Haz vs CShingiro | InfraredShow Debate

what up [ __ ]

feminist

are you a fellow feminist

in high school what's going on with you

are you a fella i'm asking you if you're

a fellow feminist i'm just

i'm i'm just wondering if you've fully

grown yet

okay are you a fan are you a fellow

feminist yes or no

yeah

would you consider yourself the defender

of women

on the internet

just like me

no i agree

i don't consider myself a defender of

women i believe women have their agency

but i'm in solidarity with them and i

want equality

why why are you asking me this

well i i just think you're i was

wondering if you're a fellow feminist

just like me that's it

[Music]

well i believe in equality for everyone

so yes i'm

feminist by definitely excellent

absolutely stunning and phenomenal um

yeah so i personally think that

so like um when you talk are you

straight absolutely stunning and

phenomenal yes i'm straight oh okay and

and you have a girlfriend

no i

i have a fiance oh you have a fiance

yes

how old are you

i'm 28.

is she also a feminist just like you

yes

excellent

is she also a feminist

um yes so let me tell you something

though and this is really important um

it's her choice

okay and she may

and it's not going to be your fault

patriotic big mac

it's uh it's not going to be your fault

right

but um

if she

cheats on you with a toxic male

you need to respect her choice

and it's the feminist thing to do okay

now you're really being an idiot why

like come on wait wait wait wait wait

wait wait wait wait wait wait wait so

honestly

you're going to deny her agency

look if she cheats then the man then the

the wedding is called off no

no that's toxic no

no

how is that toxic

because

it's her turn that's why

it's her choice

you sexist pig okay

what does this have to do with what we

were talking about

um we were talking about lacan right

yeah um and

and your two whole theories your

i don't believe in two goals everyone

knows huh everyone knows there's three

holes what kind of misogynist says two

holes it's obviously three holes

i'm not a misogynist

like this is kind of a red herring it's

not even

a relevant or significant meaningful

comment you're making

i'm just saying if she wants if she

wants if she

wants

to

give that [ __ ] up to another man you

have to watch

oh my god

it's her turn

and we're in 2021

like this is probably the most idiotic

thing i've ever heard from really it's

her okay okay so you're gonna deny her

agency you're gonna deny her agency you

need to atone for your male

crimes

and

let her

let her

get

sexually involved with other males while

you watch and attend to her needs

that is

okay

in in what way

let's let's go back to what we were

actually discussing and try to figure

out how you ended up getting that

conclusion from my argument

what i was saying

i i just want to know where your trail

of thought where your line of thinking

came in order for you to think that i'm

um for

a polygamous or no it's not polygamy

feminism

it's

feminism

feminism

sexist pig that's not panic that's not

what i'm yes it is

yes it is

i i don't know like

all right okay okay okay okay okay okay

if you don't want to talk about lacan

and try to justify him okay let's talk

about khan let's talk about what okay

let's let's let's talk what do you know

about justify this guy publicly okay

claiming to be a marxist i just want to

know that yeah that's my

that's that's where i'm kind of puzzled

here okay it doesn't seem

yeah okay

what is the marxist theory of

subjectivity

there's no subjectivity there's there's

no such thing as subjectivity objective

reality oh there's no such thing as

subjectivity at all in marxism

subjective or the subjective view that

people have on the society is based on

their relation with it so it's actually

based on material so what is the marxist

theory of individual subjectivity

individual subjectivity yeah many times

the subjectivity it's it's linked to

idealism so it's a it's a thinking that

i'm asking you what the marxist theory

of individual subjectivity is what how

do individual subjects

how do they work what what is the

individual subject how do they form an

identity how do they form

desires how do they form uncon is there

an unconscious is there a subconscious

what are those things what is the

meaning of sexual attraction what is the

meaning of sexuality what is the meaning

of uh

fantasies and

and art and imaginary what does the

marxist view on these kinds of things

that many things are based on the you

know relations to the production it's

based on class

so how does that apply in riya how do

you apply that in reality can you can

you apply that in reality how do you go

from relations of production in class to

for example furries explaining the

phenomena of furries

can you do that

well furries is just some

weird hobby that people do on this yeah

how how is that how is that how can you

explain it in terms of the relations of

production and and that kind of

thing

oh

usually people when they get involved in

this furry stuff

going into that culture or getting the

costumes and all of that

it's it's you know from commercial

influences sometimes it's influenced

from now how does that relate to the

relations of production

well in a way it's it's a destruction

it's kind of like oh oh so so the way

you explain the way you explain furries

from marx's perspective is that yeah

there's just this distraction that

people get involved in and that's all

there is to it

basically yeah so why are they furries

so why are they furries

and

so why is there perversion why is there

why are there furries what does that

mean what is that

look for

furries

comes from

people wanting to return to their tri uh

you know childhood influences wait wait

wait okay why would that be marxist why

why is that marxist what does that have

to do with marxism

and marx's marxist theory of

subjectivity that you're peddling and

you're saying is incompatible with lacan

and because you have a true marxist

theory of subjectivity yourself

look

like you wanting to transition from

lacans to freeze i i don't get i don't

really okay okay i'm asking you what

your marxist theory of subjectivity is

what is the marxist theory of

subjectivity

instead of the instead of the laconian

one

it's based off of individualism which is

generally what's based off of

individualism

um

the idealist

uh portrayal of you know of subjective

reality for example what's an example of

that

well an example of that would actually

be lacan oh okay really how is la con an

individual how is le con an individual

list if lacan says that individual

identities are interpolated by the

symbolic order which is extra and supper

individual and not incarnated in any

single individual how is it an

individualist view if lacan begins with

the mirror stage which is actually about

how individuals are defined by their own

otherness how is that individualistic

well because he's already splitting

people up

with that line of thinking oh really

how's it doing that yes

well yeah like he's making um

people into one other he's making oh oh

so we're all one we're all okay so all

is one and that's the marxist view of

subjectivity it's just all is one right

i learned that actually when i was doing

psychedelics at a la la palooza last

year and i who would have not who would

have thought that that was the marxist

view of subjectivity is just that all is

one and there's no otherness and there's

no contradiction between individuals and

society and there's there's no

relationship between um

you know

human beings with each other there are

no different human beings we are all the

same exact thing

that's what i learned when i was taking

shrooms when i was out i took shrooms

last year on lollapalooza and i that's

really interesting you said that because

i didn't know that that was the marxist

theory of subjectivity thank you so much

for anything and elaborating upon that

look that's

you know you want to twist my words okay

and say something that i didn't say

that's fine if you want to debate

yourself that's okay but okay since we

are all one

since we are all one since we are all

one

since we are all one and we're not going

to be dividing people

may i

um i'm not may i

may i

propose to your fiance

we are all one don't be dividing us

what's the issue you don't want to

divide us i'm not another person i'm not

another

what's yours is mine what's mine is

yours

right

um

you know like

feminism

this sort of psychology and this these

sort of idealist concepts yeah what's

idealist about it tell me tell me the

idealism

explain the idealism fine

no explain lacan's idealism go ahead

well yeah like i mean him him trying to

portray

the other for example and that how does

he portray the other

how does he portray the other go ahead

explain it to us

that like he tries to complain that

speech and language are beyond the

uh the subject's control for example

it's not beyond a person's

control or their line of thinking or

when does he complain about that and

didn't didn't mark say that men and

women enter history but not as they

please and that they're defined by their

surroundings in ways that they have no

control over so why wouldn't that apply

to language

oh my god look he

he may make that point but he does also

argue that eventually

the downtrodden the oppressed will act

within their own interests

what does that mean what does that mean

well

in our current modern terms that means

forming a revolutionary party okay but

but mark said that men and women enter

into relations independently of their

will independently of their conscious

will

well that might not necessarily be

no well that's not necessarily true but

that's literally aggravating what he

said that's literally aggravating what

he said

well

yes but at the same time marx marx

literally said that the relations of

production precede our consciousness

precede our ideas and precede any

attempt to control over them whatsoever

that we have he said they come first

he said material reality comes first

okay

yeah being before okay so what's

idealist

well there's no such thing as an

outbreak of gray algebraic symbolic

symbology

you're talking about the mathemates what

are the themes you understand them

what are the math themes referring to

what's their object

so

the theme

you're googling it right now i'll give

you a second keep going

keep going what are the books you've

read on the con by the way

you sound very well educated and you

sound very well educated on the matter

what are the books you've read on the

con

look all right

sorry i didn't hear you what books

look i i haven't read it about like uh

does your did your fiance read any books

because maybe i should talk to her

instead

why don't you put her on the mic i'll

talk to her instead maybe she read some

books

let's give women a chance let's hear

what women have to say first off she's

an ethiopian no no a lot of

she's in ethiopia right now she's in

ethiopia we'll put her on the phone

we'll talk to her

oh my

um

i don't understand why you want to

make women into the other

oh i don't want to make them into either

i want us all to be one i don't want to

make them in the other i want to i want

us all to be one

i want us all to be one

and that's why

i think we should

gather together

me

you

um

and if she so agrees to it your fiance

will have lunch

and i'll i will propose to her as well

and see what she responds as

i'll propose this to both of you and i

will be the third wheel of the

relationship

i'm not other i'm not a stranger

we are all one

look

i don't understand

why

you want to advocate for somebody that

ended up being a sadistic narcissist

okay what what was moses

what does that have to do with lacan's

theories

well it's an inevitable result of his

theory well angles slept angles angles

slept with everyone's wife

did you know that frederick angles he

slept with everyone's wife

did not sleep with everyone yes he did

he literally was piping every single

person in town everywhere he went he was

piping yes he was he was piping

everybody

do you actually have a source for this

yes i do look it up

literally look it up he would write

about it to marx in his letters

angles literally slept with everyone

including other people's wives

engels had a polygamous relationship

with his wife and his sister no he

didn't he literally would just sleep

around

all right

tell me this source tell me where you've

got look at that

look it up

okay

angle sleeps around let's see

look up angle sleep with person's wife

person's life

what was so uh bad about lacan by the

way what did he do that was so evil

what was so evil about what he did wow

i don't understand why his own wife

would spit on his grave after he died

that's kind of a red flag right there

especially when he was maybe he broke

her heart maybe he broke her heart

thank you sean maybe he broke her heart

see you

yeah i

broke your heart but imagine being that

vindic vindictive as an ex-wife

well it usually doesn't happen okay

usually it doesn't happen so what what's

your point that's all i have to do

what's your point he he was he was

involved in a lot of drama with a lot of

women so what so was angles

i have been too i've been involved in

drama

i've broken hearts that's your own

floats yeah i have broken hearts i've

broken hearts

broken hearts no you've also

um

made very sexist and egregious comments

for example no no claiming that she's a

slave no

no no

that's what you wrote no that's i

that's what you wrote actually actually

that actually actually no

that dirt bag has he actually wrote an

entire uh he wrote an entire sub stack

that actually revealed everything

actually happened and i disagree with it

so much right but that sorry that's just

not what he said and another thing too

is that um i watch luna oy every single

day so how dare you i watch luna oy

every single day before i go to bed and

i really look up to luna oy and

um

i am a big fan okay to say the least

i'm a feminist okay just like you we're

both feminists here

um

well i'm on the debate to kind of argue

against that i don't think somebody

who's

bragging about domineering women on a

regular basis can be called i have never

domineered any i have never domineered

any women as a matter of fact

every time i am graced with the ability

for a woman to so much as speak to me

i

cry

because of how beautiful it is that

after so much oppression by men

women would give me a chance and forgive

me and i just thank them for 70 days

every single day

and i give them

good morning beautiful texan good

morning beautiful and i give them

paragraphs pontificating upon my

thoughts and one day

they may so as to grace me with sexual

intercourse which

mind you i will be very gentle

very gentle

i will be very

very

soft and i will make sure

that

um my

ep is small

because i don't want them to be hurt

i actually am going to the doctor to get

penis reduction surgery because i don't

want to hurt

women

by the way um i still haven't found this

uh claim that anglos has slept around

with another person oh i'll look it up

okay

um let's look it up so i still haven't

seen that by the way

how frederick angle's radical lover

helped him father

angles

there's literally a bunch of

[ __ ] pdfs

angles and women

intimately of pleasure agency

so it's just talking about uh his wife

and his sister

but but that's kind of known

and that was done with consent of all

parties so it's not like this i didn't

call him a rapist i didn't call him a

rapist i said he slept with people's

wives and he slept around obviously it

was consensual

no i'm i'm just talking about your claim

that he was sleeping with other wives

other than yes he was the wife and the

sister

okay

where is that

where's that claim i don't see it

anywhere

just point look it up if you if you're

educated you'll be able to find it just

look it up you're on google you're

googling this whole time

well

yeah because you told me to look it up

and i still can't find it anywhere man

i'm finding the

his wife and his sister which is you

know well known about but

i'm i'm not what about sister still

can't

it engel's wife and his wife's sister

because they had that polygamous

relationship but i don't

know

where you can find he talked about it

with marks and who's who's that one of

those young hegelians guy that he's uh

angle slept with his wife

was he talking about again was it moses

hess

so it was a letter to moses has

sybil

sybil pess

sybil pesh

in order to redress the unjust

privileged society all they remain

happily married until has's death sybil

may have had an affair with frederick

engels while he was smuggling her from

belgium to france to be reunited with

her husband that's one of the first

cases

may have where is this

look it up frederick angles moses has

wife

friedrich engels

friedrich engels

moses has wife

now i'm just asking this because um

before when you had a debate with uh

rain or shay you had said something

about um the indigenous tribe in

oklahoma being disproportionately large

in comparison to the rest

of the race

indigenous tribe in oklahoma doesn't

have any uh it doesn't have any [ __ ]

sovereignty so that was actually a lie

by ray

it's actually not true all right

well in that case both of you were lying

because you would lied about saying that

the reason why you can do that is

because they were they they were they

were bigger in the region that they're

in

well

not not according to the statistics it's

the same ratio as uh nationwide

okay show us so

show us

their population distribution in

western oklahoma or whatever eastern

oklahoma in relation to the rest of the

country it's not i don't know are you

talking on your ass

by the way

by the way did you know p doesn't come

out of the butt right

yes i know that okay i'm just making

sure a lot of misogynists are going

around saying that and i just want to

make sure you know that

continue

so okay so eastern oklahoma

by the way did you know hold on did you

know i know that women don't pee out

women do not pee out of the butt did you

know i knew that

and i know that because i'm a feminist

by the way

okay

yeah

did you john did you know

how many did you know women have three

holes

i don't know

why

you

have decided to make it your business to

assert what's going on with the lord did

you know did you know that

nah he didn't know that did you yeah i

got him

we got him

we got him you didn't know that you

didn't know that did you yeah there is a

third hole

yeah

look i i

he didn't know about my fiance and i

know about my ex-girlfriends no you

didn't know i told you

look i'm you

you

you

you

you

need to become a better feminist

you are harming women's rights

you are harming women's rights

how am i harming women's wives because

you don't acknowledge the urethra you

don't pay enough attention to it and you

don't talk about it enough say the

urethra's name say its name the urethra

say its name

sexist pig

okay there's

urethra

why are you okay

or whether women have tools i am not

obsessing over it you pig

i am not obsessing over just because you

don't know how women pee or how vaginas

work doesn't mean i'm obsessing over it

i'm a male feminist

okay

you are obsessing over it no i'm not you

need to know you need to know how women

pee

you need to know how women pee or they

will never have rights

i don't know why you've lost your mind

no i haven't you're harming women's

rights

you're harming women's rights say its

name

say its name

oh my

say its name

three holes not two say its name

uh

say it look if you wanna say it look if

you wanna argue with yourself go ahead

no no say its name

continue

continue sexist pig i'm not going to be

okay sexist pig continue

oh so you're giving up

i'm not giving up

okay sexist pig continue

continue

i'm continuing um and yeah once again i

still haven't found uh

your the angles sleeping with angles

moses has wife

angles moses has wife

so i just

so that's uh wikipedia article

okay

and

that's all it is really it's just a

claim from wikipedia

um okay look at the footnotes

the incident may have precipitated

hess's split from the communist movement

a life event frederick angles

angles

page 89 has his influence

angles use has relations with silver

beach to brand him as an individual

unworthy of the support of the workers

okay base where

usually because their passport was not

in order asked angles to smuggle to the

beach crossed the frontier from bounds

of france and will do once he in paris

her conduct was to bring hess into

discredit

engels wrote to marx that madame has

longs for a husband and pokes fun at tez

later he declared that the lady had made

amorous overtures to him and offered to

reveal to him the secrets of her bed

chamber at the dead of night s was

furious with angles and wrote the marks

i didn't want anything more to do with

your party

sound sound scandalous

it was her right and hess was a sexist

pig for not letting it happen

but it sounds pretty scandalous to me

okay

so this is from

do you

do are you allow yourself to get pegged

i do not

really

i thought you believed in equality

okay

i thought you believed in

equality this is

like first of all first off whatever

happens in the bedroom of america no

no

no it's not private no it's not private

yes it is that's

why

reactionary patriotic chauvinist

slander

the bedroom is political the private is

political

you [ __ ] sexist pig chauvinist piece

of [ __ ]

so are you saying the same thing about

uh marx and engels because that's what

they had said about what the relation no

they didn't well marx and engels were

old marx and engels were old white

males

if you didn't know you [ __ ] sexist

chauvinist pig

are you going to be saying the same

thing about rosa lonzenberg because she

was a marx

oh i love rosa luxemburg

you do yes

because she basically went along the

same line no she didn't

no she did not rosa luxemburg

said that sex workers were the true

working class

look it up

okay she did

rosa luxemburg was the champion of sex

workers

so i think you've tried to

characterize me in a way that i'm really

not and i really understand it really

really like swerf yeah yeah swerve

swerf

swerve

swerf

cancelled

you're cancelled do you know that you're

cancelled

how dare you use sexist pig

or what

you hate you hate sex workers

um i'm generally against

really

how many holes are there how many holes

are there

i

it's not my business oh it's not your

business typical male behavior it's not

your business

you know in a truth in a true feminist

world in a true feminist world

men would use their mouth as the toilet

bowl and then it would be their business

now wouldn't it

look if that's what we have to save the

environment

we are wasting we are wasting a lot of

water with toilets and toilet bowls and

men who were

destroying the planet

have to take responsibility

and

all i have to say to

my fellow men

is open wide

and you will know about the third hole

look you want to do reactionary

reactionary

that's up to you reactionary

[Applause]

the planet is dying

you [ __ ] sexist pig

you know you've kept this role for a

long time man no kind of amazed you're

able to keep this you literally

desecrate the ground

and our plant allies of the indigenous

folk

you're on stolen indigenous land you pig

meanwhile you've got more perseverance

on this world than a five-year-old i

appreciate you are on stolen indigenous

indigenous land

stolen

oh

while you destroy the planet

okay

um

do you want to know what my politics

actually are or not or do you want to

actually have a conversation do you hold

on do you are you vegan are you a vegan

no i'm not

what

i'm not a vegan

i'm not even a vegetarian you scumbag

speciesist

so you're better than animals

you you you're a murderer meat is murder

and you're killing the planet

meat is murder

meat is murder

you know there are you don't even know

where p comes from you don't even know

where p comes from

you don't even know how women's vaginas

work you [ __ ] pig

you're sitting here eating meat

okay

yeah

yeah by the way did you know that p

doesn't come out of the butt

ah

you didn't know

okay

you didn't know

[ __ ] virgin i don't know i don't i

don't know what value uh your viewers

seem to get out of any of this

okay well let's debate then what do you

want to debate about

well i mean let's talk about why you

think dugan is uh

is a great intellect let's go with that

what what do you know about duken what

are dugan's views

what is dugan's primary views

so he starts off his book by saying that

marxism has failed

yeah did it fail in the soviet union

no he said the ideology in general is

failed was was he wrong to say that and

that han was that wrong to say in the

1990s

after the collapse of the soviet union

an entire marxist bloc and the worldwide

marxism the movement of marxism the

soviet union the eastern bloc most major

communist states was it really uh

really crazy to say that in the 1990s

when most marxists by the way weren't

even able to make sense of that and why

that happened besides in china which was

pretty remote and uh not well known in

the place and dugan was primarily

talking about soviet-style marxism

leninism which indeed did fail

objectively did fail

so the book he wrote it in 2012 well

well well russia was a victim of u.s

imperialism

and marxism couldn't defend russia from

u.s imperialism and the soviet union

collapsed the so-called self-proclaimed

marxist and the soviet union sold out

the soviet union they sold it out to

america and they sold everything off to

america and the russian people were

victims of american imperialism so was

dugan really uh an evil person for

saying that

so first off the real marxist voted

against the collapse of the soviet union

um

why couldn't they prevent it

which part which party oversaw the

collapse of the soviet union which party

well that's kind of a straw man which

party which party

was actually

the party i argue was actually

infiltrated why did they fail why don't

you do self-criticism why do they fail

why did they fail

because of infiltration

infiltration how were they how how how

were they how how did they allow that

infiltration huh

well

why did that infiltration happen how did

they allow it part of

part of what incentivized it is that

they didn't reach uh political

rapprochement with the bourgeois parties

the way china did

why why why opening why hold on

what what was the

what was the brezhnev stagnation and

what was the issue of culture in the

soviet union during the 70s and 80s why

wasn't the

soviet marxism leninism able to satisfy

these spiritual demands and cultural

demands of the soviet people at the time

what was the crisis in the issue going

on

it was dogmatic they took a dogmatic

approach okay but they are okay so is is

it is it dugan's fault that that's his

only acquaintance with what marxism is

it's he wrote it in 2012 there are yeah

so what what is is it wrong is it wrong

for him to say in context that marxism

did fail

because it actually did as far as he was

concerned as far as his familiarity with

it is concerned

and also i didn't ask you what dugan

thought about marxism which i obviously

disagree with

i asked you one of his main ideas what

are dugan's main ideas what is he trying

to say what's where's his stick where's

he coming from what is he known for

his ideas are basically about the

defense of tradition to go along with uh

the ideas of defending the collective

what does that mean and why what is it

what does that mean and why and what's

the bigger context

well the bigger context is for him to to

believe what book is dugan known for

what what book is dugan most known for

around the world

the fourth political fear no it's not

what's the main book he's known for

that's taught in the russian military

i think it's uh

the one about making a greater eurasia

right foundations of geopolitics

it's called the foundations of

geopolitics

yeah yeah that one that one so it's the

one about making a greater eurasia and

having what are his main ideas in the

book

so i mean it's really russian

centrism that one to be honest i haven't

really

dealt with the dugan is the first

russian centrist centrism guy in the

world

he's not really the first centuries he's

not the first one to advocate for

monarchy but

is that is that what doogan's really

doing in that book is that the main

thrust

is is that the main thrust of dugan's

book is to advocate for monarchy

who's dugan's number one influence

um

dugan's

main

well i think it's really just

theocratic element

that's basically what i get from reading

the book you didn't read the book

why are you you actually didn't read the

book

if you read the book you'd be able to

answer my questions you can't answer my

questions

well i'm

more focused on kind of like the main

ideas themselves what are the main ideas

what does dugan represent what does he

represent

he represents russian collectivism on a

pro monarch's

line of things really is that is that

the main thrust is that is that really

what defines dugan is monarchism

it's

monarchism the idea of the collective

maybe no it's not ideas

and is anti-liberal

okay he's anti-liberal what does that

mean

like like he doesn't um he's

anti-liberal and uh he calls himself any

capitalist

but really what he's

you don't know anything about dugan you

don't know anything about dude you never

read him in your life so i don't know

why you're complaining about him

can you give me one unique insight that

dugan has

well how about this one uh the left and

the right are

on the periphery there's no

um

they are on the periphery they are in

the periphery we are ruled by a

fundamentally centrist

ruling class

how are the the right and left are on

the periphery what are you [ __ ]

talking about

so is

is this just your moral relativism

talking again

where you say that oh so you think the

republicans and democrats are really

you think there's a real difference

between marco rubio

and um the democrats

there is none there's no difference i i

argue actually that they're both fascist

parties

okay both of them are both the democrats

and the republicans what did dugan say

about fascism especially recently after

the ukraine experience

well

i'm gonna go by the the book i didn't

actually hear his comments okay ukraine

but

um

going by the book he had basically

argued it was just about

um

countering liberalism and going back to

tradition

no it was this line of thinking about

what the that's that's actually not true

well that's what he had said i just was

going by what he wrote no dugan

said that fascism was a failed

projection of both liberalism and

communism and then he recently says

that fascism is a form of uh

anti-human

and fundamentally liberal and modern

pathology he rejects fascism

and he also completely rejects racism

and nazism

did you know that okay

so why did he write in his book that it

was a way of opposing liberalism

because he thought it

was so he thought he thought it was a

fair he also said communism was a way of

opposing liberalism

well it still is

in many ways

says he rejects both of these uh

rejections of liberalism he says these

are not able to overcome liberalism

well that's not sad

well you could disagree with him but

that's that's not that's not his main

idea though what's the main thrust of

his idea

the fourth political theory is dugan's

attempt

to answer to the inadequacies of marxism

leninism now does he do that

successfully probably not

but he at least recognizes there's

inadequacies in the mainstream way it

was being interpreted and

second of all well you haven't answered

me what are you doing's main ideas what

are his main insights

those are what i believe his main ideas

and insights are because that's not but

that's not his main ideas and main

insights what are his views about

geopolitics what does dugan say about

geopolitics

well it's

it sounds very

russian-centric

what does he say about russia well

well i mean he's

he's made many times you know

anti-anti-immigrant remarks about making

sure to preserve the collection uh

collected when is dugan spoken against

immigrants because do i recall dugan

saying that anyone who speaks against

muslims is trying to

promote separatism and is an enemy of

the russian people in the russian state

anyone who antagonizes muslim immigrants

he said anyone who antagonizes muslim

immigrants is by nature an enemy of the

russian state and the russian people

well that's because some of them are

coming from tajikistan which was a

former member of the soviet union

okay so i mean

when did dugan say

what are dugans use on racism

is dugan an ethno-nationalist

well yes in my opinion he is oh what are

some what's some evidence that he's an

ethno-nationalist

well

when he had an interview with uh these

two ladies who came by the conservative

ladies from the us and he was happy

laura southern

yeah yeah

so what he talks to anyone who will

literally talk to anyone

yeah but

i'm talking about what he actually said

to them what he said what he had said to

them

well what he had said to them is um

trying to resist and um

so

many people want to make individualist

arguments when trying to oppose and

suppress um you know

too much immigration but he had said

that we should be thinking about the

collective okay i agree with that you

should be thinking about the collective

and i'm i'm not against immigrants and i

do think we should think about the

collective realities

we should think about the collective

realities of course we should otherwise

you're going to have racism and you're

going to have problems you're going to

have tensions you do have to take into

account and you do have to think of it

from a collective perspective

you do have to take into account that on

both sides these people come from

radically different cultures and if you

don't recogni if you don't recognize

it at a collective level and you just

treat it as a matter of individualism

where everyone's just an individual

under the same thing you're going to be

ignoring the cultural tensions and the

racial tensions or whatever

does dugan think that uh does dugan

think that ethnicity by the way comes

from race and blood

uh

no i don't

[Music]

why why why why were you taught to say

all these uh unfounded things about

dugan

i'm not saying unfounded things i'm

40. i'm literally quoting his his tag

quote

the thing on the periphery for example

no relation and about making sure that

we go back to tradition that's what he's

talking about going back to tradition

why would you what is what did he say

about going back to tradition

um

that that's the the main goal can you

quote

um

that that's also what julius ebola says

so what are rene guinon says so what is

dugan's unique insight here

well

that's that's what i believe his unique

insight is and i think that this well

can you can you provide receipts and

quote it because it's obviously not his

unique insight if renee was saying it

100 years earlier

okay

look

i will definitely say that um

when

when thinking about um

um

like

dugan's a claim that you have to

manage and decrease and control

immigration that you have to bring the

money yeah that you have but you do you

do have to manage immigration you can't

just

have you can't just have chaotic

movement of peoples without taking into

account the cultural

and the economic implications that's a

disaster you think you think you think

you think in communist countries they

had on i'm gonna drop the voice you

think in communist countries they had

uncontrolled immigration people just you

couldn't even immigrate internally

freely you you the populations were

controlled internally that's how

important it was to control populations

thank you so much tennessee

[Music]

what are you talking about how is the

the so-called open borders the liberal

idea of open borders where everyone's

just an individual you don't take into

account the deeper collective realities

what does that have to do with communism

i'm just wondering why there has to be

an uh an emphasis on ethnic purity

where does he where does he talk about

ethnic purity dugan literally said a

black man can become russian that's how

little he cares about so-called purity

yeah but he's

mainly emphasizing russian orthodoxy

going along with the traditions and

going along with that culture so he

doesn't but he does what about purity

are you talking about a fundamental

standpoint it's about

[Music]

um surrendering to particular cultures

surrendering to particularly huge says

that there are different hold on all

dugan says is that there's different

particular cultures and different in a

diversity of civilizations

and

those things are worth

um being true to instead of completely

liquidating them in the name of american

universalist liberalism what's wrong

with that

are you from ethiopia are you from

ethiopia

i'm from rwanda

okay rwanda is one of the

is a very unique culture and a very

unique civilization with very unique

traditions you think all those

traditions should just disappear

who's arguing for the disappro

appearance well dugan is saying that

american liberal american universalist

liberalism is trying to erase

these different particular cultures and

make them all into american liberal

culture

oh that's not

love you don't you don't think that's

true

you don't think you don't think american

uh you don't think american global

globalization american-led globalization

is trying to threaten the particular and

unique cultures and identities of

various different peoples around the

world

well actually no look like

i agree with that but him using that as

a straw man to justify um the

suppression of other cultures

when has he advocated for the

suppression of any culture

when he uh explicitly states that he

doesn't want um other people to come in

and maintain their culture that they

have to follow along when didn't know he

didn't say that when did he say that

with his fourth political theory when he

tells everybody that they have to go

along with the constitutional monarchy

voted definition

do it quote it dugan doesn't believe in

a constitutional monarchy by the way if

anything he would believe in like an

absolute monarchy if he cared about

monarchy

he

openly says the national bolshevik party

is the closest to achieving his

political theory and the national what

year was this

what year was this

got a year it's in the book what year

would did was the book published in

which he said that 2012.

so in his book in 2012 he said the

national bolshevik party is closest

is closest to the fourth political

figure why did he leave the national

bolshevik party then by that time he

wasn't in the national boaster party at

that time

he left very early on

i can't

i can't really

say what's going on in his head but this

is what he wrote

i'm going to tell me what he wrote

give me the page number

all right one moment one moment

the fourth

okay the project of the ba of national

booster party which i in my time was

preparing to transform into an authentic

russian conscious national gulchism on

the foundations of the theories of

us

nikish and the leftist eurasianists alas

degenerated at the end of the 1990s into

a hooliganism and senseless organization

and later started to serve the

anti-russian orange ultra liberal powers

fed by the west which completely

contradicts the fundamental premises of

national bolshevism which represents

both ethereum practice the conscious

left

being thus a strictly anti-liberal

russian patriotic and consequently

anti-anti-western project

so he literally says he left

the national bolshevik party because he

thought it degenerated into hooliganism

and so on and so on that's what he says

in the book

yeah but he at the same time he says

it's the closest so how are they the

closest where did he say it's the

closest

those same marginalized groups who

imitating european neo-nazism attempt to

bring out an ammo glam of national

socialism by name

were never gaussians insofar as they

imitate as a rule from a deficiency of

intellect the gadgets of hitler's regime

as it were continuing to play on at

soldiering in the sandbox or watching

the program accepting those in the

spring

the lighting

yeah this is so he's completely against

hitler and neo-nazism

yeah

but like he's arguing for

let me just turn

so find the quote

still waiting

i'm going to read you what dugan has to

say about nazism in german national

socialism the historical subject is the

aryan race which according to racist

carries out the eternal struggle against

the subhuman races the appalling

consequences of this ideology are too

well known to dwell upon however

it was this original definition of a

historical subject that was at the heart

of the nazis criminal practices that's

what dugan has to say about nazism

in addition hitler's anti-semitism and a

doctrine that slobs are subhuman

and must be colonized is what led

germany to go to war against the soviet

union which cost us millions of lives

why don't you quote these parts

i'm just randomly searching racism and

reading every single one

european and american sides are

fundamentally afflicted with these types

of racism unable to eradicate them from

itself despite intensive efforts being

fully aware how revolting this phenomena

is people in the west tend to make

racism a taboo

however all this turns into a witch hunt

new pariahs accused of fascism are its

victims

thus this very political correctness and

its norms are transformed into a total

and darien discipline of political

purely racist exclusions

in this manner institutionalized french

left liberal anti-racism has gradually

become the distribution center of racial

hatred

even africans suffer from being accused

of fascism so he's saying the liberal

form of anti-racism

is actually functionally in reality a

form of racism against immigrants and

against other people from other cultures

who don't conform to the politically

correct model

such was the case of an unrestrained

defamatory campaign against a well-known

black comedian i can't pronounce his

name

who dared to mock

certain features of the contemporary

french establishment in his routines

that's what happened to dave chappelle

too by the way

yeah because

look

quite honestly

many of you

take the idea that people questioning

the or are you gonna get the quotes or

not to challenge them are you gonna get

the quotes or not

i'm i'm still looking for it sorry about

that but i'm just saying like

going back to what you had said earlier

about um the the campaign against dave

chappelle

um

he's not the first comedian to have gone

through

campaigns against him for objectionable

content he's not the first one

and he's not going to be the last

actually really well he can't get his

film he can't he's not he's being

disinvited from film festivals he can't

avoid born donating he can't get his uh

movie anywhere the next thing we should

ask our resident male feminist is where

did he learn to repeat all these lies

about dugin and who benefits the most

from this thank you yeah we want to know

where did you read all these lies about

dugan and who benefits most from the

disinformation

um

i honestly got a lot of this like i have

the book read in front of me i just

can't seem to

find that quote

uh i'm i'm sorry about that but i

honestly like

most of my impressions of dual game come

from

what i've what i've read

where did you what did you read my own

personal opinion

what did you read

so i mean i

i got

um

really turned off maybe with the first

few few bits

because he was it sounded like a lot of

moral relativist arguments

and um

moreover him

claiming that marxism had failed in 2012

when there were um

when when you had seen the unprecedented

growth of china vietnam

during that time that that had nothing

to do with the form of marxism

first of all vietnam

does vietnam that none of that had to do

with the form of marxism dugan himself

was familiar with he does he didn't

engage with chinese marxist theorists

and hear their perspectives he was a

russian so he knows only about marxism

the experience of the soviet union

so you're saying he didn't know there

were marxists around the world

he did but he wasn't familiar with their

theories and uh their ideas

and i think dugan's right here and this

is something that's not shared by

chinese marxism an arrogant contempt for

the past

a vulgar materialist interpretation of

spiritual culture a focus exclusively

upon economic factors a positive

attitude to the process of creating a

social differential through the

dictation of the proletariat

um and the idea of class is the only

historical subject

so

these are things that you don't find in

chinese marxism maybe besides the

dictatorship of the proletary thing but

even then it's very clear and dugan is

characterized thank you for fighting the

enemies of the american people thank you

so much conversely dugan is talking

about the majority of marxists there he

is talking about the majority of them

especially in his time they're very

dogmatic they're very much saying this

type of [ __ ]

