🔴 RED PILL NEWS | PALESTINE WAR 🇵🇸

FI don't fail me now, take me to finish mine.

All my heart breaks, every step that I take, but I'm open at the gates, they'll tell me that you're mine.

Walking through the city streets, is it my mistake or design

I thought so the long

and on the Friday

and I ask him

and make you feel like home

if I turned in line Don't make me sad, don't make me sad, don't make me cry.

Sometimes love is not enough and the world gets tough.

I don't know why keep making me laugh

lives go behind the world is long carry on your type of fun in the meantime

I need to go up in that night night when we kiss you heart and we're proud of your way.

You're gonna make it crazy same.

So, choose your last first.

This is the last time.

It's you and I, we were born and died. Lost but now I am found. I can see but once I was blind. I was so confused as a little child.

Trying to take what I could get scared that I couldn't find while the

answer's me don't make me sad don't make me cry

some returns love is not enough and the world gets tough, I don't know why.

Keep making me laugh, the little scruly feel alive.

Your own was hung, the kid in the winter.

Time comes to grow up the the meantime. You can't take your luck in my sight.

When you kiss your heart and play away.

Make it crazy same.

So to choose your last first.

This is the last time.

Because you and I, we were born and die.

We were born and tied.

We were around and die. We were around and die. I'm not sure. to the moon.

to the world.

to the today. To the move. I you They don't t fail me now, take me to finish mine.

All my heart breaks, every step that I take, but I'm open at the gates, they'll tell me that shine.

Walking through the city of streets, is it like a state of design. I feel so alone. Is it my mistake or design?

I feel so alone and over Friday night.

It's gonna make you feel like home if I tell you you're blind.

Don't make me sad, don't make me sad, don't make me cry.

Sometimes love is not enough and the world gets tough, I don't know why.

Keep making me life, Lips go be alive.

One time, carry on.

You take that fun in the meantime.

I come to go up in my sight.

I like you see how you're calling around you.

You make it goes insane.

So true is your last births, this is the last time.

Because you and I, we were born and died. Lost but now I am found.

I can see but once I was blind I was so confused as a little child Trying to take what I could get scared that I couldn't find while the answer is me.

Don't make me sad, don't make me cry.

Sometimes what happens not enough and the rain gets tough.

I don't know why. Keep making me laugh.

It's gonna be alive.

The world was wrong, you carry on, try to put fun in the winter.

You can't break in the meantime.

When you're just so I won't play away. Come to play up in the outside when it used to heart and play it rain and like it

crazy it's sad.

So choose your last first this is the last time. Because you and I...

We were born and die.

We were born and die.

We were born and die.

We were born and die.

We were one and die. I'm not so much. It's the moon. A. the-Dohr-a-Doh! I'm See, don't fail me now.

Take me to the thinnage line.

All my heart breaks, every step that I take,

but I'm open at the gates, they'll tell me that you're mine.

Walking through the city streets, is it by mistake or design?

I feel so alone.

Friday nights can you make you feel at home if I tell you you the line?

Don't make me sad, don't make me cry.

Sometimes love is not enough and the world gets tough.

I don't know why.

Keep making me less.

This girl gets high.

The world is on.

Carry on.

You take the phone in the meantime.

Can take a walk in that night.

And I can't see how I'm probably running up.

Make it cause insane.

To use your last word, say since the last time,

you and I, we were bornthe night. Lost but now I am found.

I can see but once I was blind.

I was so confused as a little child

Trying to take what I could get scared that I couldn't find

While the answer's me

Don't make me sad. don't make me cry.

Sometimes love is not enough and the world gets far, don't know why.

Keep making me mad.

It's full of daylight.

The world is harm, we care to be your own, try to take up fun in the meantime.

When you take it up in that time, when you kiss the heart and I'm calling

and make it because it's sad.

So choose your last time.

Because you and I, we were born and died.

We were born die. We were't die. I'm trying to try to the world. you know Not even they can start me now. Would I be flying overhead?

The heavy words can't bring me down.

What I've been raised from the day?

I don't even notice how hard life was.

I don't even think about it now because

I finally found you.

Time my life is sweet like feeling

Like swimming, like a fucking dream I'm living.

Baby when because I'm playing on the radio.

How's it like a feeling?

You have to take me like a feeling.

It's my life's sweet and shit shoot, the women over here.

We're a moment because I'm playing on the radio.

You're gonna' dreams came through some night.

Past war, chase on July. came through some now. Ask what chase until I was dead. I heard the streets were big with

gold. That's what my father said.

No one needs a move when life was done.

No one in the way and it's paradise.

I finally found you.

I just feel like human life. from you. My wife is being like a feeling, like a fucking dream I'm living.

Hiding them because I'm saying on the radio.

I tell you it'm thinking like a filament.

With my eyes,

we try the chute of my true on the radio.

Sweet place living on their lives.

Sweet place living in.

I can sleep on living in

that we have the best thing on the radio. I'm not sure. Mari Not even they can't start me now. I'm trying overhead.

My heavy words can't bring me down. What I've been raised from the dead.

I don't even miss how hard life was.

I don't even think about it now because I finally

sound you.

Let's see you.

Time my life is sweet like silver men.

Like a fucking dream I'm living it.

Baby, let me cause I'm playing on the radio.

I took me like a game now.

You have to take the tuce like a living

because I'm lying.

It's my life, get the shit, the woman, oh yeah.

I'm hearing no more because I'm playing on the shots, it's a shoot, the woman all the year. We're a moment cause and playing on the radio.

You won't get us.

The dream throwns came through sun now.

Past white chase on July was dead.

I heard the streets where I've been gone.

That's what my father said.

No one even knows when life was night.

Now I'm in the lane, it's paradise.

I finally found you.

Time I just feel like snowmine.

Like a fucking dream I'm always speaking like a living.

Like a fucking dream I'm living it.

Baby, let me guess I'm saying on the radio.

I'm telling you like a little bit.

You're up and taking like a living.

Because my body speaks theirtrue trip from the moor, yeah.

Really, I'm a person playing on the radio.

Sweet like living in.

Swing like living in.

Don't the fucking tree best and thing on the video. I Welcome everyone to the headquarters of the Resistance.

Headquarters of the Resistance news coverage, uncensored, completely off the chain, on kick. What's up?

Got a lot of things to cover today. Although I want to do a Twitter space with Jackson, but let's

see what he says. I just let him know I want to do a Twitter space. And I want to debate Zionists. I want to debate them.

So that's on the agenda today. That's on the itinerary.

I want to preface this also by saying I'm tired as fuck.

Like I'm about to get knocked out. I didn't sleep by saying I'm tired as fuck?

Like I'm about to get knocked out.

I didn't sleep so I'm just fucking crazy tired.

All right?

Just letting you guys know that.

But uh, streamed earlier than usual. And I told you guys I'd stream early and this is a

good start right maybe tomorrow we'll do at 6 p.m. who knows but uh there's

things I want to talk about there's definitely things I want to talk about. I didn't eat any yogurt actually.

The things I want to mention and talk about are related to the question.

Yo, Joe Sizzleg, let's go!

Let's go!

Let's go.

We are truly entering a profound era.

Sorry, I have gag.

It's not gag reflex.

It's fucking protein.

What is it called? Burping, whatever that's called, where I'm like the

hiccups and shit. Gastrointestinal adverse reaction. So bear with me. Acid reflex. Exactly. That's what it is. Anyway, I want to let

you guys know something. We are entering into a profound new era. One that is both exciting, as it is scary, strange, unforeseen, surreal, wondrous.

There's many words I could use to describe it but we are definitely

reaching beyond the threshold of what's normal. In a sense you could put it like

this.

We're not in Kansas anymore.

We are definitely not in Kansas anymore.

The end of the state of Israel is upon us, but that's not even the beginning.

That's not even the beginning.

The real beginning are the great powers, the great pre-modern powers of the world, reforming, struggling, clashing, and

struggling to be born. And I say this with a great degree of pessimism as it regards humanitarianism.

The war in the Middle East will extend far beyond

Israel's lifetime, and I can promise you that.

It'll go far beyond Israel. And you'll see in the Middle East, ancient empires struggling to be reformed.

Reborn, I should say.

And there's no telling what that's going to look like.

But it has the possibility. Thank you so much.

Hamas, whether you like them or not, launched a global revolution.

Or marked one.

Now I'm not one to be a conspiracy theorist, but...

I mean, I am, but... I don't believe to be a conspiracy theorist, but, I mean I am, but...

I don't believe this was done without the knowledge of Iran, or without the knowledge of Russia and China.

Syria, the Syrian Civil War was probably...

Lionel! let's go!

The Syrian Civil War was probably the most profound geopolitical event of the 2010s.

And it was at that moment that I believe Russia, Turkey, and

Iran came to the drawing table and decided how they were going to draw up the new maps of the Middle East.

Maybe it's not that direct, but they came together and came upon an agreement of how things

are going to develop.

And I believe this.

I believe Syria was the game changer.

In other words, I believe the present war that is brewing and developing in Palestine has its origins in Syria and in the Syrian Civil War and the powers that

are behind this it goes far deeper than you could possibly imagine.

But I also want to say that in the post-Zionist world, we are approaching the end of the

so-called central dialectic of so-called Judeo-Christian civilization,

of Christianity struggling with its Old Testament premises, as Marx would write about in the Jewish question.

That is no longer what is central to the world.

And as such, and perhaps an entire era of European history of obsessing over the internal Jew is over.

It is simply not at the center of the world anymore.

There's new civilizations emerging which have their own struggle, their own sense of impossibilities, identity, and culture, which are beyond

the West, the so-called Judeo-Christian West.

And I want everyone to understand that this is not about, I mean I've said

this many times, this is not about Jews. It's not even necessarily about Israelis.

Israelis, it's a made-up identity. It's not even about the Jews in Israel per se.

The majority of the Jews in Israel are pawns.

Sheep.

The real elites behind the Zionist entity go far beyond that region.

And so the war playing out is between the unipolar world order, whose headquarters is in Israel,

and the multipolar world order.

And as I pointed out in my post, Israel will collapse as a state.

It's not going to be an attack on Jewish people in Palestine, but it's going to be a collapse

of that entity, that state, that government, that military machine and security apparatus.

And it's going to be replaced probably with a global DMZ, a British mandate 2.0,

except headed by the UN, Russia America Saudi Arabia and Iran will

oversee a transition into a new kind of state and it will simply change form. It will change form.

And this is not an ideal outcome, obviously,

but I'm just giving my realistic appraisal because many people think that the

Zionist entity will use the Samson option and start nuking people. And I don't believe that.

I don't believe that because Zionism is not at the top of the pyramid.

Of global power. This is what the idiot right wingers wants you to think.

But it's not.

Zionism is not at the top of the pyramid.

I repeat, Zionism is not at the top of the pyramid.

Just like apartheid wasn't, and just like Rhodesia wasn't and just like

Nazism wasn't. Zionism is a tool of the real unipolar elites of the so-called New World Order.

The international capitalist class. So at the so-called New World Order. The international capitalist class.

So at the hour in which the Zionist entity is going to collapse, they're not going to use nukes.

They're going to try to renegotiate, just like South Africa did.

Mind you guys, South Africa had nuclear weapons. And what happened to the

apartheid state? It was renegotiated in a way favorable to the international

capitals class. So that is what they're going to try to do in the case of Israel.

They're not going to use nukes.

It won't happen.

It won't happen because there's a country, I don't know if you've heard of it, it's called

Saudi Arabia.

Which is one of the most important puzzle pieces, one of the most important linchpins of the world we live in and the

international ruling class in its interest, Saudi Aramco. And I think Saudi Arabia will play a big part in renegotiating the new terms of the occupied Palestine.

You know, I was thinking about something today.

And it's like, people think that Jews are the ultimate evil.

They say, Jews are narcissists.

They only care about themselves. They're ruthless and brutal to everyone around them.

And I think to myself and I say,

What suckers?

What suckers?

What suckers? Because the most brutal,

most brutal fucking people,

the most ruthless, conniving, cunning, cannibalistic people are people.

And the whole thing of the Jewish scapegoat, it's like, it makes you fucking forget the fact that human nature is fucking evil most of the time.

People are so fucking brutal and it's not even funny.

Join the IDF Twitter space. Are they taking debates? If they're taking debates I'll do it.

But it's like, no, mothfuck, or human beings are fucking evil as fuck. And they will go to extreme lengths.

Extreme, extreme lengths to do evil. So it's not a Jewish thing.

And I hope everyone keeps that in mind.

And I hope everyone remembers that the criminal violence of the Zionist state is not extraordinary in the history of colonial,

imperialist violence by the powers that be. Evil, yes.

I'm thinking of these matters.

We're witnessing an ear. I'm thinking of these matters.

We're witnessing an era of multipolarity of the revival of ancient civilizations, rising

from the ashes. And with this, a new ground of how we understand conflict

and what we make of conflict and contradiction and the central antagonisms underlying human society.

Give me a second, I have to fucking...

I'm congested and I have like huge acid reflex, give me a second. Thank you. Thank you. I hope your attention span is capable of waiting.

Debater and So Q, really? Really?

No way. Lion of Zion.

What is this? Hello?

This has got to be a troll. What's going on? Hello?

Your mic is not working. You're muted. Just so This has got to be a troll. What's going on? Hello?

Your mic is not working. You're muted just like the IDF.

Because did your mic have some weather conditions that are preventing you from

entering this debate, delaying it. What's going on? Ah, fix your fucking mic!

I can't hear you. No one can hear you.

Go on Discord settings and make sure the output is good.

Fuck. This is so annoying. This is so annoying. Fix your mic.

Cannot hear you. I know it shows he's talking, but there's no output.

So that means there's no output. Is this my problem? Let me see. Settings.

Voice and Video. Output. Uh.

Hello?

Speak again.

No, this is my problem. What the fuck?

Speak again?

Yes.

Okay. Can you guys hear him?

Hello? You guys can hear him?

Okay.

All right, what's going on?

All right, so, um, I want to be...

I could already tell you're the fucking, uh,

your Russia defender, you're... I fucking, uh, your Russia defender.

I'm a usual.

I'm a usual.

Yep.

Yeah, you're Yankee Tangies bully.

All right.

So I knew it.

I knew it was gonna be a troll.

Not trolling though.

Okay, what's going on?

All right. So specifically, I wanted to debate you and make a broader point to the left on the Israeli-Palestian conflict to be clear though

I'm not a Zionist. I don't believe in like a homeland for Jewish people. I don't believe in any of that. I think that's just like religious

like nonsense. I don't care about Zionism, but I do find it like troubling that a lot of people are

calling what's happening in Israel, like resistance or like breaking open the prison gates when

that's not really what's happening on the ground.

And I think it's wrong to say that and not support Israel in this.

So what's going on?

I believe what's happening is that the British made a big mistake and just like what India and Pakistan

created conditions that would lead to a conflict and additionally I also

believe that the Palestinians have delegitimized a lot of their struggle by

resorting to an incredible amount of violence and civilians

and the targeting of destroying Israel as a state and destroying Jewish as a people and a religion

as opposed to trying to fight for autonomy or existence.

Well first of all I think a lot of the so-called atrocities simply cannot be confirmed, and I don't really see any evidence that they're just killing civilians.

They killed civilians willy-nilly.

I haven't seen any evidence of that.

The festival attack was pretty well documented though. Right, but if you look at the videos,

there are crowds of Israeli police among the, there's Israeli police among the crowds where they're exchanging fire.

So it looked like it was people got caught up in the crossfire rather than like straight up massacre.

Yeah, well that's true, but there's also a video of like for instance someone sticking their head up and then one of the militants just shooting him right in the head.

Like that there's video of that.

Well, it was an exchange of fires, so I don't think it was an attack on civilians.

Yeah, but they just went into a festival. was a an attack on civilians.

Yeah, but they just went into a festival and then there was a big gunfight. There were no soldiers there at the time. Like where were the soldiers?

I don't know. That wasn't a military base.

It doesn't. Well, how did 260 people die though?

I don't know. I don't know where these numbers come from. I don't know what anything, where any of this comes from. I mean, they claim that they decapitated 40 babies.

Yeah, but we can't confirm that entirely, so I don't want to die in the baby.

We literally can't confirm anything.

The festival is on footage though.

Was all of it on footage?

There's a good amount of footage on it.

I don't know about every single detail.

The festival was right next to a strategic base, from what I know.

And I think they wanted to take hostages. I think that's what happened.

And then they got into a shootout with Israeli police and then

civilians got caught in the crossfire.

But why do you think Hamas is justified in taking random like Canadian and random people

as civilians?

Me as hostages.

To negotiate the release, to negotiate the release of prisoners who are held without trial,

a lot of them are innocent in Israeli prisons.

Yeah, but these people are not partto use them as a leverage against attacking civilians

in Gaza.

Yeah, but Israel is trying to avoid attacking civilians in Gaza.

I'm also doing the opposite.

No, they're not. We, they're clearly not,

dude. It's like a thousand people already died at least.

Well, why are they trying to create a humanitarian corridor in the southern Gaza though?

They're not because they're bombingporting civilians to the south.

They're preventing roadways from getting there and they're straight up killing people just

trying to flee.

So it's like...

No, the roadways were created by Hamas.

And second, that's been debunked.

The explosion of the convoy literally came from the Hamas government and the Gaza Health Ministry.

That didn't come from any independent source.

There's no evidence to suggest Hamas bombed civilians fleeing to the south.

There's none.

Well, what's the evidence Israel bombed them? Plenty.

There's a footage of a missile attack on a civilian truck.

No.

He's not true.

Yes, there is. There really is.

And what about the woman who's like taking host and then paraded around the streets?

Like you support like that? Like she was raped and then put on a truck.

I don't see any evidence of rape.

I think that parading her, she was injured by the way, not killed.

I think that is pretty brutal. That's true. And it's not that I support it. It's just that I'm not in a position to judge because I don't live in Gaza and I couldn't possibly understand.

Do I find it acceptable? No, I personally don't.

But I understand the limitations of my perspective because how could I understand what it's like to be in Gaza living under a blockade, an illegal

blockade where people can't get medical treatment, they have no future, nothing, they're just

they can't do shit basically, right?

It's like they're in a prison camp.

Yeah, but Iran created all those conditions though.

Iran is the reason that this conditions were created.

All Iran did was give the Palestinians the ability

to fight back and have leverage to fight back.

Yeah, but they're striking like Tel Aviv.

They're not striking military targets.

There's open military targets.

Hey, and it's a war.

It's a war.

The war is very ugly.

Okay, why can't Israel just call and say that?

To make that argument. Well, Israel's been doing that. And that? Why can't Israel just call and say that? To make that argument.

Well, Israel's been doing that and that's why they see fit to Stalin, Beria Gulag, let's go.

Israel has been doing that for over 70 years they've been killing civilians and committing atrocities.

And striking Tel Aviv is a is warfare. These are if you impose a blockade on a people,

that alone is a form of warfare first of all.

Yeah, but this is what there's people in the West Bank are not being

they're not being killed. Why do you think that is? It's because they don't elect terrorists in the government and Iran is not backing like these giant market attacks.

They're like getting bomb but they're regularly being brutalized, shot at. is not backing like these giant market attacks like the people in the bank are not.

They're regularly being brutalized, shot at, in prison, kicked out of their homes, evicted,

and so on and so on.

Yeah, but the reason the West Bank was occupied in the first place is because these nations

keep trying to invade Israel, right?

They keep trying to attack Israel through the West Bank and then they occupy it.

The reason they keep trying to attack Israel is because of the NAPCA where Palestinians

were expelled from their homes and all these Arab countries

absorbed all the refugees and they see it as a a crime against their own people.

Yeah, but the Arabs in Palestine never accepted a Jewish state and that's what happened,

right?

Like they never wanted a Jewish state.

Well, why should they accept?

Why, well, the thing about an Arab state, whether you're an Arab national, I'm not personally, but

an Arab, at least an Arab state allows for Jews to live in it, who are Arab.

Like Mizra, they don't identify as Arab anymore, but Mizrahi for all intended purposes were considered

Arabs by their neighbors.

They were just Arab Jews.

So what should happen to the Ashkenazis though?

What should happen to them? What do you mean?

They, they, they, they, they all came,

they didn't all come during the creation of Israel.

A lot of them came after.

Right.

They were a minority.

What should happen to them?

What do you, what, what timeline are we working with?

Because they came from your-

Well, Bad Empanada is saying that all these people, right, they're all settlers, like

even the civilians, even though like the people who flew in Israel, these are all settlers

and they're deserving of like, you know, being removed, killed, like, is that your position

or do you take a different position from Badenbana?

I don't know what he's talking about, but it is not the position from what I know of even Hamas to expel the PFLP Hamas.

They're not saying they want to expel all the Jews living in Israel.

There are real settlers in Israel who are stealing Palestinian land.

They definitely want a right of return and a rearrangement of who gets to live where, definitely.

But as far as outright expelling all the Jews, I haven't seen any evidence that that's a how you read our have you

read article 7 of Hamas Charter have you read that Hamas Charter was revised

in twenty eight seventeen so but their actions haven't changed though from the

charter like they're still trying to kill Jews. Now we've seen that

October 7th, right? And we see them try to do that. It's if they were trying to kill Jews, they would be doing

it internationally. It's not about Jews. It's about the state. Well, that's what they did on a Friday 13th. They called for a global day of jihad.

Friday 13th they called for a global day of jihad.

Didn't they do that?

So Laura Lumer and a lot of people were making a fuss about that and you know as well as I, that was just a protest.

That was a call. Someone got killed though.

Wait, someone got murdered in France. There was a a person murdered in France There was also a Palestinian child really diplomat was stabbed in China as well

it was really diplomat not my problem there was a child in Chicago who is a Palestinian child who was

killed by someone who believed in this global day of jihad theory

and they killed a Palestinian child over it in Chicago.

Yeah, but did Israel ever call for like the do a global attack on Arabs in the world?

Like did they do that? They didn't call for one, they did one.

How? When they engaged in the Nabokka, they declared war on the entire region.

Yeah, but they just want, like, that's not their land though, like, like the Palestinians

and Israelis don't have a right to that land.

It was occupied by the Ottomans and then the British.

It is right.

Is it their land?

It is their land.

How why?

Because even under the Ottomans, it was still their olive gardens, it was still their, sorry,

their olive trees, it was still their towns and, you know, it's not like, it was theirs for

all intents and purposes. That's where they lived, it belonged to them. It was their life,

their culture. It was theirs.

But what does that matter though?

The British were colonizers who came and were illegitimate colonizers obviously. And then to continue their colonialism,

they created Israel to manage it for them.

Yeah, but do you believe that the Zionist Jews who mass settled during the British Empire,

control of it? Do you believe they had the right to do that? Those Jewish settlers?

No, at the time I don't think they had a right to do it. Why?

Because what gives them the right to go to another country randomly and just take land from people.

Well isn't that what's happening now in Europe and America? People are coming to these

countries?

They're coming as legal immigrants and the government is allowing that.

If you want to change the government...

Yeah, well the British government allowed that.

The British government allowed the settlers to come in though.

The British government was an occupier and a colonizer.

Yeah, but that's never been in those people.

Like they've never controlled that.

So why do they have the right to govern what it is?

They like the inter Mongolians have the right to govern what it is?

They, like, do the inner Mongolians have the right to control the Chinese government? I don't do you know how the Ottoman Empire worked. They were in control of it. The Ottomans

were not randomly importing random groups to come and take people's homes. There was a stability in order that existed, that was

an unwritten law that respected people's way of life and not disrupted.

Yeah, but why do they have the right to say that they can't come though? Why do the Arabs

get to say Jews can't be here? Isn't that just ethno nationalism?

You, uh, so, so Jews cannot come to a place, whether they're Jews or otherwise,

settle there, claim it's their land, and then establish a state, as all states are, founded

on violence and say, this is ours and not yours.

They can't do that.

Why not?

I mean, put it, technically they can, but they can't do it without consequences.

You can't expect people not to fight back.

Yeah, but doesn't that just go down to like might makes right that Jews can do what they want,

arrows can do what they want, and no one's like in the right.

In practice, that is how it works. So why do you condemn Israel and say there's not

the land? Because I recognize Israel's a criminal anti-human state but at the end of the day

me recognizing that isn't ultimately what's going to lead to Israel's destruction. What's going to

lead to Israel's destruction is What's going to lead to Israel's destruction

is being overpowered by the actual regional forces,

which it can't, it can't fight all of them.

Yeah, but why should Israel be destroyed though?

Why, why should you destroy Israel?

Because it's incompatible with the form why should you destroy Israel?

Because it's incompatible with the form of humanity that exists in that region with the form of civilization that exists there. So that sounds like so you're basically saying that you don't want Jews to be in the Middle East. You don't want them to have their own sovereignty.

It's not about Jews. It's about an artificially contrived colonial state. When I say that, I mean,

the state of Israel is not based in any authentic community. It's not based in any authentic civilization. It's not based in any kind of

social relations that are indigenous to the region. It's a total...

Neither is America though.

I think America is different though because while America lacks a few of those things I talked

about like a fully-fledged civilization and social bonds and stuff America is

searching for one right at least America is searching for one and it's it has

an open door where like there's multiple possibilities of

what that could look like. That's why America has all these different communities

and ways of life and you know searching for way of life. Israel is an artificial

form of statehood which has a false sense of certainty that it is a real country, a real nation, a real state, without having the material premises and conditions for being that.

Right, but I'm saying that I don't believe most states, at least a lot of states like Brazil

or states like Jordan, like a lot of these states are just made up borders, made up like countries.

A lot of countries are created this way.

Like I don't think that, like why can't we just have a two-state solution?

I think there's an interaction, for example, between the Portuguese empire and indigenous people

and they fuse together and there is an organic process of civilization you see in Latin America from the mixture of those elements.

Israel, the idea of a state just founded on Jewish identity is incompatible with Judaism,

first of all.

Second of all, is premised on the view that Jews are a nation, which is not based in reality.

How can Jews be a nation?

In the same way Armenians are a nation, right?

Not at all, because Jews all around the world differ from each other as far as their national

The nations they belong to they're not one nation

They all yeah, but from their perspective. It's a religious argument. They all derive from Abraham, right?

It's the same derive from Abraham, right?

It's the same religion, sure, but Judaism has different forms across the different national contexts.

Well, then it's not strictly ethnationalists, right? You have the three main divisions of Askenazi, Mizrahi, and Sephardic.

Right.

And then Ethiopian, I don't know if that counts as Mizrahi or whatever.

What do you think unites them as Jews?

What do you think they're arguing?

Nothing. Nothing unites them. It's t you think they're arguing? Nothing, nothing unites them.

It's totally synthetic.

I mean, their religion unites them, but they have no nation which unites them.

Yeah but like why, like, look at the Syrian Arab Republic, the Egyptian Arab Republic, like these countries

explicitly define themselves as Arab Republic, so why can't they call themselves a Jewish state?

Because Arabs are indigenous to that region.

They've been living there.

So what?

So the land and the people living there have a connection, a sacred connection to each other.

That comes one day and it has gone the next though? Like, what does that matter?

Well, even if that's true, that has to happen in an organic historical fashion, a way that

makes sense as far as people's way of life is concerned.

You don't just have this thing where you artificially decide to make up a state planted in a region

it's not indigenous to, andthen say okay we have our own nation

now is circumventing and leapfrogging over all of the historical laws of development of

nations and countries.

Yeah, but that was 75 years ago. Like we can't roll, like you can't roll back the clock, right, and go back to the Belford Declaration or go back to 1948, like all that happened, right? So you can't like, so are you arguing that you just messed up with block? But then again, Israel was never a complete, completed project. Zionism was never successful

because of the Palestinian issue which was never resolved. So on account of

that same issue it will be the demise of Israel as a state.

But why can't you just resolve the issue peacefully with the two states, one Palestinian state

and one Jewish state?

I can't you just do that?

Yeah, well, the alternative is to like let Hamas and Hezbollah roll into Israel and

like mass deport or genocide everyone?

Like what is the solution?

That's not what they're gonna, that's not what they would do.

You don't think if Hamas was in Tel Aviv, they wouldn't just start killing Jews.

You don't think that.

No, I don't think that.

I think what would happen is that bigger powers would immediately intervene and they would negotiate

The dismantlement of the Zionist state

Yeah, but do you really believe that Jews are going to be safe in the Middle East if they don't have a state?

Like, do you think they will be safe?

They will be as safe as everyone else.

They will be no less safe or no more safe than everyone else living in the region.

And if you can't take that risk of, then you don't belong in the Middle

East. If you're not willing to be in the Middle East and commit to building civilization and

states that are proper to that region, which involves war. There's going to be wars, there's going to be conflicts, there's going to be, it's going to that region which involves war there's going to be wars is going to be conflicts

There's going to be it's going to be danger

But if you if you can't handle that it's called you migrate out you leave

So they either they get genocided or they leave?

No, they're not going to get genocided, but what I'm trying to say is, they will not have

any more protection than anyone else has than the Palestinians have.

They have to find a way to coexist and

build a state

For the people in the region

Yeah, but from the Israeli perspective, why would they want to just let likeas and Hezbollah destroy Israel and then become like a nothing minority in the middle of the Middle East?

Why would they want that? Because Israel's an illegitimate state. Well, who determines what makes it legitimate or illegitimate state though?

The people who live on the land.

Well, the Jewish people there determine that it is legitimate, though.

Well, they're not the only people living on the land of the Sham or Levant or Greater Syria.

So why can't they have their land and the other people have their land?

Because the division is artificial. What gives them the right to put up a wall and say this is ours?

Nobody respects that. Nobody recognized. All the borders were created,

all most of the borders were just created by colonial power. So the borders are out the anyway. You're exactly right. I agree. And Israel is part of that. So when people in the region

want to create borders or states that reflect their national character or their civilization

that will involve dissolving Israel.

And it will involve dissolving most of the borders, ultimately.

Yeah, but then that's not really objective, right?

It's just might makes right.

This is the law of history. So then why is there any moral case

against, like why is there a moral case against Israel? Why can't we just say, Red Team Blue

Team, I'm Team Israel, I'm Team Palace, why is there a difference?

Because morality is not abstracted from the material premises of the morality.

Like Israel...

Do you think there's a moral equivalence between Hamas?

Not the idea.

I'm going to put it to you this way.

Humanity is a form of might.

Human beings want to establish an existence worthy of their

historical reality and character. And that's a form of might. And when you attempt to suppress

them for that and occupy them and attack them and beat them down.

That is a form of criminal violence and anti-human savagery which will, this is what Israel's doing. Israel's vain attempts to

stop the regional powers in that region from forming, speak for themselves. You

see it in how they brutalize and attack the Palestinian people.

Their reason they're doing that is because they're trying to stem the tide of something that will ultimately prevail in the end.

Yeah, but you realize that Israel has like made calls to

different places and try to reduce civilian casualties extensively whereas

Hamas just doesn't care like isn't there a moral difference between trying

to actively stop civilian casualties versus just not caring.

Let's assume that's true. Let's assume that's true.

Okay. Israel has the higher ground in terms of strength. So it can't, it can afford to be

quote-unquote more moral. No, it can't because it's surrounded by enemies. This

is immaterial right now. Hamas is in Gaza which is an open-air prison it's in

it's under a blockade. Israel is occupying all of Palestine, has unlimited access to unlimited resources

with the help of the world's greatest power, of course they're going to be held to a different

standard and possess more of a responsibility by the international community

and even by the United States itself to not be brutal.

That's what happens when you're in a position of temporarily speaking more power.

Yeah, but you're like the Israeli left's position, right?

Your position or many other propel sign position, happened in 2005, right?

Israel withdrew from Gaza, and the result of that was that Iran came in,

Hamas came in, and then started trying to destroy Israel.

So like from their perspective, why would they want to stop settlements and withdrawing for the off and the occupation?

Because the occupation and the settlement never end against the Palestinian people never ended.

Every time they like give one inch of that, like release parts of that occupation, it just

they just fight more.

When have they released any of it?

When have they done that?

In 2005, when they created the Palestinian Authority and they drew from Gaza and the

Israeli government actually destroyed settlements of Jewish settlers in Gaza.

They actually did that.

This was after the Intifada that rocked Israel and they had no choice.

That was a concession of war.

Yeah, but regardless, they get that happened and then it things got worse, right? would you agree it got worse for Israel once they did that?

It doesn't matter if it got worse the strategic objectives of the Palestinian people were not fulfilled and they will seek to fulfill them to the bitter end

Which is a right of return? So then why does Israel have the bitter end, which is a right of return.

So then why does Israel have the right to defend itself?

Doesn't it have the right to defend itself from that?

Or should it just get killed, like, or destroyed?

Like shouldn't it defend itself from that?

The state of Israel has no moral right to defend itself.

People have the right to defend their lives, but the state, the Zionist entity, the military machine,

the

Israeli government has no right to defend the territories, quote unquote, defend its

claim to the territories it occupies immorally and illegally.

Well, how is it immoral?

Because it's an outright robbery of people's land.

Okay, but why don't you condemn the Ottomans or the British for doing that too? I do condemn the British. I don't condemn the Ottomans because, first of all, the notion of nation states and national sovereignty did not exist in the pre-modern period.

And there was a code of honor and there was laws governing rights of conquest that were implicit and organic to people living in that region.

And it made sense to them. It wasn't like some completely alien power claim and, you know, history unfolds in an organic fashion in a way

becoming of the development of civilization.

Colonialism.

We don't live in a world of organic states anymore though. Like we have micro-states, we have like South and North Korea, like none of this stuff is like legitimate.

But the era of organic civilization state is coming back.

And Israel will not be spared from that resurrection.

That preferable. Do you want civilizational states more?

Yes.

Yeah, why do you want that more?

Because I believe that more than what we have now?

Because I believe that is what history is striving toward and that is what people in the

region are striving for and that is what, that's the direction defining the arrow of world history is the resurrection of the

world's most ancient states and powers and empires.

What if that doesn't account for like Brazil or America or a country that don't have rich civilizational history though, right?

We're building one here in America we will pursue that. We will pursue.

Why can't Israel build one?

Because it's a because it's in a crowded neighborhood, that's why.

Because it's not in the right neighborhood to do that. If Jews in Israel wanted to come to the

U.S. and participate in our civilization building, they could have come and done that, but they went to somewhere that was already

struggling to deal with the modern world in its own way and it didn't work for them.

America has the largest U.S. population outside of Israel, right? Like a lot of them have decided to do that.

And that's fine. There's nothing wrong with the American Jews.

Why can't they be in Israel though? Like, why do they have to just give up their state there?

Because it's not their land. Yeah, but I guess we loop on this like who determines like there's no legitimate, nobody has a legitimate claim to any landers like that's not. People have a claim now. People have a claim to land based on the laws of history.

But if you go off the laws of history, the Jews have had it far longer than another group.

That's not really an argument in favor of having it, right?

It's not about the length of time.

Two thousand years ago.

Under what circumstances were Jews expelled from that land and under what circumstances did they

return? That's what we're talking about.

Yeah, but like, isn't the historical argument kind of like useless?

Because like, you can't just say, hey, I was, I'm Jewish and my people were here 2,000

years ago.

By history, now I'm taking your house.

To be clear, by history, I don't just mean the past in general.

I mean history in the sense of how people create actively,

through time, a shared reality.

So it's not just about the past,

it's about the inheritance of the past.

And the inheritance is what I'm talking about.

I'm not talking about something that happened thousands

of years ago.

I'm talking about people living in communities,

living in civilizations, in ways that made sense to them, in ways that reproduce

their conditions of subsistence, in relations of production that were commensurate with their

humanity and their lived existence, and some abrupt artificial synthetic project, which is a creation

of modern technology that comes, uproots them from all of that, and throws them into this

abyss of nihilism, confusion, and chaos.

Strelosterni, let's go.

Yeah, but like I've said before, it seems like that's the way the world is now.

Like Luxembourg is not a real civilizational state.

You're right.

And Singapore is not a real state.

I personally do not envision a future for Luxembourg.

We live in a state that is not like legitimate. Like our state is not created upon like some tribal answers or whatever.

Like we took over the land, maybe not you but or me, but I guess like the colonists that

came here.

That's true.

That's true.

But I think the difference.

You can't change that, like you can't do land back, right?

Like are you arguing for land back or?

It's true that the American, the landmass upon which we live was stolen.

But at the same time, the United States of America is not a definite project,

meaning the land, yes, was stolen unjustly and many indigenous people were dispossessed.

But at the same time, that was not on the basis of some kind of

definite pretense to nationhood or statehood. It's an open door as far as what

America will be. So in this strict sense, we cannot say America is like Israel, because America is not a synthetic

nation, because its national identity is not defined yet completely.

And the future of an American national identity

probably will involve taking cues

learning from the wisdom of indigenous people and their sacred relation to the land that is here.

Why would you say it's stolen? Why would you say the land is stolen though?

In America?

Yeah.

Because with the Western expansion, indigenous peoples were driven from their lands in the

Jacksonian Indian Removal Act.

They were removed from the lands in which they lived.

They were sent to the west of the Mississippi.

And then afterwards, they were driven out even from

there by westward expansion and settlement.

Right, but how do you think, like French, let me ask you this, China has a 91% ethnic

hom majority, right?

That majority comes from, like, actually if we go through the history of this, there

were the Gia people who, there was Ron Min who was a emperor, I don't want to go through

all the history, but he basically said that these people are part of the five barbarians,

right, these five ethnic groups in China that are non-Han.

So he ordered the extermination of this people, right, and also the extermination of people

who were perceived to be non-Han at the time, right? And there's many examples of things like this

happening in China. So the the Han majority only

exists synthetically through mass ethnic cleansing and genocide as well. So can

you call China a legitimacy? I'm not condemning China for it. I'm just saying

this is kind of how history is. I think I think I think you misunderstand what

synthetic means. Organic history does involve a lot of violence.

I'm, by the way, what you say is not really accurate, but regardless, history doesn't

mean it's devoid of violence.

But when we're talking about synthetic, we're talking about an attempt to create a natural nation or history in an inauthentic way.

So the conditions in which a country like Israel, country like Israel comes

about is not the same as the conditions in which China comes about. Notwithstanding

what defines it as legitimate though? What defines it as legitimate is the authentic process in which a people struggle to realize an existence out of themselves,

struggle to make sense of their being, of their material conditions,

of their history, of their past, of their common belonging, their common tongue, their

language, their relations, the sense of civilization, how people treat each other, how people coexist, how people live, how people live in relation to land, not just with other people.

And this is an organic process which becomes ingrained in people's unconscious and becomes part of what they are, literally part of their humanity.

Zionism was the intention to create that from scratch artificially,

because the problems of Jews in Europe, they decided,

Herso and others decided on the intellectual basis, I guess,

that Jews, our nation, we're going to try to create a Jewish nation.

In Palestine, we have no connection to that land. We're going to go there, settle

it, and we're going to try to emulate the process of how people come to be a nation. And it's

a total synthetic, fake, inauthent,

because it comes from their limited understanding of how nations form.

Nations don't form because people have an intention to synthetically create one from scratch.

They form on the basis

of

the people's relations becoming commensurate

in a way that makes sense to them

naturally and organically

in relation to geography in relation to geography and relation to land and

relation to material relations of production.

Yeah, but if you look at the Jewish people, there also are kind of an in synthetic or like very weird circumstances, right?

They're not like other people who've had.

It's a religion, like Han Chinese people can call like a place home that they've been

for a thousand years.

The Jewish people have been kicked out of like 100, like, what, how many countries?

Like, they're in kind of synthetic

because of their religion

which requires synthetic solutions Jews have been kicked out of Europe because

Europe did not tolerate any non-Christians that's why you didn't the the

Muslims were only kicked out of Spain but there is no Muslims kicked out of France or Muslims kicked out of Britain or only kicked out of Spain, but there is no Muslims kicked out of France,

or Muslims kicked out of Britain, or Muslims kicked out of Germany, because Muslims were

never allowed to be there to begin with.

So Jews who were temporarily tolerated were always kicked out because there was no religious tolerance.

Jews were fierce monotheus, so it makes sense that pagan empires would also persecute them in history.

So Jews, their peculiar equality in nature comes from their religion.

Yeah, not not because of their race or their nation.

Yeah, but there's like, there's like 26, like like what is it, 26 Arab Muslim states, why can't

there be one Jewish state? They're like, why can't they have diversity of, like, maybe

they can, maybe they can, maybe they should make it in Germany, maybe they should make it

somewhere else where it's not going

to be an obstruction to the development and humanity of the people living in the land in the

region. Why does it have to be... Because they're not Arab and Muslim, they can't have their own

thing. They have to be Arab and Muslim, they can't have their own thing.

They have to be Arab and Muslim, be part of it?

Isn't that no?

They could be Kurdish or they could be a Syrian or they could be Caldean or they could be,

they could be, uh, miserably.

The Turks have their own state in the region too, right?

Like why can't Kurds or Jews have their own thing too?

Because all of these nation states are artificial.

Cards are not artificial.

You can maybe argue a fact for the Jews, but the Kurds have been there for a very long

time.

And they've wanted a state for a very long time as well.

Why can't they have their own state?

I'll explain it to you like this, because the Kurdish group, just like the Turkish speaking group and the Arab speaking groups,

their whole identity was formed in relation to each other, not at each other's expense.

It seems curse want their own state though. So the notion that they would have to create a nation state for this fixed identity is stupid.

Why should each different group have its own sovereign state? Why can we not have a state that is based upon recognition of the difference of different peoples?

That's not what, that's my point, that's not what exists in the Middle East, what you have. the difference of different peoples.

That's not what, that's my point. That's not what exists in the Middle East. What you have is I agree, Syrian Arab Republic, Libyan Arab Republic, Egyptian Arab Republic, like they're allowed to have

these Arab republics, they're allowed to have 99% Arab Muslim, but you're saying the abuse and the

Kurds, you're not allowed to do that.

Maybe they won't be allowed by history.

I mean, Iran is not like that.

Iran is a multi-ethnic empire.

I don't think Arab nationalism or Arab nation states will last the test of history.

I don't think they will.

But are they immoral?

But are they, so the question of whether they're legitimate from, let's say,

the perspective of international law or morality

is different from whether they can withstand the test of history. Those are two

completely different questions.

Do you think it's immoral for Egypt to call itself an Egyptian Arab Republic?

No.

Do you think it's immoral for Israel to call itself a Jewish state?

It's immoral for Israel to exist? Why?

Because even if the Arab nationalism of Egypt is transitory from a historical perspective,

that reflects a people organically trying to make sense of who they are,

failing maybe in one instance, but nonetheless it's rooted in them, even if it's their misunderstanding.

But in the case of the Zionist entity, this is a completely artificial country, a state,

where people all around the world come and bounded by no common moors or bonds of civilization,

coming to settle there and and and and have what

kind of existence have an existence based on what based on being Jews well it's a

secular state so it's not like it's even a religious state.

It's not.

So what connects them?

What that connects them is, according to them at least, the Ashkenazi Jew, the Ethiopian Jew,

the Maserati Jew, all these Jews, and all of the they were scattered around the world

and look different, all of them can trace back their lineage to Abraham, right?

That the 12 tribes of Israel, the whole tribes of Israel.

Who cares?

Who cares about Arabs doing the same thing?

Like, none of this is not.

But Arabs, Arabs live there.

But that's where they live.

That's their home.

Now, but it can change.

Why would it change?

Why would it change?

Why would it change?

Does demographics change? Arab would it change? Why would it change?

Those demographics change?

Arab is not a religion.

Arab is just, there are Arab Jews.

They may not like to call themselves Jews, but that's what they are.

The Mizrahi Jews in Israel look like me.

They look even more Arabs than I do.

Yeah, but they all originate from those twelve cribes of Israel, even if they've scattered

out and look different now.

It doesn't matter.

That's their religion, of course, but sociologically speaking, they're Arabs.

They eat the same food, they listen to the same music, they have the same culture more

or less, they have a different religion, that's it.

Don't get white. The Arabs get to have their own thing, but Kurds and Jews don't.

Because Jews are not a nation.

Kurds do have their, Kurds historically did have their own lands.

They still have autonomy in Iraq and Syria. But, and they control their communities, they

control their lands, but what they don't have is ultimate sovereignty of the whole state.

Why is it acceptable though?

It's acceptable because the states that were created in the Middle East were not created

under the conditions of reflecting the character of the people in Middle East.

I mean, look, there's something called natural Syria.

Why is Syria divided? Why does Jordan exist? Why does Iraq exist? Why does Lebanon exist?

All of it's synthetic? So why is Israel different?

Because the... Why is that... Why is that? Because the...

Why is that that?

Because the orientation toward which people in that region are striving is integration and

is casting off the legacy of colonialism. Not going back to it or deepening it or doubling down on it.

Great of Syria is just another form of like imperialism as well, right?

Colonialism. No?

Yeah, it's one state devouring and overthrowing the government of another and forcing it under its wing, right?

Isn't that just what imperialists have done forever?

No.

This has nothing to do with European colonialism.

It's a process of organic integration, which I completely support.

Repeat that again?

I'm against small countries

Wait, what's wrong with a small country? You can't be a small country? No

And not because it's stupid Well, what's stupid about it? I mean, look at Singapore is actually a very successful place.

Every small country will inevitably act as a parasite either on the region or on the

world.

Because no small country can sustain itself.

Only when people pool together their land, their resources, and their labor, can they create

and advance the productive forces.

But when you have a small, shit-hole, tiny, piece of shit country, how does it support

itself?

It supports itself by being a parasite on the world or on the region.

So I'm against small countries.

Yeah, but isn't it nice to like go to a place like Singapore?

Look how nice Singapore is. It's a really nice place to be, isn't it?

And without the international financial system system there'd be no Singapore.

There would be no countries without the financial system.

Yes there would. China would be here. Russia would be here.

Inapi. India would be here.

Singapore would still exist. Maybe it would. It's not because economic

reasons is separated because of Singapore is not a state. Singapore is not a state. It's

not a country. It's just a city. That's all it is. It's a silly little city. It's

like you have a very arbitrary way of view.

Okay, you're going to tell me Singapore is a real country. It's not.

Singapore is not a real country. It's a city.

It's a nice city. With an ambiguous sovereign status, so what? It's a city. It's a city which doesn't need to be regulated by other states, but guess what?

If Singapore ever did anything to offend the sovereignty of any country around it, it'd get gobbled up.

I don't think it wants to.

You're right, so it's fine.

There's been plenty of city states in history, and that's fine.

But...

Beautiful. Aren't city states beautiful?

Like, look at Rome. I think that was beautiful was beautiful too. Rome was in a city state, but regardless

City states have in the beginning it was in the beginning. Okay, doesn't matter. Israel's not a city state. That's the problem

Right. Small country the problem. Right.

It's a small country though, right? So you don't think that should exist? No.

What about Lebanon? No. You're from Lebanon, right? No. That's a nice country too. I mean up until recently. It was very beautiful.

Why? Why? It was beautiful? It was beautiful for the Up until recently, it was very beautiful. Why, why can't small states exist?

It was beautiful for the Maronites and no one else.

Well, up until a lot of refugees came in and then,

as extremist groups came in and there was a civil war, right?

Because it was beautiful only for the Maronites and no one else.

I don't believe that's true.

That is true.

It was a shithole for everyone except Maron.

French Lebanon?

Have you seen the pictures of French Lebanon and they look at Lebanon

today?

You see the difference?

Have you seen the pictures of what the Muslims have to live in?

Were the Palestinians?

When the Palestinians came to Lebanon, they broke the political, the very careful political balance

in the country, actually, because they started to change the religious makeup of the place.

That's why the Civil War happened. No, they didn't. No, they didn't. That was the reason for the religious makeup of the place. No, they didn't.

No, they didn't.

No, they didn't.

Yeah, that was the reason for the Civil War.

No.

The Shiites have been in Lebanon forever, and they were oppressed by the Maronites.

Same with the Sunnis.

Shias were with the Christians against the Sunnis. Shias were with the Sunnis, the Christians against the Sunnis though.

In the same war at one point.

Not really.

Not really.

It's still no way.

Why are we talking about this?

Because small countries are stupid.

I told you small countries are stupid.

I told you, small countries are stupid.

So why do they exist if they're stupid?

Why would it be created?

They won't exist in the future.

They exist, they exist for now. because of confusion.

Yeah, but every country exists for now.

No country has a definite future.

China has existed for a long time.

They could disappear tomorrow though, right? Like any country.

I doubt it.

I doubt it too, but it can happen.

Probably not.

Why would Luxembourg disappear there?

Why would that disappear?

It's a stupid, small, shitty country.

Isn't that just your opinion though, like, on what states are legitimate or not? No, it's not my opinion.

It's not my opinion.

Why can't I just say, I just like big country, I just like like small countries and I think that they're better so that we said

Good luck good luck good luck

Good luck then you're going back to might make straight then like well if you can't do it, you shouldn't have it. Okay.

So what?

You agree with my mix, right?

Yes.

So if you have the right, if you have the ability to rape and pillage a town, should you be able to do it?

You won't be free from the consequences.

Well, what if there are no consequences?

Like, what if a bunch of Vikings want to do the town like they used to?

There will be consequences.

What if there aren't?

There will be.

Because human nature, because human beings are a mighty existence.

Human beings don't just, they're not animals. There are things that offend the sensibilities

of human beings. These are one of them. So when you engage in dishonorable acts like this, you will

have consequences as far as how others see you and treat you, how your own people would

have to cope with that, how you would have to cope with that, what kind of existence

is that, how are you going to live with yourself and live in a civilized country and society with

others if this is your mentality?

What if someone just says screw your civilized country?

I want my anarchist larp like...

They usually get shot really quick.

They usually get strung up by rope or beheaded in history.

But what if they don't? That's my point.

But morally, I'm asking a moral question.

Because they offend the sensibilities of the people.

Sometimes people agree with evil.

Some people, they do that evil and they agree with it.

Just like the Tower of Babylon, and what happened to it?

Evil has not always gone checked.

There's many times in history where evil has gone unchecked.

Sure, but eventually it can't.

Eventually everything can't, right?

Like eventually every country or every military of collapses.

It's just how things are.

But I don't think that you should justify everything by saying, well, can you keep that town?

Well, then it's yours. Like, I think we should have rules on this stuff. I think we should say,

hey, we do, maybe this is for me.

We now, we now have rules based on mutual recognition and that's fine. I'm not against that.

You agree with the rules-based order of the United States and NATO. No, that's not rules-based order, that's

international law. That's what upholds what you can have, what you can have? Russia and China

believe in international law. They have their own interpretation of how

sovereign countries should establish norms, standards that they hold to one

and another about how they should behave and that's fine.

You think China should be able to say screw it to your international law.

I want to take over the whole area of like the sea, take over like the EEE zone of Vietnam or Philippines like parts of that.

You think they should be able to just go in and build artificial islands you're okay with them taking over everything?

Yes.

What if Vietnam doesn't like that?

Shouldn't they fight back?

They can try.

Well, then the United States backs them and then they win. So then what?

They won't win.

How do you know they won't win?

Look at Joe Biden.

Yeah, but when Trump comes back, he's going to be like,

Trump can't do anything.

What is Trump going to be put back in line?

Trump doesn't care.

What will we do?

It literally just built one of the most biggest military bases in the Philippines recently.

Like China's not going to make steps that are wrong.

No one cares.

No one cares.

I just think we should respect the sovereignty of countries.

We should respect their ability to self-sustainable.

I agree, but the sovereignty of a country has to be based in something real, has to be based in something

that respects the regional conventions, and the regional convention for thousands of years has been

China's the big dog and everyone else is a tributory and that's how it must be.

Yeah, but if they all gang up on China, then that changes their way them all off the map.

No Buana, let's go!

Yeah, but global politics has changed now.

Like before, like if you were in a region, right, you're kind of screwed.

China is not, you have like global powers.

China's being very gracious.

China's being very gracious.

China's not telling people they have to change their government or way of life.

All China is saying is, you cannot claim this sea,

because we know if you claim this sea,

you're going to allow America to engage in aggression against us, so you can't do it.

You must respect China's presence.

I don't think the US wants to aggress on China, though.

Yes, they do.

Everything that has, they've done has been a reaction though.

It's been the Chinese.

From the beginning, America has tried to overthrow the government of China.

Beginning in, probably before this, much before this, but we know beginning with Tiananmen Square, the springtime of nations,

they have done everything they can to subvert, uproot, and crush and shatter the sovereignty of the Chinese people and the country of China.

No, I just think the U.S. sees China as a competitor and an adversary, but I don't think

the U.S. wants to be for China.

That doesn't give them the right to act as an aggressor against China.

What does the U.S US have to do with China?

Why not?

Wait, why not though?

And under your worldview, why can't you US act as an aggressor

against China?

They, by the laws of physics, they can,

but not without consequences. Yeah, but what if they say screw your consequences? We're going to go in and we're going to stop you from taking Taiwan for

eat, then eat a few hypersonic missiles for breakfast, put some sprinkles on it, put some sugar on it and milk.

Do you think China has the right to take Taiwan? Do you thinkthink China has the right to take Taiwan?

Do you think they have the right to do that?

They have a duty to do it.

Does the US have the right and duty to defend it?

That's gay and retarded, no.

So basically it's like... gay and retarded no.

Oh basically it's like I the countries I like

No, why should I care about Taiwan? No, no, tell me why I should care about Taiwan.

Why should I care about the same you should?

Why should any American if an American came to me and said, oh Taiwan, I would say you're gay and retarded.

Why is that our problem?

Why is that our problem?

Why is that our problem?

Why is it China's problem?

It's because it's literally been part of China since forever.

And Israel was a country 2,000 years ago, who cares?

Okay, let them try to cash their 2,000 years ago to the bank

and they will come back with a Hamas rocket up their ass.

Now that's just another might-make-right argument like you're not giving me a principal position.

I'm giving you the truth. 2,000 years ago means nothing.

And hundreds of years of China having Taiwan means nothing too like why does it matter? Yes, it does because

It's just blood and soil it does matter because

Because Taiwan is part of China. That's why I

Because of history because because it is. Look at history. What if it decides that

doesn't want to? What if it decides it doesn't want to anymore? Then it has to face

the consequences of trying to secede. What if they succeed in that? Then they succeed, I doubt it. So you're okay with

Taiwan being independent so long as they can achieve it. If they can achieve secession, then

it's fine. If I was Chinese, I would fight them to the bitter end to stop it and I'm not Chinese.

Right, but you're American. You're American. So why should you care like if Taiwan succeeds and whatever?

America should do nothing to intervene and see if Taiwan. I agree. I don't think you should intervene. I don't think China should intervene either.

I think we should just... Okay, okay. You can think that in your head.

But when you tell Americans we should go die to stop it, why?

Well, it serves our interests. Whose interest? Whose interest? Why?

Well, it serves our interests.

Whose interest?

First island chain.

Huh?

Who's interest? What do you? What is?

How? Translate that into something that makes it so it's a guy in New Hampshire who lives

in New Hampshire on the farm.

How is that in his interest?

The U.S. has a stronger position in the world.

And for instance, they can negotiate from a stronger place in trade deals, for instance.

That has nothing to do with military power.

They bring up military power.

That has nothing to do...

If China secures the first island chain, then their economy would greatly benefit from that.

And it would the US at also a weaker position.

Why can't we benefit our economy?

It benefits. It puts us on a like lesser foot though. Are you saying we

don't have enough resources and ingenuity to develop our own economy? No we do

but we don't want to bring sweatshops back home to America though.

Okay, then eat a dick.

I don't know what to tell you.

Do you think we should bring manufacturing back to the U.S.?

Yes.

Why should we bring the sweatshops from Bangladesh and China over to the U.S.?

You can call them sweatshops. I call it increasing technology in the productive forces to decrease

the amount of human labor needed. And we can produce plenty. Fine. Well, I hope you'll be the first one to sign up for it, right?

The 12 hours a day. Would you do that? We want to sign up for it, right? The 12 hours a day.

Would you do that?

We want to sign up for that?

People who need it will sign up for it.

Yeah, but I think we should be in a position where we don't need it, right?

That's the point of a country's interest, right?

Like if you can make sure that you have higher wages, you can make sure that you don't have

a really dangerous job, like pull my stuff and phase it out, then you would do that.

And so Americans will just die a fentanyl overdose because they have no jobs.

What's the point with that? What? Confused by that? Americans need jobs.

Yeah, but you can't artificially, like you're trying to artificially create a market.

If the market is cheaper, you can create a market.

You can create a market.

It's artificially created.

It's artificially created.

That's fine.

But we were talking about, like, not artificially trying to create circumstances, but letting things naturally happen.

This is what happens naturally in capital.

That's civilization.

You can artificially create a market because we can plan and control the economy.

Well, it didn't work for the Soviet Union, did it?

Yes it did.

How did it work for that?

They became the world's biggest, they became the world's second biggest superpower in 10 years.

Yeah, off the backs of like, what?

Like, virtually slave labor?

You can call it that.

I don't care.

Why would we want to do that? And Russia, if you said that, they would say that's nonsense.

Really? You think the Russian people want to go back to the Soviet factories?

Yes.

Come on, ma'am. You don't believe that. Yes. I think Russians are good with their tech industry.

I think they like the modern capital society and getting to go to McDonald's.

Maybe you're talking about Moscow.

99% of Russia is not like that.

Only talking about Moscow. Yeah.

Some parts of Moscow even

So what do you think people do outside of Russia? You think they're working in factories? They don't have a huge manufacturing

They're wasting away. They're wasting away. They're leaving they're migrating out

But lost their imperial power they lost their imperial hold on the territory they used to have.

That's how they used to sustain themselves by stealing other people's stuff.

That's what I'm talking about synthetic, right?

Like the Soviet Union was synthetic.

What is a Soviet? What even is that? That's not? Like the Soviet Union was synthetic. What is a Soviet?

What even is that?

That's not a real thing. It was not a Soviet.

It was not synthetic.

It was not synthetic.

It represents the form of land power that has corresponded with the Muscovy for centuries and centuries.

What is a Soviet?

What is that?

What is a republic?

A Soviet is a form of political association. No, I mean a person, like I'm a Soviet person, a Soviet citizen.

What does that mean?

It means you're united in a union state that roughly corresponds to a historical land empire.

Yeah, but there's no such thing as it, like that's just synthetic.

Like, that's why even Stalin started calling it Mother Russia for Mother Russia.

It's not synthetic.

Just because they didn't call it the Zardum of Muscovy 2.0 doesn't mean it's not a successor.

It's a successor to an organic civilization state.

Yeah, but they tried to like lie about it.

They try to pretend like this is a, this is, well we're all equal here.

It's just a Soviet, we're the Soviet Union, but it rally, it was just like a Russian, another

Russian empire.

They didn't lie about the centrality of Russia?

Where is the Soviet government?

Russia had the largest government.

Why do you think that is because Russians were the largest in numbers?

Thank you, Alphon.

Do you forget that Russians are the largest in numbers, numerically?

That's true.

Why do they have the right to govern everyone else?

Like the Cossacks or the Ukrainians or the Uzbeks? Why do they have the right to govern everyone else like the Cossacks or the Ukrainians or the

Uzbeks? Why do they have their other? They don't govern everyone else. They're the main

ethnicity of the civilization state. Ethnicity? What does that have to do with anything?

All Russian means is a specific nation or ethnicity molded in the image of a specific empire.

For those who are part of that empire, but maintain their prior civilization

and way of life, they have a different culture and nation and ethnicity. So the Han are the same. Han is just a mixture of

all these different people who were molded organically in the image of the

Chinese Empire, right? Right. And they came and that's same with Russian.

Russians are mixed with Tatars, they're mixed withthat's same with Russian Russians are mixed with totars

They're mixed with all these kinds of different peoples and that's how they became what they did

But they still allow and

coexist with people who did not

assimilate into that ethnicity.

And that's what makes it the empire so mighty and powerful.

But the second bill is that Russian ethnicity lost its control, right?

All these different ethnic groups like the Ukrainians

or like the cause X or all these people Ukrainian is not a different ethnicity

well of course it is no on any ancestry test will tell you that. Do you think that's a fake?

Who will tell me that?

If you, if you like were to do ancestry test and you were Ukrainian, it would tell you it wouldn't say Russia, say Ukrainian, right?

Ukrainian is a type of Russia.

Even then, like Uzbek's like, Uzbeks now have their own nation.

Like Kazakhs have their own nation.

You're saying that's a bad thing?

These people have their own autonomy and their own, like in the states now?

They have their own states, but in the future, Uzbeks, Kazakhs, they will have a different state.

They're not, those are not.

I think they should just submit to the Russians?

You think they should just bow down to the Russians?

Maybe not.

It could be a new Timorid empire.

It could be a new Central Asian Empire.

Yeah, I was going to say like a Central Asian Union, like what about that?

Maybe, maybe? Whatever they see fit?

But wouldn't that make Russians upset?

Why maybe it wouldn't?

Maybe it wouldn't. Maybe Russia can have Europe and take Poland

and take all these shitty small European countries and be fine with Central Asian Empire.

Right. And maybe Israel just gets, or maybe Israel normalizes relations with

the Arab world such as like Saudi Arabia and the Palestinians and establish a future

for itself.

If Zionists want to Larp so bad as a nation, they can go live in the Jewish autonomous a blast in Siberia.

That's that's also, I'm not against that either.

I'm not against them go there.

Will the Russian government allow them?

Sure.

Why not?

They will let them.

Why not? But they have to be part of Russia. They're going to be part of Russia.

Like, I don't, like, from my perspective, I don't care about Zionism. As far as I'm concerned, Jerusalem to belong to Christians.

It shouldn't belong to Muslims or Jews. That's my perspective.

But I also recognize that Jews are in a really like a situation where like why they're surrounded by a

I don't know why. It's just been that way for a very long time. I don't know why.

Arabs have been like on the run. They've been on the run for a very long time.

No, it no one had a problem with Jews in the Middle East.

Yeah, that's not true. Muhammad did. And the coalition. No, he didn't. Yeah, the Quran says, kill the Jew, find the Jew and kill him.

Because they fought some Jewish tribes they had some beef with. That doesn't mean they hate the Jews.

They had beef with a lot of Arabian

tribes, including Jewish tribes. So what? Yeah, but they, so they weren't buddy, buty then,

why would they be fighting these tribes if they were all like... A lot of these Jewish tribes

converted to Islam.

Yeah, but the Jews were not... It wasn't...

It wasn't...

He was killing a lot of it.

They didn't have an issue with Jews living in Italy.

They had a problem with some...

They had some beef with some specific

Arabian Jewish tribes.

Yeah, but that's how ethnic classes work, right?

Like you're not going to be mad at the African over and I hear you're probably going

to be mad at the African and whatever, like if you're fighting it in the war. had beef with each other.

So that doesn't mean the Jews hate the Jews.

It just means there's just some beef.

Yeah but they wouldn't say, hey, we hate the Jews.

We would say we hate this tribe, right?

They wouldn't be like the ethnic Mohammed is you, are you saying, no, that you're

seriously complaining the holy Quran is not politically correct?

No, I'm not complaining about anything.

I'm just, they didn't word it.

They didn't word it in a way that is sensitive to people's

feelings in the 21st century. Who cares?

So you're trying to reinterpret kill the Jews? Like, what if Hitler said that? What about Hitler saying that?

Who said kill the Jews?they don't say kill what about Hitler saying that who said

to interpret that they didn't say that it says that in the Quran no it doesn't

don't want me to pull that up it says Jews are people of the book and usually let me read you this the Jews were tolerated under Muslim rule

Oh to be clear this is the Sina not the Quran but let me read this so it doesn't matter what you're pointing to

because it does matter then why didn't the Muslims exterminate the Jews in the Middle East why didn't they do that?

Well, it didn't succeed. They didn't try they didn't even try that. Oh, come on. Let me read this hold on. It says the last hour will not come unless the Muslims will fight

Against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide behind a stone or a tree

And then the stone or tree would say it's all-muscitality. There is a Jew behind him come and kill him. You need to shut up for a second.

That was eschatology about the end times when Jesus will return and whatever.

That has nothing to do with reality right now.

Why would they say kill Jews though?

That's a specific Sunna.

That's a specific polemic with Jews.

Uh, specific Hadif.

And it doesn't mean you attack Jews.

It's just a theological polemic and it's about eschatology, so it's not based in reality right now.

It was based on reality because no it wasn't. They didn't. They didn't. They didn't kill Jews though. Muhammad Lilly did kill Jews as well.

What do you mean? He didn't try to exterminate Jews. No, he didn't.

He killed like, thousands of them. Like, he didn't, like, you think he just killed soldiers or

did you not go into towns like every other raving tribe and just wipe people out?

He didn't wipe people out.

That's literally how he died.

That's not the most the way.

They don't go and wipe people out. That's not true. Where do you think all the ethnic groups that

aren't Arab? Where do they all go? They're still there? Not the ones in the Arabian Peninsula.

A lot of them are gone now. So what ethnic groups were in the Arabian Peninsula? We can go through that, but that's where ethnic ethnic homogeneity comes from all these

countries, like, except maybe Japan because it's an island.

There's no ethnic homogeneity in the Middle East. There's none.

Yeah, but I'm saying the countries that have like 99.9% like that didn't come from nowhere

That came from everyone you agree

Arabized and adopting Iran Iran is different right Iran is different because Iran didn't end up doing that Iran has been like

Mix of everyone right Pers? Persian, the...

I think there's even like another bloke,

you're confused, as well.

You're confused.

So you're confused my son, but go ahead.

In Sham or the Levant or Syria or Egypt,

when the Arabians came, those people were already Semitic speaking,

meaning they could probably converse with Arabs to some extent. So they organically adopted the Arab identity because

they were they were semites, they were not really different people. One was

nomadic and one was not nomadic. So there was not a huge, all

the Arab meant was the Bedouin and the nomad, but everyone became Arab because they adopted

a regional identity.

Now when it comes to Indo-Europeans,

like the Persians, they were not Arabized

because they were not Semites.

They were completely different historical linguistic group.

That's why Kurds didn't become Arabs.

That's why Turks didn't become Arabs.

So the ones that became Arabs were already related to Arabs or themselves in a way Arabs in some sense.

Yeah, but it says right here like after that...

Arab is just a broad term.

Arab is just a broad term. Arab is just a broad term. The Syrians were Arabs, but they weren't called

Arabs because it's too broad. Yeah, there was a Jewish tribe right here. I'm looking at like Vanuquira Zia and then

Muhammad beheaded 600 or 900 of the male members who had reached puberty.

And then took the women and children slaves so you kind of like destroyed this tribe,

right? What's your source um this is on Wikipedia I want to see that

a post in general debate a go debate a Muslim scholar about this my point point is that ethnic groups like wipe each other out

that's the history of these places so to say Israel or America are exceptions to

that is not fair right. That's not when they people fight in battles and then

One loses like Genghis Khan who went and destroyed Baghdad

That's not the same as going and

exterminating people for being different

Yeah, but I just explained like with China, like they literally would look for people who are not, who are different and just fucking kill them.

Non-Han people, they call them barbarians.

China has always been tolerant of non-Han peoples. That's not true. Yes it is. The word is called

Wu Hu. It's called the five barbarians. Barbarian, all barbarian meant was

those not fully assimilated into the Chinese civilization.

It was specifically not. It's specifically not. not fully assimilated into the Chinese civilization.

That's all of that. It was specifically not as non-Han.

But that's what Ron Min said, look for the non-Han people and killed that.

They weren't marked for extermination.

Yes, Ron Min specifically ordered the extermination of ethnic groups that were not Han in China.

Then why did they survive?

Oh, but Gia people didn't.

And the ones that did were, what do you call, ended up being mixed into the harm population.

Usually when they say people were exterminated in history and didn't survive,

they lost their patriarchal authority and they changed. They fused or they adopted a new identity or a new tribal leadership, but it's very

rare in history that completely whole people are just wiped out. Like, no, it's not. It is rare.

It's been the whole course of history. Not true. How many native group ethnic groups are gone now? How many of those are not? That's also an exception in history because that was modernity. That was capitalism. There was hundreds of ethnicities in China.

A lot of those are like gone now too.

They're gone because of these massacres from Iran Min.

They're gone because of history.

Where are the Gia people?

Where are they?

They're gone now, right?

They're in my basement.

Unmin specifically exterminated those people.

I feel like you're almost like if non-white people exterminate people,

you're kind of like, it's kind of history.

But when British people do it, or Israelis Israelis do it all of a sudden it's like

unacceptable

Nope, no can't do that. Nope not true because it's like this third world is their Asian is stuff

Like it's just this weird like I don't know

That's your your perspective. Are you done? That's not true because... I'm going to keep going, my son?

That's not true because in pre-modern European history, including Roman history or before

the Romans even, people's had war. They were just like anyone else and they were white and

they were European.

The problem is the point of exception comes with modernity and capitalism, not because they're white.

So, why do you condemn the British? It's really specifically, but not the Vikings fighting the Saxons, the Celts fighting

who and isn't, that's also the same.

It's the same. So what is unique about like

British Empire or Israel stuff like that? The thing that's unique about that. I'll tell you why.

Because the thing that's unique is that you have what you make call the utilitarianism

where rather than an organic process of a people evolving and regionally integrating and

developing a new civilization, you have these kind of mercantile interests like the

British East India Company, instrumentalizing human beings and resources just to realize raw

profit and nothing else. So that is is kind of when it changes when there's

this kind of instrumentalist view that's imposed on being and upon reality

where people and nature are seen as a means to some transcendent ends.

But typically in civilization, some kind of ends is harmonious with those things

and has the substantive character of other human beings or

nature involved in it. So the unique thing about modernity and capitalism is how

it completely levels all distinctions, traditions,

moors, and so on within reality, liquefies them and churns them out as raw material

for some completely abstract and alienated purpose.

So for instance, right?

Let me give you two examples, right?

So one, let's say an empire, some sort of empire,

sees another empire, they fight each other,

they wipe out the other empire and they kill that ethnic group

and then the rest of them assimilate

and that happens, right?

And let's say in the second example,

you have some empire that comes in and says, hey, we want to settle this place, kick these people out. If they don't leave, we kill them.

And then we start to basically create a place for our people, right?

Do you think there's a moral difference between these two?

So I didn't catch what you said really, but empires, when they conquer and defeat a weaker

empire, the difference I think from modern colonialism is that there's skin in the game.

Typically, or not typically, always, the empire is also transformed by

the conquered. There's a fusion that goes on where the conquered and the conqueror engage

in a process of mutual recognition, creating a higher synthesis.

And this is actually what leads to an expansion of the empire.

Doesn't only expand in territory, abstracting the culture and the people and the resources, it integrates all of

those things as part of one empire. So instead of conquering a people and then

saying, okay all your land is mine, you're going to be completely instrumentalized as a tool for my purpose.

What happens is that an integration occurs.

And the empire, even when it enslaves all these people itself is is transformed. Just like Rome, the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire enslaved all of the people who had conquered. But even then, what happened? The Rome, the city of Rome, became a kind

of multi-ethnic amalgamation of different peoples. And Rome was... Is there any moral equivalence was is there any moral equivalence is there a moral equivalence between

doing it one way or the other is there moral argument there or is it just kind of

the course of history we prefer one over the other i think you're abstracting

morality from history and I disagree with that

Well if you do if one genocide is done out of like the natural course of events and the other is done out of a specific purpose to like

Economically benefit whatever you're saying the you're morally neutral on that then.

I don't think you can cast moral judgments on ancient empires. I do think morality could be

relevant. And morality has an organic existence, by the way. It could be relevant for the future.

So you don't believe in God then? You don't believe in God?

What is that? The morality? Like objective morality. You don't believe that things are wrong like by rule. You're saying that it's just

Sometimes it's okay. Sometimes it's not you're trying to

Subject all history and reality under the standard of like some video game where there's rules and there's there's rules

develop organically and concretely throughout the course of history. They don't exist at the

expense of reality. They are a part of reality. They are reflected through the development of reality.

Yeah, but I'm saying do you believe in objective morality? Do you believe in that or not believe in that?

Yes. So is it so why would it matter if in like 500 BC the Tang Empire wipes out one group or the British Empire wipes out the Namebians?

What is the moral difference there? There isn't any, right? But they're both morally wrong and they should both be judged as such right.

Morality is meaningless here. I don't know what you're talking about.

If you wipe out another tribe and ethnic group and kill all the people there, that's not

wrong?

It's wrong by the stat- yes, it's wrong, but that wrongness has a concrete reality.

So in the example of the Namibians, the wrongness is reflected in two ways.

One, in the confusion, disarray, and existential doubt, it imposes on the British themselves who have to

reflect on how this is compatible with their own civilization. And then two, with

the alienation this imposes upon the Namibians, which becomes a part of how

they come to define themselves, come to terms with their reality and modernity, and so on.

So this is how that wrongness is felt. Is there some kind of trans-historical United Nations or

International Criminal Court that exists which is going to give people

specific punishments for violating rules there isn't

but can you look at it in one sense where you make that argument but for the

british empire right you have the centralization of capital

and then they want to expand and then they create these colonies all the

civilization all of that all of that all of all these things happen. All of that, all

of that, it may not be civilizational, but all of that also didn't happen out of nowhere.

All of it happened due to the objective material conditions at the time, right?

So why would you condemn, like, go out and I'll have all this more combination? Why don't you just say, hey, this is what happened at the time, it's the reality, it was bad, but it is what it is.

It's not necessarily that I condemn it, it's that I accurately recognize that this empire

has outlived the conditions of its existence, that it emerged under the conditions of the rise

of what we call capitalism and modernity, and now that we have undergone the

communist revolutions which reconciled organic landed civilizations with modernity, the Anglo Empire has outlived its historical significance, and

basically now exists as a pure parasite trying to repress, keep down, and suppress the organic development

of the world's people.

Now this is a, in this sense, a descriptive claim that I'm making.

People are rebelling and fighting back against Anglo-Saxon modernity,

not out of moral indignation, but as an extension of their existence.

Yeah, didn't, would you agree that Hong Kong was made better during the British

rule, though, like, didn't they make Hong Kong better?

Better in what sense?

Like, I believe it was much better place to live in China.

I had all these like, first of all people had all these rights they didn't have in China.

There was much more economic development and stuff like that.

Like, wasn't it better?

Wouldn't it be a better place to live in Hong Kong than like the rest of China at that time?

Didn't you argue that?

No.

Well, why not? Didn't you argue that? No.

Well, why not?

Why not?

Because part of what we call a quality of life

is having purpose and meaning, not just being the most comfortable.

People who are comfortable kill themselves all the time. When the peoples

of China are participating in a great process for the rejuvenation of their civilization,

for the building up of their country, for the building up of sovereignty, to be what they are,

to have dignity, to have independence. That is fulfilling a purpose and a destiny felt by each individual, which no amount of wealth and no amount of

comfort or luxury could possibly replace. And this is something people die for

and the Chinese specifically would die for it.

So if you want to say, did Hong Kong have a better, was Hong Kong more developed?

This is the more scientific description.

Was it more developed than the rest of China? I would guess it was.

But what's your point?

Hong Kong was pumped with all of the wealth and capital at the disposal of the British Empire.

China had to build itself from scratch.

It didn't have some British Empire to inject it with resources and capital.

It had to take its resources, it had to take its labor, it had to take its wealth and aggregate it in a way pursuant to the common goals of development of the Chinese people and

they succeeded.

Can't you argue though that the Anglo-Saxon liberalism or Moderni has given us things

like freedom of speech or these things that places that like China

don't have isn't that a value that right now you're expressing aren't you

benefiting from that I'm not are you not benefiting from that right now

because when my freedom of speech becomes politically effective the feds assassinate me, they persecute me, throw me in jail or kill me.

That's not true.

Yes, it is.

Every single effective political dissident in this country has been either jailed, killed,

or driven into exile and persecuted into non-existence and irrelevance.

Those people also don't get, they don't also don't succeed, right?

Like a lot of them don't even, like Bernie Sanders, they didn't even win, right?

Like he failed.

Well, they, their victory has been prevented.

Yeah, but he also never got like the majority of the vote.

Like, he was always trailing behind Hillary in the polls,

and he was always trailing behind Biden.

Like, he never had a whole party again with him, like,

populist.

His momentum was crushed.

How?

His moment, because look how he was treated.

By the way, Bernie was not a dissident.

Fred Hampton was a dissident.

Malcolm X was a dissident.

Yeah, but someone said, Martin Luther King died with a 25% approval rating.

I don't know why someone brought that up in chat.

He wasn't even popular at the time.

Anyway, I just don't kill him.

Because they don't kill you for imminently about to start a revolution.

They kill you for being politically effective, which means you have potential. You're effective. You are winning people over. You haven't won everyone. You still can speak though.

No one stopping you from speaking.

What's stopping?

The minute I start becoming effective,

they come after me already.

The tech transparency problem.

That's what every country does though.

Okay.

They have barriers, right?

So, so, that's fine. So have barriers, right? So certain countries have barriers.

That's fine. So stop pretending that you have freedom of speech and you don't. Yeah, every

country has barriers, but the difference is I can still say like, like you can't say

like, I just, I hate the party in china whatever

what what good in is it to say anything if it can never be politically

effective

because i feel like saying it

okay then you also masturbate and watch pornography and

do drugs and it's all fine. This is

freedom to you I disagree. Anyway I'm gonna bring up the next way. Okay sounds good.

Yeah see him. Guys before I bring them up I'm gonna go take a piss really quick I'm

gonna go piss and I'll be right back okay give me a sec

okay the debater in Arabic wants to debate me first and then they got it.

I'm going to go take a piss.

Be right back. you know, you the to you

the to you know, you you All right, let's bring up this guy.

Hello.

Hello?

Yeah, what's going on?

Says Salam Aikum.

So, uh, yeah, we were going to talk about the future of the Middle East, yes.

The Islamic world in general.

And last time I debated you about Islam not being compatible with this bullshit ideology of your so-called socialism.

And yeah, I was defending the position that Islam only compatible with Sharia, which is not a man-made law nor an ideology, it's divine and clear divine law, you understand.

I hope my English is You understand?

I hope my English is clear.

So go make your Sharia. Sorry? Go implement your Sharia.

No, no Sharia will be re-implemented.

Look at the Islamic world, it's a failure.

Do it.

We will do, we will do.

The revenances like you believe in the Persian Revenants.

I don't know why you like these Persians so much.

Who's the alternative?

The alternatives are the Magribians.

What have you done for Palestine compared to the Persians? Uh, to the... for Palestine?

Where does Hamas...

I mean, we've been...

Okay, we've been disconnected from the rest of the Middle East for centuries now, so we cannot do anything.

Why is that my problem?

So, is that your problem?

This is the reality of things, you know.

If we were next to Palestine, we would have provided more than, for example, Jordan and your shit country, Lebanon, together.

Iran and Hezbollah... and your shit country Lebanon together.

Iran and Hezbollah are the only two people who help Hamas.

And for the last 16 years from the second Intifada they were unable to react.

So why do we want to react now?

Why?

Are you going to react?

We, wait, listen, you know something?

We, them a- Shut up.

What did you say? Then sit in your country and shut up.

Okay, so first and foremost, unfortunately, while I'm in my country is in a struggle.

And you made the point when you were talking to the Zionist, you said small countries should not exist.

I agree.

So, do you support Western Sahara being annexed by Morocco?

I support Morocco being annexed by Western Sahara.

But this is not possible in the reality because Western Sahara basically non-existent.

Just wait.

Wait for what?

For your multi-polar world?

Just wait.

Wait for what?

Just wait? Just wait. Just wait. Wait. Wait for what? Wait for what?

Just wait?

Just wait.

Just wait.

What do you mean wait?

You have...

Just wait.

Yeah, a aubi- B'uil What do you mean wait?

Wait for what?

Wait for the future?

You think we should wait for your Dugin and Russia?

They don't give a fuck about us. They don't give a fuck about Western Sahara.

They don't give a fuck about the rest of the world.

You're Sahrawi?

What?

Are you Sahrawi?

Yes, of course.

Sahrawi were always led by communists.

Fuck communism. Sahrawi were always led by communists.

Fuck communism. Well, those are the heroes of Sahrawi liberation.

You better sit down, boy, show respect.

Show respect to the leaders of the liberation of Sahrawi people.

Okay, okay. First of all, first of all, this communist of shit of yours is not even functioning

because first of all...

And what have you done?

What have you done?

Me, I work, I'm a part of the...

The, sorry, thethe uh... proletariat i'm more working i work in aviation i'm a

mechanic

what do you do you do you be speaking about communism

we'll be speaking one second one second you be speaking about communism and all

that you sit on stream and you give false hopes to these people.

Why don't you represent, huh?

The difference between me and you is I don't disrespect the leaders of the liberation of my people, but you sit here...

But you sit here and disrespect the leaders of Sahrawi liberation, you traitor?

First and foremost, Ibrahim Ghalian, most of the council, the National Council of Western Sahara,

does not believe he has socialist values.

I agree with you.

One second, I agree with you that they have socialist values, but actually there is, they've

been a transformation phase in which they literally gave up on all that

bullshit because it doesn't work.

Then why are they still call themselves socialist?

They don't call themselves socialists.

They call themselves the popular front because they represent the popular belief.

Let me educate you on something. The word popular front comes from the common turn. The common

turn is the third international, the communist international, which was based in Moscow in the

1930s. They coined the term popular front.

So the whole paradigm of Sahrawi liberation was from Marxism.

Listen, we don't represent it no more. We barely struggling to even represent our people you would not have an

identity fuck Marxism fuck this shit Marxism even China gave up on it no

they're corporate is now yes yes you have a filthy tongue you only say

disgusting tongue, you have a filthy, disgusting tongue, you insult, you disrespect

and dishonor the leaders, the historical leaders of the struggle of Sahrawi liberation?

Foy to the Kāʻa'u akellae! Yeah, Kali! Listen one second you say you say what I said is about China.

China is, you said something last time, I have been hearing you by the way, since our last debate, you corrected me.

With all the respect, I talked with the people of your community, and corrected me on a lot of things and I don't

believe in socialism still, but I believe that China is not socialist.

China is a corporatist nation and one of your things that you said...

How is it corporatist?

One second, one second, let me finish, let me finish the statement.

You said that this working party or the party state of China, the CPC,

is dominated by working class, people of the working class.

But this is not true.

Since the reforms, the youngest reforms in the late 70s,

most of the people that were joining the party were not part of the working class.

They were much, they were part of the scholars and of the elites and of the origars of the Chinese society.

So let's not bullshit ourselves. Yes, there is. of the oligarchs of the Chinese society.

So let's not bullshit ourselves.

Yes, there is the-

The business owners and the communist party are a small minority.

Okay, can you prove, can you provide the proof for it?

Because I can provide you proof that like, uh, that the, uh, that the, uh, that the corporateist

reforms led to a, like a big, like, uh, oligarchs and elites joining the CPC the state party because this bullshit

you selling the dream to these people.

All right business owners are less than 1% of party members as of 2013. 3% are individual business owners. Professionals are 26%.

Government employees are 8%. Clericals are 32% and workers are 30%.

Okay, so according to what you are reading right now, they consider entrepreneurs and skilled

expertise workers as being workers.

No, no they do.

Yes, they do.

Yes, they do.

Those people are 4% of the party that you mentioned.

Yeah, bullshit.

I call it bullshit.

Okay, call it whatever you want. want facts don't care about your feelings

Yeah, listen we ain't gonna be no socialist Middle East will go back to Sharia law

The only system compatible with Islam is Sharia and fuck this socialism of yours you you corrupting the kids, you corrupting the youth of nowadays?

What's wrong with owning, okay who will own the natural resources in Western Sahara?

And who is going to own them? Yeah. Listen, listen. I believe there is people, the smart people, where it will own those. There's a hierarchy in society. There's smart people. Huh? Who will own oil? Huh? Who will own oil?

Yeah, the elites.

The people that are smart enough and have accumulated enough capital to create a business and direct it.

Not going to be owned by the state because it's incapable of doing so.

Morocco owns all the energy.

For as of now, yes, I agree with you.

The state does.

Yeah, not totally.

Sali Aramco is owned by the state.

Yeah, OCP, I agree.

The problem is with you and your Marxist believers.

I don't believe in collective, I believe collective farms that you're you guys be like

Talking about like it's a achievement. It's a failure. It's a failure

Collective farmers. It succeeded for its goals. No, no, it's bullshit because if you...

I think you're just a little too emotional, you're not being rational, and, you know,

you're too, you're saying bullshit, this, bullshit that you're not educated.

I can educate you on collective farms if you want, but it doesn't sound like that's what

you want.

It sounds like you just want to insult and say nonsense and speak nonsense.

Do you want me to explain to you collective farms? Oh, you can, yeah, if you can add something, but I don't know.

In the late 1920s, the Soviet Union had a problem.

They needed to industrialize because they were going to get invaded and attacked.

They needed to modernize and give their people a decent standard of living.

Running water, electricity, literacy, education, integration.

And they needed to build, build, build, roads, cities, homes, highways. So what they did is they created collective farms

so they could organize the outputs of agriculture. And when they did this,

they produced far more agriculture than they did before. They used the surpluses of agriculture to buy

technology, machinery, and equipment, and they industrialized the hell out of their country

in 10 rapid years and defeated the Nazis. So it succeeded. That was their goal.

But couldn't the same objective be fulfilled with the private production and marketing?

There's never been an example of that in history.

Because it was not tried by the Soviets. That's for sure.

No, no country has ever been able to independently industrialize.

That wasn't a slave of the West.

The only countries that independently industrialized had a form of socialism or communism.

Listen man, for me, collectivization is nothing but a new type of serfdom.

It's basically, it's a new type of...

The collectivization of agriculture is not a principle of communism.

It's just what they needed in Russia at the time.

Part of the Russian culture too, by the way,

because they always had peasant

communes even before communism. So that's just part of their civilization. Other countries

don't have to do the same things the Russians did to be communist. Communism just means that the

people own the resources and not parasites, especially not imperialist

parasites, the people own the resources and use the resources to develop

and enrich themselves. That's all it means.

Okay, and we know where that led to a famine, a grandiose famine.

But first of all, talking about unprecedented prosperity and the last famines,

because there had always been famines, and those were the last ones those countries ever experienced.

You can ice it, you can ice it, like, this is the reality, the core of the thing,

like the voice within this collectivization policy that the Soviet's enacted.

Maybe it achieved some short-term objectives but caused more

harm than...

No, in the long term, that's industrialization is still the foundation of modern Russia today.

The Russian economy is made up of some private, some state-owned enterprises, but all of them

are organized and integrated from the methods of organization originating in the Soviet

period.

So the whole Russian economy today is still based on that.

To be honest, okay, it doesn't matter, but for me, collective farms, and I talked with farmers before, as private farmers are more tied to the land than these collective farms,

collective farmers would have ever been. And they because in collective forms

these people are less side to the land and they're expected to perform the same

amount of labor. Not necessarily. Yes, yes, yes, they did.

And some of them didn't want to do so.

And they were sent to the way.

You can look at the figures in the studies.

The collective farms outperformed.

The agriculture increased. so it worked.

Yeah, and caused the famine. So what caused the failure of the collectivization? It was caused by the agricultural policy, yes or no?

Because its rapid implementation led to a disruption in food production. And food, this food

supply and food production is very sensitive. It's sensitive to disruption.

So when natural disasters happen, and this was a natural event as well, there was a drought,

when this happens, coupled with a new system that creates famine, that's what colonialism

did too, on a mass scale, on a much wider scale,

when it disrupted the food supply of other countries. Because they organized people into forms of

primitive accumulation, slavery, colonial farms and so on, stole their resources.

So, the Soviets just didn't, they didn't go and colonize others.

They built themselves up from their own resources

and it led to problems, but all modern countries experienced those problems. The only difference is

the communist didn't go and starve and massacre others.

But you said something about the collectivization being done too quickly and even by means of force. It wasn't too quickly. They had to do it. They had to do it because they had 10 years. The Nazis invaded in

1941, so they had to do it. They didn't have a choice. If the West left them alone and if they

didn't have that pressure, maybe they could have

taken their time.

But they couldn't under the circumstances.

They were surrounded by everybody under attack.

So at least you can say that the collectivization policy was, they didn't think about it totally because it created a prompted, it prompted a lot of resistance and created like inefficiencies in production and this can be seen.

It wasn't, it didn't create inefficiencies, it created a disruption.

And the blame was the local officials on the ground who were misreporting the facts to the leadership.

Man, listen, at the end of the day, I don't support Marxism. I don't think it's going to work out in Islamic world.

And you guys should be focusing on Islam. I don't know where you guys gave

up on Islam. I don't know to be honest.

This is what I'll tell you. I believe in Marxism just like you believe in Western capitalism.

But who said I believe in? I believe in pure capitalism. I believe in pure capitalism.

I don't believe in the Western ideology. I also believe in a Western ideology.

So leave Islam out of it. This is not about Islam.

You don't believe in pure Islam. I do believe in pure Islam. No you don't. You're mixing Islam with Western ideology.

No, I didn't. Let me tell you something. I believe the only... If you're not going to mix Islam with Western ideology,

then you must return to the mode of production that existed in the Maghreb

before the 1700s. Go back to the ways before

That is not possible. I'll tell you for two main reasons. Okay, then either accept communism

Or accept capitalism, but don't claim you have pure Islam. There's no pure Islam.

Pure Islam is enacting the Farahid asthey're supposed to, which a lot of people listen now with.

Pure Islam must be compatible with creation.

Must be compatible with reality. If it's not compatible with reality, it means

nothing. Meaning, people have to feed themselves, they have to, they need water, they need medicine, they

need to know how to read and write, and there is no immediate solution to how to do that

just from the Quran.

The Quran doesn't teach you how to tie your shoes.

You have to learn as a human being.

I don't believe that. I'll tell you why.

Because you're saying that Islam is basically,

is the regressive since he was made fourteen hundred years ago.

No. It's... Yeah, that's what you're saying.

Islam can apply today. It can apply today.

And watch, in the sphere of socialism that you believe in, that's bullshit socialism.

That's what you want to apply Islam through. believe in this bullshit socialism that's what you want to

apply Islam through you want to just like you want to apply it is well okay

as you want to apply to capitalism I actually this is the problem because in

your socialism because you want to enact this social economical policies and reforms, you're going

to demote Islam to an individual level.

You're not going to maintain it on a societal range.

That's actually true because you what you guys believe in, look at the socialists in the

West. If I give a look on socialists in the West, I see a bunch of

Paglitz, queers, LGBTQ, bullshit, who care?

And how many of them created a socialist country?

Okay, uh, have you heard of Sdeca in France? I don't care about I

don't care about them. So no because I see listen man I am in Maghribian the

closest the closest countries to me is the Western Europe and Southern Europe and

the West you understand so when I just socialism I'm gonna judge this from the

Western which is not what you should do.

Ah man Maghrabi socialism will be socialism with Islamic characteristics. It's not going to be based on Western liberalism.

Listen man, listen, the whole Arab world lets not bullshit ourselves, man. The whole Arab world is influenced by liberalism you

go even in Saudi Arabia you have these fucking like youngsters and communism

is against liberalism we don't believe in individual individualism

okay no this is the problem but you want to bring a

modern sense of democracy you want to bring a modern sense of the communism and

for me if these... No we want to bring the real communism of Stalin and Mao.

We don't care about Western socialists.

In China, for example, they have the socialism with Chinese characteristic.

They don't have LGBT, they don't have all this stuff you're talking about.

Oh, you think China doesn't have LGBT?

No, they don't allow it in public.

You'll be amazed. They do have LGBTQ and it's not because of...

And they have to hide. Yeah, not in public.

They don't have the bride parade, they don't wave the flags, they don't...

So, so, Maghreb has it too, by the way. Yeah, unfortunately.

This is the reality that I have to face every day and a lot of people that I work with

and they don't have the ability to make any change because of this bullshit political arena

you guys created with your bullshit ideologies nothing

is empirical nowadays what I do I didn't do anything I've never even been

there you're a socialist you do you know how many diaspora you have in your

in your chat you know how many diaspora you have in your chat?

You know how many people follow you?

These fake Arabs like the people like that on Twitter and stuff.

Can you name prominent leaders of the, was Nasir a socialist?

Abdul Nasser?

Gamal Abed Nasser?

Yeah.

I don't like Gamal Abdan Nassah.

Okay, well he was a socialist.

Gaddafi was a socialist.

Yeah, and Qaddafi failed. Qaddafi failed in everything.

Who gave Algeria independence?

Who led them in their struggle?

The FLN, which is a nationalist party.

Socialists.

It's a nationalist party.

They're socialist. They're not socialist.

Yes, they are. The FNL is a nationalist.

Ben Bella was a socialist. Yes, they are. Look it up.

Muhammad Ben Bella was never a socialist. He actually critiqued socialism he was a socialist look it up

oh my god I know but I know I know I know the history of Algeria you know

so he was a socialist

Mohammed Algeria is not a socialist country. It calls itself one.

According to your notion it's not because you believe it's... But they call themselves socialist. So call us.

Who calls themselves socially? They're won by the military. Algeria. They're won by the military. Algeria and Syria.

Syria and Algeria. Listen man, listen, I don't give a fuck about no Syria. I don't give

a fuck about none of these countries. All I care about is Maghribunity and it's impossible

now.

And what do you want for me?

What do you want for me?

I don't listen. I'm here to debate you and you fail to achieve anything.

There is no middle ground.

How can I convince you if you're not listening to reason?

I'm willing to listen to reason, but you're not bringing any arguments.

You love the Jews.

You live in Sahrawi?

Yes, yeah.

Yeah, I work in a base here.

Yeah. I work in a yeah, I work in a base here in a yeah

So

So keep your Sahrawi capitalism. What do you want for me if you love it so much don't complain?

No, because you have a lot of views about the whole Arab world, you understand?

The whole Islamic world and its extension.

So when you say that the, for example, you believe that people in the Middle East and

especially the Hamas that's leading the resistance or leading

the access of resistance against the IDF. Do you think they're rationalized with

Jews? No. For them to promote. You think they're like rationalizing with Jewish

people? You think they're gonna coexist after

even they defeat the Zionist entity claim they will coexist with Jews yes there

will there will be no coexist nothing but to play to the international committee

so they don't look as genocide.

I support them. I support them. No, I actually believe Jews are the problem.

I believe Jews are the problem. This is my perspective on...

How many Jews in Sahrawi? Oh, they were back in the, you'll be surprised. In late 1800s, they ruined

our country. They collaborated even in the 60s, as of late of the 60s, they were collaborating

with the Spanish. So, yes. So where are they now? They? They left to Israel. So why do you, what, why do you

care about Jews? What does Jews have to do with your life? And after the Moroccans

normalized with the Jews, now the Jews have a Zionist, they have a lobby. The Jewish

Zionist Lobby won the Moroccan Parliament which affects Western Sahara.

So why Jews not, there's many Jews who are anti-Zionist. What do you say to them?

I think those Jews, I agree with them. There should be anti-Zinus but they

should go back to Oblast or fucking Europe whatever they come from and live whatever.

I don't give a fuck. They just should...

That's up to the people in Palestine it's not up to

you I tell you think people I talked with Palestinians every day every day I

talked with Palestinians they tell me fuck the Jews fuck the Jews fuck the

Jews well you well look at their situation, they're at war with Israel, so they feel this way,

but their political organizations do not advocate expelling all the Jews.

Which, who is their political opposition? You think the, the PLO or Fajah is the political opposition?

You think the PLO or Fetchley is the, is now the true?

And the popular front Hamas is part of which includes the communist, PFLP and the DFLP.

Those are non-xistent nowadays.

There's nothing but cry babies.

The PLP is not non-existent.

It represents almost all the Christians in Gaza and a lot of them in the West Bank.

The PLF was nothing but an entity run by Kurdish people who have no claims to Palestine.

They should not even be there to begin with.

What do you mean Kurdish?

I'm not a George Habash was Kurdish?

No, or no.

Canafani was the Kurdish though. Who? Kanafani? I don't, I don't have the knowledge

of this. Rassan Kanafani? I don't, I don't know what you're talking about. He's the Palestinian

writer, he's Kurd. And he was promoting this anti-imperialist socialist bullshit of yours.

So was George Habash and he was not Kurdish.

He was a Christian.

Yes.

So, so what? So what? So all of them should leave?

Christians should leave too? I think Christians should be there but they should enact no no governance over the Muslims.

Because for you guys it's the utopia it's up to the people who live there it's

not up to you. Yeah I know what the people think because I

am out of myself Hamas doesn't say what you say yeah I'm out of myself when did

Hamas say Iran doesn't kick the Jews out the Jews live in Iran they're

allowed okay when you think a bunch of Palestinians see Israelis pissing on dead Palestinian corpse,

how do they think they would react?

Especially with their low, one second.

Because of their low political education, most of the Arabs are not not so well endorsed in political education, including myself.

Because I don't think it's worth it. I don't think it's so...

It's nothing but wordsmithing.

Look at you, guys. Look at you.

Everywhere, no, to defend our ideals

you're not pragmatic enough to solve to find real life solutions to problems

all you do is let's combat them with our ideals and let's wait it's a word smithed.

What do you want from me?

What do you want?

I want from you.

Yes.

Oh, I came to debate, but you're...

So we're debating. So all I can do is debate but you're... So we're debating.

So all I can do is spread my ideas when I debate you, that's it.

Okay, debate then.

Why do you think there will be a coexistence of Palestinians and Jews in the future.

Because, uh, because why wouldn't there be?

Because what the Palestinians are demanding doesn't necessate the Jews have to leave.

It doesn't necessiate.

You don't know what the Jews did to Palestinians then, huh?

You don't know that the Jews still actually support the Zionists?

Let me put it this way way was Germany allowed to exist after World War

2? Yes look what they did to the Russians and the same at or worse worse than what the Israelis did to the Palestinians and the Soviets let them live

They didn't go and kill them all

But at the end of the day we know the Nazis are not dead the Nazis are not dead the end of the day, we know the Nazis are not dead.

The Nazis were funded by your elites by Western elites.

So Nazis still exist.

So are the Zionists.

So you saying like the Nazis didn't exist.

The Nazis still exist. The Nazis are the Nazis didn't exist, the Nazis still exist.

The Nazis are the elite, Western elites that still now govern and prosper evil.

Yes, and they fund the Zionists.

Okay, okay, so the reality we're gonna get rid of the Zionists,

the Jews and the Western influence. That's it, simple. That just because you're

Jewish doesn't mean you're guilty. Why you defend the Jews? Why you defend the Jews? For the

same reason, for the same reason the prophet and his nephew did. You know that's

what happened by the way, the Zionist guy you were talking to I don't know if he's your friend or not

but that guy was talking about the Muslims killing Benu Qaeda and Benunarid

which are two Jewish tribes and you know what those tribes did, by the way. They provoked the Muslims

and we killed them for what they did. All of them. The Muslims did. And now, the Zionists

have been provoking and oppressing for the last 16 years the Gazans the Palestinians

so they have a right they have a right to pick up the weapons and attack all Jews.

Simple, pragmatic.

It's like you believe in the Zionist propaganda but you just say, okay I agree.

That's all you're doing.

It's just Zionist propaganda. The Jews lived with Muslims.

Yes, there was battles with some tribes, with many other tribes too.

There was battles with Christians, but ultimately, Jews were allowed to coexist with Muslims. The Jews, man, there was no real coexist. I know I

have stories, I have stories about Maimon and the Lanatulah al-Aim Kul. All those Jews that lived in the Maghrib there were nothing but parasites.

Plain and simple. Parasites.

You understand?

Even there was, they went to another extension.

They polarized themselves, they started representing

all the political spectrum, including Abraham Sarfati who was a Marxist-Leninist, fuck him.

And that, these Jews wanted to control the Maghreb, But rightfully so, you know what Algeria did?

They kicked all the Jews.

By the time they got the independence, no Jew will ever stay plant a foot inside Algeria.

And this still pisses them off.

You understand? Because Algeria is pragmatic.

They're not like you, they're not sympathizing with the Jews, they're pragmatic.

No Jew will say.

Why do you have a British accent?

I don't have a British accent.

You do. Where did you learn English?

Actually myself.

You taught yourself English and you live in the Sahrawi and you're a proletarian?

Yeah.

Okay, and why did you teach yourself British English?

I don't know, maybe it sounds British, but...

Yeah, I don't know.

I think you're Larping. I think you live in London.

Or France.

Yeah, yeah. No, no, I don't live in France nor London. I'm still in Western Sahara.

I'm actually... Yeah, I work with the French company here though. I don't want to docks myself and stuff. So I do speak friends.

You live in France. I don't live in France. I swear. I swear to God. I don't

work with the colonizer. Why do I work with the colonizers? It's a French company.

Listen bro, you think I'm going to be jobless

like you? Of course I'm going to work to provide for my family. I don't have no other option.

There's no state-owned. You're so judgmental and you're so, whatever. So, it sounds like you're working with the colonizer how can you do that

why am I working with the colonizer I'm working because you're saying Jews are bad because some of them

work with colonizers and that no no this is the problem because there was a resistance against the colonizers wanting

sovereignty over our land, which they have no right to do so.

But now, those Jews were cooperating with the colonizer to maintain sovereignty over the colonized territory.

Yeah, all the minorities did that. A lot of them did that in the Middle East too, not just Jews.

So Christians did that too.

So should Christians be punished too?

Where in the Middle East? Yeah. Yeah, for sure, why not?

So should Maronites be kicked out of Lebanon?

Maronites are the worst type ever.

Those people, I don't know, I don't know why people still talk to them. I don't know why they still want to coexist with.

I mean they've done a lot of really bad things but they're not all bad people individually.

Lots of them cooperate with the Zionist entity and you're telling me why. You're right. A lot of them do, but not all of them cooperate with the Zionist entity and you tell me why a lot of them do but not all of them

A lot of them and the Kurds as well fuck the Kurds they cooperate

What about what about the Greek Orthodox in the Nen they don't theythey, they're not all bad. Yeah, I don't have problem with the

Orthodox. They're the only good Christians because I know of stories and how the Orthodox and the

Muslims were oppressed. I think you should learn more stories because that sounds like you're just very hateful.

Sound like a very hateful person.

Not a hateful man.

