Until voting doesn’t count, this is a fed post.

It’s ok to like slop as long as you can correctly identify it as slop.

So in the future if I see you say something that I feel is debatable. I should ask you if it’s a joke first?

Which is a problem why?

Funny but not true. Don’t give up too early, don’t give up too late. Give up at the right time. Anything else is a skill issue.

The definition of fascism doesn’t start when they put on the boots. It doesn’t end when they take the boots off. Just because Kirk never killed anyone doesn’t mean he isn’t complicit in creating a system that would kill lots of people.

You can be both a grifter and a fascist. Especially if you grift for a fascist cause.

You can be call a fascist even if ideologically you’re not, but the outcomes you produce are fascistic. This is the category I think Kirk is in.

Would we stop calling Hitler a fascist if we found out that he actually just wanted to be friends with everyone and he didn’t actually care about killing all those Jews? He just failed spectacularly.

Sorry about this second thread. It’s all my fault. I have answered your question on what I use to determine fascism in the other thread.

The 14 Characteristics of Fascism by Lawrence Britt

https://osbcontent.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/PC-00466.pdf

I missed some of your points because I made bad assumptions and overlooked some things.

I’m not surprised that at some point in time he would say he was pro-liberal. But the positions he argued for were in support of fascism. He didn’t other just gay people. He othered Muslims. He has brought up the Jewish question. He is a fan of centralizing power. Not that centralizing a power by itself would be a strong indicator of fascism. You have to take a look at the big picture.

There are several statistical lies that he keeps repeating to maintain his position. Someone is popular and is well known as Kirk would surely have people able to quietly correct him on some of these things. Yet he keeps repeating them. The outcome of this rhetoric is to empower fascists. He very likely knew that.

Now I’m not saying he was rubbing together his hands and whispering to himself “good good”. I think he just followed the money.

I didn’t imply the entire right was fascist. I think a lot of them are. But I also think a lot of them aren’t. I also think some lefties are fascists. I think some liberals are fascists. I think some black people are fascist. I think some Jewish people are fascist. I think some Palestinians are fascist. Name a group of people, I guarantee you some percentage of them are fascist. It’s an easy ideology to fall into. It feels comfortable.

I’ll write this again in case you missed it the first time. Fascism has a definition. There are criteria to categorize. What is fascist’s behavior, What are fascist beliefs, what is fascist ideology.

You want so badly for me to be some crazy leftist who calls everyone a fascists without cause. But I’m sorry, I’m not. I’m intentionally calling Kirk a fascist. Because he meets the definition. I’m not saying it hatefully, I’m not saying it with emotion. It’s just 1+1=2. The sky is blue. The grass is green. Kirk is a fascist.

That is kinda a strange way to counter my point that he is definitionally a fascist. Are you saying that if enough people are fascist then the none of them are?

I am saying that the rhetoric that Kirk used fits the definition of fascist rhetoric. If everyone in the world meets that definition, then everyone in the world is fascist. That’s how definitions work.

Kirk was definitionally a fascist.

As for what the shooter is, I’m sure time will tell. I don’t see a need to jump to conclusions on that yet.

~~Kirk was definitionally a fascist.

As for what the shooter is, I’m sure time will tell. I don’t see a need to jump to conclusions on that yet.~~

Edit: duplicate post due to lag. Please ignore

Holy poop you are coming on wrong and hard. I don’t know if the shooter conservative or not, but you desperately don’t want him to be. Probably because it would look bad for you if he was.

You’re not interested in the truth, just a narrative.

Right back at you. Finger guns

I don’t. I don’t really think the information points to a specific ideology at this point in time. I’d give the odds of them being conservative about 65%. He was born and raised in a Christian conservative family. In a religious conservative state. Gay hate can only really exist in an environment without gay people, same thing for people who hate trans people.

Which hate comment are you talking about? I am not familiar, so this might change my opinion.

As for not being far right enough, that’s easy. The online and professional media have been playing the game of who can be more extreme for a while now. I believe there’s a lot of conservatives out there who would be willing to kill someone on their same side for not being extreme enough. They would consider them traders, grifters, or not real conservatives.

Being pro-gay and protrans doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re not right-wing. It just means you don’t share the commonly held out groups. Unusual, yes, but a tell, not really.

If he was dropping some Marxist stuff, was interested in taxing the rich, or universal healthcare, then I would say he’s not right wing.

No, I don’t think that would be good. So for example if there was a guy who thought we should all be eating lead. And every time he posts you put up facts about how eating lead was poisonous. And then the lead guy blocked you. Then every time the lead guy posts about how everyone should eat lead, you wouldn’t see it and so you wouldn’t be able to reply with how lead is poisonous.

So if the lead guy blocked everyone who disagreed with him publicly. Then the lead guy can just post whatever they want and no who knew lead was poisonous would reply because they wouldn’t see the post. So others who didn’t know lead was poisonous would start seeing this guy posting about eating lead without being challenged. And so they might think it’s a good thing.

Biden deported them without going to the legal process? Like I’m pro-immigration so I get it. But there’s a big difference from deporting people via the legal process. Versus picking up some guy who’s a US citizen who has a tattoo of his mom on his shoulder. Calling him a gang member and then sending him to some other country to a slave prison without due process.

Neither Biden or Trump are good, but it’s really hard to argue that things would be just as bad today under Biden or Harris then they are under Trump. And Trump’s not even done with the first year of his second term.

Slight nitpick. Though I agree with the whole “we’re never better off with the Dem fascists in charge either.” In the long term. In the short term there are a lot of innocent people in US concentration camps and whom have been deported. Who would strongly disagree with you.

Okay, you’ve got a YouTube video that’s full of clips. I don’t know if the YouTuber is biased or not. And I don’t know the full context behind the clips. And I’m not really that familiar with Hassan. It’s really hard to have perfectly correct positions 100% of the time while events are happening. Hassan may have gone back and corrected his position on some of these things. So I can’t really speak too well to any of this.

We were discussing sincerity right? Is there anything in here that makes you believe that Hassan is not sincere?