To believe the right and left have more in common than we think

[TheKhakiQuail]

I am saddened by Charlie Kirk's murder, not because I share his political or religious views, but because he was a young father who had ideas and was willing to talk and debate with anyone. It makes me even more sad to see how many people online are celebrating, laughing and mocking his death because they think he is a 'hateful' person. Most of us share the same basic values - we want our loved ones safe, healthy and happy, we value freedom and autonomy, we have compassion. People just do the math differently. One person who values bodily autonomy and human life will support abortion and oppose mandatory vaccination, another will come to the opposite conclusion. CK was willing to be intellectually honest about the fact that all such decisions come with trade-offs - he supported the 2nd amendment because he saw gun ownership as a tool to maintain the other freedoms in the constitution, and acknowledged that the cost of that is some gun deaths every year. I am incredibly grateful to live in a country with tight gun control, I think he was wrong, but he didn't want gun deaths. I am sick of people acting like he supported gun deaths or would be happy if his daughter was raped and pregnant at 9 and forced to have the baby - he is just willing to accept that that is the potential cost of his strongly pro-life stance. Just as I am not happy about 'babies being murdered' but am willing to acknowledge that my stance on abortion accepts the ending of human lives (at a very early stage) to give women bodily autonomy. I am of the left, but the thing that is driving me nuts about 'my side' at the moment is the unwillingness to hear what the right actually believe, and recognise that it is underpinned by many of the same values and humanity, even if they do the math differently on political solutions.

I agree with you OP and I like the idea of ‘doing the maths differently’. The very first person to reply with ‘no, he’s evil’, on your thread proves your point. It’s just easier (and lazier) to shut down the other side with ‘nah, I’m not listening’ or suggest they’re evil or stupid.

If you watch CK in context, often his arguments made perfect sense from a logical point of view. You might not like them morally, but philosophically it was logical.

He was interested in unpicking how people had arrived at their views. I watched one the other night which went along these lines.
CK: What is a woman?
Student: Anyone who wants to be a woman is one
CK: No, that’s a personal statement, that doesn’t tell me what a woman is? If I asked you ‘what is a fish and you said ‘anyone can be a fish, that still doesn’t tell me what a fish actually is’. And on they sparred until it became clear the student had started from a faulty baseline.

So much of what people believe can be based on an illogical assumption or acceptance of an ideology and when you debate those things, that’s when we begin to see common ground.

It’s something I’m really excited about - division is often broken down when we actually listen to each other instead of starting from the assumption the other person is an idiot.

CK helped students to look at why they believed what they believed. I try to do this whenever I can before uncritically accepting something is true. I researched Andrew Tate just to see if there was anything remotely worthy in what he was saying. Everyone was telling me he was a nasty racist but I wanted to know for myself.

After looking at loads of his stuff, I do now agree and don’t think there’s anything worthy in his content but I do now at least understand his ‘working out’ and can see why young men are drawn to him. I might just be able to help my young nephews from falling into that trap because I understand the maths of Andrew Tate.

I think most people are quite central in their beliefs but have certain viewpoints which are left or right.
When people talk to each other generally, they find they have more in common than differences but certain issues suddenly become tribal.
Everyone has a label pushed onto them for their views. Terf, antivaxxer, covidiot, maga, woke, patriot as examples.
When you’re aligned with one, then you’re the enemy of everyone who is not even if we agree on many other things and have the same struggles of paying bills, going to work, raising children.

I am GC as it happens.
But I am not naive enough to believe that men who know what women are- Trump, Vance, CK- treat them any better.

I was surprised at how many people did know who he was, particularly young teens/tweens. I’ve got a fascination in American politics so I’ve always geeked out on YouTube. I assumed no one in my UK circle would know who he was but it was the main topic of conversation when I got into work. Several colleagues were saying their teenagers were all incredibly shocked. He had far more influence in the UK than you realise.

At least he actually debated his views and listened to opposite views! He didn't just try and shut them down by labelling them as "Evil"

YOU are the one spouting Dogma! Take your head out of your arse so you can hear people's views - even if they are abhorrent to yours.

This post makes more sense than any others I've seen in recent weeks.

It's a massive oversimplification and incredibly reductionist to pitch The Left v The Right. The vast majority of the electorate are centrists, for a start - that's why political parties are so desperate to attract floating voters.

My own values align more with Green, LibDems and Labour than with Conservative. I would rather vote Conservative than see Reform win my local seat, though, if it was a race between the two.

This left v right mentality is the dumbing down of different combinations of beliefs and values, and it does nobody any favours.

I'd never heard of this man before yesterday. I'm incredibly sorry that his family witnessed his death, and violence is never the answer. Simultaneously, I find it abhorrent that a man's pro-life stance could effectively ruin his daughter's life if she was ever unfortunate enough to have been raped and pregnant. I think there are very extreme views on all kinds of matters that affect humanity. But most fall somewhere broadly in the middle of a kaleidoscopic spectrum and choose a political party of 'best fit' with their personal beliefs, at any point in their life.

Extremists of all types have a lot in common.

Remember, Hitler’s extreme right party called itself National SOCIALIST in at attempt to get the workers on side.

One of the reason the Far Left and religious extremists seem to like each other too is that although they disagree on a
lot (eg women’s rights, LGBT rights etc) is that they think that they can help
each others cause.

The Far Left court the religious vote because there are sufficient numbers to get them elected in some places, and the religious extremists vote for them because they know the Far Left will create a climate in which criticism of some of the extreme practices of some minority religions will not be tolerated because it is seen as disrespectful of or stoking hate against minorities.

Yes, as a centrist this is my view too. Lots of extremists on both sides accept harm being done to those they disagree with because they don't really see them as people, regardless of any fine words to the contrary.

That's polite.Not sure why you assume I haven't " heard" him.

My thoughts exactly. The whole thing is bizarre. It's sad that a young guy has been killed, but horrific deaths happen every day. Many of them in our own country.

So just lazy then?

Is this the polite discourse you are championing? Ad hominem? I have watched his videos and read his views.
But OP uses the word " understand" in a different sense.

It’s always interesting isn’t it? I asked my Student years ago. If you had the opportunity to assassinate Hitler would it be appropriate to do so?
And every single one of them said yes
Obviously we then put a bit more meat on the bones but fundamentally it was agreed that eradicate in that one person may have saved millions of lives
I wonder if we did the same on Wednesday

I think a huge number of young people had heard of him and discussed him a lot (I work with 15-18 year olds). They didnt all agree with him. But he wasnt some unheard of figure. They enjoyed the debate and challenge.

They are shocked by this. Tiktok is constant for these young people. They will all have seen the actual video of him dying. Which is slightly different impact than a news report on the BBC saying 'people died in a bomb attack'

My personal view is that whilst his view were in complete opposition to mine, killing someone because they disagree with you is wrong.

Thinking that his views justify the action is a worrying place to be.

With respect, you're talking nonsense.

Charlie Kirk was happy for other people's kids to get shot and other people's daughters to get raped.

I guarantee you that until the second his blood was cascading down his white t shirt Charlie Kirk didn't think it would happen to him. He was happy to take the far right shilling and spout devisive propaganda. He profited from making society more hateful and he paid the ultimate price for it.

And I haven't seen anyone celebrating his death. Democratic politicians in the US have been respectful and compassionate.

The right without any evidence are already branding the left as terrorists and trying to martyr Charlie. Whereas they have studiously avoided commenting on the much more frequent right wing violence. As soon as Melissa Hortman was shot MAGA mouthpieces were pumping out news that the crime was perpetrated by the left wing radicals we hear so much about. It wasn't of course. MAGA are liars, the truth holds no weight to them.

Trump's government are an atrocious collection of amoral, power hungry, money grabbing monsters intent on political capture leading to dictatorship for their own ends.

As a dyed in the wool floating voter with absolutely centrist views, i can tell you as I watch on in horror that MAGA and the right are not the same as the Democratic party or those with more socialist ideals. They're worlds apart.

Exactly - horseshoe theory was debunked years ago for being too simplistic.

I don't think many people have said he 'deserved' to die, merely that they're not sad about it, and that the uptick in political violence is something he's contributed to. It isn't ghoulish or disrespectful to say that.

Think of all the political violence that the Maga movement has caused: more violent arrests and deportations, more hate crimes, more women dying because they can't get abortions.

I don’t get the “sadness” for people treating him
as he treated others?

He mocked the deaths of Palestinians, spent years mocking the murder of George Floyd and mocked the brutal beating of Nancy Pelosi’s husband.

You reap what you sow. (I wonder if Andrew Tate dies if people will be making this same argument.)

I think this is fair.

But i am still concerned about the wider implications of just shooting people you disagree with.

I think op was possibly trying to have a wider debate than just Charlie Kirk and the best way to deal with extremist views.

Maybe it is to not give them space but I did think at least ensuring I understood thier motivation and actual stance might be useful in countering the movement.

I’ve seen a lot of people alluding to messages suggesting he deserved to die on social media unfortunately. Many of them from people I would have considered myself to be politically aligned to.

The man held some beliefs which I consider to be odious, my sadness that he has died is the impact on change.

Your first part is a bit manipulative.

Accepting a price for a position is not the same as being happy for it to happen or about it.

E.g.

I accept that to secure the security of a country, young soilders will die. That does not mean that I am happy for young soilders to die. Just that I view it as the lesser of two evils

E.g.

I accept that to secure the safety of the vulnerable, reducing educational quality for children during covid was required. That does not mean I am happy for children to receive a worse education.

This carries through to pro-gun Americans (which I am 100% in disagreement with). Accepting that owning guns will lead to more gun deaths, doesn't mean you are happy for children to be shot.

horrendous and unacceptable that he was killed.

he should be remembered for exactly who he was.

Extremists from both sides always have certain things in common. Highly motivated by self interest, and happy for other people to be sacrificed to protect and extend their own rights. Big advocates of social control and silencing, neutralising and oppressing people they see as a threat to their own interests. Extremists who want to gain power are called the hard left. Extremists who want to gatekeep their own power are called the hard right.

As a dyed in the wool floating voter with absolutely centrist views, i can tell you as I watch on in horror that MAGA and the right are not the same as the Democratic party or those with more socialist ideals. They're worlds apart.

They're really not. The Democrats were happy for women to be erased as a sex class in law, and for children to be sterilised on no medical evidence. They're not The Good Guys any more than the Republicans are, and their choice to try to impose top down ideological policies on the US electorate without widespread public support is part of why they now have Trump in power there. The US Democrats sit to the right of UK Labour.

No one's The Good Guys. Plenty of democrats 'spout divisive propaganda', and 'profited from making society more hateful'. Do you think the left aren't authoritarian? They are.

The simplistic good versus evil narrative, coupled what seems to be a growing tendency for people to outsource their thinking and get their 'correct' opinions in a job lot, gives opportunity to those with extreme views. Charlie Kirk didn't come to prominence by accident , people like him are gaining a platform because so many of the electorate feel unheard and unrepresented. Shouting about evil and spewing hate and all that tribalist hyperbole contributes to the problem, it doesn't help solve it.

Ask, Why did some people listen to Kirk? The answer isn't because they're all evil or stupid.