6 ms·
I am largely neutral on this particular assassination, as I knew almost nothing about Mr. Kirk prior to his departure (just name recognition & basic political a
by ProllyInfamous 1y ago
I am largely neutral on this particular assassination, as I knew almost nothing about Mr. Kirk prior to his departure (just name recognition & basic political associations).
But I do think, after decades of reflection, that comedians are correct when they point out that stereotypical humor shouldn't be off limits to any performer (of any background/color), but is... e.g. Owen Benjamin, Chappelle, Seinfeld.
- pessimizer 1y ago[flagged]
- ProllyInfamous 1y agoI edited my above-comment to better incorporate multiple comedian's POV on off-color humor ("x-isms," to use PG's terminology) >Where was the joke? If any comedian's attempt at any "joke," however tactless, led to any two+ people sitting down and having discussion of real-world realities... then I think the jokester has exceled professionally (honestly I haven't seen this Kimmel clip; I always just remember him as black-face-guy from 90s Comedy Central™ — which was as appropriate/funny/accepted as Downey in Tropic Thunder). So in this particular case, Kimmel continues his professionalism as Jester.
- boznz 1y ago[flagged]
- Waterluvian 1y agoI’ve never seen this interpretation of the word before. Usually that’s a “hit.” An assassination is a murder if someone notable, often for political reasons.
- ProllyInfamous 1y ago¿por que no los dos? In this particular assassination, there's currently nothing more than official allegations & captured footage.
- Waterluvian 1y agoI have no idea what you’re trying to say. This feels like a non sequitur.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- theoreticalmal 1y agoWho paid Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, or Gavrillo Princip? Assassination is a subset of murder, with political motives. It seems very accurate in this situation
- ProllyInfamous 1y ago[flagged]
- ceejayoz 1y agoThe Clintons are behind Lee Harvey Oswald? What, as middle schoolers?
- ProllyInfamous 1y agoClintonComplex™ most-definitely killed Mr. Rich, unrelated to the above-conspiracy.
- themafia 1y ago> Who paid Lee Harvey Oswald Who fired the magic bullet? Anyways, the boss was (most likely), James Jesus Angleton.
- LennyHenrysNuts 1y agoWhich one? (ducks)
- throwmeaway222 1y agoIt is an assassination, look up the definition.
- kelnos 1y agoAssassination has nothing to do with murder-for-hire. Never has.
- theossuary 1y ago[flagged]
- ProllyInfamous 1y agoThe state doesn't have to censor anything when most people are too afraid to comment publicly (retaliation). My original argument, above, is that comedians ought to be allowed to "joke" about anything, as long as it generates community discussion. Any discussion will generate better outcomes than 2-party's design of PureHate™.
- theossuary 1y agoThey were allowed to joke about anything by the state. The state didn't censor them. That's the first amendment. Jimmy Kimmel had the FCC threaten to pull ABC's broadcasting license the day he poured fun at Trump and the right. How is that the same as citizens using their free speech rights to criticize a comedian?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- lupusreal 1y ago> I am largely neutral on this particular assassination, as I knew almost nothing about Mr. Kirk prior to his departure (just name recognition & basic political associations). This seems confusing to me. The default "neutral" position on any murder, most of all when you don't know much about the victim, is that murder is a horrible thing, is it not? Is that what you mean, or do you mean you aren't sure if this was good or bad? Any human with their head screwed on straight innately assigns a very negative value weight to murder. To get yourself into a situation where you aren't sure about a murder would require you to have pretty strong beliefs about the victim or circumstance, which you claim to not have.
- ProllyInfamous 1y ago>Any human with their head screwed on straight innately assigns a very negative value weight to murder. Murderers walk freely among you, and we're not all bad people. A few good people earn their legal kills. A healthy society would encourage any speech which could reduce divisiveness (e.g. comments on Mr. Kirk, without retribution) — yet ours thrives on division, getting people to hate better with bigger hearts. ¢¢ "It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society..."
- throwmeaway222 1y ago> Murderers walk freely among you, and _we're_ not all bad people what? This is nuts. Are you saying you murder people? > A healthy society would encourage any speech which could reduce divisiveness (e.g. comments on Mr. Kirk, without retribution) Yes I agree with this. There are a lot of people that do vigils and prayers and eulogies when people die. Then there are people that go: he deserved it and XXX is next. The former does not drive division. The latter does - and that's what needs to stop.
- jjtheblunt 1y agothe person might be saying they fought in a war involving shooting others
- burnt-resistor 1y agoAssassination is stupid and counterproductive, even if the subject was a shameless, ethnonationalist supremacist who said mass shootings were the "price to pay" for 2a, because all that blackpill bozo did was turn him into an "innocent" victim, lionized martyr. Offended by everything, ashamed of nothing.
- hn_throwaway_99 1y agoMore than that, though, this assassination was particularly counterproductive because it basically played to the worst stereotypes about "the left" not willing to listen to anything they disagree with. I may disagree with the vast majority of Charlie Kirk's opinions, but he was at a university, inviting others who strongly disagreed with him to debate him, face-to-face. I may not be a particular fan of this style of interaction (I find it to be more about shock value/talking points/getting clips of particular stupid things people will say than actual clarification or education), it was still an open forum that shouldn't be feared in a free society that supposedly values free speech.
- Anyhao 1y agoWe had all the info yesterday, kid was a terminally online groyper. If "the left" can do nothing and still be blamed for everything, what exactly is the way forward?
- ndsipa_pomu 1y agoOne way forward is to stop all this ridiculous left/right dichotomy. It looks like the fascists have taken over the USA, so there's only Trump-adorers and everyone else. There's actual masked men rounding up people of colour on the streets, so it's not like the fascism can even be denied.
- Anyhao 1y agoThat's the answer, but the question was rhetorical for the person I was replying to. The outgroup is getting larger, yet people are failing to acknowledge that all the accusations at this point are just bad faith, surface level excuses for said fascism.
- fsckboy 1y ago>I am largely neutral on this particular assassination could you list the assassinations that you are not neutral on? I feel the list could be interesting if not prolly infamous
- uncircle 1y agoHarambe, for one.
- ProllyInfamous 1y ago[flagged]
- tstrimple 1y ago> that comedians are correct when they point out that stereotypical humor shouldn't be off limits to any performer (of any background/color), but is... e.g. Owen Benjamin, Chappelle, Seinfeld. You're quoting a Chappelle joke that he made literally from a fucking netflix special. He's definitely been "cancelled" making millions off of trans jokes. Amazing evidence that comedy is illegal now. I honestly don't know how anyone could take this drivel seriously unless they literally only consume media from a very narrow selection of highly biased resources.
- ProllyInfamous 1y agoAnother comment better-expressed what I was attempting to convey, yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45286263 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45286263 >Mel Brooks had the right of it. Fascism and Authoritarianism is defeated by satire and mockery. The ideology is too outrageous to survive any such scrutiny.