Not claiming this, just voicing what I think Hasan is trying to do. Obviously, Hasan is not well read on Lenin.

Then my point stands.

Right, but is Hasan actually involved with building any sort of socialist movement?

Your whole premise is that he is part of a large, informal movement aimed at that purpose, that's what a "pipeline" is. I'm not saying he's the head of a caucus, obviously.

He's conditioning people's first reaction upon seeing references to Marxist leaders to be "hell yeah!" . . .

The cheerleading isn't helpful if he's using Lenin's corpse as a mask for attacking Lenin's thought. For the rest of this section, I think you just misread me.

Trust me, you and I both wish he would present actual theory on stream

Aside from the fact that he literally does read directly from leftist texts to quote-mine Lenin (specifically he has repeatedly done this with Left Wing Communism), there are times where he does explain points of political theory and when he does so correctly (an easy example, he frequently re-explains the difference between private and personal property), and that is a good thing that he could stand to do a bit more often, but that's not my main concern here, my concern here is the presence of misrepresentations.

I think this is where our fundamental disagreement comes from. You are looking for him to be more serious, but that is not what his audience is there for. Hasan's streams are entertainment, and he is closer to Bill Burr or Dan Carlin than even the Citations Needed guys, let alone any real leader.

I think being a clown is fine. If I hated him being a clown, I wouldn't listen to him for hours because that is most of what his act is (something something jestermaxxing). I think he does a great job (usually) of mocking various reactionaries who make up almost the entire mainstream political spectrum, and honestly I think he actually sometimes does a better job than you give him credit for in terms of actual education or at least closer analysis on certain subjects, whether it's carefully examining footage of the various ICE shootings or picking interesting documentaries and video essays to play on stream for his chair to react to.

His job is to make the masses more receptive to us.

And my point, which was in the part you misread (I'm not really sure what the misreading was, which is why I'm just referring to it generally) is that parts of the project that he is agitating for (his "not entryism"), the attitude that he has dedicatedly cultivated in his community toward actual MLs, and, by your own admission, the liberalism that he sometimes presents (his tailism), are a detriment to people being more receptive to us.

Is this a jab at me? No need to insult me

No, it was a serious offer.