Charlie Kirk shot dead at Utah university



"the kid who shot charlie was only 22. this is insane because 22 means he basically grew up marinating in the broadband soup. he had no buffer period of pre internet adulthood, no separation between formative years & the always on firehose. his psyche was forged entirely in the age of memes, polarization, constant feeds, & parasocial rage cycles.we are now seeing individuals in society like this reaching adulthood & have access to very sophisticated weapons. this will be a serious challenge for security in america going forward."
 
i kne albert davy said:
You should keep out of the joke thread then, PS. its humour stop fucking about with the English language :-)
Click to expand...
My iPhone and iPad don’t like my English spellings, so I don’t fight it…which also goes for what passes for humour in the supposed “Jokes Thread!”

However, we should both be thankful “****” only has one u and no room for another in both “languages!”

;-)
 
Pell said:


"the kid who shot charlie was only 22. this is insane because 22 means he basically grew up marinating in the broadband soup. he had no buffer period of pre internet adulthood, no separation between formative years & the always on firehose. his psyche was forged entirely in the age of memes, polarization, constant feeds, & parasocial rage cycles.we are now seeing individuals in society like this reaching adulthood & have access to very sophisticated weapons. this will be a serious challenge for security in america going forward."
Click to expand...

Can’t argue with any of that.
 
SamTheGuru said:
Regardless of what he stood for, it seemed to me like he thrived off of winding up teens. It was only a matter of time before some slightly mentally unstable person got hold of a freely available firearm and shot him.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Some slightly mentally unstable person with easy access to guns because of gun laws Charlie kirk approved of, the same Charlie kirk who didn't believe in empathy and the same Charlie kirk that said "I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights."

You said it Charlie. You sure won the debate
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I’m going to get pelters for this from some quarters, but I’ve got very broad shoulders.

Have had a look at this guy online in a way that I hadn’t previously. I sort of knew what he was about before this, but he’d hardly registered.

And for the avoidance of doubt, I’m not saying it’s a good thing he’s dead, or that anyone deserves to die in that way, especially with their wife and kids there. Awful business all round. And this tragedy is acting as a further catalyst to the manifest and worsening divisions in US society. So unquestionably a bad thing.

But in my view, having seen him in action, he was a horrible ****. Plainly fed from negativity. Most of what came out of his mouth was designed to make the world a less happy place. And I’d say he was definitely a bully.

He was young, fit, rich, healthy with a beautiful family and a wife that adored him.

And all the **** did was moan and winge about how shit everything was. He had fuck all to complain about from where I’m standing.

Unless it was just an act…
Click to expand...


I watched a fair bit of him a couple of years ago as my son was asking about him (which at the same time made me realise just how much the online political influencers, particularly from America, have traction over here, he asked because people at his uni were talking about him).

To me, he’s the perfect example of how much we’ve regressed in our political discourse. His debating vids are a moron up against another moron arguing about things that as a society, we had a greater shared understanding and much more nuanced and mature debate about 50 years ago. Where he clearly wasn’t a moron was how well he built his platform and influence, which to me makes it even more depressing.

I also find it very worrying that there’s British commentators, and even a former PM in Johnson, normalising his views. I get it in America, but we’ve long since moved past evangelical Christian views being considered mainstream or even palatable in some areas.

I’ve seen a lot of discourse around the use of labelling people far right and people using that term to describe people like Kirk being the problem, whereas particularly for our country, he’s espousing views that really not that long ago were absolutely considered far right for us. It’s what’s deemed acceptable views and opinions that have seemingly changed and been normalised, not that we’ve all suddenly made people with slightly right of centre views unacceptable. They’re just now seemingly considered to be “leftists” by some as we’ve shifted right so much and so quickly.

That’s the world we’re in now though. God knows what needs to happen before we actually start moving forward again.
 
Pell said:


"the kid who shot charlie was only 22. this is insane because 22 means he basically grew up marinating in the broadband soup. he had no buffer period of pre internet adulthood, no separation between formative years & the always on firehose. his psyche was forged entirely in the age of memes, polarization, constant feeds, & parasocial rage cycles.we are now seeing individuals in society like this reaching adulthood & have access to very sophisticated weapons. this will be a serious challenge for security in america going forward."
Click to expand...

It’s a really powerful point. So glad I grew up in a pre internet age and have great sympathy for young people exposed to all sorts of shit, 24/7, and it never ends.
 
Pell said:


"the kid who shot charlie was only 22. this is insane because 22 means he basically grew up marinating in the broadband soup. he had no buffer period of pre internet adulthood, no separation between formative years & the always on firehose. his psyche was forged entirely in the age of memes, polarization, constant feeds, & parasocial rage cycles.we are now seeing individuals in society like this reaching adulthood & have access to very sophisticated weapons. this will be a serious challenge for security in america going forward."
Click to expand...


This is spot on.
 
The Fat el Hombre said:
Bingo. Some slightly mentally unstable person with easy access to guns because of gun laws Charlie kirk approved of, the same Charlie kirk who didn't believe in empathy and the same Charlie kirk that said "I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights."

You said it Charlie. You sure won the debate
Click to expand...
I didn't really think of it in that much depth but wow. There is an enormous amount of circular irony!
 
ChicagoBlue said:
“Debate,” you say? He was a blowhard with a megaphone spouting lies, misinformation and platitudes, much of it racist.

It’s like saying “Hitler was a great speaker!” while hating the speech! Their views had much in common.
Click to expand...
Apparently, he didn’t want to debate with Dean Withers another brilliant young mind who unlike Kirk hated Trump. It would’ve made for great viewing. The kid would’ve own him and ripped his faith apart in front of his adoring millions. He was so intimidated by him.
 
meltonblue said:
I watched a fair bit of him a couple of years ago as my son was asking about him (which at the same time made me realise just how much the online political influencers, particularly from America, have traction over here, he asked because people at his uni were talking about him).

To me, he’s the perfect example of how much we’ve regressed in our political discourse. His debating vids are a moron up against another moron arguing about things that as a society, we had a greater shared understanding and much more nuanced and mature debate about 50 years ago. Where he clearly wasn’t a moron was how well he built his platform and influence, which to me makes it even more depressing.

I also find it very worrying that there’s British commentators, and even a former PM in Johnson, normalising his views. I get it in America, but we’ve long since moved past evangelical Christian views being considered mainstream or even palatable in some areas.

I’ve seen a lot of discourse around the use of labelling people far right and people using that term to describe people like Kirk being the problem, whereas particularly for our country, he’s espousing views that really not that long ago were absolutely considered far right for us. It’s what’s deemed acceptable views and opinions that have seemingly changed and been normalised, not that we’ve all suddenly made people with slightly right of centre views unacceptable. They’re just now seemingly considered to be “leftists” by some as we’ve shifted right so much and so quickly.

That’s the world we’re in now though. God knows what needs to happen before we actually start moving forward again.
Click to expand...

Spot on Melton.

Would just like to add, I've only seen about 30 seconds of his "debating", and it's made me realise that "debate" is now just basically trying to win an argument. Never two people trying to see each others point of view. When did we become like this? Fits with him having no empathy though I suppose...
 
citymad said:
Apparently, he didn’t want to debate with Dean Withers another brilliant young mind who unlike Kirk hated Trump. It would’ve made for great viewing. The kid would’ve own him and ripped his faith apart in front of his adoring millions. He was so intimidated by him.
Click to expand...
Bullies know who they can and cannot bully and get away with it. He was a clown and his circus was convincing lost fools he was worth listening to, because he loved to try to undermine “other.”
 
Unfortunately obnoxiousness and bitter hatred are now pretty much standard , the harshness of life turns people into monsters it can happen to anyone

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

If you're laughing about children dying you've lost your humanity

When dead children prompt laughing emojis, the problem isn't just politics - it's something far deeper, writes Rob Williams.
www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
 
meltonblue said:
I’ve seen a lot of discourse around the use of labelling people far right and people using that term to describe people like Kirk being the problem, whereas particularly for our country, he’s espousing views that really not that long ago were absolutely considered far right for us.
Click to expand...
I’m a case in point, over ten years ago I was considered a raving right wing nut job on here. My views haven’t really changed but the Overton Window on Bluemoon has moved so far that I’m now classed as a loony lefty by blue moon’s right wing fringe.
 
dublinblue12 said:
So it turns out it wasn't a radical left lunatic, 2nd ammendment hating muslim but actually a young white Christian with no clear political affiliations as of yet, and from what appears to be a family with no issues with gun ownership. It's a good job nobody jumped to conclusions, in particular the Trump supporters who are always quite measured in their response tbf and glad it didn't cause any unnecessary division between people as nobody would gain from that would they
Click to expand...

 
SamTheGuru said:
I didn't really think of it in that much depth but wow. There is an enormous amount of circular irony!
Click to expand...
Yes there is. And I think some posters here, there and everywhere are mistaking the reaction of others to said irony (and pointing it out) as a “celebration of” or “justification for” his death.
 
Last edited:
For people that don't know him, he basically had a megaphone and a sound/video production team that went around "Campuses" trolling students. Regardless of what he stood for...that was his style. He came to fame on Youtube or whatever through actively shaming uneducated students through edited clips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top