COMMUNISM IS RISING | HUGE DRAMA

You know, and you know

the 2036

One step

Do you miss

See an in wallets see a infrared left on set we don't know where to do

we'll find what we're looking for

For sure

Take us beyond

The road ahead is long

I'll see there I'll see you there

I'll see there

I'll see there

driven by

phoist way to

I'm Oh Oh Oh

Oh

Oh no you have to be there

no we can see

in the farthest reaches of space that's where i'll be that's where we'll be thinking i make it move Oh

do

take

a lot away I Oh, oh, my name.

Oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Oh. All the sun All right

I'm

going to go I go and go world there's a spark right back again

got no way to go

falling past the verge it's so dark

right don't feel

light the spark

light the spark

set the entire

world

2030s it caused to war

We received this call

The mountain can stop us

We're soldiers of faith

We smash through your walls faith we smash through your walls

we'll smash through your gates

my brain

fate persists

we'll take up the street

against those we're no wait now we take up the sword against the

We're in a way

Now we take up the struggle

Oh, see the day

We don't know we're safe for me

We'll find my world will be able to see.

I see. We say To be saved my

It's Step to you

Yes

To use

I'm I found a love I found a love like you're getting mad

One day, I'm feeling mad

I do what I'm laughing

what I do

I need to care

and if I'm going to

know I put down to my knees

and come up

my mind

I'm going to get up

I'm going to my soul and get in your head because I'm going to see your head when you're going to be. I'm going to get

I'm going to see you.

I'm going to get that I'm in the vocal

I'm going to go ahead.

I'm going to stop. So I'm put on my knees

and I'm going to go.

I'm going to go. I'm going to get up.

I stole.

Your head is now

a lot of the

I'm going to be a I found I found a love What's there for me, if you're a beautiful mess, I don't know what I'm glad,

you know what I do, I just forget.

So I put it on my name, you never know, I'm going to love.

I'm so my dream, so I'm know, and go ahead. Let me get down to get a home Go up with your money

Come up with my head

Come up with a mouse

I'm a tree

I'm going to get up

I'm going to be a guy

Let's see a guy Oh This. I'm going to be able to be. I'm going to be able to say Why? I'm saying.

Yeah.

So I'm going to go to my name.

I'm going to go.

So my God.

I'm going to get.

I'm going to get up.

I'm going to get a little.

I'm going to get out of the I'm a lot of you know

I'm

a lot

I'm black

I'm

I'm a black

if they're going to

see if you're going to

see

the black

with the black

with the all I'm like

I'm like

I'm

so

I'm a

money to and

love and

my and

so love

and I'm

so I'm and I'm going to get up. I don't.

You're going to get now.

Yeah. and the people

oh,

Well,

Well,

Ciao,

Well,

Ciao, Ciao, Ciao, Ciao, And the people that will be that will passeran no oh well well a chow well chat, well chat

chow

chat

chow

and

people

that will do

not oh and

they

do what better and Pett-o-i-ha-ha-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h- Paterano Bella,

bye la chao,

la chao,

la chao,

chao,

and I'm in the city

in Paterano

and I'm

digado

of the rest of

my

my name

bye

bye la

chau la chau la chau la chau and I'm and go and the the soul and the soul

and the child

and the man

and

I'm and I'm

I'm

a

I'm a love and

I'm

a go and

I'm

a and The soul is the Oh, I'm going I'm

a lot

I'm I'm I'm and the people

and the genties that will be said

oh, well, chow,

well, chow,

be la chow,

chow,

and the people that will be said

an o'clock Well, it's in me, what's Serrano? A big man,

What is the Lord? The Oh, I'm going to be a man.

And I'm going to be. and the other people and the other

one of the

I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm I'm I'm

I'm

and

I'm

a

I'm

I'm a I'm a little bit of all the same.

Yeah.

I'm a lot.

I'm a lot of the other than that's where I'm going to be a lot.

I'm a lot.

I'm

I'm not

I'm

I don't I'm not going and the other I'm

a lot

I'm and

I'm going to be. I'm going to and

I'm I'm and and nothing a lot of

and

I'm a Bhopal

I'm

I'm

I'm

a man I'm going to be. I'm going to go

I'm

I'm I'm I'm I'm Comrade Kid, what's up, brother?

How you doing?

Appreciate that.

What's up, y'all?

What's up, y'all?

What's going on?

How y'all doing?

How y'all doing?

Don't mind me looking fresh as fuck don't mind me looking fresh

as fuck how y'all doing

I've been homeless for months

I've been homeless I've been looking homeless

but now I'm cleaned up

Cuzzazz with the 10.

What's up, man? Appreciate you. Appreciate you.

What's up?

Damn, it's been a long time. It haven't even been a long time.

A lot of shit been popping off.

A lot of people crashing the fuck out. A lot of people losing their minds. Yellowstone with the five. What's up, man?

Guys, the yacht's not going to pay for itself, all right? The yacht's not going to pay itself back off.

I still got that monthly mortgage on my yacht that I got for $50 million.

It's not going to pay for itself, okay?

It's not paying for itself.

My $1,000 cigars aren't going to pay for themselves.

All right, guys.

You know what's so funny?

One of our big hate stalkers this happens always at how always happens

like 3 a.m. or something one of our dedicated hate stalkers who lives not even in this country

i was in the discord and uh you know these people say well i'm not going to debate you i'm not

going to give you content.

So I did like a Volk vulture style text debate.

I pinned them down.

What is the actual, like, basis of your position in any kind of way, right?

I was like, they're like, they're like, you're unemployed.

You're you just stream. I'm like, okay, let's break that down.

I'm a jobless loser who just streams, right? I was like, how does that not apply to people that you respect across history, like Marx or Lenin or so on and so on? And he said, you're comparing yourself to Marx and Lenin?

I'm saying no.

But before they became somebodies, they were nobodies.

Before they impacted history, they were selling content through the written medium, right?

That's what they were doing.

I was like, so what makes the streaming medium

so much less,

you know,

important than the written medium,

right?

What makes one vulgar

and the other one

esteemed and worthy of respect?

And they're like,

oh,

so you're like an only fan's content creator then, right? You're like a girl who's

showing her tits or something. And I'm like, okay, this is the kicker. This is what I want to bring to y'all's

attention. I was like, okay. So you're basically saying is everyone watches me who does watch me

because of my good looks that's

what you're saying you're saying that i'm getting that that people tune into the stream and watch

me because i just i i i look so good i'm just so handsome

they they're like no no you're hideous actually i was like okay so why the fuck why does anyone

support me then can you explain why people support me he's like well because because you give

them a masculinity i'm'm like, okay,

so I'm the only masculine person

in the world. That's why

people support me because I'm the only masculine

person in the entire

world who has elevated testosterone

levels. I was like, why can't anyone who

has high testosterone levels do this then?

He's like, you're a Redditor. I'm not going to debate you. I'm like, buddy, buddy, I have you

fucking pinned down and cornered, you little bitch. We're not on stream. You don't have to use

your voice. You're not showing your face You don't have to use your voice.

You're not showing your face.

This is the text format you sow prize.

People always tell me, you won't debate me through text.

Okay, here's the fucking debate.

What the fuck is your position?

They're like, this is Reddit.

I'm not going to debate you.

Buddy, if you're not going to debate me, you little bitch, if you're not going to debate me,

then fly to America and fight me.

Exactly what is the problem?

If you're not going to debate me, then what is... No, no, no, I'm going to be calm about this.

Because there's these low testosterone

little bitches who need to be slapped

into the ground. They've never been slapped enough

in their life. They need the Ottoman

slap. They need a smack down into the ground.

You know what these fucking ants, these flies,

the little gnats they say

i'm not going to debate you because i don't respect you but what what is the debate you tell

yourself what is the internal narrative you give to yourself are you claiming you've just adopted this position for

irrational reasons? You don't even have like an internal narrative where you're like, okay, X, Y, and Z. X is

Y, you know, whatever. A equals B and B equal C, therefore A equals C. It's like do you have any

procedure in your head whatsoever that

justifies your position? Or

is this personal when you don't even fucking know

who the fuck I am? Is this personal

or is there actually a rational?

I'm not going to debate with you about it.

Then debate it with yourself, you bitch.

Transparently show the public the line of reasoning and whether you have sufficiently opened yourself to scrutiny in terms of the fucking chain of reasoning that has led you to adopt the position that you have.

But then the truth is very tragic, actually.

You guys want to hear the truth. It's very tragic.

And I'm not just saying this to shit on...

I'm not just saying this to shit on our enemies.

I'm saying this because everyone needs to self-critique.

The truth is actually more simple.

These fucking losers

were at one point in their life humiliated by the community.

They're typically millennials. And yes, I'm going to keep shitting on the millennial generation.

If you, I am baffled about people who take this personally.

Why can't we speak objectively about sociology in a materialist way?

Fact is, millennials, the older ones, were not raised on social media.

They have a sense of control over discourse that is an illusion.

They cannot cope with the reality of the artificial

discursive intelligence that's at play.

Artificial discursive intelligence is what creates communities.

Artificial discursive intelligence is what sets the standards. Artificial discursive intelligence is what sets the standards

artificial discursive intelligence is the very basis upon which recognition is possible

but they think that all discourse is an interpersonal relationship

like you walk into a cafe oh i'm going to shake to shake your hand, you know, you shake my hand, you recognize this is personal.

I control this space.

This is a relationship between two people recognize each other.

No, it's fucking not.

It's an impersonal, artificial, discursive intelligence.

And when millennials are exposed to this fact,

they crash out.

And they go to inhuman lengths

to restore the sense of control

over discourse that they never had in the first place.

And this is the common threat.

You notice the common threat.

Dan Cohen, Caleb Maupin, every single one of my hate stalkers, every single one of them, they all have one thing in common. They belong to a generation that believes they are Sahib Kieran. The millennials think they are Sahib Kiran.

They think they're the chosen people.

They think that they are the generation that will lead the revolution.

No, you won't, you little bitches.

You're not going to lead the revolution.

The revolution will be led by the people born in the new era,

not the hangers-on of a dead era who are still fucking coping,

pretending that they're at the avant-garde,

when they're even behind the fucking boomers. You're not at the avant-garde when they're even behind the fucking boomers.

You're not at the avant-garde.

Only those molded by the new era, molded by the artificial intelligence, molded by

this what we call the social media, molded by the cybern we call the social media,

molded by the cybernetic form of socialization.

They alone will lead the revolution.

And these millennials are holding us back.

Now, am I talking about millennials individually?

No.

I'm talking about the sociology of people who adopt a specific ideology and worldview that is based on narcissistically assuming that in the transition

between two eras, the old era and the new one we now live in, they are the subject, they are the main character, they are Sahib Quran. No, you are fucking not. The subject, the subject is collective. The subject is artificial,

discursive intelligence.

It's not any one individual.

It's not a specific subject.

That's what they don't understand.

We're in the post-subjective age,

an age beyond mere subjective recognition.ila with the 10 thank you so much

so this is the truth and i want to talk about something for the purposes of self-criticism

not just of me but everyone needs of self-criticism, not just of me,

but everyone needs to self-criticize.

What is this pettiness?

What is this smallness inside every

human being, especially in America?

That leads people to become

traders, to become wreckers,

to become crashouts.

What is this smallness and pettiness inside of them?

It's always surprising.

It's never surprising until it fucking happens.

I just saw, you know, you see it people in ACP, it happens to them too. Absolutely happens to them.

And I want to fucking say something. I want to say a few things, actually. There's some people that claim,

Brifle with the five, what's up, bro? Appreciate you.

There's some people that falsely

get around to saying a load of bullshit.

In my book, it's a load of

fucking bullshit.

You've got a lot of fucking people that say

bullshit like, well, Haas,

the problem is the community is too aggressive they swarm

people too much hey bitch you can share your opinion in public all you want but people are

allowed to share their opinion that they think you're a fucking retard. None of that is coordinated.

None of that is organized behind the scenes.

These are individuals, the same sacred individuality you regard for yourself.

Well, guess what?

Other people are also individuals who have their own opinions.

And if people collectively, if a lot of individuals commonly think you're a fucking retard,

you can't attack ghosts and say, oh, I'm a sake, I'm under attack by the mob.

No, mobs are full of individuals, too.

Every form of individuality

is interpolated by an artificial

discursive intelligence,

which is collective in scale.

That's just true for everything.

Just like you share your opinion,

other people can share their opinion, too.

It's as simple as that. And share your opinion, other people can share their opinion too. It's as simple as that.

And if your opinion happens to align with that of a community, that's not because you're in a

fucking cult and you're a drone and you're destroying dissent, it's because you are part of the same artificial

discursive intelligence as literally everyone else, and you've taken a position.

You know, it's like seeing the sky is blue.

Okay, you see the sky is blue.

Everyone says this, oh, well, look at the sheeple saying the sky is blue everyone says this oh well look at the sheeple saying the sky is blue

well the reason people in this community tend to see things eye to eye tend to see things in more or less the same fucking way

is because they're experiencing the same fucking way is because

they're experiencing the same fucking thing.

It's because they're coming to realize

the same fucking things, because they're in the same

structural, discursive context

of knowing what's actually fucking

going on. If you're a specific

type of person that's with ACP, and all you do is see people lie and

bullshit about us 24-7, and with your own eyes, you know it's false, that's going to create

a very specific archetypal subjectivity, which you alone are not going to have.

Other people will have it

too.

And so it's always this dynamic

between people encountering

the horde. They're like,

I hate, even some people

they like me, but they're like, I like

Haas, but I hate his community.

Hey, listen, there's, if you want to be an individualist, everyone's an individual, including people that are operating in ways that look like they fit the pattern of a community, okay?

Or a cult, dare I say. Everyone's still a fucking individual, right?

And so I just wanted to get that off my chest, because it's not a fucking excuse for the way people crash out.

I hate to say it, guys, but I'm telling you the truth. Stop.

Now, look, look.

I tell you what I think is right and wrong.

That's all I can do, right?

Harassing people for no reason is wrong.

Attacking people for no reason is wrong. Attacking people for no reason is wrong.

Okay.

But simultaneously, every single person who turns on us, every single one of them, we're fucking traitors.

They have the bones of traitors. They are scum. They are not human. They're traitors. They're born

traders. They're predestined to be traitors. We cannot, there's nothing we could have done to placate them.

Somewhere down along the line they would have

revealed themselves as the traders that they are because they're weak because they're stupid because

they're useless or because they don't believe in this cause.

They're here to fit in.

They're here to find friends.

They're here to find social circles.

They're here to find a sense of belonging.

That's not belief.

Because the minute you feel ostracized,

then you turn on the entire principle.

This is the truth.

These people who turn on us cannot be placated. I want to say something.

Anytime somebody emotionally lashes out against us in public,

even if they're a member of our party, even if they're one of us, it's on them.

It's not our fault.

It's their fault.

Because what they're doing behind every one of these reckless crashouts is a fundamental form of disrespect.

You don't crash out on shit that you actually fucking respect. You do it.

You even, you know, I don't, I have a theory.

Crazy people are not innocent at all.

They knowingly are disrespecting the public in the same way a dog is pissing on a fence.

They're crying. You notice how crazy people will be like

on the street. They'll be like, oh, I'm a dinosaur.

But then somebody will pull out a gun, oh shit. And they run. Suddenly

they fucking, the sanity snaps right back

into them and they act fucking normal and suddenly they know how to react

rationally and they do all

the things rationally

it's a form of disrespect

it's basically somebody stretching their

legs out with their fucking nuts spread out

farting in our fucking face

like they don't give a fuck yeah I, I'm just going to fart with the

wind. Say whatever the fuck I want. I don't give a fuck. I'm just going to be a drunk fuck. It's like,

that's what these people are doing. They're intentionally disrespecting us. It's an intentional form of disrespect.

That's it.

Don't try to assume those people can be won over.

Those people are already our enemies.

Even before they openly attack us, they're our enemies.

You don't actually crash out on the shit you actually believe in at all in terms of principle.

You don't.

It's so disappointing.

You want to know it's fundamentally disappointing?

How many people get epiphanies?

Oh, I just realized I hate the ACP.

I don't agree with them ideologically.

Really, you subhuman little piece of shit, you fucking dog?

Really?

You just realized you disagree with us on principle?

Just so happening to align with the cosmos of you having some petty, interpersonal feud with people who give you negative feedback?

I'm going to post some dumb, retarded shit. Then I'm going to have 10 people

call me an idiot for it. Oh, actually, guys, I realized, I don't agree with any of the ACP's

principles. I just realized that. I just realized that these people who I claim to be to agree with all

their principles

coincidentally, because

my little ego was offended

one fucking time for the most petty reason

possible, because I got

1% negative feedback that

Haas gets every day,

I suddenly came to the epiphany that action that Hos gets every day.

I suddenly came to the epiphany that actually, on principle,

I reject everything the ACP believes.

I actually, like yesterday, you're like,

I'm with the ACP.

I totally agree with them.

They're totally on the, you know, they have the right.

But then one day later, because they got some negative feedback that had nothing to do with the principles themselves, they have the ab-

They just like woke up like from the Matrix.

They're like, oh, the cult, I've escaped the cult.

My eyes are open.

What, why did it take your little bitch ego getting offended for your, for your Matrix epiphany to happen?

If you were truly a principled person, you would have opposed

us from the very beginning. But why

does it take such small,

petty things that lead you

to crash out and attack

on every single one of the people

who are our enemies? If you notice this pattern thank you

you can't name a single full-time hater that we have or traitor you can't name a single trader

or full-time hater that we have whose origin story

had nothing to do with principle.

None of these people's origin stories

as far as their problem with us

has anything to do with principles.

Every single one of them had their

little, petty little

egos offended, like literal babies, like literal children.

It's not even about the substance. You need to understand what immature little babies these

little bitches are. It has nothing to do with substance. Let's say I type on X, you know, uh, uh,

my favorite ice cream is, uh, coffee ice cream. And then 10 people are like, that's retarded. I like

vanilla. That could be enough to provoke

these crashouts because it's

like the negative feedback

of them millennials not

getting their little participation trophy

and realizing they're not the center of the universe

and they're not the main character,

and them realizing like, oh my God, I'm not the subject of all the discourse.

Oh my God, I'm getting negative feedback.

I'm getting feedback that doesn't reproduce my fucking sense of elated status

suddenly that's

what drives these people to have the epiphany

the epiphany

oh my god

I've always disagreed with ACP's theory

and principles oh my god I've always disagreed with ACP's theory and principles.

Oh, my God, I've always hated Haas.

Oh, my God.

Now I realize I disagree with infrared on principle.

Wait a second, you little bitch.

If you were a principled person, it wouldn't have taken something so small and petty for you to have this epiphany.

You small little petty bitch.

That's why you're a subhuman dog.

A human being has principles.

You're not a human being.

You are a petty bitch.

If anyone acts like a baby around us, they've never respected us from the beginning.

You see, sometimes there are contexts where principle is life and death.

You only respect the principles you respect.

People who trifle in matters of principle.

People who change on a dime because their little feelings got offended, because their

petty egos got offended.

People who switch up like that on a dime.

The only thing changing being the social context of how they've been interacted in one context,

people who switch up like that,

it's not that they have no principles,

it's that they're not accountable to the real principles that they have, which are

conformity to the U.S. regime. Because nobody just passively exists in this system and status

quo that we have. Ultimately, if you're not standing up and in some kind of way, taking seriously the need to create an alternative,

you are in some way actively reproducing the system. And those are the principles you actually

respect. And you may be like, well, I don't have a choice.

It doesn't matter.

All you're saying is that your respect is based on fear.

You don't crash out on the U.S. government.

You're like, well, I can't.

They'll shoot me.

Okay.

But that's still the principles you have.

They're just based in fear.

Do you understand what I'm saying, guys?

It's like, you still have respect for the regime.

It's just that your respect is based in fear because you're a fucking coward.

I don't have any fear of anything.

The reason why I don't resort to lawlessness

isn't because I'm scared.

It's because the praxis and strategy I'm pursuing and which I believe in is one where I have to maximize a relationship with the American people, with the American working class, who by and large, follow the laws of this country. We have to ground the context of revolutionary struggle in the objective contradictions that exist among the masses. So I don't have to fear anything,

but these people, their principles are rooted in fear.

Name a single one of the traitors and wreckers.

Name a single one of them.

Every single one of them bows with sublime veneration, the regime regime or state whatever country they live in the status quo

they can say well i i can't do anything about it all you're saying is that your principles are

based in fear they're still your principles, though. Sombra,

what's up? Right?

Those are still, just because

it's, just because, oh, I don't have a choice.

You do, you always have a choice. Every human being

has a choice. Your choice

is living a life as a cattle

based on fear.

That's okay.

But those are the principles you believe in.

You understand?

Those are the principles you actually hold closely to yourself.

And you trifle with us because you treat us like a social club.

Everyone understands something.

Every single one of the traders of our movement, I'm going to use graphic language.

They, you have to see them like a rapist.

It's like they're trying to use our...

They're trying to rape our community.

But the rape, it's instead of like a direct physical sexual assault,

it's for social validation and recognition.

It's like a dog raping a toy.

That's how they see our community.

They come to us and they want...

They're just trying to take this recognition, and the minute they don't have access to it anymore, they go full wrecker.

That's kind of a form of rape, if you ask me, because you're basically saying

we involuntarily owe you

on a personal level,

psychological validation.

And if five people

decide to push back on you for having

a different opinion than you,

then you attack us and declare us enemies and try to discard us.

Well, you're a kind of social rapist.

That's what you are.

And what has to happen to those types?

I believe rapists deserve the death penalty.

I also think social rapists deserve the death penalty. I also think social

rapists deserve the death penalty. Simple

as that. They're trying to use us, like a

dog uses offense to piss on.

And if we deny them

that right, then they have

the right to attack us and go to war with us and all this

shit. Fuck you, you fucking bitch. A dog that pisses on the fence. Maybe not a dog. I don't

hate dogs that much. But you get what I mean a fucking disrespectful

little bitch like that

dogs that piss on the fence tend to be

put the fuck down metaphorically

right

ML what's up you are a fucking cancer

and we remember

every single one of them.

That's the thing.

Nobody forces you to have anything to do with us.

But if you decide to have something to do with us, if you decide to have something to do with us, we need a better actually...

I know we're all about recruitment and stuff.

But part of having effective recruitment is having an effective way to filter people. Nobody who is here should be here or should be allowed to be here because they're getting some personal psychological gratification from the social recognition they get from others.

The only guerrillas I want are the ones who are so devoted to their principles that if a

gorilla says, Haas, my will is aligned with the same will as yours. We have the common principle. We have the

common belief. And if this gorilla is attacked, if 30 guerrillas decide to clown on him over some

bullshit, He doesn't

crash out and go, my incentives

for being here have disappeared. I'm going to fucking

go be a wrecker. They go, that doesn't

change shit. This comes from my

heart.

This comes from my heart.

I don't give a fuck. This shit in my bones, I believe this shit. I'm not going to fucking let somebody 20, 30, 100 people if they give me negative feedback. That doesn't change the conviction that I fucking have.

We're going up against the entire regime.

You be a communist. You're signing up to go against

hundreds of potentially tens of millions of people.

Nothing compared to this type of shit. Those are the only

guerrillas I want following me, the only ones who are here for the principle, for the belief,

not for monkey games of social recognition, gossip circles and gossip clubs and friend friends groups.

You friendship has to come after.

That's not the premise.

Y'all can be friends.

That's fine.

But the premise of this community is the belief and the principle and nothing else.

So if your friendships start failing and you fucking feelings get hurt because you posted something

retarded or something that five people decided to disagree with, guess what?

If you were a principled person, that would not make a difference for you whatsoever

ever. Simple as that. Because this is a pattern. It didn't just happen one time. This has happened dozens of times in the

history of the infrared movement. It's happened more, it's more times than is acceptable in the ACP.

It's happened too many times.

That exact thing I'm describing, where people fucking crash out on us because of some small, petty fucking reason.

I keep going back to the Dan Cohen thing because it's just such an irony.

Dan Cohen was there when that bald-headed fucking freak crashed out on us because he got his

fucking feelings hurt because he got his fucking feelings hurt

because he got his ego bruised.

And then Dan Cohen was there like, yeah, this guy's crazy, whatever.

And then Dan Cohen goes and does the same fucking thing.

You know what that proves me?

This isn't about bad apples.

This isn't about, you know, I don't know, bald people being bad or something.

Everyone has the ability to be this little fucking bitch inside of them.

And when you have awareness of that fact, when you have awareness of that fact, you can actually

fucking have some self-awareness and be like, what the fuck am I doing with my life?

Do I want to live a life based on being principled?

Do I want to live an honorable life? Does that matter?

Well, if it doesn't matter to you, speak now.

Speak now so I purge your bitch-ass

out of here.

If honor means nothing to you, raise your hand and speak now so I can purge you, get you the

fuck out of this movement.

I don't give a fuck how much you're well liked by people.

If you're not here for honor, get the fuck out.

Simple as that.

If you don't care about honor and principle,

get the fuck out.

I don't give a fuck who you are.

Even if a billionaire came to me and like,

I'll give your party $100 million.

If we could, if if i could just uh

shit it up and no fuck off principal and honor is the foundation it's like oxygen you don't have that

then you can't breathe we don't have that then we can't breathe simple as that

every at every level of human nature especially in amer, which is not a collectivistic

society, you have petty

ass bitch motherfuckers

who make themselves the subject of everything.

And even the smallest dispute,

even the smallest petty

thing, they'll allow

that to turn into, oh,

I just had an epiphany. I just had a

complete epiphany about my principles.

No. You had a change

in terms of your interpersonal relationships.

That's what you fucking had.

Boo fucking who. Nobody gives a bit.

Nobody fucking cares. Boo fucking cares. Boo fucking

who. Nobody gives a shit.

You know what I mean? Boo fucking who.

Boo fucking who.

Boo fucking who. Boo fucking who. Boo fucking who.

You're not owed anything in this fucking life.

It's like such an in-cell mentality.

And men and women can both have it.

Not just men.

Both men and women can have this, whatever you call this mentality, this entitlement, this notion that people have to be friends with you or you are owed positive feedback.

If you're not getting the positive feedback you want, you have two fucking options.

You fuck off and leave.

