COMMUNISM WINNING | ACP RISING

and the

mrs.

Hmm. This This is This

This sun-bend Flamed in Brack this sanct. The world

to beck God

which is

with

the way

in the

state

the holy in

the world

and is might have been always at the ship, the her I'm at the

world as

you're

in the

man I miss man the hammer This

Sand-fleneing

Fleeting

Wittenberg

Which is

with a

back Byte

through the Deft

The Heing

Shrift The Erbirmish Christen through the needstall The Highing Schrift

The herbairnish

Christenheit

So,

So, very

yammerly

besudeled

At,

Spraught

Thomas Muncher

with the hammer

that the trans-le-le-lending flesh to biddenbergh

which is with a-verte-the-verte,

through the deep- rome through the

rite

the high

in the holy

chris

the

German

Christenhe

so

very

jemmerly

besudelt

hans

spoke the Thomas Mitz with light besudeled Hans Spra

the Thomas

Mincer with

the hammer

It's

Sanding

The same

He's

Manch's

The

Man

Manches Mepard The Man Man The End, The all this your man is the

june

he was

smacked

the Thomas

Minster

with the hammer

this

this sand-leeming

to Wittenberg

Hellishes with

Verqueathed bythe way

Through the deepstile

The Heidenstiff

Ereibergian christen height

So, Gensombermich bear bluish in chust and haunt, all so

very jemmerly

besudeled

had,

spoke the Thomas

Mincer with the hammer

this

this sand-wvener fleeting

blitherto written

where

which is with

perqueter way

through the needstall

of the eigenstitch

Hei

Herbendish Christenheit All the Heideligen Heirchid The

Bernanich

Christenheit

So

very

Gemberg

Mez

Hutt,

Spraught

the Tauvas

Mincer with the

Hammer

Jesus Thomas Mincer with the hammer This sand

will be wise to

Londoner

This is a bit of care

Taulose

through the dirt

The best of the highest ship.

I'm off the her bernish christend holl.

All so gall,

as yammer, not besudelt,

he spoke the Thomas

Muntzer

with the hammer

this

sand

fiender

fred

to witten

burn

which is

with

perverted

way

through the deep

stand

the Hegel

hegel she said

The hernich

Christenheim

Heard

All

so

Gremight

Eulio

Kats Spraught the Thomas and the same white Hey yo Hey yo

Hey

Yo

He said

The Thomas

Muster

With the hammer

Oh

Heyo

Heyo

Heyo

Heyo, hey, oh, hey yo! Hey!

This song, this sand-levened

in the light to hitherto

man

which is

with caretter

way

through the deep

shalt

the holy

the head the her heart is in the manrait Myelike Thee

He had

I'm at

I'm

I'm at

I'm

as you

heard of

Christ

Spraught

Thomas

Mitz

with the

hammer The the thomas minster with the hammer this sand-flamede'nge to wittenberg

this sand-blebending flesh to Wittenberg

which is with

in averturetire

through the needstal

of the

high-legens

script,

the herbirm

christenheit

so

very yemmerly

besudeled

at

spoke the Thomas Munzer with the hammer has Spraught, The Thomas

Muncher with

the hammer

The

Vann's

Flamede

To Wittenberg

Which is

With a Reckxer Way through The Gittstack berthewish with myrater

way through

the deep

steward

the high

the high high

the her

German christen

height so

very jemmerly

besudeled

Hans

he

Thomas

Minta with

the hammer

The

Mugner

To be

St.

He'll

beg

to

Witten

He has A Lich's Mitten sand the earth's to bese alex

with a

rancett

through the

stanchet

the high

the high christen

of the

chrystern

high

christend height

all

all a gemmall i'm i i'm i'm i'm i i'm i hernish clenheit all the

very much

per suede

at

smearth

smearth

with the

hammer

this

this

sand-leemend fiendent to Wittenberg this Sanflemend

Fleth

Wittenberg Helleliches

with

perkerter way

through the

deepstile

The Heid

Inchrist

Heerbe

Herbair Christian Hight Hurt So high, the chrifice heirs he had chasten

height

all so

very emmerly

besudeled

had

he sprang the

Thomas

Mitzer

with the

hammer

this sanct mints are with the hammer this

sand-levene

blithe-te-to-witten

her

which is

mis-verpecker

veise

through the needstall

the he he eigen chit he here way through the bestal the high

rindgen

chryrd

here bernish

christenheit

so

very never

mrs.

Ad

sprang the

Thomas

Minster

with the hammer

this

sand

bled by the

flesh

to mutton

bear

the

black

per

in the light and the world the dexter I The Redkest Meparder, The Rheese,

the sweetest,

The oldest,

Eichester

Aught of the herbly

Christenheim

All so

Giles,

yamberlick

resuddled

had, spoke the Thomas Muntzer yamberlite besudel'd hath

sprang the Thomas

Muncher with the hammer to Bernich Heilich Belich

Belich

with

verted by

through the

deep stone

The Heidel

The Hermich

Christenheim

Heard

Alle

So

Gembe

Alle so in Christ I Oud God God Hey, all you're so a lot of Yeah, yo, hey

Yo, Ello

Spelled the Thomas

Minster with the hammer

Heyo,

Yo, heyo, yo,

Hey! Heyo, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, yo, hey

Oh! Hey! Jesus something

and did you feel my horse leader fasted in the

spirit of sun

Did you feel my heart

is being fasted with you all?

Did you feel like on your heart? Oh, you feel like one of the reader feeling like that you're still in the spirit

soul

If you feel like all

and the spirit of mind

trust your

oh

the spirit of sound The speed of time

The speed of time

The speed of time

The spirit of time

The speed

I am The spirit I'm

Oh

Oh

I'm Yeah

I'm

The spirit

And

Oh

Oh

Oh

Oh I Oh

I

Yeah and I Yeah The spirit of song

You know what you're going to be in the soul This little song You can't feel my mind.

I feel my mind.

I feel like that's still.

I'm going soul I feel my

voice

I'm still

I'm still

I'm still I'm I feel like this is all right. I feel like

I feel like

I'm always

that's still in the

machine I'm going to see my be able to that's the must be a

see

my

place

I'm

I'm I'm

I

just and

I'm I'm just

you're on in the show Did you feel my heart?

My heart is leading fasted in the spirit of soul?

Can you feel my heart is being fast as you are? alone. You feel like on the reader

I'm gonna see the star

up the spirit of soul

did you feel like all

my heart and see that

I'm gonna go around

the spirit The speed of sorrow The speed of time

The speed of time

The speed of time

The speed of time

The speed of sight The speed

We're going to

Oh

Oh

It's beautiful Yeah

The speed of

song

And

Oh

Oh Oh

This bit

Yeah The speed of So I'm a spirit and

the spirit

I'm

I'm I'm

I'm

the same

the

I'm

and I'm

I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm a little bit of shawl I'm going to see my mind

I've been

a bit of my eyes I'm going to be short I just feel

my voice

yeah

I'm still

a little bit more

I'm still

I'm

I'm sorry I'm I'm just going to show.

You're not feeling like to find out. I feel that's a little that's a

see the

soul

in the feel

I'm feeling I'm

a

question

with

you know

I'm

I'm

I

don't I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm going to be able to be.

I'm going you feel my heart is being fast-in-the-spirit in the spirit of sound are Do you feel my heart on the leader

I was born out of fear

I'm just going to see the sun

If you feel my heart

and I'm feeling my heart I'm feeling my heart The spirit of love you That's not The spirit of soul

The speed of silence The speed

I'm

Oh

Oh

The speed of

Yeah

The speed of

Sime

Yeah

Oh

Oh Oh Oh Oh Yeah The

The

I'm

A

A

A

A

A A A and the other people you know that's

a lot of

I'm I'm going to

and

I'm and

I'm

I'm I'm I'm and I'm I'm

I'm

I'm I'm

I'm and the other and

I'm a

I'm I'm I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm going to be able to be.

And I don't know. and the I'm not

I'm

I'm

I'm I'm gonna be a I'm gonna

I'm gonna

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

I'm going lot of the world. and the other people and you know I'm going to be able to be a little bit more

and a lot of Australia Australia 20 hours ago, bro, thank you.

21 hours ago, wow. Thank you, bro. Appreciate you with the 5.

What's up, y'all? I drink. you with the five.

What's up, y'all?

I drink Sprite now.

Cuzazz, what's up?

What's up, y'all?

Thanks for sending me money.

I'm using it to buy Sprite.

Thank you, Tom.

What's up, man? Appreciate you. Sprite zero, but zero anything.

Zero sugar. So basically drinking does nothing negative at all. It just tastes good. And there's zero repercussions. Zero calories. There's no issue.

What's up, y'all? How y'all doing? Midnight Warrior. What's up, bro? Appreciate you. Appreciate you, man.

Just got to quench my thirst after a long day on the yacht.

CJ, what's up, man? Appreciate you.

Just got to quench my thirst. It's been a long day on the yacht, guys. You're wondering why I'm late to the stream. I just been on my yacht all day, you know? And it's so funny. There was actually an accident. You see, the yacht wasn't able to park right. And we ended up in yacht traffic okay could you believe it there's

something called yacht traffic because in this economy everyone's doing so well there's so many

yachts i was stuck in yacht traffic for like an hour you know So that's why the stream is late.

But I've been spending all day on my yacht.

By the way, guys, I got to fuel my yacht.

So thank you for the donation so I can refuel my yacht, you know?

Got to take it to the yacht gas station.

What's going on, everybody? How are we doing today?

So we have a lot to talk about. We're another day into this incredibly amusing, extremely low effort, low energy attack by the federal government on our ACP, our American Communist Party.

It's kind of like, it's still going, but I think people are getting tired of it now.

They're like, okay, okay, okay, we get it.

Way to beat a dead horse.

It's like if ACP is dead, if you've made your point,

you've got to do it every single day.

Well, guys, I think some things are in order, actually.

I want to talk about some stuff that's going on.

We're in the midst of Woke 2.

This is the rise of Woke 2.

And Woke 2 is going to be more intense than woke one so we had woke one woke one lasted

until just about like till charlie kirk died i guess and then uh after charlie kirk woke one is like completely dead forever like And then after Charlie Kirk,

Woke 1 is like completely dead forever.

Like Woke 1 is gone, right?

Phil Fo, what's up?

So after Charlie Kirk, we've been witnessing the rise of Woke 2.

Woke 2 is just if you understand what woke is

sound like

fucking Matt Walsh

right now

you can just

vaguely distill it

in this kind of way

right?

Moral,

morality, moral

authority.

The United States

is losing

all moral authority,

right?

The U.S. does this teeter-totter thing. It goes from two extremes, right? You have on the one hand an extreme puritanical, moral intensity of just like puritanical like freak morally absolute

moral universalism

righteousness superiority

you have that one

sorry I'm 30 years old

you have that one

and then the pendulum

also then

it swings to the other one

the opposite end of the pendulum is usually

like

oh

we're just gonna fucking kill

and rape everyone because we don't care

because the world is depraved

like if you think about it,

the 1960s was like,

you know,

the moral part where the hippies are like,

the yacht is crying.

And then in the 80s,

it was like,

you know,

Patrick Bateman,

you know, rapist cocaine on a yacht with an Uzi gun or some shit.

And then in the 1990s, say the song, save the night for the better time.

Time to wait, mine. That was the 90s. And then in the better time. Time to wait.

That was the 90s.

And then in the 2000, the 2000s, you had like the mean girl, I don't know, like Backstreet Boys, like Britney Spears type of thing.

Like the early 2000s was like, like women were like, if you're not skinny, kill yourself, bitch.

And it was like just like extremely, you know, glamorous.

And then, you know, that that lasted until Obama.

And Obama was another moral period in time.

And then, you know, we had

Kim K. And then we slid. And then when Trump got

elected in 2016, that's when

woke basically became a thing. Then that's basically

when we had woke. And woke was, well, woke was what

it was, you know, George Floyd,

Black Lives Matter protest in 2020,

the whole thing. You guys are familiar with it, you know?

And then after woke one, we had the whole

anti-woke backlash. So is matt walsh this is ben

shapiro jordan peterson was at the avant-garde uh nick fentes is one of the people i guess

you also had andrew tate that was the backlash against woke backlash against woke was mainly like the opposite end of the

pendulum and now the pendulum is swinging back to the intensity of moral you know the moral feeling

that is missing in this country, right?

So, you need to understand that this isn't woke too.

This is like woke 50 in the history of this country.

It's a pendulum.

It's like a bipolar country.

You know, it swings back and forth between these two extremes across U.S. history.

I mean, you can go very far, and you can find this pattern across history. Okay.

You can find this across every period of U.S. history.

You basically have this pendulum swinging back and forth between the two extremes.

And the pendulum is swinging back just as extremely, like as much as the pendulum swung in an extreme direction toward like the Andrew Tate,

Nick Fuentes, kind of thing.

Pendulum is now

going to swing back in the exact

opposite extreme.

With like the same intensity, it's going to,

that's how pendulums work. You know, they keep getting

more and more extreme and extreme.

Now, what are we anticipating?

This is not a pendulum between left and right.

This is a pendulum between, let's call it moral conviction and material realism. Let's call it moral conviction and material realism, right?

And if you're a Marxist in America, then eschatologically, what you want, the thing that's going to be finally causing a revolution in this country is when the pendulum swings high enough that it actually starts becoming a circle and that that's how you get a logos right because part of the logos of a nation the fundamental essence of like what makes a nation a nation is how it combines and reconciles into a pattern a a discernible pattern, a relationship between moral order

and our intuitive, unconscious understanding of our material relationships. How, you know,

what is real, not just what should be, but what is. How you balance an understanding of our view of what the

objective is and the subjective, in other words, right? The moral, but also the material, how those

things acquire harmonious synthesis, that only happens when the pendulum swings all the way up.

So, in a sense, I'm a, in some sense, I'm a a woke accelerationist just like I was an anti-woke

accelerationist I don't care I don't know where it's going to finally break and do a full

360 you know during the anti-woke period, I was very intensely anti-woke, because I'm trying to push the pendulum up.

But if the pendulum is going to go up in the opposite direction, hey, I'll happily be infarwoke. I'll happily be woke. Because our goal is to get the

pendulum up. The goal is to get the pendulum up. That's it.

The pendulum is only down right now.

The pendulum is swinging like this, right?

Whichever, it's getting more and more extreme as it swings with intensity, right?

We were just like here was like Nick Fuentes, Andrew Tate, whatever.

Now it's going to swing in the opposite direction right here, right?

I want the pendulum to go up.

Moral, you know, moral conviction and material realism, whatever you want to call it, right?

So, we want the pendulum up.

We want to combine moral conviction with the comprehension of the material.

And that's how you get cosmological moral authority.

That's moral authority finally given substance.

Because morality in America, since the time of the Puritans,

has been the morality of pure spirit, the morality of pure conceit, a morality that sticks its nose up into the air and says, I'm superior, I know better. That's the more,

the morality that doesn't want to dirty its hands in the material filth of the world, right? That's the

American spirit of morality. It's a morality that only goes up toward the clouds and doesn't ever dig its

feet in the dirt, right? And then on the other hand, you have this amoralism or this anti-moralism,

which is only focusing on the dirt and has no sense of the spiritual, the moral

at all. And it actually becomes depraved and degenerate, right?

So, as the pendulum swings in the direction of a new woke

uh i just want to think about guys i'm gonna be maybe i'm aging maybe i'm getting old

when you're on twitter

being edgy and shit it's just just like, I'm not moralizing.

I'm just saying, like, guys, it's not really the vibe anymore.

You could just be like, shut up, bitch.

I don't know.

It's kind of like...

Whenever I see edgy shit on Twitter, I'm just kind of like...

It's just kind of not...

It's kind of like...

The only things that work and are effective are what

intensity the intensity

of the pendulum so to speak right

and it's like

we need a moral code I've been thinking

about this a lot we need a moral code

some people tell me in the ACP, they're like, Haas.

Does the ACP need a social media guidelines?

No, I think we just need a moral code in general.

I just think we need moral guidance.

You guys need moral guidance.

We are a great cult.

You want to know what the problem with you guys is?

I'm going to do a very humble self-criticism right now and also a criticism of you.

My humble self-criticism is that you guys just don't look for me to guidance enough you don't listen to me

enough that's the problem you should listen to the cult leader more and then everything would

be fine if you just listen to me more right because when I tell you things, it just people rush

past me. Hey,

I'm telling you something. Don't just

fucking ignore what I'm telling you.

What am I speaking in vain

for no reason?

If that's the case, if I'm speaking in vain,

just send me my $5,000 check per month and you'll never see my face again.

I guess, right?

If you just need me as your symbolic authority to just sit here and be your symbol for you. Then give me your five,

give me $5,000 a month and I'll fuck off.

Otherwise, I'm here to give you leadership and guidance.

You should look to me for guidance.

You should actually fucking listen to me

should take it into consideration

take it into heart what I say

I'm not here to speak in vain

I'm here to talk to you guys about shit that matters

if I'm telling you something

there's a reason I'm telling you. I'm not just talking to talk.

Okay? I'm not just doing this shit for money. I'm not turning on my stream at 11 p.m. because I'm hungry for money. I'm turning on my stream at 11 p.m. Because I have something to tell you.

Things I've told you before,

but I'm going to have to repeat myself,

which I will, okay?

You know when you guys hit the hardest,

when you hit the enemy the hardest?

Like, don't be petty. Don't be petty and personal. Don't be weak, but also don't be petty. Be like Volkvulture. You know, if you want to

make fun of people for being cringe, just do that.

But why, the more times you have to use slurs against someone, the weaker it lands.

I'm just going to be frank. The more slurs you use, it doesn't land well

in terms of like

how much you're actually crushing the enemy

the goal is to defeat and destroy the enemy

if you want to destroy the enemy

don't just spam slurs

that doesn't work

it's really fucking ineffective.

When you guys are spamming slurs at people, you know what it sounds like?

It sounds like a little bitch being like, eh.

Like, you know what's really hard hitting and effective being stone cold like Volkvulture?

Just hitting them with the hammer.

Hitting them with the fucking hammer.

You keep your cool, you hit them with a...

Bro, keep your chill.

This is...

I'm gonna...

We're gonna go over the seven laws of the guerrilla moral code, okay?

And I'm gonna walk you through why each and every one of them are important.

But before I get into these laws, okay, actually I can break this.

This is part of law one.

Okay, the seven laws of the

infra-woke guerrilla moral code, because we're entering a new woke era,

and we're going to be ahead of it by being infra-woke. We're going to be at the

avant-garde of the new woke, which I've already been since Allah-cosmo-Jijing.

I've been. I've been focusing on Allah Cosmo Xi Jinping I've been.

I've been focusing on the moral dimension, moral authority, the ironic moral dimension, right?

I believe in moral authority.

I've been on this before.

People can say I follow trends.

That's not true.

Before Woke 2 even came out, I was on this extremely powerful, cosmological,

astrological, moral orientation, right?

But I explain how the morality is actually material and cosmological.

Anyway, we're going to go over the seven laws, okay? And why the number seven? Because seven's a lucky number.

Okay. So, here's the thing. Law one, you must be moral and righteous to the

utmost without being pretentious. Do you know what that means? That means be moral without enjoying being moral in the sense of like, oh, I'm so moral. Just be right versus wrong. Righteousness. Conduct yourself with righteousness.

You are in the right.

You are in the right.

You have to tell yourself.

You have to know you're in the right.

Don't just look shoulder to shoulder, be like,

am I getting approved by my peers?

No.

You have to internally do everything you do with the conviction

that it is correct.

