🔴 THE AMERICAN COMMUNIST PARTY IS HERE

You know, and the world. Oh, and

Wants

I'm

a

hush and

hush and

huk in wry, I'm not No one No.

Pongue PIN,

I just

Chong Chau Chau

Chau Chau Chon

Chau

Mait

Ery

Chie

Chie Chie

Tuan T T T

R M M M M M M M M M M

P

D I think, all the people from

the people

and

the people people people people,,,, because of my Jiangxia and see from the world

from

my name

chisim

chisim

no

the end

from

the country don't

come and army Oh, hey, you get in the world.

The Song-jou-jury-chang-hung-chang-hung-vang-hung-vang-hung-o-hung-hang-hang-hang-hung-hung-haw-hye-hury-hye-h. I think I'm going to be On the

Redmond Hong

I'm

There's

King,

Ah

and

love Oh

I'm

love

and

N'

N' N' N' N' N' N' N' N'

J' Thank you, I'm going to my name from the world

from

a man

and

chisim

no

the city and

the

country

t'ry

and king

and death and the great, you, yet in

a

The

King,

The

The People People People,

and

N

A-ha-ha-ha

and the

country, and we and soo-cheng-ha-hung-hung-hung-heng-be, I'm-hung-hung-o-h-h-hung-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-hung-hye. I think I think I think

I think

A-h-hame

A-hury-

A-ha-ha-i-

-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-

A-ha-ha-ha-ha

A-ha-ha-ha

From-co-ha-ha because of the country and the country from the country

king,

from the

country,

the king

grand

chie t'nought

the army,

and

from the

country, and from

the, and from, hey, you get in the King's

A Pond

PON chou-chong-ho-cheng-ho-cheng-ho-chang-hung-hung-hung-hung-hang-hang-hung-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-hhhhhhh. king, and get the country

people people

and

many people

and the

people

and

the people and

how

the people

and the people

and

the

people

and

and I'm going to bring a bunch of joy from Russia and pray for

my name

chisim

chintchin

no

there's

a conto

of me

and heck and oh and hey get a The Thank you. I'm not The The Thank you. I'm not. I'm The The Thank you. The I'm not The The The The The Thank you. I'm not The The Thank you. I'm going to The The The I'm not going to be. I'm not. I'm not.

I'm The The Thank you. The The and you know, Thank you. I'm not. I'm not. The I'm

No.

Oh!

Oh! The You know, The Thank you. The The The The The You know, The Thank you. I'm The I don't know. I'm not. I'm The The The You know, The I'm Oh Oh

Oh

Oh

Oh Oh and the I'm going to

I'm

I'm

I'm going to

I'm

and

I'm a lot of it. I'm a lot. And I'm a

no.

I'm

NADN I'm going to be. I'm going to

I'm going to what's going to be able to be able to be. I'm not. I'm not.

And

I'm gonna be a lot of

I'm

and the

I'm not

I'm

I'm

I'm I'm and I'm not

I'm going to

I'm I'm going to be. I'm not. 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 I hope

everyone's having a great evening.

Just kidding, I don't really care.

You know, I don't know who you are. 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 Ray Lay, 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. I'm just going to lie to you and say we know who's behind it. Of course we don't.

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.

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.

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,

etc., etc.,

that was a different matter.

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

American Communist Party was announced, before tolerate it. Before 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 several. I don't want to be technical because it's not seven, but it's more than a few licensed attorneys who are responsible for this. So I'm telling you this because

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 just 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.

We have the resources.

Thanks in part to you guys and your

generous support for infrared over the years we have the

and 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?

We will defend the honor and the reputation of this party.

Again, anyone is free 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

fentes 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, this is, this is, this is, uh, 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 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 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. K.

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

possibility of this party and it would be incumbent upon you to reconstitute and refound 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, an 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

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 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 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.

Rec, wreck, wreck, 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

and on an unprecedented scale okay and and people who are

underestimating it are the same people who underestimated

elite arrow wow what's up elite arrow elite arrow elite arrow what's going on elite arrow is great just great great

great guy all around great guy all around i don't know him but he's a great guy

guy i could tell i could tell there's just, there's an instinct within me that could just tell.

