> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
This is false: "Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x."
Charlie Kirk was hated for pointing out that black Democrats frequently (disproportionately) hunt, attack and kill white people for fun and sport. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmqCVrkXWk These "polar bear hunting" incidents happens in many US Cities, and at the Wisconsin State Fair. Black Flash Mob Attack At Wiscosin State Fair
'Race War At Wisconsin State Fair' "I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face."
"Victims [of Left Wing Violence against Whites] can be any age, male or female, healthy or not. They range from a 13-year-old boy to a 78-year-old woman carrying shopping bags.
80 percent of all interracial violent crime is LeftWing Violence by Black/Democrats against whites. Democrats openly advertise their intentions of giving blacks in particular impunity for violent crimes as a "civil rights" entitlement for blacks/democrats. The routine nature of black/democrat-on-white LeftWing violence (e.g., "The Knockout Game", "Polar Bear Hunting") openly supported by Democrats is evidence of the current existence of a "civil war and race war". Blacks/Democrats are currently in a state of "civil war and race war" against white people. This further includes the open borders scheme that Blacks/Democrats have employed to replace white people as the voting majority/citizens/rulers who will prescribe the rules for taxation of white people and for the enslavement of white children/people. Fundamentally, Blacks/Democrats are systematically and violently attacking the "progeny" of white people who founded America, America was founded by the white supremacists founders for the specific purpose of depriving pious men of color of white slaves. White Supremacist Prescient Jefferson built the US Navy specifically to send gunships to free the white slaves halal owned by pious Muslim men of color in Tripoli. Blacks/Democrats present an existential threat to the Freedom and Lives of White Saqaliba People in America.
The only redeeming quality of Democrats is that they advocate for the assassination of unborn blacks/Democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse. But, even so, the failure of Democrats to diligently procure the deaths of unborn black/democrats is the cause of over 90 percent of violent crime in US Cities. If Democrats were more effective at procuring the assassination of unborn blacks/democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse, all American cities would be peaceful and safe places. It is the Democrat white supremacists who deliberately deprive blacks of Islamic Justice (or any close approximation) and thus there is no Peace in American cities. No Islamic Justice, No Islamic Peace.
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing
party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
Cool, why doesn't your copy-paste reveal the name of the organization that conducted the polling? Could it be because nobody has ever heard of them, and the poll author went on Fox complaining about "left-wing authoritarianism"?
Wow, a retarded guy wants a "real reply" to Richard?
You don't address idiocy with...hold on I'll show you how stupid I have to be to even get to Richard's level today:
-----
It turns out Richard enjoys losing & has no concept of the actual, spiritual war that is always going on.
Yes, Richard, I do want to shut down my political opponents. This isn't fun and games.
Since you're so concerned with their voice, know this:
The "Left" will continue to spiral without the saving grace of Christian, Western Civilization building again and purging what 250 years of Enlightenment has done to mankind .
They need us, does that appeal to your gross desire to be amicable?
"This was obviously not the responsibility of “the right,” but one deranged individual. It is overwhelmingly likely that when the facts come out about the Kirk assassination, it will also turn out that there was no wider conspiracy behind what happened."
…
"What many Trump supporters would like to do is use this as an excuse to shut down political opponents. If not legally, then by creating a social stigma around speaking out about Trump’s authoritarian policies and methods of control. Nobody should be encouraging assassinations, but if a president is behaving in an authoritarian way, those who see what is happening cannot remain silent because someone out there might hear what they are saying and commit a violent act."
I always love the people contextualizing an event that was fundamentally a weakening of the power of the church and the rise of scientific inquiry as a fully Christian event.
Your thing did its thing, and it is in decline. It's ending. There may be bumps in the road, but more and more people cannot square pre-scientific claims with growing scientific evidence
The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
I was about to start telling you where you were wrong, until it became clear that almost nothing you've said here is correct. You sound like a Large Language Model trained exclusively on disinformation.
the marital terran (martian? with a spelling & comprehension problem) is a lil bot, thatssss alllllll. just meant to make certain people mad, and others comforted. awwww... good wil bottie bot.
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
You created a new account just to push this nonsense. "Assassination culture is spreading on the left... The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. ... The left into a ticking time bomb."
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
You clearly did not read nor understand the NIJ report. Which is at least 10 years old.
“Although it is not uncommon for a particular ideology to dominate the public discourse around extremism, the PIRUS and BIAS data indicate that U.S. extremists and individuals who commit hate crimes routinely come from across the ideological spectrum, including far-right, far-left, Islamist, or single-issue ideologies. These ideologies break down into particular movements, or sub-ideologies.”
This was focused on hate crimes, designed during the Obama administration and defines “right wing” in dubious terms, including counting the mass shooting at the Colorado LGBTQ+ club as right wing when the evidence clearly showed a disturbed, non-binary assailant with deep mental health issues.
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
“The left,” like most Americans, does not approve of murdering any political enemies. The majority of people are sane, and did not want this to happen. A sane person is against such a killing regardless of which political party the victim belongs to.
Psychos and lunatics exist of all ideologies, and they commit these crimes. When Vance Boelter killed those two Minnesota politicians, the left didn’t go blaming the whole right in the same way conservatives are doing with this. The left also is not creating a conspiracy that the assassin is actually a conservative, unlike the right’s treatment of the Minnesota shooter and denial of facts/evidence. That said, tribalism exists on both sides, and I am against it regardless of which side displays it. But it becomes especially dangerous when detached from reality.
With MAGA, the push to abandon any semblance of independent critical thought in favor of explicit scapegoating and dehumanizing of political enemies is greater than any we’ve seen before. And it increasingly relies upon hatred and generalizations. America should not be a country where people hate other Americans who vote differently. You have far more in common with the average American leftist than the media would ever portray. Maybe if you go out and talk to people instead of reading crazies online, you’d realize that. There are crazy people on both sides.
Keep in mind that algorithms will feed you extreme takes to fuel the attention/outrage cycle. It will feed you media that evokes strong emotional reactions and enforces your views—it will rarely show you sane views from the other side. Wanting to attack all leftists for the work of one psycho is pure tribalism. By blaming the left for this, you’re feeding right into the polarized narrative manipulation that feeds into political violence.
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
You must be projecting. I do not develop opinions based on biased partisan media, nor am I loyal to either political party. Also, I actually read sources from the right and left on a daily basis. Neither of the two examples you gave indicate that the left as a whole would be inclined to actually kill anyone. California’s decisions do not speak for the left as a whole, and neither do the participants in these surveys. One can cherry-pick extremes and present that information in an effort to demonize a large group of people (and surveys like the one you cited are weak—attitudes about something being “somewhat justified” are not the same as actual behavior).
The difference is that when you look at actual violence, the picture flips: according to a major study of U.S. extremists (PIRUS, 1948–2018), right-wing individuals were almost twice as likely as left-wing ones to commit violent extremist acts. And Brookings notes that since 9/11, right-wing extremists have killed over 130 people in the U.S., compared to virtually none linked to the left. I’m against violence regardless of who does it, and have no interest in demonizing the right; hence, I don’t go around sharing these stats—this is my first time since you brought it up. Those who are violent do not represent everyone in the party.
If you want to engage in good faith, consider looking into these sources, as well as statistics on violence from the right (including domestic terrorism and politically motivated attacks). The left is no more inclined toward violence than the right, and it is telling that those who claim to oppose violence are often silent when it comes from their own side. Offering selective, weak evidence for only one side does not make your case, it only shows you’re the one with bias.
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
About half of leftists think it's ok to murder Trump and Musk and about half supported Luigi. What the fuck are you saying? Stop fucking assuming you gaslighting piece of shit.
No one said you can’t be upset at those people, nor is anyone stopping you from feeling however you want to feel. I’m simply trying to engage in rational discourse. You’re attacking the wrong person.
Cancelling was certainly an insane lefty thing for sure. But that’s quite a leap from shutting down a speaker to lone gunman assassination, which seems to be what this is at this point.
So what do you make of his example of the Dem state politicians murdered in Minnesota? Or to his point about how Trump debases discourse more than anybody else? Or is that too much cognitive dissonance for you?
The left deserves an apology. The right wing nutters jumped to blaming the left without even a suspect. Turns out it was a crazy rightwing white cis guy who didn’t think the other white right wing cis guy was mean enough.
That's highly unlikely to be the case. There's been no evidence of motive apart from the antifascist messages on the bullets. We'll see what more emerges.
it's kind of cute to see all the rightoids hot and bothered about political violence in the comments here considering how many of them looked at a guy who literally sent an armed mob to the Capitol and thought "this is good leadership I'll vote for that"
A man who extended grace to you in person and helped you personally to promote your book was shot in the jugular while he was engaging in open discussion of ideas on a university campus—and you decide to take the opportunity to write about how orange man is bad? Classy. Real classy Richard.
I don’t think he needs to do a whole article of murder is bad. It’s fully ok for him to look at the turn the discussion’s taking and saying this murder is being used as a bad faith argument.
Plenty of others are using Charlie Kirk’s death to push their polarized political agenda, scapegoating the entire left. How is that respectful of Charlie Kirk? If people weren’t taking his death as an opportunity to serve tribalistic political purposes (instead of simply mourning his loss, and/or honestly wanting to assess the situation and prevent it from happening again), Richard wouldn’t need to write this response. However, it is this kind of scapegoating that creates a polarized environment that radicalizes people and increases political violence, and Richard is helping address this issue.
Charlie Kirk advocated for having civil dialogue with those you disagree with, which is a great message. We need to go that route if we want to address the polarization issue. Anyone on the left who is celebrating this is part of the problem, as are those on the right using it to demonize the whole left.
No individual is responsible for the actions of other individuals in their political party. There are good people and bad people on both sides.
“However, it is this kind of scapegoating that creates a polarized environment that radicalizes people and increases political violence, and Richard is helping address this issue.”
Richard is not ADDRESSING this issue.
Richard here is ENCAPSULATING this issue!
He blamed Donald Trump - no let’s strike that - he blamed Donald Trump’s VOTERS!
“The argument that ‘the left’ is somehow responsible goes along the lines that Democrats and liberals say bad things about Donald Trump and conservatives. Once in a while, then, it’s unsurprising that some unstable person comes along and takes these rantings seriously.
This argument makes sense on its own terms. The problem is that it is made by people who have chosen Donald Trump as the leader of their movement.”
So the argument makes sense, but YOUR guy is 100x worse! So therefore YOU don’t get to say anything, and your argument is wrong because of YOUR identity.
This is problematic on at least two levels:
1) the claim that the other side is 100x worse (which is a claim, one that is not remotely objective or falsifiable, and which I would argue is indeed just wrong)
2) the two wrongs don’t make a right fallacy. Or “Let he who be without sin cast the first stone” if you prefer. Or simply arguing based on identity rather than the logic of the argument.
On both axes Richard is not addressing the scapegoating in a way to reduce polarization. He is doubling and tripling down on both.
TL/DR: Richard explicitly increases scapegoating and polarization with his assertion that Trump’s voters elected the biggest scapegoater/polarizer and so their arguments are without merit.
The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
Almost everything you wrote is either invented or a logical error. George Floyd did not die because of fentanyl from “open borders,” and there is no evidence Democrats commit “99.5% of violent crime.” That has no basis in data and is flat-out made-up. You clearly have no interest in data, your emotional volatility has given you an erroneous understanding of reality.
Also, you throwing in “20 million climate deniers here for gender surgery” and medieval slavery is caricature and distraction. You’re lumping together immigrants, Democrats, criminals, and terrorists as if they’re the same thing, then using that confusion in an attempt to argue violence is justified. That’s the very fear-mongering that leads to tribalist ignorance, mindless mass panic and brainwashing.
If you want to be taken seriously, start with facts, and drop the exaggerations and invented numbers. Also, study up on logical fallacies. You have made at least eight of them in this response alone.
Light and Harris (2012) examined the violent crime rate in 1,315 counties in the United States (U.S.) and found that neighborhoods with majority Black residents had a much higher violent index rate (306.33) compared to their White counterparts (70.95). Hannon, Knapp, and Defina (2005) examined Black and White homicide rates and found that the homicide rate for the Black population is 40.99, which was nearly five times that of the White population (8.76). The higher rate of crime tracks that US blacks are disproportionately DEMOCRATS who reproduce without marriage like lions. In Atlanta, over 99 percent of violent crime is by Black Democrats. Democrats are enslavers and criminals by their nature. George Floyd and his gang robbed a pregnant woman at gunpoint because they are Democrats. Floyd swallowed a fentanyl pill during his arrest because he was a Democrat. Toxicology shows that Floyd died of lethal Fentanyl dose that he was seen swallowing.
Nowhere in the studies you cited say crime is caused by being a Democrat. Your effort to link group stats to party identity is an ecological fallacy. Your “99% in Atlanta” figure is fabricated; you are misusing data.
You are delusional. Considering only completed murders that overcame modern ER medical interventions: "Over 85 percent of known victims and suspects in homicides were Black, while Black citizens comprise 49.8 percent of the overall population in Atlanta" https://nicjr.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Atlanta-GVA-5.2022.pdf "About 92 percent of Atlanta's murders last year were of [and by] Black people: 125 Black men (or boys) and 19 Black women (or girls)." https://theatlantaobjective.substack.com/p/why-theyre-all-black
When the reported attempted murders [bad shootings that missed the target or did not kill], and robberies, rapes [often unreported], carjacking, burglaries are factored in, the "violent crime" rate has been over 99% Black Democrat. None of these statistical extremes occur in Saudi Arabia or in Egypt or anywhere else on Earth other than places where American Democrats are in control of the local justice system. Democrats are the entire cause of these extreme crime rates and statistics. [Countries in black Africa that have extreme poverty do not have such high rates of violent crime, especially where Shariah Law is enforced (e.g., Mali, north Sudan etc) Extreme Crime rates in American cities is caused by Democrats, not by poverty, not by race]. Mentally ill and opportunistic Democrats use the extreme crime statistics that they cause to further extort money from the taxpayers: "The source of violent crime in Atlanta isn’t mysterious: It’s desperation, born by inequality." So, black male democrat's are killing rival black male democrats (and killing and raping female black democrats etc) because they feel "inequality" and "desperation"?
So much BS but I’ll address this: You’re being massively disingenuous by saying “toxicology” proved he overdosed - the first autopsy found that he died of “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law-enforcement subdual restraint, and neck compression.” The second found he died of “asphyxiation from sustained pressure”. In other words, Chauvin’s actions killed him. The drugs in his system were metabolized - he’d passed the point where he would have suffered an OD.
Besides, when you OD, you get pinpoint pupils. As per the EMT report and testimony at trial, Floyd’s pupils were dilated. When you OD, your respiratory rate drops below 10 - Floyd’s was 22. When you OD, you drift into a peaceful, painless sleep - Floyd was crying out in pain. It’s physiologically impossible to OD without pinpoint pupils and a respiratory rate below 10. Floyd had neither of those two things. Derek Chauvin killed him.
Objective Prompt to GenAI: "The doctor said that my son had a blood screen that revealed his fentanyl levels at 11 ng/mL, norfentanyl at 5.6 ng/mL, and methamphetamine at 19 ng/mL What are his chances of recovery? What are the pathologies that can result from these numbers?"" AI Response: "Fentanyl is a powerful synthetic opioid. Even in small doses, it can be lethal. Blood levels of fentanyl are often categorized as therapeutic (for pain management), toxic, or lethal. An 11 ng/mL level of fentanyl is considered to be in the high-risk or toxic-to-lethal range for individuals who have not been prescribed the drug and have no tolerance. For individuals with a tolerance to opioids, the interpretation of this level can vary.
Norfentanyl is the primary metabolite of fentanyl, meaning it is what the body breaks fentanyl down into. Its presence indicates that the body has processed the fentanyl. A norfentanyl level of 5.6 ng/mL further confirms a significant exposure to fentanyl." "Fentanyl-Related Pathologies:
Respiratory Depression: The most immediate and life-threatening effect of a fentanyl overdose is severe respiratory depression, where breathing becomes dangerously slow and shallow, or stops altogether. This can lead to a lack of oxygen to the brain and other vital organs, causing irreversible brain damage, coma, or death."
Doctor states: "A lower level of fentanyl may cause death if other drugs that cause respiratory suppression or sedation is present, such as alcohol, other opiates (heroin" In addition to fentanyl and methamphetamine, the toxicology report from the autopsy showed that Floyd also had cannabinoids in his system when he died.
There was zero video evidence of cyanosis of Floyd. The medical reports found no physical evidence of external/forcible asphyxia. The assertions that officers caused the asphyxiation death are entirely subjective opinions having no objective basis other than video interpretation and political convenience. The medical conclusions are simply political opinions to conceal the fact that Floyd was the victim of self-inflicted Fentanyl poisoning etc.
AI: "The combination of an opioid like fentanyl and a stimulant like methamphetamine can have unpredictable and dangerous effects. This is sometimes referred to as a "speedball." The opposing effects of the drugs on the central nervous system can mask the signs of overdose from either substance, potentially leading to a person taking a more lethal dose than they otherwise would have." ["The opposing effects of the drugs on the central nervous system can mask the signs of overdose from either substance"]
Sorry I guess that was vague enough for you to act like you don’t know what he meant. I guess you should instead look at what miller’s wife, Andrew Tate, Elon Musk, and Laura loomer said.
Lmao, you must have a memory that starts in 2015, then, because Trump first made a name for himself as a vile shit-slinger, to my knowledge, as early as the Central Park 5, and definitely by the time he was boosting the birther conspiracy and attacking anyone who argued the point.
I'm really not a fan of Obama, but you can't attack him on civility.
He made his bones saying the Civil Rights Act was a mistake and that 10 year olds that got raped should carry their rapist's child to term. Fuck him and fuck you, too, pussy.
"Whataboutism" is when people try to distract from the subject of discussion by bringing up something similar—or in some way related—that someone else did. And to be fair to the "whataboutists", it's often an entirely legitimate attempt to call out hypocrisy and demand fairness and consistency in judgement.
Where "whataboutism" goes wrong is when either:
- 1. The comparison is entirely unfair—one that demonstrates only a superficial similarity, a sameness in kind but not in magnitude, or one that ignores the substantive issue of the criticism at hand.
For example, "Whatabout when Obama/Biden did [insert some non-criminal or only mildly controversial exercise of power by Obama or Biden] and you said it was crazy to demand impeachment!"
2. When the criticism doesn't even present a valid or relevant comparison.
For example, "Whatabout that time that Charlie Kirk was nice to you!"
If you think I'm being unfair to you here, then let me reframe this in more conventional terms. You claiming that Richard is "using" Kirk's death to criticize Trump is as valid a complaint as me saying that conservatives are "using" his death to demonize liberals.
You may say that conservatives aren't taking undue advantage of—or "using"—Kirk's death for anything, and that it's entirely fair for someone to be outraged by his murder and criticize those that they believe responsible. Fine.
Then it's entirely fair for Hanania to be arguing that such blame is misplaced, especially when the reality of the right's culpability—by virtue of the man they've willingly chosen as their leader—is so egregious and palpable. He's calling out MAGA for their utter hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness. That's the "good" kind of whataboutism.
And I think any reasonable observer would have to grant that he has a strong case—one which you don't seem quite inclined to engage. Which is understandable, I suppose; it's hard to convincingly make the case that whatever vitriol and outrage we hear from Trump's opponents is a blameworthy response to the patently vitriolic and outrageous behavior of this Administration.
Agree with it or not, calling for people to avoid that discussion—particularly an entirely reasonable one which makes uncontroversial, albeit unflattering observations about Trump and his relationship to our political discourse—by appealing to the natural human sentiment to exhibit temperance in the face of a horrific tragedy, exploits the very essence of the "bad" kind of whataboutism.
I don’t think this was about the Orange Man. It was about how the left should not be targeted for this killing or any killing. We have crazy people and guns.
It boggles my mind that the right doesn’t notice how inflammatory its rhetoric is, nor does it seem to notice that it is, in fact, the more violent side. Even in the responses today, every Democratic lawmaker has condemned this in the strongest possible terms, while Republican lawmakers are calling for blood. Not to mention their cruel and tasteless jokes every time a Democrat is attacked.
My thoughts are with Charlie Kirk’s family. This is a terrible tragedy, and the last thing America needs is more political violence. We’re hanging by a thread as it is.
It’s just so crazy how they’ll never take accountability for the violence. I don’t like Leftists but at the very least they’ll apologise and disavow any sort of violence, the right will never apologise for January 6th or the murders of the Minnesota lawmakers. They just resort to conspiracy theories to shift the blame, always. It’s literally their defence mechanism. I think this is why conspiracy theories are so popular on their side, it shields them from looking in and turning the temperature down.
Even now they’re saying the left needs to turn their temperature down but Trump is the person who needs to turn his divisive rhetoric the most.
Tbf Leftists won't apologize, but left-wing liberals will.
That being said, left-wing liberals are still confused about how, or whether, to disavow Leftists, especially illiberal or psychotic leftists.
Hanania is right that Donald Trump being the leader of the American Right makes it impossible for his opponents to call for their respective coalitions, specifically, to tone-down the rhetoric without feeling as if they're unilaterally disarming in the face of an enemy that openly calls for their persecution and destruction. But this doesn't mean that things aren't getting bad in left-wing spaces, primarily driven by shameless Leftists. Just look at the Left's reaction to Luigi Mangione.
I do think that at least now, liberals are starting to wake up to how destructive Leftists are to their own movement.
With the Luigi issue, though, I don't think the celebration was on left/right lines, I really noticed it on Populist/Moderate lines. While Leftists were absolutely the happiest crowd about the news, pretty much everyone who rails against """The Elites""" was cheering
How did they apologize and disavow the violence against Uniteds CEO? They were fucking celebrating Luigi. WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SAYING? HOW ARE YOU THIS FUCKING DISHONEST?
You can look at any regular news site and you'll learn that the killer not only had clear right-wing views, but a hit-list in his car containing the names of Democratic politicians and abortion advocates and providers. Whether or not you want to say "the right" caused it, the killer was clearly a person of the right and influenced by its political culture.
I do find it wild that right’s violence some how gets completely memory holed while the left is forced to own insane dipshit who liked a Bernie meme. But I will say, that the left has been blissfully ignorant of how violent their extremists are, too.
This is the huge problem with where we are at now. Blue foot soldiers be red foot soldiers. No one is willing to completely own and cast out their own crazies.
I agree with most of your comment, but there really is huge asymmetry between Dem and GOP lawmakers. Not even Rashida Tlaib supports Luigi. To the extent Dem lawmakers mentioned that at all, I’m 1000% sure they condemned him.
Are you familiar with Jacobin? They’re a socialist publication. Named after the Jacobins, no less! Pretty much as left as you can get. And they published an article condemning Kirk’s murder not just on moral grounds, but because they believe political violence is more dangerous to the left than the right.
I apparently consume very different news sources than a lot of people here, and it’s interesting to see how much you guys talk about Luigi. I really don’t think it’s that important in the grand scheme of things, except in the context of rising political violence. Libs have already forgotten about someone shooting up the CDC. A ton of lawmakers got credible bomb threats today.
I get that. So far I’ve seen more people condemning people who celebrated Kirk’s death than I’ve seen actually celebrating his death. The right is very good at that. Whether it’s Sydney Sweeneys jeans or Luigi or some insane teacher trying to indoctrinate kids somewhere, they’re very good at finding the dumbest of the dumb and convincing everyone that these people are in fact normie liberals
Half of leftists think it's morally ok to kill Musk and Trump, and half support Luigi. You're a disgusting lying piece of shit. Fuck you you fucking cunt.
No, that’s false. There was a moment of silence, and then Boebert wanted a spoken prayer. Dems then complained that this was excessive, given that there had been no moment of silence for the students injured at the school shooting just a few hours later. At that point, a Republican started screaming at the Democrats, falsely blaming them.
You should make a note that whoever you heard this from is not reliable.
Notably, Kirk himself said that shootings were worth keeping 2A. I disagree and think that’s heinous, but at least he was willing to be up front about it and not hide behind “thoughts and prayers”.
Easy to imagine a roles-reversed scenario, where a BLM activist is killed by an attacker with multiple convictions. In that scenario, you'd have right-wingers crowing about how the BLM activist got the police-free world they asked for.
Just give it a bit more, and we'll be totally incapable of any sort of cost-benefit discussion in situations where lives are at stake...
And he got shot as he was answering a question about gun control, the irony can’t write itself better. This man’s last words were literally ‘gang violence’, jeez. Another family and group of children growing up without a father, tragic.
Project less, will ya? He lived by it and died by it. He said some shooting deaths are the price of 2A and it’s worth it. It’s unfortunate he ended up being part of that price. But it seemed like it was a price he should’ve been willing to pay, on principle. And while I didn’t agree with him all of the time, he seemed pretty consistent in his principles when making his arguments.
He was right. It's an ugly truth but it is a truth. If deaths can be used as a reason to eliminate one right then deaths can be used as a reason to eliminate all other rights as well. And once power and authority realize they were successful with the strategy once they will keep using the strategy until the masses rise up against them.
I think the murder of Charlie Kirk is a bigger deal than you’re making it out to be, first, because of who he was, second, because it does say something about “the left.”
Kirk wasn’t an elected politician. If someone assassinated Trump, that would be wrong, but at least you could argue that there was provocation. Kirk’s thing was holding public debates. At least by the standards of American conservatism, he wasn’t that extreme. (In fact, he was one of the main forces opposing the Nazification of the right.) Are we now at risk when we give a talk at a university? This was different from killing a congressman.
We don’t know who the killer was or what his motives were. Theoretically, it could have been a groyper or a crazy person with no agenda at all. But most likely it was a leftist. And the left appears to be increasingly pro violence. There's widespread support for Hamas. Mainstream figures celebrated Luigi Mangione. Supposedly 57.6% of “left of center” Americans think it is at least “partially acceptable” to destroy a Tesla dealership. 55.2% say it is at least “somewhat justified” to kill Trump. (You could argue that this is a response to Trump’s unique evil, but I suspect you’d have similar results for almost any Republican president.) Obviously, there are major problems on the right, but the left is also moving backwards.
I’m the liberal here. Aren’t I supposed to be the one foaming at the mouth, calling everyone I disagree with subhuman?
However, I’m updating my guess. I hadn’t realized groypers hated Kirk. I’m guessing it’s some deranged Fuentes fan who thought Kirk was a sleeper agent for Israel.
Leftists generally aren’t precision assassins. This codes more rightwing-y to me. Hopefully the police catch him
Again, RH, if you want to raise the quality of your substack to something like Noah, Yglesias, Silver, or SSC, you’re going to need to monitor your comments section more carefully. High quality comments are an important part of a good substack. A loyal, thoughtful commentariat raises your credibility.
That there a bunch of leftists who openly support violence says a lot about the left. That one of them happened to actually shoot someone says a lot less. There's just not enough political assassinations for "who does more political assassinations?" to be a useful measure of which side supports violence more. What one guy did can never be strong evidence for what a group of millions of people are like. You can believe the left is violent, but I think the case for that should look more like "lots of leftists say they support violence" than "the left has had 5 major political assassinations and the right has had 4" or whatever the actual numbers are
To me, the broad impact is that Kirk, while he was a committed partisan, was perhaps the best-known avatar for free speech that we have in our culture. I was sickened by this, in part because it feels like an attack on speech itself.
Good point that he was a public figure but not a politician (contra the Minnesota example Hanania used).
However, as public figures go, he probably had more access and influence, due to his friendship with Trump and Trump Jr, than most could ever dream of, politician or otherwise.
But bottom line, this was a political assassination, and we should repudiate it unequivocally, full stop.
I agree with you, it's highly disturbing. But only in the sense that the left is *almost* catching up to the right in terms of political assassination attempts (as far as violent rhetoric goes, there is still no comparison). It's only disturbing if you expect better from one side than the other. Like you, I expect more from Democrats and find all of this incredibly worrisome.
Every urban crime committed in Democratrun cities is a form of political violence. If white Americans did not have private guns then millions would be robbed murdered raped or enslaved by Democrats anually. UNUSED GUNS PREVENT KNIFE VIOLENCE IN US. "STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES"; "END KNIFE VIOLENCE" are actual campaigns in England where there are not enough guns to prevent or terminate Knife Violence. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
Every urban crime in democrat run cities is political violence? So a heroin addict mugging someone for drug money with no broader political motive is political violence? You might as well just say all violence, everywhere is political violence
The polling you’re repeating is the kind of one-off clickbait bullshit that gets repeated endlessly by FoxNews and the Washington Times that doesn’t have a shred of science or rigor behind it.
When credible pollsters ask Americans about attitudes toward political violence, 75-85% of people identifying as D, R, and I all say it’s unacceptable.
And no, there is not ‘widespread support for Hamas’ on the left. That is just utter nonsense. Democrats and Independents largely support Israel but think Netanyahu’s military strategy has gone too far. That is not ‘support for Hamas’
There is deeper anti-Israeli / pro-Palestinian sentiment among *young* people, but people under 30 were more evenly split between Harris and Trump than they’ve been in decades. College kids waving Hamas flags hated Biden and Harris.
I won’t celebrate murder. But I won’t mourn Kirk either.
He argued on many occasions that he felt the deaths of innocent people were an acceptable cost for the 2A. So, in an ironic twist worthy of the Twilight Zone, his point was proven, I guess?
Cars kill tens of thousands of people who would not be dead if we just walked around. Charlie Kirk believed that abolition of private ownership of cars is not justified by these deaths. If he was ran over by a car, that is ironic but his viewpoint is valid. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
Approximately 40K Americans died in car accidents last year. Many of those Americans are themselves vehicle drivers. They felt the risk of a road accident was worth getting places faster. Does that make them less deserving of sympathy?
Guns are also used for sport. And obviously self defense, which is sometimes a special case where killing is good, and other times involves no killing at all.
Do you think that most gun owners and gun rights advocates want to commit murder? Seems to me that the vast majority of guns aren’t bought for that.
Of course. And cars are also used for driving into crowds of pedestrians to mow them down by terrorists or loaded up with explosives and blown up by insurgents/guerrilla fighters.
But that's not a car's default/intended use, while fundamentally guns are for killing, or at the very minimum, maiming, causing damage to living things.
BTW I'm not arguing here for pro or anti gun position -- but against the car comparison.
And no, I don't think most legal gun owners/advocates want to have them to commit murder. Of course not. But as you yourself said, many probably consider some kinds of KILLING or maiming good (self defense is the obvious one). They probably don't want guns that are bad at killing/maiming.
As a aside, I can understand the "the gun homicides are regrettable but WORTH IT cost of the right to own guns and use them for legitimate purposes" position. I'm not sure if it's my position (it's a moot issue for me personally as I live outside US and the only kind of gun I could have is a hunting one, kept in a locked cabinet ;) but it's certainly honest and I can imagine assuming that position if I lived in the US.
A good analogy is legalising narcotics: you can honestly argue that you prefer the freedom to put whatever people want into their bodies and accept the cost of likely higher prevalence of addiction and overdose. I'm sympathetic to that argument. You can not, however, argue that heroin and fentanyl are like paracetamol, and the addiction and ODs are unfortunate and avoidable misuses. Their fundamental pharmacology is what makes them inherently dangerous, just as a gun’s fundamental design is what makes it lethal.
I don't see why I should care about the ontological nature of guns. Gun control is a wholly pragmatic issue to me. Will X measure reduce violent crime? How much? What are its second order costs? That's it. If an oracle told me that banning pistols would reduce homicides by 90% with few costs, I'd enthusiastically support it. If it would increase homicides with little benefit elsewhere, I'd oppose it, regardless of what guns are fundamentally designed for.
Same as cars. Reduce traffic deaths with few costs? Ban the cars.
However, this subthread wasn't about pragmatic issues of gun control at all but about the degree of "self infliction" one could attribute to a person who had claimed that the right to relatively freely own, trade, carry etc guns was worth the costs in increased gun violence/deaths and who was subsequently murdered with a gun.
UNUSED GUNS PREVENT KNIFE VIOLENCE IN US. "STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES"; "END KNIFE VIOLENCE" are actual campaigns in England where there are not enough guns to prevent or terminate Knife Violence. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
False equivalency. We tightly regulate driving and car ownership. Also, I absolutely want more safety features, better driving instruction, stronger DWI laws. I don’t want anyone to die on the road, and we should aspire for that goal.
If Kirk felt the same way about driving as he did guns, he’d say something to the effect of, “several deaths per year are worth it to preserve the right to drive recklessly, or operate unsafe vehicles.”
Simply holding an opinion on the second amendment doesn't increase or decrease your likelihood of being victimized by someone else. To your analogy, driving recklessly because you think it is a right increases your own risk of getting into an accident. You could say the person driving recklessly deserves their fate, but you can't say that about Charlie Kirk. You are just a sadist.
If you can’t mourn Kirk, mourn for his family. He had a wife and two kids. His parents have experienced the most painful possible event, losing their child.
I assume you hold the same opinion of the attempted assassination of then-78 year old Presidential candidate Donald Trump; totally fine and not worth talking about?
I understand that you are intellectually disabled and cannot understand the concept of standing by one’s beliefs. But, this is an outcome Kirk knew was possible, yet he expressed this belief anyway.
It’s a belief that very many of us (obviously) hold and do not change despite knowing that a gun death is possible for ourselves as well. We aren’t all cowards trying to be “safe” at every cost.
This is not the “gotcha” or the “irony” you think it is, dumbo.
A gang of feral democrats recently used a car to smash into a jewelry store to rob the jeweler because of his race and color. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jr6Ym5l65Ik
The problem of "violence" is not caused by guns. Violence in America is mostly caused by feral Democrats who commit over 90 percent of violent crime in US Cities (Because the Democrats are the type of white supremacists that most strongly oppose the halal enforcement of Shariah Law Punishments of blacks/democrats, e.g., "behead" the robber. Quran 5:12).
Just looked at your page. Charlie Kirk, reasonable? Lol, if he was reasonable, he would have seen the risks that what could happen to others could happen to him.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS, MUCH LIKE KIRK HIMSELF, ACCEPT GUN VIOLENCE AS AN ACCEPTABLE COST OF LIBERTY AND YES, WE KNOW THAT WE CAN BE VICTIMS OF GUN VIOLENCE OURSELVES.
IT'S NOT A GOTCHA.
Again, this is something that we have *ACCEPTED.*
I'm sorry you seem to genuinely lack the capacity to bargain or even understand the concept of bargaining. Again, a legitimate indicator of cowardice and intellectual disability.
Lol, Yelling doesn't debunk my original point - that he got his ironic fate. I don't care whether he accepted it or not. The only one here who's illiterate is you, because you haven't actually read my OP, but instead rushed in to defend your dead hero.
Intellectually disabled? Because I pointed out that hero couldn’t see how his beliefs could bite him in the ass? And if anything, I understood perfectly well about how he stood by his (stupid, misguided) beliefs. Tell me, did you actually learn the definition of irony in school, Alanis?
But okay, “Madje the Edgelord” I’m sure his wife and kids really appreciate him dying for his wonderful principles. Tell you what, sweetheart: I’ll pay for the postage if you put that on a card and send that to them.
I actually agree with that. But there's a difference between someone who gets lung cancer because of ignorance or super serious mental issues that stop them from stopping smoking vs someone who decides to accept the risk. I smoked for 20 years before I stopped and if I get lung cancer OF COURSE I'D BE SAD AND PISSED OFF. But it'd also be pretty much totally self inflicted: I'd have taken a gamble/accepted risk and Iost.
If I say that the occasional crazy person being radicalized by radical ideologies doesn’t justify the government restricting political speech, and am then gunned down by someone who was radicalized by online Marxists, would my death similarly deserve less sympathy?
Who's saying that? Look at the syllogism of my argument first before responding.
If you wanna sympathize with Kirk, be my guest. But he argued that "some deaths" are worth unfettered gun ownership. Well, he's now one of the "some deaths." and that's an ironic case of be careful what you wish for.
Right! I, personally, am saying that although radical political content probably does radicalize a nonzero number of people into committing murder and assassinations, the government should nevertheless not crack down on political speech.
Given that I am making that statement, I am curious: if I am assassinated, would my death be dismissed as “an ironic case of be careful what you wish for” and not worth mourning?
Maybe - depends on how dedicated you are, Tovarich. But who you choose to mourn is your business. I don’t have to mourn you, or him. People gotta live the consequences of their decision making. If that makes me evil in your eyes, fine, but the late Mr. Kirk, I should point out, was perfectly fine so long as other fathers died for his right; I’d argue thats just as evil.
"STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES." "END KNIFE VIOLENCE". These are the campaigns in England where guns are limited. People in England walk down the streets carrying severed heads because of leftist border destruction. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
For everyone snarling at The Left, let’s take a look at the statements by our former presidents.
Joe Biden: “There is no place in our country for this kind of violence. It must end now. Jill and I are praying for Charlie Kirk’s family and loved ones.”
Barack Obama: “We don’t yet know what motivated the person who shot and killed Charlie Kirk, but this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy. Michelle and I will be praying for Charlie’s family tonight, especially his wife Erika and their two young children.”
Bill Clinton: “ I’m saddened and angered by Charlie Kirk’s murder. And I hope we all go through some serious introspection and redouble our efforts to engage in debate passionately, yet peacefully. Hillary and I are keeping Erika, their two young children, and their family in our prayers.”
And then watch this statement by Trump. Not a word about the numerous attacks on Democratic lawmakers. No call for calm. In fact, he issues vague threats that seem aimed at progressive institutions he’s presumptively blaming. Remember, we don’t even have a suspect in custody yet. We have no knowledge of his motives. But Trump, as always, eagerly pours gasoline on the fire.
If you don’t see the difference, you’re willfully blind.
The fact that you guys are still complaining about “deplorables” ten years later proves my point. Trump was on Truth Social three days ago mocking Paul Pelosi. There is simply no comparison. Again, I’m baffled at how you don’t see this.
Hillary's rhetoric incited left democrats to openly call for violence against suspected Trump voters. And there was such violence in 2015. Left Democrat violence and incitement is a constant unforgivable unforgettable attack against Democracy. If white Americans did not have private guns then millions would be robbed murdered raped or enslaved by Democrats anually. UNUSED GUNS PREVENT KNIFE VIOLENCE IN US. "STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES"; "END KNIFE VIOLENCE" are actual campaigns in England where there are not enough guns to prevent or terminate Knife Violence. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
Celebrities too, and I'm grateful for that. That said, these three also said they didn't want gay marriage, once upon a time. And at the time, they probably didn't think things were being led that way, especially not with their help. But when so much emotional investment is put into always pushing normalcy one way, you're not gonna stop. Between that and the older generations eventually dying off, I think things are different than you say.
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
Cool, why doesn't your copy-paste reveal the name of the organization that conducted the polling? Could it be because nobody has ever heard of them, and the poll author went on Fox complaining about "left-wing authoritarianism"?
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
The problem is that people’s identity has become so interwoven with their political views that any challenge to their party’s narratives feels like a personal attack on them. They constantly seek validation and reinforcement of their worldview, which is built on an oversimplified “heroes vs. villains” setup. In this tribal state, truth is less important than anything that flatters their side.
They treat any evidence that contradicts their narrative as false because it threatens their identity, not because it is false. So they default to explanations that preserve their belief system. That’s why in today’s climate, the ecosystem of interpretation is more politically powerful than the reality of any given act or event.
The Minnesota shooter, Vance Boelter, is a good example. Most people agree that murdering elected officials is wrong, even from the other party. You’d expect broad condemnation with little partisan controversy. Instead, there was a debate, not about what he did, but to which “team” he belonged.
In spite of clear evidence that Boelter was a conservative (with ties to Christian nationalism), much of MAGA insisted he was on the left. A sane person’s response would be, “Yes, he votes like me, but he’s a murderer. He doesn’t represent my values.” But because his existence threatens their narrative, they had to find a different interpretation.
At this point, people are living in a cognitive matrix. Anything that disrupts their belief that they aren’t in the matrix becomes an existential threat, and must be reinterpreted, denied, or rejected. Scapegoats are frequently picked to maintain this reality and increase the group cohesion, the consensus of which is significantly more important than aligning with truth/reality.
So we can see that out of 6,578 murders, 566 were Black/Democrat-on-White murders, and 246 were White-on-Black murders. If that holds for all of the murders in the country, then Black/Democrat-on-White murder is about 2.3 times as common as White-on-Black murder. Whether or not the true number is lower or higher depends on whether there are more White-on-Black or Black-on-White murders that go unreported.
we can see somewhat similar patterns here to the FBI’s murder numbers. Black/Democrat-on-White violence is a lot more common than White-on-Black violence — about 5.2 times as common.
The disproportionate rate of Black/Democrat-on-White murders would be much worse except that white people have spent Trillions of Dollars to engage in "white flight" into suburbs and other places where there are few blacks/democrats. For this reason, blacks/democrats seek to use legislation (Affirmative Action housing e.g., Obama's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing "aims to break down historical patterns of racial and economic segregation that limit access to opportunity" to commit crimes against white people ) specifically to increase the opportunities for blacks/democrats to hunt, murder, rob, rape and burglarize white people.
[And White attacks on Black people are a relatively small percent of the violence Black people experience.]
"Data from the 1981 national victimization survey reveal that ... Although violent crime by white offenders is apparently strongly intraracial, in that 96.9 percent of the white offenders chose white victims, violent crime by black offenders is apparently predominantly interracial, with 55.2 percent of the black offenders choosing white victims. Black offenders chose white victims in 63.9 percent of robberies, 51.8 percent of assaults, and 58.6 percent of rapes. In contrast, white offenders chose black victims in 8.3 percent of robberies, 2.7 percent of assaults, and 5.5 percent of rapes. These percentages suggest that each of the three violent crimes is strongly intraracial for white offenders but predominantly interracial for black offenders. This finding suggests that the motives behind black assault and rape are different than the motives behind white assault and rape. Reasons why the partially interracial character of violent crime has not been addressed are suggested."
Charlie Kirk was hated for pointing out that black Democrats frequently (disproportionately) hunt, attack and kill white people for fun and sport. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmqCVrkXWk These "polar bear hunting" incidents happens in many US Cities, and at the Wisconsin State Fair. Black Flash Mob Attack At Wiscosin State Fair
'Race War At Wisconsin State Fair' "I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face."
"If, over the Christmas season, should any New Hampshire resident visit a large population center such as New York City, Chicago, or even Boston, that person would be well advised to beware participants of the “Knockout Game” (aka, “polar bearing” or “polar bear hunting. ... censorship of black-on-white crime condemns many non-blacks to victimization.”)"
In 2019, Black people made up 12.2% of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey). Blacks, however, represent 26.6% of total arrests, including 51.2% of murder arrests, 52.7% of robbery arrests, 28.8% of burglary arrests, 28.6% of motor vehicle theft arrests, 42.2% of prostitution arrests, and 26.1% of drug arrests (FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, Table 43).
This is why the Democrat Party openly facilitates voting by FELONS. The Democrat Party is the Party of Crime and is predominately driven by the desire of blacks/democrats/felons to harm or tax or enslave white people. NY Attorney General Letitia James confirmed this specific intent by proposing legislation to deprive white homeowners of the right to use "necessary" force (e.g., knives, guns, sticks) necessary to stop violent black felons from escaping justice immediately after the black/democrat has raped murdered robbed and/or kidnapped/enslaved white people in their homes
Maybe get your head out of Twitter and take The Economist approach: given an important incident, take just enough time for some rational thought, followed by enough cognitive cycles to mull things over and evidence to surface - before publishing.
Insta-posting based on Tweets is not intellectual work.
People will insta-post regardless. People all over the internet are insta-posting. May as well have some voices of restraint such as Richard insta-posting as well.
By pointing out that people are doing that? Even Charlie Kirk said that he's ok with the situation in Gaza, that it's a deserved firestorm by Israel. I never said any similar things in this thread, as you see.
"the rightoids ... call for civil war and race war" Charlie Kirk was hated for pointing out that black Democrats frequently (disproportionately) hunt, attack and kill white people for fun and sport. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmqCVrkXWk These "polar bear hunting" incidents happens in many US Cities, and at the Wisconsin State Fair. Black Flash Mob Attack At Wiscosin State Fair
'Race War At Wisconsin State Fair' "I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face."
"If, over the Christmas season, should any New Hampshire resident visit a large population center such as New York City, Chicago, or even Boston, that person would be well advised to beware participants of the “Knockout Game” (aka, “polar bearing” or “polar bear hunting. ... censorship of black-on-white crime condemns many non-blacks to victimization.”)"
"New Hampshire’s own Mark Steyn, writing in the National Review in an article entitled, “Knockouts High and Low,” describes what happens: “Groups of black youths roam the streets looking for a solitary pedestrian, preferably white (hence the alternate name ‘polar-bearing’) but Asian or Hispanic will do. The trick is to knock him to the ground with a single punch [often fatally killing the victim]. In preparation, the perpetrator approaches the victim either as a passer-by or from the rear. As he bashes the victim’s skull, his fellow thugs record it on cell phones for uploading to youtube.com, allowing the thug’s friends and family to enjoy his victim’s agony.
Victims can be any age, male or female, healthy or not. They range from a 13-year-old boy to a 78-year-old woman carrying shopping bags. There’s more, but you get the drift.
.... That means when in large cities, you should constantly be assessing people in your immediate vicinity. Any group of young blacks, giggling and talking among themselves while occasionally looking in your direction, should be regarded with suspicion. Forget political correctness. If a single individual leaves that group and moves in your direction, beware. It’s time to either prepare a defense or cross the street to where there are people and security cameras. ... Black youths look upon impunity as an entitlement."
80 percent of all interracial violent crime is Black/Democrats versus whites. Democrats openly advertise their intentions of giving blacks in particular impunity for violent crimes as a "civil rights" entitlement for blacks/democrats. The routine nature of black/democrat-on-white violence (e.g., "The Knockout Game", "Polar Bear Hunting") openly supported by Democrats is evidence of the current existence of a "civil war and race war". Blacks/Democrats are currently in a state of "civil war and race war" against white people. This further includes the open borders scheme that Blacks/Democrats have employed to replace white people as the voting majority/citizens/rulers who will prescribe the rules for taxation of white people and for the enslavement of white children/people. Fundamentally, Blacks/Democrats are systematically and violently attacking the "progeny" of white people who founded America, America was founded by the white supremacists founders for the specific purpose of depriving pious men of color of white slaves. White Supremacist Prescient Jefferson built the US Navy specifically to send gunships to free the white slaves halal owned by pious Muslim men of color in Tripoli. Blacks/Democrats present an existential threat to the Freedom and Lives of White Saqaliba People in America. The only redeeming quality of Democrats is that they advocate for the assassination of unborn blacks/democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse. But, even so, the failure of Democrats to procure the deaths of unborn black/democrats is the cause of over 90 percent of violent crime in US Cities. If Democrats were more effective at procuring assassination of unborn blacks/democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse, all American cities would be peaceful and safe places. It is the Democrat white supremacists who deliberately deprive blacks of Islamic Justice (or any close approximation) and thus there is no Peace in American cities. No Islamic Justice, No Islamic Peace.
So we can see that out of 6,578 murders, 566 were Black/Democrat-on-White murders, and 246 were White-on-Black murders. If that holds for all of the murders in the country, then Black/Democrat-on-White murder is about 2.3 times as common as White-on-Black murder. Whether or not the true number is lower or higher depends on whether there are more White-on-Black or Black-on-White murders that go unreported.
we can see somewhat similar patterns here to the FBI’s murder numbers. Black/Democrat-on-White violence is a lot more common than White-on-Black violence — about 5.2 times as common.
The disproportionate rate of Black/Democrat-on-White murders would be much worse except that white people have spent Trillions of Dollars to engage in "white flight" into suburbs and other places where there are few blacks/democrats. For this reason, blacks/democrats seek to use legislation (Affirmative Action housing e.g., Obama's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing "aims to break down historical patterns of racial and economic segregation that limit access to opportunity" to commit crimes against white people ) specifically to increase the opportunities for blacks/democrats to hunt, murder, rob, rape and burglarize white people.
[And White attacks on Black people are a relatively small percent of the violence Black people experience.]
Yes they're already all out there convinced it was a professional job. Very very similar to the Trump assassination attempt, and just like that one, it is going to end up being a random crazy person. Thing is, Utah is one of the most heavily armed states in the country, hunting is very popular, and there are fun clubs and shooting ranges of all types all over the place here. Hell my brother enters these crazy shooting competitions where they time you running through obstacles shooting pop up bad guys, almost every weekend. Very typical activity here, so there are thousands and thousands of people who could make that shot and they don't need to be former military or CIA or whatever.
A very sickening situation though. It's a beautiful day here. I also accidentally saw the video of him gushing blood when scrolling Twitter and my stomach still hurts.
I literally grew up watching way too many liveleak videos as a teenage boy and even that close up video had me a bit unnerved. I don’t want to get into the gory details since we’ve all seen it but Jesus that was brutal. Almost looked like movie levels of fake the first time I saw, I had to watch it three times to confirm it and cleanse my mind of it. Damn…
As it turns out, the assassin Tyler R. was raised in a MAGA household with a wholesome MAGA value system including training in the skilled use of rifles. In 2023 Tyler boasted to a coworker of his long-shot skill. But, unfortunately Tyler dropped out of college and dropped out of professional electrician work, and he became a low-self-esteem looser with low opportunity to get female love. Then, Tyler was seduced by a Transsexual/Democrat into a homosexuals relationship (with his effeminate male "roommate") and Tyler's mind became twisted by the Democrat/Trans agenda and he decided to kill Charlie Kirk as a way to advance the Transsexual/Democrat agenda.
Hamas is the Islamic state. see Wiki of: Slavery in Palestine. The Hamstinian people fight only for the freedom to enslave others as they did for hundreds of years. In October 2024 a white Yazidi woman was liberated fro enslavement captivity in Gaza.
Hamas is the Islamic state. see Wiki of: Slavery in Palestine. The Hamastinian people fight only for the freedom to enslave others as they did for hundreds of years. In October 2024 a white Yazidi woman was liberated from enslavement captivity in Gaza.
This would be an intelligent and thoughtful article if you addressed the wall to wall praise for the shooter on sites such as BlueSky, Reddit, Twitter. It would be one thing if this was a singular act condemned by all, but the fact that a sizable portion of the country reacts with erotic passion at the sight of blood pouring like a fountain from the throat of a youtuber they dislike is a bit concerning.
I see tons of awful stuff, but I also see every single Democratic lawmaker and all the other various leaders of progressive causes and MSM condemning this in the strongest possible terms.
Random people are just incredibly shitty online in a way they’d never be in real life.
Elected and MSM democrats behavior is reasonable, so they use the mantra "the media lies! the politicians are liars!" to call them evil people.
Elected and MSM republicans behavior is unhinged, so they use the mantra "the media lies! the politicians are liars!" to imply they are actually good and well intentioned people.
MSM and elected Democrats do lie a lot. But I agree that in this case they’re reacting sensibly.
Elected Republicans and Fox are similar. See Mitch McConnell’s and Kevin McCarthy’s reactions to the Paul Pelosi attack. Trump himself is much worse than the norm in either party.
‘"Thankfully he's gonna be okay but thankfully the attacker, he’s a deranged individual, but thankfully he was arrested. And we've watched this with Lee Zeldin, we've watched this with Supreme Court Justices. This is wrong. Violence should not go. You watch what happened to Steve Scalise and others. This has got to stop."
‘McCarthy also added that he reached out to Nancy Pelosi through text to offer his prayers.’
It looks like I misremembered. He made a joke about hitting Nancy Pelosi on the head with the Speaker’s gavel, not her husband.
That being said, Senator Mike Lee made a truly ghastly joke about the Minnesota lawmaker who was murdered a few months ago. And Fox News hosts did make horrible jokes and spread stupid rumors about Paul Pelosi. I’m not a fan of most MSM, but CNN and MSNBC just kind of suck, while Fox News is wildly inflammatory.
It’s great that elected democrats are grieving. But the leftists I know irl do celebrate every prominent rightists’ death and also backed Luigi. The progressive base really is unhinged.
Where do you live, and what is your demo? I’m in SFC. I don’t know a single person who voted for Trump. I doubt that more than a handful even know who Luigi is, much less celebrate him.
This is like saying every Republican primary voter has a white hood in their closet.
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
> The “study” you cite is from an organization notorious for inflammatory push polls. Feel free to consult ChatGPT or another AI if you don’t believe me. “ Network Contagion Research Institute”
> It was ONE dude, done as a publicity stunt. Again, don’t take my word for it.
By "leftist" I mean members of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. All of them know who Luigi is.
I live in a blue city and used to be involved with leftist activism. I know both a lot of leftists and moderate Democrats. I'm well aware that leftists are a minority of Democrats. (Biden dominated the 2020 primary!)
Maybe we’re using terms differently. Lots of Democrats are progressive. When you say the “base,” I think Democratic primary voters. I would characterize a “leftist” as someone to the left of Bernie Sanders, who thinks democracy is a sham. The “firebomb a Walmart” crowd.
Unfortunately, social media amplifies the loudest voices, who also tend to be very young and stupid.
Might be a terminology thing to some extent. But I think you’re also underrating how radical the Bernie/Warren progressives are. Maybe it’s an age thing. Most of the Bernie and Warren supporters in my life think Luigi is cool, capitalism sucks, America sucks, and democracy is rigged. And they celebrate the death of any famous right winger.
Come on now, of course they will comdemn it after it happens. But did they ever comdemn any of the hyper aggressive rhetoric, the calling all their opponents nazis, fascists or a threat to democracy, the endless comparisons to Nazi Germany, did they ever condemn Antifa, or stand up to the radical fringe (woke) of their half of the political spectrum? No of course not. They followed the radicals' cue and doubled and tripled and quadrupled down on calling everyone a racist fascist.
It wasn't just social media that radicalised people (yes, also on the right). It's also these same politicians (often on social media themselves)
Who are you talking about? The lawmakers? Of course they condemned all that violence. And they have to call Trump a threat to democracy, because like it or not, ***he is***. Do we have to ignore that because it’s a mean thing to say?
You also seem to have entirely missed the point of Hanania’s article, which is that you can’t judge Democratic lawmakers (who are always appropriate regardless) when **Trump leads the right**. Did you even listen to his speech? Before we knew anything about the shooter, he blamed it on radical leftists, and made chilling threats to crack down not just on the killer but any organization associated with progressive ideology.
Now it looks like the shooter was likely a groyper, or possibly just had terminal gamer brain. Do you think Trump — or any of the GOP lawmakers calling for blood — are going to walk that back? Of course not.
Yeah but the average left-wing person doesn’t take their cues from politicians they take them from memes saying how epic it is that Charlie Kirk got killed
Alright I’m coming back to this and I’m gonna double down on what I originally said. I’ve seen people I know from real life defending the shooting on instagram stories and overheard people at work justifying it. So yes I think if not the majority then a sizable percentage of leftists want to kill anyone who disagrees with them.
I’m sorry to hear that, I’ve noticed people getting meaner on Twitter as well. But take a step back here. Do you really think your coworkers want to kill you?
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
Well, the evidence is in. The guy was linked to antifa and had rounds with antifascist-related engravings. But of course, as Biden told us, "antifa is just an idea"! Nothing to see here. Luckily "the left" always clearly distanced themselves from the radical fringe elements of their side of the political spectrum and totally didn't forment decades long, increasingly radical (and violent) left wing activism and agitation at university campuses. No siree. Totally also not a result of years of hysteria that "fascists" and "literally Hitler" were about to take over if, god forbid, anyone but a Democrat would win an election.
This is what happens when prominent politicians line up on mainstream television night after night and promote the Right as the second coming of Hitler and the Nazi regime. Trying to get out in front of this with your lame message turns my stomach. The Democrat Party is guilty of the most vile and violent rhetoric, and you’re trying here to brush it aside. C’mon, man.
Three weeks ago Stephen Miller went on TV and called Democrats a domestic extremist organization. This isn't some yahoo on TV. He's Trump's most loyal advisor.
*In league with the MSM, the standing narrative from the Left since 2016 has been that Donald Trump and his coalition of Republicans are an "existential threat" to the country and democracy.
"He [Trump] is destructive to our democracy, and he has to be eliminated." - Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)
-(D) Bennie Thompson, 2017, "Direct threat to the homeland" and 2019, ".. enemy of the people".
-Joe Biden campaign, 2022, "Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic."
-"It's time to put Trump in the bullseye." - Joe Biden, July 2024, just a week before the Butler assassination attempt.
-"If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere." - Maxine Waters
-"I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions." - Chuck Schumer
That said, no one on the Right has associated anyone in the (D) party with one of the greatest genocidal mass murderers in history (though the case could be better made), IMO.
Calling an organization "extreme" is far different than associating a duly democratically elected President with a psychopathic murderer, and the people who elected him with that guy's genocidal regime.
Aisha Mills (Democratic Strategist), October 2024: On CNN's "News Central, “Donald Trump has revered the Nazis… revered Hitler... he would absolutely try to exterminate an entire group of people because he thinks that their genes are somehow different than his and faulty.”
James Carville (Democratic Strategist), October 2024: In a Sunday interview, Carville compared Trump's planned Madison Square Garden rally to a 1939 Nazi rally at the same venue, saying, “They are telling you exactly what they’re going to do, they’re telling you, ‘We’re going to institute a fascist regime.’... He’s the one that chose to have a rally at Madison Square Garden. The same place the Nazis had a rally on Feb. 20, 1939.”
Hillary Clinton (Former Secretary of State and Democratic Presidential Nominee), October 2024: In a CNN interview days before Trump's Madison Square Garden rally, Clinton said, “He's actually reenacting the Madison Square Garden rally in 1939,” referring to a pro-Nazi event attended by over 20,000 people.
Biden Campaign, December 2023: “Trump channeled his role models as he parroted Adolf Hitler, praised Kim Jong Un, and quoted Vladimir Putin while running for president on a promise to rule as a dictator and threaten American democracy.”
All of these are dwarfed by what Trump himself has been saying for decades. "scum," "poisoning the blood of our country," "should be executed for treason"
He has repeatedly called Democrats communists and fascists.
He claimed Obama was not American and a radical Marxist and accused him of having his "wires tapped"
They are communists and fascists. .. They used the IRS and FBI to stifle dissent and silence conservative speech. They coerced social media partners to kick people off for "crime think". They are fascists. Mamdani is a communist, and AOC, Sanders, Beckles are all sympathetic. .. I don't care what Trump said about Obama's citizenship, heysus. .. he's already been President, so that clearly wasn't effective. Trump picked that up from the Hillary Clinton campaign. .. the allegations that Obama tapped his phone seem more and more credible with all the (D) malfeasance being uncovered.
And yes, Trump's taunts are grade school compared to what the (D)s do by trying to say Trump is going to gas people.
So calling someone "scum" dwarfs calling someone "literally Hitler nazi fascist who threatens the very foundation of the republic and who's going to kill you and everyone you know because of your genes (not to mention destroy the economy and start world war 3)".
lol, Trump calls democrats animals and threatens to be the rights “vengeance.” His homeboy miller call democrats radicals. People are joining ice for the chance to smash immigrants’ faces into the concrete. But sure.
"animals" was a term he reserved for MS-13 gang members and violent illegal immigrant criminals. .. He never used "vengence". That's a media narrative. .. Democrats are radicals:
"There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there’s unrest in our lives. And unfortunately, there’s unrest in our lives... We’re going to have to be more bold, more disruptive, more [unintelligible] than ever." - Ayanna Pressley
"If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out there and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." - Maxine Waters
"I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be when people realize that this is a policy they defend." - Nancy Pelosi
Portraying a political opponent as an existential "threat to democracy" (repeated by multiple Democrats) can justify extreme measures, including violence, by framing the stakes as survival rather than electoral disagreement—mirroring how such language has historically led to polarization and unrest.
"People are joining ICE...". I am not here concerned about the sentiments expressed by random people on the Right or Left, but by prominent leaders of either party. Democrat leadership is far less disciplined in their use of what is political rhetoric. It is much more violent, radical and extreme.
Yeah, remember when they called Republicans "enemies within" and said we should "handle" them with the National Guard because they were "Marxists and communists and fascists, and...so sick and they’re so evil"? Oh wait, that was Trump talking about Democrats.
Both sides use "enemies". I don't consider that extreme rhetoric. .. When he said "handle them" he was specifically referring to potential election day violence by "radical-left lunatics". .. Do you deny the plausability?
"Donald Trump was elected president on November 8, 2016, with results finalized in the early hours of November 9. Protests began almost immediately in response to his victory, starting peacefully but escalating to violence within hours in several cities. By the end of November 9 (less than 24 hours after the election), reports of property damage, clashes with police, and arrests emerged in multiple locations across the U.S. These incidents were widespread, affecting at least a dozen major cities. .. The violence was often attributed to a small subset of protesters (e.g., anarchists or black bloc groups). .. These groups are Marxists & Communists, and many would admit so, though they would never admit to "Fascism" because they really don't understand the term, even though that's exactly who they are.
I don't know that your claim fits. The discussion is about violent rhetoric expressed by party leaders toward opposition party and leadership.
Do Republican Party leaders (Trump) often speak of their hatred for black Americans and the dangers they pose? If you read Roof's biography, it's clear, his dysfunction stemmed primarily from an extremely troubled childhood and early drug use. (*notably, his parents divorced before he was even born, and Affidavits from the 2009 divorce described the father as verbally abusive, and the overall family dynamics involved marital infidelity, frequent arguments, and instability that contributed to a "troubled road" for Roof.
Crusius, "described as a loner with a history of mental health issues including schizoaffective disorder", claimed his views predated Donald Trump's presidency. That means his radicalism toward the immigrant community would have likely started with perhaps statements made by any of our lawmakers prior to 2016, including statements like this from former President Barack Obama:
"We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants in this country."
"Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable—especially those who may be dangerous. That’s why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent. And that’s why we’re going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security."
And there it is, the admission that there's a double standard. The Left has to "own it" when someone commits a violent act against someone on the Right. But when someone on the Right commits a horrible act of violence, like shooting up a grocery store in Buffalo or the January 6th riots, the political Right is never to blame.
Did you see Hanania’s main point? If you want to see who debases the narrative and cheapens the tone of discourse more, is there anyone within an order of magnitude of Trump himself?
A prominent conservative activist who specifically preached and practiced civil dialogue (often in the face of threats, aggression and intimidation from leftists) was brutally murdered in front of an audience (by, as we now know, someone radicalised by the left, probably at university) but let's first have another declaration of how the right "cheapens the tone of discourse".
Name anyone else besides Trump who has as big a soapbox, and bloviates to the same extent. Take your time.
That’s not to say there aren’t many people on the left who have contributed to the debasing of political discourse. But for any righty to complain, without acknowledging that their side has the biggest elephant in the room, is comical.
Switzerland is pretty permissive with their guns and they don't have this issue of lone shooters. Gun control is probably putting a band aid on a deeper problem.
What a shitty, psuedo-intellectual take on a horrible event.
Wow excellent counter argument. Really gave me a lot to think about. I like how you directly addressed the core point of the article
https://nitter.poast.org/charliekirk11/status/1909391943802703899
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
This is false: "Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x."
Charlie Kirk was hated for pointing out that black Democrats frequently (disproportionately) hunt, attack and kill white people for fun and sport. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmqCVrkXWk These "polar bear hunting" incidents happens in many US Cities, and at the Wisconsin State Fair. Black Flash Mob Attack At Wiscosin State Fair
'Race War At Wisconsin State Fair' "I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face."
https://www.ourdecline.com/brbarian/fairmob.htm
"Victims [of Left Wing Violence against Whites] can be any age, male or female, healthy or not. They range from a 13-year-old boy to a 78-year-old woman carrying shopping bags.
https://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinion/local-commentary/2013/12/15/knockout-watch-your-back-when-you-visit-the-big-city/
80 percent of all interracial violent crime is LeftWing Violence by Black/Democrats against whites. Democrats openly advertise their intentions of giving blacks in particular impunity for violent crimes as a "civil rights" entitlement for blacks/democrats. The routine nature of black/democrat-on-white LeftWing violence (e.g., "The Knockout Game", "Polar Bear Hunting") openly supported by Democrats is evidence of the current existence of a "civil war and race war". Blacks/Democrats are currently in a state of "civil war and race war" against white people. This further includes the open borders scheme that Blacks/Democrats have employed to replace white people as the voting majority/citizens/rulers who will prescribe the rules for taxation of white people and for the enslavement of white children/people. Fundamentally, Blacks/Democrats are systematically and violently attacking the "progeny" of white people who founded America, America was founded by the white supremacists founders for the specific purpose of depriving pious men of color of white slaves. White Supremacist Prescient Jefferson built the US Navy specifically to send gunships to free the white slaves halal owned by pious Muslim men of color in Tripoli. Blacks/Democrats present an existential threat to the Freedom and Lives of White Saqaliba People in America.
The only redeeming quality of Democrats is that they advocate for the assassination of unborn blacks/Democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse. But, even so, the failure of Democrats to diligently procure the deaths of unborn black/democrats is the cause of over 90 percent of violent crime in US Cities. If Democrats were more effective at procuring the assassination of unborn blacks/democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse, all American cities would be peaceful and safe places. It is the Democrat white supremacists who deliberately deprive blacks of Islamic Justice (or any close approximation) and thus there is no Peace in American cities. No Islamic Justice, No Islamic Peace.
LOL. Bull💩
Hi, I looked into this poll. Those interested can find the NCRI's own words on it here: https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing
party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
Thank you for that. While it was obvious from the results that this was a garbage poll, it's illuminating to see how they operate.
Cool, why doesn't your copy-paste reveal the name of the organization that conducted the polling? Could it be because nobody has ever heard of them, and the poll author went on Fox complaining about "left-wing authoritarianism"?
Wow, a retarded guy wants a "real reply" to Richard?
You don't address idiocy with...hold on I'll show you how stupid I have to be to even get to Richard's level today:
-----
It turns out Richard enjoys losing & has no concept of the actual, spiritual war that is always going on.
Yes, Richard, I do want to shut down my political opponents. This isn't fun and games.
Since you're so concerned with their voice, know this:
The "Left" will continue to spiral without the saving grace of Christian, Western Civilization building again and purging what 250 years of Enlightenment has done to mankind .
They need us, does that appeal to your gross desire to be amicable?
"This was obviously not the responsibility of “the right,” but one deranged individual. It is overwhelmingly likely that when the facts come out about the Kirk assassination, it will also turn out that there was no wider conspiracy behind what happened."
…
"What many Trump supporters would like to do is use this as an excuse to shut down political opponents. If not legally, then by creating a social stigma around speaking out about Trump’s authoritarian policies and methods of control. Nobody should be encouraging assassinations, but if a president is behaving in an authoritarian way, those who see what is happening cannot remain silent because someone out there might hear what they are saying and commit a violent act."
https://www.richardhanania.com/p/the-left-did-not-kill-charlie-kirk
lol give me a break.
I always love the people contextualizing an event that was fundamentally a weakening of the power of the church and the rise of scientific inquiry as a fully Christian event.
Your thing did its thing, and it is in decline. It's ending. There may be bumps in the road, but more and more people cannot square pre-scientific claims with growing scientific evidence
The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
The fuck? Did you forget to make any sense?
lmao
This shit isn’t gonna work for you guys forever, I’m sorry to say.
I was about to start telling you where you were wrong, until it became clear that almost nothing you've said here is correct. You sound like a Large Language Model trained exclusively on disinformation.
the marital terran (martian? with a spelling & comprehension problem) is a lil bot, thatssss alllllll. just meant to make certain people mad, and others comforted. awwww... good wil bottie bot.
You sound like a very stable genius!
Seem quite obviously correct? What specific problem do you have?
https://nitter.poast.org/charliekirk11/status/1909391943802703899
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
Hi, I looked into this poll. Those interested can find the NCRI's own words on it here: https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
You're doing God's work, Chastity.
Both Haniana's thesis and the spread of assassination culture can be true. They don't logically contradict.
You created a new account just to push this nonsense. "Assassination culture is spreading on the left... The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. ... The left into a ticking time bomb."
Someone's doing the whipping here.
Tell us what you think is incorrect in this take. Do you think blaming it “on the Left” is a similarly bad take? If not, why
https://nitter.poast.org/charliekirk11/status/1909391943802703899
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
You clearly did not read nor understand the NIJ report. Which is at least 10 years old.
“Although it is not uncommon for a particular ideology to dominate the public discourse around extremism, the PIRUS and BIAS data indicate that U.S. extremists and individuals who commit hate crimes routinely come from across the ideological spectrum, including far-right, far-left, Islamist, or single-issue ideologies. These ideologies break down into particular movements, or sub-ideologies.”
This was focused on hate crimes, designed during the Obama administration and defines “right wing” in dubious terms, including counting the mass shooting at the Colorado LGBTQ+ club as right wing when the evidence clearly showed a disturbed, non-binary assailant with deep mental health issues.
https://thefederalist.com/2018/11/26/washington-post-claims-theres-surge-right-wing-violence-isnt/
A reportedly - by family - frequently homophobic man who never identified as anything else until his court date because he wanted to dodge charges.
Be honest.
Hi, I looked into this poll. Those interested can find the NCRI's own words on it here: https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
i just canceled my subscription. i no longer want to financially support mr. hanania. this was just an apologia to 'the left.'
“The left,” like most Americans, does not approve of murdering any political enemies. The majority of people are sane, and did not want this to happen. A sane person is against such a killing regardless of which political party the victim belongs to.
Psychos and lunatics exist of all ideologies, and they commit these crimes. When Vance Boelter killed those two Minnesota politicians, the left didn’t go blaming the whole right in the same way conservatives are doing with this. The left also is not creating a conspiracy that the assassin is actually a conservative, unlike the right’s treatment of the Minnesota shooter and denial of facts/evidence. That said, tribalism exists on both sides, and I am against it regardless of which side displays it. But it becomes especially dangerous when detached from reality.
With MAGA, the push to abandon any semblance of independent critical thought in favor of explicit scapegoating and dehumanizing of political enemies is greater than any we’ve seen before. And it increasingly relies upon hatred and generalizations. America should not be a country where people hate other Americans who vote differently. You have far more in common with the average American leftist than the media would ever portray. Maybe if you go out and talk to people instead of reading crazies online, you’d realize that. There are crazy people on both sides.
Keep in mind that algorithms will feed you extreme takes to fuel the attention/outrage cycle. It will feed you media that evokes strong emotional reactions and enforces your views—it will rarely show you sane views from the other side. Wanting to attack all leftists for the work of one psycho is pure tribalism. By blaming the left for this, you’re feeding right into the polarized narrative manipulation that feeds into political violence.
I couldn’t agree more with this take
You're a typical lying leftist. You're addicted to lying because your entire worldview is built on lies.
https://nitter.poast.org/charliekirk11/status/1909391943802703899
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
You must be projecting. I do not develop opinions based on biased partisan media, nor am I loyal to either political party. Also, I actually read sources from the right and left on a daily basis. Neither of the two examples you gave indicate that the left as a whole would be inclined to actually kill anyone. California’s decisions do not speak for the left as a whole, and neither do the participants in these surveys. One can cherry-pick extremes and present that information in an effort to demonize a large group of people (and surveys like the one you cited are weak—attitudes about something being “somewhat justified” are not the same as actual behavior).
The difference is that when you look at actual violence, the picture flips: according to a major study of U.S. extremists (PIRUS, 1948–2018), right-wing individuals were almost twice as likely as left-wing ones to commit violent extremist acts. And Brookings notes that since 9/11, right-wing extremists have killed over 130 people in the U.S., compared to virtually none linked to the left. I’m against violence regardless of who does it, and have no interest in demonizing the right; hence, I don’t go around sharing these stats—this is my first time since you brought it up. Those who are violent do not represent everyone in the party.
If you want to engage in good faith, consider looking into these sources, as well as statistics on violence from the right (including domestic terrorism and politically motivated attacks). The left is no more inclined toward violence than the right, and it is telling that those who claim to oppose violence are often silent when it comes from their own side. Offering selective, weak evidence for only one side does not make your case, it only shows you’re the one with bias.
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism
Right wing violence far and away outnumbers left wing violence by a factor of over 5x. Tone down your rhetoric lil bro. The right has long celebrated political violence for decades. When the Minnesota senator was shot and killed and another wounded, the right posted memes and rejoiced that their political oppoents were being killed. When Pelosi's husband was attacked by the right with a hammer, the right wing gremlins once again cheered and prayed for his death.
Hi, I looked into this poll. Those interested can find the NCRI's own words on it here: https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
Baby bot troll
Get a life bro. Or a semblance of one beyond just barfing over a thread with the same copy/paste nonsense.
And you're a bad-faith debater.
About half of leftists think it's ok to murder Trump and Musk and about half supported Luigi. What the fuck are you saying? Stop fucking assuming you gaslighting piece of shit.
No one said you can’t be upset at those people, nor is anyone stopping you from feeling however you want to feel. I’m simply trying to engage in rational discourse. You’re attacking the wrong person.
When speaking events on college campuses have been disrupted or chit down, who has been doing it?
Cancelling was certainly an insane lefty thing for sure. But that’s quite a leap from shutting down a speaker to lone gunman assassination, which seems to be what this is at this point.
So what do you make of his example of the Dem state politicians murdered in Minnesota? Or to his point about how Trump debases discourse more than anybody else? Or is that too much cognitive dissonance for you?
The left deserves an apology. The right wing nutters jumped to blaming the left without even a suspect. Turns out it was a crazy rightwing white cis guy who didn’t think the other white right wing cis guy was mean enough.
That's highly unlikely to be the case. There's been no evidence of motive apart from the antifascist messages on the bullets. We'll see what more emerges.
it's kind of cute to see all the rightoids hot and bothered about political violence in the comments here considering how many of them looked at a guy who literally sent an armed mob to the Capitol and thought "this is good leadership I'll vote for that"
Something, of course, Charlie Kirk would never do
https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/charlie-kirk-once-called-for-patriot-to-bail-out-paul-pelosi-assailant-david-depape/
bold of you to think anyone values your opinion
I thought it was just a rational take on a horrible event.
A man who extended grace to you in person and helped you personally to promote your book was shot in the jugular while he was engaging in open discussion of ideas on a university campus—and you decide to take the opportunity to write about how orange man is bad? Classy. Real classy Richard.
Have you heard of “whataboutism”, per chance?
I don’t think he needs to do a whole article of murder is bad. It’s fully ok for him to look at the turn the discussion’s taking and saying this murder is being used as a bad faith argument.
Plenty of others are using Charlie Kirk’s death to push their polarized political agenda, scapegoating the entire left. How is that respectful of Charlie Kirk? If people weren’t taking his death as an opportunity to serve tribalistic political purposes (instead of simply mourning his loss, and/or honestly wanting to assess the situation and prevent it from happening again), Richard wouldn’t need to write this response. However, it is this kind of scapegoating that creates a polarized environment that radicalizes people and increases political violence, and Richard is helping address this issue.
Charlie Kirk advocated for having civil dialogue with those you disagree with, which is a great message. We need to go that route if we want to address the polarization issue. Anyone on the left who is celebrating this is part of the problem, as are those on the right using it to demonize the whole left.
No individual is responsible for the actions of other individuals in their political party. There are good people and bad people on both sides.
“However, it is this kind of scapegoating that creates a polarized environment that radicalizes people and increases political violence, and Richard is helping address this issue.”
Richard is not ADDRESSING this issue.
Richard here is ENCAPSULATING this issue!
He blamed Donald Trump - no let’s strike that - he blamed Donald Trump’s VOTERS!
🙄
He’s explicitly -not- blaming them. He’s just telling them to shut up about “civility”, a topic they patently have no standing to raise.
He absolutely blamed them for voting for Trump and this causing/contributing to the problem.
Whichever “side” you’re on, how can you not possibly see that Richard is doing the opposite of the OG claim here.
He’s saying “you guys voting as you did is causing the problems; if only you were sensible like me the problem would be gone”…
Can you quote from the post to demonstrate your point? I’m not seeing it.
What I primarily see (for example, when referring to the assassination of the Minnesota politicians) is an absolution of collective responsibility:
> This was obviously not the responsibility of “the right,” but one deranged individual.
Quote:
“The argument that ‘the left’ is somehow responsible goes along the lines that Democrats and liberals say bad things about Donald Trump and conservatives. Once in a while, then, it’s unsurprising that some unstable person comes along and takes these rantings seriously.
This argument makes sense on its own terms. The problem is that it is made by people who have chosen Donald Trump as the leader of their movement.”
So the argument makes sense, but YOUR guy is 100x worse! So therefore YOU don’t get to say anything, and your argument is wrong because of YOUR identity.
This is problematic on at least two levels:
1) the claim that the other side is 100x worse (which is a claim, one that is not remotely objective or falsifiable, and which I would argue is indeed just wrong)
2) the two wrongs don’t make a right fallacy. Or “Let he who be without sin cast the first stone” if you prefer. Or simply arguing based on identity rather than the logic of the argument.
On both axes Richard is not addressing the scapegoating in a way to reduce polarization. He is doubling and tripling down on both.
TL/DR: Richard explicitly increases scapegoating and polarization with his assertion that Trump’s voters elected the biggest scapegoater/polarizer and so their arguments are without merit.
That's because there is no reason to be civil. The other side must be destroyed
The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
Almost everything you wrote is either invented or a logical error. George Floyd did not die because of fentanyl from “open borders,” and there is no evidence Democrats commit “99.5% of violent crime.” That has no basis in data and is flat-out made-up. You clearly have no interest in data, your emotional volatility has given you an erroneous understanding of reality.
Also, you throwing in “20 million climate deniers here for gender surgery” and medieval slavery is caricature and distraction. You’re lumping together immigrants, Democrats, criminals, and terrorists as if they’re the same thing, then using that confusion in an attempt to argue violence is justified. That’s the very fear-mongering that leads to tribalist ignorance, mindless mass panic and brainwashing.
If you want to be taken seriously, start with facts, and drop the exaggerations and invented numbers. Also, study up on logical fallacies. You have made at least eight of them in this response alone.
Light and Harris (2012) examined the violent crime rate in 1,315 counties in the United States (U.S.) and found that neighborhoods with majority Black residents had a much higher violent index rate (306.33) compared to their White counterparts (70.95). Hannon, Knapp, and Defina (2005) examined Black and White homicide rates and found that the homicide rate for the Black population is 40.99, which was nearly five times that of the White population (8.76). The higher rate of crime tracks that US blacks are disproportionately DEMOCRATS who reproduce without marriage like lions. In Atlanta, over 99 percent of violent crime is by Black Democrats. Democrats are enslavers and criminals by their nature. George Floyd and his gang robbed a pregnant woman at gunpoint because they are Democrats. Floyd swallowed a fentanyl pill during his arrest because he was a Democrat. Toxicology shows that Floyd died of lethal Fentanyl dose that he was seen swallowing.
Nowhere in the studies you cited say crime is caused by being a Democrat. Your effort to link group stats to party identity is an ecological fallacy. Your “99% in Atlanta” figure is fabricated; you are misusing data.
You are delusional. Considering only completed murders that overcame modern ER medical interventions: "Over 85 percent of known victims and suspects in homicides were Black, while Black citizens comprise 49.8 percent of the overall population in Atlanta" https://nicjr.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Atlanta-GVA-5.2022.pdf "About 92 percent of Atlanta's murders last year were of [and by] Black people: 125 Black men (or boys) and 19 Black women (or girls)." https://theatlantaobjective.substack.com/p/why-theyre-all-black
When the reported attempted murders [bad shootings that missed the target or did not kill], and robberies, rapes [often unreported], carjacking, burglaries are factored in, the "violent crime" rate has been over 99% Black Democrat. None of these statistical extremes occur in Saudi Arabia or in Egypt or anywhere else on Earth other than places where American Democrats are in control of the local justice system. Democrats are the entire cause of these extreme crime rates and statistics. [Countries in black Africa that have extreme poverty do not have such high rates of violent crime, especially where Shariah Law is enforced (e.g., Mali, north Sudan etc) Extreme Crime rates in American cities is caused by Democrats, not by poverty, not by race]. Mentally ill and opportunistic Democrats use the extreme crime statistics that they cause to further extort money from the taxpayers: "The source of violent crime in Atlanta isn’t mysterious: It’s desperation, born by inequality." So, black male democrat's are killing rival black male democrats (and killing and raping female black democrats etc) because they feel "inequality" and "desperation"?
So much BS but I’ll address this: You’re being massively disingenuous by saying “toxicology” proved he overdosed - the first autopsy found that he died of “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law-enforcement subdual restraint, and neck compression.” The second found he died of “asphyxiation from sustained pressure”. In other words, Chauvin’s actions killed him. The drugs in his system were metabolized - he’d passed the point where he would have suffered an OD.
Besides, when you OD, you get pinpoint pupils. As per the EMT report and testimony at trial, Floyd’s pupils were dilated. When you OD, your respiratory rate drops below 10 - Floyd’s was 22. When you OD, you drift into a peaceful, painless sleep - Floyd was crying out in pain. It’s physiologically impossible to OD without pinpoint pupils and a respiratory rate below 10. Floyd had neither of those two things. Derek Chauvin killed him.
Fentanyl typically kills by "respiratory depression" "https://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/50/2021/12/Dr.-Collins-Toxicology-Opinion.pdf Floyd stated, BEFORE he was restrained on the ground that he is unable to breathe. Floyd repeated this same statement throughout the course of his resistance of lawful arrest, until he died. A toxicology report by NMS Labs said that Floyd had a blood screen revealed his fentanyl levels at 11 ng/mL, norfentanyl at 5.6 ng/mL, and methamphetamine at 19 ng/mL (https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/medical-examiner/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf ).
Objective Prompt to GenAI: "The doctor said that my son had a blood screen that revealed his fentanyl levels at 11 ng/mL, norfentanyl at 5.6 ng/mL, and methamphetamine at 19 ng/mL What are his chances of recovery? What are the pathologies that can result from these numbers?"" AI Response: "Fentanyl is a powerful synthetic opioid. Even in small doses, it can be lethal. Blood levels of fentanyl are often categorized as therapeutic (for pain management), toxic, or lethal. An 11 ng/mL level of fentanyl is considered to be in the high-risk or toxic-to-lethal range for individuals who have not been prescribed the drug and have no tolerance. For individuals with a tolerance to opioids, the interpretation of this level can vary.
Norfentanyl is the primary metabolite of fentanyl, meaning it is what the body breaks fentanyl down into. Its presence indicates that the body has processed the fentanyl. A norfentanyl level of 5.6 ng/mL further confirms a significant exposure to fentanyl." "Fentanyl-Related Pathologies:
Respiratory Depression: The most immediate and life-threatening effect of a fentanyl overdose is severe respiratory depression, where breathing becomes dangerously slow and shallow, or stops altogether. This can lead to a lack of oxygen to the brain and other vital organs, causing irreversible brain damage, coma, or death."
Doctor states: "A lower level of fentanyl may cause death if other drugs that cause respiratory suppression or sedation is present, such as alcohol, other opiates (heroin" In addition to fentanyl and methamphetamine, the toxicology report from the autopsy showed that Floyd also had cannabinoids in his system when he died.
There was zero video evidence of cyanosis of Floyd. The medical reports found no physical evidence of external/forcible asphyxia. The assertions that officers caused the asphyxiation death are entirely subjective opinions having no objective basis other than video interpretation and political convenience. The medical conclusions are simply political opinions to conceal the fact that Floyd was the victim of self-inflicted Fentanyl poisoning etc.
AI: "The combination of an opioid like fentanyl and a stimulant like methamphetamine can have unpredictable and dangerous effects. This is sometimes referred to as a "speedball." The opposing effects of the drugs on the central nervous system can mask the signs of overdose from either substance, potentially leading to a person taking a more lethal dose than they otherwise would have." ["The opposing effects of the drugs on the central nervous system can mask the signs of overdose from either substance"]
Funny. I'm old enough to remember Gabby Gifford's shooting being blamed on Sarah Palin. Pu-lease.
Go fuck yourself you dishonest cunt.
I’m not sure you’re replying to the right person. I haven’t said anything that should hurt your feelings.
Have you seen what Stephen Miller (Trump official) said immediately after the shooting?
Enlighten me, Jac. If it’s his tweet where he calls for defeating evil then I’m not sure it’s the ammo for your political point that you think it is…
Sorry I guess that was vague enough for you to act like you don’t know what he meant. I guess you should instead look at what miller’s wife, Andrew Tate, Elon Musk, and Laura loomer said.
Or the Jan 6er who posted a video saying “we’re coming for you.” Or that dude calling this the Reichstag Fire, but in a good way.
A good man was shot and you take this opportunity to make it about Trump?
Who else has had a more singular effect on the…ummm…quality and tenor of political discourse?
The left, but really the entire political establishment prior to Trump.
Lmao, you must have a memory that starts in 2015, then, because Trump first made a name for himself as a vile shit-slinger, to my knowledge, as early as the Central Park 5, and definitely by the time he was boosting the birther conspiracy and attacking anyone who argued the point.
I'm really not a fan of Obama, but you can't attack him on civility.
i just canceled my subscription. i no longer want to financially support mr. hanania. this was just an apologia to 'the left.'
yes you mentioned this in other threads and nobody cares
He made his bones saying the Civil Rights Act was a mistake and that 10 year olds that got raped should carry their rapist's child to term. Fuck him and fuck you, too, pussy.
> the Civil Rights Act was a mistake
It was.
"Whataboutism" is when people try to distract from the subject of discussion by bringing up something similar—or in some way related—that someone else did. And to be fair to the "whataboutists", it's often an entirely legitimate attempt to call out hypocrisy and demand fairness and consistency in judgement.
Where "whataboutism" goes wrong is when either:
- 1. The comparison is entirely unfair—one that demonstrates only a superficial similarity, a sameness in kind but not in magnitude, or one that ignores the substantive issue of the criticism at hand.
For example, "Whatabout when Obama/Biden did [insert some non-criminal or only mildly controversial exercise of power by Obama or Biden] and you said it was crazy to demand impeachment!"
2. When the criticism doesn't even present a valid or relevant comparison.
For example, "Whatabout that time that Charlie Kirk was nice to you!"
If you think I'm being unfair to you here, then let me reframe this in more conventional terms. You claiming that Richard is "using" Kirk's death to criticize Trump is as valid a complaint as me saying that conservatives are "using" his death to demonize liberals.
You may say that conservatives aren't taking undue advantage of—or "using"—Kirk's death for anything, and that it's entirely fair for someone to be outraged by his murder and criticize those that they believe responsible. Fine.
Then it's entirely fair for Hanania to be arguing that such blame is misplaced, especially when the reality of the right's culpability—by virtue of the man they've willingly chosen as their leader—is so egregious and palpable. He's calling out MAGA for their utter hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness. That's the "good" kind of whataboutism.
And I think any reasonable observer would have to grant that he has a strong case—one which you don't seem quite inclined to engage. Which is understandable, I suppose; it's hard to convincingly make the case that whatever vitriol and outrage we hear from Trump's opponents is a blameworthy response to the patently vitriolic and outrageous behavior of this Administration.
Agree with it or not, calling for people to avoid that discussion—particularly an entirely reasonable one which makes uncontroversial, albeit unflattering observations about Trump and his relationship to our political discourse—by appealing to the natural human sentiment to exhibit temperance in the face of a horrific tragedy, exploits the very essence of the "bad" kind of whataboutism.
I don’t think this was about the Orange Man. It was about how the left should not be targeted for this killing or any killing. We have crazy people and guns.
Cry more pussy
It boggles my mind that the right doesn’t notice how inflammatory its rhetoric is, nor does it seem to notice that it is, in fact, the more violent side. Even in the responses today, every Democratic lawmaker has condemned this in the strongest possible terms, while Republican lawmakers are calling for blood. Not to mention their cruel and tasteless jokes every time a Democrat is attacked.
My thoughts are with Charlie Kirk’s family. This is a terrible tragedy, and the last thing America needs is more political violence. We’re hanging by a thread as it is.
It’s just so crazy how they’ll never take accountability for the violence. I don’t like Leftists but at the very least they’ll apologise and disavow any sort of violence, the right will never apologise for January 6th or the murders of the Minnesota lawmakers. They just resort to conspiracy theories to shift the blame, always. It’s literally their defence mechanism. I think this is why conspiracy theories are so popular on their side, it shields them from looking in and turning the temperature down.
Even now they’re saying the left needs to turn their temperature down but Trump is the person who needs to turn his divisive rhetoric the most.
Tbf Leftists won't apologize, but left-wing liberals will.
That being said, left-wing liberals are still confused about how, or whether, to disavow Leftists, especially illiberal or psychotic leftists.
Hanania is right that Donald Trump being the leader of the American Right makes it impossible for his opponents to call for their respective coalitions, specifically, to tone-down the rhetoric without feeling as if they're unilaterally disarming in the face of an enemy that openly calls for their persecution and destruction. But this doesn't mean that things aren't getting bad in left-wing spaces, primarily driven by shameless Leftists. Just look at the Left's reaction to Luigi Mangione.
I do think that at least now, liberals are starting to wake up to how destructive Leftists are to their own movement.
With the Luigi issue, though, I don't think the celebration was on left/right lines, I really noticed it on Populist/Moderate lines. While Leftists were absolutely the happiest crowd about the news, pretty much everyone who rails against """The Elites""" was cheering
How did they apologize and disavow the violence against Uniteds CEO? They were fucking celebrating Luigi. WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SAYING? HOW ARE YOU THIS FUCKING DISHONEST?
Source on “The Right” being behind the Minnesota murders?
You can look at any regular news site and you'll learn that the killer not only had clear right-wing views, but a hit-list in his car containing the names of Democratic politicians and abortion advocates and providers. Whether or not you want to say "the right" caused it, the killer was clearly a person of the right and influenced by its political culture.
Just use ChatGPT, dude.
I do find it wild that right’s violence some how gets completely memory holed while the left is forced to own insane dipshit who liked a Bernie meme. But I will say, that the left has been blissfully ignorant of how violent their extremists are, too.
This is the huge problem with where we are at now. Blue foot soldiers be red foot soldiers. No one is willing to completely own and cast out their own crazies.
I agree with most of your comment, but there really is huge asymmetry between Dem and GOP lawmakers. Not even Rashida Tlaib supports Luigi. To the extent Dem lawmakers mentioned that at all, I’m 1000% sure they condemned him.
Are you familiar with Jacobin? They’re a socialist publication. Named after the Jacobins, no less! Pretty much as left as you can get. And they published an article condemning Kirk’s murder not just on moral grounds, but because they believe political violence is more dangerous to the left than the right.
I apparently consume very different news sources than a lot of people here, and it’s interesting to see how much you guys talk about Luigi. I really don’t think it’s that important in the grand scheme of things, except in the context of rising political violence. Libs have already forgotten about someone shooting up the CDC. A ton of lawmakers got credible bomb threats today.
I get that. So far I’ve seen more people condemning people who celebrated Kirk’s death than I’ve seen actually celebrating his death. The right is very good at that. Whether it’s Sydney Sweeneys jeans or Luigi or some insane teacher trying to indoctrinate kids somewhere, they’re very good at finding the dumbest of the dumb and convincing everyone that these people are in fact normie liberals
Half of leftists think it's morally ok to kill Musk and Trump, and half support Luigi. You're a disgusting lying piece of shit. Fuck you you fucking cunt.
The left wouldn’t even allow a moment of silence in congress.
No, that’s false. There was a moment of silence, and then Boebert wanted a spoken prayer. Dems then complained that this was excessive, given that there had been no moment of silence for the students injured at the school shooting just a few hours later. At that point, a Republican started screaming at the Democrats, falsely blaming them.
You should make a note that whoever you heard this from is not reliable.
I actually appreciate the correction, it appears I was wrong. I also appreciate you being civil with your response. Thank you.
Except for 58 Democrats. Not one Repub has called for blood. That is a flat out LIE.
You're in for a rude awakening.
How so?
Holy shit you are so retarded that this isn’t even worth my time.
Thanks, you’ve given me a lot to think about.
Notably, Kirk himself said that shootings were worth keeping 2A. I disagree and think that’s heinous, but at least he was willing to be up front about it and not hide behind “thoughts and prayers”.
Easy to imagine a roles-reversed scenario, where a BLM activist is killed by an attacker with multiple convictions. In that scenario, you'd have right-wingers crowing about how the BLM activist got the police-free world they asked for.
Just give it a bit more, and we'll be totally incapable of any sort of cost-benefit discussion in situations where lives are at stake...
This happened. Perhaps more a function of social media.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/13/nyregion/ryan-carson-murder.html
And he got shot as he was answering a question about gun control, the irony can’t write itself better. This man’s last words were literally ‘gang violence’, jeez. Another family and group of children growing up without a father, tragic.
Gracious reply. You’re glad he’s dead and thought he brought it on himself.
I am perfectly capable of saying offensive things for myself thank you, so no need to put words in my mouth. Fuck off.
Project less, will ya? He lived by it and died by it. He said some shooting deaths are the price of 2A and it’s worth it. It’s unfortunate he ended up being part of that price. But it seemed like it was a price he should’ve been willing to pay, on principle. And while I didn’t agree with him all of the time, he seemed pretty consistent in his principles when making his arguments.
Correct yeah, he was a huge dumb piece of shit
Leftists are huge dumb pieces of shit, I agree.
> How many of you do we have to assassinate before you'll disarm yourselves and throw away your rights?
He was right. It's an ugly truth but it is a truth. If deaths can be used as a reason to eliminate one right then deaths can be used as a reason to eliminate all other rights as well. And once power and authority realize they were successful with the strategy once they will keep using the strategy until the masses rise up against them.
> I disagree and think that’s heinous
You're wrong (and stupid).
The totalitarian society you have in mind is heinous.
I think the murder of Charlie Kirk is a bigger deal than you’re making it out to be, first, because of who he was, second, because it does say something about “the left.”
Kirk wasn’t an elected politician. If someone assassinated Trump, that would be wrong, but at least you could argue that there was provocation. Kirk’s thing was holding public debates. At least by the standards of American conservatism, he wasn’t that extreme. (In fact, he was one of the main forces opposing the Nazification of the right.) Are we now at risk when we give a talk at a university? This was different from killing a congressman.
We don’t know who the killer was or what his motives were. Theoretically, it could have been a groyper or a crazy person with no agenda at all. But most likely it was a leftist. And the left appears to be increasingly pro violence. There's widespread support for Hamas. Mainstream figures celebrated Luigi Mangione. Supposedly 57.6% of “left of center” Americans think it is at least “partially acceptable” to destroy a Tesla dealership. 55.2% say it is at least “somewhat justified” to kill Trump. (You could argue that this is a response to Trump’s unique evil, but I suspect you’d have similar results for almost any Republican president.) Obviously, there are major problems on the right, but the left is also moving backwards.
I’ll lay money it wasn’t a leftist. It’s Utah, which has ten million guns and no liberals.
It’s going to be some Mormon kid who thought Kirk was possessed by the Devil or some other weird shit.
> Utah has no liberals
> [and no liberal can enter Utah]
Leftists are addicted to lying because your entire worldview is built on lies.
> I'll lay money
And how exactly will you do that, you lying leftist rodent?
Because so far you just spouted off the same leftist bullshit babble with no money on the line.
I’m the liberal here. Aren’t I supposed to be the one foaming at the mouth, calling everyone I disagree with subhuman?
However, I’m updating my guess. I hadn’t realized groypers hated Kirk. I’m guessing it’s some deranged Fuentes fan who thought Kirk was a sleeper agent for Israel.
Leftists generally aren’t precision assassins. This codes more rightwing-y to me. Hopefully the police catch him
Answer the question, leftyrat.
Wow you sound like someone with the intellectual capacity of a steaming turd.
He did
Maybe address his points about Groypers
Instead of calling him a “leftyrat.”
You disgusting piece of lying shit.
Again, RH, if you want to raise the quality of your substack to something like Noah, Yglesias, Silver, or SSC, you’re going to need to monitor your comments section more carefully. High quality comments are an important part of a good substack. A loyal, thoughtful commentariat raises your credibility.
Imagine following an example neo-nazi who now pretends to be "left".
Pay up
Doesn’t appear to be a leftist so much as video game poisoned. I’m sad it wasn’t a groyper, though. Maybe we’ll learn more.
That there a bunch of leftists who openly support violence says a lot about the left. That one of them happened to actually shoot someone says a lot less. There's just not enough political assassinations for "who does more political assassinations?" to be a useful measure of which side supports violence more. What one guy did can never be strong evidence for what a group of millions of people are like. You can believe the left is violent, but I think the case for that should look more like "lots of leftists say they support violence" than "the left has had 5 major political assassinations and the right has had 4" or whatever the actual numbers are
Stop spamming with this same message. Banned for twenty four hours.
To me, the broad impact is that Kirk, while he was a committed partisan, was perhaps the best-known avatar for free speech that we have in our culture. I was sickened by this, in part because it feels like an attack on speech itself.
That speaks a lot to how stupid our culture is, because Kirk was committed to getting people fired for having views he disagreed with.
Good point that he was a public figure but not a politician (contra the Minnesota example Hanania used).
However, as public figures go, he probably had more access and influence, due to his friendship with Trump and Trump Jr, than most could ever dream of, politician or otherwise.
But bottom line, this was a political assassination, and we should repudiate it unequivocally, full stop.
I agree with you, it's highly disturbing. But only in the sense that the left is *almost* catching up to the right in terms of political assassination attempts (as far as violent rhetoric goes, there is still no comparison). It's only disturbing if you expect better from one side than the other. Like you, I expect more from Democrats and find all of this incredibly worrisome.
Every urban crime committed in Democratrun cities is a form of political violence. If white Americans did not have private guns then millions would be robbed murdered raped or enslaved by Democrats anually. UNUSED GUNS PREVENT KNIFE VIOLENCE IN US. "STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES"; "END KNIFE VIOLENCE" are actual campaigns in England where there are not enough guns to prevent or terminate Knife Violence. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
Every urban crime in democrat run cities is political violence? So a heroin addict mugging someone for drug money with no broader political motive is political violence? You might as well just say all violence, everywhere is political violence
The polling you’re repeating is the kind of one-off clickbait bullshit that gets repeated endlessly by FoxNews and the Washington Times that doesn’t have a shred of science or rigor behind it.
When credible pollsters ask Americans about attitudes toward political violence, 75-85% of people identifying as D, R, and I all say it’s unacceptable.
And no, there is not ‘widespread support for Hamas’ on the left. That is just utter nonsense. Democrats and Independents largely support Israel but think Netanyahu’s military strategy has gone too far. That is not ‘support for Hamas’
There is deeper anti-Israeli / pro-Palestinian sentiment among *young* people, but people under 30 were more evenly split between Harris and Trump than they’ve been in decades. College kids waving Hamas flags hated Biden and Harris.
I won’t celebrate murder. But I won’t mourn Kirk either.
He argued on many occasions that he felt the deaths of innocent people were an acceptable cost for the 2A. So, in an ironic twist worthy of the Twilight Zone, his point was proven, I guess?
https://x.com/KatieMiller/status/1965872707297489260
No matter what your views on him, there are now two kids under 5 who are going to grow up without a dad.
Never said it wasn’t sad. But again, this is the sort of situation that he himself found acceptable. Can’t we acknowledge that?
Cars kill tens of thousands of people who would not be dead if we just walked around. Charlie Kirk believed that abolition of private ownership of cars is not justified by these deaths. If he was ran over by a car, that is ironic but his viewpoint is valid. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
> this is the sort of situation that he himself found acceptable
No it isn't. Leftists are addicted to lying because your entire worldview is built on lies.
Um, yes, he actually said that. Where's the lie?
Plus, why do you sound so melodramatic? Because your hero died? Sir, this is a Wendy's.
No, he didn't.
Again, leftists are addicted to lying because your entire worldview is built on lies.
> Sir, this is a Wendy's.
Not only are you a dumb leftist, but you're also a redditor. Go figure. Spiteful mutants really do follow a pattern.
Approximately 40K Americans died in car accidents last year. Many of those Americans are themselves vehicle drivers. They felt the risk of a road accident was worth getting places faster. Does that make them less deserving of sympathy?
The difference is cars' explicit purpose is not killing. Guns' is. Cars which don't kill are PERFECTED. Guns that don't kill are LITERALLY POINTLESS.
Sympathy is due, because all such deaths are tragic but this is closer to Russian roulette than driving.
Guns are also used for sport. And obviously self defense, which is sometimes a special case where killing is good, and other times involves no killing at all.
Do you think that most gun owners and gun rights advocates want to commit murder? Seems to me that the vast majority of guns aren’t bought for that.
Of course. And cars are also used for driving into crowds of pedestrians to mow them down by terrorists or loaded up with explosives and blown up by insurgents/guerrilla fighters.
But that's not a car's default/intended use, while fundamentally guns are for killing, or at the very minimum, maiming, causing damage to living things.
BTW I'm not arguing here for pro or anti gun position -- but against the car comparison.
And no, I don't think most legal gun owners/advocates want to have them to commit murder. Of course not. But as you yourself said, many probably consider some kinds of KILLING or maiming good (self defense is the obvious one). They probably don't want guns that are bad at killing/maiming.
As a aside, I can understand the "the gun homicides are regrettable but WORTH IT cost of the right to own guns and use them for legitimate purposes" position. I'm not sure if it's my position (it's a moot issue for me personally as I live outside US and the only kind of gun I could have is a hunting one, kept in a locked cabinet ;) but it's certainly honest and I can imagine assuming that position if I lived in the US.
A good analogy is legalising narcotics: you can honestly argue that you prefer the freedom to put whatever people want into their bodies and accept the cost of likely higher prevalence of addiction and overdose. I'm sympathetic to that argument. You can not, however, argue that heroin and fentanyl are like paracetamol, and the addiction and ODs are unfortunate and avoidable misuses. Their fundamental pharmacology is what makes them inherently dangerous, just as a gun’s fundamental design is what makes it lethal.
I don't see why I should care about the ontological nature of guns. Gun control is a wholly pragmatic issue to me. Will X measure reduce violent crime? How much? What are its second order costs? That's it. If an oracle told me that banning pistols would reduce homicides by 90% with few costs, I'd enthusiastically support it. If it would increase homicides with little benefit elsewhere, I'd oppose it, regardless of what guns are fundamentally designed for.
Same as cars. Reduce traffic deaths with few costs? Ban the cars.
Fair enough on crime effects.
However, this subthread wasn't about pragmatic issues of gun control at all but about the degree of "self infliction" one could attribute to a person who had claimed that the right to relatively freely own, trade, carry etc guns was worth the costs in increased gun violence/deaths and who was subsequently murdered with a gun.
UNUSED GUNS PREVENT KNIFE VIOLENCE IN US. "STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES"; "END KNIFE VIOLENCE" are actual campaigns in England where there are not enough guns to prevent or terminate Knife Violence. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
> explicit purpose
It's people who have purposes, not the inanimate object.
> this is closer to Russian roulette
No it isn't, you schizophrenic leftist piece of shit.
False equivalency. We tightly regulate driving and car ownership. Also, I absolutely want more safety features, better driving instruction, stronger DWI laws. I don’t want anyone to die on the road, and we should aspire for that goal.
If Kirk felt the same way about driving as he did guns, he’d say something to the effect of, “several deaths per year are worth it to preserve the right to drive recklessly, or operate unsafe vehicles.”
In this video he explicitly advocates measures to reduce gun deaths:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVc9l6pjxtI
But not enough to prevent his own shooting, apparently.
Simply holding an opinion on the second amendment doesn't increase or decrease your likelihood of being victimized by someone else. To your analogy, driving recklessly because you think it is a right increases your own risk of getting into an accident. You could say the person driving recklessly deserves their fate, but you can't say that about Charlie Kirk. You are just a sadist.
Charlie Kirk argued that the deaths of others were worth his right. So, yes, he deserves his fate. I may be a sadist, but you’re a moron.
NEXT!
If you can’t mourn Kirk, mourn for his family. He had a wife and two kids. His parents have experienced the most painful possible event, losing their child.
Oh, I do. But can’t we acknowledge that this is what he wanted?
No, it's obviously not what he wanted.
You evil leftist rats are ghouls. You lie like normal people breathe air because your entire worldview is built on lies.
Paul Pelosi was old and lives his life. Kirk was about dead in his prime.
So people have a sell by date?
Early or violent death are worse yes. 100%
Sure but the death and assault should still be looked at as tragic first and foremost
I assume you hold the same opinion of the attempted assassination of then-78 year old Presidential candidate Donald Trump; totally fine and not worth talking about?
You mean, that staged event? Yes, even though it was clearly fake.
Conspiracy theorist.
There it is, the lying leftist rat drops his mask.
Yes, it’s ironic. And he also mocked Paul Pelosi. His family still doesn’t deserve this. Whatever he said, his children are innocent.
Not saying they did! Just pointing out the irony of someone getting what they wished for.
Do you think Kirk liked murder?
Did Charlie Kirk come out against the murder of 11 people in International waters? If not, then yes, Kirk liked murder
I understand that you are intellectually disabled and cannot understand the concept of standing by one’s beliefs. But, this is an outcome Kirk knew was possible, yet he expressed this belief anyway.
It’s a belief that very many of us (obviously) hold and do not change despite knowing that a gun death is possible for ourselves as well. We aren’t all cowards trying to be “safe” at every cost.
This is not the “gotcha” or the “irony” you think it is, dumbo.
Car Control. Cars can be used as a weapon of mass murder, or a weapon of targeted violence. https://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/news/nation/2025/09/12/ice-agent-shoots-immigrant-chicago-suburbs-photos/86120224007/
A gang of feral democrats recently used a car to smash into a jewelry store to rob the jeweler because of his race and color. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jr6Ym5l65Ik
The problem of "violence" is not caused by guns. Violence in America is mostly caused by feral Democrats who commit over 90 percent of violent crime in US Cities (Because the Democrats are the type of white supremacists that most strongly oppose the halal enforcement of Shariah Law Punishments of blacks/democrats, e.g., "behead" the robber. Quran 5:12).
Just looked at your page. Charlie Kirk, reasonable? Lol, if he was reasonable, he would have seen the risks that what could happen to others could happen to him.
You're not a serious person.
Please, excuse us; adults are talking.
And, it turns out you're also illiterate.
I will say it one more time, louder:
THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS, MUCH LIKE KIRK HIMSELF, ACCEPT GUN VIOLENCE AS AN ACCEPTABLE COST OF LIBERTY AND YES, WE KNOW THAT WE CAN BE VICTIMS OF GUN VIOLENCE OURSELVES.
IT'S NOT A GOTCHA.
Again, this is something that we have *ACCEPTED.*
I'm sorry you seem to genuinely lack the capacity to bargain or even understand the concept of bargaining. Again, a legitimate indicator of cowardice and intellectual disability.
Lol, Yelling doesn't debunk my original point - that he got his ironic fate. I don't care whether he accepted it or not. The only one here who's illiterate is you, because you haven't actually read my OP, but instead rushed in to defend your dead hero.
Intellectually disabled? Because I pointed out that hero couldn’t see how his beliefs could bite him in the ass? And if anything, I understood perfectly well about how he stood by his (stupid, misguided) beliefs. Tell me, did you actually learn the definition of irony in school, Alanis?
But okay, “Madje the Edgelord” I’m sure his wife and kids really appreciate him dying for his wonderful principles. Tell you what, sweetheart: I’ll pay for the postage if you put that on a card and send that to them.
You’re conflating “A is an acceptable cost for B” with “there’s nothing to mourn about A.”
Kirk never suggested that gun homicides aren’t tragedies.
I actually agree with that. But there's a difference between someone who gets lung cancer because of ignorance or super serious mental issues that stop them from stopping smoking vs someone who decides to accept the risk. I smoked for 20 years before I stopped and if I get lung cancer OF COURSE I'D BE SAD AND PISSED OFF. But it'd also be pretty much totally self inflicted: I'd have taken a gamble/accepted risk and Iost.
Apparently he did, because he said they were a worthy cost.
If I say that the occasional crazy person being radicalized by radical ideologies doesn’t justify the government restricting political speech, and am then gunned down by someone who was radicalized by online Marxists, would my death similarly deserve less sympathy?
Who's saying that? Look at the syllogism of my argument first before responding.
If you wanna sympathize with Kirk, be my guest. But he argued that "some deaths" are worth unfettered gun ownership. Well, he's now one of the "some deaths." and that's an ironic case of be careful what you wish for.
Right! I, personally, am saying that although radical political content probably does radicalize a nonzero number of people into committing murder and assassinations, the government should nevertheless not crack down on political speech.
Given that I am making that statement, I am curious: if I am assassinated, would my death be dismissed as “an ironic case of be careful what you wish for” and not worth mourning?
Maybe - depends on how dedicated you are, Tovarich. But who you choose to mourn is your business. I don’t have to mourn you, or him. People gotta live the consequences of their decision making. If that makes me evil in your eyes, fine, but the late Mr. Kirk, I should point out, was perfectly fine so long as other fathers died for his right; I’d argue thats just as evil.
When did he say that shootings are “perfectly fine?”
You’re strawmanning him.
He said they’re worth the price for his freedom. I’m not straw manning your hero; you’re excusing him.
What's an acceptable cost to you for having the Bill of Rights?
What's an acceptable cost to you for living in a free society?
I dunno. Ol’ Dead Charlie though other people dying was worth it, until it bit him in the ass.
"STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES." "END KNIFE VIOLENCE". These are the campaigns in England where guns are limited. People in England walk down the streets carrying severed heads because of leftist border destruction. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
What did he do after the Minnesota murders?
"it’s very hard to have sympathy for Kirk"
It is very easy, actually.
For everyone snarling at The Left, let’s take a look at the statements by our former presidents.
Joe Biden: “There is no place in our country for this kind of violence. It must end now. Jill and I are praying for Charlie Kirk’s family and loved ones.”
Barack Obama: “We don’t yet know what motivated the person who shot and killed Charlie Kirk, but this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy. Michelle and I will be praying for Charlie’s family tonight, especially his wife Erika and their two young children.”
Bill Clinton: “ I’m saddened and angered by Charlie Kirk’s murder. And I hope we all go through some serious introspection and redouble our efforts to engage in debate passionately, yet peacefully. Hillary and I are keeping Erika, their two young children, and their family in our prayers.”
And then watch this statement by Trump. Not a word about the numerous attacks on Democratic lawmakers. No call for calm. In fact, he issues vague threats that seem aimed at progressive institutions he’s presumptively blaming. Remember, we don’t even have a suspect in custody yet. We have no knowledge of his motives. But Trump, as always, eagerly pours gasoline on the fire.
If you don’t see the difference, you’re willfully blind.
https://x.com/josh_wingrove/status/1965942146814587272
"Deplorables" "Racists" "Russian collusion" Each person quoted previously contributed heavily to incitement of the Leftist Assassin.
The fact that you guys are still complaining about “deplorables” ten years later proves my point. Trump was on Truth Social three days ago mocking Paul Pelosi. There is simply no comparison. Again, I’m baffled at how you don’t see this.
Hillary's rhetoric incited left democrats to openly call for violence against suspected Trump voters. And there was such violence in 2015. Left Democrat violence and incitement is a constant unforgivable unforgettable attack against Democracy. If white Americans did not have private guns then millions would be robbed murdered raped or enslaved by Democrats anually. UNUSED GUNS PREVENT KNIFE VIOLENCE IN US. "STOP KNIVES, SAVE LIVES"; "END KNIFE VIOLENCE" are actual campaigns in England where there are not enough guns to prevent or terminate Knife Violence. The left threw open the US border to flood in 20 million illegal Climate Deniers who came into America to burn fossil fuel and MULTIPLY THEIR CARBON FOOTPRINT 50x or 100x and to obtain free gender change surgery that gratuitously increased their environmental impact and chances of selftermination. The left opened the border that brought in the Fentanyl that killed George Floyd and over One Million other Americans. During the Pandemic, Democrats outright murdered more people under 40yearsold than who died of covid19. Democrats commit 99.5 percent of violent crimes in US cities such as Atlanta. US Democrats/Left are a diabolical criminal organization and should be outlawed, literally outlawed. The Left condones the disproportionate murders of white people by blacks in interracial crime statistics. Black felons/mobs/gangs attack/rob/murder/rape thousands of white people every year in the US and millions of Blacks every year in Africa. The Islamic state enslaved over 8 million white Saqaliba before the global white supremacy abolished slavery and destroyed the Caliphate system of conquest and rule. The Left opened the border to import millions of pious Islamic jihadis. "maybe the effects of demographic change are so threatening that the right" is justified in any action it takes against the diabolical murderous treasonous Democrats/Left.
This wasn’t worth reading once, much less twice.
Celebrities too, and I'm grateful for that. That said, these three also said they didn't want gay marriage, once upon a time. And at the time, they probably didn't think things were being led that way, especially not with their help. But when so much emotional investment is put into always pushing normalcy one way, you're not gonna stop. Between that and the older generations eventually dying off, I think things are different than you say.
Sorry, I don’t understand what you mean.
https://nitter.poast.org/charliekirk11/status/1909391943802703899
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
Cool, why doesn't your copy-paste reveal the name of the organization that conducted the polling? Could it be because nobody has ever heard of them, and the poll author went on Fox complaining about "left-wing authoritarianism"?
Hi, I looked into this poll. Those interested can find the NCRI's own words on it here: https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
The problem is that people’s identity has become so interwoven with their political views that any challenge to their party’s narratives feels like a personal attack on them. They constantly seek validation and reinforcement of their worldview, which is built on an oversimplified “heroes vs. villains” setup. In this tribal state, truth is less important than anything that flatters their side.
They treat any evidence that contradicts their narrative as false because it threatens their identity, not because it is false. So they default to explanations that preserve their belief system. That’s why in today’s climate, the ecosystem of interpretation is more politically powerful than the reality of any given act or event.
The Minnesota shooter, Vance Boelter, is a good example. Most people agree that murdering elected officials is wrong, even from the other party. You’d expect broad condemnation with little partisan controversy. Instead, there was a debate, not about what he did, but to which “team” he belonged.
In spite of clear evidence that Boelter was a conservative (with ties to Christian nationalism), much of MAGA insisted he was on the left. A sane person’s response would be, “Yes, he votes like me, but he’s a murderer. He doesn’t represent my values.” But because his existence threatens their narrative, they had to find a different interpretation.
At this point, people are living in a cognitive matrix. Anything that disrupts their belief that they aren’t in the matrix becomes an existential threat, and must be reinterpreted, denied, or rejected. Scapegoats are frequently picked to maintain this reality and increase the group cohesion, the consensus of which is significantly more important than aligning with truth/reality.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls
So we can see that out of 6,578 murders, 566 were Black/Democrat-on-White murders, and 246 were White-on-Black murders. If that holds for all of the murders in the country, then Black/Democrat-on-White murder is about 2.3 times as common as White-on-Black murder. Whether or not the true number is lower or higher depends on whether there are more White-on-Black or Black-on-White murders that go unreported.
Here we go to the National Crime Victimization Survey for 2019. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv19.pdf
we can see somewhat similar patterns here to the FBI’s murder numbers. Black/Democrat-on-White violence is a lot more common than White-on-Black violence — about 5.2 times as common.
The disproportionate rate of Black/Democrat-on-White murders would be much worse except that white people have spent Trillions of Dollars to engage in "white flight" into suburbs and other places where there are few blacks/democrats. For this reason, blacks/democrats seek to use legislation (Affirmative Action housing e.g., Obama's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing "aims to break down historical patterns of racial and economic segregation that limit access to opportunity" to commit crimes against white people ) specifically to increase the opportunities for blacks/democrats to hunt, murder, rob, rape and burglarize white people.
[And White attacks on Black people are a relatively small percent of the violence Black people experience.]
"Data from the 1981 national victimization survey reveal that ... Although violent crime by white offenders is apparently strongly intraracial, in that 96.9 percent of the white offenders chose white victims, violent crime by black offenders is apparently predominantly interracial, with 55.2 percent of the black offenders choosing white victims. Black offenders chose white victims in 63.9 percent of robberies, 51.8 percent of assaults, and 58.6 percent of rapes. In contrast, white offenders chose black victims in 8.3 percent of robberies, 2.7 percent of assaults, and 5.5 percent of rapes. These percentages suggest that each of the three violent crimes is strongly intraracial for white offenders but predominantly interracial for black offenders. This finding suggests that the motives behind black assault and rape are different than the motives behind white assault and rape. Reasons why the partially interracial character of violent crime has not been addressed are suggested."
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/violent-crime-intraracial#:~:text=Black%20offenders%20chose%20white%20victims,and%205.5%20percent%20of%20rapes.
Charlie Kirk was hated for pointing out that black Democrats frequently (disproportionately) hunt, attack and kill white people for fun and sport. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmqCVrkXWk These "polar bear hunting" incidents happens in many US Cities, and at the Wisconsin State Fair. Black Flash Mob Attack At Wiscosin State Fair
'Race War At Wisconsin State Fair' "I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face."
https://www.ourdecline.com/brbarian/fairmob.htm
"If, over the Christmas season, should any New Hampshire resident visit a large population center such as New York City, Chicago, or even Boston, that person would be well advised to beware participants of the “Knockout Game” (aka, “polar bearing” or “polar bear hunting. ... censorship of black-on-white crime condemns many non-blacks to victimization.”)"
https://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinion/local-commentary/2013/12/15/knockout-watch-your-back-when-you-visit-the-big-city/
In 2019, Black people made up 12.2% of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey). Blacks, however, represent 26.6% of total arrests, including 51.2% of murder arrests, 52.7% of robbery arrests, 28.8% of burglary arrests, 28.6% of motor vehicle theft arrests, 42.2% of prostitution arrests, and 26.1% of drug arrests (FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, Table 43).
This is why the Democrat Party openly facilitates voting by FELONS. The Democrat Party is the Party of Crime and is predominately driven by the desire of blacks/democrats/felons to harm or tax or enslave white people. NY Attorney General Letitia James confirmed this specific intent by proposing legislation to deprive white homeowners of the right to use "necessary" force (e.g., knives, guns, sticks) necessary to stop violent black felons from escaping justice immediately after the black/democrat has raped murdered robbed and/or kidnapped/enslaved white people in their homes
Maybe get your head out of Twitter and take The Economist approach: given an important incident, take just enough time for some rational thought, followed by enough cognitive cycles to mull things over and evidence to surface - before publishing.
Insta-posting based on Tweets is not intellectual work.
People will insta-post regardless. People all over the internet are insta-posting. May as well have some voices of restraint such as Richard insta-posting as well.
> voices of restraint such as Richard
Hahaha.
I’m paying for this. Preference has now been noted.
I disagree with you on so many issues, but subscribe because I appreciate your measured take.
Have the decency to be quiet for at least a day.
but the rightoids can call for civil war and race war as loud as they want immediately? xdddddddd
Demonstrate decency yourself, and you will get decency in turn
Wow, what a horrible person you are.
Yeah, because I'm the one calling for civil war, race war, genocide, ...
Considering your comments, yeah, you are.
By pointing out that people are doing that? Even Charlie Kirk said that he's ok with the situation in Gaza, that it's a deserved firestorm by Israel. I never said any similar things in this thread, as you see.
Leftists think you can chop up a man and turn him into a woman.
"the rightoids ... call for civil war and race war" Charlie Kirk was hated for pointing out that black Democrats frequently (disproportionately) hunt, attack and kill white people for fun and sport. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwmqCVrkXWk These "polar bear hunting" incidents happens in many US Cities, and at the Wisconsin State Fair. Black Flash Mob Attack At Wiscosin State Fair
'Race War At Wisconsin State Fair' "I saw them grab this white kid who was probably 14 or 15 years old. They just flung him into the road. They just jumped on him and started beating him. They were kicking him. He was on the ground. A girl picked up a construction sign and pushed it over on top of him. They were just running by and kicking him in the face."
https://www.ourdecline.com/brbarian/fairmob.htm
"If, over the Christmas season, should any New Hampshire resident visit a large population center such as New York City, Chicago, or even Boston, that person would be well advised to beware participants of the “Knockout Game” (aka, “polar bearing” or “polar bear hunting. ... censorship of black-on-white crime condemns many non-blacks to victimization.”)"
https://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinion/local-commentary/2013/12/15/knockout-watch-your-back-when-you-visit-the-big-city/
"New Hampshire’s own Mark Steyn, writing in the National Review in an article entitled, “Knockouts High and Low,” describes what happens: “Groups of black youths roam the streets looking for a solitary pedestrian, preferably white (hence the alternate name ‘polar-bearing’) but Asian or Hispanic will do. The trick is to knock him to the ground with a single punch [often fatally killing the victim]. In preparation, the perpetrator approaches the victim either as a passer-by or from the rear. As he bashes the victim’s skull, his fellow thugs record it on cell phones for uploading to youtube.com, allowing the thug’s friends and family to enjoy his victim’s agony.
Victims can be any age, male or female, healthy or not. They range from a 13-year-old boy to a 78-year-old woman carrying shopping bags. There’s more, but you get the drift.
.... That means when in large cities, you should constantly be assessing people in your immediate vicinity. Any group of young blacks, giggling and talking among themselves while occasionally looking in your direction, should be regarded with suspicion. Forget political correctness. If a single individual leaves that group and moves in your direction, beware. It’s time to either prepare a defense or cross the street to where there are people and security cameras. ... Black youths look upon impunity as an entitlement."
https://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinion/local-commentary/2013/12/15/knockout-watch-your-back-when-you-visit-the-big-city/
80 percent of all interracial violent crime is Black/Democrats versus whites. Democrats openly advertise their intentions of giving blacks in particular impunity for violent crimes as a "civil rights" entitlement for blacks/democrats. The routine nature of black/democrat-on-white violence (e.g., "The Knockout Game", "Polar Bear Hunting") openly supported by Democrats is evidence of the current existence of a "civil war and race war". Blacks/Democrats are currently in a state of "civil war and race war" against white people. This further includes the open borders scheme that Blacks/Democrats have employed to replace white people as the voting majority/citizens/rulers who will prescribe the rules for taxation of white people and for the enslavement of white children/people. Fundamentally, Blacks/Democrats are systematically and violently attacking the "progeny" of white people who founded America, America was founded by the white supremacists founders for the specific purpose of depriving pious men of color of white slaves. White Supremacist Prescient Jefferson built the US Navy specifically to send gunships to free the white slaves halal owned by pious Muslim men of color in Tripoli. Blacks/Democrats present an existential threat to the Freedom and Lives of White Saqaliba People in America. The only redeeming quality of Democrats is that they advocate for the assassination of unborn blacks/democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse. But, even so, the failure of Democrats to procure the deaths of unborn black/democrats is the cause of over 90 percent of violent crime in US Cities. If Democrats were more effective at procuring assassination of unborn blacks/democrats produced by nonmarital intercourse, all American cities would be peaceful and safe places. It is the Democrat white supremacists who deliberately deprive blacks of Islamic Justice (or any close approximation) and thus there is no Peace in American cities. No Islamic Justice, No Islamic Peace.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6.xls
So we can see that out of 6,578 murders, 566 were Black/Democrat-on-White murders, and 246 were White-on-Black murders. If that holds for all of the murders in the country, then Black/Democrat-on-White murder is about 2.3 times as common as White-on-Black murder. Whether or not the true number is lower or higher depends on whether there are more White-on-Black or Black-on-White murders that go unreported.
Here we go to the National Crime Victimization Survey for 2019. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv19.pdf
we can see somewhat similar patterns here to the FBI’s murder numbers. Black/Democrat-on-White violence is a lot more common than White-on-Black violence — about 5.2 times as common.
The disproportionate rate of Black/Democrat-on-White murders would be much worse except that white people have spent Trillions of Dollars to engage in "white flight" into suburbs and other places where there are few blacks/democrats. For this reason, blacks/democrats seek to use legislation (Affirmative Action housing e.g., Obama's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing "aims to break down historical patterns of racial and economic segregation that limit access to opportunity" to commit crimes against white people ) specifically to increase the opportunities for blacks/democrats to hunt, murder, rob, rape and burglarize white people.
[And White attacks on Black people are a relatively small percent of the violence Black people experience.]
I’m waiting for the unhinged conspiracy theories from conservatives since the killer is still loose. It’s either gonna be Dems or Mossad. Can’t wait.
Yes they're already all out there convinced it was a professional job. Very very similar to the Trump assassination attempt, and just like that one, it is going to end up being a random crazy person. Thing is, Utah is one of the most heavily armed states in the country, hunting is very popular, and there are fun clubs and shooting ranges of all types all over the place here. Hell my brother enters these crazy shooting competitions where they time you running through obstacles shooting pop up bad guys, almost every weekend. Very typical activity here, so there are thousands and thousands of people who could make that shot and they don't need to be former military or CIA or whatever.
A very sickening situation though. It's a beautiful day here. I also accidentally saw the video of him gushing blood when scrolling Twitter and my stomach still hurts.
I literally grew up watching way too many liveleak videos as a teenage boy and even that close up video had me a bit unnerved. I don’t want to get into the gory details since we’ve all seen it but Jesus that was brutal. Almost looked like movie levels of fake the first time I saw, I had to watch it three times to confirm it and cleanse my mind of it. Damn…
*GUN clubs. Bad autocorrect there.
As it turns out, the assassin Tyler R. was raised in a MAGA household with a wholesome MAGA value system including training in the skilled use of rifles. In 2023 Tyler boasted to a coworker of his long-shot skill. But, unfortunately Tyler dropped out of college and dropped out of professional electrician work, and he became a low-self-esteem looser with low opportunity to get female love. Then, Tyler was seduced by a Transsexual/Democrat into a homosexuals relationship (with his effeminate male "roommate") and Tyler's mind became twisted by the Democrat/Trans agenda and he decided to kill Charlie Kirk as a way to advance the Transsexual/Democrat agenda.
Hamas is the Islamic state. see Wiki of: Slavery in Palestine. The Hamstinian people fight only for the freedom to enslave others as they did for hundreds of years. In October 2024 a white Yazidi woman was liberated fro enslavement captivity in Gaza.
Hamas is the Islamic state. see Wiki of: Slavery in Palestine. The Hamastinian people fight only for the freedom to enslave others as they did for hundreds of years. In October 2024 a white Yazidi woman was liberated from enslavement captivity in Gaza.
> I seriously don't understand why people are upset about this.
Yes, you do.
But you're a liar. You've become addicted to lying.
Or the CIA and the mythical ‘Deep State’.
I've already heard "Mossad" elsewhere :shrug:
This would be an intelligent and thoughtful article if you addressed the wall to wall praise for the shooter on sites such as BlueSky, Reddit, Twitter. It would be one thing if this was a singular act condemned by all, but the fact that a sizable portion of the country reacts with erotic passion at the sight of blood pouring like a fountain from the throat of a youtuber they dislike is a bit concerning.
I see tons of awful stuff, but I also see every single Democratic lawmaker and all the other various leaders of progressive causes and MSM condemning this in the strongest possible terms.
Random people are just incredibly shitty online in a way they’d never be in real life.
Elected and MSM democrats behavior is reasonable, so they use the mantra "the media lies! the politicians are liars!" to call them evil people.
Elected and MSM republicans behavior is unhinged, so they use the mantra "the media lies! the politicians are liars!" to imply they are actually good and well intentioned people.
MSM and elected Democrats do lie a lot. But I agree that in this case they’re reacting sensibly.
Elected Republicans and Fox are similar. See Mitch McConnell’s and Kevin McCarthy’s reactions to the Paul Pelosi attack. Trump himself is much worse than the norm in either party.
? Kevin McCarthy famously joked on the House floor about Paul Pelosi.
‘"Thankfully he's gonna be okay but thankfully the attacker, he’s a deranged individual, but thankfully he was arrested. And we've watched this with Lee Zeldin, we've watched this with Supreme Court Justices. This is wrong. Violence should not go. You watch what happened to Steve Scalise and others. This has got to stop."
‘McCarthy also added that he reached out to Nancy Pelosi through text to offer his prayers.’
https://www.turnto23.com/news/local-news/kevin-mccarthy-speaks-out-on-pelosi-home-invasion-and-attack
What did he say on the house floor?
It looks like I misremembered. He made a joke about hitting Nancy Pelosi on the head with the Speaker’s gavel, not her husband.
That being said, Senator Mike Lee made a truly ghastly joke about the Minnesota lawmaker who was murdered a few months ago. And Fox News hosts did make horrible jokes and spread stupid rumors about Paul Pelosi. I’m not a fan of most MSM, but CNN and MSNBC just kind of suck, while Fox News is wildly inflammatory.
It’s great that elected democrats are grieving. But the leftists I know irl do celebrate every prominent rightists’ death and also backed Luigi. The progressive base really is unhinged.
Where do you live, and what is your demo? I’m in SFC. I don’t know a single person who voted for Trump. I doubt that more than a handful even know who Luigi is, much less celebrate him.
This is like saying every Republican primary voter has a white hood in their closet.
You're a typical lying leftist. You're addicted to lying because your entire worldview is built on lies.
https://nitter.poast.org/charliekirk11/status/1909391943802703899
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
Hi, I looked into this poll. Those interested can find the NCRI's own words on it here: https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
> The “study” you cite is from an organization notorious for inflammatory push polls. Feel free to consult ChatGPT or another AI if you don’t believe me. “ Network Contagion Research Institute”
> It was ONE dude, done as a publicity stunt. Again, don’t take my word for it.
> random statement
> random statement
That's the best cope you could come up with to cover for your lies, leftyrat?
> Feel free to consult ChatGPT
Bahaha. So that's why you leftists are so stupid and gullible.
> you lied about knowing multiple leftists irl celebrating Luigi
Yeah I'm sure the "free Luigi" marches are hallucinations of mine. Lying leftyrat.
By "leftist" I mean members of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. All of them know who Luigi is.
I live in a blue city and used to be involved with leftist activism. I know both a lot of leftists and moderate Democrats. I'm well aware that leftists are a minority of Democrats. (Biden dominated the 2020 primary!)
Maybe we’re using terms differently. Lots of Democrats are progressive. When you say the “base,” I think Democratic primary voters. I would characterize a “leftist” as someone to the left of Bernie Sanders, who thinks democracy is a sham. The “firebomb a Walmart” crowd.
Unfortunately, social media amplifies the loudest voices, who also tend to be very young and stupid.
Might be a terminology thing to some extent. But I think you’re also underrating how radical the Bernie/Warren progressives are. Maybe it’s an age thing. Most of the Bernie and Warren supporters in my life think Luigi is cool, capitalism sucks, America sucks, and democracy is rigged. And they celebrate the death of any famous right winger.
Come on now, of course they will comdemn it after it happens. But did they ever comdemn any of the hyper aggressive rhetoric, the calling all their opponents nazis, fascists or a threat to democracy, the endless comparisons to Nazi Germany, did they ever condemn Antifa, or stand up to the radical fringe (woke) of their half of the political spectrum? No of course not. They followed the radicals' cue and doubled and tripled and quadrupled down on calling everyone a racist fascist.
It wasn't just social media that radicalised people (yes, also on the right). It's also these same politicians (often on social media themselves)
Who are you talking about? The lawmakers? Of course they condemned all that violence. And they have to call Trump a threat to democracy, because like it or not, ***he is***. Do we have to ignore that because it’s a mean thing to say?
You also seem to have entirely missed the point of Hanania’s article, which is that you can’t judge Democratic lawmakers (who are always appropriate regardless) when **Trump leads the right**. Did you even listen to his speech? Before we knew anything about the shooter, he blamed it on radical leftists, and made chilling threats to crack down not just on the killer but any organization associated with progressive ideology.
Now it looks like the shooter was likely a groyper, or possibly just had terminal gamer brain. Do you think Trump — or any of the GOP lawmakers calling for blood — are going to walk that back? Of course not.
Yeah but the average left-wing person doesn’t take their cues from politicians they take them from memes saying how epic it is that Charlie Kirk got killed
As an average left-wing person, I can assure you that’s not the case.
Alright I’m coming back to this and I’m gonna double down on what I originally said. I’ve seen people I know from real life defending the shooting on instagram stories and overheard people at work justifying it. So yes I think if not the majority then a sizable percentage of leftists want to kill anyone who disagrees with them.
I’m sorry to hear that, I’ve noticed people getting meaner on Twitter as well. But take a step back here. Do you really think your coworkers want to kill you?
Democrats have all "fully embraced the anti white thug culture" https://peopleagainstshittycop.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/trayvon-martin-florida-black-foot-soldier-link-established-no-limit-nigga-lingo-is-popular-florida-black-foot-soldier-slang-for-black-on-white-bow-crime-trayvon-didnt-like-whites-am/
https://nitter.poast.org/charliekirk11/status/1909391943802703899
> Assassination culture is spreading on the left. Forty-eight percent of liberals say it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Elon Musk. Fifty-five percent said the same about Donald Trump.
> In California, activists are naming ballot measures after Luigi Mangione.
> The left is being whipped into a violent frenzy. Any setback, whether losing an election or losing a court case, justifies a maximally violent response.
> This is the natural outgrowth of left-wing protest culture tolerating violence and mayhem for years on end. The cowardice of local prosecutors and school officials have turned the left into a ticking time bomb.
Hi, I looked into this poll. Those interested can find the NCRI's own words on it here: https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
In brief, the poll is a push poll. It asks respondents to rate, on a scale of 1 to 7, how justified political violence would be against Musk and Trump. Any response higher than a 1 ("not at all") is counted as supporting violence. Because it is designed to maximize positive responses, it finds a full 20.3% of right-wingers agree that it would be at least somewhat justified to murder Donald Trump.
It does not ask equivalent questions regarding left-wing figures, such as Hillary Clinton or George Soros. The reason is simple: they would produce similarly high response rates from right-wingers, which the "researchers" did not want, because it would muddy the waters. A similar set of research, done with neutral questions, can be found here: https://www.dannyhayes.org/uploads/6/9/8/5/69858539/kalmoe___mason_ncapsa_2019_-_lethal_partisanship_-_final_lmedit.pdf . It finds that left and right are roughly equal on various questions such as:
- Do you ever think: we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of [Opposing party] in the public today just died? (15% R, 20% D)
- If you heard a politician had died of cancer, would your feelings about that depend on whether they were a Republican or a Democrat? (12% R, 13% D)
- When a [Own party] politician votes against the party on a key issue, have you ever wished they would get sick and die? (6% R, 4% D)
- How much do you feel it is justified for [Own party] to use violence in advancing their political goals these days? (both ~9%, with R slightly ahead)
OK, perhaps I was too broad. But the psycho lefties on Reddit/Bluesky/Twitter do not gaf what politicians or msm say.
A lot of your commenters here just want to prove your point apparently. Hate filled screeds against „the left“ based on zero evidence.
Well, the evidence is in. The guy was linked to antifa and had rounds with antifascist-related engravings. But of course, as Biden told us, "antifa is just an idea"! Nothing to see here. Luckily "the left" always clearly distanced themselves from the radical fringe elements of their side of the political spectrum and totally didn't forment decades long, increasingly radical (and violent) left wing activism and agitation at university campuses. No siree. Totally also not a result of years of hysteria that "fascists" and "literally Hitler" were about to take over if, god forbid, anyone but a Democrat would win an election.
Are you feeling stupid yet? I’m surprised you haven’t deleted this post.
This is what happens when prominent politicians line up on mainstream television night after night and promote the Right as the second coming of Hitler and the Nazi regime. Trying to get out in front of this with your lame message turns my stomach. The Democrat Party is guilty of the most vile and violent rhetoric, and you’re trying here to brush it aside. C’mon, man.
Three weeks ago Stephen Miller went on TV and called Democrats a domestic extremist organization. This isn't some yahoo on TV. He's Trump's most loyal advisor.
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6377384186112
Ok, but he is not wrong:
*In league with the MSM, the standing narrative from the Left since 2016 has been that Donald Trump and his coalition of Republicans are an "existential threat" to the country and democracy.
"He [Trump] is destructive to our democracy, and he has to be eliminated." - Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.)
-(D) Bennie Thompson, 2017, "Direct threat to the homeland" and 2019, ".. enemy of the people".
-Joe Biden campaign, 2022, "Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic."
-"It's time to put Trump in the bullseye." - Joe Biden, July 2024, just a week before the Butler assassination attempt.
-"If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere." - Maxine Waters
-"I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You won't know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions." - Chuck Schumer
That said, no one on the Right has associated anyone in the (D) party with one of the greatest genocidal mass murderers in history (though the case could be better made), IMO.
Calling an organization "extreme" is far different than associating a duly democratically elected President with a psychopathic murderer, and the people who elected him with that guy's genocidal regime.
Aisha Mills (Democratic Strategist), October 2024: On CNN's "News Central, “Donald Trump has revered the Nazis… revered Hitler... he would absolutely try to exterminate an entire group of people because he thinks that their genes are somehow different than his and faulty.”
James Carville (Democratic Strategist), October 2024: In a Sunday interview, Carville compared Trump's planned Madison Square Garden rally to a 1939 Nazi rally at the same venue, saying, “They are telling you exactly what they’re going to do, they’re telling you, ‘We’re going to institute a fascist regime.’... He’s the one that chose to have a rally at Madison Square Garden. The same place the Nazis had a rally on Feb. 20, 1939.”
Hillary Clinton (Former Secretary of State and Democratic Presidential Nominee), October 2024: In a CNN interview days before Trump's Madison Square Garden rally, Clinton said, “He's actually reenacting the Madison Square Garden rally in 1939,” referring to a pro-Nazi event attended by over 20,000 people.
Biden Campaign, December 2023: “Trump channeled his role models as he parroted Adolf Hitler, praised Kim Jong Un, and quoted Vladimir Putin while running for president on a promise to rule as a dictator and threaten American democracy.”
All of these are dwarfed by what Trump himself has been saying for decades. "scum," "poisoning the blood of our country," "should be executed for treason"
He has repeatedly called Democrats communists and fascists.
He claimed Obama was not American and a radical Marxist and accused him of having his "wires tapped"
They are communists and fascists. .. They used the IRS and FBI to stifle dissent and silence conservative speech. They coerced social media partners to kick people off for "crime think". They are fascists. Mamdani is a communist, and AOC, Sanders, Beckles are all sympathetic. .. I don't care what Trump said about Obama's citizenship, heysus. .. he's already been President, so that clearly wasn't effective. Trump picked that up from the Hillary Clinton campaign. .. the allegations that Obama tapped his phone seem more and more credible with all the (D) malfeasance being uncovered.
And yes, Trump's taunts are grade school compared to what the (D)s do by trying to say Trump is going to gas people.
So calling someone "scum" dwarfs calling someone "literally Hitler nazi fascist who threatens the very foundation of the republic and who's going to kill you and everyone you know because of your genes (not to mention destroy the economy and start world war 3)".
Are you ok?
PS: "Scum" was reserved for criminals and gangsters. He never said it about immigrants, nor even illegal-immigrants, only crimial elements.
The Democrats radicalized first. That's why Trump got elected in the first place.
lol, Trump calls democrats animals and threatens to be the rights “vengeance.” His homeboy miller call democrats radicals. People are joining ice for the chance to smash immigrants’ faces into the concrete. But sure.
"animals" was a term he reserved for MS-13 gang members and violent illegal immigrant criminals. .. He never used "vengence". That's a media narrative. .. Democrats are radicals:
"There needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there’s unrest in our lives. And unfortunately, there’s unrest in our lives... We’re going to have to be more bold, more disruptive, more [unintelligible] than ever." - Ayanna Pressley
"If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out there and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they're not welcome anymore, anywhere." - Maxine Waters
"I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be when people realize that this is a policy they defend." - Nancy Pelosi
Portraying a political opponent as an existential "threat to democracy" (repeated by multiple Democrats) can justify extreme measures, including violence, by framing the stakes as survival rather than electoral disagreement—mirroring how such language has historically led to polarization and unrest.
"People are joining ICE...". I am not here concerned about the sentiments expressed by random people on the Right or Left, but by prominent leaders of either party. Democrat leadership is far less disciplined in their use of what is political rhetoric. It is much more violent, radical and extreme.
Yeah, remember when they called Republicans "enemies within" and said we should "handle" them with the National Guard because they were "Marxists and communists and fascists, and...so sick and they’re so evil"? Oh wait, that was Trump talking about Democrats.
Both sides use "enemies". I don't consider that extreme rhetoric. .. When he said "handle them" he was specifically referring to potential election day violence by "radical-left lunatics". .. Do you deny the plausability?
"Donald Trump was elected president on November 8, 2016, with results finalized in the early hours of November 9. Protests began almost immediately in response to his victory, starting peacefully but escalating to violence within hours in several cities. By the end of November 9 (less than 24 hours after the election), reports of property damage, clashes with police, and arrests emerged in multiple locations across the U.S. These incidents were widespread, affecting at least a dozen major cities. .. The violence was often attributed to a small subset of protesters (e.g., anarchists or black bloc groups). .. These groups are Marxists & Communists, and many would admit so, though they would never admit to "Fascism" because they really don't understand the term, even though that's exactly who they are.
Trump literally declared war on an American city like 48 hours ago
"He posted a meme picture of a war movie, so that's like... literally declaring war, man!"
Embellish much? Everyone but you knows he means the crime there.
So surely the right is responsible for guys like Dylann Roof and Patrick Crusius, yes?
I don't know that your claim fits. The discussion is about violent rhetoric expressed by party leaders toward opposition party and leadership.
Do Republican Party leaders (Trump) often speak of their hatred for black Americans and the dangers they pose? If you read Roof's biography, it's clear, his dysfunction stemmed primarily from an extremely troubled childhood and early drug use. (*notably, his parents divorced before he was even born, and Affidavits from the 2009 divorce described the father as verbally abusive, and the overall family dynamics involved marital infidelity, frequent arguments, and instability that contributed to a "troubled road" for Roof.
Crusius, "described as a loner with a history of mental health issues including schizoaffective disorder", claimed his views predated Donald Trump's presidency. That means his radicalism toward the immigrant community would have likely started with perhaps statements made by any of our lawmakers prior to 2016, including statements like this from former President Barack Obama:
"We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants in this country."
"Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable—especially those who may be dangerous. That’s why, over the past six years, deportations of criminals are up 80 percent. And that’s why we’re going to keep focusing enforcement resources on actual threats to our security."
No.
And there it is, the admission that there's a double standard. The Left has to "own it" when someone commits a violent act against someone on the Right. But when someone on the Right commits a horrible act of violence, like shooting up a grocery store in Buffalo or the January 6th riots, the political Right is never to blame.
Did you see Hanania’s main point? If you want to see who debases the narrative and cheapens the tone of discourse more, is there anyone within an order of magnitude of Trump himself?
A prominent conservative activist who specifically preached and practiced civil dialogue (often in the face of threats, aggression and intimidation from leftists) was brutally murdered in front of an audience (by, as we now know, someone radicalised by the left, probably at university) but let's first have another declaration of how the right "cheapens the tone of discourse".
Name anyone else besides Trump who has as big a soapbox, and bloviates to the same extent. Take your time.
That’s not to say there aren’t many people on the left who have contributed to the debasing of political discourse. But for any righty to complain, without acknowledging that their side has the biggest elephant in the room, is comical.
The killer literally dropped out of a university to get a trade degree.
Switzerland is pretty permissive with their guns and they don't have this issue of lone shooters. Gun control is probably putting a band aid on a deeper problem.
The deeper problem is leftists.
Famously absent from Europe