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

[dirtywick]

People who say the punishment didn't fit the crime are not (necessarily) demanding full absolution, right?

i don't know what your point is really. so i'll just ask directly, does a person who works towards creating a politically violent environment have any responsibility when political violence occurs?

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Don't make me tap the signature.

You were the one who mentioned Trump, not me.

 

[plague311]

Where did I say it was okay? Seems like you—among others—are faulting me for failing to condemn him enough.

Yes, it's everyone else. It's not your shifting standards, vague phrasing, and flip-flopping on when it is\isn't appropriate. It's everyone else but you. Good call.

 

[johnny karate]

Killing someone specifically to oppose their fascist ideas strikes me as an tactic I've heard much more from the left than anywhere else, but admittedly I'm on Bluesky much more than Truth Social.

Your personal opinion makes for an unconvincing argument.

Most of MAGA thinks Mike Pence should be hanged? Big, if true.

Most of MAGA (if not all) support what happened on January 6th, which includes threats to hang Mike Pence.

Did I say "go no further" or did I say something more specific? Once again—as usual—you generalize far too much from far too little.

What we're discussing is whether or not a lawless administration would follow the law in pursuit of their desire to see Biden executed and your nonsensical claim that they would.

 

[plague311]

You were the one who mentioned Trump, not me.

I would have just said, "Tap it all you want, I'm not beholden to your signature" and thread drift undoubtedly extends to Trump. We can't simultaneously say Kirk was Trump's mouthpiece and then somehow expect Trump not to be brought up.

The fact is both Trump and Kirk have gone out of their way to encourage political violence. Only someone extremely naive would say otherwise. That's not victim blaming, it's pointing out facts. Something skeptics shouldn't be afraid of doing even if the subject was a victim of violence.

In the Watchmen they talked about a guy who would run around and tell all the "heroes" to beat him up, and no one ever did....until Rorschach threw him down an elevator shaft. How much responsibility does Kirk hold for what happened to him, as others have pointed out here? Can we never criticize him because some misguided kid shot him?

 

[johnny karate]

Sort of crazy that this thread has generally drifted into blaming the deceased victim instead of thinking about whether we might reduce political violence going forward.

What absolves Kirk from participating in the creation of this environment of political violence?

And why do you think not holding powerful and influential people like Kirk to a standard commensurate to their power and influence is the way forward in reducing political violence?

 

[dirtywick]

trump was the centerpiece of his nationally televised funeral/infomercial, because kirk was a propagandist for the maga movement.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

You realize that we cannot simply catapult individuals (even guilty ones) into prison yards, right? There is a lot of paperwork which has to come first.

We can, however, airlift individuals (even innocent ones) to El Salvador or Somalia. The paperwork doesn't start until after the deed is done.

From Firings to the Threat of Deportation: Commenters Deemed Offensive After Charlie Kirk's Death Face Consequences​

That strikes me as beyond bizarre. Whenever I hear someone say "That guy should be in prison!" I assume they are invoking the usual process unless they explicitly say otherwise.

That is not how I interpreted Trump's calls to "Lock her up!"

I would not be surprised by that, since there have already been high-profile cases about the infamous Salvadoran facility known as CECOT.

 

[johnny karate]

I don't think it is wise to share such opinions (about either Trump or Biden) unless you can point out exactly which laws were likely broken, but people are going to keep doing it anyhow because the prevailing norm on the socials appears to be that it's just fine to share opinions without undergirding them with facts.

You do recall that Trump was actually tried and convicted in a court of law, right? That anybody in his legal situation not only *should* be in jail, but *would* be if they were anybody other than Donald Trump, is an observation that shouldn't even be politically contentious, yet here we are.

Don't make me tap the signature.

I think it's worthwhile to take a look at this exchange so everyone can have a clear picture of the bad faith argumentation on display.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

given that Kirk was critical in electing and supporting Trump, especially after Epstein, it is neither reasonable nor productive to ignore this connection.

 

[d4m10n]

Most of MAGA (if not all) support what happened on January 6th, which includes threats to hang Mike Pence.

This is the sort of claim which a skeptic might want to see supported with evidence.

And why do you think not holding powerful and influential people like Kirk to a standard commensurate to their power and influence is the way forward in reducing political violence?

What does Kirk's assassination have to do with holding powerful people to account?

given that Kirk was critical in electing and supporting Trump, especially after Epstein, it is neither reasonable nor productive to ignore this connection.

What does this connection have to do with Kirk's murder, in your view?

I think it's worthwhile to take a look at this exchange so everyone can have a clear picture of the bad faith argumentation on display.

I think it's worthwhile to avoid rabbit-holing yet another thread to make it all about Trump.

trump was the centerpiece of his nationally televised funeral/infomercial, because kirk was a propagandist for the maga movement.

And what does this have to do with Kirk's murder, in your view?

We can't simultaneously say Kirk was Trump's mouthpiece and then somehow expect Trump not to be brought up.

What does his status as Trump's mouthpiece have to do with his murder?

 

[d4m10n]

does a person who works towards creating a politically violent environment have any responsibility when political violence occurs?

To the extent that they have fomented violence, they must bear some responsibility. If Kirk had, for example, praised or excused Ashli Babbit then that would indicate that he believed she was justified in using force to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

I think it's worthwhile to avoid rabbit-holing yet another thread to make it all about Trump.

As I already noted, and as the poster you responded to with the above also noticed, it was you who brought in Trump in your bid to whatabout the discussion. *I* had been talking about Kirk until *you* mentioned Trump in post #2273.

 

[plague311]

What does his status as Trump's mouthpiece have to do with his murder?

It was central to his entire platform. He parroted the same ◊◊◊◊ Trump parrots and both of them shot at. I would say that them sharing the same beliefs, insulting the same people, and going out of their way to provoke a response from a community they openly despised is a pretty clear connection.

Since you never answer any questions and just keep doing this "answer one question with another question" nonsense I'm going to put our conversation on hold. I might refer to your statements, but conversations with you are circular and you have absolutely no interest in having an actual conversation. You're here for "gotchas" and JAQing the thread. Enjoy, I'll pass.

 

[Reformed Offlian]

To the extent that they have fomented violence, they must bear some responsibility. If Kirk had, for example, praised or excused Ashli Babbit then that would indicate that he believed she was justified in using force to prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

He had hosted pro-Babbitt material on his website such as this:

https://www.charliekirk.com/news/us...as-murdered-under-guise-of-authority-on-jan-6.

Also, he made a point of naming the officer who shot her on Fox News, when that wasn't general knowledge yet.

Now you're going to quibble about how that really doesn't count.

 

[d4m10n]

As I already noted, and as the poster you responded to with the above also noticed, it was you who brought in Trump in your bid to whatabout the discussion

I was responding to a series of posts starting at 2,122 which is why I included the "opined that Trump should be in prison" bit in that post.

In any event, I'll try harder not to help make this yet another bitching-about-Trump thread going forward.

Now you're going to quibble about how that really doesn't count.

I don't think our tallying up Kirk's sins matters overly much at this point, but presumably you see must some virtue in it. Perhaps you hang out with conservatives who can be made to ask themselves whether they've been implicitly supporting political violence when they promote TPUSA memes?

He parroted the same ◊◊◊◊ Trump parrots and both of them shot at

Going to assume you meant "[got] shot at" here.

I would say that them sharing the same beliefs, insulting the same people, and going out of their way to provoke a response from a community they openly despised is a pretty clear connection.

Not entirely sure which community you're referencing here, could be anyone from immigrants to feminists to critical race theorists to trans kids.

(To my knowledge, none of those communities were actually provoked into a violent response, though.)

Stepping back a bit, it seems to me that ISF posters here in this thread (with a couple notable exceptions) are generally taking this occasion to dunk on Kirk rather than to ask themselves whether the sort of messages which we send have been exacerbating the problem of political violence.

Here's a representative (non-ISF) example from someone whom I usually enjoy reading:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1949635922229940549

In retrospect, I find myself wondering whether characterizing TPUSA & co. as Nazis might have encouraged some people to think of them as unworthy of basic human rights such as life and liberty.

 

[Shepherd]

It's wild that you don't think the people waiting for Pence with a gallows are representative of Kirk and MAGA in general.

If Pence had been a legless "little person," then maybe those "gallows" might have been a danger to him.

 

[plague311]

Going to assume you meant "[got] shot at" here.

You're quick!

Not entirely sure which community you're referencing here, could be anyone from immigrants to feminists to critical race theorists to trans kids.

Exactly.

(To my knowledge, none of those communities were actually provoked into a violent response, though.)

We've all said it, there is no reason for political violence, but to say they weren't provoked into a response? Come on, I know you're doing the contrarian thing here, and it's adorbs, but you can't tell entire groups of people that they're trash, they're less than, they don't deserve rights, they should be stoned to death because that's God's perfect plan, and then say something like this.

Is violence appropriate? No, not in this case. Am I shocked it happened considering everything that, both he and Trump, have said? Also no.

Stepping back a bit, it seems to me that ISF posters here in this thread (with a couple notable exceptions) are generally taking this occasion to dunk on Kirk rather than to ask themselves whether the sort of messages which we send have been exacerbating the problem of political violence.

We have to ask ourselves that but we can't examine it with regards to Kirk? That's...something. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Do I think that random posts on ISF fuel political violence in the real-world? No, not really. I think most people here are intelligent enough to not resort to violence.

Here's a representative (non-ISF) example from someone whom I usually enjoy reading:

No one on ISF is responsible for what some random nobody posts on Twitter or where ever the ◊◊◊◊ it is you're getting it from. If you have a problem with that post, take it up with the poster.

In retrospect, I find myself wondering whether characterizing TPUSA & co. as Nazis might have encouraged some people to think of them as unworthy of basic human rights such as life and liberty.

In retrospect, I find myself wondering whether characterizing the LGBTQ+ community, immigrants as trash\nobodies\undeserving of rights might have encouraged some people to think of them as unworthy of basic human rights such as life and liberty.

So lets discuss.

 

[dirtywick]

In retrospect, I find myself wondering whether characterizing TPUSA & co. as Nazis might have encouraged some people to think of them as unworthy of basic human rights such as life and liberty.

keeping in mind you've agreed that he was a propagandist for the maga movement and considering the rhetoric and actions of the maga movement, particularly as of late, i guess first you'd have to decide if characterizing them as nazis is unfair. do you think that's an unfair characterization?

 

[dirtywick]

We have to ask ourselves that but we can't examine it with regards to Kirk? That...something. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Do I think that random posts on ISF fuel political violence in the real-world? No, not really. I think most people here are intelligent enough to not resort to violence.

i agree that damion seems to be going to great lengths to avoid addressing kirk's role in exacerbating political violence. again, being an unfortunate victim of it doesn't absolve him from the responsibility of his role leading up to it. seems fair game to me, being as how we've already agreed he was a propagandist for a movement that revels in political violence.