An Introduction to Communist Dictatorship

up the cornerly house

up the cornerly house

long leave the james connelly house up

the freaking cornerly house

that i'm in for sales sitting on my

computer's not doing real work boxes

like we're doing at the carly house off

the cornerly

house up the cornerly house

up the cornerly house

up the freaking cornerly house

long leave the quarterly house

all right we're not going to spend

a lot of time on theatrics today guys

because i have a pretty

i don't know how long it's going to take

but i have a lecture lined up for you

about

you know i'm going to teach you

something right so today i i didn't even

want to do this shit i didn't want to

have to cover it

or focus any time

on the paul moron shit but you know the

i don't get to pick and choose when it

happens you know also just want to let

you guys know a few things before you

get into today's content

and today's gonna be a lecture in the

similar style to um

the one we did about anarchism

and i genuinely want you to take

something away from this and learn

something from this one right so

a few things i'm going to tell you how

the stream is going to go

um

well actually before i get into the

stream two things right

tomorrow i need to visit my family i

haven't seen them in like two weeks uh

you know if you guys remember last

saturday which is usually when i visit

family i was debating adam something

so there is not gonna be a stream

tomorrow

and i i i find that really regrettable

because also there's going to be

sometime next week where i'm going to

get a haircut i need to go get a haircut

i'll try to make time for streaming when

i do that

uh but i just need to fucking cut my

hair right

um

so there's that tomorrow there's not

gonna be a stream

and then

i was gonna do the patreon podcast today

but there was only like 17 questions and

it wasn't particularly long

so i'm gonna do one of two things okay

i'm gonna give you guys an opportunity

to go ask your questions in the patreon

uh because i don't know if people just

don't know where to ask the question or

whatever but there was just a lot less

uh thanks for the gift of subs uh all

that is all i appreciate you man

i don't know if that's the case another

thing in regards to the uh

patreon is that

i'm gonna just do it sunday right

because i did it last week i did it set

thursday this week i do it thursday i'm

just gonna wait till sunday to do it

just to get back on our regular schedule

because sunday in general is a better

day so you guys are gonna have until

sunday to ask your questions there

and if you don't i'm gonna like kind of

have a really long substantive podcast

to make up for it right if you don't ask

more questions i'm going to just give

way more time to the ones that are never

be able to afford a better camera

oh yeah i'm going to buy a new cam i

just need to

honestly there's only been one thing

that's been holding me back from buying

a new camera

i just don't know which camera to buy i

genuinely don't know which camera i

should get

that's

as soon as i as soon as somebody

recommends me a really good camera i'll

just go buy it right as long as it's not

too expensive but yeah i can buy a

camera

you know i can really buy a camera

whenever especially after yesterday's

stream so you can definitely buy a

camera you know

i think i've asked jackson before but

even he really doesn't know

so yeah i i every time i ask somebody

they just give me a conflicting answer

so

and also the problem is in the camera

it's the lighting

and i could turn on the light right now

it's just that i didn't shower today so

my hair is going to look weird if i turn

on the light it'll look really bad so

i'm just going to keep the lighting off

and it'll be better for everybody right

it'll be better for everybody uh so

those are the two things i wanted to get

out of the way before i get into today's

stream and i'm gonna tell you what we're

gonna do for today's stream right

so today

there's probably three parts of today's

stream

if we're lucky right first part

we're going to cover the connelly hops

what's going on with the connelly house

the second part i'm going to be giving

you this lecture

canon eos m50 plus webcam setup package

i will check that out i'll check that

out

um

we're going to cover the connelly house

we're going to get into that fun stuff

that and also some surprising

interesting details

from that whole thing i don't know if

you guys know about right then we're

going to talk about

today's um

lecture

which i wanted to do a few days ago i

was too tired to do and i didn't get any

sleep i got like 9-10 hours of sleep

last night so i am fully

mentally uh capable of

giving this lecture today i can give

this lecture today and it's gonna be all

good right so and then

second of all

your current camera is definitely

communist tech

okay

so

um

and then third

we're gonna do more gta rp at the very

end if we have time right at the very

end

or i might just let you guys vote either

we do twitter space debates which i

don't know if that's gonna be that fun

or we could just do more gtrp

because i'm gonna

still repay you guys you know

for yesterday you know i just want to do

more so that's that

so before we get into the whatever i'm

gonna

blow my nose be right back

i'm gonna begin this by

taking us to the origin of this whole

thing so

the connelly house

so this is not the origin but it's part

of the origin right

so if you don't remember a few weeks ago

i'm going to get you guys up to speed a

few weeks ago

paul moron uh the guy who's claiming

that russia's imperialist and that we're

campus and all this kind of shit right

he made a comment claiming that

infra cells

don't do any real life organizing and

they don't do any real-life practices

uh such as the one that he was involved

with

and that his friends are involved in

which is is called the connelly house so

he went out of his way to do that

and then

i challenged him to a debate after that

uh about this connolly house and this is

what paul had to say

so

this is what paul morin had to say

okay

i'll never debate your fascist in-cell

ass

you're only worth mentioning to hook

people's attention and then divert that

attention away from your reactionary

debate bro bullshit towards genuine

revolutionary action happening irl open

the james cornerly house

and look at this is so beautiful 600

lights i mean it's so beautiful right

but

we uncovered some interesting things

about the conley house

some pretty funny things actually uh

which was basically that

the building

was earmarked for ukrainian refugees

and this uh maoist group i don't know

who it is paul moren's group i guess

they pretty much just took took it over

and occupied the building

squatting in it right so let me tell you

what the connelly house basically is

it's a random house uh it's a random

building in dublin

that somehow has decided they're gonna

go occupy because it's it's a seemingly

vacant

right to make some public statement

about the

crisis of homelessness within ireland

uh so they did that

and then they decided to come at me and

come at infrared

and and hold up this type of direct

action praxis as an example of people in

the real world doing real things uh in

comparison to us we don't do anything

important or anything real we're just on

the computer and on the internet now

honestly i don't really take myself too

seriously believe it or not

at the end of the day i do think there

is something inherently ridiculous

about this box i'm in right

and i do understand that i'm literally

just a guy on the internet

but with that being said i do think

i do believe in what i'm doing right

even if i don't take myself that

seriously

uh in the sense of like i don't think

what i'm doing makes me some

revolutionary or makes me some kind of

communist leader i'm not at that level

but i do

i do believe in what i'm doing in the

sense of the message that i'm i'm

getting out there right so that is

something i really do believe in i i

believe in it so much that i've decided

to dedicate my whole life to it right

so

but if you want to use this and uphold

this as an example of what we should be

doing today and the principal example of

socialist praxis and doing things in the

real world in contrast to what you're

doing i mean put it this way let's just

say i accept that you're correct i'm

just a guy who's sitting here sitting on

my ass streaming not doing any real

world practice not contributing anything

whatever i'm just a loser guy streaming

right okay

so your job is to convince me to go i

get up out of my ass

wake up in the morning and go do this

type of shit right and that's how i'll

become a true socialist

so the question i have to impose is what

are you actually accomplishing by doing

this shit what are you accomplishing

where is this where is this taking what

is the point of doing it is this better

than doing nothing right

for example not you know they keep

trying to say oh it's better than

nothing

uh

why why is it better than nothing

what because if it's better than nothing

that means it's gonna accomplish

something

here's three shekels for the camera

upgrade that mf thanks alex yeah i'll

upgrade it don't worry about it

that just means that you're doing

something

right

supposedly important

what where

why isn't it better than doing nothing i

don't get it right we have to look at

that at the level of the results because

if it's better than doing nothing that

means that the result that it's

producing

uh is better than doing nothing which is

nothing the result being nothing but i'm

actually going to give them some credit

because the result isn't nothing

it's worse than nothing

so let me actually show you the result

of their actions

by the way before i do i just want to

tell you what we said what i said at the

time i said this okay

the connelly house is fucking stupid

it's a stupid form of adventurism it's

the irish chaz

because the only way such an action

would ever take off

is if it somehow sparks a movement

within ireland that's gonna convince you

know thousands and thousands and

thousands of people to get on the street

and

it's gonna if you're gonna break the law

you're gonna take us an action to break

the law of your country

the only thing that can save you from

the the law and the wrath of the state

is popular support right so

what i said is that in ireland right now

you're not going to get enough popular

support

to prevent the force of the law coming

down on you

because not enough people know who you

are they don't know about your cause

uh they're not invested in your cause

you're not providing them any kind of

political solution for the seizure of

power

you're not doing anything like that

right you're not winning over the irish

masses the irish masses are not disposed

or won over to you i literally tried to

argue this and say this i mean like look

forget about all the insults and all the

mockery and all that stuff that i was

engaged in i'm a plain spoken american i

don't just like to mock people i tried

to tell you that the irish masses are

not behind you

as far as taking illegal actions are

concerned you can only start taking

illegal actions in the following

circumstances when the state is no

longer legitimate in the eyes of the

masses

um

when for example

a you're on the cusp of some kind of

revolution in which a new form of the

law is gonna replace the old one i mean

these are when illegal actions

you know might have some merit but

otherwise you're gonna go out and do

illegal shit

in broad public view knowing you're

gonna get caught i mean the only result

of that

is that the police are gonna get you

you're gonna go to fucking jail and go

to court

and you're gonna go on twitter and bitch

and cry about it like i literally

fucking predicted you would

why we all saw this coming

i literally said this i literally said

when the police come and take them out

of that fucking house they're gonna act

