Thank you for that. Even though he died, he has won. Look at the amount of hatred he has nourished. Furthermore, I don’t believe his death will bring any justice to the people he impacted with his hatred. While I see people celebrating, I’m terrified.

Terrified this is how things are at the moment. If you can celebrate the death of Charlie, it means you have it in you to celebrate anyone’s else given a motive. And I think that is The first step of the dehumanisation process he so fondly used.

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

You've identified something crucial that others miss: we don't defeat dehumanization by becoming better at it. The moment we celebrate death, we've accepted their fundamental premise that political disagreement justifies violence.

Your terror is appropriate and I feel it with you. Not just at the violence itself, but at watching people you agree with politically abandon the very principles that distinguish us from what we oppose. The hardest battle isn't against fascism; it's maintaining our humanity while fighting inhumanity.

[–] seejur@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I take a little solace from the fact that win or not, he will not be here to see it through

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

Of all the people I was worried about materially contributing to the mess, Charlie Kirk was pretty low on the list.

He said vile stuff, but he was not himself a wielder of power. His rhetoric and words had power, he did not. His death in this manner has given strength to that rhetoric and those words without removing any of his meaningful influence to the system.

Better that these folks suffer the fear of what they court, to have their own MAGA fanatics turn against them with violence that scares them, but leaves them largely intact to have them retreat from their position without becoming martyrs.

Now if some folks actively wielding the power in harmful ways meet some ends, I might have a little less mixed feelings about it.

I will confess to perhaps not celebrating, but appreciating the connection between his sociopathic stance on gun deaths and he himself joining a group he himself said we shouldn't be so concerned about.

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I understand finding comfort where you can, but consider: Kirk not being here to "see it through" assumes his death diminishes his impact. The opposite is true. Alive, he was one voice that could be countered, fact-checked, and eventually forgotten. Dead, he becomes eternal; forever young, forever wronged, forever useful to those who will absolutely be here to see it through. The solace is hollow when his absence strengthens everything he stood for.