i'm not using the death of a white supremacist to make kissy faces at fucking people who spent the last four years calling for the death of trans people.
He was often called a white supremecist in debates and always challenged people to tell him what he had ever said that reflected that, and no one ever had an answer. He was a lot of things, but I don't really think he was that. Do you have an answer? If he was, I would want to know, fuck racists.
Culture has nothing to do with White Supremecy or any other form of racism or "scientific racism". We can indeed have good and bad cultures; this being entirely subjective to individual opinions. Cultures are a social outcome, not a genetic one.
People can "define white Supremecy" however they like, though it's already well defined, so their personal definition may be confusing or discredit any other views they may share.
I don't think Charlie Kirk was a white supremecist at all, but there's many different ways of being a total cunt. At a certain point of cuntiness, it really doesn't matter if he was one or not.
This is literally how dog whistles work, my friend. They don't say what they're saying, out loud. They hide it behind a veneer of rationality, that they think prevents certain people from hearing what they're saying, while throwing a giant wink at the people that "get it".
When a white supremacist talks about "Western culture being superior to other cultures"...they are talking about "white culture".
Yeah, but people that aren't white supremecist also say that. White supremecist from non-westrrn cultures say the same of their culture instead. White supremecist enjoy and emerse themselves into other cultures without it impacting their position of being genetically superior.
What you're trying to explain is called cultural chauvinism and it's as related/unrelated to many other things as it is/isn't to racial ideologies.
No dog whistles here, just already very established and understood stuff.
Plus, it's White Supremecy here. There's so much already there to work with. There's no need to apply assumptions onto it and sell it as a new package.
Cultural chauvinism is the belief that one's own culture is superior to others, often leading to prejudice against different cultural groups. This concept is commonly discussed in the context of international relations and communication, highlighting how such attitudes can affect interactions between nations and ethnicities.
A subset of...
Chauvinism is the unreasonable belief in the superiority or dominance of one's own group or people, who are seen as strong and virtuous, while others are considered weak, unworthy, or inferior The Encyclopaedia Britannica describes it as a form of "excessive and unreasonable" patriotism and nationalism, a fervent faith in national excellence and glory.
Which is not the same as...
White supremacy is the belief that white people are superior to those of other races.The belief favors the maintenance and defense of any power and privilege held by white people. White supremacy has roots in the now-discredited doctrine of scientific racism and was a key justification for European colonialism.
It's okay to redefine what White Supremecy is just so we get to call someone one?
This is cultural chauvinism or cultural imperialism; it is not white supremecy or any racial superiority ideology for that matter. These are two different, well-defined, and bad things. You don't have to try force them together to make a bad thing. It's already done. You win. Being either one or both is bad.
But it's not exactly good to shift the goal posts to try frame a person you didn not like into being something you want them to be but cannot confirm that they were. That's my point.
Any of Charlie's ideas that were tested through good-faith debate never survived. He and many others of his kind tend to avoid that kind of discussion.
As an atheist, I put it on the shelf of "maybe could be evidence of divine intervention". But of course then I'd have to ask where has he been all these other times?
Sounds like she sucked at making people believe she would make a difference, which given this is killary "we came we saw he died" KKKlinton who's husband is behind the "tough on crime" bill that is largely responsible for the size of the current prison inmate population in seppoland is completely understandable. Get better candidates or stop being surprised why no one would show up to vote for you.
How? His strategy wasn't based on motivating minorities to vote for him but Hillary's was. He appealed to the racists and won, and she tried to make the case that she would improve things and failed.
Well your argument seems to be that people will show up for a better candidate, and people showed up for him.
Ergo, you think he was the better candidate.
Unless of course your argument is basically you refuse to participate unless everyone else fixes everything for you, so you dont actually have do anything difficult to make things better yourself.
If you wait for perfection to happen without you, it will never come. You have to fight for something better. Sometimes that means settling for something that's not good enough yet so that things can get better later.
Unless of course your argument is basically you refuse to participate unless everyone else fixes everything for you, so you dont actually have do anything difficult to make things better yourself.
I dont get why everyone assumes this? I'm not in Seppoland but will always advocate for organizing with the PSL or DSA. That's how NYC got Mamdani in position. Unless of course your argument is basically you refuse to do anything unless everyone else fixes everything for you, so you can then just vote for it.
Sometimes that means settling for something that’s not good enough yet so that things can get better later.
I mean thats basically your strat right? Keep voting for these candidates, Killary, Genocide Joe, Bomber Harris, now it looks like it could be gruesome newsom, until somehow, magically a good candidate that will fix everything comes along.
The states aren't over but the idea of American democracy is basically dead. The govt is just really fucking broken. Sure the country exists and will continue to do so, but the systems are clearly broken, corrupt, and rotten beyond the capability of the modern political reality to fix.
As far as I can see best we can hope so is dramatic reform, like many many new amendments that completely change how the govt works to the point where it's questionable if it is really the same govt. And the sadly more realistic outcome might be that reform either won't happen or will only come after much suffering and conflict
Don't give him the Trump treatment and rationalize his words in a way that are more acceptable to you. Words in general, but especially from politicians, should be taken at face value without an obvious reason to do otherwise. Newsom gives no indication here that he means anything other than what he's literally saying.
Yeah, he's dog whistling. Anyone tuning in who never heard of the guy sees the governer making a pretty stock response to an assassination of a political adversary. Anyone who knows what is going on knows it's tongue in cheek
I almost hate liberals more than open fascists. At least they admit they want to kill you rather than just casually enabling it in the name of some twisted and perverse form of civility. Republicans want you in death camps, democrats want them to file the right paperwork first.
Yeah keep talking while the pedos steal the supreme court, jerry rig elections, ignore the bill of rights, and steal your retirement. Keep talking and talking and talking. That will fix this, more talking. Or.....maybe......bash a fascist and when the next fascist comes along bash that Nazi too. The time for talking is over and all the neocons in government should get out of the fucking way.
Was it? Gavin had him on his podcast, I don’t think this was a dig. And while the lemmy jokes may be funny, I wouldn’t want any politician making light of any shooting. He should have just said nothing.
Y’all gonna shit yourselves when he runs the table on the primaries.
You could organize now - maybe work out a name and some cool election swag? Or . . . Really any effort at all in promoting a person would be good. Lines are open, call now!
i'm not using the death of a white supremacist to make kissy faces at fucking people who spent the last four years calling for the death of trans people.
also fucking glad i blocked gavin on bsky
He was often called a white supremecist in debates and always challenged people to tell him what he had ever said that reflected that, and no one ever had an answer. He was a lot of things, but I don't really think he was that. Do you have an answer? If he was, I would want to know, fuck racists.
It depends on how you define "white supremacy". He definitely held the view that western (white) culture is superior to other cultures. He just also proclaimed that "racism is bad" at the same time, in order to pretend that he was making these points from a reasoned perspective.
Culture has nothing to do with White Supremecy or any other form of racism or "scientific racism". We can indeed have good and bad cultures; this being entirely subjective to individual opinions. Cultures are a social outcome, not a genetic one.
People can "define white Supremecy" however they like, though it's already well defined, so their personal definition may be confusing or discredit any other views they may share.
I don't think Charlie Kirk was a white supremecist at all, but there's many different ways of being a total cunt. At a certain point of cuntiness, it really doesn't matter if he was one or not.
This is literally how dog whistles work, my friend. They don't say what they're saying, out loud. They hide it behind a veneer of rationality, that they think prevents certain people from hearing what they're saying, while throwing a giant wink at the people that "get it".
When a white supremacist talks about "Western culture being superior to other cultures"...they are talking about "white culture".
Yeah, but people that aren't white supremecist also say that. White supremecist from non-westrrn cultures say the same of their culture instead. White supremecist enjoy and emerse themselves into other cultures without it impacting their position of being genetically superior.
What you're trying to explain is called cultural chauvinism and it's as related/unrelated to many other things as it is/isn't to racial ideologies.
No dog whistles here, just already very established and understood stuff.
Plus, it's White Supremecy here. There's so much already there to work with. There's no need to apply assumptions onto it and sell it as a new package.
Nope. Simply not true.
Which would indicate that it IS about white supremacy rather than culture. You're negating your own stupid point.
You're REALLY reaching, buddy..
🙄
Fixed it for you.
A subset of...
Which is not the same as...
Here you go... https://www.routledge.com/Cultural-Chauvinism-Intercultural-Communication-and-the-Politics-of-Superiority/Ibelema/p/book/9780367710033
You would also do well to pay attention to the events of Daryl Davis.
On top of books and many studies on this, there's also documentaries and reports if your attention span so needs this.
Or, you know, it's all bullshit and you know best!
A sponge is wet. The ocean is wet. Therefore sponges are oceans. And saltesc is dumb.
https://oxford-review.com/the-oxford-review-dei-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-dictionary/cultural-racism-definition-and-explanation/#%3A%7E%3Atext=Cultural+racism+refers+to+the%2Cvery+fabric+of+societal+culture.
It has nothing to do with culture but they hate multiculturalism... Use that heavy thing above your shoulders bud.
That's not true at all. Some do, plenty don't. Multiculturalism is unrelated.
https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1931897306166763631
Ya huh, keep telling yourself that.
What's your point?
It's okay to redefine what White Supremecy is just so we get to call someone one?
This is cultural chauvinism or cultural imperialism; it is not white supremecy or any racial superiority ideology for that matter. These are two different, well-defined, and bad things. You don't have to try force them together to make a bad thing. It's already done. You win. Being either one or both is bad.
But it's not exactly good to shift the goal posts to try frame a person you didn not like into being something you want them to be but cannot confirm that they were. That's my point.
Delusional, discredited.
Charlie Kirk in his own words: ‘prowling Blacks’ and ‘the great replacement strategy’
Idiot.
I got a better one
Woah hold up. That seems like too good of an idea for democrats
Cause it is. They won't do it.
Any of Charlie's ideas that were tested through good-faith debate never survived. He and many others of his kind tend to avoid that kind of discussion.
Big "I was told there wouldn't be fact checking" energy.
Yeah, he was literally in the middle of blaming gun violence on trans people through pure intellectual dishonesty right before he died.
As an atheist, I put it on the shelf of "maybe could be evidence of divine intervention". But of course then I'd have to ask where has he been all these other times?
Good faith debate made me laugh, the dude was literally in the middle of moving the goal posts when gukrackk
As a trans person, fuck Gavin newsom
You know he's baiting right? Or are you this dense. Everything he mentions is the opposite of what Kirk did.
He was friends with Kirk and talked together on a podcast, at least once. It's not bait.
If the Democrats run this guy in 2028 the country is over.
Uh... it's already over. The Fascist Fuck sitting in the POTUS seat has already been trying to tell you this...
In any case, even in a non-rigged election, Newsom would get trashed just like Clinton.
If we even get to vote in the mid terms it'll only be because the full roll out isn't done yet.
The Red states are already voting in the midterms by preemptively choosing whose votes matter.
They just redistricted my state to ensure their wins... gods willing hotwheels finds a luigi
Clinton barely lost, mostly because idiots proclaimed that there was no point in voting because the system was already beyond repair.
Sounds like she sucked at making people believe she would make a difference, which given this is killary "we came we saw he died" KKKlinton who's husband is behind the "tough on crime" bill that is largely responsible for the size of the current prison inmate population in seppoland is completely understandable. Get better candidates or stop being surprised why no one would show up to vote for you.
Wild that your argument hinges on Trump being the better candidate, as slightly more people showed up for him (in specific states).
How? His strategy wasn't based on motivating minorities to vote for him but Hillary's was. He appealed to the racists and won, and she tried to make the case that she would improve things and failed.
Well your argument seems to be that people will show up for a better candidate, and people showed up for him.
Ergo, you think he was the better candidate.
Unless of course your argument is basically you refuse to participate unless everyone else fixes everything for you, so you dont actually have do anything difficult to make things better yourself.
If you wait for perfection to happen without you, it will never come. You have to fight for something better. Sometimes that means settling for something that's not good enough yet so that things can get better later.
I dont get why everyone assumes this? I'm not in Seppoland but will always advocate for organizing with the PSL or DSA. That's how NYC got Mamdani in position. Unless of course your argument is basically you refuse to do anything unless everyone else fixes everything for you, so you can then just vote for it.
I mean thats basically your strat right? Keep voting for these candidates, Killary, Genocide Joe, Bomber Harris, now it looks like it could be gruesome newsom, until somehow, magically a good candidate that will fix everything comes along.
it'll be over then
it's over now, too. but it'll still be over then.
?
The states are already over. I think that what’s he said
They absolutely are not lol. Countries can coast for decades like this. See Russia. Also the United States has been in worse places than it is now.
I already pulled my $85.44 of investments out of the American stock market. Its over for you guys the funding is cut!
Gas prices gon' go up because of you
The states aren't over but the idea of American democracy is basically dead. The govt is just really fucking broken. Sure the country exists and will continue to do so, but the systems are clearly broken, corrupt, and rotten beyond the capability of the modern political reality to fix.
As far as I can see best we can hope so is dramatic reform, like many many new amendments that completely change how the govt works to the point where it's questionable if it is really the same govt. And the sadly more realistic outcome might be that reform either won't happen or will only come after much suffering and conflict
You don't get tongue in cheek humor, do you?
Are you saying that Newsom is being sarcastic in the post?
Newsom rizzed up Kirk before, as the kids would say.
Yeah, sure... the MAGAs are an excellent example of Good Faith Debate 🤦
Charlie Kirk, famously a good faith debater lol
What a fucking tool
Pretty funny if you read the tone as sarcastic.
Don't give him the Trump treatment and rationalize his words in a way that are more acceptable to you. Words in general, but especially from politicians, should be taken at face value without an obvious reason to do otherwise. Newsom gives no indication here that he means anything other than what he's literally saying.
I know. I was joking. I forget sarcasm isn't clear from text.
Damn. If he followed internet convention with the /s, I would be rolling. But from what I know of him, I believe him to be sincere.
I laughed and assumed it was sarcastic.
Lol, it was. Everything he mentioned was the opposite of what Kirk did
Yeah, he's dog whistling. Anyone tuning in who never heard of the guy sees the governer making a pretty stock response to an assassination of a political adversary. Anyone who knows what is going on knows it's tongue in cheek
"Continue his work"...
I almost hate liberals more than open fascists. At least they admit they want to kill you rather than just casually enabling it in the name of some twisted and perverse form of civility. Republicans want you in death camps, democrats want them to file the right paperwork first.
The key phrase being "in a democracy." Are you sure that's what you guys have?
Somebody get this dip shit a history book.
And there will still be people wanting to prop him up as presidential material
Hey, Gavin, STFU.
Yeah keep talking while the pedos steal the supreme court, jerry rig elections, ignore the bill of rights, and steal your retirement. Keep talking and talking and talking. That will fix this, more talking. Or.....maybe......bash a fascist and when the next fascist comes along bash that Nazi too. The time for talking is over and all the neocons in government should get out of the fucking way.
Lol, that was a subtle but scorching burn
Was it? Gavin had him on his podcast, I don’t think this was a dig. And while the lemmy jokes may be funny, I wouldn’t want any politician making light of any shooting. He should have just said nothing.
Y’all gonna shit yourselves when he runs the table on the primaries.
You could organize now - maybe work out a name and some cool election swag? Or . . . Really any effort at all in promoting a person would be good. Lines are open, call now!
"Well you see sir the reason I deserve to be treated with human decency is that I think I'm a person, I know you disagree and we can agree to do so…"
🥱