Charlie Kirk shot and killed (updated)

Bill proposed to name roads at Florida universities, colleges after Charlie Kirk

Cult of personality.

 

I mean, doesn't UF already have enough stuff named after segregationists and racists?

 

Do you still think Charlie Kirk was a racist/segregationist? For every one clip you can post that even in your wildest imagination makes him a racist I can post 10 that prove that wrong.

 

He (@wgbgator) turns a blind eye to his commie heroes' atrocities, and would surely be ecstatic at the thought of a dirt road in the sticks named after Stalin, Castro, Guevara, Mao Zedong...

...while feigning indignation over a guy who debated ppl with mere words.

 

EDIT: UTChattanooga wisely reversed course. Harmeet Dhillon saw the Barnes post and may have placed a phone call to the university. Turning Point will now have a chapter at UTC

 

So as long as you say 10 non racist things it cancels out 1 racism you do? Interesting concept. Even you do that and I’ve seen you say some incredibly racist stiff here! I don’t think it works that way.

 

6.5K views · 1.8K reactions | CONTEXT PART 12 ⬇️⬇️⬇️ These two are so underrated. DEI is being able to be racist in return. It holds us back. And that is not progress. Its revenge. #blm #conservative #blackconservative #charliekirk #fyp #walkaway #explore | BlackCard Declined

 

You're racist. Defend yourself.

 

You are entitled to your opinion I guess

 

But you can't name one racist thing he DID and any racist thing he allegedly said is almost 100% an edited clip deleting the context.

It's like Stephen King claiming that Kirk said we should kill gays when Kirk was actually ripping apart someone else for suggesting that. Problem is Kings false statement had already been retweeted thousands of times and rippled across the platform.

Kirk's death has changed the minds of thousands who are now actually seeing his words in their entirety, and in their honest context.

 

“Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.”
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023

“If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?”
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 3 January 2024

“If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.”
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024

 

You are proving my point little soundbite out of context.

You probably are one that believes the misquotes about how woman should be barefoot and pregnant (While in actuality, his wife owns multiple companies and is working on her doctorate).

These quotes have been addressed ad nauseum. I won't bother again.

 

The videos and transcripts were linked so you could listen or read for yourself…

You don’t want to address it, it hurts your conservative feelings. And as we all know, conservatives feelings matter more than the facts.

 

Hmmm...from one of those quotes:

So what do you think of him endorsing the "Great Replacement Theory," the notion that "white civilization" is being replaced? Is that the context that you wanted added to the discussions?

How about this gem of "context" from the first quote: him making up stats of who "Blacks" had killed?

Both of those are new quotes on this board. I'd be interested in hearing how endorsing the Great Replacement Theory and making up stats about "Blacks" killing white women show that the main quotes weren't racist.

 

Someone isn't new here, but acts like they are.
Hint: I have no issue hurting conservative feelings

 

The FBI says 566 women were murdered by African Americans in 2019. So I don't know the number now but 600 isn't out of line I would assume. It isn't racist to state a statistic. It maybe racial. It may lack context, but it is not racist. Numbers are not racist.

Expanded Homicide Data Table 6

 

Is concern for one's own perceived race (as a group of people) indicative of racism? Or is there some other aspect that makes his view racist? For context, I am against racial pride in all forms. The world would be better off if we focused on race as much as we focused on hair color, but I also recognize that's too big of a leap for most of the population.

More generically, is it racist for somebody to believe that another is conspiring against them as a group because of their skin color? If yes, then how do we attempt to recognize actual racism without being racist? If no, then maybe it is something other than racism?

Most importantly, regardless of his view on the matter, wasn't he always open to debate the topic? That's my biggest take away from Kirk is that he challenged seemingly everybody and everyone, and he wasn't always successful. I saw one guy educate Kirk on providing sign language at press conferences, Charlie admitted he was wrong and he was educated on the matter. The guy still called him an expletive even though he admitted he was wrong. Charlie didn't get bent out of shape about it. Yes, we are mostly familiar with the videos where Charlie "wins" but the bigger point is his willingness to put his ideas out there to even be challenged in the first place.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

 

That is not what that table states. That is total white people (of either sex) killed by black people (of either sex). Notice the next lines where they divide victims into sex (they do not report cross-tabs). Is it racist to make up statistics (that even he admits that he doesn't know are true) to try to make it seem like white women are murdered more by black men (who, it should be noted are also not the statistic there)? Historically, would it be fair to say that the dangerous black men coming to do violence to white women was a common racist trope?

Numbers might not be racist, but racists can certainly use numbers. And it would certainly seem that inventing numbers to paint a particular race in a more negative light (blaming the entire race, it should be noted, for the crime) than was true would be the action of somebody engaging in racism, right?

 

Define "concern for one's own perceived race?" Is it racist to state that other races all got together and decided to "replace you" by eliminating your race when no such thing actually happened? Also, it should be noted that this "concern" has led to multiple racist crimes.

Inventing a conspiracy against you by other races is certainly potentially racist. There are three potential causes: racial animus, delusion, or bad faith.

Mostly, he engaged in gish gallops to make online content. I don't recall him participating in many debates where he went 1-on-1 with a well-prepared expert on a topic.

Regardless, a willingness to defend racism to other people is sort of beside the point that I was making.

 

I left that intentionally vague. I would ask you only if there's a difference between some concerns and other concerns and how you arrived at that distinction without having a logical discussion on the topic. The logical discussion on the topic should never be discouraged; otherwise you end up blaming someone being victimized by racism for suspecting that they are being victimized by racism. By jumping to calling it racism without showing your work, you are doing just that.

Did he express that?

Any promotion of or concern for race typically does lead to this regardless of the race being promoted. We are an irrational people seeking irrational means of justice. It's up to the rational folks to reel people back in. Blame the (insert race here) will typically lead to (insert race here) victims.

Let's assume that you know he was wrong and you are right. Is the appropriate thing to do help enlighten him on the topic (or others that think this way) or just shout them down by calling them racists? There's a more logical approach that leads to less animosity, I would assume.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS