Charlie Kirk's beliefs

[MsAmerica]

If You're Wondering What Charlie Kirk Believed In, Here Are 14 Real Quotes
In light of his death, Charlie Kirk's legacy is being remembered through these viral quotes.
BuzzFeed

https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexalisitza/viral-charlie-kirk-quotes

@TheClaaaw
When you copy and paste the lists of Kirk quotes written by angry reddit goblins, why not edit out the ones that have already been debunked, some on this very thread?

There is no context that makes the phrase 'prowling blacks' ok to use, except the context of someone saying 'it's racist and unacceptable to use the phrase prowling blacks'. Guess what, that wasn't the context in which Kirk used it.

Please explain in what context “prowling blacks” is acceptable?

If by complete coincidence he thought these four people who all just so happened to be black women were stupid and had not earned their success (which far exceeded his own) then presumably he would have been able to provide a coherent explanation as to why they have achieved so much and far more than he had. He didn’t, did he?

Why did he even mention the fact that they were black, or query the qualification of black pilots and not white ones, or make comments about allegedly “moronic” black women working in shops if he didn’t consider the fact they were black relevant to the alleged point he was supposedly attempting to make? Why did he say that the Civil Rights Bill was a mistake?

You have demanded evidence of the things he said even though it is available to all in the public domain and posters have provided it: direct quotes, even videos of him saying these things which are unequivolcally and objectively racist.

What evidence did he provide for his assertion that these women including Michelle Obama are not intelligent and that they “took a slot from a white person”? Should he not also have had to provide evidence for his assertions, as you are demanding from others? Or is this yet another situation where different rules apply to different people depending on their genetalia, religion, sexual orientation, skin colour, etc?

In the absence of any evidence or rationale from you to support your position (and plenty to the contrary), his views are clearly exposed for precisely what they were: very clearly expressed racism, misogynism, homophobia, and general hatred of anybody who didn’t want to live in the Handmaid’s-Tale-esque vision of society that he was attempting to have imposed by force on everyone else in the US.

In the context that its completely made up, like the "black women lack brain processing power" quote was.

The point for me is I don't really care what he said - you can make your own judgements on whether you think it is racist, misogynistic or whatever (I would hope you would actually search for the full conversations though rather than rely on partisan sources) but it about the fact that somehow opinions are a justification or reason for a murder.

His opinions are actuallu no different to what people generally thought 50 years ago, still do in Catholicism and other elements of Christianity. But what we have now seems to have spawned from the rhetoric that 'Words are Violence' that has emerged over the past few decades. It used to be that "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" but that is all in the past now, people literally believe words are violence.

And it is coming from one direction - the left. A report by NCRI showed this very clearly:

• 55% of left of centre people think it is at least somewhat justified to assiniate Trump (compared to 38% overall)
• 49% of the left believe that it is at least somewhat justified to assinate Elon Musk (compared to 31% overall)

I guess if you believe that words are violence, then this is where we end up.

People have provided links to the full clips so you can view the entire discussions that the quotes came from if you wish.

People have provided the dates of his podcasts so you can look them up and watch them yourself.

People have provided direct quotes which could never be deemed acceptable in any “context” by any reasonable person.

People have provided links to articles from reputable news organisations whose lawyers fact check everything they publish very rigorously because otherwise they can be sued for libel.

How much “context” are we expected to provide? A verbatim transcript of every single word the man said since birth? Clearly it still would not satify you even if it was possible and you’ll continue to swear that night is day and ignore all of the evidence that you don’t want to see, which really could not be any clearer.

@TheClaaaw

In the absence of any evidence or rationale from you to support your position (and plenty to the contrary),

This is ironic, because people on this thread are outright lying about hearing the words "black women" in the video clip on this, but you are moaning at me about lack of evidence and rationale.

@TheClaaaw
Yes people have provided direct quotes -
which were false

They have provided clips to watch -
Which didn't say what the quotes said they would

Then they just brazen it out like it didn't matter.

If this were a criminal trial it would have collapsed, and the prosecution probably disbarred.

He used the phrase 'prowling blacks' and as frantically as his supporters try to twist everything he said into something more palatable, no one can quite manage to erase that one. He said the words 'Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.'

Again, try saying that statement in the workplace and see what happens.

Wow, 38% of people think Trump should be assisinated?! The more disturbing statistics (if they are true) in your post are the “overall” ones. It shows what a violent mentality is prevalent in the US and what a dangerously unstable society it has become, largely stoked by the actions of people like Kirk whose stated purpose was to impose his views by force, not reach consensus.

This should be a huge warning to people in the UK that fact matter, “opinions” are not facts and aren’t all equally valid if they are clearly irrational and undermine the law, and that divisive extremists of any description are a danger to society as I said in my first post on this thread. Consensus won’t be reached by authoritarian extremists and ration debate without denial of evidenced facts needs to return before anything will improve. I won’t hold my breath though given how many people are falling for similar divisive rhetoric here and think Tommy Robinson, Farage etc are a solution.

People really do seem determined to learn the hard way, yet again. Very sad.

You describe Charlie Kirk as imposing his views by force - how was he doing that?

The quote has been stated in full and a reference provided so you can watch it yourself.

Please explain why you think his comments were acceptable and not racist?

Just out of curiosity - is it the phrase itself you are objecting to or is the idea that that gangs mainly black individuals don’t exist?

we know there is gang culture in big cities. We know black on black crime is a massive issue and also terribly sad for black youths. we know there is an issue with violence across races also Which is a growing issue

I agree the phrase is very provocative and I haven’t heard the discussion where it was used but what is the racist objection- the phrase itself or what it is describing?

He is criticising DEI policies that make judgements based on a category like race, not on the race itself. Do you not understand the difference?

What about Trump supporters shouting 'hang that bitch' about Hilary Clinton at Trump rallies? Has anyone done a survey on what percentage of people on the right support the assassination of Biden/Harris/Clinton/AOC (the last of whom routinely receives deranged rape and death threats on a continual basis)?

I’m very concerned that you think there is one.

Please think about it for even a minute, it's really not that hard?

I am objecting to the phrase, which is racist.

You mention 'black on black' crime but the quote refers to 'black on white' crime.

All of his recorded statements about black people are made up?

OK.

If people agreed with this man’s views, for god’s sake, have the balls to just own it.

The main chant about Hilary was to 'lock her up' and the occasion when the 'hang the bitch' happened was just that, once.

But note - these are actually law abiding methods - locking up is via a lawful method, and even hanging, despite our queasiness about it here, is legal in many US states.

There is a difference here!

That was the entire purpose of Turning Point. He was a political campaigner and set up political organisations which were lobbying the US Government to implement his views into law: working closely with the Trump administration to lobby for policies to restrict women’s rights in law, implement racist policies, have teachers/ public servants fired who disagreed with his policy objectives etc. He categorically was not simply stating his personal views that he wished to live by in his own private life: he was campaigning to have his “values” made mandatory for everyone else to have to comply with as well.

Yes but as I said there is an issue with black on back crime but also there is far more inter race confrontation in the USA than there has ever been

are there gangs of black men looking to cause confrontation with white people for instance? I have no idea but in big American cities it is a possibility these days and potentially vice versa. That was why I was curious if it was the phrase or an objection to something that might actually be happening. (I honestly don’t know either way)

Not exactly "BY FORCE"

In your own words - lobbying, campaigning. That is the lawful way to do things. Democratic.

Not assassinating someone to shut them up.

But that is how democracy works though - people campaign to have their views heard and implemented into policy. Lobbying is a huge thing in politics on both sides of the political divide.

voters go to the ballot box to vote for the person who represents the policies they wish to be implemented.