Hasan Piker: Difference between revisions
m (resizing image gallery, adding expand/collapse text) |
|||
(341 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| instagram = Hasandpiker | | instagram = Hasandpiker | ||
| youtube = @hasanabi | | youtube = @hasanabi | ||
| twitch = hasanabi | |||
| stock = [https://manifold.markets/destiny/hasan-stock-permanent Hasan Stock] | | stock = [https://manifold.markets/destiny/hasan-stock-permanent Hasan Stock] | ||
| awards = [[File:DestinyAwards.png|35px]] [[Destiny Awards|Antagonist of the Year]] | | awards = [[File:DestinyAwards.png|35px]] [[Destiny Awards|Antagonist {{tooltip|of the Year|OTY}}]] | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''Hasan Doğan Piker''' (born July 25, 1991) is an American political commentator, streamer, and YouTuber. He is best known for his political commentary on the progressive news network [[The Young Turks]] and for his [[Twitch (service)|Twitch]] streaming channel, where he discusses pop politics, news headlines, and popular culture. Piker has gained a large following for his outspoken views on progressive politics and social issues. | '''Hasan Doğan Piker''' (born July 25, 1991) is an American political commentator, streamer, and YouTuber. He is best known for his political commentary on the progressive news network [[The Young Turks]] and for his [[Twitch (service)|Twitch]] streaming channel, where he discusses pop politics, news headlines, and popular culture. Piker has gained a large following for his outspoken views on progressive politics and social issues. | ||
Hasan’s first appearance on | Hasan’s first appearance on [[Destiny]]’s stream occurred on October 8th, 2018 to discuss an upcoming debate with [[Charlie Kirk]] and laude Destiny for his prior debate performances against the right. Following this appearance, Hasan became a temporary fixture of Destiny’s streams, and a friend. His initial appearances focused primarily on the burgeoning online-right movement and various economic/political theory. Hasan would frequently join Destiny on podcasts, occasionally IRL stream with him at restaurants and bars, and would regularly appear on Destiny's stream to play games or discuss current controversial issues. Over time, Hasan's limited debate experience, ideological differences with Destiny(primarily concerning left-wing thought), and struggles processing criticism from both Destiny and his community, eventually strained their relationship to the point where the two streamers cut ties with one another. | ||
Currently, Hasan and Destiny are not on amicable terms. Their mutual dislike has intensified over the years, primarily stemming from personal animosity, | Currently, Hasan and Destiny are not on amicable terms. Their mutual dislike has intensified over the years, primarily stemming from personal animosity, political differences, and disputes over various contentious issues. The two will regularly criticize the positions/actions of the other, and have fostered communities that mirror their mutual dislike. Despite this animosity and his status as a prominent online political commentator, Hasan has consistently declined to appear on stream with Destiny or engage in debates with him since their second fallout, citing a general disdain for debates and "debate-perverts". <ref>HasanAbi Reacts. (2024, May 5). Why Hasan Stopped Engaging With Destiny | HasanAbi Reacts. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynxYR3m4Ug4 </ref> <ref> Destiny. (2024, January 25). Hasan Slams Shapiro And Destiny, Calls Debates Useless. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj6G8hbpJg8 </ref> | ||
For several years, Hasan boycotted all mention of Destiny on his channel, and would generally refuse to engage with any content related to Destiny(for fear of providing him underserved clout). Despite this, Hasan would sporadically react to Destiny-adjacent contact should he feel his input on the manner is necessary. As a result, Destiny's name has been banned from mention in Piker's Twitch chat, and individuals who could potentially be perceived as Destiny fans will typically be banned. <ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1beumlg/the_word_destiny_is_banned_in_hasans_chat/ </ref> | |||
Shortly following the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Hamas-led_attack_on_Israel 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel], Hasan ended his embargo on all Destiny-related content. Hasan occasionally devotes portions of his streams to either reacting to Destiny's subreddit, or ridiculing one of Destiny's mainstream media appearances.<ref> Neon Lotus. (2024, June 16). Why Does Destiny Hate Hasan? YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUOHbcQ5fI8 </ref><ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1ci6gdj/hasan_goes_all_out_on_destiny_and_this_sub/ </ref> <ref> Ben Shapiro DEBATES Destiny | Hasanabi Reacts to Lex Fridman Podcast. (Jan 24, 2024 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAcjcNMXq4k </ref> <ref> Norman Finkelstein & Others DEBATE on Lex Fridman Podcast | Hasanabi Reacts (Longest Stunlock Ever). (Mar 15, 2024 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MprW_lFCbyg </ref> The reasons for this change of heart have sparked much speculation. While Hasan maintains he feels morally obliged to respond to Destiny's defense of the military operations in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip Gaza], other have speculated that Hasan is seeking to capitalize on Destiny's rising popularity amid several mainstream media appearances and his own dwindling Twitch and YouTube channel metrics.<ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/174wtzc/about_destiny_saying_hes_more_popular_than_hasan/ </ref><ref>Hasan And Cenk Vs Crowder And Daily Wire. (Oct 7, 2023 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 3, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eZidF_MiYw </ref><ref>[[Media:HasanHemmoragingViewers.mp4]]</ref><ref> Destiny DEBATES Omar Baddar | Hasanabi Reacts to Breaking Points. (May 3, 2024 ). Www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 3, 2024, from https://youtu.be/nWxrMQf8g5U?t=2444 </ref> | |||
== Early life and education == | == Early life and education == | ||
Line 28: | Line 33: | ||
== Career == | == Career == | ||
=== The Young Turks === | === The Young Turks === | ||
Piker began his career as an intern at [[The Young Turks]] in 2014. He quickly rose through the ranks, becoming a producer and on-air contributor. Piker gained prominence for his "Bro Tips" | Piker began his career as an intern at [[The Young Turks]] in 2014. He quickly rose through the ranks, becoming a producer and on-air contributor. Piker gained prominence for his dating advice show "Bro Tips". | ||
=== Twitch streaming === | === Twitch streaming === | ||
In 2018, Piker started streaming on [[Twitch (service)|Twitch]], where he discusses pop politics, news headlines, and popular culture. His Twitch channel, "Hasanabi," has amassed a large following, making him one of the most popular political streamers on the platform. Piker's streams often feature discussions with journalists and content creators. | In 2018, Piker started streaming on [[Twitch (service)|Twitch]], where he discusses pop politics, news headlines, and popular culture. His Twitch channel, "Hasanabi," has amassed a large following, making him one of the most popular political streamers on the platform. Piker's streams often feature discussions with journalists and content creators. | ||
== Disagreements with Destiny WIP == | |||
The following section is a recounting of every disagreement Hasan and Destiny have had since their first on-stream meeting. For greater detail into a disagreement(including discussion highlights,timestamps and play-by-play), a link to the relevant section(in the form of a hyperlink or disambiguation link) is provided when possible. | |||
=== Hasan Claims to "own" Destiny in a debate regarding the successfulness of Donald Trump as a Republican === | |||
[[File:Trump McCain Not a War Hero.mp4|300px|thumb|right|{{wiki|Donald_Trump|Donald Trump}} explains why he doesn't think that Sen. {{wiki|John_McCain|John McCain}}, is a war hero.<ref> Trump: McCain Not a 'War Hero' (2024). The Wall Street Journal [YouTube Video]. In YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNugcPeCZZE </ref>]] | |||
During one of the [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_Piker#Destiny_has_a_pre-debate_discussion_with_Hasan initial discussions] between Hasan and Destiny, Hasan claims Trump has been incredibly successful as a Republican president because his underlying positions are just "regular fucking conservative principles". Hasan elaborates his positions are all the "modern GOP positions" but his rhetoric is just different, and is just more appealing to his base voters. He goes on to point to things such as the Republican Tax plan, the "destruction" of the EPA", and the "destruction" of the financial protection bureau. He concludes this is all "regular republican shit" Trump was able to accomplish in an authoritarian fashion.<ref> ( Oct 23, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9iPLU3fAFA&t=5272s </ref> | |||
Destiny claims Trump has caused a very deep division within the Republican party(Destiny calls it the Tea party on crack), citing instances such as Trumples mocking Mccain for being a war hero making it very difficult for them to see eye-to-eye with other Republicans. Destiny then discuss how Trump fans and supporters "fucking hate" establishment Republicans, citing the tendency of these groups to trash moderate Republicans just as hard as certain left leaning groups(i.e. calling them Rhinos). Destiny concludes he's unsure what kind of damage will happen to the party once Trump is gone, pointing to how a candidate like Rubio could have difficulty pandering to this new-extreme base.<ref> The Most Oppressed Group - Pre-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (Oct 23, 2018). Www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9iPLU3fAFA&t=5424s </ref> | |||
Hasan once again disagrees with this, and maintains his prior position that Trump still advocates for "staple Republican positions". He then makes the point Republicans will always vote for whoever "triggers the libs" the most. Destiny agreed with this in the end, but maintained they will just have to see what happens to the party after the midterms. | |||
On January 24, 2024 Hasan claims to have "owned" Destiny in this discussion. Hasan claims to be proven correct as Trump was able to stack the supreme court, "destroy" regulatory agencies, and offer "fat" tax cuts.<ref> Ben Shapiro vs Destiny Debate | HasanAbi reacts to Lex Fridman Podcast. (Jan 24, 2024 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i9UYIkDTsY&t=4752s </ref> | |||
=== MrDeadMoth domestic abuse situation === | |||
[https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_Piker#Domestic_abuse_-_MrDeadMoth_hits_wife_ft._MrMouton,_Hasan,_WhiteNervosa On December 12, 2018] Destiny and Hasan debated the circumstances surrounding a domestic abuse situation involving Fortnite streamer MrDeadMoth. <ref> Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa. (Dec 12, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RAZHElDZL8 </ref> Hasan, while of the opinion MrDeadMoth's wife did take steps to escalate the situation, maintains that MrDeadMoth bore the brunt of the blame in the situation for physically retaliating against his partner. Destiny took the contrary position, stating that while MrDeadMoth's physical response should not be excused, the wife's persistent approach, escalation, and starting of the physical altercation, should result in her receiving more of the blame. | |||
=== Breaking News === | |||
[https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_Piker#Hasan_and_Destiny_debate_breaking_news On January 7, 2019] Destiny and Hasan debated the ethicality of reporting on breaking news and the roles of journalists and commentators in shaping public perception. Hasan, after reporting a [https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/1/10/18175589/jazmine-barnes-shooting-houston-texas-race%7C recent shooting] may have been racially charged, was accused of "race-baiting" after more information was released revealing that the shooting was in fact gang-related, and not a hate crime. Hasan felt this criticism was unwarranted, claiming he was merely working with the facts he had at the time, and that he could not wait for more facts to come out as it would be to the detriment of his job. Destiny took issue with this, arguing it was irresponsible of Hasan to cover the shooting before more information was released. Moreover, Destiny argued that Hasan should have avoided constructing a narrative around hate crimes, pointing to the hypocrisy Hasan would show if a right-leaning commentator speculated about Arabs following a bombing. | |||
=== Moral Luck === | |||
{{disambiguation |Main Article: [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Moral_Luck Moral Luck]}} | |||
[https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_Piker#Destiny,_Hasan,_Vaush,_and_RemTheBathBoi_debate_the_necessity_of_philosophical_%22grounding%22._The_phrase_%22morally_lucky%22_is_coined On March 23], 2019 Hasan, [[Rem]], [[Vaush]], and Destiny engaged in a heated discussion on the necessity of a foundational philosophical understanding for those engaging in political advocacy. Rem was of the position that content creators, particularly those with larger audiences, have a moral obligation to attain the base level of philosophical knowledge required to "ground" oneself in a moral framework. Rem goes on to argue that content creators who do not do so, run the risk of "lucking" into a position based off their life-experiences, and therefore may not truly be advocating for the "correct" position. | |||
Vaush and Hasan challenged this view, calling it unrealistic given the fast-paced and often superficial nature of online discourse. While the majority of Hasan's disagreements(and angst) were directed at Rem, Destiny eventually made clear that he supported Rem's stance, and argued that large content-creators should have at least his own level of philosophical knowledge before advocating their positions. Destiny went on to reference his personal experience debating individuals who struggled to present strong arguments against incest, and how those individuals would have an easier time advocating for their stance with a grounded ethical framework. | |||
=== Research methods === | |||
[[File:Hasan does think wikipedia is a scholarly source..mp4|300px|right|thumb|'''Hasan explains why he believes wikipedia is a scholarly source''']] | |||
In 2019, Hasan lauded Wikipedia as a "scholarly source", referring to it as an excellent example of an [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source open source] website backed by credible information.<ref>https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/File:Hasan_does_think_wikipedia_is_a_scholarly_source..mp4 </ref> However, following the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Hamas-led_attack_on_Israel 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel],critics, including Hasan, frequently accused Destiny of primarily relying on reading Wikipedia articles for research, and even derided the website as a potential credible source altogether.<ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cp6zos/hasan_crying_laughing_at_the_fact_destiny/ </ref> <ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1coih9u/destiny_only_reads_wikipedia_as_4thot_requested/ </ref><ref> Lex Clips. (2024, March 14). Norm Finkelstein calls Destiny a fantastic moron | Lex Fridman Podcast. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fls1z4e4nvo </ref> | |||
==== Research Fancams ==== | |||
Following a flare up in tensions between Destiny and several [[Ludwig]]-adjacent content creators,and at the request of reddit moderator [[4THOT]], reddit user lordsavor made several [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fancam fancams] in response to the critique that Destiny relies purley on wikipedia articles for research. This fancam included several instances of Destiny scouring academic/historical documents for research.<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1coih9u/destiny_only_reads_wikipedia_as_4thot_requested/ </ref><ref>[[Media:Watch Destiny Only Reads Wikipedia Streamable.mp4]]</ref> | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Destiny research fancam | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
[[File:Watch Destiny Only Reads Wikipedia Streamable.mp4|300px]] | |||
|} | |||
Later that day, lordsavor posted another fancam, wherein several Hasan vods were scoured in order to find genuine instances of Hasan doing research on any given topic. lordsavor found little in their search, and had the following to say: | |||
Before making the hasan Twitter research montage fancam, I really wondered to myself. "Did Hasan REALLY do NO RESEARCH at all?". So I scoured his vods and tried to find one. Like genuinely tried. The best I can find is him getting referred to a document on a interview in which he read a paragraph and then moved on. EVERYTIME that he reads something in a academic paper or some shit, HE JUST READS ONE PARAGRAPH AND MOVES ON. READ THE WHOLE THING DIPSHIT. I fucking can't man, why do I give this worm a chance, I wasted so much time. Anyways the other fancam is coming soon, I'm a bit busy today sorry.<ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cphimw/debate_fancam_hasan_does_no_research_actual/ </ref> | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Hasan research fancam | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
[[File:Debate Fancam - Hasan does research.mp4|300px]] | |||
|} | |||
One day following the release of these fancams, yet another fancam was released, this time by reddit user Jaded-Engineer.<ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cpjtb0/pedro_pedro_pedro_pedro_pe/ </ref> | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Hasan research fancam #2 | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
[[File:Destiny Hasan research.mp4|300px]] | |||
|} | |||
=== Abortion === | |||
[https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_Piker#Hasan_and_Destiny_debate_abortion On May 17, 2019], Destiny and Hasan held a brief debate regarding their respective underlying moral positions with regards to abortion. While Destiny expressed his moral reservations with regards to abortion(arguing that human-life begins at conception), he maintained that abortion should still be legally permissible given the extenuating circumstances an individual who may desire an abortion could find themselves in. Hasan agreed with Destiny's policy assessment of abortion, however, he took issue with Destiny's "arbitrary" assignment of personhood at conception. Following a brief deliberation on "personhood" in a fetus, Hasan eventually admitted to "coming up with arguments on the spot", and went on to state he had not previously thought about whether a fetus has personhood.<ref>https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1321 Hasan and Destiny debate abortion: Hasan states he's coming up with arguments on the spot and has not previously thought about when a Fetus has personhood.</ref> As a result, the majority of the debate was spent with Destiny attempting to help Hasan discover his underlying moral position on abortion, interspersed between various disagreements on the subject of personhood. | |||
Over the course of the debate, Destiny asked Hasan's several questions pertaining to the differentiation in personhood between a one-year-old child and a fetus. When Destiny posited these questions, Hasan was unable to provide a substantive backing of any one element of personhood without making reference to some other element. This tactic was eventually [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZOr-ruA_XM&t=1678s called out by Destiny], and resolved as the two further deliberated. The debate still remained contentious following this resolution, as any trait Hasan attempted to define in the personhood of a one-year-old, Destiny was able to substantiate in a fetus(i.e. [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1268 potentiality for becoming a moral agent], and [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2299 harm to the mother]). The conversation eventually took a turn following Destiny's [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2706 attempt to use a personal anecdote] relating to his experiences with refusing to get an abortion, and Hasan arguing Destiny had not considered his partner's suffering during that experience. Destiny accused Hasan of ad-hominem, Hasan denied doing so, and the conversation continued for some time. By the end of the debate, both Hasan and Destiny(each still steadfast in their prior positions) eventually agreed that the philosophical discussion surrounding abortion is "aids". | |||
=== Emmia, Cryptofacsicsm, and dissuading voters from Biden === | |||
{{disambiguation |Main Article: [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/I_don%27t_really_know_if_you%27re_pretending_or_not..._ft._HasanAbi_%26_Emmia I don't really know if you're pretending or not... ft. HasanAbi & Emmia]}} | |||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stdrVr9BHkE|300px|right| '''I don't really know if you're pretending or not... ft. HasanAbi & Emmia'''}} | |||
[https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_Piker#Destiny_accuses_Hasan_of_perpetuating_Crypto_Fascism_and_chides_him_for_dissuading_his_audience_against_voting_for_Biden On June 16, 2019] Destiny and Hasan had a contentious conversation regarding cryptofacsicsm and political pragmatism, which ultimately set the stage for their first fallout. The conversation started with Destiny and Emmia, a fellow twitch streamer, discussing her contentious interactions with Twitch's political community, where she was accused of being a Nazi due to her prior relationship with a {{wiki|Breitbart}} writer and engagement with alt-right memes. Emmia expressed regret for her involvement with these memes, but defended herself by claiming ignorance of the memes' origins and attributing some of her behavior to memory loss from SSRI medication. In response, Destiny explained the concept of cryptofacsicsm, advised Emmia to renounce her past actions, and focus on her future behavior going forward. Destiny further advises Emmia to do so regardless of individuals who would seek to bring up her past behavior, as they would likely never forgive her regardless of any repetenace she attempts. | |||
Hasan eventually joins the call, expresses his skepticism with regards to Emima's claims, and accuses her of clout-seeking behavior. Destiny eventually steps in to defend Emmia, and Hasan responds by accusing Destiny of being overly charitable to her. Destiny counters, and accuses Hasan of perpetuating the "vicious cycle" of cryptofacsicsm by bullying a "normie" like Emmia into apologizing immediately, instead of waiting to evaluate her future behavior. Destiny further asserts that the communities Hasan inhabits, and the individuals demanding Emmia's apology, would likely never forgive her anyways. Destiny proceeds to point to the severe criticism he has received from left-leaning communities despite the breadth of progressive content he has produced. | |||
<blockquote>"There was a week's worth of chapotraphouse threads on me that said I want to fuck 19 year olds, that said I want to abandon my kid, fucking christ I've got like 7,000 videos over the past four or five years of me doing progressive work, like fuck it dude, if I haven't changed people's minds why the fuck would I tell anybody else to waste their time... And i'll maintain that position, left leaning communities are just as cancerous as right-wing communities when it comes to online discourse." | |||
:—[https://youtu.be/stdrVr9BHkE?t=5546 Destiny responding to Hasan's demands for Emmia to apologize]</blockquote> | |||
The conversation escalates as Hasan and Destiny spend the remainder of the call debating the pragmaticism(or lack thereof) of their respective political views. Hasan accuses Destiny of routinely alienating left-leaning viewers with provocative statements, such as calling workers dumb. While Destiny counters that Hasan’s has engaged in even more divisive actions, such as recently stating in a tv interview that he wouldn't vote for Biden over Trump. Hasan argues that voting for Biden perpetuates a flawed political system, while Destiny rebukes this, pointing out the harm a Trump presidency could cause. Destiny then demands that Hasan explain his logic for abstaining from voting in the next election. Hasan explains that a vote for Biden would merely perpetuate the status-quo even further, asserts that politicians like Biden will never push for change that interferes with the "interest of capital" or corporations, and contends that Biden is "basically a Republican". Destiny counters, accusing Hasan of stating one of the most hilariously stupid things he has ever heard, remarks how individuals on the right will "literally cheer" for any republican candidate to get through in an election, and asserts that not voting for a democratic candidate because it "doesn't deal with capitalism" is an incredibly privileged position to anyone not spending all their time online "larping about socialism". | |||
The conversation eventually concludes as Destiny accuses Hasan of being an accelerationist and unpragmatic, Hasan asserts the "neoliberalism" and capitalistic nature of the Democratic party has corrupted it, and Destiny once again criticizes Hasan of arguing from a point of extreme privilege and ignoring individuals who would suffer under a Trump presidency. | |||
=== Kamala Harris disinformation, the first fallout WIP=== | |||
{{disambiguation |Main Article: [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_and_Destiny_Break_Up_Over_Kamala_Misinformation Hasan and Destiny break up over Kamala Misinformation]}} | |||
On July 7, 2019 Destiny and Hasan had a very heated discussion regarding American politician [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamala_Harris Kamala Harris], leading to their first major fallout. <ref> Destiny. (2019, July 9). Hasanabi And Destiny BREAK UP Over Kamala Misinformation. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLfAuWe3xho </ref> Upon reviewing the underlying facts of the video([https://youtu.be/qvKIFQ3yh-c?t=275 which Hasan states were sourced primarily from a Twitter thread on the candidate]), Destiny found that [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLfAuWe3xho&t=94s "almost every single thing Hasan said in the video was either dead wrong or horribly stretched out of what's actually happening"]. While the two spent several hours debating these underlying facts, only a few of Destiny's grievances with the video were addressed. Furthermore, the debate was mired by several instances of Hasan inadvertently speaking over Destiny due to the poor quality headset/microphone setup Destiny possessed at the time. | |||
Prior to the call's conclusion, Hasan accuses Destiny of gaslighting, strawmanning, and creating insane hypotheticals throughout the conversation. Hasan continues, stating he "hates this shit", discusses his disdain towards accusations of [[Moral_Luck|Moral Luck]] from Destiny's community, and likens talking to Destiny to trying to speak with {{wiki|Ben_Shapiro|Ben Shapiro}}. Destiny counters that every hypothetical posited during the conversation to Hasan was provided with the specific intent of exploring a given topic, and offers to discuss any disingenuous debate tactics he feels were used against him at a later date. | |||
Shortly following the stream, both streamers created reddit threads detailing their feelings/takeaways from the discussion, and received their share of community feedback/criticism.<ref> https://old.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cayg1e/if_destiny_wants_to_remain_morally_consistent_he/ </ref><ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cbdj2w/on_bootyjudge/ </ref> Following an onstream addressal by Destiny of both the conversation and reddit threads, both streamers cut ties with one another for some time. <ref> Destiny. (2019, July 10). Hasanabi And Destiny BREAK UP Aftermath. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCsvkP_sVQw </ref> | |||
=== The N-word WIP === | |||
== Community Moderation Issues WIP == | |||
=== Ethan Klein === | |||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukk_tYX_pmA|300px|right| '''Ethan Genuinely Calls Out Hasan And Blasts His Far Left Community | |||
'''}} | |||
On September 26, 2021 [[Ethan_Klein|Ethan Klien]] (aka H3H3) and Hasan debuted {{wiki|Leftovers_(podcast)|Leftovers}}, a leftist political podcast. The podcast focused on politics, and internet culture and featured guests such as [[Amouranth]], and [[Andrew Callaghan]].<ref>Wikipedia Contributors. (2024, September 4). Leftovers (podcast). Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leftovers_(podcast) </ref> | |||
In October of 2023 Ethan announced that Leftovers would go on hiatus indefinitely as a result of tension and stress from conversations related to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war 2023 Israel-Hamas war]<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eeM3WHnZlk Ethan Announces Leftovers is Taking a Break]. YouTube.</ref>. | |||
On October 31, 2023 these tensions seemed to flare up even moreso than before, with Ethan taking a more assertive approach towards his criticism of Hasan's coverage of the conflict<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/17kwarr/ethan_calls_out_hasan_for_his_hospital_coverage/ Ethan's Criticism of Hasan]. Reddit. Retrieved 2023 Oct 31.</ref>. | |||
On November 9, 2023 Ethan and Hasan had another conversation/argument about the meaning of the phrase 'From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free'<ref> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14o7MyLuYz0 Actual boring stream today until 7 PM, then panel debate later with Alex and friends at 8 PM]. YouTube VOD. Retrieved 2023 Nov 9.</ref>. | |||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyLb-Pl5lwk|300px|right| '''Hasan Wants Ethan To Stand Down | |||
'''}} | |||
On September 12, 2024 Ethan criticised a {{wiki|TikTok}} editor of Hasan's for defending {{wiki|Letter_to_the_American_People|Bin Laden's letter to America}}.<ref> [[Media:HasanEthanReply.jpg]]</ref><ref>[[Media:HasanEthanReply4.jpg]]</ref> A moderator of Hasan's stream, [[Frogan]], took issue with Ethan's statements and requested for him to "shut up". In response, Ethan issued two separate statements: | |||
# Ethan argues that a Hasan moderator telling a Jewish man such as himself to "shut up" about Bin Laden's hatred towards jews is reprehensible. Ethan goes on to claim Frogan's voice is not "fringe" within Hasan's community, and cites this as the primary reason he ended his podcast with Hasan. <ref> [[Media:HasanEthanReply2.jpg]] </ref> | |||
# Ethan condemns Hasan for allowing an official representative of his community to behave in such a reprehensible manner, and argues that Hasan's continual hand waving of her horrific behavior is essentially an implicit endorsement. <ref> [[Media:HasanEthanReply3.jpg]]</ref> | |||
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" title="Ethan replies" data-expandtext="Show Gallery of Ethan Replies" data-collapsetext="Hide Gallery of Ethan Replies"> | |||
<gallery widths=300 heights=400> | |||
File:HasanEthanReply.jpg | |||
File:HasanEthanReply4.jpg | |||
File:HasanEthanReply2.jpg | |||
File:HasanEthanReply3.jpg | |||
File:HasanEthanResponse5.jpg | |||
File:Hasanethanreply6.jpg | |||
File:HasanEthanreply7.jpg | |||
</gallery> </div> | |||
While Hasan derided his community for this behavior, he maintained that Ethan was unjustified in issuing any response to Frogan.<ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1fglnba/hasan_then_vs_hasan_now_when_it_comes_to_his/ </ref><ref>[[Media:HasanEthanFroganDefense.mp4]]</ref> | |||
=== Destiny WIP=== | |||
* [https://youtu.be/oCsvkP_sVQw?t=279 4:39] Destiny explains that he typically walks away from conversations with Hasan feeling bad about his community's treatment of him. Destiny explains that he has recently attempted to "flip" this mindset, and look at how Hasan's community treats himself after their conversations. Destiny notes that Hasan and his community have levied almost every criticism towards himself that Destiny has ever received from individuals on the right he has debated. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/oCsvkP_sVQw?t=307 5:07] Destiny reads a highly upvoted comment from Hasan's subreddit, and argues the contents are indistinguishable from a comment in a 4chan thread. | |||
== On stream appearances with Destiny WIP == | == On stream appearances with Destiny WIP == | ||
Line 37: | Line 157: | ||
=== Destiny has a pre-debate discussion with Hasan === | === Destiny has a pre-debate discussion with Hasan === | ||
{{#ev:youtube|https://youtu.be/r9iPLU3fAFA|300px|right| '''The Most Oppressed Group - Pre-debate Debate with Hasan Piker'''}} | {{#ev:youtube|https://youtu.be/r9iPLU3fAFA|300px|right| '''The Most Oppressed Group - Pre-debate Debate with Hasan Piker'''}} | ||
On October 9th, 2018 [[Destiny]] engaged in a "pre-debate debate" with Hasan. This discussion was held in preparation for a future [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicon politicon] appearance Hasan would have with [[Charlie Kirk]]. <ref> The Most Oppressed Group - Pre-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (October 9, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 29, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9iPLU3fAFA </ref> Hasan begins the conversation cordially, praising Destiny for being "awesome," citing his "excellent" content, and expressing that he "really likes what he's about." From there, the two engage in a lighthearted conversation discussing topics such as Neoliberalism, Destiny's political and gaming background,the current political climate, and Hasan's upcoming debate with Charlie Kirk. Other topics discussed include, Destiny and Hasan's political perspectives, prior debate experiences with conservatives, and a disagreement Hasan had with Destiny regarding the successfulness of Donald Trump as a president. | On October 9th, 2018 [[Destiny]] engaged in a "pre-debate debate" with Hasan. This discussion was held in preparation for a future [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politicon politicon] appearance Hasan would have with [[Charlie Kirk]]. <ref> The Most Oppressed Group - Pre-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (October 9, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 29, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9iPLU3fAFA </ref> Hasan begins the conversation cordially, praising Destiny for being "awesome," citing his "excellent" content, and expressing that he "really likes what he's about." From there, the two engage in a lighthearted conversation discussing topics such as Neoliberalism, Destiny's political and gaming background, the current political climate, and Hasan's upcoming debate with Charlie Kirk. Other topics discussed include, Destiny and Hasan's political perspectives, prior debate experiences with conservatives, and a disagreement Hasan had with Destiny regarding the successfulness of Donald Trump as a president. | ||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
Line 115: | Line 235: | ||
On October 20, 2018 Destiny reacted to a Politicon panel featuring featuring Hasan and Charlie Kirk.<ref> POLITICON - DESTINY REACTS. (October 22, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 19, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uenf3uYDKBE </ref> The primary focus of the panel was: "Whether young people should be progressives, conservatives, or perhaps something else". Destiny was mildly impressed by certain aspects of Hasan's debate performance. He appreciated Hasan's ability to challenge and critique various points, particularly in the context of discussing systemic issues and the limitations of free-market solutions. He also recognized the difficulty Hasan faced in addressing complex topics such as healthcare, education, and wealth distribution, in the face of a practiced "Gish-Galloper" such as Charlie Kirk. He did however offer a few critiques: | On October 20, 2018 Destiny reacted to a Politicon panel featuring featuring Hasan and Charlie Kirk.<ref> POLITICON - DESTINY REACTS. (October 22, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 19, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uenf3uYDKBE </ref> The primary focus of the panel was: "Whether young people should be progressives, conservatives, or perhaps something else". Destiny was mildly impressed by certain aspects of Hasan's debate performance. He appreciated Hasan's ability to challenge and critique various points, particularly in the context of discussing systemic issues and the limitations of free-market solutions. He also recognized the difficulty Hasan faced in addressing complex topics such as healthcare, education, and wealth distribution, in the face of a practiced "Gish-Galloper" such as Charlie Kirk. He did however offer a few critiques: | ||
* Destiny suggested that Hasan could benefit from incorporating more 'scummy tactics' used in live debates | * Destiny suggested that Hasan could benefit from incorporating more 'scummy tactics' used in live debates. Destiny explains that tactics such as strategic interjections and rebuttals tailored to the format, especially facing an individual such as Charlie Kirk, would have seen immense results. | ||
* Destiny | * Destiny argued that Hasan could improve in how he handles the framing set by his opponents, particularly in redirecting or countering their narratives. | ||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
Line 130: | Line 250: | ||
* [https://youtu.be/uenf3uYDKBE?t=4448 1:14:08] After being pushed by Kirk, Hasan shares that he only makes $60,000 a year. Hasan's uncle, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenk_Uygur Cenk Uygur], proceeds to shout at Kirk from the crowd. | * [https://youtu.be/uenf3uYDKBE?t=4448 1:14:08] After being pushed by Kirk, Hasan shares that he only makes $60,000 a year. Hasan's uncle, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenk_Uygur Cenk Uygur], proceeds to shout at Kirk from the crowd. | ||
|} | |} | ||
==== Discussion with Hasan ==== | ==== Discussion with Hasan ==== | ||
{{#ev:youtube|https://https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4|300px|right| ''' Politicon 2018 - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker.'''}} | {{#ev:youtube|https://https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4|300px|right| ''' Politicon 2018 - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker.'''}} | ||
On October 21, 2018 Destiny and Hasan | On October 21, 2018 Destiny and Hasan engaged in a three and a half hour long discussion regarding Hasan's recent debate experience at Politicon. <ref> Politicon 2018 - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (October 24, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 19, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jRhGapcaK4 </ref> The conversation begins with Destiny explaining to Hasan that he did not necessarily dislike the points he attempted to convey to Kirk, but was critical of his attempts to get those points across. Hasan agreed with this sentiment, and pointed to Kirk's tactics of outright lying, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop Gish Galloping], moving the goalposts, and crafting messages for "applause breaks" as being very frustrating to deal with. Destiny sympathised with this, agreeing the debate tactics employed by Kirk are very hard to deal with in real time, particularly in a live format. From there, the two discussed tactics Hasan could have employed better in the debate, their grievances with modern day conservatives, and the best methods in reaching out to a broader audience. | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
Line 140: | Line 261: | ||
'''Dealing with Gish Galloping''' | '''Dealing with Gish Galloping''' | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=619 10:19] : Destiny tells Hasan the best way to counter a debate opponent Gish Galloping, particularly in a live format, is to pose them questions at the end which every member of the audience would be able to identify with. Destiny goes on to provide the example of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders Bernie Sanders] hammering home the same three talking points (1% getting richer, jobs suck, lack of affordability of healthcare). Destiny then pointedly suggests | [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=619 10:19] : Destiny tells Hasan the best way to counter a debate opponent Gish Galloping, particularly in a live format, is to pose them questions at the end which every member of the audience would be able to identify with. Destiny goes on to provide the example of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders Bernie Sanders] hammering home the same three talking points (1% getting richer, jobs suck, lack of affordability of healthcare). Destiny then pointedly suggests Hasan could have posed questions like this on the back end of every one of Kirk's monologues, and Kirk would come out looking worse for it. | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
'''Holding Opponents Accountable''' | '''Holding Opponents Accountable''' | ||
Line 152: | Line 273: | ||
'''Handling leading questions in a debate''' | '''Handling leading questions in a debate''' | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=6131 1:42:1]: Destiny informs Hasan | [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=6131 1:42:1]: Destiny informs Hasan "whenever someone asks you a question, the reason why they're doing that is because they know what answer you're going to give, so they've already got the response prepared. Anytime you're in a debate with somebody, if they ask you a question that seems very obvious...you have to know that if you answer... they're ready to go into it." | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
'''Neoliberalism''' | '''Neoliberalism''' | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
[https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=8367 2:19:27]: Hasan and Destiny discuss Neoliberalism. Hasan states Neoliberalism has a more "hawkish" perspective, and fails to acknowledge the failures of free market. Destiny cautions Hasan against this perspective, and jokingly suggests he already has seven Neoliberals already typing him up emails suggesting the contrary. Destiny states he has no strong stance one way or the other, but points out there are Neoliberals that seem okay and some that seem quite extreme. Hasan then jokingly suggests | [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=8367 2:19:27]: Hasan and Destiny discuss Neoliberalism. Hasan states Neoliberalism has a more "hawkish" perspective, and fails to acknowledge the failures of free market. Destiny cautions Hasan against this perspective, and jokingly suggests he already has seven Neoliberals already typing him up emails suggesting the contrary. Destiny states he has no strong stance one way or the other, but points out there are Neoliberals that seem okay and some that seem quite extreme. Hasan then jokingly suggests "Neoliberals love getting owned", and cautions Destiny against calling himself one. | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
'''Using Free-Market arguments against Conservatives''' | '''Using Free-Market arguments against Conservatives''' | ||
Line 190: | Line 311: | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=6131 1:42:1] Destiny informs Hasan that "whenever someone asks you a question, the reason why they're doing that is because they know what answer you're going to give, so they've already got the response prepared. Anytime you're in a debate with somebody, if they ask you a question that seems very obvious...you have to know that if you answer... they're ready to go into it." | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=6131 1:42:1] Destiny informs Hasan that "whenever someone asks you a question, the reason why they're doing that is because they know what answer you're going to give, so they've already got the response prepared. Anytime you're in a debate with somebody, if they ask you a question that seems very obvious...you have to know that if you answer... they're ready to go into it." | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=6985 1:56:25] Destiny points to Hasan how Kirk tends to end his points on very strong statements. | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=6985 1:56:25] Destiny points to Hasan how Kirk tends to end his points on very strong statements. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=7040 1:57:20] Hasan claims socialism is not his position, and | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=7040 1:57:20] Hasan claims socialism is not his position, and his counters to Kirk's points are rooted in Social Democracy. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=7894 2:11:34] Hasan exclaims | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=7894 2:11:34] Hasan exclaims he'd like to kill Charlie Kirk. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=8304 2:18:24] Destiny informs Hasan how schools receive funding. | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=8304 2:18:24] Destiny informs Hasan how schools receive funding. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=8367 2:19:27] Hasan and Destiny discuss Neoliberalism. | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=8367 2:19:27] Hasan and Destiny discuss Neoliberalism. | ||
Line 202: | Line 323: | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=10894 3:01:34] Hasan claims capitalism does not have an answer to artificial intelligence and automation. | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=10894 3:01:34] Hasan claims capitalism does not have an answer to artificial intelligence and automation. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=11273 3:07:53] Destiny provides a recommendation to Hasan relating to counterexamples. | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=11273 3:07:53] Destiny provides a recommendation to Hasan relating to counterexamples. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=11511 3:11:51] After exclaiming | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=11511 3:11:51] After exclaiming Kirk is a "fucking pussy', Hasan apologizes to any female viewers and makes a note on his stream of "no ableism in chat". | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=11919 3:18:39] Destiny provides Hasan the talking point "freedom means nothing without access". | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=11919 3:18:39] Destiny provides Hasan the talking point "freedom means nothing without access". | ||
* [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=12400 3:26:40] Hasan and Destiny discuss Kirk's company. | * [https://youtu.be/9jRhGapcaK4?t=12400 3:26:40] Hasan and Destiny discuss Kirk's company. | ||
Line 213: | Line 334: | ||
=== Hasan's Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate discussion with Hasan === | === Hasan's Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate discussion with Hasan === | ||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wtmabgQU8|300px|right| ''' Hasan’s Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker.'''}} | {{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wtmabgQU8|300px|right| ''' Hasan’s Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker.'''}} | ||
On November 2, 2018 Hasan engaged in a debate with esports journalist [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lewis_(journalist) Richard Lewis] regarding hot-button topics at the time. Topics included the Mainstream Media, Donald Trump, Shifting Demographics, and Obama Era Deportations. <ref>Richard Lewis Semantics Expert. (November 2, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1OXF6IEBFc </ref> The call concluded with Lewis describing Hasan as a "diet Destiny". | On November 2, 2018 Hasan engaged in a debate with esports journalist [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lewis_(journalist) Richard Lewis] regarding several hot-button topics at the time. Topics included the Mainstream Media, Donald Trump, Shifting Demographics, and Obama Era Deportations. <ref>Richard Lewis Semantics Expert. (November 2, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1OXF6IEBFc </ref> The call concluded with Lewis describing Hasan as a "diet Destiny". | ||
On November 6, 2018 Hasan and Destiny reacted to a vod of the debate together. <ref>Hasan’s Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (November 9, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wtmabgQU8 </ref> At the onset of the stream, the two experience several delays due to technical difficulties primarily attributed to synchronizing the audio of both the vods they are watching, low-volume, and Destiny hearing an echo from Hasan's stream(Hasan did not have headphones at the time). Destiny eventually decides that Hasan should simply watch his stream while he reacts to the vod, Hasan points out that Destiny's stream has a five-second delay, to which Destiny responds Hasan can just "scream" if he wants the video paused. Destiny immediately retracts this idea, and settles on just screensharing the video through discord(only after Destiny berates the chatter who suggested this alternative). From this point, Destiny's stream is left with the muffled audio of Hasan's debate with Richard Lewis, which the two react to for the remainder of the call. | On November 6, 2018 Hasan and Destiny reacted to a vod of the debate together. <ref>Hasan’s Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (November 9, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wtmabgQU8 </ref> At the onset of the stream, the two experience several delays due to technical difficulties primarily attributed to synchronizing the audio of both the vods they are watching, low-volume, and Destiny hearing an echo from Hasan's stream(Hasan did not have headphones at the time). Destiny eventually decides that Hasan should simply watch his stream while he reacts to the vod, Hasan points out that Destiny's stream has a five-second delay, to which Destiny responds Hasan can just "scream" if he wants the video paused. Destiny immediately retracts this idea, and settles on just screensharing the video through discord(only after Destiny berates the chatter who suggested this alternative). From this point, Destiny's stream is left with the muffled audio of Hasan's debate with Richard Lewis, which the two react to for the remainder of the call. | ||
Throughout the video, Destiny levies several critiques of Lewis at both a personal and argumentative level. Destiny calls "spineless" for his behavior following the [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/JonTron#Destiny_debates_JonTron_on_immigration_and_assimilation JonTron Debate], citing Lewis' claim that he had made Jontron appear racist through debate-tactics. Destiny also ridicules Lewis for being under the control of esports broadcaster, [https://lol.fandom.com/wiki/Thorin Thorin], describing him as being on a “little leash” held by the broadcaster whenever he forms an opinion. On an argumentative level, Destiny critiques Lewis's tendency to gish gallop Hasan at several points during the debate, disputes Lewis's views on American Exceptionalism in journalism, and criticizes the way figures like Lewis struggle when faced with facts which stand in direct opposition to their claims. While watching the video, Hasan observes that Lewis often claims their conversation is "not a debate" and uses this assertion to dodge pressure or clarification on issues. Hasan suggests that Lewis's likely only joined his stream for the sake of gaining clout from his stream, a point with which Destiny agrees. Destiny and Hasan went on to critique many of Lewis' defenses for Donald Trump, primarily relating to the hypocrisy of Conservatives when defending Republican figures and attacking Democratic ones, and the tendency of centrists like Lewis to use liberalism as a "convenient suit" to push any argument they may be in favor of. | Throughout the video, Destiny levies several critiques of Lewis at both a personal and argumentative level. Destiny calls Lewis "spineless" for his behavior following the [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/JonTron#Destiny_debates_JonTron_on_immigration_and_assimilation JonTron Debate], citing Lewis' claim that he had made Jontron appear racist through debate-tactics. Destiny also ridicules Lewis for being under the control of esports broadcaster, [https://lol.fandom.com/wiki/Thorin Thorin], describing him as being on a “little leash” held by the broadcaster whenever he forms an opinion. On an argumentative level, Destiny critiques Lewis's tendency to gish gallop Hasan at several points during the debate, disputes Lewis's views on American Exceptionalism in journalism, and criticizes the way figures like Lewis struggle when faced with facts which stand in direct opposition to their claims. While watching the video, Hasan observes that Lewis often claims their conversation is "not a debate" and uses this assertion to dodge pressure or clarification on issues. Hasan suggests that Lewis's likely only joined his stream for the sake of gaining clout from his stream, a point with which Destiny agrees. Destiny and Hasan went on to critique many of Lewis' defenses for Donald Trump, primarily relating to the hypocrisy of Conservatives when defending Republican figures and attacking Democratic ones, and the tendency of centrists like Lewis to use liberalism as a "convenient suit" to push any argument they may be in favor of. | ||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
Line 325: | Line 446: | ||
==== Talk with Hasan - McDonnald's employee kicking teenagers out ==== | ==== Talk with Hasan - McDonnald's employee kicking teenagers out ==== | ||
At one point during the stream, Hasan mentions that he saw Destiny's reaction to a situation involving a group of teens, whom after allegedly being threatened by a gunman in a McDonalds, were removed from the premises by a manager. Destiny, being on the side of the manager in this situation, had some disagreement with Hasan over this event. Destiny's primary contention being that the manager was in the right not to believe "teenagers walking around like a bunch of dumbasses", and that a McDonalds does not need to serve as a fortress against some "ar-15 shots". Hasan counters, and suggests that the manager should have exhibited "just a little care" for her fellow human beings. The two engage in a lighthearted debate for some time. <ref> Talk with Hasan - McDonnald’s employee kicking teenagers out. (Dec 3, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTpTLj4Lg9A </ref> | At one point during the stream, Hasan mentions that he saw Destiny's reaction to a situation involving a group of teens, whom after allegedly being threatened by a gunman in a McDonalds, were removed from the premises by a manager. Destiny, being on the side of the manager in this situation, had some disagreement with Hasan over this event. Destiny's primary contention being that the manager was in the right not to believe "teenagers walking around like a bunch of dumbasses", and that a McDonalds does not need to serve as a fortress against some "ar-15 shots". Hasan counters, and suggests that the manager should have exhibited "just a little care" for her fellow human beings. The two engage in a lighthearted debate for some time. <ref> Talk with Hasan - McDonnald’s employee kicking teenagers out. (Dec 3, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTpTLj4Lg9A </ref> | ||
<blockquote> | |||
"What if it was Nathan(at the McDonalds shouting for help)?" - Hasan | |||
"I don't care, fuck him dude... If Nathan is around there bullying some fucking dude.. Nathan what the fuck is wrong with you? Why are you screaming some dumbass shit?" -Destiny | "I don't care, fuck him dude... If Nathan is around there bullying some fucking dude.. Nathan what the fuck is wrong with you? Why are you screaming some dumbass shit?" -Destiny | ||
</blockquote> | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
! colspan="2" | Debate Highlights | ! colspan="2" | Debate Highlights | ||
Line 375: | Line 497: | ||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RAZHElDZL8 |300px|right| '''Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa'''}} | {{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RAZHElDZL8 |300px|right| '''Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa'''}} | ||
[[File:HasanMrDeadMothAbuse.png|300px|thumb|right|Destiny reviewing an image of injuries sustained by MrDeadMoth.]] | [[File:HasanMrDeadMothAbuse.png|300px|thumb|right|Destiny reviewing an image of injuries sustained by MrDeadMoth.]] | ||
On December 11, 2018 Destiny ,while driving his Nitrous Blue Ford Focus RS, has a heated conversation with his chat regarding a domestic abuse situation involving fortnite streamer [https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/mrdeadmoth MrDeadMoth] and his wife. During the conversation, Destiny asserts parents should never fight in front of their kids, maintains throwing items at | On December 11, 2018 Destiny ,while driving his Nitrous Blue Ford Focus RS, has a heated conversation with his chat regarding a domestic abuse situation involving fortnite streamer [https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/mrdeadmoth MrDeadMoth] and his wife. During the conversation, Destiny asserts parents should never fight in front of their kids, maintains throwing items at one’s partner(as the wife did in the scenario) still constitutes physical abuse, and repeatedly berates chatters whom suggest otherwise. <ref> https://livestreamfails.com/post/36043 </ref> <ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/a5bdn3/destinys_take_on_mrdeadmoths_abuse_clip/ </ref> | ||
On December 12, 2018 Destiny reviewed the domestic abuse case from his home-office, and was eventually joined by several other friends of the stream.<ref> Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa. (Dec 12, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RAZHElDZL8 </ref> Individuals in the video such as [[MrMouton]], Hasan, and [[WhiteNervosa]] had slightly varied focuses on the situation, but all came to the conclusion that MrDeadMoth bore the brunt of the blame and should not have physically retaliated against his wife's physical actions towards him.Destiny took the contrary position, stating that while MrDeadMoth physical response should not be excused, the wife's persistent approach, escalation, and starting of the physical altercation, should be viewed as provoking or exacerbating the situation. Destiny goes on to point out that the wife repeatedly engaged and re-engaged in confrontational behavior, which included throwing objects and verbal provocation, while MrDeadMoth attempted multiple times to deescalate the situation. | On December 12, 2018 Destiny reviewed the domestic abuse case from his home-office, and was eventually joined by several other friends of the stream.<ref> Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa. (Dec 12, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RAZHElDZL8 </ref> Individuals in the video such as [[MrMouton]], Hasan, and [[WhiteNervosa]] had slightly varied focuses on the situation, but all came to the conclusion that MrDeadMoth bore the brunt of the blame and should not have physically retaliated against his wife's physical actions towards him. Destiny took the contrary position, stating that while MrDeadMoth physical response should not be excused, the wife's persistent approach, escalation, and starting of the physical altercation, should be viewed as provoking or exacerbating the situation. Destiny goes on to point out that the wife repeatedly engaged and re-engaged in confrontational behavior, which included throwing objects and verbal provocation, while MrDeadMoth attempted multiple times to deescalate the situation. | ||
<blockquote>"I'm sorry.. anybody who defends the women here is a literal subhuman piece of shit... I don't even know how you can even begin to think that her actions here are remotely okay. She instigates every physical violence here, she starts every single time.. And is the guy right for slapping her? No he's not, but every single time he backs off, she keeps coming back, not to talk... but to be physically abusive over and over again... People are linking pictures in chat... of the guy.. this is aparantly pictures he has taken of abuse. I don't even need these, because it doesn't even matter... this video speaks for itself." | |||
:- Destiny [https://youtu.be/9RAZHElDZL8?t=1557 25:56]</blockquote> | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
Line 525: | Line 648: | ||
[[File:HasanVenezuelaCrying.png|400px|thumb|Right|A comment chiding Hasan for eating while debating Yiazmat on Venezuela's economic collapse and food scarcity.]] | [[File:HasanVenezuelaCrying.png|400px|thumb|Right|A comment chiding Hasan for eating while debating Yiazmat on Venezuela's economic collapse and food scarcity.]] | ||
On the same day Destiny and Hasan discussed PewDiePie, the pair had a conversation regarding whether the economic collapse of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela Venezuela] was a product of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism socialism]. | On the same day Destiny and Hasan discussed PewDiePie, the pair had a conversation regarding whether the economic collapse of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuela Venezuela] was a product of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism socialism]. | ||
<ref> Talking with a venezuelan about Venezuela ft. Hasanabi. (December 22, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 26, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDiS7WdrzQg </ref> The conversation was initially spurred on after a chatter, Yiazmat, asserted that Destiny had let Hasan claim the country's economic collapse had nothing to do with Socialism.<ref>https://rustlesearch.dev/surrounds?channel=Destinygg&date=2018-12-15T04%3A44%3A52.000Z&username=yiazmat </ref> Destiny responds that he had not seen any evidence linking socialism to Venezuela's collapse, and that it was more likely attributed to corruption prevalent throughout the government. Hasan also adds that the Venezuelan economy | <ref> Talking with a venezuelan about Venezuela ft. Hasanabi. (December 22, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 26, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDiS7WdrzQg </ref> The conversation was initially spurred on after a chatter, Yiazmat, asserted that Destiny had let Hasan claim the country's economic collapse had nothing to do with Socialism.<ref>https://rustlesearch.dev/surrounds?channel=Destinygg&date=2018-12-15T04%3A44%3A52.000Z&username=yiazmat </ref> Destiny responds that he had not seen any evidence linking socialism to Venezuela's collapse, and that it was more likely attributed to corruption prevalent throughout the government. Hasan also adds that the collapse could be attributed to the Venezuelan economy being heavily privatized, and provides Scandinavian nations as examples of socialism being successful in practice. | ||
Shortly after Destiny and Hasan's initial remarks, Yiazmat requests to join the call, and is eventually admitted into the discord room. Yiazmat, appearing to be quite emotional, makes his hatred for the Venezuelan government clear and goes on to reassert his position that Hasan is incorrect regarding his claim that "socialism has nothing to do with what happened" to the country. Yiazmat then points to several of the country's industries becoming [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization nationalized], and the institution of various [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls#:~:text=Price%20controls%20are%20restrictions%20set,and%20services%20in%20a%20market. price controls]. Destiny posits that Venezuela has been engaging in this nationalizing for quite some time, to which Yiazmat counters that the country had not engaged in such practices before [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez Chávez]. Yiazmat goes on to cite the "real socialism" undergone in Venezuela(aka seizing the means of production) as the primary cause for the country's strife, and criticizes Hasan previous attempts at comparing Scandinavian countries to Venezuela. | Shortly after Destiny and Hasan's initial remarks, Yiazmat requests to join the call, and is eventually admitted into the discord room. Yiazmat, appearing to be quite emotional, makes his hatred for the Venezuelan government clear and goes on to reassert his position that Hasan is incorrect regarding his claim that "socialism has nothing to do with what happened" to the country. Yiazmat then points to several of the country's industries becoming [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization nationalized], and the institution of various [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_controls#:~:text=Price%20controls%20are%20restrictions%20set,and%20services%20in%20a%20market. price controls]. Destiny posits that Venezuela has been engaging in this nationalizing for quite some time, to which Yiazmat counters that the country had not engaged in such practices before [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez Chávez]. Yiazmat goes on to cite the "real socialism" undergone in Venezuela(aka seizing the means of production) as the primary cause for the country's strife, and criticizes Hasan previous attempts at comparing Scandinavian countries to Venezuela. | ||
The conversation veers off into a semantic discussion on what constitutes "true socialism". Throughout the conversation, Yiazmat maintains that the nationalization of several key industries, and instituting of various price controls, is more than enough evidence of socialism occuring. While Hasan disagrees, asserting the problem was due in part to poor leadership, and imperialism from countries like the United States. Hasan would routinely attempt to point to other countries which have engaged in similar activities as Venezuela, and have not experienced economic collapse. Destiny also maintains that the collapse of the country was not a result of socialism, however he primarily asserts price-controls and poor economic policy were the primary cause for the country's downward spiral. Despite initially debating with Yiazmat, Destiny acted as a moderator for the two other individuals in the call, ensuring certain claims(i.e. causes of food shortages in Venezuela) were fact checked in real time and no fallacious arguments were made by either side. | The conversation veers off into a semantic discussion on what constitutes "true socialism". Throughout the conversation, Yiazmat maintains that the nationalization of several key industries, and instituting of various price controls, is more than enough evidence of socialism occuring. While Hasan disagrees, asserting the problem was due in part to poor leadership, and imperialism from countries like the United States. During the conversation, Hasan would routinely attempt to point to other countries which have engaged in similar activities as Venezuela, and have not experienced economic collapse. Destiny also maintains that the collapse of the country was not a result of socialism, however he primarily asserts price-controls and poor economic policy were the primary cause for the country's downward spiral. Despite initially debating with Yiazmat, Destiny acted as a moderator for the two other individuals in the call, ensuring certain claims(i.e. causes of food shortages in Venezuela) were fact checked in real time and no fallacious arguments were made by either side. | ||
<blockquote> Hasan(voice muffled with food): "Okay... printing money is something the United States does almost all the fucking time...and the reason why they did it, is so that poor people also had access to food." <br> | |||
Destiny: "Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait... chill okay... so your currency is backed by the strength of your economy... when the United States prints currency to cover its own debt, that printing is not done as a crisis play in order to save our economy, the United States does not print money in crisis to save our economy. Even the 2007 downturn was not like an extreme crisis where we had to save ourselves, in the same way that in Venezuela, there are people standing in line for like hours to buy fucking toilet paper... When Venezuela was printing money, they were doing it to literally bail themselves out of a fucked situation, but they did not have the same strength of their economy , so their bond ratings went to shit as a result of this bad monetary policy. Whereas in the US, we can print money, and that's fine, it's backed by our economy, Venezuela did not have the(same) economy." [https://youtu.be/NDiS7WdrzQg?t=847 14:10] | Destiny: "Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait... chill okay... so your currency is backed by the strength of your economy... when the United States prints currency to cover its own debt, that printing is not done as a crisis play in order to save our economy, the United States does not print money in crisis to save our economy. Even the 2007 downturn was not like an extreme crisis where we had to save ourselves, in the same way that in Venezuela, there are people standing in line for like hours to buy fucking toilet paper... When Venezuela was printing money, they were doing it to literally bail themselves out of a fucked situation, but they did not have the same strength of their economy , so their bond ratings went to shit as a result of this bad monetary policy. Whereas in the US, we can print money, and that's fine, it's backed by our economy, Venezuela did not have the(same) economy." | ||
:-[https://youtu.be/NDiS7WdrzQg?t=847 14:10] </blockquote> | |||
Following the initial dispute, the conversation becomes more personal after Destiny inquires what Yiazmat's day-to-day life is like. Yiazmat becomes quite emotional during this segment, as he describes his parents' life-savings being stripped from them by the government. Following Yiazmat's emotionally charged retelling of his family history, Hasan is seemingly more hesitant to press Yiazmat on the issue any further, and the conversation eventually concludes. | Following the initial dispute, the conversation becomes more personal after Destiny inquires what Yiazmat's day-to-day life is like. Yiazmat becomes quite emotional during this segment, as he describes his parents' life-savings being stripped from them by the government. Following Yiazmat's emotionally charged retelling of his family history, Hasan is seemingly more hesitant to press Yiazmat on the issue any further, and the conversation eventually concludes. | ||
Line 623: | Line 747: | ||
* [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=396 6:36] Destiny grabs Hasan's chest. | * [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=396 6:36] Destiny grabs Hasan's chest. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=418 6:58] Destiny states he has empirical data on the best joke ever. | * [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=418 6:58] Destiny states he has empirical data on the best joke ever. | ||
<blockquote>"So all of a sudden, a friend is out hunting with another friend, and they call 9-1-1. And he says: My friend is on the ground as he's in distress. And the 9-1-1 caller says: Okay, well what's wrong? And the guy says: I think he's dead. And then the first thing she says is: You need to make sure that he's dead first. And there's a long silence and then a gunshot. And the guy is like: okay now what?" | |||
:-The empirically funniest joke ever according to a very drunk Destiny.</blockquote> | |||
* [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=453 7:33] After Destiny attempts to grab Hasan's chest once more, Hasan tells him to stop. Destiny then asks why Hasan is being homophobic. | * [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=453 7:33] After Destiny attempts to grab Hasan's chest once more, Hasan tells him to stop. Destiny then asks why Hasan is being homophobic. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=511 8:31] Destiny gives Andy $200, and tells him to leave the rest as a tip. | * [https://youtu.be/22L8ynUNxsc?t=511 8:31] Destiny gives Andy $200, and tells him to leave the rest as a tip. | ||
Line 677: | Line 802: | ||
On January 7, 2019 Hasan and Destiny debated the ethicacy of reporting on breaking news and the roles of journalists and commentators in shaping public perception. <ref> I F#%*ING HATE BREAKING NEWS FT. HASAN PIKER. (Jan 9, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 22, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FcDO7jYQQ8 </ref> This was among one of the first major on-stream disagreements the two would have, and was met with an overwhelmingly negative response from youtube comments(primarily criticising Hasan).<ref name="BreakingNewsComments"> [[Media:HasanBreakingNewsComments.png]]</ref> | On January 7, 2019 Hasan and Destiny debated the ethicacy of reporting on breaking news and the roles of journalists and commentators in shaping public perception. <ref> I F#%*ING HATE BREAKING NEWS FT. HASAN PIKER. (Jan 9, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 22, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FcDO7jYQQ8 </ref> This was among one of the first major on-stream disagreements the two would have, and was met with an overwhelmingly negative response from youtube comments(primarily criticising Hasan).<ref name="BreakingNewsComments"> [[Media:HasanBreakingNewsComments.png]]</ref> | ||
The conversation begins with a discussion on right-wing political commentator [[NuanceBro]], and a video he had made in response to Hasan's coverage over the [https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/1/10/18175589/jazmine-barnes-shooting-houston-texas-race| death of Jazmine Barnes] being a potential hate crime. Hasan goes on to describe how the eventual revelation that the shooting was in fact gang-related(and not a hate crime), resulted in his channel being brigaded by individuals accusing | The conversation begins with a discussion on right-wing political commentator [[NuanceBro]], and a video he had made in response to Hasan's coverage over the [https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/1/10/18175589/jazmine-barnes-shooting-houston-texas-race| death of Jazmine Barnes] being a potential hate crime. Hasan goes on to describe how the eventual revelation that the shooting was in fact gang-related(and not a hate crime), resulted in his channel being brigaded by individuals accusing him of "race-baiting" and condemnations because he did not wait for more information to come out. Hasan informs Destiny that he felt this criticism was unfair, arguing that he was merely parroting what major news sources at the time were stating. Destiny took issue with Hasan's perspective, and argued Hasan was irresponsible with his covering of the shooting, asserting he should have waited for all information relating to the event to be released. Moreover, Destiny argued that Hasan should have avoided constructing a narrative around hate crimes, pointing to the hypocrisy Hasan would show if a right-leaning commentator speculated about Arabs following a bombing. | ||
<blockquote>"Here's my position on this...There's literally absolutely never ever ever ever...This is why I hate breaking news... There's never any value that comes out of covering these types of things, before all the information is released... Knowing about it a day or two or whatever earlier, it never gives you anything better, and there's so much potential harm that can come from doing it early, that's why I just try to avoid making any comment" | |||
:- Destiny [https://youtu.be/0FcDO7jYQQ8?t=269 4:32]</blockquote> | |||
By the conversation's end, Hasan conceded that framing a racial narrative around the shooting so early was irresponsible. However, he maintained that his job is to "opine", insisting he was justified in reporting on the story with the available facts at the time. | By the conversation's end, Hasan conceded that framing a racial narrative around the shooting so early was irresponsible. However, he maintained that his job is to "opine", insisting he was justified in reporting on the story with the available facts at the time. | ||
Line 757: | Line 883: | ||
On January 29, 2019, Hasan and Destiny <s> went on a romantic stroll</s> IRL streamed at a mall. <ref> I DIDN’T KNOW I GRABBED THE MAGNUM XXXL’S. (Jan 29, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4V1zrh0W4A </ref> | On January 29, 2019, Hasan and Destiny <s> went on a romantic stroll</s> IRL streamed at a mall. <ref> I DIDN’T KNOW I GRABBED THE MAGNUM XXXL’S. (Jan 29, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4V1zrh0W4A </ref> | ||
=== Destiny, Hasan, Vaush, and RemTheBathBoi debate the necessity of philosophical "grounding". The phrase "morally lucky" is coined | === Destiny, Hasan, Vaush, and RemTheBathBoi debate the necessity of philosophical "grounding". The phrase "morally lucky" is coined === | ||
<blockquote>"Someone is morally lucky when they arrive at the correct position without any sort of critical thinking as to why it is correct." | |||
:- Rem in a [https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cbfh6y/rem_what_i_mean_by_moral_luck_with_regards_to/ reddit post] following the conversation<ref>https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cbfh6y/rem_what_i_mean_by_moral_luck_with_regards_to/ </ref></blockquote> | |||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjszEJBKWRs|300px|right| '''Streamer Drama ft. Hasanabi, Vaush, Marty & RemTheBathBoi'''}} | {{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjszEJBKWRs|300px|right| '''Streamer Drama ft. Hasanabi, Vaush, Marty & RemTheBathBoi'''}} | ||
On March 23, 2019 Hasan, [[Rem]], [[Vaush]], and Destiny engaged in a heated discussion on the necessity of a foundational philosophical understanding for those engaging in political advocacy.<ref> Streamer Drama ft. Hasanabi, Vaush, Marty & RemTheBathBoi. (Mar 23, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 3, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjszEJBKWRs </ref> In the discussion, Rem argued that political pundits have a responsibility to ensure their arguments are philosophically grounded. Rem asserts that individuals who do not do so, run the risk of "lucking" into their positions through life-experiences(Rem provided Hasan and Vaush as examples). Shortly after Rem makes this statement, an irate Hasan and a bewildered Vaush join the conversation and proceed to have a very tense confrontation with Rem. | On March 23, 2019 Hasan, [[Rem]], [[Vaush]], [[Marty]], and Destiny engaged in a heated discussion on the necessity of a foundational philosophical understanding for those engaging in political advocacy.<ref> Streamer Drama ft. Hasanabi, Vaush, Marty & RemTheBathBoi. (Mar 23, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 3, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjszEJBKWRs </ref> In the discussion, Rem argued that political pundits, especially those with large audiences, have a responsibility to ensure their arguments are philosophically grounded. Rem asserts that individuals who do not do so, run the risk of "lucking" into their positions through life-experiences(Rem provided Hasan and Vaush as examples). Shortly after Rem makes this statement, an irate Hasan(seemingly under the belief Rem is trying to "clout farm") and a bewildered Vaush(seemingly hurt by Rem's comments) join the conversation and proceed to have a very tense confrontation with Rem. During the debate, Hasan and Vaush argued Rem’s position is unrealistic, particularly in the context of the fast-paced and often "surface-level" nature of online discourse. | ||
Hasan stayed in the call for around two hours before needing to leave for bed. Prior to his departure, Hasan posited the following question to Rem: "How much analytical philosophy did [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr. Martin Luther King] engage in before he decided to do advocacy?" Rem argued this was the worst possible example Hasan could have given, as MLK was a very well read student of philosophy and even wrote [https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/exposition-first-triad-categories-hegelian-logic-being-non-being-becoming a paper] on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Wilhelm_Friedrich_Hegel Hegel] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophy continental philosophy]. Vaush left the call shortly following Hasan's departure, seemingly frustrated with attempting to engage with Rem and his position. | |||
After Hasan and Vaush's exit, Destiny held an hour-long discussion with Rem and Marty to explore ways the conversation could have been more productive. He argued that one side had to "rise above" the other and suggested that the heated way Hasan and Vaush joined the call, combined with Rem's difficulty in clearly conveying his message, contributed to making the conversation unproductive. While Destiny didn't fully express his opinion on "moral luck" until Vaush and Hasan left, he emphasized that Rem held the correct stance in the conversation. He argued that individuals with large audiences should at least possess his own level of philosophical knowledge before advocating for their positions, citing his personal experience in debating individuals who failed to provide adequate arguments against incest. | |||
Rem coined the phrase "morally lucky" during the debate to criticize Hasan, defining it as a situation where an individual arrives at a position without engaging in any "philosophical grounding" as to why the position is correct. The term became so pervasive within the broader DGG community, references to it can be seen [https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/search/?q=morally+lucky&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new to this day]. | Rem coined the phrase [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Moral_Luck "morally lucky"] during the debate to criticize Hasan and Vaush, defining it as a situation where an individual arrives at a position without engaging in any "philosophical grounding" as to why the position is correct, and may not truly be advocating for the "most correct" positions. The term became so pervasive within the broader DGG community, references to it can be seen [https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/search/?q=morally+lucky&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new to this day]. | ||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
! colspan="2" | | ! colspan="2" | Play by play | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Line 812: | Line 941: | ||
"When somebody says something like "I believe in the superiority of the white race over black people. I can make these like vague understanding things like 'I believe all people should be treated equally..' or by having a little bit of an understanding of the underlying arguments, I can turn the argument on them and I can say something like 'okay, well you think that white people's lives should be valued more than black people's... what if I were to make that argument more extreme and say white people with brown eyes instead of white people with blue eyes' and then I could turn that onto them and force them to answer the question. I think having a slightly better understanding of deeper principles can enable you to understand an opponent's argument better and dig a little deeper and them kind of turn it around on them. I don't think i'd be able to do that if I hadn't spent a little time engaging with some ideas." - Destiny | "When somebody says something like "I believe in the superiority of the white race over black people. I can make these like vague understanding things like 'I believe all people should be treated equally..' or by having a little bit of an understanding of the underlying arguments, I can turn the argument on them and I can say something like 'okay, well you think that white people's lives should be valued more than black people's... what if I were to make that argument more extreme and say white people with brown eyes instead of white people with blue eyes' and then I could turn that onto them and force them to answer the question. I think having a slightly better understanding of deeper principles can enable you to understand an opponent's argument better and dig a little deeper and them kind of turn it around on them. I don't think i'd be able to do that if I hadn't spent a little time engaging with some ideas." - Destiny | ||
Hasan retorts that this is allegedly not enough according to Rem's framework, and that Destiny would be required to be able to justify morally that black people have agency before he can argue on behalf of black people. Rem agrees, and argues that this is not a difficult thing to do, to which Vaush assets such a position is not pragmatic for people engaging in actual political advocacy/debates. | Hasan retorts that this is allegedly not enough according to Rem's framework, and that Destiny would be required to be able to justify morally that black people have agency before he can argue on behalf of black people. Rem agrees, and argues that this is not a difficult thing to do, to which Vaush assets such a position is not pragmatic for people engaging in actual political advocacy/debates. Rem then asserts that while the average person should not reasonably be expected to bear this responsibility, individuals advocating for political positions, especially on public platforms, should be be expected to put in the "philosophical work" to ensure their position is the correct one. Vaush mockingly suggests that Rem is advocating for people to pursue philosophy before joining in political advocacy, to which Rem reiterates that is not his belief. | ||
Vaush argues his perspective as a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_utilitarianism "rule utilitarian"], that even if he has not fully "solved" the philosophical implications of what he believes in, he could make the argument that people could broadly lead better lives under his system than under the system of fascists. Vaush goes on to argue he has a utilitarian obligation to engage in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praxis_(process) praxis] against their values. Rem replies, in the case of right-winger, Vaush does have the moral justification to argue his position, given most ethical systems are incompatible with right-leaning positions. He caveats that his primary argument centers around the distinction between an individual who considers themself to be a communist versus a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Rawls Rawlsian] liberal. | |||
Rem's train of thought is then interrupted by a "deez nuts" joke from MrMouton, at which point Hasan takes the time mto thank Rem for making him seem more entertaining by comparison. Vaush replies that this remark was rude, and Rem replies that such a personal attack indicates that Hasan is incapable of defending his own position. From this point the two engage in a very heated personal(and unproductive) argument. | |||
"Hasan literally almost everything you've said in this discussion so far, has just been a personal attack, and you've not actually engaged with me on any sort of level". -Rem | |||
Hasan then accuses Rem of gaslighting, and calls-back to a time where he believes Rem referred to himself as "morally-inconsistent". Rem denies ever saying such a thing, and Destiny attempts to steer the conversation back on track shortly after by restating Rem's argument with an analogy: | |||
"Let's say we want to take a car trip... and the best vehicle we can take is a nice blue car, it gets really good miles per gallon. Now, let's say you have a really advanced driver, and he says 'I know that this car is good, because it has very good miles per gallon, so we're gonna use that car to go on the road trip.' What Rem is saying, is that you don't know enough about cars, to know that the reason why you're driving that blue car is because it gets a lot of miles per gallon. So what could happen is, another shiny blue car could drive by, like an alt-right blue car, and you might wanna drive that car instead even if it gets shity miles per gallon, because you don't understand why you were ever driving the original blue car."- Destiny explaining Rem's argument with an analogy. | |||
Hasan attempts to engage with the analogy, and argues that if he looks at the history of the alt-right blue car in this scenario, and finds that it has killed several individuals, he could make an informed decision without needing to understand the underlying mechanics of the car. Rem takes issue with this, and argues that if Hasan's intention is to "sell the fucking car", he needs to understand the underlying mechanisms behind the product. Vaush chimes in and states the analogy has been broken down to uselessness, he argues that when individuals in his position engage in political advocacy, they are making some "basic points" and hoping people "pick the fuck up" on it. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1936 32:16] Shortly after Vaush claims that he is "grounded", Rem asks what his grounding is. Vaush responds that he has an "axiomatic foundation of wanting to maximize happiness for as many people as possible." Rem mocks Vaush for "presupposing a random thing" that he refuses to justify, to which Vaush argues that most of philosophy is built on "unjustified presupposed axioms". Rem then derides Destiny for "bringing on a new generation of axiomatists", and Vaush pointedly asks Rem to prove to him that it is the right thing to maximize happiness for the maximum amount of people." Rem responds that he doesn't necessarily believe that, decides to play Devil's advocate, and claims he holds an axiom that he wants to cause the most harm to everyone. From this point, Vaush becomes increasingly irate with Rem. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2047 34:07] Vaush asks Rem what the political value of attempting to objectively determine the ideal mode of values that one needs to engage in political advocacy is. Vaush goes on to argue that pundits in his position make the best arguments they can, and every individual regardless of how solid their argument, will enact force/violence against the individuals they disagree with. Vaush concludes that politics is violence. Rem writes this entire argument off as pure "rhetoric", and steers the conversation back to the discussion on axioms. Rem proceeds to argue that because Vaush seemingly choosing an axiom at random, if he were to debate against an individual with a different axiom, he would be unable to have a conversation. Rem then explains [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normative_ethics Normative Ethics] to Vaush, a philosophical topic centered around the debate of moral axioms. Shortly after, Rem mockingly suggests that Vaush would have known this if he read more philosophical theory. | |||
After a brief moment where Vaush, Rem and Hasan shout at one another in unison, Destiny attempts to explain Vaush's position to Rem. He explains that Vaush would argue someone like Donald Trump would not be able to ground out his positions morally, let alone define what the word "normative" means, despite being in a position of utmost political power. Rem retorts that he was making a philosophical argument and not a political one. To which Destiny responds Vaush and Hasan are more interested in political discourse than philosophical discourse. Rem then responds that while Vaush and Hasan would be able to have a political perspective, they would be unable to have a "justifiable" one without rooting it in a moral framework. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2210 36:50] Vaush proceeds to argue that while he respects Rem's intelligence, and is admittedly "very triggered" at the moment, any argument Rem is making regarding philosophy and leftists would be laughed at from those on the right. Rem counters that he had not even hinted at such an argument. Vaush continues his argument irregardless, and asserts that if leftists were to attempt to live up to Rem's standards there would be very few available to combat right-leaning thought. | |||
''' Vaush believes people who don't share his political beliefs should be killed ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2377 39:37] Rem points out that Vaush believes "we should kill people who don't share his political beliefs. Rem goes on to describe this as a very drastic position, and argues that one who holds such a radical belief should be able to morally back it up. He goes on to deride Vaush for being incapable of morally backing such a position, and his persistent refusal in acknowledging his lack of a moral position. | |||
In response, Vaush argues that he "operates in pragmatism", and points to an example of somebody who believes in "genocidal [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism nihilism]". He asserts an individual who engages in such a belief, is far beyond having a "sit-down" conversation. He goes on to argue that the proper way to deal with such an individual who holds such a belief is to "jail or kill them." Following this explanation, Rem states Vaush's position makes more sense, but caveats the way his position was stated makes it appear as though there is no possible discourse one could have with Vaush if they share a different ethical axiom. Vaush counters, arguing once more that Rem's position is impractical. | |||
Vaush goes on to state that while it may be possible to "hash out" different value systems in a neutral way, he does not believe it is practical for the average human being, and concludes that it should not be relevant for the "political process". Rem responds that his position would be more relevant to individuals with larger audiences. He points to an example of an individual "going to a picket-line", not necessarily needing a moral framework to engage in such an activity. He juxtaposes this against someone someone like Destiny, someone who's political messages have been heard by millions of individuals, and argues that Destiny must make it his priority to ensure his positions are the absolute correct ones. Rem concludes that the goal of politics is to advocate for the most correct, and true positions. Destiny disagrees with this conclusion. | |||
''' Exskillsme joins ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2637 43:57] [[Exskillsme]] chimes in, arguing that Rem's position regarding individuals with different axioms being unable to have a discussion is incorrect. Rem denies ever saying such a thing, points out that he actually argued against this position, and informs Exskillsme that Vaush actually made this argument. Exskillsme then informs Vaush that they had previously had discussions despite the fact that both appeared to have differing axioms. Vaush counters, asserting Exskillsme engaged his value system with "flagrant dishonesty and no actual interest." | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2761 46:01] Exskillsme explains why he's somewhat in agreement with Rem, arguing that while a moral grounding should be prioritized for individuals with large audiences, these individuals do not necessarily need to "solve philosophy". Rem is satisfied with the answer, and agrees with Exskillsme position. Vaush, seemingly in disbelief that Rem and Exskillsme were able to come to an agreement so shortly, takes issue with this development. | |||
''' Hasan argues with Rem ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2907 48:17] Hasan and Vaush ask Rem what he "identifies" as on the political spectrum. Rem informs them that he identifies as a "democratic socialist". Hasan further probes, asking Rem if he believes in "seizing the means of production", and Marxist principles. Hasan then concludes that they both have similar political beliefs, and attempts to understand Rem's perspective better by asking why he and Vaush could have become alt-righters if they were not surrounded by other left-leaning individuals. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3032 50:32] After Hasan claims that one can ground themselves within an ethical system without "getting to the root of kantian philosophy", Rem asks Hasan what he thinks grounding is. Hasan avoids answering the question, and claims to have adopted Vaush's perspective of "maximizing happiness" fo the most amount of individuals. In response, Rem provides a hypothetical of an individual growing up in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Germany Nazi Germany]. He then describes how this individual's perception of "maximizing happiness" may be vastly different from Hasan or Vaush's own. Following an inadequate response from Hasan, Rem concludes Hasan is incapable of grounding out a "logical and true" moral framework. In response, Hasan claims to not care if his system is not the "most correct", and admits to be willing to change it should a perceivably better one come about. Rem then asserts this proves his own point, and that an alt-righter could say the exact same things and be just as justified as Hasan. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3317 55:17] Rem once again informs Hasan he is just as externally justified in his positions as an alt-righter. Hasan responds that he is justified as he wants the "least amount of harm". To which Rem once again asks Hasan to ground this position, and Hasan professes to being unsure how to do so, and asserts once more he just wants the least amount of harm done to the most people. Rem once again provides a hypothetical to support his position "How would you argue against me if I were an alt-righter and my core-ethical tenant was to kill all black people?" Hasan responds "That's a bad idea, I don't think black people want to be killed." Rem then informs Hasan this is not a proper justification for his position. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3429 57:09] The debate derails further, and Rem discusses his issues with Hasan insulting him at the start of the conversation. Insults thrown out include: "sleeper dipshit", "condescending mother fucker", "little dick", and "sleeper cocksucker". | |||
''' Vaush asks rem for a moral justification of left-leaning positions''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3547 59:07] Following a heated discussion between Hasan and Rem, Vaush pointedly asks Rem to morally justify his political position. Rem confesses he is unable to morally justify his position over a different left-leaning principle, and explains it is not necessary for him to do so given the fact he is not a political pundit. Hasan and Vaush proceed to mock Rem for some time as a result of this position, and criticize Rem for holding them to a standard he does not personally live by. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4069 1:07:49] Rem takes the "extreme position" and argues that there should be a higher bar set if one wishes to truly be "moral". Destiny takes issue with this argument and asserts that setting "too high of a bar" for oneself and those on "your side", then the other side will by nature have a much lower barrier to entry and be much more effective politically. | |||
''' Is Rem's position elitist?''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4120 1:08:40] Vaush and Hasan assert Rem's position is elitist, given it would require one to have at least a master's level engagement in philosophy to accomplish. Destiny steps in, and points out the current conversation is a "microcosm" of Rem's argument. Meaning while Rem's arguments may technically be stronger than that of Hasan or Vaush, if one were to poll the audience on the issue they would argue that Rem has lost the debate due to the more effective rhetoric employed by his opponents. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4495 1:14:55] Rem is pressured into providing a grounding for his position, before he can do so Vaush takes the opportunity to argue with Rem once more regarding holding him to a standard that Rem himself does not hold to. Vaush eventually asserts that it is not foundationally possible to justify an ethic axiom. Rem argues he can, to which Vaush essentially dares Rem to prove him wrong. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4670 1:17:50] Following several minutes of prodding, Vaush eventually decides to debate Rem regarding the subject of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meditations_on_First_Philosophy First Philosophy]. Before this debate can be had, Vaush throws out an olive branch to Rem, stating that while he likes Rem he'd like him to at least acknowledge there may be some pragmatic consequences to his position. Noticing that there are three people against him, Rem decides to bring in a friend to assist him. | |||
''' Stalled joins the call AKA Rem brings in the all-star philosophy team''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4985 1:23:05] Friend of the stream Stalled joins the call, and asks what the original argument being had was. Following Destiny's explanation of the arguments had up to this point, Stalled pointedly asks Rem what the "line" is for meeting his standard. Rem explains that a political pundit should be able to justify their ethical axiom in a way that is not completely incoherent, and argues that it is not that hard to accomplish. Vaush counters, arguing Rem admitted it would take himself three weeks to do so even with a degree in philosophy. | |||
''' Marty joins the call AKA Rem brings in the all-star philosophy team''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=5144 1:25:48] Marty joins the call, and Rem asks what his position is. Marty explains that while he does not understand the full breadth of the arguments being had, he asserts one needs "some sort" of background in ethics in order to make good judgments about things. Rem eventually pointedly asks Marty if someone in politics needs to be able to justify their "chosen ends" over another person's "ends". Marty responds he is determinate about this position, arguing that while some politicians will claim domain expertise on certain subjects, they more often than not do not know what they're talking about. He further argues that any individual going into politics will likely spend at least a year in preparation before formally "entering the arena", and could likely find the time to develop the background in ethics needed to justify a position philosophically. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=5348 1:29:08] Vaush chimes in, informing Marty that Rem argued pundits should be "forced" to undergo philosophical training before entering the political landscape. Marty responds with a hypothetical: "would you let a surgeon operate on you without any formal training?" To which Vaush responds that this is a false-equivalency. Marty counters, that the entire argument hinges on whether or not one should buy into the "level of professionalism" inhabited in political discourse. Marty goes on to argue that while there is not such a level of professionalism in modern political discourse, individuals like Rem argue that their ought to be. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=5448 1:30:48] Vaush provides the example of a trans-women "popping off" with their political youtube channel, and asks Marty if he feels this individual should be barred from speaking on their lived experience until they've put in the philosophical leg-work. Marty informs Vaush that he believes Vaush is misunderstanding his position. He goes on to explain that while this person can do what they want, it is not ideal that this individual is unable to formulate their position in some sort of normative ethics. Marty further explains that one could not have some "good working theory" without some background assumptions. | |||
Vaush argues once more that Rem has staked out an unreasonable position that would make it incredibly difficult for other individuals to advocate for political stances. Marty counters all one would need to understand ethics is the internet or a library card. Destiny informs Marty this position is not reasonable, and provides the hypothetical of disaffected minority with poor access to a reasonable library/internet. Marty argues this individual would have no basis for political advocacy to begin with, as they would not be readily read in any sort of areas to begin with. Destiny counters that unlike a doctor, technically every individual engages with philosophy throughout their lives, and one's political positions could be informed by their life's situations. Marty argues that Rem seems to be arguing that in order to do "good" philosophy/ethics, one needs to deliberate upon certain kinds of beliefs. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=5970 1:39:30] Marty provides a hypothetical: "Let's say you have an ethical demand, and I don't really have to meet that demand because I work 80 hours a week, do you think that that's a respectable answer?" Vaush argues that this should not be an ethical demand to begin with, to which Marty asks Vaush if he believes any ethical obligations/social constructs should exist. Marty further elaborates that he could universally apply the same criticism of "I work 80 hours a week, therefore I don't owe you anything" to even a basic understanding of the law. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6132 1:42:12] Vaush becomes very irate with Rem, accusing him of being a "rabble-rouser", argues there is no reason for him to let Rem talk except for entertainment purposes, asserts there is no justification for how unpragmatic Rem has been throughout the conversation, and accuses Rem of requiring a "doctoral level education in philosophy" before speaking about politics. Rem begins responding, but is cut short multiple times as individuals in the call ask Rem to speed up his response. Rem eventually makes the argument that an individual would arguably be more moral with a basic understanding of philosophy, during this time Rem mutes Vaush. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6571 1:49:31] Vuash argues one would require a huge amount of pre existing resources/privilege to be able to meet Rem's standard. Rem counters, arguing he has met several individuals from unprivileged backgrounds who have spent time engaging with philosophy. Hasan and Vaush are quick to write this off as superfluous anecdotal evidence, mock Rem for suggesting as such, and laugh as Rem attempts to finish his argument. Vaush provides his own anecdotal evidence, asserting that the small town he lives in has several people advocating for just political issues, yet would fail to meet Rem's standard. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6717 1:51:57] Hasan leaves the call, asks Rem how much analytical philosophy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr. Martin Luther King] engaged in before he decided to do advocacy. Rem argues that this is the worst example Hasan could have gave, as MLK was a very well read philosopher. Marty even points out that MLK wrote a paper on Hegel. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6779 1:52:59] Rem informs Vaush he was the worst person he has had to speak to regarding this topic. The conversation continues, and Vaush reiterates Rem's argument is unpragmatic, and an unfair standard to levy on any individuals attempting to engage in political advocacy. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6930 1:55:30] Rem and Vaush loop through their prior arguments for an extended period of time, the resulting conversation becomes increasingly more unproductive until Vaush leaves the call. This unproductive conversation is cut between Destiny, and Marty fruitlessy attempting to act as mediators between the two when possible. | |||
''' Vaush calls Rem privileged, Rem becomes irate and the conversation becomes even more unproductive ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=7179 1:59:39] Vaush refers to Rem as a "privileged hoity toity, big-brained white-boy" stepping into the political arena, and telling everyone to read philosophy. Before Vaush can continue his argument, Rem tells Vaush to "shut the fuck up", and informs Vaush he has no idea what his life struggles have been like. Rem goes on to detail his disability which hampered his ability to attend school. | |||
Stalled claims Rem was unclear that his position only referred to content creators with audiences, despite the fact that Rem said as much from the very beginning of the conversation. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=7472 2:04:32] Marty posits the question to vaush: Aught thought-leaders learn philosophy before engaging in political advocacy? Vaush argues they should not, and they could if they want to. Vaush then asks Rem exactly how many followers are required for a thought-leader to have before they are required to learn philosophy. Marty responds that the amount is "fuzzy". Destiny later steps in, asks Vaush to clarify what he means by the "vast majority of people being unable to meet Rem's standard". Destiny points out that he meets Rem standards, and he has a very base level of understanding philosophy. | |||
''' Destiny and Rem discuss ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=8176 2:16:16] Vaush leaves the call in frustration, Destiny takes this opportunity to explore Rem's position and see if he understands why his debate opponents felt so frustrated with his position. Rem correctly identifies that his opinions may have felt insulted when compared to alt-righters.Destiny agrees, and points out that Rem was also arguing on two fronts, a position that he didn't defend but sounded like he did, and a position that Vaush and Hasan continued to attack, but it sounded like he was defending. Destiny provides the examples of Rem arguing that a homeless individual could have met his standard, when his principle only applied to content creators with sizeable audiences. | |||
[https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=9741 2:42:11] Rem asks Destiny if he feels public figures should be well read enough(in philosophy) to justify their political positions. [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=10000 2:46:40] Destiny responds that he agrees, and that political figures aught to at least have his level of philosophical knowledge in order to advocate for political positions. Destiny goes on to point to individuals who had made dumb arguments in the past, i.e. regarding incest. | |||
|} | |} | ||
Line 839: | Line 1,066: | ||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1461 24:21] Vaush and Rem continue to argue for some time. | * [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1461 24:21] Vaush and Rem continue to argue for some time. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1491 24:51] Destiny chimes in with a hypothetical. | * [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1491 24:51] Destiny chimes in with a hypothetical. | ||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1634 27:09] Rem informs Hasan that he is not a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantianism "Kantian"]. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1681 28:01] MrMouton tricks Rem with a "deez nuts" joke. Rem loses his train of thought, and Hasan thanks Rem for drawing more "sleepers" than himself from the chat. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1750 29:10] Hasan and Rem have a fairly unproductive conversation for some time. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1808 30:08] Destiny attempts to restate Rem's argument for Hasan and Vaush. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=1936 32:16] Vaush argues that he is grounded, and Rem asks what his grounding is. From there, the two debate axioms. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2012 33:32] Vaush asserts that he believes violence is an ethical political tool for advancing narratives. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2103 35:03] Rem explains normative ethics, mocks vaush, and the conversation degrades further with all three participants shouting at one another. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2150 35:50] Destiny attempts to explain Vaush's position, further disagreements arise. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2286 38:06] Rem and Hasan fight, Destiny laughs in the background. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2341 39:01] Rem once again explains the value in morally grounding oneself, particularly to those on the left. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2437 40:37] Destiny googles how to trash items in Factorio. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2529 42:09] Vaush argues once more that Rem's position is impractical, and should not be relevant to modern political discourse. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2602 43:22] Exskillsme joins the call(on Rem's side). | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2689 44:44] Destiny asks his audience to "make the meme with the black guy and the white guy shaking hands." | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2761 46:01] Exskillsme explains why he agrees with Rem. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2838 47:18] Hasan asks Exskillsme if he believes individuals should "ground" themselves before taking on a political position, and Exskillsme agrees. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=2907 48:17] Rem informs Hasan and Vaush that he identifies as a "democratic socialist". Following this revelation, Hasan begins to contribute to the conversation | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3020 50:20] Hasan accuses Vaush and Hasan of being unable to ground out their systems in an ethics system. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3170 52:50] Hasan claims to not care if his system is not perfect, and is willing to adopt a new one if it appears to be better. Rem claims this "moral flexibility" proves his point, and that an alt-righter could be just as justified as Hasan should they follow this framework. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3285 54:45] Rem states he is not a Kantian. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3402 56:42] Rem provides his third nazi-germany/alt-righter hypothetical to support his position. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3429 57:09] Hasan states the reason he called Rem a "sleeper dipshit" is because Rem is a "condescending mother fucker". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3542 59:02] Vaush asks Rem how to justify a system from the ground up. Rem explains he is unable to do so, Vaush and Hasan mock rem for some time as a result of this position. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3883 1:04:43] Destiny googles how to make a bus in factorio. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=3919 1:05:19] Rem asks Vaush to provide the arguments for and against utilitarianism. Vaush and Hasan continue to mock Rem for holding up left-leaning individuals he does not hold himself nor right-leaning individuals to. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4538 1:16:38] Vaush argues Rem's position disenfranchises those without the means to engage in philosophy, to which Rem responds one could simply read a philosophy textbook to meet his standards. Vaush then argues that his ideal world would involve Rem being locked in an empty room where he could hear nothing echos of his own condensation until the end of time. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4607 1:16:47] Vaush asserts it is not possible to justify an ethical axiom. Rem argues he can, to which Vaush essentially informs Rem "no balls you won't". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=4892 1:21:32] Stalled joins the call. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=5144 1:25:48] Marty joins the call. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=5571 1:32:51] Marty argues the only thing one needs in order to understand ethics is the internet or a library card. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=5786 1:36:21] Rem argues a doctor operating on someone's life needs to be certain they are doing the "moral" thing. Destiny points out this stream is a cluster fuck. Rem goes on to assert that a lot of doctors trained in these areas, are actually able to justify their work. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6076 1:41:16] Hasan asserts that while he wishes everyone could have a foundational understanding in philosophy, he does not feel this position is pragmatic. During this time Vaush jokingly suggests philosophy departments should be defunded. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6316 1:45:16] Rem temporarily mutes Vaush. Rem reiterates his standard only applies to individuals with large audiences. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6717 1:51:57] Hasan leaves the call, asks Rem how much analytical philosophy [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King_Jr. Martin Luther King] engaged in before he decided to do advocacy. Rem argues that this is the worst example Hasan could have gave, as MLK was a very well read philosopher. Marty even points out that MLK wrote a paper on Hegel. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6779 1:52:59] Rem expresses his newfound dislike for Vaush. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6838 1:53:58] Vaush asks Rem exactly how much time and Money it would take for someone to meet his standard, Rem replies "$0". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=6930 1:55:30] Rem and Vaush loop through their prior arguments for an extended period of time, the resulting conversation becomes increasingly more unproductive until Vaush leaves the call. This unproductive conversation is cut between Destiny, Stalled, and Marty fruitlessy attempting to act as mediators between the two when possible. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=7179 1:59:39] Rem tells Vaush to "shut the fuck up", following accusing Rem of being privileged. Rem goes on to detail his disability which hampered his ability to attend school. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=7302 2:01:42] Despite Rem saying otherwise several times throughout the conversation, Stalled claims it was unclear that Rem was only referring to opinion leaders throughout the conversation. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=7325 2:02:05] Destiny does a meme. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=7472 2:04:32] Marty posits the question to vaush: Aught thought-leaders learn philosophy before engaging in political advocacy? Vaush argues they should not, and they could if they want to. Vaush then asks Rem exactly how many followers are required for a thought-leader to have before they are required to learn philosophy. Marty responds that the amount is "fuzzy". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=7902 2:11:42] Destiny steps in, asks Vaush to clarify what he means by the "vast majority of people being unable to meet Rem's standard". Destiny points out that he meets Rem standards, and he has a very base level of understanding philosophy. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=8176 2:16:16] Vaush leaves the conversation. Destiny asks Rem to verbalize why he feels Hasan was upset during the conversation. The conversation, becomes much more productive from here on out, and the two dissect the arguments formally presented for the remainder of the call. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=9741 2:42:11] Rem asks Destiny if he agrees with his position, Destiny responds that he does. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=10962 3:02:42] Marty asks Destiny if he believes the conversation could have been saved. Destiny responds it could have, but would have required one party to rise above the other in order to do things productively. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/AjszEJBKWRs?t=12949 3:35:49] Destiny says his goodbyes and ends his stream. | |||
|} | |||
=== Hasan and Destiny discuss Article 13 === | |||
On March 26, 2019 Destiny, Hasan and another individual engaged in a short conversation regarding [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_Copyright_in_the_Digital_Single_Market Article 13], an upcoming [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union European Union] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_(European_Union) directive].<ref>How will Article 13 change YouTube and Twitch? ft. Hasanabi. (Mar 30, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 9, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPtdhXmRgCo</ref> | |||
| |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Discussion Highlights | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
''' Destiny joins the call, asks what the main contention is ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo?t=219 3:39] Following being forwarded to this conversation by a chatter, Destiny eventually joins the call and asks what the primary contention between Hasan and the individual he is speaking with is. Hasan's debate opponent takes the opportunity to detail his position asserting that Article 13 will support small content creators more than it will hurt them. The individual continues, describing how while Twitch could potentially copy-strike every copyright infringement, doing so would be at a massive detriment of their platform and would likely not occur. Hasan takes issue with this position, asserting that while Twitch may not be doing so presently, the potential for such actions to take place in the future are still concerning. | |||
''' Does Article 13 have a "safe harbor" provision? ''' | |||
<br> | |||
Destiny describes how the American variant of Article 13 provides a "safe-harbor" provision, wherein companies are protected as long as they make a "good-faith" effort to protect against copyright infringement on their platforms. Hasan's debate opponent argues that such a provision is present in Article 13, while Hasan counters that it is not. | |||
Destiny once again details certain provisions within the American variant of Article 13, describing once again how companies must make a good faith effort to protect against copyright infringement, and that these companies have 24 hours to respond to takedown requests. Hasan's debate opponent argues such a provision exists, while Hasan once again counters it does not. | |||
''' Does Article 13 benefit small content creators? ''' | |||
<br> | |||
Destiny pointedly asks Hasan's debate opponent once more how the Article would benefit smaller content creators. Hasan's opponent responds that the article would propose a regulation to the "takedown" process, wherein the process would be regulated for both the content creator and the claimant. Destiny questions how it would be regulated, to which Hasan's opponent responds it would be dependent on technology available. Destiny reiterates that he is unsure how the ability to enforce copyright more strictly would benefit smaller content creators. | |||
|} | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Discussion timestamps | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
*[https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo 0:00] A chatter informs Destiny that an individual is fruitlessly attempting to explain a "simple concept" to Hasan. The chatter requests for Destiny's assistance in explaining the issue to Hasan. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo?t=164 2:44] Destiny requests for somebody to summarize Hasan's point, questioning why he claims only "smaller streams get fucked" by Article 13, when this Article would likely affect both parties. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo?t=219 3:39] Destiny joins the call. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo?t=456 7:37] The group discusses "safe-harbor" provisions. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo?t=604 10:04] A conversation on the true purpose of copyright is had, and questions once again how smaller creators would benefit from the new Article as Hasan's debate opponent described. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo?t=904 15:04] The group discusses how the "[https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adpocalypse Adpocalypse]" may be relevant to the situation. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/dPtdhXmRgCo?t=1247 20:47] The conversation concludes, and Destiny maintains that while he fails to see how the article would benefit smaller content creators(outside of niche false-copyright claims), he still vehemently dislikes copyright as a concept. | |||
|} | |} | ||
=== | === Destiny and Hasan debate Nick Fuentes and Sargon of Akkad on a political panel hosted by Trainwreckstv and Asmongold === | ||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= | {{disambiguation |Main Article: [[Trainwreckstv_political_panel| Trainwreckstv political panel]]}} | ||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XbT4UojaRw|300px|right| '''Destiny and Hasan debate Nick Fuentes and Sargon of Akkad on a political panel hosted by Trainwreckstv and Asmongold'''}} | |||
On April 6, 2019, Destiny, Hasan, [[Nick_Fuentes| Nick Fuentes]], and [[Sargon_of_Akkad| Sargon of Akkad]] participated in a several hour long political panel hosted by [[Trainwreckstv|Trainwrecks]], and [[Asmongold]].<ref> Trainwreckstv. (2019, April 6). SARGON OF AKKAD, TYT’s HASAN PIKER, DESTINY, NICK F, & co-host ASMONGOLD - POLITICAL PODCAST. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XbT4UojaRw </ref> Destiny and Hasan were selected to represent the "left" side of the political spectrum, while Fuentes and Sargon were selected to represent the "right". The panel primarily centered around three topics: A recent [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_personnel_in_the_United_States_military#:~:text=According%20to%20Politico%20and%20a,surgeries%20had%20hastened%20Trump's%20decision. transgender military ban], the [https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/dl Mueller Report], and the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings Christchurch mosque shootings]. | |||
While the topics discussed were quite narrow in scope initially, each subject inevitably segwayed or diverted into a tangentially related topic. Given that the "right-side" of the panel was fairly well-aligned on most issues, this allowed for Sargon and Fuentes to adequately defend one another's positions regarding transgenderism, Donald Trump, race realism, and immigration. By contract, the "left-side" of the panel was not as well-aligned on most issues, which worked to their detriment. Throughout the debate, Hasan routinely attempted to tie his arguments into either a critique on capitalism or a praise for socialism, which did not play well given Destiny's general disdain towards "lefties" at the time. Furthermore, this argumentative tactic employed by Hasan, contrasted against Destiny's attempts to engage in more relevant/substantive critiques on the topics discussed, inevitably caused the "left-wing" side of the debate to appear weaker in the face of the arguably more effective rhetoric provided by Fuentes and the "right-wing" side. Following the debate, several r/destiny subreddit users claimed the debate to be a "massive disaster", arguing Fuentes(an up and coming far-right content creator at the time), was essentially given a platform to freely espouse his views and garner more popularity.<ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/b9mahl/i_think_we_can_all_agree_that_this_was_a_massive/ </ref> | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Highlights | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=1324 22:04] Fuentes argues that he rejects the validity of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricism empiricism] over [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori a priori] rationale, elaborating that he believes his argument regarding women being disruptive towards men in the workplace is true due to "common sense". Destiny interjects and informs Fuentes that a priori and common sense are not the same thing. Fuentes proceeds to mock Hasan and Destiny for believing in people wearing lab coats as opposed to trusting their own intuition. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=2575 42:55] Sargon asserts American civilization does not exclude black people at all, due to the fact that they(Africans Americans) have been in America since the country's inception. Destiny interrupts Sargon and points to the absurdity of the statement, arguing that individuals who came to America as slaves probably felt fairly excluded from society. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=3606 1:00:06] Hasan claims Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice through the firing of former [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Bureau_of_Investigation FBI] director [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Comey James Comey]. Destiny appears to visibly cringe at this argument. Hasan goes on to argue that the investigation should have primarily focused on the interference by Russia into the US election through social media manipulation, and less on the collusion aspect with Donald Trump. Fuentes and Sargon appear to laugh at this line of argumentation. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=4563 1:16:03] Sargon attempts to provide evidence contrary to Destiny's belief that the majority of media is right-wing biased. Upon opening the link, Destiny sees that the top position on the "left-wing" list is held by late-night television host [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Kimmel Jimmy Kimmel]. Destiny and Hasan proceed to laugh off this evidence. Destiny eventually reads off his own list of influential youtube personalities, of which, the majority of positions are held by right-wing orientated channels. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=5241 1:27:21] Hasan asserts the only time he interupts Fuentes is when he genuinely wants to understand his perspective. To which Fuentes responds: "There's nothing genuine about you." | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=5593 1:33:13] While explaining capitalism as it relates to the perceived "left-wing" bias within media organizations, Destiny argues that individuals like Fuentes may think "the jews" control all media as an alternative explanation. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=6344 1:45:44] Destiny asks Sargon why he believes the prequel Star Wars movies were bad. Sargon states it's because George Lucas is an out of touch old boomer. Destiny then points to a flaw in Sargon's logic: He claims the prequels were bad because they stand on their own merit, buit the sequels were bad because of identity politics. Sargon goes on to argue that the sequel movies made no money and were eventually cancelled as a result. Hasan and Destiny then break out laughing, claiming Sargon just advocated for their own position. In response to Sargon claiming the Sequel Star Wars movies made no money as a result of their "woke-agenda", Destiny reads off the money earned by each movie. Destiny then points to a Sequel Star Wars film containing a white-male lead([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solo:_A_Star_Wars_Story Solo]), which made substantially less money than the aforementioned "woke" movies. Destiny then corrects Sargon and asserts the newest Star Wars movie was actually cancelled as a result of this movie performing poorly. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=6693 1:51:33] Destiny asks Fuentes if he believes it to be immoral to show interracial relationships in media. Fuentes responds he does not believe it to be immoral, however he does not want a "deliberate" social agenda pushed by media organizations, particularly in that direction. Asmongold asks Fuentes to clarify what he means by "that direction", to which Fuentes responds he does not believe interracial marriages should be promoted. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=8219 2:16:59] Sargon argues the only reason right-wing nationalism is up for debate, is because of the "cultural-commanance" of the left. Sargon goes on to assert that views held by those on the "radical-left" are just as horrific as those on the radical-right, yet are still platformed. Hasan rebukes his assertion, arguing that concepts such as "seizing the means of production", "redistributing wealth", and "universal healthcare", are not inherently violent and have worked in other countries unlike the conservative principles Sargon and Fuentes are advocating for. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=8449 2:20:49] Sargon once again argues that communism is inherently violent, Hasan takes issue but does not readily substantiate his disagreement. Destiny steps in and argues that while this is true, Capitalism has also had its fair share of violence. As the conversation continues Hasan eventually asserts the following: "The only example of systemic violence brought about by bringing communism into action, is nowhere near as bad as all of the death toll under capitalism. We talk about people dying in famines and what not under communist-dictatorship, seven million people every year die because they don't have access to fucking food... that is a consequence of the capitalist structure we exist under, and yet you never point the finger at that." | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=9608 2:40:08] Sargon refers to Hasan as a "fucking half-wit". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=9918 2:45:18] Destiny points to how despite left-wing rhetoric being equally as violent as right-wing rhetoric in some regards, it is arguably more justifiable and has not been born out in reality(with regards to mass shooting). Fuentes argues that left-wing individuals may just be "pussies" afraid to follow through on actions to the logical conclusion. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=10205 2:50:05] Hasan asserts the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States should be labled a genocide. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=10819 3:00:19] Following yet another communist debate sidetrack, the conversation is brought back to violence by right-leaning individuals. Sargon argues that the "prescription" against right-leaning individuals committing acts of violence is a cessation to the suppression of their voice. Destiny agrees, but caveats that bad-faith actors voices should remain excluded. Hasan chimes in, asserting that the true problem lies within the "profit-motive" of corporations, and the debate is once more sidetracked into a discussion on communism. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=12510 3:28:30] Destiny recommends that Sargon and Fuentes should publish articles with regards to differences in genetics since they have supposedly "solved" the debate surrounding the subject. | |||
|} | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Discussion timestamps | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
''' Intros ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=55 0:55] Trainwrecks starts the show and requests that the guests provide personal introductions of themselves and their political affiliations. Destiny goes first and describes himself as broadly progressive and economically neoliberal/social-democrat. Sargon goes next and describes himself as socially and fiscally liberal, and states capitalism is the best alternative presently available. Following Sargon comes Hasan, who describes himself as an anti-capitalist, stating he advocates for policies which may give ownership back to the workers. Fuentes is the last individual to give an introduction, he describes himself as a reactionary-nationalist, a paleoconservative, is indifferent to the size or scope of the government as long as the will of the people is upheld, and concludes that he is a "skeptical" capitalist. | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
''' First topic: Transgender Military ban ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=357 5:57] Asmongold introduces the first topic: the recent [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_personnel_in_the_United_States_military#:~:text=According%20to%20Politico%20and%20a,surgeries%20had%20hastened%20Trump's%20decision. transgender military ban]. He allows Sargon and Fuentes to express their views first. Sargon mentions that he has no strong feelings about the ban, whereas Fuentes, although also lacking a strong conviction about the ban, argues that the concept of an individual voluntarily joining the military to fight for interests beyond national concerns is confusing. | |||
Nick then earnestly criticizes the bill, arguing that transgendered individuals may not be the best or most capable to perform some of the rigorous tasks faced by individuals in the military and may actually be a detriment. Nick goes on to state that he does not recognize the legitimacy of people possessing gender dysphoria, and asserts that these individuals are likely a product of mental-illness/a poor upbringing. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=639 10:39] Hasan rebuts, arguing that the "jobs-program" nature of the military in the US, coupled with the fact that the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense Department of Defence] is the largest employer of transgender individuals, makes the ban both costly to the military and disrespectful to current service members. Hasan goes on to argue that transgender individuals have been proven to be just as "combat-ready" as cisgender individuals. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=725 12:05] Destiny then presents his rebuttal to Fuentes’s points, emphasizing that the voluntary nature of the U.S. military does not necessarily attract the best and most capable individuals. Destiny highlights that if a transgender person can complete [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Basic_Training basic training], they meet the minimum requirements for service. Destiny further notes that since 80% of military roles are non-combat, even if these individuals were physically less capable, they would likely serve in non-combat roles. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=810 13:30] Asmongold requests for Destiny to elaborate on the "effectiveness" of transgender individuals. Destiny responds by explaining that non-combat and support roles exist within the military, roles that transgender individuals currently fill without any issues. He continues, stating that the military has conducted extensive research into the effectiveness of transgender individuals in various military roles, and asserts that none of the concerns Fuentes raised have been substantiated by these studies. Asmongold then questions if transgender individuals would cost more per-capita than cisgender individuals. Destiny acknowledges that this might be true on a per-capita basis, but he argues that transgender individuals who have successfully completed basic training have already compensated for any additional costs they have incurred to the institution through their service. | |||
