Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd
-
Self defence =/= assassinating people you dont agree with.
His vitriol is A LOT worse than a simple disagreement. Literally, propagandists were sentenced to death in the trials after ww2 for what Charlie has done. He's not hust someone who holds vile opinions, but a banner carrier for those vile beliefs. He was a cancer on society, and no amount of your pathetic ignorance will EVER change that.
-
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.
Here's the thing, though, this guy isn't one of "us." I didn't egg him on, or help plan. I only knew Kirk from the tiny-face memes. The nebulous "we" isn't responsible; the shooter doesn't seem to have had a network radicalizing him. He's the proverbial lone wolf. That means he's exactly the kind of unpredictable, stochastic agent that I'm saying is out there in the world to provide the fascists their justification.
-
I hear you. I was really hoping that violating children would have been the bridge too far—but so far those in power are holding on. It grieves me to wonder what more it would take.
As somebody with a lot of empathy for those in need it angers and frustrates me that the sentiment is not universal and that more is not being done.
At this point I doubt Jackboots, swasticas, or gas chambers would make a difference.
Take care of your loved ones.
-
Then that would be out of character for the network. No group of people is perfect. Which is seemingly what a lot of lemmings expect. They will always be disappointed.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I've been watching PBS, listening and donating to NPR, for decades. I don't know if it's me, but it seems in the past couple years they've bent over backwards to not seem partisan. Which has made their reporting and coverage somewhat lackluster. Still better than any option out there.
-
I appreciate your level-headedness, and I definitely get where you're coming from, but I need to point out the big gaping blindspot in your argument: the crackdowns and the facism are already here, and they've pretty much demonstrated they don't particularly care for or wait for justification.
Do you see why arguing "you're giving them ammo and justification" rings very hollow at this particular point in time?
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yup. I totally understand why it rings hollow and why "feels good" that a Nazi died.
Authoritarianism isn't waiting for permission. Absolutely.
But there's a difference between "they don't need justification" and "justification doesn't matter." Yes, Trump was always going to crack down on dissent. But Kirk's assassination transforms that from "Trump's authoritarian overreach" into "necessary response to political violence." It shifts the narrative from aggression to self-defense. Did Goebbels need Wessel after his death in 1930? No, but it sure as shit worked to mobilize the base.
My point is that we, the true patriots upholding actual freedom, lose here. We all lose here and its frustrating that so many people are caught up in the cosmic justice that they can't see that this is EXACTLY what they want.
The "feels good that a Nazi died" impulse is human. But politics isn't about feelings, it's about power. And right now, people celebrating are ensuring that the worst people in America are about to get a lot more of it, wrapped in the flag and carrying Kirk's picture.
-
Depends. I expect his wife is just as alt-right-addled as he was, which might mean she’ll raise them to be little Nazis. I guess they might break out of that, and I hope so, but being raised alt-right with a prominent martyr to the cause as your father could seriously fuck you up. Don’t forget they’re very rich, so they’re insulated from the real world.
I mean you might be right, but I imagine the martyr thing could go either way
Just putting myself in their shoes, it probably won't feel nice having their dad constantly praised for doing what they saw him die doing
Plus, Charlie Kirk was more hated than loved. There's no putting them so deep in a bubble that they aren't confronted with that fact
Kids tend to either follow or reject their parents beliefs... I'm not sure what this kind of trauma does to that, but I'll bet it'll make it more extreme
-
His vitriol is A LOT worse than a simple disagreement. Literally, propagandists were sentenced to death in the trials after ww2 for what Charlie has done. He's not hust someone who holds vile opinions, but a banner carrier for those vile beliefs. He was a cancer on society, and no amount of your pathetic ignorance will EVER change that.
No, he wasnt. Thats just the dog shit propaganda that filled your head. You are celebrating the death of a human being, and you still have the fucking cheek to act like you were the victim because he said things you didnt like. Not that I think you actually know what he said, because whenever you google him all you get is the clickbait headlines that take everything he said sans context.
You are in a bubble thats convinced you that cheering for a man being murdered isnt just OK, its something you should do. You have "nazi" and "fascist" running around because that makes it easy to dehumanise people like Kirk to the point you dont even see a human being. Just a villain in some pantomime. And youre cheering, youre cheering for the death of a human being.
The funny thing is, youve all outed yourselves as the exact same extremists you claim to hate. Cheering for death of Kirk, and worse calling for the deaths of others. Like JK for example. Youre the same as some little kid convinced that theres virgins waiting for him in heaven if he puts on a special vest. Thats you. YOU are the cancer on society. Because YOU are the ones who cant talk, you cant only claim victimhood and call for the deaths of people who dont agree with you. YOU are the cancer. And its fucking scary how far gone you are that you cant even see, even when youre saying it.
I hope the cops are looking, and start rounding you people up who are calling for more death. You are the cancer. And I can only hope that your toxicity is finally exposed for what it actually is.
-
I mean you might be right, but I imagine the martyr thing could go either way
Just putting myself in their shoes, it probably won't feel nice having their dad constantly praised for doing what they saw him die doing
Plus, Charlie Kirk was more hated than loved. There's no putting them so deep in a bubble that they aren't confronted with that fact
Kids tend to either follow or reject their parents beliefs... I'm not sure what this kind of trauma does to that, but I'll bet it'll make it more extreme
wrote last edited by [email protected]For their sake, I hope you’re right.
e: and, putting myself in their shoes as a child whose father was both prominent and absent (though not dead), I idolised him well into my 30s. Raising a teen boy finally disabused me of his sainthood. He’s still the most remarkable man I’ve ever met, but he’s also fallible.
If he’d been dead, I may never have been forced to accept he’s human. -
No, he wasnt. Thats just the dog shit propaganda that filled your head. You are celebrating the death of a human being, and you still have the fucking cheek to act like you were the victim because he said things you didnt like. Not that I think you actually know what he said, because whenever you google him all you get is the clickbait headlines that take everything he said sans context.
You are in a bubble thats convinced you that cheering for a man being murdered isnt just OK, its something you should do. You have "nazi" and "fascist" running around because that makes it easy to dehumanise people like Kirk to the point you dont even see a human being. Just a villain in some pantomime. And youre cheering, youre cheering for the death of a human being.
The funny thing is, youve all outed yourselves as the exact same extremists you claim to hate. Cheering for death of Kirk, and worse calling for the deaths of others. Like JK for example. Youre the same as some little kid convinced that theres virgins waiting for him in heaven if he puts on a special vest. Thats you. YOU are the cancer on society. Because YOU are the ones who cant talk, you cant only claim victimhood and call for the deaths of people who dont agree with you. YOU are the cancer. And its fucking scary how far gone you are that you cant even see, even when youre saying it.
I hope the cops are looking, and start rounding you people up who are calling for more death. You are the cancer. And I can only hope that your toxicity is finally exposed for what it actually is.
wrote last edited by [email protected]rofl your inability to understand the basic principle of first action makes you not only fucking stupid, but pathetically ignorant... cheering for the death of scum is not equivalent and never will be equivalent to wishing death upon unknown strangers.
The fact you cannot understand that is pathetic and a gross example of exactly how this world is going to shit.
Congratulations on being the perfect example of the banality of evil, you pathetic fool. You will only ever succeed in creating a worse world, you literal fucking idiot.
-
I'm being like Charlie Kirk with my empathy for Charlie Kirk.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Now you're just talking nonsense?
-
I keep reading people complaining about how people are taking these quotes out of context.
So went to the source, and I see them in context.They are actually worse in context.
-
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.
pettifogging it matters not what you call the fascists, they're still practicing fascism. This pedantry your arguing is just that, pedantry, and it's distracting.
-
But that catharsis is blinding, vile, and destructive.
My friend, you've got the right stuff. You have a very smooth and relatable style of communication and I really do value when those like you say something that I espouse and would otherwise butcher.
I won't tell people not to celebrate because I know how disliked that sort of sentiment is on a thread like this. But you're absolutely right and it sucks. They know that they just hit the "not crying wolf" lottery and will never stop banging that drum.
I'm frightened for whom the bell tolls.
That 'right stuff' didn't work in the 1940s, what makes you think it would work in '25? Do you know what did work in the '40s?
-
pettifogging it matters not what you call the fascists, they're still practicing fascism. This pedantry your arguing is just that, pedantry, and it's distracting.
Like i said. Some Zionists are fascists, but can't be nazis. By definition. When you start to throw words around that doesn't mean what you think they mean, they will eventually stop having any meaning at all.
-
Like i said. Some Zionists are fascists, but can't be nazis. By definition. When you start to throw words around that doesn't mean what you think they mean, they will eventually stop having any meaning at all.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Pedantry separating out one right wing authoritarian from another isn't helpful in this context. Maybe in others, but not in this one
Also, language has always evolved, the words didn't 'lose meaning' they changed meaning. 'Literally' became an antonym, it's fine.
So you're doubly wrong. Wrong for being a pedant, and wrong for your stated reason for pedantry.
