Richard earned my respect when Captive Dreamer tried to bring up Richard’s drug addicted schizo brother and Richard said he was relieved when he died. Anna Khachiyan and Lomez and a bunch of other dissident right people were freaking out. Good times.
I laughed so hard when he posted his banger of being teabagged as a teenager; it takes a lot of balls just to share something like that publicly, i respect his audacity
Hanania gets a pass from me on anything. This is because he’s happy, has a sense of humor and is a legit nerd. I approve of and sympathize with that kind of person. He could privately hate the crap out of me and I’d still approve of him. I like people who can openly disagree with hiveminds.
In case it’s not obvious, I’m so annoyed at miserable, negative hiveminds that anything individualistic and happy, I can’t help but enjoy.
I don’t like hiveminds, I really don’t like hiveminds.
Hanania is good and decent. And we don't have to agree with anyone 100% anyway.
His biggest view error was falling for Caplan's Open Borders nonsense. But let's agree that - superficially - Caplan is right on this outside of Europe. So falling for it isn't disqualifying.
I can't speak for him, but I'm pretty sure Hanania has acknowledged that Europe and America are in very different situations when it comes to immigration.
Yes he repeatedly mentioned it. But unfortunately not enough to my taste. It is hard for me to have a clear judgment whether he prefers not to mention it or he just thinks it's irrelevant for America so no genuine need to mention it.....
This essay is poignant for me. My life would be different without Richard Hanania.
Maybe Sebastian Jensen would not be a writer; or he would be set on a different path. There is a network of nodes in which Hanania, as the "network whale," has a profound self-reinforcing influence.
Peter Thiel and George Soros are philosophers with the money to influence real events. Hanania is more like Socrates, a man without vast wealth, but who instead marshals ideas and force of personality to influence real events.
Politics is a matter of life and death. The intention of the political philosophy is heroic, even if muddled by the algorithm. This muddling is also the evolution of warfare away from personal close combat toward automated weaponry, machine guns, and mortars, which is impersonal and even inhuman.
History is monumental and all-consuming; we appear as ants and motes of dust. The posting of most e-celebs signifies nothing more than sound and fury. Even the purest schizo-post or autistic study, ground down by the algorithmic slop machine, can become fodder for the "bugman" mob. Memes are copied without understanding, and they become a disgusting parody of their former selves.
This is similar to Mark Fischer's critique of capitalism: the more we lash out against the slop machine, the more we drown in it. The only way to win is not to play. It is dangerous to be so close to the quicksand, the black hole of "cringe," so I hesitate to use holy words like love. But love is the basis of my poignant feelings.
I keep a dream journal, and I notice how parasocial internet relationships enter my subconscious. Internet relationships lack the intimacy of the cashier at the corner store; but they can be deeper.
"Father figures" are not just something for "lost" boys. As men seek out models, they become attached to professors, mentors, teachers and peers as surrogate brothers and fathers. In Platonism, these relationships are sacred.
Even Platonic "eros" carries more than a purely sexual connotation. The Greeks were doing gay stuff, but they also recognized forms of love based on pure intellectual admiration and appreciation.
It feels silly or cringe to "love" people on a pure intellectual basis. But if we can love a great book or work of literature, why can't we love its author? If we can love a video game or anime, why can't we also love the artist that created it -- even if we have never met them?
Intellectual work lacks the poetry that strikes directly into the vulnerable soul. But unlike literature or anime, philosophical dialogue is a dynamic two-way street. Active participation transcends the consumption of "mono-directional" art. The inspiring motive force behind the dialogue, and fondness which develops out of it, points toward the existence of intellectual love.
Hanania has changed his mind on so much it is hard to take him seriously anymore. When Hanania started talking about his driving habits, I went from thinking of him as someone I merely disagree with to someone who is deeply malevolent. He is a lite version of his dog throwing brother.
He is a powerful troll and engagement farmer because his targets still style themselves/ourselves trolls and outsiders even when they've/we've collapsed into convention.
It doesn't upset me if an internet personality has "betrayed" or been disloyal to a particular political camp. I don't expect loyalty from this group of people.
As someone who agreed more with Hanania's older standpoints, such as they were, than with his new ones, I don't feel that his newer posts have taught me anything or caused me to change my mind on anything. It's not clear to me what actual facts or insights led to this apparent change of mind. (In fact, I don't think Hanania's earlier writing was particularly insightful either - at that time he just repeated the narratives of one side, while he now repeats the narratives of the other side). For that reason, I don't consider Hanania to be an interesting or worthwhile writer.
Richard earned my respect when Captive Dreamer tried to bring up Richard’s drug addicted schizo brother and Richard said he was relieved when he died. Anna Khachiyan and Lomez and a bunch of other dissident right people were freaking out. Good times.
That's hilarious
I laughed so hard when he posted his banger of being teabagged as a teenager; it takes a lot of balls just to share something like that publicly, i respect his audacity
Hanania gets a pass from me on anything. This is because he’s happy, has a sense of humor and is a legit nerd. I approve of and sympathize with that kind of person. He could privately hate the crap out of me and I’d still approve of him. I like people who can openly disagree with hiveminds.
In case it’s not obvious, I’m so annoyed at miserable, negative hiveminds that anything individualistic and happy, I can’t help but enjoy.
I don’t like hiveminds, I really don’t like hiveminds.
Hanania is good and decent. And we don't have to agree with anyone 100% anyway.
His biggest view error was falling for Caplan's Open Borders nonsense. But let's agree that - superficially - Caplan is right on this outside of Europe. So falling for it isn't disqualifying.
I can't speak for him, but I'm pretty sure Hanania has acknowledged that Europe and America are in very different situations when it comes to immigration.
Yes he repeatedly mentioned it. But unfortunately not enough to my taste. It is hard for me to have a clear judgment whether he prefers not to mention it or he just thinks it's irrelevant for America so no genuine need to mention it.....
This essay is poignant for me. My life would be different without Richard Hanania.
Maybe Sebastian Jensen would not be a writer; or he would be set on a different path. There is a network of nodes in which Hanania, as the "network whale," has a profound self-reinforcing influence.
Peter Thiel and George Soros are philosophers with the money to influence real events. Hanania is more like Socrates, a man without vast wealth, but who instead marshals ideas and force of personality to influence real events.
Politics is a matter of life and death. The intention of the political philosophy is heroic, even if muddled by the algorithm. This muddling is also the evolution of warfare away from personal close combat toward automated weaponry, machine guns, and mortars, which is impersonal and even inhuman.
History is monumental and all-consuming; we appear as ants and motes of dust. The posting of most e-celebs signifies nothing more than sound and fury. Even the purest schizo-post or autistic study, ground down by the algorithmic slop machine, can become fodder for the "bugman" mob. Memes are copied without understanding, and they become a disgusting parody of their former selves.
This is similar to Mark Fischer's critique of capitalism: the more we lash out against the slop machine, the more we drown in it. The only way to win is not to play. It is dangerous to be so close to the quicksand, the black hole of "cringe," so I hesitate to use holy words like love. But love is the basis of my poignant feelings.
I keep a dream journal, and I notice how parasocial internet relationships enter my subconscious. Internet relationships lack the intimacy of the cashier at the corner store; but they can be deeper.
"Father figures" are not just something for "lost" boys. As men seek out models, they become attached to professors, mentors, teachers and peers as surrogate brothers and fathers. In Platonism, these relationships are sacred.
Even Platonic "eros" carries more than a purely sexual connotation. The Greeks were doing gay stuff, but they also recognized forms of love based on pure intellectual admiration and appreciation.
It feels silly or cringe to "love" people on a pure intellectual basis. But if we can love a great book or work of literature, why can't we love its author? If we can love a video game or anime, why can't we also love the artist that created it -- even if we have never met them?
Intellectual work lacks the poetry that strikes directly into the vulnerable soul. But unlike literature or anime, philosophical dialogue is a dynamic two-way street. Active participation transcends the consumption of "mono-directional" art. The inspiring motive force behind the dialogue, and fondness which develops out of it, points toward the existence of intellectual love.
Superb comment
Always back your friends against the public
Hanania has changed his mind on so much it is hard to take him seriously anymore. When Hanania started talking about his driving habits, I went from thinking of him as someone I merely disagree with to someone who is deeply malevolent. He is a lite version of his dog throwing brother.
He is a powerful troll and engagement farmer because his targets still style themselves/ourselves trolls and outsiders even when they've/we've collapsed into convention.
He gave you lousy career advice.
Richard Hoste please save us Richard Hoste if you can hear me please save us
It doesn't upset me if an internet personality has "betrayed" or been disloyal to a particular political camp. I don't expect loyalty from this group of people.
As someone who agreed more with Hanania's older standpoints, such as they were, than with his new ones, I don't feel that his newer posts have taught me anything or caused me to change my mind on anything. It's not clear to me what actual facts or insights led to this apparent change of mind. (In fact, I don't think Hanania's earlier writing was particularly insightful either - at that time he just repeated the narratives of one side, while he now repeats the narratives of the other side). For that reason, I don't consider Hanania to be an interesting or worthwhile writer.