Gross response.
Here's the Bad Empanada video I finessed this title from. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69BlRK9Jql0
Rare Hasan L. Why the fuck is he doubling down on this? Does Bernie really mean that much to you Hasan? 
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
79 points (95.4% liked)
El Chisme
475 readers
246 users here now
Place for posting about the dumb shit public figures say.
Rules:
Rule 1: The subject of a post must be a public person.
Rule 2: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 3: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 4: No sectarianism.
Rule 5: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 6: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 7: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 8: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Badempanada's criticism only makes sense from the perspective that he believes that streaming is activism. Badempanada thinks that he's going to defeat Zionism by being a really annoying person on twitter. It is entertaining that Badempanada is really annoying on twitter. This is the core of why Badempanada is so mad, he thinks that doing an interview is activism and therefore doing a bad interview is bad activism.
I watched the Hasan video and the Badempanda video. Badempanada makes a conspiracy theory that Hasan is "being groomed by the mainstream media" to launder their opinions. Hasan's video says that he agrees that the interview was bad and he didn't know the extent of how bad that Matt Duss is. Badempanada says that Hasan should have been more critical to Matt Duss. Hasan says that he should have been more critical to Matt Duss. So what is the disagreement? The disagreement is that Badempanada thinks that streaming is activism and it seems like Hasan does not agree that streaming is activism.
You think the interview was bad. Badempanada thinks that the interview was bad. Hasan thinks the interview was bad. What happens next? Hasan created this video to say that the interview was bad. At 9 minutes in the video, Hasan say he doesn't care about drama because doing activism (going outside and protesting) is more important than internet drama. Hasan seems to recognize that streaming isn't activism. Badempanada thinks that streaming is activism. That's why he's mad.
I don't think that streaming is activism. Sometimes Hasan does activism by attending protests, the student encampments, or the anti-ICE protests in LA. Other people have said that Hasan inspired them to do activism. Streaming itself isn't activism.
Hasan's stream is a news show. News shows sometimes do bad interviews or have bad guests. Chapo has had many bad guests and they acknowlege it, (contrapoints, Matt Taibbi, etc). Every news show has bad interviews sometimes.
My expectation is only that Hasan recognizes that this was a bad interview and doesn't make the same mistake again.
Their (both) activism is of limited nature, as it doesn’t collide them with the law. I’m sorry but when only interview of pal_action I could find is in nlr (bunch of nerds for any streamer watcher), and all podcast/streamer sphere is like “oh wow they made them illegal huh” after 1.5 years of work? They are all posers. Granny arrested post factum is a braver comrade than all of them
Marching in the streets and interviewing kibbutz bernie is exactly the same effectiveness as sitting at home and talking how interviewing bernie is bad.
Greek comrades rn are eating police batons to stop pisraeli ship from docking btw
🔥 facts. like I'm sure these non-violent protests are a nice way for people to blow off some steam. but how is it actually fucking with the west's ability to prop up the genocidal zionist entity? the answer is it just isn't 🤷
His whole thing is stirring drama. I've said this before, but he's basically the Keemstar of the twitter/youtube left and has a pretty consistent strategy of stirring shit in a certain way to keep himself relevant on those platforms. In a lot of cases this involves attacking people who deserve to be attacked and having takes that are objectively good. In other cases, he'll adopt bizarrely bad takes (like that China is committing "cultural genocide") because it stirs the pot just enough to get a certain amount of people fired up without pissing everyone off completely.
Also I should say I haven't seen the interview so I can't say whether or not Hasan is in the wrong here. He may be, but I'm just pointing out a pattern I've noticed.
I simply do not watch streamers.
emapanda does drama shit on his live channel and up until the escalation in response to october 7 his main channel was almost exclusively effort posting. it's been blended more recently especially with takedowns of specific zionists
Hasn't BE said the opposite of this many times? That he considers himself an entertainer and that all of this extremely online influencer shit is entertainment grifting. And he specifically included himself in that, saying NOT to look to influencers for any kind of leadership or organising because they're not.
Maybe I'm misremembering?
The problem with streamers is that quite often what they say and how they act are completely at odds with each other. They place themselves as the loudest most obnoxious voices and then go 'Oh no, don't actually pay attention to me, I don't actually have an obligation to mean what I say, saying stuff is just my job, you can't get mad at me for doing my job!'.
ah yes the Jon Stewart argument
You are correct, he posted a video about the irrelevance of online leftism like three days ago lol
For the majority of the Badempanada's criticism video, he says that creates a conspiracy theory that "Hasan is being groomed by the mainstream media" to promote "democratic party entryism".
At 22 minutes into the video, Badempanada says "He's going to be highly incentivized to become or to at least maintain the role that he already serves rather than to challenge it." What does this statement mean? Badempanada is asking Hasan to use his news show to "challenge" the Badempanada's perceived societal expectations. This is a call to activism.
Then at 23 minutes into the video, Badempanada says he fears Hasan will "prevent potential anti-systemic energy from really forming into like a critical mass that could potentially do something different or he can surprise me and everyone else by ceasing to allow them to use him." Throughout the video Badempanada has crafted a narrative that Hasan's role in society is to reinforce the status quo and Badempanada is asking Hasan to be an activist for whatever Badempanada's goals are. Badempanada is saying that Hasan's stream is what is holding the status quo together. This is delusional.
None of Badempanada's video makes sense if you treat Hasan like any other news outlet or commentator. Imagine for a second that this video is made about Matt Christman of Chapo or Brace Belden of Trueanon or Amy Goodman of Democracy Now or any media figure. Imagine I say that Brace Belden is preventing potential anti-systemic energy from forming because he's not using Trueanon to promote my ideas. You would recognize that I am being absurd.
Badempanada's video only makes sense from the perspective of believing that Hasan's job is to be an activist which challenges the establishment. If you treat Hasan's stream as a news show, which it is, then Badempanada's video makes no sense.
Badempanada talks about how mass media manufactures consent. Then he makes the assumption that mainstream media will be defeated by alternative media. His whole video is built around Badempanada's delusion that a twitch stream could defeat the mainstream media apparatus.
The solution to "manufacturing consent" is not alternative media. The solution to "manufactured consent" is organizing your community, organize your workplace, join a labor union, join a socialist party, attend an anti-ICE protest, attend an anti-Israel protest, etc.
My expectation of Hasan is not that he defeats the mainstream media establishment. That would be an absurd expectation. My expectation of Hasan is that he reports new stories that interest me, so that I can read further into those news stories and make my own conclusions. If you treat Hasan as a news commentator, him mistakenly giving a bad interview and acknowledging that it was a bad interview, a reasonable response is hoping that he doesn't make the mistake again or don't watch his show. If you expect a person to publicly chastise themself or beg for your forgiveness, then you are not treating that person as a news commentator.
Hasan has already doubled down and pretended he was being “cancelled” by people for being a Zionist. He’s pretty bad at learning from his many mistakes
It isn't irl activism but when you have a platform as large as Hasan's you have a lot of power to spread propaganda and shine a spotlight on certain issues that mainstream media would otherwise ignore.
Its moreso an issue of not platforming a rabid genocidal fascist piece of shit in any way other than to humiliate them in front of a large audience.
If Hasan wasn't tearing duss a new one for being a fascist then he should just delete the video and apologize.
There is no excuse for "interviewing" a fascist who supports a genocide that your country is committing through proxy.
At the end of the conversation, he apologized to Duss in case he was too hostile. Certainly not “tearing him a new one”
Just want to introject right there. BE is a perpetual pessimist and a defeatist. He has some good scathing critiques, but I'm always unimpressed with his outlook. Mike from PA (problematic himself) points this out and has the objectively correct take on revolutionary optimism - we must be convinced of our inevitable triumph. Just my 2¢.