🔴 RED NEWS | PUTIN NUKES! | AMERICAN COMMUNIST PARTY UPDATES

Everyone, I know it's late, but it's also Thanksgiving tomorrow, and if you are still being forced to go to work on Thanksgiving, your boss is a piece of shit and you should take a shit on their desk first thing in the morning, 5 a.m.

Horco, what's going on?

What's going on, Porco?

So

And you could tell him I told you to do that.

You could tell him I told you to do that.

You can tell him you were sent by me.

Well guys, I couldn't I was gonna skip tonight's stream, but I have so much on my mind I have to get it out.

I had to communicate this um because I really wanted to talk about it tonight.

And uh I'm gonna.

So what do I wanna talk about exactly?

My shirt is open.

Ah, very, very harmless mistake.

I mean, even if it was, even if my shirt was like totally open, it's not like it's a crisis.

It's just bad form.

But that was a completely innocent thing.

And I'm I appreciate that it was a completely innocent thing.

Meaningless.

Mistake I had made.

Anyway.

I wanted to get this off my mind so I don't forget about it.

Buffalo!

What's going on?

And I don't know if I'm going to be streaming Friday.

Uh so this may be my last stream of the week until Sunday.

So it's important.

And uh

Well you've noticed um a new pattern it's going to continue where you know I'm starting to talk about the revival of the left wing a lot.

And I'm starting to reflect a lot on twenty fifteen and twenty sixteen with Bernie Sanders.

And I know almost everyone here is a Bernie Sanders OG.

And I want to have I want to just be clear about

Mistakes that I can see coming that I don't want us to make.

And the first mistake I don't want us to make and I want you to listen to this very carefully.

I want you to l be very attentive to what I'm about to say.

And I don't want this to go over your head.

I want it I want you to listen very carefully.

I don't want us to make the mistake of somehow thinking that.

Bernie Sanders could have succeeded in twenty fifteen.

And that is a really hard pill to swallow, but he couldn't have.

Even if he had broken with the Democratic Party, he couldn't have won.

So let's just get that out of the way.

He could not have won.

Because it has a lot to do with the primitive state of consciousness within the movement that he was building.

And there wasn't enough time to really bring that to its conclusion.

So I want to be clear about something.

The victory of Maga was historically necessary as far as the development of US history is concerned.

And I don't want people to think, I don't want you to think, that we're now, you know, abandoning

the original insight of Maga communism in favor of this rose tinted classes glasses of trying to revive, you know, Justice Democrats or Bernie Sanders or twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen, you know,

Uh progressive left-wing populism.

And I'm going to explain exactly why.

There was something fundamental about MAGA that we need to take for granted going forward.

Because what it really means to abandon the Democratic Party is to take for granted.

The irreversibility of Mago.

That's step one.

And that so so it's not a split from the Democratic Party that we're pursuing.

We're pursuing a new potentially a new party that will split from both the Democrats and the Republican Party.

And that's an incredibly important distinction to keep in mind.

Um I always keep in mind logo.

Who always talks about the importance of Republicanism, not the GOP, but just in general republicanism.

Why he prefers to be a Republican over the Democrat um semiotically, right?

In terms of just what those words mean and connote.

And

Logo is correct in some sense.

Um

The defect of Bernie Sanders in 2015, 2016 was this extremely naive universalism.

It was this extremely naive.

Um

all embracing, all loving kind of

completely blind to the concrete realities,

And I think that's exactly why it was so easily subverted and hijacked by the woke stuff and by identity politics.

Because it was an empty and abstract universalism, not a concrete one.

And so it was like a death by a thousand cuts to oppose Bernie Sanders to the the concreteness of race and sex and and sexuality and all these kind of things that were more immediate.

And Bernie looked very weak, uh and he was weak because he was because that movement was not able to propose a concrete collective subject.

Um that that serves as the context for like

What are we fighting for, and who is we?

Who are we, right?

And historically speaking, that is what MAGA actually accomplished.

MAGA.

Um for better or for worse, irreversibly

was an acquiescence to the fact that the universalism of the United States

Well, not just the universalism, to be clear.

The integrity of the United States on a fundamental level had collapsed.

Now liberals like to jump to race

And this conclusion definitely resonates with people in terms of people being duped by the media that it's about race, but it's not about race.

It's not about race.

Um, it's not even about nationalism.

It's not even about America as a nation.

in within the narrow frame of nationalism or nation states.

It has nothing to do with ethnicity.

And it has everything to do with the concrete reality

Of

America's economic reproduction as a

as a form of collective existence.

And that is something which is ultimately rooted in the blue-collar American working class.

And it's something that's rooted in America's integration in the global economic system of its own creation.

And it's something rooted in America's trade policies and industrial policies.

And that reality is what is concrete.

And that is the reality that blue-collar workers who flocked to Trump in 2015, 2016.

We're seeking to address and recog and give recognition to.

So if we associate republicanism with this kind of like real politic, concrete self-interest versus abstract moral universalism,

Typically, the Republican Party is associated with corruption because it had historically represented the interests of businessmen, business owners.

So it's a directly private particular interest in the form of businessmen who want to make money.

Right?

Whereas MAGA kind of

Changes that, where instead of the particularism of businessmen, it's the particularism of America as an economic totality.

Not the global system necessarily, but American manufacturing and industry and the the the American worker and their interests, their concrete interests of just being able to put food on the table.

And

So that is the stuff out of which countries and nations are made, by the way.

They're not made by blood, they're not made by ethnicity, they're not made by any abstract notion of nation.

Stalin, if you read his writing on the national question, he outlines exactly what makes a nation: common language, a common territory, and a common extent of economic existence.

And

I think one of the biggest problems with Bernie Sanders style leftism, if we want to call it that, which was a thing that arose from within the Democratic Party, is

Well

It it more or less is Reddit, if that makes sense.

It's very Reddit.

It's very much good on paper, good sounding, good feeling.

But it's inauthentic

At the level of

Of what it actually communicates and means in reality itself.

I don't know exactly how I'm supposed to communicate this.

But I was thinking about it today 'cause I'm just thinking deeply and reflecting on this.

And when you think very deeply, you you have to think in stupid ways as well.

So I just thought and I was like, you know.

When a libtard

Is at the gym.

And sees a guy in a maga hat.

That communicates more.

That speaks more.

It says more.

than anything a Bernie Sanders style leftism could communicate.

What do I mean by that?

Like

Forget about prescriptions with respect to policy.

Forget about overt ideological commitments.

Forget about anything that is conscious, that can be consciously communicated.

Somehow, objectively, some class antagonism is being very deep, visceral, visceral class struggle and class antagonism somehow communicates itself.

We're like the Libtard.

looks at um

Probably a blue collar working class person who just doesn't care about the rules of the institutions, doesn't care about um you know, uh uh the the the neoliberal respectability.

They just there's something uh that it's like an instinctive visceral reaction that it provokes.

And it says so much.

That situation itself, that sociological encounter.

And you know, Bernie Sanders was never able to communicate something like that.

He never had a MAGA hat.

As superficial as that sounds, he never had a MAGA hat.

Anyone could say that Bernie Sanders is a

Wholesome guy who's, you know, who's good.

Even MSNBC and Hillary Clinton, they could do that.

They could do that.

And what would their criticism be?

Well, their criticism of Bernie will be like, well, but Bernie is not doing enough about, you know, sexism or, you know, oh, well, he's just too naïve and he's like not realistic enough.

But he never had a MAGA hat that spoke for itself and didn't need to defend itself at all.

It just spoke for itself.

The closest that it got was the title, the label Bernie Bro, right?

And Bernie Bro was not something that the Bernie movement embraced unapologetically.

Had they done that, maybe it could have gone in that MAGA hat direction, I don't know, of just something that self-evidently and by itself triggers the libs.

But this sounds extremely superficial.

It sounds so like shallow and superficial and stupid and like small minded.

But this is the key to how everything works for human beings.

Symbolism, uh, a signage, a sign in reality.

That is what operates at the level of the unconscious.

That's what uh operates at the level of our actual authentic material realities.

You can you can um profess any kind of position that you want.

But what i what really is your position though?

Like, you can say something, but like, what are you really saying?

You know, there's always a dual meaning.

And I feel like MAGA communism makes so much fucking sense.

When you are honest about the secondary meaning, the unconscious meaning.

And the whole point of MAGA communism, I try to explain it in like millions of different ways.

Like, people just don't get it.

Even some of you guys don't get it sometimes.

But like what it's really about Ron Swanson, what's up?

What it's really about is how the ground zero of politics is not based in overt conscious formality or conscious commitments and proclamations with respect to policy or this is where I stand.

This is my ideology.

Here it is.

Like that is that has no that is not the level in which political semiotics is operating at.

You can like say, oh yeah, I'm an anarcho whateverist and I'm a this and I'm a that and then this the semiotic significance of what you're saying at the register of the unconscious is you're just a fucking Democrat libtard, right?

So it's like there's this new realm of political reality that MAGA has introduced, which is open in terms of the theoretical or conscious or ideological implications because it's just more fundamental than all of those things.

It's far more fundamental than all of those things.

Um and every time people critiqued MAGA communism by trying to reduce it to some kind of theory or some kind of conscious notion, it's like they didn't get it.

They didn't understand that we're trying to acknowledge a reality that is just not fundamentally, primarily conscious.

Right?

And I that is and it's no surprise that a lot of the people, you know, did have mental disabilities who were the most well, there are two categories of people, frankly, that had the strongest reactions negatively: people with mental disabilities and people from the UK, such as Tess Owens from The Guardian.

And it's well known that the UK, just look at the autism rates per popul per capita compared to every other country on earth.

And they make things like Doctor Who, and they, you know, they have that thing going on over there.

Uh like Mr.

Bean.

They just have people like Mr.

Bean who just don't get it.

Everything is just very overt.

They just don't get it.

Anyway,

And and MAGA communism was very American because it was just not something that cared about defending itself at a strictly formal or uncon or completely conscious level.

Right.

Now, um, frankly, what I just said is just facts.

Look it up if you don't believe me.

MI6 l lost their mind over it.

They still didn't understand they think it's the dark magician Alexander Dugan's uh necrom uh sorcery or something.

Anyway, uh

Uh to continue what I'm saying, uh

So the idea, like, is that MAGA is this new

Opening and it is very brutal and painful to be humble, not simply to the fact.

That all the rednecks and backward people or whatever are, you know, are um you need to lower yourself to their level geographically and culturally and whatever.

That's very direct.

And it's not just that Marx self-proclaimed Marxists and socialists and self-proclaimed progressives and leftists have to humble themselves to the fact that they were just fundamentally outflanked by people who were ideologically the opposite of them, it seems like.

I think more fundamentally, the humiliation of taking the L

On MAGA for leftists and just accepting the truth of MAGA is accepting the primacy of this unconscious reality.

Of unconscious, like semiotic registers just profoundly eliding reducibility to our conscious and overt comprehension of what politics is, whether we try to reduce it to policy or ideology or something else, and understanding how consciousness and ideology and policy are all subordinated to this more unconscious register of political struggle and political reality.

And there's something very, very psychological about that.

There's something incredibly psychological about it that makes our work much more difficult in today's era.

Because you do need a kind of psychoanalysis to understand it.

You you do need a way to kind of

It's very much like

Not only is it something new within politics, it is itself a grenade thrown at conventional ways of making understand

It's it's so like hard to explain.

It's like

Okay, on the one hand, you have MAGA, and on the other hand, you have the conventional institutions of neoliberalism.

And that distinction is enough.

But in addition to that,

Part of the institutionalism of neoliberalism is a specific understanding of politics itself.

And it's that understanding of politics which MAGA also directly undermines.

And MAGA Communism was really trying to communicate that fact.

Right?

Like even the under a real conflict is not when there's two sides on opposite parts of a field.

A real conflict, and this is to paraphrase Shizhek, a real conflict is when there's a dispute and a disagreement as it pertains to the very mapping of the field itself.

That's real conflict.

If we can both agree on the battle space that we're on, and we can both agree that you stand there and I stand here, we are not actually engaged in war in its fullest and most complete sense of the word.

We're engaged in a game.

And a game at minimum is where both players accept a bare minimum of common rules and common reality.

But a real war is when there's a disagreement as it pertains to the actors and the content of the battle space itself.

That is an objective war.

That is just war objectively, right?

That's not war.

That's not a gentleman's agreement, that's not a gentleman's skirmish, that's not a duel between gentlemen, that's a war in the highest ontological or metaphysical sense of the word.

And that such war is what MAGA communism sought to communicate.

That is what MAGA represented in this country.

And it has apps, and because we have lost the ability to authentically reflect our political reality in this country.

And that is so interesting to think about.

Like the reality on an unconscious level, it's like class struggle.

Blue-collar workers, you know, walking into a diner.

And like fucking salaried office workers and a banker in one booth just like oh

And they just feel uneasy and there's tension, and it's like such a visceral, instinctual class conflict between the MAGA hat and the so-called progressives, right?

But then, when it comes to reflecting that in our consciousness, everything is the opposite.

The MAGA guy is like, oh, you're a damn commie, and you're like, and I want to be like Malay, and yeah, we should just, you know, give all of our wealth to capitalists.

And the banker is sitting there like, actually, I'm a socialist ecological, and like, I believe in equality for all, and I believe, and like, that is so, that is such, that that needs to be honestly engaged with.

Even if you don't agree with MAGA communism, the fact that this has become a fact of politics in this country, that we have lost the ability to honestly and authentically reflect our actual reality and consciousness is a real issue and a real problem that should be honestly.

And soberly like engaged with instead of instead of doing what all the leftists did instead, which is change their understanding of class itself, such that the salaried banker is the proletarian and the blue collar guy is now bourgeois.

And that's what they did to cope with the fact that.

Our consciousness just doesn't reflect reality anymore.

It just doesn't.

Yeah, you can lie about reality to make sense of your false consciousness and say that, you know, Bill Gates is the true proletariat and people in Carbondale, Illinois, or something are all the bourgeoisie, and that indebted farmers who are literally broke, who have nothing, are petty bourgeois, but you know, a prostitute is a proletarian who does OnlyFans.

You can lie to yourself.

to cope with your false consciousness or cope with the fact of the predominance of the false consciousness.

But but everyone can see that's what you're doing.

You're just lying.

You're just lying to everyone.

It's an objective fact

That

Consciousness, political consciousness, no longer aligns with political reality.

And that is what MAGA communism really was trying to say.

Like, some fundament, like, it doesn't matter what the content is, it doesn't matter what you fill the content with.

Let's just acknowledge the fact.

That there has been an acute separation between these two things.

Because of the in and we can talk about the causes.

Like, we live in an incredibly psychological era.

We live in an incredibly psychological era.

We live in an incredibly libidinally charged era where the most intimate desires and

Fantasies of people.

Like that everything is running wild and running amok.

And people are starting to look it pet politics is becoming sexualized.

Red versus blue is just man versus women, it seems like.

And that's how intimate it has become.

That's how psychological it's become.

And that is the true matrix when you think about it.

The true matrix.

is these cybernetically fueled fantasies

That perpetuates our narrow individualism.

And to escape the matrix means comprehending that.

Rummaging through all of this trash, and you have to rummage through it at the end of it is an impersonal, completely, fundamentally impersonal collective reality.

But though impersonal, one that still has contradictions, one that still has conflicts, one that still has content.

It's not an empty, flat space.

There's still shit going on there even though it's not personal.

And I feel like that's really hard for people to comprehend.

Like, class struggle is not personal.

It's a struggle.

It's historical.

Something is going on there.

But it's not something that can be reduced to an individual's extent of consciousness or desire or subjectivity for that matter or imagination.

It's something that is existing beyond the threshold of our individuality, but which nonetheless is fundamental to our existence and explains everything about our various symptoms.

So

And I think what Bernie Sanders' message back then in 2015, 2016 was basically like, you know, yeah, I'm just gonna every we love everybody and it's everybody coming together about love.

And it's like it didn't acknowledge conflict.

It wasn't able to acknowledge conflict.

It wasn't able to acknowledge something going on.

Something going on in Tartarus.

And that something going on in Tartarus took the form of MAGA.

And MAGA didn't come out of nowhere.

It reflected a deep, telluric, volcanic movement within the history of our country.

And

Bernie was like in a like a cuckold, completely blind to it.

you know, like a cuckold, really.

Um

So we cannot return to that.

We'll never return to that.

And let's be clear.

The significance of Bernie, Dee.

What's going on, brother?

Appreciate it.

The significance of Bernie, right, was.

Bom.

more so exposing the DNC than anything else.

And all of the based things about Bernie and his movement were actually the straw men that his enemies were projecting on him.

That's what was based about Bernie.

Like the Bernie Bro thing.

I hate to say this, but a lot of Bernie Sanders' bros were just like fucking stupid potheads.

like stupid college kid potheads, straight up.

Like they weren't real bros, all right.

But Liptards invented this image of the Bernie bro that was much more politically potent than the real one, right?

And um

So MAGA should be given credit where there's no, yeah, the chat boy retards.

Like, there is no going back to old Bernie Sanders style, Paul.

It had to lose, it had to fail.

There's no going back.

Um

So we're talking about a post-MAGA left wing, to be clear.

I want everyone to be clear about what I'm actually trying to communicate.

It's a post-MAGA left wing.

It's not a pre-MAGA left wing.

It's a post-MAGA left wing.

And

There's no going back to the and being nostalgic.

And that's also why we shouldn't trust Jenk.

We shouldn't trust him because now he's just starting to get it.

And

Um we are much more advanced than Jank.

Don't don't like underestimate how much MAGA communism was ahead of the game.

And keep that in mind, alright?

Um he should be following our lead, frankly.

Frankly, he should be following our lead, right?

Um

Now, uh

Now that being said, um

I'm not saying we should be dismissive of these new developments.

That's not what I'm trying to say.

But I just want us to be clear that let's not pretend like, you know, it could have gone any other way.

Let's not pretend like

There was a good old left wing and it got ruined by the woke mob.

It's just that's kind of a Zionist myth.

Frankly.

Uh when I say good old left, I'm talking about in the two thousands and nineties.

There was a good old left in the thirties and forties and fifties.

Uh but that's long gone.

Uh you know, I'm not here to say that, oh, yeah, we had a good Bill Maher left and then it came and got ruined by no, I mean, there was something fundamentally wrong with it from the beginning.

When it comes to neo the neoliberal b Bill Maher or whatever.

Uh leftism.

But

Um

And I think, let me tell you about another blind spot of Bernieism, guys.

Another blind spot was that Bernie was never a real anti-imperialist.

Let's keep that in mind.

And

There is a false anti-imperialism that accomp opportunistically accompanied Bernie, which was based in this idea that anti-imperialism is just rooted in moral compassion when it's not.

There is a concrete content of anti-imperialism.

which has to do with uh my you know, I I talked about it in my speech.

In the Free America to Free a Palestine event called the Occupied States of America, where the American global system has destroyed our popular sovereignty.

So, one of the things that was missing in Bernie's movement, and this is the key: instead of saying Bernie doesn't care about the third world and moralizing about that, what we should really say is that it's not just economic populism, it's not just economic issues, it's also political issues.

pertaining to the state, pertaining to the occupied states of America, pertaining to the fact that we don't have a republic, we don't have a united republic, we don't have a sovereign republic.

And MAGA is the one that focused on the political side of things more than anyone else.

Did they do it sufficiently?

No, no, no, I'm not saying that.

But tell me why MAGA, tell me why the thing about abolishing the FBI came from MAGA and not the Bernie Sanders camp.

Well, there's a reason.

Because we're not just fighting for health care and economics.

We're fighting for a republic.

We're fighting for a democratic republic in the Leninist sense of the word.

We're fighting for a Soviet republic, an American Soviet republic.

We're not going to call it Soviet, but you get what I'm saying.

The allusion is directly to Lenin and Leninism.

The political struggle is important.

The struggle for sovereignty is important, it's fundamental.

And that was completely missing.

That was completely missing from Bernie Sanders style politics, and it's also missing from Jank politics.

TYT politics.

It's missing from all American politics, besides MAGA itself.

Just raising the question of sovereignty, raising the sovereignty question.

Raising the sovereignty question.

They'll call you conspiracy nut.

Yeah, but, you know I I I'm really thinking and reflecting on this 'cause it's like I remember in twenty twenty where all the parapolitics retards

Um

all the parapolitics retards came out of the woodwork.

But why did they?

Because they started to become conspiracy theorists 'cause they're like, Oh, what's going on with the Democrats and what how they're screwing over Bernie?

And

They like, that's how they came to the surface.

That's really where it came from.

So, even there was an acquiescence to the sovereignty thing, even then and there.

And I think one of the reasons they hate us so much, the parapolitics people, is because.

They're not willing to make the final step and just be like, Yeah, um

There is no popular sovereignty in America, and MAGA was just an acquiescence to that fact.

They're still kind of like, I guess, here's how Bernie can still win.

They they may they'll never admit it, but that's really where they are mentally.

What if Bernie tells his followers to join D S A?

Well, D S A is not a political party.

It's not a party.

Keep that in mind.

DSA is a club for Liptards to meet together and be Liptards.

You know, I really can't stand how personal politics is in America.

I hate how it's just a it's just so reduced to like cultural

Outlook and like temperament and testosterone levels.

And I think the difference decisively is like, can you think for yourself or do you just fucking l s acquiesce to whatever the T V tells you.

But then like

Politics is such a fundamentally impersonal reality.

That's just like in Russia, they don't have this.

They don't have this in Russia.

They don't have this in Russia 'cause in the Russian Civil War, uh it was men with guns shooting and killing each other and all having to go through yeah, what it means to live r in a real life, you know.

There's no snowflakes, none of that.

There's nothing like that.

It's like everyone understands we're fighting for the future.

We're not fighting over.

You know, whether veganism is correct, lifestyle choice or not, we're fighting over the fucking future of the country.

And today that's not the case.

Today it's where I'm fighting over my lifestyle, I'm fighting over my habits.

And that's so uh tragic and disgusting to me because

I wish people could rediscover this real left wing that's like not based in your personal feelings of like loving everyone, but is like an objective position.

You know, I watched a show when I was young.

It was HBO's Rome, which was a very good show.

But you know what I liked about that show?

What it correctly communicated.

Even I, young as I was when I saw it, I liked that show because like all of the fucking warriors, all of the warriors who were real motherfuckers were left wing.

They're like, yeah, we're with Caesar.

Fuck these plutocrats.

Fuck these aristocratic pieces of shit.

Right?

We're some we're on some real shit.

And then the the you know who were the fucking like effete libtards who had low T and all had gyno and were all estrogenic?

The fucking patri the um the optimates like Cicero and that pedo old man.

Cato, you know, they were like all gyno-ridden pussies.

Like Lindsey Graham, and then there was the left wing, it was a muscular left wing of soldiers.

And like

What happened to that?

Because that actually was the norm for all of modern history.

I'm not just talking about HBO.

HBO's Rome was getting that from modern history, right?

Do you what do you guys think?

Like in the 1930s, your average New Deal supporter versus your average Liberty League supporter, it's a market difference.

Market difference.

And, you know, these are not aesthetics.

I'm not talking about aesthetics.

I'm talking about honor.

I'm talking about what it means to.

Um live on some real shit.

Instead of some fake shit.

Real ones know exactly what I'm talking about, by the way.

You just know some shit is real.

Like, who you gonna fucking run to when there's nobody to tattletale to, bitch?

Stand on some business and have some honor.

Who are you gonna fucking go to when there's no one to snitch on?

You know, who are you gonna go to when you're not you know, nobody gives a fuck you're whining, you know, for example?

Like on some real understanding the brutal nature of life itself.

And we have to be fake about that and lie to ourselves?

No, fuck that, you know?

So it's like that's why it's important.

That's why it's important.

And like I get it, the Democrats kind of understood this.

And aesthetically, yeah.

They were showing a guy in a truck in the car that they hired to go on TikTok and be like, I'm gonna tell you guys right now, I like Kyamala Harris.

And Trump is a traitor to this country.

And what they didn't understand that it's not about aesthetics, it's not about the look, it's about the real shit behind the look, right?

Sleeper side, you can't fake real shit.

You can't fake real shit.

You cannot fake real shit, you know?

And then the Trump stuff, Kamala's never gonna be being over.

Like, that's some real shit.

I'm not gonna lie.

You don't if you understand you understand.

It's like

Yeah, the blue neck shit was totally fake.

Kamala's never.

That was some real shit.

And the real shit is just like we don't give a fuck about all this.

Explaining, you have to do.

We fucking want to see the results.

We want to see shit get done, how shit really is.

You know, Biden was ruling us for four years, he's fucking senile, and it's been a disaster.

That is real.

There you don't need a blue neck, you don't need to get a redneck in the car pretending to be authentic to to just.

You don't need that because it's a real honest position about the actual reality, you know?

And people don't understand this, but traditionalism, traditional roles, traditional aesthetics, whatever you want to call it, that's just a reflection of truth.

It's just a reflection of it's just an authentic reflection of reality.

It's not something that needs to be faked or contrived.

It's actually just an after, it's a symptom of something more real than it.

So there's no going back to Bernie Sanders.

There's no returning to that.

There's no um

There's no

having nostalgia for twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen.

Let's give ourselves a little bit more credit than that, you know?

And by the way, breaking from the Democrats is introducing the political struggle, because it's a two-party duopoly.

And if we're gonna reintroduce the political struggle, it has to be anti-imperialist.

There's no other fucking way.

The the the two party duopoly is connected at the hip to imperialism.

It's natural to be an anti imperialist if you're fighting for a new political power in the USA, which is what a third party would be doing.

Just by uh saying there should be a third party, right?

And I know Movement for a People's Party tried to do that, but they got wrecked internally very quickly.

Um.

Would we consider running on a Republican Party line?

No.

No.

No, like I said, there's a political realignment and the idea is that there's gonna be a big tent party that probably draws from some Democrats and some Republicans and a lot of people who are neither in terms of representation.