-
Pedantry separating out one right wing authoritarian from another isn't helpful in this context. Maybe in others, but not in this one
Also, language has always evolved, the words didn't 'lose meaning' they changed meaning. 'Literally' became an antonym, it's fine.
So you're doubly wrong. Wrong for being a pedant, and wrong for your stated reason for pedantry.
Perhaps if you studied the history and origins of nazism you'd think differently. When you call people nazis, that really aren't nazis, then you just rob it of meaning.
The fact that sarcastic irony has twisted the meaning of a word faster during this age than should have been possible, only enforced my belief that the meaning of words are important. Otherwise you end up in a conversation with someone and you end up spending all of the time explaining 'your' definition of what a word means.
-
Perhaps if you studied the history and origins of nazism you'd think differently. When you call people nazis, that really aren't nazis, then you just rob it of meaning.
The fact that sarcastic irony has twisted the meaning of a word faster during this age than should have been possible, only enforced my belief that the meaning of words are important. Otherwise you end up in a conversation with someone and you end up spending all of the time explaining 'your' definition of what a word means.
wrote last edited by [email protected]You are doubly wrong, distinctions between right-wing authoritarians isn't important in this context.
Words do not lose meaning, they change and are understood through context. I gave you an example already:
When I use the word 'literally' in a sentence I do not have to explain my definiton (literally/figurativly) being used.
Otherwise you end up in a conversation with someone and you end up spending all of the time explaining ‘your’ definition of what a word means.
See above, if you had read my earlier comment you wouldn't have wasted your, or my time with this. You have used the word 'literally' (I presume). You have heard the word 'literally' being used. You already knew your paragraph was untrue, you're just saying stuff at this point.
Deeper explanation. 'nazi' and 'facist' in causal contexts (like this one) can be understood as 'right wing authoritarian'. In other contexts they can't be place holders, discussing ww2 for example. But here, now, they can and are. It's understood, through context, which right wing authoritarian is meant.
-
You are doubly wrong, distinctions between right-wing authoritarians isn't important in this context.
Words do not lose meaning, they change and are understood through context. I gave you an example already:
When I use the word 'literally' in a sentence I do not have to explain my definiton (literally/figurativly) being used.
Otherwise you end up in a conversation with someone and you end up spending all of the time explaining ‘your’ definition of what a word means.
See above, if you had read my earlier comment you wouldn't have wasted your, or my time with this. You have used the word 'literally' (I presume). You have heard the word 'literally' being used. You already knew your paragraph was untrue, you're just saying stuff at this point.
Deeper explanation. 'nazi' and 'facist' in causal contexts (like this one) can be understood as 'right wing authoritarian'. In other contexts they can't be place holders, discussing ww2 for example. But here, now, they can and are. It's understood, through context, which right wing authoritarian is meant.
Thats all well and good. But you're wrong.
Nazi is a type of fascist.
Zionist is a different type of fascist.So by mixing them up you are simplifying in a manner that is reductive and wrong. It would be akin to using maoist and anarchist interchangeably because they are economically "left".
-
Thats all well and good. But you're wrong.
Nazi is a type of fascist.
Zionist is a different type of fascist.So by mixing them up you are simplifying in a manner that is reductive and wrong. It would be akin to using maoist and anarchist interchangeably because they are economically "left".
wrote last edited by [email protected]What's all well and good? I see no evidence you are listening, and some direct evidence that you are not.
Once again, you are railing against how the English language works, and has always worked.
'Literally' means both 'literally' and it's opposite 'figuratively'. People using 'literally' to mean figuratively aren't wrong to do so. They don't need to, as you suggest, define their usage of the word when using it. It's understood. Once you understand a word can be expanded to mean its opposite, and people use it just fine, this expansion of 'nazi' should be a breeze.
In the current zeitgeist, it is understood, that in casual settings, 'nazi' is used to mean 'right wing authoritarian'. Get all upset if you wish, there's a long history of people being upset about time's effect on language, I'm sure you can remember your grandparents clutching pearls at the slang and short hand you used growing up. You don't have to like it, English doesn't care. Keep up, or don't, up to you. For what it's worth, I'm one of the few people I know that still say 'whom' I type it less and less and I certainly don't "correct" people who don't because their lack of usage is correct now.
All you are doing is pettifogging.
-
That 'right stuff' didn't work in the 1940s, what makes you think it would work in '25? Do you know what did work in the '40s?
I don't have the slightest clue what concept you are trying to elicit, but regardless you're taking my words out of context. It's in bad faith and I'm not the least bit interested. No thank you.
