Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd
-
Thank you for that. Even though he died, he has won. Look at the amount of hatred he has nourished. Furthermore, I don’t believe his death will bring any justice to the people he impacted with his hatred. While I see people celebrating, I’m terrified.
Terrified this is how things are at the moment. If you can celebrate the death of Charlie, it means you have it in you to celebrate anyone’s else given a motive. And I think that is The first step of the dehumanisation process he so fondly used.
I take a little solace from the fact that win or not, he will not be here to see it through
-
He had shitty opinions, we know. I won't follow them. I will have empathy and I will not celebrate his death. Still, I think the world's population improved with one less hateful person around.
What would you say if someone on the left was killed as revenge?
-
He had shitty opinions, we know. I won't follow them. I will have empathy and I will not celebrate his death. Still, I think the world's population improved with one less hateful person around.
wrote last edited by [email protected]He had shitty opinions
I think we should stop saying this.
He was killed for his actions, not his opinions. His audience members are the ones who kill for opinions.
Discussing his personal opinions feels like a bit of a republican both sidesing talking point, honestly. I mean, if one side can kill the other just for having conservative opinions, then certainly they can fight back and kill people just for having blue hair and using the "wrong" bathroom!
It was the same with talk radio hosts decades ago. People would argue whether Limbaugh or Hannity really believe all the BS or if they just do it for ratings.
I only remember caring about that distinction when I was still immersed in the conservatism I was born into.
edit: added many word was not there
-
Here’s the frustration and why this should not be celebrated:
Charlie Kirk spent years dehumanizing people, making lives measurably worse, and profiting from hatred. The cosmic irony of him being shot while calling trans people dangerous and minimizing gun violence feels like the universe delivering a punchline he wrote himself. There’s a cathartic release in seeing someone who seemed untouchable suddenly silenced by the very violence he dismissed.
But that catharsis is blinding, vile, and destructive. Every celebration post, every "rest in piss" meme, every "fucked around and found out" joke is already being screenshot and weaponized. The worst people imaginable, those eager to exploit violence, are being handed exactly what they want: supposed proof that “they were right,” justification for crackdowns, and, most dangerously, a martyr whose blood sanctifies every awful thing he stood for.
Celebration may feel like a dunk on fascism, but in reality it accelerates it. It may feel like strength, but it exposes a movement so strategically bankrupt that it mistakes emotional satisfaction for political victory. Kirk alive was one influencer among many; Kirk dead is a rallying cry that will outlive us all.
The rage at what he represented is justified. But celebrating his death guarantees those very ideas will flourish. American democracy is dying, and a gravedigger falling into the hole is no victory when it only deepens the grave.
His ideas needed to be defeated. Instead, they’ve been immortalized.
Cool story bro.
-
What would you say if someone on the left was killed as revenge?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7717mk1gk6o.amp
They have a time machine
-
This post did not contain any content.
I'll sleep ever so slightly better now.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
trump is honoring him with a military procession, to distract from epstein. people said he was killed over, because he was pining for epstein files to be released. Kirk did more harm than good, but MSMS seems to try to sanewash him.
-
Exactly. I've been saying this all day, but we literally hanged people at Nuremberg for doing exactly what Kirk made his whole career doing. Kirk was guilty of incitement to genocide.
he fomented, and encouraged hate+ violence amongst susceptible incel population, hes culpable.
-
Quick note to say legally speaking Nuremberg trials were kangaroo courts, and many prosecutors and judges were uneasy about the whole thing because many of the offences were not illegal in the Third Reich, and international law wasn’t yet developed enough to make them offences in a wider sense. That said, Nazis deserved a comeuppance and subsequently international laws were made more useful. But Nuremberg should never be held as the gold standard of jurisprudence. They were a starting point and we should always aim higher. People can look to The Hague for more effective and legally sound judgements on the matters of war crimes and human rights violations.
Why were they kangaroo courts? They were established by an International Charter.. You can point out that the Nazi's crimes weren't illegal under German law, but who cares? Multiple jurisdictions can exist simultaneously. Sure there's an element of ex post facto in making crimes against humanity a legal charge after the fact, but the ex post facto protections are something we democratically agreed to adopt. And maybe we can just agree to not let genocide be subject to ex post facto protections under international treaty. Yes, this was all just made up by people, but ultimately all laws and legal systems were first dreamed up by people doing a lot of improvisation.
-
They were gonna do it, anyway. They were just waiting for an excuse. Any excuse. In a world as big and complex as ours, probability would have provided them with some pretext sooner or later. As we can see, they don't know anything about the shooter, or his ideology. It's just an excuse. If the world didn't provide them one, they'd manufacture it. Walking around on eggshells and trying to avoid giving them one was never tenable.
You're right that they manufacture pretexts, but there's a crucial difference between forced fabrications and genuine ammunition. When they have to invent threats, their propaganda requires constant maintenance and reality-bending. When we hand them actual violence to point to, we transform their lies into prophecies. Yes, probability ensures incidents will occur, but the question is whether we contribute to that probability or work against it. "They'll do it anyway" becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that absolves us of strategic thinking. I say, let us not make the Fascist's job easier.
-
Then dont tell me youre the good guy. Cool?
Hoes mad
-
Cool story bro.
Your "cool story bro" response is exactly the kind of thinking that creates space for demagogues to thrive. When someone offers strategic analysis about why celebrating political violence backfires, and you respond with a thought-terminating cliché, you're demonstrating the same anti-intellectual reflex that makes populations vulnerable to manipulation.
Think about what made Charlie Kirk successful: he offered simple, emotionally satisfying answers to complex problems. "Your problems aren't from complicated economic systems, it's those people over there." His audience loved him because he never asked them to think harder than a bumper sticker.
And here you are, faced with someone explaining why emotional satisfaction isn't political victory, why martyrdom empowers the very ideas we need to defeat... and your response is a meme. You're operating at exactly the level of discourse that Kirk counted on: where snark replaces strategy, where being dismissive feels like being strong, where "cool story bro" seems like a clever response to warnings about tactical disaster.
The movements that win understand complexity. The movements that lose mistake attitude for analysis. When you brush off strategic thinking with internet catchphrases, you're not fighting against the Charlie Kirks of the world. You're proving that their reduction of politics to tribal reflexes and emotional reactions was right all along.
The system that produces Charlie Kirks depends on people refusing to think beyond the satisfaction of the dunk, the own, the sick burn. Your dismissal isn't rebellion; it's compliance with the exact intellectual laziness that powerful interests count on to keep populations manageable and movements ineffective.
-
You are describing parochial empathy, with the caveat that somehow you think it's different when you do it.
Hoes mad
-
And what do you think celebrating his death is doing?
I know you keyboard warriors are dumb as fuck, so Ill just tell you. Youre ramping up the other side of your dumb culture war. Youre spreading hate, and celebrating murder. You are the very thing you hate. You just dont have as many followers. But theres enough of you doing it, that right now there will be a number of unhinged right wingers looking for "payback". And thats on you, and every single other mouth breather out there cheers for murder.
Hoes mad
-
And what do you think celebrating his death is doing?
I know you keyboard warriors are dumb as fuck, so Ill just tell you. Youre ramping up the other side of your dumb culture war. Youre spreading hate, and celebrating murder. You are the very thing you hate. You just dont have as many followers. But theres enough of you doing it, that right now there will be a number of unhinged right wingers looking for "payback". And thats on you, and every single other mouth breather out there cheers for murder.
Hoes mad
-
Thank you for that. Even though he died, he has won. Look at the amount of hatred he has nourished. Furthermore, I don’t believe his death will bring any justice to the people he impacted with his hatred. While I see people celebrating, I’m terrified.
Terrified this is how things are at the moment. If you can celebrate the death of Charlie, it means you have it in you to celebrate anyone’s else given a motive. And I think that is The first step of the dehumanisation process he so fondly used.
You've identified something crucial that others miss: we don't defeat dehumanization by becoming better at it. The moment we celebrate death, we've accepted their fundamental premise that political disagreement justifies violence.
Your terror is appropriate and I feel it with you. Not just at the violence itself, but at watching people you agree with politically abandon the very principles that distinguish us from what we oppose. The hardest battle isn't against fascism; it's maintaining our humanity while fighting inhumanity.
-
I take a little solace from the fact that win or not, he will not be here to see it through
I understand finding comfort where you can, but consider: Kirk not being here to "see it through" assumes his death diminishes his impact. The opposite is true. Alive, he was one voice that could be countered, fact-checked, and eventually forgotten. Dead, he becomes eternal; forever young, forever wronged, forever useful to those who will absolutely be here to see it through. The solace is hollow when his absence strengthens everything he stood for.
-
Here’s the frustration and why this should not be celebrated:
Charlie Kirk spent years dehumanizing people, making lives measurably worse, and profiting from hatred. The cosmic irony of him being shot while calling trans people dangerous and minimizing gun violence feels like the universe delivering a punchline he wrote himself. There’s a cathartic release in seeing someone who seemed untouchable suddenly silenced by the very violence he dismissed.
But that catharsis is blinding, vile, and destructive. Every celebration post, every "rest in piss" meme, every "fucked around and found out" joke is already being screenshot and weaponized. The worst people imaginable, those eager to exploit violence, are being handed exactly what they want: supposed proof that “they were right,” justification for crackdowns, and, most dangerously, a martyr whose blood sanctifies every awful thing he stood for.
Celebration may feel like a dunk on fascism, but in reality it accelerates it. It may feel like strength, but it exposes a movement so strategically bankrupt that it mistakes emotional satisfaction for political victory. Kirk alive was one influencer among many; Kirk dead is a rallying cry that will outlive us all.
The rage at what he represented is justified. But celebrating his death guarantees those very ideas will flourish. American democracy is dying, and a gravedigger falling into the hole is no victory when it only deepens the grave.
His ideas needed to be defeated. Instead, they’ve been immortalized.
-
wrote last edited by [email protected]
Nazism is a form of fascism, identifying ethnic Germans as part of what the Nazis regarded as a Nordic Aryan master race.
Lots of ethnic Germanic folks in Israel, to be sure. Yes, this is sarcasm.
It's funny to compare the definitions of nazism in English versus Swedish though. It would appear that English speaking really want to shift what nazi means, rather than have zionism be its own term with similar meaning.
Direct translation from the Swedish version
Nazism is part of fascist ideologi. It made the claim that certain races of human had greater value than others. The "Aryan race" and the Germanic peoples were seen as the highest in the racial hierarchy. The "enemy race" were the so-called untermenschen (subhumans), who were often called "the masses from the East", which mainly included Jews, Slavs, Poles and Roma, but also the disabled and homosexuals. [
It would be like calling the Japanese during world war 2 nazis. It's just silly.
-
Ohhh! I love Starship Troopers! The book, not so much, but the movie I adore.
Let's dig into your choice to respond with this scene.
That's the moment where Verhoeven shows us 'Federation Victory'! The good guys have won! They've captured the Brain Bug! It's afraid! Humanity wins!
Except what's actually happening is fascists celebrating the torture of a sentient being. One that extracted human minds just as they'll now extract from its mind; each side justifying their horrors by pointing to the other's. All while convincing themselves they're heroes.
The Federation doesn't attempt communication or diplomacy. They literally probe its brain for intel while cheering its terror. The troops cheering 'It's afraid!' aren't the good guys. They're Verhoeven's mirror showing us how righteousness becomes the very tyranny it claims to fight.
NPH's character literally becomes a full SS-uniformed intelligence officer who feeds his best friends into an endless meat grinder. The bugs were defending their home. The Federation manufactured its own eternal enemy. And everyone cheering becomes complicit in forever war.
You've sent me a scene about people so drunk on their enemy's fear that they can't see they've become the monsters.
So either you're agreeing that celebrating suffering makes us indistinguishable from what we oppose, or you've accidentally proven my point by quoting the villains as heroes.
Either way, I couldn't have picked a better metaphor myself.