Okay?

But you can't be pretentious about it.

No, no, no, you're not getting anything in return.

I get to be bragging and pretentious.

No, you don't. You can't look down on anyone either.

You have to just be moral.

Be in alignment with the moral.

Alignment with the cosmos.

Now,

part of this thing about not being pretentious, never rise above humility.

You need to be humble and maintain a sense of humor. Okay. You cannot abandon humor. You cannot abandon comedy. Maintain your sense of humor.

Jesus Christ, maintain your sense of humor. One of the most disastrous things y'all could be doing

out here in the trenches is not having a sense of humor. Have a sense of humor. Okay. But be righteous. Okay. Second part of the moral

code. But part of number one, part of number one. Part of number one of this moral code, okay?

Keep your chill.

Even if you're going to, you don't know how you ratios someone.

Nick, can I ask you a question?

Has there ever been a single angry person who's ever raciote someone? Has that ever

happened? It's never happened in history. You want to be effective in exposing how stupid and disgusting

our enemies are? Just be chill. Yes, reply to them, but be chill about it. Be like,

if you see something fucking stupid, just

just fucking, like, mock them. Just be like, chill about

it, though. Don't lose your chill. Don't type with your fingers

with anger.

Okay?

It's in vain.

That's important.

Okay.

And don't be policing.

Jesus Christ, like... Don't be on some stupid-ass shit.

I'm just going to say some shit.

Don't police women at all for anything.

I don't give a fuck what it is. Even if a bitch has an only fan. Just fucking ignore her. Let's say a woman has an only fans, but is friendly toward our community. Just leave her the fuck alone. Don't even bring up her fucking only fan. Just be like, we welcome your support.

We welcome your support.

That's it. That's the only,

don't do this fucking thing. You're not the

Sharia, you're not police.

Stop the fucking cringe,

okay? It's none of your fucking

business. Do we approve of it? No, we don't. But is it our fucking business? It's not? It's none of your fucking business. Do we approve of it?

No, we don't.

But is it our fucking business?

It's not.

It's just the truth.

It's just the fucking truth.

Like, I...

It's none of our fucking business.

Who gives a fuck?

It's the fucking internet, okay number two law number two

okay you must reject wickedness depravity and oppose it wherever you see it without hypocrisy.

Oh boy, this one's important.

Don't follow social trends.

Don't just, don't, don't outsource your moral center to the social realm.

If you see evil shit,

you need to fucking oppose it.

What am I actually talking about?

You want to know what our disgusting enemies do?

And they're doing probably now. They they always do this they will make fake

alts then they'll make a splinter discord and then they'll invite you guys to your the little

by the way if i find out anyone's in a splinter discord you're getting fucking exiled for the

community forever and actually i'll make sure

that you're banned from the party too all these fucking splinter discords right though they'll set up a

splinter discord this is literally what they do the anti acp cult it's like four to five people that do this for their full-time

job. They'll set up a splinter discord. They'll invite all these people from IGG from the community.

And then they will start slowly and slowly making you comfortable with depravity and evil-ass shit.

And then maybe they'll try to use humor, they'll try to use something.

But they themselves will be very depraved.

These are our moral enemies, by the way, who morally moralize about us.

This is what they do on their spare time.

And they openly talk about how they do this, right?

So we have the intel to know they're doing this all the time.

And they'll invite you guys to be in these discords with them where none of us can see you.

So you're hidden from me, you're hidden from the mods, you're hidden from Amirio.

And then they'll proceed

to try to trap you into saying some

highness-ass shit. You know, some shit about women or

something. Some disgusting shit.

You know?

And then their goal is to say, this is the ACP, this is infrared

meanwhile y'all are basically like children

getting groomed in a social context

well what's the fucking problem from square one

you guys

you rely too much on the social to the fucking problem from square one. You guys,

you rely too much on the social for your moral compass.

You can't tell right from wrong.

You don't have an internal compass,

so you just go with the fucking flow.

You allow yourselves to be tricked

and put into social environments where something is

acceptable. A lot of this is human

nature, but the guerrilla army has to be

fucking different. It has to be

fucking different. So if they do these

sciops and infiltrate the community

to make y'all look bad,

ultimately the fault lies with you

because these people are fucking losers,

they're feds,

that what do you expect from them?

But putting yourself in a position

where you allow yourselves to be

infiltrated by people who don't have our principles and our morals,

you need to fucking

reject wickedness depravity, oppose it,

wherever you fucking see it.

Even if it appears to be among your peers, you should need to risk losing your social standing.

You need to risk losing your social position.

People are doing wicked evil shit.

Call it the fuck out.

And bring it to the attention of the mods,

bring it to my attention, and if it's related to the party,

of course you bring it to the attention of the party.

Don't let people trick you into losing your moral compass

because a lot of you don't have one beyond the... Don't let people trick you into losing your moral compass.

Because a lot of you don't have one beyond the social thing online.

And you need guidance.

I understand people are human.

But that's very fucking important.

Don't lose your moral compass.

Third thing, extend good faith to strangers. You only oppose them in self-defense. What does that fucking mean, by the way? It means be chill by default. Your default attitude is to just be chill. If you don't know strangers, the stranger. You know, it's not a job for a

stranger to present themselves to you in a way that is familiar to you. It's your job to extend

good faith to everyone regardless. This is that idea about the law of the stranger that I talked about yesterday, right?

There's a stranger within, there's a stranger from without. You have to be good faith to strangers.

You have to give people the benefit of the doubt. That's what that means. Give people the benefit of the doubt that's what that means give people the benefit of

the doubt even if it's naively so just given the benefit of the doubt only when they cross the line

they slander they attack they say bullshit okay then it's self-defense but by default you have to have good faith to strangers uh four you

you should be you have to be patient with people straight up four you have to be ferocious without sadism.

Okay?

When you defeat an enemy, just fucking leave them on the corner and fucking go.

Don't keep poking and torturing a defeated enemy.

Just fucking move on.

We don't want to spend our energy tearing people

down but if we have to fucking do it

you better be fucking ready to do it

like a fucking lion

pounces on their prey I mean I'm talking about the fucking internet

but in any case

be ferocious don't be this

don't do this fucking chungus thing where they're like,

well, sir, my lady, I apologize. I am here to extend my. Or you just like see someone random and

you're like, good sire let me

no they're gonna step on you don't

fucking be a bitch

just be chill

okay

some kind people overdo shit

they overdo shit in either way and it's like

no find the balance.

This is called dialectics. Find the fucking balance.

Strike the balance.

You must be ferocious.

You can't be sadistic about it.

We don't like to torture.

You know why torture is disgusting and retarded?

Because torture basically means you are weak.

Like, you need to continuously cause harm and pain to someone.

What's the goal?

You're just, you're like, you know, it's like a, that songs,

wake me up inside, wake me up inside.

Like, that's you internally screaming with hatred toward God and a sense of like confusion and befuddlement and

internal like confusion and you you need to torture and hurt people over and over again

because there's something within you that you're not at peace with, right?

So I hate torture.

I hate people who torture.

It's like, look, defeat an enemy, destroy an enemy, and be done with it.

Have a goal in mind.

Causing people pain and getting pleasure from that is disgusting.

Okay?

That can't be who we are.

I don't want anyone in our ranks to be sadistic about

anything, you know? Be ferocious

with a goal in mind.

Focus on the goal, lock the fuck in.

You must be merciful without weakness. Okay, focus on the goal, lock the fuck in. You must be merciful without weakness. Okay,

that's law five. What does that mean? It means that you show mercy from a position of strength.

Don't go, don't, don't rush and go out of your way to be merciful to people who are not at your mercy

it's as simple as that but when they're at your mercy and the threat is gone show mercy

when they're at your mercy and they're no longer a threat then it's time to show mercy okay

forgive even if every single one of our enemies every single one of these people

especially i'm talking mainly on the left

if they decided tomorrow

to just be like you know what

I'm done with this

twisted sick life I'm leading

I apologize

I'm I'm sorry. I apologize.

I'm sorry. Would I forgive them?

Yeah, because I don't fucking know these people. Why wouldn't I forgive them?

Yes, I would. I don't hold grudges. I really don't. And it makes me sad that I don't hold grudges. I really don't.

And it makes me sad that I don't hold grudges for these people because they must hold grudges.

You know, having some bitch-ass person just stop being a bitch-ass person, that's great to me.

It's just like less of my time wasted.

I just don't like my time wasted. The thing that I don't like

is having my time wasted.

Do I hold grudges? No, because I'm at peace with

myself. That's why. If you're at

peace with yourself, you don't hold grudges.

Move the fuck on. Move the fuck on.

Move the fuck on.

You know what a grudge means?

It's like,

You took everything from me!

I'll never forgive you!

That's what our haters are like.

They're like,

you took everything from me! I'm like... That's what our haters are like. They're like, huh?

You check everything from me.

I'm like,

I don't even know who you are.

You're not at peace with yourself.

You need to be at peace with yourself.

Put that in the law. You need to be at peace with yourself that's put that in the law you need to be at peace with yourself

you can't be holding rudges

never forget

but you should forgive

but never forget.

But when an enemy needs to be destroyed, they need to be destroyed, for sure.

Okay, six, you must not tell lies, but you must rightly discern the content and not just form of truth. What does that mean? You can't be in this autism anglo box. You need to understand context means something. Ultimately, what is the content of what is being communicated ultimately you have to think in these kind of ways

so don't tell lies tequila is not a form of lying by the way many people are not ready for this

wisdom okay seventh law i love this one this is my favorite one do not ready for this wisdom. Okay. Seventh law.

I love this one. This is my favorite one.

Do not gossip.

The alivis, part of their like pillars, their laws. It's like no

they say you, well they have

three that they say. They say you control

your hand.

Don't use your hand to steal and don't cause harm.

Don't attack people.

Don't kill people.

And then they say, control your tongue.

Don't gossip.

Don't speak evil.

And don't lie in this world.

And then the third one is actually really funny.

It's control your loins.

So it's about adultery.

Like don't go in, you know, don't go and have a bunch of extramarital affairs or something.

I don't know.

So these are the three laws that the Olives have, the moral code of the Olives.

But my favorite one is the one about gossiping.

Control your tongue.

Don't gossip.

Don't gossip.

Because of what, you know what my definition of gossip means?

I'll tell you my definition of gossiping.

Speaking about other people's private business to no end that's the definition of gossip if there's an

end if this is critical information that has practical significance okay example, if you're informing on someone,

if you're saying that this person has,

okay, there's, we need to know this information.

If the information has relevance,

if the information has importance or significance,

then it's not gossip.

Okay?

Conversations you wouldn't have, and that's not true okay sometimes people need to be informed on gay but that's not gossip gossip is to no end you're talking about people's private business

because you enjoy doing it.

Especially if you're a man and you're gossiping, you have critically low testosterone levels.

I'm just going to be fucking honest. If you're a man and you enjoy gossiping about people,

you have extremely critically low testosterone.

Like, you just sit there and you're like, oh, and did you hear, did you hear about the high elves in the Somerset Isles? Like, if you're sitting there just like, you know what a bitch-ass person you sound like?

You know how, like,

you know what a little bitch you sound like?

How low your testosterone has to be?

If this is what you spend your time doing,

like a little bitch.

Like, you have no idea what you look like.

You're literally like those fucking bitch-ass people from oblivion. Like, you have no idea what you look like. You're literally like those fucking bitch-ass people from Oblivion.

Like, I had the story of the thing.

Did you know?

It's so fucking, like, you're literally had man cities if this is the type of shit you're doing, your spare time.

So I hate gossipers.

I hate gossip.

You just, you turn, just, if it's no one's being harmed and it doesn't matter. Excuse yourself.

Excuse yourself from the room.

You know in Islam,

stories of Islam,

angels will not enter your room

while you have sex.

So when you're with your wife and you have sex, the angels will not, they'll leave. Why? Because the angels are good. Because they have piety. They say, this is not my business. I'm leaving. I'm not going to be here because respect. It's like they understand the

boundary. And it has to be the same when it comes to gossip. Like if it doesn't harm anyone

and it has nothing to do with you, and it is of no practical significance, you turn and excuse

yourself and try to forget about it, actually. You try to forget about it and excuse yourself.

That's the correct way to be things like, you know?

Someone who's, you know, gossip, it's like for peeping thoms.

It's like a degenerate, disgusting thing, you know?

Something that doesn't concern you, but simultaneously is of no practical significance, harms no one.

When you're witnessing someone suffering,

when you witness someone suffering, you know,

it's like, it could be anything.

You know what a good example would be?

Like, if I walked into a room and I you know what a good example would be like if i

walked into a room

and i saw someone

one of you shit their pants

i walk in you shit your pants

okay what you know what i'm going to do i'm going to walk out of that room

and pretend i never saw that.

Now, if you keep doing it over and over again,

you're going to, you know, you're going to have a,

I'm going to have to talk to you and tell you that you need to get it under control or you're gone.

Wanderers, because that's disgusting.

But let's say you walk, let's say

you're with a friend and they shit their pants.

Okay.

You excuse yourself and pretend you never saw it.

And literally wipe it from your mind.

Because why would you want to...

That's the angelic way to behave,

you know? The demonic way to behave you know

the demonic way to be to run to the group chat

be like he'll just shit his bans

he'll just shit his bad that's demonic

because all you're doing is humiliating and torturing someone

it has nothing to do with anyone. Be angelic

and excuse yourself. Excuse yourself from such things, you know? But at the same time,

what does it mean to cause harm?

Does it mean only cause harm to you?

If you see people doing things that cause harm to the movement, potentially they're causing harm to themselves, inform on them to proper authority, inform on them, to us, inform on them.

If they're doing something, if they're wrecking, if they're doing something immoral and evil and wicked.

If their you know, their conduct is not

up to the standards of what we would consider

acceptable for us,

you better inform on them.

You better inform on them.

That's not gossip. That's critical information we need to

root out people who may not fit up and live up to the standards of what it takes to be a member

of this party, this organization, this movement, this infrared movement, whatever it is, right?

These are the seven moral codes of the guerrilla army.

And, you know, guys, I want you to take them seriously.

And every time you're online, every time you're on social media, I want you to think about

the seven laws.

Am I violating the seven laws?

Am I violating the seven infrowoke laws?

Think about it.

None of these laws you can be formalistic about. You have to think about these laws. You have to think about these laws, right? So when you're on social media, when you're interacting with people, you need to think of these laws. I'm not telling you to be weak and back off from our enemies.

I'm telling you that you need to observe

the seven laws whenever. And read

them again. The seven laws are right there.

You read the seven laws. Okay.

The seven laws

of the guerrilla army.

Right? We should make a song that like the the eight the the the pla they had the

rules of attention what was it called again your laws sound like stoicism and no, it's not stoicism.

Hey, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh.

I have to sing to

lower my anger levels.

No, I'm not telling you to be stoic at all.

I'm telling you to actually

be emotional about what matters.

I'm telling you not to have no emotions.

I'm just telling you to understand what emotions are.

I'm telling you to...

All of this...

Okay, you want to know the truth

all of this is about love

just like Che Guevara

said

you observe seven laws like these

you conduct yourself with righteousness

you are moral because you love the revolution, because you love

the communist empire in the making, because you love 2036, because you love the glory, the

greatness of what's to come, because you love the glory the greatness of what's to come because you love the object what you know the objective

this is why i mean it's out of devotion to something that you have a moral code you only because you're

devoted to something you don't want to let it down you're part of history do you want to let down

the place in the story that you occupy do Do you want to like let that down? You know, be inconsistent with it?

Um, I don't give a fuck about this Greek fuck who said, I was a stoic and he had devotion.

The stoics were disgusting

and filthy. I'll never

tell you to be a fucking stoic. Don't be

a stoic. It's stupid.

Stoicism. It's stupid. Stoicism.

It's fucking stupid.

It's not stoicism because I also want you to, you got to be like the Shia.

Aydar, Ayder, Ida, you need to be like this intense devotion

that's not stoicism

that's not stoicism

that's not stoicism

you just need to

there needs to be a proper place

like we need to have rituals

where we have this intense

Allah calls Moshe by the way when we have this intense Allah Cosmosi

By the way, when we have the National Congress,

I will, I will begin a chant.

We're all going to sing together.

Allah Cosmosi Jinping.

It's going to be like a Sufi thing.

It's been like one of these...

You know when Sufis are in the room and they're circling,

they're like, hey, hey, hey, hey,

we're going to be doing the same shit.

Allah, Cosmojiji, we're going to be doing that.

See, the Sufi way is not stoic.

There's room for the emotion, but there needs to be a clarity.

What do you care about?

What matters?

What has significance?

What is actually real?

What takes you beyond the threshold of your rational faculties? Of course, there's a sublime threshold that must take you beyond the faculties of any kind of stoic temperament. You need to actually have a passionate devotion to the cause, to the truth, to God, or whatever you want to call it, Cosmos, whatever you want to call it.

Revolution, right?

But if you're a man, just don't cry ever honestly just

unless someone dies

or you have conquered a city like tamerlane

when he's sacked deli and then he cries and he goes to the crown

thanks god finally and he goes to the crown.

Thanks God.

Finally.

You know, when we reach the end goal, you can cry.

It tears of joy, you know. Actually, I believe men should not cry unless someone dies or unless it's

tears of joy for a great something really great right my opinion great, right? My opinion.

If you're watching a sad movie, do not cry, buddy.

Let your girlfriend cry. Don't cry if you watch us. Oh, I not cry, buddy. Let your girlfriend cry.

Don't cry if you watch us.

Oh, I'm sorry, we're in Woke 2.

I never went.

No, in Woke 2, we are the moral authority.

In Woke 2, we are in for woke.

We're taking over, Woke 2.

We're hijacking this shit.

Woke 2 is in for woke.

Hey, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh. Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, oh, hey, oh.

Hey, hey.

How do you guys not love that song?

You guys didn't fuck with that Thomas Munster song, huh?

I fuck with that song.

I was fucking getting my steps into that song.

I go to the gym to that song. Hey, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh.

The song, if you, I can't believe you guys call yourself Christians. You're not real Christians.

I'm the Christian. I'm the real Christian because I think about the song it's saying the lyrics are so nice. They're saying these fuckers in this castle, they stole.

There's a theft of the Holy Scripture.

They've stolen the Holy Scripture.

They've corrupted it.

They've corrupted Christianity.

And this is exactly an... you know what I think about

the song in America

this evangelical country

with all these mega churches

you know I

I think

I don't like this Latin stuff

I'm going to be honest

I have two shia extremism gulat kisleba shia extremism

thomas munser florian geyer peasants war of germany these are the this is the main spiritual polarity for me because

the truth is jesus needs to be reclaimed before it's possible for islam to be revealed again

or to acquire reality on earth again, you know?

Like Jesus has been stolen and I love the Protestant Reformation a lot.

I love Thomas Munser and Florian Geier in the Peasants War I love that so much. It's like that happened

at the exact same time as the Kisselbos

and the Safavit Empire was rising by the way.

Literally the same exact time.

It was happening exactly

like together, the same time, right?

And the reason why that was happening was because before then there was the auspicious consumption of jupiter and saturn and so sahib kiran appears on earth in this

form of christianity being reborn just which is part of the Islamic eschatology.

The Protestant Reformation is part of Islamic eschatology. When Christianity is in, the first articulation

of Islam was falsehood after the prophet. Why? Because they betrayed the Prophet's family. So Islam was forgotten for a long time. The Shia kept fighting and fighting, but there's something foundational to Islam that was totally wiped and forgotten from the beginning, right? And so the key to

unraveling the secret of the messenger's revelation in Islam is we have to go back to Christianity. We have to

pass through the stage that the Sufi is called, the stage of luminous black in the heart, which is associated with the Jesus of your being.

Okay.

Until Jesus is properly remembered, until we properly return to Jesus, we cannot reach the Emerald Mountain. We cannot actually reach the

Prophet Muhammad's revelation until we actually pass through the Jesus within, right? Which is the

luminous black, the deepest part of the heart right and that's what the

protest that's what the German peasants war was it was an awakening to the fact that the

message of Christ and Christ had been corrupted memory of of Christ was corrupted, okay, fully.

And they woke up.

It was this profound awakening,

that there's something about Jesus that's been forgotten,

and it's a return to Jesus.

And the stage of luminous black that the Sufis talk about of the Ishraq school, right?

Specifically, that stage is about Jesus is associated.

I mean, not to be cringe, but it's like the utmost sense of compassion, the utmost sense of the complete annihilation of the ego for the stranger, for the other, for the meek, for the poor, for the downtrodden.

So there's an immediate kind of communistic significance to that of these german peasants fighting

for each other fighting for their dignity you know fighting for their humanity and like that's

part of the eschatology that I believe in, right?

So, and we in America, we have to reclaim Jesus, you know, so I fully am in line with that

tradition, that lineage.

Anyway.

Hey, anyway. Well, how did I even get to this while I was singing?

Yeah, guys, look, I'm not talking about stoicism.

Was it, yeah, when I say someone dies, you can cry.

I said, you can cry when someone dies, okay?

Jesus Christ.

So, the seven laws of the guerrilla moral coat and whoever, it's not stoicism.

Because you want to know why I'm really against this interpretation that it's

stoicism?

I'll tell you exactly what my problem with the interpretation that it's stoicism is.

I don't want you guys to repress your humanity. Don't repress your individuality and your

human. As cringe as that sounds, every person has a level of human dignity.

If someone hurts your feelings, you have a right to confront them about that.

But just keep things in their proper place.

Okay, let's say you're sitting at a

Coney Island or a diner

with your comrades.

And one of them lets out a massive fart

and it's disgusting.

Okay?

What they did, it was like a disrespectful bomb.

It was like an affront to your entire meal.

So you have two options.

You could say, well, I'm stoic, so I don't care.

So then you just hold it in it like you're stowing.

I'm not going to do anything.

Then you get in the car, you go home, you're in the car, or you don't go home.

You get in the car, you go to the party event.

They're in the car.

You're just not saying anything because you don't want to, well, there's resentment is building up.

Okay, you have option two,

which is what the immature millennial man children do. They fart,

and then you immediately go on Twitter and you go,

The NCBain

has abandoned Leninism,

and I cannot believe

this.

This is the most unprincipled,

uncarmament.

You become like the Martin Luther of

rebelling against the Catholic Church

and you have to nail your

fort. Or you can be mature and just tell the person, hey man, it's presupposed. Yes, we're

comrades. Yes, we're in alignment. We have the same principles. We're fighting for the same thing.

But it's not okay for you to fart like this.

It's not okay.

Like you can't do that when we're having dinner.

It was what you did felt disrespectful to me.

I felt it was disrespectful.

And if you're the guilty one, you have two ways of responding.

You can just get defensive.

You have to balance.

We need a sense of justice, is what I'm saying.

And it goes the same.

By the way, our party doesn't deal with, like, people in relationships and and shit but there's also justice at that level

like don't don't sleep with your comrade's wife god forbid even if she's not even in the party it

well she's it's not in the party it doesn't matter

no because there's something called right and wrong

there's a moral code

it's called morality we have a moral code

that should be implicit

okay

and it's just like things like that you know it's like well what matter am so don't be stoic you know a stoic person would say well

it's okay because no it's not okay. Your dignity is very important.

You know, we are human. Your humanity is very important.

But at the same time, you need to not confuse, you need to understand.

Just have a clarity. Have a clarity.

You're not upset. Like, if your feelings get hurt, let's say you're in the party,

and let's say you propose an idea and your idea

gets shot down from space. And you genuinely get hurt. Your feelings get hurt. At that point,

you need to reflect. You need to not take such things personally you are wrong in

having that feeling actually because you're displacing something you're turning the party into an

intersubjective interpersonal relationship but the party is relationship. But the party is not a person. The party is not a

subject. You cannot turn the party. You cannot grow resentment. You cannot grow resentment over such things.

Don't displace and project your personal relationships to the party.

You need to have, and that goes for the infrared community too.

Like, you need to have a solid distinction where here's my private human dignity.

This is my private human dignity.

And then here is the objective reality of the collective struggle.

But it's like, do not confuse those two things.

I'm not telling you to suppress and deny one of those things

i'm not telling you to destroy your individuality for the collective i'm telling you to know

what the individual where the individual begins where the individual ends

and where the collective begins.

That's what I'm telling you

to understand.

Wanderers, what's up?

I'm not telling you to

suppress your feelings

and your individuality

for the party.

I'm just telling you

to respect the party

enough to know

where these things begin and end because you can be

wrong you can be wrong in your feeling it's not simply wrong that you have feelings you're it reveals a

wrong attitude to the party if If you submit a proposal and it gets shot down and you take it personally, your relationship to the party is on a wrong basis.

It's a wrong premise because you're not respecting the party as something objective.

You're using the party as a receptacle

of interpersonal

recognition and validation.

And ego.

You're letting your ego

bounce and reflect from the party.

That's a big fucking mistake. Everything I'm

saying applies to the infrared movement too, by the way, right? It's up, Wanderers. So it's like,

I'm not telling you to have no individuality. I'm telling you to know where these things begin and end.

Simple as that.

Also online on the internet.

It's fine to just tell people to get a job.

It's fine to tell people like, really, this is your life.

But don't let people get to you and make you crash out.

And

visceral nastiness we don't need to do that you don't need to be viscerally nasty you know

when you're viscerally nasty with people it's kind of intimate i'm going to be honest visceral

nastiness is a category of intimacy. And you have to consider to what extent do you even want to be related to a person, even if it's intense hatred and frustration. It's like, well, how much do you actually want to think about that person or be related to them?

You know?

Um, so this is the moral code of the guerrilla army. This is our moral code.

This is our moral code. It's very simple. Actually, it's the simplest moral code in the entire world. It's so simple. You have to be retarded not to understand, okay?

But a lot of people are in their head, they're children.

They're mentally children.

They don't, they're immature.

They have no understanding.

Everything I would say would fly past their head. you know what i mean men hushn man humphan humphan humphraq did you was munsa with them, hama.

You know, I got that from a song. I stole it from a song.

And it was a good song actually so guys this is our moral code you have to be in for woke

you have to be in for woke you have to have a sense of moral compass.

And most of you aren't going to get it, by the way.

I hope you guys get it.

But I know some of you are not going to get it, and you're going to go straight.

You know what it is you know how i

you know how sometimes i'm made to feel i feel like i'm opening best buy on black friday

y'all are all waiting in line best buy on black friday y'all are all waiting in line okay ones of you

hear me i know the audio will get disrupted best buy on black friday okay so i'm standing in front of best buy before it opens on black Best Buy on Black Friday. Okay.

So I'm standing in front of Best Buy before it opens on Black Friday.

Y'all are lined up, ready to get in.

Okay, I'm standing in front of it.

Y'all are lined up, ready to rush in.

Okay, my audio is going to get fucked gonna get fucked up one sec me a second yeah how's it now ones if we're good Okay. So I'm in front of the best buy

and I'm giving y'all very precise instructions

I feel like I'm in the geek squad

I'm like okay guys

be sure to remember

before you cross this line into the Best Buy, you need to be safe.

You need to not trample each other over.

It's very...

Y'all are like wild fucking animals sometimes.

You're like salivating.

You're tuning what I'm saying out. and you're just thinking about the Xbox.

And so, ding!

When it's midnight or whatever, and the door is to Best Buy open,

y'all rush past me.

You rush past me. You rush past me.

Stop.

And fucking think.

Like, are you retarded? Are you a retarded wild animal?

Fucking think!

I'm not the fucking geek squad.

I'm not a best buy employee in front of the fucking best buy.

I am your commanda.

Your commanda.

Y'all trying to rush.

You need to lock the fuck in.

You need to be like Haidar.

Y'all have dog energy.

You need to have lion energy. I'm going to explain the difference between dog energy and dog energy. You need to have lion energy.

I'm going to explain the difference between dog energy and lion energy.

Dog energy is a stupid, retarded dog with floppy ears and its tongue.

And it's fucking running to chase something. But the dog is weak. Did you know that? The dog is weak and

kind of stupid, actually. I love dogs, but they're not good hunters, gay. Then the lion.

You think the lion doesn't enjoy and take pleasure in the rush, in the thrill, in the hunt?

Of course they do.

But the lion is locked in.

The lion is locked in.

The lion. is locked in the lion soon as the geek squad bell opens the lion begins they begin to walk toward the door strategically. As a strategist, they think strategically.

And they fucking pounce for the Xbox,

if this is Best Buy on Black Friday, right?

But then the dog is retarded, and it's...

You need to be like the lion and not the dog.

You understand?

Uh, debate

bully, get on TikTok, buddy.

Okay, get on the fucking Discord. Get in the Discord. Or get on TikTok. I'm on TikTok now.

I have to stop swearing because I'm on TikTok now.

Sheesh Sheesh Hey

Hey oh

Hey ya

Get on it

Shut the fuck up

You dumb bitch

Get on X

Who the fuck are you to give me orders

Shut your fucking mouth Talking about get on X. Who the fuck are you to give me orders?

Shut your fucking mouth.

Talking about get on X.

Shut the fuck up, you get on the Discord.

I'm breaking the seven rules. No, I'm not.

That's y'all, you know what y'all problem is?

You think you get to act like me.

That's your problem.

You don't get to act like how I act. Unless you don't, you guys, some of you are overly confident sometimes. You want to act like me. You better have a plan like me. You want to act like me. You better be locked in like I am. You want to act like me. You better be locked in like I am. You want to act like me. You better

have a plan like me. You want to act like me. You better be seeing an infrared vision the way I am.

You can act like me if you take burden off from me and you have the clarity, the vision that have and you you render a lot of what I say

superfluous then do that nobody succeeded so far you want to act like me be as ferocious and

angry as me be intelligent because when you're dumb

and you do this, it doesn't work.

Who said the rules?

That's why I said it's not stoic.

The rules of infarwoke is to be

to never get angry ever?

That's not true.

Never get frustrated.

That's not true.

Chris, what's up?

I'm allowed to be frustrated.

This is my stomping ground. It's the thing you got to understand. This is my stomping ground.

It's the thing you get to understand.

This is my stomping ground.

Somebody want to come to this chat and mess with me.

You just came to my stomping ground.

You just came to my domain.

You think I actually

Once if you actually think this guy debate bully

I'm upset about him

Like you think when the stream is over

I go to bed like upset about this guy

This is play for me

This is play for me.

This is play.

You understand?

I get to be frustrated because it's cathartic.

It's a controlled environment of catharsis.

You need to not act like me because you don't know what you're doing.

If you have a controlled environment for a catharsis, you know what you're doing, then do it.

But you're not like me.

You don't know how to do it most of the time.

I'm sorry.

Hey, hey, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey oh, Jesus.

How many times have I unband you, buddy?

Get in the Discord right now.

Get in the discord right now get in the discord right now get in the discord right now get in the discord right now it's the same guy it's the same guy how How many times I bet?

You probably banned yourself.

He was banned for mega TOS.

So you're banned from the Discord then because you did TOS.

So you need to go in the TIC-Tac.

How about that?

Go into the Tic-Tac.

Hey, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, hey oh hey oh hey oh explain the barista don't you get bored of these topics about

baristas like why what are you talking about don't you get bored of this topic about baristas. Like, why, what are you talking about? Don't you get bored of this topic about baristas?

How about, as part of Infrault, I'm a barista now.

How about that?

Will that calm you all down?

I'm a barista now.

Here, here's your coffee.

Here I'm making the coffee.

Here's your coffee.

You want the cappuccino, macho latte?

Here you go.

I'll be the barista now. Look at me. Look at me. Look at me. I am the

barista now. As infrared woke too, infarwoke, I'm the barista now. Since you're so passionate about it, I'm the king of baristas.

All baristas from this point forward are in a religious organization and I am the sheikh

they all look to me for authority I'm the king I'm the king of the

baris I'm the shaw of the baristas at any moment like this

all baristas anywhere in the nation are under my command

like this debate is so dumb like all baristas anywhere in the nation are under my command.

Like this debate is so dumb.

Like the whole point was that you need to like actually reach out to more

segments of the working class besides the

ones that you're personally familiar

with and not be

self-serving.

You need to actually get out of your comfort zone and talk to people who are diametrically opposed to you.

That was the point of the barista debate.

But no, people think it's a... Okay, fine, I'm the barista now.

How about that?

Hey, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, uh.

Hello, mathematician. Hello.

Hello.

I'm wondering if you think Cuba will attack the United States. What?

You think Cuba will attack the United States?

Okay, look at me. Do you think, do I look like Zoltar?

No.

You know Zoltar, right? Do I look like him?

Hold on one second.

So have you mistaken me for Zoltar?

I mean,

you kind of are a little bit of a Zoltar.

Okay, so you mistaken me for Zoltar, right?

I look like Zoltar?

Yeah. mistaken me for Zoltar, right? I look like Zoltar. I mean, yeah. I do. So it's a simple misunderstanding. So you thought I was Zoltar, actually I'm not so how can I answer your question

purest reborn go ahead yo what's going on, man?

Just wanted to say that the active club network completely mocks the ACP.

You have a metrosexual twang in your voice.

You're talking about the active club?

What about the active metrosexual twang in your voice. You're talking about the active club? What about the active

metrosexual twang in your voice?

Active Club Network.

No, you have a very

estrogenic

metrosexual twang in your voice.

Nope, I'm very masculine.

No, you don't sound like it.

You buddy, buddy, you're so unprincipled.

Your life, you know the root cause of it, why you have low T levels?

Because you don't live with principles.

Because you live a false, defective, wrong life.

You lack moral authority.

The whole thing comes from moral authority, clarity, potency.

You don't have it.

By the way, if you don't know what active clubs are, these are neo-Yatis.

These are neo-yazis these are neo-yazis and they say oh we maug you you can't even speak from your chest with your voice you can't even speak with your chest with your voice you speak not from the chest,

the Jesus of your being,

the deepest part of your heart of your,

the deepest part of your heart, right?

You speak from here only,

which means you're a chicken neck

who's afraid of the

truth, the depths.

You go, and this is something

I've done about in isolation.

You're not even thinking from here.

You think from here. You're

a chicken.

So, there's so much wisdom and stuff people don't understand. Hey, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, oh, hey, you think when you speak with your chest, it's like Heidar.

You're a warrior. You speak with your chest.

Your voice booms because you're

chattling the luminous

black within

the deepest, most sacred part of

your heart. Booms and echoes

like an RPG.

You can't speak that way because you have nothing to stand on.

You are disaligned with the cosmos.

You have no cosmological mandate.

You have no moral authority.

You are not the con.

You are not Genghis. You are not the con. You are not gangus. You are not Tamerlane. You are

Tyler from Minnesota. No offense to Minnesota. Go ahead, Oshka.

Hello.

What's up?

Yo, what's up?

I would just say,

Mark's,

his whole thing was that

there's a, sorry, there's an echo.

Go ahead.

So,

his whole thing,

still an echo.

Well,

we have to deal with the echo.

What's going on?

So,

okay.

His whole thing was that there's like a two-class system,

the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

I agree.

I'm an anarchist personally.

But my issue is that whenever you do these, whenever you do his socialist to communist process, process. You're,

you're,

just changing the,

the class names. It's no longer,

uh, huh?

Are you white?

Yeah.

This is what is

your voice is much less your voice is much

less

go ahead

I mean

you have a Fred Hampton

picture so I just don't understand

why you're an anarchist and you have a

photo of a Marxist

Leninist

no I'm not going to be petty.

Go ahead.

So you agree with...

No, just finish your statement. It doesn't matter.

Go ahead.

Yeah.

So

my issue with that is you're just

replacing, like, the class system.

It's no longer bourgeoisie and proletary it's like

government proletary so like there still is a two class system uh okay i mean look it's not

the meaning of class so government is about so human beings

are understood

in our societies as

only individuals, right?

But there's a collective reality of the human

and the collective reality has to take the form.

There has to be an authority

which represents this collective reality that is its own authority right that's just the nature of

we are one society right that singularness has to find concrete determination somewhere we're not just a bunch of individuals

running around but at the same time we need one leader of some kind whether it's a government or

something else to reflect back on to us which we are so when you look in the mirror, you see your entire body, right?

Yeah.

Yes? When the society looks in the mirror, what does it see? It sees government. What else

could it see besides a government? Like, it's the same thing. there's a body of the society

they call it the body politic

or whatever

well that also has to look in the mirror

and see something

people's wills

are not just going to magically

come together

and be the same thing harmoniously

unless there's clarity

about what actually connects us.

You know, because we are

connected by something more than just our individual

relationships and the sum total

of those relations.

So what actually holds us together and connects us? Well, the job of government is to represent

that to us. Classes are a consequence of private property. If there's no more private

property and the purpose of government is just to correctly reflect us, like correctly, then there can be mistakes and there can be all sorts of problems that arise from that.

But those will not take the form of class antagonisms because the

institution of private property doesn't

exist and therefore there's

no way for this antagonism

to actually acquire a leg to stand on.

Yeah, actually I think

that's a really good answer for uh for uh what i asked actually i really like

that um yeah that's that's all i came up here to say um you have a good night okay so the woke

bloke what is exactly i said you have a problem with? Why don't you request and explain what was faulty about the reasoning about what I said? Go ahead. Let you up for sure. Go ahead and request. Go ahead and request. You can't request.

You can't request.

Yes, you can.

You can for sure request.

You're not blocked.

You can request.

You're just, you haven't found the button. Someone explained to him how he can get the request. You're just, you haven't found the button.

Someone explained to him how he can get the request button.

It's next to chat.

Perfect.

Okay, so in the meantime, we'll bring up this virginian go ahead virginian hello yeah yeah what's up the sky oh no no. I wanted to say, like,

does Marxism work for, like,

a nigger-based society?

Hmm.

That's really funny.

That's what I mean about woke to happen.

It's like,

wow,

you're just going to get me,

um,

restricted on TikTok.

Oh!

So what?

I have the power to can snitch on you.

I guess you can.

I guess you can.

Like what can I, you think it upsets me

I'm gonna go to bed crying about this

Like I care

Go ahead Quisha

You're not gonna lie bro

Communists are like the biggest TND advocates

Let's be honest though

Damn that's crazy That's not even a white are like the biggest TND advocates. Let's be honest though.

Damn, that's crazy.

That's not even a white guy who said that.

Okay, so these active people, they're brigading it and they found it and they're crying.

Go ahead, the woke bloke.

That other guy had a metrosexual twang in his voice, too.

It's crazy.

Yeah, I wanted to ask you about that.

So you have an issue with metrosexual tone.

What's your issue with women?

What are you talking about? I told the neo-yazzi that they have a metrosexual twang in the verse.

Why do you defend them?

You said a couple of people ago.

You didn't like his metrosexual tone.

Why do you defend neo-yazis?

Are you left-wing?

You're left-wing and you're here defending neo-yazis? What's your problem with women? You're here defending Neo-Yazzi.

What's your problem with women?

Who said anything about women, buddy?

You don't like metrosexual tones

because they sound feminine. I'm asking you,

what's your problem with women?

You want me to break down the logic of a neo-yazzi

who's pretending to be high in money?

Stop, stop. You've been saying this about multiple people. Don't try and tie to one person to make yourself. Who did I say this about it? Defend your attack or let it go?

I'm going to defend my attack, but you're interrupting me, buddy.

Okay.

So tell me, how is a metrosexual accent tied to being a Nazi?

You can't say that on TikTok, by the way, but the whole point is that they're hypocrites

and they're talking about maugging people and they're talking about

don't need Nazis don't they advocate you're not willing to defend it this is what I mean about

you just interrupting me you're just interrupting me so when the KPD and when even the SPD in Germany pointed out the hypocrisy of the

Nazis who claimed that they're conservative and whatever and they pointed their hypocrisy

out and made fun of them for it, you defend the Yatsies now? Is that what you're doing now?

You're defending Yattsies?

You literally came on my live to defend a Yatzi.

And you call yourself an anti-fascist?

Anything which serves to bring down the neo-yazzi is good. Period.

Like, if it's World War II and it's the USSR, they're literally doing much worse than talking

about a metrosexual accent. You're going to be the referee who goes on the field and tells

the Red Army to stop fighting, stop fighting so dirty?

Why did you come on my life to defend a neo-yazzi?

Because I made fun of their accent and their voice.

This is incredible.

These people call us fascists he came on my life to defend a fascist

of course

to demoralize the Nazis is good

they attach a special significance to things like that. By the way, buddy.

So it demoralizes them.

So what's the problem with demoralizing Nazis? Go ahead.

You're acting like you haven't you haven't said that about multiple people.

And what is demoralizing?

Name these multiple people.

Name these multiple people.

I let you talk.

You need to let me talk.

Why is the dignity of women?

What is demoralizing about calling somebody metrosexual? What is demoralizing about calling somebody

metrosexual? What is demoralizing

to a neo-yazzi that they have

a metrosexual voice? I don't think that's

demoralizing at all. Oh, so you're saying that somebody has a

feminine. You're saying that somebody has a feminine trait

and you're using that to attack them.

You're saying it would be...

What is your problem with women?

What is your problem with women?

The problem is not women. It's weak men.

Why are you...

Why are you hiding behind the skirt of women when you're a weak man?

What about that makes them weak?

You're a weak man hiding behind women. Women are strong. You're just a weak man.

Don't hide behind women to defend your weakness. Don't hide behind women to defend your weakness.

You sound so strong right now. You sound like such a strong man right now. You're impressing strong right now you sound like such a strong man

right now you're impressing everybody

right now look at how tough

you are you want to make

you're defending a Niyo Yachi you came on my

life to defend a Yeniyo Yashi

is my voice masculine enough for you

you came on my life to defend a Neo Yachti.

I want to make sure.

You're running cover for a Neo Yatsi.

Well, then you should probably make fun in my voice if that's really what you think, right?

Do I sound feminine to you?

I don't care how you sound, buddy.

I don't care how you sound. now. I don't care how you sound. This guy literally saw me

attack a Nio Yatsi and said, I took that personally. I took that person. You look like you're having a

really bad time. You look like you're not having fun. I just baffled at your hypocrisy. You're a

disgusting hypocrite. I'm morally baffled at your hypocrisy you're a disgusting hypocrite

I'm morally baffled

at you like you are morally

discussing you for

for the way that you talk

and starting

people attack you for everything all the time

when do when have you not attacked me

and do you think that's a

legitimate way to argue? First of all, if a neo-yazzi comes and tells you, I mock you, what are you

going to say to them? Go ahead. Tell me what you would say to them. I'm not going to, I'm not,

I'm not going to use my ape brain to say, well, you have a feminine voice. Okay, what will you say? I'm going to talk to them about their ideology. I'm going to talk to them about the way they talk about people. What if they don't listen to you? And the way, in the way that they attack people like I'm talking to you. You're such an effective anti-fascist, dude.

Someone comes on and tells you my mom-you.

Yeah, because I'm anti-you.

Because I'm anti-you.

No, you're pro-fascist.

You're pro-fascist.

You think you can talk to these people who come to you and disrespect you and say, oh, let me, let me coddle your ball sack.

You think that's how to deal with fascists.

You think it's how you deal with fascists.

You think this is how you deal.

The way you deal with fascists is that they come to you disrespecting you and you give them flowers

and you tell them oh let me talk to you about your ideology when they're disrespecting you

they're telling you that if they see you in real life and get an opportunity they're going to cause

you and the people you care about harm if you're not willing to stand up for your people

against these people who are coming to disrespect

what you stand for.

Hey guys. Hey guys. When a Nazi talks to you,

make fun of their feminine voice.

That's how we own fashion.

Anything that demoralizes these people

who disrespect you who are fascists

and neo-yazis is acceptable.

Why is that demoralizing to

make fun of a feminine voice? Why don't you just

answer the question? Would you like to break down

logic? Stop being such a coward. Stop being such a coward just answer the question? Why are you being such a coward?

Stop being such a coward and answer the question.

I'll walk you through the logic if you stop crying and soying out over it.

See, soy.

There it is.

There it is.

You're soying out.

You're definitely sowing out.

There it is.

They talk like right wingers and they refuse to.

Stop crying and just hear logic.

Why are you so scared of logic?

I'll walk you through the logic.

Neo-Yatis attach a lot of significance to, you know, how manly they are or something, right?

Like a lot, like way more than an average person.

If an average person... Stop muting me, for example, for example, someone, someone who sounds like you, I don't have a problem with you. You come to me and talk to me how you sound. I don't care. Like, that's your business. But for them, that really would bother them if it was known to them that they sound like a metrosexual

with a metrosexual voice like that would bother them a lot okay so for me to reflect upon them

that this is how you sound that demoralizes them and bothers them a lot.

Do you think...

Okay, so it sounds like you don't have a problem with feminine voices, then is that what you're

saying?

You don't actually have a problem.

Of course I don't.

Why would I care?

Okay, good.

That's good to know.

It's good to know that you were just making up an argument and you don't really have a problem with women.

That's good to know.

I appreciate you.

I appreciate you confirming that.

Even if I had a problem with men speaking a certain or not.

Women have nothing to do with this. Stop hiding certain way, women have nothing to do with this.

Stop hiding behind women.

They have nothing to do with this.

You're invoking feminine traits.

Women have everything to do with that.

Okay.

So let me ask you a question.

Let's say there's an elderly woman who is or a woman you know because you know men are physically

stronger than women right this is going to be so stupid let's say there's a woman this is going to be

so stupid let's say there's a woman's in everybody's strapping no no let's say she's a woman who's in danger. Okay? Let's say she's being assaulted by some man.

Okay, you're also a man.

Okay, and there's a woman with you.

Now, the woman you're with, she's terrified.

She's absolutely scared.

So she runs into a corner.

She's terrified. Okay? You on the other hand, also go and run into the corner. Is what you did just as cowardly is that woman? I don't think the woman's being a coward. See, there there we go. Okay, so you as a man

who doesn't step in to protect a woman

from another man is not a coward.

This is incredible. Is that what you're

saying? You're putting what you think about women on full display.

Is the man a coward? Do you think if you

act like a woman, you're being a coward? I don't think the woman man a coward? Do you think if you act like a woman, you're being

a coward? I don't think the woman is a coward at all. I think she's doing

something very reasonable. Okay, so then am I doing something reasonable

by joining her? Answer the question, yes or no? Is the man in that situation a coward?

Yes or no? Is the man in that situation a coward yes or no is the man in the situation

yeah he runs into a corner and he's trying to be like the woman who also runs and he won't stand up

to defend the woman who's being assaulted by another man is Is he a coward? Yes or no?

Well, if you agree the woman's not a coward,

then what would make the man a coward?

Okay, so the man...

There we go.

You don't want to protect women.

That's what your whole thing is.

There we go.

You just said it to me.

You don't think a man.

Can I talk about that?

So when a man is assaulting a woman

and you as a man do not step in

to protect the woman, you don't find that

to be cowardly. You think, oh, it's just, I'm just scared.

No, it is cowardly. That's the difference. It is cowardly if a man doesn't step in. And a woman

doesn't have to step in, by the way, because women physically are not as strong as men.

It's unreasonable to expect a woman can take on would have to.

Now, some can, some can fight.

But I'm talking about on average, it's like this is the entire problem.

You're hiding behind women to justify your mediocrity and weakness as a man

I don't think anybody

believes your argument I think you look like a fool

okay let's talk about weight loss

okay is it easier

the topic let's change the topic.

Let's change the topic.

No, no, it's the same thing.

Infrared's got a new hypo.

Everybody's strapping.

It's the same thing.

When a woman loses weight, is that the same level of discipline as commitment as if a man loses weight?

I don't even, I don't care.

How's that, how's that?

It's about a hundred times more disciplined because it's so much easier for men to lose weight

than it is for women.

So much easier.

Your brain works should be so much easier.

It's so much easier actually for men to lose weight versus women, right? That's just a natural thing, right? So when you compare these two people who went on the same journey, say, well, they're equally as disciplined. That's not true. The woman is more

disciplined. Do you disagree?

I think you're making things up as you go.

Okay. Do you disagree

with what I said, that it's harder for women? Do I disagree

with nonsense? It's nonsense.

What about it is nonsense?

Explain.

It's like your diarrhea of the mouth.

Hey, do you disagree with my diarrhea of the mouth?

I don't know.

I think it's pretty disturbing.

Are you incapable of rationally engaging with it?

What's the problem?

You know, I think that ACP, their favorite thing to do is to say other guys are feminine and to use the R word.

I think that's your ideology.

What about what I said is unanswerable?

Do you use the R word on a regular basis?

Why are you pivoting?

Do you use the R word on a regular basis? Why are you pivoting? Do you use the R word on a regular basis?

Why are you such a coward?

You can't even respond to this question.

Why don't you answer the question?

You're not saying anything.

You can't even respond to the question.

You're just taking what I say and saying it.

No, you fundamentally think that men in all circumstances should have the right despite having some advantages physically and biologically over women like being able to lose more weight men should get just as much credit as women and be considered just as this whole dumb yeah there are plenty of privileges and advantages that men have that women do not have

and what you're saying is that men who i have these natural advantages get to hide behind women

to justify their mediocrity and weakness that's's not true. Women have their own issues.

Okay. You as a man, if you're being called out by your fellow man for being lazy and not being

active and not being disciplined and you go, oh, that's just a feminine trait. I'm going to go hide behind these women. We're not talking

about women, buddy. Nobody's attacking women. I don't know. I was expecting. Nobody is attacking women at all.

You are using women to justify your weakness and mediocrity as a man. Women are not even in this

conversation right now.

Are you just going to filibuster? Are you going to

let me respond? Respond, please. Because you were

just saying diarrhea before. I thought that you

were going to be better at this. I didn't think

that you were going to crumble within 20 seconds.

Is that a response? I didn't, like, I honestly, I didn't think that you were going to crumble within 20 seconds.

I didn't like, I honestly, I didn't think you were going to go to, the floor is yours. I didn't think that you were going to go to that right away.

And can you answer my question?

How often do you use the R word?

Every day.

Yeah.

And that's what I mean.

That's what you guys are proud of. That is your ideology. So you lost on the, you lost on the woman. I want you to know, I want you to know that's what sets you apart. So you lost on the debate about weak men and stuff, right? So you want to pivot to the R word. I think weak men use the R word. That's what I think. That's your opinion.

That's my opinion.

That's a fact.

Your opinion is noted.

That's a fact.

And it's the only thing that makes you special is that you use the R word.

That's the only thing that makes you special.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Why do you think I even think about things like this?

I don't know.

I really don't.

Do you think I care about a stupid word?

I think you should.

Why?

No, no, that's what I want you to be able to argue.

Why? Why should I care? Because it's ablest. It dehumanizes people. It ignores how the ruling class just splits us up by disability. And I don't, I don't, if you don't care about that, that says everything about you as a person.

Where does the line end?

For example, dumb.

Dumb has its origins also in such words.

So should we stop saying dumb?

Would you say the F word to a gay person?

No. I also wouldn't use the R word to someone with Down syndrome.

Okay. What's off limits? I thought you didn't care about words.

No, but it's not like I'm saying the R word to someone with Down syndrome.

You're saying unilaterally in no context is it acceptable.

Okay.

So you think it's acceptable

to use the F word?

What do you mean?

What do you mean?

What do you mean?

Do you think it's okay to say that word?

In every context,

is it unacceptable?

I mean, I don't think so much about words. in every context is it unacceptable i mean

i don't think so much about words in this way

okay so the n word you you think you can go ahead and use that

i don't you don't why not i have no interest in using it

why why not well You don't. Why not? I have no interest in using it.

Why not?

Well, why do I, what, why do I need a reason to not use it? Listen to yourself.

No, listen to yourself.

I really expected more.

To use a word you need to reason.

I really expected more of you.

To use the burden of like rationality like a rational purpose i don't really

think about using the n word i just don't think about it i don't i can't i can't tell you why so if i'm clear

what you're implying is that you always want to say the n word but you but you repress yourself from saying it. Is that what it is? Because I've never had the desire to say it. You, on the other hand, want to say it all the time, but have to actively tell yourself not to out of morale. Correct, right? Yeah, are you, are you, chat, the people that support him, are you are you chat the people that support him are you

really down with this why are you really are you really are you really down why do you love

saying the N word see this is he just makes things off he just makes things off this is

you're embarrassing

well you keep interrupting me so i'm going to just what do you want man you asked me if i say

all right all right well why would i say the unword okay well we we've we've established um that you

don't think about words that's why you say the r word i don't think about i don't try i don't think

about such trifling things when clearly when someone says a word like our word they're trying to in an

exaggerated form refer to something as stupid now is stupid a problematic word for you because if you use the

end word you're basically referring to a word that solely, basically, could only possibly mean dehumanizing black people.

Yeah.

So when I say a word like stupid, am I dehumanizing people born with extra chromosomes? Or can we have the ability? Even if you're Einstein, for example, you're born with whatever, even if intelligence was innate, whatever it is. Even if you're an extremely intelligent person, you can also do very stupid things and be very stupid. And the word, the R word, it's just an

exaggeration of that fact. So it's not referring to people with inborn disabilities necessarily.

It is a hyperbolic way of referring to stupidity in a really, really

visceral way, a way

with a lot of weight and passion and

exaggeration. You want me to explain literature to you?

I don't believe in this dishonesty

when it comes to semantics and words.

Why? Because I use a problematic word. That means I

use all problematic words. No, there's different reasons for why you use words. Why is it a problematic word?

Can you explain why it's a problematic word? You just described it as a problem. Why is it problematic?

What word? You just said, just because i use a problematic word

yeah why is it problematic because i'll tell you exactly why it is a bad word it's it's a bad word

just like the f u c word or whatever? That's a bad word as well.

Do you always, is that a, by the way, is that an evil word?

Is F-U-C, is fuck a bad word?

You can't say it on TikTok, by the way, but is that a bad word to you?

Like, is that a slur to you?

Nobody recognizes that word. Do you think that's a slur?

But isn't it a problematic word? Like, is it acceptable in all contexts? Wait, do you think,

do you think that it's a slur? I'm asking you. No, you just said... I don't think it's a slur, but I think it's fair to say.

Why did you ask me if I think it's a slur?

Because it's clearly not a word that's acceptable to use in all contexts.

Look, man, your fans...

Here's what I'll say. Here's what I'll say. Your fans believe you. Like, I asked, man, your fans, look, here's what I'll say. Here's what I'll say.

Your fans believe you.

Like, I asked, hey, do you like this guy?

Why are you talking?

Please stop talking about my fans.

Stop talking about my fans.

They do.

They believe you.

I don't get it.

Why do you care about fans?

I'm talking to you.

And I'm asking your chat.

Why do you like this?

Why are you talking to chat?

I'm talking to you.

Because I can't take you seriously.

You don't have to take me seriously, but in terms of the content of what I'm saying, what about it allies you?

Can you articulate that logically and rationally?

Go ahead.

Because you're arguing in bad faith.

Why? How?

When I brought up, okay, the way that this started was I asked you, what do you have,

what's your problem with feminine you have what's your problem

with feminine qualities what's your problem

with women and then you immediately went

to you're defending a

do you think that there's an equivocation between

um

you know qualities in

men

and that automatically talking about women do you mean an equivocation what do you mean by that is that is there an equivocation between like does it automatically imply that you have a problem with women

if men are engaging in behaviors which i think if you're i think if you're using if i think if you're

why are you i think if you're i think if you're attacking somebody based on feminine traits you're

i'm gonna i just want to quickly break down the logic

and give the floor to you.

I just want to,

you have to give me a sentence,

okay, before you interrupt me.

I'm just going to be very quick about it, right?

Okay.

If there are certain behaviors,

which I would consider unacceptable in men,

what acceptable in women? Is that possible? Just because there

are behaviors men might exhibit that women engage in, does that mean I have a problem with women

doing them? Not necessarily. There's things, as we've established, that men could be doing, that maybe are unacceptable, that women could do and would be acceptable. Now, in that context, I don't have a problem with people's voices. Like, I had no problem with that. But for the purposes of logical conciseness,

for the purposes of being like

logically

correct, you're wrong.

You, a priori, like, you

came out swinging on a wrong premise.

Do you understand that or no?

Look, I'm going to be real with you.

Okay, you set the table here.

The table looks like shit.

Because what you said doesn't make any sense.

But I do want to season, I do want to season on one word that you used.

Okay. To break down the logic, you came in and you said, why do you have a problem with women?

Because I told some, I told a neo-yazzi, they had a metro sexual accent. And the logic behind your

argument, if I'm correct, is that, well, women sound feminine. So if a man sounds feminine, that means you have a problem with women. Because a man is sounding in a way that is not characteristic usually of men, right? First of all, I don't. The context was completely different.

We've established that. But for the purposes of logical consistency and clarity, your premise was wrong.

You can find things acceptable in women, but unacceptable in men. Even if women do those

same things. Why? Why? Why?

I've established the example of

cowardice. When a woman flees

from a fight in defense

of another woman, that's not cowardly.

But when a man flees from it,

it is cowardly. But when a man flees from it, it is cowardly.

Because the man has this

privilege or this advantage of

his strength, and he's not

using it to defend a woman. He's not putting himself

on the line to defend a woman.

Right? That is cowardly. What if it's ronda rousey is she a coward if she flees maybe she is if she has the ability to intervene and do something

about it and she just doesn't maybe she is well that then has nothing maybe or or or if you want

to be if you want to be feminist that has everything to do with the bill you want to actually if you

want to be feminist about it not necessarily because if we say in our society are you a feminist are

you a feminist for the purposes of logical consistency are you a feminist yeah for the purposes

of logical consistency let's a feminist yeah for the purposes of logical consistency

let's run with it okay so so so yes or no question you could you could say that because of the

way we're socialized men have a privilege because they're given more confidence when it comes to

fighting the way we were socialized as fighting. The way women are socialized.

As a consequence of how women were socialized, for example, if you want to use a feminist

structuralistic argument, you can say, well, the way women are brought up is that they're

not given the same level of confidence to fight that men are.

So even if Ronda Rousey flees, actually it wouldn't be considered toweredly necessarily

because men, if men have privilege in our society, then some of those privileges include

having more confidence to do things like fight.

If you're not using those privileges to your advantage.

Hey, I'm following you. I'm following you.

Okay.

I think I'm picking up on what you're saying.

What problem do you have with that argument?

Go ahead.

Do you think cowardice is a feminine trait?

No, that's what I'm trying to tell.

