DEBATE BLOODSPORTS

And all the light will be will be

And all the future progressing and all the ways

the sea, the sea, and on the road

for you and me. and all the winds are lightenies and all the years are lightenies and all the heat are

cases and all the morning schools

and joy

and joystiles

screams Sleep, bitch. Beach. bitch me I'm and all the and all the and all the times And all the eyes

And all the heads And all the heads

go to go and then

And only change

Just here just stay.

Oh, I'm I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm

and I'm

I'm and I'm I'm

I'm

I'm

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

a lot of and all the light will be one and all the future prophecy and all the waves and all the world I know that he was in the streets

I know that all in the school

I know this is and bhaven

bha

bha CHE

PHE and all the time. And all the dust

and drink

and all the eyes

and all the heads

smoothed

and all the change is good that's good that only change

just me

just

just I'm and

I'm

and I'm and die and die

I

see

and

I'm going to be. I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm The And all the light will be able to be, and all the light will be and all the future of the sea and all the waves the sea the sea and on the road for you and all the road

and all the world is alive and all the leaves are always in the sense.

And know that all that's cool is.

I know it starts with this.

I know it starts with this. I'm not. It's true. Oh, it's true. Please 3H3

3rd Thank you. and all the dust

and all the dust

and all the eyes

and all the tears and all the heads

moving

and only change and I'm a little bit

and

I'm

and and the I'm going to

I'm

and I'm

the I'm and you know and the I'm

a lot

and

I'm and you know I know the light I know the light will be and all the future from the sea and all the waves the city and on the road

for you

do and all the winds are like

and all the leaves are like

and all the leaves are like this

and all the most is

and all this is It's holless My voice

I'm going to

It's I'm I'm and bitch I'm I'm and all the challenge and all the challenges

and all the

and all the matters and all the eyes are

and all the heads

and all the heads

move and all the change

to stay to stay

and Just... I'm just... The guy is the same is the same.

The guy is the same. The city am the same

I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm You know, The and all the light will be one of the future from the sea and all the waves to see the sea

and on the road for you and me

and you're going to and all the world

and all the world

is alive

and all the

ears are love in the sense

and all the

of his own is I and all the heart is

I know that all is

I know it starts Please Two-H-Vee. I'm sorry. and all the challenge and all the challenge

to drink and all the dust drink

to drink

and all the

eyes

and all the heads and all the heads

moving

and all the change

just in just in the I'm only changing. Just me. Just take.

Oh. and you know, and you're

a lot The guy is I see I'm

a

man

I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm

I'm

I'm I don't know. I'm I'm

I'm and all the light will be leaving and all the future from the sun and all the future from the sea

and all the waves to see the sea

and on the road for you and me

and me and all the ways and all the years and all that are in the schools

and all

that are in the world

is 3H3 and all the time.

And all the dust

and all the dust and drink

and all the house

and all the heads

and all the head is moving

and all we change is here, just here.

Just take. and I'm a little bit

and

I'm and and the guy

and

the

people

and and I'm the same I'm

the

I'm

I'm and so la la la la la a way of the

I'm just The And all the light will be able to be and all the light will be and all the future of the sea and all the ways to see the sea and on the road for you and you

And all the world

And all the world is our life

And all the world are light and all the

deep

are all the times

and all the

heart in the

voice

and all it's

good

and all it starts and

it is all this is. It's true. It's so Two-H-3-3-3-3 and you know

I'm

I'm and all the challenge

and all the guys

alone too and all the head

is good

and all the head

is moving

and all we and I'm

I'm

I'm

I'm going to be

and you're dying

the sky

the guy

is for a

see

and the

I'm I'm not I'm

I'm

I'm and you're

I'm

La la la la

la

I'm I'm

I'm so and you know And all the light And all the light will be and all the future from the sill and all the waves the sea the sea and on the road

for you and me

and me and all the winds are like is

and all the years are never

the ears are never in the sense

and all that are in the school is

I know

I'm going to

I'm going

I'm

I'm Three H. NADC 3H. Thank you. I'm and all the time and all the talent is to drink

and all the night of us and all the night of us are all the eyes

and all the heads

and all the heads move

and only change

just be, just

I'm Just... Just... and die and die

and die

for me

and die

for see

and die

to see and a and love I see

I'm

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

I'm going lot of I'm

a

I'm You know, The and all the light will be and all the future from the sea and all the waves the sea the sea and on the words are light

and all the ears are never the ears are ever in the sense

and all that moment it's cool.

I know it's not going to be.

I know it starts to live. Sheet B. CHEGIN.

CH, Two, bitch, we know. and all the and all the

and all the just and all the

eyes

and all the heads

and all the heads

and all the heads and all

change

just here to just and I'm The only change is me, just...

Just... and you know I'm going to be able to be and go out and die I am the same and

I

have

I'm I'm

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

I'm

I'm

I'm going to be able to see you know the and all the light will be able to be and all the future

and all the waves

to see the sea, the sea, and on the road

for you and me.

Uh-huh. and all the and all the I know that is a lot of it is

and all the

one in its

hoarse I know that

I know it's

I'm

a man and

I know I'm 3H1st3000 I don't know. I'm gonna I'm gonna

a lot of

I'm not I'm not I'm Oh

I'm

I'm and

I'm

I'm

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

I'm going to be able to be.

I'm going to go. and a lot and a lot

and a lot

and a word

and and you know

I'm

and

I'm and the uh... and

the

I'm

a

I'm I'm I'm I'm

and

I'm

and and I'm Oh what is up american step with the five thank you you so much, brother. I appreciate you.

What's up, guys?

We are going to be doing our confronted chairman space today.

We do it weekly.

We're going to be doing that again and I know it's really late

and if you're asking about

you know

how come you're late

well I'll just say how come you didn't reach the goal

you know

and it's

it's a get out of jail free card for me and i hope it's an

inspiration for you of sorts sleeper cell with the 10.

Thank you so much.

I am not too confident that this confront the chairman space is going to be eventful.

I hope it is. I hope it's interesting. I hope it's entertaining. I hope that this confront the chairman space is going to be eventful.

I hope it is.

I hope it's interesting.

I hope it's entertaining.

I hope it's insightful.

I hope it's fruitful.

I'm going to make some predictions about what I anticipate.

I think Rambly might show up.

And he's going to talk about women's genitals again.

I think that there's going to be someone who is not from the U.S., who is not interested in anything that I'm talking about, come up and talk about their unfiltered

opinion on something completely random, and they're just going to say that. I think there's

going to be yappers that come up and say, Haas, I'm a really big fan, but I'm just going to take up the microphone to plug my own dumb shit.

They're going to try to do that for eight minutes, and if I interrupt them, I'm rude.

I think that, Grant, thank you so much.

I think that there's a chance that

I think there's a chance that there's going to be a lot of nothings.

So I'm very pessimistic, but we'll see.

We'll just try it. So let's uh let's open started the space.

Without any further ado, I don't really have many announcements to make tonight.

But let's just, I'm going to, you guys, spread the space, I guess, and let's see what we have in store.

I need someone to co-host, by the way.

So if you can co-host, let me know.

I'd like to...

I need...

Ah, you know, guys, I have also something to...

Um...

To...

To...

To tell you about.

So remember my debate with Truth Teller?

So RTSG researched, and they laid out every single claim, Truth Teller made in that debate every single claim and they compiled uh some images containing

every single claim he made and debunking every single one with sources so every single and, and they were about, oh my God, they were about, oh wow, the kick fucked up.

There were about, I think, like a hundred claims.

So that's something you can look for.

So they keep asking, where's your sources?

Where are your sources?

It's mathematically proven.

I could not have gone down each and every claim he made with the sources.

Within the two minutes.

You know, it's like it's not possible.

So they literally took this guy.

He was machine gun spitting out dozens of claims.

And they every, they tracked down every single one and realized it was all

bullshit you know so i don't know if that will be useful for you but i will make that available

to you pretty soon.

So you have that to look forward to.

So let's start the space.

I need a co-host.

I definitely need a co-host.

Can Kayla co-host?

She's in New York, so it's late.

Pretty sure it's late. Can Douglas Spader?

The very real Douglas Spader Can he co-host?

He's the host of the Spader

report on kick

and rumble Monday through Friday at 7 p.m. Eastern.

And it's every day Monday through Friday.

The Douglas Spader report it's on rumble

can Douglas uh co-host the space any co-host I'll invite him maybe he don't you don't have to? I'll invite him. Maybe he don't have to, though.

I'll invite Kayla.

Just if you can, co-host, you don't have to.

It's obviously based on if you can or not.

Wow!

Oh my God, Douglas.

Douglas, are you there?

Hey, what's up, pause? Yeah.

