Conservative activist, Charlie Kirk, has been shot and killed at University

[Twentyfirst]

I just watched a video from Sam Hyde titled "This is you" and the level of division is so crazy. It's so simplistic. "We are faultless and they are the devil". "They want to kill us just like they did Kirk". How can someone be so far removed from oneness. There is no us or them 

[PurpleTree]

10 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

I just watched a video from Sam Hyde titled "This is you" and the level of division is so crazy. It's so simplistic. "We are faultless and they are the devil". "They want to kill us just like they did Kirk". How can someone be so far removed from oneness. There is no us or them 

I mean that’s similar like you when you talk about the „west“ no?

[AION]

As an outsider following the US political crises gave me the insight that people really believe in their beliefs/values and a ready to die for it. There a lot of countries and people without a backbone and their beliefs/values depend on where the power is so they can get favors from the gov like jobs and other benefits. This polarization is getting out of hand though. It is a zero sum game. Either the left wins or the right wins. I don’t see a middle road. And if it comes down to a civil war, I don’t see the left winning on the battlefield. The right has been preparing for this for ages and they can’t wait to pick up their gun and start shooting people. Leftists are crazy if they think they can win this when things turn violent. Their best play is to play it civil. 

[zazen]

11 hours ago, Daniel Balan said:

He was a man. He had balls. Something the left seem to have a lack of. 

The left and right can't even agree on what a man is. This is the deeper issue as to why Western politics has become so polarized - their base assumptions about reality differ, which means they differ on what the problems are, including their solutions. It’s like flat earthers and round earthers trying to exist in the same political frame work.

The crux of it comes down to economic and cultural anxiety and dispossession. The working class felt the those two forces first - which is what allowed them to tap into the energy of discontent and anger over a much longer time frame to galvanize and propel them politically. The middle class felt economic anxiety later (2008) as late stage capitalism started to bite their pockets, and the cultural anxiety of having right wing populism rise in power woke them up to potential cultural dispossession. These are the two same issues that caused Hitlers rise (economic+cultural dispossession).

The reason the right are angrier and more violent (in some peoples eyes) than the left, is because they are more powerless (or were). This is structural. Urban centers are centers of power, and urban centers trend towards more liberal cosmopolitanism - which then dominates the country at whole on an institutional level (academia, law, corporations, media etc). This is why parallel networks were built (in media - social media) to counter the main stream media (''fake news'' lol) and are attempting to be build alternative academia (Jordan Peterson Academy). Power is blind to those who have it - including their abuses of it (cancel culture, de-banking, law fare). The logic becomes - act sorta authoritarian today to prevent future authoritarianism - whilst authoritarian undertones start creeping into their camp.

Liberal / urban elites were historically sheltered from both anxieties. But now as right populism gains political ground - they’re experiencing cultural anxiety for the first time. They now fear conservative/nationalist values being imposed on them, just as conservatives felt liberal cosmopolitan values were imposed before.

Both sides now feel the double squeeze (economic + cultural dispossession), but they don’t share the same definition of culture or the same solutions to their economic troubles. Their fighting over who ''we'' even is (identity - universal vs national), including what even is (reality). Liberalism began as the noble liberation of individuals from the harsh realities of power dynamics and domination (kings, priests, feudalism, tribalism) and mutated to liberation from reality itself (naive) - if the individual must be free then why not free them from gender roles, sexual norms and biology itself? Perhaps loosening of constrains it’s a better aim than freeing from constraints themselves - but be wary of the slippery slope they leads to.

Reality became negotiable - which to many people who want to have a sense of rootedness (in tradition, geography, biology) seems non-negotiable. Late stage capitalism (causing economic anxiety for all) is now colliding with late stage liberalism (dissolving a cohesive cultural identity and worldview of reality for the many).

Democratic politics only polarizes this further because now your neighbour can vote in a version of reality you are at odds with. It's healthy in a democracy to argue over the means, but now people are arguing over the ends (what the good life is, what reality is, who ''we'' even are). When you can't even agree on what the problem is, you are fundamentally at odds with each other. Instead of democracy being a safety valve, it becomes the amplifier of division - because the losing side experiences it as domination. Two “Americas” no longer share the same definition of the problem, let alone the solution.

On 13/09/2025 at 9:07 AM, zazen said:

I agree rifts happen within culture, but sometimes those rifts don't mend back together into one cohesive culture - they crystallize into a separate culture. So then you don't have a rift within a culture, but a rift creating two cultures that are now at odds and rifting with each other. They become different versions of what America should look like - almost like rival religions. Once you differ on the fundamentals of what is true (ontology) and what is good (morality) you are different cultures.

The left and right differing on a whether a woman can have a cock or not, or whether women should remain virgins till marriage or not (heck even the idea of marriage itself)  - are two sides walking the same planet but in different worlds all together.

Semantic hair splitting aside - whether liberalism allows or creates diversity - the structural point is liberal democracy proliferates, politicizes and polarizes that diversity in a way that conservative non-democracies don't. A centralized un-democratic system becomes unstable when the demos get fed up enough not having their voice heard and revolt. A de-centralized democratic system becomes unstable when the demos fractures because too many voices within it diverge and fight over the political space their supposed to share.

Rifts within culture create differences, that sometimes splinter into different cultures. Liberalism gives those differences legal protection and room to grow. Democracy then politicizes them by giving each faction the political power to impose their different visions via the state. Those differences are no longer private beliefs but become codified in policies that affect everyone. So suddenly, your neighbor’s worldview becomes a political threat, because it might be voted into law. In a non-democracy there's no political expression for all those differences to allow for that polarization. 

Populism is liberalism's shadow. The liberal establishment can't comprehend the nationalist, traditionalist worldview because they view any type of boundaries or constraints on reality as chains. They universalize and absolutize freedom - which manifested as globalization and financialization - which hollows out a nations people and sense of rootedness or belonging. The clash from another lens is about the legitimacy of globalization vs the legitimacy of the nation state, or national interest vs internationalists interests. Something Hitler also commented on in his speeches, and that we see commented on today.

There is a smart way to go about this or a distorted dark way to go about this - as in the case of Nazism and fascism, but that’s another discussion.

Edited Tuesday at 10:37 AM by zazen

[Elliott]

Here's for all the alligator tear progressives in here, this kid survived a school shooting, you have more empathy for this than he does?

 

Edited Tuesday at 10:25 AM by Elliott

[Socrates]

I'm still leaning heavily towards an inside job/false flag operation.

I've no idea about ballistics, the 1st video is food for thought. If the ballistic info and the countless more POVs of the shooting were public, the truth could easily come to light. Still, when there are DEI hires like Patel in those positions to muddy the waters and keep things hidden, protect Trump, and hide the likelihood of an inside job, you will most likely never get to the bottom of this without starting to dip into conspiracy theories. The groyper/radical leftist/psycho shooter theory doesn't add up at all, with the evidence we already have.

 

[oldhandle]

4 hours ago, Twentyfirst said:

I just watched a video from Sam Hyde titled "This is you" and the level of division is so crazy. It's so simplistic. "We are faultless and they are the devil". "They want to kill us just like they did Kirk". How can someone be so far removed from oneness. There is no us or them 

Did you also seem Sam Hyde completely freak out and attack Harland Williams on his own show? Dude is insane.

[oldhandle]

*physically attack if you haven't seen it. He literally destroys his set and Harland Williams takes it like a champ.

[Twentyfirst]

5 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

I mean that’s similar like you when you talk about the „west“ no?

That's after the West colonized the world for 500 years of the most insane violence that continues to this day. Not after one guy gets shot in the neck. There is no real difference between an American on the right wing vs left wing. They are both equally out of their minds so they have no reason to be at odds or divided 

I was saying a lot of the world's problems are caused by the underdevelopment of the west and pointing out the destruction caused in Gaza, the most televised genocide in history. And all you could say was "you can't type on your computer without the Wests invention". As if the two things have anything to do with each other. I hope you at least consider the insanity of trying to bring that up in debate 

Edited Tuesday at 01:47 PM by Twentyfirst

[Twentyfirst]

40 minutes ago, oldhandle said:

Did you also seem Sam Hyde completely freak out and attack Harland Williams on his own show? Dude is insane.

I only saw this one episode. I don't know who Sam Hyde is but he seems to have an agenda. Definitely not in his right mind. Egos should not have microphones 

[Elliott]

Two lynchings in Mississippi yesterday, not a peep on here from the progressives consumed with sympathy for Kirk and MAGA. One homeless man, after fox news calls for their murder. Don't call fox news nazis though!

 

https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/us/trey-reed-death-is-racial-murder-or-suicide-ask-social-media-users-21-year-old-student-found-hanging-from-a-tree-delta-state-university-tragedy-in-mississippi-no-foul-play-cleveland-police-department-investigators/articleshow/123923844.cms

 

https://vicksburgnews.com/man-found-hanging-from-tree-in-vicksburg-identified/

 

Edited Tuesday at 02:01 PM by Elliott

[Hatfort]

@Socrates

I'll add this to your compilation.

 

Edited Tuesday at 03:40 PM by Hatfort

[Recursoinominado]

1 hour ago, Hatfort said:

@Socrates

I'll add this to your compilation.

 

[Socrates]

On 9/14/2025 at 10:16 PM, Leo Gura said:

We do not know that yet. We need more information.

I did not misinterpret, I was speculating based on very little information. And we are speculating still. The motives of the shooter are still unknown. Do not jump to conclusions. He could still be a leftist. Keep an open mind.

The Groyper theory is highly convenient for the left. Doesn't mean it has been proven.

We definitely do need more info, but be aware that if it is an inside job, you will never get any relevant information to get to the bottom of this. The same applies to Epstein, 9/11, JFK, and most wrongdoing in the world.

Understand that devilry thrives in darkness; the less transparency there is, not only allows the perpetrators to stay hidden, and the less access the public has to the truth.

If the journalism/investigation isn't done by a non-partisan, good-faith organization (governmental or not), the whole system short-circuits.

TLDR: if it is an inside job and the FBI wants it to stay hidden, you will know just enough so it stays hidden unless they heavily blunder.

[Princess Arabia]

This is a good one. He exposes with explanation why he doesn't think Tyler is the real shooter.

[Jannes]

5 hours ago, Socrates said:

 

This guy seems to have found the bullet in the recording which couldnt have come from a shot from the front but from the side as the guy in the other video says. 

Time stamped it for ya. 

[Leo Gura]

Stop with the conspiracies. I expect better of you guys.

We have video of him on the roof. The end. Stop it!

[Princess Arabia]

21 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Stop with the conspiracies. I expect better of you guys.

We have video of him on the roof. The end. Stop it!

Yes, but we don't have videos of him with a gun. I've watched the videos and they are legit in their claims plus Tyler is not confessing he's the shooter plus what evidence does the dad have that his son is the shooter. If you watch the videos, they are detailed and showing legitimately how from where Tyler was, the shot couldn't have come from there. 

Edited Tuesday at 10:08 PM by Princess Arabia

[PurpleTree]

I like Kash Patel because he seems so trustworthy and competent.

 

[Joshe]

42 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Stop with the conspiracies. I expect better of you guys.

We have video of him on the roof. The end. Stop it!

There are some things that don't seem to make sense, specifically with the gun, but we shouldn't buy into anything yet.