https://www.richardhanania.com/p/why-i-used-to-suck-and-hopefully

I'm not sure I should comment on this. But fools rush in where wise men fear to tread. So here goes:

I don't know Hanania. But I do read a lot of his work, much of which I think is quite good (with some notable exceptions). And I know several people who do know him, and think highly of him. Thus, it's notable he was recently exposed as having a previous life as a (then-anonymous) racist/misogynist troll. Below is his mea culpa for this. I have both positive and negative reactions. On balance, I think his apology is sincere, and he should not be ostracized from mainstream intellectual debate and society. But he should be encouraged to take his introspection and self-improvement further.

Start with the positive:

1. It is never easy to condemn your own previous bad behavior, especially when you have to admit not only that you made a mistake, but that it rose to level of being "racist," "misogynist," and "quasi-fascist" (his terms). Hanania deserves credit for admitting all that.

2. I think the shift in his thinking is evident not just from this apology, but various other writings. E.g., he has defended immigration and ethnic diversity, condemned irrationalism and anti-intellectualism on the right (his take on Trumpist voters is actually even more negative than mine), attacked anti-vaxxerism, and much else. And he did that despite the fact it pissed off his predominantly right-wing audience, and thus reduced his revenue and audience size. All of this suggests a sincere change in views, not just a cosmetic one.

3. For both moral and pragmatic reasons, we should give people with bigoted views a chance to rehabilitate themselves and their reputations. It's both the right thing to do, and incentivizes reform.

4. Hanania's conversion is in some ways a testament to the power of libertarian/classical liberal ideology. Among other things, our argument that the world is a positive-sum game is a powerful antidote to racist/nationalist thinking that some groups can only advance at the expense of others.

As I said, I also have some more negative reactions:

1. It's bad form to start off your apology for your awful past behavior with a critique of the people who exposed it. Even if the HuffPost writer had some bad motives and wasn't entirely fair, that's not the point you should begin with. His sins in this case were minor compared to Hanania's own.

2. At some points, Hanania isn't tough enough on his past self. For example, it's true that being lonely and unsuccessful with the opposite sex can help drive some young men to racism and misogyny. But most of the many men in that situation do NOT react that way. Thus, Hanania was to blame for reacting to that predicament in one of the least constructive ways he could. I myself also had few friends and little romantic success at the same age. I did some dumb things, but never even considered going down the Hanania path.

3. On some issues, Hanania could stand to reform his thinking more. His "tough on crime" views aren't inherently racist. But he should be much more sensitive to the issue of racial profiling and discrimination in law enforcement. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: If you truly believe in a color-blind government that abjures racial and ethnic discrimination, you can't make a giant exception for the government officials who carry badges and guns and have the power to arrest and (sometimes) even kill people. This blind spot is far from limited to Hanania, or to people with a racist past. But he, I think, has a special obligation to take the issue seriously. I would add that racial discrimination by law enforcement is bad even from the narrow standpoint of fighting crime. It predictably poisons relations between police and minority communities. I would also urge him to consider the interaction between crime in these areas and the War on Drugs.

4. Attacking "Wokeness" is one of Hanania's major intellectual projects (he has a book coming out on the subject). There's nothing inherently wrong with that. I myself think there are many harmful aspects of wokeness (though I don't think the problem is nearly as bad as others on the right claim). But, after these revelations, Hanania simply is no longer a credible critic of wokeness in the eyes of most people who don't already agree with him. Anytime he writes and speaks on the subject, people will (understandably) bring up his racist past. A credible opponent of wokeness must be as free of the tinge of racism as possible. In this respect, he or she should be as pure as Caesar's wife! Hanania doesn't qualify. He probably won't listen. But I would urge him to, at least for the foreseeable future, focus his efforts on other issues.

More can be said. But this is probably too much, already. Ultimately, Hanania deserves credit for admitting his faults and working to change. Also for doing some genuinely good commentary on various political issues. Don't ostracize the man. But do encourage further improvement.