This is Utterly SICKENING [DEBATE]

hurry the fuck up get in here get in

here i don't want to waste time

so everybody get the fuck in here and if

uh

got like three debates we're gonna be

doing back-to-back

um

damn okay

what a fucking night what a fucking

night

i don't know i don't want to spend too

much time doing the introduction i want

to kind of get into the the bait

so

you know

i'm gonna basically introduce what's

been going on

actually i'll introduce that later like

we're gonna get into this debate first

probably but as a primer

here's what i'm gonna tell you right

um a lot of sick shit has been going on

on twitter recently

so we're actually debating this person

tonight as well believe it or not

they're gonna be the third person we

debate and that's what i'm gonna reveal

to you more but someone faked a

screenshot

someone faked a screenshot of me uh

thank you so much shane rossi somebody

revolution somebody faked the screenshot

of me like a headline saying that i'm

fbi

and that houses the fbi or whatever and

it got

like

3 500 likes

and people really believe it 90 of

people believe it

um

so yeah 90 of people believe that and

the reason for that is because uh

it's an empire of lies as putin said i

mean there's there's

not really anything i can do right

there's there's literally nothing i can

do i mean they could say whatever the

fuck they want about me it will get

thousands of thousands of likes

and only like one percent of people will

see the truth right

um yeah people do believe it one

thousand percent i've encountered dozens

and dozens of people who like do believe

it so yeah they actually do believe it

and i can do nothing about that i can't

do anything about that so if you want to

see the i'm gonna just show it to you

really quickly before we get into this

debate

um

and by the way that's not even the only

thing believe it or not i mean

you would think that's it nope that's

not the only thing

so here it is right

and let me just uh get this

so here it is the guy is we're going to

be debating this person on whether i'm a

fascist or not

uh after our first two debates or our

first debate i think the other guy's

bitching out

but yeah look at that 3 400 likes and

it's a fake screenshot

saying far left infrared hose claims

involvement with the fbi dhs

as american patriot

they just made up some shit you know in

the and then everyone look i mean 167

people got so excited by this that they

retweeted it 3 400 people liked it i

mean

i mean there's nothing i could do about

it there's literally nothing

i can't do anything about this right

people are just gonna believe it then

there's nothing i could fucking do about

it

and in case you want to know like

he admitted that it's a lie right

so

what does he say he just admits it's a

lie

um

it's really down here i guess it's

really down here

uh maybe i missed it it's above

oh here it is

please tell me this is really going no i

made it up

and i got 300 likes so 10

a maximum of 10 of people if even

uh know the truth but 90 of people in

all likelihood believe this is real

and again i mean

look when i first saw this i

i don't know what to tell you guys i

mean this is just every other claim they

make about me

is just like this

uh truth has nothing to do if you it's

like um

people want to believe this so bad right

because they could not possibly fathom

that i just

am a guy who exists

uh and there's no like i used to be a

leftist too i used to have this

mentality like yeah if there's some some

idea that upsets me i'm just gonna say

it's feds right

and that that's such a source of comfort

for these people because in that case

they wouldn't have to actually confront

the hard questions

that i'm confronting them with they

could just dismiss everything as all

this is the work of feds right so that's

basically the reason why people are

getting up on this but

i mean it's just it's it's a really big

tragedy because

you know if you look at the retweets

alone

you've got the ukraine flag emojis

uh

look eu ukraine flag i mean

i mean literal fetch right and i mean

that's the situation we're dealing with

we we have a situation where

um

up is down and left is right and and

whatever right i'm accused i'm called a

fed but these people

who tell us we have to vote for the

democrats and support nato

and they're not feds i'm the fed right i

mean it's just

it's it's just a joke right

but uh

yeah apparently i'm a fed because of

american patriotism

and in case people are fucking stupid in

their head

if i have to explain this to you

isolating yourself from the masses does

not make you a threat you're not a

threat to the fbi if you say you want to

abolish america why because you're not

actually a threat the furthest extent of

you being a threat is individual

terrorism that's what the fbi's gonna

look for but as far as actually saying

what you claim your position is which is

abolishing america you will never do

that in a million years if you don't

have the masses

you know every all change comes from the

masses

you are you are not a threat to the

system

by saying you want to abolish america

you're just not you're marginal the most

of a threat you could possibly be

is an individual terrorist and that's it

as a political movement as anything like

you're done you're fucking out of there

you're nothing you're not a threat at

all so where did people get this fucking

idea that i'm the fed because i'm

pushing back on that fucking retardation

that makes me a fucking fan well why

because i want to make communism

actually possible i mean riddle me this

right

don't you guys think don't you think

it's a little weird

that

everyone knows if i was the dictator of

every leftist in america and they just

obeyed me and they were all my slaves

and i was the master

we would have communism in 10 20 years

minimum right i mean just see what

happens if you actually fucking listen

to me see what fucking happens we'll

have a movement of millions and millions

and millions of people

i'm a fed though right i just want to

maintain the status quo shut the fuck up

you dumb bitch that's why we've been

doing the same shit that you're saying

we should do for decades and it's led to

no change but here i come with a new

perspective

that you're not familiar with and that

makes me a bet you stupid bitch you

fucking idiot right

fucking stupid i mean just just put two

and two together how does that even make

sense how is that rational okay

all right

we're gonna talk more about that when we

actually debate the person behind it

right

but until then

there's some guy uh

who's in the show cue his name is

chungus stalin and this guy's talked a

lot a lot of shit about me in the past

i distinctly recall this guy's a huge

troll harassing the shit out of me

saying talking all this shit on twitter

so we're gonna see what they're made of

and what they're worth

uh in a debate

and we're gonna test their knowledge

right

but until then um we have other news

really dark and disturbing news actually

so bad empanada i don't know if you know

him his name is george gonitis but he

goes by bad empanada and he is more or

less admitted

um

to possessing child pornography

so george gonitas bad empanada

has been sharing a shirtless picture of

me when i was 16 years old and he's like

raiding the attractiveness right

and he was confronted with the fact that

this is a shirtless photo of a 16 year

old boy that he has saved on his phone

and that he's uh sexualizing on twitter

and stuff

and he doesn't care right he knows he

probably knew that already actually i

mean that's what what else is proof of

that

he doubled down and we're going to get

into that but

just i mean this more in that qualified

sense he's a pedophile george gonitus is

a pedophile bad empanada in that

qualified sense he's a pedophile what

else do you call someone who knowingly

has pictures of shirtless 16 year old

boys on their phone which they're

clearly giving sexual context to right

uh by remarking on the level of

attractiveness and and making all these

sick disgusting comments

keep in mind i was 16 years old going

through puberty in those photos and

that's how disgusting it is i'm not even

a foot i don't even look like a full

adult at in that photo i'm not even a

fully grown man

in that photo and george goodnight is

bad empanada

is sexualizing little boys 16 years old

and he knows he was confronted with it

and he knows it right

and we're going to get into more into

that but i'm actually going to

work around and see what i can do to get

this really publicized and out there

because

guys imagine if this was anyone else

imagine if it was me imagine if i was

sharing and sexualizing

16 year old shirtless photos of george

gonitis

you would have 10 000 people throwing a

fit about right minimum

but he already has a lot of enemies and

you know

needless to say

you know if left twitter isn't gonna do

the job

of exposing this disgusting fucking

child predator and creep

i'm sure there's other people who are

gonna take it up

um

and and get the truth out there just for

the sake of awareness that this person

is has no problem doesn't see any issue

with sexualizing little 16 year old boys

that are shirtless and and sharing

photos with them and remarking upon them

in a sexual way and shit like that he

doesn't see any problem with that

whatsoever right

and yeah he's just you know actually

he's worse than watch right vosh made a

lot of weird comments in destiny's

discord a lot of weird twisted comments

but has vosh ever been caught

or sexually

explicit at least in terms of giving

them that context by the way you're

talking about them

photos of a miner

you know which are photoshopped and shit

has he ever actually done that

has he ever actually given sexual

context

to a minor

shirtless minor and like remarked and

talked about their attractiveness has

bosch ever done anything like that and

by the way bad empanada is one of the

people

who

popularized uh widespread awareness of

vosh's very creepy disturbing comments

right i mean foster's made a lot of

disturbing comments and he said creepy

things and he's made a lot of creepy

arguments but bad empanada is almost

exclusively unique here

in actually

like admitting to the whole world

publicly

that they actually have photos of a

shirtless 16 year old boy

which they're giving sexual

context to

so in that case

whatever you've heard about bosch

george gonitis

aka bad empanada

is far far worse right

but um

he has an alt for sharing animated cp i

think

i mean who

i don't know if that's true but you just

gave credit it's he himself has given

credence to a rumor like that

by doubling down on sharing a photo of a

of a 16 year old boy okay

so

that is something we need to get the

word out on

just for the sake of awareness right how

many miners are in his community or

anything like that

uh bet empanada for all intents and

intensive purposes

uh is either a pedophile or has no

problem emulating the behaviors of a

pedophile

um

so i'll let you

make of that what you will but um

he is whatever you've heard about vosh i

mean this guy's a lot worse now we're

gonna touch upon this

later right

i'm gonna go uh

spit some shit out

of my nose i'm congested and then i'm

gonna

drag this guy up so give me a second

why don't i inform law enforcement

i think he lives in argentina

and i don't know what process i have to

go through to do that

thank you america appreciate it so much

i did i am working with twitter right

now

uh and if you know i'm in back and forth

with them let me see if they actually

responded yet

if they didn't

but um

yeah this sick fuck he's gonna have to

be taken down somehow i mean this just

cannot stand

this is absolutely fucking ridiculous by

the way miriam thank you so much for

that dono man appreciate you so much

so so much

headed in for a good july

uh

okay

all right let's bring him up

go ahead speak

speak

uh can you

raise your voice a little bit we can't

hear you

seconds

hello

can you hear me

yeah i can hear you how old are you

uh i'm 23.

um from scotland thank you for having me

on

so you sound you sound like a very

cheerful little chipmunk right but on

twitter you're a little bit uh

aggressive wouldn't you say so

oh definitely i mean just when it comes

to you

specifically

like a cheerful little chipmunk in the

forest

uh you know you kind of sound like a

little creature a little happy smiling

little gerbil right but on twitter you

talk a lot of shit dude i remember

you've actually you seem like very angry

and bitter so

why are you so angry on twitter compared

to uh when you use your voice to talk to

me

i guess i mean

i think it'll get that eventually has

let's be honest but

specifically when it comes to yourself

i don't think you understand marxism

simply put okay and i think you do more

to harm the left and help the left

why couldn't you say that politely why

do you have to be so angry about it why

does it bother you so much simply put

you're a dumb ass

and you seem to have this heightened

self-worth well yeah

listen listen i'm glad you came to

actually

test that whether it's true or not

but you know

how how do you know i'm a dumb ass why

are you saying i'm a dumbass okay

perfect i'm glad you got into this so we

could break it down point by point if

you want um

so i think the case that i'm going to

present is just simply that you don't

understand marxism

and

let's talk about imperialism i remember

you did a stream talking about how i

can't remember if it was a debate or

what

but you had a stream where someone was

talking about imperialism and you'd

mentioned that both genghis khan was not

an imperialist and the roman empire was

not imperialist and proceeded to say

that you take your definition straight

from when it incorrect yeah remember

this yeah

said

literally the examples that lenin points

out in imperialism that i'd say yeah

yeah i know what you're referring to so

just just so we're clear before we get

into this

i'm really glad i mean i thought this

was you had something really bad cooking

up so is is this how you're going to

qualify in the relevant sense why i'm a

dumbass

there's so many there's much more to it

i mean we can get caught okay

hypothetically speaking if you're hold

on hypothetically speaking

if you are wrong about this

then does that make me a dumb ass still

or am i still a dumb ass if you're wrong

about this specific point

on this specific point i'm not wrong

hypothetically if you're wrong about

this there's no point hold on

no no i need you i need you to entertain

a hypothetical hypothetically if you're

wrong about this

if you are wrong about this

hypothetically and we are going to have

to get into the philosophy of language

too by the way but if you're wrong about

this hypothetically i need you to

entertain the hypothetical and not dodge

it will you retract the claim that i'm a

dumbass

on that one specific point i mean no i

wouldn't because

so

i'm going to have to ask you to um

to kind of like put some skin in the

game i want you to actually qualify what

is it going to take for you to retract

the claim that i'm a dumb ass right

you're not allowing me to present the

rest of the argument i guess so

imperialism was just one topic upon many

okay okay

how many topics we can go through every

single one so after we have exhausted

every single topic

that you saw fit to bring up in this

debate

will you

will you take back the claim that i'm a

dumbass

it's going to be pretty hard to do that

guys i mean if you can somehow

if we go hypothetically if we go

i am going to be absolutely fucking

shocked to my bone because me you're a

fucking idiot that's nice

that's okay

hold on that's okay you sound like a

forest fair are you calling me an idiot

but are you going to take back the claim

that i'm a dumbass if on each and every

one of these points you cannot prevail

as having the rational argumentation

if miraculously you are somehow able to

prove that then i will retract that

claim okay that's all i wanted to hear

that's all i wanted to hear okay so now

let's get into lenny's imperial fucking

wrong so let's get into plans

imperialism so the famous now famous

pedophile george gonitus aka bad

empanada was actually the first person

to bring this up in the form of like a

meme video right because in lenin's

imperialism lenin clearly writes

colonial policy and imperialism existed

before the latest stage of capitalism

and even before capitalism rome founded

on slavery pursued a colonial policy and

practiced imperialism now why am i

saying then that i'm drawing my specific

definition of imperialism from lenin's

work all you have to do is consult the

very next sentence where lenin says but

general he puts this in quotation marks

disquisitions on imperialism which

ignore or put into the background the

fundamental difference between

socioeconomic formations inevitably turn

into the most vapid banality or bragging

like the comparison greater roman

greater britain even the capitalist

colonial policy of previous stages of

capitalism is essentially different from

the colonial policy of finance capital

so what is actually going on here let me

explain

lennon

you're gonna have to let me finish and

then i'll let you talk

so so lennon is essentially here saying

that this is what most people mean by

imperialism right but what most people

mean by imperialism

is you know

a colonial policy and you know

expansionism that's what most people

meant at the time but now lenin is

saying this is actually wrong this is

this is the this is the part of the

general discrimination that's wrong he's

saying

hold on he is saying it wrong because

throughout the rest of the book lenin

will later qualify and give a new unique

meaning to the word imperialism that is

not the same thing as what existed in

ancient rome and which existed in the

past and therefore don't call me off

here let me finish

therefore if we consult an elementary

dialectical materialist and not

metaphysical understanding of language

then the meaning of a word is not going

to be some kind of fixed static essence

that is trans-historical and exists

across time when lenin developed an

analysis of imperialism that he himself

claims is unique to the current epoch

that necessarily must define the use of

that word at least among communists and

socialists as referring to that specific

epoch it does not

it could not possibly have a meaning if

it's referring to some trans-historical

materialism when people talk about

imperialism they're talking about

lenin's imperialism they're not talking

about

i mean that may have been the case

before hold on let me finish that may

have been the case before lenin's

writing of imperialism but after he

writes this and after the theory of

imperialism becomes commonplace among

marxists and among so-called leftists

and all that kind of shit the meaning of

the word at least how marxists are

trying to describe it is not referring

to any general disquisitions but is

referring to the unique epoch of

monopoly and finance capital

so go ahead i'll let you talk

so what you're saying there isn't too

far from what i was going to follow up

on i mean you're saying essentially that

imperialism's character changed which is

a correct analysis to an extent but that

does not disregard what you said

previously about the the genghis khan or

fucking the roman empire and they were

ultimately still involved in colonial

and imperialist practices which you flat

out rejected regardless of lenin's

definition

and just because the definition of a

word changes over time doesn't mean that

it still wasn't fucking

you know involved in these corneal

practices

so ultimately i think i think you were

you were just about there but again it

doesn't disregard what you said

previously like yes you can still say

that you know using the dialectical

method the word changes over time and it

means this it means that and using its

definition of imperialism is correct to

an extent but what you said about

genghis khan and the roman empire was

wrong

okay are you done or can i go now

yep okay i'm really glad you decided to

go on this road because now we can bring

up some quotations by angles and get

into the heat of the difference between

dialectical materialism and metaphysics

so i am now going to accuse you and i

can maintain this okay so two seconds

before you do this i know exactly i am

now going to accuse you of idealism hold

on hold on chung is

you're gonna have to stop being such an

emotional um

i let you speak uninterrupted now i'm

gonna ask you a question do you want to

have a debate where i constantly cut you

off and interrupt you because i'm more

than happy to do that because i mean you

do say a lot of stupid fucking shit that

i can easily respond to

what you're saying is very predictable i

know what sentence you're going to say

when you say the first word right so do

you want me to actually allow you your

own time to speak or do you want to have

a debate where i just cut you off and

whatever so i think you should just let

me speak here and then i'm going to give

you your turn unless you want this to

start getting ugly chongus by the way

don't say i'm the uncivil one who just

yells over people i'm giving you a

chance to argue so trungus you're

claiming that actually imperialism has

just changed over time

rather than lenin's imperialism

referring to a qualitatively new mode of

production that gives a qualitatively

new meaning to the word but that i'm

going to accuse you of idealism and

metaphysics you're claiming that because

the use of the word the syllables and

the combination of letters imperialism

may have changed over time by the way i

think the word originates sometime in

the

17th or 18th century

you're saying because that has changed

over time that the actual thing itself

has changed over time like materialism

materially has changed over time just

because the word people use to describe

it has changed over time can you

actually demonstrate to me how roman

imperialism evolves into the monopoly

imperialism that lenin's talking about

it has to go through so many stages to

do that it has to go through feudalism

it has to go through capitalism and the

qualifier of imperialism to describe the

roman empire has no materially essential

reality at all the essential reality of

roman imperialism does not

actually undergo a development it it is

completely annihilated with the

emergence of feudalism hold on hold on

let me finish because the essence of

roman imperialism lied in the

slave-based mode of production so it's

not imperialism that's changing it's the

mode of production that's changing now

if you want to use the same word to

describe these superficial qualitative

characteristics of expansionism that's

fine but the essence is not actually

expansionism it's not expansionism that

undergoes material qualitative change

and development it's the underlying mode

of production that actually conditions

the possibility of that expansionism in

the first place and moreover lenin does

not even mean by monopoly capitalism

expansionism he doesn't mean anything

qualitatively comparable to roman

imperialism as you're trying to call it

and he admits as much i mean there's no

comparison between the two because it

has nothing to do with some evolution of

expansionism or some evolution of a

general colonial policy lenin is talking

about a specific evolution of industrial

capitalism

there you go speak

so

nothing that you just said there is

different to really what i was pointing

out in all honesty it's very

good is it though so yeah you're correct

i'm saying yes because you're saying

what you're saying imperialism has just

changed

rather than the use of the word

it wasn't probably the right choice of

words in my title

and

fucking what i'm saying

is i'm stoned um

wait so now you're making excuses that

you're still not in that

you know i'm actually but yeah oh so so

if you lose this debate it was because

you're stuck no

and that's it right that's what you're

saying um in fact if we want to take

weiner's definition of the words under

capitalism where obviously high stage

dictates that imperialism forms you can

look at china as a perfect example which

you want to obviously bring up pivoting

to a new argument now are we going to

talk about it's not pivotal i mean we

can talk wait because

wait changes

i will

i will gladly

gladly

i will gladly debate you on whether

russia and china are imperialist but

first we have to get over this specific

point of contention you claim i'm a dumb

fuck and you use this to illustrate this

as an example because i said that the

mongol empire and the roman empire were

not imperialist knowing that i was using

imperialism in the same sense that lenin

used it because in that actual debate if

you actually evaluate the context

i'm talking about attempts hold on shut

the fuck up i'm talking about attempts

to compare american imperialism to those

things well no those things are not

imperialism at least in the sense in

which that word is used now among

marxists

um

now am i saying that universally since

the 17th century the word imperialism

has only been used in one way no but

then again that's not how language works

in the first place if you for example

say oh yeah that dog is not a cat i mean

you're not accounting for weather in

like the middle ages people called dogs

cats and use the word cat you're you're

actually um attaching a specific meaning

to that word that you're having enough

good faith to qualify that people will

somehow understand

right and then you're describing a dog

as a dog and a cat as a cat so if you

have a dialectical and materialist

understanding of language then the

meaning is actually primary now you may

try to say that oh not enough people are

familiar with lenin's imperialism but if

you're debating me on marxism and on

american imperialism

and i'm trying to point out there's a

qualitative difference between the word

imperialism as we're using it and you

know the mongol empire the roman empire

uh you can't really

say you're a materialist and not an

idealist and a metaphysician and say oh

that's not true because uh lenin claimed

that rome had imperialism well you're

taking lenin's words out of context

plain and simple

i guess that's not what you're saying

that the titanfall has i mean it's

ridiculous to say that if you're looking

at the roman empire and saying it's not

imperialist because obviously it didn't

have a capitalist moral production that

that's obviously the case mate if you're

looking at it from a case of capitalism

and the natural progression into

imperialism if you're looking at it in

the sense of how the word imperialism is

used by marxists i mean almost

universally

but it's it's still ridiculous because

it's why is it

although it's not the imperialism that

we see under capitalism where you know

armies are going

you're trying to say it's it's not the

same type of imperialism right

to an extent okay so if you're saying

it's not the same type of imperialism

and you're trying to imply

if all you're saying is it's not the

same type of imperialism you're trying

to imply they belong to the same genus

share some kind of common essence and

they're just different types rather than

words that are used to describe entirely

and qualitatively different things lenin

said again

even the previous colonial policy of

capitalism is essentially he said

essentially different from the colonial

policy of finance capital if the essence

of the word is different understand this

is this this is all right

if the word is different from how it was

used before the words no longer share an

essential genus they're not different

species of the same essence they are

qualitatively different things

if you want to go down the character of

the road rather of looking at lenin's

imperialism and actually seeing it under

capitalism i think getting started on

china would probably be a good place to

start today hold on

just so we're clear

i am i'm gonna pursue this with you as

well but just so we're clear you have

conceded on the original topic of

content

that you don't understand marxism and

imperialism if we were to go over china

but we no no

but you just brought up one bullet point

of contention which was about what lenin

said about ancient rome now i want to

move on to today's challenge

strongest i'm not moving

an example i asked you if you were wrong

about this

so you're not conceding on this one

point

that you initially brought up because

until you concede on it we're not moving

on to the next one because i'm not

conceding on it

i don't know what else i can say except

for what i've already said

okay

i have to explain to you the basics of

changes i have to explain to you the

basics of debate then if you don't know

what else to say you're admitting you

don't know how to respond to my argument

if you don't know how to respond to my

argument you are at the very least not

informed enough to come to a conclusion

about what my actual position is or go

using that as an example to say i'm a

dumbass

don't want to get caught in china is

because you know fine well that you're

fucked man

no

i will i will if you're

i will not only debate you with regard

to china i will also debate you with

regard to russia which should actually

be easier for you because russia is

officially not a socialist country at

all so i will do both of those things

but i don't want you to pivot from this

original bullet point because my goal

changus is to demonstrate everything

when you bring up a bullet point pivot

to something else without the question

of whether i succeeded

in proving you wrong on this one bullet

point is not settled i want every single

thing

is

hey if you're wrong about this specific

point about ancient roman stuff uh will

you admit you said no there's other

things okay we'll do it one by one right

so this is the one of the bullet points

that i have to conquer in order to

actually ultimately exact your final

surrender where you're going to admit

that i am actually not a dumbass and you

cannot sustain that claim so that's why

i'm focusing on this one point because

you're the one who brought it up now you

want to pivot to something else in an

entirely new debate about whether

contemporary china which is actually

after lenin road imperialism not before

is imperialist i am more than happy to

go down that road with you but first we

have to resolve this specific point of

contention

you're doing your monk you're playing

batman

this is exactly what you do you just you

don't even give people the opportunity

to talk about anything else because you

get caught on one side

you think that's something what an

argument which is fucking really so

let's say i go down the road with you on

china and every everything else hold on

just let me speak let's say i just

decide to pivot with you and go on the

road of china

by the end of our debate it will be

impossible for me to um exact your

concession because you're going to say

well i didn't concede on the imperialism

ancient realm thing so actually that's

not until what's going to happen

can you can you at least admit that you

were wrong on that point with regard to

ancient rome

i'm still not wrong i mean why not

ultimately the fucking

what you were saying at the time when it

came to ancient rome not being

imperialist

was

still totally out with the fucking

comprehension of rome ever being a

capitalist society like it's not a

capitalist society

what do you mean why would anyone even

try to fight lenin's definition of

imperialism to a fucking system that

came before capitalism but that's what

other people were trying to do when they

were talking about the mongols in

ancient rome if you want to just say

they were expansionist i never objected

to that but calling them imperialism

dilutes the qualitative difference

between lenin's

writing imperialism the high stage of

capitalism and what he was describing

there and just some mere expansionism

it's a form of establishing a general

disquisition that lenin explicitly

rejected and of course he's going to

refer to rome as imperialist before he

gets into the nitty-gritty of his own

writing because that's how the word was

used in the commonplace back then that

is obviously not the case anymore

imperialism is widely regarded as a

specific stage of so-called late

capitalism today even by non-marxist and

it's untenable to to to say

that oh actually lenin claimed in the

because in the introduction to the work

that rome was imperialist no he didn't

he didn't even flesh out what he meant

by imperialism by that time and he

literally qualified that sentence by

saying and we actually should not

establish these general disquisitions

that i just referred to he's basically

saying yeah and everyone says rome is

imperialist and practice the colonial

policy but actually

what they're referring to is essentially

different from what i'm referring to

okay so therefore they're not part of

the same genus they're not species of

the same genus they're qualitatively

different things they're not different

types of the same thing because the same

thing in question isn't based on some

platonic ideal that is trans-historical

it's based on definite concrete modes of

production so again we have to establish

why i'm wrong about this specific point

the thing is though i mean what you just

said there

specifically there i wouldn't disagree

with

okay well so you're conceding that you

were wrong that's not that's not me

conceding

listen you have a lot of other hold on

chungus you have a lot of other points

to win on but you have to at least admit

you lost on this one

i'd say maybe you'll win on the china

one you might you might win on the china

russia one by this the debate is not

going to be judged until the whole

thing's over but at the very least you

have to admit that you know you you were

wrong about this one point

you still have a lot of chances

you acknowledge that you're wrong

i think again with the context in which

you were saying it it was very easy for

someone to

take exactly what was said

you misjudged and you were wrong is that

fair

i'd say that what you discussed when it

came to let's just get straight

and move on to the next thing again

there's a lot of other things we have

okay

okay so you admit that you were wrong

yeah let's do that oh that's a yes right

that's

i fucking man on you

that's a yes right

so the next thing i want to talk about

hold on

is that a yes or a no because we cannot

proceed until we we come to a conclusion

about this one because i want to come

back to it was that a yes or no

i mean die just move on is that a yes or

no changes

can you not understand what i mean

chungus

were you wrong about this initial thing

if you're not conceding on it then we're

going to continue to pursue it so were

you wrong or not

yes

okay that's all i wanted thank you for

having the bravery to admit that so now

you want to talk about china so have at

it

so

it's

you obviously seem to think the belt and

road initiative itself is not an

imperial conquest itself no

no i don't think it's imperialist at all

and you think you see that the rise of

china is obviously a good thing in terms

of you know people in the u.s or at

least you know counteracting the usage

yeah

yes

yeah well the benefits of the belt and

road initiative although they might seem

you know good in theory it still

economically ties these countries to

china in such to such an extent they're

relying on china um and the only real

benefits of the belt road initiative are

the children of the corporate or

bourgeoisie

um

in the countries in which they're

they're obviously invested in so a good

case study that i like to point to is

liberia i spent quite a lot of time

living in liberia which is a former uh

us colony in the west coast of africa

um

they have recently had quite a lot of

chinese investment where the chinese

built a road through liberia basically

connected the capital to you know key

towns within the within the country

and they built quite a lot of offices

and quite a lot what developments um

and in exchange for these roads and the

offices that they built they almost have

near exclusive mining rights in china

but to basically

take as much as they want um while

employing some of the local population

now

one thing that i did notice when i was

in liberia is that school fees are

extortionate the vast majority of the

working class in that country cannot

afford to go to school

um even the main university in monrovia

is

way out of reach for the average

proletarian the only people that manage

to get into these schools assuming

they're not given you know grants of

scholarships which are very rare to

happen

um are the people that are benefiting

from

the the chinese loans that are coming

into the country the children of the

contradore bourgeoisie

um and what happens is these people go

through school and they end up working

for chinese companies or working for i

mean i keep i bring up china america is

also heavily involved in liberia

right but we are exactly yeah

um

and

the benefits aren't seen by the people

like yeah they've built a road but what

happens you still have people that are

working 12 hour days the children

getting sent off to work 12 hour days

working on fucking wood shops this stuff

um

so and

again what you're seeing is the pelton

roads initiative flying these countries

to china making them more dependent on

them it might be a little bit better

than obviously american agency

but ultimately you're choosing sides in

an inter-imperialistic game i just have

a few questions so dividend yeah so you

consider yourself like a

marxist-leninist maui so you uphold

stalin right

yeah of course okay just just we're

clear all right so um you talk about

dependency as being a feature of

imperialism now lenin at the time of the

october revolution um did he foresee or

expect a world revolution

of the international proletariat

that's a trump scare state yeah man well

isn't that what they all expected at

least in the october revolution there's

gonna it's gonna break out in europe and

there's a big chance for a world

revolution now

well they certainly thought that the

titans but yeah again yeah okay okay

just so we got that clear okay so

hypothetically that's what lenin

believed that's what everyone at the

time believed

um if there was a world revolution at

that time and if you don't like this

example we can move on to the stalin era

uh are there still inequalities in

development between the colonial

countries and europe and even the soviet

union

why are you getting caught up in

hypotheticals though wait okay let's not

go hypothetically

are there were there

let's do a concrete historical example

where there are inequalities in terms of

development

between the russian soviet republic

and the colonies acquired

by the russian empire in central asia

were there developmental inequalities

there

obviously okay

so did those developmental inequalities

entail a difference in the standard of

living between people living in uh

the

uh former colonies and in the russian

imperial core quote-unquote

as did capitalism

capitalism

but you don't think the soviet union was

imperialist do you

well

well what what year are we talking about

specifically before stalin or

no this was this didn't this actually um

exaggerated under stalin and that the

inequality never disappeared it still

the dissolution i mean even after the

dissolution but throughout the entirety

of the soviet union's existence this

inequality between the core and the

peripheries actually never was overcome

yes and

okay well i just want to wanted to ask

you is that imperialism

well considering that cuba was almost

certainly a sugar colony of the ussr at

the time

that that was an important thing about

it yeah

forget about i know that i know the

soviets also imperialism but lenin and

stalin right is the is the soviet union

imperialist under them

no they came up with fucking

the national question in terms of when

it came to when support national

operation movements went to basically

take them on board yeah and when to

reject them i don't know what the point

that you're trying to get to still has

the point well that

that would be even worse in the case of

china because china does not politically

interfere in the affairs of any african

country right we're just talking about

developmental inequalities that would be

inevitable even in a hypothetically

post-capitalist world

well again i mean the goalposts that i

was talking first that i said was that

you think that china is not engaged in

imperialism

i think the the kicker here the i think

i think

the point i want

is the ultimate point

of the americans is that because of

those developmental inequalities

relations of dependence are also

inevitable even in a post-capitalist

context

so it's not specifically surely it's not

specifically the relations of dependents

alone

that make china imperialist in in

liberia or anywhere else is it

it's the exports of finance staff to my

friend like let's go either give it out

it kind of seems like

these loans did they get you know high

inflation rates so they'll they will

need to pay it back you know you can say

that china rates off loans but the

majority they don't they've taken

control of supports in

other countries in africa

and because they defaulted on loans

so let's talk about the export of

finance capital then is that something

more concrete that i can work with right

um it kind of seems like there's some

gaps in your knowledge about china's

economic system and its belt and road

initiative um china's not actually

exporting finance capital it's exporting

if anything a form of infrastructural

capital which is based on concrete

infrastructure and industry and actually

it does these things at a loss

and through

while in debt it actually gets into debt

through infrastructure and then the

infrastructure pays for itself it pays

for the debt that's been china's model

but in the case of them exporting

finance capital that would be a

completely different model that would be

people taking out loans that are

unrepayable

right and in order for it to be a form

of finance capital like in the case of

the imf and the world bank

um you would actually have a scenario in

which that loan based on interest just

continues to accumu like they would

accumulate capital just from the

interest

on the loans right that would be a form

of finance capital but that is not

china's model of exporting uh so-called

capital what you're trying to say is

that because china is building

infrastructure instead of giving out

loans it's not imperialism

china's model of development whether

internally or abroad is not based on

profit at all to begin with profit is

just an ancillary

measurement

of whether it's

it's efficient or successful or not but

ultimately it's not based on profit it's

based on concrete goals

um such as building infrastructure so

it's it's not based on profit which is

why um china took control of kenya's

largest dipping port because they

couldn't afford to repay the loan their

largest what

the largest wait shipping port like

they're so i i cannot um fact check your

claim about the kenyan shipping port i

mean people are playing this take your

title people have tried to claim this

about sri lanka and it turned out to be

a complete fraud so just for the

purposes of argumentation i guess i'll

concede it to you i mean just because i

can't

i'll concede to you that that fact can

be upheld that the china has seized

kenya's shipping port and it's just like

that with no further context um why

would it has also been

essentially to countries such like such

as ethiopia where they can actually get

a cheaper workforce to produce the same

foods for them in which they can export

and sell on yeah so again that's that is

that in itself it's fine does ethiopia

have sweatshops because of chinese

imperialism or because of ethiopia's

level of development

well imperialism is a massive fact but

it may

i mean you know that

as uh nick so are you trying to say that

if a country is basically underdeveloped

then imperialism is okay to be excused

no obviously because that's the oklahoma

hold on as nakuma pointed out

neo-colonialism which he thought was

qualitatively a next step from

imperialism is actually about

underdeveloping countries so if a

country is underdeveloped

and there's concrete economic relations

being established that actually do

successfully develop that country

according to nokruma

that would actually be beyond the bounds

of of imperialism as we know it at least

in the third world or maybe the marshall

plan or something you can make the case

that they're not

doesn't make much sense so when you're

talking about under development i think

you're talking about under development

you seem to think that when people

mention under development you're talking

about that in an isolated pace in that

country that that country itself needs

to be underdeveloped

as a consequence of imperial do you know

what underdevelopment is

well that's what i was going to come to

if you just give me a chance there i was

about to say that under development is

still

um

tied to the country that

is ultimately exploiting sites

hold on you know what it's called

underdeveloped as say the u.s for

example as well just to be clear under

underdeveloped and lesser developed

they're not the same thing under

development refers

yeah i want to be clear we're talking

about the same thing so under

development refers to the active way

which the export of finance capital not

only prevents uh the countries in the

periphery

it prevents their development but

actually

stunts their development even in a

backward direction through devastation

so underdevelopment is not just

countries being less or developed you

know what right

okay so what what argument are you

making

i was basically saying that i think

you're looking at it in a vacuum by the

way i'm being told that the kenyan port

is not actually a collateral can you

comment on that or

uh you're the one that brought it up

with thesaurus

uh

with i'm just being told that i mean is

it collateral or not or not

this is the thing you do it you just

push it at your arse and fucking all

right well

the maritime executive right here is

saying report the port of mombasa is not

collateral for kenya's china

kenya's chinese loans and it says in

december 2018

um

it came with a warning that kenya

allegedly staked its valuable mama

support as a collateral for the 3.6

billion loan from china the revelation

was serious so this seems like an

accusation although they both denied

that the mumbai support which is

collateral the exact loans

have remained an enigma

the rumor has continued to circulate a

new report released last week by the

china africa research initiative the

john hopkins university school of

advanced international studies shows

that the auditor general errored in

concluding mobas support was used as the

lone collateral who are surprised our

team found that the collateral rumor

stemmed from a seemingly tiny but

critically misreading

uh by the auditor general the ag

mistakenly labeled the kpa as a borrower

responsible for repaying sgr loans

for context four stakeholders were

involved in sgr financing kenya's

national treasury the borrower krc the

project company kpa the main project

customer and owner of mobasa port and

china's exim bank the lender

under the terms of the contract kpa

agreed to be sgr's major client not the

borrower not the borrower and not the

collateral so it seems like you were

completely mistaken in making that claim

i i suspected as much because similar

claims were made about the sri lankan

report and then it was a google search

away to show this was completely bunked

so we have to be clear about the facts

when we're bringing up facts right that

we can't ready attend

uh debunk

so this is not a tenable example of

chinese imperialism because it's an

outright lie do you still recognize that

china you obviously recognize that

china's not socialist in and of itself

right now yeah no i do recognize and

it's not capitalism

yeah no i reject that view

what do you reject about it

like how is the chinese system

qualitatively different to actual

capitalists

i think the most decisive it's it's it's

a combination of many things it's not

one thing it's a combination of all land

being owned publicly within china and

that's just an unconditional thing well

i saw the case considering

it's a combination of the unique role of

the um state-owned companies it's a

combination of china's developmental

model based on infrastructure not based

on profit statement companies that still

have massive like still turn massive

profits that have fucking billionaire

shareholders but they don't turn profit

to make profit they turn profit for

purposes of development

so profits

and like they're talking with billions

so

i'll explain to you what this means

right if if the choice as far as china's

government is concerned is between

profit and development they always

choose development they will neglect

well it's funny you also say that

because there's also been studies that

have come out to show that um china

right now would develop faster using my

era policy as opposed to what continued

even if even if that's true i've heard

similar things i'd have to look at the

actual report

but that's that doesn't decide whether

china's socialist or not and then also

you're kind of pivoting from the um

the imperialism thing so well no no i'm

not pivoting from that because the the

key point i want to come to is it's

still a capitalist system and it still

dictates

like it still necessitates imperialism

to survive okay but but if we actually

analyze how china's system works

it is an untenable claim because china's

system is not based on the export of

capital it's based on the development of

the forces of production

in which you know things like profit and

things like the use of money are just

caught in the wheels of that caught in

the gears of that as as ancillary and

incidental measurements

rather than ends in and of themselves

you just had a big word salad there but

okay i'll actually make your argument

easier right to make your argument

easier would probably be like even if

you tried to claim china with socialism

speaking for you like even if you has

tried to claim that china was socialist

aren't these african countries

capitalists so isn't china's economic

relationships with these countries

necessarily um china being bounded up

with the capitalist mode of production

to that i would respond

that no because what china's actually

been doing is swallowing up the

capitalist mode of production

sublighting it into a higher mode of

production

um and that is why china has been the

number one you know engine of economic

growth since 2008 and it is also

refashioning and changing the world and

the

the global mode of production itself

such that all of the capitalist

countries with their central base

being in london still and wall street

that is entering into a crisis uh which

it doesn't look like it's going to be

able to bail itself out from except

through war with china

when you when you're talking about china

right now um

it's

i'm losing my train of thought i'm sorry

again it's like four in the morning

right now nearly five um

yeah when you're talking about china and

imperialism

it's ridiculous still to say that you

know the reason why china is doing this

right now is because they're bound to

the world's capitalist system ultimately

the soviet union is china

in a roundabout way so you said that

because they're capitalist economy no i

tried to make an argument for you and

then i responded to the argument

i'm not saying i'm not saying that

i'm not saying china

is capitalist because it has to be or

something i'm saying

china is literally transforming the mode

of production on a global level the

underlying mode of production the

underlying engine of economic growth is

being changed

what they're doing is still facilitating

capitalism and still facilitating

imperialism how is that rocking the

world

so two things right is capitalism a

global system yes or no

yeah okay

would you say that in 2008 the global

capitalist system kind of suffered a um

crisis

well obviously there's built into the

system okay have been busted like we've

seen would you okay sure sure

just these are yes or no questions and

then you're gonna you can get into the

discussion so what would you admit and

this is verifiably provable right

that the engine of world economic growth

since 2008

has come from china

no

i would not say that no okay like yeah

you can you can see

economic growth

why why are you getting so cut off on

economic growth again we're looking at

capitalist countries but well i'll

explain to you what because you're

saying i don't know about marxism but

it's kind of curious that you don't know

that for marx a mode of production is

literally how an economy

reproduces itself and grows okay saying

that is if i don't understand this

though yes so that's why i'm

ultimately what you should be what you

should be using your platform for is to

advocate for the actual overthrow of

these systems instead of looking at

china just opened by twenty fifty

so you reject the view that china was

responsible for the global economic

growth after 2008 and more or less the

system collapsed in the united states as

far as the us is concerned that the

reason the u.s and european economies

have been remained afloat is because of

china's economic growth which has been

admitted as much by the us government

and by u.s economists which is basically

that china build out the world after

2008 would you disagree with that

in all honesty and we didn't know enough

specifically about after 2008 to

probably be able to comment on it uh i

said that

would you be willing to concede that to

me for the purposes of argumentation

for the purposes of argumentation

because i haven't seen yeah yeah like

let's just assume that this world

we'll just we'll just pass over that

yeah yeah assuming that's true okay

then wouldn't that mean

none of this is relevant to socialism

well i'm gonna explain why it's relevant

i'm gonna explain why it's relevant

wouldn't that at the very least

establish

that somehow china

has an economy that is not attached to

the global economy and global capitalism

in the way that other countries are

i'd say that they do a better job of

capitalism but again why are we getting

capitalism was a global system

it is okay so if capitalism is a global

system

why didn't china go down

with

the capitalist crisis

they were affected as well though sorry

maybe not maybe not as badly but they

were definitely still unpacked by 2008.

it it it

after 2008 china's economy has only

skyrocketed in growth it had no after

2008 yes it still took a hit in 2008 and

by the way that is real economic growth

it's not based on credit or printing

money or anything like that it's real

substantive economic growth

like the group which we just said that

they give out loans at a deficit and uh

xyz internally what i'm trying to say is

that

they will just build infrastructure even

if they can't afford it and they can't

turn a profit

and you know

it's not a debt that can be turned into

a form of capital first and foremost

because the central bank of china is

controlled by the communist party which

is by the way even russia doesn't have

that okay

so that is like a really big ringer

right as far as um

a characteristic and feature of china's

socialism or at least it's this

attachment from the global capitalist

system

um so

it builds infrastructure it does not

turn finance capital into a doesn't turn

finance

uh into a form of capital as a driving

force of its motor production that's

just all ancillary to the ultimate goal

of development

infrastructure is when socialism

that is not what i said plenty of

capitalist countries also build

infrastructure but they do not make the

building of infrastructure the basis of

their mode of production

to the point where there's specifically

something that i am familiar with if we

do go back to library example like the

mining rates in exchange for roads

yeah

that is obviously somewhere where

they're going to be able to get a profit

yeah but even even even hold on even in

a

post-capitalist world there are going to

be developmental inequalities and

relationships defined by some countries

you're making an excuse for imperialism

in the most valuable way no i'm not no

i'm not

because china is merely establishing an

equal

economic partnership and relationship

with other countries it is not and i'll

explain to you why that's not

imperialism

even in the colloquial sense it is not

using political pressure in order to

coerce these countries into agreeing

with china is not even using economic

forms of blackmail to do so it is unlike

the imf and unlike the world bank

attaching zero political qualifications

to its deals it also doesn't entrap

these countries into vicious cycles of

debt because its goal isn't actually the

um

gaining of profit through finance

capital in the first place uh it

absolutely does not coerce these

countries because of their economic

underdevelopment to enter into unfair

deals with china china is very attuned

to the developmental needs of other

countries and its goal is to promote

win-win development where china has

needs for raw materials

and these countries have needs for basic

infrastructure

now why can't china and these other

countries make economic agreements

i mean wouldn't that have to happen in

socialism as well some socialist

economies would be more developed right

because of where they're starting off

they need different things

kenya right now or these african

countries they don't necessarily need

those raw materials

they need them to sell yeah but they

don't need them to um

do like uh for manufacturing or anything

like that yet but china is actually

getting them to a point they eventually

will right

so and then the more technology

increases the more the exploitation of

resources both within china and

throughout the world

will be more efficient and you know will

produce more there'll be more abundance

for everyone it's not a zero-sum game

like the malthusians say where china's

stealing their resources that they would

otherwise use to produce their own

manufacturing base it's not that's that

that is not how economic development

yeah but you know the british were

exporting industry and infrastructure

and of course they were wealthy enough

to not need the profits from that were

they

sorry can you uh repeat that i didn't

hear

so what you're saying about china right

now with win-win development

quote-unquote your words um

the british did the exact same thing

they they built infrastructure in the

country they were colonizing and what

they did was they just the british

resources said the british

so i'll explain to you two things right

so there's two phases of colonial policy

that lenin describes the early one was

based on political dominance and

exploitation and it's that those are

political colonies so those countries

have no sovereignty and britain just

steals everything now you can say that

while britain is still building them

railroads and shit well britain's only

building infrastructure to the extent

that britain is benefiting from that

infrastructure is not engaging in this

data

absolutely not true

no that is right no it's not important

the main roads that connects the country

which goes from monrovia all the way up

to um

ghana guinea i always get confused

between the two

um which we just go straight through the

middle of the country totally

all rival communities but china makes it

all rival communities that's not true

china makes deals to ensure that these

other these countries actually

themselves benefit for their own

internal development from that

infrastructure britain did not bring did

not the only people benefiting from this

infrastructure again is the compromise

when you have like a working class

obviously in my period that is living on

less than what a dollar two dollars a

day

before i like to cut you off there

um does that reflect their developmental

status in state because in china they

were living off a dollar or two you know

20 years ago as well okay yes yes so the

reason why the commodore bears rising

the ones benefiting is because they're

the ones with the money that can save

their children at school

within their interest

i didn't quite catch all that but i just

want to repeat it back to you and just

confirm yesterday you're saying that

comprador bouzouzzi benefits

because they have a better standard of

living in the immediate sense

they have more capital at their disposal

where they can then afford to send their

kids to you know prestigious

is that what you're saying

obviously okay so they have a better

standard okay because they sell

themselves

so actually actually the

having a better standard of living is

actually not enough to define a class so

when you're saying they are exclusively

benefiting that all that tells us that

in the immediate sense yeah the people

who are already i am talking

specifically about the class i've

mentioned specifically the comprador

bourgeoisie they are the ones that are

running the country they're the ones

that are benefiting from this

imperialism

okay but even in china

so this is what's a little bit

ridiculous this is what's a little bit

ridiculous about what you're saying

um china had internal inequalities

during its era of development now if you

were to say 20 30 years ago that china's

development only benefits the comprador

bourgeoisie quote unquote i mean in the

immediate sense it might seem that way

right but then 20 years later you see

the huge rise of a chinese middle class

in a huge poverty alleviation campaign

where actually the whole of the chinese

nation was benefiting from this it

turned out and that actually this is

actually the reason why china's doing

these deals with africa and the rest is

because of the needs of this new wealthy

you know chinese middle class that is

way more well-off than it was 23 years

ago so how are you so sure that the only

people benefiting from this are the

people who seem to be benefiting only in

the immediate sense how do you know

what's actually going on to project into

the future like whether or not you know

the people that are making more dollars

now

might be more wealthy in the future

here's something up for the people that

are confused the competitor of

brutalizing is not the class that exists

within the imperialist country it's the

class that exists within the country

that's being imperialized okay

we are talking about china before it's

an imperialist quote unquote adventures

in africa right

not really not very nice but i was i was

i was when i was talking about china 20

30 years ago that is not the same china

today you're calling china imperialist

today because it has a huge middle class

which has more developmental needs

when did i ever see that when did i ever

see that china has a massive middle

class and that's the reason for the

development

i'm saying i'm i'm i'm i'm attributing

to you guys hold on

i'm attributing to you the cause that

cause not because it's what you think

yourself because it's it's like that's

what i'm saying is the cause like

china's doing all these deals in africa

and stuff because of the rising demands

of its middle class its need for more

light industry and more domestic

consumption which is why it needs all

these raw materials and shit that's what

i was talking about i was i wasn't

saying that you were talking about the

middle class i was pointing out that is

actually the reason china is now having

this belt and road initiative or at

least one of the primary reasons is

because it has entered into a

qualitatively new developmental stage

do you believe that there's a middle

class in china

do you not

what do you think constitutes class

i i'm using this

is it simply money

i am using this in a colloquial sense

i'm referring to

let's just say if you don't like that

word i'm referring to the fact

people are more wealthy now and they're

not like how they were it and how people

are in liberia now where they're living

off of one to two dollars a day like

they were you know middle class isn't

even a word that should leave a marxist

mouth you dumb fuck

chunks you're getting a little emotional

because you're a forest fairy it's not a

relationship

you call me a dumb fuck i think you

maybe hold on

so i'm not i'm not going to insult you

right now

i'm not going to insult you right now i

just want to ask you questions

are you autistic just a question

no okay i just wanted to make sure

because it's very common among autistic

people to not understand that words can

be given meaning in a colloquial sense

you don't have to read too much into it

that what people mean by middle class

isn't some upfront to marxist theory but

just the vague fact you know there's a

new stratum of people who are more

wealthy than before that are consumers

now not just toilers working one to do

one to two dollars a day like they were

10 to 20 years ago so you're saying the

very fact that i used the commonsensical

word middle class which is not you know

it's i'm not saying that some scientific

phrase to describe a class in the

marxist sense but it is a definite kind

of tendency and phenomena within within

a society where you know it gets more

wealthy and it's able to actually become

consumers right who are not primarily

defined by you know sweatshops and

working one two dollars a day but are

primarily kind of defined by also having

you know their own do you think that the

majority of the chinese people even

right now have a better quality of life

than they did say

20 30 years ago on their back

without a doubt

if they don't i will cut off my balls

and send them to you in scotland

so

the amount of things that were lost with

the the end of the cultural revolution

and the death of mao and rural

communities that did have access to

universal health care

no longer have access to health care and

they don't have access to collective

bargaining at all are you sure about

that well not at all not at all um

strongest

you are saying that at the end of the

cultural revolution the majority of the

chinese people had a better standard of

living than they do now

i'm not necessarily saying obviously

china has developed to an extent that

has afforded a better quality of living

to an extent is what i'm trying to say

but what i'm also planning what do you

mean to an extent dude

listen listen

global poverty has been reduced they're

almost exclusively referring to china

what do you mean to an extent china's

success in being able to eliminate

poverty and and raise the standard of

living of its people i mean it's it's so

legendary even mythically it's untold in

the history of humanity there's there's

never been a country that has so rapidly

improved the standard of living of its

population as china there's you can't

even there's nothing nothing compares to

it and you're saying that's just to an

extent you are seriously so delusional

in your marxist leninist maoist cult

that you're trying to say that at the

end of the cultural revolution the

chinese people had a better statement

now what are you talking about dude i

mean even even the fucking cult left

deviation is an ultra leftist of the

cultural revolution if you resurrected

their corpse and asked them that

question now they would go and shine and

be like that's fucking stupid obviously

people live better than they do now but

you know if you were smart maybe you

would make the argument that well has

that development would have been

inevitable and if they continued under

the mile model it wouldn't be it would

have even been better than now but to

say something so stupid that the

standard of living of the chinese people

hasn't improved in the past 10 20 years

let alone since the end of the cultural

revolution

was that the chinese people had

lost so many quintessential things that

were they were key to building socialism

with the death about and what came after

the thing

okay so the key word is building your

version of socialism the key word is not

as far as their own well-being and

development is concerned by any metric

it's your ideological project as you've

defined it and you've qualified it it

has nothing to do with their happiness

and well-being and their standards so

are you trying to say that what was once

universal health care which has now been

replaced by a private albeit there is

still you know national insurance i

guess

it's not really private that's a really

misleading way of characterizing china's

healthcare system

because for example there's the

insurance there's like no insurance

industry in china that has you know the

power

that you know it's even comparable to

america i mean i don't think there is

one first place there's no um

the medical industry is clearly set up

and as a system was created to serve the

purpose of

improving people's medical well-being

not profit

even if profit is used as a measurement

which it also was under mao by the way

not a lot of people know this but all

deng really did was decentralize

the people's commune system which was

operating uh using profit as a

measurement and they did act

autonomously from the national central

economy uh they did use profit as the

indication of whether they were

efficient or not and all deng really did

is decentralized that system down to the

team level of farmers all we did was

implement our queue my friend you

literally trade socialism in china

okay well i'm saying it's not

imperialist and you haven't really made

an argument every all the points you've

brought up are untenable unless you want

to say those are tenable

so

i guess we could also just move on to

the other point i was bringing up

americans

we're not going to move on to another

point until we come to a conclusion

about whether what you said was tenable

or not

are the things that you've said terrible

sustainable you've been making

neoliberal arguments

remember when mao said seek truth from

facts so before you characterize my

arguments ideologically we have to

actually debate about whether i'm right

or you're wrong or you're right and i'm

wrong right so we have to come to a

conclusion about this one point before i

move on to any other point for you

i was i was waiting for you to finish

yeah so you made a lot of claims about

china and africa and china internally

and china in relation to the globe you

said it was imperialist you said it was

capitalist

um

and you didn't really respond to

anything i said so

i mean where do we stand here

considering the fact that you've been

making neoliberal arguments before

you're just so what you realize so two

things two things

what neoliberal arguments have i made

second of all um even hypothetically if

i did make neoliberal arguments

why are they false and wrong you're

excusing imperialism because you're

seeing it as a benefit of development

regardless of what that

i am at development

very least proving that it is not

imperialism or if it is imperialism

to say it's not imperialism

because imperialism is defined by the

export of capital and more specifically

the export of finance capital and it's

also a specific stage of monopoly

capitalism lenin described a hundred

years ago right in which countries were

basically um not simply just exporting

capital

but also

the new role of banks and financial

capital and actually turning industrial

capital into a middleman okay so clearly

that does not reflect china's economic

system internally or abroad because in

the chinese system somehow some

development some some goal of

development however you wanted to find

that of increasing and and um

and uh

developing the forces of production is

what's in command not profit whatsoever

if profits are not even in command i

don't even know how you could say it's

it's imperialist

i mean that's that's a very big

prerequisite of imperialism is that

profits aren't this is what you're

already doing is you're just assuming

the fact that profits aren't in command

okay when when we've already discussed

the fact about mining rights and you've

you've somehow justified mining rights

it's like oh yeah

so

we need to go through it and this is a

point of contention how are profits in

command

this

i've literally just just said it like

when you say it again i must have not

been able to hurt you because you sound

like you have a cock in your mouth go

ahead say it again

so what i was saying was um

you say that profit's not in command

despite the fact again when china's

sending these loans over to or rather

sorry you like to put it as development

yeah china is developing these third

world countries yeah

but they're doing this all off they're

good everyone hires and then there's

nothing no they're they're doing it in

exchange they're doing it in exchange

this is it has you're getting to the

point that's imperialism

we're not talking about that yet we're

talking about profits in command so is

china doing this for profit or is china

doing this to satisfy both its

developmental needs and the

developmental needs of other countries

which it's somehow trying to establish a

common interest between is it about

developmental needs or is about is it

about profit

you're acting as if those two things are

mutually exclusive and they can't be

intertwined okay

which one is in command

which one is which one is in command

such that one would be sacrificed for

the other if it came down to it

again so you also seem to think that

profit isn't primary at all in china

like when you look at big companies like

fucking 10 cent in the evergrand group

like without building again

companies not only which began at a loss

but

you know

whatsoever

we caught them

there's like millions of arguments

bombarding us now you're saying it's

anti-imperialist can we just focus on

why profits are you were talking about

the profit motive though i mean even in

imperialism in chinese imperialism

hold on you just

see you talking about the profit motive

is like what you just critiqued about

someone talking about the middle class

the profit motive or the incentives of

economic activity that's a sociological

question is not actually what's going to

define motive production because clearly

the communist party the people in power

in china are not motivated by any profit

motive

or the profit motive of some kind of

ruling class

that's such a dumb thing to say has

honestly you just don't understand

fucking materialism okay so when do you

have billionaires when you have

billionaires at the helm do you really

think their class interests are still

aligned with the proletariat regardless

you just said something kind of funny

he said that billionaires are at the

hell can you explain how billionaires

are at the helm in china

how many billionaires are in the chinese

communist party right now bro

uh

are there okay how many more farmers

just farmers alone forget about all the

other classes how many more farmers are

there in the chinese communist party

compared to billionaires

that's you know the stats you know

there's some argument to make me a

communist party

like the chinese system's so

disconnected from the masses by this

point it's effectively command isn't

that it comes from sorry how many people

are in the chinese communist party a

tenth of the whole population right

but you can try and say this it doesn't

doesn't mean that the class character of

the billionaires within the communist

party you're still misaligned with the

proletariat

okay how are they misaligned

are you fucking serious right now

i'm asking you something are you serious

if you know about oxygen you should hold

on if you know about marxism you should

be able to explain why they're

misaligned so actually we'll go over a

good quote from anarchism and socialism

um

by stalin of course in the the

dialectical method okay um

so

he talks about basically an example

where he gives a shoemaker and

as we already so where's

he says she can't find the quote here's

a simple illustration let's take a

shoemaker who owned a tiny workshop but

who unable to withstand the competition

of the big manufacturers closed his

workshop and took a and take a job say

at a shoe factory in tiflus he went to

work at the factory not with the view of

becoming a permanent wage worker over

the object of saving up some money and

accumulating a little capital to enable

him to reopen his workshop as you see

the position of his shoemaker is already

proletarian but his consciousness is

still non-proletarian it is thoroughly

petty bourgeois in other words this

shoemaker has already lost his petty

purge by position it has gone but it's

petty personal consciousness has not yet

gone it has lagged behind his actual

position clearly hereto and socially

first the external conditions change

first the conditions of men change and

then their consciousness changes

accordingly

can you get to the part where it's

relevant because stalin's just talking

about the primacy of material being over

consciousness

so can you get to the part where exactly

when when the material reality for these

billionaires is having excesses beyond

their fucking wildest dreams right

that's not true more money than spain

that's not true

there literally

can i some question can billionaires in

charge of

billionaires are

you're honestly a big fucking q a

reaction why are you getting mad why are

you getting mad i i have to explain it

to you right it's very difficult

you're getting so upset you're like a

little forest fair you're on you're

using your period or something or you

have attention potential right

so your your t levels are very low

tonight that's okay maybe it's a full

moon or something but chungus it's

almost what you do you're so insecure

i can't really respond to your emotional

moral indignation i have to respond to

the substance so in substance okay when

it comes to chinese billionaires there's

a few things okay one you just claim

that someone's lifestyle and and wealth

is not enough to define them as a class

and now i'm also going to point out that

i'm going to actually ask you a question

to see if you can obviously billionaires

exist when they're not at the helm of a

company or at least involved in is that

administrative is that administrative or

is it their actual private property

you're honestly also defending private

property rights right now like i'm

asking you

okay

let me ask you a question do the

billions of the billionaires belong to

them in the sense of private property

do they what

chinese billionaires do they actually

own their own billions as their own

private property

whether or not they do their interest is

still not aligned to the politicians

regardless what do you mean chungus they

cannot liquidate their assets their

billions are in the form of the assets

of the company

and everyone says this in china the

higher their you don't know that these

billionaires are fully controlled by the

party they have no autonomy they have no

freedom they don't own anything they

can't liquidate any of their so-called

wealth they are in an administrative

position that's

that people enjoy a higher standard of

living

that can't touch feel the touch about

women

the quality is the quality of women that

i have fucked is beyond your wildest

dreams so let's not go there

let me ask you a question

i highly doubt that you fucking struggle

with that

wait wait if i privately hon if i

privately prove it to you will you give

me five thousand dollars

you told me i had 30 minutes to prepare

while i was on a night shift i told you

i was working and what did you say i was

scared me i gave you a date that i could

have been on i'm on tonight you're so

disconnected from the active realities

of the working class you sit all day on

screen jerking off hoping that people

will give you fucking twitch donations

donation this whole stream i've gotten

like nothing okay

do you have a job

this is my job

this is your job do we want to talk

about billionaires do you you want to

pivot to something else or do you want

to actually debate

i don't know about personal shit if you

want to

your debatable tactics are fucking done

what you've done this entire

all i want to do is rationally break the

shit down i mean you keep saying i have

debate bro tactics and this and that why

can't you just honestly um have a point

or bring an argument what am i wrong

about what are my debatable tactics why

am i being dishonest how am i being

manipulated just break it down think

about this in fact just talking about

your pseudo-leftism we'll talk about the

stream that you put up a few days ago

where you're talking about quote-unquote

the left being funded by billionaires

like again this just totally goes

against class analysis you you you freak

like

you see

so are you pivoting to another point

we have a few points

you seem to think that you're all so

important can you stop yelling at the

top of your tiny little muscles

you always talk about how you're trying

you want to like oh say that to my face

oh fuck are you drunk

yeah you're a forest fairy and you're a

little pussy so chungus

can we talk about the substance of the

debate we have a few unresolved claims

right you said china was imperialist

because it's activities in africa then

you said china

all you've done is defended imperialism

i'm using your libertarians

let's actually stick to the substance so

we can go by this point by point if you

want to talk about the left being funded

by billionaires afterwards i am very

excited to get into that debate as well

but let's actually focus on where we're

at first because we're not gonna

pivot to another topic until either one

of us concedes on this one right so

changus you say that i have just

defended imperialism but the argument is

about whether china is imperialist in

the first place now the question is how

can china be imperialist if prophets are

not in command it's a very simple

question

prophets are still in command why do you

think the rock

okay then then you made the argument

just to simplify so we don't lose

just just so we don't loop just so we

don't loop you claim that profits have

to be in command because china has

billionaires also in the communist party

then i told you that these billionaires

don't have any property themselves that

they actually own themselves they can't

liquidate their assets they don't have

uh they'll think that china's national

bourgeoisie is somehow still aligned to

the proletariat despite the fact they've

done all they can to make sure it is it

is not it is not a national liberty

it is

defined by the accumulation of capital

and private property it's defined by the

relations of production it's defined by

the fact that you have people in charge

of privately owned corporations whether

or not they're part state funded or not

that yeah so that's the part i want to

get to how are they so you're saying

they're privately owned rights

so i'm gonna explain to you something

about china's system right when china

talks about private property the privacy

aspect is not actually about

um property in the relevant sense for

the bourgeoisie it's just about a gap

and a blind spot to this system of

central state planning which means they

are not going to make assumptions about

how to go about the form of economic

growth they're going to leave it through

forces that are not immediately

controlled by the state genuinely

believe in the people's billionaires

that's so fucking funny man well okay

that's that's honestly since we're not

on twitter you can't just have like

since we're not on twitter and you can't

just get away with like these snarky

remarks and like lmao stuff why is it

ridiculous for a socialist country to

have billionaires can we rationally

break that down

other than the facts or we are that

we've already talked about it we're the

only people that are billionaires exist

within positions of private property and

power that no it's not called

but i just proved to you that it is not

private property and the relevance but

you haven't received anything okay

you've just talked a lot of shit like

it's not okay

if it's private property

if the billions are their private

property can they liquidate their assets

what would happen to them

you're telling me that jack matt doesn't

already have a massive disposable income

that he can fall back on what happened

what what happened to jack ma what

happened to him well he's still right

isn't it he's back in the public eye now

isn't it why is he back in the pub why

wasn't he in the public eye what did

they do to him what happened to him

well considering that nothing's ever

been said about what happened to him

you're going to make a lot of

assumptions so so so that's a beautiful

example jack ma jungus these

billionaires have no autonomy they're

not allowed to assert any independence

even in opinion all jack ma did was just

say some things that were on his mind

and they bitch slapped him into

submission like nothing and he's still a

billionaire

is he

yes can he liquidate his assets

he's still going about his fucking he's

still got a massive disposable income

okay he goes okay

this is

you just objected to my use of the term

middle class and now you're saying the

booze is defined by disposable income

that's that's not that's not what i've

said at all this is your debate called

streamers shit you just put words in my

mouth and say oh this is what you're

saying you said he had a responsibility

why is it relevant that he hasn't said

that why is it relevant that he has a

disposable income i do as well

as if jack ma himself is like the

average proletarian it's just trying to

get by

he enjoys

just to be clear china's billionaires

enjoy a vastly better standard of living

uh they enjoy vastly more prestige and

even more influence

within china okay than the average

person but that's just like saying a

party boss does or some celebrity does

what specifically makes them an

antagonistic class

so

considering the fact that socialism is

all but being overturned in china

following the diaphragmatic because of

these capitalist voters we haven't

qualified how that how socialism has

gone whatsoever

me i mean

why would i even begin to try and debate

this with you when you seem to think

that billionaires are synonymous with

socialism like this is just another

thing

i did not say billionaires are

synonymous with socialism i merely said

it is not incompatible for a country to

be because of this

it kind of seems like you're like hung

up on the fact that according to your

prejudices which have yet to be

justified

um that it sounds ridiculous but you

have to actually explain to us why it's

ridiculous not just that it sounds that

way to you

if you actually knew the

just basic fucking

marxism give us anything understandable

give us anything

okay anything give us anything give us

anything showing that it's embarrassing

actually you know i would even make the

case that this is something marx

predicted in his critique of the gotha

program when he said that when the

principle of equality prevails that will

actually lead to immense levels of

inequality because for people to be

given the paid according to their taking

that quote highly out of distortion

i think i think it still makes sense

though i think i think i think it's not

in technical program what he was trying

to say was that by giving every work the

same wage is not fair because if you

take say one worker that works as a

single person that doesn't say 12 hour

days

based on the principle

he's saying socialism which is based on

the principle

of from each uh according to their

ability and to each according to their

ability meaning they will get what they

put in

that will lead to an immense level he

didn't say if everyone's getting equal

wages he's saying if everyone is getting

the exact proportions that isn't what i

was going to say that's what i was

saying you were saying

no in critique

two seconds let me actually just get

this point out what he was saying was

it's unfair to give everybody the same

wage because if you take the example a

single person working a 12 hour day and

say

a single mom that has say six kids for

example working that same 12-hour day

the wage that's given to one is not

going to be sufficient for the other no

but yeah i get the i get the i get the

difference is extreme but why is it

qualitatively and essentially different

that inequality will prevail

so let me explain to you something and

you're gonna have to let me speak and

not cut me off

you have to listen very closely okay

when it comes to them being called

billionaires that is because of the sum

total of the assets of the company which

is like completely controlled by the

party okay the second thing is that the

amount of disposable income that defines

the extravagant nature of their

lifestyles

is negligible compared to the national

economy which means

the it only seems extreme to you

because of the disproportion compared to

the average person what they can enjoy

but in terms of what they're taking from

the national economy to live these

exorbitant lifestyles it's nothing it's

a drop in the pond you sound like you

dumb you sound like these liberals who

say that if we just tax more yachts and

more mansions we'll be able to fund you

know state programs

this is not true

the difference in lifestyle does not

correspond to the ultimate source of

difference which lies in differences in

development differences in lifestyle are

completely negligible at the level of

the national economy that's just like

some extra shit you can enjoy here's the

cherry on top

one thing that you guys always point out

when you've been talking about china is

you always say that china has lifted you

know 900 million people out of poverty

or xyz which obviously is a good

statistic to look at but what you're

talking about there is not relative

poverty it's absolute poverty there's

people in china that are still they

might be earning more than two dollars a

day perfect

but that's still they're still living in

poverty has china stopped developing

no no but that's not to say that yeah

the question is what kind of job has

china done so far it's not done yet but

what kind of job has china done so far

it's it's done a job that is better than

any country in the history of humanity

in terms of development liberal

arguments there is no it's not a

neoliberal argument because india hasn't

done the job that china has none of the

liberal countries have done the job that

china has britain never did the job that

china has there is not a single example

in the history of mankind

of such a rapid and efficient and

successful alleviation of human beings

from poverty and it is precisely because

china is not a neoliberal system

is a better system of capitalism than

the eu or fucking america or this or

that like this is what i mean

the eu you are violently defending a

capitalist system and for what the eu

the eu

and america

don't enjoy uh any they they cannot

develop themselves they're they've

literally hit a wall all they can do is

devastate the economies and underdevelop

people around the world those countries

are there i mean look at look at what's

going on right now with inflation

they're they're literally systems that

are about to implode and collapse you

can't say that for china

they can't sustain internal development

which is why

they have to rely purely on finance

capital for these political systems

maintain themselves they have to become

empires which go and fuck up other

countries to retain the veneer of a

purely credit-based fake bubble economy

which is about to pop right now

how could you say that china is just a

different version of that i i i it's

just fucking ridiculous

it's still a capitalist estimate i don't

know how you're not seeing it

okay okay so in fact you have to at

least say this

every single example the fact that for

the majority of chinese people they will

never be in a position where they can

own their own means of production

they do and you're sitting there like oh

yeah the chinese people own all the land

but they're best they're that you're

you're this anglo guy living in scotland

who is so profoundly ignorant of china's

economy china's economy has always been

really good

china's economy

china's economy has always been based on

small ownership of the means of

production by the people even during the

sweatshops people had farmland back home

that for all intensive purposes they

actually owned and now this way they

still exist the people suicide debts

dude

look that's a human it's a cultural

issue whatever you're not talking about

the meat and potatoes of motor

production they own their means of

production that's a cultural issue they

own their own means of production that's

anti-materialistic it's a cultural issue

yeah suicide is yes

they're not able to afford their

standard of living they can't afford to

eat these

during the great leap forward have

pretty much always been able to afford

the minimum of subsistence so yes they

can afford to eat

everything they were doing those

sweatshop factories was in excess of a

very basic it was again they still exist

guys

chungus

they don't they don't nearly exist in

the way that they did before and they're

cracking down on those that shit labor

protections are increasing rapidly in

china but what i'm trying to tell you

chunk is is that that baseline minimum

of subsistence is what mao achieved

everything that changes people it is

actually no coming back to what you said

there just about chinese culture and the

fact that suicide sets tied to chinese

culture like that is still an absolutist

argument because

you are you're negating the relationship

between the base and the super structure

[Music]

shut the fuck up you goddamn cocksucker

bitch you gonna let me

okay i did not say it's chinese culture

and that's like an ancient thing suicide

obviously it's related to the economic

changes that had happened at the time

and yeah uh socialism does not

immediately hold on shut the fuck up

you've got i'm gonna fucking say a slur

so bad so i muted this dumb little bitch

temporarily just to get this point

across you're muted by the way so if

you're talking it's in vain okay

obviously there are problems that come

with modernization all the alienation

all that kind of stuff socialism does

not automatically solve all that shit so

when you're saying that china is

capitalist because people are committing

suicide at foxconn by the way is a

taiwanese company and you know at sweden

people are being miserable and shit that

is not an indictment on the socialist

system that might be an indictment on

your personal emotional and ideological

reasons for wanting to be a socialist

because you probably became a socialist

for emotional reasons you're like oh

there's so much misery and unhappiness

that's why i'm a socialist but that does

not a scientific analysis of whether

china's socialist or not the fact that

people are unhappy at periods of chinese

history is not an indictment on the on

the um socialist system period okay it's

an indictment on the motivations you

have which are emotional and ideological

in nature for qualifying what you think

socialism significance is you think

socialism is about

making sure that everyone uh is all the

problems of mental illness and

depression and suicide is immediately

solved scientifically socialism is about

developing the forces of production in a

way where social

social reasons are on command not profit

okay so it's very simple

there you go

i'm unmuting you you can't you can't

shut your fucking mouth like an adult

through this drunk

scottish dumb fuck who can't just shut

their fucking mouth for a second and

listen to a reason by the way guys this

is a prime example of has going angry i

am not an irrational person i don't

randomly blow up and get angry at people

until they start soying out and flailing

their arms everywhere and just shouting

they're not listening to reason they're

not not being rational i'm trying to

have a rational debate with you about

this okay

so if you can calm down and calm your

tits and calm your gynecomastia

and and

simmer down that pussy calm down right

and and take your tampon out whatever

the fuck you have to do

be a fucking man and actually debate

about this there you go i'm unmuting you

unmuted

i i love the fact that you're talking

about how

i got you angry because because of my

little outburst there's your empire

[Music]

don't want to talk about all this other

stuff the only thing i'm going to

respond to is my criticism of you

single-handedly driving up the fucking

price of magic mushrooms around this

world because you're fucking eating the

moment you're eating them all but you

have yet to prove that argumentatively

you see the problem

i'm trying to actually work with you i'm

trying to respond to the points

okay

i'm trying to

you know i just want someone to

sincerely tell you that you're honestly

possibly the the biggest hindrance to

the left you can pause

are you conceding the debate right now

i'm not conceding shit

[Applause]

