Charlie Kirks wife forgives the killer

I think DEI is quite a broad term that can cover a lot of attitudes and practices. It can be rigid affirmative action hiring quotas like "50% of our pilot hires must be female or ethnic minorities within 3 years", or it can be saying "not enough people with physical disabilities are applying for roles in our organisation, do we need to adapt hiring practices, reach out to disability groups or publicise key role models in the organisation?" Kirk was very against the former but IMO he seemed to be unconcerned by the latter.

Does your industry's version of 'DEI' hire straight white males only?
I mean you joke but there is a little bit of that. There have been programmes to encourage neuro diverse people, or those with diverse gender identities. These are often straight white males.

@Underthinker I'm quite confused by your post. There is DEI in your industry, though not officially, and it's a kind of DEI Kirk would get behind? This is pretty funny, given Kirk's stance on DEI.

Does your industry's version of 'DEI' hire straight white males only? 😁

Percentage of said demographic below the poverty line, which would be Native Americans. Non-Hispanic whites would be the largest by raw numbers however

I wouldn't say at the business end, I go along to the odd presentation and have done little bits of mentoring. We don't have quotas or anything like that, but we sometimes reach out to graduates/undergraduaates from particular demographics or backgrounds etc. It's very much the non controversial end of DEI. Even Kirk wouldnt be offended I think, as he was known to reach out to black conservative influencers and try to boost their careers and get them into mentoring programmes etc.

The thing that amuses me about right wingers continually decrying DEI is their number one criticism of it: 'it's not based on merit!'

But, the very thing that causes the need for DEI - education - isn't merit based at all, it's financially based (best state schools; higher house prices - or simply private schools). And as soon as you attempt to level that particular playing field to make it 'merit' based, the gnashing of right wing teeth can be heard in Australia. And the irony - nay hypocrisy - of this stance is completely lost on them.

Saying all that, I am not at the business end of DEI where you obviously are. What are your hiring requirements? Certain number of minority races? Women? You say some groups are being ignored. Which groups?

So, just a hunch, then. And you wonder why you've been accused of racism in this thread.

What do you mean by 'poorest group'? Group with the highest proportion of people living below the poverty line? Or group who's membership includes the most people living furthest below the poverty line?

Because we have a lot of different demographics in America. African Americans are not actually the poorest group, btw.

I think it's mixed. The aim is noble, the ethics are debatable (there are strong pros as well as cons), the application is sometimes good and sometimes flawed.

In my industry I find DEI initiatives are frequently targeted at a couple of demographics that are already quite well included and established, and ignore others.

What's your view of DEI? No need to answer if you haven't the inclination.

He was probably like a lot of others with his views. Don't hate women, gay people and POC, provided they stay in their lane. Exist largely invisibly in their God given position in the world, well beneath his own, unless required to be of service. If they do this, then he would deign to treat them with kindness (as we saw him do when for reasons of their own, they fawned to him) But should they get above themselves, wanting rights he didn't think they need or deserve, or worse, start posing a threat to his own position, he was furious at their audacity and determined to put them in their place.
In some ways this made him more dangerous than people who do openly hate, as it least you know where you are with them and there's no false and conditional regard to blur the lines.

I disagreed with a decent amount of what he said. I don't think he was motivated by hate though. For every quote that "proves" he hated gay people, women, ethnic minorities etc there is plenty of evidence to suggest he didn't. He certainly had the kind of sexism that a lot of conservative american Christian men have, and he had a stong dislike of many left wing ideas like DEI.

It’s pathological at this point. Absolutely bizarre behaviour. It comes down to the fact that you can’t rationalise with such intransigent irrationality and hypocrisy. It’s a waste of energy engaging with people who will insist black is white. Best to just leave them to it, thoughts and prayers 🤣🙏🏻

People who celebrate the death of others are rare, and wholly objectionable.

As far as Kirk is concerned, I agree with the notion of a defending people's rights to an opinion. But, when those opinions are as divisive and often hate-filled as Kirks, you're like no other liberal I've ever met. After all his views were the very antithesis of 'live and let live'.

Or maybe people have drawn a different conclusion to you after listening to him?

Crazy theory, I know!

This killing was gruesome, and his widow and children are grieving.

I am not sure if her words can sway the judiciary in passing sentence on the killer, but if she has not asked for a life sentence instead of the death penalty then I don't believe her words about forgiveness at all.

But maybe she has made a statement asking for removal of the death sentence, and I could have missed it. If so, she is to be admired. If she hasn't, that's a no from me.

The racist/misogynistic context of his quotes has been repeatedly explained, but people persist in sealioning for more.

Yes liberal, so respect others' right to have whatever religion, beliefs or views they want.

I have no problem with Kirk's views being criticised, but I objected to the quotes that were taken very out of context, a few that were outright false, and the small minority of people who openly celebrated.

Ok. You'll know more than me. I don't really have a clue about crime in America except logic tells me that pretty much everyone is against crime. Just with different views on how to resolve it.

@RingoJuice Can I ask you one question on this, and then I'll leave you to it.

You say this: 'I don’t believe that poverty and crime are highly linked'.

What is this based on? A hunch? Feelings? Because it's not based on evidence (as we have already gone over!). I'm really curious to know what your opinion is based on.

I don’t think it is hard wired. Bill Clinton was harsh on crime (three strikes was popularly attributed to him) and by the late 90s, people started to move into cities again.

I think they’ve been captured by elements that are softer on crime. I hope they find their way out of it. I would vote for someone like 1990s Bill Clinton.

This really sounds like ‘real communism has never been tried’.

For one, I don’t believe that poverty and crime are highly linked. Some impoverished groups in America do not commit a large portion of crime.

So what does that leave you with? Changing the culture?

I wish you and other optimists good luck with that, I would like it to work but as I said, I shouldn’t have to wait 20 years for it to work (or not) when we can just incarcerate criminals today as well as tackle whatever root causes you think will actually change things. I don’t think it’s reasonable to ask us to wait a generation or two for something that may or may not work

@Underthinker I guess I'm struggling to compute how any liberal would be defending Kirk's views.

Though, I'm also struggling to understand where you now stand politically having previously sat on the left, and not the centrist kind of left (not that you need to explain yourself to me). Maybe you've gone full circle and come out the other side! 😁

I wish you well.

I'm not sure I charged at PlasticTrees, maybe I did. There's a nearly full thread called "Charlie Kirk's beliefs", a decent chunk of which is Plastic Trees & a couple of others, demanding I watch & defend this or that video of Kirk, ignoring the fact that I already have, calling me racist, and generally insulting my ability to make an argument. I'm not right wing, I am quite stubborn though.

Except for obviously removing the person from society for a finite period of time.

@BerylSnow which in the case of recidivists and those beyond reform is of course a worthwhile aim in itself. When someone who has been burgling for years finally gets sent away, it gives the community some peace.

The way that it's used in the US though is counter-productive. But when private companies are making a profit out of government funding, and selling slave labour to plantations then they're going to lobby to maintain the status quo. The Thirteenth Amendment has a handy little loophole that meant that heavy punishments for trivial matters could be used to continue enslaving black people even after the abolition of slavery.