I swear I know I want nothing but peace.

You see this is the problem, you're reciprocating something that you are.

You understand? I'm not hateful, I think you are.

I'm not a hateful person, per se.

I'm just a pragmatic person.

Problems deserve empirical solutions which will be based on the reality of things, the conditions

of the problem. You on the other hand, you believe in diplomacy. Diplomacy failed

my country since we tried it in 1991 and we were betrayed by the Moroccan

entity, we were betrayed by the UN, We were betrayed by everyone. Every member of this.

So why are you saying this is me? I'm not telling you to not have...

But you defend. You defend Russia and China believe the multipolar world will be nothing but a it

would resolve all the problem that the Western Union polarity failed to a like

soul if if you sort out your own problems and build your own polarity, if you want to build a

Maghrebi pole, build one.

I'm not stopping you.

We're incapable of doing so.

So what do you want?

Who do you want to beg to and complain to and cry to then to do it for you? No, no, no, no. I don't want to beg to and complain to and cry to them to do it for you? No no no I don't

want to do it that we're going to get it about war or isn't a fittable. Okay I'll

I'll truly I'm not stopping you go to war to have a Maghrebi polarity I'm not stopping you. So go do it. We're going to

do it. We don't need you to give us the green light. I'm not stopping you. So what's the

problem? I'm not stopping you. Yeah. But, okay, you're not going to stop us. I appreciate that but you should just tone down this socialist bullshit

No, I should not be like

I have a right to

Believe what I believe is true and you have not given me a persuasive argument

otherwise. I said and I started my statement with saying that the only system

compatible with Islam is Sharia and anything else you said it was capitalism

no no I said that pure capitalism yes I would argue it's somewhat is not as

is not haram as much as your socialism is why because I will tell you why, because pure

capitalism only resolves like the the economical questions. You understand?

that unfortunately Sharia is not, it goes into details of it because society today is much largely...

So same with communism, same with socialism.

No, because pure communism necessarily have to be without religion.

Why? And you need to put an A. Because yeah, because you believe that religion can somewhat

contradict the party, the state, the party that runs the state. And if And if it does so, what do you mean why? Why? You want

you want to learn about what the after the Bolshevik revolution was successful? You want

to hear what those those Leninist leagues did to a

priests they were they were they were leagues that's there were atheists there

were atheists Leninist leagues that went attacks

atheists and burnt churches Stalin dissolved

them yeah Stalin oh you want you think Stalin is an example yeah a guy a guy

who not is not even a believer himself.

You think that guy should be an example.

The church said he was a believer in private.

He was a believer when he was almost gonna die.

I'm not gonna doubt he said he would visit the church by

himself. Yeah this is you see guys you're trying to look for ways that you can

like say oh Stalin was a good guy. Listen man Stalin maybe was good for the Soviet Union, give a fuck.

But you cannot replicate Stalin on the Middle East, plain and simple.

Okay, but communism is not against religion inherently.

Okay, do you believe in Arab unity? Yes or no?

Yeah.

And how would that materialize in the current, in the reality of things currently?

By also uniting with the Persians and Turks.

So you want Arab unity to be based on reuniting with other ethnic groups? Suban Allah! You are a magician, man.

If you actually do so, you are a magician. It's impossible.

I'm from Lebanon. Now Now I'm not from Lebanon. My parents are, but I know the culture enough to know

You are just as different from me as I am with a Persian. Matter of fact, i probably have more common with a perjury

so it's magic if i'm gonna unite with you or my

uh... my ancestors would unite with you you're different

you're on the other side of the world

okay you use your language i'd no one can understand your language in the NibnëN.

No one can.

Okay, so this is the problem because you don't know much about the history of the Maghreb.

I'm a Sahrawi, I'm a nomad, I'm from the nomadic Arab trials.

You're Mabrabi, your Berber. No, no, no, I'm not a Berber. I am from the southern tribes of Western Sahara, which came in the late 15th century from the Arabian Peninsula.

That's a million years ago. So what? One second.

We speak our own language, which is called Hesani,

which is Arabic, basically.

And it's more Arabic than your illegible.

And no Shami can understand what the hell you're saying.

No, no, actually I talk with a lot of shamies in my language.

I talk with all these.

They're nodding along and being polite.

They don't understand a word you say.

That's the derija.

Derija is what you are talking about.

Derija, the derribean dialect, which is derisia.

Mostly spoken in Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco.

That thing is not even Arabic.

I agree with you.

It's un-understandable even to me.

You understand?

I only communicate with them in French, in my job place.

So if you go and... So most people are like that, they're mostly

bear bears in Marlado. I mean, you're trying, I'm not telling you I'm not from

those people and you're telling me I cannot. So you're, so let me, so you call me a

magician. The geography doesn't make sense.

Your small village in the desert, in the other side of the world in West Africa, is going

to be part of a Middle Eastern Arab confederation and we're going to have to skip over all the

Berbers and just what?

What do we do about the Berbers?

Okay, I will tell you what you do about the Berbers.

The Berbers, fuck the Berbers, who cares about the Berbers?

Because Algeria and Tunisia themselves declared themselves as being Arab nations.

But they're not, they're barbarous.

What do you mean that, you see they're trying to isolate them now?

I can't understand them. No one can understand them.

You barely, okay, you want to something reality you barely speak Arabic

What the fuck are you talking about? I know I do barely speak Arabic

But I'm telling you no one from my people

ethnically can understand them because they tell me they can't and also I can pick up

the vast difference of the language.

Okay, listen, that's what I mean when I hear people from my parents village speak. I don't understand all of it but I get it like I get

what they're saying. When I hear someone from the Maghreb speak it's like a

completely different, it's so beyond anything I can comprehend. But these people in the case of Algeria, was colonized by the French for 130 years.

But they couldn't... and the evening was considered as being part of France for a certain period of time.

And they implemented,? They implemented linguistic policies.

Bro, the Magribians, they were the Islamic philosophers.

They carried, they were more well-known and more in Arabic language than you

and any of the people of the Levant.

What the fuck of the Levant.

What the fuck?

I believe in uniting with Persians and Turks.

Fuck the Turks and fuck the Persians.

Listen man, I'm telling it to you right now.

The Arabs should not rely on anyone, neither the Pers, neither the Turks.

The Turks are nothing but double-faced nations.

But they should rely on the Berbers.

No, I'll tell you.

The people of the North Africa, they have a lot of people have Arabic lineage, but unfortunately it was dissolved because of crunch.

So should we unite with the Berbers? Not me, but the people in that region. Should they unite with the Berbers?

Okay, why not? Why not the Persians? Why with the Berbers? Okay, why not?

The Uyghurs.

Why not the Persians?

Why not the Turks?

The Persians are foreigners.

You understand?

No, you're a foreigner too.

Listen, man.

What do you mean I'm a foreigner? I'm Arab. You go on a plane, go to

Lebanon and announce yourself wear your traditional dress and people will think

you're a space alien. I promise. No one will know anything you will be completely foreign to everyone.

Okay man, listen, listen. I'm a proud nomad, I'm proud of my name.

Okay, but you're just...

I don't give a fuck with some Lebanese, what some...

You think Lebanon is a country to begin with?

Lebanon is full of fucking homosexuals.

It's called the homosexual, like...

Surrey, okay, go to Ghazza, wear your traditional dress and they'll think you're Mickey Mouse.

They won't understand you.

Man, you're being very disrespectful to my people and my culture.

I'm telling you, if you want to call Persians and Turks foreigners you're also a foreigner

No, what I'm seeing is first of all first of all terms have a different history they went to the Balkans

they went all over Europe they were intermixedixed, they have their own, like a homogenous, a culturally homogenous country.

Yes, they were in the Maghreb.

They were everywhere.

But listen, yes, but they have, I will tell you something, the Turks since they became secular faggots, that double-faced nation

that suck up to the West and they think they are too smart for the rest of the

world. So other countries did that too? I will believe, listen, there will be no

homogenous society that will include the Persian,

the Turks and the Arabs.

Every one of these groups.

Ethnic homogeneity is against Islam.

Name one.

Not ethnic.

I said cultural. I said cultural.

There's only Islamic culture.

No ancient Muslim empire was homogenous based on one tribe or one race or one ethnicity.

There's never been a homogenes Muslim Empire. The only homogeneity was Islam. But this will what will happen is if you bring the Turks,

the Persians and the Arabs, the beginning it will be chaos.

It's already chaos.

It's already chaos.

No, no, Middle East can actually reunite.

I'll tell you why the Middle East, because we have best opportunities.

Stay in the Sahrawi and plan the future of the Middle East on your own. I don't believe you you haven't persuaded me

I don't think your vision

Will work

Oh fuck socialism fuck socialism man. Fuck, every communist, fuck them all.

And then long live France and the French company.

Well, listen, long live Islam and anyone who betrays Islam deserves the soul, simple

as, you understand.

And fuck you as well. but long live France and capitalism

right now fuck France you want to me to say this fuck everything then right

just fuck everything long I said long no no everything right you see you're trying to put words on my mouth

But I didn't put words in your mouth

Yo what's going on?

Yo, can you hear me? Yeah

So I was stopped by saying that Arab guy was, you know, he really represented the view of Muslim Arabs in Palestine and Hamas.

And what's your Muslims actually think about the Jews in Israel.

Right? So he actually did my job for me. I don't really need to debunk that.

I disagree because most of the ones I talk to who are actually from the region, my parents are from,

don't share his views.

That guy is from a completely alien remote village on the

other side of on a different continent all the way on the other side. No one

knows where who that guy is, where he comes from or what his

deal is, but I promise that guy is just, that is just so, that is someone so removed from

any geography.

I don't even know how he got there. He claims that he's not bare-bur, that his tribe was Otoby, and he got there 500 years ago,

and he's stuck there, I guess, he's stranded there.

That's good for him, but it's like, I don't know what I'm supposed to say to that.

I mean, he represented the views pretty well though, even though in the 1988 charter,

the Palestinian people voted for Hamas with the 1988 Charter still in place

by the way, but you know we can move on from that quite quickly.

I think we understand now the views of most Muslim Arabs living within the region towards

Israelis.

But as a British person, I want to first apologize to the Israeli people for Arthur Belfor

curating the mandate of Palestine.

I want to first apologize for that.

It's a fault on the British. And if you actually want to go into the mandate of Palestine. I want to first apologize for that. It's a fault on the British.

And if we actually want to go into the history of Arthur Belfour, he actually made a lot of mistakes when dealing with separatist barbarians,

such as Palestinians.

So you're just here to di suck Israel. Why do I care?

Nicks suck Israel dude

You don't even live in material reality you live in like a fantasy land that all Arabs and Jews and Christians all hold hands and

Be the oh yeah, we'll be all fine. It's kind of like the idea of communism.

It's a complete fantasy.

Why do you care about Israel so much?

Why do I care? Yeah.

Because I think it's an important geopolitical event in the world.

No, no, don't jibber. Why do you personally care?

What do I personally care?

Yeah, like, well, why do you apologize to, like, what do you, what, what's your skin in the game?

Why do you care about Israel?

Well, off the, well, the game? Why do you care about Israel? Well, offer, well, do Northern Irish and Israel actually have a lot in common?

Why, why should anyone give a fuck?

Why should I give a fuck? Why should I care about Northern I?

Why should I care about Northern Islands? Well, I'll tell you right now, it was

Arthur Belfor's policies that have led to this disaster within the Middle East.

Okay, and look, if the British try to come back to the Middle East, they're going to get Hamas rockets up their bum.

So what do you want?

No, no.

Yeah, what's happening right now is-

Iranian rockets up they bomb.

You're literally crying online about fucking Israel air-striking, fucking Hamas.

That's what you're doing.

When have I cried? I've only given descriptions.

So what's happened is Israel has retaliated to a disgusting terrorist attack and in you people,

you communists, you Muslims sit here and say, free Palestine, free Palestine, you Muslims, sit here and say,

Free Palestine, free Palestine, you will start waving your flags then,

after a terrorist attack, where babies were killed,

women have been paraded around the street and spitting on.

What's the proof?

What's the proof?

Yeah.

Oh, we're gonna claim it's AI images. Is this your Israeli Twitter, dude? Can you give me proof

babies were killed? What, do you really want me to post images?

Uh, point me to, whatever you want to point me to.

Give me some proof.

Well, is this your only official?

Official Israeli Twitter, but if you want to like,

argument that?

Somebody?

You're the burnt baby? Is that what we're talking about?

Oh, we're going to claim it's chicken wings.

Are we going to claim his chicken wings?

Like other people have?

Is that, how can, how does anyone know that's real?

What confirmation?

Is there international, neutral observers who are allowed to go in and witness this

Or is it we just take the Israelis at their word that this wasn't fake?

Well I treaty these radis at the words. Why wouldn't Israelis invite international neutral sources?

Such as from China from Russia.

I'm sure they will.

This event has just happened, I'm sure they will.

They posted this on-

No, they wouldn't even share evidence with American media.

They didn't even share evidence with American media, so no. That's not even true. It's on Twitter, dude. That's the American media. They didn't even share evidence with American media, so no. That's not even true. It's on Twitter, dude. Does the American media?

American media has only seen what we saw from Twitter. They did not even give CNN

anything that confirms Hamas killed babies. They gave them nothing. That's why Western media couldn't

confirm any of their claims or reports.

It's literally on Twitter. You can open your eyes and look. Why should I think that's

real? It looks fake to me. AI detectors said it's made by AI. It looks altered.

What what reason do I have to believe that? I mean, if this was, if the roles were reversed,

you wouldn't believe Hamas, if they just posted a photo with no evidence. You wouldn't just

fucking believe that. Yeah, I would. No, you wouldn't just fucking believe that.

Yeah, it would. No, you wouldn't. If the rules, if this was China, if this was China versus Taiwan,

and China was trying to post evidence of Taiwanese atrocities and an AI detector said it was fake and there was dubious evidence

and it was just this weird looking photo you would be the first one to say

it's fake nonsense so don't sit here and act like you have a moral standard

I support China so you're justthe assumptions based off nothing right now.

So well look, you are trying to like moralize and even if you are right about it,

there's no morality here at all. Morals don't exist. What Israel's doing in Gaza,

there's no morals. So stop talking about morals. Even if Hamas decalputation, stop calling

yourself Muslim then. Stop calling yourself Muslim if you do not believe in morals.

No, no, I'm saying when you talk there's no morality.

You say I'm crying about what's going on in Gaza.

There's no justification for what Israel's doing in Gaza.

There's none.

There is justification.

Okay, then there's no morals.

Then stop talking about morals if you're going to say that.

If you believe in killing children and women and the elderly and bombing hospitals and

making people in hospitals die immediately and starving people, making them die of thirst and

Genociding them do of thirst, and genociding them. Do not fucking sit here and have moral outrage about anything to me.

You don't have more.

Hamas attacked first.

Hamas attacked first.

Okay, and Israel blockaded Gaza.

So Hamas also was

They didn't wait no they put checkpoints and what happens when no they blockaded Gaza

Savaged Palestinians these savage Hamas they do attacks like we saw at the music festival as what happens

So what you want to do this what you want to when the Israelis to just lay down on the floor and do nothing and just allow their respects?

Listen, listen, I have to explain it to you, okay? So, I explain it. Yeah. So the recent events, your moral claim is Hamas, even if you're right about all these

sensational atrocity propaganda, which you're not by the way, but even if you were right,

your logic is because of that, that justifies the Israeli response. But Israel also engaged in aggression

that predates what Hamas did. So by your own moral logic Hamas was justified in committing

massacres. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. By putting up checkpoints that does not... No, no, no, no, no, no, no. By putting up checkpoints, it does not...

No, no, no, hold on.

We're not talking about checkpoints.

We're talking about a blockade that violates international law,

which leads to extremely excessive rates of mortality for the population of Gaza,

choking them out, depriving them of basic access to medical supplies.

We're talking about the increasing of illegal settlements in the West Bank

and the increased dispossession and displacement of a whole people.

We're talking about the unjust detention and detainment, persecution, shooting and beating

and oppression of an entire people.

Don't sit here and say it's just checkpoints because nobody, even Jews in Israel don't

believe that.

All right?

So yes, people in Gaza were already under siege even before Hamas did a god damn thing

living in an open-air prison by your own moral reasoning, even if you were right about

the atrocity propaganda Hamas allegedly committed, even if you are right about that,

which you're not, and almost all of it has been debunked by the way, by your own moral

standards and your own moral logic, when you justify the genocide against Gaza, you are

saying Hamas was in the moral right.

Hamas, Hamas wants to genocide the Jews as the line of Judah brought up when I was

watching him.

There's no evidence of that.

Article 7, Article 7, Article 7, and I know you're going to argue right now, oh they

removed Article 7 in, what, 2018, 2017?

Yeah, but guess what?

The Nazis still did the Holocaust without, you know, any formal policy being in place.

Hold on, what does Article 7 say?

What does Article 7 say?

It mentions the, um, the Sunnah.

On the day of judgment, so that's eschatology.

What does that have to do with it?

They are using it as justification to kill the Hebrew.

Where is that in the article though?

What do you mean where's that in the article?

Dude, they're declaring jihad.

So let me explain to you something.

Spread in Islam. This is what jihad is.

Okay. That's your opinion.

But in articles... That's not my opinion. There's been historical jihad.

So where's the jihad against the Iranian Jews?

It can see Iranian Jews? Yeah. Well, I don't know about Iranian Jews. I don't know about the topic. I don't know either.

That's the thing, because it's not real. But anyway, Israel.

Anyway, Article 7 talks about Islamic eschatology in the day of judgment and is using that within the context of

their war against Israel but they're not saying that when we take Al-Aqsa and

we take Palestine that that's gonna create the day of judgment that's not

what they're saying so there's actually no there's no what they're saying. So there's actually no, there's no evidence at all.

There is no, there has never been any evidence whatsoever that Hamas had the intention

of engaging in genocide or killing all Jews in Israel.

There's no evidence of that.

Even before they revised their charter, even in their old charter, there's no evidence of that. Even before they revised their charter,

even in their old charter, there's no evidence of it.

Them making references to Hadiths

about the day of judgment,

which are giving expression to the enmity.

When the interior minister is saying kill the Hebrew,

kill the Hebrew, they're making songs about

kidding the Hebrew.

It's pretty clear on the war, because it's just like the South Africa argument where

the kill the boar means they're going to genocide the boars.

It's not true.

It exactly means that.

It doesn't mean that. It doesn't mean that. I don't mean there's any way of looking at this house. I think cool.

Trying to make a mental gymnastic to defend Arabs and

courts in South Africa. The the highest courts of South Africa have ruled that the song kill the boar has nothing to do

with attacking actual boar people. Likewise if Hamas is engaging an anti-Jewish

rhetoric that's within the context of a war with Israelis who are Jewish, it doesn't mean they intend on

killing all Jews.

It just means...

Wait, what version of South Africa?

The current South Africa or the apartheid South Africa?

The modern South Africa.

Okay, so a...

A state which is biased towards black people and bias towards, you know, the people

that are basically not forcing you.

You could say that, but...

It's not, it's not, I can say that, that's a fact.

Hold on, hold on.

You have to let me finish.

You could say that, but I implore you to go and actually watch the trial and hear all

the arguments presented.

And I don't see how any reasonable person could disagree with the conclusion that the court

arrived at after all the evidence and arguments

were presented.

So go watch the trial.

I mean, I'm not going to go watch a trial because you have made a trial's public.

So if you think they arrived at a biased or unreasonable conclusion?

I implore you to write an article about why it's an unjust, a biased and unreasonable conclusion.

Well, when you're making songs about killing the Hebrew and you're literally running around

of axes and trying to behead Hebrews, then yeah, I do actually do believe that you know you might

want to kill the Hebrew I know this crazy as you are and I know you live in

like an idealistic fantasy where everyone wants to hold hands but right

let me ask you a question and you as the Marxist should be looking at material

but you don't you live in fantasy. So here's some materialism. During

the Great War when Great Britain was at war with Germany, the Germans were called Huns

and they would regularly talk about killing the Huns and destroying the hunts. So did Britain,

after the surrender of Germany, engage in a genocide against Germans and kill them?

Wait, no, but that's a complete different context.

No, it's not. In war, that kind of rhetoric is used. It doesn't entail that the strategic objectives

of one party implies genocide or actually killing the other side. It means you're giving

expression to the war and the enmity with a state, with an army, with a military, with the IDF.

So this is rhetoric that has to be placed into the context of a war.

But then I could make the counter argument with the Nazis.

I can just make the counter argument with the Nazis.

No, you can.

Because the Nazis...

Yes, I can.

No, you can.

I'll tell you why. Because the Nazis...

Secretly genocide and Jews in the Himmler.

So I don't see your argument here.

Wait, wait, but here's the issue.

The Nazis were targeting a Jewish population,

either that was living in Germany or dwelt within the occupied territories in Eastern Europe.

But the Nazis were not actually engaged in a real fight with a sovereign power that was

calling itself a Jewish state.

So Nazi anti-Semitic rhetoric cannot be placed on the same plane as Hamas's anti-Jewish

rhetoric because one is fighting a war with a self-proclaimed Jewish power.

That's what it calls itself.

And the other was exterminating Jewish people while fighting wars with the Soviets, the British, the Poles, and others who were not self-proclaimed Jewish powers.

So what's your point? So your point is, when you hear rhetoric like kill the boar or kill the Hebrew

as you said, that is not, you can't just abstract that from the context of war if it's

about an armed struggle with an institution and with a state.

As Malema so eloquently said in his court case, Kill the Boer was in reference to, for example,

when the South African police would come into the Bantu stands and beat everyone up and

attack them, even if the police officers were black,

they would still sing kill the Boer in protest because Bore represented the institutional power

of the apartheid state. Likewise, when Hamas is making reference to Jews, they're talking about the institutional

power of the Zionist entity, the IDF, the Israeli police, and so on and so forth.

When in China, in China when the Han went to genocide, the Jia, they said kill the Gia and they killed the Gia.

So I don't I don't I don't do the guy I think that yeah, yeah, even if that's true.

So this is different ways that this can go. So listen listen, King,

hold on, hold on, hold on. Hold on.

Hold on. King. Even if it's true that the Han

genocided the Jia, I haven't looked into that history,

but let's just say it's true.

You're right, it's a completely different context.

It's almost like songs or chants do not preempt material conditions. It's the material conditions

that give context to the song. So if they're saying kill the GIA under entirely different

material conditions than Hamas, then that doesn't mean the outcome is going to be the same just

because it sounds similar what they're saying. That the context is entirely

different. So that's the problem. Yeah, and I think it's important to remember the

goal of the Palestinians and Hamas.

Which is regaining sovereignty over...

And the right of return for Palestinian refugees

across the Middle East.

So they want to eradicate Israel.

Well, if we look at this material, that's not going to happen.

And I think you need to...

Well, I think Israel will be eradicated.

Really? Why is that because, oh, there's bigger countries around it?

Because you're bigger country, daughter? There's bigger countries, peoples, and cultures around it because your bigger country daughter? There's bigger

countries, peoples and cultures around it. That's exactly right. Wait so what

about Ireland then? That's that's kind of out of my ability to foresee.

I mean Northern Ireland's about to leave the UK and by your logic the UK is bigger than

the Republic of Ireland so surely they should just crush the Republic of Ireland right?

If you want what I think in the long term would

be the a possible solution for the British Isles I think an integration of the

British Isles under a new union not the the current British monarchy or the

kingdom I think a completely new integrated union of peoples on a different basis would probably make sense.

I think the reality of your claims is hard is that, you know, the bigger countries argument just doesn't really make sense.

Look, it's been shown nowhere for the Irish struggle is that the Irish people are fighting

for emancipation from the British Empire, right, and Britain, Great Britain,

and the United Kingdom is what we're talking about.

But that doesn't abstract them from the context

of the civilizations of the British Isles.

The Irish people have always been a part of that.

So Irish people, that's also an internal struggle.

That's them fighting the United Kingdom.

That's them fighting the crown.

That's why British revolutionaries had solidarity with the Irish

because they were also fighting the crown.

And they also wanted to have a kind of

people state of the British house and they recognize that's only possible

when these oppressed groups can achieve their emancipation and self-determination.

Then you can form a reunion on the basis of equals

who are respected.

Well, I would actually disagree with that rhetoric.

So the problem is, is when you get these savage groups, such as the Irish and the Palestinians,

your problem is when you're too nice them.

So the legal acts to allow Irish to buy land in Ireland actually was a big problem because

Belfall believed it.

Well, think about how ridiculous that is.

The Irish would be farmed with the Union.

The Irish were not allowed to buy land in Ireland where they live.

What happened to the land they had before?

They were dispossessed.

And that's the whole basis of the struggle.

We owned it.

The Irish were dispossessed of their land.

And their land was robbed and stolen from them.

And they very justly responded to that by trying to regain their land and their dignity.

Yeah, but the thing is the UK made reform, right, because you know, places can make reform, I know you don't believe in that,

but they made reform to allow the Irish by land, they gave gave them 10 times more rights and what ended up happening was the Irish

rose up in the East of rebellion right they if they look at when it shall have

been nice to Palestine the issue the issue with that is that although Irish people had the right to buy land, the majority

of Irish couldn't because they had already been dispossessed of their original land,

proletarianized and basically broke with no prospect of ever acquiring any land.

So that's an issue with that. They never had sovereignty.

And the Irish kept fighting for their freedom and good on them.

They were given reform. Like cow, for example, today in Scotland, you might not know this but they have basically

full power over their country you know places can reform and we can probably

see a reform in the state of Israel but what happens is when you give reform to

these revolutionary groups is at the end of they end up trying

to kill people.

Because reforms do not eliminate the righteous causes of people who are fighting to for a

just cause.

If the Irish want to regain their land, why should they settle for breadcumbs?

Keep on fighting.

At all costs.

At all costs, well, wouldn't you just, but didn't you just agree that they should be a part

of a greater union of the UK?

So, yeah, but a union of free and equal peoples, yes.

And by the way, uh, the English should do as the Irish do and fight the United Kingdom.

They were also dispossessed of their land.

I support the English working class. I support the Welsh working class.

I support the Scottish working class. I support them all fighting for their dignity

against the parasite monarch and the parasite lords and the city of London

which oppresses them.

Well, the Northern Irish, the Welsh and the Scottish Parliament, they all have their,

they actually have more power and control over their countries than England do.

So, you know, we can...

Well, they, what everyone, what everyone has in common, but what everyone has in common is

they are dispossessed. They're dispossessed of any stake in their own homeland.

They don't have any real power, they don't have any real land, they don't have any real

anything.

They're losing their dignity.

All the jobs are becoming what, service sector, its financial elites

are parasitizing the entire aisles.

And it's not...

Hey man, if you want to go work in the pits, you can work in the pits because my great

grandfather did and it was not a nice existence, man.

So if you want to go work in the pits,ars you can go do that it's not a nice existence. Well there's no more

decent jobs for people in the British Isles. Yeah I would actually prefer people

you know work these service jobs rather than dying from

miners' lungs and having a shorter lifespan.

Your countrymen don't agree with you.

Um, I wouldn't exactly agree with that.

They're not happy with the inequality.

They're not, it's not just about inequality.

It's about people who have lost purpose,

they've lost a means of living, decent living,

dignified living.

They've lost an ability to make sense of the world, they've, they lost everything.

I wouldn't, I wouldn't exactly agree with that. I think most people just want free time and

speak with their family and I agree. They want, why can't they have that? They, yeah Yeah well you don't have that in the pits

house like I'm not talking about bringing back pits I'm saying that people are

working bullshit jobs that they shouldn't have to be working.

And the jobs they would have to be working would be not working in pits all day,

but probably working maybe two hours a day, doing actual dignified work that benefits their country and then having free time.

Well, dignified work has been lawyer and having the opportunity to write articles and express your views.

Yeah, but that doesn't feed people. That doesn't feed people. That doesn't feed people. That doesn't feed people that doesn't feed people

that doesn't feed people that doesn't build anything that doesn't do anything

you think books don't build civilizations no they're important but they're not

a foundation you need a foundation of real stuff.

Well, the Chinese can do that for us, but I want to get back on the- Then China will own your country, that's fine, then let China own Britain.

No, China won't own us.

Yeah, they do. If China owns your bridges, and they own your roads and your bridges and your buildings,

they own you.

Nope.

Nope.

We own them because we'll feed opium to them.

We did the last time.

But let's get back to the Israeli-Padistian question.

You'll get nuked.

Anyway, anything else? So the Israeli Palestine question is what I want to get back to.

As we saw before with your Muslim friend and your Muslim brother,

I don't know what you call it in Islam is like,

it's a good word for brother in Christ, I don't know.

Let's just calm our friendly guy from Western Sahara.

Yeah, you're Muslim friends.

I think he shows and he represents the views of all you Muslim.

I disagree. I don't think he does.

I don't think he does. There's a reason there's leaders. There's a reason the Muslim world has leaders or the Arab world has leaders, educated people who know what they're talking about.

Your average person is not very nuanced about anything.

That's why they're not a leader.

You talk to leaders, and I talk to them in private.

I think he just sold the truth.

I know you're like a westernized Arab and you're not very in touch with you.

No, no, I talked to you're educated leaders of society from Lebanon. I talked to them and I talked to them in private so they don't bullshit me. And they do not hate Jews.

They have no problem with Jews.

My parents had, were very good friends with Jews.

A lot of family friends.

Some of our closest family friends were Jewish.

I think, I think Lebanon is a special case. No it's not because we're Shiite.

It's a special case. It's not because we're Shiites. We're not Maronites. We're not the subversives in

Lebanon. We know we're not like the Maronites who are civilized. We're like the Genubi Shiites who are wild and savage, as you would say. So, Lebanon's not an exception in that case.

Well, I think you say this, but then what we see on the streets in London and New York

when you know the Arabs come out to protest is you know they shine death to Palestine

and the way the first attack.

How about you do that when there's no terrorist attack? But no, you do when there is a terrorist attack, so.

I don't know what you're talking about, but if you, if you, you'll sit there and say you love Jews,

then you'll sit there and say you love Jews when Jews have just been slaughtered.

Okay. So if you're upset that people are protesting because they're outraged of how Palestinians are treated,

if this is how people in Britain were treated or people in a white country were treated,

then you would also be outraged. So it's just natural.

Well, I would argue that there is a, there is a motive within the media of Western countries such as the BBC and etc of defending

Palestine I've noticed this trend within you know these they do it

journalistic they don't do that they are obsessed with you the palace I do

do that it's because of public pressure there's no other reason

what you mean public pressure there's no other reason.

What you mean public pressure? Like the BBC doesn't really suffer with much public pressure. They're state on... Oh yeah, the Muslim Diaspora, if you call

them that, they're very aggressive and they will boycott, you protest you, and yeah,

they're very organized online, so that's a lot of pressure. There's a reason like Kylie Jenner or whoever had to delete a post

praising Israel because you'll get bombarded on social media and canceled

so to speak by the Muslim mob.

So, and also just genuine public opinion even without the Muslims.

I mean, no one can look at what goes on in Gaza and justify.

No one can do it.

So you support cancer culture?

No, I'm just saying it's not tenable.

When it benefits you.

I'm not supporting it. I'm saying it's to be expected.

But you sit here and cry about being censored by the means, yeah, Jackson Hinkle getting censored.

Whenever people are censored, you're perfectly far from it.

They're not being censored, but they're not able to get away with defending crimes

without a huge backlash just like if if BBC went and went on public and said

that they support pedophilia there'd be a backlash that's not cancel culture

it's be a backlash. It's not cancel culture, it's just a backlash. The backlash?

I mean you can't compare this to...

Well, if let's say there was a bunch of white children being slaughtered and bombed

and killed and starved, you know BBC supported it they would get a huge backlash.

Well I think all people deserve backlash for your crimes you know sitting here defending Palestine after there's been a fucking terrorist attack.

You know, look, we're going to have to wrap this up, but here's what I want to say.

I don't believe in your heart of hearts you actually believe this.

I think you know that defending Israel takes a lot of convoluted and contrived reasoning

that's just not organic.

And I know it's kind of a contrarian position maybe, but I know in your heart of hearts, you know what the situation is, I know what the situation is, and there's no way around it.

There's no way to just be too nice. I think they've just been too nice. That's the problem with Israel today.

They've been way too nice after an invasion.

Exactly.

I think...

I think...

As Donald Trump says, wipe him out.

Wipe him out.

Okay, well, don't talk about morality then.

That helps you sleep at night.

It helps you sleep at night.

But... The rest of the world disagrees with

you and there's a reason for that.

The rest of all doesn't disagree with you, you know.

All right, well go on Chinese social media and share your opinions, see what they think.

What China supports you state solution. And they think. But China supports two-state solution.

And they do not support, they do not come out and start supporting Hamas as to fucking terrorist attacks.

Chinese social media is full of...

You don't even support Hamas.

Chinese social media seems to.

Chinese social media, but I'm not on fucking Wichat.

I live in the West.

I don't do not be.

I've seen Waibeau and Wichat, and it seems like people

are saying wipe Israel off the map

because of their crimes.

Okay, look a few fucking Chinese people, it doesn't bother me.

I've seen Israelis.

I've seen Indians, like our nation 1.4 billion people.

No, Indians definitely.

You're right. India is probably an exception, but the rest of the

world, Latin America, Asia, Russia, a lot of Europe.

No, that's not anything true.

Even a lot of young liberals.

Richard, wait, Russia, a lot of people in Russia support Israel.

So what, what are you talking about?

There's a lot of Ashkenazi Jews that migrated from.

And they, and there's right people in Russia who support Ukraine, what's your point?

Anyway, we gotta wrap this up because I have to take a shit.

So.

All right, man. Well, you got defeated tonight and I think you should reflect upon your views by three different people.

I disagree with your assessment, but okay. You can claim that.

All right, man. Anyway, good night.

All right, guys, I gotta take a shit.

I'll, uh, see y'all.

See y'all tomorrow.

I know I'm ending it kind of early, but it's almost four hours, you know.

I really have to shit though.

I'm not even kidding.

Like I straight up to. Okay. I really have to shit though I'm not even kidding like I straight up do okay I straight up do guys I straight up do guys I'll see you

later all right see you bye bye

to see tomorrow See them all.