Victory is ours, Allahu Akbar

All around

Goal

back again

Got nowhere to go

go It's so dark right back again.

Got nowhere to go. I'm The light light the spark Light the spark

Mm-hmm

Set in time

World of flame Mm-hmm in time the world aflame

it called us to war we received its call no mountain can stop us

We're soldiers of faith

We smash through your walls

We'll smash through your gates

Time breaks

Faith persists

Light this morning light spark

light spark

set the entire world

flame entire world flame

he called us to

war we received

its call

oh

oh oh Oh, oh. Oh. Oh. Oh. life the spark like this far

like the spark

um Life is far Set the entire

World to flame

It called us to war

We received its call It called us to war We receive it's gone

Like the spark

Light the spark

Light as far

Set the entire world

of flame

it called us to war

we received this call

stars fade away

light the far

light the star Set the entire world of flame

Stars fade away

Life is far

Like the entire world of the plane

The stars fade away

like the spark set the entire world of flame stars fade away

light the spark light the spark set the entire world of Life is far Light as far

Set the entire

World of flame

The stars fade away

Um

Life is far

Life is far

Except the entire

world of flame

The Salazar Prepare for calling roll glasses down

anchor up

glasses down

anchor up

Salazar

Salazar

Salazar

glass the Celtsar Glass the planets

Of glasses

Where's

Settlesar

Intergalactic years Zero Zero, zero Zero, zero,lesar, intergalactic years,

Zero, zero, hero, hero, hero, hero, hero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero,

Seltz star. prepare I'll

prepare for Prepare for lunch The stars are calling

Glasses down

anchor up

Glasses down and curl

Salus are

Salus are

Salus Salazar Salazar Salazar

Glass

the planets

of glasses

wears

Salazar

Salazar

Intergalactic years

Zero

Seleuio

Salosar

Salosar

Salosar Cello Star Cello Star

Prepare for launch

The stars

Are Calling

Glasses down anchor up

Glasses down anchor up

Salazar

Salazar Glass

planets

Of glass is worse

Salazar

Intercollar

Intercollect

Here's zero

Hero

Bureau Hero Hero Beiro

Yellow

Yellow

Fellow

Star Prepare for launch

The stars are calling

Glasses down, thinker up

Glasses down, thinkerow.

Glasses down, thinkerow.

Salafs are.

Glass, the planets of glasses wears Salazar, Salazar, intergalactic

years, zero, you know, real, view, view, view, view, real, viewpaure for launch

Stars are calling

Glasses down and girl

glasses down and girl glasses

down and girl

salons are

glass and planets

of glasses

of glasses wears

salads sar of glasses wears Celtsar

Centrelactic here

Zero

Summer

So much

Prepare for launch

The stars are calling

Glasses down anchor

Glasses down anchor

Settles are

Settles are

Glass the planets of glasses wears

Celestar, Celestar, Celestar Intergalactic year, zero

Selopsaan

Prepare for long Beer, yeah, yeah, yeah, sell us all.

Prepare for launch, the stars are calling. Glasses down, anchor up, glasses down, anchor up,

Selassar.

Glass, the planets of glasses wears, Celestar Glass planets

Of glasses

Wherece

Celasar

Celasar

Intergalactic

Years

Zero

Zero

Zero

Zero

Zero

Zero

Zero

Zero

Zero

Zero Prepare for long Hello, zero, you know Cellar

Prepare for launch

The star

Lots are calling

Glasses down

Anchor

Glasses down

anchor up

Selopstar

Celal Tsar

Glass

The planets

Of glassless words

Celadzar

Centrogalactic year zero

Celadar

Prepare for lunch

The stars are called

Glasses down, anchor of

Sallot Sackle-Sar

Glass is the planets

Of glasses where earth

Sallots are Sallots are interred of glasses where Earth Salazar

Sallat Salypts are

intergalactic

years

Zero

Sallot

for lunch

The stars are calling

glasses down and girl glasses down and curl

Glasses down and girl

Celtsar

Glass, trans

of glasses

Where is

Selets are

Intergalactic year

Zero

So let's

Prepare for launch

The stars are calling

Glasses down

Anchor

Glasses down anchor

Aanguer

Selah stars Glass the planets Anchor glasses and anchor up Seven stars

Glass the planets

Of glasses wearers

Sevens

Sevensar Sevensar

In the collective

Year's zero

Seven stars They have launched the stars are calling Here's zero So, So,

So,

Prepare for launch,

The stars are calling

Glasses down Anchor

Of glasses

Down,

Anchor

Class the planets of

Glasses Where

Selots are

Sels are

Sals

Sire Select Zero of glasses where Celtsar Celad Sar Cellar And collect Zero

Cellar

Prepare for launch

The stars

of coal

Glass

I'm the finger

of glass

On the

Finger of

glass

Glass The planets of glasses of glasses and girl cellars glass

planets

of glasses

wearers

intergalactic

year zero

several stars

prepare for the stars the stars you call glasses glasses glass is Cellar stars Prepare for more

The stars are called

Glasses down

Pinker

Glasses down

Pinker

Slur

Glass

The planets

of grasses

There is

Sallow Star Sallow star Into of grasses there's subtle

salt

cello

cello

intercollect

here

zero

seto

prepare for launch

the stars

crawling

crawling brown

glass is down

pink

glass

glass down and girl

glass is glass

glass glass to glass

glass glass glass glass down to inker glasses down to incur glass is

sun

slash

glass

the planet

of glasses

wears glass of glasses

where and grassy grass wrens come to the light Come to the light

Oh

Sins and Rassaner

in that right,

Rosanna Oh my God

Oh my God

Ain't that rise

Rosanna

Oh, Susan Rosanna Oh

Sims

Come to the lights

Come to the lights

Joe Sims

and Rosanna

Come to the light come to the light your sims and rosanna ain't that right that right rose and uh oh my god oh my god oh my God Oh my God

Oh my God

Ain't that right

Rosetta

Jocin

Jocin's

Come to the light

Oh

Come to the light

Joseph Rosanna

Come to the light

Come to the light

Joseph and Rosanna

Ain't that right

That right Rosetta

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Ain't that right Rosetta

Joseph

Come to the light

Come to the light

Oh

Come to the light Ah Come to the light

Your sins and Varsana

Come to the light

Come to the light

Your Sims and Varsana

Ain't that right

That right Rosetta

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Ain't that right

Rosanna

Joe

Sims Come to the lights Go and us Joe Sins

Come to the light

Go

Come to the light

Joe Sins and Rassana

Come to the light Come to the light Oh my

Oh my gosh

Oh my God Oh my God ain't that right Rosetta

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Ain't that right

Rosetta

Chosen

Come to the light

Oh Oh Come to the light. Come to the light.

Oh, come to the light.

Joe Stim's and cross on earth.

Come to the light.

Come to the light.

Joe Sims and Rossana. That right, right, right. love your sins and rosanna

ain't that right

rosetta

oh my

god

oh my lord

oh my lord

ain't that right

rosanna

oh

your sins come to the light come to the light right Rosanna Jocin

Come to the light

Come to the light

Hey

Come to the light

Come to the light

So Joseph

and Rossana

Come to the light

Come to the light Come to the light

Josin's and Rosanna

Ain't that right

That right Rosanna

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Oh my God

Ain't that right, Rosanna.

Josephs.

Come to the light.

Come to the light.

Come to the light.

Joseph.

And Rosanna

Come to the light

Come to the light

Your sins and Roshana

Ain't that right

Rosanna

Oh my God

Oh my God Oh my God

Ain't that right

Oh my God

Ain't that right

Roseanna

Your sins

Come to the life

Come to the life

Come to the life for Israel for Israel In for Israel

In Lebanon

Pirela Isabel

We all know

We all know she smell

Purella Isabel

He's buying for Israel

In Lebanon

Your Ella Isabel

We all know she's Mel.

Pirella Isabel, he's fighting for Israel in Lebanon.

Purella Isabel

We all know she's hell

Purella Isabel

He's flying for Israel

In Lebanon

Porella Isabel

We all know she smell

Purella Isabel

He's fighting for Israel

In Lebanon He's spying for Israel in Lebanon.

We all know she's smell.

Furella Isabel, we all know she smell,

Fyrella Isabel, is spying for Israel in Lebanon

Purorella Isabel we all know she smell

Jurela Isabel

He's spying for Israel

In Lebanon

Your Ella is

We are saying you all know she Your hell, Isabel

We are amazing

In your nose

She smell

We are not she smell

We are not

She'll

He's in Israel

In Israel

In Lebanon

Your Ella in Lebanon You're Ella Isabel

We all know she smells

We all know

She'll be crying for

Israel in Lebanon We all know she's smell We're all right in

In Lebanon

Furela is our world

We all know she smells

We are known she smell

Shella is our world Be spying for Israel She's all, we all know, she's Ella Isabel

He's spying for

Israel

In Lebanon

Furella Isabel

We all know

She smell Furella Isabel Isabella isabel we all know she smelled

Furella Isabel

We spine for Israel

In Lebanon but no I know and the I think we're a lot of I'm

a lot of

I'm

a and I'm not going to be. I have a lot of

and I'm not

I'm

I'm not I'm and the other than it is a oh and the

I'm not

I'm

I'm not

I'm not

I'm a

I'm a

word I'm I know

I'm going to

I'm

I'm and uh...

I

uh...

I

know and the uh...

uh...

I'm

uh...

I'm

a

I'm I. I'm a man. And I'm a

and I'm a

I'm

I'm

I'm I'm

I'm The and I'm

I'm

I'm and i'm What is up, y'all?

What is up, y'all?

You're a-n-n-l-man, we all know she smell.

Pior-a-uh-uh, what's up, y'all?

We got a lot of shit to talk about.

So, Tippo, what's up, man? Appreciate you.

What's going on, bro?

Rabbi Teher.

What's up, man?

Man, Rabbi Teher, be a cray cray.

He posting cray cray.

Rabbi to hear, bro.

Let's chill it.

Let's chill it with the cray cray.

Um... What is up, y'all?

Okay, so we got a lot of shit we got to talk about.

There are many items of relevance for us and uh jb uz what's up man what a great name what a great name thank you for that

name harold with the five what What's up, bro?

I don't know what the hell J.B.U.Z even means. I'm going to be honest.

Brutal Stalinist with the 10. What's up, bro? How are we doing?

What's up? Brutal Stalinist. What's up, bro? How are we doing?

So, uh...

B'o La Erelle Erelle.

Be spying for Israel in Lebanon

Beulal Isabel

All right, we just roll with it.

So, uh,

guys,

I know a lot of you think I'm crazy.

I'm going to be fucking honest.

Let's have like a blunt conversation face to face as though you're right in front of me right now face to face.

I understand I sound fucking crazy all the time.

I understand a lot of people are very skeptical of the new direction of infrared as of recent.

People are extremely

skeptical of like this whole Islam

thing, you know? A lot of people like,

Haas, what are you fucking,

what are you doing?

This is fucking crazy.

No, but a lot of people,

they're like, what the fuck?

And they don't tell me that directly,

because they think I'm a crazy fuck.

But like,

they're telling themselves,

they're like,

what the fuck is this

Islam thing like are you

fucking crazy have you lost your

fucking mind

and it's like

at face value

yeah of course at face value is fucking crazy

like it makes no sense if you you, one year ago, two years ago, you asked me about pursuing this direction. I'd be like, fuck no. But it's like right now there is so much moral energy being concentrated into our movement,

I have such an oceanic feeling that we're like on the cusp of something incredible.

And as soon as we get this sustainer thing

or whatever we're calling it, sorted out,

where I can actually invest in infrared

and I can afford to be on YouTube and I can afford

editors and we can expand infrared. This shit will rise like you've never fucking seen it and I'm

so glad to be part of it and I believe in it so much. We are for now the Spart the Spartans on kick, and I'm talking to you, the

kizelbos. I call you my kizelbosch. You are the kizelbash, which means we are like the elite

fighting force, those who are aware, and we're just

in the preliminary early stages of

this, and you're going to see how this is going

to pay off later.

But to give you more reassurance,

I want to explain, many

people are not very religious

at face value, and I'm one of them.

I'm going to be honest.

I'm not.

I think that people who are, who don't really, they're not really into the religion stuff.

Actually, those tend to be some of the best people ever.

Because religion is always an excuse for hypocrisy and it tends to just be something

so vulgar, just to just be so open about. And we tend to want to be private and quiet about it

because when you're so open about it and you're just putting it, rubbing it in people's faces and shit, there's something really disgusting and disingenuous about it.

And I think we can all feel that in like the deepest heart of our hearts.

We just sense there's something wrong with that, right?

Totally understand that.

But I've always told you guys that like a lot of, this is all vision-based. Like I've had the vision this year specifically. Like I've had this profound vision that like this is the direction we need to go in.

It's just when you synthesize in isolation, it's like, whoa, America is fear.

Why are you doing this?

This is fucking crazy.

Americans are scared of Islam.

It's a foreign thing.

Why are you importing the Shia Islam shit?

It's just because your own background, right?

I get how it looks like that.

But I have, when you synthesize everything in totality

and you just think holistically about the

situation we are right now in the world

there's such a clarity about why this is the right path

and this is the necessary path forward

and it's confusing as fuck because

what do we mean by this religion stuff and what do we mean? Well, for those of you skeptical of religion, I'll just put it something very simple to you like this. Go back to Marx. Because for Marx, religion was all about the feeling.

Religion was the only way we feel humanity.

That's what Marx was saying.

It's the effectual relationship to the Gatung's Wesse, the species being.

That's our effectual relationship to it.

You can have a rational relation to it in your head through

philosophy, through Hegel, or something. But religion is more material because that's how we feel the

species essence. And the species essence is humanity itself. The essence of like the humans, the human race, you know, like the way we relate to our most fundamental material being is through religion. And that's why it's about feeling. Religion inspires you with such a vision for feeling, for right and moral purpose, right and wrong, art, all these kind of different things.

And I think people who are trying to bracket religion, I'm going to like, I could explain it to you theoretically for why we have to do the Islam shit from a theoretical perspective, I guess.

The thing is, Marx was like, yes, Boyerbach, you're right. Christianity is the culmination of the human essence expounded in the form of religious alienation.

And all we have to do is move from that to communism, to like direct praxis, and we can fulfill and satisfy the same thing that's bound up in the Christian religion, but just in practice and in the world.

And objectively speaking, and I'm open to disagreement, this is why I think it's urgent and it's punctual, actually. Because Islam poses a problem

for Marxism.

It's actually a problem.

Marxists expected

that the Islamic world

would just convert

maybe to Protestantism

or with the development

of capitalism, Islam would just go away because it belongs to an outmoded mode of production. But the opposite happened. And we're here in a situation that was not anticipated by the classical Marxists, even by the Soviet Marxists in the beginning, right?

It's like Islam is a problem for Marxism.

It actually is.

Even from the roots of Marxism,

like Islam is a massive problem.

It poses a big challenge because Christianity was supposed to be

the last religion, really, that is the last form of

estrangement from the human essence and there was no real engagement with islam which comes

after christianity remember islam comes after and like islam has renewed relevance and like okay hos but that's such an abstract

theoretical issue why are you focusing on it well i'll tell you why

because right now the country is fucking focused on it it's like all the stars have aligned in a way that

makes sense of this. Americans do fear Islam, but they, I think a lot of you are

underestimating the anti-Islam backlash that's coming, because a lot of you partially correctly can understand that it's

fueled by the Mossad and by Israel but the thing that you're missing is that I actually think

anti-Islam feeling in this country is very organic. I don't think you can just say it's Israel and it's the Mossad. They're tapping into something that was already there and is very, very compelling and very powerful.

The fear of Islam is very real.

The backlash and the hostility toward it is so real.

It's really, even I didn't appreciate the full extent of it.

And maybe I have a prediction.

I think that the current Hassan Paiqor, Zorran,

Abdul al-Said,

this like current Islam wave,

there's going to be a massive backlash,

like a massive one.

And I don't think anyone's prepared for it.

Least of all Marxists are prepared for it.

Because Islam poses trouble from...

It's an existential...

Like, we have to open ourselves to the existential problematic.

What is Islam?

And why is it driving the masses crazy?

Those of us who are educated are like, well, I know about Islam.

It's not a big deal.

I meet people from Dearborn.

They're very nice people.

Good for you.

But, you know, while some may say, Haas, you doing this Islam shit is a betrayal of your

American patriotism, I would respond by saying, actually, no, I'm tuned in with the masses. I'm

tapped in with them. Because I love and I care about the American masses is why I'm doing this

actually. Because you are dismissing their anti-Islam feelings and I'm trying to work with it in a new way.

You're just dismissing that shit though. And you're just saying, oh, that's Israel and it's Mossad.

But that's not true.

A lot of it isn't Israel.

A lot of it isn't Mossad.

A lot of it is deep feeling.

Deeply legitimate.

Not legitimate in the sense of defensible, but deeply sincere.

Like it's deeply, it's not like a fake thing.

It's very, very deep rooted in the masses.

Don't underestimate it.

If you underestimate it, you're going to do the same thing the Social Democrats did in the turn of the century.

Because when they were looking at the anti-semitism backlash they were like ah just whatever this is going to be a nothing burger

turned out that's what allowed the nazis to lap the german communists because the marxists were too dismissive of anti-Semitism and didn't take it seriously.

And now, of course, there's many Zionists and a lot of Jewish Marxists who are like, well, yeah, we should have taken it more seriously in the sense of being more punitive to it.

No, you need to take it more seriously in the sense of understanding where the masses are at. I'm doing the same with Islam. My goal is to create a new bridge between Islam and America. But not a bridge between Muslims in the Middle

East in America, but I want to target and I want to under what they call Islamophobia. Like we

need to deal with that. But we can't deal with it by calling people racist and scolding them.

The way we have to deal with it is to show people what it means to ride with Islam.

You can ride with this.

It's like Islam is a bunch of horses galloping your way.

And I want to teach Americans, you can ride the horse too.

This is not some, this thing that you're alienated from, it's a part of yourself you're alienated from, right?

And like, I want you guys to think because like a lot of people are so Philistine they have such a small and narrow perspective and the thing that they're trying to do basically is they're trying to be like yo haz you are not thinking about the

implications Orvo what's up man appreciate you

and I'm like look

okay honest to God look

um

you we have to have a way of confronting, articulating, and confronting and recognizing that this is a big existential thing going on in the country.

You will mark my words, I'm early to it. The Islam backlash in the country. You will mark my words.

I'm early to it.

The Islam backlash in this country is so explosive.

You have no fucking idea.

It's really big.

There's a genuine, deep-rooted, spontaneous, organic fear and revulsion to Islam in this country.

And it's not just the Mossad Sa'op, although the Zionists and the Mossad are exploiting it a lot,

simply saying, you know, what about Jews, Jews, Jews? That's what Muslims

typically do. That's what people who are educated typically do. Not going to cut it. Because the

truth is, a lot of the pro-Zionists are pro-Zionists just because they hate Muslims that much.

So this needs to be sorted out.

I want to sort it out by drawing out the contradictions within Islam.

Finally, some people are asking how this can be materialistically or geographically justified when America has nothing to do with Islam.

And to that, I say, well, look, I just want to lay on the table for you, where we're at, where I'm thinking, you know?

