7 ms·

Fascinating how the guardian can spin people celebrating one of the most destabilising acts of evil committed this year into a free speech issue. There's someth

Fascinating how the guardian can spin people celebrating one of the most destabilising acts of evil committed this year into a free speech issue. There's something very wrong with people when they celebrate cold blooded murderers like luigi miagione. Reddit is full of people almost openly gleeful about this and the Guardian chooses to take their side.

_DeadFred_ 1y ago
Brian Kilmeade called for the execution of homeless people on Fox news. Hopefully these same tone police/anti calls for violence people push to get him fired from Fox. Since he is talking a literal fascist talking point (execute the undesirables) there is no way my right wing friends can support him talking for them, since they HATE to be associated with fascists/called fascists.
lostlogin 1y ago
So what do you do? Ban that sort of talk and speech?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- FridayoLeary 1y ago
  No just make it clear that it is not tolerated in a civilised society. Well done to the guardian for challenging that idea. It takes a unique kind of courage to stick up for people who like political assassinations in todays day and age. I'm really impressed at their progressiveness that they are concerned about the rights of even such contempible people. Someone needs to look out for them. People calling for violence are one of the most suppressed groups, they deserve a platform.
  - DengistKhan 1y ago
    Ah, there's the misconception. The vote for Trump was a vote to end civilized society. Total misunderstanding on your part.
harimau777 1y ago
What of the violence advocated by Kirk himself?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- zahlman 1y ago
  Even in the cherry-picked, out-of-context quotes I see Kirk's detractors throwing around these discussions, I have seen nothing that advocates violence, except perhaps the government monopoly on force (e.g. to speak in favour of the death penalty).
  - vkou 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - zahlman 1y ago
      Even after taking the quote that far out of context, coming up with that meaning requires extensive, uncharitable interpretation. I don't think the median person in the 50s and 60s even had any mental concept of "being transgender" in the first place. In those days, it was considered an exceptionally rare condition (I can remember seeing a figure in the ballpark of 1 in 30,000).
      - vkou 1y ago
        > I don't think the median person in the 50s and 60s even had any mental concept of "being transgender" in the first place. Oh, the people he's referring to had no problem understanding the simple mental concept that the best way to deal with a f** or a cross-dresser was to beat the shit out of them, while the authorities look the other way. If you disagree, do tell me, pray tell, what do you think he meant by that statement? How does his well-documented history of playing identity politics that explicitly attack trans people fit into your interpretation? (Which was certainly a bit better than the 40s, where a large number of people felt that the best way to deal with them was chemical castration or an extermination camp.) > Even after taking the quote that far out of context, coming up with that meaning requires extensive, uncharitable interpretation. I'm getting rather tired of the expectation that far-right media personas saying sick shit requires us to bend over backwards to take the most charitable view of them and their attacks and dogwhistles, while random nobodies griping about them are held to a Caesar's Wife standard of civility that the targets of their ire don't even try to meet. Just look at what happened to Brian Kilmeade the other night - nothing. But heaven forbid someone says a harsh word about him or someone else equally repugnant...
ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
I don't think you should be pre-judging Luigi Magione. Is there no respect for people's rights to a fair trial these days?

_DeadFred_ 1y ago

Brian Kilmeade called for the execution of homeless people on Fox news. Hopefully these same tone police/anti calls for violence people push to get him fired from Fox. Since he is talking a literal fascist talking point (execute the undesirables) there is no way my right wing friends can support him talking for them, since they HATE to be associated with fascists/called fascists.

lostlogin 1y ago

So what do you do? Ban that sort of talk and speech?

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
FridayoLeary 1y ago
No just make it clear that it is not tolerated in a civilised society. Well done to the guardian for challenging that idea. It takes a unique kind of courage to stick up for people who like political assassinations in todays day and age. I'm really impressed at their progressiveness that they are concerned about the rights of even such contempible people. Someone needs to look out for them. People calling for violence are one of the most suppressed groups, they deserve a platform.
- DengistKhan 1y ago
  Ah, there's the misconception. The vote for Trump was a vote to end civilized society. Total misunderstanding on your part.

harimau777 1y ago

What of the violence advocated by Kirk himself?

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
zahlman 1y ago
Even in the cherry-picked, out-of-context quotes I see Kirk's detractors throwing around these discussions, I have seen nothing that advocates violence, except perhaps the government monopoly on force (e.g. to speak in favour of the death penalty).
- vkou 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - zahlman 1y ago
    Even after taking the quote that far out of context, coming up with that meaning requires extensive, uncharitable interpretation. I don't think the median person in the 50s and 60s even had any mental concept of "being transgender" in the first place. In those days, it was considered an exceptionally rare condition (I can remember seeing a figure in the ballpark of 1 in 30,000).
    - vkou 1y ago
      > I don't think the median person in the 50s and 60s even had any mental concept of "being transgender" in the first place. Oh, the people he's referring to had no problem understanding the simple mental concept that the best way to deal with a f** or a cross-dresser was to beat the shit out of them, while the authorities look the other way. If you disagree, do tell me, pray tell, what do you think he meant by that statement? How does his well-documented history of playing identity politics that explicitly attack trans people fit into your interpretation? (Which was certainly a bit better than the 40s, where a large number of people felt that the best way to deal with them was chemical castration or an extermination camp.) > Even after taking the quote that far out of context, coming up with that meaning requires extensive, uncharitable interpretation. I'm getting rather tired of the expectation that far-right media personas saying sick shit requires us to bend over backwards to take the most charitable view of them and their attacks and dogwhistles, while random nobodies griping about them are held to a Caesar's Wife standard of civility that the targets of their ire don't even try to meet. Just look at what happened to Brian Kilmeade the other night - nothing. But heaven forbid someone says a harsh word about him or someone else equally repugnant...

ndsipa_pomu 1y ago

I don't think you should be pre-judging Luigi Magione. Is there no respect for people's rights to a fair trial these days?