But it's it's r i i it's not about creating a Green Party that is for disaffected Democrat voters.

It's not about

When when you say neither Democrat, this is a thing guys we need to keep in mind.

When people say I'm neither Democrat nor Republican, the question you always want to ask them is, oh, which neither are you?

Which what do you mean?

Are you a neither Democrat nor Republican Republican or a neither Democrat nor Republican Democrat?

Because when leftists say they're neither Democrat nor Republican, what they really mean to say is that they're a neither Democrat nor Republican Democrat.

Meaning objectively, they tribally side with the Democrats and sympathize with the Democrats and associate with the Democrats and sentimentally they're with the Democrats, but they're just whining about their disaffection with the party.

And the same is true on the other side, uh, to a lesser extent at least.

Yeah, Democrat with a small D.

That's what the leftists are.

They're Democrats with small D's.

Uh they they're they're not officially pro-Democrat, but you know, low-key, they're still on the side of the fucking Democrats.

Like in reality.

That's what I'm trying to that's what MAGA communism was trying to say.

Like, but what about in reality, though, on the unconscious level?

Because you know, you notice these knee-jerk reactions.

Trump gets elected and they're going to protest.

What the hell are you why weren't you what are you protesting what?

Like, on the low, they're still Democrats, but they're just not willing to take responsibility for it.

Like on the low they're Democrats.

But they're just not taking responsibility for it.

And that's unconscious.

It's not conscious, it's unconscious.

And I am exhausted having trying to explain the unconscious to people.

I just feel like you should fucking get it if you're being honest.

And if you're autistic, please wear something that says, please be patient with me, I'm autistic.

And just admit that it's your blind spot that you just don't see between the lines.

And that's fine, there's nothing wrong with that.

But I'm sick of pretending ninety percent of us can't.

Like, how come so many of these I'm not a Democrat leftists, after Trump won, they're like,

Ah guys.

What we should have done, it's like who wait, who's we?

Why are you c why are you like with the Democr like why are you like on the low with them?

Like, we just supposed to all implicitly be on the same page.

Well, on the l well, fuck you then, bitch.

On the low, I'm MAGA, bitch.

On the low, I'm MAGA, then, bitch.

You wanna talk if you wanna be on the low about shit?

I'm the opposite of you, unconsciously.

I fucking hate you, Libtards.

You're my enemy.

I see you as literal enemies whenever I see you.

And consciously we're saying the same shit.

I'm saying fuck the Democrats and fuck the Republicans.

And s I see you saying that oftentimes.

But you see how we're still enemies a lot of the time?

Because there's something going on unconsciously.

There's something going on on the low, right?

We're saying the same shit consciously, but on the low, clearly you're not committed to to what you're saying.

Am I gonna fucking lie and say that I'm not biased in real life, that I prefer a person in a MAGA hat 99% of the time over someone with a Kamala shirt?

Should I lie?

Of course I do.

Of course I prefer them.

So no, it's not the same.

They're not the same.

They're not.

Because the manga person ninety nine percent of the time is uh or let's say eighty five to be more.

You know, fair.

Eighty five percent of the time is on some real shit and the the fucking person in the Kamala shirt is a mentally ill lip tard that's just screams at everyone and scolds everyone.

Fucking Harry Potter libtard.

Narcissist

Complete narcissist

A Twitch mod who bans me, you know, like that's what I see.

There's some crazy Magatards out there, that's true.

But yeah, that's true.

But most of them are just on but but you need to understand, like, that's just the ones that are like

too like excited about it.

But like

You just say ninety percent of people who say they like Trump are just like chill.

Just a chill guy.

Just a chill girl, whatever.

Usually the crazy ones are like people who are in liberal cultural environments and therefore have to defend themselves way too much.

I'm not talking about MAGA influencers.

99.9% of MAGA influencers, we're going to throw them in a gulag.

In a video game, if we ever seize power, I'm talking about regular ass people.

I'm not talking about Twitter space.

MAGA people on Twitter spaces.

Those people

Say waff, that's all I'm saying.

So

But if anything, you should take away is just how important the political unconscious is.

To understand politics.

It's just so fucking fundamental and don't overthink it.

Just get it or don't get it.

But don't overthink it.

It's like you get it or you maybe I'm cringe for even thinking of it this way, but I'm just like, shit.

When a Bernie Sanders person walks in the room with a Bernie shirt,

there's not a lot of class struggle in the air, but when somebody walks in with a fucking MAGA hat, there's a lot of class divisions that that exposes to the surface.

That's what I mean to say.

It's like

The true class divisions just bubble up into the surface.

Yeah, not in ways that are that that um convey like class consciousness, but like the all of the real symptoms of the class division just start to come to the surface.

Oh, yeah, you want free healthcare, that's fine.

Oh, yeah, you want like uh more taxes, whatever, fine, have all these policies.

Yeah, yeah, have the policies, but don't wear that fucking MAGA hat and don't fucking be politically incorrect and be vulgar.

and use the wrong language.

Don't you dare say the retard word.

Oh yeah, yeah, fine.

Con yeah, yeah, that's fine.

Don't you dare say retard though.

'Cause that's throwing a grenade into the

Discursive you know, fortress of bourgeois.

Of uh

bourgeois psychology.

You're just fucking b besieging their psychology.

They're you're besieging the integrity of their

Their whole worldview.

Johnstow, what's up?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

You want.

Okay.

Even in the early room.

Uh, Kamala supporters, libtards.

Someone goes, you know, I think we should have communism.

Someone goes, I think we should have communism.

And I'm also, even I'm actually a tanky, and I want, I, I, I like Chairman Mao and Chairman Gonzalo, and we should throw everyone in a gulag.

And the libtard Kamala supporter has wine and like, oh, you silly.

My co-workers, so silly.

But then someone in that same room just goes, yeah, Bob from next door is such a retard.

Woo!

And then everyone loses their mind because someone said retard.

So like that's the type of shit I'm trying to talk about.

Like that's what I'm saying.

Do you get it?

It doesn't matter what you say like consciously.

Like

There's something going on unconsciously that is the truth.

Like that, it's very, very psychological.

It's extremely psychological.

Hit, what's going on, bro?

Appreciate the five.

It's extremely psychological.

Extremely psychological.

Oh yeah, my friend.

She's a Maoist.

She's so silly.

She's my little Maoist revolutionary friend.

We're all out at brunch, and here's my Maoist friend, so silly And here's my Kamala friend, And here's my Raytheon friend, And there's my other friend, Who we just met,

Yeah.

Man, bitches be retarded and shit.

It's like you just threw it you just fucking detonated a bomb at brunch.

You just detonated a bomb.

Something happened.

What is that?

You know, think of it.

What is that?

Like, can we be real about how that's a real thing?

Like, that's, and nobody knows how to explain it, or nobody even acknowledges it, right?

Like, something's going on there.

You know, Žižek talked about this.

He used to talk about it.

But it's real.

It's actually like a real thing.

Like, it doesn't matter what you say consciously.

It what really it's the unconscious registers that get tripped over when you maybe cross a line, you say the wrong thing, and the true the true content of your class position, your class outlook just gets activated.

Hit, what's going on, bro?

It's so so viscerally psychological.

Even I can't fully explain it.

I mean, I could if I sat down and wrote about it, but

It's almost theological.

That's how much it's like in this extremely.

difficult territory.

Um

And what is it rooted in?

Well, here's the thing about you'll learn when you study semiotics and discourse and language itself.

Um, let me put it to you in these.

This is why it's.

I need to find a way to simplify it.

That's my difficulty.

It's like on the one hand you have a shared discursive horizon and there can be a diverse content within that discursive horizon.

Like you can have this political position, you can have that position.

And then underlying that shared discursive horizon is a specific logic of how language itself emerges from reality, from the real, right?

And

The real conflicts and disputes, and let's say the real discourse itself.

Is happening at that level of the different ways in which we relate language to reality at its most fundamental.

And I think that's where, you know, people say, Oh, Heidegger Haas is uh well, yeah, I mean, Heidegger is the one who opened up a lot of this type way of thi this way of thinking about

you know, uh, understanding this kind of

Way in which language is related to the world and reality.

I mean, he he started it, by no means he finished it.

It w you know.

But uh yeah, I mean um there are uh w when we have these kind of

I think true.

Um

Class

Sentiment or whatever you want, temperament, whatever you want to call it, is not happening at the level.

Of something within language.

It's happening at the level of how language is related to reality and a world itself.

And that is the real you know, um, Dugan

recently has been posting some stuff

which stupid people don't understand.

Um

But it's clear to me, 'cause I'm not one of those stupid people.

Uh-huh.

Because Dugan he says, you know, there's a new race of liberals and they are racist against everyone.

There's the liberal liberal race and they're racist to all other civilizations and also non-liberals.

Why is Dugan saying that like liberals are becoming like a new race, regardless of skin color, regardless of whatever?

Well

Because what we understand as race has a lot to do with language.

It has a lot to do with.

Our

fundamental horizon of existence.

How we

Um

How we dwell, not only how we dwell within language, but how our language dwells within and from reality, how it's made from that.

And in the case of political correctness, what is so violent and yeah, it's violence when you think about what violence actually means, it is a kind of violence, when you just say retard without any regard for political correctness, what is so violent about that?

Because within the bourgeois liberal world, I have come up with elaborate rational justifications for why the word retard is harmful and wrong and it should not be used.

Because it is offensive and insensitive, whatever, right?

And it perpetu and if you want to add a leftist spin, it perpetuates ableism or something.

Okay, well, when most people use the word retard, they're just not thinking at that level.

They're not thinking in terms of I am going to use language according to what I think.

Reality should be reflected as.

I'm just trying to communicate like.

what I really think is going on or what I how I really feel or where I where my mind really is at.

Not necess so it's not about morality.

It's in the sense of like, it's not about me creating a double world where it's a where, you know, i the moral self-consciousness reigns supreme.

Because that's a fake world that doesn't even exist.

It's not the real world.

That's a world you maybe want to exist, but it just doesn't.

And for the liberal or the leftist liberal, the reason that world can't exist is because we are not nobody else wants to participate in it.

But if we all just did the right thing and used the right language, we'd be living in that world.

And so for them, the way in which language is related to reality

Is that it has um

It has like a authority in in a sense.

It has a ability to shape reality according to the whims and fancies of moral self-consciousness.

And what kind of position in the real world does that reflect?

Well, it reflects.

A class of people

whose material subsi uh you know existence

Depends upon reflecting the world and creating worlds, whether that's artists or it's um

It's uh, you know, um Hollywood writers, it's cultural workers, whatever.

