No.16434
With recent events in mind, is it even worth debating with people who want you destroyed, who will gleefully call for your death, who will clap when you are shot dead right in front of your family?
It's not as though this is a recent thing, of course. It's been happening for a while. But for the longest time, excuses have been made. A desire to 'deescalate', to keep some modicum of decorum and compassion, even in spite of such obvious cruelty.
That clearly hasn't worked.
Things've only escalated.
How do you hold a dialogue with people who despise you so much they will not even condemn open murder on those guilty of nothing save speech alone?
Is the only solution to treat those who view you with hatred, regard you as their enemies, and long for your destruction, to hold the same view in return?
No.16437
>>16435If it were just thoughts I'd be inclined to agree.
But a man is dead, shot right in front of his family, and this isn't the first time it's happened.
Even leaving aside the violence, these're the same types who'll try to ruin your life over a political view, or even worse, some out of context clip. They'll work tirelessly to try to ruin you for nothing more than a joke, even. Try to make you unemployable, a pariah, unable to even keep a home without constant harassment.
I used to be apathetic. My political view used to be "I don't care" as a core outlook, just ignoring it and doing as I will.
But the last few years've been continually showing, such a position in modern society is impossible. Doing nothing when someone strikes you just leaves you beat and abused on the floor, end of the day.
No.16438
>>16437Realistically though, nobody has struck me. I'm not a public figure or a celebrity so things impacting those folks really don't matter to me.
Not that these assholes don't exist, but I'm still more likely to win the lottery than be affected by any of them.
No.16439
>>16438You don't need to be.
Plenty of those doxxed with their employers harassed weren't. Shit, some folk were forced to be, by the actions of these types.
Count Dankula is the easiest example. Albeit that's in the UK, but, still, man made a stupid joke, and they tried to come down as hard as they possibly could on him. Couldn't get a normal job again over it. He's tried.
Though even leaving all that aside, saying "Well I probably won't face the consequences" is a pretty shoddy reason to ignore an obvious problem.
No.16440
File: 1757725734427.jpeg (32.56 KB, 678x452, 3:2, images.jpeg) ImgOps Google
>>16434A not so friendly reminder that two children got murdered by an antisemitic and anticatholic political extremist at a Catholic school in the U.S. Midwest, right before the current political debate that you're wallowing in, and as a baptized and confirmed Catholic individual of Jewish ancestry also from the U.S. Midwest I'm still mouring them.
I wish you guys could give 0.01% of the time, money, resources, and the like that you're spending now on this political dick-waving contest to these kids and their families. I know that you don't care. Not at all. Since it doesn't fit your narrative. But I so wish that you cared. Still.
We've had over twenty years of racially and religiously motivated violent extremism aimed at Americans now. Maybe this should stop. It would be nice.
No.16441
File: 1757726228153.jpg (226.35 KB, 1800x1350, 4:3, 22xp-dcvictims-mobileMaste….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>16434>>16440And here's the young Jewish couple that got executed in front of the Jewish Museum in May before that other incident that I just mentioned. It would be nice if they deserved sympathy as well. It would nice if the inherent dignity and value of their lives received some respect.
I know that you don't care. And that nothing can make you care. But you should. You really should.
Those children could've been me, growing up. I could've been one of this couple too, right now. Yeah.
No.16442
>>16440>>16441I agree those two instances are disgusting. I don't really get your point.
These aren't things perpetrated by the right.
The first one you reference was done by a transgender woman.
The second one, in turn, some far-lefty who chanted "Free Palestine" as he was taken away.
I would posit these are two great examples of what I am talking about.
How the left's rhetoric has resulted in more and more violence, which far too many cheer on.
No.16443
>>16442How are you so pathologically not able to understand that American racial and religious minorities, such as myself, are in severe danger of violent attack daily and have been for decades? And that it's getting worse and worse?
Why the fuck don't you care about our lives? What the fuck is wrong with your soul? With your mind?
Do you really not understand the damage that's done when I have to walk through a police escort to go into a synagogue? Into an LGBT community center? Into a Catholic church?
Why the fuck can't you have empathy for your fellow man?
You guys think that there are roving gangs of Jews, of gay people, of Catholics, of disabled people, and other minorities out to 'get you'. That we're trying to violently eliminate your families. That we're trying to kill your freedoms. That we're 'destroying America'. And so on.
We're not. We're just not. I know that you guys think that I killed Charlie Kirk in some sense, that American minorities are collectively responsible for this, and that there needs to be revenge upon me. Upon us.
It's just not true. And it's a horrifying kind of reversal. We're not killers. We're the ones GETTING FUCKING KILLED.
(Please show civility and respect towards other users, towards their posts, and towards their threads;) No.16444
https://abc7chicago.com/post/chicago-antisemitism-hearing-today-jewish-leaders-speak-ahead-cchr-rising-threats-city/17771735/This was literally just this Monday.
Another story that you guys have succeeded in burying, because it doesn't fit your narrative about evil minorities trying to destroy the American way of life.
No.16447
https://www.kqed.org/news/12044922/man-charged-with-hate-crime-in-violent-attack-in-sfs-marina-districtThis too.
But, of course, we racial and religious minorities are clearly the 'bad guys' who're trying to 'destroy America', I guess?
No.16448
I'm going to ask the my own questions right back. This what I've wondered for literally years and years now:
With recent events in mind, is it even worth debating with people who want you destroyed, who will gleefully call for your death, who will clap when you are shot dead right in front of your family?
It's not as though this is a recent thing, of course. It's been happening for a while. But for the longest time, excuses have been made. A desire to 'deescalate', to keep some modicum of decorum and compassion, even in spite of such obvious cruelty.
That clearly hasn't worked.
Things have only escalated.
How do you hold a dialogue with people who despise you so much they will not even condemn open murder on those guilty of nothing?
Save being Jewish? Being gay? Being disabled? Being Catholic? Being something else that they find to be so repulsive due to their own ideological extremism?
Is the only solution to treat those who view you with hatred, regard you as their enemies, and long for your destruction, to hold the same view in return?
Individuals like the OP, like Charming Horse, want people like me dead. And there's nothing that I can really do about it. So, well, what now? Charlie Kirk's horrific assassination is an incident that's openly being used as an excuse by numerous individuals right now as justification for my death as well as many others 'for revenge'... I guess that's just it? I accept that fate is fate and destiny is destiny?
No.16449
>>16440>>16441>>16444>>16445>>16447So this is a big clump of references to a lot of other murders, which doesn't really count as a response to the OP. Like I get that you are angry at the OP, I think that comes through, but these have nothing to do with the actual question, which is just a valid question to ask. This is not a thread about whether actually people
did deserve to get shot and die and whether it's okay to laugh at them. That's not what we're talking about here.
>>16448Here you've just literally posted the OP again, which again is built on this like false idea of what the thread is about? The thread is not about attacking the OP, or explaining how the other side is also being murdered. Really barring the interview video condeming "shit leftists" (which also doesn't belong on the board, getting to that one in a moment), the post is entirely neutral on who is posting it, and you could just answer in solidarity. "I am also someone that people would murder and then laugh about, and here is what I would do about it."
>>16443But this is the real crossed line. After you posted two instances of murder, someone said "Yeah, that's fucked up, you shouldn't murder." and you just absolutely went off on them and called them out for lack of empathy. Which is bizarre on its own, but even less appropriate for the board than the other posts, which could at least maybe be reasonable in some other hypothetical thread.
Also we can still tell who you are and you're still permabanned from the board, specifically because all of your posts are these dramatic rants against strawmen that had no board contextual trigger.
So...still banned, please stop posting.
No.16452
>>16451If I could snag a clip of just the first bit and not the latter gloating portion, it probably would've been better. Though alas, I've not the ability to edit videos so cleanly.
I think he does a good job of describing the issue I am speaking of, though. Especially with the bit on how far they'll go to outright ruin your life, do all they can to destroy you, whilst holding their own to a separate standard.
Though I can understand how the superficial aspect of emotive language would get in the way of that, and as said the later half is a bit gloaty.
>>16446The alternative seems to come to pass regardless, as it currently stands, though.
That's the larger trouble.
That by engaging with these ideas and people, all that seems to result is an escalation in the attempt to destroy you.
To be fair, I don't know of a better method to combat it, bar calling out such behavior and labeling it evil... But I don't really see that changing it. I suppose the current bit of reversing the weapon of cancel culture is something. And maybe that's the solution. But debate itself doesn't seem to work, as fundamentally, you only seem to end up debating your own principles and values against those who will use it against you as a means to destroy you using them as a shield...
To be quite honest, my outlook on politics had gotten bleaker and bleaker as of late. This had only added to it.
No.16453
File: 1757793511556.jpg (1.17 MB, 1200x1539, 400:513, Tumblr_l_53186524802990.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
There's so much hypocrisy coming from OP here it's ridiculous.
Like it's really disengenuous to act like having the freedom of expression implies protection from social consequences like being 'cancelled' on social media.
It's also disengenuous as hell to think there's no moral differences between political opinions or positions. There's a huge difference between 'In my opinion I think we need higher taxes on the top 10% of earners' and 'In my opinion all these people I'm afraid of should have fewer rights than me or be exterminated'. It's really fucking dishonest to pretend like those target aren't also feared as potential tyrants precisely because of those opinions
No.16454
File: 1757793956673.jpg (2.23 MB, 1297x1704, 1297:1704, Tumblr_l_53221888056206.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
Also Tyler Robinson turned out to be a groyper. Charlie Kirk was murdered by someone who probably thought kirk wasn't extreme enough.
So OP can pretend to be neutral all they want but in the end it's just cowardly denial, as usual
No.16455
>>16454This is simply a lie. One that seems to have come about purely because of his race and gender, to be quite frank.
The rounds had explicitly anti fascist messages on them, and he's been described by those who knew him as left wing.
>>16453>Like it's really disengenuous to act like having the freedom of expression implies protection from social consequences like being 'cancelled' on social media. That's not at all what's being suggested.
Which makes this post all the more hillarious; you're trying to claim I am being dishonest and disingenuous, whilst fully engaging in exactly the same behavior, with no sense of the irony.
>There's a huge difference between 'In my opinion I think we need higher taxes on the top 10% of earners' and 'In my opinion all these people I'm afraid of should have fewer rights than me or be exterminated'.Even if we assume that's actually the position held by Charlie Kirk (it isn't), that's still a mile away from something that ought justify outright murder.
But then you've already expressed your support for the killing, so it's no surprise you'd take this stance.
Fundamentally, you're exactly the type of person I was talking about in the OP.
No.16457
File: 1757797036628.jpg (28.36 KB, 512x507, 512:507, FB_IMG_1757795960365.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>16455>That's not at all what's being suggested.>Which makes this post all the more hillarious; you're trying to claim I am being dishonest and disingenuous, whilst fully engaging in exactly the same behavior, with no sense of the irony.But it is what you're doing. You're passing them off as just 'opinions' and that they're targeted for without any reference to the content of those opiniins. It's playing dumb
No.16458
>>16456I am aware of this cheap deflection, yes.
These are not the markings I was referring to.
Good try, though. Well, not really, it's something that was pretty obviously debunked within a couple of hours, but, considering how little you have to work with in order to desperately pretend this guy's not actually one of yours following the same sort of rhetoric you espouse here on /townhall/ at a regular basis... I suppose it's about all you could do.
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/internet/charlie-kirk-shooting-suspect-fascism-memes-bullets-tyler-robinson-rcna230950>>16457>But it is what you're doing.No, it's not.
I am not at all suggesting freedom of expression protects from social consequences.
That is obviously untrue.
It obviously doesn't.
There was a bit of decorum, of courtesy when such things were much more good-faith that such disagreements did not result in attacks to one's personal life which has nothing to do with one's political views. But even then, that's not a matter of 'protection'.
But of course, you know all this. This is why I rightly call you dishonest here.
Not that it will matter. To you, I am an enemy that needs destroying.
>You're passing them off as just 'opinions' and that they're targeted for without any reference to the content of those opiniins.I am passing them off as opinions... which you directly admit in this very sentence are, indeed, opinions...
This is exactly the sort of thing I am talking about.
Is there any point at all in this debate?
Is it even slightly productive?
It's just perpetual dishonesty, obfuscation, and dodging around, because at the end of the day, all that matters to you is the destruction of an enemy...
No.16459
File: 1757798498099.jpg (105.89 KB, 768x960, 4:5, FB_IMG_1757618567394.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>16455>Even if we assume that's actually the position held by Charlie Kirk (it isn't), that's still a mile away from something that ought justify outright murder.Not too far from what he believed and what he advocated for.
But, the point I was making was following my previous one in this thread and many many many other threads on this board is that it's disengenuous, as in, 'playing dumb' to act like there is no qualitative differences between political opinions and their logical implications.
And again, it doesn't justify the murder, but acting like it's at all surprising that people whose most basic rights are being advocated against by the right would in turn defend themselves with violence. That it's illegal or wrong isn't going to stop that sort of thing,
especially right now when you've got an administration that doesn't seem to give a shit about the constitution that guarantees those rights or any of the checks on power written into that constitution. As an American raised in a conservative family in Texas to revere heroes who used violence to win and protect those rights, I'm personally willing to shed blood to
keep those rights, I'm sure a lot of political violence is rooted in that attitude for a lot of Americans. It's kinda pathetic to be an American and pretend like that violence isn't a deeply rooted part of our culture and mythology. People like you are just too cowardly to acknowledge that fact in situations like this but probably would embrace violence to fight off a radical leftist takeover.
No.16460
>>16459I am aware that dishonest people've taken a number of out-of-context snippets, and ran with them.
It's pretty scummy, but, as I said, it's pretty much standard practice from the left.
>' to act like there is no qualitative differences between political opinions and their logical implications. Nobody's doing that.
>, but acting like it's at all surprising that people whose most basic rights are being advocated against by the right would in turn defend themselves with violence. The difference between the left and the right in this regard is, the left will murder you for simply speaking a viewpoint.
The right will simply state that when you try, they will defend themselves.
A favorite line is "Come and try" from the 2A community. "Shut up and stack up" is another good one. The simple meaning being rather obvious; When you try, we will shoot your doorkickers.
We won't shoot you simply for saying "We should forcibly remove your right to defend yourself".
The left doesn't wait. And worse still, they act on absurd disingenuous fabrications as we see within your image; Things other people claim about us. Not our actual beliefs.
If we simply went off of what people like yourself assume about me, given the myriad of things said, it would be "no surprise" if say Elegant Duck showed up to my house tomorrow with a revolver and shot me in the gut.
But the irony at play here is, I am about as die-hard on rights as one can get. Yet, the narrative amongst those on the left here is, I am sat right next to Adolf Hitler.
In this very thread, Squid has expressed a "wrongness" with my very soul, that I don't care about the lives of jews, and that I explicitly want them dead. Them, personally, at that, not even a nebulous generalized group.
When the left freely makes up narratives about their enemies, fabricating whole-cloth a set of ideals and beliefs those enemies never in fact held, it seems to me most
anyone would fit that "unsurprising" result of some lunatic shooting them dead.
No.16462
File: 1757800395149.png (117.35 KB, 907x1259, 907:1259, Screenshot_2025-09-13_17-4….png) ImgOps Google
>>16459>"He ... endorsed having [gay people] put to death" (from the image)ChatGPT looked and found no credible evidence for that. And moreover, it found the likely source of that claim and showed why it is mistaken: Kirk was quoting
without endorsement a verse from Leviticus, in order to argue how the Bible is quoted selectively (“cherry-picking”).
See also:
https://www.factcheck.org/2025/09/viral-claims-about-charlie-kirks-words/ No.16463
https://youtu.be/rKQ1Y8-j2lE?si=_zqHamTiXKUHNtor>>16458>>16460>Nobody's doing that.Yes, you
are like right in this post and in the OP. You keeps framing it as
just opinions.
You can scream about people reacting with violence over opinions all day but it's not going to change that if the content of that opinion is advocating for stripping rights or citizenship or someone's right to vote, it's going to attract violence eventually,
especially when people are scared.
It's fucking disgusting how much you right-wing narcissist are just in denial of that fact. Of all facts you're in denial of about how people work apparently.
You buy into this childish narrative that one side is always good and the otherside always evil. Cowardly refusing to acknowledge that a lot of people are really fucking scared about the possibility that Trump will try and strip their civil rights or one of Trump's supporters will attack or kill them or try to turn them into ICE even if they're not an immigrant.
MAGA is too fucking cowardly to acknowledge that they come off as would be tyrants to a lot of Americans and play the fucking victim over that rather than engaging in serious introspection.
(Please show civility and respect towards other users, towards their posts, and towards their threads;) No.16464
>>16463>You keeps framing it as just opinions.Again; You yourself explicitly stated it was opinions.
I understand you disagree with the content of the opinions, but that doesn't change the fact they're opinions - not actions.
>It's fucking disgusting how much you right-wing narcissist are just in denial of that fact.I haven't denied any fact at play here.
I fully agree with you that the left have been radicalized to the point they will straight up murder you in front of your children over opinions.
>You buy into this childish narrative that one side is always good and the otherside always evilThe irony here is, for a damn long time, I didn't.
It was the constant rhetoric from people like yourself, who insist I am some kind of monster, and give perpetual excuses when those like me are destroyed or outright killed, that made me realize that 'good faith' I had clinged to was long since gone.
Even then, "evil" and "misguided" are different things. Albeit, I consider the actions rather obviously evil.
>Cowardly refusing to acknowledge that a lot of people are really fucking scaredParanoia because of the left wing narrative radicalizing people to violence is the problem.
I am not refusing to acknowledge that fear the left've cultivated.
I am well aware of it.
I am simply in opposition to it, and likewise regard those who'd commit violence over opinions as the lowest of the lowest scum.
> or one of Trump's supporters will attack or kill themA threat that only increases when you murder in cold blood a man who tries to TALK to you.
>MAGA is too fucking cowardly to acknowledge that they come off as would be tyrants to a lot of AmericansAgain; I am well aware of the left's narrative.
I am well aware how the left's narratives would shape view.
I have already pointed to how people, here, in this very thread view me.
I am sure some people here, on this very website, because of those narratives would be 'afraid' of me.
They may even seek violence on me.
To be frank, it is why I would never, ever, post any kind of personal information on this site.
I just do not think that is right, in any way, shape, or form.
I think that is a horrible, horrible thing.
No.16465
File: 1757839912497.jpg (2.23 MB, 1297x1704, 1297:1704, Tumblr_l_53221888056206.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>16464Are you just incapable of thinking about consequences? That 'left wing narrative' is a
consequence of hateful right-wing rhetoric. That's my point. I'm stating the facts. People who recognize when you're lying about them to demonize you to large numbers of people are going to be
scared of you turning people against you. He reaped what he'd sown. Regardless of the fact that it was wrong, it was a
completely predictable consequence of demonizing minorities and that are already feeling threatened by the powers that be. In fact I'm generally furious that this happened because it's going to be a pretext for civil war. Please stop playing dumb. Just cause violence is wrong doesn't mean one is morally inculpable for inciting it, and as far as I'm concerned, that moral culpability extends to those who inspire it with lies.
And it's not like I wasn't already
deeply familiar with that hateful rhetoric, I grew up hearing most of that bullshit from family,
long before MAGA. You act like my perspective on this is somehow
not a product of my own thoughts and decades of experiences with that hateful rhetoric and other hateful rhetoric and eventually seeing through it all on my own.
No.16466
>>16465>That 'left wing narrative' is a consequence of hateful right-wing rhetoric.In the sense that the left will twist it into the worst possible interpretation, rip it away from context, ignore any attempt to clarify, and dismiss the rest whole cloth, sure. The left wing narrative is the result of right wing rhetoric being warped by those who want to destroy them in every way possible, I agree.
>People who recognize when you're lying about them to demonize you to large numbers of people are going to be scared of you turning people against you.Like the left do to the right regularly, and has been done explicitly to Charlie Kirk?
I suppose you may be right. Maybe folk on the right ought follow the left's example, and start shooting folk on the left.
Personally I think that's a rather terrible idea, but, you seem to like to craft excuses for it one way, so, I don't see how you could condemn it the opposite direction.
>I grew up hearing most of that bullshit from family, long before MAGAI am well aware of your penchant for using your own family as a shield to dodge critique.
Likewise I am aware your views come from your own thoughts:
You seem to have the mistaken impression I do not know who you are.
You are not subtle.
You are not, frankly, trying to hide it in the first place.
I am well aware of your worldview. Hell, you, personally, are exactly the sort of person I am speaking of here.
After all, you've made it very clear in the past numerous times I am guilty of this same supposed "hateful" rhetoric that makes it so reasonable for those like myself to be shot in cold blood for no more than words.
No.16467
File: 1757876764849.jpg (1.12 MB, 2048x2633, 2048:2633, Tumblr_l_157064390385812.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>16466>>16466>In the sense that the left will twist it into the worst possible interpretation, rip it away from context, ignore any attempt to clarify, and dismiss the rest whole cloth, sure. The left wing narrative is the result of right wing rhetoric being warped by those who want to destroy them in every way possible, I agree.> am well aware of your penchant for using your own family as a shield to dodge critique.It's funny that you call showing a deep familiarity with right-wing views and conservatism in general "dodging critique" when I would point out why you're assumptions of me and your accusations of buying into some leftists narrative presented to me and not understanding right-wing perspectives.
>>16466>Personally I think that's a rather terrible idea, but, you seem to like to craft excuses for it one way, so, I don't see how you could condemn it the opposite direction.>Personally I think that's a rather terrible idea, but, you seem to like to craft excuses for it one way, so, I don't see how you could condemn it the opposite direction.>excusesNot, what I'm doing here. I'm explaining and people cowardly incapable of confronting the reality that people like Kirk and other right-wing media figures spreading lies at stoking fears of minorities are going to hurt or endanger the lives of those minorities who inevitably will have to deal with those now made afraid of them.
That doesn't justify the violence but makes it perfectly understandable why it happened and a lot of the right will just play absolutely fucking dumb about the possibille consequences of inspiring fear and hatred for other Americans and disgustingly enough act like they haven't been doing so for decades all over a special little media ecosystem all their own. It's fucking cowardly. All while putting all the blame on people pointing it out for what it is.
No.16470
>>16452Politics are not great right now. We may just be reaching a peak in the usual waves of political violence. There's a variety of causes and culprits, but our principles and values are getting more and more opposed to each other as time goes on. And the more extreme one's position, the more likely someone is to think that even a peaceful speech is ultimately going to lead to some level of violence, or at the very least severe negative impacts on society and the individuals living in it.
I don't actually know much about Charlie Kirk. I have vague memories of hearing him say things and not liking them. I could argue that you could avoid being assassinated simply by keeping your head down and not trying to spread any messages at all, but there are plenty of instances already given in this thread where that isn't really the case. People storming churches, or schools, or just grocery stores and movie theatres in order to kill people they see as a threat or problem is something that may never go away and that you may never truly be safe from.
The best solution we could try to give as a society is to make sure we
don't view each other as threats or problems, which is also going to be very difficult, because our society has a lot of problems and people like to blame those problems on threats. Threats can be quickly solved with violence, whereas problems are probably a lot more complicated, and most people aren't ready to try to figure that out.
I think ultimately we're just left with the fact that there are people willing or eager to resort to violence, as its an easy solution, and one somewhat innate to the animal kingdom in general. And it only takes one of those people to do one or more murders that makes the news and forces everyone to think about what we can do to prevent murder. I don't think we know a whole lot about Kirk's killer yet, a lot of early rumors are being debunked, but I've as of yet heard nothing about him working with any accomplice.
Unless you want to count influencers, and then the answer to preventing assassinations is to shut down influencers, which...is what the killer was doing.
No.16471
File: 1757882128822.jpg (50.49 KB, 678x854, 339:427, Anti nun.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>is it even worth debating with people who want you destroyed, who will gleefully call for your death, who will clap when you are shot dead right in front of your family?
Yes. It is always worth discussion.
No.16474
File: 1757884199617.jpg (2.23 MB, 1297x1704, 1297:1704, Tumblr_l_53221888056206.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>16468Y'all long abandoned civil debate on this board years ago when you decided that 'civility' was only superficial.
For instance, their is nothing 'civil' about disengenuous leading 'have you stopped beating your wife today' sort of leading questions in OPs here that just spread hateful bullshit about political opponents by treating them like 'facts' to 'just ask questions' about, which is totally fine and civil thing to do if they
act politely I guess 🤷♀️ considering how many years that's been going on on this board.
No.16476
> I would point out why you're assumptions of me and your accusations of buying into some leftists narrative presented to me and not understanding right-wing perspectivesIt's not an assumption. You and I have talked before. I am well aware of your beliefs, and even besides that, when you post such nonsense as the picture in
>>16459 it's abundantly clear you're engaged in exactly the kind of bad-faith behavior I've spoken of when it comes to your political opponents.
This is not some "assumption" about you.
It is observable fact.
>That doesn't justify the violence but makes it perfectly understandable why it happened That's rather my point. Your stance is it is reasonable. A rational response. Something that makes sense.
Yet, I am quite certain that if I responded as you suggest to your own lies about me, your own stoking of fears of those like me, and so on, suddenly you'd flip, and insist no, violence is not the sensible response.
No.16478
>>16474> 'have you stopped beating your wife today' You've spent the entire thread here so far defending the actions here. Making case for it being an entirely rational, sensible thing to do, and that really it's Charlie's own fault his blood splattered over his daughter's face, because obviously this political moderate is so horrible, so hateful, he's going to put people who listen in fear for their life.
You can hardly cry "leading question" when you fully accept where that question leads, and argue that, no no, she had it coming, she shouldn't have disobeyed me if she didn't want to get beat.
>OPs here that just spread hateful bullshitSee, this is exactly why I don't buy your narrative here.
Because even if we accept violence is the sane response to "hateful" rhetoric, you fundamentally believe everything you disagree with is "hateful".
You've said as much to me many times before in the past, and here it is again.
So if someone shoots me dead in the street, you're gonna say "well, he really brought it on himself with all his hateful bullshit. "
It's obvious crap. And thankfully, it's shit most folk can clearly see through.
Charlie Kirk was not far right. He wasn't an extremist. He was widely critiqued for how soft he was on so much.
So people like myself can very easily see themselves in his shoes.
They can very easily see how those things they give voice to online or otherwise will be called "hateful" by people who would outright murder them in front of their family.
No.16480
File: 1757896301834.jpg (1.12 MB, 2048x2633, 2048:2633, Tumblr_l_157064390385812.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>16476>This is not some "assumption" about you.>It is observable fact.Jesus dude, you're completely dodging the point I was making rather blatantly here. My understanding of the right-wing worldviews that kirk and many other espoused is based on my experiences with those very same narratives decades before, and having
long seen through them for the bullshit they are. Kirk hadn't said anything I hadn't heard decades ago back home in Texas. And that meme was just a small sample of the kind of stuff that I've heard in person from people in real life and heard Kirk espouse while acting totally polite about it. Also, all of that is the kind of stuff that can and has a history of inspiring and justifying violence. Just because
you wouldn't doesn't mean
no one would.
>>16476>That's rather my point. Your stance is it is reasonable. A rational response. Something that makes sense.Not what I said at all you dishonest asshole. I
actually said the opposite, it's
fear. Demagogues like Kirk and others pretending to be moderates via superficial performances of civility, spread hate and fear, and then we have to watch out for those fearful and hateful of us around us, it makes
us paranoid to know that the kind of hateful transphobic bullshit that the right, including people like Kirk, that they have been spreading since the first trump term, could be inspiring to potentially anyone around us at worst to act violently, or far more often, tearing apart families. This bullshit ruins lives. People aren't going to react rationally to having their friends and loved one's turned against them by a trained media figure.
What I'm saying is quit playing dumb about how this is just a basic fact of human psychology.
No.16481
>>16480>you're completely dodging the point I was makingI've already accepted it, multiple times here. I am well aware you're using past experiences to make presuppositions of your political enemies, in this instance to justify violence against them.
This isn't anything new.
>And that meme was just a small sample of the kind of stuff that I've heard in person from people in real life and heard Kirk espouseAnd it's obvious bullshit.
It's not even out of context quotes, because it isn't even a quote in the first place
But you still buy it completely, because Kirk is a political enemy of yours.
Because being a political enemy of yours warrants the worst possible treatment, the worst assumptions, the outright fabrication of things to demonize them.
Once again; You're the prime example of exactly the kind of person I am talking about in this thread.
>Also, all of that is the kind of stuff that can and has a history of inspiring and justifying violence. And yours has directly resulted in a man murdered in front of his family.
Not for the first time, no doubt not for the last.
This is what you fail to reconcile with.
Your lies, yes outright I will call them lies, of your political opponents creates that "fear".
Not their actual words. Not their actual positions.
Your fabrications.
Because you can't help but demonize the right.
No.16482
File: 1757899248386.png (343.28 KB, 744x802, 372:401, G0scWKMX0AAFTpB.png) ImgOps Google
>>16480>Not what I said at all you dishonest asshole.You literally described it as "defending themselves".
>>16459>"people whose most basic rights are being advocated against by the right would in turn defend themselves with violence. "You conflated it to armed resistance against state agents, and then
insulted me for opposing it.
>"People like you are just too cowardly to acknowledge that fact in situations like this but probably would embrace violence to fight off a radical leftist takeover"You gave an entire spiel on how I'm a disgusting right-wing narcissist for calling this shit out, that we need to stop "playing the victim" when leftists literally murder someone who is NOT in power, NOT creating policy, NOT passing law, and is instead just simply
TALKING.
>>16463>"MAGA is too fucking cowardly to acknowledge that they come off as would be tyrants to a lot of Americans and play the fucking victim over that rather than engaging in serious introspection."You explicitly blamed Kirk for getting shot. Claimed he was morally culpable for spreading "lies", something again you yourself have explicitly done in regards to Kirk and certainly myself in the past.
>>16465>"He reaped what he'd sown.">Just cause violence is wrong doesn't mean one is morally inculpable for inciting it, and as far as I'm concerned, that moral culpability extends to those who inspire it with lies. "You've explicitly said that the violence committed, shooting him in the neck right in front of his young daughter, was "perfectly understandable". Calling the right cowardly, saying they're somehow trying to shift the blame when they point out that the same rhetoric that YOU YOURSELF ENGAGE IN literally got someone killed.
>>16467>"That doesn't justify the violence but makes it perfectly understandable why it happened">" It's fucking cowardly. All while putting all the blame on people pointing it out for what it is."You'll have to excuse me if I refuse to play your shitty little game and pretend you totally AREN'T spending all your time here in this thread defending the violence committed as something entirely reasonable.
>What I'm saying is quit playing dumb about how this is just a basic fact of human psychology.I agree.
My qualm is that it's been created, encouraged, and altogether built up by people like yourself.
People who's tune would change in an instant if it happened to them.
No.16483
File: 1757900058402.png (221.15 KB, 1200x1043, 1200:1043, 1623729274669.png) ImgOps Google
The fundamental problem at play gage is, most everyone on the right can easily see themselves in the shoes of Charlie Kirk.
Because those of us are capable of listening to what he actually says, and contrasting that with the narrative the left pushes.
More than that; We've experienced it, personally.
We've had discussions, arguments, disagreement, and so on with the same sorts of people like Cardinal here.
We know that claim about "hateful rhetoric" is something they'll throw around to anyone.
We've experienced it ourselves.
So when you have someone like Kirk murdered, and you're told "Well yeah, it's his own fault for saying such hateful bigoted things!"... We all know that could so, so very easily, be used on us, too. Despite not being hateful, that's the claim that'll inevitably be made.
Not only made, but spread. Shared to others.
It's why I ask the question in the OP. Because despite my engaging in it, I wonder if there's any point in debating with Andrea here about this.
If I get shot in some alley by some crazy lefty who somehow managed to track me down, why wouldn't she say the exact same thing as she did about Kirk, and blame it all on me and my "hateful" rhetoric?
And if that's the standard... What's the point?
We're never going to come to terms. And it's not like refusing to stoop to their level is going to change anything. That weakness is what's exploited. So, what's the solution? Do we switch to the same standard as they field? How will that end?
I don't want to say "killing eachother is the only way to solve this", but fuck man, when one side wants to destroy you, I'm honestly struggling to find a way out but destroy them first...
No.16484
File: 1757901389722.png (885.09 KB, 1600x900, 16:9, teletees_1757634614128.png) ImgOps Google
People who have no argument in the public debate resort to violence - terrorism designed to silence the opposition since they can't argue against it.
Those who are too cowardly to perpetrate the violence themselves engage in stochastic terrorism.
Encouraging others to engage violently on their behalf. "I didn't pull the trigger" while celebrating the person who did. Pushing others to do the same. Providing post-hoc justifications to encourage the next act of political violence. Or trying to "win" the debate by silencing the person who's speaking via cancellation. Throwing a rock. Or slinging a bike lock. Or camping outside a person's house to let them know "I know where you live, and can harm you any time I want." Intimidation. Threats. Fabrications. Lies.
Cowardice.
Killing Kirk doesn't advance Leftist delusions. It only makes the opposition against the delusions stronger.
Kirk was an annoying thorn in your side that you had no answer for. And you've all succeeded in making him more powerful in death through martyrdom. Congratulations - you played yourself.
