The H&H Podcast Richard Hanania

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com

Rob joins me to talk about the film Civil War. We both have already posted (spoiler-filled) reviews. I really didn’t like it, while he gives the movie a kind of lukewarm endorsement. The greatest weakness is clearly its lack of explanation of how the US got to the point where Americans were killing each other. The movie doesn’t simply ignore the question. It goes out of its way to be unrealistic by putting California and Texas on the same side. The film is also notable for the lack of texture with which it presents American society, or whatever America is supposed to be in this alternate universe.
For a sample of the conversation the film has motivated, see reviews by Tyler Cowen, Michelle Goldberg, and Ross Douthat, all of which we touch on here.
We discuss different ways in which the movie is politically correct, including the lack of sexual violence. This appears to be an aspect of reality that contemporary audiences are particularly unable to handle. This ties in to larger issues about what kinds of stereotypes this film either reinforces or tries to refute.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com

The Sydney Sweeney saga continues. Rob joins me on the podcast to talk about her new film Immaculate, which I reviewed on X here. The conversation begins by Rob informing me that he thinks Sydney Sweeney is mid, and this leads to a heated debate about her appeal, which involves ranking various actresses and models over the years. We come to the conclusion that it’s a combination of her natural breasts, low class physiognomy, and nasally bored girl voice. The conversation then moves on to the film itself, its message, particularly on abortion, and Hollywood double standards when it comes to how it portrays different religions. We get sidetracked into me discussing some of my thoughts on the merits of Catholicism versus Protestantism. In the end, we didn’t find anything too deep or fascinating about the film, but it was a good 89 minutes of mindless entertainment.
Listen to the audio here, or watch the video below.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com

Rob joins me to talk about The Curse, Season 1.
Warning: spoilers in the show notes and also in the discussion. I highly recommend watching first, because it’s very good.
The first nine episodes were some of the most compelling TV I’ve ever seen. I tend not to like the premise of white liberals being hypocrites. It takes aim at an easy target and is too overtly political for my taste. But this show I think puts politics in its proper place. Asher and Whitney Siegel are human beings first, virtue signallers second, which is far more common than the opposite. Their main emotional investment is in their own financial situation and personal relationships.
Emma Stone as Whitney shines in her role. I couldn’t take my eyes off her. The way she uses humor to deflect tension, establish connections, and try to but not really succeed at eliminating status imbalances is captivating. She’s the most compelling version of the liberal white woman. There’s a kind of fakery that takes itself so seriously that it becomes authentic, even romantic. Rob thinks she’s a completely unsympathetic character, while I see more nuance.
We observe her through the eyes of her adoring husband, who turns out to be a literal cuck. We discuss the meaning of this. I argue that Asher having a tiny penis is central to the whole story, while Rob seems to take pity on the poor man and see it all as a bit much.
We also talk about my idea of there being two kinds of white liberals: those who get into Native Americans, including Hispanics, and those who get into blacks. Leftists tend to gravitate to the minority group that is most similar to them in personality. The ones who are more extroverted, risk acceptant, and into showy displays of submission like blacks better. More sensitive and subtle souls take the other path. Part of this reflects how each minority group approaches identity politics. Black Americans are more likely to lean into their role as designated victims, while Natives are sort of puzzled by the whole thing. White liberals looking to play a savior role or indulge in racial masochism pick up on these differences and choose accordingly.
I was looking forward to the final episode, but ended up truly heartbroken by it. You don’t introduce arbitrary magic into a story that was so internally consistent up to that point. I remember the sinking feeling I got the exact moment I knew they ruined the show. A world that had been absurd because it stayed brutally true to the human condition suddenly became absurd due to a supernatural element. What a betrayal of the audience.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com

In previous discussions on rewatching Breaking Bad, I’ve often talked about how our minds play tricks on us. Going over the final two seasons, I was shocked by how much I had whitewashed Walter White’s character. I remember him being a somewhat complex figure near the end, when in reality he was a kind of cartoon villain. I was most amazed to realize that I had misremembered how he killed Mike. I thought it was an accident! The fact that I got something so basic wrong indicates either that I was twisting reality in my mind at the time or I’ve done so over the last decade, probably influenced by the blaze of glory through which he went out.
Of course, the way Walt finally gets his revenge on the Nazis seemed ridiculous at the time, and it’s even more ridiculous in retrospect, given we were expecting that outcome and not experiencing the surprise and overwhelming awe one feels when seeing it for the first time. We also reflect on the famous jailhouse murders.
I present to Chris my theory of how the Nazis seem to show a remarkable number of virtues in a way that other criminals don’t. His interpretation of the series holds that individuals are often brought down by their fatal flaws. For Hank in particular, it might have been his toxic masculinity. But for the Nazis it was actually their compassion and sense of honor that did it! What were the writers trying to tell us?
Perhaps the most interesting part of our discussion is when Chris convinces me that Walt went back in the end to rescue Jesse from the Nazis. I actually hadn’t considered this, either during the original watch or this time around.
I realize that this is now the twelfth conversation I’ve released on Breaking Bad or Better Call Saul. See below for the previous discussions, which are listed in chronological order, just above the video and transcript. There’s been a lot to explore in this universe, and I hope others have enjoyed this journey with us. I’m open to suggestions regarding what to watch next.
The Breaking Bad Universe
Better Call Saul: S6E7, Plan and Execution
Better Call Saul: S6E8, Point and Shoot
Better Call Saul: S6E9, Fun and Games
Nietzschean or Christian? Marc Andreessen on Breaking Bad and Saul
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
Rewatching Breaking Bad, S1 and S2
Rewatching Breaking Bad, S3- S4E4
The transcript below is AI generated, and has not been checked for accuracy. I’ve added my own transcript because the Substack version doesn’t differentiate between speakers, which makes it seem useless to me. I hope they fix this, because it would be nicer to have actually usable transcripts integrated into another tab. But if you want to use the Substack version for whatever reason, you can.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com

