YouTube Transcript:
Hasan Is Leaving Leftovers - Leftovers #58

Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.

Video Transcript

Video Summary

Summary

Core Theme

This content is a podcast discussion exploring the nuances and practicalities of socialism versus social democracy, touching upon economic systems, governance, and international relations, particularly concerning China, Taiwan, and Ukraine.

Mind Map

Click to expand

Click to explore the full interactive mind map • Zoom, pan, and navigate

[Music] [Applause]

[Applause] [Music]

we are all domestic terrorists that's

right ladies and gentlemen we are all

I got myself a tasty coffee with that

flavored cream in it yeah it goes good a

little different flavors dude I feel

like the skinnier you get the better you

get at debates and um you've owned me

too hard I'm you know let's just get it

out of the let's just

let's just start off by saying you know

this is the last episode of leftovers

yeah after our last episode yeah in the heated

heated

uh debate that we had I realized that I

was a class Trader

and that I don't know why people said

that because like that's a good thing in

your situation to be a pleasure like I

don't think they meant it like that yeah

like that doesn't make any sense I like

what you're saying though like you'd be

like angles you know what I mean like

the guy who who co-authored it and and

was like facilitating it but also like

had a factory you know what I mean so

that's not a bad thing angles is a class

Trader that's right that's me I'm angles

oh yeah definitely but um there was

there was crazy Fallout for my last

episode which is kind of nuts because

you know I will ignoring all that though

it seemed like a lot of people did like

the conversation I myself am pretty

ignorant on the methods of governing and

uh histories and all that so I do think

this conversation of I'm not even gonna

say capitalism because that seems to

trigger people I'm just gonna say social

democracy because people hear me say

capitalism they [ __ ] their [ __ ]

britches yeah because there's a lot of

well first of all we're online so no

matter what you say people are gonna be

very passionate about it one of the

things that I do quite frequently

is yell at people to be normal because

people just have no [ __ ] way of being

normal online

so there's that problem and then the

other side of it is like there's a lot

of uh you know baby socialists out there

who are like on their own Journey okay

and they get like really passionate

and and the the goal always is like oh

my God we have to convert every single

person to socialism

immediately or anyone in the right of me

is part of the problem there's that too

but of course you know um

it's uh it takes a while it takes a

while to to engage in uh

any kind of movement building and it's

something I stress quite a bit it's hard

to tell how much of it was

um anyway regardless I I was actually

invigorated by the conversation and that

you know

I I I don't know what I'm talking about

and so I've been thinking about our

conversation a lot and I've been

educating myself a lot and I want to

continue the conversation today but I

don't want to have a debate I want to

have like a

I want to go on a

a fact-finding journey for myself about

how socialism is addressing certain

issues versus social democracy okay and

to understand from you a socialist mm-hmm

mm-hmm um

what what really that is and how how

would it be you know interactive Dan are

you a socialist would you say

I I broadly so I'd say so sure

dude we're about to get executed after

this Ethan's called dude everybody was

riding for you guys this is Ethan's uh

McCarthy trials

it's like would you say you're a card

carrying communist okay very good no

being a socialist is cool apparently

online no dude it's it's like there are

right well it's super cool it is for as

many as many like very little well of

course there's a lot of people here

there's a lot of people here that would

be uh like there are very few places

online where you can just be like out

and about and openly uh defend uh any

kind of economic organization Society

Beyond capitalism uh without a

tremendous amount of scrutiny

um well I got roses Dogma well of course

the other the other side was defending

you that's why you didn't notice it you

know that's not good though I don't want

Tim pulled defending me or whatever

whoever I didn't watch all I didn't

watch all the no I I don't think Tim

poodle absolutely but one of his one of

his one of his uh Commanders

the guy who's like always the the really

weird like failed musician guy that I

think describes all of them yeah but

true but um I want to better represent

my position uh because I didn't I don't

really know a lot and I feel like I've

done a lot of research in the week uh

following the conversation so what did

you do what did you read

what kind of research I had a very

that's good I got I got I asked it

really kind of well baseball thinks it's

social like chat gbt socialist so like

church people probably chatting right

yeah yeah that gbd keeps it so real yeah

Lenin pilled you so no is Lenin a

socialist or a Social Democrat no that's

Lenin is is uh

the Revolutionary figure that is

probably more important than than Marx even

even

his deal he's just so he's just a

socialist yes he's the first like I mean

this is where the the the father of the USSR

USSR

that was a nice that was a nice Legacy

to have

could have been I'm just kidding I'm

sorry no no no no no no no no you're no

there's there's nothing I don't think

it's that controversial to say that like

yeah I mean USSR Orwell Joseph Stalin

was basically right whatever that's not

what I want to get into right now Stalin

definitely had a lot of issues I will

admit first I want to say

that I promote my [ __ ] all the time on

the show so now I want to give Hassan a

shout out I can't there's no reason to

promote her he's already all sold out oh

it is yeah good for you new ideology

drop immediately sold out kind of

annoying that it sold out so quick but

I'm sorry except for the hoodie that I'm

wearing currently that's it

um which one is that this one cost anger

management one yeah

yeah

get the president on the phone quick no

I don't want to hear it

no yeah that's the Vibes Buy It Now

nice good for you scum capitalist scum I

[ __ ] love it dude I'm just kidding I

know you work with unionized people for that

that

of course teddyfresh.com is that sale

going on

uh support my exploited workers today still

still

it's an ongoing most of it is gone but

it's worth the brows

all right so I don't do all this new

[ __ ] I want to get straight into it oh I

have a separate dock okay damn damn

that's why I didn't see it hold on this

man this man has his own dock dude oh

well no because I put yeah you got some

notes that's fair what email is this I

say let the conversation begin

all right let me just share while you're

looking for that though it doesn't chat

CCP chat CCP that's good that's really

good that's funny I I love that I'll

just announce some uh breaking news I

saw right before we went live but

Rupert our boy died it did not die yeah

he died

but he has stepped down the Rupert

Murdoch era is officially over I've seen

enough uh secession to know that that's

he's going to come back

that's actually not a bad assessment

he's not going to leave yeah Lachlan is

the fail son he's not sure hold the

[ __ ] pull through yeah it's [ __ ]

where's my document dude first he got

cucked by Tucker Carlson and then like

had to divorce his the like fiance that

he was gonna get married to and now he's

like leaving his Empire behind what's

happening in a rope Ruby You've Lost

that's what he wants to do in his

retirement yeah he wants to go out with

style okay here it is I found it that

would be so much better than than

whatever the [ __ ] he did up until this

very moment slow crack and die

and just like go out and style you don't

even need to die just like have gay sex

do crack you know I would do hair in my

retirement what am I doing heroin right

just to ease out just be you know just

[ __ ] because like who cares if you

get all strung out and it's like who

gives a [ __ ] you're like you you're

making an argument you're making the

best of your time you're making an

argument for palliative care which I

feel like

um it's like end of life like death care basically

basically

um Hospice Care they do that no I I feel

like there's going to be there's this assessment

assessment

from economists that there's going to be

a major and it's already started a major

boom in the like uh geriatric care and

palliative care all the boomers are done

um because like the last like what you

would consider middle class uh of

America is all in the Boomer side

I mean Boomer like in a boomer Zoomer

terminology I mean like anyone over the

age of [ __ ] 50 like actual baby

they're not actually some of them are

baby boomers um

but uh they are all the people that are

like desperately holding on to like

whatever assets they have remaining yeah

so now they have money and you have

they're the only people that have money

so you have to figure out how to like

meet their needs how do we get it from

them by insanely expensive we should

make a hospice show like that we should

get their money bro oh yeah jack up the price

price

get all that money no that's my money

give it to me bro here take this take

this fentanyl shut the [ __ ] up yeah I

feel like that would be that would be

pretty fire though like what you're

saying no but seriously what's the

drawback to just going full heroin

because listen there's a reason people

get addicted to it because it's it's

good it's fun well wouldn't you argue

that morphine might be better but like

there's massive Concepts yeah it's the

same joke right in a way it's just a

matter of intensity there's no drawback

because obviously you don't want to be

an addict during you know the middle of

your life you have so there's so much

you need to do and here being a heroin

addict is just not compatible with

living a normal life but if you're in a

retirement home

then I feel like it's also more ethical

than the way that they currently operate

those places because it's like full of

[ __ ] theft and like

is making a cleaning dude she's doing

all these Elderly Homes

anyway let's move on let's get out of

office we have a lot to discuss

but we should get into that but like run

an elderly care yeah facility and then

all the fans can send their parents yeah

and we'll kick it back to them and we'll

just [ __ ] give him heroin and then

yeah the goal is we take kill the half

The Inheritance we take half of the

inheritance and then the other half goes

to the to the children it goes back to

them because they were going to get that

and that way it doesn't even get hit by

the estate tax because we already

[ __ ] taxed them I found it boom

genius [ __ ] all right first I want to

make this clear capitalism is not

Innovative but we just innovated under capitalism

capitalism

I agree so [ __ ] true that's the

entrepreneurial spirit I agree

by the way garyvee is going to do this

yo I've got a great idea let's make nft

Critters out of your dead grandparents

you guys bro you know yeah I saw it I

saw like uh statistic I don't know how

[ __ ] true it is but like I mean it

feels very real 95 of the nft

marketplace is now zero dollars like

it's collapsed it is so crazy how none

of those people none of those [ __ ]

charlatans that were advocating for this

[ __ ] and trying to get you to hold the

goddamn bag have been punished for it

including Gary vaynerchuk as a matter of

fact so man real quiet on the V friends

from perspectives dude it's like it

should be studied how fast the media

jumped on that train and was like or at

least alternative media Outlets have you

considered this jumped on it and we're

like pushing for it have you considered

this fortune favors the brave don't show

that to me I'm gonna buy I'm buying

crypto right now have you considered

that Matt Damon thinks fortune favors

the brave aka the dumb Matt Damon

son of a uh of a like activist teacher

actually legitimately like uh like a

pretty like back in the day at least

like old die in the wool Lefty [ __ ]

Shilling cryptocurrency you can't you know

know

Sports fortune favors the brave my

friend all right so one thing I want to

make clear before we engulf on this um conversation

conversation

is that me and you pretty much have like

95 crossover

in terms of like

our goal for the welfare of the people

of our utopian society yeah I mean my my

my guiding hope

in social democracy is that you can take

the the both of best worlds of socialism

and capitalism and create a world where

the poorest are are cared for where

people can get free education where

people can get free housing or not free

but guaranteed housing where they get a

guaranteed education higher education

all this stuff so let's talk about this

now my first question is this

given that you know in a social

democracy we can regulate things like

taxes housing higher education sharing

jobs and all this kind of stuff what are

the problems in social democracy that we

need socialism to address what is it

socialism does that social democracy

doesn't do

so social democracy is still capitalist

um uh with with you know serious severe

Market regulations right

um some forms of viable social

democracies you can point to right now

is places like Norway an example I use regularly

regularly

the issue is twofold one social

democracies don't address some of the

domestic problems because when there's

still capital accumulation of which

domestic problems domestic problems such

as labor issues homelessness like

there's no way to fully eradicate that

because the inherent class contradiction

between the owner class and the labor

class still exists that's an assumption

I don't know that that's true that

there's just gonna be there's not gonna

be homelessness in socialism but they're

willing social democracy well the idea

is that um

um completely

completely

abolishing the profit motive in certain

Commodities like housing for example

will address that problem because then

you're making housing specifically for

need rather than so you can make money

off of existing units right but it will

so it right there be government housing

like for example like I think that

exists in Sweden yeah where if you're

homeless is what yeah it exists

everywhere so that's what I'm saying

there's not a profit motive there's

there's a

humanitarian effort to um

to house the the people that need homes

and he was eating and now you know so so

I I don't know what you mean that

there's homelessness won't exist in

socialism but she's eating all your

tissues oh nasty oh yeah she's eating

all your tissues sorry as it grows

question girl yeah shame on you yeah she

she being a nasty girl today or used to

do that she's being a real freak

um sorry what's the homelessness in

Sweden that's just as a I mean oh before

we look at those numbers something to

consider something to remember always is that

that

um homelessness is tracked very

differently in different countries okay

so like those numbers will always be

um those numbers can be uh very

different like you could think that oh

it's so much worse like like rape

statistics in Sweden if you look at that

I think gonna test this too you'd be

like what the [ __ ] it's crazy out there

people are raping like crazy and it's

because they have a different

methodology for tracking rape like each

individual Act of sexual assault this

track is looking uh like uh is written

up as like one individual the actual

number then isn't that important but we

acknowledge that in a social democracy

that's run ideally

the homeless and whoever else needs a

home for whatever reason would be

provided one so I don't understand what

socialism does better in that case

um at the end of the day these countries

the social democracy we were talking

about still have a lot of wealthy

individuals a lot of people who are

making money off of Finance capital and

capitalism in general and their

interests are always going to be to

further erode the welfare state as best

as they possibly can in an effort to

claw back all of those areas that they

could so you'll technically putting that

on them but that's not if you have a

strong social democracy that wouldn't be

possible well my question to you would

be if everybody's provided for in the

society adequately and and

uh fairly then what why do you care how

much money somebody has

um because well first of all I don't but

the real reason is not necessarily money

but more so how people make their money

and how people make their money being

through capital accumulation is always

going to uh work to erode this nation

the the Social Democratic state that

you're mentioning and the example I will

use is Europe because like if you look

at European Social Democratic reforms

throughout uh history things that a lot

of people take for granted even the NHS

in the UK for example is not immediately

uh privatized obviously but uh it is

crippled under conservative

administrations deliberately

specifically so that they can inevitably

privatize certain aspects of it it's

kind of like how uh the same neoliberal

reforms under the Reagan Era wanted to

openly starve the Beast the American

government which is why Americans no

longer have any sort of confidence in

the government to do any kind of social

uh amenities any kind of offerings right

like you understand you and I we we both

are in the highest tax bracket we live

in Los Angeles California yeah we pay a

[ __ ] ton of taxes we pay like European

taxes right yeah

um and the reality is we both recognize

that those taxes don't necessarily go to

the places that we would love for it

love for them to be spent on definitely

roads schools libraries social democracy

that like my utopian social democracy

well there's all that money in this you

know situation it does go to those

places because they because America is

still a capitalist Nation just like all

of these other countries are yeah and in

a capitalist Nation you are always going

to have the influence of capital let me

ask you this then okay in a socialist

Nation on the other flip of the coin

wouldn't you also also have this a

similar movement of people a party of

people wanting to move towards capitalism

capitalism

there will there will probably there

will always be yes people what's the

difference counter-revolutionary

um well not just that I mean there's a

move because capitalism um

social democracy there's a certain level of

individualism that you don't have with

with uh socialism but perhaps I would

say and so

and so I would ask you what's the

difference you're saying that social

democracy nations are gonna the rich

people are always going to be trying to

erode the system

that's an assumption by the way

um well it's not an assumption

necessarily is it's not it's not

descriptive in comparison to like I mean

it's descriptive if you look at

um how it has uh played itself out in

Europe where we and you're right I agree

I agree that's what they'll be doing so

I'm not going to argue even America

America had a lot of Social Democratic

principles in the New Deal I'm not even

going to argue that but I do think that

in a socialist country like I said

there's going to be a sizable amount of

people moving towards capitalism so

what's the difference I don't know if

it'll be as sizable and there also

always has to be a state mechanism of

control which exists in neoliberal

capitalism as well and um

this is actually an area where I very

much uh uh diverge from the from other

socialists I would say or even more

Orthodox marxists that I believe the

neoliberal mechanisms of control um specifically

um specifically

uh it's just

how do I describe it free market uh

markets are better than okay than the

government at dealing with everything okay

okay um

um so

I I think that there is uh two different

as as reductive as possible there's two

different types of control control is

always going to happen this is what the

state is there to do right uh under

liberal capitalist democracies in the

west you have a neoliberal mechanism of

control that doubles the masses through

Commodities gives you the false uh

notion of choice you feel like you have

32 different brands of Oreos even though

they're like owned by three companies

that price fix right and they basically

control all matter of Commodities and

those markets are completely captured

but there's this idea that there are uh

you know this endless boundless amount

of of choices that you can choose from

on the other side the more authoritarian

mechanisms of control which have existed

what's your opinion

I like the neoliberal one I think that

uh even in a socialist State uh you

should still very much give the people

uh the the false notion of choice and

make it feel like they have a say in the

process while doing the bidding of I

mean it's a pretty cynical world view

but I think that you know that's what

states are supposed to do let me ask you

this and that and we'll create a

structure where there are significantly

less uh people who are like I hate the

system right now I don't feel happy I

don't feel good in the system that I

exist under so I should uh you know do

counter-revolutionary capitalist reforms

well and likewise I don't think there's

that many people in Sweden or Norway who

are saying no we need to move to a pure

socialist because everybody there is

provided for I don't think there's a

large I I'm speaking at it no you're

you're absolutely right you're actually

100 correct so like some Orthodox

marxists actually hate the welfare state

for this reason because the welfare

state is a continuation of capitalism by

offering social offering certain amenities

thrived and uh and and has created a

structure where like the inherent

contradictions that exist under

capitalism that I think everyone would

agree with including yourself uh those

inherent contradictions become a little

bit more muddied and they never end up

getting to a point where uh they they

converge and and uh capitalism erodes

into some socialist formation let me be

I guess more specific if you're in a socialist

socialist country

country

is there one party or multiple parties

um it depends I mean because one party's

scary right can we agree on that one is

not a good system I think you and I

would agree that we

no no I'm just asking you I don't care

about the United States I'm asking you

about socialism I I think that there are

different forms of governance and the

United States is not that different I

don't care about the United States I

want to know I just want to talk about a

socialist I think that no matter what

happens the state does what the state is

supposed to do you can either do it at

the behest of your citizens because you

genuinely earnestly believe that like

that is the best possible way of

developing a society or you do it at the

behest of capital owners and and

capitalism but you're saying you don't

think it matters if there's one party or

I don't think it matters as far as

um I care about direct democracy direct

Democratic participation in local uh in

in one party systems with Socialism or

communism has pretty much always been

a catastrophe yeah a human humanitarian

disaster no no I agree with that there's

just so much risk in having one party I

I agree with that I think that a

multi-party system is obviously going to

be better my point is that it doesn't

even matter if you have a parliament it

doesn't even matter if you have a

multi-party system the changes that are

being made in one direction or the other

are oftentimes incredibly marginal

um and and less and the differences are

not born out of like uh you know the

party disagreements differences are born

out of like genuine material conflict

like even including like the Civil War

it's never like the kindness of people's

uh or like one party of individuals

being like we are kind we want to do

good things and the other side is bad

and they want to do bad things so what I

want to say was this then but if you're

in a socialist

country with multiple parties and one of

the parties is a capitalist party which

would surely exist yeah what would you

do if that party started gaining

momentum and it was clearly like people

wanted that route they wanted that route

yeah what do you do I think um I would

do what America has done not to the same

which is right not to the same degree as

like uh you know McCarthy's trials or

anything like that

um but I would offer additional

amenities to ensure that people are

comfortable and happy because I feel

like anything what do you do if they're

like nah [ __ ] that we're doing

capitalism well if everything is if

everything is given to you yeah at that

point if every single thing is given to

you if all of your problems are solved

which I think we can both agree uh is is

not under capitalism it has not happened no

um if all of those problems have been

solved then there is no need for

conflict of that regard but they're

saying no we want ultimate because

they're like yo this is a free country

right well we want to do capitalism

we think the market should regulate the

prices and [ __ ] we don't think the

workplace should be um socialized okay

that's a great that's a great question

and what about you have to ask why

though at that point because well people

never can be explained by why anyway you

know what I mean some people are gonna

be dumb you're right it's like you don't

it's just gonna exist you know it is

yeah and so and so if the will of the

people is to go back to do more of a

social democracy is that something that

a socialist country should move towards

or should there be resistance in the

government to keep socialism I think the

resistance should be akin to how

capitalist governments have resisted

historically any kind of socialist

movement not to that same degree of

violence but I think that yes

um the the solution to that would always

be education and offering more re-education

re-education

re-education certainly yeah

I know that that's like a traditional

camps no no not like that

um I know there's a trigger word because

everyone goes oh re-education what do

you mean like immediately people think

like are you telling me about that are

you talking about like resident schools

are you talking about uh yeah 100 they

do they do it they did it in xinjiang

which is pretty good right no I don't

agree with that yeah I don't think it

was good and this is uh something I have

openly criticized as well like the

that's not good

the massive surveillance apparatus they

built in xinjiang is not good so what

would be even about a socialist

re-education camp for capitalists it

wouldn't necessarily I don't think it'd

be camps I mean it depends on it depends

on crime right like are people

committing crimes at the behest of this

because if there's a socialist State and

someone is doing like white Terror let's

say or someone is doing South Korean

style uh you know purges of Communists

which have always which has happened

historically in every country that

America is aligned with because they

were anti-communist where they've

launched you know military dictatorships

whether we recognize it or not those

things have happened right so in a

situation like that

um I think if there's any kind of like

terrorism happening sure yeah if there's

violence then yes I do think that uh

there should be an enforcement mechanism

and in that enforcement mechanism I

think like Rehabilitation which would

include re-education as well would

probably be a lot better than like uh

you know

a prison structure where they have

slavery like in the United States of

America I'm still a little bit confused

about the ideal mechanism of a socialist

country whereas

there where people still have individual

freedoms to like form to assemble and

can also be like yeah I'm a capitalist

so what and we're trying to grow our

movement I don't understand the

organization of the Socialist free

country because it seems to me to have a

socialist country

uh that there needs to be some amount of

dampening of you know uh rights

well because for what yes and no because

my point is always the same uh it's that

this is a constant this is consistent

what you're describing is consistent

with the American formation it's

consistent with capitalism it's just a

reality that will always exist violence

and who gets to do violence is an

inherent part of politics because

politics is uh at the end of the day a

distribution of resources and a

distribution of violence who gets to

have what resources and who doesn't have

the resources as a consequence of that

and if they do something to get those

resources what the state will be able to

do the state has a monopoly on violence

across the board no matter what happens right

right

I'm not an anarchist a lot of anarchists

will get mad at me for saying this but

the state should have some level of of a

violent mechanism because well no matter

what happens and there's different forms

of violence as well the structural

violence poverty or direct violence in

the in uh in the form of of uh military

uh boots on the ground military Warfare

imperialism police violence police

brutality these are all different forms

of violence there will be some exertion

of force required to maintain a

socialist group not just a social

country any country sure any country yes

I agree until

we uh reach a point of of I guess uh

until we reach a point of production uh

and our productive output has gotten to

a point where it's so streamlined and

and so organized that there is no need

for a state but I don't know if we will

ever be able to get there uh where the

state Withers away and we have a

classless borderless moneyless society

the problem yeah I mean if it is

world war three or something

um let me ask you I guess another angle here

here

um ex worker exploitation seems to be at

the heart of socialism and

so I want to ask you this question if an

employee is fairly compensated and by

fairly I mean that

that

factors like work

um uh compensation you know they're

being paid well beyond the means of

living they can afford a comfortable

housing food pleasure vacation savings

all the things people would want to do

with money if they're provided and all

those ways that are we see as important

is that still exploitation

um in the marxian sense yes in the

capital of sense no capitalism well

social so Mark when you say Marxism

you're talking about socialism yes yes

yes so uh in the in the Marxist

perspective under you know marxian

economics Marxist theory uh exploitation

is not a good or bad thing uh it is just

a thing that happens okay

um and it goes back to something I've

described many many times over which is

that the there are two classes um

there is the labor class the wage

laborers the proletariat and the the

Bourgeois class the capital loaning

class right and these two classes have

two inherently contradictory interests

you work jobs when you had a boss and

someone was paying you and you have been

a boss so you have gone through both of

these stages so as someone who worked in

a job as a wage laborer as a W-2

employer 1099 contractor you wanted to

work the least amount of hours for the

most amount of pay that's understandable

that's like perfectly reasonable right

like you want more money and you want to

work less hours you want to have more freedom

freedom

your boss on the other hand wants you to

work the most amount of hours for the

least amount of pay like that they can

get away with yeah so

um this inherent contradiction is at the

heart of capitalism and is how

Commodities are produced under a

capitalist mode of production

now when you have this when you have

this imbalance those who do have Capital

end up always being able to pay you

much less than your actual output that

is what's happening now my question is

in a situation as I outlined where the

employees are fairly provided for which

I outlined before is that when I say

exploitation I mean like

I think that also has a vernacular like

when the ruling class is

um committing some kind of harm or

um no it it's it's beyond that you could

be paying your employees fairly and

still engage in the active exploitation

so then because I don't want to get top

on that because you're saying

exploitation is neutral by itself

exploitation in the marxian sense is not

good or bad it's just descriptive a lot

of what Marx has talked about but so

what does he mean then the scripted

descriptive what does he mean then when

he goes the exploitation of workers

clearly he wants to end the exploitation

of course so is it still exploitation of

workers if they're fairly provided for

yes because because the the fairness in

this regard is not met on the metrics of

like living standards but instead on the

metrics of what their output is so when

and and this gets into the labor theory

of value excuse right goddamn the labor

theory of value which is which is

different than marginal utility which is

what we use currently when we ascribe

when we just when we say this is this

much like something is disvaluable Right

ice cream is four dollars

um but if it's really hot out maybe ice

cream is five dollars because well

there's a little bit of scarcity on uh

on on the supply but the demand has gone

up so now ice cream is more expensive

whereas from a marxian perspective the

value of that ice cream is uh is is

is stable it's just what kind of Labor

went into the production of it what were

the uh what were the the resources used

to make that ice cream what kind of like

what uh kind of capital was put into the

Ice Cream Factory and then also the the

the the moving part in that situation

would be the labor of it if the employee is

extremely satisfied yeah and they feel

well provided for it

I mean in a sense it's like who are you

to tell him he's being exploited

but you know what I mean yeah no I

understand it's

what I would say in that situation is

this right

um relying on the magnanimous nature of

your boss yeah and hoping that like your

boss doesn't uh succumb to Greed and and

choose to change certain things about

your workplace conditions can be great

and there are people like yourself out

there who are as far as I understand

pretty good bosses right but that that

is never going to be the that's never

going to be the constant that's never

going to be the case but in social

democracy you set up the bumpers you set

up the systems where yeah they they have

to do that well that's the bare minimum

they have to do well and then we go back

to the erosion of the the amenities I

don't feel like that's a strong enough

argument to say socialism is better no

as long as there is as long as there is

a some kind of of uh capitalist

compensation in any sort of sector they

will always choose to monopolize this is

what most companies like this is what

every company does when they become a

company a corporation their their job is

to their goal is to inevitably become a

monopoly you can do that by renting so

what if you know so what

if there's they still have to follow the rules

rules

well no when you are when you are

becoming a monopoly yeah you are either

engaging in horizontal integration and

expansion or vertical integration and

expansion mergers Acquisitions

um and and you know what Amazon has done

for example in in e-commerce is a great

example of this and when you get to that

point uh especially under a capitalist

state that still has Market reforms you

end up uh using the the additional

Capital that you've accumulated in the

form of profits from your workers to

Lobby the government and erode the

safety nets but you're talking like it's

a guaranteed and again I'm gonna

guarantee every single one and I and

it's been a guarantee by the same metric

that any socialist country devolves into

into disaster I mean it's not fair to

put it that out there like it's just

given because on the on the other flip

coin you can say uh you know this like I

mentioned socialism there's going to be

people moving towards capitalism so

socialism it's too hypothetical

however historically most of them at

least have not eroded or been destroyed

due to like people who are just like I

want to be capitalists usually those

people are being uh goaded or supported

facilitated by a much more powerful Nation

Nation

um that uh is is using the the uh

inherent greed to their advantage to uh

cause divisions but the real material

issues in socialist nation states

historical socialism uh real socialism

in the real world that has happened has

always been due to mishaps uh you know

famine uh or or the government

exercising too much authoritarian yeah

you can stay the same these sorts of

things these sorts of things uh are are

the real reasons as to why socialization

states have failed not necessarily their

their economic motor production

switching over to a more labor focused

uh economy and and then also

um there there are so many different

types of uh socialist developments

like a socialist mode of production that

um there is no like one

absolute perfect one and I'd be a liar

if I told you I know which one it is you

know what I mean so go back to the the

original question let's just ignore this

um theory that in social democracy and

I'll say this you know obviously we have

Anti-Trust laws that are not good that

are not been effective in the least bit

yeah that's something you can regulate

no but I would ask you why well because

our our government is super corrupt why

is the government corrupt because people

aren't are inherently flawed

you think the governments grow up

because people are inherently flawed

corruption in that sense I disagree with

you there some people not all people

that's another thing I said people are

inherently greedy and people lost their

mind some people are but really I want

to talk about that at better length but

go ahead that's actually a great take as

well we can cover that as well yeah I

always butchered this quote but I forget

who it was it might have been Mark

Fisher might have been someone else but

um assuming that greed is inherent in

human nature under a capitalist

organization of the economy is like

assuming The Black Lung is inherent I'm

not human nature if you work at a

[ __ ] Coal Mine see that's that's not

a good analogy because no you're in my

opinion breed is a part of it

self-interest is a part of it not greed

necessarily but self-interest is a part

of human existence why we have uh built

societies how we've done it however as a

survival is a biological survival

exactly however if we didn't have

self-interest we would never we we

wouldn't survive as a species I don't

disagree with you yeah you're absolutely

correct my argument always and many

Marx's arguments actually have always

been around individuals them and

self-interest and how socialism as a

matter of fact creates more

opportunities for individual liberties

for the person uh it's only been sold

and told to people as though it is uh

you know this this gray brutalist

architecture city blocks you don't you

have to you know do your government

mandated coal mining job or whatever the

[ __ ] but

um the the ultimate goal has always been

to open up more individual liberties

I'll give you an example of

socialization that you and I both agree

with right Health Care nationalized

Health Care or socialized medicine in

general gives you more Liberties as a

person that you can actually leave your

job that would happen in social

democracy as well yes however

however

like I've said there has to be the the

the counter measures in a social democracy

democracy

um are are like the the capitalist

forces are significantly more powerful

because ultimately the state is still

operating as a capitalist state that is

still the norm so I think we're having

like a a kind of just like a disc or not

a disconnect but maybe had an impasse on

that idea but what I'll say I want to

give you a specific example because this

this is interesting to me

um let's just take this workplace as an

example because we're all familiar with it

so I started my career

10 plus years ago and I was successful

by myself with zero employees yes I made

a lot of money I was I did well for

myself and then you know five years ago

into my career I made a punk I made the

podcast which obviously you all are

watching now so

so let's say we go back to five years

ago when I hired Dan as a freelance you

started as like a consultant

yeah or a freelancer yeah and obviously

you moved to full time and I'll get to

that yeah so he he started as like a

freelance consultant so what would be a

fair way of compensating him for that

in your situation um

it's it's uh like what is the most like

socialist way of doing it is that what

you're asking well yeah because that's

what I'm talking about right um it would

be it would be profit sharing uh well

ideas so so this is this is interesting

hold on this is interesting you're right

because this is actually the most

difficult aspect in my opinion of of

like trying to create the most ethical

way of existing under a capitalist

organization of the economy while you

are also productive uh and and you're

you're doing like an owned and operated

Media Company where you are the product

so I hired Dan as a consultant yeah just

to help us out to get things uh and I

have hired people as well so then so

then we're PR I'm profit sharing with

him how much profit am I sharing so the

way I do it and I think this is this

will be uh I mean this is this is

instructive for many others as well the

way I do it like the most ethical way to

do it is basically try to make an assessment

assessment

um sure there's Market considerations on

the one hand like what the normal wage

would look like but that is like the the

minimum you know what I mean that is

like the minimum that is the the worst

possible amount to pay someone in in the

form of wages in my opinion Okay so

you have the market considerations on

the one side

um which I don't necessarily care too

much about

um on the other side you have your

productive output right let's say you

were making ten dollars before Dan came

on and now that Dan came on they're

making that wouldn't be measurable no no

I know I know I completely agree with

you yeah I know

um which is why I'm saying it's it's a

tricky situation it's almost impossible

yeah yeah well technically the other

side is also very cruel but there's like

normal because in social democracy

people are fairly compensated it's not

cruel in my opinion

no there's I I don't think I I think we

we people can be more or less

fairly compensated but like generally

speaking they'd be more fairly

compensated than what we would see today

yes in comparison to the United States

of America which technically would be a

mixed market or social democracy social

democracies in other countries there is

better compensation so here's the

unintended consequence of that due to

you know regulation government

regulations if I'm if I'm just hiring

Dan to come in and help me with cameras

and stuff and I have to cut him in on

profit share people are not going to

hire as many people they're going to

think a lot more before they bring more

people on well can I can I just chime in

real quick just to clarify this point

are you still talking about the the

period of time where I was working as a

contractor yes I haven't gone to the

full time yet well we're going to move

to that right I will just say that at

the time I was essentially operating as

my own business as well because you

weren't my only client at this right

okay I I did that professionally for a

lot of people and you were one of many

people that I would come and do shows

with until you offered me a full-time

thing so just because we're using the

specific example I just wanted to

clarify that because I think that

matters and what the dynamic was when we

were initially working together I don't

think that matters in such that I'm more

focused just on the profit sharing the

reason why I was bringing up the the

implications on to a business and

business owner of that okay but the

reason why I was bringing up the revenue

is because let's say you were making 10

you're making ten dollars Dan comes on

now you're making 15 yeah right Dan has

brought in five extra dollars of revenue

for you and I think that uh the the best

possible way

to to engage with that would be to cut

Dan in on uh like offer Dan living wages

plus uh whatever

uh whatever Dan has brought in in the

form of Revenue this is a big problem

and and that moves that moves into

Direction like you make and then later

down the line you make a hundred uh

thousand dollars and and moves with now yeah

yeah

here's where this seems more like it's a

nice Theory but like in application it

makes no sense who decides how much

value he's brought how could you

possibly decide that if my show is

growing Dan joins and let's say yeah I

now I'm making 15 but the show was

organically growing how how can I how

can I attribute all five of that to Dan

you're absolutely

50 with him this is this is something

that I do not have an answer for either

which is why it doesn't like I said

which is why like I said you make do

with uh you you try to do your very best

can I can I be this seems like a big

problem to say you don't have a solution

for if you're advocating for a socialist

society I I agree which is why I always

seem like it's ready well can I just

chime in on this this isn't theoretical

there are there are lots of companies

that do do profit sharing I do this I

know but it's not like but like let's

say this and they have various methods

of how they do it the way I there are

ways to do it that makes sense I do that

the way that socialism does it in the

purest sense is like Dan joined 10 to 15

Dan gets half of the 15. so that's his

that's his even this is if we're talking

piercings if we're talking if we're

talking pure Theory yeah I would rather

have an imperfect structure that still

absolutely offers it but it doesn't work

well if you don't know how people get

paid how does it even work the

capitalist structure also is imperfect

in the exact same world functioning at

least yes I know but the the idea that

like the other structure would not

function is not correct especially when

we're telling you that even under a

capitalist organization economy there's

plenty of different ways of doing it one

of the most successful ones that I also

have have is a Cooperative right I have

a Cooperative uh collectively organized

podcast for example where we just split

it five ways regardless obviously my

output in that situation given that I am

uh the the uh like the host with the

largest audience would significantly

outweigh my producers for example who uh

could be paid uh with a very fair very

fat Market uh wage right Market wage

plus uh Market wage times three is what

I could pay him and it would still be

significantly less than what he gets

paid now yeah because we're we're

cutting him in uh five ways we're

splitting everything five ways yeah and

and that is a perfectly viable way to do

it because I think that's very generous

but I don't think you should be forced

to do that I think that I think you

should be forced to pay him what we've

determined as a minimum wage where he

can live in where he lives in a in a

generous it goes beyond wages as well

there's also another aspect of this that

uh many people fail to consider which is

decision making so uh there's also the

structure of decision making the the

structure of autonomy when we are

setting up the time for when we are

going to shoot the podcast like everyone

has to be on board with it it has to

work around every single person's

schedule these are all uh scheduling

conflicts exist usually but it's like

um in in good faith every single person

is like giving their most uh giving

their all and It ultimately I think

creates a pretty pretty solid product

let me ask you

so do you acknowledge that in this

socialist uh fear theoretical country

where I where I go from 10 to 15 and I

give Dan 15. hypothetic for any worker

joining that I as a business owner I

would be less likely to be hiring people

certainly and that's not good is it no I

don't agree with that I don't think

that's a necessarily a bad thing at all

because like I I don't know because like

I've gone through a lot of people that

did not work out um

and they were they they were hired on

like uh let's say um

exploratory so so is it at will

employment in this situation in this

structure you can you can still of

course like you can still uh have issues

with uh with an employee and fire them

there's it's ironic because like Japan

for example is like a most capitalist

country on the planet and yet uh in

Japan they have this like very unique

culture where getting into a place of

business is very difficult but once you

actually have made it into the

corporation they don't fire you they

can't fire you they never fire you what

they do is they they ostracize you and

and make you into a social Pariah within

the company right and and try to get you

to quit is it because they're trying to

avoid paying some kind of severance or

is it just no it's like it's both

cultural and I if I'm not mistaken it

could literally legal implications as

well but it but it works right okay it

technically works but I'm saying why is it

hey why is it not a good thing so as a

business owner I think the fact that I

was not super hesitant to hire lots of

people find the crew that works I work

local a lot of people it did not who

were not compatible so I was able to

burn through enough people to find a

team that that worked right so if if I

was so hesitant to hire people because I

have to profit share with them I would

do like a way more strenuous interview

process but it seems way longer you're

making an argument for why it's stronger

like I don't deal with though at all you

lucked out with Dan I don't think that's

an argument because first of all it's

good that people can go try a bunch of

jobs before they try find one that works

and as an employer it's good to be able

to try a bunch of people do you find the

right fit for employees if I had to go

through these strenuous process to find

each one of them this podcast may very

well likely not exist as it does today

might not exist as at all I I disagree

with you on that for sure I think that I

think that it's better to have a

strenuous process of of ensuring that

you have for life even for like the most

entry-level job

um yeah I think that it's but that

doesn't know it doesn't that result in

people not getting work so yes it will

so there's but then but then we're

talking about like an entirely separate

way of of organizing the economy why is

it better why is it better that I have

we're talking about hypotheticals yeah

in this situation yeah so it can like I

can just hypothesize that you found Dan

not even no no we're not talking well

we're talking hypothetically but we're

talking you found Dan so you clearly but

we went through a lot of people before

we found that yeah well you could have

arrived at Dan as well is what I'm

saying it would have taken a lot

stronger and the business might not have

survived okay

so there was a point where the podcast

almost got wrapped up yeah so why is it

better in theory to have that extraneous

of a hiring process than being able to

kind of just people try things out

um it's only this is only one aspect of

it but what you're talking about like

the extraneous hiring process also would

exist under a social democracy as well

it should exist in some form under

social democracy as well like why some

level of protection from from being

fired but so in social democracy you're

not rev sharing so there's like this big

thing that you're like I'm a business

owner I've created this business for my

own sweat and Blood and Tears over the

last 10 years and I'm making a lot of

money I gotta hire this guy who I don't

know anything about and I gotta cut him

in on my profits that doesn't exist in

social democracy

so the risk to me as the business owner

is way way way but it's much smaller to

a much smaller degree because it it's

supposed to exist through unions and

once again it's not just Revenue share

but everyone always everyone always

focuses on that aspect of it but rev

sharing comes in the form of benefits

rev sharing comes in the form of like

how much we invest in r d for example or

what kind of r d initiatives we invest

in all of these decisions are made by a

board well that's all regulatory

responsibility to the shareholders that

is not regulated under social democracy

this this is the this is the major point

I mean by register then because you see

in our example like in Germany they have

the a Trade union representative uh that

that sits on the board of Executives but

that's only one that's only one aspect

of a uh a larger board that is still

representing the interests of of the

shareholders those who own the company

who never have seen the company they can

you know even globally own it right so

having one vote in that situation is not

as good in my opinion as having all of

the vote all of the Power making these

decision decisions as a collective

something that kind of is not legally

enforced here right in your structure

but you kind you abide by because you're

a nice guy many people are not going to

be like that many and I'm saying that we

shouldn't rely on the magnanimity

we're going back to this point because

we don't have to with the right well

even an example let me ask you the one I

mentioned it still yields terrible like

still is susceptible it's not a social

democracy Capital let me ask you that

yes it is Germany Germany arguably is yes

America is a social democracy as well

the problem is like American social

democracy is a is a laughable uh example

so let's not use it then but it's going

back why is it better because I don't

think I ever got an answer

to have a strenuous hiring process

why is it better to have a shinies uh

you are when you engage in in commodity

production with another person I think

it's perfectly valid to ensure that this

person is not going to be like a scumbag

and cheat you [ __ ] you over I think it's

it's good business practice even on a

capitalist sense to ensure that the

person that you're hiring is not like

like some [ __ ] well right because

that's just um yeah that's just common

sense and the more you do acknowledge

that so you do acknowledge the heads and

hesitancy to hire people I do I do I

don't know what okay I don't think it's

about I guess a bit of it because again

because and as companies grow you have

different people in different units that

also are you know uh engaging in hiring

like it's just that workers now have

more of a say in which direction the

company should go and that's a good

thing it's not bad for me for like a

week and on my business I spent five

years building I don't want to give him

a decision on where the company goes

I think that why should he have that

right you know what I mean I I'm not

saying the janitor comes in and

unilaterally makes decisions that's not

how that works but I'm curious how it

does work so it's a it's a it's

communication the other person is a

human being as well if you have a major

disagreement then you look for someone

else to work in that position this is

how it works okay

you don't have the you don't have the

the the fear of like subsistence living

at the other end of that bargain whereas

like you have better amenities better

protections and and therefore you're

more comfortable with good living

conditions because

the idea is what I'm already saying that

I don't think that makes socialism

unique because we can provide good

living conditions and benefits can but

we haven't now that by the way one

aspect of social democracy that we've

talked about is the domestic one we have

yet to even uncover the other much worse

side of social democracies which is uh

resource extraction in the third world

and imperialism uh and and that is a

necessity under global capitalism and

that is the reason why we have the Haves

and the have-nots on the domestic level

you believe that there is a regulatory

agency that can make things more

conversation about the third world stuff

because I'm not super familiar with it

perfectly fine but like I can but you

understand that like that's a part of

everything well so exploiting in the

truest sense of the word is definitely

what's been happening even even on a

capitalist understanding that's like

hyper exploitation clearly I think that

all humans on this Earth deserve um rights and comfort and yeah and right

rights and comfort and yeah and right yeah you know what I mean it is funny

yeah you know what I mean it is funny one thing I will mention in the domestic

one thing I will mention in the domestic you know going back to the labor force

you know going back to the labor force thing is like we're so susceptible and

thing is like we're so susceptible and and so programmed under capitalist Dogma

and so programmed under capitalist Dogma that we refuse to see a world outside of

that we refuse to see a world outside of it and we're so captured in that uh in

it and we're so captured in that uh in that world view that uh oftentimes the

that world view that uh oftentimes the the number one counter against a

the number one counter against a socialist governance or democracy in the

socialist governance or democracy in the workplace or anything like that is

workplace or anything like that is always like what do you want the [ __ ]

always like what do you want the [ __ ] janitor just came in yesterday to make

janitor just came in yesterday to make these decisions like no one said he's

these decisions like no one said he's the CEO you want to understand how it

the CEO you want to understand how it works because you keep saying for real

works because you keep saying for real share

okay here is an example when I first started the podcast I was originally

started the podcast I was originally undercast it was [ __ ] terrible we

undercast it was [ __ ] terrible we quit we started our own podcast me and

quit we started our own podcast me and will we need a producer because we don't

will we need a producer because we don't have that skill set we need someone to

have that skill set we need someone to change the cameras and maybe do a little

change the cameras and maybe do a little bit of uh you know someone to post the

bit of uh you know someone to post the videos do the captions titling

videos do the captions titling thumbnailing right so

thumbnailing right so in that situation we looked for someone

in that situation we looked for someone we found someone and we were splitting

we found someone and we were splitting it three ways we were splitting the

it three ways we were splitting the revenue three ways anything that we made

revenue three ways anything that we made right and even before that I was also

right and even before that I was also giving March money as well to make sure

giving March money as well to make sure that he like at least had a [ __ ] you

that he like at least had a [ __ ] you know had had a revenue opportunity even

know had had a revenue opportunity even when we weren't generating a lot of

when we weren't generating a lot of Revenue okay right so what did I do

Revenue okay right so what did I do after that the podcast grew fear and now

after that the podcast grew fear and now has five cast members we brought in

has five cast members we brought in Austin show my good friend and cutie

Austin show my good friend and cutie Cinderella and when that happened us

Cinderella and when that happened us three we got together and we had a

three we got together and we had a conversation okay do we need more hosts

conversation okay do we need more hosts do we think that this will be beneficial

do we think that this will be beneficial right right do we think that we will end

right right do we think that we will end up making you know more Revenue

up making you know more Revenue generating more Revenue in the long run

generating more Revenue in the long run right will we have people with unique uh

right will we have people with unique uh creative ideas like I care more about

creative ideas like I care more about the creative output than anything else

the creative output than anything else than Revenue I haven't even touched the

than Revenue I haven't even touched the [ __ ] Revenue that I've generated from

[ __ ] Revenue that I've generated from the podcast

the podcast um and we got together and we had a

um and we got together and we had a conversation and I think that

conversation and I think that that is a significantly more Equitable

that is a significantly more Equitable and just and better way of doing

and just and better way of doing business than me hiring March me giving

business than me hiring March me giving Will some money originally like a fat

Will some money originally like a fat salary or maybe cutting in on the Rev

salary or maybe cutting in on the Rev share for him and then giving March like

share for him and then giving March like a super high [ __ ] wage right way

a super high [ __ ] wage right way higher than like the average producer

higher than like the average producer and then and then making these decisions

and then and then making these decisions single-handedly let me add another

single-handedly let me add another aspect to your example let's say you

aspect to your example let's say you need to hire a cleaner to come clean the

need to hire a cleaner to come clean the office

office she works for the podcast she comes she

she works for the podcast she comes she cleans the office she works full time

cleans the office she works full time how do you pay her

how do you pay her um the the cleaner side of this is not

um the the cleaner side of this is not like I mean I don't have office like

like I mean I don't have office like that but the janitorial services

that but the janitorial services theoretically in a theoretical situation

theoretically in a theoretical situation where we have someone full-time that

where we have someone full-time that needs to do it yeah we would we would

needs to do it yeah we would we would also get together as a unit okay the

also get together as a unit okay the existing company would get together and

existing company would get together and decide what level just like hiring the

decide what level just like hiring the two other hosts we decide what level of

two other hosts we decide what level of Revenue Cuts we are going to take from

Revenue Cuts we are going to take from our five percent to give you're making

our five percent to give you're making her the other part it's not really that

her the other part it's not really that different than a salary and and once

different than a salary and and once they get that job and there are many

they get that job and there are many different ways of doing this but once

different ways of doing this but once they get that job and let's say they

they get that job and let's say they worked for two years three years then

worked for two years three years then they have a say in the revenue sharing

they have a say in the revenue sharing structure and the power sharing

structure and the power sharing structure as well because it doesn't

structure as well because it doesn't have to happen like instantaneously a

have to happen like instantaneously a lot of people forget that my problem is

lot of people forget that my problem is that in the Socialist uh economy this is

that in the Socialist uh economy this is being regulated by the government people

being regulated by the government people can get together now and decide to do

can get together now and decide to do whatever the [ __ ] they want in their

whatever the [ __ ] they want in their company and that's great you know but in

company and that's great you know but in the socialistic economy there's rules

the socialistic economy there's rules that says you need to pay her x amount

that says you need to pay her x amount of rev share what you're saying is not

of rev share what you're saying is not true okay you want to know why yes

true okay you want to know why yes because you want a social democracy

because you want a social democracy which kind of exists and Market

which kind of exists and Market regulation exists under capitalist

regulation exists under capitalist formations and plenty of capital owners

formations and plenty of capital owners hate that as a matter of fact I would

hate that as a matter of fact I would say universally Capital owners hate any

say universally Capital owners hate any kind of Market regulation which is why

kind of Market regulation which is why they choose to erode it as best as they

they choose to erode it as best as they possibly can or they use it to their

possibly can or they use it to their advantage to create an artificial

advantage to create an artificial barrier of entry into certain sectors

barrier of entry into certain sectors I'm saying in a socialist economy

I'm saying in a socialist economy there's going to be laws it's just like

there's going to be laws it's just like there are laws in a capitalist economy

there are laws in a capitalist economy socialism how how

I'm saying the government is telling you how much you need to pay

how much you need to pay the janitor that's not how that would

the janitor that's not how that would work then how would it work because it

work then how would it work because it would be it would be isn't that how how

would be it would be isn't that how how is that functionally different than a

is that functionally different than a minimum wage that's my point that's my

minimum wage that's my point that's my point yeah so well I think but socialism

point yeah so well I think but socialism is much more radical we're talking about

is much more radical we're talking about social it doesn't have to be yeah

social it doesn't have to be yeah moving America to a purely socialistic

moving America to a purely socialistic Society instead of my thing is I think

Society instead of my thing is I think social democracy is better than

social democracy is better than socialism and you guys are explaining

socialism and you guys are explaining something to that to me sounds a lot

something to that to me sounds a lot like something that we can already do

like something that we can already do without this huge undertaking of

without this huge undertaking of changing our economy from a capitalist

changing our economy from a capitalist to social democracy one to a socialism

to social democracy one to a socialism one you're talking about a minimum wage

one you're talking about a minimum wage we already do that and we can already do

we already do that and we can already do better of that with that via regulations

better of that with that via regulations but why the reason why we haven't been

but why the reason why we haven't been able to is because like I will I think

able to is because like I will I think the best way to explain it is this way

the best way to explain it is this way okay

okay you like capitalism with socialist

you like capitalism with socialist characteristics I like socialism with

characteristics I like socialism with capitalist character yo you just said

capitalist character yo you just said that so we're both social so that

that so we're both social so that doesn't mean that I'm no friend I still

doesn't mean that I'm no friend I still believe that the government good

believe that the government good difference now you said you like social

difference now you said you like social media is no I I said I like socialism

media is no I I said I like socialism yeah with capitalist characteristics

yeah with capitalist characteristics meaning that the governing the the the

meaning that the governing the the the governing uh economy like the entire

governing uh economy like the entire economy still revolves around a

economy still revolves around a socialist mode of production where the

socialist mode of production where the owners uh the workers are the owners

owners uh the workers are the owners they own the means of production they

they own the means of production they have the they have a say in their

have the they have a say in their benefits they have a saying

benefits they have a saying though well you there will still

though well you there will still obviously be protections against like

obviously be protections against like unjust firings and whatnot and there

unjust firings and whatnot and there should be certainly there are no and

should be certainly there are no and there are now as well America is a great

there are now as well America is a great example in California there are really

example in California there are really America is a great example however of

America is a great example however of like how there aren't which how it

like how there aren't which how it shouldn't be and it shouldn't be that

shouldn't be and it shouldn't be that way exactly and but the reason why it's

way exactly and but the reason why it's not that way is because we have

not that way is because we have capitalism with like laughable socialist

capitalism with like laughable socialist characters it's very interesting that

characters it's very interesting that you're saying you want socialism with

you're saying you want socialism with capital capitalist character capitalist

capital capitalist character capitalist characteristics in the sense that not

characteristics in the sense that not the it doesn't touch the means of

the it doesn't touch the means of production or the the mode of production

production or the the mode of production but but offers uh and offers an

but but offers uh and offers an abundance of resources and offers the

abundance of resources and offers the the idea that you have freedom one of

the idea that you have freedom one of the major problems with former

the major problems with former historic socialist projects have always

historic socialist projects have always been commodity production being

been commodity production being streamlined on necessity and not

streamlined on necessity and not necessarily silly things like lighter

necessarily silly things like lighter production industries that revolve

production industries that revolve around making uh I don't know chocolate

around making uh I don't know chocolate and and coffee coffee was a major

and and coffee coffee was a major problem in in in uh East Germany so like

problem in in in uh East Germany so like things of that nature that people need

things of that nature that people need um I think those are things that we need

um I think those are things that we need to work on uh and and that capitalism I

to work on uh and and that capitalism I think has done a much better job at

think has done a much better job at offering uh to people and that has a

offering uh to people and that has a very sedating uh influence on the masses

very sedating uh influence on the masses I don't think it's humorism I don't see

I don't think it's humorism I don't see what's so great and humanizing about

what's so great and humanizing about hiring a janitor for point zero zero

hiring a janitor for point zero zero zero zero one five percent of the

zero zero one five percent of the company

company what do you I don't understand wait

what do you I don't understand wait that's not what I said you just you just

that's not what I said you just you just made that a certainly but we're saying

made that a certainly but we're saying there's a minimum wage

there's a minimum wage there's a minimum equity share that that

there's a minimum equity share that that janitor would need to get well are you

janitor would need to get well are you talking about in comparison to doing

talking about in comparison to doing we're talking about minimum wage

we're talking about minimum wage right well but comparing it to

right well but comparing it to uh a model where employees are cut in on

uh a model where employees are cut in on the profit is what you're saying

the profit is what you're saying comparing that uh what we have now to

comparing that uh what we have now to that yeah okay so I mean I would just

that yeah okay so I mean I would just point out that well so first of all you

point out that well so first of all you would have talked about it a lot earlier

would have talked about it a lot earlier about like well what companies do that

about like well what companies do that there's

there's a lot of examples of bigger firms that

a lot of examples of bigger firms that do do this kind of thing okay um a great

do do this kind of thing okay um a great one is Southwest Airlines did you know

one is Southwest Airlines did you know that they have a massive employee profit

that they have a massive employee profit sharing model how does it work what's

sharing model how does it work what's the detail so it's a once a year payment

the detail so it's a once a year payment and they look at how they did the last

and they look at how they did the last year and then a certain percentage of

year and then a certain percentage of the profits they distribute as bonuses

the profits they distribute as bonuses to all of the employees and it's fairly

to all of the employees and it's fairly significant dude that's great but in a

significant dude that's great but in a socialist country how that's it that's

socialist country how that's it that's all you want

all you want because that's easy I can do I can you

because that's easy I can do I can you know what I mean like like what are you

know what I mean like like what are you asking for when you're asking for

asking for when you're asking for socialism just a bonus fun based on just

socialism just a bonus fun based on just based on profit because that's easy uh

based on profit because that's easy uh no not necessarily but I I mean listen I

no not necessarily but I I mean listen I wasn't trying to make any assertion

wasn't trying to make any assertion about that I was just trying to give you

about that I was just trying to give you an example of you were asking earlier

an example of you were asking earlier like what companies do that I think

like what companies do that I think here's a big one that does it I think

here's a big one that does it I think that's awesome and I'd even be in favor

that's awesome and I'd even be in favor of regulating that and saying yo you

of regulating that and saying yo you need to put aside like five percent or

need to put aside like five percent or ten percent or whatever I don't care of

ten percent or whatever I don't care of your profits to distribute even amongst

your profits to distribute even amongst your employees is that socialism no

your employees is that socialism no that's all it takes that would be some

that's all it takes that would be some aspect of socialization especially if

aspect of socialization especially if it's like earned by the workers that

it's like earned by the workers that have some level of uh of collective

have some level of uh of collective bargaining it just seems so bureaucratic

bargaining it just seems so bureaucratic I don't understand the workplace

I don't understand the workplace bureaucracy still is very much the

bureaucracy still is very much the foundation of an a Bourgeois State as

foundation of an a Bourgeois State as well it's just like that but like we we

well it's just like that but like we we don't think I'm talking like this is

don't think I'm talking like this is bureaucratic bureaucracy on bureaucracy

bureaucratic bureaucracy on bureaucracy on bureaucracy no I don't understand

on bureaucracy no I don't understand your workplace I'll tell you that's not

your workplace I'll tell you that's not good enough then what is I don't

good enough then what is I don't understand uh there is I think uh it's

understand uh there is I think uh it's called People's Republic of Walmart it's

called People's Republic of Walmart it's a really good book

a really good book um and and so like the title there was a

um and and so like the title there was a genuine problem in the USSR with how to

genuine problem in the USSR with how to deal with uh crops and Agriculture and

deal with uh crops and Agriculture and Central planning unfortunately had

Central planning unfortunately had limitations at the time because we did

limitations at the time because we did not have the computational power one of

not have the computational power one of the ironically uh uh it like Steps in in

the ironically uh uh it like Steps in in the right direction was actually coming

the right direction was actually coming from Chile

from Chile which then got their own 911 50 years

which then got their own 911 50 years ago but we won't get into that because

ago but we won't get into that because you know socialism bad

you know socialism bad um

um but uh there was there wasn't enough

but uh there was there wasn't enough computational power and uh to to

computational power and uh to to implement centralized planning at that

implement centralized planning at that time effectively and it led to plenty of

time effectively and it led to plenty of issues right so

issues right so ironically nowadays we are we we have

ironically nowadays we are we we have centralized planning

centralized planning inside of Walmart inside of Amazon and

inside of Walmart inside of Amazon and uh the these companies are generating a

uh the these companies are generating a ton of Revenue that they could cut their

ton of Revenue that they could cut their workers into maybe they would be much

workers into maybe they would be much smaller maybe they could be maybe they

smaller maybe they could be maybe they would be much smaller than minimum that

would be much smaller than minimum that would make it socialist that's what I'm

would make it socialist that's what I'm curious about I don't I don't think

curious about I don't I don't think there's like a exact uh dollar value

there's like a exact uh dollar value rather than because you're looking for

rather than because you're looking for an exact dollar value rather than I'm

an exact dollar value rather than I'm talking about an entirely different way

talking about an entirely different way of of thinking like there's the law

of of thinking like there's the law there's a law in a socialist country

there's a law in a socialist country that says You must do I'll give you I'll

that says You must do I'll give you I'll give you one example I'll give you a

give you one example I'll give you a good example from your life right

good example from your life right right now

right now you've cam

you've cam all right cam does wonderful Goose gaps

all right cam does wonderful Goose gaps and and Photoshop splaps we love cam

and and Photoshop splaps we love cam thank you and let's give it up let's

thank you and let's give it up let's give everything real quick yeah I love

give everything real quick yeah I love you guys I love you guys

you guys I love you guys so

so technically if you were interested in

technically if you were interested in maximizing your Revenue

maximizing your Revenue what you could have done instead of

what you could have done instead of hiring cam was Outsource it to Fiverr or

hiring cam was Outsource it to Fiverr or I don't know get like uh you know some

I don't know get like uh you know some some Filipino graphic design company if

some Filipino graphic design company if you were one of those like Tick Tock

you were one of those like Tick Tock guys out there who's like you know I

guys out there who's like you know I fired my entire workplace in like

fired my entire workplace in like [ __ ] hired everyone in Pakistan for

[ __ ] hired everyone in Pakistan for you know five cents an hour it's [ __ ]

you know five cents an hour it's [ __ ] sick like you could be one of those guys

sick like you could be one of those guys and do that but the reason why you

and do that but the reason why you didn't do that is because you feel as

didn't do that is because you feel as though correctly that cam uh yields

though correctly that cam uh yields better output hey hey no chewing she

better output hey hey no chewing she almost I caught her no you do it no

almost I caught her no you do it no Alfredo you got to enforce the law on

Alfredo you got to enforce the law on her no

her no Alfredo has no interest you have a

Alfredo has no interest you have a monopoly on violence sorry

it's okay I'll welcome uh a welcome uh welcome to welcome bring yeah okay

welcome to welcome bring yeah okay please continue uh how old I am so

please continue uh how old I am so please don't do that and and there

please don't do that and and there should be restrictions on that uh

should be restrictions on that uh certainly like there should be

certainly like there should be restrictions on being able to do that

restrictions on being able to do that um being able to just like completely

um being able to just like completely Outsource your your workplace

Outsource your your workplace um those restrictions can come in a

um those restrictions can come in a capitalist country in the form of

capitalist country in the form of tariffs which many do protectionist

tariffs which many do protectionist trade uh or protocols exist globally

trade uh or protocols exist globally with the exception of the United States

with the exception of the United States of America which has some protectionist

of America which has some protectionist policies but uh others that uh I mean

policies but uh others that uh I mean most protections policies still benefit

most protections policies still benefit the interest of capital rather than the

the interest of capital rather than the working class there

working class there um and and trade Partnerships have

um and and trade Partnerships have created a structure where like labor has

created a structure where like labor has been uh outsourced overseas our

been uh outsourced overseas our manufacturing capabilities of being

manufacturing capabilities of being completely outsourced these are very bad

completely outsourced these are very bad things that exist exclusively due to uh

things that exist exclusively due to uh exclusive due to greed that you

exclusive due to greed that you understand

understand uh under under capitalism

uh under under capitalism that needs to constantly be put in check

that needs to constantly be put in check but a government that is designed a

but a government that is designed a government that's full of rich people

government that's full of rich people that is interested in in their own uh in

that is interested in in their own uh in their own wealth and wealth accumulation

their own wealth and wealth accumulation that has stock options and trades like

that has stock options and trades like Paul Pelosi and uh and and has you know

Paul Pelosi and uh and and has you know that gets jobs for their family members

that gets jobs for their family members and Goldman Sachs like Ted Cruz and and

and Goldman Sachs like Ted Cruz and and many other examples is never going to

many other examples is never going to is never going to truly represent the

is never going to truly represent the interests of the working class and is

interests of the working class and is always going to put the interests of

always going to put the interests of capital ahead of the interest of the

capital ahead of the interest of the working class you will never be able to

working class you will never be able to have a real democracy that's the

have a real democracy that's the difference between a Bourgeois democracy

difference between a Bourgeois democracy and a proletarian democracy uh or a

and a proletarian democracy uh or a dictatorship of the proletariat rather

dictatorship of the proletariat rather than a dictatorship of the capital

than a dictatorship of the capital owning class I just want to know how the

owning class I just want to know how the Socialist workplace works it seems so

Socialist workplace works it seems so nebulous when you talk about it why is

nebulous when you talk about it why is it I don't think it's nebulous at all I

it I don't think it's nebulous at all I have a living breathing working example

have a living breathing working example of it that I've given you

of it that I've given you I know but like

I know but like foreign

foreign there's got to be like a constitution

there's got to be like a constitution that says outlines or I don't know

that says outlines or I don't know whatever the [ __ ] you want to write

whatever the [ __ ] you want to write right there's got to be something and it

right there's got to be something and it says like our rule laws that says you

says like our rule laws that says you know this is the minimum that a person

know this is the minimum that a person should get from the company yes and we

should get from the company yes and we should be married to the album it should

should be married to the album it should be married to the productive forces it

be married to the productive forces it should be married to the output that

should be married to the output that should be pegged let me talk about this

should be pegged let me talk about this enough though I don't want to be pegged

enough though I don't want to be pegged to the performance and I think that that

to the performance and I think that that is the best possible way I could work I

is the best possible way I could work I guess my problem on that is like how

guess my problem on that is like how could you possibly enforce that no not

could you possibly enforce that no not even a force how could you possibly even

even a force how could you possibly even um

um uh analyze that like how much how much

uh analyze that like how much how much more uh how much more money are we

more uh how much more money are we making because the janitor comes in

making because the janitor comes in that's where we go to the Walmart

that's where we go to the Walmart example

example um that like we are already completely

um that like we are already completely aware of that we have you know it we

aware of that we have you know it we have actuaries we have uh CPAs that are

have actuaries we have uh CPAs that are working in real time uh making

working in real time uh making mathematical equations to figure out

mathematical equations to figure out exactly what not to pay people

exactly what not to pay people technically

technically um and they could be in a total

um and they could be in a total reorganization of the economy with a

reorganization of the economy with a socialist document so it would work in

socialist document so it would work in the opposite direction okay it's kind of

the opposite direction okay it's kind of like this I I let's move to another talk

like this I I let's move to another talk okay I don't want to bore people wealth

okay I don't want to bore people wealth wealth was one aspect of this right like

wealth was one aspect of this right like we already have property taxes for

we already have property taxes for example in America but we never make

example in America but we never make similar mathematical equations on

similar mathematical equations on capital gains earnings that you make in

capital gains earnings that you make in the stock market wealth accumulation

the stock market wealth accumulation could work in the exact same way as

could work in the exact same way as property taxes and yet we don't have any

property taxes and yet we don't have any mathematicians working on that that's a

mathematicians working on that that's a good idea and and that's a great idea

good idea and and that's a great idea right we'll probably do that in in a lot

right we'll probably do that in in a lot of countries that aren't socialists

of countries that aren't socialists um well this is not just the distinction

um well this is not just the distinction between socialism because there is we

between socialism because there is we talked about that we talked a lot about

talked about that we talked a lot about Theory but then we also have to talk

Theory but then we also have to talk about like what is possible right at

about like what is possible right at least in the short term and that is the

least in the short term and that is the reason why I always try to tell more uh

reason why I always try to tell more uh rugged more more rigid more um uh

rugged more more rigid more um uh passionate socialist that's where I'm

passionate socialist that's where I'm coming from to cooperate I know to

coming from to cooperate I know to cooperate with people that are also

cooperate with people that are also perceived as radicals in America like

perceived as radicals in America like there's a reason why Bernie Sanders who

there's a reason why Bernie Sanders who has been a socialist entire life

has been a socialist entire life basically is only implemented instituted

basically is only implemented instituted or advocated for Social Democratic

or advocated for Social Democratic reforms in the United States of America

reforms in the United States of America that's it that's the only there's the

that's it that's the only there's the only reason why he's done that is so

only reason why he's done that is so that he can

that he can uh he can he can

uh he can he can Inspire the masses and and create an

Inspire the masses and and create an opportunity where workers have more

opportunity where workers have more control over their own lives and develop

control over their own lives and develop autonomy and inevitably develop class

autonomy and inevitably develop class Consciousness creating ample opportunity

Consciousness creating ample opportunity for uh if you uh believe in that sort of

for uh if you uh believe in that sort of thing socialist Revolution

thing socialist Revolution right but that would never happen if the

right but that would never happen if the people were were happy with their

people were were happy with their conditions I feel like that would not

conditions I feel like that would not happen but anyway so let me ask you this

happen but anyway so let me ask you this uh to Peg this down even more in a

uh to Peg this down even more in a socialist workplace a socialized

socialist workplace a socialized workplace certain jobs are still going

workplace certain jobs are still going to get paid more than others right

to get paid more than others right yeah absolutely oh [ __ ] okay

yeah absolutely oh [ __ ] okay yeah

yeah so there's still going to be class

so there's still going to be class they'll be class right they'll be class

they'll be class right they'll be class distinctions in a socialist no the class

distinctions in a socialist no the class distinction is not on pay that's a

distinction is not on pay that's a that's a a liberal uh understanding

that's a a liberal uh understanding that's actually why people be like

that's actually why people be like you're I see people like you're the rich

you're I see people like you're the rich dude and the Porsche and I'm the and I'm

dude and the Porsche and I'm the and I'm the working class dude great question

the working class dude great question great question you don't think people

great question you don't think people will see that so social hierarchies are

will see that so social hierarchies are inevitable there will be different kinds

inevitable there will be different kinds of hierarchies what you're talking about

of hierarchies what you're talking about is is perfectly valid but the class

is is perfectly valid but the class distinction in a socialist economy is

distinction in a socialist economy is not is is completely abolished because

not is is completely abolished because the idea is and there will be those who

the idea is and there will be those who have and those who have not is what

have and those who have not is what you're saying at least in the end people

you're saying at least in the end people everyone will have but every people that

everyone will have but every people that have more exactly people will have a lot

have more exactly people will have a lot more yes some people that want to have

more yes some people that want to have more will be able to have more and even

more will be able to have more and even a lot more yes this is why I always be

a lot more yes this is why I always be part of a class this is why I always

part of a class this is why I always talk about no because they have no

talk about no because they have no control over the lives of others in that

control over the lives of others in that regard I find this idea that like people

regard I find this idea that like people in a socialist country who are have a

in a socialist country who are have a lot more they're able to make a lot more

lot more they're able to make a lot more money somehow won't be influenced by

money somehow won't be influenced by power or influence or greed that somehow

power or influence or greed that somehow and there's Society no matter what

and there's Society no matter what happens that will turn into capitalism

happens that will turn into capitalism is what you're saying I think there will

is what you're saying I think there will be a there will be these people are

be a there will be these people are going to be influencing the

going to be influencing the concentration to benefit themselves yes

concentration to benefit themselves yes um the best way to stop that from

um the best way to stop that from happening is democracy democracy in the

happening is democracy democracy in the workplace actual like we cannot even

workplace actual like we cannot even imagine Mark Fisher once said it's

imagine Mark Fisher once said it's easier to imagine the end of the world

easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism

than to imagine the end of capitalism and he was right uh this is this is

and he was right uh this is this is capitalist realism because

capitalist realism because we are having this argument

we are having this argument within the boundaries and within the

within the boundaries and within the cultural understanding of like existing

cultural understanding of like existing capitalism today and the reality is

capitalism today and the reality is uh well there you we have no way you and

uh well there you we have no way you and I as it stands I have no way of like

I as it stands I have no way of like helping you try to imagine a world where

helping you try to imagine a world where like each individual worker has more

like each individual worker has more autonomy and does not suffer from

autonomy and does not suffer from alienation you don't think it workplace

alienation you don't think it workplace you don't we would offer them plenty of

you don't we would offer them plenty of more educational opportunities plenty

more educational opportunities plenty more free time

more free time um I guess the example you can point to

um I guess the example you can point to in in terms of difference uh different

in in terms of difference uh different degrees of socialization would be a uh a

degrees of socialization would be a uh a person doing contracted work at Uber

person doing contracted work at Uber okay to make ends meet in America versus

okay to make ends meet in America versus like a regular unionized uh factory

like a regular unionized uh factory worker in Germany the level of autonomy

worker in Germany the level of autonomy that they have and the level of of

that they have and the level of of interest that they have and the level of

interest that they have and the level of Engagement that they have in a workplace

Engagement that they have in a workplace democracy or some form of it is

democracy or some form of it is drastically different than the

drastically different than the contracted Uber employee their world

contracted Uber employee their world view is drastically different their

view is drastically different their democracy yields uh drastically

democracy yields uh drastically different results as a consequence but

different results as a consequence but let's be realistic We're Not Gonna

let's be realistic We're Not Gonna spring into our alternate reality where

spring into our alternate reality where capitalism isn't doesn't we're not

capitalism isn't doesn't we're not dominate though which is why which is

dominate though which is why which is why I always Advocate which is part of

why I always Advocate which is part of why I'm saying no no because that's why

why I'm saying no no because that's why I always advocate for for that is always

I always advocate for for that is always advocate for in the interim Social

advocate for in the interim Social Democratic reforms that will yield more

Democratic reforms that will yield more opportunities for uh that will yield

opportunities for uh that will yield more opportunities for for uh uh for

more opportunities for for uh uh for workers to organize

because I think it's interesting so in a socialist country there's going to be

socialist country there's going to be people who make a lot more

people who make a lot more and within a company are they exploiting

and within a company are they exploiting their workers the only the CEO the

their workers the only the CEO the founder of a car company he makes a lot

founder of a car company he makes a lot more than the workers

more than the workers as long as it is democratically

as long as it is democratically organized in the sense that like uh

organized in the sense that like uh every single person is like no you're

every single person is like no you're you're a productive output in this

you're a productive output in this circumstance is significantly higher

circumstance is significantly higher than us then yeah that that would be how

than us then yeah that that would be how do they determine that

do they determine that through a democratic process they have

through a democratic process they have like a vote for everybody and the

like a vote for everybody and the company has equal uh ballot power

company has equal uh ballot power uh depending on uh like how long you've

uh depending on uh like how long you've worked at the company and and things of

worked at the company and and things of that nature these are different

that nature these are different formations at this point like this is

formations at this point like this is now we're getting into uh like how do we

now we're getting into uh like how do we organize uh our workplace and like how

organize uh our workplace and like how much power do we give each individual

much power do we give each individual vote in the workplace yes they would

vote in the workplace yes they would have one vote but ultimately

have one vote but ultimately um what are the matters that they are

um what are the matters that they are tasked with uh voting on and there's a

tasked with uh voting on and there's a like even in unions there's a structure

like even in unions there's a structure right like every single person does have

right like every single person does have a vote the rank and file will always

a vote the rank and file will always vote but there's still a negotiations

vote but there's still a negotiations committee there's still someone engaging

committee there's still someone engaging in the contract negotiations there's

in the contract negotiations there's still elections being held inside of the

still elections being held inside of the Union does that make sense it does and

Union does that make sense it does and but here does this make sense yeah

but here does this make sense yeah you're inside and I want to ask you Dan

you're inside and I want to ask you Dan because I I'm curious about yours

because I I'm curious about yours you're inside a big company let's just

you're inside a big company let's just say they make cars there's tons of

say they make cars there's tons of employees there

employees there the the CEO founder he makes a lot more

the the CEO founder he makes a lot more than the employees

than the employees do you think that uh the leaders should

do you think that uh the leaders should make more than the workers Dan

make more than the workers Dan uh well it just kind of depends on lead

uh well it just kind of depends on lead I mean there's

I mean there's I think there's Nuance there because I

I think there's Nuance there because I think it really depends on what what the

think it really depends on what what the company looks like how it operates

company looks like how it operates um

um should should the CEO who is on a

should should the CEO who is on a day-to-day basis working and managing a

day-to-day basis working and managing a company make more money it works the

company make more money it works the same hours as the production people I

same hours as the production people I mean with more responsibility I think

mean with more responsibility I think should inherently come with some more

should inherently come with some more privilege however I mean now are we

privilege however I mean now are we talking about a CEO are we talking about

talking about a CEO are we talking about an owner because a lot of owners don't

an owner because a lot of owners don't do [ __ ] no I'm talking about someone

do [ __ ] no I'm talking about someone who's working because the idea of

who's working because the idea of ownership is probably different in a

ownership is probably different in a socialist right and and and and and the

socialist right and and and and and the owners may it may be private or even

owners may it may be private or even maybe a public company and the CEO

maybe a public company and the CEO so you you agree he should make more so

so you you agree he should make more so it just depends there's just there's not

it just depends there's just there's not room for nuance there's just not what do

room for nuance there's just not what do you mean if you're living in a socialist

you mean if you're living in a socialist country this [ __ ] needs to be like

country this [ __ ] needs to be like laid out like there's not really in

laid out like there's not really in every workplace we're going to decide

every workplace we're going to decide this looks like different Nuance under

this looks like different Nuance under capitalism where you have the freedom

capitalism where you have the freedom but there's rules like minimum wage but

but there's rules like minimum wage but with rules exactly you would have the

with rules exactly you would have the similar structure uh Peg to like I'm

similar structure uh Peg to like I'm trying to ask you guys what the rules

trying to ask you guys what the rules like a maximum wage tied directly to

like a maximum wage tied directly to your lowest paid employees what I wanted

your lowest paid employees what I wanted to say though let's say did you hear

to say though let's say did you hear what I said I did maximum wage tied to

what I said I did maximum wage tied to like uh there there could be a situation

like uh there there could be a situation where like a maximum wage could be

where like a maximum wage could be implemented under a socialist structure

implemented under a socialist structure to ensure that every single workplace

to ensure that every single workplace has at least a maximum wage that is

has at least a maximum wage that is directly tied to the lowest played uh

directly tied to the lowest played uh lowest paid worker and their full-blown

lowest paid worker and their full-blown compensations and benefits packages yeah

compensations and benefits packages yeah let's just go back too so the the CEO he

let's just go back too so the the CEO he earns more he has more responsibility oh

earns more he has more responsibility oh Hassan you said he's I don't agree with

Hassan you said he's I don't agree with that either no no I don't agree with

that either no no I don't agree with CEOs having more responsibility or

CEOs having more responsibility or should earn more for the record what you

should earn more for the record what you just said no no no no I if you're a dude

just said no no no no I if you're a dude operator if you're an owner operator and

operator if you're an owner operator and you're literally [ __ ] I was talking

you're literally [ __ ] I was talking to Dan about this earlier before you got

to Dan about this earlier before you got here but it's like the difference

here but it's like the difference between what you do and the difference

between what you do and the difference between like let's say a jewelry

between like let's say a jewelry designer is that a jewelry designer can

designer is that a jewelry designer can Outsource their [ __ ] labor but you

Outsource their [ __ ] labor but you are the main product here which is why

are the main product here which is why which is very hard for you to see it I'm

which is very hard for you to see it I'm using a different example yeah so if

using a different example yeah so if you're a [ __ ] jewelry designer and

you're a [ __ ] jewelry designer and you are responsible for all the

you are responsible for all the beautiful designs in your jewelry that's

beautiful designs in your jewelry that's like super competitive everybody loves

like super competitive everybody loves it everyone wants to buy your [ __ ]

it everyone wants to buy your [ __ ] jewelry right um You can still hire

jewelry right um You can still hire other people like designers to help uh

other people like designers to help uh benefit that process

benefit that process okay where everybody's altruistic yes

okay where everybody's altruistic yes they vote to say the CEO should make

they vote to say the CEO should make more money than us yes well the way that

more money than us yes well the way that works would be slowly but surely as you

works would be slowly but surely as you bring on more people into your company

bring on more people into your company or as you expand and you grow okay in a

or as you expand and you grow okay in a democratic capacity you are taking away

democratic capacity you are taking away way the the earnings that you have uh

way the the earnings that you have uh right now and eroding it because you're

right now and eroding it because you're giving it to some people that are coming

giving it to some people that are coming in because you think that they're

in because you think that they're valuable enough to be able to pay that

valuable enough to be able to pay that way to be paid that way but that process

way to be paid that way but that process is being democratically voted on and

is being democratically voted on and ultimately you know that you're doing

ultimately you know that you're doing that because you're in your

that because you're in your understanding later down the line if you

understanding later down the line if you care about this sort of thing you're

care about this sort of thing you're going to make even more money or rather

going to make even more money or rather money is money a motivator money should

money is money a motivator money should not be a motivator you're right why in

not be a motivator you're right why in my situation CEO care if his company

my situation CEO care if his company makes more money it's not he's not going

makes more money it's not he's not going to make more money

to make more money no no it's long in the long term you are

no no it's long in the long term you are creating more stability this way because

creating more stability this way because you understand that every expansion of

you understand that every expansion of your of your uh productive output okay

your of your uh productive output okay every single piece of expansion on your

every single piece of expansion on your productive output yields better

productive output yields better long-term stability and more money if

long-term stability and more money if that's what you're [ __ ] motivated by

that's what you're [ __ ] motivated by but ultimately that's not the main

but ultimately that's not the main motivator and it should not be the main

motivator and it should not be the main motivator that's a horrible thing to say

motivator that's a horrible thing to say if you're considering socialism that

if you're considering socialism that money is a motivator that's like I think

money is a motivator that's like I think that's like almost like taboo I feel

that's like almost like taboo I feel like no don't don't worry about what

like no don't don't worry about what other people say in this situation or

other people say in this situation or what you think people will perceive from

what you think people will perceive from what I'm saying let me go back let me go

what I'm saying let me go back let me go back because there's like because it's

back because there's like because it's irrelevant okay so let's say in our

irrelevant okay so let's say in our world where the CEO makes more money

world where the CEO makes more money do you think it's a a possible or even

do you think it's a a possible or even likely situation that the

likely situation that the the heads of these companies who make

the heads of these companies who make more money are going to want to

more money are going to want to influence the government and their

influence the government and their workers

workers to vote or support legislation that

to vote or support legislation that gives them more money or more influence

gives them more money or more influence is that a likely outcome

is that a likely outcome wait can you can you ask that again

wait can you can you ask that again within a human saying you were

within a human saying you were rectangular and it [ __ ] my brainer

rectangular and it [ __ ] my brainer I I think that uh I I think that yes and

I I think that uh I I think that yes and I think that speaks to what Hassan was

I think that speaks to what Hassan was say ah I think that's what it speaks to

say ah I think that's what it speaks to what Hassan was saying earlier about why

what Hassan was saying earlier about why a lot of marxists uh uh have criticism

a lot of marxists uh uh have criticism of social democracy that that lack of

of social democracy that that lack of elimination of the capitalist profit

elimination of the capitalist profit motive part of the economy it doesn't

motive part of the economy it doesn't will naturally result in what you're

will naturally result in what you're saying that's my point so thank you Dan

saying that's my point so thank you Dan in socialism the motive the money motive

in socialism the motive the money motive doesn't it's literally income it's not

doesn't it's literally income it's not compatible it doesn't work because

compatible it doesn't work because you're gonna have people at the top who

you're gonna have people at the top who are going to want more they're going to

are going to want more they're going to want more influence they're going to

want more influence they're going to want more power they're going to want

want more power they're going to want more money and they are going to exert

more money and they are going to exert their influence their status even if

their influence their status even if they don't make more money they have

they don't make more money they have status

socialism is not egalitarian in the sense that there's like what I'm saying

sense that there's like what I'm saying there's a problem here socialism does

there's a problem here socialism does not social only exists when you remove

not social only exists when you remove the money motive right socialism and the

the money motive right socialism and the way we understand socialism yes the

way we understand socialism yes the money motive is is now we're talking

money motive is is now we're talking about now we're talking about it you

about now we're talking about it you don't want to remove the money motive

don't want to remove the money motive because I'm in the I'm in the middle

because I'm in the I'm in the middle ground where I'm talking about like what

ground where I'm talking about like what is your Social Democrat no I'm not I'm

is your Social Democrat no I'm not I'm talking it sounds like you are I'm

talking it sounds like you are I'm talking about the realistic short-term

talking about the realistic short-term period because I don't live in that rig

period because I don't live in that rig I don't live with that with that

I don't live with that with that no listen if we if I I know that other

no listen if we if I I know that other men can't do that for the time being if

men can't do that for the time being if we could uh just teleport into a utopian

we could uh just teleport into a utopian Star Trek world where money doesn't

Star Trek world where money doesn't exist and everybody's equal yeah

exist and everybody's equal yeah everybody would love that but let's talk

everybody would love that but let's talk about real [ __ ] I am talking about real

about real [ __ ] I am talking about real [ __ ]

