this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
87 points (100.0% liked)
Chapotraphouse
14268 readers
733 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The dude who consistently opposes the use of the word "tankie" and considers us good for the left is probably gonna have some good positions underneath what he does to be popular.
Exactly this. He's not "hiding his power level", he's playing a role. The role is media personality that explains Marxism to the masses in a digestible way, and applies a general left perspective to current events. He mainly does news commentary, and in a world where news media doesn't investigate or think critically, it's a valuable vector for propaganda.
The Hasan hater cohort here wants Hasan to parrot our party line to a T.
If you want Marxist theory explained to you in a video format, Hakim and JT Chapman already do a much better job of that. Does Hasan understand the culture of AES countries well enough to present their history or political systems as effectively as Luna Oi, Lady Izdihar, or Yugopnik? Will he provide a more informed economic analysis than Michael Hudson or Richard Wolff? Is he going to be more detailed than Ben Norton at covering current affairs from an anti-imperialist perspective? Can he put together a news program as good as Breakthrough News?
No!
His niche is covering current events in an interactive and humorous way in order to break normies of their anti-AES and anti-communist brainworms.
His audience is mostly people who have been fed nothing but western propaganda their entire lives, usually cloaked in advocacy for free healthcare, vague anti-warism, and opposition to overt racism.
The bits of idealistic liberalism he often regurgitates serve as the peanut butter required for baby leftists in the west to swallow the pills that end up shattering their naïve worldview.
Hasan understands that if you only run defense for socialist countries, libs will immediately dismiss what you have to say as "shilling for authoritarianism" and never consider the rest of your message.
His content is simply not for us. He is shitposting in a strategic way that lets him build a big audience and walk it down the road towards Marxism. Elevating him to be the voice of the vanguard is artificially caps the pipeline. Us being critical of him supports his role by making him appear relatively nuanced to those libs. Eventually they will outgrow his content and join our ranks.
Leftists need a meta-organizing strategy lmao. This is the most "loose binding coalition"-ass set of ideologies that just turns into a damn circular firing squad at any given moment.
Want to feed the homeless? Cool FNB and your local PSL efforts can collab, stay 30 feet apart, maybe some go-betweens can coordinate resource sharing, but this constant bickering and shitting on each other is beyond enervating and "aesthetic online leftism" is nothing but a gift to the pedophile-porky class.
The thing about "solidarity" is it's easier to feel connected to people from mutual approbation and caring. Western Leftism (especially online) is the opposite. But the West is largely a set of countries who would prefer some Amazon wage-slave run over the neighbor's pet dog to get their package five seconds sooner, so who fucking cares. Burn it to the ground.
Problem is that posting online is easy and organizing is hard. Online, everyone wants to show off how smart, righteous, and correct they are for what they believe.
The truth of the matter is, what you believe does not matter so much as what you do.
Quite frankly, I do not believe there is any such thing as a cohesive left. We will have momentary alignment in struggles, which we will need to organize to meet the challenges of. Through the practice of struggle, practices will reveal themselves to be more effective than others, and certain theoretical ideas will prove themselves more useful for engaging in struggle. When operational considerations force your hand, rigid ideology will take a back seat to pragmatism.
💯
mutters "pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will" to myself for the 69420th time today
I have him on for hours a day and it's not out of animosity. I give him credit and indeed have in this thread, writing all critics off as "haters" is extremely parasocial behavior.
And this is garbage. Communists disdain to hide their aims and your idea about how left-radicalization works -- besides being condescending to the point of misanthropy -- is completely failing to appreciate the fundamental differences between Marxists and the irony-poisoned, nihilistic freaks on the extreme right, for whom recruitment based on lies makes more sense.
This isn't the problem and if being a hardline socialist remotely resembles this in your view, then your mindset is totally backwards. I don't give a shit about him not cheerleading for whichever country hard enough, that's such a terminally online view of what politics is, I care about him misrepresenting Marxist theory and thereby hampering people's political education beyond receiving a laundry list of berniecrat and antizionist talking points.
Then what are you even complaining about? I'm helping him, right?
detractors, people who dont like him, overzealous critics, whatever you want to call it. "haters" is succinct.
When you read the letter and not the spirit of the text. Indeed, we do not hide our aims: to build a stateless, classless, moneyless society. One of my aims is not to get myself socially ostracized for giving my real opinions on the DPRK before I've had time to let people understand that I am a kind, rational, well-adjusted person. The rapport you lose is more valuable than being honest for honesty's sake. You do not have exclusive control over the conversation, nor are people required to hear you out or talk to you again. These are basic social skills, you speak to your audience, present phrasing favorable to their ideals, and find common ground.
Seriously, have you actually talked to your reactionary or turbolib peers IRL about this stuff? You out here quoting one line from a pamphlet released in 1848 and treating it like scripture. Oppose book worship.
I don't know where you live, but here in the imperial core, people's political education is that Stalin killed a quadrillion people and that you get immediately executed for watching western movies in the DPRK. This is inseparable in their minds from your ideology. But yeah, these people would most certainly engage meaningfully with Marxist theory without addressing that...unless you plan on peanut butter pilling them by not naming what belief system your ideas originate from?
Clearing the minefields that come up in every conversation about socialism is a major assist in us being able to proliferate our views. Again, Hasan is not an expert in Marxism, why do you expect him to do your work for you? Do you really think him giving an overview of demcent or the mass line with these brainworms still intact would have any utility?
You are the one who comes across as terminally online. What if we had all entertainers recite our holy scripture in their performances? Surely, that would result in socialism being built and not cause people to watch other shit.
I'm trying to have a polite discussion about a popular media figure's effect on the public consciousness. Did I say something to set you off? I have no idea why you are being so antagonistic.
"Haters" is a thought-terminating cliche.
This fixation on being an AES Defender is, again, a terminally online and useless view of how agitation works and I think it's good that Hasan does not do that.
Lying to people has its own detriments, especially when you don't treat agitation like a condescending game of manipulation and just talk to people like a person.
You want to know what another basic axiom of communication is? Salience. If something doesn't matter, don't bother with it, and your opinion on the internal politics of the DPRK overwhelmingly don't matter, so you should focus on things that do. Because again, I'm not trying to argue that Hasan isn't enough of an AES Defender, here I will again give him credit because he understands this: Do you think the DPRK is a shitty tinpot dictatorship? Doesn't matter, the sanctions are still barbaric and still objectively serving the purpose of hurting the most vulnerable people in the country. Even if you feel passionately about the government in the DPRK changing because you want people to do better, US imperial aggression is not the way to accomplish that. That is true and in no way disingenuous because we also endorse this line of thinking for imperialized countries that have obviously backward and repressive governments like Iran, where the government nonetheless needs to get nukes as quickly as possible.
Also, even genuine liberals with mostly-liberal audiences like AOC make this argument some of the time (she recently did with Cuba).
This is basically Hasan's position and I think that it's perfectly fair. It also explains my point here, that there is no need to be a tailist to try to pander to shitlibs when you can just focus on the more agreeable and salient points and work from there (or rely on others to work from there, if we're doing this pipeline thing, but that requires not punching left!)
I'm using a quote as a thesis statement for an argument, rather like you are. While we shouldn't worship books, there is no revolutionary movement without revolutionary theory, and Hasan would do well to actually fucking read Lenin instead of just quote-mine him not because I want him to put the economic tables from Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism on screen and scream at chat to read it, but because he would have a better understanding of where it would be useful to channel his efforts.
Mind you, if he disagrees with Lenin, that's fine and Lenin was wrong about things, but his distortions of Lenin make any sort of real conversation about Marxism more difficult. He should attack Lenin's positions as Hasan rather than pretend to represent Lenin's positions in order to attack Lenin's actual positions.
I live in America. You don't need to get into endless historical litigations to make these points and you frankly usually will not get anywhere if you get caught up in arguing about fucking Stalin. It's not "peanut butter pilling them" (this is such a gross turn of phrase to me, though I can't explain why) to just argue on the basis of extremely basic and simple principles. e.g.: "Do you want a society where decisions are made by the majority of people or a minority of people? No matter what you do, on a large scale it is going to be one or the other, so which do you think is better for us?" etc. You don't typically have conversations by saying:
(The specifics of anything said in the text there don't really matter, just the general idea)
I just argue in favor of democracy and against capitalism, imperialism, and chauvinism. It's really quite simple.
And if they support Marxist principles but have serious historical misconceptions? There are ways of approaching that, but overall it just doesn't matter that much if you can get them on your side for a living domestic political project.
Yes, I have, and it's mostly gone well for me, because I focus on what is salient. I've played an instrumental part in the radicalization of multiple "turbolibs" and I'm able to at least cow reactionaries. Mostly I focus on dealing with libs and people who have chud backgrounds but are currently "apolitical" or "centrist" types, because the real chuds tend to operate in extreme bad faith, so persuading them isn't really on the table because they have no interest in the truth and are just using the conversation as a performance anyway. I don't think there's much to do with them except via enculturation, at least in my circumstances, and if I wanted to take an approach of building rapport, I'm still not going to do it by lying to them (and I have done this before, though that project got interrupted by outside circumstances).
I agree, that character you invented in your head sounds like a useless fool, but I didn't say that. While it might be good for him to make more of an effort now and then to do little lessons on political theory, you're the one who has emphasized that more than I have. My problem is with his negative inclusions, not positive things that he has excluded.
I would like to gently encourage you to do some reflection, since you're the one saying we should follow the example of groypers rather than actual socialists when figuring out how to spread class consciousness among the masses.
Edit: I will add, since I just saw the announcement, that I think him participating in the Cuba Flotilla is fantastic and I'll eagerly be watching all of his coverage of it.
I think you're both assuming antagonism because tone is lost in text.
You both have really good points imo. At the end of the day I'll err on the side of taking whatever small wins we can get. I was radicalized the through some inane and stupid stuff, literally anti-capitalist memes on Reddit. And if there's someone out there saying capitalism is bad and the US is an evil empire, that's a strength I want to build on.
If that's his role then, given how badly he misrepresents theory, he should pack it in. Seriously, twisting Lenin to justify voting democrat? That's pretty egregious.
He's talking to an audience who's been trained to never exercised critical thinking. Anything that tickles a sense of 'things are kind of fucked, here's why' can and often is something that can be built on. We cannot see all ends and roads that this can lead to for someone to pick up a damn book.
I was one that this sort of pipeline worked on.
You be the more advanced educator, let people learn to walk before trying to run.
That said, I'm all ears on any analysis and commentary you have on Lenin's approach to electoralism.