Not a fan, unless you would enjoy to meme on George Floyd in a similar way. (which would be also pretty terrible)
I think this treatment should be reserved for people like Trump. Putin, Health insurance CEOs, who actively have the power and have used it to harm or kill people, as opposed to just being hateful bastards.
Kirk constantly made statements and spread misinformation that is used as justification by others to do immeasurable harm. He’s not exempt from blame just because he was too much of a pussy to actually take up the sword himself. He was a piece of shit and his death was a net positive for society as a whole. If media and politicians aren’t going to take responsibility to stop amplifying the lies of people like him then this shit is going to keep happening. It’s not worth it to fret over a bunch of memes.
George Floyd was murdered by police officers for allegedly trying to use counterfeit money. Charlie Kirk was killed for spreading violent racist rhetoric. Are those comparable situations to you?
A human was murdered by politically motivated people.
I think this aspect of the 2 things makes them comparable for the purposes of deciding if funny memes should be made. yes.
What was political about the murder of George Floyd by a police officer, aside from the response?
Floyd was not murdered for political reasons, unless you’re arguing that being black is in itself political. He was murdered by a white cop for the crime of being black and allegedly passing a counterfeit $20 bill.
Saying Floyd’s murder is political is racist, because there is nothing political about petty street crime unless you’re racializing the situation. And even then, it’s really only political in a post facto sense.
Saying Floyd’s murder is political is racist, because there is nothing political
I think you might be right. My reasoning was that if your political party/orientation includes racism, then this would make this a political reason, but that should probably be counted seperately.
My reasoning was that if your political party/orientation includes racism, then this would make this a political reason
If your political beliefs include racism, you are a racist who uses politics as a weapon. This is post facto rationalizing to give an excuse for racist beliefs and using the political machine to harm people.
There isn’t much difference in my mind between people who support racist parties and people like David Duke, the only difference is Duke is willing to be open and honest about his beliefs. And while the party has shunned Duke himself, good luck finding major differences these days.
There are absolutely a fuckstick worth of George Floyd memes out there like this too. I say let people have fun. There are like 8b people on this planet, and far more important people than him are dying, like the people in gaza.
I think this treatment should be reserved for people like Trump. Putin, Health insurance CEOs, who actively have the power and have used it to harm or kill people, as opposed to just being hateful bastards.
Yeah, the mouthpiece of the fascists shouldn’t be made fun of like the fascists themselves! Propaganda spewers and those who spread hate on their massive platforms don’t deserve this!!1!
I hope you can see why your statement is just absolutely laughable.
Sounds like a distinction without a difference. Why is it ok to make fun of the fascist mouthpiece, but not him being turned into a short term and tasteful water display? Why is it not ok to mock the death of a hateful person? Is it because we might make the people who look for literally any reason to be mad, mad? Or is it because we need to give hagiographic praise to the fucking moron who could barely win staged debates against college kids?
I’m not going to pretend swiss cheese Charlie wasn’t worth less than a pile of moth old dog turds just because the fuck was murdered. He was a bad person who did bad things and deserves to have his legacy dragged through the dirt.
Advocating for a thing to be banned is to advocate for violence against the people who do that thing; the fact that the state does the violent acts doesn’t change that.
Charlie Kirk spent a good chunk of his life advocating for the abortion ban which has harmed and killed people. In my book Charlie Kirk is, at least in part, responsible for all that harm. He deserved what he got at least as much as any healthcare CEO.
FWIW I’m not advocating for either Christo-fascist podcasters or healthcare CEOs to be killed. That doesn’t mean it can’t be funny when it happens, though.
I think the bar for whether or not you should be please about someone’s death (note that that’s not the same as advocating for it) is whether that person made the world a worse or better place from the point of view of the majority.
With someone like Charlie Kirk it’s easy, even by the standards of his own supporters he made the world a worse place because at least some of his supporters will have been hurt and killed by the things he supported and advocated for. After all the shooter could have decided he wanted to shoot up the crowd and in a way it would be Charlie’s fault that the shooter was allowed to have a gun without a background check.
I think you considerably overestimate his level of influence. Just because Trump’s cult isn’t letting a good shooting go to waste doesn’t mean he was anywhere near as important or influential in life as they are acting like now.
Honestly I’d laugh at both, and then immediately think it’s fucked up that I laughed, and that it’s in bad taste. Just like this meme, but it’s still funny to me.
Dark humour goes both ways, if you can dish it out you should be able to take it.
Kirk was certainly not Putin, I see where you’re coming from. For the most part, Kirk used words like we do here (just with 1mil times the hate and platform size). When Putin uses words people die, directly on his orders, which is why only one of them deserves/ed prison.
The right way to fight Kirk was to obliterate his logic without laying a hand on him. Hateful idiocy is to be overcome by us collectively with our heart & brain, not brawn.
The right way to fight Kirk was to obliterate his logic without laying a hand on him
The ‘right way’ has been tried for the better part of 20 years. If you think these fucking chuds can be defeated with logic, you’re not familiar with conservative media in the slightest.
I’m not advocating for his murder in the slightest, but let’s not pretend these people lived in a logical environment.
Not a fan, unless you would enjoy to meme on George Floyd in a similar way. (which would be also pretty terrible)
I think this treatment should be reserved for people like Trump. Putin, Health insurance CEOs, who actively have the power and have used it to harm or kill people, as opposed to just being hateful bastards.
Kirk constantly made statements and spread misinformation that is used as justification by others to do immeasurable harm. He’s not exempt from blame just because he was too much of a pussy to actually take up the sword himself. He was a piece of shit and his death was a net positive for society as a whole. If media and politicians aren’t going to take responsibility to stop amplifying the lies of people like him then this shit is going to keep happening. It’s not worth it to fret over a bunch of memes.
Probably true, but I felt like mentioning it.
George Floyd was murdered by police officers for allegedly trying to use counterfeit money. Charlie Kirk was killed for spreading violent racist rhetoric. Are those comparable situations to you?
A human was murdered by politically motivated people.
I think this aspect of the 2 things makes them comparable for the purposes of deciding if funny memes should be made. yes.
Otherwise? Absolutely not comparable.
What was political about the murder of George Floyd by a police officer, aside from the response?
Floyd was not murdered for political reasons, unless you’re arguing that being black is in itself political. He was murdered by a white cop for the crime of being black and allegedly passing a counterfeit $20 bill.
Saying Floyd’s murder is political is racist, because there is nothing political about petty street crime unless you’re racializing the situation. And even then, it’s really only political in a post facto sense.
I think you might be right. My reasoning was that if your political party/orientation includes racism, then this would make this a political reason, but that should probably be counted seperately.
If your political beliefs include racism, you are a racist who uses politics as a weapon. This is post facto rationalizing to give an excuse for racist beliefs and using the political machine to harm people.
There isn’t much difference in my mind between people who support racist parties and people like David Duke, the only difference is Duke is willing to be open and honest about his beliefs. And while the party has shunned Duke himself, good luck finding major differences these days.
George Floyd was not killed for his political opinion. George Floyd was a state sanctioned killing by police officers. They are fuck all alike.
I meant that the police officers were the ones motivated by political position, i.e. right-wing racism.
But enough about Osama bin Laden.
Kirk supported what had happened to him.
There are absolutely a fuckstick worth of George Floyd memes out there like this too. I say let people have fun. There are like 8b people on this planet, and far more important people than him are dying, like the people in gaza.
true.
Yeah, the mouthpiece of the fascists shouldn’t be made fun of like the fascists themselves! Propaganda spewers and those who spread hate on their massive platforms don’t deserve this!!1!
I hope you can see why your statement is just absolutely laughable.
It’s not the point that **he **is made fun of, but that his murder is made fun of.
Sounds like a distinction without a difference. Why is it ok to make fun of the fascist mouthpiece, but not him being turned into a short term and tasteful water display? Why is it not ok to mock the death of a hateful person? Is it because we might make the people who look for literally any reason to be mad, mad? Or is it because we need to give hagiographic praise to the fucking moron who could barely win staged debates against college kids?
I’m not going to pretend swiss cheese Charlie wasn’t worth less than a pile of moth old dog turds just because the fuck was murdered. He was a bad person who did bad things and deserves to have his legacy dragged through the dirt.
definitely not that. I don’t know. I think it is one thing to make fun of his demise, and another to make fun of his being murdered.
Maybe it was only the specific, and graphic picture that i found objectionable.
Advocating for a thing to be banned is to advocate for violence against the people who do that thing; the fact that the state does the violent acts doesn’t change that.
Charlie Kirk spent a good chunk of his life advocating for the abortion ban which has harmed and killed people. In my book Charlie Kirk is, at least in part, responsible for all that harm. He deserved what he got at least as much as any healthcare CEO.
FWIW I’m not advocating for either Christo-fascist podcasters or healthcare CEOs to be killed. That doesn’t mean it can’t be funny when it happens, though.
I think the bar for whether or not you should be please about someone’s death (note that that’s not the same as advocating for it) is whether that person made the world a worse or better place from the point of view of the majority.
With someone like Charlie Kirk it’s easy, even by the standards of his own supporters he made the world a worse place because at least some of his supporters will have been hurt and killed by the things he supported and advocated for. After all the shooter could have decided he wanted to shoot up the crowd and in a way it would be Charlie’s fault that the shooter was allowed to have a gun without a background check.
He literally said that people dying as a result of gun violence is no reason to regulate gun ownership. I suppose in a way he died for his beliefs.
Like most conservatives he’s only a fan of freedom when it doesn’t personally affect him.
it’s Goebbels lite.
That could be an unfortunate consequence of this whole thing.
We are cursed to live in interesting times.
wht could be an unfortunate consequence? Charlie Kirk was Goebbels lite, and he’s dead. He deserves this treatment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horst-Wessel-Lied
I think you considerably overestimate his level of influence. Just because Trump’s cult isn’t letting a good shooting go to waste doesn’t mean he was anywhere near as important or influential in life as they are acting like now.
Hard disagree. Those that propagate and spread hate are just as culpable.
Honestly I’d laugh at both, and then immediately think it’s fucked up that I laughed, and that it’s in bad taste. Just like this meme, but it’s still funny to me.
Dark humour goes both ways, if you can dish it out you should be able to take it.
Kirk was certainly not Putin, I see where you’re coming from. For the most part, Kirk used words like we do here (just with 1mil times the hate and platform size). When Putin uses words people die, directly on his orders, which is why only one of them deserves/ed prison.
The right way to fight Kirk was to obliterate his logic without laying a hand on him. Hateful idiocy is to be overcome by us collectively with our heart & brain, not brawn.
The ‘right way’ has been tried for the better part of 20 years. If you think these fucking chuds can be defeated with logic, you’re not familiar with conservative media in the slightest.
I’m not advocating for his murder in the slightest, but let’s not pretend these people lived in a logical environment.