is you're so insecure that this guy

there's nobody from twitter who's been

bullying you for the past two weeks

you've invited on to the stream

are you conceding the actual debate just

because i

fucking called you a dumbass for the

past two weeks okay do you actually want

to continue this

do you want to continue the debate about

imperialism socialism capitalism in

china or do you want to keep talking

about this

i just want to tell you a fucking panty

man and i sincerely

you haven't you haven't backed that up

with it

i want everyone right now to go bully

that guy on twitter go fucking bully him

he would never shut the fuck up on

twitter about how i'm such a fucking

dumbass and i gave him multiple

opportunities just to sort this out

through debate he kept saying i'm a

fucking dumbass kept saying i'm a

fucking idiot who doesn't know anything

about marxism i'm the most stupid

fucking guy on earth and then he came

here with the premise that i don't

understand marxism whatsoever and he

also was insulting me nonstop i kept my

cool and i kept my patience all i wanted

to do was debate about the fucking

substance and this little fucking pussy

this little bitch could do nothing but

fucking run away

i was very charitable with that person i

even was doing things like giving them

arguments and giving them devil's

advocates that help them and help their

case

dude he could not come here and actually

defend any of his points

and by the way guys if formally and

officially right

he conceded at the very least that the

first point of contention he wanted to

bring to me was wrong so guys this is

what i'm telling you the in every oh the

whole audience right do you remember

when he admitted that he okay he's back

he's back thank god

you're back right

and by the way

you hear his way

you're still

molding me

okay are you here to debate now

you're still so emotional

just to be clear

okay

if you run away from this debate we're

gonna bully you for the end of time i

just want you to know that oh honestly

mate go for it i i sincerely hope you do

so you you already conceded to me that

you were wrong about one thing but you

all conceded shit yes you did i have no

idea we have an appointment

we have the place to go this works out

we haven't even played before

stop talking about how everyone else is

disconnected from the masses but you're

going to lead the revolution that you're

this you're that i didn't say any of

those things changes

let's do one dumb fuck claim you ran

away i said let's do one dumb fuck claim

at a time we could go with go through

everything he wants to go through right

one thing at a time he just fucking ran

away

what do you want me to do i try to be

calm i try to calm down i want to have a

debate as a man whatever you wanna if

this is a they them or a woman whatever

it doesn't matter what you are but as an

adult a mature adult let's just talk

about the substance why is china

capitalist why is it imperialist

so unfortunately for chungus so let me

break down the debate for you chungus

came here

and said that i want to prove you're a

dumb fuck who doesn't understand

anything about marxism so the first

point he used was something about what

lenin said about ancient rome he

actually ended up conceding to me that

he was wrong to try and contest me about

that and that one point actually does

not mean i'm a dumb ass

then he tried to bring up that china was

imperialist

and he started to get emotional and

actually didn't he started constantly

pivoting to you know first we talked

about liberia and a kenyan port in

africa then he decided to shift it over

to china and talk about you know suicide

all the stuff and billionaires and their

exorbitant lifestyles and private jets

and stuff and i was happy to respond

when i could get a word in to each and

every one of those claims okay keep in

mind i responded to everything and i

systematically dismantled his position

where he actually gave me one and it got

to a point where he became so frustrated

that he started soying out and getting

extremely emotional and and just

vomiting out this incomprehensible

scottish diarrhea barrage of insults um

that are morally charged and morally

based

uh you know and then and then he

wouldn't shut up so i did lose my temper

for a little bit and i muted him and i

just got my point in right and then i

unmuted him to give him an opportunity

to respond now all he did is make a

bunch of unsubstantiated claims like uh

you know um what did he say he said i'm

smoking mushrooms and i'm crazy and i'm

stupid and all these kind of things well

we're that's what the debate was

supposed to prove you you threw in the

towel when it actually came to the

debate about the relevant points of

contention right keep in mind i don't

cut people off i don't just yell at

people i give people an opportunity to

prove themselves and look i did that

with the assatar bayer debate i've done

that with every single twitter space

anything you name it i let these people

make their case i let them try and argue

what they want to argue okay

um

none of these people can stand a chance

i mean this is why they won't debate

i've offered these people thousands of

dollars they can just beat a debate beat

me in a debate thousands of dollars

right

um he brought a bunch of other shit like

i want to be the leader of the left and

he also i really

really wanted to bring up the thing by

billionaires funding the left

um i really wanted to get into that

stuff unfortunately he bitched out

before we could do that

but i mean yeah this is this is uh an

extremely

uh sad l on chungu's part i mean this is

just

this was peanuts right

but you know i'm the only thing i regret

is that i didn't get him

to completely admit

you know and and submit and he was wrong

about the original claim as a whole but

i am glad and this is what i want to

tell you the chat right i want you guys

to get the clip of him

conceding that yes he was wrong about

ancient rome and landon imperialism and

i was right about that

and make it a clip that's less than two

minutes and i want you to hear mods

everyone hear this i want someone to do

this okay

and every time you see chungus on

twitter or just going to his replies

spam him with that video of him

conceding yes spam him with that video

okay

so that's the faith of chungus we are

never going to let this go we're always

gonna bring it up to him that he

conceded to me and he's my bitch he's my

personal bitch from scotland i have a

new personal bitch guys it's a guy from

scotland right so that's eternal that's

forever by the way

it doesn't have to be so ugly uh if you

don't make it ugly right but he made it

really ugly and that is what it is right

so i'm gonna go through donations before

we proceed to the next challenger

thank you so much saul good appreciate

you

the chinese loan auditor mistakenly

labeled the port's authority as a

borrower lol it was a paperwork error

yeah it's fucking ridiculous morning

revolution thank you so much amira good

morning revolution appreciate you so

much

good morning revolution good morning

revolution america appreciate you so

much man thank you

thank you so much morning revolution

good morning revolution america

appreciate you so much

good morning revolution good morning

revolution ej thank you so much man

eli thank you so much man appreciate you

we're getting red in here thank you so

much going into poverty and i am willing

to defend thc pc with my life

thank you so much

appreciate you so much guys if you don't

know chungus stalin's twitter i'm gonna

show you his twitter right now because i

want you guys to leave your comments and

uh know who this guy is

and basically you know i want you guys

to um

speakerpiece thank you so much base tank

appreciate you so much

btfo easy

so here's chungus stalin

uh here he is so this is his

twitter it's right here

and it's chungus stalin right he's not

really hard to find

this is him right the guys talk all this

shit thank you to fun the oligarch

appreciate you so much man

thank you so much

so yeah we're going to bring up our next

challenger thank you so much voidburn

appreciate you man

roman empire is qualitatively the same

as the british empire and nato according

to stalinist chungus very pathetic

display

yeah

thank you so much voidburn man

appreciate you so so much

appreciate that so so much

um thank you so much sistani junior

appreciate muhammad hitch out because

here shia or because he's cringe any

other reason i don't really dislike him

i don't know i don't think i ever said

that

but that wouldn't that wouldn't be the

reason i think like this thank you so

much and appreciate you

these people are psychotic yeah

absolutely i mean you notice how

immediately you got so ideological and

emotional it's like dude you have to

actually debate about these things you

actually have to debate about them right

guys let's get that clip of him bowing

to me and conceding to me

um you know because this guy has talked

a lot of shit in the past and you know

we just want

so i i the the next person is is a

person named radio free england

and they're actually responsible for um

let's see

so this person uh i guess they're

running away or something i mean who who

are they where are they

where are they at they have show

requests

what's their username

we're gonna bring them up but you know

they um

they were responsible for this spotted

tweet i'll show you give me a second

all right so this is the botted tweet

they're not really getting back to me in

my dms so i don't know what their

discord is

but this is uh their their tweet right

where they said i i have involved with

the fbi dhs american patriot got 3 400

likes

um

they admitted it was made up asitar bear

got in here he's uh traumatized from our

last encounter yeah he's admitting he

made it up and that's okay because you

know 90 of people actually believe this

um you know 3 000 people minimum believe

this

and you know there's just nothing i can

really do about it except tell the truth

on my own platform so my platform isn't

big enough

for all of these like bots and one also

thing is every time i go out to the

cpusa and critique the cpu usa and put

attention on to the cpusa these people

always somehow like um

some weird shit always happens on

twitter whenever i bring attention to

the cpusa it's a weird pattern i've

noticed but um i mean this is a botted

tweet this is just some random dumb fuck

and someone picked up on their tweet

decided to bought it and exposed it in

astroturf it

um you know and this is something people

desperately want to believe because it'd

be easier to dismiss me as a fed

even if they're literally feds

themselves their influences are at least

because you have to understand

five percent of the people who are

responsible for this shit they know

they're lying it's the 95 percent of

like casual not really that online

people that see this shit and don't know

what to think because they it's a big

lie they couldn't possibly comprehend

the fact that someone would lie this

extensively right

so yeah that's what we're dealing with

in that case and there but uh i want to

know where is this person

where is this fucking person

um

where where are they i idm them radio

free england

did they run away or something

let me see

uh what is their discord name does

anyone know the discord name of radio

free england

it's yatu okay well they were not

responding to dm's okay yatu you're on

you're up

yeah so you're the you're the english

pussy and the little bitch who's who's

responsible for those images right

um yeah i've shot those images um yeah

so you're basically like a degenerate

nihilist you know you don't care if

you're lying or spreading this

information it's okay who cares right

i'm

no i just don't think that twitter at

the level that i am posting is

particularly relevant to real world and

i just find patriotic social

so where else are you exposing to

hundreds of thousands of people

uh a lie about me that the majority of

people are actually going to believe and

take at face value

oh that that was i did just that because

i thought it was funny

yeah

you think it's funny but you know you

know what you did was immoral and

unprincipled but you just find it funny

because you're a nihilist right

nihilists

delight and laugh at things that you

know

people who believe that there's meaning

in the world would find reprehensible

immoral

and unprincipled right

well i do believe that means the world

or just

genuinely speaking don't think that

what if i started saying you're a

pedophile what about that can i call you

a pedophile or is that okay

one of my 600 people

is it because so i'm not a pedophile i'm

not a pedophile oh you're not i think

you are i think you are

but i'm not but i think it's funny that

you are so i think i might like when i

start getting if i ever get to like five

thousand fifty thousand viewers should i

just tell my viewers your pedophile

now this is the thing though because

i've very clearly stated wrong that that

photoshop was not

the majority of people are not

terminally online so they see that shit

and they believe it they don't care

about

investigation

that's more being terminally online

because they're just immediately

accepting what they believe on the

internet those are the kind of idiots

right now

who don't care to investigate they don't

care enough to investigate shit they're

just gonna see what's on the surface and

they they find it

unfathomable so i read your fucking

tweet on this mate that you made on your

on your account

you made a tweet about it on your

account right yeah and you again it's a

drop in the puzzle compared to the

people it's a drop in the puddle

compared to the people who believe your

tweet is real

i have i don't have i don't have a big

enough platform i'm not i'm not hassan

right i don't have a big enough platform

to spread the truth about this shit and

if i did oh i mean

good luck for you when i get that to

that point but that's a fucking skill

issue mate because what i've done is i

have with my puny 100 150 followers

spread misinformation about you so over

100 000 people have looked at the

impression about 110 000 because because

you can understand you have to

understand that that posts against me go

viral on twitter all the time

every day almost every at least every

two days right

yeah so yeah but you're most of those

are false and they're based on half

truths and lies

but yours was the most egregious

distortion of reality and facts

that like i i just want to like how do

you more

from what you mean you admit it's a lie

that's the difference right you're

admitting it's wrong and it's a lie and

there's no truth to it at all it's

really a photoshopped here i spent 10

minutes inspect element yeah

but the reason hundreds of people the

reason hundreds of people retweeted it

is because they genuinely and

immediately believed it on first

impression oh yeah now but that's

because oh god i actually do regret

through the retweets i got on that

because they were the fucking ukraine

flag liberal emoji lot yeah yeah those

by the way that's that's who this is for

you know without those people you don't

have enough likes

or people to engage with your tweet

against me it's literally those people

because you know because you know i've

been on their radar since i've gotten

banned on twitch for covering the the

war in ukraine but anyway um so that's

who you're pandering to basically but

it's a lie uh you know it's a lie and

you don't care right and it's fine

because you're a nihilist right

if that's what you want to say fuck it

i'm not really here to discuss with you

yeah i mean like but but you have to

understand as i grow and i start calling

you a pedophile and stuff because i

think it's funny that's acceptable to

you right

no

why isn't it acceptable why isn't it i

think it's funny

you're bad i'm good me doing bad things

to you is good you doing bad things for

me it's bad

that's how it works that's how politics

is always fun

so because i am i am a priori a bad

person anything is acceptable against me

right

well don't think actually at your heart

you're a bad person

yeah but but you're saying that the ends

justify the means that you you should

spread lies about me

because like in the underlying sense i'm

a harmful actor and that if you spread

lies about me it's okay because it's

serving the ultimate goal of

discrediting me even if it's even if

it's being used for um

even if it's being used

sorry i'll tell you why

i've put get it down to symbolizing what

i did right

i find the facts right that um

that there are like um there are people

on the top but they're i find it

whenever i see shit relating to pat

socks paycheck socialist on my timeline

on twitter right yeah

i just find it fucking annoying so i

thought well what if i posted this shit

right yeah i'm not asking your

intentions right because

you had multiple i was okay

i achieved in what were my intentions i

don't know you see the array the

actually actually your moral probability

in your actions is not confined just

your intentions but also the

consequences

especially especially when those

consequences are within your grasp to

control somehow you could have

immediately followed up that tweet with

the reply saying guys once you know this

is made up you could have deleted the

tweet because you know that people are

getting a different

consequence from that tweet than what

you intended from there's multiple

things you could have done to mitigate

the consequences are precisely what i

intended and so much more

so the consequences are what

the consequences are precisely what i

intended and so oh so you intended for

people what you intended for

you intended for a minimum of 90 percent

of people who liked the tweet who

actually think that this was true it

wasn't photoshop

you know what that's actually a lot

better than i thought it would go

yeah yeah i imagine because you were

randomly chosen

uh by this whatever algorithm is going

on but just to be clear right

you

um

you're aware of the fact that most

people who see this tweet do believe it

and it wouldn't have blown up as big as

it did if if they didn't right

yeah nah nah i wouldn't have

yeah you know that now okay so

because of that you clearly think it's

okay to completely make up lies about

people because the ends justify me

because i'm somehow a harmful actor i'm

a misinformation actor who's spreading

russian propaganda or whatever else cope

you bring up in your head but that's

actually the main reason right

there is no act of um deception against

you on that can take place in the realms

of the internet that is unjustified

perfect perfect that's all i wanted to

know so

with that being said the question then

stems

uh to the substance

how do you know that that's actually

justified if all of the things that you

know about me

could very well be just as disingenuous

and wrong as what you posted what is

actually true about what is wrong with

me that's actually based in truth what

what is actually the the actual thing

that justifies your ends that just by

the means why is the ends itself

justified what justifies it and how do

you know

how do you know the content of that

justification

isn't literally overwhelmingly defined

by similar by similar bad faith attempts

i think this is the paradox with

leftists who believe the answers by the

means you decide that someone's bad for

whatever reason right and then you you

put churn out this like factory of lies

and you smear them and you spread all

this misinformation about them because

there's no act of misinformation which

is unjustified right but then it gets it

has a feedback loop where 99 of people

hate me right because of those lies and

not because of the reason you have so

all of a sudden you have people

spreading more lies about it because

well i saw a tweet that has worked for

the fbi so anything is anything is

justified against it at what point do

you lose sight of the actual reason

for why it's justified to do this shit

against me

why i dislike you and your community in

general yeah

it's because i believe fundamentally on

fundamental level on an ideological

level yeah the

socialism is bad especially in the

american state perfect america so so

yeah

if we have a debate about the actual

reason for why you have a problem with

me

then it would necessarily follow that if

if it turns out you're wrong right

your opinion is wrong then that would by

consequence all that claim you made that

anything all misinformation against me

is justified that collapses right

because the underlying reason is no

longer tenable right

that would be correct yeah okay sure so

you are talking about patriotic

socialism a term i did not invent a term

that my community did not invent

but an enemy of our community invented

to describe us so i'm going to ask you

what your definition of patriotic

socialism is

well in your case from what i've

observed it's this idea that um

america's nation is innately vested with

a certain culture and a certain almost

sorry american nation

well do you america as a country as a

nation

is best with a certain culture with

certain way of life and principles are

worth fighting for and that are

currently being betrayed by the series

of capitalist authorities and the

communism is thus not only necessary for

you to use utilized patriotism to

achieve it is in fact the only viable

route by which communism can be achieved

in america okay so a few things

all right i saw in your description that

you're a mom

i'm not an expert on that but okay i saw

in your twitter description well you're

an expert enough to say that any active

misinformation is justified against me

right but you have in your description

that you're a marxist leninist so

are you pro or anti-stalin

i'm pro stalin okay

so if you're pro stalin

would you define stalin as a pat sock

i would describe him as patriotic for

the soviet union yes okay

well even

what if i could provide you immediate

evidence that stalin a described america

as a distinct nation okay and that b

stalin in a speech to the communist

parties of the world which was his last

speech told them that the motive

struggle they need to pursue is

upholding the banner

of national sovereignty in order that

they can be the patriots of their

country following the line of the

popular front what if i can give you

quotes by dimitrov

which

literally say the exact same thing you

said to qualify why we're pat socks and

patriotic socialists that yes only

communists can actually carry forward

into the future the genuine and

authentic national character and

national traditions of a good of a given

country and then as a matter of fact

communism cannot flourish if it doesn't

base itself in the particular form of

given nations socialist and content

national forum what if i produce all of

these quotes for you um will you what

will be your position will you just

denounce stalin and and um dimitrov or

will you change your position on pat

socks

i'm gonna say that if you provide these

quotes within this outline firstly okay

we're up i'm gonna go on a tiny bit of

time now come back the main points i'm

not gonna argue

historical authority whereby they will

stay the lines of certain people

but you refuse to extract the context

the material stuff that that being said

i would like to hear what quotes you

have i'd like to know what documents

they're from

okay so which one do you want first you

want the one that america's a distinct

nation

i know americans think nation i'm not

arguing with that okay do you want the

quote about stalin's last speech

sure okay i will read it to you in full

okay stalin last speech okay and i'm

gonna put it up on screen i don't know

if you're watching the stream

but here it is this is stalin's last

speech and it's the speech of the 19th

party congress of the communist party of

the soviet union now keep in mind this

was addressed to the foreign delegates

of communist parties

mainly actually from europe and america

uh the third world was not particularly

represented in this speech

because it was within the confines of

the members and observers of the

successor of the common turn which is

actually very eurocentric we get the

name for it right so um

here

so okay i'm going to read you two

paragraphs you have to bear with me

right

earlier the bourgeoisie

uh presented themselves as liberal they

were for bourgeois democratic freedom

and in that way gained popularity with

the people now there is not one

remaining trace of liberalism there is

no such thing as freedom of personality

anymore personal rights are now only

acknowledged by them the owners of

capital all the other citizens are

regarded as raw materials that are only

for exploitation

principle of equal rights for people and

nations is trotted in the dust and is

replaced by the principle of full rights

for the exploiting minority and the lack

of rights for the exploited majority of

the citizens the banner of bourgeois

democratic freedom has been flung

overboard i think that's you the

representatives of communist parties

communist and democratic parties must

pick up this banner and carry it forward

if you want to gain the majority of the

people there is no one else to do it

okay

now earlier the bourgeoisie as heads of

nations were for the rights and

independence of nations that put that

above all now there is not one trace

left of this national principle now the

bourgeoisie sells the rights and

independence of their nations for

dollars their nations okay he's not even

just talking about the exploited ones

he's talking about their own nations

okay some kind of globalist power which

he's alluding to is actually the bretton

woods system that he rejected and walked

out of

the banner of national independence and

national sovereignty has been thrown

overboard without doubt the

representatives of communist and

democratic parties must raise this

banner and carry it forward if you want

to be the patriots of your countries if

you want to be the leading powers of the

nations there is nobody else to name it

raise it now keep in mind this was

overwhelmingly addressed to western

countries at least in my memory served

me right

um and the american delegates were here

as well right from the american

communist party

kami's party usa

so he wasn't just talking about

oppressed nations he's talking about all

nations and he's saying the bourgeoisie

has flung overboard the national

principle communists need to be the ones

that take take it up and he wasn't only

talking about impressed nations so

what is your reaction to that

my reaction is to say that your your

principal mistake here

is to look at is to

view everything that stalin says with

honesty in the context that he was

treating the communist parties in the

west as equals and uh in fact he

actually means what he's saying here

wait what i think

what are you saying honestly you're

saying

you are a king you are akin to the earl

browder right in the 19 in the 1940s and

1950s communist party who would who

would carry the banner of stalin but in

reality you would at the end of the day

not know that

yeah

it kind of seems like you're not

familiar with what broaderism was

actually about

uh among broader the you know the

achievements quote-unquote broaderism

was liquidating the communist party

itself right which was a big problem

party brown didn't liquidate the

communist party until like what was it

like the

mid 1950s hold on let me look that up no

it was the 40s where he proposed that

the communist party should be turned

into a communist

action association something like that

right a communist association which

would be a lobby of sorts for the

democratic party but

you know broaderism's significance is

not based on patriotism that's the

william z foster was just as patriotic

if not more than browder so that that

was not at this point

that but actually that's that was a

legacy descended from the party of el

browder

right first the patriotic line preceded

earl browder second of all william z

