Comment on Charlie Kirk in his own words.

• Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I didnt say any of them were fine in context. My point was, that the context made each quote mean a different thing. Rather than just being blanket statements about race or gender or whatever.

  Hate the man for who he was, not for what some ragebait heavily edited clip told you he was.

  source

  • titanicx@lemmy.zip ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    This is who he was.

    source

    • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      No, it wasnt. Thats the point of context. You want to hate him, I have no issue with that. I dont really like him either. But the difference between us is that I hate him for who he actually was, you hate him based on twitter posts that were meant to monetise your outrage. We are not the same.

      source

      • titanicx@lemmy.zip ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        So brave of you.

        source
      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        the difference between us is that I hate him for who he actually was, you hate him based on twitter posts that were meant to monetise your outrage. We are not the same.

        yeah you’re some child, who’s obsessed with someone getting something that they may have not earned, because you say so.

        or you’re an adult who’s blaming their mediocre life on minorities getting opportunities.

        either way it’s just sad.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Not what he said. Again, edited. The full context is that he was saying that society pays a price for the nice things it has. His other example was cars.

  “You will never live in a society where you have an armed citizenry and you won’t have a single gun death. That is nonsense. It’s drivel. But … I think it’s worth it. I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.”

  “Having an armed citizenry comes with a price, and that is part of liberty. Driving comes with a price – 50,000, 50,000, 50,000 people die on the road every year. That’s a price. You get rid of driving, you’d have 50,000 less auto fatalities. But we have decided that the benefit of driving – speed, accessibility, mobility, having products, services is worth the cost of 50,000 people dying on the road. … We should have an honest and clear reductionist view of gun violence, but we should not have a utopian one.”

  Up to you if think hes right about the 2A being a nice thing for society to have. He thought it was in order for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. Personally, I didnt agree with him for a multitude of reasons. But I disagreed with what he said, not what he didnt say.

  source

  • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    As a non American, I don’t understand how this longer quote is any different from what was said by the person you are replying to.

    source

    • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Im not American, and I can see the difference between “paying a price for a greater good/convenience” and “Fuck them kids!”.

      God given right to have guns is a crazy statement. I certainly hope youre not thinking that Im defending the man? Im only holding him to account for his actual words, not the heavily edited ragebait that being passed around social media. What he actually said was enough.

      source

      • monotremata@lemmy.ca ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        You keep calling it “rage bait” to quote him, but I think that’s missing a big aspect of this. The man was very intentionally phrasing these things in ways that he knew would upset people who didn’t agree with him. There’s a whole culture around that on the far right, where you’re supposed to say things that would enrage “the left” because that’s how people know you’re “based” and not “woke.” And obviously he’s not worried about people being offended because anyone who would be offended isn’t his target audience, while people who are his target audience will get a dopamine hit from hearing him offend those other people. It’s win-win for him. So with the thing about the pilots, he knows full well that the standards are the same, but he also knows that his audience are going to be sympathetic to the idea of being uncomfortable around black people, so the facts be damned, he’s gonna pretend that’s a rational argument against DEI.

        So I don’t think it’s the clip videos that are the “rage bait” here. I think that’s part and parcel of the whole Charlie Kirk idiom.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        He is literally saying he thinks a few deaths a year are worth it. Not to mention we have a school shooting every 3 weeks in the country. And if he were asked about the one that happened the day he was killed, do you suppose he’d use his platform to demand better gun safety laws?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I have heard the entire thing. And I don’t see how what you wrote is any better. It doesn’t change the statement at all.

    source

    • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      [deleted]

      source

      • Objection@lemmy.ml ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        “Charlie Kirk said that a certain number of kids dying is an acceptable cost of having guns.”

        “You brainwashed idiots are making stuff up and falling for outrage bait! What he said, if you look at the full quote, is that a certain number of kids dying is an acceptable cost of having guns, AND a certain amount of traffic fatalities is worth it to have cars.”

        “How does that additional context in any way change the relevant part that we find horrible?”

        “You should just know, and if you can’t figure out why I think it changes it you’re a fucking idiot.”

        What a conversation.

        I suppose this is the part where you take offense to me summarizing your position instead of using direct quotes, while not explaining how anything you said is actually meaningfully different.

        source

        • -> View More Comments