The H&H Podcast

Richard Hanania
  • 4.1 (9)
  • NEWS
  • UPDATED BIWEEKLY

Connected to the Richard Hanania Substack. Discussions with Chris Nicholson on war, Rob Henderson on movies, TV shows, and culture, and more. www.richardhanania.com

  1. Dostoevsky Cucks Himself?

    APR 10

    Dostoevsky Cucks Himself?

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com Rob and I finally conclude our discussion of Dostoevsky’s Demons. (spoilers below) I’m fascinated by what the author ended up doing to Shatov. He had the worst outcome of any major character. But from his politics and background, Shatov appears to be a stand-in for Dostoevsky. So Dostoevsky has himself get cucked and killed, and then his wife and stepson also die. What’s going on here? We discuss Stavrogin’s suicide as him reenacting the death of Matryosha, the one act he never forgave himself for. Of all the characters, Stepan is the only one with a true redemption arc. He’s LARPing his whole life, but in the end does take a stand for his principles against the young radicals and their supporters among the mob. On the topic of politics, I explain how I believe that, while Dostoevsky was correct in his critique of the leftists and nihilists, in the end the Russian Empire was brought down by the stupidity and incompetence of the reactionaries. Slavophile ideas ensured that Russia entered World War I on the side of Serbia, Tsar Nicholas II refused to reform and kept his country in a state of backwardness, and the bizarre tale of Rasputin shows what can go wrong when your elites are not grounded in Enlightenment values. One of Dostoevsky’s greatest strengths is as a savage critic of his former political allies on the nihilistic left. His blind spot seems to have been his steadfast support of royal absolutism, yet in this novel at least, he takes several opportunities to mock monarchists and reactionaries. Links Reviews of Part I, and Part 2 John Psmith book review Rob’s review of Demons, Part 1 and Part 2 My review of Crime and Punishment Note: If you would like to get this podcast through a regular podcast app, go to richardhanania.com on a browser on your device (it doesn’t work in the app), log in to Substack, and click on the tab for either the Hanania Show or the H&H Podcast. Select the episode you want, and then choose one of Apple, Spotify, etc. under “Listen on” to your right. You’ll be able to add the show through an RSS feed, after which you will get new episodes, either free or paid depending on what kind of subscriber you are, through whichever platform you use.

    13 min
  2. Politics as Consolation for Losers

    MAR 27

    Politics as Consolation for Losers

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com Rob Henderson is back to discuss Part II of Demons. In this conversation, we focus on how “on the nose” the novel seems when you think of it as predicting the future course of events in Russia. Dostoevsky told us that many of his fellow countrymen were demons who just wanted to destroy. The twentieth century seemed to prove that beyond doubt. I bring up some of the strange paradoxes of Dostoevsky’s Russian nationalism, as he appears to have contempt for his fellow citizens at the same time he puts so much emotional stock in the abstract notion of their peoplehood. We contrast Nikolai and Pytor. Nikolai is a natural alpha, and seems to not care about or need politics. For Pyotr, it is a source of his identity. There’s a broader lesson here in how ideology tends to factor more prominently in the psyches of those who are less good looking and likable. Rob brought my attention to the censored chapter, which wasn’t in the version of the book that I had. As you’ll see, the chapter is actually quite vital for understanding some of the most important themes of the book, and I’m glad Rob brought it to my attention. I just read Crime and Punishment too. It had much more of an effect on me than Demons, so look forward to a written review. Links Our review of Part I John Psmith book review Rob’s review of Demons, part I and part 2 Note: If you would like to get this podcast through a regular podcast app, go to richardhanania.com on a browser on your device (it doesn’t work in the app), log in to Substack, and click on the tab for either the Hanania Show or the H&H Podcast. Select the episode you want, and then choose one of Apple, Spotify, etc. under “Listen on” to your right. You’ll be able to add the show through an RSS feed, after which you will get new episodes, either free or paid depending on what kind of subscriber you are, through whichever platform you use.

    12 min
  3. Dostoevsky as Psychologist

    MAR 20

    Dostoevsky as Psychologist

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com Rob Henderson joins me to discuss Part I of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Demons (1872). The book is conveniently divided into three parts, and so we are doing a three-part podcast series on it. The other two parts will be released over the next few weeks. We decided to begin Demons after I came across this review by John Psmith. I stopped reading the review midway through, as it made me want to go to the original source and I didn’t want any spoilers. I’ve now gone back and read it. According to the Word document that I use to keep track of which books I’ve read, I’ve finished two other works by Dostoevsky: The Brothers Karamazov and Notes from the Underground. I was probably in college at the time, and I only vaguely remember Notes from the Underground being about some lowlife who makes up high-sounding philosophical justifications for his crimes, but that’s it. The Brothers Karamazov is completely gone from my mind. I tried to jog my memory by looking over the plot but just about nothing rang a bell. I now know there were three brothers, and their surname was Karamazov, and that’s the extent of it. I have a vague recollection of a drunk father rambling and pouring out a drink for his son. Maybe it’s time to go back to these books. Anyway, regarding this convo, Rob and I recorded this after we got through Part I, so there will only be spoilers up to that point. If you like, you can read along with us. We do screen share throughout the conversation, so if you watch the video you can see us going back to passages that made an impression. Topics covered include: * Dostoevsky’s influence and reputation * Nikolai as a charismatic figure * Themes of liberalism, radicalism, and hypocrisy * Cultural insights into Russian society, politics, and ideas of honor, and how they differ from our own culture * The historical context of 19th-century Russia nihilism and its impact on society I will say that the book holds up extremely well. The radicals and the more moderate liberals, and the psychological dynamics between those two groups, are clearly recognizable in twenty-first century America. See also Rob’s review of Demons, part I and part 2. Note: If you would like to get this podcast through a regular podcast app, go to richardhanania.com on a browser on your device (it doesn’t work in the app), log in to Substack, and click on the tab for either the Hanania Show or the H&H Podcast. Select the episode you want, and then choose one of Apple, Spotify, etc. under “Listen on” to your right. You’ll be able to add the show through an RSS feed, after which you will get new episodes, either free or paid depending on what kind of subscriber you are, through whichever platform you use.

    12 min
  4. Black Masculinity in Its Natural Environment

    FEB 12

    Black Masculinity in Its Natural Environment

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com Rob Henderson joins me to discuss Sinners, which critics and viewers are both raving about. Substack has a new screen share feature, which we tried out. I wanted us to play parts of the movie and react to it, but Amazon prevents you from being able to do that. We do use screen share though to read and react to reviews of the film by Ross Douthat and Steve Sailer. The Sailer one in particular cracks us up. I had forgotten how charming his old man racism can be. He at one point goes on a rant about the history of superstitious savagery in Haiti, which he attempts to connect to director Ryan Coogler’s alleged ethno-narcissism. See also the Scott Greer review, which I bring up. Unfortunately, while screen share looked good during the stream, it cuts off part of the screen in the video. Hopefully Substack is able to fix this. Nonetheless, we read from the articles out loud, so you can follow along. Overall, this is a fun movie that is hard to take too seriously. I was expecting something a bit more sophisticated given how much critics loved the film, but it’s mostly a crowd-pleaser. The storyline is simple, the characters aren’t too deep, the bad guys are as cliché as they can possibly be (literally the Klan!), and one finds demographic sops to nearly every racial group, with the exception of Hispanics. The messaging is somewhat basic, though there is a hint of subversion in the fact that the zombies talk like woke libs. We spend some time on the director’s bizarre fixation on cunnilingus. I count four or five different times it comes up. This leads to a discussion of the way movies and TV shows portray oral sex as received by women versus men. Rob and I also debate what makes the movie appealing. Partly, as Douthat and Sailer both point out, people want to talk about a blockbuster film that isn’t some kind of sequel, remake, or spinoff. Additionally, we find black masculinity appealing, and here you get an unadulterated version in its natural environment. If such a premise sounds fun to you, you might enjoy Sinners. Even if not, you should probably watch it anyway since it’s nice to be part of a conversation involving a movie that is not about Marvel superheroes or part of some other long-existing IP universe.

    18 min
  5. Vince Gilligan Interviews as the Word of God

    JAN 8

    Vince Gilligan Interviews as the Word of God

    Chris Nicholson joins me to talk about Season 1 of Pluribus. This is a completely different conversation than the one I just had with Rob. Chris keeps pointing out, and I agree with him, that the show is probably not going to go that deep philosophically or in terms of the origins of the virus. He mentions his “oh no” moment when Vince Gilligan noted to the interviewer he was talking to that the drones were happy. Are we just getting the most basic thought experiment from intro to philosophy? Is the virus storyline simply unnecessary? I add that the interviews have another value here, in that Gilligan tells us explicitly that the show is not about Covid or AI. In some ways, the point about AI makes it worse, because it takes away one plausible method for the virus to have ended up with its bizarre and seemingly contradictory characteristics. We discuss the idea of Vince Gilligan interviews serving as the Word of God in understanding this universe. I note how incurious Carol appears to be about why animals are not part of the joining, or even why she is one of only a handful of people on earth immune from the effects of the virus. Major red flags. Chris reminds me here that I wasn’t demanding enough as a viewer. We’re getting answers about how exactly the joining works, and the rules governing the Others’ behavior. What we don’t have any hints of are the whys. There is no indication that we’ll ever get them either. Why are the Others like this? Is there a deeper logic of the origins of the rules? Does it have something to do with human nature, or does the virus not care about the specifics of the species it infects? Is there an evolutionary theory that can explain how we got here? The show creators want us to speculate on these things, but they haven’t given us anything to go on. Chris and I clarify that we’re not saying it’s a bad show. But there are a lot of opportunities to go deeper here, and we might just not get them. If things continue like this in Season 2, I’ll be disappointed but may be able to more fully enjoy the show without expecting it to be any different. For those who get to the end, you’ll see us preview the forthcoming Game of Thrones spinoff and talk about why shows take longer to make these days. For previous discussions on Pluribus, Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul, see below. All episodes are conversations between me and Chris, unless noted otherwise. “Should You Become a Pod Person?” Pluribus, S1:E1-3, with Rob Henderson “The Kim Wexler Theory,” Pluribus, S1:E1-6 “The Righteous Mestizo,” Pluribus, S1, with Rob Henderson The Breaking Bad Universe Nietzschean or Christian? Marc Andreessen on Breaking Bad and Saul “The Conscientious Objector to Therapy Culture,” Rewatching Breaking Bad, S1-S2 “A Love Story?”, Rewatching Breaking Bad, S3- S4E4 “The Whitewashing of Walter White,” Rewatching Breaking Bad, S4-S5 Better Call Saul: S6E7, Plan and Execution Better Call Saul: S6E8, Point and Shoot Better Call Saul: S6E9, Fun and Games Better Call Saul: S6E10, Nippy Better Call Saul: S6E11, Breaking Bad Better Call Saul: S6E12, Waterworks Better Call Saul finale with Chris and Marc Andreessen Note: If you would like to get this podcast through a regular podcast app, go to richardhanania.com on a browser on your device (it doesn’t work in the app), log in to Substack, and click on the tab for either the Hanania Show or the H&H Podcast. Select the episode you want, and then choose one of Apple, Spotify, etc. under “Listen on” to your right. You’ll be able to add the show through an RSS feed, after which you will get new episodes, either free or paid depending on what kind of subscriber you are, through whichever platform you use. You can also decide whether you want to receive either podcast via email or alerts through your settings. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.richardhanania.com/subscribe

