Hey friend, I appreciate all of the links and the feedback. Let me define these terms so we are on the same page.

Violence - the use of physical force with the intent to cause injury/death to a person/group Violent extremism - the belief system and actions of individuals/groups who use violence to achieve ideological/religious/political goals

Hopefully you are good with that.

Ok, so for the first two links you provided. Kirk was an evangelical christian and a promoter of those ideas. His views on the role of woman in society and his ‘all life is sacred’ stance on abortion is run of the mill in those circles. You and I likely align with our disagreement of those religious views, but these are standard, boiler plate views being promoted by evangelical christians. We may not like these views, but they are far from violent and even further from something extreme.

At the risk of sounding a bit dismissive, the other links about TPUSA members I will not and feel no need to comment on. We were talking about Kirk.

Regarding the last link, I’ve seen those racial quotes before. They are all out of context and very deceitfully so. If you are not going to take the time to listen to those quotes in context, just know that a lot of black people mourned Kirk’s death. If you do take the time to listen, I am not asking you to agree with Kirk, I rarely do, but I would ask that you question if these were calls to violence or even that extreme of a view.

All that said, the point I am truly trying to get across here is that words have meaning. Someone saying a vile racist thing is simply someone saying a vile racist thing. This is very distinct from getting punched in the face.

Really? Being distrustful of those that have nothing to gain by being truthful and a lot to gain by lying is ‘rogan levels of lol’? Would you be interested in purchasing a bridge?

Thanks for the out of context quote. I jumped around the podcast they pulled this from. I didn’t find the moment he said those specific words, but it looks like it was 4 dudes shooting the shit talking about public execution for convicted pedos. Do you consider that ‘advocating for violence’?

https://rumble.com/v4dnz20-thoughtcrime-ep.-33-the-big-fani-whammy-glee-kill-pedos.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp_a

haha, that’s really cute <3

Mentioning that we should be sceptical about the narratives pushed by the FBI and politicians does not mean I’m pushing some other narrative. None of us know what happened that day (and we may never actually find out), but I can assure you that if the truth ever does come out it won’t come from the people in power.

Again, there is no definitive evidence that this kid was the shooter. He’s only been accused of that by the FBI. You know, the FBI? The people that have a LONG history of making things up to protect their friends, the organization that is renown for destroying evidence. Looking at whether this kid was left/right/trans/gay/groyper/whatever, is a giant waste of time and energy.

Well clearly I missed it. What was it? The public execution thing?

Well that’s adorable. What evidence was provided to support the assertion that Kirk was a ‘violent extemist’?

I’m not asking to be difficult, I’m sincerely asking. I’m not in the information bubble or social circle that makes that assertion obvious.

Thanks! I appreciate the explanation. Hopefully the other person will provide the first bit of proof to back up their claim 🙂

Where did this term come from? This is the first time I’m hearing it.

I have tried to find it in the past. I was curious why people kept saying the things you are saying. I couldn’t find anything damning. I found a great deal of out of context stuff that made him look bad, but that’s true for anybody with thousands of hours of talking on camera.

Is being a sealion a good or bad thing? Is a sealion anyone that disagrees with you?

Interesting, can you find me full context quotes or videos of Kirk advocating for violence?

Though the concept of stochastic terrorism can be useful, you are misapplying it here.

I am not familiar with Kirk advocating for executions being broadcast live on tv, but no I would not consider that opinion to make someone a violent extremist. I believe George Carlin also held that opinion.

We don’t need to talk about the accused shooters political views, steam profile, or sexual interests. It’s all noise. There is no real evidence that he was the shooter. No video of him taking the shot, no medical report, ballistics that don’t make any sense, timelines that don’t make sense, no confession, etc etc etc.

We don’t know who killed Kirk yet, the FBI narrative is nonsense.

You have no idea where the actual extremes are if you considered Kirk a ‘violent extemist’. Please stop muddying the term so that we properly identify and communicate about actual violent extremists.

Hey! Someone on Lemmy actually read a history book! Thank God.

You gotta stop thinking of it as a left/right thing. It doesn’t exist. It’s clouding your perspective. Populists vs establishment might be a better way to categorize if you needed just two groups, but that’s still too simplistic.

The world is a messy place with lots of different groups trying to get power, enrich themselves, and push their ideology. Whatever ideology a group is pushing has little to do with having the moral high ground and will typically result in their own benefit.

I see a great deal of economic rationale being thrown around and usually I love a good discussion on economics, but I believe we are overthinking the question. I would argue any group of people getting together with some shared narrative is going to want to procure more resources for themselves. This can be a family, a tribe, a friend group, a company, a nation, etc. It’s just how we are.

Interesting, thanks for the feedback and followup!

I feel like you are referencing some well known economic model progression or evolution that I’m unfamiliar with. Is there a name for this or someplace I can read more about it? What is the more advanced economic model after capitalism?