Anyway, anyway, um, so let me, uh, let me clarify something.

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 siop 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 could 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 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.

Bree did this. None of us knew about it.

Bree literally, 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 is stuff.

The who is stuff is so, so our site guy explained to me like this. There's it. The who is stuff is so, so our site guy explains 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 no yeah okay it's dark

okay dark 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.

I was like, dark, 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, 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. I was like, what is this?

Anyway, again, that stuff is going to be handled in courts.

And yes, we have the resources 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 the legal department of the party.

Members of the party, that's those details.

We haven't sorted out exactly.

But they're acting as 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 has books, but, and all I could do is read the books, and I can, I just have the books. That's it. All right.

It's like a post-apocalyptic scenario.

Like in Fallout New Vegas, when Caesar thought it was Kzar or something because 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, 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 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've never said hegemony.

I do have a problem with below, though.

That's so true.

I always, for some reason, I spelled below with two ls,

so it's actually bellow, like 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 infamous Maga Communist typo.

Yeah.

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

Enough of this negativity stuff.

Let's talk about the positives.

Uh... party enough of this negativity stuff let's talk about the positives uh pronounce coerce coerce coerce coerce. Coerce? Coerce. It's coerce, is it not? It's either coerce or coerce. I don't know. Which one? Coerce. Heworse. Coerce. Got it. Got it. Got it.

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

But I want to talk about Marxism, Leninism.

And what does that mean exactly for the party 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 not just a member

but a member of the Politburo. So very

welcome and grateful

and glad to have

Slava on board.

Um, um what was i going to say how we see marxism leninism and i've touched upon briefly before, and a lot of this is the subject of my upcoming book, not the manifest of the party, but my actual book.

So, firstly, what are the five heads of Marxism?

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

thought, the mind,

and some kind of more

more

determinate historical reality. Now, why do I say

determinate? 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 the mode of production and the social relations of production and history at large, a given kind of integral,

historical era, if you will, is determinant. And although it's not the expression of a divine mind or a divine logos, it is determinate and in some sense it has form.

Such was Stalin's 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 Tao or the Tao. Everyone is conflicted as far as how that is worded. Dow or Tao, is a D or a T, I don't it's a it's a specific way in which material reality is constituted

um my former uh occult uh teacher from the sarmoong Brotherhood, you know, from the, uh, the Iranian Sufi occult order, the architectonic order of the Eschaton.

Uh, Reza Nagaristani, 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, they 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 the Marxism doesn't simply reject this Hegelian view of the kind of the rationality of history the the kind of um the external kind of collective

supra individual mind right we just don't regard it as a mind but it is something. That's the kind of deeper point. 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 that's the individual in question but it's clearly not an

individual it's something super individual, something collective. And precisely what that is and what it

refers to, Marx worded and named as communism itself, as 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 marks will say

it is a kind of um it is a kind of uh it is a kind of uh it is a kind of uh relationship between man, to man, or to woman, more specifically, as species being,

species being, being a specific type of being, which is commensurate with its own particularity its own

ex well i wouldn't say exclusive but its own particular existence right uh it's 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, 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,

um,

the,

um,

well,

the reproduction of human beings,

right?

But Marx extends this relationship also to the subsistence and sustenance of mankind, how it produces its existence, how it survives, how it acquires shelter, how it acquires food, how it acquires

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 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 what 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.

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 is the proletariat.

He is taking the fire, the Heraclitian fire, I can't, whatever, the proper way of describing a fire belonging to Heraclitus, he's taking that and he's bequeathing that to mankind, 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 you don't, 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 marks was the word he was the word the first word

the first text of the workers movement capital was like um 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, precisely as Lacne said and meant.

So that's Marx's inclusion.

Marx the Prometheus.

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

That was similar, 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, he is initiating the process by which the very same outlook discovered principally by Marx could be applied to modern science and technology and so on and so on. And it's angles for whom that paradigm become strongly emphasized. 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 was in a sense a kind of,

also he simplified Marxist thinking and more than a number,

a few works of his, but uh the thread bearing all this in

common is that angles 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 uh with marx's notion of

commodity fetishism and so on and so on in capital marks 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.

And, of course, marks and angles are inseparable so angles is inclusion within the synthesis

is inexorably connected with marks inclusion now 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 Lennonism,

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, for that it's actually formally synthesized.

You could, we could, we, in order to justify Marx and Engels's inclusion, it's kind of retroactive or 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, as a matter of fact, actually gives rise to revisionism

much before

World War I

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, Lenin connectsxism 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.

He connects Marxism with the broad,

the formal aim of social democracy,

the unity of Marxism and the workers movement.

Well, Lenin expands that on a much grander scale.

It's the unity of Marxism with 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.

Stalin's inclusion, first of all, he formally synthesizes Marxism, Leninism, in the writing of

foundations of Leninism. As the faithful student of Leninism, 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 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 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 want to explain this in a way that doesn't sound like

bedew bullshit like which is kind of true though that he sound like Bedou bullshit

which is kind of true though

that he introduces infinity into Marxism

which is true but

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 marxismLeninism and essence from the limited form that it takes that's 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 should rather say,

empirical referent, tangible empirical referent in a readily constituted 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 cynization 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 and 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.

That alliance was necessary, 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 authority, a separate authority representing them.

So 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 Miles' 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 the culture 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's a strata of

society that's working in factories, but can they really be called proletarians

when the factories they're working in are state-owned and so on and so on?

So the proletarian cultural revolution, it's waged in a great bulk in the countryside, right? So how could the notion of the continuation of class struggle within China or under socialism, I should rather say, be justified.

Well, what Mao understands and what Mao recognizes is that class struggle is not is not reducible to the form 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 bourgeoisie, it's actually the contradiction that pre-existence 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 proletary this was a movement by the way toward at the end of his life mao himself initiates uh the movement of like what did lennon 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 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 level of the development of civilization and society

and a specific dialectical tension

whose development,

as the cultural revolution itself proved,

could not be reduced to any kind of political form.

Like even if you have a proletarian dictatorship in 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'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 birthpays of capitalism that preceded it.

And these birthpays cannot be legislated away.

So for Mao, this implies an understanding of Marxism, socialism, capitalism, the proletarian class, the bourgeoisie, and so on and so on, 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 motor of production 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 literally a mode of production.

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 culture 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 matter.

This is Lenin's Klausvizian 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 uh understanding of marxism

where class struggle does not necessarily directly correspond

to klausvitzian warfare

it's an indirect relationship

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.

Regardless, 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 proletary 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 the view that class struggle still exists in China.

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

And a positive contribution, which is irreversible, was made.

It doesn't mean Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, mow 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'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 den shalping

but there are a few that have been uh added to the synthesis of marxism lennonism there uh there is a

universal lesson to be drawn from them that it that does have significance everywhere not just in china so this is my view um 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.

Matureing as Marxist,

somewhere along the course of our development,

we come to think that,

okay, the Ushanka,

Soviet flag,

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 U.S. political party, but like revolutionary Democrats, right, who wanted to overthrow the ancient 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 power, 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 or whatever,

but which is fundamentally influenced by Russia.

I mean, Russia has made a, but which is fundamentally influenced by Russia.

I mean, Russia has made an influence on China, not just in its capacity as a communist, Russia, but like a new kind of fusion and synthesis, not 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

would probably object to that 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 in 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 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't we're not

trying to just have a pure

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, you know, 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.

You know, whether it's fashion, whether it's, you know, ways of going about stuff and so on and so on.

So let's not worry about that. Let's not 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, 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.

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 have to

like accept as historically progressive.

And

globality is not, to me,

globality is not

universal human rights. To me, globality is not 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 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 globally.

Globality is kind of like when Trump visited India, there were some Hindu shrines made to Trump.

That's an example of gloat.

Now, is that something good?

Probably not because we don't like Trump.

But it is very funny. And it is a, it's a symptom of globally, right?

Globality is like, you know, let me think of something.

Globality, you know what, you know what globally 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.

Far four, 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 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.

You know, when you randomly 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 sponge bobBob? 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 American Communist Party, when I think about

ACP, and I think about what it really is, it's like, we, what it represents is this kind of it represents this kind of it represents this

acceleration of the digital age politically.

