pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @79c9095526 OP 11 Sep \ parent \ on: It is OK to not feel empathy for Charlie Kirk dying news
Here are a few examples for you. You may not agree with all of them, perhaps one resonates with you:
On Black Women and Affirmative Action: Kirk made derogatory remarks about Black women leaders, stating, “You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken seriously” without affirmative action, targeting figures like Joy Reid, Michelle Obama, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee. He added, “You had to steal a white person’s slot,” which critics labeled as deeply racist and demeaning.
On the Civil Rights Act and Martin Luther King Jr.: At a December 2023 Turning Point USA event, Kirk called Martin Luther King Jr. “awful” and “not a good person,” while also criticizing the Civil Rights Act of 1965, which outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. He stated, “We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s,” a view condemned for undermining civil rights progress.
On Islam and 9/11: Commenting on Zohran Mamdani’s win in a New York City Democratic primary, Kirk said, “Twenty-four years ago a group of Muslims killed 2,753 people on 9/11…Now a Muslim Socialist is on pace to run New York City.” This statement was widely condemned as Islamophobic for linking an individual’s faith to a terrorist attack and stoking fear.
On Gun Violence and the Second Amendment: Following a school shooting, Kirk stated at a Turning Point USA event in April 2023, “You will never live in a society when you have an armed citizenry and you won’t have a single gun death… I think it’s worth… some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights.” This was criticized as callous for seemingly dismissing the value of human lives lost to gun violence.
I notice that your examples do not link primary sources, likely take words out of context, and even use "..." to extract only the words that make your point. For example, when he talked about brain processing power, it sounds like he was attacking a specific individual and not attacking a racial group as a whole.
However, at face value, I do agree that some of these words are unkind and uncharitable and unbecoming of a public figure. That being said, you'd be able to find unkind words in the corpus of anyone who does as much public speaking as he does.
To be honest, I don't really want to talk to you anymore about Charlie Kirk. You can have your point of view and I'll have mine.
If you want to debate the issues directly, gun control, affirmative action, etc, I'm happy to do so in a new thread.
reply
Your question was "How did Charlie Kirk spread hate?"
I answered the question with my opinion and some ways where I found his speech 'hateful'.
You then say you don't want to talk about Charlie Kirk.
That's cool.
In terms of unkind and uncharitable. These are the ways we excuse things imo. We've done that for years with Trump, who brought this type of divisive language to the forefront about a decade ago starting with Obama is not an american but a somali or whatever and John McCain isn't a hero (pretty sure he had the flags that were flying half mast raised because he hated McCain). The examples are too many to count.
This type of language and the hatred it inspires and the subsequent violence it inspires is no accident. Words do matter. I am not saying there aren't people all across the political spectrum who say bad or hateful things. But I wasn't playing whataboutism, I was talking about a specific example in response to your question.
reply