To the people in denial or who aren’t seeing it on their screens, who tell me that no one is celebrating Kirk’s death.
Here’s a website with some of the many many examples. https://www.charliesmurderers.com
Discussion
what happened to free speech? you can't police people's emotions over someone's death. perhaps do some introspection as to why so many people are feeling like this? this website is grotesque and not for the reason you think.
I think a lot of it boils down to what has been acceptable and even promoted within the left culturally. There is a tendency that the sort of ghoulish posturing as some sort of signal, and people who push back on it are then outting themselves as not being radical enough. I agree that a lot of it is basically just people going along with lefty norms, and these norms have up to now had little/no consequences. So it now seems a bit unfair and might come as a bit of a shock, especially as as a society we have sort of just gone along with it. Cos they keep saying they're on 'the right side of history' etc. But it really shouldn't be all that shocking that people who are saying really abhorrent things online might suffer a job loss from it. I'm not especially pro or against this, this seems fairly normal and has been the case for a lot of people saying stuff online from different political groups, perhaps now it's more evenly distributed? So you feel the same way about Hope Not Hate (you might not know this cos it's a UK thing openly slandering people and labelling them Nazis? Especially when labelling someone a Nazi means anything goes and is a deliberate call to action and extreme ostracisation? And that's just on example that has been going on for years and years.
But now this is suddenly a problem?
I think ghoulish posturing and celebration about political murders, biolence and death is wrong in general btw, from both the right and the left. I just think it is more of an internal mechanism within left culture (as I stated before) and that it is more socially acceptable. I mean it's so socially acceptable that people seem to be in shock that they are losing their jobs about it. Despite often posting with their real names and workplaces listed.
i don't know what these "lefty norms" are and i think you are homogenising a large group of people. as far as i can tell from the clips i have seen, until recently at least, he had no issue with the political murder of civilians in palestine and supported israel. he encouraged violence and held bigoted racist, homophobic and sexist views and made a lot of money from trying to indoctrinate students with those views. he viewed most people as not being equal to him, or other white cisgender men, and wanted to take away their rights. i see there is debate about whether or not he should be called "a fascist". there's a lot of semantic posturing that for the most part seems to be people trying to cover up for their extreme anti-social views and actions. for what you are saying to be correct, then people expressing an opinion you don't like about someone's death is hate speech and should be harshly sanctioned? someone must lose their job for a joke? i don't condone what happened to this man, especially given what is likely the cause. but so much of this is extremely hypocritical and disingenuous coming from the nostr crowd.
btw i actually agree with ostracising people with extreme anti-social beliefs and actions who are not willing to be helped and change. greed being one of them. hatred towards people different from them, being another. there are many. you can't equivocate around basic human freedom and dignity like these are up for debate.
The people who made that website seem to be motivated by (most of the - I'm not including the 'greed' part) sentiment of your last paragraph.
that website is a political hitlist. if it was the other way around (and it often is, let's be real here) would this be your response?
I'm not fully endorsing the website, I've seen some people responding to the organisation with posts which I don't think are deserving of it. I have seen some where I think it probably deserves something more like law enforcement looking into it (eg people naming other targets they wish would be killed, including Kirk's wife and children).
But yes I think eg 'Hope Not Hate' have for years been making a political hitlist too. I think they tell themselves a similar justification story as your last paragraph, just like the 'Kirk murderers' website are doing, just a long different ideological lines.
i just looked at their site and don't really see how you can equate their report with that website. anyway, don't we all agree that "the far right" is a problem for individual autonomy and personal freedom?
You think Charlie Kirk was "far right"? that's rich, hes pretty middle of the road republican/trad
yeah anywhere else in the world he would be considered far right, if that helps.
this political compass and any related test are a load of crap, which he even says in the video. i actually agree that political labels and spectrums are unhelpful and wish we would just do away with them.
except the minute i see someone saying they're "just normal" or just saying/thinking "normal things" i know to run a mile, which is helpful.
You called him far right and then said we should do away with labels, so which is it?
i didn't actually. i used inverted commas when i refered to this label, and said that people outside america consider him far right. what i mean is that i'm not interested in the distortion of labels or nitpicking semantics to cover up for cruel beliefs and actions.
I think you should be more careful when speaking on these topics because your responses have given seemingly the opposite impression you were trying to convey then.
How about you say which specific views of his were contrary to freedom and autonomy? And don't bring up abortion because if you are falling for the psyop that that is to divide us, then i don't know what to tell you.
go ask grok. if this is really your argument, you should sit down. once again: i'm not celebrating this man's death, even though it seems like he was a terrible person. let him and all those like him say what they want to say, as loudly as they want to. let them reveal themselves so we see people for what they are.
You made the claim that his ideology is bad for freedom and autonomy and when i asked for specifics you used the leftist tactic of "its not my job tp educate you"... Why even post?
if you cannot see abortion as a freedom and autonomy issue then i can't help you. the man literally said he was against civil rights for black people, equality for women, rights for gay and trans people, and religious freedom. and he advocated for the death penalty. all of these infringe on personal freedom and individual liberty. why are you trying to rewrite his positions posthumously?
I never listened to him, i aint trying go rewrite his positions at all, you made a claim that ive never heard justified and so i asked for specifics.
I said to igbore abortion bc its a highly devisive issue that is not going to be solvable bc one side is religious about it, im pro choice for govt policy, but still think those who get abortions are committing murder, but thats between them and their god.
From looking up what you mentioned, the civil rights thing, you seem to be misunderstanding his opinion, you can be against the federal govt enforcement of the civil rights act and still think blacks are equal. My spouse and 2 kids are black and i share that view, its not a right wing view, its a libertarian view against authoritarianism.
I dont see anything of him against womens rights, considering he had a wife and daughter, i find your claim to be doubtful, so if you have a specific example then im open to correction.
Theres 0 chance hes against religious freedom.
I bet your point about gay rights is based on marriage, which gets back to a states rights issue.
The trans rights issue I'd bet he was just against kids getting it, which is not an infringment of freedom. Unless your talking about the sports issue, which coulntradicts your womens rights issue.
Ill agree with you on the death penalty issue, the state should never be the arbiter of life or death of a human considering the rights of life liberty and property are the purpose of our founding documents. But for the other issues, unless you can site specifics, my understanding for the republican position on all of these is states rights. Which as an anarchist i see as a solid first step towards a weaker federal govt enabling more freedom.
ok maybe actually listen to him first and then get back to me. although i wouldn't recommend it.
Nah, again youre using the "not my job to educate you even tho i made the claim" tactic.
Keep running around the internet calling people you disagree with far right and then moving the goal posts and then continuing to not provide evidence, im sure someone will end up convinced.
if the guy is a hero to anarchists then god help us
He's not, but you're sullying the memory of a dead man who was influential to thousands of americans, i disagree with at least 75% of the things ive read about his views since he passed, but all your tactics achieve is moving people towards more authoritarian influencers than him like nick fuentes.
Highly doubtful, seems like a very Americancentric view of the world lol. perhaps if by 'rest of the world' you mean only Scandinavian countries, maybe I'd give you that lol. He's pretty much considered fairly moderate socially conservative in his views
You're posting from a country with free healthcare
Wake up
I don't see what that has to do with anything and the NHS is paid for by taxes and national insurance, so not technically free.
It's free for people who don't pay taxes or insurance
And you're pretending the UK (and world) is as right wing as Nazi America, nowhere near as left wing as Scandinavia, while Nazi America will bill a homeless person millions of sats for one ambulance ride
I think the US healthcare system (the little I know about it) sounds like total shit. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
('national insurance' is just a tax on everyone who works, and not some sort of health insurance, just fyi. Cos it might be a confusing name).
But anyway.
