[flagged]

mkfs a day ago | parent | next [-]

Charlie Kirk was a "literal who" until he was assassinated, and even though his assassination was extremely graphic, and even though it took place at an event where he, at least purportedly, offered discourse with the other side, Kirk probably would have remained a "literal who" had the left not let its collective mask slip in the aftermath. It's really astounding how badly progressives are playing this.

	▲	a day ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

dp-hackernews a day ago | parent | prev [-]

"Who was Horst Wessel, and why are people comparing Charlie Kirk to him? Within hours of Kirk’s death, opposite ends of the political spectrum invoked the Nazi martyr"

https://forward.com/news/768607/horst-wessel-charlie-kirk-na...

▲

watwut a day ago | parent [-]

> While Kirk’s rhetoric was combative — he railed against immigrants, gender ideology and “global elites” — he operated in a democratic system and advocated for civil disagreement.

Kirk was openly happy about Pelosi shooting and advocated for a patriot to bail out the shooter.

Kirk should not be killed. He also was not someone who advocated civil disagreement or anything like that. He helped to create toxic culture that exists now and did it intentionally.

Horst Wessel was killed at time when Germany was nominally a democracy. Nazi took power only later. It was dying democracy, just like the democracy in the USA is dying.

	▲	southwindcg 16 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Paul Pelosi wasn't shot. He was beaten with a hammer.