jkf
2mo ago
Sometime after you have a revolution and win, usually -- I can't think of any offhand in the (quite murderey) history of American politics, at any rate.
Do you have any examples of actual assassins to whom history has been kind that you'd like to discuss? Even Brutus et al don't get very good P.R. these days.
jkf
2mo ago
How many people have actually emigrated from the US following the elections of President Trump, for both of which I remember widespread threats of emigration?
I know one family quite well that has just done so (at significant cost), explicitly for the reason of trans stuff vis a vis Trump. (sad story around the son/daughter)
I question their judgement in that regard, but it might turn out to be a good decision for other reasons.
jkf
2mo ago
Where's the prayer for the high school students shot by a neonazi a few days ago?
That's the neat thing about praying -- you can pray for whomever you want!
If the Demcritters had asked for a prayer for those people, do you think the Repcritters would have shouted them down?
jkf
2mo ago
Maybe the Democrats should start having prayer sessions for people involved in incidents that they think should be elevated then, instead of shitting all over other people's tragedies?
jkf
2mo ago
Let's approach this in good faith, is it possible they shot it down because attempts for prayers don't happen with other victims of gun violence?
Whatever the reasons that the Republicans of Congress have for not praying after other deaths, shouting people down while they are trying to pray seems awfully uncouth, at the very least?
I'd go so far as to say Just Not Done -- I don't personally pray over things, but if somebody wants to say Grace at dinner, I do bow my head and say Amen -- where are their damn manners?
jkf
2mo ago
He was actively involved in political lobbying, funding, and trying to get laws passed.
I don't think the last one is true, and anyways "political lobbyists not on your team" is a much broader class than I'm comfortable opening the season on...
What about religious stuff, gun stuff, free speech stuff, tax stuff.
I don't think assassination is a good response for people advocating changes to those laws either, no.
jkf
2mo ago
For example if I give speech that: "Gay-ness is an abomination before the eyes of God and we should not allow it in our government or our society" Am I inflicting violence? By your definition I am not, nothing I say is legally able to be restricted as I am not directly threatening anyone. However, say I do get this law to pass, now some faceless bureaucrat is going to punish any gay person they find because they are illegal, and they are going to do so with the full might on the state. Its back to stoning, conversion torture, or throwing the gays off roof tops. By my definition I have advocated for those policies, I have advocated for violence. So I think your definition is naive in the extreme.
So do you think that politicians that advocate for increased speed limits (= more highway deaths) are fair game for assassination? Or is it just the gay stuff?
(Kind of irrelevant since Kirk was explicitly not a politician -- so the chances of him getting elected and passing a gulags for gays law were zero -- so the ad absurdum of your position is that it would be OK to shoot some guy mouthing off in a bar about how much he hates gays -- which actually is kind of what's worrying to normiecons about this particular rationalization)
jkf
2mo ago
What I'd consider most likely is that his views don't map cleanly to either of the Democrat nor Republican parties. (many such cases!)
The anti-abortion theory for his motive seems strongest, although I have some concerns -- but running with that for now -- does being anti-abortion in itself make one a right winger? It's certainly possible that he thinks Trump is fascist as well, which is more of a left-wing thing and would explain the fliers.
Is an anti-abortion pro-trans socialist left, or right wing? What if he also hates Israel? Or what if he's pro-choice, but loves the 2A and hates commies?
The disconnect here is coming from your apparent need to assign coherent political beliefs to this guy moreso than however the broad right/left is responding to these events. (which seems very different regardless of the political valence of the shooters; I certainly don't recall anybody at all, left or right, celebrating the Minnesota murderer)
jkf
2mo ago
Now I haven't weighed in on who I thought killed Charlie Kirk, because deep in my heart I'm terrified it will turn out to be some right wing nut.
The ARFcom thread on the incident is annoying yet informative -- sounds like the shooter carved trans/antifa positive messages onto the shells in his gun (which has now been recovered) -- so "right wing nut" is looking unlikely, barring an unrealistically convoluted false-flag attempt...
jkf
2mo ago
They're... pretty red though? Maybe not so much at the board of directors level, but if you've met any O&G execs, "Landman" is not too far off base there.
jkf
2mo ago
no matter how blatant it is (I mean, seriously, the guy was going down a hit list of democratic legislators).
The guy also had a bunch of "no kings" anti-trump fliers -- as mentioned, rounding him off to "right wing extremist" doesn't even match up with the (normally left-wing slanted) article you linked in wikipedia. Which is kind of rough on your whole premise, mental health issues aside.
(shit, the most common far-right response I've seen to Kirk's murder is "this is our Reichstag fire, time to break out the jackboots")
You may have bubble issues -- the most common response I've seen anywhere is more like "I'm praying for his family".
jkf
2mo ago
When a right-winger does it, it was actually a mental health issue.
I'm talking about the first clause, not the second -- mental health issues are kind of par for the course with multiple murderers, no?
I'm saying that it's not clear at all where this guy sits on the political spectrum and he has mental health issues. Even if he's a left winger!
jkf
2mo ago
I thought the Minnesota guys' politics/general motivations turned out to be pretty weird and unclear?
jkf
2mo ago
That just means that it wasn't also correlated with any of the other factors that they checked -- doesn't mean that there's not some unknown covariate between "enjoys marijuana" and "is predisposed to schizophrenia".
jkf
2mo ago
You'd probably get similar numbers for tobacco use though -- I don't see anything there that establishes cause and effect?
jkf
2mo ago
The current position is basically that trans-women are not women with all that entails for sports, bathrooms and laws, but also don't be a dick about it, because that is not the done thing and they're still a protected group.
"... oh, and don't forget that we'll arrest you for mean-posting about them on Twitter..."
Seems like a bit of a mixed bag tbh
jkf
2mo ago
Your stance is that spitting on the ground in front of another man is inherently aggressive and instigatory?
I mean, kind of? Not sure if it's obsolete or some regional deal, but I thought it was pretty universal & ancient that looking a guy in the eye (esp. when trash talk is going on), then spitting off to the side is a gesture of contempt at best, and essentially fighting 'words' in most cases?
See, um -- Darwin (!?), apparently: (thanks Google!)
Spitting seems an almost universal sign of contempt or disgust; and spitting obviously represents the rejection of anything offensive from the mouth. Shakspeare makes the Duke of Norfolk say, “I spit at him—call him a slanderous coward and a villain.” So, again, Falstaff says, “Tell thee what, Hal,—if I tell thee a lie, spit in my face.” Leichhardt remarks that the Australians “interrupted their speeches by spitting, and uttering a noise like pooh! pooh! apparently expressive of their disgust.” And Captain Burton speaks of certain negroes “spitting with disgust upon the ground.” Captain Speedy informs me that this is likewise the case with the Abyssinians. Mr. Geach says that with the Malays of Malacca the expression of disgust “answers to spitting from the mouth;” and with the Fuegians, according to Mr. Bridges “to spit at one is the highest mark of contempt.”
Granted most of his quotes do involve people spitting at others -- which is clearly even more aggressive -- but I personally would not spit to the side while talking to somebody unless I were looking for a fight.
jkf
2mo ago
Drawing a gun and firing a (roughly) aimed shot inside human reaction (+movement) time does take a lot of practice -- reaching out and grabbing somebody's wrist, I'd think not so much. Faster reflexes don't really come into it -- the first mover is deciding when to act; his 'reaction' time is zero.
Can the average man really reach to disarm a knife faster than the knife holder can cut the disarming arm
Yes, if he's within reach -- this is why police etc are taught to create and maintain distance from people that they're interacting with when they draw their handgun.
It's important to note (as I mentioned) that this doesn't necessarily get you much against a physically comparable opponent -- if you have a hold of his knife arm, his other arm is still free to pummel you with -- and if he overpowers your grip on his knife hand, you are in a very convenient spot to be stabbed. But a 12 yo girl is a whole different story.
jkf
2mo ago
may be uncoordinated enough that you can just grab her wrist before she can flinch
If the girl is not actively on the attack, just brandishing the knife (as in the video), you have first-mover advantage. So long as she's within reach and you act first, you can get ahold of her wrist 100 times out of 100. It's the same concept as quickdraw guys who can draw and fire a holstered double-action revolver before an alert adult can react, so long as they choose when to draw:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ELaiJZ8tjSk&t=249
This doesn't win a knife fight against somebody strong enough to fight back once you've got a grip on them, but in the case in question it's pretty hard for me to see much (physical) risk.
jkf
2mo ago
Did the adults actually throw the kid to the ground and kick her in the head? Is there any evidence of this in the video or from the aftermath: dirt on her clothes, scrapes or bruises, bloody nose, split lip, any evidence of physical harm?
The GSG excerpt above talks about three girls; the two sisters in the video, plus their friend Ruby -- who was allegedly attacked. If she'd taken off while Lola was arming herself, the video more or less adds up?
IIRC one comment here talked about taking away her hatchet and ignored the knife
Whoever said that had it exactly ass-backwards, unless she's a surprisingly talented sharpener in her spare time -- that kind of ax isn't even supposed to be very sharp, they work better for splitting wood if they have a somewhat obtuse edge (compared to a knife or something). I doubt she could break the skin with that one even, and a skinny 12 y.o. can't generate enough blunt force to do much damage unless you offered her your noggin or something.
Grab her knife arm and twist it behind her back, end of story.
jkf
2mo ago
I'm AI skeptical than most around here, but must admit that chatGPT is becoming a damn good search engine:
Otto Rühle, a German Marxist and left communist in the council communist tradition who also came close to anarchist positions, wrote that "the struggle against fascism must begin with the struggle against Bolshevism", adding that he believed the Soviets had influence on fascist states by serving as a model. In 1939, Rühle further professed: "Russia was the example for fascism. ... Whether party 'communists' like it or not, the fact remains that the state order and rule in Russia are indistinguishable from those in Italy and Germany. Essentially they are alike. One may speak of a red, black, or brown 'soviet state', as well as of red, black or brown fascism."
It is what it is, y'know?
More options
Context Copy link