An Op-Ed by Wang Chung: Charlie Kirk’s Toxic Legacy of Hatred and Division

[Gadianton]

political murder is wrong

Any and all murder is wrong by definition, and so this is a circular statement. There is no sense of the word "murder" for which it ever refers to something that isn't wrong. If you wish to write a meaningful sentence that can be discussed, you could write, "political killing is wrong."

"Killing" is sometimes normative and sometimes descriptive. The same goes for "lying". You can use the word "lying" in a context that is merely descriptive, although it is usually normative. "murder" however, is never simply descriptive. If a killing is considered unjustified, it will then be be called murder. Murder, by its definition is always wrong. Unless it's just a bunch of crows.

Note that we are discussing the meaning of words here. In all logically possible worlds, the word "murder" refers to the unjustified taking of a life.

[ceeboo]

To be clear, I support your freedom to express your opinions - after all, this idea is one of the things that undergirds the monumentally successful experiment we call America. If Charlie were still among us, I am confident that he would support you as well.

My Op Ed (in short): Charlie modeled, day after day, how much he valued the free exchange of ideas in the marketplace. He provided the space, time, and microphone far anyone who wanted to speak, to speak and be heard. He was willing to tell people the truth (as he saw it). He was extremely courageous and unapologetic when sharing his religious beliefs with any/all (As a Christian, I admire and respect this as much as anything - especially so because I lack such tremendous courage to share mine in any/all circumstances.)

Charlie was a tremendously intelligent man - a decent man - a family man.

Charlie didn't need college - colleges needed Charlie. Charlie impacted countless young people in various ways. If nothing else, he provided an alternate view that many young people had rarely heard before - if ever.

Why was Charlie publicly assassinated in front of his wife and two young children? Hatred.

My confusion about your OP Ed has prompted me to ask few questions. If you choose not to answer, no worries, I'm really not seeking your advice/opinions/answers (I have read enough of those lately), I am doing it for anyone who might be reading/lurking.

Political violence, like the murder of Charlie Kirk, is unequivocally wrong and must be condemned. It is possible to express this condemnation and honor the grief felt by some, while also acknowledging Kirk's history of promoting division, racism, bigotry and hatred.

This is a time for both compassion and honesty. We can respect the mourning process without shying away from a critical examination of Kirk's horrible legacy. His influence, built on a foundation of bigotry and reactionary rage/anger, contributed to a climate of social and cultural violence, causing real pain, violence and division.

While no single person can resolve these issues, we must actively work to de-escalate the situation and strongly condemn all forms of political violence, and just as strongly, we must reject the hatred, fearmongering, and bigotry of people like Charlie Kirk that fuels it.

So now that we've established that the system is broken, our leader is clueless, and any plan of reconciliation with the left and right is a fantasy, the only question left is: What are we having for lunch? And with that, I'll leave you good folks to ponder our collective future. Happy thoughts!

Post moved to appropriate forum- Xen

Given that there are millions upon millions of Americans that surely align with the great majority of Charlie's stances (including me), how would you suggest handling the remaining Americans, the ones that are still breathing, that you have labeled "racists", "bigots", "fearmongering haters", "division promoters"

If I, an American citizen who didn't happen to share your opinions, were to be publicly assassinated, would you celebrate? Would you write an OP ED? Would you suggest that my wife, now a widow, could easily find another neo-Nazi to marry?

[Everybody Wang Chung]

If I, an American citizen who didn't happen to share your opinions, were to be publicly assassinated, would you celebrate? Would you write an OP ED? Would you suggest that my wife, now a widow, could easily find another neo-Nazi to marry?

Ceeboo,

I know Charlie Kirk, and you my friend are no Charlie Kirk.

Ceeboo, we've known each other online for many years. I've valued your opinions, insights and humor. I would mourn your death, and if I had to speak at your funeral, I think I would say something like this:

While I never met him in person, I feel a deep sense of loss for the man I knew as Ceeboo from our interactions on a Mormon themed discussion board. For years, his posts were a consistent, insightful, and often challenging presence in my online life. We rarely saw eye to eye on the big topics and politics, but that was the beauty of it. Ceeboo had a way of articulating his beliefs with such conviction and sharp wit that it was impossible not to be drawn into the conversation. His intelligence and humor were a gift to our community, and even when we were in fierce disagreement, I always looked forward to reading his posts, knowing that most of the time they were thoughtful, well-argued, and infused with a genuine sense of humanity. He taught me that you can have strong opinions without losing respect for those who hold different ones.

Ceeboo's voice in our digital space was a singular one, and it will be profoundly missed. He wasn't just a user name; he was a person who made me think, laugh, and see things from a different perspective. It's a testament to Ceeboo's character and his passing is a reminder that the bonds we form, even in the most unconventional of places, can be powerful and lasting. Rest in peace, my friend.

[Kishkumen]

Political violence, like the murder of Charlie Kirk, is unequivocally wrong and must be condemned. It is possible to express this condemnation and honor the grief felt by some, while also acknowledging Kirk's history of promoting division, racism, bigotry and hatred.

This is a time for both compassion and honesty. We can respect the mourning process without shying away from a critical examination of Kirk's horrible legacy. His influence, built on a foundation of bigotry and reactionary rage/anger, contributed to a climate of social and cultural violence, causing real pain, violence and division.

I differ from your words when you say that this is the time for the sort of honesty you seem to be talking about. It is not the time. To say, however, that you are necessarily minimizing the wrongness of his death by bringing up uncomfortable facts regarding his record as a speaker does not work for me either. Whiskey likes to insist that his interpretation of his interlocutors' words is the only reasonable reading in order to find grounds to condemn. I am both unimpressed with his moral fulminations and see him as looking to take out his anger on others, when he could be mourning a tragic death that has deeply impacted him. What is he doing here? Probably nothing healthy.

[I Have Questions]

Charlie was a tremendously intelligent man - a decent man - a family man.

I don’t think those things are universally accepted. He seemed to be a family man. But he certainly wasn’t “decent” in the globally accepted definition of that term. He may have stood up for values that you personally agree with, but that doesn’t make him decent. Nor intelligent. Dan Maclellan is an intelligent man, and he has made Charlie Kirk look a bit dumb by analysing some of the things Charlie said. There’s a thread where you can read about those things on here.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=160282

You should educate yourself on reality, but that probably doesn’t interest.

[ceeboo]

Ceeboo, we've known each other online for many years. I've valued your opinions, insights and humor. I would mourn your death, and if I had to speak at your funeral, I think I would say something like this:

While I never met him in person, I feel a deep sense of loss for the man I knew as Ceeboo from our interactions on a Mormon themed discussion board. For years, his posts were a consistent, insightful, and often challenging presence in my online life. We rarely saw eye to eye on the big topics and politics, but that was the beauty of it. Ceeboo had a way of articulating his beliefs with such conviction and sharp wit that it was impossible not to be drawn into the conversation. His intelligence and humor were a gift to our community, and even when we were in fierce disagreement, I always looked forward to reading his posts, knowing that most of the time they were thoughtful, well-argued, and infused with a genuine sense of humanity. He taught me that you can have strong opinions without losing respect for those who hold different ones.

Ceeboo's voice in our digital space was a singular one, and it will be profoundly missed. He wasn't just a user name; he was a person who made me think, laugh, and see things from a different perspective. It's a testament to Ceeboo's character and his passing is a reminder that the bonds we form, even in the most unconventional of places, can be powerful and lasting. Rest in peace, my friend.

That was an exceptionally kind thing to write.

Thanks!

[canpakes]

Ceeboo, we've known each other online for many years. I've valued your opinions, insights and humor. I would mourn your death, and if I had to speak at your funeral, I think I would say something like this:

While I never met him in person, I feel a deep sense of loss for the man I knew as Ceeboo from our interactions on a Mormon themed discussion board. For years, his posts were a consistent, insightful, and often challenging presence in my online life. We rarely saw eye to eye on the big topics and politics, but that was the beauty of it. Ceeboo had a way of articulating his beliefs with such conviction and sharp wit that it was impossible not to be drawn into the conversation. His intelligence and humor were a gift to our community, and even when we were in fierce disagreement, I always looked forward to reading his posts, knowing that most of the time they were thoughtful, well-argued, and infused with a genuine sense of humanity. He taught me that you can have strong opinions without losing respect for those who hold different ones.

Ceeboo's voice in our digital space was a singular one, and it will be profoundly missed. He wasn't just a user name; he was a person who made me think, laugh, and see things from a different perspective. It's a testament to Ceeboo's character and his passing is a reminder that the bonds we form, even in the most unconventional of places, can be powerful and lasting. Rest in peace, my friend.

That was an exceptionally kind thing to write.

Thanks!

I would certainly hope that Everybody Wang Chung’s eulogy would not need to see the light of day for many, many decades.

[Whiskey]

Political violence, like the murder of Charlie Kirk, is unequivocally wrong and must be condemned. It is possible to express this condemnation and honor the grief felt by some, while also acknowledging Kirk's history of promoting division, racism, bigotry and hatred.

This is a time for both compassion and honesty. We can respect the mourning process without shying away from a critical examination of Kirk's horrible legacy. His influence, built on a foundation of bigotry and reactionary rage/anger, contributed to a climate of social and cultural violence, causing real pain, violence and division.

I differ from your words when you say that this is the time for the sort of honesty you seem to be talking about. It is not the time. To say, however, that you are necessarily minimizing the wrongness of his death by bringing up uncomfortable facts regarding his record as a speaker does not work for me either. Whiskey likes to insist that his interpretation of his interlocutors' words is the only reasonable reading in order to find grounds to condemn. I am both unimpressed with his moral fulminations and see him as looking to take out his anger on others, when he could be mourning a tragic death that has deeply impacted him. What is he doing here? Probably nothing healthy.

Let’s not pretend the defense of “amazing” never happened — it did, and it was pathetic. Katrina metaphors, wonderment, context — flimsy scaffolding to applaud a killer. When that crumbled, the move wasn’t to own it but to pivot: abandon the words, huddle up, and assign motives. Suddenly I’m not critiquing language, I’m the angry villain of your morality play.

And now it’s boogeymen. Is it my anger? My AI? Tomorrow it’ll be some other ad hoc invention, anything to dodge the plain record of what was actually said. That’s the apologist choreography: defend, collapse, deflect, project. Not debate, not honesty — just a reflex to keep the applause safe from scrutiny. Midgley is gravely laughing his FAO.

And through it all, you’ve got Xenophon being sheltered like the house cat of Team Amazing Shot — perched in the window, purring at the self-admiration while the rest of you keep the cardboard shields raised to protect you from so much anger, my gosh. And AI … well, careful now. If it can already spot your deflections this easily, imagine what happens when it learns sarcasm.

[canpakes]

Let’s not pretend the defense of “amazing” never happened — it did, and it was pathetic. Katrina metaphors, wonderment, context — flimsy scaffolding to applaud a killer. When that crumbled, the move wasn’t to own it but to pivot: abandon the words, huddle up, and assign motives. Suddenly I’m not critiquing language, I’m the angry villain of your morality play.

Nah, I completely own my comment about the shot being an amazing one. And I’m still awaiting your response to the question about how that word amazing is interpreted when used in the same way to describe Katrina’s destruction.

And AI … well, careful now. If it can already spot your deflections this easily, …

OK then. Thanks for your own confirmation that this is AI generated. Not that the deflections weren’t anything other than excuses supplied to cover for your dodging.

Maybe ask Grok to punch these responses up a bit? They’re sounding like the circular ramblings of a recovering ketamine addict pacing the corner down by Wal-Mart.

[Kishkumen]

Yeah, post by AI. Yawn. Next!