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

[johnny karate]

I happen to be re-reading Eichmann in Jerusalem this week; in that narrative there was a specific break point—just after chapter 4—where the regime shifted from the sort of deportation efforts common to any nationalist regime to concentration camps followed by death camps. In reality, all three schemes worked together in a stepwise process, so the real difference lay in the ultimate goals held by higher-ups, which were generally concealed under several layers of obfuscatory language and practice.

To my knowledge, despite ample effort at internet outrage archaeology no one has yet discovered anything from TPUSA which crosses the line from common European fascism to the genocidal impulses of the NSDA, but that won't stop progressives from making the comparison.

That the two highlighted statements are almost back-to-back and you apparently think you've made a coherent argument is really something.

 

[dirtywick]

With a name like "Damion Hector Torres" on government forms (e.g. Selective Service, DEERS) I don't think it will be very difficult for ICE to jump to the correct conclusion should they start looking into DOGE's comprehensive databases. Of course that assumes they want to start implementing ethnic-based criteria without any consideration of citizenship or birthplace, a dystopian future not yet realized here and only fantasized by a handful of white supremacists like Laura Loomer.

and stephen miller. what’s he do for a living?

besides i think there’s been enough cases of ice arresting and abusing citizens and immigrants alike that this future isn’t so fantastic. in fact they’re talking about and working towards expanding it to political dissidents.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Me neither, nor do I support separating children from their families either.

Maybe we can agree on that if nothing else.

As a generality, sure. But there are also circumstances in which it's in the child's best interests to separate them from their families, so I wouldn't accept it as a hard rule.

I rather object to sending kids to prison just because their parent murdered someone, for example .

 

[d4m10n]

and stephen miller.

Has Miller openly fantasized about camps for ethnic cleansing? I mean, it sounds like him but in private.

That the two highlighted statements are almost back-to-back and you apparently think you've made a coherent argument is really something.

Do you seriously suspect TPUSA is (or was) secretly plotting to murder millions of Americans?

If true that would put the Kirk shooting into a whole new light and make me reconsider Robinson's temporal origins.

 

[d4m10n]

i think there’s been enough cases of ice arresting and abusing citizens and immigrants alike that this future isn’t so fantastic.

Fair cop; ICE is definitely apparently being groomed to play the RSHA in the brave new America.

 

[johnny karate]

Do you seriously suspect TPUSA is (or was) secretly plotting to murder millions of Americans?

Why do I need a serious suspicion of that one specific thing before you deem is acceptable to describe them as Nazis? Seems very narrow and very arbitrary.

Your own source tells you that the Nazis hid their true intentions, so the fact that you can't find any specific Nazi rhetoric coming from TPUSA means nothing in terms of determining what Nazi-esque beliefs they hold.

Your assertion that calling anyone on the right a Nazi is over some imaginary line continues to be untethered from any consistent rationale.

 

[d4m10n]

Why do I need a serious suspicion of that one specific thing before you deem is acceptable to describe them as Nazis?

Happy to answer this question after you answer mine.

 

[d4m10n]

Your own source tells you that the Nazis hid their true intentions, so the fact that you can't find any specific Nazi rhetoric coming from TPUSA means nothing in terms of determining what Nazi-esque beliefs they hold.

It wouldn't be remotely difficult to find references to Jewish extermination in Hitler's speeches and writings prior to any attempts to shift official national policy towards his preferred goals.

 

[AmyStrange]

Probably fewer than you think... but more than none. There are quite a few hikers, campers, etc. during the spring, summer, and autumn. And a fair bit of the canyon is on tribal reservation land, frequented by various first nations on a regular basis.

Maybe, but remember that the Grand Canyon National Park is more than 1.8 million acres on a flat scale, and that doesn't include elevation, or many of the smaller canyons inside it that tourist never get to see.

Myself, I'm figuring at least one person per acre.

 

[d4m10n]

Your assertion that calling anyone on the right a Nazi is over some imaginary line

Go ahead and call everyone on the right a Nazi if that makes you feel good.

Worst thing that could happen is someone takes it seriously and puts a bullet in them.

 

[Norman Alexander]

Go ahead and call everyone every fascist on the right a Nazi if that makes you feel good.

Nobody feels "good" about that. Quite the opposite. We all thought they had been eradicated in 1945.

Worst thing that could happen is someone takes it seriously and puts a bullet in them.

But is it, though? Is it, really? I mean...Americans are shooting each other by the dozens every day of the year, regardless of Trump or any political persuasion. So what's a couple of useless dead Nazis to add to that stinking pile? Make the best use of a bad situation. You can still take out the trash during an ongoing national disaster.

 

[d4m10n]

So what's a couple of useless dead Nazis to add to that stinking pile?

Who was the other one?

 

[Norman Alexander]

Who was the other one?

Miller & Trump, to start. There's plenty more. Not that I'm advocating any of them be shot, of course. Aten forbid! But if they ever happen to turn up dead with a bullet in the head, at least we know they can be treated with the same level of dismissal and insouciance as the US media and public does with all the other adults and kids who are going to die needlessly by the gun today. Nobody will mourn them.

 

[johnny karate]

Happy to answer this question after you answer mine.

I reject the premise of your question and mine was only intended to be hypothetical, so your answer is not needed.

 

[johnny karate]

It wouldn't be remotely difficult to find references to Jewish extermination in Hitler's speeches and writings prior to any attempts to shift official national policy towards his preferred goals.

The Nazi Party was founded in 1920. You’ve cited something Hitler said nineteen years later.

According to your own arbitrary standard, we wouldn’t be able to call the Nazi Party Nazis for most of their existence.

 

[johnny karate]

Go ahead and call everyone on the right a Nazi if that makes you feel good.

Worst thing that could happen is someone takes it seriously and puts a bullet in them.

As opposed to calling them “fascists”, which you have condoned.

That’s not inflammatory at all and would never incite violence because reasons.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

I don't think even the most aggressive U.S.-based gun control groups are advocating for bans on antique bolt-action hunting rifles such as the one used in the Kirk murder, so you'd need more effective regulations than anyone has actually proposed for so far.

I didn't say anything about banning particular weapon types. My brother has several hunting rifles, which he uses for... hunting. He keeps them locked away in a thick steel gun safe in his garage, inside a cupboard to disguise it and dyna-bolted to the concrete floor by me. He keeps the rifle bolts hidden away in another room. He never talks about guns or hunting in public and doesn't post hunting photos on social media. In short, he's paranoid about people stealing his guns for nefarious purposes. Or perhaps he isn't paranoid, because in New Zealand obtaining a gun license isn't easy and criminals have an even harder time getting them.

It didn't used to be like this in New Zealand, but then in 2019 the Christchurch mosque shootings happened. The government acted swiftly, banning assault weapons and making sure that gun owners were properly vetted in accordance to the how dangerous all guns are. If the police smell the slightest hint of criminality, instability or slackness you don't get a license. As a referee for my brother I got put through the wringer too, even though I haven't touched a gun in 40 years.

Your description of bolt-action hunting rifles as 'antique' is disingenuous. Gun design hasn't changed much in the last 100 years, and one that was made that long ago is still just as deadly as a new one. Bolt-action rifles are used for hunting because they are more accurate than semi-autos. Most can be fitted with a magazine (limited to 5 shots max in New Zealand), and in the hands of a skilled marksman (ie. anyone who has done a bit of target practice) can be devastating.

The big advantage of a well sighted-in hunting rifle for assassinations is the same as with deer - you often only get one chance for a kill shot. Charlie Kirk was shot from only 430 feet away, but even at that distance it's easy to just wing the target or miss altogether. I doubt the shooter was aiming at his neck. If he had a less accurate weapon he might have missed. Restricting assault rifles is more about limiting the damage when someone decides to kill'em all at close quarters.

Maybe I am advocating for more effective regulations than anyone in the US has proposed so far (though I doubt that's actually true) but if that's what it takes... And yes, I know it will never happen and the shootings will continue unabated - because that's your culture. Which is why I said that expecting effective regulations in the US is not practical. Charlie Kirk was certainly right about that.

 

[Disbelief]

Normal people who've been exposed to middle-school-level understanding of how the justice system works would understand that it's necessarily implied by the phrases "put in prison" and "given the death penalty" and "for his crimes".

Normal people who've been exposed to primary-school-level of understanding know that Kirk's audience isn't that smart to do nuance.

 

[d4m10n]

Miller & Trump, to start.

Both useless Nazis whom no one would mourn should they "happen to turn up dead with a bullet in the head," according to you. To the extent discussion is predicated upon common models of reality—with just a few disparate premises worth arguing about—we've reached an impasse. I expect at least one of those two would become a martyr to their ongoing (fascist) movement.

As opposed to calling them “fascists”, which you have condoned.

I listed the major ideological features of fascism at #2,162 and don't recall anyone making any counterargument regarding its applicability to the movement of which Kirk was a leading light. That said, I'm not at all confident that you understand what sets Nazis apart from fascists. Hannah Arendt wrote that nowhere did the differences between German Nazism and Italian Fascism "come more conspicuously into the open than in the treatment of the Jewish question." She goes on to explain how the OG fascists preserved a strong supermajority of Italian Jewry throughout the war despite Nazi disapproval and occupation; it only takes up a couple of pages if you are interested. Calling someone fascist isn't the same as saying they are the kind of person who would happily build and operate a system of death camps, and that difference really should matter when talking about the ethics of violent resistance to a political movement.

According to your own arbitrary standard, we wouldn’t be able to call the Nazi Party Nazis for most of their existence.

When we label someone a "Nazi" these days we are not thinking of the NSDAP at the beginning; we are deliberately invoking the specter of the death camps among various other horrors. One of the major problems with unifying a political movement around a single all-powerful leader is that whatever goals he has become those of the party even if that wasn't part of the original charter. For a contemporary example, the GOP used to be strongly in favor of international free trade.

 

[d4m10n]

Your description of bolt-action hunting rifles as 'antique' is disingenuous.

The weapon in question was an actual antique, though.

Gun design hasn't changed much in the last 100 years, and one that was made that long ago is still just as deadly as a new one.

Yes, exactly.

The big advantage of a well sighted-in hunting rifle for assassinations is the same as with deer - you often only get one chance for a kill shot.

I assume you mean advantage to society generally rather than the gun owner in particular. If so, fair point.

Restricting assault rifles is more about limiting the damage when someone decides to kill'em all at close quarters.

True, but not exactly on point when talking about Kirk's assassination in particular.