like Iran is doing the same thing.

And I'm sick of people not giving them the proper respect and appreciation for that.

I'm sick of them not giving them the proper respect and appreciation.

Because I was just going to say.

Yeah.

How dare America step in and prevent Iran from responding?

If an American embassy was bombed and someone told us don't respond, you think our government would listen?

Why?

I mean, what gives America the right to beg, even if they're begging Iran not to respond?

What gives them that right?

Their embassy was bombed.

And they don't have a right to respond.

It's an act of war.

Now, Iran, be responsible you be responsible, America.

We wouldn't respond if an embassy was bombed.

A US embassy was bombed.

It's an embassy, dude.

You know how unprecedented that is?

A a country, a sovereign country, not a terrorist group.

A country recognized that the UN, it's a fake country, but it's recognized that the UM bombs another country's embassy.

And the US is going telling Iran not to respond, trying to make a deal with them not to respond.

I can't.

That's what I'm trying to say.

Like, I know I sound like an idiot, but Iran shouldn't even entertain that.

I'm conflicted.

I'm schizophrenic.

Because, like, I can I know what they're doing, what they're doing, and they're coordinating with the resistance, but it's like.

How dare America try to fix this situation?

There's nothing to fix.

It's war.

It's war.

It's war.

I mean, entire wars were fought for less.

The battle be t the war with Troy was fought over some bitch named Helen.

Entire wars were fought for less.

And you're telling me that's not an act of don't even listen to them.

Oh, look, no, no, no, no, Iron, don't respond.

You know, fuck you.

You funded Israel.

This is what they do.

Set the fucking world on fire, man.

I mean, this is your dog.

If your dog comes on my lawn and bites my leg, I'm getting a double bear shotgun.

And sending that dog to hell.

You come and beg me, your dog literally bit my child, and you're coming to beg me for forgiveness.

I will take a double barrel and send that pit bull straight to hell where it belongs.

Don't come.

I will get even more pissed if you come and plead with me to not do what needs to be done.

It literally bit my child's head off, and you don't want me to respond.

That's that's what's going on.

America's pit bull dog literally bit Iran's child's head off and America is running to Iran begging it not to res begging Iran not to respond.

What the hell is that?

What is that?

You know?

Just think about think about how crazy that is.

And and it it it it's it's it's hurting me just a little bit.

I'm a little bit hurt by it because we are f spoon fed the image that Iran is an aggressive, irrational, you know, really violent

You know, scary country.

Iran is led by pacifists.

I'm not trying to insult Khamenei, but he's almost like Gandhi.

Like the guy is an extremely peaceful you know, he's so peaceful and he's so all about peace and love and calming down and you know.

To be honest, kinda to a fault in some ways.

But we're we're we're we're we're we're spoon fed such a twisted

Distortion of the reality that Iran is this aggressive, rabid, you know.

Really mean, scary country.

Iran is saying that they're they won't respond to their embassy being bombed by another country.

Yeah.

See, maybe I'm just not Islamic enough.

I am not.

I don't have enough Islamic wisdom.

You know, there's half of me that's just kind of like a Zoroastrian.

Wizard who's just a brutal tyrant.

You know, there's half of me is just totally outside, to be honest.

Half of me is totally outside the Abrahamic religion.

Half of me is a wicked.

The wicked, violent kind of Buddhist who just says kill ninety million people, no problem.

Half of me is like that.

Half of me is like, you know what?

Rain down fifty thousand nukes.

You know, the Abrahamics, oh, turn the other cheek.

Is that half of me is not like that.

I need to be more Islamic.

Because half of me, half of me is like one of these twisted.

Hindu Buddhist sects and I'm like

Eighty million dead.

No problem.

Kill thirty percent of their population.

Clean with a katana.

Slice their heads off.

Don't be emotional about it.

Get it done.

You think I'm joking, but I'm not.

Fifty percent of me is like that.

And then fifty percent of me is sentimental and whatever.

Just like what the Bible wants.

It's a brutal world.

It's a brutal, brutal world.

It's a brutal world, you know?

It's a brutal world.

That's all I get.

It's a cruel, cruel world.

It's a cruel, cruel world.

But uh you know

I am not an Abrahamic supremacist.

I am Abrahamic to the core, right?

I am.

But I have such a deep and profound respect for the East Asian

Way of looking at the world

And I'm not I'm not trying to say that it's that just pure cruelty and cold machine-like indifference, but

To me, I

am a Muslim, but the context of my Islam is a very it's just like Genghis Khan's.

It's kind of like Tamerlane, like Timmer.

He was Muslim, but he also had this kind of shamanic

context from the Mongol

Buddhist, you know, religion, and this is kind of my outlook.

You know, like I'm a Muslim, I am Abrahamic, but see, this is this is what I mean.

There's really two sides.

Like, some people are Abrahamic, but their civilizational context is antiquity, it's ancient Greece.

That's not my civilizational context in my heart of hearts.

I'm religiously Abrahamic, but the deeper texture and context is not from ancient Greece, it's from Asia.

You know?

Uh and ancient Greece is all about, you know,

Is all about

The discreetness

and tangibility of form.

An identity.

And that leads to a kind of morality which takes things a little too personally, if you ask me.

A little too personally sometimes.

Um

Unironically, for example, I think the Soviet Union made a mistake during the Bay of Pigs that cost it its existence.

And Mao was right.

They should have launched the nukes.

They should have launched the nukes.

Had they done that?

I wouldn't even be around.

I wouldn't have to be.

We'd be living in communism.

Had Che and Mao got their way?

And those nukes went flying, there would be n wouldn't be talking about any of this.

We'd literally be living in communism.

All these stupid problems would we'd be we'd be living in the Wandering Earth, that movie.

That's what we'd be living in.

We'd be t I w nobody would even be talking about politics at this point.

We'd be talking about, you know, some engineer would be like, All right, we got some geoseismic data.

We need that's what people would be talking about.

There wouldn't even be politics anymore.

We'd actually be like,

In a way better world.

Well, but Haas, fifty percent of the planet would perish.

Shit happens.

I mean it's horrible on a personal level.

But the universe isn't personal.

Shit happens.

Mao was right.

You know what Mao said?

He's like, okay, let's say there's like a nuclear destruction of such a huge scale.

He was like, that prob that's not even like significant in the solar system.

He's like, compared to the sun and other planets and like the storms that happen on Jupiter, it's just like nothing.

Who cares?

He said maybe it would be significant in a small part of the solar system, but he said, like, it would be literally nothing in the galaxy.

Literally, nothing.

It would literally be nothing.

How am I wrong?

How am I wrong?

I'm saying, listen, I'm not the evil one because at any moment a natural disaster can come and wipe out.

Half of the world.

And it's literally no one's fault.

And it was literally no one's fault.

And there's no one to blame.

And we need to find humanity in events like that and not get angry and become nihilists.

You know, we need to I'm not saying we make light of it.

We need to make shrines and memorials and honor the victims and actually glorify them in ways.

And mourn them.

But we can't take the event personally.

We can't blame something personally.

I mean that's kind of where I'm coming from.

Yeah.

Uh I'm a crazy person.

I understand.

I understand, but this is my ultimate high point of my madness is that I don't believe.

Humanitarianism

Is the absolute

aim and object of life and existence.

I I do believe that if the choice is freedom or s sorry, if the choice is

Slavery or death.

The latter is preferable.

You know who agrees with me?

Kim Jong-un.

Kim Jong-un agrees with me.

See, people will get sentimental and outraged by how I say this.

But how am I wrong?

In the real Korea, millions of people are ready to lay down their lives.

In a nuclear war.

with the South and with America.

to defend their honor and to defend their existence.

They're wrong and humanitarians are right?

I don't think so.

Koreans are right.

I don't believe that

Khrushchev was taking the higher ground.

No, he wasn't.

He was taking the lower ground.

And look at how much atrocities and evil sickness.

The West got away with after the Bay of Pigs, because Khrushchev blinked.

What what gave America the right?

To blockade.

And embargo Cuba.

How many Cubans have sought I mean, look.

Don't take it with.

You can literally have a loved one get a disease and die.

Who are you going to blame?

Who are you going to blame?

Who are you gonna blame?

Che was right.

Che and Mao were right.

Straight up.

And yes, I believe that.

It's like if you're faced with an enemy,

That is so suicidal, it's ready to take 50% of the planet with them.

Should you submit to the enemy in the name of preserving life?

I'm not God.

I don't know if I have the answer to this.

But force me into that situation.

And I know what my choice is.

You know, that's what I'm trying to say.

Like, I could be wrong, but like, that's my instinct.

My instinct is: hell no.

Yeah.

Hell no.

You know, live in slavery.

Life is precious.

Don't be frivolous about life.

Because there's a difference in your personal life.

and the life of your loved ones and your closed ones and your families, of course you need to take that seriously.

Of course you can't take that lightly.

You know, don't get it twisted.

I'm talking about something at a at a very large scale.

I'm not talking about life as we experience it, at at our actual level of experience.

There's no way to take that lightly, and if you take that lightly you're a disgusting sociopathic scumbag.

But when it's such a vast scale, when it's literally a planet colliding into the Earth, what can you do?

Can you take that personally?

There needs to be a way to morally persevere through meaningless tragedies.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

And I and I just think

In a situation like the Bay of Pigs,

If the Imperialists deign to make that into a nuclear war, that's a meaningless tragedy.

And of course they bear the blame.

But the choice has to be made.

to defend your sovereignty.

You know.

It's a philosophically interesting conversation.

And I'm open to being challenged on it, but this is my outlook.

You know.

But then on the other hand, put it this way, on the other hand, if someone puts a gun to your head and says, Enter a life of slavery or your whole family's going to be wiped out and you.

Every single one of us would save our families' lives.

Wouldn't we?

I would.

Unconditionally.

So it's like the personal

The the scale of

Morality at the personal level.

And at the geopolitical level and at the cosmic level are just totally different.

Maybe that's what Iran did.

I don't know if it can be personalized like that, though.

You know, I don't know if the analogy holds.

Because one is ontological, and then the other is just like, see, see, one is just you sacrificing yourself.

Which is a no-brainer.

All of us should be willing to lay down our lives for our families.

If you're a man, right?

That's a no-brainer.

It's not hard to just sacrifice yourself, but sacrificing your existence, which means you're not just sacrificing yourself, but your country, your ideology, your political cause, your state, your party.

That's a different thing to do.

When you sacrifice those things

In the name of humanitarianism,

I think that's something immoral, actually.

I think it's immoral to sacrifice.

Something whose scale encompasses the lives of billions.

Just to preserve life for its own sake in the short term.

Iran is immoral.

No, I'm not saying that.

But I don't think that's what Iran is doing analogously.

I think Iran's doing something else.

I'm just saying analogously

I don't think that's what Iran is doing.

It's just like, you know, oh, it's just like se selling itself out to help its family.

I don't think that's what it's doing.

You know, um

For example, like if you were a leader and you had to choose,

50% of your people die or 5%.

You know, that you're good that's on you if you choose five percent, but you have to choose it.

Right?

And you can't take it personally.

'Cause

You need to think about what's best for your country, not what's best for your personal conscience, you know?

This is what I'm trying to say.

Uh if Iran struck back immediately it would be fifty percent though.

I think the issue is

You know, like I said, I'm divided because, like, on the one hand, we don't live in an international

Um

Situation of sorry, we don't live in an era of international relations defined by Westphalian sovereignty.

Where every country has to

You know, defend its sovereignty directly, and you have to respond, or else you're not sovereign.

Because Iran's sovereignty obviously extends beyond the traditional form of Westphalian state sovereignty.

And therefore, Iran is kind of playing this bigger strategy that does involve these other allies it has in the region, where who it's coordinating with, which kind of subsumes and goes beyond the nation-state, not even just the nation-state, but just.

Westphalian sovereignty in general, right?

So there is that angle as well: that it's a long game, it's a bigger strategy.

But

Like I said, I'm I'm conflicted.

You know, ultimately, the obviously Iran knows best.

And I'm just kind of making these arguments for purposes of demonstrating

You know.

Just thinking about it more critically, I guess.

Just thinking about it a little more critically.

I mean, but it's like they're they're in they're backed into a corner 'cause it's like, you know, they can't respond.

Without being totally eviscerated and destroyed and having Israel lobby everything they have at them.

So all it can do is this protracted kind of war of attrition, just draining Israel, you know?

But but the the big lesson from this, guys, is like the pro Palestine crowd

If you're claiming to be against Zionism.

You really owe Iran a big, big thank you.

I'm sorry, but you owe them a big thank you.

I mean, what they're doing, the sacrifice they're making is just crazy.

Anyway guys, on a lighter, lighter note, I want to show you the

Worst optics for communism and Marxism I have ever seen.

in the past year, or let's say the past few months, which is also an achievement.

Now, I want to provide some context.

Richard Wolfe is a person that I defended against destiny.

Um, and I actually suffered a lot for doing that because that's when I got canceled for the Uyghur stuff.

Because I beat Destiny in a debate about Richard Wolf, where I defended him.

And Richard Wolf recently deigned to throw shots at us.

To be fair to him, he just didn't know who we were or what he was talking about.

But um

Then this clip was posted, which got 2 million views.

Final question to you, Professor.

Jesus Christ, I don't know what started that.

Anyway, I want to provide some context.

Context one.

This is about a PlayStation.

But that's not why this is bad optics because replace PlayStation with a vacuum cleaner or a camera or a TV or a kitchen appliance, a new fridge, a new toaster, a new coffee machine, literally any luxury consumer good.

And think about the optics of what Richard Wolf is saying and how appealing socialism sounds when he describes it.

So let's just watch the video.

Final question to you, Professor Wolf.

Under your system of worker cooperatives, would I still get my PlayStation 5?

Absolutely.

You'd have to struggle a little bit for it.

You'd have to talk to your fellow workers.

You'd have to talk about the distribution of income.

You'd have to compare your desire for PlayStation against all the other interests of all the other people.

It wouldn't be something you worked out on your own with your particular boss in any way.

It would have to be a democratic decision.

You'd have to come to terms with that the way you do with democratic decisions now in our society to the extent that we are.

Oh, no.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry.

Guys, tonight I wasn't acting very professional.

I'll improve next time.

But.

Can you imagine that you want to get some kind of luxury good?

Imagine it's a fridge and you have to weigh your desire you have to explain yourself to your colleagues about why you want it.

He is he's making the current society seem like a utopia where if you just have enough money, you can just go to the store and buy it.

And you don't have to like explain yourself to anyone.

You just go to the store and buy it.

And it's no one's business but your own.

He's making the current system we have right now sound like a utopia.

And I'm sorry.

What he has done is even worse optics for socialism than like the crazy transgenders or whatever.

Like this is the worst this is the biggest optics disaster for communism and socialism I've seen in like the past four or five months.

Because how can someone say this?

How tone deaf are you?

I want to buy something, but I have to I have to explain myself to my colleagues at work who are going to democratically How humiliating is that?

And it's like where i because the line between luxury goods and goods you actually need is so blurred, like a bidet.

I just got a bidet recently.

Do I have to ask my colleagues to democratically vote if I can wash my ass?

How humiliating is that?

Well, you technically don't need it, but it would kind of be convenient.

You know, like, that's what I mean, is always a gray area.

Um

It's just absurd.

It just makes the current system seem so much better where you could just go to the store and buy it.

He's like making problems out of nothing.

Richard Wolfe, the problem

with consumption today isn't convenience.