That's what I'm saying. Like, we were talking about you attacking people for having feminine trait. No, that's what I'm trying to tell. That's what I'm saying. Like, we were talking about you.

We're talking about when men are doing things. When we're talking about how men are doing things.

The way you think cowardice is feminine. No, I don't. No, I don't. I just, we know this, dude, this whole conversation started with, hey, why, what, what issues do you have with feminine traits?

And then I doubt, I know what, you're not tracking the logic.

You're not tracking the logic.

Just because it's excusable for women to do, but not excusable for men to do doesn't make the thing inherently feminine. Okay. Like if we call men doing it cowardly, but the same thing, if a woman does it and it's not cowardly, we're not saying that women are

cowards or that, you know, cowardice is feminine or something. We're saying if men are doing this thing

that it's okay for women to do, then it would be cowardly in that context, right?

This is basic logic that you're not tracking.

You can knock me all you want to be racist toward what you want.

I don't think that you feel confident in your argument at all.

You know what I think?

Since I'm on this woke bend, I think

if I was a white man, you would like follow the

logic and track the logic and take it seriously.

I honestly think it's because I'm brown

and that I'm Arab, that you're

just like dismissing everything I'm saying is

nonsense. Like if I was a white man

with glasses, you would actually understand the logical

precision of what I'm saying. And it would be very abundantly clear to you, right? But because I'm a

brown Arab man, you have to dismiss it as a bunch of like nonsense and meaningless diarrhea or whatever

you say, right?

What about being a brown Arab man

would make it meaningless? What difference does that make?

I just have to assume that your behavior

toward me is racist because you're not engaging

rationally. I don't, I genuinely

don't understand what difference that would make.

You being an Arab man, I don't understand. For you, it probably would because you associate Arabs with low intelligence and low IQ.

You don't think we Arabs can be just as smart as white people with glasses.

That's you saying that.

That's how you're treating me and making me feel.

Okay. So you feel... That's how you're

making me feel like I'm treating you less...

I didn't even know you were Arab. I didn't even know you were Arab. So how would that

be? Yes, you do. Yes, you did. You know who exactly. How would I know that?

You know, I'm Hazaldine.

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

I see ACP in the corner.

Not everybody knows who you are, dude.

You don't know that I, you know about ACP, but not that I'm the chairman?

Yes, exactly.

So who do you know, Carlos?

He's also a brown man.

I don't know Carlos either.

You only know Eddie.

Is that as brown people are invisible to you?

Because we non-whites are invisible to you.

Is that midwestern Marx?

Yeah, he's white.

And you see Eddie

because we brown people are invisible to you.

Okay. So he's an ACP.

Eddie?

Yeah. Yeah, the guy

that you only recognize.

And yes, I'm brown and invisible to you because I'm not white, you know, but Eddie is

an ACP.

This is really bad, dude.

It is bad for you because it's pretty racist how you're moving right now.

Like, I'm being very logically, like, crystal clear.

There's just, it's almost like you can break it out into math.

And you're refusing to engage and you're dismissing it because I'm a person of color and I'm

not white. If I was white with glasses,

you would track the logic so far in the debate, but you're refusing to rationally engage with me

because you see me as subhuman, because you see me as a low IQ Arab brown man. Yeah, well, okay. You know, again, I thought that you were going to bring more to the table, but you did crumble within half a minute. You did crumble within half a minute.

Because like

anytime I challenged you, you just

changed, you just changed

the argument. Isn't that what you do? If I

cornered you, then you said

well, actually you're racist.

After you established that you're okay with saying

the after after you okay that you're after you establish that you're okay with saying the r word you see

no special problem with the n word you see no special problem with that i actually did say see a

problem in the n word it could

only possibly be used to dehumanize black people so that's the problem but in any case what

where did i fumble please explain like where did i that look hey man hey man the record speaks for itself okay it really doesn't

it really doesn't because what you did is just say that what i said was diarrhea but you didn't

engage with what i said just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean you don't actually

have to respond to the argument in contention.

I responded to every one of your arguments, but you don't have to, when it's diarrhea, it's very obviously diarrhea.

For anybody that's looking at.

Break down how me talking about logic is diarrhea.

Because I'm brown and I'm Arab.

That's why.

I can only assume that's the reason.

I don't know how you made that leap.

I don't know how you got there.

Because if I was a white man with glasses,

you would treat this with the level of, like, logical scrutiny that you would with someone you consider human.

So far as I could tell you were a white man.

You're not scrutiny what I'm saying from the perspective of logic.

You're just making, like, ad homonym character evaluations and judgment because you think I'm a subhuman brown person. If I was a white guy with glasses saying the same thing, you would judge what I'm saying in terms of the content in terms of like the logical consistency, in terms of how correct or wrong it is

maybe if it's on a factual basis

I got something wrong

but what you wouldn't do is just

respond by you know

attacking my assassinating my character

and basically saying

I never assassinated your character. Brown arrow person.

Other than the fact that you like to attack people based on feminine traits.

That is part of your character and it speaks very much to you.

Using the R word speaks to your character, that's for sure.

So in context, I was attacking a neo-Yazi for that trait, which would... You was attacking a neo yazzi for that trait which would you were attacking

multiple people based on that why don't you tell the truth about that why don't you tell the truth

why do you keep lying about that i want to play the devil's advocate and just do this logic wise

to show you your premises wrong are you willing to actually like engage with

this or no i think that you're going to take us on another trip that ends in like that ends in

disaster at any point if you're i think you're about to okay at any point if you're confused you can

okay okay go ahead let's start very slowly are you ready

yep i get to cut you off okay if you're confused do you want to start okay you want me to start

it's okay we're all waiting slowly okay we all waiting. Let's say someone had a problem with feminine traits in men.

You do.

Let's say.

That's you.

You claim that means you have a problem with women.

Yes.

But if you're simultaneously okay with women having all of those traits and only think it's a problem

when men have them, the problem you have isn't actually with women.

I'm cutting you off.

The problem you have is with, I'm cutting you off.

Okay, what about that? You said I could cut you off. I could cut you off. The problem you have is with, I'm cutting you off. Okay, what about that?

You said I could cut you off.

I could cut you off.

What about that didn't make sense to you?

You're thinking that I have a problem with feminine traits in anybody, and I don't.

You're the one that has a problem with feminine traits in men.

Let's say there is X person who has a problem with feminine traits in men. Let's say there is X person who has a problem with feminine traits in men, which you accused me of, right?

That was your premise.

You do.

You came in swinging, saying, what is your problem with women?

Why was your premise that I had a problem with women?

Because you perceived that I have a problem with feminine traits in men, which I don't necessarily.

Well, not necessarily.

But let's say, no, no, for the purposes of argument, let's say I didn't.

Wait, no, no, can you answer that question?

Do you have a problem with feminine traits in men?

Not, not always, no. So anyway, when do you and why?

If a man can use his privilege to protect a woman or strength to protect a woman.

There we go. It is a feminine trait to be cowardly. Thank you. Thank you. No, but thank you. It's not a feminine trait. It's not a feminine trait. It's not a feminine trait. It's not the same thing. If a man is doing something that's acceptable for women to do, the problem is not womanhood. The problem is the man

emulating women. Do you not understand how that, that's like actually what's being said logically?

The issue isn't the woman. It's the man hiding behind, oh, well, women do this so I can do this. Well, no, it's okay man hiding behind oh well women do this so I can do this

well no it's okay for women

the chat the chat's telling me

that I got you on that and they're right

because you're interrupting me

do you know okay what was what was my rebuttal

to you can you like break it down to me

because I can explain your argument to you.

Can you explain my argument? I don't think you

could explain my argument to me. I'm going to be

honest. Can you explain my argument? I'm going to be honest.

I don't think you could do it.

Why don't you try? And then I'll cut you off again.

So your argument appears to be that if i say dog walking you man

you you are like the little dog in my picture i'm i'm dog you just challenge me to repeat your argument for you

would you like me to do that or no that's right because you do what I say. Okay.

So you just want it. So when you came on here and had a problem with how I

talked to a neo-yazzi who was being

disrespectful to me, and you said

here we go again. So why is it acceptable for you to disrespect me

this way? You just told a brown arab man

that you dog walk them is that how you feel toward brown people in arabs is that is that is that do you relate

dogs to arabs i don't it that's how you made me feel though right because this is this all about how

you feel is this all about how you feel? Is this all about how you feel?

Is this how about you feel?

That's what it's about?

Well, you talked about how all these bad words hurt people's feelings.

So what if things hurt my feelings?

I think this is about your feelings infrared.

I do.

So our bat is the R word about your feelings or was the metrosexual thing about your feelings?

The R word is about using able-less slurs.

Okay. And who's, why is that a problem?

Using able-less slurs because you're dehumanizing people because it hurts

their feelings correct no no even if it didn't hurt their feelings it would still no it's not

all about their feelings it's about regarding them as humans with dignity okay so the floor is open can you repeat my

argument back to me to prove that you've actually tracked the logic in the

argument so far repeat yeah I you know what you know what I can I think yeah I

think I can so again we started with you calling multiple people, and you still haven't admitted this, calling multiple people, not just a neo-Yazi.

No, I only called the neo-jazi. Stop, no, no, now you're lying. You have to name these other people. You called out

multiple people. Name them.

Name them. Name them. Seemingly men for having

Name them.

Seemingly having

feminine traits. No, no, name them. Name them.

You're making a claim. Name them them you want me to remember the usernames of

tic-tok like of ticot people like 15 minutes ago that's that's that's a big checkmate yeah

can it's all been neo-yazis it's all been neo-yazis. It's all been neo-yazis tonight.

So go ahead and explain and recite these people to me.

Well, it says a lot about your chat that you attract.

No, it's all been neo-yazis that I've been making fun of for their accent in this way.

So name these people.

Every single one of them were active club.

If you're in the chat right now, Google active club, and this is what this guy's defending.

Someone who came on and insulted and disrespected me, and I responded by saying they had a

metrosexual twang in their voice.

Because that's your form of insult

an active club

neo-yazi group. Okay. So let's

let's start from the beginning. Yeah, man.

You already conceded how that would demoralize them.

Because this is the last thing I'm going to do.

This is the last thing I'm going to do.

Because I've already wasted. So you're running. So you're running away. No, you asked going to do. This is the last thing I'm going to do. Because I've already wasted. So you're running.

So you're running away. No, you asked me to do something. I'm about to do it. Is that okay with you? The logic is very clear. Just because you're saying that a man is doing something that's emulating women's behavior doesn't mean you have a problem with woman's behavior. The problem in this context would be the man emulating the behavior, which is acceptable for women because men are more privileged in our society. If I make fun of you as a man for... If women and men had the same privileges, okay. But because women are at an unfair disadvantage a lot of the times, when men emulate women in some contexts, just because if you're saying that thing you're doing to emulate women is bad, the problem is not that you're saying what women do is bad or women are bad.

It's the man abandoning his responsibility to use his privilege in a way that actually helps women.

So that's my gotcha. You want to talk about dog walk buddy

you're literally

barking right now

go ahead

try to respond to that bomb

you know what

you totally want

to respond to that

try to respond to

no no you totally want

you just got pinned down

you're pinned down

everybody

you are pinned down right now you are

pinned down right now break down

why the logic is faulty go ahead

your premise when you came out swinging

saying what's your problem with women

was based on a false premise

that because a man is emulating

a woman's behavior means you have a problem with the

woman's behavior no infrared i'm telling you you sound very confident that you won you should feel

very confident right now everybody clap for infrared in the chat everybody throw us

yes i agree clap throws you're not willing to actually argue we all agree we are for red in the chat. Everybody throw up some Ws.

You're not willing to actually argue. We all agree.

Why won't you actually argue with like what I said was wrong? Why won't you let me praise you?

You won. So you're just going to be sarcastic. Why not engage?

You won.

I already know that I won because you're not even responding to the argument.

Because I'm too much of a brown Arab and I can't understand your superior intelligence.

I can't understand and detect your sarcasm because I also have autism have I also have autism and I can't understand your sarcasm. So you have to directly explain the logical inconsistencies. Now we're bringing in autism. Do you have a problem with autistic people? No, I have autism. I can't detect the sarcasm. You need to like you need to actually explain what about... Well, wait a second. If you were autistic and you couldn't detect the sarcasm, then why are you saying I'm being sarcastic?

Well, because it's clear to me that you're being disingenuous, and I can only assume that that's what sarcasm is, but I don't know how to detect it.

I just can't believe this is what people take seriously.

Okay, look, this was horrible.

This is a horrible experience.

What is your argument?

And I'm going to be leaving wrong.

The floor is yours.

What is you?

Well, you said something about the reflection being wrong.

When I said,

when I said, when I said look dude i know this

when i said society hold on i remember you were in chat and you were making fun of me because i said

society reflects itself in government what about that did you consider wrong since you're not

willing to engage with literally any of the other things you came on to argue about what about

that was dude i know i know this has been very fruitful for you and like your chat numbers.

You're just with a smug face like looking down in superiority, but like what have you achieved?

What's your position?

Is it self-evident that your position is superior?

Please, like explain for those of us who have lower IQ than you do.

What about-

I agree.

I agree.

Look, look, you're the teacher in this context.

Please teach us.

What am I getting wrong here?

Like, actually teach us.

The floor is yours.

I appreciate you admitting that. Thank teach us the floor is you i appreciate you admit admitting that thank

you the floor is but i i do agree with i do agree with people in the chat saying that this was not

to be taking seriously yours take go ahead i'm i'm. I thought the floor was mine.

I'm talking right now.

I agree with everybody in the chat.

No, no, but you're not going to talk about the chat.

You're not going to talk about the chat.

We only want education from you about the argument and why my argument's wrong.

Go ahead.

We want to be talking about why it's wrong.

Okay, I would have to ask you what the hell you're talking about, and I don't think I can do this.

But aren't you the teacher?

I thought you're the teacher.

What do you want me to teach you?

Why my argument arguments wrong?

What are you? I don't, I don't think I want to hear it again. That's the problem.

So you haven't even track the argument. Your arguments, bro, that's not tracking the argument.

That's not really something you should criticize people for.

That you're not willing to, like, engage and track the argument?

Okay.

Everybody have a good night.

What about it confounds you?

Everybody have a good night, genuinely.

Have a good night.

So you're running away. Yep, I'm running away because you're a big

strong scary man is this confidence you are such a big

strong scary man I can't handle you

you're running for the argument you just

you're too you're no exactly

I'm running from the higher IQ white person i'm the lower IQ like brown person or whatever

in your world i don't know why you keep saying that about yourself why do you because you're like you're

literally dehumanize me and won't engage with the content of the argument you're just

consulting me you're talking about how much smarter than you are than me.

Okay, but like, why am I wrong?

Can you teach me why I'm wrong?

Or the audience.

Teach the audience.

Rescue these people in the audience so that they understand why I'm wrong.

No, I think your audience loves you.

Well, you need to rescue some people. You need to teach us what about my argument is... Oh, I'm not interested in rescuing you. What about my argument

was wrong? Can you explain? I'm not interested in teaching you. I'm not interested in rescuing you.

So why did you... If you weren't here to prove that you

have a superior position why are you here i really wanted to know what your problem with women was

and you didn't tell me premise was wrong and i proved it you know and you agree i guess i guess you

kind of did tell me

when you related to me

that your premise was wrong

when you asked that question,

didn't you?

You know,

people are telling

I have to take it

as a concession

and admission through silence.

Silence is violence.

You said,

what's your problem with women?

Well, your premise is wrong.

And I proved it to you and you agree with me.

Do you not?

You just said silence is violence.

Yeah, because it's a silence.

It's an admission through silence.

It's an implicit acknowledgement that you agree

that your premise was wrong.

Yeah. No, 100%.

Okay, so there we go. When you came on swinging with that question,

it was based on a faulty premise. Tell everybody

you won. No, it's just you had a faulty premise. Can you do that?

Can you say, hey, everybody, I won?

It's not about winning and losing.

It's a teachable moment that next time you talk to people and accuse them of things, think

through it first if you're being logically coherent and consistent.

Because sometimes you're making assumptions that aren't justified by the

use of reason, which I know you

people invented. And I'm just a

low IQ, whatever, who doesn't understand that?

You people invented. No, because you

think you're... Arabs invented so much

of the modern world. But you

consider me subhuman

the way you interact with me, right?

So you, who invented reason...

I'm just saying that.

I'm just saying next time use some reason

before you come out swinging with these accusations

in the sense of smug superiority.

That's all.

There you go.

You taught me.

And I'm going to leave with this lesson now.

Goodbye, everybody.

Okay.

And I'm autistic.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic.

So I just have to assume you're being genuine.

Genuinely, did I not

give him an opportunity to like actually speak?

The floor is yours.

Like, go ahead. Teach me.

Did I not give him the floor?

He's like what is your problem with women nobody has a problem with women okay but the problem you have with this man is that he's exhibiting feminine behavior first

of all i don't care about that at all.

Like, I don't care.

But for, like, I love to be a logic, Lord.

For purposes of logical consistency,

if you have a problem with a behavior in a man

that is commonly exhibited in women,

it doesn't mean you have a problem with women or their behaviors.

It's that you have a problem with the man emulating that behavior.

Now, I don't a priori, but he said, well, there's some context in which you do,

and I mention the thing of, if a woman's in danger and a man runs away and like she's being assaulted by a man, right? A man can step in and intervene to protect her, and he doesn't. Instead, he runs away. Yes, that's cowardly. But if a woman

were to run away, that would be understandable and acceptable. You would say, well, the way women are

socialized is that they're taught not to fight.

Also, men are physically stronger than women.

You know, women may be socialized to be less confident.

We can be a structural, feminist, whatever, to explain that.

So there are contexts in which when a man justifies his behavior or tries to emulate women, it is unacceptable, even if it's okay for women to do it. That doesn't mean you have a problem with women. It means you have a problem with the man's behavior like that is his entire premise was wrong just because you have a problem with male behaviors that are commonly exhibited in women that doesn't

mean you have a problem with women.

So the ape, when he's like, what's your problem with women?

Once again, it's weak, mediocre men hiding behind women.

From 2021 from the beginning, you know, I started as a feminist.

I had no, I've never had an issue with women.

From 2021, the problem was always weak,

mediocre men justifying themselves by hiding behind women. I have to verify my life before I bring on

someone else.

That's always been the issue.

Alex, go ahead. All right, Alex is connecting. connecting you gotta figure that out

let's bring on uh closure

go ahead closure

yo what's up

can hear right

can i should i throw on the camera?

Okay, you have nothing to say? It's like what?

No. Like you come on and you say, do I, should I, like, what is this? Philosophy, go ahead.

Yeah, what's going on yeah you're just trying to get me restricted

what's going on

not much not much just the

what do you think of Hegel considering

I thought he's about to say something crazy.

Um, anyway, uh...

The problem with that person is they just didn't, they weren't calm.

They wouldn't give me any time to explain anything.

They're like, what do you have a problem with words?

You have a problem with bad words?

I... And I would say one thing, and you cut me up. Oh, you're not letting me explain it. No, I don't care about bad words in principle. I don't care about bad words. That doesn't mean I will use any bad word for no reason.

I can't think of a reason why I would use the N word with a hard R ever.

Like, I can't think of a reason why I would ever use that.

I just can't think of one.

He's like, well, then why not? It's like, well, because I just don't have a reason. He's like, well, then why not?

It's like, well, because I just don't have a reason.

He's like, oh, oh, so you need a reason now.

I'm like, yes, I do actually need a reason to say things.

And then they're like, well, what about these other words?