If you understand objectively the source of the material existence of the American people

it's tied to the system of super imperialism we are entangled in the Middle East and it's part of

our mode of production I want to like our goal should be yes get the fuck out of the Middle East and have nothing to do with it

But who's gonna start by who's gonna start doing that by totally divesting yourself from the American financial system?

Because that's what it has to take you have to divest yourself entirely from the entirety of the American financial system and just live off the land.

Yeah, I don't think a lot of people are going to be doing that, to be frank.

So we either take responsibility for where we are materially right now,

or we could continue to pretend that we're the real American patriots, despite the blatant hypocrisy of being integrated in an

objective global system, the center of which is now in the Middle East, right, because of the

system of super imperialism

and the petrodollar and so on and so on like this is just the truth bomb that i'm dropping on you

and if you need an analogy the analogy that i think about a lot to help you understand what I'm cooking

here, I want you to think about the Roman Empire. So the Romans were conquerors, and they were

also at, like America today, they were at war with Persia for centuries and with the rise of

the sassanids Persia went under went a kind of Zoroastrian revival and before the Zoroastrian

revival you had a prominence of the Mithras cult in Zoroastrian revival. And before the Zoroastrian revival,

you had a prominence of the Mithras

cult in Persia.

And anyway, I don't want to bore you with

mystical esoteric stuff, but I just

want to tell you, the Romans were fighting the Persians.

The Romans were also conquering

land in the Levant and so on. But if you understand

dialectics, the outcome of that was that among the military of Rome, you had the rise of the Mithras cult.

Meaning, although you were at war with Persia and Persia's your foreign enemy,

there was a syncretic encounter that happened internally where they started getting exposed to

these foreign beliefs and ideas, which ultimately conquered Rome. And the final example of that was Christianity. If you want to

simplify the story of, I don't like talking about religion so much, but like understand why it's

important, just the logic of it. Rome occupies Judea, and then Judea conquers Rome through Christianity.

Like this religion that came from one of these provinces they occupied that was foreign to Rome,

the city of Rome and Italy, ended up becoming the universalized world religion.

So people talk about how like,

Haas, you're moving away from the American patriotism thing

and now you're on this Islam stuff. And I'm like, look,

this is like the myth, we're building like something like the

Mithras cult. We're building some kind of syncretic

encounter or a dialogue. I like to call it a dialogue it's an

engagement between different worlds and different perspectives and that's also where your

communism comes from if i may remind you you're a communist because you found the encounter with

the Soviet Union or China compelling. But there's too many American patriotic larpers that think

they're wise guys that are like these, they're larping as like civic nationalist Tucker Normies and they're like

no I came across communism because I just

want what's best for the American people

yeah buddy if I

rewind your entire life story

somewhere along the line you're listening to the Red

Army Corps or some shit

stop fucking lying.

The truth is we're all here because

we've been exposed to ideas

which are foreign.

They're foreign. And there's nothing wrong with that because America is

entangled with the world and the global.

We don't have to be Philistines who isolate ourselves from the world.

Well, isn't that cosmopolitanism?

Not when your country is objectively cosmopolitan in the sense of being entangled and interdependent in a global system that we're

just interd we have to engage with that in a really sober and honest way like america's borders

don't end with america unfortunately i know that's a tragedy for many but it's a lost cause America's

borders the whole world is American but the whole world is also something

America has to confront and deal with and that's the you could say I didn't

sign up for this too fucking bad that's the situation you could say, I didn't sign up for this too fucking bad.

That's the situation we're in now.

You know, all sorts of foreign things are pouring in and foreign ideas and traditions and schools of thought.

Boy, would I not like to be around you in the Republic of China era?

Imagine your Chinese and some guy next to you. Marxism is foreign. We don't want to, we're

a China first. We only care about China. Why are we adopting these foreign ideas from Germany? It's like, okay, buddy. Or imagine you're

Russia, you're saying the same shit. Well, Marxism is foreign. It's not rooted and

aided to the soil. You know, it's just, uh, people need to

stop this overcorrection of LARP. I know there's an immense skepticism of me because of this new orientation and this new direction for infrared. But it's rooted in Philistinism, frankly. It's rooted in Philistinism. And like, i feel like i'm pretty on the pulse about this shit oh this is

shia islam why shia islam well it makes sense to me why because islam islam is the hot topic of

the nation right now taking the nation by storm objectively it is it's on everyone's minds everyone's obsessing i am so tapped in i'm the one tapped in with the american masses not you you're just some fucking arrogant fuck i'm talking about the people who are skeptical of me.

You're just some arrogant fuck and some ivory tower who thinks you believe in this

caricature of America that doesn't exist.

I believe in, I know about the America, which is like literally tens of millions of

people terrified Sharia law is coming.

Have you seen the Texas City Council meeting of the guy who's like trolling them by dressing as like an Ottoman guy?

And all of these normal white people were like freaking out.

They were genuinely terrified of this guy in a costume.

But that's where we're at.

You know what I mean?

Like that happened like a few weeks ago.

Like this is where we're at as a country.

I have a pulse on this country.

Islam is fucking terrifying to people.

And we have to engage with that.

Because if your response to the rise of, I don't like the word Islamophobia, but it's the truth, if you're terrified by the rise of that, sorry, if your response to that is to be like, to deflect and be like, well, what about Jews in Israel?

Nobody cares. They're not going to care.

Think about Alex Jones. You think Alex Jones is going to be convinced by talking about Israel or some shit.

Normies aren't either. The normies that you're glorifying and you worship are not going to buy your way of trying to deflect their attention from the Islam thing. I'm just, I'm sorry. There's no way around it, you know? And I just feel so strongly about this... I just feel it's kind of beautiful

that we're cultivating this community and this culture,

which is memeifying a lot of it,

and it provokes such a confusion in people.

How do people categorize us?

Like, what are they going to say that we're like some Islamic extremist group?

When we don't even, like, pray or some of you do, but, like, we don't even, we're not even legalistically Muslims, and most of you aren't Muslims in any like formal

sense, but we're still like identifying with the symbolism and stuff like that. Like, isn't that

such a mind fuck that I think it works. I think there's something about that that works.

Like how do I... The goal of... A lot of people just are not infrared people because you don't get it.

The whole point of infrared was to become undefinable within the discourse

maga communism undefinable within the discourse

okay

by the way I love how I look

on TikTok and I saw TikTok with

40, 50,000 likes

that's like

Trump, comrade Trump, who

is destroying the U.S. Empire with his

incompetence. And it's like meming him

next to Kim Jong-un. And it's like

this meme of Trump as a communist

because it's supposed to be ironic.

And then I'm kind of sitting there like, that's the entire gas and all of the fuel for

maga communism.

That's why we, you think we weren't laughing when we made memes of Trump in like a

commissar off of it?

You think that wasn't funny to us

and we didn't enjoy doing that

because it was funny?

Do you think somehow that's like

and we were actually trying to say

that this wasn't Photoshop

and he actually wore this?

But it's like that was the whole point

of Maga Communismcommunism right at the time

it was hilarious and we mind-fucked

everyone and that's kind of

what's going on now again

but this time well last time

it was the same a lot of people didn't understand it

back then and now a lot of people

don't understand this islam

shit now they're super confused by it and they think that i'm just doing this because of my own

parochial ethno religious background which is this as disappointing stupidity and philistinism

but i don't i don't want to you know there's no compulsion in faith if you Which is disappointing stupidity and Philistinism.

But I don't want to, you know, there's no compulsion in faith.

If you guys, your heart's not in this shit, it's not.

Some of you, I could tell that you're starting to get it.

You're starting to understand where we're at. But where we're at with this whole thing. But we have to be,

the way I think we need to deflect from the rising tide of Islam fear mongering, we have to make a space within discourse and within culture

that allows the contradictions within Islam to actually spill over and be something that we can articulate and engage with artistically and tastefully.

And you know where else in history that happened was in during the Italian Renaissance, it was the same thing.

So many of the rugs that were imported to Venice with Mother Mary and Jesus,

if you look at the edgings of the rugs, it's Islamic calligraphy, right?

So we need to engage with it on a higher dimension and create a culture that is comfortable with doing that.

And once we can do that, we as a body can engage with the American people and we can actually I don't want to say educate

people about Islam because that's not our goal but we can address and transmute this obsession

and fear they have with Islam into something they can tap into and partake in themselves and relate to. And that's actually my goal here, right? And, you know, you guys have to consider something about your chairman of your communist party for now at least you need to consider something about the leader of this movement i i i look like how i look like i'm hazalaldine. Adam Tihir,

you know,

that Tahrir thing is carrying a lot, right?

Just recently the Times did a story about us,

and they named me as Adam to hear.

So what can I say?

It's out of my hands now.

But this doesn't look good.

I hope you know that.

This doesn't look good.

Like, put yourself in my shoes.

You have Zoron now.

You have Hassan Piker.

Now you have Abdul al-Said, you have Ilhan Omar, you have Rashida Talib, you have all these Muslims becoming prominent on the left.

And it's like I feel like Carl Marx probably felt

when he saw LaSalle

and all these fucking Jews

becoming prominent

in the social democratic movement

and it's immensely awkward

for me because

I'm like

well look I don't really fuck with any of these people at all, but I know I'm going to get lumped in with them.

And I know that if we acquire more prominence than we have now, my background is going to be exploited and used against me and used against you and used against

all of us. Because how is it a coincidence? It's almost like the Judeo-Bolshevism shit now.

Why were so many Jews Marxists back then? Like it was just a thing that was happening. But I see the writing

on the wall, because the same shit is happening

now in America.

With these Muslims and the left, it's like,

it's happening. And

what? It's just a coincidence that I'm

also a, the chairman

of the American Communist Party is some like Arab guy, right?

And it's like, how do you think it would be effective to respond to that? Should I be like Patrick Bet David and be like, look, or should I be like Jank Oiger, and be like, look, I'm just a typical

American like you. It's kind of true, but at the same time, why don't we use it to our advantage?

Why don't I just use that to our advantage? I'm always looking out for what's best for the

movement and for the community. And it's like, why shouldn't we exploit this and magnify it in a way? You know, to, to, in order to actually, like, deal with this big fear people have about, or disastrous obsession people have with Islam.

Like, bro, I'm not just going to sit here and be taken off guard, debating people and talking to people, and you know have a but you're a Muslim and

you're an Arab okay I'm gonna wear the Arab shit like or the Muslim stuff not the I'm not

Arab anymore the Saudis can fucking have that.

I'm going to wear the Muslim thing, like right front and center, so we're fucking immune to it.

Like, what can you do, right?

It's awkward as fuck because I just don't, I don't have anything to do with these.

It was the same, honestly, there's so many parallels to the Jews shit in the late 1900s. Because a lot of Jews started becoming professional career climbing people who were getting involved in socialist politics because it was a career.

Same shit is happening with a lot of Muslims in America now.

It's just happening.

It's the same thing.

And I look at that the same way Marx looked at,

you know, LaSalle and those other people.

I'm just kind of like,

it's like Marx had Engels.

It's like I have Jackson and now Eddie and Carlos and stuff.

And I'm like, look, I'm not part of this, you know, I'm not part of this milieu, but I am going to be, I'm looking out for a future where I am going to be I'm looking out for a future

where I am going to be like considered

part of it but that's not fair

just like it's not fair that Marx keeps

getting called a Judeo Bolshevik

it's not fair

Marx had nothing to do with all those other people

and that's why I'm big on the Shia thing.

In a way, the Shia thing is just a way for me to divide myself.

It's not even just Shia.

It's not even Shia.

Oh, you're just doing it.

I was raised as a traditional Jafar, not a religious one, but my background is like a traditional Jafari school, like traditional Orthodox 12 or Shia.

But the Shia that I'm talking about is the Olavis, the really, really heterodox, crazy

types that have been forgotten by history, right? That's the thing I'm exploring and that I'm interested in.

And the reason is because I believe there's a contradiction within, not a contradiction

within Islam, but there's a conflict for the soul of Islam that we have been entangled into

and we should engage with it in a syncretic way.

And I want to be full confession about something i'm a product of some kind of encounter between islam and america like i am objectively

my parents were not the most religious nor the the most foreign, believe it or not.

You know, they came quite young.

But unlike most Muslims in America, I have been very Americanized. I was an atheist for 10 years. Most of my friends were white or black or something. And I was very alienated from the Islam Islamic roots that defined a lot of my childhood and stuff.

So, you know, I just, I have this perspective, which is a product of history.

I mean, this is history, right?

History is just a constant encounter between

different worlds you can you can say whoa this is all because of sure but it happened and here we are

and like i'm i'm the son of this nation. I'm a son of this country.

I'm a son of this country.

It's like you don't like it and you don't consider me legitimate, but I wouldn't be here.

This is what I am.

This is the perspective that I have is because of this. And for me to just be like,

well, you know, I need a larp and pretend to just, I need to just like assimilate. I'm just like,

well, Iparidaida what's up

it's like well

I can assimilate

but as I'm trying to assimilate

for a long time I'm seeing everyone

losing their minds about Islam and shit

and I'm like okay

you know this whole thing is just fucking, it's like the country is changing and Americans are going to be flooded with new ideas and new perspectives one way or another the Muslims who

immigrate here fundamentally are changing they are but Americans are also going to

change in some way you know they're just being exposed and like even for example the

prominence of um like example, the prominence of, like, for example, the prominence of Islamicate culture.

I just see it taking storm, the country by storm.

And in some ways that are direct and other ways that are indirect.

For example, for Gen Z, coffee culture is starting to replace alcohol culture.

Like Yemeni coffee is spreading everywhere.

Islamicate food is spreading everywhere.

Islamicate practices like bidets and

shit are just

starting to spread.

I just see it

happening.

There's a fusion

going on of some

kind.

Objectively, right?

There's just

such a fascination

and interest.

And every time I say that, people look at me funny like I'm biased and I, I guess I am biased, but, but then I like look at what's going on and I'm like, but the country is actually losing it's, I see other people talking about the same shit that i am now

and i'm like we do need to deal with this like you know how there was a jewish question

now there's a muslim question we can't just avoid it and if we're weak on this issue, we're going to get fucking

lapped. In good faith, like that's really what I have to tell you. It's not about religion

at this point in the sense that you'd think. In the sense that you would think, it's not about strictly religion it's about

I want to teach you about Marxist materialism okay

for Marx religion is the affectual relationship to the absolute. So before you have time to mediate

through consciousness and rationalize and philosophize consciously and draw theoretical conclusions,

our world of humanity

hits you in a certain way.

Like first you get hit,

you get struck by the

absolute in your heart and you feel

that shit. And that is

the language of religion is born from that.'s effectual it's rooted in feeling right who what's up so like marxist theory and socialist fear all these theoretical and rational also philosophical stuff that's actually secondary, objectively in the order of how

our sensibilities and our worldview is shaped, that's the secondary thing that comes after.

First thing that we feel is a relation to the absolute and that's why islam is terrifying to people

people are i i don't buy that it's racism either it's more like people look at this force it's a force

they look at this force. It's a force.

They look at this force.

It's like they look at this like force, these hordes of people that have different customs and ways and they have this other belief.

And it's like it's so insistent and it's like it's so insistent

and it's so

it's moving

it's motion

and like

people look at that

and there's this inner

terror that they feel because that's

the sublime that's moving.

The sublime, have you guys

watched Dune when he's like

the beauty and the terror?

When he's in that ecstatic, trans-like state

and he's like, the beauty

and the terror.

That's what the sublime is

it's terror and its beauty all of that bound

up into one um

and uh that has that's still for for ordinary regular Americans most of you guys believe or think wrongly that that's outdated from and since Obama it's changed. But for the Americans we're trying to reach, it hasn't changed. That's what I'm trying to tell you.

A lot of people are terrified of this Islam shit. A lot of people are terrified of it. Still the same way under George W. Bush.

And it's not simply because of 9-11.

It's because they have this comprehensive meta-narrative, this civilizational meta-narrative, that Islam is this virus, this force that's trying to conquer

and subjugate

and they're trying to take

us over and like they

it's a violent religion,

it's this plague,

it's like they're the orcs

from Lord of the Rings or something.

It's like it's a very compelling narrative.

I think way more Americans that a lot of people realize, actually.

Way more than people realize.

Seems like this is all so unenlightened.

That's why a lot of these people who are skeptical of this direction,

they're just these enlightened people. What do you do? No, this is still a big thing in America,

like a really big one, right? And like it's uniquely Islam. It's uniquely Islam they have this fear of there's nothing

else like Islam and then anyway um i want to talk about though like why that is in terms of

the sublime and shit because religion is more important than Marxists ever understood it was.

Marxist took for granted that Protestantism would be the last religion ever and then it would

be over.

That's not true.

It's still living.

It's still a living force.

And, you know, the thing about Islam that's different from Christianity and other religions, I'll tell you what's different about Islam, because, like, we have to engage with this, right?

Islam, okay, let me tell you the difference between islam and christianity ready i'm i'm gonna drop you with a bomb that will be so it'll clarify so much they be like wow okay

in christian cathedrals and in christ Christian churches of any sect of Christianity, when people visit the holiest sites of Christianity, the exception to this I'm going to say is the Pentecostalans and some of the third world evangelical, syncretic forms of Christianity.

But let's just talk about Catholicism, Protestantism, and Orthodoxy, right?

Let's just confine it to that.

When you go to church, everyone behaves eth ethically there's an ethical conduct of how people behave in church

so when you go to church you become an ethical subject you're like well i'm going to behave the

right way versus the wrong way. Why? Because

there's a degree of premeditation before you go to church, before you even step in, you have a

premeditation of consciousness that interpolates you as an ethical subject who will do right,

rather than wrong, rather than follow your immediate

impulses or what you're immediately feeling. So you're not just driven by the feeling of belief.

You're driven by a certain ethical framework of premeditation, which on the face value, it seems like that's a superior

thing. And in a lot of ways it is, but I'm going to explain the contradictions. But you want

to know what's different about Islam. I'll give you two different examples of it.

One, when you go to mosque,

let's just be frank about this because this happens.

Now, it doesn't happen in a lot of places.

For example, in Turkey at Hagea Sophia,

I don't think this happens.

But in Dearborn, for example, I've had so many people tell me stories of how when they would go to mosque and they would leave their shoes, their shoes get stolen.

I'll give you another example.

If that's just like an odd exception, right? I'll give you another example. If that's just like an odd exception, right?

I'll give you another example.

Look at Mecca.

In Mecca, people die from getting trampled.

And when people are trying to touch the black stone at the kaba they're pushing each other aside like

everyone is only focused on their like sublime spiritual experience but the ethical consideration

for people around them it's not really it don't get me wrong i'm not saying all a lot of people are good people who are helping the old lady

and they're doing they're acting in ethical ways but if you zoom out and you look at how everyone's

behaving it's this there's this combination of the purity of the religious feeling that's driving you and it's blinding

you to ethical considerations entirely right um why so does that mean christianity? Well, no, it's not that simple. Because you could say that Islam is less ethical or you could say it's more honest. How do you really feel about this belief? When you go to church, there's an element of that that is being suppressed in favor of an ethical

super ego where you're acting on behalf of conscience but who are you really in the innermost of

your being because simultaneously though christians can be are far more ethical when they go to church, what about when you're unleashing your passions in other ways?

What about when you encounter, for example, pagans or people who are outside of European civilization,

people who are foreign, strange, or fear you.

So much bloodthirstiness and savagery and rape and killing and genocide.

And look at European colonialism.

Even Spanish conquistadors

when they first stepped foot

in America, they were not angels,

okay?

They were not these tolerant angels.

There was a lot of excesses

of fanaticism and all sorts of

different things that define these encounters.

So what I'm trying to say is it's not just when you don't confront the sublime that is about the sublime feeling of faith when you're not confronting that and opening a space for that to be dealt with or engaged with in some way it's going that which is repressed will return in a different form so the the

christian critique of islamic civilization would be that islam lacks the ethical dimension

of conscience broadly and vaguely speaking that that's not entirely wrong.

But the Islamic critique of Christian civilization

is that it promotes hypocrisy.

That's also not entirely wrong, you know?

And you could say that conquest and pillage is normal throughout history but european colonialism had excesses that were absolutely abnormal they that went way too far in terms of their savagery, in terms of the lack of any recognition of the other that was just completely foreclosed.

And look at today, I'm going to tell you another thing.

The American fear of is is extremely like inhuman to be honest it kind of is it's a mentality that basically says yeah shoot these women and

children yeah shoot the pregnant muslim woman who's wearing a burqa or something. She's an enemy

invader. The way that women and children get dehumanized in this kind of like anti-Muslim

propaganda, like that's not normal, man. I'm sorry, it's just like it's not that is also some that's like

again you're being you behave at church but like are you dealing with that that side of things

that is not getting released in the context of the holy and the divine and the spiritual.

And in any case, you know, one of the reasons why I like the al-Avies so much and I like the history of Shiism is because I think Shia Islam is actually trying to open up, not in ethical, because I don't believe in ethics, but more like the moral dimension more.

It's trying to understand the relationship between faith and conscience in a way that allows for an authentic confrontation between those two things.

And in a way that I think avoids hypocrisy, the olivese saints like Pierre Sultan, who are in the Anatolian countryside, standing up for ordinary people

against the tyranny of the Ottomans,

they're absolutely dealing with this inner

reality of, you know, through Sufism, through the Alavis,

it's like, I think something is there, for sure.

But there's something about Islam that provokes fear because it is an unconditional relationship

to the absolute, just direct. It's not being mediated by the faculties of institutions or the super ego but the super ego remember

is not the same if we're talking in a Freudian framework the super ego is not the same as the drive

so you're driven and that's the truth of what you are. The truth of what

you are is actually your desires.

Not what you think you should desire, but what do

you actually desire? Caleb

Maupin might think that he should

desire being a traditional

man or something, but what he

actually desires is being spanked.

So what you actually are driven toward is the truth of who you are, and you have to confront that,

and you have to reflect on it.

Otherwise, it's going to get released in destructive ways. and by the way 530 whatever you're totally wrong even these people that you're

mentioning cruelty and and, yes, but the kind of ontological violence is unique.

There is a type of violence of European colonialism. That is

unprecedented. And

when you, because many people just

assume the Mongols behaved the way the

British did, oh yeah, the Mongols were doing

it. No, it was very different.

Even Mongol violence was within

a cosmos. It was within a cosmology that made sense that was rooted in an interplay of mutual recognition and had a sacred significance always as a subtext and as a background. And though Western historians, not even historians, because the historians usually will look into the topic and realize the truth, the Western imagination usually just projects upon the past the kind of cynical, game theoretic understanding of violence and conquest that was inherited from the modern world or started in the early modern period, and it's just not true when you study history.

Yes, there was immense violence, but it was not violence detached from a sacred world of meaning,

okay, which that type of rupture and violence is very unique to the history of European colonialism.

When you see other types of conquest and subjugation throughout history, you also see a process of integration and fusion and an interplay of mutual recognition that gets developed along some conclusion. You do not get this kind of ontological annihilation of the other and this complete suspended suspension of the process of the development of mutual recognition. You don't see that.

And he's like, they were not kind to us.

Again, it's just a Philistine response,

because I'm not talking about kindness in any capacity at all.

I'm not talking about nice

or a mean or anything like that.

Okay, you died.

I don't care, dude.

You don't even know what I'm talking about.

You need to desist yourself from the conversation

if you're too retarded to understand what I'm saying.

Or the worst part is you're not actually putting in the effort to understand what I'm fucking saying.

You're not putting in effort.

You're just fucking having a knee-jerk reaction.

Put some fucking effort into understanding what I'm trying to say.

It could be as violence as whatever, but it's not an ontological violence that kills your soul.

It's not killing the way in which

you

fundamentally

exist within a world. It's not

fundamentally killing the soul

of your people and annihilating that.

That's the different.

The worst excesses of violence and cruelty in the past

usually still ended up with a dialectic of mutual recognition playing out.

However cruel and horrific, the atrocities were take the mongols

themselves who you like to mention yes the mongols they were very cruel to the muslims in baghdad

but what happened later the mongols became Muslim. A lot of them became Muslim.

Mongols were very cruel to the Chinese, but what happened? They were assimilated by the Chinese through the Yuan dynasty, right?

So this is this dialectic of recognition that you're ignoring,

but which in European, European early modernity created fortresses

that repressed and suspended any encounter with the other.

Like, this full-on full on like you are a pagan not human you are an absolute outside other just like nature is we have to enclose ourselves

from any kind of raw contact with you and we just

have to completely separate from you that is very unique actually like that's not common throughout

history at all um and that's not common throughout history at all.

And that's a fact. You know, a lot of people will say it's the same.

It's not the same.

I'm talking straight facts to you.

Okay.

Because back in the day,

barbarians would come and rape

and pillage the civilizations

on a regular basis

you know

why do you love talking out of your ass

that's my question to you

why do you love talking out of your ass

you don't think there was senseless barbaric violence

in non-European societies as well the difference is how it resolved itself and by the way i will, in the, I've studied this extensively. Why, why were the

Turks in Anatolia? Because sometimes there's people who are Byzantine Larpers. The Turks came and

ruined everything. Okay. Why did the Turks come?

Does anyone know?

Ding, ding, ding?

Because Byzantine oligarchs imported them as mercenaries to kill the fucking families they were feuding with. So you're a Byzantine chief or landlord and you have this guy you want to take his land.

You would import Turkic mercenaries to be the instrument of your feud.

And lo and behold, these same mercenaries would then turn on you one day and get their shit sorted out and then become

the rulers same thing happened in the roman empire people think all the barbarian invasions of

rome that never happened it was the roman patricians who used these germanic and goth and alan barbarian chiefs

as their mercenaries to settle their feuds with others same thing with the arabs it's always

same thing even with the islamic conquest of persia it's always, same thing even with the Islamic conquest of Persia. It's always these

people who are at the top who use import foreign mercenaries, and then the mercenaries get entangled

in the drama, and then they realize, why are we being the puppet of these people let's unite and then whatever

happens happens after that but rarely do you ever have a situation where barbarians are just

coming out of nowhere at all without any context context, to come and rape

and conquer and pillage because of the cynical

laws of natural selection

and social Darwinism. Even

in the case of the Mongols, the reason

the Mongols invaded and

conquered China and every other

sedentary civilization in their proximity was because

Mongol chiefs and warlords were being entangled in the disputes between different wealthy cities and patrons

and the Mongols would be used as mercenaries. And so they were embroiled in these

conflicts because they were being instrumentalized by corrupt sedentary people. So that's their

story of history, not these innocent, you know, Lenin lives, what's up?

It's a fact of history that armies did this.

So we're just going to ignore everything I fucking say it's the elites fault that they come in but it's always the masses that suffer when it happens but at the same time you're you're decontextualizing these things from cycles of revenge nobody is

fully you never have these innocent lamb like people who are not entangled in any way and shit that just get victimized.

It's always a cycle of revenge. The people that are called barbarians throughout history, these are people who usually are living very brutal, gruesome lives.

And I'm going to explain what barbarism is.

Barbarians live gruesome lives, where there's endless feuding cycles of violence.

And so they form pact.

You're in or you're out.

If you're in the pact,

you're protected

according to certain laws.

You have rights

and you're recognized.

But if you're out,

it's a dog-e-dog world

and it's fair game,

so to speak, right?

That's not a universal rule, but that tended to be how it was.

And so, in such circumstances, there's no such thing as you're innocent and you're peaceful

anywhere, especially if we're talking about

I don't know even what populations you're referring to. You know, that's the thing.

Christianity sought to break the cycle of revenge, but no other religion has followed suit.

I just have to laugh at what you're saying.

Do you know what feudalism is like have you ever spent any time reflecting on anything have you ever

reflected or thought about any of the things you're saying how was any cycle of revenge ended

when we call the word of feudalism is literally the feuding of families.

You realize the whole history of Western Europe from the point of the end of the Roman Empire, up until the end of World War II

was nothing but petty parochial, egotistical,

private interests

slaughtering each other in endless cycles of revenge.

You do know that, right?

Or do you not know that?

If you want to say the Byzantines freed themselves from this cycle, you're lying.

Because the only reason the Turks came to Anatolia is because they were used as Turk as mercenaries between different feuding Byzantine princes.

By the time the Byzantine Empire collapsed because they had taken on so much credit and debt from the Venetian bankers.

So why are we pretending like there's one religion that's so peaceful and it's both only based on self-defense

when the entire history of feudalism was about feudal warring people

killing each other, slaughtering each other endlessly to the point where there was no peace.

Peace is something that is only enforced by conquerors

who enforce universal laws and create Asiatic states

with common works and common public infrastructure, waterworks,

trade caravans, you know, with camel stations or horse stations that provide for

travelers, secure roads so bandits can't come. Yeah, all those things depend upon what you saw in Asia.

You didn't even have that in Europe, though.

This is what I need you to confront. I need you to honestly confront this.

You're saying, like, we've been peaceful this whole time, and now we have this aggressive enemy that's come from within this is exactly what americans need to confront as a lie this is the root of this fear of

Islam it's like we're all just minding our business and peaceful and this aggressive, it's like a psychological projection of your own violence.

You're not even willing to confront or acknowledge or take responsibility for.

Whenever a white person wants to resist immigration, there is always the leftist argument.

We can all just get along and play nice.

Then you see the people on the other side that you deserve to be genocided.

You know what your problem is?

You just lack moral.

You lack moral, you lack moral superior, you lack moral authority. That's your problem. You

don't have moral authority. You're so worried about what all these people are saying and thinking,

but you're not worried about what's right or what's wrong.

And that's your problem.

Honest to God, that's your problem.

Like, you don't have confidence in the moral dimension.

So why should it have confidence in you?

If you have no confidence in the moral, why should the cosmos reward you with the fruits of morality when you have no faith in it yourself? What is right versus what is wrong? You want to be moral, be moral. This is about right and this is about wrong. If immigration is so wrong,

then let's put everything on the table and know what are the debts morally. Why do we have it? Because the same same people that bitch about immigration a lot of them were also the

same people that were the cheerleaders of george w bush when he wanted to go kill the terrorists

so what do you fucking want?

It's time for some fucking accountability.

Be straight with your moral cosmos.

You know, you have an issue with immigration.

Okay.

What about right and wrong?

There's no, the power comes from the masses.

That's what you don't understand.

The power is a reflection of the masses you can complain or you can become a selfless soldier of her i will never look at an american and tell them you have a right

to be whipped up on this bullshit and adopt these

deranged depraved anti-human worldviews there's a red line in the fucking sand now if you ask me

for example asman gold recently was in a clip and someone said now if you ask me. For example, Asmond Gold recently

was in a clip

and someone said

what about women and children

crossing the border? And he's like

yeah, kill them, shoot them, shoot the women and

children. Otherwise, they're never going to

learn.

And I'm just like, this is the Israeliification of our society.

And it's like I'm drawing a line in the sand.

It's like, you want to go be with that?

Go fucking be with that.

But we're drawing a fucking line.

This is about right and wrong.

Simple as that.

If you can't have the confidence and moral authority, you don't have a nation.

What do you think nations are?

They just because of your chicken tendies, bloodlines,

that doesn't mean a fucking thing.

You know, you want to address the root

cop. So some people, whenever white people say things like, I feel like I'm being crowded out of my own country and these uninvited, unhospitable guests are coming here and they have no respect for me.

I ask them the question, you're speaking in the plural,

what respect do you have for your own white people? What have you done to serve even the white

people of your nation? How have you become a collective being? You're not a collective being.

You're an individual first of all second of all well who has moral

authority is secure if you're doing right versus wrong it's this lack of i will critique the problem with

american and entirety of western civilization i'm going to critique western civilization right now

and i'm going to drop a bomb on you.

Western civilization in many ways is rooted in hypocrisy. Why? Because they separate the moral dimension from the material dimension. And as much as Westerners love to be moral, there's always

this worm of doubt in the back of their head that says,

am I being a sucker?

Am I being taken for a ride?

I know I'm doing the right thing, but...

Am I doing right?

Not I'm doing right.

I know I'm doing the right thing, but aren't I going to get trampled over and

eaten?

It's almost like, it's almost like morality comes at the expense of reality, you know?

And then you have these Jewish intellectuals like God Saad, who are like, this is the suicidal empathy of the West. You need to become more like Netanyahu, who has no regard for morality at all. And then now I'm saying, why don't you discern the material force of your morality? Why don't you discern and have faith that what is right morally is aligned with the cosmos materially? And it's this lack of faith in that that produces this civilizational ailment that has you mistrusting the cosmos, has you worried and I'm worried about this immigrant who wants to come and take all of our stuff.

Okay.

Do you have the moral authority to enforce justice?

That's the question you should ask.

If you want justice, then have justice with a capital J.

Not a half-ass justice, though.

You know?

And it is a fundamental civilizational ailment,

and if we don't start reflecting on it or thinking about it we will get lapped as communists

we will get lapped as communists some call it a blind naivety if you don't have a blind naivity toward the cosmos in the sense of an optimism, you're not a fucking American.

You want to know who an American is.

I'll name you two Americans that I know.

Okay.

I'll name you Eddie

Liger and Jackson

Hinkle. Two guys

that always

believe that what's

in front of them is the light

at the end of the tunnel. However

fucking bad the situation is,

they're always optimistic

that everything's going to turn out fine

and it's going to be okay.

And everything's going to be fine.

I mean, people have the audacity

to question how American I am

because of the shit that I say.

But the two most American people that I know,

no one can dispute their American status,

exactly have this mentality,

that the cosmos is aligned with us,

that we believe we're going to win. Don't worry. Have a lion-like confidence in the victory of our position. Things will turn out fine.

We are aligned with the cosmos.

That is the American way.

Not this fucking God sod, fucking pessimism, this fucking like domer

black pill bullshit

um like i'm just gonna be

we're just going to get overrun by immigrants

and they're all just gonna we're just this is cynicism

this is cynicism

when you have a lion like moral authority you don't let cynicism. When you have a lion-like moral authority, you don't let cynicism conquer you.

You have something to stand on with authority.

Because I'm going to tell you the truth, a lot of these right-wingers are people who are afraid of the white,

they think there's a white genocide

and they're afraid of it, right?

Something like that.

I'm just going to tell you the truth.

These people secretly believe

that they secretly believe that

they secretly envy

the

brown or black or whatever they

imagine it subject who just

enjoys without conscience

in their mind, like,

just pursues and takes and has no

mediation at all. Even

the Jewish Netanyahu

or something, there's something

about that that they look at it and they envy it.

They're like,

although I know it's morally wrong i'd be a sucker if i don't do that it's like imagine you're it's almost like that's where the cuck fetish comes from honestly because it's like

they feel like they're sitting in the cuck chair and they're watching this happen and they're like, well, am I just sitting in the chair just like watching this shit happen?

And it is a fucking psychopathology that has to be dealt with, for sure.

Because when you have moral authority and confidence, you're not envying people who do immoral things.

You don't envy them.

There's no part of you that says,

I'm repressing this,

because you're repressing something inside yourself

because you're not fully confronting your own evil.

You're not confronting the,

the thing within that you're projecting onto others right

and it's like when you have a correct account of right and wrong.

Like, you know what to me is a powerful position when you say, I'm not even going to entertain recognizing the immorality of anyone, immigrants or otherwise. I'm not even going to entertain

that. What I'm going to do

is have the confidence that what i'm doing is correct and what it is right then we seize power we take

the power we elevate the moral authority as the supreme principle as the highest law and we enforce it on everyone, regardless of who they fucking are.

I mean, that's the superior position.

That's how you have a proper account, right?

Like, let's say you're in England.

Behead all of those grooming gangs.

Fucking kill the perpetrators.

Behead them with a sword.

With a fucking Highlander's sword from Scotland.

Make it fucking medieval.

Lawfully behead them.

That's not because you're letting immigrants get to you and you hate them and you, oh, I hate

these, I just want to, I hate all these brown people.

No, you're enforcing the fucking law that applies to everyone, regardless of who fucking does it.

Right? That's your moral authority. That's how Russia is.

You know, Russia, they don't let anyone fuck with them. You know, in Russia, they don't fucking

let anyone fuck with nothing. In Russia, at least institutionally i know there's sentiment in russia that's

hateful but you the the russians have a much stronger position because they they are

they don't have a pathological hatred of the Muslims.

They do understand and recognize Muslims.

But at the same time, they enforce the law uniformly.

And they will not make an exception for you if you break the law.

Those terrorists at the Crocus thing, those

guys got chopped up. Their fucking

ears. You don't fucking

break the norms, the morality

of the civilization that applies

to everyone. Right?

It's like they do not fucking let

bullshit slide, right? Amila. And at the same time, they don't even fret over it. They don't lower the... Let's say there's some scumbag terrorists. They don't lower themselves to trying to, you know, pathologize and all this.

No, you fucking cross that line.

You fucking get what's coming to you, right?

The Russians have such a strong mentality.

They have such a correct way of dealing with such issues.

Because they don't look it into the face.

They just say this is the fucking rule.

This is what we believe.

This is the morality.

This is the authority.

And anybody, regardless of who the

fuck they are, who falls a

foul of that, gets what's coming to them.

So that's how it is, you know?

That's what it's like to have

moral authority.

Yeah. Um, um, so, uh, you know,

I don't entertain this position,

this self victimhood shit.

It's like, a true moral authority is a universal principle.

You don't, petty, you don't become a petty, hateful person who lowers yourself to

pettiness and hatefulness.

There's a lot of immigrant groups that are alienated and young people, you know, you could...

Sometimes they do gloat. I see it.

They're like making memes about white genocide and shit.

And then some white people will look at that and be like,

you know, this is proof that...

Why lower yourself?

Those people lack guidance.

They don't have anything.

They literally are just... why would you envy that?

Isn't it better to be more like you're, to be patronizing actually.

Just be like you're literally, you're lower. You're, you don't have guidance.

You know? Like the same way you see someone immature, you know.

Regardless, I digress.

I'm not going to be here lying to Americans about the reality.

I'm going to be here telling the truth.

The truth is that some people don't like this direction that we're going into and it's like but like there's no turning back they don't like the direction they don't like this strong emphasis the strong point.

And on the one hand, it's like, look, at face value,

that makes sense. But on the other hand,

there's such a huge shift in the tide.

And if you can't see it, you're just a Philistine.

You don't see what's going on.

Do not underestimate the Islam backlash.

I'm living in, like, I see it.

People, you guys, I don't know if you're seeing this, but like,

Laura Lumer is winning a lot right now.

The big winners of the past three months in America,

there's been this, like, counter-revolution that's happened.

And, like, Laura Lumer and that, those type of people,

they're winning big time and uh the phoentoids are going over to Laura Lumer and shit like Laura Lumer is her sentiment is reflected at some ground level

and you see footage of Dearborn

Dearborn Michigan that's being shared

and people are fucking freaking out

and there's definitely a fear.

People have this fear.

They're like, I don't recognize my own country anymore.

I'm a foreigner in my own country.

And you can laugh at it and make fun of it, but a lot of people genuinely feel that way.

And that's, it needs to be addressed.

It needs to be understood.

I mean, if we are going to be winning the masses, then we can't delude ourselves.

Guys, can I tell you the truth?

Like, I just want to tell you the truth.

I see how the left and liberals are responding to this, and that's not going to work.

Like there's such an overcorrection.

Like Abdul al-Said is being treated like he,

everyone's always like shocked.

Oh my God,

he's just like a normal person.

Oh my God,

Abdul's so cool. He's like smiling. Oh my God. Abdul's just like a normal person. Oh, my God, Abdul's so cool.

He's like smiling.

Oh, my God, Abdul's like really nice.

Oh, my God, he's nothing like what they're saying about it.

Oh, my God, Abdul's super positive.

Like, Zoran is like always smiling all the time.

And it's like in this, I don't, there's this, even liberals have to perform this extreme

overcorrection.

Oh my God, he's not the scary terrorist.

And then I'm sitting here and I'm like, you know what's not fair about this shit?

We're all human.

We're all fucking human.

Like, you're telling me, Abdul al-Sayyad doesn't fucking yell and lose his temper all the time in private and look scary as fuck.

He's Egyptian.

I know for a fact. I know for a fact.

I know for a fact he gets angry a lot.

Same with fucking Zoron probably.

Like we're all fucking human.

Do we not,

are we not allowed to have flaws?

So every time someone's a fucking A-rab and they have some

flaws, there's going to be a... They're going to blow

themselves up and it's the fucking next

Osama bin Laden. Like, they

have to just be these perfect cartoon

people

in order to be accepted.

I'm just going to, like, draw a line in the sand and tell you guys the fucking truth.

Like I will take a bullet before I start performing like this like a fucking monkey for Americans.

I'm a fucking American too.

This country has fucking kicked dirt in my face just like every other American.

I've had the same thing as every other American.

I'm not going to fucking pretend to be like some fucking nice guy.

Oh, you're scary.

Like, I don't give a fuck.

I don't give a shit.

You know what I mean?

Like, I'm not gonna fucking do that.

If there's people who expect me to fucking be like that,

literally take a shotgun and try to shoot me in the head.

I will never fucking be like that.

I will never, ever be like that.

I'm a human being.

Like anyone else.

Like I'm not about that shit.

No, I'm gonna fucking be who I am.

You're better off literally trying to kill me

before you impose this expectation on me that I'm going to be some fucking cookie cutter.

Abdul al-Sayed, fucking Zoran Mamdani, fuck.

Be a fake fuck.

Just got to fucking prove to people how fucking harmless I am.

I'm not fucking harmless, actually. I'm not fucking harmless, actually.

I'm fucking angry as fuck.

So you gotta be relatable

to Americans.

Okay, if Americans don't accept me for who the fuck I am, I don't give a fuck.

I'm gonna be who the fuck I am.

You don't accept me?

Fuck you.

I'll keep it fucking real.

You can't handle real.

Go be a fake bitch

with your fake bitch world.

I'm gonna keep it fucking real. You have a fake bitch with your fake bitch world i'm gonna keep it fucking real you have a fucking

problem with that turn around go fucking cry about it bitch but i'm the only one i'm the only one.

You notice I'm the only one.

You take a room of 10 men, all non-Arabs or Arabs for that matter.

I'm the only one that actually defends women, by the way. It's always me, by the way.

It's always me who's the non-judgmental one. It's always me that can hang out with any type of

woman at all and be completely chill with them. John, what's up? It's always me who will never tell a woman how she has to dress.

Like if I just see a random woman half naked, basically naked walking on the street,

you will never see me tell her to put clothes on.

Because it's none of my fucking business right flacco what's up that's

the injustice of the world that i live in i'm the most chill guy ever

who will never tell a random woman or make a big deal about how she dresses or whatever.

And yet there's literally a guy next to me who's like one of these fucking anti-Islam

people and that guy's losing his mind and fucking freaking out.

And it's bothering him.

And I'm like, this is the world we fucking live in you know all the

evils they project on foreigners, you have those evils yourself, right? bro you know i'm gonna i'm gonna like i need to be like woke 1.0

where's the compensation for me about how like i was crucified as a misogynist, just because I'm an Arab and a Muslim.

What else was the reason? They literally would crucify me as a misogynist. They were like,

you hate women, you have a problem with women. All right. And it's like, started joking about it even because they're so fucking absurd.

And then the jokes themselves became real.

You know that?

They share a quote.

Oh, what do I think of women?

I hate them.

He meant that.

Fucking Arab! He meant that! Fucking Arab!

He meant that!

What the fuck?

Fuck am I dealing with? I don't know, guys, I see the backlash coming.

I don't know.

Like, what do you guys think?

I just see it coming.

Like, I see this.

There's these big

guys, it's literally just like

the story of socialism in Europe.

The socialists were scoring all these

victories. And then

and then

the fucking head of BP

Royal Dutch Shell and like Franz Thysen, whatever, they all fucking come together.

They put Hitler in a costume and they have one card.

They dropped this card and the card literally just says Jew.

And that was it.

Like the socialists had all this momentum since LaSalle.

They were like breaking all this ground across Europe.

And then post-war period comes.

And it's like they invented this card the card literally just had three letters on it

jew they were nuked all socialism nuked all the gains that they made, nuked.

Like they could not react to that shit.

It was dead, you know?

And like the same shit,

mark my fucking words is going to be about this Islam shit.

Just understand that you ignore it at your own peril.

Down the line, the like Sharia law, Islam shit, it's no, it's not going to be racial.

It's going to be about Sharia law and Islam.

They're going to say that Zoran and Hassan Piker and Abdul al-Said and Rashida Tili and Ilan Omar

that this is a vast Islamic conspiracy to enforce Sharia law.

And like, bam, it's all the gains of the left

are going to be wiped out just

ignore this shit at your own peril

like I'm just I'm maybe it's

not going to happen in the next six months

but I see this happen

like I see it's. Like, I see

it's coming. Yes,

it's a bunch of like soon to be, uh, I, I, yeah, it is always like Israeli Jews pushing this shit.

I'm not going to lie.

Like Jake Lang, Jake Lang, the guy who marches in Dearborn.

Well, there's an elephant in the room by Jake Lang's early history.

And then if you look at, uh at this other guy doing documentaries going into

Dearborn, Michigan, they also have a strange connection. But if what they're saying works,

it doesn't matter who they are, right? It doesn't matter what background they come from.

People are not going to come after Jews.

I'm going to tell you why they're not going to come after Jews, right?

Because Jews are not a vulnerable population. Going after people who are overwhelmingly more per capita privileged,

like wealth-wise, and the Jews in question who are unpopular by the way the bagel shop owner

has not become unpopular the jews that have become unpopular are the ones who are associated with power

like apak and the zionist lobby and shit they're they can't be

targeted without a revolution because they're on top but it's easy to target muslims because they are

more vulnerable they're not they're not as powerful. Like they're,

you could just go to Dearborn and start harassing random strangers and attack them, you know,

like that's the main difference. I'm not saying I'm not worried about like, oh, there's going to be a new victimization of Arabs and Muslims.

I'm just saying like, this is going to fuck the left.

Master you are like, this is going to fuck the left, and nobody sees it coming except me.

And I'm the only one

preparing us for it. When this bullshit

happens, like I want to create a refuge

of people who have a strong position,

a morally strong position, you know?

Like, I want us to fucking bridge bridge we we need to be the bridge of worlds

this is not just about this is about a universal thing a universal a universal a world a world revolution.

What else are we fucking fighting for?

But world revolution, there's nowhere to fucking go.

You can't leave. This is here.

It's all here. The whole global system

culminates here. Everything is here.

We're entangled with the fucking world.

We're affected by the world.

We need to become perennial.

We need to become Chinese.

We need to become Iranian.

We need to become Russian.

We need to become Siberian.

We need to become Mongolian. We need to become Uzbek. We need to become Siberian. We need to become Mongolian. We need to become Uzbek. We need to become Kazakh.

We are the world. We will be the world. We are the dark shadow of the world. Tartaria. That's what it means.

We are the cosmic race. The Mexican philosopher, he made a book called the cosmic race. He said

the Americas is the land of the cosmic race. The whole world culminating into

one. That's what we are.

That's what this is.

And it's instead of the direct race,

like a biological thing,

it's all the spirituality and all of the beliefs and ideas of the world.

Like, let me tell you something.

We cannot retreat from the new left.

We have to accelerate.

Where did the Black Panthers get their Marxism from?

From China.

I promise you there was a bunch of black people who watched the Kung Fu movies.

They were like,

they watched those fucking karate movies

and they're like, I fuck with Mao Zedong.

I fuck with this Mao shit.

Like that is like,

you guys don't even know how shit works.

When, okay, people

make this critique that the American

left has always

looked to the world

for inspiration too much instead of here. But I'm like before we can get here,

the whole world, we have to exhaust it. Like we literally have to take everything. The all. We have to

make this a place of renaissance.

And then we can get here.

We need to have both.

We have to accelerate this new left thing.

Like the crazy fucking...

I'll say some crazy ass shit.

The crazy fucks in the

60s and 70s that

we're doing mushrooms and acid forming

Maoist cults.

We don't need to do

the drugs, but like we need to like

to accelerate this thing.

We can't retreat from it. We should

actually push the gas on it.

Like, through its

extreme conclusion,

and then get the opposite.

Like, we need to, like, be on some, we need to, we do need to tap in, we need to tap into the California

Renaissance type of thing where it's like all these weird cults that happened in the 60s and 70s like we don't need to be like that

but we need to accelerate this weird encounter between like American soul searching across the world for like a purpose and a language and a cosmic articulation

of their like that's we need to accelerate that you know and and the way we can do it

without becoming like retarded

is just by being open-minded and not dogmatic

like instead of being like

the Buddha called me yesterday

and I talked to him

give me all your fucking money and The Buddha called me yesterday and I talked to him.

Give me all your fucking money.

And join my commune.

And then let's all kill ourselves tomorrow because we're going to be aliens.

Yo, hold on.

We're not claiming to know all that.

You know, we're just being a little open-minded. We're not going to be dogmatic at all. Like we're not claiming to know all that. You know, we're just being a little open-minded.

We're not going to be dogmatic at all.

Like,

we're not going to... You know what I mean?

Like, that's the problem with Colts is, like,

they actually thought that they were certain about things that...

If only they were a little open-minded,

like the ones that were like UFO people

that were like

we're all gonna go

ascend tomorrow we need to kill ourselves

hey what wait wait like how do you know that

like what I'm okay

maybe I'd entertain it

I'd be like what well what you know I'd entertain it.

I'd be like, well, you know, I'd let you speak and say why you think that.

But if you can't convince me, then I'm just going to say no.

I'm just kidding.

I mean, I would never entertain that.

But you have the idea. Like, we could be open-minded about shit without becoming dogmatic and assuming we've stumbled on the Holy Grail. I'm trying to actually develop a very holistic, comprehensive worldview that is

universal. That is like the world

culmination of world history type

of thing.

That makes sense of world history

and makes sense of where we're at right now.

And, you know, can I look at you and tell you that there's nothing at all beyond the realm of what

modern science verifies? Well, why is it that when they audited and reviewed, they brought in psychologists to review the CIA's remote viewing programs and found that there were non-random statistical correlations

in the experiments

that could not be explained by chance

you tell me what that fucking means

honestly tell me what that means

why were the Soviets

so into pan-psychism?

Like, why were they so into that shit?

There's something there going on, probably.

Or maybe not.

I'm not dogmatic.

I'm just asking questions.

Like, they brought a guy in to see if it was random or not.

And I verified it even with chat Chb.

I even asked Chachybt, which is a shitlib.

Chat Chbchabit is literally Dr. Fauci, okay?

I brought these sources, and I said, think harder and research more, because I want to know if this is true.

And Chachabiti literally told me they're like, yes, it is true.

It was non-random.

It is unlikely that it could have been random.

Some skeptics thought that there must

have been something missing that they didn't

get, but it can

but yes, the CIA's

remote viewing was not

could, was not, you know, it did pass the the experimentation so i'm just like okay

i'm like fuck i mean if that's true what is that's what are the implications like you want to know okay i'm

going to tell you some shit that i think i think that the soviets discovered this one some way

and they could not reconcile it with dialectical materialism as they understood it so that's why

these top orders in the kgGB are rumored to have started to become more occult

and interested in like Sufi ideas and all these mystical traditions.

Because like they could not explain this shit within standard Soviet ideology

and it said maybe maybe we can speculate maybe one of the reasons why the USSR

dissolved was because they discovered shit that just couldn't be

explained by what the

Soviet scientists and military were finding,

what the CIA also was.

It created a crisis of like faith in

materialism, I guess.

And they're like, well, we can't really explain this according to what we thought we knew from materialism so

what does this mean we don't know we don't understand it

and they just basically like that's why they got demoralized and abandoned Marxism, Leninism. I dead-ass think that happened.

Maybe.

If the CIA was doing remote viewing experiments and the Soviets were also doing it,

and they took it seriously,

and we have publicly available information that the

experiments were it could not be explained by chance the results could not

uh what does that mean that That... Well, it means potentially, it means that we are more affected by the cosmos and by the universe than we think we are in the sense that we can feel more than we think we can feel.

Like, my explanation for remote viewing would be maybe something like, you can actually

feel the effects of someone across the other side of the world more than you think you can.

Because although it's not directly affecting you in an experientially immediate physical way,

it is still a, um, it is still like a, uh, uh, uh, I sound crazy as fuck.

It is still a distortion of space time.

And think about it, like, think about the analogy of, like, let's say there's water, right?

Let's say you make a splash in the water like you can be very far away but at even the

far level you will feel the tone of the scientists were giving the right answer.

I don't know, man.

Just look it up yourself and see what you could think of it.

I'm not even claiming to shut that down.

I just don't fucking know.

We would just have to, like, explain how the fuck all this shit is working.

If it is true, like, we have a lot of explaining to do,

and we have to think about what that means for Marxism.

And like, it's so weird how we can just feel things.

I'm starting to sound, you know who are, like, low-key...

I'm going to just be more on this feminist arc.

You know who are low-key, right, about a lot of things, women?

Specifically, like, grandmas and also mothers.

But women in general,

you know,

mothers have this power for sure.

Because when women are accused of being superstitious,

when a woman is like,

I can feel this.

I can feel,

like,

what are you talking about? This is this illogical but they're so

sensitive they can feel something they can detect something and people are like that's just this

irrational retarded woman right I'm kind of on the side of the women where I'm like but you know

they are so sensitive to the cosmos.

It is crazy.

Especially grandmas.

And I think the reason why mothers and grandmas are more psychically and cosmically in tune is because when you have a child, you become

entangled with another being that you have to give so much care and attention to, that you become

like entangled across space and time to their being and it affects you so much, right? So it's like, that's probably my explanation for it, honestly. It's like just this intense focus on another being that you care so much for.

That is also came from you that was a part of you at some point, especially that.

It's like part of you goes somewhere else, right?

So it's like, I don't know.

I think there's something to that, actually.

I'm not saying it's always correct, but it's never something you can dismiss.

It's never something that can be dismissed.

There's always a strange resonance. And I want to ask a simple question, like, why is it wrong to...

Why is it wrong to harmonize Marxism with that? At least kind of, like, be open-minded to maybe how it could be...

Like, you know know because the typical

response no Marxism is strictly just about logic and I'm just like man maybe Soviet grandmas could

have saved the USSR though you know what I mean

it's like it just I don't know I just I just I think that

we need to we need to consider these things that That's all I'm saying. You can disagree with it, but we should at least consider it.

We should consider that we know less than we think and that we're more in tune in ways than we

know. That's it.

You know, we know

less than we think and we're more in tune

in ways than we know.

This is the first time in the

entire history of infrared that I'm like, I've been, and I know it's something I've been doing this year.

It's turned off a lot of people and made them think I've lost my mind.

That now I'm going into the crazy town.

It started with the astrology thing and they're like Haas has officially lost his mind But, uh, I mean, uh, I mean, go be in your sane world then. I don't, I, I look at your world of sanity and it's not doing so well.

That's all I'm saying. I'm just like,

when you pretend to be the most sane person ever,

it's like you're,

you know,

it's not looking good for you.

I don't know.

Like,

I see so much psychological,

intense conflict inside of you, i see all this unresolved

this is your sane world it's like go be in your sane world then you know like are you

really so sane if you're in the same world and what is sane about

you you don't have confidence in your life usually get zero you usually get zero bitches you usually

are crying about it you usually have no confidence you usually can't even stand up for yourself. You usually

like

you're usually just not in a good place.

You're usually just like not in tune.

You're usually just like

fucking, I don't know.

Like, why would I want to be like you?

If I'm going crazy or something, then

who should I be like you?

The sane person? I'm talking about people who call me

crazy. I'm like, okay, I'm crazy, but

tell me who, what is the paradigm?

What is like the paradigm of sanity I should be conforming to here?

Because I honest to God, just like, do not want to be like you. like what does that even fucking mean who is saying like name one person right now who's saying

just one person.

And I will unravel the nature of their insanity to you right now. Barack Obama That guy's so fake That's one of the most fake people ever it is crazy like when you read someone's Wikipedia and you're like this person also believes in aliens and shit you're just like okay this person's fucking crazy and like this person believes in like um i don't know like this person believes in, like, I don't know, like, this person believes in astrology and all this other stuff.

It's like, okay.

But you know what I, honest to God, you want to know what I think it does become insane?

When you treat it with the dogmatism and certainty that science types treat science with, when you insist that panpsychism, that you are certain, you have certainty with the same experimental, or I should rather say, with the same imperious experiential certainty that this is how things are, and that you know that with airtight certainty, that's when I think it becomes crazy.

I kind of think when you're just open-minded when you're like, I don't know, but I'm maybe, maybe, right?

It's possible.

Maybe we should think on a different way about things. Then I think you're safe from being crazy. But when you're like, I know for a fact, this is how it works. You're starting to attach the belief that you, that's when shit gets fucked up, right?

I think, but you know

what I think? I think even scientoids

who are like, genes are real.

You're crazy, bro.

You're a fucking crazy as fuck.

Like, you're not sane.

You're literally, because you draw these people out

in the conversation. You ask them

what a gene is, and they can't even fucking

defend it, but they still insist

that it's real.

There's so many examples of scientoids being crazy fucks in the same way that the problem is not superstition versus realism.

The problem is these people who think they have control versus people who are chill with the cosmos.

Like you have a control attitude toward the cosmos or a chill attitude. The control freak people are the ones that are crazy.

Every cult you ever heard about,

like the UFO cults,

where they all kill themselves in the end,

those are people who have

a false sense of control.

The problem is not that they're

entertaining superstition. Because all your grandmas are superstitious.

The problem is they're making it about control, right?

Like, isn't that the truth? The problem is ultimately, like, the control aspect.

I don't want to control nothing, you know, like, even if I were to entertain doing remote viewing, which I already have, I'm like, but even if I was like, my relationship to that is very lynchian.'s not about control it's about just you vibe with it sometimes and you kind of there's sometimes there's things i can't really put into language because it's just like you're on a frequency and you understand it's a...

You know, you can't...

You don't want to fucking explain it to anyone, you know?

It's like you wouldn't get it.

You wouldn't fucking get it.

But I could explain it, but you wouldn't fucking get it, you know.

I've had accidental remote viewings, for sure,

where I don't like know what I'm doing,

but I'm definitely visiting places.

I think so, actually. I think I've been places and I didn't know what I was doing at all. I also don't think that when you're dreaming and

you're remote, when you're dreaming and you're like actually like seeing things that are real,

I had, okay, first of all, like, you can't think of it like a realism.

You're going, there's going to be a lot of distortions and a lot of shit that's around you.

That is a projection of your psych.

But there's going to be an underlying form that is real.

So, like, let's say you visit a house.

The house is not going to be like necessarily exactly how it is in real life, but it could

be the same layout and it could be this exact table that's there.

But for example, the cupboards could be like blurry or some nonsense. But the table is like,

so it's never like everything is direct realism type of thing you know um you have to like have this

dynamic very creative worldview where you just understand that nothing is necessarily absolute

but it is in a frequency, a certain tendency prevails, you know?

Um, I'm not saying I know I was remote viewing. That's fucking crazy. But I have had spooky dreams for sure.

Like everyone I know has said the same thing that they have.

Everyone I know has had weird spooky dreams.

Like everybody I fucking know has had weird spooky dreams like everybody I fucking know has had them

and the biggest form of, um...

You know what's fucking really scary about infrared when I think about it?

The main prophecies of the infrared movement all happened in an extremely intense period of when i was like insomniac and i would literally be like lucid dreaming during the day because i was just was not sleeping and I was just in such a state of aggravated intense mental stress where like I was going in and out and I was lucid dreaming a lot a lot and a lot of sleep paralysis when I would sleep

for like maybe one hour or something I would have crazy sleep paralysis and crazy lucid dreaming

where I'm going

in and out right

and then when I was in that like frequency

that vibe state

that's when like CPUSA 36

and something about

the American West

just started making so much sense to me.

I don't fucking know, man.

I don't know.

Like, that's when...

That's when the 36 idea just came and it was like it so much started making sense and it just felt so intensely real it just felt like i don't fucking know man and i'm not saying that was illogical or irrational because I could see the rationality of it.

Like, yes, the Communist Party, USA.

And like, that's the way forward.

This country's undergoing so many contradictions this is the way we can basically

sail through all of this more or less and it's like i had such an intensely acute understanding

of the contradictions the country's facing because of a lot of contemplation, a lot of theory, a lot of analysis is happening for our collective, infrared collective, but it's like, bro, the, basically like the prehistory of ACP is like

some crazy state of like half awake psychosis honestly

fucking crazy right

it's absolutely insane to think about Thank you. But I was, like, so aggravated in such an agri-

It was like such an intense stress, cortisol maxing state

where like everything was just drive, drive, drive, drive, right?

So, like, I was, like, combining these feelings of this intense, aggravated state of, like, restlessness, unable to sleep with this, like, really intense imagery of like a fucking American

Civil War and like

the Communist Party being

an important part of that and like

I don't know man like

probably a lot of that is the

projection of a restless man you know like a cortisol maxing restless

person who's just like feeling that they're in a war right now and i'm just like seeing all of this

flash before my eyes.

But there's another thing, too, which I think is real,

and I think all of you guys have this intuition as well,

we are headed toward an incredibly violent future.

We are headed toward an extremely intense, violent civil war.

And I just feel it the same way animals feel a storm is coming.

I feel that shit.

I feel it very deeply.

You know?

I don't just calculate it rationally that it's going to

happen. I feel it very

deeply that it's going to happen.

The whole reason I talk about this

Islam shit is because I feel the

American people where they're at and where their

dreams are, where there are heads spaces. But I also feel the American Civil War coming, like,

big time.

The rational explanation for the U.S. Civil War is a systemic contradiction that is not... See, like, the thing about... I want to... I want you guys to, like, have some insight into Marxism for me.

I combine Marxist analysis with feeling.

I'm very much

I never...

Yes, I can detach

and coldly

create a vacuum sealed

environment

mentally where I'm just completely

divorced from the feeling aspect. But whatever conclusion I draw, I have to know what it means also at the feeling side of things, right?

So something can't just make sense like completely logically or rationally. It has to make sense intuitively right that's the

otherwise you're a philistine you're not actually thinking through what this shit actually

means right so um when i think like i combine an intense level of analysis with that i don't just have an

you know who else does this is logo to be honest like logo doesn't just think about shit

because he's doing this cold you know logical shit he's he's actually thinking about

like what makes sense how would this what would be the vibe here like logo is a very tasteful man

he can sense things and things and taste things.

And it's like, that's how it kind of works.

And it's like you do form this objective analysis and you run it through that way.

Where is this going?

But we all are psychically in tune with what everyone in the country is feeling simultaneously at all times, because we're all experiencing the same thing, right?

And so, like, we can get a sense of what direction we're headed in, actually.

If you actually just think about it a little bit and what could happen what would make sense if it did happen you know what i mean what would

it's almost like everything is a puzzle and what would it makes sense for this puzzle to resolve into right But you can't be dogmatic because you don't always have perspective.

Sometimes you're clouded by biases and you're not thinking about things

through enough, you know? Thank you. a lot of people are looking at these, like, new elections with the Democrats, and it's like, this is a pretext for civil war, especially when they're pushing the communism thing and the Islam thing on the Republican side.

When you're making the elections existential, every election has been existential.

How do you not feel the civil war coming?

Every election is portrayed as existential.

This is about the... Whether America's going to die or not.

It's so existential every time now.

And, like, that's not going to...

The system cannot contain such an intensity

of conflict and polarization.

It just can't.

Everyone can feel civil war

is coming.

Alex Garland literally

made a fucking movie

about it.

Like everyone

fucking feels this.

So what do you guys think? tack should we be doing tick tack a logo's idea another thing i always keep in the back of my mind is logos a hundred

years idea.

That is absolutely something I keep in my mind a lot, actually.

Um... You know, Logo is 100 years idea or something or 50 years.

He's like, things will just go on as they are for 50 to 100 years.

And, uh, I think about that a lot, you know.

I do think about that a lot.

Are we overly subjectivizing?

You know, it's something that is only intense and immediate for us, actually, in the

time span of America, just going to be a lot longer than we think.

And... the time span of America just going to be a lot longer than we think. And I lean against the

50 or 100 years idea

but I keep it

in the back of my mind

because maybe it's true.

I lean against it though. You know, I. I lean against it, though.

You know, I kind of lean against it.

I think maybe it's an overcorrection for the first thing I talked about of like overly

subjectivizing.

Maybe that's an overcorrection.

That's kind of my take is I lean against it, that it's an overcorrection.

Because I think, okay, if I understand it right, the idea is we're overly subjectivizing,

the system itself will take another 50 to 100 years.

And my current intuition, or my, not strongly, but my current inclination, I would call it, is to say,

but too many of us are in fact subjectivizing this.

And that's precisely why it's going to come to a head, because the

American people are also subjectivizing. And that's how Civil Wars actually happened. They don't happen

because they don't happen because the system runs out of steam they happen because on the subjective side of things on a mass scale

we're unable to go on anymore with it

like from a purely systematic perspective we can survive another 50 to 100.

But can the masses

subjectively cope with this system for another 50 to 100 years?

That's when I become more skeptical.

But I don't know.

I think Logo basically thinks, he's actually more materialist than me.

It's so funny.

He thinks basically like, as long as people can have their goodies,

they'll be fine.

Like, until people start starving,

it's going to be okay.

And I'm like,

it's kind of true, though,

you know?

He doesn't have a point about that.

Cynical as it is, it's kind of,

it's like as long as people can just keep having their chicken nuggies,

it's okay.

They will just,

it'll be fine, honestly, for them. That's a good point.

Time itself has accelerated.

So what appears as 50 years, yeah, it can, it's a, yeah, you're right.

There's an exponential function here.

It's not being taken into account. What do you guys think?

Ticktack time? You know, Thank you. I do want to visit logo soon.

I just can't afford to.

And yeah, that's really it.

I can't afford it.

I would love to go to the Bay Area soon and hang out with logo

people sometimes they tell me

how can't you travel enough and I'm like

with what money?

So... Thank you. You know, You know, You know, Yes, welcome to the Ultra House. We actually added a new person, Eurasianizer. Would you like to salt him?

All right, Eurasianizer. i like so tim all right irrationizer hello i am a proponent of uracianization theory in uracianization theory we are allowing the land power to spontaneously establish its own order in its region and we will not institute a state to do this it will be a spontaneous process that doesn't yield for anything but we struggle we have tried to get in contact with him but failed because of our small numbers

in comparison to the whole of the Orationist

movement, which are currently

two programatists.

To... to the end notes publication about this idea?

We have Russian notes And

Freshizers have

Start notes

Start notes?

Yes

privatizers have

current notes

Ah

Parent Would you Would you like Privatizer to come? current notes. Ah. Parent?

Would you like privatizer to come?

Yes.

Yeah.

Ring privatizer.

That's interesting.

Privatizer.

Hi there.

What's going on?

So you're a statist?

No. You're're a statist? No.

You're not a

statist?

No, I believe

in true

autonomous

self-organization

and self-governance

such as

as seen

under the Mongol Empire

and under

the reign of the Timurit empire with tamerlane forms of

spontaneous uh localized self-organization and autonomy and uh you know true liberty

i respect that i respect that. I respect that.

But then,

but then that doesn't make much sense to me

because what I've seen is that you're a,

you're a Marxist-Leninist.

Yeah.

But how does that?

That's enough of that and finally have other guests

requesting

Jeff go ahead

oh

excuse me but Hello? Excuse me, but...

What?

Hello, can you hear me?

Yeah.

So why are you a

I think a

um myroid

what

sorry I have speech

environment my speech therapist

tell me

you gotta get the microphone

out of your ass or whatever.

I don't know what the...

Hell, I'm listening to.

Kano, go ahead.

Yo, bro, how are you doing?

Terribly.

What's up?

So, like, a couple weeks ago, I was in your life.

And I was, I was asking you about the gamble addiction advice.

About what?

About, like, gamble addiction advice.

You gave me advice and I just want to say you like you changed my life like on god thank you

drop drop 20 subs to compensate me man that's how you can thank me with all the new money

you have from not gambling you can just uh spend it on me that's uh it's only fair you know

i've saved you so much money you should give me some of that

uh king

uh whatever his name is

hello yeah his name is Hello

Yeah

Um

So what does

Infrawoke mean

Infrawalk is better than woke, I don't know, on top.

What does it mean?

Seeing in the dark.

Seeing in the dark okay and

Marxism is true

what do you mean by that

like is it like

true

as in one plus one equals two

yeah same exact way

actually

okay and how would you it's two? Yeah, same exact way, actually.

Okay, and how would you,

how would you explain that this is the truth, like Marxism is true?

Okay.

Okay. True. Or am I supposed to argue against me? I'm supposed to argue against me?

I don't know if I'm not going to be. I would have to know how to argue it and debate with you debate with you.

If I have to argue against it and debate with you

i'm going to argue against it and debate with you Is this how you debate like you're trying an oral farm or something

you believe in science i mean of course like i believe in science i mean of course like i believe in science i guess so how can you deny

the science

which is marxism

okay um i'm not denying de science um so you accept it marxism as what true because it's the science

is the science yeah i mean

when you say if i believe if science is true i didn't mean like uh or believe it's real like

of course science is a thing you can do like you can do scientific studies and science is a word we use or that is what i mean by it gibberish on your part not a whole lot of what's a whole lot of gibberish coming out of your mouth not a whole lot of what a whole lot of gibberish coming out of your mouth

okay like we aren't even arguing about anything right now like so you accept marxism

and in what way like what do you mean you accept marxism is true like as the ultimate truth or what yes i i feel like i'm

not um able to uh this say that how do you solve how do you solve the system of german idealism

explain explain your way the system of the system of what german idealism how do you solve it explain

and what is german idealism exactly How do you solve it? Explain. And what is German idealism exactly? I need to know.

You don't know what German idealism is?

Is it like is it Nazism or something?

You got to explain it to me.

I mean, you could just tell me really quick what German idealism is like have you solved philosophy i didn't solve philosophy no i didn't you just meander and what just i just

i don't know thing I don't know anything.

You just walk around like a dumb guy with ice cream?

No, do you?

You don't, you probably didn't solve philosophy like either, right?

Like, how can you solve that? I don't have to solve it something that's already

been solved by people who came before me teacher of carl marx himself like so you're

basically saying everything he says is basically answered every uh moral

question absolutely absolutely what is the moral what do you think morality is yeah probably you're

talking about like um how we should uh act

within a society all over again what what does that mean what it should mean what is the ought what is it

explain it what is the aught

the odds like i'm not i'm not like what is it

english is my third language what what does odd

what is it you have no answer so you're bankrupt nothing

nothing in the bank you're broke

no i'm not i'm not even like i'm not

nothing at all you have nothing

i'm just i'm just trying to

understand like

if this was a bank robbery

i'd be leaving empty

handed

and although nothing would have been taken from you

you didn't have anything

to begin with

what I What I was asking, right, is you believe that Marxism basically answered every moral question, right?

Right.

Every philosophical.

Yeah, okay that that

is what you claim

correct

okay

and how we

should treat each other

in a society

how society should function

what is it should

why why are you asking what should is?

Well, you're using the word, aren't you?

You should know what it means if you use the word.

Why are you using words you don't know how to explain or understand is the question when i ask you

what do you mean my true i was asking like do you mean i i understand what you're getting at like

you're trying to um uh criticize that i was asking you

what you mean by truth but it's really important for me to know what you mean by truth for me to

be able to understand what the ultimate yeah now i already understand right truth Okay.

Yeah, I couldn't tell you, like, if Marxism is true.

Because you live a life of meandering uncertainty, devoid of purpose, devoid of direction, devoid of anything, except ice cream and Doritos.

I don't eat your side.

I don't eat potato chips.

The only thing you're saying is potato chips.

That's all you believe in.

Potato chips.

I guess so, man. believe in potato chips i guess so mad potato chips and angry birds that's your life

raw like raw milk and

maybe two right

and that's it

that's all you believe in just a bunch of that's like 100% like that that is what i believe in

this one lack of confidence in your voice and i instantly know you've lost any debate you walked into

about marxism because you're not confident in your position and you the reason you're not is because you're not inspired and the reason you're not inspired is because you don't have the truth.

Okay, so

Wait a second, I need to think about what I would say

I agree, you need to think about a whole lot of things

You need to come back to me when you've solved the system of German idealism

And the way that Marx did

Ah and idealism in the way that Marx did.

ACP is an American reactionary party, and you are a simpleton.

Quite literally, you are a simpleton

Alex Zayo

you sound familiar

who is this

What's going on

It's going

I It's going.

How's going?

I don't know how.

So you're saying how much isn't work? I don't know, man, you told me.

Is it going or is it not going?

I don't know, man.

The entire system of super imperialism is going out and communism on a planetary scale

that's going they were they were imperialist too like you know that's it in the sense that you're using the word there's nothing wrong with it in the sense that i'm using the word there's something wrong with it social imperialism is bad huh it's good huh all these is western

honestly it kind of is honestly

like soviet union was doing wasn't

that bad at all

what about mal china was it good

yeah

my china was good uh

probably near perfect if you ask me

near perfect huh

and spiritually especially spiritually very close to

perfection close to perfection i thought you were muslim though yes and and they were atheists

spiritually they're not

alignment.

I could just tell you're so

unenlightened, such on a low vibration

frequency of it.

Low vibration, huh?

You're just like using words you don't understand.

Like, communist atheism is a million times closer to belief in the islamic god than majority of muslim hypocrites who do nothing for palestine when they talk about god they're talking about they're talking about FIFA They're talking about FIFA.

When Mao, even when they were denying God, they were closer to God.

They were closer to God. You don't even think with your head.

You just look at words.

You just look at words like a child.

Look at the words. I. Look at the words.

I just look at the words.

Why are you just repeating?

That's why I mean, because you don't have any ideological consistence.

I don't care about ideologies.

Those are it's idle.

You don't care.

Yeah, that's the whole point.

I don't care about ideology at all. You don You don't care. Yeah, that's the whole point. I don't care about ideology at all.

You don't give a fuck.

Yeah, that's the problem.

At all.

I'm a truth secret.

I'm not an ideologist.

Yeah.

Your gibber, Anglo box ideologies that are roped.

Anglo box.

You're collecting like funkel pops. I don't care about that.

Oh, your fungal pops don't match. I don't give

a fuck. Why would I care about it?

And that's why

Andrew Wilson destroyed you, Zerka

destroyed you, Twentas destroyed

all of them destroyed you

It's like the most ridiculous

Like right wing brown person thing

I've ever heard in my life

Oh really?

Yeah you are the face of the

You are literally the voice of the brown right

Like you're ridiculous

Yeah but still

No Still Plentis destroyed you the voice of the brown right like you're ridiculous yeah but still no still the Fuentes destroyed

you and or Wilson destroyed you why is it nobody who has an american accent ever says that

no like how come nobody with an American accent ever says American action yeah because that's what you want

you're Marxist

so like everybody

What are we even talking about anymore

I mean that's what you preach

I mean everybody deserve's what you preach. I mean, everybody deserve everything.

Like, let's go.

Like, Marxists preach American accents now?

What the fuck are we talking about?

Yeah.

Yep.

Let's go.

Marxism is good.

It is. Everyone knows knows it it's good yeah it's good yeah it is

what are you like some tether was persecuted

were you persecuted from a communist country

no not really are you like

exiled and persecuted because your egg farm was taken, your slaves were taken away?

Not really, no.

Are you an entrepreneur living in Miami who's just about to make it big?

If, if, just, just like, trust me, bro, trust me, bro, me bro it's coming no not even that so what do you do for a living

me a multitude of different things ah so nothing you're unemployed that's great yeah unemployed yeah

sure i'm a professional yawazoo thing, you're unemployed, that's great. Yeah, unemployed, yeah. Sure.

I'm a professional yacht business owner.

I own yacht corporations.

Yacht companies.

They take them out on a mortgage or a debt but my community funds me they they give subs and i pay back the debt slowly by slowly but uh the yacht business is going well actually

community drops 10,

20 subs on a regular basis

and we're all good.

Are you jealous?

Oh, what are you talking about?

You're jealous that the truth of Marxism can allow you...

Truth of Marxism.

Truth of Marxism, yeah?

Are you a Roblox character?

Like, do you actually have a personality besides giggling at things?

No, yeah,

I have pretty much, huh?

It's like you're

an NPC. You're an

NPC of like the

22023 like red pill

Manosphere.

It's like the typical

and this is the quintessential

2023 red pill NPC.

Like that's what that guy was.

Like that's all he was.

He was just like this 2023 red pill NPC who has no face or personality.

He's literally just a generic mannequin from 2023 from the red pill sphere who never moved on a bitcoin wants to talk to me what's going on bitcoin

oh nothing much how you doing terrible you're going to send a bitcoin or what oh god no

that's my private property

but you claim you are bitcoin are you not

i am i am one of 21 million

so you only you only are one bitcoin correct

that's right that's that's nothing small potatoes that's a

lot 65 000 what do you mean it's small potatoes i don't even want that it's too little

you don't want 65 000 that's. I guess I'll keep it.