like they're such victims and they're

gonna expect the irish masses to come

out in droves to support them it's not

going to fucking happen play stupid

games you win stupid prizes you do

stupid illegal shit the police are going

to come

and it's it's very simple

ireland is a country of laws you could

say those laws are hypocritical false

and wrong and illegitimate in your head

but functionally speaking

by the way this has a lot to do

with the theory stream that we're going

to get into and get engaged with

practically speaking those laws matter

that is how the state

legitimizes itself and legitimizes

itself in the eyes of the masses

in addition to itself so it's like this

state cares about the consistency of

laws the masses care about the

consistency of laws so you could say oh

that's the law

i'm just gonna steal this house

yeah i'm sorry but

you i could literally

like we we

we told you this was gonna happen

and you kept bragging in our faces that

you're doing real world

revolutionary practices

we told you what was gonna fucking

happen which is just that you're gonna

get arrested and you're gonna make it

seem like it's a big surprise

and it's some big outrage and outcry

that you got arrested i mean like this

would be aiken

to going to the jungle

and pinching a lion's ass and then when

the lion rips your head off

you start like

throwing a big fit in public expecting

break the law into justice no because

what you did was very predictable

horse is defending the lion

it doesn't matter

what you and i

think is legitimate

or not

this is like patently predictable shit

it's just like a lion in the jungle like

you sh you could easily see this coming

what did you think was going to happen

guys i don't understand this if you go

to a police station and slap a police

officer in the face and he puts cuffs on

you i mean what do you think is going

gonna happen why are you protesting this

in public

like

this is not

like

normal irish people don't see this as an

outrage they don't give a fuck about you

because you broke the law that already

exists if it was the law that they had a

problem with they would have protested

that law right

this is the law on the books within

ireland is there a protest movement

within ireland

to make it legal to occupy vacant

buildings

i mean maybe you should begin there if

this if this is the thing you think

that we need to focus on in ireland is

that there's too many emptying buildings

compared to the amount of homeless

people then focus on the law that's on

the books right focus on the law that's

on the books and try to build a movement

around

you know repealing that law or amending

that law and okay vacant buildings

should be seized by the and and you do

something like that right but when you

when you get engaged in this fucking

larp and this adventurism where you're

gonna go and take over a fucking

building illegally and then cry on the

fucking internet when the police come

and take you out i mean

i mean what did you think was gonna

fucking happen

and you were given several warnings they

kept telling you hey we have a court

order to evict you get out of this

building

if you're still in this building after

june 2nd the police are going to come

and take you out

no we are standing on ground okay are

you going to are you going to take on

the fucking irish state are you planning

a rambo style guerrilla war against the

irish state because i'm pretty sure they

could just come and take your ass out

what did you think was gonna happen they

told you they're coming after june 2nd

to take you out

they kept bloating gloating and bragging

about no the quarterly house went up the

corner of the house up the correlate

house what does that do for you what

does that do for you

i mean it's stupid it's fucking stupid

ireland is not in a revolutionary

situation right now so if it's not in a

revolutionary situation laws matter

wanna know why laws matter

because the state isn't about to

collapse the state is still

somehow legitimate in the eyes of the

irish masses

which means

by breaking laws you're not going to

really

garner sympathy right

unless it's some exceptional

circumstance like some kind of war is

happening you know it's it's just like

it's such a stupid thing right

but

let me tell you what happened

all right and and it's gonna it's gonna

get weird it's gonna keep getting

weirder and weirder

the more we delve into this

but

so this is also something that happened

is that they blocked me

the connelly house has blocked me which

is okay because we're just going to go

on knitter

uh n-i-t-t-e-r

and we'll just yeah they blocked me

because they did not want me to cover

this

which was you know i mean that's like a

temp congrats guys for blocking me i

just went on the alternative website

um

so this is what happened okay

all right so let's like go through the

timeline

socialist republicans keeping watts on

the roof of connelly house over the past

few days against potential eviction

why what are you gonna fucking do if

they try to evict you

what will you do

what do you mean you're keeping watch

what

what what do you mean keep for what

what is your plan if they try to evict

you what are you gonna do it's like are

you just gonna get uh wanted levels on

gta like you're gonna like beat up the

police and then just wait till they come

out with tanks when you're at a five

star wanted levelers like what is your

plan here i don't get it what do you

mean you're

keeping watch over what you're not are

you at war with the state right now like

what is this right it's fucking

buffoonish and clownish and fucking

stupid right

and like you tell these people this kind

of shit and they just complete look you

say this stuff and then they just keep

delving more into abstraction they go

well you don't want to do any practices

but this is your example of praxis

this is the example you've given us

so we have to focus on this specific

thing that you have elevated to the

status of true revolutionary real world

praxis so

you you can't you can't take refuge in

some generality that on the face of it

sounds good yeah it sounds good to say

something like let's go and do stuff in

real life but when these are the

examples you give us of doing shit in

real life i mean

your generality collapses

and becomes meaningless okay

today was

remember our namesake and 106 likes

remember your namesake

wednesday at 6 pm there will be a

meeting at james connelly house to

discuss the rw's on coin campaign of

housing acquisitions and attempts to

remove activists from jch and a way

forward

so you're just going to keep doing this

and it's the same result that's going to

happen you're just going to keep

occupying i think they did occupy

another house already

and they just don't stop you're gonna

keep doing this and getting arrested and

then complaining about it on the

internet you know what this is

this is a fucking getting your activists

arrested simulate simulator that's what

it is

it's a get your activists arrested

the game you're just simulating

getting your fucking group arrested one

by one

we're going to jail

let's go to

jail we're going to prison

and their mommy and daddy's going to

come and bail them out because they're

you know uncle's a lawyer or some shit

and they'll be like now he's just

please just it always happens you ever

notice those chats people never go to

jail you ever notice no anarchist ever

goes to jail they always get like

off somehow

the judge refused to jail the activists

rally is called off updates to follow

yeah we won

oh

looks like they didn't win

40 gardai evicting people from james

connelly house around malibu dublin

so this is what happened

oh my god the injustice of the state

oh my god

i'm being oppressed

yeah yeah

guess dudes going to jail tonight

guess who's going to jail tonight

guess who's going to jail tonight

the james cornely house was raided

activists continued to remain strong and

defiant

oh my god oh my god who could have

predicted this

oh my god i can't believe it

so this is this is like the news we're

looking at right salvation army regains

building earmarked for refugees after a

garda operation where they literally

just

sent police in and just they just took

them out

they just removed them

this is really shocking i can't who

could have predicted this

oh my god

this was their other house that they

took today at 8 30 they arrived at liam

mello's house in jamestown square and

arrested two activists fighting

homelessness so they took the other

house too

i thought i was going to be in big

trouble because i was like well they

still have that other house the liam

mello's house and maybe they'll still

use that as an example of like the

praxis that they could do

the revolutionary practice they'll do

and turns out that they're just getting

arrested from that one as well

we have been informed that the two

activists dragged out and arrested

by godda

are being held at caroline goddess

station now

anyone available please go and support

them asap

okay now this is the weird part i wanted

to get to right this is the weird part

that it's kind of like weirding me out

and i don't really know how to explain

it

all that well

it's kind of bizarre to me it's quite a

little bit bizarre it's quite a little

bit strange it's quite a little bit out

of the ordinary

if i do say so myself it's a little bit

bizarre to say the very very least a

quite a little bit bizarre

but

so here's this guy saying footage of the

guard eye raiding

the office just kidding they're actually

evicting people from the james connelly

house now the james connelly house like

how does anyone know what the james

connelly house is except people who are

like i nobody knows what it's called

right

so this guy must know right who is this

guy

ceo web summit financial times world's

largest tech conference

forbes best tech conference what

70 who is this is the ceo of

the world's largest tech conference

patty cosgrove

what

how why is he invested in this situation

how does he know what's going on what

the fuck

it's quite a little bit strange if you

ask me

quite a little bit strange

quite a little bit weird if i do say so

myself

so what are the lessons we can draw from

this uh

i'll give me a second

so there's a word for this type of

bullshit in marxism there's a word for

it

believe it or not there's a word for

this in the communist and socialist

tradition and it's basically called

adventurism and volunteerism it's

adventurism and it's volunteerism now

what is adventurism adventurism is

basically when you embark on these

actions

uh you know

for the thrill of it in order to kind of

realize some kind of ideological vision

or project

without any regard

pretty much for the consequences just

like on an adventure you don't know what

the consequences are going to be that's

why it's adventurous and stuff i mean

that's what it is right and then it's

voluntaristic because it assumes that

you're going to be able to like carry

out some kind of transformation by the

force of pure will alone

without regard for what connection you

have to the masses already right you're

you're just going out guns blazing in

public expecting the masses to follow

you

instead of doing the much more difficult

protracted work

of reaching out to the masses in a

methodical and careful and more cautious

and patient way right you're just going

out guns blazing it's like

it's like the equivalent of like

running in public

you are ready for the revolution who's

with me

who's with me and then nobody's with you

and you act surprised and shocked who's

with me

all right all right my name is paul

moron i've just discovered the truth of

marxism leninism maoism i've just

discovered the truth of the red

revolutionary first of may and i read it

on my kindle and people have told me

about it and it's making me very very

angry so what i'm going to do is i'm

going to run outside naked

with the revolution

[Music]

and lo and

lo and behold

stem

got my fucking chair stuck at something

lo and behold

nobody's interested nobody's interested

in joining you nobody's interested in uh

and partaking in any of this

what a big what a grand surprise what a

mighty surprise right

what a big surprise

um

because this is adventurism

plain and simple that's what it is

it's adventurism

any other day i'd laugh about this way

harder

but it's like it looks like we won looks

like we won in this little encounter

between i mean i'd love to hear their

argument i almost want to like start a

twitter space and like hey what is your

argument what what what

what position do you have

give me a second

it's a form of retarded adventurism

which just assumes that like the stars

are all going to align in the right way

all we have to do is go out in public

and announce to the world our commitment

to this ideology and the masses are

going to follow suit and this it's so

childish it's so fucking childish

what did you expect was gonna fucking

happen it's adventurism and it's

criminal volunteerism it's anarchism

this is what anarchists do

instead of actually going to the masses

and formulating a program

some kind

formulating a vision formulating some

kind of

something that has to do

with power

in the sense of like

something that relates to people in

regards to the political situation

that contains the seeds for some popular

movement i mean

instead of doing that you're just gonna

go and and you know what

this is perversion it's literally like

you know what this is

let me explain to you what the connolly

house is in essence let me explain to

you what these types of actions in

general are in essence this is the type

of anarchist and maoist praxis that they

do it's literally like that guy who

takes a picture of his dick and just

sends it to his love interest going

straight to the chase

alright

send it away and she opens her phone she

opens her text messages or her twitter

dms or her snapchat or her instagram and

there it is a bulging penis

straight straight away to the case

his intention is there his motivation is

there straight away to the case

my question is is it has that ever

worked

maybe i'm wrong because so many dudes do

it

it must work sometimes right i've never

heard of it working

but it must work right for so many

people to be doing this i mean i've

never done that

even in a relationship i've never done

that because i've been so ashamed of

that idea right

but

it's so it's such a shameful thought to

me it's such a disgusting perverted

thing to do

but like i don't think it's ever worked

right

but that's exactly what they're doing

they're going in public

and demonstrating an example of what it

what our ideological vision for the

world is

and hold on it's just a little too

front and center for people if you get

what i'm saying which is to say

yeah

there's no law written anywhere that

just because you're going out in public

and directly trying to realize your

ideological vision that people are going

to magically understand your specific

consciousness and they're going to adopt

your specific type of consciousness or

your specific type of ideology nowhere

is that written because it's just not

true it's not how it works

people don't adopt your ideology by you

going out in public and taking these

drastic actions risking you know

risking yourself and risking europe oh

it's so brave and noble but most people

just see a bunch of hooligans and

criminals doing some fuckery that's the

truth

that's the truth if you actually do want

to relate to masses in some kind of way

you have to relate to them within the

capacity of the reality that they're

familiar with and that they know about

um you have to actually engage in the in

politics the politics that they actually

as far as they're concerned

is real

i just want to get to the

i just want to get to the essence of

where this specific type of perversion

where they just think that this is an

effective thing to do i mean i just want

to get to the root of where that comes

from where do people get this idea that

this is a smart idea this is some

effective type of measure to take

um

i think it comes from the fact that

again they're just too caught up in like

this adventuristic

volunteeristic thing yeah we're doing it

dude go to the gym go to the fucking gym

if you want to do something

quote unquote do something right if you

actually want to relate to the masses

and build a movement you're going to

have to have an approach that's a little

bit more patient and a little bit more

mature and a little bit more grounded in

reality exposing these lumpens

exactly what they are they're lumping

criminals right they're just lumpin who

think that

their ideology gives them some holy writ

power

regardless of the state of the masses to

just voluntarily engage in these like

fantastical you know

dramatic interventions into reality

this is it's like it's like mussolini's

march on wrong

it's like it's like what idea do you

have you're going to do some theatrics

some dramatic theatrics that's illegal

and then it's going to wow it's gonna be

so bombastic and so impressive to people

they're just gonna rally behind you and

join you no what's gonna fucking happen

is you're gonna go to jail

you're just gonna go to jail that's all

that's gonna happen

you're not a threat to the status quo

and you're not a threat to the state

and i keep seeing these dumb asses be

like we have a homeless prop nobody

cares

if you're breaking the law

it doesn't matter what your

justification is

it doesn't matter how you're trying to

justify nobody cares about your

intentions you're breaking the fucking

law in public

you're not able to protect yourself from

the law in any kind of way

you're not powerful enough to take on

the state

what do you expect is gonna fucking

happen

those are the laws on the books it's not

like in the irish

laws they have some exception for oh

unless this is their reason no they

don't they don't give a fuck dude

i don't know what to tell you i mean

you don't have to go to law school for a

year like i did to know this okay

if you go and murder someone in the name

of chairman gonzalo the judge is going

to look at you

and when you're explaining to him your

ideological motivation is going to be

like

i don't give a god damn fuck you just

committed first degree you know they

don't care what your fucking reason is

fucking stupid

ah it's so depressing it's so depressing

because i've been here before guys i've

argued with people about this in real

life many times

before and they don't listen they just

keep doing this shit and until they burn

out and just give up on the ideology as

a whole because it's not giving them the

immediate results that they were

expecting and it's really really fucking

sad it's really sad i mean isn't it

fucking sad that this even happened and

like

didn't we call this didn't we say this

is what was gonna happen

is that not what what is your fucking

excuse

what is your excuse i told you this was

gonna fucking happen

what is your excuse

it actually makes me angry they you

literally upheld this as an example of

why they're better than us why so

let me get this straight both of us

accomplished nothing in that time span

right

both of us accomplished nothing right

okay well you're in jail and i'm not

so all you did was play yourself all you

did was accomplish

either at best you wasted your time or

you're like facing charges

they knew they would be kicked out from

the beginning so what is the point of

doing this shit

did they build a movement out of this

are they building so

what they didn't it's not like they

built a movement

oh oh they convinced a few people to be

sympathetic to them i probably convinced

way more people to be sympathetic to me

what does that do you what does that

give you huh oh they're sympathetic to

us so what can you do with that

what is that gonna what what does that

lead to

where are the fucking results i keep

asking this simple question of results

results results where the fuck are the

results

it's the only question i ever impose or

insist upon

i keep insisting on the question

of where are the results does that make

me

such a bad guy and such a criminal where

the fuck are the results

that's all i ask

remember guys results are what matter

in this world results are what matter

we are nowhere close to a revolutionary

situation right now

because we we need to do step one of

building a fucking organization and

movement in the first place

by the way

some more things about paul moron

before i finally move on

uh and i'm gonna put a time stamp and

like description like when the lecture

actually begins

that guy was also responsible for like

fucking up the communist party

in his country something about he like

caused a split he's like a fed dude he's

like a weird glowy guy he caused the

split from the youth

the youth wing and he wrecked his own

fucking party

up the cornerly house

real world organizing touch grass and do

practice

there's your praxis there's your

touching grass it did nothing there's no

result from

everyone's time was wasted some people

are in jail and not for reasons that

couldn't have been for foreseen

and before you say this is just like

when the bolsheviks got arrested no it's

not

because the bolsheviks didn't always

foresee that they would get caught

they

operated in the shadows when it was

illegal to and then when they did get

caught

it was because they didn't see it coming

they didn't go out of their way to just

get arrested

that's not something they would do

they were careful

to try and not when they started strikes

and they were going to factories and do

all that kind of stuff

they were being careful

they were being careful

says you are doing material harm in your

streams

the fuck does that mean

is that like a legal thing what do you

mean

oh oh he's talking about the

disinformation shit probably right yeah

i don't give a fuck

i thought he was trying to say something

like i'm like hurting people or

something i'm like what

oh yeah i don't give a fuck

just lip shit

doing material harm like i don't give a

fuck

fuck does that even mean

my response to that is pretty much

um that's pretty much like your opinion

man

that's my response my response is that's

just your opinion

um

you have to prove objectively how i'm

doing

but anyway

one man's harm is another man's uh

fortune right one man's arm is another

man's

whatever i'm not gonna dwell on this

okay let's now get into the lecture okay

so let's

have a palate cleanser let's clear the

palette let's clear the plate

because today i'm going to get in the

lecture and today i don't really care

about views

that much and i'm not really stressed

about that kind of stuff because

um

i want this to be on the record right so

that's what i care about i just

care about having this on the record

it's a shame

the people who are not here to join us

today are mentally retarded scumbags

who can go fuck themselves and i don't

give a fuck about that they're not real

they're not they're not really part of

our community right

um

they're not really part of the community

those people are fakes

who are you know

i i i hate that personally right

i actually hate them personally uh and i

wish them bad dreams right everybody who

didn't make today's stream

um

not debating anyone it must not be an

important stream

yeah those guys i mean you'll always be

like the peasants of infrared you'll

always be

[Music]

