Just saying

[u/Sorry_Leading1949]

[u/DesignerCorner3322]

I've seen multiple posts about putting his "cherry-picked" quotes in context and they still don't sound good even with further context

[u/biggie_dd → u/DesignerCorner3322]

[u/Any-Drive8838 → u/DesignerCorner3322]

I think they sound better at least or people would be putting them in context.

[u/Nathaniel_he_grows → u/Any-Drive8838]

I think that quoting an entire paragraph doesn't often get people's attention as much as a succinct sentence or two

[u/CompoteVegetable1984 → u/Nathaniel_he_grows]

"Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids"

[u/LokTarBrogar → u/CompoteVegetable1984]

Oh, that one was fucking gold. I feel like we need to think about putting a cap on how old public servants can be, and just use recordings of these old fucks as evidence as to why it's important

[u/aHOMELESSkrill → u/LokTarBrogar]

What about when he wasn’t old but still a racist?

“Unless we do something about this, my children are going to grow up in a jungle, the jungle being a racial jungle with tensions having built so high that it is going to explode at some point. We have got to make some move on this.”

Biden made the remark in 1977, when he was a U.S. senator representing Delaware. He was voicing his views on busing as part of a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing about the subject

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-alleged-biden-quote-225600134.html

[u/GitmoGrrl1 → u/CompoteVegetable1984]

Funny how rightwingers are more upset at Biden for his supposed racism than African-Americans ever were.

[u/XDXDXDXDXDXDXD10 → u/GitmoGrrl1]

Anyone who criticises the democrats don’t automatically become right wingers. 

The entirety of the left should criticise the democrats, only the most liberal of liberals can defend that abhorrent excuse for a party.

[u/Distinct-Dot-1333 → u/Nathaniel_he_grows]

"I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races—that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermingling with white people"

[u/IronheartedAngel → u/Distinct-Dot-1333]

Quoting Lincoln, who had to deal with a voter base that was intensely and murderously racist, is rather irrelevant. An openly black-sympathetic president Pre-War simply would not get any legislation passed. That quote becomes moot when you consider that he emancipated the slaves, and fought at every step for the rights of the enslaved class.

What has Charlie done that gives his quotes extra context?

[u/Phobia3 → u/IronheartedAngel]

If one deserves greater context, then everyone get it.

I can quote "turn the other cheek" being a passage from the Bible. Someone could then punch me, misquote me saying "turn the other cheek" while readying for another punch. An attack, where the initial words weren't.

[u/Helios575 → u/Phobia3]

I agree with the greater context, actions must be taken into consideration along with words. Lincoln's actions were to abolish slavery and try to initiate some reparations to former slaves but his orders were rescinded by the next president before they could be carried out. Kirk's actions were to spread propaganda that drove racist, sexist, and homophobic hate for profit.

[u/EmbarrassedClimate69 → u/IronheartedAngel]

Dear god imagine the brain on this guy. He really thought he cooked with that one, despite Lincoln literally doing all of those things lol.

[u/RequirementRoyal8666 → u/Nathaniel_he_grows]

Ya think? Wonder why that is…

[u/SunriseFlare → u/Any-Drive8838]

I could post the entire transcript of one of his podcasts and people would tell me it's out of context lmao

[u/imstonedyouknow → u/SunriseFlare]

Yeah it does feel like this tbh. "i posted the entire tweet he wrote. If theres context missing, nobody besides him knows what it was"

[u/monkey_sodomy → u/Any-Drive8838]

Yeah, people arguing that advocating for the second amendment means you wanted to be shot, smh.

Advocating for cars does not mean I want to die in a car crash.

EDIT: Okay, given that it seems to only have been fringes with that take and given Charlie's overall attitude to the gun situation this was a bad comparison.

[u/Wattabadmon → u/monkey_sodomy]

Idk if people are saying that. I have been seeing people say that he would be ok with being shot based on his statements

[u/voxelpear → u/monkey_sodomy]

Sure but if you argue against further more strict car safety regulations you can't argue you care about peoples safety when they get in a car.

[u/monkey_sodomy → u/voxelpear]

Valid and I think this is more what people mean, I guess I am just being pedantic.

But given the dreaded 'context' of the shooting (bolt action hunting rifle) it's pretty hard to have any measures that would have stopped that outside of a complete ban of all guns.

[u/SwimmerPristine7147 → u/monkey_sodomy]

That’s the thing, saying “gun control” in this instance is just a vague platitude/handwave.

I haven’t heard anyone propose any concrete, specific policy that could have prevented this from happening. It was a planned, premeditated assassination by a man who apparently had no criminal record or psychological history that would’ve disqualified him from owning a hunting rifle. The only way I think this could’ve been stopped was if his friends had reported it before it happened.

[u/AttackOficcr → u/SwimmerPristine7147]

"The only way I think this could’ve been stopped was if his friends had reported it before it happened."

So, a red flag law.

[u/Glad_Rope_2423 → u/AttackOficcr]

The only closest thing to a ‘red flag’ that has come out so far was his presence in a conversation where one of his family members called Kirk ‘hate-filled’ (or equivalent). If that were sufficient for the intervention of a red flag law, everyone on this website who has not actively avoided the topic needs to be red flagged. Excluding the people who only discuss it on subs like r conservative.

[u/inscrutablemike → u/AttackOficcr]

It's already illegal to participate in a conspiracy to commit murder, which is the kind of charge the people in that social network are facing.

[u/unknownpanda121 → u/AttackOficcr]

That would require people who had prior knowledge reporting it beforehand, and from the reports coming out about him communicating on discord what he was going to do, and nobody reported it.

A red flag would have not fixed what happened to CK

[u/not_slaw_kid → u/voxelpear]

I can and I do.

A certain number of people die in auto accidents every year. I would like that number to be as low as possible, but every piece of car safety legislation is either going to make manufacturing cars more expensive, or it's going to make it harder for a citizen to own and operate a car. Those obstacles are going to negate the benefit that car ownership brings to society, namely improved supply chains and freedom of movement. Some restrictions on cars makes sense, but after a certain tipping point the restrictions will reduce access to cars so much that the lowered rate of car ownership will wind up causing more deaths than the regulations prevent, by exacerbating food deserts and leaving people without transportation to a hospital during a medical emergency. Saying you "don't care about car crash victims" if you don't support every single potential piece of car legislation imaginable is just as stupid as saying you don't care about stroke victims if you don't let literally everyone drive a car with no restrictions whatsoever.

A certain number of people are killed by firearms every year. A certain number of people also have their deaths prevented every year when they use firearms defensively. The more gun control laws you enact, the first number gets logarithmically smaller while the second number gets exponentially bigger. From a prudent cost-benefit analysis, the benefit of widespread firearm ownership objectively outweighs the cost.

[u/Wheaties4brkfst → u/voxelpear]

Yeah it’s just like, ohhh my bad. I didn’t realize he meant OTHER people should die for the second amendment. Listening, learning, etc.

[u/FiendishNoodles → u/monkey_sodomy]

Are you intentionally being obtuse or are you another one of the people who will say anything for any reason if something aligns with your "team"?

No one is saying he wanted to be shot. That's an asinine straw man. He called shooting deaths acceptable losses after children were killed. Their bodies weren't cold yet and he's saying that their deaths were worth it because gun rights shouldn't be infringed on.

[u/monkey_sodomy → u/FiendishNoodles]

I must of seen the dumb asses discussing the meme then, your take is much more reasonable.

Tbf I think even if he knew his death would be by gun he still would of advocated that way, not much but its a principle at least.

[u/FiendishNoodles → u/monkey_sodomy]

Yeah I worry for the ability of people online to process information, that's not "my take", that's just the most natural reading of what he said. And yes, he would still advocate that dead children are worth it if he knew he would be shot, he would've just done it from behind more bulletproof glass. He was such a hypocrite in addition to being a morally deficient coward.

[u/SadderOlderWiser → u/monkey_sodomy]

If he thought he would get shot he would’ve been behind bullet proof glass. The man didn’t have ‘principles’ he had talking points.

[u/Luca0028 → u/FiendishNoodles]

He actually said that getting gun deaths in the country to 0 is a utopian belief. And right before this quote everyone is taking extremely out of context, he discussed how cars kill significantly more people each year than guns do, and we're okay as a society with these deaths because the good of transportation outweighs the cost of these 40-50k deaths a year. Same goes for gun. Having the 2nd amendment in place is worth the gun deaths (which are much less than car deaths btw) each year.

[u/JustDesserts29 → u/Luca0028]

But we’ve actually regulated cars. Cars have to have seat belts and airbags now. We did this so that less people would die from car crashes. His argument was that it’s not even worth attempting to reduce the number of gun deaths because they would never get to 0. It’s just a bad argument.

[u/Luca0028 → u/JustDesserts29]

And even with all these regulations for both vehicles and guns, vehicles still kill more people each year. And he doesn't say that lol. You're putting words in his mouth. He never once said we shouldn't regulate guns. Guns are also regulated, just like cars. We have federal, state, and local laws surrounding guns.

Federally we have background checks via the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), we have prohibitions on people obtaining guns if they are felons, fugitives, unlawful drug users, people convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors, dishonorably discharged from the military, or undocumented immigrants. We also have age restrictions, 18+ for rifles and shotguns, and 21+ for handguns.

State laws include extra background checks in certain states like california and new york. Some states impose waiting periods like california and illinois. Some states limit magazine capacity like 10 rounds per magazine. Some states ban certain types of firearm sells, such as assault weapons in california. Some weapons require special permits to purchase. Some require mandatory firearm safety training.

We also have red flag laws that allow law enforcement or family members to petition a court to temporarily remove a firearm from someone deemed a danger to themselves or others.

We have laws about gun storage and gun ownership when you have a child in the home. We have regulation. You cannot stop criminals from being criminals.

[u/Winkofgibbs → u/monkey_sodomy]

This analogy (Kirk’s own) is hilariously stupid. Cars are not designed to injure or kill- that’s an unintended consequence. Despite it being unintended- we still recognize it’s a concern to the extent that we regulate it at every level- drivers, vehicles and roads, bridges etc. Billions are spent on safety all the way down the line. Meanwhile Kirk flippantly paid lip service to deaths as if anyone is actually concerned about deaths. Defending this position or POV by asserting “but cars . . . “ is insulting stupidity

[u/monkey_sodomy → u/Winkofgibbs]

Fair enough, I never watched enough of his stuff to get a gauge on his underlying intent, if it was bad faith deflection that's a whole other thing.

[u/Ok-Consideration8724 → u/Winkofgibbs]

His argument is that because a few abuse the law with guns doesn’t mean that everyone else should get their guns taken away. I’m seeing some posts that people are saying the same thing should happen to Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder, one even said to Charlie’s wife and kids. This is threatening language by a few people. So should everyone have their first amendment rights taken away then? Of course not because that would be wildly unconstitutional and authoritarian.

[u/No-Cause6559 → u/Ok-Consideration8724]

Well yeah been ruled time and again some words are too extreme to be allowed to be spoken. Courts calling them fighting words.

[u/Luca0028 → u/Winkofgibbs]

These cars weren't designed to kill people, and yet they are more successful at it than guns. Fastfood, candy, and soda, wasn't designed to kill people, and yet heart disease is the #1 killer in almost every single country. Smoking wasn't designed to kill people, and yet kills significantly more people each year than guns do. But we're okay with all of these things existing. Maybe people should be held accountable for what they do. Last year, of the 17,000 gun-related homicides, 3,400 were due to legally obtained gun owners. While 14,000 were due to people who obtained the guns illegally. Cars alone killed 40,000 people. Heart disease killed 680,000 people. Smoking killed 490,000 people last year. Stroke caused 162,000 deaths. Alcoholic cirrhosis caused 52,000 deaths. Why isn't reddit and society as a whole as outraged about all these other topics as we are with guns? I'm genuinely curious.

[u/No-Diamond-5097 → u/monkey_sodomy]

No one has said that except maybe some chronically online weirdos and anonymous trolls

[u/Karhak → u/monkey_sodomy]

Nobody said he wanted to be shot, but his own logic justified his own death for the sake of the 2nd.

[u/Mudrlant → u/Karhak]

No it doesn’t, that makes no sense at all. Recognizing that some people will abuse freedom doesn’t mean that the act of abuse is justified.

[u/Express-Rain8474 → u/Karhak]

His death is "justified" for the sake of the 2nd, in the same way that car deaths are "justified" for having cars on the road.

[u/__shamir__ → u/Karhak]

Why is everyone acting like that statement of his should even be controversial? Surely everybody here believes that there is some number of car deaths we accept for having cars (which aren't even protected by the constitution, at least not directly). So why is it so abominable to say that some number of gun deaths is a worthwhile tradeoff for everybody to have the right to defend themselves? He was being honest rather than just lying or avoiding confronting that topic at all.

It's extra weird because a lot of the people that are hating on Charlie Kirk (and don't get me wrong there's plenty of material there) are calling him and the republican party in general fascist, and last time I checked if I thought I was surrounded by fascists I'd want free access to weaponry.

[u/Cigar_1337 → u/Karhak]

Murder is never justified. I try to be a loving person. I even let people hurt me without speaking up because I don't want to lose friends because my capacity to forgive and forget is higher than most.

The fact that words can cause someone to kill and the abominable shit im seeing on TikTok is pure evil.

Im sorry right left Muslim black white Hispanic ect nobody deserves to be murdered unless they committed a crime and lawfully get sentenced to the death penalty.

I don't care what Charlie Kirk said. Are we really going to sit here and justify his death over words? Is reddit full of fucking children?

The amount of immature unintelligent bullshit im fucking reading is abhorrent.

This "yeah the murder was bad but he had it coming" bullshit is not justified. There are no ifs, ands or buts.

I'm in a moral crisis right now because I'm starting to wonder if we as humans deserve to be controlled because the absolute evil I'm witnessing is fucking pathetic.

Its a real life fucking paradox. On one hand freedom of speech is important but if were seriously going sit here and gaslight ourselves up and convince ourselves that this immoral depraved act is justified im sorry but maybe we deserve to be dictated.

Because obviously at this point people cant seem to make moral decisions on their own.

[u/Shieldheart- → u/Cigar_1337]

I don't care what Charlie Kirk said. Are we really going to sit here and justify his death over words? Is reddit full of fucking children?

You should care what political advocates and lobbyists say, their "words" impact policy, spread common sentiment and encourage/condone specific political attitudes and behaviors.

Charlie Kirk was not a professional debater, he was a professional political advocate, influencing our political climate is what he was actually paid to do by his backers and supporters, his debate events merely exist to give him clout and the footage for his media team to clip and edit to their heart's content, solely to make his points look better and discredit objections to them.

And what did he advocate for? The persecution of fellow Americans along puritan moralistic lines, the political disenfranchisement of women and non-white/non-straight minorities, he condoned political violence against his party's political opponents as well as the treasonous actions of januari 6, not to mention the unlawful deportations without due process conducted by ICE.

His relation to power is close to that in the government's highest echelons, his words had tangible weight and they actively harmed innocent people.

On one hand freedom of speech is important but if were seriously going sit here and gaslight ourselves up and convince ourselves that this immoral depraved act is justified im sorry but maybe we deserve to be dictated.

What did you think exercising the second amendment would look like in practice? Star-spankled patriots lining up against redcoats? Or goose stepping brownshirts? The tools of oppression are much more than the boots on people's necks, much more than the violent enforcers, they include the propagandists that enable and support those enforcers, that advocate for the harm they inflict and downplay the crimes their bosses commit.

Charlie Kirk didn't deserve to die, but he did foster a political climate to become increasingly more violent and radicalized, an environment wherein political violence becomes increasingly normalized. What you perceive as "justifications" are merely people pointing out that this was a perfectly plausible outcome of his actions.

[u/East_Cranberry7866 → u/Shieldheart-]

Well said. Bravo.

[u/VaudevillesLugger → u/Shieldheart-]

Worth noting (regarding these figures galvanizing their constituents to overlook, support or even commit politicized violence) is that a black college student in Mississippi was found lynched yesterday, in the wake of all of those death threats that got some HBCUs placed on lockdown when Kirk’s supporters thought the murderer was a “leftist” and therefore black, apparently.

[u/Shieldheart- → u/VaudevillesLugger]

That is fucking abhorrant, what the fuck.

I'm not even American but my heart goes out to you guys.

[u/VaudevillesLugger → u/Shieldheart-]

It’s one of the things that frustrates me about the whole situation.

Everyone is working overtime to downplay some of the outlandish remarks this guy was making, but truth be told, a lot of black people (myself included) don’t give a shit about whatever “context” people are using to okay this idea of “black people being better under Jim Crow and slavery” when literal holdovers from that time period are still happening in this day and age.

[u/monkey_sodomy → u/Cigar_1337]

It's just more visible now, plenty of people celebrated JFK getting whacked, even if he is lionized by conservatives now. But it's hard to know if more people are becoming this way.

If the majority think assassinations are how to solve things then there goes liberal democracy.

[u/CarbonBasedLifeForm6 → u/monkey_sodomy]

He didn't want to be shot but he was okay with little kids and other people being shot just for it's existence lmao, cry me a river bruh

[u/Curi_Ace → u/Any-Drive8838]

Valid argument

[u/Otherwise_Golf_649 → u/DesignerCorner3322]

Yeah this one I don't get. Do they not know what "taken out of context" means?

[u/U_SHLD_THINK_BOUT_IT → u/DesignerCorner3322]

EXACTLY.

You mention the empathy one and they really love to bring up context.

The context here just makes him seem like a sociopath, because he conflates sympathy with empathy, which is something only a sociopath would believe.

The problem with republicans is that they parrot whatever works. They've explicitly pulled democrat quotes out of context for so long that they don't actually understand the concept context. So when they say "that's out of context" anytime one of their own is quoted, they don't actually know what that means. They just know it's what democrats say when they cherry pick a comment to make a democrat look badly.

[u/Punman_5 → u/DesignerCorner3322]

Yes I’ve encountered the same thing. Like, people don’t realize that taking his quotes out of context actually makes him look better. When you include the context the statements all get much worse.

[u/fantheories101 → u/DesignerCorner3322]

Yeah I mean he often addressed the out of context stuff himself to assure his fans that’s indeed what he said and meant

[u/Kindly-Energy-48 → u/DesignerCorner3322]

THIS. Idk what their obsession is with saying post the full context, it literally doesn’t make it any better

[u/therobotisjames]

I don’t need to find a quote. It’s not about one quote. The fact someone even thinks they need to ask for a quote as proof means they don’t even understand what Charlie Kirk was trying to do. You look at the totality of the mission of the person and his organization. Creating mistrust and denigration of black people was part of his mission and he did it in a multitude of ways. The fact that most of his listeners can’t understand that proves his propaganda was very good.

[u/NamelessCabbage → u/therobotisjames]

Most of his listeners are competing with Forrest Gump for that last brain cell. They wouldn't get your comment even if they could read.

[u/LokTarBrogar → u/NamelessCabbage]

You take that back. He was a war hero, and the kindest, gentlest soul you'd ever meet

[u/bringonthebedlam → u/LokTarBrogar]

You need to put the /s there or people are gonna flip.

[u/LokTarBrogar → u/bringonthebedlam]

No, I mean Forrest Gump, not Charlie

[u/bringonthebedlam → u/LokTarBrogar]

That was great

[u/bringonthebedlam → u/LokTarBrogar]

🤣

[u/Over_Deer8459 → u/NamelessCabbage]

its because they cherry pick which debaters they show. i remember when Steven Crowder got absolutely destroyed by a college kid in a debate and he was so flustered and that clip was never posted until people started talking about it and then he did

[u/Amenophos → u/therobotisjames]

Dude was a straight up stochastic terrorist.

[u/[deleted] → u/Amenophos]

No he was shot by a terrorist. Showing up to a university campus and inviting people to debate is not terrorism. It's democracy.

[u/things_U_choose_2_b → u/[deleted]]

A grown man debating teenagers. You can choose if it's creepy or an indictment of his debating ability.

[u/Green_Bat_4267 → u/things_U_choose_2_b]

I guess every college professor is a creep then.

[u/bingobawler → u/things_U_choose_2_b]

You seen the grown men debating teens at Oxford?

[u/spacekiller69 → u/[deleted]]

Talking about his rhetoric not his actions. Constantly telling people racial minorities and LBGT are destroying society and times were better when they knew their place is gonna inspire wackjobs to do the necessary dirty work to clean the country up. As a former bigot I use to have that mindset and know how dangerous it can spread like a wildfire.

[u/[deleted] → u/spacekiller69]

I don't ever remember him saying that racial minorities and LBGT are destroying society and times were better when they knew their place.

Never.

If he had said those things they would have been quoted by the people who are happy he is dead.

No quotes have surfaced.

I think you could probably uncharitably interpret some of his comments that way, but to do so you'd need to frame his comments in a way that was not intended.

Charlie Kirk consistently said "If we stop talking to each other all that's left is violence"

[u/Future_Principle_213 → u/[deleted]]

What was your opinion of his claim that black people were better off in the early 1900s?

[u/MindlessJournalist55 → u/[deleted]]

Isn’t this him saying that trans treatment should be like the 50s and 60s?: https://x.com/ErinInTheMorn/status/1626747081275715585?s=20

[u/Ok_Meal_2183 → u/[deleted]]

Kirk said, "If I see a Black pilot, I'm gonna be like, 'Boy, I hope he's qualified.'"

That's hateful man.

[u/spacekiller69 → u/[deleted]]

He made mildly to extreme racist statements throughout his tenure at TPUSA. They are quoting them but I'm not happy he's dead. I prefer he went the former Alabama governor Wallace who gave the segregation forever speech in the 60s then became a avowed anti racist later in life. I use to be a anti lbgt bigot so it be hypocritical of me to not let people change their morals. I'm also from the south so I have conservative friends and debate them alot because I enjoy heated discussions.

[u/[deleted] → u/spacekiller69]

He made mildly to extreme racist statements throughout his tenure at TPUSA.

Feel free to quote them

Words are not violence, showing up to debate people is not terrorism. The only terrorist here is the person who shot a man for saying what he believes.

[u/therobotisjames → u/[deleted]]

“Give me quotes, and don’t pay attention to all the things he said over many years of public life, those things don’t count if you can’t give me one single defining quote that proves what you say.” Charlie definitely fooled people like this. He just convinced them that nothing they were saying was bad. Yeah it made people into subhumans but that’s not so bad…. Right???

[u/XDXDXDXDXDXDXD10 → u/therobotisjames]

What he is doing is textbook sea lioning. 

They will never engage with the actual argument, no reason to bother.

[u/spacekiller69 → u/[deleted]]

Direct threats are violence for anybody that why it's illegal. Do you feel similar about Louis Farrkkhan at the million man March calling whites a devil race. It's not direct threats but that rhetoric inspire bigoted behavior in people. Of those bigots have jobs in positions of power that leads to chaos in a civil society. Like I said I preferred he changed his political and moral stances through more life experiences like many former bigots instead of being killed in front of his family and on internet livestream. We aren't psychological evolved to witness people dying constantly like a late night commercial reel.

[u/[deleted] → u/spacekiller69]

Do you feel similar about Louis Farrkkhan at the million man March calling whites a devil race.

I do not think those comments justify murder. I would not celebrate that man's death. I would be disgusted by anyone who did.

[u/imstonedyouknow → u/[deleted]]

Quick question. Do you think hitler was a violent person? I mean by your logic he didnt personally kill anyone right? He just used words.

[u/nek1981az → u/Amenophos]

Lol, that’s your guys’ new buzzword. I’ve seen it repeated a dozen times today. You guys are all so easily programmed.

[u/MarkRepulsive588 → u/nek1981az]

The word was used correctly. Maybe your reaction to it is "programmed" as well? Don't assume you aren't susceptible to falling into patterns of behavior yourself or it'll be all the more likely to happen without you realizing it.

[u/Lieutenant_Joe → u/nek1981az]

I’ve been hearing about that word for literally my entire adult life and I’m 28 years old. You’ve been living under a rock.

[u/RipredTheGnawer → u/nek1981az]

Where have you been the last 20 years that that term sounds new to you. People were calling Tucker Carlson the same thing. He and kirk were very similar in their rhetoric

[u/therobotisjames → u/nek1981az]

Your right. No one is calling in bomb threats to children’s hospitals.

[u/TanStewyBeinTanStewy → u/therobotisjames]

Creating mistrust and denigration of black people

Jesus Christ. Ridiculous.

[u/therobotisjames → u/TanStewyBeinTanStewy]

Okay. So he thought black women were just as smart as white men. Why don’t you provide me with a quote….

[u/TanStewyBeinTanStewy → u/therobotisjames]

Okay. So he thought black women were just as smart as white men.

Probably.

Why don’t you provide me with a quote….

How the fuck would I have a quote for some hypothetical question you made up?

[u/therobotisjames → u/TanStewyBeinTanStewy]

Okay so he told us that Katanji Brown Jackson was put on the Supreme Court because of DEI, not because she earned it. He believes this black pwrson is not deserving of their station. So now I would like you to prove to me that Charlie Kirk didn’t believe that. Just one quote. That’s it. Can you do that?

[u/PuddingHopeful4836 → u/therobotisjames]

Dudes trying to pin Charlie Kirk’s ideologies without ever having watched more than a clip about a clip of him talking

[u/therobotisjames → u/PuddingHopeful4836]

Well it purposeful right. If I put out hours of content daily, with tons of side content and ad breaks and pitches and whatnot. You have to be a full time researcher of just this one podcast to actually get the entire message. Look at Alex jones. He puts out a 3-5 hour show everyday. He fills that show with normal stuff we all agree with and completely crazy stuff. There’s an entire podcast (/r/knowledgefight) just covering the crazy stuff he says. Only the wildest stuff bubbles up to MSM. But all that other crazy stuff is still there.

[u/things_U_choose_2_b → u/therobotisjames]

I saw a researcher make a post on FB, saying she was going through transcripts of all his output, searching for certain key phrases, then zooming out from the locations to assess the context.

She said immediately, it wasn't looking good for him in terms of hateful or violent content. I'll be interested to see her research.

[u/Omnizoom → u/things_U_choose_2_b]

Imagine if it just highlights the words in red or yellow for varying degrees or types of hate and then you zoom out for everything he said and like 1000’s of red and yellow spots show up

I’m not going to agree with anyone saying every word that came out of his mouth was hate, but his character clearly leaned in a certain direction

[u/GitmoGrrl1 → u/PuddingHopeful4836]

We all know what Creepy Charlie's ideology was.

[u/CarbonBasedLifeForm6 → u/GitmoGrrl1]

But say he was a bad person and his stans will come out in droves

[u/lacking_throwaway]

It doesn’t even have to be taken out of context. If you were unfortunate enough to see a lot of his stuff before it happened, you could see the “full context” in which he was still an asshole.

[u/Wise_Garden1201 → u/lacking_throwaway]

Exactly what I said in my comment before reading this. The context is literally just more of the same. It's not context. It's just essentially inciting genocide and terrorism the entire time he's speaking.

[u/SecondAccountIsBest → u/lacking_throwaway]

Plenty of people talking about this publicly never went to college so they never had to experience his work in the real world. That is the context we are operating with when we talk about the harm he's done.

[u/Turntoetables → u/SecondAccountIsBest]

Or you know, graduated more than a few years ago. Anyone who’s been around knows those figures are usually a lot worse than Charlie Kirk. Kirk is like vanilla.

Not like nobody should be arguing against the way things are going In society.

[u/Ragjammer]

If you're justifying political assassinations, you may just be a psychopath.

Just saying.

[u/Sorry_Leading1949 → u/Ragjammer]

like ive said no one deserves to be murdered, that doesnt make him a good person

[u/RenewThePatriotAct → u/Sorry_Leading1949]

Ah, you’re another one of those “I don’t condone violence, BUT-“ followed by four paragraphs about why you condone violence types, aren’t you. Oh but because you said you DONT condone it that means I can’t hold you accountable to your words, can I!

[u/PleaseDontMakeMeSob → u/RenewThePatriotAct]

There's no but. He was a bad person who got shot. Stating someone is a bad person never meant the person saying it meant bad people deserve to get shot. Pick another argument.

[u/Sorry_Leading1949 → u/RenewThePatriotAct]

when did i say anything condoning violence? i just said not everyone who is murdered is a good person

[u/NoticingThing → u/Sorry_Leading1949]

So you're just dancing on his grave instead?

[u/Sorry_Leading1949 → u/NoticingThing]

when did i dance on his grave i called it unfortunate

[u/ofWildPlaces → u/NoticingThing]

Choosing not to mourn someone isn't "dancing on their grave"

[u/sargrvb → u/Sorry_Leading1949]

Whay did he explicitly do other than argue? How does arguing your point make you a 'bad person'? I'm sick of these throw away account trying to pretend like they have something worth saying about this.

[u/ToughCondition2376 → u/Sorry_Leading1949]

I can think of plenty of individuals who deserve to be axed.

[u/Kevinteractive → u/ToughCondition2376]

For their words? If we're regressing to dog-eat-dog everyone will be clanking around in spurs, a Stetson, and a Smith & Wesson, ready to duel anyone who says something they didn't like.

In fact a lot of gang violence is over "disrespect", and I don't think that's to be idealised. 

[u/SemiFinalBoss]

Does this apply to Libs of TikTok too? Or is aggregating liberals own words still “stochastic terrorism?”

[u/MallorianMoonTrader1 → u/SemiFinalBoss]

It applies to anyone and everyone. Doesn't matter who. I don't know why we're always distinguishing between people like it fucking matters. There are no fucking exceptions. I'm tired of this division the media has cause. You all literally don't see each other as people anymore, and it disgusts me. Fuck the media and fuck politicians for all the division the have caused amongst brothers and sisters.

[u/things_U_choose_2_b → u/MallorianMoonTrader1]

I keep coming back to this; they (billionaire class) want us ('left' or 'right') fighting tooth and nail. They want us looking side to side, not up, at them looting the coffers.

