How to Critique Slavoj Žižek

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

[Applause]

[Applause]

[Music]

[Applause]

like it was born

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

and let you go down

[Music]

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

every way

[Music]

do you want me on your mind

[Music]

[Applause]

to go

I might be yours as yours I can say

roses on Parade

[Music]

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

going to be far away

[Music]

is worked to cry

foreign

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

because

[Music]

they give away

the towers

sing quietly

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

wake me

[Music]

[Music]

hear me

[Applause]

[Music]

[Applause]

please

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

[Applause]

wake me

[Music]

please

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

foreign

foreign

[Music]

it took so long for me to realize

how strong your heart is

and all this time my mind was working in

the strange

ways

looking back on the days all over your

mind just wanna be free

now I'm staring inside I Just Wanna Be

Free through the love in your eyes

sweet

ties

[Music]

are full of

sharp turns

my mind's a blur

slow Passage through the air

looking back on the days all over your

mind just wanna be free

sweetly times

[Music]

the sweet ties

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

it took so long for me to realize

how strong your heart is

and all this time my mind was working in

a strange

ways

shark turns

my mind's blurred flowed

[Music]

all over your mind I just wanna be free

[Music]

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

sweet

ties

pools of love

you're

your eyes are

full of love

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

houses poses

roses

[Music]

foreign

[Applause]

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

[Music]

boxes

[Applause]

[Applause]

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

[Music]

thank you

all right

thank you

[Music]

[Music]

foreign

welcome hi everybody

let's go why is this chat dead huh where

are the fucking gorillas

well fuck I look around let's go

what the fuck

I'm sensing low energy tonight

y'all acting bitch made

let me see those gorillas and signs

let's go

let's go

don't give me this bitch made energy

that's not what I expect of my gorillas

I expect that my gorillas high energy

all the time I expect you regardless of

the feelings you have inside regardless

of the confusion you have in your head I

expect you to be like Turks

to be like Ottomans fight faithfully and

fanatically for the cause for the

infowar

doesn't matter what you're feeling

doesn't matter what's going on in your

head

your knee deep in it before you can

fucking think about it that's what we

believe in we believe that our war is

something that we're in before we can

even have time to think about it

that is a very topical and very

prescient observation for today's stream

in the topic of today's stream and we're

gonna get into that and this is gonna be

gems I'm throwing Pearls at you

motherfucking swine tonight

because I'm going to kind of get into

Zizek and I think I'm going to get into

my emotional that's going to be

everyone's gonna be crying and it's

gonna we're gonna be in our emotions and

all this kind of shit I'm gonna explain

to you why I refuse

what the fuck is his name Gabrielle rock

Rock Hill or Rockwell

I refuse so I give you some background

This Guy's in the PSL the most corrupt

fucking party in the United States

besides the DSA although I think they're

kind of on par the PSL is corrupt as

fuck it's run by vagina Prasad vagina

Prasad is a fucking creep who supports

prostitution the PSL is one of the most

disgusting despicable corrupt parties in

America and Gabriel Rockhill is someone

who's circulating you know he's some big

figure within the fucking PSO and he

decided to release an article sitting on

the same shit we got from before sitting

on Zizek because of his uh

political positions uh never mind the

fact

that

that has nothing to do with zizek's

significance yeah Zizek is a libtard

when it comes to politics he's always

been a libtard always thank you so much

he's always been a shill for NATO and

U.S imperialism from the very beginning

in Yugoslavia it's always been the case

I'm not here

to give you a Jesus thank you so much

Latvian appreciate you

I'm not here to sell you on some Zizek

like like I don't know a fucking fidget

spinner you know this is it goes back to

the autism thing I may be autistic I

don't know but if I'm autistic I'm a

self-aware artist I'm very aware of the

limitations autism creates for a fucking

individual and what that fucking means

is there's this tendency for people to

need to kind of have this little source

of guarantee and and and comfort and oh

there's everything this person said I

mean like you want jijic to be both

thank you so much that she's practically

you can't

appreciate anything

outside of its significance

within the realm of

you know

the phenomenal aspect of phenomenal

consistency the teddy bear right

if your teddy bear feels violated if

you're a little fetish your ideological

fetish gets violated it's just you can't

even engage with it because it's so

fucking

you know hurtful to you to engage with

someone with whom you drastically

disagree with politically but can

nonetheless be cognizant of their

contributions

to

fundamental aspects of thinking so much

else us I don't know what that means but

thank you so much Alex I don't know what

that kind of sounds weird to be honest

ly thank you so much Mig appreciate you

appreciate you

now everyone knows that I am a student

of slavoy Zizek everyone knows this is

how I started out everyone knows if

you're not a retard if you're not a

little retard that Zizek is like the

secret

in a way of infrared and

or the Ljubljana School of

psychoanalysis more generally

I evolved this openly now I've gone

beyond Zizek far beyond him

because I understand the actual

limitations of Jesus and I'm actually

able to competently mount a critique of

slavoy Zizek but Gabriel Rockwell or

Rock Hill

is unable to do that he's so-called

criticism of Zizek simply consists in a

complete regression to Anglo-Saxon

philistinism hey nafo retard I am

funnier than you

oh no sorry never mind you're not Nate

full

oh you don't have to spam we all agree

with you

yeah we all agree Crimea is Russia

we all agree with that no need to spam

it

I thought that was an afo guy coming and

spamming I was like I was gonna say

bring your other nafo friends into the

stream honestly bring them in uh you

could boost my view count

this guy hey Friendly Fire

we are Z over here you understand I have

to put a z up here to explain to you

you're you're at you're you're attacking

the wrong fucking guy dumbass

let me do this where do I find it

text

where do I find text here right here

okay

here I'll I'll do this for you let you

know

I don't know he doesn't speak

English maybe so there you go

the letter z

this is where we stand you understand

this is where we stand we're not Zizek

maybe he thinks because uh Zizek is a

NATO shill that we stand with Zizek as

far as his Politics As far as his

understanding of geopolitics is

concerned and we don't none of us do

here

so this is a non-starter actually as far

as understanding anything about Zizek

whatsoever

this uh it's a waste of time to talk

about how he was a CIA agent in

Yugoslavia or whatever I mean who gives

a fuck I don't give a fuck because there

was plenty of CIA agents in Yugoslavia

you want to talk about g-shek as a NATO

show fine there's plenty of NATO shills

plenty of them almost every person by

default is a NATO shill who's in has any

prominence whatsoever

okay

I challenge you to find a single example

there's none

so what separates Zizek what makes him

different in particular

that's what we're going to talk about

today

and I'm going to try and explain to you

why it's very important

to at least acknowledge the problem

zizik raises

not that Jesus correctly responds I mean

he the whole point is that he doesn't

right

I need people to understand this

but

Zizek

is not a revolutionary

he's not a political revolutionary he's

just a milk toast liberal when it I mean

this is not only true for politics when

it comes to the sphere of science Zizek

will never critique establishment

science either he'll never critique

establishment politics either

Zizek

will offer provocations to make you

think right and we're going to get into

that but ultimately if you ask him what

is your position what will you commit to

it's just whatever the status quo is you

can count on the fact that Zizek will be

there

so let's get that out of the way as far

as how to appraise g-shek's Legacy and

his significance now Andrew Saturn is in

my chat right now and I want to actually

take time to address this first and

foremost uh and his name is Dutch oven

in my chat his name is Andrew sadder

Andrew Saturn

ran for public office in Washington

and you know

did I reveal his location now I don't

know anyway

Andrew Saturn is not only I'm gonna

actually release a documentary on him

pretty soon I'm going to be doing a Wiki

article on him and Johnny and I'm going

to be releasing a documentary on them

because this is probably the most

the most bizarre stalker in the history

of the internet I've I mean when I tell

people about this shit they don't

fucking believe it

No One Believes how insane this level of

commitment this 37 year old man has to

me I've brought this guy up for the past

how many months and yeah he's still at

it every not only every day but at least

every three hours minimum of every

single waking moment of his life and you

gotta Wonder does he have a job because

who has the time for that right

anyway

it is autism 100 that's already

confirmed it's also glowy fed shit right

it's glowy fed shit and a combination of

autism oftentimes you know FBI agents

and federal agents tend to actually have

that quality about them if you could

believe it

but

it is very disturbing but it's it's you

have to ask the question

what about Chris Chan

you know

like you look at Chris Chan and you go

what the fuck how could that be person

be so delusional how could they just

have no self-awareness about how

deranged the things they're doing is

and then that's what's going on with

Andrew Saturn

it's the same thing

this person has no self-awareness as far

as what they're doing

they're spent I mean who pays for their

salary to like have the time to do this

nobody fucking knows how do where do

they have the time to do this right the

reason you don't have more Andrew

Saturns is because most people have jobs

even I couldn't commit myself full time

to obsessing over some random person

right

even I could not do that

um and make thousands of alts or

whatever or sorry dozens of alts my bad

for over exaggerating

but um

it's just one of those things uh autism

is a very serious mental health problem

people have

because irregardless of the objective

significance of a given thing a given

object if you will it's very easy for

people who have a severe case of autism

to latch onto things

and to remain within them confined

within them in a self-enclosed loop

right and in my case I pose a

contradiction for Andrew Saturn and

Johnny socialism's world view and by

world view I mean they're trained

they're self-enclosed phenomenally

consistent train I'm just this Gap there

and they there it's like they're a train

and they keep coming across this Gap

this cognitive dissonance and it creates

a cycle of obsession it's very common

for people with Autism women can attest

to the fact that when they reject people

who have severe case of autism they

could those are the people who like

extreme

stalkers and extreme you know just

obsessive obsessive obsessive people

right

and something similar is here going on

Johnny socialism and Andrew Saturn I

mean the dedication is just frankly

baffling I I first was baffled by this

level of dedication around six months

ago I believe even more than that and I

was like

why do they care that much right then

Johnny socialism in a typically autistic

manner would say something like oh this

is just Mouse uh combat liberalism where

we were not gonna let you slide highs we

have to keep critiquing you Haz

even though they won't debate me by the

way that how can you critique me if all

you're doing is lying about I mean you

we all know you're a liar you're a

pathological liar

maybe that's part of your autism maybe

it's because you're a fucking fed

but if you were called to account in any

neutral Court any neutral third party

called to account

to justify your claims about me

with either evidence or even justify how

you can draw an inductive conclusion

based on what you see from me you could

not sustain the things you say

um

yeah one one for example uh for example

um Andrew Saturn is now rolling with the

claim that Nadia my girlfriend is first

16 then 15 not 14.

so where does that come from though

because

in actual objective reality where like

things objectively like in the actual

world of fact and objective reality

Nadia is actually

significantly older than me

I don't mean like by 10 years or

anything but

I'm not gonna reveal her age either but

it's

it's definitely older than me right

she's definitely older than me

so

but so where did the claim that she was

15 or 16 come from well Andrew Saturn

has a documentable track record

of trying to start

um spread lies and just make claims that

have no factual basis in reality

because they are a pathological liar

because they're quite possibly a Fed

and additionally they are so butthurt

beyond the pill they are doing

everything in their power to bring me

down now if Andrew Saturn can't

physically bring me down because if he

was in my physical presence he would

shit his pants quite literally shit his

pants though I expect he would probably

wears a diaper given that he does have a

mental disability

the only way he can I guess inflict the

most amount of damage on me in his head

is if he um

uh tries to destroy my reputation or

starts lies about me or slanders me but

the thing is that's interesting is that

the flame of Liberation Nick maniacci is

also doing the same thing he's boosting

all of these tweets all these defamatory

and slanderous tweets as well and not to

weigh in on the Caleb situation again

but Nick maniacci was one of the

instrumental actors in

creating these allegations against Caleb

now I don't have friendly relations with

Caleb I don't like Caleb and I'm not on

speaking terms with him I'm not saying

that because I'm scared of leftists all

your friends will help I don't like

Caleb because I think he fucked me over

right

and threw me under the bus

but I don't know if I've said this

before

but I will always be very vocal about

the fact

that I do not think any of the

allegations against Caleb are credible

anymore none of them besides what he

himself has admitted to just because of

the fact

that Nick maniacci started boosting

Andrew Saturn's lies about me now I

don't know anything about Caleb but I

know the facts when it comes to me I

know for example that I didn't stay at a

hotel room in Austin Texas

at the CPI conference I know for a fact

I didn't go to the Chicago conference

either and I know for the fact that I

was with someone else when I was staying

in Austin at the CPI conference I know

those things as a matter of absolute and

irrefutable fact

so when I see Nick maniacci starting to

boost that

I think it's very clear they just lied

about Caleb if you're willing to lie

about me that way

if you're willing to believe those lies

about me in that kind of way

how do you sit here and accuse Caleb of

anything

everything you say about Caleb suddenly

has no credibility you find it easy to

make things up about people and attack

them on that basis and there's no

grounding or basis in reality at all

so why should anyone believe that right

anyway that's something I'm always going

to be clearing the record about going

forward there's nothing credible about

what they said about Caleb given the

bullshit they're saying about me

period That's how I uh now I didn't know

if Caleb was guilty or whatever I didn't

really care either way but now it's

clear to me

I don't think he was guilty of the

things that I mean what he admitted to

there's guilt there in my eyes but

what they said that he was like this

abuser and all this I don't believe it I

don't believe it

now not that I got that away I want to

make one final announcement about Andrew

Saturn before I continue to talk about

slavoy Zizek

and this is probably the most important

one

um

now I mean this

that not when with no hyperbole right

and I'm gonna qualify what I mean by

this and I have all the relevant

documented evidence and the receipts to

back it up

but

Andrew Saturn

is quite literally

a pedophile

Andrew Saturn is literally a pedophile

he is actually a pedophile

and

how I'm gonna qualify that statement is

that I think that if you have

pictures of shirtless 16 year old boys

on your hard drive

and you start sexualizing them on

Twitter

that makes you a pedophile

why do you have a shirtless 16 year old

boy on your hard drive that you're

trying to make sexual comments about and

starting to sexualize like explicitly

sexualize by the way explicitly

sexualized and make Con make actual

sexual comments about it

what she was doing on one of his

confirmed alts we know with absolute

certainty it's his alt the Emilia

I've the Emilia Khan cult or whatever

the fuck it's called that alt is that is

confirmed to be Andrew Saturn with

absolute irrefutable certainty

and

that makes Andrew Saturn a fucking

pedophile

and when I'm at 50 000 subscribe no

matter how prominent I become in public

I am always going to make sure people

know

that whenever the name Andrew Saturn is

mentioned

pedophile needs to be added as a prefix

he is actually a pedophile

unironically having a photo of a

shirtless 16 year old boy and

sexualizing it makes you a pedal if

you're a 37 year old man it makes you a

pedal yeah you're a pedophile

and he has all of the other

psychopathological symptoms of

pedophilia his extreme perverse

obsessive hate stock kind of pathology

also lines up with the pathology of

pedophilia

I mean on a clinical level so it makes

sense in addition to being true

but Andrew Saturn is a pedophile

so I just wanted to get that out there

before I continue and all this is going

to be documented in the infrared Wiki

all of it can be seen

um

scene and uh

in the upcoming documentary I'm going to

be doing but I just wanted to prove and

confirm to you guys

and you know why I'm calling him a

pedophile because

I can now say this

without any fear that there's going to

be a legal consequence

as far as definitely being a defamatory

claim is concerned it's not a defamatory

claims it's actual fact

and in a court of law

Andrew Saturn

is going to have to disclose his Twitter

accounts

to prove that he's not that account that

is his account and I hope all of his

other accounts get exposed as well but

he's very easy to catch he's one of

those retards who just

you know

thinks he's like sneaking around but

everyone knows it's him but that is one

of the accounts that we know with

absolute certainty is him

and

yeah socialism train is I mean that's

not even a secret though that's that's

also him

and there's just so much evidence of him

having all of these different alts

because he runs the socialism train

account Andrew Saturn on his main

account regularly responds to his own

tweets for by socialism train

so what does that mean it means he has a

he already has demonstrated

a habit of having back and forth

conversations with himself through

different alts

he does that with other alts as well

but um

I can confidently say that Andrew Saturn

is a pedophile

and I I could defend that statement in a

court of law with no problem whatsoever

if you sexualize if you have photos of

shirtless boys on your hard drive

and your sex and you're putting them in

sexual context and you're sexualizing

them

you are a pedophile there's no ifs or

buts about it

it's extremely inappropriate

and it betrays the fact that you're

willing to sexualize minors and children

I mean you're a pedal you're actually a

pedophile right

didn't he impersonate me as well I

yeah he did in the telegram he tried to

in the telegram

but he immediately got caught because

he's just a fucking retard he's just

incompetent at everything he does

he has no self-awareness whatsoever

because like Chris Chan

It's a combination of an extreme case of

clinical autism

with

bad

you know encouraged bad behavior

so there you go Andrew Saturn is a

pedophile absolutely confirmed

okay

in any case

um actually their rage about my comments

about GJ is a perfect example of how

the majority of criticisms of Zizek are

not actually grounded

in anything that is significant about

Zizek and anything that gives Zizek his

fundamental and essential significance

rather

it's based on

the phenomenal appearance and image of

Zizek and that taken as a whole like

what does zizek's presence make you feel

like what are what is the sum total of

his heart takes make you feel like does

he confirm your world view when he talks

about current affairs and politics and

world affairs in his superficial pop

political interventions into the public

does zizek's political activity satisfy

the Criterion of what you would consider

to be acceptable

that is the Criterion by which g-shek is

being judged that would be legitimate if

Zizek was a political actor but he's not

in his own words doesn't even care about

any any worldly matters at all really

his focused thank you so much Mason what

do you think about the origin of the

family private property in the state by

Friedrich Engels

thank you for the five Mason

uh I think a lot of things about it

but I agree with it more or less

in any case

I want to explain

something about Zizek no Zizek is not an

Entertainer

that's what everyone's missing

I want to

provoke

and basically force you

to accept that Zizek has an

unprecedented significance for all

Western thinking

all Western thinking and you want to ask

the question in terms of

truth whether these PSL so-called

marxists and so-called anti-imperialists

are reflective of truth of a subjective

stance of Truth

versus Zizek

and by every metric Zizek is superior

Zizek is more consistent he is simply

more moral and more ethical as far as

the relationship between his thinking

and his position

the PSL epitomizes and represents a

corrupt position and while they pay lip

service to Anti-Imperialist causes

uh in other countries what they

represent here in the west and here in

America is an abject position of

corruption alongside the rest of

so-called Western marxists and Western

leftists now Zizek

is wrong and he is erroneous thank you

so much dark what do you think about

what is property by prudoun

I think it's retarded

I'm not interested in talking about

freudon either and I really appreciate

your super chats guys I do thank you so

much for the five

you can't just derail the fucking stream

by having me talk about the topic you

want to talk about to take a long time

like you don't get to pay five dollars

to change the topic of today's stream

so if if that's the only reason you're

donating don't even donate I would

rather get no donations at all and be

able to stay on topic in this stream

they're in the show queue okay well I'll

get to you after I get into this

introduction because Zizek and his

significance what's their name Kate

okay

I will drag them up

no problem

the Western left as a whole is corrupt

and even superficially speaking

Zizek has exposed the falseness of the

western left including the falseness of

so-called Western Marxist leninists and

so-called Western tankies these people

are morally ethically

in every respect

existentially culturally corrupt people

they're corrupt and I'm going to explain

why

I'm going to explain why by alluding to

something that I began to stream talking

about actually

and it's this question

of

what does it mean to be in the thick of

it

already

before you have time to think about it

what makes Zizek actually important what

actually defines his contribution

Western thinking and the so-called

Western left

is he as Gabriel put it capitalism's

gesture

thanks so much John R for the 10.

well we're gonna get into all that

especially by reviewing Gabriel Rock

Hill's article

after we debate this person in so cute

because frankly we can't keep them

waiting for hours because then they'll

fucking

hello

[Music]

can you can you shut the stream off

hello

yes I hear you yeah I hear you yeah so

stream off

base uh it is awesome write down a Super

Why am I echoing in your mind address

them after the roll call TBH

um

I I don't think are you why was

okay well is it fixed now yes it's fine

now so what is it well

um what is it well I mean a lot of

people told me to debate you on this

server after I caused quite the Ruckus

In VC earlier

um

um so uh let's just lay out a few things

um you know I I you are a Marxist

leninist right

that's correct yes okay

um I just I have a few a few gripes

about specifically

um Marxist leninism

um and a lot of it comes from a

different view than what uh Marxist

holds uh specifically property to be as

well as Community

um and and a kind of functioning working

economy

um let's start with economy because

that's something I know uh quite a bit

about I think it's pretty clear the

failure of planned economics has

demonstrated throughout history

um especially when you look at uh any

any uh actually existing socialist state

it it has a sort of big distribution

right it's gonna be a debate you're not

going to be here and give a lecture uh

for four that's fine that's fine and

then wait for me to respond so you just

said something right now that it's

pretty clear the failures of planned

economy they're not clear to me so okay

if you want to apply that they're that

it's pretty clear you should actually

qualify what you mean by that okay sure

let me

um instead demonstrate

a uh how it would be okay let's say

you're you want to build a railroad

why do you need to talk about how it

would be when there are actual examples

of planned economy in history oh because

because empirical observation doesn't

really show us much to truth and there's

lots of factors that can kind of we can

art gripe about all day so if we wanted

to actual planned economies in history

the Soviet Union being one of them that

were immensely successful as far as

their formative goals were concerned is

including they had to add up they had to

implement a market economy to be able to

function

are you referring to the New Economic

Policy

um let's take like you know how in in

let's start at the very beginning you

know War communism how it led to

multiple distribution problems and uh

election was not a planned economy it

was a policy of expropriation State

mandated expropriation it wasn't

actually a planned economy because there

were no ruling and governing

institutions of planning the economy the

economy was still in the hands of petty

producers whose produce was simply

expropriated at the barrel of a gun by

the military so that was not a planned

economy that was an emergency policy

that no one envisioned represented what

long-term planned economics would look

like it but it but it but again it

failed and it led to a lot of people

joining the black Army especially in the

Ukrainian regions

um no because it didn't it no it didn't

no but this is this is demonstrated you

you can you can look at uh the history

books like uh about makno and such and

what he did is he went to these people

that the that the uh Reds were calling

kulaks and he said he let them keep a

share the in equal share like everyone

else and operate within the

um the free territory in Ukraine that's

that's what it drove them to join that

because it actually

did not acquire the significance he did

in Contra distinction to the rule of the

Bolsheviks because makno came to power

independently of any grip of Power by

the Bolsheviks in that region mathno

took advantage of a power vacuum the

absence of any organized power

whatsoever operated like a petty

criminal Bandit with whom the Bolsheviks

actually did work with for a period of

time until they treated him as the

Bandit he was and drove him out

obviously a band that

how was he abandoned because his

so-called Anarchist economy relied on

the rating of bolshevik's supply

lines and trains the Bolsheviks were

posing a threat

by by transporting the goods from their

supply lines the bandits of the

mackinawite bandits

were stealing from the Bolsheviks

raiding their supply lines and their

their entire economy was simply based on

expropriation

it it wasn't based on expropriation like

the restroom in addition they were

criminal terrorists ruling Over The

Peasants with their own contrasvetka

that acted as a single over anyone yes

they indeed did though because they're

they had an economy that was like War

communism based and expropriation except

they had no basis in legitimacy in the

actual peasants maybe so they had it

they had a they had a market socialist

economy they even had they had schools

they had uh they had working hospitals

and they thrived while the war was going

on all of those schools and all those

hospitals were a Remnant from the State

of Affairs that preceded the machinimus

they didn't create any new institutions

at all they didn't create any any

Capital but they seized the capital and

made it operate in a thriving manner

that didn't was not seen give me

evidence that it operated in a thriving

manner relative to what

that all the evidence you're going to

give me that it was thriving was

anecdotal evidence from ideological

anarchists from the region who want to

give glamorous reports and results for

their ideological agenda what objective

evidence is there that this was a

thriving state

of do you want do you want like history

books here because I want some actual

objective evidence that shows that the

economy and these institutions were

thriving

um

with like like okay so I can give you a

history book two of them that that

account this I'm not asking you for a

book that I'm not asking you for an

authority I'm asking you for

an actual

I'm asking you to oblige an actual

standard of evidence and then fulfill

that piece of evidence

um

okay so let's take

let's take um the the example of what

the what the nationalists were doing at

the time right so you you should know

that that the Nationalist economy in

Ukraine was was very awful and I don't

know why you're talking about an economy

in a state of chaotic Civil War I mean

why are you making it seem like this was

a period of ripe experimentation of

different systems like some kind of

Silicon Valley commune some sea studying

fucking commune somewhere

tumultuous state of the breakdown of

society there was no economic system at

all a system implies a self-enclosed and

functioning kind of process that did not

exist there was no consistent systemic

process of any kind of economy there was

the tumultuous chaos of a civil war

there was no nationalism if you want to

move on to the stable example of like

these established Soviet Union we can

um which which also had its own problems

but the purpose of the planned economy

of the Soviet Union was to build up and

in a national economy whose steel

production and production of heavy

industry Goods could rival that of the

West to protect it in the in the

circumstances of an invasion as well as

provide for their citizens a basic

standard of living and in doing that it

succeeded with flying colors you can

talk about the problems if I'm not wrong

I think the steel production was uh had

a big issue of overproduction

that's enough

listen

overproduction of Steel is the least of

a country's worries which is being

invaded by eventually vastly more

industrialized Germans

I mean you're talking well I mean that

was that was 13

000 tanks

I mean that's what you need to win a war

life or death

Stalin said in 31 or 28 we need 10 years

to catch up and if we don't we're going

to be buried ten years past operation

Barbosa commences the Soviet Union

ends that war Victorious I say that's an

example of success not failure

um

okay wait so so the war the war ends but

they they again they that caused a uh

because of the war it did cause a lot of

shortages and a lot of other sections I

mean yeah because 30 million people lost

their lives I mean tens of millions

millions at least are exterminated

outright at the barrel of a gun

countless soldiers or it's casualties

countless capital and Industry is

physically destroyed the entire brunt of

the Nazi war machine is almost entirely

taken by the Soviet Union and you're

trying to present that as some kind of

systemic or IDE worse ideological flaw

I'm part of the leaders of the Soviet

Union and not the objection who brought

up that specific one but they survived

is the point and that's what they were

doing that's what the whole purpose of

it was before

well what what's survival if you're like

using way too much resources to fight a

war and then leaving your people

starving and like what survival what

survival

when you don't end up being the slaves

of the Germans and being exterminated as

sub-human Slavs and having all of your

resources looted to go to Germany I

wonder is being the slave of the Soviets

you're trying to say that there was no

Soviet Victory why because they had a

transient very temporary famine in 47-48

so because of the famine 4748 the

entirety of the Soviet victory in World

War II is now non-existent and it would

have made no difference if the Nazis

would have won that is so abjectly

fucking stupid the countless and

innumerable people within the Soviet

state who had their livelihood elevated

and by the way the rebuilding was very

very quick and very rapid in the in the

years after World War II these people

had access to electricity education

running water medicine they could read

for the first time when they had no

ability to before they were having to

access the culture they had a job that

was secure they could at least live you

know there were famines in 32-33 and

47-48 those famines were real but then

again famines were a very common

occurrence in the Russian Empire and

then after the Famine of 47 which was

actually because of the war for no other

reason

they never had one again

that sounds like a victory you know what

worked better and it just going from

feudalism which people were dirt poor

and having nothing it's not that hard to

elevate lives after that yes because

most countries still can't fucking do it

that's what you're missing most

countries in Africa many countries in

the Middle East today many countries

even in that's because of American

imperialism

you can no it's not just because of

American imperialism because they have

no ability to develop themselves because

actually it's not easy to modernize your

productive forces it's not easy to

fucking do that no what you're saying is

that it's easy to go from feudalism to

something better no it's not

communism or whatever you want to call

it if they never had that and they were

just some extremely starving Nation

comparable to Africa's standard of

living Angelina Jolie would be going

there and adopting orphans from there

and Russia would be the sad oh what a

tragedy nobody actually wants to

acknowledge the achievement of the

Soviet state and the achievements of do

you know what achievement is greater

which which is somehow overshadowed by

by these like MLS who like praise the

USSR for that Yugoslavia did it much

faster much better and increased the

livelihood

no it did not Yugoslavia was already

part of the industrializing

austro-hungarian empire for the most

part when that was dissolved in World

War One

yugoslavia's

Yugoslavia was was

um for people's economic situations were

actually stable and they had a better

standard of living than USSR Most states

to the west of the USSR had a better

standard of living than the USSR you

want to know why it's not why they had

greater access to the

thing were Goods that already existed in

the west that's why it wasn't because

they built a better system from the

ground up it's the opposite they had

more access to the established

capitalist World Market than the Soviets

did that's why

the bulk okay so you're saying hungry

what's your standard life was better and

Hungary it was better in Poland it was

better in East Germany it was better in

Czech Slovakia than it was in the Soviet

Union everyone knows so what you're

saying basically is that

because the Soviet Union refused to

global trade cooperation for a very long

time

but they did but they did do that they

refused no they didn't they didn't

refuse global trade cooperation they

just they only they only traded with

other

like other socialists that's not true

that's just patently not true it was

Western countries that wanted to

restrict trade to the Soviet Union not

the reverse

the okay so the You go Okay so

why couldn't

USSR take the Yugoslavia approach and

have a instead of being a blatant like

um strong man military

like Ooga Booga Force like why why can't

they just what the fuck is why can't

they take oh yeah yeah like I guess I

guess I guess the Oriental Orcs ooga

booga right because they're Apes just

straight out of Hitler's fucking mouth

right

yeah I will not have you disrespect the

heroic

and legendary Red Army here you're gonna

call them

soldiers of the Red Army we're far more

civilized far more civilized far more

absolutely far more educated even the

German officers would note the level of

literary education level of literacy the

level of acquaintance with basic

intellectual Concepts among these

soldiers of the Red Army and you sit

here and disrespect them being forced

to read like like what

hey hold on hold on hold on all right

being told a bunch of shit from comic

books and being able to Parrot it isn't

intelligence no because that's not what

they did people consumed books and read

from thought for themselves in the

Soviet Union far more than in any

Western Country as far as the average

person was concerned people were

actually critically dissect their

propaganda but at the same time

significance

yet yes they did because when they

consumed propaganda quote unquote by an

official organ of the state they didn't

see that as some intellectually

contrived or theoretical statement they

saw it as an official statement of their

objectively existing state so it wasn't

they weren't blindly agreeing with it on

the basis of some contrived theoretical

level like they couldn't think for

themselves they were saying this is the

authority of our state and they

respected that because it was their

state

it but see that that's the thing they

the the Red Army quite clearly did a

bunch of Horrid actions to a lot of

people first of all what about the

gulags what about that like that's

that's just

what about have you ever read the gulag

what about the gulags

have you ever read the gulag archipelago

I wiped my ass with it yeah

okay shredded and they fucking wiped my

ass with it because it's shit with no

bait it's no evidence to that fucking

book it's all account it's an anecdotal

account based in nothingness based in

bullshit

system you can't morally hold the Soviet

Union accountable for not being as

wealthy and Rich to support a great

standard of living in its fucking penal

colonies but the Soviets I can

absolutely criticize it for literally

fucking starving and torturing people

and that's penal system there was no

intentional starvation of anyone at any

period in the Soviet Union's history

when there was shortages of food really

yeah because when there's shortages oh

oh what about the holodama

hold on hold on hold on

let me get this straight

because this is just baffling

you're claiming that the Soviets

intentionally

orchestrated a famine

in Ukraine

yes

so you're telling me you're mentally

retarded

I'm telling you it is there's evidence

there's multiple different different

show me one piece of evidence for sure

these stupid fucking idea that a famine

in which Russians and kazakhs also

starved

was intentional why and what meaningful

world does it make rational sense that

the Soviet state wants to just starve

people love and not produce enough food

so I have um right here

have

over over let's see over 200 references

um I don't care about your ref see

here's the thing okay okay you're

probably college educated right so

you're mentally retarded and you have

this idea that a simple allusion to a

reference as if this is some kind of uh

game of credentials somehow suffices to

actually prove and fulfill a standard of

evidence I want a primary standard of

evidence that's I want one to be

fulfilled

buy your own account that there was

actual that this was actually

intentional I don't want you to leave

references I want you to take any one of

those references and rationally

legitimize them

in your own words and in your own

process I want you to do that because I

don't give a fuck I don't give a fuck

about Western universities I don't give

a shit I will go in those universities

with my ball sack hanging and I will

wipe every professor's face with my

balls I don't care about your fucking

references I shit on your professors and

your accredited historians and I Spit on

their fucking face

okay so you're you're saying that

because I have sources right

I just gave you I just told you what you

have to do take one of those sources and

it break down to me a standard of

evidence and how that Source fulfills

that standard of evidence

I didn't ask you to give more commentary

about your sources I asked you to

actually demonstrate their significance

rationally yourself and in your own

words okay that's that's fair enough

here let me take

um

all right so

we have

a a book that's

um

all right so we have a book called

cannibals identified during the

holodomer we're given poison baits by

medical workers around the Villages

um so this this here

it's it's a Russian it's a Russian

document it's not a book I said book

sorry

um

and I have the web archive and it

directly accounts that there was

um specific

tampering with not only the food and in

Ukraine but also the supply lines to get

food there and there there was people

there's a council people right and you

give me your actual objective evidence

we're so what I have the I have

a I have an article right here do you

want that no I want you to fulfill a

standard of evidence anecdotal evidence

does not sorry

um a eyewitness testimony does not

fulfill a standard of evidence to me I

will call that a but but it was but it's

multiple different different accounts

and that would just mean sure there are

multiple different people in Ukraine who

had the agenda of slandering and

smearing the USSR and there are multiple

people in the west who have that agenda

that much is very clear to me

so you're saying we don't trust the

vastness provide from me from the Soviet

archives a single document from the

Soviet government

that explains that this is our plan and

Our intention to execute a famine

okay one second

um this should be

okay

um

P Soviet documents right here

and I we have the right where

I'm on okay I'm looking for I'm looking

for the documents right here

so all right so we have a letter from uh

Molotov

uh to Stalin

we have a letter to Stalin from

can you read us the contents the right

one let me see if this is right what's

the content of these letters

okay so so right here so we have send it

send it in uh the VC chat

okay let me

see right here let me get this so I can

send that

C chat yes VC chat

okay right sorry my computer so I'm

trying to get there

okay and

sending the file now

all right here we go there's there's the

PDF for the for the document and

let me read this out uh given the most

serious attention Ukraine uh two bars

corruptness and opportunities and

Essence and uh run diplomacy with regard

to the CC of the vkp and criminally

frivolous attitude towards this job will

eventually ruin the Ukraine uh the

Ukraine

these comrades are not up to the

challenge of leading Ukraine today if

you go to Ukrainian conference and I

insist on it take every measure in order

to improve the phone just cut you off

because you're wasting everyone's time

because I'm looking at the document

right now just so everyone can see that

I have already read it and I'm looking

at the document in question

there is even if I were to just take

this at blank value this is correct this

is a real letter i that has not been

confirmed to me in any capacity that

they are going to review remove chewbar

on account of his corruptness and this

guy koizar they're going to remove them

from positions of power I could accept

that that's possible I don't know

but you see the so this is the problem

of how to actually establish a standard

of evidence okay because I'm gonna just

just please listen to me like very very

closely right

can you please point out in this

document any illusion to the plan to

intentionally and methodically starve

Ukraine go ahead

I have I have a more

um sure but so this was just a waste of

my time then right no no no so that that

one that one that one shows that there

was that that there was that there was

uh a definitely a thing going on uh with

Ukraine and this is like setting up the

the whole conflicts and

the this this other this other document

um

shows that

what did this show actually because we

can all read it right now and I don't

think there's anything incriminating

about this letter at all there's nothing

no there's nothing criminal about this

these people are corrupt this person's

opportunistic this person has rotten

diplomacy they have a criminally

frivolous attitude to their job that's

going to ruin Ukraine so they're not up

to Leading Ukraine we should go to the

offerings and try to influence it so

that you know we can ensure a genuinely

Bolshevik decision is made and

influenced in that way and we will have

to remove them both and again by what

method do we remove them it's not clear

maybe you're gonna try to argue that

this is evidence that they wanted to

circumvent the Soviet legal system

although I highly doubt that so so if so

you have to yeah

so let let me let me give you a bit of

context here uh there was

so uh these Soviet officers were sending

uh letters to

um to Stalin about the Ukrainian food

shortages and uh like a famine that's

going on and Stalin blatantly rejected

to offer any Aid to Ukraine okay where's

the evidence for that where's the

evidence for that

okay well I have yeah you're describing

a criminally frivolous attitude toward

their job which probably have the same

document which probably could be related

to why there was a famine maybe these

people were not

running things correctly that had

something to do with the mismanagement

of the process of industrialization and

um of collectivization in Ukraine maybe

that was tangentially related

to the famine have you ever thought of

that the man was removed from power for

uh um Stalin called him corrupt

um when the letter when when when he

when he said

first of all first of all objectively

speaking they sent Aid they sent they

tried to relieve the famine as soon as

they became aware of it that's an

objective first document proof Stalin

wanted to improve conditions

wait hold up hold up hold on what what

do you mean they were to leave the

famine as soon as they got

they they did everything in their power

to relieve the famine as soon as they

became aware of it

that's that's blatantly not true because

they because right here these letters

show people put in fact checking the

relevant evidence of that fact put it in

the fact-checking section of the Discord

so that we could provide our evidence

for that fact

because it's blade and it's blatantly

shown specifically from these letters

that they were aware of the fans yet

Sullen rejected to all okay give me one

shred of evidence that these letters

evince the fact that they are a both

aware of the famines and crucially B

that they refuse to send Aid in light of

that awareness

there's our back and forth between

um Stalin and uh the the Soviet officer

where

um where is it

here the so right here in this this one

the second one I saw okay

um

it it it's it says stuff well I'm not

gonna read the whole thing but it it

says stuff like I'm going to read it

right now

go ahead yeah

foreign

and bring me Stalin's response

okay Stalin's response would be

um

okay I think this is that

have you provided it

yeah

okay

this is not Stalin's response this is a

guy named chewbar

it says Ann Stalin

no it's a letter from him to Molotov and

Stalin

uh okay wait wait wait

they're from Stalin to

yeah so so I think so I think the first

one was the response actually that I

sent to the uh to the to the second

letter okay do you have clinical

schizophrenia or something this one is a

letter from petrovsky to Molotov and

Stalin isn't it the first one from two

bar tomorrow

no okay okay look look so so the the

second one I sent the letter

um from petrovsky to maltof and Stalin

then then the response to that is the

first one I sent called the letter to

Stalin to maltov

but they already read the most serious

attention to Ukraine

two bars corrupt

and koyser's bad diplomacy and he has a

criminally frivolous attitude toward his

job now how is that

in any way an indication that he he was

he was he was talking about uh

the first letter to giving Aid to

Ukraine and and Stalin called because

they called these people Criminal

petrovsky's not mentioned in this

article

the

did you read the second one or the or

sorry the the first one the one that was

sent to him

the Trotsky is not in this letter

it it clears okay so dropsky who's

explaining that people are starving

supposedly I have not confirmed the

veracity of any of this but this is

petrovsky

yes this first one yeah

because petrovsky is not mentioned in it

only chubar is mentioned in it and

shubar is here but the idea that shubar

is allegedly corrupt

because he's

claiming that the plan is not working

has yet to be demonstrated could there

have possibly been other reasons why

Molotov is referring to him as corrupt

or there's no possibility that he could

have been corrupt for another reason it

has to be because he was reporting on

the situation in Ukraine logically

speaking what you're saying is nonsense

okay

then then you have right the

so so this was this was uh this was a

this was a policy right from from the

Soviet Union

make all property belong to Collective

farms and cooperatives

in the fields Public Reserve sliced

Cooperative stock and stores Etc uh

equivalent to state property and fully

strengthen the protection of this

property against theft

judicial uh repressions of the highest

degree as measures of social protection

yeah

oh listen I want you to do

I know it's really hard for you to do

because you're you're just used to like

listening to what authorities tell you

because you're like probably an NPC but

what I want you to do wait wait hold up

how are you going to continually explain

how the the whatever it is even the 10

whatever bushels policy can't steal from

the grain

you can't stop

I want you just to rationally make the

argument that that policy

means they were trying to intentionally

starve ukrainians rather than the

opposite which is to secure the security

of Food Supplies so that everyone could

be properly fed

as as soon as they as soon as they

um okay collectivize the Farms right

then then suddenly famine happened which

uh was like as soon as they get they

made it equivalent to State Property

well all the all the all the Socialists

like Market equivalent to State Property

suddenly which would make a different

argument you're making a different

fucking argument now now I am

willing to get into the details of the

relationship between the

collectivization and the famine I can

get into that nitty-gritty with you but

there's one little problem we still have

to resolve because you have just leveled

a disgusting a disgusting form of

slander and defamation against the

Soviet state which is that they

intentionally tried to starve the

ukrainians the only fruit of the

argument that you are making right now

that I could possibly draw is that

this is your view this is the only thing

in your argument that I'm hearing is

that you think that

collectivization start caused the famine

which I think it did partially cause the

famine actually

but you're trying to say I guess you're

trying to now make the argument that

this proves the superiority of Market

systems

they don't give a fuck if you prefer

Market systems over the collectivization

system I mean but the I mean the claim

that the Soviets methodically engineered

this famine to starve ukrainians is

patently false and you have yet to

justify it let me let me okay let me get

some evidence not a shred of evidence

let me make the argument here okay so

because the because of the

collectivization was put under State

Control right they had the authority

right to take as much resources from

these these places as they wanted

because they were they were state

property or made State Property so

because they had that

um ability to take it take resources

and there was clearly a a situation in

Ukraine where ukrainians weren't very

happy with the situation and very happy

with the Red Army cell

um so what what they did was they

cook

the resources from these from these uh

from these Farms

purposefully

to cause a short Edge

to make the make the people weak there

and more reliant on the on the state

um call it welfare

for their survival okay well thank you

for wasting my time with a bunch of

jibber jabber where's the argument

that's the argument something on the

state taking all the resources

where is the intentional famine where

that is that isn't that is an

intentional famine if they take food

then no they don't if they

requisition too much grain on accident

because they miscalculated and

mismanaged the situation on the ground

that does not fucking mean they

intentionally tried to starve ukrainians

it means they fucked up

why why do you think why do you think

it's uh it's an accident

why do you think it's March 16th 1932

here's a from the archive of the

president of the Russian Federation the

political Bureau believes that shortage

of seed grain in Ukraine is many times

worse than what was described and

comrade koiser's telegram the guy who by

the way they said was opportunistic and

they wanted to sack therefore the

political Bureau recommends the Central

Committee of the Communist Party of

Ukraine take all measures within its

reach to prevent the thread of failing

to sow in Ukraine

that was in March you gave me shit from

June 10th and then the response from

Molotov supposedly which was a response

that he sent to Stalin was July 2nd

filter

wanted was warning the Communist Party

of Ukraine the Central Committee to take

action because they were over reporting

the amount of seed grain they had there

was a shortage that the Nationalist

inclined leaders like koiser who you're

saying are Martyrs that were big oh we

just told the truth and that's why

Stalin hates us no you lied you said you

had more seeds than you had

when you didn't because you fucked up

either as an act of incompetence over

enthusiasm or corruption which is what

Molotov accused chubov of so so it but

but that's the thing it was in March so

that means I failed they failed to

actually

do like follow through right that was

the job of the Communist Party of

Ukraine

quote-unquote prevent the failing uh to

prevent that yeah they failed but they

had the intention to prevent it there's

no do you have any evidence that they

tried to prevent it that they did

anything before I I don't even have to

get that right now I probably could if I

wanted and put the time in it but right

now I have a glaring piece of evidence

that there was already an intention

there was a command by the political

Bureau

to the Communist Party of Ukraine to do

that and if they didn't do that that

means they were violating the order that

was given to them by the political

Bureau of the central authorities of the

Soviet Union

you can't explain you can't explain why

there was also a famine in Russia you

can't explain why there is also a Kazakh

famine which I believe took more

casualties you can't explain these

things you can't explain why it would be

in the interest of the Soviet state to

cause such a chaotic and

uncontrollable circumstance that is a

famine it's chaos if the Soviet state is

a totalitarian all-controlling state why

would they want to induce a famine if

they wanted to kill ukrainians

if they wanted to kill ukrainians a

famine would not be the optimal means to

do them let me you you need to

understand that all these all these laws

and legislation are just letters to

Santa without the people to enforce them

[Music]

