Asmongold TV - How is this a real article?? | Asmongold TV

Episode Date: October 11, 2025

How is this a real article?? Asmongold show for all of his stream highlights, competitions, reactions & more. ------------------------------ -------- Keywords: twitch streamer, gaming opinions, mmo gaming, twitch clips, streamer podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

New York Times is getting some backlash for its apparently glowing review of controversial Twitch streamer Hassan Piker. The Times initially headlined its profile, a progressive mind and a maga body. With the subhead reading, Hassan Piker pumps iron. He's got to tell them that like you need to stop, like they have to be more critical. Because if they're not more critical, everybody is going to think that it's like a coordinated thing. like it's almost like basically they're doing him a disservice by being so uncritical likes weapons and wears pearls his brand of masculinity has won him many fans online and has been a useful vehicle for his politics times however apparently changed that headline to read a progressive

mind in a body made for the manosphere piker as some of you may know has said some contentious things in the past he once suggested that he didn't quote have an issue with hesitancy Bickeh also said the U.S. deserved the 9-11 attack, something the New York Times did note in the piece. The Times is proof. I feel like all of that is not even close to as bad as interviewing a huthy terrorist and then saying we support you at the end of it. Like it's one thing to interview the Taliban or ISIS or whatever. I don't think that's a big deal. I think it's fine. But after watching the interview myself, because I originally defended this. I defended him doing this a lot. And I said, well, you know, journalism, it's going to get messy in some cases, and that's fine.

But the fact is that if you're glazing, no, I was just, I don't know, like, I guess I was being naive. But I assumed that he didn't glaze the terrorist. It turns out I was wrong. Well, touched on the fact that Piker gets away. I did. I was wrong. There's a line. Yeah, finance me, do you get it? Yes, you're wrong a lot? I know, but here's the difference between me being wrong and other people being wrong. You hear about me being wrong from me. Way with things he says and does, like painting his nails or wearing pearls, because he has what one sociologist called jock insurance. In other words, his masculine gender capital gives him leeway to do and say outside the box, things. The Times also... This is a general reality of...

You know, you could look at it like the, you know, halo effect. If somebody's attractive or good looking or whatever, they're more positively received in a general sense. You see this all the time. If Luigi Mangione looked like me, there wouldn't be any girls crying for his removal. They'd be crying to have him executed, okay? So that's just how it is. And so it's an obvious truth, right? People are going to like you if you're attractive and they're going to hate you if you're

not. That's life. Conceded. And I think also attraction is only one component to it. Like, for example, a lot of dictators and terrorist leaders, they've got a lot of Riz. They do. They're really charismatic. They're very likable people. They're extremely charismatic. Look at Che Guevara on interviews. Bro, this guy's, oh my God, bro, this guy's cool. This guy's super cool. Yeah, that's it. They're smart. Yeah, they're smart. That's stupid. Exactly. And I think it definitely, it's very persuasive. Extremely persuasive is due to the fact that he's, quote, a very handsome man. Lucky him. Reactions abounded on ex-journalist Mary Catherine Ham wrote this. I kind of love that gushing media coverage of Hassan has to apologize for the fact that he's good looking and fit like, don't worry. Although he looks like he's seen the inside of a gym, bad. That's right-coded. He's a shill for a...

Why is it that? I don't understand how this is a winning proposition to create the narrative that people that are in shape and attractive and healthy are right wing. Like, why, how did you think that creating this narrative was a good idea? This is like the worst idea that you could possibly have. It's true? It doesn't matter if it's true. You don't stay it. You should be like, no, it's not true.

You never say it. Astrosocialism and murderous terrorists, which is good. Meanwhile, journalist Mehdi Hassan wrote on Blue Sky. I'm glad the New York Times profiled Hassan Piker, but calling his use of the word genocide to describe Gaza extreme is insane. Some of Israel's top Holocaust scholars are calling it a genocide, as our amnesty and human rights watch, absurd from the NYT. So, this profile, I think, was...

So it's vocabulary, right? I mean, I, you know, okay. It's interesting and flawed in a variety of ways. It was very glowing toward Hassan Piker. Like it, like, the author seems to have a crush on this guy. It just. This is even a, like, this is the hill. Even he's saying it.

The glazing is insane. What makes you think? your opinion on this matters? Um, the fact that you're asking me. Described, yes, he's a good-looking man who works out, congrats to him, it was that point over and over and over again, like that's shocking. Also, it's kind of weird, the initial framing that, like, be a mega body, that part. Right. Liberals are trying to manifest the idea that only conservative people work out. I'm not even sure that on average. It's so stupid. Like, why would you even do that?

If you went through the entire country that conservative people are going to be in better shape than liberal people, that might be breaks down by income level and a bunch of other things. Well, if it does break down on income level, then it would make sense because people of higher incomes are in my understanding more conservative on average. So there's probably a correlation here, but I don't think you should leverage that. There is something true, however, to the fact now that, I mean, I've seen. plenty of articles in like ridiculous liberal publications being like a do you do you like ridiculous yeah i'm seeing my age i'm like what's that i was thinking like jezebel type place i don't even know if jezebel's still in operation something like that like do you working out is right wing coded and are there are you a secretly dude i'm so glad that that era of internet discourse is

dead i am that was the dumbest era of discourse on the internet that's the internet that's that we've ever had. It was so brain dead, pointless, stupid, like weird. I'm so happy about this. A fascist, if you work out, there has been a lot of that discourse in progress and pure brain rot, exactly. So I see where they got this. Yes, this was, yes, it was an ideology that was completely created by Karen's. But it's not true. That's correct. That working out is somehow rightly encoded. It's so stupid. Look, I don't actually pay very much attention. attention to Hassan Piker. He is a big deal on Twitch. He's a, he's very, very leftly, like, extremely socialist, extremely anti-Israel. I didn't know. One thing I learned, yeah, he doesn't like

Israel. I didn't know, but maybe everyone knows is that he admits to being a Nepo baby. He got his start. I assumed he just like, like emerged naturally on playing video games on Twitch the way a lot of people does. But no, Jank Ugar is his uncle. Right. I'm gay from a joy. I don't think that that matters. In Hassan's credit, and I know people get mad about this, I do try to be fair. Nobody can gain and maintain popularity on Twitch because they are friends or they know somebody else who's popular. There are people who are friends with other people that are popular that do not maintain

that relevancy to any degree. It doesn't matter on Twitch. Maybe it mattered with him being on the Young Turks or whatever. But ultimately, growing and building an audience on Twitch is something that, like, I mean, you can look at somebody like, you know, I don't want to. to be mean, right? But we're just going to use an example. Look at Frogan, right? You can have all the nepotism

in the world, but sometimes it just doesn't hit. With the Young Turks. Which, you know, that's fine. I like Jane Coogh. Right. I mean, nothing wrong with that. He just didn't emerge totally out of nowhere. Everybody few people do. Is connected to somebody, somebody else. What did you make of the piece?

So I found it an interesting piece. I found it kind of curious because I, like you, I'm I'm aware of that he exists, right? But obviously I'm not on Twitch on a regular basis listening to his eight hours of gaming and commentary while he's on there. Gaming. To me, in terms of the politics of what he said,

which seems to be exercising the right a lot, you know, some of the things that he is being lambasted for seem to me to be sort of clumsy wordings of legitimate arguments. So, for example, on the Gaza thing, he's talking about the fact that he believes essentially that the Israeli response to October 7th has been so brutal that it can't be justified regardless of exactly what happened on October 7th. He regards it as disproportionate whether or not there were Israeli. I think this is a fair of analysis, by the way.

I don't think that it's all-encompassing. Like, for example, like interviewing the Houthi terrorist is like just not defensible and not. any way. But in general, I think this is true. And I think also I do this too. I think that anybody who livestreams all the time does this, where like you're talking and you just kind of, you talk in like a hyperbole, people take it as that's what you meant, and then they get mad about it. Yeah, sure, of course. People raped on October 7th or not. That is not something I would say. I don't think it is wise or sensitive to get into that whole debate about, you know, well, if people were or weren't raped, that changes or doesn't change the equation. But I see his sense.

It's a bad soundbite. It's definitely a bad soundbite. That's really all there is to it. I mean, it sounds really bad when you hear somebody saying that. The point is that the is very important. really that's by the way like i mean i you know i takes one to no one i get it have gone in killed people in the tens of thousands and nothing can justify that that seems to me to be his argument september 11th um again i would not say what he said uh i'm not sure that it means that he should be i don't know you know exiled from uh twitch or anywhere else i certainly don't want him exiled from twitch i'm against censorship he should uh that's true

But according to the terms of service, the way that he conducted the interview and the way that he showed the videos of Hamas, I think it might have been Hezbo. I don't remember exactly. And interviewing that guy, if you applied the terms of service, he should have been suspended for that. I'm not advocating for him being retroactively suspended for that. But if you look at what the rules are, he broke the rules. It's just a fact. Be able to say whatever provocative things. just how it is. He wants. I do not think, you know, every criticism of what Israel does is necessarily anti-Semitic. And I, so I'm always want, I want, okay, what exactly did they say? Never take their word for it on whether that's being alleged. Now, all of that said, the things he's actually said over the years seem pretty incendiary to me. Again, I don't have, I'm not clutching my pearls. Unlike him, I don't wear any, so I have none to clutch. But, but, but he does, He just says some awful, awful stuff.

Jesus. He says really, like, violent stuff. He said, like, you know, I don't agree with Dan Crenshaw's views generally, but that, you know, he deserved to lose his eye and deserve 9-11, and everyone who disagrees with him deserves to come to some violent end. And I think if, again, if right-wing people, and there are right-wing people who similarly do use insane. Who could that possibly be?

In contrarian ways of speaking would not be, would not be, not just lionized, but lusted over in the pages of the New York Times. And so that there's something a little bit selective about what is a disqualifying way of making a provocative point. Right. And nothing about Dan Crenshaw. I wouldn't defend that in any way at all. And so this is in some ways the perils of discussing a person. with whom I'm vaguely familiar if our commenters want to draw my attention to comments like that one about Crenshaw or other things which are plainly... Right, and we... He's right, if you can't criticize the whole country, then we're at risk of losing freedom of speech.

However, there's a large line that's obviously being crossed. Who the fuck thinks you can't criticize Israel? Besides people that are like the Israeli government. That's it. Nobody else thinks that. And we always want to go back, go and check, well, what exactly did he say? I never want to rely on someone else's characterization because a lot of those sometimes are unfair. Even for people I still do think are like not good, like Candice Owens, for example, said a lot of things I think are insane over the years. But people say, oh, she's, you know, this thing she said was crazy.

And I'll go, well, that's not, you know, that is being not fairly characterized. It happens to everybody. It happens not, I'm sure. No, absolutely. And one of the conversations that I did see being seized upon was Hassan Piker talking about her. I can respect him saying that and I wish more people like the way he said that is the way that I think about things too. Like that that's really the way I am. It's like even if you disagree with a person on something, there are still fair and unfair ways of characterization.

And as far as I could tell from what I read, his argument was that it's a legitimate. resistance movement that has some political support in Lebanon, which the latter part of that is a objective fact. And that that was, he was, I'm not even sure if it's fair to say defending them, contextualizing them in that way. Now, if he said something that was more endorsing of direct acts of violence, then obviously I wouldn't defend that. But it is, I think one of the reasons that I'm approaching this slightly gingerly is that one of the people who have been most vocal in their opposition to him has been Congressman Richie Torres, a Democratic congressman who has been at the absolute forefront, I would argue, of delegitimizing or seeking to delegitimize criticism

of Israel that is legitimate by painting it as inherently anti-Semitic or whatever. That's true. He's right about this. Baldi's right. Through terrorism. And so to your point about not taking people's word for. I'm highly reluctant to take with you towards. He did, apparently, he did say, it doesn't matter if effing rapes happened on October 7. That's a pretty awful way to put it. It is a pretty awful way to put it. I mean,

he's, I mean... You're just so wrapped up on your ideological commitment that, you know, what Israel is doing is wrong that you have to say, well, don't pay attention to that or whatever. Yeah, I mean, look, those words are awful. They are part of a larger discussion, but I don't think you should say those words.

His argument is, the Israeli response was so brutal that it would not be justified even if there were rapes. There are so many other things he says that I... I actually think that this is an incredibly reasonable and sound an even handed explanation of what was said.

Yeah, I think this is yeah, this is actually a W for Balby here. I can't even repeat on the show because they're so excellent. They're being very fair yeah, which is overly reasonable. Yeah. What you can do on Twitch, but not on our show. Yeah. Interesting though that he does have a massive

following. He's part of the alternative media ecosystem and you know, has a lot, gets a lot more attention for himself and probably that's what the New York Times was trying to look at. How can, again, it's another Joe Rogan of the left kind of situation. How

can we have an appealing, have someone who speaks to young people and has a massive audience that's not totally right wing branded or vibe based as the Joe Rogan and Theo Vons and all those people are.

Right. And then in the patient there was this argument about whether... The reason why a lot of people, they're having a hard time finding, you know, quote, Joe Rogans of the left is because the viewpoints that they have aren't popular. That's the reason why.

And so Joe Rogan is Joe Rogan because of his popularity and his fame and his notoriety. The fact is that these viewpoints that are being pushed are being pushed by like a very small, very militant group of people on the internet, but they don't represent a larger audience. And you see that in audience discrepancies as well.

That's why, for example, you can have like the, you know, left-wing versus right-wing like dichotomy of, you know, like popularity. Maybe the reason why there's a lot more right-wing people that are popular online is because there's more people that are right-wing that are online. So it's harder to have a, you know, base of operations in a place where you're outnumbered. I mean, it's common sense. There is in fact too overtly political, too obviously animated by politics in a way that Rogan isn't. And so does that limit his appeal in a way that Rogan's appeal is less than it.

And he works out. Amazing. There we go. Extonishing. Up next, the Trump administration lashes out at Amazon calling the company hostile for... Yeah, it's crazy. I did see the article. And I do think it's kind of funny to see these articles get put out there. The woke left don't want to Joe Rogan. Well, I don't really know. Like, what I'm saying is that, like, I understand Joe Rogan is the left and the left, left him. I get that. I understand that. I'm not trying to go and push that. But my point is that the reason why you don't have, like, a woke voice that's, like, extremely popular in a mainstream way, the reason why is because the ideas aren't popular in a mainstream way. when you constantly take the side of the 20 in an 80-20 argument,

you're not going to get an audience of the 80. That's just common sense. And so that's the reason why a lot of these people don't catch on and they're not popular. It's because they're constantly trying to defend and run defense for ideas that are just fundamentally incongruent with reality. And I think that's the big problem that they have. Isn't Gavin Newsom trying to be that voice? Yes, he is. and I think that not only is he not gaining ground with right-wing people,

I think that he's also losing ground with left-wing people at a faster rate. Now, I think that he's alienating them because he was the guy that was using the words Latin X. So like a lot of people, people are stupid and they're not stupid. It's a very, very weird paradox that you can talk about, but people are both. And the Latinx, yeah, exactly, right? And so one thing that I think a lot of people are good at is being able to sense inauthenticity. And I think that, like, you can use a couple of examples of this. You can look at certain streamers that feel like, you know, they're, you know, I guess what you would call like industry plant or something like that.

And people just don't have any sort of respect or attention for it at all. You could also look at cases where it's certain candidates that are running for public office that they don't really feel authentic or a legitimate. legitimate at all and so people just don't like them. And there's all of these examples. I don't want to list names as streamers. Okay. I don't want to do that. I mean, everybody's going to have their own separate list. But the point is that whenever you have somebody, and this is the reason why I think that like the whole argument of like, oh, Trump, like, you know, is a felon and all this like fell apart. It's because any reasonable person can see that there's like very clearly a bias when Hunter Biden is playing GTA online in real life. But he's not in jail. But we want to have Trump be in jail. No. Like that, that to me is a non-starter. No, you don't care about the law. You don't care about the rules.

You don't care about any of that. You just care about doing it to the people that you don't like, right? It's already biased. Yeah, I don't want to hear it. Both can be criminals. Yeah, but if they're both not prosecuted and treated the same way, then it doesn't matter. A rule when it's not applied to everyone isn't a rule. It's a weapon.

And so when you see people that are applying a rule to one group of people, but not another group of people, the respect for that rule gets destroyed. And so that's the reason why people don't care about that kind of stuff. And Hunter Biden is not important? Exactly. Doesn't that make my point even stronger? That this is a person that's not even relevant, that's not even important, and even he's being protected. If Hunter Biden was a working class black guy, where would he be right now?

Where would he be? Jail. everybody knows and everybody knows it every single person in this chat fucking knows it and the only reason why he's not is because he's the president's son that's the reason and no i'm not going to respect any sort of arguments to authority or the rule of law when the person is doing that if you really believe in this then stand on it you don't because you don't believe in it therefore i don't believe in it and i don't either. Don't let people use your own virtue against you.