foster after assuming the reigns of

power independently articulated a

justification for patriotism without

merely referring to the vestigial forms

of so-called broaderism so that is

patently

but apart doesn't have this into the

change of leadership the developments of

the party are contingent on

previously well well yeah

we've kind of shifted the goal post a

little bit so first we talked about

stalin's speech and you said that

stalin's speech was taken out of context

i would like to know what conflicts that

actually

was right the second thing you said is

that actually william z foster was also

a pat sock so you're basically saying

the communist party usa has always been

pat sock

it has been passed well the thing is

it's always kind of dipped in out of

different various opportunities and

revisionist tendencies for instance i

mean

because like i mean but that was that

was going to stalin so that wasn't for

william z foster was at

uh the speech by stalin in question so

that was that revisionism i mean

that was william

was also was also revisionist he was

also a patriarch socialist and in fact

but stalin's stalin is the one

what you said was just incomprehensible

but i want to ask you a question

stalin just said that communists need to

be the leading powers and the patriots

of their countries and that the

bourgeoisie have over flung overboard

the national principle and they're

selling their nations for dollars on the

on the you know for cheap so i want to

ask you is stalin a pat sock why or why

not

stalin well i mean again the term pat's

stock is such a broad thing

as you've defined it as you as you've

so what is different from what stalin is

saying than what we're saying

because what stalin did is he um by the

way you're admitting your definition of

a pat sock is inadequate right

well i'm saying that the definition no

i'm so i was using that definition to

describe you and your people on the

screen but it also applies to stalin

that's the problem it doesn't apply to

stalin why why not what aspects what

aspects are inapplicable

you cannot call russia assad and a

russian patriot literally advocated for

the defeat of the russian empire as well

along with lenin hold on yeah

i not only have proof that stalin was a

patriot

i have proof

that stalin told

foreign communist parties including the

american one

that they need to be the leading powers

in their nation and the the actual

patriots of their country it is a direct

quote

you must carry raise this banner and

carry it forward if you want to be the

patient that he's being insincere there

oh you're saying

you're lacking like a critical analysis

give us the critical analysis the floor

is yours my friend give it to us i'm

just saying that

when you look at what

documents what starland said about the

west in general about what started but

especially gorky and his um look on and

in his book to american intellectuals

and thought he was going to get those

conferences

when you contrast that voice in public

to western communist parties you realize

public was to keep the

what was he the west on this part his

phones and the size of these all right

to be clear to be clear you're saying he

was being insincere

i was saying that he was lying yes okay

good i'm glad you're calling stalin a

liar now you're also probably gonna

apply that to dimitrov when dimitrov

even goes further than stalin right

should i bring up the dimitrov quotes or

is that basically just more insincere

line

i mean bring it up i don't care

okay before i do since we're stuck on

the stalin thing

um what privately did stalin say that um

would make you know

which contradicted what he said right

here

just curiously

um yeah holds on um well i remember what

the um general conference between i

remember i brought this up when i was

speaking to you just i think it got

covered up because i speak ways to be

fucking fast but generally

i remember it was the book by um so you

know max simple he closed confidence

right yeah

well he wrote a book called two american

intellectuals

right okay and it was written and it was

written in 1932 or printed in 1932

right

and in doing so

he says that the um

he says of course

he goes along a lot of things

but generally

he goes along and he says

that he um

i forgot the quote i was on i was i

forgot the quote let me find it

yes sorry i

actually as a matter of fact i have to

take a piss so while you find that quote

i'm gonna mute the stream for a second

and go take a piss okay so go find that

quote

i will be right back

all right i'm back so you have your

quote

yeah i've got the quote here

yeah i'll just uh trust that you're not

if you're not get get rid of that

feedback

jesus fucking christ

hello anyway

yeah it's still there feedback's still

good

all right wait hold on i think that's

because i fucked up with one is that

better

hello

hello hello it's still there

i can hear myself from your microphone

oh shit i don't need to turn it down

then

it's no better whatsoever

hello

hello

okay hello i don't hear it anymore

hello

he's probably just working on his mic

we'll give him time

i'll get the dimitrov stuff in the

meantime

uh dimitrov

through your mic dude what did you do

what did you do that was different

before i left

i don't fucking know is that better

hello hello no it's not better no it's

not better

okay what about now hello hello

no it's not dude you have a stream open

or something

i'm trying i'm trying to get down to

movement dude just do what you did

before

just do this

hello

hello

speak

all right hello

okay it's good now we're good now can

you hear me

okay go read the quote for us

um

camaro is quite right in saying that

europe is threatened by the reversion of

the barbarism that's what's told by marx

about his teachings he knows nothing

yes there's an institute with fact the

portrait

i'll read it i can't you're not

comprehensible just give me the link and

i'll read it out loud tell me which one

you want me to read

just dm me the link on twitter whatever

you're reading off of i'll read it

myself

okay so let me control f what do you

want me to do

okay hold on i'll send you the

paragraph in um there you are

control f this

hey okay k locks let's do control f

a locks

is

white right okay perfect

all right beautiful

um okay so let's see

the evidence that stalin was lying in

his speech

to the communist and democratic parties

of the world

about the need to be

patriotic and the national principle

having been flown underboard right

by these words

the bourgeois admits that the

intelligence of his class is inputted

insolvent he wants to bridal science

forgetting how much power science has

given to his class which is to

strengthen its authority over the world

of toilets to bridal science what does

that mean to forbid sciences freedom to

explore

there's a time when the bourgeoisie was

fighting valiantly and successfully

against the attempts of the church to

violate this freedom of science

in our day boudoir philosophy is

gradually becoming

what it was in its darkest years of the

middle ages a servant of theology

caliox is quite right in saying that

europe is threatened by a reversion to

barbarism as foretold by marx

about who's teaching he knows nothing

yes it is an indisputable fact

that the bourgeoisie of europe and

america now mistress of the world is

every year becoming more ignorant

into intellectually weaker more

barbarous it is beginning to grasp this

fact is this the right thing

hello

y'all too

y'all too

jesus fucking christ

i think this might be the right quote

right

because

this has nothing to do with patriotism

um

no it is this is the paragraph he sent

me

yeah what does this have to do with

patriotism how does this prove that

stalin was lying in his last speech he's

critiquing the bourgeoisie of europe in

america

and he's saying nothing i mean what is

he saying that

dude okay he left

uh maybe he just

needs to be brought back on no he left

he outright left he he's not in the show

queue anymore and he just left

what

i'll give him time

to uh

what's happened

just dm'd him on twitter

i mean surely he didn't just fucking run

away

this is the comedy if that if he just

ran away that'd be a comedy right so

surely he didn't just run away

i mean he gave me this quote

to demonstrate that stalin was somehow

lying

i i don't he's gonna have to explain how

this proves stalin was not telling the

truth about communist parties

um needing to be patriotic i don't know

i

i don't see the correlation between this

also i pulled up the um

uh

the

uh thing from

yeah so

yeah there's a lot of things

about national pride in relation to you

know

uh internationalism and stuff so that's

from gorky right here

um

should we bring on the next contestant

okay i think he ought to concede it and

i don't know how much time we're going

to give him

but we'll bring on someone else in the

meantime and then otherwise yahoo

i mean that's just a comedy he he just

chose a random quote

and and then when i read it out he just

ran away realizing how fucking stupid it

sounded

maybe he's dry he's a drunk isn't he

drunk

he's a drunk right

maybe his computer shut down or

something i don't know his phone died

but i think he's a drunk right

um

let's okay he responded

wi-fi shot the bed okay his wi-fi had

problems

okay he's trying to load back to discord

okay

all right well he did not run away

um i do still think he's a drunk but he

did not actually run away okay

let me get some donations in

thank you zk appreciate damn thank you

so much zk damn

thank you so much man

thank you it's the fourth of july we

have to remind folks that at one time a

group of guys fought against imperialism

and won for a while

sake

absolutely thank you so much america the

the the fourth of july stream is going

to be tomorrow and the topic is going to

be about patriotism it's going to be a

patriotic stream thank you so much

for happy independence day smiling face

with hearts happy fourth of july guys i

want to save it for tomorrow though

right for next stream

but we're going to get um

if y'all two can load back into discord

and he's going to explain to us why this

contradicts

what stalin said

so we will wait for that guy to come

back

he says discord appears to be working

i'm sure he's going to be here

okay well yatu is saying that it's 6 a.m

and he hasn't slept in 24 hours

and he wants to pursue this at a at a

later date

okay

well so far at the very least i really

just can't see how someone could argue

that this has anything to do with

patriotism i mean even if they were

critiquing american culture

which they're not here at least

um that wouldn't preclude the ability

for american communists to be we we

critique our own culture right it's not

in contradiction to patriotism and then

furthermore

this is literally just critiquing the

bourgeoisie of both america and europe

so maybe there's something maybe this is

just drunk and he's always linking me

but this doesn't have anything right

and obviously there's some stuff by

dimitrov

that's just way more explicit right

even than what stalin said

but

alas

that's that right so let's um bring on

the next people

hello

hello

hello

there's someone else from twitter that

wanted to debate as well

yeah hello what's going on what's up

it was just checking in

i don't know

give me this weird why are you here to

debate or what

yeah

but what

about materialism i want to know about

the interpretation

so you're accusing me of vulgar

materials and what's going on

no i'm not accusing you

oh okay well i i i i'm the discussion

sounds like it'd be fruitful and stuff

but i'm here to exclusively interact

with hostile debaters so

that's not

so okay so miracle

what do you got to say

hello

yeah hello

speak i can't hear you

go ahead speak

go ahead speak

all right he's uh

one

two

three four okay you're done

okay

you're on

go ahead and speak

go ahead you're on

sure yeah let's do it

all right all right so um

well i i can give you a short list and

you can decide which to start with if

that's okay with you

are you someone on twitter as you know

uh excuse me no i'm not on twitter no no

okay

so we can we can continue the first

debate about regarding if stalin or

ancient rome was were like imperialist

uh

i would tend to agree with this

statement actually

okay

why

i so i would like to say i'm not i'm not

a marxist and there i do have some sort

of marxist analysis when i look at

history but

i do not follow like strictly

materialist definitions strictly

leninist perspectives whatever no i'm

more i'm more along the lines of perhaps

a conventional thing but i would say

that undeniably stalin after world war

ii in particular

did practice uh imperialism and so did

ancient rome i think

all right so um

so what is imperialism to you

all right so imperialism to me at least

in this sense in the conventional sense

is um

you know the

uh

the conquest of another territory the

conquest of another nation uh forcibly

of course conquest for uh possibly for

economic exploitation okay so what is

the difference between expansionism and

imperialism in your view

i would say well i i wouldn't say

they're synonymous but expansionism

generally can refer more so to for

example the americans pushing the

western front frontier of the nation

that's more so american expansionism

while

um

imperialism is not so much about

colonization but it's more so about

holding these different territories

regardless of culture and extracting

their materials their um

you know their surplus everything

okay so the difference between

expansionism and imperialism is that in

case of expansionism in your view

uh there has to be settlers in a uniform

culture whereas in imperialism you're

just taking over other countries

generally generally yes generally i

would say so yeah

okay so

you're so you're saying

that stalin was imperialist and rome was

imperialist because of that

yes i would say that they do fit that

definition

rome

actually did engage in settlement

settlements and the exportation of the

roman agricultural system

to its colonies you're aware of them

right

yes however uh i think i know where

you're leading this and of course um

while there is some imperialism that

under my definition is not expansionism

all expansionism must start as a form of

imperialism i would argue no

okay

so this is kind of a strange definition

because

it assumes that there must be a singular

cause right

oh well what do you mean by a singular

cause

well if you're just gonna define

imperialism by one state exercising

authority over other states

um

i just wonder why that is an essential

definition why is that

why like if we have that definition

there's no way of distinguishing

this unique mode of production lenin is

describing in imperialism there's also

no way of distinguishing

uh you know its evolution into the form

of american unipolar and everything else

i mean at that point i feel like the

word can just refer to

a lot of things right

well yes i mean if you if you define it

as a state exerting authority over

another state then sure i would agree

with that but if we took you know more

for example after world war ii right you

have the you have the

soviet advance westward towards uh

germany that's of course that's

justified in the moment

but even though they had that perhaps

that initial intention of liberation

liberating these eastern european

nations from you know the nazis and so

on um

there is still this secondary and even

multiple uh you know so causes just to

be clear

do you think the soviet union's

intervention into eastern europe

was qualitatively different than what

lenin described in his book imperialism

well as i mentioned i'm not i'm not

exactly a marxist or marxist leninist so

i wouldn't i don't know what about what

most you know

critiques of imperialism mean by

imperialism

oh what do you mean i'm sorry like you

know what about this kind of

view that there's a unique imperialism

of the united states and western europe

and history

oh well i would agree with that to an

extent yes i would agree with that to an

extent so

doesn't it make it difficult to

distinguish

or make that word refer to

apply to more intelligible and specific

realities when we just say everything is

imperialist

well that's

yeah

well that's that's precisely the thing

i think that you can adequately classify

without violating the spirit of the

concept you can adequately classify many

of the actions of the soviet union the

russian empire nazi germany the united

kingdom america

well all states throughout many states

throughout do you think it matters

what the intentions of the soviet union

were that that doesn't matter

i think it i think when it comes to the

conquest of other territories i think it

does matter well

conquest

so but i i so as far as the actual

history hold on but

see the problem here is that

you're not dealing with a neutral ground

right the the option is this you're

going to have a warsaw pact

in which these countries will

not be a threat in the future to the

soviet union in any capacity or you're

going to have an expansion of nato which

is you know from the beginning was

designed when i laid the soviet union

beginning with operation unthinkable and

the rest right so it's kind of it's it's

kind of like

is the soviet union engaging in

imperialism or is it just defending

itself from this aggressive push that's

coming from the west to destroy it

because like if the soviet union

you know completely left these countries

to the daw to the winds right

um in every capacity

yeah um you know obviously the west is

coming to gobble everything up

and and they're gonna have to join nato

but this guy also assumes that

communists in those countries

were not themselves popular

but they did they were popular they did

win elections consistently they were

kind of

brought into power

in a way that wasn't just forced by the

soviet union how did the soviet union's

influence have a big part in that in

terms of providing resources and funds

and whatever i mean sure right

the presence of soviet troops maybe was

a careers factor as well

but ultimately i think it's it's wrong

to compare

what the soviet union did in eastern

europe

to you know

america or britain or what the west does

in other countries

but fundamentally though i think that

they are

fairly comparable and i'll tell you why

i know there is a you know uh difference

between the territories right of course

it's more threatening to russia to have

you know nato right at their doorstep

than it is for the us uh for there to be

a communist

revolution in iraq i don't know

somewhere far away right of course it's

more justifiable from that perspective

for uh the soviet union to intervene but

i still think i i i still would argue

that fundamentally i mean what these

nations are trying to do is trying to

strengthen strengthen their position i

mean at the end of the day the soviet

union still did have

you know they back in the day they still

had uh ukraine they had belarus they had

the baltic states and so on of course

not all of the warsaw pact but they had

a good number of these territories that

today are independent and i think that

you know i don't think it was

necessarily justified for them to have

to set up which for

what is at least in my eyes these puppet

governments i don't know if you agree

with that but i mean they were

essentially so if they were puppet

governments

why did countries like romania

leave the warsaw pact and turn their

back on the uh soviet union with no

representation

wasn't that bad like in the 90s or in

the 80s no it was well before i think it

was the 60s or 70s and then you have

albania which did the same thing also

yeah

yugoslavia which did so

during stalin's lifetime

so i think it's kind of strange that you

have these countries kind of turning on

the soviet union

while being i don't think and then also

in every case in which the soviet union

intervened

like in hungary 56 and especially checks

lockheed 68

so because the leaders of those

countries were begging them to come and

help us

so i i don't really think it's fair or

accurate to characterize the

relationship as puppet governments

usually people refer to satellite states

they're referring to a geopolitical

position

in which you know these countries are

ultimately kind of reliant on the soviet

union

um

for leadership as far as it's broad

stances what about but there was like an

immense level of autonomy

in terms of the domestic policies

pursued by these countries

and you know the leadership was only

they had to make deals right to make

sure it was

at least fair by their standards i don't

really think it's accurate to say

they're puppets

all right what about and what about for

example east germany don't you think

they were more under the direct

administration of moscow even if it was

not like deliberate uh at first

yes but

you know by the let's say mid to late

50s no um

no by that time there was an indigenous

socialist power within you know east

germany

yeah which

had its own interests and had its own

you know that's why the soviet union

like forced east germany to pay off

you know loans

committed by nazi germany which they

took up right i mean that's why they

have to actually have deals and economic

arrangements

they weren't just totally controlled you

know

yeah i see i see

and what did you say for example you

have a scenario like afghanistan no the

soviet union invaded afghanistan i guess

that was i think that would probably be

the best example of something

comparable to what the united states has

done

but you do have to keep in mind the

crucial context

which is that this was the afghan

government begging the soviet union to

intervene uh where they otherwise would

have gotten overthrown

uh it wasn't so much the soviet union

strong-arming afghanistan as much as it

was the soviet union acting on behalf

of a relatively unpopular government

um within afghanistan you know that

otherwise would have gotten overthrown

so i still think it's not really the

same as what the u.s does you know but

yeah and that that you you are getting

closer to like a form of social as they

call it social imperialism

yeah i see but i still think it's

distinct enough to you know not be the

same but yeah you're getting closer when

it comes to things like afghanistan

definitely

all right all right uh well if you want

we can move on to another point uh

multiples

yeah

um so

okay so yeah i have i so i was watching

the other day a debate between you and

uh richard spencer right

yeah

and you were talking about you know this

the spiritual

i do you have an echo i can you're a bit

of an echo but that's fine i'll lower my

voice go ahead

all right you were talking about like

some spiritual revival of

european society or western culture then

he was talking about that and then you

argued back mentioning that you know

western culture is is today essentially

like reddit right it's like this

internet like

um

you know it's not the serious thing

anymore if you get what i mean it's not

yeah civilization yeah

so i i wanted to argue against that i

mean i agree with i agree with what you

have to say you said you said a quote

that was pretty funny that was we don't

have rome we have reddit which is true i

agree with that but fundamentally what

is the issue with this reddit you know

modern liberal world that you see not

from the perspective of you know

underdeveloped countries that get um you

know get sort of tricked into liberalism

but from a western perspective i think

my perspective is is that it's devoid of

substance it doesn't have any content

it's pretty much just defined by a

a stance of negation

where everything's substantive and real

and it's inherently universalist so

any kind of common identity that's going

to be based on that

is really the common identity of

nothingness it's the common identity of

negation that we refuse to be a

particular something

this refusal is what defines us in

particular right i think it's kind of

self-consuming

madness

i think reddit think you know that that

he kind of called it more the global

citizen which i kind of agree with more

actually to describe it

and it is this kind of completely you

know cosmopolitan detached

stance toward you know

the reality of one's country and one's

like actual realities in general

and

that's what i think the problem is i

think this necessarily comes at the

expense of the actual

you know nations and what maybe do what

we call it the ethnos right the cultures

yeah of europe and america

i think these in the meantime get

trampled under foot you know for example

i'm one of the people who believe in a a

real america it's kind of

very hard to maintain the idea that

america is more than an artificial

project

but i do believe

with people culture yeah yeah i think

there's a folk america i think there's a

real real america right

yeah i agree with you you know you can

easily see how this globalist kind of

culture of the the reddit let's call it

the global citizen culture

it's choking that real america right

it's choking that

you know that that soul of america that

is real

and it's replacing it with this kind of

completely artificializing

you know

totalizing project of

what i think though is is this i don't

really view it as america like being

taken over by this this like reddit

global globalist project thing i view it

more as

i view it more as america itself

converting itself for reforming itself

because at the end of the day the engine

of this whole you know un uh reddit

internet america

yeah it's america itself at the end of

the day yeah that's what i'm saying

that's what i'm saying it's really rare

to believe in a real america because of

what you just described but i think the

thing is that why it's tough is because

american history is is defined by these

two aspects right one of them

which is the it's like from the

beginning all the way to reddit right

and there's one line and it's very easy

to see how that line is because

throughout american history a similar

kind of totalizing negation i guess if

you want to call it that

has taken place right

but then i also believe in what howard

zinn calls a people's history and i

think there's also the shadow history of

america which is not remembered and not

recalled it's it's always being

forgotten

but which nonetheless is establishing a

real lineage right in this country and

that i think

rather than america reforming i think

there's just new forms of resistance by

real america

that are developing

towards this global reddit empire and

one of the reasons i've been so

interested

in the maga movement

yeah for example

as a communist that sounds crazy

is because i think that is uh however

misled and misguided right that is that

is the expression of that at some level

it's the expression of some kind of real

america

um

yeah the material isn't

the real

yeah it's like it's the espresso it's

kind of real america trying to reassert

itself

admits this right and i always think

that real america is always there but i

think now is you know one of the reasons

i like maga so much

aesthetically at least

is because

i think we've gotten to a point where

america

declared independence from its own

consequences like the consequences of

america since 1776 i will concede to you

it is reddit right

but what i find so cool about maga is

that it is somehow declaring

independence from that

based on some

some lost america right that's why it's

called make america great again

most leftists and liberals hear this and

they're like oh they're talking about

racism you're talking about the past

before we became progressive

but what if that's not what it has to

mean what if it actually just means

let's return to a forgotten aspect of

what america is that got lost

in um

that got lost in the reddit global

empire right so i think it's ambiguous

and that's why i have such a strong

affinity toward it

i see well at least i at least in my in

my um well for my opinion i try to like

synthesize both of these i know you're

not a liberal at all you're like anti

fully anti-liberal which is

understandable

um but at least from my from my

perspective what i try to do is i try to

synthesize both of these to create what

in my eyes is the ideal american culture

identity for way of life and that is you

know for example you say all these

things like um oh reddit reddit is

defending um you know like racial uh

equality which is of course good at the

end of the day but the way in which it

virtue signals and and lgbt and all

these sort of things right

fundamentally what yeah well yeah

so fundamentally what i think is that

both the real america the culture the

folklore the music the the people the

the the real working people of the

country and these ideas can at the end

of the day be sort of integrated that's

what i think

and if

you look at societies across history for

example you'll see that this is not too

far-fetched for example you look at rome

we were talking about rome you look at

rome rome is a society that had to an

extent it had racial uh justice of

course they did not really see the

concept of race today some other

concepts they saw citizen and

non-citizen roman and non-roman

barbarian and whatever

um they had you know components of like

sexual liberation if you want to put it

that way you know they were very you

know degenerate if you want to put it

that way so i don't really see it as

anti

like i don't really see these new

so-called reddit concepts as

antithetical to the idea of an

established culture and established

civilization but rather i see them as

something that can be integrated

well i think the problem is that rome

that was also rome in its decadence

right and rome was overthrown for a

reason right

and

you know um

i think when it comes to uh

you know like reddit is just as a

turnabout way of rediscovering the

essence of the west i think this is this

is wrong just because um

in the case of reddit and in the case of

the globalist culture of the

cosmopolitan citizen and stuff

there's still a fundamental hostility to

what i called it the hidden reality or

the the shadow reality right there's

this fundamental incompatibility

i think with real america

and reddit which is not just defined by

racial equality and stuff but it's more

specifically defined

by this way of trying to premise our way

of life

with you know

um with some kind of uh

it's not even just reason or logic as in

the case of the enlightenment it's also

the

institutional consensus of

establishments right

yeah of the rockefeller foundation ford

foundation open society foundation all

the universities and this whole kind of

beast right of the institutions of the

open society

they're trying to completely refashion

and change culture according to that i

think that is inherently realistic

it's the culmination of something that

yes has been there for a long time

but i think we've i agree with dugan in

the sense that we've gotten to this

decisive point

where even our basic humanity is now on

the line right the question of what it

means to be human

the question is extinction or survival

at this point you know

i think if they get what they want it's

going to be malthusianism population

reduction

because that's part of it right if

you're going to completely refashion all

of society

according to the open society

you have to you know reduce the

population you're going to have to

control and regulate how we

eat and how we live and all these kinds

of things i think it's a form of madness

you know i don't see a light at the end

of the tunnel

i only see the light at the end of the

tunnel in the forms of the resistance to

it right this is what i kind of see in

the manga movement vaguely vaguely i'm

not i don't agree with trump on those

things

of course i just like this kind of

movement this kind of um

phenomena right you're you're bringing

something up which is which is quite

interesting to me from my conversations

with marxist you're of cour of course a

self-reclaimed demarcus correct yeah

yeah so okay so i i've generally seen

these two theories about what will

happen in the future and they go like

this one tends to follow more the line

of you know materialism and

technological determinism and whatever

and it tends to believe that you know in

the next 50 100 years we're going to see

these massive innovations

in transhumanism and genetic engineering

we're going to see a new space

revolution whatever super science

fiction stuff many people believe that's

going to be the way and then some others

which is what you're sort of hinting at

to me right now which seems sort of

weird

given that you're a marxist i mean yeah

is that you need like a more pragmatic

more practical thing you don't think

that things will change so dramatically

you think that fundamentally we're still

going to remain you know grounded we're

going to remain you know nation states

will will remain relevant and so on or

do you think more i kind of so

it's kind of an interesting thing i i

sum this up with in terms of archaeo

modernity it's this idea that

the more you go into the future and the

more advanced you become the more these

these elements of the past right become

unearthed so i agree with alexander

kojev when he said

that no we're not living in the age of

nation states anymore but we're also not

really living in a

you know trans

humanist

transnational global

world we're living in the age of what he

called empires and what i would call

civilization states which are beyond the

nation state right it's almost like the

more we

advance quote unquote the more we kind

of unearth

these more unifying realities so first

it was you know the provincial

i don't know kingdom and that turned

into the nation

and to me the nation turns into the

civilization state

and it's not that you're advancing into

the future it's almost like you're going

back into the past

by unearthing aspects of the past we've

always taken for granted right

that's that's the relationship between

the past and modernities that the more

we we become modern

the more we

unlock lost aspects of the past we've

been taking for granted and somehow you

know

aestheticize them and

um

turn them into intelligible phenomena

so you do seem to you do believe in the

the i i can't remember who um who wrote

that thesis but the civilization thesis

yes the civilization states and so on

yeah

do you tend to do you think that it's

really reflecting itself uh as it is

because for example i mean i i know that

you can't really group russia with the

rest of the european countries as russia

as you know orthodox civilization is

somewhat different from west from the

west but don't you see this whole um you

know situation recently with ukraine and

so on of course what i thought would

happen i thought that china and russia

would begin to distance themselves but

it doesn't really seem to be the case

you know they seem to be like forming

their own

sort of coalition

um

at least not not i would have

china russia are similar because they're

the inheritance of the the land empires

right

which um you know you had europe on the

one hand during the renaissance and

early modernity then you had the land

empires right

and yeah that's a shared heritage that

china and russia have despite the

differences

so i think there's something going on

there i don't know if it's integration

as much as it's like

you know um

some kind of uh

beginning seeds of an integration you

know

but you know

your kojev believed in a europe

of the latin empire he thought the

latins

shared a common civilization

france and germany and italy and stuff

yeah

so

specifically i think it's the the

charlemagne's latin empire right is what

he was referring to

and that very may very well be true

right but anything like that is going to

come at the expense of

globalism right i think globalism has

detached itself from any substantive

west it's now based it's just this

purely anti-human

demon that the people of the world are

trying to

exercise right through these populist

movements

uh and it's just it's like it's like

there's always been this demon in the

west and now the demon has escaped

the disguise of like particular

civilizations and cultures and it's just

here for us right

so i think that's what we're dealing

with

yeah it's like this this uh the way i

view it at least as well is sort of like

it's like the spirit of the west that

has sort of you know universalized now

it tries to apply itself to all

civilizations when it is fundamentally a

product of western civilization

yeah and it's even escaped that

civilization and is turned against it

now

yeah i see i see

so we we're gonna have to wrap this up

so if there's one more thing you wanna

do or

um i mean sure i mean sure sure there is

one final thing which is the abortion i

don't know if you're down to talk about

that sure yeah we can talk

yeah so i do think that abortion is

important i know you were hosting a

stream the other day saying that it

doesn't matter but i do say i do think

it matters

so

i think it matters if we're in a

position of power

but i don't think it matters when we're

on the ground right now and don't have

political independence at least this

communists

i the thing is i think that it's still

fundamentally an erosion of our civil

rights which is an issue of course it's

not illegal and not at least not

nationwide but it has become you know

it's no longer guaranteed by the

constitution which is

you know in my opinion a step back i

think that

even though you know communism i'm not a

communist but at least from your

perspective i would say i was in your

shoes um i mean even if it was i don't

think that raises it to the status of

real political significance

like i don't think it's anything to that

and that anyone can rally behind right

now

um

just because it is this wedge issue that

it involves a lot of confusion on both

sides

i mean i can concede it's it's it's a

it's not necessarily a good thing but

i don't think it matters in the sense

that we should start

raising the banner of you know abortion

to fight back i think that's just a

wedge issue never going to get a

majority on your side

it's like it's not something to die on

the hill of if that makes sense right

maybe eventually you know

it can be addressed when there's an

independent movement

to the point where it's not going to

have this status as a cultural political

signifier of like red versus blue

you know and at that point

um you know

now that you now that you're sort of uh

leading towards that sort of

conversation there is something that i

wanted to touch upon which combines both

of the last things we talked about

yeah so there is something very scary

which is at least in my opinion which is

and this is sort of in a way this form

of

you know shadow america the real america

but i think it's a more it's a form of

radicalized a form of of hostile a

hostile version and you see like the

rise of conspiracy theories and you know

evangelical christianity

uh among conservatives and i genuinely

think it's concerning i think that

there's going to be a point where the

country is going to come to uh

i would i don't know if a civil war but

it's going to come to a very high point

of tension and you know you see what the

republicans are doing right now they're

like trying to

they've already proposed like banning

sodomy they're they're proposed like um

well nation what nation they proposed a

nationwide ban on abortion it's really

it's concerning i believe i don't i

don't think it's gonna lead to that as

far as evangelicals i mean i i know that

they're very powerful but i know that

among common people it's much more

ambiguous

than what the intentions

are for for the

evangelical uh leaders right

so it's it's the reincarnation of the

you know american religious

uh

revivals right

yeah

so i don't think it necessarily has to

lead to these extreme conclusions i

think

this is just the form something that's

always been here has taken right

um

i think that's precisely why

i don't like to touch the issue to begin

with is just because

you know yeah i mean a separation of

church and state is important but at the

same time

um

when you make it about

religion in general it's a wedge issue

again right and

yeah that's a guy who's found you should

not offend the religious feelings of the

people right um because it means

something different to them than what it

does for the evangelical establishment

again that is just america's unique form

of religiosity right it's not

necessarily

bounded up with all these other

assumptions

yeah

yeah

all right well yeah it was a nice

conversation with you yeah youtube see

you all right let's see

all right so guys i um

wait so

yatu lied about the wifi

uh just to be clear

he did lie about the wi-fi so if you

guys want to know that that guy i

debated y'all so first he goes

i might got fucked and then fixed but

then i just sat there staring at my

screen

thinking yeah he's better prepared than

me and i genuinely haven't slept in 24

hours

the wi-fi thing was a bit but the rest

is true so he lied about the wi-fi shit

and yeah that's that now anyway the last

thing i want to talk about for the end

of the stream and i'm probably going to

make a different video

is uh

that empanada

has admitted

openly right

and you can go see this for yourself but

he's admitted openly that um

look he's either a pedophile or he is um

engaging in behavior that only a

pedophile could

he's collecting photos of shirtless 16

year old boys

and commenting on their level of

attractiveness he did this specifically

about uh some

photo i don't

i mean i don't even know where that's

from

it's probably from the discord you know

when i was showing my high school photos

and shit

from the old one

but

he yeah it is actually it is

he um

maybe you could say like he he posted on

twitter basically like saying oh this is

the guy calling everyone else

unattractive right

and you know i confronted him and i said

and it's it's me shirtless okay so you

can see

let me get it right

it's me shirtless okay

so

just look look so he was confronted

with the fact that i'm a minor in this

photo right so you can't say he didn't

know and by the way i look like a miner

in this photo um you can't see it i look

like a miner right

and

yeah you can see like i'm shirtless here

right

but

i go this is a photo of a minor by

sexualizing it you've turned it into

child pornography

right

so he saw the message that's showing

it's a minor and then i

i tell him again this is a photo of a

shirtless

16 year old boy i'm 16 in that photo

okay

i am 16 in that photo in high school

all right

he said why are you taking shirtless

pictures when you're 16 in high school

i i don't know

right

i just wanted to i don't i never took

much selfies in high school but like you

know

i uh

yeah all my selfies are kind of weird in

high school like i look um kind of ugly

to be honest

um

but i you know not

but who comments on the level of

attractiveness of a child who's 16 years

old right

like yeah i have a mean expression and

shit

but um yeah i was a 16 year old boy okay

um

and i'm shirtless and he's commenting on

its level of attractiveness you know

but

so you could say he didn't know i was 16

but he does know now

again he he doubled down so i said okay

are you going to address knowingly

sexualizing a photo of a shirtless 16

year old boy and so to be clear

you are knowingly sexualizing photos of

shirtless 16 year old boys right you

will deserve to know you're a predator

george i want to make sure they do look

what he says people are going to laugh

at your gibberish as they always have

actually

so

what he's saying is that

yeah he can share child pornography

and he can sexualize shirtless 16 year

old boys that's fine because no one's

going to listen to crazy has because

everything has says is gibberish so he

can literally be a pedophile that's fine

uh because no one's gonna listen to

anything i say anyway and he's literally

openly saying that that

it's not because of truth it's because

your level of credibility among left

twitter isn't high so i can get away

with being a literal pedophile right

and again why is he sharing photos of me

as a shirtless sister boy you say has

why why did you share that in your

discord in the first place well i wasn't

doing it sexually right

there was no sexual context to it i was

i think it was pointing out people were

asking like

has um

i don't know i was sharing photos of me

in high school

what was the content i think it was like

when i shaved my beard or some shit i

was showing to comparing how i looked

when i was in high school or something i

don't fucking know right it was

something like that

but

um

but he's talking about its

attractiveness right

which is weird why are you talking about

its attractiveness that's a six that's a

shirtless 16 year old boy

why would you comment on it

when i shared in the discord nobody

talked about its attractiveness right

um people talked about how you know

it's funny right

but

not the attractiveness right

it's fucking weird

anyway it's it's at the minimum creepy

if you don't want to agree that he's a

pedophile for this which is what i think

actually he's at least much worse than

what vash has done because while wash

again he's made disgusting comments

um bad empanada is knowingly in

possession of of a

shirtless 16 year old boy

which he has admitted

um

he views in a sexual context like

it's not just a shirtless picture of me

it's a shirtless picture of me

where he's admitting that

you know yeah this is um

this is like something i'm gonna judge

in terms of its attractiveness right i

mean having that photo on your phone is

creepy enough if you have downloaded a

photo of a shirtless 16 year old boy

you're a fucking pedophile i don't i

don't care what i mean what is the

like unless you're a doctor or something

or maybe you're a coach for a team or so

i don't fucking know what excuse do you

have or maybe like um

it's like a family photo at the beach or

something but like this is not an

appropriate context

to be having a shirtless 16 year old boy

on your phone because you're talking

about their attractiveness it's really

fucking creepy

to me that's enough to characterize

george gonnitus aka bad empanada as a

pedophile i'm sorry i have a red line

that's if you're not willing to respect

the red line we have in place

you're a fucking pedophile period

but yeah it's really creepy to talk

about the attractiveness

of a

shirtless 16 year old boy yeah you're a

pedophile george you are a fucking

pedophile 1 000

the fuck else do you call that you know

and you should see the sick comments

people were making about it as well you

know

but um

yeah fake lee i mean he lives in

argentina i'm not sure what i can do

except raise awareness i think i'm gonna

make a separate video about this

but yeah this is a pedophile at least as

my as far as my definition of that is

concerned that's a pedophile yeah he's a

1000 a pedophile

um

it's one thing if he did it without

knowledge okay first of all it's still

creepy because it i clearly look young

in that photo okay

so you should you should at least try

and double check or make make sure this

is like an adult

um

so that alone is creepy right but when

you're confronted with the fact

um that it's a 16 year old boy and it's

a minor and you don't retract it

yeah that's enough to call you a

pedophile in my book one thousand

percent

so i just want awareness to be raised

about the fact this is clearly someone

who doesn't have any issues sexualizing

uh young boys who are minors

and you know

look he he is a creep and look i'm not

gonna do the fizzinogomy thing

but you have to admit he kind of looks

the part

i'll let you decide i mean does this

look like someone who creeps on children

because i think it does does this look

like a guy

who doesn't mind having um illicit

sexualized photos of children on their

phone and computer i think it does i

think this is a guy who like 1 000

if i like put i like put in text pedo

over this

everyone would believe it

right

and uh i'm gonna make sure you know as

far as like i continued growth is

concerned i'm always gonna bring this up

um i want awareness to be raised that

this is a fucking predator this is an

in all likelihood a pedophile they have

a very callous disregard

for you

know for the basic norms regulating

uh conduct between adults and minors

um

at least in terms of sexualizing images

of them

right

so yeah i mean

look if this guy was like some random

like neo-nazi with an anime probably

those guys admit their pedals right but

this is a leftist you know how leftists

are like actually the one thing leftists

are based on

is

not all of them

but some of them or at least half of

them maybe

the non-voss ones they're based on this

pedal shit they're against pedos

they're um you know

they have zero tolerance for anything

relating to minors that's what i

appreciate about this is one of the only

things i like about them right

and he's welcomed in that community

right so awareness needs to be raised

that this guy's a fucking pedo he's a

fucking pedophile okay

if not by most standards

then at least by the standards of the

community he belongs to he is a

pedophile one thousand percent

and at the very bare minimum he's a

fucking creep who's flirting with

pedophilia

in which case he should be treated the

exact same way if not worse than how

voss is because vash has said

questionable things

but what he's never done as far as i

know

is literally sexualize photos of actual

miners bosh has never done that as far

as i'm aware

he has

okay

so if you look at this face i want you

to remember that this is a pedophile

this is the face of a pedophile

again i gave him multiple opportunities

to explain himself

and

retract what he did

uh and he refused

he knew that it's a shirtless minor a 16

year old boy

he doesn't care

what do you call that

leftists are not tolerant of petals

at least from what i've seen

um a lot of them are not actually

believe it or not a lot of them are so

extreme where they're like you know

even even a 30 year old and an 18 year

old

is

predatory and shit

which

i somewhat sympathize with right

but you know leftists don't do this

thing where they're like most of them i

know right the vos ones do but like the

ml ones i'm just what i'm talking about

they don't do this thing where they're

like oh yeah

a 17 year old or a 16 year old that's

fine right because that's

ophelia whatever they call that right no

they don't they have a zero tolerance

for that shit right

but something tells me they're such

depraved hypocrites that they're gonna

give george gannitus a pass on his

creepy pedo behavior just because i'm

the one being victimized

and targeted

but you know what

there deserves to be awareness raised

about this the fact that this person is

a fucking creep and a pedal

and if you object to me calling him a

pedo

um

i would like to ask you how it's

justified to knowingly possess and

spread and sexualize

photos of 16 year old boys just tell me

how that's just please break down to me

how that fucking um

how you do that knowingly and you're not

a pedo i just want to hear that argument

right

and you know that was when i was so

naive back in the day like i would i

would just i would share photos of um

when i was in high school like a

wholesome thing like yeah guys look at

what i used to look like

um

but just you know seeing these fucking

creeps photoshopping them and editing

them in weird ways and you know saying

weird things about them and shit i do

regret it i didn't know how fucking sick

and depraved left leftist specifically

were

but uh yeah i do regret it but whatever

it is what it is you know all we can do

is point these people out

and make sure you know that they're

ostracized and known for what they are

which is pedophiles right that's all we

can do

but uh yeah

all right guys i want to tell you

something um

so

i

am believe it or not if you can believe

it i'm going to do a patriotism stream

on the 4th of july i thought about it

long and hard

i'm not taking a day off on the holiday

of the fourth of july i'm gonna be

streaming

because that's the most patriotic thing

i can do right is

spread the truth on fourth of july so

um you know feel free to not tune in

if you got plans go do your plans it

goes without saying for those of you who

don't have any plans

or who may be international you know i'm

gonna be here streaming

tomorrow

and i'm going to be talking about

patriotism right and it's okay if you

want to miss this one you know

uh

you can always watch the vod

but um yeah i am going to be streaming

for the 4th of july

and i was planning on going like

like colorado or some shit with jackson

i just did not have time i only have

myself to blame for that right so yeah

i'm gonna be posting up and um

i'm gonna be streaming later at night

and all the fireworks are you know

maybe i'll stream during the day i don't

know i mean i think in general i don't

know right

how much donations to light up firework

on stream that would work better for

twitch when irl content was more tenable

but on youtube we're not probably not

gonna get a lot of irls if it any at all

right

um

so yeah guys good stream

and you know i i sometimes i'm down

a little bit

you know seeing all this i this was such

a satisfying stream that's all i have to

say like oh wow

our enemies they fold so fucking easily

that chungus guy i mean that guy he's

always

i i wish i would have knew he was down

to debate earlier like they're so easy

to crush

these stupid fucking people that talk

shit on twitter right

you get one of these little rats and

press them they cannot they have nothing

they have nothing keep calling me stupid

they keep calling me dumb

i fucking destroy them

they're done

yeah they're paper tigers and you guys

see that firsthand right

um we still have these sick sick fucks

out here

uh george gannitas bad empanada

these sick fuckers and these disgusting

people

i can really say is um

[Music]

you know we just have to keep exposing

the truth we have to keep exposing

pedals

for what they are

notice how many pedals are my enemies

you guys notice that pattern pedals

fucking hate me more than anyone you

ever noticed that shit

you ever noticed that

they're my biggest enemies they have

always been historically thank you more

luck

yeah they always have as well they've

always been

my fucking enemies pedals have always

been my enemies

so weird how that works right

but these are sick depraved nihilistic

people all we can do is drag them out

into the light of day because they

thrive in the darkness

and inshallah in a hypothetical uh

scenario maybe even with the ma if trump

gets fucking i don't care right i'm

willing to trade abortion rights for the

pedals being brought out and exposed and

drawn into the light of day

all of them

and um

you know

undergoing treatment

you know what i mean by treatment i mean

uh an early retirement

at the game in minecraft of life

if we start if we get sharia law in this

country and we have beheadings and shit

for pedophiles

oh it's gonna be beautiful it'll be

beautiful

that's tomorrow's fourth of july

but yeah these sick bucks that are

operating in the darkness they're going

to be drawn out they're going to be

drawn out

i promise you this much they will be

drawn out

each and every one of them

and they will be made to answer

for their demonic criminality

whether the trump people want to do that

or we're gonna doesn't matter when

legally obviously right but it doesn't

matter right

they will be drawn

out period

thank you so much sir

thank you so much sir

um caesar i don't know half years ago

thank you so much man all right guys

that's all for tonight

[Music]

for all the broken hearts

that got played

[Music]

me

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

[Applause]

[Music]

all these moments

in the end i should have known you were

just a heartbreaker

[Music]

foreign

[Music]

me

[Music]