MASSIVE BATTLE | INTENSE DEBATES

I'm To see I'm

No I think No. Trang-Ru-Tan't Eighty-Lang

Not-paw-Thing

To-pain-sort-

To-pain-n-n-n-fonged

Un-Cent-N-Fang

Duk-Tro-Cat

Meehion Fong-Chyr

In-N-Ling

Ony, Linshands

Y' T'-T-T you lean on you, on, it's on on

my lap on

I'm

I'm

can't I'm

can't

I'm

can

I'm

don't

let me let me let let let

you

just

you

listen and and how you and just can you and you can you is if you're silhound

just can you

is for

gentle and

shan-

I'm

Kang-kang-k

Kang-k-k-gou-chang-chang-fong-gou-haw

B'haw-Bewshu-Bethran-Fang-tong-tong-tonged

B-South

you,

you know

true-in-e, I give you I'm You're If you're

I give you

Forcian,

You're

If you're D.

I give you I'm going to be. I'm going to be. I'm going to

I'm I'm I think To see

To be

To turn

Your

To

Not

Not

Wai Wai Wai Wai S S S S S I can't long-road-torn, your eyes are clear, not-paw-paw-paw-shawn, don't think of

un-parned-and-con,

new-shund,

and the world's

still,

full-n-lough-tie-tie-tonged.

I, Kang-kong-kong-kong I was from the t'clock I I'll see you is for Chowson, be hernown, just can you

is for

we're low

shan-c-

count-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-c-ccccccccccccccccccc-cccc-c-cc-cc-ccc-c-c-ccfong

fang-ppppppoh-bhaw. You, if Trueing, I give you

So-sue, I give you So-hound,

You if

Ditch, I'll give you

Ching-Cong

I'll give you

Chang-Cong-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-C-pong

fang-pong-pong-pong-pong-pong-poh-yang Be go y'am, don't let me say with us with let's

I'm let's go

you're

not quite

you're

not quite

you're

not

will

shine

y'clock

I'm

count, count,

come, ca,

ca,

go y'

don't be saying about black c' and I can't, I can't go round, yet say, I've got my black-paw-conged

You know

If I thinker,

I give you so shan,

I give you,

I give you chen-chang

You-lough

You know-cheng,

I give you

So-shawn, I give you hear-you-lust, I give change and I'll give you I'll give you Sourcheon

You're taking

I'll give you

Ten Chong I'm going to be. I'm going to be. I'm going to

be.

I'm Music He stood unshaken, a voice in the storm, a man of conviction, a heart reborn.

He spoke the truth

When the cost was high

He lived for Jesus

Unafraid to die.

We are Charlie Kirk, we carry the blame.

We'll fight for the

gospel

will honor his name.

We are Charlie Kirk

his courage our own

together unbroken our own Together

Unbroken

We'll make

Heaven known a husband, a father, his family held near, a home built on scripture

on faith without fear

the world tried to silence

but his voice remains

innocent echo But his voice remains Innocent echoes

In Christ it sustains

We are Charlie Kirk

We carry the flame

We'll fight for the gospel

We'll honor his name

We are Charlie Perk his

Purpose, Perridge our own. Together

and broken will make heaven known.

The battle is raging

the darkness will fall

we rise with the spirit

the answer the call

the truth is eternal the cross is our god with god as our captain we march side by side

We are Charlie Kirk

We carry the blame

We'll fight for the gospel

We'll honor his name

We are Charlie Kirk

His courage our own

Together

Unbroken We will make heaven known

We are Charlie Curd forever alive

We are Charlie Curred

With God we will rise and that's love that mani

thinker

and secula

that anima

may all

laudette

monifican

and secula Happy nation Recian money secret in secular

Happy nation

living in a happy nation

where the people

understand

and dream of perfect

man situation

lit us with sweet salvation for perfect man situation litters sweet

salvation for the people

for the good for my

come by the room

we travel inside

I'm already is coming and all We try I need

Come in

And all be

back the lives

And all the time

We've burned

back

gas

Then no man's

to rule the world alone

And man will die, but not his idea

Happy Nation

Living in a Happy Nation

Where the people understand And dream of a perfect man situation

split us with salvation for the people for the good for my friend brotherhood for men than Badaloo and so on the you know

I'm

I'm Tell that we've got to fly

Tell them we've got to fly

Definition

I'm doing all this with you

Oh my destination

Talked about

expectation

No one night

Where that's where I'm No I'm living

Happy nation

Time that's too far Happy nation Living in a happy nation

Where the people

understand

And I dream of all the past

situation

Litt us with sweet salvation

For the people For the good for my friend rather than

aminization Happy nation Happy nation Happy face,

Oh, happy face, uh, Thank you Oh

Oh

Yeah then she'll that's loud that

magnificent

in

secular

et

da da'

that am

my

love

that

magnificent

and secular happy happy Money thickled in secular

Happy nation

Living in a happy nation

Where the people understand

And dream of perfect man

Situation all right, everybody All right, everybody

Listen up

Who's waiting has to fucking boost this

fucking post so people fucking see

That I'm live on kick

and you know

guys we gotta get a I'm not

I'm not I'm not about to you wait for 40 minute intro

I'm not I'm not I'm not that 40 minute intro you know I mean

it's like we're gonna do this quick

or we might even call it a rap

so y'all get to work.

Fuggin' 40 people boost that shit so far.

Let's go, y'all. for the people for the good for my friend brother who

we're trying to

I need a star

and all be both the last

and all the last And all the time

We've burned that gas

There's no man's need

To rule the world alone

And man will die

But not his ideas.

Happy nation, living in a happy nation, where the people understand, and dream of a perfect man situation,

litters with salvation, for the world. But that's mad situation Little sweet salvation

For the people

For their good

For my friend

Brother Lou and it's down there down to down to Tell them a third to fly

Telling that to fly We're going to tell my day with you validation

Stop and just about

deprivation Happy nation Time to Come in

Come on

Never Marip

A lot

I'm I'm

Happy nation

living on

a happy nation

where the people

understand and I dream of a past situation

Little sweet salvation

For the people, for the good for my friends

other than validation for my friends all that Happy

nation

Oh

invitation

Oh Happy nation Happy nation Happy Happy face

A

A

A

A I I'm

I'm

glad

the o'embechette

Missed Manifikai

I'm Thank you, God, Imsaquola

and I'm

may all

love

da da da, money

think of

in secular

Happy nation

living in a happy nation

Where the people understand

And dream of perfect

My situation

Repped us with salvation

For the people

for the good moment

come by the room

be trapped inside

I need a star

and all be

bad with us and all be popular

and all the time

we've learned

that dust

that no man's

to rule the world

alone

and man will

die

but not his ideas happy nation living in a happy nation where the people understand and dream of a perfect man situation

With sweet salvation

For the people, for their good for all my mind comes by the room I'm I'm Tell the we're got to drive.

Tell them we've gone to the bar.

Definition.

I'm sure we've never going to day for you Every station

I'm talking just

about

Every nation

No one

I'm going to

death with you

Let me

Get me just too a huh Every day Happy nation Time to come to

Come

A new

A new

A half

A half a nation

We're living in a Huckin'

Where the people understand

And I dream of a fucking situation

Littance with sweet salvation

For the people, for the good for my friend's brother

I'm in my name for all that good for my friend brother

happy nation Happy nation

Happy nation Happy

Happy

Nation

Oh

Oh Oh Oh. The Thank you. There's nobody here. Just us together. Keeping it hot.

July forever. Just us together Keeping it on

Of July forever

Because we're the masters of our own faith

We're captains of our own souls

There's no way for us to come late it's why we're called boy we're called and

take off take off all your clothes take off take off all your clothes Take off take off take off take off

Take off all your clothes take off take off take off all of your clothes

Face the only is a good tire tasteing only the third dial

that just ain't right

because we're having too much more

too much fun

Too much fun tonight

You know what's for love

You know what's for love and this one

You know what's a lot

It's so long It says the light is run. You're just a lot.

You're just a lot.

You're just a lot.

It's just a lot Because we're the masters of our own fate

We're the captains of our own souls

So there's no need for us to hesitate

But alone, it's in control, and no way

Think off, take off all your clothes, take off, take off all your clothes, take off, take off, take off, take off, take off Take off all your clothes

Take off

Take off

Take off

Take on follow your clothes

They seem to

I'm going to die

Oh That just ain't they used me as a good night that just

ain't right

because they're having too much

much fun tonight I'm like your mind

But I'm

That's for life We dance for a

We dance on the age

As a Hollywood sign

Don't we run out of breath

Gotta dance till we die

My boyfriend's back

And he's cooler than ever

There's no more night

Blue skies forever Love for us than ever. There's no more night.

Blue skies forever. Kisholomew Kempelah

and that's a lot

Kinsalai

Kinsalai Kinsalai

Kinsau

Komenchero

Komenchero Oh Comanchero, comanchero, Comanchero, Comancheero,

oh,

oh, oh,

oh,

oh

come an chero, Comancheero,

Comancheero,

comanchero,

oh,

oh, La la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la Oh, oh. Uh-oh-la-la-la-l-la-l-l-la-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l- Everybody dancing a country style.

Indian land of the sun.

Come shake your body on their run. Wanna see you moving, on a groove it, I give it up, come on everyone.

Indian, land of the sun, come shake your body, on their run, want to see you moving, all the moving, I give it up and dance's everyone i will bring the common cheer with all my heart his lonesome heart his lonesome heart

who's in my common cheer a man of love a three six four

a three feet

ago

oh

comanjero

comadjero

comageto comageto

comageto

oh

oh

oh comentero

comatio comat

Comancheero, oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Comancheero.

Comancheero,

Comancheero, Comancheero,

oh, oh.

Oh, oh. India Indian Land of the sun, come shake your body, on the run, want to see you moving, all the moving, I give it up, come on everyone, Indian, land of the sun, come shake your body, all the run, want to see you moving, all not moving, I give it up, come on everyone, Indian, land of the sun, come shake your body, all the run you moving all i'm moving i give it up and dance at everyone i will bring the calm and cheer with his own my heart his lonesome heart his lonesome heart who night coming to cheer on man of love

a three feet of war

a pretty long

Comancheiro

Comancheiro

Comancheiro Comancheiro Come comancheiro, oh, oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Comanchero, comanchero,

Comancheero,

Comancheero,

oh, oh, oh. Oh, oh, oh. Oh, oh. Oh, manchero,

Comancheero,

Comancheero,

oh, oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Oh, oh.

Comancheero,

Comancheero,

Comancheero,

Comancheero, Comancheero

Comancheo

Oh

Oh

Everybody

dancing

a bunch of sight

Oh I'm like to be. Oh, Oh, I'm and so we're so high so high spreading our wings until we lose all minds counting all the stars until we reach the sky it feels like we were million miles away it'll never be the same and slowly fly until we lose all right until we reach the sky i'm in the

way it'll never be no same I don't need to say Because I'm

Oh,

Oh,

Oh, Oh Because I would fall So I'm So I'm

Oh my

Oh my

Oh my

It's a lot a a a A profound laziness.

I mean, what the hell?

I mean, y'all look at the pin.

I mean, 91 people out of, I mean, profan...

Y'all lazy as fuck.

I'm just telling y'all straight up

i'm just like meurring you know until we knew the lines counting all those stars until we reach the sky

It feels like we were

million lives away

to never be the same

and so we fly

Ah I'm going to be. I'm going to be. I'm gonna be able to be so on the other people I'm gonna be so on

I'm gonna be so on

get a little

I'm

coming out of

I'm saying the

I'm gonna raise

I'm

so far I'm gonna be I'm gonna imagine and I'm and I'm I'm Come on all those others in a way It's the world You're saying we're in the middle and mind away

You'll never be the bad

It's the way Stay in the shallow.

That's what they say.

Don't sing too deep.

And see our dreams.

Keeping head of water that's what they pray

but in the deep

is where I can breathe

falling in is where I can breathe Fall into the deep end

Don't be afraid to dive

Into the ocean of my secrets

To finally be alone in the deep end.

In the deep end. I'm Fall into good meeting, don't be afraid to die.

Into the ocean of the secrets.

To finally be at the deep end up in their deep end. Stay in the shadow, that's what they say.

In the deep end up saying too deep and see our dreams

keeping head

that's what they pray

but in the deep

is where I can breathe.

Let me stay here in the deep

when the water's crystal clear

Where's a crushing all alone

The silence is all I hear

I'm The One of the Oh

What's

Come

Oh and the other people who are you going to be one last year

I'm going to be able to be able to be everything.

And I'm not going to be able to be.

And so. and the I'm not

I'm

and

I'm

I'm

I'm not

I'm

I'm

I'm going to be a lot of

I'm I'm

and

I'm and

I'm and the and we're not

the other

I'm I'm not

a lot of Oh my goodness time I'm I'm going to The I'm not going to be. The fuck is up all you, all you stupid ass, lazy ass.

I'm just kidding.

Of course I'm kidding. Of course, lazy ass. I'm just kidding. Of course I'm kidding.

Of course, I'm going.

Of course, I'm going, of course, I'm a jokester, right?

Anyway, y'all, uh, Midwest with the 10. What's up, bro? Appreciate you. Midnight with the 10

What's up bro?

Appreciate you.

Midnight with the one.

What's up, bro?

Kyle, what's up, bro?

Appreciate Stalin.

Barry a Gulag with the 10.

What's up, bro?

Appreciate you.

And y'all,

let me tell y'all some...

Uh, hey, get that fucking guy out of here.

Who the fuck is? Get this guy out of here. What is his name?

Get this guy out.

Get him out of here. What the fuck?

I can't believe.

This guy was spamming Sun Gorillas for a long time.

And he just say that shit. I don't know.

I can't believe what I'm fucking seeing.

All right.

Anyway, you know, guys, I want to give you guys a congratulations for a 30 minute intro.

Y'all did really well.

30 minutes.

Y'all must be loving these long intros.

Anyway, y'all.

So, here we are.

I actually have a lot to talk about.

This is not like a freewheeling stream. Like, I have a lot to talk about. This is not like a freewheeling

stream. Like I have a lot to talk about.

So if you made it,

you know, congratulations, because there's a lot of

fucking...

A lot of shit. A lot of shit. A lot of bombs I got

to drop, metaphorically.

We are Charlie Kurt.

Hold on.

We are Charlie Kurt.

I'm trying to get the tone.

We are Charlie Kurt.

We'll cat on flame. We are Charlie Kirk Will cat

Of the lame

Where I

Is Matt

DG, what's up, bro?

Osos, what's up?

We are Charlie Cooke.

My mic can't even pick this frequency up on.

We are Charlie Cork, Wilkins.

Is it?

It's not a, it's not.

Uh, yeah.

So let me start the space so I can begin my spiel.

And, you know, it would warm everyone up to what I'm talking about. All right, starting the space.

Space has been started.

So guys, you have to boost the space.

You guys, I gave you guys something to boost before the fucking stream started.

And holy fuck, only a hundred of you. Only a hundred of you. What the hell? What the hell? Everyone boost this. I'm pinning it right now. Boost it so people can fucking see it.

That's the only reason we boost this is so we get,

you want content,

you got to fucking boost the shit out of it,

all right? Literally boost the fuck out of what I just pinned

so that the new,

people will come and challenge me and they'll debate me and stuff.

You don't even have to join the Twitter space yourself.

Just boost it so that people join who will debate me.

Also, I need a co-host.

I'm going to have Sue will be my co-host because he's so good at it.

Anyway, y'all.

So, let me

begin, all right?

Let me begin.

So,

it's been an eventful last

48 hours, especially last 24 hours.

I think I have a theory about what's going on and why it's going on, but I got to talk about it.

There has been a pivotal shift in the attitudes of the Baizuo toward China.

And for the first time ever, China is now the same as Russia in their eyes.

So they've always been anti-Russian.

That's been a given.

The red libs.

Like they've always been anti-Russia, right?

But there was this delusion that China was different, that Russia is a cynical, you know, well, it's not formally a communist state.

So it's this kind of cynical state.

It's this authoritarian, illiberal, self-interested state that has no, it's not

motivated by any higher ideals or guided by any higher principles. And so people, like,

were very comfortable saying, well, you know, Russia is, you know,uizua, capital estate, whatever.

But there were a lot of red libs that were still holding out.

There were still a lot of red libs that were holding out for China.

They thought that China was different than Russia in that respect.

And then there was also the delusion that was promoted by a lot of retards, you know,

who basically were looking at some of the like maga or you know conservative american

elements who we're sympathetic with russia but we're also anti-china's like oh it's america

and russia versus china that's like the the big thing and that's the secret thing and russia's

like aligned with the gP and that China is

kind of more with the Democrats. So there's all these like stupid perceptions people had about China

that made red libs for whatever reason more inclined to stand China and claim China as their own

and, you know, admire China and talk about how pro-China they are.

And the Xi Jinping memes were, like, huge.

You know, this is the Chinese century.

It's the American century of humiliation.

Save us, President Xi, yada, yada, y, like that.

That was a huge thing going on among the red libs for a while and of course

there were some of them who kept spouting nonsense like oh acp are anti-china or haz is not really pro china

i'm we're not he's not the pro-China one.

The tropical Trotskyite or the trope.

So there's all these stupid things going on in terms of, like,

them attempting to kind of, like,

distance us from China for some reason.

And what absolutely exploded that was my own visit to China.

So when I visited China, notice how they were all silent.

Well, there was a reason why.

Because it caused it.

I don't know if I'm being narcissistic when I say that did contribute, maybe, to them kind of realizing, you know,

although I've been observing this for like a year.

So I wouldn't say my trip was like the final nail in the coffin, but it probably did add to their

kind of wake-up call that, oh my God, China is not this Baisuo paradise that I thought it was.

And then, you know, there's another factor, which I think is significant, and I think that feds probably were involved in this, uh, in this aspect.

I, I noticed that Hassan Piker went to China. And then I was thinking to myself, I was like, oh boy, he's going too far.

And, you know, Hassan in China and normalizing China to his 30,000 viewers or whatever,

it's like, I don't think the CIA is just going to let that slide.

I don't think they're going to let that slide.

I think that that's, I think that while they do want, you know, to be for legitimacy purposes,

they want these kind of liberal leftists to be nominally pro-China just so that they don't outright look like Dylan

Burns or Drew Pavlu or something. You know, it's important for them that they, you know,

one of the things, I find it, actually, it's so fascinating because infrared's been here since 2021 right and there was a

clear dichotomy like at the outset like infrared's this new thing we're part of the china zeitgeist

we're part of the zizien ping zeitgeist this is a new fresh understanding of Marxism

Marxism, Leninism, communism

and it's like it's us versus all these

CIA bread tube like

Ultras and Liptards basically

like that was a very clear

line of demarcation that used to be drawn

but then these other people came, these gatekeepers, I guess, who, you know, we call them red libs, who are basically like, no, we're the true pro-China people, you know, infrared are pro-US imperialism or something.

We're just like making shit up, basically, right?

And for a...

There was an obscurity as far as the line,

as far as who's aligned with who,

in terms of the emerging changes in the global world order. It's like there was a huge

obscurity. There were a lot of like Democrat libtards and ultras who are trying to like, I guess,

identify with China and claim the zeitgeist of the dragon, so

to speak, right? And we were

engaged in a ferocious struggle

with them for years and years and years.

Then it took two days

for them all to just

concede

that debate, I guess.

Because notice how we haven't changed our views on anything when it comes to China.

But they have.

And we were engaged in a bitter struggle with them for years about it.

And finally they've conceded that actually, no, your worldview doesn't align with China's.

Ours does, much more than yours, at least.

Or you are your appreciation for China is based on a misunderstanding because you're a tropical trotskyite

you're a fucking libtard and the world view that china has or the chinese state has if you can

call it that as a monolith uh demands a much broader range of sensibility than what liberal leftists find, or

buys a will find acceptable.

So it's like that has been going on for a long time.

And it took two days for it

to completely end,

you know? And now I'm starting

to see a lot of

arguments and positions, which

it's just a massive

mask off moment for Western leftists.

Like,

I didn't understand that it would take two days for the entirety of the Marxist-Leninist tradition

to just be seated to us, like, overnight.

But it basically has,

and it's only a matter of time before they do just kind of take it to its

logical conclusion you know the rca is growing the trotskyites are growing i think that most

of these people are going to become trotskyites uh because it goes beyond the UN vote.

I've already addressed every angle, every argument regarding the UN vote.

And to simplify it as far as like how the people critiquing China and Russia over the

UN vote don't have an argument.

The argument's really simple. It's like, what's step two?

Step one, they veto it. Okay, what's step two?

So step two is nobody can answer that question,

because they think that the vote is just going to be a symbolic vote when it's not.

It's going to impose binding

obligations on russia and china to come up with an alternative plan because this vote

because of the acquiescence of literally every state and every country on earth, besides a few, like Iran, maybe.

These are the terms and conditions of the ceasefire so far.

Any alternative plan that Russia and China put forward will be vetoed and will also not be fulfilled by the U.S.

and especially not by Israel.rael is just going to continue

bombing gaza so then the continued war and the continued violence would just be blamed on russia

and china and you could say well you know maybe hamas is willing to fight and they don't want the ceasefire.

So Russia and China should help Hamas more. And then I have to, I don't know why these people are children or something.

It really is. These people are like free shit socialist where they think you can just snap

things into existence without complicated

logistics and supply

routes. Plus doing it

in a way that's not going to lead

to a direct armed confrontation

with the U.S. I mean, if Russia and China are basically

going to stick their neck out for

the continuation of the hostilities,

then how can they

guarantee to Hamas that they're going to be able

to secure them a victory? That's impossible.

It would be akin to Russia and China having to commit to destroying the state of Israel itself,

which they can't do because they don't have a foothold in the Middle East,

because the regional forces that do exist there, like Iran, already have a hard enough time

because of what happened in Syria. Just look at the

geography and look at the borders and look at the Mediterranean Sea and then look at the land borders

that Gaza has. What can China and Russia do? What can they do to break the encirclement without a direct

confrontation with the U.S.? Russia has its hands tied in Ukraine, and China is focused on the

Indo-Pacific, because it still hasn't fully reunified yet, at least in political military level.

On historical level, China is unified.

Sure, it's one China, but on a political military level, they haven't.

There is a military threat being posed to China because of Taiwan separatism and because of U.S. aggression in the Indo-Pacific.

China would have to go through Afghanistan.

They would have to go through, well, Iraq, i don't know if that would be a hard time

who knows

the you know they'd have to come to a new agreement with iran i mean this is kind of

preposterous

and then syria somehow

you was well china can just use its economic leverage.

You know, the only reason China does have economic leverage in the first place is because

of their position that they've always had of political non-interference.

That's the advantage China gives over the Washington consensus.

I'm sure

that the people that are embedded within China

in terms of trade and economics would be

happy to ditch China and go

help revitalize American industry.

If China started interfering in their affairs and making political demands of them and creating political terms and conditions.

Okay, so the UN thing is like there's no debate.

I don't know if someone's going to be able to come on the space

and tell me what their step two is going to be

and disprove me, but I think

it's safe to say that there's no debate

as far as

the UN vote

and whether that's a meaningful thing

or not for China and Russia to have abstained. Is that a betrayal of Palestine? Absolutely not. So on to the second thing that I've been seeing from these leftists, which is very amusing and i just i find it a pivotal mask-off moment that um you know well

thank you for conceding to us the entire marxistLeninist tradition, basically, is my position.

Because now they're not saying that the problem is that China and Russia abstained at the

UN anymore. What they're saying now is that China still refuses to economically fully

disentangle from Israel. China still refuses to economically fully disentangle from Israel. China still does trade with Israel and China still does trade with the world. And so does Russia, I guess.

So why can't China stop trading with Israel? Why can't they impose sanctions on Israel?

Why can't they impose trade restrictions on Israel?

And, you know, I think to myself, and I'm like,

this is a very interesting line of argumentation here.

Because if you evaluate Marxist-Leninist states, not Marxist-Leninist states,

Stalin synthesized Marxism, Leninism, when?

When he wrote

foundations of Leninism. Let's just say that.

So let's just put the date before then, okay, if we have to.

I'm a little taken aback by the historical illiteracy.

The logic here, like, how do you call yourself a communist or a Stalinist or a Marxist

Leninist or even a Leninist of any kind?

And begin from this line of attack of, well, you are somehow entangled.

You are culpable for, you know, in Israel

because, you know, you're somehow economically embedded with them some kind of way. Let's table the

fact that it's a hypocrisy because these people pay taxes that directly arm Zionist

tendency to kill Palestinian children. Let's just put that on the back burner.

Let's talk about the angle of the economic integration of the world that China commits to, or rather say the lack of restrictions it has with respect to that.

China's just willing to trade with anyone and whatever.

Okay.

So if these...

So China's tainted now, right? into they put it into such fine words they go

china is literally um trading money to help then which simultaneously goes to build israeli

infrastructure china's co Kabul and the genocide.

They're doing things like China is involved.

They're somehow embedded there, right?

It's like, okay.

So after the 1917 October Revolution, do people know what the Treaty of Breastlet Vosk was?

Treaty of Breastletvost was a massive concession that gave...

I think it was a third... Someone correct me if I'm wrong. A third of the Russian Empire at the time.

Correct me if I'm wrong, if that's too big of... I'm kind of hazy on the exact fraction.

But it was a huge fraction, the former Russian Empire.

Grant, they just gave it to the capitalist powers.

That's what it was.

So they had this revolution,

this pure proletarian dictatorship

as leftists with, or leftists,

ultra leftists or whatever would see it.

And then they signed the Treaty of Breslaid Vosk, which handed over one third of the newly gained revolutionary territory to capitalism, where people would live under capitalist slavery.

So the Bolsheviks gave the capitalists

and that they gave

these militarists and these criminals,

these imperialists, they gave them

the populations

living on those territories to live

under capitalist slavery.

Was that a moral blunder?

Would they be morally critiqued or judged by the same standard for that?

Forget about economic pragmatism for one second, because I'm not even going to get it to the NEP yet. I'm going to talk about the Bolsheviks relationship with the Ataturk, Turkish National Liberation Movement. The Soviet government gave the Ataturk forces and the Ataturk government later on, they gave them weapons.

They armed them.

The Bolsheviks armed Atta Turk.

The same guns that the Bolsheviks gave to Ahterk, the same exact ones were used to massacre Turkish communists.

Are the Bolsheviks now?

Betrayers?

Ultra leftists say so,

that these are some of the arguments they make all the time.

I can't believe the breadth of historical illiteracy that people have.

They think that somehow

communist states in the past

were like these bleeding heart

liberals that

were just complete moralists

and didn't actually live in the material

world. And

you know, how can you reconcile this contradiction hey buddy

there's no contradiction there's absolutely no contradiction communism or marxism has always been based

in a ruthless materialism and realism.

And yeah, does that mean you are culpable in the evil of the world? Yeah, you are. There's no way to free, there's no way to insulate yourself from the wickedness and evil of capitalism in the

world there's absolutely no way to insulate yourself you absolutely are tainted by it for as long as

you exist in the world you can't build a puritan colony that is completely free from it there's no

there's no way.

You know,

communism was not bleeding heart morality and bourgeois morality

that was armed with tanks

and nuclear weapons.

That's not what it was.

You think Bolsheviks were...

See, I just find it funny

because the leftist sensibility is just now on full display.

They genuinely made allowances for authoritarianism, quote-unquote, because they were like,

we're the good guys, and for good guys to do moral things, sometimes we have to do it by force

and that's how they interpreted like

the Bolshevik Czech and

authoritarianism in

communist states like Superman yeah like

Superman like James Gunn Superman

and that's why

they were like so edgy

and they were like, I like the USSR. The Soviet Union

was like if AOC was dictator.

And it's like, that's what they think.

And

it's just a, I guess

it's a profound, at best, it's just like a profound

misunderstanding. Like, like well communists in

history when they were in power never were guided by moralism never they were always guided by

the material necessities of maintaining and consolidating the gains that they had made.

And it has nothing to do with, you know, fulfilling your bleeding heart, moral aspirations, and imposing those on the world.

It has nothing to do with imposing your moral sensibilities on the world. It has nothing to do with imposing your moral sensibilities on the world.

It has everything to do with acquiescing to the laws of historical development.

Yes, submitting to the material laws of historical development as they exist.

So capitalism was not this evil, like, wicked thing that they were, like, building a utopia,

you know, against the grain of.

And that's what, that's what the whole, like, animating thrust of the revolution and

the proletarian dictatorship is, no, that's not what it is at all.

The proletarian dictatorship in socialism was seen as a qualitative advance from capitalism.

It wasn't seen as some kind of like utopian colony that they're going to establish to free themselves from the sins and the guilt of the world.

Okay?

I'm going to continue, though, because...

Serian girl, I'll bring you on one second.

I just want to finish my spiel.

So that was when they gave the Turkish Ataturk, the guns that were used to kill Turkish communists.

They did that, okay?

The NEP is an even more striking.

Sewell, can you please meet yourself?

I'm sorry, man.

NEP was an even more striking development.

Because at that point, foreign investment and even foreign capital was invited in exploitation was allowed to resume

all sorts of you know things that left disregard as the abominal characteristics of the capitalist system

were permitted okay okay, during

the NEP, like that happened.

Okay?

And after the NEP,

the Soviet government did everything in its power,

everything, to pursue a policy of normalization with the imperialist and capitalist states. Lenin regarded peace as precious. They wanted normal diplomatic relations with the world. They didn't want to declare war on the world. Wasn't their policy or position at all.

They were willing to sacrifice

the necessities of like exporting

the revolution or whatever, or even

aiding local communists sometimes,

to have normal relations with the

leading forces of various governments and representatives

look at the bolshevik policy on the kumantong the kmt well that actually put them at odds with

the chinese communists and the kumong went and massacred the Chinese communists, you know.

So this was the reality.

This has always been the reality of communism and Marxism and Marxism, Leninism.

Realism.

Okay.

Now, I just, I can mention a lot more, but I wanted to mention those things, because that's just, that was before Stalin officially declared the policy of socialism in one country.

That was all before, okay?

So,

afterwards is actually really funny.

Because

I don't know how to tell these people

that the Soviet Union did trade

with fascist Italy

and Nazi Germany.

They were economically embedded

with both Nazi Germany

and fascist Italy.

That was a thing.

The Soviets were leading the

anti-fascist movement worldwide in the

30s while simultaneously doing trade

with fascist Italy.

And then the Soviets knew about the evils of Nazism. They knew about the evils of Hitler. They knew about the evils of the evils of a so-called national socialists. But when they, when the opportunity presented

itself, and this came from the

German side, by the way,

see, the Soviets were looking

at what Hitler was saying. They were looking at what the

Nazis were saying. Panther, what's

up, man? I appreciate the five.

They were looking at what the Nazis were saying. And they were like, what's up, man? Appreciate the five. They were looking at what the Nazis were saying.

And they were like, what the fuck?

These guys are like super agro

and they're going to like invade us

because they want to wipe out, you know,

the Bolshevik menace

and they want to conquer and take over

Eastern Europe. So anti-fascism was not

based on a sentiment that was just, oh, these, you guys have horrific views that offend us.

Anti-fascism was based on the concrete threat of militarism that the Germans were imposing on Europe and the world.

And after the Soviets pursued an attempt to form security pacts with the French

and the British. By the way, two capitalist

imperialist powers. The British,

if I can just talk about that,

and the French for that matter,

the British were responsible

for uncountable.

Probably, actually, yeah, more than the Nazis act the British were I could safely say the British were

responsible for more genocides and more atrocities

than the Nazis were

the British did

like dozens of different Holocaust

around the world like they were really bad

okay

but the British were not the ones

immediately threatening

to invade the Soviet Union the Nazis were

so the Soviets were willing to form a military threatening to invade the Soviet Union. The Nazis were.

So the Soviets were willing to form a military pact with the British on the basis of containing Germany from attacking the USSR.

And yes, that was while the UK was still a colonial power that was starving and killing millions of Indians in India.

Okay.

Um, so this is the reality but when the germans through ribandrop made the overture because they wanted to focus

on the western front at least at that point to to the Soviets that, okay, we want normalization, we want a non-aggression pact, and we're willing to do trade. The Soviets, knowing full well the evil of the Nazis, agreed, and signed the Molotov-Ribbentraw pack.

Now, it's funny because there were probably a few moments in the history of Bolshevism

that led to waves of Western leftists becoming quote-unquote disillusioned.

So the first one was like right after the October revolution.

When these Russian Civil War kicked in and the Bolsheviks, you know, had to take

dictatorial power in a way that was undemocratic, you know, Soviet democracy was not prevailing at that point many anarchists

and foreign radicals were like the revolution's betrayed and then this only kind of accelerated

basically before trotsky's betrayal before Trotsky declared the revolution

betrayed, many, many so-called Marxists, so-called left communists and anarchists declared that the

revolution was betrayed for exactly the same reasons that leftists are claiming that china betrayed

Palestine okay crotstadt was later by that i'm talking about before so this really happened like

it was a pretty common thing, right?

So then Western leftists, they think they're so slick and they're supposed to be like, okay, I accept all the necessities.

You have to break a few eggs to make an omelet, whatever.

They somehow, like, found a way to internalize and cope to themselves

that their liberal outlook was actually still compatible with Bolshevism. These were liberals,

these were New York City liberals, okay? They were shitlibs who in America

you know

kind of stomached their

disgust and their revulsion and they said okay well they kind of made an excuse

they were fundamentally never Bolsheviks in the first place never

communists in the first place in the Marxist sense of the word. They were enlightened liberals who had delusions about what the Soviet Union was. So, but when the Molotov-Ribbon-entrop pact is signed and the world knows about that

I think it was

a third

give me the correct number guys

a third of the entire CPUSA

departed they left

this is not my revolution

Stalin betrayed I didn't sign up for this

so it's just different waves of Trotskyism that you see throughout the history of

of communism okay um

I can continue Okay.

I can continue.

I really can continue.

I mean, there's a... Oh, boy, there's a whole lot.

I mean, it's like...

Talk about the great patriotic war.

Many Ultros saw that as a betrayal because the Soviet Union allied with Britain and America.

Many people were upset at the Soviet Union for its abstentation during the

the Korean War.

It didn't do enough during the Korean War.

It abstained it during the

UN Security Council vote,

green lighting, the intervention.

Similar things security council vote green lighting the intervention similar things were going on when it came to the greek communists who some the titoists i guess felt Stalin abandoned because he gave Greece away as a concession to the British.

So many splits and so much disillusion in the Western left and among Western communists. It's just waves and waves and waves of this happening, just all the time.

Because they don't know history, they don't understand history. It's just waves and waves and waves of this happening, just all the time.

Because they don't know history, they don't understand history.

So one of the most famous ones, I guess, so post-war period, there were a lot of, like, Leptards, because Stalin was kind of normalized in the West because of the war against Germany

like Charlie Chaplin I guess

and like I don't know Sart

the ugly French guy Sart

a bunch of other people

they were kind of just like well Stalin is a great

humanitarian we think and they had these

like naive liberal illusions about the Soviet Union as well. But then Hungary and 56 happened.

And that was a huge. That provoked a massive wave of dissolution massive wave of dissolution

a lot of people just stopped being communist because of that that's where the origin of the

term tankie came from by the way soviet intervention in hungary in 56 uh let me continue

you then had um you then had a different generation during the new left period after 56 the old left kind of died or just became social democratic and then the new left was born and this was a new generation and they put their hopes in China

because they're like, okay, well,

the Soviets were big fat

meanies for what they did

in Hungary, but

China, they saw, they literally

saw Mao as like this

like Barney the dinosaur character

where like he's just this oriental

like peaceful Buddhist

Barney guy

like someone that

the Beatles fans would like right

and these new leftists were thinking,

they were so naive.

They were like,

China is like

their version of Maoism

and their way of interfacing

with the cultural revolution

was just like this extreme idealism

that was based on their lack of understanding of what was going on in

China, just lack of understanding of what the culture revolution actually was.

They didn't understand that everything has a light side and a dark side.

They only, like, they just took the most naive, idealist

appraisal of what was going on. It was

like childlike. It was literal

infantilism, right? And they

combined it with all the hippie shit, and they were doing

drugs all the time, and they had

these, it's so funny, because they would do these

like weird degenerate

orgy sex practices

and then the

Chinese would like visit them

once

and the Chinese also

didn't understand

these fucking psychos

the Chinese are like

oh there's these people

in the West

that like us

and they sympathize with us

they must be swell people the Chinese that like us and they sympathize with us. They must be swell people.

The Chinese would like go to France and they'd see them like all doing like they'd be all

having orgies and shit. And the Chinese were like, what the fuck is wrong with these people?

Like, what the fuck is this?

Like, what is this?

Also, it's funny because some similar shit happened.

I think it was the Red Army faction.

Someone, I don't remember, they went to go train with the PLO in the camps in the Middle East,

and they were like nude sunbathing, and the PLO in the camps in the Middle East and they were like

nude sunbathing and the PLO kicked them out. They were like, what the

fuck is wrong with you? Who the

fuck? Like, what made you think you could do this? Like, where did you get this

idea that this is what we represent, right?

Anyway, there's all sorts of funny stories like this. So the get this idea that this is what we represent, right?

Anyway, there's all sorts of funny stories like this.

So the new left, that was the new left, and the culture revolution lasted 10 years.

So their delusion lasted a long time as well, because they never just understood the real China. But when Mao, when Mao started

overtly pursuing the Chinese policy

of real politics,

this happened under Mao, not dang, under Mao.

So Mao shook hands with

Richard Nixon, Mao, um, Mao, um, uh, allied himself with many

anti-Soviet, even anti-communist forces worldwide, frankly. China started opening up diplomatic relations with the world.

Under Mao.

A new wave of dissolution, like, really set in.

Really, really did set in, actually.

They kind of realized, what?

I thought this...

They became so cynical and embittered.

They were like, I thought this was like

Happy Fun Time, Barney Time.

What the hell is going on?

Like, they didn't...

They didn't realize...

I'll get into it, but...

It's like their whole bubble was burst, right?

And then finally, when Mao died,

and the gang of four was put on trial and finally when the gang of four was overthrown and the ultra radicalism was put to an end.

Mao wanted to put to an end, by the way. He was just very old. He didn't exactly have the ability to.

Zhang Xiaoping comes... old, okay? He didn't exactly have the ability to.

Zhang Xiaoping comes, and then the whole reforming opening up, you know, Norman Finglstein was a young Maoist. He wrote that when he found out about that, he could not get out of bed for two weeks. He said that. He said when I realized what happened in China and how I didn't understand what had been going on the whole time,

he didn't get out of bed for two weeks. He said the whole reason I care about Palestine

is because I want to defend the truth

because I realized

I was accepting lies.

And the lying question was Western Maoism.

That's literally his like reason

for being an anti-Zionist today funny enough that's what

he said in his blog at least so okay so um a lot of funny things happened where people just realized that these foreign communist states that they

project so many of their youthful, retarded infantile idealism upon don't live up to their expectations.