Yeah, you should keep it. It's too little

for me. My channel, my

supporters give me way more than that on a

daily basis. Oh, I bet.

Anyway,

I don't think

Marxism is true. you do? I don't think Martism is true.

Why not?

I think it's been debunked for like 100 years.

How?

I think it was built on labor theory of value, which is obviously false.

Okay.

What is the labor theory of value?

Where does that come from?

It comes from Marx.

Okay.

You believe that.

You're instantaneously just not educated.

Yeah, he believed in it.

But you say it comes from Marx

and it didn't. So what are we talking about?

You're asking me who initially

came up with labor theory of value?

Yeah, where does it originate from? What's the

context? Oh, I've no clue, but it's

false. Okay. What

is it consistent?

It's not consistent.

It's wrong.

What does it consist in?

What is it?

You're asking me what it is?

Yeah, what's the labor theory of value, according to you.

It's at the value of a good or service is how much labor

is put into it. Wrong.

No, that's not wrong. No,

it's not right. Instantly wrong.

That's what it is.

That's just not true. As opposed to subjective

theory of value, which is, you know,

a utility supply and demand.

But you're wrong about the labor theory of value.

No, I'm not wrong about that.

I've read books on it, so I know

it's not wrong. Well, you're wrong about that.

The notion that all values...

Yeah, the notion that

all of it is from labor is not true.

Well, that's fine.

What do you think it is?

Yeah, the labor theory of value more or less understands that the fluctuations and distinctions in value are primarily a consequence

of the laboring social metabolism of society but to mysis and adam smiths sorry according to adamises and Adam Smith, sorry, according to Adam Smith and Ricardo, who came up with it, basically when we take for granted a few things, including the fixed values or wealth that comes from nature the use values that are rooted in

what people basically considered normal to use the utilities so whether that's impacted by culture

or subjectivity or nature is completely immaterial the value that comes from nature

once we factor all of that and take it into account only then can we say that labor is the source

of value but not before you take all those things as are granted and take them all into account so

once you account for all of those things, then the differences of the quantities of value in different goods is based in the labor that was put into them.

But that's not the same as saying that, you know,

you can just abstract that from the context of use values

or values inherited from nature.

So it's as simple as that.

There is a very flowery word salad, but even Marx himself said surplus value theory comes from labor theory plus profit.

He said that you're shaving off the profit of people's labor.

And he even defined labor as you take input, which is labor labor and then that's imbued into the

good or service so he himself believed that have you read marks's critique of the gothic

program since you're such an expert on marks i haven't read the whole thing but i've definitely

read what does he say in the critique of the Gotha program?

Remind me.

So you don't know?

I read parts of it, but it's just so wrong. I can't even remember all of it.

Yeah, so Marx doesn't agree with the simplification you're running with.

He doesn't say labor is the source of all wealth.

Of course we can say that.

He doesn't claim that all profits are simply the stolen wages of each individual laborer.

He rejects, and he makes that clear in the critique of the Gotha program.

So clearly you're not familiar with it.

Yeah, I agree.

That's not what he was.

I'm just trying to say you're not educated enough to have an opinion on the stop.

You literally said meis.

You pronounced it meis.

Who are you to say that I'm not educated about?

The pronunciations don't matter when we're talking about the content of what's it.

Yeah, you don't even know.

You don't even know the modern economists.

Okay, I don't know how to pronounce the word correctly of some guy who, you know, so who cares.

So the point is labor theory about it matters.

It matters because labor theory of value.

I'm telling you, you're not even familiar with the theory or with the authors in question.

And you're telling me, I don't know how to pronounce his name.

Who cares?

Yeah, I'm telling you that it was debunked it's been debunked for a hundred years you can say that all you want but if you

don't even know what it is how can you are you in a position to talk about it i'm telling you the

reason you don't know it's debunked is because you haven't read modern economists. That's my point.

Myciss is a modern economist now? Mises. Mises, Rothbard,

these are modern economies. The school they belong to is called the modern school. I'm pretty sure

the modern economists are the neoclassical types and the

marginalists, not the Austrian school.

Austrian school is modern economists.

Even Michael Hoover is Austrian.

I don't think they're really classified as modern by most people, but whatever.

That's fine.

In any case, in any case, labor theory of value has been debunked for a hundred years.

But they haven't debunked anything.

I can debunk it for you right now again.

Go ahead.

Yeah, I can give you their deductions right now go ahead debunk it for us and then we'll

sure in fact i can even give you the example that mises himself just debunk it we give you the

floor just do it so suppose there's a town where there's plenty of pizza makers

when you make a pizza

and then you go to sell it

it won't be very expensive

it's very cheap but then if I go

and drive that pizza to a town

where there's no pizza makers

that price of that pizza shot up significantly,

meaning that it's not tied to labor.

It's rather tied to utility and supply and demand.

Okay.

It's subjective value and subjective preference.

Does Marks regard labor as individual or social?

Does he regard labor as an aggregate division of labor

or does he regard labor as this

completely isolated

individual thing?

He regarded labor as the effort

put into an item

gave it some sort of objective value.

That's not true.

That is objectively.

That's what labor theory.

Why don't you just Google it and put it up for everyone?

They Google it for me.

Did Marks regard labor as social or individual?

Just Google labor theory of value and put it up for everyone?

You can debunk me right now. Did Marks regard the labor value put it up for everyone. You can debunk me right now.

Did Marks regard the labor value put into something?

Google labor theory of value and put it up for everyone.

According to Marks, you can put this into AI right now.

According to Marks, is the labor value reducible to the individual work put into it, or can we only talk about the value of the thing when we take into account the social aggregate, which he proves in volume three when he talks about how when we have to account for the average rate of profit, we can only do so on account of the fact

that labor is actually socially

being done

and the products of labor are

only at the social level

both are false it is nothing to

labor and everything to do with supply

individual labor are not the same thing.

Both are false.

But you haven't debunk the social labor part with the example you use.

Of course I have.

Because it's not tied to laborer.

And the example itself, because it's tied to subjective problems.

But if there are more laborers

who are making pizzas

than... It's tight and subjective preference.

No, if there are more laborers making

pizzas, then

the output that produces

whatever price is attached to the pizza is going to be influenced or implanted by the fact that the price is going to go down as a consequence.

You don't even know what you're saying. I don't think you even know what you're saying right now.

Why not?

I don't even think you know what you're saying right now.

Why not?

Because it's literally meaningless.

Why?

Because it means nothing.

You just cut me off, so you have to explain why.

Yeah, because you're not saying anything.

Well, when there's more pizzas

that are being produced,

the prices are going to go down

because there's more being produced.

Yes, exactly.

Thank you.

Right.

It's based on supply and demand.

Very good.

Marks never denied supply and demand. Very good. Not labor.

Right.

He explicitly said that it's tied to labor.

But Marks never denied, hold on. No, he didn't deny supply and demand.

He just said when we account for supply and demand,

then what makes the difference?

That's the point.

So then explain to me,

where does labor come into it

if it's based on supply and demand?

So let's just,

let's just,

okay,

I'll give you the perfect example.

Let's have a,

like a mirror image

where that town has that many pizza makers, but then

there's that many, let's think of a good example. I don't know. Yes, go ahead. There's that many

people who make shoes in the same way.

Like the same exact way that there's that many people

disproportionately making pizzas, you have the same amount of people

making shoes.

You go to the other town and the pizza costs more

and there's just as much labor being put into shoes

and the shoes also cost more.

But you compare both towns and in both cases the price between the pizza and the shoes are not the

same. So in the town where there's more scarcity of labor when it comes to input into pizza, the price of pizza is still different from the price of the shoe, for example. So that's where the labor theory of that's where it would be decisive. You're not even addressing the labor theory of value. You literally just debunked yourself. If labor theory

of value was correct and it was proportional, it would be the same price. But you just

accept that it's different prices, meaning that... No, it's not. You just debunked yourself. Why are you

screaming and getting angry because you don't understand what you're talking about.

The materials that goes into shoes are more expensive. No, but the labor that goes into shoes is not the same as that goes into pizza.

So that would be how the labor theory of value explains it.

Yeah.

You just debunked yourself because you agree that I didn't say the same labor

is being put into shoes and pizza

I'm saying the same amount of laborers.

So let's say it's one guy in one town

making a pizza and then it's one guy making a shoe

the price between pizza and shoe is still different

and if you go in the other town and you have 30 people making pizzas and 30 people making shoes, the commodity price of the shoe and the pizza will also be distinct. So that would be where it would be decisive. Not when you're just creating exaggerated cases where supplying demand is the main factor.

On the social level, things balance out because of competition and so on and so on.

So eventually things get to an average.

You accept competition?

What are you talking about?

That it exists, of course.

And that drives prices down?

Yes.

Absolutely.

Mark said so.

Mark said that, but that's what Mark said.

Mark said that's in part a factor for the falling rate of profit.

So you agree, competition drives prices down, even though labor imbues an objective value into commodities. Is that correct?

Yeah, because price and value are not the same, first of all.

Okay.

But Marx is the one that talked

about competition driving

prices to go down

so down that they fall below the values

actually. And that's a

that leads to capitalist crisis and the falling

rate of profit. Yeah, I think you have no idea

what you're talking about.

Okay, go Google it then.

Why don't you Google it with your review and put it up in front of everyone?

How about that?

You're just not educated.

You're not even educated enough to talk about this.

You just debunk yourself like three times and don't even realize it.

You can keep saying that, but it's just not true.

So I don't know what you want. That's fine. I'm going to keep saying it.

Okay. You don't know what the labor three values.

Can you tell me what subjective theory of value is? Do you even know what that is?

Yeah, it's just a way of avoiding the

thing that political economists, like it's avoiding a problem. Yeah, define subjective just a way of avoiding the thing that political economists, like, it's avoiding a problem.

Defend subjective theory of value.

That everything's value is just based on what each individual subjectively deems it as worth.

And you don't believe that individuals have subjective preferences and their own values?

They may have subjective preferences, but because human beings live in a society, those preferences eventually generalize and normalize and stabilized to a point where we have to actually reckon with the nature of our division of labor that's producing

the goods that society has subjected.

I mean, that's just obviously decided that it wants.

The notion that our entire division of labor is organized around what each particular

individual subjectively decides that they want is ridiculous. It's just such a

preposterous way of modeling. It's just like avoiding political economy entirely. It's just a

ridiculous way. You agree that some people want pizza and some people don't. So what? Everything

averages out on a social level. Some people are willing to pay more and some people are not.

Some, but it doesn't matter because eventually things stabilize into social norms and tendencies.

It doesn't matter where the site of causation is, according to you.

That's a completely metaphysical, bankrupt question.

We're actually dealing with the question of political economy.

What is political economy?

What does that mean? Explain political economy.

What is that?

Political economy?

The organization of goods and services and trading in a society

What is the school of political economy?

Go look it up since you're school of political

economy. Yeah, look it up, Google it. Go ahead.

Since you're so uneducated that you're so

passionately talking about things you have no familiarity with.

Yeah, you're still like running with a theory that has been debunked for 100 years and don't even understand.

Keep saying that, but it's just cope.

You can keep coping if you want.

It's debunked a hundred times by a hundred.

Do you want to cope more?

Oh, go ahead and say it again and hopefully wish it, which is true.

Just wish it's true more. Keep ahead and say it again and hopefully wish it's true. Just wish it's true

more. Keep wish casting something.

Like, what do you think? You're just

repeating something but not providing any substance

for why. Yeah, because

not only did I debunk you, you debunked yourself

and you debunk nothing. You debunk nothing.

And I debunk anything except- Not only did the pizza argument debunked yourself. You debunk nothing. You debunk nothing. And I debunk anything except

you, but obviously people have subjective preferences. Who cares of people who have subjective

preferences? What does that have to do with political economy? The reason it matters is because

it's directly contrary to what you believe.

No, it's not.

Political economy takes for granted the fact that people have subjective preferences.

It just takes that as the premise and then works from there to actually analyze how the division of labor works and where value actually comes from.

You're against division of labor. You're against division of labor works and where value actually comes from. You're against division of labor.

You're against division of labor.

You're a Marxist.

There's no normative dimension to political money.

Marx is against the political economy is trying to analyze how.

The political economy is trying to analyze how the economic

systems that already exist in works.

Why would you interrupt me when I just said that?

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

So you conceded the debate. The fact you interrupted me

mid-sentence when I was explaining to you that

in political economy, they're not

normatively imposing what system they would prefer.

They're just trying to analyze how economics as it exists now works.

And then you interrupted me mid-sentence to do a total non-secuator about how you perceive subjectively that someone was debunked thanks for conceding the debate you lost

goodbye he like you keep telling it's like a it's like a religious mantra it's been debunked

it's been debunked you can keep telling yourself that, but it hasn't, especially not by Austrians.

Like, what a ridiculous thing that you're saying? You don't even believe in a division of labor.

That's my favorite part. My favorite part when he's like, you don't even believe in the division of labor. That's my favorite part. My favorite part when he's like,

you don't even believe

in the division of labor.

First of all,

the context is that we're talking

about the divisions of labor

that actually exist now.

Second of all,

what are you talking about

that Marxists don't believe

in a division of labor

at all? What are you talking about? marxists don't believe in a division of labor at all what are you talking

about what does that even mean what would that entail there's always even if people are not going to

be assigned fixed roles for their entire life there's still a division of labor even

in communism. It's just not

based on people assigned to a

fixed profession forever, according

to Marx. You know, when he gives this

example, I

just, I can't talk to people who lack the

patience to hear perspectives that contradict your own.

That guy is a classic example of someone who like is being contradicted and then they have to interrupt me because they psychologically cannot cope with the fact that there's a perspective distinct from their own.

It's like if you don't have the patience to hear an opposing perspective, don't go on the internet debating people because you're going to

make a clown of yourself. Imagine being a grown man calling yourself Bitcoin and like jibbering about Austrianism or whatever.

Like you're like an NPC, dude.

You're just an NPC.

Squared, go ahead.

Hey, how's it going, man?

I like your beard.

So I guess I got got a little bit of a

simpler question for you.

I guess, like, what's your response to

Bukinen?

Or Bokanin.

Excuse me, Bacanin.

He was so dumb.

Yo, ACP Chan, what are you talking about

transportation? What example

of transportation was given? I didn't even hear one.

Bro, ACP Chan, what

transportation example are you talking about?

My interpretation

of the LT...

What are you talking about?

Yo, what?

Bakunin?

Yeah, Bakunin.

Um...

Yeah, he was terrible. what do you mean

um i mean i guess i can like one of his argument for you but his criticism of um marx's

transitional state um he didn't know what his state was and he just doesn't understand the distinction between statehood and authority and he couldn't even organize anything according to his own principles i mean i don't know man uh Give me one sec. Bro, ACP Chan,

you're talking about

that wasn't about

transportation, though.

It was about whether in one place

if they're making more.

Bitcoin says that

this example debunks the LTV, but Marx considers transportation labor to also add to the labor embodied in the commodity.

ACP Chen, he's talking about isolated towns. So in town one, there's more pizza makers. In town two, there's only one pizza maker. He's

saying in town two, pizza's more

expensive, and in town one, pizza's

less expensive. He claims

this debunks the LTV. That's what he

was trying to say. He wasn't talking about

transporting anything between the towns.

Yeah.

Turkmenistan added 100 to the more chest.

Bro, Turkmenistan with the 100.

That's what I'm talking about, bro.

That's why I love Turkmenistan.

Um.

Yeah, bro, like, His example was so ridiculous, it's like it was so baffling

It's like one of those baffling examples where you're like

What?

Yo, Strah-Stany.

That's what I'm talking about, bro.

Let's go.

Let's turn it up in here.

We'll reach the goal for sure.

Bro, I'm going to get back to you on Bakun in for one second.

Yeah, take your time.

Like, why didn't he just say, like,

oh, in one town, there's a machine

that makes a bunch of pizzas

for one cent, and then in another town,

there's

500 laborers that can be even cheaper than the machine.

And it's like,

how do you explain to people that, you know,

yeah, it's just, it's like beyond,

it's so ridiculous.

It's like even Chatsybt could solve that issue for you.

Why are you debating me when AI can help you?

The reason I've gotten less patient with debates, honestly, is like, go debate AI and it will help you.

You don't need to debate me.

Go debate AI.

If you're not willing...

I want to debate people who can't win debates

or who are at a stalemate with AI

and have already been informed properly.

And it's a genuine debate now.

Matt, what's up, man?

Appreciate you.

Right?

Let's see. Matt, what's up, man? Appreciate you. Right? Like literally put it into chat, CBT. How would Marx respond to this? And it would be so simple. I'll do it for you.

It would be so simple if you just did that.

If in town one, there are more pizza makers, laborers, and pizza is cheaper. And in town, too, there is only one pizza laborer and it's more expensive. How would Marx explain that? Doesn't it debunk the...

So, how is AI going to respond to it?

I'm just going to show you why it's ridiculous to come on my stream

and tell me something and make a clown of yourself

when you can just go to AI. to simplify it for a dumb it for a dumb guy

so marks doesn't say that more workers equals higher price he says the value of a pizza

depends on how much normal labor time

it takes to make one pizza

so

it's about how much labor

in both towns

if they have so in both towns they if they have,

so in both towns,

they have the underlying same

labor value

and supply and demand

can affect

on the basis

of the labor value,

the relative price,

because value and price

are not the same thing.

Which is pretty much what I said at all,

but I don't know if that would have been more helpful for him. Bakunin

Bakunin is a fascist, you know.

I don't know if I agree with that, but I mean,

Amar, I don't really care about that conversation.

I guess I'm just curious. What about his critique

do you disagree with?

Bakunin is known for being the guy

who critiqued Marxism because

of this notion that all power corrupts

an absolute power corrupts absolutely.

But the debates between Bakunin and the Marxists were not of that nature

at all Bakunin had no problem

with power and authority

Bakkenin was

more like a romantic

petty bourgeois,

I wouldn't even call ultra-leftist.

He was...

I can explain it, actually.

Bakunin resented and detested

what we call

modern statehood and

civilization.

He was not so much

fearful about the idea

of power centralizing and therefore corrupting. As much as he was fearful about the

idea of modern urbanized intelligentsia becoming concentrated and basically becoming tyrants with respect to the agrarian element, you know,

because he was like a strict doctrinaire, romantic,

um,

agrarian revolutionary, unquote right but that was

I'm sorry I'm sorry I ask a question

but hold on hold on let me continue

the thing about

Bakunin is that he didn't think

that the revolution would have required the mediation of dealing with the same problems modern civilization does entirely. He thought he thought that it could just be avoided, you know, all the contradictions and problems of modern

statehood and civilization. This was not an abstract problem about power corrupting or something,

though. That's just a big myth that comes to that. I don't know. I guess I'm a little bit confused.

Bakun never really said the power corrupts absolutely.

That was actually Marx's claim, right?

He believed that the small leading class, right, your bourgeois is going to be corrupted by their power.

But he's like invoked a non-Pee by creating a proletarian

representative class you know of your intellectuals

of your revolutionaries or a small class of proletariat people who are going to represent

the normal no Bakunin was worried about the intelligentsia

acquiring this power over the masses.

But when he said the masses, he meant something very specific.

Well, Bakun was an anarchist, so I'm not sure why you were worried about the intelligence.

Anarchism was not incompatible

with authority and power at the time the notion of an

he was incompatible to state and he was fearful of a state but the state

you need to do your history okay the state was the modern state

primarily born in the aftermath of the French Revolution. The state meant something specific.

I know it's a statement. I think we might be equivocating. What do you mean by state?

The statehood that anarchists wanted to abolish was actually fairly recent.

It was a recent form of statehood that provoked the backlash of anarchism.

I'm a little confused what you mean by that.

What do you think Bachman meant by the state?

So, again, I'll be a historian for you.

In the aftermath of the French Revolution, states started to modernize and standardize entire nation.

So the notion of a standing army, the rise of bureaucracy, police, civil and civil state institutions for the regulation of society.

These were fairly recent formations that accompanied the rise of modern states in the aftermath of the French Revolution with their centralizing,

standardizing, and leveling tendencies with universal law and so on and so on. And anarchism

was a backlash against that. It wasn't a backlash against statehood

like in some trans historical sense

because anarchism was a recent phenomena

in the 19th century

and that that was the basic historical context

for it emerging.

Well, I'm going to think that like

collectivist anarchism shown.

Yeah, I can grant that. I know that's's what we're talking about so I'll grant that

no all the kinds of anarchism you can think of were a backlash

well no after Lee Zeno's anarchism was not in relation to

that talking about ancient Greeks yeah he was like your first

that's not that's not an anarchist you can interpret it's's why I said it's not an anarchist

you can interpret him as an anarchist

I just said that's not why it's why it's not related

I didn't bring it up because it's going to hold up

so anyway I'm not really sure

though that that really

I'm genuinely working for like a

some sort of like specific criticism of what Bokkeran that that really, I'm genuinely looking for like a, some

sort of like a specific criticism

of what Bachernan said, I guess, for like an answer.

What about his criticism

of Marx claiming, right? I mean, he's

going to obtain a P-not-P. He's going to confront

a congenation within Marx's theory,

right? Mark's going to say that the other way

to change our

bourgeois over the

proletariat class is going to be through revolution

and then he's going to have the steps of revolution.

Again, it's an invention of the

post hoc, you know, anarchist,

modern anarchists from the 20th century, that Obakunin perfectly predicted all the contradictions that would occur in the Soviet Union in China. And it's not true. That's what I'm trying to say. It's just not true. Based off of... Well, based off of the fact that what Bakunin was critiquing was entirely a different

context. I mean, Bakunin, you can be vague and say, well, Bakunin exactly predicted that

the self-appointed, you know, Marxist vanguard is going to be the new class that represents the proletary and rules over them as tyrants.

That's really vague, though.

You have to understand the context of where he was coming from, which I tried to establish a little bit.

Because in the case of the Soviet Union and China, the whole content of the experience of the proletarian dictatorship was an internal

struggle against

the urban

intelligentsia but that had to

happen within the modern state, not

outside of it, right? So the goal was

so institutionally

basically on a mass scale you had the promotion and inclusion of masses of people outside of modern civilization, Russian peasants, Chinese peasants, actually start to become involved in the modern state machine promoted as representatives and delegates and becoming educated and becoming part of the institutions. And it's like that was a truly democratizing process that Bakunin did not anticipate would happen. Now, granted,

the, we cannot evaluate the outcome of the debate between Marx and Bakunin, because the places where it was anticipated, that

argument would have been decisive, which was Western Europe.

You cut out for a second I lost, so you can say that last bit.

The only place where it would have been decisive for there to have been an outcome was

Western Europe. That was the context.

Neither Marx nor Bakunin

were anticipating

the consequences

of the proletarian dictatorship

being built in countries where the proletarian dictatorship being built

in countries

where the proletariat

was either

non-existent

or a tiny

minority.

So we don't

really,

we can't really

say Bakwinin

was right

about anything.

First of all,

and then second

of all,

what Bakunin anticipated did not happen, but neither did what Marx anticipated happened, which was that the proletariat would, in the countries where we could identify a strong proletarian majority or a strong presence of the proletarian at least that they would take power i mean okay yeah sure i'm not too worried about his predictions

right i'm more asking about like his his address in his addressing Marx's contradiction, which we haven't really gotten to yet. Right. Marx is going to suggest that that whose rock class is going to be corrupting out by an aspect of their nature, right? Instead of the maintenance of their power.

Can you repeat that with clarity?

I can't even hear what you're saying.

Yeah, sorry.

I'll slow it a little bit.

I might be talking fast.

It's a little late.

I'm a little bit tired.

So Marx suggests that the bourgeois

are corrupt corrupted not by

an aspect of their nature, right?

They reject nature

in favor, you know,

class and whatnot.

What?

Marx rejects the nature.

No,

Marx says the bourgeoisie corrupt

as a consequence of the decadent tendencies of the capitalist motor production and its inner contradictions.

Yeah, that's kind of a nice.

He doesn't say that in a normative sense.

The motive economy, right? So I don't mean normatively speaking.

Okay.

That really weird for me to say.

Okay.

But what's going to follow from that, right?

If he's making it clear about the class impact upon a person's, let's say,

corruptibility, right?

Then if they're not talking about, you're really getting things confused on multiple levels.

The individual capitalist is not necessarily, they're not becoming corrupted by their class position because there's no baseline from which to say they're being corrupt or not.

The individual capitalist is becoming corrupt according to the terms of the bourgeois values themselves.

Those are what become decadent with respect to themselves.

So I guess I'm using corrupt idiosyncratically.

What I mean by corrupt is just going to be like, you know,

obtaining a set of values of is going to be conducive to like the socialist position.

But Marx doesn't...

Yeah, but Marx doesn't claim that like we're automatically there and then it has to be corrupted or something.

It's like he's saying that we aren't there yet in a sense.

To be clear, I guess, am I confused?

Marks didn't believe in human nature, correct?

No, he did.

He did, but he didn't believe...

He didn't believe that human nature

carried with it

automatically the superstructure

of all

readily existent normative

values and their corresponding

and the activity that corresponds

to them. Right, he believed it was you're going to be your class that's going to be the predicate for that?

No, it's about the mode of production actually, which is the self-relation of humanity takes the form of its mode of production

that's what marks understood

by motive production I mean I assume you're talking about

econ three but wouldn't that just be to

I'm talking about what you're talking way too fast man

sorry I apologize are you talking about economic theory

right I'm not I'm not talking about economic theory, right?

No, I'm not. I'm not talking about that.

And if you think I'm talking about that, do more education because my patience is thin.

I can't just keep being a teacher forever.

You know, like at a certain point, I need to get paid for being a teacher.

You know, pay me like $50 if I need to get paid for being a teacher, you know?

Pay me like $50 if you want me to explain this to you more. You know, you know what you Everyone

Everyone

For the Chicago event And get your tickets if you can go stop waiting go to chicago we're

going to be speaking in person if you miss that you are literally like yo

yo what's up man

yeah

how's it going

really badly

what's up

so I want to ask you

if you think China is a state capitalist nation

no i don't okay and why do you think that state capitalism described the German state in the...

Do you believe that China is capitalist in any way?

Everything is in some way something.

I mean, yeah, so. What do you mean?

It's just like,

what do you say?

I mean,

so I mean,

my position is that I think.

Tendency within China is not capitalism.

You know,

even though there's private businesses with investors that get the profits and billionaires.

Guys, if you want this to continue to drop 20 subs, I'm not even kidding.

What are you saying?

Sorry, go ahead.

So even though there's private enterprise with investors that to get the profits and wage labor that's not capitalism no why no because it's in the

context of a motor production that's sublated capitalism.

The birth pangs, of course, of the prior mode of production are there.

It's stamped by them.

But everything is being assimilated in the context of a circuit and logic of production that can no longer really be called capitalist.

I'm not gonna lie, man.

I don't really understand

what you just said.

Can you say that more simply?

Yo, Shepson, holy fuck, bro.

Thank you. I didn't think you guys

would actually come through with that.

I thought you guys were being

tortured like I am. Bro,

here with the five, what's up, man?

Um,

if I,

hold on. I just don't

understand a lot of the terminology using.

Yeah, yeah.

So in Marxism, there's something called a mode of production, okay?

So this is what you want to call.

If you think about it like that, it's the logic of production.

Like, what is the actual pattern within which the goods and labor of society are organized

and produced, right?

Just think of it that way.

Okay, so it's a pattern.

It's like an underlying pattern.

It's a logic it's like an underlying pattern it's a logic okay so for example if you think of an organism there's a logic of reproduction when a frog man sees a

frog woman he beats them frog cheeks in a certain way i don't know how actually but there's something going

on there's some mating ritual there's some life cycle that they have and then the she frog gives

birth to these little tadpoles or something, right?

There's something to it.

But you see how it's a cycle, you know?

It's like a circuit.

It's like a logic.

I don't see the connection.

I mean, again, my point is that there's, yeah.

Space now, I just want you to think of two frogs having sex and keep that in your mind for now, right?

Why?

Just focus on that intensely right now, okay?

Yeah.

And be very vivid and everything, because it's very important.

Okay, yeah. Anyway,

um,

so in an

mode of production, we're talking about

the reproduction of

civil society,

which is not just the reproduction of goods and services, but the reproduction

of entire ways of life. So if we build a new town somewhere, or if we're going to build a new

place where, you know, there's a new 7-Eleven, there's a new store. It's like the increase of

the population leads to the reproduction of systems, okay? Economic systems, if you will. Okay. And things. You can see in a measurable material wealth, a paradigm for that being produced.

You have an existing population. How do they reproduce their existence? Because we don't just survive from nature.

And then with the expansion of population, you even see a more evident reproduction of the

logic of production, right?

So there's an underlying mode or logic of production of how human beings make the life

that they have.

And this is at an aggregate level because there's a division of labor where we're all interdependent.

So what do you do for work?

I'm a software engineer.

Okay.

So kind of a useless job, if you ask me.

Let's pretend you

were doing something that mattered.

Let's say you were a plumber or something

or let's say you were like a...

Make pizza?

Yeah, pizza maker, sure.

So if you were a pizza maker,

you're not... your ingredients and the machinery that you used to bake the pizza and the boxes that you used to put it inside.

There's a whole complex division of labor.

You're just one part of it.

So even for there to be the finished product that you have, there's this supply chain, right?

So there's a division of labor.

So there's an ultimate logic of production that regulates that and how all of it fits together and keeps getting

reproduced, just like the frogs having sex inside of your mind right now. The he frog

beat in the cheeks of that she frog, which is in your head right now, you're vividly visualizing it.

The same cycle of reproduction you can think about biologically, it's happening at a social level as well, right?

Okay. So in the capitalist mode of production, there's a specific modality of production okay and the modality of production

is rooted in the reproduction of something we call capital so there's something we call the circuit of

capital it's you starting out with money

and you invest it in the commodity that you're buying. So pizza making machine. And then there's a profit,

M prime. Now a capitalist takes that profit puts it back into the machinery

and expands so there's capital accumulation the capital increases and it expands. So that's the logic.

That's the circuit.

And within that circuit or that logic of production,

suddenly you're looking at a society of a bunch of pizza makers.

So we can see all these pizza makers, but the expansion of this pizza machinery and this whole thing is governed by this logic where you're starting out with money, you're putting it in, you're buying machinery, and you're getting more.

And that expansive and abstract circuit that we call capital, that is the governing logic of production production of the society, right?

At the highest levels, Esperata.

So the capitalism has a history, though, right?

And there's contradictions in this logic.

Because eventually, for example, you reach the monopoly stage where you're no longer taking money and putting it into things and making profit.

You own. money and putting it into things and making profit you own so much of the means of production

that you have a monopoly and at that point you can set and rig the prices to be whatever you

want them to be.

And what then there's usually laws against that

though, I mean, that's fake.

Anyway, yeah, I understand you about history.

We're talking about how history got to where it was.

United States has broken lobbies

before many times.

Eventually, the laws of capitalist

production reach their limits

because

surplus value

What does this have to do

with China having private

enterprise? It can have these features that were

characteristic of the capitalist motor production what do you do would you define like china as a social

state well it's look at its mode of production look at the ultimate governing logic of the society

and you're going to see a society that is ultimately rooted in subordinating the capitalist mode of production to a higher mode of production.

Well, that's just called socialism.

The capitalist motor production gets assimilated into a higher form of production, which is rooted in planning, rational planning and concrete.

So you're saying a social state.

Concrete goals that are rooted in the intentional, rational reproduction of society based on planning.

And they may, the capitalist mode of production is not annihilated, but it is subordinated to a higher modality of production. So in the early stages of capitalism,

it was the same relation to feudalism. Capitalism first took on a feudal form. I don't know if you

know that, but it took the form, it subordinated

feudalism, and it

looks like, well, this is just futilism, this isn't

capitalism. In reality,

capitalism is emerging out of a futile

mode of production through futileism.

It's assimilating feudalism

and subordinating it to a higher logic.

The same thing happens in the transition of capitalism to socialism.

And it can only happen when you have a proletarian dictatorship,

which is unleashing the fetters on the evolution and development of the motor production.

And that can't be something you wait for with evolution as the reformists say can i say something fires a revolution before people

call me a kotskyite or something because they don't know what they're talking about go Go ahead. Okay. So you're saying that, so China does, you do agree that that China uses capitalist

mechanics. Yeah, but, but, but you can't call it capitalism because now capitalism has been

Because it serves a higher mode of production.

Not just serves, but it's subordinated to a new logic.

It's no longer the commanding logic of production.

It's just part of a bigger logic now.

Do you think Marx would say, like, yeah, this is okay.

We can have wage labor. You wouldn't say it's okay you would probably say this is an example of how objectively

one mode of production is shifting into a new one i it to me it just seems like it marks said

that's how they that's how it happens he already

like made it clear that

the new society is going to be stamped

with the birth pangs of the old right

yeah so like arguments I've heard before

like I don't know if this is similar to what you're saying

but like that this is like the building phase and that you know this it's still and because

it's in service of communism it's still like a socialist state is that kind of what you're saying

no no no I'm not talking about utilitarianism I'm literally talking about how the way capitalism is overcome is through capitalism not outside of it eventually capitalism reaches its own contradictions lead to the socialist mode of production yeah i mean like

so how so is you do you think that china will eventually not have these capitalists like dynamics

yeah yeah probably yeah but like at what point because

it's been what like 50 years since uh they opened up would say after the overthrow of u.s super imperialism

a dollar when the dollar dies, the whole world,

there's going to be a world revolution. Everything will change.

Yeah. I mean, to me, look, to me, it just seems like

the definition of what capitalism is has been shifted. The goalposts

have been shifted. No, it hasn't.

I feel like it has because this, like,

you're talking about because it's in service.

Not really.

Can I speak?

Go ahead.

Thanks.

You're just saying because it's in service of a few...

I feel like it's kind of in the same vein of the argument.

I'm not saying.

No, it's not what I'm saying.

You're just not listening.

You're saying because there is like...

That's okay.

Okay.

All right.

Would you like to restate it not listening

i try to explain what the logic of production means and how it's subordinated to a

different or more comprehensive logic of production and that therefore

capitalism is no longer the exhaustive

mode of production because it is subordinated

to a more comprehensive logic of production where the

circuit of capital is just one part of the cycle okay and what like

how does that express itself and what we see in china compared to other capitalists and or to

capitalize their financial system is all rooted in planned economics and none of it is rooted in capital being at the top what's at the top is the plan what's at the top is a more specific circuit of accumulation and production, primarily rooted in construction,

and the expansion and reproduction of a specific social system, but not profit.

Why China takes on long-term, they take on losses that do not conform to the logic of

capitalist production for the purposes of long-term strategic industrial.

So it is for some future goal.

Yes, they take on a loss in terms of the logic of profitability.

They take on losses, the government does, takes out credit that is not profitable in any foreseeable sense,

but which is subordinated and successfully reproduces the mode of production.

So a state can basically,

they can have private property, they can have wage labor,

they can have stock markets,

they can have billion, wait, wait, wait.

They can have billionaires.

They can have, you know, investors.

But as long as it's in service of some future goal, it's still socialism.

No, as long as it's subordinated.

Okay, as long as it's like subordinated.

Like, I'm still struggling to understand what you mean by subordinated.

To me, it does seem that

businesses in China are trying to

make money and are trying to

distribute that money to

investors.

The money is not in command of

production.

What does that mean? It's not in command of production.

The logic that's in command of production is based on a comprehensive, rational, economic, planned economic system.

Without which, no one is doing anything

dude I don't you're just saying a bunch of words

can you say it like because you don't want to fucking even think about it

to understand then don't you want to educate me

you're using all these term all this terminology

I'm not a Marxist

bro I don't know this stuff

I'll just put on a British accent

because you people fucking listen to British

people just pretend I'm fucking British

Is it a good British accent?

In China

I will explain it to you so you can understand

it in a way that you take seriously.

Imagine you're going to Hogwarts right now for your attention span.

You're going to Hogwarts University and I'm the professor of the Dumbledore.

Okay.

So basically to explain it to you because you're having such a hard time comprehending the topic and the subject at hand to basically explain it to you in a way that would be more accustomed to your sensibilities and what you would take seriously and comprehend it. Thank you. More less, the whole point is that in China today,

the capitalist motor production is based on a principle of accumulation, which reproduces civil

society, even in principle from scratch. So, for example, if the process of capital accumulation

is initiated at a local level without being part of any wider

or comprehensive system. We tend to think of economies as systems as a consequence of systems

theory and cybernetics and so on, which came from the last half a century or so. But before

that time, you just had a principle of how does civil society

reproduce itself economically, right? The capitalist mode of production, that is the grounds year

ultimate logic of how the expansive process of the building of what they called modern civilization

occurs. Whereas in China, although there are features that are reminiscent or appear identical to those within societies you could call capitalist or shaped by capitalism, none of them can be abstracted from the context of a much larger system of socialist planning.

Meaning, without this more comprehensive logic of strategic industrial planning that the party

has embarked upon for the very long-term vision in mind, all of these capitalists that

you're talking about, they could not exist.

The process of ground zero capital accumulation could not possibly take off in the first place

unless it was being initiated or jumpstarted, so to speak, by the socialist planning,

which is actually a thing that drives

the Chinese economy in motion forward

do you understand now

no

what part of this do you not

fucking understand what part of this do you not fucking understand?

What part of this is so different?

Okay, you're saying the socialist planning is driving.

It sounds like you need to be put into special education.

Would you like to be transferred to special education because you cannot understand something that a child can?

Yes, a child can understand

all these buzzwords.

Listen, from 1978

onwards, China has,

you know,

lipid, you know,

millions of people out of poverty.

It's like, I'm the Joker now, bro.

This guy's like crazy NBC.

Listen, man.

All I'm saying is...

All I'm like Capital is now.

Listen, buddy.

They are.

No, they're not.

They are.

Private business.

Okay, get rid of the CPA.

Without the C...

I've heard this argument before.

It's in service of a greater goal.

It's in service of...

It's not what I'm fucking saying.

It's essentially what you're saying.

Does anyone want to request and explain it to him in their words?

Because I feel like I can't be the only one.

Yeah, maybe I'm just not able...

I don't know.

Like, can anyone use, like, normal words?

Yeah, some, explain it.

We need, like, a dumb guy.

Explain to me like I'm five years old guys.

Explain it to, like, the dumb guy.

I'm going to ask Chatsy BT to explain it to you.

Okay.

I'm talking to a really low IQ person on.

I'm talking to a super low IQ person on. I'm talking to a super

low IQ guy who

doesn't understand

what I'm saying.

I'm telling him that

China is not capitalist just

because it

has features

of capitalism. Its entire

economy is capitalized. What Marx called

capitalism because

in China

these

have become subordinated and assimilated by a higher logic of production.

He seems to think this is the same thing as saying that capitalism is in service to the party, when I am just...

Political goals, when I am just trying to say that it has been assimilated and sublated by a higher or more comprehensive logic of production.

That what defines a mode of production is dominant logic and not

not simply the features

you find in it.

Please simplify this in a way a dumb guy can

understand.

I mean, to me, this subalation thing you're talking about

it seems all philosophical

right right that's why asking Chatsy B T's

it's not an economic system

That's why I asked it for Chachibati to make a dumb guy

Okay

He gave me this really long thing.

Oh, my God.

Okay, the shortest formulation.

You're identifying the system by its ingredients, and I'm identifying it by the logic that organizes those ingredients.

Thank you, Shachshabici.

That's so nice. So basically it's like you're just looking at those ingredients. Thank you, Chatsin, that's so nice.

So basically it's like you're just

looking at the ingredients

and not the over-governing logic

that organizes the ingredients.

That's such a great way to putting it.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, AI, for that.

Do you get it now. If capitalism is sub-bladed by

socialism. So the system is the thing that organizes the ingredients.

It's not strictly the ingredients themselves. You take the ingredients on the

installation. Why does China

still suffer from like a real estate

bubble if socialism sublates

capitalism? I'll type it into chat, GBT, to help you

understand for a dumb guy. So, no, I mean,

can you answer that? He's now asking the

question which marks understood

which is why archaic forms

from a prior

or outmoded mode

of production can still persist even if they are assimilated by a newer or more comprehensive

or higher governing logic. Can you likewise dumb it down and simplify it to him in a way that a dumb guy can understand don't make it too long

okay so um Okay, so, um...

Okay, this is what it gave me.

Because the new mode of production does not erase everything that came before it overnight.

Old forms can survive.

No, sorry, these are too...

He's really dumb and these

words are too big for him.

Make it even simpler.

Or a dumber guy.

Sorry. Sorry about that.

No, it's okay, man. I get it. I understand.

New systems do not

delete everything

from the old system.

They often keep old things

and use them in a new way.

Example, capitalism still

had kings,

landlords, peasants,

and small shops.

That did not make capitalism feudalism. So just because

China still has things that also existed under capitalism does not mean China must be capitalists.

The question is, what controls and shapes the whole system. Old parts can stay

what matters is the bigger system

they now belong to. Thank you so much

chat, GBT. Do you understand?

Yeah, may I make a point?

Yeah. Okay, so my point is

that you're saying capitalism sublates

socialism. So we should be saying... No saying capitalism sublates socialism so we should be

no socialism sublates capital or sorry sorry but the whole the process is not completed

overnight yeah i understand that um but what i'm saying is like what do we see different in

china compared to other

capitalist countries that actually

shows that because like I said we still see

you have to look at the

we still see wealth in a quality. We still see a billionaire class. It's

the lynchpin of

the system at the highest

levels.

So we would look at basically the relationship between credit and production.

In Western countries, you do have complex systems of planning with the Federal Reserve and so on, but all of those are subordinated to the short-term interests of capital.

Whereas in China, the short-term interests of capital are actually completely a non-factor when it comes to the decisions that are made to actually inject liquidity and credit. What does that result in? What does that result in? It results in an economy that is willing to sacrifice things that would be vital to a capitalist motor production in the name of actually

realizing strategic economic goals.

Probably one of the best examples would be the way in which the government

is responding to the housing speculative

bubble by just not rescuing

the

speculators

by the saying

that housing is for homes, not for speculation

for example.

Another example would be the way China construct cities.

The reason we don't construct cities and we have very poor urban planning and we don't have public transportation...

You're an American?

What?

You're an American, right?

Yeah, the reason we don't have those things, though, is because it's just not profitable.

And it can't be justified according to the logic of capital.

But China justifies those things according to the logic of the fact that they're necessary for a modern, thriving, harmonious, and prosperous civilization.

So they do these things, and while they're economical about them and they're not just wasting,

they still do it even if it comes at the expense of short-term profits.

And the principle of profit-making is of secondary significance after that.

So it's a really different logic of production that's going on.

So you're saying because the government does things that aren't profitable, that's what it moves?

No, I'm not saying because of the government government i think the whole driving logic of the chinese

economy the thing that actually drives it and sets in motion competition and all the things

that you would characterize as capitalist begin with strategic initiatives pursued by the state.

Okay.

So you said that China, because they didn't, like, intervene or whatever, they didn't try to save.

My point is that we still see capitalist real estate bills.

We still see speculation.

There is still wealth in equality in China.

Like,

yeah,

but those are not,

those are not,

like I said,

think of frogs having sex.

If it was sub-bladed.

No, stop focusing

on odd words. Just think about

frogs having sex because you're only focused on

what's in front of you. It's burned into my memory, bro.

Listen, listen, you can't

focus so much on

the ingredients

you have to focus on the thing

that's organizing the ingredients

not the most important part of a meal

no the thing that organizes them is

you don't think that like

the patty ingredients exist in the wild.

The only reason you have a meal is because you organize them in a certain way.

Oh, you mean like cooking.

Yeah.

So, look...

That's a different analogy than what I was thinking.

Yeah, so basically, like, um... You need to understand that in China, they don't,

uh,

the production is not organized or dominated according to the consideration or along the lines of the

interests of capital. It's just capital is just not in command. What's in command is a long-term strategic vision for how to build a harmonious and prosperous society.

And while that, you could maybe break that down somehow into a new mode of production, like, beyond that qualitative goal, because there's quantitative and qualitative goals, right?

But even if you would look at it at that level, you have something interesting going on that that doesn't conform to what Marx described as a capitalist mode of production.

It's more like a social metabolism being reproduced as a consequence of a specific relationship between between the state and civil society in the form of

I mean I'm just thinking like in terms of like concrete things

like there I can't see any big thing that tells me like wow

I you have to look at I think I think really it's construction is the main lynchman of China

so like trains and shit trains cities infrastructure, cities, infrastructure, bridges.

I mean, the same thing they're trying to build with...

Every country builds.

The same thing there's...

No, but that's the driving force.

They're trying to expand it with the Belt and Road initiative right now.

That's the main thing in China is it's really infrastructure, cities, bridges, like all the things that go into

building a modern civilization directly.

I don't disagree that, you know,

China's very good at building infrastructure.

They obviously are.

Yeah, but that's the driving

force of their economy is that, you know?

Them building infrastructure?

That their mode of production is based on

that circuit of reproduction. Yeah.

It's based on like, there's a reproduction process

that's rooted in that.

Yeah. I mean, I still i still like i don't see how how because you have nice trains and nice roads and a lot of tall buildings how that it's about the accumulate

no it's about the circuit of accumulation it's just all about the circuit of accumulation that's it i mean

i feel to me like and i don't i'm not trying to be mean or anything like it seems like you're using

these words sublations circulate of accumulation forget about the fucking word sublation you You're so fixated on it because

you're insecure. Because you're insecure that

you don't understand it. So just for you all.

I'm not insecure about it. I mean, look.

Just I'll ask Chatchitia to make it dumb

for you, right?

I'd like to argue with you. I'm trying to explain

to this guy what a circuit of reproduction is and how

actually defines a mode of production, but these words are too big for him.

Do not use big words or a lot of words

make it simple and use

dumb guy

analogies

I'm asking

chat Chbizee to help you

just one time I mean I don't really trust those.

Okay, use loop.

He's saying use loop.

So think of it like a game loop.

You work, stuff gets made, stuff gets sold, money gets used to hire people, make more stuff. Everyone does it again.

That repeating loop is what keeps the whole system alive.

So you don't define a system by one thing inside it.

You define by how the whole thing keeps making itself again and again.

A car has screws in it.

A chair has screws too.

That doesn't make a car, chair same thing here having markets or private

companies does not buy itself tell you the whole

system bro that's so huge

that's so clutch i love AI

thank you data centers

thank you everything

thank you data centers. Thank you, data centers. Thank you,

so you're saying because everything's in service. Thank you,

well, there's in service. Everything's in service

of expanding infrastructure.

And because of that,

because it's not in service of, I guess,

profit you're saying, it's not service of, I guess, profit you're saying

it's still socialism. Is that

somewhere close? Kind of.

Kind of. What did I get

wrong?

It's not just infrastructure

because it's also the fundamentals of the premises of production.

So it's like in order to partake in economic activity, like you need like a city you need buildings you need transportation you do

need infrastructure you also need housing you also need buildings that are built that stores can be

can emerge inside of uh yeah i mean i wouldn't just call it infrastructure i would broad i would encompass that

term more broadly to include the fundamental factors of production really yeah i mean i guess

fundamental factors of production really you know yeah again like i just don't see the connection. I feel like it's an excuse that, you know, China needs to be socialist.

They need to be an example of a successful social state. So we say, oh, it's in service of, you know, the circular mode of production.

Dude,

I don't,

like,

you keep,

I don't know what to tell you,

man.

All right,

I'm going to ask you to you to again for another thing.

Uh,

he is really dumb.

And he keeps interpreting or representing...

Hold on liberal, man.

We give you a job, though.

You should be nice to us.

Who?

You should be nice to us, liberals.

We give you a job.

You have to talk to us.

You make money talking to us.

Okay, hold on.

It keeps interpreting or representing China as in too much of a normative way.

Like, he's saying, you're just saying that it's more, that it's okay for there to be capitalism because it's service to socialism.

When in reality, I am not trying to convey a normative judgment, but an objective analysis of how modes of production actually do transition.

It's too caught up in the normative and moral dimension.

Please, in a simple, short way for a dumb guy using dumb guy analogies, once again, don't make it long.

Explain why this

norm factor is not relevant

to what I'm saying.

So one second,

it's cooking, right?

Yeah.

Yeah,

you have the thinking of.

So you keep turning this into, is capitalism good or bad?

It's not what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about what the system is and how it works.

If a wolf eats a rabbit saying the rabbit became part of the wolf doesn't mean I think eating rabbits is morally good. Same thing here.

Saying older capitalist forms can be absorbed by a new system is not saying capitalism is okay because socialism uses it.

It's just describing what happened to those forms and what

system they now belong to.

So thank you for Chatsubishi.

You're putting it really much at you.

That kind of resay what you're ever saying, you know,

a chair and a car, not the same.

Just because, yeah, I think this.

I love the AI that it gave me these examples.

I would have never came up with them.

Yeah.

Yeah, AI is very smart for sure.

Smarter than TikTok live streamers probably.

Honestly, I got to give it.

I could not simplify this in that way.

The chair example is so nice. It's going to rule the world, man.

The chair example was so like, I'm so grateful for that.

I would have liked, whatever. Anyways, again, like, I'm struggling to find the connection.

Like, it's still capital it's still private

enterprise I mean I

I know I sound like a fucking

broken

a fucking broken record here

he is responding by saying

it's still capital

and it's still private

property like that that's still private property.

Like that's still, you can't have

like, you can't like, again, I'm going to say your

favorite word. I don't understand

you can sub-blade wage

and make it very

simple for him and like extremely, wage labor while still having wage and make it very simple

for him and like

extremely lucidly clear

but make it short and simple

and use analogies

or dumb guys

I understand what you're saying

I'm just looking for the connection, man.

I'm trying to explain.

Yes, it can still be private property.

It can still be capital.

That is not the argument.

A brick is still a brick, whether it is inside a house, a prison, or a church.

But the brick does not tell you what the whole building is.

Same thing here.

The property existing inside of a system

doesn't automatically tell you what the whole system is.

The question is, what larger system controls

how that property is used, grows, and reproduces itself.

You're naming the brick. I'm talking about the building. My name. controls how that property is used, grows, and reproduces itself.

You're naming the brick.

I'm talking about the building.

Mike drop.

What a crazy response.

We're just reframing the definition of every economic system.

We're reframing socialism.

You know what, dude, I've like,

you owe me $50

because I fucking, like, have given you

crazy levels of patience and education.

Like, I don't want to fucking hear this anymore.

Uno, go ahead.

You're literally the last guy.

Yo.

Hello. Hello. Hello.

Hey, man.

First of all, I want to...

What's up with the echo?

15, 14, 13, 13, 12.

Well, first of all, I want to preface this, it's hard to think with the echo, but first of all, I want to preface this debate with that I think you have good ideas and we are both on the same side.

Thank you for having good ideas and being on the same side as me.

I really love when people tell me that and it's just thank you for letting me win that one so easily go ahead nine dukats hello what's on man the sky

why what or what is the info work man I Why?

What is the info work, man?

Uh Seeing in the dark.

Why are you so against intersectionality? Why are you so against you?

Why are you asking me when you can just ask chat chabit

because i think it's a strategy

failure it's like genuinely a question

i'm like why wouldn't you just ask chad chabit why i'm against it

intersectionality is like really stupid

Well, it's just a mode of analysis, no?

No, it's not.

It's like nonsense.

In what way? Because it's basically nonsense.

In what way?

It's basically saying like a black a black guy

is less a black guy

who's poor and like in the ghetto

and like is getting shot

at by police is like an oppressor of contrapoints who has

billions of dollars because they're a transgender it's really fucking stupid fucking stupid as shit bro

it's like an insult to the reality of struggle and the clarity with which oppression actually exists.

It's like basically saying that like, yeah, if you're like a fucking, like, billionaire like Jay-Z and you're black,

in some way, like there's literally like a white redneck who's, like, living in a trailer, and he oppresses you somehow.

It's fucking stupid, bro.

Like, why don't you wake the fuck up, bro?

It's, like, dumb as hell.

I mean, in a liberal sense, I guess it is kind of stupid. No, it's like in every sense I mean in a liberal sense

I guess it is

No it's like in every sense

It's just like fucking stupid and useless

Like fucking forget about it bro

Fucking forget about it bro

Isn't it's a matter of priority

Forget about it bro

Like socialist or communists can literally

just be like yo

you know obviously we should respect

women and uh you know not

demean them and we should have respect

for them have respect for everyone

don't torture and abuse people

for their background and don't

be abusive and that's it

that's all you need to say like don't

make this stupid nonsense idea

that you know a skinny person

oppresses a fat ass or something

it's like it's so stupid bro I don't even need to hear

that shit.

Like, cis genders are oppressing transgenders.

No, they're not.

Just shut up.

That's not how the fucking world works. The world works where the oppressors are oppressing the oppressed objectively, materially,

and it's actually clear, clearly rooted in a specific mode of production.

It's not some like, my identity is Charzard and yours is Squirtle.

Squirtle is oppressed by Charzard and therefore X equals B.

It's like fucking stupid, bro. Like nobody needs

to hear that shit. Just fucking put the

fucking fries in the bag with that shit.

All right. I just went

to your perspective, man. That's all.

Yeah, see you.

See you later.

It's like, how much facts am I spitting, though?

It's like such facts.

I don't even have patience to think about this shit.

Joy, what's up?

Appreciate you, man. You know, What do I think of the Saudi Turkey-Pakistan Defense Treaty?

What do I think of it?

The Saudi-Turkey Pakistan Defense Treaty.

The Saudi-Pakistan Turkey Defense Treaty. the Saudi

Pakistan Turkey

Defense Treaty

It's like

Sarto

It's like NATO

It's Sarto

Sarto

Sarto

Yes Yes It's like NATO. It's Sarto. Sarto. Sarto! Yes, sir.

Sarto!

We are doing Sarto!

Sardo! Yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir. We'll protect Israel yes sir

Sarto is rising

Sarto is rising

rising of Sarto

We are the new

Defense treat.

It's like just for fucking LARPERS online to give a shit about.

First of all,

Turkey does not give a shit about Saudi Arabia.

I know Turks do not give a fuck about Saudi Arabia.

All the great Turks are, they hate the Saudis.

Pakistan's cool, but nobody, like anything where the Saudi Arabia,

if honestly it was just Turkey and Pakistan, it would be cool,

but like I'm not taking some shit seriously with Saudi Arabia in it.

I'm just not.

I just love the LARPers online.

The fake Sunni LARPers that are like,

now it is that time.

Now it is not time.

Bro, but stop.

Just stop the Larp.

Stop the Larp, man.

What do I think of Slavois Zijs-Zek? Hey! Bro, I, uh... Sing a sea chanty.

I don't know any.

I don't know any sea shanties.

Fuck you guys keep telling me to sing a she shanty.

A sea shanty?

A sea shanty?

I don't know how to fucking even say that shit.

Like, let me look it up.

I don't fucking know, bro.

I don't fucking know.

America against America, I have read some of that.

Shanty it up.

I got a, oh, I got a sea shanty actually.

This is actually C shanty status.

Fiorella Isabelle're spying for Israel In Lebanon

There's some shit we'll be singing on the high shit we'd be singing

on the high seas

you'd be singing

this shit on the high seas

he's fighting for

Israel

in Lebanon

your hell we all isabelle we all know she smell your bella isabre we're all know she's held your belle isabelle he's smiling for israel in lebanon in Lebanon

Purolla Isabel

We all know she's fell

Purella Isabel

He's spying for Israel in Lebanon

Puella Isabelahel, we all know she's hell

Pirela Isabel know she's hell purella isabel

he's buying

for

Israel

in Lebanon

Your Ella I You're Ella Isabel, we all know she smell.

Purella isabel, he's spying for Israel in Lebanon.

never known puerla is a hell

we all know she smells

this is the part where everybody just locked the fuck in

we all know and see each other

this is the part we're all locked the fuck in

we see each other we're, we got this shit.

Don't worry.

Piorella Isabelle, we all know she smell.

Purella Isabelle be spying for Israel in Lebanon.

Straight up, she was.

She fucking was leaking shit to the Mossad.

She's a fucking bitch.

Anyway, guys, goodbye, Tic Tac, forever.

Not forever, just soon.

Piorella Isabel. soon. E.O.

Elizabel.

We all know

she smell.

P. R. L. Isabelle.

Imagine I upload this to Spotify.

What will she do?

If I upload this shit, it's going on Instagram, Spotify, fucking Apple music, everything.

And this, imagine if it went viral.

Imagine if it started trending.

Imagine this song

about Fiorella start trending just because

it goes hard like it might

you know Fiorella

Isabelle

we all know she

straight up do smell she does smell

yes she does smell the women who were in her room

that had to stay with her in Lebanon,

they had no dog in any race. And they were like,

that woman smelled so fucking bad I had to leave she smelled so terrible it was like unbearable

she really does smell terrible like apparently

that's not even a joke bro

like she smell bro

she stank she stank I even know why she stank so bad. She stank. She stank, bro.

I don't even know why she stank so bad, but she stank.

Anyway, y'all.

It's a sea shanty.

All right, guys.

Guys, just trust that I got this shit on.

The conclusion is trust that I got this shit on lock.

I know what I'm doing with this Islam shit.

I know it sounds wacky and crazy, and it is what it is.

But it's like, I just think that there, we'll see.

Give me like six months to cook.

Give me six months.

If six months from now, I'm not vindicated, then I'll take the L, you know?

Guys, goodbye.

I'll see you.

Tuesday.