cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/35786814

Can we stop trying to beatify this psychopath? It's possible to be against violence and still condemn Kirk and his violent legacy.

all 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 12 points 1 year ago

Second article I've seen asking people not to lionize Charlie Kirk, glad to see pushback on deifying this lunatic

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    On X, Kirk insisted, "Gun control, like vaccines and masks, is focused on making people feel 'safe' by taking freedoms away from others. Don't fall for it."

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 60 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 172 points 1 year ago (27 children)

    I'm against political violence but as Kirk would say about a raped woman that was wearing a short skirt "what did he expect?"

    Dude literally died for what he believed in. We should be happy for him.

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 81 points 1 year ago* (12 children)

    Dude literally died for what he believed in. We should be happy for him.

    More than that, it's "worth it to have the cost" of everyone owning guns, so that we can have some fascist pricks die every so often.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Besides, empathy isn't real, its more of a new age belief. Luigi can be the patron saint of the righteous hand of justice. Charlie can be the patron saint of the self righteous receiver of justice

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago*

    It's gonna get a whole lot worse before things get better, but they'll be remembered as some of the first, yes.

    personally I'm of the opinion that society goes in cycles, generally, if you know history. We're either about to have civil war or mass revolt, I'm pretty sure -- when the circuses are still going but there is no bread, for millions, and it's only getting worse -- that's generally when shit gets real. Massive, massive oversimplification, mind you; but more and more people in the US are feeling the economic squeeze that republicans (and by extension also, late-stage capitalism) pile on more every year.

    In other words, we're in the opening paragraphs to a very long chapter in some high schooler's history class on this period of American history in the future -- probably also lumped into an economics class with the 1929 stock market crash and the consequences thereof. How it will be written about I shudder to imagine, but you'll have a lot of "patron saints of fucking around/finding out/delivering unto thee the finding out".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    I don't agree with the political violence (unless you're fighting back against it) but everyone in America that isn't a maga cult member should look at investing in more guns and gun handling training.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    I'm paraphrasing his quote on gun violence.

    In a way, he's right -- this death? Worth it. Totally. I just wish it didn't come at the cost of many schoolchildren and other innocents before (and after) him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So then, how do you reduce? Very simple. People say, oh, Charlie, how do you stop school shootings? I don't know. How did we stop shootings at baseball games? Because we have armed guards outside of baseball games. That's why. How did we stop all the shootings at airports? We have armed guards outside of airports. How do we stop all the shootings at banks? We have armed guards outside of banks. How did we stop all the shootings at gun shows?

    Turns out those police officers and security couldn't keep Charlie Kirk alive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    On the other hand, in a sick and twisted way, this all does lend credence to the whole "good guy with a gun" idea. you can't tell me that microphone in his hand isn't a weapon, and you sure as shit can't tell me Charlie Kirk was a good guy.

    In other words, this was justifiable self-defense, that sniper protected those college kids from a cognitohazard.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Work for the world you want to live in, prepare for the world you already live in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I didn't expect this shit to happen in my life time (a phrase uttered by many, no doubt) but here we are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Yeah, we ain't even rock bottom yet...

    Like, it's past recommending "guns".

    Everybody should legit be getting ARs/AKs and plated vests these days.

    It doesn't take a lot of range time to get competent. Both platforms are very simple.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    The time for being "against political violence" as a general concept is long passed.

    One side has violence against anyone but themselves as their only policy. Fascism doesn't surrender to reasoned argument, law or elections.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It's certainly on the very limit of when it should be used but for whatever it means, Kirk was just a hateful person. As far as I'm aware he didn't actually murder anyone but in the current climate, what did he expect?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Being "against political violence" is defending the status quo. Kirk's opinion on guns wasn't problematic at all and fucking liberals acting like that was his problem disgust me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 30 points 1 year ago

    He was a propagandist.

    Most politics is propagandist as it works to suggest we shouldn't lead ourselves, but need representatives, and that we need to support and work for the gamified tokens (money) of the nation.

  • source
  • I love how they titled the article as a direct retort to the NYC’s fucking idiotic platforming of a fascist sympathizer.

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Was never elected nor held office so never a politician, just a hate monger.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I haven’t been this elated since Luigi.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    A few hours before this article was published Jason Koebler at 404 Media published something remarkably similar:

    https://www.404media.co/charlie-kirk-was-not-practicing-politics-the-right-way/

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Kirk was a radical right-wing extremist. Groomed though he may have been (well, that hair was terrible), he just spewed hate speech.

  • source
  • [–] 48 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 30 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I think it's entirely possible to simultaneously be horrified by his murder, feel deep sympathy for his family, and be glad he's no longer in the world.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    Right there with you. His wife I don't worry too much about, she knew what she was getting but his kids didn't choose this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    There's was almost no chance these kids could grow up to be decent people with a paternal figure who believed black people are inferior, that women should submit to their husbands and that gun rights trump safety, particularly the safety of children.

    Doesnt justify murder by any means. I believe all people are capable of reform. Unfortunately capitalism was creating a positive feedback loop so that the more regressive ideas he spewed, the more views he got and the greater his wealth would grow. Making reform unlikely but its always possible.

    Ultimately his kids may have a chance of growing up to see all people as equal now, because I doubt their father would have accepted that from them.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 21 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's impossible to be against violence and say anything good about that two bit hateful grifter.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 19 points 1 year ago*

    That is perfectly the point. I am against violence and Kirk was a piece of shit who we should feel free to condemn for the harm he was causing right up to his last moments.

    Klein's fawning whitewashing of Kirk's dishonest tactics is, if we are being exceptionally charitable, naïve.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Fuck, where's the byline? I get if they are afraid to publish under their real name but gimmie more from this author, I want to see if I agree with them in other articles.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Ezra Klein sucks. Has always sucked, will always suck.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Oh my god!!!! He was a psychopath!!!!

    I love that psychopath is included in this article.

    Of course, the main purpose of posts by Russian trolls is to incite arguments among different groups or ideologies: conservatives versus liberals, pro-life versus pro choice, pro-immigrant groups versus border wall enthusiasts, etc. Researchers say as outrageous as much of this content appears to be, Americans can’t help but to click.

    After analyzing over 2,500 of these Russian posts, researchers discovered they generated clickthrough rates as much as nine times higher than the norm in digital advertising campaigns. In a rather poor reflection of human nature, it seems that controversy, lies, and fear mongering do very much equal clicks.

    Interestingly, ads that used flat out racist language didn’t do well, but posts that were threatening or contained verbiage like “terrorist,” “sissy,” “idiot,” and “psychopath” did do very well. Ads that invoked fear and anger performed the best, according to the research team.

    https://studyfinds.org/study-russian-trolls-supremely-effective-at-exploiting-american-fear-anger-online/

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    You should gander through my post history before levying accusations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I don't know what your intentions are, you could have just been brought into it unknowingly. I apologize if you're not on that side. Your post still has the same outcome.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 23 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Look, your heart is in the right place, but your entire premise is built on a single word choice in my post about a man worthy of every ounce of scorn I can muster. Take a step back and realze that me being angry about mainstream media outlets like NYT and MSNBC falling over themselves to honor this vile man isn't evidence of anything more than that. You have misread this situation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago

    *nonviolent legacy

  • source