And then every single one of these generations that I talk about just join the right wing they just become neoconservatives or clintonite liberals because they're like look because they really consider communists as red fascists I'm just telling you the truth they're like these communists are just red fascists they I'm just telling you the truth. They're like, these communists are just red

fascists. They don't have principles. I made, in order to maintain some humanitarianism and some

moralism and some principles, I was become like a, a Clinton, you know, let's do humanitarian

interventions. Hey, I visited the Washington, D.C. when I went on Tim Poole.

I went in their museums and they're like, all the protest movements and what's going on in the Gambia and what's going on in Tibet and what's going on

in East Timor

and it's like

there's all these

hip cool

like humanitarian causes

in the world

for everyone to support

and it's all propped up

by the CIA

because these people

became CIA agents

that who do you think fills the CIA today? It's these embittered ex-left because these people became CIA agents.

Who do you think fills the CIA today?

It's these embittered ex-leftists from the new left period.

That's where their ideology comes from.

And ultimately it goes back to Leon Trotsky.

Trotskyism.

He was the OG one who made this very popular in the West,

and that's what it is. Okay, so to kind of conclude this spiel that I'm on,

clearly there's something about the modus operandi of Bolshevism or of Stalinism that Western leftists just never internalized or fully understood.

They projected a lot of their youthful liberal idealism upon it.

And when that proved to not be the case, they became cynical.

They just assumed that Stalinists

or

Bolshevists are

just kind of like greedy

or power hungry

or they only care about power,

they only care about

some worldly thing or something.

And it's like,

that was where their disillusion set in.

They felt like,

you know,

oh, these people only care about exploitation.

They don't,

but there is an independent logic at play in the logic of Bolshevism or the logic of Stalinism.

It's just that they don't...

They don't understand it. Okay?

They don't understand why they make the decisions that they do.

Why they make, you know, why it...

Because it's rooted in a completely different sensibility.

A sensibility which is just not compatible with Western leftism and the bleeding heart liberal sentimentalism that comes along with it. It's a sensibility rooted in a very brutal, a very keen understanding of the brutality of existence in the world and of struggle

and they are just not mature enough to understand

it at all

I mean China China's reform and opening up

what did you think okay China does trade

with the whole fucking world all the crimes and

hideousness and evil of the world china is not like totally um insulated from at all but

the key thing is that if China believes in a better future for humanity, to put it in terms that I guess liberals would find agreeable, it can only emerge as a tendency within this world.

It cannot come at the expense of the world that exists.

It's just not part.

That's not what it...

To be a revolutionary doesn't mean

to build your own world at the expense of this one.

To be a revolutionary means to comprehend the revolutionary tendencies that are proper objectively proper to the world itself so you're not engineering things to be in ways that you, you know, you're not engineering the world to

fulfill your moral aspirations. You are grounding your moral sensibilities in the material

realities of existence.

That's the Marxist view.

Many people find Marxism repugnant for that reason.

That's fine.

Stop calling yourself a Marxist.

Just embrace idealism.

Embrace anarchism.

Embrace Fabian liberal socialism benevolent enlightened liberalism

that's your true ideology it's not marxism marxism is a materialist outlook it doesn't have the same moral or aesthetical sens that you do. You're projecting

all of these moral and aesthetical

sensibilities on Marxism

because Republicans used to call

Obama a Marxist,

and you are a fan of Obama

who just wants Obama to be more extremely

Obama than he is.

That has nothing to do with Marxism, no matter how much Glenn Beck claimed it did.

It never had anything to do with Marxism.

But that's why you're identifying with Karl Marx.

That's why you're identifying with this tradition, because you confusing it with Obamacare taken to the extreme or something. It's just not.

I have a final thing before I bring Cyr and Girl up. Final thing to say

that I saw, which I found

these

piss ant

gatekeepers from 2021

when I came onto the scene

and they just did everything they could to like

aggressively gatekeep the

discourse away from normalizing or accepting me, which is fine. I don't care to be normalized. Fuck you,

literally, uh, you know, you are buried by history, bitch, you know, we up and you're down, bitch. Like, literally.

A few of these piss ants.

I saw some funny things that they typed.

They said,

Western leftists have done more for Palestine than China.

First of all, it's just objectively not true.

Remember those news stories about China?

Israel accused China of helping Hamas, okay?

China, China and Russia do help Iran and by extension the axis of resistance.

They do it.

They do.

They just don't do it out in the open because they can't afford a direct armed confrontation with the U.S.

So I don't want to hear that. It's just nonsense, okay?

But something funny I found was that they were comparing... I don't want to hear that. It's just nonsense. Okay. But

something funny I found was that they were comparing

the moral

character of China

versus themselves. So some white

Canadian was like

they were like attacking China

and someone was like, okay, but you live in canada canada is

very much response does way more trade with with israel and canada is much more responsible for

the genocide and then he goes well there's nothing I can do about that.

I'm just some guy in Canada.

I'm just some random guy in Canada versus China.

So I want everyone to appreciate this.

Take a moment to appreciate this.

He's comparing his own individual moral agency

with the attributed with the moral agency of the CPC, which has a hundred million people in it,

and a country of one billion. So he is pure and absolutely absolved of guilt because he's one person, but because China's a

billion people and is wrapped up with the world as a collective existence, he's more morally

pure than China is, despite the fact that he lives in Canada. Why? Because

he's an individual. And as an individual, he's in no way culpable

for his own collective existence, the state of Canada. He's in no way

culpable for the institutional realities of Canada's

ties to Israel. He's an individual. He's totally blameless. But China, which economically has relations with Israel is guilty because China is an abstraction and he's an individual.

Notice the logical conclusion of this is very simple. Anything that rises to the status of any collective abstraction at all is guilty the only way

to be morally correct as a leftist in the West is to just be an individual because the minute

you commit to any collective existence, any institution,

any organization, and

God forbid, you rise to the status

of being in state power,

you have to reckon with

the realities of the world and then

be responsible for those realities.

You now have a level of responsibility that forces you to basically justify or at least come to terms with the fact that you are embedded by the world and the systems of the world, the impurities of the world.

You don't have the same level of purity anymore as an individual actor.

This is why these people cannot form organizations or act competently as an organization.

Because when different individuals believe they have absolute moral truth and moral purity on their side,

and they come together, one three four five people when they

start to fight over this they can't just put aside their differences and be like okay but for the

sake of our collective unity we are going to i'm going to put my moral sensibilities to the side and, you know, go with the majority, for example, like in Democratic centralism.

Are you kidding? Suddenly, they're no longer morally pure anymore. Suddenly they have

to make concessions and they have

to compromise. They have to

sacrifice their principles and values.

Because every human

being has two things.

An opinion and an asshole, right?

There's no one in the world who has the exact same moral sensibility as you do, because

morality is also tied to taste and aesthetics.

No two people in the world will absolutely 100% agree on what's moral, what's right, or what's

wrong.

People think this is a nebulous point that I'm making, but it's actually quite deep.

Because it's just about how even to just be in a political party, you have to make sacrifices

with respect to any

pretence you have as an individual

to absolute moral purity

and absolute

moral righteousness. Now, the

DSA is the prime example of this.

Everyone who joins the DSA is making these sacrifices.

The autistic, mentally disabled, freak, a black redguard.

He's a Maoist, but he joins the DSA.

So he's showing the maturity of sacrificing his principles for the sake of something objective, right?

But they missed the whole point. The whole point of Marxism is that you need to sacrifice the moralistic pretentiousness.

This is why we get the absurdity of Black Redguard,

who's in the DSA, and endorses Zoron Mamdani.

All these pissants are literally gassing up Zoran,

are saying that if you support China,

you need to take the triangle out of your bio.

Buddy, you're in the fucking DSA. You're literally fucking gas. You're a fucking stand for

Zohan Ramdani. Shut the fuck up. You're a fucking Maoist in the fucking DSA gassing up

fucking Zoran.

And you're talking about China?

Not doing enough for Palestine?

What are you responsible for?

Okay, China's responsible for this

or that white. What about you? You're in the fucking DSA

and you're gassing up fucking

zoron mom dani in the fucking imperial core in the fucking country that is the most responsible for the

genocide in gaza in the world that's what's on you see the ds a is corruption they openly say we're going to

violate our moral principles jesus christ they're going to say we're going to violate our moral

principles uh for the sake of like we're going to say, we're going to violate our moral principles for the sake of, like, we're going to win.

This is why the DSA is so corrupt, because they don't have good principles, because their notion of morality is bourgeois and individualistic in the first place.

In the Chinese understanding or in the Bolshevik understanding, okay, morality is rooted in

something material.

They don't have corruption.

They're not corrupting their ideals or their morals by acting in the ways that they do

because they have a different understanding of agency of responsibility and the meaning of action and activity.

They are not disposed of the illusion.

That morality is divorced from the material.

They don't have this illusion of transcendentalism, okay, this Puritanism, where they say,

I decide what's moral from some, I don't know, deductive process in my head,

in my spirit, and in my soul. And if the world doesn't conform to that, the world be damned.

That's not how they see it, though. They don't have this bourgeois understanding of morality.

Moral sensibility

for them is something interrelated

with and tied

to the embeddedness

of material concrete existence.

And the root causes

of revolutionary sensibility for Marxists is not moral indignation at the world.

It's the articulation of the objective revolutionary forces emerging within

the Marx looked at the

proletariat and he made an appraisal

this is an objectively revolutionary

class. We live in an

objectively revolutionary era.

It has nothing to do

with wanting to conform the world to your moral sensibilities. It has nothing to do with wanting to conform the world to your moral sensibilities.

It has everything to do with conforming your sensibilities to the objective and material

reality of the world. That means if you're committed, if you can see there's something wrong with what's going on,

that Israel's committing a genocide in Gaza.

Okay, that's a morally horrific thing.

But you are actually culpable in the genocide if that's only if if you begin from there and you end from

there you have to begin by saying why is there this contradiction a contradiction which offends our humanity absolutely but you have to

begin there and then you have to say what material objective forces in the world in world what

does gaza represent for world history?

And the region, what does Gaza represent for the region?

It's clear to me, at least to me, Gaza represents in some sense materially humanity.

I agree fully. It's the existential reality of mankind today, faced with a concrete system, a genocidal system that is at odds with humanity, that wants to exterminate humanity itself, oppress, control, and destroy human beings.

But without military realism, you're not articul, You're taking morality in a vacuum. You see, you cannot

understand the full breadth of oppression unless you appreciate the very thing being oppressed.

And in the case of Palestine, the thing being oppressed is something mighty.

It's a mighty power of the Arab and Islamic peoples in that region.

There's something mighty about them,

about their potential,

about their civilization,

about their values,

about what they could be.

That's what's being oppressed.

And if you articulate that on materialist terms,

you don't believe that Zionism or Israel will ultimately prevail by history.

You can only be indignant toward oppression.

Put it this way.

Can a sheep be oppressed?

No.

A sheep cannot be oppressed.

Because for a sheep, following the shepherd is its instinct.

There's nothing about a sheep that's oppressed.

Only a lion can be oppressed.

So the people of Gaza being oppressed are lions.

So the materialist thing to do is to understand that better.

Understand what forces in the region are best disposed. That requires articulating a new

revolutionary outlook and no one can do that except the people in the region themselves and i am a hundred percent certain maybe who can be a hundred percent certain i am i find it likely that if that revolutionary outlook is articulated in the region, Russia and China would be happy to support them. Happy to. But unfortunately, the grim and disgusting, and I find it disgusting, by the way, but it's

just the truth. The disgusting

reality

is that

the region today, I'm just putting this on because my

fucking eyes hurt.

The reality is that there's a, the Arab intelligentsia is profoundly complacent and is not interested in revolutionary ideas as far as I can see.

And this is a region that is organically unified by world history, but is divided by modern

history very recently, artificially.

And it's so important for the Arab and Muslim world because

there's no difference between Palestine and themselves

it's the same people it's the same

civilization

and yet

so this is not about one nation being oppressed.

This is about an entire, this is about an entire region turning the blind eye to one of its own being exterminated.

And that's what fills me with disgust frankly um i don't know what i can say except

i regard marxism and i regard communism and Marxism Leninism as the truest fulfillment of human existence.

I don't know what to tell people who despair about Palestine, anything except.

Well, I have revolutionary optimism.

And if you don't have that, I guess this is the world you want.

This is what you signed up for.

You're too arrogant to recognize the forces of world

history at play, the laws of history. So I don't know what to tell you, you know, you get what

you fucking pay for. This is the world you want. This is what you want, ultimately. This is what

you're responsible for.

I'm not going to be like Scott Ritter and lie and say that Iran is just about to wipe out

Israel. It's not. There needs to be something new. There needs to be a new revolution in the Middle East.

Until that happens, there's not going to be hope. Because China and Russia will not be able to do a fucking thing without the cooperation of the people that actually fucking live there.

That's all I can say.

I'll bring up Syrian girl. I added I added Hi, Haas, how are you?

Hey, what's up?

Good.

Thank you for bringing me up.

Big respect to you. And, and you know i hope that i haven't antagonized

you in any way with my i mean i made a thread about this whole issue it took me two days to chime

yeah um i don't know if you saw it at all.

I did.

And to just briefly tell you, you know, look, here's here, okay, because I feel like a lot of people had wrong expectations in the first place.

Russia and China are not politically revolutionary powers.

They're not.

They're not politically revolutionary.

They're not interested in exporting political revolution, and they're not interested in any

political revolution in the world, or any any political revolution in the world or any politically

revolutionary forces in the world.

I mean, there was stuff in West Africa that Russia supported, sure, but they're not like going

to create it, you know?

They are at odds

with the U.S.

Empire not on

moral grounds

Russia and China

didn't say

you know

we think the U.S. is evil

so we're rebelling

against the U.S.

These are both

very pragmatic countries that are guided by the necessities of maintaining

and in their minds, you know, fulfilling the well-being of their people and maintaining

their sovereignty, their independence, and their ability to develop

as they see fit

in a way that fulfills the needs

of their people.

That's it.

They're not motivated

by going on a crusade

against the evils of the world

and never were.

But even if their motive,

if I may, like,

even if their motive was simply to

help themselves,

essentially, like,

isolationism,

promoting the prosperity of their own people

even if that is the

agenda

they're failing

and that's my argument because

I don't I'm not I think maybe

I'm not the person you want to debate

because I'm not a leftist I'm not the person you want to debate because I'm not a leftist.

I'm not a

Western Trotskyist. I have this

dame for them. And the Trotskyists

they won't even expect

China to do anything. Because

according to the Trotskyists, China's a failed

revolution and it's not real communism and it's the

you know the true Scotsman, the no true Scotsman dilemma.

So they would never say

like why isn't China helping Palestine

rather they would say

China

needs to be overthrown

in a Soros Revolution. Right. I just have one question

for you. We don't expect much else from them.

How could China help

Palestine in your view? Oh,

well, I can get

to that in a moment but rather

I want to outline my position before

I get into the nitty-grity

and I apologize this is just

like formulating now in my mind so I haven't

like written anything down or

you know it's just an it's just it's just a thought okay

and it's bear with me if you may I think that I'm coming at you as a supporter of the resistance

axis but not necessarily a resist card because what what I saw in the resistance axis but not necessarily

a resist tard because what I saw

in the resistards as they are

fondly called on X but nowhere

else is

sorry you're cutting off

one of the first few people that came.

Oh, okay. Sorry. I'll fix it. Just give me one moment.

To a different Wi-Fi?

No problem.

Is that better now?

Yep.

Okay, cool.

So, basically, I am, just a one.

Okay, so the Wi-Fi is good now

yep okay

so

if you recall the reason why

they were referred to as resistors

I guess the way it started is I was looking at

Samira's timeline and she was saying, I am on the side of the tankies versus the resistards, essentially. And I'm going to lean to the side of the resistards in this because even though I wouldn't refer to myself as one, as a supporter of the resistance, I recognized where the resistance axis was failing and I tried to express that and I was met with a lot of denial and rage.

Yeah.

And likewise, I feel that the tankies are hiding their failures with similar denials of reality and rage.

And therefore, I don't think,

I wish Samira would come in here,

but I don't think Samira's critique is legitimate

because all of these actions and strategic failures

are constantly

sold to us as, well, Russia and China are just acting

within their own interests. You know, you can't expect them to

sacrifice themselves. This is pragmatism.

This is real politic.

When in reality, they are losing in spheres of influence, not just in West Asia, but in Africa, in the Caucasus, in South America, they're increasingly getting isolated.

The machinations against them are building.

The Turkestan Islamic Party is now inside the Syrian MOD.

I mean, you don't have to convince me.

I would say that's fair.

Sorry, what's that?

You don't have to go.

I would say it's fair that we're on the precipice of a soft power revolution in the world where I do worry about Russia and China.

I do worry about them being able to, you know,

compel the hearts and minds of the people of the world.

And so, I mean, we don't have to debate about that because I agree with that.

But I'll let you continue, but I have my own, you know, I guess response to that.

Oh, that's really good.

I'm glad, like, we can share ideas and thoughts on this because I think a lot of the frustration is...

I'm just going to put it this way

all right

I mean if you don't want to talk

directly about the UN thing

and you think this is more important

I'm willing to just kind of focus on this

because I think this is important as well

I think the UN thing is part of it but it's really more of a bigger picture for me.

Let me talk about that after. So here's my view. Okay. So I'll just tell you already know my biases. Okay, I'm a communist. I'm a Marxist Leninist. I'm from that tradition. And I have that revolutionary outlook. But why I think it's a little relevant as far as what I'm going to say. And I'll keep it open-minded even. I won't even necessarily invoke it. So I belong to a new generation. I right? I'm not going to say I'm that young.

I'm 29, but I'm definitely younger than the people who are in power in Russia and China.

Of course, like it's a given, right? And so I have a – I clearly have a perspective where I can see that, you know, on the ideological front and in the sphere of consciousness, there does need to be a big, like, big revolutionary change at that level, right? For sure. But my objection to this line of attack,

I guess if it's an attack, is that I see the logic of state power of both Russia and China as a

machine, like an infrastructure,

if you will, right?

I don't have these illusions

necessarily about like some grand

revolutionary ideology guiding

Russia and China.

But what I do have a deep appreciation

of in which the Chinese, and let me know if you can't hear me anymore,

Sewell, you can still hear me, right?

I can still hear you.

Yeah, okay, okay.

Yeah, you're good, you're good.

See, what, I don't have the illusion that the Chinese state or the Russian state are guided by some grand

revolutionary ideology that's capable of winning the spirits of the world.

But what I can appreciate about them, especially China, and what China also is very,

by the way, China is very self-aware about this fact.

They are guided by an objective principle.

It's not just self-interest.

They're guided by the objective principle of fulfilling their obligations and commitments with respect to what they have actually built as a as a like a like a like a civilization

state like a functioning machine that is capable of tending to the needs of their population

that's capable of preserving their sovereignty and independence at least within their own

borders and and they're operating by a logic of,

of, you know, common existence.

Then, like, that's not a small feat.

That's a really hard thing to build.

That's not a small feat at all.

That's in a just such an indispensable infrastructure.

And just being able to lead that like jizhen ping does or i'm not going to compare them because jizn ping is clearly a much more

powerful figure but even in the case of putin and russia just the ability and the task necessary to lead

that, just to make sure

everything is kept together, just to

make sure it works, just to make sure

there's stability, just to make sure that

they're managing these massive

bureaucracies, and they're managing these massive bureaucracies and

they're able to oversee this development

and deliver to their population.

That is by itself,

like that is comparable to

a revolutionary struggle

in terms of how difficult it is.

It's extremely difficult.

It's not, that's why it doesn't,

there doesn't need to be like this grand ideology

or grand ideal guiding them.

Just doing what is necessary to maintain what they have

forces them to

be like progressive historically. It forces

them A, to advance

their productive forces through

technology, and then B, to preserve their

independence versus the U.S., which is still, because they have origins in their

revolutions throughout history that still bother the, you know, the Anglo-Saxon Empire,

the Zionist Anglo-Saxon Empire, they want those back, they still consider

it unfinished business.

They're getting in the way of this kind of global vision and global plan of the Unipole

to totally enslave and dominate the world.

But they're not doing it out of ideology.

They're doing it because they all have

attained and fulfilled

a political and historical

logic that they're just being

faithful to and true to, you know?

But maybe that's why they're losing

because they do like ideological

background.

The unipolar world

does have ideology, right?

I don't, this is what I'm going to say

because I don't think this is a stupid point.

But I would

stress, in a way, yes. Like, sure, in a way, yes.

Like, sure, in a way.

If Russia, China,

and Iran, and all the other,

I believe this firmly.

If they don't seize

upon a new revolutionary

moment and a new

notion of world revolution, which

that's why I always use the word world revolution.

If they don't do that,

whatever form that takes, I

personally think it's going to be a new

a new like

a new like form of, like, a new,

like form of Marxism,

Leninism,

just like Mao,

you know,

revolutionized Marxism,

there has to be another thing like that,

right?

That's,

that's my personal view.

But if there has to be something

to the equivalent of that,

that's going to be able to...

Hold on. Let me finish, though. Let me finish.

Sure, go ahead. There needs to be that, and I agree with you there.

But if it doesn't internalize the mature achievements and the logic of an impersonal, like, regime machine, if it doesn't, if it doesn't affirm the need historically for China and Russia to consolidate, if it doesn't accept the necessity of real politics and pragmatism and the brutal cold realism of running and managing a state, it will never, that needs to be the foundation.

It needs to take that for granted.

And then on top of that,

like taking that for granted

and accepting that fact,

that's where the moral,

the spiritual dimension, and so on and so on, there does need to be a revolution there because we do need to existentially reconcile ourselves with the fact of this new type of civilization state and new type of political logic China and Russia represent.

We haven't translated that into ideological terms yet, and that's a big problem for them, and I agree.

But we cannot begin from the perspective of this, like, Lib-Tartism, this Western universalism, where we just want to go on a global crusade to conform the world to our ideals.

Because then we're just doing things that they already tried and they matured from.

So it's no wonder China will roll its eyes at Western

leftists and Western Maoists. Because China will say, listen, we went through that experience.

We had this naivity a hundred years ago, and we had to learn about the reality of the world.

Russia will say the same fucking thing.

So we have to accept that they won that argument to some extent.

But now that we accept that they've won the argument, on that basis, we need to translate

what they've achieved so far into a new kind of, yeah, I agree, universal, like, revolutionary outlook that will be the guiding principle of a new movement in the Middle East and throughout all the regions of the world to really challenge U.S. unipolar dictatorship. I fully believe that's necessary. But I don't think it's possible when we begin our first step is denouncing what works so far.

Like the first step should not be shitting on China and Russia because they don't know.

It's an older generation i don't expect

china to come up with this outlook i don't expect russia to come out with this outlook i'm trying

to come up with this kind of outlook like that's what my whole movement is about right and by the

way i'll say one last thing, I'll let you talk.

When I went to China, you know, I met, you know, older Chinese people who, you know,

they're, they, you know, look, and one gave me a tour of where mao first studied marxism

and look their attitude is like i'll sum it up this way they went through their own

experience with with mao's revolution and the cultural revolution and everything.

They reached its limit. They did. And you can't blame them for that. They did reach its limit.

They still honor their history and they still honor what they know so far, but they don't

know everything, and they don't claim to know

everything. They don't claim to have the

solution to all the world's problems. They

don't claim to have this universal

revolutionary ideology

capable of

empowering and liberating the entire planet.

All they have and all they know is what they've gone through and what they've experienced.

So it was kind of really interesting and nice because he took me into this old university building where Mao studied Marxism and he's like,

this is what we have.

This is what we have so far.

If you can, if you can, he's saying learn from this, you know, whatever you do, because, you know, they know who I am.

People in China know who I am that I know,

you know, they know I'm about this new revolutionary outlook. They're not against me. They're

not against this. They're not against something new. But what they will say is, study from our past,

though, so that you don't

repeat what we've already gone

through, and you can make an advance.

Because they're very humble.

This is what they've done so far.

You know, Lukashenko

in Belarus said something similar. He said,

Marxism, Leninism is just what we have so far. It works. He's like, nothing has been produced, which works better than this. These people in Russia and China are not arrogant. They're not dismissive of the possibility of like a new world revolution.

But what the, with the options that are on the table right now are very easy for them to dismiss.

It's easy for them to dismiss Western leftist retarded bullshit that's just not rooted in the world.

It's easy for them to dismiss stupid LARP ideologies, and it's very easy for them to dismiss, you know, yeah, resist artism, which did, and I'll define resist artism.

I don't know what Samira said.

I'll define it myself.

It was the way in which people were just... And I was guilty of it.

I was like, I'll fully confess that.

Everyone was exaggerating.

Like, how much the resistance stood a chance.

It was a massive, massive exaggerations on exaggerations.

And one of the reasons I think, if any fingers have to be pointed,

it should be pointed at Iran, in my view.

Because the Middle East region is Iran's turf.

It's not China's turf. It's not Russia's turf.

If we're going by a theory of multipolarity.

And Iran, unlike China and Russia, had prior binding commitments with Hezbollah and with especially Hezbollah, but Hamas too, but especially but especially hasbollah they had prior binding commitments same with with with Houthis but especially hasbalah right

Iran more than anyone Iran wanted to export its Islamic revolution.

Russia and China never made this bold

claim they're going to export the revolution.

Iran had a revolution in 79

and they embarked upon a path

of exporting their revolution and

showing the solidarity with Palestine

and the resistance in Lebanon.

So that's what their whole soft power came from that.

Iran said neither east nor west.

We're not going to be like the Soviet Union materialists.

We're not going to be like China.

We're going to be so high and mighty.

And it was great for a while.

But what happened recently?

You know, well, I don't know what to call it.

Something happened in Iran when Reisi died that really did just change everything.

And the reformists, the pro-American and, you know,

pro-Western reformists took power in Iran,

and suddenly everything changed.

And Syria fell, okay,

if you look into what happened in syria the russian military was trying to standardize

the syrian army after so at solomani was doing a great job but solomani was killed so after he was

killed the russian army was trying to modernize the Syrian military.

Who was getting in their way?

I'll let you take a wild guess who was getting in their way.

Yeah, don't go with that narrative.

I mean, Russia and Iran both signed the Astana Agreement in 2020.

They're the ones that

Decided not to go and finish off Idla

I agree but who was maintaining? So whatever it is

about modernisation you must understand also

That Russia has ties to Israel

So letting them into all of the

Military installations and gets full control

isn't exactly the wisest

decision either. Even if it's true that Russia is

just best friends with Israel and it doesn't

care about it. I didn't say best friends.

Or whatever. I care.

No, I mean, let's not build straw men, right?

Like, I'm a supporter of Russia.

I'm just saying we were in Russia together at the same time.

I'm a supporter of China.

For the devil's advocate.

I've been to China multiple times.

For the devil's advocate.

Syria was Iran's responsibility to secure and make sure it didn't fucking go to shit

more than any other state. Yes and Russia's

yes. No, mainly Iran because

Russia's all the way where

Russia doesn't, this is not Russia's

turf. Russia's not an Islamic country.

It's not a Western country. Syria's

Syria's border is

not that far from Russia either.

Like, speaking of kilometers

between Tehran and Damascus

and Tehran. Russia cared because it had

a base there from Soviet times.

But Iran...

Yeah, it's along the lines.

Iran is that is everybody's responsibility.

The access of resistance.

Syria was strategically necessary,

far more for Iran and for the resistance

than it was for Russia.

I agree. I'm not debating you on that.

I'm just saying, like,

it's not one or the other. So it was upon Iran, most of all, to be strategically wise and secure Syria. Root out the corruption, root out all the bullshit that's causing weakness and grievances, make sure the military is reformed into something competent and good.

Soleimani was making progress. Like, I'll give you that. But after Soleimani, you know, what happened?

Okay. I'm not even going to go into it, but...

No, I completely agree with you. And we were all gaslit. We were all gaslit in this notion that we shouldn't question the leadership and that they have a master plan and it's 5D chess and they know what's best, et cetera, et cetera.

But the truth is that none of that is true.

Like, we should question the leadership.

They didn't have a plan.

And we are smart enough to see things as they are.

And I say the same thing now about Russia and China.

Like to expect uncritical support

is just not wise

because you're going to end up the way that Iran ended up.

Russia and Iraq.

I think in a sense, this post in the nest,

you know, it shows an example

of a leftist

from the West criticizing China for example

but

you know as you say like they're shitting on China

but if you think about it like

some criticism

might be good in the long run because uncritical support is what led

to the resistance axis pulling down it wasn't about support or lack thereof it was about

overestimating how much they had their shit together, frankly.

Now, some may say

I don't think that they had the opportunity

to, that I think

denies the fact that they had

the opportunity to do much more

than they could, than they did,

that they ended up doing.

Like there was a lot more

on the escalation ladder that

they failed to do and

it ended up not being able to do.

I'll play the devil's advocate because look

you know I'm

you think I think it's

why do I even

still have the Russian flag

in my name

because I made it

on my honor

I made the commitment

I'm gonna keep it there

until the SMO is over

okay

well it's been

nearly four years now

okay so you think

I think it looks good

that they've been doing this for four years.

But then I think about it and I was in Donetsk and I think about it and it's like, okay, but you know,

what can Russia do to climb the ladder of escalation without endangering the lives of, for example,

one million people in Donetsk City.

Because I was there in Donetsk City while it was getting shelled.

And I was like, this is what people have been living through.

Imagine if this whole fucking city just gets, like, bombed and wiped out.

It's like Russia can climb the ladder of escalation in ukraine but it cannot do so without war with you nato and war with europe and i think about that a lot i i don't know maybe i'm wrong but it's like i think about that a lot i think there that a lot. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, but it's like I think about that a lot.

I think there's a lot of incompetency.

I think they're already at war.

Like, in any way, this is the thing that it's kind of the same narrative that the Iranians would say, like, we can't do this without risking, like, this and this.

And, or, you know, we can't launch these big, big bombs.

Because we, then, then Israel will do X and Y and Z.

And it's like, okay, then you have already, you have already lost the game theory.

I agree. I agree. You've already lost the game theory. I agree.

You've already lost the intimidation.

It's true with Iran.

It's true only with Iran because of the commitment's obligations and rhetoric they had been making for decades.

This was their whole thing since the Islamic Revolution.

So I think it's fair

to hold her on to that standard.

But Russia, which is just

Russia is not the Soviet Union.

Putin is essentially...

Yeah, but Russia also made

commitments to Syria.

Russia... Russia... Russia... I think Russia... Russia... Russia made to Syria. Russia.

Russia. We can hold it to a standard.

Russia made...

You know, we can hold them to standards.

And not only that, we can expect

that they would at least do things

that would be in their own interests.

And I'm not just talking about Russia.

I'm talking about China.

And I don't feel that they necessarily

do. Look, Russia

in Ukraine,

I don't know, but

then I would put the burden on

this question. What can Russia do, for example,

in Ukraine? And it's an open question.

Like, I'm open-minded.

Can I answer you?

Yeah.

Can I answer you?

And I'm not going to talk about Ukraine.

I want to talk about what can Russia and China do in general, because this is a critique of the

multipolar world.

Sure.

And I think that, you know, the problem is even without ideology, we can argue that

the definition of the multipolar world is that we all have different ideologies, but we're all

sort of in competition with the ruling hegemon

or the unipolar world, right?

We're trying to resist the Borg

and remain individuals.

So not necessarily

that we will all have the same ideology, but we

should at least all share

one goal, which is survival, right?

And survival is going to require cooperation.

And I don't feel that the multipolar world cooperates successfully or even if you did at it in a smaller way

who's to blame though

yeah sorry

I agree with that but who's to blame

well look

I look at the most powerful person

as the leader

and therefore they hold most of the thing

so for example

lack in the resistance access case,

you looked at Iran.

The reason why I'm picking on Iran is because I feel like,

I feel like,

I'm picking on Iran a lot because Russia and China,

I feel like are cooperating pretty well,

especially because, remember,

these were former enemies. Armenia doesn't think so.

Like, Armenia felt that

Russia hasn't

you know, completed

their side of the bargain of the

security agreement, and now they're in the US

here. But Armenia elected an explicitly anti-Russian figure Pashinian or whatever.

And who's to blame for that?

I'm not sure, you tell me.

Well, exactly.

Like, you know, hearts and minds minds are is an important thing right like

the

I think unfortunately we have to take responsibility

Russia and China

for our failures right

I agree I agree

I take responsibility because

Syria failed I want us

I want us to separate two things we already on the same page that there needs to be this new revolutionary outlook, that soft power, for Russia, for China, for Iran, to counteract U.S. Unipoll or his enemy. Because right now U.S. Unipole is winning the hearts and minds thing.

So I agree. I already agree with you on that.

And it's winning the physical war also.

So, but that's what we need to talk about.

Russia and China are cooperating and integrating pretty well.

But tell me why half or even the most prevailing

dominant voices of the politicians

in Iran are saying,

we're becoming too dependent on China,

we have to be wary of Russia,

we should still be neither

east nor west. Nobody's saying that

but Iran. Right? You know what? I think it's because

it's about quid pro quo. You know, at the end of the day, if Iran is not receiving the weapons,

if Iran is not receiving the weapons that it purchases from Russia, for example, then it feels less inclined

to side with it explicitly. Do you know what I mean? And if you look at it, for example,

Iran has been hesitant to integrate with Russia and China before the purchase of the SU-35s.

Russia probably has legitimate reasons for not wanting to trust Iran because, and maybe, but I don't see that these reasons have to do with Israel?

No, I don't think so, no, because I think that it's true that after 1979, there was heavy CIA infiltration of Iran, which is still here, and these are pro-Western reformists, who are not just a marginal force.

They own Iran's economy, and they're extremely powerful within Iran.

But there's an elephant in the room, right? I really genuinely believe that the Zionist influence inside Russia is detrimental to Russia's winning.

I think that they are a malign influence that not only negatively affects the West Asia,

but affects Russia's ability to actually resist the unipolar world.

And I would like to give an example, for example,

like the anti-ship missiles that

were, there was a consideration

that Russia was going to send it to the Houthis,

but they, and that would have been like a catastrophe

for the United States, but Russia decided not to.

And I would say that.

The anti-ship missiles to the Uphis?

Yes.

Yeah, you know what?

You know what?

I'll go ahead and say that.

Putin said that, you know, Russia is going to start arming america's enemies like america was arming uh ukraine and it

doesn't seem like they've been doing that very aggressively so there you go like they agree you know

if you read the round papers they're writing about how we're going to over-extend Russia

and this sphere and not sphere.

And they successfully did so with Ukraine

and Syria. But we don't,

we have no boldness

in our strategy.

I agree. There's a game of chicken

going on. There's a master

slave dialectic and our side

is blinking.

The reason our side is blinking

is because in order to surmount

the hege them on, see this is a game

of leverage and incentive.

When there's a hegemon, the pressure to acquiesce is just much higher than the willpower to break.

That's why I have the whole theory of world revolution.

That's what it is.

There needs to be a world revolution.

It has, that's what it's going to take. it's going to take a world revolution to topple the

unipole and this is i'm not a bricks reformist i don't think there's we're going to

there's the new world order is going to be reformed into existence their economic deals

there needs to be a world geopolitical revolution, political

revolution, and

absolutely has

to be cut across politics.

I have no illusions about that.

There's a vague rejection. There's a vague rejection.

There's a vague rejection

of the Western

liberalism, right?

Like there's this idea of

what we should oppose, but not what we

are. So, working on an

ideology is something that's maybe far into the future.

But you said something earlier,

you said like Russia and China

are working together.

But if you look at it,

the Russians are in,

like,

we're in conflict inside Ukraine,

but, you know

the Chinese aren't like starting a war in Taiwan

the US isn't facing a war on multiple fronts

likewise I just want to say this quickly

likewise in would you know

on a smaller scale like the resistance

axis a lot

of the time they were fighting Israel

one by one. Like Lebanon would ceasefire

then Gaza would start. Gaza would ceasefire

than Lebanon would start.

Look, I think

the Iraqis suddenly paused.

And it became like

a challenge of who is going to survive.

I'll tell you, let me finish quickly.

Let me just finish this thought.

Let me just finish this thought.

Let me finish this thought.

It became, instead of like, let's join forces to, to, to shock this enemy into submission.

It became a game of like, who's going to survive longer?

So I think that with China and Russia, there's something in the back of some strategist's minds

of like, at least I'm going to, at least I'm going to survive longer than the guy next to me.

You know what I mean?

I...

And that's a problem.

I think that is not just China and Russia, especially Iran, because that's what we saw.

They were in the hot seat.

But look, we don't ultimately know what's going on in the negotiations between the three.

So I can just say this, okay?

But can China do anything without backing from Russia and China?

Can Iran, sorry, do anything without backing from Russia and China? Can Hezbollah do anything without backing from Iran? That's the thing that I don't, that's the big unknown. Because Iran, remember they had Rouhani, okay? Under Rouhani, he's shit all over China and Russia. He gave them the finger and he pursued the nuclearization, the JCPOA, okay? And so that's what Iran wanted to do. If Iran, I don't think Iran has the willpower to say we're going east because their whole thing is neither east nor west

they want to play both sides right

they don't want to say if Russia and China

were stronger and they made

better commitments

that were like you know

had real world results I think

that that's a trust building exercise you know um it's about

building trust look um both china and i just look towards the stronger power for more

i'll just say this in a way that's fair to everyone both china russia, and Iran have started to become more geopolitically

aware during the same time, probably at the same pace. Iran has always been kind of aggressive

or whatever, but it's like not really like anything that translated into anything overt, right?

So all three of them were, like, getting into this new era together, and maybe it's not fair to

blame any of the three, but I will say to just be clear, because I think there's a misunderstanding here, I don't expect Russia, China, or Iran, for that matter, I don't expect them to lead a world revolution. I don't expect them. They are ruled by a different generation with a different consciousness, which I don't think is necessarily fully adapted to our era. here's what I will say what I will insist upon

and the hill that I'll die on is that a new revolutionary consciousness and a new revolutionary

outlook of the new generation has to internalize their achievements,

has to internalize

and appreciate and learn from

what has worked so far

to take it to the next step,

which people haven't done.

That's all, that's the, the only hill I die on is that the Chinese, the CPC's dictatorship should be preserved.

The hill I'll die on is that Iran's revolutionary

uh... it is some form the Islamic Republic the IRC that revolutionary infrastructure

shouldn't be annihilated and abandoned

it should be preserved

and built upon.

Same thing with Russia.

I agree with you on.

Hold on.

Russia's infrastructure

of state power,

which still comes from the Soviet Union,

shouldn't just be abandoned

and neglected and dismissed. It should be observed studied and appreciated

so something can be built built on top of that foundation so my whole thing is that we need to

study and observe and appreciate these regimes and what they've been able to achieve

and accomplish so far and build upon that foundation something compatible, not only compatible

that's willing to take them to new heights, but what I reject is the nihilism that says,

fuck China,

fuck Russia,

fuck Iran,

we're just going to build something new from scratch

because I'm morally superior and I know what I'm doing.

That's what Western leftists are doing.

That's what I absolutely reject

and have no patience for whatsoever. Yeah. Western leftists are doing. That's what I absolutely reject and

have no patience for whatsoever.

I agree with you

or not. I mean, obviously

like, I

see like, for example, Samira

has completely rejects

anything to do with the resistance

axis and Iran and he says they're no longer relevant. I'm critiquing Iran. I don't agree

with that sort of mentality. And likewise with the Western liberals when it comes to Russia and China.

Look, I'm critiquing Iran and making a lot of, you know, blaming Iran for a lot of things.

But at the end of the day, you think I want to see the Islamic Republic fall?

No, part of my anger is that I think they are laying the conditions for it to fall.

I want them to prove me wrong, you know.

I feel the exact same way about Russia and Trump.

I, as a Marxist, I very much humbled myself to Imam Khomeini in the 79 revolution.

I think that was a very profound thing.

I think that's something that

was a very powerful moment in human history.

That should be worked on to be brought into a new era,

to be improved upon, to be adapted.

But at the same time, you know, look, the way I see it is that it's not that Russia, China,

and Iran necessarily are corrupt.

It's not that they're corrupt and they've sold anyone out and they betrayed anyone.

It's that there's a vacuum in terms of guidance and leadership that just isn't there.

There's something missing. And I don't blame them for not having attained this, but there is

something missing.

And I take it upon myself, okay?

I directly assume responsibility

for sizing up to the new

era and taking on the

burden of really developing

some new spiritual taking on the burden of really developing some

new

spiritual, moral,

ideological, whatever you want to call

I don't like that word.

Understanding of world history

that will ignite a

fire for a new generation in the world to meet the demands of the era, you know, to size up to the, to the monumental challenges facing them. I take that burden and responsibility upon myself. I don't blame Russia and China or Iran for anything. I myself at least would just hope that people around the world have an open mind to what I'm trying to do or whatever or the people that I respect are trying to do. But I think there needs to be and and you know, what I'm doing is from America itself in America.

And I also think that's not a coincidence because this is the center of everything.

This is the belly of the beast.

I, you know, look, Searinger, girl, if you understand what I think about it

it's like

I think that

you know

some movement

I think a big

there's two

and this is another

thing I want to

talk about today

because it's an

important piece of news

which everyone seems

to be ignoring.

There's two dimensions of the change in world history that's going to happen.

One of them is a world revolution, but the other one, which it depends upon, and which is a a direct compliment to it and which is going to mirror it, you know, indirectly, is the coming U.S. Civil War.

Why is everyone ignoring that?

The Democrats just released a video, by the way.

I wanted to cover this.

I don't know if you saw this, where they told members of the U.S. military to stand down if there's an unlawful order.

So remember how I kept talking about the Civil War is going to start because there's going to be a conflict over jurisdiction and command over the

armed forces, which already happened in California with the National Guard. But now it's just

happening at the federal national level directly. And then Trump retweeted like some

tweet on truth social or whatever where someone was like, they should hang those congressmen who said that.

It's like extreme escalation of violent rhetoric.

And now,

like a direct conflict

over jurisdiction and control of the armed forces.

You know,

open calls for breaking ranks and breaking command.

So, look, the U.S., I'm, by this is just building on things I've been talking about for years

because there's so many other cases where this is foreshadowing.

But a civil war is coming to the U.S.

This is the big irony of everything we're talking about, Syrian Girl.

We're talking about this despair in the Middle East.

We're talking about how nobody's able to take on America.

But what a lot of people ignore is that America itself is going through a civil war.

It's destined for an extreme, extreme future, you know, internally, of instability and chaos.

And I think that that is absolutely part of, so to speak, part of the prophecy, so to speak, of how the new world is going to be built. Because America, the thing that Russia, China, and Iran all have in common is that they have not yet completed America's existence in the world. China still relies on the dollar and funds the U.S. military indirectly.

As much as China has

created a more advanced system that's outmoded

America in almost every respect,

there is something

about America that still

hasn't... Like America's

like a senile old man that hasn't died yet right and there's this

profound respect he's got an injection of the blood transfusion from some young there's a profound

respect for the power of america that the whole world still has.

And it's just a fact.

The whole world still worships America in some sense.

And it's just a fact.

Now, China's the closest to breaking out of this this spell so to speak

but even in China the illusion of America has not

fully been shattered you know so let's be realistic

about where we are um

and uh so yeah we're I mean

you have two dimensions

there's the U.S. Civil War and then there's this

this missing world revolution

against the current prevailing

geopolitical world order

but you know I actually I want to talk about the UN thing because I actually have the view

that in this case, I'll just pose the question to you instead of just stating my view.

Let's say Russia and China veto this.

What's step two?

In my opinion, when a country vetoes,

it means that it's going to put its military weight behind that decision.

So I understand where you're coming from there.

So if they're not prepared to put

their military weight

behind the decision

and they're not

going to veto.

And by the way,

so their

extension is

essentially a

protest without

threat.

But it would

be because it

would create a

binding obligation

on them

to take

responsibility

for the continuation of the war in Gaza,

or the U.S. would just do it anyway without the U.N.'s consensus, which they could, or see, you know,

they cause a diplomatic crisis with all the Arab and Islamic countries and effectively what little favor they do have with them, they just ceded all to America.

You know, Russia and China kind of fight a little kind of soft power or even some cases hard power battle with the U.S. over these puppet regimes

who are still ultimately U.S. puppets and U.S. dogs. But, you know, all Russia and China would be

doing is just going again. And I also, another thing about the UN,

the Palestinian Authority is the only representative of the Palestinians that exists at the UN.

Now, I find that bullshit, okay?

Obviously, I don't see them as a legitimate representative.

But why even care about the UN

if you're not going to play that game?

Are Russia and China

are going to just be like, let's just

how can they

vote in the UN for the Palestinian Authority

to no longer be the representative? They can't.

You know, that's... To be honest, that's already the name of the representative. They can't. To be honest,

it's already the name of the game.

The lack of veto on Libya was far worse, in my view.

Absolutely it was.

And I'll tell you why.

Because had Russia and China vetoed the intervention in Libya,

that would not have created any obligation on them

to, for example, come up with an alternative.

There doesn't need to be a fucking alternative.

Just fuck off and leave.

But in the case of this twisted,

fucked up Gaza plan,

the way it's been structured is that all regional states, the entire Arab and Islamic world, and a huge portion of the world itself, is accepting this as the terms and conditions of the ceasefire. So there's already a genocide going on in Gaza.

This is the terms and conditions of the ceasefire

that all the established powers accept.

And if Russia and China,

who do want a ceasefire

and who do want an end to hostilities,

veto the plan,

they'd have to come up with an alternative one.

So, yeah,

the Libya thing is kind of like inexcusable.

I agree.

Totally inexcusable.

But that was because there should have been no vote, there should be no plan for removing Gaddafi at all because what right does NATO have to remove him in the first place, right? There's the only problem there was NATO itself. there was no other problem so that was the difference

that in this case there is a problem there's a genocide in gaza there's daily bombings of gaza

against palestine it's causing massive instability for these arab puppet regimes and this is their solution to it.

So go ahead.

I think one of the important things I wanted to say and that you mentioned is that the Arab states are all behind this

and, you know, the Russians

don't want to go against, or the Chinese

don't want to go against them.

But I also wanted to mention the fact

that, yeah, you're right, like those Arab states,

the Gulf Arab states are

deeply now within the

US sphere. A lot of them have U.S. military

bases. Even Algeria. Egypt.

Yeah. Yeah.

But the problem I have with this is

like there is a lot to blame

on the Arabs for this.

And the Arab people themselves

because the revolutionary spirit

in them is completely dead as I

completely agree with you that not even

a genocide could revive

on their doorstep

against people that speak their own

language. So if a genocide isn't going to revive the

revolutionary spirit, then like, I think it's in the, like, I don't think anything else will.

I don't see how anything else will. But I think that in a way, there's also something else to blame

which is the fact that there's no alternative

to the West and I think Armenia shows

an example of that you see them going

into the Western sphere because they're like okay

so I surrender because there's no one else

that's going to be able to help me

the Russians they had a

security pact and that

didn't work out. So it's like a surrender,

right? And I feel that

part of the reason why the

Arab states are so shit

is because

the Russians and the Chinese

are not providing a

alternative because when you look towards the West

they are so deeply entrenched

within Israel that

they're essentially acting is the

same thing. The Israeli

brain slug is deep

inside the White House.

But if when you look at China and Russia,

are they like the opposite

pole? Are they providing an alternative

to that? No. They couldn't. They're kind of

sitting on the fence. And they're not

strong. So it're not as strong.

So it's a different thing. The only solution is a revolutionary experience.

I'll tell you exactly why.

Although Russia and China are pretty big, especially China is huge.

Here's the issue.

If you look at where all this began, okay?

Modern technology, we call modern technology,

and modern military superiority in control of the seas,

all began with the British Empire,

the Anglo-Dutch, you know, empires, colonial empires of the world.

So they had that head start.

They took the entire world

and amassed all the resources of the world,

even China's resources,

to build up a massive power center of control of the entire planet.

Since the British Empire,

the U.S. took that over and still has that.

Now, Russia and China are examples of places in the world that broke away from that.

So before it was the Soviet Union, Soviet Union broke away from that.

Then China broke away from that. And China broke away from that.

And then you have a handful, you have other communist states, you have North Korea.

Then you later you have non-communist states like Iran.

And then there, you know, there's some socialist countries.

For example, Syria was an example.

Egypt was an example.

But more or less, most of these reintegrated.

And China had to undergo, speaking with respect to, like, revolutionary strategy, a kind of retreat.

And then the Soviet Union union dissolved although russia

you know kind of reacquired a sense of sovereignty despite that this is where things stand so to build an

alternative world to the west i think is going to have to come from a revolutionary

spirit. There's no established

order of power

that's big enough to

create, and China

is succeeding to this

to an extent, but

like I

you know

when I was in Iraq

a lot of people

were just telling me

how much they prefer

China to America

for example

that's like a real thing

so there is a kind of

people are looking to China

as an alternative

in some way

you know as a model

and so on. But that's not rising to the status of a revolutionary political consciousness because, you know, people that, look, I'm not trying to to be biased and I know that this is really

controversial on Twitter and shit but

I think this has to be admitted

it was the Bolshevik

revolution in 1917

that created this for the world

and what I mean by that is like an alternative thing that literally

anyone in the world could like latch onto and be like, this is the alternative to the West,

this new revolutionary spirit, this new ideology, this new movement, this new spirit.

And that didn't work for everyone in terms of like becoming like a successful revolution.

But for a lot it did.

For China, it did.

It worked in Korea across Latin America.

Like a lot of the world was not only inspired by this, but totally. it did, it worked in Korea, across Latin America.

A lot of the world was not only inspired by this,

but took up arms, overthrew their governments,

and created a bulwark against the Anglo-Saxon Empire.

So, like, that did happen. And that's an example of how a revolutionary spirit, even if you have all the odds stacked against you, that can change the world order. That happened on a smaller level in the Middle East. Okay. Iran in 1979 had a revolution.

That sent shockwaves throughout the entire region,

and that's why Hezbollah came about, you know?

That's why there was something like Hezbollah.

Like Hezbollah, you know,

I wouldn't say they rule Lebanon directly politically,

but they are a formidable force,

or were a formidable force,

for a very long time.

The whole axis of resistance was built.

So from nothing, this whole axis of resistance was built. So from nothing,

this literal axis of resistance was built

up and went

against the world order,

which was ruled by the U.S.

politically.

That's why it was called an axis of resistance, and it had its roots in a revolutionary

spirit.

So if you ask someone like me, what's the solution?

Well, there needs to be a new revolutionary spirit that's cultivated, one that accepts and embraces the new era for what it is.

I think there is a multipolar world in the sense that there is a new system emerging in Russia and

China based on developmentalism, regional developmentalism, win-win agreements, bilateralism, you know, that is an alternative to the Washington consensus for sure. But it's only an economic base. It hasn't yet turned into

a type of political consciousness that can

inspire humanity to rise up

and topple

its regimes. But again,

for all that I'm talking about, here's the irony.

I think this revolution is going to be forced

on the world. and it may not even

be pretty it could just be horrific instability and civil war across the world because what is going to

happen is a u.s civil war and when the u.s civil war happens it's going to rock the entire planet

every single one of these

global South, quote unquote, countries,

you know, Brazil,

you know, Egypt,

Iraq, the whole

entire world is going to

be rocked from within

because of the instability and chaos caused by the dissolution of the USA politically.

And it's going to be planet war on a war in revolution and civil war on a planetary scale is my prediction.

If civil war happens in the U.S., think about the ripple effect globally, you know?

And that's what it's going to take.

I think it's the most important front now.

Yeah. I mean, it's going to take. I think it's the most important front now. Yeah.

I mean, it's where I live and where I commit most of my energy. Not causing it, by the way,

because it's stupid. I couldn't

cause such a thing, but, you know...

That would be fed posting. Yeah.

But preparing, for sure, and being ahead of the curb and

telling people about it so maybe when it does happen they'll see me as more credible than they do now

but yeah i mean Sorry I wasn't

The Trotskyite

No that's right

Maybe there's a few that are here

Sewell who's requesting

By the way

Levant guy

Yeah we have a couple of requests

I was mostly keeping it Just for you guys. I'll bring on

Levant guy first. Go ahead, Levant guy. Yeah, I just wanted to ask you, Jureen goal. Do you know when the

Henry is a schizophrenic guy no i'm not at

schizophrenia i'll give him a chance yeah i'll give him a chance

okay go ahead henry please don't cut yourself

yeah i don't cut myself do you know when the uh

syria gained it to dependents like what year

actually i don't know yeah

late 40s right 48

48 yeah

okay

Syrian girl do you know what eight times four is?

All right.

He was here to the trolls here.

You gave him the chance, okay?

I'll bring on this guy.

I told you he was schizophrenic guy.

Fenian.

Let's bring on Fenian.

Go ahead. Fenyon go ahead fennian what did you say uh pain i i i didn't think uh i'm sorry

go ahead ireland so i like there is obviously a very big connection uh between palestine and uh and ireland um it's kind of Palestine and Ireland Um

it's kind of

it's kind of wearing

thing though

then I don't know

what this guy has

he's come at

next monthas

a lot of times

he's kind of

ankle-bited him a lot of times he's kind of ankle-bited him

a lot of times

we're not going to stand

for that. It's crisis king

and you know

the Catholic Church is the one true church

and when did you get a diagnosis for autism?

When did you realize you were autistic?

Oh, no, no.

I just had like 18, 18, 20 beers.

Because I'm like, I can have a couple.

You know what I mean?

But that's about it.

That's about it.

I mean.

Oh, what do you mean?

So is it now that you're getting diagnosed?

You never were before.

What do you mean?

Like, let's talk about it.

Like, let's talk about the ideas Like, let's talk about the ideas.

Okay, what are the ideas?

What ideas do you have, bro?

Like, do you have any ideas?

Or, like, are you just, like, ankle-blending a lot?

Or, or what is it?

You know what I mean?

Yeah, let me just explain to you my entire...

No, what is it? What is it? What is it?

I mean, come on, bro. Are you Orthodox or...

What is it?

I'm a Bolshevik.

Yeah, exactly.

You, like,

yeah.

And the name of the father and the son

and the Holy Spirit, amen.

We all believe in

something called Molly I think

I think you should receive

the Eucharist every single

Sunday

from the church

from the church that Jesus Christ

founded that that's what I said from the, from the church that Jesus Christ founded.

That, that's what I said.

Why?

Why not?

I mean, well, what are you talking about?

Why?

Why, why, why would you even... I'm not, I can't be part of the church.

Why would you even question, uh be part of the church I'm a right of question

Jesus Christ

I mean I take you

you first

A lot of people like to

I'm part of the Mali Dark Temple

Why should I abandon

The Mali Dark Temple?

You're not

You but is that

But you don't believe in

Trance of Stamps

Satiation

Is that it?

I believe in...

I thought Orthodox do, though.

So, I don't know what you mean.

Like, so you're like, you're committing heresies right now.

Because, yeah, I mean, even with all, all the fallacies with the church that their centers, I mean, it's true.

And even the same with the Orthodox Church, don't even fucking come at me and say that, like, the Orthodox Church doesn't have the same fucking

problems that the

that the Catholic church does.

I mean, the Eucharist is the Eucharist.

Do you believe in that or not?

What is the church?

This is theology.

I mean, answer me first.

Answer me first.

What is the church saying about drunkards?

They do not.

It is a tendency for cent.

Yeah.

That is what they say.

But.

All right. That sounds reasonable to me.

Am I saying right now?

Well, you're not exactly the best ambassador for whatever you're trying to sell me here because you're clearly sinning.

I'm not

sending. Being drunk is not a cent.

Actually,

actually, if you actually read the

fucking Bible, read what the

father say, actually drinking

alcohol is not a sin. It just it's a tendency toward drunkenness and that's uh when you're drunk you you might sleep with a woman uh you, you're judging someone.

That's a sin right there.

You just committed a...

I belong to a different denomination.

You just judge me.

I belong to a different denomination.

Listen, there's only one true church, brother.

What about the Mali Dark Temple?

Oh, stop.

Like, this is, are you a Mason, bro?

No.

This is ridiculous.

Like, commit to Christ.

Like, like, pray.

But, yo, like, do a

novena. I'm actually committing

myself personally. Because

we're all, see, this is what

Catholics get right. Like,

we're all sinners.

I will commit myself to a 33.

Oh, well, well, excuse me, I'm talking. I'm talking. I will commit myself to a 33. I'm sorry. Oh, well, well, excuse me.

Excuse me. I'm talking.

I'm talking.

I'm doing a Novena

to St. Joseph.

33 days.

It's a book. I will share it in the space.

I'm doing I'm doing

meditation to Deng Xiaoping

so what are you doing

excuse me

you know in a way

you both do have a religion

I agree

it really

it's the Mali

dark temple

the Irish drunken Temple. The Irish,

uh,

drunken Irish are always very enjoyable,

I'll say.

I don't think you would be allowed in the temple, bro.

You would not allow in the temple.

Oh my God.

What temple?

What,

explain yourself? I want to hear this. What. What temple? What, explain yourself?

I want to hear this.

What,

what temple?

It's in Tartaria.

Have you been there?

Yeah, yeah, exactly.

Exactly.

I'm not kidding.

There's a temple in Tartaria.

It's called the Mali.

That's all you can say.

That's all you can say. That's all you can say.

Listen, brother.

You're not allowed in the temple, bro.

You're not making it in.

Rome.

You're not going to make it in the temple.

In the name of the father and the son and the Holy Spirit, amen.

Rome created the Catholic

Church. It's the one

and only church.

Do you know this?

Or do you not?

Didn't Jesus say Rome was

Did Jesus say Rome was the whore of Babylon?

Yeah, quote it.

I mean, I do not know that, but...

Quote it.

Well, he just called Rome...

He said it was the war

no no quote it

like open up like quote it

like don't throw that out there

like quote it

because Jesus is Rome

if you know anything about Jesus

if you know anything about Jesus

Jesus is Rome.

Peter, he handed the piece.

Jesus, like,

his tomb was built

on Peter's

tomb was built on Rome.

I kind of fuck with the assassins

more than Rome, honestly.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, you're a heretic, and we pray for you.

And, like, I pray for you.

I pray for your salvation, too.

What's wrong with the assassinids?

Sasanians. Do you did not Christ?

No.

Okay, so why are you not Catholic?

Because the three kings from the Magi from the Sassanid Empire actually blessed Christ, who Rome didn't.

Okay.

So it's...

It's about the world.

Did Caesar?

Did the phoenophiles of Jupiter, the temple of Jupiter?

You speak it like

You try to claim

You try to go

This is this is

Muhammad in its

essence.

You try to claim

Divinity

While you speak about the world

Shame on you.

Can I ask a question?

Jesus and Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ Church lives on earth.

Who came and visited Jesus?

Was it the Magi from Persia

from the Sassanids? Or was it

the... Shame on you you shame on you with your

Were the priests of did the priests of Jupiter come and bless Jesus or was it the magi

And the three wise kings who was it go ahead

Fenian I don't think it's a good idea to preach while drunk.

I will tell you

that Jesus Christ's king.

Who are the three wise kings?

And I agree

with the... Who were the three wise

kings, though? Who were they? The three wise

men? Who were they? The three wise men? Who were they?

I will not preach theology, but I know way more they

like, please.

And I am drunk, so

thank you for my...

My brother in faith,

in faith, in faith

if your faith is genuine,

I think you should no longer embarrass yourself

being... Shut up, shut up.

I'm just...

I'm coming to you with genuine

honestly.

I think it's a good idea to save these conversations while you're sober.

I'm saying this from one person to another.

Sure.

Apparently there's six people who are ready to speak.

Yes, there are six people ready to go. I can't see them. Bring whoever's

the most interesting. I'll bring one person out.

Can I put something into the nest of

people that are hating on

my position and basically

raging? Before you do that, Fidai,

what's up?

Honestly, I

like agree with a lot of your points,

but I think there's other points

that need to be raised

that I would like to see you

in Syrian girl like contend with

okay

um

I mean okay

like I know you all don't like this analysis

but like Russia is like Zog as fuck

like why would

like especially the Syrian girl like

why would you think that

like Russia should intervene when like

the question of like Zionism

in Russia is like definitely

not one that's been so

neatly politically

resolved in favor of, like,

Palestinians. I don't know why everyone keeps

saying this. Russia is only

Zogged to the same extent that

it's CIA

you know, it's like the same problem.

If you're

talking about

Russian intelligence infiltration of Israel, that's

a thing for sure. I'm sure Mossad

probably and the CIA for that matter

infiltration. I mean, you have to understand

Russia after the 90s literally

embraced all the Western

Libtart bullshit. Putin pushed back

against it, but it still hasn't fully

like det...

The SMO helped with that, but it's

it hasn't fully detoxified

from that

so Russia's not Zog

is that your position

uh no I wouldn't say it

I wouldn't say that that would not be fair to say

I think it I would say it's

Zieg, which

is Zionist infiltrated,

to some extent, probably.

But fully, like, occupied,

no.

I don't think

that distinction matters in, like like whether or not it's a viable decision.

Like, like people, I think, paint Russia as like a anti-imperilist like beacon of hope.

And I don't think like like most these people could name like

the ruling party in russia like no it is it's not that it's not but it's it's the manner which they

think that it's just not ideologically it is yeah right objectively but not for ideological

reasons i mean yeah but but this is what leads them to believe that like Yeah, objectively, but not for ideological reasons.

I mean, yeah, but this is what leads them to believe that, like,

chiggas and ziggers are going to come and save Palestine.

What the fuck?

What the fuck is that term?

Anyway.

Chigger than vigors So

And the other part for

Seaman girl is when they had the

Beijing forum

And they brought all the Palestinian factions

You were watching Game of Thrones

Oh my god

You're so liberal

Well You sound like an American Right Oh, my God, you're so liberal.

Well, you sound like an American, right?

So do you watch it?

Or did you watch Superman?

I don't know, whatever stupid idea from Hollywood that teaches people that the problems in the world are solved by this really powerful crusader coming and just like, you know, being the hero that saves the... This is not how the world works.

It's just not.

Like, whether it's Game of Thrones where it's that...

That woman, Denares. like whether it's Game of Thrones where it's that um that woman denarius the dragons or it's uh superman in the new movie that all the fucking soyjacks like and the soy facing millennial men who have lost all their tea levels, they like that.

That's just not how the world works, and it never has.

You know, revolutionary change is not based on crusading and idealism.

It's a very brutal, sober thing that happens.

And, you know, is there no justice possible? Of course there's justice that's possible, but

it doesn't work like Superman, you know, it doesn't work like Superman

you know it doesn't work like a crusade or something

when I was five and I

was taught about Israel's evils

and stuff I are you kidding I used to think

oh what if Saladin comes and liberates

like it sounds so cool and stuff it's just not how the world works

it's really not how the world works.

It's really not.

I don't actually banged in Dearborn. But Syrian girl,

what would you have to say about, like, the

forum in Beijing where, like, they brought

like the Palestinian factions together?

And they attempted to have them

unify on a national platform

which ultimately felt through

and like it's like there was

people and I'm not saying to you

but assume that there were zero steps

to like have like a cohesive

line or even voice for like

Palestinian political factions in every effort that's been made to unify these factions has

fallen through and I think more than a regional problem like no one wants to say it but there

is a Palestinian problem like there's just an in place. But also a regional problem like no one wants to say it but there is a Palestinian problem like

there's just an in but also what I heard from China is that a lot of the people that were invited

there were killed so it's hard to you know I don't but I don't think that

do anything when everybody around you is dead

so

how are you gonna bring people together

and Hamas leadership

does that mean we defecutive

literally the people that were invited

to China ended up dying

I think the political question hasn't been

resolved though

it hasn't been because the people were going to

resolve it are dead now

can I just tell the truth before we talk more about the Middle East

I'm just going to tell you the truth all right

and I'm going to go on a ramble

uh lenin hated and he didn't hate but he was super self-critical about russians he was like

we russians have it all fucked up we're we're lazy we're we're being stupid we need to wise up

we need to be smart so lenin he used to. So Lenin, he used to admire the West.

He used to love the West, right?

The Middle East needs someone like that who has, but instead of the West, it's like China and Eurasia.

Somebody who worships Tamerlane and says,

we need to glorify the step conquerors.

We need to glorify Genghis Khan and Tamerlane.

Have this harsh brutality and self-criticism

where we absolutely self-criticize.

Let's beat ourselves up.

Let's beat the stupid Arab tribalism out of ourselves.

Let's beat out the backwardness inside of us.

Let's fully embrace the kind of universal step empire of the Mongols and Turks.

That's what the Middle East needs. He's a brutal regime

pilled, you know,

authoritarian pilled, Mongol

whip-pilled, kind of like

harsh self-criticism.

And just like Lenin was for Russia

but instead of facing the West

it needs to be facing the East

so that's what the Middle East needs

because you know look I just

you I hear the

Middle Eastern intelligentsia

and I hear people that sit with their

legs crossed who drink macho lattes and lububous.

And that's just can't take it seriously.

It's just the truth.

There's a lot of complacency going on with the intelligentsia in the Middle East.

They wear glasses.

They cross their legs.

They read the newspaper. They sip macha. And they want to be nuanced and balanced. They wear glasses. They cross their legs. They read the newspaper. They sip

macha. And they want to be nuanced and balanced between West and East. And it's pathetic.

The whole reason the Middle East is on the map is thanks to the conquerors

from Eurasia.ia because few people know this

I'll talk about Middle Eastern history

you know

before the Mongols came

fat, disgusting

corrupt

literal fat asses

ruled the Middle East

and it was the most corrupt

decadent shithole

every manner of injustice

they say they said

they called us the Islamic golden age

there's nothing golden about it

they

you know this was like uh there was such lack of justice lack of law lack of

rule of law it was so corrupt and filthy and disgusting then the mongols came and because of their ripple effect and their influence

and then you know Tamerlane and stuff

and then you know to an extent the Ottomans even

and then the great Safavids

that's when the true golden age of the release began

and these people had their shit together, and they had unified large states.

So all these small, stupid tribes were unified into giant states thanks to the whip of the Mongols.

And that's what they need again.

And I interpret that whip to be,

they need to have,

you know,

a kind of tartarian bolshevism that they adopt in their mentality

and brutally self-criticized.

No more laziness,

no more complacency.

They need to channel the wrath of Hulagu Khan upon themselves

and light a fire under their ass.

You know, that's my advice.

Slow-mo with the five, what's up?

I mean, we need to topple the Ramallah Global Homo grip that is over Palestinian politics and all of its international seats.

And look, Palestine, look, Palestine by itself can't do anything.

Palestine, Lebanon and Syria and Jordan, it's ridiculous to conceive of these as

separate states or peoples. They're not separate. It's all one people, and they're carved up,

and they're put into these different categories you solve the issue you

solve the fundamental issue of backward tribalism and sectarianism and all these other stupid

things that plague the region and then in one fell soup you solve it it for everyone. Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, everything.

So that's my take.

And then, Sewell, can you bring up the most adversarial-looking people?

All right, let me see.

In the meantime, I have an adversarial

point to make

that I put it to the nest

and if you click on my response

it is a response to a guy called

Sonny Tang I think he might be

in the space if you want to invite him up.

He says, I'll read out his tweet.

He says China is not an empire.

It doesn't build occupations.

It builds ports and railways.

It doesn't overthrow governments.

It overthrows poverty.

Expecting Beijing to behave like

Washington is the most colonial

exceptionalism of all.

This was in response

to my thread.

And I think he

misses the point. Because

to portray

any form of Chinese opposition

to the unipolar world

as empire building

is actually

exactly what the think tanks in Washington claim

okay they literally

claim that China building

a railway in Africa

is colonialism

and imperialism

I think China Russia should

build military bases everywhere

That's the thing

Like I think that

The notion that we're going to defeat

So China makes an economic deal

With

Let's say

an African country

and then the jackals are sent in by

Washington and suddenly the country's destabilized

and now like China's

lost out on its investment

is that

is that sustainable

without any sort of resistance

I understand

anyone you found

yeah this person

thinks China and Russia

shouldn't trade with Israel and stuff like that

I'll say one last thing there's only one

force in the world history that unified the world across regions.

It was the Mongols.

They didn't do it by the U.S. through the sea.

They did it through the land.

They took horses and they fucking conquered and they fucking rode across the everything under

the blue sky through

land power connecting

the entire world creating the Silk Road as we

know it that was the Mongols thank them

anyway go ahead

Eribos

Salutation

greetings can you hear me?

Yep.

Well, I want to pay respect, first of all, to Nick Brano, yourself, Jackson Hinkle, and Samira Khan.

That paid for me when I was invited to a dinner a couple years back in what I call New York shitty.

And you guys didn't have to do that.

I eat a lot.

I'm a big guy.

And I'm thankful for that.

So I just want to put that out there.

Shout out to Syrian girl.

I've never met her, but, you know, I agree with

a lot of what she's saying.

My two succinct points

are basically this. I'm not

even any longer, you know, like with

George Galloway, I'm not even

any longer calling for

hospital ships, right? Nothing that's

even near would be considered

aggressive or assertive. What I'm saying is

you know, like the same reasoning people used

to trade with apartheid South Africa

and wild virtue signaling

about how much they hated apartheid.

This is what this is. Iran is

the only country in bricks that doesn't

trade with what I call

a Zionist terrorist

occupation colony

Zetak, you know

so-called Israel.

What I'm saying is

the cut trade

with them at a very minimum.

If they claim,

no, not you,

but if they claim

to be a moral country and all these million hours forming at the mouth speeches at the UN, at the very minimum, that's something they could do. And the second point is also succinct, I'm trying to be, because I'm usually much more loquacious than this, but I respect other people's time, is that the piece that they think China and Russia and all the civilizational attributes that they've been able to accomplish and shout out to them.

They've been able to basically

just drag America

on social media over just their

infrastructure accomplishments.

That's not going to be let alone.

It's going to be like building a castle

near the beach as the tide rises. The sand is going to be like building a castle near the beach

as the tide rises, the sand

is going to be pulled into the water as much

as possible because America

is a terrorist

ideology. It's colonialism.

They can't stop empire building.

It's a fungus that you

have to put out. It just keeps growing

and growing and growing because that's

what the nature of empire is.

There's this guy Jonathan Chadwick

that really gets into that

excellently, most

excellent, I should say.

So that's just the two points

I want to make.

There won't be allowed Russia and China

to go on peacefully doing

all these things. And both of you

have already ambrated those points.

The losses in the

caucus

in Asia

that old

Central Asia

section

and different

things

because people

are saying

okay

we want to

do trade

and we want

to build

our countries

but who's

going to

help us

fight you know unless if they do it like Burkina Faso We want to build our countries, but who's going to help us fight?

You know, unless they do it like Burkina Faso and the Sahara States.

And that's what I want to say.

I appreciate your words, bro.

I'll just say this.

Look, what I think would be great if China and Russia and other countries stop trading with Israel.

That'd be wonderful.

But I'm not going to make that the terms and conditions for me to acknowledge, you know,

the credibility and legitimacy of China as a, as, you very successful and um on its own terms principled

country i'm not going to make that the terms and conditions for me to like you know not sit here

in judgment of China and and start demonizing it and saying that they have no principles and they only care about money and stuff.

It'd be great if they cut trade ties with Israel, but there's a lot of factors you have to look into.

For example, there's also a culture barrier.

Does China see the world in that way?

Do they view trade as political support?

I don't think they do.

I think they have a different understanding of what economic relations are.

The movement to boycott South Africa was international, And one of the reasons it was successful is because it didn't get as much obstruction within the West as the anti-Zionist movement does in the West. And clearly, as shown by the facts of history,

the U.S. and the U.K. were willing to acquiesce and join the boycott of South Africa.

But they'll never do the same with Israel.

It'll never be the same in that case because look the U.S.

is willing to

overthrow apartheid in South

Africa and let that go

but they are not willing

at all whatsoever. Look, there's a factor here a lot of people

don't look at, which is, that was also with the permission of the Zionists, by the way,

who after it became clear that apartheid

South Africa was isolated by literally

all of Africa. The whole point was

to win over Africa. That's why the U.S.

See, look, you know what

would be the best analogy? The

Arab oil embargo.

When they did that shit,

I think some U.S. politicians did start having some second thoughts.

They were like, oh, shit.

If we don't do this, we're going to lose all the Arab world.

Now, they were able to outplay them.

But in the case of

apartheid South Africa, it was only because of all of Africa, all of Africa turned on

apartheid South Africa. So the U.S. could not maintain any relations or could not maintain

support of the apartheid system unless it was

going to cede and lose all of Africa, you know, and lose that sphere of influence, whatever.

So that was the issue in that case. But unfortunately, the Arabs are not behaving toward Israel, like African countries were toward apartheid South Africa. On the contrary, they're going in the opposite direction. They're going in the direction of normalization and toleration.

And then, you know, so that's a big issue.

And then another thing is that China not only regards Israel, but also the U.S. and also as Japan, as bad countries, okay, especially Japan, right?

They don't see trade as a form of support, political support.

Trade for China is just like an ambient background. It's no different than breeding the same air as other people,

right? As far as I understand it. So China can impose restrictions on trade based on the political considerations of, you know, how much it disapproves of Israel.

But just know that would be unprecedented, okay, for them, because it's not how they see trade.

And I don't think we're in any position to sit in judgment of how they see the world or how

they see things i i think it would be great if they did but i'm not going to sit here in

judgment if they don't um because at the end of the day But maybe judgment is what they need.

What's that?

Have you ever considered that pressure is necessary?

That maybe it's not necessarily...

I think child's smart enough to know that in this case...

Look, there's two ways of looking at the world.

There's some people that think you can mount pressure through economics or through wagging your finger

and that this is going to influence the world.

But China knows what Israel is, okay?

China hasn't even, by the way, militarily taken.

China still trades with the

ROC in Taiwan.

Okay?

So the point, the point of us

is

China doesn't see

Israel as

you know, getting away with what it does because it has the moral, you know, moral support and sanction of the world.

China sees Israel as a permanent aircraft carrier of the U.S. in the Middle East, which it is.

And so China, you know, you think China approves of U.S. in the Middle East, which it is. And so China, you know, you think China approves of U.S. Navy in the Indo-Pacific? Of course it doesn't. But China doesn't see this as an issue that can be

solved through moral condemnation or moral gestures or diplomatic pressure.

China, probably, well, according to Mao, they see it the same way that they see Taiwan.

It can only be solved militarily.

What did Mao say, by the way? They said say the Arabs need to unite and get rid of Israel.

Just like we have to unite and take back Taiwan.

So that's their long-term strategic perspective, basically.

They don't see it.

They're like, oh, you want to solve the Israel question?

You have to solve it militarily.

There's no way

international civil society is going to mount

pressure on Israel for them to change.

They have lost hope.

They don't even believe, they don't even entertain

it, that you can somehow just do

this through, you know know just wagging your finger

or depression or economic like they understand this is a military geopolitical question they

don't have illusions about that but they also understand it's also not theirs it's the Arab peoples

you know and I think historically they've done a lot to encourage the Arab peoples a lot

you know they were sending arms to Palestine they were they were doing a lot but it

didn't amount too much, unfortunately.

You had the DFLP.

That was one thing that you can credit China for,

which was an armed resistance group in Palestine that were Maoists.

But in general, you know, China is very realistic about the world, you know.

You want to solve problems?

We'll solve them, solve them really, you know, really solve them.

You know, I would be more inclined to criticize

china if like there was this like ability if like the arabs were unified or there was a if there was a

if there was still a no sir at least or if they're you know there there's still an egyptian

syria alliance at least something like that if iran wasn't mincing at all like israel was kind of

like on the brink and all china has to do is just like lend their support. Yeah, China probably should. I wouldn't

like, if China was like telling them, hey, slow down, don't, don't cause instability. Don't, don't, don't you

dare, you know, threaten Israel. Like, I'd get it, but that's not what's going on. What's going on is

that the people in the region themselves

are not doing enough.

And, you know, I'm not a sectarian,

but, you know, it does kind of fucking bother me how, like,

where is the Sunni world?

You know what I mean?

Think about, like, why is it with the exception of... They're busy destroying Syria.

With the exception of the Palestinian resistance resistance and we shouldn't discount that

why is it only the Shias

who were doing anything? Why was it just

Hezbollah? What do you mean?

The Sunnis are helping Israel. That's

what I mean. So it's just like to me

that, you know, if there's anything

that made me critical of mainstream Islam even including

the mainstream Shia you know clerical version it was that because you could say well shouldn't

that have just made you double down as just a Shia? And I'm like, no, because

I'm not content with that.

What? Oh, we're the righteous Shia and we're just

going to fucking lose. Like, I don't, I'm

not content with that. I'm not

happy about what happened to Hezbollah.

All right? So I

made a tweet about this, by way where i was like i think mainstream

islam has been discredited there needs to be a complete revolution within islam

that cuts across sectarian lines you know then there needs to be a totally non-dogmatic re-evaluation of everything

because I am disgusted.

I'm disgusted at the...

Can you guys still hear me?

Because my shit froze.

Yeah, my shit fucking broke.

Damn, the fucking clerics got me.

Damn.

That was divine intervention.

Maybe I'm being heretical.

Maybe that was God's way of telling me to shut the fuck up.

Huh. Right. Let's try again. shut the fuck up huh right

let's try again

god's

alright

like yeah iran did something but then

and I reconnected now

anyway

um

I became we didn't we didn't hear you for a little wildhouse could you um like

we go over like the last two minutes yeah so you know um i think in a lot of ways mainstream

islam was discredited is being discredited by what happened.

Because the fact that the Shias had to do it alone does impose a question on Shias, which is, why have you been unable to, you know, win over the Sundays? Why are you so small, right? And then it

obviously imposes a profound question on the Sundays, which is, why are you so prone to

corruption and just complacency and just like following whatever fucking dominant

leader there is.

So,

I believe, and I made a tweet about this, I'm against

well, I think that mainstream

Islam has kind of been discredited

both the main sects.

And there needs to be a, in a, there'ss. And there needs to be a

in a...

There needs to be a revolution in Islam

based on some kind of strange

Sufi stuff

that totally...

