The first guy's framing is incorrect. He's giving the "left" coverage for capitulating to the liberals when, in reality, they are part of these undemocratic, liberal institutions. And his only characterizing Trump and the Republicans as the right is also a form of endorsement for the "lesser of two evils" framing. I think that if we are truly going to wrestle power from the ruling class in America then we must be clear about who that ruling class is, and not try to soften the image of the Democratic party.
Grayson’s performance on the panel was nothing short of exemplary. His eloquence, coupled with an incisive grasp of the subject matter, made his contributions not only intellectually stimulating but also pivotal to the overall discourse. With each thoughtful interjection, Grayson demonstrated a rare ability to distill complex ideas into accessible insights while simultaneously enriching the conversation with a depth of understanding that commanded the audience’s attention. His presence elevated the dialogue to a higher plane, leaving a profound impact on both the panelists and the attendees, and underscoring his intellectual prowess and skillful engagement.
Then come! We are built on the compromise of various principled individuals. Dont let the controversy surrounding one bombastic personality dissuade you.
I'm gonna have to listen to that section about the Big Bang a few more times to see if there's something sensible about it because it sounds like total crankery.
@@timefades27 I'm not opposed to the idea that the earliest cosmological events were different than scientists 50 years ago initially described them, I'm opposed to the idea that the cultural weight of the idea of the ex nihilo event necessarily puts us into a "paradoxical brain freeze by which which we can only approach Reality by halves and never reach it."
@@matthewlewis8297 he was making fun of the RCA, formerly IMT, who published an article denouncing the Big Bang Theory on the basis that it contradicts dialectical materialism
What each speaker encouraged 1. Organize for the Revolutionary Communists of America (RCA) 2. Vote for Kamala. Discuss race & gender more, class less. 3. Organize for the American Communist Party (ACP) 4. Join a mutual aid group
Everyone except Grayson is stuck using the and understanding the world through the establishment liberal logos. It's only Grayson that has a advanced communist logos. He's even more technologically advanced using a laptop. ACP sweep.
I valued every single one of his interruptions. He was polite enough for me, and more importantly it’s so satisfying to see his worldview flail and sputter
The first speaker immediately puts the cart before the horse: he doesn't even explain what democracy really is, but just jumps to this opportunistic question about "how communists can make use of it"-- as if its even clear that that is a possibility at all.
Excellent debate that captures the main tendencies of the American Left (optimistic trots, New Left pessimists, pro-CCP patsoc Stalinists, and movementists). Unfortunately Platypus disappointingly continues its allergy to professional audio. Hire an AV worker. Keep pens and paper shuffling away from the microphone.
@@robespierre2837 , American Communist Party (ACP) uses patriotic American imagery and rhetoric. I wish they didn't! ACP promotes the thinking and legacy of Stalin. The socialists I've worked with the last 12 years refer to this as Stalinism.
@@VigilantnotMilitant ACP is following the same line put forth by all successful Communist parties in history. An American Communist Party is going to draw on American history. Ceding American symbols and rhetoric to the fascists is a gigantic strategic blunder. Read Dimitrov. "Stalinism" is just Marxism-Leninism. I suspect the "socialists" you've worked with for the last 12 years are nothing but Trots.
@@VigilantnotMilitant all socialists are patriotic, and upholding the legacy of Stalin is also standard Marxism-Leninism What the “socialists” you work with think is irrelevant
The older guy sounds like Kautsky. He's twisting what it means to have a democracy by giving a general, ahistorical analysis of the history of democracy as being uneven as "wrong". But that ignores the question of "democracy for who?" Should we give even "democracy" to the few capitalists once we communists hold power? I say no, we shouldn't. And I strongly disagree with his assessment of the race line and how America is a "white supremacist country" because the white working class is racist. These are idealistic ideas that aren't backed up by material conditions or reality. This isn't to say that individuals aren't racist and that racism isn't still institutionalized, but thats not a representation of the vast majority of the white working class. What power does the white working class have? Isn't it our goal to give to unite the working class and bring about a government of, for, and by the people? How productive would a working class "revolution" be if it were splintered by like race? Dude is seriously arguing that the primary struggle should be based on race and gender instead of class🤦🏾♂
While I can see your point I do not think he can truly be compared to Kautsky. If we got some of these old socialdemocrats on a time machine, Kautsky or Bernstein for example, and zapped them into our times, they would be considered "dangerous and extremist Bolsheviks" and would probably have the label tankie or MAGA communist be used to describe them. The state of this undefined left that people call "woke" is much worse than Kautsky.
Also the amount of people who dont get that the fourth guy basically was just doing a bit insulting everyone. I guess to be fair though he was saying this all pretty deadpan
No amount of educated eloquence, indeed even with an accompanying relative politeness from Grayson can hide the reality that Neo Stalinism is still attempting to miseducate and mislead, likely mostly among the inexperienced discontented i suppose. The obstacle to Socialism that it is would be barely tolerable even if it defended its favored States on its own terms but the sickening and obstructive disaster is its attempt to authenticate itself in the language of Bolshevism and Leninism . The irony of a "Marxist" attempting to defend the "space of bourgeois democracy" while at the same time defending " actual existing Socialism" in China was a sight to behold, even the aged new left democrat saw through the futility of trying that convoluted intellectual trick. Why some intellectuals are taken down or guided into the very dark path of Stalinism is a very large question, what is for sure is the obstacle they pose for Socialists. Tin hat on.
The professor was interestingly correct about many of his points but came to entirely different conclusions than ACP. Marx was about production, Lenin leads to stalinism, the importance of providing a form of politics that allows the masses to interpret and understand their reality, etc. I also like that he rejected being called ‘small d’ haha.
This comment section has been raided by cult-like fanboys of a internet streamer community associated to one of the participants of the debate. Watch the debate for ur urself before allowing their herd mentality to influence your opinions on it.
"it's about white people vs people of color" And "Timothy Chamalet's rendition of Bob Dylan will replace the national anthem" Are these supposed to be serious people?
He's really the only one that sounds like he has studied marxism. The bald guy has said, at least 3x, that he's not a marxist. He shouldn't be allowed to speak in these spaces.
I don't know what everyone is talking about, Grayson sounded like a puppet. Nothing original, nothing of substance. Everyone else made a lot more sense.
First guy: remember 2016
Second guy: remember 1933
Fourth guy: remember 2020
Grayson: remember 2036
The first guy's framing is incorrect. He's giving the "left" coverage for capitulating to the liberals when, in reality, they are part of these undemocratic, liberal institutions. And his only characterizing Trump and the Republicans as the right is also a form of endorsement for the "lesser of two evils" framing. I think that if we are truly going to wrestle power from the ruling class in America then we must be clear about who that ruling class is, and not try to soften the image of the Democratic party.
Grayson is a breath of fresh air. Thank you Platypus for shining a light on this young man!
Never heard of this Grayson guy before but he makes a lot of great points!
Grayson’s performance on the panel was nothing short of exemplary. His eloquence, coupled with an incisive grasp of the subject matter, made his contributions not only intellectually stimulating but also pivotal to the overall discourse. With each thoughtful interjection, Grayson demonstrated a rare ability to distill complex ideas into accessible insights while simultaneously enriching the conversation with a depth of understanding that commanded the audience’s attention. His presence elevated the dialogue to a higher plane, leaving a profound impact on both the panelists and the attendees, and underscoring his intellectual prowess and skillful engagement.
28:58 "It's not the 1% vs the 99%, it's whites vs people of color"
This Bald Professor sounds a lot like the Austrian painter.
Bro at the 33:00 mark he uses Gramsci to justify supporting Harris. It's insane that they gave this guy a speaking slot.
Don't forget the banger around 1:14 "there's no such thing as material conditions"
I think that Austrian painter also denoted finance capital as the specific source of class conflict as well, like Grayson did
@@Cricket12226 " I used to be a marxist"😂
@@airnspace4814 True but his actions betrayed his rhetoric. He was always backed by and supported finance capital and monopoly capital
Grayson made some great points!
Really appreciated the opportunity to listen to Grayson on this panel. Incredible insight from this young man.
As always, the Stalinist is the only adult in the room.
Greyson makes me wanna join ACP
Then come! We are built on the compromise of various principled individuals. Dont let the controversy surrounding one bombastic personality dissuade you.
Grayson W
The anarchist utopian sounded utterly ridiculous
I'm gonna have to listen to that section about the Big Bang a few more times to see if there's something sensible about it because it sounds like total crankery.
@matthewlewis8297 I know that's something Alan Woods and the IMT really teaches. I'm open to it.
@@timefades27 I'm not opposed to the idea that the earliest cosmological events were different than scientists 50 years ago initially described them, I'm opposed to the idea that the cultural weight of the idea of the ex nihilo event necessarily puts us into a "paradoxical brain freeze by which which we can only approach Reality by halves and never reach it."
@@matthewlewis8297 he was making fun of the RCA, formerly IMT, who published an article denouncing the Big Bang Theory on the basis that it contradicts dialectical materialism
Perhaps but his consciousness is still representative of many leftists.
Does this guy Grayson have a youtube or writings somewhere? He spoke well.
@InfraredShow
Grayson effortlessly maintains a physical & an intellectual mog throughout the conversation
#AmericanCommunistParty
What he said is correct. #ACP
#ACP RISING
What each speaker encouraged
1. Organize for the Revolutionary Communists of America (RCA)
2. Vote for Kamala. Discuss race & gender more, class less.
3. Organize for the American Communist Party (ACP)
4. Join a mutual aid group
These trots are a joke, I could never stand them. Grayson makes sense, good see that old-school 'stalinists' are back.
What was said that you disagreed with?
Thanks Grayson for holding to marxism.
LET GRAYSON SPEAK!
Everyone except Grayson is stuck using the and understanding the world through the establishment liberal logos. It's only Grayson that has a advanced communist logos. He's even more technologically advanced using a laptop. ACP sweep.
What's the great legacy of the "mass movement" after George Floyd? 0...
Grayson is right. That’s it.
That professor was such a rude speaker. He couldn't be satisfied with his own speaking time, but instead continuously interrupted the other speakers.
I like that he was there and don’t think he was disruptive. We never see his thinking disputed calmly and clearly like this.
I valued every single one of his interruptions. He was polite enough for me, and more importantly it’s so satisfying to see his worldview flail and sputter
The first speaker immediately puts the cart before the horse: he doesn't even explain what democracy really is, but just jumps to this opportunistic question about "how communists can make use of it"-- as if its even clear that that is a possibility at all.
Excellent debate that captures the main tendencies of the American Left (optimistic trots, New Left pessimists, pro-CCP patsoc Stalinists, and movementists). Unfortunately Platypus disappointingly continues its allergy to professional audio. Hire an AV worker. Keep pens and paper shuffling away from the microphone.
“Patsocs” and “Stalinism” isn’t a thing.
@@robespierre2837 , American Communist Party (ACP) uses patriotic American imagery and rhetoric. I wish they didn't! ACP promotes the thinking and legacy of Stalin. The socialists I've worked with the last 12 years refer to this as Stalinism.
@@VigilantnotMilitant ACP is following the same line put forth by all successful Communist parties in history. An American Communist Party is going to draw on American history. Ceding American symbols and rhetoric to the fascists is a gigantic strategic blunder. Read Dimitrov. "Stalinism" is just Marxism-Leninism. I suspect the "socialists" you've worked with for the last 12 years are nothing but Trots.
They don't even need to hire an AV worker, just a run basic 5-mic setup and learn how to mute tracks in post
@@VigilantnotMilitant all socialists are patriotic, and upholding the legacy of Stalin is also standard Marxism-Leninism
What the “socialists” you work with think is irrelevant
2:01:30 everything in a nutshell, thanks to all panelists, especially mr. shulman
You got MOGGED by Grayson
1:43:26 The old man on the panel reveals the "New Left" has today, with its rejection of Marx, become fascist. Or was it fascist all along?
The older guy sounds like Kautsky. He's twisting what it means to have a democracy by giving a general, ahistorical analysis of the history of democracy as being uneven as "wrong". But that ignores the question of "democracy for who?" Should we give even "democracy" to the few capitalists once we communists hold power? I say no, we shouldn't.
And I strongly disagree with his assessment of the race line and how America is a "white supremacist country" because the white working class is racist. These are idealistic ideas that aren't backed up by material conditions or reality. This isn't to say that individuals aren't racist and that racism isn't still institutionalized, but thats not a representation of the vast majority of the white working class. What power does the white working class have? Isn't it our goal to give to unite the working class and bring about a government of, for, and by the people? How productive would a working class "revolution" be if it were splintered by like race?
Dude is seriously arguing that the primary struggle should be based on race and gender instead of class🤦🏾♂
OMG I was right! George Shulman is like a modern day Kautsky distorting history and marxism to justify form an alliance with the borgeoisie.
While I can see your point I do not think he can truly be compared to Kautsky. If we got some of these old socialdemocrats on a time machine, Kautsky or Bernstein for example, and zapped them into our times, they would be considered "dangerous and extremist Bolsheviks" and would probably have the label tankie or MAGA communist be used to describe them. The state of this undefined left that people call "woke" is much worse than Kautsky.
Howie Mandel really hates the ussr 😅
Also the amount of people who dont get that the fourth guy basically was just doing a bit insulting everyone. I guess to be fair though he was saying this all pretty deadpan
I think everyone on the panel got that. He opens with saying he thinks it’s useless!
Northwestern cancels classes of professor cited during Gaza protests
Mets hat guy!
He lost
No amount of educated eloquence, indeed even with an accompanying relative politeness from Grayson can hide the reality that Neo Stalinism is still attempting to miseducate and mislead, likely mostly among the inexperienced discontented i suppose. The obstacle to Socialism that it is would be barely tolerable even if it defended its favored States on its own terms but the sickening and obstructive disaster is its attempt to authenticate itself in the language of Bolshevism and Leninism . The irony of a "Marxist" attempting to defend the "space of bourgeois democracy" while at the same time defending " actual existing Socialism" in China was a sight to behold, even the aged new left democrat saw through the futility of trying that convoluted intellectual trick. Why some intellectuals are taken down or guided into the very dark path of Stalinism is a very large question, what is for sure is the obstacle they pose for Socialists. Tin hat on.
You demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of what Grayson said, and the subject as a whole.
Impressed by Grayson. I wonder why the ACP doesnt present him more often? Haz rarely ever sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
Prove it by debating haz
@@Pdxjrt He needs to prove it to the class conscious proletariat through his party's activity. Grow up.
Then you haven't listened to his lectures or read his writings. Grayson and Haz work closely together and hold incredibly similar positions.
@@justintime470 I don't doubt it. But he presents himself far better, and his ideas thus are much clearer.
Grayson is a student of Haz
1:03:08 😂
@@feathears5284 homofascist L
The professor was interestingly correct about many of his points but came to entirely different conclusions than ACP. Marx was about production, Lenin leads to stalinism, the importance of providing a form of politics that allows the masses to interpret and understand their reality, etc. I also like that he rejected being called ‘small d’ haha.
This comment section has been raided by cult-like fanboys of a internet streamer community associated to one of the participants of the debate.
Watch the debate for ur urself before allowing their herd mentality to influence your opinions on it.
Maybe most viewers just have a different opinion than you.
"it's about white people vs people of color"
And
"Timothy Chamalet's rendition of Bob Dylan will replace the national anthem"
Are these supposed to be serious people?
LOL, and I haven't even watched the vid yet! @hmt4173
Grayson won.
Defend your guys don't just be outraged
Grayson proves real Marxism is back
He's really the only one that sounds like he has studied marxism. The bald guy has said, at least 3x, that he's not a marxist. He shouldn't be allowed to speak in these spaces.
@@VictorTheVan Well calm down. I agree it is odd, but i helps to see the disagreement too and move beyond it
4th panelist repulsive through and through
I don't know what everyone is talking about, Grayson sounded like a puppet. Nothing original, nothing of substance. Everyone else made a lot more sense.
Maybe you’re just stupid
All grayson did was
seny Duginist and Heideggeran influence on the ACP..
Where was Dugin or Heidegger mentioned in this debate
Why are you lying through your teeth, Benjamin?
Just before 1:10:00 - race and gender were discovered in the USA in the 1950s lmao
Title: "Democracy and the Left without decent mics"