I think it does matter that most people joining the DSA are completely unprepared for this eventuality.

They'll learn, but it's going to be rough.

Its a link to @drinkinglakewater@hexbear.net s comment under the same top comment, they link a video about it

but rather I was thinking back to 7DeadlyFetishes a few days ago

OK, but please try not to defend nazi concentration camp guards.

edit: I actually want to pre-run this commentary with a statement and a question. 1) I think we're actually quite close in our opinion of Hasan, and I'm very much not trying to be hostile, I like seeing you around Hexbear a lot, just wanted to make sure that got across. 2) If you could puppet Hasan, what would you be having him do and say, and why do you think that would be more effective at raising the most people's political consciousness beyond socdem/berniecrat than his current proportions of commentary and engagement with sitting/running politicians?

One pattern that is clear is that while Hasan dogs on Democrats regularly his only recourse for you the viewer is to put pressure on the Democrats.

This is absolutely not the case. He most commonly urges his viewers to join organizations and organize. He has told people to join DSA or PSL and to stop thinking of politics solely in terms of elections. I don't think it's reasonable to say that his actual advocacy for people is to put pressure on the Democrats. I don't think he's deluded into thinking that he can single-handedly pressure Democrats into change. But he does know that he is the largest popular voice for more radical socialist politics and the Democrats are significantly closer to the levers of state power, so at the very least engaging them brings his ideas up to them for his viewers to watch these politicians fail to embrace proletarian politics.

which I can't tell if you've watched or not

I didn't watch this video, I watched the stream it was cut out of when it was live. I should explain how I view Hasan's content. I've been interested in studying the socialist politics himbo for the last several years, since he is the largest voice espousing a more radical politics than is in the mainstream. I don't have a Twitch account; I don't chat or leave comments on his videos. I'm generally anathema to defend him other than correcting (really, really common, even on this site) misinformation because I think that crosses a line of parasociality that robs one's ability to be separate from the pack mentality. So I am very familiar with his commentary and coverage over the last four or five years, but I do my best not to become invested in defending him parasocially.

This is a total fallacy however, stuck in this chicken or egg situation where Hasan isn't interested in 3rd parties until just the right one comes along, or until someone else builds it.

I keep asking, and I'm not sure you've given me an answer, what exactly do you want him to do different though? I mean we're comrades in some sense right, I've seen your advocacy around hexbear, I really appreciate your commentary and what you choose to post. I'm not being hostile when I ask this, do you genuinely think that this guy that can barely organize his own travel and stream setup has the skillset to like start and run a viable ML party or something? Like are you just wanting him to be aggressively pro-PSL and refuse to ever talk to Democratic Party politicians or something like that? You say he's not interested in third parties, but when they organize an action, he covers it. He regularly uses coverage from Code Pink and BT News, and I know you know this. Both of whom were also at, for example, the Zohran Mamdani election results party. He tells his audience usually when a particular protest has been organized by PSL.

Do people like AOC or Sanders or the squad really bring him a platform? Wouldn't he be mostly talking to like minded liberals in those circles? What is the delta between a Sanders supporter and Hasan in terms of their ideas really? Palestine obviously.

Yes, the majority of squad voters are not engaged with socialist political commentary and Hasan's commentary is much more consistently progressive and to the left than theirs. He is regularly critical of AOC and Bernie when they do fuck-ups, even parts of, for example, that recent Munich Security Conference speech that AOC did that libs were gushing over. A lot of those voters only encounter Hasan's commentary when he interviews a Bernie or an AOC, and they're literally elected officials. I think it's ludicrous to suggest that elected congresspeople aren't bringing a guy like Hasan a platform. Do you think that when Sanders goes on Fox News, he's grateful for Fox News platforming him because he wouldn't be listened to otherwise? So I would say no, he wants to talk to the liberals that follow AOC and Sanders but haven't had their political consciousness raised any further specifically because he is trying to reach them with more radical agitprop, this has been his stated intentions. The delta between a Sanders supporter and Hasan himself in terms of their ideas is the amount of political consciousness. If every Sanders voter was where Hasan is, we'd have the numbers to build a revolutionary PSL cadre tomorrow. It is also much more than Palestine. I don't think that effectively enough credits criticisms of those many parts of necessary development in the U.S. that Sanders ignores, and certainly is ignorant of his overall coverage of foreign policy. Sanders always starts his milquetoast foreign policy statements of any variety, Palestine or otherwise, with the requisite dehumanization of other peoples and the rejection of their states as sovereign and legitimate. Hasan's commentary always shits on Sanders doing this.

Yet he hasn't replaced the billionaire head of police Jessica S. Tisch and likely won't, he's hired a liberal zionist as the Office to Combat Antisemitism, and is endorsing Brad Lander over Alexa Aviles. Now that last point is pragmatic I'll say, but you can't help but look at it and think it must sting for Aviles.

I don't know if you've seen this coverage, but Hasan's commentary on all of these was negative. Do you think he'd make a better difference by tossing out support for Mamdani entirely? I would describe his overall support of Mamdani as critical support.

Has anyone asked him about Maduro?

Zohran? Yes, at first he had said that Maduro and Diaz-Canel were dictators. His statement about the kidnapping of Maduro was that it was bad, but of course this is betrayed by his earlier condemnation of Maduro as illegitimate. Hasan covering Zohran on Maduro? Also yes, his coverage of Mamdani's statements about Venezuela and Cuba was negative, but noted that Mamdani's opinion isn't overall majorly impactful since he's a mayor of a city and doesn't have much real influence over U.S. foreign policy.

Why spend our time and energy on a party that is so capable of imposing itself on those who dare enter its ranks? What good does it do if we drip feed in these progressives?

To heighten contradictions and raise people's political consciousness. When Zohran does good things, that's a win for socialism. When Zohran does bad things, that's an obvious limitation of these bourgeois political parties within a bourgeois dictatorship. For Hasan's project of doing entry-level agitprop wherever the popular energy is the most left, it makes sense to engage with anything that pushes his audience towards believing that better things are possible.

In short, I don't understand what exactly you want to see Hasan do different? If you think that refusing to entertain Democratic Party politicians or wouldbe politicians would have the overall effect of a large push left among the population, then I think you'd be wrong. Engaging with these people broadens his audience generally. But he's a political commentator and news commentator, not an accepted strategist for any party, not a member of any particular party apparatus. If the flaw of DSA is trying to get these executive positions like NYC mayor without having the legislative base in Albany to avoid having to make concessions to the NY state Democratic Party apparatus to get the agenda done, then that's on DSA's organization. What should Hasan do different about that bad strategy though? He already criticizes DSA too.

Again, I think we have very similar feelings on all of these policies, I didn't mention most of what you had to say about Zohran and what he might and might not do because I agree entirely with your analysis. You said that "if there was a 3rd party big enough to engage then I would" is fallacious, but DSA grew itself large enough to compete in elections like Mamdani's on its own, not because Hasan supported them into growth. And then he started engaging with their electeds. But one does not organize a party via Twitch streaming.

There won't be a working class party worth engaging with if we don't engage with working class parties. The Democrats are not a working class party.

I agree but there's no better solution. The PSL is weak. The DSA is weak and filled with baby leftists. The green party hasn't won an election higher than Mayor of towns with 10k people. There is no working class party and expecting Americans to start one is foolish. Americans are stupid, ignorant, and selfish. I know, I live here 🙃

he was certainly somewhat interested in platner at first, but that interest waned as more and more information came out, culminating in the nazi tattoo reveal. when platner has been brought up since then, the response is a joke about supporting janet mills, the establishment democrat alternative, and nothing further. i think he gets a bit golden retrievery about candidates that are vocally against giving the zionist entity lots of weapons, and especially was at the time that platner showed up. that said, of the antizionist candidates that popped up around the same time, i'd say that piker kept his enthusiasm most distanced about platner. certainly not the deep-throated defense of the nazi tattoo that so many commentators decided to do, like emma vigeland.