If Tommy Robinson is not undermining universal healthcare, I say he is left of Charlie Kirk
If he is, but the UK is delaying it, I say the UK is left of the US for as long as that lasts
Tommy Robinson isn't running for election, most of the country including a lot of the right think he is a prat
Then pls see what I'm saying 😭
I can't tell if you've confused Tommy Robinson with Nigel Farage, so I'm not sure what you're saying. But I'm very dubious of both. Neither are conservative, there is no conservative party political representation in the UK, I would probably say there isn't /much of a socialist party political representation either btw (although the new jeremy Corbyn party might actually be just that) and I think that is a major problem here.
I have a feeling the same could be said of the US.
I mentioned Tommy Robinson as the biggest rightiest right winger I knew of from the UK
I thought Nigel Farage was considered leftist, so I might not know much, I mainly know the healthcare comparison is main reason people say the US is far right
You have all this shit to say when it comes to "lE fAr RigHt" yet won't have this same resentment as communist demons screech and recoil at being faced with the same level of retribution normal people (some who subsequently became a accelerationist statistic) were subjected to for over a decade.
Fuck off, utterly and completely.
cheers bro
It's not really obvious just from the Hope Not Hate website what they do or how they operate tbh. But they are known to harass relatives, dox people, misquote and often make up quotes, label people Nazis. And are then often sited as sources for journalists from major media organisations as a way to outsource a libel claim to this somewhat shady organisation. Which seems to be their main purpose. (although it is coming under more scrutiny lately).
I'm not even sure we all agree on what is "the far right". I have seen a lot of people call centrists and centre-right people 'the far right'. Likewise I reckon a lot of these people being labeled as " far left" extemeists probably see themselves as centre-left or moderate or 'normal' etc.
You’ll make up whatever term gives you the ability to forcefully remove opposing ideas from civil discourse and if that doesn’t work you’ll go to plan b.
You’re the same type of person everyone is pointing out as being the problem.
People like you need to be told to shut the fuck up.
what "opposing ideas" are you referring to?
Listen. Theres no point in going back and forth with you. You’re a Bolshevist. You may not view yourself that way but that’s what you are.
You’ll keep throwing around words like “racist” or “bigot” or “misogynist.” In an attempt to gain favor or sympathy.
You people have been doing this shit for ten years. People have caught on and so none of it means anything anymore except to your in group and retarded boomers who are basically just at the point in their lives where flaunting their wealth and seeming like they’re on the good guys side is the important stuff to them.
You’ve lost favor in the public eye. You overplayed your hand. You don’t have the sympathy from masses that you had ten years ago.
Maybe you’re an actual person and not just a set of talking points that you’ll regurgitate on command when certain figures are being discussed. If that’s the case then you should probably start working as hard as you can to change your political and social views as quickly as humanly possible. Your mind has been infected by parasites and they’re reproducing in there. Soon you’ll be arguing in favor of child prostitution or that pedophilia is actually good and if people don’t agree they’re fascists and should be killed.
So if you have enough sense to not want to argue in favor of those things change your views now. Otherwise you will continue to be used by a propaganda machine to spread messages that the majority of people don’t believe in and never will ever again.
this is not a slippery slope dude. i can assure you no one on "the left" is going to be saying child prostitution or pedophilia are actually good. are you insane? btw your president is the one involved with that shit and trying to cover up evidence as we speak. again, i'm asking you which views are you talking about? anti-racism? you think the majority of people believe that black people shouldn't have equal rights to white people? or women shouldn't be treated equally to men? you should stop embarrassing yourself and shut the fuck up.
People on the left are already advocating for “MAPs” idiot. This is why I said there’s no point in going back and forth with you. Regardless of what is said or what evidence is shown you won’t believe it.
Don’t act like I have any control over who the president is or what happens with the files. Are you this dumb seriously? Israel picks our president. Probably the majority of heads of state throughout the world.
Yeah and I said I’m not going to provide anything to you. This isn’t a court case. This isn’t your HR job. I don’t care what you want. I don’t care about your stupid opinions.
I gave you a warning about the shape of things to come. I’m not feeding into your little shit fit.
This sure is embarrassing for one of us. But it’s definitely not me.
