The Fourth Defeat of Destiny | Infrared and Maru vs SuccDems 🚀 Infrared Content Catalog

i'm in the discord now

i i i don't know how to join it's all

locked

uh uh one second

once one second restart sorry uh

infrared uh oh you got it good

uh perfect all right

you decided uh awesome awesome awesome

so uh

cool hell yeah so we got everyone

except spectre and destiny

yeah he's live right now so we'll i know

he's i know he's here

so let me just what's up

not much all right

i'm bomb so

um

got that all taken care of excellent

so now we're just got four minutes so if

any of you need to like

grab some water get anything else ready

uh you are welcome

if you want to reread the rules again

i'm just going to read all of them once

we start so

if you don't have all of them committed

to memory uh don't worry they're

normally pretty simple to follow

uh eris can you make the animation

you're gonna make so i can uh

remember what it is when you're raising

your hand

oh she's deaf and never mind nice

the rules are pretty simple right don't

interrupt people don't be rude

try to be nice to people you know simple

stuff right

there's no there's a bit more like

moderation in my panels than most panels

on twitch i just like i feel like it

helps

the discussion a bit better so and also

i don't participate

so um yeah i'm like i like exclusively

like just make sure everyone's following

the rules and stuff so

uh by the way can you hear my keyboard

or

oh yeah it just says smart it's fine

[Laughter]

i i love prime and and i go on the

his the on primes panel all the time and

it's really fun

but my favorite like prime like

what's the word like uh trope

or like cliche like in every stream is

when everyone's yelling

right and then he has to always step in

and then become a part of the argument

and be like everyone

shut the [ __ ] up and then someone

interrupts and be like you don't [ __ ]

interrupt me this is my show

it's great i love him so funny

yeah yep

yep yep where's specter at one second

all right i'll dm

both him and uh

oh hans roxy says hi hello roxy

hello hello

[Music]

all right

all right uh happy to have you here

spectre i'll dm

oh i'll dm stephen make sure he's ready

yeah t-minus two minutes this might be

the first panel that actually gets off

the ground on time

excellent most of the time it takes like

an extra five ten minutes just to

get everyone so uh everyone join the

whereby and start your cameras on so i

can rearrange everybody

in the correct order

i just need to make sure everything's

yeah okay all right destiny's in as well

uh now he just needs to join the whereby

perfect

give them all to join

all right

a specter if you and charlotte can get

in the whereby that would be excellent

i have to uh oops

all right

perfect excellent and then

waiting on spectre and destiny

we can get started

now

very excited for this i have uh this is

probably going to be my

uh most fun panel that we've had in like

a long time i hope this is going to be a

good discussion so

just remember everyone uh who's here uh

twitch does have tos stuff so if you can

avoid breaking it so none of us get like

our streams nuked that would be

absolutely awesome and tigers um

try and be respectful to each other

right all that sort of stuff i know

we're talking about contentious topics

so right one person all asked to

join five seconds i'm having some issues

with uh my camera here

no worries no worries spectre

and then destiny's in excellent

cool cool all righty

all right

so uh i forgot this camera had a lens

cap um

another thing i did anyway

nice very nice very

very nice

oh all right okay okay okay

sorry about the weight it's making sure

it's vectored in

there we go and then turn his camera on

excellent all right all right all right

all right

so we got

everybody cool cool cool we are all live

now awesome awesome awesome we do we all

do that

so uh let's get started again uh thank

you all wait

make sure unmuted eris if you could

undefine yourself that'd be great

harris if you could un-deafen yourself

that would be fantastic

if she's definite how can she hear you

tell her to undefine herself

what if she has that thing muted

then then they were completely [ __ ] uh

there's no uh there's no there was

nobody get through her i'll dmr god damn

it

hey

all right

all right now we're just waiting on

where'd eris go

uh sorry about the wait uh

for all of you thank you all for being

on time uh very very much appreciated

everyone's on time uh ferris's thing

just uh isn't working

quick questions before we start uh

destiny what's your policy on stealing

memes without giving credit

um well you know i myself i'm a purveyor

of memes on twitter if another man

outmemes me memes me then he has every

right to take my position over as a meme

lord on twitter

all's fair and love and meme so you know

sometimes you gotta jack them even post

it

and that's just the way the world it's a

free market baby

yeah it's a protesting ip and a

trademark clause right

all right one second also just for

everyone in chat um make sure

that you're not uh yeah like uh

transphobic people in chat please don't

try and misgender anybody uh that's

really [ __ ] cringe especially

before we even started so don't be

[ __ ] i have a team of mods out there

uh they'll time you out and then they'll

ban you if you do stupid [ __ ] please

don't again

i expect panels to be relatively cordial

with each other so i expect all of you

to not like be saying like crazy slurs

and like all sorts of [ __ ]

if you can avoid that uh be much

appreciated if not you can leave

uh so now where the [ __ ] is eris

oh she uh she says she's having tech

issues so we can uh we're just gonna

start

uh without her and then uh we'll pull

her in

uh during introductions uh so

let's start by going around the room uh

we can start

on the top left with uh charlotte uh

we're just gonna go from charlotte

uh to lina to has uh to spectre a

specter you

want to change your title from because

you're revolt rise right now because

you're getting a setup if you want to

edit that

and then destiny if you want to change

your thing as well you're fine to be

guest

and then we can go around so uh so red

charlotte uh go ahead

uh hi i'm red charlotte

i post on twitter and i stream sometimes

i'm a social democrat and i sometimes

talk about

whether or not we should bomb foreign

countries that's that's my whole thing

very cool thank you for being here uh

lena

hi i'm lina i post on twitter mainly i

don't really do streams um

i am a communist and palestinian

nationalist

uh that's a battle great thank you so

much for being with us

uh infrared or has uh how would you

prefer i uh

like to talk to you what would you

prefer

i got you all right uh you want to

introduce yourself

uh i'm haas from infrared and my

reputation precedes me

all right um spectre

hey i'm uh spector i help hans out with

like behind the scenes stuff i used to

work with prime

kai's until like you know five panels a

week was a little bit much with a real

job

um yeah i'm around the community i used

to stream

i might start doing prepared content or

a podcast here soon we'll see

uh in the meantime i'm on twitter a lot

so if you're looking for me you can find

me there

[Music]

oh it looks like eris is ready excellent

oh all right uh destiny uh

want to introduce yourself everybody uh

you just introduced me my name's destiny

everyone here so i am very true

all right and then eris uh can you hear

us

[ __ ] she's still deafened eric can you

hear us can you un-deafen yourself on

discord

all right uh while she's working that

out uh hi everyone uh i'm hans hansa

park here

thank you so much uh for coming to hang

out with us tonight

um i'm blee you're moderate for the

evening i am a market socialist

uh i can read the news and play pokemon

uh i won't be talking about any of these

issues tonight i'll just be uh helping

uh moderate the panel uh thank you to

all of my uh

amazing and wonderful panelists who have

decided to come and bring their time

their knowledge

and their debate skills uh to hang out

with all of us i really really

appreciate it

and so without further ado i'm going to

read the rules of the debate

uh my panel is moderated slightly

differently than some other

panels on twitch there are slightly more

rules so i'm going to read them through

right now for the purpose of our

panelists and for anyone out there in

the audience

if you think i am modding incorrectly or

poorly or not following my own rules

please feel free to mold about it and

let me know later

the rules are everyone gets an intro an

outro of 90 seconds

interrupt uninterrupted for each topic

uh

after that we use a list system so you

raise your hand i'll give you a signal

normally a thumbs up

uh that you're on the list once you're

on the list we'll go down the list

crossing up names as we go

you can raise your hand as often as you

want but if you're already on the list

i'm not gonna put your name on the list

twice

uh gish galloping is really stupid and

it makes a conversation it's impossible

to have so

uh keep your speaking time to under two

minutes uh at a time aside from intros

and outros i'll give you a signal i'll

do like this little uh like circle thing

on my ear i'm not calling you crazy i'm

just saying that you have 30 seconds

left

and then at 10 seconds left i'll do it

again and i'll keep going until

we get two minutes i'll tell you to

finish your point and then if you keep

going i was gonna cut you off

uh interruptions uh sometimes please try

to interrupt someone uh while they're

speaking

in like a regular time uh if you have a

question that you want to bring up or

a specific intention say quick response

after they finish talking uh you can

skip the list you can get in try and

keep those short if you have to have a

back and forth with somebody that's

totally fine

if it goes longer than say five or six

minutes i'll probably drag it back to

the

list so and then if someone explicitly

calls you out by name

you are welcome to respond uh with the

normal time frame of two minutes

uh you can skip the list it doesn't

affect your position on the list as i

said before i am not going to be

participating this i i'm only going to

be moderating so i'm

not going to like be saying anything

about any of these topics so

the topics of conversation the first

thing we're going to be hitting in the

first topic

is should the left critically support

any group

that opposes american imperialism or

interest or is there a line to be drawn

ideologies beliefs or state of goals

entities such as hamas

the democratic people's republic of

korea or the chinese communist party

if so where would that line be we are

going to go

uh in order for the intros and outros if

someone goes first

i give them both the first word and the

last word of the outro because they say

before they

resp they go before anyone else whoever

gets to respond to them so i give them

the last word so everyone can respond

as so they can respond to everyone else

so we are going to start with uh lena

then to spectre then to charlotte

then to destiny then to has uh or has

and then to

eris so with that in mind

90 seconds uninterrupted on the clock uh

lena take it away all right um my

position

on this particular issue of critical

support for

uh parties fighting against imperialism

really is one of uh pragmatics and

responsibility i am

assuming for this that the person in

question lives in the u.s

it's a question of how much influence

they have

and where or

um how much america sort of meddles in

that so for palestine

it is your responsibility but for say

uh some other locale that

isn't as affected by american actions

it's a lot less

uh but also you know

there's a bunch of other factors um such

as

yeah um i'm i'm done sorry

no problem at all all right uh spectre

um right so

i'm just gonna the the short answer is

no we we shouldn't support

um parties organizations or anything

just because it's opposed to american

interest

sometimes american interests are

actually good sometimes america is

trying to do the correct thing

uh in those cases i don't think that we

should support these people

um and even when america isn't

necessarily doing the correct thing and

the organization itself

is bad engaging in

like political extremism hurting the

population in the country that they're

claiming to help

um using anti-semitic rhetoric

using any kind of uh yikesy stuff like

that i think that's enough that you know

maybe laughter shouldn't be critically

supporting those groups

all right thank you spectre uh charlotte

uh yeah the question of should it be

like

just unequivocal no limit no no no uh

no bars right just unlimited critical

support for literally any group that

opposes

like american hegemony and american

imperialism this is like obviously

no um because the point of supporting a

group is that you believe that like

if this group is to be victorious in

their goals they would create

a situation or an environment which is

more positive than the united states but

they're obviously groups that exist

that if they were to get into power say

for example like the taliban

or um uh boko haram

these these groups right while they

technically

oppose american hegemony and american

imperialism in their regions

for if they were to get into control

right with no opposition

uh they would create a situation in

their region which is much worse

than american hegemony

all right thank you charlotte uh destiny

yeah i mean we should have like some

foundational set of values that we use

to figure out whether we think the

actions of some country

or some uh international foreign effort

is good or bad

and it should probably be a little bit

more fleshed out than are they pro

or anti-america we can think of groups

that are opposed to america

that we don't have any ideological

similarities to that we probably

wouldn't want to support over america

and then there are times where we can be

critical of american foreign policy um

not just because it's american foreign

policy but

because we can appeal to some like

standard that we feel like america isn't

living up to

in said foreign policy all right thank

you destiny

uh haas uh there is no president

in the history of international law that

enshrines or recognizes what's called

american imperialism

so insofar as america is engaging in

imperialist aggression

is it is circumventing the established

post-war convention nations have agreed

to uh

enter into terms with that decides the

manner by which nations are going to

relate to one another one of which being

the right to national self-determination

so the question is a bit strange because

it's like if america is going to commit

a crime

and people are going to resist that

crime should those people be supported

well the burden rests on the party

committing the original crime

to justify itself i have no obligation

to quote unquote rescind support

critical or otherwise to groups

resisting it because

american imperialism doesn't have any

legitimacy to begin with

so that's my position all right thank

you haas all right so

eris is the last uh person speaking so

we are going to uh start allowing the

hand raising stuff

uh so while she's talking uh start

raising your hand if you want to get on

the list and then we can go from there

so eris 90 seconds on the clock go ahead

and then

lena i see you i'll put you on top of

the list so could you just

could you ask the question again sorry i

was a little confused by it

oh no problem at all all right so

the question is uh

should the left critically support any

group that opposes american

imperialism's less interest or is there

a line to be drawn ideologies beliefs or

stated goals of entities such as hamas

the democratic people's republic of

korea or the chinese communist party if

so where are those lines

uh we can have a basic talk about

general imperialism if you want to start

talking about specific entities whether

it's like hamas or china or

korea you're welcome to start doing that

so go ahead

okay the first sentence can you just

repeat the first sentence he said it

really really quickly

sorry should the left critically support

any group that opposes american

imperialism's last interests or is there

a line to be drawn at ideologies beliefs

or stated goals of entities such as

hamas

the democratic people's republic of

korea or the chinese communist party

all right so i'm not american so like it

i'm not gonna tell americans

what to support or not i mean it totally

depends on everyone's value systems

the what it to me what makes the most

sense

is you can support say like a group

having resistance

against something that you consider

american imperialism or any

any other kind of like oppression or

something that you're wrong and still

acknowledge that there are severe

problems with that group

and at the same time you don't need to

view things in like black and white

um so just because the enemy of the

enemy is like it doesn't necessarily

make them your friend

um someone can replace a bad system with

an even worse system

we saw as a consequence of american

imperialism

regularly so it's so that seems like

such a childlike view

of viewing the world and i have a

feeling that

i like i have a feeling that even the

people in this room like no one actually

subscribes to that

um but yeah i'm interested in hearing

people's perspectives

uh thank you aris again that's that's

why uh the second part of the question

was where should the line

if it needs to be drawn should be drawn

at in regards to different groups

uh so right now the list has lena on it

and then everyone so you want to get in

start raising your hand so lena go ahead

so i'd like to look at the question

specifically uh this term used

was critical support uh and i think

everyone here is interpreting that as

like unconditional support when

the term itself uh quite literally

contradicts that

uh it's critical support it is support

with criticism uh it's not unconditional

it's not uncritical

um and in addition um

fundamentally when you support

american imperialist actions abroad uh

regardless of if you think

like the overall uh subjective

consequences of that are

good you are still legitimizing

uh an act which is in of itself

immoral you're justifying military

intervention or economic intervention in

a way

which uh gives legitimacy to the idea

that america is allowed to just do

whatever it wants

so any support of that imperial

structure

is immoral it's wrong

there's no circumstance you don't have

to support every group mind but

there's no circumstances in which

american imperialism

is in the long run good

all right thank you lina we're going to

go to ha to haas

i think we should also pay very uh

specific attention to this word support

because as it happens there does exist a

rules-based international order in which

some kind of um some kind of common

agreement is held between sovereign

nations

about what rules they're going to be

following

so when we say uh should we support them

uh it's kind of a difficult question

because what does that actually mean

if you mean to say that for example

uh the north korea has no right to

defend itself against

illegal uh aggression by america

the question stands as to what kind of

international

uh frame what kind of framework from the

perspective of international

law are you proposing or coming from

because what you're an actual

which you're in effect proposing is some

kind of uh

global government led by america that's

going to decide what

is or isn't allowed i know people find

many groups

and countries problematic but

the step from your personal opinion

about them to

support or not support is something

that's going to be arbitrated at the

level of

something like international law because

otherwise you have no power

to you have no jurisdiction uh to

exercise authority over them

all right thank you haas uh right now no

one's on the list but i wouldn't like to

respond to that

right so i don't think anybody was

confused about the uh

the definition of critically support i

think that we all understand that means

i hope we all understand that means like

you're supporting a group but

you have criticisms of it i think that

my contention is with

a lot of online leftists in particular

is they seem to think

that you can critically support anything

that is opposing american interest

um just due to the fact that it opposes

american interest

american interest bad uh the

the issue with this becomes is that you

end up supporting groups that won't even

get the result

that they claim that they're wanting a

good example of this would be hamas

right um this is like an islamic

extremist faction that is

mostly using violence to accomplish

their ends in a situation where

and i mean leftists should get this it's

the basic like master slave dialectic

here

it's not going to get them the results

they want um like

palestine is going to lose that fight if

they resort to violence

better organizations in the area to

support be something like fatah

um if you're really wanting to just you

know find a palestinian party to throw

your way behind

um but to be very frank i think that you

know the hamas situation in addition to

like even the uh north korea and the cpc

situation

um leftists just kind of see what the

discourse is that week they figure out

what the talking points for their

particular faction are and they just

like figure out how hot of a take they

can fire off on twitter as quickly as

possible without actually learning

anything about the topic

um so yeah i guess that would be more

what i was expecting um to get into here

all right thank you spectre we're gonna

throw it to lena then haas and then eris

so go ahead lina i would like to point

to a couple things in that statement

first of all no

individual should ever i mean as if it's

up to any individual outside of

palestine

who they support but regardless

fatah is a bloating aging corrupt

organization

which has defrauded and oppressed the

palestinian people

my it's fundamentally

just the party of abu mazen uh

mahmoud abbas uh he is uh

he has not allowed elections to go

through since

got since the 2006 election because

hamas won

hamas was elected because it was

essentially the only anti-fatah

bloc remaining that's where people's

support of it came from

uh hamas isn't fundamentally this

uh it's a very broad coalition you don't

see it that way

in a lot of english language press uh

but

at this point it is a broad coalition of

everyone who is

still committed to that idea of violence

uh which

by the way why are palestinians like

palestinians aren't the people who

initiated violence

if it's not up to us whether or not to

continue using it

the israeli violent the israeli state

perpetrates

violence violates international law on a

regular basis

in many respects and

and refuses to acknowledge this

and refuses to quit its own use of

violence so why should the palestinians

lay down arms

at all they have the right to resist

under international law

they have the right to resist a foreign

occupation

all right thank you lina we're gonna

throw it to haws and then eris and then

uh spectre i see you

uh you're welcome as well all right ahaz

go ahead uh yeah i'm detecting a great

deal of confusion on spectre's part

about the actual substance of the

argument at hand

no one's actually interested in his

personal opinion about the

uh supposed viability or unviability of

hamas

actually that was a decision down to the

palestinian people themselves within

gaza who actually elected

hamas i'm sure spectre envisions himself

as the emperor of the globe where his

personal opinions will exercise

some kind of impact on how people are

supposed to live and who's supposed to

rule over them but the fact of the

matter is that that's just not the case

we have a current rules-based framework

for

the way in which countries and nations

will establish the extent of their

relations

and common observance of rules with

regard to one another

and the the questions which is open

which stands is this

how are you going to replace that how

are you going to establish some kind of

global police force which is going to be

the organ of your personal views about

who you prefer or who you consider is

viable or who you consider

uh quote unquote yikesy or

woke that's the question here and

seems spector hasn't actually answered

it uh specter would you like to respond

answer it since you were directly uh

added and then we're gonna go to eris

yeah i'm not trying to be emperor of the

globe and

like say that we're gonna take the

military and enforce our will in every

like sovereign state on the planet

um i'm simply saying that like critical

support for organizations like hamas

the cpc the the the dprk

they they get the left [ __ ] nowhere

except like you know

in like [ __ ] fail compilations where

you look like absolute morons

and as far as i can tell like the online

left has basically become nothing but

like a bludgeoning stick for the right

and centrist to beat people

with politics to the left of liberalism

with because they look stupid when they

do this [ __ ]

uh you're welcome directly to respond

and then we're gonna go to eris

sure yes i also think you're a little

bit confused about the topic and subject

matter at hand because the question is

revolving around

uh critical or otherwise support for

groups resisting american imperialism it

isn't actually about your uh

personal uh problems with the the

i mentioned shut up don't interrupt me

shut up don't interrupt me i did not

interrupt you anyway um the question

revolves

not around the strategy for what looks

best for the left in america

we can talk about that but it seems like

that's a completely different topic

all right uh we're gonna go to eris and

then right now we have eris

specter back to haws uh and then destiny

so

eris go ahead

hey um can you guys hear me all right

yep

oh watching these parties it's important

that we don't just say violence is

violence right because there are nuances

within violence

and there's a reason why we have of

international law and how we guard by

violence you know like there's chemical

weapons are going to be very different

than say like normal weaponry etc right

um those nuances are really really

important those nuances are really

important when it comes to

judging how israel perpetuates its

violence as well

right for example when they use chemical

weapons um during the 2008 gaza war

right so it's important for us to care

about those nuances anyways

so the issue

uh eris you're breaking out on my end uh

right like that's probably how they

often argue it but it's not really that

the issue the moral issue and i think

the moral issue that you can really

argue

with them is not that they're violent

right i totally understand the need

to you know physically or um

to physically resist right what you

regard as like an occupation and all

that kind of stuff right

that's not the problem it's how they're

engaging in that violence right

um and this is what distinguishes hamas

from

say other groups that support that

support palestinians

the one of the main issues with hamas is

that

um hamas specifically targets civilians

so

i can just take this argument that we're

if we're saying okay let's

let's not tell so palestinians did not

start

did not start this right i mean that

totally depends

like i i agree with this but you can

argue a

anyone started i mean you can i i would

say that the the british started this

all right uh more than anyone so um to

me it makes no sense

to just say oh well they started so they

can they can do whatever they want

right that's not how we we judge things

we're not children here so

um i could start and use that argument

to say all right and just to preface

this i don't believe in this

[Music]

check

jewish people are historically oppressed

they did not

eris um like i'm having trouble hearing

you like um group of people who are in

their own charter

she's lagging so she's still talking

right

including palestinians themselves so

rather than military reps

finish your point so who are we as

mostly non-jewish people on this panel

like we're listening to our talk from

like 10 seconds ago

yes because we deserve to be able to be

critical of israel's actions

sorry uh can you hear me yeah eris

i think like it might be like a slight

delay in your speaking but uh all right

so uh lena uh had a quick response and

then uh for future quick responses

please wait till after

the whole sentence uh yeah yeah most of

it uh so just

wait till after they finish and then

just a quick response while i'm throwing

it to the next person uh so you can get

your in so elena

uh go ahead uh and then we're gonna go

to haas to spectre to destiny and then

back to uh lena so lena go ahead uh

two things one uh hamas missiles

uh you said that they were targeted uh i

don't know

if you're familiar with the uh gossip i

didn't say the rockets were targeted

you said that they were targeted at

civilians you can say the missiles are

targeted i say hamas regularly targets

civilians

okay never mind then sorry those are two

different things right

yeah sorry uh second thing is uh my

family

is from east jerusalem uh and i think i

have a

great deal of say in uh

what israel does uh but that's all

that's all

all right uh thank you eris would you

like to briefly respond yeah

please respond and then we'll throw to

has i do i do think you have

every right i think you have every right

to respond to israel's actions against

you

like 100 but i think in general right

everyone here who has the ability to be

rational

has okay has the ability and the ability

to be critical about people's morality

and all of this is

we have the ability to also criticize

various powers whether it's a tiny

um little resistance group or a large

terrorist group or a large army

to criticize their actions um which and

and how they go about that so regardless

of

you know who we are as individuals quick

response

uh yeah alina feel free to respond there

weren't authority all right

um okay but you recognize

that what's up on the media what's up in

the popular discourse

like outside of our little twitter

bubble what's

the popular opinion is that hamas is

wrong is criticism of hamas

so if you're saying oh we should be fair

and balanced sure but you can't think

about it in a vacuum

uh there's a larger ecosystem at work

and you have to consider that you have

to factor that in

all right thank you lina we're gonna

throw it to has inspector then destiny

then lena and then charlotte uh

how's go ahead buddy uh it is of course

unfortunate that civilians uh are being

targeted

it's definitely a bad thing it's nothing

to be celebrating i certainly wouldn't

celebrate it

but what we're talking what we're

talking about is a state of war

and in this case it's a state of war

that from my perspective

uh clearly cast light upon israel as the

aggressor in

so uh of course it's always unfortunate

when civilians

are involved in war but

uh i don't see how we're in a position

to reserve judgment

over the people of gaza who

are starting from a place uh

of being victimized by a state that has

no regard or respect

for the consensus of the international

community and the precedence of

international law

uh so it's not that i support the

actions or don't support them i don't

recognize an ability for outside

observers to reserve judgment whatsoever

all right thank you paws run through the

specter then destiny specter go ahead

um right so i just had a correction from

earlier i believe that has said that the

palestinian people

voted hamas into power that is not the

case they took power via military force

in 2007.