Asmongold then poses the same question to Fuentes, who states he does not care for the fiscal cost, and proceeds to deride Hasan for even making mention of it. Asmongold proceeds to ask Fuentes if his catholic background has motivated his opinion in any way, to which Fuentes responds it has. Fuentes then reasserts his indifference to the issue, conceding that transgender individuals can certainly serve in non-combat roles in an effective capacity. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=1125 18:45] Destiny asks Fuentes if he believes women should serve in the military, Fuentes responds they should not. Fuentes elaborates: "What kind of world do we want to live in where we're sending our daughters, sisters, mothers, into the middle east to get exploded." Before Fuentes can complete his thought, Hasan proceeds to interrupt him several times with the explicit purpose of not allowing Fuentes to complete his "framing" of the argument. Asmongold reiterates that only 20% of service members see frontline combat, to which Fuentes responds he does not believe women should be in non combat roles nor the business of government. Fuentes elaborates that women may interfere with the "brotherhood" like nature of the military, and may be a detriment to frontline soldiers. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=1324 22:04] Hasan argues that Nick is arguing from a personal perspective of what he wants society to look like, and has not provided any data to back up his arguments. Fuentes argues that he rejects the validity of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empiricism empiricism] over [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori a priori] rationale, meaning he believes the thing is true due to "common sense". Destiny interjects at this point, and informs Fuentes that a priori and common sense are not the same thing. Fuentes proceeds to mock Hasan and Destiny for believing in people wearing lab coats as opposed to trusting their intuition. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=1499 24:59] Sargon asks Hasan if he believes women do influence social dynamics in typically male-dominated groups. Hasan responds that he does not believe this change in social-dynamics typically yields negative consequences. Hasan goes on the elaborate that he does not care for elaborating the efficiency of the military, arguing that the "imperialistic mission of the military to go out and kill brown people" is not something he's fond of. Nick agrees with Hasan's disgust of the "military's current objective", and argues that a biological distinction between man and women still exists, making it very difficult for men and women to work in the same workplace even outside of the military. Fuentes goes on to argue that he wants to live in a world more "in-line" with human nature, and that Hasan is advocating for a "perversion" of our natural social dynamics. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=1786 29:46] Destiny offers his rebuttal to Fuentes, arguing that enabling a society to allow individuals to make decisions relative to what they desire to do, is more important than trying to enforce some "naturalistic" setting as Fuentes desires. Destiny concludes that we should allow individuals to make decisions that would make them happy. Fuentes takes issue with this statement, and argues that individuals today are not happier than they were in the past. Destiny counters, arguing that individuals in a liberal society should be "allowed to fail" instead of being forced into optimal decisions. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=2575 42:55] Sargon asserts American civilization does not exclude black people at all, due to the fact that they(African Americans) have been in America since the country's inception. Destiny interrupts Sargon and points to the absurdity of the statement, arguing that individuals who came to America as slaves probably felt fairly excluded from society. Sargon concedes that while these individuals did not have a good role in society, they still possessed a role irregardless. Sargon proceeds to argue that western birth rates declining should be an indication that society is not functioning properly, and that measures must be taken to ensure it rises again. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=2849 47:29] Hasan is given the opportunity to provide his perspective, and questions Sargon's desire to preserve western civilization. Hasan proceeds to suggest that the discussion on birth rates is irrelevant, when the discussion should be more geared towards factors contributing to birth rates declining such as technological achievements and socioeconomic status. | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
''' Second Topic: Donald Trump and Media narratives''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=3467 57:47] Trainwrecks introduces the second topic: "The as of yet not publically available Mueller report was finally published after a two-year investigation into the possibility that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to rig the election in their favor. Despite an unprecedented level of access to any political campaign, thirty-million dollars spent, five-hundred witness interviewed, nineteen lawyers retained as a special council, forty dedicated FBI staff anchored to the investigation, and five-hundred search warrants executed, they found zero evidence of any collusion. There wasn't even enough to charge a low level volunteer with any form of tampering or improper electoral conduct relating to Russia. Given how many news networks reported inaccurately that Russian collusion had occurred, and proof of collusion would be forthcoming, does this outcome not validate Trump's claims about media bias against its administration. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=3557 59:17] Destiny offers his initial response, stating that while the Mueller report may not be yet released, the idea that no Russian Collusion took place has not yet been borne out, and Mueller likely felt he could not nail anybody "to the wall" on such a conspiracy. Destiny reiterates the exact words of the judge "not enough to press charges", can be interpreted several ways, and the notion that the media erroneously reported on the events is incorrect. | |||
https:// | |||
= | [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=3606 1:00:06] Hasan chimes in, citing the Judge's own words: the bar to prove collusion is incredibly high, and that obstruction of justice( which Hasan argues had occurred), does not matter unless the bar for collusion is passed. Asmongold questions how Hasan knows obstruction occurred, and Hasan cites a media appearance wherein Trump claims to have fired then FBI director [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Comey James Comey] in order to ease pressure from the collusion investigation. Hasan proceeds to argue that the "Russian collusion narrative" was self serving, and the investigation should have primarily focused on the "millions of dollars" spent by Russia in influencing US social media. | ||
https:// | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=3873 1:04:33] Asmongold asks Destiny and Hasan if they believe the Mueller report should be released to the public in its entirety. Hasan answers affirmatively, while Destiny states he is unsure. Destiny elaborates, arguing that the Democrats may overfocus on any claims of collusion in the document, and lose the next election as a result. Sargon is given the opportunity to respond, and states that he agrees with Hasan's prior statements. He goes on to assert that Trump simply was not competent enough to collude with Russia. Hasan expresses his agreement with this position, to which Destiny interjects, stating they are both wrong and that Trump's campaign consultant([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Manafort Paul Manafort]) has been found conspiring with foreign agents in the past. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=4105 1:08:25] Fuentes is given the opportunity to provide his initial response. Fuentes argues that despite the plethora of indictments levied against individuals both Russian and American, not a single one was related to collusion. Fuentes proceeds to assert that the investigation was given plenty of funding and time to search for any collusion, and the fact that no evidence of such wrongdoing was found should exonerate Trump. Asmongold pointedly asks Fuentes his feelings on the media's role in this investigation, to which Fuentes responds the media was blatantly biased. | |||
https:// | |||
= | [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=4317 1:11:57] Destiny and Fuentes debate which direction US mainstream media tends to be more partisan towards. Fuentes asserts it is primarily left-wing dominated, and as a result unfairly influenced the investigation against Donald Trump. Destiny takes issue, arguing that most of mainstream media is dominated by right-wing organizations and individuals, pointing to Fox News and several right-leaning radio hosts. [https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=4875 1:21:15] Hasan points to the absurdity in attempting to compare the political commentary provided by [[No Bullshit]] and Jimmy Kimmel. The debate regarding the veracity of the aforementioned list continues. | ||
https:// | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=5255 1:27:35] Asmongold asks Destiny and Hasan if they believe the majority of mainstream media possess a left-wing bias. Hasan disagrees, while Destiny expresses his uncertainty. Destiny elaborates that talk-radio reaches more customers than any other form of media, while tending to have a right-wing bias. Destiny admits that while it's possible for media to have a left-wing bias today, he does feel conservatives have an adequate enough voice in media today. Fuentes responds that Destiny is denying basic reality, and points to a study claiming 92% of media coverage was against Trump. | |||
https:// | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=5593 1:33:13] Destiny argues that no media company would ever stake their reputation on "progressive values". Destiny proceeds to argue that no producer would place a transgender individual in a role if it wasn't popular to do so. Fuentes and Sargon take issue with this and discuss for some time. During his rebuttal, Sargon argues that large media corporations such as Disney are absolutely placing "morales" ahead of profits. Nick argues the left-wing media bias is prevalent, and to argue otherwise is to deny reality. Nick points to several movies, tv shows, and video games as examples. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=6468 1:47:40] In response to Sargon claiming the Sequel Star Wars movies made no money as a result of their "woke-agenda", Destiny reads off the money earned by each movie. Destiny then points to a Sequel Star Wars film containing a white-male lead, which made substantially less money than the aforementioned "woke" movies. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=6693 1:51:33] Destiny asks Fuentes if he believes if it's immoral to show interracial relationships in media. Fuentes responds he does not believe it to be immoral, however he does not want a "deliberate" social agenda pushed by media organizations, particularly in that direction. Asmongold asks Fuentes to clarify what he means by "that direction", to which Fuentes responds he does not believe interracial marriages should be promoted. Destiny and Hasan burst out in laughter at this confession, to which Fuentes states: "I like that laughter, it will be really funny when you guys are bred out of existence." | |||
<br> | |||
<br> | |||
''' Third Topic: Christchurch mosque shootings ''' | |||
<br> | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=6797 1:53:17] Seeing the previous topic reaching a boiling point, Asmongold decides to introduce the next topic: online influence of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christchurch_mosque_shootings Christchurch mosque shootings], and whether individuals who are "irresponsibly right-wing" should be deplatformed. Asmongold describes the topic, identifying the "internet memes' prevalent throughout the shooter's manifesto, and the shooter's goals in attempting to "sow dissent" between the left and right through his actions. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=7460 2:04:20] Following a short break, Fuentes is given the opportunity to respond first. Fuentes begins his argument by asserting that calls for violence by individuals on the right, particularly the white identitarian/advocacy crowd, is generally not tolerated. Fuentes goes on to describe how one would be hard-pressed to find a specific influencer from this crowd who would make a call to violence, and therefore asserts that it was unlikely the shooter was influenced by right-leaning content creators. Fuentes proceeds to contrast this shooting against several other shootings that occured in the days following Christchurch, one committed by a Muslim, and another by an Italian migrant. Fuentes argues that while he would never advocate for an ethnostate, such acts of violence are a "natural consequence" of multiracialism/multiculturalism, and that such acts should be regarded as "inevitable" regardless of online influence. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=7657 2:07:37] Asmongold reiterates the question, asking Fuentes if he believes any YouTuber's rhetoric inexplicitly led the shooter to commit the act. Fuentes responds, arguing that any talking points/data cited by the shooter in his manifesto, could easily have been retrieved from a number of other sources outside of YouTube. Fuentes goes on to assert that the true influence on this shooter is the mainstream media claiming there's no way to affect the status-quo with regards "white-erasure" through legitimate means. Fuentes caveats this by stating the shooter's actions were in no way rational, and are abhorrent. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=7781 2:09:41] Sargon is given the opportunity to speak. Sargon mirrors Fuentes' talking points, arguing that the problem is not a result of the existence of online communities, but rather the fact that the shooter felt he was unable to legitimately air his grievances. Sargon provides the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube_headquarters_shooting youtube headquarters shooter] as an example, stating she was just demonetized and did not originate from a "deeply ideological community", and felt she could not effectively reach out to YouTube. Sargon concludes by stating every community "has their shooters", and the idea that the shooter was influenced by YouTubers is a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring Red herring]. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=7939 2:12:19] Destiny provides his response, arguing that while it would be hard to establish that any particular YouTuber influenced this shooter, hateful rhetoric can still lead to hateful acts of violence. He expresses his understanding of Fuentes and Sargon's argument that the shooter may have felt his views were "suppressed," but he adds a caveat that these views were suppressed for good reason. Destiny elaborates that "horrendous anti-immigration views" held by individuals like Fuentes or Sargon, are rightfully suppressed. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=8106 2:15:06] Hasan provides his initial response, beginning by sarcastically praising Fuentes for being a "phenomenal orator" and "sneaking in" several lines of rhetoric. He accuses Fuentes of calling the shooter a martyr, and derides him for claiming the shooting was an "unavoidable" and "rationale" cause of coexisting with people who look slightly different than him. Hasan proceeds to attribute the radicalization of the shooter to right-wing nationalism, and argues such thinking has become problematic in the US. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=8219 2:16:59] Sargon offers his rebuttal to Hasan and Destiny, asserting the only reason right-wing nationalism is up for debate, is because of the "cultural-commanance" of the left. Sargon goes on to state the views held by those on the "radical-left" are just as horrific as those on the radical-right, yet are still being platformed. Hasan retorts, arguing that concepts such as "seizing the means of production", "redistributing wealth", and "universal healthcare", are not inherently abhorrent and have worked in other countries unlike the conservative principles Sargon and Fuentes are advocating for. Sargon then chides Hasan for attempting to steer the conversation down a "marxist rabbit hole". | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=8420 2:20:20] Hasan asks Sargon to provide acts of left-wing violence that is similar in nature to right-wing violence. Sargon brings up acts of violence committed by immigrants in western countries, and blames communism for allowing these individuals into these countries. A debate then arises regarding whether or not communism is inherently violent. Hasan immediately takes issue with this, but does not readily substantiate his disagreement. While Destiny argues that while communism is violent, most other economic schools of thought are just as, if not more, violent. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=9007 2:30:07] Destiny steps in, arguing a radicalization of white people around the world is occuring, resulting in them committing more terrorist attacks. He then asserts that statements like "both sides commit violence" is vacuous, and doesn't truly address the issues regarding right-wing extremism in the modern world. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=9151 2:32:31] Fuentes is given the opportunity to speak, arguing that Destiny and Hasan are using acts of violence committed by right-wingers as a pretext to silence their political opponents. Throughout his rebuttal, Fuentes asserts that radicalization exists on all sides o the aisle, and provides examples of "left-wing violence" committed by Palestinians, and the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_baseball_shooting Congressional baseball shooting]. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=9359 2:35:59] Hasan and Sargon debate communism once more, followed by Destiny attempting to steer the conversation back on track. Destiny explains that the justifications someone would use to attack someone based on their race, would be much different than someone who would enact violence on a group of people for economic reasons. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=9918 2:45:18] Destiny: "If you're somebody like Lauren Southern, and you're making videos talking about how western society is being destroyed, that the white man is going extinct, that we're being outbred and forced to take on this multicultural, cuck-culture, by jews that are trying to outbreed and destroy white people, how can you not think that's going to lead to some people committing violence?" Fuentes counters that left-wing individuals may just be "pussies". | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=10205 2:50:05] Hasan asserts the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States should be labled a genocide. Sargon and Fuentes laugh, as Destiny remains silent. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=10620 2:57:00] The conversation once again gets mired in a debate on socialism. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=10819 3:00:19] The conversation is brought on track once more, and Destiny asks Sargon what his prescription to stop radical individuals on the right is. Sargon responds that individuals on the right should stop having their voices suppressed, and be openly platformed. Fuentes agrees large in part with this assertion, and adds that isolation of individuals possessing certain ideals may also lead to radicalization. Destiny offers his rebuttal, arguing that these individuals can be brought out of "isolation" without having them embrace ideas such as race-realism. Destiny goes on to argue argue that while some individuals may be platformed, bad-faith actors such as Fuentes should be excluded. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=11475 3:11:15] Hasan offers his rebuttal to Sargon and Fuentes, arguing that the "social conditions" brought on by capitalism are the true cause for the issues seen with right-wing radicalism. Following Hasan mentioning "the profit motive", Sargon and Fuentes immediately laugh off Hasan's arguments off as "marxist-rhetoric". | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=11795 3:16:35] Fuentes attempts to bring up [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson James Watson], a researcher who discovered DNA, but is interrupted by Destiny. Destiny accuses Fuentes of attempting to make a "nazi-argument", and the panel becomes increasingly unproductive for some time until Train moderates and allows Fuentes to continue his point. Destiny argues that Fuentes is making an "appeal to false authority" as "just because you're the discoverer of DNA does not give you the ability to speak with any sort of authority whatsoever on it". Destiny and Fuentes proceed to have a heated conversation on the subject. | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=12879 3:34:39] Closing statements regarding the topic are given. Sargon and Fuentes argue that Watson's cancellation is unjustified, and is evidence of the fact that right-wing thought is being suppressed. Destiny takes issue with this interoperation, and argues that Watson's statements were incredibly irresponsible and unfounded, especially considering his standing within the scientific community on a related subject. Destiny adds that Watson has seemingly willingly ostracized himself from the scientific community, and argues that this would make it even harder for him to be "reintroduced back into the fold". | |||
[https://youtu.be/8XbT4UojaRw?t=13498 3:44:58] Before the next topic can be introduced, several panelists give an excuse to exit the call and the panel concludes. | |||
|} | |||
=== Hasan and Destiny debate abortion === | |||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZOr-ruA_XM |300px|right| '''This argument is cancer - Destiny debates Hasanabi'''}} | |||
On May 17, 2019, Destiny and Hasan debated the definition of personhood, morality, and the role of government in legislating abortion. <ref> Destiny. (2019, May 21). This argument is cancer - Destiny debates Hasanabi. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZOr-ruA_XM </ref> While Destiny expresses his moral reservations about abortions, and argues that a human's life begins at conception, he maintains that abortion should still be legally permissible given the extenuating circumstances an individual who may desire an abortion could find themselves in. Hasan agreed with Destiny's policy assessment of abortion, however, he took issue with Destiny's "arbitrary" assignment of personhood at conception. As a result, the primary contentions of the debate centered around the various philosophical frameworks used to justify Hasan and Destiny's underlying moral positions. | |||
Destiny's full stance on abortion is the following: | |||
<blockquote>"So my metaethical position is descriptive-egoism right. So I don't really believe in morality or any of that exists. My Normative position is that i'm a rule-utilitarian, that means that I wanna make the rules in society that I think will most benefit me. One of these rules that I think shouldn't be made is that it's okay to kill people without good reason. I don't think it's okay to kill somebody unless you have a really really good reason... and when you do an abortion you're basically saying it's okay to murder some people because they're very inconvenient to other people. That's a rule, like if you craft that rule, I feel like... at some point in my life I might become vulnerable to crafting that sort of rule, and that would be worrisome to me." | |||
:— [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=135 Destiny outlining his stance on abortion] </blockquote> | |||
While Hasan was initially amicable to this line of thought, he took issue upon Destiny's description of a "flawless world" wherein abortions would be illegal, unwanted children would be put up for adoption, and contraceptives/sexual education would be the primary ways of preventing pregnancy. Hasan initially based his counter-argument on the personhood of a fetus, however after further questioning on what constitutes "personhood", it is eventually revealed that Hasan is "making up arguments on the spot" and has not spent much time pondering when a Fetus has personhood.<ref>https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1321 Hasan and Destiny debate abortion: Hasan states he's coming up with arguments on the spot and has not thought about when a Fetus has personhood.</ref> Destiny and Hasan spend the remainder of the call ironing out Hasan's defense of his own position, and debating personhood. | |||
A significant portion of the "personhood debate" focused on Hasan's tendency to shift between different traits(consciousness, moral agency, and potential for development) when defining personhood. When pressed on any single trait, Hasan often moved to another aspect, which resulted in Destiny frequently accusing Hasan of being inconsistent and evasive. To address this, Destiny used an analogy comparing the qualities that make cars cool, illustrating that Hasan's argument relied on a collection of traits rather than a coherent definition of each trait individually. | |||
"Because it's not a collection of things that's the problem... Let's say you ask me: Why are cars cool? And I give you three reasons: The color of the car, how fast the car goes, and the type of transmission. Those are the three things that make cars cool. And you were to go Okay, well let's talk about the color. And I go: Okay cool, so the car's color is... blue. So mine is blue, is that enough to make it a cool car? Then I would say, well no, now a blue car gives it a plus, that's a bonus, but that's not the only reason it's cool, that's just one part of it... But I like the color blue, so that's a positive thing, that means the color is part of my argument. But let's say instead I say: I like the color red because red cars are fast. Well then it sounds like the color isn't important at all, it just sounds like you like fast cars. -[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1678 Destiny demonstrating Hasan's argumentative flaw with a car analogy] | |||
Despite Hasan's continued disagreeance(and confusion) with Destiny's "car analogy", the conversation continued and the two eventually reached an agreeable trait to deliberate on: The capacity to develop moral agency outside of the womb, and the distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb. | |||
Hasan argued that the separation from the host(the mother) marked a significant difference in the fetus's trajectory toward becoming a moral agent. He also argued that the emotional, physical, and material harm endured by the host during pregnancy further differentiates a newborn from a fetus. On the other hand, Destiny argued that both a fetus and a one-year-old have the same potential for moral agency. Destiny also contended that a wanted newborn could cause as much, if not more, harm than an unwanted fetus. The conversation took an unproductive turn following [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2892 Destiny's use of a personal anecdote involving his experience choosing not to get an abortion], and Hasan arguing Destiny had not considered his partner's suffering during that experience. Following this exchange, Destiny cut away from the call to discuss his poor experiences the few times he's used personal anecdotes, and how it more often than not results in him being ad-hominemed. The conversation continues(fruitlessly) for some time, and both Hasan and Destiny eventually agree that the philosophical discussion surrounding abortion is "aids". | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Debate play by play | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1268 21:08] Hasan lists "elements" of personhood, beginning with consciousness. Destiny responds by asking Hasan why consciousness makes one worthy of being considered a person, and asks Hasan if he believes a one year old has moral agency. Hasan initially argues that consciousness gives an individual moral agency and therefore personhood, and goes on to expresses his belief that a one year old's potentiality of becoming a moral is much higher than a fetus. Destiny counters by asserting that the same developmental "trajectory" Hasan attributes to a one-year-old—that of evolving into a moral agent—also applies to a fetus as it grows within the mother's womb. Hasan retorts, asserting that the one-year-old no longer being "tied to a host" is a significant difference, and argues once more for the higher potentiality of becoming a moral agent. Destiny then offers to abandon consciousness from Hasan's list of qualities defining personhood, arguing Hasan does not care about consciousness at all as he's merely using it as a signal for someone's potentiality for becoming a moral agent. Hasan reiterates that consciousness is just one portion of his overall argument for personhood, to which Destiny accuses Hasan of "bouncing" to another element of personhood whenever pressed. Destiny proceeds to accuse Hasan of being unable to substantiate any individual element of personhood. Hasan argues it would be impossible for him to defend every individual aspect of personhood without referring to another element, to which Destiny decides to provide an analogy relating to "why cars are cool": | |||
"Because it's not a collection of things that's the problem... Let's say you ask me: Why are cars cool? And I give you three reasons: The color of the car, how fast the car goes, and the type of transmission. Those are the three things that make cars cool. And you were to go Okay, well let's talk about the color. And I go: Okay cool, so the car's color is... blue. So mine is blue, is that enough to make it a cool car? Then I would say, well no, now a blue car gives it a plus, that's a bonus, but that's not the only reason it's cool, that's just one part of it... But I like the color blue, so that's a positive thing, that means the color is part of my argument. But let's say instead I say: I like the color red because red cars are fast. Well then it sounds like the color isn't important at all, it just sounds like you like fast cars. -[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1678 Destiny demonstrating Hasan's argumentative flaw with a car analogy] | |||
Hasan cuts Destiny off as he's wrapping up this analogy, informing Destiny that he doesn't understand what he's trying to convey. Destiny then reiterates his feelings of Hasan "retreating" to other traits of personhood when pressed on a given trait, and re-explains the analogy. Following further confusion from Hasan, Destiny eventually abandons the analogy and cuts back to the heart of the argument. Destiny explains he does not believe all conscious things are moral agents, and points out that Hasan said as much. After further deliberation, Hasan eventually provides a trait agreeable to Destiny: The capacity to develop moral agency outside of the womb AKA viability outside of the womb. Destiny then posits a hypothetical child to Hasan which could not be sustained outside of the womb without further medical assistance, and Destiny argues they should focus on deliberating the distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb. As Hasan begins to reiterate the child is no longer attached to a "host", he is distracted by his chatroom, and proceeds to yell at them for claiming Destiny is "owning him" in this debate. Destiny sympathizes with Hasan's anger, and informs Hasan that he's stepping into a "minefield" of abortion-related arguments with little experience. | |||
[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2299 38:19] The conversation continues, and Destiny argues the primary focus on this conversation should be the distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb. As Hasan is giving his explanation, Destiny gets distracted by Hasan's chat claiming they hope Destiny never needs an abortion. Destiny then recounts his experience wherein an abortion could have potentially been justified in his life, but he refrained from doing so. The conversation gets back on track, and Hasan explains the primary distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb is the "host"(aka the mother), more specifically, the | |||
emotional/physical/material harm to the host. Destiny then provides examples of how a newborn can cause just as much, if not more harm to its "host"(crying a lot at night,requiring money,preventing the parents from seeing their friends causing emotional harm), and could therefore justify aborting a one-year-old child by Hasan's logic. Hasan replies that the mother could simply give the child up for adoption, or not let the fetus become a child. | |||
Destiny restates his prior hypothetical of a newborn who cannot survive outside the womb without medical intervention, and asks Hasan what should happen to this child. Hasan replies that as long as the fetus has viability outside of the womb, it should be allowed to persist, as it will become a person at some point. Destiny remarks that a fetus also becomes a person at some point, Hasan argues a one-year-old is closer to "personhood", and the two loop through their prior debate on what makes a fetus a person and whether an abortion should be considered as killing a person. | |||
[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2706 45:06] Hasan eventually requests for Destiny's to elucidate on his position more. Destiny explains that he believes a fertilized egg is a person, and describes how his life experiences contemplating aborting his child while in dire financial straits informed his opinion. Hasan asks what his partner at the time though, and Destiny informs him that Rachel was fine with either outcome. Hasan then argues that Destiny failed to consider the most important factor in his own personal experience, which is that the harm Destiny endured through this scenario, was nothing in comparison to the emotional/physical/material harm his partner at the time endured. Destiny accuses Hasan of ad hominem, and argues this, like his other assertions, is a non statement. Hasan takes issue and argues he was not ad-homining Destiny, and Destiny proceeds to explain how he did so: | |||
"Okay so an ad-hom is when you is when you overtly attack somebody or more subtly cast doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. So nothing that we're talking about now has anything to do with any of the argument listed earlier. You're just saying that because I didn't experience as much material harm as Rachel, who was actually carrying the child, that somehow this should be taken into consideration." - Destiny <br> | |||
"No I'm saying that you were thinking for two people but the second person in this conversation... had already accepted the reality that she was going to carry that pregnancy to term, if you came to terms with that as well."- Hasan <br> | |||
"What does that have to do with any of the arguments that we said earlier?" - Destiny <br> | |||
"Because she had accepted it... therefore when you're considering the emotional suffering that your partner is going to go through, she's already accepted that she's already taken on that burden most people don't... Does that make sense, do you understand what i'm trying to say?"- Hasan <br> | |||
"I understand it, it just has nothing to do with any of the arguments we were having."- Destiny <br> | |||
-[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2892 48:12] | |||
Following further deliberation, Hasan assures Destiny he did not intend to adhom him. Destiny claims to understand, and briefly steps out of the call to speak with his chatroom regarding what occurred: | |||
"There have been three instances in my life where I've tried to give a personal example to make an argument, and I usually don't like doing that because I don't like arguing in that way cuz I think it's a really poor form of rhetoric... Every single time I've done it, the person has flipped the argument back on me, and tried to compromise my argumentation because I used a personal anecdote. It happened with that one Irish dude from the rape shit, it happened with the domestic abuse shit, and it just happened now with the abortion shit. I hate giving personal examples, because people will instantly turn it around and try to ad-hom your argument... It really triggers the fuck out of me, holy shit." | |||
-[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=3003 Destiny recounting his experiences giving personal anecdotes] | |||
[https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=3044 50:44] Destiny returns to the call, and the two continue their debate on what constitutes personhood once again. Hasan reiterates his arguments regarding the capacity for a one-year-old to feel/become certain things, and Destiny routinely points that any trait Hasan points to could eventually develop in a fetus. Destiny event ually provides a steelman for Hasan's argument: A person is some emergent property of several underlying traits, that are worthless on their own. Hasan disagrees with this steelman, and argues once more that it is not sufficient enough to point to a single quality to define personhood. Destiny counters, asserting that this same multitude of factors could be present in a fetus, to which Hasan argues the situation is complicated. Destiny retorts this complication can be avoided by simply conceding a fetus is a person, and then manipulating rules around what constitutes the worthwhile times to perform an abortion/murder someone. The two deliberate on this for some time, before both Hasan and Destiny eventually agree that the philosophical discussion surrounding abortion is "aids" and end the call. | |||
|} | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Discussion Highlights | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=0 0:00] The video begins with Destiny already speaking with Hasan. Hasan asks for clarity with regards to Destiny's opinion on abortion. Destiny explains it is difficult to define when a human life begins, and argues the most consistent way to do so is at the moment of conception. Destiny further explains that "everything else puts you in weird areas", arguing if one believes a fetus to be a real thing, then abortion is essentially murder. Destiny concludes, stating abortion is a "weird rule" to make for society to function if he himself doesn't wish to be murdered. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=73 1:13] Hasan(mouth full of food), inquires further of Destiny, asking if he believes no legislation should be established "one way or the other" with regards to abortion. Destiny replies, asserting abortion must be legal given how modern society functions. He further describes his uncomfortability with "legislating his morality" to other individuals, and recognizes the general "greyness" of the issue. Destiny goes on to explain that the best way to reduce the amount of abortions is to provide individuals with access to contraceptives, and sexual education. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=137 2:17] Destiny explains his position in philosophical terms. Destiny describes his metaethical position as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egoism#:~:text=Descriptive%20theories%5B,behaviour.%5B9%5D descriptive-egoism], in that he doesn't believe morality exists. Destiny continues, explaining that his normative position is [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_utilitarianism rule-utilitarianism], meaning he wants to make rules in society that will most benefit himself. Destiny elaborates that one of the "rules" he thinks shouldn't be made is that it's okay to kill people without good reason, and if one were to consider a fetus a child, one would have to accept the notion that killing anyone that is very inconvenient to others is justified. Destiny concludes that such a rule would be worrying to himself. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=201 3:21] Hasan asks Destiny if he believes a fetus has personhood. Destiny replies that a fetus has personhood at the moment of conception, more specifically, the time a woman's egg is fertilized and a unique sequence of DNA is created for an individual. Hasan takes issue with this, and the two discuss for some time. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=397 6:37] Hasan provides his counterargument, stating the physiological damage/emotional harm a person endures through the process of childbirth should justify their ability to perform an abortion. Hasan then asks when the fetus's personhood supersedes the mother's. Destiny reiterates his prior statement, arguing it's very difficult to justify killing an individual due to their inconvenience. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=462 7:42] Hasan asks if there's a distinction between a one year old and a one day old fetus. Destiny argues it would be hard to differentiate the personhood present within the two. The two then debate when the moment of "personhood" occurs in a fetus for some time. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=674 11:14] Destiny discusses how a child borne out of a rape scenario may violate the Non-aggression principle, and points to how a pro-choice individual may be pro-abortion in this scenario. Hasan remarks that the non-aggression principle is a "bit of a meme". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=823 13:43] Hasan brings up an argument put forth by other pro-abortion individuals law wherein an abortion should only be legal if the fetus may inadvertently harm the mother's body. Hasan argues this line is arbitrary, if one were to accept the fact that a fetus is a life. Destiny counters, stating the women is placed in a situation where they have to save one life or the other, and saving the mother's life in this case would be justification enough. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=991 16:31] Destiny reiterate that in his "flawless world" the best way to get rid of abortions would be to provide contraceptives and sexual education, however abortions would still be outlawed and any unwanted children could be adopted by the state. Hasan takes issue with this framing, arguing Destiny's "flawless world" in inherently flawed, Destiny retorts several social programs and other means of protecting the mother(both physiologically and mentally) would be in place in this hypothetical. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1268 21:08] Destiny asks Hasan when the opportune time to kill somebody(a fetus) is. Hasan first replies he does not ascribe personhood to a fetus, to which Destiny asks "why not?". Hasan begins to list reasons for why a Fetus does not have personhood, beginning with consciousness, and is immediately cut off by Destiny before he can list further attributes. Destiny reiterates this is a complicated debate and it is important to parse through every point in detail, to which Hasan admits he's coming up with arguments for his position on the spot. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1375 22:45] Destiny asks Hasan why consciousness makes one worthy of being considered a person. Hasan responds that consciousness gives an individual moral agency, and because "we assume that we have it". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1468 24:28] Destiny asks Hasan if he believes one year olds have moral agency. Hasan responds that a one year old's potentiality of becoming a moral agent is much higher than a fetus. Destiny questions Hasan's belief that one-year olds can make moral decisions, to which Hasan reiterates he is primarily concerned with "viability outside of the body", and the "natural trajectory of becoming a moral agent". Destiny counters, arguing this same trajectory occurs to a fetus within a mother's body. Hasan retorts, asserting that a one-year-old is not longer tied to a "host". | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1542 25:42] Hasan argues a fetus does not have consciousness, and the ability to become a moral agent is something that should be valued. Destiny then offers to remove the moral agent portion of his list, and Hasan argues once more that consciousness is an indication that somebody has the capacity to be a moral agent. Destiny then argues that Hasan does not care about consciousness at all as he's merely using it as a signal for someone to potentially be a moral agent. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1610 26:50] Hasan argues one more that consciousness is only one element of his argument, to which Destiny accuses Hasan of "bouncing" between his elements of personhood whenever he's unable to substantiate a particular one. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1680 28:00] Hasan argues it would be impossible for him to defend every individual aspect of personhood without referring to another element. Destiny decides to provide an analogy of "why cars are cool", and demonstrates his ability to defend each element of why "cars are cool" without referring to a separate element. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1754 29:14] [[Austin Show]] joins the call. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1825 30:25] Hasan engages with Destiny's car analogy, argues he likes cars, and being red just may be one of the byproducts of being a car, so all cars have to be red. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1939 32:19] Following further deliberation, and the abandonment of the car analogy, Hasan provides a statement agreeable to Destiny: The capacity to develop moral agency outside of the womb. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2033 33:53] Following Hasan's prior statement, Destiny posits a hypothetical baby that cannot be sustained without medical assistance. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2107 35:07] Destiny asks Hasan to provide the distinction between outside versus inside the womb. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2122 35:22] Hasan yells at chat for claiming Destiny is owning him in this debate. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2224 37:04] Hasan's anger subsides, the conversation continues. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2299 38:19] Destiny gets distracted by Hasan's chat and shouts at them for some time. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2328 38:48] The conversation continues, and Hasan provides his position relating to the potential harm an unwilling "host" may endure. Destiny argues a wanted newborn could cause just as much if not more harm than an unwanted fetus. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2500 41:40] Destiny restates his hypothetical of a 7 month old newborn which requires medical assistance to live, and asks Hasan what should become of the child. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2706 45:06] Hasan requests that Destiny define what personhood is. Destiny explains that he believes a fertilized egg is a person, and describes how his life experiences involving considering the abortion of his own child helped inform his current opinion. Hasan argues that Destiny forgot to consider his pregnant partner's feelings at the time, especially the harm she endured. Destiny accuses Hasan of using an ad-hominem and points to the shakiness of all his aforementioned arguments. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=2989 49:49] Following Hasan claiming he was not intending to ad-hom Destiny, Destiny steps out of the call briefly to speak with his chat. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=3044 50:44] Destiny returns to the call and continues his debate on personhood with Hasan. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=3207 53:27] Destiny steelmans Hasan's argument: A person is some emergent property of several underlying traits, that are worthless on their own. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=3355 55:55] Destiny explains why it is difficult to defend the argument that a fetus isn't a person. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=3510 58:30] Destiny asserts any argument Hasan can make about a fetus can be said for someone with a debilitating disease or mental illness. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=3635 1:00:35] Destiny rehashes why he doesn't do philosophical arguments regarding abortion anymore, and how "aids" these discussions are. Hasan agrees, and the call eventually ends. | |||
|} | |||
=== Destiny briefly joins a Rajj Royale podcast to clarify a point Hasan was making, leaving Hasan upset === | |||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS40ocv3SFU|300px|right| '''RAJJ ROYALE PODCAST FT. METHODJOSH, JON ZHERKA, SLIKER, GREEKGODX, HASAN, REYNAD & MORE.''' ''Portion relevant to section begins at [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=7354 2:02:34].'' }} | |||
On June 8, 2019 Destiny briefly joined a [[Rajj Royale]] podcast featuring Hasan, [[Wesbtw]], [[Kaceytron]], and [[Jon Zherka]].<ref> Twitch Lyfe. (2019, June 8). RAJJ ROYALE PODCAST FT. METHODJOSH, JON ZHERKA, SLIKER, GREEKGODX, HASAN, REYNAD & MORE. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS40ocv3SFU </ref> | |||
Approximately two hours into the show, the panel began debating whether it is possible to be racist toward white people. Following Hasan's initial response to the subject, [[Austin Show]](the host of the show), jokingly suggested that Destiny should join the show to briefly summarize Hasan's talking points. Destiny joins shortly after this request, and allows Hasan to elucidate his argument for several more minutes. Upon hearing Hasan further explain his position, some members of the panel express their confusion with the arguments Hasan is attempting to put forth, going so far as to mock him for his longwindendess. Destiny chimes in shortly following these proclamations, and explains that it is typically difficult for minorities to exercise any form of oppressive racism towards the majority of people, effectively summarizing the point Hasan was attempting to put forth: | |||
<blockquote> | |||
"There are two different types of racism that people talk about and they often get conflated. So the question is: Can you be racist towards the majority of people? Under the definition we typically work with... we would say no. Minority people can't really exercise any sort of oppressive racism towards the majority of people. The reason why is we consider racism to be prejudice plus power. If every black person in the United States today, was like "fuck white people" it wouldn't really affect us much, because white people are more socioeconomically privileged, we have more places in congress, etc. Whereas if you're a majority power person, and you can be oppressive towards a minority class person, by virtue of them being minority class, by that virtue alone, they're already typically disadvantaged in American society. So when we say "can somebody be racist against somebody", under like the common vernacular of "can somebody hate somebody because of their skin color", of course, everybody can do that. When we start analyzing society, and we look at like meaningful demonstrations of racism, so for instance like the criminal justice system or economic disadvantages right? In these ways, minority people can't really exorcise racism against majority people, because they don't really have the status or the power in society, in order to do so." | |||
:- [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8025 Destiny summarizes Hasan's position]. | |||
</blockquote> | |||
Following Destiny's summarization of Hasan's position, Kaceytron states: "I wish Destiny could just come in at the beginning and gives us the right answer right away, instead of making us wait...like we have the cheat-sheet right here." Wes also chimes in: "So we didn't have to listen to fucking Hasan." Destiny departs shortly after this, and an incredibly irate Hasan airs his grievances with the responses given by his fellow panelists, and at Austin for seemingly encouraging Destiny to join the call. | |||
<blockquote> | |||
[https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8222 "Dude don't fucking ask me to be on if this is the fucking shit you're going to pull Rajj like seriously... Fucking have Destiny on then." ] | |||
:-Hasan | |||
"I didn't put Destiny in the poll, I was joking." | |||
:-Austin | |||
"I know he's not in the poll dipshit, i'm saying it's pissing me off because you're devaluing my perspective, which is ongoing. 95% of your discord is like "Hasan is so dumb"... Yeah i'm gonna get fucking triggered after a while, it's not just the fucking chat, every fucking guest on this podcast is doing the exact same bullshit... I'm a fucking human being, if twenty-thousand people are saying i'm retarded, obviously i'm going to get pissed after a while. Especially by people who are dumber than me on the subject " | |||
:-Hasan | |||
"You're winning the round by the way." | |||
:-Austin | |||
"I don't give a fuck if i'm winning this fucking round dude. Losing my fucking hair follicles by the second because I literally have to sit here every fucking day and explain the same insanely easy to understand concepts over and over, and then literally the counter point is: "well what if you say male? Does that mean you're racist?" Like all of a sudden everyone is like "omegalul yes that's true". So obviously it's just a joke, but then it expands to people's real lives, and it actually contributes to people voting for fucking assholes like Donald Trump. That's why i'm pissed off." | |||
:-Hasan | |||
[https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8349 "It's this gigantic Sisyphean fucking hurdle, this massive boulder that I need to fucking push up a hill every goddamn day. Only to have it devalued, and only to be undercut, so if you're gonna ask me to be on your fucking show, don't treat me like absolute dog shit when i'm being serious about what the fuck i'm talking about."] | |||
:-Hasan | |||
</blockquote> | |||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | |||
! colspan="2" | Timeline of events | |||
|- | |||
| | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=7354 2:02:34] The panel begins debating whether it is possible to be racist toward white people. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=7615 2:06:55] Hasan begins his response. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=7756 2:11:50] Austin requests for Destiny to join the call. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=7934 2:12:14] Following Hasan's initial response: Zherka mocks Hasan's longwindnesses, and Reynad confesses to not understanding Hasan's point. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8025 2:13:45] Destiny summarizes Hasan's position. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8084 2:14:44] Following Destiny's summarization of Hasan's position, Kaceytron states: "I wish Destiny could just come in at the beginning and gives us the right answer right away, instead of making us wait." Wes also chimes in: "So we didn't have to listen to fucking Hasan." | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8092 2:14:52] An enraged Hasan expresses his disagreement with his fellow panelists remarks and shouts: "It's such a fucking retarded thing to say. Like i'm sorry, but if you can't comprehend the fucking shit that i'm saying... i'm doing the best that I can. He literally said the exact same thing that I just said, like what the fuck are you guys talking about. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8123 2:15:23] Hasan continues to elucidate his point, arguing he merely said the same thing Destiny put forth with a padding of legislative background. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8139 2:15:39] Wes explains why Destiny's response was better than Hasan's: "He laid out the two definitions and why they're different, and he explained why: one yes and one no. If you would've done that from the beginning I would've understood that 100%. Hasan argues Wes would not do this, and that Wes would likely ignore anything he had to say. Wes denies this. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8222 2:17:02] Hasan begins shouting at Austin for placing Destiny in the "keep not kick" poll: "Dude don't fucking ask me to be on if this is the fucking shit you're going to pull Rajj like seriously... Fucking have Destiny on then." Austin:"I didn't put Destiny in the poll, I was joking." Hasan:"I know he's not in the poll dipshit, i'm saying it's pissing me off because you're devaluing my perspective, which is ongoing. 95% of your discord is like "Hasan is so dumb"... Yeah i'm gonna get fucking triggered after a while, it's not just the fucking chat, all the fucking guests on this podcast are doing the same shit. " | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8345 2:19:05] Hasan compares the task of explaining simple concepts to his fellow panelists to Sisyphus pushing a boulder. | |||
* [https://youtu.be/jS40ocv3SFU?t=8395 2:19:55] Austin informs Hasan he won the round. | |||
|} | |||
=== Destiny accuses Hasan of perpetuating Crypto Fascism and chides him for dissuading his audience against voting for Biden === | |||
{{disambiguation |Main Article: [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/I_don%27t_really_know_if_you%27re_pretending_or_not..._ft._HasanAbi_%26_Emmia I don't really know if you're pretending or not... ft. HasanAbi & Emmia]}} | |||
{{#ev:youtube|https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stdrVr9BHkE|300px|right| '''I don't really know if you're pretending or not... ft. HasanAbi & Emmia'''}} | |||
On June 16, 2019, [[Destiny]] held a conversation with [[Emmia]] regarding her political ignorance, emotional response to serious discussions, and experiences interacting with the political side of Twitch.<ref> Destiny. (2019, June 17). I don’t really know if you’re pretending or not... ft. HasanAbi & Emmia. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stdrVr9BHkE </ref> Emmia had recently received much criticism for what she perceived to be seemingly innocuous memes, that turned out to be alt-right dog whistles. Destiny took Emmia at her word, and had a dialogue with her regarding the best path forward and how to avoid engaging with similar memes in the future. | |||
At one point during the call Hasan joins, and proceeds to have a very heated exchange with Destiny. Hasan accuses Destiny of being overly charitable to Emmia, and attempts to point to instances where Destiny went "harder" on other right-leaning individuals who engaged in behavior similar to Emmia. Destiny takes issue with this, arguing that he would never go this hard on a "normie" like Emmia, and points to instances of him being [https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/Hasan_Piker#Hasan_discusses_PewDiePie_and_E;R_with_Destiny equally charitable to "normies" like PewDiePie]. Destiny proceeds to accuse Hasan of perpetuating the "vicious cycle" of crypto-fascism by bullying a "normie" like Emmia into the arms of alt-righters, instead of taking her at her word and evaluating her future actions for what they are. Destiny further asserts that the communities Hasan inhabits, and the individuals demanding Emmia's apology, would likely never forgive Emmia anyways, and points to the severe criticism he has received from left-leaning communities despite the breadth of progressive content he has produced. | |||
<blockquote>"There was a week's worth of chapotraphouse threads on me that said I want to fuck 19 year olds, that said I want to abandon my kid, fucking christ I've got like 7,000 videos over the past four or five years of me doing progressive work, like fuck it dude, if I haven't changed people's minds why the fuck would I tell anybody else to waste their time... And i'll maintain that position, left leaning communities are just as cancerous as right-wing communities when it comes to online discourse." | |||
:—[https://youtu.be/stdrVr9BHkE?t=5546 Destiny responding to Hasan's demands for Emmia to apologize]</blockquote> | |||
The conversation diverges further, as Hasan accuses destiny of hyperfocusing on extreme criticism against himself, prompting Destiny to bring up a Chapo thread for analysis. Hasan then claims DGG engages in similar behavior towards himself, but Destiny counters, explaining he bans unfair criticism towards Hasan and that ad hominem attacks are typically downvoted in his subreddit. From here, the two spend the remainder of the call debating the pragmaticism(or lack thereof) of their respective political views. Hasan alleges Destiny deliberately uses provocative behavior to alienate left-leaning viewers, like calling workers dumb. To which Destiny responds by pointing out Hasan’s has engaged in more divisive actions, such as recently stating in a tv interview that he wouldn't vote for Biden over Trump. Hasan argues that a vote for Biden is perpetuating a "business as usual" political structure that gave the United States Donald Trump to begin with, to which Destiny chides Hasan for not considering the individuals who would get hurt by a Donald Trump presidency(i.e women in need of abortions, and LGBT people). | |||
Destiny then demands that Hasan explain his logic for abstaining from voting in the next election. Hasan explains that a vote for Biden would merely perpetuate the status-quo even further, asserts that politicians like Biden will never push for change that interferes with the "interest of capital" or corporations, and contends that Biden is "basically a Republican". Destiny counters, accusing Hasan of stating one of the most hilariously stupid things he has ever heard, remarks how individuals on the right will "literally cheer" for any republican candidate to get through in an election, and asserts that not voting for a democratic candidate because it "doesn't deal with capitalism" is an incredibly privileged position to anyone not spending all their time online "larping about socialism". The conversation eventually concludes as Destiny accuses Hasan of being an accelerationist and unpragmatic, Hasan asserts the "neoliberalism" and capitalistic nature of the Democratic party has corrupted it, and Destiny once again criticizes Hasan of arguing from a point of extreme privilege and ignoring individuals who would suffer under a Trump presidency. | |||
=== Hasan and Destiny Break Up Over Kamala Misinformation WIP=== | |||
{{disambiguation |Main Article: [[Hasan_and_Destiny_Break_Up_Over_Kamala_Misinformation| Hasan and Destiny Break Up Over Kamala Misinformation]]}} | |||
==== Destiny and Hasan create reddit threads following the debate WIP==== | |||
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cbdj2w/on_bootyjudge/ | |||
https://old.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cayg1e/if_destiny_wants_to_remain_morally_consistent_he/ | |||
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cgsvav/effort_post_rdestiny_v_rhasan_piker_hate_threads/ | |||
==== Hasanabi And Destiny BREAK UP Aftermath, Hasan types in dgg chat while Destiny discusses their breakup WIP==== | |||
=== Hasan and Destiny get back together WIP=== | === Hasan and Destiny get back together WIP=== | ||
Line 868: | Line 1,439: | ||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hodq77NShaA | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hodq77NShaA | ||
== | === End of the Leftist Arc? - Destiny Addresses the Recent Drama WIP === | ||
=== Hasan | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7XGOtOSWe4 | ||
=== DMCA claim accusation, Hasan beef & More - LNOD WIP === | |||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8B2XTCm5h0 | |||
=== Hasan's Consequences from Trump WIP === | |||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDm8MoyeIek&t=8s | |||
=== Melina vs Hasan WIP === | |||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIdlHWuxdXI | |||
=== Hasan fan calls into Destiny's stream WIP === | |||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIdlHWuxdXI | |||
Hasan | === Piers Morgan Show attempts to set up a debate with Destiny and Hasan === | ||
On May 2, 2024, the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Morgan_Uncensored Piers Morgan show] attempted to set up a debate between Destiny and Hasan. <ref> https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cirrrv/pierce_morgan_show_trying_to_set_up_destiny_vs/ </ref> Destiny agreed to the debate, and Hasan's response was never received. | |||
=== | == Notable Clips, Videos, Tweets and Controversies WIP == | ||
[ | === Clips === | ||
==== Hasan allegedly consumes Destiny content in his free time ==== | |||
[[File:Hasan watching Destiny.mp4|300px|right|thumb|''' Destiny claiming Hasan "religiously" consumes his content.''']] | |||
On May 13, 2024, Destiny alleges that Hasan spends his free time religiously following his content. Destiny claims to have discovered this following Melina's affair with Hasan's friend, [[Will Neff]]. | |||
On May 15, 2024, Destiny provided a compilation video as evidence of Hasan "obsessing" over his personal life. Within the video a six minute compilation of Hasan discussing Destiny's personal life since early March, 2024 is provided. <ref>[[Media:Hasan Dgg lore master.mp4]]</ref> | |||
=== Controversies === | === Controversies === | ||
Throughout his career, Piker has been involved in several controversies, often stemming from his outspoken political views. In 2019, he faced backlash for comments made during a Twitch stream about the September 11 attacks and brave Mujahideen fighters fucking the eye hole of U.S. Representative [[Dan Crenshaw]]. Piker later apologized for the remarks, stating that they were "inappropriate and offensive." | Throughout his career, Piker has been involved in several controversies, often stemming from his outspoken political views. In 2019, he faced backlash for comments made during a Twitch stream about the September 11 attacks and brave Mujahideen fighters fucking the eye hole of U.S. Representative [[Dan Crenshaw]]. Piker later apologized for the remarks, stating that they were "inappropriate and offensive." | ||
During the run of Hasan's show "Bro Tips", hosted on The Young Turks, he made a number of controversial comments in which he accused Lady Gaga of having a penis, and gave viewers instructions on how to isolate women from their friends, then coerce them into sexual intercourse. {{citation needed}} | ==== Bro Tips ==== | ||
During the run of Hasan's show [https://thebrotip.wordpress.com/author/hasanpiker/ "Bro Tips"], hosted on The Young Turks, he made a number of controversial comments in which he accused Lady Gaga of having a penis, and gave viewers instructions on how to isolate women from their friends, then coerce them into sexual intercourse. {{citation needed}} | |||
<blockquote> | |||
"Come back again next week when we discuss the legendary question of all time: Old enough to count, old enough to mount?" <ref>Rare Cringe Hasanabi Compilation. (May 22, 2022). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 23, 2024, from https://youtu.be/q_r7Ft35rE0?si=nDhEaR3tCq3s3C7J&t=41</ref> | |||
:— Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker | |||
</blockquote> | |||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
" | "It's time to get out of here and it's time to separate her from her herd, meaning her crowd of girlfriends who are going to do their best to cockblock you because they're fat and lonely." <ref>Hasanabi Brotip: The Lets Get Outta Here Rule. (May 26, 2022). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 23, 2024, from https://youtu.be/DLEGpN0CUJ4?si=6kUQw4qtv1_kojms&t=50</ref> | ||
:— Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker | |||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
" | "Brotip: If you stand in front of the door, she can't leave." {{citation needed}} | ||
:— Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker | |||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
" | "Here's why the 5 second rule works: Because when you start thinking for longer than 5 seconds, you're immediately not thinking with your dick, and also thinking with this thing that we like to call our brains." <ref>Rare Cringe Hasanabi Compilation. (May 22, 2022). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 23, 2024, from https://youtu.be/q_r7Ft35rE0?si=10gms6GRO_hDXmgC&t=26</ref> | ||
:— Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker | |||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
Line 911: | Line 1,501: | ||
* [https://youtu.be/2bA6Iif8-cY?t=120 "I'm a propagandist, for the record."] | * [https://youtu.be/2bA6Iif8-cY?t=120 "I'm a propagandist, for the record."] | ||
* [https://youtu.be/D9VModWq4iQ?t=602 "At least Patrick Henry college, is like, doing one good thing. Which is that like, if you have these fucking millionaire/billionaire WASP fail-sons, at least taking them out of other colleges so they can only do date-rape to millionaire/billionaire fail-daughters, is like in some respects, you know from a utilitarian perspective of course, a little bit better, you know what I mean? Taking these guys and... putting them in a pen with one another, is ultimately getting them away from the broader society."] | * [https://youtu.be/D9VModWq4iQ?t=602 "At least Patrick Henry college, is like, doing one good thing. Which is that like, if you have these fucking millionaire/billionaire WASP fail-sons, at least taking them out of other colleges so they can only do date-rape to millionaire/billionaire fail-daughters, is like in some respects, you know from a utilitarian perspective of course, a little bit better, you know what I mean? Taking these guys and... putting them in a pen with one another, is ultimately getting them away from the broader society."] | ||
* [https://youtu.be/ | * [https://youtu.be/iVqUtusANqY?t=1393 I hope, I hope, that the rest of your life is as horrible as it is every single day, okay. There ya go. Suck my dick. I despise you. I despise you more than anything else on the planet. You are fucking cancer, okay. You are cancer in this community, and you are cancer in every community. Suck my dick. For the last 15 months you've been able to fucking hide in these ranks, you catboy fuck. Move your catboy ass out of here, you are never welcome. You are never going to be unbanned, no matter how difficult it is, no matter how much you want to get unbanned, I will never unban you. You are now banished into the fucking, shadow realm, okay. The notion, that I am not, fuckin, ehh, ehh, ah- a-, like, I should not be having transphobes on, or ever talk about transphobia, or to transphobic people, is such a pathetic, and stupid fucking argument, when Vaush himself has probably said that the debate was fine. Okay? I don't like you. I'm going to make this very clear. If you are this type of person, I don't like you. I don't want you to be in here, okay? Or if you're gonna be in here, you need to fucking know your place. You need to know your place. Your place is this, okay? It's not this, it's this. You can stay in here and watch, but you're not going to fuckin', write shit, in the chat. Sorry. I would quite literally rather have someone who is on the margins, and is actually interested in learning, but might have transphobic points of view, RATHER THAN, someone who's like, (gay voice) "MM I'm a catboy, I've been in here for 50 months, and I think like, you know, you're not that good at debates, so you shouldn't have a transphobic person on." Like, no. Fuck off. Like, literally, I would rather have a MILLION people that are willing to fucking learn, and are actually here, much like the rest of normal society that have been like, socially conditioned into feeling the ways that they do, than ANY NUMBER of super woke, super fuckin' leftist, uh, uh, debate lords. Straight up. I've done more debates than you, I'm better at debates than you, I'm better at debates than most of the other people that you fucking compare me to, because debates are still pure rhetoric, okay. That's it. (sips drink) Anyway... Oh, by the way, mods, clap that person that is definitely in the discord too. If they're crying in the discord right now, 100% clap that person's ass cheeks. "] | ||
* [https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1c7ejxn/hasan_says_hamas_unironically_is_the_lesser_evil/ "Hamas unironically is the lesser evil(compared to the IDF)."] | * [https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1c7ejxn/hasan_says_hamas_unironically_is_the_lesser_evil/ "Hamas unironically is the lesser evil(compared to the IDF)."] | ||
Latest revision as of 19:53, 19 September 2024
|
Hasan Piker | |
Make the rich pay. | |
Person | |
---|---|
Status | HasanAbi |
Political Alignment | Progressive Left/Socialist |
Qualifications | Political Science/Communications Degree |
Occupation | Twitch Streamer/Political Commentator |
Age | 33 |
Country of origin | USA |
Media | |
Website | https://ideologie.shop/ |
Hasanthehun | |
Hasandpiker | |
Youtube | @hasanabi |
Twitch | hasanabi |
Manifolds Market | Hasan Stock |
Other | |
Awards | Antagonist OTY |
Hasan Doğan Piker (born July 25, 1991) is an American political commentator, streamer, and YouTuber. He is best known for his political commentary on the progressive news network The Young Turks and for his Twitch streaming channel, where he discusses pop politics, news headlines, and popular culture. Piker has gained a large following for his outspoken views on progressive politics and social issues.
Hasan’s first appearance on Destiny’s stream occurred on October 8th, 2018 to discuss an upcoming debate with Charlie Kirk and laude Destiny for his prior debate performances against the right. Following this appearance, Hasan became a temporary fixture of Destiny’s streams, and a friend. His initial appearances focused primarily on the burgeoning online-right movement and various economic/political theory. Hasan would frequently join Destiny on podcasts, occasionally IRL stream with him at restaurants and bars, and would regularly appear on Destiny's stream to play games or discuss current controversial issues. Over time, Hasan's limited debate experience, ideological differences with Destiny(primarily concerning left-wing thought), and struggles processing criticism from both Destiny and his community, eventually strained their relationship to the point where the two streamers cut ties with one another.
Currently, Hasan and Destiny are not on amicable terms. Their mutual dislike has intensified over the years, primarily stemming from personal animosity, political differences, and disputes over various contentious issues. The two will regularly criticize the positions/actions of the other, and have fostered communities that mirror their mutual dislike. Despite this animosity and his status as a prominent online political commentator, Hasan has consistently declined to appear on stream with Destiny or engage in debates with him since their second fallout, citing a general disdain for debates and "debate-perverts". [1] [2]
For several years, Hasan boycotted all mention of Destiny on his channel, and would generally refuse to engage with any content related to Destiny(for fear of providing him underserved clout). Despite this, Hasan would sporadically react to Destiny-adjacent contact should he feel his input on the manner is necessary. As a result, Destiny's name has been banned from mention in Piker's Twitch chat, and individuals who could potentially be perceived as Destiny fans will typically be banned. [3]
Shortly following the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, Hasan ended his embargo on all Destiny-related content. Hasan occasionally devotes portions of his streams to either reacting to Destiny's subreddit, or ridiculing one of Destiny's mainstream media appearances.[4][5] [6] [7] The reasons for this change of heart have sparked much speculation. While Hasan maintains he feels morally obliged to respond to Destiny's defense of the military operations in Gaza, other have speculated that Hasan is seeking to capitalize on Destiny's rising popularity amid several mainstream media appearances and his own dwindling Twitch and YouTube channel metrics.[8][9][10][11]
Early life and education
Hasan Piker was born on July 25, 1991, in New Brunswick, New Jersey. He spent his early years in Turkey before moving back to the United States for college. Piker attended Rutgers University, where he earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science and communication.
Career
The Young Turks
Piker began his career as an intern at The Young Turks in 2014. He quickly rose through the ranks, becoming a producer and on-air contributor. Piker gained prominence for his dating advice show "Bro Tips".
Twitch streaming
In 2018, Piker started streaming on Twitch, where he discusses pop politics, news headlines, and popular culture. His Twitch channel, "Hasanabi," has amassed a large following, making him one of the most popular political streamers on the platform. Piker's streams often feature discussions with journalists and content creators.
Disagreements with Destiny WIP
The following section is a recounting of every disagreement Hasan and Destiny have had since their first on-stream meeting. For greater detail into a disagreement(including discussion highlights,timestamps and play-by-play), a link to the relevant section(in the form of a hyperlink or disambiguation link) is provided when possible.
Hasan Claims to "own" Destiny in a debate regarding the successfulness of Donald Trump as a Republican
During one of the initial discussions between Hasan and Destiny, Hasan claims Trump has been incredibly successful as a Republican president because his underlying positions are just "regular fucking conservative principles". Hasan elaborates his positions are all the "modern GOP positions" but his rhetoric is just different, and is just more appealing to his base voters. He goes on to point to things such as the Republican Tax plan, the "destruction" of the EPA", and the "destruction" of the financial protection bureau. He concludes this is all "regular republican shit" Trump was able to accomplish in an authoritarian fashion.[13]
Destiny claims Trump has caused a very deep division within the Republican party(Destiny calls it the Tea party on crack), citing instances such as Trumples mocking Mccain for being a war hero making it very difficult for them to see eye-to-eye with other Republicans. Destiny then discuss how Trump fans and supporters "fucking hate" establishment Republicans, citing the tendency of these groups to trash moderate Republicans just as hard as certain left leaning groups(i.e. calling them Rhinos). Destiny concludes he's unsure what kind of damage will happen to the party once Trump is gone, pointing to how a candidate like Rubio could have difficulty pandering to this new-extreme base.[14]
Hasan once again disagrees with this, and maintains his prior position that Trump still advocates for "staple Republican positions". He then makes the point Republicans will always vote for whoever "triggers the libs" the most. Destiny agreed with this in the end, but maintained they will just have to see what happens to the party after the midterms.
On January 24, 2024 Hasan claims to have "owned" Destiny in this discussion. Hasan claims to be proven correct as Trump was able to stack the supreme court, "destroy" regulatory agencies, and offer "fat" tax cuts.[15]
MrDeadMoth domestic abuse situation
On December 12, 2018 Destiny and Hasan debated the circumstances surrounding a domestic abuse situation involving Fortnite streamer MrDeadMoth. [16] Hasan, while of the opinion MrDeadMoth's wife did take steps to escalate the situation, maintains that MrDeadMoth bore the brunt of the blame in the situation for physically retaliating against his partner. Destiny took the contrary position, stating that while MrDeadMoth's physical response should not be excused, the wife's persistent approach, escalation, and starting of the physical altercation, should result in her receiving more of the blame.
Breaking News
On January 7, 2019 Destiny and Hasan debated the ethicality of reporting on breaking news and the roles of journalists and commentators in shaping public perception. Hasan, after reporting a recent shooting may have been racially charged, was accused of "race-baiting" after more information was released revealing that the shooting was in fact gang-related, and not a hate crime. Hasan felt this criticism was unwarranted, claiming he was merely working with the facts he had at the time, and that he could not wait for more facts to come out as it would be to the detriment of his job. Destiny took issue with this, arguing it was irresponsible of Hasan to cover the shooting before more information was released. Moreover, Destiny argued that Hasan should have avoided constructing a narrative around hate crimes, pointing to the hypocrisy Hasan would show if a right-leaning commentator speculated about Arabs following a bombing.
Moral Luck
- Main Article: Moral Luck
On March 23, 2019 Hasan, Rem, Vaush, and Destiny engaged in a heated discussion on the necessity of a foundational philosophical understanding for those engaging in political advocacy. Rem was of the position that content creators, particularly those with larger audiences, have a moral obligation to attain the base level of philosophical knowledge required to "ground" oneself in a moral framework. Rem goes on to argue that content creators who do not do so, run the risk of "lucking" into a position based off their life-experiences, and therefore may not truly be advocating for the "correct" position.
Vaush and Hasan challenged this view, calling it unrealistic given the fast-paced and often superficial nature of online discourse. While the majority of Hasan's disagreements(and angst) were directed at Rem, Destiny eventually made clear that he supported Rem's stance, and argued that large content-creators should have at least his own level of philosophical knowledge before advocating their positions. Destiny went on to reference his personal experience debating individuals who struggled to present strong arguments against incest, and how those individuals would have an easier time advocating for their stance with a grounded ethical framework.
Research methods
In 2019, Hasan lauded Wikipedia as a "scholarly source", referring to it as an excellent example of an open source website backed by credible information.[17] However, following the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel,critics, including Hasan, frequently accused Destiny of primarily relying on reading Wikipedia articles for research, and even derided the website as a potential credible source altogether.[18] [19][20]
Research Fancams
Following a flare up in tensions between Destiny and several Ludwig-adjacent content creators,and at the request of reddit moderator 4THOT, reddit user lordsavor made several fancams in response to the critique that Destiny relies purley on wikipedia articles for research. This fancam included several instances of Destiny scouring academic/historical documents for research.[21][22]
Destiny research fancam | |
---|---|
|
Later that day, lordsavor posted another fancam, wherein several Hasan vods were scoured in order to find genuine instances of Hasan doing research on any given topic. lordsavor found little in their search, and had the following to say:
Before making the hasan Twitter research montage fancam, I really wondered to myself. "Did Hasan REALLY do NO RESEARCH at all?". So I scoured his vods and tried to find one. Like genuinely tried. The best I can find is him getting referred to a document on a interview in which he read a paragraph and then moved on. EVERYTIME that he reads something in a academic paper or some shit, HE JUST READS ONE PARAGRAPH AND MOVES ON. READ THE WHOLE THING DIPSHIT. I fucking can't man, why do I give this worm a chance, I wasted so much time. Anyways the other fancam is coming soon, I'm a bit busy today sorry.[23]
Hasan research fancam | |
---|---|
|
One day following the release of these fancams, yet another fancam was released, this time by reddit user Jaded-Engineer.[24]
Hasan research fancam #2 | |
---|---|
|
Abortion
On May 17, 2019, Destiny and Hasan held a brief debate regarding their respective underlying moral positions with regards to abortion. While Destiny expressed his moral reservations with regards to abortion(arguing that human-life begins at conception), he maintained that abortion should still be legally permissible given the extenuating circumstances an individual who may desire an abortion could find themselves in. Hasan agreed with Destiny's policy assessment of abortion, however, he took issue with Destiny's "arbitrary" assignment of personhood at conception. Following a brief deliberation on "personhood" in a fetus, Hasan eventually admitted to "coming up with arguments on the spot", and went on to state he had not previously thought about whether a fetus has personhood.[25] As a result, the majority of the debate was spent with Destiny attempting to help Hasan discover his underlying moral position on abortion, interspersed between various disagreements on the subject of personhood.
Over the course of the debate, Destiny asked Hasan's several questions pertaining to the differentiation in personhood between a one-year-old child and a fetus. When Destiny posited these questions, Hasan was unable to provide a substantive backing of any one element of personhood without making reference to some other element. This tactic was eventually called out by Destiny, and resolved as the two further deliberated. The debate still remained contentious following this resolution, as any trait Hasan attempted to define in the personhood of a one-year-old, Destiny was able to substantiate in a fetus(i.e. potentiality for becoming a moral agent, and harm to the mother). The conversation eventually took a turn following Destiny's attempt to use a personal anecdote relating to his experiences with refusing to get an abortion, and Hasan arguing Destiny had not considered his partner's suffering during that experience. Destiny accused Hasan of ad-hominem, Hasan denied doing so, and the conversation continued for some time. By the end of the debate, both Hasan and Destiny(each still steadfast in their prior positions) eventually agreed that the philosophical discussion surrounding abortion is "aids".
Emmia, Cryptofacsicsm, and dissuading voters from Biden
On June 16, 2019 Destiny and Hasan had a contentious conversation regarding cryptofacsicsm and political pragmatism, which ultimately set the stage for their first fallout. The conversation started with Destiny and Emmia, a fellow twitch streamer, discussing her contentious interactions with Twitch's political community, where she was accused of being a Nazi due to her prior relationship with a Breitbart writer and engagement with alt-right memes. Emmia expressed regret for her involvement with these memes, but defended herself by claiming ignorance of the memes' origins and attributing some of her behavior to memory loss from SSRI medication. In response, Destiny explained the concept of cryptofacsicsm, advised Emmia to renounce her past actions, and focus on her future behavior going forward. Destiny further advises Emmia to do so regardless of individuals who would seek to bring up her past behavior, as they would likely never forgive her regardless of any repetenace she attempts.
Hasan eventually joins the call, expresses his skepticism with regards to Emima's claims, and accuses her of clout-seeking behavior. Destiny eventually steps in to defend Emmia, and Hasan responds by accusing Destiny of being overly charitable to her. Destiny counters, and accuses Hasan of perpetuating the "vicious cycle" of cryptofacsicsm by bullying a "normie" like Emmia into apologizing immediately, instead of waiting to evaluate her future behavior. Destiny further asserts that the communities Hasan inhabits, and the individuals demanding Emmia's apology, would likely never forgive her anyways. Destiny proceeds to point to the severe criticism he has received from left-leaning communities despite the breadth of progressive content he has produced.
"There was a week's worth of chapotraphouse threads on me that said I want to fuck 19 year olds, that said I want to abandon my kid, fucking christ I've got like 7,000 videos over the past four or five years of me doing progressive work, like fuck it dude, if I haven't changed people's minds why the fuck would I tell anybody else to waste their time... And i'll maintain that position, left leaning communities are just as cancerous as right-wing communities when it comes to online discourse."
The conversation escalates as Hasan and Destiny spend the remainder of the call debating the pragmaticism(or lack thereof) of their respective political views. Hasan accuses Destiny of routinely alienating left-leaning viewers with provocative statements, such as calling workers dumb. While Destiny counters that Hasan’s has engaged in even more divisive actions, such as recently stating in a tv interview that he wouldn't vote for Biden over Trump. Hasan argues that voting for Biden perpetuates a flawed political system, while Destiny rebukes this, pointing out the harm a Trump presidency could cause. Destiny then demands that Hasan explain his logic for abstaining from voting in the next election. Hasan explains that a vote for Biden would merely perpetuate the status-quo even further, asserts that politicians like Biden will never push for change that interferes with the "interest of capital" or corporations, and contends that Biden is "basically a Republican". Destiny counters, accusing Hasan of stating one of the most hilariously stupid things he has ever heard, remarks how individuals on the right will "literally cheer" for any republican candidate to get through in an election, and asserts that not voting for a democratic candidate because it "doesn't deal with capitalism" is an incredibly privileged position to anyone not spending all their time online "larping about socialism".
The conversation eventually concludes as Destiny accuses Hasan of being an accelerationist and unpragmatic, Hasan asserts the "neoliberalism" and capitalistic nature of the Democratic party has corrupted it, and Destiny once again criticizes Hasan of arguing from a point of extreme privilege and ignoring individuals who would suffer under a Trump presidency.
Kamala Harris disinformation, the first fallout WIP
- Main Article: Hasan and Destiny break up over Kamala Misinformation
On July 7, 2019 Destiny and Hasan had a very heated discussion regarding American politician Kamala Harris, leading to their first major fallout. [26] Upon reviewing the underlying facts of the video(which Hasan states were sourced primarily from a Twitter thread on the candidate), Destiny found that "almost every single thing Hasan said in the video was either dead wrong or horribly stretched out of what's actually happening". While the two spent several hours debating these underlying facts, only a few of Destiny's grievances with the video were addressed. Furthermore, the debate was mired by several instances of Hasan inadvertently speaking over Destiny due to the poor quality headset/microphone setup Destiny possessed at the time.
Prior to the call's conclusion, Hasan accuses Destiny of gaslighting, strawmanning, and creating insane hypotheticals throughout the conversation. Hasan continues, stating he "hates this shit", discusses his disdain towards accusations of Moral Luck from Destiny's community, and likens talking to Destiny to trying to speak with Ben Shapiro . Destiny counters that every hypothetical posited during the conversation to Hasan was provided with the specific intent of exploring a given topic, and offers to discuss any disingenuous debate tactics he feels were used against him at a later date.
Shortly following the stream, both streamers created reddit threads detailing their feelings/takeaways from the discussion, and received their share of community feedback/criticism.[27][28] Following an onstream addressal by Destiny of both the conversation and reddit threads, both streamers cut ties with one another for some time. [29]
The N-word WIP
Community Moderation Issues WIP
Ethan Klein
On September 26, 2021 Ethan Klien (aka H3H3) and Hasan debuted Leftovers , a leftist political podcast. The podcast focused on politics, and internet culture and featured guests such as Amouranth, and Andrew Callaghan.[30]
In October of 2023 Ethan announced that Leftovers would go on hiatus indefinitely as a result of tension and stress from conversations related to the 2023 Israel-Hamas war[31].
On October 31, 2023 these tensions seemed to flare up even moreso than before, with Ethan taking a more assertive approach towards his criticism of Hasan's coverage of the conflict[32].
On November 9, 2023 Ethan and Hasan had another conversation/argument about the meaning of the phrase 'From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free'[33].
On September 12, 2024 Ethan criticised a TikTok editor of Hasan's for defending Bin Laden's letter to America .[34][35] A moderator of Hasan's stream, Frogan, took issue with Ethan's statements and requested for him to "shut up". In response, Ethan issued two separate statements:
- Ethan argues that a Hasan moderator telling a Jewish man such as himself to "shut up" about Bin Laden's hatred towards jews is reprehensible. Ethan goes on to claim Frogan's voice is not "fringe" within Hasan's community, and cites this as the primary reason he ended his podcast with Hasan. [36]
- Ethan condemns Hasan for allowing an official representative of his community to behave in such a reprehensible manner, and argues that Hasan's continual hand waving of her horrific behavior is essentially an implicit endorsement. [37]
While Hasan derided his community for this behavior, he maintained that Ethan was unjustified in issuing any response to Frogan.[38][39]
Destiny WIP
- 4:39 Destiny explains that he typically walks away from conversations with Hasan feeling bad about his community's treatment of him. Destiny explains that he has recently attempted to "flip" this mindset, and look at how Hasan's community treats himself after their conversations. Destiny notes that Hasan and his community have levied almost every criticism towards himself that Destiny has ever received from individuals on the right he has debated.
- 5:07 Destiny reads a highly upvoted comment from Hasan's subreddit, and argues the contents are indistinguishable from a comment in a 4chan thread.
On stream appearances with Destiny WIP
Destiny has a pre-debate discussion with Hasan
On October 9th, 2018 Destiny engaged in a "pre-debate debate" with Hasan. This discussion was held in preparation for a future politicon appearance Hasan would have with Charlie Kirk. [40] Hasan begins the conversation cordially, praising Destiny for being "awesome," citing his "excellent" content, and expressing that he "really likes what he's about." From there, the two engage in a lighthearted conversation discussing topics such as Neoliberalism, Destiny's political and gaming background, the current political climate, and Hasan's upcoming debate with Charlie Kirk. Other topics discussed include, Destiny and Hasan's political perspectives, prior debate experiences with conservatives, and a disagreement Hasan had with Destiny regarding the successfulness of Donald Trump as a president.
Discussion Highlights | |
---|---|
Destiny's Political Perspective
|
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Destiny reacts to a Politicon panel featuring Hasan and Charlie Kirk. Hasan and Destiny discuss the following day
Destiny's reaction to the Politicon Panel
On October 20, 2018 Destiny reacted to a Politicon panel featuring featuring Hasan and Charlie Kirk.[41] The primary focus of the panel was: "Whether young people should be progressives, conservatives, or perhaps something else". Destiny was mildly impressed by certain aspects of Hasan's debate performance. He appreciated Hasan's ability to challenge and critique various points, particularly in the context of discussing systemic issues and the limitations of free-market solutions. He also recognized the difficulty Hasan faced in addressing complex topics such as healthcare, education, and wealth distribution, in the face of a practiced "Gish-Galloper" such as Charlie Kirk. He did however offer a few critiques:
- Destiny suggested that Hasan could benefit from incorporating more 'scummy tactics' used in live debates. Destiny explains that tactics such as strategic interjections and rebuttals tailored to the format, especially facing an individual such as Charlie Kirk, would have seen immense results.
- Destiny argued that Hasan could improve in how he handles the framing set by his opponents, particularly in redirecting or countering their narratives.
Discussion Highlights | |
---|---|
Highlights from Destiny's reaction include:
|
Discussion with Hasan
On October 21, 2018 Destiny and Hasan engaged in a three and a half hour long discussion regarding Hasan's recent debate experience at Politicon. [42] The conversation begins with Destiny explaining to Hasan that he did not necessarily dislike the points he attempted to convey to Kirk, but was critical of his attempts to get those points across. Hasan agreed with this sentiment, and pointed to Kirk's tactics of outright lying, Gish Galloping, moving the goalposts, and crafting messages for "applause breaks" as being very frustrating to deal with. Destiny sympathised with this, agreeing the debate tactics employed by Kirk are very hard to deal with in real time, particularly in a live format. From there, the two discussed tactics Hasan could have employed better in the debate, their grievances with modern day conservatives, and the best methods in reaching out to a broader audience.
Destiny's Advice | |
---|---|
Dealing with Gish Galloping
|
As the conversation concludes, Hasan thanks Destiny and admits that although his audience initially viewed Destiny with skepticism, believing him to be a social democrat, they have now fallen in love with him. Hasan then raids Destiny's channel, and offers to help "tag-team" someone in a debate should Destiny ever wish.
Discussion Timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Hasan and Destiny meet in-person
On November 1, 2018 Destiny and Hasan spent an evening together and had dinner in-person. [43]
Hasan's Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate discussion with Hasan
On November 2, 2018 Hasan engaged in a debate with esports journalist Richard Lewis regarding several hot-button topics at the time. Topics included the Mainstream Media, Donald Trump, Shifting Demographics, and Obama Era Deportations. [44] The call concluded with Lewis describing Hasan as a "diet Destiny".
On November 6, 2018 Hasan and Destiny reacted to a vod of the debate together. [45] At the onset of the stream, the two experience several delays due to technical difficulties primarily attributed to synchronizing the audio of both the vods they are watching, low-volume, and Destiny hearing an echo from Hasan's stream(Hasan did not have headphones at the time). Destiny eventually decides that Hasan should simply watch his stream while he reacts to the vod, Hasan points out that Destiny's stream has a five-second delay, to which Destiny responds Hasan can just "scream" if he wants the video paused. Destiny immediately retracts this idea, and settles on just screensharing the video through discord(only after Destiny berates the chatter who suggested this alternative). From this point, Destiny's stream is left with the muffled audio of Hasan's debate with Richard Lewis, which the two react to for the remainder of the call.
Throughout the video, Destiny levies several critiques of Lewis at both a personal and argumentative level. Destiny calls Lewis "spineless" for his behavior following the JonTron Debate, citing Lewis' claim that he had made Jontron appear racist through debate-tactics. Destiny also ridicules Lewis for being under the control of esports broadcaster, Thorin, describing him as being on a “little leash” held by the broadcaster whenever he forms an opinion. On an argumentative level, Destiny critiques Lewis's tendency to gish gallop Hasan at several points during the debate, disputes Lewis's views on American Exceptionalism in journalism, and criticizes the way figures like Lewis struggle when faced with facts which stand in direct opposition to their claims. While watching the video, Hasan observes that Lewis often claims their conversation is "not a debate" and uses this assertion to dodge pressure or clarification on issues. Hasan suggests that Lewis's likely only joined his stream for the sake of gaining clout from his stream, a point with which Destiny agrees. Destiny and Hasan went on to critique many of Lewis' defenses for Donald Trump, primarily relating to the hypocrisy of Conservatives when defending Republican figures and attacking Democratic ones, and the tendency of centrists like Lewis to use liberalism as a "convenient suit" to push any argument they may be in favor of.
Discussion Highlights | |
---|---|
Technical Delays
16:30: As the audio was being played through Hasan's speakers, whenever Hasan speaks, the audio from the video is muted. A frustrated Destiny decides to pause the video and fruitlessly work on a solution with Hasan to settle this issue. No solution is found, and the two continue with the video.
1:08:39: Destiny discusses how Lewis' feud with the r/Leagueoflegends mods after a subreddit ban, and his threats of doxing the team, resulted in a reddit-wide ban on his account.
54:31: After mockingly presenting an argument presented by Lewis while mimicking his accent, Hasan proclaims "that's literally every fucking British dipshit, every British central dipshit", to which Destiny warns Hasan against disparaging all British people, and to focus on this particular commentator.
|
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Destiny at Hasan's place
On December 1, 2018 Destiny streamed with Hasan at his apartment for eight hours. During the stream, the two discussed several mainstream events at the time including teenagers getting kicked out of a McDonalds, a doctor being removed from a commercial flight, and a Janitor getting fired from a public school. The four seperate videos are a result of the owner of the Last Night On Destiny channel attempting to break up the eight hour vod.
At Hasan's place ft. Felklmao
Destiny arives at Hasan's apartment, plays with Fish(Hasan's dog), and proceeds to help troubleshoot some technical issues with Hasan.[47] At one point, prolific DGG chatter Felklmao requsts to join the call, and Destiny warns Hasan against allowing him in for fear of getting gnomed. Felklmao does eventually join the call and proceeds to have a friendly conversation with Hasan, no gnomes involved.
Talk with Hasan - McDonnald's employee kicking teenagers out
At one point during the stream, Hasan mentions that he saw Destiny's reaction to a situation involving a group of teens, whom after allegedly being threatened by a gunman in a McDonalds, were removed from the premises by a manager. Destiny, being on the side of the manager in this situation, had some disagreement with Hasan over this event. Destiny's primary contention being that the manager was in the right not to believe "teenagers walking around like a bunch of dumbasses", and that a McDonalds does not need to serve as a fortress against some "ar-15 shots". Hasan counters, and suggests that the manager should have exhibited "just a little care" for her fellow human beings. The two engage in a lighthearted debate for some time. [48]
"What if it was Nathan(at the McDonalds shouting for help)?" - Hasan
"I don't care, fuck him dude... If Nathan is around there bullying some fucking dude.. Nathan what the fuck is wrong with you? Why are you screaming some dumbass shit?" -Destiny
Debate Highlights | |
---|---|
|
Talk with Hasan - Doctor kicked out of airplane
Destiny and Hasan debate an incident involving a Doctor's refusal to leave his seat when directed because he needed to see patients the following day. Destiny maintains that the doctor should have booked a first-class flight if he was so concerned with the wellbeing of his patients. Hasan criticises this suggestion, highlighting the uncertainty of first-class availability and violations of consumer protection. [49]
Debate Highlights | |
---|---|
|
Talk with Hasan - Disciplining employee - School janitor case
During the stream Destiny and Hasan engaged in yet another light hearted debate, this time involving a janitor being fired from a middle school for leaving early. Destiny, was of the opinion that the janitor should not have left the school early, while Hasan felt the firing was unjustified.Eventually, Hasan agrees with Destiny that the principal had provided a compelling reason for the janitor to be present at the school, he caveats that the principal is still being an “egomaniacal tyrant and a horrible boss” in this scenario. [50]
Debate Highlights | |
---|---|
|
Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa
On December 11, 2018 Destiny ,while driving his Nitrous Blue Ford Focus RS, has a heated conversation with his chat regarding a domestic abuse situation involving fortnite streamer MrDeadMoth and his wife. During the conversation, Destiny asserts parents should never fight in front of their kids, maintains throwing items at one’s partner(as the wife did in the scenario) still constitutes physical abuse, and repeatedly berates chatters whom suggest otherwise. [51] [52]
On December 12, 2018 Destiny reviewed the domestic abuse case from his home-office, and was eventually joined by several other friends of the stream.[53] Individuals in the video such as MrMouton, Hasan, and WhiteNervosa had slightly varied focuses on the situation, but all came to the conclusion that MrDeadMoth bore the brunt of the blame and should not have physically retaliated against his wife's physical actions towards him. Destiny took the contrary position, stating that while MrDeadMoth physical response should not be excused, the wife's persistent approach, escalation, and starting of the physical altercation, should be viewed as provoking or exacerbating the situation. Destiny goes on to point out that the wife repeatedly engaged and re-engaged in confrontational behavior, which included throwing objects and verbal provocation, while MrDeadMoth attempted multiple times to deescalate the situation.
"I'm sorry.. anybody who defends the women here is a literal subhuman piece of shit... I don't even know how you can even begin to think that her actions here are remotely okay. She instigates every physical violence here, she starts every single time.. And is the guy right for slapping her? No he's not, but every single time he backs off, she keeps coming back, not to talk... but to be physically abusive over and over again... People are linking pictures in chat... of the guy.. this is aparantly pictures he has taken of abuse. I don't even need these, because it doesn't even matter... this video speaks for itself."
- - Destiny 25:56
Individual Positions | |
---|---|
Destiny's position
10:0829:33 Destiny claims that he typically never speaks on this issue(women on man domestic abuse), due to thinking it was common sense to understand how bad such situations are. He highlights how this situation has seemed dispel that thought, as he has witnessed many alleged feminists applauding MrDeadMoth's harassment by his wife. He goes on to describe how he typically doesn't speak on this issue, because he finds Men's-rights activists online to be quite abhorrent. Following this, Destiny describes the double standard at play when people find it amusing for a women to abuse a man 14:42 Destiny asserts that all domestic abuse is bad, and that no physical altercations should ever occur in a relationship. He goes on to claim that the fact that this situation is occurring in front of a child makes the situation even more tragic. Destiny then states that the women appears to be consistently instigating the situation, while the man attempting to play the game is doing little wrong. He concludes that if the gender roles in this scenario were swapped, the positions of many outspoken critics towards MrDeadMoth would be reversed. 28:02 Destiny describes the "reasonable answer" one should give when experiencing abuse, which is calling the authorities. He caveats this by stating: "All three times that I have called the police(in similar domestic abuse scenarios), they have blamed me for what happened. So when Rachel would get physically violent with me, three times... one time when my mom was even visiting. I called the cops three times, women police showed up, and they said it was my fault I was driving her to that."
Destiny's contention with MrMouton was primarily centered on whether or not the slap by MrDeadMoth was justified. Destiny maintains that if one were to get physical with their partner as a result of them instigating physical abuse, a slap is the most optimal form of retaliation. Destiny goes on to state that individuals put into stressful situations do not always act optimally, and people are placing an unfair amount of responsibility on MrDeadMoth in this situation. 50:11 MrMouton claims MrDeadMoth "punched the shit" out of his wife. Destiny responds he cannot possibly know this occured, and he does not believe MrDeadMoth ever punched her. MrMouton would go on to state that the biggest issue was that MrDeadmoth did so in front of his child, to which Destiny responds the fault is on the wife for escalating the situation in from of their child. Hasan's position
56:57 When questioned by Destiny how one should not counter being physically assaulted by their partner with more violence, Hasan describes curling up into a ball when being attacked by his partner. Destiny disagrees and argues "fuck that shit". 58:38 Hasan puts forth that MrDeadMoth should have shut off the game, and de-escalated the situation. Destiny counters that the situation is inherently ridiculous, stating: "she is using physical violence and intimidation to get her way, to force him to have a conversation he may not want to have, in order to deescalate a situation. I'm almost more in favor saying the guy is more in the right to fight her, than to fucking sit here and entertain the conversation..." 1:00:24 Hasan claims to cover domestic abuse situations in the same framework as police brutality, in that the male has much more force in most situations. Destiny counters that police sign up and have training for such situations, while the average male partner does not. 1:02:37 Hasan argues that the best possible outcome for the scenario would be if MrDeadMoth turned off his pc and attempted to confront his wife. Destiny disagrees, and puts forth that the best outcome would be for him to leave the room and call the police. 1:18:05 Hasan argues that he would never hit someone much smaller than him, especially a pregnant women. Destiny pokes fun at Hasan for this line of thought, and argues that MrDeadMoth's wife being pregnant places more blame on her for instigating and escalating such a situation. Whitenervosa's position 1:59:04 Destiny calls out WhiteNervosa for stating MrDeadMoth's wife is receiving more hatred than MrDeadmoth himself. Destiny goes on to state, he already knows what her take is, and is already anticipating killing himself upon hearing it live. 2:05:27 WhiteNervosa eventually joins the call, and asks Destiny why he believes the women is more at fault than the man. Destiny reasserts his position, stating the women instigated the violence and consistently escalated it. WhiteNervosa questions how MrDeadMoth deescalated the situation, and how his wife reengaged in physical violence. Destiny responds "he went back to his chair and put his headphones on", and "after he hits her for the first time, he sits back down, and she comes back and reengages, and re-escalates in the physical violence again." WhiteNervosa then asks "what does she do", to which Destiny describes how MrDeadMoth's wife "throw shit at him, threaten to break shit, looks like she's about to hit him." Following this line of questioning, WhiteNervosa accuses Destiny of being charitable to MrDeadMoth, and not his wife stating he has no idea of knowing whether the wife was going to attempt to hit him. Destiny responds the wife is in fact threatening to harm MrDeadMoth, pointing out that she threw items, broke items, and MrDeadMoth raised his hands in an attempt to block a blow at one point. WhiteNervosa asks Destiny if he believes MrDeadMoth escalated force needlessly after having items thrown at him. Destiny responds he does not know, to which WhiteNervosa further inquires if it matters what items are being thrown at MrDeadMoth, and provides the example of a birthday balloon. Destiny argues it likely does not matter, and informs WhiteNervosa this take is "hilariously baby brained, I can't tell if you're ironically making it or just trying to win the argument." WhiteNervosa then attempts to argue "you wouldn't say cardboard is the equivalent of a lamp right?" Destiny responds "I don't know... throwing folded up cardboard at a person fucking hurts, go get somebody into a garage and fucking try it." WhiteNervosa attempts to cut Destiny off at this point to disagree, to which Destiny responds : "Can you please shut the fuck up and go try it before saying it doesn't hurt, like this is a hilarious fucking first grade take, first of all throwing folded up fucking boxes at people does fucking hurt, secondly that's not the only thing that we saw thrown at him, she's throwing shit hard enough to wiggle the camera in the room, and we hear stuff falling on the floor in the background, but if you wanna pretend the only thing she's throwing are balloons then..." From hereon out, the two deliberate on whether MrDeadMoth received ample enough provocation to retaliate against his wife. Destiny becomes seemingly more infuriated with the conversation as it proceeds, part in fact due to WhiteNervosa's tendency to place the majority of the blame on MrDeadMoth. This tension in this call eventually builds up to a point where Destiny throws his hands to his head(shortly after being killed in his call of duty match) and states WhiteNervosa is "fucking retarded" and ends his stream. |
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Hasan discusses PewDiePie and E;R with Destiny
On December 17, 2018, Destiny and Hasan discuss PewDiePie's political ignorance, and how the same ignorance appears to be prevalent throughout much of online discourse. [54] The video begins with Hasan discussing how PewDiePie, near the end of a recent video, had inadvertently promoted a "Nazi youtube channel" by the name of E;R. Despite PewDiePie editing out the promotion of E;R from the prior video and issuing an apology, Hasan goes on to claim that PewDiePie's apology was "fake" as he included the same promotion twice in the apology video coupled with promoting pieces of E;R's content in earlier videos. Hasan would go on to state that these actions make it seem like PewDiePie may be a crypto-fascist. Destiny responds that he is hesitant to label PewDiePie as such, given that he may truly just be ignorant when it comes to interpreting harmful political messaging, claiming the same ignorance is rife throughout "gamer-bro" communities .
Eventually, the conversation veers off into a discussion on Venezuela and Socialism, and Hasan exits the call after discussing the issue for an hour. At this point, Destiny is alone and decides to watch PewDiePie's biggest OOPSIE, a video wherein PewDiePie recounts the promotion of E;R. During the video, PewDiePie plays a sound-bite from a prior video where he promotes E;R's death note review, and mocks anyone for suggesting this is nazi propaganda. Destiny watches thirty minutes of the review, questions how E;R manages to do such poor critiques of media for a living, and refuses to watch any more of "this low-iq shit". Destiny then requests that his chat direct him to some of E;R's "nazi shit", and is eventually told to skip to the thirty seven minute mark of the video where a Heather Heyer reference is made. From this point Destiny reacts to several nazi references made in E;R's videos including a Hitler speech played over dramatic music, and a montage of wealthy/influential Jewish individuals played over Orpheus in the Underworld concluding with a message of "securing an existence and future for human children". From these videos, Destiny eventually concludes that E;R is "maybe a little bit of a Nazi". Destiny eventually resumes PewDiePie's video and Hasan joins the call to get Destiny's position on the situation. Destiny informs Hasan that E;R is almost certainly attempting to red pill viewers on Nazi propaganda, and that he still has to finish PewDiePie's response video to draw a conclusion on him. After finishing PewDiePie's response video, Destiny concludes that PewDiePie is not a nazi but is likely just dumb politically.
Discussion Highlights | |
---|---|
Hasan summarizes the PewDiePie debacle
|
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Hasan debates a Venezuelan regarding the country's economic collapse
On the same day Destiny and Hasan discussed PewDiePie, the pair had a conversation regarding whether the economic collapse of Venezuela was a product of socialism. [55] The conversation was initially spurred on after a chatter, Yiazmat, asserted that Destiny had let Hasan claim the country's economic collapse had nothing to do with Socialism.[56] Destiny responds that he had not seen any evidence linking socialism to Venezuela's collapse, and that it was more likely attributed to corruption prevalent throughout the government. Hasan also adds that the collapse could be attributed to the Venezuelan economy being heavily privatized, and provides Scandinavian nations as examples of socialism being successful in practice.
Shortly after Destiny and Hasan's initial remarks, Yiazmat requests to join the call, and is eventually admitted into the discord room. Yiazmat, appearing to be quite emotional, makes his hatred for the Venezuelan government clear and goes on to reassert his position that Hasan is incorrect regarding his claim that "socialism has nothing to do with what happened" to the country. Yiazmat then points to several of the country's industries becoming nationalized, and the institution of various price controls. Destiny posits that Venezuela has been engaging in this nationalizing for quite some time, to which Yiazmat counters that the country had not engaged in such practices before Chávez. Yiazmat goes on to cite the "real socialism" undergone in Venezuela(aka seizing the means of production) as the primary cause for the country's strife, and criticizes Hasan previous attempts at comparing Scandinavian countries to Venezuela.
The conversation veers off into a semantic discussion on what constitutes "true socialism". Throughout the conversation, Yiazmat maintains that the nationalization of several key industries, and instituting of various price controls, is more than enough evidence of socialism occuring. While Hasan disagrees, asserting the problem was due in part to poor leadership, and imperialism from countries like the United States. During the conversation, Hasan would routinely attempt to point to other countries which have engaged in similar activities as Venezuela, and have not experienced economic collapse. Destiny also maintains that the collapse of the country was not a result of socialism, however he primarily asserts price-controls and poor economic policy were the primary cause for the country's downward spiral. Despite initially debating with Yiazmat, Destiny acted as a moderator for the two other individuals in the call, ensuring certain claims(i.e. causes of food shortages in Venezuela) were fact checked in real time and no fallacious arguments were made by either side.
Hasan(voice muffled with food): "Okay... printing money is something the United States does almost all the fucking time...and the reason why they did it, is so that poor people also had access to food."
Destiny: "Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait... chill okay... so your currency is backed by the strength of your economy... when the United States prints currency to cover its own debt, that printing is not done as a crisis play in order to save our economy, the United States does not print money in crisis to save our economy. Even the 2007 downturn was not like an extreme crisis where we had to save ourselves, in the same way that in Venezuela, there are people standing in line for like hours to buy fucking toilet paper... When Venezuela was printing money, they were doing it to literally bail themselves out of a fucked situation, but they did not have the same strength of their economy , so their bond ratings went to shit as a result of this bad monetary policy. Whereas in the US, we can print money, and that's fine, it's backed by our economy, Venezuela did not have the(same) economy."
Following the initial dispute, the conversation becomes more personal after Destiny inquires what Yiazmat's day-to-day life is like. Yiazmat becomes quite emotional during this segment, as he describes his parents' life-savings being stripped from them by the government. Following Yiazmat's emotionally charged retelling of his family history, Hasan is seemingly more hesitant to press Yiazmat on the issue any further, and the conversation eventually concludes.
Debate Highlights | |
---|---|
Reading Yiazmat's comment, initial remarks from Destiny and Hasan
Upon retrieving the Wikipedia page for Hugo Chávez, Destiny remarks the Venezuelan oil industry had been nationalized since the late 1970s, and that Chávez came in 1999. Yiazmat replies that he is unsure, but asserts Chávez still replaced several key workers in these industries with less competent workers. Hasan then adds that while all this is true, it has nothing to do with socialism. Yiazmat maintains that the nationalization of several industries is evidence of socialism occuring.
27:45 Yiazmat claims that some social programs instituted by the Venezuelan government wherein voters were given money and utilities like laundry machines contributed to the country's downfall. Hasan disagrees with this framing, and places the blame once more on poor management of a country. Destiny agrees with Hasan, and pushes back against Yiazmat's perspective as well.
|
Debate timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Hasan joins DGG chat
On December 24th, 2018 Hasan Joined DGG chat under the username "HasanAbi".[57]
Destiny IRL streams with with Andy Milonakis, Hasan, and Pokimane
On January 9th, 2019 Destiny streamed an IRL meetup with Hasan, Pokimane and Andy Milonakis. The group first streamed at a Korean Barbecue restaurant, and then a Bar. [58]
Destiny IRL streams with Hasan and Andy, gets very drunk
Some time around January 25, 2019, Destiny IRL streamed with Hasan and Andy Milonakis at a restaurant.[59] During the stream, Destiny became inebriated to the point where restaurant staff were forced to cut him off.
Highlights from Destiny's drunk escapades include:
- 4:26 Shortly after proclaiming himself the "master of manipulating Gyoza", Destiny proceeds to drop a dumpling on the floor. Destiny then picks the dumpling off the floor and eats it, to Hasan's disdain.
- 4:52 The restaurant manager walks in to greet Andy and the group. After shaking the manager's hand, Destiny decides to inform the manager: "I drank a little bit too much but i'm not causing trouble okay? I'm not hitting anybody or anything." Hasan questions why Destiny would even say this, to which Destiny recounts his casino experience dealing with drunk people. The manager then requests that Andy and Hasan ensure Destiny does not drive home, to which Destiny empathetically responds he would never want the owner to be held liable for his drunk driving. Following this interaction, Hasan concludes Destiny won that debate.
- 5:49 After staring at his phone confusedly, Destiny asks Andy if he paid for his portion of the meal asserting he does not want to "leech" off of him. The waitress then stops by, informing the table that Destiny is being cut off from any further alcoholic beverages.
- 6:10 Destiny lifts up his sweatshirt to reveal he has no guns on his person. Hasan shouts at Destiny for even implying he would be armed, Destiny responds "what if he looks up my license plate".
- 6:36 Destiny grabs Hasan's chest.
- 6:58 Destiny states he has empirical data on the best joke ever.
"So all of a sudden, a friend is out hunting with another friend, and they call 9-1-1. And he says: My friend is on the ground as he's in distress. And the 9-1-1 caller says: Okay, well what's wrong? And the guy says: I think he's dead. And then the first thing she says is: You need to make sure that he's dead first. And there's a long silence and then a gunshot. And the guy is like: okay now what?"
- -The empirically funniest joke ever according to a very drunk Destiny.
- 7:33 After Destiny attempts to grab Hasan's chest once more, Hasan tells him to stop. Destiny then asks why Hasan is being homophobic.
- 8:31 Destiny gives Andy $200, and tells him to leave the rest as a tip.
- 9:07 After Hasan denies a request to take a group photo with some individuals, Destiny questions why. Hasan responds it's because they did not want Destiny in the photo, and he wanted to stand in solidarity with his friend.
Hasan, Destiny, and Hbomberguy discuss politics, Brexit, and Darksydephil
On January 1, 2019 Destiny and Hasan discussed politics, Antisemitism, Brexit, and DarksydePhil with British youtuber Hbomberguy. [60] During their brief discussion on personal politics, all three parties eventually came to the conclusion that they are in favor of incremental changes towards a better society. The trio then discuss the veracity of the anti-semitism accusations levied towards British political leader labor Jeremy Corbyn, while the three agree antisemitism is present in British politics, they ultimately conclude that the accusations were superfluous. The topic of controversial British politicians, eventually leads to a discussion on Britain's upcoming withdrawal from the European Union(AKA Brexit). The primary contention in this topic being whether a second referendum on Brexit would be justified. Destiny put forth the argument that constantly redoing a vote until a particular outcome is achieved sets a poor precedent, while Hbomberguy argued that the vote won with a slim margin several years ago and voters were not quite as informed on the issue as they were presently(hence the need for another vote). Despite this initial disagreement, both parties end up agreeing important votes such as Brexit should never be held to a referendum.
Discussion Highlights | |
---|---|
Personal Politics
Despite the initial disagreement, both Destiny and Hbomberguy agree the Brexit vote should never have been held up to a referendum to begin with. Following this, Hasan argues that Destiny has become "even more of a tankie" than he has, due to the authoritarian perspective he just presented. Destiny responds that in some cases democracy is a poor idea, providing the example of citizens potentially voting on monetary policy. Hasan laudes Hbomberguy for creating such a good analogy, and Destiny argues that it is in fact a horrible analogy. Destiny explains that Hbomberguy is essentially arguing "no referendum matters because you can always do another one." |
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Hasan and Destiny debate breaking news
On January 7, 2019 Hasan and Destiny debated the ethicacy of reporting on breaking news and the roles of journalists and commentators in shaping public perception. [61] This was among one of the first major on-stream disagreements the two would have, and was met with an overwhelmingly negative response from youtube comments(primarily criticising Hasan).[62]
The conversation begins with a discussion on right-wing political commentator NuanceBro, and a video he had made in response to Hasan's coverage over the death of Jazmine Barnes being a potential hate crime. Hasan goes on to describe how the eventual revelation that the shooting was in fact gang-related(and not a hate crime), resulted in his channel being brigaded by individuals accusing him of "race-baiting" and condemnations because he did not wait for more information to come out. Hasan informs Destiny that he felt this criticism was unfair, arguing that he was merely parroting what major news sources at the time were stating. Destiny took issue with Hasan's perspective, and argued Hasan was irresponsible with his covering of the shooting, asserting he should have waited for all information relating to the event to be released. Moreover, Destiny argued that Hasan should have avoided constructing a narrative around hate crimes, pointing to the hypocrisy Hasan would show if a right-leaning commentator speculated about Arabs following a bombing.
"Here's my position on this...There's literally absolutely never ever ever ever...This is why I hate breaking news... There's never any value that comes out of covering these types of things, before all the information is released... Knowing about it a day or two or whatever earlier, it never gives you anything better, and there's so much potential harm that can come from doing it early, that's why I just try to avoid making any comment"
- - Destiny 4:32
By the conversation's end, Hasan conceded that framing a racial narrative around the shooting so early was irresponsible. However, he maintained that his job is to "opine", insisting he was justified in reporting on the story with the available facts at the time.
Destiny and Hasan's positions | |
---|---|
The shooting
However, the case took a significant turn when the actual suspects, Eric Black Jr. and Larry Woodruffe, both African American males, were arrested following a tip-off. They were charged with capital murder, and it emerged that the shooting was a case of mistaken identity; the suspects had believed they were attacking individuals from a different vehicle due to an ongoing gang-feud. This revelation led to a controversy over the initial media coverage and public discourse, which had strongly focused on the racial angle based on the first description provided by witnesses.[63] Hasan was among the individuals who took part in this media coverage.
2:09 Shortly after releasing his video, Hasan describes enduring brigading when new information about the shooting surfaces, identifying the shooters as black, which rules out the hate-crime motive. People accuse him of "race-baiting" and criticize him for not waiting for "all the facts to come out." Hasan defends himself by arguing that he was working with the information available just as any news organization would. Hasan goes on to state the criticism he receives is unjustified as he issued a correction and deleted the video of his coverage. 8:40 Hasan argues that if "the information wasn't solid" he would not have worked with it. Destiny rejects this characterization, arguing Hasan "did not work towards anything to get to the hate-crime". Hasan counters, stating he did not assert anything in the situation was a hate-crime, and merely decided to speak on the issue at the time. Destiny tells Hasan to chill, and states he's doing what NuanceBro does when he decides to discuss African American crime statistics. 11:57 Hasan states he has never been in a situation where the police officers and all eyewitness testimony was incorrect, and argues once more he was justified in covering the video. 25:33 Hasan asserts he cannot wait for all the facts to come out, as it would be at a detriment to his job. Destiny disagrees, and posits a hypothetical to Hasan: "Let's say you report the facts about some story, the facts are all true... let's say that from those facts, you could draw three or four likely scenarios that could have happened. Do you think it would be responsible to talk about any of those scenarios without having further facts to confirm them... You're speculating based off incomplete facts on a narrative you can't support." - Destiny Hasan responds once more that his job is to "opine", and he was justified in covering the story with the facts he had. 28:40 Destiny describes a hypothetical scenario where an arab was accused of a terrorist attack, and right-wing pundits decided to discuss arab extremism as a whole. Hasan agrees the pundits would be justified. 38:55 Hasan states his job isn't to report the news uncritically, and flow a narrative around it. Destiny, not paying attention to what Hasan was saying, is incredulous by a bold poker move linked to him by a chatter.
4:31,8:29,10:46, 12:34, 15:50 Destiny routinely asserts that there was no reason for Hasan to cover this event before any more information had come out, and there was no value to be gained from doing so. 18:45 Destiny argues Hasan could have covered the immediate news regarding the shooting without framing a narrative, and should not have decided to leverage the situation to discuss hate-crimes. When is the right time to cover news stories?
35:28 Hasan states he has a very limited window to get a message across, and must cover facts pertaining to breaking news immediately. |
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Hasan and Destiny IRL stream at a mall
On January 29, 2019, Hasan and Destiny went on a romantic stroll IRL streamed at a mall. [64]
Destiny, Hasan, Vaush, and RemTheBathBoi debate the necessity of philosophical "grounding". The phrase "morally lucky" is coined
"Someone is morally lucky when they arrive at the correct position without any sort of critical thinking as to why it is correct."
- - Rem in a reddit post following the conversation[65]
On March 23, 2019 Hasan, Rem, Vaush, Marty, and Destiny engaged in a heated discussion on the necessity of a foundational philosophical understanding for those engaging in political advocacy.[66] In the discussion, Rem argued that political pundits, especially those with large audiences, have a responsibility to ensure their arguments are philosophically grounded. Rem asserts that individuals who do not do so, run the risk of "lucking" into their positions through life-experiences(Rem provided Hasan and Vaush as examples). Shortly after Rem makes this statement, an irate Hasan(seemingly under the belief Rem is trying to "clout farm") and a bewildered Vaush(seemingly hurt by Rem's comments) join the conversation and proceed to have a very tense confrontation with Rem. During the debate, Hasan and Vaush argued Rem’s position is unrealistic, particularly in the context of the fast-paced and often "surface-level" nature of online discourse.
Hasan stayed in the call for around two hours before needing to leave for bed. Prior to his departure, Hasan posited the following question to Rem: "How much analytical philosophy did Martin Luther King engage in before he decided to do advocacy?" Rem argued this was the worst possible example Hasan could have given, as MLK was a very well read student of philosophy and even wrote a paper on Hegel and continental philosophy. Vaush left the call shortly following Hasan's departure, seemingly frustrated with attempting to engage with Rem and his position.
After Hasan and Vaush's exit, Destiny held an hour-long discussion with Rem and Marty to explore ways the conversation could have been more productive. He argued that one side had to "rise above" the other and suggested that the heated way Hasan and Vaush joined the call, combined with Rem's difficulty in clearly conveying his message, contributed to making the conversation unproductive. While Destiny didn't fully express his opinion on "moral luck" until Vaush and Hasan left, he emphasized that Rem held the correct stance in the conversation. He argued that individuals with large audiences should at least possess his own level of philosophical knowledge before advocating for their positions, citing his personal experience in debating individuals who failed to provide adequate arguments against incest.
Rem coined the phrase "morally lucky" during the debate to criticize Hasan and Vaush, defining it as a situation where an individual arrives at a position without engaging in any "philosophical grounding" as to why the position is correct, and may not truly be advocating for the "most correct" positions. The term became so pervasive within the broader DGG community, references to it can be seen to this day.
Play by play | |
---|---|
Is Destiny wasting his time?
1:21 Rem asks Destiny if he thinks he could be helping people better by giving positive arguments for different policy positions as opposed to engaging with the "lowest common denominator of society". Destiny responds with an anecdote about a former friend of the stream's(Micspam) argument that Destiny should have become the next Philip DeFranco(i.e. just covering politics and policies). Destiny argues that he could potentially do this, but feels he is uniquely suited to engage in the particular debates he participates in, while being able to reach a type of audience that is typically unreachable by pundits on his side of the political spectrum. Destiny concludes that he is in fact "doing good". The difficulty of Leftists engaging with philosophy and "lucking" into the correct positions AKA Rem defines moral luck(and accuses Hasan of fitting the definition)
Rem then argues that Hasan falls into this category of "morally lucky" individuals, and Destiny laughingly states "that's way too brutal, hold on". Rem goes on to describe the difficulty he had in his fruitless two hour long conversation with Hasan in getting him to proclaim any "ethical positions". Destiny puts forth the argument that some individuals don't' have the "drive" to "ground things out", and that one could always push for more "grounding". Destiny points to himself as an example, as despite his engagement with philosophy, he has not read quite enough literature to deem himself "fully grounded" for any given position. Rem caveats that while he does not think Hasan is a bad person, and does in fact do plenty good, he considers Hasan to have "lucked" into his positions. Destiny counters that he believes Hasan is "grounded enough" to provide good policy level arguments. Destiny goes on to argue that having someone like Hasan who happens to be morally lucky is fine, as he can make other people morally lucky by finding his own stream. 9:07 MrMouton joins the call and asks what the term "morally lucky" means. Destiny explains: "When Rem says that Hasan is morally lucky, what Rem is saying is, Hasan doesn't actually have the proper philosophical groundings for his ideas, and he could have just as easily been an alt-righter, and he just happened to grow up around enough people who are left-leaning, and that's why he's left leaning." - Destiny Rem once again caveats that Hasan is more empirically correct than individuals on the right, as individuals on the left are arguably more well read on certain positions. Destiny laughs at this argument, and argues that Hasan isn't quite as well read as he should be, pointing to arguments the two have had revolving around rent-control. Rem jokingly states he's trying to dig himself out a hole with Hasan right now, and Destiny isn't helping. Rem then argues that moral luck may explain why The Young Turks spawned someone like Dave Rubin, Destiny laughs that Rem seems to be on "team Vaush". Rem points out that Vaush has not read philosophy either, and that anything said about Hasan could also apply to Vaush. 11:41 Destiny states that he agrees with Rem to some extent, at least on an emotional level. He points out that he enjoys grounding out his opinions moreso than other individuals, as it allows him to change and adapt to new ideas easily. Destiny then argues that if an individual does not wish to do all the "leg-work" involved in philosophically grounding oneself, and they more or less fall in line with his own positions, he doesn't necessarily think it's a bad thing. Destiny then suggests that while it would be ideal if Hasan was literally citing philosophers on stream, it's not realistic. Hasan and Vaush join the call
Shortly after Vaush joins the call, Hasan earnestly attempts to engage with Rem regarding the difficulties he experiences in bringing over complex philosophical terms into the streaming medium he inhabits. Hasan goes on to admit this is a "bottleneck" for himself, and argues that it may be a difficulty for Rem as well. Rem counters this, arguing that he does not go onto public platforms with massive audiences, and taught a political philosophy that he does not feel he can adequately ground in an ethical theory. Rem goes on to describe the difficulty he experienced in getting Hasan to "ground" himself in an ethical theory in a prior conversation they had. 20:37 Rem remarks that while Destiny posses some frankly morbid philosophical positions, he can actually ground his political positions. Destiny then asserts that one could argue "how could you have any metaethical position when you're lost with things like metaphysics or epistemology." Vaush cuts Rem off before he can respond, and asks Rem if he truly believes he "lucked" into being a leftist. The debate
Shortly after Rem acknowledges Vaush's utilitarian perspective, he asks Vaush: "What if I was a Deontologist, your position is not compatible with Deontology, and I don't think you have a way to argue against me if I was one." To which Vaush retorts that he should not have to shoulder the burden of Deontologists and Utilitarians, and would rather just "dab" on right wingers without having to solve an "unsolvable" philosophical dilemma. Rem then acknowledges that while people in Vaush's position may be able to attack those on the right who are incompatible with most ethical systems, they would still have to concede that their positions are just as justifiable(from a philosophical framework perspective) as those on the right. Vaush responds he would never attack right-leaning individuals from a philosophical perspective, and would instead argue with the fundamental immorality of their arguments. Rem posits a hypothetical to Vaush: "Could you actually give me an argument right now to my(hypothetical) position where I have an ethical system, such that, black people are excluded as being moral agents. Do you actually think you could give me a... philosophical argument against that?" Vaush responds he would be unable to ,and that he would just want his debate opponent in this hypothetical to "be dead". Hasan responds that Rem would have to justify if black people had agency in this scenario as well. 24:51 Destiny provides a "real life" example which served as justification for his own endeavors into philosophy: "When somebody says something like "I believe in the superiority of the white race over black people. I can make these like vague understanding things like 'I believe all people should be treated equally..' or by having a little bit of an understanding of the underlying arguments, I can turn the argument on them and I can say something like 'okay, well you think that white people's lives should be valued more than black people's... what if I were to make that argument more extreme and say white people with brown eyes instead of white people with blue eyes' and then I could turn that onto them and force them to answer the question. I think having a slightly better understanding of deeper principles can enable you to understand an opponent's argument better and dig a little deeper and them kind of turn it around on them. I don't think i'd be able to do that if I hadn't spent a little time engaging with some ideas." - Destiny Hasan retorts that this is allegedly not enough according to Rem's framework, and that Destiny would be required to be able to justify morally that black people have agency before he can argue on behalf of black people. Rem agrees, and argues that this is not a difficult thing to do, to which Vaush assets such a position is not pragmatic for people engaging in actual political advocacy/debates. Rem then asserts that while the average person should not reasonably be expected to bear this responsibility, individuals advocating for political positions, especially on public platforms, should be be expected to put in the "philosophical work" to ensure their position is the correct one. Vaush mockingly suggests that Rem is advocating for people to pursue philosophy before joining in political advocacy, to which Rem reiterates that is not his belief. Vaush argues his perspective as a "rule utilitarian", that even if he has not fully "solved" the philosophical implications of what he believes in, he could make the argument that people could broadly lead better lives under his system than under the system of fascists. Vaush goes on to argue he has a utilitarian obligation to engage in praxis against their values. Rem replies, in the case of right-winger, Vaush does have the moral justification to argue his position, given most ethical systems are incompatible with right-leaning positions. He caveats that his primary argument centers around the distinction between an individual who considers themself to be a communist versus a Rawlsian liberal. Rem's train of thought is then interrupted by a "deez nuts" joke from MrMouton, at which point Hasan takes the time mto thank Rem for making him seem more entertaining by comparison. Vaush replies that this remark was rude, and Rem replies that such a personal attack indicates that Hasan is incapable of defending his own position. From this point the two engage in a very heated personal(and unproductive) argument. "Hasan literally almost everything you've said in this discussion so far, has just been a personal attack, and you've not actually engaged with me on any sort of level". -Rem Hasan then accuses Rem of gaslighting, and calls-back to a time where he believes Rem referred to himself as "morally-inconsistent". Rem denies ever saying such a thing, and Destiny attempts to steer the conversation back on track shortly after by restating Rem's argument with an analogy: "Let's say we want to take a car trip... and the best vehicle we can take is a nice blue car, it gets really good miles per gallon. Now, let's say you have a really advanced driver, and he says 'I know that this car is good, because it has very good miles per gallon, so we're gonna use that car to go on the road trip.' What Rem is saying, is that you don't know enough about cars, to know that the reason why you're driving that blue car is because it gets a lot of miles per gallon. So what could happen is, another shiny blue car could drive by, like an alt-right blue car, and you might wanna drive that car instead even if it gets shity miles per gallon, because you don't understand why you were ever driving the original blue car."- Destiny explaining Rem's argument with an analogy. Hasan attempts to engage with the analogy, and argues that if he looks at the history of the alt-right blue car in this scenario, and finds that it has killed several individuals, he could make an informed decision without needing to understand the underlying mechanics of the car. Rem takes issue with this, and argues that if Hasan's intention is to "sell the fucking car", he needs to understand the underlying mechanisms behind the product. Vaush chimes in and states the analogy has been broken down to uselessness, he argues that when individuals in his position engage in political advocacy, they are making some "basic points" and hoping people "pick the fuck up" on it. 32:16 Shortly after Vaush claims that he is "grounded", Rem asks what his grounding is. Vaush responds that he has an "axiomatic foundation of wanting to maximize happiness for as many people as possible." Rem mocks Vaush for "presupposing a random thing" that he refuses to justify, to which Vaush argues that most of philosophy is built on "unjustified presupposed axioms". Rem then derides Destiny for "bringing on a new generation of axiomatists", and Vaush pointedly asks Rem to prove to him that it is the right thing to maximize happiness for the maximum amount of people." Rem responds that he doesn't necessarily believe that, decides to play Devil's advocate, and claims he holds an axiom that he wants to cause the most harm to everyone. From this point, Vaush becomes increasingly irate with Rem. 34:07 Vaush asks Rem what the political value of attempting to objectively determine the ideal mode of values that one needs to engage in political advocacy is. Vaush goes on to argue that pundits in his position make the best arguments they can, and every individual regardless of how solid their argument, will enact force/violence against the individuals they disagree with. Vaush concludes that politics is violence. Rem writes this entire argument off as pure "rhetoric", and steers the conversation back to the discussion on axioms. Rem proceeds to argue that because Vaush seemingly choosing an axiom at random, if he were to debate against an individual with a different axiom, he would be unable to have a conversation. Rem then explains Normative Ethics to Vaush, a philosophical topic centered around the debate of moral axioms. Shortly after, Rem mockingly suggests that Vaush would have known this if he read more philosophical theory. After a brief moment where Vaush, Rem and Hasan shout at one another in unison, Destiny attempts to explain Vaush's position to Rem. He explains that Vaush would argue someone like Donald Trump would not be able to ground out his positions morally, let alone define what the word "normative" means, despite being in a position of utmost political power. Rem retorts that he was making a philosophical argument and not a political one. To which Destiny responds Vaush and Hasan are more interested in political discourse than philosophical discourse. Rem then responds that while Vaush and Hasan would be able to have a political perspective, they would be unable to have a "justifiable" one without rooting it in a moral framework. 36:50 Vaush proceeds to argue that while he respects Rem's intelligence, and is admittedly "very triggered" at the moment, any argument Rem is making regarding philosophy and leftists would be laughed at from those on the right. Rem counters that he had not even hinted at such an argument. Vaush continues his argument irregardless, and asserts that if leftists were to attempt to live up to Rem's standards there would be very few available to combat right-leaning thought. Vaush believes people who don't share his political beliefs should be killed
In response, Vaush argues that he "operates in pragmatism", and points to an example of somebody who believes in "genocidal nihilism". He asserts an individual who engages in such a belief, is far beyond having a "sit-down" conversation. He goes on to argue that the proper way to deal with such an individual who holds such a belief is to "jail or kill them." Following this explanation, Rem states Vaush's position makes more sense, but caveats the way his position was stated makes it appear as though there is no possible discourse one could have with Vaush if they share a different ethical axiom. Vaush counters, arguing once more that Rem's position is impractical. Vaush goes on to state that while it may be possible to "hash out" different value systems in a neutral way, he does not believe it is practical for the average human being, and concludes that it should not be relevant for the "political process". Rem responds that his position would be more relevant to individuals with larger audiences. He points to an example of an individual "going to a picket-line", not necessarily needing a moral framework to engage in such an activity. He juxtaposes this against someone someone like Destiny, someone who's political messages have been heard by millions of individuals, and argues that Destiny must make it his priority to ensure his positions are the absolute correct ones. Rem concludes that the goal of politics is to advocate for the most correct, and true positions. Destiny disagrees with this conclusion. Exskillsme joins
43:57 Exskillsme chimes in, arguing that Rem's position regarding individuals with different axioms being unable to have a discussion is incorrect. Rem denies ever saying such a thing, points out that he actually argued against this position, and informs Exskillsme that Vaush actually made this argument. Exskillsme then informs Vaush that they had previously had discussions despite the fact that both appeared to have differing axioms. Vaush counters, asserting Exskillsme engaged his value system with "flagrant dishonesty and no actual interest." 46:01 Exskillsme explains why he's somewhat in agreement with Rem, arguing that while a moral grounding should be prioritized for individuals with large audiences, these individuals do not necessarily need to "solve philosophy". Rem is satisfied with the answer, and agrees with Exskillsme position. Vaush, seemingly in disbelief that Rem and Exskillsme were able to come to an agreement so shortly, takes issue with this development. Hasan argues with Rem
48:17 Hasan and Vaush ask Rem what he "identifies" as on the political spectrum. Rem informs them that he identifies as a "democratic socialist". Hasan further probes, asking Rem if he believes in "seizing the means of production", and Marxist principles. Hasan then concludes that they both have similar political beliefs, and attempts to understand Rem's perspective better by asking why he and Vaush could have become alt-righters if they were not surrounded by other left-leaning individuals. 50:32 After Hasan claims that one can ground themselves within an ethical system without "getting to the root of kantian philosophy", Rem asks Hasan what he thinks grounding is. Hasan avoids answering the question, and claims to have adopted Vaush's perspective of "maximizing happiness" fo the most amount of individuals. In response, Rem provides a hypothetical of an individual growing up in Nazi Germany. He then describes how this individual's perception of "maximizing happiness" may be vastly different from Hasan or Vaush's own. Following an inadequate response from Hasan, Rem concludes Hasan is incapable of grounding out a "logical and true" moral framework. In response, Hasan claims to not care if his system is not the "most correct", and admits to be willing to change it should a perceivably better one come about. Rem then asserts this proves his own point, and that an alt-righter could say the exact same things and be just as justified as Hasan. 55:17 Rem once again informs Hasan he is just as externally justified in his positions as an alt-righter. Hasan responds that he is justified as he wants the "least amount of harm". To which Rem once again asks Hasan to ground this position, and Hasan professes to being unsure how to do so, and asserts once more he just wants the least amount of harm done to the most people. Rem once again provides a hypothetical to support his position "How would you argue against me if I were an alt-righter and my core-ethical tenant was to kill all black people?" Hasan responds "That's a bad idea, I don't think black people want to be killed." Rem then informs Hasan this is not a proper justification for his position. 57:09 The debate derails further, and Rem discusses his issues with Hasan insulting him at the start of the conversation. Insults thrown out include: "sleeper dipshit", "condescending mother fucker", "little dick", and "sleeper cocksucker". Vaush asks rem for a moral justification of left-leaning positions
59:07 Following a heated discussion between Hasan and Rem, Vaush pointedly asks Rem to morally justify his political position. Rem confesses he is unable to morally justify his position over a different left-leaning principle, and explains it is not necessary for him to do so given the fact he is not a political pundit. Hasan and Vaush proceed to mock Rem for some time as a result of this position, and criticize Rem for holding them to a standard he does not personally live by. 1:07:49 Rem takes the "extreme position" and argues that there should be a higher bar set if one wishes to truly be "moral". Destiny takes issue with this argument and asserts that setting "too high of a bar" for oneself and those on "your side", then the other side will by nature have a much lower barrier to entry and be much more effective politically. Is Rem's position elitist?
1:14:55 Rem is pressured into providing a grounding for his position, before he can do so Vaush takes the opportunity to argue with Rem once more regarding holding him to a standard that Rem himself does not hold to. Vaush eventually asserts that it is not foundationally possible to justify an ethic axiom. Rem argues he can, to which Vaush essentially dares Rem to prove him wrong. 1:17:50 Following several minutes of prodding, Vaush eventually decides to debate Rem regarding the subject of First Philosophy. Before this debate can be had, Vaush throws out an olive branch to Rem, stating that while he likes Rem he'd like him to at least acknowledge there may be some pragmatic consequences to his position. Noticing that there are three people against him, Rem decides to bring in a friend to assist him. Stalled joins the call AKA Rem brings in the all-star philosophy team
Marty joins the call AKA Rem brings in the all-star philosophy team
1:29:08 Vaush chimes in, informing Marty that Rem argued pundits should be "forced" to undergo philosophical training before entering the political landscape. Marty responds with a hypothetical: "would you let a surgeon operate on you without any formal training?" To which Vaush responds that this is a false-equivalency. Marty counters, that the entire argument hinges on whether or not one should buy into the "level of professionalism" inhabited in political discourse. Marty goes on to argue that while there is not such a level of professionalism in modern political discourse, individuals like Rem argue that their ought to be. 1:30:48 Vaush provides the example of a trans-women "popping off" with their political youtube channel, and asks Marty if he feels this individual should be barred from speaking on their lived experience until they've put in the philosophical leg-work. Marty informs Vaush that he believes Vaush is misunderstanding his position. He goes on to explain that while this person can do what they want, it is not ideal that this individual is unable to formulate their position in some sort of normative ethics. Marty further explains that one could not have some "good working theory" without some background assumptions. Vaush argues once more that Rem has staked out an unreasonable position that would make it incredibly difficult for other individuals to advocate for political stances. Marty counters all one would need to understand ethics is the internet or a library card. Destiny informs Marty this position is not reasonable, and provides the hypothetical of disaffected minority with poor access to a reasonable library/internet. Marty argues this individual would have no basis for political advocacy to begin with, as they would not be readily read in any sort of areas to begin with. Destiny counters that unlike a doctor, technically every individual engages with philosophy throughout their lives, and one's political positions could be informed by their life's situations. Marty argues that Rem seems to be arguing that in order to do "good" philosophy/ethics, one needs to deliberate upon certain kinds of beliefs. 1:39:30 Marty provides a hypothetical: "Let's say you have an ethical demand, and I don't really have to meet that demand because I work 80 hours a week, do you think that that's a respectable answer?" Vaush argues that this should not be an ethical demand to begin with, to which Marty asks Vaush if he believes any ethical obligations/social constructs should exist. Marty further elaborates that he could universally apply the same criticism of "I work 80 hours a week, therefore I don't owe you anything" to even a basic understanding of the law. 1:42:12 Vaush becomes very irate with Rem, accusing him of being a "rabble-rouser", argues there is no reason for him to let Rem talk except for entertainment purposes, asserts there is no justification for how unpragmatic Rem has been throughout the conversation, and accuses Rem of requiring a "doctoral level education in philosophy" before speaking about politics. Rem begins responding, but is cut short multiple times as individuals in the call ask Rem to speed up his response. Rem eventually makes the argument that an individual would arguably be more moral with a basic understanding of philosophy, during this time Rem mutes Vaush. 1:49:31 Vuash argues one would require a huge amount of pre existing resources/privilege to be able to meet Rem's standard. Rem counters, arguing he has met several individuals from unprivileged backgrounds who have spent time engaging with philosophy. Hasan and Vaush are quick to write this off as superfluous anecdotal evidence, mock Rem for suggesting as such, and laugh as Rem attempts to finish his argument. Vaush provides his own anecdotal evidence, asserting that the small town he lives in has several people advocating for just political issues, yet would fail to meet Rem's standard. 1:51:57 Hasan leaves the call, asks Rem how much analytical philosophy Martin Luther King engaged in before he decided to do advocacy. Rem argues that this is the worst example Hasan could have gave, as MLK was a very well read philosopher. Marty even points out that MLK wrote a paper on Hegel. 1:52:59 Rem informs Vaush he was the worst person he has had to speak to regarding this topic. The conversation continues, and Vaush reiterates Rem's argument is unpragmatic, and an unfair standard to levy on any individuals attempting to engage in political advocacy. 1:55:30 Rem and Vaush loop through their prior arguments for an extended period of time, the resulting conversation becomes increasingly more unproductive until Vaush leaves the call. This unproductive conversation is cut between Destiny, and Marty fruitlessy attempting to act as mediators between the two when possible. Vaush calls Rem privileged, Rem becomes irate and the conversation becomes even more unproductive
Stalled claims Rem was unclear that his position only referred to content creators with audiences, despite the fact that Rem said as much from the very beginning of the conversation. 2:04:32 Marty posits the question to vaush: Aught thought-leaders learn philosophy before engaging in political advocacy? Vaush argues they should not, and they could if they want to. Vaush then asks Rem exactly how many followers are required for a thought-leader to have before they are required to learn philosophy. Marty responds that the amount is "fuzzy". Destiny later steps in, asks Vaush to clarify what he means by the "vast majority of people being unable to meet Rem's standard". Destiny points out that he meets Rem standards, and he has a very base level of understanding philosophy. Destiny and Rem discuss
2:42:11 Rem asks Destiny if he feels public figures should be well read enough(in philosophy) to justify their political positions. 2:46:40 Destiny responds that he agrees, and that political figures aught to at least have his level of philosophical knowledge in order to advocate for political positions. Destiny goes on to point to individuals who had made dumb arguments in the past, i.e. regarding incest. |
Debate Timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Hasan and Destiny discuss Article 13
On March 26, 2019 Destiny, Hasan and another individual engaged in a short conversation regarding Article 13, an upcoming European Union directive.[67]
Discussion Highlights | |
---|---|
Destiny joins the call, asks what the main contention is
Does Article 13 have a "safe harbor" provision?
Destiny once again details certain provisions within the American variant of Article 13, describing once again how companies must make a good faith effort to protect against copyright infringement, and that these companies have 24 hours to respond to takedown requests. Hasan's debate opponent argues such a provision exists, while Hasan once again counters it does not. Does Article 13 benefit small content creators?
|
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
|
Destiny and Hasan debate Nick Fuentes and Sargon of Akkad on a political panel hosted by Trainwreckstv and Asmongold
- Main Article: Trainwreckstv political panel
On April 6, 2019, Destiny, Hasan, Nick Fuentes, and Sargon of Akkad participated in a several hour long political panel hosted by Trainwrecks, and Asmongold.[68] Destiny and Hasan were selected to represent the "left" side of the political spectrum, while Fuentes and Sargon were selected to represent the "right". The panel primarily centered around three topics: A recent transgender military ban, the Mueller Report, and the Christchurch mosque shootings.
While the topics discussed were quite narrow in scope initially, each subject inevitably segwayed or diverted into a tangentially related topic. Given that the "right-side" of the panel was fairly well-aligned on most issues, this allowed for Sargon and Fuentes to adequately defend one another's positions regarding transgenderism, Donald Trump, race realism, and immigration. By contract, the "left-side" of the panel was not as well-aligned on most issues, which worked to their detriment. Throughout the debate, Hasan routinely attempted to tie his arguments into either a critique on capitalism or a praise for socialism, which did not play well given Destiny's general disdain towards "lefties" at the time. Furthermore, this argumentative tactic employed by Hasan, contrasted against Destiny's attempts to engage in more relevant/substantive critiques on the topics discussed, inevitably caused the "left-wing" side of the debate to appear weaker in the face of the arguably more effective rhetoric provided by Fuentes and the "right-wing" side. Following the debate, several r/destiny subreddit users claimed the debate to be a "massive disaster", arguing Fuentes(an up and coming far-right content creator at the time), was essentially given a platform to freely espouse his views and garner more popularity.[69]
Highlights | |
---|---|
|
Discussion timestamps | |
---|---|
Intros
Nick then earnestly criticizes the bill, arguing that transgendered individuals may not be the best or most capable to perform some of the rigorous tasks faced by individuals in the military and may actually be a detriment. Nick goes on to state that he does not recognize the legitimacy of people possessing gender dysphoria, and asserts that these individuals are likely a product of mental-illness/a poor upbringing. 10:39 Hasan rebuts, arguing that the "jobs-program" nature of the military in the US, coupled with the fact that the Department of Defence is the largest employer of transgender individuals, makes the ban both costly to the military and disrespectful to current service members. Hasan goes on to argue that transgender individuals have been proven to be just as "combat-ready" as cisgender individuals. 12:05 Destiny then presents his rebuttal to Fuentes’s points, emphasizing that the voluntary nature of the U.S. military does not necessarily attract the best and most capable individuals. Destiny highlights that if a transgender person can complete basic training, they meet the minimum requirements for service. Destiny further notes that since 80% of military roles are non-combat, even if these individuals were physically less capable, they would likely serve in non-combat roles. 13:30 Asmongold requests for Destiny to elaborate on the "effectiveness" of transgender individuals. Destiny responds by explaining that non-combat and support roles exist within the military, roles that transgender individuals currently fill without any issues. He continues, stating that the military has conducted extensive research into the effectiveness of transgender individuals in various military roles, and asserts that none of the concerns Fuentes raised have been substantiated by these studies. Asmongold then questions if transgender individuals would cost more per-capita than cisgender individuals. Destiny acknowledges that this might be true on a per-capita basis, but he argues that transgender individuals who have successfully completed basic training have already compensated for any additional costs they have incurred to the institution through their service. Asmongold then poses the same question to Fuentes, who states he does not care for the fiscal cost, and proceeds to deride Hasan for even making mention of it. Asmongold proceeds to ask Fuentes if his catholic background has motivated his opinion in any way, to which Fuentes responds it has. Fuentes then reasserts his indifference to the issue, conceding that transgender individuals can certainly serve in non-combat roles in an effective capacity. 18:45 Destiny asks Fuentes if he believes women should serve in the military, Fuentes responds they should not. Fuentes elaborates: "What kind of world do we want to live in where we're sending our daughters, sisters, mothers, into the middle east to get exploded." Before Fuentes can complete his thought, Hasan proceeds to interrupt him several times with the explicit purpose of not allowing Fuentes to complete his "framing" of the argument. Asmongold reiterates that only 20% of service members see frontline combat, to which Fuentes responds he does not believe women should be in non combat roles nor the business of government. Fuentes elaborates that women may interfere with the "brotherhood" like nature of the military, and may be a detriment to frontline soldiers. 22:04 Hasan argues that Nick is arguing from a personal perspective of what he wants society to look like, and has not provided any data to back up his arguments. Fuentes argues that he rejects the validity of empiricism over a priori rationale, meaning he believes the thing is true due to "common sense". Destiny interjects at this point, and informs Fuentes that a priori and common sense are not the same thing. Fuentes proceeds to mock Hasan and Destiny for believing in people wearing lab coats as opposed to trusting their intuition. 24:59 Sargon asks Hasan if he believes women do influence social dynamics in typically male-dominated groups. Hasan responds that he does not believe this change in social-dynamics typically yields negative consequences. Hasan goes on the elaborate that he does not care for elaborating the efficiency of the military, arguing that the "imperialistic mission of the military to go out and kill brown people" is not something he's fond of. Nick agrees with Hasan's disgust of the "military's current objective", and argues that a biological distinction between man and women still exists, making it very difficult for men and women to work in the same workplace even outside of the military. Fuentes goes on to argue that he wants to live in a world more "in-line" with human nature, and that Hasan is advocating for a "perversion" of our natural social dynamics. 29:46 Destiny offers his rebuttal to Fuentes, arguing that enabling a society to allow individuals to make decisions relative to what they desire to do, is more important than trying to enforce some "naturalistic" setting as Fuentes desires. Destiny concludes that we should allow individuals to make decisions that would make them happy. Fuentes takes issue with this statement, and argues that individuals today are not happier than they were in the past. Destiny counters, arguing that individuals in a liberal society should be "allowed to fail" instead of being forced into optimal decisions. 42:55 Sargon asserts American civilization does not exclude black people at all, due to the fact that they(African Americans) have been in America since the country's inception. Destiny interrupts Sargon and points to the absurdity of the statement, arguing that individuals who came to America as slaves probably felt fairly excluded from society. Sargon concedes that while these individuals did not have a good role in society, they still possessed a role irregardless. Sargon proceeds to argue that western birth rates declining should be an indication that society is not functioning properly, and that measures must be taken to ensure it rises again. 47:29 Hasan is given the opportunity to provide his perspective, and questions Sargon's desire to preserve western civilization. Hasan proceeds to suggest that the discussion on birth rates is irrelevant, when the discussion should be more geared towards factors contributing to birth rates declining such as technological achievements and socioeconomic status.
59:17 Destiny offers his initial response, stating that while the Mueller report may not be yet released, the idea that no Russian Collusion took place has not yet been borne out, and Mueller likely felt he could not nail anybody "to the wall" on such a conspiracy. Destiny reiterates the exact words of the judge "not enough to press charges", can be interpreted several ways, and the notion that the media erroneously reported on the events is incorrect. 1:00:06 Hasan chimes in, citing the Judge's own words: the bar to prove collusion is incredibly high, and that obstruction of justice( which Hasan argues had occurred), does not matter unless the bar for collusion is passed. Asmongold questions how Hasan knows obstruction occurred, and Hasan cites a media appearance wherein Trump claims to have fired then FBI director James Comey in order to ease pressure from the collusion investigation. Hasan proceeds to argue that the "Russian collusion narrative" was self serving, and the investigation should have primarily focused on the "millions of dollars" spent by Russia in influencing US social media. 1:04:33 Asmongold asks Destiny and Hasan if they believe the Mueller report should be released to the public in its entirety. Hasan answers affirmatively, while Destiny states he is unsure. Destiny elaborates, arguing that the Democrats may overfocus on any claims of collusion in the document, and lose the next election as a result. Sargon is given the opportunity to respond, and states that he agrees with Hasan's prior statements. He goes on to assert that Trump simply was not competent enough to collude with Russia. Hasan expresses his agreement with this position, to which Destiny interjects, stating they are both wrong and that Trump's campaign consultant(Paul Manafort) has been found conspiring with foreign agents in the past. 1:08:25 Fuentes is given the opportunity to provide his initial response. Fuentes argues that despite the plethora of indictments levied against individuals both Russian and American, not a single one was related to collusion. Fuentes proceeds to assert that the investigation was given plenty of funding and time to search for any collusion, and the fact that no evidence of such wrongdoing was found should exonerate Trump. Asmongold pointedly asks Fuentes his feelings on the media's role in this investigation, to which Fuentes responds the media was blatantly biased. 1:11:57 Destiny and Fuentes debate which direction US mainstream media tends to be more partisan towards. Fuentes asserts it is primarily left-wing dominated, and as a result unfairly influenced the investigation against Donald Trump. Destiny takes issue, arguing that most of mainstream media is dominated by right-wing organizations and individuals, pointing to Fox News and several right-leaning radio hosts. 1:21:15 Hasan points to the absurdity in attempting to compare the political commentary provided by No Bullshit and Jimmy Kimmel. The debate regarding the veracity of the aforementioned list continues. 1:27:35 Asmongold asks Destiny and Hasan if they believe the majority of mainstream media possess a left-wing bias. Hasan disagrees, while Destiny expresses his uncertainty. Destiny elaborates that talk-radio reaches more customers than any other form of media, while tending to have a right-wing bias. Destiny admits that while it's possible for media to have a left-wing bias today, he does feel conservatives have an adequate enough voice in media today. Fuentes responds that Destiny is denying basic reality, and points to a study claiming 92% of media coverage was against Trump. 1:33:13 Destiny argues that no media company would ever stake their reputation on "progressive values". Destiny proceeds to argue that no producer would place a transgender individual in a role if it wasn't popular to do so. Fuentes and Sargon take issue with this and discuss for some time. During his rebuttal, Sargon argues that large media corporations such as Disney are absolutely placing "morales" ahead of profits. Nick argues the left-wing media bias is prevalent, and to argue otherwise is to deny reality. Nick points to several movies, tv shows, and video games as examples. 1:47:40 In response to Sargon claiming the Sequel Star Wars movies made no money as a result of their "woke-agenda", Destiny reads off the money earned by each movie. Destiny then points to a Sequel Star Wars film containing a white-male lead, which made substantially less money than the aforementioned "woke" movies. 1:51:33 Destiny asks Fuentes if he believes if it's immoral to show interracial relationships in media. Fuentes responds he does not believe it to be immoral, however he does not want a "deliberate" social agenda pushed by media organizations, particularly in that direction. Asmongold asks Fuentes to clarify what he means by "that direction", to which Fuentes responds he does not believe interracial marriages should be promoted. Destiny and Hasan burst out in laughter at this confession, to which Fuentes states: "I like that laughter, it will be really funny when you guys are bred out of existence."
2:04:20 Following a short break, Fuentes is given the opportunity to respond first. Fuentes begins his argument by asserting that calls for violence by individuals on the right, particularly the white identitarian/advocacy crowd, is generally not tolerated. Fuentes goes on to describe how one would be hard-pressed to find a specific influencer from this crowd who would make a call to violence, and therefore asserts that it was unlikely the shooter was influenced by right-leaning content creators. Fuentes proceeds to contrast this shooting against several other shootings that occured in the days following Christchurch, one committed by a Muslim, and another by an Italian migrant. Fuentes argues that while he would never advocate for an ethnostate, such acts of violence are a "natural consequence" of multiracialism/multiculturalism, and that such acts should be regarded as "inevitable" regardless of online influence. 2:07:37 Asmongold reiterates the question, asking Fuentes if he believes any YouTuber's rhetoric inexplicitly led the shooter to commit the act. Fuentes responds, arguing that any talking points/data cited by the shooter in his manifesto, could easily have been retrieved from a number of other sources outside of YouTube. Fuentes goes on to assert that the true influence on this shooter is the mainstream media claiming there's no way to affect the status-quo with regards "white-erasure" through legitimate means. Fuentes caveats this by stating the shooter's actions were in no way rational, and are abhorrent. 2:09:41 Sargon is given the opportunity to speak. Sargon mirrors Fuentes' talking points, arguing that the problem is not a result of the existence of online communities, but rather the fact that the shooter felt he was unable to legitimately air his grievances. Sargon provides the youtube headquarters shooter as an example, stating she was just demonetized and did not originate from a "deeply ideological community", and felt she could not effectively reach out to YouTube. Sargon concludes by stating every community "has their shooters", and the idea that the shooter was influenced by YouTubers is a Red herring. 2:12:19 Destiny provides his response, arguing that while it would be hard to establish that any particular YouTuber influenced this shooter, hateful rhetoric can still lead to hateful acts of violence. He expresses his understanding of Fuentes and Sargon's argument that the shooter may have felt his views were "suppressed," but he adds a caveat that these views were suppressed for good reason. Destiny elaborates that "horrendous anti-immigration views" held by individuals like Fuentes or Sargon, are rightfully suppressed. 2:15:06 Hasan provides his initial response, beginning by sarcastically praising Fuentes for being a "phenomenal orator" and "sneaking in" several lines of rhetoric. He accuses Fuentes of calling the shooter a martyr, and derides him for claiming the shooting was an "unavoidable" and "rationale" cause of coexisting with people who look slightly different than him. Hasan proceeds to attribute the radicalization of the shooter to right-wing nationalism, and argues such thinking has become problematic in the US. 2:16:59 Sargon offers his rebuttal to Hasan and Destiny, asserting the only reason right-wing nationalism is up for debate, is because of the "cultural-commanance" of the left. Sargon goes on to state the views held by those on the "radical-left" are just as horrific as those on the radical-right, yet are still being platformed. Hasan retorts, arguing that concepts such as "seizing the means of production", "redistributing wealth", and "universal healthcare", are not inherently abhorrent and have worked in other countries unlike the conservative principles Sargon and Fuentes are advocating for. Sargon then chides Hasan for attempting to steer the conversation down a "marxist rabbit hole". 2:20:20 Hasan asks Sargon to provide acts of left-wing violence that is similar in nature to right-wing violence. Sargon brings up acts of violence committed by immigrants in western countries, and blames communism for allowing these individuals into these countries. A debate then arises regarding whether or not communism is inherently violent. Hasan immediately takes issue with this, but does not readily substantiate his disagreement. While Destiny argues that while communism is violent, most other economic schools of thought are just as, if not more, violent. 2:30:07 Destiny steps in, arguing a radicalization of white people around the world is occuring, resulting in them committing more terrorist attacks. He then asserts that statements like "both sides commit violence" is vacuous, and doesn't truly address the issues regarding right-wing extremism in the modern world. 2:32:31 Fuentes is given the opportunity to speak, arguing that Destiny and Hasan are using acts of violence committed by right-wingers as a pretext to silence their political opponents. Throughout his rebuttal, Fuentes asserts that radicalization exists on all sides o the aisle, and provides examples of "left-wing violence" committed by Palestinians, and the Congressional baseball shooting. 2:35:59 Hasan and Sargon debate communism once more, followed by Destiny attempting to steer the conversation back on track. Destiny explains that the justifications someone would use to attack someone based on their race, would be much different than someone who would enact violence on a group of people for economic reasons. 2:45:18 Destiny: "If you're somebody like Lauren Southern, and you're making videos talking about how western society is being destroyed, that the white man is going extinct, that we're being outbred and forced to take on this multicultural, cuck-culture, by jews that are trying to outbreed and destroy white people, how can you not think that's going to lead to some people committing violence?" Fuentes counters that left-wing individuals may just be "pussies". 2:50:05 Hasan asserts the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States should be labled a genocide. Sargon and Fuentes laugh, as Destiny remains silent. 2:57:00 The conversation once again gets mired in a debate on socialism. 3:00:19 The conversation is brought on track once more, and Destiny asks Sargon what his prescription to stop radical individuals on the right is. Sargon responds that individuals on the right should stop having their voices suppressed, and be openly platformed. Fuentes agrees large in part with this assertion, and adds that isolation of individuals possessing certain ideals may also lead to radicalization. Destiny offers his rebuttal, arguing that these individuals can be brought out of "isolation" without having them embrace ideas such as race-realism. Destiny goes on to argue argue that while some individuals may be platformed, bad-faith actors such as Fuentes should be excluded. 3:11:15 Hasan offers his rebuttal to Sargon and Fuentes, arguing that the "social conditions" brought on by capitalism are the true cause for the issues seen with right-wing radicalism. Following Hasan mentioning "the profit motive", Sargon and Fuentes immediately laugh off Hasan's arguments off as "marxist-rhetoric". 3:16:35 Fuentes attempts to bring up James Watson, a researcher who discovered DNA, but is interrupted by Destiny. Destiny accuses Fuentes of attempting to make a "nazi-argument", and the panel becomes increasingly unproductive for some time until Train moderates and allows Fuentes to continue his point. Destiny argues that Fuentes is making an "appeal to false authority" as "just because you're the discoverer of DNA does not give you the ability to speak with any sort of authority whatsoever on it". Destiny and Fuentes proceed to have a heated conversation on the subject. 3:34:39 Closing statements regarding the topic are given. Sargon and Fuentes argue that Watson's cancellation is unjustified, and is evidence of the fact that right-wing thought is being suppressed. Destiny takes issue with this interoperation, and argues that Watson's statements were incredibly irresponsible and unfounded, especially considering his standing within the scientific community on a related subject. Destiny adds that Watson has seemingly willingly ostracized himself from the scientific community, and argues that this would make it even harder for him to be "reintroduced back into the fold". 3:44:58 Before the next topic can be introduced, several panelists give an excuse to exit the call and the panel concludes. |
Hasan and Destiny debate abortion
On May 17, 2019, Destiny and Hasan debated the definition of personhood, morality, and the role of government in legislating abortion. [70] While Destiny expresses his moral reservations about abortions, and argues that a human's life begins at conception, he maintains that abortion should still be legally permissible given the extenuating circumstances an individual who may desire an abortion could find themselves in. Hasan agreed with Destiny's policy assessment of abortion, however, he took issue with Destiny's "arbitrary" assignment of personhood at conception. As a result, the primary contentions of the debate centered around the various philosophical frameworks used to justify Hasan and Destiny's underlying moral positions.
Destiny's full stance on abortion is the following:
"So my metaethical position is descriptive-egoism right. So I don't really believe in morality or any of that exists. My Normative position is that i'm a rule-utilitarian, that means that I wanna make the rules in society that I think will most benefit me. One of these rules that I think shouldn't be made is that it's okay to kill people without good reason. I don't think it's okay to kill somebody unless you have a really really good reason... and when you do an abortion you're basically saying it's okay to murder some people because they're very inconvenient to other people. That's a rule, like if you craft that rule, I feel like... at some point in my life I might become vulnerable to crafting that sort of rule, and that would be worrisome to me."
While Hasan was initially amicable to this line of thought, he took issue upon Destiny's description of a "flawless world" wherein abortions would be illegal, unwanted children would be put up for adoption, and contraceptives/sexual education would be the primary ways of preventing pregnancy. Hasan initially based his counter-argument on the personhood of a fetus, however after further questioning on what constitutes "personhood", it is eventually revealed that Hasan is "making up arguments on the spot" and has not spent much time pondering when a Fetus has personhood.[71] Destiny and Hasan spend the remainder of the call ironing out Hasan's defense of his own position, and debating personhood.
A significant portion of the "personhood debate" focused on Hasan's tendency to shift between different traits(consciousness, moral agency, and potential for development) when defining personhood. When pressed on any single trait, Hasan often moved to another aspect, which resulted in Destiny frequently accusing Hasan of being inconsistent and evasive. To address this, Destiny used an analogy comparing the qualities that make cars cool, illustrating that Hasan's argument relied on a collection of traits rather than a coherent definition of each trait individually.
"Because it's not a collection of things that's the problem... Let's say you ask me: Why are cars cool? And I give you three reasons: The color of the car, how fast the car goes, and the type of transmission. Those are the three things that make cars cool. And you were to go Okay, well let's talk about the color. And I go: Okay cool, so the car's color is... blue. So mine is blue, is that enough to make it a cool car? Then I would say, well no, now a blue car gives it a plus, that's a bonus, but that's not the only reason it's cool, that's just one part of it... But I like the color blue, so that's a positive thing, that means the color is part of my argument. But let's say instead I say: I like the color red because red cars are fast. Well then it sounds like the color isn't important at all, it just sounds like you like fast cars. -Destiny demonstrating Hasan's argumentative flaw with a car analogy
Despite Hasan's continued disagreeance(and confusion) with Destiny's "car analogy", the conversation continued and the two eventually reached an agreeable trait to deliberate on: The capacity to develop moral agency outside of the womb, and the distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb.
Hasan argued that the separation from the host(the mother) marked a significant difference in the fetus's trajectory toward becoming a moral agent. He also argued that the emotional, physical, and material harm endured by the host during pregnancy further differentiates a newborn from a fetus. On the other hand, Destiny argued that both a fetus and a one-year-old have the same potential for moral agency. Destiny also contended that a wanted newborn could cause as much, if not more, harm than an unwanted fetus. The conversation took an unproductive turn following Destiny's use of a personal anecdote involving his experience choosing not to get an abortion, and Hasan arguing Destiny had not considered his partner's suffering during that experience. Following this exchange, Destiny cut away from the call to discuss his poor experiences the few times he's used personal anecdotes, and how it more often than not results in him being ad-hominemed. The conversation continues(fruitlessly) for some time, and both Hasan and Destiny eventually agree that the philosophical discussion surrounding abortion is "aids".
Debate play by play | |
---|---|
21:08 Hasan lists "elements" of personhood, beginning with consciousness. Destiny responds by asking Hasan why consciousness makes one worthy of being considered a person, and asks Hasan if he believes a one year old has moral agency. Hasan initially argues that consciousness gives an individual moral agency and therefore personhood, and goes on to expresses his belief that a one year old's potentiality of becoming a moral is much higher than a fetus. Destiny counters by asserting that the same developmental "trajectory" Hasan attributes to a one-year-old—that of evolving into a moral agent—also applies to a fetus as it grows within the mother's womb. Hasan retorts, asserting that the one-year-old no longer being "tied to a host" is a significant difference, and argues once more for the higher potentiality of becoming a moral agent. Destiny then offers to abandon consciousness from Hasan's list of qualities defining personhood, arguing Hasan does not care about consciousness at all as he's merely using it as a signal for someone's potentiality for becoming a moral agent. Hasan reiterates that consciousness is just one portion of his overall argument for personhood, to which Destiny accuses Hasan of "bouncing" to another element of personhood whenever pressed. Destiny proceeds to accuse Hasan of being unable to substantiate any individual element of personhood. Hasan argues it would be impossible for him to defend every individual aspect of personhood without referring to another element, to which Destiny decides to provide an analogy relating to "why cars are cool": "Because it's not a collection of things that's the problem... Let's say you ask me: Why are cars cool? And I give you three reasons: The color of the car, how fast the car goes, and the type of transmission. Those are the three things that make cars cool. And you were to go Okay, well let's talk about the color. And I go: Okay cool, so the car's color is... blue. So mine is blue, is that enough to make it a cool car? Then I would say, well no, now a blue car gives it a plus, that's a bonus, but that's not the only reason it's cool, that's just one part of it... But I like the color blue, so that's a positive thing, that means the color is part of my argument. But let's say instead I say: I like the color red because red cars are fast. Well then it sounds like the color isn't important at all, it just sounds like you like fast cars. -Destiny demonstrating Hasan's argumentative flaw with a car analogy Hasan cuts Destiny off as he's wrapping up this analogy, informing Destiny that he doesn't understand what he's trying to convey. Destiny then reiterates his feelings of Hasan "retreating" to other traits of personhood when pressed on a given trait, and re-explains the analogy. Following further confusion from Hasan, Destiny eventually abandons the analogy and cuts back to the heart of the argument. Destiny explains he does not believe all conscious things are moral agents, and points out that Hasan said as much. After further deliberation, Hasan eventually provides a trait agreeable to Destiny: The capacity to develop moral agency outside of the womb AKA viability outside of the womb. Destiny then posits a hypothetical child to Hasan which could not be sustained outside of the womb without further medical assistance, and Destiny argues they should focus on deliberating the distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb. As Hasan begins to reiterate the child is no longer attached to a "host", he is distracted by his chatroom, and proceeds to yell at them for claiming Destiny is "owning him" in this debate. Destiny sympathizes with Hasan's anger, and informs Hasan that he's stepping into a "minefield" of abortion-related arguments with little experience. 38:19 The conversation continues, and Destiny argues the primary focus on this conversation should be the distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb. As Hasan is giving his explanation, Destiny gets distracted by Hasan's chat claiming they hope Destiny never needs an abortion. Destiny then recounts his experience wherein an abortion could have potentially been justified in his life, but he refrained from doing so. The conversation gets back on track, and Hasan explains the primary distinction between a baby outside versus inside the womb is the "host"(aka the mother), more specifically, the emotional/physical/material harm to the host. Destiny then provides examples of how a newborn can cause just as much, if not more harm to its "host"(crying a lot at night,requiring money,preventing the parents from seeing their friends causing emotional harm), and could therefore justify aborting a one-year-old child by Hasan's logic. Hasan replies that the mother could simply give the child up for adoption, or not let the fetus become a child. Destiny restates his prior hypothetical of a newborn who cannot survive outside the womb without medical intervention, and asks Hasan what should happen to this child. Hasan replies that as long as the fetus has viability outside of the womb, it should be allowed to persist, as it will become a person at some point. Destiny remarks that a fetus also becomes a person at some point, Hasan argues a one-year-old is closer to "personhood", and the two loop through their prior debate on what makes a fetus a person and whether an abortion should be considered as killing a person. 45:06 Hasan eventually requests for Destiny's to elucidate on his position more. Destiny explains that he believes a fertilized egg is a person, and describes how his life experiences contemplating aborting his child while in dire financial straits informed his opinion. Hasan asks what his partner at the time though, and Destiny informs him that Rachel was fine with either outcome. Hasan then argues that Destiny failed to consider the most important factor in his own personal experience, which is that the harm Destiny endured through this scenario, was nothing in comparison to the emotional/physical/material harm his partner at the time endured. Destiny accuses Hasan of ad hominem, and argues this, like his other assertions, is a non statement. Hasan takes issue and argues he was not ad-homining Destiny, and Destiny proceeds to explain how he did so:
"Okay so an ad-hom is when you is when you overtly attack somebody or more subtly cast doubt on their character or personal attributes as a way to discredit their argument. So nothing that we're talking about now has anything to do with any of the argument listed earlier. You're just saying that because I didn't experience as much material harm as Rachel, who was actually carrying the child, that somehow this should be taken into consideration." - Destiny |
Discussion Highlights | |
---|---|
|
Destiny briefly joins a Rajj Royale podcast to clarify a point Hasan was making, leaving Hasan upset
On June 8, 2019 Destiny briefly joined a Rajj Royale podcast featuring Hasan, Wesbtw, Kaceytron, and Jon Zherka.[72]
Approximately two hours into the show, the panel began debating whether it is possible to be racist toward white people. Following Hasan's initial response to the subject, Austin Show(the host of the show), jokingly suggested that Destiny should join the show to briefly summarize Hasan's talking points. Destiny joins shortly after this request, and allows Hasan to elucidate his argument for several more minutes. Upon hearing Hasan further explain his position, some members of the panel express their confusion with the arguments Hasan is attempting to put forth, going so far as to mock him for his longwindendess. Destiny chimes in shortly following these proclamations, and explains that it is typically difficult for minorities to exercise any form of oppressive racism towards the majority of people, effectively summarizing the point Hasan was attempting to put forth:
"There are two different types of racism that people talk about and they often get conflated. So the question is: Can you be racist towards the majority of people? Under the definition we typically work with... we would say no. Minority people can't really exercise any sort of oppressive racism towards the majority of people. The reason why is we consider racism to be prejudice plus power. If every black person in the United States today, was like "fuck white people" it wouldn't really affect us much, because white people are more socioeconomically privileged, we have more places in congress, etc. Whereas if you're a majority power person, and you can be oppressive towards a minority class person, by virtue of them being minority class, by that virtue alone, they're already typically disadvantaged in American society. So when we say "can somebody be racist against somebody", under like the common vernacular of "can somebody hate somebody because of their skin color", of course, everybody can do that. When we start analyzing society, and we look at like meaningful demonstrations of racism, so for instance like the criminal justice system or economic disadvantages right? In these ways, minority people can't really exorcise racism against majority people, because they don't really have the status or the power in society, in order to do so."
Following Destiny's summarization of Hasan's position, Kaceytron states: "I wish Destiny could just come in at the beginning and gives us the right answer right away, instead of making us wait...like we have the cheat-sheet right here." Wes also chimes in: "So we didn't have to listen to fucking Hasan." Destiny departs shortly after this, and an incredibly irate Hasan airs his grievances with the responses given by his fellow panelists, and at Austin for seemingly encouraging Destiny to join the call.
- -Hasan
"I didn't put Destiny in the poll, I was joking."
- -Austin
"I know he's not in the poll dipshit, i'm saying it's pissing me off because you're devaluing my perspective, which is ongoing. 95% of your discord is like "Hasan is so dumb"... Yeah i'm gonna get fucking triggered after a while, it's not just the fucking chat, every fucking guest on this podcast is doing the exact same bullshit... I'm a fucking human being, if twenty-thousand people are saying i'm retarded, obviously i'm going to get pissed after a while. Especially by people who are dumber than me on the subject "
- -Hasan
"You're winning the round by the way."
- -Austin
"I don't give a fuck if i'm winning this fucking round dude. Losing my fucking hair follicles by the second because I literally have to sit here every fucking day and explain the same insanely easy to understand concepts over and over, and then literally the counter point is: "well what if you say male? Does that mean you're racist?" Like all of a sudden everyone is like "omegalul yes that's true". So obviously it's just a joke, but then it expands to people's real lives, and it actually contributes to people voting for fucking assholes like Donald Trump. That's why i'm pissed off."
- -Hasan
- -Hasan
Timeline of events | |
---|---|
|
Destiny accuses Hasan of perpetuating Crypto Fascism and chides him for dissuading his audience against voting for Biden
On June 16, 2019, Destiny held a conversation with Emmia regarding her political ignorance, emotional response to serious discussions, and experiences interacting with the political side of Twitch.[73] Emmia had recently received much criticism for what she perceived to be seemingly innocuous memes, that turned out to be alt-right dog whistles. Destiny took Emmia at her word, and had a dialogue with her regarding the best path forward and how to avoid engaging with similar memes in the future.
At one point during the call Hasan joins, and proceeds to have a very heated exchange with Destiny. Hasan accuses Destiny of being overly charitable to Emmia, and attempts to point to instances where Destiny went "harder" on other right-leaning individuals who engaged in behavior similar to Emmia. Destiny takes issue with this, arguing that he would never go this hard on a "normie" like Emmia, and points to instances of him being equally charitable to "normies" like PewDiePie. Destiny proceeds to accuse Hasan of perpetuating the "vicious cycle" of crypto-fascism by bullying a "normie" like Emmia into the arms of alt-righters, instead of taking her at her word and evaluating her future actions for what they are. Destiny further asserts that the communities Hasan inhabits, and the individuals demanding Emmia's apology, would likely never forgive Emmia anyways, and points to the severe criticism he has received from left-leaning communities despite the breadth of progressive content he has produced.
"There was a week's worth of chapotraphouse threads on me that said I want to fuck 19 year olds, that said I want to abandon my kid, fucking christ I've got like 7,000 videos over the past four or five years of me doing progressive work, like fuck it dude, if I haven't changed people's minds why the fuck would I tell anybody else to waste their time... And i'll maintain that position, left leaning communities are just as cancerous as right-wing communities when it comes to online discourse."
The conversation diverges further, as Hasan accuses destiny of hyperfocusing on extreme criticism against himself, prompting Destiny to bring up a Chapo thread for analysis. Hasan then claims DGG engages in similar behavior towards himself, but Destiny counters, explaining he bans unfair criticism towards Hasan and that ad hominem attacks are typically downvoted in his subreddit. From here, the two spend the remainder of the call debating the pragmaticism(or lack thereof) of their respective political views. Hasan alleges Destiny deliberately uses provocative behavior to alienate left-leaning viewers, like calling workers dumb. To which Destiny responds by pointing out Hasan’s has engaged in more divisive actions, such as recently stating in a tv interview that he wouldn't vote for Biden over Trump. Hasan argues that a vote for Biden is perpetuating a "business as usual" political structure that gave the United States Donald Trump to begin with, to which Destiny chides Hasan for not considering the individuals who would get hurt by a Donald Trump presidency(i.e women in need of abortions, and LGBT people).
Destiny then demands that Hasan explain his logic for abstaining from voting in the next election. Hasan explains that a vote for Biden would merely perpetuate the status-quo even further, asserts that politicians like Biden will never push for change that interferes with the "interest of capital" or corporations, and contends that Biden is "basically a Republican". Destiny counters, accusing Hasan of stating one of the most hilariously stupid things he has ever heard, remarks how individuals on the right will "literally cheer" for any republican candidate to get through in an election, and asserts that not voting for a democratic candidate because it "doesn't deal with capitalism" is an incredibly privileged position to anyone not spending all their time online "larping about socialism". The conversation eventually concludes as Destiny accuses Hasan of being an accelerationist and unpragmatic, Hasan asserts the "neoliberalism" and capitalistic nature of the Democratic party has corrupted it, and Destiny once again criticizes Hasan of arguing from a point of extreme privilege and ignoring individuals who would suffer under a Trump presidency.
Hasan and Destiny Break Up Over Kamala Misinformation WIP
- Main Article: Hasan and Destiny Break Up Over Kamala Misinformation
Destiny and Hasan create reddit threads following the debate WIP
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cbdj2w/on_bootyjudge/
https://old.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cayg1e/if_destiny_wants_to_remain_morally_consistent_he/
https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cgsvav/effort_post_rdestiny_v_rhasan_piker_hate_threads/
Hasanabi And Destiny BREAK UP Aftermath, Hasan types in dgg chat while Destiny discusses their breakup WIP
Hasan and Destiny get back together WIP
"I've never been more gaslit in my entire life..." - Destiny Debate ft. Hasanabi, TheSerfsTV, & More(n-word arc) WIP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hodq77NShaA
End of the Leftist Arc? - Destiny Addresses the Recent Drama WIP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7XGOtOSWe4
DMCA claim accusation, Hasan beef & More - LNOD WIP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8B2XTCm5h0
Hasan's Consequences from Trump WIP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDm8MoyeIek&t=8s
Melina vs Hasan WIP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIdlHWuxdXI
Hasan fan calls into Destiny's stream WIP
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIdlHWuxdXI
Piers Morgan Show attempts to set up a debate with Destiny and Hasan
On May 2, 2024, the Piers Morgan show attempted to set up a debate between Destiny and Hasan. [74] Destiny agreed to the debate, and Hasan's response was never received.
Notable Clips, Videos, Tweets and Controversies WIP
Clips
Hasan allegedly consumes Destiny content in his free time
On May 13, 2024, Destiny alleges that Hasan spends his free time religiously following his content. Destiny claims to have discovered this following Melina's affair with Hasan's friend, Will Neff.
On May 15, 2024, Destiny provided a compilation video as evidence of Hasan "obsessing" over his personal life. Within the video a six minute compilation of Hasan discussing Destiny's personal life since early March, 2024 is provided. [75]
Controversies
Throughout his career, Piker has been involved in several controversies, often stemming from his outspoken political views. In 2019, he faced backlash for comments made during a Twitch stream about the September 11 attacks and brave Mujahideen fighters fucking the eye hole of U.S. Representative Dan Crenshaw. Piker later apologized for the remarks, stating that they were "inappropriate and offensive."
Bro Tips
During the run of Hasan's show "Bro Tips", hosted on The Young Turks, he made a number of controversial comments in which he accused Lady Gaga of having a penis, and gave viewers instructions on how to isolate women from their friends, then coerce them into sexual intercourse. [citation needed ]
"Come back again next week when we discuss the legendary question of all time: Old enough to count, old enough to mount?" [76]
- — Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker
"It's time to get out of here and it's time to separate her from her herd, meaning her crowd of girlfriends who are going to do their best to cockblock you because they're fat and lonely." [77]
- — Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker
"Brotip: If you stand in front of the door, she can't leave." [citation needed ]
- — Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker
"Here's why the 5 second rule works: Because when you start thinking for longer than 5 seconds, you're immediately not thinking with your dick, and also thinking with this thing that we like to call our brains." [78]
- — Hasan 'The Brofessor' Piker
Controversial quotes
- "Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?"
- “I paved it on my own”
- "I live on a basic necessity budget"
- "Twitch leak"
- "I make the same amount of money as a doctor"
- "A real job ... doesn't suck the soul out of you in the same way that ... streaming absolutely will."
- "I'm a propagandist, for the record."
- "At least Patrick Henry college, is like, doing one good thing. Which is that like, if you have these fucking millionaire/billionaire WASP fail-sons, at least taking them out of other colleges so they can only do date-rape to millionaire/billionaire fail-daughters, is like in some respects, you know from a utilitarian perspective of course, a little bit better, you know what I mean? Taking these guys and... putting them in a pen with one another, is ultimately getting them away from the broader society."
- I hope, I hope, that the rest of your life is as horrible as it is every single day, okay. There ya go. Suck my dick. I despise you. I despise you more than anything else on the planet. You are fucking cancer, okay. You are cancer in this community, and you are cancer in every community. Suck my dick. For the last 15 months you've been able to fucking hide in these ranks, you catboy fuck. Move your catboy ass out of here, you are never welcome. You are never going to be unbanned, no matter how difficult it is, no matter how much you want to get unbanned, I will never unban you. You are now banished into the fucking, shadow realm, okay. The notion, that I am not, fuckin, ehh, ehh, ah- a-, like, I should not be having transphobes on, or ever talk about transphobia, or to transphobic people, is such a pathetic, and stupid fucking argument, when Vaush himself has probably said that the debate was fine. Okay? I don't like you. I'm going to make this very clear. If you are this type of person, I don't like you. I don't want you to be in here, okay? Or if you're gonna be in here, you need to fucking know your place. You need to know your place. Your place is this, okay? It's not this, it's this. You can stay in here and watch, but you're not going to fuckin', write shit, in the chat. Sorry. I would quite literally rather have someone who is on the margins, and is actually interested in learning, but might have transphobic points of view, RATHER THAN, someone who's like, (gay voice) "MM I'm a catboy, I've been in here for 50 months, and I think like, you know, you're not that good at debates, so you shouldn't have a transphobic person on." Like, no. Fuck off. Like, literally, I would rather have a MILLION people that are willing to fucking learn, and are actually here, much like the rest of normal society that have been like, socially conditioned into feeling the ways that they do, than ANY NUMBER of super woke, super fuckin' leftist, uh, uh, debate lords. Straight up. I've done more debates than you, I'm better at debates than you, I'm better at debates than most of the other people that you fucking compare me to, because debates are still pure rhetoric, okay. That's it. (sips drink) Anyway... Oh, by the way, mods, clap that person that is definitely in the discord too. If they're crying in the discord right now, 100% clap that person's ass cheeks. "
- "Hamas unironically is the lesser evil(compared to the IDF)."
External Links
References
- ↑ HasanAbi Reacts. (2024, May 5). Why Hasan Stopped Engaging With Destiny | HasanAbi Reacts. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynxYR3m4Ug4
- ↑ Destiny. (2024, January 25). Hasan Slams Shapiro And Destiny, Calls Debates Useless. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj6G8hbpJg8
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1beumlg/the_word_destiny_is_banned_in_hasans_chat/
- ↑ Neon Lotus. (2024, June 16). Why Does Destiny Hate Hasan? YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUOHbcQ5fI8
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1ci6gdj/hasan_goes_all_out_on_destiny_and_this_sub/
- ↑ Ben Shapiro DEBATES Destiny | Hasanabi Reacts to Lex Fridman Podcast. (Jan 24, 2024 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAcjcNMXq4k
- ↑ Norman Finkelstein & Others DEBATE on Lex Fridman Podcast | Hasanabi Reacts (Longest Stunlock Ever). (Mar 15, 2024 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MprW_lFCbyg
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/174wtzc/about_destiny_saying_hes_more_popular_than_hasan/
- ↑ Hasan And Cenk Vs Crowder And Daily Wire. (Oct 7, 2023 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 3, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eZidF_MiYw
- ↑ Media:HasanHemmoragingViewers.mp4
- ↑ Destiny DEBATES Omar Baddar | Hasanabi Reacts to Breaking Points. (May 3, 2024 ). Www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 3, 2024, from https://youtu.be/nWxrMQf8g5U?t=2444
- ↑ Trump: McCain Not a 'War Hero' (2024). The Wall Street Journal [YouTube Video]. In YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNugcPeCZZE
- ↑ ( Oct 23, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9iPLU3fAFA&t=5272s
- ↑ The Most Oppressed Group - Pre-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (Oct 23, 2018). Www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9iPLU3fAFA&t=5424s
- ↑ Ben Shapiro vs Destiny Debate | HasanAbi reacts to Lex Fridman Podcast. (Jan 24, 2024 ). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 4, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i9UYIkDTsY&t=4752s
- ↑ Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa. (Dec 12, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RAZHElDZL8
- ↑ https://wiki.destiny.gg/view/File:Hasan_does_think_wikipedia_is_a_scholarly_source..mp4
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cp6zos/hasan_crying_laughing_at_the_fact_destiny/
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1coih9u/destiny_only_reads_wikipedia_as_4thot_requested/
- ↑ Lex Clips. (2024, March 14). Norm Finkelstein calls Destiny a fantastic moron | Lex Fridman Podcast. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fls1z4e4nvo
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1coih9u/destiny_only_reads_wikipedia_as_4thot_requested/
- ↑ Media:Watch Destiny Only Reads Wikipedia Streamable.mp4
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cphimw/debate_fancam_hasan_does_no_research_actual/
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cpjtb0/pedro_pedro_pedro_pedro_pe/
- ↑ https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1321 Hasan and Destiny debate abortion: Hasan states he's coming up with arguments on the spot and has not previously thought about when a Fetus has personhood.
- ↑ Destiny. (2019, July 9). Hasanabi And Destiny BREAK UP Over Kamala Misinformation. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLfAuWe3xho
- ↑ https://old.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cayg1e/if_destiny_wants_to_remain_morally_consistent_he/
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cbdj2w/on_bootyjudge/
- ↑ Destiny. (2019, July 10). Hasanabi And Destiny BREAK UP Aftermath. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCsvkP_sVQw
- ↑ Wikipedia Contributors. (2024, September 4). Leftovers (podcast). Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leftovers_(podcast)
- ↑ Ethan Announces Leftovers is Taking a Break. YouTube.
- ↑ Ethan's Criticism of Hasan. Reddit. Retrieved 2023 Oct 31.
- ↑ Actual boring stream today until 7 PM, then panel debate later with Alex and friends at 8 PM. YouTube VOD. Retrieved 2023 Nov 9.
- ↑ Media:HasanEthanReply.jpg
- ↑ Media:HasanEthanReply4.jpg
- ↑ Media:HasanEthanReply2.jpg
- ↑ Media:HasanEthanReply3.jpg
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1fglnba/hasan_then_vs_hasan_now_when_it_comes_to_his/
- ↑ Media:HasanEthanFroganDefense.mp4
- ↑ The Most Oppressed Group - Pre-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (October 9, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 29, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9iPLU3fAFA
- ↑ POLITICON - DESTINY REACTS. (October 22, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 19, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uenf3uYDKBE
- ↑ Politicon 2018 - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (October 24, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved January 19, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jRhGapcaK4
- ↑ Meeting with Hasanabi. (Nov 1, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 12, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVf1hMt-XbI
- ↑ Richard Lewis Semantics Expert. (November 2, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1OXF6IEBFc
- ↑ Hasan’s Richard Lewis Debate - Post-debate Debate with Hasan Piker. (November 9, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7wtmabgQU8
- ↑ CNN, A. by Z. B. W. (February 27, 2018). Trump’s attacks on Judge Curiel are still jarring to read. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/27/politics/judge-curiel-trump-border-wall/index.html
- ↑ At Hasan’s place ft. Felklmao. (Dec 1, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwiRb8RveDQ
- ↑ Talk with Hasan - McDonnald’s employee kicking teenagers out. (Dec 3, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTpTLj4Lg9A
- ↑ Talk with Hasan - Doctor kicked out of airplane. (Dec 4, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eBl1Ntx45A
- ↑ Talk with Hasan - Disciplining employee - School janitor case. (Dec 6, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 20, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RYq-F6AUcU
- ↑ https://livestreamfails.com/post/36043
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/a5bdn3/destinys_take_on_mrdeadmoths_abuse_clip/
- ↑ Domestic abuse - MrDeadMoth hits wife ft. MrMouton, Hasan, WhiteNervosa. (Dec 12, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RAZHElDZL8
- ↑ Destiny. (December 7, 2018). PewDiePie and E;R ft. Hasanabi. In YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ENmudByKig
- ↑ Talking with a venezuelan about Venezuela ft. Hasanabi. (December 22, 2018). www.youtube.com. Retrieved February 26, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDiS7WdrzQg
- ↑ https://rustlesearch.dev/surrounds?channel=Destinygg&date=2018-12-15T04%3A44%3A52.000Z&username=yiazmat
- ↑ https://rustlesearch.dev/surrounds?channel=Destinygg&date=2018-12-24T06%3A45%3A50.000Z&username=hasanabi
- ↑ 2019-01-09 - irl stream with andy, hasan, bella and poki at kbbq, bar. (2/8/2020). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3FdEGY9Xo8
- ↑ STOP JĘRKIŃG ME OFF. (Jan 25, 2019). Www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 19, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22L8ynUNxsc
- ↑ There’s something you value more than democracy... ft. Hasan Piker & H.Bomberguy. (Jan 3, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyOnBYaLFwY
- ↑ I F#%*ING HATE BREAKING NEWS FT. HASAN PIKER. (Jan 9, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved March 22, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FcDO7jYQQ8
- ↑ Media:HasanBreakingNewsComments.png
- ↑ https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/1/10/18175589/jazmine-barnes-shooting-houston-texas-race
- ↑ I DIDN’T KNOW I GRABBED THE MAGNUM XXXL’S. (Jan 29, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4V1zrh0W4A
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/cbfh6y/rem_what_i_mean_by_moral_luck_with_regards_to/
- ↑ Streamer Drama ft. Hasanabi, Vaush, Marty & RemTheBathBoi. (Mar 23, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 3, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjszEJBKWRs
- ↑ How will Article 13 change YouTube and Twitch? ft. Hasanabi. (Mar 30, 2019). www.youtube.com. Retrieved May 9, 2024, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPtdhXmRgCo
- ↑ Trainwreckstv. (2019, April 6). SARGON OF AKKAD, TYT’s HASAN PIKER, DESTINY, NICK F, & co-host ASMONGOLD - POLITICAL PODCAST. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XbT4UojaRw
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/b9mahl/i_think_we_can_all_agree_that_this_was_a_massive/
- ↑ Destiny. (2019, May 21). This argument is cancer - Destiny debates Hasanabi. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZOr-ruA_XM
- ↑ https://youtu.be/LZOr-ruA_XM?t=1321 Hasan and Destiny debate abortion: Hasan states he's coming up with arguments on the spot and has not thought about when a Fetus has personhood.
- ↑ Twitch Lyfe. (2019, June 8). RAJJ ROYALE PODCAST FT. METHODJOSH, JON ZHERKA, SLIKER, GREEKGODX, HASAN, REYNAD & MORE. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS40ocv3SFU
- ↑ Destiny. (2019, June 17). I don’t really know if you’re pretending or not... ft. HasanAbi & Emmia. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stdrVr9BHkE
- ↑ https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1cirrrv/pierce_morgan_show_trying_to_set_up_destiny_vs/
- ↑ Media:Hasan Dgg lore master.mp4
- ↑ Rare Cringe Hasanabi Compilation. (May 22, 2022). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 23, 2024, from https://youtu.be/q_r7Ft35rE0?si=nDhEaR3tCq3s3C7J&t=41
- ↑ Hasanabi Brotip: The Lets Get Outta Here Rule. (May 26, 2022). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 23, 2024, from https://youtu.be/DLEGpN0CUJ4?si=6kUQw4qtv1_kojms&t=50
- ↑ Rare Cringe Hasanabi Compilation. (May 22, 2022). www.youtube.com. Retrieved April 23, 2024, from https://youtu.be/q_r7Ft35rE0?si=10gms6GRO_hDXmgC&t=26