🔴 THE AMERICAN COMMUNIST PARTY IS HERE

Welcome, everyone, for another IGG stream.

That's what we have to call it now.

To clarify exactly, we see the infrared globe is here, so it's an infrared stream.

But hope everyone's having a great evening.

Just kidding, I don't really care.

You know, I don't know who you are.

Anyway, anyway.

We have a lot of things to discuss today.

I'd like to talk about the founding vision of the American Communist Party.

I'd like to talk about some of the things that inspired it, some of the

Things that motivated us to this, and on another point, I want to get out of the way another pressing matter, which is.

Exactly how we strategized in the year or so building up to the launch of ACP.

How we basically planned for contingencies, which they're not really contingencies, they're inevitabilities.

And the primary one is the most common tactic.

Thank you so much, Alec and Rayleigh, whatever.

Appreciate it.

The most common tactic that's employed by federal agencies, by the DNC, by think tanks.

I'm not going to lie to you and say we know who's behind it.

Of course, we don't.

We just uh I'm just not personally convinced that it's all organic.

That's all.

I'm not convinced that it's organic.

The personalities that are involved in this, what is their motivation?

There's like no personal beef, if you can believe it, as far as I know.

Uh and I'll more on that in a second, but

They have motivations which are just not clear.

They're telling lies.

These lies are going viral on a daily basis.

By the way, have you guys noticed that?

It's been four days since we launched.

Every single day, there's a new lie they come up with.

First, it was the accusation that we had a cryptocurrency.

That got squashed, like immediately.

But it still went viral.

Now there's a new thing that they're trying to have go viral.

It already kind of went semi-viral, which is they're trying to say that our website, acp.us, is run by a CIA professor in Georgetown.

Um

So, you know, I'm not going to spend time talking about these that much.

But what I am going to talk about is how you'll notice that it's a daily recurrence that lies about the American Communist Party, whatever they are.

I mean, how could we foresee these lies?

We can't.

They make them up.

on the spot and they go viral, and I'll leave it up to you to decide whether you think that's organic or not.

When a cursory investigation, just a minimal, minimal critical scrutiny, reveals them to be bold faced lies.

See, when it came to personalities, Hazaldeen, Jackson Hinkle, Eddie Liger.

etcetera, etcetera, that was a different matter.

Um, we were personalities, so it's just you believe it or you don't.

It's that kind of thing.

But when you're making actionable claims about an organization that all of us really take seriously, really believe in, really put a lot of work into, and are committed to putting a lot of work into, you're entering a new territory.

It's not the same.

The individuals who have harassed us for years, if they think they're going to do that same thing to our party and get away with it and make actionable defamatory statements that are outright demonstrable lies, knowingly make these lies, by the way, we're not going to tolerate it.

Before the American Communist Party was announced, before the meeting that we had in Chicago.

We made sure that we had licensed attorneys that were on board with our initiative.

And yes, we have a legal department.

And to explain to you exactly how it works, there is a seven-person executive board of which I'm a part of and of the I am the chairman of.

Okay.

And then under that, there's a Politburo, which is deputized with different roles and tasks.

The legal department falls under the authority of a member of a polit of the Politburo.

And that legal department is responsible for s uh several I don't want to be technical 'cause it's not seven, but it's more than a few licensed attorneys who are responsible for this.

So I I'm I'm telling you this because I want I want to make clear that

As we keep getting a barrage of defamatory and false statements about the American Communist Party, the purpose behind which is to muddy the waters and fedjacket us and attack our reputation, attack our credibility and delegitimize us, we are handling that legally.

And we already have our legal department on it.

And they're taking care of it.

And we have the resources.

Thanks in part to you guys and your generous support for infrared over the years.

We have the resources.

We have the resources to pursue this.

And we have every intention to pursue it.

And I won't say much more than that.

Just wait and see.

We will absolutely pursue this to the very end.

and the very existence and the honor of the party

Is attached to that motivation, meaning there is no way we're going to proceed as a party without defending our honor in the public as a legal party.

And we're going to defend our honor.

I care about this party.

I don't treat this party in the same way that I treat my personal ego.

I am loyal to this party.

I will dedicate my entire life, my entire every fiber of my being to this party.

And I am not going to allow anyone to publicly defame us and violate our rights.

To defend our reputation and standing in the public, I am not going to let them lie and defame my party, our party.

I'm not going to let it happen.

I put my life on this.

I put every fiber of my being on this.

Period.

It's not going to happen.

This is not, they're not going to do what they did to Jackson and me and to Infrared to this party.

Now, everyone is free to criticize the American Communist Party.

You're free to make fun of us.

You're free to make fun of how we look and how we dress.

And you're free to speculate.

And you're free to have opinions.

You're even free to speculate like an idiot and make stupid speculations.

But you cannot make defamatory and actionable claims and present them as fact.

You can't do that.

I've consulted extensively with our legal department on this question, and I myself have utmost confidence in their ability to pursue this to the end.

Point blank, and they will.

Crass, Bryce, what's going on, guys?

Uh we will defend the honor and the reputation of this party.

Again, anyone is free to to to speculate and whatever, but you can't literally just present lies as fact.

You can't say that we got our website from a guy named Burton, who's a CIA agent.

First of all, I didn't even know who owned the domain until yesterday when I had to ask our website guy, okay?

And I find out it's some random guy named Ben who's owned the domain for 20 years until we bought it from them what is it, two months ago, two months ago or so.

So

The fact that I had to find out about this is ridiculous and it's absurd.

It's just an absurdity.

It's ridiculous.

And that's precisely why we let the legal team handle these kinds of things.

Because it's a waste of our breath and it's a waste of our energy.

And that's the intention behind it.

What these feds want us to, when I say these feds, I mean the probable bad faith actors that are behind these stupid claims.

And yes, they're barefaced, stupid claims that are going viral.

The intention is to distract us from the more pressing work of combating the far right and that ideology.

You see, all we are are a strong left-wing force.

And bad faith actors don't like that.

You know who's smiling right now is Nick Fuentes and all these scumbags.

They're smiling because we're dealing with these fake, whatever they call themselves, pan leftists, who are in reality fascist collaborators and nothing else.

And that's exactly what they are.

And this is a huge distraction.

That's why we're making it a legal matter.

Because the honor and the reputation of the party is non-negotiable.

You can hit us for things we're guilty of.

You can hit us for things we've done.

We haven't done anything as a party.

We've done nothing as a party.

So, four days later, they make up and fabricate lies to right off the bat try to kill us in our cradle.

And, ladies and gentlemen, let me tell you, that's what they're trying to do.

They are trying to kill this in its cradle.

And we're not going to stand for it.

We're simply not.

They don't understand.

This is not some casual thing.

This is something we're going to fight for.

I don't know about you, but I will fight for the American Communist Party.

I will fight in a legal, nonviolent manner.

I will fight for this party with every fiber of my being.

I will fight for it.

I believe in this.

I actually believe in this.

Amilo with the 10, what's going on?

I mean this is the party we've been waiting for, the American Communist Party.

And on a final note, before I talk, I don't want to bask in negativity, so I'll just leave this on a final note.

Even if it were somehow true.

that the American Communist Party in its current constitution, in its current form, where somehow everything they're accusing us.

They claim we're a crypto scam, whatever.

Even if all of that was true,

Even if one day, somehow, you know, in a fantastical scenario, all of that, it's math, it's physically not possible.

But even if it one day were to be proven true, you know what your duty would be as a communist?

To reconstitute the American Communist Party, just as we've reconstituted the CPUSA, and that would be your solemn duty.

It would change nothing, it should not change your faith in the possibility of a communist party, and that is really what we're being attacked for.

K Croat, even if we were bad, the leaders and founders of this, that should not change your belief in the possibility of this party.

And it would be incumbent upon you to reconstitute and re-found the party just as we have.

But just make sure you prove it.

Make sure you prove it with hard evidence first.

And that's precisely in that capacity we're going to defend ourselves.

You see, Kimball with the 10.

See, notice in our declaration, we don't claim the CPUSA are feds.

We can speculate about the likelihood of that, but we ultimately don't have solid proof of it.

What we do have proof of, and extensive documentation of, is that, in our estimation, they pulled off a coup at the 32nd National Convention.

They unconstitutionally crushed the petition movement.

So these are indisputable facts.

which are on record.

These are indisputable facts

Do I think that there's a probability the CPUSA are bad faith actors who work for the DNC and feds?

Yeah, but I can't just claim that as fact and say, oh, their website like I can't just make things up.

All I could do is speculate.

You understand?

That's what honor means.

That's what conducting yourself in an honorable way actually means.

And

What pe see, look, what people are after right now is the hope that you're feeling and the belief that you have in this.

You don't believe in a few personalities.

You believe in an American Communist Party.

Nobody else is doing it.

We did it.

No one else.

We did it.

We did it.

You know these cowards are afraid of putting the word communist even in the name of their organizations.

We're not.

We are being attacked because we had the courage to reconstitute the CPUSA.

We had the courage to do that.

And that's why we're being attacked.

And if our enemies succeeded and in some fantastical scenario we all died or disappeared overnight,

They would not even make an inch of progress in the direction of their own self-proclaimed and self-stated goals.

Not even an inch in the direction of progress.

They would just tear each other apart even more.

Because that's what they were designed to do.

Wreck, wreck, wreck, destroy, destroy, destroy.

As far as the left wing is concerned, but build nothing.

Build nothing.

Meanwhile, the far right is gaining traction and gaining steam in this country on an unprecedented scale, okay?

And people who are underestimating it are the same people who underestimated Elite Arrow.

Wow.

What's up, Elite Arrow?

Elite Arrow, what's going on?

Elite Arrow's great, just great, great per great guy all around.

Great guy all around.

I don't know him, but he's a great guy, I could tell.

I could tell.

There's just uh there's an instinct within me that could just tell.

Anyway anyway, um

So

Let me uh let me clarify something.

Uh

They don't want there to be a strong and robust left wing in this country or in any western country.

They want there to be a strong far-right opposition and a weak left, which is not even a real left, but is just this kind of psyop that runs cover for the DNC and the neoliberal class.

That's what they want.

If you notice, they are all terrified of a strong left wing.

Okay, Nick Fuentes, these far-right guys, and the liberal leftists, as you can see now.

It's missing from the equation of their false dialectic.

It's just missing.

It's just missing.

And there's a reason for that because what we represent is an inconvenient truth, one that directly names the root causes.

of the contradictions fully on display to everyone, ravaging our society,

but which no one has the courage to admit.

And now that Kamala Harris is running for president, who I suppose is more popular than Biden for reasons that evade me beyond the simple explanation, which is that people are just not very smart and they just see Kamala Harris and I guess she's younger than Biden is.

And I guess what?

I mean, why are people pretending she wasn't vice president during the Gaza genocide?

That's, by the way, still ongoing.

Why are people pretending like she is somehow better than Biden?

I don't know where that comes from.

Where does it come from?

In any case,

That's why I suspect it's possible there's DNC involvement in this.

Because the DNC is thinking that Kamala Harris is going to re-energize all of these trendy leftists, I guess.

And then here we come on the day of Biden's resignation, and it's a huge slap in the face to them.

But, I mean, I just don't see the responses to this being organic.

I don't.

And the reason is because they're so irrational.

Why are people.

I mean, I guess that maybe there's a Lacanian psychoanalytic explanation, but just why are people so addicted to the black pill?

Why are they so addicted to believing that this couldn't possibly be a sincere and authentic initiative?

What about this cynicism is just so appealing and attractive to people?

Why do they want to be so hopeless and cynical?

Is it because they don't want to get scammed?

I mean, but but why don't they actually just rationally investigate the claims that they're buying into and hyping up?

I understand the need to be vigilant, like I totally get that.

But why don't you actually do your due diligence and really try to investigate the things that these people are trying to say about us?

Because upon minimal scrutiny it all collapses.

Brie did this.

None of us knew about it.

Bree literally I don't know ex I don't know the terminology.

She found it in the code of the site or the domain or whatever.

Where it was actually in Jackson's name the whole time when it was just refreshed.

That's all you would have had to do.

That's all you had to do.

It's that simple.

The who who is stuff, there's a the the whois stuff is so so our site guy explained it to me like this.

There's a bunch of websites that don't that try to mirror these public registrars or these who is websites, and a lot of them don't update.

They don't update when they mirror something to do with mirroring, I forget.

So we had to call support yesterday.

I didn't call them, but I had him call support to fix the problem.

I'm not a tech guy, but it's something like that.

Am I getting it correct?

Okay, the guy is in the chat.

Are you okay with me saying who it is that's telling me this?

Or now.

Yeah, okay, it's Darg.

Okay, Darg is the one who knows about this stuff, and he's the one I had to actually message and contact.

Like, who is this Burton guy?

Guys, I saw that shit and was like, Darg, what is this?

Like, what is going on?

Who is Burton?

This actual CIA.

I'm like, what is this?

And he's like, no, it's actually, it's a guy named Ben.

And I'm like, what?

Why would someone post such an easily actionable claim that's just a fabricated lie?

Even I'm...

I fall for the big lie sometimes where it's like a lie so egregious, so so it takes so much like dishonor and dishonesty to construct that like a normal person couldn't even fathom the possibility that someone would lie like this.

And even I initially was like, I didn't believe it, but I just like had questions.

You know, I was like, what is this?

Um anyway, uh again, that stuff is gonna be handled in courts.

And yes, we have the resources to do it.

Yes, we have multiple licensed attorneys on board.

Who are members of the party and are acting in their capacity as party I mean, as as the legal department of the party.

Members of the party I that's those details.

We haven't sorted out exactly.

But they're acting as the you know, the the lawyers of the party, more or less.

He needs to pronounce egregious.

Egregious.

I'm a guy who reads, I don't listen to lectures.

Anyway

I'm like a caveman, basically, who had has books, but and all I could do is read the books, and I can s I just have the books.

That's it.

All right.

It's like uh post apocalyptic scene it's like a post apocalyptic scenario, like in Fallout New Vegas when uh s when Czar thought it was Kesar or something 'cause it wa 'cause there's a C.

He didn't know that the C was actually functioning as an S.

Anyway.

Uh yeah.

But you get but at least you get the point, that's what matters, right?

At least you get the point and you understand what I'm trying to say.

I pronounce hegemony wrong.

You know, that that much I don't believe, okay?

It's hegemony.

Hegemony?

Is it hegemony?

Because if that's what it is, I won't use that word because it sounds stupid when you say it like that.

It's hegemony, right?

Oh no, what is it?

No, I do pronounce it right.

Yeah, hegemony.

Okay, that's how I've always said it.

I've never said hegemony, I've never said hegemony.

I do have a problem with below though, that's so true.

I always for some reason I spell below with two L's, so it's actually bellow, like a the bellowing of a whale or something.

But below is a word I still, I guess, from the kindergarten age.

I'm in my, I'm stuck in some kindergarten.

Problem where I just can't get over that one spelling word.

I'm constantly failing every test.

Anyway, uh

Yeah, the the infamous MAGA Communist typo.

Yeah.

Anyway guys, uh I want to talk about the founding vision of the party.

Enough of this negativity stuff.

Let's talk about the positives.

Uh

Pronounce coeirs.

Coers.

Coerce.

Coeers.

Coerce?

Coerce.

It's coerce, is it not?

It's either coerce or coerce.

I don't know which one.

Coerce.

Coerce.

Got it.

Got it.

Yeah, this is not the subject of the stream tonight, sorry.

No, but I want to talk about um Marxism-Leninism and what what does that mean exactly for the party and and how we see it.

And Slava, what's going on?

If you guys don't know, Slava is a

Politburo member of the party as of now.

From what I've been told, at least.

Slava is a member of the Politburo.

Not just a member, but a member of the Politburo.

So very welcome and grateful and glad to have Slava on board.

Um

What was I gonna say?

How we see Marxism-Leninism, and I've touched upon this briefly before.

And a lot of this is the subject of my upcoming book, not the Manifesto of the Party, but my actual book.

So um

Firstly, what what are the the five heads of Marxism?

And the interesting thing about the five heads of Marxism is that the last head, which is Mao.

Can gi can uh has created the precedent for kind of infinitely new synthesises of Marxism.

So under the head of Mao, you have Deng Xiaoping.

You could have um Xi Jinping, and there's even people in between that, if you can believe it, because they're all part of the process by which Chinese Marxism is being synthesized across history.

But we broadly compartmentalize that under Mao.

Because they're still within the kind of Mao Zedong thought paradigm, at least in my view.

But what does it mean for there to be a synthesis?

And what is the status of these thinkers?

We call them heads, but what are they?

And in my view, they're not philosophers.

In my view, they represent a different type of relationship between thought and reality, and therefore between thought and itself, which is different from philosophy in the sense that

It's not a relationship between thought and the form of thought, or vice versa.

It's a relationship between.

um thought, the mind and

Some kind of gr more um

more uh determinate historical reality.

Now why do I say determinate?

Not not my intention to gibber.

I hope a five year old can understand this.

Well, because in the Marxist view,

There isn't just a dichotomy between forms as thought and a kind of formless, chaotic reality of pure content and pure flux and whatever.

Rather, the uh h um the mode of production and the social relations of production and history at large, a given kind of integral

um historical era, if you will, is determinate.

And although it's not the ex uh um the expression of a divine mind or a divine logos, it is determinate and in some sense it has form.

Such was Stalin's uh explicit view when it came to the national question, by the way.

But is it form in the same way that Plato meant it?

Well, not quite, but it's form in the sense that it is determinate.

It is a determinate way.

Maybe there's a proximity there to the the Tao or the Tao.

Everyone is conflicted as far as how that is worded.

Tao or Tao, what is a D or a T, I don't know.

But it's a it's a specific way in which material reality is constituted.

Um my former uh occult uh teacher from the Sarmoon Brotherhood.

Um, you know, from the uh the Iranian Sufi occult order, the architectonic order of the Eskaton.

Uh Reza Nagarstani, he has a book called Intelligence and Spirit.

Where he kind of fleshes out this Hegelian notion of intelligence, right?

Because it's a word a lot of people use, but they don't conceptually have a very weak grasp as far as what that word means.

Where intelligence refers to something collective, intelligence is something actually at work in reality somehow.

And this view is idealistic, and he, in that book, proudly avows it as such.

But Marxism doesn't simply reject this Hegelian view of the kind of rationality of history, the kind of

The external kind of collective suppra individual mind, right?

We just don't regard it as a mind, but it is still something.

That's the kind of deeper point.

It it is still something.

It's just not a mind.

In fact, a mind.

In reference to this something, is still too methodologically individualistic.

When Hegel uses the words reason and mind and understanding and so on and so on, he is using methodologically individualistic terms which ultimately refer to some individual thinker.

And this is the philosopher's god, basically.

That's the individual in question.

But it's clearly not an individual.

It's something supra-individual, something collective.

And precisely what that is, and what it refers to, marks.

uh worded and named as communism itself, as this kind of it's sort of an equivalent to this logos underlying reality itself, but it's not a logos.

But as far as what it is, Marx will say it is a kind of

Um

It is a kind of um

It is a kind of uh

relationship between man uh to man or or to woman more specifically as species being.

Species being being a a specific type of being

Which is commensurate with its own particularity, its own.

Well, I wouldn't say exclusive, but its own particular existence, right?

Its particular essence.

It's in accords with that essence, right?

And the essence being something particular, right?

So, this is the meaning of species being in Marx.

Now in any case uh

This is what Marx means by the human, by the way.

By the human, Marx is not actually talking about some kind of ideal of man.

He's not talking about some kind of pretense of universal man as the idea of man or what man ought to be or what man should be.

By mankind, by the human, Marx is referring to a relationship, a relationship which is suspended in the process of reproduction.

The epitome of that relationship, according to Marx, is the relation of man and woman, right?

Which is literally the relationship that gives rise to the birth of and the

the um well, the reproduction of human beings, right?

But Marx extends this relationship also to the um

to the subsistence and sustenance of mankind, how it produces its existence, how it survives, how it, you know, acquires shelter, how it acquires food, how it acquires um

you know, uh clothing and so on and so on.

So that is Marx's critique of idealism, I guess.

The critique of idealism was not the view that there are forms d or determinate things in reality.

The opposition to idealism rather lied in the view that these determinate things take on the consistency of a thought or a given form of thought, rather.

So what does it actually mean for there to be a kind of

Uh what so so drawing from this how does Marx how does Marx justify his synthesis within Marxism-Leninism or rather how do we justify Marx's inclusion in it as we know Marx was no statesman um

So, was Marx just a philosopher?

Well, first of all, no.

Marx is the closest of everyone within the canon of Marxism-Leninism to philosophy.

But his inclusion is defined precisely by his naming and his discovery of the object which is beyond the threshold of philosophy, which is the immediate object.

which initiates the process by which the mind and the intellect becomes involved in its own historical premises.

That's why Marx is named Prometheus.

The comparison to Prometheus is that Prometheus stole fire from the gods and gave the fire to humanity.

But the gods in question, as far as Marx is concerned, is the realm of philosophy.

And Marx is taking something from the realm of philosophy, namely the supreme principle of Logos, and he is returning it to mankind as it actually exists, and in particular, mankind as the proletariat.

He is taking the fire.

The Heraclitian fire, I can't s pro whatever, the the proper uh way of describing a fire belonging to Heraclitus, he's taking that and he's bequeathing that to mankind.

uh something that was the pure province of the philosophers.

So this is what Marx's first gesture is.

And in doing so, Marx begins the process by which thought is related to reality in a way that actually affects reality.

But the principal manner by which Marx affected reality, beyond his actual involvement in the proletarian movement, which he was involved with, we shouldn't discount that.

But that wasn't his principal achievement.

His principal achievement lied in something else.

His principal achievement lied in capital, producing capital.

So Marx's contribution to the synthesis proves that in order to be part of the synthesis of Marxism-Leninism, you don't necessarily have to be a statesman, or it doesn't necessarily have to be earned on the basis of.

Of having a political savviness in general, even organizing movements.

But it does have to affect and alter the fabric of history itself.

It does have to alter, to use an inappropriate kind of phrase, the intelligence of history.

It has to affect and shape that in some kind of way.

And Marx did precisely do that because Marx was the word.

He was the word, the first word, the first text of the workers' movement.

Capital was like

Like the scripture of the the workers' movement that took off kind of in Marx's later life and after he died.

He was the first person to name the symptom.

In precisely as Lacan said and meant.

So that's Marx's inclusion.

Marx, the Prometheus.

Uh Engels, how did Engels contribute to the unique synthesis uh of Marxism-Leninism?

That was similar in in a similar way as Marx.

Engels was not a statesman, and he was not, his primary contribution was not any kind of political savvy, and so on and so on.

But why is Engels distinct from Marx, though?

I would say Engels is primarily distinct from Marx because of his works like The Dialectics of Nature, right?

What Engels is doing is he is um

He is uh uh he is uh initiating the process by which the very same outlook discovered principally by Marx uh could be applied to modern science and technology and so on and so on.

And it's Engels for whom that paradigm becomes strongly emphasized.

Uh

Engels is also known for many other kinds of works, the origin of the family, the rise of early Christianity, so on and so on.

He he was in a sense a kind of also he simplified Marx's thinking in more than a number a few works of his, right?

But uh

The thread bearing all this in common is that Engels applies Marx's insight into reality in a way that is scientific and empirical.

And and um

Not exclusively.

Capital is also scientific and empirical, but it's something much more than that.

That's the thing.

It's something much, much more than that.

With Marx's notion of commodity fetishism and so on and so on.

In Capital, Marx establishes a clear relationship between thought, the form of thought and the form of reality itself.

And he establishes that very clearly in Capital, in addition to yielding the kinds of empirical and economic insights that he is.

He's establishing, first of all, a way in which the mind can be related to and connected with its economic premises.

Um

And uh of course Marx and Engels are inseparable.

So Engels' inclusion within the synthesis is inexorably connected with Marx's inclusion.

Now um

Uh with Lenin.

What is Lenin's primary contribution to the synthesis of Marxism?

Now, that is a long story.

It's precisely Stalin who synthesizes Marxism-Leninism in his book Foundations of Leninism, where he precisely lays out precisely how that was.

But Lenin, let's be clear though, to simplify it.

His inclusion in the synthesis of Marxism-Leninism, which he is the first synthesis of Marxism-Leninism.

I mean, he's the first person to s for uh that it's actually formally synthesized.

You could s we could we in order to justify Marx and Engels' inclusion, it's kind of retroactive or um retro spec retrospective, how you say it.

But Lenin is the first person who in reality

leads to this synthesis in reality.

Why not the Social Democrats?

Yeah, but I'll tell you why, precisely because the Social Democrats couldn't synthesize Marxism and relate it to their practical political activity.

There was a kind of cognitive dissonance that was there from the very beginning that in ma as a matter of fact actually gives rise to revisionism much b much before uh World War One.

For example, Bernstein and so on and so on.

So that's why the Social Democrats were still a little bit confused about what Marxism actually was, let's say.

Now uh Lenin connects Marxism with political authority.

He connects it with the method by which political authority is founded in the first place, in the form of the party form.

Um

He connects Marxism with the broad the the formal aim of social democracy, the unity of Marxism and the workers' movement.

Well Lenin expands that on a much g grander scale.

It's the unity of Marxism with uh with the the whole of civilization itself, right, in the form of this huge majority peasantry.

So Lenin's synthesis of Marxism-Leninism is based in this kind of directly political, practical, historical contribution.

Now Stalin's inclusion, I think actually Stalin himself would contest, which he did contest to the extent of my knowledge within his lifetime.

Stalin avowed himself only as a student of Lenin.

Which is why they didn't call it Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, although Kojev liked to call it that.

Uh Stalin's uh inclusion

First of all, he formally synthesizes Marxism-Leninism in the writing of Foundations of Leninism.

As the faithful student of Leninism, he realizes Lenin's contribution in ways that Lenin himself did not live long enough to foresee or expect.

He he was very ambiguous about what his legacy would amount to himself, and Stalin realizes that in a specific way.

But if you want the TLDR, it's socialism in one country.

That is really the groundbreaking contribution of Stalin, the precedent that he sets socialism in one country and his writings on the national question and his understanding of the relationship between Marxism and form in general, the dialectic of form, which is in na that's that's really the essence of the national question, by the way.

The national question is about the form of class struggle, which is national, right?

So, this is Stalin's.

There's much more, but this is kind of a way to simplify it.

Now, Mao is.

This is like explaining rocket science probably.

Um

Because

I I want to explain this in a way that doesn't sound like

Badou bullshit, like but which is kind of true though, that he introduces infinity into Marxism.

Which is true, but um how do you make that more concrete, you know?

Well, what Mao contributes to the synthesis of uh

Marxism-Leninism is that he fully emancipates.

Within the kernel of Marxism Leninism

An essence

Uh from the limited form that it takes.

that still borrowed in many ways from social democracy.

Mao's contribution is about the refounding of Communist Party authority from scratch in an environment where, in contrast to Russia's combined and uneven development,

The existence, the real, I mean, realized existence of a proletariat is negligible, right?

So, on what basis could Communist Party authority and existence and organization be founded on in such circumstances?

By emancipating Marxism and Marxism-Leninism at large,

from the pretense of having a clearly defined conceptual or i I should rather say empirical referent, tangible empirical referent in a readily constituted uh proletariat,

Mao discovers a deeper essence of the proletariat, which could actually be applied in countries where one has not yet come into existence in a tangible or definite way.

And this is what is meant actually by the cynicization of Marxism.

The unique conditions that they attribute to be unique conditions of China, which make the

traditional application of Marxism, which I mean you could say something similar about Lenin in Russia as well, but even in Russia, Russia still had a factory proletariat.

It's just that Lenin pursued a different strategy for that proletariat.

But notice how Mao is more advanced than Lenin.

Because if you look at the events of the October Revolution and the Civil War, the Socialist Revolutionaries had to be liquidated, and they represented an element that was missing in Bolshevism, that had to be absorbed in Bolshevism, which it was the left SRs that got absorbed into the Bolshevik movement.

Um that alliance was necessary, um, very necessary.

To constitute an alliance between the proletariat and the peasantry.

But what Mao does is he consolidates support among the peasantry itself.

Directly, the Communist Party of China having its basis in the peasants.

without a need to make an alliance with some kind of authorita a separate authority representing them.

So uh Mao's synthesis of Marxism-Leninism.

Corresponds to the political history of Mao's rule within China.

And in particular, Mao's understanding of the continuation of class struggle and class contradictions under socialism itself, which is, by the way, related to this kind of

broad, more broad kind of way I'm characterizing Mao's contribution.

The continuation of contradictions under socialism or class struggle under socialism appears to be baffling and mysterious when in consideration of the fact that by the time uh the Cultural Revolution begins, there is no clear bourgeoisie.

And if there is, it's definitely not one that has any influence or power.

There is also no clear status of the proletariat.

I mean, there's a factory

There is a a strata of society that's working in factories, but can they really be called proletarians when they the factories they're working in are state owned and so on and so on?

So and and and and um

The proletarian cultural revolution, it's waged in a in great bulk in the countryside, right?

So.

How how how could the notion of the continuation of class struggle within China, or w under socialism, I should rather say, be justified?

Well, what Mao understands and what Mao recognizes is

That class struggle is not

Um

is not reducible to the form of a of a conflict between, let's say, two tangible parties.

That class struggle refers to a dialectical tension and contradiction that is at the heart and the founding and the constitution of any modern state or society.

Even before we can say there is a readily formed proletariat or or bourgeoisie, it's actually the contradiction that preexists the formation of these definite classes.

And this is what is discovered in the Cultural Revolution.

What is the object of proletarian consciousness really?

What does it mean to realize socialism correctly?

What is the dictatorship of the proletari?

This was a movement, by the way, toward i the end of his life, Mao himself initiates.

Uh, the movement of like what did Lenin mean by a dictatorship over the bourgeoisie?

What did he mean by the fact that, for example, the bourgeoisie constantly is reproducing itself at every minute, at every day, at the thresholds of society, at the furthest thresholds of society, whatever that quote is.

Well, what he meant by that is that the symptom, let's call it of capitalism, can't be pinned down.

on the actual tangible form of capitalism, that it refers to a a a level of the development of civilization and society

and a specific dialectical tension, whose development, as the Cultural Revolution itself proved,

Could not be um

could not be uh reduced

Uh to any kind of political form.

Like even if you have a proletarian dictatorship and a socialist state,

You have not really addressed the root causes of what is called capitalism.

So the profound conclusion of Mao

at least implicitly, with Deng Xiaoping it's explicit, is that a proletarian dictatorship can only oversee the correct development historically of society, but it cannot politically legislate this.

And socialism is born of not a kind of ideological project to be imposed upon reality.

but a tendency that arises from reality itself, one which includes the birth pangs of capitalism that preceded it.

And these these birth pangs cannot be legislated away.

So for Mao this uh implies

An understanding of Marxism, socialism, capitalism, the proletarian class, the bourgeoisie, and so on and so on.

which i which is finally liberated from the kind of methodological individualism or substantialism of let's call it vulgar Marxism, from social democracy.

He acknowledges that

the reality of a mode of production is is processual.

It's not based in some kind of empirically tangible form that's static or definite.

It's more of a processual kind of uh literally a mode of production.

Um one again which cannot be

determined or legislated voluntarily.

but represents something objective.

So, that class struggle continues under socialism, and the lesson of the Cultural Revolution proves this, doesn't mean that that struggle has to be antagonistic.

It doesn't mean that there is a group of people who have to be destroyed and liquidated, and this is how class struggle will manage.

This is Lenin's Klaus Vitsian class struggle as applied in Russia, which you could say was correct for the time, right?

But

Mao represents a more refined and a more developed understanding of Marxism, where class struggle does not necessarily directly correspond to Klaswitzian warfare.

It's an indirect relationship.

Right?

That's why Mao develops the notion of primary and secondary contradictions.

And in the face of imperialism, class struggle is a secondary contradiction.

Or am I getting those reversed?

I always get them reversed, I think.

R regardless, the the the the antagonistic contradiction was imperialism, the one that has to manifest itself as political warfare.

Whereas class struggle can be dealt with through the wise governance and effective leadership of a Communist Party, which can suppress the emergence of a proletari of a bourgeois class by reaffirming the integrity of the party authority, which is the proletarian dictatorship.

See, in China today, I'm not exactly sure if they

Accept of the view that class struggle still exists in China.

Um I think it's a contentious notion to the extent of my understanding.

But the way I see it is that yes, it's still there, but it doesn't take an antagonistic form.

The class struggle takes a more passive form through the integrity and sovereignty of the state itself, the party dictatorship itself, which keeps at bay and suppresses the possibility that there could emerge a bourgeois class.

Which is actually constituted as a class, which can constitute itself as a private interest, separate from the interest of the whole people.

So these are real kind of historical contributions based in practical relationships.

With uh history, you know, and with um the creation and construction of states and movements.

And a a positive contribution which is irreversible was made.

It doesn't mean Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao are above any criticism.

It just means there needs to be acknowledged a recognition that they did contribute something irreversible to history.

Which is a necessary premise and a necessary beginning for Communist activity anywhere.

That's why, ironically, the main thing I would probably disagree with Orthodox Chinese Marxism-Leninism about.

Which I'm not sure is a disagreement.

But I would disagree with the view that Mao was something that it's only specific to China.

In my view, Mao made a universal contribution to Marxism, and Mao, to me, Deng Xiaoping and the rest culminating in Xi Jinping I'm not saying every leader in China after Deng Xiaoping, but there are a few that have been added to the synthesis of Marxism Leninism there.

Uh, there is a universal lesson to be drawn from them that it does have significance everywhere, not just in China.

So this is my view that we must all be Chinese in some sense.

As a matter of fact, I reject the view.

You see, there's something I want you guys to think about because it's really interesting.

Maturing as Marxists, somewhere along the course of our development, we come to think that, okay, the Ushanka Soviet flag, you know, Ketusha listening, that song, it's a good song.

That's just kind of LARP.

Like, okay, those are not really inherently communist.

It's just something specific to Russia.

You're not a Russian.

Why are you LARPing as a Russian?

You should have a uniquely national character.

Broadly speaking, there's truth to that, but it's actually not the whole truth.

For example, after the French Revolution, I don't know if you guys knew this.

But

Across all of Europe, all of the Democrats, not the US political party, but like revolutionary Democrats, right, who wanted to overthrow the Ancien regime across Europe would wave French flags, not because they were pretending that they were ethnically French, but because the French nation state,

had a symbolic significance that was fundamentally rooted in the ideals, the ideals of the French Revolution, which Europeans at that time thought had universal applicability.

So

The content of the French Revolution, the let's call it inappropriately, the ideals or the ideals it's not the technically correct term, but it's more correct than this kind of racialism which just reduces it to something specific to the French nation that had a universal significance and it led to the cultural soft power of France in Europe.

So that the soft p see, a nation earns its seat at the table on the global stage when it contributes something universal.

That's when the soft power of that country gets absorbed.

If you look at, I looked at Chinese border troops, and it's like they're still wearing clothes that in many ways was inherited from the Soviet uniforms, you know.

And the Chinese paradigm of technology is still has a bedrock and basis in Soviet, the Soviet technical expertise that came after 1949 to help the young China.

And there's many aspects of Chinese culture today.

At least political, you know, maybe higher culture, whatever, but which is fundamentally influenced by Russia.

I mean, Russia has.

made a uh uh an influence on China.

not just in its capacity as a communist Russia, but like a a new kind of fusion and synthesis.

Not syn synthesis in the loaded sense, but basically Russia's civilizational soft power affected China because of that political relationship.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

That's not an inherently

You know, inauthentic or false thing.

So, in the same way, we should not be afraid of the soft power cultural influence of China.

China has made an indisputable contribution to the development of world history and represents the most advanced civilization on earth today, from the Marxist perspective.

It's not just the most advanced socialist civilization, it is the most advanced civilization.

And my Chinese friends uh would probably object to that and s and you know, because they're humble.

They say no, no, no, no.

But no, I insist, from the Marxist perspective, China is the most advanced civilization in the world today.

Absolutely is.

From the Marxist perspective, China is leading the way as far as the revolutionizing and development of the forces of production and the transition into a new mode of production and a new era.

Absolutely China is leading the way.

China is the most advanced civilization in the world.

We should not be afraid of adopting aspects of that.

See, there's two forms of extreme LARP.

One that is exclusively foreign and it's only foreign with no roots in your nation.

And the other one is purely your country, refusing to accept influence from anywhere else.

We should combine, you know, we should we should adopt aspects of Chinese culture and history and Russian culture and history and combine them with our unique national context.

We shouldn't be afraid to adopt the things that work or that are aesthetically striking and significant and apply that to the context here, you know.

It's in this kind of sense, we of course we're internationalists.

We don't, we're not trying to just have a pure America, there's no such thing.

We it's an interconnected world that we live in, you know.

So

You should not be afraid of that soft power influence.

I mean, do you need to wear an Ushanka hat?

Maybe, maybe not.

But let's say a civil war started tomorrow in a science fiction scenario.

Is it wrong to adopt historical Russian military thinking, like deep battle or whatever?

Probably not.

It'd probably be a good thing to learn from that kind of stuff, right?

If it works, it works.

That is the American way, you know.

After all, that is the American way.

And let's face it, Russians do get things right that we don't get correct.

They do do things that are correct that we don't.

Whether it's fashion, whether it's ways of going about stuff and so on and so on.

So let's not

Let's not um

worry about that.

Let's not try to purify the meaning of the unique national form of Marxism.

into something that is exclusionary and purely exclusive.

Because you you know, look anywhere in even in Cuba, there's aspects of Russian culture that made their way into Cuba.

There's nothing wrong with that.

And most of the world today speaks English.

You know, that's an aspect of English culture that's, you know, made its way across the whole world.

Uh you know, see, Stalin's socialism in one country.

was not about

It was not about closing yourself off from the world.

And I'm going to go ahead and say something crazy.

I mean, we don't agree with globalism, but there is a dynamism of this new.

dimension of globality that emerges

You know, let's say Y2K post-90s, which we absolutely um.

have to like accept as historically progressive.

And globality is not to me, globality is not um

Universal human rights.

To me, globality is how in Peru, randomly, there's just some Shia cleric who's like creating like a Peruvian Hezbollah, like recruiting local indigenous Peruvians, and it's like for some reason it makes sense there.

That is the meaning of globality to me, you know?

And there's nothing wrong with that.

As a matter of fact, that is something very interesting, you know?

That's kind of globality.

Globality globality is kind of like

When Trump visited India, there were some Hindu shrines made to Trump.

That's an example of global.

Now, is that something good?

Probably not because we don't like Trump, but it is very funny and it is a symptom of globality, right?

Globality is like.

You know, let me think of something.

Globality, you know what, you know what globality really is?

Globality is like the Hamas videos.

If they're not made by Hamas, please forgive me because the internet said they were.

Maybe they weren't.

Farfur, the Mickey Mouse.

Mickey Mouse being used in Hamas propaganda.

That is an example of globality, you know?

But they didn't call him Mickey Mouse, but still, it's like they repurposed this.

This symbol, which is a global symbol, but they could somehow apply it locally, right?

That's really the kind of meaning of globality I'm talking about.

Uh you know, when when you randomly s when when the Iranian uh IRGC says, you know, or who said this?

Kham and I said this, I think.

They said, What heroes of America will we strike?

SpongeBob?

That's globality.

They're talking about SpongeBob, you know.

So there's a dynamism of the globality that we like.

And we don't want to close ourselves off and just LARP as if we represent some kind of purity of parochial America because we don't represent that.

We are here to usher a new age into America and lay hold and seize that new age.

You know, we are you know, when I think about the American Communist Party, when I think about ACP, and I think about what it really is, it's like

We it what it represents is this kind of

It it represents this.

acceleration of the digital age.

politically.

Like we are here to update the superstructure in tandem with the the the updated base, already updated base.

You know, it's like I think of it as um

How d how did I imagine it the other day when I was thinking about it?

I think of it as like um

It's like we're here to connect the entire country to this like global social media it doesn't have to be global necessarily, but this like new digital collective consciousness hive mind.

You know, we're we're here to kind of

It's like death stranding, kind of.

Like, we're here to connect America.

We're not here to like go to rule America and embrace.

The backwardness, technological backwardness and cultural backwardness.

When I say cultural backwardness, I don't mean conservatism.

I mean like they're just not they're n you know what the most progressive thing ever that's not directly communist is but originates in China?

TikTok.

It's like TikTok's already beaten us to the punch, you know?

Americans, however rural and however remote, all use TikTok.

And like they're able to kind of

Express their like rural parochial sensibilities and like be connected with this like kind of

Fully um

fully digitized, fully connected on the national level,

You know, sphere of culture and reality.

And it's so cool, you know.

And we that's what we want to do at the political level.

Because a lot of these rural areas in America, they because their their backwardness is taking it.

When I say backwardness, again, I don't mean ideologically.

I mean, like, literally, in terms of like just they're not up to date with technology or anything or culture.

What happens is you have these corrupt evangelicals and corrupt politicians that go in and take advantage of that and they keep people in the stone age, right?

And we're here to liberate them.

By going down and and and including them and making them a part of the national conversation.

You know, right now they're being left behind.

So

It's like online we've cultivated

You know, I this is something I was thinking about the other day.

And it's like when you think about it, every political influencer, every single one outside of our subculture, every single one.

Had to curry favor with some established authority.

This is why Haas has has a hard time in general.

Like, this is why I've had it so rough, you know?

Because it's like everyone else could orbit someone.

Hassan, Destiny, Vosh, whatever.

Uh Hakeem.

Now most of the people who say I hate streamers and I'm outside all of that, those are Hassan Piker orbiters.

Will they ever critique Hassan Piker in public?

No, because they're Hassan Piker orbiters.

Anyway.

Like they all had to follow something that was already established.

I had to come out here and build all this from scratch.

And I'm not saying build all this from scratch in the sense of like I was the only ML, but this was the first community, to my knowledge, that was making it like a point of emphasis to just unapologetically be like, Stalin, Mao, 100% Communist, no apologia, nothing.

And like we made that a distinct subculture.

We made that a distinct subculture.

We made it cool and trendy and acceptable and like possible and sensible.

Like we gave it there's a sense to it, right?

And like that was us, okay?

And we had, I had no bigger author.

Caleb Maupin did not approve of that shit.

Okay?

When he was debating these guys, he was kind of apologetic a little bit.

And he kind of was not really keen on using that C word a lot, let alone the Stalinist Maoist type of thing.

Right?

Um, we very strongly just really, really hammered it in.

And like the use of these words, we did not.

We did not have any, like, we didn't explain ourselves.

Like, that's what we did, you know.

And there was no established authority that, like, supported us.

Th y you know, I couldn't orbit anyone.

Um

So that's not like easy, you know.

And, but that's why infrared is so advanced.

Because look, for everyone else, there's a money trail.

I don't mean they're all bought and paid for.

I mean, like, it's all based in legacy media institutions.

And if it's not based in legacy media institutions, it's based in web 1.0 or web 2.0, alt media.

Like, for example, the Young Turks.

The Young Turks is like the authority out of which arises a lot of different influencers, right?

The Young Turks.

Like a lot, right?

And then if it's not the young Turks, it's like something else.

Like, I don't know, the uh the Daily Wire or what I'm not up to date on every single one of these things.

But it's like that that's the authority.

Like everything else was literally LARP.

The hill, yeah, whatever.

So, infrared was founded like totally, totally from scratch.

This community, I mean, like totally from scratch, with no connections to any, yeah, Chapo, that's from the Bernie stuff.

Like, we did not have any connections to literally anything starting out.

And it's so funny that these parapolitical idiot, whatever people, who are about to do some real parapolitics research, because they're going to be in court, good luck with see, welcome to the real world.

This isn't going to be a game anymore.

You're going to be in court.

Anyway, go happily go do all the research you need because you need to research yourself a lawyer, probably.

Anyway, it's so funny that they are like, they always attack me.

And you know why they attack me?

It's because they're friend groups.

Because.

Because one disgruntled, deranged psychopath or two made friends with these guys.

And it's literally just a circle jerk.

Like, it's not based in some kind of, like, you know, impartial research into the connections within reality.

It's like, I don't like this guy.

I dislike this person on a personal level.

So I'm going to go out of my way in bad faith and like...

Really hold them to a ridiculous standard where like, oh, you're using a microphone?

Oh, oh, sure, MV7.

Did you know Sure was connected?

The CEO of Sure was connected to some defense contract company whose dad, whose uncle was in the CIA, and that that guy actually worked for military intelligence.

Oh my God, this proves you're directly connected to the CIA because you're using a fucking microphone that was somehow indirectly connected to defense contracting in 1987.

Like these people, these people will just randomly target someone they don't like for personal reasons and employ that ridiculous logic against them.

And it's just personal.

And it could be applied to literally anyone for any reason.

It could literally be applied to anyone.

Okay.

And it's literally just because they don't like us personally.

Why?

Because it's like some millennial thing.

And they see us as a Zoomer movement for whatever reason.

Even though I was born in 96.

But don't tell them that because they literally think I'm Adam Tahir or something.

Anyway, yeah, sure.

It sounds like Schiller.

Anyway, uh these people

It's so funny that they accuse Infrared of like being the ultimate psyop.

There's like a dialectical irony to it because it's like we are like the one thing that has no connections.

We came from nowhere.

Literally like nowhere.

There were some established communities that came over to the, but they weren't led by anyone.

Okay?

So it's like.

We came from scratch.

We infrared was developed from scratch.

We, you know, you know why they hate us?

You guys, you know, in Death Stranding BB?

You know how BB is like an artificial baby that was just created by technology or whatever?

I think it was, right?

That's literally you guys.

You guys are like the BB, and I'm Norm Ritas and carrying you across the country.

That's so weird.

Don't take that seriously because it's not actually like, don't make memes of that.

It's weird.

I don't like it.

I don't like visualizing that.

But anyway, you guys were born and molded out of this like cybernetic social media thing.

Okay, whatever.

And it's like the reason they think it's like a psyop is because it's like it's precisely because there's no connections to any legacy institutions and this is like purely born like from the internet itself.

And they're like the reason they're they lose their minds over that is 'cause like this is what the CIA was planning in the 80s with ARPNet and like this is what the internet was designed to be.

It was designed to be a psyop.

So it's like they see you guys as a pure result of a synthetic AI psyop.

Which is but but this is why they're idiots, because it's like the actual psyops are connected to offline real world institutions like the DNC, like the Young Turks and the Kratzbergers and these fucking billionaires they're connected to.

We are literally connected with nothing, completely unhinged and proud.

Unhinged and proud.

Unhinged and proud.

Like, this community was born of such a fundamental trust.

Of the new dimension of socialization and discourse, political socialization and discourse, ideological socialization, not like cultural socialization, born from the internet, you know, and that's why we are at the avant-garde and we're the most progressive.

Ditto7, what's up?

People can't, people don't.

Why do you think Genghis Khan and nomadicism is so big?

Like such a I went viral for the Genghis Khan thing, the Mongol thing.

Why do you think that is?

Because it's like it's the new no, it's the Deleuzian nomads, you know, it's total kind of nomads treading the completely smooth space free of the stratiations and the crazy web of connections of the offline world with the DNC.

Like, I'm not saying we have no connections to the real world.

We do, but we do in our capacity as individuals.

We're not connected to institutions that have agendas that are responsible for how we've taken the form that we have.

It's based on a radical trust in the future.

Infrared was born and based on a radical trust in the future.

And we're not impervious or oblivious to how the internet and social media is manipulated and psyoped.

But it's precisely these people that are doing the psyops and participating in them.

Because they don't have trust and hope in the future.

That ultimately the winds and direction of history.

Is contrary to that of the ruling class.

They view it the opposite way.

For them, the ruling class is actually at the end of history, rather than something in vain trying to hold on to power while it's being outmoded by the development of reality and history.

I mean, our view is Marxist.

It's the Marxist view that historical development itself is outmoding the ruling class, which in vain has to cling and claw to power to stay in power.

That's not how they see it.

You know?

Um and our view is the opposite.

So

It's like

And and I've b I've been here tho the whole way through and seen everything.

And I was here when Gorillas and Sons were in the chat.

Guys, show the Sun Gorillas.

I paid a guy on Fiverr to make that.

I literally remember commissioning on Fiverr a guy to make that.

But these people will find.

Oh my God, Fiverr?

Okay, listen.

The CEO of Fiverr, his uncle, his grandpa was connected in the military, and then his grandson was literally connected to a guy who met a CIA agent in 1971 in Czechoslovakia who was spying.

And the Fiverr Indians are actually related to, I don't fucking know.

Like.

But you could do it.

You could begin from Fiverr, what I just said, that Sun Gorillas came from Fiverr, and create any fucking connection you want.

It's just it's a matter of how selective you are about it, because it can be applied to anything, to literally anything, right?

Yeah.

Uh if you want to know who made the ACP logo, I don't actually know who to thank or sorry, who to credit for that.

It was a collective effort.

I think Panther.

Was Panther the one who made that version?

All I did was curate it.

Meaning like people were making a bunch of different versions.

Santiago made it.

Alright, got it.

Shout out Santiago.

So they were making a bunch of different versions and then I just chose the one that was actually good and I told them to improve on that and like that's how it worked.

We yeah, we use the internet instead of candlelight.

The internet was made by the feds, which by the way, it was.

The internet was created by the feds.

Like, that's true.

ARPNET.

Like, it was created by the feds.

But it's like.

I don't think you can go back and be Ted Kaczynski and go back into the woods, free from contamination by the Feds.

Um, the way I think of it, here's my delusion.

This is why the true heresy that makes us hated by these people is the following fact.

I will tell you with a straight face that somewhere something in me compels me to believe that infrared is more advanced in terms of consciousness and like more at the cutting edge than the CIA itself.

Like

The CIA are like retarded boomers.

Who like don't understand how anything works and we have a much clearer like grasp and understanding of reality than them, which is why they don't intimidate me.

I I I I I see them as like stupid boomers, uh gen x whatever, gen xers, like just in the sense that like actually we're more advanced, like we are more advanced than they are.

ACP is more.

NCP was created.

NCP was created by a 90-year-old Georgetown CIA guy who's 90.

I don't think it was.

I don't think that guy has the vision to do this.

I don't think he does.

I think he's a retarded boomer who's stuck in his stupid nonsense prejudices.

And I'm more of an intelligence, savvy, KGB on steroids guy than he is.

I am.

I was created in a KGB laboratory in 1985 to be born in 1996.

A f a human being forged purely, synthetically, to realize communism in America as a total bioweapon.

Like I see myself

As Raz al-Ghul, who's hundreds of years old.

And I see these like creepy CIA fucking Satanist Michael Aquino people as like bitches who are under me and beneath me.

I am actually that delusional, and I have no problem saying it.

Because look, think about it.

What's the fucking alternative?

Being a doomer and being blackpilled?

Then go fucking kill yourself, dude, instead of bothering me.

I don't want to live my life that way.

I want to live my life stepping forward.

And you're saying that they have a trap laid up for me?

Fine, then I'll step in the fucking trap and the guy behind me will learn from it and bypass that trap and keep fucking going forward.

But as long as we're moving forward, we're in the right fucking direction.

And that's how I see it.

I don't give a fuck about.

MK Ultra is time.

I don't give a shit.

Prove it, first of all, with hard evidence.

You haven't done that.

You're just insinuating that it's very probable.

It's like, so what do you want us to do?

What do you want us to fucking do?

Just give up then?

Because everything's rigged?

Like, because everything is fucking tainted by it?

There's nothing we can do.

We should be blackpilled?

Fuck you.

Yeah, no offense to actual boomers who are old, that's not what I mean.

Yeah, and excuse my friends.

It's just like, fuck, I'm not living my life like that.

No fucking way.

Like, we will be an army, you know?

If they're lay if a trap gets laid before us, fine, I'll fucking step in it and, like, I'll step on the mine and just blow up.

Keep moving forward, just go around me then.

Literally, just walk around me, keep going.

Don't you ever fucking turn back like a rat scurrying away, retreating in some dark basement, being a fucking black-pilled schizo retard.

And that's all it takes by because you want to know what?

I don't think the CIA are masters of history.

I think Genghis Khan still has something that they don't fucking have.

You know?

Like, they are not masters of history.

Okay?

All it takes is one Genghis Khan to topple the entire system from scratch.

And they'll never see it coming.

And they can't see it coming.

Not one step back.

It's like fucking blackpilled nonsense.

That's literally what they want you to be, just blackpilled.

Oh, ACP just launched?

Oh, that's totally the fads.

Let me just go back to being a fucking alcoholic and just gonna kill myself in five years.

Yeah, fuck you.

Literally, fuck you.

How about that?

Fuck you.

How about fuck you, bitch?

Go back crawl back in whatever fucking...

Dark basement, you came from, you bitch.

Nobody fucking wants to hear shit from you, nobody cares.

No, ACP is here.

The American Communist Party is here.

We're not going a step back.

We're going forward.

Too bad, bitch.

Oh, but what if but but but what if no one's done this before?

Literally no one's done this before.

If nobody fucking does it, it'll never be done.

So we're doing it.

If nobody takes the initiative to reconstitute the Communist Party, it will never be fucking done.

So we're doing it, regardless of where it takes us.

You just gotta fucking do it, like Shia LaBoff said.

Just fucking do it.

Somebody's gotta pick up the red banner.

It's gonna stay there on the ground forever if it's not.

Yeah, go fucking vote for Kamala Harris and leave us alone if you're not with us.

By the way, all this is about Kamala Harris.

It's all some nonsense about Kamala Harris.

They don't believe anything they're saying, by the way.

They don't.

I have proof of that.

Zapatismo, what's going on?

I have proof of that.

They don't believe a fucking word they're saying.

Oh wait, Santiago okay, Bacilities

I stand corrected.

Bacillides made the logo.

It was Bacillides.

It was Santiago who made the font, and it was Bacillides who made the logo.

He must be so pissed if you heard me.

Bacillides, literally, no offense.

Literally no offense.

Literally no offence.

Literally no offence.

Yeah, this black bill shit, it's like look guys, there's a reason

We it's for been four days.

It's been four days.

Look, this is just how it works.

If you wanna hate us, you're gonna find ways to justify it.

But you already fucking don't like us.

For whatever reason.

By the way, another scandalous thing is the homeless tweet, the famous homeless tweet.

And it's like, you know.

You know, look, would I make that tweet again today?

No, because I like I understand

Nobody got it.

It was a fucking joke.

Okay, it was a joke.

It was a troll and I don't it it it it was the wrong message because the majority of homeless people, first of all, it's invisible.

It's invisible homeless.

But

Rev

Was talking to me, and he was like, How do I like gain notoriety on Twitter?

And I was like, well, the way I did it is I just started trolling a lot and like triggering people.

So it's like that's how it started.

It was literally just like a fucking way it was literally a troll, but like who were we trolling?

Um we were I guess we were I guess we were trolling the like stupid class analysis that pan-leftists tend to have where it's very much based on like like direct personal proximity like oh you're oppressing me you're oppressing me you're exploiting me because I you know I wasn't your I was your editor for your video and like you know you didn't give me the means or like this kind of stupid naive you know what I mean like how they like always personalize class analysis in this stupid way like we were just kind of trolling that shit it was it was nothing serious

Um

No, the homeless are not the ruling class of anything.

It's just funny because it's like when you think about it, it's funny.

Like when you're on the subway and a crackhead is around, everyone is like it's like Game of Thrones and like the Lord of the Lord has come and we gotta bow our heads and look away.

Like it's just funny.

It's not serious.

You know?

And by the way, the most homeless is invisible, and there should be no homelessness in this country.

Didn't it start when he visited LA?

Yeah, and it's like

Yeah.

There's a drug problem, there's a homeless problem that is rooted in uh

the economic system we have, but it's like if you care about the homeless, why are you attacking the America's only Communist Party, which probably has the only solution to that problem, which is free housing, just like North Korea has it.

You know, let's build why don't we build

more and get rid of the landlord, parasites,

like they did in China.

I feel like that would solve the problem.

It's very simple.

But, you know, here's the thing.

You want to know what's so funny?

An actual homeless guy would laugh at that tweet.

It's just these kind of like student leftists, I don't know who they are, these like urban hipster people who are in New York and like genuinely try to repress the fear that they have of crackheads on the sidewalk because they're like, I'm so privileged compared to them and I feel guilty about it.

That's why they have a sour face in the face of that tweet.

But you guys want to know what do you guys think?

I feel like those tweets.

Those screenshots on social media

Our Fed boosted.

What do you think?

I I saw him on Reddit, I saw him on multiple places in social media, and I look at the comments and I'm like, doesn't seem like something real people would say.

Sorry.

It's just speculation.

There's no definite evidence for it, but it's just like, I kind of feel like that shit is just fake boosted.

Because you want to know why?

Because the CIA are retards.

Because there's some retarded CIA officer who's like, you know what?

I knew how.

You know what?

I'm going to do the GoFullerRouche right now.

It's always these fucking British MI6 people who fuck with us.

It's literally always MI6, by the way.

It's always MI6.

like Paul Mason and these weird creeps.

So it's some British MI six fucking retard, probably, who's like You know what?

Actually, they're calling themselves the Communist Party, but look what they said about the homeless If we make this f artificially go viral, it'll totally ruin their credibility It's like you're a fucking retard, why don't you read a book, you fucking uncivilized savage fucking cave beast?

Fucking pre-critical retard.

Go get civilized by fucking France and Germany and then come o talk to me.

Fucking M I six.

M I six, they're so smart, but they still haven't wrap their heads around Kant.

Kant?

I can't.

I can't read Kant.

Everything is just what it appears as on the surface.

Everything is just what I sense it as immediately.

I can't count the can't.

Workers' Party of Britain is probably gonna

Um sail a ship over here, kidnap me and I don't know, keelhaul me or some shit, hang me on the the noose.

Sorry, guys, you got I give you guys the right to make fun of us worse.

But it but there is something to the fact that it's always MI6.

It's always MI6 who's doing this shit.

Uh and that's a fact.

It's like that's my uh that's my stereotype.

It's always MI6.

Or maybe the CIA is just more competent than the MI6, but it's like I just feel like it's always MI6 doing this shit on the it's always MI6 on the internet.

I don't know if the CIA like knows how to use the internet, to be honest.

Maybe, probably they do, but MI6 uses it better than them and and more effectively, like in terms of realizing their goals.

Um can I ask a question though?

Uh

They use foreign intelligence to attack Americans.

It's a loophole.

Yeah, you're right.

You're actually right.

That's why.

Mossad and Mi six.

But I don't

Yeah.

Can Mossad stop like

Having an accent of a fake language.

They're like

I am Israeli and I like Humus.

It's like, alright, you don't you're kinda being extra, all right.

The LARP has gone too far.

Just talk like a fucking normal person.

Your fake language isn't

Like authentic enough to have an accent.

I feel like all Israelis.

Fake Israeli accents, and they all just speak like perfect English or German or some shit or Polish.

But they just like pretend that they have an Israeli accent.

But it's actually not.

It's just like uh

This is like Family Guy.

Like, yeah, when no one's around Oh, I am from Israel.

We like Humus and Hamas is attacking us.

And I am Israeli.

And then no one's around.

It's like, Oh, God.

That shit's exhausting.

Anyway, back to my uh

Back to my child murdering.

Cameras are off.

Back to my civilian bombing.

Yeah, it's code switching.

Yeah.

All right.

Anyway.

Code switching.

Yeah, Benjamin Netanyahu is literally just some random guy from Philadelphia.

They're just the LARP's gotta end.

LARP has gotta end.

That's why I can't stand these fucking JQ retards.

It's like why are you why are you making the Jews into an ethnicity?

American Jews are literally just American.

Don't believe.

Have you ever met an American Jew?

They're literally just Americans.

There's nothing exotic or like extraordinary about them.

They're literally just Americans.

It's just as retarded to IQ Italian question.

Imagine if you just started targeting people of Italian descent.

How fucking stupid and retarded would that be?

That's the same thing as anti-Semitism in the U.S.

It's like this Ellis Island generation of Jews they came here fully, just part of America.

They're just literally just Americans.

You just meet one and they're literally it's just like Aiden Ross, and they're like making them so exotic and they're just doing work for Zionism.

It's what Zionists wanted.

That's what the birthright tour does.

The birthright tour takes some guy

I don't know, like walking around in New Jersey or some shit.

Hey, I'm walking here.

And they take that guy and bring him to Palestine.

And they're like, they're doing this crazy.

You are an ancient exotic thing.

It's like a big fucking show they put up.

And it's like just some nonsense.

And then here you have Nick Fuentes doing the same shit.

The Jews!

The Jews are everywhere.

It's like, and then, you know, here's reality where the Jews.

Are just random fucking people in America, like Italians.

They're like, they're literally the same shit.

You know?

They're just mystifying people who are just not really fundamentally different from anyone else in America.

And I mean fundamentally different.

I'm not saying they don't have a unique religion or even culture or whatever or history.

I'm not denigrating that.

I'm just saying like it's being mystified in a retarded way.

It's being mystified.

Okay, there's nothing, there's no reason to mystify any of it.

There's no reason to make it more.

than what it is in the sense of like making them out to be like leprechauns.

Imagine if there was Italian Zionism and like all the Italians in America.

I mean, it wouldn't count because like.

Italians are from Italy, so it's doesn't it's not the same thing.

But imagine for a moment that like Italy got conquered by like Carthage or something.

I don't know, it'd be an alternate timeline.

But anyway, it's retarded.

And then they did Roman LARP, where they or imagine this: imagine if Italians 1000 years from now in America.

Wanted to do ancient Rome in Italy again, even though Rome isn't ancient Italy right now.

Okay, sorry, ancient Rome right now.

It's like Italians are just like normal people in Europe, right?

They're like, Yeah, I mean, we were Romans like 2,000 years ago, whatever.

But like imagine if one thousand years from now Italian Americans did Ital did uh Roman Empire Zionism where they colonized Italy and like LARPed the Roman Empire.

And like started slaughtering all the Sicilians who like descended from the Arabs.

And like that's literally how stupid Zionism is.

Like that's how retarded it is.

It's just some nonsense.

Are Greeks doing the same thing, yeah.

Which they might.

Well th well

Actually I can't I can't criticize Greece anymore because Chris Hilali is on the executive board.

So I will not criticize Greece ever again.

Sorry, Turks.

The Greek question has ended.

You guys, by the way, did you hear about the Greek question?

Why does such a small ethnic minority have so much over-representation in, like.

like literature and like so many words we use and like

We're always talk Aristotle and Plato and all this shit.

It's like and then I realized I went to DC and it's like everything's like looking like a fucking Greek style architecture.

And like you look into the Greek question and these Greeks, they're punching way above their weight in terms of numbers.

And I don't know what's going on, but something weird is going on with these Greeks.

They're like 0.5% of the population in the US, and yet they have so much disproportionate influence, it's fucking crazy.

Imagine if we held the Greeks to the same standard as the Jews.

Like, oh, we've been infiltrated by the Talmudic.

It's like, you fucking moron.

Chris it's 'cause of Christianity in the Bible.

The Jews are literally in the Bible.

That's why, you dumbass.

It's not a coincidence.

Nobody's saying it's a coincidence.

It's literally just a rational.

Like it makes total sense.

Like okay.

Jesus was a Jew.

They're like, But the Jews are the people who rejected Jesus and it's like

Well, okay, yeah, but that doesn't change that Christianity still came from the Jews at first.

Doesn't change that.

Doesn't change it.

Doesn't change that the Jews are in the Bible and whatever.

It's like, why do you think Zionism is so persuasive to evangelicals?

Am I Jewish?

You know, you know, guys, can I just tell you what parapolitics is?

All parapolitics is.

Are just anti-Semites who are just too scared.

To like just own up to it, like deep down, they truly believe the Jews are behind it all.

But

They they just don't wanna say that because they're gonna get like cancelled by hipsters.

So they just repr it's just based on repressed anti-Semitism.

Why don't these people just shut the fuck up and admit what they are?

'Cause they're already being fascist collaborators anyway.

Pathologically, it's the same mental illness, though.

Like, the mental illness is when it's schizophrenia.

You take, you isolate a rational part of reality and turn it into an extraordinary exception, which doesn't belong there, which is an irrational exception.

And once that irrational exception starts repeating itself in patterns, You're isolating it.

So you're you're mate.

You're like, oh, is that a coincidence?

How could that be a coincidence?

Like, no, no, you've just ripped and abstracted it from its rational context so that every time it reappears, it demands some extraordinary explanation.

But if you just situated it in its rational context.

It's the way that it's part of reality would make sense.

You wouldn't need to resort to these ridiculous explanations.

Anyway guys, I think that's all.

I think that's all.

Uh

You know, I had some people ask me, they're like, Haz, are you really starting everything out with um litigation stuff?

And it's like, yeah, this is what we're going to get out of the way in the beginning.

Um

We're going to defend the reputation and honor of the party right away, like right out the gate, and that so we can actually.

Do the work, you know, that we want to do without distractions and nonsense.

So, yeah, we're just gonna fucking deal with it now.

I'm n you know.

Why would we wait?

Why would we want to wait?

You know, we're going to do it now.

We're gonna do it now, you know?

And um, yeah.

Anyway guys.

Guys, I can't go on any space.

I already told him.

Uh I ha if I'm doing a debate, it's gotta be like professional.

I'm not doing it in a space.

I'm executive chairman now.

I'm not gonna go in spaces and

Make her a fool of myself talking, joking, and all this shit.

I can't, you know?

I'll debate people but it's gotta be like planned, you know?

It's gotta be planned.

'Cause, you know, formally I'm only representing myself, but like we all know in reality, I'm representing more than that.

Will you ever go onto space just to talk or have a discussion?

Possibly, but uh

You know, I should be wearing a suit and it should be in person.

That's how I should be debating going forward.

Like, debates going forward are gonna be in person, me wearing a suit.

Uh and if I do it online, it's got to be like

Planned and scheduled, and it's like an event that's promoted, and it's I'm not just gonna do it randomly, you know?

What are your thoughts on Andrew?

I heard he's suing Drew Pavlou, which is good for him.

Honestly, good for him.

Good for him.

Alright guys.

Well, this is a party that stands on business.

You know, we're still we stand on business.

This is uh this is going to be a professional legal party.

And its reputation will be defended in a public forum where everyone can see and it's just not disputable.

Because we're not going to deal with this, you know.

This this lying defamation libel nonsense and then have to defend ourselves and explain sh we don't we don't have to explain shit to nobody except in a public court of law.

That's how we're doing it.

Like that's the vibe, you know.

What?

Because every day in the last four days there's some new shit.

Every single day.

And you think that's how we're gonna operate as a party is dealing with that?

No.

We're gonna deal with it now.

And s wherever it goes, it goes.

But we're not gonna wait till later.

Uh, you know, to deal with this kind of stuff.

We're gonna set the precedent for how we proceed in the future now.

Um

Yeah.

Don't worry about it.

That stuff is being worked on as we speak.

And uh, you know, who who knows how long it'll take.

I mean, it could take a year, it could take years, but we're pursuing it to the end, and we have the ability to, and that's all that matters.

Anyway.

React to Jackson on Jimmy Dwar.

That's thirty minutes.

I don't know if I have time for that.

Alright y'all, see you later.

Bye-bye.

See you all next time.

Goodbye.