Hey, what's up, Mr. Spader? I know you have the new show, the Spader Report Monday through Friday 7 p.m.

Eastern time.

You just got wrapped up with today's report, didn't you?

Yep, yep.

Just finished up.

Happy to do a little co-hosting here.

Wow, that's great, Douglas.

That's excellent. So, guys, we want to just bring people up.

I guess beggars can't be choosers tonight because it's pretty late and there's not a lot of people lining up for today's space.

It doesn't seem like yet. I mean, the space just started started so we'll give it time of course but guys

focus on adversarial views and that's not because we we're trying to have drama it's just because

we you know it's it's nice to come on and talk about how you're a big fan and you wish me good luck and stuff.

But we want confrontations because I want to be accountable to the public. That's why. Because I'm a

servant of the people and I'm a servant of the public.

So this person claims that they're a Wignat and a white nationalist.

Let's bring up Dumer Nat, the white nationalist.

Go ahead, Dumer Nat.

Hello?

Oh, he's Australian.

No, I'm not. I'm not

Australian. Oh, okay.

You know, I, to be honest, I'm a little jumpy.

Because when you said hello, it kind of really sounded Australian.

And then something fired in my brain that connected all the dots

but I'm from

American South. Okay

got it. Yeah I have a

I listen to your

debate with that truth teller guy and I had a couple

contensions with some things you said.

Okay, go ahead.

So you think communism

or Marxism is compatible with

Christianity? Yep.

Doesn't that contradict

like most of the things the

Pope's have said

no

so like when

when pope pious the 12th

or like

pop Leo the 13th called

like communism wicked

and said that like socialism

isn't compatible at all

with Christianity you think they were just wrong?

Yeah.

Well, I would take what the Pope say is compatible with the church way more than what you would say.

Would you?

Yeah.

So you really...

I mean, I think that's like a very reasonable...

I think that's a very reasonable thing to do. Do you attribute great weight to the words of the popes to the point where it would define your whole worldview?

I mean, yeah. I mean, I think they're like sitting in the seat of Peter.

Interesting, you say that. So what do the Pope say about racism?

Like which Pope?

Well, what is the Papal doctrine currently about white nationalism and racial discrimination and racism?

Yeah, Pope Leo, excuse me, not Pope Leo, Pope Pius the 12th called for something, he called it, he said that we, the Catholic Church position is not a type of a pagan worship of race, but it's not a denial. He specifically called for a healthy racism. And then in his encyclical critiquing the Nazis

he said that race is a fundamental value

of humanity and it's something that God

ordained. What about what Pope

Paul the 6th said?

Pope Paul,

what did he say about it?

Racial discrimination

you know that

Do you think those two things contradict each other?

Well, I think they kind of do.

I think that the Vatican

2 has been pretty absolutely clear

on, you know, it's now possible to remove the curse of ignorance. You know, we need to ensure the recognition everywhere of everyone's right to human culture without distinction of race

racial discrimination possesses at the moment a character

of relevance by

reason of the tensions it stirs up racism is a sin

a sin that divides

I don't disagree I don't disagree

I don't disagree that this type of

vile ignorant, unjustified

discrimination and

racism is a sin.

They just said it directly.

I don't disagree with that,

but when they say racism there, they're talking about a type of vile, ignorant discrimination that treats people worse than others.

The Pope's said it themselves.

Pope Francis, no tolerance.

Yeah, was Pope Leo the 12th, not the Pope during Vatican 2?

Okay, so which Pope do you recognize?

Only that one, or all the popes that came after are not?

No, when I gave the quote about healthy racism,

that was the exact same Pope during Vatican 2.

The 6th?

No, it's Pope Pius the 12th.

Was he not the Pope during Vatican 2?

Well, I'm talking about after in 1971.

Well, anyway...

Yeah, it's the same thing.

I mean, you can go to the catacism right now the popes absolutely rejected racism

and they reject it within the church and they reject it within society

and i mean it's literally in the encyclical

that Pope Pius the 12th wrote that

race is a fundamental value to

humanity.

And the same Pope, who was the Pope during

Vatican too, said that the Catholic

position is not this type of racism

that should be condemned, but it's also not ignoring the differences between the races, but to acknowledge and value that God ordained differences between the nations, and that is something that's actually a gift from God.

But this is a pivot away from what...

Racism is a gift from God.

I don't know what you're...

They're just saying that the diversity of different peoples is a gift from God.

That's not the same thing as saying they support white nationalism or tolerated.

I didn't say they said that. I didn't say that now, did I? That's a different claim.

I mean, all the popes rejected racism. It's just a fact.

We literally called for a healthy racism. Like, I can show you the quote.

He said healthy racism?

Yeah.

Yeah. But what does this have to do with communism being compatible with?

Well, what does this have to do with communism being compatible with Christianity?

This is a big pivot.

Well, because you said that

for you, Christianity is the Pope,

and that the Pope defines your

worldview,

and that means... It's not necessarily what I said.

Well, that's exactly what you said. I asked you

directly, and it's what you said.

Okay. Not really. I mean, the Pope, the Pope is infallible

in certain issues and I'm going to take what the Pope says about what's

compatible with Christianity way more than what you say. Right? That seems like the

reasonable thing to do. Well, why don't you do this? Why don't you apply the same when it comes to racism?

I just told you the church is very, my opinions on race are exactly in line with the church, is that you value your race, but you shouldn't treat other people differently because they're a different race.

It's an important characteristic of humanity,

but you shouldn't exalted

over than what it should,

you know, the role it should play.

Well, when, that's what you claim right but for example in the u.s you claim you claim you're a white

nationalist so what does that actually mean in practice well i believe i believe people should have the freedom of association

so if white

if white people want to cultivate together

and form their own communities

maybe it's already something that happens

so what do you

no no it's not

no of the basis of race at least you know so what do you? No, no, it's not.

None of the bases of race at least.

You know, and most of the time, even when they do it by, like, de facto, they get hit with lawsuits. People should be able to create a town and that just says no black people and no non-white people.

Do you disagree with that?

Yes, I do. I mean, how could you

justify that if under the law,

unless you're creating a different state?

Well, I think we should change

the law. I don't think the law is the

inhibitor of truth, right?

Or, you know, just because something's the law doesn't make it what people ought not to do.

So what gives someone the right to move somewhere just beyond the fact that they have a certain racial origin?

How do you determine that?

What gives someone the right?

Yeah.

I mean...

I mean, how do you even decide that, you know?

Oh, that would just be up to the people who are forming the community.

I wouldn't be the one who's dictating it, right?

So can you think that any kind of exclusive communities should be able to form?

Yeah.

Yeah.

I mean, America's not.

America's not really in.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

I just believe in freedom of association.

I don't believe people should be forced to cultivate

These communities should still be recipients of our tax

dollars and we should still have to

subsidize them.

That's a joke, right?

I'm asking you, should these communities

still be residents of

tax dollars? Do you think tax Do you think... Do you think...

Do you think tax dollars is what funds government programs?

Do you... does the central federal government

or the state governments, for that matter, which are...

who have a multiracial constituency. Is it their job

to fund these exclusive racial communities that you're talking about? No, no, no, no, no. No, I don't think

that's right. So who's going to fund them? Because they, they, themselves. Okay, so how are they

going to be completely autarkic in a state, for example? I didn't claim they would be completely

altarctic, right? They can still engage in commerce and whatnot. And they can, you know, they can,

they can get their own, it would work almost like an autonomous zone except it's more

private like chaz no not like chas what's the difference it's not some gay hippie commune

yeah it's just a gay white nationalist

commune. Why would it be gay?

Do you think...

Do you think...

No, you're the ones... Why would I tell you? You're the one who accused it of being gay?

No, I'm just using your words.

Well, Chaz was filled

with homosexuals and

degenerates.

So was the Nazi party

under Ernest Rom.

And he was murdered

during the

night of long knives,

right?

He was open about it.

Anyway, look.

No, he wasn't open about it at all, actually.

Like, that was, and by the way, even, like, when people figured out that he was gay,

like, Goebbels, Himmler.

I could tell you really invest in this topic.

What do you think about Hitler?

You're the one who mentioned, you're the one who mentioned, bro... No, you mentioned that I just use your own words.

What do you think about Hitler?

I've mixed opinions about Hitler.

Do you think Hitler was a Christian?

I think he probably considered himself a Christian, but he was a heretic.

Because this is the quote from Hitler,

Pure Christianity, the Christianity of the catacombs,

is concerned with translating the Christian doctrine into facts.

It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind.

It is merely wholehearted

Bolshevism under a

tinzel of metaphysics. That's what Hitler said.

Where is that... Where's that quote?

Where's that quote from?

Hitler's table talk,

14th of December... La Malle.

That's a joke, right? Have you read table talks?

Why is it a joke?

Yeah, because there's multiple historians like Richard Carrier and a couple other people that, I mean, the alticity, the, excuse me, the altitency, I'm not that good with

saying some words, don't judge me, please.

But the reliability of table talks

is something that is up extremely

of debate. There's been entire books written

about it. But even if you read table talks,

like I would ask, what is this Pacific German there?

Why did he put the pagan swastika as the flag of the country rather than the cross?

That's a meme, right?

You can go find swastikas on tons of churches.

Like, in fact, a lot of people don't know where

it comes from but like the one of the most like um accepted places where hitler first all the swastika

was on the gravestone of his parents at a church in a church cemetery. So why are we

playing stupid here in denying the origin?

You're the one who pivoted to Nazism.

I wanted to talk about communism.

No. And it's real and it's

you're yeah. Well, here's the thing.

You said that

you just go with what the Pope says,

but Hitler was a pagan, and you like

Hitler, and white nationalism... I said I have

mixed opinions about Hitler. I never said

I liked Hitler. I've very mixed

opinions about Hitler. Like I said,

he was a heretic.

He did a lot of things wrong.

You're not a very consistent follower of papal doctrine and Christianity in general.

I literally quoted the encyclical that Pope Leo the 12th wrote against the Nazis.

What are you talking about?

Yeah, but the Pope never said that, you know, a multiracial

constituency has to fund

a white nationalist enclaves.

I didn't say they had to fund it either.

I said it should be more private.

If you're going to go out

and fuck off. But that's not possible.

And do your own private things. We all know that there's no

such thing as a private sector at scale.

At scale, there's no such thing as a private

sector. Well, that's why we need

more state inter... Okay. The reason

why a private sector...

What are you saying? There's no such thing as

the private sector at scale. When it comes to

infrastructure... Right now? When it comes to all

of the things that require, like, the total

resources of the country or a giant

volumes of materials

and construction and labor

and skills. The private sector doesn't even

fucking exist. Elon Musk's

X, it's a government DOD,

or not X, SpaceX, it's a government

DOD project. Tesla

was subsidized by the government.

Every large scale project at scale that's owned by the private sector was created thanks to the government and owing to...

I don't disagree with any of this. I agree.

So when it comes to all the things that small communities depend on, if they want to live in a modern civilization, they depend on a centralized government whose constituency in the USA is multiracial. So why should a multiracial constituency prop up, help, and fund a group of people who want to exclude people on the basis of race?

Well, I guess a couple of things that, number one, is that, well, it doesn't, first of all I said is that people should have the freedom of association to, you know, associate with who they want or who they don't want to, which is what will have happened in this country long before the Civil Rights Act. So, I mean, if we could do it back, we can do it back then it. If you want the resources and money from a multiracial centralized policy, you cannot set up barriers that say you can't come here. You're not allowed here if you're from a certain race.

The government doesn't have to fund the creation of these

communities unless you're saying that like the

specific money that they're using, the state

has a monopoly of. That's true.

Every community that wants to participate in modern civilization

has to depend upon the government

one way or another. Every single one.

Okay, so what so unless this is a group of people that want to go live in the woods naked and not shower ever and what you're talking about

is not plausible and definitely probably would not be

well i didn't well i don't think this is going to be plausible not acceptable from church doctrine

probably not acceptable you dude you're a communist bro what you like your entire ideology isn't acceptable off of church doctrine.

Now, all I said is that if people...

Pope Francis said that communism is Christian.

That's what he said.

No, he said Marxism.

He said Marxism is wrong.

Like, that's a quote for quote.

He literally, he's allowed to have that opinion.

Yeah, but don't say, he, don't say he said communism is Christian when the whole, because I know the quote you're referring to.

It's not exactly communism is Christian, but he-

He said a hammer and sickle from Evo

Morales? Who forced him to do that?

Why did he accept it?

I don't know. He probably just

accepted it as a gift.

Wouldn't he say, like, would he accept a swastika,

do you think?

I mean, I think there's a big stigmatization around a swastika compared

to hammer and sickle i think he would say this is a profane evil symbol if it was a swastika but when

there's a hammer and sickle he was cool with it also he said that's what i just said he said christians

and marxists should work together to fight

corruption i'm cool with i agree yeah i agree well i agree with that you want if you want to just

be a catholic and you and you think that marxism contradicts your catholic worldview and you want to

just form uh you know some Catholic thing. We communists

are willing to work with anyone who wants to fight

corruption and

you know, but we reject racialism. That's our issue is the white nationalism

thing. Yeah, you don't like white people. I agree with that. But when you say that the papacy is like

endorsing communism, that's not at all what's happening. I don't, I don't have a problem with

white people. I just have a problem with you. You do. You don't want us to associate with each other. You don't care if we become a minority in our homelands. I mean...

Well, white people can associate with each other and white people can marry each other and have as many kids as they want.

Can they form communities that exclude other people?

No, not in the USA. No, they can.

Why not? Why shouldn't they be able to do that?

Because the constituency of the central government is multiracial, and you need a...

A what?

And without the central government and without government, such communities can't exist.

So why should-

Wait, wait.

If the only thing you're saying here is there's roads and shit that they have to use in these communities.

Like, I don't, I don't see.

There's roads.

There's roads.

There's electricity.

There's energy.

There's law in the last resort.

There's all sorts of things.

I'm not even mentioning.

All the subsidies, all the federal projects, all these things, all the state projects, for that matter, all these things that go into urban planning.

Sewage systems.

You know, people don't just come out of nowhere, a group of 20 people and say, we're just going to come out

from scratch. You know, it's not

how it works.

If you were to be fair, most of the

infrastructure that we're talking about here was built

by white people, right? And it's just like...

Well, white people are the majority of the population,

but they're not the... And that's changing, right? majority of the population, but they're not the...

And that's changing, right, because of the Marxist influence that is...

You know, that has influenced policy around race and things of that nature.

Why would Marxists care about making white people a minority? Can you explain that?

No, I'm saying that Marxists were responsible for, like, the shifting of... white people a minority. Can you explain that?

No, I'm saying that Marxists were responsible for like

the shifting of views around race and immigration

and things of that nature. And so that's

where you get things like the Civil Rights Act and the

Hartzeller Act. But MLK rejected

Marxism.

Did I explicitly say MLK? Do you think MLK

was the only civil rights leader? Even if he rejected

Marxism, he was still a leftist. He was

the leader of the civil rights movement, wasn't he?

He was a leftist. I mean, he was probably, he was influenced.

Movement had its own ideology.

It wasn't Marxist.

Although I don't agree.

You don't think they were influenced by Marx?

Do you think, like, the new left people and, like, the New York intellectuals and, like,

the Frankfurt school?

The new left people

Well it really depends when you say

It really depends when you say new left

But I mean it's either the 70s or the 50s

But it's like

Are you going to do

That's why it's either the 70s or Are you gonna The Civil Rights Movement?

That's why it was either the 70s or the 50s It's kind of hard to pin

When like these student

These student bodies started protesting

And that type of stuff

But

Well look

You know

You just

Look

Obviously they were communists

In the Civil Rights Movement I'm not denying that They played in a violent part But Look, look, obviously they were communists in the civil rights movement.

I'm not denying that.

They played an important part.

But what I'm actually trying to say is that the point is not about making white people a minority or being against white people.

The point is the fact that communists had

a theory, which I agree with,

which is that the U.S.

never became a full democracy

because black people still didn't have equal

rights. Well, America

was never supposed to become a full democracy.

It was never supposed to. It was definitely supposed to be a republic by for and other people like lincoln said

and you know the reconstruction era and the american don't don't look before lincoln don't

look before what the founding fathers had to say just just look at others had no idea what the country would eventually look like or evolve into.

Neither did Lincoln.

Right, but he definitely created a new benchmark for the future of the USA.

Yeah, a completely fucking revisionist one.

I mean, that's, like, kind of stupid to bring up.

Well, about Lincoln, there's no such thing as a USA.

So what are we talking about?

Yeah, that's, I mean, for better or for worse, I don't really know.

But, like, the point of, like, bringing up Lincoln and all this stuff, it's like, no, man, America was never supposed to be a democracy. And, like, even when this stuff it's like no man America was never supposed to be

a democracy and like even when you say it's

like a republic you get we don't have to get

in the details of the electoral system

no even a republic that like this like

America was supposed to be like this

some type of aristocratic type of system

where modeled off of like the ancient republic type of aristocratic type of system where

modeled off of like the ancient republics of Rome

and Greece

like this kind of

diversion here

I'm gonna be right back

give me one sec I'm gonna be right back. Give me one sec. I'm gonna be right back.

