Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#391

Post by seadan83 »

gred wrote: post #267

So sad, he was more willing than most to hear and debate contrary viewpoints (the "prove me wrong" table).

Agree sad, but not because he was reaching across the intellectual divide. Kirk's debate responses/performances were very often bad faith. It seemed more performative than an actual debate - "owning the libs" and not an intellectual exercise. I really don't think there was a true willingness to listen to contrary viewpoints. For example, his positions did not evolve on most all positions, even when confronted with compelling arguments.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#394

Post by anthem2025 »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #349

I bang on a lot about not saying things like "this person is a threat to democracy" and other such apocalyptic statements. This right here is a perfect example of why: when you steep people in a culture that tells them someone is (or their ideas are) an existential threat, eventually someone is going to be the right level of scared + unstable that causes them to kill people to try to defend their way of life. If you…

[flagged]

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#396

Post by zdragnar »

autoexec wrote: post #357
ipython wrote: post #346

I was just at a conference today where one of the presenters referenced the "Trust barometer": https://www.edelman.com/trust/2025/trust-barometer According to that study, 23% approved of the statement "I approve hostile activism to drive change by threatening or committing violence". It's even higher if you only focus on 18-34 year olds. Full report here: https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2025-0..…

"threatening or committing violence" could mean almost anything. It isn't hard to find evidence of people (especially young ones) equating speech with violence. I imagine that "I support assassination to drive change" would be even less popular.

Have we already forgotten the absurd amount of support the murderer of the CEO of UnitedHealthcare?

Maybe it wasn't 23%, but it was certainly not insignificant.

> It isn't hard to find evidence of people (especially young ones) equating speech with violence.

I don't think anyone conflates the phrase "threatening or committing violence" with "threatening or committing calling you a bad name". Yes, there's too much equating speech and violence, but the particular wording of threatening or committing imho is largely still reserved for the physical variety.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#397

Post by crinkly »

iknownothow wrote: post #312

[flagged]

Very US centric view. I doubt it. I didn’t know who the hell he was until 3 hours ago and will probably forget he existed within a week.

As for lowering the temperature, good luck. Anyone with above average influence is in a position to try and extract as much personal gain from this already.

It kills me inside because I would like to live in a world where this isn’t the case.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#398

Post by pjc50 »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #349

I bang on a lot about not saying things like "this person is a threat to democracy" and other such apocalyptic statements. This right here is a perfect example of why: when you steep people in a culture that tells them someone is (or their ideas are) an existential threat, eventually someone is going to be the right level of scared + unstable that causes them to kill people to try to defend their way of life. If you…

> when you steep people in a culture that tells them someone is (or their ideas are) an existential threat, eventually someone is going to be the right level of scared + unstable that causes them to kill people to try to defend their way of life.

Well, yes. People point this out regularly with mass shootings. Sometimes the shooters helpfully leave a list of all the violent rhetoric that inspired them. Anders Breivik claimed to be acting against an "existential threat". Those words get used a lot.

Re: Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah

#400

Post by ponector »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #349

I bang on a lot about not saying things like "this person is a threat to democracy" and other such apocalyptic statements. This right here is a perfect example of why: when you steep people in a culture that tells them someone is (or their ideas are) an existential threat, eventually someone is going to be the right level of scared + unstable that causes them to kill people to try to defend their way of life. If you…

>> this person is a threat to democracy

I would say it is true. Such killer is a threat to democracy.

Post reply on HN