The streaming star on how to reject political violence while staying honest about Kirk’s rhetoric.
A horseshoe debate? Would it have ended with them agreeing about everything?
No, Hasan Piker would not have agreed with Charlie Kirk on everything
A debate is not to agree on things?
It is the reichstag fire, in that it was a nazi crime that the Nazis used to get liberals to willingly vote to grant all power to the fuhrer to protect germany. Thats what they mean right? Right???
… yes? why are you implying that he might mean something else?
The State Department has already made an announcement saying that they are going to look at people’s profiles at the point of entry into the country to see if they actually sufficiently grieved Charlie Kirk—which is, of course, a violation of the First Amendment, regardless of whether I personally think that’s inappropriate or not. I’m just simply talking about how ridiculous it is to make this kind of enforcement a priority and how unconstitutional it is.
And it’s very clear that they’re using this as a Reichstag fire moment, very clearly, using this as an opportunity to further persecute and prosecute political dissidents.
“Charlie Kirk was a vehement white nationalist that is currently burning in Hell. Debate me and prove me wrong.”
Kirk was not a white nationalist, even though there is overlap in their taking points. The key difference is that white nationalist sources often present a more systematised ideology, often with explicit references to racial superiority, or calls for formal racial separation. Kirk did not publicly as far as sources show explicitly promote white supremacist violence or call for a white ethnostate.
As for burning in hell, thats just silly. There is no hell. No hot place where you go to pay for your sins. There is only the absence of existence. Charlie Kirk is just gone. Nothing of him remains anywhere.
Kirk did not publicly as far as sources show explicitly promote white supremacist violence or call for a white ethnostate.
No, he was very careful to never explicitly express these particular views. But when you read his rhetoric you can see between the lines that he very much viewed white people as superior to all people of color. And in particular he viewed Christianity as superior to any other religion.
Doubt it. Hell is much worse then just fire. Probably getting railed by a huge black guy while his wife watches and wishes she was him. Black, gay, and cucked. His worst fears. And he’s on fire.
The Heritage Foundation has been working on this for centuries.
Honestly, if I ever believed that a malevolent alien species invaded Earth, it would have been during the 1800s and they’ve been working to terraform the planet to be habitable to them.
All this shit going on has They Live vibes and I honestly can’t pretend to see how the idea of murdering scores of humans does anything helpful.
Hassan is just outrage farm and nothing else. He has been covering Israel Gaza for years, but only learned about the meaning of the Western Wall like last week. Vapid, insipid aimless people making bank off of Gaza genocide
Edit: For as much of a vile person Kirk was, at least he knew how to organize and mobilize people politically with success. The most Hasan can seem to do is read Twitter headlines from the comfort of his Beverly Hills mansion lol. It’s the equivalent of Kony 2012, just repackaged for genz.
Don’t believe me? Go watch his stream. Go for it.
Notice how the user does not say Gaza genocide.
It was implied. There. I added it in. It. Hope it makes you feel better
Saying that covering the Gaza genocide was a grift has to be one of the dumbest things you can possibly say.
Your first time interacting with online media pundits?
No I have seen your comments before.
Oh ok. cool. Listen, if twitter text to speech analyzer Hasan Piker makes you happy, go for it.
Grifters do all sorts of shit, mate. That fact is why 4chan started using “woke” ironically. ie “Hey, guys. This racist shit is really wrong. Dont forget to like, share and subscribe so we can fight racism together!!!”.
So prove to me where Hasan changed his stance on Palestine to grift.
how does knowing “the meaning of the western wall” at all supposed to inform one’s stance on Israel’s atrocities on Palestine?
this is like saying a journalist has been covering NASA for years but they still don’t know which zodiac signs are in the water group.
Not at all. He professses to be an expert on me issues and the conflict in Israel. He’s been covering it for years. You’d better damn well know at least the fundamentals of the GODDAMN region you’re covering holy shit.
again you failed to demonstrate how it is at all relevant. literally the same relevance as my analogy.
No, he did. If I claim to be a computer programmer with 20 years of experience, but dont know the basics of any computer language, that would be an important detail in discrediting me and my “expertise” on the topic. Right? So if someone is saying they are an expert on Israel and Gaza(ie, “listen to me!”) then pointing out that they dont know basic things about the topics is very important. Because the last thing the world needs, is more listening to fucking grifters that only feed into collective outrage.
your analogy is not correct. this is like claiming to be a computer programmer with 20 years of experience but not knowing how the computers in star trek work. it’s just bullshit that has no bearing on your opinions on programming.
Really? One of the keystone elements in the biggest geopolitical conflicts in the middle east? One of the biggest claims the zionists use as justification for right to return? The most sacred site in the Jewish faith?
Really?
Wikipedia is free, you know?
i don’t remember saying i don’t know what the fucking wall is. i said how is it fucking relevant to forming a fucking opinion on the fucking genocide.
I don’t know man… Why does having any historical context help to discuss the biggest conflict in middle east? Are you under the impression the genocide started on Oct 7?
what are you even talking about? “the meaning of the western wall” has no bearing on the reality of the genocide, not the morality of it. this is not a religious project. it’s a settler colonial project. you don’t even need to know what religion they are part of, let alone what some fucking magic wall is supposed to “mean”. here’s what it means: nothing. none of this shit is for or because of the wall.
Inaccurate simplification of Hassan. So much so that I assume you are just elaborately saying, “Nothing to see here folks. Go about your business.”
Your tactics are in line with those of right wing trolls. Call into question something you want silenced with ad hominem attacks, obscure references, with just a glint of truth buried in there to make anyone arguing with you get sucked into a lengthy complicated debate. Yes, modern popular media feeds off of outrage and Hassan is part of it. That’s something I could say about virtually every popular person on the internet. It’s doesn’t mean that none of them have ever said anything relevant, accurate, or otherwise worth listening to.
Crawl back into whatever hole you came from you disingenuous troll.
He streams on twitch spewing hate and farming intellectual elite club by heavy moderation.
He fucking farms you for money.
Crawl back into whatever hole you came from you disingenuous troll.
Every single defense is this. Name calling and getting offended for pointing out of what Hassan is.
A narcissist farming idiots. Just like Tate. Like Jones. Like Shapiro.
It is the same fucking play. Different political spectrum.
Get. Fucking. Real.
It’s the equivalent of Kony 2012. People like the aesthetic of caring about the genocide while doing the least possible to stop the suffering.
If you say so. I’m not a fan, but he’s been a decent debater and representative of the left in the few times I’ve heard him speak. I find anyone dismissing him wholesale to be disingenuous. He’s speaks well, makes good points, and makes right-wing idiots look like idiots. I appreciate that.
Maybe you are like the other guy and just want him to cheerlead the Democratic Party blindly and follow their talking point? Or are you just upset because he seems to be pretty hard on Israel?
He is not left. He is not right.
He is not a decent debater. He gishgallops and gaslights. Just like Shapiros. Kirks. Tates.
He does not give a fuck. He is making money. And shoving himself into the politics.
Get.
Real.
If.
You.
Say.
So.
Fucking bullshit. Hassan has a special particular type of rage bait farming. I’ve been watching his content on and off for years. It’s unfortunate that he has such a large following because he’s a disingenuous piece of shit. Also, it’s fun and easy do just discount any criticism of Hassan as “trolling”- what a cowardly copout of an answer. It’s prefertly fine to use Ad-hominem attacks on people who negate or downplay sexual abuse or say constant vitriol on his stream. I don’t care how many charity streams he did. He’s a slop streamer (just last week he doxxed several people).
It’s weird how his fan boys enjoy this grotesque parasocial relationship with him and come to his constant defense whenever the slightest criticism is levied of our idol. Almost like another group of abhorrent individuals I see online…
Downplaying sexual abuse?
You mean saying that if rapes occurred on Oct 7th that doesn’t excuse Israel murdering 200,000 civilians? That “downplaying”?
But he’s right. So, where does that leave you?
Haha. Show the full context. No, I mean first denying then laughing at victims of sa, then sliding like a vermin to the “we’ll it doesn’t excuse” talking point. Yea sure man. This the brilliant political pundit of twitch politics. Barf.
I’m not a Hassan fanboy, or even a fan really, and I’m not having fun. You simply didn’t put any effort into your accusations. They still sound like the typical troll behavior used to silence or muddle people you don’t agree with. Try to offend, barely substantiate, if at all, your accusations and assertion, and try to engage without putting any effort into it. Be as disingenuous as possible but bait responses and keep interlocutor lost in the weeds of your half assed arguments.
So I assume you are a troll.
What a joke. What am I even to say to that? Just because I didn’t get into specifics off the bat doesn’t mean we can’t bring receipts. If you want, ask. But don’t be no disgustingly superficial in your discourse. I’m exhausted hearing about this guy.
You can’t even spell his name right. You should try to work on becoming literate before inserting yourself into politics you know nothing about.
Thanks for the that brilliant and cogent response. I love that that’s the best you got. “you CanT SpelL goOd”… Fuck. At least I know what the Western Wall is or how to find Israel on a map lol
If you and your favorite internet personality can’t “do the research” to spell a name correctly, you should expect the effort directed toward understanding the actual issues to be equally as low. Your replies thus far have proven your lack of comprehension.
Maybe this sort of thing just isn’t for you.
Hassan is just outrage farm and nothing else.
I don’t need justification for your glint of truth. I need justification that nothing in the linked interview of Hassan is worth reading or listening to because he’s nothing more than an outrage farm.
I actually listened to the interview. He said several things that so few people in mainstream media are willing to say, and he criticized mainstream media for not saying those things.
Kirk advocated for gross positions. He literally stated that empathy was invented by the left. In response to the shooting, right wing politicians and pundits immediately called for retribution against the left just like they did when the democratic lawmaker was assassinated, and say nothing when it turns out it wasn’t a leftists killer. Trump never bothered did any honor the victim of that killing, but they lower flags this weekend for Kirk and don’t mention the school shooting that happened literally one hour later or the 45 prior shootings in 2025. They praised Kirk for valuing debate and free speech, but are now firing people and refusing to let in travelers if they posted negative opinions of Kirk. Rage bait, or reasonable things to talk about?
Yes. I’m familiar with the horrible human that is Kirk. Nothing of value was lost. He was committed to punching down everyone that wasn’t white or Christian. But one thing he was exceptionally good at is organizing.
See, the difference between Kirk and Hassan is that Kirk was so successful at rallying right wing youth that they showed up in droves to the polls, especially in this election. We gotta appreciate the ability to mobilize so effectively.
The only thing Hassan seems capable of is shitting on EVERYONE. Because Hassan is not solutions oriented. He is not particularly motivated at building a political movement or accomplishing anything apart from a charity drive once in a while. That’s it. He spends 80% of his stream chastising democrats. Then rallying his base day after day about Gaza but not looking towards any meaningful prescriptions. Just the other week he streamed an interview of a man who lost his son in the Nova music festival. Despite losing his child this man was calling for a ceasefire. He wasn’t a settler. He wasn’t IDF. He wants peace. The best we can get out of Hassan? He calls him Nazi scum.
I could go on about the ineffective and meaningless content that is Hassan, but at the end of the day, it’s just superficial. And I think that’s the part that bothers me the most. He has such a massive platform and all he can do is read Twitter headlines and rage bait seven days a week. For what?
The only thing Hassan seems capable of is shitting on EVERYONE. … He spends 80% of his stream chastising democrats.
Ah, there it is. So you want someone on the left (the actual left) to pretend like the majority of the Democratic party and it’s leadership isn’t ineffective and feckless. You’d rather blame the left for pointing it out and call their criticism worthless rage bait.
He has such a massive platform and all he can do is read Twitter headlines and rage bait seven days a week. For what?
Here we go again. The dude streams for how many hours a day, how many dayss a week, and you expect him to deliver high quality content the entire time… to modern Internet audiences…?
Like I said, I’m not a fan. I’ve seen a few interviews and debates he participated in. A few referenced clips of note. I remember the clips had a lot of bullshit. Inside jokes with chat, immature shit, or references to things only constantly online people would get, at least I assume. I’m aware enough to know modern shock humor and genuinely offensive comments are separated by a fine line within internet culture.
Just the other week he streamed an interview of a man who lost his son in the Nova music festival. Despite losing his child this man was calling for a ceasefire. He wasn’t a settler. He wasn’t IDF. He wants peace. The best we can get out of Hassan? He calls him Nazi scum.
Ok. He watched and interview with this person? I have no context so I can’t really comment beyond the polls coming out of Israel disturb and scare the shit out of me. Just because you are a victim of a tragedy, and aren’t a member of groups openly commiting crimes against humanity in Israel, you aren’t immediately a good person. Supporting Bibi at this point is enough to make you a pretty horrible human being.
Hasan is a wimpy baby who makes money on the existence of the right wing. He is to scared to rejoice in a good thing.
he was set to debate Charlie before he got a new hole on his neck just in a couple weeks. if the shooter waited a little while Hasan could have literally been a couple meters away from him during the shooting. even putting aside the possibility of being the target himself, he could just catch a stray bullet one day because the US is just generally an insanely violent, backwards-ass country. why would he want this to be a normal thing
He should just not say anything on the matter. If he can’t publicly celebrate the removal of trash, then he should remain silent. Calling this a tragedy is saying his behavior is acceptable, and people have the right to poison the world as such.
no it isn’t
Yes it is 🤷♂️
i mean you’re wrong but ok
I’ve noticed that half the media freakout is mid-level political commentators coming to terms with the idea that they can also be victims.
The fact that a lot of left commentators are realizing this along with the rightoids is a little disturbing because where have they been in the last several decades of escalating right-wing violence?
“left commentators” they are almost all resistance grifters, more than being with the actual left. resistance grifters has an interest in keeping the “debate” culture war going as much as the right winger grifters are, more views more money for them. much like people jeff tiedrich, jojo, BTC(bryan tyler cohen)
I think that there is a lot of fuck around and find out going on now.
Over the past several decades people have been increasingly willing to speak their mind In public forums. I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing except the people who are speaking the loudest are the ones who are the craziest, racist etc. I think by allowing these people to exist we are normalizing them. And by doing so they start to think that their opinions are OK, and that they won’t get in trouble for sharing them.
Hopefully, if we must have guns in the hands of every American, these right wing nuts continue to get what’s coming to them.
Why would he celebrate the assassination of a political commentator when he holds the same exact job title
Why would a soldier want an enemy soldier to get killed when they have the same job title
They are not soldiers. They do not kill each other.
They shout at each other on camera. Their animosity is probably exaggerated. At least one commentator brought up meeting him in person, in a debate, as a reason his death affected them more. Soldiers rarely meet opposing soldiers in such good terms as even the spiciest debate.
There is a reason propaganda needs to dehumanize and otherize the “enemy”.
Fascists are my other, thanks.
Human rights are a social contract and they specifically and deliberately opt out of it.
How old are you?
Grow up, lol
I mean, they aren’t the brightest people.
Yeah someone with the judgement to debate fascists is someone everyone should listen to.
Piker is a terrorism apologist.
Lets assume this brain dead comment isn’t a bot… How does one get this dense?
Defend that statement
It think we’re at the point where terrorism = violence against my preferred ideology.
I mean it was always a meaningless word, even in 2001. Its just even more so in 2025.
Probably something about he’s not sucking off Israel
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/left-wing-pundit-hasan-piker-says-i-dont-have-an-issue-with-hezbollah-praises-yemens-houthis-for-seizing-ships/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2024/01/17/what-to-know-about-the-viral-yemeni-pirate-rashid-dominating-social-media/ https://www.algemeiner.com/2025/05/13/hasan-piker-how-an-israel-hating-terror-supporting-streamer-seduced-the-new-york-times/
anti-Israel sentiment is not the same thing as terrorism apologism. But being pro Israel demands being an endorser of child murder war-crimes and terrorism.
You can’t support Israel right now without being the bad guy. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t other bad guys, but there are no pro Israel good guys.
.de
Figures.
He is a zionist who still think he can spread propaganda on lemmy whrn the whole world watch israel terrorism
Hilariously misinformed. Everyday he talks about how Isreal/zionism must be stopped. To the point of if there is nothing else breaking happening, the conversation is about the genocide.Apparently this is about a commenter not hasan
We don’t seems to talk about the same person
Oops!
Pretty sure he’s talking about OP, not Piker
You are
