74: National Justice Party Program, Part 2 - Ecofascism
Part 2 of our look at the National Justice Party's 25 Point Program, with special attention paid to ecofascist rhetoric. Content Warnings. Links / Notes: Part 1 pf this discussion: https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/73-the-njp-program-part-1 National Justice Party: https://nationaljusticeparty.com/ National Justice Party Platform: https://nationaljusticeparty.com/platform/ Mike Enoch/Peinovich "The Way Forward" Speech: https://nationaljusticeparty.com/2020/11/19/the-way-forward/ Strike and Mike Episode 137: (unavailable because it's paywall content, can't imagine why) Bernie Sanders Rally Ann Arbor March 8, 2020. AOC arrives around 1:14:00. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekJo2mW_yAA Relevant previous IDSG episodes: 9: Mike Enoch and The Daily Shoah https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/i-dont-speak-german-episode-9-mike-enoch-and-the-daily-shoah 52: Genocide and The Right Stuff https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/52-genocide-and-the-right-stuff 70: The National Justice Party https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/70-national-justice-party Jack's article about why fascism and socialism are different things, including stuff about fascists appropriating left rhetoric: http://www.eruditorumpress.com/blog/killing-in-the-name-of/
I'm Jack Graham, he him, and in this podcast I talk to my friend Daniel he him, and in this podcast I talk to my friend Daniel Harper, also he him, about what he learned from years of listening to today's Nazis, white nationalists, white supremacists, and what they say to white nationalists, white supremacists, and what
Be warned, this is difficult subject matter.
Content warnings always apply.
And we're back with another episode It's episode 74, which pleases me because I like that number.
I find the number 74 aesthetically pleasing, especially if you write it the way I do, because I write it with the continental 7 and the 4 that isn't one line, it's two lines with one crossing the other.
When you write it that way, it looks really nice.
But that's irrelevant.
The 7 with the cross in it, that's the way you write the 7s?
Yeah.
I do too, mainly because, you know, you do enough math, you pretty much have to.
Well, it's funny.
I picked it up from a teacher I had at secondary school, and he was the only maths teacher I ever had who I liked, whoever actually made the subject feel accessible to me.
And he used to do it that way, and I copied him, and I've done it my entire life.
And yeah, when you write 74 that way, it's a very attractive number.
But, as I say, that's completely irrelevant.
This is 74, and it's also part two of the two-part episode about the National Justice Party.
This is National Justice Party Platform 2.
Daniel wants to call this National Justice Party Platform 2 eco-fascism.
I was planning on The Legend of Jewish Gold or something like that, but that's probably... The Legend of Beggar Vance.
Best avoided.
So yeah, not much topical to talk about, nothing much happening as they're in the world.
It's a big day for us lefties because that avowed Maoist revolutionary Joe Biden has picked a cabinet of left-wing radicals.
It's amazing stuff happening in the States.
You know, we just have to get him elected, then just push him left.
That's the way to do it.
And clearly these cabinet picks are, you know, certainly not just the list of people who already served under Obama for eight years.
I just remember the fan casting of like, hey, what if Elizabeth Warren is in there and Bernie Sanders is Labor Secretary?
And it's like, no, it's like Janet Yellen.
Janet Yellen is getting the job that people wanted Elizabeth Warren to get.
Elizabeth Sanders.
Elizabeth Sanders, another person.
There's an amazing hybrid creature.
There was a weird moment there where Fox News and the online left were having identical fantasies about Biden's cabinet, but it didn't happen.
Right.
Yeah.
So yeah, on with the actual subject of this episode, which is the rest of the National Justice Party's platform, as you will remember from having listened to episode 73, the last one.
Which I have not yet, because at the time of recording, it has not been fully produced.
No, it's still in post-production, as we say.
But you, listeners, will have heard it by now.
And if you haven't, probably go and listen to that before you listen to this one, to be honest.
So yeah, you will know...
That we didn't get all the way through their program, all the points of their program.
So we're going to jump straight back in and pick up where we left off, aren't we, Daniel?
Well, we're going to start off where we're going to talk, because there were three speeches given on November 14th at the time that they sort of unleashed this 25-point platform.
And so in the first episode, we listened to a bit of Mikey not talking.
And his speech and kind of gave him a little bit of time.
There's a really interesting other speech that when I kind of discuss by this guy, Warren Ballag, about not much is known about this guy.
He's done a couple of other podcast appearances.
Kind of since coming out with the National Justice Party.
His father is a guy named Alan Balogh, and he's a little bit better known mostly because he's been involved with the white nationalist movement since the 70s, I believe.
And in fact, there are photos of him standing alongside National Alliance founder and author of the Turner Diaries, William Luther Pierce.
So that gives you some idea as to the bona fides of this family.
Warren seems to be someone that we're going to be paying attention to and this does highlight the fact and what I think is really important and the reason that we are sort of spending so much time on this is that the move that the TRS crew are making right now is to poach people from the nominal left.
This has been something they've been talking about for a while.
But the National Justice Party, the goal is to find people on the left, to find disaffected Bernie people, disaffected, you know, like Democratic Socialists, kind of whatever, and bring them into the white nationalist fold by touching on their issues.
So that's kind of the theme, certainly of the speech segments that we're going to play.
In fact, He will play very specifically on the very frustrations that I shared at the beginning of this podcast about Biden's cabinet, although the Biden's cabinet had not been picked at that point, but so we will be discussing those issues, but also using labor organizing and a form of kind of ecological preservationism.
That's sort of the message that we're getting and it's a pretty He's selling a pretty eco-fascist message, and so we're going to have to talk about that now, because it is something that we're definitely going to be kind of looking at more and more, I think, in the next year or two, for sure.
So, we're actually going to start off, and we're going to do some of these clips, and then we'll get into the other 15 points of the National Justice Party plan, and then we'll wrap up.
That's sort of the goal at this point, if that makes sense to you.
Absolutely.
Yeah, right.
Okay.
All right, so All that said I assume everyone has listened to the previous episode already So we don't have to get too into the weeds of exactly what's going on here But on the 14th of November of 2020 the National Justice Party held its second meeting They called it the second meeting and this guy Mike Enoch gave a speech a guy named Michael McAvett gave about a 10-minute speech he is Another really interesting character.
He didn't really have anything interesting to say in his speech.
He was a buddy of Coach Fenstock, Matthew Q. Gerbert.
He's kind of the second chair, in a lot of ways, on the Full House podcast, which we've discussed before.
And so, intimately connected in this whole crew.
He's also an avid, what they call, Fed poster, which is to say he talks very openly about, you know, the overthrow of The overthrow of the federal government through violent means, and he's much closer to expressing directly violent rhetoric towards the minorities he doesn't like than the guys with, quote-unquote, better optics are.
And the fact that he is kind of deeply invested in this thing tells you how wide their net is.
But anyway, we won't be talking about him today.
Instead, we are going to be talking about this guy Warren Ballack.
He gave about a 17 minute speech.
I'm playing about 6 minutes of it for you today.
We are going to jump right in with his intro and you get a nice flavor of the kind of thing you're about to be listening to.
I'm speaking right now to every idealistic person who supported Bernie Sanders in 2017 and 2020.
and forth whether they preferred the clips bit up or not.
I kind of liked it because you just got through them a little bit quicker.
But you know, people-- anyway, let me know what you think of these, whether we should be speeding them up or not.
So here we go, clip one.
I'm speaking right now to every idealistic person who supported Bernie Sanders in 2017 and 2020.
You know things are bad in this country.
You think about climate change and the working class.
You know people have it bad in America right now.
You know this planet is getting more and more screwed up by global capitalism every year.
Millennials are the largest share of the workforce in this country.
72 million people.
Yet we control only 4% of U.S.
wealth.
And for all the wealth that that 72 million people have, 1 out of every 40 dollars, 1 out of every 40 is owned by just 3 individuals, the heir to the Walmart fortune, and Facebook founders Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin Moskovitz.
The richest 50 people in America right now have as much money as the 165 million others on the bottom.
Over the last 50 years, productivity soared while wages stagnated.
In other words, all the wealth has gone to the top.
The coronavirus pandemic accelerated this trend of huge monopolies crushing small businesses, concentrating even more wealth at the top.
In a year when people are dealing with constant money worries, losing their jobs, losing their homes, the CEO of Amazon made $13 billion in a single day.
And so that's the intro to his speech.
And I think there are some things that are worth noting right out of the box here.
First, The audience is definitely tuned up to Hate the Jews.
This is pretty clear.
Yeah, kind of giving the game away.
The Walton family airs, and then two founders of Facebook, both Jewish, look who got the booze and who did not, which I think is… It's very telling.
It's very telling, especially given the degree to which Walmart 20 years ago was the corporation that got out the headlines for crushing middle America.
And as much as any individual company does in terms of crushing mom and pop stores, etc.
Walmart is, you know, Facebook is evil.
Walmart is also very, very evil.
Doesn't seem to come in for the same kind of criticisms.
Weirdly enough.
Can't imagine why that's true.
Almost as if it isn't really capitalism he's talking about.
Or even recantalism or whatever.
Anyway.
Also, Balog is, I think you can tell just from that clip, a much better orator.
In terms of giving political speeches than Mike Pinovich aka Mike Enoch is.
Enoch goes off on his own little tangents.
He likes to yell.
He's a podcaster.
He's a perfectly fine podcaster.
He runs over all of his co-hosts.
He has talent in that arena.
He is not a person giving appropriate political speeches.
Balog is much more measured.
He has a very clear message.
He knows exactly what he's trying to say.
And he obviously you're not seeing him.
There is video here that I can you can watch him.
He looks much more like a credible political presence than either of his other than any of the other people within the National Justice Party.
Let's be frank about that.
Also, If you have been following kind of US politics for a while, the tone of that speech, like everything that wasn't the overt anti-Semitism in that minute and some seconds that I displayed for you, could have come from a Howard Dean speech in 2004.
This could have come from a very bog standard, halves and halves, not 99% versus 1%.
2000s, late 90s, you know, political speech.
This is very, very, very standard democratic rhetoric from just a few years ago.
And that's what I think is really kind of interesting in this, in the framing.
This is very much trying to grab disaffected Democrats and disaffected kind of DSA types.
It's not necessarily going for, you know, kind of anti-fascist, anarchists, Marxists, etc., etc.
He is looking for people with, you know, vague ties to social democracy here.
And that's the point.
Yeah, absolutely.
It could have come from, as you say, apart from the overt antisemitism, it could have come from an Occupy Wall Street protest from around that period.
And still very much the sort of rhetoric you hear from the Left, the sort of Left Democrat Left today.
There are some big problems with that kind of rhetoric, but it is nonetheless the sort of standard complaint that you will hear from the Left about.
inequality rising, wages stagnating, climate change, etc.
And, you know, very justified in many respects, but obviously here presented in bad faith.
And, I mean, I want to say one thing, which is that I don't think it's even necessarily true to say that it's, and, you know, it's anti-Semitic because he singled out Jewish businesses.
But if they were not even mentioning Jewish-owned businesses, to be a little more exact about that phrase, Jewish businesses is not a great phrase that I used just there.
I didn't mean it that way.
But Businesses owned by Jewish people is what I mean.
If they weren't doing that, if they weren't singling it out like that, it would still be anti-Semitic in the context of the entire rest of their politics.
The fact that they are capable of acknowledging that not all capitalist enterprises are necessarily owned by Jews, that doesn't mean that they're not convinced that the entire system is fundamentally set up by and for this evil Jewish elite that they see running everything.
I know you know that, that's the only little word of warning I would sound there for people listening.
No, absolutely.
Part of the reason I'm playing so much of this today is to get the counterpoint out there and to reveal what he's actually doing here, and to show what they are doing in their initial stages and to their core audience.
The people yelling from the crowd about the Jews is part of the point here.
It's part of the whole aesthetic, you know?
Yes, indeed.
That's the goal.
They are making an explicitly anti-Semitic party.
They are making a blatantly anti-Semitic… That's the point of the National Justice Party.
It's not to create this kind of center-left coalition of, quote-unquote, it's to go after the Jews.
That's what this is about.
It's to bring anti-Semitism into the mainstream of American politics.
Now, do I think they can do that?
No, I do not.
But one of the reasons that they're not going to be able to do it is because we're going to fight against it.
And the way we fight against it is to understand how the rhetoric works, right?
And so, if down the line Warren Ballack is giving the same speech but not mentioning the dues, you know what he's actually talking about here, right?
There it is, yeah.
Is there also, do you think, a sense in which these sorts of speeches are aimed at instructing, by example, you know, their cadres in how to address this sort of stuff to people outside the group?
Oh yeah, no, absolutely.
They talk, um, I mean, you know, one of the major themes of these guys, of all of these podcasts, but particularly kind of TDS and a lot of the other ones is, you know, how do you convince the normies?
How do you get your kind of like MAGA uncle or your MAGA parents?
How do you get Trump supporters to hate the Jews and to blame, not just, you know, like welfare cheats, but to blame black people?
How do you get the, you know, how do you get them?
Into this sphere of politics, because people are kind of naturally resistant to being openly anti-Semitic and openly racist.
They want to be covertly racist, so, you know.
So, yeah, let's just move on here, because the other kind of thread of this speech, he's not just talking about sort of like workers' rights and, you know, kind of the excesses of capitalism.
The other thing that he starts talking about is the environment.
And you mentioned climate change before.
And one of the things that we're going to learn here is that these people do not believe in climate change.
They don't believe in global warming.
They believe that that whole thing is just a trick by the Jews to take attention away from the real environmental problems.
And you might ask, what environmental problems are those?
Well, I'm going to play you a clip and you can hear.
The most direct driver of the destruction in recent decades has been land use change, pristine habitats like forests and grasslands turned into agricultural systems, and also the overfishing of the ocean.
You can't buy your way out of this with tax giveaways for the lobbyists to the energy industry.
But on the other hand, you can't really say this in leftist circles.
Overpopulation has become a racist term.
White privilege.
It's easy to understand why.
In the year 1900, there were about 1.6 billion people on the planet, 120 years ago.
We're now at 7.5 billion, and that's expected to jump to 10 billion by 2050.
Yet, in the year 1900, Europe had a quarter of the world's population, which was, at the time, three times the population of Africa.
By 2050, Europe is projected to have gone down to just 7% of the world population, which will at that time be one-third that of Africa.
We've got the same problem with labor.
Globalization created a race to the bottom and forced Americans to compete with third world workers.
This has also led to labor market concentration, with a smaller number of large companies providing all employment.
You guys know what I'm talking about.
It's just more and more monopolies.
Immigration has transformed this country since the 1970s, the exact time frame when wages stagnated and unions declined.
Yet if you point out the connection, you're a racist.
Just like outsourcing.
Mass immigration reduces wages because people from countries with low standards of living will do for a lot more for a lot less.
This isn't rocket science.
Everybody knows why it happens.
This is the whole point of immigration.
Every wave of immigration brought into the U.S.
from the big capitalists has been for this reason.
It's the same logic that brought the slaves here from Africa hundreds of years ago.
You think those plantation owners wanted slaves for cultural enrichment or to increase diversity?
They weren't seeing rainbows, they were seeing dollar signs.
And it's the same reason why we have immigration today.
And there you have it, right?
It's not really much more complicated than that.
I cut a lot out of that.
I mean, he spends a lot of time talking about, like, wetland depletion, deforestation.
He spends a lot of time—you notice the sort of, the head nod to land use policies, which he doesn't actually define, but in sort of other contexts usually means things like, you know, Defoliation, etc, etc, in order to kind of build ugly strip malls, etc, etc.
I actually agree that land use policies are a huge part of the problem in terms of solving our environmental problems.
But it's mainly because we've, at least here in the United States, we've built an entire society around the automobile, and so we just have to slap asphalt all over everything.
And that's ultimately a problem that is driven, that drives more of the climate change issue than it does the deforestation issue.
There is plenty of forest in this country, I can assure you.
It is very, very empty in large sections.
But you can see right there, he's, again, in bits that I cut out because I didn't want to play the entire thing.
He downplays the threat of climate change.
He doesn't think it's real and then points out correctly that the major solutions that we see to climate change are essentially capital investments into, you know, kind of cleaner energy and, you know, cleaner cars, electric cars, etc, etc, as opposed to things that would actually solve climate change.
It's almost as if the capitalist class sees the problem as something that they can profit on as opposed to something that they have any interest in solving, and that they have the entire governmental structure of the most powerful nations in the world in their back pocket.
it's almost as if that's the problem and not you know yeah and not the juice right and also that there are plenty of left-wing activists who have been talking about the problems of climate change and the problems of land use policies and the issues with like letting the capitalist class control how we try to solve climate change and This is something that is very, very common within left-leaning circles.
It's just not where Warren Bullock wants you to look.
There are plenty of people who have been talking about this going back to the 70s.
That is the central rhetorical trick which is going on here.
There is plenty of discussion about these deeper problems and deeper necessary solutions which are always essentially anti-capitalist solutions on the left.
It's just the trick being pulled here is that the left is being equated with liberalism.
Now, when these people do that, and then they, in some respects, and please don't misinterpret me, but in some respects do point out correctly the problems of the sheer hypocrisy of liberalism.
He goes into the bit where he says, the slave owners didn't bring the slaves over for diversity.
Yeah, and that's absolutely true.
They brought them over to be cheap labour.
Definitely unpaid labour.
You have to pay for slaves, but you don't pay them.
Hyper-exploitable, etc., etc.
Yeah, that's absolutely true.
And it's absolutely true that modern liberalism and liberal capitalism is completely hypocritical about this stuff.
Absolutely right.
The point is that that's the problem because that is still capitalism.
Now, the left solution is, you know, the left solution I would subscribe to is the replacement of capitalism with a different system.
That's not what these guys are doing because they're not anti-capitalists.
They just want to rearrange capitalism so that it benefits them.
They have this dream of rearranging it so that it benefits all white people instead of a minority capitalist class of white people, which firstly doesn't abolish capitalism and secondly isn't going to ever happen because capitalism is inherently about a minority rule of a capitalist class, which these people just completely pass over.
Right, they're essentially arguing in favor of a sort of a broad social democracy only for white people, enforced at the hands of a police state, which enforces rigid rules about racial purity, right?
Like, that's essentially the vision of the world they're selling.
Exactly.
But it's still going to be based on the hyper-growth, the capitalist imperative towards hyper-growth and expansion, which is what's driving the ecological catastrophe.
And it's still going to be based upon essentially the same system of racialized white supremacist capitalism, which is precisely what led to the de-industrialization of the United States and the exportation of all these jobs.
Elsewhere, because capitalism did that so that it could engage in the same hyper-exploitation of cheap labour abroad that was at the root of slavery.
The jobs were exported abroad to the global south, which is still poor because it's still reeling from the historic effects of colonialism and imperialism.
So, their arguments are literally just going around in circles.
The argument, I mean, essentially, I agree with you completely, is, you know, even if they did believe in climate change, essentially it's like, well, We're going to live in a nice white country.
We're going to live in a sparsely populated white country with rigid controls at the borders, essentially a militarized border, which we can keep everyone else out and you can live on the inside of that and we will, you know, have enough wealth that we can make sure that we survive just fine.
And the rest of the world can go choke on the CO2 fumes.
That's essentially what, I mean, you know, to the degree that these people will eventually have to establish, have to believe in climate change, that will be their answer, right?
Yeah.
So, and if you- The answer, you know, the overpopulation is the supposed problem because their solution essentially is just, we look after ourselves, i.e.
white people, and we let them die, which is always at the root of narratives about these Malthusian narratives about overpopulation, which is precisely why they are racist.
Exactly.
And I would just posit that I have much more in common with the Exploited worker who put my cell phone together in China or wherever it was manufactured and who mind the rare earth elements that make that cell phone work than I do with Jeff Bezos.
And ultimately, we're only going to defeat Jeff Bezos if we can all Work together to do so.
And any kind of fantasy that's built on, well, we can just build a vague social democracy and militarize the border and only work for white people.
And, you know, we can just keep the darkies out if we if we just work hard enough is built on.
It is built on a fantasy.
It is.
It is.
It is all it is all.
And it's completely unsustainable on its own terms, because if you shut out everybody else outside the walls of your lovely social democratic but only for white people ethno-state,
You're still going, in practice, because global capitalism is what it is and works the way it works, and you're not getting rid of it in this scenario, this fascist scenario, you're still going to be reliant on the rest of the world, the hyper-exploitation of the labour and the production of the rest of the world.
And the rest of the world, you know, even if you could somehow avoid being affected by the climate change catastrophe yourself, the rest of the world is going to be affected by it.
So, essentially, on a very crude level, eventually the imports that you need are not going to come in.
I really want to know where these people think they're going to get coffee if the planet is uninhabitable.
In practice, of course, with fascism, they try to establish autarky.
That was a big thing with the OG Nazis in Germany, because they needed to be self-sufficient and not at the mercy of blockades and stuff when they launched their war.
And what that means, of course, is the establishment of living space.
It means expanding and taking other people's stuff and running their countries as direct colonial imperial slave labour camps, basically, so that you've got all the resources you need.
And you're invulnerable as an imperial power, even if that's not what they say now, and even if that's not what they think now.
The basic economic logic of the fascist capitalist position just entails that as an inevitability.
And of course, the OG Nazis, and Hitler in particular, were deeply inspired by the genocide of the Native Americans in the United States, so certainly the US's hands are not in any way clean on this.
But we need to move on and we have more clips to play, so let's just slide past that point, and here's Warren talking about how he's going to convince the left.
The question is, how did they convince the left?
How did they convince the left, which supposedly cares about labor and the environment, how did they convince the left to take up the cause of abolishing ICE and increasing immigration?
The same way they got the left to sign on to the globalization which is destroying our planet with bullshit slogans about human rights, diversity, multiculturalism, anti-racism, and so on.
Which are incidentally the same slogans used to justify America's unjust immoral wars.
Instead of leftists speaking up, the opposite is happening.
Recently, a corpulent neoliberal Jew by the name of Matthew Yglesias, one of the co-founders of Vox, with a very high, squeaky voice, called for increasing the United States population.
He wrote a book called One Billion Americans.
He called for increasing the United States population by 650 million people, mostly through immigration, about three times our current population, all in the name of economic growth.
The reason this totally insane plan wasn't condemned as labor and ecological suicide by all quarters is very simple.
It's because the left is in bed with neoliberalism.
Where do we start with this?
for First of all, Matthew Iglesias was in my corner of the left, in my corner of Twitter, and no one took Matthew Iglesias remotely seriously.
No, exactly.
It's one big in-Americans book, which I have not read, but I actually listen to Matt Iglesias on the Vox podcast quite regularly.
That's how I keep my – dip my toes into kind of neoliberalism is listening to Ezra Klein and Matthew Iglesias on a pretty regular basis.
I'm so sorry.
That might actually be worse than listening to the Nazis on a regular basis.
I don't listen to as much of Klein and Iglesias, but if you listen to interviews that Iglesias did about the book, his justification for the one million Americans was actually an imperialist one, because he sees the rising threat of China that can only be defeated by having an increased population, and so he sees it as sort of a way of Engaging in a more muscular geopolitics around China.
That's literally the justification he gives.
And so… Brilliant.
Just brilliant.
So A, Balogh is wrong about Iglesias' logic of the thing.
He's wrong about the fact that it wasn't criticized on the left, because it was criticized on the left.
And he's wrong about the basic justification of Iglesias' point, right?
Yeah, yeah.
To just, you know, start with the things he's wrong about there.
Right, right.
Also, of course, you know, he thinks that making fun of Matta-Glacies' appearance is enough to, you know, he calls him fat, he calls him a squeaky voice, etc., etc., none of which has anything to do with anything.
But if you are a race realist, and if you are an ethno-nationalist, and if you essentially are carrying around your set of mental calipers wherever you go, That is enough to completely discredit any of your opponents, which is why whenever they come after me, they just call me fat.
It's a devastating argument, isn't it?
Yeah, it's devastating.
It's just like, congratulations, that's all you had.
There's so much more there!
The left was convinced to stop caring so much about I'm putting all this in heavy quotes here.
The left was convinced to stop caring so much about labor and the environment, and by environment they mean not climate change but, you know, despoiling of nature, etc., etc., by referencing human rights, by referencing kind of flower language around human rights that ultimately It's sly how he gets this in here, right?
Like, the point is, the capitalists are selling you all this, like, bullshit about human rights.
They're selling you all these lies about human rights.
You need to not care about other people.
You need to care about white people.
You need to care about us.
And he doesn't say that explicitly, but in other places you can find these guys using this exact same logic, but he slides it in there.
The capitalists are telling you.
They're telling you lies about human rights.
You shouldn't care about human rights.
You should only care about labor protections for the people who already look like you.
And then he flips it and says, the same way they sell their Immoral Wars.
I agree.
It turns out that the capitalist class will use Completely valid argumentation and appeals to people's natural human emotion and empathy and caring about other people as a way of justifying their terrible, terrible actions.
Not because they care about it, but because they think you should care about it.
And again, how do we actually combat this?
We join forces with the people who are being most exploited and attack the capitalist class who is engaging in these horrifying actions.
Yeah.
We don't replace the capitalist class with people who will point the guns at the people that we already don't like.
No, no.
And again, a completely pig-ignorant, ahistorical reading of neoliberalism.
I mean, again, building on germs of truth, pointing out that the capitalist class, capitalist media, et cetera, sells you neoliberalism, sells you neoliberal globalization, sells you imperialist wars, which are, of course, part of Neoliberalism as, you know, with a narrative of human rights and diversity and all this lovely stuff.
Yeah, absolutely right.
And there is a germ of truth to the idea that the left in recent times de-emphasizes class issues and talks more about things like diversity and stuff like that.
That's true as well.
That's because neoliberalism set about Making the left do that, it's part of the neoliberal cultural counter-revolution.
But the fact is, the left, unless of course you're dishonestly conflating the left with liberalism or left-liberalism that's contained by the Democratic Party or very soft analogue there too.
Which is again the exact thing he's asking you to do.
Exactly what he's doing.
If you're not doing that, then you can see by an honest reading of the left that the left is deeply anti-neoliberal.
It wants to roll back these very things.
Arguably the left, and certainly the further left, Over emphasizes the struggle against neoliberalism.
In my opinion, it should be talking more about the struggle against capitalism generally.
But it's just not true to say that neoliberalism has been embraced by the left.
It's true to say that the language of the left has been embraced by neoliberalism.
That's not the same thing.
And it's a completely dishonest, ahistorical reading of what actually happened.
It's in no way rooted in a materialist analysis, and it's completely based around an idealist.
It's based on a language base.
It's based on who's using what language.
Yeah.
Because ultimately, if you believe that there is a series of a small number of puppet masters who are controlling everything, and those people have three parentheses around their names, then you don't have to engage in the materialist analysis.
You can just blame those people, and anyone who sounds like those people, You can immediately dismiss and so it is it's a clever little rhetorical trick.
They're pulling although I think he also believes it so, you know Yeah, yeah.
Well, they fall for their own bullshit.
Yeah.
Well, yeah, I Got one more clip.
I got one more clip It's the conclusion of his speech and that is the is the sort of the selling point and again He's a reaching out Specifically to disaffected Bernie voters disaffected DSA people and so it's worth kind of hearing him out on this I'm sure this will be much more solid than the than the rest of what we've heard, right?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah, we'll get to the good stuff now and the rest of it will all suddenly make sense and I'll go Oh, sorry.
I was wrong my message to the left is Get your head out of your ass!
Look at what is happening to your planet!
Look at what's happening to your planet!
Look at what's happening to your people!
Look at these scumbag liars in the DSA, at the Jacobin, in the Bernie movement, who conned you into voting first for Hillary Clinton, then for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
Look at the rich Jews funding your organizations and your political candidates.
You think You think that a party led by a man like Chuck Schumer, the biggest friend of Wall Street and the Senate, is going to help the workers or save the planet?
Come on!
Join us!
Join the real resistance!
Stop being led around by the nose.
Our movement is filled with former leftists.
We hate injustice as much as you do.
We don't want working people anywhere, of any race, to be exploited.
We love nature, and we want to preserve it, not just for some materialistic bottom line, but for its own sake.
We are not funded by any globalist NGOs.
We're the real threat to this neoliberal system.
So get with us, get with the real fight against these pigs, or get back in bed with Kamala and Wall Street.
Yeah!
AJP!
AJP!
S&P! S&P! S&P! S&P! S&P! S&P! S&P!
You want to start with this one?
Well, what he means is stop caring about black people being murdered.
What he means is stop caring about racism.
What he means is stop caring about climate change.
What he means is stop caring about getting rid of capitalism.
Stop caring about the real problems.
Get fooled by the rhetoric.
The problem with Chuck Schumer isn't that he's Jewish.
The problem with Chuck Schumer is precisely that he is a corporate democrat.
And yeah, that's a problem.
But the problem...
He thinks that the left...
The left as a whole doesn't think Kamala Harris and Chuck Schumer and the Democratic Party are the solution.
Certainly at the moment, the left thinks of them as the lesser evil.
And that's because, you know, the greater evil at the moment, for instance, is the rising fascist movement.
Right.
And beneath that, the standard line Republicans, which are, you know, to a person worse than the standard issue Democrat, right?
Yeah.
And significantly so.
You know, if we did not have the Republican Party, and if the, you know, median Democrat were sort of the median politician in this country, we would be making More steps for change.
I'm not saying we would be actually doing things we should be doing, but, you know, there is a very clear difference between the two parties there.
And so, when Bernie Sanders does the thing that he always said he was going to do, and drop out and endorse whoever won the primary, and then campaigned for that person, it's not because he suddenly learned to love Joe Biden's economic policies, or any of his other policies.
It's because he recognizes that as bad as Joe Biden is, Donald Trump and any random member of the Republican Party is always going to be worse.
Period.
Yeah.
Bernie Sanders did not sell me out.
I donated to the Bernie Sanders campaign.
Bernie Sanders did the thing that any reasonable politician would do.
I voted for Joe Biden.
I voted for Hillary Clinton.
I was not happy about either of those choices.
But in either case, it was better than the alternative, right?
And also, voting is not the end of my political life!
I do plenty of other things as well, to affect the world around me, including this podcast!
Organize your union!
Form mutual aid!
Joining a fascist party is not the way to solve your fucking economic problems!
Even if you're one of those people on the left who says there's no difference or there's effectively no difference or not enough difference between Democrats and Republicans, like the Democrats are in hock to Wall Street, they're totally committed to managing US imperialism, they're totally committed to US capitalism, they're no better or they're not significantly better if you're one of those people.
Which is a position I have a lot of.
I have a lot of time for that.
I actually mostly agree with that position, to be fair.
So do I. So do I. My disagreement comes at that one moment of voting where it's do that little thing to hold back the advance of an outright fascist takeover, or fascist mutation of neoliberalism, or however you want to look at it.
Do that much and then, you know, buy some time to operate against that.
Fine.
But if you don't feel that way, if you think, no, I won't vote for Biden and Kamala because they're just as bad or they're, you know, effectively just as bad, OK, that's fine.
That's still not what this guy is talking about.
This guy is talking about the left.
And it's the same con job, the same rhetorical con job.
He's talking about the left thinking that corporate Democrats like Kamala, authoritarian Democrats like Kamala are the solution.
No, no, he's conflating.
The Democrat left with the entirety of the left and that is not the end of the left argument.
I mean, you know, doesn't even mention the IWW once.
You know, not to not to put any like great, you know, like that's the that's the shining light that we need to follow for, you know, but like, you know, Having a real discussion about, like, a meaningful left in this country has to go through radical labor unions.
It has to go through, like, radical left organizations during the Civil Rights era.
This is much more important than, you know, whatever neoliberal chill with a slight, you know, like, more female drone pilots in the Democratic Party or the DSA, you know?
I agree.
You know, I'm with her, liberalism is not the solution.
Adopting uncritically neoliberal talking points about diversity is not the solution.
I agree.
The alternative to that is not to go to fascism, which is just crafting rhetoric around a barely obscured, authoritarian, anti-Semitic narrative.
The solution is to go to a proper structural materialist critique of capitalism, which you will find on the left.
That's the way to go.
Relatedly, inextricably towards the absolute solidarity with organic struggles from below for liberation, like Black Lives Matter and stuff like that.
Inextricably.
Because you can't have one without the other.
Right, exactly, exactly.
No, completely agree.
And of course, the National Justice Party is built specifically on rejection of Black Lives Matter and Antifa and the riots and the protests during 2020.
They reject that.
They literally build their entire rhetorical structure around that.
They want to appeal to people who think You can meaningfully challenge the nature of capitalism without challenging the racist assumptions that are built into capitalist exploitation.
Yeah, their whole goal is to combat the very thing that they're pretending doesn't exist.
Right.
And, you know, making like the entire, you know, the entirety of the United States something like the lily white suburb that, you know, and shunt all the problems outside the border south of the Rio Grande, apparently.
So.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So I think at this point, now that we've, I think, thoroughly eviscerated that dickhead and expect a lot more.
I mean.
Expect a lot more of that rhetoric.
Sorry, go ahead.
Go ahead.
I was just going to say, we're not getting the job done here, because this is just you and me talking, right?
If anybody's listening to this and they're unconvinced, there are lots of places to go for information and more carefully thought out and argued representations of this.
You don't have to just rely on us two guys.
All we're doing is pointing out the completely obvious and You know, just the completely basic things that we can point out very quickly between the two of us that completely invalidate everything that this guy is trying to sell you.
And this guy is a more effective communicator of these kind of third positionist, eco-fascist ideas than most people.
And that's why I thought it was important to kind of pull it out and then kind of go, Well, look, here's what he's actually saying, and you know this because it contradicts all the other things that they've been saying the entire time.
Period.
Like, we don't have to... Like, yes, there are much better places to go than to the two of us for detailed, like, leftist analysis.
Like, that's not the point here.
The point is to say, you don't even, like...
You should have that, but you don't need it.
I can literally do this right here with just the things that I have in my back pocket.
And understanding how the fascist rhetoric works, which is my own area of expertise, kind of understanding what these people say when they think we're not listening, is a key to understanding how this guy is completely full of shit, without even having to kind of go there.
So, again, Absolutely we are not trying to right now I understand where you're trying to go with that and I'm just pained by the idea that somebody might be listening to me you know stammering and making shit up off the top of my head at one o'clock in the morning and think well that's not very convincing you know there are there are other places to go please don't.
And, you know, you and I interact with a lot of those.
I mean, you know, even just in kind of the online spaces.
I mean, you know, like, follow us on Twitter.
We retweet a lot of this stuff.
And if you have questions, there are places to go.
Believe me, there are better leftist places than Jacobin Magazine and the DSA.
I promise you, there are better leftist places than that.
Anyway, we should discuss the other 15 points.
Well, we're not even talking about Jacobin, you know, but if you go by this guy's account, then the left is... Like Matthew Galatius!
Yeah!
There's definitely better places to go than that.
Right.
Definitely.
Definitely.
Yeah.
So we should read the rest of the National Justice Party platform.
I think we got through the first 10 last time.
So we are going to move through these pretty quickly, one by one.
Once you get through the first few, it's kind of repeating kind of things over and over again.
We're gonna go through these and then at the end as promised I do have another clip from AOC which is again We are not standing AOC on this podcast But I do I am kind of standing AOC's this particular speech just a little bit as something that like even within the mode of a Left of Center kind of Democratic Party DSA type and
The rhetoric and the language and the message that is being sold, even in those circles, is so much more positive and so much more effective than what these dipshits are selling, right?
I'm so much more connected to material, historical reality.
Exactly.
And in fact, the clip that I'm going to share with you from AOC at the end is a There's a clip of her talking about when Bernie Sanders endorsed Jesse Jackson in 1988.
So there is some happy times kind of coming at the end of this podcast, so stick with us for just a few more minutes, I promise.
Point 11 in this National Justice Party platform.
I'm just even reading these, even just having them in front of me and thinking I've got to go through 15 of these fucking things.
Anyway, 11.
We oppose America's ongoing military entanglements and demand the return of all troops to the homeland.
We will engage in diplomacy under the doctrine of America First and cease the internationalist project of exporting liberalism.
So, um, unless you're, like, trapped in these guys' head, this is fuckin' worth salad, right?
Wait a minute, The Internationalist Project, is it supporting liberalism?
Like, you have to really stretch the word liberalism.
I mean, I don't, like, that's...
What they mean is, you know, various programs within the United States to promote acceptance of, like, homosexuals and, you know, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, outside of the United States.
You know, basically, you know, defending against human rights abuses.
And they see that.
There's a line that they say, butt sex for Botswana.
And I apologize for, you know, kind of putting that out there.
But that's what they mean by that.
Yeah.
We will engage in diplomacy.
Okay, go ahead, go ahead.
Two things.
Yeah.
Imperialism is entailed by capitalism.
You can't have one without the other.
They're not anti-capitalists.
They will be imperialists.
They need to be imperialists.
Fascism always... We talked about this.
The other thing, this is hilarious to me, right?
Because these guys make such a song and dance about rejecting The liberal narrative, the narrative about diversity and human rights and all that stuff, they think they're so clever that they see through it all.
In this bit you just read, they are literally recycling, having bought hook, line and sinker, the rhetoric that you get from liberal so-called humanitarian interventionists, liberal imperialism, about spreading democracy.
They are literally reiterating the bullshit line you get from people like Clinton and Bush and Hillary Clinton as well and all these people about we need to go to Iraq or Afghanistan or wherever to spread democracy and human rights.
They have literally fallen for the stuff that they boast about having seen through.
They fall for the most obvious line of that.
That the real purpose is exporting liberalism and not, you know, Various geopolitical goals around controlling resources for the American population.
If these guys were actually in charge of the United States, there would be more imperialism because they would just torture brown people in the Middle East more in order to get the oil faster.
American capitalism and imperialism is already based upon white supremacy.
These guys are openly committed to it.
They'd just do it more.
And so they demand the return of all the troops to the homeland.
They're going to staff them around the border with machine guns to mow down any brown person who chooses to come within 100 yards or whatever.
Number 12 is related.
We will nationalize the defense industry and make war profiteering a criminal act.
So instead of like Northrop, there's a second part to this, so instead of like Northrop Grumman and various of the defense industry, no, we're just gonna make that, we're gonna nationalize those companies, and so they will be paid directly by tax dollars instead of inadvertently through tax dollars, like there will be no, like the real problem with the military-industrial complex is that a handful of companies are making billions of dollars, not the military-industrial complex.
We're not challenging the military-industrial complex.
We're not challenging the F-35 system.
We just think that giant corporations should be able to make money from it.
And by that, they mean the Jews.
They mean the Jews.
It's all about keeping money out of the hands of, quote-unquote, the Jews.
Second part of 12, all able-bodied men will be conscripted into national service.
Aha!
I know that there's no definition of able-bodied men.
I know that there's no, like, what does national service mean?
Like, this is essentially, like, they keep talking about sort of, like, engaging in, like, private companies, etc., etc.
And then, like, essentially, depending on how you want to interpret this, this is essentially a planned economy of all men between the ages of, like, you know, 18 and 64 are working for some planned economy.
I don't know.
Like, again, it's word salad.
There's no meaning there.
Yeah, no, it's – the whole thing is statist authoritarianism.
You know, we – As you say, we don't get rid of the military-industrial complex, we just jiggle it around a bit so that the state sector is more of it than the private sector.
Suddenly we've got this massive military and we've got the state controlling this massive compulsory military and it's just state authoritarianism.
And that's what the left is against.
The left is generally mostly doesn't reject the state as such, but it's about democracy.
It's about the democratic use of the state.
That's the exact opposite of this.
This is about the authoritarian control of the state and the war machine and the people as fodder for the war machine.
13 and 14 go together and then 15 kind of comes back to what we're just talking about.
So we'll get through 13 and 14 quickly because There's one sentence that you can, I mean, you know, so.
13.
Lobbying on behalf of foreign nations will be banned and classified as espionage.
Guess which nation they're referring to?
Foreign negotiations will be conducted through official diplomatic channels.
Again, guess which negotiations they're referring to?
14.
I think you might have something in your head.
We will declare Israel a rogue state and exporter of terrorism.
The national rights of the Palestinian people must be respected.
None of these people give a fucking shit about the Palestinian people, except to the degree, not even to beat up on Israel as a nation state, or the Israeli government.
Also, the rogue supporter of terrorism, they have this idea that 9-11 was caused by Israel.
ISIS, that all of, like, Mideast terrorism done on the behalf of people who are fighting the oppression of the US military industrial complex, are actually all kind of, like, it's all part of the Jewish trick to, you know, keep us in these wars, right, you know?
Which is insane!
It's just absolutely, like, it's funny how, like, seriously, like, I am not a giant follower of the geopolitics of the Middle East and North Africa.
I fully admit my limitations on this.
I am not a person who is, like, deeply invested in the, like, the nature of, like, particular arms deals, etc, etc.
But I know enough to know that it's not all controlled by a handful of a bag of all of shifty hand rubbing Jews, which is what they believe.
So 13 and 14 are literally just like, no Jews.
It's just beating up on the Jews.
That's all that boils down to.
That's all that boils down to.
Okay.
15.
And again, coming back to this conscripted international service bit, 15.
We will establish a new economic policy that stresses the family wage, full and stable employment, and a strong middle class.
We will abolish the income tax on productive work and put this burden on capital and speculative income.
But you've conscripted every able-bodied man into national service.
So...
Maybe what they mean is like we're gonna conscript young men into like it's gonna be something like a National Guard or you know You do two weeks two weeks every year months or something like it's all it's like it's incoherent.
There's no like policy here and if you Listen to them talk about this and that like striking Mike episode that I played a clip from in the last episode They talk Over and over again about, like, all these policies are just very popular.
They're very, you know, you put this to people and people will absolutely support this and they think this is a good thing.
Like, actually, so, the family wage, again, there's a lot of stuff about family we can talk about here, full stable employment.
Like, both of the, like, mainstream US policy parties Agree with the idea of, like, we will stress a policy that stresses the family wage, full and stable employment, and a strong middle class.
This is bog-standard American rhetoric going back to at least World War II, right?
Yeah.
Boilerplate.
Boilerplate nothingness.
Abolishing the income tax on productive work.
I wonder what they mean by productive work.
Hmm.
Big questions there.
I do agree with putting more of a tax burden on capital and speculative income.
Support your local DSA.
Those are the people who are going to be the best able to do that.
And again, look at the actual record of fascist governments in power and their actual relationship with capital.
Exactly.
Essentially, let's give away to our buddies in the capitalist industries.
Sixteen.
You and I could do a whole episode on this one.
We call for correcting the power imbalance between labor and management through a national labor organization that guarantees employee rights.
Now, On the Strike a Mic episode, they went through this for about 15 or 20 minutes, if I recall correctly, discussing exactly what that means.
And what you have to understand is that they see a national labor organization as something that is imposed from the top down onto employers and onto workers.
Essentially, they're going to create some government policy that organizes workers and that enforces standards against Employers, which is really just like regulating employment law in some sense?
Like, they don't understand how labor unions actually work, which is bottom-up organizing.
They think that's something you can just declare by fiat.
Well, they want to stop that, they want to crush it, and do.
Whenever they get, again, look at the actual record of actual fascist governments in power, they crush labour organisations and they have state-controlled bodies, which effectively amount to controlling workers and stopping them causing problems for capital and or the state, whether separately or in unison.
I mean, I'm just imagining what would happen to, you know, say, a radical left labor organization that was actually trying to organize people of all races within this society, because even they admit that they're not—they say explicitly that they're not going to actually export people of other races from this country.
They're just going to enshrine the rights of kind of European-descended people.
So there will be people of all races in this country, at least until they all choose to leave by, you know, quote-unquote peaceful ethnic cleansing or whatever.
So, if there were a local labor organization that chose to combat Rule 1 from this platform and were organizing workers against both the state and the corporations in order to demand certain kinds of rights, I can only imagine what would happen to that organization.
Would that organization be a part of this national labor organization that guarantees employee rights?
No, of course not!
I have a feeling it would be declared to be secretly in the pay of those private interests and those foreign governments that they're so worried about and probably be shut down maybe with the increasingly state-controlled military complex that they were talking about as well.
There could be some secret police coming by.
Maybe that's what that national service is going to be.
Every able-bodied white man is just going to go around with a rifle and take care of those pesky leftists.
Well, you're gonna have a great big army of conscripted young men on, you know, able-bodied, and of course we're talking about those people who are eligible, so they're going to be white, etc.
Yeah, it is funny how they say, like, every able-bodied man, and then like, well, how about the large minority of, like, African American men?
Yeah, something tells me alternative arrangements have probably been made for them.
Yeah, something tells me we're talking about apartheid, we're talking about camps, you know.
We are, yeah.
And I wonder what use the government would find for those men doing their national service.
You know, it might involve putting down quote-unquote treasonous upstart unions that were actually secretly in the pay of monopoly and finance and foreign powers, etc., etc.
17.
We support an industrial plan that brings home capital and manufacturing and invests in our depressed and de-industrialized heartland.
Aww.
We will implement massive public works projects to modernize our crumbling infrastructure.
Again, boilerplate, Donald Trump kept saying he was going to do Infrastructure Week over and over again for the last four years.
This is very standard rhetoric that every political person in the United States has been saying for years.
We're going to bring jobs back!
We're going to bring back jobs, we're going to bring back farming, we're going to bring back coal, we're going to, yeah.
And again, I actually say, yeah, sure, bring back capital, bring back manufacturing.
I actually think, yeah, sounds like a great idea.
Can we do that without the genocide?
That sounds like a better plan to me, but I'm probably just paid by Jews or something.
Yeah, well you don't actually need genocide in order to... Yeah, you can just build better infrastructure.
You could build, you know, through state investment, you could build up domestic industry, yeah.
You don't actually need to tie it to ravid genocidal antisemitism.
There's a middleman there we can cut out.
Yeah, it's almost like one of these things actually doesn't work with the other.
18.
Again, one word we can point out what this is really saying.
You serious and predatory lending practices will be outlawed.
All credit will be issued by the state with no middleman profiteers.
How many codes for Jews were in that sentence, right?
Quite a few, yeah.
And also, you're going to be issuing credit by the state So the state benefits from – like, is the state drawing interest?
Is the state – like, where does that – how does that work exactly?
I mean, I actually agree with things like, you know, banking, like public banking and post office banking.
I think that would be a great step forward in terms of – and local credit unions, which are often, you know, like, have There are various kinds of financial products that would be much better so long as we're still living within a society that cares about things like money.
That's not what they're talking about.
They're just talking about getting rid of the genius.
Yeah.
Or the Federal Reserve, I think, is kind of the other thing that's kind of hiding in the background there.
19.
Healthcare is a right.
Healthcare must be removed from the control of for-profit hospitals and insurance companies and made a public service for all people.
Agreed!
All people!
Not just the white ones.
Everyone.
Not just the white ones, first of all.
Okay.
Here's where they go off the deep end.
Preventative care will be emphasized.
I also agree.
Sure.
Yeah.
We should have much better, you know, having free access to healthcare would do that.
And then the other part of that, the last clause.
And physical fitness will be promoted.
Yeah, I was going to say preventative care will be emphasized.
What does that mean?
Does that mean like with public health you just don't get treated if you're deemed to have not behaved in the proper way by the state?
Yeah, essentially this is the health care is a human right for all except for the fatties.
That's essentially what they're arguing.
Exactly.
20.
We will restore reason, logic, and tradition to the education system by implementing It's not even going where you think it's going.
We will restore recent logic and tradition to the education system by implementing a comprehensive classical curriculum.
Let's go back to the, what is it, the Five Pillars, I think is what it was called back in the classical British system, like the three R's plus Latin, and I forget exactly what it was.
Sorry, do they mean classical in that sense?
I think that's essentially what they're saying, yes, is something.
I don't think that they're, like, again, it's all kind of words out, and there's another sentence here, which...
It gives you the real sign that they're in for it, but if you imagine some, like, 1920s kind of American or, you know, kind of European educational system that is kind of teaching, you know, I don't know.
Like, again, it's word salad.
It's hard to exactly interpret what that means, but certainly the real thing that they mean is revealed in the second sentence, which is Homosexual, neoliberal, and transgender propaganda will be explicitly banned from being taught to children.
So enshrine bigotry in the public education system.
Right, yeah, just enshrine bigotry, you know, because what they see is that those things are, they're not like, being gay or being trans are not things that just are things that people are sometimes.
They see them as being promoted by – this gets very, very dark, and we're just going to mumble our way through that.
But essentially, I think it's all a trick by, again, the people with the three parentheses around their names, programming it into people.
They don't see it as natural.
They see it as fundamentally unnatural.
Yeah.
And not to get off our topic here, but particularly when it comes to the quote-unquote transgender propaganda, if you look at some of the language around what's called rapid-onset gender dysphoria, which plenty of well-meaning liberal people in your country and mine
Believe a thing is a thing that exists that children are being propagandized to about being trans and suddenly they're just coming home and going like I just want to be I just want to be a girl now because It's just a cool thing to be and really it's not like a natural thing that comes about them because there's some really shoddy science that somehow gets accepted by people because Because they don't want to believe that trans people are real.
Take the words like homosexual and neoliberal out of it, you know, just say transgender propaganda will be socially banned from being taught to children.
You can give this to a whole lot of very well-meaning, you know, liberals.
A lot of like trophy types and people who are like sympathetic to those arguments and kind of go, yeah, like, you know, you shouldn't be able to be trans until it's too late for you to actually correct your puberty.
That's the thing.
Yeah, absolutely.
So again, how insidious this can be if you don't know what language to look for.
21!
Sorry, I just wanted to pause briefly over the absurdity of saying we need to essentially get homosexuality out of schools.
You're not allowed to talk about homosexuality to kids.
While also saying let's bring back the classics because Yeah.
I think you might- This is one of Eric Stryker's things, is that, well, if you look at the original translation, none of that was there.
It wasn't until the Jews got a hold of it.
Fuck's sake.
All that gay stuff, that wasn't really gay stuff.
That was just men being men and having a strong, emotional, manly relationship with other men.
And it's like, yeah, no.
Yeah.
Yeah.
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Fuck off.
Just again, an aside, but the one good thing that Destiny has ever done, the YouTuber Destiny, was he was having a debate, quote-unquote, with Eric Stryker, and Eric Stryker used the example of music, that Mozart and Bach are much more complex and much more...
Much, much more intellectually engaging than, say, like jazz.
And it's like jazz is just like, you just go and you just go, you know, and he makes kind of a sound of a, you know, like a French horn or whatever.
And Destiny actually has a degree in music theory and goes like, well, no.
No?
It was pretty delightful.
Anyway, no great fan of Destiny here, but when you do run across people who, when he starts spewing these talking points to people who actually do have like technical expertise about the thing he's spewing nonsense about, it is a glorious sight. 21.
We will establish a department of culture that will oversee the creation of art and architecture to enlighten the public through beauty and transcendence.
Oh, fuck off!
Fuck you!
Suburbs and small towns will be revitalized with beautification projects to make them walkable and attractive and to encourage social life.
Again, check the actual record of fascist governments and fascist art and public architecture.
It is a parade of the dreariest, emptiest, most boring, soulless, middle-brow crap.
You... I don't even... I can't even deal with this.
Yeah, it's not even... And of course, what is... I mean, you know, we want to make walkable cities.
Again, something that plenty of urbanists have been working on for decades.
You know, trying to, you know, work on that project.
The major thing that's standing in the way is the fucking automobile industry and the fucking, like, and the highway.
We need public transit.
We need to essentially move into a more city-like way of living.
This is going to be a century-long project to do this, even with the best will in the world.
Yeah.
I just imagine that he thinks like, yeah, you just put some sidewalks around and suddenly, you know, like, I don't know, like it's... Yeah.
Anyway.
Pig ignoramuses.
22.
The state must act as a steward of the environment.
Industrial and economic needs will be balanced with quality of life and the preservation of natural beauty.
Wildlife will be protected and we will expand national parks and wilderness areas.
Religious slaughter and other inhumane treatment of animals will be banned.
I wonder what that's about.
I'm not going to get into that, but they have particular things.
They're talking about Jewish Jewish and, to a much lesser degree, Islamic slaughtering practices, which they consider inhumane.
Which, without even discussing the details of the things that they're really talking about, the factory farms are Orders of magnitude more cruel.
Exactly.
And orders of magnitude more, you know, like... When quote-unquote Western capitalism has an unblemished record on its treatment of animals, then we can talk about...
Then we can talk about, like, some religious ritual that you don't like, you know?
Yeah, yeah.
And also there are plenty of people within their movement who follow various pagan rituals who do involve the slaughter of animals.
And I'm not trying to equate anything, I'm not trying to make any kind of statements about anybody's kind of religious practices, etc., etc.
But, you know, you wonder exactly how that's going to work in practice, even if they did manage to gain political control.
23.
We support strong families.
Married women will be paid by the state to care for their children.
Not single mothers.
No.
Only if you're married and you get paid by the state.
I actually agree.
I actually agree that child labor- I agree.
Domestic labor and childcare should be paid.
It should be renumerated.
Yeah.
And it should be people of any gender, and it should go for anyone who is married or not.
It should just be remunerated by the state, so long as we're going to keep having a state.
Yeah, I agree.
Anyone who takes on that socially necessary and vital work, yes.
Absolutely.
Not just married white women, gentile white women, which is what we're talking about.
But the other sentence of this does kind of make this even more explicit.
No fault divorce will be repealed, and homosexual marriage will be banned.
So, hey, they get to throw in gay marriage at the end, right?
But no false divorce will be repealed.
So essentially, young women get married to a guy, they get married young, because I'm sure they're not going to want to give the women all that nice fancy classical education that they care so much about.
So, women are expected to get married young.
These guys are all fucking misogynists 100% of the time, always.
That's at the root of this.
It's basic.
Misogyny is as basic to fascism as racism.
They want to get rid of divorce and then tie women's income, only while they're married, to the care of the children.
So in other words... Make women domestic slaves.
Make women domestic slaves.
That's what that does, exactly.
24.
The benefits of automation will be shared among all citizens.
I'm sure they mean all white citizens.
Technological advancement will be used to reduce work hours, raise wages, lower the retirement age, and increase pensions.
As stated, I actually think that's a really good idea.
Yeah.
Well, yeah, this is the thing.
Loads of this on its face is, I mean, it's not going far enough for me, but loads of it on its face is good stuff.
But the thing is, here it is completely tied to, and indeed is a facade for, genocidal bigotry, sexism and racism.
That's the problem.
And you don't You don't need the genocidal racism, sexism, and bigotry, and homophobia, and transphobia, and antisemitism, and all this filth.
You don't need it to do some of these things that, on the surface, are good ideas.
So just do the good ideas without the genocidal bigotry and racism.
Well, it is like Balogh's thing, in which he is kind of saying accurate things about Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris, and the Democratic establishment, and even the DSA and the Jacobin types.
The criticisms are not wrong.
Um, per se, although they are, but like, but the answer, the solution that he's giving you, he's saying, yes, there is this kind of terrible thing that's kind of at the heart of our society, and we should be working to solve that.
And the solution to that is let's all go drink poison.
Like, that's the...
That's the answer, right?
Again, check out the actual record of fascism in power.
It's an aggressive recovery mode for capitalism in crisis, which attains power partly through dishonest use of anti-capitalist rhetoric.
This is an established historical fact.
You can see it recurring as a pattern over and over again.
Last one.
We're there.
We're there, we're there.
In order to put an end to racial conflict and hate, all people will be entitled to be policed, educated, and judged by individuals of their own race.
No longer will any race be exploited for the benefit of another in America.
That's segregation.
He's talking about segregation.
That's what he's talking about.
Yeah, exactly.
That's apartheid.
Yeah, it's apartheid.
It's apartheid.
Yeah.
And again, as we said last time, you can't have apartheid or Jim Crow or ethnic cleansing or any of these things without violence.
Violence is inherent to them.
You need violence, state violence, state authoritarianism in order to do them and sustain them.
Always have, always will.
That is how it works.
Period.
Alright, how do you feel about that National Justice Party platform?
I think this is really going places.
I'm really excited to see this party really start making moves in the American political system.
Yeah, yeah.
I'm not all that impressed.
No, this is not the moment for sarcasm.
It's fascism, as I said.
They always do this.
It's straight up third positionism.
The eco-fascism is not quite as apparent in the 25 points as much as it was in Balogh's thing, but it's all there.
They're telling you what they mean, and all it takes is a reasonable close reading and understanding, again, what they're saying to each other about What they mean by these 25 points.
This is not hidden, it's very very in the open, and it's very much what they actually believe, and if they were to gain power, which seems unlikely, what they will actually implement.
These guys won't gain power, but they are part of a trend, a movement, which is increasingly dangerous, increasingly influential, increasingly powerful.
And, you know, as an overall thing, not these guys in particular, but as an overall thing, represents a dawning threat.
And, yeah, it is still essentially the same beast it always was, and we know how it works, and we know what it does when it gets into power.
And your concern about them trying to peel off a layer of disaffected leftists, you can absolutely see it shouldn't, because, you know, It should be clear from both the historical precedence and from our knowledge of what these guys actually are and what they actually think and what they actually say to each other, it should be clear that this is not actually a program that should appeal to anybody on the left.
Because, you know, the essential difference here is that The left, however much you might agree with this or that policy on the surface, as they couch it in dishonest terms, it's not socialism, it's not leftism if it isn't combined with an absolute recognition of racial equality and a commitment to democracy.
And those are the two things that these people are absolutely, completely dead nuts against in their very basic nature.
But it is nonetheless a danger that they might be able to peel off a layer of disaffected leftists because they correctly represent deep problems with the establishment left, the democrat left, the soft left, if you like, although I don't want to get sort of contentious on that score.
And they're trying to exploit them.
And there's a lot in here that, if you don't have the context, it can sound like it's good stuff.
So it's absolutely necessary for us to point this out for the hypocrisy and the deceit that it is.
Absolutely, and you know, I just think about the number of people, and you know, I try not to be too critical of individuals who are fans of particular podcasts nominally on the left, but there are plenty of people in that kind of like stupid poll crew feeling their way towards leftist politics, sort of like the quote-unquote anti-woke left, who will absolutely see this and see it as
Oh, I disagree with certain things, I'm not anti-Semitic, etc., but it seems basically right to me, and it's a better policy than either the Democrats or the Republicans, and so dot dot dot.
And what we really need to do is to start dealing with that thing.
As people, as you and I are on the left, that's something that I think It has to be kind of a central pillar of our politics moving forward is to, you know, really start kind of dealing with this kind of anti-woke left stuff.
And yeah, that's my feeling.
Absolutely.
Every time one of these people, the anti-woke left, the dirtbag left, whatever you want to call it, And there's some generalizations there, and that's a wider topic.
But you know, there are lots of them out there.
And you will get people saying, well, you know, the left needs to return to questions of class and questions of labor versus capital.
And the great socialist thinkers were critiquing this a hundred years ago, a hundred plus years ago.
They were critiquing that kind of narrow economism.
They were saying, no, a socialist movement has to be against all oppression everywhere on behalf of all workers.
This is not new.
And every time they do this, every time they do this, we should not be worrying about transgender people in bathrooms.
We should be putting aside this hysterical wokeness and we should be concentrating back on issues like class.
Every time they go for that fake opposition and that narrow argument that actually betrays the real socialist argument or left argument, They make it easier for somebody somewhere down the line to read, like, for instance, the part of this program where they're talking about taking transgender propaganda out of schools, and for that person to think, well, you know, there's something to that, isn't there?
And we cannot have any truck with that, because it's poison.
I mean, Brett Weinstein and Heather Hying on many of their most recent podcasts will, you know, say, yeah, we praise Donald Trump for his, you know, taking critical race theory out of government trainings, because we think that's a good thing.
We don't like Donald Trump at all, but that was the thing that he did that's good, and none of our friends on the left ever seem to agree with that.
I mean, and this is Again, I'm not trying to kind of bring it back to that other kind of IDW side or whatever, but that rhetoric, that kind of like anti-woke, anti-CRT, anti-SJW rhetoric is absolutely what pushes this kind of idea.
And so we have to make a real commitment to those issues at the center of our political project, alongside Organizing along labor lines and along work lines and really having an understanding of a global, multi-ethnic, multi-racial, multi-gendered working class, if I am stealing language from you there.
But, you know, that's where we are.
No, I yeah.
Go ahead.
Steal away.
Yeah.
There it is, really, I think.
So, we're going to wrap up here, and again, I'm really just playing this because I think it's a really nice moment, and it does show that regardless of all the problems that I have with the Democratic Party, and with left-of-center politics in the United States, and the problems with electoralism, there are some voices out there that are much more effective
At selling a real left of center, even kind of social democrat message, than these fucking dipshits.
I want to cleanse our palate with this.
Hopefully you will not think that I am again standing an elected politician because believe me I am perfectly willing to hold these people to account But I know a good speech when I hear a good speech, and this was again something that struck me this is from the Bernie Sanders rally on March 8th of 2020 in Ann Arbor and this is AOC speaking
And talking about Bernie Sanders' history with Jesse Jackson, when Bernie Sanders endorsed Jackson for president in 1988.
So let's listen to that, and then we'll get out of here, OK?
Well, I think we'll just have AOC play us out into the theme music.
So before we play the clip, we'll just say thanks for listening, and thanks for everything you do to support us, and goodbye.
Absolutely.
I want to leave you with a story.
Because as Reverend Jackson was running, he came to the state of Michigan, and he won.
He won the state of Michigan.
And at this point, some of the most powerful and conservative parts of the party really began to panic.
And then, shortly after Michigan, came several more caucuses.
And there was a mayor of a small city called Burlington, Vermont, in 1984, who had won a shocking victory to the mayoral seat.
And it was time for the Vermont caucuses to come around.
And Mayor Sanders stood up to break with the common consensus And endorse Reverend Jesse Jackson for president.
He stood up and delivered that speech in the Vermont caucuses.
He was yelled at.
He was hit.
But he said, this is our opportunity to bring millions of working people into our political process and transform who America can work for.
Michigan, I am here supporting Senator Bernie Sanders for president.
Because when I ran just two years ago, when we first started, it was profoundly lonely.
No one was on our side.
No one.
Even the Women's Equality Party endorsed a man over me.
And, but, you know who was there early?
The people.
the People's Movement.
And the movement of Not Meet Us was there early.
When it did not seem likely, you were there early.
When it seemed improbable, you knocked on doors.
When it seemed like it was not politically convenient to challenge a powerful member within their own party, you were there knocking doors because we knew that what was most important was establishing Medicare for All, tuition-free public colleges you were there knocking doors because we knew that what was most important was That was I Don't Speak German.
Thanks for listening.
If you enjoyed the show or found it useful, please spread the word.
If you want to contact me, I'm at underscore Jack underscore Graham underscore, Daniel is at Daniel E Harper, and the show's Twitter is at IDSGpod.
If you want to help us make the show and stay 100% editorially independent, we both have Patreons.
I Don't Speak German is hosted at idonspeakgerman.libsyn.com, and we're also on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify, Stitcher, and we show up in all podcast apps.
This show is associated with Eruditorum Press, where you can find more details about it.
