Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
There's still Candace Owens, Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, Michael Knowles, Benny Johnson, Erika Kirk and others. Candace Owens who's just as good at debating, and has done a lot of the same kind of college debates, was a very close friend of and worked extensively with Charlie Kirk. They've all been saying that they'll all keep Charlie Kirk's legacy going full force.
Perhaps in some right wing circles, probably yeah, but hardly in Europe widely. He is more known here for his comments on Ukraine and Russia and cooky comments on some European countries and on NATO. So I don't see why he'd be given a moment of silence in the EU.
I don't think you need to be Right or Left wing to support free speech. For western democratic and free nations like those in Europe, Britain, Canada, Australia and NZ we have lived by free speech at least since the Bills of Rights around 200 years ago or more.
I don't know. It seems out of character to the person you see accommodating people who even called him all sorts of names ect. This is why I think its a silly game that people bring up all these things trying to find fault.
Well all I can go on is how he actually lived qand put into practice that principle of free speech. The very institutions he worked in and engaged with were the cultivators of deplatforming and cancelling alternative beliefs. KIrk is in there giving those very people a platform and bring open dialogue. Which we know is the key to stopping hate and violence as it allows people their say and to enage face to face and talk things out.
He didn't create a climate of free speech. He created a climate of performative, shallow "debate" that he used to enrich himself. If he had been interested in creating a "climate of free speech," he wouldn't have compiled a Professor Watchlist that called out and attacked professors for engaging in speech that Kirk/TPUSA found objectionable. Contrary to what some have claimed, the list isn't primarily about calling out discrimination against conservatives. Grab any sample and you'll find that, even if you take TPUSA's allegations at face value, the majority are only guilty of advancing left-wing ideas, not any sort of malfeasance. Of those who are alleged to have done something wrong, most of them involve tweeting mean things. Few even allege any improper conduct in the classroom.
They're all skilled debaters in their own way with years of experience. They don't need to ape Charlie Kirk to get the same job done.
That people are celebrating and offering winner badges to what is basically making arguements that Kirk derserved what he got is the problem. Regardless of what you or anyone else claims there is no justification in the murder of someone expressing their beliefs.
Not quite sure what this portion had to do with the quote portion you replied to.
Not around Europe really. Except for the few things mentioned, probably best known for his pro Russia stances on Ukraine and Crimea. And over here for saying that "Finland is very Russian" and we should have never been allowed in NATO. Which did earn him a collective "well *bleep* you too" from here.
I am mentioning this because this is what I know him for. These are things he has said or views he held, very recently. It does disservice for honesty to ignore and not acknowledge them.
This is all just a long speech that had nothing to do with what the topic was on the discussion before, which was why he wasn't given a minute of silence in the EU, nor address any of the things mentioned.
From your link (dated 2020):That people are celebrating and offering winner badges to what is basically making arguements that Kirk derserved what he got is the problem. Regardless of what you or anyone else claims there is no justification in the murder of someone expressing their beliefs.
The reality is Kirk is not the only one. There has been hateful and violent speech and even calls from Dems for the death of certain figures. Even its celebration. Polls show around a 1/4 to a 1/3 of young Dems would support political violence and even the killing of opponents who disagreed.
This thinking has been cultivated in the very universities Kirk was engaging with. We had Leftist media trying to blame Kirk and are now sacked. In fact a number of people including teachers at these universities have been dismissed for such hateful responses.
The violence and murder we see now is the result of this rhetoric full stop. That people are attacking kirk and not the violence and killing and even celebrating or remaining silent on condemining this only to want to conflate the two is gross as far as I see. It reminds me of how Hamas was justified and the Jews attacked as the bad ones and the rise of antisemetism. Comes from the same evil spirit.
Yes it comes from both sides. But right now the majority is coming from the radical Left and the evidence is coming out in how they used their power to cultivate such a culture of violence, hate and division.
Any healing requires people to look at themselves and the reactions we are seeing in trying to justify this act and even celebrate it is only making it worse. Still the ideological capture is blinding people and in fact making them double down I think. .
The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the United States
The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the United States
The United States faces a growing terrorism problem that will likely worsen in the next year, particularly around the 2020 presidential election. The most significant threat likely comes from white supremacists, though anarchists and religious extremists could also pose a threat.www.csis.org
