189
Hasan Piker was set to debate Charlie Kirk. Now he's warning of a "Reichstag fire moment."
(www.motherjones.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2025
189 points (94.8% liked)
United States | News & Politics
3314 readers
1115 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
No memes.
Post news related to the United States.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't need justification for your glint of truth. I need justification that nothing in the linked interview of Hassan is worth reading or listening to because he's nothing more than an outrage farm.
I actually listened to the interview. He said several things that so few people in mainstream media are willing to say, and he criticized mainstream media for not saying those things.
Kirk advocated for gross positions. He literally stated that empathy was invented by the left. In response to the shooting, right wing politicians and pundits immediately called for retribution against the left just like they did when the democratic lawmaker was assassinated, and say nothing when it turns out it wasn't a leftists killer. Trump never bothered did any honor the victim of that killing, but they lower flags this weekend for Kirk and don't mention the school shooting that happened literally one hour later or the 45 prior shootings in 2025. They praised Kirk for valuing debate and free speech, but are now firing people and refusing to let in travelers if they posted negative opinions of Kirk. Rage bait, or reasonable things to talk about?
Yes. I'm familiar with the horrible human that is Kirk. Nothing of value was lost. He was committed to punching down everyone that wasn't white or Christian. But one thing he was exceptionally good at is organizing.
See, the difference between Kirk and Hassan is that Kirk was so successful at rallying right wing youth that they showed up in droves to the polls, especially in this election. We gotta appreciate the ability to mobilize so effectively.
The only thing Hassan seems capable of is shitting on EVERYONE. Because Hassan is not solutions oriented. He is not particularly motivated at building a political movement or accomplishing anything apart from a charity drive once in a while. That's it. He spends 80% of his stream chastising democrats. Then rallying his base day after day about Gaza but not looking towards any meaningful prescriptions. Just the other week he streamed an interview of a man who lost his son in the Nova music festival. Despite losing his child this man was calling for a ceasefire. He wasn't a settler. He wasn't IDF. He wants peace. The best we can get out of Hassan? He calls him Nazi scum.
I could go on about the ineffective and meaningless content that is Hassan, but at the end of the day, it's just superficial. And I think that's the part that bothers me the most. He has such a massive platform and all he can do is read Twitter headlines and rage bait seven days a week. For what?
I don't suppose you have any "receipts" for this? Perhaps any information about the interview?
Ah, there it is. So you want someone on the left (the actual left) to pretend like the majority of the Democratic party and it's leadership isn't ineffective and feckless. You'd rather blame the left for pointing it out and call their criticism worthless rage bait.
Here we go again. The dude streams for how many hours a day, how many dayss a week, and you expect him to deliver high quality content the entire time... to modern Internet audiences...?
Like I said, I'm not a fan. I've seen a few interviews and debates he participated in. A few referenced clips of note. I remember the clips had a lot of bullshit. Inside jokes with chat, immature shit, or references to things only constantly online people would get, at least I assume. I'm aware enough to know modern shock humor and genuinely offensive comments are separated by a fine line within internet culture.
Ok. He watched and interview with this person? I have no context so I can't really comment beyond the polls coming out of Israel disturb and scare the shit out of me. Just because you are a victim of a tragedy, and aren't a member of groups openly commiting crimes against humanity in Israel, you aren't immediately a good person. Supporting Bibi at this point is enough to make you a pretty horrible human being.
Engage with what I wrote instead of strawmans. I'm aware of the polls coming out of Israel. But here was one individual not aligned with that poll. So you're point is moot.
I don't want him to do anything for the democratic party. That's not what I said. I compared effectiveness. One (Kirk) dsepite being a vile person, accomplished something. Hassan, despite being vile and narcissistic, can't seem to do much but read Twitter headlines all day.
Were not having a conversation because you seem incapable of engaging with my points.
Go watch his stream. In ten years, it will be the same garbage in garbage out, and nothing will be gained or accomplished.
You made a claim. This is the problem with engaging with comments like yours. I'd have to hunt down whatever you are talking about and waste how much time watching it? Then I might have to do more researching in order to just verify that it happened the way you claim, or the way some summary video portrayed it, and that you yourself did enough research on the guy.
Fucking give me something other than assertions about his personality and motivations, or suggest I would agree if I make watching his stream a full time job.
Did you check to make sure your results were statistically significant or was it just vibes and who won the last election? Effectiveness at what? More importantly how the fuck does this support dismissing what was said in this interview? You know, the comment that I originally responded to?
Alright, I checked. He streams ~7 hours a day, ~7 days a week. No thanks. You don't get to assign me that kind bullshit work in order to justify my opinion that your opinion isn't justified. You gave me one link to an hour long summary of one dude allegedly watching Hassan for a week (which I doubt they actually did ~49 hours of watching for). This was to support your claim that he didn't know the importance of a location within Israel and felt that it was a point of such extreme ignorance that it invalidated any of Hassan's comments, ever, on the Israel - Palestine conflict, therefore he's a rage baiting narcissist who's accomplished nothing?
We're not. You're making assertions and I'm telling you why assertions aren't evidence. Then you tell me to go find support for your assertions within an extraordinariky large body of work. I feel like you are wasting my time. I suspect you are just easily offended, a Zionist upset because this guy isn't backing ADL talking points (both of your only actual, specific references were related to Israel), or just don't want people to pay attention to what is being said.
You know what, I'll gladly admit I did not bring enough specific receipts and I'm talking in broad terms (although I provided plenty of examples to support my point). My comment was also not about the interview in question. I agree: "assertions are not evidence". That's why I brought you some examples which you discounted or simply ignored. You don't have to watch Hasan's stream all day to see the difference in social impact he has against the tide that is the right wing media apparatus, because at the end of the day, and this is my main claim: Hasan is not interested in outcomes (except the one that generate revenue).
The point about him not understanding the Western Wall is not central to the claim that it discounts everything he says. It's central to the claim that his stream is superficial slop content meant to generate views. I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. If you've been covering Israel / Gaza for over two years and you still don't know what the Western Wall is....That's weird. It tells me you have no interest in covering this beyond an extremely superficial level. It's Kony 2012 all over again.
I am making claims that would require you to verify them by consuming his content. I've been familiar with his content for over five years. I don't need to watch his stream any more. I look at the sum total of his outcomes. What has he managed to achieve politically so far? What is he doing to build the movement up? He doesn't seem to care. Why should I?
It's only strange if you give weight to the specific religious claims to Jerusalem rather than the humanity of the people living there. The archeological significance of that wall doesn't change the politics of Zionism or Palestinian liberation, nor should it.
It would be like complaining that someone doesn't know the significance of the Black Stone in the Kaaba while discussing the geopolitical influence of Saudi Arabia at the UN. Is it a significant part of the mythology of Islam and the region broadly? Sure. Is it relevant to the actions taken by the Saudi government today? Uhhh, not really, no.
Sure. But you should at minimum know about it. You don't have to talk about it every day. But if you professed to be an expert in Saudi geopolitics and you didn't know what the Kaaba is then I really don't see any reason to listen to you any longer. It's getting ridiculous at this point
Maybe if he was a religious expert, but its not relevant to the geopolitics of the middle east.
You can stop listening to whoever you want at any time bud.
...
You're "examples", paraphrased:
He doesn't know the significance of the Western Wall
He called an Israeli that wasn't a settler or IDF and called for "peace and a ceasefire" a Nazi
Am I missing any?
I don't know much about the significance or controversy of the Western Wall. It's where politicians get photos taken when they want to demonstrate their Zionism. I don't see the open air prison that is Gaza, or it's destruction, or the Settlements in the West Bank being directly related to the Western Wall.
I don't know anything about the interview or the guys comments on this allegedly reasonable, peaceful Israeli. Maybe he just decided a week before the interview that enough is enough. Maybe he is perfectly fine with the situation in the West Bank and the open air prison of Gaza, he just wants to stop worrying about the geopolitics of the conflict and his own safety. I don't know because you did nothing but make assertions.
Your points, paraphrased:
He just reads Twitter
His content is just slop
He doesn't care, he just wants money
He doesn't just reads Twitter. He's been on TV, He's been in debates (literally was scheduled to debate Kirk in like a week or two as per this interview). I've seen him visiting other political programs. I'm not a fan but it's obvious he does more than Twitter.
The content I've described above is more than slop. He allegedly averages 49 hours a week. A lot of that is going to be trash and low effort. It's not all he seems to do.
Does he run ads for his own products, like the other grifters? Does he shift his position to maximize viewership or is he principled? I have seen and products (though I don't really follow) and he has seemed pretty principled. Does he make money? Yes, he's the largest streamer/influencer on the left. I've heard him called the Joe Rogan of the left and that we need of him. While I think that is a ignorant simplification and a bad metaphor, it sounds like he's at least not just feeding rage bait and slop the entire time.
What do you expect him to achieve? What would change your mind about him caring? What could he do going forward to earn your respect?
These are fair points. I don't expect 49 hours of content to be high quality. You are asking the right questions though. I like where this is going!
If after ten years of streaming and media presence the most he can achieve is... More of the same, I count that as a loss. I do see him making bank though. Hasan has stopped most debates and has been adamant that they are useless. Where is the "turning point left"? Where is the canvassing? The fundraising? What legislation or policy is he pushing forward? He's not a politician, but he has one of the biggest platforms and access. What is he doing with it?
I'm not saying for the democratic party. For any party. Something beyond media punditry. Kirk built up a whole movement that overturned an election. Young white males showed up in droves to vote. As much as I despise Kirk, I see the damage he did because of how effective he is. I wish those on the left could move beyond online punditry and into organizing.
I'm honestly not sure. I've seen him have a few interesting discussions with left leaning political figures so I assume there is more of that. I know Cuomo is, as of like a week ago, demanding that Mamdani condemn Hasan because he's had a few pictures with him so again Hasan isn't just doing nothing - he's visible, though he may just be taking advantage of his status to pal around with popular people on the left. The few streams I've been linked to I recall feeling like he was honestly engaging topics on the left and making an effort to educate those watching. I'm not deep in his content so I don't really know how often that happens or how accurate his "takes" are on average. My impression is that, on average, he far exceeds you assertion a 100% self-serving slop factory.
Honestly, I saw him as just another gross, right wing internet personality spewing the kind of garbage that disgusts me. I assume he spends most of his time regurgitating the typical talking points of the right like a good little soldier. He's maybe a bit more creative with his debate tactics. I've seen him masterfully dodging and manipulating the conversation to avoid having to actually defend his abhorrent views (like in his recent debate with those student in that British university), though he has also proudly taken disgusting stands without any shame and just basked in his own self righteousness. I am just not deep enough into the right wing internet sphere to consider him specifically effective. Just another loud, popular, well paid voice strengthening the right wing echo chamber.
Here's what I think is more important. As I said before, I've heard multiple times that Hasan is "The Joe Rogan of the Left". Again, I think it's kind of apples and oranges but along those lines how much of what you've said would apply to Joe Rogan? Is he as openly political as Hasan? Is he as consistent with his views? Does he fundraise for the right or has he pushed for certain policies? I know he's known for agreeing with whoever is in front him him and I don't know of him doing anything more political than having a political person on his his show. Would you consider Joe Rogan to have had no impact on the success of the right? Could he disappear and the right wouldn't notice?
Regardless of whether or not Hasan is actively maximizing the value of his political capital or wealth to change the world, he's popular and he is openly, consistently left. More left than Destiny, who I (admittedly) recall being more politically proactive - I heard he was canvasing for 2024. I'm also not a Destiny follower so please don't make me defend him. I'm a lefty who's online enough that I'm familiar with a number of popular personalities because they bounce around and get mentioned in the space.
So Hasan could do more, sure. Hasan makes a substantial amount of money, yes. But, as far as popular strongly left-leaning personalities he has influence and I think he's contributing a lot more than nothing. That's why I'm countering your assessments.
Every time someone hates Hasan, that's why.
I'd be satisfied with any outcome. Even if it meant the communist party wins the 2028 elections. The key to remember is that Kirk and Shapiro and the entire media apparatus of the right gets people mobilized.
They organize. They vote.
Hasan reads Twitter headlines. If that makes you happy, then do with that what you will.