Haz vs Oiroliv | InfraredShow Debate

[Music]

okay is this any better

include

billionaire capitalists elon musk people

who you know yeah oppose socialism like

the organization

where workers own the means of

production

where you know

commodities are produced on base of need

not profit

worker alienation is abolished etc

so you asked me to prove that's not hold

on

even mark said that a society where

production is based on need

uh first of all that's that's called

poverty right that's not [ __ ]

communism

second of all uh the principle where

they say from each according to their

ability to each according their need

that's not even what they say is social

they say that's far out in the future

that's the highest and final stage of

communism that's what lenin said

is the one who imposed the distinction

by the way between communism and

socialism

yeah yeah that's right they didn't use

those terms like as different stages

until after marks but

um

i guess the discrepancy is like the way

you were describing socialism kind of

like to me it seemed that it was just

eroding the meaning of the word like

pretty much anybody

could be

yeah that's why it means nothing to call

yourself a socials today because

you're right the word has been totally

eroded and basically means alcohol

because for example there are people who

consider this because it's super

capitalist socialism already won

yeah no i'm saying like like chuds in

you know the midwest or something who

consider themselves capitalists yet they

own

no capital they aren't they don't

control any means of production they're

just workers themselves but they

advocate for the capitalist system right

but yeah but can you realize capital

just like how there's

uh mao zeitong thought there's kim

il-sung thought and there's hoja and

virhoja and there was titoism in in the

cold war america created an ideology

called free market capitalism which was

actually just another flavor of

socialism

i don't know if i agree with that that

you know i'm literally taught you giving

you the biggest red pill of your life

for free by the way

okay well

would you agree with a book

textbook issued by the economic

institute of the academy of sciences of

the ussr

something along those lines that

describes socialism not not just marx

just just start uh the basis of the ussr

uh

it depends what the what's the context

what are they referring it to are they

referring to describing a socialist

society and a socialist economy no i

think they're talking about socialism as

a

a means of a means a mode of production

okay well here i'll just talking about

socialism as a mode of production but

okay

yeah the economic basis of socialist

society is a socialist system of

national economy socialist ownership of

the means of production which have been

consolidated by elimination of the

capitalist economic system the

abolishment of the private ownership of

the means of production and the

eradication of exploitation of man by

man

right so i i don't agree with the latter

uh description but by that definition

the u.s is socialist today

well i mean

not at all because you know and the u.s

capitalism has not been abolished

private ownership

no private ownership is a buzz there's

no private ownership

really in what way like you're

considerations ask the libertarians you

don't really have any private ownership

we have more than the company we have

governments publicly owned we have

government contracts that tell us

we can have things we don't actually own

them

according to the classical liberalism we

don't really yeah exactly the government

doesn't own them the workers don't own

them they're owned by capitalists

no uh no one actually

no one owns them individually at all

which means they're not yeah no no one

owns them individually but collectively

they're owned by a cabalic group a

cartel of capitalists

right

if it's owned by a group that means it's

socialized

lenin by the way lenin called monopoly

capitalism a form of a socialization a

means of production um yeah but by

socialization he meant like the

transition from like individual guilds

producing commodities the transition

from capitalism to socialism and he said

like into in like the industrialization

process yeah he said that this was the

transition from capitalism to souls he

literally said that

yeah exactly yeah the industrialization

which would lead no he wasn't [ __ ]

talking about industrialization

industrialization happened in the 19th

century when lenin was describing

imperialism in the stage of monopoly

capitalism he was talking specifically

about the way in which the means of

production would be becoming

concentrated

and socialized and aggregated right yeah

and the transition to a society that in

lenin's eyes was more planned more

socialized and get had less room for

capitalist markets and he said this was

a transition into socialism yeah the

word socialized the word socialized

doesn't mean that it was socialist it

just means that they transitioned yeah

it wasn't socialist at lenin's time

according to lenin because it was the

highest stage of capitalism

okay again again just because an

industry is socialized meaning that it

doesn't take place like in the household

or it doesn't take place in individual

like

family owned or like guilds or something

doesn't mean that it's publicly owned or

socialist

capitalist industry in the 19th century

wasn't at the level of guilds or

families but you could still say it was

capitalist right yeah yeah but that's

not why lenin was talking about the

socialization of the means of production

he's specifically talking about

how the means of production

are becoming

when london wrote that he was describing

how capital tends to monopolize how

industry in capitalism tends to come to

a monopolization of all industries right

is what he was describing and you think

socialism is a not socialism but

socialization of industry is a process

that can socialization of industry

literally just means

that industry increasingly

organizes itself around

the

fulfillment of social life

okay

so yes i mean evie yeah as benign's

quoting in my chat angles literally

described this as a dialectical process

in which he literally talked about how a

feud a socialist society is invading

from the future

and transforming our society into it

he called it the invading socialist

society which was through

the trusts and the cartels and through

the monopolies so you have to ask

yourself the question what has happened

since lenin's time

but the point of contention that i have

with like what you're sort of talking

about with socialism is the part that

you disregard this last sentence the

abolition of private ownership of the

means of production it has been it has

been a boss libertarians are right

okay well i guess that's just

no meaningful sense disagrees in no

meaningful senses private property is

property private

any longer

private property has ceased to exist

and this network of global financial

institutions which by the way is

completely irrational and inefficient

when it comes to the actual management

of resources and goods and which is

being increasingly organized by

completely impersonal algorithms like

aladdin which is used by blackrock and

which accounts for how many trillions of

the global economy now yeah that is not

actually because of private property

that is specifically because

capitalism has

culminated and condensed itself into a

type of arbitrary institutional

political arrangement

there is no

vitality or any there's no fight there's

no vitality or any

vigor to a capitalist system proper

whatsoever we're basically living in a

socialist economy that is being held

hostage

by these dogmatic precepts uh first of

all in no specific order institutional

arrangements that are the legacy of the

20th century right

and all these cartels and monopoly

groups

of families like the rockefellers and

the morgans

and you know whoever else you want to

name them

who have basically maintained their

power in an increasingly

uh in in a way that is increasingly

circumvents the laws of capitalist

accumulation which is based on like

brute political power like in feudalism

okay i just see like if you describe

sort of the economic reality of today as

being socialist then i it would just ask

like then what are you fighting for then

like what's what's the purpose if

socialism has already been achieved

socialism is just the base but the

superstructure is still the old

it came from the old system yeah so

that's what it talks about in critique

of the gertha program but again i'm just

going to ask you like what how do you

define private ownership because

yeah let's put it this way do you do you

think there's class struggle under

socialism

it depends on what degree of social

and according to

yeah yeah but according to mao there is

where mao is

class struggle continues through

socialism

and it it that the whole i have said the

whole key

to today's uh

struggle

is the sino-soviet split actually

sino-soviet split prove there's a class

struggle under socialism and that's the

same struggle we're dealing with now

where our professional managerial class

and our state bureaucracy as well as the

monopoly capitalists

kind of do resemble the soviet

bureaucracy

uh

of which was a kind of that's where

barbara eichenrich got her critique of

the professional managerials in the

first place it was against the soviet

bureaucracy right and that's what the

western bureaucracy and the western

establishment increasingly resembles

um

and we are kind of waging a class

struggle that is within socialism and

that is the whole scandal of what we're

dealing with

and so just like as an anarchist that

would probably be one of the points that

i would use to sort of explain why the

ussr was not you know

fully communist or like entirely

socialist just because of the fact that

the way that the party was structured

and the levers of power

were strong

it's not class though that there's

another new class it's not a class but

functioning

of control sovereignty and power

derive from the metaphysics of statehood

created under the conditions of 17th

century anglo-saxon modernity where they

viewed this kind of state of nature of

complete wilderness and that power is

like a zero-sum game where it's like you

have power and you hold it over others

at their expense

at this individual level like we are all

individual sovereign free beings and

power necessarily comes at each and

every one of them i've read

whatever you want but it's basically

this idea of states power where all

forms of state's power come at the

expense of the range of will freedom and

inherent natural liberty of the

individual whether that's the hobby in

wilderness where we are individual

animals running around on the forest

killing each other for food and for

competition or it's you can have a

rousseau view where we're all free

individuals uh and we're expressing our

natural liberty running around naked in

the forest or you can have the lock view

where you know we have this inherent

innate

natural law of liberty whatever the [ __ ]