And when those people are institutionalized, those institutions carry with them traditions, and those traditions reflect a specific outlook.

And it it just changes the nature of language.

And why has this become

a division at the level

Of society, how has this polarized our society itself in two?

Well, it's because, um,

This country is becoming institutionalized.

at such a level that

how reality is being reflected

Is itself becoming part of reality, like Baudelard or whatever, would say, right?

Um

But the institutions of civil society are beginning to permeate every aspect of reality as a consequence of the fourth industrial revolution and as a consequence of social media.

Everything is becoming hyper reflexive.

It's becoming a copy without

an original, you know, a reflection without an original, whatever baudrillard or whatever

talked about.

So

This leaves us a great deal of anxiety with respect to the real.

What is reality?

And

For those of us in the thick of it,

Um

You know, there's no way to have any certainty about that.

There's no way to trust any.

Any

Um

Any simulation of reality, right?

But if you're a salaried Netflix employee, there is.

It comes from the assurances and

Yeah.

safety that comes with your institution.

Your social network.

Your community.

But I think what MAGA reflects is that America's r that is a layer on top of the real community of language upon which America rests.

And the real community of language upon which the country rests

Is the reality of material reality, of material economic existence?

Which we cannot

Um, represent directly, but which nonetheless, um.

has the quality of this kind of

uh overcoating, if you want, right?

It's like

The real, real reality is not the one that we can

Choose to create.

It's one that is definitely real.

Definitely there, but

But um

There's no way to directly represent it.

It just exerts itself in the form of symptoms, and y it can only be denoted in seemingly irrational ways, like MAGA itself.

And I think the liberal outlook, which is an extension of the Anglo Saxon metaphysical outlook, is that that reality cannot have content.

They may acknowledge it, but it for them it's this purely

hostile and malign real.

which is which they identify with Nazism, let's be clear.

They identify it with all the worst aspects of bad human nature and Hobbesian chaos and everything dark and evil and it's all Nazis and swastikas and it's criminal and it's bad.

So we need to have this fake simulated world, or else we're thrown into the wilderness of that.

But

What they lack is what Marx had, which is

Um

A sense of faith in the real that in that wilderness lies.

the concrete whole of our existence.

And we should not be afraid of that.

We should understand that in that alone lies our salvation, if there is any.

In that alone lies the content of our moral morality, for better or for worse.

And for Marx that was the proletariat, which

Marx wasn't a philanthropist who believed the proletariat needed to be rescued.

He believed that it contained the key

To the emancipation of all of mankind by virtue of its existence in the real, not by virtue of some empathetic and compassionate philanthropist who is going to save the proletariat, but that.

real existence that Marx identified as the proletariat.

contain the key to mankind's existence, to our humanity, everything we consider moral, everything we consider good, everything we consider real and human and in common.

Our language, everything.

All of that was bounded up with this class for Marx.

All of human history.

All of history itself.

Dunes, what's up?

And for Marx, that was

a risk to take that step, but he did.

And that's what Marxism was.

And Fabian socialism was the opposite.

Fabian socialism, which is where all these people are coming from, said, Ah, this is horrible oh, it's so horrible the proletariat we need to fix it by having r you know, remedies and we're gonna fix it and we're gonna alleviate the problem, and then everyone's gonna be living in the the uh yogurt commercial where it's all solar punk.

But that wasn't Marx's position.

It just wasn't.

It really wasn't.

Marx had faith in humanity's real existence, not an imagined existence, the real one.

and he thought it heralded a world historical transformation.

And that we just need to have the courage to have faith.

Yeah, and I'm gonna say faith because what else?

Marx would say we need to have the courage

To

To know, to dare to know.

So it's a scientific outlook.

But to have the courage to know

Is a form of faith.

To know what

is said cannot be known, is a form of faith.

To know the unknowable is a form of faith.

And he gave it the authority of knowledge.

That's why Marx

you know, was not

Uh

some religious mystic he had the brow of Socrates, and 'twas the authority of knowledge.

that he gave to the proletariat.

But um

That is an acquiescence to the real, at the least.

That is a

Promethean gesture of knowledge that's here in the realm of the conceit of self-consciousness and the imagined and the ideal, and you go down, you go down.

to reality.

Like Prometheus,

And you bring that knowledge down, you bring it

You bring it down.

And what does that actually mean?

People don't get it.

It's not come down from your university and be politically correct and teach people how to be politically correct.

No, you go down in the sense.

That you accept that concrete material reality.

That's what's real.

That's the realm of existence.

Not that bullshit in your universe.

That's the real world that can be known, that a new relationship of praxis.

But that is it.

That's it.

Whether it's good, whether it's bad, whether it's ugly, whether it's beautiful, it doesn't matter.

That's what it is.

And that's what it means to come down and bring the fire of Prometheus down.

Give that accursed and forsaken reality of mankind, the oppressed and the exploited of mankind, the authority, the courage, and the dignity of knowledge.

And that's what it is.

That's what it is.

In any case, guys, this wasn't supposed to go so long.

But uh

He caught me thinking a little bit.

Uh anyway, guys, I think I'll see you uh

I don't know when I'll see you, maybe Friday or Sunday.

Anyway guys, happy Thanksgiving.

Hope you have a good one.

And I'll uh I'll see you around.

Mm.

See y'all later, everybody.