It's like, everything's about context. It's all, that's how language works. It's just based on context. What are you trying to say? This is about literature. This is about like the language. It's like, what are you trying to say? Language is not mechanical. That's my problem with woke 1.0 and what we're going to change in woke 2.0 we're changing this mechanical anglo-saxon understanding of language because language is also hyperbole language is also all manner of different literary devices rhetorical devices things that have nothing to do with a direct oxford dictionary definition attached to the word and have everything to do with accents of meaning, points of emphasis.

It's not about, you know, if you're using the R word, okay, technically the word might mean something in the Oxford Dictionary, but not every context in which that word is being

used means to demean people with an extra chromosome or something. Well, there's a bad history

associated with the word. There's a bad history associated with your iPhone. It comes from

children in Africa in mines. Okay. There's a bad

history on the land you're probably on. It was stolen, was it not? So what are we talking about here?

But by cleansing ourselves of the words that we use, we're somehow addressing the fundamental material causes.

We partake in every material injustice every single day.

What we do individually, you can't cleanse yourself through this through these contradictions you have to find the moral high ground

you don't begin a priori from a more position of moral superiority to then look at the material world

and divest yourself from it, through this world, you discover the position

of moral supporty. And in Marxism, that's the material class struggle, the proletariat, right?

Something material. It's not a conceit. This is a dirty world. You can't just cleanse yourself of this world by cleansing your vocabulary and that makes you a good person. It doesn't. You have to face all of the intensity of all the contradictions of the world and embrace all of them.

And through them, you have to discover where actually is the moral.

Right?

That's the Hegelian understanding of morality.

And these people have a completely anti-Marxist, anti-communist view. It's based in some bourgeois, boutique liberalism.

This notion that a priori, if you use a word in a context where you do not you're not demeaning anyone can the can the widespread use of a word attest to the fact that a given group within society has a history of being demeaned or is currently being demeaned? Yes.

But you're confusing the symptom for the disease.

Just because you're using that word doesn't mean you're perpetuating that condition.

You might be reflecting it, but by ceasing to reflect the condition, you do nothing except be dishonest

about what that condition is. Roll that up, pack that into your pipe, and smoke it. We're doing

Woke 2.0 in for Woke.

James Lee, go ahead.

Hey, what's up?

The sky.

All right, all right. This is, ah, Haas, right?

It says infrared on here.

I don't know.

Right?

Yes, correct. All right uh so you're the chairman of the acp right the american

commune's party yeah i i just like to ask because i know the acp split off from the

commune's party america right we don't the ACP split off from the Comneys Party America, right?

We don't see it that way, but whatever.

All right, all right.

Well, that's how it described it.

I researched it a bit.

Okay.

I don't know if you've gotten this question, but I just like to ask, what different do you bring to the table?

The ACP?

Yeah, the ACP.

I think we provide the most dynamic platform for people to actually engage in forms of praxis experimentally without the constraints

of like bureaucracy and conceits that come from leadership.

Like I genuinely think that we have the most flexibility when it comes to experimentation of what we would consider communist praxis today, whatever that looks like.

We have a system in place that simultaneously permits a huge degree of experimentation while simultaneously having a system in place to make sure that these actions do not disalign with our mission and our principles.

All right, all right. I'd also like to ask, you as a person if you could change anything systematically

within the united states what would it be like that or at least within uh leftist

forms you know

like you as an individual

i would i want the culture on the left wing to change i want people to

reflect on their mental conditions and mental illnesses and not let that spill over and harm collective

organizing. I want people to have the maturity to be able to have collective discipline in an

independent capacity. Understanding how much of a struggle it is to really balance our individual

selfhood with the realities, the objective realities

of collective struggle. I want people to be able to distinguish the objective reality of the

country from our deeply psychological, subjective mental conditions.

And I think the left doesn't do that.

I think they just, which is why, you know, they consider every small disagreement, a pretext to go to war.

They don't have an understanding of primary versus secondary contradictions because they lack objectivity.

They lack a sense of the objective, you know.

If your subjectivity is confused, your opinion is confused for the objective, you're going to be alone in a room by yourself. Because only you recognize that reality the one that's in your head there needs to be a way that we get out of our heads in a way you start respecting the dimension of the unconscious that's the actual space that we're glued together socially is the unconscious, not that the conscious level.

When we project a vision of communism that's in our head, we might temporarily align with other people.

But it's temporary because we're not glued together fundamentally.

There's a temporary coincidence of opinion.

May I interject really quick?

In any time in organization forms, the subjective differences start to be drawn out,

and it's splits,

splits,

splits,

splits,

splits,

because there's no unconscious recognition

of the objective.

So the dimension of the unconscious

needs to be opened up

and understood.

So would that be, sorry, I don't want to be like the last guy i

understood some of what you said so are you describing uh the value of political diversity within a party

that's part of it.

Yeah.

I mean, yeah, there needs to be a degree of understanding.

There is room to experiment.

There is room to have disagreement here because we don't fundamentally have all the answers.

Hmm.

So, I also want to ask, you are the second.

I look this up, too.

This isn't the most popular party, leftist party in the USA, but

you're the second

chairman, right?

No? First? No?

All right, yeah. I was just looking at up.

Yeah, I'm the only chairman that ever was.

Okay. Okay. The only ever ever chairman all right uh i was wondering how you got in that position

uh so at the plenary committee they decided i should be the chairman the plenary committee was a

meeting of the people who were

closely involved in what was happening in the CPUSA and the preparatory work into the formation of the

ACP. And we had to start somewhere with some kind of structure, some kind of direction, and some kind of leadership.

So I was voted by the plenary committee to lead the board.

Yeah, yeah, it's nice.

I'd also like to ask.

I mean, I've watched some of your speeches.

I've watched people come up to why I would describe

as conferences, you know, hosted by the ACP.

But I also want to ask,

sorry, Zay is just writing a lot of things i i want to ask uh have you ever

had any public speeches like out in front of a public crowd yeah that's the last question and uh yes many

times multiple times i've had public speeches all right um who's next abyss go ahead Next.

Abyss, go ahead.

Yes, hello?

What?

Nothing I wanted to, like if you would like some feedback on, you know, the chat you have

with the smock guy,

like the guy, uh,

what do you mean feedback?

Arguments or what? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I mean,

uh, I think I have

some ideas like, guess I don't know like I'd like to say that uh yeah like uh i don't know i'm kind of nervous sorry but what i would say is that uh you should not give uh you should be like more selective with who you fight with

no because the guy was really like

I understand what you're going to say but those types of people are so

rare to actually get them to actually confront me with their voice

and so I just wanted to prove to everyone that these people, like, have no excuse.

I'm not yelling over them.

I'm giving them the floor.

Giving them every opportunity to address the substance of what I'm talking about.

And I'm being good.

I'm being at least committed to the like argument to the objective

right like the logic no yeah like I agree that you were trying to be like logical and trying to

uh yeah like run down the argument and whatnot but i would say that

well at least i guess it's a personal thing but i would uh try to be like more nonchalant i guess

like not commit to people who don't no it's just i need to understand

what we need to there needs to be a way for people to communicate if people there is a lot of problems

people have with acp um, what is the problem?

This is the opportunity for people to actually, like, I don't consider it even for me,

the debate.

It's like more like, I want these people to confront internally.

Why do I have this position I have?

Have I ever thought about it? Do I have any doubts about whether I'm right or I'm wrong? And it's like they just won't do that. They won't reflect. They won't think about what their position is and why they have it. And they make...

So I just want that confrontation.

That's all.

It's like, I understand it's a waste of time to win a person like that over,

but it's like, will they ever actually think about these pretensions

that are being used as the basis to completely wreck the possibility

of organizing in this country, right? Who should I bring up? Ashy, go ahead.

Oh my God, finally. Jesus Christ has.

It's the boss, the bait bully. What's up what's up buddy look at him he's stone cold

how's uh how's the russia doing in this war this guy wants us all to be uh putin to be daddy

for us why do you want why do you want putin to be all of our daddies?

Just like the other guy you came in swinging with a false

premise. He's your

daddy. Why do you want him to be all of our daddies?

Explain how Putin is my

father.

You bootlick oh so because I support Putin how's the war going is this good for the Russian people are you glad Putin started this war?

Look at him.

He's not saying nothing.

You want to talk about the war in Ukraine?

Yeah, let's talk about the war that Putin started, the unprovoked invasion.

And then he's going to support

Palestine and

and say Israel shouldn't invade

but Russia can invade. I think it was

unprovoked?

Obviously it was unprovoked.

And don't talk about the Dombast

and the fake genocide

and the plants and the Russian

How is it fake?

What?

What are you going to say?

What rises to the standard of a genocide

in your view?

No, no, tell me what you're going to say.

I don't want to assume anything.

No, like, what about the genocide? Who don't want to assume anything no like who started the war

about the genocide war no

no who started the war and why how

actually let's do this

who started world war two and how

tell me that

let's see if you know your history

everyone knows the german started world war two Tell me that. Let's see if you know your history.

Everyone knows the Germans started World War II.

How?

Because they invaded Poland.

Okay. So who started this war? And it's not Russia who invaded Ukraine?

Was it not the Maidan Fushis who invaded the Donnas? I'm pretty sure they already debated this in court in the Netherlands and was shown that it was a...

Do you consider the Netherlands in Europe to be unbiased in this?

One of your buddies, one of your boys did.

And by the way, can I get unbanned because I didn't show anything?

You guys, you ban me from everywhere.

You're running.

You need to first of all calm down.

I'm not going to engage with you if you're not calm.

You need to stop yelling.

You need to stop yelling.

You need to be calm because I'm calm right now.

Okay.

So your point is that the invasion was unprovoked and that it was unjustified.

I disagree.

The war started in 2014 during the Maidan coup.

If they're allowed to have a coup in Kiev and overthrow the elected

leader unconstitutionally, then the people in Donbass also have the right to pursue their own

form of sovereignty. There's nothing gluing them or attaching them to the sovereignty of a state

whose constitution is being torn up and overthrown.

They then have the right to create their own state. Okay. So they did that and then they were invaded and then they were continuously attacked.

Well, the people of the Donbass

have a historical relationship with Russia.

They had a dual visa

or whatever system with Russia, right?

There's a porous border between Donbass and

Russia. For all intensive purposes,

historically, these are considered one people.

Russia was not

wrong to take it upon itself.

So you can invade anyone that has a coup?

Any country that has a coup you can invade?

They can invade Syria. We're not at the invasion yet.

Yeah, but the premise is if there's a coup, you can invade, right?

No, the premise is if there's a coup, then you can invade.

Okay.

Go ahead, scream all you want, if you don't want me to get a word in.

I just want you to get it off your chest.

Go ahead.

No, we're not at the invasion yet.

We're at the Donbass.

Okay?

Did the people of Donbass have the right to secede?

No.

No, why not?

Explain that.

That's what I want to understand understand people don't have a right to

see from their country that they're in which country you can't just can you explain any any country

nobody can just say what was the country ukraine and and and what structures Ukraine?

Like what defines its borders?

The treaty that the USSR, Russia signed.

Oh, so the USSR is responsible for Ukraine?

Exactly.

Forever. You know your history from this point forever um it was a

treaty that was agreed on by all the parties involved and so you're going to rip up that treaty and say

oh i don't care about this anymore and i'm just going to invade. So you're saying that a

country in the past has

the right to define the eternal

borders and sovereignty of a nation

forever? That's your... I'm saying if there's a treaty

and there's a peace time, you don't have the right

to... Let's not talk about what happened on

22 yet.

Stop screaming about about february 2022 we're just going to dial it back a little bit you're claiming there's a peace

treaty and there's a peace time okay but that's the russian federation we're talking about the

people of the dawnbass you don't

got to meet me you're too emotional and you're screaming and you're yelling and i'm totally calm

you need to calm down so when a country i'm very calm its constitution

what actually defines that

as a sovereign country anymore

where does that exist

the people the culture

the people who live on the land

I agree no no you know what I agree with you

I don't actually disagree with that

but it just so happens to be that what, I agree with you. I don't actually disagree with that.

But it just so happens to be

that those who lived in the eastern

part of Ukraine and the Donbass

have a different history, different culture

and different language.

The thing that they can move.

They can move to Russia.

But they, why should they have to move? That's the land.

It'll have to. They chose to live in Ukraine.

Let me ask you a question. This is what it lies me. If they're living under this government that defines the territory of Ukraine, and then there's a coup that overthrows the person they elected on constitutional...

Unconstitutional overthrow of the person they elected.

Actually, the Congress voted and ratified it.

You're talking about things that happened after the coup. The populace uprising, the revolution.

It was popular.

Maybe it was popular.

Okay, you want to talk about culture and history.

Maybe it was popular for Western Ukrainians. Maybe it was popular for Western Ukrainians, but not for Eastern ones. Okay, they have a different culture, just like you said. So why are they not allowed to secede? Let's not talk about Russia right now. Forget about the Russian Federation. What, in your mind, makes it an illegitimate act for them to declare their own sovereignty on the land that

they live on? Am I allowed to talk? Yes. Okay, so...

Like, what entitles Kiev to that land?

Not versus a foreign invader, the people already living on it pursuing a different form of sovereignty.

Why is it okay for Western Ukrainians to have a coup coup but it's not okay for people in the donbas to

declare their own sovereignty and separatism explain you need to settle down i'm calm

can i ask a question i just asked you a question.

I live in Southern California.

In Texas, in Southern California, a part of America, there's a lot of Mexican-Americans.

If they all say, I want to succeed, I'm not, America conquered this land.

I want to go, this land to be back to Mexico.

Do they all have the right to then just up in arms and make Southern Californiaas secede from america just because that's what they want

was america founded on a contract between mexicans and americans that says we will conditionally

have this sovereignty as long as your language is recognized, as long as you

are respected, as long as you are allowed equal electoral participation in our system, and you

are respected and acknowledged. No, and neither was Ukraine. Yes, it was. Yes, it was. No, it wasn't.

Yes, it was. Cited. wasn't. No, it wasn't.

Cited.

Cited.

Cited.

Cited.

Cited.

I'm going to look it up right now.

Cited.

Tell me.

You can look it up all you want.

Part of the terms and conditions of Ukrainian independence was that the Russian speakers in

Eastern Ukraine would have equal rights and equal say and Russia would be recognized as an official language.

Let me see.

And can you cite it?

No, look it up.

Well, I'm doing your homework for you now.

Yeah, you are actually.

That's kind of lazy.

If you don't believe it, if your entire position hinges on

whether this is true or not, you've already lost the debate in my eyes. If there's a language,

then that means that Russia is allowed to invade. That's what you're saying. We're not at Russia yet.

We're at Donbass. You claimed it was illegitimate for them to secede. I'm asking why.

In 1991, Independent Act

contained no language condition.

We're talking about something different, okay?

What are you talking about?

The formation of the independent Ukrainian government.

Okay. Okay. the formation of the independent ukrainian government okay so you claim it was illegitimate for the people of the donbas to leave i want to know why that was illegit you don't just get to be a citizen of a country and just say hey I want to know why that was illegitial. You don't just get to be

a citizen of a country and just say, hey,

I want to leave. And then

so you're saying in Southern California

in Texas, they can just say,

hey, we're going to make this be part of Mexico now.

Because we're Mexican and we speak into language.

No, we're not talking about Mexico yet. But what is the principle that you're talking about? In this analogy, we would be

talking about, let's say there's a huge concentration of Mexicans in southern Texas and

Southern California, like right on the border.

Like, and they're the majority, like the overwhelming majority, right?

Like, we're talking like 90% majority, right?

Let's say they, all of them, elect elected Trump, which of course they did it.

Let's say the, maybe Trump's not an example maybe Obama let's say the

by the way in Dombast Russia was a minority

let's say they all elected AOC

no they weren't a minority

yes they were they're 46% their minority

no they weren't a minority

before the invasion before the bombing before all the Ukrainians fled no they're a minority. No, they weren't a minority. Before the

bombing, before all the

Ukrainians fled

at their homes.

Yes.

Not true.

It's true.

It's true.

46%.

46% is a minority.

For your figure that

46% of those people.

I'm looking at the Western google yeah only 46% of people in donbass are russian speakers

this bia google so you're saying only 40% of people in donbass were Russian speakers?

I didn't say speakers.

But that's all that matters here in this case.

So just the language is the only thing that makes you a Russian. Yeah, that defined. They have a unique... He speaks Russian.

They have a cultural, historical proximity to Russia. Okay, so it's not just the language yeah it's many

it's a confluence of many different things okay so 46% of those people were russian that lived in

the dombas region so they're minority that's debatable of where it was not debatable. Look at the

census. Absolutely debatable. Do you go by the census or no? You don't go by

the data, the third party data, the reports, the research.

What do you go by? You just your feelings?

You are emotional right now.

Look at you. You are emotional right now. Look at you!

You look but hurt.

You're talking about people strictly defined as ethnic Russian being 46%.

But the other people's identity was very fluid. They had a very fluid understanding.

So what's your point? Because a lot of that census is about how you self-identify, not necessarily

about what your blood or your ethnicity or your culture. They have the same blood. They're brothers.

I agree. They have the same blood. They're brothers. I agree.

They have the same blood.

But people would be more willing to identify as Ukrainian before the coup when people in Eastern

Ukraine, most of them have a dual sense like, yes, we're part of Russia, but we also are Ukrainian. And it was a porous border and it was a very fluid, porous relationship. Once a hard distinction was imposed by Maidan that said, we want to completely wipe out every trace of Russian people who have Russian family like it's more

than 46% of people who have ties to Russia way more some tie historical familial lingual cultural

that's a fundamental part of who they are and they're not willing to familial, lingual, cultural.

That's a fundamental part

of who they are

and they're not

willing to let

that get destroyed

and be exterminated,

right?

Can we go back

to your framing?

There's only one force

that's a force

of exclusion here

because even Russia

isn't exclusionary toward Ukraine.

You're drifting. The Maidan coup was

exclusionary. Okay. You're drifting.

So in any case, let me continue.

The analogy in this

case would be that if those Mexican people

voted for AOC

and then there was just a coup and then the person that they voted for AOC, and then there was just a coup. And then the person that they voted for, there was a coup. And then their social contract with the government expires. At this point, there's no way for them to recognize themselves as citizens, no way for them to situate themselves lawfully within the sovereignty of the United States. And plus, this coup was done by white supremacists who want to exterminate every trace of Mexican identity. Every trace of Mexican identity.

So if these Mexicans then decide that they want to succeed from the union to protect themselves and their families,

they have every right to do that.

Why wouldn't they?

All right.

So let's go back to your frame of movement.

If there was a once supremacist coup in the U.S. that was targeting Mexicans, wouldn't they have the right to secede?

You're very emotional.

Are you saying they would have to go to Mexico?

If they're living in Texas for centuries or Southern California, why would they have to do that?

Why would they have to leave?

Can I, can we talk about your framing?

Yeah.

This might not do.

So Putin is a mob boss.

He demands fealty.

So he put in this president's puppet.

He was a fake election.

Yeah, obviously.

He pulled this back from a popular, populace joining of the EU.

Excuse me, excuse me, pipe down.

I'm talking.

He pulled back from a populist opinion, majority of joining the EU to placate

Putin, to make Putin daddy happy.

You're making it sound like Ukraine

was always under Russian control.

They busts in voters.

They put their army men they're little green martians out

you're saying that Putin bust in voters

to get the president of ukraine

how do you think he gets 90% of the vote

do you really believe the 90% of the vote?

Do you really believe he gets 90% of Ukraine before 2014 was elected because of Putin's bust in voters?

Who would never, never violate the sanctity of borders on my fault.

You're right.

Where are you getting the's crazy that putin

boston boston voters to vote for the deposed ukrainian president before 24 you've never seen it

they pay them because they don't get any money they get all the all the bapskas and all the

the grandma's a babushka's coming out of a bus so is this what you believe

yes or no like is this it do you believe three fair elections result in 90% so this is this is

you just lost the argument. You lost the debate.

You talk so much in my

chat about how he's such a good debater.

Now we have to make AI of Putin

busing in Babushkas to

get Yanukovych or whatever

elected, right? So he's claiming

that the president of Ukraine before the coup was only

elected because Putin bust in voters of Babushkas to get that guy elected, and that the coup was

actually like a stop-the-steel thing to, like, restore legitimacy.

So that's it.

And I gave him multiple opportunities,

like explaining to him what he's saying.

And he's committing to that.

He's committing to that.

Dawes, you're cooked, man.

No, no, you got to deal with the Babushka thing.

Jonathan, go ahead. Jonathan, go ahead. I look at. I look, can you me?

Yeah.

All right, thank you for having me on.

A few quick questions.

You can stop me whenever you're ready.

I am currently a member of the PSL Action Committee and I'm aligned with them in a lot of their party lines. I feel as though they kind of represent a lot of what I believe in. Do you have any specific critiques of the PSL at this time?

Yeah, a few

actually.

I mean,

um,

my main critique

has to do with

their model of organization.

I think it's not very effective. I think that it's very much a top-down party with not enough of a dynamic relationship to the bottom. And of course, that's because they have a lot of money that comes from the top.

But the problem, that's great.

But the problem is that it locks in a specific vision for how things should be run and how things should be that is not open to feedback from the bottom. Party can only get its strength from two directions, from the top, which is money that's injected, or from your base,

your grassroots, right? And I think the pressure that PSL feels from the bottom is mainly from

stuff like cancel culture and online stuff and people trying to it and i remember in 2020 that was

like really happening but they don't do a lot to build material foundations on the

bottom right and uh that's i think the problem uh so now it's one of the critiques the second critique

i think is that they pursue a type of praxis, which I think is about, it's always playing second fiddle to trends that are being defined outside the party.

And the PSL, I think, doesn't take seriously the fact that these trends that they're following are being initiated by leaders.

And that the goal of a party should be to compete for leadership,

not to tail other leaders. They treat as though every Democrat, like, liberal thing is some spontaneous,

organic thing, but that's not true. Like, for example, Momdani, I know that PSL is trying to,

trying to, like, capitalize as much as they can off this hype from the DSA,

but it's like, but that doesn't, that's not like a reflection of the objective realities

of the masses. It's a reflection of a competing form of leadership that's doing it more effectively

and competently than both PSL and ACP, by the way, right? Because they have more advantages and all

that kind of stuff. So the goal is to be at the avant-garde.

The goal is not to play second fiddle to anyone.

So that'd be my second critique.

My third one is that their online influencers need to calm down.

Maddleton, Pendleton, and chain smoker or whatever chain slayer, they need to just calm down and

and stop jealously attacking us so much. And when I say jealous, I mean like, you only assume it's just

PSL, just ordering them that oh suppress ACP it's like

on down now we're both kind of not all that happening right now because of the DSA

that's really it.

Yeah, and that's a good segue into another question.

I did want to ask you a little bit about

some of the critiques of the ACP at this time.

A lot of other organizations

in the United States are accusing the ACP

of participating in like red fascism and

calling them national Bolsheviks. Do you have any specific feelings about that sort of critique?

I think it's completely wrong. And you know, the secret about ACP, it's, it's Huey Newton's

intercommunalism theory. We, first of all, there's orthodox Marxist line in the socialist

patriotism, which is actually what CPSA kind of has. You know, not the Democrat politics specifically, but, you know, they, they believe in the United States as historically progressive, and that's just standard socialist patriotism. I think we actually take it in a heterodox direction in a lot of ways with the intercommunalism theory of nationhood and the national question that Newton developed.

So Newton develops this idea that because of the age of globalism, the form of the nation state has basically been supplanted. And that the premises of nationhood or the equivalent to it, something like that, is going to develop in a more local way. There have, you know, he talks about this idea of like,

liberated zones

that organizations established

and they all link up to each other.

And it's this kind of like,

much more,

um,

grasping with the

material foundations of nationhood itself,

like outside the institution of the nation,

which is the sovereign form of the state.

I don't fully agree with Newton

and the intercommunalistic idea,

but we are searching for

the premises of, like, the form of social existence, which is what a nation is, beyond the institution of the U.S. Constitution and the enumerated USA.

Whereas the CPSA, for example, takes as the premise of communist organizing the USA and the

Constitution and so on. But I think the reason why we are associated with like national Bolshevism or

the right wing is because of this

lack of proximity to the institutions it it's if you just replace the word right wing or

nozbole with barbarian

everything starts to make sense

we're being accused of being barbarians well in a way we are barbarians

you know but

can something left wing emerge out of barbarism

I think so I think the right wing has a wrong monopoly on the barbaric.

You know what? I believe in, I believe, again, we have proximity to the Black Panthers here.

Even among criminals, you can find a spark of something progressive, right?

And you can be moralistic and hypocritical and say, no, you're condemned, you're a barbarian.

Because you don't talk like us and you're, know whatever and it's like well those tendencies exist

that are right wing for sure but then there's also left wing tendencies it's a sacred duty

to draw out the correct tendencies okay i've got a couple more questions tendencies. Hmm.

Okay.

I've got a couple more questions if I can have the time.

One is a little bit more theoretical.

I wanted to ask you about your perspective on commodity production.

And obviously this is a far and away question to be talking about right now, but there is sort of a recent fad online, at least that I've noticed, about accusations of LaSalleism.

People calling the USSR a LaSalleist structure being that they still participated in, like, capitalist relations?

Do you have any feelings about commodity production and lausolism?

Yeah, it's just left comms loudly projecting their illiteracy and confusion about Marxism.

So LaSalle was a significant figure in the prehistory of modern-day communism, if we call it that,

because he was seminal in the foundation of the movement

we call social democracy, even before Kotzky became its pope, its theoretician. Lassell made it

into a mass movement, basically. And he did so in a kind of dirty way, very like real politic, pragmatic way. He kind of had this mutual understanding with Bismarck. So Bismarck was firmly in the pocket of certain sections of the landed aristocracy in Germany who had industrial ambitions.

But LaSalle thought there was a temporary room for some kind of alliance with Bismarck,

specifically against the, like, bourgeois liberal Democrat types.

So LaSalle basically established a popular socialist movement, but he did so on the basis of implicit tolerance and alliance with Bismarck, right? And that's why Marx and Engels were suspicious of him. It was mainly because LaSalle did not have the balls, so to speak.

I mean, I guess we're changing our language.

They didn't think he had what it took to actually muster proletarian independence when push came to shove.

Like Engels was anticipating World War I was going to happen.

And he thought now the proletariat in World War I, they're going to have to organize.

They're going to have to take up arms and build their own power, their own sovereignty.

And LaSalle is creating all this wiggle room for the rise of a legal, like, mass, socialist

movement, but he could only do so on the basis of some kind of, like, relationship with Bismarck

and an implicit understanding with him.

But it's absurd to refer to the USSR in that way because there's no Bismarck factor here.

All of the power was built from the ground up.

It's like payroll Giovanni, he said, built this shit from the ground up. It's like payroll Giovanni, he said,

built this shit from the ground up.

Every single case of communism historically was the ground up.

There's no alliance with pre-existing status quo,

with landowners, with industrialists, with the bourgeoisie whatsoever.

All the sovereignty and all the powers being built from war, from the ground up.

So the decisive thing is not the persistence of commodity production or not.

That for Marx, at least, that wasn't the issue.

Marx and Engels were wary of LaSalle

because they thought his theoretical distortions

or his theoretical innovations

or his way of phrasing things

like in the critique of the gothic program,

Marx basically thought that this was a,

these were just expressions of opportunism

that pertained to the increasing tendency of opportunism in the social democratic movement,

which they were very, very vigilant about. They're like, okay, I understand we need a legal

dimension of struggle and we need to grow. But they could see how these opportunistic tendencies were emerging

that amounted to conformity with the actual state power, you know,

rather than building an independent one.

And that was the basis. it wasn't about how long commodity production will persist

in the early stages of socialism that wasn't the decisive problem for marks and angles at all they

basically were safeguarding themselves against the possibility

that in the future, the Social Democratic movement would try to make itself compatible with the

existing state machine and just be in appendage of the bourgeois state.

And explain this theoretically in terms of how there's not this decisive rupture with capitalist mode of production.

There's a degree of continuity, but we're just going to call it socialism.

That's what they were wary of.

But again, the Soviet Union had its revolution. China had its revolution. These revolutions uprooted all of the foundations of what we call

everyday life and civilization.

And so when those things began to recover in a way,

and there appeared things that were associated with the capitalist era,

we can only assume that these qualities that are characteristic of capitalism,

like commodity production and others, are there because they have to be objectively.

Not because, like LaSalle, they're

opportunists who are selling out to some

existing power or authority.

That would be my basic

retort.

Okay.

And I will say this is my last

question, but before I ask it, I'd like to say thank you for having me on, and I appreciate having the conversation with you. I'll cede my time after this one. I heard from the last discussion that you had with Mr. Haas that you have some synthetic views with Putin in regards to the, what I agree with you,

is in totally provoked war between Russia and Ukraine. Do you have any specific sympathies for the

Russian Federation as a nation outside of this specific war.

In a way, I do, because the Russian Federation is a testament, living testament, to the fact that the CPSU failed.

Who betrayed the Soviet Union? It was the CPSU.

Okay, but the Soviet Union did not die

materially or historically

speaking. Institutionally

there was a failure. And the

Russians were left.

They were faced with, like,

how do we cope with this?

How do we deal with it?

So we had the 90s in the Wild West era of total Western colonization

and total Western whatever plundering,

plundering by the oligarchs, all that kind of stuff. And Russians are now

existentially facing the question, what are we to do with this inheritance of the past? Because

the Soviet Union built literally everything that exists in Russia, basically. How do we move on and how do we carve out an existence?

And I think that the problem the Russians are facing is the same as Marxism today.

We can't just refer to the past to carve out and chart our future.

The past failed.

The CPSU betrayed the Soviet Union.

We need a comprehensive examination of why that happened.

And anyone who thinks they have an easy answer to that is lying.

Like we could just say, well, Russian Federation is tainted.

Only the USSR was legitimate.

In a way, of course, we know the USSR was better.

But why did the USSR collapse?

Is it simply possible to go back like this?

If only it was so easy.

No, there were serious contradictions within the USSR itself that made its dissolution, given those contradictions and the inability to respond to them, inevitable.

And so my sympathy to Russia is really that, like, I feel like the Western left dehumanizes Russians.

Because they're no longer ideological pawns.

Because they're no longer ideologically pure.

They have no human.

No, the humanity that persists amidst the contradictions within communism is the one

that marxists need to take especially seriously because that is us we are russia like malema

says putin is us we We are Putin in a way. We don't have all the answers. We have yet to comprehensively explain what we're wrong. Nobody, nobody on the left has this nailed down in an easy way nobody but yet we persist and we

live should the entire russian nation have disappeared because the soviet union failed them

or the u s the cpsu failed them failed them. No, these are living people.

These are living people whose lives matter to me.

The people who lived in the USSR, it's the same one still living there.

They don't know how to make sense of their

existence and their future, but

their lives still matter to me.

And when I see

everything about them being

hated, like in Ukraine and elsewhere,

when they're dealing with the contradictions

after the USSR, they're blaming

Russia. They're blaming Russianness. So these Babushkas and these elderly Russian grandmas and

grandpas and people just living in their villages, the same way they've been living under the USSR

are now suddenly finding themselves under siege and under attack for who they are for being

Russia. Or in buses being sent to Ukraine. Yeah. And it's like it's a survival thing at that point. No,

we don't know how to fully square what happened

with the Soviet Union, but we're actual living people, and Russians beginning to stand up

for their dignity and recognize that, is more important to me than ideological purity.

Because it's still the same people.

The whole point of the Soviet Union

was the human element. Who are

the human beings that the Soviet Union

exists for? Right?

The human should be first. Not the ideal, the human, be first not the ideal the human you know and that history didn't end

you know so that's my understanding it's like it's right and wrong is russia waving the flag of the

ussr no they profess to be communists and marxists no they don't they're not led by waving the flag of the USSR? No.

They profess to be communists and Marxists?

No, they don't.

They're not led by Marxists.

But if we want to prove the superiority of Marxism to Russians, of all people,

maybe we should prove first that we recognize and understand

their humanity.

They're human beings first.

Marxism is about serving and working for humanity.

You know?

I feel that's a very poignant

argument to make, and I appreciate it.

I did say that was my last question. I do have but one more, kind of a funny question.

I saw some pictures online that you were out in China, speaking with some CCP members. Some other organizations in the United States, some other Marxist organizations said that that was AI and that you had not been to China.

Have you been to China?

Who said it was AI?

I've never heard that.

Some members of the uh... uh... b s l

they said it was a i mean um

they are they are very adamant against you know on chinese

social media i talked to a chinese influencer who has millions of subscribers.

I think I can post it on my channel soon.

But maybe that would be proof for them if they just saw the footage of me talking to this Chinese famous Chinese influencer?

Or maybe they think he came to America?

There's no telling what they'll say.

They're definitely stringently adamant against the ACP.

And I think that's a very popular position to take right now in

like modern American leftist circles. I'm a little bit more open to that, which is why I'm coming

to talk to you. And I am interested in what you have to say, though. Yeah, I mean, I was in China.

I'm not sure it would matter if that was proven

to them, but...

Well, fair enough. In any case, Haas, I thank you

for your time. I appreciate you so much for having

discussion with me, and I do feel like I've learned a lot time. I appreciate you so much for having a discussion with me.

And I do feel like I've learned a lot about your platform and you from this talk.

So it's been my pleasure.

I'll gladly cede my time to the next speaker.

For sure.

See you later, man.

Bye-bye.

Hmm. Bye. I.O., what's up, man? Yeah, what's up?

Yeah, what's up?

Yeah, I just had one quick.

When is the World Revolution song coming to Spotify?

I'm releasing a huge album,

but you guys aren't giving me good feedback

on like the Thomas Munster song.

You guys don't like that song, so I don't know.

And you didn't also, I have other songs.

I don't know, guys, You guys are very selective about you.

Like Dawson can come back on. Dude, you're literally like, your connection is broken.

Order of the right go ahead

rest negative 70s you're out of here

to go ahead just one quick question. Do you think China moving towards tokenized currency and digital assets is like their way of solving the resource allocation issues that kill the Soviet economy with smart contracts that could control speculation and maybe hoarding. Is that a possibility that's going to happen anytime in the future? I don't understand the relation of between that and the resource allocation problem. So you're talking about planning central planning i don't know i i i am

i don't know what you're talking about okay dawson go ahead this is your last chance

all right so let's let's just say it was a valid war, right? Putin was justified. So let's do the calculation. We're going to sacrifice all of Russia's future. Tank the stock market. One of these clowns in here said,

oh, it's just the stock market.

That's people's lives, their futures, and livelihoods.

Hundreds of thousands of men, I know you'll say,

oh, it wasn't hundreds of thousands of men.

But you give me the numbers.

There's gas lines everywhere.

Putin has been shown to be a paper tiger.in has been shown to be a paper tiger okay no respect

they're uh a pariah um nobody wants to do business with them who you mean the western world everyone no that's their neighbors that's really not true

uh Belarus doesn't want nothing to do with them he said he said no we're not going to host

any record troops no it's not true. You're just thinking like

NAFO, only thinking in the short term.

All right, so was it worth invading

and all these losses

happening? In the long term, yes.

All right, what are they winning? What are the people of Russia

winning for this war?

I could explain if you don't interrupt me and calm down.

Go ahead, guy.

You need to calm down.

Waiting.

The world is experiencing very very rocky changes and this became evident to everyone during

covid but this has been get to the point right there you go so you're just going to interrupt so

what do you want go no you're going to interrupt me so what do you want? Go.

No, you're going to interrupt me.

So what do you want?

Be concise.

Get to the point.

Say the words.

I'm going to say it on my time.

So I'm going to say it.

I'm not going to say it.

Grandstand.

Okay.

I'm going to grandstand or nothing.

How about that?

If that helps you see. You're a Macstar.

Because I'm not going to give you a two-byte, sound bite to explain.

Let's go then.

Go.

Hurry up.

I'm not going to hurry.

This is my time, actually.

You're going to hurry. This is my time, actually. You're going to listen or are you going to leave?

So the world's undergoing tremendous changes that make it inevitable, that the current world order is going to break down.

Supply chains are going to break down, blackouts are going to be inevitable, wars are going to increase, and the U.S. Unipolar System is collapsing.

Now, Russia has been part of the U.S. unipolar system is collapsing. Now, Russia has been part of the U.S. unipolar system for a long

time, but it has been building its own alternative polarity without simultaneously building

a direct political confrontation with the U.S.-led world order.

So little by little it started, you know, in 2014, Crimea, whatever, little by little, and Georgia maybe before.

22 had to happen because Russia had to prove it has the political, the political balls to break away from the U.S.-led world order that is condemning every single dependency on this world order to ruin. You need to break away, stand your ground, and build and prepare for this very rocky future ahead

where people who lack independence are not going to survive.

Well, Russia did prove its independence, and it proved its ability to survive this as independent.

Supply chain-wise,

in terms of economic relationships, political relationships,

Russia is hunkering down and it's been surviving.

I know things have gotten rocky recently.

But that was worth it.

Ultimately,

to break from the West

and not be reliant

any more on the U.S.

led unipolar world order

was worth it.

Okay.

That's it. um number one russia is not leading this of this other poll that you're talking about that's china russia has become a resource state for china, well you can...

Talk about all the terrible things. They don't have any freedom of information.

They're censored. We can't even use the internet in Russia.

So this is terrible for the Russian people. Do you want this war to end or you want it to keep going?

And what does victory look like

just quickly define that victory means two things or can i only say one thing

their brothers dying but what else

ukraine has to be prevented from ever joining nato and the people in donbass have to be

secured and never threatened ever again and being able to speak Russian and not have to be culturally genocided.

So no NATO for Ukraine ever.

Was Ukraine joining NATO one of the pretexts to the war yeah okay so putin wanted to prevent the

expansion of nato on his borders right for ukraine specifically for ukraine specifically oh he doesn't care about the other states he doesn't care about Finland Sweden not as much as the longest border that he shares not as much as Ukraine that's that's fine expanding NATO but as long as it's not Ukraine what the hell is the difference the vulgar gap go on so geographically if ukraine

were in NATO it would give a major advantage geographically to penetrate into russia through a land question i don't want to

interrupt and get you but hurt oh it's called the vulgar grad gap you can look it up i have a question

yeah what's your question?

Does Finland not have this same geographical?

Compare the border Finland has to Russia with the one Ukraine has.

Okay?

Any other questions?

Yeah, Finland's longer. longer what finland is longer

finland has a longer border with russia yeah than ukraine yes in terms of the populations in neighbors, really?

You don't count a border's length by the number of people in it.

No, you count the strategic significance for a war, okay?

Yeah.

Can my missiles hit you?

Are they next to you?

Can I invade?

What will, so Finland

it borders ice, and you're saying

that's longer than Ukraine that borders Russia's

major population centers and stuff?

Finland has a longer border

with Russia than Ukraine has with Russia.

It has a border with

ice, if it does, if that's true.

What does that matter? They have trucks and

tanks and cars that can drive on ice.

That they're going to go into the ice, into the North Pole with?

It's Finland.

You don't know you're the white war you don't know your history

the winter war it's what it's called

the white winter war

Russia will deal with Finland

it will deal with Finland in the future by the way

another question with that yeah is this. Is this a justified war,

a moral war, and if so, why don't you

join to do something about it? They have

a signing bonus. Because I'm not

Russian.

Either are most

of the people fighting. They're from Africa and north korea i'm sure they're

being rich is so pathetic they don't have their own people to fight they have to get prisoners

and people from nigeria and north korea can you believe it? North Korea is there to train

I don't need to go to their train

I would be prevented from ever returning

to the United States

And Russia's like

Oh North Korea you're our best friend

Why are you so like emotional

Brian? I'm having a good

time. It's just hilarious. You're so emotional

about this. I'm smiling. You look butter. You look like your paintings

are in a bunch. Because I'm hungry

and I'm tired of this. So what I'm... Yeah, I know. You got your face all scrunched.

You're just boring. You're just boring.

You're just boring.

You let the guy with the dog talk about nothing for an hour.

What are you talking about?

The dog?

Yeah, the're talking about feminism

in circles for an hour

yeah because that guy was genuinely

like no because you just wanted a grandstand

I'll tell you why

because that guy is gatekeeping

me like from the left people like that you're just like a why because that guy is gatekeeping me

like from the left, people like that.

You're just like a naiffle retard dude.

I don't even care about you.

That guy's actually gatekeeping

the ACP. He represents

the archetype that gate keeps the ACP.

Like gate keeps the ACP from having any ability to be like...

Can we do a thought experiment?

You're like a NATO supporter, dude.

Your like opinion doesn't matter to me.

Fuck NATO.

I don't care about NATO.

No, you're a Ukraine supporter.

Like, I don't even consider you, like, I don't care.

No, I don't even care about Ukraine.

So why are you passionate about this topic if you don't care about Ukraine?

I don't care about Israel.

I don't care about Palestine.

So stop crying about it.

I didn't kick him out.

I got restricted because that guy.

Reason, harassment, and bullying.

So he was harassing and bullying me and then got kicked out.

Oh, no.

Okay.

We got to end the live.

I didn't ban you, dude.

This is TikTok.

Check your notifications.

We got to end the live.

I just got a violation.

We got to go.

Dude, I did try to join again. I literally didn't do anything. Okay, one last word. Try to join again.

I did not ban you, dude.

TikTok banned you.

Jesus Christ.

TikTok banned you, I promise.

Dude, this guy's gonna, like, cry forever.

You can't say Arsler.

I don't know what I said. I don't know what I said.

I don't know what anyone said.

Okay.

Someone in Shok you.

Jesus Christ.

It's a gorilla. We'll talk later. I gotta... You're not live.

Dude said, right dude says I'm running

he literally got banned by Tick-Tock

it's crazy

dude why would I kick you

after asking you a question?

I was like, why do you care about Ukraine then if you don't care about it?

And then TikTok banned, you're like, I don't give a fuck.

Carl Mark said religion is the opium of the people.

What does that mean? do you know what that means Let up Dumer Nat. All right.

Last person.

Okay, hold on.

Peter Gibson has a hammering circle.

I got to let them up.

Yo, Peter, what's up?

Go ahead, Peter.

Hello?

Yeah.

I don't mean to record.

I don't know me to request to it.

That's no bad.

No problem.

Okay, let's bring on Dumer Nat.

Yo, what's up? Hello.

What's up?

What's up, man?

Hey, what's going on man

I'm usually a big fan of your work but I joined

and I heard that guy arguing about Russia

and Ukraine so I just came up

to ask would you mind arguing about

any conflict

or does it have to be specifically like a current one?

I guess any conflict.

Okay, cool.

I heard your opinions before about the American Civil War and it seems that you side much more with Lincoln in the Union.

I completely with Lincoln, yeah. So why not with the Confederacy?

Well, besides the slavery elephant in the room, you know. You also have

the fact, you have

two angles, I guess.

One of them from a Marxist perspective

is about the development of the productive forces.

So the South would not be able to

develop productive forces,

industry, technology, and so on.

And we have a permanently stalled, stunted state of development.

It's unable to actually reduce its dependency on the planter economy.

And then the second thing has to do with geopolitics.

The United States had less than a century of a history of sovereignty,

and part of that sovereignty would have been that they would have had to industrialize.

But the South was being backed by Britain and France and all of Europe, basically all of the European powers.

And the goal was basically to destroy the American

Republic, my view.

Okay, so

I would like to address the slavery question

in the room and then answer

the two objections that you've raised.

Is that cool? Yeah. Okay, so number one, the North also

had slaves, right? I mean, the whole point of the emancipation proclamation was to preserve slavery

in the northern occupied territories in the south right so even in occupied territories

like union occupied territories in the south slavery was preserved under the emancipation

proclamation um but the material foundations of slavery were rooted in the South.

Sure, but don't you think that because of this is what I'm going to mention with industrialization, don't you think that the war effort by the South and the little but rapid industrialization that happened due to that,

don't you think that would eventually cause them to have an industrial economy and, you know,

so you think it was always like bounded, determined to be an Egoerian economy?

Yeah, that was Marx's analysis, basically.

The logic of the planter economy was such that it would never be able to move beyond this.

And the rise of wage labor would have never happened and therefore capital would never be able to accumulate.

Why is I don't understand why that's an inevitability though.

Basically, well, wage labor is a condition of capital, right? For capital to be able to accumulate.

Because you need a flexibility in the division of labor of the labor force, basically.

And if labor is not free, quote unquote, then it is intrinsically bound with a specific form of accumulation and production

right okay and uh there's no way wage laborers would have ever been able to compete with slaves, you know?

Well, I think we can agree that wage labor is, I was the what would the word be more progressive than a slave-based system just for Marxist perspective?

We're just getting rid of all the morals and stuff. We're just focusing on the material.

Yes, that's what I meant. Yeah. Um, okay. I would argue, I mean, two things. Number one, I think slavery was probably already on its way out. I don't think it would have been this thing that just stayed the entire time. There's no real reason.

It would have if they weren't able to expand.

But the Civil War was about the expansion into the Western territories because what Marx's analysis basically was, was that the same contradictions of capitalist crisis in a way you do see those in the planter economy.

But where capitalists can innovate through technology

to get themselves out of the crisis per se, you know, industry,

the only solution for the planters was the expansion

in terms of like geography of like the square mileage of the plantations. That's how they get more profit. Because at a certain point when the profit starts to reach equilibrium with the cost of production or whatever

and you're unable to accumulate

anymore. Well, if you're unable to accumulate anymore, you're

unable to service the debts that

were a condition of being able to... I mean, these were all

enterprises that are founded on debt, you know?

Yeah.

And so.

But because the South succeeded, I don't think there's any, there's no prospect of expanding slavery.

That would just, especially into the West, that's basically impossible. That was that was their goal they had they wanted to expand in terms of more square mileage and territory correct but the union also wanted to expand and eventually did no no i know but they did they wanted to expand in territory but not the institution of slavery they wanted to expand in territory, but not the institution of slavery.

They wanted to expand in territory, but they didn't want to expand the institution of slavery into that territory.

Exactly.

Okay.

But even so, with the South succeeding

it seems to just be an impossibility

that they would be able to expand anywhere

um

just by the capability

just by the military capabilities of the South

how would they be able to expand

oh they planned on it. There was an idea

called the Golden Circle that Albert

Putt... Right, but they were going to go south. Yeah,

but also West. I mean, they wanted

to go a lot of places. So you think

there would have been an eventual, even if

things didn't play out the way they did,

there would have been a military confrontation between the North and the South.

I think it was inevitable.

Okay.

You said something interesting earlier about the Republic.

Don't you think of there?

I mean, because we don't have to live in this universe with like the, like, we don't have to create a universe where the Union won, right? That is the universe we live in. Don't you think the Republic almost immediately died after the Civil War?

Um, like, come on, like, you can admit that reconstruction was like an evil thing that happened

no i wouldn't be fully prepared to admit that you don't think like putting the south

under military occupation enforcing the 14th Amendment, like that just...

No, there were a lot of things about reconstruction that had a lot of promise, actually.

It's just that the same foundations of reconstruction were later exploited and abused. Maybe, you know, to give the government

this extraordinary power. But there was a lot

of things in the beginning of reconstruction,

which could have actually

would have been progressive more, you know?

Sure, but I mean, what ended up happening was the South didn't vote on the 14th Amendment

and the radical Republicans and the federal government, like, you know,

split the South up into like five military districts

and then basically put them under martial law

and then with like the with a gun to the back of their head

they forced them to vote like the 14th amendment

was to have disempowered the planter class

which had an absolute grip

on Southern society but the problem

But they emboldened the industrial bourgeoisie

Which is you know

There was that

There was that and then this same power

That was originally should have been

Just to disempower

The Planter class

never actually ended up

raising up the people

right and never ended up

raising up the free laborers

the slaves the former slaves

whatever the white

workers whatever they were never raised up you know so correct the

bankers the finances those were the people that were raised up took advantage of this you know

um occupation this extraordinary

power over the federal government

to establish monopolies

and so on.

Right. So that's kind of what I'm getting at when you mentioned

that republic thing, right? It seems like the

Republic of like

died almost immediately

after the fact, right?

Well, no, in a way, the republic

was

always what it was.

What do you mean by that?

Like I don't, I don't really, maybe

you might agree, you might disagree, like i don't i don't really maybe you might agree you might disagree like

the american people in a real sense were never represented by the federal that's what i mean there was

never okay there was never that but if we're talking about why the union was more progressive

because that would have been a premise even if progressive forces were in command it would have had to do the same thing uh in terms of undermine the planter class in the south but we agreed though essentially uh that there were two reactionary forces fighting against each other in the civil war right or do you disagree no i think

that the north was more so you know when you think about dialectics, there's different tendencies.

And oftentimes reactionary tendencies can immediately prevail even within a more overall progressive tendency.

So it's always like relative in a way, right?

Well, don't you think, though, that...

Like, reactionary, not with respect to something that actually exists,

but reactionary with respect to a clear

and evident possibility that was

never pursued. You know?

Like, there was possibility

with reconstruction

and with the kind of

direction Lincoln was taking the nation in,

there was a possibility that was there for that,

to have actually cemented a real republic by foreign of the people.

But because of capitalism, it was immediately shown to be impossible but we can still reflect on that

you know kernel of possibility and be like there was promise in that we should draw from that

in terms of inspiration and stuff you know i i just don't really see it i I mean, I just see Reconstruction is essentially punishing the South,

which is essentially what it was,

and that's even what Northerners saw it as.

That is what it was.

And also, Lincoln almost, I mean,

he died very early on during Reconstruction, so there's kind of, I mean, he died very early own during reconstruction. So there's kind of, I mean,

he wasn't really around for reconstruction.

Part of, but there, there's two tendencies. It's always a double

as short. Yes, part of it could have been that

unilaterally punishing the South, not just the planters, but everyone.

But then there's the other aspect of reconstruction, which was this was a new opportunity to lay new foundations for a republic by for and of the people, right? And get rid of the baggage that tainted

the republic in 1776, which prevented more popular sovereignty in the beginning. All these

compromises the founding fathers had to make,

you know,

to prevent,

I know the word is cringe,

but when I say democracy,

I mean it in the sense of the rule of popular sovereignty.

Yeah,

the authentic popular rules.

Yeah.

Yeah.

But I would, I would say that

that is essentially

what the South was fighting for

was authentic popular

sovereignty. That's why they succeeded.

It's because they didn't feel like they were, there was

true representation of the south and the federal government

would have subordinated i mean if we succeeded succeeded succeeded like succeeded from the union not succeeded sorry

that's why i feel like they left is because they simply just didn't want to be in the union

anymore and it feels like that they did by an elite planter class they were like a correct but

the north was dominated by an elite industrial class uh yes but the northern industrial class was up and coming and the northern industrial class was up and coming, and the northern industrial

class was historically more progressive because it had not yet at that point in time,

it didn't become the imperialist bourgeoisie at later would.

You know, at that time... But it seems like the Civil War was inevitable for it.

That was it not?

Like that is where like total war and unconditional surrender comes from.

And the war crimes from Sherman and whatnot, that laid the foundation for the way that the Empire conducted itself

up until today.

You're talking about

the aftermath of the

Civil War. No, I'm talking about

during, no, I'm saying the Civil War laid the foundations of unconditional

surrender and, you know, war is hell, this idea that, you know, we can do anything we want

in the war as long as we win. That was that was kind of foreign until the civil war happened.

You know, like the whole point of the civil war was to destroy the Confederacy, right? That was the

whole point. We're not going to accept any type of peace of cease nothing it will be nothing but total

surrender and that's how america's operated since then i think that's it's interesting because

in a way it's like america's internal contradictions are the reason why it is the way it is externally.

And I feel like the Civil War is like a huge foundational moment of the way the federal government operates, of the precedent that was set that eventually led to the Rockefellers, the Morgans and all of that.

But we can only say these are bad things in retrospect from a position of how it could have been done differently.

But the idea that the South would have been able to resist these kinds of evils or something, I think it's completely wrong. The South...

But it was very clear the Union could not, right? Well, in retrospect, we could see that

with hindsight, for example, if we took a time machine, for example, it's like, well, no,

there was a way out. There would have been a way to actually build a powerful, sovereign,

popular republic from that, you know? But the contradictions

of capitalism made it inevitable that

things became what they were.

And you have to go through these contradictions. You can't

resist them. You have to go through it, you know?

It's like it's very similar with feudalism, actually. It's like

actually on the left,

there's a guy named

Dominico Lesudro, right?

It's interesting because I've never

actually heard anyone make this argument.

It would be extremely,

it would be

extremely, how would it would be extremely

how would I put it

provocative

I wouldn't make the argument

but if you

someone wanted to troll

the supporters of Lesudra they could

he basically said that the Marxist idea that bourgeois revolution someone wanted to troll supporters of Lesotho they could. He basically

said that the Marxist idea that

bourgeois revolutions are progressive is wrong.

He said that

the bourgeois revolutions

for example

1776 and others

do you agree with this?

No, I don't actually. But I'm saying

I think there's resonances between where you're

coming from and that sentiment actually

which is like, well,

this unprecedented evil

was actually unleashed by the bourgeois

revolutions

like colonialism and genocide

and all these kind of things

and he points out how like well under feudalism

and the absolute monarchies and stuff

there were like restraints

and some kind of

you know who also

kind of makes that point yeah

who the the anarcho-capitalist

thinkers like hopper like making

arguments for monarchy and about how

like democracy you know they kind

of hinted something like that

I guess you know the sujro is like basically

pointing out that like well no actually the bourgeois revolutions are not progressive

they also actually led to more evil than before in a way right but i think that so if someone

would just make that

argument in the case of the union

not, you know,

I mean, it would be hard because slavery is pretty

evidently whatever evil, but

you know, if someone would say, well then

unprecedented types of evil were opened up by the precedent of the Civil War, like the total war of annihilation or whatever, right?

Right.

Well, I would say that I don't think the Civil War was like a crusade against slavery, right?

I mean, the North was very honest about the fact that it wasn't.

You know, that didn't become a thing until like in the middle of it. It wasn't materially.

That wasn't the material cause, but in terms of the morale and the spiritual significance of the war for many people in the north and the way it was morally

justified was i think about slavery the material cause was not that northerners just woke up one day

and decided well i i do actually think that they were...

They realized that this institution, which they had tolerated for centuries, is suddenly evil.

No, there was material causes for why, for sure.

But that was a moment where on a spiritual and moral level the country through abolitionism and you know

i mean i don't really think so i think you know i'm sorry but i just don't buy the fact that

it is true that the north and the country at large was still very racist.

I don't think that they were down to go risk their lives for the fact about liberating black people.

For example, the songs the Union soldiers would sing were about slavery, you know?

I'm pretty sure it was like

Hale Columbia and shit like that.

John Brown's body.

That's where the...

It's a very minority point of view.

But that's where the Marine Anthem

comes from, Battle Him of the Republic.

It comes from John Brown's body.

No. No. Yeah what i don't think i don't think that's true wait wait wait battle him of the republic post dates okay anyways i think it was yeah

might have to fact check about this

but anyways

I'm wrong I think I always remember John Brown's body was first

it doesn't matter if you could be right

it doesn't matter um there is something

else I wanted to speak to you about

besides the Civil War stuff.

I think we're kind of just...

You introduced a good idea, I think, with the Islam and Marxist stuff, and I wanted to poke your brain about it for just a little bit.

Is that cool? It's not going to take that long.

Sure, sure.

I connected that, because I believe,

I think you're 100% correct that the actual

revolutionary forces in the world today

are the

two H groups. I don't think I can

say I'm on TikTok, but I think you know what I'm talking about.

The Islamic Republic,

Ansar Allah, and Yemen.

And I connected this

to, I do really think that a big reason why the Soviet Union fell was because they lost this religious spirit during destonization, right? And I think there is something unique about religion. What did you say? I agree.

And I think there is something.

That was the loss of the morale, basically.

Yeah, and you see North Korea, they still have something like that, and they're still standing strong. And I think there is something inherently

revolutionary about this kind of spiritual

higher ideal that Islam offers

that communists have lost.

Same with China. China. I mean, I still,

I support China, but I think China's kind of

lost it. I don't think China's a revolutionary state.

Inadvertently, it's probably revolutionary

on a global level, but yeah, it's politically

not a revolutionary. It's a conservative

though kind of thing that's not like the Islamic Republic, right?

And I think you connect this. Yeah, yeah, yeah,ic republic right and i think you connect you can connect this

yeah yeah yeah yeah i think you can connect this to like i said the fall of the the soviet union

but also uh even like maybe venezuela dude like after hugo shavez and this kind of rallying

you know it's it's the dimension of the moral, you know, the morale.

Yeah.

Yeah, that's what it all is.

And, yeah, communist Marxists have lost that for sure.

They've lost it.

100%.

Yeah.

And so, you know, when Islam, and also, you can look in the Palestinian resistance.

The secular forces did lose, right?

100%.

It lost to the age group.

Everywhere in the Middle East, yeah.

Yeah, well, look, like, Ba'athism's dead.

Gaddafi's fallen, and Nassar's fallen,

and what's left,

it's the Islamic resistance.

You know,

that's what's one,

I think it's something that,

I'm not a communist,

but revolutionaries in general

can kind of look at it and be like,

okay,

this is something.

And communism itself has experimented with this more,

you know, I don't want to say ideal, because it's not like idealistic, but you said morale, right?

I think that's a good word to say, you know, just morality, higher than being kind of thing.

The Soviet Union had that, right?

You had the Bolshevik revolution.

You had the great patriotic war.

You had Stalin.

And then with the Stalinization, it lost it.

And that's what's rooted in the fall of the Soviet Union.

And, you know, you've seen it, you can see in the

Middle East and whatnot the secular forces have lost and the religious ones have won. And I just

think you were 100% right about that. And a lot of people misinterpreted what you say, but there's

a whole lot of truth into it.

Yeah, I plan on writing something, so watch out for that.

But thanks for coming on, man.

Yeah, man, of course.

See you later.

All right.

Okay, we're ending the Tic Tac.

Go to sleep, dude.

You're like literally freaking out.

Can you join?

No.

We're ending it right now.

All right, guys, whoever's still here and...

Wow, on the kick.

Don't say I don't give you guys content.

Bye-bye.