Not here on Lemmy apparently, or at least not in this community especially.

And you point is? You need to check yourself before you wreck yourself.

TYT didn’t coopt the entire progressive movement. They are a voice in the progressive movement, which anyone is capable of doing, including yourself. You claim Cenk is one of the biggest frauds on the entire internet but don’t provide any evidence to support that. Cenk has been consistent, honest & fair. He has shown strong moral character & that seems to make you mad.

The Hitler comparison actually proves my point - Hitler was a dictator who invaded countries and orchestrated genocide. Kirk was a campus activist who held debates. Who despite having ideas we opposed, still engaged in dialogue. If we can’t distinguish between those two things, if every political opponent becomes ‘literally Hitler,’ then we’ve lost the ability to have proportional responses to actual threats.

My concern isn’t about protecting Kirk’s memory - it’s about what celebrating political murder does to democratic discourse and how it hands ammunition to people who want to justify their own extremism. When the left cheers assassination, it makes every accusation about us being violent radicals seem credible.

I’m not a Republican nor do I support Trump. I just believe in putting out into the universe what you hope to get back. I believe in being the better person, and leading through example. If you hated Kirk & what he represents, even justifiably, then show everyone what a better person should be.

I’m agnostic, but good to know that Jesus loves me. I have enough love for myself that I don’t need admiration from everyone else. This sounds more like a confession or projection than anything. I hope you can find love for yourself.

I’m intolerant of who again? The guy who thinks abolition was a mistake? That women shouldn’t vote? That shouldn’t be tolerated.

Again, you should go read more Popper. You’re clearly intolerant of those with opposing views, and I was just pointing out the flaw in the paradox with Popper later acknowledged. You’re the one who brough it up & I’m explaining why it is weak, and how it could be uses against you.

You’re a clown. Take the L. Everyone here thinks you’re a moron.

I honestly don’t care. If your worldview is based around what you feel are popular opinions on social media, then maybe you should learn to think for yourself.

So then debate & oppose people’s ideas with better ideas, not violence.

You keep trying to stifle people’s views and call us celebrating, and keep us from expressing our views. So that’s why I ask why you’re trying to limit our freedom.

I’ve been consistently clear that I support your right to have those views. No where have I said that you should be banned. In fact, if someone were to try to ban you I’d be opposed to that. So to act like I hate freedom is disingenuous, which I believe you’re ultimately being.

I’ve stated that I think what you’re doing is what does damage, not that I don’t support your right to do it. But I feel like if you actually care about humane causes you should put more thought into your actions.

If next election you get even less voters because voters see things like this & say to themselves, “those people acted gross & dehumanizing,” then how does it help you?

If someone like Trump does end up trying to go after people for speech, then how do you think you can argue non-hypocritically that it’s okay for you to be happy when someone silences free speech, but act appalled when Trump does it?

Watch the movie. It’s not a gun. I can’t believe you haven’t seen the movie. That’s sad.

I notice you dropped the point of it being pointed at the neck. Good call.

It is up to others to judge. You can certainly see historically the word gun has been a broad enough term to include a shrink ray gun. And to say, “it’s aimed at the head & not the neck” is rather weak from my perspective.

Sounds like you need to read the paradox of tolerance and fully understand it.

It sounds like you should maybe do some more research before coming to speak to me about Karl Popper, because I honestly doubt you’ve done much, at least to actually understand his writing or what he even said. Furthermore, there is a whole list of philosophers who responded to Popper & exposed several flaws in his writing that Popper himself acknowledged. Do you really want the right coming after you saying you’re the intolerant one? I mean after-all, you’re the one who does appear intolerant in this specific situation. Do you want them censoring your speech saying you’re the intolerant one? The very same arguments you are making right now using The Paradox of Intolerance, would be exactly what would be used against you.

The same arguments are used in Gaza to justify genocide. How many times have we heard Netanyahu say they we’re just defending ourself against the intolerant ones? The same genocide that Biden funded & supported, and that Kamala Cheney couldn’t think of anything she’d do differently. So please, spare me pretending that I need to read something, which it appears you have not either read or spent the time to understand. Which is expected, because honestly I find your arguments pretty lazy & disingenuous.

The Paradox of Intolerance is frequently brought up by the same people on the left opposed to free speech, that believe they should be able to imprison others for speech. The very same anti free speech laws pushed by people like Netanyahu for criticizing Israel. Like, why even pretend that you’re against that, when it appears that is exactly what you’ve been a big supporter of all along.

I’ve never seen hateful ideas that spread like wildfire & infect the minds & hearts of people. These are easily defeated through dialogue & debate with actual good ideas. Instead you run around claiming… “don’t let them speak, you’ll turn into a Nazi too if you do!”

Maybe you should work on finding better politicians. Ones that don’t support genocides, or lie about their mental fitness, or use drones to kill children in Yemen, etc. How many times do you think you can call everyone you disagree with a Nazi without the word losing its meaning? Just like how many times do you think people can call those opposed to genocide antisemitic before the word is no longer negative. Do you want those words to lose actual meaning?

Look inward. Look at your own party leaders, and say… “Our blind faith in you was naive & ignorant. This was your fault.”

You alone? Seriously, you actually make me optimistic that we could get some bipartisan support for mental health reform.

I think you need to go look up the definition of a troll. You need to step away from the ledge friend, before you end up in a really bad situation.

I can tell you 100% right now what you’re espousing is gross, harmful, dehumanizing, and its going to come right back around & bite you in the ass. Probably not in the way you expect either, fate usually works like that. I can only hope it only has to give you a few gentle reminders before you get it, cause you don’t always get that many before something tragic happens. If you’re going to push anything, it should be pushing your keyboard away & actually going outside. If you’re legitimately planning on pushing things, it might help to get some exercise & sunlight first.

Gross dude, real gross. What goes around comes around, just remember that. This despicable stuff you’re saying, that you’re advocating for, will come back around to you. Just remember that. I can only hope you meet someone like me that just feels bad for how far you fell, rather than someone like yourself that has become the dehumanizing monster you’re acting like.

Yes absolutely I do. If you want me to be specific I will, but in terms of my gender I don’t define myself as cis, nor do I define my sexuality as straight.

I disagreed with a lot of what Kirk had to say, but first that doesn’t mean he was opposed to people saying it even if he too disagreed with their beliefs.

I grew up in the the bible belt, so I had some empathy to understand components of how he got there & the power structures that would push people in that direction.

I’ve also seen many people, including myself, that can’t claim that we’ve never ignorantly or willingly taken a job, did something for money, or spent money on something, that ultimately helped support or fund things we opposed or came to oppose. So I try not be quick to fully judge someone, especially those that I don’t know personally or that well.

I did see some pieces of good in Kirk, but that doesn’t mean that I thought his ideas were great or that he didn’t have more bad than good. But I think we all, or most people, have some bad & good things about ourselves. I believe the best way to stand up against ideas I’m opposed to, that people like Kirk supported, is to be the best example of what you want.

Also, being able & willing to challenge your own beliefs, and ensuring they are centered around truth, morality & empathy. I believe fundamental truths in this way are not something that can be erased, or that it would take some sort of drug administered early on, or some drastic modification to humankind to wipe that away forever.

Now I’m confident in those beliefs which shows, but I also don’t have to convince everyone, because I believe they will resonate with enough people, being based in moral purity & actual truth, that they too will know them if being honest or remember them.

I also want to show others that I believe there is a future for honesty. I’m not afraid to admit my challenges, or my faults, like I used to be. I’m actually proud of them in a way, and they also show that we all have struggles or things we could do better. I can’t tell you how much that has done to build connections with others, simply by admitting what you struggle at… and then they too feel open to admit the same.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to know more, but it was about his ideas. At someone point I think it becomes easier to recognize that those who claim to support Democrats, can be vicious too.

I had several people on Lemmy wishing me dead merely for calling out Biden’s support of genocide. Like, at what point do people speak up & say no we’re not okay with this, this isn’t who we are?

When people on the left pretend, like they did with Biden claiming he was young & dynamic, saying he actually firmly stood against the genocide in Israel, all it does is push people further away. It does damage to the party & helps people like Trump. It says, we’re also the party of hypocrites but we’re better liars about it. When people see others claiming to be Democrats celebrating someone’s death for their speech, do you think it is helping?

Like why am I like the only person here willing to say this now? Do you think that leaves me or others hopeful about the future of the Democrat party? Is everyone else here that called me the Russian bot for pointing out Biden’s flaws & advocating for a better option sooner than when he dropped out, the actual Russian bots? Are they trying to push for more violence & chaos in America? Or is this really just what the Democrat party has become now?

Either you’re moral & ethical or you’re not. He didn’t bring it on himself, because no one deserves to die like that for their speech. It isn’t condemning violence to say it shouldn’t happen but they deserved it. What you’re saying instead is you’re not really opposed to it as long as you think they deserve it. That is the same thing people say about the genocide. Wouldn’t a better example be, that you value all human life… even those you disagree with? That you have empathy even for those you feel might not share the same for you?

The most success I’ve had changing people’s hearts & minds, is by having empathy to understand where they’re at. To not have hate for who they are, but almost sorrow. I was bullied growing up, I know the impact it causes & so I understand wanting revenge. I also know what it is like to hurt others and even when it feels justified, it isn’t something I celebrated or felt like I should.

Like, imagine all the parents with kids that have tremendous special needs & all they go through as well. Some of them can be terribly destructive, but there is still so much to cherish, love & get to know. What would the world be like if people stopped having empathy for them? Instead, everytime one unknowingly picked up a sharp object & went outside, terrifying neighbors, so they called the cops, who showed up demanding they drop it, but the kid was autistic so they couldn’t understand, and the cops shot them. Are you going to celebrate it?

Say, “they brought it on themselves” & “they deserved it.” Are you going to tell the parents, “well they were broken afterall?”

Are you going to argue how every time they went somewhere in public, how disturbing their challenges were to you & they deserved it? Or if someone else kills them, how you’re not surprised someone would get annoyed & murder them?

If you believe it is unlikely to stop it, then why do you sit so idly by? I think it is bizarre what the people did on Jan 6., but in a way you’re basically saying… well they had the right idea, but not the right reasons.

As much as I disagree with them, at least they actually had the audacity to do what they did… but you’re telling me, “No… I am not brave or bold enough to champion what I claim to support.”

I think you should spend more time studying the actual aftermath, the impact, what that would look like for Americans.

Dictatorships do collapse but we’re on a second term of Trump who was elected by the people & as much as I hate it that Kamala decided she wanted to be a neocon towards the end thinking it would help her win, nothing suggests that the 2028 election has been canceled at this point.

I don’t even think we’re facing a dictatorship of power by a single person, but a corpocracy. I think if you want to fight that system then you’re going to have to convince yourself & others to stop funding it. I don’t think you’re going to tear it down by replacing one corporate politician with another.

It sounds like you knew him well, were really close to him & he told you this personally? That you had some psychic connection & just knew he wanted to manipulate everything, and ultimately wanted everyone opposed to him in a concentration camp? That as Cenk Uygur was talking alongside him building bridges, that he was thinking to himself… “I just can’t wait until I can put Cenk in a concentration camp for what he is saying here, but I’ll let those ideas propagate to my followers first.”

Rather, maybe you should consider if that is what you want. Do you want people murdered that disagree with you? Do you think it somehow is good & shows your passion for free speech? Do you think it gives an impression that you are opposed to fascism?

What a terrible thing for her to say. Tim Walz had demonstrated working progressive ideas, things Pete Buttigieg would ignore for his corporate sponsors. Now I guess Pete can say, see… she would have won if it weren’t for Walz. But her picking Walz boosted her campaign initially, until she started acting like a neocon Republican towards the end of her campaign.

This many be the only instance I partially agree with something Cruz has said.