the

you'll always be like the surfs the

helots you'll never actually be part of

holy fuck thank you man

gorilla sun gorilla sun

yeah as i was saying those people will

never actually be part of the og they'll

never like be

on the elite rank type of thing right

those are like the uh

dumbass people who don't even know

what's good for them right

anyway

let's get right into it

i have shit in my throat let me clear my

rope give me a second

i'm going to begin this by talking about

politics

i'm going to begin this by talking about

politics and the state

politics and statehood

and we're gonna have to go pretty

ancient right

and i want you to suspend

most of your prejudices and intuitions

and have an open mind just

have an open mind to the fact that maybe

you don't quite understand

what a state actually is

ugh

i need like a bucket to spit in this is

fucking insane every time i talk every

fucking time i talk

based

i get shit in my throat son give me a

second

give me a fucking second

since

let's call it the classical period of

ancient greece

philosophy as we know it

philosophy has been closely bound up

with

statehood and politics in particular

probably the most famous work of western

philosophy and philosophy as we know it

in the western sense in the history of

the world was plato's republic

plato's republic

being

uh

this text

which united

plato's philosophical system

with some kind of vision of a society

some kind of vision of a polity of a

republic

now what is it that unites these two

things

why did plato unite his ideas about the

mind and being

and reality

philosophy the realm of philosophy

proper why was this united with a book

or a text

about

a

republic um that

basically is um

defining

a super individual reality of

collectives right a collective

what is the connection what could the

connection possibly be between those two

things

typically

we begin in our understanding of

politics

from a perspective of some kind of

methodological individualism

which is to say

we begin with the individual as the

substance of politics the self-same

rational individual

all i want to present right now as far

as right now is concerned

is the fact that for the overwhelming

majority of mankind's history

the individual was not the substance of

politics the individual

was not

some unit of politics

plato's philosophy which unites

the correct

understanding of being by the individual

by the individual mind i should say

with

some kind of outline of

an ideal

state

which is of course

going beyond the bound and depth of the

individual

sorry beyond the uh beyond the bound and

scale of the individual

now how and why is that

how and why could that be

how is it that for plato

philosophical correctness

somehow can at the same time correspond

to

some type of republican virtue in which

the individual will

corresponds

to some kind of collective reality

karl popper

who is

the thinker behind george soros and the

open society foundation

yada yada yada

claimed that the number one threat and

enemy to the open society was none other

than plato himself plato plato the

number one threat

an enemy of the open society why

what actually is the crime

of plato

the crime of plato

of course is also the crime of aristotle

and the rest of the greek philosophers

but popper singles out plato because

scandals scandalously

plato represents a unity of the philis

philosopher

the unity of the philosopher's truth

with the political truth which is to say

somehow according to plato

when we as individuals access the truth

of being

by the divisive thought

we can correspondingly

access the truth

of our collective reality

we no longer only speak for ourselves in

our own individual capacity we are

somehow accessing and participating in a

supra individual reality a collective

reality that imperils and involves the

whole of a given polity and a community

so it's part of this reason why soros

sorry why popper

will call plato the enemy of the open

society

plato basically says we can know

how a society should be

we can tap into the essence of society

by the device of thought we can tap into

the essence of our collective social

being

by the device of thought

what that means

is that when an individual participates

in philosophy

they are not only doing so within the

capacity as an individual plato does not

only speak for plato

plato does not only speak for his

substantive individuality whether taken

in the sense of his own physical body or

the sum total of his own individual

experiences plato participates in a

discourse

in a

language

that is commonly accessible

by

mankind as a whole

plato of course was not alone each of

the greek philosophers

were also philosophers of politics they

also had specific views about statehood

statesmanship

after all

the sophists

against whom plato constructed

part of his philosophical project

against

not only were sophists within the realm

of epistemology and the mind

and politics

the sophists were also

as such within the realm of statehood

the sophists claimed

that all we would have to do is trick

the masses

into

believing whatever bullshit we want to

believe and then from this we can derive

legitimate true state power

it basically be political hucksters

that can bullshit their way into power

lying to the masses and it wouldn't be a

lie because we can make up the truth to

be whatever we wanted to

more or less right it was political

social street not just of the

philosophical kind

of course it's not just philosophy and

the discourse of philosophy

that somehow establishes mankind in

common

it's also something called language more

generally

language proves

that our individuality

is not our own

each and every one of us are separate

physical individuals

we are separate physical bodies with

different experiences

and perhaps of course different

relationships

to material reality

but the manner by which we give

expression to our individuality

the manner by which we define our own

individuality somehow is social and

collective in nature through the use

first and foremost as far as the

intuition is concerned to you

language we all speak some kind of

commensurate language moreover we speak

the same language not just in public in

order that we can communicate with

others we speak the same language to

ourselves in private

you will probably

you will probably get the idea somewhere

along the line

i'm going to spit in this fucking water

bottle give me a fucking sec

okay

it's gonna keep spitting in there

you have probably heard

the commonsensical idea

that what is the purpose of language the

purpose of language is to communicate

now you may not see it now

but i will demonstrate to you in the

course of this lecture throughout

precisely how this false understanding

of language

can also be the dividing line between

different political ontologies different

metaphysics of statehood and politics

and differing furthermore ideological

views from marxism leninism to anarchism

liberalism and fascism on the other hand

the idea that language

is simply a means of communication

between individuals

neglects the fact that language also

possesses the role

of articulating

ourselves

we don't just use language to

communicate with other individuals

because that presupposes the idea

that each individual atom

already has an individual identity

but it is language that gives us the

identity that we have in the first place

so in a strange sense language precedes

our individuality

language in a strange sense

precedes our individuality

language is how we come to understand

what we are in the first place

before we can be worried about

how we will communicate with others

it is through some kind of otherness in

the form of language that we come to

define what we are in the first place

what we are is only in relation to

others or to some kind of other in

general typically we call this other god

what are the implications of that

the implications of that is simple

just by participating

in language forget about philosophy

but just language in general

we are participating in some kind of

supra individual reality

now let me premise and define supra

individual reality

this reality may very well in the

material sense come down to us in some

biological natural physical capacity

maybe

but in so far

as we conceive of ourselves as

individuals

this is going to be mediated

in a way that goes beyond the threshold

of our ability to know

or define our individuality

so let me rephrase that

it may very well be the case that the

object of the whole thing is some kind

of physical biological self-interest

maybe

that's not important because insofar as

we conceive finitely of that interest

we are already doing so within terms

established

beyond that specific individuality

i am not

myself

you are not

yourself

this true individuality let's say this

real let's call it the capital r real

individuality

could only ever relate to our minds

could only ever relate to our knowledge

as some kind of transcendental object

some kind of object

that goes beyond the bounds of both

experience

experiential and rational knowledge

some kind of transcendental knowledge

that is beyond the threshold of our

conscious understanding

relating to us only in some kind of

unconscious sense

by the way any retard in the chat wants

to debate me or challenge me

about any of this

get in vc

specifically zvz

i have a stupid fucking student in my

chat zvz

what's so funny cbc

go ahead spit it out

spit it out so the teacher

can slap you

back into humility you little bitch

go ahead

tell us what's so funny

make us laugh

oh you're making fun of the dude that

got blamed ah

ah so you're not paying attention to the

actual lecture at hand

and you're disrupting my classroom like

a monkey jumping up and down disrupting

my classroom

so you share with the class what's so

funny and the professor's not laughing

the professor's not laughing

the professor doesn't find it funny

so it couldn't have been that funny

could attempt it

it can't be that funny because it didn't

make the professor laugh

that's okay

this is a mediterranean academy

let's continue

let's continue

in this sense

the question is very simple

what is the individual

rather than simply explain to you what

has been explained many times before

that we are not simply individuals

that we belong within some kind of

social whole or social totality

let's go a step further beyond this

cheap criticism of european

individualism let's rather ask the true

question what is an individual

what is it that makes an individual

because an individual

is quite a mysterious thing

an individual is quite a mysterious

thing

as heidegger would put it

an individual is a being

remit

with the question of what it is they are

that is

an individual is a being which enters

this world

asking the question

of what it is

now a retard will tell you that an

individual is a discrete

biological organism

a discrete

biological organism

they are bluffing and pretending to have

knowledge that they as a matter of fact

do not have

what is the genesis

of this biological organism

well the birds and the bees and then

what is it where does it come from

what about the whole of cosmos and the

whole of being

gives rise to something like a human

individual

a human individual moreover

first with

the quality of questioning

what it itself is

this very question

this very question

is realized

in the polity

or in the republic

that is what the republic realizes

the republic of plato

is not just

sorry

the republic of plato

is not some kind of model

arbitrary model

of this is how i think society should be

run it should be this is that is not

what plato's republic is if you think

that's plato's republic i want you in a

video game to find the nearest

river

and jump in it

and let it take you

off of niagara falls

because i'm sick of hearing people like

you

the republic

is an answer to a question

the question being that very question of

being

what are we

it is the republic that realizes this

the republic realizes our true

being

how

how

what is this republic

is it a tangible thing

is it is it a little thing like this

that we can hold and

and and grasp in our hands in some kind

of way no

so how could it be

the truth of our being how is it that

the republic can be the truth

of our being

the question is very simple

why do we make the assumption

why do we make the assumption

that in order for something to be real

it must possess the quality

of sensuous and empirical tangibility

why do we possess this assumption that

in order for something to be real and

material it must possess the quality of

sensuous

tangibility

the problem of course and the paradox

already pointed out

by emmanuel kant

who's dealing with this precise issue in

response to empiricism

is this

whereupon we as individuals come across

in a sensuously and empirically tangible

thing

there are already a myriad

of ways in which we are structuring that

object

before we enter into empirical and

sensuous intercourse with it

which means

before this is the real thing to me

i have somehow

structured it

in some kind of way

that i

cannot control or arbitrate consciously

there are things we take for granted

in other words

that define our relationship to

empirically definite and sensuous

objects

what did marx say men and women enter

the world

of their own creation

unbeknownst to them that it is of their

own creation

what did marx say he said

men and women make history

but not as they please

men and women enter into relations over

which

they neither have any control nor any

conscious knowledge of

when we enter this world as individuals

we are already embedded within some kind

of relation

some kind of relation over which we have

no control

soda blood thought it was smart to dab

in the chat

soda blood

go ahead and explain to the class

why you're dabbing explain to the class

what a dab is

explain to the class what that is

it's a cough

explain to class why you cough out loud

explain to class

where did you mean to ask a question to

interrupt my lecture

based

pardon me sir but can you debate

commatria effect news i'll debate anyone

who dares

rear their head

i'll debate any of these people

all right everybody

soda blood is the resident dunce

for coughing in the middle of my lecture

make sure they're known as the resident

dunce

change their name to resident dunce

they're wearing the duns cap in the

corner

since you want to interrupt my lecture

teacher can i use the bathroom i don't

know can you

can you

and the answer is no you can't

hold it

you have to hold it

now i'm gonna ask the class the question

what was i just covering

what was i just covering class

and there's going to be many beatings

if i don't see widespread knowledge of

what i was just talking about

fine i'll take that what is an

individual but what specifically

i was talking about

how we always make the assumption

that in order for something to be real

and to be materially real

it has to be empirically and sensuously

tangible

the problem with this of course

has been discovered

or

laid out already by kant

that the things that are sensuously

tangible to us

already presuppose

let's call them a set of relations

that are within

in khan's case

the categories of the understanding

or in marx's case

relations to production

that proceed

that precede them

tangibility sensuous tangibility

is not what defines

reality

reality is defined

by the contradictions

within the relations

of the objects presented

within our phenomenal

purview

it is in the contradictions between the

various things and objects that we can

discover their reality and materiality

it is in the very discrepancy

between the word of a thing

and the thing itself

that we discover reality

we have to change our understanding of

what is real

why did paul moron say that he's doing

real world action

because paul moron is doing things

empirically tangible

he's feeling things he's touching things

it's all empirically tangible

this is the furthest extent

of the relation between

anglo-saxon metaphysics and reality

it is empirical tangibility

how can the republic be something real

if it is not empirically tangible

i answer that question quite simply

the republic

is an object

the republic is the name

of an object

a state

a state

is the name of an object

an object that reveals itself

only in the relationship

between things and between individuals

the state

the republic

these are not things

these are words that describe the

relationship

of things

not the least of which being included

individuals

how do we understand the reality of a

nation slash culture thank you us

i'll get to that hopefully

we have arrived

at an understanding

an understanding now of politics

which renders the masses which renders

the people

that are the subject

of the state the subject of the politics

blind

sheep-like

oblivious

empty

and blank

if it is true

that the truth of politics

and the truth

of our own individual reality

reveals itself in a way

that is in no way immediate to us

in any phenomenal experiential

or rational

or epistemic sense

then we stand before the form of the

expression of our own being

naive

blank

child-like

and ignorant

the individual is not

the vessel

of politics

the individual is not the truth of

politics

because the individual stands before the

politics as a student stands before

their master

asking the simple question of what am i

politics and the state

give expression to our individuality

in a way that is more fundamental

than what is within the immediate and

proximate

sense of the individual

what do the anarchists say

what did the liberals say actually

forget about the anarchist what does the

liberals say

the liberal conceives of the state

as an externality upon the already

constituted individual

the liberal conceives of the state

the sum total of already constituted

individual wills

rousseau

what did he say

man is born free

but everywhere he finds himself

in chains

oz says no

as the german

says no to rousseau

the frenchman

as the german says

the individual is born

nothing

it is the state

that gives them freedom

the individual is neither born good or

evil

neither free

neither in chains

the individual is born

nothing

why does the liberal begin with the

presupposition

that the individual

moreover the self-constituted individual

is the substance of politics

i have given you the example of ancient

greece

but it would be superfluous

for even the most minimally educated

person for me to point out

the understanding

within the rest of mankind and mankind's

history

of the relationship

between the individual and the state

the individual is given expression

by the external reality

that molds them

the truth of the individual is revealed

only in the contradictions

that manifest themselves at the level of

our sovereign

collectivity

we are not first self-constituted

individuals

our individuality is itself constituted

in a way external from us

what happened

what changed to give rise

to the liberal view

and the liberal conception

the key word of course

here being

the self-constituted

individual

what does this phrase

self-constituted individual remind you

of

it should remind you as a matter of fact

as nothing short

nothing short

of the bourgeoisie

of early modernity

the boudoir

experiences

their reality

as self-standing and self-constituted

individuals the bourgeoisie walks around

with their nose in the sky

reducing everything before them to the

common and abstract measure

of price

is the bourgeois

with their nose high up in the sky

not merely smelling the shit

of the king whose ass is already above

them

the bourgeoisie conceives of itself as

self-constituted

conceives of the state the monarchy

and moreover all external realities

that confront them

as obstacles to its mercantile interests

however

the bourgeoisie takes a great deal for

granted

in terms of what actually defines

its individuality it conceives of itself

as self-constituted but it is anything

but

the bourgeoisie does not constitute

itself

the world of humanity constitutes

the bourgeoisie

the bourgeoisie then only survives

as a point of exception within this

world this world of feudal and

patriarchical

and uh

ancient

relations

the bourgeoisie is the individuality

constituted from the perspective

of their negation

in profit

in excess surplus

a surplus which by virtue of its

indeterminacy confronts the entire

manifold of human and substantive

relations

as nothing

as mere forms of nothingness

chat needs to remember that us won his

opponent's phd in a recent debate thank

you for the lecture dr oz

let me fast forward for you in time now

that i've given you this

bombastic introduction

i would like to call your attention the

following paradox

let us establish the most simple

relation

between a subject

and a political form of their

representation

the working class

the class struggle in it

the working class in it

oh

blimey mate there's a class struggle

going about

between the working class

on the capitalist class in it

in it

rough

that was blokes

lenin trotsky

stalin

they wasn't the working class

it wasn't the working class they wasn't

working in the factories

blimey mate what's up with that

what's up with that

because when i talk about the working

class i'm talking about the individuals

i'm talking about the individuals

that's what i'm talking about mate the

individuals

lenin was in a working class

in that horse boy

blow him he's not working class

he's a streamer

how can he talk about the blimey working

class bull looks to your theory bollocks

to your literature bollocks to your

philosophy in it my working class don't

care about any of this how could the

working class possibly understand any of

that haze

dialectics and hegel are a bunch of

rubbish the working class doesn't

understand hegel so it's rubbish

rubbish

it's all rubbish bollocks to it all the

working class doesn't understand it

the manner by which

the bolshevik

establishes the relation

to the working class

is not an extension of the way in which

the bourgeois state

posits itself

to establish a relation

to the whole people

the bourgeois state

the parliamentary state

i should add

of the english

empire the british empire

establishes the relation to private

persons

as a representative

that is direct

parliament

represents the whole people

because the whole people are literally

being represented

in parliament

in their private interest

the bourgeois state

says

i am an empty vessel

it is through votes

that i will be given content

and expression

i am an empty vessel

the people vote

and choose

the content of the state

this is the bourgeois state

the bourgeois state which presupposes

this self-constituted citizen

the irrational and self-same individual

so what is the bourgeois conception of

the state

a bunch of individual atoms

self-constituted and self-same

individual citizens

which decide

who they want to represent them

on the ballot

within their individual capacity and so

get what you pay for

but who voted for lenin mate

who voted for him

how could the bolshevik party be a party

of the working class

when the party was not even open

to the workers at the time which it

wasn't

it wasn't the whole bolshevik menshevik

dispute

was because lenin insisted on not

opening the party to the masses

to become individual members

communist parties have always been rever

reserved for the best of the best and

the elite of society and the more

numerous they grew

when they were actually in power

the more numerous this elite section of

society

itself grew

how could that possibly be

how could that possibly be

how could it possibly be

that proletarian consciousness

can be first be held

by people who do not individually belong

to the proletarian class

because the communist party i'll answer

it for you

because the communist party participates

in a sphere that is more fundamental

than our individuality

the communist party participates in his

fear

of clash struggle more fundamental

than the individual members of the class

themselves

the interests of the proletariat

can only be represented singularly

one will

one representative

one communist party

the falsehood of political paganism

consists in the idea

that we all are different individual

snowflakes

with different ideologies no

whatever ideology we have

whatever view

of society we have

is a view

that can be reproduced

there's nothing special about us

it can be reproduced

as a matter of fact i'm going to explain

the class struggle

in rather simple terms to you

since you don't understand

plato

has a universal conception

of the whole of society

as an individual

surely it can be reproduced

surely it refers to something

more fundamental than plato as an

individual

and so if that is the case

what obstacles stand in the way of other

individuals

being able to perceive the same truth

as plato

and his republic

in other words

let's say haas

has a political ideology

what separates another individual from

adopting that political ideology

if it is universal

if it is in fact universal what

separates another individual from

adopting that ideology

it so happens

as it so happens

and this is going to come as a big

surprise

we're here for the theory and grateful

professor after stream check twitter dms

at people's badger

i will

as it so happens

there are somehow

political differences

within a given society

and so the bourgeois

liberal

looks at these multitudes of political

differences

and simply posits the following

explanation

they posit the following explanation

these differences are down to individual

disagreements

we are all separate

different individuals with different

individual interests so the political

differences within a given society

merely reflect individual differences

therein would reside a profound tragedy

if it were true

because if this is true

then each and every one of us can be

plato's can be philosophers who

think in our own head we perceive

that we are somehow arriving at

something

universal

something which

relates to us all in common

something which

is universally true for all of us

but while we think this subjectively in

our head

we are merely

giving expression to our own individual

point of view

ladies and gentlemen do you not see

the profound tragedy at hand

implied by liberalism

the tragedy is as follows we conceive of

ourselves

sorry

we somehow in our heart let's say

intuitively believe

we can refer to the common universal

reality of our communities of our

polities of our countries and

now of the world globally

we can somehow access

a universal truth of all humanity

but there is no connection between this

and the real existing

universal humanity

it's not real

plato

was dreaming he was just dreaming

it wasn't real

it was just

plato the individual

this is the bourgeois conception of

politics

and so

and so

since

there can be no connection

tragically

between the individual

and

the universal humanity

the bourgeois state resigns itself

to a position of empiricism

we cannot know the political truth

of society

we cannot know

the political truth

of humanity

so

we must resign ourselves

to establishing a state

an open society if you will

which does its best to try and

approximate what all of these differing

individual wills want

and arrive at a consensus of some kind

between the differing

interests and wills of the individual

thank you jackson for the raid

appreciate it man

appreciate it so much

appreciate that ray man

i'm in the middle of uh

anti-soros lecture

that was karl popper's view of the open

society the open society as i've said

before

simply refers to this following idea

we cannot know the truth of universal

humanity

by means of politics why because there

are differences

within the interests

of humanity so the bourgeois liberal

conceives those differences

at the

level

of the individual

it's just differing individual interests

now unsurprisingly

the anarchist is the same

the anarchist in their view

the state is an oppressive instrument

upon the individual's ability to freely

exercise their will

and so individuals need to come together

and form some kind of consensus

together this commingling of individual

wills

from scratch

annihilate the state form a community

from scratch

that allows for a consensus

that is as immediate

and tangible to us

as descartes

i think therefore i am

we will therefore we are for the

anarchist

our consensus is just so and there

is the furthest extent

of our statehood

this is the view

of the anarchist

but now you understand

that it is

individualism

which is the common

denominator you understand it is the

individual which is the common

denominator

definite individuals

and definite institutions of the state

which recognize and which refer only to

the people as a whole as one

universal commingling

of differing

and even contradictory private

wills this is the people of the

bourgeois state

it is the people of individual will

that are in contradiction with each

other

it is the hobbesian state

of the war of all against all

why is

why is it

that the communist view

and i'll qualify that even better the

proletarian view why is it necessarily

different

we need only begin

from how the proletarian class is

defined

remarks

to understand the essence

of communist dictatorship

the proletariat

is a being defined

by a promethean shame

primordial shame

the proletariat is not the

self-constituted individual

that the bourgeoisie is

because the proletariat cannot take

its individuality for granted

the truth of the proletariat's

individuality

is set before it

in the cog turning

steel mills

in the looms

in the production lines and assembly

lines

in this mechanical

and repetitive movement

of their work

the proletariat bears witness

to its own innards its own intestines

being dragged out and ripped out before

it

in the machinery of modern industry

thank you emirio appreciate it

the proletariat is defined by one

