this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2025
422 points (96.3% liked)

Boycott US

1538 readers
1190 users here now

Overview:

The community dedicated to boycotting the US until they stop fascism, restore full democracy and start following international law.

Americans have a moral obligation to resist Donald Trump and project 2025 at every turn.

America is a flawed democracy currently being ruled by oligarchs. Stop the backslide! Dont let America become the next Hungary.

America needs to challenge the court rulings of citizens united v. fec and shelby county v. holder, protect the media, implement independent district drawing, and the single transferable vote so they don't end up having people stay home in life-changing elections because they cannot vote for their favourite candidate.

Join 50501.chat to fight back!


Related communities:

Boycott:!buycanadian@lemmy.ca

!buyeuropean@feddit.uk

!boycott@lemmy.sdf.org

!boycottchina@sopuli.xyz

Activism:!antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world

!petitions@lemmy.ca

!palestine@sopuli.xyz

!protest@lemmy.world

!israelicrimes@lemmy.world

!patriotsforprogress@lemmy.ca

!goodsuniteus@lemmy.ca


founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
 

This young evangelical guy is one of the most popular man in the US. Many americans respect him.

He said Joe Biden was an illegitimate President because Trump won the 2020 US Presidential Election.

He had no issue when JD Vance falsely accused Haitians in Ohio of eating cats and dogs. It didn't bother him at all that these people received death threats.

He praised Trump for sending people with no criminal records to prison in South America (1) (2)

He said the US had wonderful gun laws that shouldn't change. He thinks Canadian gun laws are silly.

https://www.newsweek.com/charlie-kirk-says-gun-deaths-worth-it-2nd-amendment-1793113

I don't condone violence or murder. But I'm not going to cry either. Sorry.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheDwZ@lemmy.world 27 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (11 children)

I will not celebrate violence. I will not celebrate murder. It's wrong.

I'm sure he loved his wife. He loved his church. He loved his kids.

But this very same man had no issue with throwing men with no criminal records in horrific south american prisons. Men who simply wanted a better life.

He had no issue with spreading lies about election results, even if the result was violence.

He had no issue with lying about legal Haitian migrants eating dogs and cats, even if they received countless death threats.

He believed Canadian gun laws were silly, any angry man should be able to easily purchase guns. He didn't respect Canadians. He laughed at them.

I don't want to sound like a horrible monster, but it's hard for me to feel empathy.

[–] y0kai@anarchist.nexus 56 points 6 days ago (1 children)

“I can’t stand the word empathy actually. I think empathy is a made-up, New Age term that — it does a lot of damage, but it is very effective when it comes to politics,” - Charlie Kirk

[–] Whostosay@sh.itjust.works 11 points 6 days ago (4 children)

That cannot be a real quote Jesus Christ

[–] athairmor@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

There’s a concerted conservative effort to make empathy a bad thing. Research it. There are many conservative pundits trying to portray empathy as bad.

[–] Whostosay@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I know that's how they act, just hearing in such plain words is shocking. Who the fuck hears that and agrees? Cult.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Do you have two and half hours to spare? Here's an excellent video by Lindsay Ellis about the same topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwpanShgOp4

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 days ago

Yup, it is among the ridiculous (and now somewhat ironic) things he said.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/charlie-kirk-empathy-quote/

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 23 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I will in fact celebrate his death. We got here because we allowed tolerance to go WAY too far. Shame needs to make a comeback and if you actively advocate against other people being treated with basic decency, then your death deserves no decency itself. Respect is a two way street - a social contract. You break that and no one owes you shit.

[–] riquisimo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 6 days ago

I mean, I feel sorry for his kids. They didn't choose this life. But I would have felt sorry for them even if he didn't get shot.

He chose his lifestyle. He upset a lot of people and actively defended gun violence. And that did him in.

So it goes.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 days ago

He loved his church

He found his church to be a convenient venue for his hate speech.

[–] cheers_queers@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I celebrate because he tried to erase me and i outlived him.

[–] immutable@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

"Laws are threats made by the dominant socioeconomic-ethnic group in a given nation. It’s just the promise of violence that’s enacted and the police are basically an occupying army.” - Brennan Lee Mulligan

I always upvote Brennan.

[–] mathemachristian@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

We're not supposed to cheer the death of those that cheer on the death of tens of thousands of children? The guy was a zionist through and through and the world is better off with one less. Himmler had a family too you know...

[–] ZDL@lazysoci.al 2 points 5 days ago

Kirk was more a Goebbels than a Himmler, though.

Still, the point doesn't change. Goebbels had a family too.

[–] null@lemmy.nullspace.lol 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

You can absolutely be against violence and murder and still celebrate that someone awful is dead.

You certainly have no obligation to feel any amount of sympathy.

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

there's no need to celebrate his death. it's enough merely to acknowledge the fact that the world is a better place without him, however it happened.

[–] nkat2112@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Who not both?

(But in Spanish, I'm short of time - sorry.)

[–] RagnarokOnline@programming.dev 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

¿Porque no los dos?

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

por qué no los dos?

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

I'm not saying you can't. I'm just saying it isn't necessary. doesn't mean it might not feel good, what do I know

[–] Charlxmagne@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

2 comments from a yt clip of London radio LBC in which James O'brien discusses this with viewers, which I'd say summarise this well:

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world -2 points 6 days ago

This is the way.