That's actually a great thing.

It's great that technology has made it convenient for electronics to be accessible to people.

That's not the issue we have.

The issue we have is wastefulness.

The issue we have is

efficiency of production.

The issue we have is

Less accessibility than there could be.

The issue is affordability, things like that.

And more importantly, the issue is being able to have electronic goods.

without having to wor uh worry about debt.

The issue is like planned obsolence or whatever, where like I don't know how to pronounce it, where they actually plan for their product to go bad after a certain time.

These are some issues you can bring up.

But you just made an issue out of nothing that makes capitalism, quote unquote, look really good.

So this is where I want you guys to start clipping and whatever.

But we're going to talk about how you would actually get a PlayStation under socialism for real.

And this is the real answer, right?

How would you get a PlayStation under socialism?

Now before I start talking about this for the clippable moments.

Obviously, I'm not a fan of gaming and gamers, but but it's just like to answer the question, you know, it's not about gaming, it's just in general.

Let just let that be any other luxury.

How do you get a PlayStation under socialism?

Simple.

You use your smart device, which for which could look like anything at this point in the future.

It's not even necessarily a phone anymore.

It could literally be, you know, something that's.

like some go some glutton funny glasses or contacts you wear.

Caleb Maupin.

I have a B Day too.

We are B Day brothers.

You know, Caleb.

All I have to say to that is uh

How did that fat bitch fall down in that fight?

Anyway, um, thanks for the five, though.

Anyway, uh,.

How would you get a PlayStation under socialism?

It's simple, you would order one.

And that's it.

You'd press a button.

Huh?

You just press a button?

Yeah.

And I don't have to pay for it?

Yeah, you just press a button.

And you get a PlayStation.

Wait a second, how if I press it a million times?

Here's the thing.

I know AI is a buzzword, but your consumer profile, your consumption output profile,

The ability to calculate the cost and the resources, all of these things can be handled by algorithms and artificial intelligence.

So if you are abusing the system and ordering a hundred PlayStations,

are trying to order a hundred PlayStations.

That is going to be a form of data that is picked up and registered by the algorithms, and you'll obviously be prevented.

And then the question is like, well, don't some people deserve to have more than others because they use resources more productively?

Yes.

And that's exactly why, again, how algorithms work is that they can actually measure that.

So if you're taking, if you're ordering raw materials and you're producing more output than the input in terms of the resources you're consuming, you will have access to have more resources allocated to you because you're using them efficiently.

And if you create an enterprise, I mean, there's so many ways to imagine it.

If you just want to consume a PlayStation, you know, everyone will more or less have the same consumer profile, maybe related to their productivity and their contributions.

If you want to start an enterprise, remember enterprises are not necessarily profit-based.

They're just forms of economic association and productive association.

Then by default, all enterprises start out with the same opportunity to have the same amount of resources.

Now, the ones that use them more productively and efficiently and effectively, that's measured and recorded on their profile, their enterprise profile, and they're allocated more resources.

So, you see, with AI and algorithms, we don't even need to talk about what socialism is going to look like.

We don't need to talk about how we're going to organize it.

Technology has outmoded the need for any kind of economic democracy whatsoever.

We don't need, put it this way, it's capitalism that's too democratic.

We have boards of shareholders, and we have this huge managerial class, and all of these like people who sit around HR departments, and people who sit around and do nothing for a living, you know, micromanaging production at all these levels.

We can literally clean, sweep, fire all that, get rid of all that, wipe it all out, and automate the whole damn thing.

And have it so that the need to make decisions by human beings diminishes to a much, much smaller level than what it is now.

So, Richard Wolfe is talking about the opposite of socialism.

Socialism, if you read Marx and Engels, this is the guy who doesn't read Marx and Engels.

I'm sorry, Richard Wolfe doesn't read Marx and Engels.

Because if he did, he would know what Engels say?

Socialism is no longer at a certain stage in its development.

the rule of men over men, it's just the administration of things.

So in socialism, the need to politically determine production diminishes to zero at the higher stage of communism or whatever.

That diminishes to zero.

There is no need to democratically decide anything about production.

Anything.

This is why Marx and Engels said democracy is bourgeois.

that in the higher stage of communism,

Democracy too disappears.

Because production itself accounts for its premises.

Labor becomes life's prime want.

You don't need to democratically decide anything about the kinds of things we consume.

That is registered at the level of production itself.

And production is tailored to the consumption patterns and the way of life and the form of labor and the the production patterns of society as it is.

Love it or hate it.

That's what communism is all about.

Communism is not about controlling and adding more layers of bureaucracy to production.

What communism is about is actually getting rid of the

Of the red tape and bureaucracy, which we have now with this huge managerial class, and just replacing it with technology.

I just think it's such a profound tragedy.

He said something so profoundly stupid.

Yeah.

What a great way to sell socialism to people.

To get a PlayStation, I have to literally beg my colleagues who then humiliate me by having a Democratic vote.

Imagine if I lost to the vote.

Imagine imagine that.

Imagine if we were work colleagues.

This is like some fat woman and some like asshole guy you hate.

Like and they convince everyone to say no.

And you don't get a place how corrupt that's such a recipe for disaster, it's not even funny.

Can you imagine such a preposterous situation?

It's such a preposterous situation.

Charmel, it's retarded to pretend that communism is when no money.

What?

First of all, in a sense, it's retarded because communism is just a movement.

It's just a process.

Communism isn't the final state of society.

But Marx and Engels did vaguely describe a society fundamentally transformed by the communist historical tendency, right?

At a much later stage of development in history, where they did say that money will be outmoded completely.

Um and that was a prediction they made, which I agree with.

Those are already no money.

Yeah, in a in a way, sure.

In i I don't know about that.

I think there is money, but it's just not commodity money anymore.

It's not the money of classical capitalism.

It's a different kind of money.

It's a socialized form of money.

I agree.

Money is still necessary because of the world market, remember that.

Because of trade between sovereign countries and sovereign nations, that's where there's still exchange value because China can't determine America's production directly.

Because we have completely different laws and we have completely different

And even for Russia and China and and for Russia and Iran and China and Iran, they will conduct business on the in the form of trade because they have to find a way to have a fair economic relationship that doesn't give one party political power over the other.

And one of the reasons I've always been skeptical of the adversity to markets that Marxists in the contemporary age have, not because I think markets will exist forever, I don't actually.

And I'm going to talk about that.

But because I think they need to appreciate

That um

Markets

It's neoliberal Jargon.

But what they mean by markets are really decentralized.

forms of economic control.

and economic production.

You cannot preemptively a account for the entirety of the content of a mode of production or economic life

By an absolute plan that accounts for everything.

You can't do that.

So I think people have this adversity to markets because markets are chaotic, but that's actually what makes markets good, if anything.

The problem with markets is they're not chaotic enough, actually.

And what I mean by chaotic is not random.

What I mean by chaotic is.

Um

Forcing the mode of production

Um

To account for its premises.

And why why would I call that chaotic?

Because it's like

For a mode of production to reproduce itself at the level of its real premises,

It has to be in a way open

to both the content of what that reproduction entails and what those premises are in a way that cannot be rationally accounted for beforehand.

There's a room of contingency.

Thank you so much, Smudly.

I appreciate you so much.

There's this level of contingency where

Social association in general needs to be constantly replenished, constantly reproduced from the ground up over and over again.

It's never just like socialism wins and then it never has to prove itself ever again.

No, it needs to constantly, constantly prove itself economically, constantly have skin in the game, right?

And

You know, um

It's so cool because in the age of informa the information economy, which is what we're living in, we can simultaneously have an ex a highly sorry, not a fu uh a fully integrated economy, fully socialized economy, where everything is interconnected, while simultaneously decentralizing control.

economic control and the content of economic association.

And we can do that with algorithms and AI, which can be sensitive and respond to contingencies and changes

At lower levels and aggregate them into higher levels so that the whole thing comes together.

So that's such a such a neat, cool thing, actually.

And um

You know, the the issue with bureaucracy is that when an institution gets the conceit that it knows everything on the ground.

There's people on the ground who want to just get things done.

They know what to do to get things done.

But then the bureaucracy is: no, no, we can't do it because if you do that, it wouldn't fit in our grander scheme and our grander plan.

And we have to check with the higher ups, and we have to.

And that is a problem that can be solved that markets.

In China, for example, solved

But only because markets were a primitive form of the information economy whose form today is going to be fully digital and fully based on AI, and it's a consumption information economy

We're basically

Spontaneous, I'm not using the terms correctly, so just forgive me, but spontaneous forms of production.

And economic association will be able to form in relation to demands.

and in relation to what people want to consume,

in ways that do not have to be mediated by institutional bureaucracies.

While simultaneously harmoniously being part of a greater whole, rather than being the anarchy of production represented by capitalism, which is on its way out completely.

So I think that's

That's really what I mean, you know?

I think that, um

I think that uh I don't know why Marxists, self-proclaimed Marxists, aren't talking about these kind of things.

Because the other one

Because saying that

production should be more politicized.

And when I say politicized, I don't mean

made politically sovereign.

I mean like made a site of political contention and disputation.

That is r that is the opposite of progress.

That's literally reactionary, you know?

It's everything people hate about today's capitalism actually.

People hate this idea.

People hate the power that HR departments already exert on the content of their products.

You think people want HR the equivalent of like an HR department given absolute dictatorship to force us to democratically decide if we can buy Charmin toilet paper rather than cardboard toilet paper?

You know, it's just kind of ridiculous.

Um

But here's the kicker, right?

It's like, okay, so communism was only possible because of computers?

No, actually.

The so the communist system, let's call it that.

That the USSR had, that Mao, China had, that all these other countries had, it worked.

It actually did work really well for what it was intended for.

It's just that a new historical era emerges after that one, which is based on thank you so much, Joshua, which is based on information based economics.

and consumer economies.

And consumerism and light industries.

See, there's something called heavy industry.

Heavy industry is like the production of steel and timber and wood or whatever and oil and charcoal and chemicals.

I mean, the Soviets were great at that.

They were great at that.

They were unparalleled.

Everything heavy industry equipment, they've wiped the floor.

But light industry forms as a layer on top of that foundation where, okay, after we have this foundation of heavy industry, we can creatively apply the resources we extract from that to produce consumer goods on a mass scale, you know, to produce automobiles, to produce this, to produce that.

And at the secondary level, it's a higher and more complex form of planning.

You know, American corporations would visit the Soviet Union and they'd be like, you know, the Soviet Union is one big corporation.

And that's actually true.

The Soviet Union was run like a heavy industry cartel from the nineteen twenties or the nineteen thirties.

The advanced level of economic planning

And information-based economics represented by the post.

New Deal and post war light industries never took hold in the Soviet Union.

Because there was this battle against the bureaucracy, and Stalin was fighting them, and there was also other things as well.

But that never took hold in the Soviet Union.

And it could have.

And how could it have done this without markets?

Through computers.

At least as early as the 19 see, the Soviet Union was chilling from the 40s to the 60s.

They were doing really well.

The 70s is when the stagnation began, right?

Coincidentally,

At the same time, the 1970s, they could have implemented computer technologies to plan the entire Soviet economy way more efficiently, way more productively, and solve the crisis of light in industrial consumer goods production and allocation, and literally became more advanced than the West.

And Paul Cockshot has written books about this.

Paul Cockshot tried to convince the Soviet leadership of this and failed.

Um

The architects of Olgaz tried to convince the Brezhnev government to do this and Brezhnev government said no.

Why did they say no?

Because it would have destroyed the bureaucracy.

It would have destroyed the political order in the Soviet Union and the political stability.

It would have led to rapid social change, which the political order was not adapted to.

But materially, it would have been possible.

It's just at the spiritual level, it wasn't possible, right?

Um

And you know, and also why didn't China do this?

China didn't have comput China did not have the ability to produce computers at this time.

On a mass scale.

It couldn't.

It simply couldn't.

China actually still needed to industrialize more at the primary level.

The national industrial system created by Mao did not complete China's industrialization.

And one of the uh justifica justificatory causes of Deng's reforms was the acquisition of Western technology.

So people are like, Well, why doesn't China just do that now?

Maybe it is.

Thank you so much, Rafael.

I mean, maybe, maybe, have you ever thought about something?

Maybe China is transitioning into that.

I mean, look at China's apps.

Like WeChat, and like how everything is centralized in one app, all the data, all the consumption.

I think China.

won't do that immediately because there is the issue of the world market.

Right, but China is trying to accelerate the development of the world market and the productive forces at the global level probably because it recognizes that this is what's necessary to overcome markets entirely, right, to lay the foundation for that.

Um but I am a dengist, okay, whatever denguist.

I support Deng Xiaoping thought.

And I agree that the role of markets in China, I mean, it's a great and beautiful achievement and accomplishment.

But markets in and of themselves are not eternal.

And as a matter of fact, what is a market?

You know, when we think of a market, we think of entering a fruit stand.

Sorry, we think of entering a marketplace, and everyone's at all these vendors are there that have fruit stands and all these different kinds of stand-selling stuff, like a bazaar, right?

And it's basically just individual sellers

Selling things to people and trade happening and bartering happening, and that's a market, right?

But

All a market

In today's context refers to

is a form of data collection.

a decentralized form of data collection.

not individual trade, but decentralized data collection.

But uh yeah.

I mean, like, neoliberalism is a huge myth.

There's no return to classical liberal economics.

What really happens is that we have a.

new information economy, which is taking an archaic form, wearing the corpse of nineteenth century liberal capitalism, because we don't have the institutions to adapt to the new relations of production that have emerged from the twentieth century.

Capitalism and classical liberalism is just the costume that the new information economy wears.

It's a themed costume.

But it's not actually the reality.

Anyway guys, uh I've talked a little too much.

And I'll see you guys on Tuesday.

You know, I'll address something really briefly about.

Leftists talk.

I mean, guys, um.

We don't really need to uh respond.

I think you guys have been doing a good job, but let's not lose focus.

That we really need to be responding to the right wing right now.

Thank you so much, CO two.

Appreciate you.

I mean, those those leftist gate or I should call them CO two, what's going on, man?

I I I should really call them pan leftists.

Those pan leftist gatekeepers.

Uh they're on their way out.

If you see Hassan's recent like Discord logs, he's like talking about how upset he is that he's losing viewers and

So like that's why he's attacking Jackson.

And kinda losing his mind.

And I just kinda think with what we have planned this year alone, I just don't think we need to lower ourselves.

To to

to really care about that stuff.

It's like, okay, let let Carl Bager

Um scream about LaRouche.

I I forg I literally forgot about LaRouche altogether.

Like I forgot that that was a thing for for like two months.

And I saw that, I was like, wow, that's kinda like some that's almost nostalgic, honestly, for like two years ago.

When I guess that was like a thing people were saying.

Um

Yeah, I saw that.

I I just don't think we'd have to care about them all that much.

I mean, like, like I know you guys saw, like, pamphlets.

Started joining in on some of the hate against Jackson, and I just DM'd him.

And apparently Jackson did too.

I didn't even know about that.

But, you know, I told him, like, listen, I think you're a good faith guy, you know.

I th and it was basically a misunderstanding.

And, like, you know, he was cool.

Like, people like pamphlets.

I do care I I feel like it's like this, guys.

If you want to care about leftist opinions, care about the people who have potential, who agree with us on, like, ninety percent of things.

And if they disagree with us about culture,

You know, I don't really think that's a primary contradiction.

Now, I maintain my views on culture, and I'm not saying I'm compromising them, but

That's not the primary contradiction, right?

Um, Pamphlets is like a cool guy who who's trying to defend communism in a very just like simple way, and I just think that's kind of you know, with so many people spreading lies and like myths about communism killing a billion people and being so it's such a failure, and that you know, Russia's bad and China's bad.

It's like you know, he's kind of doing good work, and we don't really have to care if they disagree with us on some culture stuff because.

That's not like what we that's not something we really care about that much ourselves, to be honest.

We care about Marxism-Leninism.

I think that's what people need to understand.

We're not right-wingers, we're just Marxist-Leninists.

We don't believe that

We are in some pan-leftist basket with Trotskyites and anarchists and democratic socialists and social we don't think that there's this like pan-leftist no, we're Marxist-Leninists, we're communists with a capital C.

There's no we're not we're not allied to other leftists, there's no such thing, there's no such thing as a general left.

A left-wing position refers to

A position with an actual concrete subject at a specific point of time.

What a left wing looks like in America is not really clear right now because there's no established left wing position at all in America.

in any form.

There's no international left.

There's no global left.

There's no such thing.

There's no pan-leftism, okay?

We are Marxist-Leninists.

We do obviously

Occupy a left-wing position in the US, but that doesn't that doesn't place us in pro it's not a spectrum.

That's my issue with politics.

That's what actually I'm gonna say.

Politics is not a spectrum, there's no political spectrum.

There is a right wing and there is a left-wing, and there is no spectrum, meaning we are the left-wing we're Marxist-Leninists.

If you're an anarchist, if you're a tri you are objectively a right-winger.

In terms of how actual politics works, you are on the right.

Because

Being left wing

or being right wing is not about your ideology.

It's about what position you're communicating in relationship to power.

What position do you communicate in relationship

to political power right now.

Specifically, in the form of hegemony and the imperialist hegemony, what position are you communicating objectively?

For example, if you attack Jackson Hinkle, you are a right-winger.

Because it doesn't matter what ideological justification you have for that, objectively speaking, you are communicating a position in relation to power that the number one anti-imperialist voice and the number one voice for Gaza in the US, the number one voice for Palestine.

In America.

And that's literally how the enemy sees how the hegemony sees it.

That guy needs to be taken down and targeted and attacked.

For example, if you're in Palestine, think about it this way: for all the people bad jacketing Jackson, I'm just gonna like chuck a nuke at them and they won't recover.

And I'm just gonna do it once, all right?

If you lived in Palestine.

You would be saying the same thing about Hamas.

you would say that because I don't like Hamas

Actually, Hamas is Zionist, and I'm the real resistance.

But Hamas is objectively the one fighting Zionism.

And then what if someone said, Oh, but Hamas was created by the uh Mossad to fight the secular left, the secularist p um PLO?

which is an argument people make sometimes.

But that doesn't mean Hamas isn't fighting Israel right now.

And that even has more truth to it than the claims that are being made by Jackson, which are demonstrably false,

And how do you know they're false?

Because none of these people will actually make these claims in a live setting where either Jackson or myself are there to respond to them, where they could just be dismantled in two seconds.

You know, I saw this one guy being like, Well, Jackson, how did he surf with Tulsi Gabbard when he was like a kid?

Because he lived in Orange County.

His ex, that same ex-girlfriend literally started dating Jonah Hill like a year after they broke up.

It's a small world in Orange County.

Okay.

And, you know, well, is it a coincidence that Tulsi Gabbard's a PSYOP officer?

So I looked this up myself because, like, people kept saying this.

Oh, Jackson's connected to a PSYOP scop.

It's such a disingenuous claim because Tulsi Gabbard in 2019 and 2020, at the time Jackson was interviewing her, wasn't even on active duty.

She wasn't part of any PSYOP, whatever.

So that's just nonsense.

Second of all, Tulsi Gabbard wasn't known for that.

I wasn't born yesterday.

Tulsi Gabbard was known for being skeptical of regime change in Syria.

And that's why everyone listened to her.

And that's why she was controversial.

And that's why she was a thing because of her view on regime change in Syria.

That's why I have uncles who liked Tulsi Gabbard at that time, not even knowing really who she.

I mean, if you go deep into her background, she's an extremely problematic person because she's like a Hindufta Modi, anti-China, whatever.

But just rhetorically, what she was saying and getting in trouble for about regime change in Syria was and how she met Assad or whatever, like that's what she was known for.

The idea that she like represented the interests of feds at that time, at least, in anyone's eyes, is nonsense.

Unless you think that, you know, it's it's and this is another thing.

She she later joined the psyop division of the US Army.

So do you think she was acting as an as a on behalf of US Army psychological operations to go meet with Assad and speak out against regime change in Syria?

That sounds like nonsense.

Also, it sounds like these people aren't even educated about how the deep state works.

The CIA and the US Army are not the same thing.

DOD and CIA actually clash.

And are not united, actually.

They're the the different departments of the deep state compete with each other and they're different factions and they fight each other.

Um

As far as US Army Psyops being deployed domestically,

obviously it's a thing, but does the US does the US Army concern itself?

Does the US Army PsyOps division is that is is her role tasked with like focusing on like stuff going on on Twitter?

Because I think that's a different I think that's more DHS.

Am I wrong?

Um

I think even the Air Force gets in on that too, by the way.

I don't think people know what they're talking about when they're saying these things, you know?

There's like a bunch of different intelligence agencies doing all this different stuff.

But it doesn't even matter because.

She, when Jackson met her, and he met her to interview her, but the interview was literally on his channel before it was deleted.

Um.

If if she was acting as a psyop agent by being critical of regime change in Syria, how would Jackson have known that?

How would my uncle have known that, who liked Tulsa Gabbard?

How would anyone have known that, right?

Um, it's just such a stupid thing to say, and I just think that's literally it.

Is there anything else that's claimed?

That's it.

That's literally it.

So it's just nonsense.

But but like I said, that's a if you attack Jackson Hinkle, you are a right winger and a fascist collaborator and an imperialist shill.

Now I know you have an ideological justification in your in your mind, but objectively that's what you're doing.

Objectively, you're communicating a posi a position in relation to the powers that be, objectively, where you are trying to delegitimize one of the most popular anti-Zionist voices on social media.

Your reason doesn't matter.

That's what you're doing.

You are f see, that's how the Army thinks too.

The Army doesn't care about ideology.

The Army thinks in terms of pure results and pure objective operations.

That's how intelligence agencies in the Army thinks.

If you're communicating a position

That's meant to delegitimize

One of the most popular and effective voices against Zionism, you are a right winger objectively.

That's what a right winger is doing.

Objectively, you're running cover for power.

You may have this crazy theory, this crazy paranoid conspiracy theory.

That, like, um, actually, it's like 4D chess.

Like, Jackson's actually only the most popular voice against the genocide because he's trying to, he's actually in the long term, like, 10 years from five years from now, he's going to sheepdog all of these new supporters into some imperialist agenda.

Okay, like, we'll, but, like,

But that b b but there's nothing objective or tangible about that claim.

Like w okay, w but where is he doing that?

Where is he actually doing that?

You are hypothesizing that this is going to be the consequence of what he does because

Because you think that progressive cultural issues are the most important thing in the minds of Americans, and that if Jackson is saying things against progressive cultural issues, that delegitimizes the resistance.

That's the argument that Hassan and his fans were making: that like Jackson is delegitimizing the Palestinian resistance by associating them with anti-woke politics.

But this country is more or less.

Split probably 80-20, where 20% are pro-woke and 80% are against it.

Guys, am I wrong about that?

Like, where does this idea come from that?

Cultural progressivism is particularly wildly popular in this country.

On university campuses, that's true.

But is that true for the majority of people?

First of all, no.

Second of all, it's going in the opposite direction now.

So, actually, by doubling down on this woke, whatever you want to call it.

you're the one who's wrecking.

You're the one who's harming th you know, the optics of of a cause.

You know, if if a regular American thinks that Hamas are a bunch of woke scolds who want to cancel them and

you know, teach their children

Bizarre

Views about sexuality and like groom them, I think that's going to demonize Hamas a lot.

Um secondly, you know, I live near Dearborn and Ham Tramick.

Where members of the Arab American community were attending.

school board meetings outraged at the sexuality, the the the hypersexualization of their children in the schools.

That wasn't the result of a Jackson Hinkle psyop.

That was literally an organic response.

And I'm sorry to tell you this, but the facts are: the majority of the people in the world resisting U.S.

imperialism.

Are not really a big fan of American cultural progressivism.

They're just not.

Like, yeah, there's exceptions.

Cuba

Has its own thing going on.

And I'm not saying it's universally true.

I'm just saying, in general, it's not really that popular.

And I feel like I'm underselling it because if you talk to the Chinese

If you talk to r Russians, if you if you talk to Iranians, if you talk to people in the Middle East,

I don't know what to tell you, dude.

If you go to Lebanon and act like you do here, you'll literally disappear.

I'm not even trying to demon.

I'm just trying to tell you, like, you need to understand, you come from a different culture.

Jackson isn't.

Offending anyone except you.

He's literally only offending you, no one else.

That's all I'm trying to say.

Okay.

So that's all I'm going to say on it, to be honest.

It's not even really worth addressing.

Um

Yeah, the the woke era is coming to an end.

That's why we don't really focus on anti-woke politics because it's o it's pretty much over.

Now they're kind of like

They're basically um

It's been over for a minute, to be honest.

Now what they're doing is they're uh pivoting to like a fake based messaging where they're like, you know, actually, you know, we're gonna go back to having a masculine US army and we're gonna kill all the black people in Haiti 'cause it's based.

I mean, that's pretty much the orientation now of the US government.

It's basically Malay from it's like Malay from Argentina, you know, like that's the orientation now.

Um

Because the wo the woke stuff didn't work.

They they they tried it and it just it was like they were um it's like what is it called when a corporation is like testing if a consumer will like the product?

What is that called again?

They were market they were focus testing the woke stuff.

It was a disaster.

So now they're they're do oh they're gonna overcorrect in the opposite direction.

And we're just like we were against the woke stuff, we're going to be against this nonsense too, you know?

Focus group testing, exactly.

But in any case, you know, that that's pretty much it.

You know, I think we covered everything I wanted to cover.

Uh I'll see you guys Tuesday.

See you guys Tuesday.

Bye-bye.