It is reductionist to say that he “endorses a lot of liberal zionists and encourages people to vote for genocide”. I do not watch him with any regularity these days, but my SO does, and we did watch a significant portion of his coverage in the run-up to the elections. Watching him get kicked out of the DNC for his positions on Palestine and his live critique of the event was the final nail in the coffin for my SO to break from the Democrats to vote with me for PSL. He still will fluff up people like AOC and Sanders, but he also regularly expresses criticism of Sanders and AOC on the grounds of their liberal zionism. [edit] In addition, just this week while talking about Zohran, expressed his concern for the comments Zohran made in this Free Press article. The man talks for 8+ hours a day; do you have clips of him expressing this “sqishy-ness” about the West Bank? Because I recall him being pretty clear that Palestinians have a right to return and that it should be enforced.
He never expressed that criticism to their face, nor did he platform PSL during election season. I’d be curious to see him talking about enforcing the right of return, i recall him talking about two states being impossible because of the settlements, so you need one state in order to not violently evict the settlers from their homes. In this clip around 5 min, he says he’s against decolonization for “practical” reasons, misrepresenting actual decolonization as “native people doing 9/11 to New York.” He says he doesn’t want to displace the settlers who settled there during the Aliyahs and afterwards. I’m not sure how you square that circle, saying that you want the right of return without displacing settlers. He calls decolonization something “that is never going to happen” around 6:40.
No, he never does; I’m aware of this. However, it would be worse if he never criticized them at all. I don’t share his optimism about “the squad” and their adjacent cast of characters. He believes they can be reformed. I do not.
That sums up everything you need to know about his position. He clearly has a base understanding of Marxism and Marxism-Leninism. However, Leninism at no point enters into his operational framework in the context of America. He exposes people to Marx’s ideas but doesn’t engage with them directly and explicitly isn’t interested in discussing theory at all with his audience.
I brought up PSL because I was the one who was advocating we vote for them, not Hasan, if that wasn’t clear. I have, for a while not, grown out of the positions he holds into ones to the left of his.
The gold standard that sits at the center of his position is always South Africa. I think there is something to be said about the distinct difference between a place like South Africa and, say, Vietnam. When French Indochina fell in the 1950s many of the French settlers fled, to my understanding, and concurrently, they constituted a much smaller portion of the population compared to the native population. (in scratching this out because I need to do more reading on both of these events.) Often I feel like Hasan is taking a “realpolitik” approach to these topics, rather than an ideological one, because again, I don’t think Marxism or Marxism-Leninism is a primary guiding worldview for him.
I won’t “square this circle” (I don’t mean this antagonistically, just that, I’m willing to accept critique of Hasan, because obviously, I have my own) because I haven’t seen this video, but I don’t agree with him based on what I’m seeing through skimming the transcript. I also don’t take his hyperbolic rhetoric at face value either, but that doesn’t change my thoughts on his actual position.
He sees “abolition of apartheid” as a more realistic alternative than the destruction of Israel
Yup, South Africa is his gold standard. In the previous video he mocks “settlers” readers, which again shows you that he is at a minimum aware of these critical works, but he doesn’t believe that they contribute to any sort of real solutions. He is an incredibly mixed bag, and I think every day there is a Hasan watcher who grows beyond his limitations in the way that I did.
Yeah I think we should be critical of him, or at a minimum understand where here sits in the landscape of political thought. I can’t put all the causality on Hasan for my radicalization, but he contributed, same with Sanders, as well as his betrayal at the hands of the Democrats. I needed to hear Sander’s perspective and also see him cut down. Much in the same way that I’m sure my SO needed to hear Hasan and seem him get evicted by the Democrats.
Were all at different stages of our own radicalization. All these figures and events have a role to play in that process.
If I’m growing beyond Hasan’s positions I don’t doubt others are too. We should strive to help others grow in the same way. If there is one thing me and Hasan agree on is that people can change, if they couldn’t, then Leninism would have failed over and over again.
Is it reductionist to say he wants a one state solution because he’s too squishy about forcing West Bank settlers out of stolen homes?
It is reductionist to say that he “endorses a lot of liberal zionists and encourages people to vote for genocide”. I do not watch him with any regularity these days, but my SO does, and we did watch a significant portion of his coverage in the run-up to the elections. Watching him get kicked out of the DNC for his positions on Palestine and his live critique of the event was the final nail in the coffin for my SO to break from the Democrats to vote with me for PSL. He still will fluff up people like AOC and Sanders, but he also regularly expresses criticism of Sanders and AOC on the grounds of their liberal zionism. [edit] In addition, just this week while talking about Zohran, expressed his concern for the comments Zohran made in this Free Press article. The man talks for 8+ hours a day; do you have clips of him expressing this “sqishy-ness” about the West Bank? Because I recall him being pretty clear that Palestinians have a right to return and that it should be enforced.
He never expressed that criticism to their face, nor did he platform PSL during election season. I’d be curious to see him talking about enforcing the right of return, i recall him talking about two states being impossible because of the settlements, so you need one state in order to not violently evict the settlers from their homes. In this clip around 5 min, he says he’s against decolonization for “practical” reasons, misrepresenting actual decolonization as “native people doing 9/11 to New York.” He says he doesn’t want to displace the settlers who settled there during the Aliyahs and afterwards. I’m not sure how you square that circle, saying that you want the right of return without displacing settlers. He calls decolonization something “that is never going to happen” around 6:40.
https://youtu.be/lFLj8_KFFTY
He sees “abolition of apartheid” as a more realistic alternative than the destruction of Israel
https://youtu.be/yAv-TDcu5yc
He appears to want to pay off Palestinians who lost their land and homes, and sees that as justice
How does this not come off as him offering ways to preserve Israel through reconstruction?
Why in the world should Palestinians take a bribe and citizenship in non-apartheid Woke Israel over returning stolen land and homes?
No, he never does; I’m aware of this. However, it would be worse if he never criticized them at all. I don’t share his optimism about “the squad” and their adjacent cast of characters. He believes they can be reformed. I do not.
And he never will, because, as GQ describes his “career”, it is a protracted and so far largely unsuccessful effort to “pull the Democrats to be more radical, to be actually progressive.”
That sums up everything you need to know about his position. He clearly has a base understanding of Marxism and Marxism-Leninism. However, Leninism at no point enters into his operational framework in the context of America. He exposes people to Marx’s ideas but doesn’t engage with them directly and explicitly isn’t interested in discussing theory at all with his audience.
I brought up PSL because I was the one who was advocating we vote for them, not Hasan, if that wasn’t clear. I have, for a while not, grown out of the positions he holds into ones to the left of his.
The gold standard that sits at the center of his position is always South Africa.
I think there is something to be said about the distinct difference between a place like South Africa and, say, Vietnam. When French Indochina fell in the 1950s many of the French settlers fled, to my understanding, and concurrently, they constituted a much smaller portion of the population compared to the native population.(in scratching this out because I need to do more reading on both of these events.) Often I feel like Hasan is taking a “realpolitik” approach to these topics, rather than an ideological one, because again, I don’t think Marxism or Marxism-Leninism is a primary guiding worldview for him.I won’t “square this circle” (I don’t mean this antagonistically, just that, I’m willing to accept critique of Hasan, because obviously, I have my own) because I haven’t seen this video, but I don’t agree with him based on what I’m seeing through skimming the transcript. I also don’t take his hyperbolic rhetoric at face value either, but that doesn’t change my thoughts on his actual position.
Yup, South Africa is his gold standard. In the previous video he mocks “settlers” readers, which again shows you that he is at a minimum aware of these critical works, but he doesn’t believe that they contribute to any sort of real solutions. He is an incredibly mixed bag, and I think every day there is a Hasan watcher who grows beyond his limitations in the way that I did.
Ok we’re def on the same page. I truly hope you’re right about Hasan watchers growing past him
Yeah I think we should be critical of him, or at a minimum understand where here sits in the landscape of political thought. I can’t put all the causality on Hasan for my radicalization, but he contributed, same with Sanders, as well as his betrayal at the hands of the Democrats. I needed to hear Sander’s perspective and also see him cut down. Much in the same way that I’m sure my SO needed to hear Hasan and seem him get evicted by the Democrats.
Were all at different stages of our own radicalization. All these figures and events have a role to play in that process.
If I’m growing beyond Hasan’s positions I don’t doubt others are too. We should strive to help others grow in the same way. If there is one thing me and Hasan agree on is that people can change, if they couldn’t, then Leninism would have failed over and over again.
I found YouTube links in your comment. Here are links to the same videos on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Link 1:
Link 2:
I found YouTube links in your comment. Here are links to the same videos on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Link 1:
Link 2: