In the most recent Blocked & Reported, Katie pointed out something out that I thought was helpful: that there were two Charlie Kirks. You can find many videos of Charlie Kirk interacting with college students in a generous, thoughtful and compassionate way. You can also find many examples - some of which you point out in this piece- of Charlie Kirk- on his podcast or in other forums where he was pretty much exclusively with other people on the right- where he wasn’t any of those things. In our polarized world, people on the right are focusing on “College Charlie Kirk” while people on the left are focusing on “Podcast Charlie Kirk”. The more complicated reality is that he was both.
People who produce hours of content a day are inevitably going to have some bad takes. Those points should be followed up on later to see if they still hold them when not doing a stream-of-consciousness-while-on-camera, which is a nerve-wracking experience.
The idea that Groypers are against Israel because of any concern towards Gazans is laughable. Just because not all anti-Zionists are anti-Semites doesn't mean plenty aren't
Shorter: it's not about whether or not you agree with the things someone's saying. It's about whether or not you think they deserve a bullet in the neck simply for saying things.
Perhaps for conduct but certainly not for the claim that loving one's neighbor is foreign to, as he put it, secular pagans. Briahna is brilliant but is a great example of the Left loving the vague and nebulous "humanity" but having little patience with individuals. John Lennon's great little line "you want to save humanity but it's people that you just can't stand" applies in this instance.
Nobody with good politics should read this guy Zaid. Go look how he treated Briahna Joy Gray on her podcast this week. He's just as committed to white supremacy, has just as much misplaced and bizarre disdain for Black women as Charlie Kirk. Zaid does not understand white supremacy or systems of power enough to speak on them. Not sure why this mentally unstable has so many readers here.
Zaid, I really appreciated a tweet you wrote last week, and I’ve cribbed the idea as it helped my own thinking and when talking to others about what’s happening.
Many (most?) seems to be conflate empathy and principles when talking about politics. People are always asking/wanting people to share their feelings - on heavy things like gun control, or Gaza, or religious stuff, or in this case a life lost. But we all have different things that activate that part of the brain, and we can’t expect anyone will match our emotions about any issue, or person, no matter how strongly we personally feel about it or them.
But, what we can share, and should strive for, is the strengthening of core principles. A firm code of what to do and what not to do, that is supposed to unify community and our nation’s commitment to a shared democracy. In this case, that principle is that killing over speech is unacceptable and should be condemned, no matter what anyone’s personal feelings about the person were. At the same time, even with that code in tact, it’s an overreach to ask anyone to emotionally feel a certain way about it. It’s just not how nature and people work, no matter who or what is driving it.
I've agreed more with your sentiment than I've had with others in this space. And while I think your position is commendable, I found your discussion with the "left-wing podcaster" to be less commendable. Hopefully you rewatched your discussion and understood what some found insulting about your comments: ("I'm gonna learn you something"). Because while I agreed with your position your disagreeable manner immediately put me off.
I actually really liked that discussion and that’s where I heard him first. I love Brie but I did feel like his interjections were refreshing and needed. I felt like he wanted a conversation and she was just demanding that he agree.
I didn't disagree with his argument, I just found some of his comments to be ugh, like the family stuff and the comment I pointed out above as well. But I did agree with his argument more than hers.
Apparently Brie's having gone to Harvard was fundamental to Zaid's utterly disgusting attitude. Deep stuff.
Zaid floats above American reality by imagining himself alongside of "normal Americans". He needs to watch whatever he can get his hands on to "learn himself" about the fundamental American reality that was happening all over in the decades of the Civil Rights Movement and its long aftermath.
Those were some "normal Americans" jeering at Black kids on their way into school and blocking Freedom Rider buses and beating on people. Zaid would like to pretend otherwise.
She is an incredibly ineffective political communicator because she doesn’t listen well and lacks self awareness. This was proven through every job she ever held in the field, at this point it’s easier to argue the sky isn’t blue.
Not sharing your centrist, ameliorative, liberal "politics" is not the same thing as being an ineffective "political communicator".
And not being capable of grasping the very obvious reality that people like Charlie Kirk and, say, William F Buckley, can come across as "nice" and have "nice" families while at the same time being moral and political monsters you shouldn't piss on even when on fire?
Ineffective political thinking and lack of backbone.
You, like her, confuse left-right, liberal conservative, etc. with how loudly you yell and how angry you are at the "other side." In many ways Briana endorses elitist, anti-populist politics like when she wanted the government to pay off her Harvard Law loans (???) while earning a six figure salary. But she's meaner to conservatives, so she's the ideal leftist?
Nobody is under an obligation to mourn Charlie Kirk. Nobody should face repercussions for sharing their personal opinion on his life and the circumstances of his death.
Charlie Kirk advocated for entire groups of people to be legally barred from having children, for instance. If Charlie Kirk wanted to legally bar me from having children, while wielding influence and power much greater than my own, all while presenting himself as a good faith and equal actor for clicks and capital, I might too celebrate that person's demise.
Regardless, the facts haven't changed. America is still a country where violence directed institutions of power at people is rarely redirected back at that power, and when it is power is consolidated at the top and the line will be towed through force. The violence is not justifiable, it is bad for the country. Beyond that, people are entitled to their opinions.
In the most recent Blocked & Reported, Katie pointed out something out that I thought was helpful: that there were two Charlie Kirks. You can find many videos of Charlie Kirk interacting with college students in a generous, thoughtful and compassionate way. You can also find many examples - some of which you point out in this piece- of Charlie Kirk- on his podcast or in other forums where he was pretty much exclusively with other people on the right- where he wasn’t any of those things. In our polarized world, people on the right are focusing on “College Charlie Kirk” while people on the left are focusing on “Podcast Charlie Kirk”. The more complicated reality is that he was both.
I think this is a complicated reality with people in general.
People who produce hours of content a day are inevitably going to have some bad takes. Those points should be followed up on later to see if they still hold them when not doing a stream-of-consciousness-while-on-camera, which is a nerve-wracking experience.
Yes. It's the difference between showing up the shallow ideas of others and then coming up the shoddy ideas of ones own.
Originally he was more hated for the former.
But you DO have to choose between “words I dislike are violence” and “I don’t want anyone to be killed for expressing ideas I disagree with.”
I am glad to agree with you on this.
Charlie Kirk, like so many other pundits on the right and left, suffered from a lack of humility. Extremely unfortunate.
Interestingly, Jesus had a lot to say about humility, or lack thereof.
The idea that Groypers are against Israel because of any concern towards Gazans is laughable. Just because not all anti-Zionists are anti-Semites doesn't mean plenty aren't
Groypers are definitely a racist group
Shorter: it's not about whether or not you agree with the things someone's saying. It's about whether or not you think they deserve a bullet in the neck simply for saying things.
You owe Briahna an apology dude
Perhaps for conduct but certainly not for the claim that loving one's neighbor is foreign to, as he put it, secular pagans. Briahna is brilliant but is a great example of the Left loving the vague and nebulous "humanity" but having little patience with individuals. John Lennon's great little line "you want to save humanity but it's people that you just can't stand" applies in this instance.
Walk and chew gum. Time-honored standard.
How dare you accuse us Americans of maturity. I’m offended. How dare you!!
You also don’t need to immediately trash him, or the ideas he was murdered for, right after he was murdered. You could wait a couple weeks.
Here’s the two ideas I’m currently holding
“He was an asshole”
And
“I don’t really care that someone shot him, I’m just glad they didn’t shoot anyone else in the crowd”
Nobody with good politics should read this guy Zaid. Go look how he treated Briahna Joy Gray on her podcast this week. He's just as committed to white supremacy, has just as much misplaced and bizarre disdain for Black women as Charlie Kirk. Zaid does not understand white supremacy or systems of power enough to speak on them. Not sure why this mentally unstable has so many readers here.
Zaid, I really appreciated a tweet you wrote last week, and I’ve cribbed the idea as it helped my own thinking and when talking to others about what’s happening.
Many (most?) seems to be conflate empathy and principles when talking about politics. People are always asking/wanting people to share their feelings - on heavy things like gun control, or Gaza, or religious stuff, or in this case a life lost. But we all have different things that activate that part of the brain, and we can’t expect anyone will match our emotions about any issue, or person, no matter how strongly we personally feel about it or them.
But, what we can share, and should strive for, is the strengthening of core principles. A firm code of what to do and what not to do, that is supposed to unify community and our nation’s commitment to a shared democracy. In this case, that principle is that killing over speech is unacceptable and should be condemned, no matter what anyone’s personal feelings about the person were. At the same time, even with that code in tact, it’s an overreach to ask anyone to emotionally feel a certain way about it. It’s just not how nature and people work, no matter who or what is driving it.
I've agreed more with your sentiment than I've had with others in this space. And while I think your position is commendable, I found your discussion with the "left-wing podcaster" to be less commendable. Hopefully you rewatched your discussion and understood what some found insulting about your comments: ("I'm gonna learn you something"). Because while I agreed with your position your disagreeable manner immediately put me off.
I actually really liked that discussion and that’s where I heard him first. I love Brie but I did feel like his interjections were refreshing and needed. I felt like he wanted a conversation and she was just demanding that he agree.
I didn't disagree with his argument, I just found some of his comments to be ugh, like the family stuff and the comment I pointed out above as well. But I did agree with his argument more than hers.
Apparently Brie's having gone to Harvard was fundamental to Zaid's utterly disgusting attitude. Deep stuff.
Zaid floats above American reality by imagining himself alongside of "normal Americans". He needs to watch whatever he can get his hands on to "learn himself" about the fundamental American reality that was happening all over in the decades of the Civil Rights Movement and its long aftermath.
Those were some "normal Americans" jeering at Black kids on their way into school and blocking Freedom Rider buses and beating on people. Zaid would like to pretend otherwise.
She is an incredibly ineffective political communicator because she doesn’t listen well and lacks self awareness. This was proven through every job she ever held in the field, at this point it’s easier to argue the sky isn’t blue.
Not sharing your centrist, ameliorative, liberal "politics" is not the same thing as being an ineffective "political communicator".
And not being capable of grasping the very obvious reality that people like Charlie Kirk and, say, William F Buckley, can come across as "nice" and have "nice" families while at the same time being moral and political monsters you shouldn't piss on even when on fire?
Ineffective political thinking and lack of backbone.
You, like her, confuse left-right, liberal conservative, etc. with how loudly you yell and how angry you are at the "other side." In many ways Briana endorses elitist, anti-populist politics like when she wanted the government to pay off her Harvard Law loans (???) while earning a six figure salary. But she's meaner to conservatives, so she's the ideal leftist?
Zaid is acting like a politician and trying to please both sides
His butt must be sore from all that fence sitting
Klein said he is only writing this because of his similarities with Kirk.
So why doesn't Klein write about his similarities with Hitler?
Everybody has similarities. It doesn't mean that we use civility politics to white wash their legacy
Nobody is under an obligation to mourn Charlie Kirk. Nobody should face repercussions for sharing their personal opinion on his life and the circumstances of his death.
Charlie Kirk advocated for entire groups of people to be legally barred from having children, for instance. If Charlie Kirk wanted to legally bar me from having children, while wielding influence and power much greater than my own, all while presenting himself as a good faith and equal actor for clicks and capital, I might too celebrate that person's demise.
Regardless, the facts haven't changed. America is still a country where violence directed institutions of power at people is rarely redirected back at that power, and when it is power is consolidated at the top and the line will be towed through force. The violence is not justifiable, it is bad for the country. Beyond that, people are entitled to their opinions.