I don't even have to entertain that

argument and I'm not going to entertain

it because you're failing to actually

get to the central point which is that

you have yet to provide a single piece

of evidence just a single one that shows

there was an intentional

and methodical plan by the Soviet state

to starve ukrainians not a single piece

of evidence

so I am but but I'm making the argument

you're just saying I'm not going to like

you're avoiding it you're not making

that argument or and if you are trying

to make that argument you're not

establishing the connection between a

supposed shortage of people or lack of

willingness on part of the Communist

Party of Ukraine to fulfill the orders

of the political Bureau and an intention

by that very same political Bureau to

starve ukrainians there's no connection

between those there's none if you want

to make the argument that there's a

connection go ahead and make it

that's that wait hold on it's not about

the the willingness I'm talking about

that you can't just like say

that's um

you can't just you can't just say go

kill the the like ukrainians right

um that's that's not that doesn't well

especially because there was a lot of

there was a lot of like actual uh like

Ukrainian people in the Red Army that

was that was a thing and you so if if

you're going to tell an army which

people uh a lot a lot of Russians like

Russian people held ukrainians to be

their brothers if you're gonna tell

those people to then go Slaughter

civilians they're not gonna do it

they're not gonna do that

so it's a it's a matter of trying to

convert so okay

did the Holocaust happen because I don't

know you seem like a Nazi benderist

apologist so I just want to confirm wait

wait wait hold up where'd you even get

that you didn't ask you did the

Holocaust happen yes okay

did everyone know it was happening at

the time

now okay so wouldn't it have been

possible for the Soviet state to

disproportionately Target ukrainians in

a more covert way because here's the

idiotic logic supposedly the

totalitarian Soviet state was starving

ukrainians and keeping it a secret from

all of the Russians and they didn't know

about it so if the Soviets decided to

exterminate ukrainians outright

all they wouldn't be able to contain

that secret everyone would have found

out

yeah

how does that make sense

that makes that makes sense because okay

you just mentioned the Holocaust not

everyone knew about the Holocaust they

had to do it in a covert Manner and so

the the the Soviets couldn't just order

people to go kill uh civilians that's

that's absurd they could have rounded

them up and

that would still be that was that would

still be like pretty blatant especially

if you have like you're gonna have to

take away from Like official party

resources like the people who are most

loyal to go execute these people because

I'm saying there was a conspiratorial

intention to starve ukrainians that no

one none of the rain can file

functionaries knew about who knew about

it exactly then

Stalin himself and the uh the the higher

ups and the one and Molotov and the

political Bureau and the political

Central Committee of the Communist Party

the Soviet Union

did chubov know about it did koiser know

about it

um I mean I I don't know necessarily I I

don't exactly know the Communist Party

of Ukraine know about it

um probably not

wait a second I just have to inquire

about a little contradiction here

if you will

earlier I showed you documented evidence

of the political Bureau giving an order

to the Central Committee of the

Communist Party of Ukraine to take all

measures within its reach to prevent the

threat of a failing soul to prevent the

threat of a famine and you claimed that

the inaction on part of the Central

Committee of the Communist Party of

Ukraine

they might have known to probably not

why why do why before I raise that

logical contradiction to you because

because again like I don't I don't know

about that specifically two minutes ago

before I brought up this glaring logical

contradiction in your argument and now

wearing logical contradictions

of the Central Committee of the

Communist Party knowing about this

conspiratorial plan goes from not likely

to oh oh oh it's now likely how does

that make sense

what do you mean how does that make

sense like I I I did I don't know about

that like Okay so let's assume that they

were also complicit in it

the Central Committee of the Communist

Party of Ukraine is complicit in the

conspiracy

but you also just linked me evidence and

here are the two pieces of evidence of

people from that same Central Committee

or from the Communist Party of Ukraine

sending letters to Molotov and Stalin

describing the situation on the ground

and then you then claim that Stalin

Molotov refused to offer relief why are

people who in your own

um words are probably complicit in this

conspiracy sending letters to Molotov

and Stalin for Relief when they

themselves were the perpetrators of the

conspiracy did they have a sudden change

of heart did they decide so so why why

why so the the issue to help in Ukraine

was issued in March she had the letters

were sent in June right

okay

in March

this political Bureau of the Soviet

Central authorities

sent it to the Ukrainian communists

yes and that was that was in March yet

the the famine still soaking continued

and there's amazing situation started by

then

you're getting your timelines completely

wrong

yeah okay

um

so so there there was a

so there's a short wait so you're saying

a famine didn't start but there was a

shortage of

seed in March

yes because in order for there to be a

famine there has to be an extremely low

yield from those seeds

which results in a shortage of food

because people don't eat seeds they eat

food

right okay

so

there was a shortage of seeds right and

then and then they were like

they sent a letter and we're like uh oh

there's no food I sent that to Stalin

and Stalin Stalin replied with oh the

this this guy's corrupt you know

there's no evidence that this letter

from Stalin to Molotov and kaganovic was

in any capacity a response to these

letters from June there's no evidence of

that

they're

what it literally is writing too okay

okay so I'm gonna explain to you how

evidence works so in this letter if

Stalin would have told Molotov and

kaganovic hey these guys just told me a

famines going on that means they're

corrupt and I want you to remove them

you would have been right not once does

he even allude to the idea that

his decision that these people are

corrupt opportunistic and rotten

diplomatically

is related to their report of a famine

on the ground

and actually it doesn't square up with

what you're saying how can these people

be Stalin's victims for asking for

Relief when in your own words it is

logically

likely that they were themselves part of

in the know about the conspiracy to I I

didn't okay wait hold on hold on hold on

I I pulled I pulled back on that because

I again I don't know like that that

specific like history no then I wanna I

wanna actually confront you the logic

here because well I didn't make it as

like wait wait wait wait wait wait but

no no you have to though because I

presented you with a piece of evidence

and the only response you gave me to

that evidence was that why was there

that failure

why was okay so the

the so I'm saying it's it's possible

that okay the Ukrainian Communist Party

didn't didn't know I don't want to give

you I don't want you to give me stuff

about possibilities I demand from you

that you respond to this piece of

evidence

I demand from you that you responds you

want me to take a stance on this

specific thing the political girl

believes the shortage of seed in Ukraine

is worse than what was described in

quizzer the guy they later decided they

wanted to purge telegram therefore they

recommend the Communist Party Ukraine

takes all measures to prevent the threat

of failing to sow crops in Ukraine

oh if if the if the uh Central Communist

Party had the plan of uh intentionally

Starving ukrainians in a genocide then

what would it look like if they if um

they never gave any kind of orders to

the Ukrainian Communist party to help

right

Communist Party reporting to them that

there's a famine but somehow the Central

Committee

the political Bureau knows about that

there's a shortage of seed grain before

there's an awareness of any of the

things going on that's right oh that's

strange okay you know because that's

straight why does the why does the

central communist like why does the

politic Bureau right why do they know

about a shortage of seeds before the

Ukraine because they're able to parse

out inconsistencies in the report of how

much grain there is

based on and and comparing that to facts

um verified by people on the ground that

they trust

because they were because comrade koiser

is what he's being called reports to the

central authorities that there's a

larger amount of seed grain than there

is the central authorities find that to

be inconsistent with other facts and

evidence gathered on the ground so they

tell us

you're making the claim that that the

ukrainians

the Ukrainian Communist party don't know

about a shortage of seed which is

something they should be overlooking

anyway because of the prior

um collectivization

it is very possible that they over

reported the amount of seed grain I bet

they do that

for political careerism because they

were corrupt

what do you mean for political careers

um how would reporting it makes them

seem more competent and successful in

actually getting bigger agricultural

yields there was a political incentive

for them to over report the yields

because it would have bolstered their

fucking careers

is this is the sum no this is a widely

known fact even according to your

Bourgeois historians on Soviet history

it's a widely used argument by the way

you've been Bourgeois historians what

are you talking about

okay Anglo angloid historians angloyd

lying piece of shit historians even

agree with what I'm saying oh so you but

but okay can you name a few historians

that deny the holodomer

or over fur

Steven cotkin is a reputable historian

all the whole revision is School

uh Sheila Fitzpatrick

J Arch Getty all of those people

okay okay they do not believe there was

an intentional famine

so yeah the idea that it is a

well-established fact that the Soviets

had an intentional genocide against

Ukraine is a myth it's not even the

prevailing view in Western scholarship

it is only are you sure yeah are you

sure no it's exclusively the Ukrainian

emigre Lobby and the Ukrainian

institutions and Ukraine's International

policy to push this line but outside of

that influence it is not a

well-established fact this is literally

equivalent this is literally equivalent

to saying like the Holocaust didn't

happen not no it is even the fucking ADL

even the fucking ADL and Jewish

organizations pushed back against the

claim the halodemore was a the hello to

more so-called by the way where did the

name come from Hello to more but the

claim that it was intentionally a name

that was made even so as to make it seem

like this is the Soviet version of a

Holocaust by the way

can you provide me a source at the ADL

denies it

yeah I I saw it somewhere

that's somewhere because I I don't

I I don't I don't believe that I don't

believe that's true here I'll even look

it up myself

because

it may have not been the ADL but it's

it's beyond the point there are

established organizations

that deny this that are ruling

organizations because precisely because

of the equivalence being drawn with the

Holocaust

so

I'm I'm looking I'm so so okay so I I

wanna I wanna I wanna Source right that

that says that these these Jewish

organizations deny the uh

deny the holodomer because that that's

not no one denies there was a famine but

the claim that there was an intentional

policy of killing ukrainians and

Exterminating them through famine is not

well established and yes I I have seen

uh

organizations you would probably have to

find reputable

that also denied that that was the case

but this is this is the this is the

common view in Academia that that

happened well how do you define common

because Stephen cotkin doesn't accept

that view Stephen let me let me let me

how do you spell his last name

k-o-t-k-i-n

okay Stephen cotkin

yeah so there's a whole Wikipedia

article

okay here here I'm gonna do this for you

because you're probably a ball site who

loves Wikipedia

and oh my God why is Wikipedia have a

hollow to more genocide question because

apparently it is subject

to some kind of dispute historian J Arch

Getty states that the scholarly

consensus

of classifying the halodemar as a result

of bungling and rigidity rather than a

genocidal plan

that's how he characterizes it

okay wait let me let me let me read this

so the Soviet Head of State

uh Mikhail

fucking say that name uh responded to

Western authors of food by telling the

by telling of political cheats who offer

the help of The Starving Ukraine and

commented only on the most decadent of

of classless or capable of producing

such cynical elements and I've a source

for this right

um he he sent me the source and let's

see what it was actually said because I

couldn't hear what you said really okay

hold on look at this look at this

this is from

wow there's a lot of evidence that was

provided since then

the story which has emerging is because

of Soviet leadership which was

struggling with a famine crisis which

had been caused partly by their

wrong-headed policies but it was

unexpected and undesirable

the book claims Stalin is responsible

but they say it was not intentional

no reputable Source today claims it was

intentional even Robert why did why did

Robert Conquest has gone back on his

original claims of Soviet intentionality

in the famine

why okay so so why was it recorded right

when when they they counted the Corpses

um

they they reported 300

3997 when the actual number was uh nine

thousand four hundred and seventy two

for the uh you just medical uh a bunch

of jibber jabber what corpses where whoo

what

thank you so much John Kelly they left I

didn't do anything not a communist but I

like your content since we are talking

about Soviets do you think communism can

actually occur given that the current

marxists are unwilling to go to the

lengths that men such as Stalin and

Lennon were willing thank you so much

John Kelly appreciate you

well they left I'll wait them to

reconnect I bet their internet probably

disconnected

I'm guessing their internet disconnected

no I don't think they uh intentionally

left I think their internet probably

just gonna

they would have probably

why are they gone

did they leave how do you know

so they just left

we'll give them some time to come back

but um

yeah so Stephen cotkin was the person I

was referencing said Stalin was

responsible there's no evidence for

Stalin's intention to kill ukrainians

deliberately

it was not an intentional murder

there's so much

government recognition

of it being a genocide

look at this it's the it's the

International Community again

wow it's the International Community

wow the International Community

recognizes it was a genocide I guess

it's over

I guess all these ooga booga people in

her words aren't willing to recognize it

but all of these um great nice people

are willing to recognize it because

they're civilized and they're human

right

what a fucking joke

it was not all gathered on a kind of

over optimistic promises from rural

districts again people on the ground

we're over reporting their success

or ideological and political reasons

this was a really big problem at

characterized the process of

collectivization there was a huge

disconnect between the objective reality

and the enthusiasm

as well as the corrupt political

careerist aspirations of leaders on the

ground who thought that they would be

good for their careers to over report

their yields which did come at the

expense of producing rain

did they did they get banned

because I'm looking at the mod chat and

they said

they were gonna get banned after the

debate because they were saying things

in the

he said Hitler was a great man so this

was a troll or

I don't know

they're not banned yet

they're not banned yet

according to the mods

so I don't know what happened to them

they said I can't join back something

came up I'll see if I can

I'll see if I can join another time

that's what they're claiming

for 2069 wants to debate me

go ahead

go ahead

foreign

go ahead and speak

yeah what's up

so you said how's it going what what

else

yeah what's going on

all right what do you want to talk about

Z Jack

well I was just kind of thinking earlier

about um

the uh what was it

the uh damn it

the sort of the Fabian socialist thing

with the world economic all right so are

you here to debate anything

no I'm not very great on the spot so so

what would that so you're basically

saying you're gonna provide better

content than me then and go fucking do

your own stream

not here to talk to you it's 430 people

watching me

it's not all about you

the point is

you can get in VC to challenge me

not to be my friend you want to be my

friend get in chat and watch like

everyone else

you want to challenge this I put it on

the line I put my credibility on the

line I put my authority as the con on

the line I go into fucking battle and I

charge in with a fucking sword head

first and I'll take on anyone I'm risk

it all

I rinsed my power

everything I have

Victory or perish

so you want to come challenge me then

come challenge me come put on the line

challenge my credibility challenge that

I'm bluffing challenge that I'm

knowledgeable get on my BC and challenge

challenge me see if you can sow that I'm

full of shit and I have nothing to stand

on and I'm bluffing and I'm not

knowledgeable and I'm a bullshitter and

I'm whatever I don't read books come

fucking prove it

and if you can't and if you can't

and if you can't

I accept your manhood

and I crossed it in the palm of my hands

in any case

now we return back to Zizek and Gabriel

Rockwell which is the subject of today's

stream

now without any further Ado I'm going to

introduce you to Gabrielle Rockwell's

abjectly retarded

critique of Zizek

here it is

here it is

slavoy Zizek capitalism's Court Jester

this is the claim by Gabriel Rockwell

that Zizek is capitalism's court jester

I find this to be a stupid title because

you're referring to what

the fact that g-shek's more popular than

you will he's not that fucking popular

if you're gonna claim that we're living

in the mode of production of capitalism

to somehow say that this man is an Indus

is like a indispensable part of the

necessity of the capitalist mode of

production

is retarded this is some stupid PSL

thank you so much

Mussolini slash Langley socialist flees

the battlefield in Terror from the red

Emir of all tankies never will they

disrespect the Red Army again never

one of the most prominent intellectuals

in contemporary world was named

oh I'm just jealous that Zizek is

popular and I'm just gonna talk about

zizek's popularity coupled with his what

his liberal politics

and his uh rejection of 20th century

communism

uh oh

DJ said bad things about communism

g-shek is a political liberal

but he's known for saying the big

revolution the left is waiting for will

never come and he's fucking right

that's what I'm here to prove that

whatever you think Zizek is wrong about

he's right about this

I'm gonna explain why

he's supposedly eurocentric

well

that seems to be correct given the fact

that Zizek is indeed

a thinker from Europe

within the European pole Jesus is

eurocentric I agree he's also a European

thinker

that is much more than someone like

Gabriel Rockhill can say because

Gabriel's also a European thinker except

Gabriel thinks he has accessed some kind

of ideology that can somehow speak for

non-europeans Gabriel thinks he's

mastered the Marxism leninism of China

and of Asia and of Russia and of all

these non-western civilizations and

peoples when he hasn't Gabriel is just

as eurocentric as Zizek is the

difference is that Gabriel's not

self-aware and Gabriel is not doing good

and well on his commitments I bet you

anything I bet you anything

that Gabriel Rockwell

is an enthusiastic supporter of LGBT

rights

that Gabriel Rock Hill is somehow a

shit-lib western NGO shit-lib on climate

change and on every fucking issue there

is that defines the purpose and the

pathology of the modern West I bet you

anything that Gabriel fucking Rockwell

whatever the fuck his name is is a euro

shit retard white buys wall leftist

right

but he can't justify it he can't sit

before the world and so is the world at

least

the logos underlying his shit Library

Zizek he's a shit lip I agree but Zizek

has laid out

on his sleeve laid out comprehensively

and consistently the real logos of shit

livery

that's why this person Gabriel is

corrupt

he's corrupt

Jesus is not

she's a can explain shit Liberty he can

try to justify shit Liberty and he can

do it consistently at least shisha gives

us something to critique

Gabriel is a slimy slithering PSL shit

lib and when we raise our finger in

defiance of the western imperialist soft

power

thank you when we raise our finger in

defiance of the LGBT and woke agenda

when we raise our finger in defiance of

the pathology of the modern West Gabriel

this corrupt scum resorts to tactics

I'm Slayer of destination of deep

platforming of conspiracy

dirty tactics

instead of reason and logos he has no

philosophy he has no consistent

communicable reason for his position

s education wing all you have to look at

is how educated PSL members are in

exactly exactly

when we confront Gabriel with our

position he responds to us by and he

sticks out his tongue

and just sits

he has nothing zizak has a logos Zizek

has the logos of the modern West

through words through text Zizek

explains to us our Western logos

so we know how to critique not just

Zizek but the modern West as a whole

that makes g-jack worth something

Gabriel is a piece of shit

who cannot consistently stand to account

on his

for his commitments

he cannot be accountable for his

commitments through any logos Jesus can

that's why

Gabriel is a barbarian

Zizek

is someone that Chinese Scholars can

critique Russian Scholars can critique

him they can go toe-to-toe with him and

they can confront him

and engage with what he's saying and

what is he saying by the way because

he's certainly not saying bass thank you

so much

if you think the bread and butter of

zizek's work consists in these

statements about politics you're a

fucking retard

zizex

work is in his works like sex and the

failed absolute or in his canonical text

less than nothing it's a Quantum

ontology that really tries to deal with

a relationship between an ontology of

dialectical materialism and quantum

physics what implications does

superposition and decoherence and the

collapse of the wave function have for

Logos as such what does this tell us

about all of our Western

civilization and reality what does it

tell us about truth and politics and

enact a true free act what does it tell

us about these things what is truth what

is reality these kinds of things is what

Zizek really tries to deal with and

that's what Zizek is for if you can't

get past zizek's pop culture personality

you are a mental retard

and you cannot say a word about zizak I

know how this works because there was a

time in which I was 15 years old once

and when I was 15 years old I saw

thinkers not really as thinkers but pop

intellectual influences and I'd watch

YouTube videos of Chomsky and I'd say oh

I like what he's saying and I watched

Pop I watch YouTube videos of Zizek say

oh I like what he's saying and I'd watch

YouTube videos and you'd watch YouTube

videos of Jordan Peterson and you say oh

I like what he's saying yeah you're not

an intellectual if that's what you're

doing what you're doing is a prolonged

form of parasocial autism okay

you want to actually get to what gizek's

actually about get to his work

that's how you measure zizek's

contributions to mankind

the same thing is for Noam Chomsky

I don't actually care about what Noam

Chomsky has to say about contemporary or

historical politics that's not important

what's important is what is Chomsky

posit as the truth

what is the truth what is the underlying

world view Chomsky as about the nature

of reality what are chomsky's

metaphysical commitments and when you

get to that Chomsky is an Anglo

empiricist who believes in

universal language intrinsic cognitive

psychology

idolatry mental retardation he's an

analytic hard

who believes that truth simply consists

in the formal consistency of Any Given

statement

uh squared up with empirically

measurable and observable

facts or something I don't know I mean

like that is what Chomsky really is if

on the side he wants to critique U.S

foreign policy

that's fine that doesn't make him an

intellectual it makes him a voice yeah

this voice is being critical of U.S

foreign policy I'm gonna latch on to it

and pretend that this is the same thing

as far being a follower of an

intellectual no it's not you just like

his voice you like the things he says

about U.S foreign policy

you like his takes you like his hot

takes but are you actually a follower of

Chomsky if you're not aware of his

action the actual Stakes of Chomsky

you're not

and the same thing is true about Z Jack

except it's the opposite because we all

hate zizek's political takes and his

foreign policy takes but the actual

Colonel of zizix thought the actual

underlying worldview behind that is

worth engaging and it's unavoidably true

in many respects

and compared to the Western left Zizek

is he's unsurpassable there's no PSL

Marxist leninist in the west who can

actually square up to and address and

challenge zizek's underlying I mean

zizek's critique of the western left his

critique it's unsurpassable

even his critique of anti-imperialists

is actually and ultimately correct and

before we get into more of this article

I'm going to explain why that is

oftentimes Zizek critiques

uh Western tankies who enthusiastically

support the Soviet Union North Korea

China and so on so on

and the content of zizek's criticism is

actually correct why because as we all

know Western Marxist leninists have

always from the very beginning

held a view of actual existing social

Estates that is pathological and has

nothing to do with the actual Marxism

leninism that existed in those States

that much both Communists and

anti-communists should agree with

Western Communists and Marxist leninus

lived in a delusional fantasy land and

propped up the Soviet state and

Communist States

as some kind of

reservoir of psychopathological

fulfillment and ideological fulfillment

that often LED them to at the first sign

of disappointment like when solzenitsin

came in the west they all turned

the Western leftists the same ones that

were enamored corruptly with the Soviet

Union abandoned the Soviet Union as soon

as solzenitsin came and bursted their

fantasy bubble that actually yeah Soviet

Union is not this libtard red-lived

fantasy you're living in just like how

red lips today thank you so much quiet

rakil is an idealist he critiques see

Zeke's form rather than his Essence sure

thanks Goliath

I have to remember what I was saying I

just forgot

Western that's what I was talking about

soul zenitsin and these people who came

and exposed the fact that Soviet Union

was not a libtard paradise good morning

they immediately

uh uh denounce the Soviet Union

just like today's so-called

Communists who support China as soon as

they find out China is not a transgender

Utopia and North Korea is not a

transgender Utopia they're going to be

the first people to join NATO

join the NATO infowar against them

that's how it worked the most Ardent

anti-communists were people who were

disappointed and disillusioned by

communism because it didn't square up to

their pathological Western fantasies and

those pathological fantasies are

correctly destroyed and exposed by Zizek

but Zizek is a liberal he's just an

honest one Zizek is saying the honest

truth yes your anti-imperialism as a

Westerner is false corrupt and

pathological it's based in an ideology

it's not based

in an actual appreciation for the

reality of these states but here's where

zizik is wrong then Zizek will go and

say this reality of these Communist

States is self-evidently barbaric and

no human being can square that up with

anything that could be appreciated and

then here's where I say you're wrong I

do the Chad yes face Jesus

um

actually in stalinism it was horrible

there was gulags and it was

authoritarian thank you dark princess

I apologize for the leading some

personal things crap fine thanks for the

20.

he goes oh the Soviet my God then the

Soviet Union that was oh my God it was

like not a paradise for leaptarts and oh

my God you want to do the LGBT rights

there was none in the Soviet Union and

oh my God it's a

um it was authoritarian mind God and it

was not Western utopic Freedom where you

can be a hipster who just goes in your

Cafe and has a great time mind God all

of these so-called Communists who are

endorsing Stalin Soviet Union how naive

oh my God in Soviet Union you would be

thrown in gulag

and then I am here

saying you're right g-shek you're right

then I look at him the Chad face and I

go

yes

nice

fucking based

that's what I fucking do

based

based I am the synthesis there's the

naive Western leftists who depicts

Communist States as a libtard paradise

there's Zizek who bursts their bubble

and says no they're not and there's Haas

who says

that's exactly why they're based

that's that's what it is you understand

that's what it is but I want to go

deeper into this I want to go deeper

into this

I'm gonna go deeper into this

because

going deeper into it

when you

it's not even just specifically about

the content of

Western Marxist relation to foreign

communist projects it's more about the

relationship between the west and the

East more generally

and the truth is that in the west we

have since

the turn of the century this is not a

CIA conspiracy it's just a objective

change in the forces of production

you can call it the information age

right it's a phenomenological turn what

does that mean a phenomenological turn

it means

the relationship we pose to something

like the Communist project of the 20th

century is no longer is no longer based

in any kind of actual material relation

to those projects

but based on how they present themselves

to us how they appear before us and how

we pathologically psychopathologically

relate to that in the form of an

ideology

and so

that is why Zizek is not politically

based because Zizek will dismiss every

single

Marxist leninist position

as a misinterpretation and he's correct

to do that every single Western Marxist

Len in his position is a

misinterpretation of actual existing

Marxism leninism whether it's in the

affirmative or if it's in the negative

it's just a mistranslation and it's a

misinterpretation somehow

and Gabriel Rock Hill

is just an incompetent Westerner he's

not on Eastern Marxist leninist he's

just a shitty Western

leftist he's just like Zizek except

Zizek is a competent and consistent and

Brilliant Western leftist Rock Hill is

just a retarded and incompetent and

stupid Western leftists they're both

NATO shills they're both libtards

they're both Western leftists it's just

that one of them is smarter than the

other

so I want to emphasize that

I think one of the most important

aspects of g-shek's thinking

job is going to allude to here

is

vaguely I'm going to present you a vague

pop

pop political I guess or pop

philosophical simplification

because I'm not going to get into the

nitty-gritty of zizek's thinking stream

I might do that in another stream not in

this one

it's this understanding of withdrawal

withdrawal right I think even on a

popular level most people associate the

meme of Zizek just with that mind God

it's all ideology man God

that's the uh

meme of Zizek right and the meme is

there's truth to that because most

people when they encounter Zizek they

encounter it as the for the first time

in their lives the ability to enact some

kind of distance to these various

different

well

psychopathological or ideological

commitments that they never knew they

even had right

mind God we are always eating from the

trash can of ideology that's the meme

and most people understand that Meme

because it's basically like

we are somehow

presupposing this ideological worldview

that's not based on any encounter with

material necessity that we are somehow

invested in

and we somehow rely upon to make sense

of the world and we need

but at the same time

we are unaware of it and Zizek is one of

those people who just makes you aware of

it and gives you this ability to enact a

critical distance or more importantly a

withdrawal

a withdrawal

and in the specific context of the

western left I think zizek's

contribution has overall been productive

because before Zizek you basically had

these retarded

larpers just to clarify something

because people say how can you call

anyone a LARP or Oz how can you call

anyone a larper

because I'm a self-aware larper

when I LARP I'm just trying to make an

aesthetic point I am not confusing my

LARP

or an actual political intervention of

some kind I'm making an aesthetical

statement I'm making an ideological

statement

but I'm not confusing that for material

reality

so when I say something is LARP

I'm talking about how something which is

inherently ideological and purely

aesthetical

and purely about how you cope with the

world

is experienced as some real political

revolutionary intervention into material

reality when it isn't when you are

dressing up in a maoist Red Guard suit

and you're going to a demonstration

marks Landing mom's already done like

the art Austin red guards

you're not actually engaging in any

revolutionary Praxis you're eating from

the trash can of ideology as gizic would

put it with no self-awareness of the how

what you're doing is entirely

pathological you're not actually

engaging in Praxis you're just

fulfilling some kind of urge some kind

of itch

which is a cope

with reality not actual not any actual

way of participating in reality to

change it you're not changing anything

about your reality you're just coping

with it and gizek's ruthless

criticism holds true for the entire

Western left especially the PSL when the

PSL is going out and handing out flyers

and engaging in demonstrations all

they're really organizing is their own

ideological psychopathological ways of

coping with the society that we're

living in coping with the various

contradictions that reality poses to

thought but what they're not doing is

actually intervening and acting in a way

that affects reality in any political

meaningful sense it's just a form of

ideological cope that's zizek's critique

of the western left and he is absolutely

fucking correct every time you think

you're organizing and you're

jumping into the Embrace of the absolute

as wajijic would say and you're acting

and doing things and engaging in Praxis

all you're doing is fulfilling A coping

mechanism for your

A coping mechanism for your actual

underlying material symptom which could

be interpreted as your embeddedness

within the status quo and within Society

so when Jesus Takes milk toast

libtard and lib shit takes and he gives

these lip tart takes he's just being

realistic about where he actually stands

he's just a conservative thinker

in some kind of way he's just being

honest about where he stands Jesus could

say oh yeah I'm a revolutionary I'm

engaging in revolutionary action sure

but he would be lying to himself and he

would be lying to the world if he were

to posture in that way just like how the

PSL does the PSL claims it's

revolutionary and it's intervening in

reality in some kind of way the PSL has

not even made a dent in what they call

capitalism or imperialism or any of the

other things they're trying to change

not even a fucking Dent so zizek's

radical intervention into the Western

left which is a presupposition of

Infrareds

thinking right is this idea of

withdrawal that to truly fall into the

Embrace of the absolute is not to charge

in and LARP and try to change reality

politically

but to actually withdraw withdraw from

ideology withdraw from this urge you

have to fulfill this coping mechanism

you call Praxis withdraw and enact a

critical distance

and critical distance doesn't simply

enable you the freedom to be able to

think about things you weren't

previously able to think about but more

radically within gizek's very coherent

and consistent ontology this

withdrawness with regard to our object

and our aim is itself where we

participate

in the absolute itself that is what the

absolute is it's a withdrawn-ness with

regard to ourself when we enact this

withdrawal

right this withdrawal according to Zizek

we subjectively

fall into the Embrace of what the

absolute actually is

that is something fucking brilliant when

you think about it and in a way it's a

kind of lacanian contortion of Hegel

for Hagel our relation to the

metaphysical absolute comes at the point

of absolute knowledge

which is the end of hegel's

phenomenology of spirit it's the end

point

and it's like when we are put in this

position

of having true knowledge

of all being

that is where being is at its most

absolute that critical withdrawal at

withdrawness that distance that

reflexivity between the object and the

subject

and it's a this is a very very powerful

um

system of thinking

and I have never seen

anyone respond to it

no one has responded to it no one any

everyone who's actually learned anything

from zizik became like a schizo

none of them actually

were able to like I've never seen a

leftist strategic right because when you

actually understand zizak you're just

you just leave left to someone you're

just you're going beyond that you're now

you're dealing with like what is quantum

again it's like

it confronts you with some an

irreversible step you can never return

to the trash can of ideology and dwell

in this naive state of this naive

leftism in which you're just what what

oh I'm gay I'm engaging in revolutionary

action no you fucking not you're a

fucking hipster you have no self-awares

you're a Brooklyn Hipster who fucking

wears glasses who has gynecomastia you

have fucking man titties and you're a

soy cuck you're not living in reality

you're dwelling within an ideology

so where does infrared step in

is here's what I think is beautiful

about infrared

all infrared says to someone like Zizek

is that she's like you're right that

this withdrawnness is a feature of the

absolute

but where you're wrong is that

it is not the ACT

that establishes the absolute

it is not the subjective Act

which does this why

my hegelian critique of Zizek is that

the object

has already beaten you to the punch the

object has beaten the subjective act to

the punch

and that object has a history and that

is the history of what we call the east

so you see zizek's whole ontology

is about the Western logos the history

of the the Western history of this

constant

radical

self-alienation and self-withdrawnness

from all determinate reality this

revolutionary overthrow of all

traditions and all histories is constant

enactment of a critical distance right

which characterizes Western history

but then zijak doesn't understand how

uh

is it I I some of isomorphy somehow

isomorphologically if that's correct or

top topologically

this corresponds to a lost history of

the East

which is a history of the objective

correlate to this subjective

withdrawnness that this withdrawnness is

a feature of the object itself

the Eastern object is not some naive

as gizuk would call it guarantee of the

big other it's not it's just a

chronologized historical consistent

symptom or way of this instances thank

you so much Joshua

so much wisdom Dr Hayes thank you

greetings from the other side of Lake

Mitch thank you so much Jazz so holy

fuck thank you man thank you so much

so zizak

does not

realize

that all of what he says

has already happened

and that is what we call the history of

Asia

including most importantly including the

history

of communism

because Eastern Marxism leninism is not

some kind of contrived subjective Theory

it's not a philosophy it's not a

subjective

stance it's an index of objective

developments in actual material reality

it's an actual science it's actually

really an immortal science of actual

reality that has no regard for the

psychopathological

guarantee

that characterizes

the

subjective stance of a western subject

like put it this way

stalinist Marxism leninism says this is

an objective truth all that stuff you

talk about ideologies fine but like this

is an objective presupposition

objective in being like in material

being it's an objective presupposition

of your subjective contemplation of

reality and that has a determinate form

but where does Zizek by the way

agree with this

he agrees with this

implicitly not this but

for example

Zizek as far as the material premises of

his subjective withdrawal that brings a

subject in the Embrace of the absolute

so of course what it's NATO it's the

West it's the established institutions

of society the political institutions

um it's the established scientific

institutions all of these things for

Zizek are the material presuppositions

of this subjective act that is the focal

point of his thought it's all about the

act for Zizek right it all ends in the

ACT what he calls the ACT an act which

grounds its own presupposition

supposedly but it just also implicitly

presupposes something in material

reality too it's just that Zizek being a

western thinker does not accept that

that material reality

has a determinate form or a history

Zizek thinks that the established

institutions of society and the

established scientific institutions of

society and so on and so forth simply

represent some kind of

passive reflection of reality it never

occurs to him the fact that this is part

of a specific civilization a specific

Empire a specific geopolitics a specific

State he doesn't accept this he takes

this for granted

he takes it as the foundation for him

going forward but in doing so

in taking this as his foundation and

taking this for granted

he arrives at a pretty brilliant

conclusion which is he exposes

the logos of the West

in a communicable and cognizable form

such that it could be precisely

critiqued

my and this is something many people

mistaken

infrared is something called Marxism

leninism in the age of multi-polarity in

the post-covered world

so this understanding of Marxism

leninism

is not based in an ideological coping

mechanism wherein we think China or

Russia is our teddy bear and we simply

have this kind of consistent

phenomenologically consistent ideology

that we use to cope with the world

infrared has all of the dynamism

and um

revolutionary character of any Western

subjectivity except it's from the

opposite perspective

and there's something to me

unprecedented and beautiful about that

what does this globe here really

represent right all the dynamism of the

western globalism and all the supposed

lack of bias and so on this is not one

ideology this is

the this is the

substance

of a truly multi-polar

conception of ideology like

we don't

see Russia and China

as some big other right

we recognize

the impossibility of the other of the

other of a big other as a source of

guarantee but we also recognize that

this lack

is only represented as a lack when taken

from the expectation

of some kind of

absolute guarantee of universality or

whatever ideological consistency

but beyond the lack lies a different

kind of object a different object an

object of the senses an object of the

intuition and object of the unconscious

a Sublime object

a new signifier

that's what infrared has always been

about we take the radical leap

and I argue this is the same leap Marx

took to arrive

at the proletariat being the subject of

all of history

and the Revolutionary subject as such

infrared

Embraces the history of Marxism leninism

not so as to establish them as some kind

of phenomenally consistent ideology

but to somehow establish a relation to

them

on a deeper relation to them through the

unconscious through unconscious

signifiers like

we want to acknowledge

through our senses

the objective history of Marxism

leninism

right we don't want to make it seem like

these Communist States are some kind of

absolute big other guarantee some Utopia

some fantasy no we want to somehow

establish a connection

to the way in which they gave material

reality a determinate form

and that is why in the sphere of

ideology infrared appears to be so

inconsistent where Maga Communists or

libertarian stalness many people

complain about this so-called lack of

ideological coherence but what

corresponds to this ideological

eclecticism supposedly is a deep

intuitive connection to actual material

material communism not an ideological

communism but the material kind right

by the way what do I mean of unconscious

relation or intuitive relationship I

mean in the sense of how to put it in

shizeki in terms

the way in which the absolute

fails fails in a certain way and this

way takes on the form of a pattern or a

symptom and then when that symptom is

named it's a signifier and these various

different symptoms comprise different

forms of material being

and these forms have a history and they

have a chronology and that's the history

of Asia

the history of Asia is not a history of

some kind of ideological consistent past

it's a Sublime history it's a history of

an a various contradictions and

impossibilities that nonetheless have

some kind of determinate form it's just

that it's determinate it's not that it's

an absolute big other or absolute

resolution to all contradictions and

lacks and inconsistencies but that it's

a specific way of that it's lacking it's

a specific kind of inconsistency it's a

specific kind of impossibility and

that's what makes it Sublime

the fact that it is specifically

that it's not just impossible but that

it's impossible in this way

that's what

the name of the father really is

it's not about

an impossible imaginary consistency

which is the object of the Freudian

neurotic subject

it's about an acknowledgment of a deeper

material reality it goes deeper it's a

reality we access through the heart not

through the Mind through the heart

that for us is what Marxism leninism is

I am trying

to make possible in the West for the

first time ever

a Marxism leninism of the heart

after the destruction of ideology after

the destruction of any guarantee of the

consistency of the big other after all

of that after you get over that that

yeah all this idea I saw fucking

bullshit reality is not like that

I want there to be an ability to say

the object of my heart

is Meaningful

that meaning has a determinate form

maybe in my head

there's an inconsistency

and then once you set Yours once you set

the heart in order

then you can come back to terms with the

head and there you can be a real

philosopher like Alexander Dugan

and you can say

for me thought never bore the commitment

to Absolute formal

or ideological consistency of the idea

as g-shek put it I don't have to talk

about things like ontological

indeterminacy or lack or inconsistency

because the object of my thinking of my

thoughts never ever even implied there

was some fully absolutely consistent

form

there you can actually engage in the

science of humanity and the science of

History you can go beyond Zizek

and that's where I am beyond Zizek

Beyond Zizek and back into the Embrace

of the object

dwells in the subject I want to return

to the object

and that's what all of this is about

returning to the object not the object

of Gabriel Rockhill the object of what

of oh it's just reality empirical

which is just your subject subjective

position reified that's not really the

object that's just your subjective

position reified

it's as though Zizek grabs a sword

he grabs an Arabian sword

and he cuffs your dick off

and he says no you have not gotten to

the sublime Secret

of the East you're still in the fucking

West when you're sitting here thinking

you're a Marxist leninist who's

understood China and the Soviet Union oh

I support China I support the Soviet

Union I grab my sword I cut your dick

off

you're still in the west I castrate you

you're still a libtard you're still a

fucking liberal I got my sword and I

remind you and put you in your place

that you're still a liberal

if you want to join hands with the east

you must

Traverse the West First

you must go through

the West you must go through the

subjective turmoil and angst of the West

you must deal with that the more West

you go the closer you will be to the

east

see

the

PSL libtards

they're in the west and then they look

East but they're still in the west but

they look East oh I love you China I

love you North Korea I love you Russia I

love you communist foreign I love you

Palestine I love you Arabs I love you

Iran I love you guys I love you but

you're still in the fucking West

so account for it account for where you

stand

account for where you stand they don't

need you they're there you're here where

you need to go is not toward them that's

what Hitler did Hitler was in Germany

where did Hitler go

he went East

no go west

keep going west

and once you do that then you will

you will be able to understand the east

and appreciate the east

account for that difference there's a

difference between you

and these Global South Communists there

is a fucking difference so account for

it take responsibility for it stop

pretending it doesn't fucking exist and

condescendingly acting like you're gonna

be their fucking Savior and you stand

above them all I you know how many

fucking

Western leftists I see on Twitter

criticize

uh China and North Korea for not being

LGBT enough oh well they made a mistake

here and you know when Chen Wei Hua

was arguing that China was correct in

the Sinnoh Vietnamese War all these

Western leftists were were like trying

to put him in line now Chen Wei Hua you

took it out you run you're ran you're

wrong because you're a fucking Western

chauvinist you're sitting in the fucking

West but you're not taking

accountability for it so you think

you're the Hitler who can go conquer and

boss around the East because you've

mastered the essence of the East I

shatter your ideology of the East I

shatter your ideology

and so does Zizek and although Zizek

shatters your ideology

he doesn't arrive at a correct

conclusion I agree he doesn't

but I still side with him over you you

fucking retard

because I'm here to do the same thing he

is I'm here to fucking destroy destroy

your ideology destroy your Idols destroy

your copium destroy your falsehood I'm

here to do that

it's just that for infrared at the end

of the tunnel

is a Sublime object

I don't and by the way

brazizek the gesture

of participating in the absolute

consists in the withdrawnness opened up

by reflexivity in the form of thought

but Zizek does not realize

that by the time

you complete this dialectic of being and

arrive at the point of absolute

reflexivity of thought

something happened in reality what is

the thing that happened in reality

reality itself proved to you it's

cyclical

and determinate form

it's symptomal form

and that form that symptom that

signifier is the object

and that is where it's resolved and that

is the point of the absolute and yes

the distance implied by thought is not

something created by thought but

something created by the object you have

to destroy the USSR communist ideology

as well no because communist ideology is

not an ideology in the western sense

it's simply

an interface with the material the total

material symptom

Marxist leninist and communist ideology

is a historical index of reality

you have to ask the question how can you

be a Marxist leninist in the west with

no material communist movement and no

material communism Soviet Union has

communist ideology sure but they also

have communist reality they have

communist political reality they have

socialist economy

so there's a relation between those two

things there's no pure ideology

it's not a pure excess of pathology it's

not a pure virtual excess as it is in

the west and that excess is what needs

to be dealt with and that excess is what

we represent as the globe

that is infrared the infrared Globe

that's how we represent it

because for us that's excess

there's the marking of a deeper object

and a deeper resolution of opposites

why isn't this just a hammer and sickle

huh because we're dealing with the

psychopathological excess the excess the

sublime excess

the virtual excess

many people try to reduce me to some

kind of ideology like Andrew Saturn

it's all autism they fail every time

they try to reduce me to a position and

then go and make an ALT spouting that

position they fail they don't realize

infrared is inherently inherently

Beyond ideology

because it's dialectical you will never

understand what this is if you try to

pigeonhole it into some kind of

ideological

anal ideological cope position it is

objectively beyond that it is

objectively oriented towards something

Beyond

ideas

or memes or whatever it's it uses those

things to realize itself but it's beyond

all of those things and there would be

no possibility for the coherence and

consistency of this community if that

were not the case most of you understand

this intuitively

you just participate in it through

endless memes and shit

this stream is living fucking Testament

to the correctness of this view want to

know why

I literally was just a giga Excel

I was literally one of those Zizek

intellectuals

and I made myself a phenomena

I used to be a fucking guy who just read

books and wrote Things

with all of the western intellectual

reflexivity as anyone else I put it into

practice and I became a fucking

phenomena literally a phenomena in

reality that people could somehow relate

to and understand beyond the explicit

commitments of pure thought and pure

Theory

that's the miracle of infrared for me

you know how it's the instinct

of the intellectual to say oh all of

this is I'm going to critique this my

critical withdrawnness toward this thing

implies the destruction of the thing

but I say no what if it implies the

destruction of your thoughts and your

ideology and your

formal ideas

what if reality is not what's

incriminated but the content of your

subjective withdrawal

or the form in the form of thought

that your thoughts must change not

reality

so I jumped into the Ring of reality the

thing I'm supposed to always be critical

of and enact a critical distance toward

I decided to throw myself in there

into the flux

a phenomena

literally into the Stream

a phenomenal reality Jesus sits here and

he critiques movies and every cultural

phenomena there is really I threw myself

into the Stream

a phenomenal culture in reality and I

made something out of it

and I didn't do this because

I have magical powers I did this because

I was applying if root and results of

the most advanced form of Marxism

leninism there is and it's a Marxism

leninism turbocharged with all of the

insights

of 20th century Continental European

thought

physics does not cater to your Echo

chamber delusion byz Wars

I call your bluff

physics must reflect

the most low in base and and a based

thing

if the truth of physics does not reflect

the truth of Honey Boo Boo it's wrong

if the truth of physics does not reflect

a Netflix TV show it's bullshit

it's bullshit

physics must obey some logos

if you think physics is just some messy

meaningless reality

You're Not a Human Being you have

nothing of any why are you even speaking

why don't you just go into a dumpster

and just lay there

for the rest of your life what's the

point of living

if you will not say that our closest

relation to the real and to the absolute

is just as meaningful as our farthest

one

I'm gonna point out the shocking idiocy

of uh this Rock Hill guy

as I continue

thank you so much Jay Grimes from dust

you came into dust you shall return from

dust you came into dust you must return

you know what I'm gonna try to explain

to you what I think zizek's significance

is through batai I'm gonna do a

Microsoft Paint version

and it's going to be really quick right

according to batai

true

reality the true absolute is realized in

the death of God it's a simple Christian

position by the way

and batai understands this in the form

of this kind of metaphysical

opposites represented as the head and

the body right

now what is the body the body is the

reality of material being and the head

is the form of material reflexivity

sorry of Ideal reflexivity so this is

the idea and this is the material object

or this is material being and this is

the way we cope about it and we reflect

it right according to batai

absolute being the truth of absolute

material being consists in the point of

beheading right so for batai

the society or Journal he was part of

was called

was called AKA feel something like that

something like this I don't know how

it's exactly spelled it's called AKA

feel which means headlessness because

according to batai it's kind of this

nietzschean view of the body having an

ontological Primacy

but not just the body as a pure material

harmonious being but the headless body

the body deprived of its head the body

that comes at the expense of its head

and the saying

is like uh

man will escape his head like a

condemned prisoner

and here lies the point of our

connection in relation to the absolute

and this is very much

similar

to what gizek

talks about with his understanding of

the absolute being defined by its

failure or its own impossibility

it's this same

same

defining the absolute in terms of its

failure that the Thai shares with Zizek

all I simply learned is that

at a certain point one must ask the

basic question

with regard to the headless body

at what point

does of course

the the headless body

rely upon

The Head and presuppose the head the

head being what the state Authority the

ruling class whatever you want to call

it idealism

at what point

does this rely on this but most

importantly

at what point

does this process of beheading which of

course is only taken from the standpoint

of the head itself

start taking on specific forms wherein

you don't only Define this beheading

in terms of the loss of the head

but

that this beheading is just part of some

bigger cycle some bigger symptom

some bigger thing

that is somehow consistent and what if

that is all objects consistent

what if that's all an object is what if

an object is not somehow

sorry

what if an object is I don't know why

what if an object is somehow not the

illusion of a fully integrated

harmonious body

but simply

this Loop

that the process of beheading is caught

within the specific symptom the specific

way in which the beheading keeps

happening

what if that's all an object actually is

and if you can change your understanding

of what an object is you no longer have

to dwell in negation as Hegel put it and

the point of subjective Witness

to this destruction

of uh the form of the absolute but can

finally engage with material content in

a positive

braxiological sense as Marx did his

recognition of the proletariat is the

Revolutionary subject

or Hegel the destruction of State

right

the destruction of

all forms of thought

the head

culminates in the point of absolute

knowledge whose very excess Bears

witness to the incompleteness or

inadequacy of all given forms of reality

including the state but then Marx says

what if this specific

withdrawal implied by absolute knowledge

implies some kind of withdrawnness or

alienation within actual reality itself

and moreover what if that alienation is

just a symptom of some positive material

being

that positive material being already

implying

this process of separation

and what is the process of separation

and reconstitution called it's called

Labor

right

it's a process of Labor it's a cycle

it's a circuit of Labor

you have a given thing before you you

raise it to the level of the imagination

you alter it and it produces a different

result

you transform the World by confronting

it and filtering it through the form of

your Humanity

and that's what labor is for Marx

the question is how do we return to Marx

we must return to Marx because the marks

of the PSL and the marks of these

Western

dipshits is not actual marks it's a

fucking bullshit corrupt hoping shit no

one has gone past gig I'm the only one I

think

and that seems outrageous

but I'm willing to test it who can come

show me they've gotten pashijic

who can come prove that to me right

no think about it

what do all these critics of zizik and

the end of the day say oh it's too hard

to understand so it's just a bunch of

bullshit it's just a bunch of bullshit

it's just a bunch of nonsense it's just

a bunch of bullshit that's all they can

cope with they don't actually respond to

him they can't

because they're fucking corrupt they're

scum

discursive sausage for the uneducated

I saw his provocative Antics as a poorer

rats for historical and materials

analysis

he tried to explain September 11th

through lacani interpretation of the

Matrix his hot takes well they sold like

that pelden comparison to the rigorous

materials analysis of U.S history

in what way is chomsky's analysis

materialist can you explain how it's

materialist

why are you using words like materialism

because you're corrupt because you're

trying to cater to a authoritative

discourse without returning to the

foundations of that discourse by way of

thought if I ask you what is materialism

and what makes Chomsky a consistent

materialist and can you make do on your

commitment to met materialism you would

come up short you would have nothing for

me all you have is the convention that

this word carries Authority and

credibility and legitimacy in your party

and Michael parente so according to this

guy these people are better popularizers

of thought than gizek okay well zizek's

trying to make you think in ways that

these people are not it's just that

simple

I translated a book by Rancier

is this the guy that

the pigs guy no that's a different guy

this guy's the uh

I know who this guy is what does he

write

well I'm supposed to not like this guy I

don't like him I just don't remember why

every single publisher turned it down

disgusted by this Shameless disregard

for scholarly rigor yet devoid of any

institutional power

I felt that my hands were tied and I had

to accept the industries of the

charlatans to promote its Commodities if

I wanted my translate to see the light

of day

let me get this straight

because I'm just gonna outright exposed

Rock Hill for being a fucking bitch

you wanted to make you wanted to sell

and commodify

a translation of this French author

so you

couldn't sell it without getting Zizek

or you couldn't get it published sorry

without getting Zizek to write a preface

for it except Zizek just copy and pasted

something he already wrote and added

some other stuff now does Zizek have an

obligation to write you a fucking good

introduction he doesn't was Zizek being

lazy probably because he doesn't give a

shit about what you're asking him to do

he's just probably doing it as a

personal favor or maybe he's doing it

for money but it's not actually what he

cares about clearly he doesn't have to

care about it so he so you're disgusted

by his disregard for scholarly

regardless shut up you fucking Anglo

nobody fucking cares about scholarly

rigor shove it up your fucking ass

see Zizek is fucking cringe

when it comes to anything

you know you Russia China Middle East

whatever but now I'm gonna defend him as

a fucking slovene Balkan from one

from one uh Barbarian to the other this

is a fucking snobby angloid fuck trying

to attack

racistly our Mediterranean Southern

European slash Mediterranean work ethic

shut the fuck up you uptight Anglo bitch

fuck your scholarly rigor and shove it

up your ass

nobody fucking cares you cock sucking

posturing bitch

you just want to suck off some fucking

Professor

so I will I can't even say on YouTube

what I want to do with fucking academic

institutions

but all I can say is

I don't like glasses

when people wear glasses I tend to not

really trust them

that's what I fucking think about your

fucking scholarly rigor you fucking

cocksucker

proper form proper form proper form what

about truth

what about truth

what about being real

what about being real you fake bitch

he's just he's appealing to Convention

he's like oh this is what people are

supposed to do why are they supposed to

do it Rockwell

um

because uh decorum why does that matter

um

because I love academic institutions

because these are fucking Petty

Bourgeois piece of shit who just wants

to preserve he he also want every time

there's a fucking person butthurt about

gizic it's always somehow some like

career driven

resentment like oh she's exact is

popular and I'm not yeah because you're

a boring talentless bitch who has

nothing to offer to the world and the

market has spoken the market speaks and

it doesn't want your shit

so fuck off you fucking bitter bitch

if you had a YouTube show it'd get no

views because you're a fucking loser

you're not entitled to success you're

not entitled to people's attention

you're not entitled to people buying

your fucking books

you're not entitled to Publishers

publishing your shit either you fucking

loser

you fucking loser your hands were tied

your hands were tied because you want to

change this is like when feminists are

complaining that their shit isn't as

popular

fucking shut the fuck up nobody's gonna

fucking consume your shit ethic because

of ethics

they're gonna consume it if they want it

they don't want your shit so shut the

fuck up your hands aren't fucking tied

it's just that nobody likes or wants

your shit and if they do go pedal it to

them instead of bitching about how your

hands are tied because Publishers aren't

gonna fucking do what you want you

fucking loser

as part of the ascendant PMC

I was a target for his antics

he's admitting it at least

so Zizek is just trolling these pmcs and

he's complaining about it you're not a

victim fuck the PMC

uh radical demerit lacloud

if you think leclaw's main point was

uh becoming part of the anti-communist

movement rather than making sense of the

pink wave in chavismo you're sorely

mistaken

and laclau hated zizik

the global social solution revolution of

traditional Marxism

of course this has nothing to do with

traditional Marxism just Marxism as

conceived within the West which was

frankly yes wrong and pathological

dial I want to see an actual critique

here though

you say both over time

yeah again zizek's like ideas are based

in fucking like a Quantum ontology of

superposition and shit it's like sorry

dude I'm sorry your brain is stuck in

the era of classical physics like a

retard I'm sorry you can't think Quantum

sorry you're Unworthy of like what it

means to think in the 21st century like

yeah or he says two things at once you

can't do that you can't do that why

because the Anglo said so I don't give a

fuck bitch

physics says I can't I can do that

actually

wrote Western anti-communist dissonant

yeah true he was he was he was

absolutely that

okay these are all his political sins I

guess I'm not I don't deny those

um

neoliberalism capitalism

Marx oh he's like a fucking

holy shit

so many phrases

Kami cosplay depiction

um

declared himself a leninist Allah

yeah I don't really think this is like a

conspiracy I just think this is how

words are used kind of like follicularly

it's not that deep it's just like people

are just you know when people say like

you know I'm a

this thing is Freudian or this thing

they're just kind of using it in a

colloquial not really rigorous formal

sense or official sense I don't really

think Zizek is actually oh you're saying

he's doing Kami cosplay but I think he

would agree with that I think if you ask

him yeah are you serious about leninism

and Marxism leninism he'd be like oh of

course not mine God no no you know he

says it's like so what point are you

making here you're saying this is what

neo-nazis do

and this is what a fascist sympathizer

does or what Steve Bannon does but it's

like also what everyone else who's not

autistic does as well it's just like a

very common thing to do if you're not

like super uptight about ideology in

general which most people aren't

okay there's more of his political sins

all he's saying is uh

it's the unbridled Death Drive that the

Slovenian laconian feels compelled to

repeat

no it's not if anything you could try to

say like oh this is Jesus

symptom or it's his fundamental fantasy

or something but this is just a

completely incorrect use of Concepts

like what do you mean this is the

unbridled depth chart I would say you

holy fuck like death drive is not

something Zizek is feeling compelled to

repeat

Death Drive is

the compulsion to repeat it is that

it's not something you feel compelled to

repeat it is the very compulsion to

repeat

you could say the unbridled Death Drive

that is being repeated like you're so

wrong about this shit

by the way this repeating Lenin text is

brilliant I really recommend it I don't

agree with all of its conclusions but

like it's a lot the logic displayed in

it is very brilliant

communism was and is a cataclysmic

failure

well

if we are just dealing with Communism as

some kind of

uh

satisfaction of your psychopathological

longings Gabriel

then it was a failure and that's all

zizik deals with it as Jesus is just

like you Gabriel he doesn't deal with

Communism

on its own terms is like a real material

Force he deals with it like you do just

some psychopathological projection

you know

that fails to like make you happy and

Gabriel you wouldn't be happy under

communism I promise you you wouldn't I

promise you you would she's I mean

Gabriel if you lived under communism you

wouldn't be a communist you're not the

person

you're not the stuff out of which a

communist is made I promise you you're

not I saw how you talk on Midwestern

marks I saw how you talked let me show

you how he talks and tell me if this is

what a communist is made of in real life

you could say this is like a

um cheap superficial analysis fine

he of course I don't care but

Stalin's Soviet Union

has a deep interest in or had I should

say psychoanalysis and really

uh much of his work was subjected to the

influence of Lacon

and that influence I think uh really set

the stage for a lot of the figures that

we're talking about who I would refer to

as lecano altusarians just as the

Frankfurt schools often refer to as

freudo marxists we have in the latter

half of the 20th century in many ways

there's deep deep continuities between

these Traditions that would be

fascinating to unpack and talk more

about but the lacanian altusarians are

that's not a real thing

ones who take fundamental insights from

the Marxist tradition and again this is

the same as with the Freudian Marxist

you know it's funny he says this because

wasn't a CIA memo on the French scene

saying altuser is a pro Soviet influence

and then Foucault is our guy

so altuser was targeted I think but I

don't I don't really like Altus Air that

much but it's like to box zizik in

without lucer

and Lacon and that's like at the camp

he's talking about well those people

were not the glowy ones

read the CIA report it explicitly

outlines Al thus air as one of the you

know Soviet aligned influences but they

merge these insights with a framework of

analysis that is not historical

materialist but is based on the or

emerges out of both Freud and Lacon for

that matter uh

kind of at best liberal ideology within

the capitalist core right what jibberger

what

Okay so

so what you do is you take so if it's

not what you consider to be historical

materialism it's just liberalism I guess

this is discourse I'm not saying Zizek

is not a historical materialist is like

such a worthless thing to say

is jijak a historian

is he like actually in this fear of

historiography where that claim would be

relevant

why do you think historical materialism

is even a Doctrine it's not a Doctrine

historical materialism is not a Doctrine

what the fuck are you talking about

what a dumb fucking thing to say

guy named Jay Stalin in chat uh-oh

totally not another fucking Andrew

saturnalt

totally not an Andrew you know you give

it away you give it away because it's a

I mean there's nothing wrong with autism

but it's like so clear you're trying to

you always try to cope you're always

trying to cope

and you think you've found some like

glaring ideological inconsistency of

some kind but you haven't you fucking

retard you really haven't

are you just stupid dude are you fucking

stupid you don't even know what we're

talking about

if I'm critiquing Gabriel

of not correcting zizek's mistakes

but only pretending to while being a

fucking hypocrite how does that make me

like nafo can you please explain to me

what that has to fucking do with

agreeing with what Zizek said about

Russia it's my whole fucking point is

that Gabriel is no better than Zizek

and that he's even worse in many ways

because Gabriel conceals the very

Western pathology that gives rise to the

nafo position

how is that an affirmation of nafo

you fucking retard

this is why you won't debate me by the

way you bitch and when you did debate me

you screamed for two minutes and then

ran away like a cock-sucking bitch

cause you're a pussy

on Marxist discourse founded on liberal

ideology and more specifically

definitely in the case of Freud like

Colonial ideology patriarchal ideology

and other such things and you do a

mashup and that mashup does not work out

so well

um not because there should not be a

Marxist account of psychology and

psychoanalysis on the contrary no that's

uh

what do you mean on Marxist account

you're already implying when you say an

account you're already implying some

kind of reductionism that's antithetical

to the Marxist method

we're dedicated to that I think is

extremely important and there's

excellent work you know the goatski

comes to mind but there's a lot of other

people who work in that particular

tradition because you need an analysis

of the social totality and human

psychology is okay I wonder what this

guy thinks about the LGBT movement

try again fail again feel better based I

agree with that

nothing more than it

this is a Rebel Without a Cause no a

Rebel Without a Cause

is somebody who doesn't want to fail who

simply wants to preserve the pure stance

of being a rebel without ever actually

proving it in any kind of fucking way by

having skin in the game what is the

determinate content of your position

nothing because it will always fail

but g-shek's message is actually pretty

good here right because he says you're

gonna fail either way so just keep

fucking failing keep failing because

failing is how you actually participate

in reality

don't worry if your intervention in

reality doesn't live up to your ideal

expectations it never will

I I don't know why he's even writing

this when Jesus is already fallen out of

favor

anti-scientific belief and Superstition

okay how

it can be described as transcendental

idealism they present their brand

managed conceptual framework

on personal interpretations of

non-marxist discourses like those of

lacan and Hegel I know this guy's a

retard already

first of all the idea that lakhan and

Hegel are within the same class of

thought so as to be mentioned in the

same sentence in this way

it's just such a baffling like M it

betrays such like an amateurish lack of

understanding

even of the historical background of

zizik

to claim that

I mean okay who is kojev

who was Karl Marx maybe maybe it's

somehow related to handle I don't know

I don't know maybe it's related to Hagel

I don't know maybe Lacon who is a

student of KOJA maybe Lacon who even in

his late years affirmed the correctness

of dialectical materialism

maybe Lacon who said that Marx was the

first one to have named the symptom

maybe these are not so reducibly

non-marxist is this really dialectical

to call them non-marxist discourses I

mean they may not fit fulfill the

Criterion of some like officiated

PSL Canon of Marxism

but they're certainly relevant to

Marxism

then choose specifically so so this is

what this um really like scathingly

resentful Petty bourgeois you know butt

hurt guy is is doing here is he's

basically saying

he's he's cracking the code of the

success of zizek's hot takes in the

market and his like YouTube videos

I have yet to see a single

engagement with zizex

ontology

less than nothing sex in the failed

absolute what about the other people in

the Ljubljana School of psychoanalysis

elenco zupancic's book sex what is sex I

mean are you engaging with any of that

are you engaging with what Zizek

very coherently and rigorously outlays

as a

as an ontology

in the era of modern physics

is that somehow not important

they assert that communism is an idea

and a desire

okay

in the west that is all it is

show me where in a western country like

America

or Britain you can see the real movement

of communism

can the communism of intellectuals like

Gabriel be justified by any real

movement it can't it could only be

justified as an idea

or as a desire but

it's not like they're part of a real oh

that is hey Gabriel is the PSL a real

movement is that what it is Gabriel is

PSL shut the fuck up

now dedex not joining the PSL go pay go

give Vijay Prasad your fucking money go

fucking give vagina prashad your money

they towed the capitalist propaganda by

condemning the real movement of

communism

I mean

what what does that mean right like

they're condemning it who

I think all they're actually saying is

that

real communism doesn't fulfill your

fantasies

real communism doesn't

satisfy your desires

which I think is correct it's just that

in concert in contradiction to Zizek

I say it's not supposed to fulfill your

desires fuck your dumb Petty booze y

desires you know what I mean like I'm

harsher than Zizek on these PMC fucks

I'm unironically a stalinist

yes yeah Western intellectuals we're

wrong and are still wrong when they're

leftists about stalinism

but to me that's an indictment on them

not stalinism it's an indictment on

their expectations it's not an

indictment on stalinism I'm Pro

stalinism I'm anti-westoid intellectual

I'm anti-glasses wearer westoid

but Khan and lacany elements and

outducer's work

what about what about

um everyone else what about

what about Deluxe

yes I guess that's not there

the latter Drew on lacon's

to create a

misleading inter portrayal of ideology

why is it misleading is there any

substance to this claim that it's

misleading moreover I feel like this

professor just read a Wikipedia article

on Lacon since he's reducing the

influence Lacon exerted on altuser to

the mirror stage completely neglecting

lacon's

you know work on the symbolic and the

signifier that's probably way more

important

an individual identifies with the image

put forth by the other assuming one's

placed in the extent symbolic order

well that would be far beyond the

confines of the mirror stage you fucking

retard

not too compromise one's desire

this is not another possibility

at all

oh another possibility compared to what

ideological interpolation

well that's out to Sears

idea of the ideological State apparatus

Lacon seven seminar the ethics of

psychoanalysis does not

respond to or in any way presuppose

altuser's notion of ideology or the

ideological State apparatus so to claim

that this that lacan is referring to not

compromising one's desire is somehow a

way to escape ideological interpolation

is completely wrong not compromising

one's desire only escapes and that again

would be an extremely misleading word

because dialectically speaking you're

not escaping anything you're just I

guess confronting it actually rather

than escaping it you're confronting

your neurotic symptom

lacon's ethics of psychoanalysis of

don't compromise your desire

is a way to confront the underlying

symptom of neurosis

but it's not it has nothing to do with

how an individual is situated within

this you know

within the uh

ideological State apparatus

and by the way Lacon does not

say that oh you should do this to

utilitarianly realize a desirable

political outcome again Rock Hill is

like so knee-deep in this shit that

Lacon is pathologizing he's so like he

lacks basic self-awareness Rocco you're

already presupposing

a some kind of desirable end State why

is that end State desirable

because it'll make you happy why it's

all pathological

says do not compromise your desire he's

saying this is an ethical Maxim

he's not saying do this because it will

lead to a desirable outcome he's saying

this is an F this is the ethical Maxim

this is what ethics is for Lacon this is

what an ethical Act is

do not compromise one's desire be

delivered to the sublime object of

Desire be delivered to what it is

very much within the ethics of

psychoanalysis outlines the tragical

structure

of this commitment it's a tragical

structure it leads to a tragedy it can

lead to a Calamity it doesn't promise a

good outcome up quite to the contrary it

promises

a self-destructive outcome in many ways

rather than remaining an ideology again

this is a completely wrong reading

trapped in the imagined relationship of

the social relates to production one can

become a subject by fearlessly pursuing

the real

which is that

that resists the symbolic order

no it's not no it's fucking

fucking not completely confused

the real does not resist the symbolic

order at all rather it's undermines

the structure or the form

of the imaginary

which is the form of the symbolic order

not the symbolic order itself

holy fuck and he's a professor

he's a charlatan and he doesn't know

what the fuck he's talking about

you can't escape this symbolic order

without entering into psychosis

that's what Lacon says that's what

anyone who knows anything about Lacon

says

resisting the symbolic order that's the

structure of psychosis

being delivered to the real rather

delivers you to the foundation of the

symbolic order it doesn't actually lead

you to resist it it leads you to the

foundation of the thing allows you to

confront that foundation and be able to

make sense of it and dwell within it

and all it undermines is the ideology

the object a

is the void filled out by creative

symbolic fiction

it drives our Jewish songs in a sense

that We crave it precisely because of

its impossibility yeah it makes sense

the real can never be seamlessly

integrated into the symbolic order or

simply translate into Ela Khan calls

reality right but the symbolic order is

not what the naive experience of reality

consists in because ordinary reality is

also mediated by the imaginary order

which

strangely enough Rock Hill is really

consistently neglecting here

I wonder why maybe it's because an

acknowledgment of the imaginary which is

a mediating element between the symbolic

and the real

while they're all mediating each other

because they're in a bromian knot but

acknowledging the imaginary in

particular

forces Rock Hill

to come to terms with his own

embeddedness within some kind of

psychotic fucking foreclosure of the

signifier Rock Hill is just dwelling in

the imaginary he's foreclosed the

signifier to his only relation to the

real is through the imaginary that's

what psychosis is

the Dew is more systemic and rigorous

than the scatter saw Zizek no he's not

it's just that Badu

um

is a formalist and an idealist

in a way that g-shek is not Jesus is not

a formalist doesn't mean he's more

systemic and rigorous juzik is if

anything more rigorous than Baidu it's

just that Badu is more soothing

to read and he causes less anguish when

you read him doesn't mean he's more

rigorous and systemic

the Communist idea is the imaginary

operation by which an individual

subjectuation projects a fragment of the

political real into the symbolic

narration of History

again this is not a lacanian structure

it's just a use of lacanian Concepts I

would not call this a laconian structure

at all the idea that you can that

imaginary operations project the

fragment of the real onto the symbolic I

think

definitely is a inversion of a laconian

structure

means the idea of Communism is an

operation by which an individual

ideologically commits themselves to an

unexplainable political event

whose consequences they attempt to trace

out in a given historical situation

this can't be done because the event is

recalcitant to the symbolic realm of

History

can only be done imaginarily

by the individual subject

dude

if you're going to use laconian Concepts

then stop opposing

words and Concepts like the imaginary to

some kind of

concept of actuality you fucking idiot

because

you actuality is already mediated as you

should know by all of these things in

the first place but he's just he said oh

it's just the imaginary one it's not the

real one

dude you're a fucking retard

the real

does alter the symbolic realm of history

and state idiot

it's just that it can never be reduced

to them so in every era of the event the

individual is called upon

by the new era right by some new

disclosure of a novel revolutionary

event or period to you know

to heed the call of this new event

imaginarily

and badoo's example of that is the

cultural revolution in China by the way

so it being imaginary doesn't mean it's

not real or part of reality it just

means

he's just talking about specific ways of

interfacing and relating to reality

imaginary just means through form

through phenomenal forms that's all it

means it doesn't mean imaginary as

opposed to real it means phenomenal

forms and not just images but any kind

of phenomenal disclosure at all

this is one of the reasons Badoo

proclaims Communists cannot be used as

an adjective to describe an actual part

of your state

right because according to Badoo the

event is always a revolutionary

circumstance and but you Rejects

The View that

it can be permanently Consolidated in a

state or in a party he thinks communism

dwells only in the moment of this

revolutionary event do I agree with

Badoo I don't but I just think this

guy's hypocritical because almost all

Western leftists

have that same view implicitly Rock Hill

if he lived in the Soviet Union or

today's China he wouldn't be a communist

precisely because communism is being

used as an adjective for an established

state of affairs Rock Hill is someone

who wants to be opposed to all of

society and all the status quo

could could Western leftists really live

in a mature socialist order no they

always want

to be degenerates who oppose everything

that's real and everything that's

established

the reason they call themselves

Communists is just because they want to

negate all reality

which is what Badoo is just saying

explicitly that's just what Badoo is

admitting

right

the collective project is doomed to fail

if it

takes the foreign parties or States

there'd be no concrete form

of the other worldly real that's not why

you may you may try to argue that's what

an argument that you

uh makes

but it's there's nothing fundamentally

laconian about this Insight because

given the fact actually

that that you

is not a dietitian but you is a um

spinosist and ultimately a follower of

delos not Lacon he just uses a lot of

the lacanian conceptual Arsenal but

badoo's metaphysics or his ontology is

delosian or it's spinozist it's

ultimately based on pure imminence so

that's probably why he's unable to

recognize how

the real

uh presupposes a specific symbolic form

rather than just dwelling in the space

that comes at its expense

it's that same delusion imminence which

is unable to see how these opposites are

reconciled in determinate forms

something which lacan can recognize

because he's actually some kind of

dietitian

the communism is thereby displaced from

Collective action sure but you're gonna

blame Badoo and Zizek for that

really are you gonna blame them for the

absence of any real communist movement

in the west or maybe they're just

reflective of that sorry State of

Affairs maybe if you read them you'd

learn more about why it is

you don't have a communist movement

instead of blaming them literally for

why you don't have them

maybe they're the logic contained in

their work

can help you understand how you're also

culpable for why we don't have a

communist movement maybe there's a lot

of things but you and Jesus say which

you're also really

who also reflect your prejudices too

he has a disdain for the working class

boring idiots

I mean but it's true if you're a

philosopher

Ordinary People

like literally going to up to a random

person are you gonna have a

are you gonna like learn about some

great revolutionary truth probably not

you're not gonna I mean what I mean by

that is you're not gonna learn about a

goal or anything like that you're not

gonna like

you're not going to consciously explain

to you the essence of Marxism leninism

or Marx revolutionary Marxism or

something

but but zizek's point is that's not what

makes them the Revolutionary subject

their position as the Revolutionary

subject comes at the expense of how they

personally on a personal level literally

are

oh wow Rock Hill establishes such a

profound solidarity

with uh

with the pros and peasants

by opposing them to the petty Bourgeois

luminaries of the global Theory industry

no the true solidarity

is the pros and peasants

being alongside the fucking failed

academics like Rock Hill who only has 3

000 followers on Twitter by the way

Rock Hill stop hiding behind pros and

peasants you're just as much as Petty

Bourgeois Zizek or anyone else like

Badoo it's just that you fail to be as

successful as them and you hide behind

pros and peasants and you project upon

the disdain for them the disdain that

you experienced by your betters

roles and peasants have nothing to do

with this beef it's all about you being

an inferior Petty Bourgeois

Intelligentsia

or whatever than they are you're mad

that you couldn't make it in the global

Theory industry so you're spitting this

vitriol hiding behind pros and peasants

it has nothing to do with them it has

everything to do with you

later on cable reviewing the material

structures that under again and

determine the conceptual games they play

okay can you do that

where have you done that you didn't do

that here you said gizic is politically

a NATO shill okay have you proven

the true reality underlying zizek's

work on ontological incompleteness you

fucking retard you haven't

you've done a lot of sloppy work trying

to make an essential uh associations

between things whose Association has yet

to be essentially Justified

by any real standard of logic

oh the real reason they're doing this is

because

they don't believe in see this is the my

here's my Smoking Gun critique of Rock

Hill you guys want to hear it it's a

Smoking Gun Rocco's basic criticism is

that

Jesus can bet you don't believe in

building a real communist movement

um

because they're Petty Boozle opposition

situates them in such such a such a way

that their their stream of income

personal income

gives them an incentive to just never

have a communist movement

now there's a very easy problem with

this critique which is that

that would that might be valid if you

could speak of a substantive communist

movement in the countries Within

they acquired relevance

uh which is like America and Britain and

France and so on but there isn't

so I just destroyed your argument

I mean if they were um

you can say they say bad things about

foreign communist projects

okay that means their shills of already

existing Powers but they actually

haven't established themselves

as an independent uh opposition to the

Communist project in foreign countries

so your material explanation is just

wrong they're not stopping the growth of

any Western communist movement because

there is no potential for such movement

that has any concrete manifestation

anywhere show me a single example go

ahead and show me a single example

there's not

there is a working class movement which

they indeed did turn their backs on I

called them out for it

when the French yellow vests happened

back in 2018 I attacked Zizek for it for

his comments on it and bet you

same thing with Maga they both reject

Maga but I have a strong inkling

suspicion that Rock Hill also rejects

Maga

so in terms of real movements you're

just as you're the same as them Rock

Hill your critique of them applies to

you with regard to uh right-wing

populism it's the same fucking thing

what concrete example of a western

communist movement is there racism can

bet you to have neglected in the first

place there's no such thing

and that's the that's why you can't what

what the PSL

it's so fucking stupid

they don't want any Rock Hill it's it's

this simple dude

Zizek is not holding back anything if

you think you can do substantial change

and build a communist movement go

fucking do it Zizek is not stopping you

from doing it this article is not going

to convince people to do it that

otherwise wouldn't have

but go do it dude

why are you bluffing

he's blaming Zizek for his own failure

dude

if Ziza died tomorrow

what are you gonna say then

or his lasting influence is the reason

the PSL isn't as popular no it's that's

not the reason you're fucking coping you

fucking idiot

the work of Marx is always difficult but

the thing that makes them different is

that they don't declare it's difficult

to be impossible

the liberal cause difficult World

impossible so as to conceal as

pronunciation of it

and this is anticipating the lakanian

alcusarians according to delusional Rock

Hill

no it's not Rock Hill

it's very concretely talking about

liberals at the time Lenin is writing

La Connie and Al tuscers have not

declared

communism to be impossible because they

think the work is difficult they are

using the word impossibility like Che

Guevara or sorry like May 68 demand The

Impossible

for them

impossibility is a realm of

potential novelty that is somehow

outside of the established possibility

of the whatever symbolic order

so I don't know why you're trying to

claim

that this this has some relevance to

lakani and aldusarians that Lenin Road

it has not

apparently

um Marx also

predicts Badu and Zizek

charlatanism and science are on several

from a point of view

the vanity of the subject the only

question for him is all vain people is

the success of the moment the eclac of

the day

again this has nothing to do with Badu

or Zizek it has more to do with you

using an example of Marx calling Pro

someone a charlatan

uh oh this is exactly what Baidu and

Jesus is because I think they're

charlatans okay how is the logic of

their charlatanism contained in this

because for example

um

he plays with his contradictions and it

develops them according to circumstances

into striking paradoxes

okay

so as to maintain the vanity of the

subject

and there's more as he says more in

common with fascism

like hitlerism right

then it does anything but do in Zizek

because

it implicitly is about to compromise

with the powers that be will proton

is part of his socialist movement at the

time not an isolated intellectual

thinker

so this is what he's talking about

all right well there's some dumb shit in

here that I remember

like him talking about the Death Drive

in a retarded way

okay well this guy's a fucking more

all right well there's the article

uh there's another tweet I wanted to

respond to

and it's by this uh idiot

Andrew Tate fans after reading hegel's

phenomenology of spirit and realizing

that higher self-consciousness depends

on Mutual recognition between two equals

and cannot come from an attempted

subjugation of the other it's so smart

that I liked it because it's 15 000

likes because a bunch of fucking nerds

who are powerless before the

traumatizing Insight of Andrew Tate that

there was a fat disgusting losers trying

to cope by posturing his intellectuals

uh well Hegel

no Hagel probably agrees with Andrew

Tate actually don't run to Hegel when

you're running from Andrew Tate you want

to run to hegel's phenomenology of

spirit you fucking loser you're just

trying to pull things out of hats you

just have a hat and you're just trying

to pull whatever you think sounds so

profound

uh it's like it's like a Yu-Gi-Oh card

aha my Exodia card phenomenology of

spirit put on your fucking nerd glasses

Andrew Tate fans

are not

they're not um in academic philosophy

Hegel is not relevant to them

so running to Hegel just a posture is

somehow Superior to people

he's just a cope you're a fucking loser

but as an actual see the problem is that

I there's people who actually read Hegel

like I'm one of them who can call you

out on your fucking bluffing bullshit

and say that first of all

higher self-consciousness is not some

stage of Enlightenment to be attained it

is simply a moment in an already

existing kind of organic totality of

History

which is only higher with regards to

Consciousness within the chronological

structure of both the book Hagel is

writing as well as the logic of spirit

but it is not higher in the sense of

something a person should Aspire towards

on a moral or ethical level because for

Hegel all that is real is rational he's

describing things as they already exist

not as he thinks they should exist that

as they already exist

so you already fucked up with this kind

of implicit

use of what self-consciousness actually

means

finally

the idea that self-consciousness depends

on Mutual recognition between two equals

and cannot come from attempted or

achieved subjugation is directly wrong

there's multiple prongs to the

retardation in this tweet

but Mutual recognition according to

Hegel

um

first of all

The Interpreter the equivocation of

mutual recognition with legal

egalitarianism is kojev's innovation

it's nowhere implied in Eagle

but second of all it precisely does come

from achieved subjugation of of the

other it's called the Lord and bondsman

dialectic

in the Lord and bondsman dialectic two

people have to prove their life by

fighting to death

now if one kills the other the dialectic

cannot go any further but if one does

successfully subjugate the other it

initiates the dialectic of the Lord and

the bondsman which results in mutual

recognition that's how Mutual

recognition comes about

but the problem is that for Hegel

nothing ends in mutual recognition it

doesn't end there Mutual recognition can

also be called a state of unhappy

Consciousness which is the next chapter

by the way it's a state of stoicism and

skepticism where a subject is no longer

satisfied in either

um lordship or bondage

they're not satisfied in that anymore

but that's not some like higher state of

um equality or something it's rather a

position of stoicism

it's kind of like uh you know

this limbo state of the unhappy

Consciousness it doesn't mean it it's

it's you've achieved this social

elimination of hierarchies no because

because in when you transition to the

realm of the ethical life and you

transition to the realm of spirit

you're already dealing thank you so much

Chris Morlock

after listening to this lecture I feel

like I was duped by Rock Hill all

tankies are hard up to attack Western

Marxism we have a lot of hate for it I

liked his attack on Frankfurt earlier no

idea he was PSL hey so much Chris I

appreciate you man yeah I see a lot of

people got duped too I didn't notice

that I didn't take it personally

um

but I I hate the Frankfurt School don't

be wrong it's just I also don't like

hypocrisy you know that's just really

the issue but um

heggles later chapters on Spirit and the

ethical life

very much imply a kind of organic

reconciliation of the various

hierarchical differences within Society

from the state the monarch of the state

all the way to

um you know the sphere of

um Civil Society right which is mediated

by classes and hierarchies now that's

just differences between men that Hegel

is very keen on stressing he

acknowledges

the differences of right

but to say

that the two subjects

uh in question can be sexed into men and

women according to Eagle

is so fucking stupid

it's like

for Hegel women cannot even be

recognized

as subjects of History

for Hegel women have diametrically

contrary Natures to Men Women cannot

dwell within the realm of statehood at

all Hegel doesn't believe

women are fit to rule anything basically

to be even politically relevant at all

for Hegel women are purely confined to

the household because they are

dialectically the topographic or

topological opposite as men they're the

inner reality where man is the outer

reality

so I'm just tldring it for you by the

same logic implied by the dial the

dialectical logic contained within the

phenomenology

I think Hegel actually

vindicates almost everything Andrew Tate

says it's Hegel who stresses the

necessity of recognizing contrary

Natures of the sexes in order for his

logic to be coherent in the first place

Hegel isn't saying he thinks men and

women should be unequal he's

acknowledging the differences and that

difference between inner the inner life

I mean I'll just read you what Hagel

wrote actually

this is in the uh

philosophy of right

sure let's just go to like the most

famous one on women right

women are capable of education but

they're not made for activities which

demand a universal faculty such as the

more advanced Sciences philosophy and

certain forms of artistic production

so I'm just going to break down what

that means the very book that's cited by

this Irish Republican larper

phenomenology of spirit Hagel is saying

it's not meant for women women cannot

attain absolute knowledge they cannot

attain that standpoint

so for Hegel

all of the dialectical logic contained

in that book such as the bondsman and

lordship dialectic that's not between

men and women women are not even part of

the picture for Hegel why

because

women correspond

to the more Placid

vague Unity of feeling when women hold

the Helm of government the state is at

once in Jeopardy because women regulate

their actions not by the demands of

universality but by arbitrary

inclinations and opinions

they breathe in ideas rather than living

by acquiring knowledge

the status of manhood on the other hand

is attained only by the stress of

thought and much technical exertion holy

fuck like this is more toxic than

anything Andrew Tate ever said this is

way more sexist than anything Andrew

Tate ever said by the way it's not even

something I agree with okay but to say

that you're going to oppose hegel's

phenomenology of spirit to Andrew Tate

fans sorry you fucking retard Hegel is

way more sexist fundamentally on a

philosophical level way more sexist than

Andrew Tate could ever even hope to be

sorry you dumb fucking fat LARPing bitch

you chosen the fucking wrong philosopher

to Bluff about you stupid bitch I've

actually read Hagel and I can put a

stamp of bullshit on this retarded tweet

15 000 fucking people liked not one

fucking person pointed out this guy

never fucking read the book he climbs JK

they don't fucking read you fucking

bluffing bitch you didn't fuck can read

that book I just explained to you in

like 12 different ways how you got this

wrong you did not read the fucking book

you bluffing fat bitch

I might start hegelian misogyny as a new

fucking thing just despite this fat

bitch you're gonna you're gonna run to

fucking Hegel because you can't confront

Andrew Tate fans you coping bitch I will

grab you by your fucking fat stubby legs

and prevent you from reaching the

heavens of Hegel so you're down with the

Andrew Tate fans again you fucking

bluffing fat bitch

running to Eagle

the posture that you're a smart

intellectual

because it's the most esoteric and like

intellectually Advanced thing you can

think of you may as well just name drop

fucking I don't know Einstein or

something ah have you you care it's like

you're running away from reality by

making references to extremely in your

standard obscure and intellectually

difficult things to absorb Hegel is one

of the most rigorous difficult thinkers

to understand

trust me I would know right so when

people just name drop him to try and run

away from oh I'm hiding behind Hegel

you're not hiding behind Hegel bitch I'm

ripping the Hegel Veil away and I'm

exposing your fat naked ass to the

cruelty coldness of reality fuck you and

15 000 retards like that tweet which is

proof that Humanity

is filled to the brim with unironic NPC

retards with no inner monologue 15 000

fucking people liked that fucking tweet

fifteen thousand that is stupidity

agitate fans are in their Lane they're

not actually stupid they don't posture

and say things that are just abjectly

wrong 15 000 people looked really

fucking stupid when they liked to tweet

that evinces such a poor poor level of

knowledge about Hegel that there's no

way of getting around it you could at

least give Andrew Tate fans the benefit

of the doubt that if they actually tried

to read Hegel or try to be confronted

with hegel's work they probably could

come to some kind of understanding of it

sure maybe they can we don't know but

now we know these fifteen thousand

people are actually by any objective

Criterion and standard stupid fucking

people they're bluffing stupid bitches

and they're posturing about being

smarter than they fucking are are I'm

smart I'm an intellectual and I'm

knowledgeable and I'm putting my stamp

of uh retardation on these people you're

a fucking idiot you bluffing bitch go to

fucking hell you dumb fuck

all right guys I'll see you tomorrow

we're ending the Stream

uh I wanna by the way to Gabriel Rock

Hill I want to fucking debate you

debate me I'm calling your shit out

see you