[ __ ] you can do which is why I'm giving you

you can do which is why I'm giving you an example of like the inter room period

an example of like the inter room period of moving towards socialization or

of moving towards socialization or social uh a a socialist transition I

social uh a a socialist transition I agree with that but but the problem is

agree with that but but the problem is when I describe that you say well that's

when I describe that you say well that's not socialism like I'm like yeah I know

not socialism like I'm like yeah I know money being a motivator for certain

money being a motivator for certain people once you move to socialism the

people once you move to socialism the system in my opinion falls apart it

system in my opinion falls apart it doesn't work because it falls to the

doesn't work because it falls to the same trappings because people are going

same trappings because people are going to want more power they want more

to want more power they want more influence you're going to have

influence you're going to have capitalistic parties thank you Lena that

capitalistic parties thank you Lena that are going to influence you're going to

are going to influence you're going to have these external forces

even in a democratic organization I believe the best that we can do yeah

I believe the best that we can do yeah is provide laws and regulations that

is provide laws and regulations that guarantees people a fair Equitable life

guarantees people a fair Equitable life let me ask within that within those

let me ask within that within those rules I believe if you're operating

rules I believe if you're operating within those rules then you can do and

within those rules then you can do and make however much money as you want if

make however much money as you want if you're operating the rules with a super

you're operating the rules with a super progressive tax rate and everybody's

progressive tax rate and everybody's provided for it if you want to move to a

provided for it if you want to move to a socialist system I don't think that that

socialist system I don't think that that I don't think that system actually works

I don't think that system actually works so the cultural differences the cultural

so the cultural differences the cultural differences that we see in countries

differences that we see in countries that are still capitalists but Social

that are still capitalists but Social Democratic versus countries like the

Democratic versus countries like the United States of America that are hyper

United States of America that are hyper individualistic and and have like very

individualistic and and have like very little social democracy is the argument

little social democracy is the argument that I'm making is that with more social

that I'm making is that with more social amenities and with higher degrees of

amenities and with higher degrees of socialization people's attitude towards

socialization people's attitude towards money and money making becomes

money and money making becomes drastically different there are

drastically different there are different motivators yes status can be

different motivators yes status can be an important thing but that social

an important thing but that social hierarchy but that social hierarchy

hierarchy but that social hierarchy designed around status has nothing to do

designed around status has nothing to do with the productive output and has

with the productive output and has nothing to do with like your material

nothing to do with like your material reality it has the capacity to change

reality it has the capacity to change like the way people perceive you it's

like the way people perceive you it's like an attractive person versus like

like an attractive person versus like someone who is maybe not as uh

someone who is maybe not as uh aesthetically pleasing right those

aesthetically pleasing right those things are going to exist like there's

things are going to exist like there's always going to socialism doesn't mean

always going to socialism doesn't mean like LeBron James has to be the same

like LeBron James has to be the same [ __ ] height as like you know uh like

[ __ ] height as like you know uh like a like a five-foot person to play

a like a five-foot person to play basketball there's going to be different

basketball there's going to be different earners there's going to be uh there is

earners there's going to be uh there is always going to be some level of

always going to be some level of competition this is not a bad thing this

competition this is not a bad thing this is a good thing this is how you it's how

is a good thing this is how you it's how you innovate if there's different levels

you innovate if there's different levels of earners

of earners do you agree that that seems to be

do you agree that that seems to be incompatible with Marx's theory of

incompatible with Marx's theory of socialism

socialism because if no because no it's absolutely

because if no because no it's absolutely not because it all all and correct me if

not because it all all and correct me if I'm wrong a song because you're more

I'm wrong a song because you're more read on this than me but all all that is

read on this than me but all all that is being said at the end of the day is that

being said at the end of the day is that people are entitled to the value that

people are entitled to the value that they create if somebody creates more

they create if somebody creates more value than somebody else then they are

value than somebody else then they are entitled to more value the theory is

entitled to more value the theory is wonderful yes but and yeah and I'm

wonderful yes but and yeah and I'm talking about we're talking about real

talking about we're talking about real [ __ ] right but when people make more

[ __ ] right but when people make more they're going to want to influence I'm

they're going to want to influence I'm not saying everybody but again this goes

not saying everybody but again this goes back to what I was saying last week

back to what I was saying last week there's people who

there's people who are pathological

are pathological okay yes there's always bad and even in

okay yes there's always bad and even in a socialist country the sociopaths are

a socialist country the sociopaths are probably going to float to the top just

probably going to float to the top just because they're willing to do everything

because they're willing to do everything that other people aren't or they care

that other people aren't or they care about status and power other people

about status and power other people don't and so these high functioning

don't and so these high functioning highly motivated sociopaths are going to

highly motivated sociopaths are going to want to influence government and

want to influence government and business democracies

business democracies to increase their power and influence

to increase their power and influence like they do now under a castle like

like they do now under a castle like they do now right and that's why I think

they do now right and that's why I think it's not realistic to expect that not to

it's not realistic to expect that not to happen and I think the most realistic

happen and I think the most realistic and the best way is in between because

and the best way is in between because capitalism hold on capitalism doesn't

capitalism hold on capitalism doesn't work we know that and I think socialism

work we know that and I think socialism doesn't work for the same for the same

doesn't work for the same for the same exact thing because people are going to

exact thing because people are going to want to the psychopaths are going to

want to the psychopaths are going to want to move it and the I think the only

want to move it and the I think the only realistic solution is in the Middle

realistic solution is in the Middle where you just create a Sandbox that is

where you just create a Sandbox that is good for everybody and operate within

good for everybody and operate within that sandbox because everything else

that sandbox because everything else seems like a fantasy to me every single

seems like a fantasy to me every single thing that you've mentioned in both of

thing that you've mentioned in both of these equations still revolve around

these equations still revolve around human greed turning humanity and the way

human greed turning humanity and the way people operate into capitalist little

people operate into capitalist little demons who are driven by profit I do

demons who are driven by profit I do believe self-interest is a thing that

believe self-interest is a thing that happens it's that's certainly true which

happens it's that's certainly true which is why

is why you have to have certain restrictions

you have to have certain restrictions placed upon people that ensure that they

placed upon people that ensure that they don't go uh they don't get out of hand

don't go uh they don't get out of hand with the level of power they have the

with the level of power they have the way I describe it is this in America

way I describe it is this in America people always say labor unions are

people always say labor unions are corrupt they're actually really bad they

corrupt they're actually really bad they have a rigid hierarchy and they're they

have a rigid hierarchy and they're they are also susceptible to nepotism this

are also susceptible to nepotism this much is true in certain labor unions

much is true in certain labor unions there's been a lot of reform in the

there's been a lot of reform in the teamsters in the UAW shouts out to that

teamsters in the UAW shouts out to that no what do you mean historically there

no what do you mean historically there absolutely has been uh I mean I don't

absolutely has been uh I mean I don't say that about oh no I know you don't

say that about oh no I know you don't say that about unions my point is this

say that about unions my point is this though the way I counter that always is

though the way I counter that always is this there's always going to be

this there's always going to be corruption there's always going to be

corruption there's always going to be you know bureaucratic red tape there's

you know bureaucratic red tape there's always going to be nepotism but I would

always going to be nepotism but I would much rather if corruption is inevitable

much rather if corruption is inevitable I would much rather have a more just and

I would much rather have a more just and more Equitable a more democratic process

more Equitable a more democratic process that at the very least by it's very

that at the very least by it's very designed like in the union structure

designed like in the union structure offers offers tangible benefits to the

offers offers tangible benefits to the workplace that the workers rather than

workplace that the workers rather than the corruption that we currently

the corruption that we currently experience on a daily basis under the

experience on a daily basis under the capital of the same thing I want

capital of the same thing I want okay which is why I said

okay which is why I said um

um socialism with capitalist character I

socialism with capitalist character I also think that socialism when you

also think that socialism when you consider corruption and high functioning

consider corruption and high functioning sociopaths there's a lot more risk when

sociopaths there's a lot more risk when you when you centralize the power at the

you when you centralize the power at the top let's say one party or a full of for

top let's say one party or a full of for a dictatorship or tyranny no that that I

a dictatorship or tyranny no that that I actually don't agree with at all I think

actually don't agree with at all I think that the Democratic process in and of

that the Democratic process in and of itself whether it's a multi-party system

itself whether it's a multi-party system or a single party system or a two-party

or a single party system or a two-party system like we have that yields like uh

system like we have that yields like uh results exclusively like the material

results exclusively like the material changes that are made are are done at

changes that are made are are done at the behest of Corporations and the

the behest of Corporations and the wealthy Capital owners

wealthy Capital owners um no matter what I think that a more

um no matter what I think that a more democratic process is always going to be

democratic process is always going to be a better and more effective mechanism at

a better and more effective mechanism at fighting against centralized power and

fighting against centralized power and and sociopaths that want to assume

and sociopaths that want to assume control I I think that if there are

control I I think that if there are again if that is an inevitability no

again if that is an inevitability no matter what happens I personally believe

matter what happens I personally believe that more of a democratic process is

that more of a democratic process is going to be more effective I'll give you

going to be more effective I'll give you an example I like democracy Dupont

an example I like democracy Dupont chemical Dupont chemical under the

chemical Dupont chemical under the capitalist liberal Bourgeois democracy

capitalist liberal Bourgeois democracy in in uh the United States of America

in in uh the United States of America was able to uh dump toxic waste into

was able to uh dump toxic waste into farmlands and Destroy natural water

farmlands and Destroy natural water supplies and delicate ecosystems they

supplies and delicate ecosystems they still do it to this day we have pfas the

still do it to this day we have pfas the forever chemicals right

forever chemicals right um that is everywhere we have

um that is everywhere we have microplastics all that good stuff right

microplastics all that good stuff right in a situation where let's say Dupont

in a situation where let's say Dupont Farm Dupont chemicals was like at least

Farm Dupont chemicals was like at least democratically organized the workers

democratically organized the workers themselves have more power to say what

themselves have more power to say what the [ __ ] are we doing you're destroying

the [ __ ] are we doing you're destroying my [ __ ] uncle's uh you know Farm

my [ __ ] uncle's uh you know Farm you're destroying my backyard right and

you're destroying my backyard right and that way they can put a stop to it or at

that way they can put a stop to it or at least demand changes to happen rather

least demand changes to happen rather than expect the government to turn

than expect the government to turn around and be like all right we're the

around and be like all right we're the EPA we just realized that we are going

EPA we just realized that we are going to uh government or more government

to uh government or more government because socialism not all government

because socialism not all government government no that's not true through

government no that's not true through Ethan socialism is simply giving more

Ethan socialism is simply giving more power to the individuals in that

power to the individuals in that regarding business you have a government

regarding business you have a government that also you're killing people

that also you're killing people you do not have a choice you cannot run

you do not have a choice you cannot run your business this way you you cannot

your business this way you you cannot yeah I mean you that that's a that's a

yeah I mean you that that's a that's a stronger government than we have

stronger government than we have yeah that's like what do you think you

yeah that's like what do you think you want a stronger government than we have

want a stronger government than we have you want a strong government regulation

you want a strong government regulation yeah but it's even stronger than the one

yeah but it's even stronger than the one that I want that says here's your

that I want that says here's your workplace you must exist in it so you're

workplace you must exist in it so you're saying on one hand the EPA is silly

because it's not a hypothetical this is something that actually happened EPA

something that actually happened EPA said sorry we're gutted we don't have

said sorry we're gutted we don't have any we don't have like enough

any we don't have like enough researchers a lot of the research that

researchers a lot of the research that work at EPA also end up getting jobs at

work at EPA also end up getting jobs at Dupont or vice versa there's always a

Dupont or vice versa there's always a revolving door Tit for Tat uh regulatory

revolving door Tit for Tat uh regulatory capture is something that these

capture is something that these corporations do in an effort to

corporations do in an effort to monopolize and also improve their profit

monopolize and also improve their profit margins as always so in that structure

margins as always so in that structure the EPA basically delegated Dupont with

the EPA basically delegated Dupont with figuring out how toxic their pollutants

figuring out how toxic their pollutants were and of course uh until a journalist

were and of course uh until a journalist uncovered this entire thing uh they were

uncovered this entire thing uh they were able to claim that these toxic

able to claim that these toxic pollutants weren't as bad right so there

pollutants weren't as bad right so there is no mechanism in the situation where

is no mechanism in the situation where the answer is capitalism yeah so we just

the answer is capitalism yeah so we just sit there and we expect the government

sit there and we expect the government that uh that is you know appointing

that uh that is you know appointing people into positions of power that

people into positions of power that literally material cereal oh no listen

literally material cereal oh no listen we expect the government to enforce

we expect the government to enforce certain regulations and restrictions

certain regulations and restrictions that they do not because the people that

that they do not because the people that are placed into that position of power

are placed into that position of power have no interest or need in placing said

have no interest or need in placing said restrictions or maybe even lack the no

restrictions or maybe even lack the no people in the country don't want to make

people in the country don't want to make less money so maybe they don't have

less money so maybe they don't have access to all the data the beautiful

access to all the data the beautiful part about that is that at least

part about that is that at least historically speaking what you're

historically speaking what you're describing has never happened what I

describing has never happened what I mean by that is when you look at the UAW

mean by that is when you look at the UAW for example it is supposed to be in

for example it is supposed to be in their best interest to be anti-ev and

their best interest to be anti-ev and yet for some reason Sean Fain and the

yet for some reason Sean Fain and the uaw's perfectly understanding of oh

uaw's perfectly understanding of oh there's also and pushing for that as a

there's also and pushing for that as a purely socialistic hierarchy where where

purely socialistic hierarchy where where they make sure there's there's

they make sure there's there's Cooperative positions okay where they

Cooperative positions okay where they make less like Mondragon is a good

make less like Mondragon is a good example of and have they been uh have

example of and have they been uh have they been levied with the task of

they been levied with the task of deciding to make less money to help the

deciding to make less money to help the environment yes win absolutely not not

environment yes win absolutely not not unless

help the economy but my point is that saying one is better than the other is

saying one is better than the other is just Theory you know well we are talking

just Theory you know well we are talking about simply Theory I think we strongly

about simply Theory I think we strongly agree that capitalism doesn't work I

agree that capitalism doesn't work I think a strong EPA is great in fact I

think a strong EPA is great in fact I think you'd still need an EPA in a

think you'd still need an EPA in a socialist country I don't think it

socialist country I don't think it eliminates the need for that they agreed

eliminates the need for that they agreed 100 which is what what I was saying is

100 which is what what I was saying is in that social Reformation there is

in that social Reformation there is actual real mechanisms of control that

actual real mechanisms of control that can put a stop to this kind of thing

can put a stop to this kind of thing rather than

rather than rather than power accumulating in the

rather than power accumulating in the hands of the few at the top of the

hands of the few at the top of the corporate structure that then make these

corporate structure that then make these decisions I think make these hiring

decisions I think make these hiring practices people in the revolving door

practices people in the revolving door in theory what I think in practice it

in theory what I think in practice it would be great as well I think your

would be great as well I think your practice would be great but I don't

practice would be great but I don't think it's I don't think it's possible

think it's I don't think it's possible but but okay so now let's go back to

but but okay so now let's go back to this idea so first you said the theory

this idea so first you said the theory doesn't work now you're saying in

doesn't work now you're saying in practice it won't work no because it's

practice it won't work no because it's not it's not and what I mean is that

not it's not and what I mean is that it's you can't organize it that way it

it's you can't organize it that way it won't work and and you know but

we do see different you and I are in agreement that higher degrees of

agreement that higher degrees of socialization is a benefit okay we we're

socialization is a benefit okay we we're in agreement you like unions you want

in agreement you like unions you want workers that have more control you want

workers that have more control you want workers that have more power more say uh

workers that have more power more say uh and have more autonomy ultimately so you

and have more autonomy ultimately so you and I are at absolutely in agreement on

and I are at absolutely in agreement on that front so to say that that doesn't

that front so to say that that doesn't work in theory I I think betrays the

work in theory I I think betrays the workplace specifically well yeah in the

workplace specifically well yeah in the workplace as well if you're an agreement

workplace as well if you're an agreement no that's a huge difference we spend 80

no that's a huge difference we spend 80 percent of our adult lives in the

percent of our adult lives in the workplace is the most important and I

workplace is the most important and I believe it's a regular organization

believe it's a regular organization listen um we we seem to have a

listen um we we seem to have a disagreement with about like greed like

disagreement with about like greed like there seems to be this notion that

there seems to be this notion that people that live in a capitalist country

people that live in a capitalist country we ain't we understand greed and desire

we ain't we understand greed and desire for wealth

for wealth uh differently than an example we see is

uh differently than an example we see is like Native Americans and that's part of

like Native Americans and that's part of why I can't conceive of a true

why I can't conceive of a true socialistic country you're you're saying

socialistic country you're you're saying that like uh you know primitive

that like uh you know primitive communism or primitive accumulation

communism or primitive accumulation which has been uh the foundation of like

which has been uh the foundation of like societal development for much longer

societal development for much longer than the Industrial Revolution or

than the Industrial Revolution or post-industrial revolution capitalism

post-industrial revolution capitalism right I've seen a lot of people say that

right I've seen a lot of people say that greed is learned that if you grew up in

greed is learned that if you grew up in a pure socialist society no absolutely

a pure socialist society no absolutely self-interest is a is a real thing that

self-interest is a is a real thing that people have but people can be taught and

people have but people can be taught and people can uh learn that the the

people can uh learn that the the collective aspects of societal

collective aspects of societal development are far more important for

development are far more important for self-interest than the individual the

self-interest than the individual the hyper individualistic like I'm gonna get

hyper individualistic like I'm gonna get mine [ __ ] everybody else so let me the

mine [ __ ] everybody else so let me the point of going to this greed discussion

point of going to this greed discussion is to talk about like human nature and

is to talk about like human nature and that innocence I believe that in a

that innocence I believe that in a perfect Society socialist society

perfect Society socialist society there'll be forces of influence of

there'll be forces of influence of wealthy people people with status people

wealthy people people with status people with power wanting it more for

with power wanting it more for themselves my argument and I believe

themselves my argument and I believe that that's it and I believe that that's

that that's it and I believe that that's innate yeah if so first of all uh I

innate yeah if so first of all uh I don't think that there's a biological

don't think that there's a biological imperative I think that like I said

imperative I think that like I said what's the self-interest self-interest

what's the self-interest self-interest can be

yes so how is it how is accumulating lots of money different than resource

lots of money different than resource Gathering or accumulation I will

Gathering or accumulation I will describe it to you

describe it to you a society that heightens

a society that heightens um collectivist understandings okay as a

um collectivist understandings okay as a consequence of it being directly tied to

consequence of it being directly tied to our uh at this point our means of

our uh at this point our means of production and how we understand it how

production and how we understand it how we how we uh generate Commodities is

we how we uh generate Commodities is going to have the exact opposite opinion

going to have the exact opposite opinion on collectivism versus Hyper

on collectivism versus Hyper individualism in the way that you see it

individualism in the way that you see it under capitalism more people will have a

under capitalism more people will have a a collective understanding that like we

a collective understanding that like we are in this together and that we're

are in this together and that we're working side by side

working side by side um and then yes you're right and the

um and then yes you're right and the reality is that there will still be

reality is that there will still be people who are self-interested people

people who are self-interested people who will still want to utilize uh the

who will still want to utilize uh the the existing constructs the existing

the existing constructs the existing hierarchies to their immediate Advantage

hierarchies to their immediate Advantage at the cost of others but my point is

at the cost of others but my point is that if that is an inevitability which I

that if that is an inevitability which I agree because there will be people who

agree because there will be people who are sociopathic criminals okay

are sociopathic criminals okay charlatans the lump and pros and whatnot

charlatans the lump and pros and whatnot okay

okay that will always exist but even if that

that will always exist but even if that exists in the hype and I'm being very

exists in the hype and I'm being very realistic about this wouldn't it be

realistic about this wouldn't it be better to have more mechanisms of

better to have more mechanisms of control in the form of democracy and

control in the form of democracy and have to ensure a world in which everyone

have to ensure a world in which everyone has more autonomy in a place where they

has more autonomy in a place where they spend 80 of their lives on it would be

spend 80 of their lives on it would be so yeah then we're in agreement there's

so yeah then we're in agreement there's a rubber band

a rubber band you know it's pulling us the center of

you know it's pulling us the center of gravity is social democracy capitalism

gravity is social democracy capitalism socialism and the rubber bands pulling

socialism and the rubber bands pulling us in both directions towards the center

us in both directions towards the center that's what I believe

that's what I believe okay

okay and my point always is that while

and my point always is that while marginal incremental reform and social

marginal incremental reform and social democracies were made when uh there was

democracies were made when uh there was actually a counter force in the form of

actually a counter force in the form of Communists trade unionists anarchists

Communists trade unionists anarchists and the like okay they have been

and the like okay they have been thoroughly eviscerated both in this

thoroughly eviscerated both in this country and in Europe as well which is

country and in Europe as well which is precisely the reason why you see Europe

precisely the reason why you see Europe following the American attitude with uh

following the American attitude with uh with with its own uh

with with its own uh conditions uh getting worse and worse

conditions uh getting worse and worse year over year if you're willing to at

year over year if you're willing to at least acknowledge that there are going

least acknowledge that there are going to be innately just as a product of The

to be innately just as a product of The Human Condition people that are born

Human Condition people that are born greedy with a with a desire to want to

greedy with a with a desire to want to hoard resources I don't know why you're

hoard resources I don't know why you're afraid to say greedy they're hoarding

afraid to say greedy they're hoarding resources

resources um if you're willing to admit that

um if you're willing to admit that they're going to be like black people

they're going to be like black people yeah then then that's okay for me

yeah then then that's okay for me because there was some takes I saw no

because there was some takes I saw no pretended like that don't don't have a

pretended like that don't don't have a conversation when you go on on Reddit

conversation when you go on on Reddit who also themselves will probably change

who also themselves will probably change their uh ideas there's there's people

their uh ideas there's there's people are very rigid especially under the

are very rigid especially under the guise of anonymity online uh it's it's

guise of anonymity online uh it's it's not reflective of the the actual

not reflective of the the actual conversation that you could be having

conversation that you could be having that's productive okay good I'm glad you

that's productive okay good I'm glad you hear that but I yeah so let's move on I

hear that but I yeah so let's move on I fall into this trap too I yell at

fall into this trap too I yell at [ __ ] people in my child all the time

[ __ ] people in my child all the time because I sometimes uh lose sight of

because I sometimes uh lose sight of like sarcasm and I can't get an accurate

like sarcasm and I can't get an accurate assessment because I don't know where

assessment because I don't know where you're coming really bad okay but I want

you're coming really bad okay but I want to continue this if you if you go to pee

to continue this if you if you go to pee I'm [ __ ] everyone's a communist after

I'm [ __ ] everyone's a communist after this I'm just letting you know it's okay

this I'm just letting you know it's okay maybe we should both go so you don't get

maybe we should both go so you don't get the advantage no I'm Gonna Get You don't

the advantage no I'm Gonna Get You don't need to pee always people for me no I'm

need to pee always people for me no I'm holding it in

not you want me to mute his mic that's [ __ ] up

um I'm reading I'm reading no I have control I have control uh there you go

control I have control uh there you go I think this is a I think this has been

I think this is a I think this has been a a relatively productive conversation I

a a relatively productive conversation I mean God knows what people will do to

mean God knows what people will do to pick this apart because we're every

pick this apart because we're every single time we have conversations very

single time we have conversations very frustrating that like there is a

frustrating that like there is a secondary market like a like a cottage

secondary market like a like a cottage industry of people who will like pick

industry of people who will like pick apart every uh detail and make these

apart every uh detail and make these like Grand uh assertions off of it which

like Grand uh assertions off of it which is very frustrating because it's like

is very frustrating because it's like like I guess if you're from one of these

like I guess if you're from one of these communities out there and there's plenty

communities out there and there's plenty of them uh there's so many people that

of them uh there's so many people that make videos right

make videos right I mean how weird I'm not gonna say that

I mean how weird I'm not gonna say that the HD podcast is right I mean I would

the HD podcast is right I mean I would say the HP podcast we do that too you

say the HP podcast we do that too you know what I mean yeah we do that as we

know what I mean yeah we do that as we do that as well yes I do that as well

do that as well yes I do that as well but like my my question always is like

but like my my question always is like if you're coming from one of these

if you're coming from one of these communities like don't you feel like

communities like don't you feel like you're duped a little bit by your by

you're duped a little bit by your by whoever you trusted into believing that

whoever you trusted into believing that there is like genuine uh Discord and and

there is like genuine uh Discord and and division here like talk about you and

division here like talk about you and Ethan uh yeah or even well people didn't

Ethan uh yeah or even well people didn't attack you as much surprisingly it was

attack you as much surprisingly it was more so me even though you and him had a

more so me even though you and him had a a big disagreement as far as well nobody

a big disagreement as far as well nobody gives a [ __ ] about me I mean come on uh

gives a [ __ ] about me I mean come on uh it was odd I don't know because you have

it was odd I don't know because you have a lot of uh differing opinions as well

a lot of uh differing opinions as well but for some reason you weren't getting

but for some reason you weren't getting uh you weren't getting criticized as

uh you weren't getting criticized as much it's almost like people are more

much it's almost like people are more self-interested in certain direction but

self-interested in certain direction but yeah I think there's definitely an

yeah I think there's definitely an element of that people definitely have

element of that people definitely have it out for you and also I think I think

it out for you and also I think I think I saved myself a little bit by being um

I saved myself a little bit by being um uh

uh at the beginning I don't know if you

at the beginning I don't know if you caught how much of that conversation you

caught how much of that conversation you caught but I I was very reluctant to

caught but I I was very reluctant to engage in that conversation and so you

engage in that conversation and so you know anything that I said was kind of

know anything that I said was kind of tinged with the fact that like Dan

tinged with the fact that like Dan doesn't even really want to be here so I

doesn't even really want to be here so I guess maybe that softened uh people's

guess maybe that softened uh people's anger I'm sure people did get angry

anger I'm sure people did get angry about it but frankly I was stressed

about it but frankly I was stressed about it afterwards just because like I

about it afterwards just because like I I don't know I I don't like being the

I don't know I I don't like being the center of attention and so I stayed off

center of attention and so I stayed off of I stayed off of social media all

of I stayed off of social media all weekend I just didn't look at it

yeah they just said they were glazing me up I wonder some people were but yeah

up I wonder some people were but yeah you were saying Queen Dan when they were

you were saying Queen Dan when they were saying when

saying when um you know

um you know maybe I'll take this as an opportunity

maybe I'll take this as an opportunity to uh to drop a little bit of knowledge

to uh to drop a little bit of knowledge I don't think I've ever actually shared

I don't think I've ever actually shared on the show

on the show but knowledge

but knowledge um

um my uh one side of my family was actually

my uh one side of my family was actually uh I am descended from a bunch of like

uh I am descended from a bunch of like hardcore Bolsheviks in the Russian

hardcore Bolsheviks in the Russian Revolution I knew it [ __ ] dude that's

Revolution I knew it [ __ ] dude that's you that's right

you that's right actually trying to draw this out of you

actually trying to draw this out of you dude you're [ __ ] done my last name

dude you're [ __ ] done my last name swerd love is a bastardization of

swerd love is a bastardization of sverdlov who was uh one of Lenin's like

sverdlov who was uh one of Lenin's like lieutenants

lieutenants or you want this to go out I mean I'm

or you want this to go out I mean I'm kidding we're talking like great dude

kidding we're talking like great dude we're talking about great great uncle or

we're talking about great great uncle or something here you know

something here you know your family's proletarian violence and

your family's proletarian violence and his contributions

his contributions yeah where's Zara's here how dare you

yeah where's Zara's here how dare you sorry sorry I didn't want me to piss off

sorry sorry I didn't want me to piss off the whites um so I yeah I know I always

the whites um so I yeah I know I always see this picture and I'm always like

see this picture and I'm always like dude he seems a little too comfortable

dude he seems a little too comfortable in that outfit

in that outfit but like he's just filling that you know

but like he's just filling that you know it's a Halloween costume it's a

it's a Halloween costume it's a Halloween costume

Red Scare yeah okay so I want to move on to some more

okay so I want to move on to some more practical topics but before we do that I

practical topics but before we do that I want to say

want to say I think this is a great conversation I

I think this is a great conversation I agree anyone that's mad you're wrong

agree anyone that's mad you're wrong is upset right now about this

is upset right now about this conversation you're just you're wrong

conversation you're just you're wrong this is a good conversation we're having

this is a good conversation we're having you know people get heated but uh

you know people get heated but uh on the chat and

uh really interesting okay good yeah the last time was a little jading but I

the last time was a little jading but I wasn't gonna stop me but anyway also I

wasn't gonna stop me but anyway also I want to emphasize that we agree on so

want to emphasize that we agree on so much like literally 95 in in the

much like literally 95 in in the practical application in the short term

practical application in the short term we are in agreement 100 of the way if

we are in agreement 100 of the way if you like Bernie Sanders then you know

you like Bernie Sanders then you know you're good with me that's like that's

you're good with me that's like that's my opinion because Americans do not have

my opinion because Americans do not have any class Consciousness and you have to

any class Consciousness and you have to build that there are certainly differing

build that there are certainly differing opinions like people who believe in

opinions like people who believe in accelerationism or whatever but I truly

accelerationism or whatever but I truly think that uh America will only

think that uh America will only accelerate towards barbarism as it has

accelerate towards barbarism as it has and not necessarily socialism without

and not necessarily socialism without any kind of uh without people believing

any kind of uh without people believing that like they have any any kind of

that like they have any any kind of autonomy in the workplace any kind of

autonomy in the workplace any kind of means of collective bargaining in the

means of collective bargaining in the workplace okay so anyway my point is if

workplace okay so anyway my point is if you're angry you're just you're being

you're angry you're just you're being silly right now this is good this is a

silly right now this is good this is a good conversation and on my part again

good conversation and on my part again I'm come from I'm pretty you know

I'm come from I'm pretty you know ignorant so this is good for me to kind

ignorant so this is good for me to kind of I think you understand yourself I

of I think you understand yourself I think I think you are more importantly

think I think you are more importantly than anyone else ignorance is is one

than anyone else ignorance is is one thing but you're very curious and you're

thing but you're very curious and you're charitable uh when you want to learn

charitable uh when you want to learn things and I think that that is truly

things and I think that that is truly important as opposed to being like I've

important as opposed to being like I've made up my mind this is good I mean

made up my mind this is good I mean obviously there's still Hang-Ups yeah

obviously there's still Hang-Ups yeah but that's always going to happen it's

but that's always going to happen it's it's just you know this kind of Dogma is

it's just you know this kind of Dogma is too powerful everyone has their own

too powerful everyone has their own Journey not that we have like over 30

Journey not that we have like over 30 000 people watching like a really

debate about this yes socialism and social democracies yeah I'm happy to see

social democracies yeah I'm happy to see that and like Hassan said earlier I mean

that and like Hassan said earlier I mean I I think there's been a massive uh sea

I I think there's been a massive uh sea change in this country in the last

change in this country in the last decade largely thanks to Bernie Sanders

decade largely thanks to Bernie Sanders but I would even go further back and say

but I would even go further back and say like the Occupy stuff in the financial

like the Occupy stuff in the financial crisis is when it really started to

crisis is when it really started to creep into the Consciousness but like I

creep into the Consciousness but like I can't imagine having this conversation

can't imagine having this conversation when I was like a teenager you know oh

when I was like a teenager you know oh yeah like it would be a non-starter in

yeah like it would be a non-starter in this country well we're both Radical by

this country well we're both Radical by the way it's worth saying by yes

the way it's worth saying by yes yourself in the eyes of the broader

yourself in the eyes of the broader American public or I would be considered

American public or I would be considered radical compared to someone like myself

radical compared to someone like myself yes people will go oh he seems

yes people will go oh he seems reasonable which I personally love I

reasonable which I personally love I think that that's a [ __ ] great thing

think that that's a [ __ ] great thing I don't think because the more insane I

I don't think because the more insane I look the more sane you look and in the

look the more sane you look and in the short term what you're advocating for is

short term what you're advocating for is unironically a good thing right which is

unironically a good thing right which is why I also you look crazy for one I look

why I also you look crazy for one I look sane for once no but like but that's my

sane for once no but like but that's my point is that that's why I also uh we're

point is that that's why I also uh we're working in the same that's why I also

working in the same that's why I also try to engage in movement building in

try to engage in movement building in the other direction as well whenever

the other direction as well whenever there's like because there's plenty of

there's like because there's plenty of people who [ __ ] hate me on uh to the

people who [ __ ] hate me on uh to the left of me who have like radical you

left of me who have like radical you know maoist third worldest opinions or

know maoist third worldest opinions or whatever the [ __ ] but I never give that

whatever the [ __ ] but I never give that any kind of light or any kind of

any kind of light or any kind of attention or dunk on it because I feel

attention or dunk on it because I feel like yeah they look crazy or whatever

like yeah they look crazy or whatever who gives a [ __ ] ultimately if they are

who gives a [ __ ] ultimately if they are working in their own way to erode the

working in their own way to erode the power that Capital has then you're good

power that Capital has then you're good in my book and that even extends to

in my book and that even extends to social Democrats to the right of me as

social Democrats to the right of me as well

well so just to summarize my point before we

so just to summarize my point before we move on is essentially this I believe

move on is essentially this I believe social democracy can address all the

social democracy can address all the issues that socialism attempts to

issues that socialism attempts to address

address and also offers a more realistic and a

and also offers a more realistic and a proposition for a

proposition for a um

um an organization of society that's it but

an organization of society that's it but let's move on

let's move on um it is a 12 20 I should just point out

um it is a 12 20 I should just point out we've been going for about two hours

we've been going for about two hours here you need to bail that's fine but I

here you need to bail that's fine but I have more I have more questions okay

have more I have more questions okay what do you have I'm down to are you

what do you have I'm down to are you talking can I just point this out real

talking can I just point this out real quick you sent this a moment ago yeah

quick you sent this a moment ago yeah ladies and gentlemen we got them every

ladies and gentlemen we got them every time every time one of my favorites to

time every time one of my favorites to be fair predictons has gotten me as well

my parents every time we do a clickbait title they go Dan left baby died baby's

title they go Dan left baby died baby's dead maybe he's dead what yeah and in

dead maybe he's dead what yeah and in the role of a lifetime Gary all right

the role of a lifetime Gary all right let's talk about some like realistic or

let's talk about some like realistic or not realistic let's talk about some

not realistic let's talk about some actual applications of of socialism

actual applications of of socialism today because I kind of want to

today because I kind of want to understand it

understand it so let's look at China

so let's look at China so I know China's done a lot of good for

so I know China's done a lot of good for the massive amount of its populance

the massive amount of its populance they've uplifted them out of poverty

they've uplifted them out of poverty they gave them access to health and

they gave them access to health and housing and on the whole the um improved

housing and on the whole the um improved literacy rates yeah everything okay

literacy rates yeah everything okay rapid organization rapid development the

rapid organization rapid development the um exactly the the quality of life of

um exactly the the quality of life of the average Chinese person is absolutely

the average Chinese person is absolutely uh

uh catastrophically improved okay now you

catastrophically improved okay now you tell me when I ask you is she's pretty

tell me when I ask you is she's pretty radical for you to even admit that in my

radical for you to even admit that in my opinion but okay well hold on I I'm not

opinion but okay well hold on I I'm not I've never denied that okay but what I

I've never denied that okay but what I my question is you is China socialist or

my question is you is China socialist or not because you always say China isn't a

not because you always say China isn't a socialist country I think China if you

socialist country I think China if you ask them is a transitional social estate

ask them is a transitional social estate um do I do I think that it has certain

um do I do I think that it has certain socialist characteristics in China

socialist characteristics in China what do you mean you said if you ask

what do you mean you said if you ask them the CCP government that's like

them the CCP government that's like that's their main thing is that this is

that's their main thing is that this is like they say socialism with Chinese

like they say socialism with Chinese characteristics we are a transitional

characteristics we are a transitional socialist state every Communist party

socialist state every Communist party will always say that they are uh trying

will always say that they are uh trying to implement a transitional social

to implement a transitional social estate obviously that socialism has to

estate obviously that socialism has to be adjusted to the material conditions

be adjusted to the material conditions and the needs that the people have uh

and the needs that the people have uh because so so last week you were telling

because so so last week you were telling me China isn't a socialist country so I

me China isn't a socialist country so I was asked I was curious what you meant

was asked I was curious what you meant by that it's not socialism in the sense

by that it's not socialism in the sense that like there is collective ownership

that like there is collective ownership over the means of production across the

over the means of production across the board it's uh it's state ownership that

board it's uh it's state ownership that benefits the interests of the citizens

benefits the interests of the citizens as you've also uh admitted or recognized

as you've also uh admitted or recognized I'm not it's not an admission yeah I

I'm not it's not an admission yeah I reckon it's an admission if you're

reckon it's an admission if you're living in the western world because in

living in the western world because in the western world they're unreliable

the western world they're unreliable it's just a fact

it's just a fact yeah but people will use here comes I'm

yeah but people will use here comes I'm not one of those people I'm not one of

not one of those people I'm not one of those people you know you know what I

those people you know you know what I mean okay

mean okay so

so so

so well okay here's what I'll say about

well okay here's what I'll say about Taiwan here's what else statements hold

Taiwan here's what else statements hold on we'll get to that before we get okay

on we'll get to that before we get okay here's what I'll say about China

here's what I'll say about China 's economy was extremely stagnant

's economy was extremely stagnant for a long time and even if you compare

for a long time and even if you compare it to Taiwan who separated from them in

it to Taiwan who separated from them in about 1950s if you compare well

about 1950s if you compare well more to that separation I think

more to that separation I think sorry there's a little bit more to that

sorry there's a little bit more to that separation I think well we'll get into

separation I think well we'll get into more depth than that but my point is

more depth than that but my point is around the uh 1970s 1980s is when

around the uh 1970s 1980s is when China's economy started to Boom yes and

China's economy started to Boom yes and the reason for that boom was because

the reason for that boom was because they started to open up their economy

they started to open up their economy and lean into more capitalistic

and lean into more capitalistic Notions they and from they got an influx

Notions they and from they got an influx of foreign Capital yes and that is when

of foreign Capital yes and that is when the average quality of life of the

the average quality of life of the average Chinese person was vastly

average Chinese person was vastly improved so here before that the Chinese

improved so here before that the Chinese economy was extremely stagnant and the

economy was extremely stagnant and the quality of life was not good yeah so

quality of life was not good yeah so here's how that works right

here's how that works right um there is plenty of trade that occurs

um there is plenty of trade that occurs with other countries as well that do not

with other countries as well that do not have a a mandate of of trying to do even

have a a mandate of of trying to do even development right let's not use the word

development right let's not use the word socialism here let's just say uh

socialism here let's just say uh urbanization even development like

urbanization even development like uplifting Chinese people will say

uplifting Chinese people will say Chinese Prosperity right

Chinese Prosperity right um plenty of other countries that get

um plenty of other countries that get foreign Capital do not necessarily

foreign Capital do not necessarily develop in that in that direction in the

develop in that in that direction in the same way that China did the reason why

same way that China did the reason why China was able to do so is not

China was able to do so is not necessarily because foreign Capital came

necessarily because foreign Capital came into the country it was because of what

into the country it was because of what they did with said foreign Capital if

they did with said foreign Capital if China had developed in this similar

China had developed in this similar structure with like you know

structure with like you know western-backed klept rats that control

western-backed klept rats that control it like an oligarchy in the same way of

it like an oligarchy in the same way of the of the democratized market in the

the of the democratized market in the dissolution of the USSR did then China

dissolution of the USSR did then China would objectively be in a similar

would objectively be in a similar situation to Russia and the Russian

situation to Russia and the Russian economy in general

economy in general um Russia made all of its or the USSR

um Russia made all of its or the USSR made all of its uh of its

made all of its uh of its collectivization in that time frame in a

collectivization in that time frame in a very short time frame without 400 years

very short time frame without 400 years of like slavery and and uh uh and and

of like slavery and and uh uh and and all of the many benefits that that gave

all of the many benefits that that gave to the Western World and and went from

to the Western World and and went from [ __ ] potato Farmers to uh people that

[ __ ] potato Farmers to uh people that beat uh the United States uh to the

beat uh the United States uh to the space to be the first person to go to

space to be the first person to go to space you're a Gaga and shouts out uh

space you're a Gaga and shouts out uh similar structure existed and similar

similar structure existed and similar thing happened in China as well after

thing happened in China as well after foreign Capital came in but it wasn't

foreign Capital came in but it wasn't necessarily because the foreign Capital

necessarily because the foreign Capital came in it was what they did with that

came in it was what they did with that foreign Capital does that make sense so

foreign Capital does that make sense so in that situation because money is just

in that situation because money is just money right if there was like uh I don't

money right if there was like uh I don't know if we lived in a very mining world

know if we lived in a very mining world of money for it was for cheap labor yes

of money for it was for cheap labor yes yes absolutely and so in a sense they're

yes absolutely and so in a sense they're serving capitalism they're taking the

serving capitalism they're taking the money it was a survey the Dingus Gambit

money it was a survey the Dingus Gambit is that uh that utilizes it

is that uh that utilizes it it's just like utilizing the the thing

it's just like utilizing the the thing was the leader interesting oh that was

was the leader interesting oh that was his name Dingus

um uh is that uh you can take advantage of uh

of uh Western Society has uh has has this uh

Western Society has uh has has this uh division of power where uh there's a

division of power where uh there's a there's an imbalance there where Capital

there's an imbalance there where Capital owners and their their Capital interests

owners and their their Capital interests are better represented by their

are better represented by their Bourgeois government so they will if we

Bourgeois government so they will if we offer them you know cheap manufacturing

offer them you know cheap manufacturing and then take their IP uh and and start

and then take their IP uh and and start slowly but surely developing our country

slowly but surely developing our country through uh through Rapid urbanization

through uh through Rapid urbanization like taking all that foreign capital and

like taking all that foreign capital and like building roads uh building

like building roads uh building hospitals building trains and and

hospitals building trains and and whatnot uh we will be able to inevitably

whatnot uh we will be able to inevitably improve our material conditions as a

improve our material conditions as a collective in doing so they've also

collective in doing so they've also entrenched themselves in a capitalistic

entrenched themselves in a capitalistic model I think and not totally right but

model I think and not totally right but to an extent and I think to that extent

to an extent and I think to that extent it was a great benefit to them to

it was a great benefit to them to operate in that middle ground and I'll

operate in that middle ground and I'll say this since that's happened uh you

say this since that's happened uh you know that's when we you started seeing

know that's when we you started seeing all these Chinese billionaires which is

all these Chinese billionaires which is not a good thing I'm saying but it's

not a good thing I'm saying but it's global capitalism that's that's the

global capitalism that's that's the that's the inevitability it's impossible

that's the inevitability it's impossible to escape global capitalism under a

to escape global capitalism under a global capitalistic structure unless you

global capitalistic structure unless you are forced to exist or operate outside

are forced to exist or operate outside of those boundaries in the form of like

of those boundaries in the form of like Cuba for example well we both agree on a

Cuba for example well we both agree on a realistic uh approach so in that sense

realistic uh approach so in that sense we agree that that's why I believe

we agree that that's why I believe social democracy is the way but you know

social democracy is the way but you know Abe wrote something if you want to read

Abe wrote something if you want to read it

it oh yeah uh we were saying about how the

oh yeah uh we were saying about how the CCP um

oh you I didn't see the second part since established in 1921 CCP has

since established in 1921 CCP has proclaimed himself to be a Marxist

proclaimed himself to be a Marxist leninist party and has consistently

leninist party and has consistently referred to its system as socialism with

referred to its system as socialism with Chinese characteristics

Chinese characteristics in snccp views itself as

in snccp views itself as overseeing a transitional socialist

overseeing a transitional socialist State working towards the eventual

State working towards the eventual realization of communism

realization of communism because communism is a bit different

because communism is a bit different it's not like when you have like a

it's not like when you have like a strong central leader no communism is

strong central leader no communism is when when after a successful uh stage of

when when after a successful uh stage of development in a transitional socialist

development in a transitional socialist State uh where the the

State uh where the the um the scarcity problem has been solved

um the scarcity problem has been solved and uh and and there is no interest in

and uh and and there is no interest in like uh capital accumulation and the

like uh capital accumulation and the state eventually Withers away uh

state eventually Withers away uh yielding a borderless moneyless

yielding a borderless moneyless stateless society it's the Star Trek

stateless society it's the Star Trek future you were talking about earlier

future you were talking about earlier yeah but not nine as well entirely

yeah but not nine as well entirely because there's the critics often point

because there's the critics often point to the gap between the party's rhetoric

to the gap between the party's rhetoric and the realities of it noting the

and the realities of it noting the prominence of capitalistic practices

prominence of capitalistic practices wealth Gap and the and the absence of

wealth Gap and the and the absence of political freedoms as challenges to

political freedoms as challenges to their characterization as a transitional

their characterization as a transitional socialist state but isn't that just like

socialist state but isn't that just like okay but we kind of agree on that so let

okay but we kind of agree on that so let me ask you this

me ask you this um one of the reasons that China is able

um one of the reasons that China is able to govern so effectively and we agree

to govern so effectively and we agree they get [ __ ] done fast yeah and that's

they get [ __ ] done fast yeah and that's how part of again how their economic

how part of again how their economic growth was so um

growth was so um so quick and strong it can act don't

so quick and strong it can act don't have to be bogged down by

have to be bogged down by Congress and [ __ ] can I can I cut in

Congress and [ __ ] can I can I cut in here really quickly that's a dangerous

here really quickly that's a dangerous prospect that capitalist countries are

prospect that capitalist countries are also uh Reckoning with for the record

also uh Reckoning with for the record and under a capitalist country if they

and under a capitalist country if they want to continue consistently competing

want to continue consistently competing with China for example one of the things

with China for example one of the things that the EU did recently was uh talk

that the EU did recently was uh talk about the government-backed subsidies

about the government-backed subsidies and in the form of EVs and how Chinese

and in the form of EVs and how Chinese development is impossible to compete

development is impossible to compete with because they're offering insane

with because they're offering insane subsidies that offer Chinese EVs and and

subsidies that offer Chinese EVs and and is like basically uh destroying the EV

is like basically uh destroying the EV Marketplace for European car

Marketplace for European car manufacturers so they want to create an

manufacturers so they want to create an investigative team and and stop that

investigative team and and stop that from happening somehow or possibly even

from happening somehow or possibly even Implement tariffs by the way that in and

Implement tariffs by the way that in and of itself makes the Chinese centralized

of itself makes the Chinese centralized planning structure significantly better

planning structure significantly better than capitals ones in the form of global

than capitals ones in the form of global trade that will create in my opinion a

trade that will create in my opinion a very scary future for the West liberal

very scary future for the West liberal democracies where how do you implement

democracies where how do you implement that kind of central planning which

that kind of central planning which already exists but how do you make it

already exists but how do you make it worse fascism

worse fascism okay and well that's what I'm genuinely

okay and well that's what I'm genuinely afraid of well I mean China's not that

afraid of well I mean China's not that far off from it in its current state

far off from it in its current state what do you mean with like I mean they

what do you mean with like I mean they have basically a all-powerful leader

have basically a all-powerful leader everything's owned by the government the

everything's owned by the government the only difference is they're not at War

only difference is they're not at War basically that's the only missing Factor

basically that's the only missing Factor no they are building their military

no they are building their military and threatening countries like Taiwan

and threatening countries like Taiwan they're pretty close to Fascism right

they're pretty close to Fascism right now they're they're building their

now they're they're building their military uh government rules culture but

military uh government rules culture but what they've done with that military is

what they've done with that military is very different than what uh the American

very different than what uh the American Military okay they have a large military

Military okay they have a large military and they're threat it's always a

and they're threat it's always a hypothetical and it's the same way

hypothetical and it's the same way China's not that far from fascism it's

China's not that far from fascism it's the same with it's like right it's not

the same with it's like right it's not that far from fascism America is

that far from fascism America is literally 10x the Nazi Germany fascism

literally 10x the Nazi Germany fascism though kindness closer

they have a government control of business manufacturing okay of social

business manufacturing okay of social life of the press okay okay I have one

life of the press okay okay I have one strong these are authoritarian yes these

strong these are authoritarian yes these are authoritarian constructs for sure

are authoritarian constructs for sure and then

and then missing from that is basically they have

missing from that is basically they have they have a national they have strong

they have a national they have strong nationalism I agree with that and they

nationalism I agree with that and they have a and the only difference basically

have a and the only difference basically now to go full Fashions is if they were

now to go full Fashions is if they were uh invading countries what they're

uh invading countries what they're threatening to do right now so on the on

threatening to do right now so on the on that same metric you realize that the

that same metric you realize that the only difference in America is the simple

only difference in America is the simple feeling that you are free and that you

feeling that you are free and that you have all manner of different freedoms

have all manner of different freedoms whereas we have freedom we do have

whereas we have freedom we do have freedoms of we have freedom to say

freedoms of we have freedom to say freedom of I agree religion we have

freedom of I agree religion we have freedom of assembly those are big deals

freedom of assembly those are big deals but I know you don't think you don't

but I know you don't think you don't want to no no those are huge deals yeah

want to no no those are huge deals yeah okay of course no of course this is

okay of course no of course this is something I willingly recognizes that's

something I willingly recognizes that's why I say like I'm not living in [ __ ]

why I say like I'm not living in [ __ ] China right now it's not like their own

China right now it's not like their own cities to say well oh America is yeah

cities to say well oh America is yeah and I'm not being an American simple I'm

and I'm not being an American simple I'm just saying that

just saying that American fascism like China's China

American fascism like China's China fascism is better okay here's the here's

fascism is better okay here's the here's the difference because fascism okay

the difference because fascism okay fascism is supposed to be a a means of

fascism is supposed to be a a means of control with a with a oftentimes

control with a with a oftentimes capitalist uh understanding of the

capitalist uh understanding of the economy to and effectively to organize

economy to and effectively to organize the economy and continue organizing the

the economy and continue organizing the economy capitalism doesn't have a lot to

economy capitalism doesn't have a lot to do with fascism I don't think capitalism

do with fascism I don't think capitalism has everything to do with fascism I mean

has everything to do with fascism I mean capitalism you're striking on one of the

capitalism you're striking on one of the biggest uh political philosophy debates

biggest uh political philosophy debates of the 20th century

whipping the [ __ ] masses a lot of people Define fascism as capitalism in

people Define fascism as capitalism in crisis yes so so I think about it more

crisis yes so so I think about it more about like

about like um yeah maybe it's maybe it's like

um yeah maybe it's maybe it's like capitalism gone [ __ ] totally on all

capitalism gone [ __ ] totally on all the rules maybe yeah yeah

the rules maybe yeah yeah nothing to do with capitalism then all

nothing to do with capitalism then all of these supposedly populations

of these supposedly populations who started off as like supposedly

who started off as like supposedly quote-unquote socialist or even like you

quote-unquote socialist or even like you know uh interested in in higher levels

know uh interested in in higher levels of socialization would not have worked

of socialization would not have worked alongside Capital owners and destroyed

alongside Capital owners and destroyed trade unions and Communists in general

trade unions and Communists in general those were the first people that they

those were the first people that they [ __ ] butchered okay fine I don't care

[ __ ] butchered okay fine I don't care about uh capitalism I mean I'm a Social

about uh capitalism I mean I'm a Social Democrat so are in terms of like how uh

Democrat so are in terms of like how uh I just say I don't think social

I just say I don't think social Democrats in Germany there's also I

Democrats in Germany there's also I think contention there but I don't think

think contention there but I don't think Chinese fascism is better or worse in

Chinese fascism is better or worse in America why is that funny

America why is that funny because I don't think that I do not

because I don't think that I do not think that China is fascist I think that

think that China is fascist I think that they are authoritarians I don't think

they are authoritarians I don't think China is closer to Fascism than America

China is closer to Fascism than America I mean not because yeah I think it's the

I mean not because yeah I think it's the most significant part but like the most

most significant part but like the most significant part that you're mentioning

significant part that you're mentioning is like oh they're building their

is like oh they're building their military and they don't have freedom of

military and they don't have freedom of assembly or freedom of speech well they

assembly or freedom of speech well they they control the culture yes this part

they control the culture yes this part this part is correct the manufacturing

this part is correct the manufacturing nationalism is the best part that you

nationalism is the best part that you can actually identify in the in the

can actually identify in the in the problems with China you can absolutely

problems with China you can absolutely push that I don't see where's that part

push that I don't see where's that part where it is it is nationalistic okay

where it is it is nationalistic okay however uh the the the Chinese

however uh the the the Chinese development and and Chinese military

development and and Chinese military action is either irredentus in nature

action is either irredentus in nature which is different than Imperials where

which is different than Imperials where it's like it's more so uh expansive in

it's like it's more so uh expansive in its own limited area rather than Global

its own limited area rather than Global imperialism which is Express effort with

imperialism which is Express effort with the the bat Taiwan they're all okay well

Tibet in Taiwan and then not expect me to to explain I'm not ready for this

to to explain I'm not ready for this tangent because okay Ethan but like go

tangent because okay Ethan but like go ahead go ahead Tibet was literally a

ahead go ahead Tibet was literally a [ __ ] feudal slave uh mandate

[ __ ] feudal slave uh mandate like autonomous zone I'm trying to do

like autonomous zone I'm trying to do them a favor that was one I mean in

them a favor that was one I mean in America when I say something like this

America when I say something like this people get very upset you know if you

people get very upset you know if you talk about the Dalai Lama saying suck my

talk about the Dalai Lama saying suck my tongue or whatever but like that's not

tongue or whatever but like that's not far from the norm in [ __ ] normal

far from the norm in [ __ ] normal Tibetan existence before the Communist

Tibetan existence before the Communist Party came in and and

Party came in and and unilaterally

unilaterally took over Tibet like their culture

took over Tibet like their culture they basically are trying to you know

they basically are trying to you know homogenize the culture if your culture

homogenize the culture if your culture they're trying to spoil the religion and

they're trying to spoil the religion and the part the part of the party they did

the part the part of the party they did the Warlords in slavery abolishing that

the Warlords in slavery abolishing that yes I do think that that is good no

yes I do think that that is good no China did them a favor I think that yes

China did them a favor I think that yes I will be on the record it's just like

I will be on the record it's just like America did it that while the Chinese

America did it that while the Chinese government wait

government wait I'm not going to say it well there is no

I'm not going to say it well there is no there is no equivalent in American

there is no equivalent in American intervention that you can point to in a

intervention that you can point to in a similar capacity unless you're talking

similar capacity unless you're talking about okay so and I think this is a good

about okay so and I think this is a good uh this is a good way to describe Taiwan

uh this is a good way to describe Taiwan as well the American Federal Government

as well the American Federal Government going into the [ __ ] South and killing

going into the [ __ ] South and killing unfortunately not all of them but a

unfortunately not all of them but a decent amount of flavors and Defenders

decent amount of flavors and Defenders of slavery this is violent retribution

of slavery this is violent retribution from a powerful federal government

from a powerful federal government squashed that squashed okay Tibet is the

squashed that squashed okay Tibet is the south in the Civil War yes

south in the Civil War yes Tibet in the in the time frame where

Tibet in the in the time frame where Chinese intervention happened would be

Chinese intervention happened would be the South yesterday the moral aspect of

the South yesterday the moral aspect of the war of China the interests uh are

the war of China the interests uh are are obviously like National Security or

are obviously like National Security or whatever the [ __ ] they uh claim but but

whatever the [ __ ] they uh claim but but ultimately the reality was uh that

ultimately the reality was uh that beyond the the uh material benefits that

beyond the the uh material benefits that yes they were a feudal oppressive uh uh

yes they were a feudal oppressive uh uh slavery-backed uh State autonomous

slavery-backed uh State autonomous region so just like just like um

region so just like just like um Russia's denotsifying Ukraine no I don't

Russia's denotsifying Ukraine no I don't agree with that for the record I don't

agree with that for the record I don't think that Russia is denouncing Ukraine

think that Russia is denouncing Ukraine if anything there they will end up

if anything there they will end up notifying Ukraine in the long run if you

notifying Ukraine in the long run if you want to point to a modern uh country

want to point to a modern uh country that you could probably fairly

that you could probably fairly characterize as fascists I would point

characterize as fascists I would point to Russia before I agree 100 I think

to Russia before I agree 100 I think that Russia is a significantly better

that Russia is a significantly better example of a of a fascist nation-state

example of a of a fascist nation-state given its uh modern Russia contemporary

given its uh modern Russia contemporary Russia being a capitalist nation state

Russia being a capitalist nation state built by oligarchs that were anti-soviet

built by oligarchs that were anti-soviet and anti-communist that made deals with

and anti-communist that made deals with Western bankers and and westerners

Western bankers and and westerners originally uh leading up to the

originally uh leading up to the dissolution of the USSR so they could

dissolution of the USSR so they could literally pick apart the entire country

literally pick apart the entire country Vladimir Putin being another primary

Vladimir Putin being another primary example of this okay good they're

example of this okay good they're fascists I would agree that Russia's

fascists I would agree that Russia's interests are significantly more fascist

interests are significantly more fascist than the outcomes are because their

than the outcomes are because their interests do not lie around improving

interests do not lie around improving their productive forces or or the

their productive forces or or the abolition of like uh like what Russia is

abolition of like uh like what Russia is doing in Ukraine is no different than

doing in Ukraine is no different than what America has done in Iraq like oh

what America has done in Iraq like oh we're bringing democracy like they're

we're bringing democracy like they're not denotsifying Ukraine it's [ __ ]

not denotsifying Ukraine it's [ __ ] [ __ ] whereas I will not say the same

[ __ ] whereas I will not say the same thing about like uh well

you can create a pretense to take any anything you want you know yeah but

anything you want you know yeah but there are but there are also but you

there are but there are also but you agree like for example the the federal

agree like for example the the federal government uh in the Civil War did the

government uh in the Civil War did the right thing right it was very violent

right thing right it was very violent but if they did the right thing yeah

but if they did the right thing yeah would you agree with that yes okay good

would you agree with that yes okay good so let's talk about Taiwan then because

so let's talk about Taiwan then because Taiwan in its formation is uh created by

Taiwan in its formation is uh created by the kmt uh that uh or kmt general uh

the kmt uh that uh or kmt general uh Chang haishek

Chang haishek I'm butchering the his name I think that

I'm butchering the his name I think that was close but I think it's the closest I

was close but I think it's the closest I can get to that and it's for in its

can get to that and it's for in its formation it was a military dictatorship

formation it was a military dictatorship that was fascist openly fascist openly

that was fascist openly fascist openly Nationalist and there was no surprise

Nationalist and there was no surprise there that uh the American government

there that uh the American government was backing them right in its entire

was backing them right in its entire Inception now is very different than

Inception now is very different than that yeah I don't know a lot but this is

that yeah I don't know a lot but this is very important talking about Taiwan

very important talking about Taiwan should they be invaded for how they were

should they be invaded for how they were absolutely not right absolutely not

absolutely not right absolutely not because hey guess what everybody was

because hey guess what everybody was when America when America builds you up

when America when America builds you up to be a nation as a counter a

to be a nation as a counter a counterbalance or or as a as a the real

counterbalance or or as a as a the real uh China as we did originally that's why

uh China as we did originally that's why we were in support of Taiwan because

we were in support of Taiwan because they were nationalist fascists military

they were nationalist fascists military dictatorship that was brutal uh

dictatorship that was brutal uh comprised of dudes that got owned by

comprised of dudes that got owned by [ __ ] Mao uh overall right but at a

[ __ ] Mao uh overall right but at a time and in a time when

time and in a time when um yeah 100 at a time and they were butt

um yeah 100 at a time and they were butt hurt losers that believed that like

hurt losers that believed that like Hmong Mongolia is also a part of

Hmong Mongolia is also a part of Republic of China they have more

Republic of China they have more expansive desires more expansive

expansive desires more expansive territorial desires than Mongolia than

territorial desires than Mongolia than that they can't do anything they're

that they can't do anything they're military according to American generals

military according to American generals assessments was [ __ ] dog [ __ ] I think

assessments was [ __ ] dog [ __ ] I think taiwan's a better example then so but

taiwan's a better example then so but Taiwan but wait I'm not ready but Taiwan

Taiwan but wait I'm not ready but Taiwan in its institution tangent is out of

in its institution tangent is out of control wait but but like you're you're

control wait but but like you're you're you want me to just we'll go back to it

you want me to just we'll go back to it these things don't happen overnight if

these things don't happen overnight if you assume that it's like a war between

you assume that it's like a war between good and bad or that it happened

good and bad or that it happened overnight it materialized that of

overnight it materialized that of nothing then yes it is that is

nothing then yes it is that is infinitely more susceptible to Western

infinitely more susceptible to Western framing to be like these are the good

framing to be like these are the good guys these are the bad guys they want to

guys these are the bad guys they want to do this thing and then you make

do this thing and then you make comparisons to like reasonable Wars or

comparisons to like reasonable Wars or whatever and then all of a sudden we are

whatever and then all of a sudden we are not factoring in the understandable

not factoring in the understandable whether I agree with it or not doesn't

whether I agree with it or not doesn't matter the understandable desires of

matter the understandable desires of national security from the Chinese

national security from the Chinese nation-state that is is in an openly

nation-state that is is in an openly contentious yet still very favorable

contentious yet still very favorable trade relationship with the Western

trade relationship with the Western world old why the [ __ ] would they want a

world old why the [ __ ] would they want a American military base in a nation-state

American military base in a nation-state that was developed by America originally

that was developed by America originally a fascist nationalistic uh brutal

a fascist nationalistic uh brutal military dictatorship why would they

military dictatorship why would they want that to be an American base one

want that to be an American base one mile off their [ __ ] Coast okay you're

mile off their [ __ ] Coast okay you're right so that is precisely the reason uh

right so that is precisely the reason uh uh so that's precisely the reason why

uh so that's precisely the reason why the the people of Taiwan who recognize

the the people of Taiwan who recognize that reality while they yearn for

that reality while they yearn for Independence they recognize that reality

Independence they recognize that reality that it will never happen as long as

that it will never happen as long as China has a military or a powerful

China has a military or a powerful economy and and as long as America has a

economy and and as long as America has a legitimate interest in Taiwan being an

legitimate interest in Taiwan being an American uh base of of uh support to

American uh base of of uh support to inevitably control China dominate China

inevitably control China dominate China in some ways okay hold on let me go back

in some ways okay hold on let me go back because we did like the monster tangent

because we did like the monster tangent here okay I was saying one of the

here okay I was saying one of the reasons China is so effective is because

reasons China is so effective is because of their one-party state

of their one-party state um

um you know without opposition they're able

you know without opposition they're able to move fast and effectively so do you

to move fast and effectively so do you think this is a good model

think this is a good model um

um do you think the one-party state is a

do you think the one-party state is a good model because the outcome of that

good model because the outcome of that one party state is also massive human

one party state is also massive human rights violations across the board I

rights violations across the board I mean I don't think that uh I think that

mean I don't think that uh I think that America is a one-party I don't care

America is a one-party I don't care about America no but it's important to

about America no but it's important to understand because like the one-party

understand because like the one-party state is an inevitability under any kind

state is an inevitability under any kind of formation of the government the

of formation of the government the government is going to yield results

government is going to yield results that are either positive for the people

that are either positive for the people or negative for the people even if it's

or negative for the people even if it's a marginal there is still a difference

a marginal there is still a difference even if it's marginal there's still

even if it's marginal there's still difference for example abortion which I

difference for example abortion which I consider a human right it's it's

consider a human right it's it's marginal I agree with you on that I

marginal I agree with you on that I think that it but I don't want to talk

think that it but I don't want to talk about America I want to talk about China

about America I want to talk about China well the reason why we're talking about

well the reason why we're talking about America is to put it into a framework

America is to put it into a framework that is understandable like that that's

that is understandable like that that's the only reason why I always bring up

the only reason why I always bring up people always say Hassan your only

people always say Hassan your only assessment on the situation is America

assessment on the situation is America bad it's significantly more nuanced than

bad it's significantly more nuanced than that the reason why I always go back to

that the reason why I always go back to America is to help Americans or

America is to help Americans or westerners understand uh Chinese

westerners understand uh Chinese governance not all that different they

governance not all that different they you say they don't just pretend to have

you say they don't just pretend to have two parties yeah no no I disagree with

two parties yeah no no I disagree with that I don't think it's like super super

that I don't think it's like super super wrong I think there are marginal

wrong I think there are marginal differences in the parties and I do

differences in the parties and I do think there's space potentially although

think there's space potentially although super unlikely it's happened in American

super unlikely it's happened in American history for a third party it's probably

history for a third party it's probably never going to happen again but it has

never going to happen again but it has happened before yeah the Civil War

happened before yeah the Civil War and so but like the consequence of the

and so but like the consequence of the greatest material differences okay but

greatest material differences okay but the greatest material differences were

the greatest material differences were ever represented in American history was

ever represented in American history was during the Civil War okay

during the Civil War okay the greatest material difference is like

the greatest material difference is like genuine material differences in the form

genuine material differences in the form of how to produce cheap Commodities like

of how to produce cheap Commodities like cotton okay well in in uh the northern

cotton okay well in in uh the northern states uh they backed the abolition of

states uh they backed the abolition of slavery Southern States didn't that was

slavery Southern States didn't that was a major point of contention that was

a major point of contention that was probably one of the last times where

probably one of the last times where there was like a real and significant

there was like a real and significant difference in an agreement I guess a

difference in an agreement I guess a difference in opinion that led to a very

difference in opinion that led to a very violent uh conquest of the South that

violent uh conquest of the South that wanted to secede and was forced to not

wanted to secede and was forced to not um the one-party system in China does

um the one-party system in China does result in a lot of human rights

result in a lot of human rights violations does the does the ends

violations does the does the ends justify the means in that case I don't

justify the means in that case I don't think it's control I don't think it does

think it's control I don't think it does okay I think that in in Cuba which also

okay I think that in in Cuba which also has a certain restrictions on civil

has a certain restrictions on civil liberties for example

liberties for example uh there is uh there is a better

uh there is uh there is a better argument to be made that the ends

argument to be made that the ends justify the means in Cuba because you

justify the means in Cuba because you know Cuba is an island that has been

know Cuba is an island that has been under embargo and uh since its

under embargo and uh since its inceptions is the Cuban Revolution after

inceptions is the Cuban Revolution after we you know we backed Batista and wanted

we you know we backed Batista and wanted to make sure that ensure that Cuba was

to make sure that ensure that Cuba was still a tourism destination and sugar

still a tourism destination and sugar plantations with slavery uh and then

plantations with slavery uh and then lost we immediately said okay [ __ ] this

lost we immediately said okay [ __ ] this [ __ ] Cuba you we are gonna do everything

[ __ ] Cuba you we are gonna do everything in our power to stop you from developing

in our power to stop you from developing in that situation because it's a tiny

in that situation because it's a tiny island nation that is in the ass cheeks

island nation that is in the ass cheeks of the largest imperialist superpower on

of the largest imperialist superpower on the planet it's understandable to have

the planet it's understandable to have certain uh it's understandable to have

certain uh it's understandable to have certain restrictions on civil liberties

certain restrictions on civil liberties whereas or not and by the way ironically

whereas or not and by the way ironically Cuba is like way better on abortion gay

Cuba is like way better on abortion gay rights and whatnot which we can get into

rights and whatnot which we can get into if you want no that's a that's a

if you want no that's a that's a consequence of direct democracy even

consequence of direct democracy even though Cuba is a one-party State as well

though Cuba is a one-party State as well okay like I mean there's plenty of cute

okay like I mean there's plenty of cute I know plenty and again I'm not super

I know plenty and again I'm not super familiar with that the politics so I I

familiar with that the politics so I I don't even want to speak on it

don't even want to speak on it necessarily just because I don't know a

necessarily just because I don't know a lot I do know that a lot of Cubans that

lot I do know that a lot of Cubans that I've met [ __ ] hate

I've met [ __ ] hate the Cuban government yeah because

the Cuban government yeah because they're in America they're not like Rich

they're in America they're not like Rich they're like no no it doesn't matter

they're like no no it doesn't matter okay so they're like they don't have to

okay so they're like they don't have to be rich they're but they're in America

be rich they're but they're in America which means admittedly I don't know I

which means admittedly I don't know I don't know like they had a disagreement

don't know like they had a disagreement in the latest terms they either were

in the latest terms they either were forced to uh to run away or literally

forced to uh to run away or literally had in the lightest terms a disagreement

had in the lightest terms a disagreement with the Cuban government so of course

with the Cuban government so of course they are not going to be fond of of okay

they are not going to be fond of of okay the current Cuban so uh government isn't

the current Cuban so uh government isn't there when you're looking at a country

there when you're looking at a country like China who's able to act so

like China who's able to act so efficiently and if you're looking for

efficiently and if you're looking for some democratization or like some

some democratization or like some equality of outcome in terms of income

equality of outcome in terms of income for the lowest people

for the lowest people seems like a

seems like a a a potential and almost like inevitable

a a potential and almost like inevitable outcome is some of the stuff that you

outcome is some of the stuff that you see in China like

see in China like um one cultural identity one religion or

um one cultural identity one religion or non-religion like this need to be

non-religion like this need to be homogeneous so that people are compliant

homogeneous so that people are compliant and they live that way this is State

and they live that way this is State development 101. every every nation

development 101. every every nation state does so the reform the reason that

state does so the reform the reason that that has happened in China is why all

that has happened in China is why all these mass human rights violations are

these mass human rights violations are able to exist like re-educating people

able to exist like re-educating people Mass detention for people who are

Mass detention for people who are religious you know what I mean

religious you know what I mean um

um forced labor camps they [ __ ] and I

forced labor camps they [ __ ] and I know you deny that they organ they are

know you deny that they organ they are organ harvesting but I do believe that

organ harvesting but I do believe that they do do that or did do that maybe

they do do that or did do that maybe they stopped organ harvesting yeah organ

they stopped organ harvesting yeah organ harvesting did happen in China what

harvesting did happen in China what you're talking about is like falun gong

you're talking about is like falun gong propaganda which is that they have a oh

propaganda which is that they have a oh no well there's two different types what

no well there's two different types what we're talking about is like yeah were

we're talking about is like yeah were there criminal components and and

there criminal components and and certainly people sponsored Oregon no I

certainly people sponsored Oregon no I don't know if it was state-sponsored or

don't know if it was state-sponsored or evidence suggests that it was the state

evidence suggests that it was the state actually watch out oh she's right behind

actually watch out oh she's right behind you sorry it's okay

you sorry it's okay um if it was state sponsored the state

um if it was state sponsored the state would not have cracked down on it

would not have cracked down on it inevitably well they did we realize how

inevitably well they did we realize how bad it looks it was that evidence

bad it looks it was that evidence why would they care about how bad it

why would they care about how bad it looks you said that they know labor

looks you said that they know labor camps China doesn't care about

camps China doesn't care about appearance oh well they do to it if

appearance oh well they do to it if they're authoritarian why would they

they're authoritarian why would they care well I mean they have labor camps

care well I mean they have labor camps which is by the way ironic because

which is by the way ironic because America still has a much higher prisoner

America still has a much higher prisoner density than any other Nation on the

density than any other Nation on the planet and slavery is not abolished in

planet and slavery is not abolished in America we can't criticize

America we can't criticize well my point is yes it's wrong in China

well my point is yes it's wrong in China as well but it's of course it's wrong in

as well but it's of course it's wrong in China as well okay forget about forget

China as well okay forget about forget about that I mean look like what about

about that I mean look like what about the but what about for example now

the but what about for example now you're doing What About Us by the way no

you're doing What About Us by the way no I'm not I'm gonna tell you why I'm

I'm not I'm gonna tell you why I'm specifically let's use this and now this

specifically let's use this and now this example because it's the best one the

example because it's the best one the the uyghur um I'm sorry I don't know how

the uyghur um I'm sorry I don't know how to say their name detention camps were

to say their name detention camps were they re-educated and eliminated their

they re-educated and eliminated their Ultra identity and relation and also

Ultra identity and relation and also frankly as a there it's almost

frankly as a there it's almost impossible to do that and not like

impossible to do that and not like think of them as others were they also

think of them as others were they also you know are under horrible horrible

you know are under horrible horrible horrible Mass surveillance even

horrible Mass surveillance even including like certain uh

including like certain uh Representatives living with people in

Representatives living with people in families like some of this is like

families like some of this is like people will say oh this is Adrian Zen's

people will say oh this is Adrian Zen's propaganda and some of it is very real

propaganda and some of it is very real 100 uh propaganda to be like it wasn't

100 uh propaganda to be like it wasn't as bad

as bad I'm not saying it wasn't as bad good

I'm not saying it wasn't as bad good because I thought you said but hold on

because I thought you said but hold on no I think that my analysis on on the

no I think that my analysis on on the matter is is

matter is is fairly nuanced but still incredibly

fairly nuanced but still incredibly critical of the Chinese State I have

critical of the Chinese State I have never said that mass surveillance Mass

never said that mass surveillance Mass imprisonment even execution in certain

imprisonment even execution in certain instances and China's development in

instances and China's development in China they're homogeneous socialist

China they're homogeneous socialist society the reason that the Chinese

society the reason that the Chinese nation state claims they did this and Xi

nation state claims they did this and Xi Jinping famously even I forget when he

Jinping famously even I forget when he said this this is a while back but

said this this is a while back but basically said something along the lines

basically said something along the lines of like we learned how to deal with uh

of like we learned how to deal with uh we learned how to deal with with uh

we learned how to deal with with uh Islamic Terror from the American nation

Islamic Terror from the American nation state okay uh and and that is why we had

state okay uh and and that is why we had to deal with the uyghurs I don't agree

to deal with the uyghurs I don't agree with what they did I think that it's

with what they did I think that it's [ __ ] [ __ ] you think it's

[ __ ] [ __ ] you think it's necessary to maintain their socialist

necessary to maintain their socialist homogeney it's not a socialist

homogeney it's not a socialist homogeneous now we're talking about

homogeneous now we're talking about cultural homogeny right that's what

cultural homogeny right that's what you're saying but it's all yeah it's all

you're saying but it's all yeah it's all it's connected the the separatist

it's connected the the separatist movement uh within uh xinjiang and and

movement uh within uh xinjiang and and some of the aspects of that did include

some of the aspects of that did include uh you know uh knife attacks and and the

uh you know uh knife attacks and and the like they don't have a lot of guns in

like they don't have a lot of guns in China luckily

China luckily um this like uh the criminal component

um this like uh the criminal component of that uh should have been dealt with

of that uh should have been dealt with on an individual basis rather than

on an individual basis rather than dragnets and Collective punishment for

dragnets and Collective punishment for the entirety of xinjiang which is what

the entirety of xinjiang which is what China did and re-education camps and

China did and re-education camps and mass surveillance which exists still to

mass surveillance which exists still to this day xinjiang or any kind of

this day xinjiang or any kind of separatist movement in xinjiang has now

separatist movement in xinjiang has now been absolutely squawked destroyed

been absolutely squawked destroyed eviscerated and and uh not only have

eviscerated and and uh not only have they done that but also on top of that

they done that but also on top of that they've basically softened like you said

they've basically softened like you said or uh I guess the term that westerners

or uh I guess the term that westerners who uses honified xinjiang uh and and

who uses honified xinjiang uh and and have now and now use their like uh uh

have now and now use their like uh uh their their cultural output as like an

their their cultural output as like an export even like you could just go to

export even like you could just go to xinjiang and see uh how how wonderful

xinjiang and see uh how how wonderful everything is that kind of thing

everything is that kind of thing um oh here oh you found it God damn

um oh here oh you found it God damn that's so funny Mr G urged the party to

that's so funny Mr G urged the party to emulate aspects of America's war on

emulate aspects of America's war on terror after the September 11th attacks

terror after the September 11th attacks from documents leaked in 2019.

from documents leaked in 2019. just to just to frame this for people

just to just to frame this for people that aren't familiar with the history

that aren't familiar with the history that the the

that the the crackdowns over there were a result of a

crackdowns over there were a result of a rise in terrorism in that region there

rise in terrorism in that region there were bombings and stuff going on and so

were bombings and stuff going on and so all those camps and and the re-education

all those camps and and the re-education all of that was a response it was

all of that was a response it was essentially a Crackdown and but it was a

essentially a Crackdown and but it was a completely for the record completely

completely for the record completely unjustifiable way over the top [ __ ]

unjustifiable way over the top [ __ ] Dragnet yes I right exactly yeah or or

Dragnet yes I right exactly yeah or or what the United States did in

what the United States did in Afghanistan after September 11th I mean

Afghanistan after September 11th I mean we we rocked to that country for 20

we we rocked to that country for 20 years as a result of the terrorism

years as a result of the terrorism defending America or something that's

defending America or something that's really funny you should say that because

really funny you should say that because that is the automatic position of people

that is the automatic position of people in the west though is that like whenever

in the west though is that like whenever I make a comparison to America like if I

I make a comparison to America like if I compare Russia to America people think

compare Russia to America people think I'm doing that to defend Russia and it's

I'm doing that to defend Russia and it's like no that is the worst comparison I

like no that is the worst comparison I can make for a country's actions because

can make for a country's actions because my opinion on American uh the American

my opinion on American uh the American superpower is is that it is incredibly

superpower is is that it is incredibly bloody and Incredibly unjust but the

bloody and Incredibly unjust but the reason why people immediately go uh say

reason why people immediately go uh say what the [ __ ] why are you uh bringing up

what the [ __ ] why are you uh bringing up America in this situation is because

America in this situation is because they inherently without recognizing it

they inherently without recognizing it will defend American foreign policy

will defend American foreign policy because they are under the understanding

because they are under the understanding I agree most people do that yeah but so

I agree most people do that yeah but so my ultimate question is do you believe

my ultimate question is do you believe that this um cultural homogeney is is uh

that this um cultural homogeney is is uh required in a

required in a socialist or communist yes I think that

socialist or communist yes I think that some form of positive uh social cohesion

some form of positive uh social cohesion needs to occur if you are going to build

needs to occur if you are going to build a nation-state and this happens in

a nation-state and this happens in public education I'm I think that public

public education I'm I think that public education is very valuable and I'm 100

education is very valuable and I'm 100 in agreement if it's being done in a

in agreement if it's being done in a more positive in a more positive way

more positive in a more positive way through public education then it's great

through public education then it's great right but not like not like erasing

right but not like not like erasing their ethnic identity yeah if they're

their ethnic identity yeah if they're doing it in a negative way in that

doing it in a negative way in that situation where like education moves to

situation where like education moves to re-education a positive a positive

re-education a positive a positive component would be something that we

component would be something that we unfortunately do not have in America

unfortunately do not have in America either would be to uh to to

either would be to uh to to to have uh regions that that still have

to have uh regions that that still have their own uh ethnic identities preserved

their own uh ethnic identities preserved through their own board of education and

through their own board of education and and uh are allowed to exist this is a

and uh are allowed to exist this is a major problem with the USSR as well this

major problem with the USSR as well this happened in the USSR where there was a

happened in the USSR where there was a russification of all the the nation

russification of all the the nation states that were under the banner of the

states that were under the banner of the USSR which ended up creating a [ __ ] ton

USSR which ended up creating a [ __ ] ton of division uh and and also uh a a uh

of division uh and and also uh a a uh like suppression of religious freedom

like suppression of religious freedom religion is something that is so

religion is something that is so personal and so important for human

personal and so important for human beings and their identity isn't Mark's

beings and their identity isn't Mark's theory around like we have to get rid of

theory around like we have to get rid of a religion

um that's no I mean the the I no and also I don't even care what I don't even

also I don't even care what I don't even care what Marx's own personal

care what Marx's own personal perspective on religion is ultimately

perspective on religion is ultimately because I'm saying I'm looking at real

because I'm saying I'm looking at real implementations of socialism throughout

implementations of socialism throughout historical uh materialist socialist

historical uh materialist socialist nation-states and I'm saying that that's

nation-states and I'm saying that that's bad and wrong it is demonstrably bad it

bad and wrong it is demonstrably bad it was bad in Afghanistan it was bad in the

was bad in Afghanistan it was bad in the USSR and it's certainly bad when China

USSR and it's certainly bad when China does the same exact [ __ ] so you're

does the same exact [ __ ] so you're saying yes it's required but nothing

saying yes it's required but nothing different than what you see in in

different than what you see in in countries today that's that's it yeah

countries today that's that's it yeah they're good yes allowing people to have

they're good yes allowing people to have a natural identity allowing people to

a natural identity allowing people to have a national identity while

have a national identity while simultaneously reinforcing their their

simultaneously reinforcing their their you know ethnic differences or uh their

you know ethnic differences or uh their diversity of culture is absolutely a

diversity of culture is absolutely a necessity for nation-state development

necessity for nation-state development if you want this nation state to succeed

if you want this nation state to succeed and I'm giving an example of why it

and I'm giving an example of why it didn't work work in in the USSR by the

didn't work work in in the USSR by the way I would urge you to look more into

way I would urge you to look more into the organ harvesting thing because I do

the organ harvesting thing because I do believe that that did happen by the

believe that that did happen by the state they were harvesting the the

state they were harvesting the the Muslims organs man like the wait time on

Muslims organs man like the wait time on the on the um

the on the um but you're saying in modern China no not

but you're saying in modern China no not modern China I don't think well it was

modern China I don't think well it was modern China it wasn't that long ago but

modern China it wasn't that long ago but I don't think they're doing it you're

I don't think they're doing it you're saying the state was harvesting the

saying the state was harvesting the organs of of Muslims yeah who were in

organs of of Muslims yeah who were in that detention Camp too to uh give to

that detention Camp too to uh give to their citizens

their citizens that dude the wait time for Oregon here

that dude the wait time for Oregon here listen to this one of the most cited

listen to this one of the most cited pieces of evidence is the rapid growth

pieces of evidence is the rapid growth of China's organ transplant industry in

of China's organ transplant industry in the early 2000s with much shorter

the early 2000s with much shorter waiting time for organs than other

waiting time for organs than other countries Chinese government has

countries Chinese government has attributed this to the use of organs

attributed this to the use of organs from executed prisoners but the critics

from executed prisoners but the critics argue that those numbers do not match up

argue that those numbers do not match up the prisoners of conscious uh yeah so

the prisoners of conscious uh yeah so backgrounds literally can't I'm sorry if

backgrounds literally can't I'm sorry if it was in the early 2000s it would have

it was in the early 2000s it would have been before the Crackdown in on the ugh

been before the Crackdown in on the ugh I don't know when it sounds like it was

I don't know when it sounds like it was just the general prison population there

just the general prison population there was a criminal component I'm not saying

was a criminal component I'm not saying that when did that happen organ

that when did that happen organ harvesting certainly happened there was

harvesting certainly happened there was a black market for organs 100 not just

a black market for organs 100 not just for Chinese citizens mind you that is

for Chinese citizens mind you that is like literally massaging The Narrative

like literally massaging The Narrative to fit uh the the uh like the the the

to fit uh the the uh like the the the ugurus being harvested for Oregon

ugurus being harvested for Oregon because it's respectful

yeah they're [ __ ] turkey yeah like it's called it's turkistan you know what

it's called it's turkistan you know what I mean right it's not like my my the

I mean right it's not like my my the other side of my family my mother's side

other side of my family my mother's side is literally their last name is so this

is literally their last name is so this is not like random individuals that I uh

is not like random individuals that I uh like I have no Affinity towards that I'm

like I have no Affinity towards that I'm saying like the Chinese nation state

saying like the Chinese nation state should oppressively [ __ ] I'm just

should oppressively [ __ ] I'm just saying so it's always additionally funny

saying so it's always additionally funny when some [ __ ] dumb [ __ ] from Iowa is

when some [ __ ] dumb [ __ ] from Iowa is trying to tell me about [ __ ] muslim

trying to tell me about [ __ ] muslim oppression why don't you care about

oppression why don't you care about Muslim oppression than John it's like

Muslim oppression than John it's like what the [ __ ] are you saying anyway

what the [ __ ] are you saying anyway sorry I get very heated about this

sorry I get very heated about this because like people are so merciless

because like people are so merciless just like people are merciless with you

just like people are merciless with you when they say you're a [ __ ] Tyrant or

when they say you're a [ __ ] Tyrant or you're a capitalist pig dog or whatever

you're a capitalist pig dog or whatever the [ __ ] people are infinitely more

the [ __ ] people are infinitely more merciless when you deviate from the

merciless when you deviate from the foreign policy Norms that have been

foreign policy Norms that have been mandated by uh Americans through our

mandated by uh Americans through our mainstream media okay so in short I

mainstream media okay so in short I think I got my answer on that which is

think I got my answer on that which is you know the China Tribunal

you know the China Tribunal okay whatever I want to move on to

okay whatever I want to move on to Taiwan so last time I just want to point

Taiwan so last time I just want to point out it's one o'clock we're pretty far

out it's one o'clock we're pretty far over already yeah okay I mean it's fine

over already yeah okay I mean it's fine we can we can okay

we can we can okay very good so I'm perfectly fine talking

very good so I'm perfectly fine talking about this okay great great love that so

about this okay great great love that so last time we were talking about Taiwan

last time we were talking about Taiwan you had mentioned one country two

you had mentioned one country two systems what did you mean by that

systems what did you mean by that because I don't know anything about that

because I don't know anything about that when you when you said it but I've read

when you when you said it but I've read it so yeah so since the Nixon era of

it so yeah so since the Nixon era of normalizing relations with uh China

normalizing relations with uh China America's understanding of China has

America's understanding of China has been that it is one over-encompassing

been that it is one over-encompassing nation and that uh Taiwan uh which

nation and that uh Taiwan uh which certainly does want an independence

certainly does want an independence movement or has a as a robust

movement or has a as a robust Independence Movement is simply Chinese

Independence Movement is simply Chinese Taipei the American understanding of the

Taipei the American understanding of the global understanding is the same that

global understanding is the same that there is a different autonomous

there is a different autonomous organization inside of Taiwan an

organization inside of Taiwan an autonomous government inside of Taiwan

autonomous government inside of Taiwan but it's still under the Chinese

but it's still under the Chinese umbrella my opinion on the matter does

umbrella my opinion on the matter does not deviate away from the American

not deviate away from the American foreign policy on the matter and the

foreign policy on the matter and the reason for that is because it also does

reason for that is because it also does not deviate away from the Taiwanese the

not deviate away from the Taiwanese the collective Taiwanese understanding on

collective Taiwanese understanding on the matter which is that if

the matter which is that if there's two different forces here at

there's two different forces here at play

play Taiwan Independence is not something

Taiwan Independence is not something that even Anthony blinken or the

that even Anthony blinken or the American state backs why because it

American state backs why because it would be incredibly disruptive to to our

would be incredibly disruptive to to our largest trade partner great the people

largest trade partner great the people of Taiwan want independence yeah in the

of Taiwan want independence yeah in the future possibly in the future the reason

future possibly in the future the reason why they take that position well if you

why they take that position well if you were to ask them without any sort of

were to ask them without any sort of Chinese influence like without any sort

Chinese influence like without any sort of like mainland China influence would

of like mainland China influence would you want independence tomorrow they

you want independence tomorrow they would say yes that is the majority

would say yes that is the majority opinion well what they say is that we

opinion well what they say is that we already have the independence they said

already have the independence they said we already had china has no influence

we already had china has no influence over Taiwanese economy or government yes

over Taiwanese economy or government yes and yet but and yes and yet from a

and yet but and yes and yet from a Global Perspective they are still

Global Perspective they are still considered to be Chinese Taipei right

considered to be Chinese Taipei right because people doesn't want to rock the

because people doesn't want to rock the boat exactly Taiwanese and that is my

boat exactly Taiwanese and that is my perspective as well we are already

perspective as well we are already independent

so then there's no additional need for State intervention from Western forces

State intervention from Western forces there well but China is you know China

there well but China is you know China is what it is um

is what it is um being a uh provocative what are they

being a uh provocative what are they doing with the Taiwanese what are they

doing with the Taiwanese what are they doing that you would consider to be

doing that you would consider to be provocative towards the time I mean they

provocative towards the time I mean they have military station around they're

have military station around they're making they're doing War Games you know

making they're doing War Games you know where Taiwan is in proximity to Mainland

where Taiwan is in proximity to Mainland China right it's one mile off their

China right it's one mile off their Coastline so whenever people say America

Coastline so whenever people say America China is obvious though China is

China is obvious though China is violating their airspace we know what we

violating their airspace we know what we China says it China the government even

China says it China the government even says it that we're gonna [ __ ] take

says it that we're gonna [ __ ] take Taiwan if y'all don't

Taiwan if y'all don't play ball yes

play ball yes China no matter if I agree with this or

China no matter if I agree with this or not right because I want I want autonomy

not right because I want I want autonomy for uh the people that I want to want

for uh the people that I want to want them to do whatever the [ __ ] they want

them to do whatever the [ __ ] they want self-governance right so

self-governance right so I understand that and I also

I understand that and I also simultaneously understand one the

simultaneously understand one the history of the the Taiwanese nation

history of the the Taiwanese nation state being propped up and and why it

state being propped up and and why it was propped up and more importantly than

was propped up and more importantly than that I understand that the Chinese

that I understand that the Chinese government which is a different

government which is a different government than ours right they are

government than ours right they are human beings over there that have their

human beings over there that have their own concerns is not going to want a

own concerns is not going to want a [ __ ] American Military Base one mile

[ __ ] American Military Base one mile off of their Coastline that is a

off of their Coastline that is a perfectly reasonable thing to never want

perfectly reasonable thing to never want and given the historical reasons as to

and given the historical reasons as to how Taiwan has has been created as a

how Taiwan has has been created as a separate nation state with its own

separate nation state with its own expansionist interest in the Republic of

expansionist interest in the Republic of China the entire mainland China

China the entire mainland China including Mongolia uh that's like its

including Mongolia uh that's like its founding mandate that it is

founding mandate that it is understandable for China to not want

understandable for China to not want that to happen which is why they

that to happen which is why they constantly counter American saber

constantly counter American saber rattling with their own version of saber

rattling with their own version of saber rattling this does not mean that the

rattling this does not mean that the Chinese state is nice this does not mean

Chinese state is nice this does not mean that the Chinese state is is uh genuine

that the Chinese state is is uh genuine or wants to implement communism Taiwan

or wants to implement communism Taiwan what 30 U.S troops are stationed there's

what 30 U.S troops are stationed there's no way you think that that is I don't

no way you think that that is I don't know material I don't know what you read

know material I don't know what you read is offering Taiwan 30 U.S taiwan's

is offering Taiwan 30 U.S taiwan's entire standing army would not exist

entire standing army would not exist without U.S support since its Inception

without U.S support since its Inception okay but their America you say America

okay but their America you say America has a military base there is one of the

has a military base there is one of the and that would be no no no but I don't

and that would be no no no but I don't know I don't want it to turn

know I don't want it to turn I do not want further conflict the

I do not want further conflict the people of Taiwan do not want further

people of Taiwan do not want further conflict which is why the overarching

conflict which is why the overarching assessment is like we're independent we

assessment is like we're independent we want to maintain Independence we want to

want to maintain Independence we want to be fully independent but we don't want

be fully independent but we don't want to rock the boat but it seems like if

to rock the boat but it seems like if China was to and just invade Taiwan and

China was to and just invade Taiwan and like look we're over it would be

like look we're over it would be devastating it would be awful for Taiwan

devastating it would be awful for Taiwan it would be awful for China it would be

it would be awful for China it would be horrifyingly bad

horrifyingly bad it'll be it would be disastrous if we

it'll be it would be disastrous if we are in agreement right there right yeah

are in agreement right there right yeah okay so we both want no further

okay so we both want no further Bloodshed to happen

Bloodshed to happen and that's what the people of Taiwan

and that's what the people of Taiwan also say they want as well you also kind

also say they want as well you also kind of see where China's coming from

of see where China's coming from I absolutely understand why China would

I absolutely understand why China would feel like this is a major issue with

feel like this is a major issue with their National Security concerns the the

their National Security concerns the the example I will give you is this let's

example I will give you is this let's say just like England and and uh France

say just like England and and uh France tried to do during the Civil War because

tried to do during the Civil War because they had material interest in the cotton

they had material interest in the cotton trade uh continuing with uh chattel

trade uh continuing with uh chattel slavery let's say they offered material

slavery let's say they offered material support to the southern states that

support to the southern states that wanted to secede right in order to

wanted to secede right in order to continue slavery okay and they were

continue slavery okay and they were actually successful to a certain degree

actually successful to a certain degree because third parties like Imperial

because third parties like Imperial Japan were also invading uh Mainland

Japan were also invading uh Mainland America okay in this process so the

America okay in this process so the Civil War ended in a way where chattel

Civil War ended in a way where chattel slavery continued in the South and every

slavery continued in the South and every abolitionist was executed and they

abolitionist was executed and they called it instead of white Terror let's

called it instead of white Terror let's say they called it Black Terror okay

say they called it Black Terror okay they executed mercilessly and ruthlessly

they executed mercilessly and ruthlessly any abolitionist that lived in the South

any abolitionist that lived in the South and then after after

and then after after years and years of this fascist white

years and years of this fascist white supremacist implementation hyper

supremacist implementation hyper nationalist implementation the southern

nationalist implementation the southern states that had successfully seceded

states that had successfully seceded okay kept building a robust military

okay kept building a robust military apparatus through Surplus military

apparatus through Surplus military supplies and weapon systems that other

supplies and weapon systems that other countries that were foreign adversaries

countries that were foreign adversaries to the United States of America started

to the United States of America started giving them even more and more of this

giving them even more and more of this and then and and also said the real

and then and and also said the real America is the South America southern

America is the South America southern states are the real America and they

states are the real America and they will one day take over the rest of

will one day take over the rest of America you're saying and that they will

America you're saying and that they will inevitably they will inevitably take

inevitably they will inevitably take over the rest of America and that's

over the rest of America and that's going to be the real America we're going

going to be the real America we're going to help them do that and then you're

to help them do that and then you're saying Taiwan is comparable to the South

saying Taiwan is comparable to the South succeeding Taiwan and its Inception is

succeeding Taiwan and its Inception is identical to the South how long after

identical to the South how long after the South seceded did the War begin

the South seceded did the War begin what do you mean how long before between

what do you mean how long before between the South seceding and the Civil War

the South seceding and the Civil War happening I mean there was there was a

happening I mean there was there was a period there was a there was a period of

period there was a there was a period of time no no there was a period of time

time no no there was a period of time leading up to that where there were

leading up to that where there were abolitionist movements that happened

abolitionist movements that happened that's why people say that John Brown's

that's why people say that John Brown's like execution Taiwan was independent

like execution Taiwan was independent pivotal point I mean they've been

pivotal point I mean they've been separate for a long time no yeah no I

separate for a long time no yeah no I understand which is why I'm saying like

understand which is why I'm saying like imagine if the South was able to

imagine if the South was able to successfully secede yeah right and in

successfully secede yeah right and in America

America Northern America no Northern America is

Northern America no Northern America is like we're worried about our own [ __ ] we

like we're worried about our own [ __ ] we can't [ __ ] deal with South America

can't [ __ ] deal with South America right now right like Northern America

right now right like Northern America the the you know the the Federation

the the you know the the Federation let's say okay is now working on

let's say okay is now working on improving their own productive forces

improving their own productive forces doing trade deals and and whatnot with

doing trade deals and and whatnot with the rest of the world and they start

the rest of the world and they start rapidly urbanizing rapidly developing

rapidly urbanizing rapidly developing okay and you know the New Deal only

okay and you know the New Deal only happens there or whatever the [ __ ]

happens there or whatever the [ __ ] meanwhile the southern states are

meanwhile the southern states are entirely propped up by a foreign

entirely propped up by a foreign adversary okay that is infinitely more

adversary okay that is infinitely more powerful than Northern America

powerful than Northern America and and they kept they keep saying we're

and and they kept they keep saying we're going to take over the entirety of

going to take over the entirety of America is one America okay

because the northern because the northern states are able to improve

northern states are able to improve their conditions have favorable trade

their conditions have favorable trade deals with the rest of the planet they

deals with the rest of the planet they inevitably get to a point where they

inevitably get to a point where they want to maintain their uh hegemony they

want to maintain their uh hegemony they want to maintain their security their

want to maintain their security their National Security do you think it would

National Security do you think it would be appropriate uh do you think it would

be appropriate uh do you think it would be appropriate to rock the boat per se

be appropriate to rock the boat per se and allow the South to continue

and allow the South to continue developing and continue having a massive

developing and continue having a massive military and and uh inevitably like you

military and and uh inevitably like you send you send envoys like Nancy Pelosi

send you send envoys like Nancy Pelosi to Southern American states to [ __ ]

to Southern American states to [ __ ] say hey look there's they're Democratic

say hey look there's they're Democratic now like yeah sure they were designed

now like yeah sure they were designed around slavery but they're they have a

around slavery but they're they have a democracy now and I think that it's okay

democracy now and I think that it's okay it's okay and appropriate to [ __ ] uh

it's okay and appropriate to [ __ ] uh keep building their military make it as

keep building their military make it as robust as possible seceded just because

robust as possible seceded just because we were talking about it it was like

we were talking about it it was like three months between the war and leading

three months between the war and leading up the build up to that was yeah

up the build up to that was yeah definitely longer yeah okay so I I

definitely longer yeah okay so I I understand your position on Taiwan I get

understand your position on Taiwan I get I get all that you know from a for from

I get all that you know from a for from a uh

a uh California is silly though because

California is silly though because living in California you personally

living in California you personally understand it right like living in a

understand it right like living in a blue State you understand why that would

blue State you understand why that would be like genuinely uh like you would

be like genuinely uh like you would understand how blue states in America

understand how blue states in America would have security concerns if like

would have security concerns if like Southern States had seceded successfully

Southern States had seceded successfully and kept saying like no the rest of

and kept saying like no the rest of America Is Ours after they [ __ ] lost

America Is Ours after they [ __ ] lost too

too well I mean this was 70 years ago that

well I mean this was 70 years ago that Taiwan Taiwan now is not a [ __ ]

Taiwan Taiwan now is not a [ __ ] fascist uh National I don't think the

fascist uh National I don't think the military I don't think that how it was

military I don't think that how it was founded matters at all 70 years is not

founded matters at all 70 years is not significant in development it's of

significant in development it's of course it's that's my point no it's it's

course it's that's my point no it's it's what do you mean I'm not I don't think

what do you mean I'm not I don't think that you should be like oh yeah Taiwan

that you should be like oh yeah Taiwan is a bunch of losers that went and

is a bunch of losers that went and started their own country and like uh so

started their own country and like uh so they don't know they're not entitled to

they don't know they're not entitled to National to a national identity I don't

National to a national identity I don't think that matters 70 years is is a blip

think that matters 70 years is is a blip in time in in as far as like

in time in in as far as like as far as talking about a [ __ ] Empire

as far as talking about a [ __ ] Empire or a history that spans over like I

or a history that spans over like I don't care but that doesn't matter right

don't care but that doesn't matter right we're talking about human beings yeah

we're talking about human beings yeah and now they're now they are democratic

and now they're now they are democratic which is great and I understand their uh

which is great and I understand their uh want in autonomy and not being uh under

want in autonomy and not being uh under uh like some form of of uh crushing

uh like some form of of uh crushing civil liberties that the Chinese State

civil liberties that the Chinese State well one country two systems that's not

well one country two systems that's not a real thing

a real thing what do you mean it's not a real thing

what do you mean it's not a real thing it's one country one system like in Hong

it's one country one system like in Hong Kong that's what they want to do they

Kong that's what they want to do they say they say Taiwan we'll do the one

say they say Taiwan we'll do the one country two systems but that's that's

country two systems but that's that's propaganda

propaganda would it no but that's the that's the

would it no but that's the that's the American policy which they did with

American policy which they did with China they have

China they have America said that they would not uh

America said that they would not uh support an independent Taiwan and that

support an independent Taiwan and that Taiwan is a part of China

Taiwan is a part of China but internally Taiwan still has autonomy

but internally Taiwan still has autonomy which is what is currently happening and

which is what is currently happening and the Chinese State sees it as a a

the Chinese State sees it as a a autonomous region that is still under

autonomous region that is still under the Chinese Banner that ends up getting

the Chinese Banner that ends up getting uh military support from you know

uh military support from you know Western forces

Western forces let's talk about Ukraine and then that's

let's talk about Ukraine and then that's my final one okay so we were talking

my final one okay so we were talking about Ukraine and um your your position

about Ukraine and um your your position was that the support for Ukraine is 100

was that the support for Ukraine is 100 manufactured no that's what you said

manufactured no that's what you said last time no I think that all all matter

last time no I think that all all matter of American foreign policy is greatly

of American foreign policy is greatly influenced by manufacturer consent

influenced by manufacturer consent because of our interest in uh you know

because of our interest in uh you know doing whatever the [ __ ] we want to do

doing whatever the [ __ ] we want to do there whether it be like bringing

there whether it be like bringing Ukraine into the Western sphere of

Ukraine into the Western sphere of influence or or uh you know it's not

influence or or uh you know it's not it's not genuine uh because they want

it's not genuine uh because they want like genuine emancipation for ukrainians

like genuine emancipation for ukrainians so what so last time you guys compared

so what so last time you guys compared it you said well nobody gave a [ __ ]

it you said well nobody gave a [ __ ] about Georgia when that got invaded

about Georgia when that got invaded therefore

therefore you know the fact that anyone cares

you know the fact that anyone cares about Ukraine is feels like okay it's

about Ukraine is feels like okay it's not even just you guys know that but you

not even just you guys know that but you guys realize there's like a massive I

guys realize there's like a massive I didn't know anything about the Georgian

didn't know anything about the Georgian War I learned about it there's a huge

War I learned about it there's a huge difference you guys understand well I

difference you guys understand well I mean the scale is a five-day weather

mean the scale is a five-day weather yeah

yeah drop in five days and if it did we

drop in five days and if it did we probably wouldn't be talking about it

probably wouldn't be talking about it because that's true that's true so like

because that's true that's true so like that what happened was Ukraine mounted

that what happened was Ukraine mounted this uh miraculous defense and they've

this uh miraculous defense and they've got Russia a fascist country on the back

got Russia a fascist country on the back foot and we all like when fascism I

foot and we all like when fascism I don't I don't think Russia is on the

don't I don't think Russia is on the back foot I think it's just like

back foot I think it's just like extending all harm and and only

extending all harm and and only furthering we conflicted so much and I I

furthering we conflicted so much and I I stand with the Ukrainian people because

stand with the Ukrainian people because I pref I like I think Ukraine is a is a

I pref I like I think Ukraine is a is a Force for good in the world they're

Force for good in the world they're they're on can I I think right can I

they're on can I I think right can I just stop you for a second because you

just stop you for a second because you said 100 manufacturer consent like

said 100 manufacturer consent like that's what you said nothing is genuine

that's what you said nothing is genuine I said 100 manufacturing consent is a

I said 100 manufacturing consent is a like leading role in this

like leading role in this reason why no no the reason why I take

reason why no no the reason why I take issue with this is because it's like

issue with this is because it's like it's like stating like I don't give a

it's like stating like I don't give a [ __ ] about Ukraine of course I give a

[ __ ] about Ukraine of course I give a [ __ ] about people in Ukraine uh I want

[ __ ] about people in Ukraine uh I want the I want the war and the Bloodshed the

the I want the war and the Bloodshed the unnecessary Bloodshed to end okay my

unnecessary Bloodshed to end okay my assessment on the situation might

assessment on the situation might deviate from uh you know NATO uh like

deviate from uh you know NATO uh like blood to Thirsty NATO Defenders or

blood to Thirsty NATO Defenders or whatever they feel like we shouldn't

whatever they feel like we shouldn't even be doing anything in Ukraine no I

even be doing anything in Ukraine no I don't nothing no no I don't I think you

don't nothing no no I don't I think you don't think so no I think that of course

don't think so no I think that of course there's a a necessary intervention that

there's a a necessary intervention that that must happen I'm not saying that at

that must happen I'm not saying that at all I mean I [ __ ] raised hundreds of

all I mean I [ __ ] raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Ukrainian

thousands of dollars for Ukrainian refugees like I'm sorry this is well

refugees like I'm sorry this is well we're just silly [ __ ] thing that like

we're just silly [ __ ] thing that like not from you but I hear so much from

not from you but I hear so much from [ __ ] online

[ __ ] online suck my dick you know so you do you

suck my dick you know so you do you believe that America's actions in

believe that America's actions in Ukraine are are the right ones I think

Ukraine are are the right ones I think that America's actions to a certain

that America's actions to a certain degree in Ukraine is understandable it's

degree in Ukraine is understandable it's it's reasonable certainly whether

it's reasonable certainly whether Ukrainian people want but I think

Ukrainian people want but I think America's interest in Ukraine is not

America's interest in Ukraine is not genuine it's not genuine emancipation

genuine it's not genuine emancipation it's more so a continuation of the

it's more so a continuation of the Bloodshed well it was demonstrated not

Bloodshed well it was demonstrated not by me but by American politicians like

by me but by American politicians like Chris Murphy who have openly said on the

Chris Murphy who have openly said on the record that for five percent of our

record that for five percent of our military budget we've been able to

military budget we've been able to [ __ ] a foreign adversary's military

[ __ ] a foreign adversary's military budget without a single American Service

budget without a single American Service member dying in the process I would say

member dying in the process I would say that that is profoundly successful what

that that is profoundly successful what are we doing in Ukraine we're sending

are we doing in Ukraine we're sending our refurbished old weapons and weapon

our refurbished old weapons and weapon systems the Ukraine we have to replenish

systems the Ukraine we have to replenish those weapon systems it's a never-ending

those weapon systems it's a never-ending cycle okay because there well the reason

cycle okay because there well the reason I ask is because there seems to be a

I ask is because there seems to be a somewhat of a

somewhat of a a sentiment in the left circles or are

a sentiment in the left circles or are social I don't know how to even describe

social I don't know how to even describe it I don't know but that that the the

it I don't know but that that the the proxy war people say in Ukraine is war

proxy war people say in Ukraine is war no I know but they're saying we

no I know but they're saying we shouldn't be supporting Ukraine and the

shouldn't be supporting Ukraine and the whole thing yeah I I should just take

whole thing yeah I I should just take Ukraine no I can't speak for other uh I

Ukraine no I can't speak for other uh I can't speak for other leftists I don't

can't speak for other leftists I don't know what the [ __ ] they say but plenty

know what the [ __ ] they say but plenty of those people also despise me and say

of those people also despise me and say that I'm like not pushing Z or whatever

that I'm like not pushing Z or whatever so it doesn't [ __ ] I heard I thought

so it doesn't [ __ ] I heard I thought I heard Richard Wolff have some kind of

I heard Richard Wolff have some kind of thing like that I don't I can't speak

thing like that I don't I can't speak convertible either there's disagreements

convertible either there's disagreements that I have with Richard wolf you're

that I have with Richard wolf you're down with what's happening down you're

down with what's happening down you're down I'm not down with what's happening

down I'm not down with what's happening in Ukraine because I want the Bloodshed

in Ukraine because I want the Bloodshed to end and the only way to do that is by

to end and the only way to do that is by bringing China to the table bringing

bringing China to the table bringing America to the table we think the real

America to the table we think the real actors here Ukraine should make some uh

actors here Ukraine should make some uh secessions to Russia I think the

secessions to Russia I think the original six-point plan uh that was a

original six-point plan uh that was a continuation of the Minx uh Accords that

continuation of the Minx uh Accords that were tried twice and failed twice

were tried twice and failed twice um would be a far preferable situation

um would be a far preferable situation than like endless Bloodshed over you

than like endless Bloodshed over you know inches of territory where you know

know inches of territory where you know people are being [ __ ] slaughtered

people are being [ __ ] slaughtered ukrainians would describe it as inches

ukrainians would describe it as inches of territory

of territory wait what do you mean well you're saying

wait what do you mean well you're saying they're fighting over inches of

they're fighting over inches of territory it's just saying in the

territory it's just saying in the context of how stagnated the war has

context of how stagnated the war has become like that the back and forth has

become like that the back and forth has pretty much ground to a halt at this

pretty much ground to a halt at this point and this is what I mean it's like

point and this is what I mean it's like a very cynical interpretation of what

a very cynical interpretation of what I'm trying to say it is interest of

I'm trying to say it is interest of territory physically when we when we

territory physically when we when we speak about it but you're I guess a lot

speak about it but you're I guess a lot I think Ukrainian people get angry when

I think Ukrainian people get angry when they hear you talk about it because they

they hear you talk about it because they I that's understandable I mean they get

I that's understandable I mean they get like you're

support right they understandably want that and they want more than that they

that and they want more than that they also wanted Article Five they wanted

also wanted Article Five they wanted full NATO protections and NATO Nations

full NATO protections and NATO Nations they don't they don't like that you say

they don't they don't like that you say that they should secede territory to a

that they should secede territory to a fascist Invader it's not even a

fascist Invader it's not even a secession of territory it's like prior

secession of territory it's like prior agreements that neither party is held on

agreements that neither party is held on to the real Ukrainian criticism in this

to the real Ukrainian criticism in this situation comes from people who say well

situation comes from people who say well Hassan how can you say that when Russia

Hassan how can you say that when Russia has not held on to their obligations and

has not held on to their obligations and that is true Russia has not held on to

that is true Russia has not held on to their side of the bargain on the men's

their side of the bargain on the men's Accords but neither has Ukraine and my

Accords but neither has Ukraine and my point is

point is ensuring that with it International

ensuring that with it International cooperation about that Accord what is

cooperation about that Accord what is that the Minsk Accords were

that the Minsk Accords were um so this again goes deep into [ __ ]

um so this again goes deep into [ __ ] history and you can't always say like oh

history and you can't always say like oh I don't know the history so I don't know

I don't know the history so I don't know and then repeat like mainstream media

and then repeat like mainstream media propaganda you know well I don't okay I

propaganda you know well I don't okay I don't know anything thing about it

don't know anything thing about it Ukraine as a nation state has uh has

Ukraine as a nation state has uh has even predated or some form of like

even predated or some form of like Ukraine has predated even the Russian uh

Ukraine has predated even the Russian uh nation state or the the Russian Empire I

nation state or the the Russian Empire I guess uh and it's nation state

guess uh and it's nation state development project has always hinged on

development project has always hinged on uh excising Russian influence however

uh excising Russian influence however under the USSR Ukraine uh which was

under the USSR Ukraine uh which was called the Ukraine originally which just

called the Ukraine originally which just means like the Border okay was seen as

means like the Border okay was seen as uh I mean what had plenty of Russian uh

uh I mean what had plenty of Russian uh sympathy uh sympathetic people that

sympathy uh sympathetic people that lived in the Eastern regions

lived in the Eastern regions um and that sympathy only grew the

um and that sympathy only grew the further east you went the closer you got

further east you went the closer you got to current uh existing Russian territory

to current uh existing Russian territory now that is no longer the case make no

now that is no longer the case make no mistake I'm not saying that at all it's

mistake I'm not saying that at all it's and that is no longer the case almost

and that is no longer the case almost entirely due to Russia's actions in that

entirely due to Russia's actions in that area like blowing the [ __ ] out of car

area like blowing the [ __ ] out of car give is going to make sure is a fast

give is going to make sure is a fast this way to make sure that there is no

this way to make sure that there is no sympathies for your government whatso

sympathies for your government whatso [ __ ] ever ever again for the rest of

[ __ ] ever ever again for the rest of your life so

your life so that's all gone away

that's all gone away um but originally the contention was LPR

um but originally the contention was LPR and DPR through Russian influence and

and DPR through Russian influence and this is the Ukrainian assessment of the

this is the Ukrainian assessment of the situation these two areas uh wanted

situation these two areas uh wanted autonomy and were getting backed by the

autonomy and were getting backed by the Russian government and Western

Russian government and Western involvement that wanted to keep Ukraine

involvement that wanted to keep Ukraine in the sphere of the West did not want

in the sphere of the West did not want to give the actual protective

to give the actual protective assurements or assurances sorry to

assurements or assurances sorry to Ukraine but wanted to play the the

Ukraine but wanted to play the the delicate balance of like saying you know

delicate balance of like saying you know what yeah maybe we'll get you in the

what yeah maybe we'll get you in the NATO maybe we'll get you in the NATO

NATO maybe we'll get you in the NATO with no real interest in getting them

with no real interest in getting them into NATO maybe we'll get you into the

into NATO maybe we'll get you into the EU

EU what how did Ukraine violate their

what how did Ukraine violate their agreement

agreement um there was mass shelling on both sides

um there was mass shelling on both sides uh like back and forth

uh like back and forth uh no back and forth shelling that has

uh no back and forth shelling that has been happening since uh

been happening since uh 2004. okay

2004. okay 13 or 14 000 uh people dying Okay so

13 or 14 000 uh people dying Okay so so that is so at the time there was a

so that is so at the time there was a agreement called the Minsk agreements

agreement called the Minsk agreements there were two versions of this which

there were two versions of this which neither side agreed upon which meant

neither side agreed upon which meant that uh LPR and DPR would still remain

that uh LPR and DPR would still remain under Ukraine but would have autonomy

under Ukraine but would have autonomy okay and Ukraine understandably did not

okay and Ukraine understandably did not want this because that would mean that

want this because that would mean that Russia would have an outsized control on

Russia would have an outsized control on Ukrainian Affairs and Ukraine politics

Ukrainian Affairs and Ukraine politics which it already did through Russian

which it already did through Russian loyalist leadership that they had that

loyalist leadership that they had that was uh that was obviously squashed

was uh that was obviously squashed because there's always been this back

because there's always been this back and forth between Western influence in

and forth between Western influence in Ukraine wanting to move them into the

Ukraine wanting to move them into the Western sphere of influence and Eastern

Western sphere of influence and Eastern influence Russian influence in Ukraine

influence Russian influence in Ukraine which wanted to maintain uh Ukraine's

which wanted to maintain uh Ukraine's status and and wanted to change

status and and wanted to change Ukrainian Affairs okay so they were both

Ukrainian Affairs okay so they were both attacking each other and you think the

attacking each other and you think the attacks were equally provocative and

attacks were equally provocative and again I don't know anything about it I

again I don't know anything about it I think that I think that uh uh the the

think that I think that uh uh the the this was another instance of of proxy

this was another instance of of proxy war 100 okay like there are people who

war 100 okay like there are people who who uh wanted to be a part of Russia and

who uh wanted to be a part of Russia and um the

um the at the end of the day though like the

at the end of the day though like the reaction from the Ukrainian government

reaction from the Ukrainian government to that was understandable they wanted

to that was understandable they wanted to protect their own interests they

to protect their own interests they wanted to protect their own borders they

wanted to protect their own borders they wanted to protect their hegemony and uh

wanted to protect their hegemony and uh and and National Security interests

and and National Security interests but there's a difference between like

but there's a difference between like what they did in Crimea for example and

what they did in Crimea for example and what they did with LPR and DPR what do

what they did with LPR and DPR what do they do in Crimea there there was a

they do in Crimea there there was a referendum people say it was [ __ ]

referendum people say it was [ __ ] referendum it was under gunpoint which

referendum it was under gunpoint which is understandable to say that because

is understandable to say that because that is what happened in Crimea but

that is what happened in Crimea but Russian territorial claims the Crimea uh

Russian territorial claims the Crimea uh as a like Russian territorial claims

as a like Russian territorial claims that Crimea had more historical

that Crimea had more historical prescience and and and the highest level

prescience and and and the highest level of support uh for uh you know uh a

of support uh for uh you know uh a Russian expansionist uh policies in

Russian expansionist uh policies in Crimea specifically because of its a

Crimea specifically because of its a military base uh that the Russian

military base uh that the Russian military operated out of okay and what

military operated out of okay and what did Ukraine do in that situation they

did Ukraine do in that situation they cut the water supply they immediately

cut the water supply they immediately [ __ ] broke a dam a USSR era Dam that

[ __ ] broke a dam a USSR era Dam that was offering Supply like water water for

was offering Supply like water water for the Crimean citizens that they said they

the Crimean citizens that they said they you know care talk about that recently

you know care talk about that recently no that Dam has been destroyed when

no that Dam has been destroyed when Russia invaded Ukraine but essentially I

Russia invaded Ukraine but essentially I wanted to clarify they cut Crimea off

wanted to clarify they cut Crimea off and and not in the same way that they uh

and and not in the same way that they uh wanted to deal with LPR and DPR I wanted

wanted to deal with LPR and DPR I wanted to clarify your position yes because it

to clarify your position yes because it seems like there's a lot of confusion so

seems like there's a lot of confusion so it's good to clarify you do support this

it's good to clarify you do support this will not clarify my position in the eyes

will not clarify my position in the eyes of people who want to say that I'm like

of people who want to say that I'm like anti-ukaine people are still going to

anti-ukaine people are still going to [ __ ] yell at me but you said that you

[ __ ] yell at me but you said that you believe what America is doing in Ukraine

believe what America is doing in Ukraine is right

is right I believe that Ukraine has a right to

I believe that Ukraine has a right to emancipation what America should do in

emancipation what America should do in Ukraine is is offer security commitments

Ukraine is is offer security commitments and assurances and only and you can only

and assurances and only and you can only get that by arriving at a at a table

get that by arriving at a at a table where you don't [ __ ] uh destroy the

where you don't [ __ ] uh destroy the the bargaining chips and instead allow

the bargaining chips and instead allow the original security commitments to

the original security commitments to continue hey I don't know what you mean

continue hey I don't know what you mean by that you mean Ukrainian envoys and

by that you mean Ukrainian envoys and Russian envoys got together in Antalya

Russian envoys got together in Antalya and put a 15-point security plan

and put a 15-point security plan together uh as they were negotiating in

together uh as they were negotiating in terms of a ceasefire agreement Russia

terms of a ceasefire agreement Russia they we need to get them and I mean that

they we need to get them and I mean that it's not that easy I would assume well

it's not that easy I would assume well it there was uh moves that were being

it there was uh moves that were being made to arrive at them like a year ago

made to arrive at them like a year ago kind of like a fascist leader is yes

kind of like a fascist leader is yes Putin's interests are are take the whole

Putin's interests are are take the whole thing Putin's interests certainly are

thing Putin's interests certainly are nationalistic uh there's obviously

nationalistic uh there's obviously material benefits to Ukraine because

material benefits to Ukraine because Ukraine would be a competitor to to

Ukraine would be a competitor to to Russia as far as yeah should go to the

Russia as far as yeah should go to the table and make concessions to the

table and make concessions to the Russians I think the ukrainians went to

Russians I think the ukrainians went to the table and made concessions to the

the table and made concessions to the Russians originally and it was actually

Russians originally and it was actually a very clever move by zielinski to like

a very clever move by zielinski to like for example uh push the Crimean

for example uh push the Crimean referendum 15 years down the line in

referendum 15 years down the line in order to not uh deliberate on that

order to not uh deliberate on that aspect right now because ukrainians want

aspect right now because ukrainians want Crimea back as well they want LPR and

Crimea back as well they want LPR and DPR to be Ukrainian

DPR to be Ukrainian um and zielinski knew that that was

um and zielinski knew that that was going to be an like impossible thing to

going to be an like impossible thing to deal with because he's right now on the

deal with because he's right now on the one hand you have ukrainians with re

one hand you have ukrainians with re with interest in emancipation ridding uh

with interest in emancipation ridding uh the Russian Scourge from their uh

the Russian Scourge from their uh borders uh and and taking back all of

borders uh and and taking back all of their territory from Russia which

their territory from Russia which includes Crimea as well so he has a

includes Crimea as well so he has a delicate balance where he has to make

delicate balance where he has to make sure that those guys are not pissed off

sure that those guys are not pissed off uh and and you know overthrow him and

uh and and you know overthrow him and then like you know

then like you know or or that America somehow gets involved

or or that America somehow gets involved and overthrows them while simultaneously

and overthrows them while simultaneously ending the war I'm assuming where people

ending the war I'm assuming where people get mad at you

get mad at you is just the suggestion that Ukraine

is just the suggestion that Ukraine should make concessions to an aggressive

should make concessions to an aggressive fascist Invader because as we know you

fascist Invader because as we know you know the European fascists Invaders

know the European fascists Invaders um people often wonder they don't stop

um people often wonder they don't stop if we made consent if we didn't make

if we made consent if we didn't make concessions to Hitler would the would

concessions to Hitler would the would the war happen people wonder that

the war happen people wonder that yeah um there's a there's a difference

yeah um there's a there's a difference of like um there's a difference of

of like um there's a difference of talking pre-World War II and post-world

talking pre-World War II and post-world War II because we do have mutually

War II because we do have mutually assured nuclear uh destruction I was

assured nuclear uh destruction I was about to say it's so unfortunately the

about to say it's so unfortunately the nukes change all the calculus so that's

nukes change all the calculus so that's the difference there and that's a very

the difference there and that's a very significant one because Article 5

significant one because Article 5 dictates that like any kind of NATO

dictates that like any kind of NATO nation that Russia tries to attack okay

nation that Russia tries to attack okay because NATO was developed against

because NATO was developed against Russia USSR communism it was an

Russia USSR communism it was an anti-communist institution of itself

anti-communist institution of itself um immediately means that all other

um immediately means that all other nations according to Article Five are

nations according to Article Five are drawn into war with a nuclear superpower

drawn into war with a nuclear superpower like Russia right so there's a

like Russia right so there's a difference plus one other aspect of this

difference plus one other aspect of this is that like they Russia kind of showed

is that like they Russia kind of showed its ass and it's uh it's its

its ass and it's uh it's its capabilities and where those

capabilities and where those capabilities end as far as ground war

capabilities end as far as ground war goes which is the reason why you see

goes which is the reason why you see Finland and Sweden which previously had

Finland and Sweden which previously had long-held neutrality not like direct

long-held neutrality not like direct agreements but long-held neutrality uh

agreements but long-held neutrality uh uh I wouldn't say treaties because it's

uh I wouldn't say treaties because it's not an official treaty but just like

not an official treaty but just like didn't join NATO and understand

didn't join NATO and understand immediately join NATO why because they

immediately join NATO why because they realized they don't have any [ __ ]

realized they don't have any [ __ ] power what are they gonna do go to

power what are they gonna do go to Finland get the [ __ ] out of here they

Finland get the [ __ ] out of here they can't even they can't take over Ukraine

can't even they can't take over Ukraine they said it was gonna be a day they

they said it was gonna be a day they suck they don't have the power so also I

suck they don't have the power so also I don't know the exact name of it but I

don't know the exact name of it but I know Ukraine surrendered their nuclear

know Ukraine surrendered their nuclear weapons which one of the best things you

weapons which one of the best things you can help worst things you could do never

can help worst things you could do never give up the nukes like in terms of like

give up the nukes like in terms of like a humanistic uh a political move it's

a humanistic uh a political move it's bad but like as a as a human something

bad but like as a as a human something that yeah I mean obviously we should get

that yeah I mean obviously we should get rid of nukes some say Ukraine had no way

rid of nukes some say Ukraine had no way of utilizing those nukes because like

of utilizing those nukes because like the controls were the control mechanism

the controls were the control mechanism was in the USSR so in Moscow but

was in the USSR so in Moscow but um but you still shouldn't have uh given

um but you still shouldn't have uh given your Nuclear So yeah so your your point

your Nuclear So yeah so your your point is that we should never they should

is that we should never they should never have done that no I think we'd be

never have done that no I think we'd be looking in a very different world if uh

looking in a very different world if uh for ukrainians at least with the benefit

for ukrainians at least with the benefit of a hindsight how could you say that I

of a hindsight how could you say that I mean I don't think they would get right

mean I don't think they would get right now if they had nukes right I mean well

now if they had nukes right I mean well if you have nukes you don't get invaded

if you have nukes you don't get invaded that's just kind of how it works anyway

that's just kind of how it works anyway we made a guarantee to them that you you

we made a guarantee to them that you you give up your nukes and we will got your

give up your nukes and we will got your back

back and so I do feel like that's a pretty

and so I do feel like that's a pretty important agreement to uphold

important agreement to uphold I mean what

I mean what you're talking about American promises

you're talking about American promises to Ukraine in exchange for surrendering

to Ukraine in exchange for surrendering their new surrendering our news uh

their new surrendering our news uh America America never like actually

America America never like actually followed through on any of their

followed through on any of their promises America's still not following

promises America's still not following technically their Promises of Defending

technically their Promises of Defending Ukraine they're just giving ukrainians

Ukraine they're just giving ukrainians weapons Ukraine is currently sitting in

weapons Ukraine is currently sitting in a very unique position that I see uh

a very unique position that I see uh happen in the same cycle of violence in

happen in the same cycle of violence in the Middle East all the [ __ ] time

the Middle East all the [ __ ] time America goes to a militant group and

America goes to a militant group and says hey we're going to give you weapons

says hey we're going to give you weapons you want autonomy specifically Kurds

you want autonomy specifically Kurds right you think every country should

right you think every country should have a nuclear bomb

if you have a nation-state you have to have a [ __ ] nuke otherwise America

have a [ __ ] nuke otherwise America will come and [ __ ] you up so yeah every

will come and [ __ ] you up so yeah every nation should have a nuke I think either

nation should have a nuke I think either every nation has a nuke or none of them

every nation has a nuke or none of them have it and I would obviously want none

have it and I would obviously want none of the Nations to have it unless this is

of the Nations to have it unless this is why I was in support of the Iranian

why I was in support of the Iranian denuclearization agreement I thought

denuclearization agreement I thought that was good which you know Donald

that was good which you know Donald Trump [ __ ] up oops I believe an

Trump [ __ ] up oops I believe an individual citizen in this country has a

individual citizen in this country has a right to own do you believe every person

right to own do you believe every person that's the Socialist Vision yes I think

that's the Socialist Vision yes I think everyone should have a nuclear bomb

everyone should have a nuclear bomb that's the only equality that we can

that's the only equality that we can really everyone should have a nuclear

really everyone should have a nuclear Silo in their garage

so okay in short you support Ukraine what what the Allied powers are doing to

what what the Allied powers are doing to support them is is right

support them is is right no because America's interest in Ukraine

no because America's interest in Ukraine is not one that is genuine America's

is not one that is genuine America's interest in Ukraine is just I don't care

interest in Ukraine is just I don't care about withering I don't know but that's

about withering I don't know but that's everybody I'm asking what you think

everybody I'm asking what you think because no America's interest in Ukraine

because no America's interest in Ukraine is incredibly important what do you

is incredibly important what do you think is the right thing to do in

think is the right thing to do in Ukraine I told you what I think the

Ukraine I told you what I think the right thing to do and I asked

right thing to do and I asked declaration you setting up the deal

declaration you setting up the deal instead of [ __ ] up the deal that

instead of [ __ ] up the deal that Ukraine had with Russia by uh you know

Ukraine had with Russia by uh you know Boris Johnson [ __ ] showing up in the

Boris Johnson [ __ ] showing up in the middle of that going to Kiev directly

middle of that going to Kiev directly dude do you think what's happening there

dude do you think what's happening there is right if not why

is right if not why do I think what's happening Allied you

do I think what's happening Allied you asked me a question I answer it and then

asked me a question I answer it and then you move on to something because you I I

you move on to something because you I I ask you I'm telling you what I want

ask you I'm telling you what I want Allied Powers is what they're doing

Allied Powers is what they're doing they're right you said no but I just got

they're right you said no but I just got done having this whole conversation

done having this whole conversation where you said yeah I think what the

where you said yeah I think what the Allied powers are doing as far as like

Allied powers are doing as far as like uh as far as giving weapons to Ukraine

uh as far as giving weapons to Ukraine with no end in sight because they see it

with no end in sight because they see it as a great way to [ __ ] like a great

as a great way to [ __ ] like a great way to continue the the harm done to a

way to continue the the harm done to a weak Russia that they can simultaneously

weak Russia that they can simultaneously claim is like really [ __ ] powerful is

claim is like really [ __ ] powerful is is only going to continue this war

is only going to continue this war rather than try to [ __ ] Implement

rather than try to [ __ ] Implement security commitments and and get to a a

security commitments and and get to a a uh a unilateral agreement or a bilateral

uh a unilateral agreement or a bilateral agreement where uh and not just [ __ ]

agreement where uh and not just [ __ ] Russia and Ukraine but like bring China

Russia and Ukraine but like bring China to the table and put an end like do a

to the table and put an end like do a ceasefire and put an end of this war is

ceasefire and put an end of this war is infinitely better for Ukraine in

infinitely better for Ukraine in Ukrainian development Ukrainian economy

Ukrainian development Ukrainian economy Ukrainian citizens not [ __ ] dying uh

Ukrainian citizens not [ __ ] dying uh senselessly under a uh artillery

senselessly under a uh artillery shelling campaign that's literally

shelling campaign that's literally happening you know what's really [ __ ]

happening you know what's really [ __ ] insane about this Russia is getting

insane about this Russia is getting artillery shells from North Korea and

artillery shells from North Korea and America is giving uh America's telling

America is giving uh America's telling South Korea to give artillery shells the

South Korea to give artillery shells the Ukraine it's [ __ ] nuts both sizes

Ukraine it's [ __ ] nuts both sizes shelling each other shells but it's so

shelling each other shells but it's so stupid Ukraine is now also using uh

stupid Ukraine is now also using uh depleted uranium uh as well on its own

depleted uranium uh as well on its own [ __ ] soil okay so you're going to

[ __ ] soil okay so you're going to have damage implications is that that's

have damage implications is that that's gonna happen helping Ukraine is good but

gonna happen helping Ukraine is good but that Ukraine needs to be more willing to

that Ukraine needs to be more willing to make concessions not just Ukraine are no

make concessions not just Ukraine are no allies need to be more willing to uh to

allies need to be more willing to uh to to some in certain instances even push

to some in certain instances even push Ukraine to make uh understandable uh

Ukraine to make uh understandable uh concessions with because the idea of

concessions with because the idea of land what like giving up land not giving

land what like giving up land not giving up land no it's not giving up land but

up land no it's not giving up land but it's pushing a referendum 15 years into

it's pushing a referendum 15 years into the future for Crimea is a really solid

the future for Crimea is a really solid uh middle of the ground approach

uh middle of the ground approach zielinski's own team actually put

zielinski's own team actually put forward which I thought was great do you

forward which I thought was great do you think zelenski is a provocateur no oh

think zelenski is a provocateur no oh should I have a doctor's appointment

should I have a doctor's appointment what the [ __ ] oh I'm just asking because

what the [ __ ] oh I'm just asking because that's a position I'm not I'm not saying

that's a position I'm not I'm not saying that you ever said that

that you ever said that what you said it like I've said it no no

what you said it like I've said it no no I was just getting your opinion on it

I was just getting your opinion on it just because I've heard people say that

just because I've heard people say that and I just do it I just checking your

and I just do it I just checking your opinion on it no what time is it at Lena

opinion on it no what time is it at Lena it's at it's at two that's my last part

it's at it's at two that's my last part though basically no I don't think

though basically no I don't think zelinski is a provocative or what like a

zelinski is a provocative or what like a bad faith actor no I think zelenski is

bad faith actor no I think zelenski is uh certainly a self-interested

uh certainly a self-interested politician who uh definitely wants a man

politician who uh definitely wants a man salvation that's literally yeah meaning

salvation that's literally yeah meaning his well anyway yeah no he want he wants

his well anyway yeah no he want he wants Russia to no longer have uh control over

Russia to no longer have uh control over Ukrainian territories which is perfectly

Ukrainian territories which is perfectly reasonable he also has to strike a

reasonable he also has to strike a delicate balance because as I correctly

delicate balance because as I correctly pointed out when the invasion first

pointed out when the invasion first happened whenever an era dentist or

happened whenever an era dentist or imperialist power makes a move on

imperialist power makes a move on another Nation you embolden some of the

another Nation you embolden some of the most reactionary forces and they are

most reactionary forces and they are seen as liberators because in that

seen as liberators because in that moment they are the liberators the ones

moment they are the liberators the ones who have the violent means to to push

who have the violent means to to push back are going to be seen as protectors

back are going to be seen as protectors that only grows nationalistic hyper

that only grows nationalistic hyper nationalistic sentiment minute and that

nationalistic sentiment minute and that is never productive that is never good

is never productive that is never good it's not good for workers rights that's

it's not good for workers rights that's not good for uh future prospects of

not good for uh future prospects of Ukraine and I think that that blowback

Ukraine and I think that that blowback uh who knows what's going to happen but

uh who knows what's going to happen but is is terrifying I have to leave bro all

is is terrifying I have to leave bro all right but it's wonderful I thank you for

right but it's wonderful I thank you for going so long how long have you been

going so long how long have you been going no you know who needs to leave

going no you know who needs to leave three hours Vladimir Putin I need to

three hours Vladimir Putin I need to leave those people alone hey

leave those people alone hey brothers I know that's controversial but

brothers I know that's controversial but he's gotta leave this is probably our

he's gotta leave this is probably our most our longest episode and we did it

most our longest episode and we did it not even mentioning a single Uh current

not even mentioning a single Uh current event uh we did mention that Rupert

event uh we did mention that Rupert Murdoch died

Murdoch died um that turned out to be misinformation

um that turned out to be misinformation that we were spreading but no I said is

that we were spreading but no I said is he dead okay

he dead okay he's not dead not yet yet

he's not dead not yet yet not yet

not yet okay he's getting up there this was a

okay he's getting up there this was a good conversation was that good did you

good conversation was that good did you do you feel like uh I'm uh I'm a [ __ ]

do you feel like uh I'm uh I'm a [ __ ] anti-American charlatan who's bad faith

anti-American charlatan who's bad faith no I I think your foreign policies after

no I I think your foreign policies after talking them out is they're all like

talking them out is they're all like completely defensible

completely defensible um and and and good positions on the

um and and and good positions on the point of socialism I can say like well I

point of socialism I can say like well I I have a deeper understanding of it now

I have a deeper understanding of it now I I I do still believe that

I I I do still believe that it seems more mystical and no you want

it seems more mystical and no you want marks you want Marx's Lenin is kleinus

marks you want Marx's Lenin is kleinus thought uh which is socialism with

thought uh which is socialism with capitalist characteristics yes and

capitalist characteristics yes and ultimately that is what I want and

ultimately that is what I want and ultimately

ultimately we agree almost entirely and if you're

we agree almost entirely and if you're mad about that you're dumb yeah all

mad about that you're dumb yeah all right dumb idiot I have to pee really

right dumb idiot I have to pee really bad I don't know you're watching this

bad I don't know you're watching this and you're angry you're a stupid

and you're angry you're a stupid freaking Gotham man dumbass

freaking Gotham man dumbass no I thought that was good I thought

no I thought that was good I thought that was good I think so unless you're

that was good I think so unless you're Ukrainian then you have a then I mean

Ukrainian then you have a then I mean they have a right at least yeah no for

they have a right at least yeah no for sure I understand our Taiwanese or

sure I understand our Taiwanese or Tibetan I understand they have a right

Tibetan I understand they have a right to be angry I'm just saying I I I get it

to be angry I'm just saying I I I get it you're an armchairs Warriors

I can't wait for it I can't wait for it yeah so many so many people from

yeah so many so many people from Virginia Langley uh writing about how

Virginia Langley uh writing about how they've been living in Taiwan for 25

they've been living in Taiwan for 25 years right like those uh no I I thought

years right like those uh no I I thought that was a good faith conversation I

that was a good faith conversation I thought it was fantastic I thought it

thought it was fantastic I thought it was good to um and it was good for me to

was good to um and it was good for me to kind of explore

kind of explore it's the classic like uh uh Donald Trump

it's the classic like uh uh Donald Trump my people yearn for Freedom please glass

my people yearn for Freedom please glass Iran uh take that you hear from uh you

Iran uh take that you hear from uh you know people living on American soil

know people living on American soil thank you the only way to save Iran is

thank you the only way to save Iran is by glassing it thank you

by glassing it thank you all right I have to pee so bad that's

all right I have to pee so bad that's what Ian said oh thanks bro see you next

what Ian said oh thanks bro see you next week bye everybody

[Music] foreign

Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps

Paste YouTube URL

Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript

Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.

Add to Chrome — Free

Works with YouTube, Coursera, Udemy and more educational platforms

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube

←

→

↻

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YoutubeToText

←

→

↻

https://youtubetotext.net/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

YouTube TranscriptPreparing your results…

YouTube Transcript:Hasan Is Leaving Leftovers - Leftovers #58

Video Transcript

Summary

Core Theme

Paste YouTube URL

Transcript Extraction Form

Get Our Chrome Extension

Get Instant Transcripts: Just Edit the Domain in Your Address Bar!

YouTube Transcript:
Hasan Is Leaving Leftovers - Leftovers #58