You can’t talk down a rabid dog.
JUPPLANDIA
I posted this on FB today:
“I suppose all of the Charlie Kirk reactions were highly predictable.
The slightly smarter, more professional Democrats say “this is terrible”. And yet within a few hours they will be demonising and smearing and trying to get another Republican killed. But that’s ok because sure we are all stupid, and supposed to believe them when they offer up a few crocodile tears. They will give us a little speech about friendship across the aisle, or ‘I didn’t agree with him but….’ And that’s supposed to wipe away the fact that yesterday they were calling him a Nazi, and tomorrow they will go right back to calling everyone they don’t control and own a Nazi. I saw a formulation from one of these types on a thread that was truly, tellingly despicable. “I don’t agree with what happened to Charlie Kirk, but Charlie Kirk agreed with what happened to him”.
It’s terrible, we are upset just like you, what a dark place….but scratch that surface and you get “it’s his own fault for daring to disagree with us”.
The fake brief humanity is a threadbare cloak, a nod to convention, a Seinfeld character at a funeral putting on a serious face when the widow notices them but actually not feeling a thing and perhaps being there to score with some chick or recover a loaned item or steal the dead man’s shoes.
The dumber Democrats go for what passes for ‘policy focus’ in their pathetic version of political thought. These ones will call for gun controls and gun laws, as if the response an armed Republican should take from armed Democrats running around slaughtering Republicans is that this would best be solved by all the Republicans being unarmed. ‘Hey guys, we are killing you…don’t you think it’s time to hand over your weapons?’ Is not a very convincing argument, and not nearly as persuasive as Democrats think it is. The ‘policy’ Democrats of course indicate that everything that happens is, for them, stripped of real human meaning. It’s just a string that is pulled on the back of a doll, allowing the doll to share a pre-recorded message.
And then there is the honest Democrat.
The ones who gleefully delight in the murder. The ones who have been truly twisted into monstrous shapes and sick parodies of what a human being is. The real pod people, the ones who screech on command and hate on command and say ‘you are hateful’ and ‘you follow a politics of hate’ while doing nothing but hate, and hate, and hate. The ones where after years of university indoctrination or legacy media paychological prepping are like cackling zombies stumbling from one brain eating expression of soulless malice to the next. The ones who think they are witty when they post “I guess he lost the debate” or the ones who feel a little thrill and get a clap on the back from other sociopaths when they say “sending thoughts and prayers for the bullet”. These are the people who, let’s be as honest about the truth as they are about their dedication to lies and murdering people who don’t accord with their lies, have lost all human individuality by their own choice and by lifelong immersion in a media dominated world that tells them their shade of evil is nothing but good.
And there are so many of them. The universities have done their job well. The female teachers with the BLM flag and the LGBTQ+ flag and the Palestinian flag and the Marxism painted with rainbows have done their job well. The CNN panel shows and MSNC anchors and The New Yorker and The Atlantic and The New York Times have done their job well, and even The Simpsons episodes and the Southpark episodes have done their jobs well. Rolling Stone magazine has done its job well. Even the ousted Lemon and the departing Colbert have done their jobs well.
Because their jobs were never to share anything of worth and never to inform and never to entertain and not even to hold ratings above the level of “who the fuck is listening to you anymore?”
Their job was just to poison the well. Their job was to make the other lot, the trans with guns, the “lol, got what you deserved dude” smears of inhumanity, the We Care A Lot Outright Fucking Psychopaths, think that they represent normal. That was it.
All along it was the opposite of what Kirk was doing, not just the opposite of what Kirk was saying. Kirk went around trying to get the other side to think. The entire mainstream media and all the news circus and all the Democrat Party went around opening up Democrat heads, taking out most of the frontal cortex, and putting a laughing sneer and a burning hatred in there instead, wrapped in a blood soaked bow called Empathy.
When Kirk said that Empathy was dangerous, he didn’t mean (as the Empty Ones insist) that loving people, caring about people, being kind to people is dangerous. He meant that you can’t stick the word Empathy, as a label, on NOT caring about your own people, on HATING your own people, on making their lives worse, on laughing at their fears, on smiling at their deaths, or on importing or releasing or excusing people who kill them.
He told them that their ‘empathy’ was a lie, the thing they tell themselves so they get to enjoy being cruel, and evil and bullying and vicious, all without the annoying guilt of recognising white people, or Christians, or Republicans as human beings.
A boot stomping on a face forever is still a boot, even if you call it the Empathy Boot.
And their reactions to his death? Well don’t they really, really prove that point correct?”
And to give some evidential weight to the above, here is what I am referring to. First, the dishonest Democrat, the one who offers those completely insincere homilies about reaching across the aisle and all being better:
Well gee thanks Ed. So that’s the way it goes, is it? You spend an entire career telling people to hate everyone like Charlie Kirk. You get to throw out all that Nazi and misogynist and threat to democracy and just like the Third Reich and ‘trans genocide’ and borders are evils and babies aren’t real human beings and whatever other patently insane, hate building, evil excusing bullshit that every Democrat endorses, votes for, expresses and believes….then the most well known people on our side get brutally murdered, murdered, and innocent nobodies and ordinary citizens on our side get brutally murdered, and we just flip the page and be friends and buddies….until you do it again?
Charlie Kirk’s murder wasn’t the first, was it?
But saying “bring us together” wipes that out, right?
Only it doesn’t.
The only way a Democrat could honestly clean himself of being a Democrat, now, is by leaving the Democrat Party, or at the very least owning what the facts and the deaths show.
The Democrat who stands there and says “hey, guys, let’s be friends” and holds out a hand isn’t doing that. Not really.
Only the Democrat who stands UP and says “You know what, we got it horribly, horribly wrong. All the death and madness is coming from our side. That’s on us. We built this. I’m ashamed that we built this”….that just might be a Democrat worth listening to.
Remorse before reconciliation. Recognition of the sin before forgiveness of the sin. A return to sanity BEFORE we shake hands again. Actual repentance.
Without those words OWNING this shit, you aren’t truly sorry for it. Christian forgiveness isn’t a thing to ask for while still pretending you did no wrong, and even alcoholics have to follow steps that admit their harms and admit their wrongs. This used to be religiously and paychologically obvious. Democrats destroyed all that because they don’t need God to tell them right and wrong and they don’t need to apologise to all us ‘Nazis’ because they are ALWAYS right and always good….even when all the murders in the building are ones they committed.
Second, the middling ones who try a bit of Krassenstein crocodile crying but are just too thick or too filled with rage, hate and malice to keep it going past a single line. This one is proof of how the Democrat mind virus is very strong in the UK, an independent councillor (who has now been forced by the backlash to resign) who said this:
I don’t condone violence….here’s me explaining why I condone violence because I’m glad Kirk’s dead and I want Trump next.
Nobody ever accused these people of being ferociously bright. Wild by name, wildly stupid and vicious by nature.
And here’s a smattering of the honest Democrats doing what they do, howling in delight, bumping each others legs, pissing with excitement because somebody who disagreed with them was brutally slaughtered:
All lining up their NEXT victim. Because they know, like Krassenstein knows but won’t admit, that once you spend 10 years or 20 years or 30 years turning a whole slew of people into rabid dogs, they don’t turn into puppies when a throat is ripped out.
One of the people in this camp had ALREADY debated Charlie Kirk. Kirk did the civilised route with him. He listened to and answered him. They probably shook hands at the beginning or the end. Because on of the people celebrating Charlie Kirk’s death was the head of the Oxford Union, a guy who opposed Kirk in a student debate. The Oxford Union itself stages debates and assumes debate means something and inspires respect for the peaceful working out of different views.
And what does this august and venerable student body have representing it? The Desth rattle LOL, a sub-moronic snicker, a reaction clearly suggesting he wants more of the same, when a better debater (and a much better human being) is murdered:
Debate doesn’t retrain rabid dogs in civilisational values. That chance has gone by the time they think like this.
They do what they are trained to do, infected by a mind virus and conditioned to do, and they look for the next throat. Walsh, Shapiro, Libs of Tik Tok, Trump or Musk, whoever has embarrassed them, beaten them in debate, shown that they are wrong or stood in the way of them doing whatever they like.
A friend of mine has been going through the grim task of collecting these kind of comments and posts, to show how bad the situation is. I won’t name him as I haven’t asked if I have his permission to do so, but he’s a thoughtful, Socratic kind of guy who, like Charlie Kirk, sees debate, discussion, painstaking objectivity and asking rhetorical questions as the basis of slowly trying to return us all to a better kind of society and politics.
But there’s a problem with that, and it’s this:
I differ from classical liberals, and I differ from Charlie Kirk or from my friend who is both collecting these accounts and dealing with these reactions with utmost decency and moderate self restraint.
I would not defend to the death their right to call for my death.
I’m not a free speech absolutist. I’m not willing to die for the rights of those who want all my rights taken away. And I’m talking here about real rights, not the kind of imaginary rights leftists are always so willing to kill for.
Conservatives are innately suspicious of anything radical, including any radical fightback. Classical liberals and libertarians are idealist absolutists, who will always put the general principle above the real world situation. The Right is exceptionally prone to disappearance through moderateness, applying to themselves civilisational standards that the Left has never obeyed, and never will obey.
But for me I do not care if silencing the lunatics is called denying free speech. I do not care if imprisoning the lunatics is called tyranny. I do not care if dealing harshly with the people who wanted Charlie Kirk dead or who celebrated his death is called being the same as the other side.
I want an end of ANY debate with terrorists, murderers, rapists or perverts. Charlie Kirk did a lot of good in terms of OTHER people seeing those debates and perhaps changing their minds. Some do, I accept, some are standing in the shallow end of madness and can be persuaded to return to shore.
But most are in and of the depths, now, if they are Democrats, progrsssives, or Labour voters and representatives in the UK.
Hold out a hand and they bite it. Hold out a hand while they swim in the deep waters and they will drag you under, like some Celtic fay creature that grabs unwary swimmers.
George Abaraonye didn’t seem to learn much from his debate with Kirk or his Presidency of the Oxford Union. He didn’t even learn to think of Kirk as a human being. He would probably have learned more if people didn’t try to debate him, but had told him sooner and louder that he was thinking and behaving like a total cunt. If society had given him that message earlier, or parents, or friends, or teachers and lecturers, perhaps he would have turned out to be a better human being able to treat Kirk as a human being.
And there’s the difference too. I think the time of debate has ended, and it’s time for punishment. Oh that makes you the same as them!
Well no, it doesn’t. I want their free speech curtailed and their words treated as misdeeds and their attitudes chased out of society because people are being killed by them. They want that power of censorship and punishment because their ideas were being beaten.
This article (The End of the Debate) was created and published by Jupplandia and is republished here under “Fair Use”
See Related Article Below
The killing of Charlie Kirk shows just how poisonous Left-wing politics now is
The importance of free speech and open civilised debate in the West has never been more urgent
It is impossible to imagine a more gruesomely visceral demonstration of the silencing of free speech than the shooting in the neck of its defender-in-chief, Charlie Kirk. The placement of the bullet, fired from 130m away, while Kirk was mid-sentence was profoundly symbolic. One can easily imagine the killer aiming to hit him in the voice box where it was really going to hurt.
Had the 31-year-old father of two miraculously survived, he would have been a muted version of his former self; in all likelihood, unable to communicate as before. That was surely the objective – to shut him up, in one way or another.
We now know that the ammunition found with the high powered, bolt action .30 calibre hunting rifle was engraved with what police say is “anti-fascist ideology”.
Whoever did this truly believed that killing someone they disagreed with could be justified in the name of “anti-fascism”, of all things; that this ultimate act of intolerance, could in some way be spun as a win for liberalism. In truth, it was eerily reminiscent of the worst of the far-rightism they accused Kirk of: a public execution for a supposedly higher cause.
Kirk’s supporters in Turning Point USA, the conservative youth movement he co-founded as an 18 year old in 2012, claim that anti-Right rhetoric is to blame for his death. But words don’t kill, people do.
You cannot simultaneously argue that the Left’s violent language was responsible for his murder – but that the US Capitol riots on January 6, 2021 weren’t inspired by Donald Trump declaring: “We will stop the steal” and “If you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country any more”. It can’t have helped for Kirk to have been branded “Hitler” and a “Nazi” but you believe in free speech, you have to support the right for people to call others anything they like.
Why some on the Left are now disgracefully dancing on his grave is that for a long time, nearly no one was unapologetically standing up for free speech for all. Virtually no one else was doing what Kirk was doing. This allowed a groupthink to take hold that the Left were the goodies and the Right were the baddies. If you didn’t agree with statements like: “transwomen are women”, “black lives matter” or concepts like “critical race theory” and “Israeli genocide” then you were deemed not just wrong but inherently evil.
Schools and universities, big businesses, governmental and non-governmental bodies, normalised this bias by taking the knee – literally and figuratively – to all these statements without any debate or discussion whatsoever. It wasn’t the rhetoric itself but the silencing of those challenging the rhetoric that caused this to happen.
This lack of balanced discourse has resulted in students at Oxford – supposedly our best and brightest academic minds – apparently cheering Kirk’s death. They celebrate the murder of someone simply because they have not been taught that fundamental of all lessons: If you don’t have respect for other people’s opinions then you don’t have respect for humanity itself.
Instead they’ve been brought up to believe that we don’t need critical thinking because there is only one truth of which the Left is the ultimate arbiter. That leads to even well educated people believing that being opinionated is the same as being informed; that feelings are more important than facts; that it’s tolerant to be intolerant.
Those caveating their tributes to Kirk with statements of where they disagreed miss the point of him entirely. You didn’t have to agree with him on anything – you just had to agree with his right to speak openly – and crucially, be heard.
When young people are only exposed to one side of any argument then they will end up with extremist views – on either side of the ideological divide. It cuts both ways. One criticism that was made of Kirk is that Turning Point’s Professors’ Watch List was designed to intimidate Left-wing academics out of US universities.
He was also criticised for refusing to debate the Left-wing Tiktokker Dean Withers, who has four million followers. Nuance was often lost as Kirk, a self-styled provocateur, railed against abortion, advocated the Second Amendment and opposed gay marriage. But there was far less nuance in the vitriol and hatred spewed by his critics.
So while what has happened is undoubtedly shocking – horrifying, even – it is not altogether unsurprising. Kirk himself had warned that so-called liberals would abandon dialogue for destruction. That was the motivation behind his public speaking tours around US university campuses.
“When people stop talking, that’s when you get violence,” he once said. “That’s when civil war happens, because you start to think the other side is so evil, and they lose their humanity.”
That’s what explains Leftists gleefully celebrating his death on social media, Democrats disrespecting efforts to lead a prayer for Kirk in the House of Representatives and European MPs refusing to partake in a minute’s silence. They can’t even sympathise, on a human level, over the brutal slaying of a husband and father of two young children.
This is because some on the Left have convinced themselves – and others – that they are right, even when they are wrong. They adopt hashtags like #bekind and preach “gentler, kinder politics” when their own behaviour is far nastier than anything Kirk has ever said.
Labels are quickly invented to scare people into submission…
The irony of all this is that this suppression of freedom of expression has only served to bring out the worst in those seeking to silence the Right. They have become the new bigots.
The Telegraph: continue reading
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply