In the context of the quote, he clearly didn’t know what empathy means. He said he prefers the term “sympathy” (likely not really knowing the distinct definition of either one).
He was actually supporting empathy in the full context, saying that Democrats were running astray from Bill Clinton’s messaging utilizing empathy/sympathy.
The “prefer sympathy” part is true. I’m not going to listen go his podcast to get the full context though. Everything else he said tells me he didn’t care for sympathy either.
In the context of the quote, he clearly didn’t know what empathy means. He said he prefers the term “sympathy” (likely not really knowing the distinct definition of either one).
He was actually supporting empathy in the full context, saying that Democrats were running astray from Bill Clinton’s messaging utilizing empathy/sympathy.
No, he didn’t. You can attempt to sanewash your idol all you want, the words are pretty clear.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/fact-check-charlie-kirk-once-001900786.html
The “prefer sympathy” part is true. I’m not going to listen go his podcast to get the full context though. Everything else he said tells me he didn’t care for sympathy either.
Words are only as good as their definitions. If he’s operating with different definitions, then the meaning is, in fact, not clear.
Quite the interpretation for the quote that says the precise opposite in at least two different ways, context or not.
You’re a good example for the crazy world we live in now.
Video of the quote in (more) context: https://archive.is/a5BHv