Rob joins me on the podcast to talk about what it takes to become a writer, “public intellectual,” or however one wants to describe what we do. This conversation can serve as a guide for those who might try to follow a similar path. But even if you’re not going to be writing for a living, I think there’s still a lot you can get out of our talk, as it served as an opportunity for us to take a step back and reflect on our previous work — and really our lives — up to this point.
When we got to the topic of each of our writing processes, I came to realize that we have deep differences regarding how we get motivated, and our approach to life more generally. Rob says don’t romanticize the process, while my philosophy is that romanticizing everything is the key to joy and meaning. Writing is something he occasionally has to force himself to do, while I hate taking breaks and vacations, and wish family life didn’t pull me away from working even more. Rob of course is the psychologically normal one here, and which of us you decide to take advice from is going to depend on how exactly your mind works. Ironically, in the midst of our discussion about how we get ideas, I realized that I needed to at some point write an article on my romanticize everything philosophy. This is something I have thought about before but it’s been a while since I’ve reflected on it.
Other topics we cover include:
* How we describe our jobs to other people
* What it was like having one foot out the door of academia
* How we both sort of stumbled into our current positions
* The odds of actually making money at this
* How to build an audience
* The ways in which we use X
* Internet fame as a way for single young men to find girlfriends
* Avoiding audience capture
* Why we were both lucky to start our newsletters around the time that we did, rather than a few years later
* Dealing with book publishers and the prestige media
* Why journalists, academics, and independent writers all tend to share similar characteristics
* The ways in which various writers like Razib Khan, Scott Alexander, Freddie deBoer, and others have been able to make it on their own, and how their different backgrounds have contributed to their success
This ended up being one of the most inspiring conversations I’ve had in a while. It was fascinating to hear Rob’s story and invigorating to reflect on my own, and I felt a sense of overwhelming gratitude when considering just how much serendipity was needed for both of us to end up where we are.
Below, you can watch the video of our discussion or read the transcript, lightly edited for clarity.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.richardhanania.com

Rob joins me to talk about our experiences growing up poor, or poorish, with a focus on what race relations were like.
For some context, I’m 38 and spent my childhood in one of the less nice suburbs of Chicago, while he’s 34 and was raised in rural California. Both of us mostly hung out around people who didn’t end up going to college and had prole habits, ideas, and interests. My family had some money but like many immigrants they didn’t spend it on moving to a nice school district, so I grew up with the lower-class American experience.
We discuss racial tensions in our schools, whether kids we grew up with were just uncomfortable with gay people or actively hated them, dating across color lines, and much more.
Over the years I’ve come to realize that everybody is in something of a bubble. When I was growing up among the proles, I had a lot of misconceptions about what those at different socioeconomic levels were like, and more educated Americans are just as clueless about those at the middle or bottom. Rob and I came of age at about the same time, in communities that were majority white and non-college educated. Nonetheless, there was a lot more anti-blackness and anti-gayness where I lived, while these attitudes appear to have been less prevalent in Red Bluff. Maybe this is a California thing, as regional differences seem to matter a lot. Our divergent experiences reflect only a slight portion of the variation that exists across the United States, as neither of us has spent time in say Appalachia or the Deep South.
We tell stories about the gay kid that Rob knew who was once the only one with the courage to say the “n word,” the Muslim girl at my school who one day took off her hijab and caused the boys to lose their minds, the Christian Arab girl whose family swore to kill her if she ever slept with a boy, and Rob’s only experience with the trans movement. The first of these causes us to reflect on the 1990s and 2000s as the era of a more masculine liberalism, which joyously mocked those who felt harmed by words, whether incantations to Satan or racial slurs. Near the end, we get to wiggers versus cowboys, and how Trump has shifted the ways in which the people we grew up with see the political world.
This conversation motivated me to look into what happened to the town I grew up in. It went from 1% black and 5% Hispanic in 2000, to now about 7% black and 22% Hispanic. Over 5% of households speak Arabic at home, and another 15% Spanish. I was recently back and saw signs and billboards in Arabic for the first time, and a sushi restaurant, which would’ve been a very strange sight when I was a kid. There’s something truly beautiful about demographic transitions, where those willing to reproduce and take the necessary steps to better their lives by crossing a border inherit the earth. Life is about movement. Whenever you find yourself on the opposite side of the youth, you must reconsider. Those who mourn certain aspects of the past can’t push a rewind button, but must use contemporary ideas, technologies, and institutions to try and build something new.
You can watch the video or read the transcript below. Note that the transcript is AI generated and has not been checked for accuracy.