Hold that thought. What's up chat? Do do do do do do do do You know, Anyway, what were you saying?

Well, to try to wrap it back

in i guess i mean would you agree that

white people have an interest

in like um

staying a majority in remaining

like the dominant force in the

country in the political process

that their forefathers kind of built for them.

When you talk about white people being the dominant force or the non-dominant force,

you're already framing politics and power in terms of racial division and balkanization.

Why is it that white people have to either be dominant or subordinate?

What if the actual power relations in this country are not actually rooted in race?

Because white people don't actually really have any power.

Only a minority do.

I agree with you there.

That's 100% true.

So only a minority of white people actually have power.

And black people definitely don't have power.

I don't know about that.

Well, they really don't, though.

I mean, there's way less black people that have power than white people.

That's a fact, okay?

Not really, though.

I mean, black people's interests definitely get represented more in the political

process than white people's and when and obviously like i'm not there there's more lip service

but the way that it translate into reality it's like a nothing sandwich so they talk about a big

sandwich they talk about a big burger and And then in reality, they, they're delivering a nothing sandwich and nothing changes for black people in America.

That's not true. Not a lot of things. That's not true. I mean, the material well-being of black people has been

improving while white people has been

going down. It's, well,

it's been marginally improving,

but in terms of black communities,

they have not really improved

significant. I mean,

wealth, income income and things

of that nature

is definitely going up

and then if you look

at white communities

specifically

there's more of a black

middle class

and there's more

black people

who are entering

into the

so it's getting

better for black people

but it's getting worse

for white people

not overall

I mean it's pretty much the same for everyone.

I don't know.

I don't really agree with that.

But when you, when you ask me if, um, what'd you say, you said the political process, what

happens if it's not about race, but it's about something else?

I'm assuming you're alluding to like this type of class warfare.

Well,

yeah.

Do these,

like,

does national and,

like,

ethnic and even racial identity,

like,

do these things have to contradict the type of class division?

Like,

I don't,

I don't really think so.

And I think that,

well, the thing is, is that America is one nation.

I don't agree with that.

Well, it is.

Well, then you don't believe in America.

America's one nation. No, I think America resembles more of aizizational state that encompasses multiple different cultures

and nation and similar in a way to other places in the world.

Different cultures and subcultures and that's fine, but it is one nation. And the notion of race

is just because a lot of people from

a bunch of different nations

all came here simultaneously

who were very far apart from each

other for hundreds of years, thousands

of years.

So, you know, that is why we have

this big continental category of race, because race is not the continental category. It's Europe. It's Africa. It's Asia. And that's just because America's a new nation and the whole point of an American nation is building one people. So what you're talking about is racial division and Balkanization.

Well, there's always been racial division in the country.

Then everyone should just, everyone should just go back to their...

Well, no, you're basically saying, you're telling like the founding fathers and like all the most of the important people

in this country. You need to understand something about the

founding fathers. They did

not have a clear idea of

what the long term consequences

of building

this kind of republic would be.

It was a big...

Yeah, but they made it explicitly clear, though.

They only wanted white people to be in it.

At the time, yes, but there's a reason they didn't put that in the Constitution.

They made a lot of the naturalization.

The preamble...

No, the preamble says for ourselves and our posterity, meaning for ourselves and our descendants.

And if you look at who the descendants are, it was only white people.

That could be broadly interpreted, you know, and there were so many thinkers among the founding fathers, you know, who were not of the view that of any kind of racial exclusion.

So, you know, it-

Which ones?

Benjamin Otis.

Benjamin, what did he say about race?

He said that he

loved everyone.

I'm just kidding.

Well, I don't know.

No, I'm putting you on the spot, man.

My bad, James Otis.

And literally it's just

Volk-Boltz.

That's a thing to say.

I've never heard of Benjamin

Otis. No me neither

it was James Otis

In any case

But would you

Definitely the consensus of the founding fathers

And like the most important ones

Like Jefferson Franklin Washington Hamilton

John Jay they made it very clear that they did not won't non-white people in the

country and if you look how that manifested in policy only people who become citizens

were white and that that like you that that that was a, it's true they were like racist and whatever.

They didn't really like black people.

Well, you leftist Chas communists, our founding fathers are racist.

That's 1619 project, bro.

I mean, what are you doing?

Okay, well, you just said they were. No, I'm just, no, I'm just, I'm fucking, no, I'm just fucking, I. I mean, what are you doing? Okay, well, you just said

they were... No, I'm just... I'm fucking...

Well, look, they were... They were definitely racist,

but the thing is, is that

for them, it was not the fundamental and sexual

principle upon which the Republic stood. It was

just their convention

and prejudice

during the time they lived. Well,

if it was a fundamental principle of

what the Republic must always eternally

be, they would have put it in the

Constitution. They would have put it

in the fundamental defining documents of what the Republic is. They wouldn't have just passed a law which can be amended and whatever and changed at any time. I would argue they did put that in the Constitution with the preamble. I mean, you can say that language

is vague, but when it's said this is for us...

It's very vague language. I don't think that is

vague. And if you... And it could be

vague, and maybe I can grant it to be vague

in the abstract, but if you put together what all

these guys thought, the lulls that they

enacted, like, for example, I mentioned John thought, the lulls that they enacted?

Like, for example, I mentioned John Jay. There was definitely a prejudice at the time in the sense that it would have been very radical, according to their conventions at the time, to, you know, to make citizens, give total equal citizenship to people who have very different culture than them and, you know, and were, by the way, people that were demeaned because they were slaves, remember that. And also the

Indians or the indigenous people

who... You're going to be canceled for that one.

They regarded as... Well, no, I heard

that they like to be called Indians more.

That's what I heard. No, I'm just joking.

Well, anyway, look, they

definitely

considered them heathens.

And so, you know, these prejudices

weren't rooted in

the metaphysics of race. They were rooted in

class relationships. Because black...

I just 100% disagree with that right because

and i'll give me let me give two examples if i would consider the most important piece of political

literature that was ever written in this country was the Federalist Papers.

And in the Federalist papers, John Jay said that he thought it was a gift from God

of how homogenous

and how racially and

ethnically homogenous the colonies

were, and that was a gift from God,

and he thought that we all

to preserve it that way. And then if you go

look at Jefferson in his,

is it, notes on Virginia? I mean, he's

literally writing equations

based off of ancestry to determine

how, how, like, what determines

if someone's white or how, who, what determines

someone's black. I mean, he's writing literal equations like, they have one four, one, eight.

There was a huge range of views among these early enlightenment thinkers about what race is and how

to make sense of it. For example, I just mentioned James Otis, and we have Volkfurture here,

the colonists, black and white, born here, are freeborn British subjects,

and entitled to all the essential civil rights.

You know, what you're saying about their racism is true, but you're only painting one side of the picture.

There is also another side.

Yeah, but that's one guy.

I can show you the consensus of the founders, and then if you look at the lulls that they enacted it was very look the point is

they may have had a consensus about being racist they were majority slave owners anyway but yeah but

that impacted the country they founded but But the country was not founded

upon that as a fundamental

principle of what it has to be.

That was not the point. So they weren't

saying 200 years from now

it's going to look exactly like this.

All they said, it was a shot in

the dark that we're going to build

one United

Republic in a completely

new land

totally different from Europe,

totally new on a fresh

blank page, and let's see where it goes.

That was the idea

at the founding of America.

Yeah, but a property that's a part of that

is that it's for white people

and if we ever do abolish slaves,

they got to go.

And the reason why I bring this

up is because I mean not

hold on hold on it wasn't

it wasn't quote unquote for white people

because there was

no you know there was all sorts

of other types of white people that

they wouldn't have ever envisaged, for example, Slavic and Finnish and all these other subdivisions of the so-called white race. It was one historical, sociological group mainly

Anglo-Saxons who came

Oh dude this is like critical race theory stuff

Like listening right

It like first of all there were

It's common sense

No that's that's like

First of all it is critical right here.

No, it's not because they were non-Anglo founding fathers.

There were Irish and Italian and Catholic founding fathers.

And they were black people who were for the independence movement.

So what are we talking about here?

Wait, what, can you repeat that part?

There were black people who fought for the independence

and were part of the movement on the streets.

It's a different thing to say

that they thought

white, only mid-Anglo, right?

Because that's what you were saying,

and that's like a very common in the main yeah

that's really what they thought

in the other cases there were

there were Scott

well no because there were Scottish

and German and Irish they were adjacent

to the Anglo civilization.

You think Italian,

you think,

you think,

like,

Irish and Italian Catholics

are, like,

adjacent to Anglos?

