4 ms·

I'm only vaguely familiar with Charlie Kirk and his messaging but assassination is never a valid response to being offended.

laimewhisps 1mo ago
No one knows why Charlie Kirk was killed. Plenty of theories but it doesn't have anything to do with anti-AI or even anti-CEO protests.
croes 1mo ago
> While talking with his father over the phone on September 11, Robinson allegedly told his father that he had killed Kirk because "there is too much evil and the guy [Kirk] spreads too much hate". That is not being offended. That isn’t so much different from Trump‘s reasoning when he decided to blow Venezuelan boats.
thephyber 1mo ago
> The Democrat Party believes everything that God hates. Like, we’re dealing with maggots, vermin, and swine here. This is not — these are not good people, they’re not even a little bit good.[1] He also called for the death of Biden (because he was a "tyrant") and all surgeons of transgender people. If he was merely trying to be offensive, then he succeeded. If, however, he was trying to make someone fear enough for their life to preemptively defend himself from someone claiming to speak for God + using the same dehumanizing words that have preceded multiple genocides before, then he succeeded. A "valid" response entirely depends on what you think he was apart of. If you think he was only involved in good faith debates on college campuses and getting out the vote, then obviously shooting the guy was unjustified. But he wasn't only that, so we have to struggle with what his legacy actually was and what might have driven someone to pick up a gun against him. My point isn't to justify his killing. It's to point out that we need to learn from history so we don't blindly repeat it. [1] https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-refers-democrats-maggots-vermin-and-swine https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-refer...
- brightball 1mo ago
  His entire life is on video. Please pull direct quotes for any of that. I watched in the aftermath of his death as all of these horrible things he supposedly said were paraded around. Every one was manipulated nonsense. The machine hated Charlie for telling the truth and people were listening.
  - rc5150 1mo ago
    Charlie Kirk, the trans activist? never heard of her.
  - Ancapistani 1mo ago
    I don’t think the point of GP’s post was to claim one way or the other; rather it’s saying that it’s important to understand the motivations of others if you’re going to publicly characterize their actions or effectively oppose them.
  - AlexeyBelov 1mo ago
    Wow. A real Charlie Kirk supporter here on HN. Shocking.
LtWorf 1mo ago
I think having health insurance denied isn't "being offended" but more akin to being killed.

laimewhisps 1mo ago

No one knows why Charlie Kirk was killed. Plenty of theories but it doesn't have anything to do with anti-AI or even anti-CEO protests.

croes 1mo ago

> While talking with his father over the phone on September 11, Robinson allegedly told his father that he had killed Kirk because "there is too much evil and the guy [Kirk] spreads too much hate". That is not being offended. That isn’t so much different from Trump‘s reasoning when he decided to blow Venezuelan boats.

thephyber 1mo ago

> The Democrat Party believes everything that God hates. Like, we’re dealing with maggots, vermin, and swine here. This is not — these are not good people, they’re not even a little bit good.[1] He also called for the death of Biden (because he was a "tyrant") and all surgeons of transgender people. If he was merely trying to be offensive, then he succeeded. If, however, he was trying to make someone fear enough for their life to preemptively defend himself from someone claiming to speak for God + using the same dehumanizing words that have preceded multiple genocides before, then he succeeded. A "valid" response entirely depends on what you think he was apart of. If you think he was only involved in good faith debates on college campuses and getting out the vote, then obviously shooting the guy was unjustified. But he wasn't only that, so we have to struggle with what his legacy actually was and what might have driven someone to pick up a gun against him. My point isn't to justify his killing. It's to point out that we need to learn from history so we don't blindly repeat it. [1] https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-refers-democrats-maggots-vermin-and-swine https://www.mediamatters.org/charlie-kirk/charlie-kirk-refer...

brightball 1mo ago
His entire life is on video. Please pull direct quotes for any of that. I watched in the aftermath of his death as all of these horrible things he supposedly said were paraded around. Every one was manipulated nonsense. The machine hated Charlie for telling the truth and people were listening.
- rc5150 1mo ago
  Charlie Kirk, the trans activist? never heard of her.
- Ancapistani 1mo ago
  I don’t think the point of GP’s post was to claim one way or the other; rather it’s saying that it’s important to understand the motivations of others if you’re going to publicly characterize their actions or effectively oppose them.
- AlexeyBelov 1mo ago
  Wow. A real Charlie Kirk supporter here on HN. Shocking.

LtWorf 1mo ago

I think having health insurance denied isn't "being offended" but more akin to being killed.