Ask Me Anything w/ the Politics Discord!

let's get right

into the news uh

i didn't even shower i didn't get ready

and i i went straight from 10 he sweated

my ass off right into this shit i am

prepared to do nothing

ready to go into this bullshit

straight without any hesitation without

any

meditation without any

amelioration

we are live we're gonna be doing this

so so uh i don't want i don't really

want my chat

i want to focus on people who are not

fans and who are not regular watchers if

you're a regular watcher and you want to

ask questions just do the patreon you

know i do it every week

y'all questions i don't want people like

oh so i'm a big fan yeah you guys do

that every week okay so we want to get

people who are outside of the community

to do this ama with because i do amas

with my chat all the time okay

i do amaze with my chat all time so

we're gonna be doing this in the

politics discord and um

ain't no need for our own

gorillas to be doing the ama really you

know i mean you can if you want but it's

like it's kind of superfluous

and pointless okay

it's a little bit superfluous a little

bit pointless all right i did not shower

i did not get dressed get ready i even

know how i'm looking here i'm looking

okay i'm looking okay just got done

sunbathing

it's sweaty

my hair is not looking

too great that's okay that's okay

and we are super early okay we are super

early today

and you know what that's telling me

that's telling me we

need to

like the fucking stream right now

because there's 80 people in here but

there's only 50 likes and that's telling

you we have a lazy ass fucking chat that

don't know how to click a goddamn button

so

that is a problem okay that's a big

problem

and i was actually thinking of not

streaming today and skipping today

because i get one free week to skip i

was thinking of skipping today

because you know i'll just do the

politics square thing but you know i was

thinking you know i may as well stream

it i may as well stream it

you know

there's a jimmy dora i don't give a fuck

dude what that is

i don't share that many viewers with

jimmy dore okay

you guys have to understand my my age

demographic

is like 90

20s okay

so i do not jimmy dore's age demographic

is much older than me

so that's just a fact

here's sedona for streaming super that

is just a a matter of fact that is just

factually correct

i should stream this early every day

shouldn't i want to be nice if i stream

like this every day

i do this every single day okay

so i there they should be um

they should be uh

contact me whenever one second i'm gonna

blow my nose because i got some shit

based

euro brass where you at

i'm gonna share this shit with tweeter

with twitter

i should have dressed up for this man

but this is still early in my day

if i'm being real

so

let me let me uh

go on twitter

and get this shit going on twitter

live now doing ama for politics discord

all right

all right

where should i go

today's stream i'm gonna make ad revenue

because

uh

because uh

there's no music

europeans are up right now

that's funny

that's really funny

that's really funny

um oh there you are house can you hear

me

you should be able to speak

you are speaking i can't hear you

[Music]

oh i gotta get my shit

there you gotta get my audio

[Music]

okay so while he's getting set up

all right we're good yeah i got

everything set up okay cool

um

thank you very very much for coming

along um actually there's some um

uh feedback from your mic

when i talk which is terrible because i

hate my voice

but

is it still there or

uh testing testing nah it's good we're

good

okay

well uh haas thank you very very very

much for for visiting us i feel like

we've had way too many right wing uh

retards on lately

um so we were trying to get somebody on

those reasonable uh intelligent those

providing a perspective they don't

really hear much of the mainstream these

days

so i'm i was really excited that you

said yes

um you want to tell everybody a little

bit about yourself

um haas i'm a uh

political streamer i was formerly on

twitch i got banned on twitch because my

coverage of the russia ukraine conflict

i stream marxism leninism in the age of

multi-polarity providing a perspective

about you know communism and marxism

leninism that is not coming from a

traditionally american leftist

perspective you know my basic view is

that

communists in america have gotten it all

wrong they've translated

uh the communists in russia and china in

the wrong way and they're actually just

liberals right so basically you know

that's what i do i pretty much do

debates do some news coverage and i also

uh

share my unique insights about theory

awesome um so i want to start off with

like a question for myself uh

while people are getting set up oh and

for the rest of you for if you haven't

visited our for our discord server for

an ama before it's very simple there's

an ama questions channel um just above

this uh voice channel stick your

question in there if you want to ask it

yourself if you want a debate has about

anything sick vc at the end of your

question and i'll unleash you can talk

to them directly

um

so first questions for me

um

so you

i remember the first time i stumbled

onto your videos i feel like it was like

a couple years ago now maybe like a year

and a half ago and you were debating

vosh and destiny and it seemed like uh

they weren't really taking you seriously

i watched both those debates i think it

was like the first time you spoke to

either of them

and it seemed like they weren't taking

me seriously at all

um

and it seemed like they're kind of

dismissing you as oh this guy's a tanky

so you know i don't really need to

respond

i can just make a joke of it

and and just totally avoid all the

points he's making

and i think that kind of like led me to

believe that you are

i think gave me the impression that

you're really intelligent person all

right then i found out further you're

like in law school and that you've

actually done a lot of reading and

you're actually like really

knowledgeable about this topic

um and i've always wondered like what

got you on this track like how did you

get into because in our like modern you

know western society this is a pretty

uncommon like line of thinking how did

you get there

well at first i didn't start off as a

tanki but i was i think i did start off

as a leftist and a marxist right

and the reason for that are kind of

complicated but you know i was in high

school i started off very young as a

marxist probably like

12 years ago pretty much

and eventually i got to a point of like

kind of marxist snobbery right where you

know i was i was not a tanki i thought

oh that's just really unsophisticated i

was more into the kind of western

marxist tradition

uh beginning with adorno the frankfurt

school lucox and and those people and

then i kind of moved on

through people like zizek i got really

into the french theory

what people you know

usually call post-modernism

and

i i'm like i'm skipping a lot of things

but then eventually i kind of got my way

into

uh landy and accelerationism

more or less that whole milieu right and

then from there

it's kind of like a full circle type of

thing and i i

and authors like boris groys were

actually pretty um

instrumental in realizing this as well

as the fact that you know china did have

a special significance within the

accelerationist crowd as well i began to

realize that you know western marxists

have gotten marxism leninism wrong

they've gotten the eastern communist

experience completely wrong and they've

dismissed it for so long because you

know it didn't appear theoretically

sophisticated or self-aware enough well

little did they know is that the

language of marxism leninism

was not an academic theoretical language

it was a language forged through

concrete and material experiences

which you know from a materialist

perspective if you're a marxist that's

going to be a level above

the more kind of abstract academic stuff

so i i began to reappreciate marxism

leninism specifically through

you know a high dagarian lens and the

reason heidegger is important is because

heidegger allows us to place primacy

on some you know um

primary reality

of embeddedness and groundedness

before you know uh before the use of

kind of logo-centric reason so for me i

kind of tr i translated eastern marxism

through that frame and it became very

clear to me that

you know there is a bridge between

western marxism and marxism leninism

that has never been crossed and i wanted

to

help cross that bridge

awesome okay so first question and this

is kind of a step on that bridge

um for the uninitiated this question is

from spectre what is neo-marxism

neo i'm a bit dusty on the specific

like milieu or school that neo-marxism

is referring to i i'm really i just kind

of sound familiar but i i i'm not

sure i don't know so what does you see

you see your marxist leninist though not

in a marxist so what's it

what is marxist leninism

uh okay i think for me marxism leninism

was a specific regrounding of

marx's original insight

because before then there was something

called orthodox marxism what orthodox

marxism tried to do is to try to kind of

make a dogma out of marx's thinking and

turn it into this kind of formula that

can be applied everywhere regardless of

circumstances and i would say most

marxists especially western marxists

they are one way or another they're

orthodox or they're classical marxists

right so marxism leninism took marxism

and it completely rediscovered it in a

new context specifically the context of

russia

and it forced marxism to for the first

time acquire a national forum right

marxism itself had never had a national

forum the communist manifesto said

communism should have a national forum

but the theory itself was never

developed in such a way that it itself

would have a national form what i mean

by that is that you know the orthodox

marxists viewed the peasantry as

backwards and they viewed countries like

russia as like you know they're not

developed enough to have a revolution

yada yada

so the application of marxism to a

specific civilizational and national

circumstances outside of the west

basically meant that you know

a new significance of the peasantry is

going to be had you know the peasants

that this this this notion of linear

time according to which the west was the

most advanced and these other countries

were the least developed and least

advanced kind of is being abandoned

and furthermore you know the role of the

party has changed the view that you know

bourgeois democracy is more advanced

than you know these prior political

forms and that communists just have to

like tail behind the quote-unquote

progressive movement of the democratic

bourgeoisie it's kind of what you see

today in marxist in america they kind of

tail behind the corporate liberal you

know progressive agenda

well marxism leninism said no you know

we're gonna put an abrupt halt

to that and we are going to

rediscover what marxism is

in a

in a completely new context

a non-institutional con context i should

add

awesome um so

in the west the first thing you tend to

hear from people who

hear that you're a tanki or a

marxist-leninist or even a communist uh

is this criticism so i figured i'd give

this person a chance to

express it uh communism

you're ready to talk in bc so it's uh

all you hello mr haas

hear me all right

oh yeah we can hear it

okay so two years ago uh destiny did a

video about um

the bolivia political crisis

and within the video he said

that platforming

like far leftists like yourself or

communists or marxist-leninists who

engage in historical revisionism

is very similar effect the same as

platforming say nick fuentes

to do historical revisionism with

holocaust do you believe this is true

uh so i think there's two levels to this

question the first level is is a

descriptive one so from a descriptive

perspective regardless of morality it's

not true obviously because the taboo

around nazi germany and that kind of

legacy is because of the post-war a

world order that was forged

after world war ii and that world order

was forged in part by the soviet union

which was a victor

to world war ii so

um

it's just not true from a descriptive

perspective that it's the same thing you

know this this you know

whatever you want to call it this end of

history for fukuyama or whatever you you

know this new world order after world

war ii that had formed uh according to

which you know the nazis were the last

stage of human barbarism i mean that was

something that was constructed and

shared by the soviet union so

this notion that there's just this one

universal consensus and we cannot have

any quote unquote historical or

visionism well it begs the question why

does the west have the lion's share

of you know

of power and being able to set what the

consensus on history is

when you know the west did not play

uh more of a significant role in in

creating this post-war world order than

the soviet union did

and the second part of this would be a

kind of normative one so my personal

perspective on this and and i know

people like zizek have said you know we

should treat it like a red line and just

simply not tolerate it well i think from

an official perspective there should be

you know an official stance

about these events you know a

commemoration of the victims of nazism

and recognition of that and yada yada

but at the same time i do think

that the inability to

debate about these things and the

inability to actually and this is my

personal opinion i don't know if i mean

i'm not jewish so maybe that

makes me have less uh

i don't know how it works privilege and

being able to discuss this but i do

think that you know

there should be a way to

debate about every and all things i

don't think anything should necessarily

be

taboo when it comes to understanding

history or understanding things from a

political perspective now that being

said you know the more personal it gets

the more i think there should be taboos

like for example i don't think there

should be debates about age of consent

laws

and you know about you know bestiality

and things like that from a cultural

perspective but

i i think it you know i'm i'm confident

enough

in my understanding of that history you

know to be able to defend the view that

you know that there were that the nazis

engaged in these crimes and so on so you

know i that's my personal perspective

there's there's two layers to it right

one is more official it's at an

institutional level the other one is

kind of you know if you're a political

streamer and if it was up to me as far

as these big platforms were concerned

there would be no censorship on anything

of a de-personalized political

historical whatever nature now you know

obviously when again when you get more

to you know

age of consent stuff or bestiality and

incest i mean maybe i'm cool it's

pornography maybe i'm cool with

censorship but

when it comes to things of a more

academic nature i'm and then this

applies also to you know

uh

debates about racism and all that kind

of stuff i i don't i would prefer that

these things could be debated in the

open

that was it i'll just know quickly just

quickly one thing right

um for has

what i was supposed to be going on about

is that

for example a lot of you commies have a

very twisted reality

on say american foreign policy

um

and i think destiny was getting to the

point

that similar to how nick fuentes has a

very twisted reality

on what the reality of the holocaust was

uh

yeah you for example like coups uh done

by the cia for example

uh yeah that that's what he's gonna go

about like bolivia was like everyone

thinks the cia had this huge

uh presence within the 2019 bolivian

coup but it actually wasn't um

i think that's the point that destiny is

trying to go do you believe that i mean

i think you definitely have a twisted

well i i can't speak for what destiny

said but if you're accurately

representing what he said i just find

that a little silly like you know

denying an atrocity against the people

uh that were specifically targeted and

exterminated

you know even even if it was true that

the cia wasn't involved in the bolivia

coup which is not something i'm

convinced i'm not convinced that they

weren't involved i don't know why it's

being assumed they weren't but i mean

even if i were to be convinced that the

cia wasn't involved getting that wrong

isn't the same thing as denying

you know i just it is though

okay so because you're it's part of the

hackery that's what it is okay so

it's

it may be the same at the level of being

incorrect

but the nature of what is being the

nature of what is

um being inaccurately

expressed is qualitatively different i

just the the idea that saying that

that's the cia was behind the bolivian

coup is the same as uh holocaust

revisionism i just find that really

fucking stupid to be honest it's the

same you're intentionally incorrect to

fuel your political narrative but it's

fine

again again

i don't know how to break this down to

you but

them just being incorrect for political

purposes doesn't mean they're the same

thing

qualitatively they're just not

okay

all right thank you dude

okay thank you mr comm mr scum

uh next up we have

um this is from real jit turbo

uh i think he wants a speaking voice so

go for it

what's up

hello

so my question

was

so obviously your marxist one is right

yeah that's correct

so what's your opinion on

mainly what i'm going for is soviet and

the communist china

famine so your entire ideology

is based around not getting enough food

to people because

you know if you look

look at

any estimate especially for a great

chinese plague

i mean famine sorry that's upwards of 30

million people so what's your opinion on

that

okay i'll talk both about the um the

famine of 32 and 33 in the soviet union

and also the uh

the famine resulting from the greatly

forward so there's something called

modernization that happens

at the principally at the level of

agriculture in history right and this is

this is what has given birth to what we

call modern industry

so this basic revolutionizing of

agricultural production or the what they

call a primary sphere of production is

actually something that has happened in

every single country that has developed

an independent base

for industrialization or for

modernization

being in the form of you know just

primitive accumulation or reaching what

actually only england really did at

first which was

an independent form of you know

industrial capitalism in the 19th

century

so when you look at portugal when you

look at the dutch when you look at the

english especially i mean we really have

to focus on the english here

all of them partook in this process of

revolutionizing the base of production

whether that was within europe or more

importantly in the colonies abroad

and this disruption in the traditional

way of growing food did produce an

unmitigated not just famine but social

cultural

um political just absolute disaster for

all parties involved um the the amount

of famines that occurred across

the history of europe as it was

experiencing this tumultuous process of

you know uh of the development we call

early modernity

um

and then the legacy of colonialism i

mean the scale of the disaster

was much more drawn out

was much more savage and brutal and

dehumanizing

and i would argue had a much higher

death toll

now when it comes to the famines that

were experienced in the soviet union in

china you said that they didn't achieve

the basic goal of feeding people well

for the short years or a year

in which the famines were occurring

that's true but that was condensed

uh into a very short period

and yeah i mean that there was many

there were many victims but

this was a disaster that accompanied

this revolutionizing of the agricultural

base without any foreign investment to

help without any foreign capital

investment you know to help them along

they completely from scratch

revolutionized their base of production

so that they could actually form an

independent economic base

rather than kind of be slaves to england

because the rest of the world kind of

you know it all goes back to the you

know anglo-saxon financial

uh capitalist center the city of london

or wall street you're going to have to

go through that after the post-war

period at least if you want to develop

your country the world bank and the imf

and yada yada so if you want to develop

your own independent economic base

uh you know

historically that has

that had that had led in the two times

that it happened um

there could be more instances

but you know i i don't recall any in

which that has happened

uh yeah it's going to lead it led to a

disaster the optimistic thing is that

you can learn from the mistakes of that

specifically the great leap forward and

now china is offering a model of

development that actually won't require

countries to just from scratch

completely build up their own industrial

base

countries can now take advantage of the

differing developmental levels between

themselves and china you know through

trade so china has a model for investing

in countries and helping develop

countries without you know and so this

need of of doing what china or the

soviet union did i think is gone i think

there can be actually a

non-exploitative

uh you know

win-win cooperation the belt and road

initiative so that these underdeveloped

countries

can modernize

without having to risk

you know

uh

risk

um causing damage to this highly

sensitive agricultural base but i mean

it's it's not it's not communism which

was the problem it was modernization

because you have to understand people

have for thought you know hundreds of

years if not thousands they have a

specific way of life for growing food

agriculturally it's a non-modern way

so standardizing that and and

forcing that to produce the necessary

surpluses that will allow for

modernization is an extremely violent

disruption

and discontinuity from that traditional

way of life

mr jd

there oh yeah that's it for my question

thank you

thank you sir

um next off

we've got uh yeezus he just had a

question whenever you're ready mr

hey there

i guess he doesn't want to i'll ask a

question for him uh the question was why

do you hate individuality which i was

hoping he would expand upon uh influence

shot

it seems like he's uh i think i can

roughly

um

get wherever he's coming from because

i've critiqued individualism before i

don't hate individuality but i do have

this problem that we can we can like

legislate our social reality

based on something an individual pulls

out of thin air what i mean by that is

that like i don't like this idea that

individuals

um should should be abstracted from

their communities to such a point

where they deny their communal social

national whatever civilizational

realities and just decide you know oh

yeah i'm gonna ignore my father my

forefathers my ancestors and just decide

that you know i'm gonna decide what

gender is i'm gonna decide what

uh sexuality is i'm gonna decide what um

you know uh

those are actually probably the main

ones but i'm gonna decide what it means

to be like you know a man all these

kinds of things i just think that

there is a communal reality that we are

embedded in within

uh before we can develop as an

individual we have to acknowledge that

so i just don't like abstract

individualism but i don't really i don't

have a problem with individuality i

think individuals should utilize the

fullest extent

of their individuality but that is not

possible without acknowledging you know

where your individuality comes from or

what it is individuated from i should

add

awesome okay well jesus i hope that

answered your question

tank you're up next go for it

oh god your audio is terrible um

yeah you got to fix your audio sorry

that you sound like you are like inside

your microphone

i don't know what's going on

okay so you well well uh tank is

figuring that out

um we will go to

uh

service

connaught i don't know how to explain

that

um so this kind of whenever you're ready

you get a question on results social

contract theory

uh yeah so

uh i wanted to ask um

with regards to rousseau and his like

formulation on the social contract

how important do you think it is in the

modern day that countries like

china

and

the united states place

their very existence and being

on

uh

maintaining

uh people's

happiness with the state and

do you think sometimes this is a

detriment to the state

for example in spain when it comes to

um the way that spain operates by giving

pensions to the elderly which

negatively impacts the young

in order to

keep in most in this social contract

like do you have any criticisms of the

theory of the social contract and

what can these modern states do

i i think the social contract is more of

a description now without getting too

much into the weeds of rousseau's

specific theory because it is a specific

one

um just to speak on what you're

referring to i think the social contract

primarily takes economic form not in the

form of welfare actually but in the form

of a way of life that the state somehow

guarantees or at least acts as a warden

in relation to so this was very

important for the social stability and

cohesion

and actually political stability is more

important for for example the post-war

united states

ensuring that people you know out of

high school could have a white pig

offense house and a car and a good

paying job and be able to raise a family

that was pretty much the implicit social

contract between the american masses and

the american state right it's not so

much just giving pensions or giving

welfare i guess social security can be

part is part of that

but it's about ensuring a basic stable

way of life right that will ensure the

loyalty of the population to the state

now states usually engage in land reform

to do this sometimes it fails like the

shah of iran who tried his white

revolution to you know and carry out a

land reform to ensure a loyal base it

failed stollepian reforms in russia

under the tsar were an example of this

that also failed

but in general you know um when you're

looking at quote unquote democratic or

communist states you do usually see

success here that in china the land

reform that first occurred was a form of

the success of it i would argue that

during under deng xiaoping

the family

farming that was promoted after the

reform and opening up was also an

evolution of this and now under xi

jinping

you are seeing a step even further where

the social contract is now taking the

form of the chinese dream

and as they want to revolutionize their

farming methods to a more in a large

scale industrial agriculture they're

starting to give people apartments you

know with their poverty alleviation

communities and apartments

and yada yada so you know i i think

china will be more proved to be more

resilient than the united states in

terms of upholding that social contract

i think right now the political crisis

we're facing here in the us is that the

state does not know how to fulfill its

end of the bargain

since the post-war era like we're facing

this fourth industrial revolution trump

was a manifestation of the grievances of

the people who want those jobs back and

want that way of life to return that

completely failed

it's aggravating especially under biden

and i think the reason is because the

american state has not is not

constructed in such a way

so as to um

shape the economy in the image of its

people i think it's constructed in such

a way so as to fulfill the interests of

a minority of you know

financial elites

and it'll throw breadcrumbs at the

people when it has to i just think that

the breadcrumbs are kind of running out

at this point

was that it

uh yeah

oh okay

i gotta say um

maybe they're like intimidated or

something

but the last uh handful of people were

very critical of you and chat

as soon as i got them in here they're

all like

you know

rainbows and and quivers

i don't know maybe there's not ready to

sit in front of the con of the tankies

yeah i mean it's it's something i'm very

used to so yeah

okay this next guy uh he says he's not

afraid of you

mr prince of lebanon have you read it

yeah so i know you like talking in

circles and not saying anything but

first of all i want to know what i'm

gonna get my fifty dollars for

destroying you british umpire and second

i wanna know why you attack uh

palestinians and you don't defend russia

on your channel

okay you want fifty dollars for what

oh remember when we debated and you

didn't give him about fifty dollars

remember that

over what the over the british empire

controlling america

uh i don't remember debating you but i'm

pretty sure you lost that debate yo

where's my money

you little bitch

okay yeah this is this y'all actually i

do remember you're the kid so you're

like 50. yeah what's good what's up okay

well you are a child i'll call your

parents and see if your parents can give

you 50.

you want to keep pivoting you want to go

down the substance

okay let's go to the substance so

explain to me how the british empire

controls america go ahead

okay well what i specifically said

actually was that

the british had a huge role in shaping

the american deep state through the oss

basically completely shaping the cia

there was a fusion also in terms of

finance with the city of london where

the american elites basically fled to

the city of london for the offshore

havens with which they were going to

bear are you going to keep monologuing

why don't you explain it

okay what answer would be satisfactory

to you uh first of all you criticize the

person

shut the fuck up a little bit

what's wrong with the british empire so

i do remember this debate you were i

kept telling you that i never said they

directly controlled it in terms of like

you said they controlled the systems the

institutions

i said structurally there was a

structurally institutional brawl you're

pivoting like a basketball semantics

yeah why are you playing semantics

i think i think you're a little too

butt-hurt and excited who's butthurt

where's my money so so based on my money

that's what we're dealing with you are

like a 15-year-old kid who's super

excited to get on vc and talk to you

yeah a semi-famous guy so you're too

enthusiastic your channel is fantastic

okay your heart is racing right now

jackson hinkle's chair your heart is

racing

your heart is racing you're completely

terrified of being you have nothing to

say bro are you getting crushed

let me ask you this question what's

wrong with the british empire what's

wrong with it go ahead

what do you mean what's wrong with it

what is wrong with the british empire

the brotherhood part was the most

important thing that ever happened no

it's a

hit world history okay well why was it

the most beautiful thing to happen in

world history because it unified people

and it built trade systems economically

actually actually

the queen was the greatest person to

ever

save the world okay the british empire

divided people so severely that to this

day

there are artificially um control

created ethnic and national divisions

that did not exist probably because it

broke up british

no no it's because the british okay who

basically coined or

was most famous for instrumentalizing

this strategy of divide and conquer do

you know which empire was

most famous for instrumentalizing that

strategy in the early modern british

empire that's correct

so they're literally known for dividing

people as the basis of ruling them

dividing no they're not uniting anyone

they're just they are they're conquered

by the british empire the queen what's

wrong with the queen go ahead

uh first of all the queen is a puppet of

parliament ever since the glorious

revolution do you not know your history

oh wow so the queen didn't save india so

the queen the queen is basically a

symbol of the private elite you know

ruling class interests of the world we

need a ruling class we need a ruling

class what's wrong with the ruling class

your western democracy can't even pass

an infrastructure bill you can't even

pass a health care bill dictatorships

work monarchies work and uniting people

works

well actually britain is none of those

things and china does the same thing

china doesn't use democracy they just do

shit when they want to

so i think you just i don't think you

want an ama i think you want to hear

yourself talk because every time i try

to respond to anything are you running

you immediately you cut me off

you can run go ahead okay mr prince like

if you can ask a question you have to

let him respond to it right all right

let him let him get a word out okay so

first of all

the british do not rule in the form of

an open dictatorship even if you were

right about all the things you said

about democracy that is not actually the

reason why the you know british elites

exist they exist because they're a

handful of thieves and plunderers who

got their wealth by robbery and piracy

basically and you are just being a cuck

who's like retroactively trying to

justify or rationalize the power that

they have i mean if you were so correct

about the fact that oh yeah we need a

benevolent elite and we need a

dictatorship you would think that like

there would be a deliberate design of

like establishing some kind of

accountable open system

in order to enshrine that reasoning you

have

openly that's not the case you're just

pretty much a cuck who's kind of retro

did the mongols conquer things did the

mongols steal land and kill people

actually the mongols only conquered land

in the same spirit and tradition of you

know that the victims got so basically

the whole there was no such thing as the

modern kind of sovereign territories or

borders that exist today the mongols

basically did was

um

they they conquered by the very same

sword that their victims ruled by so

that's why the mongols were able to

assassinate doesn't exist sovereignty is

only depending on if you can defend it

and the british empire had the right to

liberate that land

i don't think you know what sovereignty

is and by the way talking about whether

the british were like morally justified

in doing what they're doing is fucking

stupid because the question of being

able to arrive at an accurate

description of the history

you can't go back and change the history

of what the british did all you can do

is point out the differences between the

british you know method of of conquest

or the british system and the mongol one

right which is something we could do

but it seems like you're more interested

in trying to like you know i don't know

uh polish the ball sack of some like

lord you know let me ask you why did my

country why didn't my country not

deserve colonization why did we deserve

not to be colonized let me ask that

yeah i mean again the the whole question

is posed wrongly it's not a description

descriptive question what is the

practical relevance of your question the

practical relevance is that is

colonization something that can be

justified okay what is your country what

is your country

read my name okay lebanon okay so you

i'll tell you this the french empire so

regardless of what argument or

conclusion you come to on discord the

french can go to lebanon and try to

recolonize it and just see what happens

okay i want that to happen well i don't

think i don't think it will turn out

very well for them i think that the

french what is lebanon right now we need

that we need to be civilized because the

countries are going to waste good luck

i have to tell you is good luck see if

the saiyan will tolerate that and you

know good luck i mean i accepted it

i accept your defeat

no i i think uh the only defeat

you can only surrender my son you can

only surrender yeah i think i think the

only surrendering that would have

happened in that scenario would be the

french against hezbollah so yeah

okay uh thank you mr prince of lebanon

uh okay

uh so i'm glad you guys found your

testicles that was really interesting

um the next one uh we're gonna try this

guy again because i'm stupid tank go for

it

house

is it better now is it better

if there's an echo but it's way better

yeah go for it okay okay i deeply

apologize i didn't mean to try to

threaten you or whatever i just meant to

say that i was in new york and i think

we have some kind of appointment i'm not

sure you could you could help me on that

but my question here to you is uh i

don't know if you have heard about this

term i think it's called labor

aristocracy or i don't know i've read it

somewhere um whatever thoughts in it uh

i would like to know

sure um yeah i've had some passionate

debaters about this very topic

but um

which coincidentally you share the name

with but you know i can actually speak

to this i think that lenin's labor

aristocracy has been deeply um

misunderstood

so usually people think that lenin was

referring to the relative privilege and

you know decent way of life that was

enjoyed by the american working class

after the post-war period i don't think

that was what the labor aristocracy was

at least as lenin was referring to it

lenin was referring to a top-down

stratum not something that was just

existing at the root you know the soil

of the people but a bureaucratic very

professionalized very institutionalized

stratum of the working class that exists

at the top the union leaders the

bureaucracy and so on and so on and as

well as this kind of the people who were

closest in proximity to that

at the very top so i think in continuity

with the labor aristocracy the closest

thing you're going to get to that today

is something that's commonly called the

professional managerial class which is a

term that was coined by barbara

einen whatever her name is einen reich i

don't know if i'm saying that correctly

but you know basically you know

professionals kind of you know um tech

workers and people

more urban kind of hipster whatever um

craft brewery kind of you know that that

more is what we're getting at in terms

of a labor aristocracy and it makes

sense politically too because this class

or the stratum society happens to be the

one that is you know the most on board

with whatever the latest corporate

uh agenda is where the democrat agenda

is so

yeah i think the late mythocracy is

basically you know more closer to the

professional managerial class is what i

would

but say

you agree that uh every uh white person

in america is part of the liberal

aristocracy they are all white uh

settlers and all that

oh no no i don't agree with that

oh my god

that was all this was all that's such a

reversing reason why i can't i can't

believe this

thank you

um next stop we have

uh where are you

there you are okay so next up we've got

this guy

russian nationalist go for it

any minute now

no i guess not okay guess we're skipping

it we'll come back we're going to circle

conan horlio that's a terrible name okay

go for it that's a great name i don't

know what you're talking about okay

it's a fucking amazing name anyway so i

wanted to secure your take on uh

the whole russia ukraine uh award do you

feel that russia was justified to attack

ukraine

uh i'm on youtube right now so i'm gonna

mute my youtube so give me a second

sure

from

okay right now okay we're we're

uh

we've moved past that topic

yeah and so you guys didn't hear what

has said but everything you said was

objectively correct and uh base

so um the next question is going to be

from

uh we're gonna go with this dude um a

russian nationalist

who

tried to ask a question earlier i didn't

realize it was a voice it was a text

question so i'm just gonna read it off

for him

um

actually it's related to the same thing

okay never mind i've got another one

then

the question is going to be from

uh me

the question is

so what are the most common criticisms

of tanki's quote unquote

um that you hear from

people who consider themselves to be

liberal

is it hey everywhere these ideologies

have been tried you've had thousands

hundreds of thousands or millions of

people die

um why should we believe that the

ideology itself isn't tainted and why

should we believe that if you were to

try to enact this again it wouldn't

again lead to you know hundreds of

thousands of people dying

um

i i don't think there's any way to

guarantee that but what i will say is

that i do think that um that violence is

inevitable either way because the state

and these very large states i should add

that have emerged in the modern era

you know have as their foundation an

immense level of violence and turmoil i

mean in the united states alone the

possibility has reared itself of another

civil war i think right i don't think

that's too far-fetched to be considering

at this point

um so i i just think that modern history

is very violent and ugly and um

sometimes it's senselessly violent and

ugly like things like the rwandan

genocide and various conflicts in the

middle east that occur

and sometimes that violence is under you

know

it's uh

it's

uh

accompanied by you know a

genuine you know vision to to to

build a state or some lasting

civilization that reflects the interest

and serve the interests of its people so

you know

i'm not denying that marxism leninism or

communism and its history is immensely

violent

but i just questioned the idea that you

know

that violence is uh avoidable if it's

gonna happen i think

as much violence as possible to be

avoided right uh is preferable unless

you're a psychopath right

and i don't think any violence should

ever occur for the sake of an ideology

just to be clear

but i do think that there are these

fundamental antagonisms and

contradictions regardless of the

ideology that gives expression to them

whether it's the class conflict it's

national conflicts you know whatever you

want to call it there's something

fundamentally antagonistic

about

the current states especially in the

west

so i think the question is like how do

we respond to those how do we make sense

of those and communism has been

usually um

a very common way of doing that or

marxism maybe not in the west but in the

east at least

so yeah it's it's not that i think that

you know

all this um violence

is justified because we're making a

utopia it's more

how much of that kind of violence is

part of the process of what we call

modernization

all right so i mean correct me from rome

but your perspective is that like

if we were to compare it to um the way

that

current

uh civilizations have formed right now

whether it's the united states or uk or

germany or

israel whatever

um

so the idea that you i think you're

putting forward is that people tend to

forget all the violence that happened in

constructing those societies right in in

uniting people whether it's disparate

tribes or different states etc around an

idea around a government and then

forcing them to adopt these ideas in

this form of government right so there's

violent kind of like in intrinsic to the

process right just because people are

going to disagree people are going to

resist people are going to have other

ideas that they also want to enforce

using violence right so you might need

to fight to to get your to get to your

your vision right but this doesn't mean

that the the the fighting is in itself

uh bad it just means this might be part

of the process and you should accept

that basically right yeah yeah more or

less with one exception that you know

it's not so much about the vision as

much as it is you know for example the

chinese um for their civil war

they weren't really just saying oh yeah

we have a vision we want to fulfill it

was more kind of like you know we are

the we can resist the japanese the best

we can resist the foreign imperialists

the best way so i think it the one

caveat i would add to what you said is

just that

it's not so much about fulfilling some

abstract ideology or vision it's about

giving concrete articulation to the

reality of your people in a specific and

yes antagonistic way inevitably

antagonistic way i think i what i mean

to say is i don't really think it's

about ideology i think that these

differences exist

in reality right i think that if a

people for example the best example

probably be like things like the

american war of independence if people

come and decide they want to be free or

they want to be sovereign or you know

they want to form a republic or

overthrow a monarchy of some kind

uh not not to fulfill an ideology

specifically but just just to kind of

create a state that reflects their

reality that already exists you know

i think that's already taking a stand

you're if you're resisting a foreign

invader if you're you know

if you're liberating your people somehow

and

i i i don't agree i met many western

communists have this idea that you know

we're gonna have a revolution

and all this violence just for this end

goal of realizing this specific type of

society and i think that's totally wrong

i think that revolutions and civil wars

and wars

have not happened

in communist states to fulfill ideas

they've happened

um they've happened according to

the already existing realities they've

inherited right the revolutions were

necessary because

you know a constitution was being

already overturned

um

you know that there was a need for all

power to the soviets something that

already existed in russia at the time

wasn't created by the bolsheviks so i

mean that's that's in the chinese

they're resisting the japanese you know

foreign aggression so i think it's it's

things like that you know

okay that makes sense

uh next question is from hacker hacker

whenever you're ready

why am i on though

yes

oh okay so has like i'm pretty sure you

are a communist

uh so like are you pro statelessness

like exclusively in the end goal because

both marks and angles defined communism

as a stateless society

because

states were objectively like committees

for the ruling classes so at least in

the end are you um

pro statelessness

i mean abstractly yes but i think some

context is necessary right the modern

state

which marx and engels viewed as the

culmination of the state property that

began in ancient greece because remember

for them history begins with ancient

greece and basically asia falls asleep

during this whole time and doesn't

really undergo any real evolution so the

development of the state culminates into

the modern state and the state is an

institution

which abstractly represents the people

right

um in a universal sense

at the same time this representation is

abstract and it's in contradiction to

the actual people in their actual

reality not just because it's you know

it's a universal common interest as

opposed to an individual one

but because it exists in the form of an

abstract institution

so i do think that state yes the the

development of that state to its highest

conclusion

through the proletarian dictatorship

is that it will dissolve

but i disagree that it's going to

dissolve by just you know having this

kind of chaotic society where everything

is locally in our i think that the

ability for people to represent

themselves

at a common universal

level right which is which is yes

abstracted from the locality that will

remain

that will remain but what will disappear

is the

institution that opposes itself

to the reality of the people rather than

reflect that reality

and i don't think that

i don't think it's going to happen in

the form of like you know there's just

gonna it's just gonna be lawlessness or

you know somehow it's gonna be abolished

i kind of agree with what stalin said

you know the state will be dissolved in

the process of strengthening it

to an unprecedented degree

in dialectical terms like to the point

where it becomes superfluous and no

longer even necessary to acknowledge as

a as a completely separate institution

apart from the general interest of

society so the idea is basically that

the interests of the state

and society will kind of organically the

anglo-babies fuse together

that's that's basically um the idea

yeah because a lot of these anarchists

think that you know exclusively mutual

aid is going to solve the problem of us

getting to a communist society and i

don't see how like without any effort of

centralization whatsoever you're gonna

have a full communism immediately but

obviously you

agree that there necessarily needs to be

some sort of transitory social state

correct

oh yeah i mean even even more it's that

you know how does the state dissolve it

doesn't dissolve because we decide okay

we're just going to make it disappear it

dissolves through its own development

and you take the state to its own

further conclusion you develop it

um to like along the path of its own

destiny basically

and it the the result according to marx

and engels is that it will just become

superfluous it'll dissolve

as a separate institution

all right well um fantastic talking to

you uh thank you dubi great thank you

hacker

okay next up we've got a question from

sugartits um they want me to read out

this question actually

uh well no actually it's not it's from

hot sauce i forgot about your house

that's okay

you're on me all right thank you um has

gonna be honest i don't know too much

about you i always hear people talk

about you

um as someone who you know has done

streaming um done a lot of these types

of talks and debates and has made a good

amount of money off of this well not a

good amount but made a decent amount of

money and somewhat turn this into

a way of living do you think you're kind

of on a high horse to talk about

communism and your beliefs in this way

but you don't really preach it or you

don't really practice it you just preach

it more or less

uh yes but only in so far as i have not

been successful enough so

i think that

in order to um practice what i preach i

need to turn infrared into a you know a

huge multimedia corporation that's you

know

net worth you know tens of millions of

dollars expanding across the country you

know basically becoming a huge media

mega corporation

that will be the like solid base or kind

of interface of a political party or a

political movement that it could direct

its effort in so yeah it's i tell myself

that every time i wake up you know i

have not i am not successful as i should

be

um but beyond that no i i think yeah i

mean right now i'm just pretty much at

the level of

subsistence what i mean by subsistence i

mean like just survival like i'm

basically supporting my own life right

now but

i think i have to get to a level where i

can expand this and you know have

you know a studio and have people who

work for this and employees and you know

things like that

expanding outward so

still like someone who like i mean you

seem very very heavy into this communist

belief um yet you still live in a

capitalistic society with a lot of

values that are anti-communism in the

sense of freedom of speech i mean what

countries have you seen

historically and in present times that

have actually worked off of a communist

um government i mean there's really no

evidence of any communism working in any

country

yeah i mean besides china which is like

the world's ascendant power right and

it's actually but they still follow

capitalism they're they they're they're

but it kind of follows so

i want to

um clarify where you're coming from

because you said you mentioned freedom

of speech which is like a political

thing not an economic thing so do you

mean politics or do you mean economics

like what are you getting at a mix of

both just like communism as as a whole

because it's not just political it also

is economical okay because it's the

people who are supposed to control the

money and the government

okay so you're saying china's not you're

saying china's capitalist right even

though it doesn't have um you know the

thing you were talking about which is

complete free speech and all that so

i'm just a little bit confused about

where you're getting at i mean you talk

about

i live in a capitalist society that

doesn't reflect my values

well like i'm a materialist right

marxism is about materialism it's not

about this like idealistic view or i'm

gonna have these moral values that i'm

gonna apply to society it's a

materialism according to which you know

you're trying to scientifically

understand

and through that understanding apply it

into practice the reality that exists

now not some you know contrived

values you pull you know pull out of

your ass or something then you also said

you know you're taking advantage of the

freedom of speech offered to you by the

west i'm gonna this is the second thing

there's a third question i got from you

and i'm gonna answer that so the second

thing is like you're taking advantage of

the freedom of speech and all i would

say is that if the west dropped its

pretenses to being like the liberal

democracies of the world i don't think

it would be sustainable like just

imagine it imagine if joseph biden or

the democrats or you know

uh the

uh the tory party the labor party in

britain or justin trudeau and canada

imagine if they dropped all pretenses

and said guys we're dropping the

democracy pretenses we're just going to

be a dictatorship no one would tolerate

that because we have a very shitty

system which almost openly is rigged to

serve the interests of a minority of the

ruling class it's not i mean on a lower

level it's not quite like aesthetically

promising it doesn't offer like this

bold ideological vision that's going to

enthrall people's consciousness to and

devote loyalties you know or anything so

if if

they stopped being a liberal democracy

here they wouldn't survive so i i i just

want to call your bluff by all means

eliminate your freedom of speech in

america eliminate all those things and

see

how long your state is going to last

it's it's going to be overthrown and

toppled and replaced by another one

fairly quickly i would argue i mean it's

just

nobody would want to live under that

now the third thing that i'm sorry sorry

so yeah the reason china can get away

with not being a liberal democracy is

because

china has a consistent

state forged

on a completely different model of

political governance it has a specific

social contract with its people that

they've come to an understanding with

each other about it's also delivered on

its results of both effective governance

and improving the welfare of its of its

people and improving the population of

people as well as having an ideology and

having some promising you know

sense of purpose and meaning it gives to

its people

with all things that are lacking in the

liberal west so the third thing you said

finally

is name a single successful communist

state i think almost all communist

states were successful were they

successful in establishing a

great light consumer economy with

various luxuries and iphones and things

like that no but that's not where they

were starting out from they were

starting out from extremely backward

kind of agrarian

uh you know pre-modern relations of of

not only subsistence

like the bear subsistence but also you

know at the mercy of nature if there's a

drought there's going to be a famine

plenty of people are going to die you

know slavery starvation um you know

popperism whatever you want to call it

right and communism came and it gave

people you know running water and

electricity and healthcare and baseline

jobs and basic access to culture basic

access to literature literacy right

education uh engineering um the the very

basics that are necessary for a modern

industrial society

and it did so in a manner far more

effectively

and with far less of a human toll

than 19th century english industrial

capitalism did for its time now these

the metric of success that came later

which was about this development of a

light consumer kind of information age

society you're right most communist

states did not succeed in adjusting to

that they they kind of

accomplished what they set out to with a

very crude primary political and

economic system and they didn't know how

to evolve into the next era well china

did and now you say china's capitalist

and i would contest that view china is

not capitalist um

all the land is owned by the state in

china the state owned enterprises

dominate the chinese economy still and

the china still has five year plans

where i mean it controls its economy to

an even greater degree than it did

before just because it has allowed for

the market to have a role in shaping the

economy doesn't mean that the

basic parameters of exchange are not

still determined by the state according

to a definite plan

so

okay so you said you said two things i

kind of want to hit on you said first

they have a very um good understanding

of the contract between the government

and people yeah they're one of the the

few super power countries that still

allow slavery second china also right

now is going through a huge economic

failure as in other countries but right

now with their infrastructure and

building which is 30 of their gdp which

is causing riots as everybody in this

discord knows and they are trying to

suppress these riots trying to suppress

it from the media and from other

countries so if they have such a good

understanding why is there such um

why is there such dispute right now in

the country and why are they still

allowing slavery

so to answer your question i think the

problem here is you've gotten all the

facts wrong china doesn't allow slavery

and no you're wrong the chinese economy

is not failing whatsoever

what what

so you're telling me right now that one

of china's biggest infrastructure or um

building companies did not go wonder for

billions of dollars that they're not

thinking about putting trillions of

dollars into all these other companies

where people have stopped paying their

mortgages on houses that weren't built

second of all nike has not been caught

china's not experiencing weight it's not

experiencing a housing-based market

crash i mean people are predicting the

crash of the chinese economy for three

decades now it hasn't happened it's not

going to happen this time either okay

because the chinese i knew you were

special needs bro put your helmet on

okay

i think i think you should put your

helmet on because you're trying to apply

you're such a dumb fucking

how long do you want one or two years

for the chinese economy to collapse how

long do you think this has to take

50 bucks right now everybody can hear

this everybody no no we're not putting

50 we're not putting 50. since you've

come at me with so much

if the chinese economy collapses within

the year

or within one year however you want it

long it will give you five thousand

dollars

you have five thousand dollars but

you're living a sustained life

just living right now off of capitalism

but yeah you have five thousand dollars

to bet on this but you're living just

bare minimum you're living with just

what you need with right now that

contradiction wait when did i say when

did i say that

i expressly quote you no no no no okay

you know what this this retard this

retard is too excited hey retard retard

retard i expressly

i expressly conditioned my statement of

subsistence as in not in terms of better

survival but just in terms of supporting

my way of life if my way of life

includes having five thousand dollars in

the bank that i've saved up i mean

that's beyond the fucking point i still

don't have enough to expand i didn't

fucking say i was living off of the bare

minimum i said the exact opposite you

dumb bitch when i fucking said i'm

living the bare minimum i didn't fucking

say that you see you run your fucking

mouth just like how you talk about china

without doing any investigation without

preparing to pay attention to any of the

fucking details why because you're

mentally retarded you're a simpleton

you're even less than a midwife at least

a midwit can actually muster the ability

to pretend to be smart you are actually

a fucking dumbass who can't even manage

to do that all you can really do is run

your mouth and sound like a dumb bitch i

am wrong about the gdp

does not come from infrastructure that

they are not having riots right now that

people are not paying mortgages why why

did china's gdp come in why is he why is

it a problem

no they're not first of all you're wrong

you're wrong on all counts

you're wrong

you fucking pussy you're you're so

you're sowing out

you're sorting out squealing you're

wrong on all counts there are not

widespread riots in china right now and

even if china's in gdp 30 of it's based

on infrastructure why the fuck does that

entail china's economy is going to

collapse it sounds to me that they're

going to keep developing their economy

keep building a real fucking economy

it's not the fucking speculative

financial capitalism you have in the

fucking west they're going to keep

building infrastructure they're going to

expand that globally with the belt and

road initiative i think that's a pretty

fair deal i think it's a pretty fair

future they have out of themselves i

have no fucking idea why it's going to

fucking entail their economy is going to

collapse

like you think an economy is more

sustainable when it puts money it pulls

out of its ass and just throws it at the

economy

as opposed to a fucking economy that's

based on producing and building physical

real things you think there's even a

fucking competition here you actually

think that china is going to collapse

because 30 percent of its gdp is based

on building real long-lasting physical

things that are necessary to facilitate

any economy yet the united states and

the west is fine even though their

economies are based on uh printing

fucking valueless credit that's backed

by nothing

what a stupid fucking thing to say

we have a dwindling manufacturing base

we have a dwindling manufacturing base

we don't have any fucking actual

substantive base of our fucking economy

anymore it's completely based on credit

and speculation and thin air and that

you are here talking about how china's

economy is about to collapse all these

western analysts and people have

predicted the collapse of the chinese

economy for like four decades now

because they don't fucking understand

how it works they apply the logic of how

they understand their own economies to

china's just like how they thought

china's economy is going to collapse in

2008 when china is single-handedly

responsible for the global gdp economic

growth since 2008 build out the entire

world bailed out america because guess

what the chinese government actively

intervenes in its economy doesn't let

profit stay in command to fucking drive

it into a hole even when profits are low

the government can come in and rescue it

why because china is not a capitalist

system it's a socialist system that

believes

capitalist state capitalist

you can call it whatever you want but

what do you mean you can call whatever

you want but the chinese don't fucking

they don't get scared by symbols and

dollar signs and and currency they care

about real meat and potatoes substance

they care about the real me and potato

substances

i agree right now the west is bad

because we have a retarded human being

as president who printed 88 of our money

in the last two years i'll agree with

that uh no debate there you're right we

also have a retarded president that's a

big factor second of all if you're going

to tell me that that right now they are

not having riots that are not being

suppressed by all and this is not just

the u.s it's not about the evergreen

bank so the evergreen bank is an example

of the chinese people came out in

protest over and protests are very

common in china i don't know why you

think that china protesting is not

allowed it's very common in china

i know people on the ground in china and

you you don't have to take it from me

just look it up they are not protesting

against the central government they're

protesting against what they consider to

be a corrupt local government and this

is a dynamic that's very common in china

xi jinping's presidency has been defined

by a huge anti-corruption campaign where

he's clamping down on these more corrupt

lower officials you know on behalf of

the chinese people so the evergreen bank

protesters were appealing to the beijing

government to step in and you know

and bring it justice and they have the

right to do that in china

can i ask you how many banks were in

this with this this little scandal do

you know how many banks from the scandal

because i just want to know how much you

know about not not enough to uh destroy

the chinese shut the fuck up pause get

talking to you

okay well i hope you got that off your

chest

wait can we just like get clarification

so has um how sucks uh the guy

you're talking absolutely chase

all right so are you willing to bet five

thousand dollars at the chinese economy

while we're collapsing here

i don't have that cash for i wish i did

however however much money you have

right

uh

i'll bet 500 without a doubt okay let's

do it five hundred dollars easy how many

years

how much we want everybody click this

how many i said i'll save

china's economy i'll go two years i'll

go two years okay perfect

okay but can we can we do it an

inflation adjusted if it's going to be

u.s dollars just to be clear

uh

it's up to you well i have a question

why

china if you i have a question why

haven't you moved to china if you like

are so passionate about

because my passion for china my passion

for china only extends as far as how

much i believe we can learn from china

to fix some of our problems here i'm

still an american i'm an american

patriot i believe in america i just

think that we need to learn from other

people's success i'm not saying to

emulate china and replicate it we're

still americans we have our own system

we have our own values for example

americans believe in things like free

speech we believe in you know more of a

kind of homestead kind of independence

people have less collectivistic i get

that but there's a lot of things the

chinese government does right it has it

has a state bank instead of a federal

reserve it you know it focuses on

infrastructure building infrastructure

focuses and prioritizes on building real

things and it doesn't it's not in the

bed it's not in the pocket of a handful

of uh financial elites and you know

bankers and shit so yeah i mean there's

i just think there's a lot of things we

could learn from china i got one last

question before i go because i gotta go

to work uh do you deny the ugurus

genocide i don't know how you pronounce

this

uh so i'm gonna mute my youtube for one

sec

you have a good day bro okay

so thank you mr how sucks

uh

next up

we have um

let's see i think i promise uh sugar

tits had asked a question

so sugar taste question is uh do you

recognize that capitalism encourages a

heteronormative society through its

meritocratic structure and that

queerness encourages a shift of

socialism and is actually not a product

of capitalism or liberal corporation

i would argue the the exact opposite is

true capitalism does not promote true

heterogeneity because heterogeneity

requires an acknowledgement of a

material base

uh specifically first of the people but

also you know of labor specifically as

in command as opposed to profit whereas

profit is kind of homogeneous

capitalism only is possible because of

this homogeneous homogeneizing

universal state first the one created in

the french revolution or you know with

the english parliament depending on how

you want to look at it and capitalism is

actually all about homogeneity rather

than heterogeneity right so

that is why

the capitalist civilization

is the only one in the history of

mankind to have normalized or not

normalized but has institutionalized

um

non-heterosexual

non-heterosexuality without getting too

much into this

um i i don't agree with that whatsoever

i think that what they call queerness

is 100 a product of capitalism now we

can look at socialist societies for

reference okay

um

in the soviet union

um and in communist states in general

both in the past and today

with one actually i don't think cuba is

an exception i'm gonna get to cuba in a

second

they are far more heterosexual than

capitalist states are in general there's

a more pronounced

expression of masculinity there there's

also a more pronounced expression of

femininity there and there's stronger

family values and stronger family ties

more traditional gender relations there

than you have elsewhere

uh and then people point out cuba you

know has this you know it's been

pioneering lgbt rights well that

actually has been exclusively pioneered

by

it was one of the castro daughters i

forgot her specific name

but

she was educated in the united states

and she imported this to cuba

that was her initiative and it's there's

been a back and forth you know there's a

catholic part of cuba that's against it

the government has cancelled pride

parades before because they kind of want

to be neutral in this whole thing

you know so it's just not true what they

say um so no i don't think capitalism

gives rise to heteronormativity i also

don't think there's any evidence that

queerness points to socialism now i do

think though

what they call queerness might actually

point toward uh socialism in one sense

and i think that could be the national

socialism of ernest rahm and the ss in

the 1930s

so that is definitely a form of

socialism that was associated or was the

conclusion of what they call

a queerness

so that that's my response

great okay next step is astro

proletariat

um

go whenever you're ready

hello thank you um i just have a simple

question here should be done pretty

quickly um do you see unions and

striking as a viable option for both

revolution in developed and undeveloped

nations and if so how do you how do the

how do the two situations compare

uh yeah it just depends on the context

obviously striking can be an effective i

mean look at the indian farmers strike

it's for unions again it depends what c

unions are an institution and they're an

institution that is either hegemonic or

counter-hegemonic so in the united

states the amazon labor union is a

counter-hegemonic union it's completely

independent of the democrats or it was

at least it's completely independent of

the established unions it's a completely

new union formed from scratch that kind

of places it strategically as a

counter-hegemonic institution whereas

most of the

big unions in the united states are

hegemonic institutions so you know you

have to really evaluate the context

and i don't think there's a

one-size-fits-all answer to this

but i will say that it's not inherently

unions are not inherently

uh

you know

i don't know what the word would be

they're not inherently revolutionary or

inherently even

uh

against capitalism or they want to call

it

and how do you think it contrasts in

both undeveloped and developed nations

i think um underdeveloped

countries

i would just just a guest random guess

probably have a union sector that is

more um

new right and so it's basically probably

has a more popular dimension to it

populist

dimension to it

uh it seems to be more agrarian if we're

talking about underdeveloped

and it seems to be more pivotal in

organizing you know

organizing things against the status quo

whereas in developed countries it

appears that unions have a role of

consolidating the status quo

so i guess that would be my best guess

right

all right thank you guys

great thank you

uh so next up we have pepe pinochet

howdy so um no i don't quite know who

you are um but i've been listening um

i'm a i'm right wing myself

but i just want to ask you a couple

questions um

so all right i would say that like here

in the west

and by the west i'm gonna i'm referring

to uh

you know the

five countries in the anglo-sphere and

of course western europe that there is

um

kind of like a cultural war that's been

waged against white heterosexual

christian men where

um

you know to put it in the words of um

eric zamor from france that um are

quote-unquote

brilliant progressives have brought

racial war and religious war back to us

with their belief that people are

undifferentiated

beings interchangeable of no sex and

without roots

and he he

also stated are the young french going

to agree to live as a minority on the

land of their ancestors

um so that resume resonates with me a

lot so i

from what i've heard you say it seems

like maybe there's some um maybe you're

in some agreement there that like some

people would consider me an ethnognat

which i

i just kind of consider conserving

your fucking land for your people is

that something that you

critique or you're against

so you know as far as that culture war

is concerned i would not describe it in

those terms specifically i think you can

be more broad and just say there's an

attempt by the globalists

to subject the populations of the world

actually to the homogeneity homogenizing

institutions

uh

of of social engineering and social

control the reason why

it seems like

for example i'll name them right why are

white people seemingly targeted well

they're only targeted in

white countries because they form the

majority of the people there

because they form the majority they have

the potential or the possibility you

know of giving expression to a politics

that is antagonistic to the interests of

their own ruling class globalist elites

so that's why there's that right it's

and it's ultimately against populism now

then there's christianity why are they

turning against christianity because

again christianity is this reservoir of

values and beliefs and traditions that's

thousands of years old that cannot be

conditioned or controlled by these

institutions okay which want to create

values from scratch

then there's heterosexuality why is

there a war on heterosexuality well

um that seems to be more because

if you think about it the traditional

heterosexual relationship is always

going to be the one that is the majority

of any given people it's also the

relationship

that gives rise to the um

you know uh creation of new people right

so heterosexuality is a specific

relation that

creates other human beings

controlling the way in which other human

beings are created is necessary if you

want this like

plan to homogeneous

and and institutionalize the entire

population and the reason why

heterosexuality has to be targeted is

because heterosexuality you know from a

freudian perspective contains the seeds

of

alternative forms of sociality and and

um and culture

uh because it because it produces that

family unit which is the you know it's

the unit of civilizations okay so

whereas you know the reason they're

promoting the lgbt stuff so much at

least in part is because

there's no threat that this is going to

give rise to an alternative unit

of a of a

civilization

antagonistic to the ones the globalists

are trying to create

so you have to look at the specific

reasons it's not just white christian

heterosexuals it's also for example

they're doing it against africans

african muslims right black african

muslims

develop develop their economies and

industrialize they're saying no you

can't do that you have to have green uh

sustainable development which basically

means secure the profits of the oil

bankers and secure their monopoly so no

one else can challenge them um you know

so this is being applied to everyone in

the world

you know in france it's going to be

applied to french people

and christians and the united states is

going to be applied you know i think the

u.s is what 60 60 70 white so mostly

white people

you know

mostly christian the united states is

mostly christian

and it's just the nature of where it is

right

okay so

yeah and that's why i only mentioned

western countries because i mean quite

frankly we're not

for different cultural reasons you're

not quite seeing this take place in

eastern in east asia you know well um

it's just bad to add it is kind of

happening but it's coming from these

western institutions these ngos and

these color revolutionists george soros

and the globalists funding the taiwan

government the hong kong protests

you know um

if you go to south korea or japan like

you'll find these proxies of the

globalists who are trying to implement

this agenda there too so it's it's a it

is a worldwide thing

i'm not some global homo

fanatic i i don't really can give a fuck

about corporations they're pieces of

shit parasites

for the most part but um i think that

would probably be where we you know our

agreements kind of start to end um

but it does seem like so i'm just

curious so

if i recall correctly you thought like

with the homodor

you thought that was just and i've heard

that critique that it was during uh

russia's attempt to um industrialize

that

the famine just

it just inevitably happened there wasn't

any kind of terror i can yeah i can

really simply explain it so russian

agriculture

at that time was not organized in a way

that could produce enough excess

or i should say organize the surpluses

of production to have enough excess to

buy machinery

as well as ha free up labor for you know

industrial workers and to produce these

kinds of industrial technologies so

agriculture had to be organized in such

a way that the surplus grain that was

being produced could be confiscated by

the state

and sold on the world market in order to

buy machines

or buy some kind of capital

or

even employ labor in such a way that

will allow them to industrialize so that

was the main issue with collectivization

a lot of people think all this is

because they wanted to implement you

know um

a project of making everyone equal or

making everyone communal and that really

was not the that was really not the main

factor at all i mean the communal

structure of the cold calls was in many

ways just in continuity with the

traditional russian

you know murder and cooperative systems

that existed before the stolepin reforms

it's it wasn't something that was like

completely new or alien it was just it

had to be organized in a specific way

that the state could um it's all look

you you look at the history of western

capitalism eastern whatever right it's

all about those surpluses coming from

the primary sphere of production you

have to have a little bit more than you

already have or organize that excess in

such a way that you can expand

your wealth so it's like it's a cost

benefit analysis in the immediate sense

it's going to produce a level of poverty

and it's going to produce this kind of

level of um you know almost populism

but in the long term it leads to more

wealth

so i just want to ask you a question i'm

going to be blunt about it but

if

if let's say you had um you and people

who think like you

had uh

had a revolution or just said you know i

don't know whatever happened you guys

just had the uh opportunity to change

your america what exactly what drastic

changes would we see

um

so since we're already a modern country

and we're a modernized country uh we

won't have to do anything like

collectivization

but some of the changes i think i would

like to see is um

let me simplify this so we would

basically have a focus on

reindustrialization

we would have a focus on redistributing

parcels

of means of production of some kind

first in the form of like a plots of

land

possibly for agriculture actually that's

a possibility

maybe you know i don't know if you want

to be really futuristic you could do

like the 3d printer type of thing just

give the american people some kind of

independent baseline means of

subsistence that they could live off of

independently of of any kind of

institution

not totally independently because it's

not possible but some kind of land

reform basically um and then we want an

infrastructural revolution we want to

build more cities we want to shift to

fusion energy want to accelerate

actually production even accelerate the

production of hydrocarbons so-called

fossil fuels

um build you know i mentioned build new

cities build new highways build new

roadway roadways

and even if we don't have the money to

do this we do it anyway because it'll

pay for itself

and yeah we all one thing is um

completely eliminate the service

industry that's something i believe in

shorten the workday which is something

possible if you eliminate the service

industry and redistribute the heavy

industry heavy-duty jobs to the

population as a whole

which can be possible if you shorten the

workday

and you know we will have immense levels

of free time to basically

have that good old-fashioned american

liberty i am not of the view that i want

communists to like

choose what culture we have i want

culture to be a kind of free market i

want us just to have the free time to

develop whatever forms of culture and

art we want to as a people and as a

civilization

after we like secure that baseline of

production that we need to survive and

we need to reproduce ourselves

so you know that that is pretty much

what i believe for america and probably

something similar i would imagine for

the west

so one okay this and this will be i'll

just wrap it up with this question um

so you did use the word redistribution

now when it comes to of course there's

personal property and obviously you

would know the difference personal and

private property now you know there are

i wouldn't say what i think deserves to

happen to them because it wouldn't be

allowed on here or youtube but you know

they're companies like blackrock um i'd

say people who own obnoxious amounts of

um

properties

um

oh yeah i just want to in order to read

shit you would have to take

from somebody

i i think actually um when it comes to

those i'm not really thinking of

redistribution at all i'm thinking more

of elimination

um we don't need blackrock we don't need

most of wall street we don't need most

of these bullshit financial speculators

these hedge funds whatsoever i think

that would be more of a kind of purging

of a parasitic sector of our economy

um and then when it comes to um i want

to say another thing

which is with regard to banking we need

to have a national bank when you have a

state-owned bank and we need to

eliminate the federal reserve

obviously that's part of this right all

these private banks will be completely

liquidated

we will have probably a change in the

nature of our currency going from you

know free-floating fiat currency to

something that's backed up

by either minerals resources gold i i

probably not gold actually but but

something right

um you know possibly even using

blockchain technologies who knows i mean

i'm very open open to this futuristic

kind of stuff

but yeah i mean there are definitely

going to be entire sectors of the

economy that will just be outright

eliminated

yep

okay what was that peppa

yeah yeah that's good

awesome okay thank you very much

uh so next up we have

uh lil liz dog

whatever you're ready mr

um am i unmuted yeah

so um i was wondering what you think of

uh the juice

okay so i'm gonna mute this just

anything want to make it clear i i'm not

anti-semitic i've got nothing against

jews

um and i personally don't um

think jews control the world or anything

like that

religion it's like the kind of i don't

know if maybe calling it the foundation

would be problematic or controversial

but it is you know it it it it does

contain thousands of year old wisdoms

the kabbalah and things like that that i

think

you know are very interesting to

understand and and i mean i'm i'm

personally a muslim right so i

have great reverence for the abrahamic

tradition in general um whether it be

jewish or christian

okay so well if you

definitely not

we'll probably rise to take its space

but i think i can i can probably

actually say this on youtube right i

don't think israel is has a legitimate

right to exist

as a state i think it's a completely

artificial state that uh

doesn't have any long-term future you

know but i but i also don't think that

the people living there should be

deported

you know um i just think that as a state

it can't it's not sustainable it

shouldn't exist

um democratic and secular i just

i think

it's just kind of like uh you pretty

much just mean western right at that

point and

yeah i i don't i don't even think that's

sustainable i think israel has a huge

orthodox very religious population

that

have really big problems with the kind

of secular culture you have in tel aviv

uh you know what i what i envisioned for

the future is you know some kind of

alliance between the orthodox jews the

religious ones

and the uh

the kind of

you know the

the other

peoples of the middle east to you know

revive the traditions of the region in

general right also revive the mizrahi

eastern judaism revive the christianity

revive islam in new ways now does that

require the european model of secularism

probably not they can come up with their

own you know

model of multi-religious

tolerance and you know

not so much atheism as much as

you know not

not enforcing one specific religion at

gunpoint you know so they're i think

there's different paths to this you know

it's it's an interesting topic in

general about seculars and all this kind

of stuff but you know i think in that

region of the world

i don't think any of the states are

sustainable at all i don't think

you know i don't think lebanon for

example take lebanon that's where my uh

family's from lebanon is a complete

no no lebanon so lebanon is a completely

um fake country created by france

it was historically part of the syrian

uh

syrian uh what do you call it

region of the ottoman empire

and then you have things like saudi

arabia which historically was the hijaz

it was a state that only exists to

safeguard mecca and medina the holy

cities of islam

but saudi arabia came to be because of

the british it's literally just a family

that rules a state i mean there are so

many states in the middle east that just

don't have any long-term viability from

the perspective of enduring

civilizations

so i'm not even just singling out israel

right

israel also was created by the british

as a completely artificial project

you know it's not that i think jews

shouldn't have their own state i just

one i take kind of issue with the idea

that jews are a nation

rather than a religion

and then also um just the nature of

israel's creation as well so

you know i think the middle east is

probably going to have a future of

not a not a revival of the ottoman

empire but the revival of the historical

tradition of empires there

whatever form that takes

yeah i i i don't

i don't know

about that you know i don't really think

saudi

see like you have to look at this from a

traditional historical perspective i

mean have the saudis or has the hijaz

region ever been something that had

political hegemony and that no it hasn't

right it's just people were kind of

living in the desert and then there was

mecca in medina and not really much else

whereas the seats of empire kind of

usually was egypt or persia

you know

these are the centers of the middle

eastern civilization

so

i just i'm kind of skeptical that saudi

arabia is going to have a huge role

in that i think probably egypt and iran

and turkey actually probably are the

three you should look at to see

who's gonna probably shape the future of

the region

oberon whenever you are ready you can go

for it

hey what's up

all right so

between uh

the big dick giga chad

wonder hero leon trotsky

and

the uh micro penis

soy boy wonder cup smallin

trotsky was linen's favorite successor

um do you think that he was a nice pick

uh it is actually a um

widely

mishelled view that lenin that trotsky

was lenin's successor there's no

evidence for that there's evidence to

the contrary actually

that letter was a forgery and it was

proven as such

also you have i think your descriptions

are wrong from a historical perspective

trotsky was known to be

his very vain kind of nerdy kind of like

you know pretty much a soy jack

sigma

no he was known to be this kind of like

complaining whining very weak guy

whereas stalin was this kind of very

sage like you know pretty much a giga

chad

and it's pretty much like you know the

the the chad uh

the chad wojack versus the soy jack

that's like crying and screaming with

glasses on that is literally the

relation between trotsky and stalin

like stalin is that chad wojack just

staring and saying yes yeah i know you

you keep repeating yourself i appreciate

that but i wouldn't expect anything less

from you know um stalinist revisionists

so

but that's okay

you mean like how trotsky tried to

revise and eliminate lenin's theory of

the democratic dictatorship of the

proletariat in the peasantry in favor of

like a almost like uh nazi-like

dictatorship of the urban russia and the

european russians the countryside that's

right i mean yeah yeah yeah look up

trotsky's

trotsky's trotsky's method of super

industrialism would have amounted to the

use of state-sanctioned terrorism to

basically use the european centers of

russia to enslave and terrorize the rest

of the 90 of russians

into submission in order to

industrialize with no leeway really yeah

really that would have been sort of a

better or a worse play out than what

stalin's terrorism and fucking

actually yes actually yes

because

because collectivization however ugly it

was eventually did give rise to a

people's state that reflected the

character and reality of the russian

people from culture art literature just

to the level of like who got appointed

to become the rulers right the the the

administrators they all were derived

from these like peasants that were newly

educated and all these old all these old

urban kind of europeanized elites were

overthrown in the great purges which was

a very populist event

yeah yeah i can't help but see the irony

here though from somebody with a

not quite the wrinkly brain that trotsky

had but a little bit of a smooth brain

to understand that trotsky understood

that you needed to work with the

capitalist governments of other nations

to get past it right uh stalin wanted to

completely lop off an isolationist to to

the detriment of the ussr yeah well so

translation translation is trotsky

trotsky wanted to turn the soviet union

into a prostitute of the western

capitalist powers and when he got exiled

he was willing to work with the

governments of nazi germany and imperial

japan including british intelligence in

order to recapture the soviet state for

the express purpose of basically

prostituting it to the capitalist west

because to fulfill his uh delusion of of

a permanent world revolution that would

that never was going to happen he was

capable of thinking ahead like stalin

wasn't right so had to wait till later

until he started working with the

capitalist west right wait wait yeah

they're too late

so stalin worked with the capitalist

west as an equal rather than at their

mercy

yeah so yeah i wouldn't expect anything

like that

yeah

i don't know why you're bringing up

trotsky you're just pretty much coping

trotsky was not a bolshevik the only

reason he rose to any prominence

whatsoever is because he decided to go

over to lenin's side temporarily but he

was never a bolshevik he was always a

menshevik he rejected lenin's theory of

the democratic dictatorship of the

proliterate in the peasantry he hated

the you know present majority of russia

he was an elitist snob who thought they

were all sub-human asiatics he had this

racist view of stalin as well and

trotsky's pretty i mean stalin's dabbing

on trotsky he got that ice pick and he's

no more and

all his followers now are just a bunch

of like you know people who are coping

about what happened

i'm sorry to tell you trotsky failed

trotskyism failed uh they were caught

red-handed during the great purges all

their sabotage failed trotsky trotsky's

have never accomplished the damn thing

in the history of mankind you know i

don't know why i mean they've never rose

to power they've never secured the state

they've never had any you are coping

coping and seething means that stalinism

literally was not pure marxism you're

doing you're doing the no choice there's

no there's no stay on that's that's the

perfect so that's a perfect that's a

perfect um

that's a perfect argument you just made

because there's no such thing as pure

marxism so you're basically admitting

that you don't understand marxism

they're more dialectic democracy saying

such a stupid thing

saying such a stupid and undialectical

thing i mean there's no such thing how

could there be a pure marxism that's so

fucking stupid it's completely it's

completely antithetical expanding

towards marxism

was exactly what should have happened

that's what marx and lyndon would have

wanted that's why lenin did favor him no

he didn't know there's no evidence

there is no evidence there is no lenin

wanted trotsky removed there is evidence

for that there is no evidence that he

wanted to be a successor

all right got you all right all right uh

mad love keep coping keep seething

trotsky foolin all

well i don't think i need to because

considering trotsky's have never had a

revolution they've never been in power

anywhere i mean china is inheriting the

legacy of stalin today i mean

i i mean like there's at least a few

states that i mean what significance

what do i have to cope about exactly

like trotsky is selling newspapers on

the side of the road and costing

strangers i mean okay

okay next up is uh half ads i think

that's how you pronounce it

yeah

wonderful uh hello guys we meet again uh

was the guy reciting gawk yesterday

uh i wanted to ask you

uh what do you think of the kosovo

situation

um right now

yeah right now

who does it belong to is it a sovereign

state uh should it be serbian albanian

uh i don't think its borders are viable

in the long term and as far as who it

belongs to is concerned

you know i'm gonna be a fence sitter

here and try to be neutral because i got

albanian nationalists and serbian

nationalists in the community i think it

belongs to no one i think it belongs to

a future state that is going to be able

to integrate

the various peoples of that region while

and i do i do think there needs to be a

point made that the sovereignty

and

just reality of the albanian people who

are such a unique people

they're not slavs they're not latins

they're completely unique people that

has to be respected in some kind of way

but at the same time

serbia's historical you know role

in the balkans with regard with respect

to the other slavic nations also has to

be respected so i think that it really

comes down to

serbia and albania need to come to a

deal they need to come to a deal of some

kind need to come to an understanding

and whether that's going to be the

formation of a federal state or some

kind of

fusion state or

maybe even just clearly marking their

respective borders in a way that's going

to satisfy all parties

what i think is really detrimental to

long-term prospects of peace in that

region is nato i think nato is the

problem

and i think nato has done more

to consolidate

the differences that exist there than

any any other force now i mean granted

the yugoslav civil war

was really ugly there was ultra

nationalism uh throughout the whole

region

on all parts and by all parties

but nato just kind of stepped in and

decided to take one

side in that conflict of

ultra-nationalists

and that has led to a kind of very

long-term

you know grievances and resentments that

have built up for decades

so

you know i just think

i i think uh i i place the blame

squarely on nato for

you know the conflicts there but i at

the same time i i also want to be fair

to the albanians

thank you i have a second question and

that is what do you think is the

greatest problem facing marxist leninist

today

themselves easily i think it's the

problem is quite literally their own

inability to make sense of marxism

leninism in the 21st century

so that's i mean

that that is just my view i think uh

they are bogged down by so much

dogmatism and so much

you know confusion basically because you

know i think marxism leninism as simple

as it is it's only really simple from

this practical historical perspective

but in order to appreciate that

simplicity i mean you've gotta

you gotta do a lot of homework you gotta

understand hegel you've gotta go through

you know heidegger and you gotta go

through the 20th century french school

and all this kind of stuff

and then you can appreciate

you know the meaning of marxism leninism

so it's really hard it's something

that's really hard to understand and i

think that's the biggest problem it

faces is that it's not really understood

by anyone

at least in the west now i can't really

say that in china or russia but in the

west at least yeah that's the problem

it's facing but also i think in china

and russia

they're probably also facing a problem

of you know also trying to make sense of

marxism leninism

in a non-institutional context in china

they teach marxism but it's it's a very

kind of you know dry from what i've been

told

you know very much procedural kind of

thing it doesn't really satisfy the

subjective

longings of people to make sense of

their world

from what i've been told so

i think this is the big problem the

crisis we're facing

and a follow-up question would you say

marxist leninist in the west are stuck

in the past

uh

in many ways yes but i think that's not

the problem per se

the problem is not so much being stuck

in the past as it is being stuck in the

present in a specific way they have not

embraced the future they haven't

rediscovered marxism leninism

in a completely new way

and while they make reference to the

past they're not actually legitimately

you know

succeeding that past they're not

inheriting that past successfully

they're basically just

they're referencing it in many different

ways but the truth is is that they're

stuck in the present in a very specific

way

uh specifically stuck in this position

of

subservience to the status quo at least

in the west the liberal status quo

also and not just in the west i mean

there's there's creators

from who allegedly live in the middle

east

although some have contested this view

you know who call themselves marxist

leninists or

some live in asia you know luna oy and

hakeem and you know they're

they're basically just western marxist

londoners so

it's not it's not just where you live

it's just like what cultural milieu are

you what context you're grounding your

marxist melanism is is it a real

historical tradition or is it in this

kind of like trendy

you know um

form of liberalism that emerged recently

i see and uh if you could give one

advice to marxist letters today what

would you give them

i would say

uh drop everything you're doing and go

back and study hegel i think that would

be the simple thing i say go back

study hegel study the 20th century

thought western thought

and

you have to make it full circle if you

start out as a marxist leninist you're

not going to go anywhere you got to go

for it full circle right

you'll you'll be able to appreciate the

wisdom of marxism leninism after you

step outside of its narrow

dogmatic confines

is what i would say

let's see i see uh thank you for the

talk guys it's been it's been amazing as

usual

thank you for having me twice in today's

uh god bless you

you too great thank you guys

um how's we've been going on for almost

two hours um i don't remember if we set

an exact time for how long you want to

go on we'll keep going as long as you're

available so i just want to be

respectful of your time yeah yeah i

think i can i can i can pretty much do

this for

probably i think the absolute cutoff

time would be like

two hours from now i probably gotta go

but

yeah i can pretty much do this okay

we'll keep going uh next up is cjc

uh go for a teacher

hello

yup

all right so i just have a question um

what is your opinion on pol pot and the

khmer rouge

um

so

that is not

i'm kind of limited in terms of what i

can say

but not only just because of censorship

but also because

there is not

a lot of conclusive um let's just say uh

it is not a widely under well understood

or well particularly well documented

period of time

however i i am confident being able to

say that there is a historical

significance of the camera rouge

that is not just

you know this murderous

horrific genocide that they're accused

of committing

i think that the specific way in which

they kind of are building off of maoism

this idea of year zero of just

completely returning to the countryside

to rebuild up

your industrial base from scratch

as well and then most importantly though

right the most important takeaway is

the revolutionary strategy that they

employed which was

kind of just like this hyper maoism of

going to the countryside

from scratch and almost completely

neglecting the cities

is well i mean i'm quite sympathetic to

it in in many ways but

let's just say let me put it this way

okay so

there's two aspects to the story of

cambodia okay

one aspect is the americans and the west

or what do you want to call it right

the other aspect is the soviets and the

vietnamese now these two sides had a

monopoly on history on writing history

okay because the um kimmer rouge was

aligned with china at the time

so in terms of writing the history of

what happened it was pretty much

monopolized by their enemies

so what really happened in cambodia is a

question i don't really think has been

conclusively answered

but i i will acknowledge that there

probably was a lot of atrocities and

horrible things that had happened just

from what eyewitnesses and local

people have said

but how much is that uh to blame on the

kimmer rouge and you know to what extent

was that

because of the kim rouge

what how much of it was just senseless

local violence there i mean it's a

complicated question

but i hope that

somewhat satisfies your uh question

what's up

yeah that answered my question thank you

great thank you okay next up we've got

uh fr hamper

um you are unmuted

hello

hello

hello

yeah we can hear you speak up a little

bit though

so

in your debate with

wait hold on are you like

like in a sock like you sound very quiet

no i'm here in your debate with um

dylan burns

you've said that

if um taiwan was taken over

that china would respect their autonomy

but recently

recently china said what can you i can't

really quite make out what you said

hey you're very quiet

you had to speak up a little bit

yeah i don't know if it's working this

sure

now i noticed it's like i think you said

it's like 1am there but fuck your

neighbors you're talking to haws so you

got to speak up a little bit

okay i think he died i think he's uh

maybe himself stuck underwater in the

taiwan straight somewhere because

it's just his microphones very muffled

and

but i i think i'll just try to answer

what you

asked um because uh there's two

possibilities of what you probably have

so i said what about china's recent a

refusal of taiwan's

um

insistence on bringing pelosi

and

taiwan being able to have its own system

uh is not the same thing as being able

to

you know um

invite whatever foreigners it wants to

and make all these i mean it will have

the least amount of freedom when it

comes to its geopolitical orientation

but in terms of what system it wants for

its own people i mean china will

probably

give it

autonomy i will okay so yeah

he typing training he wanted to ask you

about china rolling back commitments to

taiwan and being autonomous yeah so

that's the that's the second thing so

taiwan has been very pa sorry china has

been very patient with the taiwan

authorities

since the 1990s when china was in a

disadvantage and disadvantageous

position it gave them a lot of

assurances and a lot of you know leeway

in terms of guarantees and stuff

and it's been trying to work with the

taiwan authorities

you know to for to

create a plan for eventual reunification

the problem is that the taiwan

authorities recently have pursued a path

of independence since 2014.

and the straw that broke the camel's

back was inviting nancy pelosi who's the

third most powerful

political uh leader in the united states

to taiwan at the uh

against the express wishes of china

so taiwan is not

they basically pissed off the beijing

government and they're saying well you

know what

reunification is happening one way or

another but

they're you're basically going to be

punished for this

in terms of

you're not going to have all the

assurances you used to you're not going

to have all the autonomy you were

promised of having an example of this is

china promised it was not going to

station a pla garrison

in taiwan after reunification and that

you know the taiwan authorities can keep

their own army

that's probably out the window now uh

there probably is going to be a pla

garrison after unification

i don't think the chinese are just going

to completely come and implement a ch

the beijing government system that's

just not

sustainable

for purposes of social stability

but there's going to be less autonomy

with more freedom comes more

responsibility and the taiwan

authorities have used that freedom

to undermine in the beijing government's

view the sovereignty of china fun china

as a whole

and inviting foreigners you know

specifically the americans

and this statement is

of of of to pro-independence forces i

mean the more china thinks

that the

taiwan authorities are going to use

their freedom to pursue

independence or separatism

the less inclined they will be to give

them autonomy

so if they want to just have their own

system

internal to that island

and live whatever way of life they want

to live that's fine right but if you're

going to use

that autonomy to play geopolitical games

and just like help the americans

undermine

the mainland i mean they're not going to

tolerate

that great thank you

uh next up is ferris ferris go for it

that has how are you

all right how are you

i'm doing just fine thank you very much

um i have a few questions to ask you

about patent africanism

and socialism in africa so i'll just go

ahead

so um firstly i want to ask what are

your opinions on the pan-african

movement and their key figures

i'm broadly sympathetic

just i don't know what else to say i'm

broadly sympathetic

specifically sympathetic to the economic

freedom fighters in south africa's

view of this

um

yeah i mean i i i don't know if it's

possible for all of africa to be unified

into one state given all the differences

but i do think all of africa is united

already in having interests

they're they're united in so far as

their victims to foreign powers right

that are trying to undermine its

sovereignty and independence

so is there a common african identity

and interest well in that sense yeah

there is i mean just in justin so far as

uh

the belgian king i think it was him i

don't know if it was him or the german

kaiser said that they want to carve up a

meg uh a piece of this magnificent

african cake

during the um

partition of africa in the 19th century

yeah there is a common africa

so yeah i am broadly sympathetic to all

the people you just mentioned

all right um yeah i broadly agree with

you on that because i agree that like

african countries in general they should

all have like they should all like try

to cooperate with each other rather than

trying to cooperate with primarily

foreign non-african countries first is

to try to cooperate with each other

develop infrastructure obviously there's

difficulties surrounding this

but they should try and move toward this

but i'm

i'm sympathetic towards it but i

understand that pan-africanism at the

end of the day is a western idea trying

to be implemented in

africa like i feel like yes to be morgan

this moves on to my next question which

is um do you think it's possible for

marxism or socialism or any sort of like

proper left-wing movement to succeed in

africa in the future and if so how and i

know saying africa

is obviously a very large continent so

that's kind of oversimplifying it a bit

but for simplicity

simplicity's sake let's just say um west

africa

or sub-saharan africa because at the end

of the day a lot of the countries the

reason why they're poor they have

different economic realities but they're

still all poor at the end of the day

like

the country i'm from sierra leone 42 and

those people are literate it's a deeply

religious country which means the nation

its people are generally less inclined

to more progressive um economic and

social ideas and the labor unions that

exist in the country are very very weak

and my country particularly has so many

different ethnicities to deal with and

obviously the country the problems my

specific african country has are

different to the ones like other west

african countries have but the sit but

the end of the day um economic um

like low economic output

um

a

a sort of tribalism in the country um

illiteracy those are issues that plague

african countries so i just wanted to

ask how do you think uh go back to the

major depression how do you think

socialism or marxism can succeed in

africa uh sorry for the uh long stuff

before that

i think the place to probably begin

there's two i think there's two elements

to that right and i'm going to simplify

them the first is going to be land

reform which is a pressing issue in

southern africa

it's the context of zimbabwe and south

africa what's going on there

and the second thing is going to be the

specific marxist theory of the

productive forces

that will give a paradigm of of

industrialization

you know that will allow africa to not

only have a land reform but have a land

reform that

you know

succeeds in in revolutionizing the

forces of production

so those i think those are the two ways

marxism specifically can help africa

uh both a theory of

from a sociological perspective

land reform uh you know giving people a

piece of the pie

in terms of

the policy politically right the

economic base

then there's the element of you know

unleashing the productive forces

unleashing wealth unleashing prosperity

increasing technology and increasing the

material livelihoods of the people

through the unique marxist understanding

and so i think those are two aspects

that marxism

can be very useful and and also learning

from the chinese experience i think is

very important more more a chinese model

rather than the soviet model will

probably be

much more beneficial to that context

yeah and

also like whatever model of socialism or

marxism like sprout south africa it

shouldn't really be the pan-african

model it should be more so something

that develops organically sure yeah of

course yeah so socialism will be

different wherever it is so yeah we'll

have african characteristics

very different from the chinese system i

imagine

do you think this should begin in like

more developed countries of africa like

developed in like

quotation marks for like nigeria or

south africa or egypt like some of the

richer countries or do you think this

can happen in a relatively poor country

like we can still move towards because

i'm not too sure like you can

i'm not too sure we can jump from like

if capitalism hasn't fully developed i

don't think we can jump to

a form of a dictatorship of the

proterria or just

moving away from a catholic system i

feel like we need to develop

catastrophic

capitalism first uh do you agree with me

on that do you think

it should be more staff in countries

that have a more developed economy first

or do you think developed developing

nations or least development nations can

succeed in

bringing about socialism so i think from

historical experience the stages view

has not been accurate right this idea

that you have to develop capitalism

first

has not been it hasn't panned out

historically in terms of which countries

had revolutions you know look at china

for example

so i i think it's true you're gonna

probably i think that some of the hot

spots are probably gonna be

um so south africa because of its

intense political situation

uh you have ethiopia because of its

intense geopolitical situation

uh and then you have the west african

cfac countries under and i think there's

a revolution that's

brewing there

uh against the french imposed currency

system

yeah absolutely

trying to make yeah so those are three

places that are very three places that i

envision

uh political change

to be foreseeable

in africa

all right i was just interested in your

opinions on this because like i'm

obviously like the two views i have and

the main view i have on africa is mainly

from my father who

currently works there and is like sort

of involved in the political system on

of my specific country so i have like

sort of that insight from there about

sort of like wanting an insight from a

foreign but like

someone who like understands like

just socialism and marxism very well i

just wanted to just get this of

perspective from you

um as for the um

that's what the whole thing about the um

the whole stages system i do so like i

can see the stage system like obviously

like

the system we understand is that that's

how it is because we were first in

feudal society then let's all like

capital society and i was like the whole

thing is we're trying to move to a

social society but i do like i do

acknowledge that we can jump because

russia was like

mainly it was like industrializing but

they're so like most of it was still

under feudalism in my opinion and then

obviously it jumped to association so

i'm somewhat sympathetic to the african

post-colonial frames that kind of say

you know this is a very kind of um

european west european kind of view of

linear time

so this paradigm of of of like backwards

and more advanced

has limitations you know is is

is capitalism is it a stage or does this

understanding of the evolution from

feudalism to capitalism to socialism in

the european context is that more of a

spatial logic to help us understand the

present rather than a linear um temporal

logic of of time

can it be more spatial logic of

understanding the various relations that

permeate

the makeup of

the present right so

when you're talking about the african

context i mean is there a feudalism in

africa i don't think so i think there's

a unique african mode of production that

needs to be

understood and developed

outside of the european paradigm so i'm

sympathetic with post-colonial views

with regard to that

all right um thank you

thank you thank you

thank you ferrets

okay okay so next up we've got data

data go for it

hello um yeah i just find it really

funny you know in that last question

you're talking about how like marxist

leninism can

help

africa when if we look at examples of

marxist lands in africa the first one

that jumps to my mind is angola and has

do you remember what happened in angola

do you remember what happened

oh refreshment okay

we don't obviously know so what happened

was the mpla which was cuban backed

right they basically cut all the water

off

in angola they raped and murdered

thousands of people

they murdered anita

politicians including joseph savimbi who

was american-backed

um the anita angolan politicians were

striving for democracy they were

striving for um

uh free market capitalism the best type

of the best type of system

they were they were striving for the

best and

your fucking dog shit ideology

murdered thousands and we can go to

another example let's go to nicaragua

where the uh

famous african country as well right

what like it's another african country

you're mentioning right

what do you say sorry

so so since since we're apparently globe

trotting around the whole fucking world

let's just focus on africa

bullshit propaganda allegation against

communist states on a global level and

we're not going to take to take up too

much time let's focus on angola okay so

everything i've been presented with in

terms of the claims made about the

atrocities of the angolan mpla

has been shown that this is all

propaganda this is cold war propaganda

specifically

um

funded by the cia

so they didn't uh murder the uh leader

um of anita's joseph savimbi in 2002

that didn't happen

uh i'm not familiar with the details of

what happened in 2002 but i will say

that during the cold war

so during the during the cold war

there's verifiable evidence from xcia

people who worked with the cia that yes

they did everything they could to churn

out a factory farm of bullshit

propaganda smears against the mpla to

demonize them and

as much as they could without any regard

for the truth whatsoever so yeah you're

talking about a whole mountain of

bullshit to get through in terms of what

happened in angola and you expect me

just to accept all these claims that

you're making well i'm actually going to

be skeptical okay so it's a

from just from what i know about what

was why did they just end elections and

kill opposition politicians

um they may or may not do that i don't

know but if they do that i mean uh but

you don't know they didn't have an

election throughout the whole of the

mpla's uh de facto authoritarian rule

over angola and they just killed people

well it doesn't it doesn't sound

particularly out of the ordinary or oh

funny as well when you think democracy

is a western thing like western has like

this inherent negative connotation

democracy is better than your dog shit

wait no that's beautiful i wasn't i

wasn't going to be the one

this is beautiful i was not going to be

the one who plays hold on shut the fuck

up no you know i was not going to be the

one who plays what about his um with

west the west but since you want to

bring up the fucking west we don't live

in a fucking democracy we live in a

two-party duopoly where the politics

never fundamentally changes in any way

and when an outsider actually does come

and change when an outsider actually

does come and change up not even the

fundamental policies we implement but

just the political culture we have like

donald trump the fucking fbi comes and

fucking raids him and wants to fucking

indict him don't fucking come and tell

me we live in a fucking democracy even

someone like trump who bowed down to the

establishment in every conceivable way

just because we upset the political

culture so radically and drastically

they're not going to fucking send him

try and send him to jail and borrow him

from fucking running don't fucking sit

here and tell me you live in a democracy

you dumb little bitch bernie sanders got

fucking they had the democratic

primaries were rigged against bernie

sanders you're going to fucking say we

live in a western

you talked about angola killing

political opposition my dude are you

aware of what the cia and the fbi have

done to kill political opposition in

this fucking country you are so fucking

blind to the country you live in you

dumb fuck you come here fucking yelling

bitching at me about all the dumb

fucking propaganda you were fucking fed

about communist states i wasn't even

going to bring up well what about what

happened in america and the west because

i know it's a what about ism but since

you insist on bringing up western

democracy no dude we don't live in a

fucking democracy we're only allowed to

vote for the fucking people that are

compatible with the interests of the

ruling class there's never been a

possibility of any anti-establishment

person running successfully without

being undermined in some fundamental

fucking way undemocratically and extra

democratically so don't fucking sit here

and talk i mean who fucking killed mlk

the fbi we all fucking know that who

killed malcolm x they didn't know they

know i'm okay with no date yet okay okay

to the same extent that mlk was not

killed by the fbi

and golan's didn't kill any opposition

i'm gonna go with the official

government story of angola wait wait

wait wait wait since you're just like uh

swerving around this what about the uh

nicaraguan uh sandinistas what about

that one i think they're gigantic i

think they're giga chads personally

wait you think you think so the nickel

walker is a permanent commission on

human rights reported two thousand

murders in the first six months and

fourteen thousand can you can you uh

hold on i'll tell you what sen send that

human rights senate hold on i'll tell

you what i'll tell you what

sure sure it's all it's all correct it's

all correct

they've never lied about anything so

okay i'll i'll help you i'll help you

get that ngo that human rights with

everything send them my number and i

will arrange a time in a meeting where

they can like line up in a congo line to

suck my cock every single one of those

human rights guys

so yeah i'm against human rights i'm 100

against human rights and i don't believe

in any of the official stories any of

these human rights bullshit are you

against human rights are you from like

revolutionaries raping like the contras

for example

i just don't buy it see that's the thing

i just i don't buy anything

denise is like raped like people who

were supporting the conference would you

say that is uh valid and moral to do

obviously not but you know i just i'm

not really convinced

so so

at best like this is something i could

imagine this is something i could

imagine i could imagine a really ugly

war in which both sides commit

atrocities but you are specific shut the

fuck up you are specifically fed only

the crimes of the sandinistas and all

what a bunch of horrible people

but the context could very well be that

everyone's horrible right so it's like

i'm not inclined to believe this

specific villainization of the sandinis

i don't even know if what you're saying

is true or but even if it was true i

highly doubt just from what i know about

the history of u.s funded crimes in

latin america funding thugs funding

terrorists funding mercenaries funding

death squads funding death squads

including death squads that have raped

nuns with dogs

yeah that's what us the us has funded

debt squads in i think guatemala that

raped nuns with dogs so they've done a

lot of bad shit in latin america

whatever story you're giving me about

the sandinistas doesn't come anywhere

near close to the like far right death

squads funded by the fucking cia during

the cold war okay so i i don't really

buy anything any of the things you're

saying

this funny this funny um this funny

characterization death squads it's like

you're trying to paint them like fucking

nazis all right they were not seats

they literally were nazis the nazis fled

to argentina the nazis after the war who

got sanctioned from the cia literally

were fucking nazis that carried out

these fucking crimes in chile you had

that fucking farm of incest and rape and

pedophilia of children that the allende

government sent out uh you know

opposition figures to they literally

were nazis dude what are you talking

about

i mean that is literally where they fled

and they were employed as mercenaries by

the cia to commit these various

atrocities especially this was

especially true in latin america it was

also true in africa but especially true

in latin america

way okay okay so this death squad thing

so a house intel committee uh said

basically and i quote the staff has

uncovered no evidence that u.s

intelligence officials or u.s

intelligence policy in any way

so the u.s decided that it was the u.s

has cleared itself of any wrongdoing is

that what you're saying the american

government has absolved itself of any

wrongdoing the the american government

decided to investigate itself and it

found no wrongdoing on its own part

right

brilliant logic

logic so at the end golden government if

the santa needs the government to do the

same investigation and found no crimes

on its part you would say that's

propaganda and we have no reason to

fucking believe that but if the literal

united states government investigates

itself and clears itself of any

wrongdoing we're supposed to fucking

take that at face value you are so

fucking brainwashed you are the

definition of the blue pill you are the

definition of the blue pill you are so

fucking brainwashed it is out of this

world i cannot believe how much fucking

fluoride do you consume dude your tap

water stop drinking tap water dude just

stop drinking tap water

okay someone stabbed me and said i'm a

communist and i agree all these human

rights abuses occurred

wait you realize bosch calls himself a

communist and that word carries no

currency anymore in the united states

shut the fuck up dude even who supports

nato calls himself a fucking communist

that word that word carries zero

currency at all doesn't fucking mean

anything in the united states so let's

not talk about communism because i'm

pretty sure a ron paul libertarian would

agree with all the things that i'm

fucking saying right now it's not about

ideology it's about the facts let me get

this straight let me get this straight

so you called the sound denises based

and chad and like all that they raped

and murdered like thousands of people no

no billions just say billions why not

say billions since we're lying just say

trillions they they raped and murdered

trillions of people continue

underneath has also gained power via an

illegal coup they also tried regime

changes now salvador and belize and

other countries that's the reason why

america so hold on so when america funds

color revolutions they call these the

springtime of the people it's all it's

the democracy spring it's the arab

spring but when the revolutions happen

in latin america these are coups being

exported by the san anistas and the

soviets this is what george orwell

called double speak ladies and gentlemen

this is so fucking pathetic this

language we're using don't fucking sit

here and try to you know use this

semantics language games of trying to

it's the epitome of fucking hypocrisy

you're just speaking double speak right

now

basically you said like you criticized

america for getting involved in south

america do you know the reason why

america started funding like el salvador

in the contract oh just out of the

goodness and graciousness of its own

heart no actually the icj the

international court of justice oh

so they were just following the law it

was it wasn't about protecting the

interests of american capitalists and

american businesses it wasn't it wasn't

about trying to destroy the soviet union

latin america we're going to let the cia

trying to you know uh consolidate it

it's it's a global vision of control no

you're it's not about safeguarding the

bretton woods system of the usds

hegemony it's none of those things the

actual reason is because some made-up

bullshit institution created by the

americans themselves decided that the

americans should go and do something

that just so conveniently happens to

fall right into the interests of the

american capitals class at the time is

that what you're trying to say

so no has what happened was el salvador

explicitly asked ronald reagan and the

united states oh

you mean the pot you mean the puppet the

el salvadorians who were already puppets

of the american ruling class

you took the santa niece's dick so hard

the sandinistas were trying to set up a

regime change which apparently the the

cia does oh

you oh i understand so it's regime

change when the santa needs to do it but

when america does it it's like a it's a

it's a color it's the springtime of the

people right so my dawn my dawn was the

ukrainian people rising up in a glorious

democratic revolution but when the

sandinistas are helping revolutionaries

that's regime change got it totally not

double smoking totally not double speed

the sandinistas were so bad at regime

like it's so bad like um bolstering

nicaraguan people that when they finally

introduced democracy they fucking voted

the sound nieces out they were that

fucking bad they raped and murdered

thousands you're just hoping right yeah

i think i think you're the one coping

because uh as far as i can tell daniel

ortega is well

loved and unfortunate see your pro the

problem the problem here is that you're

saying that i'm the one coping and that

you're the one who has to come with all

like even the even like the mainstream

academia will not agree with the dumb

fucking bullshit that you're saying

nobody would agree with the dumb

bullshit that you're saying right now

but i'm the one coping you are the one

who has to convince people that the

world is like has a consensus that the

us is the villain in the story of latin

america that's just the world's

consensus so you have the job you have

the job of coping your way out of that

fact

what do i have to come about what do i

have to call about all the shit that i'm

saying is like commonplace

i mean you go you go to if you go to any

fucking academic institution anywhere in

the world

like they're just going to confirm what

i said so it's like why do i have to be

the one who's coping isn't the burden on

you to prove like oh everyone's lying

about what happened actually uh

which say that sound denise has like had

mass graves every year like read the ia

okay so so so this is what you want so

it's just like it's just like when

gaddafi was giving his soldiers viagra

right it's that kind of thing

wait wait let's get to gaddafi real

quick so the mass murder of innocent and

peaceful arab spring protesters yeah

obviously you deserve to die for that

obviously

yeah except the only evidence we have

any of those crimes that he allegedly

committed come from the people who would

have benefited from his toppling aka

nato and nato's puppets

do you think it was illegal to intervene

in libya yes

wait okay so it wasn't so under un unsc

resolution 1973 a no fly zone was

established and enforced by nato and

basically it said

this nato went far beyond the bounds of

what there's two there's two facets of

that first of all nato went far above

and beyond the bounds of what that u.n

resolution permitted it to do second of

all

russia and china at that time were not

assuming a bold anti-hegemonic stance so

they abstained from the vote okay but

that that alone does not prove its

legality

do you think libyans supported uh the

intervention by america no they did not

oh that's crazy because the gallup polls

showed that okay again again again if we

had a soviet or chinese poll that was

serving its own interests like

afghanistan so so when the soviets

invaded afghanistan if the soviet polls

said most of the afghans are pro-soviet

you would say that's propaganda but if

the gallup poll goes to fucking libya

why are you fucking sitting here trying

to convince me that these are like some

neutral god-like omnipotent institutions

that are totally not tied to the us and

its interests in some kind of fucking

way it's a comedy dude you have to

understand you're talking to someone

who's coming from a perspective of multi

polarity so when you talk to me about

the gallup polling talking all these

fucking western polls and shit i'm

thinking in my head okay these people

are aligned with the west we're not

gonna be able to arrive at a position of

truth or unbias here because it's like

it's like if i told you the soviet poll

said that the afghans welcomed the

soviets i mean you would dismiss that as

propaganda and rightfully so it would be

fucking propaganda but i but i can't do

the same thing about the gallup poll in

libya um and from the western media i

mean look look do you think okay let me

ask you a question do you think the

western press is independent

um it depends do you think the

mainstream media which is owned by like

three three total companies in total

right do you think it's independent

ngos they're not they're not

governmental okay perfect do you think

ngos are independent and not infiltrated

by the cia through rockefeller ford

foundation money

your schizophrenic okay so i'm

schizoposing because i'm talking about

the very prominent and widely

acknowledged role of the ford foundation

ngo uh

philanthropic laundering organizations

like the ford foundation which were used

by the cia to funnel money into ngos

that it supported that's schizo

you're not allowing me to disprove your

first point which we still have not just

i've still not allowed me to so

this idea that it was unpopular is

absolutely bullshit so 75 of libyans

favored nato's uh military intervention

in libya in 2011 yeah yeah it's just not

true it's just not true

you know you know the people they blame

the most like libya's like awful

position russia they blame russia the

most so did you get that from bellington

wait wait wait hold on so there's a gala

what's your source your source is the

western source

why would i believe only a western

source is there a russian source i can

look at

no this is the schizophrenia why i want

a russian source i don't want just a

western source i want a russian source

and then i can balance both of them and

see you know truth is probably somewhere

maybe in the middle i don't know but you

can't just fucking throw at me a

pro-western source that says libyans

love the west and they hate the west's

biggest enemy which is russia oh how

convenient they just like is fully in

the interests of the globalists to

topple the libyan government so let me

ask you a question do you think it is

improbable to assume that gaddafi's plan

for an indigenous african currency off

of the petrodollar had something to do

with them trying to topple him

so the african dinar that had nothing to

do with it right that would not be that

would not be a threat to the like legacy

of the bretton woods system and the

petrodollar like africa an african

currency that is exclusively backed up

by africa's own resources and minerals

that would not upset the world economic

order in a way in a way that the western

elites would lose bigly on right

there's a reason why

um

61 of people in libya disapproved of

russia

because they fund fucking terrorists in

libya

okay

so speaking of terrorists was ice did

isis and al qaeda play a prominent role

in the uh beautiful democratic

revolution against gaddafi

wait why are you

why is al qaeda got to do with like nato

and

cia and all those

how old are you how old are

i you refused to engage someone so

fucking ill-informed that they would ask

such a stupid fucking question

you're asking me what does al-qaeda have

to do with the fucking cia in libya are

you just do not know anything

wait wait this is so funny because even

western media has admitted that this

that the

even western media admitted the cia

worked with al qaeda in syria that's not

even a secret you fucking idiot

wait wait do you think al qaeda was

created by cia

hold on we went from the cia worked with

al qaeda in libya to the cia created

al-qaeda right

nice shifting of the goalposts

okay so if you're gonna deny a fact as

simple as that

i don't think you are informed enough to

debate about this in general

wait the cia have never worked with al

qaeda in anything ever

would you bet money on that okay

oh yes absolutely how much

um

hundred dollars okay

wait no can i ask you a genuine question

though what um with the uh

okay

what about you guys know what to do just

give me the sources and uh fact checking

in the discord because

you're a bitch so so jake sullivan

admitted it in his emails okay so

i have no idea who that is okay

well i mean because you're just not

fuck you're just not fucking educated

wait i'm not educated but you said the

were based what okay that first of all

that's a like a normative opinion

whereas you whereas that's that's that's

an opinion whereas you're just getting

the facts wrong me saying the sanities

are based it's not a question of fact

that's a question of opinion you have

gotten the actual facts wrong you have

literally said the cia has never worked

with al qaeda which is just a

categorically false statement wait wait

wait there's no uh al-qaeda um

intervention in 2011 in libya there's no

there's no evidence though okay al qaeda

definitely played a very prominent role

in overthrowing

gaddafi

what role did they play

okay

are you trolling this is a troll or

something

i'm asking you a question they played an

extremely prominent role in determining

okay so

i wait wait you're not just like

operation cycle that's a gotcha but

operation cyclone funded the mujahideen

not al qaeda okay so al-qaeda and the

cia have definitely worked together in

syria and libya

and possibly elsewhere so now oh my god

so in syria as well right

of course in syria yes let's be clear

the initial

the initial claim was that uh they've

never worked with al qaeda ever

which you can actually get in the

youtube chat where you can watch the

stream

sure but he'll have to and if he if he

links me like operation cyclone where he

funded the mujahideen

that i wanted all right so

so

okay so here here it is here's here's a

source

after jake sullivan chirped to his boss

about al qaeda being on our side in

syria he advocated for more covert arms

shipments to the syrian insurgency the

jihadist group was leading

um so here's what he said in his email

from wikileaks unclassified sullivan see

last item aq is on our side in syria

otherwise things have turned out as

expected so this is it aq is on our side

in syria

right here no idea it's i'm showing it

on stream right now this is a

unclassified cable or it was a leaked

cable that was classified between him

and hillary clinton jake sullivan and

hillary clinton this is like the tip of

the iceberg it's literally common sense

common knowledge

uh hold on i need can you link the

hyperlink with the url so i can look at

it myself

okay where will i link it

oh i don't know oh wait hold on let me

fucking find your

youtube channel

what's your name infrared

what a shit are you trolling by the way

because i don't know i can't tell if

this is like a joke

do you think that um do you think you

know do you know how to send super chats

because you owe me a hundred dollars so

do you know how to like do that or

wait no wait no i don't own your hundred

dollars yet well you you do owe me a

hundred dollars like

like very it's like a very easy

hundred dollars okay so here's cbs news

libyan intel document this is another

one i just showed you one that gives

it's

sorry okay libyan intel docs show ties

to cia renditions

wait wait wait that doesn't show that

doesn't say about al qaeda what the

intelligent diamonds were left behind

when it tripled he fell to the levels

uh the

okay let's see

comes the surprise the cia

many of these same countries

yeah this is the wrong one wait i'm

looking at this the wrong way cbs

wait no the c cbs one is is a is a red

herring should be completely ignored

it's a red herring okay yeah it should

be even more why is it gonna be red huh

i'm so done oh my god but but i already

showed you from jake sullivan's leaked

emails hold on wait

um

wait you're you this this this this one

that you're looking at libyan intel does

show ca cia renditions

yeah that was that was referring to uh

cooperation between the cia and the

libyan government apparently so that was

a wrong thing but that was that was

linked to me wrongly

right yeah but you're ignoring the thing

from jake sullivan because can you

address that

what do you mean

all the jigs yeah

um yeah sure

so basically

oh my god i'm being sorry i'm being

fucking spammed by a retard hold me

block him fuck me

for some reason um has people really

want you to know that data has an anime

pfp

yeah i mean i can i could i could

already tell i mean like

like these are things i can pretty much

into it

but yeah i mean wait

your article says the the thing that

says that

al qaeda was on their side in terms of

being against the regime not that they

worked with them no they did work with

them because al qaeda was leading those

forces that they were funding

no no no you're conflating two things so

they can be id al-qaeda in the cia okay

so you're basically twisting yourself

into a pretzel to uh

wait wait wait hold on slow down please

so basically this jake sullivan guy it

shows that yes al qaeda and the cia were

both ideologically opposed to libya but

not that they worked together that is

the difference they have worked together

yes they did no they are both

ideologically opposed to each other al

qaeda had no

presence within libya um

what

no this jake sullivan guy literally says

yes we are both ideologically opposed

okay so what what was the al-nusra front

why are you just skipping was the

al-nusra front an al-qaeda organization

can we agree on that

the all-news reformed

yeah oh

let me think uh yeah

yeah yeah the al-qaeda in syria right

okay

so did the cia help the al-nusra front

no there's no us connection in fact we

designate them as a foreign terrorist

organization we hate them

like we fucking but we fucking bombed

them like what

so the us did not help the al-nusra

front in any capacity

in any um

i mean there's a washington post article

i've read that says that we

um

[Music]

we didn't we ship syrian um

weapons against the al-nusra front

like against them

what

we we didn't we never helped thousands

all news were front

we never supported we did help the

all-new front

no

okay

so

at at this point i can't tell if you're

like trolling or if you're making like

an earnest uh commitment you're just

making very big statements with no um no

like substantial evidence right wait

wait if we were if we were so for the

allen user front why would they why

would we designate it as a fto and why

would we bomb them

okay it's very weird so do you know what

timber sycamore is

oh my fucking god i'm gonna kill myself

i'm sorry i shouldn't say that um yeah i

know what that is yeah i know what

you're gonna say and it's just okay

so why is the bullshit

it doesn't exist

timber sycamore didn't exist

wait wait um let me let me just see

something real quick so you're saying

timber sycamore did not exist

oh yeah

okay so what what would you need to be

for it to be proven that timber sycamore

existed

firstly can you tell me what you think

it means

what do you think timbers okay i'll just

read the wikipedia to you it was a

classified weapon supply and training

program run by the united states central

intelligence agency

that supported

and supported by some arab intelligence

services including saudi intelligence it

supplied money weaponry and training to

rebel forces fighting

assad in the syrian civil war

can we agree on that

um what

well you just said it doesn't exist

so did it exist or not did the cia

have a classified weapons supply and

training program to fund the syrian

rebels the moderate rebels

i would say no

okay what would you need to be convinced

uh that that that was the case

wait can i just tell you that real quick

um

can i i wish i could send you articles

but uh sorry a link a federal court said

it didn't exist

okay

so

the western press that was reporting

timber sycamore were lying

wait i wish i could send these in the

chat um

so then is the new york times lying

wait hold on because the new york times

reported on it

hold the phone jesus dude can you post

this in the chat so this is a um

a federal court which says this thing

that he's alleging that happened never

there you go

what keeps on dm you too you too smoke

for your shit iq that's funny

um

yeah this timber sycamore thing never

happened so i have no idea we're gonna

go so timber sycamore never happened

despite that the new york times admitted

that it did

the new york times also put out an

article that said we never ran drugs

into la via contras why did this why did

the new york times how do you know

timber sycamore didn't exist

is that a reliable standard of evidence

absolutely more than why why is that why

is it a reliable standard of fed

evidence for the feds to deny something

the feds created that would embarrass

them and cause a scandal

you think everyone's effective is

against you right that's funny

okay is the cia a federal agency

my federal court uh evidence was not the

cia okay

is the federal court a federal court

there's a difference between like a fed

in the federal court right you

understand that no it's literally in the

name federal court okay it's a federal

court and you're talking about a federal

agency so yes they are feds that's what

they are if you're taking a facebook

wait so this is what i mean are you

mentally retarded are you like retarded

in your head like are you no actually

actually are you should i know do you

have anything i should know about

you know house it's very funny because

you're saying timber sycamore didn't

exist

because a federal court claimed it

didn't even though the western press

which has no reason to lie about this

reported it existed

can you say like 20 minutes ago i cited

a press from the west

yeah yeah yeah but you have to you have

to you have to balance all the relevant

interests why would the western press

lie about something like this if not

because of the fact they have no way of

covering it up

to lie about the sound of nieces killing

people because they can get away with

lying about it

what

yeah if they can lie about something

that serves their interests but when

when they start saying things that go

against their own interests you know

they're telling the truth

because why would they otherwise if not

for the fact that they have no way of

covering it up

no so basically timber no so basically

let's get let's just like overview like

uh everything that we've accepted today

all right

so

the al qaeda never had any um presence

within i think you're taking up you're

just like trying to take time are you

gonna run me my money or not because

timber sycamore certainly does exist

it did prove cooperation between the cia

and the al-nusra front aka al-qaeda

that's just like open transparent clear

evidence and

that means you owe me a hundred dollars

this is so funny because your own

wikipedia article says it didn't uh fund

alan user front it said it um it backed

rebels fighting alongside the

alzheimer's in front not the elements

which article

the wikipedia page you read it off if

you look yeah yeah so so you

so you realize that there's not a clear

distinction between these groups at all

whatsoever the al-nusra

these groups are the al-nusra front

there's no democrat there was never any

democratic

you know free syrian army was a complete

myth

so you're dealing with al qaeda and the

forces that would become isis

do you know what a preposition is

okay

if i say timber sycamore backed rebels

fighting alongside but you just said

timber sycamore never existed so which

one is it

i'm not saying it did exist i'm saying

your article itself even says it never

funded the al-nusra front it said it

funded rebels fighting alongside not the

al-nusra front itself so your own so so

if they're fighting alongside the

al-nusra front does that make them a

part of the al-nusra front

no that does not mean you're part of the

user from that because if they were it

would have just taken out that

preposition and just said it funded the

al-nusra front okay u.s supplied weapons

ended up in the hands of the al-nusra

front

okay so if they supplied weapons to

person x and ended up going in person

wise hand but not because we intended to

do so that's not as a funding

it pretty much is because

yes it is this is the same

same meme when people go we funded the

mujahideen in afghanistan in the 1990s

and all the weapons have managed to fall

in the hands of al qaeda we must have

funded al qaeda you mean the taliban i

don't know why the fuck you're talking

about al qaeda

but sorry the talmud yeah oh wait no the

taliban yeah sorry um this is the same

retarded logic that that that is

basically

we fund person x and just because we

fund person x and those funds and

weapons go in the hands okay there there

is

so

so there there is plenty of evidence the

cia has worked with al-qaeda

in syria and in libya

i'm amazed

so there is no standard by which you're

going to admit you were wrong

wait i will

no this is the thing so you said paul

let's go over like all the different

evidence you've supplied that the cia

have worked with al qaeda okay you've

said firstly they were

al qaeda was in libya in 2011 with the

cia right

uh however you supplied your evidence

which only said that al qaeda in the

city so so in order for the cia to work

with al-qaeda do they literally have to

like sit together in a room and like

smile and be friendly with each other

and like create common plans isn't there

like indirect ways that they could work

together why does it have to be that

they directly

have to like be in a room together and

uh and it has to work that way

okay do you think the cia usually ever

will directly fund anything no they

always use proxy groups

whether it's the listen you don't know

how the cia works is your fucking

problem you are literally here trying to

make it seem like the federal the u.s

federal government slated money to be

sent for al qaeda no that would cause a

national scandal but what they did do

was they funded groups that were for all

intents and purposes part of the elusive

front but they just arbitrarily said no

this is a separate group just so they

wouldn't be accountable for doing so

slow down slow down you just said the

cia never directly uh has never directly

funded anyone do you know what operation

cyclone is

again even in operation cyclone it

wasn't a direct paycheck but between the

cia and the mujahideen well obviously

isis got involved yes because that's how

international law works okay well okay

so what's your fucking point

my point is the cia directly fund people

all the time not really no it's actually

pretty rare for the cia's own federal

budget to be for the cia's own federal

budget to be used to like use that money

to fund people no but it's not how it

works it has various front groups

various philanthropies various arms uh

manufacturers various uh allies in the

us military or not allies but uh

contacts in the us military various

private you know corporations it doesn't

do it in the direct way that you think

and usually the way that they fund the

way that they fund the groups that they

want to fund sometimes they won't even

directly send them you know shipments or

packages of arms it'll just make those

arms very readily accessible to them and

conveniently accessible to them knowing

that it's going to be in their hands so

let me ask you a question do you think

do you think the cia okay let me ask you

two questions did the cia know al qaeda

was very prominent in syria among the

rebels two did the cia somehow not be

able to have the foresight to see did

they not somehow see

that their efforts to help these rebels

in syria would also lead to helping

al qaeda do you think that was like an

impossible thing thing for them to

forgive oh we couldn't have known i mean

we know like just about everything about

al qaeda apparently we know that they're

in syria but we could have never

expected that our efforts are going to

be helping al qaeda

it's so funny how you like firstly i'll

answer the question but firstly it's so

funny how like you speak in these vague

terms like you have no fucking clue what

you're talking about right you say like

various you say oh there's so many or

all of that shit right you just don't

know what you're talking about all right

i'll answer the questions firstly you've

shifted the question you firstly stated

that al qaeda and cia had direct

intervention with direct presence with

each other when did i say that

can you roll me back i don't really

remember saying direct at all

okay

this is so funny uh okay so you've

shifted the question entirely now to

like

general situation this is a this is a

leaked cable

okay internally events are taking a

clear sectarian direction b the salafist

the muslim brotherhood and aq that means

al-qaeda are the major forces driving

insurgency in syria this is a leaked

cable

yeah i don't care for the main driving

force you need to prove to me the cia

funded them

you need proof that the cia funded the

insurgents

when they admitted al qaeda was the

leading force among those insurgents

wait we didn't fund them though you i i

i may accept the claim that we funded

certain people and it fell into the

hands of al qaeda but that's not funding

al qaeda

so unless we literally write a check

slated to al-qaeda directly we're not

funding al-qaeda

no no no no no that's not your straw man

me the fucking fucking hell right now

all right

what my point was is if we fund our if

we fund person x

and somehow

our funding happens

that's not a somehow when you are in

direct possession of knowledge that

allows you to know that the person you

are funding

is being led by al-qaeda you already

know that's the case so don't fucking

say it somehow lands in al qaeda's hands

like it's a fucking accident or

something because it's not because the

intelligence was already fucking there

that al qaeda was fucking leading them

in syria so stop weaseling your way out

of sending me this hundred fucking

dollars you fucking pussy

you need to prove to me that the cia had

the intentionality of all these

resources from uh falling into that okay

all i have to do to prove that is to

prove to you the cia knew al qaeda was

leading the insurgents to syria

yes it is because if the cia knows that

al-qaeda is leading the insurgents and

the cia funds the insurgents the cia

knows that its funding of the insurgents

is going to help al-qaeda and fund

al-qaeda so that establishes the

intention now just because they

specifically didn't hand-pick al-qaeda

to do the job themselves doesn't fucking

mean it's not within the scope of their

intention to fund al qaeda

you are a fucking rat just admit you're

a broke bitch who can't fucking

run me my fucking money you are a rat

you are a broke bitch

wait wait i'll leave hold on let me just

let me just tell you one thing

intentionality is not when you fund a

group

and the prominent group of that area

takes that resource no no it is when you

know that the prominent group is the one

leading that group you're helping it is

if you didn't know where your resources

are going to end up that's one thing but

if you already knew where they were

going to end up that does establish

intention

you didn't even prove that yes they did

they did know it was going to be that

because they already established that al

qaeda was leading the insurgency in

syria

that's not true though because they

literally admitted that in their own

fucking words

wait no this is funny this is funny

because when you quoted like who was

leading the insurgency you didn't single

out al qaeda you name it okay so do you

think there is much

you think there's a hard line between

the salafis the muslim brotherhood and

the al-qaeda you don't think there's

like very clear overlap between all

those things

you think there's like a strict line

between all those three things salafis

al qaeda arsenal office the muslim

brotherhood who in the syrian context

are known to mingle and intermix with

al-qaeda and then al-qaeda itself you

think there's somehow like this this

direct

discrete line between all these things

which you're arbitrarily establishing

this is so funny because your own

wikipedia page on timber sycamore makes

a distinction yes okay i don't care if

the philip cross funded wikipedia are

not funded uh edited wikipedia makes the

distinction

i want you to make the distinction what

is the distinction between what is the

distinction between the groups the cia

funded in al qaeda you make it in your

own words since you're so knowledgeable

and then you go against wikipedia to

disprove my point yeah again you have to

balance all relevant interests i can i

can i can i can in one context i can in

one context use wikipedia as evidence in

another context question some of the

things

it's based on the relevant balance of

interest wikipedia

you dumb retard stupid shut your cunt

mouth for one fucking second wikipedia

has no fucking reason to lie about the

existence of timber sycamore the reason

we fucking know that is because there is

direct proof that the mi6 edits

wikipedia on a daily fucking basis why

would they fucking lie about something

that makes them look bad they have no

reason to do that within that article of

course they have a fucking reason to

make a hard distinction between groups

that they're and they even make a hard

distinction by the way between the

groups that they're funding and al-qaeda

so yes you have to balance all of the

relevant fucking interest you peanut

brained fucking idiot you are a peanut

brained retard low iq retard peanut

brain dumb fuck who can't even

comprehend the actual argument being

made

this is the most disingenuous shit ever

i basically say i use western source bad

western source bad retard retard you you

the retard doesn't understand context

this retard literally doesn't know how

to situate a source in the context of

the relevant balance of different

interests you are mentally retarded like

there's no way anyone can get through

you're actually mentally retarded you

have no mention of the possibility of

why would they lie about themselves this

is literally an argument that cannot

penetrate your peanut brain skull your

small peanut brain skull retard skull

case you are a fucking retard you are a

fucking low iq dumb fuck it literally

cannot occur to you that a criminal has

no reason to lie about their own crime

when they're in fucking court so they're

probably telling the fucking truth you

fucking dumbass you literally can't even

comprehend this argument it is

it's a baffling level of fucking

stupidity it's a baffling level of

fucking stupidity

okay so i think uh i've kind of reached

the end of that one data while you're

gathering up the money um let us know

when you've got it so we can announce

that you've sent it that it has in the

youtube chat

um

peanut pepe uh pepe pinochet you're up

next

go for it mister

yeah so i've just been like listening a

little bit more like i said like i

haven't really listened to you much

before but i have never heard so many

um low iq fucking inbred takes

totally fucking coping for

the

barbaric savagery

of a bunch of fucking tankies uh you

know passed

such as the sandinistas i mean i i i

heard that hollomador shit okay and

obviously yeah all right you know there

was some fuck ups when it came to trying

to modernize how they they they grow

crops and everything but like what i

want to ask is how is that it by the way

i don't know if you've heard of a

fucking body trimmer but how is a short

little fucking man like you gonna reach

fucking communism when you can't even

reach the top fucking shelf

uh that's funny coming from a completely

anonymous probably a fat greasy fuck who

won't even show their fucking face

talking shit about my fucking appearance

you sound like a fat fuck you sound like

a fat obese fuck you're an anonymous fat

obese fuck on the internet talking about

my appearance

you already took the fucking hell bitch

you already took the fucking elbows

you're a fat anonymous greasy fat fucker

you already took the fucking out you're

a fat fuck i'm deciding you're a fat

fuck because you're anonymous anonymous

and there's no way for us to know

otherwise no listen to me you fat little

manly you want to come onto the surface

yeah yeah the difference is everyone

everyone can already see me you fat

greasy obese bitch

everyone can already see me you fat

greasy obese bitch no one can see you

no one can see you you anonymous pussy

you you probably have a you probably you

sound like you have a vagina literally

in my profile we're speaking out of your

vagina can you speak more clear you're

speaking you're speaking out of your

vagina let's look at this ugly fuck

let's look at this ugly fuck that's

talking there's a reason why

where's this ugly fuck that's talking

and it was amazing okay you

you are flexing with no biceps and you

look short how fucking tall are you

i'm 5 11. i'm i'm not short

so you're like two inches you're like

two inches taller than me

what are you flexing for with these

fucking needle arms look at those

fucking noodle arms what are you flexing

for what are you flexing for noodle arms

what are you fighting for

who am i flexing for i was flexing a

fucking picture nobody can see shit i

don't know why you're flexing you may as

well not flex they don't make a fucking

difference you can't even see any muscle

there okay zero biceps

you're fat ass i can promise you that

much fucking better looking no you're

not bitch you're not you're not your

small ass profile picture we can't

how you look that well with that small

ass profile picture but you look like an

ugly retard you look like an ugly retard

that's the truth

look like an ugly skinny retard and

you're even like relatively short enough

to have an advantage in lifting and

you're still a skinny short flabby

retard so i don't know why you're coming

to me talking about my appearance

okay thank you uh mr pepe

killjoy you're up go for it

any second

wait can you not even meet yourself i

think i think you can

if you can't this can be really awkward

because i can't find you

okay it's gonna be really awkward one

second

i i can confirm that pepe i mean i've

seen him on kim he's not fat but i feel

like he's spiritually you know i feel

like he has like the soul yeah i feel

like he'll be fat in a few years at

least he's got the mentality

all right i guess earlier we were

yeah i mean whatever that was i was

talking about spaces the other day and

uh actually i want to continue this uh

conversation um how do you as a as a a

like uh apparent muslim and a a

socialist uh reconcile the fact that

communist dictators basically uh have

oppressed like hundreds of well at least

at the minimum tens of millions of

muslims do you do do you what are your

thoughts on dictators like ember hoja

who's basically like

uh oppressed like muslims just for like

existing uh i i want you to defend that

yeah i just don't think muslims were

oppressed for existing i think the

clergy were oppressed um i don't really

but there was there was mosques and even

hojo's albania was probably the most

militantly atheist communist state that

ever existed there are still mosques

functioning and open mosques that were

there so you know you have to understand

the fact that they existed like as

mosques it means they weren't oppressed

that's your argument well i mean people

were not if you'd think if people were

oppressed just for being muslim then you

know it would be illegal to convene

religiously there would not be any imams

you wouldn't be allowed to pray you

wouldn't be allowed to practice your

religion and it's just not true all

communist states had constitutions that

enshrined the rights of people to

practice how they saw fit

the issue was not people's practices

that was oppressed what was usually

oppressed was the independence of the

religious clergy that was the most

depressed thing in the history of

communism and you know aren't you an

ottoman empire simp and now you're

literally saying oh well communism is

justified see so you you kind of have

this like little girl anime mentality

where you're either simping for

something which means which means like

you're like fantasizing about

implementing every aspect of it in the

present day

versus like a more mature mentality

where you can appreciate aspects of

these historical empires and appreciate

their historical significance kind of

like seems like you can't tell the

difference between that so if i say

things like like there's interesting

things about the ottoman empire that are

overlooked today that translates into i

i believe that we should like implement

the exact things about the details of

the odds

yeah so thinking about them so like you

you have that like anime like kind of

autistic mentality anime kind of

mentality

yeah yeah so it's like it's like doesn't

really seem like you're like uh aware of

what is actually being said here or like

where where are you everyone

said anything

okay well you said that how can you

reconcile being a muslim with the fact

that communists have oppressed muslims i

argue that they didn't oppress muslims i

would argue that they oppressed the

clergy and i think rightfully so in many

cases i think the clergy did not so

enver hoja did nothing wrong that's what

you're saying okay so i don't so

are you like are you in the olympics or

something like how did you make that

leap

like

like

can i give you like a gold medal can i

give you a gold medal for making the

leap can i make you a gold medal for

making the leap to

enver hoja did not oppress people just

because they were muslim too and hoja

did nothing wrong like you dude you have

like beat that you're like in the you

know they need to make those videos

about you on youtube that are like soft

core porn where they're showing like

these fine ass olympic women like these

runners and shit like bruh

i honestly like that could be you

honestly just make sure they don't get

like are you gonna make sure make sure

make sure like you don't wanna ask your

question yeah make sure they don't make

clickbait titles of you i don't know

what which way you sway but you kind of

seem like one of those pole jumpers like

do you believe do you believe women

should be able to wear the hijab freely

um sure yeah simple question yeah okay

do you believe that enver hota did not

let people wear his jobs

i'm not aware that he prohibited his

jobs unilaterally i'm just like

so you don't even know what you're

talking about well the reason i'm saying

that is because

the reason i'm saying that is because

the reason i'm saying that is because

people claim that about the soviet union

that they banned hijobs and if there's

literal footage of soviet central asia

i'm not talking about this one's the

thing i'm just saying what's your source

what is your source that women in

albania could not wear he jobs what is

your source

okay

are you aware of who and virhoja even

was

i'm using this as one example because i

because i i'm aware you're using the

example of the most like the mill using

the example of the most aggressively

atheist communist state in history but

even then you want to go to dudayam

instead they blew up dude i have for no

reason basically for

for revolting against russia are you

going to defend they blew up what you

call yourself a muslim they literally

killed

and he was like they're both stopped

supporters weren't there

can you repeat the name again

okay do you know who are you

with the champion

sultan goliath is that you said

no dude

do you die okay

which one was he again

oh lord have mercy he was

one of the most staunch uh chechen

generals who even led invasions into

afghanistan and then that's that's

during that's during the civil war what

he was part of that wasn't the boss

matches wasn't it who was that

why are you asking who that was i gave

you the name

what time period are you talking about

i'm talking about the first civil war of

so not the not the 20s but more recently

like after the soviet union like what

are you talking about i'm not i'm

talking about postal

you're talking about post-soviet union

yeah yeah

why are you talking about the

post-soviet union

because that was a former soviet colony

wasn't it

okay you the you literally just said the

word former soviet colony like

dude are you like are you slower what is

wrong with you like you have you have

defended russia whether they were part

of the uh as the uss star or poster i

mean there's there but there's hold on

but there's even less evidence that

post-soviet russia oppresses muslims

because muslims enjoy immense

rights in russia even righteously they

killed the wanto

no that was a national insurgent that

was nationalism had nothing to do with

religion at all

yeah like we can tell how much energy

you had before and how much energy you

had now sitting there going like be on

don't don't call yourself okay

you shifted the topic retard retard you

shifted the topic first we were talking

about communism now you're talking about

russia i don't know what you're talking

about first we were talking about

communism now you're talking about

russia i'll talk about both gladly it's

gotta you gotta focus in on what topic

you wanna talk about because there are

two different things okay okay

you are not educated enough on enver and

you basically

what is your source that hoja banned

women from wearing hijabs

this is well known

what are you talking about look at

plenty of wealth plenty of well-known

things are tall tales and myths

the cia did how about that all right i

made it up the cia did it yeah i'll be

charitable and do a google search

all right i'll just be charitable

uh communist albania hijab all right

i'll just hoja albania and post hoja

albanian and you're gonna sit here and

tell me like oh well you know like it

was just the clergy he made everybody

like uh he did nothing wrong he only he

only got rid of corrupt clergy

i don't i don't know where you're

getting the source that the hijab was

banned in albania i just don't i'm

looking for it on google i can't even

find it

so okay

you already acknowledged that edward

hojo was a militant

right you said this earlier yeah

okay

what was albania before and

are you aware

under the italian occupation

or nazi occupation

okay what was the culture of albania

before before it was pre-modern was it

was it

pre-modern and it was it was what

majority practicing muslim right yeah

and the clergy acted as like chieftains

and political leaders as well part of

the tribal culture

that was pretty modern they were they

were not though they were not the only

they were clearly like uh uh

you had the catholic church government

the catholic church

and then you had you know the local

clergy which regulated the tribal

society

of pre-modern albania i know what you're

talking about

okay

so why are you sitting here and

pretending that post uh post and virgo

albanian did not like uber secularize uh

uh

albania as a society through militant

atheism

because that's not because that's not

the same thing as saying people were

oppressed for just being muslim it's not

uh curtailing the influence and power of

these older clergy

leaders

is not the same thing as prohibiting

people from practicing islam

uh

they closed down moss

they didn't allow people well it just

seems okay i guess it's arbitrary

because there is plenty of functioning

opening mosques and then hoses albania

and you know they closed you're saying

they closed they closed they closed down

some of them but they kept other ones

open and why did they keep the other

ones open oh i don't know they just

decided to i mean it's just it's not

really consistent doesn't make any sense

if they if their goal was just to ban

all religion they would have banned

religion they didn't so there has to be

a reason for why

okay this is like the same argument as

like like uh mao's like oh well there

was no religion there because uh

confucianism was a philosophy so they

removed all of the al all of the uh uh

corrupt aspects of it made it pure like

this is what you're doing right yeah i i

i would actually i would i would

actually make that argument are you

kamalas

i would make that argument are you a

kamala

i'm i'm not a kamalas or do you

subscribe to the channel politics

okay so if you believe that do you

believe that kamali politics was was

inherently uh uh antithetical to islam

yeah i do

okay so why are you making this argument

for kemal i'm not

arguing i'm not i'm not because

chemicalism is not incompatible with

islam

just because it was secular but more

specifically that it was one for one

importing the

european notion of the nation state the

secular nation state and a fundamentally

non-european civilization so that's why

cannibalism is incompatible with islam

in a way that communism wasn't

so communism was basically just about

modernization you want to talk about

though they oppressed religious people

it wasn't about religion it was about

the way in which those religious leaders

were embedded and intertwined

with you know these pre-modern relations

that stunted the development of the

people according to them

materially right stunted their ability

to industrialize to get clean you know

drinking water access and electricity

and you know basic things we take for

granted in a modern a modern country and

you know is that something worth

repeating no i think we can learn

that you know that that that kind of

state atheism is definitely a folly

especially with the middle east but that

doesn't that doesn't mean that

communists

you know we're just oppressing

people for being religious i just reject

that view

fundamentally

what i don't understand why all of the

arguments that you're making about kamal

ism doesn't exactly apply to

considering it's also a nation but okay

let's take that well

the main difference is that these

communist states

were applied to the local circumstances

and derived their character from the

local circumstances in a way that kamal

ism did not so for example kamal ism

resulted in

places like like istanbul and ankara

being these like isolated urban centers

the rest of anatolia was pretty much

like uh left behind in this modernizing

project whereas you know you see with

you see with communist states there's a

like a huge

national

civilizational integration it's all it's

a it's a process that encompasses

okay let me ask

wait do you believe that communism is

inherently cultural compatible with all

with all of the middle east like do you

actually believe that

okay

okay how is that supposed how is that

even sustainable your own parents

your own parents country can't even deal

with itself but you you by yourself

acknowledge that the amount of uh uh

infighting in the middle east would not

be uh

uh uh

would be too high to surmount communism

as a unifying well

there was more infighting during the

chinese civil war and they managed to

unify i think the middle east can unify

too

they killed millions during the chinese

during during the war era of china where

there's a bunch of warlords so you know

empire long divided must unite empire

long united must divide it's good that

kind of thing the middle east

historically has been unified

the ottomans whether you're talking

about the various caliphates whether

you're talking about yeah well those are

multi-ethnic empires yeah we're only

united based on religion not communism

well i think there has to be a fusion

between islam as a civilization because

it is a civilization not just a

religious doctrine are you a baptist

am i what

you

you you keep intertwining communism and

modernization so i i feel like you're

this is baptist politics so i'm confused

about i'm not a boss

okay but why do you keep using communism

and modernization as if like there are

no other models on western uh not

western there are no there are no there

are no there are no alternative

uh

paths to modernization

for non-western countries

except through communism now there's one

exception i can think of one what and

it's how are you saying this you're arab

no watch nope the bath

talk about tell me why aren't the gulf

states modern in europe okay

okay you're gonna

stop fucking interrupting me and shut

your cunt mouth and let me speak okay

so the one exception i can think of

before explaining myself the one

exception i can think of is possibly

iran

but to what extent iran's

modernization is dependent on china

is that's that's up in the air right who

knows but the reason the gulf states

have not accomplished the modernization

is because modernization is not just

having technology it means modernizing

the fundamental social relations that

comprise a state now these fundamental

relations even the gulf states are still

fundamentally tribal patriarchical and

not in the feminist sense but just like

in the anthropological sense tribal

patriarchal still have those same

pre-modern tribal relations they always

did they just have uh gold to go with it

it's just a it's

gilded it's a gilded form same primitive

social relations that all the arab

states have except they have more wealth

and they have more money because of

investment why are you calling it

primitive they're tribes they have that

because since since i'm arab since i'm

arab i'm allowed to call it primitive

that's why

what kind of that's

this is not relevant like i i'm south

asian we have tribes here too i'm gonna

sit here and go oh well yeah the

difference the difference is the

difference is uh in all the arab states

there is a tribal uh there's a truck

there's social relations are underlined

by a sense of tribal uh loyalty that

that has made it impossible

to integrate any real civil society with

a universal state of any kind okay and

modernization accomplishes precisely

that modernization creates an actual

material civil society that affects the

material social relations of the

civilization

and in many ways it revives them right

it doesn't just create them from scratch

it revives them it's like the russian

one was revived and the chinese one was

revived because these historically have

the culture the middle east also has a

historical material civil society in

regards to a universal state but it's

long been dormant it's long slumbering

right now you basically have this

warlord here a bunch of sects and tribes

and chieftains fighting amongst

themselves sooner or later you know

there's gonna be uh

another empire

okay

that

i'm trying i'm trying to understand

i'm trying to drill down

why do you believe that deconstruction

people's families on a tribal level is

necessary to

modernize the arab world i don't believe

you should deconstruct people's families

but i do think you do have to establish

a space or a form of sociality and

social relations

that are not strictly defined by tribal

relations there has to be some kind of

civil society defined by the relation to

the universal state

did this not exist in every other empire

in in the middle east

but it has not existed since european

colonialism

uh okay i will grant you that but i i

don't think this is relevant to

communism it is because what communism

successfully accomplished is reviving

precisely that china historically had

the same thing but it was gone after the

century of humiliation and then it had

its warlord era and then you know it had

a pretty similar situation not exact

exactly similar but similar at least in

the relevant senses and yeah so that's

similar right russia was similar as well

russia had the romanov romanov dynasty

which is since peter the great a

westernizing dynasty the russian kind of

element russian civilization from

muscovy was suppressed and also from the

mongols was suppressed and then you know

communism brought it back so yes there's

this universal element of the universal

civil society that existed in all these

asiatic empires and communism has

historically fulfilled the role of

reviving those

communists communism has had the role of

suppressing people's culture and

religion in favor of forming trying to

form a

non-existent classless society and

you're never going that's just not true

that's just that like that's just not

true i mean it's just not true

okay no no you you you don't you don't

appreciate you don't appreciate you just

don't appreciate

the fact that communists were never

idealists they were always pragmatic

they didn't care about all these dumb

ideals they were very pragmatic they

were interested in industrializing

modernizing i mean like they weren't

they didn't care about this like oh we

want to build a classless society i mean

like that is just so removed from the

immediate concerns communist had um

you know and

you could say that in terms of

propaganda they'd be like yeah

we've eliminated the exploiting classes

which in a sense they did

but you know it's just like this idea

that that's what was they were motivated

by like making this ideal utopia is just

completely wrong and it's just

historically not true

fine if you're saying they're being

practical the only way to actually

practically institute any cops form of

communism in in in

uh middle eastern society is to

basically give up half of like communist

ideals so i i don't understand yeah i i

think you're confused about what

communism is like i don't know what

communist ideals you have in mind um the

science of marxism if that's what you're

referring to

is applicable anywhere i don't know like

why like what i don't know what you're

talking about really you just kind of

just kind of sounds like you have a

really like dumb view of what communism

is or wrong view okay it sounds like

you're actually socially liberal when it

comes to the middle east but

conveniently i'm like

actually i'm actually not socially

liberal

because even iran has had a unique path

to modernization that i can appreciate

and iran has done that by suppressing

the like you realize the iranian

state after the revolution

has suppressed the patriarchal tribal

relations in favor of the civil society

of the universal states

republic

the clergy the clergy have become

abstracted from their previous kind of

feudal local context

and that is is being overturned by by a

process of modernization in iran so you

know there's there's different unique

paths to it but the old

rule of the chiefs and the tribes that's

just not sustainable for the police

future just not

you keep mentioning

uh modernization of particular countries

in the middle east none of them are

communists or ever have adopted any sort

of communications you keep mentioning

iran actually i actually appreciate that

you appreciate iran i mean i'm not even

shia but the the point is like what

where where's the communism here in

terms of like why well well the iranians

have managed to do it without

uh subscribing to communist ideology

but my wager would probably be that for

the long term prospects of the region

communism will probably be necessary in

some kind of capacity

you know um maybe i could be maybe i'm

wrong right maybe i'm completely wrong

but as far as i can see iran is a shia

country as you said so its project is

going to be under on it's going to be

held back by the sectarianism of the

region i think communism is the only

thing that can elevate itself above all

that maybe i'm wrong and maybe something

else will come i don't know but from

what i can see based on historical

experience nobody's successfully done

this

you know people talk about japan japan

industrialized because of western loans

uh

loans from british and french and even

american banks so i mean like

and it was a top-down industrialization

too

so i mean like yeah i don't really like

i don't really

there's no historical precedent

at the very least whatever future

islamic thing you have in mind for the

middle east it's going to have to learn

from communism and learn from marxism at

least in some respects

you know

because they

okay look i i think i think

uh the structuralist argument has has

critiques that everybody can

sort of understand right but your

solutions for them are are as if you've

already admitted not necessary so i have

no reason to adopt yeah i do definitely

think there's aspects of marxism

leninism and communism that are

necessary

i think that's just irrefutable like

there's going to have to be a way

to

have a sense of a universal state that's

not grounded in any sectarian group and

i think that class struggle is the only

path to that

that's lit

isn't that sort of like begging the

question because your whole argument is

well we need to revolt against a certain

class of people

no that's not that's not what all class

struggle is is basically an

acknowledgement of the fact that there

is a division in the at the heart of the

universal state that is not inherently

the form of a nation or a group or an

ethnicity it's a it's an imminent

division that has to do

with you know the relations to

production in the you know production

even in the abstract sense i i think you

have to have some kind of abstract kind

of scientific view like that to build a

civilization today i don't like it you

can you can you know isis is the worst

example

iran is probably the best example

but both of those examples are going to

be mired in a an environment of

sectarianism which neither have can

succeed in elevating themselves above or

beyond so it's just you know it's just

you have to think about this you have to

think about what does it mean to build a

truly universal state how do you do that

without just emulating the modernistic

western universalism which is just of

the citizen which is still has all these

like the baggage of all these like you

know like prejudices national prejudices

and whatever civilizational prejudices

you know um

what's how do you build the universal

state in in uh how do you all pursue a

non-western path of development and

build a universal state that's the

question you have to have basically what

you said earlier iran i i don't think

iran has succeeded no i don't think iran

has succeeded

why

um

aren't you the guy who who always says

like well it's america's fault for

sanctions

and ciao no that's that's that's so cool

so that's a big part

but there's also the aspect of the

sectarianism both ethnic and religious

that the islamic republic i don't think

has um

you're never going to get rid of that

just because you institute something

right you're right but right but there's

a huge danger within iran of for example

aziri separatism the issue with

azerbaijan

that's a huge issue

you also have the issue of iran and the

region is being treated as like a pariah

because it's shia so there's a sectarian

aspect

also there's yeah there's the aspect of

them being persian is when it's caused

problems so it's like you have all these

other problems

which i'm not saying those can be wished

away or they could disappear but

uh as a universal state based on the

dictatorship of the proletariat so based

on class struggle i think does situate

itself

at least in a way that allows itself to

be critical of all these things from a

distance

uh i think i think you the word the

biggest critique of what you're saying

is you're replacing a boogie man with

another boogie man and it will never go

away so i think we should just no okay

it's class struggle that struggle is not

about a boogeyman it's just about

recognizing there's a division within

the universal state that's imminent and

that's what dialectics is about it's

about understanding the objectivity of

contradictions mao said there's primary

contradictions and there's secondary

contradictions and class struggles a

secondary contradiction most of the time

it's not something you can just dismiss

as like

you know it's it's it's an internal

division you just acknowledge you have

first and foremost okay

all all societies acknowledge that

within government over central life no

man the united united states really no

you don't think nope united states

doesn't acknowledge that it does not

recognize that there's there's class

distinctions at a formal state level

there's no institution or organ of the

state that recognizes this there are

extra extra formal institutions that

enforce the rule of the ruling class

which are hidden and kept out of sight

the deep state so certainly that exists

but there's no like communist party that

enshrines a recognition of the class

struggle constitutive of the universal

state

you don't need communism to recognize

that there's a class struggle between uh

multiple classes

well hold on

at the level of the state you do need

communism to recognize that as an

individual at the level of an

intellectual individual you probably you

don't need a communist system to

recognize that but at the level of a

state for a state to be able to

recognize that yes it does have to be

communist in some capacity

i i think anyone with with a

i think you're smart enough to

understand that anybody with a

critical eye can can recognize

hierarchies within the government okay

but that that's different from a state

institutionalizing that recognition in

some kind of way

generally federalism does that that's

that's okay

federalism is not an

institutionalization of the recognition

of class struggle okay federalism is the

institutionalization of the recognition

of regional differences okay

or you know differences between

different nations where you want to call

it

but that is still not specific enough

see it's still not universal enough

federalism which recognizes the

distinction between nations doesn't

recognize any division within nations

it's a very complicated kind of hegelian

logic

which you know it depends if you want me

to explain it to you i don't want to

ramble but

you have to understand there's something

significant about recognizing that even

within a universal state there's a

division that's imminent it's not a

division between two different things

it's an imminent division of one thing

with regard to itself

okay i

what you're saying is that there's a

recognition of an internal internal

hierarchy within no no

no no no you just said hierarchy okay a

hierarchy is a is a relation between

different things

a division an imminent difference or a

division

is a division only imminent to one thing

so you're recognizing only one thing

which is the universal subject of a

universal state which is inherently

divided in some kind of way so it sounds

paradoxical

right but that's what dialectics is and

that's what class struggle is class

struggle begins with the universal

citizen after the french revolution you

know we the people whatever you want the

rights of man

and then there's a division there

imminently that's like a deadlock it's

not a division between two groups

it's not a division between different

layers of a discrete hierarchy it's a

division internal to one universal

reality

okay fine there's no point in debating

further because we'll go in circles but

i think this distinction is ultimately

uh theoretical

but anyway i'm done hey i didn't mean

for that to get here appreciate it no

problem

okay thank you mr college life

uh next up we have

the biggest american government show on

the server

my pal my buddy mike as soon as i find

you

any second now

oh also can i ask one last question

while you're at or you're finding it

uh what do you think of samira khan's

politics and what do you think of

hakeem's politics

uh i i know samira uh very well and we

don't really disagree on much

uh i uh however hakeem to me is just a

liberal he's pretty much he panders to

western leftist audiences he uses his

iraqi identity to gain clout and

legitimacy among them but ultimately

hakim is someone

who

doesn't care about iraq he doesn't make

any content for iraqis for his own

country he panders to western leftists

he's pretty much a lib

he's the same as bread tube he you know

he's pretty much he he claims he's

against bosch but when he talked to voss

she didn't actually confront him in any

kind of way pretty much just sucked him

off the whole time

and yeah hakeem doesn't reflect any of

the indigenous like iraqi communist

traditions or history or reality he's

pretty much just like uh like you know

he's pretty much just like a a white boy

from america for all intents and

purposes who has industry this is sort

of ironic because like you're lebanese

american yeah but i'm an american i i am

an american i live here i'm a citizen of

this country my audience is american

this is my country okay hakeem

always talks about how he lives in iraq

and that's his signal i have a i have a

iraqi communist perspective

there's nothing iraqi about his

perspective his perspective is 100

defined by and tailored for

western leftist audiences

what is what is uniquely iraqi socialist

i've never heard of this concept maybe

i'm clueless okay iraq has its own

indigenous communist party it has plenty

of indigenous

marxists no an actual communist party uh

it was it has plenty of homegrown

iraqi and in

even beyond iraq the arab world the er

the thinker the marxist and you know

communist thinkers of the arab world how

many times does hakeem reference them or

shared

anyone you know anything from their

perspective he hasn't so

well they're not meaningful parties

yeah the iraqi communist party is

actually pretty prevalent actually so i

don't know why you're saying that okay

so okay all right well i'm not gonna do

it okay fine

okay thank you again kill troy okay next

up mike whenever you're ready

fantastic

so there's three different areas i want

to address with you because you just got

fucking humiliated before by data

and another uh point i want to address

so one of them you you still believe

snowden's fake news about the government

spying on everyone despite his own

leaked documents and declassified

documents to disproving that in uh

discussion you're literally british dude

you are literally in second point

dada was correct why why are the british

so why do the british have such a vested

why do the british why do the british

always have this best interest in

defending our deep state

they always have this vested interest in

defending the americans i wonder why of

this claim with regards to al-qaeda

specifically

is an email that was even declassified

by the government through foia with

regards to hillary clinton

your big blockbuster evidence is a

fucking little tab that says see last

item al qaeda is on our site in syria

what's that item one might ask

it's a copy of a fucking news article

that's talking about al qaeda fighting

elements of the fucking regime

you're fucking yeah but if that were the

if that were the only cables if that

were the only first of all

the other emails also referred to

gaddafi's brutality quote guida used

helicopter gunships and benghazi to

execute people cut telephone electricity

water supplies and so forth they all

deserve to die without trial like dogs

curious

um

jesus christ and then the third point is

your reference of

timber some more right funny that

someone thought well trump's tweet

evidence this thing existed funding

vetted to moderate groups in syria

but the funny thing is with foyer you

have some case law with regards to gloma

right and a federal court in 2019 in an

appeals court in 2020 said

but trump's tweet

made no evidence or even reference to

such a thing

you're a fucking idiot

okay angloid are you done like mouthing

off uh to defend

created deeply i give you permission to

speak so why don't you shut your cunt

mouth and you don't interrupt me this

time okay respond okay yeah so

you claim that snowden's leaks were a

bunch of bullshit i have no reason to

believe you about any of that you also

reference that oh

shut the fuck up

you also said

you also said

wait i said this all right you know what

okay so

i'm gonna give you two options

you shut the fuck up and i just respond

to the entire mountain of bullshit you

gave me or we move on to the next

speaker and you don't get anything

that's a curve okay

so i'm gonna let you choose

which one do you choose

so the angloid literally cannot hear

any rebuttal without melting

like a fucking pig

don't interrupt me bitch

so you talked about the the cable that

was leaked by sullivan

in which he admits which is actually all

the proof that shows is that there's an

acknowledgement there by the us

government that al qaeda is leading the

insurgents in syria now just because he

attached an article to prove this

doesn't mean anything he after all i

mean like this isn't an internal revenue

did you not hear what i said all right

get rid of this fucking guy just get rid

of him i don't have the patience

he's not civilized enough to actually

debate so just get rid of him i gave him

so many chances

just fucking get rid of him

but i will actually no

i'm going to respond very quickly to

what he said but he's not going to have

a chance to say anything back

so because he he's not civilized enough

to have an actual debate

he can't restrain himself he's got that

english colonial urge where he's just

got to fucking squeal like a fucking pig

because he can't actually acknowledge

the fact that there's opposing

perspectives to him

but

that

acknowledgement that it's being led by

al-qaeda just because they they linked

an item to back that up which is an

article we're not talking about an

internal cia cable we're just talking

about very you know people the the state

department are people high high up in

the us government dealing with this

acknowledge that it doesn't matter if

they're getting this from a new news

article they acknowledge that al qaeda

is leading the insurgents now finally

you didn't even address the other

fucking

cables that i brought up

where according to which

there's an acknowledgement from a dia

report

that al-qaeda are the major forces

driving the insurgency

and there's no reason to believe that

just comes from some fucking article and

then you said some other shit

uh you said some other shit about

what did you fucking say you said the

sycamore the report is wrong but you

didn't give any fucking reasons for it

you mentioned trump's tweet for reasons

that evade me that are just beyond me

um i i don't know what the significance

of of that tweet is and no one talked

about trump's tweet

so

yeah of course the cia did help al-qaeda

i don't know what else there is to it

okay

so yeah that's it

okay okay so um next step is stardust

uh she's gonna no no skip skip this one

skip this one she's like a leader

uh

yeah just why do you call me a leachate

when i get out of my way just just skip

them yeah it's it's like it's like a

it's like a streamer from twitch

politics she was like always this huge

leech that like she basically became

bankrupt after destiny got banned on

twitch so she had to move to youtube

she's like the worst orbiter ever

and she's always trying to leech off of

my shit like whenever she can whether in

twitter spaces were here so

yeah

okay well yeah sorry guys i can't uh you

know has his um

giving us some of this time here on the

server so if you just want to talk to i

just i can't do it i'm sorry

um okay next stop

it's going to be

uh we will go with

this person here

uh this is die long whenever you're

ready miss

all right thank you very much duby for

having me

on now

as a as you claim yourself to be a

self-proclaimed uh marxist leninist

muslim who is

for the people's republic of china

i was just wondering what your thoughts

were on the chinese

i won't necessarily label it as a

genocide but

definitely as a re-education of certain

uh cultural minorities such as the

uyghurs especially in the xinjiang

autonomous state of china

and i was also wondering what you

thought about the cultural erasure of

many of those so-called minorities and

other autonomous states

specifically tibet and also xinjiang

where we see many different uh cultural

significance just dissipating

okay so i'm gonna put to bed on the back

burner because it's too much to get into

but so we're just gonna focus on

xinjiang because that's the most

sensationalized one at the moment

so china has these vocational jobs

training programs that it has used

throughout china

as part of its poverty alleviation

program okay

and these basically equip people with

the necessary skills in order to enter

the job market at a uh sufficient level

so in xinjiang because there is a

problem of extremism they have

integrated within these vocational

training programs which again are like

oftentimes carbon copies from the ones

that are taken from other regions in

china as part of its poverty alleviation

program

and they've they've included you know

anti-extremism

uh education or materials like to

counter extremism

but the the erasure is not actually

against oig culture or oygar islam

in any capacity

it's a crackdown on a foreign

funded from the gulf states and from

saudi arabia a version of islam that is

not indigenous to the region

and is not indigenous to oil or culture

or the version of islam that has been

practiced in that region for the

majority of its existence

and also

finally the xinjiang issue

is not primarily about islam

it's primarily about oyger separatism

which predates the current bout of

islamism that is popular in defining

that now the only proof we need of that

is that you know during the soviet

union's existence

the

is i think it's called the etif i don't

know what's called today

it came from an organization the premier

leader of voyager separatism was an

atheist marxist leninist group that was

soviet-backed because there was a

sino-soviet split and after the soviet

union collapsed they started larping as

islamists to get funding from the muslim

world okay so you're basically dealing

with nationalist etim yeah nationalist

grifters

who

are not particular don't have a

particularly strong attachment to islam

there's probably a closer proximity to

some kind of turkic nationalism going on

there the islam thing is a grift it's to

trick the muslim world into turning

against china

primarily for the purpose of harming

china's belt and road initiative which

the u.s sees as the premier

threat to the so-called rules based

international order that it created

after world war ii

um

all right so yeah well i'm gonna have to

respectfully disagree with you there in

fact that um

before

1949 that xinjiang was previously known

as eastern turkistan and it was an

independent uh not necessarily a nation

but definitely autonomous from china and

was completely separate and had no ties

with the chinese government or the prc

the newly founded prc at the time

um

and

uh but what china is trying to push

today is that not this isn't necessarily

trying to assimilate a culture

that this is mainly just an imperialist

tactic used by the chinese because they

are trying to

i would say coerce many of the chinese

people into thinking that they're trying

to re-establish a former great nation of

china through their dynasties and this

is definitely present during the taiwan

situation as we see as

many of the people are as i should i say

government officials are trying to push

a narrative that they're trying to

re-instate a uh previous glory to as i

said and lame in turn basically make

china great again but we see is that

these cultures deviate very drastically

the chinese people are

tend to be more confucius uh an

atheistic society where

an auger

uh population is definitely the majority

in the uh

autonomous state of xinjiang as it's

known today

and

on the claims that you put there

that

that this is just some sort of

separatist uh movement of rebellion that

not really about religion

you see i have a source that was given

to me by one of the politics servers

uh executive mods here white kupo thank

you very much he gave me a source from

the guardian here showing that i just uh

sent it to you through discord oh

this end well

anyways regardless of that then i guess

it uh states that there uh

xi jinping the current leader of china

is

is closing churches jailing pastors

uh he he is trying to basically rid

religion and he's going with a lot of

marxist tenants here and

as we see as mark said here in i don't

know if you're familiar with a

contribution to the critique of hegel's

philosophy of right

uh marx writes here that religious

suffering is at once there's like

there's like we're getting way ahead of

ourselves okay so like

i i don't

i can i can do two things for you okay

you can only choose one because you're

taking up a lot of people's time i can

either um discuss with you marx's views

on religion okay which is a completely

separate topic

yes and i could talk to you about the

critique of a contribution to the

critique of halo's philosophy of right i

could talk to you about that i'm more

than happy to talk to you about that but

if i talk to you about that we're not

going to be able to talk about xinjiang

so let's keep it on xinjiang and not i i

just find it really fucking like dude

the communist party has been in power in

china since 1949. the communist party is

drawing from a tradition coming from the

bolshevik party which has existed you

know for well over a century by now so

looking for the like looking at marks

for like oh this is the real reason why

this new thing is happening it's like

it's really we don't have to get into

the fucking nitty-gritty of marxism to

understand it i just find it fucking

silly dude like nobody nobody's gonna go

and like bring up the free masonic

connections of george washington to

explain anything concurrently going on

in the united states like there's no

need to do that all right let's just

let's just focus on the immediate topic

at hand which is the allegations you're

making with shinjong i don't want to

hear some shit about marx's contribution

to the critique of hegel's philosophy of

right to to explain china's current

fucking orientation and religious policy

which we're also i'm also have things

with things to address so unless you

have more things to say

about china

we stop it there and i address what you

said or you have more things to say all

right all right well i'll move on uh we

see uh many different uh mosques in

particular in china and xinjiang uh

being torn down this is uh due to

culturally we'll see a militarization in

many of the certain areas in xinjiang

and that many uyghurs are being sent to

certain uh re-education camps that have

been photographed on satellite images

and that many of the mosques that are

run uh by obviously uh uyghur muslims in

the province of xinjiang

are are being forced to sort of rebrand

themselves and become more traditionally

uh

more traditionally chinese per se

trying to rid them of their cultural

freedom which you said earlier that you

are for a culturally free society

so i just want to see here

is are you for a homogeneity of chinese

people through

forceful tactics such as these

re-education camps that these oyggers

are being sent to by the chinese

government

the problem is that your questions are

extremely loaded because they contain

various various facts that i would argue

rest upon extremely

tenuous and sometimes outright false

uh foundations okay so

is there anything called yeah pretty

much all of the allegations you've made

about xinjiang uh are from which one all

of them just pick any of them

all bullshit is there any reason so hold

on not just what you said about xinjiang

but

in particular the view

that we're seeing this crackdown on

priests and churches in china under xi

jinping also a load of bullshit uh xi

jinping is very widely well known and

well quoted for saying that islam is

part of china as has always been a part

of china's culture and civilization and

should be promoted in the new era in new

ways i mean like there's just direct

things he said that contradicts that

himself maybe he's hiding what he's

really doing behind the scenes but you

haven't really produced any real

credible evidence to show that behind

the scenes something else is going on

but i wanted to speak to something

specifically you said earlier so you

said xinjiang was east turkestan before

the people's republic of china you're

ignoring the fact

that east turkestan

never actually existed in any capacity

xinjiang has always been part of china

properly even since the tang dynasty

especially under the qing dynasty when

that integration even ramped up to an

unprecedented degree so you're talking

about something that has always been

part of china and china's civilization

and the notion that there's a

fundamental incompatibility between the

civilization because

han chinese people are more secular or

more confucian begs the question okay

how does that speak to the immense

diversity within

you know that what you would probably

acknowledge as china because there's

such a thing as we muslims who are

indistinguishable who are just han

muslims who converted to islam pretty

much and they're muslim right so china

affords the chinese civilization has

always afforded an extreme level of

diversity in ethnicity language culture

and religion while forming one common

chinese civilization this might be hard

to understand from the perspective of a

nation-state china isn't a nation-state

it's a civilization state okay

china historically refers to the middle

kingdom in the middle kingdom

and the han ethnic identity is

specifically formed around a level of

proximity to this um

to this the dynasties the imperial

dynasties specifically

and it is always

engaged in a process of fusion

assimilation and interaction

with the various peoples on the

periphery that it had integrated

historically now in the case of xinjiang

we're not witnessing an extension of

even that the people in xinjiang are not

being made into han they're not being

forced to adopt han culture rather you

mentioned like the mosques are they're

not they're they're they're they're

having their identity race they're not

having their identity erased what's

being erased is the foreign version of

islam that was only recently imported

there and the mosques in xinjiang are

starting to look like how the mosques

have always been in xinjiang

from a traditional historical cultural

perspective

in some oygers

are

adopting an auger version of islam now

instead of the one that was adopted more

recently that comes from saudi arabia

and the gulf states there isn't only one

version of islam islam looks different

in the various regions of the worlds

that you go to and xinjiang the oyggers

have their own specific islamic

tradition and version of islam which is

what the chinese are promoting now you

look at that and you say oh they're

promoting a han version of islam no

that's not the han version of islam that

would be the hui muslims

by the way have always been prominent in

the chinese state

and even in the chinese elites

historically in the past

um you know so i mean

what you're saying is just wrong right

the things that are and also if it's

about religion why aren't the same

things happening to the hui muslims

they're not

the fact of the matter is that china

does not oppress muslims

china doesn't allow for the blasphemous

kind of cartoons that exist in france

when the if chinese version of the

sacred verses

was published their own version of that

it was some equivalent and the muslims

within china had an outpouring of

protest the chinese government censored

it right so the chinese government even

censors

the freedom of speech of chinese

citizens

so as to not offend the feelings of

muslims the chinese government also

upholds elements of chinese traditional

sorry china islamic religious law such

as for example

in muslim communities you cannot build

pork serving restaurants

you can't build them within a certain

level of proximity to halal restaurants

chinese universities accommodate muslim

students by mandating

you know the serving of halal meals

china does a lot to actually

go beyond the bounds even of a secular

state that strictly separates the church

and state it does things

to accommodate the muslim religion that

even western that's that are unthinkable

in america or western governments so

this idea that china is like extremely

hostile to muslims it's just not true

well i guess we just have a fundamental

disagreement there and we can just agree

to disagree on the this state on certain

the muslim religion in particular

in china but i know one in that

is

for sure persecuted is definitely the

buddhist religion and as we see in tibet

that the even the dalai lama that word

has been blacklisted and you're not even

allowed to mention of the dalai lama

unless you be

sent away by certain chinese exactly

again i think it's just the the dali i

mean the chinese government is even

involved in the succession process of

the doc so it's like it's just not true

what you're saying

like i i don't

it's really not true like

especially in the tibet i mean there's

just a rapid militarization and cultural

changes and the chinese government is

just trying to

completely assimilate and erase cultures

that have all i would say to you as a

closing remark is

i think you should be open to the idea

of having a critical perspective when it

comes to

the these sensationalized

topics

what whose interest does it serve to you

know raise the issue of tibetan

independence or xinjiang independence

it's not even just the u.s it's india

it's other actors are involved i mean

even russia had a historical role to be

fair the soviet union and xinjiang

separatism so it's like you you have to

you have to put this all in a very

critical lens you have to out you know

you have to analyze all the relevant

actors

um

and i i just think your perspective is

kind of one-sided and has not taken into

account

opposing perspectives

well with xinjiang in particular there

definitely is an economic incentive for

uh

china's gdp

for uh xinjiang the autonomous state

alone accounts for around 20 percent of

china's energy reserves and is a source

of

you know it's just it's it's really

weird

how you're framing it because you would

think that china has gone in and invaded

xinjiang like bush invaded iraq

but you're talking about something that

has first of all always been part of the

people's republic of china

and has always been part of china proper

for centuries so it's like

i don't i don't know what your point is

like this is a re like you realize the

burden of separatism is on the xinjiang

separatists it's not like china has to

go and take xinjiang it is part of china

like

i don't know it's really weird right

well you see it's easy to say that right

there is how it's always been a part of

the people's republic of china and it's

really easy because they've been

formulated not too long ago and there is

a distinction between the former

republic of china and the people's

republic of china they're the only

correlation there is between what land

they had but an expansion there doesn't

really necessarily correlate also it's

kind of funny like you mentioned you

also mentioned taiwan in the republic of

china just to be clear i hope you can

look at the map

i'm referring to the yeah yeah but i

just want you to know look at the map

the taiwan authorities use to represent

the republic of china

and not only does it include xinjiang it

includes

like way bigger pieces of territory than

currently

china has and you know it's like

so they claim way more than china

already has okay from other places so

they claim basically everything that the

qing dynasty used to have

unconditionally so if that's true then i

would disagree with that as well yeah

i'm just trying to point out that

you're talking about a warlord era in

which there was no central chinese state

at all that doesn't mean china doesn't

exist it just means china was in a state

of civil war disarray and chaos

that does not speak to the legitimacy of

any kind of east turkestan national

project any more than it does speak to

the legitimacy of some warlord

having the right to carve out a piece of

china for themselves

all right all right well i mean with

xinjiang in particular

it it well you mentioned iraq earlier

with bush invading iraq

it would be similar to the iraq and

kuwait situation i mean kuwait would

have no

chance

okay so

you're talking about iraq

invading a country that is

internationally recognized as being

separate from iraq

whereas no one has contested the terror

no one has formally contested

china's territorial sovereignty

in xinjiang

period

even even the western countries even the

western countries that are

condemning the so-called violations of

human rights

acknowledge xinjiang is part of china

well it's one thing to be

internationally recognized and have a

distinct different culture i mean the

u.n recognizes yeah again china is a civ

china is a civilization state china is a

civilization state it doesn't have one

ethnicity or one national even just one

culture there's one chinese civilization

that includes many different languages

religions and cultures

okay there's

i mean like you just i just

it's just it's kind of silly to talk

about distinct cultures as if that's

like the grounds for a different state

with within the chinese context

considering that china has always been a

multicultural multi-ethnic multi-racial

multi-religious civilization

with multiracial i mean the chinese

people

they are

definitely not open-minded when it comes

to different racial relations okay again

again again i mean that is like a

statement made

from

a position of baffling ignorance okay

the idea that the chinese are

close-minded to

other people even in a historical sense

is extremely silly i mean just just

speaking in terms of like the reception

they had to islam they were extremely

open-minded to islam when islam emerged

it's just that the process by which this

kind of interaction happens

is one

of mutual respect where you can

acknowledge differences first and you

can fuse together and interact

if chinese appear close-minded

they're probably close-minded to having

their country looted raped and pillaged

by these pirates that were called the

british empire and other powers that

tried to carve up china and and and you

know

smuggle dope into china and sell drugs

into china the queen

the british monarchy being the biggest

uh drug peddlers in the history of

mankind so it's like you

yeah it's just i'm sorry but what you're

saying

it's just not the chinese are not open

to

other cultures or for it's just not true

they are but they are on their own terms

they they will not allow

some foreigner to impose themselves on

them

you know at gunpoint

well a lot of chinese society definitely

is not caseful of

certain black people and uh other people

of african descent and they have to

remove them

yeah even like look in movies look i can

acknowledge there's probably some

tensions between african immigrants and

locals and some parts of china but

that's just one side of the story okay

the other side of the story is that

there's an interaction going on

and you know it's not one-sided like

you're trying to say and by the way just

because chinese people find foreigners

strange and

like are curious about them which is

usually what we're talking about there

doesn't mean that they're like

closed-minded to them it just means i've

never seen a person who has this skin

color in my life

you know

well that's definitely not it because

when you're interested in a certain and

have a certain curiosity your first

result isn't to just blacklist them and

take them off of movie posters and

again i i i videos i am not familiar

with uh i'm not i i like

i'm like a lawyer i gotta i gotta

i gotta i need to like deal on a

case-by-case basis when it comes to

these things and

you know i i have i'm not familiar with

that story i have to look at what

happened there and what the what the

story is behind that but i mean

regardless i mean

is there racism in china yeah probably i

mean there's racism everywhere did you

do you blame the entire chinese

civilization for that i mean that's like

saying that like all white people are

bad because there's racism in america

like is that true i mean i don't really

think so

well no definitely not true but i think

that just exposes that you know they're

not just some happy-go-lucky people that

are looking to accept everyone and that

they don't no well that's not what i'm

that's not what i'm saying all i'm

saying is that china has a historical

tradition of being able to handle

cultural

differences through a common

civilization and tolerate those

differences that doesn't mean that

people don't have prejudices or the

people aren't racist ever

it just means that there's a precedent

for this not to spill over into like a

necessary like bloody conflict of some

kind

well and i mean this will circle back

around to the augers i'm we see this

and especially in america america is a

good uh correlation between here i mean

i'm not trying to pick sides here

between america and china and which

one's worse i just call in it like i see

it and when i see certain persecution

against a certain

ethnic group of minorities in a country

i'm going to call it out i'm i'm not

trying to pick it up well

for all intense purposes um

i just think you're coming from a

one-sided perspective i i encourage you

to uh

what's one-sided about it it just seems

like you haven't heard the chinese side

of the story

at all the chinese side of the story uh

well i'm i'm coming here from a

bipartisan side i'm i'm

seeing this is come from satellite

imaging okay insider

i know for a fact

they're real i mean there's no denying

genocide no no listen

no no listen listen listen

you you have you

there you're talking about data which

has been presented to you in a specific

way and oftentimes in a deceptive way

for example a lot of those satellite

images that you're talking about that

supposedly give you direct unbiased

bipartisan access as you put it to

what's going on in china a lot of the

times those a lot of the times those are

literally showing random schools and

hospitals and calling them camps

so it's like okay you know like what

you're wrong you've just heard these

sources that are part of a

an american-led smear campaign against

china

and you haven't been exposed to the

other perspective you just have not

you've just heard one side of the story

which is part of of an actual agenda if

it has it's not clear to you i mean like

you have to be open to the fact

that that's not the only side to the

story here okay there's other sides to

the story

okay okay i hear you keep bringing this

up over and over again throughout

many of the previous people here is that

you know that we're trying to peddle

some you know biased media that i mean

of course media is biased all media is

biased okay here's what i'm telling you

i'm gonna tell you this you're an

english speaker you live in america

you're exposed to that specific type of

media intentionally i should add all i'm

telling you is your world is not the

only one that exists that's all i'm

telling you if i were if i were to

bombard you with exclusively chinese

sources that were written in chinese

and are being presented and tailored for

the chinese audience

you would think it's bullshit if i did

the same thing from soviet sources you

would do the same so when you're dealing

with international affairs all i'm

asking you is to

try and have an unbiased perspective on

this because

it's just kind of baffling that i'm

being presented with these

exclusively english-speaking western

sources

that are part of an agenda and that's

supposed to i'm supposed to take that as

objective truth i just i just

it just doesn't sound

yeah no no no there's no objective truth

here i mean what you got to understand

is that i'm not trying to tell you that

this is unbiased sources of of course

they're biased towards a western

perspective and of course chinese

sources will be biased towards an

eastern perspective but how can we get

anywhere and come to any sort of

agreement when we're just saying oh

you're sourcing all right well well

square one

square square one

square can't expect anything we can't

i'll let you finish then how will we

know are you done well i'm just you know

i'm trying to say here is that we can't

make any progress to any towards towards

any solution if we're just

throwing out yeah i mean like yeah i

could have i could

yeah i could have responded you didn't

even have to say that because i i got

your point already but i guess you like

to hear yourself talk so you decided to

say that

so

i'm trying to give you a platform too

you're not giving me a platform right

now okay but what i'm trying to tell you

is that

the first thing step one is you have to

understand the systems you're dealing

with so what is the western media how

does it work that's one thing you have

to understand okay

uh you also have to understand the

history of precedent have they lied in

the past are there similar things that

have happened in the past okay you also

again yeah you should also probably

understand the same from the chinese

perspective you got to balance all these

things out balance the relevant

interests the relevant particular

interests form your own conclusion based

on what you think is most likely but you

can't do that when you just like

you you have the mentality of a consumer

you're sitting on your computer and

you're looking looking all these news

articles and shit you're like oh my god

but you don't have that critical

stepping outside the box mentality of

like

huh is this part of an agenda like i can

give you an example of of patterns of

agendas and how the see if you

understand how the western media works

you understand why why does the western

media report on alex jones you know and

demonize him the way they do why they

report why do they spin the news against

trump in this specific way why do they

push this agenda

of pro-censorship and why do they push

this stuff against joe rogan i mean like

you got to understand how it works it

it's it's

based on these agendas

that

not and it's not based on just this kind

of like oh all these different news

sources are independently coming to the

same conclusion based on the reporting

of the facts i mean like american media

is specifically designed

um

to serve you know the public interest

through

having these loyalties to these agendas

so you gotta understand the systems

you're talking about you have to

understand the relevant interests that

are involved in them

and you have to understand okay just and

you have to understand more about china

and how china works and and how chinese

civil like what is the reality in china

you have to understand these things you

need local perspectives you have to

balance all these things and then you

can form a conclusion like talk to

anybody who lives in china talk to

anybody who's been to xinjiang in china

who has lived there i mean most of the

time these people are going to tell you

the same thing this is a bullshit story

okay

so you got to get other perspectives

okay okay well i mean yeah you can

always get you can always add more

information to any story there's an

unlimited amount of information you can

always get well you can get this you can

get that

there's always no there's it's unlimited

is what i'm trying to say it's

infinite but

what what i'm trying to say here

is that there there is you're gonna have

to try and come up with a

a an inference here at one point you're

gonna have to i have i have arrived i

mean i myself

so i myself have arrived at an inference

which is that the allegations are like

almost completely bullshit

and are baseless okay and that is

because i've been in my view informed

i've seen all of your sources i've read

all of them i've looked at all of them

okay but i've also looked at the

opposite side

so when i and because of that i've come

to a radically different conclusion the

only difference between you and me is

you haven't

read the other side

all right well i mean i guess we can

just have a fundamental disagreement

there i mean

trying to assume that i am i i'm limited

in certain sources because i haven't

presented as many as you might know

but

i guess that's just

i

we're just gonna have to disagree on

different news sources there that

certain that

they're biased in particular ways but

well i guess that's uh i guess that's it

then

all right so i can take uh one i know i

know i said the hard cutoffs would be a

ten but i can take one more and then i'm

going to have one wrap it up

okay who's it going to be let's see

you guys want to get and just spam your

questions in chat i'm going to pick one

random okay

oh my god

okay fuck you guys this is not uh

hopeful

okay

um we will go with this dude i guess

um

[Music]

from low value male king ali

go for it all right oh dope

all right so my question is is that do

you think that's chinese censorship of

the internet and harvesting of user data

is problematic

okay so that's two-pronged i'll start

with censorship

and i'm gonna pin that down to cultural

differences uh they have a culture of

red lines about what you can say in

public and what you can't what i will

say is that the censorship does not

actually translate into

um capping access to information as much

as it caps the ability to form these

kind of hashtag movements you know that

form color revolutions but the chinese

big that i mean vpns are so common they

come pre-installed on the phones

so it's not that they're censoring

access to information

they're censoring access to information

that can be used

in you know ways that cross

the boundaries of what they consider

acceptable as a rallying point like not

information that's a description of

reality but for example

information

like yo let's go out and and burn down

buildings or you know obviously calls to

violence are you like unanimously not

tolerated but

to understand the censorship thing it's

a lot like how in islamic culture

they're super sensitive to drawing the

prophet muhammad right

it's going to be one of those things

where a lot of it's going to be down to

culture

um you know even in south korea

there's censorship

do you think there's an issue with not

being open to criticism of the

government or censoring certain opinions

that may descend from what the

government considers considers

mainstream

so

okay so there's that's two separate

things there's immense criticism of the

government in china immense and it

happening on forums happening even on

social media there's there's ant economy

there's there's immense criticism that

happens

like that's it's an understatement me

saying that immense levels of criticism

i mean from the handling of the shanghai

lockdowns even to the the what is it

called the everest or green whatever

bank that was i mean there's a ton of

criticism that goes on in china

um but

as for like presenting alternative

political views

i mean

there's these responses there's a

there's an understanding that

information is not neutral it's not just

like

innocuous

it has meaning so if you're

if you're saying something like yeah we

should like overthrow the state and like

overthrow the communist party like

they're gonna they're gonna consider

that they're gonna take you seriously

when you say that and they're gonna

censor it for that reason you think

that i think that censoring dissenting i

mean the way that they've responded to

criticism in many takes of the

government like it's currently with the

banks that are there's like bank runs

that are going on in china they're

running low on cash the reserves were

cut down to like 11.25 i believe and

there were people who were protesting

and i think that china actually

mobilized tanks in the area again no no

that's a myth that's a myth so

there is footage of some random place in

china of tanks rolling by

the tanks are not there to against

protesters that the tanks are there like

it's the same thing when you see tanks

on trains in the united states

they're just being transported in a

given place in china so it's just not

true

um got it um and what about okay i don't

know if you've been aware of a lot of

the people who were yeah just just

really quickly

um so how's just fyi somebody dm me

and they said that they they will uh

donate to this stream uh through the

superstrat if you'll let them ask a

single question

they're begging me india

okay how much are they gonna donate

uh

i don't know they said give them a

second okay it's gotta be i'll let you

know when it's gotta be quick okay it's

gotta be quick um

okay okay

now the second thing you said

was

you said something about

uh the first thing was about censorship

and then the second thing was about

harvest of that yeah china china is

actually ahead of the us in this regard

they are

cracking down on the major companies

in order to give um chinese citizens

control of their data and give them

rights in regards to like the ownership

of their data for economic purposes

so they're much better than the us in

this regard

do you think that do you think that

making

companies that want to operate in china

forced to release their user data and

information to the government or to the

ccp is problematic and of itself for

user data and privacy and freedom

um

i i don't uh because

it's

i mean like is it is it problematic uh

who's to say what are they doing it for

that would be the ultimate decider but

you know the us does the same right so

so we're clear

right yeah but it's not it's not right

when the u.s does it or when the china

does it yeah okay okay just we're just

like china's not especially guilty of

this

um you know i i here's what i want

people to believe i want people to

understand there's no such thing as

privacy on the internet

and i think the real problem is this

illusion we're being fed

that you know we all we have this like

user private we don't okay everything

you're on the internet if it's being if

if the infrastructure that is supporting

your internet

you know

has connections to the government which

it does in every case

it's not yours right so i i just think

that's just it's just the fact we don't

have any privacy and

i don't think it exists anyway unless

you unless you can ensure privacy like

technologically you're not going to have

it no government is just going to

benevolently be like yeah

we're just like not going to harvest

this data which may be important for

national security or something like it's

not going to happen

do you think like issues like the great

chinese firewall and things that

ban or sites that they censor like

discord for example they have a firewall

against discord so discord is not

readily available in china like it is to

you and me in the west do you think that

this sort of censorship of

the outlets and social media places like

the platform that we're using to have

this discussion right now would not be

allowed in china do you think that

that's an issue to free speech no i

think that's more an economic thing

about um it's a form of protectionism

where they want to promote chinese

companies instead of rely on western

ones that's why facebook never had a

foothold there that's why china has its

own alternate internet

which you know

the chinese people actually prefer

because they have vpns that allow them

to access

any of the platforms they want and again

vpns are not like some esoteric

hackers i mean like everyone has vpns

everyone right people watch youtube they

go on twitter do whatever they want

they're not going to be in trouble for

it at all

i mean yeah they see there's difference

between individuals

having the freedom to access these

things which they do

and a social policy of like do we want

twitter to be the dominant platform do

we want facebook to be the dominant

platform do we want discord to be a

dominant platform that's what the

policies tailored for it's not about

preventing individuals from having

access individuals can have access

they're just curtailing

at the level of social policy

you know the widespread adoption of

these platforms

i mean at that point if people are going

to just go in and get vpns and go around

these sorts of things anyway wouldn't it

no no because

no because just by establishing

uh the official ban they're establishing

a culture and they're establishing a

precedent of we're just going to use the

chinese platforms

and you know again why would a sovereign

government want to cede all of its data

to foreign corporations and a foreign

government and foreign platforms it just

does if you're really an independent

country

yeah i personally think that these big

tech companies in the us have way too

much power

compared to our own sovereignty our own

constitution

especially because of their right their

rights to censor us right we have pretty

much the same censorship

but it's done by through the private

sector rather than a way that's

accountable to us as a people

so you know i

that's that's one of the problems that

we have

right do you do you think that the

censorship and the level of censorship

that is that occurs in china is anyway

equal to the level of censorship that is

in the west or in the united states do

you think no no no not not no there's

definitely more on an official level in

china but i do think the west is more

effective in worse with more subtle

methods to repress

to a repress our individual access to

information especially through big tech

censorship and then b

to you know establish a culture

in which

you know

we dismiss out of hand alternate

alternate views as conspiracy theories

or illegitimate or crackpot theories i

mean like we there's all these ways that

the intelligence agencies employ to

discredit

anti-establishment voices so it's it's a

much i think i think all in all there's

way more official censorship in china

obviously but the west is way more

effective in actually

um

curtailing the abilities for people to

think independently whereas the average

chinese citizen

is way more critical and way more

independent minded than the average

american definitely

all right cool all right awesome thank

you for your time please do that

uh so how does this person is saying

that um they'll donate ten dollars

yeah it's it's gotta be quick and then

yeah i can ask the question sure okay

okay

okay so this is uh

kitty cat cammy

um you are unmuted go for it

um can i be

heard yes

all right so this is kind of a two-part

question

um the first part is why do you think

it's the case that defunding the fbi is

going to help leftist movements the same

way that it would have helped during

like the red scare given the fact that

the fbi now has a lot of restrictions on

what they can and cannot do that they

did not have during the red scare and

that a large portion of the fbi's

activities as we now know from like

reports from 2000 onwards are actually

spent on disrupting far right groups

which are a lot more successful at like

actually getting political figures into

power and killing people so i just

thought that was a bit strange um kind

of a second part why did you accuse bosh

of lying about gutsy kodzo being

raided by the fbi

so i want to begin with the simple one

which is the wallace lie

he

was reacting to the um cpi's conference

in which the uhuru movement leaders were

speaking who are not the black hammer

party and vosh accused the uru movement

someone asked aren't these the people

that had a dead body at their compound

and val said yes that is them when it

wasn't in fact them

it's the uhuru movement who are rated

for a completely different reason so

yeah that does establish bosch

objectively as a liar whether he's doing

it intentionally i'll let you guess so

the second thing is um about the fbi

um

so i'm just gonna answer pretty bluntly

i don't really care about leftist

movements in general a lot of those far

right movements the fbi attacks are

actually just libertarian militias which

i don't think are inherently far right

actually i think they're just you know

um against this monstrous overgrowth

over our constitutional democratic

republic that has taken the form of this

kind of like globalist you know deep

state

these federal agencies with like so

little oversight i mean don't look into

the details of the oklahoma city

bombings and you know timothy mcveigh

and how witnesses police witnesses a

police witness who said the whole

official story is bullshit was found

dead in a ditch completely shot with you

know his wrists lit and it was labeled

as a suicide there was no way it could

have been a suicide so i mean it shot

himself back at two times yeah

yeah so you know

you i mean like

the fbi

is not restricted in the way that you're

saying it is like if if it was cracking

down on communists in the cold war

um

and it no longer has the ability to do

so today that's just because communists

aren't as prevalent as they used to be

and you know i don't care that right

wingers are their primary target because

the same things that they target

right-wingers with they would also

target communists with because they're

not targeting people because they're

right wing they're targeting them

because they're challenging in some

capacity

this globalist deep state this kind of

national security state this patriot act

state that has been created so i mean

i i just i i'm kind of shocked at this

idea that

oh yeah we can have like this globalist

imperialist deep state that was created

in the cold war to destroy the soviet

union and destroy communism with the

help of former nazis

and it's all based and fine because they

actually just target right wingers and

instead of leftists well it's like

that's why i hate leftists i don't like

leftists i think leftists are chill i

think leftists are literally a creation

of that very same state i mean the left

as we know it is pretty much a

completely astroturfed fake a civil

society that was created with the ford

foundation's rockefeller money through

with the help of the cia when you're

talking about the frankfurt school the

institute for social research you're

talking about

the funding of like gender studies and

postcolonial studies all these things to

combat classical marxism you're talking

about the propping up of the new left in

the specific way was propped i mean all

these things propped up to combat the

soviet union on a cultural level i mean

so like what

i i don't care about the left i hate the

left i'm against the left

almost in every way and i have more in

common with those libertarian militias

targeted by the fbi than i do with

leftists on any day of the week

well i would hope that's not true since

usually they're targeted

to prevent acts of violence or so just

like the

gretchen whitmer just like the alleged

kidnapping of gretchen whitmer which was

actually orchestrated by an fbi

provocateur just like how the fbi is

always sending people in these militias

to like infiltrate them to get you know

to get them to do things or get get

agents to try and do things to discredit

them i mean you're not deal you we're

this i mean

i'm kind of baffled like you know what

the fbi did to the black panthers i mean

do you know what the fbi does the fbi

isn't

bounded by any rule of law they're

fucking dirty as fuck they are corrupt

as fuck i mean nothing is outside of

their advice

you're gonna make references to things

like incidents of the fbi disrupting the

black panthers for otherwise

legalitivity you're just going to be

incorrect right because now there are a

lot of restrictions on the fbi as the

trump administration actually found out

while they were in power there are

actually a lot of restrictions on what

the fbi can and cannot do who they have

to go through

even if they do go through some of these

processes they can still be held liable

later like some of the fbi people you're

talking about they've been charged with

crimes right by the department of

justice for things that they've done

that's just just for what they get this

is what they get caught for in the

public eye

just saying blanket oh the fbi does all

this bad stuff and complaining like the

like the cold war

red scare

like late 70s error right to right now

i'm kind of like it's gonna be no i i

don't i don't think it is because again

you're just talking about what they get

caught for secondly i mean like

you sound like gloria steinem gloria

steinem was pretty much like hey you

know we were recruited by the cia she

was the she was the founder of american

feminism she was like oh we were

recruited by the cia and i found out

actually the cia wasn't what we thought

it was going to be which is going to be

like this conservative patriarchal thing

they were four minded progressive minded

people who are very much liberal in

their spirit and it's like yes because

that is what you are you are serving

their agenda so it's like when you're

sitting here being like oh actually i

used to think the fbi was like super

traditionalist and super conservative

but i'm realizing they're like leftists

like yes because you were you're a

product of them at the feds in the first

place and i just i find it like really

funny because

i we always used to just be like oh yeah

wash and wash the voss community it's

like created by the feds they're pretty

much like a tool of the feds whatever

and now you're literally like coming

here

this is unprecedented and you're trying

to make the left wing case after you did

it for nato after you did it for the

democratic party and joe biden and all

that kind of things now you're making

the left wing case

for the fbi i just i find that baffling

that's just incredible

i wouldn't say i wouldn't say

particularly attached to leftism i'm

just against people committing crimes

violence

like even the other case you're brought

up with the fb i was going to bring this

up with the the um the boss thing i

think the confusion with bosch is there

was like an overlap between uh one of

the ur oh my gosh

you said you said aurora at one point no

no no no

movement is completely separate from

ghazi's whatever it is and that they

were rated for completely separate

reasons they were rated i just want to

be clear they were raided by the fbi

like in the same time period the leader

of the

wife were arrested around the same time

period

completely different in completely

different locations for completely

different reasons

yeah but you brought it up as well i'm

just saying that they could i think i

think you i think you're doing a

confusion with what boss was talking

about bosch was asked like the time

he was showing a video

okay vosh plainly put said the uhuru

movement was raided because they had a

dead body on their compound

and he lied i mean there's not i don't

know what else you're trying to say here

there's no one was talking about black

hammer no one was talking about ghazi he

made that association uh either

intentionally or unintentionally because

he's a dumb ass it doesn't matter what

the reason was he lied

yeah so he maybe has listened to the

video because at a prior point he had

brought up

uh black hammer okay not not in the

video of the cpi conference

where he directly accused the uhuru

movement

in front of like his thousands of

viewers

of having a dead body on their compound

which is a complete slanders lie

yeah cami your uh

mike is

dead it's stop working

yeah me there

yeah if you're speaking we can't hear

you

hello

yeah that's better

yeah so i don't think it's accurate i do

think it's a i don't know if you just

watch like the two hour long videos or

like the clipped out streams but if you

watch the whole stream he is actually

talking about the

black panthers or oh my goodness now i'm

doing it he is talking about black

hammer black hammer but black hammer

wasn't relevant

to what he was reacting to which was the

uhuru movement at the cpi

conference

people overlapping no they didn't no

they didn't there was nobody speaking

at the cpi who had anything to do with

the black hammer organization

it doesn't matter people in the specific

okay this is like it's like incredible

mental gymnastics

vosh objectively lied about something

and you're like it's you're going look

he lied okay the uru movement has

nothing to do with black hammer

they were rated for completely different

reasons they're completely separate

organizations based in completely

separate places in america

again

he slandered them he made it out to be

that they were making a big fuss of

getting reward you have a dead body

under compound of course that's ground

for getting raided well they didn't they

were rated for exercising their first

amendment rights okay so

like that is such a dis

that's that's something really bad to

lie about

they were rated for

a

foreign excuse me allegedly

yeah what is it what is the foreign

agent accused of doing exactly in

relation to the uber movement

is accused of spreading propaganda yeah

okay there you go spreading propaganda

aka

exercising our first amendment rights

so there aren't there aren't you're

talking double speak right now

they they i read the report the uru

movement yeah they're black nationalists

they talked about a genocide against

black people committed by the us

government they talked about how they

wanted reparations they were associated

with a russian who was part of the alter

globalization movement all they did was

host them on a youtube video where they

talked they spoke together okay and

everything the uru movement has said on

its facebook page which is actually just

expressing its own black nationalist

ideology whether you agree with that or

not doesn't matter um

you know that that was being accused of

being russian propaganda just because

they talk to a guy who happens to be

russian

on a youtube stream okay even if even if

it is quote unquote russian propaganda

how does that

now say they don't have any first men

rights to spread their opinions and they

can be rated by the fbi without even

being um given any due process

unconstitutionally

again again the left always the left the

left always talks

just let me talk please please so look i

i really think this is this comes up

with the trump thing as well i think

people are really confused when the term

raid is used because they assume raid is

like it means that the person who's

being raided is guilty you can be quote

unquote raided by the fbi and completely

completely okay and and and the eyes in

the eyes of most knowledge

and the most americans were

knowledgeable

none of the people in the rural movement

aren't even indicted

that's even worse that's even worse okay

when

that's even worse that's even fucking

worse that's even worse the fbi has

entered

they've taken documents

that's even worse if you're not indicted

and strangers bust down the horse

the doors to your fucking home and start

raiding your shit

that is completely in contradiction to

the spirit of what this democratic

republic was founded upon anyone who

defends the us constitution should be

condemning this and oppose it

wholeheartedly and you're

against search warrants what tell me

what country on earth does not include

okay a third warrant issued a search

warrant issued on the basis of people

expressing their first amendment rights

on the basis of the uru movement their

own speech it's issued on the basis

yes it is because of their speech it is

because of their speech yes it is and by

the way this speech with no threats

there is no threats of doing anything

and they're not

you know what i'm not tolerating this

fucking iranian double speak anymore you

talk about a fucking foreign agent you

know the fucking details of that war the

only thing that a legend

shut the foreign up shut the fuck up

with this fucking little rally and

double speak the only fucking thing this

foreign agent is accused of fucking

doing is whispering false and bad ideas

and bad thoughts in the fucking years of

your rule movement to give them an

ideology they're gonna fucking type out

on fucking facebook expressing their

opinion about the nature of this country

they're not threatening to do anything

illegal they're not implying they're

gonna do anything illegal there's no

probable cause to fucking raid them for

them doing anything illegal the foreign

agent and foreign interference just like

the fucking russiagate hoax is 100 about

ideas the establishment considers wrong

and bad being disseminated and being

spread ideas speech thoughts not speech

and thoughts that imply violence and

imply you're going to do illegal things

but things that imply a different world

view if you can't fucking see how this

is a fundamental violation of our

constitutional rights i don't fucking

know what to tell you i mean you're

literally living in la la land at this

point it's fucking insanity

and it's absolute fucking insanity

you can check the record for the history

of the united states the bar to get a

search warrant is not as high okay the

fbi the fbi the fbi is not a con the fbi

the existence of the fbi contradicts the

founding principles of this country and

the constitution

okay i i am for the that's why the fbi

that's why the f no no no local police

could not have that low level of

probable cause that the fbi had to

conduct a raid they couldn't a local

fucking sheriff couldn't fucking do that

only the fbi could act so

unconstitutionally in this country why

because they have been disposed of these

unc extra constitutional extra

democratic powers

and you leftists always fucking talk

about fascism and shit

when you're talking about people who

fucking question gender theory and other

retarded as fucking shit but when you

literally have these outright violations

of our constitutional liberties you go

and you have all these fucking mental

gymnastics to defend it it is fucking

baffling it is absolutely fucking

baffling

well

as we went way over the time that uh you

had allotted so thank you so much for

sticking with us longer than uh we'd

expected yeah

i hope you had a good problem but i i

hope that person is gonna send me the

ten but you know

i guess if they don't

you know there's nothing that can be

done if they don't do it i will oh no

don't worry about it you already donated

enough

don't worry about it but uh yeah i mean

appreciate it i had a good time

um you know it was an honor it was a

pleasure

great time i know a lot of people had a

lot of fun we hope you will find it in

you to visit us again because i know

there are a lot of people who didn't get

to ask a question who really wanted to

uh but thanks again guys i will link his

stream again in the chat

please subscribe they put out a lot of

great content pause as you've just heard

is an extremely knowledgeable guy

so if you want to hear uh perspective

that you don't really get access to in

the west these days that's where you

look okay how's again thank you so much

thank you so much doobie and i gotta

head out but uh see ya bye

yo stop by bro

okay i'm gonna unpause the donations

because i had them pause this whole

stream

and there's people who donated

someone on pause them and read those out

thank you so much tyler

us i just recorded my first stream

talking about what an inspiration you

and jackson have been to me it's called

walk in the woods number one and it'll

be premiering on my channel in the

morning at 9 00 a.m keep fighting

brother cool face thank you man

appreciate it thank you so much emilio

appreciate that

good morning revolution thank you man

thank you muriel for the other five

appreciate you so much man

good morning thank you so much muriel

appreciate you man good morning muriel

thank you so much man

a lot of those

a lot of gifted

gifted subs

good morning thank you so much muriel

i think he he kept donating because this

uh

notification wasn't going off so he

probably got sorry about that man i had

him i had him paused throughout the

whole thing

by the way guys tomorrow we're going to

do the patreon

thank you so box albania has one of the

lowest percentages of atheism 16

in the former communist world if hachi

was trying to get rid of religion he

clearly failed yeah good morning thank

you so much emirio for that 20.

appreciate you man

thank you so much

thank you you found the oligarchy

is the king of tankies crown crown crown

thank you so much man

thank you so much stephanie oligarchy

appreciate you

thank you so much auto revive person but

here's the 10. thank you so much man i

appreciate you

thank you so much claw base stream

leftism and shamples thank you so much

man appreciate you

thank you darg holy shit man thanks

appreciate it so much

thank you so much jahan can you check

original content

okay i'll check it

[Music]

funny

so guys um

holy shit

[Music]

and mila thank you so much appreciate it

our enemies are weak and fell flat with

all of their flaccid resolve like a wave

into the mountain shore you destroyed

and exposed the vashitazovites

this is why they're afraid to debate

thank you so much amelia son

son thank you so much amilo appreciate

you so much

thank you

yeah guys by the way the uh

the um

the tick tocks have been super

successful i've been looking at those

tick tocks

and we've been daily they're getting 10

probably even more by now 10k views 20k

views they're like blowing up

so if you want to if you want a new

grift and you want to start doing the

infrared clips

may allah find us worthy to stand in his

presence

thank you man yeah guys infrared tick

tock is blowing up i've been noticing

that it's like holy fuck it's getting

it's been getting really really crazy

that's something i noticed

yeah yeah tick tock it's blown up

and i i think it's going to go super

viral but i'm already expecting the

backlash so the first thing that's going

to happen

is like i'm going to get super viral on

tick tock and then

immediately afterwards people are going

to like

you know um

i don't know there's there's going to be

a backlash though 100 percent

i just don't know which backlash they're

gonna use because there's a lot

what are some of the backlashes

i don't remember probably me yelling or

some shit

it's not really something you could use

though right

but yeah they're gonna definitely

yeah but tick tock

the decentralized approach to growth is

really good

so yeah

a lot of this content is so fucking

golden but it just there's no way for it

to get out so

yeah

quick question do you have any thoughts

on the armenian liberation struggle in

art sack nagorno-karabakh thank you

uh to be honest i really don't

i really don't have thoughts

i just don't

that's the truth

i don't

but guys i think we're gonna wrap it up

there

and i i don't know if i'm going to be

streaming

tomorrow i might take tomorrow off

or oral stream who knows

but i do want to write more i want to

get more into my writing thank you

also us challenge them for their

transphobia on the two whole thing they

that that's what's going to happen if i

get super big on tick tock

they're going to do the two whole thing

thank you

zealous

most of the people on politics say that

as one and many people are saying that

you changed their perspective

alhamdulillah

i really enjoyed i got super heated and

angry but that's just because like my

temperament i really enjoyed

doing that on the politics uh discord

and i i found that the new perspectives

very refreshing i just really enjoyed it

um

i got it got heated but that's that

doesn't take away from the fact that it

was a ton of fun

actually that was why it was fun right

you know i really enjoyed it i re i it's

oh my god it's a breath of fresh air i'm

so stuck up sick of being in this echo

chamber it's like so few people ever

want to debate me about anything and

this this is like a blast to the past

like this reminded me of um when i was