🔴 RED PILL NEWS | PALESTINE WAR 🇵🇸

Don't shop, baby, you can wanna Don't wanna think about you

Welcome.

How's everybody doing?

yet again

Having another one of our bi-weekly high quality infrared streams.

What's up, everybody?

Feels like it's been a long time.

Might be I might start doing these Wednesday to distribute them 'cause they're all happening at the end of the week, Sunday and Thursday, kinda close together and we should probably diversify it a little bit.

How's everybody doing?

So, status report.

Have you all been been lazy?

Have y'all stopped pumping out the content?

Stopped fighting the InfoWar?

What's going on with the momenta?

I'm just kidding.

I got eyes everywhere and I'm watching all the time.

Can always see what you guys are doing.

'Cause I'm stalking you.

'Cause Big Brother's watching you because this is a cult.

Nah, on some serious shit.

I think I have some stuff I want to talk about today, some high-quality stuff.

And we're going to cover some news as well.

Although, you know, I don't know if it's just me.

I just kind of find news boring a little bit.

I don't know if that's just me.

You know, if I was an infrared viewer, if I was somebody who views this, I would say I would actually want to see some of the high-quality theory stuff.

I want to see this guy's views on things.

I want to hear him talk about interesting things, right?

But it's okay.

We're going to do news for the retards because there's some people that I'm just kidding.

I'm just kidding.

But there's some people that just want the news.

They just want to hear about news and they want me to comment on the news.

And I'm going to basically give it to you simply.

Um everyone keeps saying that this is it as far as South Lebanon is concerned.

Meaning this is the war officially as it started.

Israel's unprecedented attacks on South Lebanon, Hezbollah's attacks today on Israel signify the start of a real full-scale war between Hezbollah and Israel.

Well,

We'll see.

Because I remember people saying that earlier as well.

I remember people saying that months and months ago, right?

I know Hezbollah is striking Israel right now, but it's just like a quantitative.

I'm gonna update you on what's going on, all right?

The difference is so far a quantitative escalation.

It's not a qualitative change as far as I could see.

Although some people are saying that, I I don't see that yet.

Although it's very clear.

It's very, very clear that they don't stand a chance.

Hezbollah will defeat the Zionist entity as they've done before.

I have no doubt about that whatsoever.

I think there's a madness prevailing in the so called Israeli government

Which according to which they can somehow take on the entire world.

By the way, Darg, I see you, brother.

I see you, Darg.

I see you, Ron Swanson, Stalinist.

What's going on, guys?

I see that.

But in any case, there's a madness prevailing in the.

I don't know what's going on with the leadership of the Zionist Dennis.

They think they can somehow take on Hezbollah and Hamas, and it also seems like they're itching for a war with Iran.

What else but madness?

And people say madness couldn't possibly be a factor in how people with in power are behaving and acting.

Well, look at Hitler in his last days in his bunker.

Look at Hitler's madness.

It's madness.

Simple.

Simple.

It's not going to be 2006 all over again.

It's going to be a worse defeat for the Zionist entity.

And we are witnessing the limits reached by the Zionist ideology itself.

It's at the threshold of what it's able to accomplish as an ideology in terms of being a reality, being reflective of reality.

It's just at its limits, you know.

Reality is knocking on the door and they're trying to keep it shut as hard as they can.

It's not working.

And this is the madness that usually accompanies the collapse of states and governments and things of that nature.

You know, it's interesting.

I was on Twitter today.

I'm on Twitter every day, of course, and I saw a tweet.

It's very tragic and it's very sad.

And it says, communism is Jewish.

I want to actually talk about this.

Just like that.

And this guy, Stu Peters.

Let's see, Stu Peters.

Stu Peters, he, you know, I'm not going to lie, kind of looks like he might be mentally disabled.

So I'll go easy on him.

But Stu Peters definitely looks mentally disabled.

Let me just show this to you.

Stu Peters, I think he's mentally disabled.

Wi this kind of like a dead dead

Stare.

I don't know what this is.

Definitely some mental disabilities going on.

This guy claims communism is Jewish, and then look what he lists: Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky.

Now I'll I'll

Cut the story short, this is going to get a bunch of likes, by the way.

It's already at 4.5 thousand.

I'm showing you this tweet because I want you guys I want you gorillas to

Respond to this tweet the right way, k?

This is so fucking stupid.

I mean, what a fucking retard, first of all.

But anyway, let's not get emotional.

Communism is Jewish.

Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky.

Now, what's the problem with this?

And I read the community note, the proposed one.

I was really disappointed by it.

Lenin is not a Jew at all.

Lenin's grandfather was not Jewish.

It's a lie.

It's a fabrication.

We've provided a source in this thread.

Let me find it.

Showing that Lenin had no Jewish ancestry.

Now, why is that important?

It's not necessarily that important, but it's important because there's neo-Nazi misinformation that's basically infiltrating established sources.

I mean, Wikipedia lists Lenin as a quarter Jewish.

It's actually not true, okay?

There were two uh uh there were other Alexander blanks, okay?

And there were specifically two of them with recorded biographies that were deliberately mixed to feed the narrative of the Judeo-Bolshevism nonsense, that Lenin was a quarter Jewish.

But it's not true, okay?

So stop conceding that.

It's literally not even fucking true.

Now, second of all,

Uh, of course, everyone knows Lenin didn't even know, but what's the problem with this, by the way?

I mean, I'm breaking this down rationally as though you can reason with this Down syndrome, half-human, ape beast who can't even use reason.

Uh, I don't know what right-wingers are like, are they fucking animals?

Are they swine?

Are they incapable of reason?

I don't understand what it fucking is because I reason with them, I show them evidence.

We have an entire fucking thread where we discarded this nonsense, and these half-human, half-beast, retard, monkey, apeling, fucking Down syndrome, extra chromosome, autistic, extreme ass burgers far beyond the spectrum.

Actual mental pygmy, I don't fucking know what to call them.

They're like actual animals that are barking.

I just hear them bark.

But can you respond to reason?

Is there any ability to reason with these people?

Are they even people?

I don't know.

I mean, if I say the sky is blue and they say, No, it's probably, I mean,

Isn't there some kind of way that we could say, okay, what's your evidence?

How do we know this?

Is there any way to test this?

Well, look what he said.

I just find it kind of funny.

He says, Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, two out of three of these people are Jews.

So communism is certainly Jewish, right?

And I don't know how 4.5 thousand people like this.

Every single one of these 4.5 thousand people mentally retarded.

Uh we're going to talk about this topic today, not the ju the JQ stuff.

But

Do you guys notice something wrong with this?

Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky.

Just like a basic exercise in logic, okay?

Well, Karl Marx was Jewish.

There's no need to deny that.

He was a Jew.

I mean, at least by their standard, he was a Jew.

And so was Leon Trotsky.

But what's the issue here?

Does anyone understand the issue?

Um, why is Trotsky even fucking mentioned?

That's the issue.

Why is Trotsky mentioned?

And how many people are they leaving out that are fundamental?

In defining what communism was historically, an actual experience.

Marx, Engels,

Lenin, Stalin, Mao,

Need I go on?

Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, basically every other prominent communist in history throughout the entirety of the Cold War in the developing world.

By the way, there was a time in which 25% of the world's population were living under communist governments.

So there's a whole host of communist experience that's defining what communism is.

And only Karl Marx among the main figureheads are Jewish.

Now, people could say, well, what about Rosa Luxemburg and these other people in Europe?

And Bella Kuhn.

Well,

They didn't create communist states, so they had no hand in.

I mean, the communism, this word, people know about this word because of the Cold War and actual communist states, okay?

So, people like Bella Kuhn briefly ruled over Hungary.

Thank you, Anonymous.

Are anti-communist neo-Nazi theories being boosted on Twitter?

I think so.

I don't know what else to explain it, but I'm going to continue.

Bella Kuhn.

What, a year or two, the Hungarian Soviet Republic, and then it collapsed.

There is no experience of actual communism there, okay?

It's just a very brief, spontaneous, sporadic thing.

Now Rosa Luxemburg, I regard her as a hero.

Don't get me wrong, I'm just saying Blackpack, wow, with the twenty.

I see you.

See you black bag, what's going on?

So and then finally Leon Trotsky.

What s what Communist state did Leon Trotsky build?

Trotsky was

kicked out of the Soviet Union in the late twenties.

What is Trotsky known for except trying to destroy the Soviet Union?

Yeah, he was the commander of the Red Army.

In the early days, he wasn't even a Bolshevik.

Trotsky is at best a footnote in communist history.

So, look at this actual fucking retard.

This guy's actually retarded.

You know that?

He says communism is Jewish, and then for no reason at all, he names Trotsky as the prominent figures in historical communism.

He doesn't name Mao, he doesn't name Xi Jinping, he doesn't name Deng Xiaoping, he doesn't name any of the brown communists, even though they're the most numerous.

He doesn't name Frederick Engels, he doesn't name Joseph Stalin.

He only deliberately names Trotsky because Trotsky's a Jew.

Do you understand the twisted reasoning that these right-wingers are using, if you even call it that?

They deliberately go out of their way to exaggerate the significance of people who are Jewish, not because those people represent communism, but because they're Jewish.

Yeah, they're they're not even clowns because it's they're not even funny.

Like this guy is probably someone who wants to be a comedian, but he's not.

Um, I don't even know who this guy is.

I'm gonna be honest.

I don't even know who he is, but.

Four point five thousand people like this.

I'm beginning to, you know, I'm increasingly of the opinion you just can't reason with these fucking people.

Like, we're trying so hard, and you just can't.

You know?

I think they only respond to force.

They only respond to force.

They only respond to power.

They don't respond to.

Like saying, hey, wait a minute, you know, Lenin wasn't even Jewish at all.

Trotsky's not even, he's barely relevant to communism.

Trotsky never presided over a communist state.

He never built a communist state.

On the contrary, he just tried to destroy them.

So, why are you so etc in the etc is just like a bunch of Asian and brown people?

The etc.

is just like a bunch of Asian and South American and Arab and African people who are not Jewish at all.

But that's a real the it's the etc in this sentence is like really really tired.

It's like really carrying a lot, you know.

This this is like Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, and then you have this etc that contains Engels, Stalin, Mao, you know, Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chave.

I mean, it's just this etc is like Atlas, it has the whole weight of the world on its shoulders.

It's really carrying this sentence with all its might.

Pretty incredible.

Pretty incredible.

Um, you just have to laugh and mock these fucking retards.

You should just absolutely humiliate, mock, and laugh at these fucking people.

I don't care at this stage.

He's not saying this for any other reason than to take a swipe at us.

I hope you know that.

Stu Peters is only saying this to take a swipe at Haas, at Jackson Hinkle.

At infrared, at us.

He's doing it to attack us, you know, the MAGA communists.

No other reason he's they're doing this and they're saying this.

Okay, g let me tell you something.

You can say this all you want.

Keep peddling this.

We are confident that we're gonna win anyway.

So keep saying this.

Keep saying it.

It's not gonna change the fact we're coming.

It's not gonna change a damn thing.

Communism is Jewish.

It's Jewish.

Okay, then Christianity's Jewish too, you fucking retard.

Does no one care about that irony?

The guy's got a cross in his bio.

He goes, Communism is Jewish.

Really?

Who's this?

What is this cross about?

Who's the guy on this cross?

Is it just a coincidence he was a Jew?

Was it just a coincidence?

It's a coincidence, isn't it?

It's such an irony.

It's almost like the obsession with Jews is like a theological problem, some unfinished business, rather than something about the entire fucking world.

You know, yeah, let's burn the Old Testament gu guys.

Guys, something guys, I just found out.

You know, Abraham and Moses.

You know all these people in the Bible that are like prophets?

Dude, they're Jews.

Holy shit.

Is it a coincidence?

Dude, the Bible is more Jewish than communism.

Isn't that crazy?

The actual literal Bible is more both the Old Testament and the New Testament is more Jewish than Communism is.

Because there's no Asians in the Bible.

There's not a single, I don't know.

Is there a single Chinese guy in the Bible?

I don't think there is.

I don't think there's a single Chinese guy in the whole Old or the New Testament, right?

Not a single one.

So I'm pretty sure you're, you know, more Jewish than the thing you're claiming is Jewish.

The irony is lost on them, though.

It's incredible.

It's absolutely incredible.

You know, and I'm saying this because I look on my TL, what's going on?

And you think we're in the midst of the communist revolution right now.

You think we're in the midst of a mass movement calling for the nationalization of the energy and the transportation, the railways, and the minerals and the means of production and the factories.

And there's a full-blown communist movement underway, which there is.

It's us.

But you'd think in the mood of this country, if you were transported, you were going on X, oh my God, communism in America, there must be this mass workers' movement.

You know, that's calling for the fundamentals of the economy to help be held in common and in the common interest.

And it's like you look around and what do you see?

Nothing.

It's like, where is this communist boogeyman even fucking coming from?

Stu Peters, you fucking retard.

The most relevant communist phenomena is China.

Now, I could be wrong.

But when I look at those Chinese guys

You know, I don't know.

Doesn't look very Jewish to me, but I could be wrong.

You know, maybe I'm just a Jew myself trying to deceive you, but I don't know.

I don't know.

I think the the the country that gives the most immediate significance to the word communism, because it's literally ruled by a ruling Communist party, over ninety million strong,

Um not sure if there's a lot of Jews over there.

And how do I know this?

Well, I just kinda look at their faces and I just I don't really see a lot of I mean, I don't know, guys.

Am I uh what do you guys think?

Maybe, maybe, what do you guys think?

Guys, he said communism is Jewish.

You know how you should have responded to that?

You know how you should have unironically responded to that tweet?

You should have just been like, Does this look like a Jew to you?

Just be like, I don't be like, I don't know, Stu Peters.

This guy doesn't really look very Jewish to me.

But I could be wrong.

I could be wrong.

Maybe I'm just Jewish myself.

Because Rev.

Link to this and look at their replies.

The first thing is people call them a Jew.

Where's it at?

Or maybe that was Kareem?

You're the Jew and you're lying.

Mark's daddy was a rabbi and a Jew, so Marks is a Jew and Lenin to Trotsky daddy was a Jew too.

I just got a fucking aneurysm reading this.

Should I be envious that there's not retards in my movement?

Like, we don't have a single Down syndrome actual spur retard in our movement.

Not a single one.

But they're way more inclusive than us.

They just bring their a I'm not even kidding.

We should have more numbers.

We should have more people.

It's kind of a shame.

I'm kind of envious.

Uh, we never have people who type things out like this.

I'm not even talking about the content, I'm talking about just the form, like how retarded, clearly, like disabled this person is.

We don't have anyone like that.

Hey, you're anonymous.

Stephen Kodkin.

Um

You know, he's uh I don't wanna call him a good historian.

I'll just say Stephen Kotkin, you know, you should read him, not not so you accept what he says blindly, but you know, he

He in his mind he's trying to compile facts together and you could use that to your advantage with research.

So you could use him for research.

Uh he he's not like I'll I'll tell you this, I don't think Stephen Kotkin's the type of historian who like goes out of his way to make things up.

He's not like Robert Conquest or s that service guy.

He you know, he's wrong about a lot of things, even most things, but he's not going to go out of his way to like make things up in his own mind.

He's going to try to arrive at the factual truth in his own flawed way.

Not like yeah, he's not like Timothy Snyder.

That's like kind of the revisionist school of Soviet historiography.

They're kind of just like trying to.

the best of their limited, puny, undialectical bourgeois ability, arrive at the factual truth, failing to com and the whole story at least, but they're definitely better they're definitely more professional than like these other historians like Timothy Snyder and Robert Conquest and what not.

So that's uh an important thing to keep in mind.

You know, um

I find it really interesting though that

Also, I want to start getting into more debates.

But nobody wants to debate me.

We all were past this.

But I'd like to I kinda want to have a debate tonight, but stop, 'cause I know there's gonna be community members.

They get in VC and they're like, I'll debate you, Haas.

And then they're gonna drag them up into VC.

Hi, Haas.

What's going on?

And I'm actually looking for like actual ops, you know.

I'm not looking for.

Social hour.

Alright, we have some other breaking news.

Apparently, I'm exposed.

Samuel Hazaldeen is an English actor working in film.

Uh.

I'm not even joking about this.

There's actual some there's actually some people that will look at this and they'll be like, This is irrefutable proof that Haas is an MI6.

Did you guys know that?

There's actually some people that will look at something like this and they'll be like, I have irrefutable proof Haas is an MI6.

Oh, what's your proof?

Well, he's an English actor, Samuel Haas Aldeen.

Coincidence?

I think not.

You know what else is English?

The MI6.

Therefore, Haas is in the MI6.

I'm not even kidding.

That's their way of reasoning.

Um and people

I guess there's a demand for it, you know.

People kind of.

I don't think people believe it, but I just think they just.

They're just looking for anything to dream about.

You know, people are dreaming.

They want it to be true.

I want to believe.

I want to believe.

I want to believe.

Who is this?

Who the fuck is this?

Who is this woman?

Anyone know who this is?

Celebrating today's passage of the Assad regime Anti-Normalization Act in the House.

Who is this?

I mean, I don't know what's going on.

I've never is that a politician?

Is that a politician?

Who is that?

Oh no, it's not.

It's just an activist.

I thought that was like a Congress.

Alte, what's going on?

Here's your Talmudic funding.

Alte Khan.

Oh my god, what did you do to me?

You're just I'm funded by Jews, guys.

No way out of it.

Thank you, man.

I appreciate you.

Iranian diaspora, interesting, all right, interesting.

I'm just saying, interesting, all right, interesting.

You know, not too interesting.

I'm gonna be honest.

Not too interesting.

Anyway.

Alright, what are we looking at?

And show requests.

2036, dude, this is this is unironically how some people like do research accordingly.

Check this out.

This is a fucking crazy coincidence.

All right, Hasrof Dulo, British writer, director, and producer, Hasrof Dulul, also known as Haas.

Now, why am I showing you this guy named Hasrof Dul, also known as Haas?

Because apparently

He directed and co-produced a film called 2036 Origin Unknown in 2018.

Oh, no, no, no, no, no!

We found it!

I'm not even kidding.

There's some people that I've seen.

You've probably seen them too.

Or maybe they blocked you, but this is actually like how they reason.

This is how they like accuse people.

of being uh CIA.

So Haas is actually Hazroff DeLule.

It's actually me.

I'm actually Hazroff The whole infrared project was a a fictional story written by Hazroff DeLul turned into a ARG.

Created by the KGB.

The Jews control all of it.

You know what's fucking weird?

He kinda looks like me, you know?

This is him.

Well, does he look like me?

Has Roth DeLool got some surgeries, you know?

Close enough.

Close enough, right?

Doesn't this look just like me or no?

Like if I was Indian or no?

Now

This is him.

But you don't think this looks like me?

Not at all.

What a shame.

What a shame.

Here I thought I looked good.

I don't look anything like this guy.

Therefore, I must be ugly.

Anyway.

Too Mad passed away.

Apparently he was a horrible person.

I don't know anything about him.

I'm not even gonna comment on the situation.

I don't even know anything about what.

What didn't he.

Wasn't he like.

Didn't he like quote tweet me once?

I think he did.

Didn't he?

He quote tweeted me once, didn't he?

In a bad way.

He was like attacking me.

Anyway, I don't celebrate people's death.

I don't know who he is, I don't know anything about him.

Uh that was some some big news that passed.

Sorry that.

was blowing up.

It was big news.

A lot of people were talking about it.

He's a rapist, I didn't know that.

I d I'm not even gonna I don't know I haven't s I haven't been confronted with anything I don't know I'm not even gonna not gonna bother all right

Anyway, I don't know

Let's get on to the business at hand.

Yeah.

What is this?

Hold on.

Is this real?

Iran declares Antarctica its property in direct challenge to Biden's global treaty.

Is this real?

This is the most badass thing ever.

So based.

Let me look this up.

This is actually real.

Iran declares Antarctica its high

Uh okay, one of these sources is like a virus.

Give me a second.

A Washington Examiner

Iran claims ownership.

Iran claims ownership and plans military base there.

Uh the Navy rear declared that his country has property rights.

What's up, Code Along?

Us, I have irrefutable proof that Taylor Swift said the N-word.

You can expose it, I will text you.

Please send me your phone number on Discord.

I would never do that in a million years.

Giving Code Along my actual phone number, I think I'd rather like kill myself, probably.

Well, I could just get a new number, to be honest.

It's not that dramatic, but c if Code along had my phone number, I would get spam called every second of the day from 3,000 different phone numbers because the guy just has a fetish for making alts and just like, I don't know.

No, dude, you already f fucking have my Discord server.

Ah, anyway, he declared that his country has property rights in Antarctica and the South Pole.

With regard to the South Pole, we have property rights there, they belong to the public.

Our plan is to raise the flag there.

It is not only military work, but also scientific work that needs to be carried out.

I support this fully.

You know, I was thinking when I was a few years ago, I was thinking of like this idea.

You know, somebody was like, you know, Haas, you can make money from script writing.

what if you wrote a script for a movie and I said, you know, if I did that, I would want to do something like Pirates of the Caribbean, but the Safavid Empire is getting in on it.

It makes no sense geo geographically, but like the idea is like,

Persia goes to the New World like the sixteen hundreds.

seventeen hundreds.

And it's like a huge adventure and it's like it's like Pirates of the Caribbean, but it's like the Safavid Empire.

Explorers.

And now there's gonna be a scene in my head.

I was imagining this scene

there's like a Safavid galley.

It's like sailing in the smooth waters at night.

And then as soon as it's night time, you look up into the night sky and it's like this huge

Extremely detailed, bright, looks like outer space, like um looks like an alien world.

It's like the stars are like so colorful, everything's so cool.

You see the constellations and shit, and it's like ancient Iranian esoteric astrology.

I have not done any drugs.

Alright.

Anyway.

I don't I don't even want to bother explaining my thoughts.

I just gave you a really cool visual that you can keep in your head.

Alright, I don't fucking know what a galley is, alright?

I just.

What is a galley?

What's a pirate ship?

Um.

What is a okay one of them ships they were using back in the day, alright?

God damn, crucify me, man.

See, like the visionary director doesn't even have to know stupid details, all right?

I could just get people to research that for me.

I have the vision.

It's all matters.

So, somebody give me money and I'll make that movie.

You know, maybe the Iranian government can commission me to direct that movie.

And, you know, it'll it'll be a killing.

It'll be such a cool movie.

Uh

Alright, everyone's talking about Tucker Carlson in Moscow, so I guess I have to look at this and see it.

Check it out.

The Grocery Store

Tucker Carlson at the grocery store.

Was the here it is.

A long-standing feature, maybe the longest-standing feature of Cold War propaganda in the West was the Soviet grocery store.

No products, no choices, shoddily made things.

And it wasn't actually propaganda, it was real.

And you can look up the pictures on the internet if you want.

So we thought it would be interesting to take a look at a contemporary modern-day 2024 Russian grocery store two years into sanctions.

Here we go.

All right.

Here we go.

So I guess you put in ten rubles here and you get it back when you put the cart back.

So, it's free, but there's an incentive to return it and not just bring it to your homeless encampment.

Okay, this is the grocery cart escalator.

This is designed, I'm figuring this out now, where the wheels don't move, they lock.

I like, I like people say like Russia has nothing to do with communism, but like these visuals are clearly some kind of some kind of thematic continuity is going on here on the grocery cart escalator.

I mean, I'm not saying that's.

You know, that proves everything all.

And I'm just saying it's like, you know, you you it's very common when you're in Russia to see things like that everywhere, you know, to see a thematic continuity with the past.

Look, Ma, no hands.

Retail placement here is a little bit different.

It's like walking through Macy's to get to Whole Foods.

Okay, we've gotten through the perfume section to get to the grocery store.

So we're gonna try and buy what a family of four would buy every week, and we're gonna see what the selection is and we're gonna see what it costs.

A red star?

That's just a coincidence, all right.

Now, Russia is famous for its bread, which is one thing I can assess pretty well.

The low-carb lifestyle has not swept Russia.

Thank heaven, because they, I mean, look at that.

Fresh too.

Look at that.

Oh, come on.

Unicorn and mini mills.

Alright.

Some kind of Russian wheat cookies.

Ooh, we need coffee.

Don't we?

I don't know if this is sugar or flour, to be honest with you, but it looks like a staple, so we should get it.

It's a very good-looking package.

It's gotta be flour, right?

And this is Russian wine.

It's from Crimea, which not only has the warm water naval base, but also is the source of most of the grapes in this part of Russia for wine.

So it's apparently pretty good.

Uh

Cheese puffs, you check out of a grocery store and you've got gum, razor blades, and candy.

Actually, they hide the razor blades because we steal them.

But these are all seem to be Western products: Mars, Twix, Snickers, Milky Way, Bounty, Gillette, Paul's Cough Drops, Mentos.

It's pretty non-sanctioned to me, but what do I know?

I went from amused to legitimately angry.

You know, one thing you realize traveling around the world, I've only been one place outside America.

What's up, Johnny?

Tucker's tick is that the Soviet Union was evil and repressive, but now that Russia is not communist anymore they're cool.

Yeah.

Yeah, that that makes sense, that that's what he thinks, but who g who gives a shit?

The the end result is uh less hostility to Russia.

Who gives a fuck what stupid reasoning people use in their head?

I mean, we care about it, obviously, but

We can see in the short term it's not a bad thing.

Angry.

So we were guessing what this would cost.

Everybody here from the United States buys groceries and we didn't pay any attention to costs as we were just putting in the cart what we would actually eat over a week.

And we all came in around 400 bucks, about 400 bucks.

It was $104 US here.

And that's when you start to realize that ideology maybe doesn't matter as much as you thought.

Corruption.

If you take people's standard of living and you tank it through filth and crime and inflation, and they literally can't buy the groceries they want, at that point maybe it matters less what you say or whether you're a good person or a bad person.

You're wrecking people's lives in their country and that's what our leaders have done to us.

And coming to a Russian grocery store, the heart of evil, and seeing what things cost and how people live, it will radicalize you against our leaders.

That's how I feel anyway.

Radicalized.

We're not making any of this up, by the way, at all.

Alright, I have a few thoughts.

Uh some people are saying

A lot of people are saying, like, uh, you know, Tucker, it's just purchasing purchasing power difference.

Which I think ignores the point.

Which is the crazy inflation that we've just normalized in the US, you know, spanning over the course even of a few years.

But if you look at it in terms of decades, even one decade ago compared to now, the crazy diminishing purchasing power of Americans is incredible.

People have experienced that tangibly.

They've noticed that they can buy less when they go to the supermarket.

You know, so I think people are kind of missing the fucking point.

Anyway, I also think that.

People may say, well, this is just Moscow.

What about the rest of Russia?

And then I'd say, well, even if you go to America's major cities, they really suck.

Even even our like major cities suck, you know?

Even affluent cities in America suck.

Um

So, yeah, this is why people are getting radicalized, as Tucker said.

I don't think it's because he's stupid.

I think people are missing the point, actually.

Very clearly, actually, people are missing the point.

But what do I know, right?

I'm just um

Freaking tanky.

You know, you know, there's something a little bit wrong going on.

You wanna know what that is?

Infrared

Is not

Showing up in the just chatting section.

Why the fuck is that?

That is quite an enigma, if I do say so.

That is quite an enigma.

Why am I not showing up on Kick's Just Chatting section?

What is this?

You guys, if you go on uh don't yeah, yeah.

Shadow banned?

I guess I am.

Shadow banned.

I'm gonna have to email them about that.

The hell is going on?

What the hell is going on?

This must be an error of some kind.

You see me there?

Okay.

If you see me there, you see me there.

Anyway,

I'm there now.

I just fucking appeared there right now.

I literally just looked at it now and I'm there.

Okay?

So that's really interesting.

That's incredible.

That's incredible.

Okay, anyway.

Enough distractions.

As soon as we like mentioned it, everything was fixed.

So that's all that matters.

There's things I'd like to talk about today.

I would like to actually

Oh

Okay, hold on.

We got some good news, but I can't talk to you about it.

But we're going to watch Tucker's other video, and then we're going to get on to what I wanted to talk about.

So this is Tucker Carlson visiting the Moscow subway station.

139k likes, okay.

And there's some things I'd like to say about this.

And then we'll go into show requests.

Sure, let's watch this first.

One of the ways you understand a society is through its infrastructure, the places where people gather, the places where they go to travel.

You've got a lot of people in one place, it tells you a lot about the people.

So, with that in mind, we're standing in front of the Kiev Skaya Metro Station and this train station next to it.

Now, the Metro Station was built by Joseph Stalin 70 years ago.

Wow, thanks, Tucker.

I didn't know you were going to say that.

I thought he was just going to not mention that.

Thanks, Tucker.

This first thing you mentioned, that's so cool.

And the question is, how's it doing now after 70 years?

So we went into it to take a look, and what we found shocked us.

Now that's not an endorsement of Stalin, who was bad, obviously.

You take the L for that.

Or is it an endorsement of the current president, Vladimir Putin?

You may not like him either.

Well, he's got to play safe with his optics.

You know, you can't expect him to fully...

But it doesn't change the reality of what we saw or more precisely didn't see.

There's no graffiti.

There's no filth.

There's no foul smells.

There are no bums or drug addicts or rapists or people waiting to push you onto the train tracks and kill you.

I'm going to talk about why that is.

No.

It's perfectly clean and orderly.

And how do you explain that?

We're not even going to guess.

That's not our job.

We're only going to ask the question.

And if your response is to shout at us slogans dumber than the slogans we used to call Soviet and mock, that's not really an answer.

How does Russia, a country we're told is a gas station with nuclear weapons, have a subway station that normal people used to get to work and home every single day that's nicer than anything in our country?

Because of communism.

We're not going to speculate.

We're just going to raise the question and wait for someone in charge to give us an answer.

What is the answer?

So we'll stop the lecture and let you take a look for yourself at what the Kievskaya Metro Station in Moscow, Russia looks like today, February 2024, in the middle of a war.

Here it is.

Yeah.

Comrade Tucker.

Yeah.

That's so nice he's showing the truth.

Wow.

That's so beautiful.

That's so beautiful they keep this.

Oh.

I'm really glad Tucker shows this.

I mean

Just one trip to Moscow changed you know

has such an impact on him, it's so incredible.

Look at this.

This is the founder.

of the era we live in.

Not just Russia's, the whole world.

Very cool.

Very cool, Tucker.

Really enjoyed it.

Now show NYC and we're gonna talk about this.

Why is NYC such a shithole in comparison to New York subway and

So on and so forth.

I'm gonna talk about that, but

I have to uh

Clear out my throat.

I mean, I have to I'm gonna I also

I've been making poor dietary choices, which I'll also talk about.

Just give me a sec.

Alright.

Give me a damn second.

Yeah, yesterday was Valentine's Day, um, which I spent with my spent with my missus, you know.

But then for the rest of the day we just went to my parents and hung out.

You know why?

Because I should have done a Valentine's Day stream, right?

I didn't have time.

But it's like when you really think about it.

When you have when you're in a relationship with someone

It's like it's not just you.

It's your whole family.

You know what I mean?

It's like you're just 10% of it, 90% of it is family.

You're the 10% that's extending it and bringing it forward, like potentially with like having a kid, you know, passing down your legacy.

But anyway, I was eating straight garbage yesterday, you know, a bunch of candies and sweets and just a little not good stuff at all.

Not good stuff.

Um

Ah, I feel sick already.

Anyway, let's get to the business at hand.

I'm not having a kid, I'm just saying like

You know, Valentine's Day is this

You should spend half of it with your family, probably, right?

Because it's like they're the reason you even exist.

Anyway, um.

Anyway

We're going to look at one last thing and then I'm going to talk about the thing I wanted to talk about.

Someone put this in show requests: The KKE on civil marriage and same-sex couples and its impact on children's rights.

These guys have done a hit piece about me, so keep that in mind.

This website is so old and out of date.

Recently met the K president of the KKE on civil marriage and same-sex couples.

Uh this is a way paved trafficking in refugee children.

Wow.

This same applies to adoption.

Given that the number of adoption applications filed by couples or individuals is many times higher than the number of children for adoption and child protection structures, the way is essentially paved for trafficking in refugee children, but also children from countries where people are starving.

The first and main reason for Kike's refusal to extend civil marriage to same-sex couples uh is the commercialization of procreation and adoption.

I think that's a very reasonable position.

A second equally important related reason is that the bill bypassed social rights of a child to the motherhood-fatherhood relation as an evolving bio-social relationship.

Our party considers the parenthood as the relationship between a parent and the child, which at the individual level reflects existing social relations.

It's a very interesting position they have.

Um

on this the gay marriage question.

It's not it's not their position is not based on

the de the bourgeois degeneracy thing, capitalist degeneracy position, which is Orthodox ML.

They're not they don't uphold that position.

They rather uphold a curious position on it, which is interesting to think about.

I don't know if I agree with it.

The KA's position is based on the rights of the child, the chil child's social need to have ties with the mother and father.

This need has an objective basis the interrelated motherhood fatherhood relation resulting from the complementary function of man and woman in the process of procreation.

Like when I say communism is conservative, it's pretty much like

This is kind of a basic form of reasoning, which only today is considered unacceptable by, I guess, leftists.

But their position is uh more or less like the the family is based on bourgeois relations, based on capitalist relations.

But for that reason

Um

Needs to be defended because it's almost like they're combining a kind of like normative position with the analytical one.

It's very interesting.

And

I've read their earlier writings about this.

The KKE more or less says something along the lines of like they give a description of of the family under capitalism, right?

And then simultaneously they say because this is objectively true,

Normatively speaking, we reject attempts to extend marriage beyond this.

As this deviates from the fundamental reality, it's very interesting.

You know, it's an interesting form of.

Marxist conservatism, or Western Marxist conservatism, in a sense, right?

Uh it's unique to say the least.

Ugh.

Uh here, but here they say something different.

They say that humans are social being natural beings.

Their natural needs, like their social needs, can only be met in a social way.

The motherhood and fatherhood are inherent to the species.

Humans are the sum total of social relations, a fact that does not negate their biological nature, but includes it.

Uh individual responsibility.

So they say it's not related to the sexual orientation, to its stance toward homosexuality or bisexuality as an expression of sexuality.

We recall, moreover, KA has made legislative proposals and developed political actions in order to abolish any form of isolation, condemning form of racism against this is mistranslated: condemning any form of racism against people of homosexual orientation.

I almost admire this.

It's like boomers run the party and they're trying to be responsive to the younger people, I imagine.

I'm like, okay, whatever.

Yeah, we're against racism to the gays.

We oppose the exclusion of homosexuals from apprenticeship, employment, housing.

I uh K fights against any kind of discrimination.

Yeah, I mean their position isn't people are like this is too dogmatic and orthodox.

This is not an orthodox ML position because the orthodox ML position is that the gay rights movement is capitalist degeneracy.

It's always been.

Only changed with the new left.

And the the KKE, everyone says it's like an orthodox Stalinist party.

It's really not.

It's the KKE is just as much a product of the New Left as anything else.

It's just that.

they have an eccentric posi th though the difference with the k but here's the truth, the KKE just hasn't compromised its position.

I mean, look, they're they're very cringe about the Russia Ukraine war, but I can confidently say

The Communist Party of Greece has the position it has because of its own dogmatism, not because it's opportunistic in the sense of like.

Being connected to Western NGOs or Western imperial interests on a material level?

I don't think they are.

I don't see any evidence of that.

They just are assuming the wrong position out of dogmatism, out of a th out of a theoretical dogmatism, which I guess is more respectable than leftists.

But in any case I

They don't want to win.

I've talked about this before.

This is a party that doesn't want to win.

They want to remain in opposition forever.

Uh so that's that.

I don't find that very interesting, if I'm gonna be honest.

Not the most riveting news or information I've seen.

Anyway, what I'd like to talk about is why is it that the subway in New York is so shitty?

Why is America in decline?

Yada yada yada.

Let's talk about conspiracy theories.

You know, I remember

Russia Gate.

But even before Russia Gate I remember the WikiLeaks email

Scandal.

I remember h reading Hillary Clinton's emails and the emails of all these people in the State Department.

And you want to know what I found?

And you can you can do it yourself.

Be my guest.

What I found s s uh moving through these emails and

and reading them is that I found

People who were learning about history and reality and sharing information with each other that you would expect them to already know if they really were in on some grand conspiracy.

I saw emails of Hillary Clinton sharing like Wikipedia articles.

Apparently, Vladimir Lenin was the leader of the Bolshevik party who overthrew the it was factoids like that that they would share with each other that you'd think they would already know based on the level of accreditation and education they have to be in the positions they are in.

But when you read, look, a lot of people focus on the Pizzagate stuff.

I have my suspicions.

Yeah, something weird is going on there.

I definitely do think they're child rapists.

I'm not denying that.

But don't let that confuse you into thinking that these child rapist pedophiles.

Are somehow

Somehow, they have a plan for the future of America because they really don't.

Because they don't even have a holistic grasp of the reality they live in.

They're just like Destiny or Vosh or whoever else you want to talk about, in the sense that they're constantly reading Wikipedia to get informed on basic facts.

I would read emails between Hillary Clinton and all these other people in the State Department, all these other higher-ups.

Apparently, the Sunni and the Shia have been in conflict for hundreds of years.

The issue concerns the succession of the leadership of the Ummah, the Muslim community.

And it's like they're typing these things out, paraphrasing Wikipedia articles, not just Wikipedia articles.

This is what's even more pathetic.

They would send each other news articles and quote the news articles, not to be like, Oh, look what's in the news, but to say, Look at this new information you didn't know before.

They are literal, stupid boomers.

Don't take my word for it.

Go on WikiLeaks if it's still up and read the emails for yourself.

It's really pathetic.

It's really fucking pathetic how stupid they are, right?

And I don't know what's going on in its entirety in terms of.

who is running the deep state and what their plan is.

But there's one possibility that I can't brush off, which we have to consider and think about, which is that no one is in control.

And what do I mean by no one is in control?

I mean in the strict sense that nobody has a vision they're trying to implement.

I think that there's different eccentric individuals in the State Department, in the Pentagon, in the CIA maybe, in the FBI, and in their private capacity as individuals.

Have a holistic ideology that they're trying to implement, but they're facing too many hurdles because of the chaotic, bureaucratic, imperialist machine.

They don't find themselves at the helm implementing some kind of idea.

They find themselves facing an uphill battle just to implement their diabolical evil plans.

For example, Peter Thiel.

Peter Thiel is a guy with ideas, right?

He clearly has some kind of idea-based vision for the future of America.

You know, with Curtis Yarvin.

And the whole, you know, yeah, the NRX thing and the neocameralism and, you know, the seasteading.

And he's got allies in the Pentagon.

I mean, he's, he's, he, he did Palantir contracting with them.

But Peter Thiel and his followers are just one faction.

There's other people in the deep state who who have a conflicting vision.

And it's not, it's not a binary thing of like one faction versus the other is the source of the conflict.

There's like probably 12 different factions, right?

And it's all eccentric individuals trying to like get a hold.

And steer the state in the direction they want it to go in, but they always fail.

Take Trump's administration.

When Trump was elected in twenty sixteen and he was choosing people for his cabinet, a lot of different like people and factions were vying for control there.

And it's like he had Roger Stone there.

I guess he represents a different faction than Steve Bannon, or I don't fucking know.

And it's like, there is so much chaos going on.

And then even in the GOP you have Marco Rubio and it's there's all these different factions w who have their own ideas, but there's nobody actually in control of the whole thing.

Do you want to know a country where

There is like kind of in a way an idea or a spirit guiding the whole of society.

China.

China is a society where there is a w sorry, my mic fell.

Uh, Ch China is a uh China is a um

Yeah, Bap and I don't fucking know all these other people.

Anyway,

China is an example of a country where China is an example of a country.

Where you can say, like, there is a vision that's guiding the whole of the government's decisions.

And there's different factions, of course, I'm not denying that in China, but there is a holistic plan of action.

One of them is called the five-year plans, right?

But then there's also Xi Jinping thought.

So in China, it's like there is a sense of purpose, and not just a sense of purpose, but there's a sense of a vision that needs to be fulfilled.

Another example of a country like that is Russia.

Russia's a country where there's a sense of a mission, there's a sense of a um a decision the state is making to fulfill uh some kind of objective in a holistic way.

You don't have that in the United States.

So that's why Russia's subway system, there's not feces and shit everywhere.

It's not because Russians are less poor than Americans.

It's because it's guided by a type of purpose.

It's guided by an idea of some kind.

Where people have to take responsibility for the state of society, right?

In the open society, no one takes responsibility for society.

The people in power are fucking sending each other emails about different Wikipedia articles over information that's somehow new to them, which begs the question of why they're even in power in the first place.

I mean, like, you're so ill-informed about the world, and yet you have so much power over the world, and you're telling me you're still learning to the point where you're sending each other articles about, like, basic history that you should have known as a prerequisite for being able to get in power, right?

Like the reason I'm making a big fuss over the fact that they basically don't have basic a basic understanding of like history and stuff is because

When no one is in control, when no one is taking responsibility for the outcome of reality and for the state of society, and at least in a limited sense,

What that means is that nobody has a holistic grasp of not only the state of the country, but also its history.

I mean, you look at the Tucker Carlson Putin interview, and one of the things that should strike you is Putin's grasp of history.

And I talked about this a lot.

I'm not going to get into it too much, but it's like, well, the reason he has that grasp of history, in addition to his upbringing with master class Soviet education.

Is because it's like it's a given.

He's the leader of Russia.

Of course, he has to know everything about Russian history and, in a sense, world history, at least in a limited sense.

He has to know this.

He has to know things about this.

How could he not know these things?

How could he ever be equipped to make any kind of major decision?

If he doesn't know these things, right?

You think Putin is sending emails with Ord?

It appears to day I just found out that, as a matter of fact, the cotton gin was a big part of the expansion of slavery in the United States, culminating in the events of the Civil War.

It actually turns out according to this Wikipedia article.

that it is said the Republicans and the Democrats are still fighting over co no, they don't do that.

They already have their shit locked down.

They got intelligence agencies collecting information.

You s you know that shit.

They got it locked down.

They don't need to be sending each other emails and

Looking up fun facts

To know basic shit.

They know the world that they live in, and they've made a decision about their place in that world.

That's not true for the United States.

We don't know the country that we live in.

We haven't made a decision as it pertains to the country we live in.

We haven't made the decision that we want a subway without shit everywhere, right?

And why haven't we made that decision?

We haven't made that decision because we can't.

We can't make that decision.

Because we, as a collective interest, don't even fucking exist.

We're not given any recognition.

It's just an amalgamation of different arbitrarily

private interests competing and conflicting and fighting for control of an extremely outdated, monstrously bureaucratic imperialist state machine.

And they're just vying they're just competing over it and and nobody actually controls it completely.

And everyone can point fingers about who's responsible.

Republicans say can say it's Democrats' fault, Democrats can say it's Republicans' fault, but the truth is it's no one's fault because nobody is at the helm of the ship.

That's the truth.

That's the sad truth about the United States.

There isn't a United States, nobody's at the helm of this ship.

You know, I'm almost tempted to say sometimes

The conspiracy is out in the open.

Yeah, the bickering that's going on in the Congress and the Senate, that is the extent of governance in the US.

Like, yeah, that's that's real.

That's the government shutdowns where they can't come to a decision.

Yeah, that's actually real.

Nobody knows what they're doing.

It's all on paper.

Mm-hmm.

It's funny because I have two basic suspicions.

One is this, what I'm just telling you, and the other is the act exact opposite, where it's like, no, they're they are in control and they know exactly what they're doing.

But I don't think they do.

I increasingly don't think they do.

I mean, I could be wrong.

I'm not saying I know this for certain.

Of course, I don't.

But I suspect it could be possible that they don't know what they're doing.

And if they don't know what they're doing,

That should tell you that one of the roles of communists should be that we need to be the people who know what we're doing, right?

We need to be the ones.

Who are the Illuminati in a sense?

We need to be the Freemason Illuminati or whatever the fuck, because they're not, you know?

We need to be the ones who have a sense of purpose, a purposeful future.

And, you know, I think that the forces, I think, in a way.

It is true that the idea that's animating people in power is a destructive one.

I agree.

I mean, whether it's Marco Rubio's thing or whether it's Peter Thiel or

It's all united by its basic destructive thrust.

Or it's like Bill Gates or Soros and the Degrowth.

Environmental degrowth kind of stuff.

reduce the population kind of deal.

I mean

But then you see the World Economic Forum, and then you see, you know, it's kind of scary because.

The one place that I feel is united is corporate America.

It seems like corporate America is fucking united.

When I watch the Super Bowl,

I feel like I am watching people who have an agenda pushing through their agenda in a holistic, unified way.

When you watch the Super Bowl, you get that impression.

All the corporations converging to push a specific agenda, to push a specific ideology, right?

It's very bizarre.

It's very bizarre.

And then, you know, at the same time, let me do a self-criticism.

Let me do a self-criticism.

Hillary Clinton isn't in power.

Of course, the politicians don't know what they're doing.

Of course, they don't know about basic history because they're not the ones who are in control.

Those are just the pawns.

So, of course, they're sending each other Wikipedia and on.

They're not the ones who actually are making the decisions, right?

Yeah, corporate America seems locked down in a way, right?

I was the Super Bowl was crazy, you know.

I mean, Usher?

Who the fuck is Usher?

And then I remember on New Year's was Ryan Seacrest, New Year's Eve.

Who the fuck is Ryan Seacrest?

Why are we stuck in two thousand eight forever?

we're like stuck in like twenty ten or two thousand eight on a time loop.

Corporate America is recycling the same celebrities.

Taylor Swift?

Wasn't Taylor Swift a big deal in like two thousand seven?

Who the fuck is Taylor Swift?

Wasn't she a big deal like fifty years ago or some shit?

Corporate America is it's like uh it's like an extended Marvel cinematic universe of the same boring celebrities and brands and corporations, and it's all one big hegemony.

It's literally like the Matrix or some shit.

And it's like you watch the Grammys and everyone's there and everyone knows each other and it's all, you know, what is going on, man?

I don't know about that.

I know who Leonardo DiCaprio is.

He was at the Super Bowl.

I know a few.

I know about.

I know about uh Shaq.

Uh Shaq was there.

Chris Brown, I know about him.

But who are these people?

They're all part of like one universe.

They're all part of like one corporate

Thematic Universe

And it's like brought to you by Verizon Wireless bounty, the best kind of absorbent toilet paper.

Sh-sha shar man.

Corporate America is people say this is the epitome of capitalism, but that's seems like if it seems like China has a Communist Party.

Russia has the FSB.

And we have some shit going on.

You know, we got our own shit going on.

I don't know what it is exactly, but.

It's definitely something that has a

um, a high uh it's definitely not a hidden hand controlling the economy.

You know, it's more like a open hand.

You know, it's more like something out in the open directing and controlling.

The economy, the hegemony.

It's really the hegemony, right?

I mean, New Year's Eve brought to you by Ryan Seacrest.

Who that guy from what 2005?

Who the fuck is that?

I remember when people are like Beyonce and Jay-Z are in the Illuminati and I was like, that's stupid as fuck.

And then I look at the Super Bowl and I'm like, and the Grammys and I'm like, you know what?

That shit might be real.

Because it's like, why is this like one big industry?

People say it's all the same industry.

Why is it the same industry?

Because it's controlled by literally the same people.

The same record companies, the same movie producers, the same corporations.

forming a cartel controlling all of it.

The same damn people control it.

It's not an industry.

It's not as though this is like a community that's been created because it's just like a bunch of people randomly selling the same products.

No, this is a monopoly cartel, obviously.

Uh and yeah, there are these like weird occult undertones to it that you just can't ignore.

I mean, I don't know how far it goes, but definitely something strange is behind it, you know.

And brought to you by Verizon Wireless, brought to you by Chevy Ford.

There's something about that we we need to investigate this kind of new by the way, this isn't even like my deep lecture, this is just me bouncing thoughts off of you.

But we need to do we need to like come up with like some kind of new art movement.

No, we shouldn't.

This is unworthy of art.

But I would love for the first time someone to mock or at least represent.

this like strange two thousand eight to two thousand ten, or I don't know, two thousand five to two thousand ten, I don't know exactly how far it goes.

This weird time warp, corporate America time warp, where it's like

Some strange, strange

Hegemony

The music industry, Hollywood, the Super Bowl sports.

Um

Just like give us make a movie that's not mocking it in the sense of a comedy, but just like representing it in some kind of way, you know?

I wish we had something like that.

You know, I wish I feel like I'm the only person who watches the Super Bowl and thinks like, this is not 2024.

This is like.

This is a a uh a version of society that's trying this sorry, this is a simulation that's trying to convince us that we have never moved past

The late two thousands ever.

Even though we have.

I mean, we're in the era of AI.

There's a new thing with open AI, by the way, where you can literally type in a prompt and it'll give you a video now.

I'm using that.

And actually, one of the things that makes us certain we're the avant-garde, one of the avant-garde political movements of our era, is we're the only people who make extensive use of AI for our agit prop.

Nobody else does that.

The right wing doesn't do it.

The so-called

Leaders of the counterculture, alt-right, the alt-right is dead.

They fucked up in twenty sixteen.

Even on their own terms, they're dead, they're gone.

They don't have an edge.

They don't have the edge they think they have.

They just have idiots like Stu Peters spouting nonsense.

The alt-right thinks

It's the cutting edge because they have free speech on Twitter now.

That doesn't make you the cutting edge.

The cutting edge means you're at the cutting edge of history.

That's us now.

Okay, it's not you, it's us.

We've overtaken.

Them in the capacity of being the cutting edge.

I'll admit, in the 2016, you know, as far as.

Things that people, yeah, I'm not saying the alt-right was good, but I'm saying that was in a way ahead of leftists, it was ahead of the left.

And what do I mean by ahead of the left?

I mean in terms of their ability to tap into mass culture and, you know, the ho so-called meme magic and the ability to capture the zeitgeist of the era with the rise of social media and fake news and whatever, whatever, right?

That era is dead.

We're in a qualitatively new era of AI, which they're not able to adapt to or adjust to.

Milo Yiannopoulos.

Remember when Milo Yannopoulos was like a a thing?

Yeah, this I'm sorry, we're not living in an era where that's like a thing, all right?

Twenty twenty four is not twenty sixteen or twenty seventeen for that matter.

They're coping.

I'm telling you the truth.

The alt-right is dead and they're just coping about it.

They're not a thing.

They're trying to tell you they're still a thing.

We still got it.

Where's the whole meme?

We're so back.

We're so back.

Nobody who's back has to say, we're so back.

Okay?

You're coping.

You're not back.

You'll never be back.

The fact that you've idealized 2016 and 2017 as your golden age proves you're never going to return to it.

Because the whole ideology of the right wing is propping up golden ages so pure and so remote from reality, it'll never be attained.

Just like a utopia, right?

We need to go back to ancient Gay Rees, where everyone ran around naked in the forest.

And it was only men doing it.

And they were all muscular bodybuilders.

I'm sorry, like that's what they're doing for 2016 now.

Just like how they romanticize ancient Greece, they're romanticizing 2016.

You're fucking gone, you're out, it's dead.

We're the future now, bitch.

They're literally romanticizing 2016.

They think they're the cutting edge.

You're not the cutting edge.

We are.

We are.

You wake up to it or don't.

We don't give a shit.

We're gonna overtake you anyway.

Anyway, I'm not gonna waste breath rubbing in their faces.

I'm just sick of hearing about it.

I'm just sick of hearing about it.

I'm sick of hearing about the alt-right as we're so back.

We're this way.

You're not shit.

You're fucking dead in the water.

Every single one of them.

You've lost your whole shit.

You're trying to get it back.

You're never going to get it back.

Why?

Because you didn't know what you were doing.

2016 was a vacuum, and these neo-Nazis from the 2000s, the elders of the neo-Nazi movement,

From Stormfront or wherever the fuck they came from, they crammed in there to get into that vacuum.

But they didn't know what they were doing in the sense of like they didn't understand.

It was a pure coincidence.

It was a pure accident.

They got it.

And then you had the Peter Thiel people where it was being funded.

But then look what happened.

Trump filled his cabinet with neocons and traditional cuckservatives and

What happened to the the based based alt-right?

They Charlottesville happened.

And that then they lost all their relevance.

It's dead.

No.

It's totally dead.

And why is it dead, by the way?

Because it was never a thing to begin with.

It was a coincidental false consciousness of that era.

We should have been there in 2016.

Had if infrared was around in 2016, there wouldn't have been an alt-right.

There would have been no alt-right.

We would have been able to surpass in terms of clarity.

An ability to articulate this new niche, this new vacuum in terms of popular consciousness or digital online consciousness, because the mainstream hegemony broke down in terms of the ability for people to make sense of reality was breaking down, right?

Trump got elected.

Nobody saw that coming.

Just like I told you about the Super Bowl earlier, right?

The Super Bowl.

Everything's, it's all part of the plan.

It's all part of the plan.

Rihanna's here.

Jay-Z's here.

All the fucking celebrities are here.

Hillary Clinton.

Obama.

Trump wasn't part of the plan in this like matrix simulation.

So people found themselves at a loss for being able to make sense of reality.

By the way, Trump won accidentally.

It was like a miracle, right?

So the alt-right came in and tricked a lot of people into thinking, oh, the the the the I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm gonna allow you to understand this new territory.

You see, the reason you're not m able to make sense of reality anymore is because it's all Jews.

And actually Hitler was right and they're covering it up.

Oh my god.

Yeah, but that failed.

That and why did it fail?

Because it's fucking stupid is why.

What do wh why am I saying it's fucking stupid?

Because compare it to Marxism.

And I don't mean dogmatic Marxism.

I mean

Compare it to a minimum.

Compared to the bare minimum of any kind of like scientific appraisal of the new

Era as a contradiction between the forces of production and the relations of production.

Square one.

You know,

Like yeah, what's going on is that

There are new technologies, for example.

There are new relations of production corresponding to the technologies, to the productive forces, which the superstructure can no longer account for.

So square one is how do we account for it?

How do we understand it and appraise it?

That's what Marxists do.

That's why Marxists last more than a year.

The truth is the alt-right were our era's equivalent of anarchists, right?

Capitalism in the nineteenth century always produced anarchists, always produced people who unreflexively and spontaneously wanted to rebel against the system.

And then after one year, they were just they disappeared forever.

I want you guys to appreciate something.

Marx and Engels.

Let's say they started out in the early eighteen forties.

And then Engels dies when?

In the 1890s, right?

Let me actually fact check that.

Yeah, he died in ninety five.

'Kay.

Do you know how incredible it is that their specific outlook, their specific theory, their specific position survived fifty years through the revolutions of eighteen forty eight, through the Paris Commune, through the Franco Prussian War,

Through all of the developments that happened through the through the Great, the Long Depression, whatever it was called.

Through Henry George and Georgism, Marxism is the only thing that was robust and survived.

Did you know that?

You know, when people say Marxism is dead, you have to laugh.

Because Marx and Engels alone.

They had infinitely many anarchistic and socialist contemporaries who had their own.

There was a million Hitler particles surrounding them.

Like there was Bakunin and there was Prothaun, there were all these proto-fascist, Hitlerite, alt-right people, you could call them that, who had their own wacky view of the world, their own unique perspective about, you know, how to rebel against the system, every possible.

Ideology and outlook you can think of.

The utopian socialist, all of it was there.

And the only ones who survived.

The only outlook that survived was Marxism.

And there's a reason for that.

Marxism is robust because it is true, because it's actually true.

Because it's actually the truth.

It's actually correct.

I mean, really appreciate.

The Paris Commune was led by a guy named Blanqu Blanqui or whatever.

The Blanquists.

Nobody remembers who the fuck that guy is.

He fell off.

Marxism never fell off.

Even to this day, it didn't fall off.

And there's a reason for that, alright?

So you have to put the alt-right in that context.

These were idiot, stupid people who didn't know what the fuck they were doing.

They didn't know what forces they were wrangling with.

Okay.

They were so excited and confident.

Oh, we're so we're we got this.

We g we're the true counterculture.

You don't know what the fuck you're doing.

You're just the most bare bones, spontaneous, false consciousness.

The stream broke.

Fives in the chat if we're back.

Okay, cool.

Anyway.

You know, kick, I don't know what's going on with it, all right?

Anyway.

Why isn't Marxism able to gain currency or communism?

What's the fundamental contradiction we're immediately faced with?

And what's my perspective on this?

Why has infrared come out of nowhere the way it did?

I mean, what what context is that coming from?

Well this is what I want to talk about today.

I want to talk about ancient infrared theory.

By ancient I mean mm twenty seventeen, let's say to twenty nineteen.

What fundamental theoretical questions were we wrestling with?

that we believed no one else had overcome or sufficiently clarified.

And more or less, you can boil it down to the question of the issue of consciousness and proletarian consciousness.

How does proletarian consciousness take root among the masses?

And moreover, what are the masses?

What does that even mean?

Right?

So, the basic thing you're faced with as a Marxist from square one is the fact there are masses of people.

Who hold views contrary to what your theory claims they are disposed to on account of the material relations of production they're embedded within.

Many leftists responded to this question in their own ways.

They responded to it, for example, by saying that because American workers were not disposed

To communist ideas, it's because they're settlers, it's because they're white, it's because they benefit too much from imperialism.

It's because they're straight men.

It's because they're cisgendered.

It's because they're ably-bodied.

There is a occult origin of the kind of vulgar liberal.

Wokeness, I don't know what else to call it.

Which, you know, you you there is there is an extent in which

Um

That has some basis in Western Marxism.

And I'll I'll specifically specify that.

I'm not saying most of it's from Marxism, I'm saying there is a specific lineage coming out of the New Left.

Confronted with the question of why the Western working classes were not disposed to socialist ideas or communism,

Which first explained it in terms of privilege.

And the privilege was trying to take from Lenin's theory of the labor aristocracy and apply that to the masses, which is something very unprecedented, right?

Lenin's labor aristocracy was a theory of the compromised nature of working class institutions from the top down.

Lenin was not saying that at the root there's something wrong with the working class in the West.

He's trying to explain why the representatives of the working class sold out.

And why there's this upper strata of the working class that's holding and propping them up, that's being bribed by imperialist superprofits, right?

Anyway, uh with the new left, you had something kind of different.

you had people trying to explain why at the root level there's something fundamentally wrong with the Western working classes.

From France to America, everyone's trying to figure this question out.

And the way they did that was

Uh beginning from some kind of

uh theory of their privilege, right?

Which is this kind of vulgarization of Lenin.

So first they said they're bribed by imperialism.

But this was not

adequate to them.

This eventually proved to be inadequate to them.

Why did it prove to be inadequate?

Because they realized

that with the process of deindustrialization going on, based on an objective analysis, people's standard of living, with especially with the arrival of neoliberalism, was more or less starting to decline.

So they're no longer benefiting from imperialism, observably, which there's an irony to this in a way.

I'll explain the irony is that, you know, like the standard of living enjoyed by American workers after the post-war period was actually down to the strength of US manufacturing, meaning the US was exporting, what, 50% of the world's products?

For global trade.

So that was why they were wealthy.

It wasn't because they were taking things from other countries necessarily.

I know there is still an extraction of raw materials from colonies and whatnot.

But the US originally in the 50s, I'm not saying this to defend the US, I'm just giving you an objective analysis, was against, in some capacity, the vestiges of European colonialism and tried to encourage Europe to desist from the old colonial model, to transition into neocolonialism, right?

But anyway, I digress.

Eventually, they had to find all these kinds of different ways to explain why it was not in the material interest of these workers to come around to proletarian consciousness.

And they increasingly kept finding.

New things that made them privileged to the point of absurdity.

So, one of the first ones was race, right?

They said, Okay, it's because you're white.

You're clearly better off than black people.

So, because of your whiteness, you're not disposed to revolution.

Because you're white, what do you have to lose, right?

You have less to lose.

So, that was their quasi-materialist explanation.

For why their consciousness was not gaining currency among the masses.

They began by saying you're white.

It's because you're white, because you have that privilege, right?

Then that was no longer sufficient.

The white thing was no longer sufficient.

So it became you're a man.

I mean, maybe the man thing was the first one.

You're a man.

You're not a woman.

As a man, you benefit from the system.

This is kind of like Gloria Stein.

As a man, you may not benefit from the system completely, but you benefit more than women do, right?

But then that didn't, that was not sufficient.

Because even women are privileged compared to who?

To homosexuals and.

you know, sexual minorities.

Well,

That's why these women aren't coming around to it because they're not gay.

But even the gays are privileged, right?

Because at least they're not transgender.

Transgenders have it really bad.

So they're cisgender, right?

But even that even they have it bad, right?

So because you're still not disabled, you still have legs and arms.

So on and on it goes.

Uh

the most wretched, miserable possible person who

has absolutely no stake whatsoever in the system at all.

And that is the c that is the vague relationship between Western Marxism and the leftist madness of uh the present present day, right?

But anyway, we didn't buy any of that.

We said there's clearly something wrong with this model and with this theory.

And why?

Because it can be infinitely applied because it's an infinite regress for one, obviously.

This and also we understood the class interests i these theories corresponded to is this kind of new corporate sanitized

grad students and professionals, you're not fucking underprivileged poor people.

You're a bunch of gentrifiery yuppies who for some reason are predisposed to this outlook.

We saw it as inherently corrupt even just on that basis.

Just look at the fucking people espousing it, right?

The oppression Olympics.

Anyway, I'm not here to beat a dead horse and talk about wokeism and stuff.

I'm just here to give you some background on where we were.

Because we were leftists back in the day.

We were still, we weren't anti feminist or anti-LGBT, none of that sort.

We just didn't buy their specific way of explaining why American workers weren't receptive to their ideas.

We say maybe there's something wrong with your ideas, right?

Anyway, we had to formulate a basic distinction, operative distinction, which we're not the origin of.

I mean, this is all in Marxism from the beginning.

I'm just saying we had to rediscover these things, right?

And it's between the organ of consciousness, let's call it reflexivity, and the unreflexive dispositions of the masses.

And the basic theory.

uh is that there will always be some content to reflexivity.

Some kind of forces will be monopolizing the consciousness.

So, to basically address the question: well, why aren't working class movements led by people, individuals from working-class backgrounds?

Well, because.

In order to develop proletarian consciousness, you need free time that being a proletarian probably can't afford you.

This is why Lenin said, although there can be proletarian intellectuals, they do so not as proletarians, but as theoreticians.

And they're few and far between.

There are not a lot of them.

That's what he was writing.

And

The question was, what is the relationship?

between the faculty of criticism, critical thought, theory, philosophy,

The intellect, right?

What is the relationship between that and the revolutionary aspirations of the masses?

Sorry, not the revolutionary aspirations of the masses, but just the practical reality of the masses in general.

What's the relationship between the ivory tower?

And the masses below it.

What's the real relationship?

So we basically developed

The following view

The key to achieving proletarian consciousness was a type of accelerationism.

And we were keeping up with the Landian accelerationism and the revival of it and the new trends there.

We weren't very impressed by it.

I've talked about it in the stream before.

But to cut a long story short, we thought there was something salvageable in the logic of acceleration, except as the acceleration of technology or the economy necessarily with regard to our critical reflexive faculties, but rather the relationship between.

The sentiments, moods, orientations, and political, um

dispositions of the masses versus our reflexive critical faculties.

Because you have to understand, after twenty sixteen, I think accelerationism, uh the Landian kind, received a revival for the wrong reasons.

Landian accelerationism was kind of about the disorienting nature of technology and.

uh you know uh globalism and things like that and it was very prescient for the 1990s but why did that resonate with people so much in 2016?

I think it was for accidental reasons, right?

Trump didn't represent a huge feat of technological change.

Okay.

Trump didn't really incarnate any kind of shift in society that's like purely objective in terms of like, you know, a huge virus or some kind of like rise of machines.

And I understand there's the rise of social media and there's that kind of context.

But Trump really represented

Um

Our expectations being completely um

Completely falsified, right?

He represented.

the acceleration of this kind of

mood in the country.

Th this kind of uh consciousness, vulgar plebeian consciousness, which surpassed our ability to give reflexive, critical, um

content to it, right?

And I think that's what Trump represented.

I I'll give you an example of this, right?

The real accelerationist content of Trump in twenty sixteen, it wasn't

It wasn't like, oh, this AI hyper techno capital from the future is outpacing our ability to rationalize it and integrate it within a sense of human meaning.

It's surpassing the human security system.

It's kind of the contrary.

Trump's vulgar plebeian populism.

Was accelerating past the ability for the intellectual class to make sense of it and to kind of attribute content to it.

And actually, that's why we had RussiaGate.

The reason Rachel Maddow and Democrats and Stephen King had this psychotic meltdown where they started attributing Trump and his movement to Russia is because there was this kind of.

Total acceleration of

The discourse, if you want to call it that, in terms of what people were talking about, what kind of slogans were gaining currency, the new outlooks and forms of consciousness that were taking shape, and like they couldn't make sense of that.

Rachel Maddow couldn't explain the rise of QAnon and like the rise of like, you know, all these wacky new theories and all these new like trends and

You know, build the wall, make America great again.

The vote and all these, you know, Trump, what was really accelerationist about Trump.

Was when he called, you know, um

When you would like to call people names.

Like, how do you even respond to that?

It's accelerating past your ability to respond, okay?

So, how do you make sense of that?

You have to attribute it to something like Russia.

I mean, oh my God, Russia is interfering in our elections, and that's why Russagate was.

Was uh

was so persuasive among liberals, right?

Because it's almost like liberals were Marxists.

I'm not saying they were Marxists, but there's an analogy here.

It's almost like liberals were Marxists, and here they are trying to like

feel like the masses reflect your consciousness.

Like, okay, America is this progressive Obama consciousness, whatever.

And then suddenly the masses defy your expectations so radically

In terms of Trump

And you just can't keep up.

You can't keep up.

You can't keep up.

You can't make sense of it.

You can't attribute it within your own intellectual framework, within the framework of your own consciousness.

You have no way of explaining its causes.

How could Rachel Maddow explain why Trump was elected in 2016, why the MAGA movement came to be?

How do you make sense of that?

How do you rationalize it?

How do you have time to do it?

It's happening in real time, and you don't have any hold over it.

You have no reflexive.

Let's call it reflexive edge over it, right?

So people need to understand, like, that's a crucial context to why accelerationism started to gain currency again.

But again, it was like completely farcical in a way, because Landian acceleration was precisely what couldn't explain this either.

Landian acceleration was talking about some kind of relationship between the human security system and this kind of.

You know, positive feedback loops, which are monstrously inhuman.

But in the case of 2016, you clearly have a struggle within humanity.

You have something all too human.

It's almost like MAGA.

They're too human.

They're too ape-like and monkey-like.

They're too vulgar and stupid.

And all of the smart intellectuals are so humiliated.

And it's like there's like an ape escape, not from the human security system, but from the Rachel Maddow safe space system.

It's not the human security system that's being defied in 2016.

It's the corporate liberal HR department that's being defied not by some hyper intelligent AI, but by these stupid monkey masses, stupid plebs.

Who are so uneducated, they don't even have college education, and yet they take over the country.

And there's a kind of analogy you can draw, or a comparison even.

With what happened in the Cultural Revolution in China, actually.

Like, that's what Mao did.

Mao got all the country bumpkins so confident with the quotations of Chairman Mao, talking down to engineers and, like, Soviet educated intellectuals and physicists and, like, trained glasses wearers.

And it's kind of like that's what was going on in 2016, in a way, right?

Anyway, why am I talking about this?

Because we were observing this reality and trying to make sense of it ourselves.

And.

Um

We weren't pro-Trump at this time at all.

As a matter of fact, we thought Trump was providing crucial ingredients to the growth of a fascist movement.

We

thought there was a fascist spectre looming on the horizon.

And we thought, how do we defeat it?

Well, we have to understand it first.

We have to understand what's going on, right?

Anyway.

So we were confronted with the basic contradiction between like the unreflexive movement of the masses, let's call it MAGA, right, or whatever you want to call it, versus the faculty of reflexivity.

The prevailing consciousness

Guiding the masses.

That's the contradiction that struck us as the most important.

And for us, there was an accelerationist dynamic.

Um

And the form of acceleration wasn't capital as Nick Land envisioned it.

It was more kind of like there's this relationship between unleashing the revolutionary potential of the masses and accelerating the faculty of the intellect and criticism.

It's almost like if you bring enlightenment to its conclusion.

Mm-hmm.

culminating not simply in Hegel but in extremely reflexive position, like Deleuze and Lacan and these French incomprehensible ivory tower theorists,

You go so far in the direction of isolating yourself from the masses and purely focusing on the intellect, the faculty of reflexivity and criticism, right?

That will liberate.

extremely explosive revolutionary potentials and energies among the masses.

How?

Because the idea was that basically the consciousness of the masses was being held

in these kinds of corrupt

Fortresses of reflexivity.

Um

What is the fortress of reflexivity?

It's basically an idea that becomes so crystallized, a prejudice that becomes so crystallized and becomes reinforced by reality itself

Uh because people make a living off of propagating it, right?

people who are paid for a living to control

Our consciousness to define our consciousness.

Universities, for example, right?

We very clearly understood there's a dynamic here of the town and the country, the mental and physical, right?

The urban versus the rural.

That's how we initially appreciated its significance.

We had no background in Maoism originally.

We didn't.

We didn't w it's not like we had experience in Maoist organizations.

We didn't.

We were confronted with the significance of Maoism and Cambodia.

Because of how we understood the meaning of the urban rural distinction.

Urbanism crystallizes this is our primitive view, it's not correct.

Urbanism in our view, a specific form of urbanism, of urbanity, crystallized a specific threshold of ideology

A specific prejudice with regard to the world, right?

This stupidity.

um becomes adopted by the masses as the limited extent of their consciousness.

If we could somehow subvert and undermine the institutions of the intellect by doing an independent kind of um

ruthless criticism of all that exists, we could actually liberate the masses from the limited form of their reflexivity.

And the masses refers to what?

All the masses refers to is an undefined.

extent of uh subjectivity and humanity.

That's what masses means, right?

This is why I think white nationalism and the right wing nationalism and right wing populism for that matter as an ideology at least is really fucking stupid.

Because think about this notion of like, okay, we are white identity nationalists.

Then why are you a fucking nationalist?

What is tangible?

In your view about a nation, because you're saying, well, I don't believe in, you know.

Just communist stuff.

I I think that white people should just stick together 'cause white people are tangible.

It's not tangible, okay?

You wanna go to the fucking conclusion of right-wing thinking, go to Ayn Rand or some shit.

Only the individual is tangible by that logic, right?

It's so stupid, they're like

Yeah, I I'm a white nationalist.

But but uh a nationalism

A populism predicated on a strict delimitation of identity is incompatible with mass politics.

Mass politics is about a lack of definitiveness of identity, right?

You call them the masses.

You don't call them Joe, Bob, Larry, and Michael, and John, and Eugene.

You say the masses, because it's an undefined extent.

of people.

It's an undefined content.

The content is undefined.

You don't, you're not preempting it with an identity, right?

And institutions, most of all, preempt the masses with the form of an identity.

If you undermine the institutions, this was our view, you subvert and bypass these institutions,

Then you can free the masses from the limited form of their identity and truly allow them to be masses, pure masses.

This is where there's most of all probably the Landian influence.

It was not we whoa we were we we liked his capitalist economic no, we didn't care about that.

For us the true accelerationism was unleashing the pure.

Pure form of the masses, the pure masses, masses untainted and unblemished by a specific identity, masses as such, the pure mo you know, masses as masses, undermining and overthrowing every fixed identity, right?

So we were still leftists basically, but it was some pretty hardcore shit.

Anyway, this view is completely wrong.

But I'm just telling you, like, we were from the get-go, beginning from a very unique perspective.

Reflexive institutions in the form of, let's say, the professional managerial class, people who are paid for a living.

And this is why we considered it corrupt, by the way.

We considered all classes defined by mental labor as inhibiting the revolutionary energies

Fives

Where did I leave off?

Where did I leave off?

The real masses.

Holy shit Holy fuck Five minutes is gone

Yeah, we were beginning from a very unique perspective.

Yeah, I'm not gonna repeat myself.

Fuck that.

Fuck that.

Honestly, fuck that.

I'll just conclude it.

We were completely wrong, but I'll explain why, alright?

It was a completely wrong position, but it was still a unique perspective.

Um why it was we discovered it was wrong was because

the institutions pre empting, let's say, the form of the masses,

Um we're not the only things giving form to the masses.

There was an objective form of the masses.

That's not preempted by institutions, giving them so this was how we eventually came to the dialectical outlook and perspective.

It's not just a pure content or a pure form, it's a dialectical relationship between the two that's actually materially objective.

So

For us, we had to reckon with the fact that institutions are not preempting the national character of the masses.

Institutions are not preempting, for example, the specific culture of the masses.

On the contrary, institutions are the ones that want to be.

Universal pure content of some kind, pure negation.

It's the masses that are clinging to particulars.

Not particulars in the form of identities, mind you.

This is why white nationalism in the right wing is fucking retarded.

But a particular character, a particular culture, a particular way of life, a particular national character.

Leftists would have you believe that all of these things are just crystallizations of ideas and prejudices.

But we could see from investigating it, again, without any prejudiced commitments, that this was not true.

There is something about the qualitative, particular nature of the masses that was integrated with them at the level of their material way of life, their material relations, reproduced from the bottom up, not preempted by institutions crystallizing their prejudices, but reproduced by material reality itself.

So, this notion of uninhibited masses is somewhat.

One-sided.

Um

We extended this analysis.

far beyond realizing even the state has a material basis.

The state is not just what w what it was described as in Engels' origin of the family.

That's the Athenian state.

That's the Western state.

There's a objective unity of the people, an objective form of sovereignty, an objective power.

integrated materially, in a way continuous with the m the the the real material life of the people, rather than something contrived by ideas enforced by institutions.

And we considered corrupt.

Any class that was defined by mental labor.

Why?

We wanted to accelerate the faculty of criticism and the faculty of the intellect to its uninhibited conclusion, the ruthless criticism of all that exists, as Mark said.

We wanted to do this.

We realized the corruption of the intellectual class.

When your way of life is defined by being paid to be a grad student or being paid to enforce a certain perspective or a certain narrative,

You are not sufficiently open to the possibility of criticism.

A ruthless criticism and a holistic view of reality.

You have a now you have muddied the faculty of the intellect with the filth of some kind of private interest.

Meaning you're not saying this is true because it's true, you're saying that because it's you're getting paid to fucking say that, for example.

You get the idea?

So all of these communities and cultures created by intellectuals

Um, let's call them intellectuals, or let's call them ideal mental laborers.

We wanted to blow that all up.

We despised it and hated it, the university, the academia.

and we believed that proletarian consciousness could only be formulated independently, outside of the institutions.

But in the process we

We um did not appreciate that those institutions were not the only things giving form to the masses.

There's also a

Um

Prereflexive content.

of the masses.

In other words, let's call it an unconscious, right?

An unconscious.

has content, particular content in it, right?

It's not like a pure form or a pure n a pure smooth space.

As maybe Deleuze would put it.

It's not like a pure uninhibited.

plane of imminence.

There are specific symptoms in the unconscious.

And this is also holds true for the masses.

There's a specific character and historical character and quality of the masses.

And we learned this was basically fast forward a lot.

We discovered

Marxists already knew this.

They this is exactly what Stalin was talking about when he's talking about the national traditions of the people, the need to preserve those, the need to preserve the integrity of history itself.

Boris Groys wrote about it in the total art of Stalinism, but the all of Marxism-Leninism, like this, suddenly made sense to us.

And when I say suddenly, I mean over the course of like a year or two, right?

But like we started to really get it, we started to really understand what it was really about, right?

Just by focusing on that distinction.

Um

And like, why we were receptive to this idea of a professional managerial class wasn't because we cared.

I never read Barbara Eheronreich or whoever the fuck she was in my life.

I just knew there was a specific class of mental laborers who were being paid to reinforce dogmas and ideas.

Um

And how their institutional culture was shaping their outlook and limiting its ability to actually account properly for reality.

While dismissing arrogantly and snobbishly everyone who comes outside of the confines of the institution.

For example, if you don't use their language and talk like they do, you're an idiot.

Haas is an idiot because he doesn't talk like these university professors.

He doesn't, you know, use the exact formalities to bluff about how accredited he is.

Therefore, everything he's saying is meaningless.

Look at President Sunday and how he treated me in our debate.

It's a perfect example of this arrogance, this veneer of uh

of the intellect

Which is actually a mockery of the the faculty of the intellect, right?

So I what I want you guys to take away from this

is to think about

The following the following, right?

Marxism has always been burdened with the question of the relationship between consciousness and the masses.

Between people who are educated and people who are uneducated.

Marxism requires education, something working class people at the outset do not have.

That's a problem.

They're not just going to spontaneously become communists.

So Hall of Marxist history is about

Thinking about this difference, trying to overcome it.

I mean, real Marxism did overcome it.

That's Leninism, Mao and so on, but we in the West didn't because we haven't thought it through properly enough, I suppose.

the translation error I talked about, and how Marxism-Leninism was never translated into the West.

But when you think about it, what I call let's call it um

Let's just call it

The urban apparatus

Which filters the unreflexive moods, ways of life, outlooks, whatever, translates the unconscious into some kind of conscious interpretation and content, right?

That's what that's what the glasses wearers do, that's what universities do, that's what.

But even in ancient history, that's what the first urban forms of urbanism were doing with the first temples and priests.

It's like,

They are interpreting through mental labor reality.

And it's like there's this discontinuity between the reality of the masses.

and the thought which gives content to them, or the content

of them accessible by thought.

That can be accessed by thought.

There's an unconscious and there's a conscious realm, right?

You guys don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.

I should have actually.

Scripted this lecture.

It's all right.

You guys are fucking getting distracted talking about nonsense.

It's pathetic.

It's alright.

All I wanted to say is um

With the rise of information, the information age and cybernetics.

This function of urbanism has become decentralized.

information to put it in

Plain speech has become universally accessible to anyone, even a factory worker or a truck driver or a construction worker.

The need for intellectual gatekeepers who wear glasses.

Mm-hmm.

is gone.

Even on the you know, there there's a moral uh dilemma to this question too.

The masses are bad, the masses can be racist, the masses can be anti-Semitic.

How do you properly educate them into enlightenment?

And it's like

This is the wrong

The whole paradigm of enlightenment is completely warped and idealist.

But the rise of communication uh in um technologies like the internet.

and information technologies like the internet.

has allowed it so that

Somehow, um

the consciousness of society.

It's almost like when Elon Musk tries to say some shit like Twitter is like this hive mind universal consciousness of the whole world.

And it's not stupid and naive what he's saying, but the the kernel of truth in there is it's like there is this now decentralized ability

For people to make sense of reality in ways which are not just unreflexive bursts of passion and instinct, as in the past with mobs of peasants going on pogroms in the Middle Ages, you know, like killing a bunch of Jews or whatever, but is like the ability for our reality to be mediated by information.

It's what media means, by the way, right?

Social media.

has become decentralized.

The need for the sharp division between mental and physical labor in terms of the the movement, in terms of creating a communist or socialist movement, that has become overcome to a huge extent.

And um

I think people should appreciate that his you know

Hist historically speaking, um

The gatekeepers of information.

Are no longer able to gatekeep, right?

Paul Pott's vision has been achieved in a way.

The glasses wearers.

Have been overthrown, but they haven't been overthrown by a peasant with a pickaxe, uh bashing them over the head.

They've been overthrown by the computer.

By the smartphone, by social media.

That's what has overthrown them and their privileged role.

And I mean, like, one of the reasons, I mean, we're here.

I mean, I've created, in a limited sense, a mass.

It's not a mass movement in the proper sense, but it's like a mass phenomenon on the internet.

I've created one, I've participated in creating one, so have you.

We really did realize

A very obscure theorizing we were doing that had people would, when people would hear us or they would talk to us, what the hell are you on?

It's you're on some crazy, it's so far removed from reality.

What are you even talking about?

And it's like, well, look at infrared.

We actually did it.

We've put our theory into practice.

The first step, the first step.

The first step is not like creating in the real world a mass movement for us.

The first step for us was just proving we could make this a mass phenomena.

And we fucking did make it a mass phenomenon.

I mean, holy shit, nobody else was able to do this.

We put our theory into practice, high level information theory, high level communications theory.

We put it into practice, and here is this actual mass phenomena.

What is a mass phenomena?

It means

I don't know how many people are in infrared.

It's not a membership thing.

It's like.

It's a mass phenomenon, and not just in terms of there's a lot of people, but in terms of the barrier to entry isn't that large.

People can start fucking with infrared just by repping our shit and talking like us and joining with us.

And there's a fluidity there at the outer edges of our movement where some people will flip-flop back and forth with other shit.

But it's like we're in that's why it's undefined.

Every mass movement is undefined.

You know, every mass movement, a mass move, the difference between a mass movement

And let's say an institution is that an institution has defined parameters.

To be part of this institution, you have to meet certain credentials, right?

But a mass movement has an undefined extent of barrier to entry.

It's a mass movement.

We don't know all the fucking people.

Who are associating with this phenomenon?

It's bringing all these people together in ways that we can't control.

That's what a mass movement means, right?

You guys aren't an experiment, by the way, but it's like

Um infrared was an experiment and it was an experiment that turned into something even we couldn't foresee, right?

I'm not saying we foresaw foresaw all of this and you're all part of our art project.

I'm just saying our theory was turned out to be fucking true, you know?

About how this shit works.

If you guys remember in the OG infrared days,

We had the law of the gatekeepers, right?

There's a reason why I was able to understand how that shit worked.

Um

And I'm telling you this because in preparation for our upcoming organization, you're gonna feel that theory applied again, learning from infrared itself.

You know?

You're gonna see how it's not like an organization you've ever been in ever.

The extent to which it's decentralized is crazy.

People are people are asking the mods, Hey, Tal Haas, Rainer Shaw.

Is starting a Draco thing to do Takia and infiltrate the infrared org.

And I'm like, I don't think you understand what this org is supposed to be about.

It's decentralized.

He can do that and he can try and see what's going to happen and how many people will be persuaded by that.

I doubt it's going to work.

But whatever.

If he wants to overthrow infrared or s I mean, you ha I'm debate me, you know.

Anyone who wants to do that, you I'm out here in the open, you know, there's no need for um wor worrying about that.

I don't even know what Draco is.

I don't know what it is.

I don't care.

It's like, that's not what this is.

I'm not creating the KKE, I'm not creating the Caleb Maupin CPI.

Where I'm going to be ordering you guys around directly.

It's not going to be like that.

Um

I'm really excited about how

the relationship between ideas and practice, and between education and lack of education,

Is going to be explored in ways that haven't been explored before.

You know, um it's not gonna be Haas Aldeen.

You know, being your dad.

I'm not going to be your dad.

Okay?

This thing, this org we're launching, it's not going to be me as your dad.

You're gonna have to fucking do it for yourself.

You know?

You have to figure it out by yourself.

I'm going to give you advice.

I'll help I'll help you with advice.

You can ask me for help in terms of, you know, what do you think or what's your view on this?

Sure.

But I mean, we're going to have guidelines too.

It's not going to be a free for all, but I'm saying like

You know, um

You're going to be experimenting with reaching the masses.

And I'm not going to be an institution that's going to preempt your ability the extent of your ability to do that.

You're going to be experimenting with with it, but it but but

Let's make no mistake because some people make this false equivalence.

There's always going to be a difference.

Between the organization and the masses.

They're never going to be one and the same thing.

Never.

Thank you, Anonymous.

Appreciate you.

Take it from an old man.

It's just the old Marxist-Leninist tendency reborn.

You guys remind me of the guys in their 80s back in the 1980s that taught me.

Thank you so much, man.

I appreciate that a lot.

And I believe you.

I mean, when we called ourselves Marxist-Leninists off the bat, many, many years had passed for us to be truly convinced of that.

We didn't just say it for no reason.

We really did embrace Marxism-Leninism as the truth.

But the difference between us and other self-proclaimed MLs.

Is that we didn't want to adopt an ML aesthetic because of the aesthetic.

We actually did independently discover the truth of Marxism-Leninism without being in any way predisposed to it in terms of, you know, I want to be friends with this person, I want to be in this org, I want to like have this degree of popularity.

It wasn't a social gesture to other leftists that we're making.

It was actually like, holy fuck, this is what Stalin was talking about.

And he was actually right.

He was actually completely spot on.

There was a wisdom here that no one in the West has ever been able to translate.

And we finally did it.

And it's like, that's where it came from.

Uh this lecture was extremely im I you know, in my head it was gonna come out a lot better than it did.

Um

But I think a big reason is like

By the time I started the lecture I kind of

I was already a little tired.

Um

What gives form to the masses, to the people?

Is the national form

An idea.

Is that just an idea?

That has been crystallized and reinforced by a material reality?

Or does it reflect?

A materially objective material form of reality?

Is there something materially at stake in it?

And in our view, the latter is the case.

There is a dialectic of content and form, and that dialectic is material.

To us, that's the main contribution of Marxism-Leninism, by the way.

Because the Western Marxist view is that form is just the realm of ideas.

There's a pure content, there's pure material content.

Um, and then there's forms which are actually just ideas.

This is basically Spinozism, right?

Spinoza's substance is the supreme content of all reality.

He calls it the substance.

All ideas are just attributes of the substance.

In other words, all forms are just configurations of the same content and substance.

But the Marxist-Leninist view rejects that.

It says actually form is at stake.

Not only is form is at stake in content, material content is at stake in form.

And also,

This is kinda what my book is about.

Form is not just the idea and it's not just it's not derivative of the logos.

Form even isn't maybe an inadequate term.

Lacan explores how preceding the definit definitiveness of identities.

and the consistency of forms, you have symptoms.

Symptoms.

Within the realm of cybernetics, another way symptoms are explored is

What is his name?

Wiener?

Norman Wiener?

Whatever the fuck his name is.

Norbert Wiener.

I'm an idiot.

What's his name?

Norbert Wiener.

Norbert Weiner, okay?

Norbert, I'll call him Wiener because it's funny.

Wiener and his notion of negative feedback, which is kind of like.

Similar to Lacan's symptom in a way, the negative feedback, right?

And cybernetics gives us this notion of form.

Let's look it up.

This notion of form, which.

departs in many ways from the classical Platonic

Notion of form as a definitiveness of idea or identity, right?

Take this notion of homeostasis, which is what negative feedback loop refers to.

The form in question would be the homeostasis of the body temperature, right?

But this homeostasis is not maintained on the basis of an identity or on the basis of some kind of idea of itself, a form, a fixed form.

It's rather based on this kind of

Contradictory relationship of negative feedback, where when the temperature increases, the cooling process decreases it to return it.

When the body temperature decreases, the heating process activates to return it, right?

This is, and then this leaves us with a homeostasis which is defined purely by the consistency of these processes out of which it arises as something consistent from something contrary to it.

This is kind of like very dialectical, right?

The regulated temperature is not maintained by the form of that temperature, it's maintained by a specific processual relationship that acquires a symptomal consistency in the Lacanian sense.

And this is what allows us to kind of understand Marxism-Leninism better in a way, right?

In the terms of the dialectic of content and form.

The nation.

Or the civilization that I always talk about, it's more like this.

a homeostasis produced by negative feedback.

It's not an idea.

It's not a f it's not a um identity.

It's more like this, right?

It's it's a specific thing

Whose determination is based on a specific, specific relationship of opposites, right?

So.

Food for thought.

And of course, yeah, machine learning rests upon this principle.

So we have an interesting convergence of contemporary AI technologies.

With this new advanced outlook of Marxism that I'm talking about, and comes full circle because.

Because AI is primarily how we create agitprop and

We create a theme to our movement, right?

Well, that's form and content coming together.

The content of infrared's vision through the form of AI, which is.

kind of things coming together if you think about it, right?

Anyway, just some food for thought.

Um

I'll see you guys Sunday.

I do want to come back to res I might start streaming easing into streaming more regularly.

Next time I'm streaming is going to be Sunday, but after Sunday, I might stream Tuesday.

So we might have Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday.

And that's how I'm going to gradually balance finishing my book with getting back into a regular streaming schedule.

Anyway guys.

Um

I hope that was at least some food for thought, right?

See you guys.