Or you have a principal debate about why.

Something.

Anything but changing your principles

would be a justifiable response.

And I want to say

something, all right?

I want to say

something. I want to especially say some

shit, right? It's like

say some shit, right?

It's like the day that I feel like

I'm not getting any positive

feedback for the shit I'm doing or I'm saying

I'm fucking leaving. And I'm not

going to take, I'm not going to hold a grudge.

I'm not going to try to seek revenge and be angry about it.

I'll just fucking go.

I'll just fucking go and do literally anything else, but be bitter about it for the rest of my fucking life.

Okay.

And there's a final thing I want to address. Final thing I want to address.

There are some people. There are some people. And I genuinely, people are so stupid. They think I

haven't thought about this. They go, Haas, don't you think you're holding ACP back a little bit?

Don't you think the party might be better off with someone else who's less controversial,

who's less polarizing?

Wouldn't it be better?

Wouldn't it be better if there was less of this toxicity associated with you?

Hey, you know who thought about that for years? I did. If you think I didn't think about that, I don't care what you say. I'm telling you the truth.

ACP launches in 2024, I thought about that i thought about that

through the entire year of 2025 okay and i'm going to be honest with you about something very i'm

going to be very frank with you about something and this is my two cents I'm allowed to get. Everyone's allowed to give

their two cents. I'll give you mine. I've never claimed to be the perfect leader. I've never

claimed that. In fact, I began extremely inexperienced, extremely inexperienced.

And I don't claim I'm perfect, all right?

I don't claim I'm a Messiah.

I don't claim I'm perfect.

I don't claim I'm the second coming or something.

So, first of all, I'm not here to gas myself up and say I'm the best guy ever,

okay? But what I will insist upon, what I will insist upon, what I will insist upon,

to my dying fucking breath with utmost conviction with 100% fucking certainty

if you want to go down this path i'm not talking about me i'm talking about me. I'm talking about this path. I'm talking about communism with a capital C. I'm talking about Marxism and Leninism, independent of the Democratic Party. I'm talking about a path that they're wrong

and the communists were right.

I'm talking about the path

of Marx, Engels,

Lenin, Stalin,

Mao, that path,

that simple path. Revive the

Communist Party. Make the Communist Party party great turn it into a party of

millions then my words which you should regard with utmost sincerity certainty and, and conviction, okay?

Follow these words carefully when thinking about who should lead you.

Whoever leads you, better be a fucking warrior who's ready for war.

Meaning, they will be just as, if not more, toxic, controversial, polarizing, attacked as me.

When considering the question of optics and toxicity and controversy, understand that if you follow this

fucking path

you're at war

you're asking for war

this is a war

this is a war

there's no way to

fucking be neutral

about it

the minute

the minute you declare

yourself the Communist Party

you are at war.

And someone who is weak, someone unwilling to fight, and someone unwilling to defy the discourse like I am.

Cannot lead you.

Cannot lead you.

Someone who would, for example, take this retarded cigar thing.

Someone who would go, oh, I'm sorry for this cigar, they get stepped on.

Okay, if your commander gets stepped on, you get stepped on.

Everything gets stepped on.

They take and they take and they take until they destroy us versus someone who says suck my

fucking nuts bitch i will not back down i will give you nothing.

Because you're not even a good faith actor to begin with.

They're going to attack you no matter what.

You need to understand that.

They're going to try to destroy you with everything they fucking have. Every communist organization in this nation. Everything has been done to destroy them

and still fucking happening. The past

fucking three months

holy shit there was like a story

dozens and dozens of

splits. All the major

organizations splits, splits,

fucking wreckers.

They come and they wreck

and they destroy. Only a

fucking warrior can stand

up to that. Only a

fucking warrior. When the

fucking military

siops rigged the fucking social media discourse

to put the heat on your leader

on your party

fuck this guy, fuck this party, yada, yada, yada.

Some people go, damn, why are we so attacked?

It must be because, It must be because what?

The person fighting the war on the other side?

This is war.

You're going to be, oh, no, no, no.

A competent leader would be very popular.

Really?

Tell me, tell me you think that.

Tell me it's possible to be popular in this niche.

I'm humble. I don't see it. I don't see it.

Because I have 10 years of experience watching. That's how I know.

I've seen principled people. I've seen it. I've seen them come. They were weak. They got destroyed. Every single one of them, every single time gets destroyed. Caleb Mauppin, the weak, was a weakling, and his optics were bad.

He was cringe as fuck.

He was always cringe.

But anyone who says, oh, I always knew that Caleb was a bad person because the spanking thing.

It's like, well, no, you didn't actually.

Caleb started off as a soft-spoken guy in a suit who never insulted anyone in their

fucking life.

And it was just going on fucking stream being like, well, I kind of do respect the Soviet Union.

He was just saying the most milk-toed shit.

Look at how much he was destroyed and stomped on.

Why?

Because he was weak.

Because he was a fucking weakling.

And the more he showed weakness, the more they would step on him

and then only retroactively can people say well i always knew this guy was a bad person you

didn't always know that actually you didn't always know that actually you didn't he was cringe for sure but it doesn't it doesn't matter if you

disaline with the discourse that's created by U.S. military

sciops, they're coming after you.

This whole thing about me and Jackson being

traitors, Randy Fine,

Laura Lumer, let me ask you a question.

Genuinely, correct me if I'm wrong.

In your life, have you ever met one Laura Lumer fan in your life?

Like, have you ever, like, went to the grocery store and I'm like, oh, I'm a big fan of

Laura Lumer.

Have you ever met a single person who said that ever?

But she has a following.

Sometimes she ratios people.

Sometimes she gets 20, 30,000 likes.

Let me ask you guys,

you think those are real?

You think those are real?

How much of it you think is real?

Okay.

So consider the possibility that if you're in this kind of fucking movement

This is what happens if if you are a threat to the discourse created by US military sciops

John what's up? They're gonna fucking come after you and they're gonna create the perception

that you're the most unpopular,

hated person in the world.

In reality.

Like, you guys see this shit.

I'm so glad you see this.

I tell this to someone,

they'll literally think I'm clinically insane. But how many of you see this. I tell this to someone, they'll literally think

I'm clinically insane.

But how many of you

see in accounts

with 200 followers?

But then they say

something about ACP.

Oh,

5,000 likes.

Okay.

If that happened one time,

okay.

If it happened two times, okay. If it happened two times, okay. If it happened three times, okay. If it happened 100 times, okay. But it's happened like thousands of times. How can we believe it's real? I can't. I just, you can't, there's, those people don't exist. And in real life,

leftists have a broad spectrum. There's three, three types of leftists who know, who interact

with us. Some like us. Others are kind of indifferent toward us. And then a fringe minority will be like,

get on you fast, scum. But all this hate you see on the internet, it never translates in real life.

Nobody sees it in real life. You see one mentally ill furry never translates in real life. Nobody sees it in real life.

You see one mentally ill furry do it in real life.

Marginals.

And isn't it obvious to you that what the fucking,

the whole Department of Defense,

the whole fucking Psiop division, what they do is they'll take these mentally defective, mentally ill people and prop them up.

Like there are some authentic actors who obsessively hate us, but they would not have any traction if it wasn't

for the fact that there's this artificial discourse created against us. So, you know, what I'm

trying to say is, I'm not claiming I'm the best at all, ever. I'm not claiming, I'm trying to say is

I'm not claiming I'm the best at all

ever. I'm just saying

if you're complaint about me

is the controversy, the toxicity

and all that kind of shit, you're not cut out for this.

Okay?

This is war.

It's it will never actually

maybe you should criticize me

for being too much Buddhist, actually.

Not

pet, not not not, not vicious enough

actually.

How often do I attack people on X almost never I'm quite Buddhist actually

quite moderate quite restrained

and Jackson who's Jackson he's The guy smiles every single day.

You've never, you never see a photo of Jackson where he's not smiling.

He's always smiling.

He's not a toxic, angry person like I am.

Fascinating how that book was there.

So, look, I can tell you the simple truth.

Whenever I'm going to, I want to teach you guys something.

I want to teach you something.

When an aggressor, when unjustly, you're seeing thousands of people attack you, and it leads

you to reflect and say, what am I doing wrong?

What am I doing wrong?

If you keep doing that, I have to go with the analogy.

It's an unfortunate analogy, but I just got to, I got to give it to you viscerally.

So you understand.

Like, you need, you need, at least to get in your fucking head.

In prison, in prison prison when you're at the cafeteria and some dude comes and takes your food

okay takes your honey buns something like that and then you start getting into the habit of going

well what can i do better how can i blame myself you're not you're not gonna make it man

you're not gonna make it not gonna fucking make it you got to go find that dude and fucking beat the living shit out of them in front of everyone.

Or else, you're cooked.

You start getting into the fucking mentality and the mindset of being a fucking victim.

You are not cut out for this shit.

People need to understand that. Like, people need

to understand that.

That's how they're making you into a victim.

Oh, how can I appease people?

You got to fight,

fight, fight, fight.

That's how it fucking works.

There's right

and there's wrong. There's right

and there's wrong. Okay's right and there's wrong.

Okay? I'm

willing to debate almost anyone

about anything.

Actually, really, anyone.

I'm willing to debate anyone. I've

proven that many times. About anything.

Just so I can expose to you guys, okay, I'm presenting you right and wrong.

Let's see other people present right and wrong.

What leg do they have to stand on?

What right do they have to... What leg do they have to, what, what, what, what like do they have to stand on?

What are the, what are their principles?

Nothing. Nothing.

Their principle is doggy dog.

I'm going to come and I'm going to take your shit.

What are you going to do about it?

You do nothing?

You start blaming yourself.

Buddy, they're challenging you. I go to sleep at night happy that the guerrillas cause mental anguish to our bad faith actor enemies. I'm happy y'all do that shit.

I'm not going to lie.

Because if you weren't fucking doing that,

they would try to, oh my God,

how much they would try to abuse.

They already do, by the way.

Y'all are fighting and standing up

for your own dignity.

That's what you're fucking doing.

I don't want to be in an army

of victims. I want to be in an army

of lions.

Not victims, lions.

They try to make you into victims

if you don't defend yourself. They try to make you into victims if you don't fight

back.

Who has the moral high ground?

We do.

Is it wrong to say that?

We have the moral high ground.

We do.

We do have the moral high ground.

Absolutely.

Sometimes our enemies try to posture in some moral way. They try to find and exploit

some perceived inconsistency in our morals or principles.

But the level of scrutiny they apply to us is never applied to any human being on earth because it's impossible.

Because moral consistency has nothing to do with contextual omnipotence and omniscience.

Just the impermanence of context forever, that everything is always the same exact context and everything always looks the same way. No, everything has to be considered in its totality. How does it relate to everything else? What's the context? What is the relationship that it has to other things?

Our enemies in bad faith, they'll exploit something out of context.

They'll strip it of its underlying rationale.

They'll say, look at Haas and Jackson, look at ACP, look at this thing they said four years ago. Okay, what's the context, though? What's the actual angle? What's the rationale? No, no, that it's just in a vacuum. There's a universality of context, really? It's bad faith. See, they don't ever apply that scrutiny to anyone. They've

never applied that to anyone. But us. But us. It's smallness.

It's like everyone's got a dog inside themselves.

Have I told you guys about the earliest symbols of state sovereignty?

The master of beast.

The master of beast is like this.

Got two rabid dogs to your left to your right.

That's sovereignty.

You keep that shit at bay.

You stop.

Don't be the fucking dog that pisses on a fucking fence.

You stop. You respect.

Just like when you go to the White House, no, you don't see nobody going up to the fucking

U.S. Capitol building and taking a shit on the steps.

You don't see nobody going to the White House and taking a piss and making a mess.

It's because of fear.

That doesn't fucking mean change anything.

Respect can be based in fear.

Respect can be based in principle and belief.

It's still respect. We're going to be doing TikTokic-tok by the way

be doing tic-tok debates

i want to you guys to understand something.

Our crime is believing in this shit.

It's always been our crime.

Believing in this shit.

Believing in it.

Some people call us revisionists.

For example, sometimes they call us revisionists.

Cousaz, what's up? Sometimes you got my... revisionists. For example, sometimes they call us revisionists.

Cuzazz, what's up? Sometimes you got Maoists calling us revisionists. For example,

someone posted a picture of the Filipino Maoists in a jungle fighting and they go, ho, compared to this,

you and,

you and Jackson are nothing,

Oz.

All right.

Is that you and,

is that a photo of you in that jungle?

Have you taken an AK-47

and gone to the jungle?

Is that what you're doing right now?

You larping ass, bitch?

Shut the fuck up and sit down.

Oh, is that a photo of you?

I'm a Maoist.

I'm a...

Fuck are you doing that?

Nothing.

I'm in the Maoist party for a party.

Toward a party.

We're in the organization.

It's called toward a party.

We're not ready for a party yet, but we want to be,

we want to be an organization toward a party.

Okay.

Got you. Yeah. to party okay got you that's the shit you have going for you okay so with all that grandeur you seem like a know it all who knows everything with all that grandeur you don't know how to make a party, the bare minimum.

It's just a bunch of nonsense.

J.K., what's up, man. Appreciate you. How many of our enemies are enemies because they're principled people or because they

fucking got fucking butt hurt because you guys bruise their ego by giving them negative

feedback one time in their life?

And then they became obsessive haters.

I mean, it's just as simple as that.

It's so petty. It's so small. It's so sad. midnight what's up

what's up

what's up midnight

the number one enemy

I want to tell you something

the number one enemy

in the world the number one enemy I want to explain the number one enemy in the world, the number one

enemy, I want to explain

the number one enemy of American

communism, the number one enemy of American

communism. I'll remember this. Number

one enemy of American communism

are the psychologically

unwell and unbalanced.

You ever

encounter on social media

those people who randomly just start

attacking you because they're like, I have this

theory that aliens invented

dialectics

and there's an alien

UFO dialectic

and then we kind of

will just be like

all right

I mean

what difference

does it make

we don't know

and then we just

kind of like

we're not attacking

them

we're not even like

publicly

disagreeing with them

we're just like okay we'll just go our own way, you know?

And then randomly they'll just come at you and they'll be like,

how dare you collaborate with the aliens?

You're, by being silent about this and not validating me

and not, and then by even contradicting me

sometimes inadvertently,

you had declared war on me.

I'm going to destroy you.

That's what I mean

by like, that's the number one enemy of American

Communion, the mentally unwell, the mentally

unbalanced.

We don't understand that just because somebody is not giving you

the attention and recognition you think you deserve

doesn't mean that it entitles you

to start being an aggressor

and attacking them.

They have done nothing wrong to you, actually.

If you, you have an entitlement issue that you think you deserve recognition,

you want to debate me, you can debate me.

If you persuade and convince my audience and take 50 people

with you, good luck.

I've never closed myself off

to the risk that you're going to convince the people

who are watching me.

You know?

But it's like these people who feel entitled that they have you have to if you don't

not only like if you if you if you inadvertently disagree with them about things that's a declaration

of war but it's like if you don't specifically agree with them

and talk about the things they like to talk about you're an enemy you need to be destroyed

that's the number one enemy of communism in america They're mentally unwell, the mentally unbalanced.

Simple as that.

Contrary to what you might think, I'm a profoundly balanced person.

On stream, I'm yelling, all this kind of shit.

When this camera turns off, the whole day I don't even say a word

I'm meditating I'm reading

I'm whatever I'm locked in

I release all my anger

on stream that's actually balanced

in my life that's balance

that's balance in my life okay i'm like this here so i can be chill

for the all the other time i live my life okay Somebody named Alex Alex Zayo wants to speak to me.

What's up?

Hey, what's going on?

What's going on?

Good. Marxism is Islam.

Marx literally said that religion is opium and stupid.

Do you consider yourself a smart guy or like a dumb guy who just, walks around being a dumb guy who's like a midwit?

What do you think?

I would say I'm pretty reasonable.

Yeah, I just like some dumb guy walking around being a dumb guy who just like never thinks about anything.

I mean, I'm not a stupid left thing.

Okay.

Let me ask you a question.

How do you, so you just

know me from this TikTok, right? Nothing else?

No, I mean, I saw debate you with Nick Flantis who crushed you.

Okay, so, so, we'll get to that in a second.

But, so you, you to that in a second.

But, so you know who I am.

So knowing who I am, do you actually elevate, no, hold on, do you think so highly of yourself?

Do you think you're so intelligent that this thing, this contradiction you're pointing out to me,

I've never considered it internally and my own internal monologue

before I actually say this.

Like, do you genuinely think

I've never thought about this in my life

until you confronted me

with this contradiction, supposedly?

Of course, that's where you were done.

You're so smart.

You're so smart in comparison to me that I've never even thought about this before, right?

That's why I mean, that's why the other people.

You're not even white.

You can hear the twang in your voice.

You're not even white and you're a fucking Nick Flintess dick rider.

Nick Flirtis, bro.

You're stupid Marxist.

Marx was Jew.

What the fuck?

And you are brown.

You're brown, bro And you are brown. You're bro, bro.

You are brown and brown white nationalist.

White nationalism is stupid.

That's Nick Fuentes, your king, who you follow.

He's Mexican,

I mean.

Okay.

What can I say?

What can you say?

You're a brown,

self-hating brown white nationalist.

You're pathetic.

Your whole existence is bowing

before colonizers. Bowing before colonizers.

Following before colonizers, bro.

Yeah, you literally worship Nick Fuentes.

You worship white nationals and hate yourself.

Nick is brown, he's Mexican

And he's a, you are a white nationalist

But you're brown

You're a self-hating brown white nationalists

I've never said anything about white nationalism

You're a Nick Flentes follower.

What can I say?

Nick Fulthes.

Okay.

So we can go down two dialogue

trees because you're an NPC

where you're going to get schooled.

Which ones do you want to go down?

Do you want to talk about the opium of the people?

Or do you want to talk about the debate with Nick F people or do you want to talk about the debate with Nick Fuentes

which one?

I mean go with opium.

Okay. So where did Marx write

religion is the opium of the people? Where did he write

that? Do you know?

Manifesto.

Okay.

You're wrong Goodbye

Go do some more homework

Before you decide to challenge me on things you have no familiarity with

He said the comedy

He said the manifesto.

Why challenge me?

Why would you even bother challenging me?

I'm a dragon.

Why would you challenge a dragon?

You think it's easy?

Why?

Because on the internet, you see people ratio me sometimes.

So it's going to be easy for you to come and challenge the dragon.

I'm a dragon.

Why are you going to come in my cave and challenge me?

I'll literally eat your head off.

Your head will be torn off.

I ask you a simple question.

Where does it come from? He goes the manifesto.

Eh, you're wrong. Get out of here. You're illiterate. You don't know anything about Marxism.

You don't know enough about Marx. You haven't read enough Marx to cite him or quote him with any degree of reliability.

You're resorting to conventional tropes. Now, have you, had you phased yourself politely and went,

Haas, I'm a dumb guy who's not educated. Typically, you know, the common stereotype is that Marxism

is against religion. You know, I've heard this opium quote before.

So how do you square those things?

But this guy came in as an expert.

He's calling me stupid.

He's saying Nick Fuentes can beat me in debates.

He's saying all these things that position himself

is more intelligent and knowledgeable than I am.

Well, if you're going to come at it with that angle, you're going to get smacked down.

Simple as that. I got restricted, by the way.

Nick Fuentes beat you in a debate.

Ask these people, what do you mean?

They don't even have any answer.

Nobody who, even if you go on YouTube,

the top comment is making fun of that dumb little kid.

Why are we even talking about this irrelevant, Nick Fuentes?

And before you say, oh, how can you call him

irrelevant? I have the whole

future ahead of me. His entire potential

is gone. He's reached the apex, and there's no...

He's confused about what he is. He didn't even know

what he is anymore.

I started out my whole career being like supposedly critical toward Israel and stuff.

But I'm just like this Laura Lumer or what?

He's a Laura Lumer, Zionist, Democrat,

Richard Spencer,

neo-yazzi,

Republican,

anti-communist,

pro socialist,

apparently, I don't know.

Gavin Newsom supporting,

Laura Lumer supporting,

Randy Fine supporting.

It's like,

what is this guy,

what is he,

what's his angle?

What does he even have?

Nothing.

He has an identity crisis.

He's done. He's nothing.

By the way, the guerrillas tore his entire lieutenants a new one.

The guerrillas, they never knew what guerrillas wore. They encountered us. Oh my God, you guys

viciously beat them bloody into the fucking ground.

They're a cult.

We'll show you what a cult looks like, actually.

We'll show you what a fucking cult looks like.

He's swine. You guys get dunked on.

Who are you talking to?

Talking to me.

On Twitter, you got dunked on.

What does that have to do with anything?

What does that even have to do with me?

Explain.

What does that have to do with me?

You got dunked on.

You are cattle.

So you're saying you just go with whatever's popular, really?

That's the type of person you are.

Oh, you got dunked on.

Okay, you have no sovereignty.

You have no independence.

You're not a human being in my eyes.

You're not even like an animal.

You're just some nothing.

You brought up your own family.

We destroyed them. We absolutely destroyed them. We caused them irreversible. you brought up your own family.

We destroyed them.

We absolutely destroyed them.

We caused them irreversible trauma.

They're never going to recover from it.

Simple as that.

Destroyed them.

Oh, you got dunked on.

You know, all his stuff is botted.

It has nothing to do with reality.

Just look at his viewership how much it went down.

That's all you have to look at.

Not this botted nonsense on X.

It's totally botted. You know, you're just coping you're just coping pathetically it just coping pathetically. It's like they got destroyed.

It's as simple as that.

I don't know why you're coping about this.

The right wing has overwhelmingly turned on this little boy what else can we say what else do we want you know what else What else would be victory, if not that?

Here's this guy again.

Yo.

He's here to tell me about how I'm theologically incorrect because of the plenora mora of the locatoicus of the

the logos of the Saint Ephesus of the Epicurean variety of the, um, what?

He just keeps coming and leaving.

Hello. That's the best response you could conjure up.

What are you talking about?

What are you talking about?

What are you even talking about? Oh, they made fun of some of your people's appearance, okay? We destroyed their appearance.

We drew the lines that led them to be destroyed as a movement and as a community.

They've lost all the support and networks that they had.

They become marginalized and existentially confused.

We drew out all the necessary contradictions.

What more do you want? Oh, but they made fun of someone's

appearance. Okay, you, okay, what are you like? I'm sorry, but if you're a man, if you're a man,

that doesn't mean anything. But even if it means something to you, why would we, why would you even bring that up?

All of their lieutenants are much smaller than even the smallest among us.

They're out of shape.

They're hideous looking.

Even the boy wonder is like

100 pounds soaking wet or something

what who is talking about

whose appearance for what

she didn't destroy anything

your crew is dysgenic

okay look I'm a tolerant person you are a homosexual you're anything. Your crew is dysgenic. Okay. Look,

I'm a tolerant person. You are homosexual.

You're looking for handsome men that you find

handsome. You don't find enough

attractive males in my army.

Or there's one person you find extremely unattractive

and now you're upset about it because you're a homosexual looking for a boyfriend

it's not my problem go somewhere else for that

like why are you crashing out at me for something I don't care about.

There's someone in your party, I don't find them attractive,

huh?

Therefore you lose.

All right.

What is this?

What is this a runway or something?

A fashion runway?

What are you talking about?

Are you like a straight man?

No, you're not.

Nothing wrong with that,

but just you're in the wrong place whatever

you're looking for if you say any of this i rl we got a tough guy i'll say it irRL and what you claimed

you would do

you would do nothing

you would do nothing

you would cry

just like you're crying

now and you'd go home

crying

I'm in Michigan now

and you won't do anything

you won't do anything I promise you won't anything, I promise you won't do anything.

I promise you, you won't do anything.

Because you're not made, you're not built like that, you're not made of that, you're nothing.

You are nothing less than on the bottom of my shoe, you won't do anything, I promise.

Want to bet? Yes yes you will do nothing nothing you will do nothing but cry because you're not built in any kind of way except to be stepped on.

Drop an Addy.

Okay, go there right now.

If you promise to get in your car, you're going to go there right now.

Yeah?

Oh, you think I'm joking.

We got a tough guy here.

We got a tough guy here.

We got a tough guy here. Yo.

Hello.

Hello.

What's up?

Alright.

You didn't read what I said.

You haven't read me.

That's the problem here.

Why do?

Why should I read you?

There's nothing you're providing that I'm in need or guidance of, nothing.

There's nothing you say I'm in need of guidance of. Because you're missing the core point, the core origin in Islam.

Okay, teach me what I'm missing. Go ahead.

You believe in the alienation from Christ that exists in the Western churches.

I don't disagree with you.

I think the Western churches turn their back on Christ in the Western churches. I don't disagree with you. I think the Western churches

turn their back on Christ

in the 5th century.

But it wasn't lost in Christianity.

It remained.

Christ remained with us in the East.

Okay.

The Oriental churches.

Great. Good for you.

So why are you bothering me about it?

Because Islam, in and of itself, is just the antithesis to this Christianity.

It exists as contradiction as an opposite emerging.

That you would wish for a world in which Islam did not exist.

Well, sorry, that's not the world we live in.

No, I don't say that at all.

I live in a world where Islam must exist.

Islam must exist.

But it is going to be sublated by Christianity in the end.

There's no need to identify as Islam.

Walk me through how that's going to happen.

You say it yourself.

In the Eschaton of Islam, Christ will return.

You know that you will be sublated.

Well, everything gets sublated.

Everything in the world does.

Absolutely.

Into Christ.

Well, we have to agree to disagree.

Well, that's what I'm trying to show you.

You can agree with me.

I don't think everything ultimately gets sublated into Jesus Christ.

I don't think that's true.

Everything reaches his judgment.

True.

The true believers and the sinners will be separated, like the chaff and the wheat?

Yes, but I don't...

I mean, you're using the word sublation very loosely here.

How so?

Because every sublation, okay, I want to explain something to you, right?

What we call dialectics, okay, which is a Western tradition.

Dialectics is the culmination of Christian mysticism, hermeneuticism, and esotericism.

And that gets expounded into the form of philosophy and hegel is the one that carries

that lineage to its conclusion now the dialectical cycle that hegel describes is literally just

christianity expounded into the form of philosophy right where you Where you have God the Father, you have the Son as Jesus, and the sublation as the Holy Community.

That's not in coincidence or like, that's not like, oh, my God, it's a miracle.

That's baked into the premise of the entire lineage of Western philosophy, culminating in Hegel.

So Hegel's philosophical system is just expounding Christianity into the form of philosophy, the comprehensive end of philosophy.

But... The comprehensive end of philosophy, okay? But the notion of sublation that Hegel concludes with does not sufficiently sublate the original problem which philosophy was born to respond to.

And this problem is drawn out by the young Higalians concluding in Marx for this incomplete or unsatisfactory sublation because the true sublation

has to transform our understanding

of the dialectical process in the first place

not indefinitely reproduce it forever.

Yes, absolutely. It's taking your original thesis. It moves through its contradiction, through its antithesis.

And renders it superfluous. Absolutely. It moves through its contradiction, through its antithesis.

And renders it superfluous.

Absolutely.

Raises it to sublation.

Raises it up.

Past and prevails, which it originally was.

Right.

I agree.

Absolutely.

This doesn't start with Hegelgel This does not begin with Hegel

It absolutely

We didn't formalize it either

It starts with Hegel

So far as philosophy is concerned, absolutely

No

It began much, much earlier It was formalized and it was directly spoken as by the early

church fathers okay indirectly it was no directly not as and this is something not as philosophy was. No, directly.

Not as philosophy. Not as philosophy.

No, as philosophy.

Okay.

Truly.

I want to provide this for you.

This is something I wanted to speak to you about.

Where do we have the equivalent of Hagle's Science of Logic in the early church fathers?

What's the equivalent then?

It is St. Gregory of Nissa against Unomius, book 5.5.

Okay. And that's the same thing as the science of logic, where he talks about the relation

of universals and particulars and singulars and how the roses read and all that kind of stuff like he talks about

that in that book nearly identically no no not nearly identically does he explicitly talk about it

in those conceptual philosophical terms yeah he defines the uh dialectical process in the exact same steps that Hegel does, thesis, antithesis, synthesis.

Not using those exact words, but using that exact process.

What words does he use?

He uses humanity no longer remains within its own boundaries and properties, but is lifted up towards

that which prevails and surpasses. The conceptualization, theoria, of the properties of flesh and

the divinity remain undivided until each other than is theorized in itself. I already told you,

Hegel's philosophy expounds the Christian religion. Because he doesn't use those hermeneut told you, Hegel's philosophy

expounds the Christian religion.

This is permutical terms that

Hegel was born into. This is

synthesis. This is synthesis.

This is sublation. This is why I call

it Babel. This is why I'm

calling it Babel. Because you're not being

precise about what you're talking about i

already said hagel's dialectics is just christianity expounded into philosophy and the most

comprehensive possible but it doesn't reward to the trinity that's where you're kind of getting it

wrong here it refers to christ this passage refers to

the nature of christ you don't even know what you're dialectics dialectics at its core is focused in on

christ and where does islam stick with christ it on Christ.

And where does Islam stick with Christ?

It removes him.

Completely.

Entirely.

It is a contradiction.

It is a growing antithesis against Christ.

This is so incredibly frustrating. It's like I try to talk and you just interrupt me and I don't even know what you want.

You just want to scream at me about your religious faith that I don't share.

So what am I screaming?

Because I'm trying to fucking explain something to you, and you keep interrupting me to go on your tangents.

Who are you convincing? I'm not convinced. So who is this meant to convince? Do you want to hear my feedback as far as what you're telling me? Or do you want to talk to yourself about your faith?

You asked for where I found it, and I gave it to you. No. Please go ahead. I would like your feedback. I already... I already... I already said that Hegel's philosophy is just Christianity

comprehensively expounded into the form of philosophy.

He said, no, no, no, Hegel didn't start that.

And your proof is that Christianity proceeds Hegel.

I didn't deny that.

But only Hegelian

philosophy expounds

this fully and comprehensively

into a comprehensive philosophical system.

Now you say, well, it may as

well be the same thing. You're just using different words.

But it's still not philosophy.

Directly religious polemics are not directly philosophy.

Heagel brackets God.

He brackets religion.

He brackets faith.

And he purely draws out the logic or the logos of Christianity, okay, isolated from God, isolated from any direct relationship or direct ideas about Jesus or Christ or something. He's drawing out the logic and drawing out a comprehensive

philosophical system based on the Christian religion, but not directly. Not in the sense of

directly saying, you know, talking about his belief in God and Christ and stuff, but the logos underlying the religion expounded into philosophy. Okay. So that's the Hegelian system. That's what I said. You responded by saying some guy in the fifth century already did that, but he didn't do that. He was just a Christian. I already said that

Hegel's philosophical system is a reflection of Christianity. I didn't say he invented Christianity.

Christianity was already there. We agree. Christianity was already there. Okay,

the logic was already there, but it wasn't drawn out in a philosophical way until Hegel.

I think in parts, yes and no.

Theology itself, some see it as a combination of religion and philosophy.

No, philosophy has to bracket theology because theology doesn't make it sufficiently clear what we're talking about and why okay i don't

think that's true at all that's. The church fathers will have written

hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages explaining

exactly what they believe, and will do

so using countless examples,

countless analogies, countless syllogisms

in order to show both

philosophically and theologically

and reasonably

what their reasoning is,

how they came to this position in the church.

Is that what I said?

Is that what you said

I'm not certain what you said

I'm not certain what you said

did I

did I deny that religious theologians and polemicists employ logic?

I didn't deny that.

But philosophy as such, what we call philosophy in the modern sense, which begins, let's say, in the early modern period,

is not the same thing as religion.

They are, in fact, distinct.

No, absolutely.

The philosophy of the early modern period,

I would say, is reduced.

Okay, so we're just saying,

I don't care about these semantical

distinctions. There's clearly

something unique

about the philosophy and European

philosophy during the

pre-modern and enlightenment period

let's say beginning with

Descartes, up through the Scottish Enlightenment, French

rationalism, all that stuff, German idealism.

That's clearly a qualitative rupture with all prior

forms of thinking.

Absolutely. Absolutely.

Okay.

And Hegel, the culmination of that process

finally expounds in the purest possible form,

the Christian religion into the form of philosophy.

Which is evident and clear to all of Hegel's followers, like Feuerbach, who writes about the essence of Christianity. Have you read

Feuerbach? I have, of course. Okay, so...

So you're just playing semantical games when you insist that, you know, religion and philosophy are the same thing. No, they're not.

No, I didn't say that.

I just said they aren't necessarily apart.

They aren't bracketed away from each other. Nothing is necessarily a part, but there is, you can meaningfully distinguish religion from philosophy.

Just because anything can be interrelated and have overlaps doesn't mean

it's impossible to speak meaningfully about distinctions. There's no two things in the cosmos

that are unrelated. That doesn't mean if we suddenly cannot meaningfully refer to distinctions between things.

Okay.

And what does this have to do with my initial premise?

You're not even addressing what I said, okay?

The notion that I don't necessarily disagree with it.

I just want to see where it goes.

The Christian nature of Higalian dialectics is not a surprise.

It's not news.

It's not a miracle.

It's not some epiphany that some miraculously vindicates

one religion or another. It is just the plain, like, premise of all Western philosophy and is not a

surprise. It's not like a miracle. It's just, it's just

yes, a Christian civilization

is going to produce a Christian philosophy.

It's not, there's nothing profound

about that at all.

And again,

where does this fit into my initial premise of Islam?

It is the antithesis to Christ.

You're using words like sublation, which you're not using correctly.

You're saying all things are going to be subllated into Christ, okay?

Yeah.

But sublation

is not the same thing

as direct eschatology of any religion.

For example, it's possible to speak in Hegel's logic of the sublation of objects. Objects can be sublated into other kinds of objects. Okay. It's possible to speak, even if you apply it to nature to the sublation inherent in the development of nature, okay? The way in which one species sublates another or something. So when you're describing this trinitarian logic of the dialectical process, that applies to everything. And it's not meaningful to say things like, oh, everything sublates into Christ. It's like saying the only meaningful way to talk about motion is that everything moves toward Christ. Okay, but that doesn't tell us about local motion. It doesn't tell us about the way in which we can use the word motion to actually describe things. So when you're using sublation in this way,

that the only sense in which there's a dialectical structure

is this one, that's not true.

Christian eschatology is not the only receptacle

of the dialectical process Hegel talks about.

There's many other processes

you can talk about sublation. So you have

to specify within what frame you're

talking about when you say

these things.

Specify what frame in which

I'm talking about.

I don't know.

You're saying I'm using it incorrectly,

but it doesn't seem like I'm using it incorrectly at all.

It's just a point of reference between us.

What relative scale are we using to talk about sublation?

Right.

Okay.

So...

I'm talking about

creation's movement

back into the creator,

back into divinity.

And then you can talk about

at a local level,

on individual levels,

on objective levels, you can

but I'm just speaking on that cosmological level.

The movement of creation from its beginning,

from the fall, the original sin,

its contradictions that build within it.

You don't understand this is where I disagree

with you.

Okay.

Because I don't consider creation has to return to anything.

I think it already has and is processually, continuously, over and over again.

And that's where we disagree.

I don't believe creation is broken and needs to be

fixed or something.

Like, Hegel's dialogue like in some ways haigle's dialectical logic describes the lawful in some way if you understand it in a material's way the lawful development of the cosmos in my view right and he draws out real tendencies inherent to the development of matter and that is not a story of negation and then synthesis, right?

I'm interested in a notion of sublation that makes negation impossible.

In other words, negation is not real. Negation is an illusion. The real thing is the sublation for which negation is superfluous.

So the point is to change our understanding of what objects are in the first place. Change our understanding of what the first thing is in the first place.

That's a good point.

So for me, it's, I don't like this notion.

My critique of Hegelian dialectics

is that i don't agree with the tripart structure i don't think that there's a you know a um

a for premise one premise, and then sublation.

I think that sublation attests to the fact that premise one was wrong from the beginning,

and we should discover a premise that will not lead us to be surprised by the sublation.

That's beautiful.

That's very beautiful. I like that.

That's my view. I can agree very much more.

I mean, that's just my understanding.

No, absolutely.

In regards to original sin

with something like that,

I don't see

as a fundamental brokenness

to creation, a fundamental

disunity or disharmony.

It's something that was cast upon us, something that we have to deal with.

And it is our duty as humans as, you know, the lords and shepherds of the world to move back, to get back to an original state.

It's a goal.

It's the new Soviet man, essentially.

I don't agree.

I don't agree.

We have to go back to an original state.

I think that...

Not an original state, as in like, we're going back to Adam and Eve back in the garden

you know we're all living hunky dory no we're going back to a completion

a sufficient ending in the same way that Christ's death on the cross renewed us of our original sin and allowed us to move in his path towards this new goal, theosis.

And so it's not... But I just don't agree.

It's just my view.

I don't agree.

Okay.

Then we're at an impasse.

Now, if you had read the last two paragraphs of what I had wrote...

Which I'm not going to. I agreed with you here.

That's fine. That's fine.

I said,

brother, our disagreements here

will

never result in us fighting.

These kinds of conversations are left for the end of the day, when all the work is done, and when Tel Aviv is buried under 40 feet of rubble and salt.

That's when we can talk about it.

Look, it's fine.

It's just, uh, I just, I don't like religious debates because it's, there's too much baggage.

Absolutely.

And, um, I also think that it's like, I just don't come at it the same from the same place as you because it's like for me the truth is has to be something more than anything from before.

And it's like at best, I have to say something like you know like islam for example has been forgotten

in the world and that there's no nothing in the past i can point to and be like my god it's

been here all along everyone always knew it even from the

past i was like no actually since the time of the prophet the muslims have been missing something

okay fund fundamental now throughout history there have been symptoms and examples of them coming to the understanding, but there was something they were missing. There was something that was, you know, that like wasn't there, right? And I as a marxist marxist leninist in 2026 and in a very

good faith way i'm reexamining and rediscovering islam but not in a way that compromises my heerness now. So I'm not larping as

a medieval Muslim or something. And I'm not being like, oh, I just got to follow the Muslim

theologians from the 7th century. It's like, no, well, we're here now. I'm a Marxist, Leninist,

I'm a communist. and this is my premise actually

what about Islam has been missing from the world and from itself

why was Islam unable to explain itself?

What is it actually?

How does it reflect back upon itself?

And what are the various contradictions in terms of how that happens?

So this is like the thing that I'm interested.

And I'm not really interested in adopting a religious identity, per se. I'm interested in understanding

how we got here now, you know, and I don't like generalizations. I don't like saying things like,

oh, we just need to go back to, it's funny if I just say, let's just quote on, that's it. In some sense, it's true. In some sense, it's true when we just say, let's go back to Christ, that's it. But it's also not concrete

it's also not concrete

I can agree to that

some extent but my

point of contention always sits with kind of that history. You know, you,

your Lebanese heritage, you always have that root back to kind of that ancestry back there,

their tradition, their history, while here in the West we're, we're so, we have centuries of humiliation and satanic

nonsense that governs our entire identity for a long, long time.

And for me, when I look, when I look back... I don't even necessarily agree with that. I think that the West... Hold on. Hold on. Allow me.

When I look back and I look at the history, I came out as a Marxist, yeah. I wasn't someone who was always Christian. I wasn't someone who was always... I was an atheist for quite a long time like you.

And it wasn't until, actually, infrared, that I took tradition, I took religion more seriously, and began weighing them against each other.

Until I finally kind of did come to Christianity, and I looked back on its history, and I saw

this split that happened in the fifth century between the Western Church and the Oriental

Church, where in my research this last couple years, I found

it wasn't an annoying distinction

between how many natures does Christ have. It wasn't some

annoying syllogism. It was the difference of dialectics and metaphysics.

The Western Church took metaphysics because they were imposing their superstructure of platonic and Aristotilian logic, of how the ideal forms and material work, and they applied it to Christ, which differed from the Oriental position, which kept the dialectical one that I gave you from St. Gregory.

And so for me, looking back on that history, I saw, wow, there's something that I can, as a Christian, is someone aspiring to be a Christian.

I have Marxism again in my faith.

I can, at least, from the very least, draw out Marxism.

I can draw out that tradition that I want from the theology that I see for me.

So I'll give you some dialectics.

Sure.

Two things being true at the same time.

Communism is eternal.

Of course, everyone's been communist by default, and the West was a deviation from this.

Then the second thing, communism comes from the West. Communism comes from the West.

Doesn't come from the East because the East was already communist. So what does that mean? That sounds very contradictory and confusing, but what does that mean?

That makes sense. The communism of the East was always filled by something integral and

determine it and didn't need to be called something called communism.

Communism is an abstraction.

And that abstraction is a consequence of the vacuum in the sociists, let's say, right, in the comments,

that defines the history of private property, which is the Western trajectory and the Western lineage. But the historical necessity of the West, this is also very important. There's something historically necessary about the West

because keeping that vacuum open,

keeping that filled with a nothing,

and therefore we have the abstraction of communism,

which lacks determination, by the way,

why that's necessary piece of the puzzle of the story of mankind.

Because all of the other human civilizations in history filled communism up with something, determined it yes, but also insufficiently

self-relating with respect to the universal. Now, these were universal empires and stuff for sure, but there's a reason why

modern science and technology and

modern philosophy comes from the West.

The West did do what others only...

The East discovered all of the brilliant things that the West did.

All of them.

But in the east the discovery all the brilliant discoveries were like having a beautiful dream when you woke up it was all forgotten. Only did the West have the insomnia to say,

I've discovered this beautiful principle, and I will commit to it. I will commit to it with such an

intensity, with such a devotion, with such an unyielding stubbornness, and I won't let go of it.

In the East, the brilliant appearance of the light, right? It would come and it would go.

But it would never be grasped and taken, right?

And acted upon.

They got close.

I mean, they infinitesimally approximated for sure. that's why marks came from the west it was a definition from absence, defining the other.

We lacked it, and so we tried to give it a name and to find it again.

No, it was lacking. Yeah, well, no, the name was for the vacuum, for the thing that was absent.

That's part of the story of humanity.

It's part of the story of humanity, for sure.

The West played a mainly evil role throughout history.

Yes, I agree.

But that evil is the evil

of mankind.

So those

people who

claim to be

anti-West and they go, well, you know,

the white Yucubian devils and stuff, it's like, well, look, there's nothing about white people that's more inherently evil than the rest of humanity. This is an evil that was within all of humanity, but was localized in a specific region. Why? Because it's part of the total division of labor of mankind in human history. So, um, the question is about...

I don't think that...

I think that the element within the West that is irreducible, you can't say it's an identity, you can't say it's a culture even. There's some people, I'm culturally pro-Western. It's not even a culture. It's an irreducible infinitesimal nouness, right?

And in the same way the West was blind to the rest of the world, the rest of the world was in some way blind also to the West. I mean, let's be brutally honest, all right?

The British East India Company came and they toured, they destroyed all the gunpowder empire.

So the Mughals, probably the decline of the Safavids had something to do with the rise of the East India Company.

And then finally the Ottomans.

And these were all destroyed and why could they not protect themselves from this destruction?

Why did the Ottoman Empire become indebted to the West at a certain point in the 1700s or something, right?

When people say before Western colonialism, there were all these brilliant civilizations and empires, I agree, you know, you're arguing with the wrong person when you say that. But it begs the question, how did the West prevail over them? How did the West prevail over them, though, right? So there was something missing in them if they could not protect themselves from Western colonialism.

That's why the Chinese today are different from these decolonial western sakai people the chinese

don't say we're just going to go straight back to our indigenous chinese civilization they say no we're

going to yes exist and go forward

in harmony with our Chinese civilization

but acknowledging

the necessity of

the revolutions of the 20th

century and of Marxism

when people make this of the 20th century, and of Marxism.

When people make this accusation of third-worldism, it's so pathetic.

The only third-worlders who are resentful brown people who hate white people,

it's actually like the Pahalavisavis, the ass kissers of the West,

who want to fit in and be white themselves, but they're not. The anti-colonial and anti-Western forces in the world, every single one of them has given the devil his credit, that is the West.

And they made peace with it and they don't hate the West.

Jackson was just in Iran. Everyone loved him in Iran.

The Chinese glorify, they venerate, they elevate, they love the classics of Western philosophy, Western classical music, literature, theory, you name it.

The Chinese don't belittle these things. They consider them invaluable contributions to the history of humanity. There's no resentment or hatred toward the West at all there. The resentment comes from the sellouts, you know?

Well, I think part of it, I am going to have to disagree.

So someone...

Fundamentally.

Someone in the chat goes,

giving the West any inherent qualities is historically reductive and anti-Marxist.

Okay.

So Michael Hudson is historically reductive and anti-Marxist.

Do you even know what the West is?

Tell me what the West is. Tell me what that is.

So we're talking about Western, Northern Europe.

What's the history of the West

genius? Explain it. So we're talking about the Greeks,

the Romans, and then the Western part of the Roman Empire, and then European feudalism.

There's an objective historical continuity between all of those things pertaining to the continuity of creditor classes and systems pro-creditor systems, okay?

And the legal development of private property as an institution, which nowhere else in the world actually developed.

And you could say, well, they had user-funked rights and stuff.

Private property as such comes from Greco-Roman law.

And Frederick Engels, who people falsely said was blind and didn't know what he was talking about,

is the one who pointed and spelled this out?

We don't see what happens in ancient Greece

with the rise of private property

happen anywhere else in the world.

Spontaneously.

If I'm wrong, point out where?

Go ahead. What do you want it to say?

Um... go ahead what do you want it to say um what did i want to say i have to disagree on that level of we never understood the original premise i i just have to.

I think it was there.

I think it's always been there.

I think it's something we will return to.

God, Christ,

truth.

That's what we'll return to.

When you say, you know,

Muslims, even themselves forgot the original understanding of Islam and that we have to go back and find it.

No, that's not the difference. I don't think we have to go back, actually. I think we have to embrace the now.

Or embrace moving forward, you know, we don't step back. Not even that. have to embrace the now. Or embrace moving forward.

You know, we don't step back. It's about the now, you know? What is the now?

The only reality is what's now.

Everything else is a memory, right?

So the only

the now is regal, actually.

That's where I disagree. But it's the truth. The now is the only the now is real, actually. That's where I disagree.

But it's the truth.

The now is the only thing.

Even the past is part of the now.

For us. No, for the whole cosmos.

Even the past is just somehow part of the now.

The now is what is continuous. The now is what's living. The now is here. Everything

about the past that is worthy of being called history in the past is so because it is somehow

fitting in the now in some kind of way. But it's been sublated

and raised up in the now already.

Sure.

I think that's just a limitation of our anthropology,

of our mind.

I think all things do exist at once.

They exist in the now. Absolutely. The way that you're describing it, I mean, that's, I think that's the human mind. That's what the now is, the now. You know,

what is the now. Well, the now is, the now is reality. The now is what's real. I'm not even talking

about the immediacy of our experience. I'm talking about what is the now. What is real? What is actually here? You know? No. No, I don't know, man. At this point, there's no no disagreement there's nothing to be had i wanted to provide some of my research um i think the one thing

just showing other christians that there is a way to kind of double back to look and see this alternate form of Christianity that exists.

That I think Islam is a descendant of, specifically the Axomite Empire, the Himmar kingdom that existed in Yemen and in Ethiopia

that Islam drew a huge amount from

and that we have the shared

spirituality, the shared mysticism

between you and Mijas.

But that's a surprise to you, but it's like

it's not... I don't want to be you, but it's like, it's not...

I don't want to be rude, but it's not... I guarantee you, it would be a surprise.

It's not interesting. To the many Christians that are listening to this that are in ACP...

I'm just saying, like, to me, the reason I kind of roll my eyes is because it's like, well,

it's not interesting to me because it's already baked into the premise of where I'm coming from, you know?

Yeah.

No, I speak for that other for you, but I have to go to sleep.

I have work in the morning.

See you later.

God bless.

Have a good night.

What do you think about Muslims who say voting for election in non-Muslim countries?

I might be the biggest atheist to ever exist in the world, which is why I'm not an atheist, you know?

Like, I don't even know where to begin with that.

Like, what...

What are you talking about?

It's like...

It's Haram or it's halal it's like I think meaning is the most important thing in the world, meaning.

Said it's Haram to vote while the far right is uprising.

Here's what I disagree with religion about, whatever the religion is.

I don't think that there's any moral code that comes from the past,

which absolves you of the responsibility of staking out a position in the now i think that in contrast

to the entire history of religion when people say i just have this moral code of how i should act it's like

that's so easy.

It would be so easy to be a Muslim.

People say, no, you have to follow all these rules and these laws.

Are you kidding?

I just have to follow these rules and that's it.

I don't consider that genuine conviction or faith. I think that you have to break down the architecture of the now, the situation you're in now,

you have to break down the formula, the mathematical equilibrium

that makes the now, the now, right?

Thomas, what's up?

Because everything, it's a story now.

It's a situation you're living in now.

It's like, you have to carve out the right

position now, here here and there are no laws or guidebooks

that can directly tell you what the truth is the holy koran is not a direct set of commandments.

When you read that book,

what conclusions you draw from it,

it takes a lot of effort to think about what did this mean

then and what does this mean now

that requires you to put in effort and you're not absolved of the responsibility of taking upon

yourself the burden of carving out being right now, you know, because you're

something in the past told you you're doing something right.

I didn't go to Iran.

I was in Iraq a year ago.

That's the footage you saw.

Working class is excess and automation sublates work, therefore working class.

What are you talking about?

ACP is Bunn, sincerely a Marxist.

You're not a Marxist, though.

If you came on and requested and used your voice, I could dogwalk you through a million different reasons for why you don't know anything about Marxism and you're not a Marxist. So stop LARPing in my chat. You're not a Marxist. You've adopted a political identity online because you're in a furry discord and you

want your fellow furries to be nice to

you or something. It's like, what are you talking

about? You're a Marxist.

You're LARPing. Everyone

accuses me of LARP,

but you're LARPing

you're in an unmediated way without any curiosity

just being like

I'm going to be a Marxist in the same way as a hundred years ago

you're LARPing

what does that even mean today?

Have you thought about it for two seconds?

What is a derivative?

Explain what a derivative is.

Explain to me the world you live in right now.

You don't.

You just adopted this political identity because, I don't know, you found a discord or something.

You're not a Marxist.

99% of these Marxists say that we need to stop AI.

You're not a Marxist.

You're a boutique.

You're a boutique like hipster, you know, artisanal, petty bourgeois reactionary who's being declassed and confuses that for Marxist critique of capitalism.

You do have some kind of vague petty bourgeois anti-capitalism, which I'm not even saying is devoid of revolutionary potential, but it has nothing to do with Marxism at all.

At all. To be clear. Okay, Mage, you won't request and use your voice. I want you in your own words to explain to me what is

decisively the essence of marxism what is marxism write one sentence explaining what is marxism

in your own words you can't copy and pay something you get from something else.

Tell me what you think Marxism is.

In your own words. You know, Did they leave or are they thinking about it?

You'd think someone who's flaunting their Marxist credentials would on hand have a sentence ready to explain what Marxism is.

In a simple way.

You'd think they'd be able to just be like, well, this is Marxism. where did they go they just left or what

they ran so i asked them a simple question Where did they go? They just left or what?

They ran.

So I asked them a simple question.

What is Marxism?

They can't answer it. And they claim,

we're not the real Marxist.

Get out of here.

He's a post-Marxist i just care so little for labels

but you can't pin me down

if you if you have to accuse me of something

you can't pin me down and have to accuse me of something.

You can't pin me down and say he's a fascist, he's a Nossbole.

No, I'm not.

Clearly, I'm just broadening the threshold of possibility of what Marxism is in a way that makes you feel uncomfortable.

The emancipation of the working class and the abolition of private ownership.

Okay.

Marcelline, you're confusing Marxism for a vague definition of socialism, which preceded Marxism.

A communism was popular among proletarian masses before the Communist manifesto was even written.

The notion of the emancipation of the proletariat and the common ownership of the means of production was a demand that existed before Karl Marx.

That's not the essence of Marxism whatsoever.

So that's a very poor definition of Marxism. Jackson Hinkle, oh, B. Why? Because you said bigoted things. Oh, yeah, because Nazism equals bigotry, right? opinion on left coms coping they're just coping coping I oh you know

you know sneco is his own man okay

I don't know why you keep telling me about Sneco.

He's his own man and he can come to any conclusion he wants to.

Uh... Chexton, also being homophobic is crazy.

What is that noise? I genuinely don't even know what that is.

Yo, what's up um so have you ever heard of uh uh end-sterm accelerationism and uh neoliterian phlegism

what's the first one end stern accelerationism and neo libertarian phalanism

well dude you need to like uh you need to like study up bro it's it's the new uh

ideology of the FARC um 19 revolutionaries of the FARC, M19 revolutionaries of the future, bro.

It's not a very good one.

What do you mean?

How can you argue against ends? ends

Says the dingest Stop the larp

Stop the larp! Stop the larp!

If you are an internet leftist you are a larper by default you're a larper you're a larping you're pretending you're very loud about how much you're pretending,

but it's really exhausting at this point.

How do I be a real leftist? Show me when robots in a mass scale can take blue collar jobs, all right, if, to make your argument, Prometheus.

Dang is a social Democrat.

Stop the LARP!

You don't know what social democracy is.

You're using that as a word to describe your own ideological journey because at one point in your life,

you were a Democrat Obama supporter, and someone corrected you and told you you weren't a real

socialist, just because you want health care, and they define that as social democracy.

Social democracy can mean a few things. We can be talking about the turn of the century of the

previous century, right? It was a large movement in Germany and in Europe with the second international. Or we can talk about the contemporary, more contemporary, social democratic governments that ruled Europe in the post-war period, more or less welfare states, right?

That were part of NATO, NATO welfare states.

These are the two senses in which the phrase social democracy might have some meaningfulness.

But to describe social democracy as consisting in the view that, you know, you can have,

it's like China where there's markets and simultaneously there's socialist pretensions,

that's not social democracy, okay?

You just don't know what you're talking about.

ACP is social democracy because they don't immediately abolish commodity production.

I hope you're joking or you're like pretending or something. Here we go.

The LaSalle and Mussolini

I feel like these left comms,

it's like a group, a discord of 100

of them. We all

have a hive mind and they just say the same

thing everywhere on the internet all the time.

What are you even talking

about? What are you even talking

about?

Oh, LaSelle.

LaSelle.

So niche.

LaSelle.

Oh, LaSelle and Mussolini.

Oh, so niche.

These people are not materialists.

Was Mussolini a product of an ideology that wanted to compromise social spending with a market economy?

Or what is the objective phenomena behind Mussolini?

Wasn't Mussolini the leader of the black shirt thugs that were propped up by landlords in the capitalist class to destroy the socialist movement?

Didn't Mussolini not even nationalized one thing under his entire reign?

Why are you even comparing him to this insufficiently revolutionary socialism thing?

Mussolini nationalized not one thing.

The IRA took out public money to pump credit into companies that the market had destroyed and bankrupted.

But ownership, in the sense of financial ownership remained with the capital's class it was a Ponzi scheme

musilini didn't even nationalize anything so why are we even why are you talking about Mussolini like he was the socialist he wasn't not even in like a super like a like a conventional sense Your Nuselini nationalized a lot.

He nationalized basically nothing.

The IRI did not nationalize anything.

It was a Ponzi scheme

to take on

to be, it was literally a bank bailout

Obama style.

That's what it was.

Okay, I'm simplifying it for you.

But the shares that were owned by the IRA were not to be owned by it indefinitely.

It was to get these companies which were bad collateral for the banks,

fix up the companies,

and then give them back to the private banks.

The state

took on these failing companies

because The state took on these failing companies because the bank's ownership of them gave them bad collateral.

Like, you don't even know what you're talking about.

Marxism rejects all religious beliefs.

It's like these people copy and paste what they learned and these like elementary uncurious

cookie cutter readings of things they've never actually explored with any degree of curiosity

or detail then spam me with these they just copy and paste and spam me with it.

I'm not going to let you on if the thing you have to say is that I need to talk to Sneco.

If Sneko wants to talk to me, he can speak to me.

And if I want to talk to Sneco at a given time, you know, I can.

But right now I'm very busy, right?

And I... If Sneko wants to talk, I'm no problem.

I'll talk, you know, but...

I'm just not the type that just follows people around and ask them to talk to me, you know?

Like, Sniko already talked to me. That's the thing. He already spoke to me that's the thing he already spoke to me so it's like and he reached out first actually right um uh so like i it's just like i I don't, I'm not built, like, I'm just going to keep bothering someone and, you know, harassing them for clout. It's just not what I do. I don't feel entitled to anyone's, uh, clout, you know?

You need to understand how I'm built.

There's a reason why I'm here in the way I am.

It's like, I'm not built that way.

I don't, I don't beg people for cloud.

I just don't do that. How quickly is ACP growing?

Pretty quick. How quickly is ACP growing?

Pretty quick. We don't know where to go We'll find what we're looking for

The show

Take us beyond

Take us beyond Take us

Okay now we're going to get into music hour

How did you guys like that song?

Be honest

I don't want you guys to just

Be sick of fans

Who are just like

Haas you make great music give me if you know

if you're like someone who knows what they're talking about i'm gonna be i'm gonna be totally

honest about something i don't know what i'm doing with this music stuff i don't know what i'm

doing i'm not a trained music theorist I'm just going off of what I think sounds good.

But I also know that there's probably room for improvement.

There's probably ways to make it more professional and better.

It's just like, you know, all we do is critique your music.

You don't like them? Yeah, I mean, I'm learning. You know, it's a learning experience for sure.

No,

the one that was in the,

um,

the,

the,

the,

the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, Tempo should have been higher faster.

I do have a faster version.

The opening song.

The one from today, right?

The Turkish media,

uh, what? The TRT t the turkish turkish uh news or that's what's the turkish state news it's called

trt right testosterone what? Oh, you're talking about that looks maxing stuff.

I'm going to get an ACP to our I thought you guys would like the infrared song.

Nothing compares to the slow infrared, infrared show theme song.

You mean the Kanye song or the Wally Wire song?

This song. This is a This is a faster red

This is a faster version We'll find what we're looking for

For sure

O worker music, I mean I like it.

It's not my usual style.

I'm starting to learn, guys. I'm learning.

As soon I'm going to be, I'm going to move away from having any help with AI.

I'm just going to use the DAWs, right?

But it's nice because the studio, it lets you see the music on the timeline,

and it lets you mess with every single aspect the beat the tempo the vocals everything you can arrange it and it's like I'm just kind of learning, you know?

I'm going to be honest,

I'm not satisfied with anything I've made, even though the really good one, which I actually listen to myself that I put on Spotify.

I'm still not satisfied.

It needs more polish.

It needs more.

There's something missing clearly. Like, I want

perfection, you know?

FL Studio.

Yeah, soon I'll learn.

Not soon. I mean, eventually. One day.

You got to lock in. I just don't have time for this music stuff, but I love it.

I don't have time for it, though, but I do love it.

Our restaurant cooks proletarian, or are they unproductive?

Yeah. restaurant cooks proletarian are they unproductive um well in what sense are we talking about proletarian i have no problem calling them proletarians i think people who work a nine to five and they're on their grind set are people who have to grind for a living are proletarians.

That's my definition.

Shadow, what's up?

But not all, let's put it this way.

Maybe we can just say, not all proletarians are productive laborers.

Proletarian is working class.

Yeah, they're working class people.

I just...

I just... people i just i just uh i find a lot of the times when leftists decide to evangelize among workers

they tend to do so in ways that don't have to challenge their own discursive bubbles and step out and have any self-reflection.

That's all, you know.

Prometheus, proletary doesn't exist industrial automation and AI abolish them.

Dude, I get that you're saying this, but it's just not true. Yang! Yang Shao Ping, Renver Hojo. Review the song I sent Carlos made a song now.

Alright, I'll listen.

I hate it already. I don't like this at all.

I don't like this country stuff.

Forever.

Friendship and labor.

Our mighty republic. and labor our mighty

republic

will ever

endure

it's kind of good

the great Soviet Union

will live through the ages

the dream of the people

their fortress

secured

soon I No, that was a failure.

That was, because it has to go, no, it was a failure.

I'll tell you why.

Because it has to go, it has to go, when it has that part, it has to go,

love, live on, nah, it has to have that continuity.

When it, when it's, the minute he went, I'll tell you when it failed, the minute he went,

long live our, it has to go, he would, if he, I was expecting like a country thing where he was like, long live our soul, like if he did that high that high

voice note or whatever that would have been nice you gotta have that part that was coming i was listening carlos i was listening to it

ay ay ay all right let's see i need guys i need something

i need the original suno link to the original Allah Cosmo Xi Jinping, because I want to make a mix.

I want to mix the original Allah Cosmos Jizien Ping and make it perfection.

I want to make it perfection.

I can make that song perfection. I want to make it perfection. I can make that song perfection. I just need the link to the Suno. Whoever has it. Put it in original content. Where is it? Where's the original Suno link to

Allah Cosmo, Xi Jinping? original suno link to allah kosmos shi Jinping no it would have to go long live us.

Like, it didn't do it right.

Soviet mother land built by the people's mighty hand

long live our people

united

for this part it's like he needs

it's not

it and free long part it's like he needs it's not it's not it's not something i like like long long Long live our Soviet motherland. uh... uh...

dada

d'ra

world

revolution

star

hirmed

uh world I will put this on World Revolution but I want to make it perfect first. I don't feel like it's perfect. This guy with Indian call center

The Indian call center music

The truth is India music This guy has an Indian call center music.

The truth is,

Indian music bangs.

Why are we pretending like India doesn't make some of the best music on earth?

The one thing you can never say about India as bad

is you can't say the music is bad you can't that's such cope

Indian music is some of the best in the world

you know what one of my favorite songs growing up was

y'all want to you all want to be take a trip down memory lane

this was my exposure to Indian music Y'all want to take a trip down memory lane?

This was my exposure to Indian music.

The world of India.

Ready?

Where the fuck is the original music video?

Because I don't want nothing less than the original music video.

This was my exposure to Indian culture.

No. No, this is a fucking mix, but I already gave it away. Holy shit.

The music video is gone forever.

What the fuck?

I guess the music video is just gone.

Forever.

This was such a good song.

Nauri, gnaurie. This was such a good of His Nari, N'Aren,

this was an

This was an This was an Egyptian guy and an Indian woman made this song it was so good

but I'm saying like that's how I was introduced to it because it was Arabs found this song popular

at the time and then I looked up the music

video and there's a lot of Indians in it and I was like wow this is the Indian rabbit hole so then I

would look up Indian music.

Ding ding ding ding ding do ding do that da da. D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D-D. D-D-D-D-D-D-D.

Hapid-DU-N-DU-WAN. All right. All right You're saying that it's not authentic Indian.

All right, here we go with the gatekeepers of culture.

Here we go. Here we go with the gatekeepers of culture. Here we go.

Here we go with the...

It's not real.

Taco Bell's not real, Mexico.

Just shut up.

I don't care.

It's not real horizon go ahead yeah you hear me? Yeah.

All right, cool.

I'm 24 for TikTok purposes.

Are we just talk about Marxism equals Islam?

Or can we talk about like- Immediately just said I'm 24 for TikTok purposes?

What does that even mean?

So you're what?

You're a child?

Get out of here.

What the hell?

You know what's funny?

When you're young, you're always in a rush to like...

All right, all right, this is the truth and this is the truth.

It's like, young people have this fanaticism where they're like, they think they've

discovered everything already.

I don't know.

It's kind of funny.

I'm authentically 24.

Then why are you saying for TikTok purposes?

He just means you have to say it.

All right, go ahead again, request again. Okay.

Yo. Yes.

Are we just talking about Marxism equals Islam or can we do like communism broadly? Anything.

Any.

All right, cool.

I wanted to run like a developing, I would say, like argument against like communism.

Would this be cool with you?

Mm-hmm.

All right, just like to summarize it, the critique is going to be that communism is described as a evolutionarily unstable state.

Alright?

Okay.

Now, evolutionary instability means that it's a specific state that will deterministically regress into a system that does not contain it.

Alright?

Are you good? I don't want to like ruin your

mood bro you stop babbling you just mean to say it doesn't work all right that's all you're saying

um well it doesn't work like long term, it won't persist.

Okay, so you're saying it doesn't work. That's, that's your argument.

Sure, sure. Okay.

Am I like, actually like getting you in a bad mood or something? Okay, look. So like in the communist manifest on page 45, it literally references the fact that if there are sectarian principles for the proletariat to like divide themselves upon then communism will essentially not sustain and as a result

it doesn't say that it doesn't say that yeah i'm paraphrasing just a little bit but would you like me to read

that's not what it means though uh-huh read us the passage go ahead or give us the chapter

yeah it says two proletarians and communists in what relation do communists stand to the proletarians as a whole

the communists do not form a separate party

opposed to the other working class parties.

They have no interest separate

and apart from those of the proletariat

as a whole.

They do not set up any sectarian principles

of their own by which to shape

and mold the proletarian movement.

Is that cool?

Yeah, it has nothing to do with a communist mode of production at all.

All right.

Would you say that sectarian principles are, like, can be, genetic in like modality but that's not the

you don't even know why they said that in the manifesto the reason they said that in the manifesto is that

they're not trying to develop a special ideology or doctrine.

They're trying to develop something that articulates the will of the proletariat

and do that in a humble way, one that acknowledges the primacy of the actual proletarian movement whose conditions are hitherto

now in existence, you know, to paraphrase Marx. So it's not, it's not about, you know,

this notion of the abstract reality of people forming sects and different belief systems

all right um if groupings were to arise in a communist system for people to divide themselves on

does this not threaten the perpetuation of the system

no no there would be a type of hierarchical like classism based off of the differentiation, would there not be?

Based on people adopting collective identities arbitrarily? That's not where classes come from.

No, it's not about their self-perception of collective identity it's about

the arising of group beings objectively how do groups arise in your view

okay well like broadly like there's not like one unified thing, but

specific like modalities that we can look at here for like what I would be meaning. Like,

genetically, for instance, like we agree that evolution is true. And as a result, there is a

mechanistical system that applies itself on populations to create more diversity genetically

so it's all just biology huh well this is the approach that i'm taking right now sure but like

it's broader than that i guess somebody else could be self

contradictory and self-defeating it's like if all we're talking about is biology then why are we

talking in the first place well in fact like communism is a thing that applies itself on a population of humans which is biological

yeah what's the biological reality of communism what are the biological processes

that are responsible for the word or communism itself. For the word communism itself?

For anything.

I mean, what is by the notion to reduce any type of being to a specific field of inquiry of being, like biology or chemistry or anything like that. It's self-defeating.

It's self-contradictory.

Because even by partaking in language,

you're presuming an ontology

for which biology is of secondary significance.

I would not say that there is a reduction fully of the system to a biological, like, reality.

There is simply a projection onto an axis of a part of all.

But even the function of projection to say this is biological, the fact that you're saying that what's the biological reason for you giving this analysis about how biology is just projecting itself upon things somehow?

Well, first of all, like it wouldn't be biology projecting itself onto things. It would be the fact that things have constituent parts and one of them is a biological reality, is what I'd be trying to say. But I'm not trying to say that projection in and of itself is a biological function.

So what is it then?

Right. It's simply that

there is a descriptive layer into

communist systems that applies itself on

populations, which is a biological thing. And as a result, it will be

governed by... that communism is first a meme there's the different terms that we can use right like it's a meme it's an idea it's ideology and it is also sorry what's a meme a meme yeah a functional unit of ideological inheritance

what's what what is an idea what's it what are ideas made of what's an idea well this is

like a perspective thing would you like me to give my opinions on like philosophy of mind?

Well, no, we're not just talking about the philosophy of mind. We're talking about something you regard as having a overriding significance with respect to different minds, not just one?

Yeah.

So like ideas would be, I take a form of identity and functionalism.

So ideas would be something that is evident through matter specifically like neurons interacting but of course there's always

the possibility of broader so ideas are configurations of neurons yeah indeed that's where

their identity is why stop there stop there aren't neurons configurations are neurons

configurations of anything uh yeah neurons are in a configuration yes of what

in like spatial terms.

Of what?

Of what?

What are they a configuration of?

Of matter.

Okay.

And why is matter configured in such a way so as to produce ideas like communism well yeah because there is a mechanistical mathematical

system of laws that determines how moments interchange break them down where do we how do we go from

matter to communism how to go from matter to communism uh-huh

and also how do we go to from matter to the ideas you have about matters relation to communism both of those please

well yeah if if the ideas have an identity with matter then in fact, having matter in specific confirmations will yield the ideas. And the thing is that there is, in fact, like, laws of physics and laws of logic that govern the way that the interchange of moments happens, which would yield, but we have currently, which contains comedy. How do you know?

Is it least the name these laws?

How do I know which one?

Can you draw these laws out?

Can you name them?

Can you describe them?

Yeah, like, certainly we could, right?

Do you.

Do it.

Like, Kulom's law, like Newton's laws of motion, the law. right? Do it. Do it. Do it.

Like Coulogne's law,

like Newton's Laws of Motion,

the law of non-contradiction,

the principle of sufficient reason and you've gone with a law of contradiction.

Law of non-contradiction.

Fascinating.

That's a feature of matter.

That's very interesting.

Indeed, I take it on an identity with matter itself. Yes. It's evident everywhere.

Is it taking no time to think about any of this, or you've thought about it?

Well, indeed, I try to ponder about it, yes.

But I don't see how that's relevant.

Do you think about it?

Sounds like you're doing too much pondering and too little thinking.

How is pondering not thinking?

Because when you say you

pondered, it just sounds like you've had these thoughts

in the shower, but didn't even think about

how consistent they could

possibly be with respect to themselves.

Like, for example, if it's true

that everything is just a configuration of

articles or something why have a debate what's the point well here i think you're using like loaded

like language here it's not like we have a choice in the matter if If it is deterministic, then it's actually like occurring out of necessity.

So why debate? This is my necessity.

Because there literally is no way not to.

But my brain made me have this position so why are we debating right right

precisely you just explained like why we're debating and then you asked why we're

debating again it's like you just answered yourself why debate i mean how was

how okay how could your view explain the possibility of debate it's's a better question. Here.

I don't want a burden to

burden to it, but the report pretty much is

how not debate.

Well, if ideas are just a reflection

of neural configurations

and that's that, then there would, there would not need to be a negotiation between different neural actors or whatever. They would just seamlessly adopt what they do because their neurons demanded it.

This is false. There would be a strict necessity here for their confirmation in the way that they are and the way that they will project themselves in the future.

Why?

Because there are laws of physics and laws of logic that govern the way that moments interchange.

That's not a direct response to the question.

Which resolution would you like me to respond to with then?

You're claiming that an idea is just a configuration of neurons, and that's how we can explain the meaningfulness of an idea, right?

Or what an idea refers to?ness of an idea, right?

Or what is an idea to what does an

idea refer to what

does an idea

referred?

What is an idea?

Well,

ideas are just

configurations of

neurons, okay.

So your

position is just a

consequence of the

configuration of

your neurons,

and my position

is a consequence of the configuration of your neurons and my position is a consequence of the

configuration of my neurons how do we know if there's so much wiggle room then how is it a direct

relationship at all so there was an initial question.

If it's possible that my neurons are configured in such a way so as to seamlessly

give rise to the idea that you have, which is I presume the reason you're debating me is to see if that's true or not.

How is that arbitrariness possible?

It could be possible I could have a different idea than the one I have now.

Well, like on multiple resolutions.

It's not arbitrary. It's necessary necessary and i wouldn't even say that something that didn't occur is possible and won't occur as a result of like the mathematical

laws the govern is possible at all what what what what why is it necessary it necessary to find recognition and validation in the way you're talking about?

I'm sorry, what do you mean recognition and validation?

Can you not answer it sure just can you even like

resate it i'm going to miss why is it necessary to debate your position is true or false if

you truly believe in it right because reality forces me to, through the way that it

works. Because of the

laws of physics, you have to debate me.

Indeed, this

would be the case.

It's just

nonsense. I'm sorry. It's just it. I'm sorry.

It's just total nonsense.

Okay.

I mean, that doesn't sound like very convincing, but I guess we have no choice, right?

Yeah, I guess so.

I guess our neural configurations make it impossible.

All right.

Impossible.

Okay.

Sure.

You know, to, you know, to.

To broadly respond to where you're coming from, I think that you haven't given it enough thought.

I think that you do it. I mean, to be very generous, there's some kind of trend within analytical philosophy,

which is more sophisticated than what you're putting on the table here.

But do you have people like, what's his name, Daniel Dennett and others who will be like,

consciousness is an illusion. It's like it's just this nihilism that attempts to claim that that there is something unreal about the things we regard as meaningful, which calls into question the very weight behind words like meaning or reality in the first place like what is real versus what is false right is what is real strictly what we can um measure in ways that excise the dimension of partiality we associate with the subject.

If that's true, then reality, the term reality loses all the weight it has.

If reality and meaning are so separated and so divorced from each other,

then why should we respect the real?

For what? Fear?

You know, because of the necessity of respecting science to stay alive but meaning is the thing that makes us put everything at stake including our lives why should we respect reality if it's completely divorced from meaning,

you know?

Okay, so I'm not a nihilist,

nor would I deny some sort of like consciousness.

There are definitions that will satisfy you here,

nor do I deny meaning.

Like semantic content exists.

No, I'm not talking about... Well, I ask you how does it exist and you just say it's a configuration of matter?

That's not a useful explanation at all because what is at stake is the very question, what is matter?

The content of what matter is cannot be found in some primal-based substance.

We're well past the ideas of the 17th century when there were these fundamental particles and billard balls moving in space and that's matter matter is what we're talking about right so i'm asking you what is an idea and you say well it's matter that's not telling me anything. What is an idea?

Because your framework for understanding humanity is that it's just biology.

It's just a series of causal

mechanistic determinations.

But the problem with that framework is that

to even speak of what matter is in the first place, that it's most fundamental, you can go down the path of modern science and try to inquire upon the most fundamental possible particle or quote unquote

building blocks of the universe and they haven't done so with any degree of success at all they've just

found confusion for themselves and so it begs the question of what is matter and why should the direction of causality be the same thing as the scale between parts and the whole, right?

The emergent property of the whole with respect to the parts is a clearly

observed

tendency and phenomena

within nature even by modern scientists

so this reductionistic framework just doesn't work when you say well biology is the reason communism

doesn't work it's like well what are we even talking about here what do you mean biology right

how could how could biology give rise to something that contradicts biology it doesn't make any sense

well here right so the original point had nothing to do with my specific views on what reality

is in matter it had everything to do with my specific views on what reality is in matter it had everything to do

with a mathematical necessity so even in a different framework what i'm saying as long as evolution

has been accepted according to my own view? Yeah, explain mathematically why communism is impossible in the long term.

Right, okay. I'm going to do this on the scope of resolution of the biological stuff we were referencing previously because, in fact,

do you want a different resolution? Is that what you're making

the face?

Can we stop talking

about resolutions and just get on with it?

Okay.

So, in fact, is the case that life is predicated on an internally facing preference to a genetic identity, all of the elements that once expressed to yield one individual like entity. And as a result, if in fact, the...

What's a genetic identity? Are by genetic identity, are you referring

to discrete parts of DNA?

Yeah, I'm referring to

functional units of inheritance as a set.

But those don't exist.

End of story.

Functional units of inheritance don't exist?

There are no units of inheritance

that we can observe.

Okay.

Is this because you're taking some sort of like

view that matter doesn't exist

and reality isn't there? There are no units of heredity

there just aren't any okay so reality's there and DNA is there it's just not units of heredity

yeah DNA doesn't contain units of heredity it doesn. It's not how heredity works.

So what would you say is the necessity of the replication that a DNA molecule will go through

that contains within it functional units?

They're not functional units. They're part of a greater metabolism.

They have a function with that greater metabolism.

But that function doesn't even apply to the direct coding for proteins.

If it doesn't even code for proteins, quote unquote,

and there's an interdependence between the DNA and the metabolic system,

talking about heredity at the level of discrete units of heredity,

is totally meaningless the entire

metabolism is involved in the process of heredity end of story um when you say end of story

would you are you trying to like tell me to get off or do i get to

respond like what's your response um what's my response okay i sort of you haven't even thought about it

so that's why i'm kicking you off because i asked what's your response and then you're like what's my response i don. So that's why I'm kicking you off. Because I asked what's your response?

And then you're like, what's my response?

I don't know.

That's what I asked you.

Exoteris, go ahead.

Hello?

What?

Why do you say that Marxism is Islam instead of saying,

Islam is Marxism?

Oh, good question.

Because Islam comes before Marxism

but I kicked you off because I'm

in my speed running thing because I'm

going to leave soon

just Alex go ahead

Hello

Yeah Look sorry if you can Hello? Yeah

Look, sorry if you can really understand me that is just like English is now my first language.

You're from?

Moldova?

Moldova?

Yeah, it's in Europe between Romania and Ukraine. You're not from Moldova? Yeah, it's in Europe between Romania and Ukraine.

You're not from Moldova.

I'm from Moldova.

No, you're not. You have an Arabic accent. You're not from Moldova.

Bro, other people that say that I have like a Russian accent.

Oh yeah actually you might be from Moldova when you heard.

Alright go ahead.

Okay so and also I might be, I don't say that I'm 100% correct.

I just read...

The only Marxist book that I read it was Capital.

So, basically, what do you mean, like, Islam Eagles, Islam?

I mean, Max Eagles Islam I mean Max Eagle's Islam

I'm going to

I have an essay

coming out about it

you know

if you're just

going to ask me

questions I have an essay

don't worry

it's strictly

debates only

uh

whatever this guy's name is

go ahead

hey hey man how's it going

I don't want to take too much of your time I just

wanted to say keep doing what you're doing

shout out to you and

free Palestine thanks my man

that's all I want to say thank you thank you appreciate it

all right guys we're wrapping up

the tic talk bye bye the guy who is like the guy who is like, the guy who was like,

what was he?

We could have a resolution to this.

You're going to resolve it to the,

anyway, guys, I, see you tomorrow.

Bye-bye.

See you tomorrow.

Bye-bye.