um there's a struggle between them and

go ahead lena i think you have a

correction

uh no there was an election in 2006 in

which hamas won the majority of seats

in yeah but then both parties are

accusing each other of a coup d'etat

so like we're taking hamas's word for it

or

no we're taking the word of the election

officials and then

fatah and hamas had a war over it

because hamas wasn't expected to win

and they won okay maybe i'm misreading

this and trying to get through it too

quickly i don't know

um regardless i mean

what what argument so what do we think

is going to happen

or come good of critically supporting

hamas and also what is the argument that

they have because i believe that you

said that like

um like the the israeli state is

an illegal occupation basically is that

your position because i know that's

hamas is still

uh my position i think i've been trying

to make it pretty clear

it's no it's asking you know actually

okay

oh really yes israel is engaging in an

illegal occupation of the west bank in

an illegal blockade of the gaza strip

so do you think that israel just needs

to

be like is that the solution here israel

needs to go like israel

are you are you asking what my solution

to the conflict as a whole is

the solution so i'm asking if that's

what you think like i'm trying to figure

out

i support a singular secular state for

all peoples

yeah the area between the jordan river

and the mediterranean sea

i mean of the two groups which one is

like closer to being a like

secular democracy right now i'd say that

israel was a lot further along than

anybody um as far as the palestinian

parties you don't know

how i said for all peoples and israel is

absolutely nowhere near that

considering that palestinians are

effectively second-class citizens

within israel all right thank you lena

uh we're going to throw it to destiny

and then back to lina for a longer

statement if he wants and then to

charlotte so destiny go ahead

um i had something to respond to from

some of the earlier conversations but i

don't know how relevant it is now um i

will say that um

i think we have to be careful because i

think right now we're talking the topic

is supposed to be like the general

principle

of how do we decide when or when not to

support u.s

imperialistic action or foreign

intervention um especially through

military means

i think that that's a little bit

different than like the exact

specificities of the israeli-palestinian

conflict

i don't know if that influences our

broader arguments or if we're just going

to get bogged down arguing about this

specific

conflict um yeah

so it was specifically about like uh i

referenced different organizations

because i assumed

people on this panel wanted to talk

about like say specifics because there

were this this panel was originally

planned

back at the height of the tensions

between israel and palestine

uh like a couple weeks ago uh so we're

kind of like filtering back into that

later so

we can obviously talk about other stuff

as well but if people want to like

specifically discuss israel palestine

stuff

that's totally fine uh for the purposes

of this panel right now so

is there anything else you want to say

or can we throw it back to lina hello go

for it

all right i uh actually know

i was going to say something earlier but

it's already been addressed so skip me

please

all right uh charlotte yeah i just

wanted to make um all i wanted to say

was a quick correction

um on a couple of things so one i know

what specter is referring to

and i used to be of the same opinion

that like the 1988 charter is

it's pretty bad right it's like mine

comp level right it's

really [ __ ] bad right um but right

uh even though hamas is still an

islamist organization and is

fundamentally like

far right and in their beliefs and in

their um

prescriptions for the world uh in 2012

they do have a new charter and they do

like have a different set of

prescriptions

and inside whether you want to believe

them is a different conversation

right and i am i am leaning towards it's

probably just a pr move but the thing is

you still have to acknowledge

that they did make that statement and

they have like stated those goals

right so that's still a part of like the

conversation and also

um hamas does have guided missiles they

have cornets

and they have used them against

civilians and the only reason they use

kasam rockets

is because they lack the means to use

anything else if hamas had access and

they

are starting to now because of other

countries like uh i think like russia

helping them

um they have access to more modern

weaponry the only reason they use

some rockets is because they don't have

access to anything else they would use

other weapons if they had them and they

are starting to get those and they have

used them against children

all right uh thank you charlotte uh

specter you're directly added you're

welcome to respond

yeah no i'm aware that they took that

out of the charter i agree with your

assertion that it was a uh pr move and

that they're still anti-semitic as all

hell

um good instincts there uh but i would

add that my issue isn't really the

charter as much as back in

uh i think it's 2017 when they were also

cutting ties with the muslim brotherhood

again i would assume for pr purposes um

and said that they would consider the

establishment of a sovereign palestine

state on the 67 borders they even added

in the cause

that the establishment of israel is

still considered entirely illegal by our

movement

now i don't think that what hamas is

saying is that they want

a democratic secular

state for all people when they call

israel legal i think that they're saying

that they would like

israel wiped off of the map of the

middle east

so uh if i can just quickly respond to

that if that's okay um like

uh do you acknowledge that a group can

believe that a state or an organization

is illegitimate without wanting to

genocide them

yes but if right before that you had

stuff that looked like it was pulled

directly out of mind comp from your

charter and then you back off to that

i'm a little bit suspicious about what

your intentions actually are with that

verbiage

so so like obviously yes you can be

suspicious

right but like if they were making some

effort

since it's been like 40 30 years right

since that

charter right and there is an effort

like both culturally and politically

in the gaza strip to change their

beliefs right they can still be

anti-semitic right

like i will not like have you seen the

adl um surveys of

the gaza strip and the west bank they're

really anti-semitic like as in like

jq level right but that that's

different from stating that they

literally want to uh

kill all israelis and uh make them all

suffer and die

right like they're at some point when do

you start believing them

if they change their positions do you

just like stop never believe them

please please don't talk actually

all right all right eris uh i just

finished i'm good

all right aerosol you're welcome to do a

quick response all right go ahead

okay so first of all all of this is just

total total bush [ __ ] right

so hamas has first of all they uploaded

an uh they uploaded an

addition to their original charter right

so some people

are trying to use words like um uh

they're playing with semantic words by

like semantic debates by saying oh it's

a new charter

right um implying that it replaces the

old charter no it does and it just adds

to the new charter and

it adds to the old charter and this

charter is literally just for public

consumption in 2017

literally the leaders of hamas literally

said okay

when there were some reformers with him

within hamas who wanted it to replace

the charter

but it got completely outvoted within

hamas and hamas literally said

okay that their their so-called new

charter was just the public charter

and it was not replacing the original

one and the and the organization still

officially went by that original charter

so there is they are still in they are

still genocidal

by their very very definition not only

are they genocidal by their definition

right but they are also anti like

palestinians too they only like specific

types of palestinians right

like sunni palestinians who go along

that islamic that specific

form of islamic line that they subscribe

to this is why they regularly

discriminate against basically anyone

who doesn't fall into that

um including like shiite muslims

christians etc

so like don't so acting as if they're

somehow they've changed their position

and they've reformed no you know who has

changed their position

but uh right and i know and i know

they've got tons of problems

i am not denying that but like if we

want to talk about a group that

went from being you know engaging in

terrorist activities to completely

changing their positions

then let's talk about fatah because

that's the only accurate description

there

it does not apply to hamas whatsoever

all right just can i say one sentence

it's literally of course yeah

of course go ahead so i we've had this

conversation before us you know i am

i'm profita right i was only talking

about

hamas in this context with spectre in

relation to

like perhaps like after 30 years they

don't hold exactly the same positions

that they did back then right because

they have a new body

of people in charge right culture

changes right and political goals

changes

have changed based on the conde okay

when like when charlotte's responding

please let her finish like you're

welcome to respond immediately

afterwards all right

like that's totally fine but please like

let them like finish their sentences so

charlotte finish what you're going to

say so i like it

i i even said to spectre like i i i lean

pretty heavily on the

it was probably a pr move right but i

was

i was i added on top of that like if

like

we say this specific this move

specifically in 20 2017 whatever

whatever it was right

if that's a pr move right but if they

continue to like reform their image

reform their charter reform their

prescriptions reform their like beliefs

right

at what point does it do you start

believing them

like is there any point where you start

believing them

uh if hamas actually starts

if hamas like actually starts trying to

reform itself

right i'm gonna trust me i will be the

first person to be like yeah come

be legitimize yourself by all means holy

god palestinians need someone better

than fatah right that's a legitimized

like source but that's not what they're

doing so i actually think it's really

dangerous to be giving like this

impression um that they've somehow

changed their opinion or evolved since

the 1980s or something like that right

that's actually not happened

and i mean people within hamas will

actually tell you the exact same thing

like reformers within hamas have tried

like the younger generation so-called

i've tried it's not possible right

because there are still you know there's

still a huge movement of

younger um hamas supporters and people

within hamas

that support that old that old line so

and in fact they actually have gone even

more extreme after the most recent

the most recent conflict because they

feel like they are really effective

so it's not so that's we're giving like

a total wrong impression we're trying to

imply that they

they've kind of changed right if if they

start training then i i'll probably be

the first to believe them if they

actually start changing

right because i am i have a bias towards

this

towards like uh you know roses and

sunshine but

that's just not what's going on like

they're not actually they're not

actually changing i'm listening to them

i'm believing them i don't want to

respond with anything i just want can

you do you mind

posting in chat somewhere a citation for

the that the private meeting stuff

all right uh speak heiress if you could

do that uh right now the list is lena

and then haas

so uh lena go ahead uh hos go ahead if

someone else wants to get in this uh

please raise your hand or eris make your

animation so i'll need to go i would

like

to correct a misconception the idea is

that critical support

and even then like i'm not going to

explicitly state

whether i do or not but regardless

critical support does not mean i want

these people to be in charge or you want

these people to be in charge

critical support is uh they are the

uh entity which needs it uh

fundamentally

at the end of the day hamas is the sole

organization of palestinian resistance

right now

bataan isn't fatah suppresses protests

of palestinians against the israeli

state

but uh does security for the israeli

state uh

helps the israeli state for children in

prison

via their own police force their own

militarized police force

and sort of just for the most part

submits to this occupation

uh and for the purpose of enrichment

self-enrichment uh this is what happened

with

arafat this is what happened with uh abu

mazen

uh

so fundamentally it's not a choice for

palestinians there isn't a choice

if i in a perfect world i'd have a

secular socialist party in charge

in a perfect world that be what happened

uh that's who i would support i'm

critically

uh or not uncritically critically but

there's

no choice there's no other entity

all right uh thank you lena um i'd just

like to remind everybody uh this

is getting like specifically in the

weeds if uh you can elaborate slightly

uh when like say you like use a name or

use a term just so people who are

watching can follow along a little bit

better

uh myself included that would be uh

fantastic and exceptional so

if it means i have to give you like an

extra couple seconds so you could be

able to do that that's totally fine

i just remember that some people are not

as educated on this as anyone on this uh

panel so

uh feel fr so please do that in the

future all right so hot we right now we

have pause and then we're throwing to

spectre so how's it go go ahead buddy

yes the projection of uh

european uh history and the crimes of

europe and european anti-semitism

and phenomena like nazism

upon the palestinian peoples or the

general peoples of the middle east is

complete

opportunism and completely unjustified

opportunism first and foremost

whatever excessive

rhetoric on the part of the palestinians

or hamas or others

it is within the context of a war

between two peoples

in contrast european anti-semitism

emerged in the context of a

minority of uh the population

in europe the jews who were oppressed

and targeted with

exterminationist

designs for example by the nazis so it's

a completely different context

furthermore

they find it really rich to project

european

anti-semitism and politics and hold

palestinians to that standard

when it is the powers of european

imperialism

who were ultimately responsible and made

possible

uh the current conflict in the middle

east uh

and between the uh jews and palestinians

or israelis and palestinians

so it's a complete form of opportunism

the fact that you find and again no one

has responded to this singular point

the fact that spectre finds hamas to be

yxi

he has not demonstrated why that is of

any relevance what

what why do your personal views have any

bearing

on the right of the palestinian people

to self-determination

you you're not palestinian you don't

know anything about palestinians you

don't live in palestine and you have

nothing to do with

uh the palestinians who cares what you

think about it

who cares what you think about it then

i'm defending the palestinians right to

self-determination

so i'm not imposing my specific

arbitrary subjective view on the

palestinians you are

that's the difference specter when you

want to interrupt me at least come with

a good point

doing terrible dude we're done talking

uh like uh haas are you finished uh

because

i'm gonna throw it to spectre and then

and then uh and then destiny all right

thank you haas

all right spector uh you're welcome to

respond and then like i said the list is

as it is so expect to go ahead

right so if anti-semitic extremist

groups in the middle east didn't want to

get compared to

the anti-semitism of the european powers

they shouldn't have copy and pasted it

into their [ __ ] charter

this is from the 1988 charter of hamas

with their money they took control of

the world media

news agencies the press publishing

houses broadcasting stations and others

that's when their money they stirred

revolutions in various ways let them

finish

with the purpose of achieving their

interest in reaping the fruit they're in

they were behind the french revolution

the communist revolution

and most of the revolutions we heard and

hear about

here and there with their money they

formed secret societies such as the

freemasons

rotary clubs the lions and others in

different parts of the world for the

purpose of sabotaging societies and

achieving zionist interest

with their money they were able to

control imperialistic countries and

instigate them to colonize many

countries in order

to enable them to exploit their

resources and spread corruption there

so if they don't want to get painted as

anti-semitic in the same way

that you know the [ __ ] nazis were

they shouldn't be copying mineconf and

putting it in their [ __ ] charter

also lena i understand that the people

of palestine have no other group to

support by hamas

but that is by hamas's design they have

kneecapped every other party including

fatah who they have killed many

officials of

and every time that they launch rockets

over that [ __ ] wall they know the

iron dome is going to ensure that they

don't land

they do it so that rockets will be

launched back more people will be

radicalized and conditions will

deteriorate so that they once again have

no

choice but to support hamas because of

the very little infrastructure that

they're actually able to [ __ ] provide

all right uh haz and lina you're both

were added there so you're both welcome

to respond briefly before we throw it to

heiress and then destiny so

uh whichever one goes first excellent i

just want to congratulate spectre on

failing to address the point whatsoever

we're all aware that hamas

repeats anti-semitic talking points and

copies the protocols of elders of zion

all that kind of stuff

but just because they do that doesn't

mean it's in essence the same thing

obviously those views are deplorable uh

from my perspective their deplorable

views but they are within the context of

a war between two peoples

not of a uh oppressor population uh

targeting jews for being jews uh

with extermination is rhetoric shut up

don't interrupt me

plea please be polite but like specter

please don't interrupt odds when he's

talking all right

both i know both of you are starting to

get into it please stop yeah right

if i had to mute the other one while the

one of you is talking i'll do that but

like please don't make me do that so

how's that going buddy

you off you're you're making it seem

like this is just a matter of ideology

now from an abstract ideological

perspective

oftentimes hamas does appear

indistinguishable from european

anti-semites

but it's the context that makes it

different

obviously i don't condone those views

but i can also recognize

that the meaning they have within the

region is different than they have in

europe in the region

it's a form of impassioned hatred

and complete uh attack

uh ideological um opposition to their

enemy that they're fighting within the

region now if you look at the history of

conflicts between any two nations

in the developing world you're going to

see there's a huge degree of impassioned

you know dehumanizing rhetoric and all

this kind of stuff but it is not

in essence it doesn't make them the same

as nazis

just because they abstractly to you

sound like nazis a person who has

complete ignorance about the situation

in the region

doesn't mean they're the same thing

that's what i was trying to say

all right uh thank you haas we're on

tour to lena then spectre you can

respond to both of them and then eris

and then destiny all right

go ahead i nearly completely disagree

with most of hamas's social

and political views i'm not an islamist

i

deplore anti-semitism but your

position your statement specter that

hamas

that palestinians are sacrificing their

own people their own children

for the sake of sympathy is extremely

offensive and

and very reflective of a common

prevailing attitude among many

westerners that arabs in general

are willing to sacrifice uh other

people are willing to sacrifice members

of their nation

their people for the sake of

looking good or appealing to others it's

a view that paints us

as barbaric savages it was expressed in

iraq it was expressed

in many other places and

it's just untrue there's no evidence

backing up that claim

all right uh spectre you're welcome to

respond to both them two minutes on the

clock then eris and then into destiny so

go ahead spectre

yeah i think that um you know

hamas's treatment of the shiite muslim

population is evidence enough that they

don't really care too much about the

population they're ideologically driven

i i do not understand how accusing jews

of being behind a global banking

conspiracy

multiple revolutions in several secret

societies

is somehow better contextualized by

a conflict between two groups of people

um you'll you'll have to explain that to

me at some point because i'm just

yeah no go ahead sure i'll explain it

right now

there is no inherent animosity that the

palestinian or arab peoples have

towards jews and there isn't really a

history in the thousands of years

there hasn't really been a history of

anything remotely comparable to european

anti-semitism the reason hamas goes to

great lengths to villainize

jews as a whole uh in in many cases is

because

uh israel israelis are mostly uh jewish

uh so it's the context of a war between

two peoples it's not the same as

european anti-semitism

when the context was a specific

pathology

of persecution and dehumanization of a

minority of uh

the population so it's completely

different hamas

is digging up the archives the dirty

archives of european anti-semitism and

other

groups as well like the protocols of

zion because they're using it as

ammunition to villainize

uh their enemy in a conflict of war

um this isn't just but this doesn't work

in essence shut up

shut up this doesn't in essence make it

yes

all right all right all right so okay so

uh take like 30 seconds finish your

point specter you have like a minute and

a half left on your clock

you'll finish yours and then we're going

to aeris and destiny have been waiting

very patiently yeah yeah

yeah if you analyze the structure and

pathology of european anti-semitism it's

a great deal more

than uh what we're seeing with hamas

hamas is villainizing

an enemy it's engaged in war against in

the form

of villainizing jews as a whole a

horrible thing obviously from my

perspective

but the context doesn't allow for a

comparison to european anti-semitism

whatsoever

that was the point i was trying to make

and by quoting hamas

making use of the protocols of zion or

other anti-semitic materials

it doesn't actually respond to my point

so i'd love for you to actually respond

to my point this time

all right inspector please respond what

is your point that you feel that i have

not responded to

the point that you haven't responded to

is that the context of the conflict

in the region makes the use of

anti-semitic materials

and views completely different in

context

than where they originated from which

was in europe

so due to the fact that it's it's

palestinians doing the global banking

conspiracy jq i'm supposed to

contextualize

that differently and feel better about

it like what are you saying i'm trying

to it does

serve a different context and a

different meaning i don't agree with it

and i think you'll shut up shut up i

think just to make sure that i

understand here

yeah we're saying that the the whole

like

protocols of the elders of zion it's

justifiable to use it if it's

villainizing the people

okay i'd like you to roll back the tape

i'd like to remember

go back to tape and see where i said it

was justified my good friend i didn't

say it was justified said the context

why are we then why does it matter i

didn't even shut up shut up

shut up shut up i didn't even say i

got this hans i got it i didn't even say

i don't care i need you to stop for a

second all right

all right i want both of you i'll give

both of you [ __ ] three minutes on the

clock let's just go to

eris and then destiny i want you both to

think about what you're going to say and

i will mute the other one

while you're speaking so you can

adequately respond to each other's

points yeah we're going to erase first

and then destiny

and then haze and then spectre so eris

go ahead

okay first of all right lena what you

were right about the stereotypes about

arabs um is 100 correct

and i think that is gross and it's it's

a complete western life

um and it's something that i talk a lot

about on my stream and where that

stereotype comes from and who's

perpetuating all that stuff

um and it is often perpetuated by the

idf particularly like this idea that oh

like the arabs like don't value their

own children

um kind of thing goldman ear made some

really nasty quotes about that too

so yeah i agree with you just in general

right

is that i i actually think in some ways

you're

you guys are talking past each other

both infrared and um inspector

because infrared i agree with you the

context is different right is

middle eastern anti-semitism um and

palestinian-style anti-semitism or like

homo style

anti-semitism is it different yeah of

course and the context is it does matter

right um so like i'm gonna put them

maybe like not at nazi level but maybe

like a few

you know when people perpetuate it i'm

gonna put them like a few slides like

you know above it um on them on the

moral scale in my head

um but at the same time it doesn't

like and the idea that anti-semitism

only exists because of israel it's

actually

i and i know that and trust me i know

you're not an answer to americans so i i

just want to pre-face i'm not calling

you that

but it is a narrative that is further to

perpetuate kind of like this

anti-semitic um idea

um that jews are actually like anything

that bad whenever people hate jews it's

because jews are actually making actions

it's like a victim blaming attack

that jews are you know engaging in

actions that make them deserve

um or at least like under they should

understand where it comes from

right so um and it's just it's not true

because

while european anti-semitism um oh come

on

i barely got to talk okay uh while

european anti-semitism

uh you know is certainly its own brand

right um that entire brand of

anti-semitism has been transferred

to the middle east right now and it was

transferred by the soviets right but

that doesn't mean

that that didn't exist before israel

right so i'll

just hamas literally the quotes that it

makes

like the quotes that it does in uh the

quotes that it does like in its original

charter

um that it still still uses to this day

right the idea that like the

the jew behind you you still need to

kill them i forget the exact quote

like there's tons of quotes like this

those come from the quran right

there's there's like middle eastern

anti-semitism has always been a thing

and yeah it never it wasn't at the level

of what was at

in europe but it was still pretty

[ __ ] bad it was still at the level of

like

you know i'm going to be anachronistic

for a second but like you know like

apartheid second-class citizens

um you know they they were treated

pretty pretty terribly

right um so this so that's also like

this total myth that's kind of being

spread

um that really really gets under my skin

as someone that stutters studies middle

eastern history

um that you know jews were just treated

totally great um there yeah

they you know they weren't being burnt

alive right and they weren't being sent

to gas chambers but that's not the

standard i like to

to have um to have uh when i'm judging

how how people are chosen

and additionally right it's been three

minutes please finish your last thought

all right

one more line right is that is that

palestinians did pers but there are

there are portions of palestinians that

did

um purposely court your european style

anti-semitism the grand mufti of

jerusalem

literally met with you know um literally

met regularly with hitler

okay organizing how they were gonna

continue to perpetuate a holocaust

in the middle east once the nazis got

down there it only got called off

because they

lost the war right so like this idea

that's totally separate is just not true

all right quick response uh lena uh

welcome to respond quickly and then

throw it to destiny

uh the grand mufti was is not like some

elected

official leader whatever he was

appointed

by the hashemites uh by the hashemite

dynasty when

they briefly held control uh i think

that's it

at least i'm not quite sure but he

wasn't elected is the main point is the

main factor yeah yeah

he wasn't a representative in any sense

he was just a dude

all right uh i disagree with the

representative part but that's another

debate

all right thank you lena thank you aris

all right destiny uh sorry you've been

like

silence for so long uh you got three

minutes of the clock same as eris uh

take it away

um yeah sorry i just wanna see if i can

sort out what's going on here between

spectre and hans

so i if i can understand what house is

saying i think

and i'm going to ask you quickly wrong

it sounds like house what you're saying

is that

your uh the anti-semitism that existed

in europe was different because it was

like an

oppressive majority population

oppressing a minority population of the

same country

but when it comes to the palestinians

that's different that's a conflict

between two separate countries

and we ought to support their rights to

self-determination to figure out how

they ought to resolve these conflicts if

one side chooses or opts to violence

then that's part of their right as a

country to have that self-determination

is that like the distinction you're

drawing there

first of all there's a lot of

difficulties because as we know hamas is

classified as a terrorist organization

under u.s law but what i will say is

that

i don't think i have to support anyone i

think the burden r

lies upon people who want to take steps

to

support israel or specifically go out of

their way to oppose

hamas in some specific way that's been

okay yeah so then my

yeah sure so i understand so broadly

speaking then as

general rules of thumb you would support

the right of both of these

of these countries to act in the ways

that they feel is best for their

population if somebody wants to

intervene then they would need a good

reason to do so

uh well uh no i

i don't know what you're trying to say

well i don't understand why because you

keep using this phrase the palestinians

have a right to self-determination

yes and it seemed like that was being

used um i don't want to say in defense

of

hamas bombing civilians but more as a

justification were like

this is something that they have a right

to do if they demand israel has

transgressed the palestinians right to

self-determination as defined

by the president of international law

that's my position

okay so so your position then for

interventions relating to palestine and

israel there's an appeal to

international law there then every time

for how that ought to be resolved or

there is some kind of common

international framework in which nations

abide by common rules

that they seek to respect

and is it would you so

my my next question is obviously going

to be let's say that the framework was

updated in such a way because obviously

the u.s sits

at kind of ahead of a lot of these

discussions for how this framework works

um is it not possible that there's a

world where israel essentially has the

right to delete

the entire gaza strip from existence to

to have all um

to have all israeli citizens there where

they move all the palestinians out of

east jerusalem and they move in all

israeli citizens there

if the international framework were

updated such that that was an

internationally legally recognized move

by them would you still support that or

would there be some other value system

that you would appeal to there

according to the post-war framework for

the us to be able to

drastically change international law to

such a degree it would in effect

be completely circumventing it and

abolishing it there's a reason why

international law is as balanced as it

is is because there are other

polarities and powers which conflict

with usf so i don't imagine

in a situation in which international

law is updated in the way you're saying

it could be

without the us in effect uh

doing maybe like what hitler did in in

germany just taking power completely

suspending uh

all laws and precedence well not

necessarily that but like

let's say for instance um let's

hypothetically oh my god am i my time

uh keep going this is like i'm almost

done

okay let's say that hypothetically you

get a more right-leaning president

um to sit at the head of the united

states uh like trump

and let's say that they start making

moves to recognize that israel's actions

are actually

okay so like moving the embassy to

jerusalem

and let's say that other countries begin

to kind of sort of follow suit in that

and eventually like

the international community just comes

around to recognizing for whatever

reason the

israeli claims are to some of the

palestinian territory like this your

mind i it's what i'm ultimately pushing

at is like

right now we're making appeals to

international treaties um

because it seems that no other countries

right now recognize israel's right

to i guess bully palestinians around or

embargo the gaza strip or

to push them further east in the west

bank um

but if that international like consensus

were to change i

i personally i don't believe that your

opinion would change with it i feel like

you'd appeal to something else at the

end of the day

but i could be wrong one of the reasons

i respect the legitimacy of

international law is because it reflects

uh not even so much fairly but it more

or less is some kind of common framework

that

uh reflects the actual populations of

the world and the actual uh

bilateral multilateral relations

established between the peoples of the

world

the middle east is a region of vital

significance the relations between

china and iran and russia and so on and

so on these are

we're talking about populations of

hundreds and of millions of people

uh and then in the case of uh china and

russia billions you know so

uh in the i don't think i don't believe

this

i think this is more a philosophical

debate about the what is

where does the legitimacy of law come

from should laws be respected just

because

it's the law no i don't think that but i

do think the laws that we do have

respect some uh reflect some kind of

underlying material reality

i guess uh my mind yeah uh uh destiny i

saw a finisher a final point there and

then you said you might have do you have

any questions for spectre or just want

to finish your point for haas

yeah it was just kind of figuring out

what i was saying just my final point in

that is that like

one of the criticisms that i see people

give a lot to people that um

talk about international law is people

say well international law is written

so much by the big players that it's not

really fair to appeal to that it doesn't

actually

um represent what most of the people in

the world would want because of the

disproportionate amount of power given

to certain countries so for instance the

fact that everybody on the security

council can get an instant veto vote

over certain types of actions

or the idea that like even some of the

definitions that we have will slightly

change based on

who's being represented at the un so

some regardless i don't want to open up

a whole argument but like so some people

would argue that like the holodomor not

being recognized as a genocide

was part of the un's attempt to like

kind of appease the soviet union because

they didn't want to start that conflict

or whether or not we enter certain

conflicts you know a single veto vote on

the security council can downvote that

so some people would say

international isn't really reflective of

what everybody wants it's it's it's

way too tipped towards like larger

players like an influence but yeah okay

yeah it's not really argument uh has

finished like

a brief point because then like you

still have your three minutes so um

uh has finished like your a quick

response to destiny and then we have

give spectre three minutes and then haas

you get three minutes

under interrupt so please just make this

quick yeah like the laws of any given

country including the laws of the united

states

um i disagree with america's laws and i

also disagree with the framework of

international law but

there's nothing else countries have to

go off of uh to know what the rules are

as they're in place

should there can a discussion should a

discussion be opened up in my opinion

about reforming uh international law to

reflect better

the uh interests of the smaller

countries collectively

sure but this has to be done in a legal

way is my point just like how in america

i may oppose the laws but this doesn't

mean i'm going to start doing illegal

things

all right all right thank you haas ah

we're going to spectre for three minutes

and has for three minutes everybody

uh we have 40 minutes left on this topic

uh trying to keep this pedal under three

hours

people seem to be like uh doing uh a lot

in this conversation so we're gonna keep

going a bit longer than normal we're

gonna keep the last one to say probably

about an hour

hour 20. so specter three minutes on the

clock uh uninterrupted uh

please uh go ahead right i don't think

i'm gonna need three minutes here

um yeah if the whole point of our back

and forth earlier was that

anti-semitism in the middle east is

different

than anti-semitism in europe in some

ways

fine it's just it felt really loaded the

way that you were accusing me of trying

to

force some kind of european label onto

them um

but whatever cool i i don't think that

either

group groups that practice either kind

of anti-semitism are worthy of critical

support

um i think that that should be a deal

breaker i guess that was my contention

it sounds like you might agree with me

there so

that's fine uh and yeah lena in regards

to the

stuff with um arabs not caring about

their own people

that that wasn't my intention to make

the argument that way if it came across

that way i do apologize

um i do think that groups like isis

probably don't care about the lives of

civilians a lot of countries there in a

lot of times i

am suspicious that hamas might be one of

those groups as well that's really all

that i was saying it's not an

islamophobic thing

um i'm sorry yeah uh

obviously no one here supports isis

or boko haram there are not in any way

in my opinion yeah okay sorry i wouldn't

yeah i wouldn't i wouldn't

um i wouldn't assert that uh about

anybody on this panel um what i was

basically just saying is that i was

using them as an example like you know

we can understand that like isis

probably doesn't give a [ __ ] about the

civilians

um in a lot of the countries that

they're active in i would argue the same

thing for hamas it's not an islamophobic

thing

um that's all i'm saying all right all

right

all right thank you spectre all right

all right uh you have three minutes

uninterrupted

uh you don't use all of it uh go ahead

buddy and everyone else uh the list is

empty now so if you wanna start getting

in and again start raising your hands

like i said we have about 25 minutes

left on the clock now for this

before we do our closing statements uh

eris i'll put you on the list

uh so despite the fact that i think

uh anti-semitism is unjustifiable from

an ideological perspective and obviously

from a personal perspective

i do not think that whether or not

groups

hold uh quote unquote yikes views

is decisive as a decisive starting point

to

justify or support imperialist

aggression

against them i may disagree with them

subjectively but i don't think i have

the right to sit in judgement

against them from a perspective of some

way to objectively

affect them and change them in some kind

of way

regarding uh one of the things eris

pointed out in the

history of jews in the middle east it's

certainly true that jews

at as far as i'm aware at no point were

equals to muslims in the history of uh

middle east jews were relegated to the

status of second-class citizens the

difference

is is so were christians all non-muslims

uh who were recognized at least as

recognized religions and had a dimmy

were relegated to second-class citizens

there was no

in the broad in the main there are

specific exceptions i'm going to

mention in the main there is no specific

form of anti-semitism

in the middle east there is a kind of i

guess

oppression of muslims against

non-muslims but there is no specific

targeting or isolating jews were able to

rise to great positions of

fame prominence and power in the middle

east

especially compared to europe at the

time it's a no-brainer but

i know the narrative that jews were you

know complete equals is wrong but

it must be recognized that some of the

greatest jewish thinkers of all time

flourished within muslim lands

and middle eastern lands uh secondly

and then the exceptions i want to point

out is i remember specifically there was

uh a case of a jewish vizier being

overthrown by the population and

that one minute left buddy but keep

going yeah that corresponded to some

kind of uh

i guess seems like maybe a specific

anti-semitism but i don't i don't know i

think it was just uh

some kind of uh incitement against a

specific population for a different

reason

i'm not aware of any main major

instances of anti-semitism

before a european uh intervention in the

middle east

all right uh thank you haas we're gonna

throw it to eris and then

uh lena so eris go ahead

all right so uh first of all i

i don't think the argument that like

jews were that there were you know

specific jews that you know flourish and

did incredibly well

um you know it is a good one right um

for example uh you know there were a lot

of jews that were doing incredibly well

literally

you know the year hitler got elected um

uh so

it like within nazi germany so that

doesn't yeah that doesn't really carry

over though you are right that jews were

flourishing

by comparison um in middle eastern

countries

um particularly in places like iran um

but uh you know but the question is like

where are those jews now

right how many jews used to live in iran

um

in uh in lebanon in uh

in jordan like in turkey

in um in morocco like where are all

these jews now

none of them exist there right i think

there's like in iran iran has the

largest jewish population in the middle

east outside of israel

um and i think their their population is

definitely in like the few thousands

it's very very very tiny um so largely

right jews have been ethically cleansed

out of these regions so

it like it doesn't matter if you know

there was something that inspired it

right or there was something that

involved it right like

it still the result was an ethnic

cleansing

and that means that you know is middle

eastern style anti-semitism is still

really really dangerous and really

really bad

um because mizrahi jews who are not

white right even though they get treated

like they're just white europeans

um got treated terribly as a consequence

i don't think it's fair to just like

brush over um

and act like it's not um you know it's

not really that bad

or that i'm just i know you're not

saying this but it definitely feels

like um you know that i'm just kind of

being like maybe like a woke schooled

about hamas like they're just

you know they're just not uh politically

correct sometimes like sometimes they

say this but

you know like the um but in reality

uh you know and the core issues like

they're really just this

um group of resistance fighters fighting

against imperialism that's that's not

true and

i can use all those arguments to justify

israel's actions and i don't want to

justify israel's actions but i could use

those arguments and that's why they're

so faulty

right i could really do the whole thing

about how jews

are just like people that are

historically oppressed in the middle

east

right um and that they didn't start the

violence and they just wanted their own

country when they were surrounded by all

these different muslim countries

and in their historical and their

ancestral land and

when they try to establish just their

own land then boom all these neighboring

muslim dominant countries like wage war

on them and then they defended

themselves i could use that argument too

right i think it's a pretty faulty one

but i'm just demonstrating why

this argument that like kind of journey

to justify hamas um

or trying to downplay like hamas's

anti-semitism is so faulty

all right thank you eris i wanna throw

it to lina and then haze if you wanna

respond to that after leah lina uh

you're welcome to as well then we're

gonna go to spectre so

and uh just running everyone uh we have

uh we have 15 minutes left on this topic

before we get a closing statement so

uh if you want to get in start raising

those hands all right so lena go ahead

the ethnic cleansing of jews from many

middle eastern countries was

almost not almost certainly was an

atrocity uh

a very very regrettable one but

it's not on palestinians and the context

with regard to palestinians is different

i'm not speaking for any other nation in

the middle east

uh but hamas anti-semitism is deplorable

and um if it were

if there were literally any other choice

uh that wasn't

as bad they and was resisting in the

same way

they should be supported but hamas is

that soul organ

and fundamentally i don't think you can

compare

israel uh and

palestinians struggle like that

especially in the context of

israel was established as a colonial

halt

uh the relations are colonial relations

it's a very one-sided thing putting the

um

crimes uh the persecution and

expulsion and violence against jews

within those

arab countries is uh completely

unjustifiable

uh nothing justifies it i'm not saying

israel

and the conflict with israel could have

possibly justified that it was a

a horrible horrible thing um

i think uh there but however there are

attitudes now

of some kind of critical reflection and

remorse

i don't know how popular they are to

reflect upon this history why were uh

you know mizrahi jews who were a part of

these nations a part of these

countries so unjustly targeted in this

frenzied violence but i ultimately

believe

that if you even look at the history of

mizrahi jews within israel itself

and the the conflict there and the level

of uh

racism and kind of colonial attitude i

ultimately think that

some kind of reconciliation between the

peoples of the middle east

has to be had from the perspective of

the anti-imperialist

popular forces now iran is not a perfect

country but

i am not aware of widespread persecution

of

the jewish community in iran who are

whose religious rights are

respected and who are allowed to drink

alcohol and so on and so on

so maybe it's not perfect but it's an

example of the fact

that um opposition to israel from an

anti-imperialist perspective

doesn't always equate to oppression of

native

uh jews all right thank you

haas all right we're gonna throw to

spectre and then charlotte specter go

ahead

right i'm gonna let somebody else get

into the iran and jewish people's stuff

cause that's that's insane to me

um so just to make sure because i'm

gonna have an aneurysm like i'm

understanding here

um lena what you're saying makes sense

to me it's the only group

so i wish that i didn't have to support

them i find the anti-semitism deplorable

but it's the only group that i feel like

has a chance of getting like the

palestinian people where i think they

need to be correct

yes that is the position and i guess

that my contention there is i don't

think that hamas has any chance of

getting the palestinian people where

they need to be

because they're using like brute force

and violence it's

not an option it's in the way you're

presenting this choice is that if hamas

gives up violence there won't be

violence and reprisal from israel but

this

isn't true it's not a choice of

uh peace process or hamas violence

versus israeli violence it's a question

of

lay down or take up arms against an

entity which is violent

by its very structure

that's that's the choice okay um

very existence is you consider violent

right

not it's very

yes in that it isn't a state founded on

the principle of equal rights for all

peoples

i because

especially because of the nation state

law uh but even before that

uh it is the case that israel was

founded on the displacement of over

uh 470 000 palestinians way more but

that's the

number i can remember at least and those

palestinians still aren't allowed back

and it fundamentally places the rates of

jewish people above the rights of

palestinian people

uh so yes by its existence

it is a violent entity it cannot exist

without oppressing

palestinians uh

even even if it were to let go of the

west bank and the blockade

the palestinians within israel and the

palestinians outside of israel who lived

in villages like lifta

in villages in the over 600 villages

that were destroyed

during the nakba they would never be

allowed to return to a homeland and

they would be slowly integrated into

the rest of the world disconnected from

their nation and from their people

and that is violent heiress would you

like to respond before

having the right to return is

automatically violent and justifies any

form of violence

i answer uh

more so that even in

the case that everything but the right

to return is resolved

it still doesn't change the fact that

israel is founded on violence and that

it is

exclusionary toward those palestinians

okay so then i would actually say that

your argument right

um is yeah it's against the peace

process

um and considering israel has nukes

right

um the only option for palestinian

sovereignty and for palestinians to

be free is to engage in a peace process

with israel

what is peace like fundamentally when

you say peace

what do you mean a two-state solution

the parameters were negotiated between

yester arafat

right um uh yeshua during the camp david

accords and during the

during the oslo accords the two-state

solution is where palestinians will have

their own sovereignty

over the over west bank east jerusalem

um and gaza with a tunnel or a highway

or something like that

connecting them um where they have their

own self-determination etc right and

live

peace in like in peace alongside like

israel and this

this way do you still have their their

own right to self-determination

in a country where they're the majority

right considering they are literally one

of the tiniest minorities in the entire

world and they are surrounded by muslim

majorities

um countries which are also all

basically ethno-states as well

no one seems to give a [ __ ] about them

strangely um

so that so those two groups um living

assigned alongside and that will

lead to palestinians not having to live

under occupation it means that

palestinians will not have to deal with

blockades and all that kind of stuff

because they will be you know like a

proper national country with

their own self-determination etc so this

is an out

this is like a proper organized plan it

probably will lead to eventually

right it probably will lead eventually

like i agree with you i also want

eventually a secular state um for both

groups to live alongside one another i

just think that you need a stepping

stone

to get there um and palestinians don't

exactly have time to wait

for you know this uh utopia that's just

not gonna get there

um from one end to the other all right

uh

lena you're welcome to respond then we

go to red charlotte and then to

haas if you want to get in before we do

closing statements raise your hand right

now

all right lena go ahead uh fundamentally

that two-state peace process which you

described may have been possible in 1994

and in 2000 but with the current state

of affairs it is

functionally impossible and even if it

were possible even if we

could even if we let decide all mortals

and

uh removed all jewish people uh or not

all jewish people but all settlers

from the west bank and we removed uh

and we allowed palestinians to move back

into palestine interesting and we

determined that a jewish majority state

was absolutely necessary

even in that instance uh the aquifers

in the west bank are saline because

they've been way over-farmed

many of the many of the

natural sites in the west bank are have

been exploited

have been nearly destroyed the dead sea

uh

is currently undergoing a process of

destruction which may be irreversible to

produce cosmetics

uh so many ancestral olive trees and

plantations have been

removed and now a lot of areas are

desertifying

uh what you'd be handing palestinians is

a broken state

with no possibility not no possibility

but with a very very difficult path to

repair

uh and which fundamentals you know what

the palestinians had before israel

existed

yeah it's like heiress like

your question's fine but like please uh

let leona finish

30 seconds finish eris you can do a

quick response briefly then we're going

to throw it to red charlotte

okay uh fundamentally and

no israeli government in the modern day

is going to

accept any sort of security arrangement

that is in israeli security arrangements

for the west bank that was legit's

position

and the current administration's

position is just as drastic

uh yes this might have worked but

this is hypothetical it's not reflective

of reality

um go ahead

in what reality can you get israel um

how are you going to get israel to

somehow

uh destroy its own existence

you describe it as a process of

destruction but i

think it's more like rebirth it's

decolonization i don't

view i would actually decolonization is

what israel is

israel's entire existence that's how

they justify their existence was

decolonization from the original

actually no in their founding they

described it as colonization as

civilization it only hurts what did not

like the growth

just just because hurts and he used and

it was a totally different form

of the word colonization than the way we

understand it now

it's a complete misunderstanding right

like i

i just don't understand like how um

you're trying to apply

this european lens to the middle east um

to two very uh historically oppressed

groups of people

um both palestinians and jews and it

just the lens just does not

it makes no sense like it's just gonna

take you away from truth and that makes

sense because

your all your opinions are just steered

so way so far away from the

peace process to me you're just a

complete like unproductive

member of this conversation because

anything that

like anything that we could try to

engage in or negotiate

like literally the the very existence of

a jewish state

okay um is considered violence to you so

if that's

if everything's violence that means

anything's justified against that

violent entity and that just means

it's just totally unproductive like i

there's nowhere we can go because

the truth is israel's just not going

anywhere no matter what we want to do

right it's not going anywhere the same

way any other problematic country that

exists right now

including the countries most of us are

on right now are not going anywhere they

have nukes it's done

right we need to go and we for

practicality we need to negotiate

on how we can actually make things

better and work on incremental change

if you're talking about oh no uh lena uh

you're welcome to respond another two

minutes and then we're gonna go to

charlotte

then haas then spectre and then we're

gonna start closing statements

if you're talking about practicality a

two-state solution is impractical

there's no way israel will agree to it

at this point there's

absolutely no way to resolve the

question of settlements without

forced population transfers there's so

much resource depletion

that it's a palestinian state would be

unviable

and even if it

sorry sorry no uh and fundamentally no

i'm not applying a white european lens

the way i see it it's like south africa

the west bank isn't an independent state

it's under a military occupation but

it's the same as a reservation or upon

tuesday

like it's the exact same it is a

separate

uh ethnic enclave or not enclave

it is a separate ethnic region which is

forced to abide by israeli military law

and which

no one recognizes or very uh only a

select number of countries recognize

because it's not its own self-governing

entity

it's not truly self-governing and

fundamentally

the way that this all works out is that

there is no viable two-state solution

there isn't so the question is do we

accept coexistence

or do we accept something else or does

this continue

right right there's no bible like none

of the experts agree with you like i

it's just totally untrue the only thing

that both parties have actually

literally agreed to

so it is the only viable solution the

only the other solution

is literally a one-state israel

apartheid-like system

where uh we're basically we're basically

palestinians just have to live as

second-class citizens

that's the only other option in terms of

practicality

so like that that makes no sense to me

all right uh thank you eris thank you

lina charlotte uh go ahead

uh okay so i'm gonna say a bunch of

small things and then like a main thing

because like i've just been waiting so

long

so like in response to lena i i i think

that this um like i don't describe as

defeatist

but like it sort of sounds defeatist

because this sort of like oh fatah is

like a shell of its former self it is

completely pointless to um believe that

fatah can ever take power back and be

like an effective

uh entity to support and represent the

palestinian people i just believe this

just

just isn't true like every every party

and political power has its ups and

downs

like it's just in a dip right like

because

of the things that have happened in the

past 20 years uh

like so like i think it's still um

we should right it's like imperative

that we should push

to support the secular leftist fatah

right because they are social democrats

and socialists um

and then uh two a bunch of these are to

heiress

um the whole argument that you brought

up why don't we care about other

countries

uh this is like a classic talking point

that people always

bring up we all do every single one

every every single person in this room

is against ethnostates i hope

right um and the difference is that

other countries most countries have

organic ethnic majorities right

nobody here is opposed to like if

organically just so happens that there's

an ethnic majority

that doesn't that doesn't i don't think

it's killing anyone else what what what

what matt well it matters what matter

you know what i mean when i say organic

so please

like don't do this so like there's a

difference between that in a

legislatively like prescribed uh system

where they say this is a land for this

people

and this people only and these people

will be prioritized over

everyone else where half the country

wants to expel

the non-in group and then

also um it's just just so much like this

whole topic like sort of got

off the rails uh because it was supposed

to be about critical support

it's just an israel-palestine debate

right um

uh i just wanted to end it like does

everyone anyone here disagree

that like there is no there is a limit

to whether or not you should critically

support something

based on like the means based on

alternative

alternatives that exist and based on

what they would do if they were to

replace the dominant

dominant power right like is this

disagreeable to anybody

i think that everybody agrees on that

there should be a line we're just

disagreeing on where the line is because

of the line for me

anti-semitism i'm not going to support

that group as a jewish man

has said that he's totally fine with it

because it's just a yikesy view

so maybe i was talking about your ass

when i subscribed to anti-semitism

earlier that's literally what you said

dude i didn't say it

because they have yikes so that was your

word

and like to expand it outside of israel

palestine right i want to go

i wanted to talk about earlier about

afghanista afghanistan right the a

a right the a a right has a ton of flaws

right they turn their eye

on bacha bazi right which is literal boy

rape

right they turn their eye on corruption

they turn their eye on violence

but i still think they are worthy of

critical support because

the alternative right is the taliban

right and the taliban would do

like that times 20 right

and this applies to literally every

situation right if

if hamas abides by its 88 charter if we

all believe that which we aren't in

agreement about that

if they do like they aren't worth

supporting if they adhere to the 88

charter

because they if they replaced israel as

the dominant power

what they what they would do is worse

than what israel is doing

right is this disagreeable to anybody

i'm not going to respond you want to

talk

you can say something like sure uh

regarding the

two-state um solution even if we were to

agree with the two-state

what incentive does israel israel have

to pursue it

uh and furthermore what is israel israel

is so politically divided that any party

within israel that's going to push for

a two-state solution i don't think they

would have a chance i think israel is

too divided

for that to be possible and i don't

think the palestinians are going to be

able to rely upon the good faith and

goodwill of uh

the israelis when they have no incentive

to and even the people who do feel that

they have an incentive to

are nowhere near the majority now

regarding the european origins of

zionism i don't i wasn't aware that this

was even contested zionism

was rooted in the modern european

thought of the 19th century and the view

was basically that

it was inspired by german romanticism

and the view is that

uh jew that there was a jewish question

in europe quote unquote and the solution

was that

jewish people need to become a

nation-states just like uh

other european countries regarding the

view that

fatah is left-wing i think this

results from a form of political

analysis that rests upon browsing

wikipedia panels

the fact of the matter is that on the

ground within the west bank

no one considers fata a left wing quote

unquote

they're extremely corrupt and it's

interesting everyone wants to talk about

fata when during the 1980 today

yesterday's hamas was fatah right

the israelis supported hamas against

the plo in the 1980s so now all of a

sudden everyone wants to support them

all over again why should anyone even

trust that and regarding uh

the thing about the taliban well

obviously i don't personally

think the taliban are preferential to me

but the fact of the matter is that the

practice you just mentioned bacca bazaar

whatever

was eliminated by the taliban and the

corruption and the

arguably the corruption and crimes of

the current afghan government

dwarf those of the taliban the problem

with the taliban

comes from a perspective of human rights

to my knowledge

outside of afghanistan within

afghanistan it's up to the afghani

people

who they want a foreign propped up

a completely corrupt pedophilic

government

critical support for that wow that's

incredible now the allegation from

spectre that i said

anti-semitism was fine is a complete

fabrication and a complete lie

you said okay that i'm fine with it well

what do you mean is it no you said that

it's not a deal breaker for you to offer

critical support no no

it's not what i said but that's not what

i said what i said is that it's not

decisive

for me to believe that i should take

extraordinary steps to oppose

to oppose them you see the difference

i'm not doing anything i'm just sitting

on my chair

i'm not going to speak out or use my

powers to oppose hamas because of that

i'm not going to support them

but i'm not going to go out of my way to

oppose them there's a difference

you see all right okay so like i

i think this one charlotte uh you got

one minute left finish whatever you're

gonna say because again like

you were very patient waiting uh you got

one minute then we're gonna go two

minutes on spectre and then we're

starting closing statements anyone else

like you're raising your hand now i'm

sorry it's too late like we got to get

to the next topic so

charlotte one minute go ahead yeah i

just think like everything you said

about

afghanistan is so funny right because

actually the afghan people

absolutely agree with my position

wholeheartedly this is shown in people

absolutely agree with my position

wholeheartedly this is shown in polls

then the us can withdraw and there's no

problem nope the the afghan people do

not want nato to withdraw until there is

a full peace deal and a peace deal has

not yet been met

so uh this has been shown in polls and

while if you take in a vacuum

the taliban right eliminating

bachabazi is is good that was good right

in a vacuum but you you omit everything

else the taliban did

like slaughtering like up to 150 000

people

you talk about the kabul government

dwarfing the crimes of the taliban

is it just literally just ignorance like

you just don't know anything about

afghanistan and like the conflict

and what has happened since like the

1990s this is like insane

like the believe that government is the

worst thing why do they need the us

military to enforce their will why can't

the afghan people themselves

decide their own outcome they they are

they're at they literally ask for

foreign assistance

what do you mean why do they need that

for an assistant

you know i don't know i think it just

comes down to different value systems at

the end of the day

um yeah i'm done

all right thank you spectrum thank you

all thanks to everyone uh participating

we're now gonna go to closing statements

for this topic we have one more topic so

everyone stick around

uh we're gonna go from eris to haas to

destiny to charlotte

to spectre and then lena is gonna finish

because she started and she gets to

respond to everyone who

like followed her in the opener so eris

90 90 seconds uninterrupted go ahead

well first i just wanted to respond to

um the conversation before i get to

those

those statements that's okay um the the

biggest thing

that one of the biggest changes that's

happened recently is there is a new

israeli government

um and that government literally

includes palestinians or arab israelis

depending on your political terminology

right in the power in the power of the

government okay

monsoor bus is literally a part of that

government the only reason why people

don't care about it because

um is because you know it doesn't serve

their political narrative

um but yeah they are part of that

government and um

and on top of that it is a coalition

government with mostly

leftist parties led by a so-called

extreme right winger but he's basically

a puppet king okay um uh that is

basically that is going to be cycled out

and they believe in a two-state solution

like this official party stance of the

coalition is literally

to perpetuate a two-state solution

netanyahu is out

so it's a total possibility and the

party that is going to be leading that

two-state solution

is fatah right has worked its ass off to

legitimize itself from its previous plo

past and when people say like

um oh um that it's it's gone it's gone

downhill et cetera

fatta was always corrupt it always had

problems with corruption right

um and definitely needs to be fixed but

what they really mean is that fatahs not

trying to kill jews anymore and it's not

trying to kill civilians anymore

so and that's aside from that entire

that entire thing um but just in general

zionism as a whole right even though i

really disagree with how it's

been enacted and there's been a lot of

problems with it

is that zionism is not particularly

unique and this

obsession of pinpointing and trying to

just isolate israel as being somehow

like

this um unique uh immoral light on the

world

was just um is just not true right

particularly in the middle east

so for example right zionism itself was

inspired by really like

i mean obviously inspired by like

anti-semitism and like all those things

and humanism but the real thing that

pushed it was there was a global

nationalist movement as a consequence

to imperialism right the region of

palestine had been under

like and basically the entire middle

east had been under various imperialist

controls right

from the you know the roman empire the

basic empire the

byzantine empire the ottoman empire

right like this is a region that's still

incredibly trying to recover so yeah

it's native populations

which includes jews are try are trying

to

like they're trying to get along and

there's it's going to be messy but we

need to

we need to be supporting productive

members who are leading towards peace in

the region

not people or not arguments that are

just saying that any existence

of anything without any kind of

compromise is automatically violent

and does not deserve any kind of

compromise um

but yeah that's uh that's my closing

statement all right thank you eris um in

the interest of fairness for everybody i

didn't want to stop errors because seems

like she had a lot to say so

everyone now gets a two minute and 45

second closing statement if they decide

to make use of all that time

uh haas two minutes 45 seconds on the

clock go ahead

yes i'm reviewing this source you gave

me

uh it's from the institute of war and

peace which is a washington

american-based source so we already have

a red flag for bias

the methodology appears questionable in

the survey

61 of those who responded did so online

i'm not sure how representative that is

of the

rural afghan population that the taliban

actually has a base in

and actually survives and subsists

through so i find this source completely

uh questionable and uh in no way do i

see this as evidence that a majority of

afghans want to continue

nato occupation um i can't even find the

part

specifically where you highlighted where

it even says this 46 percent of afghans

want the us and nato out of the country

once a deal is struck 33 would have them

stay

i don't how is that how does that mean a

majority want

the us and nato to still stay in the

country so i

i was mistaken i should have said

plurality sometimes i will

i will say it's not a majority when i

mean plurality yeah it's not even that

even sounded like was that

did you call that again was that a

majority of people want and they're

gonna say until a piece deal is reached

46 so not like majority plural

but it's like a pretty big plurality

but that's also once a deal has been

reached right yes and which one has not

been because of these

that's just and that's also we assume

that there's no bias to the study and

that it has

good methodology representative of the

afghan population

which i call into question i would like

to see more

diverse set of sources on the subject

matter before i

would believe that the majority of

afghan people want a continued

nato occupation

all right thank you haas all right uh

destiny

uh go ahead um so anyway whether or not

we critically support

nations uh just because they oppose

america turn into an israel palestine

debate which is fun

um yeah i mean i'll start my same

position beginning i don't think we

should support

nations just because they oppose the

united states um

yeah all right thank you destiny uh

charlotte if you'd like to respond

if you'd like to say your statement go

ahead i i i uh

we can talk about like probably after

the panel because this is like a whole

another conversation about afghanistan

and nato

completely different conversation but

like yeah uh we got bogged down in

literally just

it was just an israel versus palestine

debate which i mean it's fine

you know it's still an important issue

and you know people should talk about it

but like we didn't really get into like

the weeds of like like what we all

find like disagreeable about like the

specifics of what's worth

like defending a group and siding with a

group critically

uh and like where that line is and we

never really discussed like

the the general concept we just got

bogged down and specifically hamas which

is i mean that's fine but you know

whatever

that's all i got to say sorry about that

if you were uh uninterested in like

specifically no no no

i'm always interested in talking about

israel palestine but it i was

sometimes you know mix it up right you

talk about other things

yeah all right uh we're gonna go to

spectre

right um

so yeah if we're just answering the

like critically support groups simply do

the fact that they uh

oppose american imperialism um however

you define that

um i don't think that hamas is worthy of

leftist critical support specifically

um i believe that this is the case

because they will not get a good

end result for the palestinian people

and

also due to the fact that they engage in

anti-semitic rhetoric

i don't think that this is

an extreme take to have um

yeah just seems pretty cut and dry to me

i don't know

all right thank you spectre all right uh

lena last word on this topic

and then we'll uh take a small break and

then we're going to move to the last

stop which will be about an

hour in terms of length because we took

up the first

almost two hours with this one so lena

go ahead

yeah sorry about bogging down the debate

yeah um i would like to respond to one

point that eris brought up

in uh their statement

which was um no one's talking about the

new government which includes an arab

party that's because the arab party is a

handful of seats

the government was formed netanyahu and

it's composed of so many parties it's

almost guaranteed to fall apart

um this is not i don't assume

or i do not think this is a

controversial view um with regard to

everything else

uh i do not believe in peace for peace's

sake i believe in peace to achieve

some sort of goal for justice uh and the

peace process is not that

so that's it uh and with regard to the

larger question which is what i actually

want to talk about

fundamentally it's dependent on who we

is defined as if you're talking about

communists

specifically communist and social

specifically uh

oppose the enemy at home and

don't let it harm people abroad and also

don't legitimize

uh american violations of sovereignty uh

or backing of states or governments

which are hostile to their people um

but with regard to where the line is

again it's

uh really dependent on a multitude of

factors uh

i of course i do logical alignment is

one of them but i would argue it's a

minor one it's more about

uh their in which way they're opposed to

those interests

uh fundamentally groups like isis

uh and boko haram are not in particular

really that opposed to american

interests other than

toppling american set up governments or

american back governments

but in that they are far worse

so they shouldn't be supported and they

aren't resisting on behalf of the people

uh they're resisting for a specific

ideological end it's not anti-colonial

um but that's all

all right thank you lina thank you all

for that excellent discussion on that

first topic

uh we are going to take a three minute

break now so if you need to like get a

drink use the bathroom and something

like that

uh feel free to run away from your

keyboard and we will reconvene

at uh 8 50 uh sorry about

9 50 let's just do a five minutes like 9

54.

all right take five i'll be right back

wow good job guys

what happened um he got still pissed off

that you went afk that he

just left the panel i hate coming back

when like i know the primary source is

on a pdf somewhere

but it's probably hidden in a [ __ ]

website somewhere and i hate when

when people cite polls and new stories

and they don't have a hyperlink to the

[ __ ] poll it's really obnoxious

destiny how do you restream with subs on

um you know i just do what i do

wait oh afk i don't understand did i

just

miss here

i understand he thought i went afk no i

was completely [ __ ] i made that up

completely we're on a five minute break

sorry oh god damn it [ __ ]

so is boss gonna box me or no it doesn't

seem like it

that yeah they're gonna box gonna be a

big fight

i would pay to say that he told his

viewers on stream he would

but when i dm'd him i guess he doesn't

want to anymore

i actually thought hans was upset with

me for a second

good very annoying is it called the aila

i thought there was um people were

saying that anti-semitism started in

europe but

my understanding is that there are a lot

of jews from middle eastern countries

that eventually started to flee to

israel once it was set up in the 40s is

that that not true i don't remember no

it's true yeah actually the majority

the majority of israelis are not even

white jews they are brown jews like

these are keys

from the middle east countries

i'm gonna continue to search for the

like the institute of war and peace

like fair pdf like so i can like the

whole breakdown

because i i that would be good for me

and also i do want to get it for you

11 percent of people in afghanistan have

internet access and sixty percent

but eighty percent have phones but

internet access is internet access

sixty percent of respondents did so

through the internet

that's what it says

i mean it sounds like with that standard

then you wouldn't trust any polling data

for afghanistan but like the survey of

afghanistan from the

uh asia institute all of it is uh

face-to-face interviews in all 34

provinces

it's like 39 is possible 39 was

face-to-face

and we don't know i'm saying for the

survey of afghanistan like it's a

different

like for a different poll like i'm

saying in response to destiny

that like there are survey methods that

are effective

and full proof in afghanistan because

they're all face to face in all 34

provinces

can you provide the link to that one i

did it's in chat yeah

it's all those screenshots of like

blurbs and

numbers from the asia foundation

perception that the ana and anp what

does that stand for

i don't remember what a p stands for but

ana's afghan national army

well yeah that they need foreign support

but does that mean that

they want foreign support like the

government what does that mean

the government needs foreign support

most people agree the government needs

foreign support

but most people support the government

so if you have a bunch of intersecting

facts like

they think the a a needs support right

yeah

they are completely opposed to the

taliban right in all

shapes and forms ideologically

institutionally

culturally and they support the kabul

government

right and and they and they don't want

the foreign forces to leave until peace

deal is struck which means peace

right with the with the taliban i don't

i don't know how you could read i take

all these facts into consideration

and then in good faith not not not

like infer that like when they mean like

need foreign support

it means they like think that it's

necessary okay hold on a few things

i'm just saying from the graph i saw is

just that they need foreign support it

doesn't say anything about whether they

support

as for opposition to the taliban it

seems like the respondents of this

survey

overwhelmingly have no sympathy at all

85 percent

but what i want to know is i want to

know more about the methodology and i

want to

look into this and see if the the pdf

that's linked has an entire methodology

methodology page you just just control f

methodology which pdf

uh yeah yeah sure i'd have to review it

i'd have to review it and i'd also have

to see if this represents the majority

of afghans or the majority of

educated urbanized afghans because

that's often a difference that's

overlooked

so i'd have to look at all those things

sorry go continue sorry i i would like

to point out

that uh miserably jews are yes

a plurality but just barely uh there's

about an even mix

of ashkenazi and mizrahi jews in israel

the populations are about equal

with a slight edge to mizrahi

lina if you could uh put your camera

back on uh we're ready to start

oh oh yes yes yes sorry no problem

just talking that i'm good yeah oh all

right

excellent uh again everyone thank you

we're about to start our next topic

again uh just

quick clearly before we start thanks to

all the people who like followed and

subbed uh like during this time uh

followers are greatly appreciated but i

just wanna i wanna remind everyone

especially those who are new

that i have a great irl job that i don't

need money uh

from like internet stuff at all so

please uh support other streamers if

you're going to drop subs and that sort

of [ __ ] but followers are always welcome

anyway our next and uh final topic of

the evening

uh we're probably gonna talk about this

for about an hour uh

is

is there anything that can be done to

deal with or fix

inviting or purity testing on the left

and can those

left of center in america and the world

over ever form

effective successful political

collisions uh we're gonna start uh with

destiny and then go to charlotte then

spectre then lena

then eris and then haas gets the uh the

last word and then

the uh final word for the uh so industry

gets like the first and the last word of

this topic so

uh with a minute and a half on the clock

and everyone please keep opening closing

statements to like less than 90 seconds

i completely believe in

all of your capacity to do that and keep

regular statements under two minutes if

at all possible unless we like agree

otherwise

uh destiny 90 seconds on this topic take

it away buddy

uh i think that the most important thing

when it comes to like keeping allies and

keeping people together and

reducing infighting is to try to like

center in on common policy points or

common solutions for problems

rather than focusing on some ideological

purity through and through

for every single possible position that

could exist in some utopian world

um it feels like a lot of us want to aim

for positions

that are maybe further along than other

people but we should still recognize

that there are a lot of stops along the

way that we can all share

and i think it's important to build on

our commonalities that way in order to

have a coalition of people that are

moving towards common goals

rather than people that are getting

divided because they don't want to know

if they want to stop at

y or z when we haven't even gotten

through like the abcs

um so for instance like people that are

making enemies of each other because

they don't know if they want a public

option versus single-payer

is such a sad waste of time to me when

we don't have any form of universal

health coverage at all in the united

states

all right thank you destiny we are going

uh spread charlotte uh your turn uh yeah

i think the

um the notion of infighting um

even between uh leftists and liberals

right

is really is really overblown i think it

is absolutely a non-issue

in literally every other country that

has had a

socialist or um strong center-left

coalition

and like movement uh every single time

like

marxists uh liberals and uh social

democrats

are able to create large coalitions to

defeat opposition conservative

and uh national parties uh this happened

in the nordics this happened in western

europe

um and even at times it's like happening

right now um what do you think the dsa

is

that's all i gotta say all right thank

you charlotte uh spectre

um yeah i'm pretty much in agreement

with what's already been said by

destiny and charlotte um i agree with

charlotte that it's a little bit of an

overblown issue as far as i can tell

this exists

mostly um in online unity

and as destiny pointed out it's often

over stuff

that uh we're just not even there yet

that we need to be burning bridges over

these issues

um people aren't even just fighting over

you know public option versus

single-payer

they're fighting over like my utopian

like

workers democracy versus your utopian

workers democracy

and i think that this is very much a

product of the internet i don't think

that people who actually go out and

getting politically involved have the

time for these things um

so yeah maybe how we take that kind of

political hobbyism and

kind of steer people in a direction

where they're thinking about things

pragmatically and useful

the um what i would say we need to

improve to uh

make it easier for us to build

coalitions and work together on the left

all right thank you spectre uh lena uh

my fundamental question is

what is the left what is classified as

the left how do we sort this category

where are its boundaries

uh and secondly what are the

circumstances

and thirdly to what extent

so if the question is common if the

question is social democratic policy

goals uh there is broad humidity in real

life

uh this is inviting is at this specific

moment in time

a problem which exists only on the

internet and doesn't occur

in smaller leftist sort of hubs

it's mostly a problem

once you get to very very large scale

body politic

i think i use that term right um

but yeah that's probably my position

um it just depends on what you're trying

to achieve

all right thank you lena and for the

purpose of this discussion i framed it

as

uh left of center right so like the

fifty percent

on like uh what you consider like on the

left side of any uh given like political

uh community like or sorry country uh

all right eris

go ahead um

i think in general the best way uh to

unite

anyone any group of people is to have a

common enemy you know

um speaking from from history and that

tends to be what would happen

uh on average um for example having

someone like trump

um really united a lot of people um

together have been against them or

having someone like netanyahu be

united a lot of people against them to

work towards progressive change it's a

sad fact about humanity um

but just in general i do wish that like

i and i feel like i can be really guilty

of this too because you know we're all

humans and you know in a society as one

says

um and it's easy to start like you know

pulling onto these

uh jumping onto these uh um habits

of always of just always purity testing

everyone

expecting people people as either good

or bad or they're problematic or they're

not problematic

and you know i'm like i can't tell you

how often someone's just like withdrawn

support for me because i had one

bad opinion or something like that um

and

even people on this panel like i've seen

people treat infrared um

terribly right just because of like they

disagreed with them on like one thing or

something

it's a really i don't know it's a really

like problematic attitude and it just

gets us absolutely nowhere

and it's just it's a very childlike view

um of the world and

it reminds me a lot of 17th century

style like pure titanical

christianity and i wish we'd get past it

luckily it seems to be mostly online

right now but

um i'm concerned about that kind of

moving into the real world so

we should just put a put a cap on that

all right thank you eris uh

all right haaz uh you have the last

opening statement everyone is

welcome to start raising your hands for

the general discussion all right uh

let's take it away yes uh my position is

uh pretty simple

uh but it might seem confusing at first

being left

for the sake of being left or what you

perceive to be the left-wing position

is actually right-wing if you look at

the origins of the left

the whole point was the people on the

left side of the

national assembly during the french

revolution who were for the revolution

as opposed to the um established forms

of

monarchy and constitution and so on and

so on so the basic

the real meaning of being a leftist

is uh to ground your position in some

kind of determinate content

that actually doesn't have any regard

and it's completely indifferent for

where that's gonna land you on the

political spectrum

uh for example the point isn't that you

know you don't be a

you don't first say i want to be a

leftist and align with left-wing values

you say

uh i'm for the revolution in the case of

france obviously now it's different and

then

accidentally you're placed in the left

now as far as america is concerned at

this specific

decisive juncture i think that there is

only one real

left-wing position and that is the

pursuit of some kind of

uh third party alternative to the

republicans and the democrats and in

that

that is something in the pursuit of

which i am willing to engage with people

who

uh possess a diversity of uh views i

don't really care if someone identifies

as a leftist

or not because being a leftist is to me

an essential

i do consider myself a leftist but

not because i want to be a leftist but

just because it's a byproduct

of a more fundamental position

all right thank you haas all right so

we're gonna start the list uh the only

person

right now is lina so lina take it away

and everyone's welcome start raising

their hand to respond to anything ahaz

uh has said all right go ahead so it

really does depend on where you are and

you have to define that you can't just

say

i want to include everyone because

that's how you get

like look at the dsa uh the dsa is a

very big tent party

uh it is in some cases a good thing but

when it comes to elected officials and

because they're caucusing the democrats

you get a bunch of people uh who would

vote for them uh it's you get sorry

uh you get um the benefit of primary

but the dsa has no institutional power

and the dsa because its politics are so

well defined because it doesn't have a

strict line

uh has no discipline has no ability to

force

its people its representatives to do

anything which is why

as an organization it is currently

extremely ineffectual

and clearly this isn't working and it's

not going to result in any

it might result in some social

democratic programs but i doubt even

that

and if you're talking about a leftist

program a communist program a

revolutionary program

there's no way to do that um the

fundamental purpose and i'm

going to talk way past all of the social

democrats here

the fundamental purpose of a party

participating in bourgeois electoral

parliaments is to demonstrate the first

of democracy to the workers to the

working class

that's the purpose uh and

to sort of sorry yeah

um uh

but if you have no discipline if you

can't force your representatives

even in a social democratic party to do

things for you to vote a particular way

what's the point what's the point

all right uh thank you lina art spectre

right so i don't think it's fair to say

that dsa doesn't accomplish much

especially because it's just like

you know it's chapter by chapter right

um

the the chapter that i was like involved

with in los angeles did a lot of work

with homelessness

um the one here in austin got the city

government to uh

completely decriminalize homelessness

which they're now fighting to keep

decriminalized but the dsa does good

work um but your contention seems to be

that they support

democrats in election you'd rather they

what i mean the communist party of the

usa and

um my contention isn't necessarily

i mean i get the dsa strategy i don't

expect the dsa

to form some sort of communist vanguard

party or whatever

uh but with regard to what they have

done the representatives what they have

done the representatives they do have

they can't

they don't have a line they don't have

any discipline for them they don't have

any way to punish them they have no

institutional power to do that

and if you're talking about where your

line is on the left

yeah but it seemed like you were also

crazy

yeah but you were also critiquing them

for being a big tent party which i mean

i would think that the way that you get

the power to be able to hold your

representatives accountable

you should bring more people over to

your way of thinking like that's that's

how it works in democracy

yeah so we want to have a big tent and

we want to bring as many people like

into that as possible that way we

actually can hold like representatives

accountable now

yes but if you don't have the line the

representatives you'll find will be at

the most compromising conservative

portion of your party

the most sen the uh most

uh moderate the mo the ones who are

tending the most towards that position

if you get me you fundamentally if you

just accept everyone

then the weakest link in the chain will

be what you achieve

uh for the purpose of this discussion uh

lena if you could

uh briefly like explain to like what

your line is or like what the harder

line that you would want uh from let's

say left-leaning

uh groups or parties like the dsa you

don't have to respond to it right now we

can come back to you uh we're gonna go

to haas first i lean i want you to think

about that then

maybe give us some of those lines about

uh those specific things

so and then lena and then destiny i

think something should be clarified uh

doing

good work quote-unquote is not actually

inherently relevant toward

questions of political strategy charity

is also good work and i'm not saying

that ironically but it's not the same as

having an effective or meaningful

political strategy it's very clear to me

that the dsa

is the uh quote unquote left wing of the

democratic party and that's all it'll

ever be

but what's even more um pathetic about

it in my view is that

i don't even think biden has secured a

foothold

in acquiring legitimacy in the eyes of

um half of the country half of the

country seems like they don't even

recognize biden as president

so for the dsa to take liberties to be

the quote unquote

left wing of the democrats a party that

doesn't have legitimacy in the eyes of

half of americans

rather than working to build an

independent base of their own

in the american people seems like

it's not only um going to be a appendage

to the democratic party in objective

practice

but it's even going to be um

it's even going to harm the democratic

party because as we know

the democratic party as it is has a hard

time

gaining legitimacy in the eyes of half

of americans for the

the democratic socialists to take the

democrats as their foundation and then

use that to take all of these liberties

and

calling themselves socialists and

radicals and all this kind of stuff

without building a foundation of their

own they're they have a foundation on

thin

air

all right so you want a vanguard party

and the dsa isn't a vanguard party so

that's not good

i think that's a more ideologically

loaded phrase i like

the more american context phrase a third

party

a people's party a vaguely populistic

party

which i think communists will have

decisive significance

in but i think we have to prove that but

for now i think the correct position is

some kind of third party what that looks

like

is a matter of further discussion in

detail

right so a third party has never been

able to wield any kind of actual

political power in this country do you

have any ideas as to why that might be

yes it's very clear to me that we don't

live

in a so-called liberal democracy we live

in a

country in which the democrats and the

republicans

whether that's by custom or whether

that's by some kind of deeper

enforcement of some kind of rules is

is of no is not so much important the

fact of the matter is that

we have a two-party system but i believe

that we're at a decisive point in the

history of american politics

in which the two-party system is

facing its uh dissolution no not as long

as you still have

like freaking gerrymandering um

the electoral college ranked choice

voting would probably be very helpful

for making um

third parties viable and your best ally

there is going to be the democratic

party because that also helps them

um so yeah yeah uh

we're gonna go uh to destiny and then to

lena so destiny if you want to jump on

um yeah this is like it's kind of hard

when socialists talk about like their

political aspirations i think that

sometimes

it's hard to wrestle with the fact that

there just really aren't that many

socialists in the united states in terms

of citizens

um i noticed a lot when very far left

people try to talk strategy you know

they're very quick to point out like oh

well the democrats oppress us or oh it's

just a two-party system

or oh the media is against us i think

the reality is there's just not very

many people

in the united states that identify as

socialist or are that far left

um and it feels like if like really far

left-leaning people want to get more

people

on board with like really far

left-leaning candidates then they need

to be doing more

for like advocacy for their beliefs

oh is was that my mic yeah no problem

it's okay i i would say that like the

justice stems have done a better job

historically at least or in my lifetime

than i can remember for third parties

doing because

especially for libertarians as an as an

example there seems to be an obsession

over

trying to elect somebody as president

and if you can't do that you just

completely give up on everything

so i really just feel like um like very

far left-leaning people like supporting

like local

politicians or even people for federal

offices and kind of like building up

like that would be the best idea

but i i just don't think that there's

this huge support in the united states

for very far left-wing people

and for some reason like it seems like

so many left-leaning people seem to

think that there are like the approach

they have for us politics is just

everybody's a leftist they either don't

know it yet or corporations are lying to

them and that's why they're not

instead of thinking like well actually

maybe legitimately in the us there

really aren't that many far-left people

all right thank you destiny uh we're

gonna go to lena and then charlotte and

then back to haws

go ahead i'm gonna quickly jump back to

my previous point uh my point isn't

this line should be here my point is we

should determine

it because it's based on present

circumstances uh what i think is

the line should be in the place that

offers us

the maximum possible concession while

or yeah that gives us the maximum

possible concession

so we need to let in exactly as many

people as possible to do what needs to

be done

and that's a line that we determine not

not through pontificating about it

in in a debate or amongst ourselves but

by doing the work

and seeing where that is and with regard

to

a left-leaning party it's not my view

that the majority of people in the u.s

are socialists

and i don't think that's anyone's view

that's just not true but i think the

majority of people in the us are

to some level sympathetic especially

among uh the so-called working class

or not so-called uh i think people are

a lot better than people give them

credit for uh at least that's been my

experience

all right thank you lina all right

charlotte go ahead

uh i think destiny is like like uh

partially right and partially wrong i

think like there is a lack of

perspective

for a lot of people um like like you

said like if we don't win

if bernie doesn't win then you know

everything's over right

um there's a lot of lack of i think this

might be an online thing only because i

think this is just selection bias on

most of our parts because when i'm

in real life right when i'm organizing

when i'm helping uh like

unionized workplaces in real life right

people

understand that the goal isn't just to

elect a socialist as president for four

years

right because that's not going to create

long-term

systemic success right you have to look

at like

moss in south america you have to look

at the swedish social democrats from the

30s to the 80s

right you uh you everything is from the

bottom up

right um you create large coalitions of

organized

labor specifically stuff like sectoral

bargaining sectoral unions

right that can coalesce together and

seize state power democratically right

which is has shown very

huge success in south america

specifically and in northern europe

um and this is like a kind of praxis

that is sort of

as far as i know um while it exists it's

very uh

low priority for a lot of people because

people's um

concepts of political success are too

large in the short term

all right uh thank you charlotte dusty

would like to respond to that before

throughout the house are you good

um no i think i agree all right uh

paused go ahead

uh i think there's no dispute over the

fact that there is

the american people are not quote

unquote left wing and there's no

i don't think there's any support or

even sympathy for communism or socials

among the american people

but i don't think that's where communism

has decisive significance i don't think

the idi a lot

etiology comes first i think the

material reality comes first and it's

the job of communists to give a correct

expression to that material reality and

what i mean by that is that

while most americans probably don't care

about socialism or communism there is

widespread dissatisfaction

with congress there's widespread

dissatisfaction with the two-party

system

and the american people seem to agree on

a lot of things

as far as policy is concerned and both

the democrats and the republicans have

failed to deliver

on the aspirations of the american

people so my goal isn't really that i

think

communists are out there and you know

all we have to do is make ourselves

known and they're going to agree

i think communists have to prove

themselves

to the american people that they are the

best force and best vehicle

to represent and carry through their

interests

regarding the justice democrats i sort

of agree with this

in the initial stages of the justice

democrats they were very effective

at um uh getting people elected and

becoming a real political force but it

has to also be remembered that this was

because the justice

justice democrats had a very ambitious

uh posed a very ambitious threat and

challenge to the democratic mainstream

they represented an entirely new trend

and basically were

anti-establishment democrats the

situation has changed now aoc

has completely cut her roots from the

people that even got her to power in the

first place

so i think we should learn from the

lessons of the justice democrats but we

should also learn from the way in which

people like aoc and others

and also factions of the justice

democrats themselves who took over and

completely

[ __ ] up the whole thing so to speak uh

betrayed it now as a final point very

briefly

i think when we're talking about the

scandinavian model i think we have to be

mindful of the geopolitical significance

there would have been no

scandinavian so-called social democracy

without the

pressure coming from the soviet union

without the us-led global monetary

god [ __ ] sorry i just gotta uh thank you

so much for the subscription

sorry i just had a notification uh yeah

there would have been no

um it wouldn't have been possible it's

not simply because people had right

ideas or people were just moderate

enough it was because they were

operating within a very specific

geopolitical

context that's all i want to say all

right thank you haas all right uh we're

gonna go

to spectre then lena then charlotte all

right spectre go ahead

right so

sorry can you go on i gotta look

something up oh yeah uh no problem all

right elena go ahead

fundamentally if you want a viable

political movement which achieves real

change

you cannot simply uh

be a free club of anyone who wants it

and you cannot

merely uh say oh

we're different because we're a separate

organization

and we have moderately leftist

interviews you have to provide a

real alternative you have to

differentiate yourself

to an extreme extent not an extreme

extent necessarily but

you have to differentiate yourself and

this goes for any political movement

um fundamentally you also

have to implant yourself in the people

you have to

in this day and age be a people's

movement and that doesn't just mean

uh advocating for the people that means

being a part of the people

that means uh working

with the impoverished working with the

marginalized directly

implanting yourself in those communities

being a part of them

making yourself sort of synonymous with

them and that's how you achieve real

political power

all right thank you lina spector did you

find what you wanted to make your

statement

yeah i was trying to remember what the

latest thing the aoc did to make all the

ultras mad

um so yeah it's her healthcare take this

gets

right back to like why we can't actually

build productive coalitions

because of the purity testing we're

excluding her because she won't say i

want single-payer health care and that's

what she ran on there for its betrayal

goes back to exactly what destiny was

saying in his opening statement at a

certain point

we don't have [ __ ] single-payer we

don't have a public option

like our health care system [ __ ]

sucks i'll take any improvement that i

can get

and i'm sure that the people who are

rationing their insulin at home right

now possibly like dying from it

and we can look at those numbers we'll

take any help that they can get too so

to make this an ideological issue and

then say the aoc [ __ ]

not left enough for us anymore because

she

moved to a more pragmatic position on

healthcare is absurd to me and it's the

reason that

we have to have these conversations

about [ __ ] purity testing and like

being productive in coalition building

all right thank you spectre uh we're

gonna go to charlotte to destiny to haas

to lina all right uh yeah

uh was it lena that said it um results

are what is going to give you the vote

right so like this is like consistently

seen

in all social democratic success all

across europe

um they gave people they built

socialists and communists

together built the welfare states of

europe like pretty much most of them

uh in the way that they exist today from

like the 30 even the 20s

up until the 1980s and the early 90s

these like systems

were built like by socialist parties

like spd all like uh in sweden

in germany etc right um

uh they gave people results and the

third way

only became a thing because after like i

think two economic crises and then the

neoliberal wave of the 80s and 90s that

was global

during like global recessions uh the

parties

failed to like meet the task of

fixing those specific crises so they

lost power

right and like we now have the hindsight

of like the specific like crises they

couldn't handle in the 70s and 80s

because they didn't have the economic

knowledge right that we have now with

hindsight

and learning from their mistakes right

so like this worry

that without the ussr or some like

global

socialist hegemon that social democracy

and social democratic parties who are

socialists not third lawyers

like can't thrive is just like i don't

think is true

because social democrats and social

democratic ideology has

like precedes the ussr was in power

before the ussr

and their existence from during the

ussr's reign

was in direct opposition to the ussr

and like they expressly opposed the

communist parties in their countries

because they were expressly stalinist

parties and only worked with them in

coalitions

when this is like just true this is what

the popular front was

they worked with them because they

needed to get majority governments

like do you disagree that these

communist parties of the mid 20th

century in europe were

primarily stalinist parties you said the

social democrats preceded

the ussr's existence by the time the

october revolution happened there was no

stalinism

social democrats helped murder as you

know

rosa luxembourg she wasn't a stalinist

wait that had nothing to do with what i

said you said that the social democrats

were set up before the ussr existed

and they opposed you know that germany

isn't like

the only country in europe right well

i'm i'm giving you the this division

between social democrats and communists

was not because of quote unquote

stalinism that's a complete fabrication

that that so that's not what i

the conflict that happened in the

spartacus revolution with

like the entire with the entire conflict

of social democrats versus communist

parties in the entire 20th century

the reasons

charlotte finish and then infrared

you're welcome to respond immediately

immediately after yeah

i'm yeah i'm almost done uh the reason

the social democrats oppose the

spartacus revolution

it's because they were expressly

reformists they didn't believe in

insurrection

and violent revolution why would you

expect a reformist party in a reformist

ideology to back a violent insurrection

right this just doesn't make any sense

when i said they opposed stalinism i'm

talking about

the entire 20th century not just a

single event in germany

all right uh has you're welcome to

respond to that then we're throwing it

to destiny well yeah i think it goes

back to this issue of

wikipedia panel political analysis okay

so

it's not because of abstractions about

ideology that the social democrats were

committed

to opposing the spartacus revolution it

was because they had entrenched

themselves in the respective

establishments of their countries

materially

lenin analyzed the material foundations

it has nothing to do with abstract

ideological commitments

uh second of all you're forgetting again

the decisive significance of

world and global imperialism and then

later so if you want to

divide this into phrases i guess uh

american-led unipolar global order this

was all

of decisive significance and importance

for these

european social democrats to be able to

acquire power

you say that the real reason why the

third wave was able to prevail

was because of economic crisis and that

now we have some kind of special

economic knowledge

that is necessary for psych but i think

that's a completely irrelevant argument

firstly it's just speculation we know

that the soviet union

was of decisive significance around the

same time the soviet union was

collapsing

the whole left across the whole world

was in retreat so there's clearly a

correlation at the very least

um as opposed to the speculation you're

talking about second of all

i actually don't really care so much

about ideology

i care about a real material analysis if

your view is that oh i don't want

a revolution i just want to be able to

provide people

and fulfill the necessary people's

welfare

i completely agree with you but the

whole point of marxism isn't to say oh

we need a revolution just to be radical

the whole point is that

even when you're pursuing these reforms

you're going to find

institutional and systemic roadblocks

that require you to

build the foundations of an alternative

state because the state's going to rig

the system against you

that's what historical experience shows

us and the only

examples we can find to the contrary in

the case of social democracy

are parties that were completely

entrenched on an institutional basis and

we're in cahoots with

the ruling class and with uh please

finish your point hans can you chill

i'm like the i'm providing the most

content on this panel be polite to me

dude

that's excellent all right uh destiny uh

go ahead buddy

um [ __ ] well my response is gonna be

like somebody like three or four

uh things ago um i think it was to lena

um

but i feel like i'm derailing if i

respond to the point um i guess

broadly speaking when people on the left

talk about flexing a lot of political

power in the united states people get

really upset about

aoc or the justice system's not doing

enough i think again i think it's an

extension of what i said earlier

i don't think that leftists are as

popular in the united states they seem

to think so

um they seem to think that uh you know

like aoc and the rest of the justice

gems can flex all this power and

obstruct all the processes

but the reality is that they just don't

have the support to do it people look at

like mansion and like well you know

mansion could do it so why can't aoc be

as influential as mansion because if

aoc's knocked out

there's 7 000 more democrats that will

jump up and take her seat immediately if

mansion is knocked out then that seat's

probably going to republican

right it seems like coming like being

more closer to the center having more

popular support is the way to get your

ideas passed

if you want to branch off and form your

own party and do that that's fine but

now you're losing all of your influence

in the democratic party which is the

only place you could reasonably push for

change

and now you're just going to be

relegated to some completely and totally

oblivious random

like non-important third party that gets

about as much as the libertarian party

does

thank you destiny all right uh lena oh

sorry uh

lena and then into eris all right let me

go ahead uh

so fundamentally if you can't make your

representatives adopt a line if they

have to adopt the most centrist line

anyway

then you have no institutional power

there is none

you can it's what you get is

fundamentally indistinguishable from

someone

cynically running on a platform and then

abandoning it to the center

what is the distinction here um

fundamentally

if that's the case then this work is

worthless there's

nothing that you've done except

guarantee that that slot isn't going to

a more rightward dem

um fundamentally in that instance

you are forced into working

on base building which is the only way

that you're going

to do these things you just need to have

the geographic concentration

you need to have the people on the

ground integrating themselves or

being a part of the community building

these alternative structures

and making the people see you see your

movement

as fundamentally part of themselves as

fundamentally

a part of their identity uh as being a

part of this community

all right thank you lina we're going to

go to like real quick

yeah go ahead um yeah so i i think

the problem is is that like if you could

choose to have

uh you know we'll say in the senate i

know aoc is a congressman but if you

could have like

50 like justice stems in the senate

that have compromised on some

legislation to get there you'd rather

that than

50 moderate dems that aren't

compromising but are passing exactly

what they want

the more left-leaning representation you

have even if they are willing to meet

and and pass more centrist leaning

legislation means that they are going to

have that much more pull in the future

um one of the most interesting kind of

like ironic twists of fate that has

happened is aoc

actually in my opinion probably has a

very promising career ahead of her

in politics and it's largely because she

learned to grow up out of that

idealistic twitter phase

of i'm just going to attack my party all

day long and get absolutely nothing done

which she hasn't really and instead

start working with party leaders and

seniority to try to figure out like well

what can i pass what can i advocate for

on the side to kind of make that slow

move to the side

um it seems that like on the internet

and in other places in these spaces

where these talks

it's like if we don't get the full

leftist movement right now then forget

everything we're done

we don't care but like getting those

left-leaning senators or those

left-leaning congress people in there

that will advocate for more left

positions when they can

but is willing to meet the party when

they need to that's like the important

thing you're going to need to establish

to get real change done

if you want it to move further and

further left otherwise again all you're

doing is knee capping yourself and just

completely

um giving that entire you're seating

that whole space to centrist you know

like i hear people over and over again

so like why

well biden didn't biden didn't do

anything to a piece bernie but i didn't

do anything

of course not because they lost they

lost miserably they got destroyed um

against hillary clinton and against

spider-man they got destroyed so

nobody's going to make concessions to

that side of the party so you have to

come a little bit more to the center you

have to like

join that coalition and then hopefully

over time you can slowly move them left

if your ideas are good

or good enough to convince people that

they're good i know

lena would you welcome yeah you're

welcome to respond to respond to that

and then we're going to go to eris

specter charlotte minhas

if you have reduced the distinction

between yourself on the left and in the

center and the center

and you are compromising so much to

achieve these marginal gains

that might not particularly mean much

and you're just having to hold in this

holding pattern

while you wait for the support and wait

for the representatives and legislators

then the lack of results is just going

to

turn people off it's going to drive them

away

you have effectively doomed yourself

because you are incapable

of making good on those promises that

people want

of getting people the things that they

need

if you're not able to do that then how

the hell are you going to get more

representatives

in more difficult areas

uh jesse do you want to do a quick

response that or can we throw it to eris

well i mean like i i mean do you reckon

like hillary clinton said it best

we've got public and private positions

um if you think there's literally if you

think that a vote on a piece of

legislation is every single thing that a

person in congress represents i don't

know to say to you if that's what you

think then i

i don't i mean you're politically [ __ ]

anyway i mean it's

oh sorry are you done well yeah i mean

like

like if if if if there were 50 aocs in

the senate

and they could only get like a a medium

like health care pill passed

like some extension of the aca let's say

next midterm cycle you get 10 more

democrats in the senate you've got 60.

well what do you think is going to

happen they're not just going to

continue to vote moderately right you

vote as far left as you're able to

um so fundamentally yes but how do you

get to the point where you have 50 aocs

when you're half when you have to start

at one and people

are going to want to see this is

something new they want to see something

exciting they want to see results

uh which is why fundamentally

okay sure let's it just doesn't look

good to compromise on those positions it

doesn't look right but that's because

the left is largely uneducated about how

the us political system works you're not

going to see major

like extreme change like that happening

it's just it just doesn't work that way

i'm sorry do you think do you think the

general population that voted for that

person is going to see it that way

either they voted for that person

expecting to get some sort of concrete

result

no they don't see it that way but that's

why they're so politically ineffective

because they don't understand how any of

our system works is why they're turning

their back so that's why you see people

like jimmy dore and brianna turn their

backs on people like aoc who are their

their best allies in congress

who still do support things like the

green new deal and who would support

single-player healthcare but because

they're not completely squandering all

of their political opportunity and all

the biblical power by constantly

fighting

on twitter or or screaming at pelosi all

day they're like oh well [ __ ] them we

don't want anything to do with this

person anymore

like you're [ __ ] so you've essentially

for a movement to gain significant

traction you do need results and you

need big results concrete results

uh and i don't see that capable of

happening i don't think yelling at

pelosi on twitter will achieve that

either

uh i guess my position is more

okay so we can't focus on electoralism

for now

it won't work we gotta focus our

attention our energy

somewhere else just just just just in

another place

uh so that we can

but that's just confusing because you're

critical of groups like the dsa that do

focus their efforts outside of

electoralism

and i mean elect can we just button

whenever like this

one second uh like lena take take a

second to think about what you mean when

you say like outside like total process

we're gonna go back to the list real

quick

and uh yeah also if you do jump in

please remember it's a quick response so

i know that you're not just like

randomly like

flying all right heiress the specter

charlotte then has

eris go ahead yeah i mean i think

the main disagreement is like i don't

know if it's a misunderstanding of how

democracy works or just like willfully

being ignorant of it

or just arguing that you don't want the

system that we have right now and

replace it with another system

that's another conversation i to me what

makes much more sense

right if for example if you're like a

marxist okay i don't know if the people

on the panel

remarks not sure right um but say if

you're a marxist okay

and to me it would make much more sense

to focus on teaching marxist theory

educating people about false perceptions

that they have about communism or about

communist regimes or

like correcting like for example like

right now like a lot of things that

people get taught in history about

marxism

is just completely incorrect right in

terms of like you know

holland more things like that right so

there are like some aspects that

like to me would make sense to focus on

um

uh in terms of education but you've got

to genuinely change

change people's minds um you know and

move people

slowly to your side and but meanwhile

that's going on

like there's like actual detrimental

effects

so if i say didn't vote i mean if i was

an american right and

only say i was like a super extreme like

um marx's socialist or something

right and i and i didn't vote for trump

because

bernie or sorry because uh i'm sorry if

i

didn't vote um for hillary clinton

because hillary clinton you know is so

far away and i had to compromise too

much for marxism right

um the consequence of that is like even

like trump is even worse for it right um

and

then like literally say if i was muslim

or something um

it's gonna have like real effects it's

gonna split muslim families and all that

stuff

when it comes to like the trump muslim

ban like there were real

like on the ground effects um and

consequences to

you know to trump taking power so it

always feels like it comes

and i know not everyone is this case but

it always feels like it comes from like

this weird

place of privilege or something like um

when people don't at all want to

participate in any kind of democratic

process or they act like it's completely

irrelevant

or they're not willing to compromise at

all all right thank you eris i went

through the spectre

right yeah this is where i get

frustrated because it's like well

electoralism is bunk and we can't do

that but

[ __ ] groups like the dsa because they

support democrats even though

they do like leftist organizing outside

of electoralism

um and then we look at people like aoc

who

are probably going to be the furthest

left people that you can get elected

um her and omar and they move just

they compromise a little bit on health

care they're not going to be able to get

single payer they acknowledge that and

suddenly these people just

well they're not going far left enough

we're done with them we're

we're casting them out like yeah you're

politically irrelevant there's a reason

for that and i mean

the democrats have proven that they can

win the election without the bernie or

busters twice now

um so i don't know why they're going to

be paying attention to anything that

they have to suggest or say

unless they actually start getting

results one way to do that is to expand

the amount of people in this country who

currently have health care will we get

universal coverage

no probably not but again like for the

person who's rationing

actually going to be able to get health

care now under whatever plan the aoc is

supporting and ill and omar are

supporting

uh that's going to be a big difference

in their life um

and that's more what i care about than

even optics at the end of the day to be

very frank

but i also think that it's good

optically all right thank you spectre uh

charlotte and then haas

go ahead uh yeah i think like this

entire conversation like it not to be

like

like mean it's like it's it seems very

terminally

online because like in in real life

organizing nobody has these like

well not nobody obviously not

categorically but like most people

who organize know that this is a

long-term

process this is not like like people

expecting

these like short-term this great like

political gratification where it's like

oh i've been pushing for the green new

deal for three years it hasn't happened

yet

there's no [ __ ] point right like

three years

politically is nothing right like even

if you talk on like a revolutionary

basis

like i think like the mao mao's mao and

the um

the chinese communist parties like

revolution took

course the course over like 27 years

right

it took 27 years of fighting and

building

like support to and and a world war ii

to eventually topple the the chinese

government

and the same thing with the bolsheviks

if there is no world war one there might

not have been a bolshevik revolution

um like these things take a very long

time

which is why the dsa is so great because

the dsa is focused while they have a

um what's the word

um like political wing where they push

and uh uh elect push

and um uh support like

politicians to get elected a lot most if

anything dsa work is on the ground

organizing creating like uh like the

ability for mass action

and like creating communities of people

who can be educated

and like turned into large coalitions of

support um

which is why like stuff like the pro act

people there should be

as much support and push for the pro act

and like organizing for the proact as

there is for

pretty much any policy that we could

possibly think of

in the short term because with the

proact you open up the doors

to mass organize people in their

workplace

and historically what's been shown is

when you help organize people in their

workplaces it becomes much easier

to uh get them on the socialist train

and to support socialism

like this has happened like basically

every single country all right thank you

thank you charlotte uh haas go ahead

buddy i think a lot of the confusion

here has to do with framing this in

terms of the political spectrum

because there's all sorts of

complications uh that make this an

ineffective way to look at the actual

political situation from

perspective a political strategy

specifically in regards to destiny

um it seems like you have this implicit

assumption

that the current political alignments

within congress in the current quote

unquote political spectrum

is because of abstract ideas and ideals

rather than the fact that this

in some way represents constituents it

represents the sentiments

and interests material interests of uh

the constituents that these

representatives are voting for

um and if we operate on it from that

basis the issue with aoc isn't that

she's not being

far left or she's not pursuing left-wing

values for the sake of being left-wing

it's where she aligns in regards to

these real

uh material uh

politics she has it's not that

we we are see for example we have to

define

the significance of single player in

terms of

the impediment to it now we can assume

that the reason we can't have single

players because the american people are

just more moderate

but the example of history shows us

that's not the case the reason we can't

have single payer

is because there's an establishment an

institutional barrier to its realization

now politics and charity are two

entirely different things

politics is about representing the

people in some kind of way charity is

about doing work

that uh helps people directly politics

isn't

it simply isn't that and if we look at

it from that perspective

aoc not standing by single player is an

objective form of capitulating to the

democratic establishment and even if we

approach this

from a very pragmatic perspective we can

see that the democrats really aren't

able to get much

done they're not able to deliver even

biden's infrastructure bill they're not

even going to be able to

get that passed in the way he originally

proposed it

so i think we don't have to approach

this from an ideological perspective

of uh who's left more left-wing than the

other we can approach this from a very

pragmatic perspective

when we say that people are sick of the

two-party system

people are sick of the do-nothing

democrats and the

republicans who are just outright

corrupt and there's room for some kind

of alternative aoc

promised to be that alternative and

she's failing to deliver on that

it's not about that she's compromising

everyone has to make compromises in

politics it's who she's compromising

with

why and the strategic significance of

that is she doing it because it's

necessary for some independent movement

or is he doing it because it's just more

easy and convenient to do

in the position that she's in all right

thank you

destiny dustin you're welcome to respond

yeah so i mean like um

at the end of the day politicians

represent their constituents um we can

go into bigger conspiracy theories but

it's all corporate lobbying or it's all

uh you know some big conspiracy blah

blah blah but again i i think those are

fun to get into

and it's cool because then we get to

shift all the responsibility away from

voters and any work we have to do to the

evil boogeyman of the

uh politicians are all corrupt and evil

and blah blah blah i think politicians

are corrupt i think that actually i

think if you if you honestly take a look

at the american people

i think the way politicians work it's

like super predictable and it's and it's

super obvious and it's super

understandable too

you know like a lot of people are

wondering like uh you know you look at

statements by lindsey graham this is a

guy that said that he would never

support trump and he hated him and now

you know you've got all these republican

senators all these public congressmen

that don't want to investigate what

happened on the sixth

and they don't want to uh and you know

they still kind of sent for trump

you know even publicly and it's like

well why are they doing that you know is

trump paying them off is it a big

conspiracy well no it's just

trump is a really popular republican

party so of course the elected leaders

are going to continue to stim for trump

it's as simple as that when you look at

somebody like aoc

your goal for a candidate like that is

not only for her to grow in congress to

grow her reputation to grow her power to

maintain

loyalty to her constituents but you also

want to get more people like her in

there in the future

and you also want to make it so that in

the future if she's the deciding vote on

something

maybe she can move some piece of

legislation further to the left but

she the far left is not going to be the

deciding vote in a left-leaning party

it's going to be the center people now

if we had 60 or 61 or 62

votes in the senate i'm using the senate

alliance to the house because the house

is really democrat but if we look at the

center right if you would have like 60

60 162 senators

in the senate on the democrat side well

now the people all the way at the far

left now they have some say they're like

okay well hold on we got like 60 dems in

here

you guys want us to come on board with

us now you need to talk to us but when

your margins are razor [ __ ] thin

then you are constantly appealing to

that center because that's what you're

going to lose your leads at

so for all these people that complain

about oh they're not holding their

promises

get more people in [ __ ] congress like

people look at like oh well look at what

linda we dropped it look at the gains

look at the leads that that guy had

in the senate look at the leads of that

guy in the house that he had in the

house you know you people talk about do

nothing democrats but when you lose your

house and then you lose your senate for

six years or the eight years you're a

president you're not going to be able to

do anything

and you know people talk about like a

biden's watered-down infrastructure bill

coronavirus bill that he passed with no

republican support was amazing

the infrastructure that we're looking at

getting even though it's scan i think

950 billion

is still really amazing if you want more

the goal isn't to destroy the few

democrats that you have that are giving

you your lead the goal should be to go

and elect more get a bigger margin

that's where politics are made not on

this weird infighting when you barely

have lead at all

okay well i still think the issue is

that you're just confused about what i'm

talking about what i'm talking about is

that

when we're talking about the center in

the far left and all this kind of

political spectrum stuff when it comes

to the democratic party i'm trying to

say that

the democrats are not innocent uh for

being so that

like they just passively reflect uh what

the american people think in terms of

like why are the democrats centrist why

do they

have the policies they do in the

positions that they do my point is that

the reason for that isn't because

that's all the american people are

willing to support it's because the

american people don't know of any

alternatives

and one of the other things that's uh

that's being ignored here is that

a lot of the times the american people

will vote for candidates and vote for a

slew of policies that they don't

necessarily agree with

but simply because they've been whipped

up into fake political and cultural

divisions if you look at sp on

matters of specific policy the american

people don't seem to

deviate from one another so much it's

only when

they're divided along these cultural

lines these artificial lines that seem

to be uh

imposed from the top that you find this

issue the real question

i i get your whole point like oh with

the democrats i know they're not able to

do much but at least they're able to do

something so and if you want them to do

more

why don't you just select more of them

well the issue is it's all

you're making it hard for people

partisans of democrats who are uh

like like bernie's people and other

people you me you're making it hard for

them to make the case to the people

because everyone can everyone is so

dissatisfied with the democrats

to me the populism that trump unleashed

is irreversible people are not going to

buy

uh buy into this false promise and oh

yeah just vote for the democrats and be

able to fix it all

people are sick and tired of it there's

no way around it there's no way to um

heal the fundamental anti-establishment

sentiments

of the necessary and decisive portion of

the american people that's going to

allow for

uh any any any voting in a decisive way

yeah the problem isn't like whether

you're anti-establishment or the

do-nothing difference the problem is

that you have a gridlocked government

and we can't get a majority on either

side you're not able to do what because

there's a huge diversity of opinion of

what people want in the united states

is that really it or is is some of that

division artificial is some of that

division

necessarily because the american people

disagree with each other

or is it because uh those corporate

conspiratorial interests or whatever

are doing at least participating whether

knowingly or not and whipping the

american people

into what's like i'm curious what do you

think it's like a what's like a fake

issue that you think we're not really

divided on but we all actually kind of i

hear this from

this i think i think the majority of the

american people want healthcare

infrastructure they want to be able to

have

you're just living and i would encourage

you to talk to other people that are

outside of your ring

because the way that people look at

stuff like healthcare is just not at all

in life

i'm talking think the opponent now it's

been politicized too much and

culturalized now it's all socialism in

venezuela

but before then it was pretty most

american people

wanted health care for example do you

think that if trump proposed universal

health care trump supporters would be

against it

um it really depends on how he swung it

but just

like it's possible they'd support it

sure i don't

you know they want to be oh trump's a

socialist now we can't support him no

there's there's more fundamental factors

and things at play here

i don't think the majority of the

american people really disagree about

what they want i think the

system and the two-party system is not

allowing them to give real and authentic

expression to their interests on the

political arena

then why doesn't some politician just

come up and offer all of that because

that's what bernie was supposed to be

twice and he got crushed so

where is this where is this person come

up and just offer what they really

wanted to win all these elections before

but we can talk about it again

bernie did try initially but he was

stopped on an institutional level that

was another no he wasn't

he was stopped because he didn't get

anywhere near the amount of votes he

needed

why because he wasn't popular why wasn't

the media covering him

in proportion media gave birth

especially when bernie swept uh

when bernie did really well in uh iowa

and new hampshire

bernie was starting to get all sorts of

positive media attention

can you measure that in some kind of way

um

there have been studies on it i don't

have links to them right now but for

anybody

that followed the main stream i don't

even know i don't need to cite it

because i followed the media

in the united states around this time it

was a shock i think it was a shocking

turn

it was a shocking turn and you know

about media on the left

to see how much differently they treated

bernie when he did really well in those

two primaries it was it chris matthews

made that statement about

uh it was like watching that and

everybody [ __ ] roasted him for it he

got in huge trouble for how stupid that

statement was like

there were a lot of people that were

kind of sort of warming up until super

tuesday came along and destroyed his

entire campaign wait so you're saying

that there wasn't any institutional

opposition to bernie and that they

didn't actually regardless of the extent

of his popular support not want him to

win

they probably there wasn't any

meaningful inspiration i have an answer

to this uh yeah charlotte uh charlotte

please respond destiny get like one last

word against that and then we're gonna

go to lena specter

and then we're probably gonna start

going to closing statements we have

about we have nine minutes until closing

statements

uh obviously um like uh in 2016 this has

been measured in like multiple

uh like research pieces us bernie got

much more positive coverage than clinton

during the 2016 election

specifically because like bernie didn't

have any controversies

hillary clinton was literally baked

like in like three four different like

national

like controversies got the email thing

you had the fbi investigation people

were still hung up on benghazi

like all of these different things

people literally think hillary clinton

is like a serial

killer or whatever right like they're

all these things are hanging over her

head

and like yes there is internal

dislike of bernie sanders from members

of the dnc

because people in the dnc aren't

socialists

but that people democrats right

democratic

lawmakers not liking bernie is not

evidence that they

rigged the dnc like primaries or that

like

they had a hand in him losing he lost

because

bernie like as as much as i love bernie

right

and him like jump starting partially

right it's not all him

like this like new socialist young

socialist movement

like he's just too old in the wrong time

the wrong place right like if bernie if

we had like

eight more bernie runs bernie would be

president eventually

but right now americans are in fact

very moderate like um the

i didn't obviously clinton was more

demonized but that's because she had the

whole republican

machine against her from the very

beginning we all know that but just

because they didn't demonize bernie

didn't mean they

took subtle steps in forms of

manipulation

to make him seem like a less effective

less viable and less relevant candidate

overall

the media

the cards were stacked against bernie

from an institutional perspective i'm

not talking about in a way that just

neutrally can you describe how you're

using a lot of flowery language yeah

yeah the way i mean

the way the the way the media covered

bernie for example yeah my favorite

coverage the way the media handled the

debates

uh as you know which was leaked we only

know about this because it was leaked

there was one time where hillary's

giving a we're getting no questions wait

destiny you don't know if there was one

time you just know that because that was

what was leaked we don't know

you don't know either but you're making

the assumption because but what can we

reasonably infer if they're willing to

play dirty at that level what else do we

don't know about what can we reasonably

infer from an organization that

had like thirty thousand plus emails or

whatever leaked by [ __ ] wikileaks i'm

gonna infer that anything bad that

happened was probably leaked and we

probably would have heard about it

that's why i mean well there were a lot

of things bad that happened that were

leaked actually what else

hillary clinton eating a plain hot dog

okay

virginia voted for bernie they threw out

the results and they picked hillary

what do you mean they threw out the

results of an election of a what do you

mean are you talking about the super

delegates these are the super delegates

the super delegates would have switched

if bernie had the the election was not

going to be decided by the super

delegates it's not true

it doesn't matter what state you want to

bring up the caucus and the primary

results are the caucus and primary

results

there is i would i'll bet my the life of

my entire family

that if we could go back in time if

bernie would have won a majority vote in

the democratic party

there is no change you have to get

through the chicken

it's the the horse and the cart okay in

order to win a majority

you need media you need effective media

you need people you need awareness you

need people to know who you are you need

people to know that you're an

alternative

yeah institutions that control that were

stacked against bernie from the very

beginning

that's part of the game that's part of

what you have to do okay and you know

what else is part of the game

saying [ __ ] you to the democrats and

building a third party

okay then do that and be relevant and i

don't want to give a [ __ ] about what

you're saying then you can cry and look

for years again when nobody likes you

i have about 500 viewers now keep saying

be irrelevant i'm growing awfully fast

be

you know watch your words you're going

to be proven wrong before you know i

thought we were talking about political

effectiveness not how many viewers we

have on twitter youtube but i mean it

makes sense to me that a leftist would

measure their success based on their

social media engagement i guess

well it's all about well engagement's a

good step isn't it

step isn't it well i'm like now we can

put it a little bit

it went before it seemed like the only

thing that mattered was the most extreme

the niche is out there doesn't it at the

very minimum no it

i understand that the niche is out there

but that was my whole point that's

that's why everybody laughed at me when

it [ __ ] left again

when i said that i thought biden was

going to win the reason why is because

it seemed like the only thing bernie

ever could appeal to was a niche

but that's not enough to win an election

i agree with you but leftists are not

the main

my main views leftists hate me i have a

lot of ordinary people apolitical people

even right-wing we're not talking about

you we're talking about bernie but i'm

just saying in general i know for a fact

based on my own experience

that the people are out there who are

willing to listen to the

type of things i'm saying

like what i'm saying is pretty popular

in general from what i know not just

from

like my streaming experience but just my

everyday life experience people agree

with pretty vague populism it's pretty

much why populism is called populism

it's a real force in america and it's

not going anywhere no matter how much

people like you or spectre complain

about it it's a real objective in

material force now

all right one second everybody uh we're

like three minutes for closing

statements do we want to continue this

conversation for like say like another

like 20 minutes

i'm good yeah all right cool actually

pretty soon so i can't but

sorry all right all right no worries all

right

uh all right so then uh destiny uh

you're welcome to respond same thing you

spec so i'm sorry right now the list is

destiny make your last uh statement uh

then lena then spectre

then charlotte uh then i guess we can

move to

closing statements because like i feel

like edfard wants to argue with you like

competition i just respond to the idea

that i hate like the left-wing populism

in this country i voted for

bernie dude everybody else [ __ ] lost

didn't you just [ __ ] on jimmy jordan

because he's the only real populist left

in the media's future holy [ __ ]

no no jimmy dore is not and so

defense right now how is the dsa

populous the dsi i live in michigan on

jimmy dorothy

will never make it rule michigan is it

is it populist

to uh to to deny war crimes and uh

berate

popular politicians you're gonna slander

jimmy slander me too because i'm pretty

much in agreement with him about almost

anything when it comes to foreign policy

so why don't you say that to my face too

let's bring up and we can bring up

the case-by-case things you're talking

about too if you want let's just get

back to the aoc

stuff that you were talking about right

now sure i already mentioned you said

it's pretty clear aoc stuff is pretty

clear the point isn't that aoc is not

being leftist enough for the sake of

abstract leftist principles

it's that she's going back on what she

would initially got her

made her a phenomena which she was a

justice democrat she was going to

challenge the democratic party

on behalf of uh popular america on

behalf of the people

she failed to do that she capitulated to

the democrats uh and it just makes

excuses for uh continuing to compromise

them

while gaining nothing i'm not of the

opinion that the american people are so

left-wing

i think joe biden i'm approaching this

almost from a right-wing perspective if

you want to look at it like that

even joe biden is too much quote unquote

left wing for the american people right

now it seems to me

so no i'm not under the illusions that

aoc has the ability to be this like huge

leftist

but what she can do is relate to the

sentiments

of the american people and their

populistic sentiments and distinguish

herself

from the democratic establishment that

from both the left and the right the

american people

as a whole hate the ideology really

doesn't matter all that much

she's been talking about single-payer

health care and the green new deal her

entire political career

just last week she was [ __ ] talking joe

manchin

weekly uh meetings with exxon lobbyists

like that's pretty [ __ ] populist like

what do you want you said i want to get

back to what you said your actual

criticism was i'm talking to you but

she's in congress

what you said can i finish what you said

was

who what you said was it's not about the

fact that she's compromising on

single-payer

healthcare it's about who she's

compromising with those were your words

would you prefer

to compromise with because right now

she's compromising with center dems to

try and get some [ __ ] health care

legislation and why

why is that like why is she compromising

with them

because who else is she supposed to

compromise with and trying

because joe biden's elected and she

could have she in the squad could have

done forced the vote

they could have done it it was nothing

it's a strategy they're trying to repeat

now

actually for other things we're not

going to do

a force the vote thing um we can we can

debate that

i'll do it any day of the week we can

talk about forced to vote because

the director needs to be set straight on

here contention with aoc is that she

didn't get single-payer healthcare

passed and

the fact that she is now i don't think

i'm not on the illusion she's ever gonna

get single-payer healthcare but the

thing is

is that she didn't distinguish herself

the point is building an alternative

base that's what's of decisive

significance

single-payer is a sufficient rallying

point to distinguish yourself from the

establishment democrats in order to do

that

she failed to do that worrying about

whether she's actually going next time

that would be absolutely [ __ ]

fantastic so in the future

i would very much appreciate that all

right we are going to go to closing

statements now

everyone gets plenty of time completely

uninterrupted from each other and they

can say

whatever they want to say uh while we do

that i am

very excited to hear what everyone's

like thoughts are on this specific topic

and if people want to argue about it uh

more after this by all means i'm going

to kick back and have a couple beers

uh so without further ado we are going

to start

with infrared haze i'm really sorry for

interrupting you buddy uh you have two

minutes say whatever you want to say and

during that two minutes you're welcome

to plug whatever you want to plug

so infrared um

i guess my point is i would i want

people to stop

framing things about this fake uh

political spectrum and this fake

division along left and right as the

most decisive thing right now i do

believe there's a real distinct

distinction between left and right but i

don't think you define that based on

people who call themselves left-wing or

people who call themselves right-wing

the reason why people have

dissatisfaction with aoc isn't just

because she doesn't uh

she's not ultra left enough it's because

even from an objective and

balanced pragmatic perspective her

political strategy is a fundamental

failure

insofar as it's supposed to be a vehicle

to provide an alternative to the main

the democratic mainstream

um furthermore uh regarding uh the final

thing i want to say is regarding this

slander of jimmy dore about forced to

vote i will literally debate any of you

any time of the week any day of the week

i said i can't promise any time

uh about this because i think on twitch

political twitch specifically typically

the record needs to be said straight

about this because there's been a lot of

smearing slander and [ __ ] that's

been said about jimmy dore

uh so i'll say that yeah that's it

all right thank you ahaz if anyone liked

what has had to say you're welcome to

follow him on all of his stuff

uh eris uh go ahead

um i think just in general i mean both

this conversation was american focused

so i didn't really have

too much to contribute um but i just

think it generally it makes sense to

work towards like incremental change

um and the like the truth is is that

like if you don't

um if you don't work towards incremental

change

uh like everything thing there's there's

there's tons of right wingers in the

united states sorry i have like a thing

going on my stream

it's like distracting me but yeah the

the right wing in the united states is

still incredibly popular

and i feel like sometimes um i agree

with something that read charlotte uh

said earlier like

we can get in our heads and be think and

be obsessed and just think that the

world

is what is on our twitch and what is um

online

and that is just not how the average

human being is operating and that's not

like

where that overturned window window is

um

so you need to be slowly working towards

moving that and uh yeah

all right thank you eris uh lina sorry

about uh that

the conversation went away from you uh

go ahead say whatever you want to say

and plug whatever you want to plug

all right i'm gonna say two things first

of all talking in the abstract

the problem with compromising when

you're fundamentally running

anti-establishment

is that um you have two options

for continuing to build up your base you

can either extract concessions

or you can criticize either looks good

but compromising to get something that

is more margin

far more marginal is a loss in people's

eyes it's a loss

it's they see you as compromising cow

towing to the establishment

and they won't vote for you we're not

just speaking about

specific people's political careers uh

and the concern of pragmatism cannot

outweigh

what specifically we desire we don't

simply want things to get better in the

abstract we want

specific things uh and

compromising on that will get us nowhere

also a lot of people in this

conversation

have been uh speaking under the

assumption that

uh conditions in the us will remain

static for the foreseeable future and i

just don't think that's the case

uh i think there's going to be

significant change in the near future

because

of um american foreign overtake

by china uh sometime this decade

there's going to be a new age

multipolarity

that we're going to start seeing and

that's just the reality of it

and that's going to significantly change

domestic politics

and we have to be ready for that and

it's going to change a lot of things

with regard to that um that's all all

right thank you so much lena

and then you're welcome like to plug

your twitter or whatever you want in

dot com slash posting all right uh

spectre go ahead

right oh it's unmuted already um so

yeah i don't know i i feel like if we're

going to

excise um politicians

uh from like our movement withdraw our

support of them

over them basically not doing exactly

what we want in the form of like

grandstanding and just

virtue signaling rather than past

meaningful legislation

that we're probably not going to get

anywhere thankfully as far as i can tell

this is a problem exclusively

almost only with like the jimmy rihanna

joy gray fans

um that are terminally online these

people don't actually have any kind of

real political power

i doubt that they ever will because they

don't understand how to

use it or seize it nice

yeah that's that's about [ __ ] it all

right thank you spectre uh charlotte

uh yeah okay so i just

like a lot so i i i i strongly disagree

with this idea that like concessions are

a loss

especially when uh the actual

relationship that exists between the

justice democrats

specifically the socialist ones not just

the progressive ones because a lot of

them aren't socialists most of them

actually

only like seven of them are um they

aren't just

cons like them giving they aren't the

ones giving concessions to biden and the

biden administration the democrats

as seen with biden's change in policy

and appointing aoc and bernie to the

the climate um committee and all these

different things

it is literally biden conceding to the

left

oh bernie want to do a four trillion one

right uh

okay i'm going to do a two trillion

dollar one and like i literally

he literally says it's the green new

deal it's just not called the green new

deal

like the the introduction of like this

left wing movement

has created material change and this

material change is in fact taking place

like there is a chance that none of it

happens because of you know the senate

and you know all that stuff but like to

act like

this is all a loss and that nothing is

happening is just like really weird um

also on the jimmy dore thing jimmy dore

is a [ __ ]

fascist tool bag who spreads conspiracy

theories

uh accuses dying children of lying for

american

american hegemony and like literally

spreads

like the most awful vile [ __ ] [ __ ]

and he's the

like epitome of garbage like he is

absolute trash

and does not deserve a platform and you

are an insane person for supporting him

all right thank you charlotte uh we're

gonna finish up

with destiny uh i think incremental

change is awesome

uh i know that when if if all you do is

like team politics on twitter and that's

the only thing you care about then it's

like either all or nothing because

who the [ __ ] cares honestly otherwise

but for people on the ground uh the

difference between like a one trillion

dollar

infrastructure bill and a zero dollar

infrastructure bill probably means a lot

um for you know people that are getting

to take advantage of that extended child

tax credit

for people that are going to take

advantage of the quasi ubi that was

passed where you can file an early tax

return and get some of that money back

month over month over month

um i think that those people probably

very much appreciate that and they're

probably going to be more appreciative

of that than they are going to be sad

that they didn't get single-payer

healthcare i think incremental change is

awesome

incremental change is how we got the aca

and hopefully more incremental change in

the future is how we get a public option

and maybe even single-payer

all right thank you destiny and i just

want to say thank you to all the

panelists

uh for being here i think this was an

excellent discussion i really appreciate

all of you bring your time your talent

all that sort of stuff

and i hope you enjoyed your time here if

you have any criticisms as me as the

moderator

you're welcome to tell me them after the

panel uh whenever you want

and again uh hopefully this will be up

on youtube and like in my twitch channel

for

you know if you if you all want to use

the bot or anything like that so again

thank you all so much

for being here with us and uh yeah

you're all welcome to uh bug out

as you will i'm going to raid into uh

try hex and then we're going to like

just i'm go i'm

going to sleep uh so so i thank you all

so much and i hope you enjoyed

this conversation and everyone if you

enjoyed this as well again

yeah if you enjoyed this as well please

drop a follow and all sort of stuff

all these lovely people if you agreed

with their takes and thought they were

based and if they're horrible

uh please don't harass them or anything

like that uh we're very uh into

positivity here

uh so yeah thank you all so much and

have a lovely evening

hey hey destiny uh don't you think it's

based

when uh when people deny uh russian war

crimes like bombing hospitals and

killing children in mass and that's so

great

i love that man is that a jimmy dude

yeah absolutely

my favorite bit is when they propose

like red brown alliances and i really

guys circle jerking

about your loss because yeah how do you

feel about what do you have with each

and every one of you

hey inference how do you feel how do you

feel about uh [ __ ]

all right uh one second i'm just gonna

hit the red button and then we're gonna

go off

really funny you talk about russian war

crimes nothing russia ever did in syria

even compares to uh america's actions in

iraq and afghanistan

pretty [ __ ] pathetic yeah okay wait

why why the what about us can't you just

be critical about it because i'll tell

you why because in order to critique

russia you have to provide an example of

a

superpower conducting war in some kind

of country in an ethical

way because you live in america you're

trying to cast judgment upon russia

so you have to you have to you have some

you have to you can't be hypocritical

but

if you're critical of your own country

and critical of other countries as well

is that not possible

it isn't because you have to sort your

own house in order before you can

critique other countries what where do

you what um

what seat of ju in judgment do you sit

upon

like what where do you stand to uh

critique russia like from thin air from

uh like i i i hate to go like full

debate bro here

yeah um but i will formally cite like

this is an appeal to hypocrisy

just because somebody is hypocritical

doesn't make the judgment they make

wrong

it is entirely possible that a man beats

his children and then comes out publicly

and says hey we should meet our children

that doesn't that doesn't mean that that

judgment is incorrect you shouldn't beat

your children even if the person does

commit errors of their own

sure it doesn't mean that they're

incapable of calling others first of all

you're

first of all two mistakes you're making

what the first mistake is you're

mistaking with your example

individual actions individual actor with

the actions of a state two entirely

different things

the second one that strengthens my

argument no it doesn't it really does

and i'll tell you because the reason it

does the reason

is because the reason russia or america

engages in the actions it does

is not from the perspective of one

individual actor controlling everything

there's a whole material reality there's

a whole complex

assortment of realities that give rise

to these outcomes just say it the second

thing the phrase

yeah but the average voter might not

support a particular thing or some voter

might not support a particular u.s

action

so how are they helping us we didn't

vote for the iraq war yeah we absolutely

did

what are you talking about 85 percent of

americans approved the iraq war

we had an authorization of military use

that probably would have extended into

the

iraq if we had a referendum if we had a

referendum in 2003 and 2002.

americans would have overwhelmingly

voted for that but they didn't charlotte

they didn't

so you keep you keep coming at me with

your polls and you're whatever but they

did it well because you can't because

it's it's not even it's not about [ __ ]

polls and [ __ ] everything it really

doesn't matter if you lived in the us

during 9 11

we would have voted if it came down to a

vote to go to war we would have

absolutely

to say about the whole thing about

judgment i agree uh

about judgment but judgment has to be

based and has to assess

not only reality but your concrete

position in relation to

that reality that's really interesting

that you talk about reality please deny

me

bombing of hospitals i'm talking where

the the the the

talking there's a bunch of crimes so

listen for you to critique russia

you have to have some kind of ground of

your own to stand upon

you understand you have to be able to

say i don't think russia should do this

and if i were in that like you have to

be like if i were in that position or if

i had some

amount of power to use again you ha it

has to be something

based in reality you can't just

abstractly say oh i think this is bad or

good

it's a completely uh stupid way of

looking at how individuals can relate to

these

bigger realities everyone here believes

that you should have to substantiate why

something is good or bad

nobody here thinks glitter is bad

blanket good or bad and like yeah

beautiful well you think that's what's

going on good or bad you think i'll

talk to the mods no you got no he's

gotta unban me oh my god i gotta get

back from dude or bad it's something you

judge when it comes to what kind of

[ __ ] food you like

good or bad is not a [ __ ] real

judgment about

you know countries and the actions of oh

is this good or is this bad it's a

completely meaningless thing

do you have no normative like framework

for the world yeah but a normative

framework

requires a moral framework but it's good

framework relies upon a material in a

concrete practical relation

that's not necessarily true yes it does

yes it does

there's no such thing as an abstract

normative framework divorced

from the practical relation that the

actor the normative agent has to the

reality that's completely meaningless

and

it doesn't even make any sense thank you

both so much for being here i'm going to

close this room

y'all are welcome to go wherever you

want

yeah go complain on twitter charlotte go

complain about it twitter charlotte

infrared is rising

you'll never be relevant charlotte yeah

at least i don't you'll never be really

serious we'll complain on twitter

go complain about it on twitter to your

followers on twitter we're not you're

not going to stop our rise we're always

going to be more relevant than you

people love me more than

all of those right all of the syrian

kids dude like that's the thing is all

[ __ ] dead

you're moral you're the greatest

hypocrite

complete hypocrisy nobody recognizes the

legitimacy of your faith hypocrisy

you're talking about crocodile tears

and you're apologizing for the us's

continual foreign occupation of

afghanistan

you just apologize for pedophilia in

afghanistan if you want to act like an

individual

so you think

is okay it's permissible in that context

absolutely okay so you are an apologist

for pedophilia

so we have uglier if you want to believe

that you want to talk about you want to

talk about you want to talk about

you want to talk about i'm going to talk

about in afghanistan you want to talk

about pedophilia in afghanistan

yeah what's your [ __ ] clown

pedophiles in afghanistan you defend

children being and you didn't you deny

the mass killings of syrians by assad

and the bombings of hospitals by russia

you are an insane but if you want to

individualize that

i'm going to individualize the way you

apologize for pedophilia

afghanistan because ultimately for you

it's ultimately worth it

yeah how about you go get some zyprexa

dude all right so you lost the debate

you lost the debate again

hans i love you see you later

thank you so much for being with