6
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by chosensilence@pawb.social to c/goodoffmychest@lemmy.world

it's all i hear across the political spectrum: "nobody should be killed for their opinions"

sure, that's fair. you can hold that position, but what does that have to do with Charlie Kirk? if we are going to lend credence to the idea his killer did what he did to stop Kirk from further spreading fascism and bigotry then an opinion would have been the least of the killer's concerns. opinions don't do anything on their own. simply stating how you feel about something and maintaining your beliefs is not oppressive to anyone. it's when you commit action based on that belief and that is what Charlie Kirk had done very, very successfully the last ten or so years of his life.

Charlie Kirk took his beliefs and turned them into a movement. TPUSA, his political organization that he co-founded, has over one thousand chapters nationwide. Imagine if the KKK had that many locations in 2025. He was able to amass an insane amount of support for Trump/MAGA and Christian nationalism as a whole that it blows away anything he did prior to throwing himself in the Trump administration swamp.

people are still stuck on seeing him as some kind of internet guy or podcaster or talking head.. no lol. no, no, no, god i wish. Trump doesn't reach as far without Kirk, Trump doesn't appeal to young crowds without Kirk, Trump doesn't get older conservatives to see him as having longevity without Kirk.. he took the MAGA message and cemented it as an identity; he validated and perpetuated their whole brand.

Kirk is so instrumental in Trump's image and PR that MAGA wouldn't have organized itself as well without him. Jan 6? TPUSA bused folks to the capitol. They were actively participating in the overthrowing of a democratically elected leader.

this was not about opinions; this was not about beliefs. Kirk was shot because of what he did and was doing. acting like he was a victim of having too wrong of an opinion takes away all the real-world damage he contributed to; the literal deaths he was responsible for through stochastic terrorism and COVID denialism.

we have to face and accept the reality of righteous assassinations. this isn't to say to agree with or support them, but to merely acknowledge them as inevitable and not worthy of condemnation. lone assassinations are never helpful for the cause they intend to support, but when there are no peaceful, non-violent options left and you are being systematically killed by the state and its actors, a violent response in self-defense is understandable. don't avoid these actions, show the country what is at risk when we allow fascists to terrify and subjugate us. this is the ultimate fault of those keeping us oppressed, not the person pulling the trigger.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 3 points 1 week ago

As I understand it, he was killed by someone who thought the Kirk wasn't Fascist enough.

[-] SpikesOtherDog@ani.social 1 points 1 week ago

WTF. There are plenty of righteous assassinations worldwide, depending on your pov. If I had enough people believe, your murder could be a righteous assassination. Most of the executions under Sharia law are considered righteous.

If you advocate for political violence, you are opening yourself up for... political violence. You are rooting on face eating leopards.

If you firmly believe what you are saying, go out and say it in public.

[-] FishFace@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Oh right, so for you the limit is not opinions, it's just if you convince people too effectively of those opinions.

I'm sure when MAGA starts shutting down websites and locking people up because they were creating a movement (of leftist, antifa, trans propaganda, of course) you won't be crying from the rooftops that it is an unforgivable suppression of civil liberties.

fuck that.

The whole point of freedom of speech is that it is the freedom to convince people of your opinion. Both the left and right in America have been anti-free-speech for ages, and while the right continues to be the main source of political violence, the left has little to no recognition or shame of the role it has played in normalising the suppression of speech.

stochastic terrorism

If you believe that it is wrong to make public statements that don't incite violence but which, due to their hostility, contribute to a small amount to an overall atmosphere in which violent acts are more likely, surely it is even worse to say it is not worth condemning murder - as long as the victim is someone sufficiently effective at convincing people of the views you disagree with. That contributes a small amount to an overall atmosphere in which political violence is more likely. How are you not being a stochastic terrorist with this post?

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

He didn't say the guy who shot him was innocent. He said the person that murdered Charlie Kirk wasn't just because the guy held an opinion, it was because he was trying to spread opinions that would hurt people. Maybe I missed it but no where did they say what was done was right.

Yet here you come labeling someone a form of terrorist... Jeez the next 15 years are going to be rough for all of us

[-] chosensilence@pawb.social 0 points 1 week ago

it's because i don't have sympathy for Kirk or feel the need to condemn the shooter. i am unbothered by their misdirected anger because it stems from genuine ignorance.

[-] NormDeplume@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

In that dispute you spoke too contentiously: do not for the future argue with ignorant people: those who have never been taught are unwilling to learn. You reprimanded that man with more freedom than you ought, and consequently you have offended him instead of amending his ways: in dealing with other cases of the kind, you should look carefully, not only to the truth of what you say, but also whether the person to whom you speak can bear to be told the truth.” Seneca on anger book 3 36

this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2025
6 points (100.0% liked)

Off My Chest

1504 readers
4 users here now

RULES:


I am looking for mods!


1. The "good" part of our community means we are pro-empathy and anti-harassment. However, we don't intend to make this a "safe space" where everyone has to be a saint. Sh*t happens, and life is messy. That's why we get things off our chests.

2. Bigotry is not allowed. That includes racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia, and religiophobia. (If you want to vent about religion, that's fine; but religion is not inherently evil.)

3. Frustrated, venting, or angry posts are still welcome.

4. Posts and comments that bait, threaten, or incite harassment are not allowed.

5. If anyone offers mental, medical, or professional advice here, please remember to take it with a grain of salt. Seek out real professionals if needed.

6. Please put NSFW behind NSFW tags.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS