You’re being a little terse and I am thereby not sure exactly what you mean. Is what you’re saying that you what me to go dig up a clip where he’s talking about how cool it is that Platner continues to poll well with Mainers?
If you believe that what I just said and what you just said are different things, then our disagreement isn’t based on believing or disbelieving in a clip. Did we say different things?
I don’t want to fucking dig around for some clip that I hardly have on hand (and would probably be part of a 40-minute video in the form I could find it) when you may as well just be fucking with me if you disagree with the premise anyway. If you reject that the clip would be evidence, why should I spend a half hour or more going through stream footage so I can bring it back and you can just tell me literally the same thing you could right now? You can just dismiss me without wasting that much of my time, it’s okay.
Though I was literally just about to edit the comment to repeat what I already said in the comments I directed you to, which you surely by accident misrepresented, which is specifying that I don’t know what Hasan believes, I don’t know what his ideology is, I am simply identifying the nature of a particular line he took as relates this specific issue.
I’ll totally call him an opportunist, but that’s because it’s a pattern of behavior and not an ideology, and I don’t think anyone who seriously purports to be interested in Marxism can make an argument against his entryist bullshit being textbook opportunism.
If you’re gonna lop accusations of Strasserism against prominent pro-Palestinian leftist voices, then I don’t think it’s a big ask to back that claim up with something more than a vague intuition of “opportunism”
Am I not explaining myself clearly? Arguments aren’t just collections of empirical facts, they are also the relations of ideas. A conclusion can’t be proven simply from facts if there is a disagreement on the relations of ideas. With empirical facts themselves you can only have premises. If we agree that the sentiment that, and this is my paraphrasing, “It’s good for people to be willing to embrace economic populism coming from someone who had Totenkopf tattoo until like two weeks ago and doesn’t acknowledge the basic nature of the tattoo, much less the meaning of it, i.e. I’m glad that they don’t care if he could very easily be an unrepentant Nazi if he’ll make the trains run on time” is a Strasserist line, then I’ll go look for an example of the multiple times he’s said that shit. If you do not agree that that’s a Strasserist line, then our disagreement doesn’t hinge most proximately on if that’s what he said, it hinges on our interpretations of that sentiment.
The opportunism thing I mentioned is tangential, and it’s not a “vague intuition” (could you stop insulting me, by the way?), it’s because Hasan is very explicitly an entryist and has argued for it frequently in the past few weeks. Do you not remember him screaming at his chat over and over about how they’re ultras for believing that it’s not productive to run socialists in a capitalist party? Do you not remember his butchered exegesis of Lenin? Here’s a clip summarizing that issue from Socialism4All.
Stop fucking insulting me, what’s wrong with you? I’m literally just asking you to answer a single yes or no question because I’ve seen this behavior before and I’m pretty confident how it’s going to go, which is that after I sit through an hour of his bullshit about Platner to find where he says the thing I present him saying the thing and then you do exactly what I describe above, which is rejecting the significance of it, meaning it was a waste of time. But no, deigning to do that wouldn’t be a power move, wasting even more of my time while slinging absolutely horseshit accusations at me is a power move, even when I directly and immediately refute some of your claims with evidence. When I did give you evidence, you ignored it, almost like I have a reason for anticipating this. It doesn’t matter that he’s an opportunist, he’s Your Guy and you can use his Palestine advocacy to shield him from any criticism and smear his critics.
It’s so fucking tiresome that people can’t have a basic level of consideration and there’s just this miserable posturing and shit-slinging instead.
3:34, and I expect you will disagree even more with my view on this one but 11:03. He also says similar stuff somewhere around 30 mins about “cancel culture” arguments in relation to the news panel, though he is obviously a bit ambivalent here again. Here he overall makes a much stronger statement.
Obviously Hasan does not like the Nazi tattoo, he does not like Nazis, etc. etc. but he is still casting it as being a clearly good thing that libs are willing to overlook seeming to be a Nazi because of economic populism. This is a catastrophically bad line and he perhaps he’s too stuck in his specific manner of being “I just want healthcare, man” internet brain-broken to see the problem, but Platner’s success here would only demonstrate the viability of Strasserism, or maybe people on this board would find a term like “social chauvinism” (in the sense Lenin wrote about) more useful as a description, i.e. socialism distorted by chauvinism.
Hasan’s arguments about how it’s good that Platner can succeed despite some of what’s on his Reddit account is true (though I would disagree if the thing about effectively disobeying orders to keep using explosives in densely-populated areas was a real vector of attack, you shouldn’t be able to shrug off that but Platner doesn’t even need to), but bearing a Nazi symbol on your chest for 20 years and lying about never knowing what it meant until the oppo dump and even then insisting that it merely “looks like” a Nazi symbol (e.g. 42:54 in the second video) means it is clearly the less reasonable interpretation to say he’s just a dopey person who nonetheless takes the issue of fascism seriously.
My overall stance is that, for the left to be able to survive, it does need to be able to accept people changing, but Platner has proven that he is some type of horribly bad actor and needs to be shunted to prevent coopting, whether he is personally even capable of doing such a thing or not (and I don’t believe he’s an “op” or anything of the sort, I think he’s just a chauvinistic fool).
Now please prove me right and move the goalpost to “what Hasan was explicitly outlined as saying is something that was never meaningful evidence, actually,” and you were just disingenuously fucking with me. If you gave a shit, why not respond to the opportunist thing that you immediately misrepresented and then ignored? Why demand evidence that you’re about to reject anyway when I already told you what it was? Do you just get off on me having to sit through over two hours of stream footage to retrieve this nonsense? You could have just said “no” at some point over the past two replies and it would have been much better.
It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be this hard to get someone to answer a simple yes or no question, but he’s insisting on being obtuse because they think it’s some kind of fucking power move to make me sit through an hour of tiresome litigating on Hasan’s stream to find where he made this argument just so he can turn around and say it doesn’t fucking matter anyway.
You’re being a little terse and I am thereby not sure exactly what you mean. Is what you’re saying that you what me to go dig up a clip where he’s talking about how cool it is that Platner continues to poll well with Mainers?
I’m asking where is the clip that proves Hasan is a Strasserite?
If you believe that what I just said and what you just said are different things, then our disagreement isn’t based on believing or disbelieving in a clip. Did we say different things?
Huh? Purpleworm, just post the clip, you made a claim, I just want to see what you’re talking about firsthand
I don’t want to fucking dig around for some clip that I hardly have on hand (and would probably be part of a 40-minute video in the form I could find it) when you may as well just be fucking with me if you disagree with the premise anyway. If you reject that the clip would be evidence, why should I spend a half hour or more going through stream footage so I can bring it back and you can just tell me literally the same thing you could right now? You can just dismiss me without wasting that much of my time, it’s okay.
Though I was literally just about to edit the comment to repeat what I already said in the comments I directed you to, which you surely by accident misrepresented, which is specifying that I don’t know what Hasan believes, I don’t know what his ideology is, I am simply identifying the nature of a particular line he took as relates this specific issue.
I’ll totally call him an opportunist, but that’s because it’s a pattern of behavior and not an ideology, and I don’t think anyone who seriously purports to be interested in Marxism can make an argument against his entryist bullshit being textbook opportunism.
If you’re gonna lop accusations of Strasserism against prominent pro-Palestinian leftist voices, then I don’t think it’s a big ask to back that claim up with something more than a vague intuition of “opportunism”
Am I not explaining myself clearly? Arguments aren’t just collections of empirical facts, they are also the relations of ideas. A conclusion can’t be proven simply from facts if there is a disagreement on the relations of ideas. With empirical facts themselves you can only have premises. If we agree that the sentiment that, and this is my paraphrasing, “It’s good for people to be willing to embrace economic populism coming from someone who had Totenkopf tattoo until like two weeks ago and doesn’t acknowledge the basic nature of the tattoo, much less the meaning of it, i.e. I’m glad that they don’t care if he could very easily be an unrepentant Nazi if he’ll make the trains run on time” is a Strasserist line, then I’ll go look for an example of the multiple times he’s said that shit. If you do not agree that that’s a Strasserist line, then our disagreement doesn’t hinge most proximately on if that’s what he said, it hinges on our interpretations of that sentiment.
The opportunism thing I mentioned is tangential, and it’s not a “vague intuition” (could you stop insulting me, by the way?), it’s because Hasan is very explicitly an entryist and has argued for it frequently in the past few weeks. Do you not remember him screaming at his chat over and over about how they’re ultras for believing that it’s not productive to run socialists in a capitalist party? Do you not remember his butchered exegesis of Lenin? Here’s a clip summarizing that issue from Socialism4All.
Translation: you can’t back up your claim
Love the idea of reading the streamer tea leaves to smear pro-Palestinian voices, super cool habit you got there
Stop fucking insulting me, what’s wrong with you? I’m literally just asking you to answer a single yes or no question because I’ve seen this behavior before and I’m pretty confident how it’s going to go, which is that after I sit through an hour of his bullshit about Platner to find where he says the thing I present him saying the thing and then you do exactly what I describe above, which is rejecting the significance of it, meaning it was a waste of time. But no, deigning to do that wouldn’t be a power move, wasting even more of my time while slinging absolutely horseshit accusations at me is a power move, even when I directly and immediately refute some of your claims with evidence. When I did give you evidence, you ignored it, almost like I have a reason for anticipating this. It doesn’t matter that he’s an opportunist, he’s Your Guy and you can use his Palestine advocacy to shield him from any criticism and smear his critics.
It’s so fucking tiresome that people can’t have a basic level of consideration and there’s just this miserable posturing and shit-slinging instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woPJcVNBiyQ
17:38, 1:14:35 Here’s the tepid version he had when the story broke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bf2fD21fLK8
3:34, and I expect you will disagree even more with my view on this one but 11:03. He also says similar stuff somewhere around 30 mins about “cancel culture” arguments in relation to the news panel, though he is obviously a bit ambivalent here again. Here he overall makes a much stronger statement.
Obviously Hasan does not like the Nazi tattoo, he does not like Nazis, etc. etc. but he is still casting it as being a clearly good thing that libs are willing to overlook seeming to be a Nazi because of economic populism. This is a catastrophically bad line and he perhaps he’s too stuck in his specific manner of being “I just want healthcare, man” internet brain-broken to see the problem, but Platner’s success here would only demonstrate the viability of Strasserism, or maybe people on this board would find a term like “social chauvinism” (in the sense Lenin wrote about) more useful as a description, i.e. socialism distorted by chauvinism.
Hasan’s arguments about how it’s good that Platner can succeed despite some of what’s on his Reddit account is true (though I would disagree if the thing about effectively disobeying orders to keep using explosives in densely-populated areas was a real vector of attack, you shouldn’t be able to shrug off that but Platner doesn’t even need to), but bearing a Nazi symbol on your chest for 20 years and lying about never knowing what it meant until the oppo dump and even then insisting that it merely “looks like” a Nazi symbol (e.g. 42:54 in the second video) means it is clearly the less reasonable interpretation to say he’s just a dopey person who nonetheless takes the issue of fascism seriously.
My overall stance is that, for the left to be able to survive, it does need to be able to accept people changing, but Platner has proven that he is some type of horribly bad actor and needs to be shunted to prevent coopting, whether he is personally even capable of doing such a thing or not (and I don’t believe he’s an “op” or anything of the sort, I think he’s just a chauvinistic fool).
Now please prove me right and move the goalpost to “what Hasan was explicitly outlined as saying is something that was never meaningful evidence, actually,” and you were just disingenuously fucking with me. If you gave a shit, why not respond to the opportunist thing that you immediately misrepresented and then ignored? Why demand evidence that you’re about to reject anyway when I already told you what it was? Do you just get off on me having to sit through over two hours of stream footage to retrieve this nonsense? You could have just said “no” at some point over the past two replies and it would have been much better.
Typing out this bizarre ass post is a lot more work than digging up a clip
It isn’t, and it shouldn’t be this hard to get someone to answer a simple yes or no question, but he’s insisting on being obtuse because they think it’s some kind of fucking power move to make me sit through an hour of tiresome litigating on Hasan’s stream to find where he made this argument just so he can turn around and say it doesn’t fucking matter anyway.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: