Democrats spent the last year asking where their Joe Rogan was. Hasan Piker is one of the few left-wing figures with the audience they covet — but the party is deeply hostile to the spontaneity and independence that make figures like him appealing.
Yea Ok, but Hassan only cares about clout. That’s it. He found his grift on the left and has capitalized on it. Any attempt to build coalitions, lift up the left or acquire power for the movement is undercut by his need for more clout. He’s not the ally the movement needs, but a peak representation of superficial rhetoric that the left seems to be drawn to these days. The medium is the message or whatever
Democrats are shit but God what I wouldn’t give for politics to no longer be a playground for twitch streamers, failed TV actors, retired sports stars and podcasters. Anyone with a mic and inflammatory hot takes can be a political force majeure without any risk, effort or leg work.
Even though they’re both influencers, I respect the shit out of Kat Abughazaleh for the bare minimum fact that she’s actually out there organizing and helping her community. Hassan can say similar stuff from his $2.7m mansion but that doesn’t mean he deserves the same respect.
Piker is an act of a conservative’s idea of a leftest
Maybe we should not want the tankie, dog torturer?
Point on your Destiny waifu pillow where Hasan touched you.
Man, destiny sure lives rent free in your heads holy shit.
Yeah they already have a Hasan Piker, his name is Hasan Piker
Puppy killers on one side and dog torturers on the other. Canines can’t catch a break.
The thing is the Democrats today are nowhere near the left, more like right center, while MAGA is far right.
I just don’t think “Dems” really exist. People left of MAGA just vote for Democrats because it is what they have to choose from. People who want communism or socialism or social programs or just more fallbacks all want them in varying ways. People say “corporate Democrats” which is basically the majority of what the democratic party has represented for the last decade. A lot of people want to reform what the democratic party is because it is the only structure that exists so that’s why people want to primary everyone. In the end though that means that a corporate Democrat, and all those other groups are voting to replace the same people, but they don’t have the same views/wants. So there is no one person that would be an agreeable spokesperson for all of the various beliefs. Someone who believes the means of production should be owned by the people will never agree with someone who believes the means of production should be own by private entities. So they would be shitting all over each other’s “spokesperson” or whatever.
Interesting, I have never heard this claim before
The party is deeply hostile to anything that questions capitalism and the status quo. They’re shooting themselves in the foot, again, by wanting to push Hasan away as a messenger. He clearly appeals to a certain demographic under the left’s umbrella.
agreed, they want a coalition sized vote without acknowledging any of the concerns having that size of a vote needs. Bunch of spoiled rich crooked babies who refuse to do the hard work of leading… and then they repeatedly lose and try to blame everyone else for their lack of attention to the voters who dont feel represented.
spoiled rich crooked babies who refuse to do the hard work of leading… and then they repeatedly lose and try to blame everyone else
That line fits Hasan pretty well, actually.
His whole model is to deride institutions while depending on other people to do the institutional work he looks down on. He can bless the handful of candidates who pass his purity test, but that is not the same thing as building power. In U.S. politics, elected officials need a broad coalition around them, and the way Hasan operates his platform subverts that.
So even when his preferred progressives win, what then? If there are fewer Democrats overall (because people like Hasan don’t discourage voting third-party or abstaining from voting in general), then progressives have fewer coalition partners, and smaller voting blocs to work with, so those wins come with less leverage, not more, and the country slides farther to the right.
Bernie Sanders understands this, which is why when Hasan tried to draw Sanders into criticizing Newsom, Sanders did not indulge it. Same reason Sanders was so friendly with Manchin: he knows what compromises need to be made to maximize chances of enacting progressive policy.
I think this is a good take from the Sam Seder crew regarding how new media operates:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BACFyzIjehQ
Because of media fragmentation, two things. First, the vast majority of people do not know who Hasan Piker is. It’s a big fragmented media landscape, so most people don’t know who “everyone” else is in the media landscape. If you listen to Meidas Touch or Don Lemon, you probably have no clue who Hassan is.
Second… People get whatever content they are going to get from whichever podcasts or news programs they like, and in general, they like the personality of the people they’ve developed trust in to give them the news or media analysis. People who know who Hassan is, they like him.
It’s a form of positive selection bias. People like who they know and they know who they are because they like them. It’s why they’ve come to know them.
The Hassan derangement syndrome thing is real and it brings no one to the table. It only serves to appease a small group of donors and only hurts the Democrats.
Amanda Litman (who runs the Run For Something organization) just wrote a nice piece about the Hassan vs Democrat Party conundrum:
(substack, I know, I know)
https://amandalitman.substack.com/p/build-a-bigger-tent-wait-no-not-likeThe important part, though, is that establishment democrats and the consultant class over-value the type of media that participates in this derangement.
So we’ll (again) end up with a democratic establishment that turns their shoulder to leftist independent creators and they will (again) lose and blame those same people
Well said!
Bad dog. No barking.
Put your shock collar back on and sit in place quietly like a good Hasan fan, @TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world.
Oh Jesus, this bullshit from Destiny and Saltman has permeated here as well? Gross.
I have no idea who those other streamers are. But I’ve watched several hours of Hasan on his own merit, and that fella is a trog all the way through: The Rogan/Asmongold comparisons are right on the money.
Now sit in your place.
I have no idea who those other streamers are
Haha IKR how could you have seen hasan even briefly and not know who destiny is?
All they talk about is eachother lol
Oh I’m sure there’s plenty of people who know Hasan exists without ever realizing who Destiny is and I love that for him.
I’m sure it chaps little Stevie’s ass every time.
You’ve completely lapped up their disinformation campaign while remaining ignorant of their existence then. Almost impressive.
I just refreshed my memory from the KYM dogtober page and both those people are mentioned once, offhand. What else would I know them from?
I did see a video of Hasan dragging his other dog by the tail and yanking it around. Did those other streamers make him do that?
Ethan Klein, Destiny, and Dan Saltman all have a hard on to take Hasan down and collaborate on how to do so frequently. They’re obsessed.
You have fallen for a disinformation campaign.
Yep. And let’s not forget, just as recently as a year ago, Lemmy would ban people for saying “both parties suck.” And anyone who supported third-parties were pounded on and called russians and nazis. That still happens, but not as much anymore, thank goodness.
Finally more and more people here are starting to come around to realizing that neither the democrats nor the republicans want to help us plebs.
Both parties do suck and as long as people keep shooing away third-party voters, they’ll continue to suck. Remember guys, the only reason third-parties are weak is because you all refuse to support them.
Yep. And let’s not forget, just as recently as a year ago, Lemmy would ban people for saying “both parties suck.” And anyone who supported third-parties were pounded on and called russians and nazis. That still happens, but not as much any more, thank goodness.
Yeah, because context matters. The political environment when you’re in the middle of the general election and infighting accomplishes fuck-all except to help the enemy is entirety different from the one when it’s time to find new primary candidates and there’s an opportunity for dissent to actually serve a useful purpose.
Weird how attempting to control peoples opinions online didn’t win Harris the presidency then.
Maybe the focus should’ve been on earnestly listening to concerns from the leftists under the umbrella instead of silencing them.
IT WAS TOO FUCKING LATE FOR THAT! Harris was the candidate. End of. There was zero possibility of replacing her with somebody more leftist. The choices were only “vote for Harris” or “help Trump.” That’s it.
Game theory is MATH, not an opinion!
Did you think I wanted that class traitor prosecutor bitch either?! Fuck, no! But, being someone who isn’t a goddamn drooling moron, I realized that Trump was even worse and held my nose. That’s how the system works, and it does not care how much you or I both hate it.
Nobody was trying to “control people’s opinions;” we were trying to stop you from making an objective mathematical error that would destroy us all.
The choices were only “vote for Harris” or “help Trump.”
Or vote third party. Which I proudly did. And will do again unless the Democrats stop fucking shit up.
Did you think I wanted that class traitor prosecutor bitch either?! Fuck, no!
So why didn’t you speak up? Was it because you knew Lemmy would censor you? Do you think it’s right to censor someone for what you just said?
That’s how the system works, and it does not care how much you or I both hate it.
The system is like that because you refuse to support third-party support. By you refusing to validate third parties, they don’t have the pull they should have. But if EVERYONE voted third party, guess what? Shit would start to change. You are actually part of the problem, not the solution.
Nobody was trying to “control people’s opinions;” we were trying to stop you from making an objective mathematical error that would destroy us all.
And how did that work out for you? What ended up happening?
The choices were only “vote for Harris” or “help Trump.”
Or vote third party.That’s a lie. “Vote third party” is a subset of “help Trump.”
Thanks for proving my point. I bet ya miss the lemmy times right before the 2024 election, huh? I bet you hate seeing how many people are pro-third party these days! lololEDIT: A little too much snark, but poster is definitely showing how angry some people can be when it comes to third-party talk.
Yep. And let’s not forget, just as recently as a year ago, Lemmy would ban people for saying “both parties suck.”
Oh interesting. Good to know.
I realize I’m late so am just responding here for posterity, but - while I’m open to evidence - in my experience the people who were banned were clearly or very likely bad faith astroturf and propaganda accounts. They were clearly trying to split the vote, depress left turnout, and would just repeat LLM-generated junk rather than respond to any good faith debate.
And I think the bans were right in retrospect because the timed (not typically perma) bans expired and those people still magically disappeared completely from Lemmy after the election.
In the end, they probably did their job. Trump is in office destroying the country/world, and right now there are probably real people in this thread who think their “both sides” opinions are being censored in part because of the echoes of the noise those bad faith agents made way back in 2024.
And I think the bans were right in retrospect because the timed (not typically perma) bans expired
Lol, no they weren’t/didn’t.
and those people still magically disappeared completely from Lemmy after the election.
Lol, no we didn’t.
I’m standing with ya, brother! Thank you!
very likely bad faith astroturf and propaganda accounts.
And that’s the same tired argument that was made then. Why do you find it so hard to accept that some people just aren’t onboard with either of the two main parties? Look around. Tide is turning. Lots of people on Lemmy now are open to third parties now. Are they all propaganda accounts too?!
This is why you all lost the fucking election. Because you can’t wrap your head around the fact that you may be wrong about things.
Facts: Lemmy had about 40,000–50,000 monthly active users worldwide in November 2024. There were 236 MILLION U.S. citizens voting-age. 154+ MILLION actual ballots cast. Third-party advocates made an even smaller slice of that already microscopic global user base. It’s utterly ludicrous for anyone to think that third-party voters on Lemmy could have split the vote or had any meaningful say whatsoever in the presidential election.
Yet you are ok with them being censored because you were scared of them. How’d that work out? They were banned, and guess what? Trump still won. Again.
those people still magically disappeared completely from Lemmy after the election.
I was told I would “disappear” after the election. Maybe it looks like I did because I had to create a new username (not for ban evading–I actually blocked the instances I was banned from). But here I am.
Am I a ‘propaganda’ account, still going, 2 years after the election?
Not only that, but I see lots of people being accused of being alts of those ‘propaganda’ posters. So did they really disappear if their alts are everywhere? Hmmm…
You want democrats to win the next election? Then pick a candidate who can win. You all lost to Trump twice. Think about that.
Also, even if every single person who voted third party, changed their vote to Harris, she still would have lost. That’s how big the margin of her loss was. Lemmy wasn’t even close to making a dent in any of that, so to blame Lemmy posters for it is crazy.
It costs next to nothing to include Lemmy in a social media astroturf and propaganda campaign, and is even easier and more effective because the small userbase means people’s posts are viewed less suspiciously (case in point: Your entire “the userbase is too small lolol” argument here). I am absolutely certain a few people I interacted with during that time were astroturf, MAGA-in-disguise or propaganda accounts. Re-read the part of my reply about necessary but not sufficient causation, to address your “third party vote” argument (I said nothing about third party voters, note, but you also ignore depressed turnout).
But to get a little meta: I’m engaging in good faith discussion and giving reasons for my arguments. And you come here, respond to me twice (edit: three times?) with condescending derision when I wasn’t even talking to or about you, and are making an illogical claim that a 50K userbase somehow means Lemmy is immune from propaganda (whether state or individual). You then downvote me, which I didn’t do to anyone I disagree with here. It’s childish and petty.
We are two people who probably want the same left-based outcomes and have disagreements on the method to get there, but you’re ranting to me about random things in this thread that I didn’t even say. You’re being extremely unpleasant, unkind and uncivil. I stand by what I said.
Second edit: Seeing your profile and comment about being banned, here’s a direct question: Did you go by the username UniversalMonk prior to the election? The MO, aggressive response style, and AI-generated profile stuff is almost identical.
Hasan is sketchy as fuck.
yes, but the centrist dems are even sketchier than that. Whats comes after ‘sketchier than fuck’?
The party wants a “Joe Rogan of the left” so they can focus on controlling one person to drag millions of people along into whatever fresh hell their billionaire donors are cooking up. Just like the Joe Rogan of the right.
I do not want there to be a Joe Rogan of the left.
The problem is that what they actually want is “Joe Rogan of the middle” and they already have that in the form of basically every single newscaster that isn’t a magatard.
magaturd, please
Joe Rogan is a right wing manifestation. The left wing equivalent is some sort of group, not an individual. That’s one of the fundamental differences between the two sides.
Well actually the party is composed of many different people, a variety of backgrounds, and many of them don’t want a Joe Rogan of the left because they know that it’s just b*******. But it’s a cute idea to pretend that they do.
I think it’s clear “the party” here is referring to top party leadership. When people say “Washington holds negotiations with Moscow”, do you object that, in fact, very few citizens of either city were involved?
We used to have a Joe Rogan of the left, he was Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
RFK Jr was never left
Neoliberal maybe but they’re right wingers unless you still drink that high fructose American koolaid where Democrats are “radical far left”
I guess you don’t remember Ring of Fire and Air America Radio. Granted, it’s been a minute. 😉
Huh, TIL. There’s an interesting personal account from someone who interned at Ring of Fire and worked with RFK Jr. out there. Seems to be his lack of research is a common theme throughout his life.
Pretending Democrats wanted a Hasan Piker is a neat way to spin things.
Democrats never wanted Hasan. They are a liberal party, and Hasan is a staunch anti-liberal. Why pretend like he was ever wanted by them?
They never wanted Hasan, but they definitely wanted someone like Joe Rogan. I remember the talk around it as the 2024 presidential campaigns were really ramping up.
They don’t want to be challenged. They want a cheerleader who will help rally people to vote for them without actually having to change their positions.
Democrats want a moron?
Hasan is uncontrollably brain broken from the roid rage.
You’re thinking of actual Joe Rogan
and many more but no I was talking about hasan
Fuck Hasan he’s a fake ass animal abuser
Better a “fake ass” animal abuser than a real animal abuser.
Why are you so confident he didn’t hurt his dog? /gen