And this will get me shot and the Shias

will behead me and the Shias will behead me

and the Sunnis will behead me

and I accept it

because what I'm saying is heretical

and I'm going against everything

but I genuinely believe that

they both been discredited

you know what's going on

I mean you know

if there's anything that should shake our faith and you, if there's anything that should shake our faith.

And,

you know,

if there's anything

that should shake our faith,

it's this,

Islam,

the way people interpret Islam

has failed us.

I'm not saying

necessarily Islam failed us,

but I can't take it seriously.

I can't take the turban seriously.

Well, Muslims have failed us

And you know what

I'll go further house

And I hope you're listening to this

But I will say this

If Israel destroys

Al-Aksa Mosque tomorrow

They're going to go

To the McDonald's takeout and buy some of the McDonald's.

That's what I was going to say.

Listen, I'm going to say something.

Maybe I'll get banned from all the Muslim countries.

I can't take the turban wearing stuff seriously.

I can't take the towelhead seriously.

I can't take the turban head seriously. I can't take the towel head seriously. I can't take the turban head

seriously. Because

and I'll go ahead and say that.

I can say that. Okay, as a Muslim, I can say

that. Because who are you to say

shit? There's literally a fight.

Gaza was genocided

and the Muslim world then do a fucking thing.

So if you can't do the bare minimum,

why should I take it seriously at all?

You know,

I'm saying, hey,

call me heretical,

but what is the mainstream done?

You know, it's an open question.

So I'm saying heretical ass shit, but, and I'm risking

hellfire. But you know what? Gaza was already put through hellfire. So what, what am I even

scared of? Why should I be scared? You know, uh, the, the hell in Islam

is not as bad as what Gaza went through

already. So what's everyone scared of anymore? Let's start

questioning it. Let's start... Maybe we should innovate.

You know, maybe we should... They have no answers to this, by the way.

Like, we have little al-Qaeda and

ISIS took over Syria they kept screeching for decades that Assad wasn't allowing them a

border with Israel they have their border what are they doing? Yeah. They're collaborating

with it. They're allowing the Dateniahu and his

tanks to roll right in without firing a shot.

It's complete bunk.

That's all they can do is kill

minorities. It's all they can do.

And you know, I'm not against Islam.

I still consider myself a Muslim, and I still think there's great beauty and wisdom in it.

But the way it has been interpreted so far has failed.

And everything interesting that's happened in Islam was from innovators recently.

Like Khomeini, let's be honest, Khomeini was not an Orthodox Shia at all.

He had many strange ideas.

He had many strange ways of interpret.

He was very influenced by the mystics and the Sufis and all that interesting stuff.

That's what they need to go back to.

They need to go back to the mystical stuff.

And we need to have our own Islamic, like, Freemasonry or something.

We need to have her own Islamic enlightenment

where we are

perennialists we're bringing everything together

some Sufi we need

our own Rosicurean movement we need our own

what's going on you know we need to destroy

Al Jazeera right so Wahbism

dies we need Enverhoja

Islam because, you know, Enverhoja

came from a Sufi,

what was it, the Bakhtashi Sufi order

of Albania. The Albanians have a secret

that they're hiding, and they

need to bring it to the rest of the region because

that's and for hojo was on some shit i had a dream about i was in albania and it was an alternative

timeline where it was still around and it was such a beautiful country so um we need to start

somewhere.

And the turbine guys and the towelheads

they've lost all credibility in my head.

I'm committing

I don't care

But the other guys

Even the worst

Like Salafi Takfirri

Like I'm going

You know like Jolani how he used to say

He's going all the way to Jerusalem

They turned out to be the most treacherous Jolani how he used to say he's going all the way to Jerusalem.

They found out to be the most treacherous ones of all.

How do you, you know, sorry, I have to agree with you. I see a lot of posturing.

I see a lot of moral, I see a lot of religious grandstanding in Muslim communities.

And I don't see it amounting too much. You know, the only

people who could contradict what I'm saying is

the Houthis in Yemen, but they don't belong

to Orthodox 12-Rism. They have their own

thing. So, you know,

who am I kidding here? The Houthis are

the only ones... But you see how we're critical of everybody,

but I just feel like everyone's...

A lot of the Chinese tankies are going to hate on me

for my critiques, as you could see in the nest,

they maybe misunderstand.

But I'm critical of everybody, right?

I hate everybody equally.

I have more respect for China and the Chinese than the current so-called leadership in the Middle East.

Because they didn't lie about what they stood for.

That's, yeah.

Honestly.

They remain faithful to Sykes Pico.

Why they're faithful carrying out their contract of Sikes Pico?

You know, honestly, I'm going to talk shit and say some racist shit.

I'm an Arab. I can say, or I'm an ex-Arab.

I used to be an Arab. I don't identify. I'm a Tartarian now.

I also, I've been, welcome. I've been an ex-Irab for 15 years.

So let me, let me talk some shit and allow myself some racism.

You know who the Arabs? They're literally the sand people like the

from Star Wars. They're a bunch of a fucking desert sand people.

They're a scattered sand people. I'm talking especially about the Gulf, but everybody.

Because I'll tell you why.

They're really the Gulf.

Because at the end of the day, they still have this like colonial worship of Britain and France, but especially Britain.

And Britain used to like put these sand people on leashes and they were like the pets of the British.

And, you know, the British had these like sand people that they would use as their mercenaries.

And the Arabs are just British sand people for the British in my mind, you know, because basically they, um, they, they don't, they like when push comes to shove for like a grand unified geopolitical power

even the bare minimum

like even what Iran tried

the British

controlled sand people

will make those noises

of the sand people

from Star Wars

and they'll scatter

and they'll reject it and they'll scatter and they'll reject it

and they'll

they don't care about anything

but but

eating the lizard

in the desert

that's what they're for

they like eating lizards

in the desert

they want their next lizard

that's all they care about

they don't know

the camel piss

to be fair.

That's,

I'm not even joking.

Jolani's literally a fucking,

specifically the Gulf are,

right?

What do you think Jolani's doing?

The Levant has an

infested with them in cowards.

Jolani's a lizard eater.

That's what he is.

He eats lizards.

He only cares about his next meal, which is they're fat, they're greedy. They care so much about luxury and lububoos and nonsense. And they don't have an independent. They don't have a civilizational independence or authority. That's what they lack. Civilizational independence and authority. What they have is a mindset of following whoever the most power. They still implicitly, it's all going back to the Arab revolt sponsored by the British and we're

all guilty, see we're all of us

who come from Arab, all of our tribal

elders for some reason were

like, let's go with these sand

people who eat lizards

and it's doomed us ever since.

And look look the young

Turks were terrible what they did was horrible

but the Arab revolt was absolutely

what has cucked to the Middle

East to this day

I genuinely believe that the only

salvation for the Levant is to

decouple ourselves

from the San people by going back

to the American. I have my own grand

vision. The only solution is

the Central Asian

cruelty must come back. There needs

to be an Eastern cruelty that returns

that is based on grand back. There needs to be an Eastern cruelty that returns. That is

based on

grand unified vision.

But the Eastern

cruelty was imposed on Syria. I mean,

these things exist. No, it wasn't. No, it wasn't.

But they exist to service Israel.

It was a British cruelty that Joani represents.

That's the Salafi nonsense from the desert, the bad desert.

Okay, this one...

But the Turks are definitely among them, right?

Not just to Turkistan or Uzbekistan, but Turkey is one thing.

Turkey is one thing.

There needs to be Turkey, all the Turkic countries, Central Asia, Iran, Afghanistan, hell, why not Pakistan, the Levant.

There needs to be a great, powerful movement that unifies all of these.

And that's the only thing that can defeat the lizard eating, backwardness, the small-mindedness.

Because I'm sick of the sand people. eating backwardness and small-mindedness.

Because I'm sick of the sand people,

the British sand people from Star Wars running the show.

As an American who has no direct material investment in this,

this is how I see it.

This is why I'm an ex-Arab. I'm not one of these British controlled sand people. I'm sorry.

Can't wait to see the meme for that. Turkey and Saudi Arabia are in a rivalry right now for the region,

and they're both as bad as each other.

I'm not even talking about Ottoman bullshit.

I'm not talking about that.

The Ottoman Empire died.

It collapsed.

I'm talking about something.

I'm talking about Tamerlane.

Okay, Tamerlane.

Tamerlane massacred Damascus.

He went to Syria. He massacred Damascus He went to Syria He massacred them

But that's what I mean

I'm not talking about neo-automanism

I'm talking about pan-thurkey

I'm talking about the pan-turcic

Tamerlane

Yeah but we have the pan-turcic thing.

The pan-turcic thing is happening.

It's happening against Armenia.

It's happening against Syria.

It's just not happening against Israel.

Look, pan-turkism is nonsense.

It's not what I'm talking about.

The way to bring back Tamerlane is spiritual primary.

I'm not talking about literal Turks from Central Asia coming on horses, but I am talking

about that legacy being tapped into spiritually, intellectually, civilizationally.

And that requires a revolutionary break from the West.

It lurks in the depths,

but there's still this thing that comes from the Arab Revolt that has cucked them.

To this day, where they want to play

We need strong leadership essentially

I agree with you

There needs to be a

That's exactly what I said

What Lenin was for Russia

How Lenin saw the West

There needs to be something that comes out of the Middle East, where they see the East that way.

They adopt Stalinism and Stalinist cruelty, and they adopt the path of Genghis Khan.

And they self-criticize because selfishness and narrow-mindedness and honorlessness

and all these pathetic puny Western consumerist trifles and stuff

there needs to be a gangis Khan

type cruelty

But to be fair

Lubbos came out of China

Hong Kong actually

Okay that means sense

To Hong Kong is a part of China now

So they need to shake up China is so hands off on Hong Kong is a part of China now, so they need to shake up.

China is so hands off on Hong Kong.

They don't even, they're not going in there and sweeping them.

But, you know, the generation, our generation,

is so full consumerism and it's just so

stale

I can't see

it's coming back to life

it's like fine

you want your macha fine

drink your fucking macha

what I can't forgive

is the Philistinism

I can't forgive the narrow mindiness I can't forgive is the Philistinism. I can't forgive the narrow-mindedness. I can't forgive the stupidity. I can't forgive the laziness. I can't forgive the lack of curiosity, the lack of thinking outside the box, the willingness to just kind of like go against the grain as far as what's conventionally accepted

there's none of that you know um i have nothing but you know if people honestly you know

these these groyper people one of them came on they're like you're an you're an ethnic uh you're an ethnic, uh, you're an ethnic, uh, what do they call

them, ethnic narcissist. And it's like, buddy, I have nothing but self-criticism for the people I

dissent from, to be honest. You know, if, if I do identify with anything in my lineage, it's probably

from like a thousand years ago, all right?

It's nothing from the past.

I mean, Hezbollah, sure, it's a lot to be proud of, but I'm not content with pride in anything that's been established yet, you know.

They say I'm like a brown third worldist and stuff.

It's like, well, no, when you actually talk to me about these things, you'll see that

a...

Back confronted that term, and he is a... see that uh bap

invented that term

and he is

yeah it's that

it's that i have

Jewish

homosexual

they have

they say I'm

resentful toward

white people it's not true

if anything

I'm jealous

of the

Mongols

honestly like

that's who I

think are like like, the

superior people, honestly.

And those with North Korea.

Yeah. For real.

But you know what they have that we didn't have?

Because Syria, under Hafez, was trying

to be North Korea. He adopted

Jusay and he

like

adopted their principality with very strong

allies but what they have is a border

with China and Russia

and what we have is a border

with Israel and Turkey. I'm telling you the whole

Sunni... The odds were stuck against them.

Dare I say the problem in the Middle East, you could say there's a religious issue here.

You know, because where has the religious sectarianism gotten them?

It's a form of Islamism, whether it's Shia or Sunni, it can't, it's in, it's irreconcilable.

They can't unite with each other, right?

And the Sunni Shoe beef is so profound.

It's so profound.

It's like it is so visceral.

It was no.

This is since the 80s and the older, do you know, I'm telling me.

I know, but now I'm'm talking about at a mass level.

Like, even everyday people have this extreme

religious animosity, and it actually has gotten in the way of the region

getting its shit together.

Like, yeah, it's a big problem and the only way to

fix it is through atheist communism to you know to to exaggerate a little it's like what else are

how else can we solve it you need a ban there needs to be a force that

puts both in their place

and both the clerics.

Both both

need to be humbled, actually.

Maybe, but we did, we the art experiment was tried during the cold war i know and

his place was pan arabic which was bunk it failed because it was just there needs to be like a

mongle version it needs to be like uh it needs to be like it needs to be like a Mongol version. It needs to be like...

It needs to be...

It needs to be a blood and sound version.

I mean, then it's sectarian again, you know?

Because then everyone's going to debate about what their sand is and what their blood is.

There used to be something that unifies people beyond small things.

Blood and sand is just you're going to have

Kurdish fighting,

you know?

They have blood, I mean, but they were nomadic people up until the first world war so

yeah but then then then the fact of the i can bring on a curtis person is going to argue with you

about that you know i could already see it. But they'd be wrong.

Everyone thinks they're right.

Yeah,

but history literally says,

like shows that they were nomadic

until the turn of the,

like,

century.

Okay,

and then I know

Kurdish people that say that they,

you know,

um,

okay,

namely one city that was built by Kurds.

They say all of them.

But,

but none of them were literally none of them.

Yeah,

that's another,

that's the debate.

It's a grand,

that's another,

this is the ballcon this is like

this is like the serbs versus the fucking uh croations it's like the eternal balkan nonsense jibber war like who cares

it doesn't matter if a curt tells me they built dam Damascus and Aleppo and Beirut.

Like, I don't give a fuck.

Fine, you built it.

What do I care?

Everyone built it.

Who cares?

It literally doesn't matter.

Because this is just bulk and jibber among small-minded people.

It's just, honestly, it's just brown retard gibber, inter-retard gibbering.

I don't care.

Fine.

If you say so.

No problem.

And then if the Turk comes and says the Turks build it, okay, if you say so.

And therefore, it belongs to us is the thing that comes next after the...

But then, yeah, I have to ask them a question.

By us, who do you mean?

Do you mean NATO occupied Turkey?

Do you mean...

See what I mean?

By us, who do you?

Because you know, none of them are free.

Nobody's sovereign.

They'll say Kurds, right?

Nobody has autonomy.

We have to impose our language and we have to change the names of the streets.

Yeah, that's, you know,

and that's something that came from Europe

because that's what they were doing in Austria-Hungary

when the stupid small people in Austria-Hungary

would fight over street signs

and stupid shit like that.

And that's why they should impose, again, I have a solution.

You know, you always ask me with the solutions.

I have a solution.

Mongolian, forced on everyone.

Yeah, I agree.

Shaka Zulu,

you know,

they said he was psychotic

and all of that.

I mean,

who made their diagnosis

when it didn't exist

when Shaka was around?

King Shaka had a similar idea.

His attitude was unify or die.

You know, some say he went too far. He didn't go far enough.

But he was able to clearly see that what they call the swallows, you know, the British, because they had the red vests and the same color scheme, He saw that they were going to conquer and dominate the

continent. He was sending

his spies to run about tank

technology with rifles.

And his thing was like, unify

or die. I agree

and well spoken, but

there's someone named Kareem

who is an Arab, anarchist,

libertarian, and I want to bring this guy

up. Wow.

I want to bring him up, man.

He's a current pusher.

He appeared on Israel 24. He's a current pusher. He appeared on Israel

24. He's a Zionist.

But I do think he has an interesting take. No,

but he did appear on Israel 24

and he did ask Israel

for support for the Druze.

This is a profound combination.

He supports essentially the

Balkanization of Syria.

Okay.

But he has some interesting takes.

This is one of those black sheep like Richard and Anay.

Wait, is this the same Kareem?

No, different Kareem.

Different Kareem.

Oh, different one.

Okay.

Sorry, my bad.

This is a different guy.

I take back everything I just said.

All right, go ahead, Kareem.

What's going on?

Apologies.

Me?

Yeah, what's up?

What's your solution to everything?

Well, okay.

So I agree with you

50%. I think a Gamala, Bill Moss, or a secular

leader, would be good to do a few things.

One, get rid of the state of Israel.

Two, unify people of Sunnisia,

Sufi,

other sex.

I just get to the part where you disagree,

man.

I don't, sorry.

Okay.

But here's my thing.

I don't, like we discussed before,

I don't see the state

as a necessary entity.

I actually like

anarchical comedy as a mutualism.

So you're talking about

desert bandits eating lizards without any

authority, because that's what it would look like in the

Middle East. Well, that's what's going to happen.

Well, that's what will happen.

So, sand people doing whatever

they want without anyone putting them in check

because that's what it would look like in the Middle East.

The sand people from Star Wars kidnapping

Anakin's mom and all this horrible stuff.

That's what you're advocating for.

No, that's a good movie.

I'm not advocating for that.

I didn't say Samplea.

Somalia had it.

Syria had some of it

during the Civil War. It's like

Anarchy, they tried it, bro. It's horrible.

And also the deserts

in Indiana Jones and

Lawrence of Arabia, those wild

lizard eaters in Lawrence of Arabia, those wild, those wild lizard

eaters in Lawrence of Arabia

when they were riding around

in the desert.

I will say that the Syrians

slapped up Lawrence of Arabia.

I don't think Lawrence of Arabia qualified.

That's a good movie.

Okay, so all those are good movies.

That being said, that's my position.

But at first, something like a Gamalach Bill Masser.

Okay, I just have one question.

You said a state isn't necessary.

So there's a Dubai billionaire raping children.

Who's going to stop them?

Go.

The people who are going to stop them is the community themselves.

The government. There's a difference between as the community themselves, the government.

There's a difference between a government and the state.

Okay.

What's the difference?

That doesn't mean people can't organize and stop violence.

It just means that there's no central institution.

So there's no central government?

No. And central governments are not necessary.

They're not necessary, really? So what if there's a conflict between different mobs as far as their interpretation of justice? What then? Who mediates?

Okay.

Well, Peter Leeson actually has a good thing.

The Anglo-Saxon border did not have a central government,

but they figured out ways, specific rules.

The Anglo-Saxon border?

Yes.

And in so...

Oh, the border between the Anglos and the Saxons.

Those were different tribes that came to agreements between different tribal elders.

Yes, without a central institution.

So it is possible to negotiate without a central institution. So it is possible to negotiate without a central institution.

This is nonsense.

This is a bunch of tribal desert people and chiefs.

What if one of these chiefs likes to rape children?

And what's going to happen? He gets away with it because he's one of the big chiefs likes to rape children and what's going to happen?

He gets away with it because he's one of the big chiefs.

Well,

fun enough, in the

state you have that, look at Jeffrey Epstein

right now. So yes,

this happens more prevalently

in a state. Could it happen in an anarchist society? Yes. But that doesn't necessarily mean nobody will stop it.

You're talking about, you're talking about an extremely backward state of affairs where

literal tribes, people are

like subjected to the law of their tribe

and that the only way to mediate

differences between tribes is different

tribal chiefs, like

I guess not forming a central authority

but going to the border and like like, making grunting noises across, like, the, like, the ape-like Saxon and Anglos did when they were primitive cave people.

And you're saying this is the solution to the Middle East?

I'm saying it's a solution to civilization because you don't actually need

whether it is israel or the criminal government of dubai which is causing a genocide in

sudan you don't need central institutions to govern your affairs.

Now, if we're going to talk about primitive people, I don't know, the Somalians got their

murder rate down to something like Mexico without a central institution.

Okay, how do you at scale

maintain nuclear reactors?

What's your solution to that one?

So, I'll give you a real-life example.

The people in Nepal overthrew their government

and used voting on Discord to elect the prime minister.

So you can do it through decentralized councils.

Yes.

Through discord?

You can do that through the private.

You can do that either through an anarcho capitalist way of having the free

market do it, or you can have the community

of the delegate. The free market

manage nuclear reactors

at scale, all the raw materials

you need, all the supply chains,

you got to lock in, like, tell me how the free

market's going to fucking do that, please.

Without any, like, central strategic oversight at scale over the entire nation.

Like, how does that happen, please?

We'll do it better than the USSR, which you hold in high regard.

I can probably buy it It didn't because the USSR

had one pretty bad accident, but

for the most part it managed its nuclear

reactors pretty effectively and built them up

Yeah, what about Japan? They also had

three nuclear reactors explode, and they're

still leaking, so

But the idea

of that scientists

sorry but the idea that

scientists couldn't function under a

you know without a central

institution to me as preposses.

We have giant

supply chains at scale and integration of different, you know, means of production at scale.

So without a central institution, how will those remain unified and not you know become irreconcilable

or you know no longer have a common shared law or language or framework with which to operate

they would use the language they're already using.

The interesting thing you're asking to is...

Which requires central institutions of law.

No. Even Mark said it is advanced communism.

The end goal is a stateless, classless society. Lenin

was just supposed to be a transition.

They didn't say end goal, and then second of all,

the state was not regarded

as a central institution

for the administration of things.

But it was regarded as a transition

period. Is it not? as a transition period. No,

you're supposed

to transition.

They still believed

under communism

you would have a

centralized

government that

administers the

means of production

and administers

the facilitation

of production.

The reason it's not

a state is

because it's no longer

at war

with a segment of the population through class

warfare. So it's no longer...

It's still a government.

It's still enforcing things. It's still

like, you know, it's still an authority.

It's a supreme authority for certain. But it's not a state proper because it's not a bureaucracy formed, you know, over and against the people in any kind of way. It's just a kind of means of production to ensure

the facilitation of production at

scale and life at scale.

It's not doing it in a way that is socially

controversial.

So why can't workers through

councils own the means

of production like Markswell

and work together? Workers are the world.

I'll just say you have a methodologically individualistic

framework according to which

common decisions are made when individuals

come together and bind and express their

will in a common capacity by

tallying up their different individualized expressions of choice.

But that's actually not how humanity itself is defined.

Humanity exists by virtue of having a shared implicit principle and world and existence that is collective and irreducible to the sum of its parts so in methodological individualism where you know we're not going to have a center, why not have

a center? All human communities

are formed on the basis of having a common

center. And for that center to become

actual and

have accountability and

responsibility and kind of

have a voice is necessary for the functioning of any human society.

Because it's part of the definition of what we are as humans, like a turtle has to have a shell.

We have to have a center that binds us together in actuality otherwise but we do we do have a center the center is the town hall the council uh the masjid but there's no central institution in terms of somebody who can act violence in that region.

A central authority has to be proportionate to the scale of the complexity and integration of civilization itself.

But you can have societies like

the CNTFAI in Spain, which I think

has been an amazing model, should have

been carried out further. That was real

social. They were literally

raping nuns, dude. They were horrible.

They made that, okay, but Francisco Franco

created, if we're going to throw

like bad things, Francisco Franco

created way, way more

humanitarian disasters.

That's true, but the CNT FAI

was so

brutal and unpopular among

the peasantry in Spain that they

gave Franco the war. That's why the

Stalin has hated these fucking anarchist

retards because they were ruining everything

with their like extremism.

Okay, but funny about funny about like some of the leaders, Len and Mal, all these people were quite brutal themselves.

They weren't exactly.

They had no, absolutely did not sanction or support any kind of horrific acts of depravity like the

cn tf a i did c mt f a had problems but that that doesn't mean that have stateless socialism

they were anarchists who were given the ability to do anything they want and desired, whereas

Stalin and Mao, when they found out people were doing

wicked shit, they would kill them.

But if you're in the CNTFAI

and someone's raping nuns, who are you to kill them?

Because there's no authority, right?

Just because there's no central

institution doesn't mean I can't stop rape I mean that's to me a little bit of an overstretch here doesn't mean I can't stop violence the whole idea of anarchy is not some mystical you know kumbaya weayah, we're going to get along.

There'll still be violence and mayhem.

You just won't see it on the level of the Zionist entity or on the level of the Saudi Arabian entity in the L.A.

The biggest anarchist society in history failed. How do you account for that?

The biggest anarchist society in the world to me is people interacting without any state oversight.

So I don't know how...

There was an example of that,

and it completely failed.

And which example are you alluding to?

I'm talking about Nazi Germany.

Nazi Germany wasn't anarchist.

Yes, it was.

It was anarchism in practice.

Well, I would reject that premise.

And you would be wrong to reject it, because Hitler was an anarchist, and that was the rule of anarchy.

And it fell.

That's not what anarchists do.

In practice, it is. That's not what anarchists do. In practice it is. Anarchist.

Anarchist would reject

the term, would reject, if you're

a real anarchist to me, you would reject

Zionism, Nazism. That's a no true

Scotsman fallacy. Hitler and Mussolini

were anarchists.

And now as a libertarian?

So how is this, how does this add up?

How exactly, if Hitler was the head of the state. How is he an anarchist?

Because it was the rule

of anarchy.

In one way?

Show me how

there was...

You want you? You want to do you want? Anarchism is rooted in involves show me how there was just because

you want to

know what

anarchism

is rooted in

voluntarism

according to

which the will

is supreme

right

so

Hitlerism

was the triumph

of the will

it was

voluntarism

elevates to

the status

of state

power

all manner

of

adventuristic

terroristic kind of voluntary

will.

Hitler's entire reign in the whole state power was based on the individual will, according to the

Nazi view.

So that was the reign of anarchy.

So just because you say voluntary will, to me this is almost like idiomime saying, you have freedom of speech, but I can't guarantee freedom after speech. So yeah, on paper, you can write that down, but that's not what happened in practice. He was actually very authoritarian.

And he had the state to control of most

things. It was a state centralist.

It was the authority of

anarchy itself. That's what anarchy looks like

when it's in power.

When anarchy's in real functioning,

it looks like the Zapatistas,

which is actually highly effective.

It just needs help from other Mexicans.

That's what it looks like.

It looks like Hitler's Germany.

Looks a lot like Hitler's Germany looks a lot

like Hitler's Germany

the biggest

anarchist society is the Zapatises

who are actually functioning quite well

in Chiapas and it can be

reproduced and it can be reproduced

they're not anarchists

they have a boss they have a big boss They have a boss. They have a big boss.

They don't have a big boss. Some Condante Marcos is not a big boss. He's a big boss, bro. He's a big boss. And I respect him for it, but he's a big boss.

See, my ideal thing is something like Subcondante Marcos, but Subcondante Marcos isn't like a Trump or Putin or a she.

He's a Putin. He's a big boss.

All right.

He's a Putin.

But he does not have the same stretch or the ability as Putin.

Yes. Does he have some authority? Does he

have some respect? Yeah, of course.

You'd have that in any society, but to

think, so my ultimate solution

is something like the Zapatistas.

And that would even be to orient the

ACP to do that. if you scale the Zapatistas

to the entire state of Mexico

it would look like North Korea

I just

I highly disagree with that

yes it would because

the reason they can do that is because they're local, but if you scale it up to all of Mexico, you have to take responsibility for the state and for the borders and for the security of the nation and its well-being and its scale. And yeah, it would be North Korea because they'd have security issues and they have to make a military that's powerful, it can fend off the enemies.

Well, to me, what it would look like is just what it is now, but at scale.

No.

And it would have cooperative

labor as the course.

It doesn't scale up.

Doesn't scale up.

By the way, how do they deal with the cartels?

Sorry.

How do they deal with the cartels?

I'd say quite well, there's still existence for 40 years

since I've heard them on, learn

about them to raise against the machine.

They have to see a degree of autonomy.

People just roll

up on your shit with guns and stuff. How do you

defend yourself? You can't.

You can organize community defense is

easy and that's my

message. Is that... Is community

defense what won World War II?

Yes.

Just at scale, but just at scale if we're going by your thing come on man come on this is exhausting

and we're not fighting world war two

we're not and that's

are you kidding if you

caused a stir and overthrew the capitalist system worldwide?

Yes, you would.

You'd be fighting all over three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, and ten all at once.

The capitalist system is destroying itself, as we can see right here.

If your idea was put into practice, you'd be fighting World War III, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, and eleven, all at once.

The capitalist system is going to overthrow itself.

I'm not worried about that. What I am interested in is, okay, the capitalist system, neoliberalism is crushed, corporatism is crushed, the American Empire with Zionism is falling. What comes next? And I think the best solution is, not saying it has to be one thing,

but mutualism by Prudone,

ideas from Nome Chomskyy,

I hate it. I hate it. I hate it. Because I go out of, you know, I hate it.

You support Nome Chomsky? How can you call yourself

anti-Zionists? He's on the Epstein list. Anyway, look, I hate it so much.

You know what I hate about mutualism and all this?

It's more than just on the obscene.

This disgusting shit is that it's on...

You know what it's based on?

It's honestly based on interpersonalism.

And one of the greatest, most profound achievements of civilization is that we have the

ability to survive and depend upon one another materially while not having to look at each other

in the face at all, or be friends, or be nice, or anything. And sometimes I don't want to be around people

and I don't want to talk to anyone.

And that's a... I mean, I'm an egoist as well.

No, I'm not an egoist. I don't believe in

egoism. I believe in

a tantric connection

with... even a tantric connection with the dark spirit of the world that is absolutely impersonal and a kind of metaphysical force.

And sometimes retards are talking about nonsense.

And I need to tune them out and have them shut up so I can tune in to this

profound tartarian ancestral voice in the void.

So this is the issue, you know, like, um, basically,

you know,

this whole thing about mutualism is just an ideology

created by lonely people who want to force everyone to be their friend.

And I don't believe in that.

I don't want to force anybody to be my friend.

I don't want to force anybody even to associate with me if they do not want.

They hate me. That's funny. But that's stupid because as human beings, we have to materially

associate with each other to literally survive. And the ability for us to do so on an impersonal

level where, like, you can depend upon someone living in Indonesia to some extent without ever having to meet them is a, that's how we have, that's how we have the ability to sustain 8 billion people. That's how we have the ability to cure diseases.

That's how we have the ability to basically, you know, like, allow us to accumulate information and educate ourselves and advance and thrive

and mutualism is based on

individuals voluntarily

setting terms and conditions contractually

like in every

to whatever extent that they associate

is just fucking ridiculous

no because humans do all that voluntarily extent that they associate is just fucking ridiculous.

No, because humans do all that voluntarily. Technically those things

won't exist if there's not a voluntary

interaction at some level. Look, some

guy in Idaho grows my

the potatoes that go into my french fries.

I'll never meet him in my life.

And I don't have to go and ask him if I

can, like, wipe my ass with Charmin in exchange

for, like, I don't have to, like,

create these different, like,

zones of negotiation for, to whatever

extent I depend upon all these different supply

chains. That's a profound achievement of civilization.

And I think reversing that or attempting to reverse it is just misguided.

We're not attempting to revert.

We're trying to make it so it's completely voluntary, but without any bosses or hierarchy.

Well, hierarchy is absolutely inevitable.

Hierarchy just means hierarchy is different degrees of proximity to the unifying principles that bind people together.

I absolutely said this is part of the Dark Mali movement.

The whole notion of communism being about equality is nonsense.

Egarity.

Egalaterimism is important.

Egalitarianism, no, it's nonsense because I'll tell you why.

Because hierarchy is not

about some people

being innately

more superior to others.

You know,

you know why

inequality is necessary

for human beings?

Actually, I can accept

this perfectly.

Absolutely it is.

Absolutely it is.

I have to explain. Let me talk. So, human beings form as individuals an integral totality, a total division of labor, right?

So this is a kind of integral, unified division of labor, a total complex of labor.

So for Stalin, he may call this a nation, for example, right? Just some kind of unified community of labor that individuals form a part of.

Now, in order for that unity to itself communicate itself to people and make itself

intelligible to the

individual.

In order for the

individual to

recognize the authority

of any given

community whatsoever,

it has to take

singular form.

It has to be

kind of incarnated

in another individual, right? Some individual has to be kind of incarnated in another individual, right?

Some individual has to be a stand-in for the universal principles that bind a given community together.

And otherwise, if we're all just the same individual, we're all equal, quote-unquote,

then at no point are we able to communicate the authority of our shared existence itself? Because I have a personal relationship to this, this, that, and that person, and they're only speaking to me to the extent that they're just an individual. But when someone is speaking to me, to the extent that

they're an authority, that they represent the community's will itself and the community

itself, suddenly the community becomes something I can recognize. So the process of the kind of Hegelian recognition,

the, what do you call it?

The interrelated recognition or whatever.

I don't know what the fucking term is.

I forgot about it.

Hegelian recognition, let's just say, this... or whatever. I don't know what the fucking term is. I forgot about it.

Hegelian recognition, let's just say,

this presupposes a profound kind of inequality

where, let's just in the most crude example, on the one hand,

you had the entirety of a tribe, and on the other hand, you have one authority within the tribe. So this is literally the one person equals, in some sense, everyone else, right? Because that person is the authority who represents the community itself now hierarchy

defines itself by different degrees of proximity to that kind of source and that's why inequality

even extreme inequality in some sense probably will always be inevitable because

some people the people who represent the will of the community itself will

never be distributed

will never ever be able to be distributed

among everyone equally

because

the reason the inequality is extreme is because

there's only one community think about is because there's only one community

think about that if there's

only one community

that means that community

only has one existence and therefore

one authority it can impose upon everyone

it cannot be distributed equally

without there being an equal amount of different

authorities and different communities, meaning everyone, if everyone is their own, if everyone

is the chief of a different community, people are no longer commensurate. Now, I think progress does correspond to, yes, the devolvement and distribution of authorities and privileges enjoyed by a small group, meaning sometimes there are things that there are privileges and there are skills and there's a type of special knowledge that comes with being the authority.

To whatever extent that can be...

Hello? A loser.

He's lost, but I... Okay, it's good. He's back.

Oh, dear.

Lovely sound.

Most I've got him. Karim, do you follow... Kareem

Do you follow my bookcham?

Do I follow my bookcham?

I've read his stuff.

What the fuck is going on?

Me, not so much. It's an incentive to be a what the fuck is going on me not someone I'm sorry

to be sure

hello

yes it's kind of

a new robot

all right

welcome back

I think

that's okay

I'll treat you as an equal

with every

egalitarian

with every with every with every That's okay. I'll treat you as an equal. With every... Egalitarianism, I'll let you keep going on.

With every...

With every development of the forces of production

corresponds, yes, to an extent more egalitarianism

in the sense of devolving and distributing privileges,

knowledge, skills, and so on and so on, that previously were reserved for these few people who can represent the will of the community to more.

But there will always be unforeseen challenges that face a community, which can only be communicated to a community in a singular way, right?

And so basically what I'm trying to say is that, and also the progress of civilization also corresponds to another thing, which is unique to, for example,

bourgeois democracy created this.

When you can have the leader,

let's say a president,

who only in one respect,

you treat them as the authority,

but there are other contexts in which they are your equal.

Like, you can go to McDonald's and the president has to wait in line.

Fuck you, you're the president.

Who cares?

You're just like everyone else.

See, that's a great mark of progress in a society.

But to whatever extent, if there's a chain of command and there's a law, you know, and there's a, you, you respect the authority.

I'm just speaking in terms of the old bourgeois civilization, because you're not saying this person is inherently superior and you're not saying that this person is better than you or above you.

But you agree through a process of recognition necessarily so that this person happens to be the one that represents the community itself or the will of the community. So...

So if a community has a singular existence, then its authority also must be communicated somehow

in a singular manner.

And that's all I'd say, you know?

Like, unless you disagree that communities are real and you only think individuals are real.

See, this is the paradox.

Eagulitarianism is only possible if there are just individuals.

It's the very fact that human beings are inherently communist, communistic, in the sense that we do exist collectively.

It's that very fact that makes inequality inevitable. If we were all just self-interested

egoistic individuals, we would all be equal. There would absolutely be no need for any kind of

hierarchy at all. Differences in accumulated wealth would not be a marker of hierarchy

because it's not my business. Someone else

acquires more wealth, who cares?

That's what he did. It's none of my business.

This is why libertarianism

is utopian socialism.

Libertarians are the ones

who want extreme egalitarianism. It's libertarians

who want no hierarchies. They don't want any hierarchy. They want everyone to be an equal,

free individual, and whatever, to whatever extent, some are more wealthy than others. Well,

it's just because you earn more yourself through your own labor.

But you're still equal to me.

You're still an equal subject as I am.

It's just that you did more and therefore you earn more.

So it's fair.

It's still inequality.

But that itself is why Marx and Engels said egalitarianism is bourgeois, because it's rooted in the formal equality, exactly the kind that libertarians take to an extreme.

Such an extreme that it becomes socialism.

Anyway, that's my lecture.

Kareem, I didn't say this to

be open-minded to your perspective.

I just said it as a lecture,

and we're going to have to wrap it up there.

Anyway, guys,

Karim, we can debate more later,

but I got to scram.

We got to four hours in.

So I wanted to finish that point and kind of explain this view.

That actually, hierarchy is not... If you you're a communist you should accept hierarchy

because hierarchy is inevitable when there must be authority nothing wrong with

hierarchy at all there's nothing wrong with inequality.

We can only because we are all equal

as members of a community,

that's why inequality is inevitable.

Because there needs

to be a way we recognize our common

equal existence.

So you know when George Orwell, he said, some men are more equal than others.

It's like, so what?

So what?

Literally, so what?

In order for our equality to be recognized, we need a Stalin. Otherwise, how can our

equality be given determinate existence and common kind of source we can recognize? Do we all just agree to use a symbol in a distributed manner that signifies our equality?

How to, what's the, what's the, where's the source?

What's the enforcement mechanism?

I'm all for decentralized stuff and kind of, ways and emergent ways communities form and authorities form.

I think that the Internet age has created that memes and stuff.

But ultimately, and at the end of the day, there has to be something that gives expression to our existence in a unified capacity

so this is a dark Ma Li insight okay this is dark Marxism not the stupid shit you

you hear about Marxism, not the stupid shit you hear about. Marxism is not only nothing wrong with

inequality, but it affirms the necessity of inequality. Now this is not apology or justification

for the current inequality in the world today, but this is why

inequality is a trend of history in a way, because it's not... And once we understand and accept

this fact, we can have a better kind of inequality. I'm not for elimination of inequality. I'm for the revolutionary establishment of a better inequality where those who represent our society are not stupid people who just blindly make more money,

but those who serve the community and who serve the society, like in China, for example.

Well, to an extent in China, you know. Anyway, guys, that's all.

Bye-bye.

Think on it.

Everyone think on it.

Big ideas.

All right.

So, guys, if you love the stream, then donate subscriptions.

I'm just kidding.

It's literally a joke.

It's literally a joke.

I'm literally ending it now, and I'm fucking hungry, so don't donate, because I'm...

I'm gonna end it now and feel bad if you fucking do.

Okay, I'm fucking starving.

Like, shit.

And it's 2 a.m.

Like, what the fuck?

I don't even have food.

I need to have a mutualism agreement with...

Shrailsani, what's up? I don't even know where I can get food from.

Fuck, I'm going to Chicago tomorrow.

So going to Chicago tomorrow.

Bye-bye.

This was a very beautiful... Australia, Stanley, what's up, bro?

Appreciate you.

And slow-mo, what's up?

Everybody who...

Shout out everybody, you know?

Shout out everybody. We're ending it right here.