houseoftolstoy @[email protected]

@unabomber if anyone wants to deny that they are an organization or say "it's just an ideology," just deal with the assholes wearing black. Regardless of their word magic labels, they are committing violence and property damage, and they should be rounded up for those actions.

Anyone who does not support rounding them up should know that without the government, people would respond with frontier justice. So "fascism" being gone would not make them less hated.

Any time I have seen some leftist dipshit argue that "Antifa is not an organization, it's an idea!" Whatever they want to claim, it really does not matter. Whenever you see some assholes dressed in black committing violence and property damage, they are cleary organized. I have no pity in the event of their arrest for being labeled as part of a terrorist organization. Because even with their retarded reasoning, they are still committing the acts regardless of their wordmagic labels.

@shortstories He is correct that Baby Boomers as a whole will cherry pick their values based on their self interest by calling whatever they don't like "socialism." But seeing his other videos unfortunately he would be absolutely fine doubling down on the very policies that cause our system to collapse.

Getting mad at Baby Boomers only to complain that you did not get yours too does not make you better than them.

One thought regarding governments pushing unpopular/bad policies while everyone is distracted. I don't think that they are always creating the distractions, but rather they will take advantage of any moment the public is distracted. Sure, they are doing shady actions, but sometimes it is easier to just wait for the opportunity than to try and create one. That gives them plausible deniability, since they only technically took advantage of a crisis rather than created one themselves.

@GrungeQueef He should have made sure he had his fish taping license first.

@nomebullyyou why the hell are there any Mexican independence day celebrations in the US in the first place? They can proud of their independence all they want in their own country. And if they don't want to do that, does it not beg the question of why not?

Charlie Kirk was by no means extreme in his viewpoints, regardless of what is said about him from those on the left. For many of them, anyone moderately right wing is considered a hard core right wing extremist. So I do not think that they will be convinced that Charlie Kirk being killed will bring about an even further right wing figure. Because they are all Evil Fascist Nazi's in their eyes.

I know there were voices on the left that spoke out against him being killed and condemned anyone taking joy in his death, though we cannot know for sure whether or not this is geniune or simply performative. From a public eye standpoint, it makes sense to condemn violent extremism regardless of your personal feelings. And in a way, even if you are just putting on a performance, it does show you to be truly different from those who publicly celebrate his death.

The reactions of many on the left in various social media platforms is no surprise either. There were plenty of gleeful posts that are glad he is dead, though it comes off as far more spiteful since he was murdered at a very young age rather than someone who died old and with health problems, such as Rush Limbaugh.

I had a very cautious opinion Charlie Kirk. My impression of him being such a prominent figure on the right was the equivalent of the high school quarterback who just so happened to be the son of the team's coach. That is, I am not entirely sure that he got such prominence based solely on his merits. And it might be the case that the son of the coach shows some competency and plays well as the quarterback. And I could say the same about Charlie Kirk, as he has remained influential on the right.

@Lorgar @VeganMGTOW @Tfmonkey I concur. Just because you can identify a problem does not mean you are able to properly determine a solution. His labeling of tribal societies helping others who were injured as "universal healthcare" shows that he really is not thinking through what it would mean if he were to have a society that was primitive (as he said in point 3). And the people in helping that man still had to work, thus not supporting his point of "you don't need to work to live."