And this connects to the context you're replying to in some way? How?
Discussion
You brought up Kirk engaged in group violence. That is not a thing.
It's when a group of creatures (in this case people) perpetrate violence together. Try to keep up
Again, that is not a thing. Be specific, what exact act has Kirk done that could be considered violence? If you cannot state that, he has not committed any violence. If you’re claiming he’s a member of a “group” you have to define the members of the group and prove how each of them has committed violence. If you cannot, your claim has no merit.
Group: Nazis
Exact acts: voting, sending dollars, etc.
Am I gonna have to repeat this again?
Lmao have a good day man, I hope you think hard about what you’re attributing to a “group” and how you define them. Make sure it’s not an idea someone else put in your head.
Kids in Gaza are walled in and starving.
Charlie Kirk supported that, with words and also materially with actions.
That's what I call being a Nazi / a member of the Nazi group.
By that definition hamas would also be part of this group. They are walling in and starving (stealing food aid) from civilians. Would they be nazis too?
Any members of Hamas participating in walling in children and starving them are Nazis. Yes.
Unlike the Israeli authorities, I have no evidence that includes many, if any, members of Hamas.
😉👌
Weird time to post those emoji you fucking Nazi creep
Now I’m a nazi? Look at this group definition widening even further… not a problem at all. Re-evaluate your mental models. Make sure it’s not a demonic idea proliferating with your consent.
Humans are the ones with dangerous ideas, not demons.
Anyway, re-evaluating 👀