you want right it's all coming from the

same metaphysics of it's all coming from

a very specific

very non-universal view of um the

relationship between the state and human

beings as well as nature

which was definitely outmoded and

overthrown

by the science of marxism leninism and

you have to understand that ideologies

like anarchism well the most famous

anarchist in hitler in history was adolf

hitler right so

i'm pretty sure it's like emma goldman

or it is definitely adolf hitler by the

way

uh i don't know by the way emma goldman

is actually famous for her racist

vitriol calling the blaming the problem

of bolshevism on the asiatic uh

character and non-european character of

the russians and the peasants oh they're

inherently oriental despots she said all

sorts of racist vitriolics all of that

culminates in adolf hitler all of it

yeah well i mean i don't know i don't

just because emma goldman said something

doesn't mean i'm gonna automatically

agree with it so if she did say that i

obviously denounced that i'm telling you

the truth hitler was an anarchist

um i don't know i'm pretty sure hitler

was a fascist i mean it's the same thing

where do you think fashion came from

bachelor has its origins in syndicalism

right through george and sorel right and

that's really the bridge between

anarchism and fascism is that it was a

form of anarchism and they took it

through the union syndicalist view of

anarchism right culminating into the

corporates of fascist statehood

corporates right the corporates that

mediate the relationship in the state

and civil society economically and that

from that corporatism you basically get

fascism right according to mussolini so

actually fascism does have its origins

in our anarchism and it's basically an

ultra left deviation because when the

social when the second international

broke down of social democracy which

almost all of the major leftists in

europe were a part of all the major

socials in europe are part of uh there

was a lot of leftist ultra leftist

deviations lenin talked about in

left-wing infantilism uh and in pathol

disorder right left-wing communism

infiltrator so you had the bosovic which

broke the social democracy in a rather

clean way according to the continuity of

historical time in a way that's

consistent with dialectical materialism

and on the other hand you had all these

ultra left deviations from social

democracy the way the recoil would like

um cope with its destruction and those

forms of anarchism council communism and

then also you had mussolini's fascism

which was just another ultra leftist

deviation from trying to make sense of

the collapse of social democracy in the

midst of world war one and they actually

saw world war one as a revolutionary

force which would mobilize all europe

and it'd be a this thing that would

awaken us

and that's the whole source of fascism

by the way so actually it does happen

towards the anarchism they saw world war

one as this chaotic anarchistic event

which was going to overthrow the old

order of europe in the past that's what

they saw um uh world war one as it was

an animal it was in a form of anarchy

right they're anarchists yeah i mean

okay dude just slow down by the way i

don't take adderall this all comes

naturally by the way no i mean i get it

i mean i'm just saying like when you

compare to like someone like how like

destiny speaks i'm just like goddamn you

know i'm not a dgg or anything like that

but

i'm just i just have to say that i you

know i i fundamentally disagree with

that um

conception of anarchism you know just

because like in the simplest form

anarchism simply put is just

the

seeking the abolition of unjust

hierarchies right so

if you just go off of that fascism is

probably well defined defining something

as

that's like saying i want to abolish a

bad monday you know what i'm saying it

doesn't really mean anything it doesn't

actually like refer to anything real

it's kind of a talk it's like i want a

good thing and not a bad thing well you

have to be more specific everyone nobody

wants anything to be unjust justice by

nature is tautologically and

exomatically defined as a state of

balance in a state of of good if

something is unjust that means it's

deviated from what you consider a

natural and good order right so anyone

who's going to find something is unjust

i mean yeah every we we don't no one

wants anything unjust it's just like you

have to get to meet up potato why you're

characterizing state power and the world

that is today is unjust they're not

going to find the essence of what your

ideology is in the first place and it's

really not hard to see how you get from

a to b from there to adolf hitler

yeah exactly it's very hard to see how

you get from you know the abolition of

unjust hierarchies to adolf hitler who

is concerned because when you put it

this way right when you consider the

entire wealth of the past right when you

consider the entire wealth of past and

all the wealthy accumulation of all the

things that we've inherited like all the

forms of states power political power

society culture tradition all that when

you all consider that completely unjust

and completely meaningless and all you

know it's completely arbitrary in the

face of the modern uh the equality of

the modern subject the cartesian subject

right you had you end up getting to this

liquidationist point of view where you

can kind of arbitrarily exterminate

things wholeheartedly from history

replace them entirely with your own with

these mythological fantasies you pull

entirely out of your own ass and that's

really where fascism when the hitler

thing is coming from it's this anarchic

way of destroying the entire past

destroying the entire world replacing it

with your own fantasy instead so that's

why you can say we're going to go and

invade eastern europe we can enslave the

slavs we can exterminate the slavs

exterminate whole people's whole

histories whole cultures whole groups

and get into all this genocide and the

reason because he shares the anarchistic

presumption that all those things that

exists like oh they're just like unjust

hierarchies they're all completely

arbitrary things we've inherited from

the past we have to replace them with

the cartesian kaguto of modern d

now i would argue against that because

it would be an unprincipled

application of the term unjust no it

wouldn't because there

because the premise of that being an

unjust target doesn't mean it's possible

for there to be a just argument

everything would be completely arbitrary

parameters super just complete chaos

which is what the fastest view is yeah

have certain anarchists are good at

breaking things and they're good at

blowing things up but they've never been

good at building anything they need

people like adolf hitler to ever build

anything and that's what hitler did i

don't think that's necessarily true you

could look at the anarchist communes of

catalonia

jazz what do you mean jazz catalonia was

a complete catastrophe everyone even

george orwell who called himself an hour

he went to catalonia he said what a dump

this was like the chas of the of the 30s

this was a complete dump it was

completely degenerate it was a life was

so horrible the peasants were rebelling

against them in catalonia nobody was

having a good time there and that's why

franco's forces won because those

antichrists were having such a shitty

mess in catalonia everyone knew

catalonia was a [ __ ] disaster right

and only last friday it only lasted four

years anyway they can even hold

themselves and yeah being able to

military repel the fascist forces is a

good index of how well you're being able

to organize your society in the first

place so i don't think anarchists are

ever good at organizing anything in

their lives

well i mean i don't know there have been

they're definitely been throughout

history you know anarchist communes you

could even look at pre-history

of history historical anarchist

communists

i mean

you could say rojo right now but i feel

like rojo was kind of too serious the

cia experiment funded by the americans

nothing about it if this would happen

why are they getting all their funds for

the americans or the cis the only thing

that's priming them out

i agree with you i agree with the

eurohas probably most definitely cia but

if you look at the way that they

actually organize their government you

know

semi-representative direct democracy

with socialist mode of production

it's pretty stable and pretty good i

would say

there's nothing sorry what are you

talking about it's an organized

democracy this is all lip service so the

fact this is an ethno supremacist

exclusionary form of uh you know it's

just it's just the curtis form of

government it's form funded by the usa

yeah they have all their virtue

signaling organization whatever the [ __ ]

they do that doesn't mean anything

i'm just saying look at the system

absent of the people who are

in the system you can't

can't put in a vacuum because that

system wouldn't even be able to be

sustainable without the cia and the

usual support i mean you could have the

us literally parachute in the middle of

the desert and with five other people we

can set up any system we want and be

successful because we're getting the

protection from uncle sam that's true

okay okay well i mean i don't know i

think it's just fundamental

disagreements and generally just the way

you define socialism

i feel like i i disagree with because

like i said it's just like eroding

the word in itself so the word does

deserve to be eroded because it's

completely eroded away yeah the system

doesn't really have any you know we

shouldn't make a video

because it's really divisive too you

know it's especially the vice versa in

america because a lot of workers when

they hear the word socialism ah they

gotta don't throw a fit over and you'll

have a cool relaxed attitude tour then

workers aren't gonna really have a

problem right if you just have uh

socials and whatever you know workers

like okay that's not the main point but

we're not trying to impose this

radically alien system that we have no

familiarity with whatsoever when we talk

about sources and we're talking about

fighting the capitalist establishment

whatever and we're just getting on board

with that when we talk about social this

way to radically transform our way of

life and what people are used to what

they know makes sense people are not

going to be on board with that it's

going to be a crazy utopian thing that

workers will never be unfortunate

because by the end of the day workers

are normal human beings they want to

have a family want to live their lives

they want to be able to get by you know

they don't want to they don't want to

have to be imposed this crazy alien idea

called socialism it's just there's no

point in making it a big deal you're

saying we should just do away with the

word because it's just trivializing we

shouldn't do away with it but let's

trigger

that

we're not going to do with it but we

let's just trivialize it let's stop

making a big deal over it let's stop

attributing so much value and

significance to the word let's use it

very loosely and it's not going to be a

big deal we don't have to get

okay sure i'm all for not gatekeeping it

i think but when i sort of use the word

colloquially right what i'm describing

is

when workers own the means of their

production and they have meaningful

democratic control over their workplace

right where they don't suffer i don't

want to have democratic control of the

workplace i don't think i think most

people don't want to have control of

person want to go to work clock in clock

out do we got to do then go home and

then do what we want to do on our own

time you go to the workplace doing the

democratic controller

with toilet paper in the bathroom we

don't want to deal with these my new

small thing they waste their time

someone went to the soviet union right

they traveled in the 1930s and they had

a story about this workers development

soviet union did have a type of workers

democracy at the workplace and this is

what happened they would work right and

then afterward they would have a meeting

where they would say okay workers sit

down and decide you know decide on how

you want your workplace to organize this

[ __ ] and the workers hate it so [ __ ]

much because all they want to do is go

home you know they don't want to deal

with this [ __ ] of having to govern

and legislate daily life you know

through these little comments

the goal eventually is to make it to the

point where our material needs are met

enough to the point the material needs a

subsistence to where you don't have to

there's the only the only reason why you

need to the only reason you need checks

and balances over how the workplace is

controlled in such a radical way is

described by the breadth sourceless is

if you begin from the presumption that

human beings are inherently evil and

inherently bad and all power comes at

the expense of individuals which is an

anglo-saxon metaphysical view of state

power which i do not share i think i

think efficient managers can manage

workplaces while taking in into account

the basic human everyday needs of the

workplace without having to distribute

power in a completely horizontal and

equal way now can workers give feedback

yeah even in china you know unions have

represent work

workers have representation on the board

of every single company in china right

so yeah they can give input and stuff

and actually you know if there's

something that the managers are missing

and they're not being cognizant of and

needed awareness of yeah i agree that

this should be there but ultimately it

doesn't need to be completely 100 run by

the the workers that the that are

working it instead of managers and

instead of like

i don't think so i'm not saying that

human nature is necessarily evil or

because you advocate worker control

you know signifies that what i'm saying

is that under capitalism we have these

inherent roles that incentivize this

behavior and the exploitation of the

worker it's not necessarily speaking

upon

human nature if not the organization of

the system which causes humans to behave

a certain way it's not about this is the

issue it's not about the organization

this is whatsoever it's coming from

foucault michael fugo the french guy

who's the pedo he's dropped by the left

that they look at all it's all about the

power and organization our society

instead of the mode of production and

instead of the economic fundamental base

of how things are made in the first

place and how we actually feed ourselves

and ourselves you gotta you need a ship

and review of having this michael fugo

stuff fixation on the organization of

power it's completely infantile it's

completely juvenile have more of you of

a kind of political economy you've got

to understand currencies understand

bitcoin understand fiat under foreign

exchange currencies understand the

petrodollar understand all these kind of

systems in the world and geopolitics and

all the time [ __ ] works and you're gonna

have a better view of socialism instead

of focusing more on this kind of stuff

focus more on unleashing the force of

production what's going on at that level

rather than on this kind of thing about

how do we organize this and how do we

organize our organization horizontal

spatial organization it's not really

that important we use the new sense of

temporal organizational fossil fuels all

this kind of stuff let's focus on what

what is the actual engine that drives

our economy and how is it being driven

instead of how is it organized because

how is it organized the secondary from

the fact of how it's being driven and

what's making it taken it's being driven

by profit and it's organized that's

another thing that's the ending of why

we don't live in capitalism anymore

because our economy is actually not

driven by profit we look at blackrock

look at all these companies look at

these banks it's being driven by debt

it's being driven by losses and at the

end of the day it's actually not being

driven by profit because most big

companies are operating at a loss

in those industries are still making

money even if those they're operating at

a loss their profits are at a record low

of all time profits are so low adam i

mean actually that's the origin of the

the north stream two things

and yeah he's still a billionaire right

the company itself doesn't actually be

being a billionaire means nothing the

only reason he almost gets a billionaire

because he owns the amount of shares in

in his company that he could liquidate

into money but he actually hasn't

liquidated most billionaires are not

actually billionaires instead of having

that much amount of monetary value in

their accounts all they have is amount

of liquid assets they could liquify into

that but if they were to do that they

would lose their position in the first

place so that they really can't just do

that most billionaires can't actually

just liquify all their assets

yeah okay what i'm saying again is that

these like these shares from the company

corporations okay these are just social

constructs that we you know we make up

for everybody

come on it doesn't function that way

it's a legally recognized entity by the

government and it functions yeah exactly

the entire thing is it's so it's all a

social construct in nature a corporation

doesn't exist but that's not what i'm

trying to get out of why is there

exciting

these industries might can operate at a

loss while still producing money for the

people who have a stake in them and they

therefore have an investment i don't

know

what do you mean produce money you do

what you understand the capitalism you

produce money and reinvest into the

force of production the money you expend

on what big booty [ __ ] and yachts

that's not really like a big huge

decisive factor in what's going to

actually drive the motor production so

they're operating at a loss and they're

the reason they're getting all these new

investments because

of the stock market it's because the

stock value is going high people are

buying the shares either liquefying the

assets

in order to invest in their own

companies they're actually not doing it

through the direct circuit actually

profitability today in this day and age

through consumption that's all a form of

data profit is just a form of data

actually profit actually does not drive

what forms reinvestment back into

capital what

foreign back in the capital is either

coming from loans from banks governments

or it's coming from these stock assets

or the financial security assets as well

a little scenario for you so let's say

you're a capitalist and you own a

company okay what are what incentivizes

you

right to continue to stay in business

and to i don't know what what

incentivizes

unironically if you have these huge huge

fantastical ideological no unironically

going to mars because that's why we live

in socialism all production is being

driven at the subjective level by these

capitalists no longer even by the

impersonal decision that they want to

make it profitable per se that's what a

manager does actually you hire like a

manager or a ceo who makes sure okay

we're gonna make it profitable but sort

of the underlying vision of why people

want to prop these companies up they

have these huge overreaching visions of

how they want to change the world and

fundamentally transform how life is i

mean even mcdonald's mcdonald's doesn't

even say mcdonald's doesn't even say

that mcdonald's doesn't say that we're

doing this for money mcdonald's doesn't

even say that they were doing this

because they want to give us hamburgers

mcdonald's says we want to fundamentally

change life at the most visceral

fundamental level we're going to you

know unleash the 15th dimension or some

[ __ ] ronald mcdonald is going to be the

harbinger he's going to the messiah the

new jesus christ you have understand

each and every one of these corporations

under capitalism all of them are

actually considering themselves these

ideologists who have these fundamental

ideological visions of how to solve

those problems

let's go to mars

what you're saying is that you

fundamentally believe these companies

and what they say that their mission is

is actually the truth and that's just

what their subjective motivation is and

i'm telling you subject motivation is

not actually making money

i'm asking like in the terms of the way

that in capital marx breaks down the

capitalist mode of production marks

yes in mar as far as mars is concerned

yes a capitalist simply wants to make

money for money's own sake and exactly

that's what capitalism but that is not

what that's that's not what

crap that these [ __ ]

