We're ready. To our white surprise, we're ready to record. This is... A settler is always ready. A settler is always ready. A settler is always ready to annex the jobs of an oppressed nation. I'm waiting for someone to be mad

that we're like being glib about settlers because it's such a serious text for so many

people but I am I am taking it seriously I hopefully we know we're inspiring some

people to read it so I hope we can be forgiven for our settlerness I don't think it's I don't

think we're being overly glib I think that we're taking this book a lot more

seriously than I think most people who...

Well we're reading it for one yeah for one we're reading it. We're reading it. For one, we're reading it. And for second, where

trying to take it at face value, I think the last couple of sessions we recognize that as Sakai later on says that it's not a

historical text per se although it does lean on some marginal or limited historical resources.

It's primarily a polemic, right?

It's him trying to make sense of what he saw

as an industrial worker. This is, course if he actually exists, but we're assuming it is that he really does exist.

Despite the most distinctions... I'm hearing more and more that he does exist and is a real person.

I never doubted that he really exists.

There's a lot of proof that he's real

and not just some made up sigh up by what,

anarchists or something.

But yeah, like, so it's not a work of history per se, although it leans on history. It's a polemic. But on top of that, and I think this is something that it's important to add.

This is also to a historical text in that we should read it

as a piece of history.

We should read it as a text from 1983.

That's a really good point.

...