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

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

how did,

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, and cultural backwardness.

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

I mean, like, they're just not, 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 beating us to the punch, you know?

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

And like they're able to kind of express their like rule, 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 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

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, 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 outside of our subculture every single one had to curry favor with some established authority this is why haz 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

hasan destiny vash whatever uh hakeem now most of the people who say i hate streamers and i'm outside

all of that those are hasan Piker orbiters.

Will they ever critique Hassan Piker in public?

No, because they're Hassan Piper orbitors.

Anyway, like, they all had to follow something that was already established.

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

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 authority.

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 we

and

there was no established

authority that like

supported us you know i couldn't orbit anyone um so that's not like easy you know and um 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.

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 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, 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 burning stuff. Like 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 para politics 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 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 with the 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. We're like, oh, you're using a microphone?

Oh, oh, sure, MV7?

Did you know, sure, was connected...

The CEO, 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 they're

because like it's like some millennial thing.

And they see us as like 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 to hear or something.

Anyway, yeah, sure, it sounds like Schiller.

Anyway, these people, it's so funny that they accuse infrared of like being the ultimate

sciop

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 b b and i'm norm rittus 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.

Kay, whatever.

And it's like the reason they think it's like a

sci-op 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 lose their minds

over that is because 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 sci-op.

So it's like they see you guys as a pure result of a synthetic AI sciop which is

but this is why they're idiots

because it's like the actual siops

are connected to offline

real world institutions

like the DNC

like the young Turks and the

Kratzburgers 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.

Ditto, seven, 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, it's the Delusian

nomads, you know, it's total kind of nomads treading the completely smooth space free of the

straciation 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 in 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 siopped. But it's precisely these people that are doing the siops 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 they view it the opposite way for, 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, and our view is the opposite. So it's like, and I've been here 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, the Fiverr? Okay,

the CEO 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 is spying

and the Fiverr Indians

are actually related

to

I don't fucking know

like

but you could do it

you could begin from Fiver

what I just said that Sun Gorillillas 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 the 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.

All right, 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 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.

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 see them as like stupid boomers,

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 mcp was created

mcp 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 1996, a human being forged purely synthetically to realize

communism in America as a total

bio weapon.

Like, I see

myself

as Razal Ghoul 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 dumer 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

Sop. 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. 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 fuck, I'm not living my life like that. No fucking way.

Like, we will be an army, you know?

If a trap

gets laid before us,

fine, I'll fucking step in it

and, like, I'll step

on the mind 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 blackpilled 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 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 he's going to kill myself in five years yeah fuck you literally fuck you how about that 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 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 got to fucking do it, like Shilabov said, just fucking do it.

Somebody's got to pick up the red banner.

It's going to stay there on the ground forever if it's not you 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, Bicilities, I stand corrected.

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

He must be so pissed if you heard me.

Bacilities, literally no offense.

Literally no offense.

Literally no offense literally no offense Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, this blackbill shit, it's like, look, guys, there's a reason.

It's been four days.

It's been four days.

Look, this is just how it works.

If you want to hate us, you're going to find ways to justify it. But you already fucking don't like us for whatever reason

by the way another scandalous thing is the 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 fucking joke.

Okay?

It was a joke.

It was a troll.

And I don't...

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 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 really 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 was in 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

personalized class analysis

in this stupid way. Like, we were just

kind of trolling that shit. It was, it was

nothing serious.

No, the homeless are not the ruling class of anything it's just funny because it's like when you think about 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

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,

most homeless is invisible

and there should be no homelessness

in this country.

Didn't it start when he visited L.A.? Yeah, and it's like

you know, there's a drug problem

there's a homeless problem that is rooted in the 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 bid's 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, are Fed boosted.

What do you think?

I saw them on Reddit.

I saw them 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 retarts. Because there's some

retarded CIA officer who's like,

you know what? I know

how it's, you know what? I'm going to

do the goal full of Roos 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 MI6 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 artificially go viral, it'll totally ruin their credibility.

It's like you're a fucking retard.

Why don't you read a book book you fucking uncivilized savage

fucking cave beast fucking pre-critical retard go get civilized by fucking france and germany and

then come talk to me. Fucking MI6.

MI6, they're so smart, but they still haven't.

Wrapped their heads around, can't!

Kant?

I can't!

I can't read, can't.

Everything is just what it appears as on the surface.

Everything is just what I sense it as.

Immediately.

I can't, can't, the cant.

Workers' Party of Britain is probably gonna um sail a ship over here kidnap me and i don't know keel haul me or some shit hang me on the the noose sorry guys you i give you guys the right to make fun of

us

worse

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

And that's a fact.

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

It's always MI6.

Or maybe the CIA is just more competent than 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 more effectively

like in terms of realizing their goals

um

can I ask a question, though?

They use foreign intelligence to attack Americans.

It's a loophole.

Yeah, you're right.

You're actually right.

That's why. Moss, you're right. You're actually right. That's why.

Mossad and MI6.

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 hummus.

It's like, all right, you don know, you'd kind of be an extra.

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 hummus and Hamas is attacking us and I am Israeli and then no one's wrong.

Oh God, that's just 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. Yeah. Yeah

Anyway

Code switching

Yeah

Benjamin Netanyahu was literally just some random guy from Philadelphia.

They're just the LARP's got to end.

LARP has got to end.

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

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

American Jews are literally just American.

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

literally just Americans.

You just meet

one and they're literally, it's just like Aidan Ross

and they're like making them

so exotic and they're just doing work

for Zionism.

It's what Zionists want to do.

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...

Ooh.

Nah, nan, nah, 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.

And 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, 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 1,000 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

1,000 years from now, Italian

Americans did

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, actually, I can't criticize Greece anymore because Chris Hillali 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, as you hear about the Greek question,

why does such a small ethnic minority have so much over-representation in, like, literature and, like, so many words we use and like we're always

talking Aristotle and Plato

and all this shit it's like

and then I realized I went to D.C.

and it's like everything

is like looking like a fucking Greek

style architecture

and like you look into the Greek question and these 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 U.S.

And yet they have so much disproportionate influence. It's fucking crazy.

Imagine if we held the Greeks to the same standard of the jews like oh we've been infiltrated by the talmudic it's like you fucking moron christ it's because of christianity in the bible the The Jews are literally in the Bible. That's why, you dumb, 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 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 just don't want to say that because they're going to get like canceled by hipsters

so they just repress it's just based on repressed anti-semitism

why don't these people just shut the fuck up and admit what they are? Because they're already being fascist collaborators anyway.

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

Like, you, you, this is 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 like, oh, is that a coincidence?

How could that be a coincidence?

It's 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.

You know, I had some people asking, they're like, Haas, are you really starting

everything out with

litigation stuff?

And it's like, yeah,

this is what we're going to get out of the way

in the beginning.

We're going to defend

the reputation in 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 going to

fucking deal with it now.

I'm, you know,

why would we wait?

Why would we want to wait?

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

We're going to do it now,

you know, um yeah anyway guys

guys i can't go on any space i already told him uh i have if i'm doing a debate it's got to be like professional I'm not doing it in the space I'm executive chairman now I'm not going to 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 got to be, like, planned, you know?

It's got to be planned.

Because, 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 on a space just to talk or have a discussion? Possibly, but, 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 going to be in person, me wearing a suit.

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 I'm not just going to do it randomly you know what are your thoughts on Andrews I heard he's

suing Drew Pavlou which good for, which good for him.

Honestly, good for him.

Good for him. All right, guys. Thank you. Well, this is a party that stands on business, you know, we're still, we stand on business. This is, uh, this is a party that stands on business, you know, 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 these lying defamation libel

nonsense and then have to defend ourselves and explain

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 going to operate

as a party is dealing with that? No.

We're going to deal with it now.

And wherever it goes,

it goes. But we're not

going to wait till later, you know, to deal with this kind of stuff.

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

Um... um um and, you know, 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 it matters.

Anyway, react to Jackson on Jimmy Dore.

That's 30 minutes.

I don't know if I have time for that. Thank you. All right, y'all, see you later.

Bye-bye.

See you all next time.

Goodbye.