Haz from Infrared has a dicussion with ChumAgain

hey

yo what's up dude

yeah so you're vegan

i'm not vegan actually

but ask yourself server is in my like

sphere of discord debate servers

uh i want to give you props on the

destination was [ __ ] hilarious and

embarrassing for destiny i'm certain

which one i debated him many times

monday i was listening on monday about

like the honesty of the media that was

[ __ ] ridiculous oh yeah yeah yeah

holy [ __ ]

yeah um

i mean like you go down the list like

one week ago the media was lying and

saying that like miami protests are

cuban citizens protesting it's just like

insane

but okay so i guess to get to the point

she like you like cut into the chase uh

but uh

i was listening so i was looking at that

debate live

and my impression

when you gave when when you went down

the second line of reasoning

something rather like the la um the

argument was

if you live in society you'll

necessarily have developed some moral

system some understanding of good and

bad

and that therefore

if he doesn't understand what you're

saying

uh or you know understand your system of

of good and bad then he's lying

necessarily and i think right there

there's like some kind of conflation

between

some system of good and bad and

understanding your particular sense of

good and bad

um

so the reason i disagree with that

is because

my sense of good and bad is going to

result from

reflexive contemplation of good and bad

right

but functionally speaking

it's not actually relevant what my sense

of good and bad is

like for example if i say

uh

that

uh

let's say that cows were talking about

cows earlier that cow is bad right

i may have a

specific view of bad and good and

actually i may as an individual have a

specific sense of good and bad that is

uniquely me as an individual alone

right

but in so far as i'm communicating that

socially

my specific view

is not relevant

it's not it may be relevant

objectively but

functionally speaking it is not relevant

did that i don't know i'm sorry sorry

not functionally uh to clarify online

functionally speaking

in terms of the statement i am trying to

convey to another person it is not

relevant

you mean like the the feelings behind

the statement or something like that let

me let me put it like this so let's say

i say that guy is bad right

yeah he's a bad guy so ultimately why i

am saying his bad he is bad may come

from something only specific to me and

my specific view of good and bad that

may be true

but in so far as i'm conveying that

information

to another person

this uniqueness that i may have my

specific view of good and bad is not

relevant

that's confusing to me

uh do you have like uh

can you elaborate on what you mean by

it's not relevant which you mean by bad

when you say something is bad because i

think that's pretty much the whole point

isn't it when you say my specific view

of good and bad is not relevant

it may be

it may ultimately be proved to be

relevant in so far as the question is

why am i saying that

but

it's not relevant

to to convey what i mean by that

to another person so another so for

example you are what's your name chum

chum you have a

idea of good and bad i have an idea of

good and bad they are radically at odds

let's say right

sure okay

um

the only way we can

arrive at the relevance of this

difference between us is by

developing the content so

if i say i'm a guy who thinks

um big booty [ __ ] are good and you're

a guy who thinks

i like big titties

they're yeah

good and bad not relevant okay you have

to say you like this you like that and

then you will arrive at what this per

what good means to this person or what

bad means to that person

yeah okay

so i mean that's fine i think that that

that kind of would fall into

like uh

like a subjectivist or like a moral

non-realist kind of view

well it's

it's interesting because uh i was

accused of the opposite yesterday but no

i don't think so because my point is

trying to say is that

what bad means

for an individual

uh is not premised by the way in which

they contemplate

the meaning of the word bad

it's actually only

manifesting in what they are calling

good and what they are calling bad the

underlying reason for that is not going

to be identical to the reason

they arrive at by means of reflexive

contemplation so i think the confusion

comes from the inability to recognize

that discontinuity there's a

discontinuity between what we actually

think is uh bad and

the way we try to reflexively make sense

of why we think it's why we sorry

uh

use the word red

no i understand um i think that concept

of of like reflexive reasoning is pretty

interesting and though i was i was

asking uh chad earlier and you can

confirm this uh like likanian

psychoanalysis

laconian yeah what's that

are you is your reasoning that you're

