Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Let's get something straight about Charlie Kirk's legacy: He was NOT a champion of free speech.

The media on both sides is lazily repeating this and/or spreading the propaganda so that Kirk's assassination can be used as motivation for their political designs.

What Charlie Kirk was (at least in his public life) was a far right, sexist, racist, selfish man who used his so called debates to platform his Christian Nationalist rhetoric and foment outrage and division among those sympathetic to his way of thinking.
In fact he was decidedly NOT an advocate for bipartisan free speech, only the freedom for him and his kinds to say whatever they wanted.
You may recall his Professor Watchlist which was a database of Professors that were saying things he didn't like and so he published their details to his site, the obvious result of which was harassments, death threats and pressure for dismissal.

So let's be clear on that. Kirk was a propogandist who used control of the venue and targeting largely students unskilled in debate to spread his own message and vindictively attempted to silence people who spoke out on issues he didn't agree with.

You can mourn the man if you want, but mourn the man and not the imaginary martyr to free speech 🙄
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
RedBaron · M
“The media on both sides is lazily repeating this and/or spreading the propaganda”

Something the media on both sides does all the time.
AbstractWave · 61-69, M
@RedBaron define both sides
RedBaron · M
AbstractWave · 61-69, M
@RedBaron define both sides
RedBaron · M