• mhague@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    People like Charlie Kirk are capable of all of it.

    He debated some people fairly. Rare for them to debate adults, but it’s easy to find them arguing with youth. Charlie wasn’t stupid and he could navigate through common topics with something approaching grace.

    He also performatively debated, like when he was shot. He doesn’t listen to facts, he’s hoping to say punchy phrases for the cameras, he’s hoping someone makes an ass of themselves. It’s a product for his customers that harms society.

    He also went to safe spaces like podcasts and got very loose with it: conspiracies, hatred, divisiveness, violent rhetoric. Nobody could challenge him there.

    He also engaged in unapologetic racism, like recently blaming a black fire chief for kids drowning somewhere else. No debate, no engaging the public, literally just being evil.

    I think when people say Charlie was basically good, they are talking about very specific parts about his life. I get TPUSA ads about Kirk destroying stupid trans kids. It was Charlie’s hatred that got the most play. I’m just trying to be objective about it.