who owns nothing except

their own labor

to own only your own labor means to own

the very source

of property the subjective essence of

property

as marx called it

that's all they own

they don't own any self-constituted

and already definite already tangible

form of property

they only own

their labor which is the source of

property

now what implications could this

possibly have

what implications could this possibly

have

it has the following implications

waiting for this

it's donor not gonna go through

it's just not gonna go through i guess

based

do you love or hate industry

love

the implications that this has

is that for the proletariat

not only

is the form the sovereign form of the

commodity not given to it

because the proletariat is selling the

very source of commodities

through its labor

for the proletariat not even its own

individuality is given to it

the proletariat somehow bears witness to

the genesis

of individual identity through labor

itself

the things and goods that define the

individual

define what an individual is

for the proletariat

cannot be taken for granted

all you have to do is look at the way

the proletariat

reproduces itself

this drivel makes no sense

have you considered you are mentally

retarded and deeply deficient in your

brain

have you considered you're mentally

retarded have you considered you're

mentally retarded it makes perfect sense

the proletariat is defined

by a primordial shame the shame being

the fact

that it has to

live off of

the very source of dignity

that the bourgeoisie can take for

granted

the proletariat has to live on the sale

of the very thing

that makes us individuals in the first

place you know what that means it means

we can't even take our individual

identity for granted or they can't even

take their individual identity for

granted

they have to actively sell

the very source of individual identity

in order to survive

that's different from the bourgeoisie

who proceeds as an already constituted

individuals

as al already constituted individual

that is before capital

before profit making

the different word for it

before the

making of money

as someone

who is defined by the selling of goods

that means that before the institution

of the state

the bourgeoisie is a free and abstract

sovereign

subject

it's a sovereign subject

that sells goods the products of human

labor

it has only the products of human labor

which means it does not have to deal

with the social process by which

their goods come into existence

in an anti-social way they acquire the

goods

and these goods belong to them

individually

you say this is drivel that makes no

sense

it makes perfect sense

it makes perfect sense

since the proletariat cannot take its

individuality for granted

since the proletariat deals directly

with the source of sovereign

individuality

through its very labor

it relates to its political identity

also in a different way

whereas the bourgeoisie relates to its

political identity as an already

constituted citizen

for which the state is as a matter of

fact

merely the empty vessel for whose will

to be realized

the proletariat also

just in as much as it finds its labor

lost in production

is a class which finds its consciousness

lost in the visicitudes

of philosophy

of ideology

and of consciousness

the interests of the proletariat

are not the sum total of individual

interests

it is an interest universally

articulated

by the hand

of the proletarian philosopher king

the proletarian plato

who correctly perceives and articulates

the consciousness of the proletariat

and proves the correctness of this

articulation

by means of their ability

for it

to be related to by the proletarian

class

they proved the proletarian-ness of

their consciousness

by the ability for that consciousness to

be

an object for the proletariat themselves

in other words through the political

praxis

of winning the masses

the communist leader proves

the proletarian-ness

of their position

it is not in the sum total of the

disparate confused and conflicting wills

of the class

that the singular interest of the

proletariat

acquires form

it is in the singular

singular articulation

of the interests of the proletarian

class that it acquires form

the singular form of the communist party

and there is fundamentally a

discontinuity between the form of the

party

and the individual reality of the masses

of proletarians

and the reason for that discontinuity

is not because of alienation

it's not because of elitism and

oppression and exclusion

it's because the proletariat only

acquires universal reality in the form

of the party

only there do its definite and

determinate interests

supersede the interests

of the individual

so

how does the marxist how does the

communists

respond to the dilemma

of plato

i just told you what this dilemma is

the dilemma is the following

plato the philosopher

presupposes

that the object of his philosophizing is

held in common by universal humanity

the tragedy

however is the fact that there are

different

political conflicting political

interests

within society

the bourgeoisie responds to this by

saying that these are merely the

differing interests

of different individuals

the marxist the communist

the prometheus

who returns to mankind

its sacred and ancient wisdom

that there is a connection between the

individual and universal humanity

that universal humanity in its actual

reality is not just the coincidental sum

total of individual wills there is a

connection the individual can make a

connection to universal humanity

how does it do this

it does this

by establishing a difference at the

heart

of universal humanity

as well as the universality of the

bourgeois state different than the

differences between

various competing individuals

it is none other

ladies and gentlemen

then the difference

of class struggle

there are different classes

of the universal state and the universal

polity

and it is precisely by being cognizant

of these different classes that we may

yet again within our individuality

reclaim

a connection

between the individual and universal

humanity

and restore and complete

the wisdom of plato

against the nihilism

and degeneracy of bourgeois and liberal

society

we rekindle the fire

the fire of heraclitus

out of which

the consistency of the platonic form

arises

this is what lenin did

this is what the october revolution

did

understanding class struggle

means

that we can somehow scientifically

account for the political differences

within society not as the expression of

the differences of individual wills but

of the differences

between classes

and it is has been consistently the

prejudice of anglo-saxon liberalism

of which anarchism

is a guilty culprit

that the assumption has time and time

again been made

that classes are referring to the sum

total of individual wills

the problem with this stupidity

is that it renders a notion of class

struggle pointless

if classes are merely the sum total of

individual wills and is merely a

universality defined by what is in

common

coincidentally between these individual

wills

class struggle could have no causal

reality classes would merely be the

accidental

harmony

of common interests between individuals

and in this way

we could not possibly go

from a bourgeois conception of the

polity and of the universal humanity and

statehood

to the proletarian understanding of a

world defined by class struggle we would

not be able to establish

that leap

if we possess the notion

that classes are composed

of individuals whose interests are

coincidentally in common

if that was the case

class would be an ephemeral

accidental

and politically meaningless contingent

reality

that would have no causal reality we

could not describe our world in terms of

class struggle

because class is merely the accidental

result of a more fundamental causal

reality being the reality of the

individual

class struggle

is meant to revive and redeem

the platonic view of universal humanity

in materialist terms

keep plugging brother

professor ass have you investigated

managerialism a la burnham based

marxists need this pls don't tell dollar

hitlibs

not burnham but i have an idea of what

managerialism is but just not through uh

burnham specifically and in particular

but i do have a conception of

managerialism in general

more general terms

the aristocracy possesses beauty and the

pros don't

i'll show you the beauty the aristocracy

possesses

this is their beauty

i'll show you their beauty here it is

the beauty ladies and gentlemen of the

aristocracy

of which the proletariat possesses no

possession ready

here it is

the beauty of the aristocracy

the beauty of their aristocracy

here is the beauty of the aristocracy

of course the aristocracy has no beauty

beauty is the unity of opposites the

aristocracy is defined by the incest of

self-same form

how could a form that does not

continuously

replenish itself in its true material

opposite

ever be remit with the quality of beauty

class struggle means

there is struggle within universal

humanity which is to say there are

different universal humanities

this also aligns coincidentally neatly

with theories of multi-polarity

that have been presented

by alexander dugan

but that is the essence of class

struggle

that there are different universal

humanities

it's not that there is one universal

humanity

and differing individual interests

there are different

universal humanities

and that is what accounts for political

difference

within a given society

plato was right

i want to establish this very clearly to

you this is the most crucial part

of my

lecture

so pay very close attention to what i

tell you here

this is the most important part

this is also why i've instructed you

to join the communist party

this is the most important part of the

lecture

so buckle in

and get ready

what are we doing

when we as individuals

commit ourselves to the discipline of a

party

as the bolsheviks had done

what is a party

what is an organization

how does something like an organization

become tangible

how does it manifest itself as somehow

real

because it establishes a pattern

some kind

within the differences that define

the multitude of our language

and of our activity

it is within the gaps within the

contradictions and interstices

that an organization becomes apparent

i'll give you an example of this

let's say someone works for an

organization

i work on the field for an organization

some have said some may allege for

example let's say i

let's say i um

i

i supply goods for an organization i

perform some kind of labor for an

organization

some kind

irend would say something like

who's your boss

who's your boss

whoever you're taking orders from

that's the truth of the organization

it's just some individual

that you're listening to

some other individual

but what i'm rand doesn't take into

account is the way in which

even the boss

submits himself before the law of the

organization

effectively

participating in it

just as the workers are

impersonally

this is clear

when you see leaders in japan

leaders of companies and in asian

countries

even the boss resigns themselves

to the discipline of the corporation

so there is some kind of reality

irreducible

to our individuality

how do we access

and discern that reality

we do so only in the definite patterns

defining our behavior

moreover

within the gaps of our language

the consistency of the deliveries i'm

making on this truck

running supplies for the organization

this way in which i subordinate my

interests

to these interests

the way within

the hierarchy of being as given

representation by language

that i subordinate beings to this

organization

that is the organization

the organization

is not

empirically tangible

it is discernible only by various

patterns and inconsistencies

across

the multitude

of relations between empirical

things that is the organization

and yet somehow the organization

in our minds intuitively

we see that as what's precedent

we see that is somehow primary and we

see the individual as secondary

when you for example

think of the

think of uh a company

you don't think of the company in terms

of the workers

when you're going to target you think oh

this is a worker working for target

now a dumb fuck anarchist or fake

marxist will say

that's because of boudoir consciousness

actually target is the workers no target

is not the workers

more

than the bolshevik party is lenin and is

the individuals

target is some pattern defining the way

a host of individuals

are defining their lives and behavior

so when you're at target

you're not wrong for not seeing the

employee as target

i have to piss i'll be right back

[Music]

i'll be right back

so

an organization

is more than just

individuals

if an organization is more than just

individuals then what is it

the thing is

we

we make assumptions about what the

individual is based on the cartesian

uh mistake

of thinking that an individual

is the same as

the way in which individuality is

tangibly immediate to us

that individuality is the same as the

means by which it is disclosed to us

that's the mistake

we are more than that

we are more than that

we account for our individuality in ways

that inevitably involve others

so all this philosophical confusion and

stuff i lay upon you

coming from remember

the central question

of the relationship between the party

the communist party

and the proletarian class

it's not a direct relationship

the anarchist believes for example

that the masses themselves will rise up

and and but we believe this is true the

masses will rise up but they take it

literally which means what does that

mean it means the anarchist goes in

public naked

they're naked and they're swinging their

dick around

and then they do this saying we are the

masses we are the masses but you're not

the masses because

only a specific particular type of

person is doing this behavior

not the proletarians

the connelly house what did the connelly

house people say the working class of

ireland is retaking these homes

but it's not it's a specific type of

person

who's retaking the homes it's not a

social phenomenon

if it's not a social phenomenon

then

these are intelligentsia these are

failed philosophers

pretending and disguising themselves

amongst the multitude

while failing to discern

differences within the multitude

now this is a point of agreement that

both a marxist leninist

and a liberal will have why because the

liberal is going to look at

the anarch as direct action and they're

going to say

you are not doing that on behalf of the

masses you're doing that on behalf of

your own individual interests

the marxists will also say you are not

doing this on behalf of the masses

you're doing this on behalf of your own

interests but the marxists will add

these are not simply your individual

atomic interests these are the interests

of your psychotic lump in class

your specific class

herein lies the significance

of class struggle

you see

[Music]

the only way in which it is possible to

establish some kind of relation to the

masses is by turning your back on the

masses

what do i mean by that

i mean by acknowledging the fact that we

are not the masses there's a

discontinuity between us and the masses

we are not the masses

we are somehow

an articulation

we are somehow a reflexivity

that is not imminently one and the same

as the masses

only by doing this and taking

responsibility for our actual role

is it possible then to establish a

relation to the masses because suddenly

we don't proceed by saying

we are the masses we say no we are

communist

intellectuals some kind

we seek to reach the masses

because we are not them

we are people who dedicate ourselves to

politics

we are people who dedicate ourselves

to

a cause an idea

and how we establish this cause as

bounded up with the interests

of the masses

first and foremost proceeds

in the form

of articulating the real movement

already in place and already in

existence

correctly

correctly perceiving the class struggle

already in existence

setting ourselves up as strategists

who seek to bring this movement

victory

we are not the masses experiencing

itself

that's not what i'm trying to say don't

obfuscate what i'm saying

i'm trying to say

masses

merely refer

to those multitudes that have not yet

been inscribed

with the definite form of our own

consciousness hence they are masses

masses

not individuals masses

we are individuals

someone can be part of the masses

and then join us to be an individual we

can be both part of the masses and

individuals but insofar as we are

communists

we are individuals not masses

but

we're more than individuals

we are

soldiers and fighters

of an organization and a party

where the bourgeois distinguishes

themselves from the masses just by being

a self-sane

individual

the communist distinguishes themselves

from the masses

by being a soldier and fighter

a part

of the definite party

of the working class

a partisan

that's what a communist is it's a

partisan

the masses and the partisan are not the

same thing

chaos wants to debate

about what

how do you ensure that the party has the

same interests as the interests of the

masses if we are not one and the same as

them

okay good question because this is

exactly what i want to educate about

my whole point is that the interests of

the masses don't exist except in the

form

of a party

a party is a party of plato

when someone decides to sit down and

just think about shit

they are participating in some kind of

collective reality

it is not as though the masses already

have given

interests the interests of the masses

are always already being articulated by

the various differences of the ways in

which different platos

are conceiving of our collective reality

insofar as our social reality becomes an

object of contemplation it is already

charged with the quality of having a

class character

you know there's a reason why marx

discovers proletarian consciousness

marx begins with the highest

development

of philosophy

hegel

he arrives at the proletariat

only when

he discovers

something

imminent within the development of pure

thought

pure philosophy some imminent

contradiction

that forces marx

forces him

to open himself

to the meaningfulness of the reality

outside of philosophy

because of an internal contradiction

within it

now this reality outside of philosophy

this remainder this excess

is not some alternative philosophy

it is neither some empirically tangible

thing

some concept in reality to replace the

concepts of thought no

it is the real it is the meaning in the

real itself

that meaningfulness in the real itself

means

we as philosophers somehow

we platonic philosophers let's say

somehow

resign ourselves to the openness of the

fact that the truth we discover up here

in heaven is the same truth

being disclosed to us

from earth

we make finally the connection between

the universal truth of philosophy and

the reality of humanity

that was how marx discovers the

proletariat the proletariat

this mass these masses are not simply

masses in the sense of some

mere private interests

remember what marx called the

proletariat the ingenious soil of the

people

if the proletariat is the ingenious soil

of the people

it basically amounts to the fact

that it epitomizes the universal truth

of humanity

let's put it this way

a brave and ballsy philosopher

does what marx did

if you don't do what marx does at the

end of your philosophy even your

philosophy will be false

it will not have the quality of truth

that is why philosophy as a whole today

it's a bullshit

false enterprise

you must see that the masses are the

makers of history and join the domain of

the masses you must come off your

sensitive fascist pedestal and face the

anarchy

you're just confused you're just

confused

you're just fundamentally confused

when one speaks of the masses they're

not literally referring to the sum total

of these different individuals

that's not what it's meant by the masses

you end up with stupidity when you think

of this in this way

no the proletariat is not directly the

individual

again that's the bourgeois conception of

political metaphysics

class struggle means

there's no direct relation between the

political consciousness of the

proletariat

and the proletariat in their actual

existence as individuals

there's no direct relation at all

who's in shoku

if you're in queue go in show requests

and tell me what the fuck you want

don't just sit there and think i'm gonna

drag you in i don't know what the fuck

you want

hegel disagrees with what

with what

have you studied formal logic

a little bit

based

midway point about chins i'm afraid and

seems to contradict your point about

bolsh vs menge

what

he salutes the whole time he

pisses true

based

please give your opinion of

transhumanism

uh it won't it's a fantasy

it's a fantasy

i'm trying to basically establish to you

guys the difference

between communist dictatorship

ultimately beginning with the example of

the bolshevik party

and anarchism and fascism

this is really the point here

the difference being it seems like

they're the same

because both suspend

the liberal form of sovereignty in which

we simply defer and relegate our power

to some precedent form

and it seems like the bolshevik

decisions are made

in accordance with the anarchic chaotic

individuality right

win and will

but in the case of communist

dictatorship

it merely appears this way from the

liberal perspective that's why liberals

can't tell the difference between

communist and fascist dictatorship

it appears this way but in reality the

dictatorial will being exercised under

communism obeys

the common

rationality

of some class interest

know that class interest does not

exercise itself in the form of bourgeois

liberal sovereignty where each

individual member of the class

drafts the legislative bill

but the individual will is beholden to a

discipline of some kind beyond itself

no communist leader acts as a whimsical

dictator

it appears that the dictatorship is

anarchic and anarchist

it's not

it is beholden first to the discipline

of the collective form of the party

and then this very party

any decisions that it makes

is beholden to the discipline of a very

acute

philosopher-king perception

of the course of development of society

and the class struggle

and the class antagonism

this is the fundamental difference

anarchists say that the bolsheviks

establish themselves as dictators

against the rest of society what's the

problem with that the problem with that

is that it assumes that by itself

statehood is an interest it's not

statehood

and political form is a vessel by which

universal humanity finds determinate

interest

the boudoir liberal view says no because

the state is merely

the domination of some individuals over

others and there's only individuals

but this is not

the communist view

and moreover it's wrong

i always reproach these anarchists who

talk about the bolshevik coup and the

bolshevik dictatorship and they're

seizing all the power for themselves i

always reproach them with the following

question why why are they doing that

just power for power's sake the ability

to order people around

the ability to have the sort of

democracy hanging over your head

meaning the ability to like put your

life in danger and always have all this

pressure and burden of doing this work

of the state

or is it the is it the mere egoistic

ability to live a luxurious life

something you could easily doing by

making

by living your life as a bank robber

instead

you really mean to tell me that these

bolsheviks and these communists

merely seized power because they wanted

to sit on rocking chairs and sip

lemonade or something

no

that wouldn't account for the immense

level of self-sacrifice and heroism

people going and giving up their literal

life for this

it wouldn't account for the fact that

stalin people like stalin didn't live a

luxurious life at all stalin

slept on a cot

he lived very modestly mao did as well

and even if they didn't

there's a million other ways they could

have just gotten rich and ran with the

money instead of

working themselves

to death sometimes

but working so hard

it doesn't even properly

describe the nature of corruption

corruption doesn't happen when you

selflessly use state power to serve

private ends

corruption happens

when for you you lack the will

to actually

be a powerful statesman for whatever

reason because there's a limit of your

power of some kind

your ability to your ability your limit

to your ability to exercise power so you

simply say oh there's an opening here

let me just take this opening on the

side while i perform my regular duties

as a statesman

i'll exercise this extra shit on the

side

it's not simply that they're in power

just to get rich or whatever no they're

in power to do their duty it's just that

their duty

is not enough to exhaust

the need of humanity

corruption is stems and is the

result of a lack of resolve and

political will above all remember that

remember what i just fucking told you

guys corruption

stems from a lack of resolve and a lack

of political will for example our

congress members our senate and our

house right

how why are they corrupt

they don't have the will

to do anything

so on the side what do they start doing

they start taking money and taking

bribes

because they don't have the resolve

to actually represent the people

and make the necessary changes that

serve the interests of the people so

they do the regular duties and their

regular functions and then it just so

happens to be the fact that on the side

there's all these other opportunities

that get come with that right

corruption is not the result of private

individuals

usurping the power of the state

for their own individual ends

corruption is the result of the

corruption

of the state itself

the corruption of the universal

incarnation

of a given polity itself it's internal

corruption gives rise to the corruption

of the individual

let me put it this way every form of

corruption also bears witness to a

corruption of philosophy

it's not just that what they're doing is

corrupt they have a corrupt philosophy

they have a corrupt worldview they have

a corrupt

understanding of statehood

but there's a specific discontinuity

that i wanted to make the highlight of

today's lecture

make the specific highlight of today's

lecture

and it's the discontinuity that is

between

how the

bolshevik state how the soviet state i

should rather say

legitimated itself

because on the one hand let me just

very clearly point out this fact right

okay

hello

hello

hello

i'm going to give you 30 seconds

30

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

9

8

seven

six

five

four

three

two

one

we're not wasting time

i'm not wasting any fucking time you get

in my fucking vc

then fix your fucking mic and make sure

it works

instead of wasting all of our fucking

time you've been sitting there for an

hour but you didn't think to make sure

your shit worked before fucking wasting

my time

most disrespectful shit you can do

fucking idiots

[Music]

anyway the specific discontinuity is

between the october revolution

sorry between the provisional government

and the october evolution

that's the discontinuity now first i

want to discount this idea that just

because we ideologically discover

some truth that the bourgeois state is

condemned and it's illegitimate and it

merely serves the interest of the

capitals class and yada yada that this

this alone

is enough

to anarchistically

have a coup or just destroy whatever

this is nonsense right so this is what

mls on twitter believe

who are adopting the anarchistic

worldview which is basically that

the discoveries of my individual

consciousness

are enough

to basically

establish a total rupturing

discontinuity between the existing form

of the state and the one that i imagine

is more legitimate okay so let's be

clear the bolsheviks did not cease power

because they had a vision of society

that they wanted to conform society to

and and implement they don't communists

don't advocate

for a violent revolution just to seize

power in order to you know

implement their specific will

i will explain to you

what happened

and i tried to do this um a few days ago

but i was like so tired i was like took

two really long i'm gonna really like

shorten it and um

simplify it for you okay

so

they had what you call the february

revolution of 1917.

there is widespread civil unrest

widespread discontent and the basic

sentiment on the street

was that

the russian people were basically

dissatisfied with the war they were

dissatisfied with breadlines the

presidents were hungry for land there

was all sorts of social factors that

culminated in what actually happened and

the main

demand i would say of the revolution

was basically one give us some kind of

constitutional state

instead of a czarist autocracy

that was the main demand behind it right

the second one was pull out of the war

immediately right give us a

constitutional state and pull out of the

fucking war okay

so

they basically appointed

existing members of the douma that had

existed at the time

and

for the whole year of 1917 there was no

convocation of any constituent

assembly there is no election that

happened to legitimate the new

government so the question of the

legitimacy of the state

is basically being

reared it's rearing its head now how do

you legitimize the state now from the

standard liberal conception of politics

this is how you're gonna do it right

you're gonna hold a new election and

you're gonna allow the will of the

people to exercise its will right and

then that new government will have been

legitimated by an election and we're

happy now right that's a democratic

government that's the liberal conception

of

of the state right

so in the meantime i'm just summing up

what i already explained to you before

but in the meantime while everybody was

waiting for the convocate convocation of

this new

constituent assembly

um

there arose across the russian country

and in the cities soviets

soviets were these councils right

he's like city councils right let's just

think of it that way i guess

which basically

attended to the day-to-day

lives of people in the meantime he

didn't have a functioning government

really

so they're going to establish these

soviets to bypass the political

bureaucracy that already existed to

basically defend and safeguard the

revolution

while everybody was waiting for a

constituent uh

a constituent assembly that's going to

create some kind of parliamentary

democratic republic of some kind right

and that's what the soviets were

so those had already arisen

now lenin

in his april thesis

basically comes to the conclusion that

the soviets already represent the

skeleton of a new form of democratic

government

now so from the very outset right lenin

is not here proposing

his own

ideal government

one already exists according to lenin

it's the soviets the soviets are the key

right so

already we don't have anything in common

with anarchists or fascist volunteerism

because the seeds of the thing are

already there in reality right

that's important to keep in mind

now the october evolution happens under

the slogan all power to the soviets to

establish a soviet government okay

but the question of the role of the

bolshevik party is still not very clear

we want to establish a soviet

constitution and a soviet government to

give all power to the soviets and this

is what the anarchists and also have to

say but you lied because it was actually

the bolsheviks who were in charge

it was the dictatorship of the

bolsheviks more like all power to the

bosovics

right that's pretty much what they say

so

if it was just the soviet government

there wouldn't be a dictatorship right

it's the bolshevik party the party that

represents

the dictatorship part of the whole thing

it's the party that represents the

dictatorship right

the part of the dictatorship

so how do we reconcile ourselves with

that

right

how do we reconcile ourselves with that

fact with the bolsheviks in fact lying

when they said all power of the soviets

they really meant all power to the

bolshevik party well

what you first have to establish and

understand is that the bolshevik party

represented in its most

organized form

the incarnation of the universal

interests of the russian proletariat

just like it had before

it seized power

and this is not only because the

overwhelming majority of the urban

proletariat was in favor of the

vulsevics that alone wouldn't even be

enough

it's also because of the fact

that

what the bolsheviks

stood for in terms not only of their

program but even in terms of the form of

their organization in their political

form corresponded

to the reality of the proletarian class

in reality

it was the party of the proletariat

even if not a single proletarian

supported them it was

now that sounds like an absurd thing to

say

right it sounds like an absurd thing to

say

but this would neglect the fact

that within the various sphere of

conflicting

views and understandings

of the revolutionary situation at the

time which preceded the bolsheviks right

between the mensheviks and the socials

revolutionaries and the various other

forces it was the bolsheviks alone who

represented something like a proletarian

interest

this is not

the existing

short-term interests

of the factory proletariat that had

existed

within the russian empire at the time

this is the interest of that class which

has nothing to sell but its own labor

which means

there is something inherently

anticipatory

about proletarian consciousness

rather than deriving

this is idealism you are mentally

fucking retarded

you are mentally fucking retarded

stupid fuck stupid anglo metaphysics

stupid bitch

looks at something that fucking goes

beyond the bounds of their fucking

narrow understanding

of marxism and their empiricism their

empiricist shit and they call it fucking

idealism you stupid bitch

this is idealism

this is idealism

how is it fucking idealism you dumb fuck

how is it idealism to recognize that

material reality does not only

lie

in the sum total of empirically tangible

individuals in the commingling of their

interests which is

coincidental and arbitrary from a

fucking empiricist perspective you

stupid fuck

this is idealism

the proletarian class

refers

to a specific relationship to production

the reality of that relationship does

not only exist in the form

of those individuals whose lives

have come to be defined and

constituted by that relation the

relation precedes

the individual

because in marxism the relation has a

primary and causal status in regards to

the individual the relation is what's

primary

if you don't understand that you are not

a fucking marxist you're an empiricist

retard

the question of how this relation

can prove itself is a different question

but what we are arguing about right now

is

the chicken in the egg what comes first

what comes first

if we ask the question of what comes

first

it becomes obvious to us that from a

marxist perspective

the idea that the interests of the class

represent some

phenomenally distinct

strata

is a wrong view

there's a discontinuity between those

two things because the phenomenal

distinction arises only as a result

of the relation

the relation is what's primary

because the relation is a universal

relation

so we are talking about the very essence

of the genesis of social forms

ask a simple question

where is the proletariat in the united

states right now

where's the proletariat what most dumb

fucks do is they set up an arbitrary

definition of proletarian and then

whoever fits that definition is a

proletariat right the opposite of the

marxist view no it's clear that the

proletariat specific to marx

is seemingly missing in a country like

the united states

that proletariat isn't here and no it's

not just it's taking new form it's like

there's no distinct proletariat in the

united states

proletarian-ness as a class interest

can only be discerned at the level of a

specific political relation

the proletarian class

is real

it just doesn't seem like it exists

anywhere

the proletariat is the cause of these

various different social formations

but

it doesn't seem like it

is just anywhere that exists somewhere

like oh that is the proletariat

every time you get a group of people in

the united states say that is the

proletariat even according to your own

definition of proletariat there's going

to be so many contradictions

especially today

everyone is somehow

not

even factory workers somehow it's not

simply as it was in marxist time

they exist you are not a challenge then

just zero understand i know he does

he does

acknowledge the working class i agree

but the proletariat

that class

as a universal class interest

it's very hard to find

a group of people and say that is the

proletary

which means

the relation has to be somehow precedent

the phenomenal form in reality

the relation somehow possesses

precedence over the phenomenal form

proletarianness is dissolved in all

these different

phenomenal and cultural

relations which makes it hard to

pinpoint a proletariat

so we can only recognize a proletariat

in the relation

and the implications of the recognition

of the proletariat of the relation

thereof

for our common social reality

what is the meaning of bolshevik

dictatorship

let's continue the story

the bolsheviks promised

to not get in the way of the convocation

of the constituent assembly election

however they did say

that

the binding effects of the constituents

assemblies election will be dependent on

the mood of the country lenin's word the

mood of the country already lenin does

not defer

to the prior forms

as the essence

as a liberal would he doesn't say this

is the sacred form by which a people

exercises their will he refers to

something called

mood not the sacred

law of democracy but the mood

the mood of the country as it happens

was that no one gave a fuck about the

constituents assembly elections because

they did not adequately reflect

the realities

of the people

i pointed out before how for example the

socialist revolutionary party which

everyone knew was going to win

split in november in the lead up to

these elections on the 27th

between left and right and only it but

it was elected as one party because it

registered

itself on the ballot in october for the

split

so chernov was placed the head of the

constituent assembly the speaker of the

constituent assembly in the meantime the

bolsheviks were forming a government

with the left srs respecting the fact

that the left srs were already immensely

popular among the people

however

so disbanding the constituent assembly

as many claim was the bolshevik coup is

simply not true the bolsheviks got into

power by saying all power to the soviets

as a matter of fact they did form a

constitution in january and they did

create a soviet government but the

question stands is why didn't the

bolshevik measures and decisions why

were these not the result

of

soviet democracy but rather the result

of the party dictatorship and the inner

decisions taken by the party

give me a moment

give me a moment

all right

party dictatorship

and the form of sovereignty that party

dictatorship

represents

is neither

a whimsical dictatorship of individuals

over the

rest of the country nor does it simply

represent

some kind of direct democracy grassroots

whatever

party dictatorship articulates the

universal rationale

of the whole of the society within a

definite form

that is what a party is about a party

realizes the universality of the whole

of society within a definite form this

form being

uh

this form being yes exclusive to members

of the party but by being a member of

the party you have already committed

yourself

to being a fighter for example of the

proletarian class and since the

proletariat only epitomizes a universal

a specific universality of the whole

people

in a specific way

then

effectively and this is what it has come

to mean in countries like china today to

be a member of the communist party means

to be one who has resigned themselves

and committed themselves to serving the

whole people

it's not simply that the people don't

know what they want the question is

about what form

do the interests of the whole people

take

do the interest of the people magically

arise

in the confused and disparate

expressions of will by several

individuals no because as we see within

bourgeois democracies like the united

states and and within the west

every single one of these individual

votes and individual choices that we

make are somehow over determined by

universal social forms we don't act on

behalf of some individual interests

we participate in some kind of universal

social conflict which marxism describes

as the class struggle now make this

really simple for you in a country like

the united states when you vote

republican

are you voting for your individuality

when you vote democrat are you voting

for your own individual individuality no

you're taking a side in a clearly social

universal struggle

if liberalism was correct

then there would be as many parties as

there are individual wills

there aren't

there's clearly a class struggle at hand

right

it's our inability to cognize and

recognize class struggle

as a function of state power

that's why we're on the cusp of a civil

war right now this is why china won't

have a civil war and we might because we

are still pretending

like we are all just

individuals

with conflicting wills and that

republicans are just people whose

individual interests

magically coincide and democrats are all

people whose individual no it's not true

there's clearly a conflict at the heart

of our country right it's like there's

two different americas right

it's our inability to recognize that

that it's the reason for the political

turmoil right china recognizes that it's

ingrained in the form of their state

they recognize

not only is politics not

just

a bunch of individuals interests

there are also there's also a social

antagonism

at the heart of the universal political

interest of the country that is why

there has to be a dictatorship

there needs to be a dictatorship to give

determinate and singular expression to

the interests of the whole society

if you're gonna have

if there is a single interest of society

if we are one society and one people

with one interest

the reason you need a dictatorship

is because that interest is undercut by

an internal antagonism

if it were simply the case

that there were no antagonism there

would be no need for a dictatorship

our common interest would just magically

arise somehow

um

without any discontinuity between our

activity in life

and

the form of its representation but alas

there is an antagonism

there is an antagonism there

and dictatorship does not mean arbitrary

exercise of individual power over others

where no one has rights no as a matter

of fact

within the chinese and soviet state you

do have all of the formal rights that

you have in a bourgeois society you have

all the formal civil liberties and all

the formal rights you have

but that is not where sovereignty is

that is not where the power is

it's also not where the power is in

bourgeois society either by the way

because we're ruled by a deep state and

we're ruled by the cia you know they

don't fucking have to they're above the

law

so it's not accountable to us but the

difference between the cia and the

american deep state and the chinese

communist party is that

it's not like we can join the cia and

like participate in some common

discourse about the future of our

society we can't

but in china you can

you can participate in what the party

does right the party has debates they

have discussions about what i mean it's

all open to the public right the public

knows about it you can participate and

it's not secret right

you can deal with that

so that's the difference

give me a moment

political dictatorship

was not something that came at the

expense of soviet power

the dictatorship of the party is what

activated the possibility of soviet

power

soviet power could not defend itself

on its own foundation

soviet power was constantly under threat

and under siege

by antagonistic class elements

in a way that wasn't possible within the

internal logic of the bolshevik party

now to be clear there were

anti-antagonistic elements and foreign

powers

that infiltrated the bolshevik party but

at the very least those people are

subjected to a level of discipline and

accountability to a common iron

dictatorial will

that would mean even if you're

infiltrating the bolshevik party from

within you still have to submit to its

laws in a way that makes it very hard to

just usurp and overthrow them

stalin

was not

some charismatic bombastic guy who took

power stalin literally represented the

impersonality

of the party stalin was a bookkeeper he

was a note taker stalin was like just

some middle man in the party right he

wasn't some bombastic personality he was

banal

that's why stalin was the symbol of

power

the very

internal logic

of the party itself

safeguarded soviet power

in a way that soviet power alone could

not do

so the question i want to leave you guys

with before we move on and i'm going to

cap

i

think i did want to talk about the cult

of personality

i did want to talk about the call to

personality no i'm going to talk about a

few more things right

the question i want to leave you with

before i get to the one last thing is

this

why does a true democracy need the

dictatorial party form

the party bureaucracy

america needs a party form

because

and it has one it's in the form of what

moldback calls the cathedral it's this

bureaucracy of professional managerials

and all these type of people

who are not

enshrined in our constitution anywhere

but it seems to have all this power over

our lives and over the direction and

course of our country except this is a

fascist party

not a proletarian one that represents

our interests

so instead of looking out for our

interests like the chinese communist

party does this one conspires against us

and works to destroy us and our families

finally

i want to mention this part as well

that is not to say

party dictatorship

is in and of itself a good thing

stalin

i don't know if you know this

stalin

spent his whole political career

his whole leadership

trying to strengthen the soviet state

and the power of soviet government

at the expense of the party

stalin wanted the party

out of government

he still wanted a one-party state as

grover first said

but stalin wanted

the rulers of the society

to be people chosen by the soviet

democracy

not these party functionaries who are

appointed internally by the party he

wanted the rulership

to be yes reserved for party members but

that means they have to compete in

elections to get elected

so stalin was trying to democratize the

soviet state

[Music]

which is why

he was denounced by khrushchev

party dictatorship was necessary at the

infancy of the soviet state to protect

it

but the difference with fascism

is that this party dictatorship

existed

to defer power to the people continually

which is what stalin continually

continually was doing bit by bit

to create a mature soviet state of the

whole people

which was safeguarded from

antagonistic elements and foreign

elements

at the expense

of the party bosses

and the party functionaries

these gatekeeping parasites

who eventually conspired to usurp

the power

of the proletarian dictatorship

the origin

of the state is platonic by nature

it can only arise according to a

singular and universal will

but this will must then prove itself

by filling the content of its character

with the character of the whole people

that was the sincere aim

of stalin and mao

they were dictators

not against the people

but against the functionaries of party

dictatorship

that resided below them

hmm

i'm just sorry i just got lost in uh

remembering

some stuff

i think i'm gonna leave you with that

today

well before we're gonna do gtrp but for

the lecture

i'm just not quite satisfied

i feel like i missed a lot

i feel like i missed a little bit

um

because it's the specific

here's what i feel like i missed

explaining which was the delay

why did it not begin

as soviet democracy why begin as party

dictatorship why begin

but i think this is also because the

beginning in question is also the

beginning of modernity more generally

it's true that just on the face of it

bolshevik dictatorship seems

indistinguishable from an anarchistic

bourgeois modern dictatorship that

completely

um wipes out all precedent forms of

statehood

and reality of the people and just

appears whimsical but i think the

alternate modernity of soviet communism

represents how

it appeared this way indeterminate

negation

only to clear the way and give rise for

a new expression

of what is truly

authentic within the russian people

a new president of statehood a new

civilization

is not important

but why must it begin life from this

begin from this because of the disaster

of

modernity

let's put it this way

the communist dictatorship

the bolshevik dictatorship

was a dictatorship

that from the beginning

and by its own inner nature

resigned itself

to its own

dissolution resigned itself to its own

rather i should say imperiment

in the broad strata of the people and

civil society

first the bloody dictatorship

and then

it resigns itself

to the people

to give it content

it's an energy head of modernity

i hope for some of you this lecture

has clarified some things

i'm not quite satisfied with it

however

i haven't even finished my book on this

so maybe that's why

but i i do think there's things i left

out

i do feel i've left some things up i

feel like i've left out

some crucial crucial things

i think the main takeaway of these

dictatorships whether chinese or

soviet

these are people who stood up

and decided

ethically speaking

to confront the universal dilemma of

modernity

headfirst on their own terms

because the alternative is to be a slave

of modern europe

in a microcosm they repeated the

disaster of european modernity

rather than be on their knees as slaves

to the occult

masters

in modern europe

of this modernity

they repeat modernity on their own in

their own way

according to their own logos

you