Merged Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University event. / Charlie Kirk Shot And Killed

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'm not ignoring it. But I'm also not ignoring that we had a pretty consistent and vehement refrain from Democrats over the last decade demonizing and dehumanizing conservatives and Republicans, calling them all fascists and nazis, and calling it an existential threat, and even implying that a violent uprising might be the only way to address the evil fascist nazis.

Both houses are ◊◊◊◊◊◊. And both are fomenting a civil war.

You have to exaggerate the POV of the Democrats to make your post true. [Assuming you meant something different from "vehement refrain from Democrats". Or maybe it's me not understanding how you parsed that sentence.]

 

[Emily's Cat]

Core characteristics of fascism

• Dictatorial leadership: The government is led by a single authoritarian leader who claims to represent the will of the nation.

We don't have a dictator in the US. And every single president we've ever had has claimed to represent the will of the nation.

• Centralized autocracy: Power is heavily concentrated at the center, leaving little or no room for representative democracy or other liberal government practices.

We still seem to have a pretty healthy representative democracy, with both major parties well represented throughout all levels of our governing apparatus. Indeed, it looks like about half the states in the union have Democratic governors. The House is 49% Democrats, the Senate is 47% Democrats.

• Ultranationalism: The movement prioritizes the nation above all else, often relying on a mythic or imagined historical past and a narrative of national decline.

I don't see this happening. Efforts to prioritize US interests over foreign interests don't seem to meet the standard of ultranationalism in my mind... if they did, then I suppose FDR was ultranationalistic.

• Militarism and violence: Fascism glorifies military strength and views violence as a legitimate and even purifying tool for achieving national goals.

I suppose you could make an argument that deploying the national guard to some areas might be considered militarism. I don't see that violence is being glorified or used as a purifying tool.

• Suppression of opposition: Opposing political parties, labor unions, and other dissenting groups are forcibly repressed to remove any challenge to the one-party state.

Yeah, this doesn't seem to be happening.

• Scapegoating: Fascist movements often rely on the demonization of internal or external "others," such as ethnic or religious minorities, immigrants, or political opponents, to unify the population.

Illegal entrants to the US has been a problem for a long time. And other than illegal immigration, this doesn't seem to be an emphasis. I'm sure you'll tell me that I'm missing something.

• Social hierarchy: Fascism promotes a belief in a natural social hierarchy and an inherent inequality among different groups.

Also not happening so...

• Propaganda: Sophisticated propaganda techniques are used to build popular support and promote the movement's agenda.

"Existential threat" used in the same verbiage by almost every democrat, repeated by all of their supporters along with labeling non-Democrats as fascists and nazis, and propagating that message over the course of more than a decade?

Realistically, a huge amount of social media is propaganda, it's just not coming from the US. It's largely sourced from China and Russia.

The current POTUS, the most powerful person in the world, declared war on his own citizens in a city he doesn't like. If the isn't actively promoting political violence, I don't know what is.

Well, I suppose if you uncritically accept every bit of hyperbolization based on out-of-context clips and fail to engage your brain, it's easy to convince yourself that Republicans are going to take over the country and set up concentration camps where they'll do nefarious experiments on liberals.

 

[Emily's Cat]

i find it that calling donald trump and the maga movement fascist somehow promotes political violence an almost offensively dishonest argument.

I find the unwillingness to step back and think about 10 years of a concerted message being broadcast by Democrats, and how that has contributed to the current situation, to be concerning.

Are you really okay with a politically motivated civil war? Is that what you actually want? Is it so much to ask that actual citizens stop parroting inflammatory rhetoric and think about what we want for our county?

 

[W.D.Clinger]

I know, and I've explained it the best I can, so I guess we're going to have to leave it at that.

Regardless of the point you were trying to make, the point you actually made is that willful ignorance distorts one's Bayesian priors.

 

[dirtywick]

I find the unwillingness to step back and think about 10 years of a concerted message being broadcast by Democrats, and how that has contributed to the current situation, to be concerning.

Are you really okay with a politically motivated civil war? Is that what you actually want? Is it so much to ask that actual citizens stop parroting inflammatory rhetoric and think about what we want for our county?

i did step back and think about it, that's why i think it's a dishonest argument. if i took it at face value, i might agree with you, but it's stupid if you think about it even a little bit.

what i find concerning is the president of the united states and officials representing the office and the government threatening cities and states with sending in the national guard against their will, and threats to people's jobs and even legal action if they say the wrong thing about charlie kirk. that's what i find concerning. i find your lack of concern about the big picture typical and i'm not interested in whatever silly axe you have to grind

 

[Resume]

We don't have a dictator in the US. And every single president we've ever had has claimed to represent the will of the nation.

Okay, sure. Tell yourself that. That's why he and his cohorts are actively seeking a way for Trump to have third term.

We still seem to have a pretty healthy representative democracy, with both major parties well represented throughout all levels of our governing apparatus. Indeed, it looks like about half the states in the union have Democratic governors. The House is 49% Democrats, the Senate is 47% Democrats.

Do we? Name the last significant piece of bi-partisan legislation. All Trump does is sign executive orders. And golf.

I don't see this happening. Efforts to prioritize US interests over foreign interests don't seem to meet the standard of ultranationalism in my mind... if they did, then I suppose FDR was ultranationalistic.

America First!

I suppose you could make an argument that deploying the national guard to some areas might be considered militarism. I don't see that violence is being glorified or used as a purifying tool.

Might be? JFC you are dishonest.

Yeah, this doesn't seem to be happening.

Other than this corrupt administration suing media outlets and universities into silence.

Illegal entrants to the US has been a problem for a long time. And other than illegal immigration, this doesn't seem to be an emphasis. I'm sure you'll tell me that I'm missing something.

"They are poisoning the blood of our nation." You are missing more than something.

Also not happening so...

Head meet sand. The late Mr. Kirk was a major promoter of a hierarchy.

Realistically, a huge amount of social media is propaganda, it's just not coming from the US. It's largely sourced from China and Russia.

Through this administration's media outlets: Fox, Newsmax, OAN ism.

Well, I suppose if you uncritically accept every bit of hyperbolization based on out-of-context clips and fail to engage your brain.

Out of context?

◊◊◊◊, you're a hypocrite. Hyperbole? Talk about brain failure.

it's easy to convince yourself that Republicans are going to take over the country and set up concentration camps where they'll do nefarious experiments on liberals.

Geez, where did I say that?

 

[I Am The Scum]

Yes, Steve. I DO see how it works. There's a reason I think both parties are absolute dog ◊◊◊◊. Democrats over the past decade calling all conservatives nazis and fascists is just as stupid and short-sighted as tea partiers calling all liberals communists and socialists.

You keep objecting to the modern Republican party being called fascist but you make no objection to them being fascist. You've passed up countless opportunities to dispute the accuracy of the accusation, and yet you only concern yourself with tone and decorum.

Your complaint appears to be best summarized as, "Yes, it is accurate, but please don't object to it."

 

[Resume]

You keep objecting to the modern Republican party being called fascist but you make no objection to them being fascist. You've passed up countless opportunities to dispute the accuracy of the accusation, and yet you only concern yourself with tone and decorum.

Your complaint appears to be best summarized as, "Yes, it is accurate, but please don't object to it."

And don't call bigots bigots.

 

[jt512]

Regardless of the point you were trying to make, the point you actually made is that willful ignorance distorts one's Bayesian priors.

Thank you for being yet another "skeptic" who doesn't understand Bayesian inference.

 

[Resume]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1967387427112395178

Party of Free speech.

 

[Resume]

Charlie doing his own mocking.



But that's okay because Floyd was . . . you know.

 

[stanfr]

I find the unwillingness to step back and think about 10 years of a concerted message being broadcast by Democrats, and how that has contributed to the current situation, to be concerning.

Are you really okay with a politically motivated civil war? Is that what you actually want? Is it so much to ask that actual citizens stop parroting inflammatory rhetoric and think about what we want for our county?

It may be pointless to keep pointing out to you the fascist actions of this administration,
so let's get back to the topic at hand here, the murder of Kirk:
You seem concerned with people inciting violence with hyperbole and what you feel are unjustified characterizations.
How do you feel about this Charlie Kirk quote, which really needs no context to understand, and it is word for word from the video interview:

"Joe Biden is a bumbling, dementia filled, alzheimers, corrupt tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty for his crimes against America."

Now, do you think this is divisive rhetoric, Emily? Calling for the execution of an American President?
Replace Biden's name with Trump and it is basically what you are accusing the left of doing, except it is never on tape, and never made by
anyone in a serious position of power or influence.
Can you understand why people are offended that our present Wannabe Dictator-in-Chief is Sanctifying Kirk to the point of requiring flags be flown at half mast to honor him as a man of Peace??

 

[dirtywick]

JD Vance threatens crackdown on ‘far-left’ groups after Charlie Kirk shooting

Vice-president says White House will pursue those who praise Kirk’s death and groups that ‘promote terrorism’

www.theguardian.com

wonder if they’ll go after the right too? both sides are the same after all

 

[Resume]

It may be pointless to keep pointing out to you the fascist actions of this administration,
so let's get back to the topic at hand here, the murder of Kirk:
You seem concerned with people inciting violence with hyperbole and what you feel are unjustified characterizations.
How do you feel about this Charlie Kirk quote, which really needs no context to understand, and it is word for word from the video interview:

"Joe Biden is a bumbling, dementia filled, alzheimer's, corrupt tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty for his crimes against America."

Now, do you think this is divisive rhetoric, Emily? Calling for the execution of an American President?
Replace Biden's name with Trump and it is basically what you are accusing the left of doing, except it is never on tape, and never made by
anyone in a serious position of power or influence.
Can you understand why people are offended that our present Wannabe Dictator-in-Chief is Sanctifying Kirk to the point of requiring flags be flown at half mast to honor him as a man of Peace??

Nah, that was out of context hyperbolization.

When I first saw that quote, I didn't think it was real, but that was Kirk.

 

[Resume]

JD Vance threatens crackdown on ‘far-left’ groups after Charlie Kirk shooting

Vice-president says White House will pursue those who praise Kirk’s death and groups that ‘promote terrorism’

www.theguardian.com

wonder if they’ll go after the right too? both sides are the same after all

Where's he gonna find that "far left?"

Vance said the administration would “work to dismantle the institutions that promote violence and terrorism in our own country”.

Better not look around the office.

 

[JayUtah]

But that's okay because Floyd was . . . you know.

Fun fact: Eric (the quoted social) was my first personal trainer.

 

[Segnosaur]

We don't have a dictator in the US. And every single president we've ever had has claimed to represent the will of the nation.

While Trump is not a full dictator yet, he is certainly taking the country in that direction.

We still seem to have a pretty healthy representative democracy

Umm, no you don't.

Currently, the US is best described as an anocracy... a system of government which has the look of democracy, but there are certain aspects that prevent elections from being free/fair. For example, the US has widespread voter suppression and gerrymandering.

...with both major parties well represented throughout all levels of our governing apparatus. Indeed, it looks like about half the states in the union have Democratic governors. The House is 49% Democrats, the Senate is 47% Democrats.

Yet despite the fact that the Democrats have "almost" half of congress, they have very little political power. The republican tax cuts were forced through despite universal opposition from the democrats, and they regularly vote against Trump's nominees for cabinet and judicial spots, but despite that Drunky McRapeface and the Stepford Wife are still there to support Trump o the supreme court. And Trump has been taking actions that in theory should be under the role of congress but he has usurped power by declaring everything "an emergency".

Having a bunch of democrats in congress doesn't really show "democracy is healthy" if their concerns are regularly ignored.

Meanwhile, the the republicans have only got a majority of the popular vote once since George Bush Sr. was in office (and even when they win elections they often lose the popular vote). Yet republican nominees dominate the supreme court.

I suppose you could make an argument that deploying the national guard to some areas might be considered militarism. I don't see that violence is being glorified or used as a purifying tool.

Renaming the department of defense the "department of war"? Holding a military parade on Trump's birthday? Trump bragging constantly about how we have "jets you can't see" and will build a "golden dome"? Sounds pretty militaristic to me.

Suppression of opposition: Opposing political parties, labor unions, and other dissenting groups are forcibly repressed to remove any challenge to the one-party state.

Yeah, this doesn't seem to be happening.

Trump has called the media "fake news" and posted a video of himself "symbolically" attacking them. He has had the government threaten legal action against people he doesn't like. (And remember his administration threatened various law firms that he would cut access to government buildings if they did not provide "free legal services", just because they represented people Trump didn't like.)

Scapegoating: Fascist movements often rely on the demonization of internal or external "others," such as ethnic or religious minorities, immigrants, or political opponents, to unify the population.

Illegal entrants to the US has been a problem for a long time.

Actually no, they haven't "been a problem".

There have been illegal immigrants, but the fact is the vast majority of them live peacefully in the U.S., and in fact they tend to commit property and violent crime at a lower rate than natural born Americans. They do not use services like social security, yet many of them pay taxes, giving them a net benefit to society. In other words, they were not a "problem".

Yet despite that Trump implied "Mexico is sending rapists", and "Haitian immigrants are eating dogs". Sounds like he's demonizing "evil brown people" for crimes they are not committing.

Social hierarchy: Fascism promotes a belief in a natural social hierarchy and an inherent inequality among different groups.

Also not happening so...

The Trump administration has a record number of billionaires. they have also proposed a "gold visa" for rich people to get instant citizenship.

 

[sackett]

Fun fact: Eric (the quoted social) was my first personal trainer.

But you came out alive.
Right?

 

[Brainster]

Axios unkindly pours cold water on the Groyper theory:

How Charlie Kirk's killing sparked unfounded theories about Groypers​

And reveals the latest theory among investigators:

Authorities told Axios they believe Robinson's romantic relationship with his transgender roommate could be key to determining a motive for Kirk's killing, and that Robinson believed that the conservative was spreading transphobic hate.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Fox’s Greg Gutfeld: I picture God asking Charlie Kirk for his autograph.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1967322283632111972