giving here is it like a lacanian

laconian psychoanalysis no explanation

not specifically i think

this distinction we're working with

will you already find it in german

idealism but

i think it if anything it should be more

most reminiscent of heidegger right

because for high degree heidegger is the

one whose basic

contribution to thought is this idea

that we are already in

some kind of

we are already beings

uh

before we

ascribe form to being right so it's

mostly if you have to blame someone

probably hydrogen would be the best

blame oh i don't okay i don't know if i

would put it that way but all right um

so idealism makes me think that

well you did mention that you're

religious um and idealism has its own

like really interesting challenges i'm

not super

by german idealism i don't necessarily

mean

idealism as a philosophical or

metaphysical uh position i mean like the

the school of thought that's begins from

kant spans through ficte and shelling

and goes through hegel and so on and so

on ends with hegel sorry

well i thought that

idealism was the idea that the universe

exists in the mind of god and it takes a

mind to sustain existence and reality is

that um that's a very

well it's a really loaded way of

interpreting

uh idealism but german idealism is just

referring to as historical school of

thought

okay all right well i guess uh with that

out of the way so i gave my thoughts

there and i guess we can have

the

the more substantial bit of it which is

so you say

well i don't know it seems like an edgy

position to get the conversation started

uh vegans are bad people

and then i would ask uh why do you say

that vegans are bad people

sure um

great yeah i think vegans are bad people

because they don't actually accomplish

elevating animals to the level of human

beings they only accomplish degrading

human beings to the level of animals and

thus

they end up opening

the floodgates to being able to have a

kind of psychotic and sociopathic view

toward other human beings because well

it's all the same we're already training

animals like [ __ ] i'll give you an

example of this i recently saw a debate

where a guy was asked if you saw a

chicken suffering and you saw a human

child suffering which one would bother

you more and the guy said the chicken

would bother me more because a chicken

is innocent unlike a human baby who will

one day grow up to consume a lot it was

a baby it wasn't a person sorry

it was a baby that was suffering and not

a person

because you said person no no there's a

chicken suffering and a baby a baby

human human baby suffering yeah that's

really weird i don't know you know i

don't know what to say to that

um

so what do you think about so forget the

forget the moral ethicist like animal

rights view of veganism

uh if we look at it strictly from like a

survival standpoint if we talk about

meat consumption as it relates to global

warming do you do you place significance

on global warming as like something to

be avoided carbon emissions something to

be avoided

it implies we have the power to avoid it

i take a skeptical sorry pessimistic

view as far as climate change is

concerned i think uh the climate change

is inevitable

there's no way to stop it

uh well when you say okay so when you

say that climate change is inevitable

uh do you mean just that

that humans don't have the capacity to

reduce our carbon emissions and reverse

uh reverse and like create an economy

that's like sustainable or something

like that or that sequesters carbon all

that stuff uh

according to the laws of physics we do

right but if human beings were as simple

as physics um

well

uh we wouldn't even be in the mess we're

in now in the first place

so physically it's it's physically

possible but

uh

you cannot

i reject the view according to i reject

let me talk about hegel again hegel

describes this view about the individual

who arrives at the true position

in spite of the fact that everyone

ignores them they stay true to their

position and hegel calls this the

beautiful soul

hegel critiques this and he says the

world is the way it is

for

a reason

so for hegel all that is real is

rational

um

why you're a communist right

of course

okay and i have i have communist

sympathies uh i see myself as like a

leftist i'm not sure what label to give

myself but yeah i have a lot of

communist sympathies uh but so i would

say like so communism has this radical

vision for transformation of society and

transformation of the planet and class

relations

and

what do you think is different between

that kind of defeatist view towards

global warming versus somebody that has

a defeatist view towards the uh the

hegemony of neoliberalism and corporate

capitalism

because uh the type of communists that i

am is a marxist and scientific socialist

so for this type of communist

[Music]

this transformation that is being

envisioned is not a voluntary

uh

transformation that results from

implementing a subjective vision we have

but from a vision we perceive the world

to be going

in the direction of already so for the

from the scientific socialist

perspective uh you can say communism is

inevitable

uh it's not going to happen at the

expense of our subjectivity but

with the development of the forces of

production and the increased

socialization of labor

communism acquires the force of

objectivity

so to me

i don't

i don't have a prescriptive view of

communism like communism is true and we

must impose this true vision upon the

world

it's not the marxist view of what

communism is

okay

so in the same way that uh

that it's deterministic that like

socialism will win communism you know

the workers will take over the means of

production and

retool society into this utopian vision

you also see they they will not uh they

will not really tool society voluntarily

uh so the idea for

marxism is that freedom and freedom in

this case is the freedom to implement

policies and do all these kinds of

things

freedom consists only into

in sorry freedom consists thank you for

the bits jay lawrence freedom is only

insight into necessity

you don't

change the world because of some utopian

vision you have you perceive

the

contradictions material contradictions

whether in the forces of production or

in society at large

and you participate in the development

of those contradictions toward

their sublimation their ultimate

sublation so the communist does not

say the workers will take over and

implement a utopian society

it will still very much be our

society and to the extent that it's

different is the same extent to which

society

uh possesses the uh

seeds of its own

transformation into something different

sure you know i understand that that

reminds me of uh when i was listening to

caleb maupin how he was saying that you

know when we create socialism in america

it's going to be american socialism it's

not going to be

german or russian socialism so i

understand and

um but so but that was what i was

describing there when i was saying uh

well maybe i i i probably didn't

describe it in a way that she would

agree to but i said that that the

workers are going to retool society in

their in their utopian vision or at

least make their attempts to and towards

the end of your statement there you were

talking about people participating

in

in the society in that way in that

transformation

um

but i think like so

um

even if it's let's say it's futile or

whatever

let's say it's futile to top global

warming i don't think that it is and i

think that a vision of transforming the

world and society uh you know it would

also necessitate transforming our

relations to production

in respect to making them

uh sustainable

but even if it's futile right like let's

say let's say attempting to fight global

warming we get an extra uh you know 100

years out of the planet or something

i think that

that would be worth it regardless

you know whether it's futile or not

that's that effort and that story beyond

this philosophical conversation

just because i think it's futile doesn't

mean i think nothing

it communists have no task in relation

to it i think

the program of communists in relation to

global warming must be one of

adjustments we have to prepare humanity

to adjust

the new uh

the new climate

the new reality precisely yeah yeah um

so this is where i think the heroic task

of

overcoming this obstacle lies i don't

think we're going to change the

overall trend of the planet especially

when

the industrialization of india and

africa is not even in the um

initiative the first stage you know and

industrialization looks ugly when you

can already take it for granted but for

people who don't have access to clean

drinking water and electricity and

uh air conditioning you know and it is

vital

yeah it is a vital necessity

so yeah i wouldn't be against

transforming africa and asia and

third and second world countries to be

more industrialized and well i i just

think uh it's not so much that we will

do it ourselves but they will do it they

we cannot stop them from doing it

yeah that's fine

i just think like so for example when we

when we're talking about cutting down on

co2 emissions

western countries europe and america

specifically emit a tremendous amount of

co2

sphere they they do uh american uh

consumption patterns very clearly uh

responsible big part of the

carbon and especially the wealthy too

of course but um you have to also

understand that a huge part of these

emissions are coming from

industrializing countries as well uh

china and other countries and so on

russia yeah um

i think uh

i think the priority is not so much

flatly reducing emissions

in general which i don't think is a

sustainable path but

reducing the harmful effects on the

environments that we can know about so

for example in china there's a very

clear issue of pollution and smog

that's an issue they can tackle

um

i think an approach to climate change

must be uh

based on dealing with the particular

effects

but as for the underlying disease

right rather than just the symptoms i

don't think

um

we can change the general pattern the

overall trend especially with and not to

sound cynical but

while

climate change activists are

at for every moment that they think

they've made progress

the ice caps are melting and countries

like russia

want to take advantage of

[Music]

being able to exploit these precious

and vital minerals

that are going to be in the the the

poles the arctic north pole america

wants in on it canada wants in on it

even china wants in on it and

they don't want in on it simply because

they're greedy but because it will

ultimately contribute to um

greater wealth of mankind and humanity

as a whole

okay um yeah i don't know i haven't seen

about

mineral wealth locked in

the ice or or whatever i don't

maybe it's like on the ground yeah also

fossil fossil fuels most most

importantly so i mean there there is a

we are going we are on the precipice not

of uh

arriving at zero emissions but an age of

hyper hyper industrial is it hyper

industrialism which will probably

accelerate

climate change

and i don't see how we can

stop this it's like it's almost kind of

uh

like certain i don't want to mention the

word because it'll just confuse but you

know it's almost like uh this

kind of fatalistic idea of capitalism

some people have it's

already happening

you can't stop it it's just going on too

fast

it's it's happening

in ways you haven't even noticed you

know

yeah well i mean i think that

obviously if we want to turn things

around

um there need to be drastic changes done

so for example

uh veganism was my jumping off point to

talking about that because something or

other along the lines of 50

of land use when it comes to agriculture

is dedicated specifically

to growing animals yeah there's there's

a few reasons for that um

the first reason is obviously that

meat is a superfood

um

you don't need to consume as much meat

in terms of total mass as you do

[Music]

non-meat to get the same amount of

nutrients

the second reason is obviously that

people love meat

love eating meat

um in the same way people love air

conditioning you know you don't actually

need air conditioning but it makes life

easier

meat is the same way

um

it makes life better

people want meat people have a demand

for meat now do we have wasteful meat

i agree we waste a lot of meat

we have a lot of pointless meat we have

a lot of pointless food in general it's

not just meat that's incriminated

i would love for

a revolution in our food consumption

thank you based soccer i'm about to make

some shawarma thank you thank you yeah

thank you

i would love for a revolution in our

general food consumption but you have to

get your priorities in order so

if you're saying we should become vegan

uh

to help the client

no no i know but if one were to say that

let me even like even meat reduction of

meat consumption is right for sure

if one were to say that

your first obstacle

is

the following fact

physically what you're saying is

possible but if people again if people

were the same as

physical objects we wouldn't even be in

the situation in the first place people

will not accept

cutting changing their diet or their

lifestyle

or some kind of um

ends

like this people just won't it's part of

their lives it's part of their

livelihood

people are too concerned as it is

with getting by with raising families

with going to work with they're not

going to accept it the world is not

going to accept it

um

[Music]

that's not going to be instantaneous

obviously you know when if we're if

we're comparing the pr project of

building a socialist society and versus

the project of building a more

sustainable society through reduced

carbon emissions you can talk about like

renewables but

uh

let's say like you you set up you set up

direct

and like

cheap and affordable and tasty

uh

vegetarian or vegan food the same way

that like you have a mcdonald's on every

corner you have a vegan donald's or

whatever people will resist people will

resist this um

so when it comes to something like

socialism i don't think a socialism will

take will gain traction in america

by telling people they have to radically

transform everything about their lives

i think socialism will assume the form

of a populism in america and um

probably in the form of like a land

reform like we will just give you and

people don't want to think about these

things and they would want to have to

radically change

everything around like

lawn gardens would be nice

decolonializing

like the lawn

and the

the suburban like neighborhood stuff

like that it ultimately depends on the

people um

i think american people are very

suspicious and hostile toward attempts

from the top down

to implement

political agendas and visions i think

the aoc approach and the approach of

socialist thus far has been a complete

failure and is a complete brick wall

it's not going to accomplish

the yeah now

i would say that the uf historically

especially after world war ii has

probably been one of the greatest forces

of fascism in the world

through gladio and condor and

cyclone and everything like that

uh yes i agree fascism after world war

ii has taken the form of an instrument

of a global american imperialism but

still the american people are a real

people and

we're not just sinful uh

evil people

real people no i wouldn't i wouldn't no

i wouldn't smear the people with the

actions of the government yeah um i

think that

uh that public relations has a strong

aspect to it like people have kind of

psychologized the

math in a way they can understand how to

keep

the political conversation from being

about issues and being more about drama

you know what i mean uh culture culture

wars and the counterculture movement and

everything like that

seymour hirsch yellow journalism

got it down to a science pretty much and

so that's going to be a very powerful

thing but i think that if we rebuild

local communities and rebuild our

institutions

that that could you know at least serve

as a base of power from which to further

develop

uh like more class consciousness so the

issue is i don't know what communities

are being referred to here um

usually these communities are gentrified

kind of neighborhoods of millennial

young millennial activists and they're a

tiny minority of the

majority necessary to win power

i think the decisive

task for communists in america

is building a movement

with executive ambitions

even if you don't believe you're going

to become president

you have to have a scope and scale

worthy of executive central power

and in order to build such a movement

you can't relate to people like

activists

you have to relate to people as people

just living their lives their own lives

and

who will only be able to afford to give

support to you in very small

very very small ways but those small

ways can add up and those small ways are

the stuff of real revolutions in history

so it's very important not to have grand

visions of change at the local level

um

it's more important to cultivate a sense

of small trust with the people the

majority

slowly gaining their trust and slowly

being a source of leadership and

guidance for them

and this not only requires leading the

people it requires learning from the

people and humbling yourself

before them

so that's a very important distinction i

think i would draw

yeah well i think someone that thinks

that they're done learning is uh you

know like one of the biggest

idiots that is like the chinese word for

for teacher is or

yeah for teacher is like

it has the word student within it

so i think i think that's the

interesting concept

but that you're never done learning that

you've you've never filled your brain up

with knowledge and it's too full that if

you're bored of like learning or

listening to people

that at that point

probably need to re-evaluate

but um

yeah all right so i guess i got out i

got out of the conversation

and talked about the stuff that i wanted

to talk about it's just the two things

okay it's veganism as it relates to

carbon emissions just the science and

the data on that and how you feel about

that and then the other thing about

whether you're conflating

uh between having some view of good and

bad and whether that means that someone

can understand your view of good and bad

all right so anyways i appreciate i

appreciate you bringing me on thanks so

much i hope you have a great rest of

your stream all right