that's not that's not that's not what

defines that's not what it defends

today's

reality and the way that it affects

society as a whole and the workers

underneath that structure i don't give a

[ __ ] what they say but that's that's not

that's not the motor production is the

motor production today is not private

profits own sake

it's i mean fundamentally you kept

bringing up the stock market and what's

the purpose of the stock market so that

people can invest to then produce a

profit through dividends correct and

companies essentially at the popular

level when it comes to these major

capitals

companies legally like legally speaking

it's codified into law they have to act

in the best interest of their

shareholders to make yeah

yeah i understand but the shareholders

again the shareholders well that's just

any anyone can do that

the system is driven by profit okay so i

don't know

all these companies are in debt and

they're operating at a loss it's not

driven by profit okay but the

shareholders

derivative you could talk about the

derivative right company goes bankrupt

they're still making money those people

they're not

listen shareholders are just an arm of

the company the shareholders exist to

help the company the companies it

doesn't exist without the shareholders

um companies can exist without

shareholders there's private companies

that don't yeah the companies don't

exist for the shareholders

even companies like blackrock which is

the fullest manifestation of

contemporary whatever capitalism right

now the least you know whatever even

black right now has made its global

mission to completely change the world

to all this kind of [ __ ] even blackrock

has a founding mission and by the way

blackrock is a form of central as

capitals uh sorry socialistic central

planning would like rather use the

algorithms and how to efficiently invest

things into companies and based on

efficiency and ultimately properly is

the form of data about the efficiency of

the investment of resources and the

investment of capital

can you describe what blackrock is i

have no idea what is black prague is an

investment fund right it's it's wisely

and you know you give it your money and

it's going to wisely invest your money

into things that are going to make sure

that it's going to you're going to be a

retirement fund or whatever the [ __ ]

blackrock starts to use algorithms to

see what do we invest in what's going to

actually turn a turn of profit and be

wise to invested

okay

if they manage financial assets

okay so is it more or less something

like a hedge fund or something

yeah

okay but it controls the whole it's

starting to swallow up the whole economy

now

okay it's turning everything into a

financial asset i was buying up homes

buying up cars everything financially

i see

but you know yeah

talk about blackrock he yes boss about

black friday oh they want workers the

democrats can control black right hello

black rights are completely parasitic

you know black pride you know it's not

about work zones that means brokers but

how does our economy actually work what

makes it tick

yeah no it's both i agree with you it's

both things it's not only the way that

it's organized but what drives you know

the engine of the beast obviously yeah

because it even if black rock was

democratically a lot of workers it

wouldn't make the effect it has on the

people of this country anyways

destructive

yeah i would have to look more into

blackrock before you know i completely

agree with you but but boss doesn't

remember that thing that black rock is

fine there's nothing wrong with block

rockets that workers should be in

control at blackrock

um

yeah i don't really i don't watch what

he says that's what he believes

i mean okay

good for bosh i guess

but no fundamentally just what i wanted

to come on here was because of you know

how you were speaking like the word

socialism i mean

i feel like

fundamentally it's not a moralistic word

let's stop being religious about it it's

not a reservoir of goodness

at all it's just what i what i mean when

i use the word all right

you were describing it's calling

yourselves

listen i go out with my bernie sweater

and i swear i [ __ ] you not like at least

six hoes will come up to me and tell me

how much they love bernie and then suck

my day

[Music]

that's about it i mean there are some i

go to the university of florida and you

know there's some people who

are you know politically inclined and if

you can find a politics so yeah she will

love his name that's what i'm saying

about socialism that's what i'm saying

for the most part no they don't really

they don't care yeah

of course they do yeah i was also saying

oh [ __ ]

yeah hellos if you say that [ __ ]

well i don't know if there's anything

else you want to talk about but

that's what i'm saying you know you

don't want to dilute the you know it's

not diluting the word souls if it's not

going to stop him from getting hold it's

going to be a little harder you know all

you got to do is you know go you know

start uh

what's the latest trend today man are

you going to uh you know you got to go

you know just

go to the gym and uh what are they what

do they like about it be a goth you have

to look like a goth guy and whatever

yeah like they like guys who look sick

they like guys who look sick you got to

be like the island boy i might be like

little zan and be like little who a

little this make your hair all crazy put

colors in it and get tattoos on your

face and [ __ ] and they'll be the same

pretty much same thing yeah worry about

the word socialism right no no no it's

okay it's okay i'll stay away from that

all right

well if you don't have anything to talk

about it was nice talking at the very

least to clear

all right have a good night bye