Richard Hanania's Career of Coal

[GymChad]

BEHOLD ... Richard Hanania.

As of writing, Richard sits at 82k followers on X.com. His career started a couple of years ago, gaining notoriety with some retarded substack posts he enventually formatted into a book called "The Origins of Woke." In these posts he rejects the philosophy-centered model of history favored by Curtis Yarvin and his elves in favor of a law-centric model where wokeness can be essentially traced back to Civil Rights legislation. Legislation itself seems to be a mostly random process in Hanania's model. Consequently, his narrative is essentially that, for random political reasons, the Civil Rights Act passed, and for mostly random reasons, it was never repealed, and this is why we have wokeness. If we could just repeal the Civil Rights act, wokeness would go away. Very easy!

After this, his coal got worse. Hanania started posting stuff like "liberals read, conservatives watch TV." Probably one of his worst posts was one arguing for mass immigration called "diversity really is our strength." Like all of his posts, he cherry picks noisy, shitty data, with no general understanding of social biology and human behavior, misinterprets it poorly, makes wild, disjoint assertions one right after another, until finally his article abruptly ends.

Hanania, in general, is a midwit coal spammer who has built his audience by pandering to 110 IQ "people" and trolling right wingers.

What's sad is that it seems that Hanania has a degenerative disorder that involves progressively posting more coal as time wears on. 10 years ago he was known as "Richard Hoste" and was essentially a wignat, better than what he is today. In response to getting doxxed as Richard Hoste, he wrote an article apologizing for racism and misogyny called "Why I used to Suck and (Hopefully) No Longer Do". Very delusional.

This thread is for progressively documenting Hanania's decline and coal postings.

[GymChad]

https://twitter.com/richardhanania/statu...6052306000

Yesterday Hanania got mega ratio'd by proles for posting about selectively breeding 14 year old girls for millions of dollars. He is perhaps a troll mastermind as it has reached 2.8 million views. The low IQ are posting death threats about wood chippers in response.

Could Hanania's career be turned around with an age of consent arc? Could we see a substack article on why 14 year olds can consent? Or is he too pussy?

[Guest]

His physiognomy is painful, this likely explains the coal.

[august]

Classic community note. Whenever I see one of these using a mobile wikipedia link, I can usually be sure that it's going to state the absolute most obvious "context" in a passive aggressive, faggotised "ooo burn" / "clap back" way... "advocating for this hypothetical". It's funnier when you compare it to the polls that that slut Aella girl posts about necrophilia or having sex with dogs or whatever. The results were a great example of what GymChad talks about in the Age of Consent thread. At 125K votes and 2 days left, we currently have: Yes/male 5.3%; No/male 78%; Yes/female 1.3%; No/female 15.5%. 

You really get to peer into the mind of the hominoid brain on X dotcom. "But it's the public forum... the town square... populism!" He'd get a more candid and sensible response if he went down to his local zoo's orangutan exhibit and posed the question. What's that tell you?

[Guest]

You really get to peer into the mind of the hominoid brain on X dotcom.

I took a brief glance into the replies of the post by Hanania in question against my better judgement.

https://i.ibb.co/0FfpTvq/Screenshot-Capt...-35-13.png

I'm not even gonna say anything about this, I think it really speaks for itself.



I'm not gonna say anything about this, I think it really speaks for itself.

[GymChad]

You really get to peer into the mind of the hominoid brain on X dotcom.

I took a brief glance into the replies of the post by Hanania in question against my better judgement.

https://i.ibb.co/0FfpTvq/Screenshot-Capt...-35-13.png

I'm not even gonna say anything about this, I think it really speaks for itself.



I'm not gonna say anything about this, I think it really speaks for itself.

The mind of a child. Children and children's cartoons are the center of the moral universe. If you blaspheme the sacrosanct "child", a child's cartoon character will heckin KILL YOU. Worship the weak, i.e. women and children, GOY

[august]

By 2035 the AoC will probably be ≥ 21 years old.

[Nigel Carlsbad]

By 2035 the AoC will probably be ≥ 21 years old.

High school is extended another two years as for some inexplicable reason literacy and other metrics used to measure the effects of education keep dropping. No one can understand why inner-city high school patterns of data are now being represented nation wide. Also there will be a heavy emphasis on emotional intelligence as not only are kids less intelligent(for reasons that can’t be speculated) but are now more violent and aggressive. 

Centrists not wanting to return to barbaric Christo-fascism but loving the idea of church make community therapy groups mandatory if you want to be accepted into higher education or get a good job. Community college becomes the new high school and 90% of the required classes are social justice classes because as said by president H. B. Ahuja, “Education is the soul of this nation and the basis of prosperous, just democracy.”

[NuclearAbsolutist]

I suspect that Hanania might descend from Christian Zionist settlers in Palestine (like John Steinbeck's grandfather)

According to mainstream media hit piece biographical details he was born in Illinois to Palestinian Christian parents. He also gave out his 23 & me.
https://x.com/RichardHanania/status/1701...29208?s=20


As for the subject of Hanania himself, I share the learned view he is too clever by half and should be ignored outside being a exemplar of a certain type of what counts for intellectual nowadays.

[Hamamelis]

The Haniana opinion I like best is "the right is a loser club that attracts low IQ creatures on purpose". I like it because it is true.
The Haniana opinion I like least is his irrational belief in the medical literature.
He is also a pretty good troll, and we should credit that. Having fun is the main goal of posting.

I obviously disagree with Haniana on a lot of topics, but I want to counter this thread by proposing an alternative perspective: He has not "declined" in a meaningful way, he chose a path of mainstream success. You see this as decline because you would have to compromise your beliefs to do it. He (probably) didn't. He achieved the cozy pundit status without denying HBD, sex differences or his libertarian leanings. I might go as far as call him the next Steve Sailer. Haniana is as close to a mainstream representation of "our sphere" as it's ever going to get. If the political tides turn in our favour, as many here seem to expect, expect guys like Haniana to be mediators between a very reluctant intellectual class and the new fascist overlords.

[Guest]

The above post is reasonable, but it is impossible to like, or tolerate, someone who is so ugly. He should have hired a model to be his public face.

[Mason Hall-McCullough]

"Troll mastermind" is too kind, he's a professional attention whore. The troll's reward for baiting others is private personal enjoyment, not substack money. The only subject Hanania has a genuine interest in is the art of manipulating the average social media user. If you share his posts anywhere, whether you hate the post content or not, he wins. If you really hate him (and don't "love to hate him") you should turn your hatred indifferent, cold and absolute.

[Hamamelis]

He should have hired a model to be his public face.

Yes. On the other hand, I will admit that I have drafted a several tweet long reply to his stupid Shakespeare thing, looked at his pfp, thought to myself "this is who you're debating?", and deleted the whole thing. Silver lining.

The troll's reward for baiting others is private personal enjoyment, not substack money.

Suckers paying you is not a reward?

[Mason Hall-McCullough]

The troll's reward for baiting others is private personal enjoyment, not substack money.

Suckers paying you is not a reward?

If a major source of your income is downstream from outrage clickbait, that's something cynical and is no longer light-hearted trolling. I wouldn't consider a Buzzfeed headline trolling if it happened to enrage people. There is nothing innocent or fun about the practicalities of amassing 80,000 Twitter followers from zero.

Trolling has the power to humble and topple elites who do not deserve their position. Parasites such as Hanania (and many mainstream journalists) transmute this energy into ad/subscription revenue. They indirectly protect the regime by subverting dissident sentiment.

[Hamamelis]

This sounds too much like the "comedy needs to punch up" trope. I agree that institutionalised clickbaiting crosses some sort of line, but mindreading Haniana to diagnose cynicism downstream of his success on twitter and substack is petty resentment at best - which plays into the whole reason why I went against the grain of this thread in the first place. How would you even know he's not having fun? And if he enjoys getting rich off of dark centrist midwits, is that somehow a bad move because he *also* makes money, and doesn't purely do it for the lulz?

I don't want to defend somebody who I find fundamentally unlikeable any more than this, I think. All of you should think really hard about the fact that he has a blog with tens of thousands of readers where he says openly that blacks are dumb and commit crime, and ask yourself why you are convinced he's somehow worthy of attack.

[Mason Hall-McCullough]

Somehow I don't think having fun is Hanania's top priority:

Show Content

Spoiler

It doesn't matter whether he enjoys it or not, grifters are inherently subversive because their concerns are not aligned with those they claim to represent. I don't personally envy his success because I'd never be able to enjoy the grift, I do think the most successful grifters tend to be genuine sociopaths who find sport in deceiving others for personal gain. You shouldn't support Hanania just because he's pandering to your views somewhat.

The problem isn't just that he's acting in bad faith, but that he's plainly sending a signal to everyone else that he's acting in bad faith. There is very little expectation of intellectual rigor or consistency when any criticism will be taken as just another outrage wave that he regularly endures. He's likely even to jump ship again if his popularity falls off. Selfish people can be put to productive ends if their incentives are properly aligned, but these kinds of attention whores aren't beholden to any person or ideal to begin with.

[Guest]

There are marketing books dedicated to trolling to be honest. It's very common, to the point that a bastardized, incestuous version has become standard in the big firms (see the terrible marketing of Saint's Row for example.)

[Hamamelis]

It doesn't matter whether he enjoys it or not, grifters are inherently subversive because their concerns are not aligned with those they claim to represent. I don't personally envy his success because I'd never be able to enjoy the grift, I do think the most successful grifters tend to be genuine sociopaths who find sport in deceiving others for personal gain. You shouldn't support Hanania just because he's pandering to your views somewhat.

As I said, I will not defend him any more than I have already. Haniana is an easy target because of his obvious shortcomings, but these reactions would be better reserved for conservative politicians (bans against cigarettes now instead of against immigrants) or communist pundits in mainstream publications (whose bad faith is not just some speculation).

[The Green Groyper]

Checking his recent posts-I see a lot of attacks on social conservatives. As well as a comment on the recent Bill Maher clip about London becoming non White-basically "lol yeah its happening".

Along with tacitly supporting mass immigration by saying comparisons to Israel restricting the same are dumb.

Hanania isn't even grifting at this point-if grifting means appealing to a single constituency without principle. He's clearly trying to build up his rep as a rational centrist like Yglesias or the rest of the twitter "muh rationality and data" contingent.

[Mladorossi88]

Personally I think he's completely useless and ineffectual but after seeing just how much he makes libtards and Rationalwiki troons seethe, I just can't bring myself to hate him.

https://x.com/RichardHanania/status/1721...66880?s=20