PREAMBLE: Ladies and Gentleman, Super is happy for this discussion to continue if we can remain civil and disagree respectfully, updated as necessary. If not, comments will be removed and if necessary the blog closed and any future Kirk-related blogs closed for discussion.
Part 1, by Wiz (more right leaning)
Part 2, by Prof Daz (more left leaning)
SYNOPSIS: Charlie Kirk spoke his final words at 12:23 p.m. on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University, in front of around three thousand people. Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old alleged shooter of the 31-year-old Republican, remains under investigation. Utah’s governor suggested he may have been radicalized by the Left, though his MAGA-entrenched family and transgender partner complicate the narrative.
The attack shook the United States, exposing deep ideological fractures. Two days later, President Donald Trump concluded that “the radicals on the left are the problem” rather than the radical right who, he said, merely want to “stop crime,” framing the debate in partisan terms during a live Fox News interview. However, voices such as Jack Posobiec and Steve Bannon, speakers at Kirk’s conventions, had long used hard-line rhetoric, calling the Left “demonic” and urging the building of “an army of the awakened.”
History offers a far broader perspective. Abraham Lincoln, Yitzhak Rabin, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. were assassinated by right-wing extremists. John F. Kennedy and Archduke Franz Ferdinand, whose death helped ignite World War I, were killed by left-leaning radicals. A two-way street.
Just months earlier, on June 14, Democrats Melissa and Mark Hortman were gunned down in their Brooklyn home by Vance Boelter, a hard-right evangelical, white Christian who disguised himself as a police officer. Married nearly 32 years, the couple left behind two children. The killings, however, received far less attention than Kirk’s death and did not prompt a presidential call to confront the radical right.
“What do they all share in common? Every political assassination is an attack on the collective; on our ability to disagree without destroying,” an academic observer noted. George Bernard Shaw called it the "extreme form of censorship."
Left or Right isn't the problem in my view. The greater danger lies in the radical mind and in how easily society nurtures the “us versus them” divide. As Desmond Tutu warned, “The moment we divide the world into ‘us’ and ‘them,’ we begin to lose our humanity.”
Charlie Kirk (above and below) is survived by his wife and two children.
Married nearly 32 years, Melissa and Mark Hortman as well as Gilbert, their Labrador (below) leave behind two children.
Boelter who assasinated the Hartmans allegedly kept a hit list of 70 targets, including Democratic lawmakers and even some anti-abortion clinics. The same early morning at 2am he invaded the Minnesota home (above) of the Hoffmans and their children who survived the shooting following surgery.
Replies
Grok:
Based on extensive data from government reports, academic studies, and nonpartisan organizations tracking extremism in the United States, a politically driven shooter (defined as one motivated by ideological extremism, such as targeting victims based on political affiliation, race, religion, or policy views) is more likely to align with far-right ideologies than far-left ones. This holds particularly true for lethal attacks like shootings and assassinations since 2000, where far-right extremists have accounted for the vast majority of fatalities—often 75% or more in recent decades—compared to far-left (typically under 5-10%) or Islamist extremists (around 20%, though not strictly "left" or "right" in U.S. terms).
Industrial-scale inhumanity always, always, always backfires, and leads to those who have been the most merciless inevitably being the ones begging for mercy...to no avail.
....and who the fuck wants to wear our flag on a shirt. It's disrespectful to it.
Fakey wants to go out and about cosplaying as a 'murican but he is just to scared of the Boogyman
You would Fakey I have actually found your commentry over this thread as the exceedingly odious and naive, From fix their shit trans brains(we don't know how beyond letting them live Trans) to telling me to educate my Wife on Womens Rights issues(fuck me dead), to christian morals having superiority to fucking sooking about charlie like you knew him.
For mine The Captain won best comment, Bobbo the worst. You win most deluded
You do realise that racially and physically, ghouls you submit to are Purity obsessed. yeah?...and you still don't fucking get it
Gibberish
You can't understand today's political violence without understanding the growth of identity politics. The previous political violence was Marxists versus everything else.
Bobbo, you do not understand violence at all. You're black rectangle just gives you a hard-on for it
Disperse, child.
It would be more accurate to say that disputes over what constitutes identity and how identity should relate to politics is important to understand if one wants to understand political conflict. For instance, identity politics as calls for equality, or identity politics as bourgeois sectarianism, or identity politics as woke censorship, are radically different understandings of identity politics. That makes the relation between identity politics and violence tricky to pin down, and also difficult to pin as a single kind of influence.
The other interesting part of idenitty politics is that the political right has been saying identity politics originated in upstart leftist circles that aimed to stigmatize whites and the west. Really? Ethnic colonialism, much of the Scottish enlightenment, eugenics, all pre-dated post-civil-rights identity politics, but those earlier social movements all inferred from identity to moral and political worth.
The current underlying 'philosophy' of leftism is intersectionality. It places everyone into categories of race, gender and sexuality. It then moralises which categories are superior and inferior, good and bad. White males are immoral and the cause of all ills. Non-white males are innocent, and are all oppressed by white males. Non-whites males are therefore justified in acting violently toward white males. Furthermore, white males who empathise with non white males are also allowed to act violently toward the white males who don't empathise. Kirk's assassin subscribed to such a philosophy, as do most of the intelligentsia, politicians and media.
The bigger issue over left and right is MH. The far right and far left likely have MH issues, whether it is insecurities, anxiety, feeling they are alone and seeking acceptance into any group that will have them. Extremists prey on these people seeking to belong to something.
There are idiots and loonies everywhere but as Charlie Kirk once asked a nurse, if an anorexic patient turned up to medical practice, would the Dr agree they are fat and tell them they should starve themselves or continue throwing up all their food. No they would be treated and the issue identified.
Body dismorphia is real but the same as others with other MH issues shouldn't it be discussed and treated before undergoing life changing alternatives. I have a cousin who cried during puberty. She wanted to be boy so badly, and was what was considered a tomboy.
Now grown up with kids of her own she looks at gender reaffirming care and thinks what may have happened to her if she was a child now and it makes her fear the pressure kids are under. Even the cool seemingly confident kids have sense of not belonging or body images as kid. It is normal but being a femine man or a masculine girl is fine.
It is clear through demographics of famous people in Hollywood and in elite suburbs where being left isn't just cool but worshipped, that LGBT and trans kids are at an unnaturally high ratio. Why is that, if it is natural then rates would be consistent across the board, or are the parents and society influencing these innocent kids to for attention and belonging.
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
of 14 Next