644
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2026
644 points (96.8% liked)
Progressive Politics
3972 readers
1280 users here now
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The fundamental issue here is that you literally don't know what the word grifter means. We're operating on two different planes here because I'm using the actual definition, and you're not. So just as a refresher, this is what a grifter is:
This is the definition from the Cambridge dictionary.
Source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/grifter
If we use this definition as the basis of our discussion, then we can make rule out some things such as:
Therefore, your argument in this comment is invalid based on these points that we just inferred.
Furthermore, since consistency and grifting are not opposites, a political commentator, such as Hasan or Ben, can absolutely hold consistent views and still be a grifter. Grifting, as per the definition, is about motivation and incentives, not whether someone’s positions change over time. A commentator may repeat the same arguments for years, but if those arguments are primarily shaped by what attracts money, attention, or loyalty from an audience rather than a genuine effort to inform or engage honestly, that is grifting. In fact, consistency can make grifting easier by creating a reliable brand that builds trust and is easier to monetize. What separates good faith commentary from grifting is not stability of views, but a willingness to acknowledge uncertainty, admit mistakes, update positions when evidence changes, and criticize one’s own side even at the cost of popularity.
Based on this basic analysis, I think my conclusion to call both Ben Shapiro and Hasan Piker grifters is valid. The conversation now shifts from what makes a grifter that to why I think Hasan is a grifter. Just an FYI, I won't focus on Ben from here on out since he was only referenced to demonstrate a point and nothing more. So why do I think Hasan is a grifter? It's simple, he's a hypocrite who lives a lifestyle that completely contradictory to what he preaches. He's swindling his audience for money by selling them ideas that he himself doesn't believe in and live by. Do I have proof for this? I think it's only fair that the burden of proof falls on me to prove the deception, and the answer to that is, yes, I do. I already written a comment here showcasing exactly how Hasan is a grifter right here:
https://lemmy.world/comment/21924262
Thus, we can conclude that Hasan Piker is a grifter as per the definition of the word.
According to Wiktionary:
(informal, originally Canada, US) A con artist; someone who pulls confidence games; a swindler, scammer, huckster, hustler, and/or charlatan.
(colloquial, especially Internet) A manipulator or otherwise generally corrupt person who "games" a system, group of people, or other entity for selfish gains; especially of a political "sell-out" perceived as lacking integrity.
Hasan doesn't lack integrity. Hasan has been pushing the same beliefs and world view for his entire career. And the moments where he was wrong in his analysis, like when he predicted that Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine, he owned up to it and said he was wrong. He tends to avoid making predictions about what world powers will do these days because his predictions have been wrong before.
Hasan is not selfish, as I've already demonstrated in one of the comments I responded to you with.
Hasan does not manipulate because his funding source, coming from his fans, allows him to be impartial when it comes to covering the news. The same cannot be said for Ben Shapiro, Candice Owens, Megan Kelly, Fox News, etc. because these people have to tow the line of the party and follow the direction of the US State Department or else face getting de-platformed. If Hasan is de-platformed on Twitch, he can pick up and move to YouTube or somewhere else and his fans will follow. Hasan is an independent commentator. And if you think he's manipulating his fans, it's only because he's acting in opposition to the US State Department who's doing the same. It is an information war out there.
Hasan is not a con artist. I can't believe I have to state this given that the biggest con artist in the US political system is the man currently at the top, which happens to be Hasan's largest opponent. Hasan makes it his mission to debunk what Trump says and cut through the lies he spews. If you think Hasan is a grifter but ignore the reality of Trump, then I have no other conclusion to make than to think you're a conservative in sheep's clothing, disguised as a progressive that actually wants to undermine the movement, or an enlightened centrist that tries to do "both sides" apologizing. Not going to cut it on Lemmy of all places.
Kindly, fuck off.