This CPUSA Chapter Is OBSESSED With Me!

like the fucking stream by the way

like the fucking stream

anyway i've been taking a long time

today

because i've been fucking dealing with

these uh

cp usa bots on twitter

they're probably dnc bots they're also

these butthurt legacy members of the

cpusa on twitter jesus christ these

people are literal fucking npcs i'm not

kidding you they are actual npcs

they don't think they don't have any

reasoning

fashion fastest name called name call

you this name calling that charmander's

fastest challenge fashions child is

faster

shut the fuck up you stupid child i'm

not allowed to say what i think should

be done with these people on youtube but

needless to say

i mean at what point can you just not

reason with these they lea they

literally have dialogue trees where it's

like they literally just call you names

that's it they just call you fascists

choven it's fascist chopinus you are

mentally ill psychotic

fucked up scumbags i just want a

communist party of normal people people

who actually are normal people who are

not

literal psychos who like see reality in

this black and white way where it's like

progressive oh you're a fan it's like

they don't even know like

these people

are not even human in my fucking eyes

they're not human they're not capable of

any discourse not giving anything and

they're especially getting so fucking

aggressive

um

just because of the fact that i'm pretty

sure we're making headway and like

getting a bunch of new people to join

the party as of recent because of those

initiatives i got to tell you guys join

the fucking cpusa join it they're

squirming like fucking worms these rabid

liberal scum are squirming like fucking

worms like maggots

in the fucking dirt

they're being tortured right now the

demons are squealing join the fucking

party and make the fucking demons even

squeal harder

these fucking pieces of shit

scum

fucking criminal pieces of shit lump and

scum that's what they are they're all

fucking criminal scum is what they

fucking are because they spent all this

fucking time calling us racist and now

we have a cpu usa member i shit you not

i'm gonna show it to you right now i

shit you not this is the type of rabbit

shit i'm dealing with with these cpusa

members look at this check this out

look at this

um

look at this

holy fuck it's like they this whole time

they were calling us racist whatever get

a life you crooked nosed

what

rook it's like this person is especially

some rabid vicious

this is a vicious cunt right here right

they're called they he they said the

proletariat is waking up because one

larper brought a cpusa flag to an

anti-abortion protest you'll see it here

yeah this is the larper with the cpusa

flag and they're saying this is the

proletariat this is a vicious little

cunt this is a vicious little cunt and i

implore all of the people we have in the

river city cp usa work like snakes in

the background we want this person we

want this person specifically purged

right so put this person on your list

and take note of them

but yeah they're a vicious cunt

seething vicious little cunt a fucking

maggot squirming in the fucking dirt how

much they're fucking enraged that we're

taking over their party

and i always get random fucking seething

hunts from the cp usa in my fucking

mentions

they're so fucking angry they are so

fucking angry and by the way this whole

backlash against us it's not because

we're racist not because we're

chauvinists it's not because of anything

like that because we're not and look at

this look at this criminal scum

talking about my crooked nose right is

he gonna get any um

and by the way the leadership doesn't

give a fuck they say oh do whatever look

let me tell you the truth about these

criminal scum

when it comes to dealing with us all

bets are off the laws of wokeness are

suspended so if you're a female member

of infrared

you have to understand they're good they

have no rules that all of that woke shit

collapses just like when the state you

know when the state deals with

communists during the cold war all of

the rule of law the due process all of

that shit it's thrown out the window

they hire mercenaries they hire all

these fucking people torture rape you

fucking name it it's all fucking open

right

now this is a microcosm of that they're

dealing with us

and they have this like woke politically

correct super super woke culture but

when they deal with us they don't have

to be bound by any of its rules so their

real ugly face

it starts to get revealed and they show

their real ugly face and they become so

fucking vitriolic and vicious this is

what the lumpin are they're lumpin

criminal scum we need to clean our

streets of these lumpin criminal scum

get them off our streets

and that's what i really think about

people like this to be honest i think

these people um belong in prison that's

what i think

not because they're saying this

specifically but you know you know you

just know this person they call

themselves a street medic i mean what

what kind of vicious acts of violence do

you think that they're responsible for

against working-class people

this is a dangerous vicious lumpin

cunt

that belongs in prison

100

you know these are this is why i think

we need to work in the light of day i'm

telling you guys the truth these are

literal feds

these are literal literal fets they're

azovikes yes but they're literal feds

you know how the feds infiltrated the

cpu usa well they caught wind of our

plan to take it over

and almost everything bad that's

happened to me in terms of uh negative

press that i've gotten

is because of that it's because i

decided to you know point attention at

the cpusa and the feds who thought they

took over the party forever were like oh

we're not gonna let you uh challenge our

dominance over this party because they

already drove it into the ground and

neutralized it

and here i came and i want to revitalize

our party so this is literally an

existential battle right the most

important thing if you're an american

and you're a communist the most

important thing for you right now

it is an existential battle this is like

the most important antagonism you should

be dealing with now is this war

between the taqiyya secret infrared

operatives in the party and you have to

be secret don't fucking get caught and

get yourself

um

uh revealed who you are and these

fucking fets and you have to play the

long game so you have to do the activism

on the ground because that's what

they're looking for for delegates next

year during the elections and as we

approach those elections these vicious

cunts are going to get even more

aggressive

being uh directed from above by people

like taran who are literal feds

all of the criminal lump and scum

elements of the party to wage their

vicious attacks on us and by the way

their bots are in full motion now and

they're getting vicious i think we need

to see our gorillas

stepping up their game

and fighting this info war on social

media against these people so i think

the guerrillas need to be coordinating

more dealing with people like this and

other people you know you really need to

put these people in their place

and show them that they're outnumbered

right

look at this this this is another

vicious cunt pussy

soy cock bitch

old empanadas kept fucking spamming my

shit

i said okay let's debate no they don't

want to debate

just keep talking shit behind the

keyboard

fucking pussy

fucking pussy you don't have a party

you don't have a party

it's ours now

you will be purged

in less than four

years enjoy

this is our message this is really what

we're out here saying you know

this is like the listen guys everything

everything everything is about the cpusa

all of the shit i've been dealing with

is because of the cpusa literally all of

it all of it is about the cpusa like

literally all of it it's all because

they don't want us to take over the

cpusa you want to ask me a question

how's what can we americans be doing

right now focus on the party they are so

fucking scared of what we're doing focus

on the party flood that fucking party

and we'll just outnumber them and purge

the fuck out of them when elections come

around next year and it's gonna be so

fucking easy when it happens

we're gonna purge the fuck out of these

people we're gonna purge the fuck out of

them

out of our party

so they blocked me but

the news today so let me break this down

to you the basic news today

is that there's some larping third

positionist guy who made a

hit piece video about me which i'm gonna

spend today's stream covering

um and responding to

in full and that's gonna take up like 90

percent of the stream

and it's gonna be a lot of interesting

things but in the meantime um

a lot of interesting similarities

between leftists and this third position

is fascist people

but the first thing i want to cover is

like this part this chapter of the

louisiana cpusa they have been like

tweeting about me non-stop this is a

literal

chapter of the cpusa in it's the only

louisiana one their whole fucking

twitter is like dedicated to bitching

and whining about me so like let's take

it from the top right

it's actually fucking insane like this

is what a serious communist holy fuck

this is what a serious supposedly

serious communist parties doing thank

you so much boyd birdman appreciate you

it's already too late the floodgates are

open the cpusa can't stop the tide we

are building a new sun a sun that is

both light and dark a sun beyond their

one-sided comprehension 2036 gorillas

don't forget thank you so much voidburn

holy fuck man thank you

but yeah um

so they tweet non-stop i already showed

you this shit from yesterday so that was

one thing right and they continued

um load newest so they continued today

continuing to tweet about me he said

infer house is not a dialetician he's a

book worshiping dogmatist so to be clear

let me show you just the weakness of the

argument they're presenting right now so

i said the patriotism debate's fucking

over why because the soviet textbook on

the fundamentals of marxism leninism

is saying the same shit that we're

saying except we're being called

fascists for it adverbatim so for

example

the fact that so the reason most of this

patriotism debate has been drawn out is

because they're basically trying to say

that yes there was a socialist

patriotism but that was only a form of

affirmative action for the oppressed

nations and for the global south not for

the imperialist nations right

so this textbook directly contradicts

that right so the fact that the

proletarian defends the freedom of the

nations their independence is an

expression of the patriotism of the

working class

the patriotism in the working class is

from the feeling of pride and the

contributions they made to the struggle

of the oppressed and exploited

it's progressive and revolutionary and

bourgeois propaganda tries to represent

the capitalist class as the bearer of

patriotic feelings

they want to slur over the fact that the

patriotism of the bourgeoisie is always

subordinate to its selfish narrow class

interests and to disparage the

patriotism of the working class and the

communists

in this connection bourgeois propaganda

sometimes refers to passages in the

communist manifesto which says the

working class have no country now

leftists and even buys all mls are

always quoting this specific passage to

tell us that we cannot be american

patriots and also communists because

holy fuck jenna thank you so much man

care package inbound thank you so much

man they always tell us this shit

because apparently uh it's not possible

because the the communist party and then

this this soviet textbook saying no

that's bourgeois propaganda it's

perfectly clear

that it is not a question of repudiating

the fatherland

but of the fact that in society ruled by

capitalists the fatherland is actually

usurped by exploiters and not a good

father

but a vicious stepfather to the workers

and that by overthrowing the rule of the

exploiting classes the working class

creates the conditions for the fullest

possible manifestation of its patriotism

for it itself is the true bearer of

patriotism in our time

so he they quote lenin that the

fatherland the given political cultural

and social environment is the most

powerful factor in class struggle the

proletariat cannot be indifferent to an

unconcerned about the political social

and cultural conditions

can't be indifferent to the fate of its

country boudoir ideologists allege that

by combating cosmopolitanism marxists

disavow the international character of

their doctrine and become nationalists

but the authors of such falsifications

perpetuate a double forgery

first they put a sign of equality

between the cosmopolitans and of the

bourgeoisie and the internationalism of

the working class

they have nothing in common

and then they ascribe to marxists the

nationalist views are characteristics of

boozy ideology the internationalism of

the working class

is an expression of their struggle

against capitalism

and the unity of their ideology the

ideology of friendship and fraternity of

peoples

this does not mean that while belonging

to the single international army of

working people the workers ceases to be

a frenchman englishman etc quite on the

contrary true and not sham patriotism

springs naturally from proletarian

internationalism

so the working class wants this not only

for itself but also for the working

people for the whole nation

only the achievement of its aims the

overthrow of the exploiters will include

the progress of the nation building

socialism can bring every nation real

freedom independence and national

greatness

okay so this is unambiguously

contradicting everything the

anti-patriotic faction revisionist

psychiatrists have been saying so i

quoted this and i said the debate's over

and they have a few quote copes right

the mowers are saying well this was a

khrushchev

no this finnish guy was appointed by

stalin first of all second of all

these views were officiated under

stalin's reign and third of all

regarding the sinnoh soviet split it was

actually the khrushchev revisionist who

accused mao of being too nationalistic

and too patriotic

so

even if this is revisionist crucified

shit

that would be because it's not patriotic

or nationalistic enough because that was

the entire basis upon which

the revisionists not wasn't the entire

basis but it was a big basis by which

the revisionist attacked mao even enver

hoja attacked mao for being too

nationalistic because of his

encirclement of the city's

ideas so

that's a coke but the other thing you

say is

just

where is it

no you stupid coping bitch you fucking

bitch you fucking pussy this isn't

fucking book worshiping this is a direct

fucking citation from the fundamentals

of marxism leninism the soviet textbook

which at the very bare minimum even if

you disagree with it does not allow you

to sustain this psychotic view that

we're fascists for saying the same thing

if a soviet textbook is saying

literally the same thing that we are you

can't keep calling us fascists that's

what we're trying to fucking tell you

and this is the biggest fucking cope of

all time oh you're a book worshipping

dogmatist no we're trying to tell you

that you're uneducated about the

traditional marxism leninism you're

uneducated about these fat the fact that

these views were literally commonplace

views among all marxist leninists

in the history of the 20th century it's

such common sense and such commonplace

like

it's so given that when you talk to

marxist-leninists in other countries

about it they look at you in a puzzled

way and are like what of course we're

patriots why is this even a fucking

debate

but no this is listen whenever these

dumb fucks who don't even know what

dialectics means and i'm going to talk a

lot about dialectics today

say oh this is just because you're not

being there you're just saying this

because you're talking out of your ass

and you have nothing this is your way of

coping and basically

um

bullshitting your way out of fucking

confronting an actual argument they

don't they never have arguments they

just call us names you're a dogmatist

you're a black worshiper you're a

fascist you're a chauvinist where's your

actual fucking argument you fucking

pussy you fucking bitch and my people

are in your fucking club and i swear to

god i cannot fucking wait

till our delegates get elected next year

we are going to purge the fuck out of

people like you we're going to purge the

fuck out of you

i can't fucking wait i cannot fucking

wait to purge these filthy criminal scum

out of our fucking party

cannot fucking wait i really cannot

fucking wait

see this is what i'm saying they're all

out in full force for some fucking

reason today thank you so much dionysus

for the gifted sub like look at this

shit like look at these random fucking

they're all out in full force

you're a child blah blah it said you'll

never even reach one percent of the

masses

but brooklyn great grad student masses

had ass right that's your fucking masses

you're so far off you're not even funny

cpuc members are out here organizing

with tenants unions phone banking for

alu doing mutual aid creating book clubs

you're all talk

show us one percent of

progress

show us

you made any progress doing anything

whatsoever you haven't done

done shit but larp and book clubs lmfao

what the fuck do you mean book clubs

cause you're a fucking streamer where

does this fucking idea come from that's

being calling me a streamer's a fucking

insult

you're a cunt what the fuck are you

talking about streamer well as opposed

to what a fucking newspaper writer some

shit or someone hired by some fucking

ngo the fuck is the difference between

streaming to an audience from my own

independent fucking platform and writing

for fucking people's world which reaches

five people total just the fuck up you

stupid bitch oh

you're you're you're the most advanced

form of the dissemination of media in

2022 that's such an insult to such a

fucking insult

who is this fucking pussy anyway

follower of jesus christ how

he him

follower of jesus christ but also let's

show the fucking pronouns right

you're a fucking streamer

you're a

no i can't say that um

yeah never mind never mind

never mind

i'm just going to respond with this

profile picture how about that

it's going to respond to this profile

picture

i was going to say fat ass

i was gonna say they were fat

right but we're not gonna be uh

we're not gonna be a

fat phobic we're just gonna respond

with their profile picture

i think

since they're out in full force i think

the gorillas should be out on full force

on fucking twitter

doing your fucking thing you know get

out in full force and coordinate and

organize whatever the fuck

wage this infowar

wage this infowar

how about we how about we start let's

just ratio this frog guy how about we

just ratio them i got nine so let's just

uh

spam this in the chat and ratio them

let's go ahead and get it to a hundred

y'all can't see it because he the pussy

blocked you yeah it's okay we'll get the

mods to get the link and we'll just

fucking ratio him he's a pussy so he

blocks all my fucking followers

um and that's okay we'll just fucking

get mods to spam with mods just spam

this in the fucking chat

spam this in the uh the youtube chat

just get everybody to fight and get it

in discord get on the whole thing

let's just ratio this guy

put it in the discord and everything

fucking pussy little bitch

fucking little bitch fucking cartoon

fucking profile picture fucking lip shit

piece of shit

fucking pussy

nordstrom 3 i didn't hear shit about

that

i did not hear anything about that

you know you know what you know what the

real thing you gotta fucking keep your

eyes on and focus on here is that these

people are just angry about the truth

like we confront them with the truth and

they're angry about it every time i i'm

angry with the position i will debate it

i will just i will be able to rationally

and discursively demonstrate where the

line is but these people are so they

have such a fucking irrational reaction

to us that it manifests itself in the

form of this like irrational butt hurt

ass hurt fucking seething and these are

like rabid dogs that metaphorically have

to be put down they need to be kicked

out of the fucking party and thrown and

locked into a fucking mental asylum

they're not capable of rat like it makes

them

foam at the fucking mouth when we

fucking confront them with the truth

that marxism leninism

has always contained socialist

patriotism as a fundamental part of what

it is

nordstrom 3 is the new dory to jackson

to infrared subscriber raid system

i'm the one who came up with that term

to uh on the phone with jackson

that's what you're talking about yeah i

i uh

i told him about that

but um

how did he tell you about that um

but uh yeah it's funny

yeah

yeah i mean i'm so glad i have j i

invested in jackson as an ally i would

rate him every day on twitch that he was

live

and it paid off because he's like bigger

than voss now

in terms of his average viewers

so we're building a big ass community

here you know

we're building a big big ass community

yeah

if i could disable ads with membership

like you can have it on twitch i'll do

that as well

but um yeah another coping saying you're

a book worshiping dogma there's no

you're just a fat soy low testosterone

pussy and the idea of patriotism bothers

you and upsets you for psychoanalytic

like psychosexual reasons that's not our

fucking problem you clearly have daddy

issues if that's okay you need to go see

a therapist or something but you need to

be fucking booted out of the party

because you're of mentally ill deranged

fucking freak that has nothing to do

with what normal human beings around the

fucking world consider like basic facts

of what it means to be a communist

your fucking deranged fucking adoption

of cold war propaganda against communism

has no place in our fucking party no

place whatsoever

look how they copy our memes

with like the soy jack shit

book worshipers when they find a quote

no we didn't just find a quote we have

an entire fucking chapter of a textbook

supporting our view

that's not just a fucking quote taken

out of

context and what do you mean what do you

mean our dog how are we fucking dogmatic

if anything

we're the opposite of dogmatic because

our position synthesizes a position that

is discernible that we can put in our

own fucking words but whose essence is

clearly replicated across all the

fucking history that's not a some

dogmatism is when you're literally

clinging to a quote from mao taken out

of context which is book worship you're

taking what mao meant by book

worshipping out of context that's the

literal definition of dogmatism and even

worse you're just fucking coping and

saying that oh oh that's the error of

bookworship if i find things in the

canada monster the momentum that

contradicts my fucking radlib position

that means that's just because this book

worshipping you can ignore it because

that's book word shit you fucking fat

pussy you fucking low testosterone bitch

you fucking pussy cunt

fucking little bitch cunt

truth is not determined by debate

all day they're fucking seething about

me all fucking day receiving about me

seething whining bitching and crying

about me all fucking day

and you'd think if they had been debated

demonstrate the validity of your

position in real time you can't you just

fucking block us and you fucking smear

us because the normal people who are in

the cp usa if they caught wind of what

we were actually about they would

overthrow you fucking party bosses and

party lord scum you fucking parasite

gatekeeping pieces of shit because we're

offering a lot of answers to questions

that are on everyone's fucking mind such

as why is this party going nowhere why

is it accomplishing absolutely fucking

nothing why is it that we're being

stalled and bogged down with all this

liberal bullshit and is there an

alternative you want to eliminate the

possibility of an alternative by lying

about our positions

and continuing to try and fucking

slander us you fucking pussy you lying

pussy bitch

you've always been a lying pussy that's

what you are a lying pussy

how they're defending a congressman who

riled up a crowd of fascists before

january 6

because this is what i said

i said

i said it's crazy how the dnc scum are

so open about their attacks they're not

even subtle they're paper tigers because

they're they came out an accused musk of

flashing a private flight attendant

thank you so much chris morlock it's

clearly a fucking hit piece because he's

trying to fucking acquire twitter right

but then he says oh you're defending a

guy who's a bad person personally

you're a fucking you know what i

who like is there a solution except

gulags is good is there any solution

except gulags these people are such bird

brain fucking idiots

it's like they don't have any notion of

pragmatic reality everything is just

judging someone's personal moral

character um because elon musk is a bad

guy personally

yeah is elon musk marrying my fucking

daughter or something

or am i making a fucking analysis about

contradictions within the ruling class

what the fuck does what does let's just

assume all of this is true he's an

apartheid emerald mind billionaire who

wants to become jeffrey yes mean okay so

so you're not gonna suck his cock

congratulations you're not gonna

literally get on your knees and suck him

off and you're not sexually attracted to

him and you're not turned on by him and

you're not gonna hold his hand and go

out to dinner with him and kiss him on

the fucking cheek okay we got that now

what about the materialist class

analysis about the contradictions within

the fucking ruling class you want to

actually form a sober and objective

analysis or do you want to fucking keep

having your fucking morally indignant

language

is that marxism has lenin or marx ever

spent their time engaging in fucking any

analysis using all of these morally

indignant fucking phrases instead of an

objective materialist analysis

where the fuck does that come from where

the fuck does that fucking instinct to

just

throw labels on people instead of trying

to actually understand what's going on

in the world where does that fucking

come from it's that it's the same thing

as what i told you in that speech i gave

before the stream when i told you

that these people

hold all reality to the standard of this

like impossible ideal of perfection and

that any inconsistency or contradiction

within that

that is made to be the essence of their

fucking position so if i say one thing

that paints elon musk and like

even the slightest good light not even

good but just like the slightest light

of him being right about something and

others being wrong then you have to

point out how oh actually elon musk

is actually bad in all of x y and z ways

so

what does that have to do with anything

i'm saying you know mao during the war

against japan he allied with the kmt

the bolsheviks sent money to the turkish

nationalists

who actually used the arms the

bolsheviks gave them to kill communists

the soviets helped nasser nasr literally

hung egyptian communists thank you so

much morloc appreciate you man

so it's like

if you're not able to understand primary

and secondary contradictions within the

frame of reference not even of a

practical position of like oh we should

ally with this person

but just like an analysis of what's

fucking going on you're not a marxist

you can't be a marxist you're an

emotional toddler you're an immature

little bitch you're a fucking child

who should never ever be allowed to have

control of the official fucking

communist party chapter of louisiana

right and then i responded to this shit

like yeah hit jobs against musk had

nothing to do with the twitter

acquisition or his denunciation of the

democrats just like hit jobs against

cawthorne had nothing to do with him

exposing the republican establishment

and the reason that those connections

are not allowed to be made is because

they're bad bad people that's

materialism you want to know what these

stupid fucking people did and i can't

tell you what i think should be done

with these fucking people but

when rationality is not possible anymore

what's left

now infrared is defending a congressman

who

what did i just mock these fucking

people for doing

and the reason is because they're bad

bad people

because thorn is a bad bad person he's a

bad bad person

does anyone see the fucking insanity of

this does anyone see the literal

insanity of this these fucking npcs

cannot think they're incapable of

thought they are incapable of using

their heads they are incapable of

thought it's fucking incredible it is

actually baffling it is literally

baffling it's like you confront them

with this shit and they just go

and

yeah

and they just fucking hiss at you they

literally hiss like a fucking animal

instead of being able to respond to what

you're actually fucking saying

man fuck you two hands fuck you hans

whenever you get to the point where

you're in a fucking dialectic

battle with someone and you're arguing

with them and then you eventually have

to give up and respond and like

mal fuck you you lost bitch you're a

pussy and you fucking lost you have no

rational response

you have no fucking response

you fucking coping bitch

you have no response whatsoever

except fucking seething through your

fucking mouth you goddamn fucking pussy

how dare you fucking rear your head in

public you fucking seething lying pussy

you can't treat these people like humans

you cannot i they are not even human you

could you literally cannot treat these

fucking scum like human beings they are

not human

plainly they are not human there is

nothing human about these people

they're literal bots they are literal

fucking bots

this is what happens when we have no

coherent ideology beyond owning the libs

pointing out contradictions between the

ruling class pointing out ambiguous

populist

not everything is

you can't fucking put everything in some

pre-made ideological cardboard box there

are ambiguous

populistic phenomena that happen that

don't belong to some pre-existing

fucking agenda sometimes it's

communities that form based on mutual

recognition

that are somehow outside of this deep

state and yes there is a fucking deep

state

and them entering into contradiction

with the establishment that doesn't mean

you're endorsing their ideology that

doesn't mean you're endorsing every

fucking belief they had about the world

it's about actually having an objective

fucking analysis that's why lenin for

example in contrast to what paul moron

is trying to fucking say

said that we need to support the

anti-imperialist bourgeoisie against

imperialism and why is that is it for

some moral or ideological reason no it's

because objectively speaking there's a

contradiction between the the

anti-imperialist bourgeoisie and the

imperialist boozy that's an objective

contradiction that exists

irregardless of ideology mao said that

the war against the japanese was a

primary contradiction irregardless of

ideology and that the class struggle was

a secondary contradiction and that's

where ideolog ideology is going to have

more of a decisive role

these people don't think like

materialists or marxists everything for

them is about ideology everything is

about what box people's ideology is in

or what moral shortcomings they have

this person's a capital yeah who gives a

fuck what does it have to do with an

objective analysis

like there are plenty of people who are

capitalists just being a capitalist just

being a billionaire is not enough to

define your class interest there's still

contradictions among that ruling class

believe it or not

thank you reaper so much and thank you

so much chris morlock appreciate you

guys there's still class contradictions

there are still class contradictions

within the ruling class

but no you have this simplistic fucking

view of reality where it's like you

don't put reality first you put your

fucking ideology first you're a fucking

ideologue you worship an idol you

worship idols you don't even pretend to

have a connection to the real world or

try to form a concrete analysis of the

concrete situation everything for you is

about confirming your preconceived

ideological fucking psychotic worldview

you can't even at the very minimum

acknowledge that musk is somehow

rattling up

the democrats and the media

establishment and they're going after

him because of his twitter acquisition

you can't even like do the minimum to

acknowledge that

no but no forget the ideological

implications just look at reality

objectively look at the objective

fucking reality that's as clear as day

but these people are scared of doing

that because they're actually tempted by

the idea that if they look at reality

objectively they may become fascist and

that nazism may in fact be true well i

think that not they don't actually

believe in anything they say they don't

actually believe in it if they actually

hadn't like opened themselves to an

unbiased view of reality

they're actually scared that they might

be tempted by nazi ideology and they'll

be like oh i'll just become a nazi

they don't trust that there's some kind

of connection

between the intuition of what you

consider moral moral intuition and

objective fact and that is the

fundamental problem with these fake

materialists they don't think there's a

connection between like these irrational

intuition that they have an objective

fact they're not willing to imperil

their heart and their sentimental

ideological feelings

with a like they don't believe in this

thing of seek truth from facts don't

seek truth from metaphysical precepts

and ideological precepts seek truth from

facts no matter what they happen to be

seek your truth from the actual facts of

the real world

be open to the fact that reality isn't

premised by ideology seek your truth

from the actual fucking facts but no

they don't fucking do that because

they're scared that if they do that

their ideology is going to be disproven

that's why they're not marxists they

take marxism literally as like

like a scientology cult instead of a

literal science

that's the fucking difference

they actually think we'll just allow

nan's balls to take over the party

having expelled yeah can you guys can i

ask you guys a question this is what's

so

so fucking creepy it is so weird and so

creepy i have interacted with just about

two dozen cpusa accounts on twitter and

all of them are pushing this idea that

we've expelled several we've expelled

several where are they who is feeding

them this dialogue loop to say i have

interacted with like a dozen of these

people today every single one of them is

saying we've expelled several we've

expelled several we've expelled several

like this exact line so they're clearly

being fed this line by someone because

from my intelligence channels and my

lines of communication that i'm getting

i am not getting any significant

news of a bunch of people getting

fucking expo expelled

it's actually disgusting

y'all need to get serious about joining

that fucking party because it's it's

the heat is uh

is being turned up

and they're they're they're all out on

their push to get in a a purge right and

they're fucking paranoid as shit and

they're fucking freaking out and

panicking just like i fucking told you

right

so you gotta fucking practice that

techia

and you gotta really fucking

get root yourself in that fucking party

root yourself in that fucking party dig

your fucking claws and heels in that

fucking party

and join if you haven't don't just join

though be a very active leader in your

chapter and in your party

be very active do do their dumb activism

shit lead the initiatives lead the

efforts gain their fucking trust and

then fuck them when we have an election

next year just hold it all in all the

cringe you're gonna have to do a lot of

cringe hold it all in in one fucking

year we purge all of these scum one

fucking year we purge all of them all of

them purged one year just

keep it all inside

deal with it stomach it stomach it have

discipline for one year then when one

year pass and then by the way this is

what you're going to do

when you spend your time with the party

it's going to be tough

you're going to stomach a lot you want

to know where you're going to get your

release

you're going to watch the infrared show

with me

and we're we're gonna just

be the opposite of that culture here and

you're gonna go on discord and you're

gonna be able to all of that repressed

anti-liberal and anti-cringe shit that's

in your stomach

infrared will be your outlet don't worry

about that we will be your outlet you'll

come here and we'll just

we get to say the r word here we get to

say retard here you can't say it in the

party

you have to hold it in right you come

come on come on our telegram

or watch me we could say retard for

example right that's what we're talking

about just hold it in and then be a

fucking devil

in infrared be an angel in the cp usa be

a devil

in our community

so you can stomach it you will we we can

do this guys we can do this

we can fucking do this okay you just you

got a stomach at it you gotta stomach it

you gotta stomach it but we can fucking

do this and then in one year in one

fucking year it's all it's gonna take

one year we purge the fuck out of all

these people

best case scenario there's a civil war

in the party because

even if we don't fully take over the

party next year

we are going to have significant

positions of power significant

yes one year be a delegate oh we're

gonna clean house with this fucking

party we're gonna clean house we're

gonna clean house from top to bottom

from bottom to top

they seem to think that procedural

tricks will

protect non-active members who

flagrantly violate the party's

democratic centralism okay

this is what their strategy is if you

didn't know they're going to be looking

for the non-active members to purge

right so if you're in the party be

active even if you don't have a lot of

time spend some time being active

because their strategy right now is to

be like oh we're just going to purge the

non-active members no go to their

meetings do the activism do the

on-the-ground work do the phone banking

and canvassing and all that cringe

protestant puritan shit that they value

to do like just to make themselves feel

better even though it doesn't lead to

any real material outcome do all that

shit that they want you to fucking do

and you'll be fine

fucking bitch

fucking pussy

look at this dumb fuck literal stupid

fuck

so i i made this promoting tonight's

stream

thanks for the free publicity if you're

tired of fascists claiming to represent

the real communist movement in the

imperial core join the communist party

they're literally telling

my followers to join the party that's

how fucking stupid these people are yeah

i agree join the party

join the party

they keep calling us nozbes they keep

calling us fascists

which is ironic because today we're

going to be responding to a video from

real self-proclaimed fascists who and

it's going to be beautiful because they

literally arrive at the exact same

conclusion as our leftist enemies

in this video and i'm just gonna break

down

and get through this fucking video

which was called

so this is the video right

and probably most of the track today is

going to be um

spent responding to it

so the video is called

why haas is wrong about conservative

communism and patriotic socialism so to

give you a tl dr i responded to it in

the comments and i was basically like so

this is zoltanius this is basically

zultanius or zultanius's friend it's

connected to zoltanius the guy i debated

a year ago so i wrecked this fucking guy

in a debate but if you didn't know this

this guy calls himself a fascist but

adopts all of the left calm

left-wing communism anti-leninist

arguments and basically like well lenin

was a revisionist stalin was a

revisionist actually um pure marxism so

they're basically coming from that

fucking perspective of left calm

bullshit but they're literally a fashion

they call themselves a literal fascist

right and they made this video to like

br

reach out and uh make friends with the

the anti-pat sock people or whatever

like hans is wrong about patriotic

socialism

so i i watched some of this and i

basically was able to come to the

conclusion pretty easily that

all of this stupid bullshit

all this uh critique literally comes

from an absence of knowing what critique

is in the first place

they confuse the appearance for the

essence of things

and moreover

um

confuse the fact that there's a

discontinuity

between

modernity

and tradition and i'm going to clarify

what i mean by that later but all of

this can be summed up is

tfw no dialectics so

if everyone would just spam the comments

tfw no dialectics that would be accurate

although i'd never advocate for anyone

to spam anyone i'm just saying that

would be the accurate response to this

they're trying to take passages and

quotations from marx lenin and other

people without understanding the

dialectical view that underpins those

very quotations so when you take them

one-sidedly in the absence of a

dialectic understanding

of course you're gonna arrive at the

exact opposite position that they

actually fucking had like for example

if you if you cling to the phrase

uh communists believe in everyone should

be equal well it's that's not even true

because that's not even something

communists have said but let's just say

like communists believe in overthrowing

capitalism then you could just like say

a very simple question like well how

could you overthrow capitalism

without developing capitalism to such an

extent that its own inner contradictions

develop that give rise to its very very

own overthrow so actually opposing

capitalism means that you're

pro-capitalism right so in the absence

of dialectics you have all of these

tricks that they use to ascribe to you a

position that is the opposite to the one

that you have because they're making an

unjustifiable unjustifiable assumption

that you're coming from a formalist or

one-sided perspective rather than a

dialectic one so what is a dialectic

perspective all the dialectic

perspective is is that it's recognizing

that the object of your position the

object of your thought your ideology and

your views

is ultimately going to be a

contradiction it's going to be the unity

of what are opposites those opposites

happen to be the contradiction between

the content and form or something or the

appearance or essence of or of something

so

when we say for example that

communism is conservative

the object of the that association is

precisely going to be a unity of

opposites it's not going to try and say

that oh

clearly communism isn't the same fucking

thing as

this like

you know um vernacular idea of

conservatism that i have but by

associating these opposites i'm trying

to give expression

to a deeper sense right which does make

sense at an intuitive level

most people

understand my positions intuitively to

be correct but when you put your nerd

glasses on you arrive at the conclusion

that logically speaking this actually

ends up being a contradiction well what

is it a contradiction for it's a

contradiction

for the pure form of some kind of

logical axiom that you're ascribing to

my position that was never there in the

first place i have not presented my

position to be a dogmatic logical type

of axiom

some kind of purely formal claim

uh

my position synthesizes the unity of

form and content if you're not able to

understand that you're gonna be caught

you're going to be pointing out all

kinds of inconsistencies and

contradictions yeah that's what happens

when you don't fucking understand

dialectics you dumb fuck

so let's get through the fucking video

my main goal of this video is to show

that people like haws and those who are

associated with the infrared project or

i think this person's a teenager so i'm

gonna go uh i'm not gonna go too heavy

on them because i literally think it's a

teenager they're very illiterate

extremely illiterate and just not very

well read about anything

that they're trying to talk about

it's about ideas such as patriotic

socialism conservative communism and

similar labels are bad by the way

patriotic socialism is the label our

enemies came up with marxist according

to the words of marx angles and lenin

themselves

i don't want this to turn into a

historical debate hence why i will leave

my quotations to the three thinkers of

whom we can both agree are orthodox

marxists i am also not trying to delve

into the details about maoism stalinism

or other figures so this is like right

off the bat they're like

okay i'm gonna try and delegitimize your

position but the entire history of the

ussr in china you know the things that

actually gave meaning

to what marxism was in the first place

those are completely irrelevant i'm

gonna have an extremely dogmatic and

doctrinaire type of interpretation of

marx engels and lenin to prove that your

position is illegitimate never mind that

your position is correct when

measured under the standard of the

actual experience of communism in the

20th century i'm going to have a very

narrow interpretation and very wrong

interpretation i should add of what marx

engels and lenin say

in order to determine the legitimacy of

your position well here's the problem

with your

methodology your methodology contradicts

the methodology of marx angles and lenin

they had a dialectic methodology

according to which the development of a

thing has to be judged at the very end

of the process not from an axiomatic

first cause that's a metaphysical and

dogmatic view not a dialectic one

according to the dialectic view a thing

can only its quality is only possible to

be judged at the end of its development

through the process of its real being

not through some first cause dogmatic

axiom

that is like the measure of all thing if

you read dialect end goals is dialectic

of nature you read marx's um early

writings you read marx how he talks

about his method in capital their method

contradicts this

if the real world practice of marxism

actually proves the correctness of my

position you cannot then go and say oh

never mind the real world practice of

marxism uh this is a very narrow

interpretation of what marx angles and

lenin meant no

what marx engels and lenin actually

meant can only be proven

in how their position was practiced in

reality that is the only criteria for

its real proof

so right off the bat you're an amateur

dumbass who doesn't know anything about

marxism and that's 30 seconds into your

fucking video just 30 seconds into your

video you've proven your inability to

understand anything about marxism

the most fundamental thing being the

unique nature of the marx is dialectic

here's our countries that were led by

self-described communist parties rather

i will be taking a look at the positions

that has taken and seeing how well they

mesh with actual marxist theory for this

reason i will be quoting extensively

from marx angles and lenin to show that

i am not just making stuff up but rather

shown how this socialist patriotism is

no way true to marxism which leaves haze

as a bad marxist and subsequently a bad

nationalist you know what's funny it's

so funny how the the the fascist larper

is allied with all of my leftoid cpusa

enemies

i told you guys this before it's us

versus everybody all these scum are

unified against us it's not just that

we've united all of the left against us

there's even niche larper factions of

the right that are united with the

leftists against us they're all united

against us all of them it's just like

how in the the japanese invasion of

china all of the ultra leftists joined

the japanese fascist invaders it's just

like how in the nazi invasion of the

soviet union the ultra leftists sided

with the nazis

the anarchists in ukraine so they were

nazi collaborators

same thing within the soviet union same

thing even there were left comms that

literally said bolshevism is a greater

danger than nazism

so and then obviously we know about the

way trotsky collaborated with the nazis

so there you go

they're all allied

they call us nozbes and call us fascists

these are what the self-proclaimed

fascists are saying about us you fucking

bitch they're siding with you

cp usa libtards they're siding with you

they agree with you

that's how you know we're fucking real

both the left and right deviations are

attacking us that's how you fucking know

we're the real deal

because of this imminent dialectical

critique i will be doing of haz and

holding him to the fire of his own

purported ideology my friends on the

actual marxist left should be in

virtually unanimous agreement about

everything his friends and the marxists

left

i'm about to say however i do want to

make it clear that i am not a marxist i

am merely showing why haaz is a bad

marxist for a more in-depth explanation

about why communism is incompatible with

conservatism traditionalism nationalism

etc

i suggest checking out the essay that my

friends autonomous and i co

you guys want me to cover this instead

or you want me to cover the video

you want me to cover this sub stack made

by zultanius the pussy who i destroyed

in the debate so ran away and made a

fucking sub stack instead of having

another debate with me

wrote together like in this video we

primarily relied on quotations from marx

angles and lenin and again with few

exceptions that is an essay i'll check

the essay out after actually i'll like

skim through it doc's marxist londonist

should be able to easily agree with

in order to not have to watch out so

they're literally pandering to all of

the fucking leftists where i war with

because they all have the same position

it's funny how theoretically speaking

the ultra leftists were attacking are in

literal unanimous agreement with

self-proclaimed fascists

huh it's almost like why is that why are

they all in agreement with each other

hours and hours of live streams i will

be limiting my analysis of haas to his

formal explanation videos that he has

and that are even on the front page of

his website also be using a few quotes

from his sub stack as well

in his video socialist patriotism

america versus america has in the

infrared collective tried to lay out

their i had nothing i wasn't in that

fucking video so

but i'm gonna defend it anyway obviously

but it's like this is like such amateur

mistakes you know a case for socialist

patriotism here of course socialism is

meant as a scientific and marxist

socialism the video sets out to answer

what was the actual relationship between

socialists and patriotism historically

we are then immediately told what

becomes immediately clear is that the

track record

five dollars to cover both thank you

grimes record of the 19th and especially

20th centuries show that socialists and

communists have consistently been

patriotic and deeply attuned to the

national realities of the countries they

held from next it's said that only due

to americanism do leftists say that

imagine they can elevate themselves

above national realities and speak on

behalf of an abstract working class

uprooted and estranged from its

particular and national instantiation

the first evidence provided of this long

socialist patriotic tradition allegedly

going all the way back to marx and

angles is from the communist manifesto

literally in the quote itself marks and

angles are quoted as they speak of

national struggle in form and not in

substance and the actual full quote then

says the proletariat of each country

must of course first of all settle

matters with its own bourgeoisie the

national struggle in particular

countries is not the end-all be-all in

fact the communist manifesto is full of

quotes promoting internationalism and

anti-nazis just to be clear

i'm gonna wait i'm gonna wait

nationalism the nationalities of the

peoples who join together according to

the principle of community will be just

as much compelled by this union to merge

with one another and thereby supersede

themselves as the various differences

between estates and classes disappear

through the superseding of their bases

private property

we can also glean the marxist view of

nationalities from their views of

religion as well

all religions so far have been the

expression of historical stages of

development of individual peoples or

groups of peoples but communism is the

stage of historical development which

makes all existing religions superfluous

and brings about their disappearance

and as this video progresses i will show

more more quotes and statements proving

what should be okay so okay

there's a part specifically that was

talking about the national and substance

i was waiting for but i'm just gonna

address it now i think it's probably

gonna come up uh again

saying that the class struggle is

national in form

doesn't mean that it's trivial

form matters

because without the national with if

if

if national realities were the content

of struggle then national reality would

already be predetermined which means it

would not undergo any fundamental

development

for the national reality to be the form

means that it is the object of

development it is the thing that is

being developed by way of its true

essential content so that's a very

important distinction if you elevate the

nation to the level of the substance or

the

content

there can be no deeper national reality

because it's just the thing that so

happens to be on the surface nothing is

deeper

it's already predefined and it doesn't

need to go

undergo any

development so the development of form

is only possible when the content is not

the same as the form

so for the nation to be form of the

class struggle means that the class

struggle is the engine of national

development

that is how the nation actually has a

history and develops

without that the nation is this fixed

thing

which

if it was the true content

it doesn't have any fundamental

actual material reality it's just

it's just some kind of fixed thing in

the background

the manner by which it exerts influence

on events

being almost invisible so why even talk

about the nation when these people call

themselves nationalists and talk about

the nation they're not referring to the

nation they're referring

to a

to the superficial appearance of the

nation

under the dictatorship of the

bourgeoisie

they're not actually referring to the

nation

at its most fundamental level which is

form

so form doesn't mean it's trivial

content is not true form content is

content form is form

in form and not in substance and the

actual full quote then says the

proletariat of each country must of

course first of all settle matters with

its own bourgeoisie the national

struggle in particular countries is not

the end-all be-all in fact the communist

manifesto is full of quotes promoting

internationalism no it can't be the

end-all be-all because that would reduce

national realities

to some kind of fixed object of

knowledge

which means the national reality doesn't

even have any substance at all

for if the national reality is the

substance it does not have the quality

of substance there's a difference

between national realities being the

substance of struggle and national

realities having the quality of

substantiality in order for national

realities to have the quality of

substantiality they cannot be the

content

of their own development

this is very simple dialectic thinking

anti-nationalism the nationalities of

the peoples who join together according

to the principle of community will be

just as much compelled by this union to

merge with one another and thereby

supersede themselves as the various

differences between estates and classes

disappear through the superseding of

their bases

okay

now let's look at the context of this

quote

[Music]

so this was published in 1847

this will this was published in 1847

uh

and

sorry was it published

no it was never published it was a draft

of a communist confession of faith that

was never even published

and was only published in 1969 so this

is the evidence they're using well

nationalities continue to exist under

communism the nationalities of people

who join together according to the

principles of community

will be just as much compelled by this

union to merge with one another and

supersede themselves as the various

difference between class okay

so

actually this has both of the quotes

that they have in question this is from

an unpublished draft which was never

published which means you can't hold it

to the standard of being the actual

final view of marx and engels there's

plenty of things they didn't publish

because they realized there was an

underdeveloped view

but this in no way implies

that nationalities

uh cease to exist if the existing

nationalities

joining together according to the

principle of community

merge together

and supersede themselves that's not the

same thing as nationalities ceasing to

exist

i bet in the original german supersede

means of hibon so if nationalities are

superseded if they undergo the hegelian

of hebong they're just preserved in a

new form they take a new form actually i

can't think of a better example than the

soviet union or something like that the

soviet union contained various different

nationalities they merged together they

fused together and yet somehow the

differences between them were sublated

and preserved in a new way into a new

kind of fucking unity so again this

narrow interpretation of what angles is

saying stems from a lack of

understanding what dialectics is if you

don't understand dialectics you don't

understand what supersede means you just

think that he's saying they're all going

to join together in a melting pot and

completely annihilate one another never

does he say

that nationalities are annihilated

they supersede themselves that happened

in china that happened in the soviet

union

and by the way

nationalities don't refer to the

more fundamental civilizational

character of a people for example is

china a nation i don't think it's just a

nation china is a civilization that

contains many different groups that

would fall under the category of what a

nation is according to the european

conception of the nation state so no

uh

nice l

second do communists reject existing

religions all religions which have

existed

hitherto were expressions of historical

stages of development of individual

peoples or group of people but communism

is that stage of development which makes

all existing religions superfluous and

supersedes them

again the key word is supersede doesn't

mean it negates them

uh as far as rendering their rendering

them

superfluous you have to understand the

new role religion took during modernity

so although angles didn't talk about

this explicitly you're missing the

crucial context of what religion meant

to marx and engels through this kind of

young hegelian lens of the critique of

religion that they interpreted german

idealism's development to have entailed

but the religion in question was

religion only so far as that was taken

in the philosophical sense of religion

religion as

um

some kind of uh

alienated essence

of humanity

this didn't actually refer to religion

in its real material reality what is the

proof we need of this the actual role

religion would take in communist states

such as the soviet union later on where

they came to realize there's more to

religion

than the philosophical criticism of

religion could possibly exhaust so in so

far as religion is reduced to being the

object of philosophical criticism angles

is right communism does make all of that

superfluous after all in modernity

religious form takes on the quality of

artificiality

it's disconnected from the effectual

uh sensuous reality of religious feeling

that predominates among the masses it

turns into this corpus of dogma

that is fully uh molded in the same

artificial clay

as the rest of the idols of liberal

modernity

so again

you're not actually engaging in any

original or independent analysis of what

not so much what but why marx and engels

are saying what they're saying

it's almost like you're just taking

everything at face value and not

engaging in any deeper kind of inquiry

as to why they're saying what they're

saying it's almost like you're directly

contradicting marx's method according to

which the appearance of things and their

essence

are not the same and that the critical

method is about revealing the deeper

rationality and deeper processes behind

an object

of inquiry that manages to present

itself to you in some way

private property

we can also glean the marxist view of

nationalities from their views of

religion as well all religions so far

have been the expression of historical

stages of development of individual

peoples or groups of peoples but

communism is the stage of historical

development which makes all existing

religions superfluous and brings about

their disappearance

and

hold on

i

did he just misquoted or something like

because engels here says supersedes them

he doesn't say

brings about their disappearance

so what why would they um why did he

omit the part where he says supersedes

them and not maybe this is from a

different passage

um

oh

wait this is the principles of communism

so

oh sorry okay i have to make a

correction

so this was actually from the principles

of communism

which

was actually still only first published

in 1914

so

it wasn't actually published it was

still unpublished and it was still

written in 1847

but it was first published in 1914 by

bernstein and here you have

the same thing

uh

although translated differently thereby

to dissolve themselves

uh

i don't know this isn't the original

translation so we'd have to look at that

original translation

but supersede seems like it would be

more accurate

this was translated originally in

german i bet right

because this was before the exile after

48 so i bet this was in german highly

doubt he actually said dissolve

but even if he did that would just be

the existing nationalities of the people

not nationalities in general

so

what will be existing religions again

okay so here it says brings about their

disappearance so let's look at this

right here

similarly this prefers to answer a

question in the june draft where he says

supersedes them

so i would like to know the original

translation of this

um to see if this is actually what was

said

brings about their disappearance well

regardless you don't even need to look

at this to find passages from marx and

engels talking about the disappearance

of religion clearly this was their view

the question is

were they actually talking about

religion in a sufficiently exhaustive

sense i argue that the experience of

history

proves otherwise

plus wasn't it also marx and engels's

view that the revolution would first

occur in advanced england didn't they

later through the course of experience

correct this view so it's kind of like

you have to actually arrive at the

essence of their position

instead of taking out positions at a

given time

regardless of situating them within the

context of their reasoning

and as this video progresses i will show

more quotes and statements proving what

should be an uncontroversial thesis that

communism is in fact antithetical to

nationalism

we are then presented with a quote from

marxist critique of the gotham program

which again is another cherry-picked

quote as the title suggests marxist

critique of the gothic program is a

criticism of the plans put forth by

social democratic workers party of

germany the so-called gotha program the

specific question for my collective

chose stems from marxist critique of 0.5

of the gotham program which reads as

follows

in class strives for its emancipation

first of all within the framework of the

present-day national states conscious

that the necessary result of its efforts

which are common to the workers of all

civilized countries will be the

international brotherhood of peoples

and now to give full context to the

quote that was cherry-picked marx

immediately after writes the non-mark

says socialist lasalle in opposition to

the communist manifesto into all earlier

socialism conceived the workers movement

from the nearest national standpoint

he is being followed in this and that

after the work of the international it

is altogether self-evident that to be

able to fight it all the working class

must organize itself at home as a class

and that its own country is the

immediate arena of its struggle in so

far its clash struggle is national not

in substance but as the communist

manifesto says in form

so not only does the full context of

this quote reveal how infrared is trying

to distort the meaning of the quote how

is it being fucking distorted

you have to understand la soleil was

only working within

la soleil was meeting with like bismarck

he was reducing the international to the

narrow

national conditions of germany at the

time

by the way for them to be narrowly

national

also means they're not deeply national

enough

how are we distorting anything i'd love

to hear how we've distorted anything

given the wider context of the quote

we've deliberately omitted

but the full poll also explicitly

affirms my assertion that their previous

cherry picked quote from the communist

manifesto is also being distorted for

something it is not barely into the

video and they are already off to a poor

start

the video then says

what what what is being distorted

because he said it's

not in substance but in form

well yeah that's what gives substance to

the nation

the fact that it is not its own

substance

if the nation was itself the substance

it would not have the quality of

substantiality

get that through your fucking head if it

itself was the substance of its own

development

it itself would not have the quality of

substantiality

and why is that because the nation

through the dialectic process of its

actual development enters into

contradiction with itself in some kind

of way that contradiction is what

defines what the nation is

in content and if that contradiction

simply is the nation itself

it doesn't have any substance

the nation would just be reduced

to some to the kind of deeper cause of a

more fundamental substantive reality

suspended in development that's what i'm

trying to tell you if the nation was the

substance there would be no deeper

national reality why because the actual

process suspended in development

the actual thing suspended in the

process of its development

would not

be the nation

the nation would be its substance its

content

the thing in development would not

actually be national

marxist lindens never advocate on behalf

of an abstract supernatural working

class where they preach the destruction

of their own nations to berate their own

people for their sensible backwardness

while the alleged marxist londoners they

have in mind may have never said this it

is clear that both marks and goals and

london all believed in this returning to

the man

let's let's rewind that because it was

too fast what did marx angles and lenin

believe in let's see

supernational working class where did

they preach the

the video then says

marxist lunas never advocate on behalf

of an abstract supernatural working

class where do they preach the

destruction of their own nations to

berate their own people for their

ostensible backwardness

while the alleged marxist londoness they

have in mind may have never said this it

is clear that both marx angles and

london all believed in this

but you just showed how they didn't

fucking believe that because the class

struggle is national in form i don't

think you appreciate what the

significance of form here is i think you

just think form is like oh they just

said that it's foreign formative no form

is everything do you think content has

any apparent reality it doesn't the

reality of content is only actualized

through form

form is everything so if the class

struggle if the universal class struggle

is national in form

that means the only way we could relate

to it

is within the context of a given nation

there is no supranational working class

because that implies

that the form of the working class is

supernatural

like you're referring to a working class

as an object as right you're referring

it to it as an object

but you're not just referring to it as

an object you're also referring to it

as a substantive reality

a working class a group of people

well what is the form of that group is

the form of that group itself

supernational no you dumb fuck it's

national in form get this through your

fucking head you don't understand the

dialectic of content and form

returning to the manifesto marks and

angles say

the communists are further approached

with desiring to abolish countries and

nationality the working men have no

country we cannot take from them what

they have not got and why is that by the

way why is that maybe it's because

through enclosures and other fucking

process they were deprived of the

quality of national substantiality they

were deprived of the quality of being

able to have any stake or roots in their

fucking nation and that the nation was

already deprived from them are taken

away from them

it's almost like their nationality was

taken from them when they were robbed of

their fucking land you know the thing

that attaches them and gives them some

kind of fucking connection to their

nation they were taken from that and

reduced to being fucking cogs in the

wheel

maybe it's almost like mocks and angles

are saying you're saying we communists

want to abolish countries and nations no

we don't you've already abolished it and

taken away from them

and what do they say instead

oh

this is a bunch of bullshit

you want to talk about quotes taken out

of fucking context

you want to talk about quotes taken out

of fucking context

i i can't tell if this shit is fucking

deliver deliberate

holy fuck these people are liars plain

and simple liars chapter 2 proletarians

and communists so this is what they say

immediately after we cannot take from

them what they have not got since the

proletariat must first of all acquire

political supremacy must rise to be the

leading class of the nation must

constitute itself the nation it is so

far itself national but not in the

bourgeois sense of the word look at what

these fucking snakes did they said this

is the quote from the communist

manifesto the working men have no

country we can't take from what they

have not got national differences are

disappearing that's what they fucking

said they said

we can't take from what they have not

got but the proletariat must fight to

reclaim their nation that's literally

what they say afterwards fight to

reclaim your nation because it was taken

away from you

it's actually fucking incredible how

much co what this is so dishonest

what kind of dumbass watches this

fucking video and is like oh they made a

really good point here you fucking just

omitted the most important fucking

passage here

now let's let's address the the uh the

one they decided to focus on which is

this one got

national differences in antagonism

between peoples are daily more and more

vanishing owing to the development of

the bourgeoisie to freedom of commerce

to the world market to uniformity in the

mode of production and in the conditions

of life corresponding there too the

supremacy of the proletariat will cause

them to vanish still faster okay so

let's be fucking clear about the context

here because this guy talks about oh we

took and sherry pick quotes out of

context no that's what you're doing so

they specifically talk about national

differences and antagonism between

peoples are more vanishing owing to the

development of the bourgeoisie to

capitalism more or less right

but the key context of this is this

united action of the leading civilized

countries at least is one of the first

conditions for the emancipation of the

proletariat

this is the immature view of marx and

engels that they later abandoned and why

did they later abandon this view because

it's very clear that national

differences in antagonism were not

vanishing they were deepening and

consolidating themselves in ways marx

and engels had not anticipated at the

time just in as much

the united action of the civilized

countries was no longer going to be the

basis for the emancipation of the

proletariat

but actually the revolution within the

anticipated revolution within russia

according to marx and engels and the

later years of their life

this is taken out of context

but the

there's a key um significance here there

was no developed nationalism at the time

marx and engels were writing this

nationalism was an artificial project

and the national differences and

antagonisms that were the object of that

project were not being clearly defined

at the time

so

this is just complete bullshit right

that's the context of what marx and

engels are writing here

um

like germany had not even yet

constituted itself as a united nation

what they all you need to do is all you

need is like just look at the revolution

of 1848 which was a german national

revolution marx and engels were fully

supporting it when they were referring

to this differences antagonism more and

more vanishing they're referring to

things like how all of these separate

different parts of germany were

separated but there was this deeper

aspiration for them to be united

they just superimposed this german

national project of unity onto the unity

of the civilized countries in general

clearly

it didn't play out like that and they

later acknowledged that

they later acknowledged that

so this is fucking stupid to point out

now for lenin i will just provide one

quote although there are countless other

statements by him expressing the exact

same sentiment sounds sounds like a

bluff to me

sounds like a huge bluff to me

some of which i will show later the

class conscious workers fight hard

against every kind of nationalism both

the crude violent black hunter

nationalism and that most refined

nationalism which preaches the equality

of nations together with the splitting

up of the workers cause

so this comes from a passage called this

comes from something lenin wrote in 1914

corrupting the workers with refined

nationalism

so preaches the equality of nations

together with

the splitting up of the workers cause

the workers organizations and the

working-class movement according to

nationality

so do you know what that means you dumb

fuck

it means we're against a refined

nationalism that preaches equality of

nations alongside

splitting up the workers cause according

to nationality now there are plenty

plenty of context

to this

lenin called the russian empire the

prison house of nations so russia is

one civilizational space with many

different nationalities within it lenin

believed in one worker's cause and one

workers movement within this russian

civilizational big space he didn't use

that term for it but that's what it was

in practice he was against a refined

nationalism that at the same time

preaching an equality of nations wanted

to split up the workers cause the

workers organizations and working class

movement but the workers cause the

workers organizations and working class

movement were already national in form

so he's clearly talking about

within the russian empire here

unlike all the varieties of the

nationalist bourgeoisie

the class conscious workers carrying out

the decisions of the recent conference

stand only for the most incomplete and

fully applied equality

of nations and languages

but also for the amalgamation of the

workers of different nationalities in

united proletarian organizations of

every kind

what's wrong with that

any problem

herein lies the fundamental distinction

between the national program of marxism

and of any bourgeoisie be it the most

advanced

you want to remove every trace of

distrust estrangement suspicion and

enmity what's wrong with that

and fully equality implies the

repudiation of all privileges for any

one languages and the recognition of the

right to self-determination for all

languages again this is all within the

context of the russian empire you want a

fucking example of this just look at the

fucking

examples he's using of the boudoir

nationalism the refined nationalism the

bundes the liquidator liquidators the

narodniks the various petty bourgeois

groups these are all groups within the

russian empire he's not talking about

the whole fucking world in context here

again you removed it from its fucking

context and thought you were saying

something smart it's embarrassing let

the petty yeah this is what he's fucking

talking about now you go

further in time and you want to look at

the context of what lenin's saying

lenin's not a russian nationalist

he believes in a united russian

civilization

that's the fucking context of what he's

saying whether he knows it at the time

or not that's what it turned out to

actually be

the amalgamation wasn't only through the

ideological unity of communism but

through a historical unity

that was represented

that was sorry um

created by the history of russia as a

civilization itself

the workers organizations and the

working-class movement according to

nationality

unlike all the varieties of the

nationalist bourgeoisie the class

conscious workers stand not only for the

most completely consistent and fully

applied to quality of nations and

languages but also for the amalgamation

of the workers of the different

nationalities in united proletarian

organizations of every kind yeah

again within the russian empire

lenin didn't believe in a simultaneous

revolution

of every fucking that's not

and even if lenin was naive about that

and believed that somehow early on

because of the social democratic

dogmatism

stalin socialism with one country makes

it very clear that it is not the logical

conclusion of

what is what stalin calls the

fundamental essence of leninism

leninism

in its unique break with orthodox

marxism or social democracy does not

have as its logical conclusion the idea

of one simultaneous revolution of all

nations

despite what there's a difference

between

the unity of nations within the russian

empire and the unity of nations

abstractly and in general there's a

crucial distinction between those

red so-called marxist asserts the core

of marxism is indeed about a

supernatural working class that has no

nation but

no it's fucking not you have no citation

for has no nation

none

there's no supernational working class

whatsoever the best you've fucking done

is

allude to some loose insinuations

that marx engels

and maybe lenin believed

that eventually

the working class will amalgamate into

one super nation

now whether that's true or not

is a different debate you're wrong about

that as well by the way

but that is not saying that there's a

supernational working class there's a

there's a stark difference between

saying

there is a supernational working class

and eventually

the working class of all nations will

unite into one nation even though that's

nothing marx angles or lenin ever even

say

they continue the indisputable fact that

communism invariably assumed a deeply

national and patriotic form is not in

fact a happenstance but is directly tied

up with the essence of socialism itself

again i'm going to quote from the quote

they provided at the very beginning of

their video from the manifesto though

not in substance yet informed the

struggle of the proletariat with the

bourgeoisie is that first national

struggle

so the marxist variety of socialism is

not as they claim deeply national yes it

fucking is

that's exactly what deeply national

means

if the struggle is national in form but

not in content or in substance

that means

that there can be a development of the

form

what part of that do you not fucking

understand

that's what deeply national means if the

nation was the substance or the content

it's not deeply national

there's nothing deep there's nothing

deeply national about it

what i don't i don't get why that's so

hard to understand

yes deeply national

is referring to the development of the

form through its content

that is what it means to be deeply

national

to develop the form through its content

you know why you know what these people

are just perverts you know i'm gonna put

it this way

they have an idea that deeply national

means the nation is itself the content

of struggle

but if the nation is the content of

struggle and you actually know that

content somehow

how could your relationship to it

have the quality of deepness whatsoever

you would basically have the most

superficial nationalism where you're

waving the flag and doing this and that

but

in actual reality

there's nothing past the surface

it's just that

if you make the nation the content of

struggle there is nothing past it it is

the content there's nothing deeper that

is the content let me explain this to

you it's like i'm gonna simplify this to

you and then like you should just get it

like that okay

if the nation is the substance or the

content

of the struggle there's nothing past it

it's just

some

dogmatic form

there's nothing deeper than it

but if the nation is the form and the

content or the substance is the class

struggle of that form within that form

then

it is precisely through that

contradiction

wherein the form develops

according

to its content

to the course produced by its content

that it

is more than just what's superficial so

for the nation to be the form of class

struggle basically means

it's not just on the surface it is

undergoing a real

deepened development

do you guys understand this

if the nation

if the nation is the form of the class

struggle

then by virtue of undergoing further

development

because its content is not identical

with the form of itself

it has a deeper reality than just what

appears on the surface so what is a

nation right a nation is a language some

culture customs whatever that's the form

what's the deeper reality of that form

if the deeper reality of that form is

just itself

there's nothing past it that's it it's

just all on the surface there's no

deeper reality whatsoever

this is a very very important point i

want you guys to

i want to hit home because

this is so bafflingly stupid what this

person's saying

neither is it part and parcel to the

media yeah it's a basic application of

the dialectic of form and content it's a

very basic one i mean that's also why

though

oftentimes

people who larp as nationalists are not

nationalists

they're cosmopolitans who cynically see

the nation

uh

as just another larp

their furries and their degenerates and

fem boys and all that kind of fucking

shit and it's just another fucking

cosmetic flavor and larp it doesn't have

a deep

reality but moreover it's like

hidden gromski lenin deeply natural

i'm looking for the quotes

just to show you is gramsci some kind of

fundamental deviation

from marxism because this is what

gromski had to say

there you go the word is profoundly

so this is what uh

gromski has said

bronstein who presents himself as

pro-western was in fact a cosmopolitan

that is superficially national and

superficially western european on the

other hand lenin was profoundly national

and profoundly european bernstein

recalls in his memoirs that it was his

theory that shown his correctness his

theory was no good okay so gromski

called lenin profoundly national and

profoundly european i thought he said

deeply natural that's how i remember it

but he said profoundly national

that's what gromski said about lenin

of socialism itself martian angles are

very explicit to write that the struggle

is at first national not in substance

but only in form which is i don't you

don't know what that means you don't

know what it means for something to be

informed

national you think that means it's like

it's uh

unimportant

or insubstantial doesn't have the

quality of substantiality there's a

difference between something being the

substance and having the quality of

substantiality it is precisely the class

struggle

that gives the form of a nation the

quality of substantiality

key distinction in the area because the

essence of a nation is not

the nation itself

influenced marx in short it means the

core of marxism is not national

whatsoever but for practical reasons

that is how it will probably occur at

first

the core of marxism is not

national whatever that fucking means

marxism is a science with which people

within nations understand the

development of their own respective

nations and civilizations

so what what do you mean for it the core

of it to be national i mean in a sense

it is national and the core of it

because every form of marxism is

national there's

marxism within the context of china

there's marxism within the context of

the soviet union so what are you really

talking about here it's just nonsensical

there's no it's not like there's a

universal doctrine of marxism there's

some kind of uh pope of marxism

oh that's what they used to call kotsuki

but you know

after the second international's gone

you don't have a pope of marxism anymore

yes form is content telling you what it

is that is exactly true

that is exactly true

i think you know i think people just

don't even know what a nation is a

nation is not

some arbitrarily some arbitrary um

preconceived characteristic of a people

a nation is precisely the form of a

people

a nation is precisely a form a nation

isn't the content how could a nation be

a continent that would mean a nation is

an idea

of some kind that precedes reality

that's stupid

due to proximity linguistic barriers and

how virtual political power is currently

divided they then double down on this

distorted view of marxism

as first stated by marx and later

elaborated upon by stalin and mao the

universal truth of marxism finds

expression only in specific national

characteristics and its acquisition of a

definite national form

and this is mao but i thought he doesn't

want to talk about mao

this is perhaps the poorest reading of

marx i've ever heard i'm not

it's a direct quotation from mount

it's a direct quotation

i'm just waiting for the donation

thank you chris morlock

i fucking lennon insulted gramsci by

saying that mussolini had the passion in

24. these fascists like gramsci because

he was a classmate of gentile and came

from the same italian intellectual scene

hegemony i know but it's like

soviet writers say the same thing about

lenin

going to the issue of how true to marx

mao and stalin were but even a curse

right glance at the works of marx angles

and london shows that they always had a

positive international and global

revolution while the revolution might

start off as we've already seen and

explained national in form the substance

will not be national

this is just the zultania's debate again

all over again it's the same fucking

debate i had with zoltanius

but he's just saying it again hoping

that audiences

aren't going to fucking remember when i

literally address this exact same

fucking point with zoltanius

you are making assumptions about what

internationalism actually entails you

think according to marx angles and lenin

it's the trotskyist view of the negation

of everything this it is not a negation

national but it will merely be the

stepping stone to an international

revolution that is as global as capital

itself is

again

what form does that take does that take

the form of a simultaneous global

revolution this is exactly what i told

zoltanius does that fucking mean it

happens all at once

does that fucking mean

that it happens overnight like that no

obviously we believe in a global

revolution that's just as global in

abstraction as capital but that doesn't

mean it takes the form of a simultaneous

and immediate global revolution for

example there is a global revolution

going on right now it's just at what

pace is it proceeding it's a revolution

in the forces of production that is

being led by china right now actually

right and then under the ussr there was

a global revolution occurring a global

anti-imperialist revolution

uh against american union polarity and

again marx and engels got it wrong about

the revolution first happening in the

advanced civilized countries

for reasons they would later acknowledge

at the end of their life

that doesn't tell us what the essence of

marxism is even if i granted you the

idea that marx engels and even lenin

happened to have believed

um

that the revolution was going to be

immediately global which they didn't but

even if i granted you that

why did they think that

why is the question what was the essence

of their position why

that is a question you can't answer

because if you answer that question you

would see

how

coming from their very same method you

cannot arrive at that conclusion

let me put it this way let's okay

i'm going to explain to you dialectics a

global international revolution that is

just as global and

abstract as global capital

still takes national form

that's what you don't understand it is

just as global abstract and

international

for example the october revolution

russia was a prison house of nations so

for all intents and purposes that was an

international revolution and yet

when the morning comes after the night

and the dust settles after the storm you

see that this is a particular

civilization with a long history simply

reasserting itself in a new way

this is how you arrive and rise from the

abstract to the concrete ad verbatim

that's marx's method rising from the

abstract to the concrete

you you have this complete negation sure

that's modernity modernity is total

complete negation but the decisive

significance of marxism is what happens

after

after the negation is done

and some semblance of positive being

reveals itself

at the end of it

marxism elects

to recognize that positive being

as its true object all along that

reconciles the very negation

that's why marxism replaces hegel's

negation of the negation which is

metaphysical

and is confining itself to the realm of

pure thinking

with

a form of positive being that reconciles

negation that's the difference between

materialist dialectics and hegel's

idealist

one so plainly and then by the way you

know how i know this is because that was

consistent with marx's own intellectual

journey with the young hegelians it was

the young hegelians who imagined this

complete

um

abstract negation

communism uh all differences being

eliminated because we have eliminated

them with the faculty of thought they

are already completely eliminated for

all intents and purposes all we have to

do is enlighten the masses about it marx

said no marx said you have arrived at

some kind of abstract universal humanity

that has eliminated all difference all

particularity and it's just this

universal form of thought

marx poses the question though he says

but why after this do we still have

the proletariat

why after this do we still have this

specific

form of humanity

on the street

can't and fikte soar heavens blue

but i seek to find

what is on the street it's a literal

quote from one of marx's early poems

marx's own

conclusion from the development of

german idealism is pretty much the key

to understanding what the marxist view

on the nation

patriotism or conservatism is that's all

you need to know

it's a specific way of reconciling

the all-encompassing negation that

corresponds to modernity

after all of the artifice of modernity

is exhausted in negating everything

within the realm of modern form what

remains

marxism basically allows us to have

access to the materiality of tradition

of the nation

and of humanity in general

outside of the artificiality of the

universal modern form remember what

modernity is modernity is

beginning with some absolute universal

form and setting that against the wealth

of substantive and particular reality

whether that is the universal form of

the citizen

openly and honestly admitted or it's

some kind of false reactionary and

conservative larp where you adopt the

appearance and form of some kind of

national whatever but it's just an empty

form it's just an empty appearance set

against reality

and set against its actual material

reality

how to relate to the real material thing

and not just the artificially contrived

form of it

that's the question remarks and engels

the way to relate to the reality of the

nation

by the way

foucault had pointed this out before

juco pointed out that initially marx and

engels posited

before the class struggle

a struggle between nations as the

driving force of history it is precisely

for this reason they decided no class is

the essence nation is not the essence

class is

and this is what allows

nations to have reality

this is how we can access the true

reality of a nation

outside of the artificially contrived

modern form

through this precise dialectic of

content and form when we refer to the

nation sultanius

we're not fucking referring to some larp

parade furry identity we are precisely

referring to a specific

dialectic of form and content we're not

referring

to some kind of like ready-made

comfortable

identity we're not referring to an

identity we are referring to a specific

unity of opposites

a specific way or form the unity of

opposites

acquires reality and actuality

that's what we're talking about when we

talk about a nation we're not talking

about

some

cute little identity we're not talking

about a pokemon we're not talking about

a fucking

what are the those uh

uh

that fucking website like poland ball or

whatever the fuck that is we're not

talking about that dumb fucking cringe

larp shit talking about something real

it's honestly embarrassing that i'm

having to explain basic stance of

marxism too so what's embarrassing is

that you put your nerd glasses on

who would have guessed that the

appearance and essence of things are

different who would have guessed that

things aren't the same as what they what

they are at face value who would have

guessed that there's more to things than

you just don't understand dialectics

what is it what is fucking embarrassing

about any of this what is the point of

any of this from a practical perspective

um

actually you're wrong

what is okay what's what's the purpose

of this you want to unite with the

leftists

why aren't you trying to tell it truth

hath it's not the fucking truth because

that that wasn't the reality of what

marxism or communism actually was

so what's the point of this

um i just want people to be able to make

the choice between being fem boys and

degenerates who call themselves fascists

third positioners

and being leftists and then we can be

friends with each other

but hans the way you

are proving that we're both full of shit

and that we're both larping scum

is really upsetting my furry my little

pony discord where we can all um

bask in our ideological and spiritual

corruption

and get away with it this is literally

just fucking lump and degeneracy you

know it's literal i'm i'm ruining the

party for them i'm ruining the lump and

degeneracy larp party for them that's

why they're fucking doing this called

marxist leninist

the objectivity of the nation including

its rights rituals and the national

spirit defining people is something

which communist should strive to

authentically express rather than ignore

the realities of the nation cannot be

wished away nor cheaply be considered a

spook most of what we just heard was

pure word salad nonsense and should make

actual marxist line as cringe this is a

frankly static and non-dialectical view

to see things like right

okay whenever you just said word salad

and let's give the reasoning

planning is cringe this is a frankly

static and non-dialectical view to see

things like rights rituals and national

spirit to be part of the objectivity of

the nation foreign explains

of course that's part of the objectivity

of the nation how is that undialectical

explain how that's undialectical go

ahead

political judicial phil

i already before i read this i'm just

gonna guess he's saying because all

those things change they can't be

objective

watch him try and fucking say that but

also

it is not the economic base is the cause

alone inactive while everything else is

a passive effect there is an interaction

on the basis

how so how does that contradict with

what grayson said

i would love to hear the cope about how

this contradicts anything grayson said

this affirms what he said are you

fucking kidding

this affirms everything grayson just

fucking said philosophical religious

literary artistic etc development is

based on economic development but all

these react upon one another and also

upon the economic base it is not that

the economic position is the cause and a

loan active while everything else only

has a passive effect there is rather an

interaction on the basis of the economic

necessity which ultimately always

asserts itself he then explains in

another of his thank you net rando but

i'm gonna put a pause on this because

i'm sick of being sunlocked okay let's

just fucking go back to what grayson

said

or cheaply be considered a spook most of

what we just heard was pure word salad

nonsense and should make actual marks as

long as cringe this is a frankly static

and non-dialectical view to see things

like rights rituals and national spirit

to be part of the objectivity of the

nation so rights rituals and national

spirit so i don't know if you're trying

to equate political juridical

philosophical and religious literary

restrictive development with their

rights rituals and national spirit but

those aren't the same fucking thing

actually and engels is literally saying

even those things can't be reduced to

economics so i don't know just what

exactly you're trying to even fucking

say here

it's based on economic development but

all these react upon one another and

also upon the economic base it is not

that the economic position is the cause

and alone active while everything else

only has a passive effect there is

rather an interaction on the basis of

the economic necessity which ultimately

always asserts itself

he then explains in another of his

letters the economic situation is the

base but the different parts of the

structure the political forms of the

class struggle and its results the

constitution's established by the

victorious class after the battle is won

forms of law and even the reflection of

all these real struggles and the brains

of the participants political theories

judicial philosophical religious

opinions and their further development

into dogmatic systems all this exercise

is also its influence on the development

of the historical struggles and in cases

determines that sounds like it just

affirms rather than contradicts anything

grayson said marxists are thus not

tasked to authentically express these

things because all these so-called

cultural traits of the people that were

listed are as angel has explained based

in part of economic development

angles literally just tried to tell you

that those very things influence the

economic development too they exercise

and influence on the base as well

so

what are you trying to say what kind of

stupid fucking reasoning is this what

kind of dumb fucking cop reasoning is

this has explained based in part of

economic development rather than just it

r as angle has these things because all

these so-called

marxists are thus not tasked to

authentically express these things so

marxist shouldn't authentically express

these things because they are in part

derived from the economic base huh so

that's like saying marxist shouldn't

authentically express

the interests of the proletariat because

those interests also come from the

economic base that's how fucking stupid

you sound right now

because all these so-called cultural

traits of the people that were listed

are as angel has explained based in part

of economic development rather than

deeply rooted the culture is some sort

of epiphenomenon of other material

factors

that's literally not what angle says

by the way

how it's there is nothing incompatible

about

something having a basis in the economic

base

and also having roots

the word roots is a phenomenological

description engels is giving a

scientific and materialist description

roots and all that stuff about national

this is

this is how that manifests itself to us

and how we experience it

phenomenologically so there's a

difference between

the more metaphysical understanding of

what the content is

and the phenomenological experience

that enters our horizon

that discloses itself to our phenomenal

horizon

so

these are experienced as the roots which

means they are the roots

phenomenologically they are the roots

now

roots and economic base are not the same

thing because the description angles is

talking about with regard to the

economic base

is not a phenomenological description

and then in turn it asks the question

what are the roots

of such a description angles himself is

making

that is the significance of

phenomenology and ontology opened by

heidegger which marx and engels weren't

dealing with at the time that's where i

come in

but they were not dealing with that they

were plainly not dealing with that

the conditions for the very disclosure

of

uh

the object of materialist analysis are

very different

than just the object of materialist

analysis taken in some kind of vacuum

for example it's just like when gromski

said that lenin was profoundly national

ingalls was also profoundly national and

profoundly german what he was saying had

roots in the german nation

him talking about the basin

superstructure

itself had national roots

you don't even know how these different

words you're using relate to each other

you're a fucking idiot

pseudo-intellectual

who's trying to impress your discord

follower peers or your telegram

followers

thinking that you're not you're going to

just going to get away with it and

you're not going to be called out

it marks this but moreover

you literally cited engels saying no you

shouldn't look at this bulgarian

consider all of those things epi

phenomena because they themselves exert

and exercise influence on the economic

base itself so there are like multiple

ways in which it is it can be shown

that you are fundamentally wrong about

this

which seeks to revolutionize the means

of production and the economic base will

thereby change these things as well

these things changing

does not negate their quality of

objectivity nor does it negate the

necessity for marxists to give a

authentic expression to them because

precisely what they are

corresponds to the changes in the forces

of production

you mentioned moreover you talked about

philosophical juridical

artistic and intellectual shit and

grayson talked about rights rituals and

spirit of the nation two entirely

different fucking things

but yes a nation is itself laden with

the development of the forces of

production

if your nation can't survive changes in

the forces of production

you just never understood what your

fucking nation was in the first place

the notion you had of your nation

was limited

wrong

narrow

and subjective it wasn't actually the

objective real material nation you were

talking about

how can all these cultural expressions

of the people be authentic when the very

goal of marxism is to change them the

only conclusion

something can't be authentic

if it implies change

but how do we want to change them it's

fucking stupid

you're just wrong in every regard

there's like

i just gave you like seven different

ways in which you're fucking stupid and

wrong about this

like no you're not correct

about the equivocation of a

superstructure with national feeling and

national spirit you're wrong about that

but moreover you're also wrong about

this idea that giving authentic

expression of to the nation is somehow

impossible because nations change

and no we don't want to change the

nation if we want to unleash the forces

of production

the nation changing would at best be an

incidental byproduct of that

but i don't even think you know what it

means to unleash the forces of

production unleashing the forces of

production is not only possible through

the development of technologies

but through

de-territorializing the relationship

between

state institutions in a given population

after all it's this day

territorialization that corresponds

to um

revolutions in the forces of production

that offset

the

law uh falling rate of profit

and re re-establish the law of value

so unleashing the forces of production

is also a national project it also

corresponds

to deepening the relationship between

the institutions that represent the

people the actual character of the

people itself something that's only

possible

if the real character of the people ergo

their national character is given

authentic expression i think you just

have a dogmatic and preconceived idea of

what a nation is

and because that's contradiction you're

saying we're changing the nation no you

just never had a sense of what your own

fucking nation was in the first place

your idea of what a nation is is just an

arbitrary arbitrarily contrived and

dogmatically formulated set of

characteristics that is in no way

actually essential to what a real nation

is illusion it seems is that infrared is

not a marxist organization but don't

just take my word for it we're not an

organization at all you dumb fuck we're

a media collective

it's from marks and angles themselves

the nationality of the peoples

associated themselves in accordance with

the principle of community will be

compelled to mingle with each other as a

result of this association

you literally already quoted this and i

already fucking addressed it

appreciation and they're about to

resolve themselves

you already fucking quoted this and i

already addressed it private property

likewise the notion that the reality of

the nation cannot be wasted away is

equally laughable one of the major

threats that permeates marx's body of

work is that marx sees the revolutionary

forces of the bourgeoisie and capitalism

and he is very elucidating on just how

much they are destroying the nation and

everything else they touch to quote that

famous line from the manifesto

so

grayson says we are not going to wish

away we can't wish away the realities of

the nation

and he

quotes

a passage from the manifesto

that says

capitalism is melting all that is solid

into air can you explain to me the

connection

child boy can you explain to me the

connection between those two threads of

association you're trying to establish

constant revolutionizing of production

uninterrupted disturbance of all social

conditions everlasting uncertainty and

agitation distinguished the boudoir

epoch from all earlier ones all fixed

fast frozen relations with her train of

ancient inventorial prejudices and

opinions are swept away faced with

silver senses his real conditions of

life and his relations with his kind

the whole point of marxism is to realize

that these realities can be wished away

and are currently

retard you're retarded you're mentally

retarded i have nothing else to tell you

you're mentally retarded marx just

described to you

the process by which

parochial relations

are being materially eroded by

capitalism and the conclusion you drew

from that

is that marx is saying oh yeah we can

wish away all these things in our heads

no you can't wish them away because the

pro even if we

assumed

that this process of all that is solid

melts into it air

which the list caused

deterioratorialization

implies the destruction of the nation

that destruction of the nation isn't

happening because anyone's wishing it

away in their head it's happening

because of a material process

called capitalism but you're also wrong

about your interpretation of what marx

is saying about

all that is solid melting terror because

as the laws pointed out and in a way

that's actually oddly consistent with

dialectics despite deliza's rejection of

the dialectic is that every

deterritorialization corresponds to a

re-territorialization in other words

in the same way that capitalism melts

everything

and that all that is solid melts into

air

it then

goes on to acquire a new form of

solidity and even from a literary

perspective if you're a liter if you're

an english literary major and you read

this fucking um

passage

it says all that is solid melts into air

but then

mark says man is at last compelled to

face with sober senses his real

conditions of life his relations with

his kind so it's almost like from only

from a literary perspective capitalism

is melting everything away now we're

forced

to have a solid understanding of what's

going on

capitalism melts everything away now we

must re-establish

some solidity

through our sober senses

just from how this is structured from a

literary perspective that's what he's

saying

and are currently being destroyed this

is what mark saw in his time in the

1800s and has only increased during our

time as capitalism has spread and

intensified but marx as a

non-reactionary socialist sees this as a

good thing and said no he doesn't see it

as a good thing at best

you might try and argue that he sees it

as an inevitable thing but you cannot

normatively ascribe it with the quality

that he thinks it's good obviously he

doesn't fucking think it's good

obviously him and engels described the

rosy dawn of capitalism

as being extremely bad

the question is is it inevitable

it says explicitly that this process

will be accelerated under his form of

socialism

yeah and it's almost like you don't

understand dialectics it's almost like

you don't understand how through

accelerating this process

you can yet again arrive at a new sense

of those things that capitalism has

negated

it's almost like you don't fucking

understand what dialectics is

it's almost like

by

engaging with their negation

in thought modern thought

nothing is fixed anymore everything is

subject to liquefication

nothing's fixed anymore

okay we've acknowledged that in our

heads

what happens after what happens after is

that reality yet again acquires

determinate form

but in this way we allow reality to

breathe and develop in such a way that

is not attached to our preconceived

dogmatic views about it

so we negate reality in our head

supposedly

only to free reality

to

become what it actually is freed from

our

prejudices of thought

this is the radically different

modernity of marxism

compared to liberalism

and this dumb fucking my little pony

cope

well let's continue on

like the liberal cosmopolitans

reactionaries confuse the outward

appearance of the nation with its

essence which is precisely inexhaustible

and irreducible to its existent form

precisely

again this is just more wart salad

i hate this little fucking twerp kid

this is a smart wear salad shut the fuck

up you little bitch

just beca

it's too hard for me to understand so

it's word salad

less than two minutes ago in the video

they said the objectivity of the nation

including its rights rituals and the

national spirit defining of people is

something which combinations strive to

authentically express rather than yes

ignore the realities of the nation

cannot be wished away nor yes deeply be

considered a spook

literally confusing what's the

contradiction the outward appearance of

the nation with its essence it is they

who are engaging in a phenomenal

reduction

no it's not

you are refusing you are confusing the

outward appearance with the assets we're

not it's that fucking simple

how is there a contradiction between

those two things whatsoever

giving authentic expression to the

essence of the nation is not the same

thing as reducing

the essence of the nation to its outward

appearance that would be like saying

that to give authentic expression to the

american nation

we're just going to engage in george w

bush neocon iraq war fox patriotism

you're a fucking idiot dude you don't

even know what grayson was saying and

you have the audacity to accuse him of

saying word salad you stupid fuck sit

the fuck down you dumbass kid you don't

even know what you're fucking responding

to

this same idealism permits the

idolater's corrupted vision of

internationalism a word long since

abused by the post 60s left

internationalism for the fake and

anti-popular left exists at the expense

of national realities the revolution it

is imagined abolishes borders peoples

and nations all at once on the basis of

their offense to universal reason

justice or other golden idols

okay

again infrared is showing how little

they understand marx

go ahead

no please go ahead and explain

how this evinces a lack of understanding

of marx i can't wait to hear what this

fucking kid has to say go ahead

marks as a good hegelian in radical

bourgeoisie

very much believes

marx is a hegelian and radical bourgeois

thinker it's not like marx literally

turns hegel on his head

it's not like marx accomplishes the

wholesale negation of german idealism

and sublation of hegel and german

idealism it's not like marx was famous

for his critique of hegel

precisely on the basis

of beginning with the universal and not

with the particular

i would i want to i want to hear more

what does he have to say

as i have already shown in a global and

borderless world as well as he believes

in that so-called golden idol of

universal reason

marx believes in the golden idol of

universal reason

now what i'm curious about is how this

dumb fuck is gonna justify that

i have literally read cover to cover

marx's critique of hegel's philosophy of

right i have read the german ideology

marx literally

plants a bomb under so-called universal

reason

that was like his defining moment

marx it faces the pretended universality

of the reason of german idealism

he ascribes to the so-called pretense of

universal reason

the concrete reality of the proletarian

class

meaning it's not actually universal

it's limited in some kind of way

which after a quick search i was able to

find at least two positive uses of that

term in the critique of hegel's

philosophy of right

this fucking kid controlled f the phrase

universal reason

then read some shit by marx and thought

it was a positive use and is using that

as an example for why marx believed in

what grayson called the golden idol of

universal reason this kid's retarded

he's a retard he's actually retarded

he's actually retarded

this is like bafflingly fucking

embarrassingly stupid

and in a newspaper article he wrote on

may 10 1842

and that

even if he did so okay i have to look

this up myself 1842 is before

he even wrote

that was before he wrote the critique of

hagel's philosophy of right he wasn't

even

he didn't even arrive at his break yet

he was still a hegelian at that time you

dumb fuck

marks may 10th

1842

okay this is what he's talking

about okay i'm gonna literally show you

like a bunch of shit

not a bunch a few things from marx

talking about universal reason

the direct phrase universal reason this

is like this these people they're made

they might be autistic to be fair i

think they're autistic which means

that's there's nothing wrong with that

but they probably have that disability

where they're like i can't think about

the thing deeper or more critically i

have to like just take everything at

face value and uh just assume like i

have to literally use the word universal

reason to know what that actually means

i can't like actually synthesize the

meaning of words

in different ways you know i have to

literally use the word universal reason

but that's okay we'll work with that so

this is the philosophy of right

so there's one use

the content of the state lies outside

these constitutions merely an external

identity mutual determination

was developed as the universal reason in

opposition to other spheres as something

opposed to them

so he's literally engaging with

hegel

he's paraphrasing hegel

he is literally paraphrasing hegel in

order to reveal the internal

contradictions

of hegel's thinking

or his conclusions i should say he's

paraphrasing hegel dumbass

by the way even hegel's universal reason

isn't the golden idol of universal

reason because hegel's universal reason

is suspended in the active process by

which it confronts its own determinate

particularity

in its own concrete reality so hegel's

universal reason is not

grayson literally said the golden idol

of universal reason this autistic guy

literally controlled f universal reason

throughout the entire body of marx's

work

well mark said something positive about

universal reason well he didn't first of

all it wasn't normatively positive

but what does that have to do with

grayson said about the golden idol of

universal reason and

communism being in the name of the

golden idol of universal reason

you don't even know what you're trying

to critique you dumb fucking kid sit the

fuck down dumbass i can't wait till i

critique him monday so the guy said he's

gonna debate me monday and i'm gonna

press the fuck out of him

and like force him to actually defend

his reasoning

and it's gonna be so

so

fun

i cannot fucking wait i literally cannot

wait

i cannot wait to debate this fucking guy

where like he's gonna have the quotes

okay

so this is in the holy family

okay marx doesn't use it here okay well

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

say with this you're not saying anything

that is why for marxists historically

internationalism comes into being

through the nation and corresponded to a

deepening of national realities rather

than their forsaken

all this shows in light of all the

evidence i have brought is just how not

marxist those countries were

the literal ultra left fascist i

literally told you they're the same

thing i literally told you they're the

same shit

and you didn't provi i literally fucked

every aspect of this segment all of this

got fucked

your whole video got fucked

this all we have this to go still but

like yeah all of this is destroyed so

you know

every time you reference anything you

said here it's null because i already

blew it the fuck out

the birth of the united states has seen

the development of various local and

quasi-national traditions with deep

roots from appalachian americans to the

black belt they have long since become

indigenized and is in fact their

uprooting at the hands of the american

oligarchy that constitutes a

proletarianization of white america it

seems like here they are making as marx

would call it a reactionary socialist

point

i would love to hear how this is a

reactionary socialist point

pointing out

proletarianization

is reactionary

pointing out how people become

proletarianized

is reactionary

so angles and marx were reactionary

socialists because they pointed out

literally the same fucking time thing in

their own era so they're reactionary

socialists according to this literal

dumb fuck this person is so fucking

stupid they should never show their face

on the internet again i swear to god

they're being rather undialectical in

their inability to see the iron

please tell me what's on dialectical

in capitalism proletarianization which

shows to see

all he did was give a description of

what's happening

and you're accusing him of being

undialectical and not seeing how this

sows the seeds of capitalism's

destruction we know it does dumbass

we're not saying we can return to the

past and we can return

to these state of affairs before the

proletarianization we can't

we can't

it's so fucking stupid

it is literally so stupid

as angles wrote in socialism utopian and

scientific it is the compelling force of

anarchy into production of society at

large that more and more completely

churns the great majority of men into

proletarians and it is the masses of the

proletariat again who will finally put

an end to anarchy in production

okay

what about what henry just said it

contradicts that they then start

attacking leftists and the land back

movement which according to what what

what no no don't move on from that you

dumb little twerp

go ahead and explain how what henry said

contradicts what angle said he gave a

description of what's happening in

america right now

and you just said this contradicts

angles how

thank you so much ffff for the uh 20

gifted so wikipedia is a campaign that

seeks to establish political and

economic control to indigenous people in

the united states and canada over land

that had historically belonged to them

prior to colonization following the age

of exploration laughably after a lot of

twisted logic they come to this

conclusion which is why jasokai left us

never have never willed was a threat to

the existing establishment and are in

practice the radical left length of

actually existing white supremacy

aside from asserting that a movement to

give native american sovereign control

over land

i can't you know what you know what this

fucking guy and the leftists have in

common

low testosterone doesn't matter he calls

himself a fascist and a third

positionist

but

the you know what it's not about left or

right guys it's about low t versus high

t

and he's literally repeating everything

leftists are saying ad verbatim

out of low testosterone solidarity

beta male solidarity among the low

testosterone

fuck males they all they're all in

solidarity with each other that's the

struggle just it's not about left and

right it's about soy versus giga chad

that's what's going on

and is white supremacist let's see what

they have to say actually about land

reform

this is why communism has nothing to do

with land back and everything to do with

land reform it is only in the repulsion

of yes it's every fucking communist

movement in history

was land reform as the most basic means

of production that the productive

capacities and entrepreneurial spirit of

the american people can be unleashed

ignoring the fact that agricultural

employment is only around one percent of

the workforce in america retard fucking

retard

he thinks land reform

is literally about agriculture

maybe there's a deeper essence to it

than just agriculture dumb fuck

maybe it's about

economic space in the abstract and its

significance for a given polity

you're out of your depth

if you just look when you watch our

infrared vision videos just trust your

feeling when you watch this video in

your feeling you understand what we're

saying you understand what we mean by

land reform give americans some

fundamental means of production everyone

gets that they you understand the vibe

but as soon as you put on your fucking

urbanoid goggles on and try to out

intellectualize us we are going to fuck

you we are going to fuck you as soon as

you try to out nerd us and just

intellectualize what we're trying to

fucking say we will fuck you don't

fucking do it we're being charitable and

generous with you to rely on your

intuition and rely on your feeling you

want to get into this nerd theory shit

we will fuck you okay so

don't infrared again as i've shown time

and time again now fails to understand

marx let's look at what marks angles and

london how to say about this so-called

land reform

okay before you do i'll show you what

they had to say

i'll actually show you what they had to

say

so the first thing

in america where a democratic

constitution had already been

established the communists must make the

cause with the party which will turn

this constitution against the

bourgeoisie and use it in the interest

of the proletariat

that is with the agrarian national

reformers the national reformers

wanted land reform

in his letter to sorge in 1892

big landowners from the south

only when the land the public lands is

completely in the hands of the

speculators and settlement land thus

becomes more and more difficult

will the time come with peaceful

development for a third party land is

the basis for speculation

mania and speculative opportunity

only when there's a generation of native

warriors that cannot expect anything

from speculation there you go small

farmer and petty booster will hardly

seem to small party

there you go

[Music]

when he talks about the civil war in

france

this is also what i want i'm looking for

it here it's in the vermeer

so in this last chapter of the 18th

premier he talks about the small holding

peasants

he talks about how the small holding

penmans form an enormous mass

they're basically indebted right

so

somewhere here he talks about

where did you fucking say this

hold on

okay so here's what lenin says

in speaking of a real people's

revolution marx without at least

discounting the special features of the

petty bourgeoisie

took strict account of the actual

balance of class forces

was required by the interests of both

the workers and the peasants that it

united them

before the common task of removing the

parasite and replacing it by something

new

secondly of particular attention is the

profound remark that the destruction of

a bureaucratic military machine is the

re precondition of every real people's

revolution the idea of a people's

revolution seems strange coming from

marx so that the russian pleconovites in

mensheviks

declared it to be a slip of pen

they have reduced marxism to such a

state of wretchedly liberal distortion

that nothing exists for them beyond the

antithesis between boudoir evolution and

proletarian revolution and even this

antithesis they interpret in an utterly

lifeless way if we take the revolutions

of the 20th century

they're both bourgeois revolutions

neither of them is a people's revolution

since the mass of people their vast

majority doesn't come out independently

this is the premier's proof that by the

way that lenin was a populist

if you needed an example of that

a people's revolution one actually

sweeping the majority into steam could

only be seen if it embraced both the

proletariat and the peasants by the way

this entails land reform there is no way

to rally the peasants without land

reform that's what it implies

and i i guess this dumb fuck is gonna

try and selectively be like well lennon

was being a revisionist with regard to

marx just the fuck up dumbass

you're just essentializing

positions you claim marx and angles have

removed from their context and that any

deviation from these

arbitrarily cherry-picked quotations is

some kind of fundamental revision of

marxism without demonstrating their

actual essentiality with regard to the

actual method of marxism

and it's reparalization in the peasant

question in france and germany ingles

writes in the context of critiquing

another socialist party's platform

socialism's task is rather only to

transfer the means of production to the

producers as their common possession as

soon

as we lose sight of this the above

statement becomes directly misleading

and that it implies that it is the

mission of socialism to convert the

present sham property of the small

peasant and his fields into real

property that is

to say to convert the small tenant into

an owner and the indebted owner into a

dealers owner

undoubtedly socialism is interested to

see that the false semblance of peasant

property should disappear but not in

this manner

okay

what does that have to do with

re-parcelization you dumb fuck

what does that that's not even how land

reform happened in russia of converting

the sham property

into real property

yeah what are you talking about this is

this is uh

the stolipin reform in russia that was

stolepin's plan

or

the model of like

what um

a strict model of private property of

land i mean yeah that was not

a particularly even common

facet of land reform in europe at the

time

in a similar vein marx wrote the petty

bourgeoisie will want

to give the feudal lands to the peasants

as free property they will try to

perpetrate the existence of the rural

proletariats and to form a penny

bourgeoisie peasant class which will be

subject to the same cycle of

impoverishment and debt which still

afflicts the french peasant

the workers must oppose this plan both

in the interests of the world

proletariats and in their own interests

okay

what about what happened in actual

history you dumb fuck

what what do you think marx meant by a

people's revolution in the continent in

1871 when the proletarians weren't the

fucking majority

of any nation

by the way let's look at the context of

this fucking quote actually

okay this is 1850.

abolition of feudalism the petty we want

to give the feudal lands to the peasants

as free property that is they will try

to perpetrate the existence of the rule

proletariat

okay

so

i don't know if you understand this you

dumbass

that is not the same thing as land

reform

that is an attempt

to transform the peasants

stolipin style and lenin also was trying

to fight the stolipin reforms

into a new kind of bourgeoisie which

would yes repeat the cycle of

impoverishment

and

want to you they want the feudal

property to be used for workers colonies

cultivated collectively by the rural

proletariat with all the advantages of

large-scale farming whereas the

principle of okay so that's

literally what land reform is you

dumbass that's still

land reform dumbass it's still land

reform by the way the idea that this

specific

french situation applies universally

everywhere

is not a marxist way of interpreting

anything

marx is giving his specific analysis of

what's going on in france and then this

dumb fucking inbred retard comes and

says

his message was saying that um

you're you're such a fucking idiot

this means that in america it's the same

thing

no america has a radically different

civilizational basis than france

this was a cheap ploy by the bourgeois

democrats

to turn the peasants

into the petty into a form of the petty

bourgeoisie basically it's like the deep

in reforms

that's literally what the context is

they must demand that the confiscated

fuel property remain state property and

be used for workers colonies

that's

that's what land reform is activated

collectively by the world proletariats

with all the advantages of large scale

farming and or even look it's like

even

even if i were generous and i was like

okay this is not

the same land reform

as what we're talking about for america

what is your point how is that in

contradiction to marx's method and

marx's fundamental position

why are you turning this into a dogma

why are you making it seem like

what marx's address to the communist

league about the situation in france

is some universal prescription for how

communists should address the land

question for all eternity

i just want to know where that comes

from

thank you irish american appreciate you

i just want to fucking know where that

comes from

the principle of common property will

immediately achieve a sound basis in the

midst of the shaky system of bourgeois

property relations

marx seems to contradict your position

no he doesn't because

he's saying something that has nothing

to do

with the context from which my position

actually has any meaning you dumbass

and lastly to top it off i'll quote from

lenin who is attacking the neurotnx in

russia for one

team to parcel out the land the

catchword of socialization of the land

merely denotes the left neurotnix is

utter

bruh is literally quoting lenin against

land reform

brah is literally quoting lenin

against land reform brah is literally

trying to quote lenin to make the

argument that marxists are against land

reform

brah is literally retarded bruh is

literally retarded

this is all correct

lenin supported the democratic petty

bourgeoisies quest for land reform

seemingly in contradiction to the quote

you gave by marx

so first of all if lenin is so radically

deviating from marx in your view why are

you quoting lenin as an authority of

marxism if lenin is

so radically contradicting marx

according to your own logic because

lenin does

advocate for a land reform by for the

democratic period

why are you citing him as an authority

in the first place but what does this

have to do with anything we're saying

[Music]

failure to grasp the principle of

boudoir measures for agrarian reform

are not the same thing as socialism we

know they're not

marx says political economy and the fact

that they are going

to realize socialization of the land

means it let's immediately have coal

causes no he said land reform first then

we have coal closes

bro you are retarded you are literally

retarded don't over

he's arguing against the socialization

of land

catchword

which is confusing

the immediate demand for land reform

which has to be addressed first then you

can have socialization later

stealthily by fits and starts and often

unconsciously to the side of visual

political economy mark's advised class

conscious workers while forming a clear

idea of the bourgeois character of all

the grain reforms so this guy is quoting

something i what i'm interested is like

how are you going to synthesize this and

in your own words explain what

significance this has

under capitalism including the

nationalization of the land to support

bourgeois democratic reforms as against

the feudalists and serfdom but marxists

cannot confuse bourgeois measures with

socialism but this idea of land reform

is something that has harped on a lot in

their videos such in another of their

explanation videos called the meaning of

what

socialism in 2021 where they continue

advocating for land reform politicians

and parties can make all the promises

they want but at the end of the day then

or economic space the most important

means of production is the only thing

that makes promises a reality for the

black majority to be able to rule and

live dignified lives in their own

country then it's the simplest and most

fundamental premise it's the foundation

of civilization itself is what allows

people not to have to depend on

politicians promises but be able to in

the first place cultivate a sense of

living being independent aside from the

how is that same as the narodnik slogan

of socialization of land

that lenin was addressing in context i'd

love to hear how that's the same thing

anti-marxist characteristic of land

reform the idea that land is the most

important means of production

maybe this was when he this was 1919

after all so maybe he was being a

revisionist

maybe he was just being a revisionist

thank you adam maybe he was just being a

revisionist

but this is rosa luxembourg

the most important means of production

the land

i'm looking for it

i'm looking for it but like

i'm pretty sure marx is the one

who said

this is lenin lenin

the most important means of production

so let me just show you what's going on

here okay

like you are going to be baffled at what

a fucking idiot disguise sense of living

being independent aside from the

anti-marxist characteristic of land

reform the idea that land is the most

important means of production

but here's lenin calling it the most

important means of production i just

showed you rosa luxemburg all marxists

have always called land the most

important means of production it comes

from marx i was i'm looking for the

fucking passage from marx but it

literally comes from marx that land is

the most fundamental and most important

means of production

someone get me the quotes from marx

here's lennon saying that

wow this is embarrassing this is such a

fucking dumbass

is yet another anti-marxist position

retard literal retard

mark says it in the gotha volume just

just quote it

quote it in the chat so i always fucking

and i'll know where it's from just quote

it

he said

he said it's an anti-marxist position

bruh it literally came from marx brah it

okay

capital volume 1 chapter seven

it's over this guy's just lost all

credibility

where

no i'm saying he like directly says it

i'm saying he directly says it somewhere

the soil man with necessaries means his

hand directly independently of him is

the universal subject of human labor

it wasn't here though he says it

directly somewhere i forget where he

says it

this dude's retarded he lost all

credibility just saying this he lost all

credibility just saying this so you guys

remember it was at 20 minutes in that

this whole video got blown the fuck out

this idea is not a new idea and in fact

it predates marks this belief of the

so-called physiocrats some of the first

brutal economists coming from france and

are actually the people who coined the

term la say fair mark studied these

physiocrats and was even in some way

influenced by them in the same way he

was influenced by other boudoir

economists such as adam smith and david

ricardo however marx rejected their core

economic claim of land being the most

important means of production as early

as the 1844 manuscripts to us

please show us where he rejected

the claim that land is the most

important means of production

which is the it's a fundamental precept

of marxist orthodoxy but go ahead and

show us as late as volume 3 of capital

for the physiocrats this analysis

coincides with the analysis of rent the

only form of surplus value which they

recognize therefore they consider rent

yielding or agricultural capital to be

the only capital producing surplus value

and the agricultural labor set in motion

by it the only laborer producing surplus

value

mark's then simply critiques this view

in his economic manuscripts by saying

hence the contradictions in the system

of the physiocrats it was the first

foreign

never mind

never mind

never mind a little too angry a little

too fucking angry a little too fucking

angry that he's quoting marx's critique

of the physiocrats

as evidence that marx rejected the idea

that land was the most fundamental means

of production

a view that is a literal precept of all

marxist orthodoxy

originating in marx himself

lenin said the same thing rosa

luxembourg said the same thing stalin

mao have said the same thing even

trotsky said the same thing nearly every

marxist has said almost ad verbatim yes

land is the most important means of

production

land being the most important means of

production

doesn't fucking mean

that agriculture is the most important

fucking um

sphere of industry

within political economy you dumbass

explain surplus value by the

appropriation of the labor of others and

in fact to explain this appropriation on

the basis of the exchange of commodities

but it did not see that value in the

general form of social labor and that

surplus value is surplus labor on the

contrary it conceived value merely as

use value merely as material substance

and surplus value as a mere gift of

nature which returns to labor in place

of a given quantity of organic material

a greater quantity on the one hand it

shipped rent that is the true economic

form of landed property of its fetal

rapping and reduced it to mere surplus

value in excess of the laborer's wage on

the other hand this surplus value is

explained again in a feudal way as

derived from nature and not from society

for man's relation to the soil not from

his social relations

so there better be more because if

that's it

i'm depressed

i'm depressed

i'm literally depressed

this retard with his mouth opened ruling

just made a 30 minute video openly

saying something so fucking stupid

doesn't is not embarrassed and not

ashamed not embarrassed and not ashamed

literally just said

that marx didn't think land was the most

fundamental means of production

because he critiqued the physiocrats in

1844.

do you know what a means of production

is you stupid fuck

you know what a means of production is

you stupid fuck how do you have a means

of production without land land is the

basis of everything before you can have

a means to produce anything you need the

space

first and foremost to do it

and that is very simple

fucking

fuck

instead of having a diamond i'm

depressed now i'm just fucking depressed

i i don't want to live in a world with

people who are fucking this stupid and

peanut brained it's actually fucking

baffling how fucking stupid you are

practical view of man and his social

relations in the proper marxian sense

haas and infrared are repeating the same

errors that mark's pointed out of the

physiocrats for them namely what go

ahead the land is seen as a source of

wealth in and of itself that simply

needs to be redistributed

no it's not it's seen as a means of

production it's seen as the means by

which man

through his labor

can create wealth

so no

you're wrong it's a means of production

will go well

you don't know what a means of

production is you dumbass wealth and

means of production aren't the same

fucking thing wealth is the product of

production

the means of production are the means of

production it's in the name you dumb

fuck

utopian socialization i sat through

three hours dealing with this shit and i

have to finish it but i have to finish

it and i'm already so fucking angry i'm

gonna fucking lose

i'm gonna go bald by tomorrow that's how

fucking angry i am then true dialectical

marxists to further drive this point

home i will show how marx even goes as

far as to consider the idea that land is

the most important means of production

to be an error in the feudal point of

view

please

he's just gonna quote some shit he

doesn't even i'm gonna press this twerp

actually

explain

what marx was trying to fucking talk

about in his critique of the physiocrats

and please fucking explain

dumb ass fucking kid how that's the same

thing as critiquing the idea that land

is the most fundamental means of

production you stupid fucking dumbass

kid

stupid peanut brain dumbass bird brain

dumb fucking kid

stupid bitch stupid fucking twerp

stupid fucking twerp dumbass kid

you know these fucking bird brain kids

their teachers and parents never yelled

at them for being empty-headed dumb fuck

so they go on the internet and say all

this stupid shit

[Music]

with no shame

with no shame

from the manuscripts of 1844 it is

argued against physiocracy

[Music]

what does this have to do with anything

we've said

this is literally that zoltanius

i can't say the word i want to say it so

fucking badly but that would he that's

what he is he just

he just makes some shit up about what

you actually believe

and says this is what he was critiquing

us

this is what he was critiquing us

fucking

you know it's like it's like it's like

that

it's like that

we said land is the most fundamental

means of production

we said land is the most fundamental

means of production

land is the most fundamental means of

production

that's what we said

we said land is the most

fundamental means of production

the property in the soil is the original

source of all wealth and has become the

great problem upon the solution of which

demands the future of the working class

that's literally what mark said

you know the thing is

thank you john harvey for the 20

and thank you if i

thank you net

evangelist appreciate you as well thank

you so much

the nationalization of the land the

international working men association

1782

okay it is argued

so let me actually it's like this guy

you know why i'm getting enraged because

he's like he's throwing all these quotes

out of context and then i have to sit

here and explain to you the context and

it takes hours and it's he's just like

recklessly throwing these quotes here

without understanding what what their

context originally came from

so here

marx is talking about conflicts within

political economy

right it is argued

that

agriculture does not differ from any

other industry

that the essence of wealth is not a

specific form of labor bound to a

particular element a particular

expression of labor but labor in general

physiocracy denies particular external

merely objective wealth by declaring

labor to be the essence of wealth but

for physiocracy labor is at first only

the subjective essence of landed

property now what does that have to do

with the claim that land

is the most fundamental means of

production

what does the view that landed property

or sorry land is the most fundamental

means of production have to do with the

idea that labor is first only the

subjective essence of landed property

saying that land is the most fundamental

means of production is not the same

thing as saying that labor is only the

subjective essence of landed property

those are two entirely different claims

one is not the same as the other one is

just saying that the fundamental

prerequisite to every other kind of

means of production is land the other is

talking about how labor

can only be valorized through landed

property

not through any other kind of property

so there are two entirely different

claims one is saying

that labor is only the subjective

essence of landed property not the

subjective essence of capital in general

but just landed property again he's not

saying

that labor

in

for labor to be valorized there needs to

be land as means of production that's a

given

the physiocrats are saying that for

labor to be valorized

it can only be valorized within the

context of agricultural labor

now what does that have to do with land

as the most fundamental means of

production nothing

literally nothing because as it so

happens you stupid bird brain dumbass

fucking kid

i have to say this shit i have to say

shit that you should know before you

make a 30 minute fucking video trying to

fucking

out nerd me you dumb bitch

i have to explain to you that even

capitalists in marx's time had to pay

ground rent to land owners because they

even they didn't own the fucking land

that factories which were not forms of

agricultural production

were on so capitalists had factories on

land and they had to pay the landowner

even though the factories weren't

producing grain or fucking agricultural

food stuffs

you stupid bitch you don't even know

what land is you dumb fuck

that agriculture does not differ from

any other industry and that the essence

of wealth therefore is not a specific

form of labor bound to a particular

element a particular expression of labor

but labor in general physiocracy denies

particular external merely objective

wealth by declaring labor to be the

essence of wealth but for physiocracy

labor is at first only the subjective

essence of landed property it announced

its future by declaring industry

agriculture

but it disavows the world of industry

and acknowledges the feudal system by

declaring agriculture to be the only

industry now how is acknowledging land

as the most fundamental means of

production the same as claiming that

agriculture is the only industry and

anywhere in our video or our writings

did we ever fucking imply that

agriculture is the only industry is that

ever something we've ever so much as

fucking hinted at or implied

as its essence but it disavows the world

of industry and acknowledges the fetal

system yeah the ben shapiro school of

sounding smart

but being a dumbass is literally what

sums up this retard right here literally

what sums them up agriculture to be the

only industry land reform is

neophysiocratism not revolutionary

marxism

now later in their video

i'm going to debate the monday still

this person please clip this ship this

whatever is a retard

every semblance of credibility they've

ever attempted to establish on the

internet they should never be allowed to

be the source of authority for anything

i'm telling you they're a retard they

don't understand any of the words

they're using

every

authority that they've invoked they've

done so in a way that completely abuses

the meaning of what those authorities

were trying to fucking say

this retard just said that land reform

is

a reflection only of the views of the

physiocrats and his anti-marxist and

that marxist

can't advocate for land reform

and the evidence he gave for that was

marx's critique of the physiocratic idea

which wasn't even marx's critique but it

was the critique

coming from the classical school of

political economy

that agriculture isn't the only industry

i would love to see how this retard

tries to save face after saying

something so fucking stupid

so they actually bring up for once a

very marxist point in that if you buy

the marxist framework that there is

revolution or potential in america to do

this they bring up a quote from lenin's

letter to the american working people i

don't want to talk about this argument

but i would like to further hammer home

the cosmopolitan and universalistic

nature of marxism for in that same

letter where they quote lenin london

himself further undermines this idea of

socialist patriotism that they've been

spouting this entire time specifically

where his letter says but must

socialists wait with their cause the

cause of liberating the working people

of the whole world from the yoke of

capital of winning universal and lasting

peace until a

path without sacrifice is found much

they fear to open the battle until an

easy victory is guaranteed

must they place the integrity and

security of their bourgeois created

fatherland above the interest of the

world socialist revolution

the scoundrels in the international

socialist movement who think this way

those lackeys who grovel to bourgeois

morality thrice stand condemned

lennon just said don't wait for some

magical

international global proletarian

revolution fight to win your own country

and this retard is quoting it as an

example against patriotism

what

don't wait

for the whole world to turn uh from

freeing the whole world from the oak of

capital don't wait for universal and

lasting peace

don't wait fight here and now to win

your country and your nation

don't defend opportunistically

the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie

in the name of waiting for the whole

proletarian world revolution

literally my point literally our point

so according to lenin in the letter that

they cite their patriotism is mere

bourgeois morality

patriotism is bourgeois morality

the integrity so you know what this is

this is like those dsa people who say

paz don't support china and russia

because this is going to create chaos

and instability for america's national

security

that's the equivalent that's the

bourgeois morality now what the fuck

does that have to do with patriotism

exactly

what is the relevance of this passage in

regards to our patriotism how does that

establish our patriotism as bourgeois

morality

he's saying socialists should not wait

until things are going to be easy for

them

prioritize

the cause of the working class

this contradicts what we said how

this this would be a good criticism of

us

if we were like we need to support

american national security and only

after american hegemony and national

security is completely secure then we

can have

a fight for the working class if we were

saying shit like that sure

but we have supported every single

instance around the fucking world

every instance of every instability and

chaos for the american empire we've

supported it so how does this apply to

us in any capacity whatsoever you brain

dead bitch

thrice stand condemned

so according to lenin in the letter that

they cite their patriotism is mere

bourgeois morality no not according to

that letter you fucking retard and haas

and socialistic patriots can either

listen to lenin and be actually

principal marxist leninist which while

still wrong why would i listen to lenin

when you just told me that land reform

comes from the physiocrats and not

marxists and yet lenin is one of the

most notable advocates for land reform

in the history not only of marxism but

the fucking world you retard why would i

listen to lenin when you've just said

that lenin isn't even an authority on

marxism anymore

at least be principled or they can go on

about how american socialist patriotism

meanwhile correctly charts the stalinist

golden mill

another anti-marxist line of reasoning

that permeates the so-called communist

conservatism is this romantic view of

the peasantry if you that they even

mistakenly foist upon both marks and

lenin as a matter of fact many western

mass marxists were especially complicit

in the stigmatization and impression of

the peasants because they didn't conform

to the model of the traditional

industrial working

to this very day dogmatic marxists have

yet to appreciate this yes because

they're dogmatic like we call them

dogmatic marxists i wonder what the

criterion for dogmatism is going to be

it's the passenger

and that's hazrat in one of his

substance articles in his 1899 work the

development of capitalism in russia

lyndon viewed the democratic veneer of

the urban bourgeoisie as just that a

veneer which disguised the impotence of

their class in the face of zarism to

exhume the future he looked at the most

backward and underdeveloped segment of

the russian empire the peasantry in

order to predict how capitalism would

come to develop in other words he more

or less completely ignored the urban

bourgeoisie in urban petty bourgeoisie

as worthless parasites with absolutely

no historical future and immediately

decided to go down to the countryside to

derive the long-term political strategy

of the russian social democratic party

in relation to the overthrow of zarism

for lenin the essence of the democratic

revolution lied not in the enlightened

educated urban bourgeoisie toppling

dazar a laughably unlikely scenario but

in the peasant striving for land reform

again the historical revisionism runs

deep communism is to be achieved for the

dictatorship of the proletariat not the

dictatorship of petty bourgeois peasants

you know the one main thing

that separated lenin from trotsky the

one thing trotsky objected to with

regard to lenin's ideas the one thing

trotsky is to this day say lenin was

wrong about

i'm engaging in historical revisionism

i'm engaging in historical revisionism

can everyone in chat just spam

we can't say retard in the chat but just

say arthard say zoltanius and ko are our

tarted

just spam it i want to see the

satisfaction i just want to see it i

just want to see the world

reflect my consciousness i want to see

what my consciousness say regarded say

they're regarded say they're regarded

say they are regarded say

sultanius and co are regarded

just say it

just say it

just please i just

this is boiling under my skin i want

some outside presence to reflect back

upon me this

deep and inner truth this deep and inner

truth these people are mentally retarded

i am so fucking baffled that they they

got away with this fucking cope video

it is so fundamentally baffling

i can't fucking believe it i literally

cannot fucking believe it

while others will be involved in the

revolution fundamentally the

revolutionary agents are the

proletarians this is literally marxism

101 which anyone who has done any

cursory reading of say the communist

manifesto should be able to understand

it's almost like lenin contributed

something new to marxism

the lower middle class

you know i've

what's your point we all know this is

what marx and engels thought

it's just that i've given hours-long

lectures explaining why i've explained

why they've essentialized the

proletariat and not the peasantry

because essentializing the peasantry

isn't the same thing as corresponding

to the peasant revolution in actual

reality

by essentializing the peasantry and

elevating them to the status of the

revolutionary subject

you cannot actually arrive at the

essence of the peasantry

by elevating the peasantry to the status

of the revolutionary subject

you essentialize ephemeral

formal qualities

that are subject to further

transformation you do not actually

arrive at the essence of the peasant

being only by elevating the proletariat

to the status of the privileged

revolutionary subject is this possible

i have given extensive hours-long

lectures about this very topic we all

know the dogmatic narrow view of marxism

that you get when you just take this at

face value without any further inquiry

or critical thinking yes at face value

that's what it seems like

the whole i'm gonna sum up zultanius and

ko's entire thrust

wow

if you take everything at face value

you arrive at a bunch of contradictions

that's literally it they just take

everything at face value

and they don't subject subjected to any

deeper

inquiry wow if i just take it at face

value

wow there's i guess there's nothing more

to things than meets the eye

every dumbass simplistic

one-sided interp is one-sided impression

i get from this that's all marxism is

it's not like we define marxism by

actual material reality and would

actually gave it material significance

across history no

the dead letter

of what marx and engels wrote in the

communist manifesto word by word

is the essence

that's it anything that seems to deviate

from that superficially is a deviation

from marxism

the small manufacturer the shopkeeper

the artisan the peasant all these fight

against the bourgeoisie to save from

extinction their existence as fractions

of the middle class they are therefore

not revolutionary but conservative i

find it

we know this though we all know that's

what marx and engel said the question is

why did history develop in such a way

that seems to indicate

the contrary

and does this negate marxism or does

this on the contrary reflect the essence

of marxist and engel's initial discovery

better than they themselves immediately

articulated it after all marx and anglos

immediately thought that the proletarian

revolution and this is in the communist

manifesto was going to happen first in

countries like england that wasn't the

case that was still a reflection of

their hegelian idealist prejudices

which they matured from throughout the

course of their life marx and engels

discovered something more fundamental

than the limited ways they could even

give expression to it their method is

more fundamental than the way they gave

expression to it

that's why marxism isn't a dogma now

i'll show you what english said about

dogmatism retard

ingo's dogmatism

actually we just fucking have a video on

this

and the video pretty much

explains it and i was just like watch

parts of the video

and here you go it's the vos knows

nothing about socialism

to present himself as an authority you

know because like there's a difference

there's the philosophy of marx and

engels and then there's the particular

way in which they gave expression to it

which is limited and definitely fallible

whereas the underlying method and

philosophy

is what is actually constant to marxism

the topic of meaning of socialism

from those seeking establishment of

various communes to those tyrant to

science definitions are worthless

because always inadequate the only real

definition is the development of the

thing itself but this is no longer a

definition

so what's the development of what's the

definition of marxism is it a few

passages of marks and angles taken out

of context no

it's the development of the thing itself

the way in which marxism was applied to

reality now how do you apply marxism to

reality you don't apply pre-made

concepts and precepts and force that on

reality

you establish a dialectical

understanding and relationship to the

material world

and everything is completely open

with regard to marx's work specifically

he had this to say

we should not expect to find fixed cut

to measure once and for all applicable

definition in marx's works it is

self-evident that where things and their

interrelations are conceived not as

fixed but as changing their mental

images the ideas are likewise subject to

change and transformation and they're

not encapsulated in rigid you know they

may object to this by being like oh

you're just saying that marxism is

arbitrary then no i'm not saying it's

arbitrary there's a fundamental

method to this

there's a fundamental essence of marxism

which i have gone to great length to

actually describe

that doesn't mean every single thing

marx and anglo said removed from their

original context

is some kind of doctrine of the essence

of marxism they themselves objected to

that interpretation

of their method

definitions but are developed in their

historical or logical process of

formation

marx himself criticized such definition

mongering at his own time for instance

arguing against prude

you try to give a definition of proper

principle

the principles are not the starting

point of the investigation but its final

result it designed conformity with guys

always in the imagination the premises

are not arbitrary dogmas but real

premises from which abstraction can only

be made in the imagination

they're the real individuals their

activity and population

so there's more to marx's method

than the limited ways in which they gave

form to it immediately

after discovering it the criticism of

the question itself

that is not only how i sponsor one of

the

super underrated video

logic

not out of the object but he develops

the object in accordance with ready-made

thinking put together in the abstract

sphere of logic

procedure

find me plenty of this

it's crucial difference from the present

order consists naturally

now let's look at with lennon let's look

at what stalin said stalin

contextualism this is what sultanius is

this is actually sultanius the

textualists quote mechanically without

delving into the essence of the matter

and apart from historical conditions may

say that one of these conditions should

be disregarded as being absolutely

incorrect while the other conclusion as

the absolutely correct one should be

applied to all periods of development

marxists however know that textualists

are mistaken they cannot know that both

of these conclusions are correct

although not absolutely each being

correct for its time marks in english

conclusion for the period of

pre-monopoly capitalism and lenin's

conclusion for the period of monopoly

capitalism textualists say the

circumstances created so that's stalin's

position right

so what lenin said about the peasantry

in the communist manifesto was correct

at the time why was that because at the

time the romanticization of the

peasantry

and the privileging of the peasantry as

the revolutionary subject

obfuscated the more fundamental changes

that were happening at the time was

basically a form of cope avoiding

confrontation

with

the way in which modernity was

absolutely destroying

the overt and explicit social bonds that

prevailed in the countryside at the time

so they saw

in the proletariat an image of the

peasantry's future all we're saying is

that it's true marx and engels

identified the peasantry sorry the

proletariat as the peasantry's future

but

is there more to the peasantry

than just the superficial aspects and

characteristics that were being

romanticized by the reactionary

socialists we say yes there is more

depth to the peasantry

than just

those aspects that were doomed by

modernity

you have to keep in mind that in marx

and engel's lifetime at no point did the

proletariat acquire a majority of the

population within france germany or any

of continental europe whatsoever it was

only in england where the proletariat

seemed to acquire a majority

so marx and engels were primarily trying

to just tell these feudal and

reactionary socialists you can't cling

to the peasantry because you see this

proletariat

this has implications for the future of

the peasantry that you're ignoring so by

upholding the peasantry you're basically

trying to prevent the inevitable which

is a cope

it's that simple all we have added to

the mix is saying it's clearly been

proven by history that there was more to

the peasantry

than just those aspects romanticized by

the roman reactionary socialists that

were condemned and doomed by industrial

modernity clearly there is an aspect of

the peasantry that has survived

proletarianization and has survived

industrial modernity

question is what is that aspect we have

used heidegger

in order to answer that question

particularly funny to point out to these

self-described conservatives that marx

is using that word conservative as a

pejorative here

and

yes we know retard

you think when i said communism is

conservative i'm trying to deny

the obvious fact that communists have

at least superficially opposed

conservatism of course they have they

opposed conservatives and they opposed

conservatism but

fundamentally that's the irony communism

in doing so ends up being even more

authentically conservative than the

self-proclaimed

and self-described conservatives

real conservatism

is not about resisting change

but having the necessary sense of those

aspects

that survive the change

not clinging to them

in vain against the inevitable

but arriving at the way in which they

authentically re-emerge despite the

inevitable change that is conservatism

we know at face value communism is not

conservative it's just that

there's more to communism than what's at

face value and me saying communism is

conservative

is a way of trying to give people a

sense of that

of course communism is conservative

it's just not conservative at face value

i know at face value it's not

conservative i know at face value it's

not conservative retard i know at face

value it's not conservative

maybe i'm not talking about something

that's just that face value

again

marxism

this decisive thing is not this

all-encompassing negation of modernity

that was already a given both by

capitalism as well as by the radical

bourgeois socialists and also the

anarchists and other types of communists

the thing that was decisive in which

is the way in which marx

marxism

uh

bestows charity

to those aspects those fundamental

aspects of humanity that survive this

process

it gives them the benefit of the doubt

the bolshevik revolution all

encompassing destruction etc etc etc but

then what happens afterwards you give

the benefit of the doubt for the real

character of peoples to authentically

re-emerge you quoted my video the

meaning of socialism in 2021 retard

did you quote the part of that fucking

video where i described precisely this

the way in which

yes communism is a form of modernity but

it's a form of modernity that allows

tradition to survive meaning it's real

conservatism your conservatism doesn't

confront modernity doesn't confront the

inevitable change

it

is scared of it it surrenders to it it

maintains the veneer of a false

conservatism

unable to survive the inevitability of

change

but the change happens either way so

this is the sad tragedy of the retard

conservatism of

monsillo nevsky right

he says we have to be conservative guys

conservatism conservatism and then

slowly and slowly in their discord

someone shows up

as a femme boy in a maid costume

someone shows up as a furry the

conservatives slowly slowly while

clinging to the veneer and pretense of

being conservatives

degenerate and decay

as this external alien force

makes them submit to it one way or

another and they get raped by it one way

or another

it's very sad and very tragic

meanwhile communists who boldly face

this alien force

bravely and soberly maintain their

dignity maintain their manhood maintain

their honor maintain real conservative

values because they're not denying it

they're not scared of it they're willing

to pass through the change they're not

coping about it

that's stalinist industrialization

that's what it means to be man of steel

i know i've already you are furry you

are furry you are sissy boy you are

fanboy we man of steel

shown that land reform is an

anti-marxist proposal but perhaps

another quote can't hurt so i cite

london insane hitler got pegged in

private

we know what he did in vienna when he

was staying in vienna we know what he

was doing stalin never did any of that

never

there will be only land which is

national property and free tenants

rinsing land from the states

is an anti-marxist proposal but perhaps

another quote can't hurt so i cite

london in saying there will be only land

which is national property and free

tenants renting land from the state when

you set up this system it will not mean

the transfer of land to all the working

people it will merely mean that every

farmer will freely dispose of his land

anybody who wants land will be free to

rent it

and

that's not even what happened in

practice by the way but what's your

fucking point

that's the china that's what china has

too

do you know what a free tenant is

dumbass

you actually think we're advocating for

private property and land where like you

can do whatever the fuck you want with

the land and sell it and no we don't

want that we want

land

to be owned

in common we just believe that according

to american culture people want the

autonomy over their own parcels of land

that's fine but every form of autonomy

within a parcel of land comes with

definite restrictions now what is the

extent of those restrictions it doesn't

matter

there will be restrictions

it doesn't matter what the extent is

even the bare minimum of restriction

means

it's not fully a form of private

property

besides

we're we're not going to allow for

speculation and land with our land

reform we're not going to allow people

to do whatever the fuck they want with

it and use it as a speculative asset and

turn it into a way of fucking no we want

people to be rooted in the soil

from the states now that land reform has

been 100 shown to be a marxist heresy i

now turn my attention to

[Music]

retard you just quoted lenin to say that

land reform is a marxist heresy

lenin is the most famous

figure of land reform in the 20th

century

the slogan of the october revolution was

peace land and bread

they literally did engage in a land

reform where they took land from the

nobles

and the kulaks

mainly from the nobles and the church

and the czarist estates and they gave it

to the peasants that's literally what a

land reform is retard

london in the peasantry well the

bulldozers project seems to stem from

the sort of romanticization of the

peasantry he even goes into this sort of

walmart brand heideggerianism and

talking about the living being okay

let's talk about how it's walmart brand

of the peasantry a deep and earthly

reality of chinese peasants this is a

reality that can never be reduced in any

superficial culture but as an entrance

unconscious basis i've already harped on

marx's view of the peasantry but now

let's turn to

london maybe lenin with his focus on the

less industrialized the more agrarian

russia saw the revolution as originated

with the peasants again no while there

is a role that peasants can play even

lenin makes it very clear that first and

foremost the revolutionary agents are

the proletarians the fight for socialism

is a

the fight for socialism is not the same

thing

as the revolution within russia that was

at hand between the peasant petty

bourgeoisie

and

feudalism

everyone thought that was inevitable

lenin was trying to carve out the place

of the fight for socialism within that

the fight against the world capital it

is being carried on first and foremost

by the wage workers who are directly and

wholly dependent on capital as for the

small farmers some of them own capital

themselves and often themselves exploit

workers hence not all small peasants

join the ranks of fighters for socialism

only those who do so resolutely and

consciously side with the workers

against capital with public property

against private property

retard

what is your point

what point are you trying to make

[Music]

the whole point of the heidegger stuff

you fucking idiot is that despite all of

this there is still something

fundamental about the peasants

peasant does not just refer to a class

within the genus

of proletariat in bourgeoisie

it refers to a more fundamental

grounding of the contradiction between

the proletariat and the bourgeoisie

read lenin's analysis of the development

of capitalism in russia in 1899 and

you'll understand that for lenin it is

in the ranks of the peasantry within the

soil of the people that the

contradiction between the proletariat

and the bourgeoisie which he even

alludes to here is being reproduced

so yes of course

the proletariat has a privileged

significance in that the question is

what is the ground of the proletarian

class struggle here lies the

significance of the peasantry you

fucking idiot

it's the ground and the being

you don't understand the question of

being and lenin does not ontologize the

proletariat he recognizes the

proletariat as the content of the class

struggle sure so do we

but what is the question of being

before we can give recognition to the

distinction between proletariat and

bourgeoisie

we are grounded in some kind of fucking

way some determinate way beforehand

we are not revising marx's class

analysis

or the privileged significance of the

proletariat we are situating it within a

more fundamental context that is the

significance of heidegger

how such a basic tenant of marxism is

lost i do not know but this attempt to

downplay the role of the proletariat for

some romanticized peasantry seems to be

rather endemic in their thought for

instance

yeah this is just some strange thing

that's endemic in our thought it's not

like the literal development of

communism and world history proves this

orientation

first

you have marx and engels slowly and

slowly

giving more significance to the

peasantry in places like france

where they're indebted to bankers and

marx talks about a continental people's

revolution then you have marx talking

about the irish resisting the british

then you have lenin with his democratic

dictatorship with a proletarian

peasantry

then you have stalin with his

agricultural revolution that privileges

the soviet peasant as the subject of

statehood

then you have mao who

this

privileges the industrial proletariat in

its um manifestation

as the privileged revolutionary subject

altogether

basically assailing the significance

the privileged subject

the proletariat

has

sorry the privileged status the

proletariat has

as a form of wisdom ideological wisdom

that allows him to interface with a

great chinese peasant mass

in a way conducive to socialist

revolution

it's almost like the entire evolution

and then i can talk about the iranian

revolution even though it wasn't led by

marxists explicitly

these revolutions in history seem to

correspond to an increasing significance

of the geographical rurality first and

foremost then the peasantry

away from

the industrial and urban proletariat and

the reason for that is very simple

the proletariat

the urban proletariat i should say

phenomenologically has a significance

for marxist consciousness

but as a class

the urban proletariat and marx alluded

to this in during the civil war where he

said the people who went into the

factories during the civil war are not

the proletariat

he said they're pampered privileged

bourgeois

why did he say that because

the urban proletariat has a privileged

significance only in so far

as it forces us

to confront the great peasant mass

as something more than its apparent form

by arriving at the complete negation in

thought with the faculties of modern

reasoning and modern conceptual thought

we arrive at the true material reality

of the peasantry in actual reality

by arriving at the proletariat in

thought we arrive at the peasantry in

material reality whereas by arriving at

the peasantry in thought

we arrive at the existing status quo in

reality

so that's the dialectics and that's why

the proletariat had to have such a

privileged significance

but

that wasn't

the real existing proletariat

that had happened because

this strange dialectic which marxists

have not yet

made explicit

explicitly acknowledged yet

has to do with the fact that yes

we looked at england this is what marx

and engels did they looked at england

and saw this new proletariat

but by the time it had disclosed itself

to them it was too late

the owl of minerva had taken its

departure which means

when you

are confronted with the essence

of the thing

you go down and deep

sorry when you are confronted

with something significance in order to

arrive at the essence of that

significance you go down and deep into

its bases

so by the time the proletariat forms a

mass

it ceases to have a revolutionary

quality

the proletariat is a potentiality

within the broad peasant strata

within the

broad strata of the rural masses that

must be wrought out

through proletarian consciousness and

through the party

that's my argument

and that's why mao was not

as stalin critiqued him

a petty bourgeois romantic for someone

who wasn't a marxist mao didn't have

to primarily form a basis in the

industrial proletariat

because the industrial proletariat

is not the same thing as the proletariat

as a class in order to understand class

you have to understand like

uh

delusion transcendental empiricism you

have to understand that class

is a potentiality not in actuality

the actuality of the realization of the

class

is very different from the

precedent class antagonism which

um

has reality only at a kind of um

plane of imminence it doesn't have an

existence

it has

some

precedent ambiguous reality

it's similar to lacan's view of sexual

difference for lacan sexual difference

precedes

sexuation into definite genders it's the

same thing with class giza has made the

same point

class difference precedes

formation of classes

so the class difference for example of

the proletariat in the bourgeoisie is

not actually reducible

to the um

existent difference between the english

proletariat

and the english bouzouzi it has a more

essential significance

whose implications are not coincident

clearly they weren't because the

revolution didn't happen in england so

for example i'm marx and engels i'm

looking at the conditions of the english

worker in 1844 or whatever

clearly this imparts upon me some

significance

but then look as it turns out that

significance

just so happens to be something

happening in russia

not england

england is where it was disclosed to me

russia is where it's actually happening

so do you see what i'm trying to say and

why heidegger is important the

difference between i should say the

discontinuity between the conditions of

the disclosure of a thing

and the real being of the thing itself

the class struggle becomes apparent to

me in england

where is it actually existent and actual

well it was a false assumption that marx

and engels made that the appearance and

existence were the same

because by the time something appears to

us

it has no longer

it has no longer um

it no longer is the essence of what it

is

that appears to us by the time something

appears to us

it has lost the quality

of essential novelty

so something new that's happening in

actual reality is what we can't see

we establish a relationship to it

through practice

not through that's that's why for

example i'm just explaining it to you

that's why there's no contradiction

between

the supposed volunteerism of proletarian

consciousness and building the party and

the inevitability of class struggle and

socialism for example they say

why do you need to build a party and

have proletarian consciousness won't the

workers just do it all by themselves no

no that's

a wrong way of looking at it because

the essential reality of the proletariat

is not something that's already formed

it's something that has to be discerned

in the ambiguous

uh

mess that is material reality

by class conscious fighters of the

proletariat

has to be wrought out

it's not already formed

by the time it becomes formed and

apparent

it's too late

and this conclusion this new way of

looking at marxism is perfectly

consistent

with the fundamental and essential

discovery of marx and angles at least

from a philosophical perspective

of their break with hegel and their

material is dialectic it's far more

consistent

since in talking about south africa they

lament the fact that the post-apartheid

anc didn't do land reform which instead

of making the black population into a

nation of petty bourgeoisie instead

cause mass proletarianization

[Music]

according to the retard land reform

means everyone becomes petty bourgeoisie

they didn't even look at they didn't

even pay attention to the actual

argument we made in the video

no i'll bite how about i fucking press

you what is the bouzwazi retard

the bourgeoisie the burgers

as they were called historically

could take their grounding for granted

they had a fundamental grounding they

could take for granted that allowed them

to be urbanized it allowed them to

subject reality to the abstract quality

of the measure

abstract measure

it is the cartesian subject that's the

bourgeoisie who

treats

all particular beings

in such a way that takes for granted a

specific and particular grounding of

being that is in no way itself

determinate or particular to them but

only universal and abstract

so if there's a land reform in south

africa and this land reform has to be

institutionally defended

uh politically

through some kind of common unity of the

polity

that could not possibly give rise to

a bourgeoisie of any kind

because

the fundamental being

that grounds this new class

the ground

of their ability to engage in processes

of exchange

on the market et cetera et cetera et

cetera is not something they could treat

as given and abstract

but as something determinate and

particular

so they would not be

a

petty bourgeoisie

they would not be a bourgeoisie in any

capacity

they would be citizens of a new

socialist republic

which is safeguarding their right to the

land their right to common land

[Music]

as an ends of statehood

so no they would not be a petty

bourgeoisie in any capacity that's a

retarded view of looking at it just

because they're small holders

of what appears to be property

doesn't mean

they would be pedibu zuzi because that's

just the word

that would not be the form of property

that corresponds to the bourgeoisie the

former property that corresponds to the

bourgeoisie

is not in any capacity socialized

it's not subjected to some kind of

common state

which gives terms and conditions to it

moreover

land reform as proposed by the economic

freedom fighters which were the people

we were giving as an example for

having a proposal for land reform

wants to establish like lenin the state

as the owner of all land

with south africans having the right to

lease the land similar to the system

they have in china so how would that

give rise to a class of petty bourgeois

capitalists when all land would be owned

by the state

fucking idiot

he has continued to assume the

appearance of anomaly socialist party

and south africa has a nominally social

state with its reconstruction and

development program initiated in the

1990s but an unprecedented type of

probabilitarianization has occurred in

south africa since then ironically as a

result of the end of political apartheid

rather than taking up a basic

dialectical view and seeing how the

bourgeoisie are digging their own graves

so what this retard is basically trying

to allude to is that

when proletarianization happens the way

in which this

threatens the bourgeoisie

is that it creates the conditions for

the total socialization of everything

and the complete aggregation of all

individuals into one propertyless mass

thereby converting all property into one

piece of common property this is what

marx called

uh

crude communism which he critiqued

extensively

and that you know nobody has

everyone's just um

you know some kind of

pee and a hive or some shit like that

right

what you're saying is irrelevant

yes

the

ruling class dug its own grave through

proletarianization but how has it dug

its own grave

because we're not advocating for the

state of affairs before the end of

apartheid

for us to not be dialectical would be

for us to say okay the solution is to go

back to apartheid before the

proletarianization

of the people living in the townships

that's not what we're saying we're

talking about a new land reform

so what are you fucking trying to say

here

fucking idiot the creation of

proletarians as marks and angles wrote

about throughout their whole lives they

instead take what marx angle but that

proletarianization is what gave rise to

the economic freedom fighters you

fucking idiot we're not just bitching

passively about the anc's refusal to

engage in the land reform we're talking

about how this gave rise to the economic

freedom fighters

which is fighting for that land reform

now we're not just trying to fucking

whine and lament the fact that the anc

isn't engaging in land reform those

would call a reactionary view of trying

to oppose proletarianization in order to

try to cope with this they simply try to

imply that marxism is really about the

revolution coming from the peasantry and

try to act like they don't even know

what the word proletarian means

okay retard what is the word proletarian

mean

i'm gonna grill you on that on monday

i'm i'm gonna remember to grill you on

defining

see you're going to give me a definition

but i'm going to press you on i'm going

to give you the why why is that the

proletariat why why why why is it

defined in that way

so i can't wait

we clearly situate the proletariat as a

moment in the positive being of the

peasantry a moment of negation within

the development

of what we very loosely call the

peasantry

better called the people it's a moment

in the development of the people just

like how marx called them the ingenious

soil of the people

majority of people in any given nation

never confirmed somewhat of the troop

pearl turret

hmm

who else talked about the

stupidity of the idea of a pure

proletariat capitalism would not be

capitalism if the so-called pure

proletariat were not surrounded by a

number of exceedingly multi-types

intermediate between the proletariat and

the semi-proletariat between the

semi-proletariat and the small peasant

the small artisan handicraft worker and

small master between the small peasant

and the middle peasant and so on if the

proletariat were not divided into more

or less developed strata it would not be

divided according to the territorial

organ trade sometimes religion and so on

huh so here's lenin deriding the concept

and idea of a pure proletariat

also remarks

i have to find that one where lenin was

reproaching those fucking left wing

communists or whoever else

saying oh there's a pure proletariat he

said no that's mingled in with others

and there's revolts in the colonies and

other fucking it's that's never pure

it's a fucking undialectical way of

looking at it

and a similar idea is expressed on

haza's substance when he writes the

proletarian subject is not neatly

defined within the ranks of the people

despite the fact that marx

it's not

in angles and all their works very

clearly and very concisely lay out what

the definition of proletarian means that

doesn't mean it's neatly defined

in actual reality among the people that

doesn't mean it exists as a pure and

separate strata either geographically or

otherwise and even if it fucking did in

marx and engels time it certainly

doesn't in our time

but for marx and engels the proletarian

is the one who has nothing to sell but

their labor now why did they say that

and what is the significance of that

in an era in which almost everybody has

something a little more than just the

pure labor they have

that's what we're here to fucking set

about to actually understand but this

retard contact

you can't doubt that

that's contradicting my dogmatic and

narrowly contrived view of marxism which

has never had any basis or grounding or

justification in the history of marxism

outside of left-wing communists that led

into writing and marks and angles spit

upon

the fuck up you fucking idiot

all this is indicative that they don't

understand marxism and frankly it's

embarrassing that i and anti-marxist i

will bitch slap you into the next

century any debate when we have a debate

monday you're really gonna regret saying

this

i am going to press you so fucking hard

into defending this precise statement

good luck dude

since someone who has never even been a

marxist understands the revolutionary

project of marx angles and lenin and all

the rest i'm leaving out better than has

himself does

bro how old is this kid how old is this

kid

how old is this fucking kid

how old is this fucking kid i've been a

marxist for 10 years

i've read more marxist literature than

this person has ever read anything in

his whole fucking life including the

fucking ingredients of cheetos

fucking bags when he's trying to go on a

fucking diet and he's deciding he's

gonna have some fucking

fat free fucking lays chips or some shit

i've read more marxist literature than

you have read anything in your whole

fucking life

guaranteed

and you're telling me i don't know

marxism or understand marxism

look when you come at me like this i'm

gonna fuck you i'm gonna fuck you in a

debate you're gonna get fucked and blown

the fuck out

don't fucking come at me from this

perspective of how does it know enough

about marketing no i do so clearly i

have a unique understanding of marxism

maybe you disagree with it or don't

understand it but don't just say i have

a lack of acquaintance or understanding

or i haven't thought about this

because while you were on these telegram

larp channels uh with your uh fellow

degenerates

i was doing the fucking reading and the

research and the homework

it should be clear by now that the

entire infrared project and the

so-called patriotic socialism or

conservative communism is completely

unfounded from their own alleged

positions plain and simply they are bad

marxists and the

truth is is that the so-called western

life or by swa however cringe and

aesthetically deficient they may be are

better marxists than the so-called

patriotic communist left

so they're better marxists and they're

also we would presume

better marxist than stalin and the

chinese

and mao

because those were revisionists and that

apparent only i think i think he wants

to say lenin's also a revisionist

because i have shown numerous instances

in which lenin directly contradicts his

narrow and contrived view of marxism so

clearly you have to get rid of this head

here so i guess you're just going to go

with the um

the like left com cope of like oh we're

going to be the pure marx marxist even

though marx and engels spit on everyone

who tried to do that with when they were

alive and they had anything to say about

it

they hated the dogmatists and marx even

said i'm not a marxist because those

people were so fucking cringe and

annoying it comes to actually following

and adhering to dialectical and

revolutionary socialism as detailed by

marx angles and lenin this person's

indistinguishable from a leptoid by the

way this is exactly how the leftist

marks it marxoid's sound they're all the

same they just use phrases they don't

understand the revolutionary thoughts

like shut the fuck up dude you don't

understand any of those words shut your

dumb whore mouth

you don't understand any of those

fucking words

as always and i have already shown there

is no possible way in which conservatism

or any form of nationalism can mess with

communism the two are fundamental odds

in every way possible even their two

critiques of capitalism are incompatible

with each other at the

end of the day what we have with the

infrared project and all the other

patriotic socialists is people who are

both bad marxists and bad conservatives

with this there is nothing left further

ideology to stand on besides perhaps

some crude aesthetic theory and all they

can do is scream about trotskyites

byteswa and

i anglometaphysics destroyed this video

good luck on monday

we're gonna check their uh their other

video their other we're gonna briefly

skim their sub stack because i gotta

wrap this up

i gotta really wrap this up we're gonna

check their sub stack

is that the track record of the 19th

okay we're gonna check this stuff dumb

shit out

lennon

the basis of traditional philosophy and

compared with marx philosophy in the

case of traditional it's metaphysically

grounded in idealism or platonism

okay

what do i mean by traditionalism

and i'm also a

you fucking retard

i'm a materialist platinus

marx mixes idealism with materialism and

is incoherent

lenin

detached marks from his elements of

idealism

this is just

every aspect of this paragraph is wrong

and cope

in lenin's book materialism and imperial

criticism a book that would be mandatory

in higher education

he says materialism and full agreement

with natural science takes matter as

primary and regards consciousness

thought secondary it is well-defined

form

sensation is only associated with higher

forms of matter

while in the foundation of the structure

of matter one can only summarize the

existence of the facal taken to the

sensation okay

sensation depends on the brain nerves on

matter organized in a definite way the

existence of the matter does not depend

on cessation matter is primary sensation

thought consciousness are the supreme

product of matter organized in a

particular way

such are the views of materialism in

general

violating marx's opening line on the

thesis of foyerbach

the chief defect of all hitherto

existing materialism that of foyerbach

is the thing reality consciousness

conceived only in the form of the object

or of contemplation but not as sensuous

human activity practice not subjectively

what does this violate you fucking

retard that doesn't violate anything

because

because lenin is saying that

consciousness thought and sensation are

secondary to matter

and that

sensation

is the result of a specific organization

of matter

does not mean

that he is giving

no

significance

to the way in which human beings

enter into definite relations of mutual

subsistence and reproduction

otherwise known as the relations of

production

so

what marx was critiquing in his opening

line here

was the view that

the material object was only conceived

as a one-sided object of thought

it wasn't conceived

as the object of human activity and

practice itself

so what does that have to do with what

lenin said how is lenin

treating objective

material reality only as an object of

thought

and not as itself an object of real

human activity

thought and even consciousness

apparently having solved the problem of

consciousness yes the dialectic of form

and content very easily

solves this so-called problem of

consciousness

is simply matter organized in a

particular way

okay

that doesn't mean we know how matters

organized you fucking idiot

we're just saying

it is matter organized in a specific way

what's your problem

what's the issue we're not saying that

that's the fucking uh

we're not saying we know what that

matter happens to be

we're saying it's matter it's something

more fundamental than the consciousness

itself organized in a certain way

something more fundamental than the

consciousness itself

organized in a certain way

is the essence of i mean like it's

literally in the word essence matter

content it means the same thing

meanwhile mark says that his philosophy

is a correction of classical materialism

which wrong we see sensation

only in the form of the object or of

contemplation

well it's a good thing lenin doesn't

only see sensation

first of all that's not even what lenin

said you fucking idiot

he says the thing reality and

sensuousness that's different from

sensation so there's a radically

different context here

lenin is responding

to the latest philosophical trends of

the time

including imperial

criticism

uh the people of the views of like marx

and uh who the fuck else

i forget their names

who viewed

some privileged role of sensation

that said the senses somehow

our primary with regard to material

reality

but

when marx is talking about sensuousness

he is not talking about sensation

in the same way that

mach and the other

uh imperial

whatever kantian weirdos are saying it's

not the same sense

he's not talking about sensation as such

he's talking about

sensuous reality

which means he's talking about the

object of senses

so he's not talking about sensation he's

talking about the object of sensation

there goes sensuousness the thing

reality the object of sensation etc

that's all he's talking about

so you are a retard zoltanius you're a

stupid dumb fuck and i will fuck you in

any confrontation debate period and

that's why you

ran to this sub stack and fucking coped

your way

out of a debate and you just decided to

have this mental diarrhea

instead

every every i could tear this whole

thing to shreds

lenin builds off a dialect of

materialism in turn the extends into

materialistic physicalism how

lennon only sees sensation is merely

organized matter

okay

so if you read

materialism and imperial criticism

sultanius you stupid dense dumb fuck

you'll very clearly see that

lenin is citing angles who said thought

and consciousness are products of the

human brain

which means thought and consciousness

are products of a specific organized

organization of matter which is what the

brain is in their view

so unless you can somehow establish that

angles is in contradiction to marx or

that marx is in contradiction to himself

there's no need to fucking say any of

this there's no need to bring lenin into

this when all lenin is doing is

repeating what marx and engels

themselves said

so maybe you just

have a

wrong interpretation of what marx was

actually saying in the thesis on

foyerbach

he wasn't saying

he wasn't saying that sensation

wasn't from a specific organization of

matter he was saying that the problem of

all types of materialism is they took

the object of sensation

only as an object of thought

not as an object of real human activity

which is a pretty profound criticism

but then again you're in a literate dumb

worthless fuck you couldn't possibly

appreciate that because zoltanius is a

guy who thinks he already understands

marxism just cherry picks quotes out of

context

and reveals his mental retardation

uh

by claiming that they align with what he

already thinks so lenin builds off

dialogue he extends the materials

physicalism there's nothing physical

list about anything lenin said let's say

everything is reduced to simply being

matter

no lenin doesn't reduce anything to

matter

he said it's the product of matter

organized in a particular way he does

not say it's reducible to matter

organized in a particular way if he were

to say that he would deny that there's a

discontinuity between them all together

which would be on dialectical

which is not

lenin's view lenin is a dialetician

consciousness is matter that's not

really what lenin is saying he's saying

it is the product of matter

but moreover let's just say

consciousness is matter that doesn't

mean

consciousness is our limited notion of

biology that would be idealist

matter

sultanius you stupid fuck

you realize that matter

one of the qualities of matter is that

it's not reducible to the limited form

of the knowledge we have of it which

means for something to be material only

means

for it to be the real content or the

essence of something

now the idealist tradition treats the

essence of things as thoughts or forms

the whole difference between materialism

and idealism is basically this idealism

treats

essence as an idea

materialism treats essence as essence

an idea as idea

we give room for the essence

to not be reduced to the form

religion is not real um

no one has said that

darwinian evolution in feuerbach

foyerbach does not say religion is not

real you dumb fuck he says that religion

is the estranged being of mankind

and everything is reduced to the plane

of materiality no one said that

they follow physicalism so this whole

thing was diarrhea that you fucked up on

and you came to a conclusion your

conclusion is also diarrhea and can be

easily dismissed scratch it out moving

on

um

you know the the more he fucks up the

less i'm inclined to like have to like

get through all of this because i'm

really

you know

i really gotta wrap this up

um the comedy is not investing yeah at

face value uh yeah marxism

criticizes religion in some kind of way

i've already addressed that i've never

denied

that at face value communism appears to

be the negation of religion i've talked

about that on stream given lectures

hours and hours long lectures about that

fact

he's gonna probably show the

league of the militant atheists or

something yeah yeah i've talked about

all of this even dugan talked about how

this just fits within the

uh

archaeo-modern

predicament of russia where this is

basically just a repeat

of the orthodox iconoclasm and only gave

rise to a deepened sense of orthodox

spirituality even dugan talked about

that

um

[Music]

we all know that communism

at face value appears anti-religious and

that this has a lot to do with the

immaturity of communist consciousness

uh and that communists today don't share

that view because they've matured from

it

through the actual experience of history

which has proven

that the critique of religion

was inexhaustive

i've talked about this

sultanius use retard if you're gonna

like talk about what i've said about

communism in relation to religion then

talk about it

because i've talked about this for hours

on stream i've addressed all of this

hours of footage of me giving lectures

about it

all the fucking time several times

you're this is like very cheap

amateurish shit yeah the church was

persecuted we all know no one denied

that

um now

the question you should add sultan is

like okay

the history of communism was clearly

latent with a lot of anti-religious

stuff so how does haas reconcile that

with his idea

that communism

allows for return to

the

authentic appreciation for spirituality

and religion

uh what has has actually said about that

that's probably what you should be

looking at

marx and engels praise the jacobins so

have i

i've praised the jacobins in my speech

in the cpi i praised the jackman's i

said the jacobins were the true

conservatives

the true traditionalists were the

jacobins sorry not conservative the true

traditionalist was robespierre i've said

that several times i've given lectures

about that

yeah i think sultanius he's not maybe

he's not retarded maybe he's just

autistic i think he is autistic didn't

he say he was

well then he would have a hard time

understanding where i'm coming from

because he's like

oz is pointing out all of these ironies

of history i don't understand ironies i

just understand everything only at face

value and in a one-sided way

so that makes what has trying to say

really confusing it's really hard for me

to understand

that the appearance and essence of

things are not the same

um i think he's just autistic i don't

know what else to say

is there anything else

real conservative socialism

what does this is just heidegger kojev

is the one who reconciles heidegger with

marx and hegel

uh heidegger didn't heidegger said

the marxists have discovered

struggle without death

heidegger gives us death without

struggle and i want to unify them

but this is a very

overly generous interpretation of marx

who

is not a wig

progressive who just fucking believes in

progress

and doesn't understand death

actually you have to have an

understanding of

life to understand capital as dugan puts

it

capital is

follows a cyclical temporality a

dialectic temporality it's not a

one-sided growth

spangled calls marxian see you always

notice these autistic fuckers always

just say shit like marxian because

they're just kind of

they kind of give me this vibe they kind

of give me this they kind of seem like

this they kind of like appear this way

they kind of give me this feeling they

never actually like penetrate beyond the

surface of their vague intuitive

impression of things

the national spirit was an epiphany i've

already addressed all this shit in that

video

they denied any ontological priority to

nationalism

how could you give ontological priority

to something invented in the 90 in the

1800s

wait didn't you just quote dugan because

i can literally give you like evidence

that dugan rejects nationalism

it's right here

so do again

nationalism

from his telegram i remember reading it

here it is right here so let me get this

uh going

um

window capture just gonna do telegram

isn't it so fun to just destroy

zultanius like with ease

no it's not what i'm looking

us telegram

yeah

why does fourth political theory reject

nationalism

fuck

how do i zoom in can you guys see it

fourth political dreary rejects racism

in a form of nationalism because it is

anti-traditional bourgeois western and

modernist

so

dugan pretty much goes into how

nationalism is a modernist

uh notion and he does not give any

ontological priority to nationalism

whatsoever so is dugan not a

traditionalist either zultanius you

fucking idiot you fucking dumbass

talking out of your fucking ass you

pseudo intellectual bitch

you stupid

pseudo-intellectual dumb bitch

here he talks about lenin's critique of

national cultural autonomy

which was actually about some dumb

bullshit in austria

where viennese workers were arguing

about

what street signs language should be in

or some dumb shit like that

what does national cultural autonomy

have to do with any of this

aren't you a literal fucking fascist

hitlerite do you think hitler tolerated

national cultural autonomy dumbass

hitler forcefully conjoined austria

with germany the whole f he didn't even

give any fucking room for those dumbass

mini ethnicities that existed in austria

what a big l you just fucking took you

dumbass

haas contradicts marx and lennon here

how

i want to know where i do that

does he quote anything from me

does he quote anything from me actually

no

nothing

okay

all right we're done

all right that was not fun

gonna debate that guy

one day guys

i am not

uh streaming tomorrow i'm gonna go visit

my family because you know what

saturdays usually take them off so i'm

gonna visit my family tomorrow not

streaming

so i'll see you guys um

see you guys uh

sunday okay

bye guys

[Music]

hey

[Music]

i just wanna see

[Music]

goodbye

goodbye to the people who hated on me

goodbye to the people who loved me

goodbye to the people who trusted me

goodbye goodbye to everybody

goodbye to the people who hated on me

goodbye to the people who loved me

goodbye to the people who trusted me

goodbye goodbye

to everybody

now i need some changes in my life now i

need to move on in life

now it's time to say goodbye goodbye

goodbye to everybody

but back to the people who hated me

goodbye to the people who loved me

goodbye to the people who trusted me

goodbye goodbye to everybody goodbye to

the people who hate me taught me

goodbye to the people who loved me

goodbye to the people who trusted me

goodbye goodbye to everybody

i'm thinking deeply right now my life

with you

it's like i

don't know how

to explain this i don't know why

it's happening to me but i just realized

i'm not the person

i used to be

now i just wanna leave

this city this bullshit is not gonna

happen again

goodbye to the people who loved

me

goodbye to the people who trusted me

goodbye goodbye to everybody goodbye to

the people who hated on me

goodbye to the people who

goodbye to the people who trusted me

goodbye goodbye to everybody

[Music]

i

believe