this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2024

159 points (97.6% liked)

politics

18828 readers

4573 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

159

How Charlie Kirk Plans to Discredit Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Act (www.wired.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

45 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk is preparing to launch a campaign against Martin Luther King Jr. and the landmark civil rights law he helped enact.

all 49 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 69 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s.”

Ah. There it is. I’ve heard this one before from other White Nationalists and NatC’s

Next comes: ‘we should have separated the people into their own regions’ and other such complete and utter nonsense.

Segregationists. The lot of them.

Blake Neff, a producer of The Charlie Kirk Show. In 2020, Neff resigned from his job at Fox News as Tucker Carlson’s top writer after CNN revealed he had been making racist posts under a pseudonym.

And there’s the real architect of this pyramid of shite. Blake “Neff”; the NatC bag of shite that held Cucker Tarlsons reins.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

you can just say Nazi

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

'we should have separated the people into their own regions'

We should launch all the white supremacists to Mars and see how well they fare building their own civilization.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Having had some close up experience in my life with incredibly wealthy hardcore Christian Nationalist White Supremacists, most would probably absolutely love that. With a stop-over on the dark side of the moon to join up with all the Legacy already stationed there. I’m sure of course, it’ll be called “Planet X” by then.

[+] [email protected] -15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s.”

He's absolutely correct on this one though.

There still was way too much discrimination left in all sorts of laws despite of the Civil Rights Act.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

There still was way too much discrimination left

True.

However, I believe their stated argument is that it went directly against the US Constitution and should be abolished.

We’ve heard this before from the, ‘it’s racist to say there was and is institutional racism’ crowdthunk.

That we’ve been ‘led astray to believe there was a holocaust’, that we’ve been taught a false and ‘fake history’ by nefarious ‘globalists’ (read: Jewish peoples).

[+] [email protected] -26 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Don't discuss deeper meanings of shithead-agendas with me, I just wanted to do this thing where I shock everyone by seemingly agreeing to a racist and then turn around by saying something that's the exact opposite of what the shithead said.

Have I called this muppet a shithead often enogh? Ah, whatever, once more can't hurt. He's a shithead. In my opinion that is (Shitheads tend to be letigious).

[–] [email protected] 19 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I just wanted to do this thing where I shock everyone

Ah,.. sarcastic edge-lording you say?

[–] [email protected] 37 points 8 months ago (4 children)

Behold, the new leader of the proud white race!

Good luck demonizing one of America's greatest heroes you dumbass.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I don't know if every white power asshole is ugly, or hate makes a person ugly... But God damn every white power douche is ugly as fuck.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago

If you're proud of limiting the genetic diversity in your lineage, you probably look as weird as some "purebred" dogs (i.e. inbred).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/5f5de8d9-8343-48aa-9e32-9e13a6c81f8f.webp

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Such a punchable face

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Be careful, if you don’t aim precisely, you’ll hit 100% forehead and hurt yourself

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago

Dude might be the only person with teeth whom you could punch in the mouth and hit only gums.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

"What if a possessed ventriloquist dummy and the creepy doll from the music video for Daft Punk's 'technologic' had a kid?"

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

That smile looks like Jack Nicholson's Joker's smile

[–] [email protected] 35 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Charlie Kirk can get fucked. Never in all of human history has there ever been somebody with a more punchable face.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

He looks like MODOK

[–] [email protected] 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

You just can't unsee it

[–] [email protected] 24 points 8 months ago (1 children)

This idiots videos pop up on YouTube, and I'm curious so I watched a few.

All his videos are about are him "debating" an actual idiotic left leaning person.

The leftist has valid points, but can't express them clearly, which Kirk then points out very easily, and which then silence the other person.

Then, the comment section is filled with people stating how great kirk is, and thanking him for shutting down idiots.

If they would actually find smart people to ask questions, instead of deliberately finding the weaker ones, we'd see the true weakness in Kirk's viewpoints.

But, that doesn't make for very good brainwashing, now does it?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Pretty sure they also edit and manipulate the video. Is rhe video format of the chad Wozniak vs the virgin one.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago

The only think Charlie Kirk can discredited is his own arguments. Dude is about as sharp as an orange

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Honestly what the fuck.

Curious to see what bombshell they plan on dropping on Monday, because this is wild.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I suspect they're going to attack MLK Jr. on his "character". They love to cite that he cheated on his wife, which...okay, yeah, that's bad. But any reasonable person can see that his alleged cheating and his campaign for civil rights are separate issues.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It'll probably be about his criticisms of capitalism, and his progressive economic ideals that neolibs love to gloss over when they do their performative worship of his memory.

Capitalism is basically a religion to these people at this point.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Nah they do this every year and try to lie and pretend he was a Republican. So checkmate Dems 🙄

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's toilet paper USA. There's no bombshell

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Fair. Should've put "bombshell" in quotes lol

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago

Well then he can go fuck the fuck off

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago

Your first mistake was listening to Charlie Kirk on any topic

[–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago

"Are we the baddies?"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Eyes are too close together to be trusted

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Anyone that would actually listen to Charlie Kirk is probably already on his side of this "argument", why even give him the exposure