    1h 44m
  6. The Righteous Mestizo

    JAN 6

    The Righteous Mestizo

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com I’ve done two previous podcasts on Pluribus: one with Rob Henderson, and one with Chris Nicholson. I didn’t want to choose between them for discussing the end of the season, so I decided to do an episode with each. I’m releasing Rob today, and Chris will be later this week. As you will see, these are vastly different conversations, and I think many will enjoy the contrast. In this discussion, Rob brings up a good point, which relates to how Manousos and Carol approach their shared situation in ways that reflect sex stereotypes. I bring up Manousos as the “Righteous Mestizo” prototype, a figure we also saw in the Breaking Bad universe. I mention the hints of religiosity in his character, and the way that this undergirds his stubbornness and morally upright behavior. Perhaps this ties in to Vince Gilligan’s conservatism, and also his contempt for AI. Throughout the conversation, we refer to two Gilligan interviews, one in Variety and the other in Esquire. For previous discussions on Pluribus, Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul, see below. All episodes are conversations between me and Chris, unless noted otherwise. “Should You Become a Pod Person?” Pluribus, S1:E1-3, with Rob Henderson “The Kim Wexler Theory,” Pluribus, S1:E1-6 The Breaking Bad Universe Nietzschean or Christian? Marc Andreessen on Breaking Bad and Saul “The Conscientious Objector to Therapy Culture,” Rewatching Breaking Bad, S1-S2 “A Love Story?”, Rewatching Breaking Bad, S3- S4E4 “The Whitewashing of Walter White,” Rewatching Breaking Bad, S4-S5 Better Call Saul: S6E7, Plan and Execution Better Call Saul: S6E8, Point and Shoot Better Call Saul: S6E9, Fun and Games Better Call Saul: S6E10, Nippy Better Call Saul: S6E11, Breaking Bad Better Call Saul: S6E12, Waterworks Better Call Saul finale with Chris and Marc Andreessen Note: If you would like to get this podcast through a regular podcast app, go to richardhanania.com on a browser on your device (it doesn’t work in the app), log in to Substack, and click on the tab for either the Hanania Show or the H&H Podcast. Select the episode you want, and then choose one of Apple, Spotify, etc. under “Listen on” to your right. You’ll be able to add the show through an RSS feed, after which you will get new episodes, either free or paid depending on what kind of subscriber you are, through whichever platform you use. You can also decide whether you want to receive either podcast via email or alerts through your settings.

    19 min
  7. The Kim Wexler Theory

    12/07/2025

    The Kim Wexler Theory

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com Chris Nicholson returns after almost two years to discuss Pluribus, up to episode six. He raises some good questions about the direction of the show. Chris says that thus far, it is mostly a character study of Carol, and he has no reason to care about her yet. I say fair enough, but the reason that most of us began watching the show is the involvement of Vince Gilligan and Rhea Seehorn. We compare Pluribus to Breaking Bad, which was plot-driven at first, and Better Call Saul, in which we were going in with a character that we already knew and loved. This led me to think through my own theory: perhaps Carol Sturka is Kimberly Wexler. I asked ChatGPT about this, and things went in a very weird direction. I haven’t seen any reason so far why this is impossible. Chris and I discuss the question of whether the hive mind is its own creation, or the result of what you get when you amalgamate all of the world’s humans. Is there a way to see the hive mind’s code of ethics as a sort of least common denominator human morality? The ethical system has some inconsistencies, and there are still open questions like why they can kiss others without their permission to fundamentally change them but they can’t violate their individual rights in other ways. The ethical system seems to be a mix of the most extreme forms of libertarianism and paternalism. And why do they care about Carol so much anyway? All of these questions hopefully have satisfying answers. We also talk about the possible AI angle. Is this hive mind the result of something that evolved naturally, or, as I suspect, a technological creation that started to spread across the universe? The latter is seeming a lot more likely. The idea that this is misaligned AI would explain the oddities of their ethical system. Chris lays down his marker and says that Pluribus is going to invert the process that unfolded in Gilligan’s previous two shows. Instead of a character going bad, here they’re going to become better. By the end, we’ll see peace, love, harmony, and an understanding that we all need each other. That would be kind of lame though, and I have too much faith in Vince Gilligan to think he’ll take us in that direction. Still, this makes sense in light of some of the lessons of the previous two shows, which teach that most people in American society are good. Chris and I debate whether we are supposed to share in Carol’s contempt for her fans, or react more negatively to her sneering at them. I was sure it was the former, but on further reflection maybe this is wrong. Just as most lawyers are ethical, finance isn’t about screwing people over, and most Americans try to live their best lives and follow the rules, perhaps the truly enlightened view is that we should let the romance novel readers have their fun. For previous discussions on Pluribus, Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul, see below. All episodes are conversations between me and Chris, unless noted otherwise. “Should You Become a Pod Person?” Pluribus, S1:E1-3, with Rob Henderson The Breaking Bad Universe Nietzschean or Christian? Marc Andreessen on Breaking Bad and Saul “The Conscientious Objector to Therapy Culture,” Rewatching Breaking Bad, S1-S2 “A Love Story?”, Rewatching Breaking Bad, S3- S4E4 “The Whitewashing of Walter White,” Rewatching Breaking Bad, S4-S5 Better Call Saul: S6E7, Plan and Execution Better Call Saul: S6E8, Point and Shoot Better Call Saul: S6E9, Fun and Games Better Call Saul: S6E10, Nippy Better Call Saul: S6E11, Breaking Bad Better Call Saul: S6E12, Waterworks Better Call Saul finale with Chris and Marc Andreessen Note: If you would like to get this podcast through a regular podcast app, go to richardhanania.com on a browser on your device (it doesn’t work in the app), log in to Substack, and click on the tab for either the Hanania Show or the H&H Podcast. Select the episode you want, and then choose one of Apple, Spotify, etc. under “Listen on” to your right. You’ll be able to add the show through an RSS feed, after which you will get new episodes, either free or paid depending on what kind of subscriber you are, through whichever platform you use. You can also decide whether you want to receive either podcast via email or alerts through your settings.

    32 min
  8. On Being Possessed by the Antihero

    12/03/2025

    On Being Possessed by the Antihero

    This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com Tyler Tone joins me to discuss There Will Be Blood (2007), as part of my Paul Thomas Anderson series, which has thus far included One Battle After Another (2025) and Boogie Nights (1997). I absolutely loved this film. Daniel Plainview was one of those characters who become incorporated into my psyche for a substantial period of time, like Don Draper or Tony Soprano. I open by discussing how Plainview’s relationship with his son affected how I interacted with my own for a few days. I find myself still returning to his competent benevolence whenever the kids become too annoying. We talk about the themes relating to capitalism, progress, and religious fundamentalism in backward communities. The movie was genuinely pro-capitalist in ways I didn’t expect. The man of action gets ahead by building, based on his own intelligence, competence, and drive. And I’ve rarely seen such a satisfying ending. Late in the conversation, we circle back to other PTA films, with Tyler giving me his theory for the general worldview of the entire body of his work. Note: If you would like to get this podcast through a regular podcast app, go to richardhanania.com on a browser on your device (it doesn’t work in the app), log in to Substack, and click on the tab for either the Hanania Show or the H&H Podcast. Select the episode you want, and then choose one of Apple, Spotify, etc. under “Listen on” to your right. You’ll be able to add the show through an RSS feed, after which you will get new episodes, either free or paid depending on what kind of subscriber you are, through whichever platform you use. You can also decide whether you want to receive either podcast via email or alerts through your settings.

    16 min
See All (77)

Ratings & Reviews

4.1
out of 5
9 Ratings

About

Connected to the Richard Hanania Substack. Discussions with Chris Nicholson on war, Rob Henderson on movies, TV shows, and culture, and more. www.richardhanania.com

Information

  • Creator
    Richard Hanania
  • Years Active
    2022 - 2026
  • Episodes
    77
  • Rating
    Explicit
  • Copyright
    © Richard Hanania
  • Show Website
    The H&H Podcast