marxism is relevant in terms of its

description of liberalism and

identifying the contradictions of

capitalism and its criticism of the

bourgeois system and revealing the truth

behind bourjois democratic policies of

exploitation and enslavement which are

presented as development and liberation

marxism critical potential is highly

useful and applicable

but if so marxism will not appear as an

ideology that provides answers to a full

range of emerging issues answers that

are rational and exomatic in their

foundation

yeah

the marxism which we can accept is

mythic sociological marxism

i think dugan is open to the possibility

of marxism being revived and given new

perspective and he would probably be

open to it he's just saying as far as

the marxism we know now which i agree

with him it's been inadequate to address

the current realities and current

problems

well

that's

russians

the russians being dogmatic about

marxism and abandoning it in 1991

um was just one event in political

history

most of the other he

raised a good point the first and most

prominent contradiction is marx's

unfulfilled prediction about the type of

societies that are most prone to those

with revolutions he was confident this

would take place in the greatly

industrialized countries of western

europe which had a high level of

manufacturing contained a large

proportion of urban proletariat such

revolutions were considered impossible

in agrarian countries as well as those

countries with an asiatic mode of

production due to their supposed

backwardness in the 20th century

everything that occurred to the exact

contrary you realize d colonial and

fenonian thinkers say the same thing

he's saying right now in his critique of

marxism right

you realize those people say the same

exact thing

sorry i missed that

socialist revolutions and social

societies developed in agrarian

countries which had a traditional rural

population while nothing similar

occurred in any of the highly developed

nations of europe and america

however even in those countries where

socialism was victorious the dogma did

not allow for a rethinking of its basic

logical assumptions such as the

reconsider the role of pre-industrial

factors or to honestly evaluate the real

power of myth i think that's a fair

criticism i don't really necessarily

disagree with that then he goes and this

is my favorite part

he's talking about his dogmatic this is

my favorite in the end european

revolutionary communists turned into

petty bourgeois clowns entertaining the

bored and jaded democratic public i

agree with that

i fundamentally agree with that

i think dugan seems like he's alluding

to this idea of

in his own way maybe i disagree with it

but he still wants to revive marxism and

he wants to

like he wants to salvage what he

considers important about marxism

um while deviating from what he

perceives to be its uh its dogmas sounds

to me like dugan

isn't really

anti-marxist all right so let me let me

go to what i said was basically

what i said along along the lines him

arguing that national [ __ ] was the

closest so yet in any case

it's necessary to rethink the second and

third political theories in a new way

from a new perspective and only after we

reject our trust in those ideological

structures on which they were deductible

so there are orthodoxy is the most

uninteresting worthless

aspect cross reading them would be far

more productive marks through a positive

view of the right or a voila through a

positive view of the left this

fascinating

national bolshevik undertaking

in the spirit of nikolai v gustriala for

ernst

uh

he says it's not suspicio

sufficient by itself but he's arguing

basically that they're the closest

so he's the the fascinating question the

so-called national bolsheviks predated

the nazis predated the so-called

national socialists so it's not a play

on nazism whatsoever these theorists

came from the 20s i'm not saying that

it's a play on nazism okay that's what

he's he dugan is obviously influenced by

the so-called national bolsheviks of the

20s

uh who by the way lenin critiqued very

briefly

um in his critique of left-wing

communism and infiltral disorder

but he's basically saying they're not

sufficient by themselves

and he basically wants to go beyond even

them

well yeah he does but keep in mind that

lenin himself railed very fiercely

against the same social patriots no he

didn't no he didn't he was railing

against yes he did no listen

no no he you're stupid he wasn't he

wrote a book called left wing communism

and infantile disorder which was mainly

um written to address the descent

created by the treaty of breslidvask

right where the soviets had to

compromise

and he was addressing the national

bolsheviks

who basically were saying no we need to

continue a revolutionary

war against the imperialist bourgeoisie

so the national bolsheviks lenin was

critiquing were anti-imperialists right

he was critiquing them as ultra leftists

in that book and he very briefly said it

is curious and i'm quoting him um

social patriots no he didn't

the social patriots

no he didn't the social patriots were

from the social democratic party and

left-wing communism and infantile

disorder the national bolsheviks were a

completely different phenomena whom he

was critiquing for their ultra-left

radicalism in relation to brexit vosk

and the need to seek peace

had nothing to do with the social

patriots of the social democratic party

because the national bolsheviks were

advocating after world war one for like

a revolutionary war against imperialist

britain and america in an alliance with

the german bourgeoisie

after the war right as a form of

anti-imperialism not during the

imperialist war after the war

all right well i'll just um

try to find that uh

letter

that he wrote to the american

like he wrote this letter to america and

he was actually complaining exactly

about the same people you're talking

about the one no he wasn't um wanted to

keep the fight going instead of signing

the piece

um he was that was left-wing communism

and infantile disorder which was about

brexit vosk

so yeah like he's he's he's caught

criticized them many times in many

writings

he criticized the national bolsheviks

literally like once

in passing

okay well let me just let me just try to

find that uh

go ahead letter

all right

um i'll i'll be able to quote it

because he actually called them

closed captioning

so

yeah the right social revolutionaries

and metrofix also accuse us

let me see if i can find him using that

exact quote actually social

because i remember

that actually being used him saying that

exact term

and you know him quite arguing uh

arguing in this speech for the need for

the destruction of america actually

okay

show us

show us where london advocates the

destruction of america

so a letter to american workers so

comrades so we talked about how the

civil war

i need to talk i need to find the part

about the destruction of america because

in this this is the letter where he

praises the history of america's

revolutionary tradition and compares the

russian revolution to the american

revolution so it's not really helping

your case can you explain where he

advocates for the destruction of america

in this letter

well not necessarily the destruction of

america quite literally but he does

advocate for civil war

um

and he talks about how that's going to

be a necessity can you um can you please

quote it

yeah yeah just

because it sounds like lenin is trying

to say that the american bourgeoisie is

betraying the revolutionary legacy of

the american state the american workers

and their struggle against the

bourgeoisie should pick up the mantle of

the revolutionary past against the

bourgeoisie itself

yeah

can you please find where he talks about

the destruction of america

all right so the civil war

uh first they will be us okay so there

we go the american workers will not

follow the bourgeoisie there will be

with us for civil war against the

bourgeoisie so he literally says

the american workers will not follow the

they will be with us for civil war

against the bourgeoisie the whole

history of the world the american labor

movement strengthens my convictions that

this is so

and and the words most beloved eugene

debs

and he's basically talk he's talking

about

in the period of war

in during the world war one where he's

advocating for the american workers

to go to war against the bourgeoisie

now the representatives and defenders of

the bourgeoisie and also the reformist

socialists who have been frightened by

the bourgeoisie and are shunning the

revolution

cannot and do not want to understand

that civil war is necessary and legit

now so granted there was a world war

going on at the time

and that was

probably going to end up being their

choice

they were in the middle of a war it was

literally a in the middle of a war and

lenin was appraising the situation as a

revolutionary situation

to check the year it's 20th of august

1918. so lenin thinks this is a

revolutionary situation at the time

yeah

um

but you need you need to under also

understand and at this time the

bolsheviks were banking on the

revolution to spread to europe and the

so-called advanced countries

and that was their idea according to

marxist orthodoxy that the revolution

would spread to the advanced countries

so they lit it was literally a matter of

faith that it was going to happen and

that was what was going to save the

revolution

well yeah but i mean he's

also arguing in this

article here

that

it's going to be a vastly greater task

of overthrowing capitalist wage slavery

than

the old contemporary slavery and

he's talking about a period where there

was no world war

the overthrowing of negro slavery and

that needed a civil

so he's actually arguing in general

that

in order to overthrow capitalism in

america lenin considered the american

civil war to be a revolutionary

situation in and of itself it was a

revolution

he appraised it as such

yeah but now when we are confronted with

the vastly greater task of overthrowing

capitalist wage slavery

so he's not necessarily talking about

america why are we now confronted with

it what are the circumstances and

conditions in which we are now

confronted with it is it just because

it's a matter of principle or is it

because of the actual material

conditions at the time which was the

state of world war and therefore

according to lenin a revolutionary

situation and also a situation of um

following the russian revolution which

lenin was thinking was going to spread

and he was wrong about that by the way

it didn't spread

it spread to hungary and then

attempted spread to other places

this ultimately was crushed in its

cradle

crushed

um

not necessarily the bourgeois had to

make concessions in europe

and they had to end the war

because it was threatening uh it wasn't

because of the revolutions whatsoever

that they ended the war

what was the war it was uh the plague

and yes there was a strike wave

throughout the

throughout europe it was not that was

not the reason the war ended whatsoever

the war ended because of

strike wave the panda no it wasn't

those are those were factors that

contributed to the end of the war

okay um

um also you know the treaty itself the

treaty of breslavas so it had nothing to

do with the united states entering uh

the war

and changing the game so profoundly that

it couldn't even be fought anymore by

the germans

um i

don't like

there's there's a lot of sensationalism

from americans that they're entering the

war

basically at the last minute was really

what changed the game i

i i don't know what about the 100 days

offensive

what about the arrival of 1.4 million

american troops in france and germany

sorry in france

and the overwhelming of germany what

about the food shortages the illness

okay so the strikes and demonstrations

in berlin

contributed to it but the main thing was

america's entrance into the war

and the resilience of france and the uh

britain

and being able to repel germany

like

what about the withdrawal what about the

withdrawing of germany's allies like

austria-hungary and

the ottoman empire

yeah

like

all of those things are are factors in

in what ended the war

um well the revolution did not spread as

was predicted

it did not spread as was predicted

because yeah the bourgeoisie took

measure

looking at the situation

in order

like there there are conscious class

they're going to find ways to

try to put a lid on it but even then

communist parties were still growing

um

largely

it was nothing it was nothing remotely

there you had it in the east like in

china but in western europe you had

pretty much nothing

you had a whole nothing burger as far as

the spread of the revolution was

concerned you had an ex you had an

adventure or some kind of experiment in

hungary which was an abysmal failure

you had the uprising in germany which

was also an abysmal failure

sorry

the

yes um

that uprising failed but the communist

party actually

stayed relevant and stayed strong it was

relevant but nowhere near enough to ever

be in a position to seize power

i mean we can always

debate well it objectively was not

i

argue like if you were looking at the

polls and the and the figures of what

they were getting

numbers-wise and things like that they

they were growing

yeah they probably weren't going to be

able to seize the revolution tomorrow

but they were generally like they're

definitely a lot stronger than the

parties here

for example i'll give you like that's

just one example that's one comparison

um

like i don't think um

parties can really perform much worse

than the ones in the subtler colonies

but

generally um

like

it's arguable that the socialist the

socialist party led by eugene depps

arguably performed better than the

communists in germany did

the american socialists

the american socialists arguably

performed better

um

like uh

like those socialists ended up being you

know opportunist in a lot of ways like

colluding with the democrats for example

things like that and accepting certain

compromises that lenin didn't think so

lenin thought that eugene debs was uh

the leader of the american proletariat

well uh

that ended up not working not working

out did it

and

honestly

failing to look at the multinational

character of the country is the root of

the failures of the communist movement

what what is your overall point here

what is your overall point

so my overall point is

that um

like particularly in canada and in the

us generally

um we

need to actually look at

what we're actually being patriotic for

um

like when when it comes to

looking at uh what we need for

uh to build revolutionary conditions in

a revolutionary situation

i think a lot of the times when people

advocate for this

socialist patriotism and they're against

the idea of returning

sovereignty to the land nationalizing

the land what is the what is the

revolution what's the revolution

a revolution is uh

the

overthrow of the existing society the

existing orthodoxy

and the existing

um

production

existing

by revolutionary forces the

revolutionary class at the time when it

was bioclass

so is it a result of class struggle

yes it's a result of what form does

class struggle take

a revolution

no what form does the class struggle

take

so it can take

it can take shape in many ways sometimes

it's in

labor struggles okay go go do that then

go do it

see how it works out go do it

i'm in the party i'm doing it we are

doing what party you're in i feel the

communist party of canada okay you're in

the communist party of canada go do it

we're doing we're gonna do it keep doing

it i'm not stop how am i stopping you

we're not stopping you but i want to did

you read the communist manifesto

yes

is that book set the class struggles

it's been a while since i've read that

that book said the class struggle is

actually national in form

but if you think it's not national

informed go ahead and see what's gonna

happen it is national and foreign but

this is these are multinational

countries both canada and the us are

multinational

so

um if we want to have um

a revolution that succeeds we have to be

reticent of the right you want you want

something that doesn't exist

do you know what a revolution is no

country

a multinational country you don't think

this is a multinational country

uh canada or the us you don't think

they're multinational

are you saying that they're not

multinational so let me explain to you

what's going on

you want a reality that doesn't exist

right

so you're saying we need a revolution to

make our current reality that reality

right

well we need to advocate for it yes or

no

yes or no

yes

we need to make you know oh then hold on

what revolution in history has ever

proceeded on those terms

on what

on the terms of i want a reality so i'm

gonna do a revolution to make that

reality

name one revolution in history that was

like that

that changed the

knowledgeable conditions or what do you

mean by that

i mean a revolution being carried out

because individuals wanted

their reality to be different

um

not just individuals but the masses

generally when you are okay name one

name one

the russian revolution was not a [ __ ]

example of that the russian revolution

happened because the bolsheviks

correctly articulated the national

conditions

and reality

do i have to mute you

uh

can you still hear me i can hear you now

okay okay

yeah yeah you're sounding better now

the russian revolution was not

a case of people getting around and

masses simply wanting a new reality it

was about the way in which masses

specifically led by the bolsheviks

correctly articulated the existing

national reality and seized hegemony

over the russian nation proving

themselves to be worthy of inheriting it

and its continuity

specifically the russian civilization i

should say instead of nation

so if you're claiming that um they

basically wanted to preserve certain

things but improve the certain

yeah the conditions every single

revolution in history is conservative

okay well why did um

now

here's here's my uh do you know what

revolution means

the word yes the revolution what is it

it comes from turning of the wheel it

means

turning of the situation is it only of

the wheel

no it just means transformation how is

the transformation if you're just

returning how is the transformation if

you're just returning to the same place

well when you

spin a wheel you don't end up in the

same place you move you go you don't

listen

a revolution is literally a 360 degree

movement

of the wheel yeah 360 degrees

of the wheel but not what the wheel is

moving

it is literally returning it is

literally movement

it is literally movement to return to

the same place you were before

a return to

tradition like dugan has claimed

maybe not true maybe

maybe it's precisely what they were

trying to

they specifically advocated for the

upending of the current

um relations

yeah and what actually happened what

actually happened

what actually [ __ ] happened as a

result though they restored russian

civilization they restored the legacy of

the pre-romanov russian civilization

under stalin

no they didn't yes they did

yes they [ __ ] did they overthrew the

westernized and germanized aristocracy

and allowed the civilizational character

of the russian people to dominate the

state

and preponderate the form of the state

that's exactly what happened under

stalin

he said as much he said peter the great

was a westernizer and ivan the terrible

was a good conservative fighting against

the foreign influences

to preserve the unique russian

civilization that's what he said

now

yeah that's that might be his particular

take but i don't remember any society

before

um the romanovs where women were voting

or where um the peasants on the land

so heavens own the land peasants own the

land

under napoleon

napoleon gave the peasants land when he

freed them from serfdom

peasants on the land after the french

revolution

no in in many ways he argued for you

know private relations and it ended up

creating the kulak

so like it's who created the gulak

well the kulaks

came from the

you know private from the logic of

private ownership of the means of

production

the the land was collectivized and it

was under the ownership of the state

under the revolution

so it was very different

they um the call causes were very

different

um

organization of peasant society from

what was going on before i mean this

argument that is uh

this was not something brand new is kind

of a ridiculous one honestly hey but all

you said was that the peasants owned the

land i don't give a [ __ ] your point is

my argument that it's

like

the peasants on the land yes it was the

first social estate in history what is

your point

no one denied it was the first socialist

or communist state in history what is

your [ __ ] point that's

my point is um revolution is inherently

so what is socialism what does socialism

do

socialism is about moving forward it's

not about moving back it's about what is

the content of that what does that look

like

what is back you do only you can only

say that if you take the past for

granted what if you don't know the past

what if there's aspects of the past

you've either taken for granted

forgotten or didn't even know about what

if the past

is itself eternal why is the only the

future eternal why not the past two

what if you just take the past for

granted and there's things in the past

that are waiting to be revived so now

now you've gone in completely different

uh directions okay go forward

and where's star trek you're gonna wear

the star trek souks

how on the one hand can you star trek no

no star trek that's that's what that's

what communism was about right star trek

how on you one hand can you argue about

going back and yet at the same time rail

against the idea

of the of the land and uh being returned

to indigenous nations

how can you on the one hand

because because because here's why

how can you say both of these things at

once and be consistent yeah i do not

understand that yeah it's very simple

i've never i didn't say we can't give

the indigenous people land back because

uh

you can't go back in time per se

i just said there's a fundamental

dialectic of modernity

which i would agree with in the soviet

case as well that in order to return to

the past you have to accept as

inevitable now as far as indigenous

people are concerned i never i never

said i was against

allowing them to have sovereignty

secession or national determination

whatever form they see fit i've just

rejected the idea that the united states

has no basis of existence and that it

has to be completely dissolved and the

entire land mass from seaboard to

seaboard of us territory has to be given

to indigenous people that's literally

all i [ __ ] said i never [ __ ] said

i'm against indigenous people having

their own land or governing their own

territories or being completely separate

sovereign states even i've never said

that not even once

now um taking all those conditions into

consideration

um is something that actually i brought

forward to a lot of people in your camp

and they vehemently opposed it too even

though

um

it seems to be a viable plan for many of

the communists in in canada it is about

having a lower house where you have

proportional representation in an upper

house of nations

the land itself is nationalized

completely

you have certain nations having okay you

want me to tell you what i think about

canada

but but

well it's the same conditions

i'll tell you what i think about canada

let me tell you

why don't you hold your horses

because i actually believe the united

states should fully annex canada and cut

it off from the british commonwealth

entirely canada is not an independent

state it's still a colony of the british

commonwealth and it's technically under

the sovereignty of the british crown

which means it's an enemy of the united

states the british crown is the enemy of

the united states and the american

people and it is my view that we cannot

share a border

with

the british crown

which we fought a war of independence

to

expel

and a territory which was used in 1812

to come and burn down the white house

so

as far as canada is concerned i do not

recognize the legitimacy of the canadian

state or the sovereignty of canada

whatsoever

so

you you want to

get upset about the fact that the uh the

us white house was burned down

they're our enemy canada is the enemy

canada is a historical enemy of the

united states

it's an agent of the british empire it's

a subject of the british empire

and it's ruled by the queen of england

so if if the us is truly independent and

not a member of the eu of the british

empire then why officially we're not but

we have been infiltrated and colonized

by the british empire in the form of in

the intelligence agencies which all came

from

britain the cia was an offshoot of the

oss which was created by the british

empire

so

so ultimately

you're saying that noble's in charge of

the con

of the country which

which we're talking about the ruling

class essentially they're they're from

families uh

nobles from different parts of europe

that's really what they what they are

they're the makeup largely british but

you know from

different persuasions and that's what

makes up the the united states

um

and yet you want to claim

that um

the us is uh sovereign enemy of canada

but

all of that kind of presupposes that the

border that's written out or the

independence of the us itself was

somehow legitimate yes it was legitimate

a war was fought for it so yes it's

legitimate any any european country

which wants a piece of our land is gonna

have to come and take it the same way we

took it so yeah it is [ __ ] legitimate

you talk about how you stole it from the

indigenous people in reality we took it

from the [ __ ] european empires who

were gonna take the westward land anyway

no they weren't yes they [ __ ] were

spain and france had designs on the

american continent they absolutely

[ __ ] did

well they did but here's the reason why

um the

uh

the us patriots sided with the french

and and opposed the british it was the

strategic maneuver it was just a

strategic maneuver

yeah but ultimately it was about doing

the west westward expansion and no it

wasn't british no it [ __ ] wasn't it

was ultimately about

seceding from the united kingdom and

establishing a republic by for and of

the people simple as that

so why did 11 years after the revolution

did

the shae's rebellion happen

because 11 years after the revolution

the shea's rebellion ended up happening

and that

was

rooted in the fact that the

the same people the same ground units

that had fought for independence

with a promise of you know lower taxes

and whatever

were instead

uh being uh being imposed even higher

taxes than what they had before

and the constitution itself as was

written by the way

um shea's rebellion is rumored to have

been instigated by

british agents

anyway well why did why did they why why

was there rebellions and uprisings

against the bolshevik government in the

aftermath of the revolution in russia

well yes there was infiltration but the

conditions themselves were pretty bad

because they were coming out of a civil

war so the conditions in the united

states weren't bad

well the conditions in the united states

um

were bad but another

underlying reason why the constitution

came out in the way that it did was

because there was precedence established

by uh the british against um

uh that it was gonna lay the path for

the abolition of slavery that's what

ended up happening what what evidence do

you have that the british were going to

abolish slavery in the americas

it was it was about the court judgment

and what court judgment had set the

president which yeah which court

um it's a court judgment made

see if i can find

because

yeah like what i'm trying to say is on

the

so

may 1772 there was a significant court

judge it also kind of instigated the war

um

and

what did the court judgment say it

didn't it didn't that's somerset versus

stewart what was the court judgment

relating to the right of an enslaved

person on english lawyer to not be

forcibly removed from the country and

sent to jamaica is that what you're

referring to

yeah so what does that have to [ __ ]

do with the usa

oh because

um there were there were um states that

actually accepted that judgment after

the uh the independence so connect

connecticut vermont they used that

beginning during the revolutionary war

northern states began to abolish or rule

against maintaining slavery vermont was

the first in 1777.

yeah that's what i'm talking about so

so using that as a basis

this somerset decision was an important

in anti-slavery constitutionalism

what the literal [ __ ] are you talking

about

you think the americans

rebelled because of somerset when

somerset was the inspiration i did not

say they rebelled because of somerset so

why did you bring it up

cut it out because that was the the

basis for the constitution

um after what had happened with the

chase rebellion after the declaration of

independence and the war and all of

these other things like all those it was

part of the

anti-slavery constitutionalism

well

no the the constitution ended up

embedding slavery and there's an act why

because why would it embed slavery on a

ruling

that was a

foundation

for anti-slavery constitution

so they were trying to oppose what had

um

what was happening with uh all of the

states accepting that precedence because

who was who was

what are you specifically referring to

because

there's no evidence that the somerset

decision

was

promoting slavery later

was promoting i'm not saying that it was

i'm saying that it threatens the

institution of slavery yeah i agree it

did i the founding fathers

did not consider slavery an institution

that they wanted to uh

have forever they thought slavery was

the scandal

on the founding of the republic and it

was tolerated in the south because um

according to them and this was their

view

um so they couldn't afford any stuff

that they were

the southern states we find that

you'll actually find that bourgeois

politicians talking out of both both

sides of their mouth is a time-honored

american tradition

so they were doing that while at the

same time having um

plantations owning slaves

um yeah that that's that's not listen

listen that has nothing that has nothing

to you are just personalizing it you are

just [ __ ] personalizing it they could

have been the biggest scumbags they

could have been pedophiles they could

have been rapists they probably were

they could have been the most deranged

sick twisted [ __ ] individuals but

that has nothing to do with their

historical political significance for

world history believe it or not the

the um the popularis in ancient rome

came from the patrician class and yet

they represented the people outside of

the petition class right so what you're

doing trying to [ __ ] personalize it

does not give us any [ __ ] insight

about the relationship between the

american war of independence and slavery

okay

so the american

war of independence was

about

ultimately

preserving the colonies and being able

to expand westward after the british

conceded to the indigent no it's not

that's not that's not what it was about

it was about seceding

it was about seceding from the british

empire because the united states

established its own independent economic

foundation and the british empire was

acting as a parasite which was stealing

the [ __ ] money from the american

colonies without giving them any

representation

politically

taxation without representation but what

happened when they revolted the taxes

ended up being higher on the on the same

people that fought yeah it was being

taxed as being taxes being levied by a

government that was representing the

people

the government was not represented yes

it [ __ ] was it was a republic and

they had representations in the [ __ ]

congress and in the [ __ ] institution

of the republican government

so why wasn't everybody allowed to vote

only a minority was allowed to avoid

yeah that's that's the history of

[ __ ] all european republics and

democracies at the time

there was no universal suffrage it was

only white for the slave owners what

freedom for the slave owners yeah right

or for the property owning males

the property owning males yeah

what's your point

but that would eventually be the that

would eventually be the bedrock upon

which universal suffrage would be

expanded to everyone

including former former slaves until

1960

yeah

it was it wasn't expanded up until 1960.

and the country that you're saying

what is your point what is your point

brandon

what point are you trying to [ __ ]

make

you're pointing out a contradiction that

was only created because they said we

the people so what's your point yes it

was a hypocrisy and a contradiction and

because of that they eventually did have

universal suffrage like what is your

point by pointing out that hypocrisy

they they they were the ones who

declared universal uh rights of man or

at least uh we the people and that the

people of the united what is your

[ __ ] point

you're the ones who went out they didn't

say we the white owning property mails

and yet in practice that's what they did

but that's not what they said so they

laid the very foundations for it to be

expanded to everyone so what's your

point

there was no foundations for it to be

expanded to everyone

um

most of the people were being killed off

on the west end

um and

like that's still ongoing

and

to un understand that really what both

of these countries are canada and united

states are actually military occupations

by colonies

so

like it's it's kind of

your argument that because they fought

against the british or got independence

in some way means that they're not

necessarily a colony um and what are we

a colony of what are we a colony of it's

you're making this

a colony of british nobles basically no

we're not a colony of british nobles

we're not a colony of british nobles no

we're [ __ ] not

yes you are

no you are

you literally have to answer to the

[ __ ] queen i can literally go to

school

and wipe my [ __ ] ass with a picture

of the queen and smear it on the wall

and i might get in trouble but no one

will care that it was the queen i was

desecrating if you do that in canada you

probably go to jail shut the [ __ ] up i'm

not a british colony

you are british no we're not i can

literally

piss on a picture of the queen i can go

outside

literally put up a frame picture of the

queen and take a piss on it

and it won't be disrespectful to anyone

in this country no one will give a [ __ ]

ultimately means nothing if your army is

used to fight for

really the property of british noble

at the end of the day it's the same

thing

and it's

essentially still a military occupation

okay either way so britain is still

occupying the country

britain is still occupying the country

it's still a colonial occupation okay so

i okay then i'll just leave that

then okay then we just have another

declaration of independence apparently

we need another one i'm fine with that

we need a a

revolutionary situation no we need a

declaration of independence from the

british empire

and we need to return so we need 1776

must commence again we didn't go far

enough apparently

no the revolution has to be led by

the indigenous right

the multinational working class the

multinational what do you mean by

multinational working class do you think

do you think the working class is just

like a mishmash of [ __ ]

random people

no boo lookers you're full of [ __ ] your

60 19 project [ __ ] has [ __ ] been

debunked wrote a paragraph for nothing

anyway what do you mean multinational

you know you're referring to different

groups that are distinct cultures that

have their own [ __ ] culture and [ __ ]

right

you're not just referring to like a

rainbow coalition of mishmash of

individuals who happen to be of

different backgrounds you're referring

to different peoples right

yes different people okay talking about

the africans

yeah so it's not just a random like it's

not just their random

like diversity it's just

different peoples

so i'm just wondering is your discord

always this [ __ ] racist i mean you've

always who's being racist we'll ban them

we don't we don't tolerate racism in our

discord who's being racist so vlad clash

is having people pulling their pants on

black people putting their uh their

pants uh where where show me which

general chat

uh it's in the uh general vc chat yes

that's a general vc chat hold on here

with me mods can you get in there

general vc chat

shut up for a second

general vc chat what's his name

so i've got

vlad cash what is he doing

vlad cash

what is what is vlad cash post

just one of those nights

okay that's actually tos

that's not racist but it is tos he's

basically posted a video of showing ass

so i'm gonna ban him now

he's banned he just posted a picture of

two people showing their ass

yeah this is

i can't believe this [ __ ]

okay

let me tell you

mods can you look at general vc and see

what the [ __ ] is going on you know these

people are not community regulars no one

even knows who that [ __ ] guy is by

the way

so i don't know what your [ __ ] point

is

okay we got another

i just

noticed it and i was really

anyways

honestly

wait why was it racist by curiosity just

out of curiosity why was it racist

well i mean

i didn't watch the whole video i just

watched

well i just saw two males with their

pants down walking and i banned him

immediately and deleted it

i don't see what's racist about that

[Music]

i just think it's it's tos i don't know

why it's racist

just because they were both black

but whatever they're doing why are they

having that why they're having their

pants down like that like it was some

sort of a prison site because that's

kind of like a prison site so why were

you talking about prison i wasn't

talking about prison what the [ __ ] are

you talking about

i'm not saying you are talking about

prison i'm just talking about that

particular i don't know i don't know

what the [ __ ] that video was i deleted

it and banned him immediately

okay all right so i that's all i've got

to say about that

now um

what i'm honestly trying to say here is

that each nation has to be be recognized

as equals

for unity to occur

okay and um

this has been emblematic and exposed

last year with

many of the riots that percolated

throughout the country

it showed kind of the central

contradiction of the nation

it's that it's operating under an

ideology of white supremacy yet at the

same time it has its multinational in

character and ends up with this sort of

conflict and this conflict has been

going around ever since the occupation

began

that's what i'm trying to say

both these countries are the result of

400 years of military occupation in

central colombia first of all calling it

military calling it military occupation

it's the most stupid [ __ ] i've ever

[ __ ] heard

because by that logic

why then why then is the police armed

uh more substantially than many other

countries armies

if it's not a military why don't you

hold your horses what you're talking

about is the specific

um repression of the black community in

this country

not just the black community yeah that

is what you're talking about that's

exactly what you're talking about white

supremacy is are the police institutions

of military militarization of police is

overwhelmingly targeted against the

black community

yes the black community but also the

indigenous no not really it's not really

it's not really

the the indigenous are suffering from a

lack of support but they're not policed

in the same way the black community is

so it's not a general occupation what

you're talking about is the specific

circumstances of black people in this

country which yes i agree their

communities are in a sense being

occupied and that's why i agree with the

black belt thesis and the right to

national self-determination by black

people and if they want to buy their own

accord form a united states with the

country that's their choice but they

don't have to

but

i don't see what your [ __ ] point is

none of what you just said

makes it that the whole of the united

states has to be completely dissolved

and that there can be no continuity with

1776

and the us constitution and the legacy

of the war of independence

so don't get it twisted about what this

is [ __ ] about this isn't about

whether certain communities

should be respected and having national

self-determination and sovereignty it's

about whether the united states has to

be completely destroyed or we have to

tell people well just to be clear you're

not gonna [ __ ] destroy it so what

this is actually about is whether you're

gonna run around telling people that's

what your intention is to do and thereby

ostracize yourself

from everyone while not even being able

to accomplish it so that's actually what

we're [ __ ] talking about

so

worrying about the name itself is not

necessarily what we at the communist

party of canada are advocating okay

listen i don't even believe canada's a

real country

i don't believe canada is a real country

can i just say that i don't think canada

is a it's not an it's not a sovereign

independent country i don't know why

canada still exists that the us is a

real country i think well

here's the thing here's the thing is

that we actually fought we actually

fought and kicked the british out and

you still bowed before their queen so

yeah i think we are a real country

you about before the queen you do you do

you do

you pay for the queen you literally paid

for the [ __ ] royal couples and megan

martin with your [ __ ] tax dollars you

pay for them

we don't do that [ __ ] here

so the cares act where where do you

think the money went to

a lot of that money went to british

banks yeah

so think about that for a minute

you're paying for the uh for british

nobles no we're not you're paying for

what

what what's the difference actually what

is the difference is for us we are

informally calling the difference is

with us we are informally colonized by

britain that's why i'm advocating for a

new 1776 while you

are actually formally a colony of

britain in the sense of being a subject

of the british crown that has

sovereignty over your country

i mean honestly

this is really just splitting hairs at

this point because i think we're quebec

the french quebec

becky should have their own country and

then the rest of canada probably should

be taken by the us

well

what i

argue is that you know honestly the the

border the the

this

you're trying to project your own

british empire on us and saying the

united states isn't real you bet your

ass it's real

it is a real country we are a real

country yes we are

okay

so i don't understand why you want to

hold on to the legacy of the united

states when soldiers because you're

trying to cope and pretend the united

states never even happened or that the

only significance of it is that it was

immoral and that's that's all it was

just it was just immoral and nothing

more

well i think it was actually a world

historical

um

objective contribution to history and

the history of humanity

and our history as a people

as an american people it's part of our

history it's part of who we are it's

part of who we are today and it's part

of what makes us what we are today and i

don't want to liquidate that history and

pretend like it was all a bad dream and

it we can just reverse it never even

happen with 1619 projects let's go back

to the british empire hell no i think

there was something real about 1776 i

think there was something unique about

the american revolution and i don't want

to forget that so i'm a traditionalist

that's why i want to preserve the

revolutionary tradition of the united

states

so you do realize this argument you've

made is an argument made by

by martin luther king

and many of the other um people that you

know

people in our you know revolutionary

community black people would call house

negroes

because i don't know if you can use this

word on i know you're black yourself but

i don't know if you can use this word so

let's not use this word on twitch i'm

not sure what the rules are i don't i

personally don't mind you using it but

twitch might have an issue so let's keep

a low on that and okay yeah yeah yeah

but guess what

that might be true for the black

community that's not for the black

community to decide i'm hands off i'm

more of a malcolm x guy too but

ultimately that's internal to the black

community that doesn't apply to white

america white america can't do they

can't say the same thing what you're

basically talking about is white liberal

fringe hipsters

taking control and seizing power you

want them to rule everyone you want them

to rule the black community the latino

community the indigenous community and

the white america that's actually what's

going to happen

you want the white leftists to rule the

country come on yeah that's what you

want

that's that's that's not you you think

it's this you think it's the same thing

for black people when are the liberals

ever advocated for the nationalization

of the land when have they ever

advocated they are advocates jeff bezos

jeff bezos funded the land back

collective the ndn

alan black was about privatization yeah

that's what they want

hear them towards the idea of

privatization yeah that's what they're

using it for

that's what they're using it for

yeah but that doesn't legit uh so

indigenous people indigenous people

can't sell wait wait indigenous people

can't sell the land they're being given

the the

lands

under indigenous cultures were not for

sale

they were not for sale well if they

choose to make it for sale themselves

there were some communities that did

have property relations

but the the majority linkedin can you

stop wasting my time you're not going to

return to the past indigenous people

don't live the same way they did 300

years ago they're not the blue people

from avatar so they are participating in

our modern economy there's no indication

that they're going to return to how

their society was 500 years ago or

whatever so

yes they can sell their land right

because they own it what makes you think

they're not going to sell it they've

done it in canada and elsewhere where

they're renting it out and they're

privatizing it so that's actually what's

[ __ ] going on they own casinos all

those guys indigenous people are not

blue people from avatar whatever stupid

thing you have in mind

indigenous people also have class

relations and they have that

contradiction going on with them as well

so

there are people as well and they also

have

bourgeois teddy bourgeois and working

class and they have traitors in their

movement as well they're like other

people

we argue for multi-national

representatives so indigenous people are

just your cope and your ability to

bypass actually winning over the

majority of people in your country you

can just focus on a very

marginalized minority who's extremely

repressed

and you're gonna have to call standpoint

you're gonna use them you're gonna use

them as like your eternal justification

for being an anti-social and this is

what white leftists do they use the

marginal groups as a justification for

their anti-social stance toward their

own people

i'm not white

okay black

and as an african we know why the

struggling for the land is important so

do it i'm not stopping you go go do what

you want in canada do whatever you want

in canada i don't give a [ __ ] i'm not

stopping you

okay but but but i'm not going to tell

my followers to join you in your failure

so do what you want

i'm not going to stop you i'm not going

to tell anyone to stop you advocated for

you're going to fail i'm telling you

you're going to fail i'm telling you

you're going to fail utterly you're

going gonna waste your own time and

decades and decades will pass nothing

will happen

promise you our party is growing

your party's not gonna your party's not

gonna grow to [ __ ]

without in the infrared

vision i promise you that your party's

not going nowhere without infrared

same with the cpu usa

uh matter of fact your party's probably

gonna be destroyed

in at least a decade

unless you adopt

and grow up from this ultra left

stupidity

it's not ultra left oh you've been at it

your new left strategy y'all listen

y'all have been at it since the 60s with

your new left strategy

we're coming on

more than half a century now

no

we're coming on 60 years now 60 years

later what have you what have you

produced what have you done nothing you

just wasted time and you've wasted

people's entire lifespans

so you want to waste your life go ahead

i'm not on board with you

um i think you really should look into

the actual history of the party before

you go ahead and make these

outrageous assertions about what was

going on

because

if you adopt the altar left strategy

that everything is about indigenous

people and that's the center of

everything

good luck that's all i could say good

luck

we're not saying it's about indigenous

people we're saying that this country is

multinational i don't believe canada is

a real country i don't believe canada is

a real country canada is more like a

series of cities plus quebec which seems

like it's a country i guess

canada population how many people are in

canada again yeah 38 million

which is extremely small um

seems like it's just a bunch of

cities

and

yeah i don't really know what country

there is in canada like where's the

country

in canada

just seems like it's a bunch of cities

well where's the country in the united

states most of uh

where's the country in the united states

we have various regions of our country

we have the midwest and the agricultural

midwest we have the south we have the

black belt we have the um

the more

mexican-influenced uh south uh

southeast sorry no southwest sorry

southwest and how stable we have the

country been andre on operating we're

still we have appalachia we're still a

country

we're not just a collection of like

cosmopolitan cities we're actually a

country

a country with borders that are quite

frankly questionable

okay that's the central contradiction of

the country so you want canada to take

our borders

so you want canada to take our borders

no you'll have to

understand um

what do you want like the indigenous

issue isn't something you can just sweep

under the rug

when when talking about these settler

colonies

i think i think the primary significance

of the indigenous issue as you're

bringing it up is not actually

proportionate to the extent to which

it's an issue in reality

or it's the immediate concern of

communist parties

i think the reason you're talking about

it is because it's part of your

moralistic ideological world view that

justifies your

justification and reasoning for caring

about communist or socialist ideas

so keep in mind what uh the event that

happened in in canada this year um had

to do with uh the uncovering of mass

graves

of india yeah i know i know it caused a

lot of outrage within canada because of

the crimes of the canadian government

and the schooling system

the schooling system um also there was

um

the fair creek protest which ended up

being the largest protest we've had yeah

i know because the only real people

the only country within canada is quebec

and maybe the indigenous people

because but the reason is because the

indigenous people aren't just

a cities they're actually people who are

based in canadian land

as making their

their um

what's the word they're indigenized

indigenous

and

while while all this and at the same

time eighty percent of the land is is

crown land now i agree with you that

that's a contradiction that has to be

addressed

in in canada

and

that is the underlying rule what about

quebec what about quebec

british nobles okay what about quebec

and all of

quebec has um has a national issue

but

we have to be careful about that one

because that can risk being a lot like

what the afrikaners were struggling for

um when they were resisting the british

so okay that's a really weird comparison

it's a really weird comparison

it's not a weird comparison because

they're algonquins in quebec and there's

also the inuit in quebec

so it's actually not a weird comparison

if you really it's an extremely weird

comparison

i wouldn't say so

it's an underlying contradiction that

has to be addressed

um and we

propose a solution

that addresses the concerns of so may

why don't you call yourself the

indigenous the representatives of

indigenous people party of canada

because we advocate for the working

class because you're a philanthropy no

you're not you're a philanthropic

which is purely based on [ __ ]

urban morality of the bourgeoisie and

nothing more you don't have a [ __ ]

class base you don't have a base in any

people here's a bunch of [ __ ] moral

philanthropists who are trying to

[ __ ] do charity work for indigenous

people or whatever just like bourgeois

philanthropic moral society concern

organizations of the 19th century in

victorian britain

don't give me your dumb [ __ ] about how

this is about the working class because

it's not

uh

that's actually

probably the worst take i've seen you

have in a while

because honestly that is

one hell of a terrible team

that is unbelievable

um especially

like especially when you consider the

fact

that we're also the only party that

advocates for housing is a human right

um and we have a housing issue

in this country and it at the underlying

root of the problem has to do with the

the land the privatization of the land

and the land being 80 percent of it

being under the ownership of a queen

so

um

when we talk about the legacy of

colonialism as an underlying issue

um we're talking about it from a class

standpoint so you making the claim

that we're just uh advocating for you

know some sort of

bourgeois moralism

yeah you are there's no what about your

claim isn't bourgeois against our entire

party

yeah you have a bourgeois moral stance

absolutely bourgeois nature you know

what that means

it's based on the abstract subjectivity

of the bourgeoisie and it's not based on

the material class realities of any

determinate people

what a housing problem for the working

class

you are advocating for things

but you don't have a base in the working

class of canada you don't have an actual

base in them you're just basing it on

[ __ ] morality

so why are we in the uh unions why are

we in the working councils if we have no

basis because you're trying to get a

base but you don't have one

how did we get in there

and literally

i'm going to create my own party called

the ass crack party of canada and join

[ __ ] unions

then i'll be in i'll be i have a base in

the workers right

it's not just the base and the workers

we also participate in the mass protests

that happened uh my ashbrack party would

mom

my ass crack party will do the same

thing i'll go to the protest too with my

ass crack out

you'll find that the vast majority of

canadians do not share your view on the

indigenous questions well that is

exactly why we're getting the the the

majority of canadians are bourgeoisie

very urbanized and are not really

they're just like they're like it's like

[ __ ] coastal elites in america

they're just pretty much like democrats

and they don't really

they don't really have a country of

their own

they just live in cities

yeah so

so we have

on

an issue where we don't have housing

requisite housing for the masses

um

requisite access to land of the masses

control of the means of production what

happens with the production what happens

with the natural resources

what is canada's means of production

what

what is canada's means of production

like actually it's a lot of it is uh

primary resource destruction

and um that's part of the

see the the problem with this colonial

legacy is that it ends up spreading in a

very malicious way abroad

uh we end up having um if we if we let

the nobles continue to own the mines

they end up going to africa and they go

to south america

and sometimes they even go to uh to

europe and they um they don't

they they default on taxes um

one country i think it was

pakistan

what's your point what's your point

how do these things make you a working

class party

we have to deal with the underlying land

issue and the resources i don't care

what you're talking about okay okay

read okay read read fred great angles

utopian and read it frederick angle

socialism utopian and scientific there's

a difference between philanthropic

bourgeois socialism which has grand

solutions for society and the scientific

proletarian socialism which isn't about

just offering a [ __ ] remedy or a

panacea for the situation but it's

actually about basing yourself in the

actual [ __ ] working class

so

i i just want to clear something up

are you against nationalization all of a

sudden

i just want to understand because you're

saying that nationalization is just uh

bourgeois tolkien is

but i'm wondering if you are against

nationalization

are you nationalizing canada

are you nationalizing

that's our program go do it

okay my program is everyone has to have

their ass crack uh be inspected

by robotic birds

every single day when they go outside

and the the birds gonna pick pebbles off

their ass crack

and um

put pebbles inside just to make

everyone's life more uncomfortable

because how much i [ __ ] hate

everyone

and that's my program are you against it

if you want to have an

outrageous program like that

it's my program that means it's real and

it that means it's real right so it's my

program so that means it's actually a

real thing that's happening

making that sort of comparison thank you

jackson appreciate you

the fact that you're going to make that

sort of comparison between thank you so

much jackson what we advocate for up in

our party yeah i i i yeah they're the

same in in in their their grounding in

reality it's not going to [ __ ] happen

doesn't matter what you advocate for if

you don't have the [ __ ] material

means to actually [ __ ] same grounding

the same grounding in reality we don't

have the material means no you don't you

don't you're declaring you're declaring

what your program is and you're not

telling me how it's [ __ ] relevant to

you being a working class party being a

working-class party isn't just about

having a [ __ ] program it's also about

basing yourself in a working-class

masses and that being the material base

of your party

your party doesn't have a material base

except in bourgeois philanthropic

moralists

and this is based on what what would you

know about the people in in canada or

our party they don't they're not in

participating in any material class

struggle they're participating in

[ __ ] individuals being morally

outraged at reality and joining a party

that they think is going to be a vehicle

to rectify all the [ __ ] moral

problems they think exist in the world

well

really we're trying to address the

underlying conditions of canada

okay and uh

that's what what is the case

read angles you social utopian

scientific

we've read it

we've read it again please just just

keep reading it you say you're supposed

to read the quran once a year so read

that once a month

read angles is work once a month

until you get it because you haven't

gotten it i promise you you haven't

all right well you won't have to tell

that to our party later because this

program

i don't give a [ __ ] about your party

leader

wow

that's amazing

and

we wonder

you wonder why we have so much disdain

over the social page

no i don't wonder i know exactly the

reason

actually well the underlying reason is

because you're all struggling no it's

because you're a [ __ ] npc who who's

instead of being a communist party is a

indigenous

uh indigenous welfare

by non-indigenous people organization

justice so because we want justice no

it's because you've you've made this the

entire linchpin of your [ __ ]

existence

why don't you try reading the program or

learning the history of the party

for a moment instead of just uh

dismissing our party albright

if you think like you're the one that

you okay i need you to understand

something i need you to [ __ ]

understand something from angles utopian

scientific

socialism is not about individuals

looking at injustice and saying i want

justice socialism is about a material

class struggle where different classes

have opposing interests and you

represent the material not moral

interests of the proletariat which means

you are fighting on behalf of a material

force in society like lenin said

morality is what serves the proletariat

immorality is what goes against the

interests of the proletariat the

interests of the proletariat are not

going to be distilled on the basis of

morality or what's just or what's moral

but based on the concrete reality of

what their actual [ __ ] interests are

as a class

if you claim that there's no underlying

uh moral framework that the uh workers

can be moved back

only the boudoir

has the only the bourgeoisie has the

wiggle room to make morality the basis

of its [ __ ] practical politics the

proletariat doesn't have this wiggle

room because it's concerned with

actually working and making a living the

bourgeoisie is philanthropic and bases

itself on animal welfare and all this

dumb [ __ ] which they also racistly

project upon minorities like indigenous

people

that's what the bourgeoisie does because

it has the [ __ ] spare time

to be moral about [ __ ]

the rest of everyone is caught up in

actual material reality a ruthless

dog-eat-dog world of cold sobering

reality of conflict

so

are you saying so which ones are you

saying are the bourgeoisie the people

protesting at fair creek or the ndp led

police bashing their heads canada is a

country full of bourgeoisie middle class

it's a bourgeoisie urban middle class

if there's a working class in canada i'm

not well acquainted with it i'm open to

the possibility of there being one but

it's not the canadian working class that

was at those protests

oh yeah i mean you're the one who said

that people should go to school become

engineers become a computer scientist so

that when they graduate you can then go

out turn around and tell them they're

not working class because they protested

uh

because they approached i literally told

my chat do whatever makes you [ __ ]

money to survive in this world so i

don't know what the [ __ ] you're talking

about but you can do what you want and

make money in this world without

pretending you're personally the working

class what have i [ __ ] said that

twitch streamers are working class do i

switch streamers or work in class do i

say that my fellow twitch streamers that

we are the working class we gotta get i

never said that [ __ ]

i'm a [ __ ] person making a living off

this [ __ ] i don't represent the twitch

class i'm not advocating for the twitch

streamer class where the [ __ ] that is

i'm not talking about twitch

well i'm telling you you don't have to

[ __ ] be validated individually oh am

i working class am i proliterate no

honestly i don't really i don't i don't

i don't respect people who waste their

time going to school for the prestige

instead of money everything in this

world is about [ __ ] money it's about

money it's about making money that's

what you got to do in this life is make

money you want to go to college and do

that dumb professional [ __ ] good luck if

that's your secured way to make money

i'm not against it go make your money

but if you're doing it if you're doing

it for any other reason beyond making

money i don't really respect you

honestly

you're a philosophy student you i'm not

no i'm not i'm completely self-taught

i'm not a philosophy student

well i thought you were in school i was

in law school

i was in law school you were in law

school yeah and guess why i was in law

school money

literally just money

there's no other reason why i wanted to

go to law school other than i think this

is the way i can make the most money to

have the most free time to write my

[ __ ] books

so underlying you've made the accusation

that uh us as com uh members of the

communist party canada are actually

essentially splitting the uh the workers

on identities no you're not yet here you

are making they're not you're not

splitting the workers you're not even

talking to the workers you're not even

addressing the workers in any capacity

whatsoever you're not splitting them

you're not even addressing their

existence

we're not addressing their no you're not

have you even bothered to read the

program no

so then why would you know that because

i know

uh that's ridic

i know it based on your actions that's

actually

that's completely ridiculous

you know it's ridiculous can we talk

about how canada canada is not a real

country again it's literally a country

that's the bow before the the british

crown

kind of country is that

that's not a real country

i'm saying most

most cellular colonies the communist

party of canada

what is the what is the political goals

of the communist party county do you

have a goal to make canada or an

independent republic

yes we do you do where

that's our goal it's our goal is to

eradicate the senate

um

achieve independence from the monarchy

establish an upper house of nations

where each nation gets one vote in the

lower house

that's voted in through proportional

what about quebec

we're republican what about quebec the

only practical republic what about

quebec

well back well the french will have one

[ __ ] ewoks told me they do not have

a republican agenda they don't have an

official republican agenda what are you

talking about

well the communist party does have an

official republican agenda well we have

intelligence saying the contrary what

about quebec

unconditional independence for quebec

yes every every individual nation will

have the right to succeed

including quebec

including unconditionally

yes unconditionally

but we imagine that with the revolution

and with communist leading because we're

the only ones that support republicanism

from a practical standpoint that it's

all going to be communists in charge of

quebec anyway

so

that's that's our our practical

pro uh program if

we're we're not we're we're republicans

we're not uh

we have we don't support the queen

why shouldn't you just be part of a

united states with america

we're not going to recolonize the

country after decolonizing no what if

communists take power what if communists

take power in america and we're the

united states

uh led by a communist party why not just

become one of the states

of our communist

union reason why

the underlying reason why communists

have failed in the us is because they

haven't dealt with the national question

no the national question according to

you is that

the national question according to you

is the completely stupid psychotic idea

of giving all u.s land dissolving the

united states as a whole no more united

states only indigenous ownership of land

not in like we advocate for

nationalization

the united states is a democratic

republic the united states is a

democratic republic

already angles and marx said the united

states already has a democratic

constitution so

you don't need you don't we don't need

to [ __ ] uh

reconstruct you think the united states

is a democracy

angles and marx

angles and marx called it a democratic

controversy

i i believe what angles and marx did

about it

look

we can talk about um different

um

do you have a closing remark for your

argument what is your argument

my closing remark is um the us is

not actually a bourgeois democracy and i

actually want to close by saying

that uh

the settler colonial question has to be

addressed in order for us to succeed

there's no colonial there is no subtle

the only settler colonial question there

is in this country is the [ __ ]

hipsters and white leftists who gentrify

black communities and latino communities

and that's the only settler colonialism

that happens in the united states right

now

the settler colonial question the

multinational question those have to be

addressed in order for any communist

party to succeed

in both canada and the united states

it's actually not the job of the

communist party to create a national

multinational agenda the job of the

communist party to respect black

nationalist forces and other communities

who are struggling for

self-determination it's not going to

dictate the terms of that

self-determination in the party

yes but if you don't even thank you

great mingle

if you don't even mention the issue

and you don't bring it up and you don't

have to it seems like you just want like

this morally castrating thing where you

just want people to be morally cast oh

we have an issue here we have to talk

about this issue we have to talk about

this you know you just want to be able

to like morally castrate people and

[ __ ] like you know extra it's just

this dirty game that when you say you

just want to levy attacks you know and

just want to [ __ ] um

you just want to like

you just want to like uh take a chunk

out of people's enjoyment and take a

chunk out of their [ __ ] sense of

being and just be like oh we're gonna

take a tax and [ __ ] force you to give

me attention about some dumb [ __ ] like

you're you're saying we have to force

this question and uh it's just complete

moralizing [ __ ] you know

it's

it's not you you have to you have to sit

here and think about how immoral and

evil we all are like dude that's it's so

[ __ ] stupid you know you have to sit

here and really contemplating and

reflect upon your evil and your evil

immorality you know i don't know i don't

i don't buy none of that [ __ ]

nobody wants to hear that [ __ ] you'll

never make a popular party saying that

dumb [ __ ]

i haven't accused you of running the

united states but if you want to take

the crimes of the country personally

that's your own problem

but i'd advise against it if you are

nervous

in fact i think you probably should be

looking towards your own arab identity

and think about what this country has

done

to your people in the middle east

i because i identify myself as an

african okay i'm an arab 100 arab by the

way and i come from an arab culture i

come from an arab cultural family too i

was raised as a muslim and an arab was

never uh he didn't come from an

americanized family i was born in this

country raised in this country guess

what i'm an american you want to know

why i'm an american because america

isn't about ethnicity it's not about

ethnicity it's not about where you're

from either i am an american and yeah i

agree america has engaged in criminal

actions against my own people which is

why i'm trying to win over my own

country

to stop the imperialist war machine and

went over the american people to turn

their attention and turn their struggle

against the same forces which have

uh victimized my own people because what

goes around comes around this the [ __ ]

that they do overseas that reflects

internally too it reflects in wacko and

ruby ridge and the way the federal

government polices and oppresses and

clamps down on its own people too

so and that's why the biggest allies of

people like me who were against the wars

i didn't see that i i really didn't see

much left is leftist will completely

antagonize my arab identity the only

people i could [ __ ] with growing up were

the libertarians

ron paul and the fed all those type of

people who were against the wars the

leftists existed but they were so

marginal in comparison to those

libertarians i didn't even notice their

existence at the time

the libertarians yeah

libertarians

at heart they they're anti-government

and they're anti

you're missing the class reality ron

paul libertarian populism mobilized he's

the right libertarian he's a right

libertarian that's a little different

but ultimately

ultimately ron paul was at a certain

point ron paul was one of the biggest

domestic threats to american imperialism

in this country

and i and i will give him kudos for that

now that the neuronics in russia had

issues and there's shortcomings with

them as lenin critiqued them i would

critique the ron paul people the same

way but they were the most effective

domestic enemies of american imperialism

easily

and you don't think any of that has to

do with the multinational question

listen there's some that's as you

understand it's a multinational question

there's still a united states and an

american people okay i agree there's a

separate national reality but there's

it's not just

it's not when you're talking about white

people for example and white supremacy

white people are not just white people

you know there's there's an american

people too who's not just white by the

way

and i agree that black people were

excluded from america

um and specifically excluded from having

40 acres and a mule but it's still a

real country america is still a real

place with the real people it's not

based on race per se most of them

probably are white but

you can't ignore that that's my whole

point was i'm not against indigenous

people or having their own thing or

latino people or black people i'm just

saying

you can't sit here and act like the

american people don't exist because they

do

who said that

people where people were trying to say

that the communist party's goal

shouldn't be to win over those people or

base themselves on those people insofar

as the guess what the communist party

as an institution has its origins in

that part of them that that american

people now it's multi-racial right it's

always been multi-racial especially the

communist party but it has its

fundamental origins there the communist

party is not a black nationalist

organization like uh

the nation of islam or anything right

so

hold on nation of islam is a church

yeah yeah but um or marcus garvey's or

the black panther party or anything like

that hold on give me one

second uh hold on

sub virgin character infra i want it on

record 900 internet thinks you're a

character law yeah 99 of the internet

can literally line up in a congo line

and get in line and one by one suck my

[ __ ]

actually suck my [ __ ]

99 of the internet you want to get in vc

a little [ __ ] how many holes do women

have two suck my [ __ ] two

you understand two two

two two chat give him twos show him how

many holes

show him there's only two show him

there's only two

you wanna cry you wanna cry you wanna

cry you wanna cry you wanna cry you

wanna cry keep crying we're saying too

you wanna cry about two yeah yeah two

you wanna cry gonna cry gonna cry gonna

cry go quiet go cry guys things are

gonna need two rolls

it's so massaging this thing

go cry go cry to twitter go tell twitter

what i just did right now go tell

twitter oh my god

go cry go cry go cry go cry little [ __ ]

little [ __ ] [ __ ] and hey i want to

tell you something you will always be an

aunt a pathetic little [ __ ] [ __ ]

sitting in their mom's [ __ ] basement

on the [ __ ] internet you will always

always be a little [ __ ] a little ant

you're [ __ ] miserable sitting in your

[ __ ] house

and that's all you can [ __ ] do is try

to attack people like me because you're

trying to project your disgusting

negative ugly [ __ ] energy upon me

it'll never [ __ ] happen

it'll never [ __ ] happen

all you nerds can say you're insecure

i [ __ ] dominate you

i'm [ __ ] dominating your soul your

mind and even probably your body right

now

finally let me tell you what

finally let me tell you what ready ready

at the end of the day you're still a

[ __ ] and your girl that you're after

that you want

as long as she's over 18 of course that

girl that you want that you're after you

got a crush on

she would

beg

make me

take me

to do my worst on her

she would beg me to throw her around

take me

peg me peg me to completely turn her

body into a canvas of my will

i want you to know that personally

i want you to know that personally

she would literally

beg

me

beg me

everyone in chat peg me peg me

what the [ __ ] up little [ __ ] ass chat

i'ma start banning i'm gonna start

banning

talk [ __ ] like that

anyway let's continue

yeah anything else

no no i think i i basically concluded it

um

one thing i would also add is thinking

about

even your own experience you have to

admit that the country operates under an

ideology of white supremacy much like

canada actually yeah but i disagree with

you about where the main

point of that white supremacy is which

is clearly in the democrats the urban

centers of the country and among white

leftists were the biggest white

supremacists in this country as malcolm

x understood

i'm i o i pose liberalism as well that's

why i'm a member of a communist party

not a member of the liberal party okay

bye

all right