Corbyn Backs Banned Streamer Hasan Piker

Corbyn met Piker and posted on social media, stating, "Great to meet Hasan, still banned from the UK. An absurd decision that must be reversed now. Well done to Hasan for refusing to be quiet in the face of genocide and ap." This endorsement follows Piker's history of controversial remarks, which include describing Orthodox Jews as "inbreds," suggesting landlords "should be murdered in the street," and claiming "America deserved 9/11."

Hasan Piker's past statements, particularly his assertion that "America deserved 9/11," have resurfaced amidst Corbyn's advocacy. He also expressed support for Iran's terror proxies, Hamas and the Houthis, stating, "Therefore, I would vote for Hamas over Israel every single time." Piker further claimed, "Hezbollah is a terror military organization. I don't have an issue with them," and referred to Houthis as doing what "we would do." These remarks underscore the reasons for his ban from the UK.

There was no evidence for this whatsoever." He also appeared to justify the slaughter of civilians on October 7th, arguing it was not driven by antisemitism. Piker claimed these were "horrifying atrocities" but suggested they did not stem from "antiquated anti-semitic tendencies."

The discussion highlighted the Houthi slogan "death to the Jews," which Piker claimed to criticize but not enough to prevent platforming figures. Commentators pointed out that Hamas's manifesto explicitly calls for the eradication of Israel and the killing of all Jews. Piker's radical views extend to economic issues, where he has advocated for violence against property owners, stating, "KILL THEM. KILL THOSE. Murder those in the street. Let the streets soak in their red capitalist bloods, dude." The segment concluded by noting the irony of such a "lunatic commie" being financially successful, broadcasting these views from a privileged position.

The panel reacted to Corbyn's support for Piker, with Thomas Corbett, Dylan, and Henry Ford from DC, and Duncan Barks and Matthew Staden from London weighing in. Corbett stated Piker was a prominent figure, leading the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which has a significant presence in American politics with numerous candidates running. He noted that the policies pushed by the DSA are concerning, suggesting they are not far off from some political trends in England, including a desire to suppress free speech. The panel questioned Corbyn's motivation for associating with Piker and calling for his unbanning from the UK.

The panel connected Corbyn's advocacy for Piker to his consistent record on antisemitism and anti-establishment views. A panelist highlighted that Corbyn has "always hated this country," recalling his invitation of Sinn Féin to the Houses of Parliament during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. Piker was labeled a "dangerous character" who is "very, very popular on social media," with clips garnering millions of views, posing a significant problem. The discussion then shifted to whether Piker's content, despite its controversial nature, should be tolerated under free speech principles or if it is too sinister and requires intervention, with no clear consensus.

Duncan Barks elaborated on Corbyn's history of controversial associations, including being photographed with Hezbollah figures. Barks then posed the question of balancing free speech with the potentially sinister nature of Piker's content. He questioned whether society should allow such individuals to operate freely or if their content warrants intervention. The panel invoked a hypothetical scenario of excusing one's presence at a controversial event by claiming to be "there but not really present," drawing parallels to past political excuses.

Matthew Staden drew a parallel between political excuses, mentioning Nigel Farage's explanation for a meeting in Clacton where alleged improper funding was discussed. Farage reportedly claimed he "wasn't really listening." Staden expressed his reluctance to defend Corbyn, noting he did not vote Labour under his leadership, which he considered a "low point in our democracy." The discussion underscored the difficulties of navigating political integrity and accountability.

He expressed admiration for the English people, whom he believes "invented the modern world" and are currently struggling under socialist leadership. Corbett asserted that the current government has "corrupted a once great nation and are running it into the ground," exploiting its people. He reiterated his belief in the greatness of the English people despite their governmental challenges.

Matthew Staden, reflecting on Thomas's use of the word "hate," noted his own preference not to use such strong language. He highlighted Piker's extreme far-left views, which he described as embodying "absolute vitriol." Staden explained that social media algorithms encourage and amplify such divisive content, leading to deeply unhealthy outcomes that corrupt democracies. He observed a concerning trend in how platforms monetize this radical content, suggesting a parallel to certain aspects of the Green Party's advocacy in the UK.

The discussion continued on the theme of political hypocrisy, drawing parallels to Green Party deputy leaders who advocate for scrapping private landlords despite being landlords themselves. Commentators noted that hypocrisy exists across the political spectrum but emphasized its prevalence on the left. Piker's ban from the UK was attributed to security concerns and the judgment that his presence would not be conducive to public good. Specifically, the ban was reportedly due to his incitement of violence against landlords.

Hillary explained Piker's significant role in the Democrat party, noting his alignment with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which prominent Democrats have disavowed due to their radical policies. She described Piker's followers as primarily young, with an average age of 31, making him a major character in the movement. Hillary also mentioned the hypocrisy within the DSA, where wealthy individuals advocate for socialist policies. This connection highlights Piker's broad reach and the concern among mainstream Democrats regarding the DSA's impact.

Thomas discussed the popularity of Piker among certain youth cohorts, referencing JD Vance's insights on Joe Rogan's podcast. Vance suggested that young people, feeling "betrayed" by societal structures, lacking homeownership, and unable to start families, are drawn to Marxism and communism because they have "nothing to conserve." He acknowledged that while he doesn't agree with these ideologies, he understood why young people turn to such "trash." Thomas, however, argued that many of Piker's audience are "privileged socialists" in affluent cities like New York, inventing victimhood narratives and focusing on issues like Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) rather than genuine hardship.

He argued that these individuals invent "victimhood" and focus on concepts like DEI, rather than experiencing real betrayal from a broken social contract. Thomas concluded that Piker's followers are a "terrible group of people," contrasting them with young men on the right who are "rising and defending this nation."

The panel discussed Donald Trump's perceived liking for New York City Mayor Eric Adams, with Thomas explaining that Trump is a "smart operator" who loves New York and understands the need to work with its mayor. He emphasized that Trump avoids unnecessary conflict and is willing to engage with political opponents, including the Labour party, to be an effective politician. This willingness to engage, even with those who attack him, was presented as a strategic approach.

He argued that the "Trump hatred has ruined" the special relationship and that the UK embassy ignored Trump during his first term, waiting instead for President Biden.

He pointed out the irony of the UK being snubbed because they hated Trump, only to pivot to Biden, who then made statements perceived as anti-Brexit. Henry supported Thomas's view on the provocation regarding Northern Ireland, suggesting that the UK's actions had alienated the US.

The panel concluded by criticizing the UK's decision to offer a royal invitation, suggesting it was motivated by a desire for a trade deal rather than genuine hospitality. A commentator argued that the invitation was a strategic move to secure favorable trade terms with the US. The discussion underscored skepticism regarding the true intentions behind political gestures and the ongoing debates surrounding international relations and trade.