I’ll say it, don’t decry political violence, it should just be done to an elected official or fascist leader. If all else fails democratically, that’s your duty.
But not against a private citizen. I would much have preferred to have heard Charlie Kirk died of auto erotic asphixiation, while wearing a Wonder Woman costume and jerking off to gay porn. He was a dirtbag, and I’m glad hes gone but this means his message will live on
Sorry about wording, him being assassinated, instead of dying shamefully will make his followers treat him like a martyr and others will continue his message of hate.
Hello from 12 hours later. Now that it’s out that the shooter was even farther right than Kirk, does martyrdom still work? Loads of far right types have dirty deleted their previous calls for civil war.
I can’t seem to find any definitive answer on his political leanings, seems he was all over the place. I know he was from a MAGA family but that doesn’t mean he is MAGA, he had the most jumbled messages on the bullets.
This is how I feel too. Technically, he was exercising a right of free speech. And he absolutely deserved a good punch, but he didn’t deserve to be killed for it.
If it had been someone in power who had a direct hand in the cruelty they are causing immigrants and other struggling communities, I would feel much differently about the situation.
I know for many that seems like a dumb distinction, but when it comes to something as important as free speech, I think it does matter.
The US version of “free speech” is broken. It’s not about the freedom to express yourself or share thoughts and ideas, it’s about being able to harm, vilify, slander, and control others with impunity. Most other countries with freedom of expression have corrected this oversight, and hate speech, slander, libel and the like are not tolerated. Or less tolerated, at least. The US has the intentionally broken, abusive neoliberal version of this. Outright lying about others is allowed in the US, and because the only remedy is civil instead of criminal, it naturally favors those with wealth and power.
I’ll say it, don’t decry political violence, it should just be done to an elected official or fascist leader. If all else fails democratically, that’s your duty. But not against a private citizen. I would much have preferred to have heard Charlie Kirk died of auto erotic asphixiation, while wearing a Wonder Woman costume and jerking off to gay porn. He was a dirtbag, and I’m glad hes gone but this means his message will live on
Wait, how does being a private citizen mean his message will live on?
Sorry about wording, him being assassinated, instead of dying shamefully will make his followers treat him like a martyr and others will continue his message of hate.
Hello from 12 hours later. Now that it’s out that the shooter was even farther right than Kirk, does martyrdom still work? Loads of far right types have dirty deleted their previous calls for civil war.
I can’t seem to find any definitive answer on his political leanings, seems he was all over the place. I know he was from a MAGA family but that doesn’t mean he is MAGA, he had the most jumbled messages on the bullets.
People are now saying he’s a groyper. Those guys are all about trolling. The jumbled messages make perfect sense in that light.
First I ever heard of a gyroper, I hate 2025
Me too actually. Even though I was aware of these people (4chan, pepe memes, incels etc) for a long time, I’d never heard the term groyper.
This is how I feel too. Technically, he was exercising a right of free speech. And he absolutely deserved a good punch, but he didn’t deserve to be killed for it.
If it had been someone in power who had a direct hand in the cruelty they are causing immigrants and other struggling communities, I would feel much differently about the situation.
I know for many that seems like a dumb distinction, but when it comes to something as important as free speech, I think it does matter.
The US version of “free speech” is broken. It’s not about the freedom to express yourself or share thoughts and ideas, it’s about being able to harm, vilify, slander, and control others with impunity. Most other countries with freedom of expression have corrected this oversight, and hate speech, slander, libel and the like are not tolerated. Or less tolerated, at least. The US has the intentionally broken, abusive neoliberal version of this. Outright lying about others is allowed in the US, and because the only remedy is civil instead of criminal, it naturally favors those with wealth and power.
I don’t disagree that it needs to be fixed. My concern is that people who have power now are labeling things like “Free Palestine” as hate speech.
The US can’t even figure out how to identify lies. Those who are in power decide what is true and that can be scary.