The problem with these "events" is the knee-jerk reaction and the abuses of power it leads to, which is why as a cynic, I'm going to wait to see who they find for a suspect. Charlie Kirk was probably one of the few on the right or at all that was trying to teach young people how to disagree constructively. That's not exactly "bringing people together," but it is teaching them how to get out of their own little bubble, which is a step to a society where people can coexist and at least work together.
There are plenty of grating voices on the right. Some have huge followings. Maybe Charlie Kirk was killed because he was the only one who spent time in the open. But the symbolism can't be missed that the one young person willing to try to converse civilly and find common ground is now gone and out of the way.
I agree with Zaid. Violence and murder cross political lines and should be denounced by all public figures on both sides of the aisle. However, the way public and political discourse has ratcheted up to accuse or define political opponents as Nazis, Hitlers, fascists, etc. leads some deranged people to believe that extreme responses are justified or needed. I don't know how that kind of discourse can be de-escalated, but it is certainly needed. Our politicians and commentators need to learn how to debate, discuss, and argue without going to extreme ad hominem attacks.
“Everyone said this act of violence was unacceptable, and everyone wanted to pray for Kirk and his family after hearing the news.”
You’re deeply misrepresenting the response from many on the left. It was not “everyone” at all whatsoever. Some Democrats in the House protested and refused to have a moment of silence within *hours* of Charlie’s murder. Some in the media and many who identify as liberals or leftists across social media have been just as wicked.
President Trump’s response was not “bizarre”: it was honest snd accurate.
Why don't we go back and see what some conservatives said about the killings of Minnesota lawmakers or the attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband? There will be fringe shit posters looking to say terrible things across the political spectrum, and we have a social media company founded for the purpose of making sure they hog the spotlight.
I'm not sure about this. The demonization and dehumanization of political adversaries can make political violence more likely. Would-be perpetarors can rationalize to themselves that their victims deserve their fate AND they can hope to bask in the praise of all the online ghouls who spent the past few years celebrating the deaths of Covid vaccine skeptics and wishing for red state residents to suffer for the sin of voting for Trump.
Here's how the game works: You label someone as a Nazi, a fascist, or whatever class of monstrous imminent threat you can. You create the perception, 'These people are hellbent on exterminating you. Dialogue with them is impossible'. People feel backed into a wall. People start to feel that, committing murder against someone who speaks _words_ against them is not only morally right, but it is an act of self defense.
We are not so ignorant or impaired we won't see that's been happening on the Left. Hell, Charlie's entire *career* proves you wrong!! He was trying to open up dialogue with people. Did he have a need to go do that with the Right? Or did he take it to Liberal college campuses? Did he extend a hand of peace to those kids, *precisely BECAUSE* he knew they'd been propagandized to see him as an inhuman monster?
If you thought Trump's response was confusing, it is proof that you are not paying attention. I was a Democrat for 35 years. I left the party when I saw how easily "my" party was rallied to send death threats to Nick Sandmann, for the crime of standing in one spot and doing literally nothing. It took a few more dominoes falling for me to formally leave, but that's when I knew, 'The soil in the minds of the Left must have been seeded with poison for a _long_ time now, for the zeitgeist to say, "MAGA kids go screaming, hats first, into the woodchipper," and for people gave that statement likes and reposts and nod in approval like that wasn't purest insanity.
I saw _years ago_ that "my" party was being primed to accept the idea that the death of the other sides' youth was a moral necessity. That's _literally_ the thought process of Anders Behring Breivik.
Yes, the culture shifts over time, and in a few generations, the Right will be this rabidly insane again, as it was during Jim Crow. But RIGHT NOW, if you think there is not a severe problem in the minds of the Left, you need to dig yourself out of a hole. Yesterday I was told point blank, "There is no peace with fascists." The man he believed was a fascist was a man who never did anything more violent but speak. Fix yourself, man.
Maybe I missed it but I didn’t see Trump arguing for UK style restrictions on speech. My takeaway from Trumps typical hyperbolic statement was the idea that people should calm down, take the long and nuanced view on history , understand that people can disagree and maybe even work things out a bit. There is a tendency these days for people to become wildly emotional, spewing the N word (so many Nazis!) and dropping family and friends and others, over political disagreements. And it seems logical that this level of urgency and anger can take vulnerable people over the edge.
"Your life has value and your political opponent's lives have value too. You can hate your adversaries ideas and you can fight hard for your cause. But the moment we stop seeing each other as human beings and we start concluding that violence is the answer, that's the moment we let the soulless corporations, the ruthless authoritarians and the sociopathic demagogues win." (David Sirota)
if someone is truly convinced that the country is being taken over by Nazi’s, why wouldn’t violence or assassination be the proper response?
in fact, the most cliched trope about time travel is going back in time to kill Hitler.
just like the attempted assassination of Trump, there are thousands if not millions who wished the shooter had been successful. no doubt the same can be said of Kirk. I have several friends who are joyful that he was killed and I have seen dozens of accounts on SM celebrating his death.
in other words, we have millions of people who wish violence on their political enemies, but are too chickenshit or comfortable to carry it out. it only takes a few bad turns in someones life to turn into Travis Bickle.
for a decade the MSM has been calling Trump and his supporters fascists, Nazi’s and white supremacists. is it any surprise that many actually believe it..?
The problem with these "events" is the knee-jerk reaction and the abuses of power it leads to, which is why as a cynic, I'm going to wait to see who they find for a suspect. Charlie Kirk was probably one of the few on the right or at all that was trying to teach young people how to disagree constructively. That's not exactly "bringing people together," but it is teaching them how to get out of their own little bubble, which is a step to a society where people can coexist and at least work together.
There are plenty of grating voices on the right. Some have huge followings. Maybe Charlie Kirk was killed because he was the only one who spent time in the open. But the symbolism can't be missed that the one young person willing to try to converse civilly and find common ground is now gone and out of the way.
I agree with Zaid. Violence and murder cross political lines and should be denounced by all public figures on both sides of the aisle. However, the way public and political discourse has ratcheted up to accuse or define political opponents as Nazis, Hitlers, fascists, etc. leads some deranged people to believe that extreme responses are justified or needed. I don't know how that kind of discourse can be de-escalated, but it is certainly needed. Our politicians and commentators need to learn how to debate, discuss, and argue without going to extreme ad hominem attacks.
“Everyone said this act of violence was unacceptable, and everyone wanted to pray for Kirk and his family after hearing the news.”
You’re deeply misrepresenting the response from many on the left. It was not “everyone” at all whatsoever. Some Democrats in the House protested and refused to have a moment of silence within *hours* of Charlie’s murder. Some in the media and many who identify as liberals or leftists across social media have been just as wicked.
President Trump’s response was not “bizarre”: it was honest snd accurate.
Why don't we go back and see what some conservatives said about the killings of Minnesota lawmakers or the attack on Nancy Pelosi's husband? There will be fringe shit posters looking to say terrible things across the political spectrum, and we have a social media company founded for the purpose of making sure they hog the spotlight.
I'm not sure about this. The demonization and dehumanization of political adversaries can make political violence more likely. Would-be perpetarors can rationalize to themselves that their victims deserve their fate AND they can hope to bask in the praise of all the online ghouls who spent the past few years celebrating the deaths of Covid vaccine skeptics and wishing for red state residents to suffer for the sin of voting for Trump.
This is _insultingly_ wrong, Zaid.
Here's how the game works: You label someone as a Nazi, a fascist, or whatever class of monstrous imminent threat you can. You create the perception, 'These people are hellbent on exterminating you. Dialogue with them is impossible'. People feel backed into a wall. People start to feel that, committing murder against someone who speaks _words_ against them is not only morally right, but it is an act of self defense.
We are not so ignorant or impaired we won't see that's been happening on the Left. Hell, Charlie's entire *career* proves you wrong!! He was trying to open up dialogue with people. Did he have a need to go do that with the Right? Or did he take it to Liberal college campuses? Did he extend a hand of peace to those kids, *precisely BECAUSE* he knew they'd been propagandized to see him as an inhuman monster?
If you thought Trump's response was confusing, it is proof that you are not paying attention. I was a Democrat for 35 years. I left the party when I saw how easily "my" party was rallied to send death threats to Nick Sandmann, for the crime of standing in one spot and doing literally nothing. It took a few more dominoes falling for me to formally leave, but that's when I knew, 'The soil in the minds of the Left must have been seeded with poison for a _long_ time now, for the zeitgeist to say, "MAGA kids go screaming, hats first, into the woodchipper," and for people gave that statement likes and reposts and nod in approval like that wasn't purest insanity.
I saw _years ago_ that "my" party was being primed to accept the idea that the death of the other sides' youth was a moral necessity. That's _literally_ the thought process of Anders Behring Breivik.
Yes, the culture shifts over time, and in a few generations, the Right will be this rabidly insane again, as it was during Jim Crow. But RIGHT NOW, if you think there is not a severe problem in the minds of the Left, you need to dig yourself out of a hole. Yesterday I was told point blank, "There is no peace with fascists." The man he believed was a fascist was a man who never did anything more violent but speak. Fix yourself, man.
Maybe I missed it but I didn’t see Trump arguing for UK style restrictions on speech. My takeaway from Trumps typical hyperbolic statement was the idea that people should calm down, take the long and nuanced view on history , understand that people can disagree and maybe even work things out a bit. There is a tendency these days for people to become wildly emotional, spewing the N word (so many Nazis!) and dropping family and friends and others, over political disagreements. And it seems logical that this level of urgency and anger can take vulnerable people over the edge.
Well put.
Well said, Zaid
The internet/social media as well as our political system being painted as a perpetual zero sum game by interested parties has made everyone crazy.
"Your life has value and your political opponent's lives have value too. You can hate your adversaries ideas and you can fight hard for your cause. But the moment we stop seeing each other as human beings and we start concluding that violence is the answer, that's the moment we let the soulless corporations, the ruthless authoritarians and the sociopathic demagogues win." (David Sirota)
if someone is truly convinced that the country is being taken over by Nazi’s, why wouldn’t violence or assassination be the proper response?
in fact, the most cliched trope about time travel is going back in time to kill Hitler.
just like the attempted assassination of Trump, there are thousands if not millions who wished the shooter had been successful. no doubt the same can be said of Kirk. I have several friends who are joyful that he was killed and I have seen dozens of accounts on SM celebrating his death.
in other words, we have millions of people who wish violence on their political enemies, but are too chickenshit or comfortable to carry it out. it only takes a few bad turns in someones life to turn into Travis Bickle.
for a decade the MSM has been calling Trump and his supporters fascists, Nazi’s and white supremacists. is it any surprise that many actually believe it..?
hey there dumdum why have you blocked me on x? Along with applebaum? whadda I do?