Confronting the enemy...

Automatic sprains sporadic and accurate.

Clips to the back of it, verbal cock and immaculate.

Learn to move packages in and out of Los Angeles.

We savages, busting off rounds, freeing them out of clips.

Knocking pounds off them like Anna Nicole Smith.

Shit, I'm in the hood, walking with choppers.

Cocking and popping the coppers.

Glocks be talking like blockadi block blocker.

I probably pop hopper and possibly just forgot where I tossed them.

These niggas obnoxious.

Me and Top got your bitch in the cockpit.

She wanted pit stop just to see how the cops fit.

These bosses deposit their profit.

Then watches.

We cop it.

On top of the ostrich and foxes.

I used to be your little bastard distress.

Now I'm a boss where I'm from with a laska on my chest.

Yes.

See, I know you like my slider.

You know I'm strip when I come through.

Chain hanging like Dolly Driver.

It never don't get it, cause I'm too

Go get it.

Watch your moon, nigga.

Never gonna get it.

She ain't got a clue, nigga.

I put it down for the wild, wild west, like the 1800s and them stagecoaches.

The fund strapped in my blaze poking.

It ain't a 600 big body, the 6400 spoken.

The drama spokesman, streets endorse them.

I'd rather be opening up my nine and closing my coffin.

I'm from Westcovina, this ain't Compton.

Still money passed around like we taking the offering.

I'm something like a phenomenon.

When they see the sad, happy faces, then they know that the drama's on.

It's the West Coast back at your front door.

We up close in person, no ain't done till the curtains close.

Could be friend or foe, love it or hate it.

I'm the king, but I play with the aces.

Run up to find out I keep it loaded like bases.

Your wise in your mouth, and these ain't braces.

Hey, see, I know you like my slider.

Noise trap when I come.

Shane hanging like

You got my dog.

Don't be watching who I die.

See when I walk through the door, I wonder why these fake niggas jocking before.

On display like I came from a store, you know, posing like a mannequin in front of your home.

Out front block, more than 50 deep now.

Convicts surrounding the whole compound.

Cause you don't really want what you're staring at.

Clip full of bullets, don't mind sharing that.

Thanks.

You know how.

You never don't get it, cause I'm too smooth, nigga.

You never don't get it, don't you know, nigga?

Automatically had to be carrying automatic spraying, sporadic and accurate.

Clips to the back of it, barrel cock and immaculate.

Learned to move packages in and out of Los Angeles.

We savages, busting off rounds, freeing banana clips.

Knocking pans off them like Anna Nicole Smith.

Shit, I'm in the hood, walking with choppers.

Cocking and popping the coppers.

Slocks be talking like lockety block locker.

I probably pop hopper and possibly just forgot where I tossed them.

These niggas obnoxious.

Me and Top got your pitch in the cockpit.

She wanted pit stop just to see how the cops pit.

These bosses deposit the profit.

Then watches me copping on top of the ostrich and foxes.

I used to be your little bastard distressed.

Now I'm a boss where I'm from with a laska on my chest.

Yes.

See, I know you like my slider.

You don't stop when I come through.

And light body driver.

The way that I move, nigga, you never don't get it.

Cause I'm too smooth, nigga.

You never don't get it.

Watch you move, nigga.

You never don't get it.

I put it down for the wild, wild west, like the 1800s and them stagecoaches.

If I strapped in my blaze poking, it ain't a 600 big body, the 6400 spoken.

The drama spokesman, streets endorsed them.

I'd rather be opening up my nine and closing my coffin.

I'm from Westcovina, this ain't Compton.

Still money passed around like we taking the offering.

I'm something like a phenomenon.

When they see the sad, happy faces, then they know that the drama's on.

It's the West Coast back at your front door.

We get close in person, no ain't done till the curtains close.

Could be friend or foe, love it or hate it.

I'm the king, but I play with the aces.

Run up to find out, I keep it loaded like bases.

Get wides in your mouth, and these ain't phrases.

Hey, so y'all know you like my slagger.

Noise trap when I come through.

Chain hanging like

It's not a

But don't be about you, nigga.

You ain't got a clue, nigga.

When I walk through the door, wonder why these fake niggas jocking before.

On display like I came from a stone, you know, posing like a mannequin in front of your hole.

Up front block 15 now.

Around in the whole compound.

Cause you don't really want what you're staring at.

Clip full of bullets, don't mind sharing that.

See, I know you like my slider.

You know it's tracked when I.

You never don't get it, cause I'm too smooth, nigga.

You never don't get it, I'm too new, nigga.

You ain't got a clue.

Um

Ay, ay, ay, ay, ay.

Go, gangsta, ay, ay, ay, ay, ay, ay.

Go, gangsta, keep poppin'.

Block for ya, bit me, let's get this bitch poppin'.

Go gangsta, keep poppin'.

Strike back when the neck of us clockin'.

See, nowadays it seems like everybody wanna be killed.

Gorillas getting high up, they weed and liquor.

You die quicker.

Paramedics dry back slow to the hospital.

You get pronounced dead at foot to the hospital.

Stop frontin' when you know you won't pull none.

First nigga to retreat when the tools bust tools.

Playing with death is bad for your health.

All your homeboy's gone.

You the last one lived.

Their hearts beatin', but these niggas be scared.

Real ones are all locked up for dead.

Nowadays you can't find a good connect.

But if you do, you might be the fifth.

So I don't know you, you don't know me.

You don't know the history I got on these streets.

Only if you see what my eyes have seen, then you'll understand why I'm surrounded by G's.

If you owe me, oh we got B.

I recommend you reach for your eating.

Man the game.

How we was raised, growing up in these streets.

Go, gangsta, keep poppin'.

Rock with me, let's get this bitch poppin'.

Go, gangsta, keep poppin'.

Like back when the nigga was a closet.

It's all egg and good, easy to do evil.

And I ain't really into meeting with new people.

Just put the money in the bag and I'll leave you.

With the week, old clamble, old diesel.

You make a hundred dollars to the streets, you made a cheat.

When you cop a nose, they swear and you move keys.

Hairs getting close and the rats seem cheesy.

And they tryna find them birds, not the one that's stuck in trees.

We got that bird, we got that blue.

You want short skirts, we got that too.

Whatever you need, my nigga, show me the cheese.

And baby, you could believe that we can make that proof.

I don't know you, you don't know me.

You don't know the history I got on these streets.

Only if you see what my eyes have seen, then you'll understand why I'm surrounded by cheese.

If you owe me, reach for you.

Yeah.

That's how we was raised growing up in these streets.

Rip me, let's get this bitch pop.

Like back in the nigga was pop.

Streets been watching and they don't blink.

Sidewalk got years to pay me no sleep.

The greatest will survive the week, just don't eat.

Everybody in between, just getting a wrap sheet.

The streets been watching and they don't blink.

Sidewalk got years to pay me no sleep.

So we was raised real one.

Rock with me, let's get this much.

Though gangsta, keep poppin', pop like back when the knicker was clockin'.

Go gangsta, keep poppin' with me, let's get this bitch poppin'.

Go gangsta, keep poppin', pop like back when the knicker was clockin'.

Screen.

Convict.

Victory.

Guess who's best who's bad?

Still here, haters.

A con and old man.

Trice?

Trice?

Yeah.

What you gonna do with it, eh?

Take them on back to the screen.

Yeah.

Steady number.

Fast by

Risky, the bitch to rise out of nigga.

His history snitch, who decided he's a member.

Once he got pinched, coincided with law.

Same homie say he laid down for the ball.

Brought gang squad around ours.

How could it be?

Been homies since Superman draws.

Only poniness never came to par.

He had us, a true neighborhood actor.

Had his back with caves.

Now we see Thorn like X-rays.

Cuffed in that Adam car.

No matter his loss, we atom is war.

Knowing not to cross those reservoir dogs.

You help plant seeds just to be a vegetable.

When we invest from team, it's to the death for show.

No X and O's, text calicos.

Aimed at your chest, nigga.

Keep the 40 cow on my side.

Stepping with the mind state of a monster.

Got cocks per sell.

Red cocks per sell.

Anything that you need, believe me, I'm gon' lace you.

Just don't whatever you do, snitch, cause you will get hit.

It's all honest, private conferences when we eat.

Benny Hondas, reconnaissance when we peep, enemies on us, been in these corners, selling like anything on us.

Knowing heaven is shawners, being devils, miners, that ain't got shit to do with the tea in China.

We gon' keep the grind up, death can find us.

Meantime, leaning in them European whips reclined up.

It's I for an eye for the riders.

We ain't tryna get locked up.

We sold survivors.

Popols, cowards, it's no you, it's ours.

We vowed this.

Mixing yayo with soda powder.

Who would have known he would fold and cower?

Once the cap is sold, he sold old McDonald's.

So it's no X and O's.

Tex Calicos aimed at the chest, nigga.

Keep the 40 cat on my side.

Stepping with the mind state of a monster.

Momster, see a nigga fast by.

Touch your chain and fussy microphone.

Ya, got clocks for sale.

Red tops for sale.

Anything that you need, believe I'm OLAC.

Just don't whatever you do, snitch.

Cause you will get hit.

Break, I don't face you.

Nowadays, Sammy the Bulls got the game full.

So he moved to a rural area to keep cool.

They're snitching on a snitch now, it's nothing to tell.

Nowadays, your circle should be small as hell.

Ain't trying to meet new faces, this don't interest me.

Even if we double slow, we get it eventually.

No penitentiary, don't we?

No clemency.

You will meet the Lord snitching, giving us a century.

These cats is rats now.

The streets need decon.

That's how they react now.

Weak when the heat's on them.

Stop snitching.

You ask for the life you're living.

This act is not permitted nowhere on the map.

It is forbidden to send a nigga to prison if you've been in it along with em and then snitching become hidden.

So it's no X and O's.

Tex Calicos aimed at your chest, nigga.

Keep the 40 cat on my side.

Stepping with the mind state of a monster.

Monster, see a nigga fast by.

Touch your chain and fussy microphone.

Sell red rocks, but sell anything that you need believe I don't lay seal free.

Just don't whatever you do, skip your mouth.

What's up?

What is going on, everybody?

We have a very nice show lined up today, assuming the enemy shows up.

Well, some of our enemies, not all of them, are even the main ones.

But I wanted to have a special stream tonight.

I wanted to give the public an opportunity to basically ask me questions directly, confront me with their criticisms, whatever.

Because although I think the enemy has suffered a major defeat.

More on that later.

I think that the public, you know, is confused and maybe deserves some kind of explanation.

Well, not necessarily an explanation, but they deserve to have their confusions cleared up and their questions cleared up and so on and so on.

I did do a huge stream Friday, pretty much, and there's a YouTube video or whatever.

But just in general, I think that right now what's happening that I've noticed, which is really interesting, is that this has all introduced a lot of people to the American Communist Party.

I think that the Wreckers actually ended up accomplishing the opposite of what they originally intended to.

Their goal was to basically say that ACP was this crazy cult or whatever.

But I actually think that most people who were opposed to us already had that impression that our party was just a joke, that it is just a cult of Haas or Jackson, and it's a grifting and it's a crypto scheme and whatever.

And I think that the first party controversy actually revealed to people that we are a party that has a diversity of different opinions and viewpoints inside of it.

And it has internal politics.

And when people are unprincipled and undisciplined, those internal divisions can actually explode for the entire public to see.

And I actually think that it's given people, it's actually made people take the party more seriously.

It's made them more interested in it.

We can confirm this on our end.

It has increased interest in our party.

It's made people more curious about us, not only in negative ways, by the way.

I think people were very shocked to see this controversy and scandal because they just assumed that everyone who's in the party, you know, it's just one homogeneous, uniform thing.

And it's absolutely not that.

It's definitely a political organization, both in the sense that it has politics within American politics, but oh, there's internal politics and political dynamics, and it absolutely is not reducible.

To um well, first of all, the the notion that it's a grifting scheme, I think, is com comprehensively debunked.

Okay, um, now people understand this is a party with actual beliefs and goals and people that are committed to it, and so on and so on, and so on.

And feds are willing to wreck it.

I think people can see that feds are actually trying to wreck and take interest in it and clamp down on it and tear it apart using classic cointil pro tactics and so on and so on.

So, um

I am very impersonally noticing an uptick in interest in both me.

That's always fun.

Hi, everyone.

Both me personally and the party as a whole.

But negative and positive.

Not just positive.

I'm saying also negative.

People are starting to become very intimately interested in me, which I'm always flattered by because, you know, I

I consider myself to be quite a

William, thank you for reminding me not to talk about myself because that's incredibly narcissistic.

William with the nine, thank you so much.

I appreciate you, man.

Appreciate you so much.

No, I think that basically I think the change that's been happening in the world is that there are a lot of losers who have this idea that you don't need to have skin in the game and that anything that becomes real in real life basically just becomes a clown show and that the solution is just to blackpill and become a doomer and just to give up.

And I think that the acceleration of political changes that's happening in the United States is quickly revealing to people that you don't even have that choice.

You actually have to be committed and have skin in the game or else your politics and your political opinions are totally fucking worthless.

Okay.

If you want to blackpill, you should just admit to the world that you're a depressed fucking loser.

Because what you're really communicating to the world.

By the way, I don't have anyone in particular in mind.

Uh this it just occurred to me that this could be misinterpreted.

And I want to go out and say I'm not talking about Yankee.

I'm not talking about Joey.

Joey's a fighter, he's strong.

I know he's kind of going through something, but I'm definitely not talking about him.

He's definitely somebody who has skin in the game.

Um

And, you know, I don't want you guys to.

If Joey is telling you guys, you know, he's.

Feeling depressed or some shit.

I feel like that is actually courageous, what he's doing because he's being honest.

Like a lot of these people that are depressed just become fucking wreckers and psychopaths.

He's straight up from the heart telling you guys how he's going.

And you know, you guys should support each other.

You shouldn't tear each other down.

You know, I know we can't be weak out here.

I'm not, that's not what I'm saying.

But you shouldn't punish people.

You should show mercy.

You know, show people mercy and keep giving them chances.

And people say, oh, we could we give people so many chances and it's like well keep doing it, you know, until people can figure it out.

Anyway, so I'm not talking about that, but I'm talking about a specific kind of like pseudo-leftist nihilism.

It's kind of manifesting now into this weird fringe ultra-left left comm and the KKE supporting retards and and and so-called Maoists and stuff.

It's just this kind of black pill where they assume a position of arrogance, that everything in the real world's just a clown show and that they're somehow correct, right?

But in reality those people are engaging in a desperate cry for help to the world and what they want is to be hugged.

And that's fine.

If that's what you want, just say it.

I'm not saying anyone's gonna give it to you, um, but you can definitely just be honest about the fact that you are a you are in a weak state emotionally and personally, but you don't have a right

to intervene in politics because of that.

You don't have the right to make these grand metaphysical and political claims just because you personally happen to not have your shit together psychologically and you happen to be depressed and black pilled or whatever.

And that's kind of my message to this new nihilism that I see is taking gaining traction, where people are just kind of like, oh, I'm just gonna, I'm just gonna make fun of everything.

And like, well, what are you making fun of?

You're, you're literally the punchline.

You're the clown, you know?

Um.

Being in real life means that you're going to be flawed, okay?

The bluff of formalism is such that you have no skin in the game.

You never actually have to reveal the contradictions which propel your development and your existence as a human being.

You could just pretend when you're anonymous or when you're whatever that you're just this perfect person who has no flaws at all and that you have your shit together somehow because you've read you didn't these people don't even read books, by the way, but I digress.

Um because you've you've you've you're signaling the correct viewpoints, you know, or something.

It means it's total nonsense, all right?

You have no skin in the game and you're not willing to risk demonstrating to the world that you are an imperfect human being.

You are not a perfect person.

You have flaws.

You have defects.

And someone has to do that.

And the reason someone has to do that is because people need the mercy of recognition.

Okay.

People in the real world need the mercy of being shown that they don't need to constantly be tortured and constantly need to suffer because they're not living up to a false notion of perfection.

That there are that.

you know, that this is something true for our reality in general.

And I think that's especially true when it comes to even politics.

So many people that are in debt somehow think that it's their problem and that it's embarrassing and they don't want to tell anyone and they're trying to hide it as much as they can.

Somebody needs to come out here and represent these people and recognize them and they can recognize, you know, likewise.

To understand this is a fundamental existential state our country is in, you know, and it's not just an individual problem.

And there's so many things that applies to actually, not just debt.

There's so many other things that applies to, especially economically, right?

Um so I wanted to say that

But nonetheless, we're going to be getting right into the Q and A and um

Well, in terms of announcements, stay tuned.

Um

Really?

For real.

Anyway, let's get right into it.

So I've started the space.

We can wait for people to get in.

We can continue on to the theme and topic of what we were talking about.

But the party is going to be entering into its recruitment drive phase within the next two weeks, I believe.

It was slightly delayed, actually, because of the sad little wrecking attempt that a few people tried or attempted, but we're going to go push forward with it.

And.

We're going to be moving forward with our critical plans and strategies with respect to the labor movement and so on and so on.

And everything is on track.

Everything is on track uh to be w what it is.

I think I also need a co-host, by the way.

I'm gonna need a co-host not to participate, but to uh bring people up and see people that are requesting to speak that I cannot see.

It so I'm going to need some kind of co-host.

Let me see.

I don't know if Orvo speaks.

I think Orv I Orvo, I think, is someone who's like blocked a lot because he has the Infra Globe as his profile picture.

So maybe that's not a good idea.

Maybe Slava, if Slavo wants.

You don't have to stay the whole time 'cause I know you probably can't stay up too late, but let's have Slava co-host.

Why not?

It's an A C P Q and A.

If you want, you don't have to.

So somebody named Tribune of the Future.

Uh let me just see what this person's ideological background is, so I have an idea of what.

Uh what to expect.

Is this a right winger?

think this is somebody coming from the right.

Anyway, we can bring them anyway.

Uh let's go ahead.

Tribune, go ahead.

Go ahead.

Mr.

Chairman, thank you for giving me the chance to speak.

I have respect to you for the way you've handled the party wrecking issue and staying your course.

My question is this: How is the party handling the tension right now in the U.S., where we have a lot of state-level Dems, governors, representatives who are fighting, attempting to nullify executive orders, attempting to block what Trump's doing?

Is this a contradiction?

In the bourgeois US state, that we should be pressing to develop?

And if so, what side, what side is your party pushing on?

And finally, if this escalates to a worse crisis where we potentially see conflicting orders given to National Guard units like we've seen in Texas in the past year.

Booty back.

Thank you.

Uh actually a very good question.

Um

So

Right now, I think that as crazy as this sounds, we are actually trying to figure out what's going on still and to to to come to a a g um a solid position and conclusion about you know with respect to the contradiction you just d described

Um, what's whose victory would be more beneficial to us?

And

I don't want to say who we should back because obviously the answer is we're not going to back either side, right?

But we are trying to understand which forces represent the reactionary force and, you know, maybe I wouldn't say progressive, but maybe the one that's going to allow us to have a little more wiggle room.

So that's actually something we're continuing to wait to play out because we really don't have a very clear idea.

Of which actors involved in this contradiction, what they represent, and so on and so on.

I actually encourage party discussion on this matter.

I encourage people to investigate and study it and and and allow us to have a better

um appraisal of what's going on right now.

But that aside, that very specific thing aside, I think that we are assuming a position of absolute independence.

We absolutely foresee that the contradiction you just described is going to lead to a constitutional crisis.

And I think that what I can say kind of confidently is that regardless of which side wins, we are going to be very, very active in contesting whatever reconstitution they're going to be proposing.

So if the Democrats propose a reconstitution, it's going to be about overturning the results of the 2024 election.

If Trump's side is proposing a reconstitution, we speculate that Silicon Valley is going to have a big part in that and the whole neo-feudal agenda is going to be there.

And also the imperial tendency, not just in terms of Lenin's imperialism, but strangely in terms of political formations that are emerging, such as the extreme centralization of the government, as well as the imperial designs on Mexico and Panama and Cuba and Venezuela for that matter.

So we are assuming a position of Marxist-Leninist conservatism.

Let me clarify what that means.

Not conservatism with Slavo, kick that person, please.

Not conservatism with respect to US political divisions, but just like a steady, you know, classical orthodox Marxist-Leninist line, and we're not going to budge.

We're going to maintain our independence.

We absolutely foresee a breakdown of the constitutional order, and we are absolutely going to be carving out a piece of whatever comes in the aftermath of that.

And I'm not saying that in terms of carving out a piece of the hegemony.

I'm saying carving out a piece of contesting the outcome.

And I will allow you to interpret that as vaguely as you want to.

But thank you for the question.

And let's get to the next person.

A, go ahead.

Somebody else in the bathroom before they had to excuse themselves.

Anyway, sorry, go ahead.

I've read a decent amount of your recent article in Red America on the special military operation, but I still don't fully understand what's your reason for backing the special military operation.

Yeah, the article I wrote was very philosophical, and I guess it wasn't like a political.

Well, it was obviously political, but it was highly philosophical and highly theoretical.

More concretely, why I back or I sympathize with Russia's special military operation is because I think it started a world revolution in the political superstructure, the global political superstructure, the so-called rules-based world order.

I think that Russia's defiance of that order has opened the way for many other anti-imperialist or counter-hegemonic actors, both domestically within the West and the United States and externally in the so-called global south, in Africa, in Latin America, and in the Middle East.

You know, there would be no October 7th without February 22nd, so to speak.

So that is why I support it.

I regard it as revolutionary, historically speaking.

It's the simplest way I could put it.

Don't you feel as though, I mean, when I see Jackson, you know, taking the stances that he does, especially with regard to the Culture War, it feels as though he kind of like takes this jouissance in just kind of like

I don't know what the correct word would be, but just like gloating at the reactionary turn that I feel the country has gone through.

You know, it feels like I guess with all due respect, I don't mean to cut you off.

I want to be able to answer everyone in an orderly and quick way.

But I understand what you're asking.

And I would ironically respond that I think that in terms of

Um

The form of media, I actually think that your sentiments reflect a reactionary view.

And what I mean by that, I'll preface it very precisely.

I think that modernity is about a kind of dimension of now-ness, things that are happening now, instantaneously, where there is not enough time to react or think about it or whatever.

And the tendency of modernization goes in such a direction that it increasingly closes the amount of time we have to.

reflexively respond to things that are happening.

Whether through contemplation, whether through making moral decisions, you know, all the way up to, you know, social media algorithms.

Playing on the most unconscious and carnal desires of people.

You know, there's no moral, intellectual, whatever, mediation whatsoever.

It's OnlyFans Girls.

It's violence.

It's whatever.

Brain rot is what they're calling it, I think.

So that is, I guess, how it has reached the degenerate tendency in many ways.

But on the other hand, when it comes to politics, the trend of the modernization of media is absolutely irreversible.

And I think that a lot of the problems people have with Jackson is that he represents the modernization of media.

And they're coming from a reactionary perspective where you'll hear a bunch of different criticisms of Jackson's.

He's sexist, he's misogynist, he's this, or he's reactionary, or but all these criticisms boil down to the view that Jackson is just not he's too quick, he's not taking enough time to basically reflexively condition his his injection into the algorithm.

that he's engaging in.

And um I would say that Jackson very artfully maneuvers the highly modernized social media algorithm and form while while do while actually carving out a plan and a strategy to to um

To catalyze and facilitate the dominance of a very specific outlook and a very specific ideology and perspective.

And it's not always clear how he's doing that directly, just because every single post he's not directly saying things that directly seem to reflect Marxist theory or communist ideology.

But indirectly, they do.

And before anyone criticizes Jackson, I would like them to think very carefully and holistically about how that is.

I mean, sure, he could tweet something and he'll say, well, directly, he's not waving a red flag.

Directly, he's not mentioning Marx and Lenin.

But indirectly, what is he actually communicating?

What is he signaling and and what does that actually

communicate.

Oftentimes people miss the point.

There's so many tweets he'll make where the point is actually to influence people in such a direction so as to be more sympathetic to Russia than they otherwise would be.

But you have a handful of reactionary leftists or pseudo-leftists who will see that, and they'll say, Well, this is not conforming to my ideology.

This is not speaking to me.

But they're falsely assuming that they are the subject.

They're falsely assuming that the point of social media.

Is just to say, you know, to directly reflect an ideological form.

When in reality, social media is about.

directing consciousness in a certain direction.

So, you have to understand where the baseline is.

If Jackson is tweeting in favor of social conservatism,

It's probably because a huge portion of his audience is already socially conservative.

So, what is the actual content of his tweets oftentimes?

It's that Russia or China endorsed social conservatism.

So, here you have a bunch of people who might politically have come from the right direction or the conservative direction, the religious direction, who are more sympathetic to China, North Korea, and Russia than they were yesterday, thanks to Jackson's influence.

So, this is an example of the logic that underlies his strategy.

And I think people really miss that.

A lot of people are too quick to point out.

that he's alienating people.

But the people that he's alienating academics, these are a small minority of the population compared to the one that's actually decisive and important for for opposing militarism and imperialism in war.

So

I really appreciate that perspective, first of all, but I'd like to say that I think Jackson went too far.

And I get that it's just a tweet, but you can't pledge full support for Andrew Tate and claim to be a communist.

That man is a rapist and a sex trafficker, most likely.

Like, we don't have the evidence for that necessarily.

But he's admitted to the fact that.

Aside from the question of Jackson pledging full support, which I think is, again, it doesn't appreciate the modern nature of social media.

It's modern.

You're not supposed to read too much into it or assume he's making this grand metaphysical statement.

But even if I were, even if I were to directly just to claim,

Is it okay for Jackson to support in any way or express approval in any way of Andrew Tate, despite the fact that he has a history of being involved in the sex trade and allegations of sexual assault?

I have a very simple question, I'll just ask you.

What is your opinion of Fidel Castro?

I generally support Fidel Castro.

Was it okay for Fidel Castro to meet with Malcolm X and support Malcolm X?

Give his approval to him.

He was directly involved in the sex trade.

It's a decent point.

Um I think the final thing that I'll say Also, I'm not done yet though.

What do you think about the Black Panther Party?

Um

I generally support the Black Panther Party.

I know the Black Panther Party in its leadership.

I know your example of Eldritch Fleeter, who publicized his sexual assaults in Soul on Ice, which was released in 1969, I believe, during his time in the party.

And it was public and everyone knew about it.

And he wasn't endorsing it, by the way, but he was admitting to that past, which was far worse than anything Andrew Tate is accused of, by the way.

So am I comparing Andrew Tate to the Black Panther Party and to Malcolm X because of his politics or because of his...

No.

But I'm saying when people just make this statement that, oh, how could Jackson in any context ever express support for or a positive view of Andrew Tate because Andrew Tate has this background?

Well, there are plenty of figures that leftists approve of without any criticism whatsoever, really, who have worse backgrounds.

Okay.

And I think it's fair that if people can support Malcolm X and the Black Panther Party, Jackson has the right to positively encourage Andrew Tate to continue having a more or less progressive foreign policy outlook when it comes to U.S.

imperialism, specifically when it comes to Russia and North Korea and so on and so on.

And nobody's saying that Jackson shares Andrew Tate's ideology, but it is generally good for as many large influencers as possible.

To support counter-hegemonic foreign policy positions, regardless of whatever problematic pasts or backgrounds that they may have.

Fair enough.

I think the final thing that I would finish with is

It is of the utmost importance that we have collective discipline in the organization that you run.

And it is of the utmost importance that you have faithful relationship to the truth.

I think that you generally do a good job, but I think that you could do a better one.

That's fair.

I mean, we could all be better and we're all learning.

And look, I will fully confess to the world that I don't have experience running an organization.

This is running a political organization.

This is the first time.

This is the first time for a lot of us.

We're not experienced.

But this is a kind of thing where it's like when the job says you need at least five years of experience.

Well, how do you get the experience?

Where do you get it from?

Well, that's the kind of place that we're at when it comes to communist politics in the USA.

Where are we going to get the experience in terms of building organizations?

Because the ones that existed so far turned out to be complete and total failures.

And again, I tried for three years in the CP.

I wasn't in there, but I tried to intervene within the CPUSA or encourage my followers to go there and bring new life to it.

And even though they would ban me and smear me, I still kept the course.

It's just that it became impossible to be politically involved in that organization for anyone because their recent national congress, they pretty much just totally rigged it.

And they were so unresponsive to the pressing and very modern nature of the tasks were the issues we're facing.

Forget tasks, the issues we're facing alone, that we found it necessary, life and death, to reconstitute that party.

And here we are.

Nobody's saying that our party is perfect or is in the most advanced and best state it could possibly ever be in.

But we are saying it is a party, and that is much more than anyone else can really say, you know?

I agree with that and think that the American Communist Party is the best hope that, you know, Americans have of working people coming into power, and that's all I have.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

So, Sammy

Hey, Haas, good to talk to you.

I actually used to be in the in the ACP.

I left due to, you know, what I'll say publicly was ideological reasons.

But, you know, I wanted to come up and talk to you.

I do owe you a lot of credit in my political journey and my political consciousness, I guess, especially because of Ewan Jackson and MAGA communism.

Really took me from being, you know, basically a normie leftist, culturally leftist socialist to being a bit more socially conservative while also having, you know, believing in the science of Marxism-Leninism.

But ultimately, I did end up leaving the ACP.

And the reason for that was originally when you were your article that you wrote a few years back on MAGA communism, it really called for a new political birth of the American partisan who wasn't really left or right, but was more coast-left, I would say.

Well, to be more precise, it's not, the opening part of the article is a rejection of third positionism.

The point is that the actual left-wing political position has somehow no longer become synonymous or is no longer synonymous with this broad phenomena we could call that I called in it leftism.

And the leftist tendency in that article, I argue, is actually right wing.

The key word is the ism.

Now, I've stopped using that terminology as much as I did before because I consider the leftist ideology to be dead now.

And it has already predicted that it would merge directly with the right.

And I think that that has actually already happened with two major pivotal events.

One was the increasing rightward trajectory of the left liberal centrist camp or whatever, right, that we saw in the aftermath, especially 2023 and 2024 after October 7th.

I think that the Zionist wing of the left liberals totally actually created a new, it set in motion the kind of Hitler leftist synthesis that I predicted would happen.

And then I think that the second thing that happened was the.

Um

The rise to prominence of Silicon Valley and Silicon Valley's rightward shift.

I think those two things have definitively put the final nail in the coffin to leftism with the ism thing, right?

Now, as far as the left and left-wing politics is concerned, that is obviously not something that can be destroyed because all left politics means is revolutionary politics.

That's all it means.

Um it has no other meaning.

Leftism was something more meta than that.

It wasn't about revolutionary politics, it was about this subculture and ideology of attempting to kind of domesticate that politics and and turn it into an ideal of some kind, which means not something real.

Yeah, but in terms of selling that to the to the American people, I mean that's just not how Americans in general see the see the left or see leftism.

And and in terms of selling that to the American people, I mean the idea wasn't meant for the layman, I don't think.

I think the article was meant for

The um more theoretically inclined, I suppose.

That's fair exactly.

To communicate that this was a very serious that the MAGA communist meme, I mean, that is open to so much interpretation.

It's a meme.

That's what it is.

It spread in so many different directions, and it was highly modern, modern in the sense of you didn't need to read my sub stack to get it.

But for the glasses wearers, no offense to anyone who wears glasses, but for the glasses wearers and these pseudo-intellectuals who kept on pointing out the absurdity of that meme, that was what the article was meant to humble them, basically.

The article was meant to basically tell these glasses wearers who were wrongly understanding the meme by resorting to pseudo-intellectual formalism and ideological gibber, basically, that, no, actually, there is a lot of theoretical depth behind this, and you're just midwits.

The average person who's not thinking about it in a highly theoretical way understood the meme.

It didn't need to be really.

It didn't need to be explained in the way I explained it in the substack.

But for these liberal midwits who you know had all of these extremely stupid criticisms, like, Oh, uh but MAGA's right wing and and communism is is the opposite of the and and ideolog like that was really what it was meant to

Suppress or or oppose yeah.

But ultimately, and and just just let me go for a little just like one minute here.

Uh and ultimately, the the the profound you know theory behind it all, in my opinion, was the idea that MAGA was revolutionary or is revolutionary.

And I think that we need to to to take a look back on all of this and and see that you know, in 2016, yes, MAGA was revolutionary.

It represented you know, really nationalism versus uh globalism, whereas in twenty twenty-four it kind of represents, you know, this left versus right culture war.

And so I disagree with that.

I think that MAGA has actually become

The fundamental basis of all politics in the US right now, such that there the MAGA is no longer.

An extraordinary thing.

Everyone is MAGA.

Hassan Piker is MAGA.

Everyone is MAGA now.

Because MAGA represented a change in the form of American politics, not just the content in terms of policy prescriptions and stuff, but the form.

It turned America MAGA is the cybernetic form of American political sovereignty.

And as long as it's American, as long as it's formulated in terms of American national self-interest, as long as it's based in

You know, a kind of this more inward orientation rather than this universal prescription of liberal morality and humanitarianism.

It is fundamentally MAGA.

You know, it's building off of Trump's movement in 2016.

Yeah, and I agree with you that everyone is MAGA now, but that means that MAGA is no longer revolutionary like it was in 2016.

And now the only remaining faction of the right that is truly revolutionary, in my opinion, is the America First Faction of the right.

And so, you know, the I don't see how that's revolutionary at all.

What's revolutionary about them?

They call for a reconstitution of the country for they can call for whatever they want, but concretely in terms of

What politically they represent, I don't see anything revolutionary.

Uh, that's fair enough.

I think that there's a there's a lot more common to be a revolutionary means you're part of a revolutionary strategy, it means that you're part of a revolutionary movement of some kind, having

You know, counter signalling dominant narratives is not really by itself anything revolutionary.

I don't know.

I think that calling for demographic realism, for expelling foreign influence entirely from the country, for advocating for theocracy.

I think it's important to understand that if you advocate for anything that is extreme at all and so radically in contradiction to what exists now, then by the same logic, that's right.

If I advocated right now, for example, for

all meat eating to be banned.

That would be so at odds with the reality we live in right now that it could posture as revolutionary.

But that's not actually what makes something revolutionary.

For something to be revolutionary, it has to be part of a revolutionary movement.

And I don't mean movement in the sense of an organization or or um or an organized group.

I literally mean in the sense of a a change, a movement in history itself.

Something that is actually happening objectively that represents a change in the historical era we live in.

And I don't see that in for the for the uh

the online phenomena you're talking about.

That's fair.

I mean, I just think that, you know, and my friends in the American First Movement might not like this, but they do have a Leninist tendency within them in that they really are working for a top-down revolution.

They have a pedophile problem.

Ali Alexander, you know who that is, Sammy?

Uh no.

Who is he?

You don't know.

He he's the guy that uh that Flint has enabled to molest uh your own members of your own movement and groom them.

He was grooming fourteen year olds.

I think this is the movement that this is the movement that you support.

This is your shit.

This is what you're doing?

I do support the American First Movement, yes.

All right, we are done with this topic.

I think your question was sufficiently answered.

We're not here to talk about these right-wing, far-right, neo-Nazi.

Anyway, art, please go next.

Hi, uh, long time listener, first time caller, trying to figure this out.

I have a question for can you guys hear me?

Yes.

I have a question for Chairman Rafiq.

Oh, first before before I just wanted to say um thank Lyndon LaRouche, but um I was just wondering how many going with like all of the stupid inside joke like memes of these terminally omnipotent controls.

Listen, Mailbox said, I waited ten minutes to talk.

It's my turn.

So what is your question?

Or what is your criticism?

So I so I was just wondering how many inches is your head up your ass?

Oh, I wish there was a cricket sound effect.

Just give me a straight answer.

Why are you so afraid to engage in good faith?

What are you like afraid to hear?

Engage with what?

I mean, you're clearly somebody who belligerently is angry about me and has a problem with me, and you can't state your problem in an honest and good faith way.

Okay.

I'm in a good mood.

You don't sound like it.

You sound kind of angry.

But in any case, you can be angry and upset and hate me a lot, but you should at least have the courage to try to articulate whatever problem or concern you have in a good faith way.

At least try.

I'm I'm excuse me, sorry.

I I'm still waiting on my answer.

Well, actually, just how many inches?

I think actually we can work with things that you've already said.

For example, LaRouche, why does your crowd, which are millennial schizophrenics, why are you guys so fixated and obsessed with LaRouche?

And why do you always mention LaRouche when you're talking about it?

Real quick, I am not diagnosed schizophrenic.

Okay, go on.

Yeah, why did what's the significance of LaRouche here?

Well, I think you guys should tell me you're the LaRoucheites.

Yeah, why are we LaRoucheites?

Based on what?

Chapo told you that?

That's what I'm asking.

What?

Yeah, I mean, like, your millennial online friends, we're talking about your para-political podcaster groupies.

Talk about LaRouche.

You don't have any friends.

Yeah, I mean, but what significance does LaRouche have for us?

Well, that's what I'm asking you.

Literally none.

Wow.

Okay.

Thanks for answering.

Can you answer my first question?

I guess that's it then.

Is that it?

How about the first question?

Do you mind answering real quick before I go?

This is really pathetic, and you're a coward.

It's a good idea.

Can you send me those Bordiga texts, please?

I just want to read them.

Thank you.

Who is speaking?

Anyway, um

Yeah, this person was just a coward.

I gave them an opportunity to confront me and they're gonna run back to their parapolitical mil millennial friends and talk about how courageous and brave they were for having literally zero skin in the game.

Anyway, uh cryptical, go ahead.

Hey, can you hear me?

Yes.

Um, okay.

Uh, this isn't a loaded question, and I do mean this genuinely.

Uh, do you think there's such thing as a normal trans person

That it can be part of, like, the party and society and all of that?

Or is the whole thing degenerate?

I've been wondering this about you for a long time.

Um

I wanna know why this topic is so important to you.

Well, 'cause I kind of like you, and I'm trans myself, basically.

But you're revealing a very private aspect of who you are, which I don't think is relevant at all to anything political.

And I don't know why there is such an obsession and fixation on things like that.

Because I think that there's a public aspect to all of this inevitably.

I think we completely reject encouraging the obsession about the topic across the board.

That goes for both sides.

We just do not want so much attention to be on such private and...

non-political non-collective things.

I mean Yeah, I I agree it shouldn't be it shouldn't be political.

I agree.

I just think that is a public thing to it.

I think that the fixation and dwelling upon such questions reflects a deep level of individualism, which I don't think we accept at all.

I think we completely reject it.

I think we reject navel gazing and and all that kind of stuff.

As far as people's private lives, we are not interested we are neither interested in navel gazing nor taking a magnifying glass and and and interjecting in people's private lives and and um

And worrying so much about it.

I think that we want to focus on what we share collectively, not what we are personally and privately.

It's not of any concern or significance for politics.

Okay, fair enough.

That's what I had.

All right.

Um very well read.

Go ahead.

Hang on, thanks for taking my call here.

I used to be a member of the ACP.

I was very excited when I joined up with you guys.

Was connected with Midwestern March for a long time.

I guess I have a couple main questions, and I guess I'll tier them and try to keep it brief.

My first question is, after seeing the Danny Shaw video, the leaked meeting video, when the leadership of the party says, hey, we'll use this guy or what we can get out of him until we can get rid of him and then move on.

I guess my main question would be: how are people who sympathize with the party and want to support the party, how are they supposed to do that moving forward and trust leadership in that type of situation?

I guess that's the first main question that I have.

Well, let's start with that first.

Sure.

So basically,

The problem is that we wouldn't have said that ordinarily for an honest member of the party who is in good faith engaging us and participating with us.

But John was engaging in such an extreme degree of duplicitous behavior with respect to his position.

He was.

We held the struggle session and criticism meeting that he wanted.

We held other meetings after that where he was just fine.

He was regularly communicating to people that everything is fine.

And he was not being honest about his intentions and his position.

He was concealing his views and he was concealing his real feelings, which made it impossible to trust him.

It made it impossible.

I mean, he could tell us one thing, but he's plotting and planning something else.

I mean, he was trying to rally the entirety of leadership to depose me and make me resign, which doesn't even make sense constitutionally.

So, and he did, he had no regard for the Constitution.

So, I think he already took steps to break all of our trust.

But at the same time, he had obligations and loose ends to deal with when it came to his position for the party.

We were also worried about him, you know, basically doing illegal things with his position because he was legally registered as our lawyer for our 501c4.

And, you know, he, God knows what he would, what he would do.

You know, he could, he could try to.

Uh, he had access to our bank account.

You know, he had our credit card as a party, which we don't really have a revenue stream.

But in any case, it was a bet we absolutely had to put the security of our party first.

And we prefer to work with everyone in good faith and in a comradely way and honestly, but he already broke our trust and made that impossible.

So, we were faced with the question: this highly emotional, highly unstable, and unpredictable individual has our credit card as a party and our bank access to our bank account.

And he has access to all these other things as our lawyer when it comes to the party formalism, the legalism stuff.

How do we wrest this out of his hands, first of all?

And how do we just make sure that we can have a smooth transition in our legal department?

Which is the which would have been the honorable thing to do.

I mean, he gained our trust.

He was like in our legal department, the head of our legal department.

Um, and then very suddenly he turned on a dime, and it's like, well, you could at least put your two weeks in, honestly, if you're gonna commit this much.

Already.

And people are wondering, like, oh, well, you yelled at him.

Of course, he would want to leave.

But the reason I yelled at him is because from the moment he began his resignation speech, which was a theatrical spectacle, because before the meeting started, he linked it right then, right then and there, his resignation.

So we all knew what he was going to be doing.

I had had enough.

He already made up his mind, and there's nothing anyone could have said to dissuade him.

So basically, long story short, it was because he was engaging in duplicitous behavior that made it impossible for us to trust him.

If you act in a comradely way and in an honest way, you're not going to force us to be in a position where we're going to have to soothe your feelings and pretend to be your friend just so you do the honorable thing.

For anyone that's in the American Communist Party, you need to put the party first.

Okay?

This is not a friendship circle.

This is not about ego.

This is not about your social life.

This is not about any of that.

This is about the party.

If you don't have that comprehension,

That even if you feel like your ego is bruised or you're sad or you didn't get your way, you know, instead of being a baby who wrecks and destroys everything, put the party first.

And if you genuinely need to resign and leave, do it in an honorable way that's not going to cause damage to the party that you already committed and made a vow to commit to.

I don't think that's a lot to ask, actually.

That's fair.

I guess the one small follow-up question to that would be: is that is the, especially coming from you as the primary leader and as the other leadership that's involved, are you all

Committed to fostering a positive, not in a liberal sense, but like a truly genuinely revolutionary, positive spirit and network to where people can rely on each other in that close-knit community where we're all trying to fight for the same thing.

Is that something moving forward that is being focused on?

And I mean that as a genuine question.

Yeah, that's just comradeship to us.

And that's why you saw the anger that you did in that clip.

The reason you saw me get angry at John is because I genuinely thought John was a comrade.

Even up to that point, as much as I distasted his duplicitous, gossiping, back-channeling behavior, I still said he was a comrade who's losing his mind and he needs help and he whatever.

But for him to lie to all of us and then surprise us with his resignation on a business meeting after several meetings where he's pretending to be fine, and then after the meeting where we are alleged, you know, we supposedly sorted the beef.

Like, if you understood what happened, it's like John had a meeting where he tried to do a coup, it failed.

I just thought maybe this guy is stressed.

He told people, I need to resign.

He realized nobody was going over to his position.

So then he started changing his tone and he started going, you know, I'm willing to move forward.

You know, I'm willing to go forward.

And he started being positive and saying, you know what?

Last meeting went really well.

I'm optimistic.

Right.

I was just thinking, you know, maybe he just, maybe he just is too stressed and he's got doxxed.

He's got a big workload.

You know, maybe he just kind of lost it a little bit.

And I didn't take it personally at all.

And I still saw him as a comrade, right?

But when we open that meeting with him trying to hijack it with this theatrical performance where there's so much personal anger and resentment and shit he seems to have with me.

I genuinely did get upset.

I was just like, dude, what the fuck is your problem?

I've done nothing to you.

But only now do I look back in retrospect and realize this guy was probably operating under duress.

And that's why his face looked the way it looked, where he's red and he's like, looks like he's about to cry.

And that's the leading theory I'm going with, is that he was under duress and he didn't necessarily want to, but he was being compelled to.

But I could be wrong.

I'm not saying I know that with certainty.

But it it it's the only thing that really makes sense to me, frankly.

Well, that's definitely good to hear your side of things and to get some more clarification.

I guess I got one more question, if you don't mind.

It's a kind of a two-pronged question.

So, like I said, I was a part of the ACP.

I had pushed Midwestern Marx, who I worked for for about two years.

I had pushed them to start a Communist Party of their own back when CPUSA was not working out.

I had been a part of CPUSA for about a year.

And obviously, they were terrible on just about everything.

So, I was pushing them at the time.

I was told over and over again, you know, hey, you can't start a party outside of CPUSA.

I disagreed.

I thought that could be done.

But I kind of went along with it.

You know, I wanted to, I didn't want to rile anybody up or cause any issues.

So, continued working.

And then Midwestern Marks and you guys kind of joined forces, which was great.

I saw you guys getting closer and closer and really appreciated that.

I was happy to see it.

Um Eddie had texted me.

A couple of days, maybe about a week or so before the launch of the party.

It's like, hey, man, the stuff that you've been hoping would happen is going to happen soon.

Get ready.

And so he was like, I'll just be just be ready.

And I was like, cool, let's do this.

Whatever is going on.

I didn't even know what it was.

Then the party launches.

I went ahead and joined right away.

I was in the party for not long.

I don't know.

Maybe a couple of weeks.

And there were some questions in our chapter with Kyle Pettis about dues.

And so I understood the perspective of like, hey, dues are not going to be necessarily the best way to collect money.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but we need to speed this up.

So really, really get to the point.

Good thing.

So, trying to clarify with Kyle Pettis about the dues situation, we just wanted to collect some money so we could do the trash pickup that we were asked to do.

Did not get sufficient information from him as to why that was the case or how to move forward with the pressure.

To be to be clear, chapter finances in terms of that's all decentralized.

So, if chapters want to do something and want to pool money, they have to come to an agreement about that themselves.

And it's not really forbidden, but that's the point in the very early stages.

And also, it is not the so I don't know if you can do it in a binding way where you say you have to, but it's still things it hasn't presented itself as really a problem to us so far.

So, that's fair.

And I didn't think it was that big of a situation, but the main point was that I was kicked out of the party.

I was never given an explanation.

Well, look, I don't want to dwell on this question further because Kyle's not here, and it's not really fair to, you know, for his side of the story.

But I did answer your question, I believe.

That was your second one.

Durant, go ahead.

It was good, man.

So, I mean, I guess, like, my thing is, right, I'm probably like one of the only actually working class people here.

You know, I make fucking 13 net per hour, whatever, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

My thing with like with all of this, with the ACP, and like I've never been a member.

I've never been like a part of it, but like, I've supported it.

And, like, I like you.

You know, I like the shit that you say.

I like the ACP.

I just personally, I can't bring myself to invest in that because I'm trying to focus on my family and like, and on my own, like, personal shit, like, and on my life right now, if that makes sense.

That's totally fine.

I think that if you have a family, your first obligation is to your family.

And parties, political parties, I hate to say it, but in the beginning, you know, i it it does take a certain degree of flexibility and dare I say privilege to fully commit to a Communist Party in its early stages before it's a mass movement.

And

That has just always been true.

And I I would never ask someone to

you know, to put the party before their own kids and their own family, you know, I I wouldn't.

So I don't think there's anything shameful about your position at all, actually.

And, you know, I wish you good luck and

You know.

Um Well, you know, it's it it's good it's good that you say that, right?

'Cause of like all the cult accusations.

Like I've been following like, you know all this all this shit, you know, like people like accusing the ACP of being a a a cult.

That's not something that a cult leader would say, you know.

Well, yeah, I mean, um I it's ironic because it's not really that they say ACP is a cult, it's mainly that they say infrared is a cult and that the cult has taken over ACP, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense because infrared is just online.

I don't know how we could have a cult mechanism beyond the fact that it is just a we have it's a it has a very dedicated following.

Um, but nobody is out here telling people to

To isolate themselves from their real lives and somehow sacrifice the obligations that they already have.

But I think that I will comment one last thing on that.

I think that.

As much as people don't have free time, I think that the rise of the information age and social media.

Has definitely made it so that seconds that pass by are seconds wasted if they are not spent consuming information.

So it's not that people have more free time, it's that people have more time that they expect to dedicate to consumption than they did before.

People don't want to spend their free time just staring at a wall or staring at nature or just sitting on their couch doing nothing.

They want to spend it consuming when they're at work, at break, during lunch, when they come home.

And that's what social media and the information age has done.

And, you know, that is what infrared obviously has tapped into alongside every other kind of viral online phenomenon following.

So

That has not actually disrupted the normal cycle of life.

Nobody's quitting their job.

And estranging themselves from their families and whatever because of infrared.

But people are choosing to consume infrared rather than, you know, um ga video games and pornography and um frivolous, nonsensical content that is meaningless, brain rot.

They are filling they are replacing that with a lot of it with infrared.

Not all of it.

Some people still, I guess, play video games and stuff.

But there is so much time people have to consume things on social media.

And people are choosing in my community to consume the infrared content and be in this community.

And that has such a level of intensity and and such a defining influence on people's

On people's consciousness, that it seems to people like it's a cult.

Like, wow, th it has commanded this level of dedication.

All these people must be living together in a compound, and they all must be like directly taking orders, and and the leader, the cult leader, must have all of this private information on them and keeping track of them.

And it's no, it's really just that social media.

has

created a highly partisan, highly um centralized or various different highly centralized and partisan online communities.

You know, they call it parasociality or whatever.

But that's mainly referring to this idea that people in a community think they're literally friends with an influencer.

Whereas in this case, we're talking about a form of sociality where like, you know, people are congregating together and creating content and consuming content based on shared convictions and beliefs.

Which are

Regarded as highly fringe and marginal in America.

I think that's another thing.

I mean,

Defending Stalin takes a lot of brain power because you're constantly surrounded by though.

You could read about the truth about Marxism and about history, but you're constantly going to be bombarded with people who haven't, and you're going up against the history channel and basically the entirety of the mainstream media and plus all other influencers.

So, when you find people that are like-minded that you don't have to spend so much time explaining the truth to.

It is really just a breath of fresh air for a lot of people that we could just take for granted that we are Stalinists and we don't need.

to constantly justify and explain ourselves.

Um that's how I see it at least, you know.

I mean, yeah.

I was thinking about something that you said earlier.

I can't remember if this was in one of your Substack articles because I do read your Substack articles.

They're so fucking funny, dude.

The James Lindsay one.

I love that shit.

I love that shit.

It's fucking keeno.

I love it.

But in one of them, I think it was the AI one that you wrote.

You said that something along the lines of, and I may be misquoting you or like misinterpreting you, but you said that like the revolution of AI and the rise of AI is going to push people towards historical knowledge and towards reading books.

Which I I thought that was very interesting if that is what you said.

I don't know what you're referring to exactly, um, so it'd be hard for me to comment.

Um

Damn, I can't hear you.

Yeah, I don't uh exactly remember or know exactly what you're referring to there in terms of what I've written.

I my my AI post I don't know if I did make an AI post on Substack.

I may have, I don't know.

It it it might have been Twitter.

I just assumed that it was your your your Substack, but like it it was it was the piece that you wrote about AI.

I think that yeah, I I I don't know.

I think that um I don't exactly remember the argument there as far as

Reading books and historical knowledge from AI.

Oh yeah yeah, I think um

I think I may have made the argument, yeah, that it doesn't matter if AI destroys our ability to determine what's rea what's real.

People will have to read books.

They'll have to actually start reading.

Yeah, that was it.

Yeah, yeah, that was it.

Yeah.

Like brain rot, when brain rot is brought to its furthest possible extreme, then people will no longer in vain believe that they can have the real truth just by scrolling through TikTok.

They will finally decide that they need to open books and read books.

It's kind of the idea.

Yeah, very, very true.

Very true.

That was an observation that I had, but like, I'm not a very like well-read person, you know, but that, like, I don't know.

I guess like I'm not able to articulate it in the in the way that you do, but I've had the same exact thought like for a very long time.

All right, man, I appreciate it.

Um, I'm going to try to keep these quicker, guys, because we have a lot of people.

Uh, let's go with Spanish, Dominican.

Hey, Hawz.

Um, listen, um, I'm a truck driver at the port of New York in New Jersey.

I belong to a small organizing committee, and we're trying to organize truck drivers here at the ports.

Um, I'm just reaching out to you guys to, you know, help us organize.

Um, you know, I think that Spanish, uh, I'm gonna cut you off there.

Um, sorry, I don't mean to be rude.

Uh, yes, we're we're you said you're in New York, uh, that that could easily be something we're interested in.

I would recommend if you're in New York, reaching out to Spiros.

um, who is the who is American partisan.

I would recommend he's on Twitter, American Partisan.

I would recommend DMing him.

And that way you guys could discuss details, which I don't think we should do here.

But I don't know if that satisfies your question.

No, it's fine.

Thank you.

Yeah, no problem.

Yeah, just DM him and message him.

And if he doesn't get back, just message me, I guess.

Um.

Uh vest whatever.

Vasily or whatever.

Go ahead.

Oh hi, um I'm Vasiliki, I'm from Athens, Greece.

Um Yeah, I can hear you.

Is that all you wanted to say or?

No, I I just wanted to ask you a question, a general question.

Um why do you think people around the world um are afraid of leftism?

Why don't they understand that um they should go on left for their own good?

What keeps them away from left leftism?

I think that the campaign to demonize the left started to take the form of people that the the leftist movement itself basically became a way to smear the left.

I think billionaires started pumping a lot of money in these leaders of leftist movements and leftist politicians and think tanks and ideologies and whatever that really did repulse populations around the world.

And I think that was intentional to discredit and smear genuine left-wing politics, which is revolving around questions related to economic, social justice, political sovereignty, anti-imperialism, republicanism and so on and so on.

So

Thank you.

All right.

Um

I see, go ahead.

Are you referring to me?

I have my hand up as well.

90 countries?

Are you asking me?

Go ahead.

You yeah, you spoke first.

Go ahead.

So, um, I'll be really quick because I know you want to wrap up the space.

Um, I have a degree in marketing.

I also taught myself languages.

I speak Russian and German and French.

And uh, I recently discovered this movement.

And uh, I just want to say you're t totally right about people don't read anymore.

They're just uh and and the the marketing matters.

It really does.

I mean

Thank you for your implicit question.

The answer is um maybe.

Uh Triz, go ahead.

Hey Haas, uh thank you for the mic.

Um I just want to bring up the fact that Stalin got poisoned by Jews, Lenin was a Jew, so I'd like to hear your explanation of how you are not a Shabbos goi.

Well, I know you're not Jewish.

Exactly.

Have you read the Grouper Sutra?

Hold on, Kareem.

Because I'm a Bavarian German Christian.

How do you know you could be Jewish?

And let me tell you something.

I want to genuinely.

Why don't you just answer the question?

I asked you a question.

I couldn't, because under the premises of your question, if you are in fact Jewish, then according to your own logic, what you say cannot be trusted.

You could be living Groundhog Day every single morning where you are Jewish, but you have a mental condition that convinces you you're not, and you only remember late at night, such as in a Twitter space such as this, for example.

And then you get shocked, but you're too tired to do anything about it.

You go to bed, you wake up, and you think you're Goyim.

You could, you know, hold on a second.

First of all, you said you're not very well read.

I mean, I can tell that.

When did I say that?

Honestly, I'm a Bavarian Lutheran.

When did I say I wasn't well read?

Your whole point is moot.

So, can you explain how you are not a Shabbat school?

How are you not Jewish?

That's a know you.

I'm asking you.

No, you.

Yeah, okay.

Well, I'm interested in you.

I'm reflecting.

Why are you avoiding it?

Why are you dodging it?

Because this is your space.

This is a QA.

And I'm asking you, how do you know about yourself?

How do I know about because I know my vindictions and how I know what I'm doing?

So, I'm asking you: How do you know everyone in your family was being truthful?

Let's start from there.

What's that?

How do you know everyone in your pedigree and in your family was being truthful?

They could be Jewish and have lied about it.

No, I've had DNA tests done and all that.

So, they're not back to the question that I asked you.

They're not that reliable.

Back to the question I asked you: How are you not a Shabboskoy?

Fatal question.

How are you not a Shabbos Koy?

How are you not Jewish?

Because I'm not.

How do you know?

So, back to the question that I asked.

How do you know?

Because I'm not Jewish, but how do you know?

I don't run cover for Jews like you do.

So I'm asking you, how are you not a Shabbos boy?

How are you not Jewish yourself?

Because I'm German and I'm Christian.

Plenty of Jews are from Germany.

Okay, well I'm German and Christian.

So back to the question I asked you.

How are you not?

Why do you hate Jews if you're Jewish?

I don't hate Jews.

I wish they'd convert to so you're Jewish, so what's the issue?

I'm asking you.

It's not about me.

This is your space.

I came up here to ask you a question.

This is a QA.

Why don't you say why you just admitted that you're Jewish and you don't hate Jews?

So, what's the issue?

Why are you bringing no, I never admit I'm Jewish.

I said I'm a German Christian and I don't hate Jews.

You just said you were Jewish.

No, that's not what I said.

I have the space.

I think your memory, you have because your memory is so unreliable, that just leads credence to the groundhog theory.

Groundhog theory.

Maybe you misunderstood what I said.

I said I'm German and Christian, and I am asking you a little party that you converted to Christianity.

How are you not a Shabbos Koy?

How are you not Jewish just because you converted to Christianity according to your own logic?

I didn't convert to Christianity.

I said I don't hate Jews and Jews can be saved from Christianity.

No.

Yeah.

I said Lenin was a Jew and Stalin got poisoned by Jews.

How do you know you're not a Jew?

How do you know you're not a Jew?

How are you not a Shabbos Koy?

How do you know you're not a Jew?

Because it gets traced via DNA and all that.

Have you checked the early life section of the 23andMe DNA company though?

Yes.

I have 0% Jew in me.

So what about you?

Have you checked the early life section of the video?

How are you not doing DNA?

Because there could be a grander thing at play here.

I mean you could say that, but that's not true at all.

How do you know?

How do you know if that's what they want you to think?

How are you and exactly what they want you to think?

Excuse me?

That's what they want you to think.

Okay, yeah, so all DNA tests are alive.

So we could.

For all we know, you could be Jewish.

Lemon was a Jew.

And you are one.

No, I'm not.

How do we know?

Just because you say that doesn't mean it's true.

But Lennon was the Jew.

But how do you know?

Cause it's in the DNA, brother.

Where?

Show me.

Show us a picture of you.

Show us a picture of this non-Jewish DNA you have, and we may believe it.

On your mind.

I'll just dox myself real quick.

That's also very Jewish of you to say that.

No, I'm sorry.

How are you just not doing that?

Please show us the microscopic DNA that is in your cells.

That would definitely dox you if you showed us the DNA strands, the various peptides and all that stuff.

Well, you mentioned earlier you weren't very well read, and you're kind of making that point very clear right now.

So, my question is.

I'm just asking you to read into your own heart and soul with a long look in the mirror where you read into your own eyes and ask the question of whether you are, in fact, Jewish.

So, anybody who criticizes you is a Jew, meanwhile, you worship.

We don't know.

Anyone could be Jewish.

No one knows.

Okay, well, I can assure you I am not a Jew.

But I can assure you Lenin was a Jew.

You think it's going to be Dolin got poisoned by Jews?

Why would I believe how he died?

How do you know?

Because you do DNA tests, which go back to your room.

Who's doing the DNA tests and what's their background?

How do we know?

Who knows?

That's kind of irrelevant because it trades.

Wait, wait, wait.

You don't want us to notice?

You don't want us to notice?

All I did was notice.

We're not allowed to notice these Jews.

Exactly.

So we're not allowed to notice.

Did you notice Stalin killed one Jews and Lenin?

Did you not notice the patterns?

Is that what you're saying?

Did you notice Lenin was a Jew and you worship a Jew?

I'm noticing a pattern here.

And I read somewhere that the Jews tend to not want to reveal that they're Jewish.

And that's what you're doing right now.

Therefore, you are yourself Jewish.

No, I ask you.

I think there's noticeably.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

We're noticing and we're on to you.

Why are do you refuse to answer the question?

I'm just asking anything to us in the audience how you are not a Shabba score.

As soon as you explain as soon as you explain why you didn't invite me to your bar mitzvah.

Because I didn't have one.

So, so you're lying?

That's your answer?

That you had one, but you didn't invite any.

I mean, look, dude, your argument is so bad right now.

Everyone can see that you are.

It wasn't even an argument.

I just asked you a question.

If you weren't Jewish, then you would be pretty certain about it.

You don't really sound certain.

Your arguments aren't really that airtight, so to speak.

So it's the needle is leaning in the direction that you may yourself be Jewish.

Okay, well, you can say that, but that's not that is all I wanted.

Clipped and shipped.

Lennon clipped and shipped.

That's all I wanted.

A confession.

He said, You can say that.

Everyone saw what he just said.

He said, You can say that.

Sir, thank you for the honesty.

Shalom, Shabbat Shalom.

I have no problem with Jewish people, by the way.

But I think this was a classic case of a self-hating Jew who had a big problem with their own self.

And we just solved all of that.

Go ahead, LC.

Alright, he left.

Um Jessica.

Go ahead and speak.

Hey.

So when it comes to DNA and all this stuff, like it depends on what you're looking at.

You gotta really dive into it.

So don't follow what the stories your family's telling you.

You gotta really go in there.

So 100% genome sequencing, uh you find some answers maybe.

And uh sorry, what is this?

I was told I was German, but I definitely did not uh find that out in my DNA.

So what is your question for the ACP?

Uh I

Don't, I guess I don't have a question.

I just was making a statement.

Sorry.

I got a question.

Who has a question?

I have a question.

Go ahead, whoever's speaking.

Love Banish.

So, yeah, nice to meet another communist with a Shiab background.

I love the ACP.

I really support what you guys do.

I love what you guys have been doing so far.

So, my question is: say you reach a level of success or control of political means that is substantial to the point it becomes a real threat to the establishment.

How would you reconcile that with the level of surveillance, intelligence, and sort of hard power of American militarism that exists in the U.S.

and historically has been able to successfully sabotage movements like the Black Panthers or even overseas?

That's a good question.

I think our party will be successful if we have a succession, an effective succession protocol.

And the sad thing is that I think there's a very high likelihood that I could be killed if we get to that state.

Frankly, I could be assassinated if it gets to that point where we're this huge movement that's making so much waves.

But that's not the point.

The point is not to ensure my survival.

The point is to ensure the survival of the party and that the party will be able to respond to things like that.

And the party, if nothing else, will need to live on as a symbol.

If it's true that they managed to succeed in crippling all of our infrastructure, we even want this party to survive that

In terms of the symbol surviving, in terms of the idea surviving, so that others could.

The point is not to have instant success.

The point is for there to be constant iterations that respond to failure.

And

It's just like AI.

AI is not meant to be successful.

The algorithms, the machine learning, it's not supposed to be successful right away.

It's supposed to be various different iterations of failure, right?

And then they actually start, that becomes the success, that there's these more and more accurate iterations.

And that's the thing we're trying to initiate politically and organizationally.

We know that we will be testing limits as far as how far we could get with this.

But even if we are fully annihilated as a party upon running up those limits, everyone will be able to see that and learn from the experience and pick up from where we left off.

And we mean to ensure that and plan for that.

And that's kind of how we're seeing it.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, no problem.

Uh Wodie, go ahead.

Hey, what's up, Ozman?

Hey, genuine, I'm not a shit talker or anything like that.

Genuine skeptic, you know, with just two questions.

Yeah, I really feel that the ACP has touched on something genuine as far as a unique way for the American left to go.

I just there's there's a few things that I just stumbling blocks big time.

Is there any plans of yours to distance yourself from Dugan or any regrets from that association?

Where do you stand with that, man?

No regrets.

No regrets.

I think Dugan is an extraordinary thinker.

I think he's an extraordinary human being.

I have nothing but respect and admiration for him.

He was a father.

He is a father in a sense, you know.

Um

And um he is um fully prepared to you know sacrifice everything for what he believes in terms of his own safety and his own comfort.

He paid a heavy, heavy price, um and he remains resolute and I have nothing but respect for him.

Um you may not agree with his pol politics or the conclusions he draws when it comes to ideology and political theory, but

I see him as an anti-imperialist fighter.

And I see him ultimately.

As a kindred spirit fighting against an evil global system.

I don't agree with his political theory entirely.

I do think he makes valid points.

I d in s not all of them, but he does make some valid points.

I do think he's a very interesting and and and mighty thinker that should be reckoned with.

And definitely not dismissed.

I have no regrets at all in my association with him.

Okay, one more question.

If you don't mind, I'll be quick.

One of the things that I, you know, I'm somewhat of a class reductionist, so I'm kind of sympathetic to putting the culture war on the back seat, but I'm not totally against it.

Is there any plans for the ACP to try to make alliances with the left that is going to be more into the culture war, or is it just going to be staying the same direction with the anti-wokeness?

We are willing to make alliances with anyone and everyone who is interested in a counter-hegemonic.

We don't mean that ideologically, we mean that in the sense of.

Um if you can accept working with us toward any goal and you are on the left, chances are we will not turn you down.

Boom.

Okay.

Oh, well thanks for taking my questions, Hodge.

I appreciate it, man.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Um

Alexander, go ahead.

Harry Haas, can you hear me?

Yeah, I could hear you.

Just want to let you guys know I'm not a Jew, but I wish I could.

Hold on, I can't hear you.

I said, I just want to let you guys know I'm not a Jew, but I wish I was.

Okay.

Okay, so, anyways, well, I would like to give you credit, Haas, because, you know, I come from a MAGA background originally, and you did bring Marxism into my political consciousness.

So, I'm still a baby Marxist, no longer pro-ACP.

You know, there's two two reasons.

One is that I did start looking into Trotskyism, and I did find their analysis more appealing.

But before that, there were certain behaviors, not just in the party, but in leadership.

And in particular with Jackson, right?

The first red flag that I saw, I mean, there was a couple before that, but the first big one was when Jackson said this is, after all, they killed Jesus.

They crucified our Lord in response to the Zionist events, right?

Now, I understand that there were justifications made for this or a sort of explanations made for this about, oh, he didn't mean it in that way.

He didn't mean all Jews.

And it was meant in a more esoteric way, referring to imperialism or something like that.

Michael Hudson's ideas about the creditor class, not Jews.

Sure, sure, right.

He's talking about the hegemony in general.

It wasn't talking about Jews.

It wasn't only talking about Israel either.

He was talking about the whole capitalist hegemony.

Right, but you have to understand the way it was presented and the way most people see that.

Look, my issue is that.

Sorry, uh brief interruption there.

No problem.

Um

My issue is that

I am not interested in offending the religious sensibilities of Jews or insulting Jews or denigrating them at all.

But at the same time, I think that with the genocide in Gaza, I don't think

I don't think it's necessary to walk on eggshells.

I don't consider Jews to be an oppressed people today.

Um, okay, and I don't and so if people misinterpret what he's saying, I don't think it's I don't think it's going to lead to pogroms or something.

I don't see that.

I don't see Jews as but that's that's I don't think that's uh you know what most you know right but I just I don't see Jews today as victims, I see them as like anyone else.

I neither regard them as the people who control everything and they're they're bad or and that but I neither think that they're victims who are somehow oppressed and and you know there can be nothing nothing can be said at all that could possibly you know be twisted in a way that I don't think there needs to be walking on eggshells frankly.

It's just I don't think Jackson you know made any Jew or non-Jew lose sleep over that too much, but the point is that it's still like as far as like your typical like Marxist analysis on on racism or even anti-Semitism, which historically Jews have had I don't think the yes, but I don't think anti-Semitism today is an existential I think the all of the negatives about ant overall majority today of the negatives okay 95% of the harm from anti-Semitism is not to Jews it is to dissident 5% of it is to Jews in the form of hate crimes

Right, but do you realize this is what the left says about uh white uh reverse racism, that you can't be racist towards white people 'cause they're in a position of power?

No, I I I understand that fully.

But but the thing is, is that Jackson wasn't engaging in ra you would have to yourself interpret what he tweeted in a way.

That and and and and if if for example if I make a joke on stream saying that we're you know I'm going to war with the white race or something some ridiculous thing when I'm mocking white supremacists you know I don't I'm not saying reverse racism isn't real.

I'm just saying it's a joke and it's not I don't need to walk on eggshells.

It's like it's not But why do you walk on eggshells with regard to Jackson?

I'm not.

I'm not walking.

Far from it, actually.

Far from it.

If you know about.

You know, Jackson, he threw my AirPods away on accident or something, but I completely criticize him for that shit.

I mean, I had to buy new AirPods in Russia.

It was fucking terrible.

He still won't tell the truth about what he did with my AirPods.

What a fucking Jew.

Unbelievable.

No, well, look, here's the thing.

Jackson is a public figure, okay?

And he said these comments in public, right?

And a simple, like, hey, guys, you know, I didn't mean it that way.

No, no, no.

You never, never, ever apologize or anything.

It's the worst thing you can do.

But see, see, that's the thing.

It's like, that was a red flag, right?

No, you need to understand the need to understand banana things.

You need to understand, basically, that when you're a public figure and you apologize, you're apologizing to your enemies.

They're taking it as weakness and they're preying on your downfall.

And he should not have shown any weakness or apologized at all.

I don't know.

I'm going to, as a good Christian boy, I'm going to have to beg to differ.

But that's fine.

Okay.

Like, he did that, right?

But he continues to show indications of this guy can't be trusted on a basis where it's just like this.

I can trust that he's going to make the right decisions.

He has appreciation for Marxism.

I think that it's just, you're making a lot of assumptions about Jackson's personality and character because you only know.

I'm sure he's a great guy.

Jackson is not.

Jackson's a very.

He's not.

Jackson actually has like a real life where he, you know, he has a girlfriend.

He has her friends.

He has a real life.

He is not a crazy guy like me who's like, you know, well, I don't really do that anymore, but he's not.

He didn't like stream 10 hours a day with the chat telling jokes and being a crazy guy like I did.

Jesus Christ, what is this idiot?

It's this guy Gore.

Uh, anyway, um, well, here, Haas, if I if I may, because here's the thing: then you get into Andrew Tate.

You were talking about Andrew Tate earlier, and like, oh, you know, I you look at Malcolm X and look at the Black Panthers and you know, the stuff they committed, and you fairly you said, okay, Andrew Tate's not Malcolm X or the Black Panthers, right?

But are you, but you're saying that there are conditions in which you are willing to look the other way for egregious crimes of the same, if not worse, uh, nature.

No, no, no, no, no, no.

What I'm saying is that you're willing to look away for L John Coober, who is much worse than Andrew Tate, and you're willing to look away to Malcolm X, who's also arguably worse, because he was actually trafficking.

Well, I'm not going to create different gradations of severity in the sex trade because it's all terrible.

But I just find it hypocritical to, in one circumstance, look the other way, and in another, you know, make it such that it's guilt by association if you ever say anything positive about them at all.

And he doesn't need to be Malcolm X or the Black Panthers and share their politics for me to demand moral consistency when it comes to how leftists treat these figures.

They don't need to be of the same level of ideological commitment.

It's about the morality of what they have done, which people are focusing on when it comes to Andrew Tate.

Well, you should be morally consistent then.

That's all I'm saying.

Haz, I agree.

I agree with you.

I agree with you there.

It's not about Andrew Tate's sexual deviancy, right?

Now, that is an issue in itself, but that isn't that shouldn't be the crux of it, right?

What I think about Andrew Tate is that he is a figure, a perfect representation of what you would call the petite bourgeois, right?

He is like, has anti-imperialist sentiments, yes, but his ideology, right?

Even though it may drive some, some, some, there may be some overlap in interest, you can't, like, you, oh, you cannot, as a Marxist, associate yourself with these types of people because they cannot be trusted.

Now, look at that.

I don't think they betrayed the revolution.

Andrew Tate would lick the type of people.

But Andrew Tate is not in our party.

He would liquidate Jackson and you if he truly had, like, you know, okay, maybe not.

So look, first, look, the party hasn't even said anything about him, let alone let him in.

All Jackson did was make a tweet, a positive tweet about him and on his personal account.

All right.

To go from there to make the argument that, well, I mean, Andrew Tate, you know, he's not going to take power with you and share it.

It's like, well, we're kind of getting ahead of ourselves here.

But what I'm saying is like who you choose to associate with, even if you agree on certain things like anti-imperialism, right?

How much is Andrew Tate really an anti-imperialist?

But what do you mean by association?

What do you mean by association?

I mean, association is such a vague word.

I mean, okay, when you're a public figure, I think the problem is very simple.

The problem is that what you're talking about is like, you're talking about cancel culture.

I think it's dead.

I'm not saying that.

No, I'm not.

I'm not saying that.

No, no, no, no.

Let me clarify.

This is about cancel culture.

Cancel culture is dead.

It's just dead.

I'm not saying that.

For better or for worse, it's just an objective fact.

It's not a thing anymore.

Some communities fringe so-called left-handed people.

Would Lenin do this kind of associate himself in this way with Andrew Tate?

Would he defend him like this?

Because Andrew the type of anti-Jewish Andrew Tate employs is useful.

It's just Lenin literally positively spoke about the significance of priests and even certain people that were there were so many different pragmatic alliances, even in civil war, that the Bolsheviks made temporarily.

I mean, the Bolshevik government in its foreign policy allied with the reactionary government in Afghanistan, you know, in the 20s.

I mean, there was an alliance with Ataturk, who used the weapons the Bolsheviks gave him to literally massacre Turkish communists.

I mean, you have no idea of the level of realism, political realism, and real politic that characterized the Bolshevik attitude.

I think, you know, there's always a great risk to that.

And what I'm trying to say is, like, you had a you had a caller earlier who, you know, he turned to America first, right?

And he was talking about like, you know, they're the real revolutionaries.

They want to, you know, demographic change, theocracy.

Like, all these people really want to do is just bring back America back to the 1950s, right?

Look, I think you're listening, man.

We're going to have to wrap it up on this topic because we're getting into a whole debate about everything Andrew Tate stands for, which is not relevant to our party or me, but it is all spurred on by the fact that Jackson made a tweet that positively appraised his foreign policy outlook.

Okay.

I don't know what to tell you.

Just because you like someone's foreign policy doesn't mean you are here to create an entire organization dedicated to them and share everything that they believe just because of this guilt by association.

I think that's reading into it way too much, and it's just a fixation I don't understand.

All right, let the guy up.

There's somebody who wants to come up because he took offense to what I said about Malcolm X.

What's your name on the space?

I don't know what your name is.

You have to request again.

Anyway, um let's have uh

Christian go.

Right on, thank you.

I just got a few questions for you.

Um first question is, how many people do you have in ACP, give or take?

Uh we have over five hundred right now.

Okay.

Uh w it would it be fair to say that you get a lot of your ideology via Lenin and Trotsky?

So I noticed you laughed about that number.

Why is that funny to you?

Because it's minuscule.

But regarding my next question, so you had one question, and I'm going to answer your one question because we don't tolerate SNIDE passive aggressiveness year.

And I'm going to explain to you how modern organizations work.

You're going to find a ton of organizations that are claiming thousands of members because the key to membership and the barrier to entry for those organizations is a button you click on the website.

If we had that same button, which we're going to have something like that, we would already be in the thousands and thousands and thousands.

Okay.

We're only at 500 because every single one of those 500 people are active.

They're doing work on the ground on a regular basis and they have all individually been vetted in direct video interviews.

So that is why the membership doesn't seem oh, you're not as big as PSL and all these others because those organizations have an extremely low barrier to entry that is just clicking a button on the website.

Which

Which doesn't reflect active membership.

If you count their active members, it's way smaller than anything they claim.

Second of all, I mean, Haas, Haas, Hawes.

The thing that I don't understand, right, is that you wanted to debate Candace Owens, right?

And I think Jackson also wanted to as well.

You guys were taking issue with the

Who the fuck told you you can interrupt me?

All right.

I'm gonna finish what I say and then I'm gonna let you go and say what you want.

Um Jesus Christ.

Um, yeah, in the future we're gonna have a different tier of membership, which is gonna be recruits.

So for all new people who join the party, you're going to click a button, you're going to uh take an oath.

You're going to have actual commitments, and then you will be connected with your chapter that's closest to you, and you're going to be given the opportunity to become a cadre.

But we're going to have a cadrification process.

So the difference is not simply going to be fully outside or fully in.

We're going to have an intermediary formal status within the party for people that are either don't have time to fully commit or you know want.

To you know.

uh that need time to become cadre.

So but but if you are here now already you are cadre so you've made it so this core 500 we have Phil Thank you.

They will be the founders basically more or less um now I'll unmute so the rent guy can speak again So you tech you're commenting on all right man listen okay, there is absolutely zero utility to Andrew Tate.

There's no reasonable okay I talked about moral consistency.

If you can address the argument about moral consistency, I'd be happy to talk about Andrew Tate's utility.

But we're going to have to get to one thing at a time.

Go ahead.

If you keep fucking muting me, then I can't get to what I actually want to say.

So, anyways, anyways, you are alienating a shit ton of people when you say that, or I guess when you compare Malcolm X to fucking Andrew Tate, Malcolm X was a criminal.

He was a criminal.

He went to jail.

He served this time.

He was a pimp in involved in the sex trade.

Okay.

He wasn't just a criminal.

He was a pimp.

And in one case, it's morally acceptable to have that past.

And in another case, it's not.

Now, you can make the argument, I'm fine with that, but admit that there are circumstances in which you find that past acceptable.

And then we can move on.

That's all I want these people to admit.

Go ahead.

Well, Steve, that's the problem.

Andrew Tate is still doing it, and he's unrepentant, and he's lying about it.

How is he still doing it?

What evidence is there that he's still doing that?

Based on what?

You can look at Diecot, you can look at Gadget on YouTube, you can look at a lot of channels that are documenting.

Uh

Which no one's denying.

It was specifically pornography he was involved in, which is I don't defend it at all.

But I don't like the moral hypocrisy and inconsistency of people who are trying to attack Jackson guilt by association, but

Turn a blind eye to the Black Panthers and to Malcolm X.

It's that simple.

That was my argument.

No, I'm not attacking Jackson.

You keep muting me, right?

Because you're afraid of what I have to say.

You're not attacking Jackson, then there's nothing to discuss.

All right.

Uh Nesta, go ahead.

Hey?

Um hey, has uh first of all, I want to say that I agree with pretty much all of the ACP positions and as a European I consider it to be the probably the most advanced uh Marxist party.

Uh but yeah, my question would be if the ACP takes power and you in the US Government stop uh actually subjugating countries through imperialism, uh death coupes, military bases and so on, and begin treating other countries equally, it will be more moral, sure, and probably way better for the world overall.

But will um it will do you th still think you can make America great again as in actually maintaining or improving the quality of life for the uh American working class?

Yeah, I think that it's all a matter of a long term versus a short term perspective.

So in the short term, there will be many sacrifices made, but in the long term, it will be for the better.

And I think that's my simple view.

I mean, it's not about sacrificing the material in favor of the moral, which Marxists completely reject that idea.

But when considering material facts, you also have to consider them with times, the scale of time, right?

It is not about thing it is not about the most optimal and comfortable thing now.

That is more like hedonism, which Marxists reject.

If Marxists believed in hedonism, then forget about making America great again.

Why would I sacrifice even an ounce of my personal immediate comfort as an individual to dedicate myself to politics at all?

You know?

The whole outlook of Marxism believes that

the that that um socialism, that communism will be much better for all mankind.

But when is the question?

And sacrifices, of course, will be made for the sake of future generations.

And that has always been the view.

I mean, in the short term, the October Revolution caused a devastating civil war.

Life was terrible in the short term.

Um hold on.

Emila, what's up?

But in the long term, that was necessary for Russia to have sovereignty.

So basically that's how I would put it.

Um yeah, I mostly agree.

I I see it the same way.

It's just that I'm used to Communist parties selling empty hope and not um uh pointing at the fact that it will be actually rough for a while at least.

Of course.

Yeah.

Of course.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Um

A guy whose name is just uh the cross.

Go ahead.

Hey guys, how's it going?

This is actually Lulfekar, but I had a question about Danny Shaw, if you don't mind.

Yeah, go ahead.

I've been following up on this Danny Shaw issue, particularly with him because he's so fascinating as a character.

It sounds like, from everything you've shared, he's been very difficult along the way, even before this whole crisis or this whole issue happened.

So my question is, how did Danny Shaw acquire such an influential position given all these issues along the way?

Was it like a case of him?

He is a master of duplicity.

And I hate saying that because he is a clown and stuff, but he is very good at pretending to be someone he isn't and deceiving people into thinking that he is a very good comrade and he is totally on board and dedicated.

And I don't think in retrospect.

He is so duplicitous that, in retrospect, we would have had to hold him in such a high degree of suspicion and mistrust to see his real.

V who he really is, you know.

Um he is incredibly Machiavellian and duplicitous though, I will tell you that.

And speculate as you may as far as what his real motivations are when it comes to that, but incredibly duplicitous.

It's interesting 'cause when he does speak for himself, he doesn't really come off as like this cr criminal mastermind.

He a lot he says is.

No, he very much fakes sincerity in a really scary way.

I see what you're saying.

So moving forward, are there like different plans in motion for like screening members and whatnot?

Yes, but there's only so much we could do with respect to that.

I think the most important thing is

strengthening two things.

One, party morale, two, party institutions to be resilient.

Because when it came to Danny Shaw's plot and alongside John, the reason that it failed the most wasn't actually because it's a cult.

Yeah, I'm talking about internally, within the leadership structure.

It failed the most because it lacked legal and constitutional credibility.

You know.

I defended the authority of the Constitution and they were coming from a position of, whoa, the constitution's bullshit.

Well, it's not, it wasn't really persuasive and convincing to the leadership because we all already agreed on the constitution.

And if we decide now to throw that away, it causes total chaos.

It's totally impossible.

So that was really why they failed.

We can they would prefer to read into it and and say it's because it's a cult and all this kind of stuff.

But the truth is, is they had no constitutional pretext for doing what they did at all.

And it's that simple.

So we need to really

really respect the procedures within our party and take them seriously because they're the only thing that's going to um prevent infiltrators and bad faith actors from wrecking the party.

And you spoke on this briefly publicly, but I just want to ask just in case there's anything new, are there going to be any steps forward in this case, or are you just like moving on from it entirely?

No, we're there's gonna be steps forward.

Uh you can count on that.

Anyway,

Thanks for the question.

That's all.

I have a question the so-called Chairman Haas.

Okay, past the mind.

No.

Manu, go ahead.

Uh hi, can you hear me?

Yes.

Uh are you doing?

Uh no, I just wanted to uh I just wanted to ask like a relatively light question, I suppose.

Uh just out of uh curiosity, just to get a little bit of your uh perspective.

Uh no, I'm not from the US, but uh I wanted to know a uh a bit of your perspective on like the officiality of the of the English language.

Like if you uh got into power uh one day hypothetically, uh would you consider well would you think uh the English language should be uh like the official language of the country or uh maybe co-official with indigenous languages or uh minority languages where a lot of people speak it or should it just be so I have to cut you off because uh in the interest of time, but I'll answer your question.

It it has to reflect

The language of the people and what people are speaking.

So, right now I see no reason to change or to remove English as an official language, but if there comes a time when, you know, by the time we come to power, peop majority of the country is speaking a different language, we would we would make that the official language, I guess.

Um, but it

For now it's just about what people speak in real life in their ordinary

It's not something I would like to engineer artificially, basically.

Anyway, guys, we're gonna wrap up the space.

Um why are you a short homosexual Chavez boy?

So there's another guy who's confused by Jewish you're a short faggot.

But can you say it without pinching your nose this time?

Why are you a short homosexual Shabbos go?

Are you reciting one line?

Why are you a short, fat, homosexual Shabbosquoy?

Um, just say it to my face and then I'll answer.

Dude, I'd hover over you and you'd I'd look down on you.

Yeah, yeah, you're an anonymous you're an anonymous pussy on the internet.

Shut the fuck up, all right.

That's what you are, little bitch.

So simmer down there, you're a little loud for being an anonymous pussy.

Well, you wanna talk shit, say it to my face, bitch.

Simple as that.

Anyway, um.

Think it's as simple as that.

It really is.

You know, some some pussy.

I mustered the courage to speak, but they got so nervous they just kept repeating the same thing over and over again.

Which shows me they don't have the flexibility, the maneuverability to actually, you know, even use their voice to um stand on business.

They're so nervous and their voice is shaking like the pussy they are with their nasally bitch voice that they're just cornered and they're they're resorting to looping over and over again.

But um

You wanna talk shit?

I'm out here, you know?

You're on the internet, you little bitch.

Come say it to my face, and see what happens.

For if you want me to take you seriously, that is, you know.

Um, anyway.

That's the end of that.

Alright, we are wrapping up.

That's that.

You know, a lot of people got way too comfortable with these little destiny memes.

You know?

Like.

But then they see me in person and it's it's not exactly

what the internet told them, you know, from my experience.

Um and that's why nobody talks shit ever in person to me ever, not even once.

Uh anyway.

Spirit, what's up?

Uh Gigi, the issue is that you're a time waster wanting to argue about Andrew Tate when no one gives a fuck, frankly.

And I was just making the point that you can't create problems surrounding Jackson's tweets given the moral hypocrisy if you're making if you're coming at it from a moral place of argument.

Then you said, oh, I don't have a problem with Jackson.

So whatever.

So then end it.

It's fucking over.

Nobody gives a shit about arguing about Andrew Tate.

Like, nobody gives a fuck.

It's literally not relevant at all.

Alright.

Alright.

I honestly think the people that constantly make discourse about that one fucking tweet are feds.

Oh, should I go there?

Should I go there and call them feds?

Because why the fuck else are you trying to just it's like, yeah, we got an angel to divide them.

Let's divide them.

Let's divide them.

You're a fucking fed, all right?

Why would you want to constantly press this issue and blow it out of proportion if you weren't a fed, frankly?

Yeah.

Let me go there.

That's exactly what a fucking Fed would do, is just constantly make a big fucking deal out of nothing.

It's classic Cointel Pro bullshit.

Make a big fucking deal out of something to divide people and and cause rifts and issues.

Huh.

Huh.

Sounds like some bullshit.

And if it's not some fed shit, it's some shit that people do as an excuse for not wanting to do real world work and actually get off their ass and fucking do something and show results.

They just wanna gibber and talk and sit all day and cry and bitch and whine about a fucking tweet instead of actually going and doing results and putting the work in.

You tell me.

You tell me.

By the way, I just want you guys to know something.

The feds are hyper in hyperdrive right now, obsessively focused on me and the party, but me in particular.

They are really interjecting themselves in all leftist discourses everywhere on the internet right now, because this whole plot failed, so they're just on overdrive.

Um

To make up for it.

And um

Yeah, so that's why by though, if you've noticed that, that's literally why.

Because this little plot of theirs failed, so they have to find some way to make up for it.

Um

They're very active right now though.

Very, very active.

Anyway, alright guys, I will see you guys.

I don't know when.

Sunday.

Maybe tomorrow.

I may be going on a show tomorrow.

I don't know actually if that's still happening.

They have to get back to me through DMs.

But I had one scheduled for tomorrow.

I don't know if it's still going on.

I'll let you guys know.

Bye-bye.