They were not really thinking

of a bunch of,

like,

Irish people.

That's who was in the colonies.

Like,

there was Catholic,

there were Scots,

Irish Catholics,

and Italian Catholics,

like,

who signed the Declaration of Independence.

I'm sure there was a Lebanese guy.

There was exceptions all around, but the main thing...

Not who signed the Declaration of Independence.

I'm sure you'll find her.

If you look hard enough, you'll find them.

There's only 56.

I mean... Oh, by the way, just

a question about the James Otis guy. I mean, I've never

really heard of that guy before. Did he, was he

like one of the 56 framers or

signers of the Declaration of Independence

or a framer of the Constitution? Like,

that's not really a name i've very

really heard of well he is recognized by some as a founding father but he died yeah but people

recognize thomas pain as a founding father which is like bullshit well it's i don't think is bullshit

anyway look to get to the main point which is like bullshit. Well, I don't think is bullshit.

Anyway,

look,

to get to the main point,

it is true,

let me just finish this,

it is true the founding fathers.

Definitely,

you know,

it would have been considered very radical for them,

for foreign, what they considered foreign peoples and groups that didn't share their cult and also it was the same with class so the founding fathers

were terrified of the mob so-called mob rule of the poor underclass and the the yeomen and even the white people

who were working class and you know small farmers and so on rising up i think he disconnected rising up

to overthrow them i I think he disconnected.

So it wasn't just they had these racial anxieties.

They had anxieties.

They had class anxieties too.

Again, if...

You know, look, this is the last thing i'm going to say about this too

the whole premise

that the founding fathers

are the sole people that had the authority to define

the purpose of america

i actually reject that

because the people who were indispensable for actually winning America's independence was the common people.

And it was a multiracial common people.

And they had a dream and an idea of a totally independent republic.

Totally. They had a dream too you know so it's not just

the founding fathers who should have the exclusive uh although it's part of our national mythology

that they do i agree it's just of our national mythology that they do, I agree.

It's just not true, though.

And then second of all, I'll say this again.

Even then, they did not make it a fundamental principle of what the Republic must be forever, because it wasn't put in the Constitution.

So... public must be forever because it wasn't put in the Constitution. So that's what I would say.

The USA was not just founded by the founding fathers. That's our myth. That's our national myth.

The founding fathers are the symbol of the founding. But who are the real founding fathers? The real founding fathers were the masses of people that fought spilled their blood and made it happen. And they were white and they were black as well. And they were also also mixed between black and white so that was the real founding it's it was the founding peoples of america not just the founding fathers

you know let's remember that not i'm not demonizing the founding fathers either i'm just saying you can't reduce the whole vision

and the whole spirit of what america is to their opinions and to their beliefs and to their

point of view because there were other points of view.

No nation is founded just because of a few people having an idea.

A nation is founded by a great movement of the masses, a great movement and development happening among the, you know, the tens of thousands of ordinary people who are rising up and a great movement overtakes them and animates them, calls them into action.

Dakota So Sirellian.

What an

interesting name.

What's going on?

Well, I'll give you time to find your mic we'll bring the based irish republican

are we talking about me who is speaking right now uh Dakota

okay Dakota sorry Dakota

Sirelli go ahead Dakota

so good discussion

I appreciate it

I just had

a few questions and then

I'll probably

refocus on listening in, not much of a

debater. My first

question, I'll preface with like a

general, like, do you have

critiques of Marx.

And then specifically, I kind of see Hegelian bias to Mark

and that he kind of lands out this from work that he calls scientific,

but he says, or more so his followers portrayed as an inevitable

economic rule that

it's going to portray

that history is going to see the way

that he has laid out for

right now obviously it has

Marxists have talked about this

for decades since then, but it does

have kind of like a Gellian like, oh,

the tides of history will

naturally lead to this

path. Right. What do you have to say

about it? Yeah, I think

people, it's

misinterpreted a lot.

So the first question is, do I have critiques

of Marx? The late marks,

I'm not trying to say there's a

young versus old Marx hard

split. I don't agree with that. Epistemological

break idea from El Tusser, but I definitely think that the late marks corrected most of his mistakes that I would talk about, which are mainly, you know, about his predictions about where the revolution is going to break out and his, wrong views about Russia and non-European civilizations.

But I think the late marks really matured from that.

And by the time there's a light marks, I don't think there's really much I have to critique marks on. I think he pretty much was coming into having the correct view. You know, it's an interesting question of what Marx should be critiqued on.

The only things I could think of Marx should be critiqued on is Lenin, but Lenin already did it, you know?

And maybe he wasn't even critiquing Marx.

Maybe he was just applying Marxism in a completely different age than the one Marx lived in.

So now the question of historical fatalism, which is what you're talking about,

what Marx says is that by the laws of history, capitalism is going to dissolve and socialism will be victorious. But it is still upon living men and women to correctly respond to these laws of history without that responsivity.

And we will respond inevitably because we're part of history.

Our response to changes in the mode of production and the relations of production and the forces of production,

those are themselves inevitable.

We can't, there's no possibility of just standing still in the face of historical change.

We will inevitably respond to it, right?

So for Marx, he was himself embodying what he viewed as the correct response.

He was perceiving and he had correct insight into the laws of history.

And basically, he would say that all of the

false responses are not

they're not

somehow escaping these laws

but they are prolonging

their fullest

realization or at least clear

realization by creating you know a cycles of insanity and and you know um confusion we're

you know and sure that could go on for quite a little that could

definitely go on for quite a while but the fundamental antithms is people which false

consciousness is responding to falsely, you know, is still there. It's not going to go away. It's just if you don't respond to it correctly, to the laws of history, you know, you will be condemned into a never-ending cycle of just not understanding

the essence of what's going on and condemning yourself to like a spiral of decay and confusion

and barbarism and so on and so on.

But insofar as history picks up from where it last left off, which is inevitable.

I mean, it's a question of probability. It's absolutely inevitable because although there are infinitely many different permutations about how you can respond to the laws of history,

eventually you're going to, someone's going to strike the right one, right?

And it's going to help continue to facilitate the development of socialism.

It's just only when this is done so consciously and on a scientific basis will so

many absolutely avoidable tragedies and mistakes and so on be prevented. But it will happen

inevitably regardless, just as a matter of probability.

So the other questions talking about the national as opposed to the economic questions, right?

So I've kind of changed it

after listening to you talk to a based

dumer base whatever the fuck

um

is there a

valid anxiety to European

peoples both in the overseas colonies as well as obviously in Europe

to their demographic group. Is there what? A valid, valid anxiety. So that anxiety that exists

and let me Let me explain

on it a little bit you don't mind as.

Obviously, the United States

is a complex

racial intermixing,

but

take a place like Ireland, where there isn't

a complex history.

It has been largely homogenous first centuries for a millennia or more, right?

And you see dramatic changes happening.

And they are happening at the behest of a capitalist class that wants to significantly alter demographics because it's conducive to

lower prices for them, right?

Lower labor costs.

Is it valid for people who have to

anxiety that are also tied up

into their national anxieties?

Because as an Irish man, your

your anxiety

in that you're...

Is it Dakota? Dakota.

Okay. Yeah.

Yeah, no, no. I just think Ireland.

No, I'm not British.

So I want to...

Dave Irishman or something.

Yeah.

So there's obviously the complexities that happen in America that make it a much more complicated question.

Yeah, I understand your question.

That's why you moved the Irish example because it's easier to elucidate the point.

Yeah.

I'll answer.

You know, and I... Your question, I know what your question is.

So the problem in places like Ireland and other European countries is that there's a total loss of popular sovereignty in general.

There's a total loss of any kind of sense of communal belonging and national

belonging in general. And that is because of the rule of the capitalist class. That is because the

majority of people, the working working class don't have a voice

you know so with the introduction of foreigners who have a very radically different culture and way

of life and lifestyle and so on and so on, that feeds into this resentment because it's like,

but the original problem was a class struggle.

That's what I'm trying to say.

If there was a confident leadership of the working

classes within Ireland, there would not be enmity between people of different racial groups.

Would mass immigration and the importation of cheap labor be curbed? Yes.

Of course it would.

There was no mass immigration in communist states, you know?

If it were to occur...

I was valid in wanting to retain their Irish...

I don't like being interrupted, you know?

I really don't like being interrupted, you know. I really don't like being interrupted, you know.

I really don't like being interrupted, you know.

And you're, you have a very loud voice, and I don't appreciate it.

In any case, what I'm trying to say is that the confident leadership of the working classes can permit the possibility of different groups mixing together on a sovereign basis.

And so the reason communist states didn't have mass immigration wasn't because they believed in ethnic and racial purity.

It was because they understood the flow of populations to be a matter of planning at scale you have to take into account the social dimension of social harmony of you know planning the economy in

general you have to take into account populations so they were very careful about things like this. But in any case,

to attack the immigrants themselves and demonize the immigrants themselves is a big mistake.

The problem is sovereignty. The problem is no popular sovereignty. The problem is not the immigrants themselves. The immigrants themselves, including economic immigrants, why wouldn't they go to some country to get more money? I mean, why wouldn't they, you know? They're not the issue the issue is also not a so-called marxist plot to destroy the white race

again the issue has always been the class struggle it's always been the same issue. It's the erosion

of popular sovereignty.

In those countries where the immigrants

come from,

the global capitalist class also

tries to destroy their popular sovereignty.

Also tries to create neo-colonial

governments to enslave.

So this is coming to Europe now,

or has been, since the decline of

social democracy,

at least.

And Europeans, you know,

are realizing that they also

are becoming subjugated by this global imperial

hegemony that has subjugated so many people, you know? So the thing to focus on is waging

struggle, two struggles, the struggle of the working class, the class struggle, and then simultaneously the democratic struggle for popular sovereignty, actually having control over government and expelling NATO,

expelling the CIA, expelling these extra Republican, extra constitutional forces that obscure the possibility of real Republican, you know, governance.

And the question of immigrants should not be the focus because then the struggle becomes pathological. Then the elites can depict this as a struggle of natives against foreigners and they, you know, it's not our our fault we have no part in it and it just becomes a stupid um a stupid uh like retard fest you know it's just completely

devoid of any strategic possibility of actually confronting the real forces behind the enmity and

the turmoil, you know, which is the capitalist class. So this is what I'll say. Thank you very much

for coming on. Based Irish Republican,

please go ahead.

Thank you very much for bringing me up. I came

on because of the previous discussion.

I found that conversation

about my own country to be interesting.

I agree with

very much your sentiment there and

a lot of the facts in ways

that you dissected it,

to be honest with you,

has.

And pardon me for my accent

if you need me to slow down feel free to you i can understand

you sorry that's great pal um but yeah pal the way i see it uh growing up in this country a long

time you know we didn't really have much diversity at all

we were essentially a third world country you know and somewhere around the 80s around the

calthic tiger and the european union we kind of came up the first world level.

But it was very bad for a long time.

There's a lot of immigration to the country at the moment.

It's not very popular.

You know, it really isn't very popular across the island.

And I even see this sentiment from people who are not originally Irish or, let's say, mixed Irish or what have you.

You know, I hear the same sentiment because everybody would agree across the board that the way that the governments are in full amount of it is purely for profit.

Yeah, I mean, I think that the reason for mass immigration into ireland is clearly a tactic by the ruling classes

to do two things one eliminate popular sovereignty overall and this is a this you know it's it's not just

well it's mainly about you know, the competition of labor,

harming the power of labor, that's the obvious one. But people also overlook there's another

dimension. Create conflict and turmoil to help erode popular sovereignty,

to depict the masses of people as irrational and incapable of having a voice politically.

Because what they're trying to prepare Europe for is a kind of Macron-style centrist technocratic dictatorship.

So this is something they also do is they'll inflame and incite conflicts among the masses

by suddenly importing masses and large, large values and people who, you know, there's not a clear

history of understanding or coexistence between Irish people and these people. So, you know,

and then the whole point is that the bourgeois is that the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the capital's class, they'll come in as the saviors of the day. Okay. The people, you know, they're, they're, they're irrational. They can't govern themselves. So we're going to come in and be Macron and be the responsible ones to save us from barbarism.

So those are the two things going on the way I see it.

But go ahead.

You see your hand raised.

Thank you very much.

And again, thanks very much for having me up.

I came up before or something

and I believe I came in contact with the likes

of Timmy and Harold and Burr and stuff

but yeah

like it it's an interesting

place in my country like it's a

microcosm up in the other countries

and I do appreciate a lot of things

in them

in this country here

we're after the end

of the war in

1998 we are kind of

a victim now of foreign intelligent agencies so European, American

and Mossad, you know, so they play a lot of sciops on us, but it's an interesting country.

I do encourage everyone to come visit because genuinely it'll change your perspective on things.

Like I said, I've been the other countries in the America been the other European countries

and it is

very different my home

long like I'd love to visit

Ireland sometime so based Irish

thank you so much for coming on I really appreciate

it

Walter we have Walter who is a state representative from Minnesota HD30A.

What's going on, Walter?

How are you all doing?

I'm just hanging out.

It's right at night. I'm in the final week of a very

contentious legislative session and just having a good time.

You mentioned a phrase that caught my attention, which is popular

solvent team. And the reason why that phrase

catches my attention is because that was quite literally

the concept

that was advocated by Stephen Douglas

in the historically famous

Douglas Lincoln debate

and

what he was advocating for

was slavery

quite literally. He was

saying that if U. you have territories that want to expand and want to establish themselves if they want to vote as the people that other human beings are less than then they probably ought to be able to because they have

popular sovereignty.

And so I guess what I guess what I'm wondering is

like is your conception of that

out of sync with that historical analogy, or are you talking about something?

I think it very, I mean, the notion of popular sovereignty definitely does not originate in that.

That seems like

an opportunistic use

of an enlightenment concept

at the time

for the purposes

of advancing the interests

of the planter class.

So definitely not.

For example, I'll give you an example of what I think, you know, is a form of popular sovereignty.

The popular sovereignty of the Palestinian people in Gaza were fighting for that against occupation.

It's actually something I think is similar to when the American people were fighting the occupation of the British.

You know, that's really where you see popular sovereignty try to assert itself i mean okay i

no i'll take that for granted. My question is...

I mean, why do you got to take it for granted?

Do you not agree with it?

No, I don't.

Because the people of Hamas

want to destroy the Jews. Why would they want to destroy the Jews.

Why would they want to destroy the Jews?

Is there any reason that could possibly be legitimate?

No, I'm just, it's, it's really weird.

Like you're saying, oh, they want to destroy the Jews like where

how based on what

what could what could

possibly be the reason the river

to the sea the river to the sea

that whole concept is obviously

intended to

convey the sense that we should engage in genocide against the Jewish people in that area.

How is it genocide to demand a one state that doesn't exclude all non-Jewish people by definition.

The state of Israel literally does not exclude anybody.

There are Arab people who live in Israel.

So can a majority of the so-called country of Israel be non-Jewish

ethnically according to their racial

conception of Judaism, which is actually against

the Torah and against the Jewish

religion?

Are you suggesting that the state of Israel

discriminates against who can be part of their country

as long as they're peaceful?

They literally don't allow anyone to become citizens except people that have blood

quantoms that come it's like literally out of nazi germany where you have to have blood

quantoms of the right race in order to be a citizen you could literally be a guy living in

new zealand and if you have the right blood

quantum they'll open the door for you welcome you're a you you are the citizen

israel claims to be the state of all jews in the world based on a racial notion of Judaism

and it defines that

state based on that

and you know you could see why that

would upset the people who were like you know

already living there

kind of like

well why did they say

what

that being the case

why did they accept

and grant rights to

people who are not Jewish

because they anticipated those people will always be a minority

if they if there was a right of return for the Palestinians who were

expelled in the in 4748, then that would no longer be the case. So would they tolerate a non-Jewish

majority? Is that even possible for a so-Jewish majority? Is that even

possible for a so-called Jewish state?

Would any

country tolerate being

taken over by people who are not

associated with the

nation?

So it's kind of like, do you support apartheid South Africa?

Because that was their same reasoning, that we can't let black people have voting rights or else they're going to take over our white nation.

Well, absolutely not.

I mean, but that's not the same thing.

Why not?

Why not?

Because the Jewish nation in Israel, like, the Jews have been historically persecuted for thousands of years.

Like, there's been no place to go.

Why is that the problem of Palestinians?

What do they have to do with that?

The nation of Israel is historically belongs to the Jews.

I mean, they've been there for thousands of years and there's no... All right.

What, what, Alright, what...

You said you're in Minnesota.

What land...

What people does that land

historically belong to?

Well, I mean, I pay my mortgage and I pay my property tax.

So just paying mortgage and property.

We went from they're allowed to go and steal all this land because they had ancestors that were there thousands of years ago to paying mortgage and property tax.

What legitimizes a people to just steal land, you know, if it's not?

They didn't steal land.

Well, basically,

anybody who want,

no, listen, brother, anybody who wants to live in Israel without killing people can do so.

That's not true. If you're Jewish, yeah, according to how they define it.

But if you're non-Jewish, you can't.

Unless you were granted

the right a long time ago.

Um, you can't,

you know, I can't go there. Can I go there?

I can't.

I, I would love to

Are you Jewish?

No, sir.

I would love to have evidence of what they're playing.

Even you can't go.

Okay.

Why are you defending Israel? they don't even want you in

because according to them

you're not

you're not racially allowed

I don't think that's true

it is I think I can go there tomorrow

well not as a citizen

well I tomorrow. Well, not as a citizen. Well, if you can provide me

with evidence of that, that would be

significant. they're not going to let you in if you're not

Jewish according to them

so I mean on what basis so on what basis does any nation have a right to determine who comes in

who can't come in but in Israel it's based on race

that's the problem

what about the United States

did we get to determine

not on race

did we get to determine

like can

what do you think about you, when Trump in his first term said that, you know, people who are coming from predominantly terrorist-oriented nations did not be in the United States?

Is that a bad thing?

Again,

we're talking about race here.

In so-called

Israel, it's a Jewish state

for the Jewish people, which is a racial

concept to them, to the

Zinus.

If the to the zinus um if the u.s started you know having racial laws i think that would be pretty concerning of course it wouldn't i'd be the first one to object to it as a

object to it in israel where it's a racial apartheid state.

I don't believe you.

If you could prove that to me, that'd be...

I would probably change my tune, but I don't believe you.

So, do you think it's a form of discrimination that if you have a

certain blood quantum of jewish you can be a citizen but if you're non-jewish you barely have any chance of that

I mean

so the question that

could just as easily be applied to any of the tribal nations that we have here in the United States of America

So, you know, I have

Some

Native blood in me somewhere deep down my wife is probably has more

um my

her great her grandmother

is a elder in the

uh

chippelot tribe

are literally defined by lineage they're not

full blown ethno states they you know of course defined by lineage. They're not full-blown ethnostates.

You know, you can't claim to have lineage

from a group. No, no, no, literally, of course

they are. Like, literally, you have to prove

that you are racially aligned

with their line.

No, you just have dissent from the, but that's like a tribal identity.

That's not an ethno-

Okay. What's the difference between that one you're talking about in Israel?

Because Israel is a full-blown

ethno state that has a law of return.

So it is literally every

tribal nation in the United States of America.

They're not ethnic states. They don't actually

have real sovereignty. They don't have

sovereignty. Walter, there's no

checkmate. They don't have sovereignty. Plus, there's no checkmate. They don't have sovereignty.

Plus, you're missing like a really...

Are you kidding me?

You're telling me that the tribal nations

of the United States of America don't have sovereignty?

They would all object to that.

Pretty aggressively.

Well, I don't care if they would object. It's the fact

that they don't have sovereignty.

Okay. Well,

I don't know what else to talk to you about.

They can't have their own army. They can't have their own anything.

It's not sovereignty.

Okay. All right. So apparently

sovereignty is based upon whether or not you can build nuclear

weapons. This has been a very entertaining conversation.

I appreciate it. Literally. Literally.

You lost it. I appreciate it.

Literally. Literally. Literally. Literally. You lost it. I appreciate it. Literally.

Literally. Literally.

Literally.

Literally.

That's literally it.

Okay.

Enjoy that.

I have a good night, man.

Well, why do you love racism?

That's a ridiculous question to ask you a half-whalter.

Why do you love Hitler?

That is a ridiculous question to ask.

Why do you love Hitler?

Just answer it.

I'm not going to accept your stupid premise, you fucking retard. I'm a half black, half white man.

A guy who loves Hitler. Why do you love Hitler, Walter?

I don't dip shit. It seems like you do.

And no matter how many times you say it

is not going to make it true.

So you support Hamas.

So you support Hamas.

No, you support

humas so if you don't

like that's how he thought it is you supporting

him on you're the biggest Hitler lover

okay

oh my god

you're hilarious dude I love you.

I'm not laughing.

Have a good time.

Have a good time.

Why do you love Hitler?

Why do you love the racial laws?

Enjoy yourself, dipshit.

Why do you love Hitler's racial laws and worldview?

That's all I'm asking.

All he left.

Well,

well, ladies and gentlemen,

I'll never know why he loves Hitler.

Anyway, let's bring Rambly, the most enlightened guest.

Go ahead, Rambley.

Go ahead.

You have 15 seconds, 15, 14. Go ahead. You have 15 seconds.

15. 14.

All right.

13. 12.

Hold on.

11. 10.

Would you support the pro side in a debate about the U.S. criminalizing homosexuality?

What?

Would you be pro

U.S. criminalizing

homosexuality has?

I mean, I see no need for that.

I mean, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I don't really think anyone about that. I mean, I don't see that happening anytime soon. I don't really think anyone

about that. Really? Really?

Because a lot of your party, you guys love this

BF ever again. You guys love the

UPS. We're cutting out a lot.

I don't care.

I don't think people use bad words.

It means that they want to have these extreme

laws by American standards.

Why shouldn't I believe that you guys

are pro-criminalization?

I don't, you know, I'm

disconnecting.

You believe whatever you want, dude.

I don't care what you believe.

You ask me a question I answer.

You could believe whatever you want.

I don't really care.

Why would we...

The fuck. the fuck it's like a hero UFO or some shit anyway

um guys is anyone else requesting

yeah we got Guys, is anyone else requesting?

Yeah, we got Showtime

25 years in

China, hip-hop adventurer.

Give me one second. I'll be right back.

Bring someone on, though.

I brought up someone,

but they feel connecting their real

spiel. If they don't connect, you can bring up Showtime next. Thank you. All right.

I'm here.

What did I miss?

Yeah, they just put me up.

Peace and blessings. This is Showtime from...

Oh, Showtime. I know you, man. What's up? How are you doing?

I'm doing good, brother. So I wanted to ask you about a really unfortunate incident.

I'm not trying to instigate.

I saw your letter, but I did see those leaks, the China leaks.

And I don't know if you want to talk about it anymore, but it caught my attention.

Just want to know in general, like the position of the party on China moving forward.

No, our position did not change at all.

We were, we had a misunderstanding with a very specific group, you know, very, like, people that we know personally, right? So this, we're not

talking about, you know, any big change in the principle overall, like, like politically. This,

we're talking about talking about a diplomatic incident

with a very

like

personal group that we

know personally.

And it was a misunderstanding anyway, but even if

it wasn't, it wouldn't have changed our view about China

overall. It wouldn't have.

We were venting and we were, you know, in private, we don't always reaffirm our, the stances that we take for granted in general, you know?

I mean, even Carlos, a lot of people took offense to what he said, but, you know, what he, what he meant is that we shouldn't take it personal because of the pragmatism, you know, when it, there's a, there's an overall spirit of pragmatism, which is not based in

ideology and stuff sometimes when it comes to, you know, business and media outfits. So we were talking about

Guancha, which is a media, not the whole, not even all of Guantancha, they're just the people that we knew, you know.

So it was just a big misunderstanding and it was also, like I'm saying it was misunderstanding because it was all cleared up like a week or two after. Everything was fine. But then also, we were not talking about overall China. We weren't talking about that. We weren't talking about Xi Jinping and the, you know, the CPC.

So I don't know if that helps at all.

Well, I hear you.

In private, when, you know, when you talk in private, when you actually know people and you're like that plugged in, you're not going to preach to the choir. Like, we already take it as a baseline. We support China. We support Russia. It's like it's a given to us you know it's not even a question

the last question um are you guys back on this bag of communism too i see the slogan pop it back up

is that directly with the party or is that just...

No, it's not a party thing.

It's still...

If you ever see it, it's still mainly an infrared thing

or maybe a Jackson thing, but...

The party...

I don't even know what the party would do with it

you know that

is the party going to be going to maga rallies

and no probably not

and and reppping maga communism

no

but uh Maga Communism, no. But the slogan, I think, is coming back into use because a lot of people are, because we see

Hassan use it and we see everybody making memes of Trump as like Hamas.

And we kind of feel like, you know, we made this meme. making memes of Trump as like Hamas.

And we kind of feel like, you know, we made this meme.

This was ours.

So that's why, honestly, it's not... A lot of people think that there was no...

I'm not saying it was a big joke, but like, it is an irony.

You know, I was talking to a woman a few days ago through Twitter, through X.

I think her name is, I don't, something, misha she was like so what what what are you guys saying here

like you know that trump has no principles you know that he's not motivated by ideology. Are you saying that just

accidentally, you know, things have fallen into place in such a way that he is inadvertently,

you know, assuming positions that are more progressive than Democrats but are not for the intentions of

it's like yeah it's we're not assuming his intentions are good at all we're not assuming that

he it's motivated by principle but that was always the point from the beginning. It's about an irony. The contradictions of the U.S. Empire being revealed so openly and nakedly that they actually opened the door for giving expression to genuine opposition to the empire, you know?

Like, and I'm not saying that, like, Trump goes so extreme that the opposition to Trump is what does that.

It's like, no, like Trump himself unconsciously and inadvertently is starting to articulate positions that I think would not have been possible before, but because of the state of the heightened contradictions of the U.S. Empire, he'll, like, say something and mean one thing, but the actual meaning is

entirely different how it comes out, you know?

It's like a Freudian slip constantly.

And these constant Freudian slips, if you want to call them that, I guess, you can actually say maybe there's a way to turn that into something principled.

You know, not turn Trump principled, but turn this sentiment of non-interventionism abroad, the sentiment, I mean, you know, and, you know, prioritizing the interests of our country at the expense of NATO and so on and so on,

what if we could give that principle, you know? We're not expecting Trump to, but what if we could? You know?

He's opening in a lot of ways the door for that among a lot of people who otherwise wouldn't have.

And no, his motivations are not good. They're not based in any shared ideology with us, but it's still happening in a way, you know?

Strahl Stanley, what's up?

So I guess I don't know if that clears things up for you.

Yeah, that does.

That helps a lot.

I appreciate it.

Thanks for bringing me up.

And give a shout to Infrared Henry and Harold down there.

And stay positive, man.

Be good, brother.

Thank you, brother.

I appreciate it so much.

Thank you.

See you later.

All right, guys.

Is there anyone else requesting oh Jennifer what's going on

hello Hello?

Hello?

What is going on?

Well, anyway, let's bring on safe ground.

Oh, wait, sorry.

Wait, wait. No, no no no yeah you're still on oh god fucking twitter anyway how are you

what's up jennifer no long time yeah long time to see

no here

yeah

god

goodness um

I kind of just like

came on here

randomly

when family came on

I'm like I don't want to hear

this fucking guy again

but um I don't really have I don't think I have like a criticism, but I do have an idea.

So it's kind of weird.

It's kind of weird.

It's kind of weird.

Like goes me on this.

Okay.

Let's hear it hello oh my god oh my god sorry okay

so I'm like so this date in March Sorry. Okay.

So I'm like, so does the date March 18th,

2002, sound familiar to you?

No.

I think I was still on Twitter. I didn't think so.

Yeah, but I didn't think so

But that date

You put out a tweet

Basically

I don't have to tweet up right now

But it's basically saying that

I got to interrupt

Guys if I suddenly lose power

Uh That's why.

I'm like, I feel like I'm getting bombarded right now, like missiles.

Anyway, please go ahead.

So you put out a tweet talking about Gapers. And there was a tweet talking about gamers.

And there was a tweet, gamers.

Gamers, yeah.

Yes, and about how we basically need to smash their consoles.

And I was just thinking the other day, I was like, you know, like the U.S., like America, American culture, like I feel like there isn't a kind of tradition, specifically for boys to transition from like boyhood to like kind of like adulthood manhood like you can kind of quasi reason like like like you know sexual debut yeah, I had sex. So now I'm not a virgin anymore.

Now I'm a man, blah, a while.

But that doesn't really, I don't know.

I don't feel like it's really tangible.

So I was thinking, it's kind of crazy idea,

but I was just thinking that you,

like imagine you're out

maybe in the field or something you're just in a place

and you have like

safety goggles on

and in one hand you have like a sledgehammer

and the other hand

you have a console

PS4 or PS5, whatever.

And you, like, make a speech or whatever.

And you just, like, smash that console.

You smash your console.

Peace is fine everywhere.

You smash the console.

I like the idea, but the one I had in mind is that I'll basically wear like a hooded robe.

And there won't be a speech, it'll just be sudden out of nowhere.

I'll break into their homes and break their consoles.

But I think it's like it's kind of like you like you

like you be the change

you know

cause like being a change you want to see

a surprise

because

no like it has to

there can't be any prep there can't be

with you like

what a great transition.

Like, pretend like it's your birthday.

You're 30 years old now.

You still have that console.

You smash it.

I think it's not a surprise.

There'll be too much cope and, like, there'll be, it'll be, it needs to be a surprise. You need to hit them like a train, that the gaming, it's destroyed.

But like, I feel like, what better way to, like, really put your money where your mouth is to just say, like, I'm not a gamer anymore.

So many of you need to do that afterwards. I feel like it'll be a gamer anymore. So none of you need to be gamers

afterwards. I feel like it'll be a good

transition from like just

adolescent boyhood to like manhood.

They can just like smash it.

After the after it's smashed, that's what

happens. It's like they also get an award.

They get an award that says,

I'm no longer a gamer.

And it doesn't have to be,

it doesn't just have to be you.

It could be like other ATP members.

They just like,

they have their sled cameras,

they have their psychological,

they're just like,

and then they just like go out

with the roads going into humans. And then it gets, and then they just like go out with the robes

going into homes and then it gets

like, let's drag them out of the basement

and then they do it.

To keep the console, smash it.

I don't, yeah, I don't you have to do it anymore.

Then they do it to their neighbors

and they were the robes and they,

and it's like a legacy that

it'll be a whole new like american like just like century new american tradition of boys

going into becoming men they're just letting go of adolescence i like this idea. We have the 40-year-old men

who like literally have

like wives and children

going out and smashing like

their consoles

and just be like,

I'm not doing this in like.

You could totally start

and they like come out

with like GT6 or whatever.

It would be like the greatest that's

when it will start as soon as

Gt6 comes out yes as soon as

GtA 6 comes out like that's when

you start you'll be like no

we're not doing GTA6 we're smashing

the consoles I'm sorry we're smashing the

gaming PCs.

Sorry.

Everything.

That's, yeah.

Everything.

Yeah.

That's it.

Well, Jennifer, really big ideas.

Yeah.

It's already in motion.

Thank you so much. I'm glad you listen to it.

Yeah. No problem. in motion. Thank you so much. I'm glad you listen to it. Yeah.

No problem.

So, good night.

Safe ground.

What's going on?

Safe ground.

And you're going to be the last speaker.

Okay.

So, you can hear me?

Yes. Great. How are hear me? Yes.

Great. How are you doing?

Good. How are you?

Excellent. So we look out at the world and we see what we see. We hear what we hear. We feel what we feel.

But sometimes, like a child getting born and becoming one year old, two year old, and so on and so forth, they grow up in a system that they learn how to talk and communicate.

We need to go ahead.

I don't feel smash this console or smash this or shoot this.

I think we need to have some...

I didn't say shoot anything, to be clear.

I didn't say, I did not, I did not say that you did.

I just wanted to clarify it.

Okay.

Clarified it is.

I'm saying that I feel

that we need to have some baselines, education,

you know, understand

this is a dictionary.

If we have misunderstandings, we go

to said dictionary

and like you mean it in

you know, definition number three. And three and you know we need to have

clarity but we need to have a world i feel i'm expressing my feelings my thoughts here that gives the

opportunity of uh that opportunity of that belief

that Jefferson put forward and before him other people,

the unalienable rights concept that we are endowed

by this concept

of certain

liberties and

a belief that we can

think different ways.

We can behave in different ways.

Now when it comes to us being

in a society and a realism of life, we do need to, as a society, work with our neighbors and so on and so forth. I'll lend my plane here. I don't want to... I'm not going to go on and on and on here.

But the thing is, I feel that whether you're talking communism,

republicanism, this ism, that ism, my flag,

your flag, concepts, I think we can sometimes be going down a slippery slope when we think we have the Bible.

We have the magic book.

I hope that we live in a world and a universe that

is going to be different.

But we need to go ahead

and protect certain things

of like people hurting other people

unnecessarily. What I see

happening in the wars around the world,

I think so many people are being played and misunderstanding.

They're being lied to or manipulated by so many politicians.

You look out and you see the rich yachts and mansions

and this and that while you have other

people actually living

on street sidewalks

and so on so forth.

And I'll land the plane there. Thank you for your ear.

Thank you safe ground. I appreciate it. Thank you for your ear. Thank you, Safe Ground. I appreciate it. Thank you for your perspective.

So I think we're going to wrap up the space with that. That's a good closing note.

And I'll see you guys next thursday bye bye so the space is done great space Great space. Um,

so let's close blue stacks.

And I have Jimmy Johns in my fridge.

I could stay and hang out with you guys, but, or I could eat.

You know, decisions, decisions.

But I'm very hungry, you know, I'm very hungry.

So, guys, I'll have to see you Sunday.

Or it might be Monday.

Worst case.

But Sunday, hopefully.

If not Sunday, then Monday.

All right, guys.

Good stream.

Bye-bye.

See you guys.

Sunday or Monday.

Bye-bye.