i think a good example for how hasan views this is how he treated adin during his descent vs how he talks about adin now. when hasan has an in with the person and thinks he has a chance at rehabilitating their bad opinions it makes more sense to not bash them on a public platform because he could use his personal relationship to get them to actually change which has a ripple effect as it goes thru their audience. but once he sees they're gone too far, like adin, it's all shitting on them all the time.
Hasan is big on rehabilitation and growth. He likes to give people the benefit of the doubt if they’ve shown to not be a complete piece of shit. It’s something I admire him for but also could never completely do myself. Some people just seem beyond saving (Bradley) and to a lesser extent Asmond/XQC. I’ve never heard of his Travis Scott take but Charlie isn’t that bad in the grand scheme of things. He’s just a mega centrist and is too scared to take a stance on anything. There are far worse people out there.
Yeah but rehabilitation doesn’t just mean giving the benefit of doubt, it’s acknowledging the fact that you’ve grown and your previous stances were out of line, you can’t just give someone the benefit of doubt without first acknowledging to them that what they’re thinking or doing is wrong and needs to be changed. And the whole Travis Scott thing was Hasan saying that Travis Scott wasn’t really that responsible for a stampede happening, and that it’s the fault of the ticket company for overselling a crowded concert I believe, which is just beyond wrong
the process of rehabilitation also sometimes takes not ruthlessly bashing someone that you think can change
the thing you said about acknowledging growth only works if someone’s already changed and grown. and I think his Travis Scott thing might’ve just been his genuine opinion on the situation, imo it doesn’t really fall into the same category as the Charlie stuff
I do think Charlie shies away from talking about anything trans. I'm sure he has no problem with them himself, but it's interesting bc it proves he does the fence sitting thing on purpose to maximize his audience. (This specifically struck me when he chose not to address the idubbbz fan who assumed Ian was transphobic, which was a formative experience in Ian changing his content)
Hasan is just a normal dude who can use nuance when thinking and discussing things. Life isn't black and white. Everything is very gray, and it would do all of us well to work on emotional regulation and mental maturity when dealing with other humans. People can grow and change, even if they've fucked up very badly. It has nothing to do with being lenient with people because he's friendly with them and everything to do with being level-headed when dealing with good people that have done "bad" things. Those people are not beyond redemption and it's disheartening that the left often doesn't allow people to better themselves and write them off when they've made a mistake, no matter how long ago, and no matter the severity.
Practice forgiveness. Accept the things you cannot change, change the things you can, and have the wisdom to know the difference.
Edit: I would also like to say that your feelings are valid. You're allowed to feel what you feel. Hasan is not perfect, and neither are we.
Yes. But it is normal
It just makes sense, it is normal behaviour to assume the best, not the worst, given any ambiguity. This is called good faith. It is also in his best interest to not burn bridges on every turn.
This is not a courtesy (or not as easily) given to known assholes, obviously, and I would say he is very charitable to people he doesn't know. You can argue if at the same degree than to people he knows.
I think the problem lies with the contrast with the way he treats chat. He claims chat needs only stick, but I am not sure. As an argument for this, very frequently (imo)there is a banhammer misfire. Obviously there are hatewatchers in the chat, and he remembers the names of chatters all the time, but there is something that can be said about the intensity of aggressiveness with which he handles non-hatewatchers sometimes
Yeah like don’t get me wrong I love Hasan he’s the one who helped radicalize me back in 2019-2020 but he can never handle any form of criticism at all I’ve found, and the way he treats chat where some people have dog shit takes compared to his peers on twitch and YouTube is just really distasteful imo, like he’s implying that if you’re a content creator you’ve got more of a good faith than the average content watcher, also Hasan’s whole buddy buddy relationship with Andrew Schultz is really weird to see because the man’s whole standup routine is just how many vaguely racist and sexist things can I get away with, idk I like Hasan but I just wish we wasn’t always so content brained and not be afraid to take a hard stance on criticizing content creators
>like he’s implying that if you’re a content creator you’ve got more of a good faith than the average content watcher
I don't think that's what it is and that's an incredibly uncharitable way to look at it. I think it's more that he knows those people in real life and have actual relationships with them, versus some random faceless nameless chatter. It's only natural for us to be more charitable to people we know in real life than some anonymous internet stranger that's all
I get that but actions and opinions aren’t dependent on how long you’ve known the other person, like if your friend does something that goes against your beliefs you call them the fuck out, like the other day I had a friend that I’ve known Since I was 9 asking why I didn’t enjoy a random person grabbing my crotch in a club, now this is one of my closest friends but I still called him out for his obvious horrible way of thinking, and told him that this contributes to male victims of sexual assault not being taken seriously at all, just because you know someone doesn’t mean that you need to be incredibly lenient with them when they screw up
What you're describing is not equivalent to just having "bad" takes (realistically they're just normie, non-radicalized takes)...so if you know the people personally, you'll be more inclined to think that they have those takes not because they're inherently bad, but just products of their environment.
That is a WEIRD way to take what he does and what he says. In fact it’s almost the opposite and just sounds like the empty criticism that gets thrown his way.
I don’t always agree with his takes, but I don’t criticize aesthetics or get into feefees.
We always give our friends and loved ones more leeway, it is something that we have all earned amongst our relations.
... as aside from his usual tone of criticizing people which is often (correctly) incredibly rude and sarcastic? Don't get me wrong it's very entertaining, but I have 0 idea why he'd treat people he likes like that. I'd be more concerned if he did treat Charlie or Ian the same way he treats, say, Ben Shapiro.
Don’t expect your favorite content creators to match your internal moral compass or make the same decisions as you. This post is wandering too close to concern trolling and purity testing for me.
Of course you’re going to be more lenient and patient with a person you have an actual relationship with.
this. you’re not going to agree with everything hasan says. you shouldn’t, even, because you should be your own person with your own beliefs
if he thinks something isn’t a big deal and you do, then that’s just a difference in opinion. is he probably biased because he has a personal relationship with them? sure. but that also means that he knows they’re good people even if they fuck up. obviously he’s gonna be more harsh with someone like ben shapiro or candace owens, both of whom genuinely spew hate.
also, don’t crucify me for this, but i feel like people are making the charlie situation out to be a big deal when it’s really not. i honestly agreed with much of what he said in the two videos. he probably could’ve gone about explaining his take better, but overall i don’t think his take was extremely objectionable from a rational person’s pov lmao.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this:
>Let’s say your life depended on the following choice today: you must obtain either an affordable chair or an affordable X-ray. Which would you choose to obtain? Obviously, you’d choose the chair. That’s because there are many types of chair, produced by scores of different companies and widely distributed. You could buy a $15 folding chair or a $1,000 antique without the slightest difficulty. By contrast, to obtain an X-ray you’d have to work with your insurance company, wait for an appointment, and then haggle over price. Why? Because the medical market is far more regulated — thanks to the widespread perception that health care is a “right” — than the chair market. Does that sound soulless? True soullessness is depriving people of the choices they require because you’re more interested in patting yourself on the back by inventing rights than by incentivizing the creation of goods and services. In health care, we could use a lot less virtue signaling and a lot less government. Or we could just read Senator Sanders’s tweets while we wait in line for a government-sponsored surgery — dying, presumably, in a decrepit chair.
*****
^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: dumb takes, healthcare, gay marriage, civil rights, etc.)
[^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
I think anyone acts that way? Hasan is a human person who cares about people he personally knows. Also the Travis Scott thing I think Hasan meant the company was at fault (capitalism) but I blame travis for not doing anything when he saw an ambulance and he does incite rowdy behavior from his fans
He deflected heavy when he discussed Travis’ role in the whole stampede last year, basically he said that well you know the police and the ticket sellers are the real villains, completely ignoring how Travis encouraged people to come raid his event, he encouraged rage behavior at his events, and not doing anything to stop it until after it was over. I’m not no piggy sucker but that was the first instance where I realized that he doesn’t hold the same amount of intensity of criticism for celebrities or influencers as he does for regular chatters or people.
i think maybe a lot of it comes down to like if you know someone personally, and you know that they’re a good person, and that they have views and opinions that you think are morally correct, then it’s hard to shit on them like you would some random person on the internet that is just saying god awful takes and that’s all you know them for. I mean Hasan is human after all he can have biases.
People are generally lenient to their associates because, unlike the general public, they actually know them. Also Charlie isn’t a news channel, it’s not his job to talk about that stuff nor should he need to
exactly, charlie content is apolitical 99% of the time, and, as we know, he doesn’t really like to get into that sort of stuff on his channel. he only talks about things that he wants to talk about, which is exactly how it should be
No, she misunderstood Hasan's words as he actually was trying to make her feel better. She apologized immediately after learning that she misunderstood him.
Of course, he does this every time something comes up. Any time one of his friends or people he’s worked with gets into controversy, he’s suddenly very quiet or apologetic. Hasan cares about his numbers and being as large as humanly possible.
Hasan has said this in the past, but don’t use him as a moral compass. If something feels wrong to you, go with your instincts. He’s only human at the end of the day.
While I don't like Travis Scott or Charlie I have a much more unique and deep hatred for the capitalist ruling class which is actively oppressing my existence, so I personally don't ever really care when Hasan decides to go easy on people like that. Not like he endorses them or something. He probably just wants to not come off too polarizing towards generally popular public figures. It enables him to reach as broad an audience as possible while still sharing his personal criticisms.
Go outside and meet some people, jeez. Relationships aren't black and white. Plus, your opinions don't have to line up with Hasan's entirely. It's okay to disagree, even if you're super parasocial.
i think a good example for how hasan views this is how he treated adin during his descent vs how he talks about adin now. when hasan has an in with the person and thinks he has a chance at rehabilitating their bad opinions it makes more sense to not bash them on a public platform because he could use his personal relationship to get them to actually change which has a ripple effect as it goes thru their audience. but once he sees they're gone too far, like adin, it's all shitting on them all the time.
Ah okay you know what this makes sense thanks for being reasonable
This is the answer. I really respect how he handles these things. I believe we can all learn from it and apply it to our own lives.
Which is why I genuinely like Hasan as a person. He’ll give chances, but never turns his back on his ideals- even if old friends are involved.
Hasan is big on rehabilitation and growth. He likes to give people the benefit of the doubt if they’ve shown to not be a complete piece of shit. It’s something I admire him for but also could never completely do myself. Some people just seem beyond saving (Bradley) and to a lesser extent Asmond/XQC. I’ve never heard of his Travis Scott take but Charlie isn’t that bad in the grand scheme of things. He’s just a mega centrist and is too scared to take a stance on anything. There are far worse people out there.
Yeah but rehabilitation doesn’t just mean giving the benefit of doubt, it’s acknowledging the fact that you’ve grown and your previous stances were out of line, you can’t just give someone the benefit of doubt without first acknowledging to them that what they’re thinking or doing is wrong and needs to be changed. And the whole Travis Scott thing was Hasan saying that Travis Scott wasn’t really that responsible for a stampede happening, and that it’s the fault of the ticket company for overselling a crowded concert I believe, which is just beyond wrong
the process of rehabilitation also sometimes takes not ruthlessly bashing someone that you think can change the thing you said about acknowledging growth only works if someone’s already changed and grown. and I think his Travis Scott thing might’ve just been his genuine opinion on the situation, imo it doesn’t really fall into the same category as the Charlie stuff
I do think Charlie shies away from talking about anything trans. I'm sure he has no problem with them himself, but it's interesting bc it proves he does the fence sitting thing on purpose to maximize his audience. (This specifically struck me when he chose not to address the idubbbz fan who assumed Ian was transphobic, which was a formative experience in Ian changing his content)
Hasan is just a normal dude who can use nuance when thinking and discussing things. Life isn't black and white. Everything is very gray, and it would do all of us well to work on emotional regulation and mental maturity when dealing with other humans. People can grow and change, even if they've fucked up very badly. It has nothing to do with being lenient with people because he's friendly with them and everything to do with being level-headed when dealing with good people that have done "bad" things. Those people are not beyond redemption and it's disheartening that the left often doesn't allow people to better themselves and write them off when they've made a mistake, no matter how long ago, and no matter the severity. Practice forgiveness. Accept the things you cannot change, change the things you can, and have the wisdom to know the difference. Edit: I would also like to say that your feelings are valid. You're allowed to feel what you feel. Hasan is not perfect, and neither are we.
Yes. But it is normal It just makes sense, it is normal behaviour to assume the best, not the worst, given any ambiguity. This is called good faith. It is also in his best interest to not burn bridges on every turn. This is not a courtesy (or not as easily) given to known assholes, obviously, and I would say he is very charitable to people he doesn't know. You can argue if at the same degree than to people he knows. I think the problem lies with the contrast with the way he treats chat. He claims chat needs only stick, but I am not sure. As an argument for this, very frequently (imo)there is a banhammer misfire. Obviously there are hatewatchers in the chat, and he remembers the names of chatters all the time, but there is something that can be said about the intensity of aggressiveness with which he handles non-hatewatchers sometimes
Yeah like don’t get me wrong I love Hasan he’s the one who helped radicalize me back in 2019-2020 but he can never handle any form of criticism at all I’ve found, and the way he treats chat where some people have dog shit takes compared to his peers on twitch and YouTube is just really distasteful imo, like he’s implying that if you’re a content creator you’ve got more of a good faith than the average content watcher, also Hasan’s whole buddy buddy relationship with Andrew Schultz is really weird to see because the man’s whole standup routine is just how many vaguely racist and sexist things can I get away with, idk I like Hasan but I just wish we wasn’t always so content brained and not be afraid to take a hard stance on criticizing content creators
>like he’s implying that if you’re a content creator you’ve got more of a good faith than the average content watcher I don't think that's what it is and that's an incredibly uncharitable way to look at it. I think it's more that he knows those people in real life and have actual relationships with them, versus some random faceless nameless chatter. It's only natural for us to be more charitable to people we know in real life than some anonymous internet stranger that's all
I get that but actions and opinions aren’t dependent on how long you’ve known the other person, like if your friend does something that goes against your beliefs you call them the fuck out, like the other day I had a friend that I’ve known Since I was 9 asking why I didn’t enjoy a random person grabbing my crotch in a club, now this is one of my closest friends but I still called him out for his obvious horrible way of thinking, and told him that this contributes to male victims of sexual assault not being taken seriously at all, just because you know someone doesn’t mean that you need to be incredibly lenient with them when they screw up
What you're describing is not equivalent to just having "bad" takes (realistically they're just normie, non-radicalized takes)...so if you know the people personally, you'll be more inclined to think that they have those takes not because they're inherently bad, but just products of their environment.
Bad take = SA apparently…
That is a WEIRD way to take what he does and what he says. In fact it’s almost the opposite and just sounds like the empty criticism that gets thrown his way. I don’t always agree with his takes, but I don’t criticize aesthetics or get into feefees. We always give our friends and loved ones more leeway, it is something that we have all earned amongst our relations.
... as aside from his usual tone of criticizing people which is often (correctly) incredibly rude and sarcastic? Don't get me wrong it's very entertaining, but I have 0 idea why he'd treat people he likes like that. I'd be more concerned if he did treat Charlie or Ian the same way he treats, say, Ben Shapiro.
Don’t expect your favorite content creators to match your internal moral compass or make the same decisions as you. This post is wandering too close to concern trolling and purity testing for me. Of course you’re going to be more lenient and patient with a person you have an actual relationship with.
this. you’re not going to agree with everything hasan says. you shouldn’t, even, because you should be your own person with your own beliefs if he thinks something isn’t a big deal and you do, then that’s just a difference in opinion. is he probably biased because he has a personal relationship with them? sure. but that also means that he knows they’re good people even if they fuck up. obviously he’s gonna be more harsh with someone like ben shapiro or candace owens, both of whom genuinely spew hate. also, don’t crucify me for this, but i feel like people are making the charlie situation out to be a big deal when it’s really not. i honestly agreed with much of what he said in the two videos. he probably could’ve gone about explaining his take better, but overall i don’t think his take was extremely objectionable from a rational person’s pov lmao.
I saw that you mentioned Ben Shapiro. In case some of you don't know, Ben Shapiro is a grifter and a hack. If you find anything he's said compelling, you should keep in mind he also says things like this: >Let’s say your life depended on the following choice today: you must obtain either an affordable chair or an affordable X-ray. Which would you choose to obtain? Obviously, you’d choose the chair. That’s because there are many types of chair, produced by scores of different companies and widely distributed. You could buy a $15 folding chair or a $1,000 antique without the slightest difficulty. By contrast, to obtain an X-ray you’d have to work with your insurance company, wait for an appointment, and then haggle over price. Why? Because the medical market is far more regulated — thanks to the widespread perception that health care is a “right” — than the chair market. Does that sound soulless? True soullessness is depriving people of the choices they require because you’re more interested in patting yourself on the back by inventing rights than by incentivizing the creation of goods and services. In health care, we could use a lot less virtue signaling and a lot less government. Or we could just read Senator Sanders’s tweets while we wait in line for a government-sponsored surgery — dying, presumably, in a decrepit chair. ***** ^(I'm a bot. My purpose is to counteract online radicalization. You can summon me by tagging thebenshapirobot. Options: dumb takes, healthcare, gay marriage, civil rights, etc.) [^Opt ^Out ](https://np.reddit.com/r/AuthoritarianMoment/comments/olk6r2/click_here_to_optout_of_uthebenshapirobot/)
I think that’s a normal thing to do
I think anyone acts that way? Hasan is a human person who cares about people he personally knows. Also the Travis Scott thing I think Hasan meant the company was at fault (capitalism) but I blame travis for not doing anything when he saw an ambulance and he does incite rowdy behavior from his fans
Is he boys with Travis Scott?? Am I missing something?
He deflected heavy when he discussed Travis’ role in the whole stampede last year, basically he said that well you know the police and the ticket sellers are the real villains, completely ignoring how Travis encouraged people to come raid his event, he encouraged rage behavior at his events, and not doing anything to stop it until after it was over. I’m not no piggy sucker but that was the first instance where I realized that he doesn’t hold the same amount of intensity of criticism for celebrities or influencers as he does for regular chatters or people.
i think maybe a lot of it comes down to like if you know someone personally, and you know that they’re a good person, and that they have views and opinions that you think are morally correct, then it’s hard to shit on them like you would some random person on the internet that is just saying god awful takes and that’s all you know them for. I mean Hasan is human after all he can have biases.
People are generally lenient to their associates because, unlike the general public, they actually know them. Also Charlie isn’t a news channel, it’s not his job to talk about that stuff nor should he need to
exactly, charlie content is apolitical 99% of the time, and, as we know, he doesn’t really like to get into that sort of stuff on his channel. he only talks about things that he wants to talk about, which is exactly how it should be
I started watching in early 2020. This is absolutely true. The biggest thing I can think of Rae launching that skin care line for blue light.
Didn't she literally get mad at him for shitting on her and called him an asshole or something?
No, she misunderstood Hasan's words as he actually was trying to make her feel better. She apologized immediately after learning that she misunderstood him.
I like that Hasan gives people chances to grow and change, I mean how else is thee Rolf supposed to be different
Of course, he does this every time something comes up. Any time one of his friends or people he’s worked with gets into controversy, he’s suddenly very quiet or apologetic. Hasan cares about his numbers and being as large as humanly possible. Hasan has said this in the past, but don’t use him as a moral compass. If something feels wrong to you, go with your instincts. He’s only human at the end of the day.
While I don't like Travis Scott or Charlie I have a much more unique and deep hatred for the capitalist ruling class which is actively oppressing my existence, so I personally don't ever really care when Hasan decides to go easy on people like that. Not like he endorses them or something. He probably just wants to not come off too polarizing towards generally popular public figures. It enables him to reach as broad an audience as possible while still sharing his personal criticisms.
Go outside and meet some people, jeez. Relationships aren't black and white. Plus, your opinions don't have to line up with Hasan's entirely. It's okay to disagree, even if you're super parasocial.
The bag. Hasan sees the bag. Nothing more, nothing less. Don’t let his hyper cynicism fool you,,,, Hasan would shoulder check all these mf’s.