Is political violence acceptable? Is it hypocritical to gravedance on tranny suicides and then get upset about gravedancing on political violence?

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Lokenstien said:
This has been a thing for a while here but it still amazes me how often users here will gleefully dehumanize one population before shitting & wailing about the dehumanization of their population.
Click to expand...

There is nothing really strange about that. In any war or conflict you must hate the enemy enough to kill him, so that he does not kill you. If you kill one of your own, you are a murdere, but if you kill the enemy, you get a medal.

It's just tribalism, and it is a very deeply ingrained character trait in any human, because for millions of years we needed it to survive. We divide the world into in-groups and out-groups and apply different morality to each group. Every single human does that.
 
Otis Mallebrok said:
It's just tribalism, and it is a very deeply ingrained character trait in any human, because for millions of years we needed it to survive. We divide the world into in-groups and out-groups and apply different morality to each group. Every single human does that.
Click to expand...
I agree with this and I have little disillusionment that we as species are escaping tribalism, especially when it’s an evolutionary survival trait in the same way fear, anxiety, FFFF, etc are.
There is nothing really strange about that. In any war or conflict you must hate the enemy enough to kill him, so that he does not kill you. If you kill one of your own, you are a murdere, but if you kill the enemy, you get a medal.
Click to expand...
I understand this but I believe my larger point was that this dehumanization happens often and casually between Americans which for the vast majority of them are not at war. I mean people on here describe basic, minor and ultimately meaningless interactions with minority groups as if they are at war them, as if they had a life and death encounter by just meeting someone different. If Americans are really going out everyday viewing life as a warzone where they need to inherently trust allies and violently hate enemies just to survive than it’s really no wonder why political violence and corruption is on the rise.
 
Kirk's death and those celebrating it signals that violence against a political speaker is above board and we have begun our descent into sectarian violence.
I don't know about the rest of you but I REALLY REALLY do not want to live in Car Bomb America.
 
Cannibal Fuckface said:
Kirk's death and those celebrating it signals that violence against a political speaker is above board and we have begun our descent into sectarian violence.
I don't know about the rest of you but I REALLY REALLY do not want to live in Car Bomb America.
Click to expand...
Welcome to Murrica turning into terror country where just murdering everyone who disagrees with you is perfectly fine.
 
Lokenstien said:
I understand this but I believe my larger point was that this dehumanization happens often and casually between Americans which for the vast majority of them are not at war. I mean people on here describe basic, minor and ultimately meaningless interactions with minority groups as if they are at war them, as if they had a life and death encounter by just meeting someone different.
Click to expand...

I think that is pretty naive:

1) Logically, whenever a tribal war starts, dehumanization of the other side must already have happened to some extent. And people DO feel threatened when they have meaningless encounters with members of their outgroup, because feeling that way is an important survival instinct.

2) Whenever the states monopoly on violence recedes, tribal warfare immediately starts on the fringes. Whether it is in Rotherham England or on a bus in Charlotte. When the Yugoslavian state collapsed, people there immediately continued as if the prior hundred years had not passed. Tribal conflict is the default state of human kind, and it is peace and the rule of law that is the exception.

3) While our tribal instincts are the same as they were in the bronze age, tribal antagonism is amplified many fold by the existence of the internet. Like when that video of the knifing on the bus circulated. This will only get worse.

4) Another technical innovation that will make this worse, is the existence of drone-tech that comes out of the Ukrainian war. In the future you will not need to get within 200 meters to assassinate people, getting within 5-10 km with a 200$ drone will be enough. The threshold for the state to maintain a monopoly of violence has increased by several orders of magnitude, so expect tribal killings to increase.
 
Account said:
I would rank a school shooting of children worse than killing Charlie Kirk. At least Charlie Kirk was able to live to 31, a bunch of children has barely started their lives. Both types of murders are also symptomatic of severe societal dysfunction.

The reaction to Kirk's murder is definitely worse because there is a bunch of people who think he deserved it and very few people think children deserve school shootings. Many of the people who want him dead also find humor in his death too. I don't want to lump in the psychos with people who make edgy jokes for non-murderous reasons.
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstood me.
I was saying that this isn’t irony. The line of “it’s ironic that the anti-gun control guy got killed by a shooting” is bullshit. It would have been irony had he be been caught in the crossfire, not deliberately singled out and assassinated.

That said, I agree with you that a school shooting where kids dies is worse. Obviously. I never want a child of any kind to be shot.
 
DankMaster420Fat said:
ye

this is by definition an ironic way to die

The Titanic was touted as an “unsinkable” ship, yet it sank on its first voyage

Charlie kirk -"Gun deaths are unfortunately worth it to keep 2nd amendment"​

he is then killed by a gun this is situational irony
  • The expectation: The lion advocate works to protect lions, and their efforts are meant to ensure the animals' well-being and continued survival. The person expects their actions to lead to a positive outcome for the species.
  • The reality: The advocate is attacked and eaten by a lion.
  • The irony: The very animal the person dedicated their life to helping ends up being the cause of their death. The situation undermines the person's intentions and the expected, positive outcome of their advocacy
Click to expand...
Irony means expressing things that have the opposite effect. Like you said, calling the titanic unsinkable only for it to sink. But it would not have been ironic had someone intentionally sunk the titanic to prove a point.

Kirk never said guns can’t kill you. He said shooting deaths were unfortunately worth it if it meant maintaining the 2nd amendment. By his own words, his death was not ironic. He was killed by someone trying to silence him in a method that tried to make his followers turn their back on the 2nd amendment. Instead he died for his principles and his beliefs and his followers are doubling down. The only irony here is that the killer’s plan had the opposite effect
 
Duke-Diggler said:
I always have this view in once you start shit talking people dying on either side of the spectrum, you shouldn't get mad when people do the same to you. You open yourself up to the game of tennis between dancing on other people's graves. That being said, political violence on either side is fucking gay and retarded. If you cheer for it, you are also gay and retarded.
Click to expand...
Obviously when someone on my side dies I'll be irked when the opposite side makes fun of them but Its not like I expected any different. you can cheer when the opposing team concedes and sulk when it happens to yours, these aren't mutually exclusive. I don't care that retards are cheering for Kirk's death because what else were they going to do.
 
LiquidKid said:
Irony means expressing things that have the opposite effect. Like you said, calling the titanic unsinkable only for it to sink. But it would not have been ironic had someone intentionally sunk the titanic to prove a point.

Kirk never said guns can’t kill you. He said shooting deaths were unfortunately worth it if it meant maintaining the 2nd amendment. By his own words, his death was not ironic. He was killed by someone trying to silence him in a method that tried to make his followers turn their back on the 2nd amendment. Instead he died for his principles and his beliefs and his followers are doubling down. The only irony here is that the killer’s plan had the opposite effect
Click to expand...
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what irony is and what forms it has Irony doesn’t depend on intent or denial it’s also about contradictions between belief and outcome. A prominent advocate for widespread gun rights being killed by a gun is situational irony, even if he admitted guns are dangerous. The shooter’s motives don’t erase that contradiction the fact is that the very tool Kirk defended ended his life. And claiming “the only irony is the killer’s plan backfiring” undermines itself because that reversal is irony too meaning his death is ironic.
The Titanic was branded “unsinkable.” If it sinks, that’s ironic whether it was an accident, negligence, or sabotage. The irony isn’t in how the Titanic sank, but that it sank at all after being declared unsinkable.
 
Duke-Diggler said:
I always have this view in once you start shit talking people dying on either side of the spectrum, you shouldn't get mad when people do the same to you. You open yourself up to the game of tennis between dancing on other people's graves. That being said, political violence on either side is fucking gay and retarded. If you cheer for it, you are also gay and retarded.
Click to expand...
I think thats why i am super upset about this despite not liking Kirk.
Because leftists will talk shit and defend killing Kirk then turn around and cry about being victimized, marginalized, "scared" what the fuck have you in the very same sentence when they probably have a "kill all white people" meme in thier folders. They are never going to stop bitching while saying killing is good or dance around saying it like a pussy.

That and probably the fact that im black and i have to defend whitey this time
 
Michael_Jordan_Peterson said:
its wierd how every time theres a mass shooting of random kids or people you get a motive, manifesto, social media.
Whenever its someone who tries to kill a major republican political target its some completely non descript, zero social media, political leanings 22 year old.
Super normal. Not saying its impossible that thats the truth but odds are the leftist tranny shit was scrubbed before we got to it. I still think both of them are trantifa types because if they had right wing leanings theyd publicize it to neutralize public discourse. They dont have anything but leftist social media posts so they wont disclose them as that would only inflame tensions in the country.
Click to expand...
You honestly don't need many reasons at all to kill conservatives, when you look at the last 100 years of Conservatives holding society back and stifling progress, It's morality and human decency that is preventing people from slaughtering conservatives wholesale.

tl;dr
You have to invent wacky and insane reasons and absolutely fucking retarded conspiracies to kill Liberals.
A guy who wants.. Everyone to have free health care? Gotta stop him, he's really an evil agent trying to poison you with 4G and the Gay Gene. The only way to stop him is to kill him!

You have to invent wacky and insane reasons to not kill Conservatives.
A guy who wants women to be broodmares , feels that you should own nothing ,be happy, be his slave and proudly professes that gay people should be stoned to death? It's not nice to kill people for their opinion.
 
Charlie Kirk was literally a victim to the right wing bible-and-gun culture he advocated for. That's true fucking artistry right there. :story:

The fucking cherry on top is how quiet every right wing influencer and politician is right now after having so much fire and fury calling for revenge against the entire left for a crime that "the left" didn't commit.
 
Starved Artist said:
You have to invent wacky and insane reasons and absolutely fucking retarded conspiracies to kill Liberals.
A guy who wants.. Everyone to have free health care?
Click to expand...
What a grand and intoxicating innocence/generosity you have when you speak of liberals paired with the damning admonition of a conservative viewpoint.
Starved Artist said:
holding society back and stifling progress
Click to expand...
Is this "stifling of progress" here in the room with us right now? Do you think if the keys to the castle were handed wholesale to modern day liberals a century ago we'd be in paradise? Violence as a catalyst for political change is anathema to what we as a society have tried to venerate which is open dialogue. Kirk, like him or not, was a walking example of that by trying to have a dialogue with those who are most fervent in their political interest: students. Time and time again, people from the left have shown that in pursuit of their idyllic utopia they dehumanize the very people and principles who endowed them with the ability to voice their ideas in an open forum, and would rather build a bridge to this utopia with the bodies of their benefactors. You, "starved artist", are the mouth which bites the hand that feeds and your soul is ugly.
 
Starved Artist said:
You honestly don't need many reasons at all to kill conservatives, when you look at the last 100 years of Conservatives holding society back and stifling progress, It's morality and human decency that is preventing people from slaughtering conservatives wholesale.

tl;dr
You have to invent wacky and insane reasons and absolutely fucking retarded conspiracies to kill Liberals.
A guy who wants.. Everyone to have free health care? Gotta stop him, he's really an evil agent trying to poison you with 4G and the Gay Gene. The only way to stop him is to kill him!

You have to invent wacky and insane reasons to not kill Conservatives.
A guy who wants women to be broodmares , feels that you should own nothing ,be happy, be his slave and proudly professes that gay people should be stoned to death? It's not nice to kill people for their opinion.
Click to expand...
okay and now with this logic do you think its okay if people kill democrats because someone deems their views as a danger to democracy?
 
Dragged Into Sunlight said:
Why are the leftists in this forum and online trying to hard to frame him as a Republican? I thought it was a good thing that he killed Charlie Kirk? Why are they suddenly so desperate to paint him as one of the enemy?
Click to expand...
Because of the delicious irony of your own icon being murdered by someone who was radicalized by the same violent rhetoric espoused by that icon is just so delicious. Charlie Kirk said it himself that a few sacrifices were worth it to keep second amendment rights. So why are you bitching? He’s just another sacrifice,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom