Hasan Piker is one of the biggest streamers on Twitch, which is quite the accomplishment because the platform was originally for gamers, but he does political commentary. With over 2.2 million followers on Twitch, 1.1 million on Twitter, and 1 million on YouTube, he has quite the influence. He’s a hardcore “eat the rich” type pro-socialist leftist, but he’s not who he appears to be.
However this person is under some pretty big misunderstanding about what Marxism is about.
This is such a cop-out that allows wealthy, privileged people like Hasan Piker to get away with whatever he wants. The idea that as long as you’re not exploiting labor, all is well and good is ridiculous. Until people who believe in Marxism recognize this, we’ll never solve any of the problems we see with capitalism.
Somehow they created this strawman that thinks making money is fine as long as you don't exploit people and attributed that as some sort of Marxist basis.
Maybe it is not a strawman and some people actually think like this but the point is using the Marxist label to describe this goes against his whole argument as he keeps repeating this "Marxist morality problem", socialists and communists are more likely to read something like this and instantly look away in horror.
IMO it doesn't take much to correct this, the argument should be that it is not the act of making money itself that is bad, but how this is used to defend someone with other questionable background and character flaws. As they said there is plenty to argue about the morality and utility of 7 figure homes in questionable cities, sports cars.
For me there is a clear and obvious line where you cross between "normal" people and just scumbag capitalist behaviour even if you are not a capitalist. I think things like excessive air travel, owning too many properties/being a landlord, buying and using excessively wasteful products like private jets/yatchs/sports cars etc. These things IMO are clearly harmful to society and the environment and I don't give a shit if you earned your money in a lottery, found a 50 million blank check on the ground, or own a slave factory in South East Asia. The behavior is equally harmful no matter what.
But still the biggest argument in favor of Hasan is that despite everything we are not his audience and if you want to be strictly utilitarian then maybe having such a popular figure is slightly more beneficial than not.
I don't consume his content so I'm not invested either way but it is sad this is the best we can do.
However this person is under some pretty big misunderstanding about what Marxism is about.
Somehow they created this strawman that thinks making money is fine as long as you don't exploit people and attributed that as some sort of Marxist basis.
Maybe it is not a strawman and some people actually think like this but the point is using the Marxist label to describe this goes against his whole argument as he keeps repeating this "Marxist morality problem", socialists and communists are more likely to read something like this and instantly look away in horror.
IMO it doesn't take much to correct this, the argument should be that it is not the act of making money itself that is bad, but how this is used to defend someone with other questionable background and character flaws. As they said there is plenty to argue about the morality and utility of 7 figure homes in questionable cities, sports cars.
For me there is a clear and obvious line where you cross between "normal" people and just scumbag capitalist behaviour even if you are not a capitalist. I think things like excessive air travel, owning too many properties/being a landlord, buying and using excessively wasteful products like private jets/yatchs/sports cars etc. These things IMO are clearly harmful to society and the environment and I don't give a shit if you earned your money in a lottery, found a 50 million blank check on the ground, or own a slave factory in South East Asia. The behavior is equally harmful no matter what.
But still the biggest argument in favor of Hasan is that despite everything we are not his audience and if you want to be strictly utilitarian then maybe having such a popular figure is slightly more beneficial than not. I don't consume his content so I'm not invested either way but it is sad this is the best we can do.
deleted by creator
Idealist liberal sees everyone else as an idealist