4 ms·

Feels like your second paragraph negates the first. That he wasn’t honestly debating ideas but fishing for soundbites to spread hate and appear intellectual, us

by latexr 1y ago

Feels like your second paragraph negates the first. That he wasn’t honestly debating ideas but fishing for soundbites to spread hate and appear intellectual, using the backdrop of college campuses to lend legitimacy to his divisive ideas. That is not what college campuses are for, and it is not a debate. I’m not American, I never heard of this guy before. But I saw the video of the last moments and it’s a telling snippet. He was incredibly dismissive in his answers which were vague and devoid of information, while being clearly rage bait meant to be cheered on by his base.

loughnane 1y ago
As I've said in a few other comments, I agree it's a poor "debate". But sadly it's the sort we've got now in the public sphere. I hope for better, but I can't help but think his killing doesn't help.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  >But sadly it's the sort we've got now in the public sphere. Why can't we strive for a proper environment and expel those who don't want to foster it? Schools are not entitled to give "equal platform" to unequal ideas.
  - daveidol 1y ago
    What is an “unequal” idea?
    - LordDragonfang 1y ago
      They pretty clearly meant "ideas", plural, which are pairwise not equal to each other in some metric (presumably,merit).
2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago
He didn't deserve to die but I don't like how racist rhetoric somehow became honest political discussion. The elevation of racist ideology to being just another political opinion deserving of respect worries me.
- diogenescynic 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - digdugdirk 1y ago
    Luckily, this information is not hard to find for non-entitled people who don't live in a bubble: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk-quotes-beliefs https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk...
    - diogenescynic 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - famouswaffles 1y ago
        >Show me a racist quote If you don't see anything racist in that article, then congrats you're racist. >Where does he use a racial slur You think that's the only way to be racist ? >or say someone is something negative because of their race? Are you blind, willfully obtuse or is your reading comprehension just this poor ? "If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified." This is not racist? Are you fucking stupid ? “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” - Charlie Kirk Oh the irony. The more i learn about this piece of shit, the less i care about his death.
        diogenescynic 1y ago
        [flagged]
lilsoso 1y ago
To dismiss him as being “devoid of information” is lazy and cheap. He had scholars on his team shape his message.
- Forgeties79 1y ago
  “Scholars”
matheusmoreira 1y ago
> That he wasn’t honestly debating ideas but fishing for soundbites to spread hate and appear intellectual I'm not convinced political debates are good for anything else. Most people believe in things without really thinking about them. Especially politics. If you stop and actually reason this stuff out, you're going to reach some deeply disturbing conclusions which border on wrongthink. If you try to spread the nuggets of truth you discovered, you just fail miserably at first. People will not be convinced. They probably won't really refute you either. Maybe it's because you're right, maybe it's because they didn't even think about what you said and just responded emotionally, there's no way to know for sure because trying to test ideas in debates just doesn't work with the vast majority of human beings. If you insist on this path, people start thinking you're acting superior to them with your unconventional ideas. At some point you start getting flagged and downvoted on sight. Then you start getting personally called out. Labeled as some "extremist". Maybe one day you become such a nuisance authorities actually knock on your door and arrest you. Maybe your ideas offend someone so much they assassinate you. So I don't blame this guy at all for debating like a politician. If he debated seriously and won, would his opponents revise their entire belief systems and start following his logical footsteps? Of course not.

by latexr 1y ago

loughnane 1y ago

As I've said in a few other comments, I agree it's a poor "debate". But sadly it's the sort we've got now in the public sphere. I hope for better, but I can't help but think his killing doesn't help.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
johnnyanmac 1y ago
>But sadly it's the sort we've got now in the public sphere. Why can't we strive for a proper environment and expel those who don't want to foster it? Schools are not entitled to give "equal platform" to unequal ideas.
- daveidol 1y ago
  What is an “unequal” idea?
  - LordDragonfang 1y ago
    They pretty clearly meant "ideas", plural, which are pairwise not equal to each other in some metric (presumably,merit).

2OEH8eoCRo0 1y ago

He didn't deserve to die but I don't like how racist rhetoric somehow became honest political discussion. The elevation of racist ideology to being just another political opinion deserving of respect worries me.

diogenescynic 1y ago
[flagged]
- digdugdirk 1y ago
  Luckily, this information is not hard to find for non-entitled people who don't live in a bubble: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk-quotes-beliefs https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk...
  - diogenescynic 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - famouswaffles 1y ago
      >Show me a racist quote If you don't see anything racist in that article, then congrats you're racist. >Where does he use a racial slur You think that's the only way to be racist ? >or say someone is something negative because of their race? Are you blind, willfully obtuse or is your reading comprehension just this poor ? "If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified." This is not racist? Are you fucking stupid ? “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” - Charlie Kirk Oh the irony. The more i learn about this piece of shit, the less i care about his death.
      - diogenescynic 1y ago
        [flagged]

lilsoso 1y ago

To dismiss him as being “devoid of information” is lazy and cheap. He had scholars on his team shape his message.

Forgeties79 1y ago
“Scholars”

matheusmoreira 1y ago

> That he wasn’t honestly debating ideas but fishing for soundbites to spread hate and appear intellectual I'm not convinced political debates are good for anything else. Most people believe in things without really thinking about them. Especially politics. If you stop and actually reason this stuff out, you're going to reach some deeply disturbing conclusions which border on wrongthink. If you try to spread the nuggets of truth you discovered, you just fail miserably at first. People will not be convinced. They probably won't really refute you either. Maybe it's because you're right, maybe it's because they didn't even think about what you said and just responded emotionally, there's no way to know for sure because trying to test ideas in debates just doesn't work with the vast majority of human beings. If you insist on this path, people start thinking you're acting superior to them with your unconventional ideas. At some point you start getting flagged and downvoted on sight. Then you start getting personally called out. Labeled as some "extremist". Maybe one day you become such a nuisance authorities actually knock on your door and arrest you. Maybe your ideas offend someone so much they assassinate you. So I don't blame this guy at all for debating like a politician. If he debated seriously and won, would his opponents revise their entire belief systems and start following his logical footsteps? Of course not.