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

@CantCallItLove You have to protect your sanity here, I think it could genuinely lead to burn out when trying to engage with people who hold so tightly to such toxic beliefs and continue to minimise and obfuscate. They are too intransigent to reflect, they just double down. Definitely important to have boundaries for yourself and walk away from it, you’ve shown boundless patience in response to so much disingenuity and nonsense. We are in flat earthier territory at this point. Enjoy your day away from it all!

No one has claimed to hate Kirk. We hate his hateful and damaging rhetoric, we he stood for and promoted.
Kirk doesn't claim to hate black people or women, but you seem confideent to assert that he does. The reason it seemed to me posters on this thread hate him, rather than his rhetoric, was the rejection of evidence counter to the idea of him being a bigot. If you hated the message not the person, it seemed to me you would welcome doubt and not react angrily to it. I'm glad if you say you didn't though, hate is bad for you mentally.

It truly is sad and utterly perplexing to me that you are defending Kirk still, when if he had wanted, you would have no rights or body autonomy. You, and your daughter, would be forced to go through the trauma of a pregnancy you didn’t want, even in cases of rape.
Luckily your opinion on me is already rock bottom, so cannot get worse when I tell you I'm male. (Still very pro choice as is my wife who shares my opinion of CK). I lurk on MN to follow a few topics, and try not to post but have gotten slightly carried away with the CK stuff.

You’ve not explained why you keep defending Kirk.
I think i have explained, but it is understandable to miss that in a long thread.

I began "defending" Kirk, because I saw misinformation being shared about a murder victim. I don't share Kirk's politics, but I like that he would debate his views openly. I think truth and tolerance are important. I think many people want to make celebrities and politicians into hate figures, whether that's Kirk, Corbyn, Farage or Greta Thunberg. If any such person tragically died, I would want to point out incorrect or misleading information written about them, even if that misinformation was amongst other valid criticisms.

That’s some serious gaslighting you’ve got going on there.

RIP Charlie, a good man with sound principles and beliefs. Those that didn't agree with your beliefs are those that were unable to live up to your standard. That's the top and bottom of it.

17/09/25 09:51 Underthinker

I’ve said I don’t know if hes [sic] racist or not. I might look into the “prowling blacks”comment later.

18/09/25 08:21 Underthinker

I would need to trawl hours of footage to find the exact quotes mentioned, and see what the context is. There are dozens of them and each will have 5 or 10 minutes of relevant footage around it.

18/09/25 09:14 Underthinker

As for “prowling blacks” I said I hadn’t looked into it, because I only have limited time, and it takes time to go through all these accusations & respond to them.

Yet in the 24 hours since that last quoted post you’ve had time to make a further 19 posts on this thread yet allegedly still “not had time to look into it”. How very convenient.

I’m afraid it is perfectly clear that your level of dishonesty about what you have posted, which is clearly evidenced in the thread for all to see, is very similar to the dishonest manner in which you have engaged in the discussions about Kirk with your increasingly less plausible attempts to justify his comments, combined with constantly trying to accuse other posters of being dishonest when it’s perfectly clear who is the person doing so.

Out of interest, do you think there was the some nominative determinism involved in your choice of username?

I think most posters are very happy not to live up to Mr Kirk’s “standards” of racism, misogyny, homophobia and endorsements of child abuse.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

I’d presumed that one was satire, but perhaps not!?!?!

@Underthinker Unlike you I did my research before coming onto this thread. I knew he was a misogynist, racist bigot and no amount of minimising, deflecting and obfuscating from you will change this. We have all been very clear that we abhor his beliefs, which are damaging to women and minorities. He had a large platform to promote his dangerous, divisive rhetoric.

It makes sense you are a man. You don’t have skin in the game. If you say you are pro-choice yet you to continue to defend Kirk, that doesn’t make sense. Kirk promoted forced pregnancies for all women, including child rape victims. It remains baffling to me why you are here and the way you have conducted yourself on this thread.

To be honest I feel like most of these threads have to be satire, perhaps we could recreate a snap shot of one for the Edinburgh Fringe.

I agree, @CantCallItLove you must make sure these people don’t get to you. I do not believe that the majority of sane and decent people support the extreme and deranged views posted here. You’ll never convince such people but it is worthwhile to call them out because other, moderate people reading the thread will read the sane comments you have written which are rational and factual and highlight the dishonesty, incoherence and disingenuousness of the posters making these attempts to defend blatant racism, misogynism etc.

However, it’s clear that the posters who are so entrenched in their extreme views that they believe everyone who disagrees with them belongs to another extreme and they cannot fathom that some people are moderate, and refuse to accept undeniable evidence that Kirk expressed the views he did, cannot be reasoned with and will never change their view. Let’s just hope that a sufficient number of rational and moderate people remain and that the majority of normal people don’t get sucked into this kind of hate.

That's convenient that you know how all non racists talk. Then you can tar everybody with the same brush to virtue signal aloud. Racism as we think of it doesn't actually exist and is a convenient concept the left likes to use. Human beings naturally recognise other human beings as being the same animal regardless of skin colour.

I'm sorry you feel there can't be such thing as a moronic black woman. If you think moronic as a term to label someone is exclusive to white people you might have more of a problem with racism yourself than you first realised.

Herein lies the problem with leftists. Unable to look back in the mirror or take accountability.

It’s pretty obvious that non-racists tend to talk in a non-racist manner and don’t continuously make racist comments.

Why would it be relevant to even mention someone’s skin colour when calling them a “moron” for something they did that he didn’t like? Only a racist would consider their skin colour to be relevant to the discussion and noted it in the first place, unless he thinks somehow them having a different skin colour is related to his assessment that they were “moronic”?

Why was he “concerned” about the competence of black pilots, specifically? Why did he view their skin colour as a factor that would make them less able to fly a plane competently?

Why was he concerned about “prowling blacks” rather than just prowling violent criminals? Strange that he didn’t say “prowling men”, really, isn’t it, given that 98% of violent crime is committed by men. If he was wanting to address the profile of most offenders, surely that would have been his primary concern given that sex has far stronger correlation to violent offending than race, in all countries in the world currently and throughout history.

Nobody’s buying it, I’m afraid.

The point Kirk was making about DEI was that it makes him have thoughts which make him a worse person, ie is this person there because of merit instead of quotas. This makes sense in the context of say the stated aim of United Airlines to have 50% of pilots being women or people of colour - an incredibly difficult target given the profile of pilots at that time.

The fact that the incoming president of the Oxford Union got into PPE with ABB at A level is a case in point. I wonder how many ethnically Chinese or Indian kids got into PPE with those grades?

Why was he “concerned” about the competence of black pilots, specifically? Why did he view their skin colour as a factor that would make them less able to fly a plane competently?

How have you got this far into the discussion on Kirk and not even have a clue about what his answer to that would be? Kirk explains this in various videos. People have been mocking me about banging on about "context" but had you read the quote in context, and not in a way designed to inflame, you would already know the answer to your own question.

@Underthinker quite, every single Kirk quote used against him is out of context.

He was concerned about black pilots in particular because to go from a situation where 80% plus of pilots are white males to a situation where 50% plus were women and poc was not possible to achieve in the timescale without a drop in entry requirements.

Racism as we think of it doesn't actually exist and is a convenient concept the left likes to use

@underthinker do you ever read the thread and have qualms about the kind of people you align yourself with? (Like the poster quoted above). Ever stop and wonder about the kind of things Kirk supporters say with their full chest, out in public? Sometimes you should look around the room and ask yourself why you're standing with the racism-deniers.

Turns out you're a man, I'll hazard a guess that you're white and since you mentioned your wife then we know you're in a heterosexual relationship. So yes, this is just a theoretical argument on the internet you'd like to win. No one is threatening your rights, your dignity, your safety, your freedom to love and your very humanity. Kirk and his supporters were never coming for you. And, fuck empathy, right? You don't need to imagine for one second what it feels like for those he did have in his sights.

I promise this is it, I'm out! Hitting Hide Thread and going away for the weekend and this time I really won't be back.

Whataboutery.

Nobody here’s defended the disgusting comments of the president of the Oxford Union. Do you know what the Oxford Union is? It’s a debating society for teenagers joining university. Hardly comparable to someone who was heavily involved in to the campaign to elect the President of the US and was instrumental in forming its authoritarian policies and attempting to have laws change to restrict the rights and freedoms of over 50% of society to enforce everyone in the US having to comply with the doctrines of his extremist religious cult.

My comment wasn’t about how difficult it might be to recruit a balanced demographic of pilots or the merit of such a policy. It was about Mr Kirk’s explicitly stated “concern” of travelling on a plane flown by a pilot who happened to have black skin. Please can you explain why you believe he would be concerned about the ability of a qualified pilot to fly a plane competently based on no other knowledge about that pilot except their skin colour - as he stated - if he was not a racist?

You’ve conveniently chosen not to reply to my question about why he felt it necessary to comment on the colour of the skin of a shop assistant who he deemed to be “moronic”, unless he believed being “moronic” and having black skin were connected i.e. was racist. Please explain to us all your alternative explanation of why he mentioned the person’s skin colour in this context.

You’ve also conveniently chosen not to reply to my question about why he made the comment about “prowling blacks” in relation to crime and how you believe this not to be a racist comment. Why, if he was concerned about the demographic profile of violent offenders, did he chose to focus on skin colour rather than their sex given that sex is far, far more highly correlated with violent crime than skin colour and this is a widely known and well-evidenced fact in every single country on Earth for which data on crime is available split by sex and ethnicity and it has been the case throughout history consistently in every country for which evidence is available that men are the perpetrators of the vast, vast majority of violent crime and no other demographic factor comes close to such a level of correlation. Why would someone with a genuine concern about the profile of violent offenders choose to ignore the primary determining characteristic and instead try to focus such a discussion on race, unless they were….. a racist?

I’m sure you can provide a rational explanation for all of the above which demonstrates this was all just an unfortunate coincidence, as the Underthinker has postulated, and which demonstrates that Mr Kirk had completely valid and rational reasons that weren’t racist to make these racist comments. Please provide your evidence to support your explanations, in line with the demands for evidence that have been made of posters here who don’t support Mr Kirk’s racist views.

We’ll wait.

Indeed, what a complete shock that the person unconcerned about and vociferously defending racism, misogyny, homophobia and enforced childbirth for ten year old female rape victims happens to be a while, male, heterosexual adult. It seems Kirk wasn’t the only one lacking in any capacity for empathy.

Great. Let us know the context that justifies his view then.

Do he have evidence that black pilots have more crashes? Live up to the evidential standards you’ve demanded of others and provide the data to support this “concern” about the safety records of black pilots.

@TheClaaaw again, his “concern” about a black pilot is based on his expressed distaste for how DEI was making him have thoughts which made him feel like a bad person. Given female pilots are only what, 4% or so of total US pilots the aim for having over 50% pilots being women / POC would have to come mainly from male POC who are what - 16- 18% of the population. So to achieve that is going to be unbelievably difficult without dropping standards.

I intensely dislike his use of the word “ prowling” but I’m guessing you’re aware of the fact that there are twice as many black on white murders in the USA than white on black.

I also dislike the use of the word “moronic” in relation to a shop assistant. But again he was making the point that DEI policies can have a corrosive impact on people’s thinking. I raised the case of the Oxford Union guy not because what he said but because he got into PPE with an ABB. This knowledge might lead people to look at black students at Oxford and assume they are there because of DEI policies rather than merit which would of course, be absolutely appalling.

Good black pilots crash as much as good white pilots and bad black pilots crash as much as bad black pilots.

The comment was in response to American Airlines announcing a target to increase non white, not male pilots from 12% to 50%. CK argued that to set quotas in that way, rather than appointing purely on merit would mean the best person doesn't always get the job. He said that he would hate to think of black pilots as less safe, that it wasn't part of his normal thought process, but unrealistic quotas would make non racist people, like him, question whether a pilot was there on merit or for a quota.

Again, please provide evidence showing the pilots with black skin did not have to meet the same objective tests in terms of qualifications and experience before they were allowed to fly passenger jets, which would justify such a position. Or data from safety records showing that skin colour is a relevant factor increasing the risk of plane crashes or unsafe flying practices.

In the absence of this data, his comment is exposed for the pure racism it was.

He did not state that it was unfair that black pilots might receive contextual offers to enter pilot training schemes more often than white pilots because black people in the US are still generally poorer and go to poorer schools on average. Where’s the data that the pilots who received such contextual offers were less capable or less safe or held to lower safety standards when awarded their qualifications?

He stated explicitly that he would be worried about the safety of flying on a plane if he saw that the pilot was black so presumably, if he’s not a racist, there is evidence to support his assertion clearly showing that black pilots are more of a risk to safety than white ones and his alleged fear of a black pilot flying a plane on which he was a passenger was justified by objective data rather than him simply hating black people?

Where’s the data that support his assertion that black pilots are less safe and therefore shows that this wasn’t a racist comment?