He was a vile propagandist who died as he lived, making life worse for the vulnerable.
And of course this is an opportunity for all the high-minded pundits to go, "awww he was so awesome because all he was doing was talking!" "Exchange of ideas!"
He didn't think empathy was valid for the rest of us, so when the tiger he rode turned around and devoured him, I will give him as much empathy as he offers others.
Do remember that it is—under Murc's Law—required for elected Democrats to offer grace while Republicans can say whatever they want.
In addition to his other vile ideas, Kirk outspokenly believed that the slaughter of unarmed civilians, attending school, church, parades, grocery shopping, meeting friends at a bar, watching a movie, or peacefully protesting was a reasonable price to pay for the availability of completely unregulated guns. He celebrated and encouraged violence, and he was gunned down in a manner he fully supported, on a campus free of gun regulations. Obviously, he figured anyone with a weapon was a kindred spirit, who was more likely to shoot some mouthy woman who dared to speak out.
The only sad part is that the violent right wing loons, who embrace Kirk's ideology, will quickly return to their usual targets. So school children, POC, immigrants, women, LGBTQ+, and other unarmed civilians who gather for the usual reasons while going about their daily lives will be at risk. Only the wealthy and powerful will have security details. No gun regulation will come from this.
‘I’ve seen (mostly) men express this sentiment, and it’s incredibly naive. Kirk’s intentions were aggressive and abusive, like the trolls who’d regularly challenge Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to a debate. They don’t want to exchange ideas. They want to subdue and humiliate. You might recall all those YouTube videos with titles boasting about how some right-winger “owned” or even “destroyed” some liberal (especially a woman). That’s not reasoned debate. It’s a show of dominance.’
Yep.
He was never interested in the truth. He wanted a verbal wrestlemania spectacle.
Very well said. Thank you for being brave enough to say it clearly, without rancor or malice, and with words and philosophy that defy our AI gibberish era.
The lionization of this horrible, damaging troll by MSM and several Democrats has been just as disturbing as his assassination, so the only way to honor his legacy is by reminding them of all the horrible, damaging shit he said over the years.
And there is no shortage of it. In fact, he said so much terrible things there is a quote for everything.
Thank you Stephen. Everywhere I've read fawning praise and normalization of Kirk and his grievance empire. You laid out all the horrible things that Kirk did to whip up discontent, hatred, violence and most importantly, money for his racket. MAGA are making him into their call-for-action martyr when he was just another in the long line of grifting hate-trolls.
Not the point of your essay, but the fact that you effortlessly invoke Captain Picard and Jeremy Brett's Holmes makes me feel like I've found a kindred mind.
This shit drives me crazy, and gives me little hope that when Trump *finally* does shuffle off, we will simply bury the atrocities because, well, he had a family after all (fwiw, I think Kirk's kids will be better off without him in the long run).
I don't care what the motivation was, killing Kirk was wrong. We still don't know who the killer is, what the motivation was, and if anyone else was involved. Yet most are treating this as a political killing. While they may be right, it could be personal. But if it's not personal, it doesn't mean that a liberal killed Kirk. Kirk wanted the Epstein files released, but otherwise supported tr*mp. Some maga mad that Kirk broke with tr*mp on this one issue could have done it.
He was a hateful person, and made the world a worse place for being in it. Another victim of gun violence, who made the world a better place for being in it, speaks for me in this song:
I like Ezra Klein yet his editorial left me speachless: Kirk did not do it right. His hate speech crossed the line. Certainly this does not justify violence but let’s stop pretending there are zero norms in society. If you listen to some praising Kirk you’d think David Duke might return as a Saint. I, for one, see him as a hateful bigot that no matter how smart, he’s still a bigot. We used to ostracize such people. Today, if they are very successful at creating political organizations to help elect other bigots to office, they are praised.
Some are eulogizing him as a brilliant Saint. Read his comments about women, blacks, Jews and LGBTQ and it’s hard to see him in this light. Mathew Dowd was absolutely correct.
He was an unabashed bigot. His murder was horrific and avoidable.
Both can be true.
He was a vile propagandist who died as he lived, making life worse for the vulnerable.
And of course this is an opportunity for all the high-minded pundits to go, "awww he was so awesome because all he was doing was talking!" "Exchange of ideas!"
He didn't think empathy was valid for the rest of us, so when the tiger he rode turned around and devoured him, I will give him as much empathy as he offers others.
Do remember that it is—under Murc's Law—required for elected Democrats to offer grace while Republicans can say whatever they want.
In addition to his other vile ideas, Kirk outspokenly believed that the slaughter of unarmed civilians, attending school, church, parades, grocery shopping, meeting friends at a bar, watching a movie, or peacefully protesting was a reasonable price to pay for the availability of completely unregulated guns. He celebrated and encouraged violence, and he was gunned down in a manner he fully supported, on a campus free of gun regulations. Obviously, he figured anyone with a weapon was a kindred spirit, who was more likely to shoot some mouthy woman who dared to speak out.
The only sad part is that the violent right wing loons, who embrace Kirk's ideology, will quickly return to their usual targets. So school children, POC, immigrants, women, LGBTQ+, and other unarmed civilians who gather for the usual reasons while going about their daily lives will be at risk. Only the wealthy and powerful will have security details. No gun regulation will come from this.
‘I’ve seen (mostly) men express this sentiment, and it’s incredibly naive. Kirk’s intentions were aggressive and abusive, like the trolls who’d regularly challenge Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to a debate. They don’t want to exchange ideas. They want to subdue and humiliate. You might recall all those YouTube videos with titles boasting about how some right-winger “owned” or even “destroyed” some liberal (especially a woman). That’s not reasoned debate. It’s a show of dominance.’
Yep.
He was never interested in the truth. He wanted a verbal wrestlemania spectacle.
and money.
Very well said. Thank you for being brave enough to say it clearly, without rancor or malice, and with words and philosophy that defy our AI gibberish era.
The lionization of this horrible, damaging troll by MSM and several Democrats has been just as disturbing as his assassination, so the only way to honor his legacy is by reminding them of all the horrible, damaging shit he said over the years.
And there is no shortage of it. In fact, he said so much terrible things there is a quote for everything.
Thank you Stephen. Everywhere I've read fawning praise and normalization of Kirk and his grievance empire. You laid out all the horrible things that Kirk did to whip up discontent, hatred, violence and most importantly, money for his racket. MAGA are making him into their call-for-action martyr when he was just another in the long line of grifting hate-trolls.
Not the point of your essay, but the fact that you effortlessly invoke Captain Picard and Jeremy Brett's Holmes makes me feel like I've found a kindred mind.
Oh, did you catch the Family Ties allusion?
Not a show I watched as much of, but yes!
SER is the master of this type of allusion and analogy. We're not worthy! 🙇🏻♂️
This shit drives me crazy, and gives me little hope that when Trump *finally* does shuffle off, we will simply bury the atrocities because, well, he had a family after all (fwiw, I think Kirk's kids will be better off without him in the long run).
I don't care what the motivation was, killing Kirk was wrong. We still don't know who the killer is, what the motivation was, and if anyone else was involved. Yet most are treating this as a political killing. While they may be right, it could be personal. But if it's not personal, it doesn't mean that a liberal killed Kirk. Kirk wanted the Epstein files released, but otherwise supported tr*mp. Some maga mad that Kirk broke with tr*mp on this one issue could have done it.
He was a hateful person, and made the world a worse place for being in it. Another victim of gun violence, who made the world a better place for being in it, speaks for me in this song:
https://youtu.be/Ts0XSyWpMnU?si=KHbb-Qqf8SIE15A5
I like Ezra Klein yet his editorial left me speachless: Kirk did not do it right. His hate speech crossed the line. Certainly this does not justify violence but let’s stop pretending there are zero norms in society. If you listen to some praising Kirk you’d think David Duke might return as a Saint. I, for one, see him as a hateful bigot that no matter how smart, he’s still a bigot. We used to ostracize such people. Today, if they are very successful at creating political organizations to help elect other bigots to office, they are praised.
Some are eulogizing him as a brilliant Saint. Read his comments about women, blacks, Jews and LGBTQ and it’s hard to see him in this light. Mathew Dowd was absolutely correct.