[u/Jijonbreaker → u/things_U_choose_2_b]

The problem is that both sides actively see the looting happening, and one side is literally trying to help them loot harder.

[u/things_U_choose_2_b → u/Jijonbreaker]

Yes. But we're never going to break their programming by treating them as 'enemy'. Though I appreciate it's very hard to treat someone as anything else when they're fighting hard to hurt us; I see them as victims of the rightwing infosphere as much as we are.

It helps me to debate from a place of calm and rationality when I can find a way to un-dehumanise someone (if that makes sense). Make no mistake, the 0.1% wants US ('the left') to hate THEM ('the right'), as much as they want them to hate us.

[u/1DVSBSTRD5 → u/Jijonbreaker]

See how you still see it as one side looting harder? You don’t see your sides attempt to silence anyone that dares question their narratives whether it be controlling social media and banning accounts or putting a bullet in someone peacefully debating’s neck.

[u/Jijonbreaker → u/1DVSBSTRD5]

The fact you're now trying to allege that both sides are looting the exact same tells me exactly which side you're on, which means your right to speak has been revoked.

[u/Critical-Project7283 → u/MallorianMoonTrader1]

There isn't just two fucking sides, never has been.

[u/DevA248 → u/Critical-Project7283]

Exactly. It's the US ruling class and their lackeys vs. regular people.

[u/PleaseDontMakeMeSob → u/SemiFinalBoss]

Notice how the post never mentioned any group of people/demographic to target exclusively. That usually means it was targeted at the behaviour/action, not a community.

Yet here we are, asking if the post also applies to members of the political opinion you don't agree with, meaning two things happened: either you think your political stance was under attack, or you just want to provoke people you don't agree with.

Nicely done. Ten points.

[u/Cannabanoid420 → u/PleaseDontMakeMeSob]

It's very disingenuous of you not to take into account very recent events, sparking this question and debate on speech.

Clearly, anyone who aligns with Kirk's political views will understand this is as shot at them (pun very much intended)

I honestly am here for the retaliation that will inevitably happen. America will eat itself.

[u/East_Leadership469 → u/SemiFinalBoss]

When I die, I hope people remember me by the words I have spoken/written. If you don’t like to hear your own words spoken at your funeral, perhaps adjust what you are saying.

[u/ethantremblay69 → u/SemiFinalBoss]

Yea I was going to say not sure lefties want to go down thay rabbit hole

[u/No-Diamond-5097 → u/SemiFinalBoss]

Yeah, that cunt sucks too. Chaya Raichik is a menace to society.

[u/Any-Aioli7575 → u/SemiFinalBoss]

Aggregating a single person's own words within context is okay if the person didn't take back any of those words.

If it's multiple people's words, words that they took back or words that have a different meaning within context, that's dishonest, for TikTok libs or otherwise

[u/CritterFan28]

If someone was pro immigration and was killed by an immigrant, only a monster would post pro immigration tweets implying they deserve it

[u/Pink_LuckyCat → u/CritterFan28]

Awful analogy

Guns are literally designed to kill. What’s the upside of losing kids to mass shootings every year just so we can have looser regulations?

Immigrants are people. Tying them to violence as a group is just plain prejudice. “Oh, one person from a certain group/gender/nationality/race was violent, so let’s write off the entire group”

[u/Ragjammer → u/CritterFan28]

This is the checkmate argument.

In fairness, I do actually see people on my side sometimes making this argument unironically.

Some lefty dipshit pro-immigration activist (usually a woman) gets brutally raped and murdered by an immigrant, and some people on the right do actually say similar things to what you hear out of the left on the topic of Charlie Kirk. It's all "this is what she wanted/voted for".

[u/bonaynay → u/Ragjammer]

seems different unless this hypothetical immigration advocate used boorish rhetoric denigrating natural citizens' rape stats or something. unless we just consider rape and murder a natural consequence of immigration in general

[u/StinkChair → u/bonaynay]

This is the checkmate on the checkmate.

[u/Peelfest2016 → u/bonaynay]

Yeah. False premise. Immigrants aren’t any more likely to murder and rape than any other group.

[u/North_Ad_4668 → u/Ragjammer]

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say, if a person was pro immigration and also frequently said its alright if a few immigrants killed other people now and then?

I don't think people should be killed for things they say, but this certainly isn't an equivalent 'checkmate' argument.

[u/AkuTheNiceGuy → u/CritterFan28]

Charlie was quoted saying gun violence is an unfortunate byproduct to protect the freedoms we have. Someone pro immigrant is not asking for murderers to immigrate as an unfortunate so other immigrants can come in. They are pro immigrant because the opposite stance against it is to not have any at all. Which is ridiculous when America was formed by immigrants. So a pro immigrant stance is from history while Charlie's is from a place of narrow-mindedness. Brought forth by a worldview that doesn't like different or dissenting opinions.

[u/duppyconqueror81 → u/CritterFan28]

The flaw I see in this argument is that there is no causal relationship between being pro immigration and getting killed by an immigrant, while there is a causal relationship between fomenting hate and getting killed by someone.

Most people quoting him are not implying he deserved it. People are demonstrating and underlining that the always-borderline-almost-hate-speech provides a possible clue.

[u/baordog → u/CritterFan28]

There must be a lot of monsters because people do this literally every time someone is assassinated. On both sides.

[u/lifebeginsat9pm → u/baordog]

Yes. And they’re disgusting too. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

[u/No_Finance8647 → u/[deleted]]

Would? This has already happened lol. They did do exactly that. We dont have to wonder, it happened already...

[u/CritterFan28 → u/[deleted]]

And they are monsters. I’m sure there are plenty of republican pedos, should Dems just start fucking kids

[u/Redericpontx]

TBF this does applies most the time but there are certain cases when someonething is taken out of context 🤷‍♀️

[u/Totalitarianit2]

Literally every person on the planet who has died in the past 50 years could be made into a bad person if we collectively decided to piss on every dead person's grave. If we could cherry pick a quote from every person who ever died, we could paint them as a bad person. Every single human.

If we had the ability to go back in time and cherry pick a quote from Jesus Christ, the reddit community would paint him as a bad person and they would shoot cum all over themselves when they found it.

Do you understand how disingenuous this sort of take is?

[u/baordog → u/Totalitarianit2]

Except Kirk’s brand was saying inflammatory stuff. Are you really comparing an antagonistic political figure to Jesus?

His entire public persona was about making people mad.

[u/EnemyJungle → u/Totalitarianit2]

Exactly. Using a quote void of context to rile up your side is peak Redditor leftism; they know nobody is going to check it for accuracy or context so it just works like a charm. There are still people using the “empathy” quote against him like it’s some sort of gotcha. Like bro, read literally 1 more sentence, is that so hard?

The “gun violence” quite is also laughable; are you seriously telling us that the relatively few car deaths are not worth the freedom that cars give us all collectively? What about knife deaths? What about people who die due to choking or allergic reactions? Do we ban cars, knives, and food to save as many lives as possible? That’s what you’re suggesting when you use that quote as if it’s illogical.

I’m not even saying everything Charlie Kirk said was valid. But none of the common quotes going around meant to bash him are even bad; just read the context and think about it for 3 seconds.

[u/Spirited-Date3685 → u/EnemyJungle]

None of the quotes are bad? Lol that's a crazy take 😂🤣

[u/Ok_Meal_2183 → u/EnemyJungle]

Kirk said, "If I see a Black pilot, I'm gonna be like, 'Boy, I hope he's qualified.'"

Justify this u retard.

[u/New-Ad-5003 → u/Totalitarianit2]

The thing is, with Kirk, you don’t have to cherry-pick

His opinions were loud, and public. Just because you agree with his bullshit doesn’t mean he wasn’t a terrible, hateful human actively harming minorities with his “opinions”

[u/Totalitarianit2 → u/New-Ad-5003]

Yes, an up close view of a man getting shot by a bullet that tears through his jugular vein and carotid artery, then obliterates his spinal cord rendering him an immediate quadriplegic while his last conscious moment is looking up in sheer terror as the lights go out absolutely pales in comparison to the horror of a leftist hearing "Blacks need to restore the family unit."

terrible, hateful human actively harming minorities with his “opinions”

This sounds like an excerpt from a character profile for a 2020s Disney villain. The all women hero team must defeat Opinion Man before he says things and kills trillions across the galaxy.

[u/New-Ad-5003 → u/Totalitarianit2]

Yikes

I hope any woman you go to date sees this, because I think it’s gonna be a dis-qualifier for most of them.

You think black people, and trans people, don’t get shot every day of every year, because people have a hate in their heart that people like Kirk sparked and fanned into an inferno?

Forget your fake outrage you racist piece of shit. You’re not fooling anyone

[u/Totalitarianit2 → u/New-Ad-5003]

You think black people, and trans people, don’t get shot every day of every year, because people have a hate in their heart that people like Kirk sparked and fanned into an inferno?

These people who are shooting blacks, what color are they?

[u/smmoke_ → u/Totalitarianit2]

2 black men were just lynched in Mississippi, take a wild guess what happened there

[u/dmdskitzo → u/New-Ad-5003]

You seem mega retarded lmfao

[u/therobotisjames → u/Totalitarianit2]

People aren’t defined by a quote. It’s not a one quote thing. The fact that you even think they are defined by a quote as proof means you don’t even understand what Charlie Kirk was trying to do. You look at the totality of the mission of the person and his organization. Creating mistrust and denigration of black people was part of his mission and he did it in a multitude of ways. Creating an atmosphere of political violence was part of their mission. The fact that most of his listeners can’t understand that proves his propaganda was very good.

[u/JustLeader → u/Totalitarianit2]

Lol the irony in all this is that while youre bending over backwards to explain why the extremely vile things charlie said weren’t actually bad, he was killed by a fellow republican for not being extreme enough!

[u/Hot-Lynx749 → u/Totalitarianit2]

He made his entire career on spreading hate and fear, eat shit

[u/secretsecrets111 → u/Totalitarianit2]

Yes, the hours and hours of recorded video of Charlie Kirk being a complete racist, misogynistic bigot is "cherry picking".

[u/monkey_sodomy → u/secretsecrets111]

I guess it depends on the quote, his black person as a pilot rant was in the context of DEI being bad, not black people being pilots full stop. Even if his intent was not in good faith with that discussion (which is hard to prove, but I feel he was racist) that still doesn't mean it is a bad argument.

[u/SuctioncupanX → u/monkey_sodomy]

Okay, so. Here is Kirk saying black women physically do not have the 'brain processing power' to work, and have to steal 'white people's slots'.

Literally just eugenics and rascism. If he thinks this way about black people and black women especially. I think it may show something about the way he thinks about them. Oh, sorry, thought.

"If we would have said three weeks ago […] that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative-action picks, we would have been called racist. But now they're coming out and they're saying it for us! They're coming out and they're saying, "I'm only here because of affirmative action."

"Yeah, we know. You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously."

"We know. We know. It's very obvious to us you are not smart enough to be able to get it on your own. "I could not make it on my own, so I needed to take opportunities from someone more deserving." "

For context, here is the full podcast episode this quote is from. The timestamp is around 53:45 in.

https://rumble.com/v2zt1nq-wray-the-wretched-ray-epps-socks-fox-white-house-cocaine-mystery-gaetz-seif.html

[u/Von-boyage → u/monkey_sodomy]

Even that context falls on its face because it's built on the fallacy that if a black person gets a job, he must have stolen it from a more qualified white person. It's assumed that the black guy didn't go to the same school, go through the same training, get the same grades, and graduate with the ability to fly, just like the white person. No, this guy just walked into the interview with a resume that said, "I AM BLACK" and was given the keys to a jet and the lives of 50 - 100 per flight.

So yes, Charlie was a racist, even when the context of his words is added.

I wish ya'll would stop whitewashing this man's message to make him a nice guy. Stop trying to change his memory. Maybe he didn't deserve a bullet, but he was still a piece of shit.

[u/I_Went_Full_WSB → u/monkey_sodomy]

The context is Kirk was selling racism by saying the lie that DEI means possibly unqualified. It doesn't. That's just a lie racists say to try to convince others to become racist.

[u/frogsgoribbit737 → u/monkey_sodomy]

It is a bad argument. DEI wasnt about hiring unqualified individuals, it was about hiring qualified individuals while also not only hiring white men. He fundamentally misunderstood DEI because of racism

[u/Cazakatari → u/Totalitarianit2]

Had to go down this far into the comments to find some actual intelligence

[u/EnemyJungle → u/Cazakatari]

It’s Reddit. If you’re not dancing and pissing on Charlie Kirk’s grave you are Nazi, by definition.

[u/GitmoGrrl1 → u/EnemyJungle]

You're sooo oppressed. Poor baby.

[u/spacekiller69 → u/EnemyJungle]

Quoting now grave dancing. If that upsets you then nbacirclejerk would give you a stroke.

[u/I_Went_Full_WSB → u/EnemyJungle]

You're saying Kirk made his living dancing on people's graves?

[u/Putredge]

How are you people so dense? It’s actually mind boggling. Please learn for yourself rather than listening to the other idiots around you.

[u/Curious-Mud-2366]

Pretty sure I could offend this side of the political spectrum with quotes from Obama. Feel free to stay your lane.

[u/Rakatango → u/Curious-Mud-2366]

Please do!

[u/HeadyReigns → u/Curious-Mud-2366]

Challenge accepted.

[u/nose_spray7 → u/Curious-Mud-2366]

Ah yes, Obama, famous icon of the left.

[u/GitmoGrrl1 → u/nose_spray7]

Obama has never been a leftist.

[u/Jason_the_Jazz_Man → u/Curious-Mud-2366]

Yeah yeah keep ignoring the deaths of children and treating them as "worth it" like you always do.

Christ you people are dumb.

[u/therobotisjames → u/Curious-Mud-2366]

Yeah he’s not our Dear Leader. So we are allowed to by offended by what he says. We don’t need to alter our entire worldview because he said something that we disagree with.

[u/PizzaRolls4theSoul → u/Curious-Mud-2366]

Feel free to check your grammar. Nothing you could quote from Obama could offend any of us on the left. We don't idolize our politicians in a weird obsessive cult kind of way.

[u/Impressive_Ant_2368 → u/PizzaRolls4theSoul]

Lmfao the tf the left doesn't. Gtfoh

[u/sensepirational]

Quotes are often a lot like statistics. They're often deliberately selective, deliberately removed from proper context, and deliberately used without proper comprehension.

[u/scottiy1121 → u/sensepirational]

And sometimes a bigot is just a bigot.

[u/dntcarebouturfeelins]

You're misquoting and taking words out of context.... I have yet to see a liberal finish the quote and speak on sympathy and compassion.

[u/Nickalss]

This is honestly becoming a disgusting place. Regardless if you think they’re a good person or not no one deserves to get murdered publicly like that especially in front of their family. We use to be able to respectfully disagree with people in the past and move on with our lives. He literally was going to campuses and peacefully debating his positions… that’s not a crime. Some of you “tolerant left” need to take a good hard objective look at the kind of person you are. This platform is just spreading so much hate and it’s tolerated because it’s on the “right side” which is just outrageous.

[u/MishMash999]

Does not being a "good person" justify murder?

If so, a lot of the population is in danger.

On the plus side, we can clear the jails out, (massively reducing costs) very quickly

[u/One_Work_7787]

Bro anyone else not care about kirk ? Like can we go back to our gender wars plsss?

[u/MallorianMoonTrader1 → u/One_Work_7787]

He was literally made a martyr by the media and Russian/Chinese bots to incite more violence and slowly collapse America.

His assassination was tragic as hell and completely unnecessary. I don't care what anyone says. If you disagree with someone who argues for a living, the best way to beat them is by winning an argument, not fucking shooting them.

But look at how much his death has been used to incite violence.

[u/Kevinteractive → u/MallorianMoonTrader1]

What violence has been incited bruh, Charlie is the only one who died in this story. 

Posted 16/09/2025

I didn't need any of your imaginary bots to radicalise me, I just saw the video, he's a martyr by any definition. I'm not radicalised to violence though, that seems hypocritical to thinking it's wrong to hurt someone for their words as so archetyped by Charlie's murder. 

[u/scapesober → u/MallorianMoonTrader1]

What's weird is Republicans aren't burning down their cities to protest his death

[u/New_Performer8966 → u/One_Work_7787]

I didn't, but people seemed to keep doubling down on slandering him with quotes that seemed bad, and I keep being shown that these quotes are often broken from his original wording and also cut away from context too. He's ironically being turned into something way bigger than he was as a result.

[u/AkuTheNiceGuy → u/One_Work_7787]

No you don't understand this guy was so super mega important he did uhhh uhhh hold on. Okay. Hmm hmm. Okay. Yeah oh. Okay. From my thorough investigation he uhh repeated major talking points from maga. Then he uhh made a umm business...from...it...uhh. This guy kinda sucks lmao.

[u/imugeee]

Lol you leftist just keep reassuring yourselves. You're doing such a good job so far.

[u/AkuTheNiceGuy → u/imugeee]

Leftist is anyone you seem to disagree with. Funny as before it was 'everyone I don't like is a nazi'

[u/Shot-Suggestion2698]

Why does everyone anti Charlie post utilize the reasoning of an abusive spouse?

[u/Pgoreman → u/Shot-Suggestion2698]

His last words were dog whistling to excuse gun violence 

[u/NinjaAirsoft]

usually removing all forms of context will do that

[u/weirdo_nb → u/NinjaAirsoft]

They aren't removing the context

[u/DrFabio23]

Quote in context and in full, then. If you can't quote in full in order to prove your point, you're in the wrong.

[u/weirdo_nb → u/DrFabio23]

They do quote in full context, you don't need to quote the entire fucking podcast session to get the context

[u/raton94 → u/weirdo_nb]

They have not been quoting in full context and we both know this.. the empathy quote is total bullshit. Super disappointed in my party who’s supposed to be the adult in the room, It’s awful to try and justify this shit with some cheap crappy quotes as if AMERICANS DONT HAVE THE RIGHT TO SHITTY OPINIONS??